I work with some people who were ex-military and fought in afghanistan.
Lets just say, they arent sad.
I train with current military that had boots on ground in the sandbox. 1 was a Corpsman for 24 months and one was a IA (Naval volunteer soldier).
Mostly what happens over there is patrols..... aka, martial law. There are few places that need captured and few things that need searched. They patrol until they get a tip and then they take care of it. Out of 8 months the IA only had 1 break from patrols and it was to investigate a bomb lab and it turned out to be bad info.
The Middle East is not guns blazing and people dropping dead left and right.
Understandable, considering that my mom is infinitely better than you.
Are you suggesting that she has a bigger **** than me!?
I never said that there was a difference. I think you are an intelligent person, savior, and I believe that you think outside of the box. So I want you to re-read my previous post. My contention is that in order for the conspiracy theory to work, there must be a difference between Democrat and Republican parties.
The theory is that bin Laden was killed earlier in the Bush administration, but the announcement was held off like a secret trap card to be revealed when Obama needed it. The scenario implies two things 1) Obama or his party is desperate to improve his approval ratings; 2) the Republicans and the Democrats are working together because Bush sacrificed his own approval ratings for the future president. These two things are contradictory. Approval ratings only matter for a president considering a second term, or in the case of Bush, for a party interested in getting another candidate in office. But why would the government need more votes in favor of one candidate over another if the parties are the same? If they are the same, then it doesn't matter who gets credit. Bush could get credit, the Republicans could get voter support, and McCain could become president. Or Obama's ratings could plummet, and they'd just replace him with a Republican. It wouldn't matter either way, and it wouldn't be worth it to stage something of this magnitude that is not only costly in terms of military undertaking, but also for the negative impact it has on foreign relations with other countries and the added danger it puts Americans and the rest of the world in for retaliatory attacks.
Furthermore, how did they anticipate that a future need would arise that would require them to make the announcement? What if Obama's ratings had stayed high? Would they have never made the announcement?
Consider also what this conspiracy theory is placing at the center of the motivation of political actors: the American public. The assumption at the root of the conspiracy is that the American public's opinion is so valuable that the government would tamper with an extremely complicated military operation and endanger international relations in order to win the approval of the American public, while putting that same public at risk.
Do you think that the approval of the American public is worth that much? Especially if both parties are the same. What is voter approval worth if both parties are the same?
Does this theory strike you at all as being somewhat ego-centric on the part of the spectator, one who can do nothing but watch these events unfold, one who places such worth on his opinion to think that complex events are being constructed only as an elaborate show to control his view of the world? Implying that his view of the world is somehow of great importance.
This.
Assuming that the two parties are working together, if he gets voted out of office, a Republican will take his place, and things will continue as before.
*I read it to fast.... my bad
I honestly think that theory is nothing but...... a secondary achievement.
I think that the main reason why Osama's death was announced right now is because the American people have lost faith in this war. In this past week I have heard time and time again "OH! We finally got him, we are finally getting somewhere." The people's morale has improved.
Think about it, with our government practically falling apart what a better excuse to keep funding the war than "We got the lead terrorist and now we are currently tracking down his subordinates so we can finally end this war." *cue crowd applause for they think the war we finally be over* Guess what though, it was just another excuse to prolong it.
Krauts start srs bzns. England save the day as always. Everyone wanted to avoid that way but treaties etc etc.
Well it's about time they save instead of ****. You do know that most Independence Days are celebrated because that country became Independent from England? lol
Here in about 30 years Iraq will have an Independence Day.
Lol, don't start with that bull****.
See that's ********. I am a MORAL MAN but you know, I'd enjoy torturing someone to death. Also why does everyone pick on child molesters? Has anyone ever consider that the child they groom and **** might be a ****?
Man seriously some of the kids I went to school with, if some dude at the time took them and ***** them I'd probably give the molester a high five.
Moral's= of, pertaining to, or concerned with the principles or rules of right conduct or the distinction between right and wrong
It is not right to kill innocent. However, child molesters are not innocent, so they go out of my moral standards and become fair game.
And child molesters **** little kids up in the head and they pretty much stayed ****ed up for the rest of their lives.... especially when they are males. That's why people pick on them.
Who said anything about justification?
Besides I think people care way too much about ****/sexual assault/molestation.
It's mainly because people think sex is such serious business.
Teran, you are the biggest troll moderator I have ever met. I think I am in love with you.
Also, the politican quote is hilarious haha.
