Will the US bomb Iran?

[Chris_Xavier]

So a whole bunch of guys got college deferments in Vietnam. You're pissed because they used a womb to do what other people have shot off fingers and run away from for generations?

Don't think I forgive that either... but at least is was a bit more "honest". Women getting pregnant to avoid the obligation that they volunteered for. During Vietnam it was a draft at least. When it came time for the women to "earn their pay" they welshed on the deal. Comments like "I didn't think there would be a war" were pretty common. Christ, what did they think might happen when they were taught to use a gun or how to use a bayonet to gut someone?

 

[Chris_Xavier]

Actually, Persia was one of the few places on the globe at one point to embrace pluralism to any degree while Europe was still inquisiting everyone.

True Islam is a very tolerant religion..

 

[Netzach]

Don't think I forgive that either... but at least is was a bit more "honest". Women getting pregnant to avoid the obligation that they volunteered for. During Vietnam it was a draft at least. When it came time for the women to "earn their pay" they welshed on the deal. Comments like "I didn't think there would be a war" were pretty common. Christ, what did they think might happen when they were taught to use a gun or how to use a bayonet to gut someone?

And no men backed out of that little sandbox venture in any way. Or this one.

http://www.laweekly.com/news/news/just-deserters/1401/
http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,138137,00.html
(curious about 2007 stats)
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,265137,00.html
and even faux admits it's going on.

Now, unless the population has gone up a lot, I don't think all these guys are pregnant.

Please.

Everything a woman in the military does is vetted for "proof" in a bullshit way that no man is subject to. And no matter how many die, bleed, and leave children with no one, there's going to be someone scrutinizing and second guessing.

 

[WriterDom]

It's the men dying by a rate of 45:1. Personally, I think the only women that should be in Iraq should be highly trained specialists. There is no need for female truck drivers or cooks. If we need a draft, so be it.

 

[Netzach]

It's the men dying by a rate of 45:1. Personally, I think the only women that should be in Iraq should be highly trained specialists. There is no need for female truck drivers or cooks. If we need a draft, so be it.

Of course it is. And this is total devils advocacy because I am not sure that I think a society that sends women to get blown up alongside men IS a better one. But they are there - the ones who are there deserve a modicum of respect for doing their jobs, not to have everyone ass-picking the things other women did so it somehow colors what they're doing there. I don't evaluate men who go and who fight by those who didn't and don't - as though cowardice is a defect just lurking in them because they have a penis? Can someone explain that logic?

 

[WriterDom]

http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/iran_attack/2007/09/02/29343.html?s=sp&promo_code=396A-1

Pentagon Has 3-Day Blitz Plan for Iran

Sunday, September 2, 2007 6:28 PM

Article Font Size



The United States has a "shock and awe" plan designed to annihilate Iran's military, in the event of an attack.


According to the Sunday Times of London, the plan calls for massive airstrikes against 1,200 targets in Iran, over three days.


Alexis Debat, director of terrorism and national security at the Nixon Center, told the Times that U.S. military planners were not preparing for “pinprick strikes” against Iran’s nuclear facilities. “They’re about taking out the entire Iranian military. ... Whether you go for pinprick strikes or all-out military action, the reaction from the Iranians will be the same.”


President Bush has accused Iran of putting the Middle East “under the shadow of a nuclear holocaust" because of its nuclear program. He has warned that the U.S. and its allies would confront Iran “before it is too late." One Washington source told the Time that the “temperature was rising” inside the administration.


Bush is committed for now to the diplomatic route but thinks Iran is moving towards acquiring a nuclear weapon. According to one well placed source, Washington believes it would be prudent to use rapid, overwhelming force, should military action become necessary.


Israel, which has warned it will not allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons, has made its own preparations for airstrikes and is said to be ready to attack if the Americans back down.

 

[Chris_Xavier]

Alexis Debat, director of terrorism and national security at the Nixon Center, told the Times that U.S. military planners were not preparing for “pinprick strikes” against Iran’s nuclear facilities. “They’re about taking out the entire Iranian military. ... Whether you go for pinprick strikes or all-out military action, the reaction from the Iranians will be the same.”
.

If you're gonna bomb someone, why not destroy their entire military?

 

[BiBunny]

Of course it is. And this is total devils advocacy because I am not sure that I think a society that sends women to get blown up alongside men IS a better one. But they are there - the ones who are there deserve a modicum of respect for doing their jobs, not to have everyone ass-picking the things other women did so it somehow colors what they're doing there. I don't evaluate men who go and who fight by those who didn't and don't - as though cowardice is a defect just lurking in them because they have a penis? Can someone explain that logic?

Thank you, thank you, thank you.

You mean to tell me that there's never been a man who chickenshitted when it mattered? You mean to tell me that there's never been a man who shirked his responsibilities? Like Netz, I'd prefer that nobody get blown up, but as long as there are men and women out there fighting in a fucking useless, pointless battle, they deserve equal goddamned respect.

I swear to God, I never encountered this attitude until I got out into the "real world." I have the best father ever, and, while he may have secretly longed for a son, I'm what he got, and he always made sure that I knew women are just as capable as men.

 

[Chris_Xavier]

Thank you, thank you, thank you.

You mean to tell me that there's never been a man who chickenshitted when it mattered? You mean to tell me that there's never been a man who shirked his responsibilities? Like Netz, I'd prefer that nobody get blown up, but as long as there are men and women out there fighting in a fucking useless, pointless battle, they deserve equal goddamned respect.

I swear to God, I never encountered this attitude until I got out into the "real world." I have the best father ever, and, while he may have secretly longed for a son, I'm what he got, and he always made sure that I knew women are just as capable as men.

Let's clear this up once and for all...

I VOLUNTEERED and WORE the uniform. I still wish I did. I have every bit of respect for those that wear the uniform and DO THEIR DUTY. Those that sign up and the shirk their duty, well.. I can't respect that.

 

[midwestyankee]

Let's clear this up once and for all...

I VOLUNTEERED and WORE the uniform. I still wish I did. I have every bit of respect for those that wear the uniform and DO THEIR DUTY. Those that sign up and the shirk their duty, well.. I can't respect that.

Chris, I don't think anyone is calling your service or your honor into question. But your criticism of women who avoided duty with pregnancy was one-sided and the ladies rightfully called bullshit.

 

[Chris_Xavier]

Chris, I don't think anyone is calling your service or your honor into question. But your criticism of women who avoided duty with pregnancy was one-sided and the ladies rightfully called bullshit.

That's the part I don't understand.. it would be like you paying me to watch your house for you and when I know that someone is breaking into it, instead of calling the cops, I call out for pizza.


In a PM with Netzach.. she brought up the draftdodgers (college deferments is what she said) of the Vietnam era and while I don't particularly care for those.. I can understand that in terms of being "forced" to join the military.

The women I am referring to voluntarily signed up.. completed Basic training where they were taught the fundamentals of combat and probably received some sort of enlistment bonus. Then when Uncle Sam said "I need you".. they got knocked up. I'm not saying all did that.. but a bunch did.

I don't have any shred of respect for the guys that suddenly decide when faced with the prospect of going off to war decide they found Jesus.

The ones that I really respect.. the ones I truly think are the heroes of today..
Are the "kids" joining up today.. or since 9/11 knowing that they were going to go to war. They know that there is a chance they might not come home and are willing to do the job.

On that, I would hope we could all agree.

 

[midwestyankee]

That's the part I don't understand.. it would be like you paying me to watch your house for you and when I know that someone is breaking into it, instead of calling the cops, I call out for pizza.

Let's move this analogy around to be more accurate.

Let's say that I hired 1,000 people to watch my house and during the course of their engagement, about 200 went out for pizza. Without checking facts, I complained after finding out about the pizza runs that you can't trust Italians to do their duty. Trouble is, there were at least as many folks of other ethnic persuasions who ran out for pizza but I singled out the Italians.

 

[Chris_Xavier]

Let's move this analogy around to be more accurate.

Let's say that I hired 1,000 people to watch my house and during the course of their engagement, about 200 went out for pizza. Without checking facts, I complained after finding out about the pizza runs that you can't trust Italians to do their duty. Trouble is, there were at least as many folks of other ethnic persuasions who ran out for pizza but I singled out the Italians.

LOL I'm editing my response my..

 

[Netzach]

Let's move this analogy around to be more accurate.

Let's say that I hired 1,000 people to watch my house and during the course of their engagement, about 200 went out for pizza. Without checking facts, I complained after finding out about the pizza runs that you can't trust Italians to do their duty. Trouble is, there were at least as many folks of other ethnic persuasions who ran out for pizza but I singled out the Italians.

Let's even extrapolate about 45:1 Other:Italians using WD's data. Shit, I'll say it's 55:1 for fun.

 

[WriterDom]

I think I read there have been around 155,000 of women in either Afghanistan or Iraq. And that wasn't current. That's a lot of women. I'm sure some got knocked up but I don't think that sheds a bad light on all of them.

 

[Netzach]

That's the part I don't understand.. it would be like you paying me to watch your house for you and when I know that someone is breaking into it, instead of calling the cops, I call out for pizza.


In a PM with Netzach.. she brought up the draftdodgers (college deferments is what she said) of the Vietnam era and while I don't particularly care for those.. I can understand that in terms of being "forced" to join the military.

The women I am referring to voluntarily signed up.. completed Basic training where they were taught the fundamentals of combat and probably received some sort of enlistment bonus. Then when Uncle Sam said "I need you".. they got knocked up. I'm not saying all did that.. but a bunch did.

I don't have any shred of respect for the guys that suddenly decide when faced with the prospect of going off to war decide they found Jesus.

The ones that I really respect.. the ones I truly think are the heroes of today..
Are the "kids" joining up today.. or since 9/11 knowing that they were going to go to war. They know that there is a chance they might not come home and are willing to do the job.

On that, I would hope we could all agree.

What about the stuff I posted not in PM?

About AWOL troops, current. Not drafted men. Plenty of people, they don't fill in the blanks, but we can assume mostly men as the whole endeavor is mostly men, who just aren't showing. You're saying it matters when comparing a conscript not going and a volunteer not going. These women weren't the first, only or MAJORITY of volunteers not going. So that is my point. The moment someone says "women in Iraq" you decide to bring up women who avoided going to the Gulf. It's at least a non sequitur.

 

[Chris_Xavier]

Going back over the posts, I am kind of amazed how this became a referendum on women in the military.

 

[BiBunny]

Going back over the posts, I am kind of amazed how this became a referendum on women in the military.

That's what happens when you judge an entire group based upon the actions of a few.

 

[Sir_Winston54]

That's what happens when you judge an entire group based upon the actions of a few.

I vote (back on the original topic) that we (ALL the "customer nations") just tell the truth -- we want the damned oil! -- and tell 'em they have two choices:

They can sell it to us at a price that will let them have a reasonably outrageous profit margin and keep their private little religious wars, etc., etc.,

OR

we'll come in, wipe out the entire ruling class, put in a bunch of sock puppets, and have THEM sell us the oil at only a reasonable profit margin. Then let 'em make up their minds which way they want to go.

It might still mean we (still ALL the customer nations) have to go in and kick some butt, but at least we'll be honest about the reasons for it. Personally, I don't give a damn whether the Shiites, the Sunnis or any of the other fragments run the countries -- but I want oil and oil products at a reasonable price, and I want our soldiers (male, female, and other) out of harm's way at the earliest point consistent with our national safety and interest, and their safety.

 

[JMohegan]

I vote (back on the original topic) that we (ALL the "customer nations") just tell the truth -- we want the damned oil! -- and tell 'em they have two choices:

They can sell it to us at a price that will let them have a reasonably outrageous profit margin and keep their private little religious wars, etc., etc.,

OR

we'll come in, wipe out the entire ruling class, put in a bunch of sock puppets, and have THEM sell us the oil at only a reasonable profit margin. Then let 'em make up their minds which way they want to go.

It might still mean we (still ALL the customer nations) have to go in and kick some butt, but at least we'll be honest about the reasons for it. Personally, I don't give a damn whether the Shiites, the Sunnis or any of the other fragments run the countries -- but I want oil and oil products at a reasonable price, and I want our soldiers (male, female, and other) out of harm's way at the earliest point consistent with our national safety and interest, and their safety.

I vote that we, the United States, put as much ingenuity, capital, determination, and strength as we can muster into the development of an alternative energy source - which we then legislate into use throughout the military, industrial, and consumer spheres of our economy.

1 - So we can tell the oil-producing nations to kiss our dollars and our asses goodbye,

and

2 - So we can avoid your second option, which I find morally repugnant. Not to mention, infeasible and grossly inefficient as a long-term option.

 

[Sir_Winston54]

I vote that we, the United States, put as much ingenuity, capital, determination, and strength as we can muster into the development of an alternative energy source - which we then legislate into use throughout the military, industrial, and consumer spheres of our economy.

1 - So we can tell the oil-producing nations to kiss our dollars and our asses goodbye,

and

2 - So we can avoid your second option, which I find morally repugnant. Not to mention, infeasible and grossly inefficient as a long-term option.

Yeah, I know, JM. I shoulda put the rolly-eye guy in that post, since it was mostly sarcasm. Sorry. (I find the second option morally repugnant, too.)

 

[Betticus]

poor people being blown up for other people's enrichment is a problem)

Isn't this what the whole thing is all about?

If we're going to go all Genghis Khan on the world we should at least do it boldly instead of hiding our profiteering under the guise of trying to protect the world from evildoers.

 

[JMohegan]

Yeah, I know, JM. I shoulda put the rolly-eye guy in that post, since it was mostly sarcasm. Sorry. (I find the second option morally repugnant, too.)

Good to know, and no apology necessary.

Thanks for clarifying.

 

[Netzach]

Isn't this what the whole thing is all about?

If we're going to go all Genghis Khan on the world we should at least do it boldly instead of hiding our profiteering under the guise of trying to protect the world from evildoers.

It's things like this that make me realize even a Claudius versus a Caligula doesn't matter in the end.

 

[midwestyankee]

It's things like this that make me realize even a Claudius versus a Caligula doesn't matter in the end.

At least Caligula was entertaining. The Decisionator lost his entertainment value after the second pretzel.