# Gosh...!



## Bullypulpit (Sep 12, 2006)

Anbar province in Iraq is, for all intents and purposes, no longer under US control. Iraq's Prime Minister, you know the one we installed, is sucking up to Iran's bat-shit crazy President. And things were going so well...


----------



## Annie (Sep 12, 2006)

Bullypulpit said:


> Anbar province in Iraq is, for all intents and purposes, no longer under US control. Iraq's Prime Minister, you know the one we installed, is sucking up to Iran's bat-shit crazy President. And things were going so well...



And you sound gleeful about that, Bully. Why? You want US soldiers killed? Iraqis hurt?


----------



## trobinett (Sep 12, 2006)

Bullypulpit said:


> Anbar province in Iraq is, for all intents and purposes, no longer under US control. Iraq's Prime Minister, you know the one we installed, is sucking up to Iran's bat-shit crazy President. And things were going so well...



What a complete DICK HEAD.:tdown2: 

Do you have NO LIFE?

Wait, I know, your just reporting the news, right, DICK HEAD?

Ya know, It's not like WE are the bad guy's, it's not like WE have our military guy's drive car bombs into crowned market places, and blow up INNOCENT civilian's.

You and yours or SO lost.


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 12, 2006)

No links, no comment. Except if true, we should pull out yesterday.


----------



## OCA (Sep 12, 2006)

Kathianne said:


> And you sound gleeful about that, Bully. Why? You want US soldiers killed? Iraqis hurt?



Kathiannee this is further proof of what i've been saying all along about Bully, he hates America, he just happpens to reside behind enemy lines is all. That is why when news is bad Bully is happy, when news is good Bully is sad.

I for one though am not gonna buy into his bullshit about "I love Amerrica but I hate this administration" crap anymore since when the question is posed to him about when has he ever been happy with any American governmet at anytime in his lifetime you never get an answer.

To me Bully does not deserve the rights bestowed upon him by this great nation.


----------



## Annie (Sep 12, 2006)

Mr. P said:


> No links, no comment. Except if true, we should pull out yesterday.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/12/AR2006091201188.html

Here's one, though it's a 'denial':



> Marines deny losing Iraq's biggest province
> 
> By Peter Graff
> Reuters
> ...


_No editorializing here. _


> A senior U.S. defense official said Zilmer's comments should not be interpreted as meaning U.S. troops in Anbar are merely treading water against insurgents while building an Iraqi security force that eventually will have to defeat the rebels.
> 
> But the official, speaking anonymously because of the sensitivity of the issue, described the "main mission" for U.S. forces as "to have the ability to be able to turn over the security responsibilities to a capable police and military force that can operate within the central government and local governments."
> 
> ...


----------



## OCA (Sep 12, 2006)

Mr. P said:


> No links, no comment. Except if true, we should pull out yesterday.



Foreward:i've been a supporter of going into Iraq from the beginning.


P as i've been saying for some time now we do not have the intestinal fortitude to fight this Iraq battle and win it, it goes against my nature to say this but I think maybe we should pull up stakes and let the civil war between Shiite and Sunni which is well under way now get going big, let them all fucking kill each other then wheen its oover we will take every oil tanker under U.S, flag, back them in and loot the place of every single drop of oil it has. Teach em a lesson.

I don't see where another U.S. soldier getting picked off is going to change the current mess that shithole is in.

Can't wait for the Murtha comparisons to me to come rolling in.


----------



## Bullypulpit (Sep 13, 2006)

Kathianne said:


> And you sound gleeful about that, Bully. Why? You want US soldiers killed? Iraqis hurt?



You know better than that, dear lady.


----------



## Bullypulpit (Sep 13, 2006)

trobinett said:


> What a complete DICK HEAD.:tdown2:
> 
> Do you have NO LIFE?
> 
> ...



No, our troops are not the bad guys. The insurgents who have no regard for human life are the bad guys. Our president and his administration who recklessly put our troops in harms way are the bad guys. Our troops are doing the best they can in the face of badly flawed leadership at the top of the chain of command.


----------



## Bullypulpit (Sep 13, 2006)

OCA said:


> Foreward:i've been a supporter of going into Iraq from the beginning.
> 
> 
> P as i've been saying for some time now we do not have the intestinal fortitude to fight this Iraq battle and win it, it goes against my nature to say this but I think maybe we should pull up stakes and let the civil war between Shiite and Sunni which is well under way now get going big, let them all fucking kill each other then wheen its oover we will take every oil tanker under U.S, flag, back them in and loot the place of every single drop of oil it has. Teach em a lesson.
> ...



US troops don't need to pull out of the region entirely. Kurdistan, Oman, and several other Gulf Emirates would be close enough to quickly redeploy US troops once the dust settles from a civil war, or help stabilize the region should the civil war spread outside the boundaries iof Iraq.

And no, I won't compare you to Jack Murtha.


----------



## OCA (Sep 13, 2006)

Bullypulpit said:


> And no, I won't compare you to Jack Murtha.



Thanks, i'm not a traitor like you and him.


----------



## Annie (Sep 13, 2006)

Bullypulpit said:


> You know better than that, dear lady.



So I figured. Don't you think it's important for all of us to watch how we sound, at to reasonable people? It was you that posted in that tone.


----------



## Bullypulpit (Sep 13, 2006)

OCA said:


> Thanks, i'm not a traitor like you and him.



Have ya looked in a mirror lately?


----------



## Bullypulpit (Sep 13, 2006)

Kathianne said:


> So I figured. Don't you think it's important for all of us to watch how we sound, at to reasonable people? It was you that posted in that tone.



Given the falsely optimistic tone that has been emanating from the White House, I only thought the irony fitting.


----------



## OCA (Sep 13, 2006)

Bullypulpit said:


> Have ya looked in a mirror lately?



Yes, and I and the ladies love what we see.


----------



## rtwngAvngr (Sep 13, 2006)

OCA said:


> Foreward:i've been a supporter of going into Iraq from the beginning.
> 
> 
> P as i've been saying for some time now we do not have the intestinal fortitude to fight this Iraq battle and win it, it goes against my nature to say this but I think maybe we should pull up stakes and let the civil war between Shiite and Sunni which is well under way now get going big, let them all fucking kill each other then wheen its oover we will take every oil tanker under U.S, flag, back them in and loot the place of every single drop of oil it has. Teach em a lesson.
> ...





I'm actually inclined to agree with you for once.  Yes.  We can't stop people from hating each other.  My only concern would be Iran rushing to fill the influence vacuum with loads of support and a unifying vision of caliphatic supremacy.  I guess we could make it clear to every Iraqi shia, sunni, and kurd that alliances with Iran would be a bad choice.  I'd like to see a ballistics demonstration about now.


----------



## glockmail (Sep 13, 2006)

OCA said:


> Foreward:i've been a supporter of going into Iraq from the beginning.
> 
> 
> P as i've been saying for some time now we do not have the intestinal fortitude to fight this Iraq battle and win it, it goes against my nature to say this but I think maybe we should pull up stakes and let the civil war between Shiite and Sunni which is well under way now get going big, ......



Bush and Condi made a big mistake by not dividing Iraq into three countries: Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites, with a loose federation to distribute the oil revenues by the relative population of the three states at the time of formation. Oversight of the federation by the UN, with oversight of the UN crooks by us. The three States to have strong, defensible borders along rivers or mountain ridges. This will require forced moves of some residents and perhaps entire towns. Such is the price they must pay for losing the damn country to Saddam, then to us Christian devils.

That being said, it's not too late to do this. Call it "Plan B", whatever.

The main reason we have so much trouble getting the Iraqis to police themselves is that the tribal feuds that have been going on for centuries. Arabs are not like us Americans who don't really care about issues that our ancestors might have had with neighboring tribes back in Europe, China, or wherever. Their culture will always be at war with each other and there is nothing that we Americans can do about that. 

After we get them in their respective corners, then we leave. But at least we gave them some method of securing themselves.


----------



## glockmail (Sep 13, 2006)

rtwngAvngr said:


> .... My only concern would be Iran rushing to fill the influence vacuum with loads of support and a unifying vision of caliphatic supremacy.  I guess we could make it clear to every Iraqi shia, sunni, and kurd that alliances with Iran would be a bad choice.  I'd like to see a ballistics demonstration about now.


  Good point. Let's cretae a no-man zone on the Iran-Iraq border. Two rows of razor wire 100 yards apart, encompassing a bulldozed strip of wasteland. Flights over randomly with orders to kill anything with a temperature signature. Constant satellite imagery alerting guarded outposts stationed at 5 mile intervals.


----------



## Hagbard Celine (Sep 13, 2006)

OCA said:


> Thanks, i'm not a traitor like you and him.



That's over the top don't you think? Murtha called for an exit strategy because there is none. Calling a decorated veteran a "traitor" is ridiculous and based solely on your hawkish opinions of this war--nothing more.


----------



## Hagbard Celine (Sep 13, 2006)

glockmail said:


> Good point. Let's cretae a no-man zone on the Iran-Iraq border. Two rows of razor wire 100 yards apart, encompassing a bulldozed strip of wasteland. Flights over randomly with orders to kill anything with a temperature signature. Constant satellite imagery alerting guarded outposts stationed at 5 mile intervals.



Yeah, because that would fly like a lead turd.  What we need is a department of nation-building in the Pentagon so that when we topple a government we don't have to re-invent the wheel every time trying to rebuild infrastructure. We also need more highly-specialized cultural, language and police-strategy training for our troops so they will be better able to work fluidly as "peace-keepers" in foreign battle environments. Right now we're sending traditionally-combat-trained killing machines--trained to fight other traditionally-combat-trained armies--who speak no Arabic in to Arab countries to act like a police force with no strategy for success fighting militias and gangs using guerrilla tactics. No wonder every area we "liberate" devolves back into gangland as soon as we leave it.


----------



## GeeWhiz (Sep 13, 2006)

rtwngAvngr said:


> I'm actually inclined to agree with you for once.  Yes.  We can't stop people from hating each other.  My only concern would be Iran rushing to fill the influence vacuum with loads of support and a unifying vision of caliphatic supremacy.  I guess we could make it clear to every Iraqi shia, sunni, and kurd that alliances with Iran would be a bad choice.  I'd like to see a ballistics demonstration about now.



I thought it was supposed to be democracy. So they practice democracy and ally with Iran, because of that you want to squash democracy. Flippy, Floopy, Junior cheerleaders are all drunky with hypocrisy.

Eisenhower said if an election were to take place in Vietnam the people would have voted Ho Chi Mhin, the popular man of the day because he succeeded in the ousting of the French.

The message the United States gave to the people of Vietnam was this: If you want democracy you'll have to fight our troops. 

The troops went over there and realized they were being lied to. They thought they were sent over to bring democracy, instead they realized they were sent to kill half starving innocent women and children and to prevent democracy.

The reason Junior is doing illegal wiretapings is not to fight terrorism but to prevent the embarassment that took place in the Vietnam war, which is members of the military created newsletters and protested the illegal invasion of Vietnam. Junior doesn't want the same embarrassment happening under his watch so he is illegally watching the soldiers communicating with us back home and making sure no soldiers truth hits us back home, the truth of which is, it's not about democracy.


----------



## CSM (Sep 13, 2006)

GeeWhiz said:


> I thought it was supposed to be democracy. So they practice democracy and ally with Iran, because of that you want to squash democracy. Flippy, Floopy, Junior cheerleaders are all drunky with hypocrisy.
> 
> Eisenhower said if an election were to take place in Vietnam the people would have voted Ho Chi Mhin, the popular man of the day because he succeeded in the ousting of the French.
> 
> ...



Pure unadulterated horse crap. 

You have NO idea what the environment in VietNam was like or what the troops thought that were there except the things you have heard from the likes of Jane Fonda and John Kerry. You also have NO idea of what the soldiers are writing back home about or what they are communicating.


----------



## glockmail (Sep 13, 2006)

Hagbard Celine said:


> ....Right now we're sending traditionally-combat-trained killing machines--trained to fight other traditionally-combat-trained armies--who speak no Arabic in to Arab countries to act like a police force with no strategy for success fighting militias and gangs using guerrilla tactics. .....


  I can see you have no clue about modern military tactics, including Rangers and Special Forces. Based on that alone the remainder of your no-win stategy is pointless.


----------



## manu1959 (Sep 13, 2006)

Hagbard Celine said:


> That's over the top don't you think? Murtha called for an exit strategy because there is none. Calling a decorated veteran a "traitor" is ridiculous and based solely on your hawkish opinions of this war--nothing more.



john kerry was a traitor.....met with the enemy in paris while in uniform and attempted to undermine the posistion of the us government = treason......murtha is only a stones throw behind that


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

GeeWhiz said:


> I thought it was supposed to be democracy. So they practice democracy and ally with Iran, because of that you want to squash democracy. Flippy, Floopy, Junior cheerleaders are all drunky with hypocrisy.
> 
> Eisenhower said if an election were to take place in Vietnam the people would have voted Ho Chi Mhin, the popular man of the day because he succeeded in the ousting of the French.
> 
> ...





Pa-lease....don't make comments and suggestions about the VN war unless you do real research or had been there...The French were ousted after the defeat at the A-Valley 1957, a company was ambushed by an overwhelming force of NVA....the General in charge of the NVA forces said kill all... take no prisoners...even though a few remaining French forces surrendered (even the wounded were executed)...they lost their will to fight...However the US Army's 7th Air Cav(Custers unit reborne) went back to the A-Valley in 1965-1966 and kicked this NVA Generals arse...even though they were overwhelmed in numbers!

These cold blooded tactics are practiced by the terrorist insurgent forces in Iraq and Afghanistan today! A overwhelming force is needed to end this war...It was working in VN and we were only 3months from complete victory as stated after the war by the NVA commanders...So Murtha and Kerry are all wet and just using politics for personal gain!

I agree with OCA though either kicked butt or get out and take the oil for war debts owed!


side note: The NVA and VC used women and children as suicide bombers as do those in IRAQ and Afghanistan...so if you consider women and children as innocent bystanders take your argument to those who use them!


----------



## Hagbard Celine (Sep 13, 2006)

manu1959 said:


> john kerry was a traitor.....met with the enemy in paris while in uniform and attempted to undermine the posistion of the us government = treason......*murtha is only a stones throw behind that*



I didn't say anything about Kerry. I said John Murtha is not a traitor--as did you in the post above. Take it.


----------



## GeeWhiz (Sep 13, 2006)

CSM said:


> Pure unadulterated horse crap.
> 
> You have NO idea what the environment in VietNam was like or what the troops thought that were there except the things you have heard from the likes of Jane Fonda and John Kerry. You also have NO idea of what the soldiers are writing back home about or what they are communicating.



What do you know about me? Be careful what you spew out of that worthless mouth of your.

You think a bullet just hits a man and thats it story over. Doesn't work like that kiddo. It leaves a child without a father, a father and mother without a son, a wife without a husband.

You want to meet my daddy? It's a flag folded into a triangle, that's my dad. I remember the day I met dad. I asked mom about him, she took me to a closet, reached up to a top shelf, pulled out a flag folded into a triangle, handed it to me and said, "there that's your father." Mom went into the next room and got drunk, leaving me all alone with dad.

I remember sitting on the street curb watching a parade, the veterans were marching by, all the people stood up holding their hands to their hearts or saluting, not a single person knew I wasn't standing, I wasn't saluting, I wasn't holding my hand to my heart, not a single one knew my dad either and certainly not you.

I've told that to many of people and guess what I'm supposed to have? I'm supposed to have amnesia, I'm supposed to forget about it, to move on. 

Yet it's okay for you to whore out 911 isn't it America? make a market out of it, make a few bucks from it, and whore it out even more just so you can feed that military industrial complex Eisenhower warned this country about. Feed it with human lives as if you even know what a human life is. Whore it out, so that sleaze of a political party you belong to can squeeze a few votes out of the citizens in this country.

America I'm not conned by your perfume. Your perfume called democracy. America you are a perfumed scorpion. Your sting kills. You're killing for oil just so you can drive that big SUV while eating a greasy cheeseburger so you can later die of clogged arties and that is a piss poor reason for people around the world to die.

Want to know what soldiers wrote about? heres a link

http://www.sirnosir.com/site_sections/library_construction.html


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

GeeWhiz said:


> What do you know about me? Be careful what you spew out of that worthless mouth of your.
> 
> You think a bullet just hits a man and thats it story over. Doesn't work like that kiddo. It leaves a child without a father, a father and mother without a son, a wife without a husband.
> 
> ...




