Total Posts:64|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

RIP Norman Schwarzkopf

wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2012 7:40:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
"Retired Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf, who led allied forces to a routing of Iraq in the 1991 Persian Gulf War and became one of the nation's most celebrated military heroes of the era, died Thursday, a U.S. defense official said. He was 78."

http://www.cnn.com...

"Schwarzkopf told CNN's Larry King in a September 1992 interview that the preferred plan with Iraq was to avoid ever having to invade."

"While his role in the Gulf War made him famous, Schwarzkopf told King, war itself and the bloodshed that went with it didn't appeal to him."

"I hate war. Absolutely, I hate war," he said. "Good generalship is a realization that ... you've got to try and figure out how to accomplish your mission with a minimum loss of human life."

"In his autobiography, "It Doesn't Take A Hero," Schwarzkopf outlined the reasons that coalition forces didn't press on to the Iraqi capital during the first Gulf War."

"Had the United States and the United Kingdom gone on alone to capture Baghdad, under the provisions of the Geneva and Hague conventions we would have been considered occupying powers and therefore would have been responsible for all the costs of maintaining or restoring government, education and other services for the people of Iraq."

"Schwarzkopf wrote that had "we taken all of Iraq, we would have been like a dinosaur in the tar pit -- we would still be there, and we, not the United Nations, would be bearing the costs of that occupation."


Was Schwarzkophf right in 1991? Did this logic apply in 2003?
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2012 8:35:17 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Well, he should be thankful that there's no afterlife, or he'd be burning in hell rather than resting in peace.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2012 8:36:08 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/29/2012 8:35:17 PM, charleslb wrote:
Well, he should be thankful that there's no afterlife, or he'd be burning in hell rather than resting in peace.

???
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
Deathbeforedishonour
Posts: 1,058
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2012 9:05:23 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/29/2012 8:35:17 PM, charleslb wrote:
Well, he should be thankful that there's no afterlife, or he'd be burning in hell rather than resting in peace.

Go away commie. Your distain for all things American and for this valiant man is not welcomed.
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." ~ John 1:1

Matthew 10:22- "And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved."
lannan13
Posts: 23,017
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2012 9:43:01 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/29/2012 9:05:23 PM, Deathbeforedishonour wrote:
At 12/29/2012 8:35:17 PM, charleslb wrote:
Well, he should be thankful that there's no afterlife, or he'd be burning in hell rather than resting in peace.

Go away commie. Your distain for all things American and for this valiant man is not welcomed.

Yes, and take you paganism with you...
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-Lannan13'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

If the sky's the limit then why do we have footprints on the Moon? I'm shooting my aspirations for the stars.

"If you are going through hell, keep going." "Sir Winston Churchill

"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." "Eleanor Roosevelt

Topics I want to debate. (http://tinyurl.com...)
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2012 10:06:16 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/29/2012 9:43:01 PM, lannan13 wrote:
At 12/29/2012 9:05:23 PM, Deathbeforedishonour wrote:
At 12/29/2012 8:35:17 PM, charleslb wrote:
Well, he should be thankful that there's no afterlife, or he'd be burning in hell rather than resting in peace.

Go away commie. Your distain for all things American and for this valiant man is not welcomed.

Yes, and take you paganism with you...

Apparently he took your advice...account no longer active.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2012 1:33:28 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/29/2012 8:36:08 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 12/29/2012 8:35:17 PM, charleslb wrote:
Well, he should be thankful that there's no afterlife, or he'd be burning in hell rather than resting in peace.

???

He played an instrumental, i.e., a particularly culpable part in the taking of quite a few human lives to serve the special economic interests and realpolitik agenda of the elite. Mm-hmm, participation in such heinously unrighteous wholesale military slaughter, especially at his level, makes one a mass murderer most foul, and in the belief systems of those sweet people who believe in the existence of a literal hell, a very good candidate indeed for eternal torment in the pit. But apparently to your mind his U.S. Army uniform was made of some form of consecrated Teflon and none of his sins stick to it or to his moral character, ergo your question marks and your inability to conceive of how he could be viewed as an iniquitous individual deserving of fire & brimstone? Or perhaps you believe that there's a Dorian Gray type American flag hidden away in some Washington archive mystically absorbing all of the evils committed by this country's military men (and women), growing ever more corrupt and vile every time "the troops" aggress against some Third-World victim for the strategic & economic benefit of the ruling class and thus preserving our dear GIs and jarheads from any and all taint and degradation? Well, you certainly seem to have some bit of difficulty viewing American military leaders and personnel as villains, you have kind of a patriotic blind spot for them, don't you? Come on, fess up now.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2012 1:35:50 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/29/2012 10:06:16 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 12/29/2012 9:43:01 PM, lannan13 wrote:
At 12/29/2012 9:05:23 PM, Deathbeforedishonour wrote:
At 12/29/2012 8:35:17 PM, charleslb wrote:
Well, he should be thankful that there's no afterlife, or he'd be burning in hell rather than resting in peace.

