Mattis’s Last Stand Is Iran

[Peter1469]

"Wiki covers it well"....

…..

Tahuyaman, these two wouldn't know a Neocon if one bent them over the fence post while whistling Dixie.

Entertaining...….I gotta hand it to these two. The utter ignorance, the wrong calls, they both get the ass when corrected, both in denial.

Award winning statements they're both famous for, I love them both.

Like the love you have for the Village Idiot. Yeah, he's the f'n village idiot, but he's OUR f'n village idiot!

First, your policies have failed.

Second you learn your lineage traces back to 1960s dems.

It has to hurt.

[Ransom]

First, your policies have failed.

Second you learn your lineage traces back to 1960s dems.

It has to hurt.

If you were a baseball player, Peter, you'd be hitting .147. Ethereal....about .067. You two wouldn't make anyone's farm team either.

Leading the league in strikeouts, errors, balks, and forfeits.

[Ransom]

Wiki covers it....

...yeah.

Get a hold of yourself, Peter. You normally can cite better sources than that, this isn't a time to resort to leaps of faith using wiki. You're just making this harder on yourself.

[Peter1469]

If you were a baseball player, Peter, you'd be hitting .147. Ethereal....about .067. You two wouldn't make anyone's farm team either.

Leading the league in strikeouts, errors, balks, and forfeits.

Demonstrably false. Read up on Walt.

[Ransom]

Demonstrably false. Read up on Walt.

I was referring to your analysis, not Walt's. I read your posts in here and as this one was in slight error as you're trying to deflect. .146 your new BA.

For donttread, that average would be strong. But you claim such vast knowledge and experience. Thus never denting the .150 average is a bit more than disappointing.

[Peter1469]

I was referring to your analysis, not Walt's. I read your posts in here and as this one was in slight error as you're trying to deflect. .146 your new BA.

For donttread, that average would be strong. But you claim such vast knowledge and experience. Thus never denting the .150 average is a bit more than disappointing.

You are simply incorrect. I called the Islamic State correct the day they declared their statelet. I called Afghanistan correctly continuously. I said the NATO attack on Libya would cause chaos. I said the US should not support the Syrian rebels / ISIL.

My track record is pretty damn good.

What do you have? 17 years of Afghan failure. A destroyed Libya (which prior to your interference was the greatest nation in North Africa) and a screwed up Syria (although I agree with attacking ISIL there - just not Assad.) And so much more.

[Ransom]

You are simply incorrect. I called the Islamic State correct the day they declared their statelet.

That's demonstrably false and we both know it. Your reputation harmed immeasurably and your continued denial and refusal to admit error further strains your integrity here.

I called Afghanistan correctly continuously. I said the NATO attack on Libya would cause chaos. I said the US should not support the Syrian rebels / ISIL.

You'd surrender Afghanistan to the Taliban, Libya was predictable, you blew the Syrian analysis, and was ever more wrong on Iraq.

My track record is pretty damn good.

Your track record today a trophy on my forum wall, Peter. Stuffed. Used for stories and training on what not to do.

What do you have? 17 years of Afghan failure. A destroyed Libya (which prior to your interference was the greatest nation in North Africa) and a screwed up Syria (although I agree with attacking ISIL there - just not Assad.) And so much more.

Prior to 'my' interference? The leaps and reaches you go to in attempts to address anything but your now tattered analyses on these pages are humorous and entertaining. But there is a reason they never come with links or showing of the record here. You cannot defend yourself, I've shown why. And taught you much in the mean time.

[Ransom]

What Member of our forum might have used these words when speaking to the Islamic State.

"IS is a regional problem. The US will never commit enough forces to matter. And Americans will never put up with an occupation long enough to fix the problems in the region."

Who indeed would have used those words not one month before the horrific events in Paris France proving the Islamic State had far surpassed "regional problem" on the national security threat matrix of every western nation?

The date....October 2015. Who wants to take a guess who's quote that is?

[Peter1469]

That's demonstrably false and we both know it. Your reputation harmed immeasurably and your continued denial and refusal to admit error further strains your integrity here.

I am very confident with my foreign policy positions. I started out like you- a rabid Neocon. Combat experience gave me another perspective.

You'd surrender Afghanistan to the Taliban, Libya was predictable, you blew the Syrian analysis, and was ever more wrong on Iraq.

The US has little to say regarding who rules Afghanistan. Only fools think otherwise.

With Libya you dodge- why did the Neocons destroy that nation?

I did not "blow" the Syria analysis. Why would you think that I did? Are you supporting the rebels / ISIL?

Iraq, I was there more than once. You were not. So where did I get something wrong?

Your track record today a trophy on my forum wall, Peter. Stuffed. Used for stories and training on what not to do.

Delusional.

Prior to 'my' interference? The leaps and reaches you go to in attempts to address anything but your now tattered analyses on these pages are humorous and entertaining. But there is a reason they never come with links or showing of the record here. You cannot defend yourself, I've shown why. And taught you much in the mean time.

Laughing out loud.

Neocons could legitimately be tried for war crimes.

[Ransom]

I am very confident with my foreign policy positions. I started out like you- a rabid Neocon. Combat experience gave me another perspective.

I'm much less confident in your foreign policy positions and your experience prevents you from excuses. Where you 'started out' irrelevant, when your analyses here are wrong headed and proven absurd, that's going to be pointed out.

The US has little to say regarding who rules Afghanistan. Only fools think otherwise.

I concur. Little. The Taliban doesn't rule.....that's our little. You can choose Ethereal to run the nation should you like...….if he converts to the Taliban, he'll be overthrown. Case closed.

With Libya you dodge- why did the Neocons destroy that nation?

Peter, start a straw man thread should you like and I'll scorch on over and learn you a bit about Libya too. Ok. Your deflections need tuning.

I did not "blow" the Syria analysis. Why would you think that I did? Are you supporting the rebels / ISIL?

A huge misread, a blown analysis I've shown time and again and just did again in my previous post.

Iraq, I was there more than once. You were not. So where did I get something wrong?

Lee was at Gettysburg too. And didn't make the right decisions.

Delusional.

Send you a pic should you like.

Laughing out loud.

Neocons could legitimately be tried for war crimes.

Neocons made the correct decisions on the Islamic State. The Neocons on this forum called for overt US military involvement long before it became a reality. Called estimates of 100,000 US boots on the ground being necessary to roll ISIS back, preposterous. Dismissed isolationist views and scolded the forum when Russia took the lead in Syria making further military action there by the US even more difficult....and risky. Called for overt military activity to extract ISIS out of major Iraqi cities that they'd been permitted to overrun while realists here in the US drew maps and ran mission creep analyses. Were running roundtables on ways, means, ends, purpose, ends to a means, means to an end....in other words...sat idle. Bragged on about their covert operations killing senior ISIS leadership but watching ISIS roll over the Levant. The endless analysis that ISIS was no match for the US thus not a threat for America or the West....when ISIS wasn't confronting the US, they were rolling over the Iraqi military, Sunni Tribal factions, Shia militias, and even woke Ethereal up when they quickly rolled up the Kurds and pushed Peshmerga back, that's who they were fighting.

And transforming into an international terrorist organization matching and then eventually surpassing al-Qaeda on that front. Another reality our forum 'experts with such vast experience missed.' Realists explaining that ISIS wanted territory only, had no desire for external matters. We had members of this forum preaching that not one month prior to the Paris attacks followed by several others proving ISIS' threat matrix realities....and proving Neocons correct. Again.

It's the reason we have John Bolton as NSA. We're had to dismiss and seat a few bad actors. I've had to do so on these forums.