Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!
Feel free to critique military operations once you have participated in one. Until then, you should keep your cock-holster shut.
Did the operators get what they came for? Yes.
Do they normally release all of the intel they get from these raids? No, and you are an idiot for expecting they would.
Did an American die? Yes. This is less than ideal but it will continue to happen under any administration until we have Jesus as a medic.
Did we lose an aircraft? Yes. I was part of the test group for the Osprey before it became operational. Every member of our team said it should NEVER be used for this type of mission. More than 30 lives were lost developing it and more have been lost since it became operational. Expect that number to continue to rise. There have been about 20 crashes or mishaps that I know of and probably many more that I don't. But once billions of dollars had been spent in development, there was no stopping it. So, in short, an Osprey crashed. What else is new? (In other words, this cannot be blamed on Trump.)
On a side note, it was also reported that the AQAP forces were well-prepared. These guys do not normally maintain a high state of readiness. This would indicate they were tipped off. The media, the Obama administration, and Clinton supporters have tried to sabotage the Trump administration at every turn. Are they above putting American lives at risk to do so? I don't think they are.
(The media sometimes gets intel on operations before they launch and it would not be the first time they had cost an American serviceman their life.)
My money is on one of Obama's douchebags.
I will put you down on the side thinking it was a success. You simpering girl.
We'll put you down as a non-thinking, lib-retarded jackass, who intellectually cannot handle anything more challenging than regurgitating the lame-stream media's talking points.
How the fuck would you know about "war"? I spent 3 years preparing for the possibility. It's called training douche-bag. Which you haven't done considering you apply game terms and know nothing about after action run-throughs.
Now remind me what you know about it. Or how you would evaluate my response?
Let's use your scale of proof to check some claims. How should we score your refusal (or mine) to look for available info? Let's play it by ear.
Here you are on a fucking hooker board blathering and ranting about "tactical decisions" made by Generals with more experience in their cut toe nails than you'll have in your entire fucked up life .... ! You are the worst of the worst ....!!!! Despicable ..... even as a know-nothing blogger! Here you are, pretty in pink. So what tactical decision have I been "ranting" about pinkguy? Moonless night?
Have you found the missing bust of MLK YET? I think the millions of fraudulent voters have it.
Or can you find your ass with both hands, yet?
Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover
He'd rather take the word of the media that couldn't find a sculpture of MLK in the Oval Office so they reported Trump got rid of it ...
Now you're the mind reader? Sorry I don't read the fake sources you do. Now would be the time for you to prove I ever said a word about your "pink" herring other than in response to you.
....as opposed to at least three Generals, two of whom are Marine combat veterans, with a collective military combat and tactical planning history of a little over 120 years most of which was "in country" (boots on the ground) combat, planning, and implementation ... who BTW had already been "vetted" and "approved" by Obaminable! Generals Mattis, Kelly, and Flynn. Now is the time to prove what I disagreed with them over. Because I didn't. I pointed out a moonless night was called for. Come on douche-bag. in all my rants it should be easy to prove. Unless you're lying.
But what do you expect from an absolute self-demonstrated DUMBASS LOSER who would get lost in a wet paper sack. Said by the guy in pink. Lots of regrets about losing your position as the smartest stupid guy? Because he provides links and you can't?
Remember all the whining about "too much military experience" in the cabinet?
Or do they prefer Leon?
Quote:
Originally Posted by goodman0422
The new moon was the night of January 28.No. The new moon was about 3 in the morning, on Saturday, the 28th which is Fri. night. Central time is UTC-6 and Yemen time is UTC+3 or 9 hours difference. Going back in the thread you can see I didn't say that was the reason it failed/succeeded/broke even. In the mountains or on the desert there can be a huge difference in the visibility conditions in the same time frame due to the temp, wind, humidity level, etc , It's easier to check what the sensors on an M-1 take into account to hit a moving tank from a moving tank 2 miles away. The point is many conditions determine visibility at night. Saying the number and type of people killed isn't criticizing except to our new fake news and fake outrage folks. They're easy to spot. They call others liars without proof, After midnight was this same cycle of darkness was the morning of January 29. The raid was conducted January 29 before sunrise, still part of the moonless night at 1% illum. (Military guys will know what this means but it is basically the amount of light on that night.)
