Why the Military should get out of Iraq...NOW!

[4nik8]

I have no reasons this should happen.

I think they're doing a hell of a job at keeping things going fairly smooth there.


Others, I'm sure, will have differing opinions.

At least, I hope so.

[CrAnIuM]

Thats not your usual god awful lengthy post ... what's up with that ?


Still ...


There is NO way the US military can reasonably with draw en mass at this point.
The vacuum of stabilizing influence would be filled either by lawless anarchy or by a neighboring region's own military.

The power of Saddam's brutal regime ensured one thing above all else ... that his GOVERNMENT was the only thug in the neighborhood, now the dude with the most guns is.

We made the shit cake, and regardless of WHY and HOW we came to be at this stage, we are left with no alternative but to see every bite eaten.

[Blood]

I agree with Prick, it would be nice if we had the luxury of pulling our troops out now, but we don't.

People need to understand that we are pretty much stuck there now and so we need to band together all of our resources to help us get through it safely and with minimum casualties.

All of the anti war bullshit and pulled funding for our troops is just delaying the inevitable, and potentially fucking up our street cred.

[4nik8]

Thats not your usual god awful lengthy post ... what's up with that ?




Like breaking in a new girl friend, I'm trying to ease into it.

I'll be going full tilt again in no time.

[Josie]

Thats not your usual god awful lengthy post ... what's up with that ?


Still ...


There is NO way the US military can reasonably with draw en mass at this point.
The vacuum of stabilizing influence would be filled either by lawless anarchy or by a neighboring region's own military.

The power of Saddam's brutal regime ensured one thing above all else ... that his GOVERNMENT was the only thug in the neighborhood, now the dude with the most guns is.

We made the shit cake, and regardless of WHY and HOW we came to be at this stage, we are left with no alternative but to see every bite eaten.

:smilie907599:

aka, I completely agree. We need an "I'm with stupid ^" sign :42_002:

[KommieKat]

We made the shit cake, and regardless of WHY and HOW we came to be at this stage, we are left with no alternative but to see every bite eaten.

The WHY is because the CIA put him in power. He was a lackey puppet on a leash bidding the commands of his master, the U.S.

The HOW is because he broke his leash and started to run around doing his own thing. Master was not happy so decided to INVADE and put a stop to it.

[Josie]

regardless of WHY and HOW


The WHY is because the CIA put him in power. He was a lackey puppet on a leash bidding the commands of his master, the U.S.

The HOW is because he broke his leash and started to run around doing his own thing. Master was not happy so decided to INVADE and put a stop to it.

No matter how flawed the reason, it doesn't make ANY sense to just pull out.

[KommieKat]

No matter how flawed the reason, it doesn't make ANY sense to just pull out.

You're so right. Better to stay and kill off some more civilians.
A few more dead Americans being sent home in bodybags is another good reason.

While we are at it, let's pour another $400billion as military aid while the U.S. slides into
as recession.

[CrAnIuM]

The WHY is because the CIA put him in power. He was a lackey puppet on a leash bidding the commands of his master, the U.S.

The HOW is because he broke his leash and started to run around doing his own thing. Master was not happy so decided to INVADE and put a stop to it.

You make those statements as if to instruct me.

I assure I am the last person that needs instruction in the realm of international tinkering that is done by ALL governments.

I made my statements because to blame or find the source of the current situation does NOT alleviate or change the current path the US military has to maintain.

The current situation is as it is, one can't take back five years of influence by the US military. Contrary to what you may think I can tell you from first hand knowledge that the people of that region are better off now than five years ago.

During Saddam's regime the large cities had running water, a stable electrical grid and a stable environment of seemingly quiet and peaceful community life. But those things were a white wash of placation to the people which the regime held captive by an overwhelming policy of fear and oppression.

The common man held no individual rights, no power of self change, no outlet for intellectual or artistic expression that was free from governmental oversight and influence. Today the common man can follow his path as he sees fit for the most part.

Freedom is not a chicken in a pot and a working air conditioner ... FREEDOM is an ideal and lifestyle that can not be contained within a sadistic and all consuming dictatorship where only the privileged are given rights to express themselves.

The road to a self governing Iraq is long and like it or not will be influenced by the US government.

Some will say its merely a puppet government some will say otherwise.

[Josie]

You're so right. Better to stay and kill off some more civilians.
A few more dead Americans being sent home in bodybags is another good reason.

While we are at it, let's pour another $400billion as military aid while the U.S. slides into
as recession.