Go away commie. Your distain for all things American and for this valiant man is not welcomed.

Yes, and take you paganism with you...

Apparently he took your advice...account no longer active.

You do rather jump to conclusions, don't you?! A tendency you might wish to rein in.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2012 1:56:53 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/30/2012 1:35:50 PM, charleslb wrote:
At 12/29/2012 10:06:16 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 12/29/2012 9:43:01 PM, lannan13 wrote:
At 12/29/2012 9:05:23 PM, Deathbeforedishonour wrote:
At 12/29/2012 8:35:17 PM, charleslb wrote:
Well, he should be thankful that there's no afterlife, or he'd be burning in hell rather than resting in peace.

Go away commie. Your distain for all things American and for this valiant man is not welcomed.

Yes, and take you paganism with you...

Apparently he took your advice...account no longer active.

You do rather jump to conclusions, don't you?! A tendency you might wish to rein in.

You came back just to tell ME that? I'm flattered.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2012 9:18:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/30/2012 1:33:28 PM, charleslb wrote:
At 12/29/2012 8:36:08 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 12/29/2012 8:35:17 PM, charleslb wrote:
Well, he should be thankful that there's no afterlife, or he'd be burning in hell rather than resting in peace.

???

He played an instrumental, i.e., a particularly culpable part in the taking of quite a few human lives to serve the special economic interests and realpolitik agenda of the elite...etc

Ok, to the extent that you MIGHT actually hold this view in earnest, I'll simply respond that "Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil," (Thomas Paine, Common Sense), and that guys like Schwarzkopf should be commended for minimizing this evil to the greatest extent possible.

With this in mind, I encourage you to reread this article, and hopefully rethink your perspective. Cheers and Happy New Year (you grumpy little SOB) :D

http://www.ushistory.org...
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2012 11:17:31 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/29/2012 8:35:17 PM, charleslb wrote:
Well, he should be thankful that there's no afterlife, or he'd be burning in hell rather than resting in peace.

OMFG. YOU MADE A SHORT, TO THE POINT, NO USELESS JIBBERJABBER, POST!!!!

*hands flowers, pins a badge on*

Here are seem complimentary flowers, and a badge. I knew you could do it someday! Others, they scoffed at the idea, but I had faith!

Congratulations Charleslb.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
tmar19652
Posts: 727
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2012 2:18:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/29/2012 8:35:17 PM, charleslb wrote:
Well, he should be thankful that there's no afterlife, or he'd be burning in hell rather than resting in peace.

Are you kidding? Stormin norman was one of our best generals ever. He understood the value of the media in war and steered clear of unethical conduct in his personal life. He was a tireless advocate for our warriors and he deserves a spot behind the pearly gates of heaven.
"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." -Ronald Reagan

"The notion of political correctness declares certain topics, certain ex<x>pressions even certain gestures off-limits. What began as a crusade for civility has soured into a cause of conflict and even censorship." -George H.W. Bush
tmar19652
Posts: 727
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2012 2:23:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/30/2012 1:33:28 PM, charleslb wrote:
At 12/29/2012 8:36:08 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 12/29/2012 8:35:17 PM, charleslb wrote:
Well, he should be thankful that there's no afterlife, or he'd be burning in hell rather than resting in peace.

???