I am going to assume that your Dad was KIA in VN...your Mom made a big mistake in the way she handled the incident you are referring to...I lost a few friends in VN although I came home okay as well as my three best friends from HS...we all were spit upon on return SF,Ca....So for you to relate Vets as wanting out... you are wrong... this is what Lt.Kerry,Jane(Hanoi) Fonda and now Murtha want you to believe! You are so wrong about the general assessment of how VN vets and now ME war vets feel...please do not embarrass your Dads name...he is probably rolling over in his grave!


----------



## CSM (Sep 13, 2006)

GeeWhiz said:


> What do you know about me? Be careful what you spew out of that worthless mouth of your.
> 
> You think a bullet just hits a man and thats it story over. Doesn't work like that kiddo. It leaves a child without a father, a father and mother without a son, a wife without a husband.
> 
> ...




You can take that little tirade of yours and stuff it right up your ass....

You have no idea who I am either but let me give you a hint. I have enough lead and iron in me to set off every metal detector from here to SE Asia, contibuted by those benevolent peoples from that region. I have seen first hand the results (short term and long term) of a bullet hitting a man. Suffered the personal effects of said event as well.  You lost your dad...I truly am sorry for your loss. However, you have NO right to lecture me about how I should feel, what I should be reacting to or to judge me. 

After 30 years of personal contact with soldiers ... living with them, suffering with them, laughing and crying with them... I know damn well what they say and what they think and no little turd like you is going to tell me what he has read and heard and then judge me personally.

You, sir, had better be damn careful of what comes out of YOUR worthless mouth!


----------



## Hagbard Celine (Sep 13, 2006)

glockmail said:


> I can see you have no clue about modern military tactics, including Rangers and Special Forces. Based on that alone the remainder of your no-win stategy is pointless.



I didn't know Rangers and Special Forces were "military tactics," I thought they were types of soldiers. You are full of sh*t and you spew weightless, strawman arguments out of your ignorant mouth in every post. I listened to a conversation between ex-generals and military strategists yesterday aired on NPR--they said exactly what I posted above. That's where my argument came from. Sorry, but I'll take the opinions of ex-generals and military strategists over that of a pissed-off redneck whose avatar is Ann Coulter with a gun anytime. Give me a break.


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

Hagbard Celine said:


> I didn't know Rangers and Special Forces were "military tactics," I thought they were types of soldiers. You are full of sh*t and you spew weightless, strawman arguments out of your ignorant mouth in every post. I listened to a conversation between ex-generals and military strategists yesterday aired on NPR--they said exactly what I posted above. That's where my argument came from. Sorry, but I'll take the opinions of ex-generals and military strategists over that of a pissed-off redneck whose avatar is Ann Coulter with a gun anytime. Give me a break.





Rangers are as well as Special Forces part of military tactics!...Rangers are used as Airborne Units to infiltrate behind enemy lines...'Shock and Awe!'...And Special forces are used to play havock on the enemies will to fight...'Black Op's and all! And for the record all the "Field" Officers have been asking for more troops for the last two years...against the so called modern Generals... who for the most part are 'politicals' with limited combat experience!


Check out "Ballad of the Green Berrets" Barry Sadler...will set ya free!


----------



## Hagbard Celine (Sep 13, 2006)

archangel said:


> Rangers are as well as Special Forces part of military tactics!...Rangers are use as Airborne Units to infiltrate behind enemy lines...'shock and Awe!'...And Special forces are used to play havock on the enemies will to fight...'Black Op's and all! And for the record all the "Field" Officers have been asking for more troops for the last two years...against the so called modern Generals... who for the most part are 'politicals' with limited combat experience!



No, a ranger is not a tactic. No, a special forces unit is not a tactic. No. These two words are words used to describe types of soldiers. Not tactics. The use of these two different types of soldiers is part of military tactics. They themselves are not tactics. Learn English.

And you're right. Soldiers on the ground have been calling for more troops. So have generals. When operation "shock and awe," you know, the one you brought up, was planned, the generals in question called for a higher number of troops to be used in that operation. From the beginning! Were they listened to? No. And they still aren't being listened to. Thanks for cementing my point.

Our soldiers aren't fighting a traditional army here so they need different tactics. Traditional combat training doesn't cut it. The military is being used as a police force in Iraq and that's not what they are trained for. They are trained for "shock and awe," not maintaining law and order.


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

Hagbard Celine said:


> No, a ranger is not a tactic. No, a special forces unit is not a tactic. No. These two words are words used to describe types of soldiers. Not tactics. The use of these two different types of soldiers is part of military tactics. They themselves are not tactics. Learn English.
> 
> And you're right. Soldiers on the ground have been calling for more troops. So have generals. When operation "shock and awe," you know, the one you brought up, was planned, the generals in question called for a higher number of troops to be used in that operation. From the beginning! Were they listened to? No. And they still aren't being listened to. Thanks for cementing my point.
> 
> Our soldiers aren't fighting a traditional army here so they need different tactics. Traditional combat training doesn't cut it. The military is being used as a police force in Iraq and that's not what they are trained for. They are trained for "shock and awe," not maintaining law and order.





Well since 'I' was one of those I can say 'I' was used as a tactic...please explain what military tactics encompasses...this should be interesting as ya probably learned the venacular of debate from your draft dodging professors!...LOL


----------



## manu1959 (Sep 13, 2006)

Hagbard Celine said:


> No, a ranger is not a tactic. No, a special forces unit is not a tactic. No. These two words are words used to describe types of soldiers. Not tactics. The use of these two different types of soldiers is part of military tactics. They themselves are not tactics. Learn English.
> 
> And you're right. Soldiers on the ground have been calling for more troops. So have generals. When operation "shock and awe," you know, the one you brought up, was planned, the generals in question called for a higher number of troops to be used in that operation. From the beginning! Were they listened to? No. And they still aren't being listened to. Thanks for cementing my point.
> 
> Our soldiers aren't fighting a traditional army here so they need different tactics. Traditional combat training doesn't cut it. The military is being used as a police force in Iraq and that's not what they are trained for. They are trained for "shock and awe," not maintaining law and order.



his first sentence_ (Rangers are as well as Special Forces part of military tactics!...) _said the same thing you just said....too busy trying to be right at the expense of being correct


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

manu1959 said:


> his first sentence_ (Rangers are as well as Special Forces part of military tactics!...) _said the same thing you just said....to busy trying to be right at the expense of being correct





Although I did not master English 101 in college...I also did not fail...LOL


----------



## Hagbard Celine (Sep 13, 2006)

archangel said:


> Well since 'I' was one of those I can say 'I' was used as a tactic...please explain what military tactics encompasses...this should be interesting as ya probably learned the venacular of debate from your draft dodging professors!...LOL



Exactly, you were used as a tactic of war. You were not a tactic though. The use of soldiers is a tactic. Soldiers are not tactics. A synonym for the word, "tactic" is "plan." Were you a plan? No. You were a soldier. Using you, the soldier, was the plan. Case closed. 

Your use of the word "vernacular" is a correct usage, but it is inappropriate. The vernacular of debate is by default the vernacular of the debators. Since we both speak English (in your case a variation thereof), the vernacular of our debate is English. I think you meant "protocol" of debate. But since the style of debate used on this forum is anything but civilized or formal, I think your point is moot.

Sorry you see draft dodging as a such an abominable crime. What were the draft dodgers thinking? It was like they had some crazy idea that maybe their lives should've been in their own, personal control instead of in the control of idiot legislators. What a crazy idea.


----------



## Hagbard Celine (Sep 13, 2006)

manu1959 said:


> his first sentence_ (Rangers are as well as Special Forces part of military tactics!...) _said the same thing you just said....to busy trying to be right at the expense of being correct



You used the incorrect form of "to." You should've said "too busy trying to be right." Try again Mo-mo.


----------



## manu1959 (Sep 13, 2006)

Hagbard Celine said:


> You used the incorrect form of "to." You should've said "too busy trying to be right." Try again Mo-mo.



oh my a typo ..... guess that invalidates the entire post .... i am sure your friends really appreciate this trait of yours


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

Hagbard Celine said:


> Exactly, you were used as a tactic of war. You were not a tactic though. The use of soldiers is a tactic. Soldiers are not tactics. A synonym for the word, "tactic" is "plan." Were you a plan? No. You were a soldier. Using you, the soldier, was the plan. Case closed.
> 
> Your use of the word "vernacular" is a correct usage, but it is inappropriate. The vernacular of debate is by default the vernacular of the debators. Since we both speak English (in your case a variation thereof), the vernacular of our debate is English. I think you meant "protocol" of debate. But since the style of debate used on this forum is anything but civilized or formal, I think your point is moot.
> 
> Sorry you see draft dodging as a such an abominable crime. What were the draft dodgers thinking? It was like they had some crazy idea that maybe their lives should've been in their own, personal control instead of in the control of idiot legislators. What a crazy idea.




LOL...backslidding is so unbecomming...albeit ya aren't a "Officer and Gentleman" Enlist then you will learn what life is all about...vs...professors take on life...just food for thought! And for the record 'I' will use the word venacular anyway 'I' choose...the shoe fit ya perfectly!


----------



## manu1959 (Sep 13, 2006)

archangel said:


> LOL...backslidding is so unbecomming...albeit ya aren't a "Officer and Gentleman" Enlist then you will learn what life is all about...vs...professors take on life...just food for thought! And for the record 'I' will use the word venacular anyway 'I' choose...the shoe fit ya perfectly!



dude there is a typo in your post....he is going to jump all over you for saying a officer instead of an officer....god help ya.


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

Hagbard Celine said:


> Exactly, you were used as a tactic of war. You were not a tactic though. The use of soldiers is a tactic. Soldiers are not tactics. A synonym for the word, "tactic" is "plan." Were you a plan? No. You were a soldier. Using you, the soldier, was the plan. Case closed.
> 
> Your use of the word "vernacular" is a correct usage, but it is inappropriate. The vernacular of debate is by default the vernacular of the debators. Since we both speak English (in your case a variation thereof), the vernacular of our debate is English. I think you meant "protocol" of debate. But since the style of debate used on this forum is anything but civilized or formal, I think your point is moot.
> 
> Sorry you see draft dodging as a such an abominable crime. What were the draft dodgers thinking? It was like they had some crazy idea that maybe their lives should've been in their own, personal control instead of in the control of idiot legislators. What a crazy idea.





Quit dodging the question I asked you...What is your take on 'military tactics'...since I was used and out of the fold...ya are in the 'In crowd' of all encompassing knowledge...I was evidently just a pawn! and have no knowledge of what the word 'tactics' means...please enlighten us all! My Tact Officer at OCS musta been a fool with no knowledge of military tactics...albeit the trainning did save my arse later on...lol


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

manu1959 said:


> dude there is a typo in your post....he is going to jump all over you for saying a officer instead of an officer....god help ya.





I should have said a "Officer and a Officer" then he would really had fun...lol


Me thinks I will make mistakes on a grand scale in the future as evidenced in my posts to make sure I make SP and typo errors so the opposition will have something to 'bitch' about!...lol


----------



## manu1959 (Sep 13, 2006)

archangel said:


> I should have said a "Officer and a Officer" then he would really had fun...lol
> 
> 
> Me thinks I will make mistakes on a grand scale in the future as evidenced in my posts to make sure I make SP and typo errors so the opposition will have something to 'bitch' about!...lol



they can't refute the argument so they will change the point of attack and say you can't type or spell or whatever....so they can feel like the won something....


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 13, 2006)

manu1959 said:


> they can't refute the argument so *they will change the point of attack and say you can't type or spell or whatever....so they can feel like the won something.*...



And THAT *is* a tactic.:rotflmao:


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

manu1959 said:


> they can't refute the argument so they will change the point of attack and say you can't type or spell or whatever....so they can feel like the won something....




ya made another typo...ya said 'the' instead of 'they' oh my the end of the world as we know it!...LOL


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

Mr. P said:


> And THAT *is* a tactic.:rotflmao:




Point taken...albeit not a military one...more along the line of a teachers kiss ass...or something along that line...:fifty:


----------



## Hagbard Celine (Sep 13, 2006)

archangel said:


> Well since 'I' was one of those I can say 'I' was used as a tactic...please explain what military tactics encompasses...this should be interesting as ya probably learned the venacular of debate from your draft dodging professors!...LOL



Military tactics is the collective name for methods of engaging and defeating an enemy in battle. (i.e. the USE of different types of soldiers.) If your tact officer at OCS told you you were a "tactic," he did not know the meaning of the word "tactic." 



> LOL...backslidding is so unbecomming...albeit ya aren't a "Officer and Gentleman" Enlist then you will learn what life is all about...vs...professors take on life...just food for thought! And for the record 'I' will use the word venacular anyway 'I' choose...the shoe fit ya perfectly!


I don't want to know what army life is about. Life isn't just about the military. You shun professors--the givers of knowledge and embrace a life of violence instead. You prefer having your head shaved and dressing in camo so that you can be a government space monkey? Ppfffft. Not for me. Thanks but no thanks. If that's what you like, then that's your prerogative, but you're absolutely crazy if you think military life is the beat-all, end-all of life plans. It was my absolute rock-bottom plan. If I had lost everything I had, gone bankrupt and had to drop out of college, my plan was to go into the military. Otherwise, it's civilian life for me. When Al-Qaeda comes to my doorstep, I'll exercise my second amendment rights. If not, you space monkeys keep on keepin' on. 

And what "shoe" are you talking about? Are you calling me a "vernacular" now?


----------



## Hagbard Celine (Sep 13, 2006)

manu1959 said:


> they can't refute the argument so they will change the point of attack and say you can't type or spell or whatever....so they can feel like the won something....



 What argument? Glock said I didn't know anything about military tactics. I said if what you're saying is true, then ex-generals and military strategists don't either because that's where my argument came from. Then you guys started ribbing me because I'm not in the military? Where's the argument I'm supposed to refute genius?


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

Hagbard Celine said:


> Military tactics is the collective name for methods of engaging and defeating an enemy in battle. (i.e. the USE of different types of soldiers.) If your tact officer at OCS told you you were a "tactic," he did not know the meaning of the word "tactic."
> 
> 
> I don't want to know what army life is about. Life isn't just about the military. You shun professors--the givers of knowledge and embrace a life of violence instead. You prefer having your head shaved and dressing in camo so that you can be a government space monkey? Ppfffft. Not for me. Thanks but no thanks. If that's what you like, then that's your prerogative, but you're absolutely crazy if you think military life is the beat-all, end-all of life plans. It was my absolute rock-bottom plan. If I had lost everything I had, gone bankrupt and had to drop out of college, my plan was to go into the military. Otherwise, it's civilian life for me. When Al-Qaeda comes to my doorstep, I'll exercise my second amendment rights. If not, you space monkeys keep on keepin' on.
> ...






Was I a soldier from day one...'No'...I was a party guy in college...loved the 'Surfer girls' and "Cheerleaders"...Did I morph over the years...? Hell ya I went out and found out what life was all about...minus the party agenda! Did I love to kill the enemy and suffer 'pain' for having to eliminate innocent bystanders...the answer is hell NO! So if your professors experienced the pain...well they are entitled to their opinion... if not they are talking out of their collective asses..."No pain no gain"..a true and collective phrase...gimmee a break 'oh' enlightened one who listens to those who have not experienced life but know all the answers...'Party Hardy' college "Dude"...lol


----------



## ScreamingEagle (Sep 13, 2006)

glockmail said:


> Bush and Condi made a big mistake by not dividing Iraq into three countries: Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites, with a loose federation to distribute the oil revenues by the relative population of the three states at the time of formation. Oversight of the federation by the UN, with oversight of the UN crooks by us. The three States to have strong, defensible borders along rivers or mountain ridges. This will require forced moves of some residents and perhaps entire towns. Such is the price they must pay for losing the damn country to Saddam, then to us Christian devils.
> 
> That being said, it's not too late to do this. Call it "Plan B", whatever.
> 
> ...



Excellent comment.  Why is it our leaders never seem to take a clue from history?

Maybe they're too embroiled with "grammar wars" like in this thread....started, as per usual, by a liberal.  :coffee3:


----------



## Bullypulpit (Sep 13, 2006)

glockmail said:


> Bush and Condi made a big mistake by not dividing Iraq into three countries: Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites, with a loose federation to distribute the oil revenues by the relative population of the three states at the time of formation. Oversight of the federation by the UN, with oversight of the UN crooks by us. The three States to have strong, defensible borders along rivers or mountain ridges. This will require forced moves of some residents and perhaps entire towns. Such is the price they must pay for losing the damn country to Saddam, then to us Christian devils.
> 
> That being said, it's not too late to do this. Call it "Plan B", whatever.
> 
> ...