Wow. Are you really that entrenched in the here and now details that you can't see the big picture?

[KommieKat]

You make those statements as if to instruct me.

Absolutely not. May have read that way, but not meant that way.


Contrary to what you may think I can tell you from first hand knowledge that the people of that region are better off now than five years ago.

And that's where I should quietly back out. I do not have that knowledge.


Some will say its merely a puppet government some will say otherwise.

I shall stick with the "Otherwise."

[Jenn]

Absolutely not. May have read that way, but not meant that way.



And that's where I should quietly back out. I do not have that knowledge.



I shall stick with the "Otherwise."

The great majority of us civilians dont know what's really going on there. A lot of people see violence, dead soldiers, dead civilians, and whatnot. But no one ever sees the children with the soldiers, people thanking them and whatnot. The US being there, have really made a difference in a good way.

I know you don't see it that way. I like you and all, but I think you're just biased. Open your eyes a bit and see the big picture here. We are there to help them, not to harm at all.

[Chriss]

The current situation is as it is, one can't take back five years of influence by the US military. Contrary to what you may think I can tell you from first hand knowledge that the people of that region are better off now than five years ago.

I completely agree. I'm sure alot of us know someone that has lost a loved one in Iraq due to the war, but we have to know that their sacrifices aren't in vain. It may be hard to see, but we are making a difference!

[CrAnIuM]

I completely agree. I'm sure alot of us know someone that has lost a loved one in Iraq due to the war, but we have to know that their sacrifices aren't in vain. It may be hard to see, but we are making a difference!

I've literally worn the blood of a fallen battle buddy in more than one conflict and its
never an easy thing to deal with, but its made especially more difficult when the negative
rhetoric of the media, and citizens in general, see the troop as the one to blame for the conflict.

I have no doubt in my mind that the US has muddied the water in more than
one political landscape ...still, the warrior does not choose the war, he only chooses to end it quickly.

[KommieKat]

The great majority of us civilians dont know what's really going on there. A lot of people see violence, dead soldiers, dead civilians, and whatnot. But no one ever sees the children with the soldiers, people thanking them and whatnot. The US being there, have really made a difference in a good way.

Yes yes, I saw those old reels of WW2 vets riding the backs of tanks as it goes through Paris or Tokyo, throwing Hershey chocolates to the half-naked children. How heart warming.

Sorry, but I don't buy that bullshit.

You're more than welcome to point out the "good way (s)" if you wish, but please spare me the candy handouts.:yociexp35:

[KommieKat]

I've literally worn the blood ......


.......of a civilian in a bar many years ago in L.A. who was shot through the heart by some patron. As I tried to give her CPR, she was already dead. Does that make me any more a hero? No.

You're not the only who has seen blood.

[CrAnIuM]

.......of a civilian in a bar many years ago in L.A. who was shot through the heart by some patron. As I tried to give her CPR, she was already dead. Does that make me any more a hero? No.

You're not the only who has seen blood.

You obviously misunderstood my post ...

I did not say that to elicit a standing ovation nor to portray myself as some sort of 'hero'.

I say it to illustrate a more personal, human perspective of the soldier that does these things in the face of public scrutiny.

As a soldier I followed orders, yes. However I never felt compelled to follow an illegal order. Every act of violence I committed
was done within military law with the backing of an established Congressional order.

That means that there were MANY chances for the entire conflict to be called off and for political pressures to prevent the conflict
PRIOR to me having to board transport to those war zones.

So, I say that the war fighter is not the one to be held responsible for the conflict but it is the failed
policy that led to the troop being deployed.

[KommieKat]

So, I say that the war fighter is not the one to be held responsible for the conflict but it is the failed
policy that led to the troop being deployed.

Here here! Bravo bravo!:78:

And my statement about doing CPR is a true story. Sad, but true.

[Chriss]

So, I say that the war fighter is not the one to be held responsible for the conflict but it is the failed
policy that led to the troop being deployed.

Agreed.


And my statement about doing CPR is a true story. Sad, but true.

I'm really sorry to hear about this. :(

[Jenn]

Yes yes, I saw those old reels of WW2 vets riding the backs of tanks as it goes through Paris or Tokyo, throwing Hershey chocolates to the half-naked children. How heart warming.

Sorry, but I don't buy that bullshit.

You're more than welcome to point out the "good way (s)" if you wish, but please spare me the candy handouts.:yociexp35:

I'm not trying to conince you or anything about anything. I'm stating how I feel. And I feel that we are in Iraq right now helping them.

