Discussion:
Little for Canadian jets to do in Iraq . . . .
(too old to reply)
(ಠ_ಠ)
2014-11-28 01:18:31 UTC
Permalink
Remember that little TV theme "Have gun, will travel . . ." ?
Seems the Harper government is looking for a war to fight in. What a bloody
joke on Canadians with the mission estimated at "up to $266 Million for 6 months".

____________________________________________________
Postmedia News | November 27, 2014


With little for Canadian jets to do in Iraq, expanding mission to Syria may be next

Canadian military aircraft tasked with fighting ISIS in Iraq are spending most
of their time on the ground, which could bolster arguments for extending the
war into Syria.

Canada is contributing six CF-18 fighter jets, two Aurora military surveillance
aircraft and a Polaris refuelling plane to the U.S.-led bombing campaign
against militants with the Islamic State of Iraq and Al-Sham, commonly known as
ISIS.

Canada’s Iraq mission by the numbers

116: Total sorties flown by Canadian military aircraft in Iraq since Oct. 30
42: Sorties flown in the first week
26: Sorties flown in the second week
35: Sorties flown in the third week
13: Sorties flown in the fourth week
4: Canadian airstrikes since the start of the mission
0: Canadian airstrikes in the past week

The aircraft began flying sorties on Oct. 30, and by the end of the first week
had logged a total of 42. Those included an airstrike that destroyed four ISIS
construction vehicles.

The pace has since slowed, particularly over the past week. While the CF-18s
and other aircraft flew a combined 26 and 35 sorties in the war’s second and
third weeks, only 13 sorties were flown between Nov. 20 and 26. (The military
counts a sortie every time one of its planes embarks on a mission. If two
planes are involved in the same mission, it is counted as two sorties.)

Of the 13 sorties, six were flown by the CF-18s, or exactly one mission per
fighter jet over the entire six-day span. The Auroras flew four while the
Polaris flew three. Each sortie is believed to run about four to six hours.

A U.S.-led command centre is responsible for assigning missions to all
coalition aircraft, and the Canadian commander on the ground, Col. Daniel
Constable, said Thursday that Canada accomplished all the missions asked of it.

But Constable also admitted two weeks ago that coalition forces were having a
hard time finding ISIS targets, and the latest figures indicate the situation
hasn’t gotten any better.

This was the first week where Canadian warplanes did not launch an attack
against ISIS targets after destroying the construction vehicles, an artillery
piece, a warehouse and a bunker over the previous three weeks.

Constable said the most noteworthy Canadian mission over the past week was
escorting an allied transport plane dropping water, tents, blankets and other
supplies to Iraqi civilians.

He would not say what country was behind the humanitarian drop, how much aid
was delivered, when the mission happened, or where it occurred, citing concerns
the information would help ISIS forces.

With Canadian warplanes having little to do in Iraq, the discussion turns to
the future of the six-month combat mission. In particular, the government will
be faced with the question of whether to end operations or, conversely, expand
into Syria.

Syria has been embroiled in a complex and bloody civil war since 2011, and
unlike in Iraq, the Syrian government has not invited Canada or its allies to
fight ISIS within its borders. That has created legal hurdles as well as fears
of being drawn into a broader conflict.

But while the country has been off limits to the Canadian military, the U.S.
and some Arab allies sidestepped the Syrian government to launch attacks
against ISIS forces there since the summer. There has been speculation in
recent weeks that Canada will follow suit.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s spokesman, Stephen Lecce, would not comment
Thursday on the possibility of expanding the mission into Syria.

“Canada is focused on our current mission: air strikes against [ISIS] in Iraq,
and soldiers performing an advise and assist function,” he said, referring to
the several dozen Canadian special forces troops working with Kurdish and Iraqi
government forces in northern Iraq.

However, Justice Minister Peter MacKay told the CBC last weekend that the
government had discussed the idea of expanding the mission with other allies,
and that lawyers in his department were working to eliminate the legal hurdles.

“We’re operating against an enemy that does not respect any borders,” he said.
_______________________________________

Seems Harper's Canada is also operating without any borders . . . .
Alan Baker
2014-11-28 01:20:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by (ಠ_ಠ)
Remember that little TV theme "Have gun, will travel . . ." ?
Seems the Harper government is looking for a war to fight in. What a
bloody joke on Canadians with the mission estimated at "up to $266
Million for 6 months".
Of course, if they don't actually DO much the costs will be lower...