Chimpy and Co. made a big mistake by invading Iraq to begin with. They took their eyes off of the real threat, Osama bin Laden and his ilk, and went haring off into Iraq based upon a tissue of lies. Bu that's all water under the bridge now. The real issue is how we extricate ourselves from this mess without destabilizing the whole region and restore a measure of American credibility which Chimpy and Co. pissed away with the invasion. 

Sending all patries to their respective corners might be a start. A "Marshall Plan" for the region might be another. But any solution will require the administration to give up its intransigent refusal to accept any but the input from their own noise chamber. Even the Iranians and Syrians.


----------



## Bullypulpit (Sep 13, 2006)

Hagbard Celine said:


> No, a ranger is not a tactic. No, a special forces unit is not a tactic. No. These two words are words used to describe types of soldiers. Not tactics. The use of these two different types of soldiers is part of military tactics. They themselves are not tactics. Learn English.
> 
> And you're right. Soldiers on the ground have been calling for more troops. So have generals. When operation "shock and awe," you know, the one you brought up, was planned, the generals in question called for a higher number of troops to be used in that operation. From the beginning! Were they listened to? No. And they still aren't being listened to. Thanks for cementing my point.
> 
> Our soldiers aren't fighting a traditional army here so they need different tactics. Traditional combat training doesn't cut it. The military is being used as a police force in Iraq and that's not what they are trained for. They are trained for "shock and awe," not maintaining law and order.



General Shinseki called for 200,000+ troops on the ground for the occupation of Iraq. He was shit-canned by Rummy and the other neo-cons at DoD for telling the truth.


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

Bullypulpit said:


> Chimpy and Co. made a big mistake by invading Iraq to begin with. They took their eyes off of the real threat, Osama bin Laden and his ilk, and went haring off into Iraq based upon a tissue of lies. Bu that's all water under the bridge now. The real issue is how we extricate ourselves from this mess without destabilizing the whole region and restore a measure of American credibility which Chimpy and Co. pissed away with the invasion.
> 
> Sending all patries to their respective corners might be a start. A "Marshall Plan" for the region might be another. But any solution will require the administration to give up its intransigent refusal to accept any but the input from their own noise chamber. Even the Iranians and Syrians.




C'mon Bully...'Professor et al" why don't ya enlist and go over and show all of us idiots how it is done..."Talk is cheap" actions rock! I am referring to your comments about "Chimpee et al" He was not a combat vet anymore than you were! Do you get my drift?...or would you prefer to tell all of the idiots how it is done...without getting your hands..."DIRTY" I will be waiting with baited breath for your knowledge based on 'Bookwork'...:teeth:


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 13, 2006)

archangel said:


> C'mon Bully...'Professor et al" why don't ya enlist and go over and show all of us idiots how it is done..."Talk is cheap" actions rock! I am referring to your comments about "Chimpee et al" He was not a combat vet anymore than you were! Do you get my drift?...or would you prefer to tell all of the idiots how it is done...without getting your hands..."DIRTY" I will be waiting with baited breath for your knowledge based on 'Bookwork'...:teeth:



You're right, talk is cheap. Bully didn't advocate invading Iraq, Bush did. Your point is moot (for a change...)


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> You're right, talk is cheap. Bully didn't advocate invading Iraq, Bush did. Your point is moot (for a change...)




another 'White glove' never get the hands dirty Know it All.......roflmao!:wank: <<<<<< you and Bully!


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 13, 2006)

archangel said:


> C'mon Bully...'Professor et al" why don't ya enlist and go over and show all of us idiots how it is done..."Talk is cheap" actions rock! I am referring to your comments about "Chimpee et al" He was not a combat vet anymore than you were! Do you get my drift?...or would you prefer to tell all of the idiots how it is done...without getting your hands..."DIRTY" I will be waiting with baited breath for your knowledge based on 'Bookwork'...:teeth:



Arch, Bully is a Vet. Go nap.


----------



## Bullypulpit (Sep 13, 2006)

archangel said:


> C'mon Bully...'Professor et al" why don't ya enlist and go over and show all of us idiots how it is done..."Talk is cheap" actions rock! I am referring to your comments about "Chimpee et al" He was not a combat vet anymore than you were! Do you get my drift?...or would you prefer to tell all of the idiots how it is done...without getting your hands..."DIRTY" I will be waiting with baited breath for your knowledge based on 'Bookwork'...:teeth:



I already served...During the Reagan years. Too old now, and wouldn't fight in Chimpy's dirty little war anyways. If Chimpy and Co had stuck to Afghanistan, which now seems to be circling the drain, and actually concentrated on cutting the head off the serpent, ie offing bin Laden and his associates, it might be a different story. But it's not, so lets deal with the present situation and see if we can't move the sorry SOB's who are now running this country to refocus doing their job and getting bin Laden.

If you're active duty, you have my respect and my thanks. If you've served, you have the same. If not, sod off.


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

Mr. P said:


> Arch, Bully is a Vet. Go nap.






Bully served during the 'Reagan' years...as did you...pa-lease give this combat vet a break...are your hands dirty?...or do ya just like to spank us 'dirty' warriors for 'Political gain'...be honest now cause' your spouse is a "Judge" or is that 'Justice of the Peace'?


Ya are starting to sound alot like...Lt.Kerry and 'Murtha' they had their say as do you and Bully...a beer break is in order...NO?


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 13, 2006)

archangel said:


> another 'White glove' never get the hands dirty Know it All.......roflmao!:wank: <<<<<< you and Bully!



Here's a piece of advice AA, and it's free. If you keep on stepping up to the plate, and get struck out EVERY TIME, maybe it's time to sit in the stands and realise that you just ain't got it...


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> Here's a piece of advice AA, and it's free. If you keep on stepping up to the plate, and get struck out EVERY TIME, maybe it's time to sit in the stands and realise that you just ain't got it...





would you like to go 'one on one'...I may be getting older..but by no means dead...now take MrP's advice and take a nap!


----------



## The ClayTaurus (Sep 13, 2006)

archangel said:


> Bully served during the 'Reagan' years...as did you...pa-lease give this combat vet a break...are your hands dirty?...or do ya just like to spank us 'dirty' warriors for 'Political gain'...be honest now cause' your spouse is a "Judge" or is that 'Justice of the Peace'?
> 
> 
> Ya are starting to sound alot like...Lt.Kerry and 'Murtha' they had their say as do you and Bully...a beer break is in order...NO?


Jesus Arch, the only way you'll ever give anyone any credit is if they were sitting directly next to you in the trench you were in. Now military service isn't good enough either? How many more qualifiers does one have to pass before they get the Arch Angel seal of life experience?


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

The ClayTaurus said:


> Jesus Arch, the only way you'll ever give anyone any credit is if they were sitting directly next to you in the trench you were in. Now military service isn't good enough either? How many more qualifiers does one have to pass before they get the Arch Angel seal of life experience?





If I were younger I would love to be your CO I would show ya the way...in the meantime...ya are young and physically fit...or so ya say..so get off the 'bench' and show me how I am wrong...until then...'Party Hardy' Dude!


----------



## Hagbard Celine (Sep 13, 2006)

ScreamingEagle said:


> Excellent comment.  Why is it our leaders never seem to take a clue from history?
> 
> Maybe they're too embroiled with "grammar wars" like in this thread....started, as per usual, by a liberal.  :coffee3:



F*ck you nimrod. I said we needed culture training for our troops so that they can more effectively police Arabs, which is basically what you quoted above from the angry female redneck. The only comment I made that got any attention, however was the grammar comment. I can't help it if you knuckle-draggers have a chip on your shoulder because you can't communicate effectively. The reason the administration hasn't properly administered this war is because they made a bunch of stupid mistakes--like not listening to their generals--like not having a plan for what to do after "shock and awe." It's not because of the "vast liberal conspiracy"  Get real.


----------



## The ClayTaurus (Sep 13, 2006)

archangel said:


> If I were younger I would love to be your CO I would show ya the way...in the meantime...ya are young and physicall fit...or so ya say..so get off the 'bench' and show me how I am wrong...until then...'Party Hardy' Dude!


How in any way did this address my question?


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 13, 2006)

archangel said:


> Bully served during *the 'Reagan' years...as did you*...pa-lease give this combat vet a break...are your hands dirty?...or do ya just like to spank us 'dirty' warriors for 'Political gain'...be honest now cause' your spouse is a "Judge" or is that 'Justice of the Peace'?
> 
> 
> Ya are starting to sound alot like...Lt.Kerry and 'Murtha' they had their say as do you and Bully...a beer break is in order...NO?



No Arch, I served during Nixon, Ford and Carter.


----------



## Hagbard Celine (Sep 13, 2006)

The ClayTaurus said:


> Jesus Arch, the only way you'll ever give anyone any credit is if they were sitting directly next to you in the trench you were in. Now military service isn't good enough either? How many more qualifiers does one have to pass before they get the Arch Angel seal of life experience?



You have to have:
1.) joined the military and started taking orders before you experienced any other way of life.
2.) been in a war
3.) killed people during war
4.) obtained a purple heart
5.) sleep in and wear camo every day
6.) keep a constant buzz cut
7.) clean your weapon daily :wank: 
8.) never question the military and give soldiers respect simply for having joined the military
9.) never have contact with women
10.) unfold, raise, salute and sing the national anthem to a US flag every morning in your front yard.

Then ol' Wyatt will respect you.


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

Mr. P said:


> No Arch, I served during Nixon, Ford and Carter.





Class of 74'...Chopper pilot school...end of the VN era...rest my case!
Now attack Lt.Kerry and Murtha...I did my duty! Without being a traitor!


----------



## manu1959 (Sep 13, 2006)

Hagbard Celine said:


> What argument? Glock said I didn't know anything about military tactics. I said if what you're saying is true, then ex-generals and military strategists don't either because that's where my argument came from. Then you guys started ribbing me because I'm not in the military? Where's the argument I'm supposed to refute genius?



post 34


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

The ClayTaurus said:


> How in any way did this address my question?




Beats me...ask Mr P ...down deep inside he knows...politics seems to get in his way!


----------



## Hagbard Celine (Sep 13, 2006)

manu1959 said:


> his first sentence_ (Rangers are as well as Special Forces part of military tactics!...) _said the same thing you just said....too busy trying to be right at the expense of being correct



Where's the argument in this poorly-written sentence?  Seriously.


----------



## The ClayTaurus (Sep 13, 2006)

archangel said:


> Beats me...ask Mr P ...down deep inside he knows...politics seems to get in his way!


But I wasn't asking Mr. P.

I was asking you. 

I guess I shouldn't have actually expected an answer. One day I'll learn.

I'll stop now; I fear this has already gotten too complicated for you. Have a good beer break.


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

Hagbard Celine said:


> You have to have:
> 1.) joined the military and started taking orders before you experienced any other way of life.
> 2.) been in a war
> 3.) killed people during war
> ...




why the draft should be re-instated...dudes like you need to grow up and face reality!


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 13, 2006)

archangel said:


> Class of 74'...Chopper pilot school...end of the VN era...rest my case!
> Now attack Lt.Kerry and Murtha...I did my duty! Without being a traitor!



Are you drunk? Really man, get with it. Yes, I was in class 74-43..Do you think I came off the street to flight school in 74? Nope, I didn't. When did the *VN era *end agian, Arch?


----------



## dilloduck (Sep 13, 2006)

Hagbard Celine said:


> F*ck you nimrod. I said we needed culture training for our troops so that they can more effectively police Arabs, which is basically what you quoted above from the angry female redneck. The only comment I made that got any attention, however was the grammar comment. I can't help it if you knuckle-draggers have a chip on your shoulder because can't communicate effectively. The reason the administration hasn't properly administered this war is because they made a bunch of stupid mistakes--like not listening to their generals--like not having a plan for what to do after "shock and awe." It's not because of the "vast liberal conspiracy"  Get real.



The adminstration did make some mistakes--and the liberals stood back, laughed , ridiculed, obscured and obstructed. We are a house divided against itself and no one can claim inoccence. We screwed unless someone steps up to the plate.


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

The ClayTaurus said:


> But I wasn't asking Mr. P.
> 
> I was asking you.
> 
> ...


 to him


 ...ya can design the weapons as a 'Naval Architech' but can't pull the trigger...go figure...I rest my case!


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 13, 2006)

dilloduck said:


> The adminstration did make some mistakes--and the liberals stood back, laughed , ridiculed, obscured and obstructed. We are a house divided against itself and no one can claim inoccence. We screwed unless someone steps up to the plate.



So true. Not holding my breath though.


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

Mr. P said:


> Are you drunk? Really man, get with it. Yes, I was in class 74-43..Do you think I came off the street to flight school in 74? Nope, I didn't. When did the *VN era *end agian, Arch?



Okay enlighten me where did ya serve in Nam? the war just about ended in 73!...When did you attend flight school? The connatation of class 74-43 tells all who served what the class designation means...let me know though if I am wrong...this should be good!


side note: please quit with the 'Drunk' comments...not fitting a 'Officer and Gentleman' if ya get the drift! Coca Cola all the way!...lol


----------



## The ClayTaurus (Sep 13, 2006)

archangel said:


> to him
> 
> 
> ...ya can design the weapons as a 'Naval Architech' but can't pull the trigger...go figure...I rest my case!


You can't even string a coherent thought together, so I wouldn't concern yourself so much with who can and can not pull a trigger.


----------



## dilloduck (Sep 13, 2006)

Mr. P said:


> So true. Not holding my breath though.



Me neither but on the lighter side----if this person ever DOES step up we will able to recognize them immediately. After years of this bitter in fighting, we know what all the BS looks like.


----------



## manu1959 (Sep 13, 2006)

Hagbard Celine said:


> Where's the argument in this poorly-written sentence?  Seriously.



you repeated what arch said and claimed he had not said it ....


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 13, 2006)

archangel said:


> Okay enlighten me where did ya serve in Nam? the war just about ended in 73!...When did you attend flight school? The connatation of class 74-43 tells all who served what the class designation means...let me know though if I am wrong...this should be good!



I have never said I was in Country.

Graduated Flight School was in 74.

I was enlisted 1 1/2 years before that.

Happy, Pappy?


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

The ClayTaurus said:


> You can't even string a coherent thought together, so I wouldn't concern yourself so much with who can and can not pull a trigger.[/QUOTE
> 
> 
> 'Skippy' stealing a phrase from pale rider...it sure fits you and yours...TODAY!


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

Mr. P said:


> I have never said I was in Country.
> 
> Graduated Flight School was in 74.
> 
> ...




and the truth set ya free...lol


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 13, 2006)

archangel said:


> and the truth set ya free...lol



I've always told the truth about my service. WTF is with you?


----------



## Bullypulpit (Sep 13, 2006)

archangel said:


> Bully served during the 'Reagan' years...as did you...pa-lease give this combat vet a break...are your hands dirty?...or do ya just like to spank us 'dirty' warriors for 'Political gain'...be honest now cause' your spouse is a "Judge" or is that 'Justice of the Peace'?
> 
> 
> Ya are starting to sound alot like...Lt.Kerry and 'Murtha' they had their say as do you and Bully...a beer break is in order...NO?



Just what do you mean by 'dirty warriors'? Like I said, if you're a vet, You have my respect and thanks. If you're active duty you have my respect and thanks. My beef isn't with the troops...It's with a reckless, feckless Administration that doesn't give a rat's ass about the troops beyond their use as props in their photo-ops.


----------



## Bullypulpit (Sep 13, 2006)

archangel said:


> why the draft should be re-instated...dudes like you need to grow up and face reality!



So, when are you going to face reality, or are you just trolling?


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

Bullypulpit said:


> So, when are you going to face reality, or are you just trolling?




except when fishing for trout or bass...but I will smack ya when ya talk BS! Am I clear or must I become 'Blunt'?...LOL


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

Mr. P said:


> I've always told the truth about my service. WTF is with you?





innuendo that ya were more knowledgable in the war in VN...and challenged me on my experience and knowledge of flight school and class designation...NOTHING....


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

Bullypulpit said:


> Just what do you mean by 'dirty warriors'? Like I said, if you're a vet, You have my respect and thanks. If you're active duty you have my respect and thanks. My beef isn't with the troops...It's with a reckless, feckless Administration that doesn't give a rat's ass about the troops beyond their use as props in their photo-ops.



Why is it that all your posts are just 'Bush' bashing...calling him Monkey and such...ya really are not to believable..I have issues with GW on border security and with Donald on not listening to his 'Field Commanders' and what I mean by this is the rank of Col. and below..vs DC Generals! Is this clear now?


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 13, 2006)

archangel said:


> innuendo that ya were more knowledgable in the war in VN...and challenged me on my experience and knowledge of flight school and class designation...NOTHING....