[Jenn]

Here here! Bravo bravo!:78:

And my statement about doing CPR is a true story. Sad, but true.

I'm sorry to hear that. =(

[4nik8]

You make those statements as if to instruct me.

I assure I am the last person that needs instruction in the realm of international tinkering that is done by ALL governments.

I made my statements because to blame or find the source of the current situation does NOT alleviate or change the current path the US military has to maintain.

The current situation is as it is, one can't take back five years of influence by the US military. Contrary to what you may think I can tell you from first hand knowledge that the people of that region are better off now than five years ago.

During Saddam's regime the large cities had running water, a stable electrical grid and a stable environment of seemingly quiet and peaceful community life. But those things were a white wash of placation to the people which the regime held captive by an overwhelming policy of fear and oppression.

The common man held no individual rights, no power of self change, no outlet for intellectual or artistic expression that was free from governmental oversight and influence. Today the common man can follow his path as he sees fit for the most part.

Freedom is not a chicken in a pot and a working air conditioner ... FREEDOM is an ideal and lifestyle that can not be contained within a sadistic and all consuming dictatorship where only the privileged are giving rights to express themselves.

The road to a self governing Iraq is long and like it or not will be influenced by the US government.

Some will say its merely a puppet government some will say otherwise.

That was so....eloquent and moving it brought a tear to my eye.

Where'd you c/p this from?

[CrAnIuM]

That was so....eloquent and moving it brought a tear to my eye.

Where'd you c/p this from?


Nigga please ... thats all me dude !!

[Shade]

Can i ask a question....any one got a picture of the iraq uniform? I heard someone else say this, and it doesnt seem like we are fighting an army, rather then fighting city's and there people. I agree we can't pull out now. It's like that guy in that movie who got his dick stuck in his zipper. We are stuck till something happens, we can try to move out slowly, but if we just leave we will end up cutting off our own dicks. still i've been against the iraq war from the start. I just dont belive in fucking over the majority of our troops. though there are a few specific units that i wouldnt mind.

Perhaps our troops can pull out, and let the merc units hold, even though its poliiticly a nightmare to do that, its the only semi reasonable solution. The fact is we will most likely be there atleast 2 more years if not more. Fighting in the middle east is like a perpetual conflict of a 5 yearold breaking up to 3 yearolds fighting over who has the right to the last cookie. It wont stop, and the 5 yearold is still in danger of the 2 idiot 3 yearolds ganging up on em.

[Amythist]

We shouldn't have been over there this long in the first place. It angers me that they have kept families from their loved ones to rebuild a place not even in the us! They need to start getting our people back in a safe manor!

[KommieKat]

We shouldn't have been over there this long in the first place. It angers me that they have kept families from their loved ones to rebuild a place not even in the us! They need to start getting our people back in a safe manor!

You mean U.S. and manner?

I got what you're saying and agree with you. "Get them back to us and put up in a motel manor?"..............heeeehaaaaw

[Amythist]

hey i never said i was a perfect typer...hahahaha oh wellzzzzzzzzzz

[KommieKat]

hey i never said i was a perfect typer...hahahaha oh wellzzzzzzzzzz

Just teasing you with a taser..........:42_002:

[Amythist]

ITS ALL GOOD.... NO WORRIES!!!

[HerCUNTness]

The military should get out of Iraq now..... Because those people have families. Im ALOT unhappy about deployments. Im Biased, I know. When my hubby went I was shattered. I was soo happy that he returned, and in one piece! I know that there are alot of other wives who go thru this ... its NOT fun. So yes, I want all those guys/gals home... this time for keeps- not just 2 weeks.

[gigman]

I agree with Prick, it would be nice if we had the luxury of pulling our troops out now, but we don't.

People need to understand that we are pretty much stuck there now and so we need to band together all of our resources to help us get through it safely and with minimum casualties.

All of the anti war bullshit and pulled funding for our troops is just delaying the inevitable, and potentially fucking up our street cred.
Your right about that and so is Prick.
We still have troops in Afghanistan and no one is bitching about that. The truth of the matter is that the democrats are just stirring up shit to fuck up the republican party from getting a foot hold into the White House.
We need to bomb the shit out of Iran and 80% of the problem is solved. They are supporting terrorist activity in Iraq. Plus they are a terrorist country.
Enough said.

[KommieKat]

............................................. to help us get through it safely and with minimum casualties.


Your correct Blood. Best to minimize civilian casualties as much a possible.

