• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why I hate Civilians - A Military-member's Manifesto

Status
Not open for further replies.
Geoist said:
From that section:

Many Arab citizens feel that the state, as well as society at large, not only actively limits them to second-class citizenship, but treats them as enemies, affecting their perception of the de jure versus de facto quality of their citizenship.

Yousef Munayyer, an Israeli citizen and the executive director of The Jerusalem Fund, wrote that Palestinians only have varying degrees of limited rights in Israel.

And yet it says nothing about the voting rights of Palestinians. No wonder you just gave a link to a Wiki article with no direct quote presented.

But here is one for you:

1. One in seven Palestinians can vote in Israel’s elections.
Only one in seven of the total Palestinian population live inside Israel’s pre-1967 borders and have citizenship. A third live under Israeli military rule in the West Bank and Gaza Strip and can’t vote (though the Jewish settlers living among them can). Meanwhile, around half of all Palestinians are prevented from returning to their homeland by Israel; expelled and denationalised, their forced exclusion is the reason why the majority of Israel’s citizens are Jewish.
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/2...t-israels-elections-and-the-palestinian-vote/
Click to expand...

You noticed the key word, "citizenship". There are few, if any, countires in the world that allow non-citizens vote in elections.
 
apdst said:
You noticed the key word, "citizenship". There are few, if any, countires in the world that allow non-citizens vote in elections.
Click to expand...

Most countries in the world grant citizenship to those born in their country. The Israeli government is making these people foreigners in their own homeland.
 
Geoist said:
Most countries in the world grant citizenship to those born in their country. The Israeli government is making these people foreigners in their own homeland.
Click to expand...

But not all countries?
 
Geoist said:
I'm not doing your research.
Click to expand...

Sirry.

On a cell phone so I cannot detail yhe thousands of jon fatal attacks upon Israeli citizens.

But if you are interested I believe post 149 of the thread on the US abstaining fits the bill. Two posts filled with atracks is Oct 2015.

It took two posts to list all of them.
 
Last edited:
Tangmo said:
Here now is some further discussion of the points I have made, to include the Army's being declassed under the AirSea Battle doctrine. Reading this excerpt clearly demonstrates why I use the simplified term AirSea Battle instead of the current Pentagonese of it, which is the Joint Concept for Access and Maneuver in the Global Commons, aka JAM-GC.


January 20, 2015

The new Joint Concept for Access and Maneuver in the Global Commons (JAM-GC pronounced: Jam, Gee-Cee) will take the work done by the ASBO and fold them into a new revision of the original ASB concept due out by the end of the year. The ASB effort was advertised by the Pentagon as a counter to the anti-access area denial (A2/AD) threats that emerged while the U.S. military was focused on the land conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The creation of the office was — in part — an admission that certain U.S. military skills had atrophied while the brunt of U.S. technical and tactical innovation was focused on Iraq and Afghanistan. “We’ve lost some skills and let them wither, because it wasn’t required in operations in the past,” one defense official told USNI News in 2013.

Some pundits called ASB concept a provocative move against the growing capability of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army and accused the Pentagon of antagonizing China with the move — a charge the DoD denied. Internally, the name itself — and the Air Force and Navy’s early involvement with the concept — caused the Army to complain they were left out of the A2/AD conversation and were quickly folded into the ASBO.

https://news.usni.org/2015/01/20/pentagon-drops-air-sea-battle-name-concept-lives


If you too might be concerned about antagonizing the CCP Dictator-Tyrants in Beijing then do let us know.

In the meantime...

I refer to 'AirSea Battle' because that is what it is. It's also a way to avoid evaporating the precious brain juices of the career lifer NCOs of any generation up to the present moment who have no clue of it, and by my not referencing the formal Pentagonese new name of it as the Joint Concept for Access and Maneuver in the Global Commons, aka JAM-GC.

Your deal so you'd need to have some cards up your sleeve on this one...which means we will be watching any reply post you may choose to offer. On the other hand, if dealing in facts and documenting the record might be too much for you, do let us know...
Click to expand...
I don't know what you think that link says but it certainly does not back up any of your claims. Nice try though.

You know those claims like air sea battle replacing air land battle. Or the one of the Army shifting to artillery and not being as important to the military. See the thing you don't seem to understand is that air sea battle is simply one tool available to use on certain instances. It is not the only one and in many occasions it will not be the tool chosen. Pretending like it is the focus for all future military conficlts is you simply either not understanding the topic or you being dishonest. Which going from your previous posting is not surprising
 
Last edited:
braindrain said:
I don't know what you think that link says but it certainly does not back up any of your claims. Nice try though.

You know those claims like air sea battle replacing air land battle. Or the one of the Army shifting to artillery and not being as important to the military. See the thing you don't seem to understand is that air sea battle is simply one tool available to use on certain instances. It is not the only one and in many occasions it will not be the tool chosen. Pretending like it is the focus for all future military conficlts is you simply either not understanding the topic or you being dishonest. Which going from your previous posting is not surprising
Click to expand...


Give a specific for instance. You need to say something rather than nothing. Or say something that is off base, which is what your post does, then run away.

I'd noted above for instance in a million word post (!) Europe continues to be a place where AirLand Warfare would be conducted by Russia and Nato in the event of a war or an open conflict at some level. Same as in WW2. The fact has always been prohibitive to Moscow since Nato was formed in 1949.

Everything I've posted about AirSea Battle says China would not get primarily AirLand Warfare. If a major war broke out between USA and the CCP we would not send divisions, corps or Army groups to invade the land mass of CCP China. Same if a low-intensity fighting broke out over the Scarborough Shoal in the South China Sea, or over other disputed areas such as the Senkaku Islands of Japan in the East Sea.

CCP Dictator-Tyrants in Beijing have in fact been the principal driving factor and force in the Pentagon devising and developing AirSea Battle as a means, then as a doctrine and now as a war fighting or combat strategy, circa 2006-2015 going forward. Congress authorized ASB in by formal vote in 2010 which makes ASB pretty serious and major stuff for the USA...as proposed and thoroughly worked through by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and on the recommendation of the commander-in-chief.

In the SCS disputes, Washington has not publicly said so, but its plan is to place Army missile batteries in Vietnam operated by U.S. Army forces. Same for the Philippines which is another reason why the leadership in Manila needs different thinking than exists at this time. In SCS disputes to include CCP vs Japan island disputes USMC will be the primary boots on any land areas that need ground forces.

On the Korean peninsula, it would be a combination of LandAir and AirSea warfare, given the U.S. 8th Army (Group) and its 30,000 troops (in three divisions) are stationed there under the command of a four-star general, as is the U.S. 7th Air Force, both supported by the USN Pacific Fleet (3rd and 7th Fleets).

In Operation Iraqi Freedom (2003-2010) the U.S. utilized large unit maneuver ground forces, i.e., division sized forces of Army & USMC, to include large unit air and naval forces to obliterate the Iraqi armed forces in a short order (less than three months). It's what happened afterward for the next seven years that means we can expect never to see that again in the ME. A repeat of Iraq anywhere in the ME would be exceptional and unexpected by everyone.

Even now in Europe and Nato the U.S. moves nothing larger than a Brigade sized ground force and this is the new operational mode forseeably, in Europe or anywhere in the world. Brigade is a medium sized ground maneuver force whereas a division (at least three brigades) is a large unit maneuver force. The United States is the unparalleled master of maneuver warfare, as we saw in Europe in WWII and in the Pacific Theater of the War. The U.S. armed forces are an awesome integrating of Roman Legions, Hannibal's armies and Genghis Khan fast attack mobile warfare, all of it and more synthesized into the most powerful and effective fighting force the world will ever know.

AirSea Battle is designed to defeat an enemy fighting force that is large and strong, and to prevail in low-intensity conflicts of a single battle here or there. There are seven chokepoints of the world's oceans which the U.S. is fully capable of controlling as necessary. South China Sea is one. The adjoining Strait of Malacca is another, so are Strait of Hormuz, Suez Canal, Bosphorus Strait, Gibraltar, Panama Canal (and for good measure include the English Channel). No Army or USMC division can occupy a strait or regain a strait that has been closed. Ground forces of Army or Marines do participate in securing a strait or a canal, a vital island, but naval and air forces must and do carry the day in such instances. As the Navy likes to say to the Marines, they give 'em a ride which means the unspoken other half of the equation is that Marines get told where to get off. Same is true for USAF with airborne and often special ops forces.

Your deal dude and you still need more cards up your sleeve than you've used up so far.
 
Tangmo said:
Give a specific for instance. You need to say something rather than nothing. Or say something that is off base, which is what your post does, then run away.

I'd noted above for instance in a million word post (!) Europe continues to be a place where AirLand Warfare would be conducted by Russia and Nato in the event of a war or an open conflict at some level. Same as in WW2. The fact has always been prohibitive to Moscow since Nato was formed in 1949.

Everything I've posted about AirSea Battle says China would not get primarily AirLand Warfare. If a major war broke out between USA and the CCP we would not send divisions, corps or Army groups to invade the land mass of CCP China. Same if a low-intensity fighting broke out over the Scarborough Shoal in the South China Sea, or over other disputed areas such as the Senkaku Islands of Japan in the East Sea.

CCP Dictator-Tyrants in Beijing have in fact been the principal driving factor and force in the Pentagon devising and developing AirSea Battle as a means, then as a doctrine and now as a war fighting or combat strategy, circa 2006-2015 going forward. Congress authorized ASB in by formal vote in 2010 which makes ASB pretty serious and major stuff for the USA...as proposed and thoroughly worked through by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and on the recommendation of the commander-in-chief.

In the SCS disputes, Washington has not publicly said so, but its plan is to place Army missile batteries in Vietnam operated by U.S. Army forces. Same for the Philippines which is another reason why the leadership in Manila needs different thinking than exists at this time. In SCS disputes to include CCP vs Japan island disputes USMC will be the primary boots on any land areas that need ground forces.

On the Korean peninsula, it would be a combination of LandAir and AirSea warfare, given the U.S. 8th Army (Group) and its 30,000 troops (in three divisions) are stationed there under the command of a four-star general, as is the U.S. 7th Air Force, both supported by the USN Pacific Fleet (3rd and 7th Fleets).

In Operation Iraqi Freedom (2003-2010) the U.S. utilized large unit maneuver ground forces, i.e., division sized forces of Army & USMC, to include large unit air and naval forces to obliterate the Iraqi armed forces in a short order (less than three months). It's what happened afterward for the next seven years that means we can expect never to see that again in the ME. A repeat of Iraq anywhere in the ME would be exceptional and unexpected by everyone.

Even now in Europe and Nato the U.S. moves nothing larger than a Brigade sized ground force and this is the new operational mode forseeably, in Europe or anywhere in the world. Brigade is a medium sized ground maneuver force whereas a division (at least three brigades) is a large unit maneuver force. The United States is the unparalleled master of maneuver warfare, as we saw in Europe in WWII and in the Pacific Theater of the War. The U.S. armed forces are an awesome integrating of Roman Legions, Hannibal's armies and Genghis Khan fast attack mobile warfare, all of it and more synthesized into the most powerful and effective fighting force the world will ever know.

AirSea Battle is designed to defeat an enemy fighting force that is large and strong, and to prevail in low-intensity conflicts of a single battle here or there. There are seven chokepoints of the world's oceans which the U.S. is fully capable of controlling as necessary. South China Sea is one. The adjoining Strait of Malacca is another, so are Strait of Hormuz, Suez Canal, Bosphorus Strait, Gibraltar, Panama Canal (and for good measure include the English Channel). No Army or USMC division can occupy a strait or regain a strait that has been closed. Ground forces of Army or Marines do participate in securing a strait or a canal, a vital island, but naval and air forces must and do carry the day in such instances. As the Navy likes to say to the Marines, they give 'em a ride which means the unspoken other half of the equation is that Marines get told where to get off. Same is true for USAF with airborne and often special ops forces.

Your deal dude and you still need more cards up your sleeve than you've used up so far.
Click to expand...

Word salad, Tangmo style....

Long on the C&P and monkey see monkey post nonsense.

Short on the understanding of what the Army, Navy and Marine Corps can and would do in the case of a closed strait.
 
Tangmo said:
Give a specific for instance. You need to say something rather than nothing. Or say something that is off base, which is what your post does, then run away.

I'd noted above for instance in a million word post (!) Europe continues to be a place where AirLand Warfare would be conducted by Russia and Nato in the event of a war or an open conflict at some level. Same as in WW2. The fact has always been prohibitive to Moscow since Nato was formed in 1949.

Everything I've posted about AirSea Battle says China would not get primarily AirLand Warfare. If a major war broke out between USA and the CCP we would not send divisions, corps or Army groups to invade the land mass of CCP China. Same if a low-intensity fighting broke out over the Scarborough Shoal in the South China Sea, or over other disputed areas such as the Senkaku Islands of Japan in the East Sea.

CCP Dictator-Tyrants in Beijing have in fact been the principal driving factor and force in the Pentagon devising and developing AirSea Battle as a means, then as a doctrine and now as a war fighting or combat strategy, circa 2006-2015 going forward. Congress authorized ASB in by formal vote in 2010 which makes ASB pretty serious and major stuff for the USA...as proposed and thoroughly worked through by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and on the recommendation of the commander-in-chief.

In the SCS disputes, Washington has not publicly said so, but its plan is to place Army missile batteries in Vietnam operated by U.S. Army forces. Same for the Philippines which is another reason why the leadership in Manila needs different thinking than exists at this time. In SCS disputes to include CCP vs Japan island disputes USMC will be the primary boots on any land areas that need ground forces.

On the Korean peninsula, it would be a combination of LandAir and AirSea warfare, given the U.S. 8th Army (Group) and its 30,000 troops (in three divisions) are stationed there under the command of a four-star general, as is the U.S. 7th Air Force, both supported by the USN Pacific Fleet (3rd and 7th Fleets).

In Operation Iraqi Freedom (2003-2010) the U.S. utilized large unit maneuver ground forces, i.e., division sized forces of Army & USMC, to include large unit air and naval forces to obliterate the Iraqi armed forces in a short order (less than three months). It's what happened afterward for the next seven years that means we can expect never to see that again in the ME. A repeat of Iraq anywhere in the ME would be exceptional and unexpected by everyone.

Even now in Europe and Nato the U.S. moves nothing larger than a Brigade sized ground force and this is the new operational mode forseeably, in Europe or anywhere in the world. Brigade is a medium sized ground maneuver force whereas a division (at least three brigades) is a large unit maneuver force. The United States is the unparalleled master of maneuver warfare, as we saw in Europe in WWII and in the Pacific Theater of the War. The U.S. armed forces are an awesome integrating of Roman Legions, Hannibal's armies and Genghis Khan fast attack mobile warfare, all of it and more synthesized into the most powerful and effective fighting force the world will ever know.

AirSea Battle is designed to defeat an enemy fighting force that is large and strong, and to prevail in low-intensity conflicts of a single battle here or there. There are seven chokepoints of the world's oceans which the U.S. is fully capable of controlling as necessary. South China Sea is one. The adjoining Strait of Malacca is another, so are Strait of Hormuz, Suez Canal, Bosphorus Strait, Gibraltar, Panama Canal (and for good measure include the English Channel). No Army or USMC division can occupy a strait or regain a strait that has been closed. Ground forces of Army or Marines do participate in securing a strait or a canal, a vital island, but naval and air forces must and do carry the day in such instances. As the Navy likes to say to the Marines, they give 'em a ride which means the unspoken other half of the equation is that Marines get told where to get off. Same is true for USAF with airborne and often special ops forces.

Your deal dude and you still need more cards up your sleeve than you've used up so far.
Click to expand...

It's funny seeing you try and change yourclaums. So what happened to air sea replacing air land. Where's your claim of air sea declassing the loser Army as you put it. Or the Army transitioning to a focus on artillery.

The fact of the matter is you made a lot of BS claims with zero to back it up and now are trying to change your story. It's sounds very much like someone who in an attempt to prove your point skimmed a few articles without actually understanding them and tried to use them to back you up. Unfortunately for you none of it actually says what you wish it said.


Pathetic but nothing anyone who has seen more then a few of your posts wouldn't suspect.
 
Last edited:
Fledermaus said:
Copy and pasting things you do not understand is instant Tangmo fail.

Oh, and an officer woudl understand battleplans and strategies are in a constant state of flux depending on perceived threats, changed logistical realities and enemy arms and strategies changes.

Try understanding before commenting.
Click to expand...


Tell us Gunny lifer retired NCO a major objection to the Doctrine of AirSea Battle.

A major strategic objection.

Then discuss.

Gunny.
 
braindrain said:
It's funny seeing you try and change yourclaums. So what happened to air sea replacing air land. Where's your claim of air sea declassing the loser Army as you put it. Or the Army transitioning to a focus on artillery.

<<snip>>

Pathetic but nothing anyone who has seen more then a few of your posts wouldn't suspect.
Click to expand...


My posts in respect of AirSea Battle are consistent and true.

Your posts about my posts are classic DP Right Sector excrement.

You are making it up as you go along absent any substantive or content-related discussion of the Doctrine of AirSea Battle. You accuse (falsely) and attempt to denounce while establishing nothing in respect of ASB and my discussion of ASB that is material, factual, authentic, central, verified, verifiable or tangible. You cite no sources, never mind respectable sources or documentation.

Your hairy and hoary opinion is in reply to the documentation and the facts, not to me, which is why you have been flailing from the start. Let me render an unsolicited favor to inform you that you are self-embarrassing in the extreme in these posts.

Your posts are grounded in a nothingness that self-defines them as vacuous and thus as only a repetition of meaningless tripe.
 
Fledermaus said:
So, Tangmo, you never answered.

Why the hate for veterans and career military?
Click to expand...


You keep posting the 'have you stopped beating your wife' category of question which is wholly and long discredited and out of order. I reiterate the fact for the umpteenth time here and now in this post.

That is, if you want to debate then debate.

Advance yourselves from the constant repetition posts that ignore, deny, accuse then rinse and repeat more and always.

It is churlish to do and to continue to do these impetuous things after they have been pointed out and identified as needing to be corrected or modified. If anyone needs to get it right Gunny it's the retired career lifer NCOs -- YourSelf being Number One -- who not only cannot adjust to civilian life amidst civilians, but who demand interminably that we get it right or youse retired lifer NCOs will keep at it till Kingdom Come.

Repeating.

So I would reiterate the OP is an abominable piece of work as is everything pursuant to it that is posted in the same vein by retired NCOs of the like and similar mind.
 
Tangmo said:
Tell us Gunny lifer retired NCO a major objection to the Doctrine of AirSea Battle.

A major strategic objection.

Then discuss.

Gunny.
Click to expand...

Hey, look. Another STRAWMAN argument.

Where have I stated I object to AirSea battle?


And I must say you look so cute pretending you know what you are talking about.

Pretending.
 
Tangmo said:
You keep posting the 'have you stopped beating your wife' category of question which is wholly and long discredited and out of order. I reiterate the fact for the umpteenth time here and now in this post.

That is, if you want to debate then debate.

Advance yourselves from the constant repetition posts that ignore, deny, accuse then rinse and repeat more and always.

It is churlish to do and to continue to do these impetuous things after they have been pointed out and identified as needing to be corrected or modified. If anyone needs to get it right Gunny it's the retired career lifer NCOs -- YourSelf being Number One -- who not only cannot adjust to civilian life amidst civilians, but who demand interminably that we get it right or youse retired lifer NCOs will keep at it till Kingdom Come.

Repeating.

So I would reiterate the OP is an abominable piece of work as is everything pursuant to it that is posted in the same vein by retired NCOs of the like and similar mind.
Click to expand...

Hey, look. Another non-answer.

Your hatred is palpable. It is demonstrated in libelous post after libelous post.

It is demonstrated in your insane claim every war since 1945 was lost.

It is demonstrated in your ridiculous claim these fantasy losses were due to the NCOs.

It is demonstrated in your repeated ignorant claims in regards to me vis a vis adaptation to civilian life.

Your words have damned you more than I have any power to.

And you were pathetic enough to demand that I and others call you sir. An honorific you certainly have not earned in my eyes nor do you have the right to demand from others.
 
Fledermaus said:
Hey, look. Another non-answer.

Your hatred is palpable. It is demonstrated in libelous post after libelous post.

It is demonstrated in your insane claim every war since 1945 was lost.

It is demonstrated in your ridiculous claim these fantasy losses were due to the NCOs.

It is demonstrated in your repeated ignorant claims in regards to me vis a vis adaptation to civilian life.

Your words have damned you more than I have any power to.

And you were pathetic enough to demand that I and others call you sir. An honorific you certainly have not earned in my eyes nor do you have the right to demand from others.
Click to expand...


You invariably create your own reality.

Your own reality is predicated on a military career each day and every day for some 20 years (or more). Flag up every morning, flag down each evening with three squares in between and grunts for dessert. You grew accustomed to being minute by minute boss throughout almost the entire day, to include directing loo-tenants directly or indirectly. Butter bar ones being the favorite.

To include of course your final status as a retired career lifer NCO of the USMC, as a rightwinger, as a wingnut, and as in your case a military mind incapable of adjusting to civilian life among civilians. To wit: you cannot retire your bombastic ill manner nor can you modify the military imperative that the mission always has the absolute priority over the troops who wear the same uniform. In civilian life this translates to your placing politics and ideology above people, and subordinating respect of a given person and his integrity to the personal cause and its bent. Easily.

So I do not waste time or effort to deal with your hard core and fanatical, fixed in concrete denial of my active duty military service, the nature of it, or the character of it. There is no cure for a pathology so the best professional recommendation for a long time now is to detach from it immediately and forever. On the point I leave you to your posting in this regard and its daily grind.

Carry on.
 
Tangmo said:
You invariably create your own reality.

Your own reality is predicated on a military career each day and every day for some 20 years (or more). Flag up every morning, flag down each evening with three squares in between and grunts for dessert. You grew accustomed to being minute by minute boss throughout almost the entire day, to include directing loo-tenants directly or indirectly. Butter bar ones being the favorite.

To include of course your final status as a retired career lifer NCO of the USMC, as a rightwinger, as a wingnut, and as in your case a military mind incapable of adjusting to civilian life among civilians. To wit: you cannot retire your bombastic ill manner nor can you modify the military imperative that the mission always has the absolute priority over the troops who wear the same uniform. In civilian life this translates to your placing politics and ideology above people, and subordinating respect of a given person and his integrity to the personal cause and its bent. Easily.

So I do not waste time or effort to deal with your hard core and fanatical, fixed in concrete denial of my active duty military service, the nature of it, or the character of it. There is no cure for a pathology so the best professional recommendation for a long time now is to detach from it immediately and forever. On the point I leave you to your posting in this regard and its daily grind.

Carry on.
Click to expand...

All that prattle.... And precious little substance.

Your ignorance as to my adjustment to civilian life is astonishing.

To this day I would wager most who interact with in the workplace have either no idea I served or may a faint idea I served at some time.

I do not demand military honors from anyone. I do not force my mores and beliefs on others.

Once again you are ignorant about what you speak of.


BTW - Your own rants have damned you far more than anything I could add.
 
Tangmo said:
You invariably create your own reality.

Your own reality is predicated on a military career each day and every day for some 20 years (or more). Flag up every morning, flag down each evening with three squares in between and grunts for dessert. You grew accustomed to being minute by minute boss throughout almost the entire day, to include directing loo-tenants directly or indirectly. Butter bar ones being the favorite.

To include of course your final status as a retired career lifer NCO of the USMC, as a rightwinger, as a wingnut, and as in your case a military mind incapable of adjusting to civilian life among civilians. To wit: you cannot retire your bombastic ill manner nor can you modify the military imperative that the mission always has the absolute priority over the troops who wear the same uniform. In civilian life this translates to your placing politics and ideology above people, and subordinating respect of a given person and his integrity to the personal cause and its bent. Easily.