Yep Drunk, that never happened, Arch.


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 13, 2006)

archangel said:


> would you like to go 'one on one'...



I have with you a few times. Knocking you out ALL the time gets a bit boring..


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

Mr. P said:


> Yep Drunk, that never happened, Arch.




Just to end this...cause' I like ya and don't want to embarrass ya with postings of your past comments on this subject...I will concede to you 'Chopper Guy" but at least give up the 'Drunk" comments when one disagrees...then again I may be on a coca cola high!...lol...have a good night dinner calls!


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> I have with you a few times. Knocking you out ALL the time gets a bit boring..




*** fades out with a pseudo knockout from the scarry Dr.Grumpy*** I'm shaking in my boots...night all!


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 13, 2006)

archangel said:


> *** fades out with a pseudo knockout from the scarry Dr.Grumpy*** I'm shaking in my boots...night all!



I've only got one scar. Above my right eye...'bout it...


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> I've only got one scar. Above my right eye...'bout it...




OMG it's "Rocky Balboa" Sylvester Stallone...cool Rocky... only remember ya are the actor I am for real!
Carry on to bout 2 if ya dare to go another round! "I'll be Back" "asta la vista baby" for now!


----------



## OCA (Sep 13, 2006)

GeeWhiz said:


> What do you know about me? Be careful what you spew out of that worthless mouth of your.
> 
> You think a bullet just hits a man and thats it story over. Doesn't work like that kiddo. It leaves a child without a father, a father and mother without a son, a wife without a husband.
> 
> ...



Your father is in heaven right now looking down upon you and he is ashamed of the disrespectful asscrack douchebag you've become. 

Fuck you Whiz, I don't give a shit what anyone says if I had my way you and all the motherfuckers who dis this country with baldfaced lies while at the same time reaping the benefits of living in this country would first have your heads bashed in with a Louisville slugger then stuck on a barge and sent to live in the slums of Rio De Janeiro, Brazil. Yeah we'll see how much you hate America after that.

I swear, i've got half a mind to just ban your sorry fucken ass right now, don't piss me off again by pissing on vets ever, i'll shit all over your free speech on this board and not give a fuck what anyone thinks about it.

Comprende?


----------



## OCA (Sep 13, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> I have with you a few times. Knocking you out ALL the time gets a bit boring..



Chump far be it for me to defend Arch because he's a big boy but..........all your empty and baseless chest thumping has the whole board laughing. You couldn't debate your way out of a 2nd grade social science class, you're a joke!


----------



## trobinett (Sep 13, 2006)

So, thats a wrap then............


----------



## OCA (Sep 13, 2006)

trobinett said:


> So, thats a wrap then............



Uhhhhh ok, what gives?


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 13, 2006)

archangel said:


> *Just to end this...cause' I like ya and don't want to embarrass ya with postings of your past comments on this subject..*.I will concede to you 'Chopper Guy" but at least give up the 'Drunk" comments when one disagrees...then again I may be on a coca cola high!...lol...have a good night dinner calls!



Post em Arch, I'm tired of your shit! Post away pal! Lets see what ya got.


----------



## trobinett (Sep 13, 2006)

OCA said:


> Uhhhhh ok, what gives?



I'm with ya OCA, just thought it was time to "wrap this thread up".

Wouldn't YOU agree?


----------



## OCA (Sep 13, 2006)

trobinett said:


> I'm with ya OCA, just thought it was time to "wrap this thread up".
> 
> Wouldn't YOU agree?



Uhh we're getting there, not quite done with cheese whiz though. This person hs me fired up with that post.


----------



## glockmail (Sep 13, 2006)

Bullypulpit said:


> Chimpy and Co. made a big mistake by invading Iraq to begin with. They took their eyes off of the real threat, Osama bin Laden and his ilk, and went haring off into Iraq based upon a tissue of lies. ......



So if you repeat your lie enough times you think that we'all will believe it?


----------



## jillian (Sep 13, 2006)

OCA said:


> Uhh we're getting there, not quite done with cheese whiz though. This person hs me fired up with that post.



RAFLMAO! It's always a hoot to watch you.... your complete lack of reality is always good for a laugh.


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

Mr. P said:


> Post em Arch, I'm tired of your shit! Post away pal! Lets see what ya got.





hit a nerve eh?...so be it I will not go back over the last two years...but just this thread...I was having a diatribe with gee wiz ,whats his name the Rocky impersonator and bully and ya stepped in with innuendo..see your post#'s 56,65,73 and closing with you conceding on post #81...if you are sick of my s*** complain to a mod...maybe they will ban me...


----------



## Annie (Sep 13, 2006)

archangel said:


> hit a nerve eh?...so be it I will not go back over the last two years...but just this thread...I was having a diatribe with gee wiz ,whats his name the Rocky impersonator and bully and ya stepped in with innuendo..see your post#'s 56,65,73 and closing with you conceding on post #81...if you are sick of my s*** complain to a mod...maybe they will ban me...



Maybe someone will. I must say, I find your flaming of Bully and Mr. P indefensible, but not bannable. Just shows you for what you are, a psychoblues wannabe.

Putting down those that served, whether in battle or not, is just so lame. I thank you  for your service, so many years ago. That doesn't excuse this attack on those that also served.


----------



## OCA (Sep 13, 2006)

jillian said:


> RAFLMAO! It's always a hoot to watch you.... your complete lack of reality is always good for a laugh.



Ahh, you are always trying to take hill OCA but my howitzers always repel you, one day little girl, one day. 

Seriously in the meantime you can cut the lack of reality shit, secretly you want to sleep with me, the board pimp, because you know my posts are full of dazzling intellect and worthy of high praise and merit......otherwise you wouldn't respond to them with your pathetic drivel.


----------



## jillian (Sep 13, 2006)

OCA said:


> Ahh, you are always trying to take hill OCA but my howitzers always repel you, one day little girl, one day.
> 
> Seriously in the meantime you can cut the lack of reality shit, secretly you want to sleep with me, the board pimp, because you know my posts are full of dazzling intellect and worthy of high praise and merit......otherwise you wouldn't respond to them with your pathetic drivel.



   

you do have a vivid imagination.... that or you're just hallucinating


----------



## archangel (Sep 13, 2006)

Kathianne said:


> Maybe someone will. I must say, I find your flaming of Bully and Mr. P indefensible, but not bannable. Just shows you for what you are, a psychoblues wannabe.
> 
> Putting down those that served, whether in battle or not, is just so lame. I thank you  for your service, so many years ago. That doesn't excuse this attack on those that also served.





I did not flame either of them...I just argued using past experience...what they said to me did not get my goat...if any flamming was done it was by Mr.P calling me 'drunk'...and your little diatribe was also considered flamming...no matter I am not offended...but it is time to relax and watch some TV...think I will follow OCA's approach and just get nasty with a touch of humor...naw not my style...Good night to you fair Lady!


----------



## OCA (Sep 13, 2006)

jillian said:


> you do have a vivid imagination.... that or you're just hallucinating



Babe all you got to do is ask, i'm a 2.5 hour drive to NYC, we could stay at the Plaza. Satisfaction guaranteed plus a free bottle of Dom.


----------



## Gunny (Sep 13, 2006)

Bullypulpit said:


> Anbar province in Iraq is, for all intents and purposes, no longer under US control. Iraq's Prime Minister, you know the one we installed, is sucking up to Iran's bat-shit crazy President. And things were going so well...



So?  Neither is the Southwestern US border.  You don't appear too concerned about THAT.


----------



## jillian (Sep 13, 2006)

OCA said:


> Babe all you got to do is ask, i'm a 2.5 hour drive to NYC, we could stay at the Plaza. Satisfaction guaranteed plus a free bottle of Dom.



lol... babe, I wouldn't touch ya with someone else's....


----------



## OCA (Sep 13, 2006)

jillian said:


> lol... babe, I wouldn't touch ya with someone else's....



Honey, I'm Greek, we don't ever fail to achieve our goal when it concerns the ladies and believe me you will not let another to touch me, you will want me for all your own and guard me like a momma lion guards her cubs.

I'm the penultimate metrosexual pimp!


----------



## Abbey Normal (Sep 13, 2006)

What a wacky thread. First a miltary service p*cker contest, and now we have OCA & Jillian getting it on at the Plaza. I am supposed to be reading a Poe short story right now, but this is much more intriguing


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 13, 2006)

archangel said:


> I did not flame either of them...I just argued using past experience...what they said to me did not get my goat...if any flamming was done it was by *Mr.P calling me 'drunk'..*.and your little diatribe was also considered flamming...no matter I am not offended...but it is time to relax and watch some TV...think I will follow OCA's approach and just get nasty with a touch of humor...naw not my style...Good night to you fair Lady!



Ya gotta be druck, else yer nuts...

explain yourself please.....
My posts you noted follow. Plus one

56.. Arch, Bully is a Vet. Go nap.
65.. No Arch, I served during Nixon, Ford and Carter.
73.. Are you drunk? Really man, get with it. Yes, I was in class 74-43..Do you think I came off the street to flight school in 74? Nope, I didn't. When did the VN era end agian, Arch?
81.. I have never said I was in Country.
Graduated Flight School was in 74.
I was enlisted 1 1/2 years before that.

Happy, Pappy?

84.. I've always told the truth about my service. WTF is with you?



> archangel
> Wyatt Earp	 	Join Date: Oct 2004
> Location: Nevada
> Posts: 4,880
> ...


 
Show me...WHERE DID I CHALLENGE YOU!
***********


----------



## Annie (Sep 13, 2006)

Mr. P said:


> Ya gotta be druck, else yer nuts...
> 
> explain yourself please.....
> My posts you noted follow. Plus one
> ...



All he said, PLUS where did I flame you? Sir, you are losing it.


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 13, 2006)

archangel said:


> I am for real!



I know. That's what makes you so laughable...:cof:


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 13, 2006)

OCA said:


> all your empty and baseless chest thumping has the whole board laughing!



Whereas they take you seriously Geek...



OCA said:


> You couldn't debate your way out of a 2nd grade social science class, you're a joke!



Considering I do so to you with my eyes closed, doesn't say much for you does it....


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 13, 2006)

OCA said:


> Babe all you got to do is ask, i'm a 2.5 hour drive to NYC, we could stay at the Plaza. Satisfaction guaranteed plus a free bottle of Dom.



But you have to bring your own magnifying glass so she can find "it"....


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 13, 2006)

OCA said:


> Honey, I'm Greek!



True story. About six months ago there was a doco on the effects of legalised prostitution on society. It was in Melbourne, Australia (the state of Victoria has legalised prostitution). Anyway, the reporter asked a prostitute who worked out of a brothel how much she charged. She said "$150 for straight, $250 for Greek". So the reporter asked the obvious "what's Greek"? She said "anal sex". So, you being Greek, my question is, why do they call Greek anal sex? Is there something about your culture that we don't know? :happy2:


----------



## Kagom (Sep 13, 2006)

Bullypulpit said:


> Anbar province in Iraq is, for all intents and purposes, no longer under US control. Iraq's Prime Minister, you know the one we installed, is sucking up to Iran's bat-shit crazy President. And things were going so well...


I've mentioned it before and I'll do it again: my friend Ahmed speculated that Iran is looking to Iraq the way Russia was looking to China after WW II.  It's only a matter of time before Iran has its influence put into Iraq.


----------



## GeeWhiz (Sep 14, 2006)

OCA said:


> I swear, i've got half a mind to just ban your sorry fucken ass right now, don't piss me off again by pissing on vets ever, i'll shit all over your free speech on this board and not give a fuck what anyone thinks about it.
> 
> Comprende?



Given what you just said I'll bet when it comes time to whore out your shtick in the service you'll lie to everyone by telling them you fought for freedom of speech, but your real heart says, you don't believe in freedom of speech.

Did you notice the main page on this web site? The link is right here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/

Notice the banner? notice on the lower right hand side where it says: "Where your voice counts"

While you're on that page have you noticed this statement:

Our variety of forums and overarching belief in freedom of speech provides the world with a place to come and be heard.

And this statement:

offers the chance to all to speak their mind freely. We believe in freedom of speech and the beauty of diversity, and do not kick people off because their opinions are &#8216;different.&#8217;

But you don't care about all that do you? You didn't really fight for freedom of speech did you? 
You insult all Vets by flaunting the fact that you don't care about freedom of speech. you react to truth like the devil reacts to holy water.


----------



## OCA (Sep 14, 2006)

GeeWhiz said:


> Given what you just said I'll bet when it comes time to whore out your shtick in the service you'll lie to everyone by telling them you fought for freedom of speech, but your real heart says, you don't believe in freedom of speech.
> 
> Did you notice the main page on this web site? The link is right here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/
> 
> ...



You wouldn't know truth if it kicked you in the ass.

I'll say it again, piss on vets one more time and you will be gone, your free speech be damned.

Your just a very confused and possibly mentally sick scumbag. Your dad still is ashamed of you.


----------



## OCA (Sep 14, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> True story. About six months ago there was a doco on the effects of legalised prostitution on society. It was in Melbourne, Australia (the state of Victoria has legalised prostitution). Anyway, the reporter asked a prostitute who worked out of a brothel how much she charged. She said "$150 for straight, $250 for Greek". So the reporter asked the obvious "what's Greek"? She said "anal sex". So, you being Greek, my question is, why do they call Greek anal sex? Is there something about your culture that we don't know? :happy2:



Don't know, wanna find out though?


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 14, 2006)

OCA said:


> Don't know, wanna find out though?



Dunno. Would be interesting I guess. Obviously I couldn't find out from you because you said you don't know. Your cousins or brothers/uncles might tho'? No?


----------



## OCA (Sep 14, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> Dunno. Would be interesting I guess. Obviously I couldn't find out from you because you said you don't know. Your cousins or brothers/uncles might tho'? No?



I'm sure I could find some Greek who could help you find out what you are seeking. Give you some "in depth" information.


----------



## OCA (Sep 14, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> Whereas they take you seriously Geek...
> 
> 
> 
> Considering I do so to you with my eyes closed, doesn't say much for you does it....



More baseless chest thumping, cool.


----------



## KarlMarx (Sep 14, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> True story. About six months ago there was a doco on the effects of legalised prostitution on society. It was in Melbourne, Australia (the state of Victoria has legalised prostitution). Anyway, the reporter asked a prostitute who worked out of a brothel how much she charged. She said "$150 for straight, $250 for Greek". So the reporter asked the obvious "what's Greek"? She said "anal sex". So, you being Greek, my question is, why do they call Greek anal sex? Is there something about your culture that we don't know? :happy2:



Greek means anal and French means fellatio... 

The  French are credited with oral sex because it was a common saying among servicemen returning from France after WW II that the French f with their mouths and fight with their feet, and French is to this day prostitutes slang for fellatio.

I think it's known as "greek" because the ancient Greeks engaged in homosexuality, as in the joke..

Q: "How did they separate the men from the boys in Ancient Greece?"
A: With a crowbar.

I once read that the practice of women applying lipstick originated with prostitutes who practiced oral sex in order to give the impression that their mouths were vaginas....

I'm sure that's more information than anyone wanted to hear


----------



## OCA (Sep 14, 2006)

KarlMarx said:


> Greek means anal and French means fellatio...
> 
> The  French are credited with oral sex because it was a common saying among servicemen returning from France after WW II that the French f with their mouths and fight with their feet, and French is to this day prostitutes slang for fellatio.
> 
> ...



This is true, it was back before Christ, before we knew RIGHT FROM WRONG, the thinking was any hole in a storm so to speak.


----------



## rtwngAvngr (Sep 14, 2006)

OCA said:


> the thinking was any hole in a storm so to speak.



Tell us more, big rager!  :tongue1:


----------



## Stephanie (Sep 14, 2006)

KarlMarx said:


> Greek means anal and French means fellatio...
> 
> The  French are credited with oral sex because it was a common saying among servicemen returning from France after WW II that the French f with their mouths and fight with their feet, and French is to this day prostitutes slang for fellatio.
> 
> ...



You said a mouth full there, Karl Marx...........(NO PUN INTENDED)runs and hides now, bye:fifty: 

J/K


----------



## GeeWhiz (Sep 14, 2006)

OCA said:


> I'll say it again, piss on vets one more time and you will be gone, your free speech be damned.



That's the second time you've said I've dissed the vets.

Go ahead show everyone here on this board where I've dissed the vets.

Let us know when the shock of not being able to find where I dissed the soldiers wears off.


----------



## The ClayTaurus (Sep 14, 2006)

The grounds for getting banned get more and more muddled as each day passes.


