|
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
Gosh. You could make the argument that they were much more prepared for what they faced than, I dunno, say, every division that stormed the beaches at Normandy that promptly got mowed over and massacred by artillery and machine gun fire. Oh wait--I forgot--that was one of history's most brilliant military maneuvers. So no, I don't necessarily agree with you that they "aren't good words to be known for." They are true words spoken that have been twisted by the opposition to gain a political upper-hand.
As I've said many times before, a good plan today is better than a perfect plan tomorrow (not my quote, of course). To then use hindsight for political gain by criticizing imperfect planning is not honorable nor respectful. To use it for better future planning and constructive criticism, however, is. So please kindly shut the fuck up already. I'm not fooled by your antics and no 8 page reply by you citing every editorial you can get your hands on will change that, IMHO.
Happy New Year to you and the Mrs., by the way. Sincerely. |
Good post. Too many people are playing monday quarterbackers.
Blabbing on and on and on and on and on like 'one general
said we needed more than 100k troops blah blah blah' then
say 'your military said not to go to war' from that ^^^ one
general making a suggestion.
And all of a sudden these people are experts on foreign
and military affairs lol.
Oh and if we did release figures on the amount of enemies
we kill and arrest, it would be MANY times more than the
amount of our casualties, so yes we're fucking 'Them' up.
___________________
 
Electric Zoo 2010! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVE-RutexSE
|