...but you're not really interested in facts, are you?
Post by (ಠ_ಠ)
____________________________________________________
Postmedia News | November 27, 2014
With little for Canadian jets to do in Iraq, expanding mission to Syria may be next
Canadian military aircraft tasked with fighting ISIS in Iraq are
spending most of their time on the ground, which could bolster
arguments for extending the war into Syria.
Canada is contributing six CF-18 fighter jets, two Aurora military
surveillance aircraft and a Polaris refuelling plane to the U.S.-led
bombing campaign against militants with the Islamic State of Iraq and
Al-Sham, commonly known as ISIS.
Canada’s Iraq mission by the numbers
116: Total sorties flown by Canadian military aircraft in Iraq since Oct. 30
42: Sorties flown in the first week
26: Sorties flown in the second week
35: Sorties flown in the third week
13: Sorties flown in the fourth week
4: Canadian airstrikes since the start of the mission
0: Canadian airstrikes in the past week
The aircraft began flying sorties on Oct. 30, and by the end of the
first week had logged a total of 42. Those included an airstrike that
destroyed four ISIS construction vehicles.
The pace has since slowed, particularly over the past week. While the
CF-18s and other aircraft flew a combined 26 and 35 sorties in the
war’s second and third weeks, only 13 sorties were flown between Nov.
20 and 26. (The military counts a sortie every time one of its planes
embarks on a mission. If two planes are involved in the same mission,
it is counted as two sorties.)
Of the 13 sorties, six were flown by the CF-18s, or exactly one mission
per fighter jet over the entire six-day span. The Auroras flew four
while the Polaris flew three. Each sortie is believed to run about four
to six hours.
A U.S.-led command centre is responsible for assigning missions to all
coalition aircraft, and the Canadian commander on the ground, Col.
Daniel Constable, said Thursday that Canada accomplished all the
missions asked of it.
But Constable also admitted two weeks ago that coalition forces were
having a hard time finding ISIS targets, and the latest figures
indicate the situation hasn’t gotten any better.
This was the first week where Canadian warplanes did not launch an
attack against ISIS targets after destroying the construction vehicles,
an artillery piece, a warehouse and a bunker over the previous three
weeks.
Constable said the most noteworthy Canadian mission over the past week
was escorting an allied transport plane dropping water, tents, blankets
and other supplies to Iraqi civilians.
He would not say what country was behind the humanitarian drop, how
much aid was delivered, when the mission happened, or where it
occurred, citing concerns the information would help ISIS forces.
With Canadian warplanes having little to do in Iraq, the discussion
turns to the future of the six-month combat mission. In particular, the
government will be faced with the question of whether to end operations
or, conversely, expand into Syria.
Syria has been embroiled in a complex and bloody civil war since 2011,
and unlike in Iraq, the Syrian government has not invited Canada or its
allies to fight ISIS within its borders. That has created legal hurdles
as well as fears of being drawn into a broader conflict.
But while the country has been off limits to the Canadian military, the
U.S. and some Arab allies sidestepped the Syrian government to launch
attacks against ISIS forces there since the summer. There has been
speculation in recent weeks that Canada will follow suit.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s spokesman, Stephen Lecce, would not
comment Thursday on the possibility of expanding the mission into Syria.
“Canada is focused on our current mission: air strikes against [ISIS]
in Iraq, and soldiers performing an advise and assist function,” he
said, referring to the several dozen Canadian special forces troops
working with Kurdish and Iraqi government forces in northern Iraq.
However, Justice Minister Peter MacKay told the CBC last weekend that
the government had discussed the idea of expanding the mission with
other allies, and that lawyers in his department were working to
eliminate the legal hurdles.
“We’re operating against an enemy that does not respect any borders,” he said.
_______________________________________
Seems Harper's Canada is also operating without any borders . . . .
(ಠ_ಠ)
2014-11-28 01:26:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Of course, if they don't actually DO much the costs will be lower...
...but you're not really interested in facts, are you?
Loading Image...
M.I.Wakefield
2014-11-28 01:44:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by (ಠ_ಠ)
Remember that little TV theme "Have gun, will travel . . ." ?
Seems the Harper government is looking for a war to fight in. What a
bloody joke on Canadians with the mission estimated at "up to $266
Million for 6 months".
Of course, if they don't actually DO much the costs will be lower...
...but you're not really interested in facts, are you?
Having not much to do means that the air mission is doing its job.

Notice all the stories in the news for the last month on how ISIS is
overrunning territory virtually unopposed?
Dave Smith
2014-11-28 12:03:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
...but you're not really interested in facts, are you?
Having not much to do means that the air mission is doing its job.
Notice all the stories in the news for the last month on how ISIS is
overrunning territory virtually unopposed?
What appears in the media has more to do with what the media thinks is
newsworthy than what is happening around the world. ISIS is still a
threat. Russia is still in the eastern Ukraine, Ebola is still a
problem in Africa. CNN was running nonstop coverage of the events in
Ferguson.
M.I.Wakefield
2014-11-28 14:46:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Smith
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Having not much to do means that the air mission is doing its job.
Notice all the stories in the news for the last month on how ISIS is
overrunning territory virtually unopposed?
What appears in the media has more to do with what the media thinks is
newsworthy than what is happening around the world. ISIS is still a
threat. Russia is still in the eastern Ukraine, Ebola is still a problem
in Africa. CNN was running nonstop coverage of the events in Ferguson.
No ... the decline in the number of available targets indicates that ISIS
has lost freedom of movement, and can't gather forces to launch assaults,
for fear of air attacks.
Dave Smith
2014-11-28 22:24:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Post by Dave Smith
What appears in the media has more to do with what the media thinks is
newsworthy than what is happening around the world. ISIS is still a
threat. Russia is still in the eastern Ukraine, Ebola is still a
problem in Africa. CNN was running nonstop coverage of the events in
Ferguson.
No ... the decline in the number of available targets indicates that
ISIS has lost freedom of movement, and can't gather forces to launch
assaults, for fear of air attacks.
If that is the case I guess they will go back to the old hit and runs
system of mines, IEDs and sniping. They are not well enough trained or
equipped to take on a real army so they usually know better than to
engage modern armies in real battles.
Mudge
2014-11-28 23:11:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Smith
If that is the case I guess they will go back to the old hit and runs
system of mines, IEDs and sniping. They are not well enough trained
or equipped to take on a real army so they usually know better than to
engage modern armies in real battles.
Trouble is - no "modern army" can ever defeat a band of dedicated guerillas !!
--
The Canadian Curmudgeon (in Calgary)
Fix the biosphere - eliminate people
Dave Smith
2014-11-29 14:42:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mudge
Post by Dave Smith
If that is the case I guess they will go back to the old hit and runs
system of mines, IEDs and sniping. They are not well enough trained
or equipped to take on a real army so they usually know better than to
engage modern armies in real battles.
Trouble is - no "modern army" can ever defeat a band of dedicated guerillas !!
It has been done in the past. There have been rebellions that have been
quashed. Sometimes it is a matter of how harsh the regime is willing to
get.
(ಠ_ಠ)
2014-11-29 20:28:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Smith
Post by Mudge
Post by Dave Smith
If that is the case I guess they will go back to the old hit and runs
system of mines, IEDs and sniping. They are not well enough trained
or equipped to take on a real army so they usually know better than to
engage modern armies in real battles.
Trouble is - no "modern army" can ever defeat a band of dedicated guerillas !!
It has been done in the past. There have been rebellions that have been
quashed. Sometimes it is a matter of how harsh the regime is willing to get.
Or already is . . . . if I ever took the time to read about 'the regime' before I posted this tripe.
Alan Baker
2014-11-29 20:29:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Smith
Post by Mudge
Post by Dave Smith
If that is the case I guess they will go back to the old hit and runs
system of mines, IEDs and sniping. They are not well enough trained
or equipped to take on a real army so they usually know better than to
engage modern armies in real battles.
Trouble is - no "modern army" can ever defeat a band of dedicated guerillas !!
It has been done in the past. There have been rebellions that have been
quashed. Sometimes it is a matter of how harsh the regime is willing to get.
Or already is . . . . if I ever took the time to read about 'the
regime' before I posted this tripe.
How sad for you...

...that your best rebuttal is to lie about what someone else said.

Does it bother you: what you've let yourself become?
M.I.Wakefield
2014-11-29 20:57:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Dave Smith
Post by Mudge
Post by Dave Smith
If that is the case I guess they will go back to the old hit and runs
system of mines, IEDs and sniping. They are not well enough trained
or equipped to take on a real army so they usually know better than to
engage modern armies in real battles.
Trouble is - no "modern army" can ever defeat a band of dedicated guerillas !!
It has been done in the past. There have been rebellions that have been
quashed. Sometimes it is a matter of how harsh the regime is willing to get.
Or already is . . . . if I ever took the time to read about 'the
regime' before I posted this tripe.
How sad for you...
...that your best rebuttal is to lie about what someone else said.
Does it bother you: what you've let yourself become?
"[L]et yourself become?" ... that's the best she's ever had.
Alan Baker
2014-11-29 21:19:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Dave Smith
Post by Mudge
Post by Dave Smith
If that is the case I guess they will go back to the old hit and runs
system of mines, IEDs and sniping. They are not well enough trained
or equipped to take on a real army so they usually know better than to
engage modern armies in real battles.
Trouble is - no "modern army" can ever defeat a band of dedicated guerillas !!
It has been done in the past. There have been rebellions that have been
quashed. Sometimes it is a matter of how harsh the regime is willing to get.
Or already is . . . . if I ever took the time to read about 'the
regime' before I posted this tripe.
How sad for you...
...that your best rebuttal is to lie about what someone else said.
Does it bother you: what you've let yourself become?
"[L]et yourself become?" ... that's the best she's ever had.
No, I must beg to differ.

I don't believe that she believed it was alright to lie about people
merely for disagreeing with her from the time she was a child. Claiming
it as the best she ever had lets her off far too lightly.

:-(
(ಠ_ಠ)
2014-11-29 21:40:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
No, I must beg to differ.
I don't believe that she believed it was alright to lie about people merely for
disagreeing with her from the time she was a child. Claiming it as the best she
ever had lets her off far too lightly. :-(
Why do bachelors like smart women? Opposites attract.
Alan Baker
2014-11-29 22:07:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
No, I must beg to differ.
I don't believe that she believed it was alright to lie about people merely for
disagreeing with her from the time she was a child. Claiming it as the best she
ever had lets her off far too lightly. :-(
Why do bachelors like smart women? Opposites attract.
How sad for you...
Dave Smith
2014-11-30 00:06:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Alan Baker
No, I must beg to differ.
I don't believe that she believed it was alright to lie about people merely for
disagreeing with her from the time she was a child. Claiming it as the best she
ever had lets her off far too lightly. :-(
Why do bachelors like smart women? Opposites attract.
How sad for you...
Note that she is still single.
(ಠ_ಠ)
2014-11-30 01:23:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Smith
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Alan Baker
No, I must beg to differ.
I don't believe that she believed it was alright to lie about people merely for
disagreeing with her from the time she was a child. Claiming it as the best she
ever had lets her off far too lightly. :-(
Why do bachelors like smart women? Opposites attract.
How sad for you...
Note that she is still single.
Single women are not called 'bachelors'. They're called fortunate.
M.I.Wakefield
2014-11-29 22:12:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Post by Alan Baker
Does it bother you: what you've let yourself become?
"[L]et yourself become?" ... that's the best she's ever had.
No, I must beg to differ.
I don't believe that she believed it was alright to lie about people
merely for disagreeing with her from the time she was a child.
She doesn't believe it now: She just knows that she's never going to get
anywhere with her intellect, and it's her best option.
(ಠ_ಠ)
2014-11-29 23:16:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Post by Alan Baker
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Post by Alan Baker
Does it bother you: what you've let yourself become?
"[L]et yourself become?" ... that's the best she's ever had.
No, I must beg to differ.
I don't believe that she believed it was alright to lie about people merely
for disagreeing with her from the time she was a child.
She doesn't believe it now: She just knows that she's never going to get
anywhere with her intellect, and it's her best option.
At least I get to play with Alan Baker even if the girls don't much like me.
Alan Baker
2014-11-30 02:54:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Post by Alan Baker
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Post by Alan Baker
Does it bother you: what you've let yourself become?
"[L]et yourself become?" ... that's the best she's ever had.
No, I must beg to differ.
I don't believe that she believed it was alright to lie about people merely
for disagreeing with her from the time she was a child.
She doesn't believe it now: She just knows that she's never going to get
anywhere with her intellect, and it's her best option.
At least I get to play with Alan Baker even if the girls don't much like me.
How sad for you...

...to have no better rebuttal than to lie.
(ಠ_ಠ)
2014-11-30 03:03:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Post by Alan Baker
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Post by Alan Baker
Does it bother you: what you've let yourself become?
"[L]et yourself become?" ... that's the best she's ever had.
No, I must beg to differ.
I don't believe that she believed it was alright to lie about people merely
for disagreeing with her from the time she was a child.
She doesn't believe it now: She just knows that she's never going to get
anywhere with her intellect, and it's her best option.
At least I get to play with Alan Baker even if the girls don't much like me.
How sad for you...
...to have no better rebuttal than to lie.
Loading Image...
Alan Baker
2014-11-30 03:48:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by (ಠ_ಠ)
Post by Alan Baker
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Post by Alan Baker
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Post by Alan Baker
Does it bother you: what you've let yourself become?
"[L]et yourself become?" ... that's the best she's ever had.
No, I must beg to differ.
I don't believe that she believed it was alright to lie about people merely
for disagreeing with her from the time she was a child.
She doesn't believe it now: She just knows that she's never going to get
anywhere with her intellect, and it's her best option.
At least I get to play with Alan Baker even if the girls don't much like me.
How sad for you...
...to have no better rebuttal than to lie.
http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/a9/2f/bf/a92fbf65b79cf83039f17c9bc50a601c.jpg
You mean it's "obsessive" to reply...

...but repeatedly lying by pretending people said things they actually
didn't say is normal, Karen?
(ಠ_ಠ)
2014-12-01 01:05:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by (ಠ_ಠ)
Post by Alan Baker
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Post by Alan Baker
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Post by Alan Baker
Does it bother you: what you've let yourself become?
"[L]et yourself become?" ... that's the best she's ever had.
No, I must beg to differ.
I don't believe that she believed it was alright to lie about people merely
for disagreeing with her from the time she was a child.
She doesn't believe it now: She just knows that she's never going to get
anywhere with her intellect, and it's her best option.
At least I get to play with Alan Baker even if the girls don't much like me.
How sad for you...
...to have no better rebuttal than to lie.
http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/a9/2f/bf/a92fbf65b79cf83039f17c9bc50a601c.jpg
You mean it's "obsessive" to reply...
...but repeatedly lying by pretending people said things they actually didn't
say is normal, Karen?
Loading Image...
Alan Baker
2014-12-01 06:13:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by (ಠ_ಠ)
Post by Alan Baker
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Post by Alan Baker
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Post by Alan Baker
Does it bother you: what you've let yourself become?
"[L]et yourself become?" ... that's the best she's ever had.
No, I must beg to differ.
I don't believe that she believed it was alright to lie about people merely
for disagreeing with her from the time she was a child.
She doesn't believe it now: She just knows that she's never going to get
anywhere with her intellect, and it's her best option.
At least I get to play with Alan Baker even if the girls don't much like me.
How sad for you...
...to have no better rebuttal than to lie.
http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/a9/2f/bf/a92fbf65b79cf83039f17c9bc50a601c.jpg
You mean it's "obsessive" to reply...
...but repeatedly lying by pretending people said things they actually didn't
say is normal, Karen?
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31484YtAApL._UY395_.jpg
And now your obsession with misquoting others has led you to pretend
that I added the last line...

How sad.
(ಠ_ಠ)
2014-11-29 21:36:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Post by Alan Baker
Does it bother you: what you've let yourself become?
"[L]et yourself become?" ... that's the best she's ever had.
Mom always told me: 'If you’re too open-minded, your brains will fall out.'
That's why I limit myself on these newsgroups.
Alan Baker
2014-11-29 21:49:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Post by Alan Baker
Does it bother you: what you've let yourself become?
"[L]et yourself become?" ... that's the best she's ever had.
Mom always told me: 'If you’re too open-minded, your brains will fall out.'
That's why I limit myself on these newsgroups.
How sad...
(ಠ_ಠ)
2014-11-29 23:16:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Post by Alan Baker
Does it bother you: what you've let yourself become?
"[L]et yourself become?" ... that's the best she's ever had.
Mom always told me: 'If you’re too open-minded, your brains will fall out.'
That's why I limit myself on these newsgroups.
How sad... you really should take your mother's advice, Wakefield.
Alan Baker
2014-11-30 02:55:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Post by Alan Baker
Does it bother you: what you've let yourself become?
"[L]et yourself become?" ... that's the best she's ever had.
Mom always told me: 'If you’re too open-minded, your brains will fall out.'
That's why I limit myself on these newsgroups.
How sad... you really should take your mother's advice, Wakefield.
How sad...