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 14, 2006)

GeeWhiz said:


> That's the second time you've said I've dissed the vets.
> 
> 
> > Go ahead show everyone here on this board where I've dissed the vets.
> ...



Looks like disrespect to me. Not to Vets but one Vet.


----------



## rtwngAvngr (Sep 14, 2006)

The ClayTaurus said:


> The grounds for getting banned get more and more muddled as each day passes.



The purpose of banning is not to achieve a state of totalitarian group-think, as you seem to believe.


----------



## The ClayTaurus (Sep 14, 2006)

rtwngAvngr said:


> The purpose of banning is not to achieve a state of totalitarian group-think, as you seem to believe.


Excuse me?


----------



## rtwngAvngr (Sep 14, 2006)

The ClayTaurus said:


> Excuse me?



You may need new batteries, they're the tiny round ones up at check out.  

I said,"The purpose of banning is not to achieve a state of totalitarian group-think, as you seem to believe."


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 14, 2006)

OCA said:


> I'm sure I could find some Greek who could help you find out what you are seeking. Give you some "in depth" information.



I'm sure you could. The fact you are the go-to guy for this type of behaviour does not surprise me in the least...


----------



## The ClayTaurus (Sep 14, 2006)

rtwngAvngr said:


> You may need new batteries, they're the tiny round ones up at check out.
> 
> I said,"The purpose of banning is not to achieve a state of totalitarian group-think, as you seem to believe."


My remark was more out of disbelief than confusion. When did I ever give you the impression I thought banning was for achieving totalitarian group think?


----------



## OCA (Sep 14, 2006)

I think P did my leg work for me Cheese Whiz, you not only dishonour your vet father by dissing everything he apparently believed in but you go to a parade and don't show any appreciation for vets as they walk by but reveal yourself to be the spoiled brat you are. These people put their asses on the line whether you agree with the cause or not and deserve at least an acknowledgement of that fact.

Fuck you.


----------



## OCA (Sep 14, 2006)

The ClayTaurus said:


> The grounds for getting banned get more and more muddled as each day passes.



Clay it is true that this jackoff does not break any rule as listed in the rules per say but.................I do not want to commune nor does the board need any asshole who apparently doesn't have at least the minimal amount of respect for vets, although I haven't polled it yet I would gather most agree with this thought.


----------



## OCA (Sep 14, 2006)

Mr. P said:


> Looks like disrespect to me. Not to Vets but one Vet.



Thanks for the effort P.


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 14, 2006)

OCA said:


> I do not want to commune nor does the board need any asshole who apparently doesn't have at least the minimal amount of respect for vets, although I haven't polled it yet I would gather most agree with this thought.




What you want is irrelevent. Jim makes the rules and there is nothing in there about vets or peoples' opinions on that subject. Until Jim says otherwise, that's the way it is. Get over it/yourself...


----------



## OCA (Sep 14, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> What you want is irrelevent. Jim makes the rules and there is nothing in there about vets or peoples' opinions on that subject. Until Jim says otherwise, that's the way it is. Get over it/yourself...



First of all you have nothing to say so its none of your fucking business, shut the fuck up until further notice.


----------



## The ClayTaurus (Sep 14, 2006)

OCA said:


> Clay it is true that this jackoff does not break any rule as listed in the rules per say but.................I do not want to commune nor does the board need any asshole who apparently doesn't have at least the minimal amount of respect for vets, although I haven't polled it yet I would gather most agree with this thought.


Perhaps. Maybe the rules should be ammended?


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 14, 2006)

OCA said:


> First of all you have nothing to say so its none of your fucking business, shut the fuck up until further notice.



I'll take it under advisement (did I ever tell you what a great debater you are??) Anyway, if you did ban people for dissing vets, there'd be no more conservatives on this board. Can you say "Kerry, Murtha and Cleland"? Man, out debating you is just too easy...(sigh)...


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 14, 2006)

The ClayTaurus said:


> Perhaps. Maybe the rules should be ammended?



Also, you'll note that although Gee was being a little OTT, he was calling CSM on his opinion, not his status as a vet. Two different things....


----------



## OCA (Sep 14, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> I'll take it under advisement (did I ever tell you what a great debater you are??) Anyway, if you did ban people for dissing vets, there'd be no more conservatives on this board. Can you say "Kerry, Murtha and Cleland"? Man, out debating you is just too easy...(sigh)...




3 traitors who have cashed in their vet credits.


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 14, 2006)

OCA said:


> 3 traitors who have cashed in their vet credits.



Ah, so there are exceptions....


----------



## OCA (Sep 14, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> Also, you'll note that although Gee was being a little OTT, he was calling CSM on his opinion, not his status as a vet. Two different things....




No he was saying that because his father died a vet he is more knowledgeable on war and America in general and that vets who are patriotic are fools.

Fuck him.


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 14, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> Also, you'll note that although Gee was being a little OTT, he was calling CSM on his opinion, not his status as a vet. Two different things....



IMO, it was the same thing, given the subject.


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 14, 2006)

Mr. P said:


> IMO, it was the same thing, given the subject.



hhhmmm..He didn't appear to say CSM had a worthless mouth because he was as vet.


----------



## OCA (Sep 14, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> Ah, so there are exceptions....



Lets face it John Kerry is about as much of a vet as me, his service was merely a publicity stunt to further his political aspirations, he then went and trashed his comrades in arms when discharged.

Murtha, well he is disowned by the marines.....never surrender or retreat is one of their mottos.


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 14, 2006)

OCA said:


> Lets face it John Kerry is about as much of a vet as me.



You got three purple hearts, a bronze star and silver star?? Wow...there's more to you than meets the eye...


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 14, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> hhhmmm..*He didn't appear to say CSM had a worthless mouth because he was as vet.*



Did to me. Cheesewiz is a troll, I don't see why you'd want to defend IT, or play the language game. I was offended by what was said and it wasn't even directed at me.
Drop it from your radar Grump.


----------



## OCA (Sep 14, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> You got three purple hearts, a bronze star and silver star?? Wow...there's more to you than meets the eye...



What did he do? Stub his toe? Oh no wait, he was dating a 3 star general's daughter.


----------



## jillian (Sep 14, 2006)

OCA said:


> I'm sure I could find some Greek who could help you find out what you are seeking. Give you some "in depth" information.



Ah... explains why you're so uptight about gays. Fighting your nature, huh?

You know, your ancestors had a much healthier attitude about it than you. :food1:


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 14, 2006)

OCA said:


> What did he do? Stub his toe? Oh no wait, he was dating a 3 star general's daughter.



Yeah, he pulled the wool over the top brass's eyes not once, twice or three times.


----------



## OCA (Sep 14, 2006)

Mr. P said:


> Did to me. Cheesewiz is a troll, I don't see why you'd want to defend IT, or play the language game. I was offended by what was said and it wasn't even directed at me.
> Drop it from your radar Grump.



Chump is a troll, if you notice he has two things he does here, baseless chest thumping and trolling the board looking for a fight where he doesn't belong. 

Classic troll.


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 14, 2006)

Mr. P said:


> Did to me. Cheesewiz is a troll, I don't see why you'd want to defend IT, or play the language game. I was offended by what was said and it wasn't even directed at me.
> Drop it from your radar Grump.



having gone back and reread the thread, I disagree. Both CSM and Gee had interesting points in amongst the vitriole. Troll? No. OTT? Both were IMO....


----------



## OCA (Sep 14, 2006)

jillian said:


> Ah... explains why you're so uptight about gays. Fighting your nature, huh?
> 
> You know, your ancestors had a much healthier attitude about it than you. :food1:



Babe what did I tell you? This isn't elementary school, you don't have to be darkhearted to let me know you like me, just come out and say it.

Love the hints of racism though, surprising coming from a Demo..........not.


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 14, 2006)

OCA said:


> Chump is a troll, if you notice he has two things he does here, baseless chest thumping and trolling the board looking for a fight where he doesn't belong.
> 
> Classic troll.



And what do you add to the debate other than whining and moaning? If anybody was to drop in on a flying visit and make a decision on who a troll was between you and I, you'd lose hands down. You have nothing. I just like playing with you because you crack me up (not in a good way). Somehow you think you're the board Tough Guy, but all I see is a Cream Puff...


----------



## OCA (Sep 14, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> having gone back and reread the thread, I disagree. Both CSM and Gee had interesting points in amongst the vitriole. Troll? No. OTT? Both were IMO....



Well your opinion don't mean shit.


----------



## OCA (Sep 14, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> And what do you add to the debate other than whining and moaning? If anybody was to drop in on a flying visit and make a decision on who a troll was between you and I, you'd lose hands down. You have nothing. I just like playing with you because you crack me up (not in a good way). Somehow you think you're the board Tough Guy, but all I see is a Cream Puff...



Lol your eyes are turning green.


----------



## jillian (Sep 14, 2006)

OCA said:


> Babe what did I tell you? This isn't elementary school, you don't have to be darkhearted to let me know you like me, just come out and say it.
> 
> Love the hints of racism though, surprising coming from a Demo..........not.



Actually, you were the one who talked about getting "greeks" to pay a visit to Grump... not I.  

But you can come out of the closet... might make you less angry a person.


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 14, 2006)

OCA said:


> Well your opinion don't mean shit.



To some, yes, to some, no. I ain't under any illusions...you however...

Oh, yeah, and I wake up every day wishing I was you... because you know, you're someone that other poeple should aspire to be...:alco:


----------



## jillian (Sep 14, 2006)

OCA said:


> Well your opinion don't mean shit.



And yours does?


----------



## OCA (Sep 14, 2006)

jillian said:


> Actually, you were the one who talked about getting "greeks" to pay a visit to Grump... not I.
> 
> But you can come out of the closet... might make you less angry a person.




Oh, Chump was asking what Greek was, so I thought i'd oblige him and hunt down a couple of queer or bi ones(don't know any but they must exist) to give Chump's browneye the once over so he can be more knowledgeable.

Honey i'm a pure, masculine and wholly virile hetero, I live to please the ladies which I have as many times has Tiger Woods has struck a nike golf ball. Don't deny yourself, i'm easy, you don't even have to buy me a drink.


----------



## OCA (Sep 14, 2006)

jillian said:


> And yours does?



By popular opinion, yes.


----------



## OCA (Sep 14, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> To some, yes, to some, no. I ain't under any illusions...you however...
> 
> Oh, yeah, and I wake up every day wishing I was you... because you know, you're someone that other poeple should aspire to be...:alco:



To some? Put down the purple microdot.


----------



## CSM (Sep 14, 2006)

Mr. P said:


> Did to me. Cheesewiz is a troll, I don't see why you'd want to defend IT, or play the language game. I was offended by what was said and it wasn't even directed at me.
> Drop it from your radar Grump.



Hmmm...being the subject of the aforemetnioned insult to vets I draw your attention to the following:

Yet it's okay for you to whore out 911 isn't it America? make a market out of it, make a few bucks from it, and whore it out even more just so you can feed that military industrial complex Eisenhower warned this country about. Feed it with human lives as if you even know what a human life is. Whore it out, so that sleaze of a political party you belong to can squeeze a few votes out of the citizens in this country.

America I'm not conned by your perfume. Your perfume called democracy. America you are a perfumed scorpion. Your sting kills. You're killing for oil just so you can drive that big SUV while eating a greasy cheeseburger so you can later die of clogged arties and that is a piss poor reason for people around the world to die.

If you think for one minute that the two paragraphs above are not a direct insult to vets then it is obvious that yo have never been a vet.  Soldiers are instruments of national policy, that is true. However, they are not whores, the vast majority know far better the value of human life than non vets. I am not sleazy because I belong to a particular party ( the same party that the majority of active duty military belongs to); I do not and have not killed for oil. There is and was no doubt in my mind that the above was intended as an insult to me personally and to vets in general.

That being said, I do not care if it is a bannable offense on this board. I will not stand by while someone who has never served tries to impugn the character of those who have served honorably.  I will not stand by while someone who has not got the intestinal fortitude to defend this country and its citizens tries to spread lies and vitrol against those who do.  

As for the rest of this thread, I have stated many times that being a vet bestows no special status when it comes to political opinions. It can and does deserve a good amount of respect and consideration when a vet expresses an opinion on military operations, how the young men and women of our military are likely to react or even in general how they think and feel.  That does not mean that a vet has all knowledge or cannot be mistaken, but in those areas, a vet is far more likely to be accurate than some snot nosed punk who was abused as a child by an alcoholic mother and who's only exposure to vets is through anti war propaganda.

Just my opinion.


----------



## jillian (Sep 14, 2006)

OCA said:


> By popular opinion, yes.




A legend in your own mind....


----------



## CSM (Sep 14, 2006)

One more thing and then I will leave this thread. As I mentioned in an earlier post, if ANyONE thinks for half a minute that a person who has to take human life in combat does not think about the enormity of such an action for a very long and difficult time or does not relive those moments constantly, then they have never been in that position. Very damned few soldiers or Marines I know who have been in combat are "cold blooded killers"; in fact, I can safely say that NONE I know are like that and believe me, I know plenty!

The comment made about not knowing what a bullet does to the human body and then implying such things are forgotten is also an insult to vets and specifically to combat vets.


----------



## jillian (Sep 14, 2006)

OCA said:


> Oh, Chump was asking what Greek was, so I thought i'd oblige him and hunt down a couple of queer or bi ones(don't know any but they must exist) to give Chump's browneye the once over so he can be more knowledgeable.
> 
> Honey i'm a pure, masculine and wholly virile hetero, I live to please the ladies which I have as many times has Tiger Woods has struck a nike golf ball. Don't deny yourself, i'm easy, you don't even have to buy me a drink.




Thou dost protest too much....


----------



## OCA (Sep 14, 2006)

jillian said:


> Thou dost protest too much....



No babe, extremely confident.


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 14, 2006)

CSM said:


> Hmmm...being the subject of the aforemetnioned insult to vets I draw your attention to the following:
> 
> Yet it's okay for you to whore out 911 isn't it America? make a market out of it, make a few bucks from it, and whore it out even more just so you can feed that military industrial complex Eisenhower warned this country about. Feed it with human lives as if you even know what a human life is. Whore it out, so that sleaze of a political party you belong to can squeeze a few votes out of the citizens in this country.
> 
> ...



Shared by many.


----------



## manu1959 (Sep 14, 2006)

CSM said:


> Hmmm...being the subject of the aforemetnioned insult to vets I draw your attention to the following:
> 
> Yet it's okay for you to whore out 911 isn't it America? make a market out of it, make a few bucks from it, and whore it out even more just so you can feed that military industrial complex Eisenhower warned this country about. Feed it with human lives as if you even know what a human life is. Whore it out, so that sleaze of a political party you belong to can squeeze a few votes out of the citizens in this country.
> 
> ...



cheeze dick insults all americans not just vets.....he should move


----------



## trobinett (Sep 14, 2006)

Damn, this thread has sure gone into the dumpster.

Whoa it down a bit guys, and get back on subject.

The vet's on this board, which I am one of, can take care of themselves, and don't need protection.

Talk the talk, and walk the walk, only those that have served know for sure.

I for one, don't give a rat's ass about the like's of the Kerry's of this world.

It's been said, and I agree, vet's don't have a "crystal ball" when it comes to war, but, we sure do, when it comes to feelings.

Lets leave it there, and allow "others" to express their opinions, that is, after all, what this is all about.

:huh:


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 14, 2006)

trobinett said:


> Damn, this thread has sure gone into the dumpster.
> 
> Whoa it down a bit guys, and get back on subject.
> 
> ...



Yup, we know. But, we can't leave it there, what would be the point? Should Jane ever forget her acts? Get the point?

Besides, wiz is a troll, IT is not here to dicuss.

BTW..have you given me your info for the Vet list?


----------



## GeeWhiz (Sep 15, 2006)

Whoa fellas, I said show me where I have insulted vets. I didn't say desperately spin my posts.

First of all I want to touch on the issue of the parade OCA brought up.

A couple of months just before I was going to graduate from high school it dawned on me that there was something peculiar about these vet parades, something was missing. I talked it over with a girlfriend of mine and she agreed that I had a valid point.

We went to see this old man whom lived in the hood. This old guy was active in the vet parade and vet get togethers.

Every night this old man would sit in his car all by himself and get drunk. He never drove his car, he would just sit in it and get drunk. If you talked to this guy; all he would do is lament about how he wished he never got married and stayed in the service for life. As far as his wife goes she would go out and make a cuckold out of the old guy everynight.

My girlfriend and I came up to this old man asked him if he would take my idea to the next vet meeting. He asked me what my idea was. So I told him, which is this, In the next parade why don't you guys take a casket drapped with a flag along with you. He refused to bring that idea up to the next vet meeting.

