The peasantry is like that in every time and place.

> The_Yell wrote:

> no, Hitler lost for opposing TACTICAL retreats.

a tactical retreat is "mr president, I can't achieve your goals at this time"

a strategic retreat is "what the hell are we here for anyhow">

Tactics are concerned with the operation of combat, the battlefield. Strategy is concerned with the overall means for reaching the intended military, political, and economic outcomes.

Withdrawing from Iraq is the most strategically sound decision because

1. Our forces are entangled in largely two countries. This reduces our international power, and this reduction of power has been costly to us in South America.
2. Our commitment of forces in Iraq has been financially very costly. Our annual military expenditures have soared from 300 billion in 2001 to 800 billion, most of it paid by loans.
3. We're giving the terrorists the strategic high ground. They harass our expensive troops with their unlimited supply of cheap soldiers, and they can continue this a lot longer than we can. An American soldier is expensive and difficult to replace.

We need to withdraw in order to improve our global strategic position, or the results could be catastrophic and make the terrorists even more powerful.

My recommendation is we change our military doctrine. We do not occupy, because our small and effective force is better suited for quickly moving in and then moving out. It is not nearly as good for occupation. Rather, we should generally use our airforce to level cities and villages that oppose us. It's cheaper and instills fear in to our enemies. It works too (Saddam Hussein vs the Kurds).

Yell,

Ever hear of a strategic retreat?

Can we stop talking about Obama? We have had more than a year to, and he's pretty much guaranteed victory.

I hate drinking. Only drink enough to get buzzed when I go party, then I stop.

How about ObamaOsama!

> twistedpuppet wrote:

> I don't see how anyone lives on 12k a year unless they still live with mom and dad and they don' t have any actual bills.>

It pays for my own apartment, sends me to school, and pays my bills like internet, cable, and food etc. It also lets me spend money on partying every Thursday.

It's just that the cost of living is lower where I live lol.

I could also live a minimalist existence off $7000 a year, and that's with very little spending money. That means no car, school, or health insurance. It also means a room mate. At least we have the metro bus .

Actually, Kefka was a great villain.

> Gladiator wrote:

> i stoped reading all the other posts after this by justin
"I'm now voting for Obama"

SAYS IT ALL!!

never thought there'd be a turn around from the man who at one point wanted obama dead

good for you justin >>

Don't think I don't hate him or don't want him dead, I just hate the Republicans more atm.

<<@ justinian

dude why are you going to vote for Obama? from what iv read about you through your posts you are mostly conservative. This cant be about "bipartisanship" and other crap like that because bipartisanship is a complete lie.  even if you agree with obama on one major issue there are still hundreds of other things that the man will be able to affect.  he will levy taxes, appoint justices, block spending bills (or worse APPROVE THEM), and a myriad of other things on his liberal agenda.>>

I'm voting for Obama because I just don't care anymore. Because of the economic hit that has devalued my family's assets, my confidence in the Republican party has been extinguished. I am now really tired of their misguided idealism, and this was demonstrated with the debate last night when McCain really only reinforced what he said. I sensed that Obama was more intelligent and had more strategic sensibility. I can't say what he will do exactly, but it's a gamble I'm willing to take knowing that McCain is a faithful member of a method that isn't working and can't even defend his position.