Interesting #'s for you.

Most deaths in WW1 was only 10% civilian casualties. The rest were service personnel.

WW2 had 50% civilian casualties.
Vietnam saw 70% and Iraq is at a whooping 90%.

That means as we get more sophisticated with weapon technology, we get to kill more civilians.

For some reason, Americans get real emotional about a suicidal bomber with explosives strapped around their waist as opposed to a bomber 3000 ft in the air dropping a few payloads with the push of a button.

[Severina]

Your correct Blood. Best to minimize civilian casualties as much a possible.

Interesting #'s for you.

Most deaths in WW1 was only 10% civilian casualties. The rest were service personnel.

WW2 had 50% civilian casualties.
Vietnam saw 70% and Iraq is at a whooping 90%.

That means as we get more sophisticated with weapon technology, we get to kill more civilians.

lf you are using these figures to back up your opinion, l would like to see your source. WW1 figures are 10% civilians ... are you sure of this?

[suki]

I've literally worn the blood of a fallen battle buddy in more than one conflict and its
never an easy thing to deal with, but its made especially more difficult when the negative
rhetoric of the media, and citizens in general, see the troop as the one to blame for the conflict.

I have no doubt in my mind that the US has muddied the water in more than
one political landscape ...still, the warrior does not choose the war, he only chooses to end it quickly.


I don't blame the TROOPS at all. not in the least. I know it takes an unbelievable amount of courage and pride to be there (or anywhere like there). I have young cousins on their way...and I, for one, would like to know they aren't being treated as disposable before their fucking plane lands.

blood mentioned something about stupid anti-war protests. are they? is it STUPID to want to bring our youth (and geezers like you) home? I certainly don't think so...

I have a significant problem with the administration(s) who:

a. fucked around there for self-involved interests to begin with
b. went back and fucked around some more

I have several iraqi friends who have vascillated between disgust, gratitude and disgust, again with the US/Iraqi policies.

initially...disgusted for taking so fucking long for cleaning up their mess, there.

then...grateful they finally got off their asses and made a move to correct their mistakes.

now, disgusted again at the mishandling of the situation.

I don't disagree with you that we're stuck, now...I might just see it in a different light, though.

I think it is FUCKED BEYOND ALL COMPREHENSION the mess that's been made there. we've destroyed the infra-structure of a once incredibly wealthy nation, reduced any underpinnings of what could've been a sustainable internal economy (I actually know ambitious dick-faced assholes who bought iraqi currency a few years back as an 'investment.' FUCK YOU, SELFISH DOUCHEBAGS!!! How bout actually investing your USD's IN the economy? how about some micro loans or rebuilding grants??? dicks. what was I saying?), and now we're footing the bill for 'restabilization.'


there's a reason the US is going it alone on this one.

I'm not sure what it is. Were our administrators just war-mongering meglomaniacs?

it can't be as simple as that.

is there an ultimate financial gain involved here?

I can't believe that either. what kind of monster sacrifices a hedgemonic economy for gain in personal wealth? (don't answer that)

what??? are we actually attempting to accomplish long-run there?
this wasn't well thought out...and I'm having difficulty believing that's going to change in the near future.

I've got two words for any motherfucker even considering making a run for my vote:

exit.
strategy.

[suki]

Your right about that and so is Prick.
We still have troops in Afghanistan and no one is bitching about that. The truth of the matter is that the democrats are just stirring up shit to fuck up the republican party from getting a foot hold into the White House.
We need to bomb the shit out of Iran and 80% of the problem is solved. They are supporting terrorist activity in Iraq. Plus they are a terrorist country.
Enough said.

^ sheer. utter. ignorance.

you have a mullet, don't you?

[Titty]

you have a mullet, don't you?

I'm betting since birth.

[suki]

I'm betting since birth.


at the risk of hi-jacking (btw prick, I'm sending in troops to overthrow your oppressive regime)...

show me yer junk.

(both of you)

[CrAnIuM]

at the risk of hi-jacking (btw prick, I'm sending in troops to overthrow your oppressive regime)...

show me yer junk.

(both of you)

I am a "professional".

We only show our junk to those we intend to dispatch.