My girlfriend and I showed up in the next vet meeting. I introduced my idea to the meeting. The vets did not appreciate my idea. All I asked was for them to let my dad participate in the parade. I didn't mean in the literal sense, but symbolic, like a cardboard box painted black with a flag drapped over it. The main thing is my dad gets to participate in the parade.

I was torn apart when I left that meeting. Thank God I had my girlfriend there to comfort me.

My girlfriend came up with this idea that I go and talk to the parade organizers and see if they'll let me enter my dad into the parade. All of you here at usmessageboard probably guessed I got turned down.

This is where we get to OCA's bogus claim that he knows what my dad is thinking. Did any of you click on that link I provided? Why not? if you don't know the link I'm talking about it's right here: http://www.sirnosir.com

OCA claims my dad hates me. There comes a time in a man's life when he talks to his parents about important decisions. In my case my mom is the only parent I could talk to. When I a sophomore in high school I talked to mom about joining the service after I get out of high school. The fact that I brought it up crushed her.

When two people are married there is an intimacy they share. My dad wanted my mom to pass something on to me should he never make it back alive. That initimacy is between me and my father and my mother. Because I'm not going to share that initmacy, I point all of you in the direction of the link I provided.

My father would be proud of me because I am not one of those people that live by the moral standard which is "my country right or wrong". 
I'm one of those people where if I feel this nation's policy is wrong, then I'm going to say that it is wrong and my saying so doesn't make me any less of an American and it certainly doesn't mean I dis vets.

Those vets in that link felt the war was wrong. My father felt the war was wrong. Unfortunately he realized it only when he got over there. Unfortunately he came back in a box.

OCA, CSM, and P are alive, my dad is not. You want to know how old my dad was when he died? he was 23 years old. Barely out of his childhood.

I almost forgot. Back to the parade. My girlfriend and I realized that nobody wanted my dad in the parade. We came up with a plan. Most of you have seen the platforms they set up, where there is someone speaking through a cheap public address system, announcing the groups that pass by. We positioned ourselves across the street from the platform where the organizers can see us. When it came time for the vets to go by and the announcer tells everyone to stand up and salute the vets, my girlfriend and I remained seated on the curb, because the whole bullshit dissed my dad, because the whole bullshit was too embarrassed, just like the Pentagon and the media is to embarrassed to show all of you Americans on a nightly basis the flag drapped coffins that comes home from Iraq. The Pentagon and the media is the whole bullshit too.

I end this post with a lyric from the Unknown Soldier

Wait until the war is over
And we're both a little older
The unknown soldier
Breakfast where the news is read
Television children fed
Unborn living, living, dead
Bullet strikes the helmet's head
And it's all over
For the unknown soldier
It's all over
For the unknown soldier
Hut
Hut
Hut ho hee up
Hut
Hut
Hut ho hee up
Hut
Hut
Hut ho hee up
Comp'nee
Halt
Preeee-zent!
Arms!
Make a grave for the unknown soldier
Nestled in your hollow shoulder
The unknown soldier
Breakfast where the news is read
Television children fed
Bullet strikes the helmet's head
And, it's all over
The war is over
It's all over
The war is over
Well, all over, baby
All over, baby
Oh, over, yeah
All over, baby
Wooooo, hah-hah
All over
All over, baby
Oh, woa-yeah
All over
All over
Heeeeyyyy

CSM, OCA and P fuck off.


----------



## Stephanie (Sep 15, 2006)




----------



## GeeWhiz (Sep 15, 2006)

Stephanie said:


>



Ignore Stephanie, it isn't human, it's just a computer generated script. There's a site that has better script than the Stephanie script, that site's script comes off as more human too. It's coded in Java. It was fun to play with. But that gets old real quick. Sometimes you want a real human responding back.

Getting back on topic. 

According to a Washington Post account of the secret document, the intelligence officer, Col. Pete Devlin, concluded that &#8220;there is almost nothing the US military can do to improve the political and social situation there.&#8221;

The newspaper quoted an Army officer familiar with the report, which was dated August 16, as saying, &#8220;We haven&#8217;t been defeated militarily, but we have been defeated politically&#8212;and that&#8217;s where wars are won and lost.&#8221; The Post article continued, &#8220;Another person familiar with the report said it describes Anbar as beyond repair; a third said it concludes that the United States has lost in Anbar.&#8221;

Junior failed,  but in his mind he succeeded because he is not in it for the reason he claims, he is in it because Defense and Oil reaped windfalls from the Iraq war. This is what Eisenhower warned this country about.

Request: can this site come up with a better script than the Stephanie script? I can give you a site address that can show you a better script. Like I said it comes off more human than Stephanie.


----------



## archangel (Sep 15, 2006)

GeeWhiz said:


> Whoa fellas, I said show me where I have insulted vets. I didn't say desperately spin my posts.
> 
> First of all I want to touch on the issue of the parade OCA brought up.
> 
> ...



list of FO..!

This would have been a heart warming story had it not been so political...and how do you know your Dad was against the VN war after he got there after all you never met him or talked to him...just your grieving mother..
To be blunt I believe you watch way too many Hollywood versions of how VN vets acted...Like the movies always portray them as never getting close to their comrades in arms...this is plain and simple BS...Many times when friends were hit and you asked them what could you do for them...they would smile(even in pain) and say tell Mom & Dad and sis and bro and GF I love em' then shout...and get that sob who did this to me!


side note: as for your choice in songs...gag me with a spoon!...try "Ballad of the Green Berets" Barry Sadler...written and sung by one....!


Then again..second thoughts here...I think you watch way too many "Simpsons" cartoons...this little diatribe smacks of a re-run!


----------



## Abbey Normal (Sep 15, 2006)

CSM said:


> Hmmm...being the subject of the aforemetnioned insult to vets I draw your attention to the following:
> 
> Yet it's okay for you to whore out 911 isn't it America? make a market out of it, make a few bucks from it, and whore it out even more just so you can feed that military industrial complex Eisenhower warned this country about. Feed it with human lives as if you even know what a human life is. Whore it out, so that sleaze of a political party you belong to can squeeze a few votes out of the citizens in this country.
> 
> ...



You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to CSM again.

I know you know this, but just to reiterate, we all know that you do not have to defend yourself against such garbage. But thanks for taking the time to do it so well nonetheless.


----------



## Abbey Normal (Sep 15, 2006)

> My girlfriend and I showed up in the next vet meeting. I introduced my idea to the meeting. The vets did not appreciate my idea. *All I asked was for them to let my dad participate in the parade.*didn't mean in the literal sense, but symbolic, like a cardboard box painted black with a flag drapped over it. * main thing is my dad gets to participate in the parade.*



There is a place where your father is honored and included. It is called a war memorial, and they are everywhere. I suggest that if you really want to honor your father's memory, you visit one and pay your respects. I have, and I don't even have a loved-one who died in a war.


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 15, 2006)

Abbey Normal said:


> There is a place where your father is honored and included. It is called a war memorial, and they are everywhere. I suggest that if you really want to honor your father's memory, you visit one and pay your respects. I have, and I don't even have a loved-one who died in a war.



And lets not forget Memorial Day.


----------



## The ClayTaurus (Sep 15, 2006)

> My girlfriend and I came up to this old man asked him if he would take my idea to the next vet meeting. He asked me what my idea was. So I told him, which is this, In the next parade why don't you guys take a casket drapped with a flag along with you. He refused to bring that idea up to the next vet meeting.
> 
> My girlfriend and I showed up in the next vet meeting. I introduced my idea to the meeting. The vets did not appreciate my idea. All I asked was for them to let my dad participate in the parade. I didn't mean in the literal sense, but symbolic, like a cardboard box painted black with a flag drapped over it. The main thing is my dad gets to participate in the parade.


When have you ever seen a casket in a parade, symbollic or otherwise? Parades are not funeral processions.

Why not another way of your dad participating? Why not a symbollic arm band? The only thing you could come up with was a symbollic casket?


----------



## Abbey Normal (Sep 15, 2006)

The ClayTaurus said:


> When have you ever seen a casket in a parade, symbollic or otherwise? Parades are not funeral processions.
> 
> Why not another way of your dad participating? Why not a symbollic arm band? The only thing you could come up with was a symbollic casket?



That wouldn't have been sufficiently dramatic.


----------



## OCA (Sep 15, 2006)

The ClayTaurus said:


> When have you ever seen a casket in a parade, symbollic or otherwise? Parades are not funeral processions.
> 
> Why not another way of your dad participating? Why not a symbollic arm band? The only thing you could come up with was a symbollic casket?



Painted black nonetheless.

Whiz you are a piece of shit, how dare you politicize your father's death. God that is fucking sick! You got issues!


----------



## musicman (Sep 15, 2006)

Abbey Normal said:


> That wouldn't have been sufficiently dramatic.



Or ostentatious. This was all about GeeWhiz, you see - not his dad.


----------



## OCA (Sep 15, 2006)

Abbey Normal said:


> That wouldn't have been sufficiently dramatic.



Exactly. 

Whiz could have given two shits less about his father being included in a parade it was all about expressing his political views, in other words whoring out his father to make a twisted point.

What pathetic excuse for a son.


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 15, 2006)

Abbey Normal said:


> That wouldn't have been sufficiently dramatic.



There are trolls (wackos) everywhere, they are rejected outside of cyber space too.


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 15, 2006)

musicman said:


> Or ostentatious. This was all about GeeWhiz, you see - not his dad.



Exactly!


----------



## archangel (Sep 15, 2006)

But y'all missed the innuendo of gee wizzies comment...this was taken directly from a "Simpsons" cartoon several episodes ago...I am guilty of missing this the first time around...and spilled my guts on a fraud!...end of story!   <<<< on him!


----------



## The ClayTaurus (Sep 15, 2006)

archangel said:


> But y'all missed the innuendo of gee wizzies comment...this was taken directly from a "Simpsons" cartoon several episodes ago...I am guilty of missing this the first time around...and spilled my guts on a fraud!...end of story!   <<<< on him!


Care to clue the rest of us in?


----------



## archangel (Sep 15, 2006)

The ClayTaurus said:


> Care to clue the rest of us in?





Not a big fan of the 'Simpsons' but hey I am a G/pa and have to watch what the kids view from time to time...and 'Marge'...did the same thing on one of the episodes awhile back...had to expalin to the kids that this was just a 'Cartoon' not real life...need I say more?:rotflmao:


----------



## The ClayTaurus (Sep 15, 2006)

archangel said:


> Not a big fan of the 'Simpsons' but hey I am a G/pa and have to watch what the kids view from time to time...and 'Marge'...did the same thing on one of the episodes awhile back...had to expalin to the kids that this was just a 'Cartoon' not real life...need I say more?:rotflmao:


What did G-wiz do that was from the Simpsons? I'm so so confused.


----------



## archangel (Sep 15, 2006)

The ClayTaurus said:


> What did G-wiz do that was from the Simpsons? I'm so so confused.





The Simpsons cartoon did an exact episode of what 'Gee Wiz'...related to on the casket of the Dad in the veterans parade..it was a wash for all vets...I like cartoons as long as they don't get too political and try to brainwash my kids...I have no way to set this episode on line in here...ask others who may have also seen this rediculous episode...what else can I say...go out and live it then get back to Me!


----------



## The ClayTaurus (Sep 15, 2006)

archangel said:


> The Simpsons cartoon did an exact episode of what 'Gee Wiz'...related to on the casket of the Dad in the veterans parade..it was a wash for all vets...I like cartoons as long as they don't get too political and try to brainwash my kids...I have no way to set this episode on line in here...ask others who may have also seen this rediculous episode...what else can I say...go out and live it then get back to Me!


That's all I wanted to know. I've never seen the episode where they parade a casket. I'll have to keep an eye out for it. Thanks.


----------



## musicman (Sep 15, 2006)

I just flashed on something: "The Simpsons" sounds an awful lot like, "The Symptoms". It could certainly apply; a dark comment on what our culture has wrought, perhaps?


----------



## Eightball (Sep 15, 2006)

glockmail's comment that we should have divided Iraq up into different regions each with their own self governing bodies makes a whole lot of sense.  

Obviously the Northernmost Kurdish region needed to be separate from the strong Sunni regions.
*
I'm also dismayed by the Iraqi president paying a visit, unless it was to pass on some requests, such as don't fund/support the Sunni insurgents in Iraq, or any other insurgencies that are attempting to create anarchy and tumble the current Iraqi government.  Maybe he even passed on a message from GWB, since we do not have good diplomatic relations with Iran.  The guy(Iraqi President) could be a good "go-between" for us.

His visiting Iran shouldn't be taken as a bad omen necessarily until we see how things unfold between the two countries in the next few months.

Afterall, GWB visits some leaders that in all respects don't give a rat's behind about the U.S. and would sell us out at a moments notice.......i.e. France, U.S.S.R., Red China..

The worst thing that can happen with these despotically ruled countries is when they are isolated from all interaction, geo-politically, economically, culturally,.. etc from the rest of the world or their own local regions of influence, as in the case of North Korea.  

I say, keep hitting Iran with covert and overt Western cultural information, and possible economic opportunities, that reaches the masses.  There's supposed to be a growing population of young Iranians that desire Western democracy, values, culture, and liberties.  Thats where our CIA should really be covertly working.


----------



## dilloduck (Sep 15, 2006)

Eightball said:


> glockmail's comment that we should have divided Iraq up into different regions each with their own self governing bodies makes a whole lot of sense.
> 
> Obviously the Northernmost Kurdish region needed to be separate from the strong Sunni regions.
> *
> ...



And most likely are.


----------



## Said1 (Sep 16, 2006)

GeeWhiz said:


> archangel, I don't even know this Simpson show, I don't even care, whatever that show did that's their thing, I was doing mine and my thing doesn't even come close to what you and others are claiming because my thing wasn't even political.
> 
> The reason you guys are going ballistic is because you don't want to be reminded that your day at the parade is wasted, a joke. Because that coffin shows everyone what goes down. That coffin ain't political baby, that coffin is reality, that coffin is what goes down.
> 
> ...


----------



## Stephanie (Sep 16, 2006)

[/IMG]


----------



## trobinett (Sep 16, 2006)

GeeWhiz said:


> archangel, I don't even know this Simpson show, I don't even care, whatever that show did that's their thing, I was doing mine and my thing doesn't even come close to what you and others are claiming because my thing wasn't even political.
> 
> The reason you guys are going ballistic is because you don't want to be reminded that your day at the parade is wasted, a joke. Because that coffin shows everyone what goes down. That coffin ain't political baby, that coffin is reality, that coffin is what goes down.
> 
> ...



Having a bad LIFE there GW?

Actually, the whole "me thing" in your post comes as close as anything to describing the way I look at YOU.

YOUR the only joke around these parts.

Your disrespect knows no bounds, as does the contempt that you are held in.

At first, I thought you were making an honest attempt to explain your feelings about memorial day, and what your father's death did to YOUR perceptions of both our military,and memorial day.

But I was WRONG, you had a hidden agenda, you were just setting up this thread for a flame job.

Congratulations, I'll never take you serious again.


----------



## nt250 (Sep 16, 2006)

manu1959 said:


> john kerry was a traitor.....met with the enemy in paris while in uniform and attempted to undermine the posistion of the us government = treason......murtha is only a stones throw behind that



I hate to bump this thread since it's obviously got an America hating troll on it, but....

John Kerry wasn't in uniform when he met with the enemy in Paris.  After his 3rd Purple Heart, Kerry was sent back to the United States where he spent some time as a driver for some big wig in New York.  He put a request into be transferred to inactive duty so that he could run for Congress.  That request was granted, and by 1970 Kerry's obligation to the Navy Reserves was apparently over.  Why he didn't get his honorable discharge until 1978 remains a mystery as far as I know.

Kerry has given several different versions of exactly how his meeting in Paris came about.  The best one  is that he just happened to be there on his honeymoon.

Many people have no idea that George W. Bush spent more time in the military than John Kerry did.  Not that that means anything, I just think it's a very interesting detail.


----------



## Avatar4321 (Sep 18, 2006)

trobinett said:


> Congratulations, I'll never take you serious again.



You took him seirously to begin with? You give him far more credit than I ever did.


----------



## Avatar4321 (Sep 18, 2006)

nt250 said:


> Many people have no idea that George W. Bush spent more time in the military than John Kerry did.  Not that that means anything, I just think it's a very interesting detail.



*Gasp* Dont you know? The National Guard isnt the military! or atleast so claims the left who think the national guard is the way to dodge the draft.


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 18, 2006)

Avatar4321 said:


> who think the national guard is the way to dodge the draft.



Certainly looks that way with GW IMO....