He played an instrumental, i.e., a particularly culpable part in the taking of quite a few human lives to serve the special economic interests and realpolitik agenda of the elite. Mm-hmm, participation in such heinously unrighteous wholesale military slaughter, especially at his level, makes one a mass murderer most foul, and in the belief systems of those sweet people who believe in the existence of a literal hell, a very good candidate indeed for eternal torment in the pit. But apparently to your mind his U.S. Army uniform was made of some form of consecrated Teflon and none of his sins stick to it or to his moral character, ergo your question marks and your inability to conceive of how he could be viewed as an iniquitous individual deserving of fire & brimstone? Or perhaps you believe that there's a Dorian Gray type American flag hidden away in some Washington archive mystically absorbing all of the evils committed by this country's military men (and women), growing ever more corrupt and vile every time "the troops" aggress against some Third-World victim for the strategic & economic benefit of the ruling class and thus preserving our dear GIs and jarheads from any and all taint and degradation? Well, you certainly seem to have some bit of difficulty viewing American military leaders and personnel as villains, you have kind of a patriotic blind spot for them, don't you? Come on, fess up now.

No matter what he did, he was a hero in Vietnam and risked his life to save several soldiers from a minefield, can you really argue he was a bad man? No you can't.
"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." -Ronald Reagan

"The notion of political correctness declares certain topics, certain ex<x>pressions even certain gestures off-limits. What began as a crusade for civility has soured into a cause of conflict and even censorship." -George H.W. Bush
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2013 2:34:28 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/30/2012 9:18:49 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 12/30/2012 1:33:28 PM, charleslb wrote:
At 12/29/2012 8:36:08 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 12/29/2012 8:35:17 PM, charleslb wrote:
Well, he should be thankful that there's no afterlife, or he'd be burning in hell rather than resting in peace.

???

He played an instrumental, i.e., a particularly culpable part in the taking of quite a few human lives to serve the special economic interests and realpolitik agenda of the elite...etc

Ok, to the extent that you MIGHT actually hold this view in earnest, I'll simply respond that "Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil," (Thomas Paine, Common Sense), and that guys like Schwarzkopf should be commended for minimizing this evil to the greatest extent possible.

http://assets.diylol.com...
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2013 9:46:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/1/2013 2:34:28 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 12/30/2012 9:18:49 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 12/30/2012 1:33:28 PM, charleslb wrote:
At 12/29/2012 8:36:08 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 12/29/2012 8:35:17 PM, charleslb wrote:
Well, he should be thankful that there's no afterlife, or he'd be burning in hell rather than resting in peace.

???

He played an instrumental, i.e., a particularly culpable part in the taking of quite a few human lives to serve the special economic interests and realpolitik agenda of the elite...etc

Ok, to the extent that you MIGHT actually hold this view in earnest, I'll simply respond that "Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil," (Thomas Paine, Common Sense), and that guys like Schwarzkopf should be commended for minimizing this evil to the greatest extent possible.

Really, in what way, pray tell, do ethically challenged military men, such as ole Norm, who serve the ole voracious-for-our-tax-dollars Defense Department-big business-big government complex by making war on Third-World countries minimize the extent of the evil constituted and perpetrated by our government? I'm afraid that your logic here truly does escape me, please clarify. Thank you. (And, btw, I hold in earnest all of the views that I express, I'm most certainly not a facetious troll, that's often just an epithet tossed about by intolerant right-leaning types who can't bear the aggravation of someone such as moi expressing an opposing radical viewpoint.)
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2013 10:01:57 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/31/2012 2:23:10 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 12/30/2012 1:33:28 PM, charleslb wrote:
At 12/29/2012 8:36:08 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 12/29/2012 8:35:17 PM, charleslb wrote:
Well, he should be thankful that there's no afterlife, or he'd be burning in hell rather than resting in peace.

???

He played an instrumental, i.e., a particularly culpable part in the taking of quite a few human lives to serve the special economic interests and realpolitik agenda of the elite. Mm-hmm, participation in such heinously unrighteous wholesale military slaughter, especially at his level, makes one a mass murderer most foul, and in the belief systems of those sweet people who believe in the existence of a literal hell, a very good candidate indeed for eternal torment in the pit. But apparently to your mind his U.S. Army uniform was made of some form of consecrated Teflon and none of his sins stick to it or to his moral character, ergo your question marks and your inability to conceive of how he could be viewed as an iniquitous individual deserving of fire & brimstone? Or perhaps you believe that there's a Dorian Gray type American flag hidden away in some Washington archive mystically absorbing all of the evils committed by this country's military men (and women), growing ever more corrupt and vile every time "the troops" aggress against some Third-World victim for the strategic & economic benefit of the ruling class and thus preserving our dear GIs and jarheads from any and all taint and degradation? Well, you certainly seem to have some bit of difficulty viewing American military leaders and personnel as villains, you have kind of a patriotic blind spot for them, don't you? Come on, fess up now.

