OFFICIAL: Donald Trump thread.

[BERNIE'S CORNER]

Bases don't stay closed forever

All it is is concrete runways

It gets holes, you patch it back up

That's why all military airfields have these kinds of equipment to fix the runways.

You can bomb the planes, hangars radars, etc.

But at the end of the day a strip of concrete to launch planes is easy to fix.

Yeah 90+Mil. for fug'n potholes.....

[IMG][/IMG]

[Left Hook Tua]

I'm not buying Trump's cheap excuse;

If you want to make a statement for sake of one (not that it's a good idea in the first place), you don't let that base become operational. You stick around if you have to, and blow whomever you need to out of your way. This is the United States we're talking about; you think Assad is stupid enough to challenge, risking a direct war?

Yeah, right.

This was all staged, and they butchered innocent Syrians for the sake of a pathetic distraction.

I don't care if you say it was staged or whatever.

But it's a damn fact that you can't keep an airbase from launching planes indefinitely.

Temporarily stop operations? yes.

Forever? No. Unless you take the airfield.

It's a concrete airstrip. You just repaved it, dumbo.

No one gives a crap about your shiet opinions.

What I'm saying is a fact.

[Left Hook Tua]

Yeah 90+Mil. for fug'n potholes.....

[IMG][/IMG]

It's like they don't learn from Vietnam.

Don't use force unless you use overwhelming force.

If it's not worth going to full out war over it, it's not worth getting involved.

We can't do things half ass imo.

Either go all the way or don't do anything at all.

[Left Hook Tua]

And you don't need img codes to embed video, grandpa!!!!!

[siablo14]

It's like they don't learn from Vietnam.

Don't use force unless you use overwhelming force.

If it's not worth going to full out war over it, it's not worth getting involved.

We can't do things half ass imo.

Either go all the way or don't do anything at all.

Yeah. I read that in Colonel Powell autobiography. He said you can't half-a$$ it and there must be a goal to have a measuring stick to have a Vietnam-type situation again.

[TheLennox]

I don't care if you say it was staged or whatever.

But it's a damn fact that you can't keep an airbase from launching planes indefinitely.

Temporarily stop operations? yes.

Forever? No. Unless you take the airfield.

It's a concrete airstrip. You just repaved it, dumbo.

No one gives a crap about your shiet opinions.

What I'm saying is a fact.

If you're going to go so far out there as to make a "statement," then either stick around to make sure they don't rebuild any time soon (i.e. periodically bomb), or take the whole thing. Yes, indefinitely.

That's a statement.

This? This is a murderous facade.

Business as usual after 24 hours? LOL

It's the equivalent of TP-ing someone's car on Halloween night! XD

Yeah, that'll stop them!

Not like they've already started butchering civilians again from that very base since those 24 hours or anything.

[Left Hook Tua]

Yeah. I read that in Colonel Powell autobiography. He said you can't half-a$$ it and there must be a goal to have a measuring stick to have a Vietnam-type situation again.

Exactly.

Pgw1 they set a goal and deployed the necessary troops to accomplish it.

They booted saddam out and had more than enough troops needed to do it.

I wasn't against the Iraq invasion 2003. Saddam was a headache and he needed to go.

My problem was they didn't have a worthwhile plan for it.

They brought enough troops to topple him and not enough to occupy.

If we deployed overwhelming force, enforced the peace, rearmed and deployed the Iraqi army, used iraqi secret services......

We would have had an easier time of it.

Instead we deployed as little troops as possible.

[Left Hook Tua]

If you're going to go so far out there as to make a "statement," then either stick around to make sure they don't rebuild any time soon (i.e. periodically bomb), or take the whole thing. Yes, indefinitely.

That's a statement.

This? This is a murderous facade.

Business as usual after 24 hours. LOL

It's the equivalent of TP-ing someone's car on Halloween night! XD





Yeah, that'll stop them!

Not like they've already started butchering civilians again from that very base since those 24 hours or anything.

Like I said to put an airbase out of commission indefinitely, you need to take that airbase.

That means airborne, Rangers assault. Is that what you want? That's the only way to do it.

You can bomb hangars, fuel depots, planes.

But cratering a runway is a temporary thing.

All you need is a bulldozer, cement trucks, etc. And you can use the runways again.

Especially with Russian aircraft.

Russian aircraft unlike the west are designed to fly off dirty, damaged, crappy runways.

That's why Russian runways look like crap while west runways have to be pristine.

[TheLennox]

Like I said to put an airbase out of commission indefinitely, you need to take that airbase.

That means airborne, Rangers assault. Is that what you want? That's the only way to do it.

You can bomb hangars, fuel depots, planes.

But cratering a runway is a temporary thing.

All you need is a bulldozer, cement trucks, etc. And you can use the runways again.

Especially with Russian aircraft.

Russian aircraft unlike the west are designed to fly off dirty, damaged, crappy runways.

That's why Russian runways look like crap while west runways have to be pristine.

As I said, taking the airbase is an option, if Trump's looking to make a "statement."

But that didn't happen, did it?

[siablo14]

Exactly.

Pgw1 they set a goal and deployed the necessary troops to accomplish it.

They booted saddam out and had more than enough troops needed to do it.

I wasn't against the Iraq invasion 2003. Saddam was a headache and he needed to go.

My problem was they didn't have a worthwhile plan for it.

They brought enough troops to topple him and not enough to occupy.

If we deployed overwhelming force, enforced the peace, rearmed and deployed the Iraqi army, used iraqi secret services......

We would have had an easier time of it.

Instead we deployed as little troops as possible.

Powell said under the George H W Bush when they did that quick attack to push back Saddam from Kuwait or Qatar, I don't remember which one it was right now, but they pushed back Saddam forces and were waiting on directive whether to go into Iraq and wipe them out but that wasn't part of the goal so they didn't. Even though Father Bush wanted to get rid of Saddam because he saw him as a "bad man."

But they got the opportunity to do that when Son Bush came in. It seemed to be a beef that carried over from the father's time to the son's time. It was expected though because some of the same staff that worked with the dad worked with the son.