----------



## Avatar4321 (Sep 18, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> Certainly looks that way with GW IMO....



So the President volenteers to join the national guard, who did have forces in Vietnam, and even volunteered to go to Vietnam. But he did all this to dodge the draft?

Does this make any sense to anyone else?


----------



## jillian (Sep 18, 2006)

Avatar4321 said:


> So the President volenteers to join the national guard, who did have forces in Vietnam, and even volunteered to go to Vietnam. But he did all this to dodge the draft?
> 
> Does this make any sense to anyone else?




The national guard didn't get deployed to Vietnam as far as I'm aware because we had a draft. National guard was where people went who didn't want to go. I don't blame him, I'd have done the same, but don't make it like he volunteered and then dis people like Kerry who really did.


----------



## manu1959 (Sep 18, 2006)

jillian said:


> The national guard didn't get deployed to Vietnam as far as I'm aware because we had a draft. National guard was where people went who didn't want to go. I don't blame him, I'd have done the same, but don't make it like he volunteered and then dis people like Kerry who really did.



how would you like your crow prepared.............

http://www.1800goguard.com/whatistheguard/whatis_history_vietnam.html

Twenty Army National Guard units from 17 states were mobilized for service in the Vietnam War on May 13, 1968. Company D (Ranger) of the 151st Infantry, Indiana Army National Guard arrived in the country in December of that year. The Indiana Rangers were assigned reconnaissance and intelligence-gathering missions. Operating deep in enemy territory, Ranger patrols engaged enemy units while conducting raids, ambushes and surveillance missions. "Delta Company" achieved an impressive combat record; unit members earned 510 medals for valor and service


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 18, 2006)

jillian said:


> The national guard didn't get deployed to Vietnam as far as I'm aware because we had a draft. *National guard was where people went who didn't want to go.* ....



Nope, that was Canada. Check Manus post.


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 18, 2006)

manu1959 said:


> how would you like your crow prepared.............
> 
> http://www.1800goguard.com/whatistheguard/whatis_history_vietnam.html
> 
> Twenty Army National Guard units from 17 states were mobilized for service in the Vietnam War on May 13, 1968. Company D (Ranger) of the 151st Infantry, Indiana Army National Guard arrived in the country in December of that year. The Indiana Rangers were assigned reconnaissance and intelligence-gathering missions. Operating deep in enemy territory, Ranger patrols engaged enemy units while conducting raids, ambushes and surveillance missions. "Delta Company" achieved an impressive combat record; unit members earned 510 medals for valor and service



You do know what the words "As far as I'm aware" mean, right? That aside, what does that have to do with Dubya.


Avatar
If you can find me a credible link that shows Dubya volunteered to go, I'll certainly look at the guy in a new light...


----------



## manu1959 (Sep 18, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> You do know what the words "As far as I'm aware" mean, right? That aside, what does that have to do with Dubya.



don't pretend to be stupid it fits you too well


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 18, 2006)

manu1959 said:


> don't pretend to be stupid it fits you too well



Sorry I'm not as intelligent as you. Because, you know, you are a real Bright Spark...


----------



## jillian (Sep 18, 2006)

manu1959 said:


> how would you like your crow prepared.............
> 
> http://www.1800goguard.com/whatistheguard/whatis_history_vietnam.html
> 
> Twenty Army National Guard units from 17 states were mobilized for service in the Vietnam War on May 13, 1968. Company D (Ranger) of the 151st Infantry, Indiana Army National Guard arrived in the country in December of that year. The Indiana Rangers were assigned reconnaissance and intelligence-gathering missions. Operating deep in enemy territory, Ranger patrols engaged enemy units while conducting raids, ambushes and surveillance missions. "Delta Company" achieved an impressive combat record; unit members earned 510 medals for valor and service



I said "as far as I know" for a reason. Secondly, while the units were mobilzed in 1968, you've only shown that the one division went from Indiana in 1968... not a lot out of a 10 year military action, no?

And Bush wasn't going anywhere after training on an aircraft they weren't using any more by the time he learned to fly it... 

Good try, though.


----------



## manu1959 (Sep 18, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> Sorry I'm not as intelligent as you. Because, you know, you are a real Bright Spark...



nah i am a red state boy....yall keep insulting me trying to get me to be a blue state guy....btw ...how is that working out for all yall


----------



## manu1959 (Sep 18, 2006)

jillian said:


> I said "as far as I know" for a reason. Secondly, while the units were mobilzed in 1968, you've only shown that the one division went from Indiana in 1968... not a lot out of a 10 year military action, no?
> 
> And Bush wasn't going anywhere after training on an aircraft they weren't using any more by the time he learned to fly it...
> 
> Good try, though.



as far as i know you were fucking wrong....so to claim that bush dodged service in vietnam by joining the national guard beacuse "as far as you knew" the national guard was not deployed to vietnam is wrong wrong wrong....

good try though.


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 18, 2006)

manu1959 said:


> nah i am a red state boy....yall keep insulting me trying to get me to be a blue state guy....btw ...how is that working out for all yall



The only one who starts insults around here is you (well, towards me anyway). Go figure...a Red Stater insulting somebody...who'da thunk it! BTW, I'm a no state boy


----------



## manu1959 (Sep 18, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> The only one who starts insults around here is you (well, towards me anyway). Go figure...a Red Stater insulting somebody...who'da thunk it! BTW, I'm a no state boy




you are such a liar.....my first post was to provide jillian a link to National Guard deployment in vietnam....and you jump in and ask me if i know what "as far as i know means".....

accuse others of what you yourself are guility...


----------



## jillian (Sep 18, 2006)

manu1959 said:


> as far as i know you were fucking wrong....so to claim that bush dodged service in vietnam by joining the national guard beacuse "as far as you knew" the national guard was not deployed to vietnam is wrong wrong wrong....
> 
> good try though.





I do believe I struck a nerve. I don't think I used the word "dodge", though you guys love using it as regards Clinton having a student deferrment which was totally legitimate as was Bush not wanting to go. S'okay, though... I'm used to up being down and down being up and people being dissed who really served (like Kerry, Murtha, Kleland) and people like Bush and Cheney being held up as paradigms of patriotism when Bush didn't even finish his military service because he didn't take his physical (for whatever reason) and Cheney had 5 (count 'em) deferrments cause he wanted to keep his butt out of harm's way (again, not that I blame him). :cof: 

Laterz... have to go get my boy.


----------



## jillian (Sep 18, 2006)

manu1959 said:


> you are such a liar.....my first post was to provide jillian a link to National Guard deployment in vietnam....and you jump in and ask me if i know what "as far as i know means".....
> 
> accuse others of what you yourself are guility...



where's the lie in his post? just curious...


----------



## Avatar4321 (Sep 18, 2006)

jillian said:


> The national guard didn't get deployed to Vietnam as far as I'm aware because we had a draft. National guard was where people went who didn't want to go. I don't blame him, I'd have done the same, but don't make it like he volunteered and then dis people like Kerry who really did.



Um he did volunteer to go to Vietnam. I diss Kerry not for volunteering but for lying about the troops when he got home and meeting with the enemy. His lies were used as propaganda for the North Vietnamese.

As for Bush volunteering. http://opiniontimes.blogspot.com/2004/09/bush-volunteered-for-vietnam.html

All it takes is about a two second search and you can find numerous references to President Bush volunteering. But you dont care about that. It doesnt matter how many times we prove you guys wrong on the national guard issue you still continue to give us BS.


----------



## jillian (Sep 18, 2006)

Avatar4321 said:


> Um he did volunteer to go to Vietnam. I diss Kerry not for volunteering but for lying about the troops when he got home and meeting with the enemy. His lies were used as propaganda for the North Vietnamese.
> 
> As for Bush volunteering. http://opiniontimes.blogspot.com/2004/09/bush-volunteered-for-vietnam.html
> 
> All it takes is about a two second search and you can find numerous references to President Bush volunteering. But you dont care about that. It doesnt matter how many times we prove you guys wrong on the national guard issue you still continue to give us BS.




I don't care how many right-wing bloggers spout untruths... no matter how many times a lie is repeated... it's still a lie. 

How's this? Bush didn't have enough flight hours because he stopped his training when he failed to take his physical.... a million dollars worth of flight training down the drain.

And Kerry never lied. He may have been misinformed by some of the winter soldiers ABOUT SOME THINGS, he didn't lie about what the leadership was doing.


----------



## manu1959 (Sep 18, 2006)

jillian said:


> where's the lie in his post? just curious...



there are no lies in the post you quote


----------



## jillian (Sep 18, 2006)

manu1959 said:


> there are no lies in the post you quote



There weren't lies in any of his posts. You might not agree with him, but there wasn't anything that wasn't truthful. Sorry.


----------



## manu1959 (Sep 18, 2006)

jillian said:


> There weren't lies in any of his posts. You might not agree with him, but there wasn't anything that wasn't truthful. Sorry.



simply not true. and for the reason i stated.

remember.......no matter how many times a lie is repeated... it's still a lie.


----------



## jillian (Sep 18, 2006)

manu1959 said:


> simply not true. and for the reason i stated.



And I pointed out how weak that link was, didn't I? One division sent over in the '60's out of a 10 year war. People begged for spots in the guard so they wouldn't have to go in country.


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 18, 2006)

Avatar4321 said:


> Um he did volunteer to go to Vietnam. I diss Kerry not for volunteering but for lying about the troops when he got home and meeting with the enemy. His lies were used as propaganda for the North Vietnamese.
> 
> As for Bush volunteering. http://opiniontimes.blogspot.com/2004/09/bush-volunteered-for-vietnam.html
> 
> All it takes is about a two second search and you can find numerous references to President Bush volunteering. But you dont care about that. It doesnt matter how many times we prove you guys wrong on the national guard issue you still continue to give us BS.



Note I asked for a credible link. And even if he volunteered, the cynic in me says he knew full-well he didn't have enough flight hours to go on the mission.


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 18, 2006)

manu1959 said:


> you are such a liar.....my first post was to provide jillian a link to National Guard deployment in vietnam....and you jump in and ask me if i know what "as far as i know means".....
> 
> accuse others of what you yourself are guility...



You called me stupid. I said no such thing to you.


----------



## trobinett (Sep 18, 2006)

jillian said:


> I don't care how many right-wing bloggers spout untruths... no matter how many times a lie is repeated... it's still a lie.
> 
> How's this? Bush didn't have enough flight hours because he stopped his training when he failed to take his physical.... a million dollars worth of flight training down the drain.
> 
> And Kerry never lied. He may have been misinformed by some of the winter soldiers ABOUT SOME THINGS, he didn't lie about what the leadership was doing.



Hold up there son, that's the SAME BS the Dem's use againts our President.

The President is "misinformed", and he lives with this for the rest of his life?

Kerry is "misinformed", and he gets a free pass, fuck you......... 

YOU weren't there, YOU weren't a NATIONAL GUARDSMAN, you don't know WHAT they were required to do, or HOW they were required to do it.

Speak of those things you have some background on, or STFU. 

People are responsible for their actions, our President, Kerry, YOU, ME, everyone.

History is still playing out, twenty five years from now, I believe, history will show, President Bush did the RIGHT THING.

Twenty five years from Kerry's little junket siding with OUR enemy in the North, we see what he did WAS FUCKING WRONG.

Show me I'M WRONG.


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 18, 2006)

jillian said:


> I don't care how many right-wing bloggers spout untruths... no matter how many times a lie is repeated... it's still a lie.
> 
> *How's this? Bush didn't have enough flight hours because he stopped his training when he failed to take his physical.... a million dollars worth of flight training down the drain.*
> 
> ....



Need a link for that claim, jillian . As I recall he had completed training and transfered to Alabama before the missed physical.:scratch:


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 18, 2006)

trobinett said:


> YOU weren't there, YOU weren't a NATIONAL GUARDSMAN, you don't know WHAT they were required to do, or HOW they were required to do it.



You weren't there with Kerry, yet you have an opinion on the matter. Go figure...


----------



## Annie (Sep 18, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> You called me stupid. I said no such thing to you.



You threw this out after the jillian post:



			
				jillian said:
			
		

> The national guard didn't get deployed to Vietnam as far as I'm aware because we had a draft. National guard was where people went who didn't want to go. I don't blame him, I'd have done the same, but don't make it like he volunteered and then dis people like Kerry who really did.






Quote:


			
				Manu said:
			
		

> Originally Posted by manu1959 View Post
> how would you like your crow prepared.............
> 
> http://www.1800goguard.com/whatisthe...y_vietnam.html
> ...


You jump in, forgetting the question mark in the second case, then try to change the subject, by throwing in another question for Avatar:


			
				Grump said:
			
		

> You do know what the words "As far as I'm aware" mean, right? That aside, what does that have to do with Dubya.
> 
> 
> Avatar
> If you can find me a credible link that shows Dubya volunteered to go, I'll certainly look at the guy in a new light...


----------



## jillian (Sep 18, 2006)

Mr. P said:


> Need a link for that claim, jillian . As I recall he had completed training and transfered to Alabama before the missed physical.:scratch:



He let his flight certification lapse.

But try this... 



> By Matt Kelley
> 
> Updated: 7:53 p.m. ET Sept 7, 2004
> WASHINGTON - President Bush was ranked in the middle of his Air National Guard class and flew more than 336 hours in a fighter jet before letting his pilot status lapse and missing a key readiness drill, according to his flight records belatedly uncovered Tuesday under the Freedom of Information Act.
> ...



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5922174/


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 18, 2006)

Kathianne said:


> You threw this out after the jillian post:
> 
> Quote:
> You jump in, forgetting the question mark in the second case, then try to change the subject, by throwing in another question for Avatar:



Forgetting a question mark is now an insult? And what is wrong with asking the question of another in the same post? Are you some sort of poster police? Either you and Manu are seeing some sort of conspiracy or reading WAY too much into my posts. There was no hidden agenda in there. Jill had a qualifier in her post. She put it there for a reason. Manu either seemed to deliberately ignore it or think it didn't matter. It did matter. That is why she put it there.


----------



## Mr. P (Sep 18, 2006)

jillian said:


> He let his flight certification lapse.
> 
> But try this...
> 
> ...



Based on the link you have no case, let's see ALL the records. I think (could be wrong) Bush released his, did Kerry, even after he said he would, do that?


----------



## Annie (Sep 18, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> Forgetting a question mark is now an insult? And what is wrong with asking the question of another in the same post? Are you some sort of poster police? Either you and Manu are seeing some sort of conspiracy or reading WAY too much into my posts. There was no hidden agenda in there. Jill had a qualifier in her post. She put it there for a reason. Manu either seemed to deliberately ignore it or think it didn't matter. It did matter. That is why she put it there.


Jill is a lawyer and didn't need you to argue her case. BTW, knock off the 'poster police' crap, what I posted was as a member, I wasn't in any way trying to use 'rank' in any way, shape or form.


----------



## nt250 (Sep 18, 2006)

jillian said:


> I don't care how many right-wing bloggers spout untruths... no matter how many times a lie is repeated... it's still a lie.
> 
> How's this? Bush didn't have enough flight hours because he stopped his training when he failed to take his physical.... a million dollars worth of flight training down the drain.
> 
> And Kerry never lied. He may have been misinformed by some of the winter soldiers ABOUT SOME THINGS, he didn't lie about what the leadership was doing.




You are wrong.

Not only did Kerry lie, by April 22, 1971, *when kerry told the whole world that ALL our service members were war criminals who cut off ears, raped,  and rampaged in a manner remniscent of Ghenis Khan, that they did it on a day to day basis with the full awareness of all levels of command, he KNEW it was a lie.*

Kerry is a known, proven liar.  His lies are on tape.  There is no denying that fact.  And when he testified in April of 1971 he KNEW that many of the "witnesses" at Winter Solier were liars, frauds, or imposters.  Nobody claims that atrocities never happened.  But because of John Kerry, too many people want to believe that it happened all the time.  That's a fucking lie.

And he knew it was a lie when he said it.

Do you know what John Kerry did later that same day?  After he "testified" that our soliders were a bunch of murdering barbarians?  He held a press conference with the wives of POW's to advance the views of a member of the Viet Cong on how to end the war.

The man doesn't even qualify as shit.  Shit, at least, is useful.


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 18, 2006)

Kathianne said:


> Jill is a lawyer and didn't need you to argue her case.



But Manu needs you to argue his?



Kathianne said:


> BTW, knock off the 'poster police' crap, what I posted was as a member, I wasn't in any way trying to use 'rank' in any way, shape or form.



Didn't think you were. If you were not a moderator I would have said the same thing. I mean, forgetting a question mark??? Pahleezee...The reason I asked Avatar in the same post was to save time...