...that you have nothing other than to put your words into other's mouths.

Surely once you must have expect more of yourself.
(ಠ_ಠ)
2014-11-30 03:03:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
How sad...
...that you have nothing other than to put your words into other's mouths.
Surely once you must have expect more of yourself.
http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/a9/2f/bf/a92fbf65b79cf83039f17c9bc50a601c.jpg
Alan Baker
2014-11-30 03:49:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by (ಠ_ಠ)
Post by Alan Baker
How sad...
...that you have nothing other than to put your words into other's mouths.
Surely once you must have expect more of yourself.
http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/a9/2f/bf/a92fbf65b79cf83039f17c9bc50a601c.jpg
I'm not talking ABOUT you, Karen.

I'm talking TO you.
(ಠ_ಠ)
2014-12-01 01:06:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by (ಠ_ಠ)
Post by Alan Baker
How sad...
...that you have nothing other than to put your words into other's mouths.
Surely once you must have expect more of yourself.
http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/a9/2f/bf/a92fbf65b79cf83039f17c9bc50a601c.jpg
I'm not talking ABOUT you, Karen.
I'm talking TO you.
Loading Image...
Alan Baker
2014-12-01 06:13:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by (ಠ_ಠ)
Post by Alan Baker
Post by (ಠ_ಠ)
Post by Alan Baker
How sad...
...that you have nothing other than to put your words into other's mouths.
Surely once you must have expect more of yourself.
http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/a9/2f/bf/a92fbf65b79cf83039f17c9bc50a601c.jpg
I'm not talking ABOUT you, Karen.
I'm talking TO you.
http://s2.hubimg.com/u/7436639_f260.jpg
I'm not mad, Karen.

Mildly amused and a little sad for you.

:-)(
(ಠ_ಠ)
2014-12-03 01:48:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by (ಠ_ಠ)
Post by Alan Baker
Post by (ಠ_ಠ)
Post by Alan Baker
How sad...
...that you have nothing other than to put your words into other's mouths.
Surely once you must have expect more of yourself.
http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/a9/2f/bf/a92fbf65b79cf83039f17c9bc50a601c.jpg
I'm not talking ABOUT you, Karen.
I'm talking TO you.
http://s2.hubimg.com/u/7436639_f260.jpg
I'm not mad, Karen.
Mildly amused and a little sad for you.
:-)(
Loading Image...
Alan Baker
2014-12-04 03:39:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by (ಠ_ಠ)
Post by Alan Baker
Post by (ಠ_ಠ)
Post by Alan Baker
Post by (ಠ_ಠ)
Post by Alan Baker
How sad...
...that you have nothing other than to put your words into other's mouths.
Surely once you must have expect more of yourself.
http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/a9/2f/bf/a92fbf65b79cf83039f17c9bc50a601c.jpg
I'm not talking ABOUT you, Karen.
I'm talking TO you.
http://s2.hubimg.com/u/7436639_f260.jpg
I'm not mad, Karen.
Mildly amused and a little sad for you.
:-)(
https://img1.etsystatic.com/033/1/7834569/il_340x270.609890697_3cvb.jpg
Wow.

You have nothing but empty platitudes and other people's jokes...

How sad.
(ಠ_ಠ)
2014-12-04 19:43:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
You have nothing but empty platitudes and other people's jokes...
How sad.
You ARE a 'sad' person, Baker . . . . Sexist And Detestable.
And likely feel safer playing with girls than with boys. That's why you follow
me around like a puppy.
Alan Baker
2014-12-06 01:23:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by (ಠ_ಠ)
Post by Alan Baker
You have nothing but empty platitudes and other people's jokes...
How sad.
You ARE a 'sad' person, Baker . . . . Sexist And Detestable.
In what way has anything I've ever said been sexist, Karen?
Post by (ಠ_ಠ)
And likely feel safer playing with girls than with boys. That's why
you follow me around like a puppy.
I don't "follow" you anywhere, Karen.

You post in a public group.

You post mostly ridiculous things that are easily disproven.

I reply.

That's it.

I neither know nor care what your gender really is.