I am sure some liberal media source said it was not a moonless night because they based it on the calender date of January 29/30. (This night would have been 3% illum which still would have been acceptable for this type of mission if they had been delayed from their initial target date. Delays can happen due to weather or aircraft problems both of which are very common.)
Your mistake was in trusting a liberal media source to accurately report. It would be wise to double check ALL of their "facts" before you repeat them. Their accuracy rate has gone down dramatically in recent months.
Reporting the facts of news is what is supposed to happen. Saying it isn't accurate or using the same stupid example over and over without proof is the media you hate without any restraint.
When have you ever seen a blogger admit they made a mistake? They don't. They're op-ed. They want to claim they have facts without being responsible to prove what they say. CNN or CBS ets, usually admit mistakes. Because if they don't their fellow services will eat them alive. Are they always right?
Of course not. Who said they were?
It's called check multiple sources. And 5 stories that are exactly the same on 5 locations isn't 5 sources. A person who "knows" the truth without providing links doesn't know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover
As the next eight years progress, if the media continues their current campaign of snapping at every little tidbit of "bad fake news" and repeating it as though it were gospel, they will have ZERO credibility down from the current 12-15%. That's unfortunate from the perspective of those dependent upon the news media for INFORMATION, but also for those politicians who seek the media to spread political/campaign information in order to get elected or re-elected.
It will be extremely interesting to see the "sources" disclosed of the "bad" information being disseminated about Trump's communications with other World Leaders AND with his military advisory staff in what are classified meetings.
BTW: As for the decision there are many other considerations for the timing besides illumination values and factors. It would be imprudent to discuss them openly thereby revealing resources and methods, if not personnel on the ground gathering real time information. His transparency could come and bite him in the future.
Fortunately the training is sufficient for adjustments to be made as appropriate and/or necessary and ideal situations rarely exist on a regular basis, if at all.
As for Munchie ... he's out of his element.
Case in point right here.
Sources I provide are lying because she says so. Nothing she can put forward as a reason let alone a fact. Because she says so. Current credibility is 12 to 15%. Not low. Not very low. 12 to 15%. Imprudent to discuss methods and sources. For us that is. But not for you to demand details you personally know nothing about
And nowhere does she show any links or facts that supports her opinions above anyone else's..
Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover
Do you listen to yourself?
Now where was that sculpture of MLK?
Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover
The "prior administration" gets credit for the increase in jobs!
Right?
It will be a challenge for the current administration to conduct clandestine, special military operations with the media diligently reporting the content of secure strategy sessions. Example? Of course not/.
Perhaps that is the "mission" of the media to assure the current administration fails in its attempts to "make America secure again"! Sort of like burning down an institution of higher learning! Fuck knowledge or progress!
Like they need any help to fail. I'm glad you see reporting as harassment. Welcome to Washington.
Had a bunch of her other opinion selected but it's pointless to keep reminding the douche-bag he can't read minds and his opinions are easy to point out the flaws and explain why they are flawed.
It always brings out the pink fonts. Like cherry blossom season.
Reporting the facts of news is what is supposed to happen. Saying it isn't accurate or using the same stupid example over and over without proof is the media you hate without any restraint.
When have you ever seen a blogger admit they made a mistake? They don't. They're op-ed. They want to claim they have facts without being responsible to prove what they say. CNN or CBS ets, usually admit mistakes. Because if they don't their fellow services will eat them alive. Are they always right?
Of course not. Who said they were?
It's called check multiple sources. And 5 stories that are exactly the same on 5 locations isn't 5 sources. A person who "knows" the truth without providing links doesn't know.
Case in point right here.
Sources I provide are lying because she says so. Nothing she can put forward as a reason let alone a fact. Because she says so. Current credibility is 12 to 15%. Not low. Not very low. 12 to 15%. Imprudent to discuss methods and sources. For us that is. But not for you to demand details you personally know nothing about
And nowhere does she show any links or facts that supports her opinions above anyone else's..
Like they need any help to fail. I'm glad you see reporting as harassment. Welcome to Washington.
