Alliedassault - View Single Post - Wouldn't it be nice to be like most countries

BallisticWookie · 08-31-2002, 09:23 AM

Buddy, if the US didnt get involved more the world would be even more unstable than it is now. I dont have to show proof because anybody with a brain would realise that. Perhaps rethink strategies, but show no involvement in International issues ?? The word collapse comes to mind.

CNN doesnt report current troop movements, especially when combat is concerned. Conventional forces (a big fat) hell no, Special Forces ?? Not on your life. There is a thing called Operational Security which involves all facets of a military operation. The media will not and cannot know jack about troop locations, size of force and/or designated targets. That would completely throw out the use of sending the military into an operation in the first place. Most news that news networks get is blackened out sketchy info on almost always, irrelevant information.

Western civilisation (America, Canada, Britain, Australia, Germany, you name it...) does hold life higher than any other values. Where the Arabs/Muslims and any other backward nation on earth forfeit their love for life we show them that we give a damn about life, thats its precious and it's not something to fuck around with. But when push comes to shove we will most definately kick their skinny asses back into the stone age (if they arent there already) and show them who is boss and who NOT to fuck with. Sure, it may just be America and its faithful (maybe blind ??) followers from other nations who end up taking on Iraq after (hopefully) all diplomatic solutions have been exhausted, but we ("we" being the Coalition against Iraq) will definately not lose, and I think, as demonstrated by those tough as fuck Rangers and SFOD-D boys in Somalia back in '93, Close Quarter Battle and MOUT (Military Oprtations Urban Terrain, for those not in the know) Operations are a specialty that Western Military forces are heavily trained in and quite capable of carrying out.

Zxcvnm, America doesnt need any support to wage a war against Iraq...mostly Saddam. If they hit hard and fast the US could take Iraq in the same amount of time it took the Coalition forces to defeat Iraq in the Gulf War. 100 hours. But ofcourse there will be massive air attacks and bombings first, taking out airfields and bunkers, SAM sites and radar stations, oops, I mean hospitals and schools. All this will happen before a main assault occurs, by then most the draftees from the Iraq "army" will be devastated emotionally and psychologically, and they will, like they did in the Gulf War, give up with little or no resistence. Iraq has no chance against a massive assault from the United States alone. Not a chance in hell.

The US could just fund the resistence groups over there, but how large of a force are these resistence groups ?? Are they after a free and democratic Iraq or just after the same bullshit power hungry crap that Saddam was all about ?? Personally I would prefer to see massive amounts of Coalition troops there instead of a puny resistence force, it would feel safer to me, and if your gonna do something right, you gotta do it yourself.

Personally, I think that only after diplomatic talks have been exhausted should an attack go ahead. If Saddam is dickheaded enough to think he can take on the United States he's about to get a big fucking wakeup call, just like those fruity little arrogant Taliban pricks got. They thought they were invincible...look where they are now....

Woah.....didnt mean to write an essay on it... eek:

	(#9)
BallisticWookie is Offline Senior Member Posts: 4,202 Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Queensland, Australia	08-31-2002, 09:23 AM Buddy, if the US didnt get involved more the world would be even more unstable than it is now. I dont have to show proof because anybody with a brain would realise that. Perhaps rethink strategies, but show no involvement in International issues ?? The word collapse comes to mind. CNN doesnt report current troop movements, especially when combat is concerned. Conventional forces (a big fat) hell no, Special Forces ?? Not on your life. There is a thing called Operational Security which involves all facets of a military operation. The media will not and cannot know jack about troop locations, size of force and/or designated targets. That would completely throw out the use of sending the military into an operation in the first place. Most news that news networks get is blackened out sketchy info on almost always, irrelevant information. Western civilisation (America, Canada, Britain, Australia, Germany, you name it...) does hold life higher than any other values. Where the Arabs/Muslims and any other backward nation on earth forfeit their love for life we show them that we give a damn about life, thats its precious and it's not something to fuck around with. But when push comes to shove we will most definately kick their skinny asses back into the stone age (if they arent there already) and show them who is boss and who NOT to fuck with. Sure, it may just be America and its faithful (maybe blind ??) followers from other nations who end up taking on Iraq after (hopefully) all diplomatic solutions have been exhausted, but we ("we" being the Coalition against Iraq) will definately not lose, and I think, as demonstrated by those tough as fuck Rangers and SFOD-D boys in Somalia back in '93, Close Quarter Battle and MOUT (Military Oprtations Urban Terrain, for those not in the know) Operations are a specialty that Western Military forces are heavily trained in and quite capable of carrying out. Zxcvnm, America doesnt need any support to wage a war against Iraq...mostly Saddam. If they hit hard and fast the US could take Iraq in the same amount of time it took the Coalition forces to defeat Iraq in the Gulf War. 100 hours. But ofcourse there will be massive air attacks and bombings first, taking out airfields and bunkers, SAM sites and radar stations, oops, I mean hospitals and schools. All this will happen before a main assault occurs, by then most the draftees from the Iraq "army" will be devastated emotionally and psychologically, and they will, like they did in the Gulf War, give up with little or no resistence. Iraq has no chance against a massive assault from the United States alone. Not a chance in hell. The US could just fund the resistence groups over there, but how large of a force are these resistence groups ?? Are they after a free and democratic Iraq or just after the same bullshit power hungry crap that Saddam was all about ?? Personally I would prefer to see massive amounts of Coalition troops there instead of a puny resistence force, it would feel safer to me, and if your gonna do something right, you gotta do it yourself. Personally, I think that only after diplomatic talks have been exhausted should an attack go ahead. If Saddam is dickheaded enough to think he can take on the United States he's about to get a big fucking wakeup call, just like those fruity little arrogant Taliban pricks got. They thought they were invincible...look where they are now.... Woah.....didnt mean to write an essay on it... eek: