Army Strong

[Garrette]

No, I meant it in an adult way. I found your response extremely juvenile.

Then allow me to be quite adult:

This is balderdash, and your are, as Darth Rotor put it, bloviating.

You did not find my response juvenile; you simply decided to attempt to paint it as such because you have no coherent response.

Allow me one more freedom. Here is an example of a juvenile response, repeated and repeated:

"Meh."

IMO people with strong, rational arguments do not need to behave like immature thugs in order to get their points across. I have zero tolerance for bullying in all areas.

No disagreement here.

If you think you have something valuable to say and want me to take you seriously try communicating like a civil human being among equals.

Communication entails give and take, not unfounded dismissal of comments aimed directly at your arguments. There is imperfection on both sides but fault almost solely on yours.

However, on the chance that I have misread you, I'm willing to start again. You'll withhold the "Meh" and I'll withhold the like responses.

As I'm sure you know, bullying is generally not regarded as a sign of strength but as a cover for fear, cowardice and insecurity.

Mostly true, but fear, cowardice and insecurity are covered by other things, too. Among them is an unwillingness to address relevant comments.

If the abuse offered here is not rooted in these emotions then it is fair to regard it simply as elementary propaganda i.e. name-calling, in which case it is also best to ignore it.

And again, we can start over. No more "Meh" or the like.

 

[newton3376]

Neither do I

I'm no longer in the service, but I still have friends and family that are.....and now that I think about it I actually don't know any soldiers/vets who have a high opinion of BW...

They did have a "golden opportunity" to provide a legitimate and necessary service- they screwed it up

Yeah they really did...

 

[newton3376]

This is a good summary...

War is hell?- yes it is
People die?- yes they do
it aint fair?- it aint
people surrendering under fire get killed?- yes they do
bad things happen?- yep
blood and gore?- yep

Next topic....

 

[JihadJane]

JJ,
You did get an explanation of how and why some Iraqi soldiers were buried in sand.


Why no comments on that?

Probably because the poster is on my ignore list, which would mostly likely be due to their persistent ad hominem habit.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Then allow me to be quite adult:

This is balderdash, and your are, as Darth Rotor put it, bloviating.

You did not find my response juvenile; you simply decided to attempt to paint it as such because you have no coherent response.

Thanks for being adult.

As I mentioned earlier in the thread in relation to LONGTABBER PE, I have little patience for domineering posters who, when they don't like another's reality, simply deny it and alter it, making up a new version to impose on their victim as if it were true, as you have done, above.

I did indeed find your response ( and earlier responses to which I responded with "Meh"), juvenile. If you are able know what goes on inside my head better than I am then I suggest you apply for the MDC.

Allow me one more freedom. Here is an example of a juvenile response, repeated and repeated:

"Meh."

My Mehs were short-hand indications that I wasn’t interested in playing silly ad hominem games with you. I will be more explicit and expansive in future.

Communication entails give and take, not unfounded dismissal of comments aimed directly at your arguments. There is imperfection on both sides but fault almost solely on yours.

If posters are unable to resist spicing their directly aimed comments with attempts to patronize and insult etc. then I am very likely to ignore their post entirely.

In the past I have put a lot of energy into attempting to engage with thuggish posters but most appear unwilling or unable to drop their defenses and communicate civilly. I no longer bother communicating with mud flingers.

However, on the chance that I have misread you, I'm willing to start again. You'll withhold the "Meh" and I'll withhold the like responses.

Okay



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What happened in Fallujah?

 

[Quad4_72]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What happened in Fallujah?

The US went in, drove out the insurgents, then left the city. While it was a success from a military standpoint, the insurgents moved back in when we left. So guess what we have to do again...clear the city of Fallujah.

 

[funk de fino]

In the past I have put a lot of energy into attempting to engage with thuggish posters but most appear unwilling or unable to drop their defenses and communicate civilly. I no longer bother communicating with mud flingers.

This is a blatant lie. Thuggish in this sense is asking for back up for claims made by jihadjane. Then proving those claims totally wrong.

Gives jihadjane an excellent get out clause for avoiding facts that jar with the fantasy that appears to be jihadjane's homeworld.

The most cowardly posting history on this site IMO.

 

[LONGTABBER PE]

Probably because the poster is on my ignore list, which would mostly likely be due to their persistent ad hominem habit.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~




Thanks for being adult.

As I mentioned earlier in the thread in relation to LONGTABBER PE, I have little patience for domineering posters who, when they don't like another's reality, simply deny it and alter it, making up a new version to impose on their victim as if it were true, as you have done, above.

I did indeed find your response ( and earlier responses to which I responded with "Meh"), juvenile. If you are able know what goes on inside my head better than I am then I suggest you apply for the MDC.




My Mehs were short-hand indications that I wasn’t interested in playing silly ad hominem games with you. I will be more explicit and expansive in future.




If posters are unable to resist spicing their directly aimed comments with attempts to patronize and insult etc. then I am very likely to ignore their post entirely.

In the past I have put a lot of energy into attempting to engage with thuggish posters but most appear unwilling or unable to drop their defenses and communicate civilly. I no longer bother communicating with mud flingers.




Okay



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What happened in Fallujah?

As I mentioned earlier in the thread in relation to LONGTABBER PE, I have little patience for domineering posters an aversion to the truth and no use for the facts whatsoever so I make up false arguments so I dont have to address posters who, when they don't like another's reality anothers FALSE and MISLEADING claims attempted to be PASSED OFF as reality because its what I want to believe in my world, simply deny it and alter it stand me down, correct me and destroy my lies, making up a new version to impose on their victim as if it were true, as you have done, above.

