Fidel Posted September 30, 2006 Report Share Posted September 30, 2006 A MUST watch on the how Bush Administration dealt with the terror threat: http://www.spikedhumor.com/articles/56772/A_Look_Back_at_Bush_s_First_Months_in_Office_Leading_Up_to_9_11.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gummigut Posted September 30, 2006 Report Share Posted September 30, 2006 sanddawg: You are funny. Flame? I called you IGNORANT. And your previous post has done NOTHING to enlighten anyone that you are anything BUT IGNORANT. As I said, attack Clinton? Fine. Do so with something substantive. As for having visited Iraq? No, I haven't. But there is NO way you can convince me that the Army corp of engineers can not keep the light on in the capital if they were really serious. 1) Electric infrastructure is NOT new technology. It's pretty damn old. Overlapping electric grids is what's needed to prevent blackouts and provide distribution. Given the amount of time that they've been there, they've could have laid underground lines that would have been a lot harder to disrupt and easier to detect if someone is trying to disrupt the lines. 2) Rewards for information (photo's etc...) leading to anyone that is harming the infrastructure (that's something the iraqi people can definitely get behind). 3) Stick the power plants in the middle of jack shit. SHOOT anything that comes near without identification. Give me an argument I can respect. Something substantive than the rantings that are childlike. Show yourself as something other than IGNORANT and we'd have an even better board!!! <> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Hippie Posted September 30, 2006 Report Share Posted September 30, 2006 Actually, it is really not all that easy to control a war zone, as the army cannot be everywhere at once. As for under ground lines, takes time and planning. Agree the generating plants in the middle of no where makes them easier to protect, but more difficult to get the fuel to, the fuel is needed to burn to generate the power...pipelines etc cannot be 100% protected 24 hours a day...Solar? o.k. maybe in a dessett, but would it be enough? no, probably not...Nuclear? must be kidding? So back to square one. I do agree, all this mess is/was a mistake, but then we are now stuck with that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted October 1, 2006 Report Share Posted October 1, 2006 If they were/are anything like the women I was in the army with, I hope they never ever publish these pictures! Now, be honest. I saw a few good looking Army gals. I think they may constitute as much as .01% of the "female soldiers". (I got chewed out often enough for my habit of still calling them WACs!) One absolute cutie was half-Thai, daughter of a GI who'd been stationed at Sattahip. She really looked out of place in BDUs. p.s. The Air Farce used to get some decent looking gals. So did the Navy. The Marines apparently got their gals from the dog pounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gummigut Posted October 1, 2006 Report Share Posted October 1, 2006 Actually, it is really not all that easy to control a war zone, as the army cannot be everywhere at once. As for under ground lines, takes time and planning. They had tons of time to plan. I think it is evident that no one in the administration looked beyond "winning the war" and rebuilding is definitely an after thought after profits. They are reaping the seeds they sowed now. I don't think it will ever happen, but I truly believe there is more than enough evidence to bring Bush to trial. Actually, it is really not all that easy to control a war zone, as the army cannot be everywhere at once. Agreed, but the US has been a huge part of the cause that it's still a war zone. The US's inability to even provide what folks in the States believe as the minimum amount of basic utility services has contributed greatly to the crap mess we've got today. People were willing to give a certain buffer time before things at least got better, or at the very minimum, the same under saddam, but it's only gotten worse. My question is, can you blame them? Can you IMAGINE what would happen in Chicago, New York, or Los Angeles if they averaged 3-6 hours of electricity a day? Can't flush the toilets? Agree the generating plants in the middle of no where makes them easier to protect, but more difficult to get the fuel to There are only 2 main feeder lines to all of baghdad if I remember correctly. TWO! Yes, fuel disruptions are a problem, but you can store fuel to help manage the disruptions. I really feel for the iraqi people. We had/have no credible rebuilding plan. Because of the ineptness of the US, chances are iraq is going to take two steps back instead of taking a huge leap forward. <> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Hippie Posted October 1, 2006 Report Share Posted October 1, 2006 I agree with what you say, but we all know GWB did not listen to those who knew. I agree he has probably made things worse not better... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.