No matter what he did, he was a hero in Vietnam and risked his life to save several soldiers from a minefield, can you really argue he was a bad man? No you can't.

Hmm, well, tell that to the ghosts of all of the innocent Vietnamese victims of an imperialistic war whose manifestly unjust nature in fact disqualifies all of its American perpetrators and participants from being viewed as "heroes".

You're quite simply making the socioculturally programmed error of thinking patriotically rather than ethically. Ethically speaking unjust killing is ipso facto murder or manslaughter, ergo military men who take part in unjust wars are engaged in a bit of homicidally bad business and don't in the slightest deserve to be hero-worshipped. Again, it's only your amoral patriotism that blocks you from grokking this bit of pretty simple ethical reasoning. Stop thinking from your nationalism and make an effort to think from your humanity.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
tmar19652
Posts: 727
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2013 5:01:10 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/1/2013 10:01:57 PM, charleslb wrote:
At 12/31/2012 2:23:10 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 12/30/2012 1:33:28 PM, charleslb wrote:
At 12/29/2012 8:36:08 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 12/29/2012 8:35:17 PM, charleslb wrote:
Well, he should be thankful that there's no afterlife, or he'd be burning in hell rather than resting in peace.

???

He played an instrumental, i.e., a particularly culpable part in the taking of quite a few human lives to serve the special economic interests and realpolitik agenda of the elite. Mm-hmm, participation in such heinously unrighteous wholesale military slaughter, especially at his level, makes one a mass murderer most foul, and in the belief systems of those sweet people who believe in the existence of a literal hell, a very good candidate indeed for eternal torment in the pit. But apparently to your mind his U.S. Army uniform was made of some form of consecrated Teflon and none of his sins stick to it or to his moral character, ergo your question marks and your inability to conceive of how he could be viewed as an iniquitous individual deserving of fire & brimstone? Or perhaps you believe that there's a Dorian Gray type American flag hidden away in some Washington archive mystically absorbing all of the evils committed by this country's military men (and women), growing ever more corrupt and vile every time "the troops" aggress against some Third-World victim for the strategic & economic benefit of the ruling class and thus preserving our dear GIs and jarheads from any and all taint and degradation? Well, you certainly seem to have some bit of difficulty viewing American military leaders and personnel as villains, you have kind of a patriotic blind spot for them, don't you? Come on, fess up now.

No matter what he did, he was a hero in Vietnam and risked his life to save several soldiers from a minefield, can you really argue he was a bad man? No you can't.

Hmm, well, tell that to the ghosts of all of the innocent Vietnamese victims of an imperialistic war whose manifestly unjust nature in fact disqualifies all of its American perpetrators and participants from being viewed as "heroes".

You're quite simply making the socioculturally programmed error of thinking patriotically rather than ethically. Ethically speaking unjust killing is ipso facto murder or manslaughter, ergo military men who take part in unjust wars are engaged in a bit of homicidally bad business and don't in the slightest deserve to be hero-worshipped. Again, it's only your amoral patriotism that blocks you from grokking this bit of pretty simple ethical reasoning. Stop thinking from your nationalism and make an effort to think from your humanity.

How many more Americans would have died had he not been a great general? He had a job to do, and he did it. Storm in Norman is sitting in heaven looking down on us right now for all he did.
"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." -Ronald Reagan

"The notion of political correctness declares certain topics, certain ex<x>pressions even certain gestures off-limits. What began as a crusade for civility has soured into a cause of conflict and even censorship." -George H.W. Bush
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2013 1:27:39 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/1/2013 9:46:02 PM, charleslb wrote:

Really, in what way, pray tell, do ethically challenged military men, such as ole Norm, who serve the ole voracious-for-our-tax-dollars Defense Department-big business-big government complex by making war on Third-World countries minimize the extent of the evil constituted and perpetrated by our government? I'm afraid that your logic here truly does escape me, please clarify. Thank you.

1) The Defense Department is presided over by Congress and the President. If you have a problem with ethics, it starts and ends there.

As you can see from my OP, Schwarzkopf recommended a strategy DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED to what Bush ended up doing in 2003. Schwarzkopf was not the only one - most of the military establishment recommended a wholly different plan than what Bush ended up running with. Bush wholly rejected sound military advice, and prosecuted his own war on unfavorable terms.

Much of Congress was vehemently opposed to such action (which ended up being largely unilateral), but given the circumstances of a great evil done to our country - 9/11 - they felt compelled to "march in step".

The military is also compelled to "march in step". They made their recommendations to the Bush administration, and their recommendations were wholly rejected by the White House. The military was then left the choice of either coup d'etat, assassination of Bush, or following orders. They chose the latter option.

2) Again, I encourage you to reread the article. Schwarzkopf's "preferred plan with Iraq was to avoid ever having to invade."

"I hate war. Absolutely, I hate war," he said. "Good generalship is a realization that ... you've got to try and figure out how to accomplish your mission with a minimum loss of human life."

This mission is given to generals BY THE WHITE HOUSE. Generals are compelled to obey, or face charges of treason. If you want to complain about ethics, take it up with the Bush White House. In fact, get in line.

I hope this answers your sincere inquiry to your satisfaction.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2013 1:30:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/2/2013 5:01:10 AM, tmar19652 wrote:

How many more Americans would have died had he not been a great general? He had a job to do, and he did it. Storm in Norman is sitting in heaven looking down on us right now for all he did.

That's easy to answer - 5000, right? That's around how many died in Bush's Iraq War.

The REAL question is how many FEWER IRAQIS would have died had we followed his advice in 2003. Body count in Iraq is in low to mid six figures right now.

Keep in mind that for every Iraqi father or mother that died, an Iraqi son or daughter gets raised hating America and will probably harbor radical terrorist sentiments.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2013 3:39:24 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/2/2013 1:27:39 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 1/1/2013 9:46:02 PM, charleslb wrote:

Really, in what way, pray tell, do ethically challenged military men, such as ole Norm, who serve the ole voracious-for-our-tax-dollars Defense Department-big business-big government complex by making war on Third-World countries minimize the extent of the evil constituted and perpetrated by our government? I'm afraid that your logic here truly does escape me, please clarify. Thank you.

1) The Defense Department is presided over by Congress and the President. If you have a problem with ethics, it starts and ends there.

As you can see from my OP, Schwarzkopf recommended a strategy DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED to what Bush ended up doing in 2003. Schwarzkopf was not the only one - most of the military establishment recommended a wholly different plan than what Bush ended up running with. Bush wholly rejected sound military advice, and prosecuted his own war on unfavorable terms.

Much of Congress was vehemently opposed to such action (which ended up being largely unilateral), but given the circumstances of a great evil done to our country - 9/11 - they felt compelled to "march in step".

The military is also compelled to "march in step". They made their recommendations to the Bush administration, and their recommendations were wholly rejected by the White House. The military was then left the choice of either coup d'etat, assassination of Bush, or following orders. They chose the latter option.

2) Again, I encourage you to reread the article. Schwarzkopf's "preferred plan with Iraq was to avoid ever having to invade."

"I hate war. Absolutely, I hate war," he said. "Good generalship is a realization that ... you've got to try and figure out how to accomplish your mission with a minimum loss of human life."

This mission is given to generals BY THE WHITE HOUSE. Generals are compelled to obey, or face charges of treason. If you want to complain about ethics, take it up with the Bush White House. In fact, get in line.


I hope this answers your sincere inquiry to your satisfaction.

Well, you're even more unkind to "the boys" and girls in the military than moi, reducing them to mere killer automatons who have no ability to take a moral stance. Even I don't deny their humanity in such an ungenerous fashion! But then this isn't really a terribly original defense, I'm sure you're merely regurgitating thinking that your brain has been fed from childhood. Well, you might try practicing a bit of critical thinking for a change, you'll find it challenging but well worth the effort.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2013 3:42:24 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/30/2012 1:56:53 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 12/30/2012 1:35:50 PM, charleslb wrote:
At 12/29/2012 10:06:16 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 12/29/2012 9:43:01 PM, lannan13 wrote:
At 12/29/2012 9:05:23 PM, Deathbeforedishonour wrote:
At 12/29/2012 8:35:17 PM, charleslb wrote:
Well, he should be thankful that there's no afterlife, or he'd be burning in hell rather than resting in peace.

Go away commie. Your distain for all things American and for this valiant man is not welcomed.

Yes, and take you paganism with you...

Apparently he took your advice...account no longer active.

You do rather jump to conclusions, don't you?! A tendency you might wish to rein in.

You came back just to tell ME that? I'm flattered.