[Shade]

Your right about that and so is Prick.
We still have troops in Afghanistan and no one is bitching about that. The truth of the matter is that the democrats are just stirring up shit to fuck up the republican party from getting a foot hold into the White House.
We need to bomb the shit out of Iran and 80% of the problem is solved. They are supporting terrorist activity in Iraq. Plus they are a terrorist country.
Enough said.

way to fuck up a perfectly logical and smart post! You do realize at some point we will bomb someone who will fight back? and then we will start to lose hundreds of thousands of lifes? We might even be stuck there for years. But what the hell, lets but together a poor excuse and do it anyways! It will help the economy to! Because all terrorists should die no matter what! Cause if we run out of bullets, we can start throwing babies at em, and eventually we can make them choke in the blood of the innocent! Now if i could only think of the battle cry that sums up your view...oh yea, allah akbur!

[suki]

^ hahahahahahaha.

niiice.

[KommieKat]

lf you are using these figures to back up your opinion, l would like to see your source. WW1 figures are 10% civilians ... are you sure of this?

You can add another 10% if it makes you feel better.

[Pinkslit]

You can add another 10% if it makes you feel better.

It is impossible to determine the civilian death toll for the 1st World War.
8,500,000 service personnel were killed.
Estimates range from 6,000,000 to 13,000,000 civilians.
Whatever, it would appear to be much higher than the percentage you have given, as Severina rightly states.

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm

[Severina]

You can add another 10% if it makes you feel better.

Reverting to your usual stance when questioned on facts regarding your posts is no surprise.

[KommieKat]

It is impossible to determine the civilian death toll for the 1st World War.
8,500,000 service personnel were killed.
Estimates range from 6,000,000 to 13,000,000 civilians.
Whatever, it would appear to be much higher than the percentage you have given, as Severina rightly states.

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm

You can add another 10% if it makes you feel better.

[Shade]

Here is my question. In history when a country invades it has 3 choices. To take over the country, up and leave, or allow reconstruction. Obviously america isn't going to just take iraq and make it the 53rd state (52nd would be canada), so we have the get the fuck out or be there for the long hall. It seems the longer we stay in an invading country, the more dependent they become on us. For instance, we are expected right now to put out fires, kill insurgence, Create the goverment, reconstruct the city. If we leave right now, it all falls on the iraq people. Which inevatably means they gotta rely completely on themselfs. It seems in both cases we are fucked. But i still wonder if there is a chance if we planed an exit, gave them the ability to rebuild themselfs, and got the fuck out earlier instead of staying for 4-5 years, would they of rised to that and rebuilt there city, created there own mility, and rebuilt themself, asking for aide packages, and shit when approprate, or would they of just ended up collapsing on themselfs till something new was created, or would of it always been the same old thing?

[CrAnIuM]

Here is my question. In history when a country invades it has 3 choices. To take over the country, up and leave, or allow reconstruction. Obviously america isn't going to just take iraq and make it the 53rd state (52nd would be canada), so we have the get the fuck out or be there for the long hall. It seems the longer we stay in an invading country, the more dependent they become on us. For instance, we are expected right now to put out fires, kill insurgence, Create the goverment, reconstruct the city. If we leave right now, it all falls on the iraq people. Which inevatably means they gotta rely completely on themselfs. It seems in both cases we are fucked. But i still wonder if there is a chance if we planed an exit, gave them the ability to rebuild themselfs, and got the fuck out earlier instead of staying for 4-5 years, would they of rised to that and rebuilt there city, created there own mility, and rebuilt themself, asking for aide packages, and shit when approprate, or would they of just ended up collapsing on themselfs till something new was created, or would of it always been the same old thing?


The Iraqi 'government' is already imposing restrictions on US combat. In some regions it is forbidden for US troops to pursue insurgents,
even if the US troops have 'eyes on' a bad guy they have to let the Iraqi troops pursue and kill.

This is a HUGE problem since 75% of the time a US commander has to practically BEG his Iraqi counterpart to do his fucking job.
When the Iraqi troops fight they are a modestly capable force ...the issue is GETTING them to fight in the first place.

I did my tour in 2003, the soldiers that do their combat tour today are fucked in more ways than having to worry about getting dead in the traditional manner,
now they have to worry about getting dead because of a restrictions imposed on their missions.

It sucks ass no matter how you cut it. We HAVE to stay otherwise Iran and others will take up the slack.

[Shade]

I get the if we stay we are fucked but if we leave we are fucked statement.

So as a soldier how do you fight that? If your not allowed to kill anyone? How do we make the iraqy soldiers fight? If we leave will the iraqy's be strong enough to deal with the outside infulences?