Had a bunch of her other opinion selected but it's pointless to keep reminding the douche-bag he can't read minds and his opinions are easy to point out the flaws and explain why they are flawed.
It always brings out the pink fonts. Like cherry blossom season.
Check your sources Munchmaster. New moon was January 28. Some sources may state it began at 3 AM the night of January 27/28 but 3AM to sunrise is hardly enough time to conduct this type of operation. (Remember Infil/Exfil times.)
The first FULL NIGHT of decreased illum related to the lunar cycle was the night of January 28/29 and this is the night the raid was conducted. TOT (that's Time on Target for you fucks who claim to be veterans but aren't) was approximately 282300Z JAN 17 (that's Jan 28, 2017 at 11 pm Zulu aka UTC or 2 am local time in Yemen Jan 29, 2017). I was not there so I cannot factor in all the intel that was available. From what I see, Friday night/Saturday morning would not have been the optimal choice because the new moon did not start until 2-3 hours before sunrise. Saturday night/Friday morning would have been a better choice because the new moon lasted the entire night. Illum was low enough either night to successfully accomplish the mission but Jan 28/29 was better based on the lunar calendar. The media may be reporting otherwise because they slant all reporting and rarely actually understand military operations. Disregard the slant and go to the sources below if you would like accurate information. Or disregard these sources and listen to the inaccuracies of CNN/MSNBC.
I spent 3 years preparing for the possibility. It's called training douche-bag.
.......know nothing about after action run-throughs
Now remind me what you know about it.
You just made MY POINT.
I'll take the 120+ years of EXPERIENCE in combat and tactical planning of Mattis, Kelly, and Flynn, three Generals two of whom are Marines, over your loudmouth pansy bullshit "training." You are not qualified to "critique" THEM on tactical decisions.
I'm trying to figure out how anyone without any "action" would know anything about conducting "after action run-throughs," or was that in your AfterActionRunThrough 101 class during your 3 years of "preparing for the POSSIBILITY of doing an "AFTER-ACTION-RUN-THROUGH" on tactical planning and implementation of a raid on a Yemen terrorist camp and the proper calendaring of the raid to assure proper Moon lighting to GUARANTEE no U.S. personnel would be hurt or U.S. equipment lost along with assuring no women and/or offspring would be hurt or killed? But go ahead, loudmouth! Entertain yourself!
Now how did I know you would start turning it around as though I were criticizing the manner of planning the raid. You are the dumbass, know-nothing armchair tactical expert talking shit about how Trump fucked up ... NOT ME! ... There you go babbling again with your big blue letters attempting to hide your ignorance. But actually you're just "cutting and pasting"!
Just matching your bras and panties, Little Pussy! You didn't "ace" "Color Coordination 101" IN YOUR "3 YEARS OF preparing for the POSSIBILITY" OF WAR? That would seem critical in case you actually had to participate so you can make sure your fresh panties would match after you shit in the pair you wore.
You've spent post after post making a case for an "ill advised" decision to raid the camp ... and then you claim you didn't have a quarrel with Mattis, Kelly, and Flynn? You've even done internet research on the "moon" phases to prove your point, as you reference published articles giving opinions regarding the mistakes that were made .... and you still claim you didn't disagree with them?
Was it your "3 years of training" that finally convinced you that perhaps the 120 years of experience they have "Trumped" yours?
Or did you decide how foolish you appear?
You jumped on the anti-Trump wagon and now you want off!
We'll put you down as a non-thinking, lib-retarded jackass, who intellectually cannot handle anything more challenging than regurgitating the lame-stream media's talking points.
"]Usual reply when a blow hard gets his ass in a crack Can't explain why you hate odumbo so much and if the raid was a success then why are you giving him credit for the raid.
Should be fun watching you worm your way out of that.
Can you show where I regurgitated any media talking points ?
The "prior administration" gets credit for the increase in jobs!
Right?
It will be a challenge for the current administration to conduct clandestine, special military operations with the media diligently reporting the content of secure strategy sessions.
Perhaps that is the "mission" of the media to assure the current administration fails in its attempts to "make America secure again"! Sort of like burning down an institution of higher learning! Fuck knowledge or progress!