Well, in actuality you flatter yourself, now don't you, and with no grounds to do so! Yes, someone here apparently poignantly needs to supply himself with little ego boosts. You might wish to undertake a wee bit of introspection and examine that need.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2013 4:05:59 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/2/2013 3:39:24 PM, charleslb wrote:

Well, you're even more unkind to "the boys" and girls in the military than moi, reducing them to mere killer automatons who have no ability to take a moral stance.

They have a choice but they are not paid to choose. They are paid to follow orders. Therefore, what choice they have in regards to this specific situation amounts to treason or mutiny.

Even I don't deny their humanity in such an ungenerous fashion! But then this isn't really a terribly original defense, I'm sure you're merely regurgitating thinking that your brain has been fed from childhood. Well, you might try practicing a bit of critical thinking for a change, you'll find it challenging but well worth the effort.

I find your entire line of reasoning to be tantamount to non-reason and attempts to do nothing other than to besmirch for the sake of besmirching.

Even if you say your intent is not to troll, you obviously are trolling here by going into ad hominem instead of discussing the topic at hand.

Thanks for showing your true colors.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2013 4:49:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/2/2013 4:05:59 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 1/2/2013 3:39:24 PM, charleslb wrote:


Well, you're even more unkind to "the boys" and girls in the military than moi, reducing them to mere killer automatons who have no ability to take a moral stance.

They have a choice but they are not paid to choose. They are paid to follow orders. Therefore, what choice they have in regards to this specific situation amounts to treason or mutiny.

So, you insist on maintaining that members of the military forfeit a fundamental aspect of their humanity, the right and-or ability to make choices of conscience. Essentially, your condoning their dehumanization without realizing it. Yes, with backhanded apologists such as yourself they certainly don't need critics like little ole me.


Even I don't deny their humanity in such an ungenerous fashion! But then this isn't really a terribly original defense, I'm sure you're merely regurgitating thinking that your brain has been fed from childhood. Well, you might try practicing a bit of critical thinking for a change, you'll find it challenging but well worth the effort.

I find your entire line of reasoning to be tantamount to non-reason and attempts to do nothing other than to besmirch for the sake of besmirching.

Yes, this, alas, is apparently all that your mentality can make of my POV. Oh well.

Even if you say your intent is not to troll, you obviously are trolling here by going into ad hominem instead of discussing the topic at hand.

Thanks for showing your true colors.

Fiddlesticks, pishposh, and piffle.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2013 4:52:23 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Typo correction, "Essentially, your condoning their dehumanization without realizing it." should of course be "Essentially, you're condoning their dehumanization without realizing it."
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2013 6:06:37 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/2/2013 4:49:10 PM, charleslb wrote:
At 1/2/2013 4:05:59 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 1/2/2013 3:39:24 PM, charleslb wrote:

So, you insist on maintaining that members of the military forfeit a fundamental aspect of their humanity, the right and-or ability to make choices of conscience. Essentially, your condoning their dehumanization without realizing it. Yes, with backhanded apologists such as yourself they certainly don't need critics like little ole me.

Like I've already said, the government is a necessary evil. No question that the military is the final and most definitive arm of the government.

There are times where the evil is minimal. Schwarzkopf presided over one of those times.

There are times where the evil is not minimal, i.e. the Bush administration.

In the end, none of us have freedom from death - none of us can make that kind of choice.

You can go back to your utopia now.

Even I don't deny their humanity in such an ungenerous fashion! But then this isn't really a terribly original defense, I'm sure you're merely regurgitating thinking that your brain has been fed from childhood. Well, you might try practicing a bit of critical thinking for a change, you'll find it challenging but well worth the effort.

I find your entire line of reasoning to be tantamount to non-reason and attempts to do nothing other than to besmirch for the sake of besmirching.

Yes, this, alas, is apparently all that your mentality can make of my POV. Oh well.

No, I mean it. You didn't do anything in this paragraph except to insult and ridicule. You didn't have a point, so I made one for you. You're a troll.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 2:48:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/2/2013 6:06:37 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 1/2/2013 4:49:10 PM, charleslb wrote:
At 1/2/2013 4:05:59 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 1/2/2013 3:39:24 PM, charleslb wrote:

So, you insist on maintaining that members of the military forfeit a fundamental aspect of their humanity, the right and-or ability to make choices of conscience. Essentially, your condoning their dehumanization without realizing it. Yes, with backhanded apologists such as yourself they certainly don't need critics like little ole me.