Allow me to rething. If on one hand we leave, we must trust the iraqy people to do what they gotta. And there is thousands of years of tradition, thoughts, beliefs and values that make this a risky endenver as is, but then you have everyone else forcing there beliefs on the iraqy people, or trying to outright take over. So it comes down to how strong are the iraqy people as a whole.

If we stay and fight, they will always rely on us to be there and fight the war for them. They obviously arn't really concerned about fighting insuregence, else we wouldn't have to beg them to do our jobs. So we gotta have faith in the fact they may infact start standing on their own. Which again begs the question, how strong are the iraqy people?

Then the other is we just say fuck it, and start imposing our own views. We force our policy's down there throat to prevent anyone else from taking them over, and we do it while protecting our soldiers. However the Iraqy people basicly become oppressed, and either stay stagnent, and we end up having to stay there forever, or make them a US nation. Which the US has never done before.

It just seems no matter what way you cut it, it always ends up on the iraqy people. They gotta either shit or get off the pot. Our only real choice is what is easier for them, and are we willing to sacrafice american lives to make it easier on them.

I get that there are alot of political ties and the like making it so we do have a vested interest, but it seems it's yet another way we really can't fight. The Iraqy people have to figure it out and fight it themselfs.

[Amythist]

I just hope that they have a solid plan to eventually remove our troops completely out of there safely.It is understandable why they can't just do it...but the end result should be that they get home to their families as safe as possible given the situation.

[KommieKat]

........... or would of it always been the same old thing?

No, it would not have been the same old thing. Yes, SH was a brute bastard but the amount of people he tortured and killed each year was way less than what invading America has done.

He was incapable of invading any other countries because of the embargo during the late 1990's.

The WMD were destroyed by the U.N. inspections and what little was left, destroyed by Iraq themselves.

People had jobs and a livelihood compared to what they do not have now.


The Iraqi 'government' is already imposing restrictions on US combat. In some regions it is forbidden for US troops to pursue insurgents,
even if the US troops have 'eyes on' a bad guy they have to let the Iraqi troops pursue and kill..........................
It sucks ass no matter how you cut it. We HAVE to stay otherwise Iran and others will take up the slack.

Of course it's not going to meet American standards in the beginning but that is the idea, isn't it? To let them take over?

Why is it that now Iran is the bad guy?
Because of what some anonymous organization like American Intelligence has to accurately report or is that Inaccurately report?
They report whatever they decide to report to keep in tune with the wishes of the president.

Got to keep the war machine griding, from one nation to another, they fall like dominoes to the might of the U.S. military for Peace and Democracy.

The problem here is how the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) is in sharp contrast with Bush and does not reflect his own views.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which has been doing inspections as far back as 2002 has found no credible evidence that Iran has been in the business to produce Nuke bombs.

It is nothing but Bush and his hawks who are hyping up the Iran menace thing. There is not ONE proof you can provide as to why Iran should be the next target.
Go ahead and try. I challenge you.



It is understandable why they can't just do it...

Is it? Please explain. I have no idea of this.
I no longer live in the U.S., therefore, I am not inundated with the media on a daily basis.

"In reality, Democrats need just 41 Senate votes to stop the war—enough to maintain a filibuster (which is not, incidentally, part of the Constitution) and prevent any new war funding bills from being passed."
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3221

[Shade]

Small numbers, usually in groups of 3 to 10.
Surprisingly the locals wanted em dead as much as we did.

Well, the didnt like us invaded, the sure as hell wouldn't like them either. Nice kills though. It just seems like with those numbes its smaller factions positioning themselfs to make purposals to larger factions

[CrAnIuM]

Well, the didnt like us invaded, the sure as hell wouldn't like them either. Nice kills though. It just seems like with those numbes its smaller factions positioning themselfs to make purposals to larger factions


I am unable to translate what you are tying to say. :laluot_05:

[Shade]

I am unable to translate what you are tying to say. :laluot_05:


I was saying that it sounds like smaller factions of those goverments are sending those troops in. If tho troops show sucess, their respective goverments will add more troops. Kinda like a buisness purposal. We got 100 guys holding there own here, why not commit 1000 and we will take it. I just don't expect to see anything up till the point that the US withdraws. We are still to much of a pain to fight. Plus it looks really bad if they send an official force. I mean killing 10 guys here and there they can claim there just randoms, but when your facing 100+ troops, with obvious origin, it gets hard to deny to the US that there not involved. Though if i where in charge of their military i would be doing the same thing. Feeling out spots that are soft, and working on inserecting the people of those soft zones, so that when the US pulls out, they can plunge in.