Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Discussion Forums > The Club House > You just can't appease Terrorists

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-22-2008, 02:51 AM   #21
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Slickrick214's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 187
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SGT-MILLER View Post
I am glad to be in this military so I can defend people like you who voice their opinions without properly educating themselves.
Me not educated..I've read more books on modern warfare and military tactics then you can possibly imagine. If you want to believe me fine; if not then fine to that too. I own books about 19th century tactics and the Civil War (my..."specialty" [main area of concentration]). I've also read books about tactics and arms of WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, and the first Gulf War. Don't even try to tell me I don't know about warfare.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SGT-MILLER View Post
I just want to ask you a few questions?
How old are you? Look at my profile if you had you wouldn't be asking me this
Quote:
Originally Posted by SGT-MILLER View Post
Do you know what sacrifice is?
My great uncle got is freaking head blown off by a German sniper so yea I know what sacrifice is.



Quote:
Originally Posted by SGT-MILLER View Post
Good people are still dying every day, so I will always maintain that every decision that the US government makes must be well-thought out and rational, because every decision means that family members will have to bury their loved ones.
Yes people are still dying because the military has it all screwed up and wrong. This stupid bs of precision bombing and having to tap someone on the shoulder and ask them if its ok to kill them will never win a freaking war. When a civilian dies people act like we just killed 6 million Jews. I'm sick of this trash and I'm sick of this idiotic way of fighting a war. We will never win in Iraq or Afganistan fighting a war like this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SGT-MILLER View Post
I'm proud of the accomplishments of the US military so far, because there are alot, and unfortunately the media does not broadcast them.
Because the Obama media mania are to busy sniffing his butt and acting like the world has come to an end every time a civilian dies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SGT-MILLER View Post
I still have faith in the US government, as flawed as it is, even though you obviously couldn't care less.
I'm all for the military but not the goverment. Until they change thier tactics we will have alot of trouble fighting wack jobs like Bin Laden and his group of rag head screw balls.
__________________

Last edited by Slickrick214; 09-22-2008 at 02:55 AM.
Slickrick214 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2008, 03:11 AM   #22
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
SGT-MILLER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,354
Liked 6 Times on 5 Posts

Default

I have also studied military tactics more than you can know.

Old military tactics have no bearing in todays asymmetrical warfare. Today's military knows exactly what they are doing. You, on the other hand, is uninformed, because you are basing everything on historical facts and figures.

I'm sorry to hear that your uncle gave his life, but that doesn't mean you sacrificed anything for this country. Your uncle sacrificed, not you.

Do not presume that you can instruct me on military affairs. I know my duties, and my military histories. You have read books, and presume you are an expert on the subject. I am now welcoming this debate, as it's been awhile since I've had one.

Since you're an "expert" on the subject, can you tell me what your plan would be on this current war. How would you go about directing the warfighting efforts of two asymmetric war fronts? Go ahead and "educate" me on how you would handle everything from combat logistics issues, to combatant commander organization, and cooperation, and handling the diplomacy efforts required to maintain combat support airlift (i.e. diplomatic clearances - since you read history, you'll know how important that is). Also, explain to me how you would handle to politics of the war (i.e. keeping the media off your back), and handling the multi-service movements around the theatre of operations. How exactly would you base your initial and follow-up combat forces? If you were to use the USAF, how would you set up the attack forces, and the tactical/strategic forces? How would you balance the use of our Special forces with our conventional armies? Would you want to open up more combat fronts, and if so, where and why? Do you have a budgeting plan to support any new operations? Will you be able to use other countries as staging for logistical supply?

You say you are educated in the matter of military affairs. If that is the case, let's have an educated debate.

Otherwise, go back to reading military historical books, and looking at the cool pictures inside them, and leave the military planning and decision to the adults.

__________________
SGT-MILLER is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2008, 03:47 AM   #23
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Slickrick214's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 187
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SGT-MILLER View Post
I have also studied military tactics more than you can know.

Old military tactics have no bearing in todays asymmetrical warfare. Today's military knows exactly what they are doing. You, on the other hand, is uninformed, because you are basing everything on historical facts and figures.
Thats exactly what is wrong here. It does. If we went back to the old way of fighting maybe we wouldn't be so screwed up in Iraq and Afganistan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SGT-MILLER View Post
I'm sorry to hear that your uncle gave his life, but that doesn't mean you sacrificed anything for this country. Your uncle sacrificed, not you.
You didn't ask me if I sacrificed anything you asked me if I knew what it meant and I gave you personal example.



