It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by nextguyinline
I was under the impression that there was enough troops to get the job done, and that the generals of the armed forces requested such—and it was the private sector generals, Rumsfeld and crew, who insisted the job could be done with less.
Originally posted by superpaul55
SpeakerofTruth, do not try to state that the United States has a small military. You easily have the largest military force on the planet, you have bases scattered everywhere and are currently on a conquest for global supremecy. You are the global facists, you have more military presence globally and a stockpile of 8'000 nucleur weapons. May I ask you, at who do you think these warheads are aimed? If you could give me a list numbered from 1 to 8000 it would be highly appreciated. You are a pretender.
Originally posted by mel1962
superpaul your attack on the speakerofthetruth is uncalled for!
We are debating this war and America and Britain are paying a price. We only want the best for all, unfortunately we are being failed by our leadership.
Don't be so high minded, we are all on the same side, just debating different aspects.
Chill
Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
It's funny to me that Bush ran on the notion of lessening the pressure on our overstretched military. It is more stretched now than it has ever been!! I just really don't understand this guy at all.
You have systematically devestated countries worldwide leaving the citizens to live in squalor and death for the last 100 years. It will not be forgotten.
Originally posted by superpaul55
SpeakerofTruth, do not try to state that the United States has a small military. You easily have the largest military force on the planet, you have bases scattered everywhere and are currently on a conquest for global supremecy.
U.S Personnel
Total troops 2,685,713 (Ranked 7th)
Originally posted by superpaul55
Unfortunately this is not uncalled for. SpeakerofTruth is not a 'speaker of truth' and has just been removed from his little media based pod. We are not on the same side at all. America and Britain may have payed a small so-called 'price' for this international piracy. I will tell you who has paid the real price.
The 100'000 dead Iraqi's civilians just trying to live their lives, making the best of what they had. They had no choice whether to be born in Iraq. They had no choice whether to take place in 'humanitarian bombing' events. They didn't want to die. Nobody talks of them, they are an embarrassment to this new era of 'high precison capability warefare'. To end this disgrace a new attitude is required, this attitude requires America to stop invading sovereign states and respect people.
Superpaul
In some respects I agree with you. It all comes down to the quicker the war is over the less that will die.
We have 2 choices, send more troops and slaughter the insurgency
or
pull out and let them slaughter each other and let one side win.
Not very good choices, but that is what they are unfortunately and there is nothing you or I can do about it.
Originally posted by superpaul55
Would you like to provide me that list numbered from 1 to 8000 please? I was just wondering what targets your military expansion would cover that are not already covered?
I[edit on 18-1-2007 by superpaul55]
Originally posted by grover
I am sorry Marge but that simply is not correct. After the fall of the Soviet Union, during the tenure of Bush senior, the Republican leadership decided that in keeping with their rhetoric about fiscal responsiblity that without the threat of the Soviet Union, we could begin downsizing the military.