There you go JJ, fixed it for you

 

[Marcus]

I'm just a lurker on this thread, but I have to say, JihadJane, that you seem extremely reluctant to accept any new information. All these military types have first hand knowledge and you are simply ignoring it.

 

[paximperium]

Soooo...has anyone figured out JJ's point is so far since she has refused to ever state it?

 

[Nosi]

Are we going to establish a permanent base in Iraq as we did in S. Korea?

 

[Garrette]

Are we going to establish a permanent base in Iraq as we did in S. Korea?

The current agreement says no. For that to change it will take agreement of the GoI. If the proposed referendum in January makes it on the ballot (about a 50/50 chance right now) and then if it passes: No, we will not and will, in fact, depart faster than currently planned. I don't know if the US Media is following this or not, but it's a potentially huge issue.

We're scheduled to be completely out by the end of 2011. The proposed referendum will say, in effect, "stop doing everything else and just focus on leaving asap." Several potential second and third order effects from that, exacerbated by the physical limitations on how fast we can withdraw. If we do that (stop everything else and just get out asap), the finite capacity of the embarkation points and movement assets really only speeds up our departure by about six months to mid-2011.

That will likely be seen as corrupt dawdling on our part by the populace and the neighboring countries (though probably not by the GoI) and could signal an uptick in both resentment and violence.

 

[Garrette]

What happened in Fallujah?

Remember that we're keeping it adult. The first step in that is to stick to a topic. We were discussing two:

1. The status of the Iraqi air force in regard to it being wholly inadequate and how that is measured (by numbers?).

2. The bulldozing of Iraqi troops into their trenches.

Once we are through with these we may move on to Fallujah. Which would you care to start with?

 

[Garrette]

**Bump for JJ**

Just so it stays on the first page. I wanted it easy to find when your weekend duties are done and you're able to get back to one of these two topics.

 

[funk de fino]

Remember that we're keeping it adult. The first step in that is to stick to a topic. We were discussing two:

1. The status of the Iraqi air force in regard to it being wholly inadequate and how that is measured (by numbers?).

2. The bulldozing of Iraqi troops into their trenches.

Once we are through with these we may move on to Fallujah. Which would you care to start with?

Iraqi Airfield defences also.

Its quite essy to get figures that prove how good it was initially despite JJ thinking it was not very good.

 

[Garrette]

Iraqi Airfield defences also.

Its quite essy to get figures that prove how good it was initially despite JJ thinking it was not very good.

I'll check, but I think JJ conceded the air defense point by saying she had mixed the First Gulf War with the second.

 

[JihadJane]

Remember that we're keeping it adult. The first step in that is to stick to a topic. We were discussing two:

1. The status of the Iraqi air force in regard to it being wholly inadequate and how that is measured (by numbers?).

2. The bulldozing of Iraqi troops into their trenches.

Once we are through with these we may move on to Fallujah. Which would you care to start with?

The topic of a JREF thread is defined by the OP.

Unfortunately, discussuion about the topics you mention, above, is severely hampered my the consequences of some posters' previous forum behavior, namely that I now ignore their contributions to the JREF entirely.

If you would like to convey their points to me I may be able to respond. I have something else related to the OP onto which I shall move later today.

I'm just a lurker on this thread, but I have to say, JihadJane, that you seem extremely reluctant to accept any new information. All these military types have first hand knowledge and you are simply ignoring it.

Thanks for your comment. I hope my reply to Garrette, in this post, above, satisfies you.

The US went in, drove out the insurgents, then left the city. While it was a success from a military standpoint, the insurgents moved back in when we left. So guess what we have to do again...clear the city of Fallujah.

Does it bother you that 75% of people's homes there were destroyed or that many civilians, many of them women and children, were needlessly killed by US forces?

 

[JihadJane]

I wanted it easy to find when your weekend duties are done and you're able to get back to one of these two topics.

Is this comment adult or juvenile?

 

[Toke]

I have read of Fallujah.
An obvious solution to the problem of wholesale destruction and large civilian casualties would be to do without air, artillery and armor support for the attacking infantry.

The resulting larger causalities on ones own side may be hard to justify to the troops and civilians at home.

I am sure there could be endless argument on how much support and destruction is acceptable.

 

[Garrette]

Is this comment adult or juvenile?

Adult. You stopped posting when the weekend started. I am frequently under those time constraints myself, but not this time. The thread was about to slip to the second page.

Take down your defenses; I aint attacking.

 

[Garrette]

The topic of a JREF thread is defined by the OP.

Here is the OP in its entirety (though without the ability to actually watch the video):

Army Strong

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=152750#I AGREE

You have left this topic repeatedly, including with me. If it is what you want to discuss, then let's discuss it, beginning with your comments on it.

If it is not what you want to discuss then we are left with the two topics I listed since those are the two topics you were discussing with me.

Unfortunately, discussuion about the topics you mention, above, is severely hampered my the consequences of some posters' previous forum behavior, namely that I now ignore their contributions to the JREF entirely.

That has no bearing on your discussion of the topics with me.

If you would like to convey their points to me I may be able to respond.

May?

Before I waste our time, let's settle the simple issue of what topic we will discuss. We now have the two I listed earlier along with the OP.

Your choice.

I have something else related to the OP onto which I shall move later today.

Do what you like with others. Please stick to one of these three topics with me.