Quote:
Originally Posted by SGT-MILLER View Post
Since you're an "expert" on the subject, can you tell me what your plan would be on this current war.
I never claimed to be an expert..I would really like to know where exactly I said that. I said it was my main concentration in my masters degree for history. Why I chose 19th century tacticts and the Civil War I don't know. I could have done something alot easier like the battle of Gettysburg.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SGT-MILLER View Post
How would you go about directing the warfighting efforts of two asymmetric war fronts? Go ahead and "educate" me on how you would handle everything from combat logistics issues, to combatant commander organization, and cooperation, and handling the diplomacy efforts required to maintain combat support airlift (i.e. diplomatic clearances - since you read history, you'll know how important that is). Also, explain to me how you would handle to politics of the war (i.e. keeping the media off your back), and handling the multi-service movements around the theatre of operations. How exactly would you base your initial and follow-up combat forces? If you were to use the USAF, how would you set up the attack forces, and the tactical/strategic forces? How would you balance the use of our Special forces with our conventional armies? Would you want to open up more combat fronts, and if so, where and why? Do you have a budgeting plan to support any new operations? Will you be able to use other countries as staging for logistical supply?
I don't have time to get into everything. Do you know how long it will take to write every movement I would make..I would be here for a century.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SGT-MILLER View Post
and leave the military planning and decision to the adults.
Sure I'll leave the military planning to stupid sh!ts like you and the rest of the army that have no idea how to fight a war.
__________________
Slickrick214 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2008, 04:08 AM   #24
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
SGT-MILLER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,354
Liked 6 Times on 5 Posts

Default

You do not know what sacrifice means. You heard about your uncle, and about how he gave his life in a war. You know the dictionary's definition of sacrifice, but you do not truly understand it.

I think you have plenty of time to answer all my other questions I presented you. Feel free to send me a PM once you manage to get some answers for me.

You have already demonstrated that you have no credibility. Being able to effectively debate any subject is a simple task that anyone with half a brain can accomplish. You are starting to degenerate into insults, which means you are frustrated, and you really don't have an argument to stand on. I would advise you to stay out of affairs you do not fully understand. You risk making yourself out to be a fool every time (like you are doing right now).

Feel free to drop out of this debate at anytime, so you can continue to read your history books, and memorize more facts and figures.

Since you just stated that you have a masters (or very close to having) degree, I can't help but wonder why you are not conducting yourself more befitting of an educated person with a college level education?

__________________
SGT-MILLER is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2008, 04:15 AM   #25
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 93
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SGT-MILLER View Post

Old military tactics have no bearing in todays asymmetrical warfare.
I have to disagree on a few parts, our snipers our still using technology that is hundreds of years old, and is as valuable as it was then if ever, the only real difference is the weapons which are more advanced and sophisticated.
__________________
mpoirier22114 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2008, 04:18 AM   #26
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
SGT-MILLER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,354
Liked 6 Times on 5 Posts

Default

Even snipers are used in a non-traditional way which is very different from the historical use of them.

Some units may use tried and true technology, but the way the units are utilized are much different in certain cases.

Nobody really cared what the definition of asymmetrical warfare was until this current conflict popped up.

__________________
SGT-MILLER is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2008, 04:40 AM   #27
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Slickrick214's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 187
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SGT-MILLER View Post
You have already demonstrated that you have no credibility. Being able to effectively debate any subject is a simple task that anyone with half a brain can accomplish. You are starting to degenerate into insults, which means you are frustrated, and you really don't have an argument to stand on.
There is nothing else to debate. This thread is beyond beating a dead horse. The horse was dead along time ago and your beating on the skeleton

Quote:
Originally Posted by SGT-MILLER View Post
Feel free to drop out of this debate at anytime, so you can continue to read your history books, and memorize more facts and figures
I will..and I will learn from the misakes made by militaries in the past and how they can be fixed in the future. Thats more then anyone can say for the retards in Washington and in the military today. Maybe if they read a few history books they would have learned from Vietnam ad they wouldn't be making the same mistakes again today.
__________________
Slickrick214 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
"Lone wolf terrorists" mr1911 Politics, Religion and Controversy 5 06-15-2009 02:01 AM
Miranda rights for suspected terrorists Jo da Plumbr Politics, Religion and Controversy 12 06-14-2009 03:13 AM
Should terrorists be given Constitutional rights? skullcrusher Politics, Religion and Controversy 34 06-11-2009 04:53 PM
Gasp! terrorists dont want to be "reached out" to roosterjuicer Politics, Religion and Controversy 19 04-01-2009 10:05 PM
Supreme Court Surrenders Us To Terrorists ScottG Politics, Religion and Controversy 21 06-14-2008 02:06 PM