So I do not waste time or effort to deal with your hard core and fanatical, fixed in concrete denial of my active duty military service, the nature of it, or the character of it. There is no cure for a pathology so the best professional recommendation for a long time now is to detach from it immediately and forever. On the point I leave you to your posting in this regard and its daily grind.

Carry on.
Click to expand...

Tangmo,

In post after post you have demonstrated ignorance of history, dishonesty in regards to military victories, disrespectful and libelous posts directed at NCOs, ditto career military, ditto right wing persons, demands for military honorifics you do not rate as a non-retired officer, in addition to copy and paste arguments for strategies you obviously do not understand.

Your continued disrespect for veterans goes on page after page.

Other than CLAIMS you have made why should anyone believe you served?
 
Fledermaus said:
Word salad, Tangmo style....

Long on the C&P and monkey see monkey post nonsense.

Short on the understanding of what the Army, Navy and Marine Corps can and would do in the case of a closed strait.
Click to expand...


This is another vacuous claim, i.e., it is absent any content and substance. You need credibility gunny. Same as all the Right Sector who make hit and run posts that assert, claim deny or ignore, accuse, cuss out, try to turn the table, then hat out right quick. You need instead to state your case, not simply to assert and to claim the other guy does not know anything while only cussing out the other guy and his post. Post your expertise gunny. Put some meat on the bones gunny.

Because it's all well above your pay grade Gunnery Sergeant. There are indeed numerous scenarios for the U.S. military and its partners to respond to a strait being closed, or a canal getting closed, or CCP Dictator-Tyrants possibly declaring an Air Defense Identification Zone over some or all of the South China Sea (inside its nine-dashed line that includes 80% of the Sea which is in turn a global commons under the UNCLOS). So the Right Sector and its hit and run posts are less than courageous while also being out of the loop.

To reiterate as youse force we posters to do -- ever so redundantly -- generals and admirals win or lose on their strategy. Colonels and USN Captains and their Lieutenant Colonels, Navy Commanders and LtCmdr, military Majors, win or lose in the operations of the war or combat undertaking. NCOs win or lose in their tactics. Your pay grade Gunnery Sergeant is at the level of tactics. If you were there, that's where you lost your wars, conflicts, battles, fights, contests. And it shows always and in each and every one of your posts. Gunny.
 
Fledermaus said:
All that prattle.... And precious little substance.

Your ignorance as to my adjustment to civilian life is astonishing.

To this day I would wager most who interact with in the workplace have either no idea I served or may a faint idea I served at some time.

I do not demand military honors from anyone. I do not force my mores and beliefs on others.

Once again you are ignorant about what you speak of.


BTW - Your own rants have damned you far more than anything I could add.
Click to expand...


I see from the last line of the post you've thrown in the towel eh.

So as we also see in the post, all the carryings on of bluster, deny and ignore, accuse, always trying to turn the table, cussing and stomping are all being done for the sake of it only.

That anyway became apparent 100+ pages ago and several threads back in your multiplicity of redundant posts. You say the same thing over and over again while expecting a different result. I meanwhile have been trying to move on. You should try it sometime yourself. Gunny.
 
Fledermaus said:
Tangmo,

In post after post you have demonstrated ignorance of history, dishonesty in regards to military victories, disrespectful and libelous posts directed at NCOs, ditto career military, ditto right wing persons, demands for military honorifics you do not rate as a non-retired officer, in addition to copy and paste arguments for strategies you obviously do not understand.

Your continued disrespect for veterans goes on page after page.

Other than CLAIMS you have made why should anyone believe you served?
Click to expand...


You and the Right Sector have proved nothing. Zero. Zilch. Oogats.

You have only arbitrary declarations and summary pronouncements. And it is because you have no content, no substance, no argument, no veracity...no nuthin.

You only accuse while you ignore or deny. Then you try unsuccessfully to turn the tables. Finally youse cuss.

Fail.

:failpail: DP Tourist Attraction #32: Fledermaus & Cohorts Shat Here.
 
Last edited:
Moderator's Warning:
This little flame-war is done. Infractions may be issued after review. Thread will remain closed. Do not even THINK about starting this again elsewhere.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom