# Operation Swarmer



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

Operation Swarmer which was hopefully going to put a dent in the insurgency has been a failure.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/ ... 48,00.html

It unfortunately looks as if we will not be out of Iraq anytime soon.


----------



## racer66 (Oct 6, 2003)

Is this not proof enough how the left has everything wagered on us losing this war. Absolutely pathetical, they actually hope we lose.


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

Racer you seem to have formed this idea in your head and refuse to let it go. What on Earth gives you such an idea?


----------



## Alaskan Brown Bear Killer (Feb 22, 2005)

Why would anyone that doesn't even care about our troops want an operation to go smoothly?
Like volchurs waiting for negitive news so they can SPIN it to the MAX. :lame:


----------



## DecoyDummy (May 25, 2005)

MT ... The frigging Operation is about 36 hours old ... how can anyone possibly know anything at this point from were we all sit ... you sound like Harry Reid ... give us a break!


----------



## Gun Owner (Sep 9, 2005)

Right in the time article it talks of confiscated items, items that would have been used by insurgents. Seems to me that any progress is still progress.


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

DecoyDummy said:


> MT ... The frigging Operation is about 36 hours old ... how can anyone possibly know anything at this point from were we all sit ... you sound like Harry Reid ... give us a break!


Did you bother to read the article? I'm reporting the news, not spinning it.


----------



## Alaskan Brown Bear Killer (Feb 22, 2005)

Militant_Tiger said:


> Operation Swarmer which was hopefully going to put a dent in the insurgency has been a failure.
> 
> http://www.time.com/time/world/article/ ... 48,00.html
> 
> It unfortunately looks as if we will not be out of Iraq anytime soon.





> *I'm reporting the news, not spinning it*.


Doesn't appear to be the failure you been hoping for, try keeping up with current events.


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/03/ ... topstories

On Saturday 80 people were retained, 20 have been let go, thus yielding 60 detainees.


----------



## Alaskan Brown Bear Killer (Feb 22, 2005)

WOW! Always Outnumbered and Always Outgunned! :beer:


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Militant_Tiger said:


> Operation Swarmer which was hopefully going to put a dent in the insurgency has been a failure.
> 
> http://www.time.com/time/world/article/ ... 48,00.html
> 
> It unfortunately looks as if we will not be out of Iraq anytime soon.


MT can you please list what you see as criteria for the operation to be a success? I just want to have a reference for future discussions to ensure we are all on the same page on what you consider mission success.

That way some days/weeks from now we can refer back to your answer and avoid any ambiguity or success criteria that you can spin.

Thanks! :wink:


----------



## racer66 (Oct 6, 2003)

So you are saying then that it is better to not have 60 more trouble makers locked up.


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

I reported that it had not gone well based upon the Time article. If you feel that it was a misjudgement, take it up with Time.

It appears to have gone poorly because of the lack of resistance. Nary a shot has been fired. That either denotes a great success or a failure. Being that a few prisoners have been taken and a few small caches of weapons uncovered, it does not seem like they have completed their mission, ergo the operation did not do what it was intended to.


----------



## racer66 (Oct 6, 2003)

We round up 60 more bad guys, caches of munitions that could be used to make IED's that have been injuring and killing our soldiers, arms that have been used to kill and injur our troops and YOU call it a failure. Keep diggin.[/quote]


----------



## Gun Owner (Sep 9, 2005)

And we did it all without any loss of American soldiers!


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

racer66 said:


> We round up 60 more bad guys, caches of munitions that could be used to make IED's that have been injuring and killing our soldiers, arms that have been used to kill and injur our troops and YOU call it a failure. Keep diggin.


I saw it coming to this. You see, the intent of the mission was to break the back of the terrorists. There were supposedly as many as 200 insurgents in the area. We have detained approximately 60 people. We do not know if any of them have contacts with the insurgency.

I will not claim that it was a complete failure, because there was no loss of life, but thus far minimal results have been returned. As such, it has not yet achieve its objective.


----------



## racer66 (Oct 6, 2003)

> Operation Swarmer which was hopefully going to put a dent in the insurgency has been a failure.





> I will not claim that it was a complete failure


So you start out the thread by saying it's a failure(FLIP), then when faced with the facts of the article that prove there was success you (FLOP). You see once the people actuall read the facts in the article they can see that it was no where near a failure, but you have to keep portraying it as one to maintain the liberal drum beat. I should get you a new shovel, cuz I'm sure your old one has to be about worn out by now.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Militant_Tiger said:


> racer66 said:
> 
> 
> > We round up 60 more bad guys, caches of munitions that could be used to make IED's that have been injuring and killing our soldiers, arms that have been used to kill and injur our troops and YOU call it a failure. Keep diggin.
> ...


MT where did you come up with the definition of the intent of the mission? You don't think all the shots we fired with the choppers into the housing untis of the suspects didn't kill a few dozen? THOSE 60 people weren't just people.. THEY WERE the insurgent suspects! They weren't just contacts for the insurgency... WOW you can spin anything in an article!

So once again... can you please simply spell out in 3 objectives... what are they goals of this mission in your mind to be a success?

1. ?
2. ?
3. ?

Thanks!

Ryan

.


----------



## boondocks (Jan 27, 2006)

Mt reply to racer66's first comment


Militant_Tiger said:


> Racer you seem to have formed this idea in your head and refuse to let it go. What on Earth gives you such an idea?


 MT you have formed this idea in all our heads with your negative posts that YOU refuse to let go.You actually make it pretty obvious.


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

> So you start out the thread by saying it's a failure(FLIP), then when faced with the facts of the article that prove there was success you (FLOP). You see once the people actuall read the facts in the article they can see that it was no where near a failure, but you have to keep portraying it as one to maintain the liberal drum beat. I should get you a new shovel, cuz I'm sure your old one has to be about worn out by now.


In the words of the president, I worked on the intelligence I had. I think the intelligence I get is darn good intelligence.



> THOSE 60 people weren't just people.. THEY WERE the insurgent suspects!


We don't know who they are.

I checked around to find the exact intent of the mission, and there is no page listing them off, but everyone seems to agree that the intent was to "Break the back of the insurgency. Being that the intent was to do serious damage to a possible insurgent stronghold, it seems that the results have been underwhelming.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> In the words of the president, I worked on the intelligence I had. I think the intelligence I get is darn good intelligence.


I think you suffer from visions of grandeur. Something a good psychologist might be able to help you with.


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

Nay, I simply suffer from visions of sarcasm.


----------



## Alaskan Brown Bear Killer (Feb 22, 2005)

I think the FACT that this operation is being performed by a large percentage of Iraqis is a success in itself. To ween them off our troops so soon they will have proof they're capable of taking care of their own country so our troops can slowing turn it over to the Iraqis.

It's this what you want MT?


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

Alaskan Brown Bear Killer said:


> I think the FACT that this operation is being performed by a large percentage of Iraqis is a success in itself. To ween them off our troops so soon they will have proof they're capable of taking care of their own country so our troops can slowing turn it over to the Iraqis.
> 
> It's this what you want MT?


I certainly hope that happens, but I haven't seen much evidence of it thus far.


----------



## racer66 (Oct 6, 2003)

> I certainly hope that happens, but I haven't seen much evidence of it thus far.


Exactly, you hope it fails. :eyeroll: uke:


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

Racer, when you fabricate information, no matter how many times you say it and no amount of wishing will make it come true.


----------



## Alaskan Brown Bear Killer (Feb 22, 2005)

Militant_Tiger said:


> Racer, when you fabricate information, no matter how many times you say it and no amount of wishing will make it come true.


You keep saying everyone HERE fabricates information, you say that to everyone. Is there anyone HERE that you believe?


----------



## Militant_Tiger (Feb 23, 2004)

Not everyone, racer and zogman are just good for it. Whether anyone believes me is not my concern, I know that I am in the right.


----------



## Alaskan Brown Bear Killer (Feb 22, 2005)

WOW, You spend a lot of post trying to convince others that your right.


----------

