Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So, here we are in a debate regarding Afghanistan, and all of the "make love not war" people are wishing to continue to throw out the whole Bush "mission accomplished" banner as they continue to oppose criticisms of Obama.
It is such a stupid argument that a post needs to be made to point out that the fallacy of the position that Bush premptively spoke through said banner.
Its quite apparent that most of you on this forum, especially those who through out stupid little arguments like "mission accomplished" have no concept of military procedure or operations.
A "mission" is simply a directive. If a commander gives somebody an order to obtain more toilet paper, that soldier is on a mission. Mission doesn't mean the entire engagement, nor the entire war.
The amount of people who have been complaining about "mission accomplished" for 8 years just continue to make themselves look uneducated and ignorant to military lingo. Even people like Jon Stewart and Bill Mahr don't even realize how absolutely ignorant their complaints on the subject look to knowledgable people.
Mission accomplished NEVER was declared to mean that we won the objective of the engagement in Iraq.
People who try to use it to prove that Bush somehow mis-spoke are using a stawman based on ignorance.
Please, stop using the argument as its absolutely stupid. And before criticizing somebody on something they say, at least know that you are correct in your assessment of their error. Otherwise, you just look more ignorant than the speaker.
So, here we are in a debate regarding Afghanistan, and all of the "make love not war" people are wishing to continue to throw out the whole Bush "mission accomplished" banner as they continue to oppose criticisms of Obama.
It is such a stupid argument that a post needs to be made to point out that the fallacy of the position that Bush premptively spoke through said banner.
The "Mission Accomplished" banner flew over the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN-72) after that Carrier Air Group returned from a successful mission in Iraq for Operation Enduring Freedom. It was a fitting banner to honor all the soldiers and sailors who were returning home after completing a successful mission. Bush knew he had nothing to do with their success, it was all due to people like those on the deck of that carrier.
The "Mission Accomplished" banner flew over the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN-72) after that Carrier Air Group returned from a successful mission in Iraq for Operation Enduring Freedom. It was a fitting banner to honor all the soldiers and sailors who were returning home after completing a successful mission. Bush knew he had nothing to do with their success, it was all due to people like those on the deck of that carrier.
And thus, the "mission accomplished" banner was appropriate.
People that have NO idea what they are talking about will continue to criticize Bush for YEARS after this situation simply because they are ignorant.
So, here we are in a debate regarding Afghanistan, and all of the "make love not war" people are wishing to continue to throw out the whole Bush "mission accomplished" banner as they continue to oppose criticisms of Obama.
It is such a stupid argument that a post needs to be made to point out that the fallacy of the position that Bush premptively spoke through said banner.
Its quite apparent that most of you on this forum, especially those who through out stupid little arguments like "mission accomplished" have no concept of military procedure or operations.
A "mission" is simply a directive. If a commander gives somebody an order to obtain more toilet paper, that soldier is on a mission. Mission doesn't mean the entire engagement, nor the entire war.
The amount of people who have been complaining about "mission accomplished" for 8 years just continue to make themselves look uneducated and ignorant to military lingo. Even people like Jon Stewart and Bill Mahr don't even realize how absolutely ignorant their complaints on the subject look to knowledgable people.
Mission accomplished NEVER was declared to mean that we won the objective of the engagement in Iraq.
People who try to use it to prove that Bush somehow mis-spoke are using a stawman based on ignorance.
Please, stop using the argument as its absolutely stupid. And before criticizing somebody on something they say, at least know that you are correct in your assessment of their error. Otherwise, you just look more ignorant than the speaker.
Yeah - people know sucker words when they see them!
Yeah - people know sucker words when they see them!
I used to catch carp using doughballs.
U.S.A.! U.S.A.!
So basically, you couldn't defend the criticisms over the whole "mission accomplished" situation, so instead you just redirect and try to change to an attack on those who....
geez, I dont even know what your point is. Just face it, the criticisms over "mission accomplished" are only put forward by people ignorant of what the term means.
Yep, The Carrier Group's Mission was Accomplished but the War is still lost. Big deal.
More spinning! Yay!
So, you admit that the criticisms on "mission accomplished" are ill founded, but then instead of admitting the ignorance, you redirect to some subjective term like we "lost" the war.
Some of you are on par with debating with 10 year olds upset that they can't have ice cream.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.