Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

So, for the past 2 days our boys are dropping bombs, firing aircraft mounted missiles, and firing ground based guns that shoot rounds the size of my thigh. This only happens when they are getting ready for a major Op.

Anyone want to take a guess as to whom is about to get their butts kicked? We should run a list here, so in 2 or 3 months, when it goes down, we can see who the club Nostradamus is?

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

We could hope so, but given Obummer's latest hijinks, maybe it will be BiBi Netanyahu's party headquarters.

I hope that he is not stupid enough to do that. I think that will turn the entire world against us.

I HOPE I was kidding. But who knows?

MarcSpaz wrote:So, for the past 2 days our boys are dropping bombs, firing aircraft mounted missiles, and firing ground based guns that shoot rounds the size of my thigh. This only happens when they are getting ready for a major Op.

Anyone want to take a guess as to whom is about to get their butts kicked? We should run a list here, so in 2 or 3 months, when it goes down, we can see who the club Nostradamus is?

This is still a very limited action. Besides, the ROE prevents our troops from engaging ISIS at a level that would stop their advance.

This is one of those times where I would be okay with scrapping the rule book for a few days. Goes back to that whole "It takes a monster to kill a monster" POV.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Well, looks like we may be finding out sooner than I thought.

Saudi Arabia is going in to square-up Yemen by taking out the Houthi.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/25/middleeast/yemen-unrest/

Another situation we helped create with our $500 million in missing weapons falling into enemy hands. Our foreign policy is just great. We need enemies to fight, so let's create them ourselves.

And people say there's no room for cuts at the DoD.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

You know what is needed in this situation?

A muthafracka with an axe.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -ISIS.html

ShotgunBlast wrote:Another situation we helped create with our $500 million in missing weapons falling into enemy hands. Our foreign policy is just great. We need enemies to fight, so let's create them ourselves.

And people say there's no room for cuts at the DoD.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

SB: are you suggesting that DoD ginned this up to create a mission for themselves? Doesn't sound like the military I know.

I'm saying the ineptitude of our foreign policy and intervention into the affairs of other countries inadvertently creates the enemies we will be fighting down the road.

Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda, ISIS, and these guys in Yemen only get to be a threat once they get their hands on US military hardware. Maybe we should do something about that.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Sure, but that isn't the military's policy. Look to the Zero White House for those bad decisions. And don't jump to ascribe their malice to ineptitude.

add to those missing weapons, that drone that went down over Syria about a week ago.

On a less serious note (I think?) that dude with the axe is pretty BA!

I've been complaining about this administration's policy for near a decade, that leaving weapons and resources behind is a bad idea. I keep hearing the same excuses too. Its cheaper to make a new one than to take it home. Well, I call BS.

If it was affordable enough to bring it there, it affor enought to bring it home. The real cost is human life as bad use use this policy to do bad things. AND we end up in another confrontation, lose more life, and leave more supplies behind to start the cycle over.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

FiremanBob wrote:Sure, but that isn't the military's policy. Look to the Zero White House for those bad decisions. And don't jump to ascribe their malice to ineptitude.

I never assigned blame to the military. The military doesn't create foreign policy.

Who's the one jumping?

"We need enemies to fight, so let's create them ourselves.

And people say there's no room for cuts at the DoD."

Whether or not you meant to, the conjunction of these two statements implies that it is the DoD that needs to create enemies to fight. I'll take it that you did not mean it that way.

We prep the area for a couple of days, Iraqi ground forces roll in, they come apart at the seams, and we're right back where we started. The Islamic extremists have had plenty of time to dig in and set traps to grind down the momentum of an Iraqi assault (not too hard to do).

Bottom line, our fearless leader is a day late and a dollar short yet again.

"Wars Without Borders". LOL! Who woulda thunk it?

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

With the exception of the Kurds, who are a multi-religious ethnic group, no matter which side you are cheering for over there right now, there will be problems later. The Sunni minority in the north (Saddam Hussein was one of them) ruled and oppressed the Shiites in the south and the Kurds in the Turkey, Iran, Iraq, Syria mountainous border region. After Hussein's removal, the more numerous Shiites (with Iran's support) started getting their payback against the Sunnis. Many of the Sunnis having experience with being part of Hussein's "Thug-ocracy", Baathist ruling party weren't going to put up with it and that is when all the bombings started during the Bush administration.

So right now there are three groups vying for varying degrees of power in Iraq, the Kurds who want some form of a Kurdistan, whether it is a state, province or nation, ISIS (many members were formerly Al Qaeda in Iraq) and Shiites from the south (many of which were part of Muqtada al Sadr's Mahdi army, which received much support from Iran). In terms of actual combatants, the number is probably 20-40 percent of the male population, the remainder really just want to live a semi peaceful existence and couldn't care who is in charge.

The Iraqis that the Obama administration seem to hate the most are the Kurds and he and his minions choose to support them the least, even though they seem to be some of the more competent and disciplined fighters on the current battlefield. As for who we as a nation support or don't support, those choices are made by two agencies as far as I know the State Department and the CIA.

Given all the accusations about President Obama's religious loyalties, I haven't figured which of the two sects he seems to favor. He looks like he is trying to play both sides of the fence, He is trying to get in bed with Iran on his nuclear deal and encourages them to support Iraq in the fight with ISIS, then he supposedly opposes them with his anti Assad actions in Syria (who they support). That would lead me to believe he has sympathies toward the Shiites, but then again given his virtually blind support for the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Hamas, that would point toward Sunni leanings.

Well said.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]