[2Cdo]

bootlegga bootlegga:

2Cdo 2Cdo:

That's impossible, only senior officers have any brains. Enlisted men are just in the army because they couldn't get a real job.

Just beating the anti-military crowd to the punch.

Nope, officers can be as dumb as posts, especially low ranking ones.

Agreed. Just remember Jimmy C**!

$1:

That's why god created sergeants!

Thank you.

[Smacle]

Maybe Taliban Jack is looking at this the wrong way, instead of saying "when" NATO pulls out, what's gonna happen? He should be saying "If" NATO pulls out.. This is what's gonna happen.

[EyeBrock]

2Cdo 2Cdo:

bootlegga bootlegga:

My problem isn't with EB calling out Andy, it's with giving blanket generalizations about CF troops that they are some sort of all-knowing immortals on the topic of Afghanistan when in reality they might not be.

I didn't read his post that way. But I will trust someones opinion who has been there versus someone who hasn't left the safety of their home.

$1:

CF troops are awesome on the battlefield - but that doesn't make every single one experts on the Middle East an global terrorism.

No one said they were. But you implied that only senior officers were capable of understanding the strategic side of the house when there are plenty of NCO's and lower ranks who also "might" have a similar understanding.

Thats exactly what I was saying. andy likes to comment on things he has no knowledge of and then argues with those who do have experience on the subject matter. I'll take Pen and CM's views over his.

[andyt]

bootlegga bootlegga:

And Andy shouldn't take this as defacto support of his side of the argument either, especially given his comment that the West invaded Iran on the first page.

andyt andyt:

2. Al Qaeda did that, and GWB served to strengthen Al Qaeda by invading Iran.

While he will probably attribute it to a typo, it's this lack of accurateness that makes me think he might be talking out his ass.

All in all, my point is that because someone does job A, that doesn't necessarily make them experts on topic B. Sadly, these blanket types of generalizations are the norm here on CKA, instead of the exception.

Wow, you're harsh. One wrong letter and I must be talking out of my ass. Don't address my points at all, easier just to dismiss them. Seems a bit gratuitous.

And yet we seem to actually be making some very similar points, guess you're doing your own bit of farting here. And one post earlier you seem to have had to go back and edit something you said - wish I could say it was all out of your ass, except I happen to agree with it. Unlike you, when somebody says something I agree with, I say so, even if I've had differences with them on another topic. You should try it.

[KorbenDeck]

Gunnair Gunnair:

KorbenDeck KorbenDeck:

Scorched earth is the way to go here. When NATO leaves Afghanistian, we need a fail safe. If the Taliban retake control we nuke the living hell out of it, leave not even bacteria alive.

We can justify it as cleaning up our mess.

Nuking several millions so you don't have to hug your pillow at night quite so tightly.

Fotunately, you're not a policy maker, just a basement occupier.

Even if i was a policy maker Canada doesn't have enough nukes. And its not several million people its tens of millions