Hearts and minds
-
Is this really the way to go about winning hearts and minds?[^] This will surely create more insurgents.
-
Is Chess about winning the hearts and minds of the pieces?
2011 - Our best hope is that things will be frightening and dangerous rather than desperate and horrific. Jesse's Café Américain
-
Majerus wrote:
I really thought that was self-evident.
Then why are you making stupid remarks and linking one sided articles on such a serious topic?
-
Don't be an ass. The piece I posted to links to a discussion of why it was done. So it isn't one sided. So what's your problem?
Majerus wrote:
So what's your problem?
Apparently you've already decided I'm an ass - so is your question rhetorical? Seriously - war is hell. It's hell for the combatants as well as the civilians. It's especially hell for civilians who take sides. Modern warfare and politics are no better than their ancient brethren.
-
Majerus wrote:
So what's your problem?
Apparently you've already decided I'm an ass - so is your question rhetorical? Seriously - war is hell. It's hell for the combatants as well as the civilians. It's especially hell for civilians who take sides. Modern warfare and politics are no better than their ancient brethren.
I was suggesting you can behave better and my question is not retorical. What is your problem with my posts? What is stupid about my comment that destroying villages will create more insurgents? What is stupid about pointing out that this is not a chess game?
Mike Mullikin wrote:
Seriously - war is hell. It's hell for the combatants as well as the civilians. It's especially hell for civilians who take sides. Modern warfare and politics are no better than their ancient brethren.
I don't disagree with any of that. Did you think I did?
-
I was suggesting you can behave better and my question is not retorical. What is your problem with my posts? What is stupid about my comment that destroying villages will create more insurgents? What is stupid about pointing out that this is not a chess game?
Mike Mullikin wrote:
Seriously - war is hell. It's hell for the combatants as well as the civilians. It's especially hell for civilians who take sides. Modern warfare and politics are no better than their ancient brethren.
I don't disagree with any of that. Did you think I did?
-
Majerus wrote:
I was suggesting you can behave better
It's war! An entire village that supported one side allowed that side to wire the whole place with explosives. What would you suggest?
Majerus wrote:
Did you think I did?
Yes
Mike Mullikin wrote:
An entire village that supported one side
Prove it. As noted in the 2nd piece there were no civilian casualties - and what I've read from other sources the Taliban drove the residents out.
Mike Mullikin wrote:
What would you suggest?
Getting out of there now.
Mike Mullikin wrote:
Majerus wrote: Did you think I did? Yes
Based on what?
-
Mike Mullikin wrote:
An entire village that supported one side
Prove it. As noted in the 2nd piece there were no civilian casualties - and what I've read from other sources the Taliban drove the residents out.
Mike Mullikin wrote:
What would you suggest?
Getting out of there now.
Mike Mullikin wrote:
Majerus wrote: Did you think I did? Yes
Based on what?
Majerus wrote:
Prove it.
Errrr... this is an internet forum. Prove anything! :doh:
Majerus wrote:
As noted in the 2nd piece there were no civilian casualties - and what I've read from other sources the Taliban drove the residents out.
So we quickly cleared a bomb laden village without a single casualty so the civilians can return with safety. Just think of the lives and limbs we saved. That should win a few hearts and minds. No?
Majerus wrote:
Getting out of there now.
If I had my way, we never would have been there. These days occupation is much harder than the actual war. Personally, I would have carpet bombed Kabul in retaliation for 9/11 then threatened worse to the Afghans, Saudis and Pakistanis if they didn't root out al Qaeda for us. No American boots on their soil.
Majerus wrote:
Based on what?
This entire thread.
-
Majerus wrote:
Prove it.
Errrr... this is an internet forum. Prove anything! :doh:
Majerus wrote:
As noted in the 2nd piece there were no civilian casualties - and what I've read from other sources the Taliban drove the residents out.
So we quickly cleared a bomb laden village without a single casualty so the civilians can return with safety. Just think of the lives and limbs we saved. That should win a few hearts and minds. No?
Majerus wrote:
Getting out of there now.
If I had my way, we never would have been there. These days occupation is much harder than the actual war. Personally, I would have carpet bombed Kabul in retaliation for 9/11 then threatened worse to the Afghans, Saudis and Pakistanis if they didn't root out al Qaeda for us. No American boots on their soil.
Majerus wrote:
Based on what?
This entire thread.
Mike Mullikin wrote:
Errrr... this is an internet forum. Prove anything!
So the claim that the "entire village that supported one side" was just a fiction that you invented to justify the village's destruction.
Mike Mullikin wrote:
That should win a few hearts and minds. No?
I hope you are kidding. I doubt you would be all sweetness and light if someone blew up your home.
Mike Mullikin wrote:
Majerus wrote: Based on what? This entire thread.
Another non-answer. You're clearly pissed about something, but you are apparently too inarticulate to actually put into words what your problem is.
-
I was suggesting you can behave better and my question is not retorical. What is your problem with my posts? What is stupid about my comment that destroying villages will create more insurgents? What is stupid about pointing out that this is not a chess game?
Mike Mullikin wrote:
Seriously - war is hell. It's hell for the combatants as well as the civilians. It's especially hell for civilians who take sides. Modern warfare and politics are no better than their ancient brethren.
I don't disagree with any of that. Did you think I did?
Majerus wrote:
I was suggesting you can behave better
"Don't be an ass."
Majerus wrote:
What is stupid about pointing out that this is not a chess game?
The assumption that anyone, including the poster you were responding to, needed reminding that war is not a chess game. :rolleyes:
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” ~ H.L. Mencken
-
Mike Mullikin wrote:
Errrr... this is an internet forum. Prove anything!
So the claim that the "entire village that supported one side" was just a fiction that you invented to justify the village's destruction.
Mike Mullikin wrote:
That should win a few hearts and minds. No?
I hope you are kidding. I doubt you would be all sweetness and light if someone blew up your home.
Mike Mullikin wrote:
Majerus wrote: Based on what? This entire thread.
Another non-answer. You're clearly pissed about something, but you are apparently too inarticulate to actually put into words what your problem is.
Majerus wrote:
So the claim that the "entire village that supported one side" was just a fiction that you invented to justify the village's destruction.
It was absolutely as truthful as everything you've written about it or was written in the forum you linked to. Prove otherwise... ;P
Majerus wrote:
I doubt you would be all sweetness and light if someone blew up your home.
If my "estranged" government kicked me out of my house and wired up my entire village to blow-up and someone else decided to bomb it so they don't risk there own lives - I doubt I'd hold a grudge. I tend to think logically. Sorry, it's a character flaw.
Majerus wrote:
Another non-answer.
To the contrary, everything you've written so far says "I blame America and/or it's military for what happened to this poor village - regardless of the circumstances of why they are there or what the Taliban (or the civilians) do." Which pretty much means you're clueless about war and it's aftermath. P.S. I'm not pissed about anything. I really don't get too shook up about internet forum debates. Particularly political ones.
-
Majerus wrote:
So the claim that the "entire village that supported one side" was just a fiction that you invented to justify the village's destruction.
It was absolutely as truthful as everything you've written about it or was written in the forum you linked to. Prove otherwise... ;P
Majerus wrote:
I doubt you would be all sweetness and light if someone blew up your home.
If my "estranged" government kicked me out of my house and wired up my entire village to blow-up and someone else decided to bomb it so they don't risk there own lives - I doubt I'd hold a grudge. I tend to think logically. Sorry, it's a character flaw.
Majerus wrote:
Another non-answer.
To the contrary, everything you've written so far says "I blame America and/or it's military for what happened to this poor village - regardless of the circumstances of why they are there or what the Taliban (or the civilians) do." Which pretty much means you're clueless about war and it's aftermath. P.S. I'm not pissed about anything. I really don't get too shook up about internet forum debates. Particularly political ones.
Mike Mullikin wrote:
It was absolutely as truthful as everything you've written about it
No, it isn't. I actually have a report from within the unit in question that supports me. You have nothing other than your own fantasies.
Mike Mullikin wrote:
someone else
"Someone else"? No, the soldiers of the army that invaded and then occupied your country for 10 years.
Mike Mullikin wrote:
To the contrary, everything you've written so far says...
No, it doesn't. You may not be a teabagger, but just like a teabagger, you don't like what I say so I "blame America".
Mike Mullikin wrote:
If I had my way, we never would have been there.
Looks like you blame America to.
-
Majerus wrote:
I was suggesting you can behave better
"Don't be an ass."
Majerus wrote:
What is stupid about pointing out that this is not a chess game?
The assumption that anyone, including the poster you were responding to, needed reminding that war is not a chess game. :rolleyes:
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” ~ H.L. Mencken
-
Is this really the way to go about winning hearts and minds?[^] This will surely create more insurgents.
-
He's back! :laugh: You need to work on your trolling skills - you don't have any.[^]
It is so much easier for you to hurl insults than to deal with arguments, isn't it? I would have no problem if you told me my world view was simplistic, as I told you your is - after all you might be right, but instead, if anyone confronts you, you immediately violate the terms of service that Chris set up for this forum and drop into Back Room mode. Do you really think you win any arguments that way? Or contribute to discussions?
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” ~ H.L. Mencken
-
Its a well-known fact that if we grab them by the balls and start moving, their hearts and minds will follow. ;)
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” ~ H.L. Mencken