Like I've already said, the government is a necessary evil. No question that the military is the final and most definitive arm of the government.

Put a bit more simply, one might say that the military functions as the violent instrument of the business-political Establishment that exists and reigns from atop our capitalist society's power structure.


There are times where the evil is minimal. Schwarzkopf presided over one of those times.

Hmm, would you have the insensitive chutzpah to attempt to make such a claim to the righteously aggrieved victims of the first Gulf War.

There are times where the evil is not minimal, i.e. the Bush administration.

Well, at least your patriotism & pro-militarism hasn't caused you to suffer a total dissociation from reality.

In the end, none of us have freedom from death - none of us can make that kind of choice.

Ergo immoral, imperialistic wars and the ethically-challenged warriors who wage them aren't to be criticized too severely?

You can go back to your utopia now.

Ah, I see, taking an ethical anti-war stance gets one marginalized as a utopian.

Even I don't deny their humanity in such an ungenerous fashion! But then this isn't really a terribly original defense, I'm sure you're merely regurgitating thinking that your brain has been fed from childhood. Well, you might try practicing a bit of critical thinking for a change, you'll find it challenging but well worth the effort.

I find your entire line of reasoning to be tantamount to non-reason and attempts to do nothing other than to besmirch for the sake of besmirching.

Yes, this, alas, is apparently all that your mentality can make of my POV. Oh well.

No, I mean it. You didn't do anything in this paragraph except to insult and ridicule. You didn't have a point, so I made one for you. You're a troll.

I see, attempt to dismiss me as a troll, that's just brilliant. No, I'm hardly a troll my friend, but as the much-decorated Marine Corps general Smedley Butler astutely observed, war is a racket (i.e., one that patently and grossly profits the rich and high-placed), and you're apparently one of its semi-blind, all too amenable, and pathetically easy dupes.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 2:54:58 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Does my ethical and critical anti-military stance strike some of you as a bit too radical or harsh? Well, it's merely that I don't at all buy into the validity of a moral double standard that on the one harshly judgmental hand categorically condemns those who commit or are complicit in unjustifiable homicide in our so-called civil society regardless of extenuating social factors, and that on the other flag waving and much more forgiving hand hypocritically commends those who have a part in the wrongful life-taking of an unjust war.

Shall I simplify, to participate in killing that's actuated by economic incentives is quite simply immoral, whether you're an armed robber who offs a liquor store clerk for some quick cash, or an army grunt who joined up for the benefits and who finds himself dealing out death in a war/occupation that's being undertaken to economically benefit the corporate elite. There is no genuine, significant ethical distinction, we've simply been socioculturally programmed to think that there is, lest we all take a position of conscience against unjustified military violence that would prevent our political leaders and capitalist overlords from using war as a means to their own ideological and economic ends.

But then of course some of us have managed to reject our programming and see this country's wars and "police actions" for what they truly are, the self-interested aggressions, imperialistic "crimes against international peace", and episodes of capitalist-driven military terrorism perpetrated by the business-political Establishment that uses the armed forces as its own glorified and gargantuan goon squad. Well, the choice is yours, you can remain mentally conformist and patriotic patsies who "support the troops" with the result that they go off and fight, kill, and die for the profiteering likes of Bechtel and Raytheon, or you can join our ranks and begin to cultivate an ethical and critical consciousness that will perhaps make you a part of the moral and life-affirming solution of creating peace rather than the mortal and lethal sin of perpetuating war.

Yes, the choice is indeed yours, make a contribution to breaking the cycles of man's destructive & deathful inhumanity to his fellow man, or continue entertaining and expressing pro-military attitudes that prolong "the terror of history" and add to its already unspeakably atrocious body count.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 3:38:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Btw, let me also refer you to my comments on the Petraeus scandal in the News section, http://www.debate.org...
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.
charleslb
Posts: 4,740
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/3/2013 4:45:37 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
And, oh yes, I do genuinely hope that I haven't really offended anyone on a personal level.
Yo, all of my subliterate conservative criticasters who find perusing and processing the sesquipedalian verbiage of my posts to be such a bothersome brain-taxing chore, I have a new nickname for you. Henceforth you shall be known as Pooh Bears. No, not for the obvious apt reasons, i.e., not because you're full of pooh, and not because of your ursine irritability. Rather, you put me in mind of an A.A. Milne quote, "I am a Bear of Very Little Brain, and long words bother me". Love ya, Pooh Bears.