1. SPS Accounts:
    Do you find yourself coming back time after time? Do you appreciate the ongoing hard work to keep this community focused and successful in its mission? Please consider supporting us by upgrading to an SPS Account. Besides the warm and fuzzy feeling that comes from supporting a good cause, you'll also get a significant number of ever-expanding perks and benefits on the site and the forums. Click here to find out more.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
You are currently viewing Boards o' Magick as a guest, but you can register an account here. Registration is fast, easy and free. Once registered you will have access to search the forums, create and respond to threads, PM other members, upload screenshots and access many other features unavailable to guests.

BoM cultivates a friendly and welcoming atmosphere. We have been aiming for quality over quantity with our forums from their inception, and believe that this distinction is truly tangible and valued by our members. We'd love to have you join us today!

(If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you've forgotten your username or password, click here.)

POLL: British help in Baghdad

Discussion in 'Alley of Dangerous Angles' started by Carcaroth, Oct 19, 2004.

Page 2 of 2
  1. Aldeth the Foppish Idiot

    Aldeth the Foppish Idiot Armed with My Mallet O' Thinking Veteran

    Joined:
    May 15, 2003
    Messages:
    12,434
    Media:
    46
    Likes Received:
    250
    Gender:
    Male
    Remove all ads!
    I think we're actually agreeing here joacqin. My point is that after the shock and awe campaign (or the smackdown as I referred to it), you need troops with boots on th ground to secure an area. That scared 19-year old has to be out there to do that. That's why I'm saying we need to increase the amount of soldiers in Iraq to about 250,000 to have a reasonable shot at quelling the resistance.

    I never denied that it is through technological superiority (and by that I meant equipment and vehicles) that America gains its fighting prowess, but it seems like you're trying to make a counterpoint by saying the same thing I am. For the main attack, sure you're going to use a hell of a lot of bombers, but you need troops for the counter-insurgency campaign. I'm not sure what I said that lead you to believe otherwise :confused:
     
    Aldeth the Foppish Idiot, Oct 20, 2004
    #21
  2. joacqin

    joacqin Confused Jerk Adored Veteran Pillars of Eternity SP Immortalizer (for helping immortalize Sorcerer's Place in the game!)

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2001
    Messages:
    6,117
    Media:
    2
    Likes Received:
    121
    Seems like we are in agreement, I thought you said that the American *troops* were superiour, ie that the American 19-year-olds with guns were superiour to other armed kids. Which is where I was differing.
     
    joacqin, Oct 20, 2004
    #22
Page 2 of 2
Sorcerer's Place is a project run entirely by fans and for fans. Maintaining Sorcerer's Place and a stable environment for all our hosted sites requires a substantial amount of our time and funds on a regular basis, so please consider supporting us to keep the site up & running smoothly. Thank you!

Sorcerers.net is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to products on amazon.com, amazon.ca and amazon.co.uk. Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.