:-)
(ಠ_ಠ)
2014-12-06 22:59:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by (ಠ_ಠ)
And likely feel safer playing with girls than with boys. That's why you
follow me around like a puppy.
I don't "follow" you anywhere, Karen.
You post in a public group.
You post mostly ridiculous things that are easily disproven.
I reply.
That's it.
I neither know nor care what your gender really is.
Loading Image...
Alan Baker
2014-12-07 03:11:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by (ಠ_ಠ)
Post by Alan Baker
Post by (ಠ_ಠ)
And likely feel safer playing with girls than with boys. That's why you
follow me around like a puppy.
I don't "follow" you anywhere, Karen.
You post in a public group.
You post mostly ridiculous things that are easily disproven.
I reply.
That's it.
I neither know nor care what your gender really is.
http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/fb/4c/ba/fb4cba579d7e89ff9371228c278e8aae.jpg
Aww...

How cute!

You think other people's platitudes are a good response!

Dave Smith
2014-11-30 00:05:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Dave Smith
It has been done in the past. There have been rebellions that have been
quashed. Sometimes it is a matter of how harsh the regime is willing to get.
Or already is . . . . if I ever took the time to read about 'the
regime' before I posted this tripe.
How sad for you...
...that your best rebuttal is to lie about what someone else said.
Does it bother you: what you've let yourself become?
Doesn't bother KKKaren. The small amount or cerebral matter her skull
hosts is accustomed to her lies.
(ಠ_ಠ)
2014-11-30 01:25:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by Dave Smith
It has been done in the past. There have been rebellions that have been
quashed. Sometimes it is a matter of how harsh the regime is willing to get.
Or already is . . . . if I ever took the time to read about 'the
regime' before I posted this tripe.
How sad for you...
...that your best rebuttal is to lie about what someone else said.
Does it bother you: what you've let yourself become?
Doesn't bother KKKaren. The small amount or cerebral matter her skull hosts is
accustomed to her lies.
Loading Image...
(ಠ_ಠ)
2014-11-28 23:47:14 UTC
Permalink
If that is the case I guess they will go back to the old hit and runs system of
mines, IEDs and sniping. They are not well enough trained or equipped to take
on a real army so they usually know better than to engage modern armies in
real battles.
"They are not well enough trained or equipped" ?! Another big mouth, small
brain, dares to post those words to demonstrate it.
Read it for yourself, ya ignorant person. I'll post a link just for you - and
only this one time ((+_+))
_____________________________

ISIS an 'Incredible' Fighting Force, US Special Ops Sources Say

"These guys aren't just bugging out, they're tactically withdrawing. Very
professional, well trained, motivated and equipped. They operate like a state
with a military," said one official who tracks ISIS closely. "These aren't the
same guys we fought in OIF (Operation Iraqi Freedom) who would just scatter
when you dropped a bomb near them."

ISIS appeared to have a sophisticated and well thought-out plan for
establishing its "Islamic Caliphate" from northern Syria across the western and
northern deserts of Iraq, many experts and officials have said, and support
from hostage-taking, robbery and sympathetic donations to fund it. They use
drones to gather overhead intel on targets and effectively commandeer captured
military vehicles – including American Humvees -- and munitions.

In sobering press conference Friday, Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel said
ISIS has shown that it is “as sophisticated and well-funded as any group that
we have seen.”

“They’re beyond just a terrorist group. They marry ideology, a sophistication
of strategic and tactical military prowess. They are tremendously well-funded,”
he said. “This is beyond anything that we’ve seen.”

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/isis-incredible-fighting-force-us-special-ops-sources/story?id=25116463
(ಠ_ಠ)
2014-11-28 23:40:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Smith
Post by M.I.Wakefield
Having not much to do means that the air mission is doing its job.
Notice all the stories in the news for the last month on how ISIS is
overrunning territory virtually unopposed?
What appears in the media has more to do with what the media thinks is
newsworthy than what is happening around the world. ISIS is still a threat.
Russia is still in the eastern Ukraine, Ebola is still a problem in Africa.
CNN was running nonstop coverage of the events in Ferguson.
No ... the decline in the number of available targets indicates that ISIS has
lost freedom of movement, and can't gather forces to launch assaults, for fear
of air attacks.
No . . . ISIS is smart enough to take those cities and towns that are not the
focus of the western forces.
There are over 200 individual anti-western islamic groups that are ready,
trained, armed and ready to strike.
When the western forces move on, they will be back to start again.

Thank you, George W Bush and the Republicans of the United States of America !
[ಠ益ಠ]
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...