----------



## trobinett (Sep 18, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> You weren't there with Kerry, yet you have an opinion on the matter. Go figure...



Go figure what?

Wasn't there?

Have an opinion?

I was there BEFORE Kerry, figure THAT OUT.  Ya don't have to be "in country" to have a sense of the times, and the feelings that were going round.

We laughed out loud at that sorry SOB.

I don't know that I could control myself if I found Kerry and me in a room by ourselves.

Don't PRESUME to know, what others have seen, and been a part of  sir.

I'll NEVER forgive that little rich kid, for betraying his country, and his service.  A complete slim-ball.

Trying to compare our President to kerry is like comparing apples to watermelons.


----------



## Annie (Sep 18, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> But Manu needs you to argue his?


 I posted a round up, this thread is damn long. 





> Didn't think you were. If you were not a moderator I would have said the same thing. I mean, forgetting a question mark??? Pahleezee...The reason I asked Avatar in the same post was to save time...


Hey, I may be wrong, but I seem to remember you playing grammar policeman before? If I am, apology offered, seriously.


----------



## nt250 (Sep 18, 2006)

Kathianne said:


> Jill is a lawyer and didn't need you to argue her case. BTW, knock off the 'poster police' crap, what I posted was as a member, I wasn't in any way trying to use 'rank' in any way, shape or form.




Bullshit.  As long as you have "USMB Staff" in your title, everything you say is as a moderator.


----------



## jillian (Sep 18, 2006)

Kathianne said:


> Jill is a lawyer and didn't need you to argue her case. BTW, knock off the 'poster police' crap, what I posted was as a member, I wasn't in any way trying to use 'rank' in any way, shape or form.



He's one of my very closest friends, Kathianne, and he's known what I do for going on 4 years. Nor was he playing poster police. He was participating in a messageboard and people who agree with each other on certain issues, support each other's positions.


----------



## Annie (Sep 18, 2006)

jillian said:


> He's one of my very closest friends, Kathianne, and he's known what I do for going on 4 years. Nor was he playing poster police. He was participating in a messageboard and people who agree with each other on certain issues, support each other's positions.


Jillian, the 'poster police' was in response to his post, not mine.


----------



## jillian (Sep 18, 2006)

Kathianne said:


> Jillian, the 'poster police' was in response to his post, not mine.




Hmmmmmm.... didn't look that way from what I read. I think I'm doing too many things at once. lol...

But my other point is still valid.


----------



## Annie (Sep 18, 2006)

jillian said:


> Hmmmmmm.... didn't look that way from what I read. I think I'm doing too many things at once. lol...
> 
> But my other point is still valid.


Truly, it was. As for a response to the latter, from both you and Grump, Manu, like you, didn't 'need' my help. I wasn't really 'defending' or backing, rather did a roundup, like I replied to Grump.


----------



## nt250 (Sep 18, 2006)

jillian said:


> He let his flight certification lapse.
> 
> But try this...




Their service is actually very similiar.  Except George W. Bush served longer.

Kerry joined the Navy Reserves in 1966, spent two full years on active duty aboard the USS Gridley, a ship that patrolled Vietnamese waters.  He volunteered for Swift Boat duty at a time when it wasn't all that dangerous.  It's mission changed shortly after he was transferred and it did become very dangerous.  All that is debateable and I'll leave it those who know what they're talking about to argue about his Swift Boat tour and his medals.  But the fact is that Kerry got 5 medals in four months and never needed more than a Band-Aid.  After 2 years and four months he was sent back to the United States.  He spent a few months as a driver for Navy brass in New York, then he requested a transfer to inactive status so he could run for political office.  It was granted.  By 1970 there is no evidence that Kerry ever wore the uniform of the United State Navy again.  He spent 1970 and 1971 as the official spokeman for the Vietnam Veterans Agasint the War.  All during that time, there are numerous pictures and videos of him with long hair, attending anti-war events all over the country.  If he was still fulfilling any Navy Reserve obligations, there is no record of it.  All that is from his own website.

George W. Bush joined the Texas Air National Guard in 1968.  He spent the first two years on full time active duty status learning to be a pilot.  Again, I'll leave the debate about how dangerous it is to learn to fly versus serving on ship during a ground war up to those who know what they're talking about.  Bush, too, requested a transfer.  In early 1972 he requested a transfer to the Alabama Guard so that he could work on a political campaign. His request was denied.  He went anyway. In July of 1972 he failed to take a required physical and was grounded as a pilot.  There is no record of his reporting for duty during the entire summer 1972.  In September of 1972 he requested a transfer to a different unit in Alabama and that request was granted, but there is no clear evidence that he actually ever reported there.
Between November of 1972 and May 1973, Bush earned enough points to keep his standing. 

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a39ea05224b3e.htm "On October 1, 1973, First Lieutenant George W. Bush received an early honorable discharge so that he could attend Harvard Business School. He was credited with five years, four months and five days of service toward his six-year service obligation. "




Both men signed up for 6 year committments.  Neither served a full 6 years.  Kerry was out of the Navy Reserves after less than 4 years.  Bush was in the National Guard for about 5 1/2 years.

Nobody knows why Kerry did not receive his honorable discharge until 1978.


----------



## manu1959 (Sep 18, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> You called me stupid. I said no such thing to you.



believe what you will but your response to my link to the national guard serving in Vietnam would prove that you are once again claiming less than the truth.

because if your quote You do know what the words "As far as I'm aware" mean, right?" from post 214 is not an insult then thank you for the compliment for correcting your friend's knowledge of the fact that george bush did volunteer for service in Vietnam


----------



## Gunny (Sep 18, 2006)

jillian said:


> The national guard didn't get deployed to Vietnam as far as I'm aware because we had a draft. National guard was where people went who didn't want to go. I don't blame him, I'd have done the same, but don't make it like he volunteered and then dis people like Kerry who really did.



You would be incorrect.  Several states' National Guard were deployed to Vietnam.  Look it up.


----------



## manu1959 (Sep 18, 2006)

GunnyL said:


> You would be incorrect.  Several states' National Guard were deployed to Vietnam.  Look it up.



LOL....her knight in shinning armor will be by shortly to ask you if you know what "as far as i know means" then claim he wasn't insulting you and ask you what your post has to do with GWB's service in the NG....


----------



## Gunny (Sep 18, 2006)

jillian said:


> I said "as far as I know" for a reason. Secondly, while the units were mobilzed in 1968, you've only shown that the one division went from Indiana in 1968... not a lot out of a 10 year military action, no?
> 
> Combat troops were first deployed to Vietnam in 1965.  Any military previous to that were advisors, and no real military strength was in country prior to that.
> 
> ...



http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/history/q0185.shtml

Feel free to educate then correct yourself at your leisure.


----------



## Gunny (Sep 18, 2006)

manu1959 said:


> LOL....her knight in shinning armor will be by shortly to ask you if you know what "as far as i know means" then claim he wasn't insulting you and ask you what your post has to do with GWB's service in the NG....




I anticipated as much, so I decided if they can't educate themselves, I'd at least bring it to them.


----------



## Gunny (Sep 18, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> You weren't there with Kerry, yet you have an opinion on the matter. Go figure...



One doesn't have to be "there with Kerry" to have a professional opinion of his four-month stint in Vietnam.  

He's either a liar, or he was a shitty officer and derelict in his duty to immediately report crimes to the next higher up in the chain of command.  That in itself, makes one complicit in the crime per the UCMJ.

My opinion is he's the former.  A liar.  He used the Vietnam war and every war crimes cliche the left spouted to jumpstart a fledgling political career.  

Is falsley accusing others of wrongdoing that could adversely impact their lives a virtue?  Oh, I fogot my audience.  YOu libs have tried to make a living off that MO, haven't you?


----------



## manu1959 (Sep 18, 2006)

Bullypulpit said:


> Anbar province in Iraq is, for all intents and purposes, no longer under US control. Iraq's Prime Minister, you know the one we installed, is sucking up to Iran's bat-shit crazy President. And things were going so well...



So you want anbar province to be under US control?! I thought you wanted the US out of Iraq?.....i know, i know you were for the war before you were against it...


----------



## nt250 (Sep 18, 2006)

GunnyL said:


> One doesn't have to be "there with Kerry" to have a professional opinion of his four-month stint in Vietnam.
> 
> He's either a liar, or he was a shitty officer and derelict in his duty to immediately report crimes to the next higher up in the chain of command.  That in itself, makes one complicit in the crime per the UCMJ.
> 
> ...



Actually, Kerry is both. He was a shitty officer and he's a liar.

http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/index.php

Kerry's claims of his own wrong doing is pretty much limited to his description of "free fire" zones.  There are a lot of different opinions about that.  The link above has some info on it.

Kerry's lies are well documented.


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 19, 2006)

trobinett said:


> Go figure what?
> Wasn't there?
> Have an opinion?
> I was there BEFORE Kerry, figure THAT OUT.  Ya don't have to be "in country" to have a sense of the times, and the feelings that were going round.
> ...



I don't care if you were there before, during or after Kerry. I'm only interested if you were there WITH HIM. That was your criterion when chastising Jillian about her opinion regarding Bush. If you served on a swift boat or out on the ocean with Kerry I stand corrected.

I don't presume ANYTHING with what you have seen. Never have, never did. I agree re Kerry and Bush being apples and watermelons. I'd even go as far to say both are not worth crap...


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 19, 2006)

Kathianne said:


> I posted a round up, this thread is damn long. Hey, I may be wrong, but I seem to remember you playing grammar policeman before? If I am, apology offered, seriously.



I once had a go at Sitarro when he scolded somebody for bad grammar when is own post had mistakes. I was pointing out the irony to him. I also told Pale I had a scar over my left eye when he accused me of trying to be a "scarry guy". The first instance doesn't fit the bill, and the second was an attempt at humour. I have never seriously had a go at somebody who does typos unless they have a crack at me first. In fact, people picking on typos is one of my pet peeves. Posting should be fun...


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 19, 2006)

manu1959 said:


> believe what you will but your response to my link to the national guard serving in Vietnam would prove that you are once again claiming less than the truth.
> 
> because if your quote You do know what the words "As far as I'm aware" mean, right?" from post 214 is not an insult then thank you for the compliment for correcting your friend's knowledge of the fact that george bush did volunteer for service in Vietnam



Why would it be an insult or a compliment? I was pointing out Jillian's qualifier, which you either ignored or didn't see. If you didn't see it mea culpa, if you did, I was pointing it out. If you think that is an insult, your skin is bordering on the transparent.


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 19, 2006)

GunnyL said:


> One doesn't have to be "there with Kerry" to have a professional opinion of his four-month stint in Vietnam.



But apparently one doesn't have to apply the same test re Bush, which was Trobinet's point ...as for a four month stint, two things: 1) It was four months longer than Bush; 2) Somebody said in another post that Kerry spent two years on boats in Vietnamese waters. That doesn't count as Viet Nam? So those navy personal who served in the Bay of Tonkin etc during the time can no longer call themselves vets of the Viet Nam war?



GunnyL said:


> He's either a liar, or he was a shitty officer and derelict in his duty to immediately report crimes to the next higher up in the chain of command.  That in itself, makes one complicit in the crime per the UCMJ.
> My opinion is he's the former.  A liar.  He used the Vietnam war and every war crimes cliche the left spouted to jumpstart a fledgling political career.
> Is falsley accusing others of wrongdoing that could adversely impact their lives a virtue?  Oh, I fogot my audience.  YOu libs have tried to make a living off that MO, haven't you?



He was never charged with anything, which suggests you are wrong. I don't think he did what he did in an attempt to kick-start his political career, I think he did it out of a genuine concern not to see any more servicemen killed over there in a war the US was never going to win. As for falsely accusing people of things, watch Hannity. Coulter and O'Reilly - libs don't have a monopoly on false accusations or innuendo.


----------



## CSM (Sep 19, 2006)

Just so you know:

http://www.ngb.army.mil/About/default.aspx

The National Guard called up about 23,000 for active duty and approximately  9,000 served in country during Vietnam.


----------



## trobinett (Sep 19, 2006)

DR Grump posts:



> But apparently one doesn't have to apply the same test re Bush, which was Trobinet's point ...as for a four month stint, two things: 1) It was four months longer than Bush; 2) Somebody said in another post that Kerry spent two years on boats in Vietnamese waters. That doesn't count as Viet Nam? So those navy personal who served in the Bay of Tonkin etc during the time can no longer call themselves vets of the Viet Nam war?



No Grump, MY point was that Kerry was, and IS a traitor.  He ALLOWED his self to be USED by our enemy, AGAINTS our soldiers.  He made his bed, now he has to sleep in it, no amount of time, nor spin can change what he did.

If you want to spin the time that Kerry spent in 'nam's territorial waters as time Kerry spent in harms way, its ok by me, I don't agree, and most combat troops wouldn't agree either.  How far does the left want to push this dead carcass?

Our President has never tried to present his military service for anymore than it was.  The same can not be said for Kerry, PERIOD.


----------



## Abbey Normal (Sep 19, 2006)

trobinett said:


> DR Grump posts:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Kerry's entire tour of duty in Viet Nam was from 12/1/68 until 4/11/69.


----------



## archangel (Sep 19, 2006)

Abbey Normal said:


> Kerry's entire tour of duty in Viet Nam was from 12/1/68 until 4/11/69.




damn those pencils and paper cuts!


----------



## Gunny (Sep 19, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> But apparently one doesn't have to apply the same test re Bush, which was Trobinet's point ...as for a four month stint, two things: 1) It was four months longer than Bush; 2) Somebody said in another post that Kerry spent two years on boats in Vietnamese waters. That doesn't count as Viet Nam? So those navy personal who served in the Bay of Tonkin etc during the time can no longer call themselves vets of the Viet Nam war?
> 
> He was never charged with anything, which suggests you are wrong. I don't think he did what he did in an attempt to kick-start his political career, I think he did it out of a genuine concern not to see any more servicemen killed over there in a war the US was never going to win. As for falsely accusing people of things, watch Hannity. Coulter and O'Reilly - libs don't have a monopoly on false accusations or innuendo.



Each is held accountable for their actions; which, are not comparable.  Neither are the results of their actions.  If Bush screwed anyone ducking a pysical, he screwed himself.  Kerry on the other hand tried to screw every military vet who served in Vietnam in and/or around him.

The fact that Kerry was not charged with anything does not suggest I am wrong.  It suggests that he lied to Congress.  The fact is, he testified before Congress concerning crimes HE personally witnessed; yet, there is no documentation existing that suggests he attempted to do anything about any crimes committed in his presence as the UCMJ dictates.

In the political atmosphere of the day, no one was going to try and charge him with anything, but it would have been as simple as what I have posted in this and my previous thread.  He's guilty of one or the other.  Each spells "scumbag."    

Sell the "genuine concern" BS to someone willing to believe it.  He's a political hack and liar.


----------



## Annie (Sep 19, 2006)

GunnyL said:


> Each is held accountable for their actions; which, are not comparable.  Neither are the results of their actions.  If Bush screwed anyone ducking a pysical, he screwed himself.  Kerry on the other hand tried to screw every military vet who served in Vietnam in and/or around him.
> 
> The fact that Kerry was not charged with anything does not suggest I am wrong.  It suggests that he lied to Congress.  The fact is, he testified before Congress concerning crimes HE personally witnessed; yet, there is no documentation existing that suggests he attempted to do anything about any crimes committed in his presence as the UCMJ dictates.
> 
> ...



You said it, wish I could do more:

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to GunnyL again.


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 19, 2006)

GunnyL said:


> Kerry on the other hand tried to screw every military vet who served in Vietnam in and/or around him.



Total crap. He never accused the military as a whole. I saw his evidence in front of congress.



GunnyL said:


> The fact is, he testified before Congress concerning crimes HE personally witnessed; yet, there is no documentation existing that suggests he attempted to do anything about any crimes committed in his presence as the UCMJ dictates.



If he saw it, he should have done something, true.



GunnyL said:


> In the political atmosphere of the day, no one was going to try and charge him with anything, but it would have been as simple as what I have posted in this and my previous thread.  He's guilty of one or the other.  Each spells "scumbag.



Oh, so now we have the "political atmosphere" as a reason? You could argue the same about _some_ of what he said/alleged. I find Bush hiding behind his daddy's skirt the action of a scumbag, too. Go figure.



GunnyL said:


> Sell the "genuine concern" BS to someone willing to believe it.  He's a political hack and liar.[/QUOTE?]
> 
> Unless you have spoken to him personally, all you have is your opinion, which you are certainly entitled to.


----------



## Gunny (Sep 19, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> Total crap. He never accused the military as a whole. I saw his evidence in front of congress.
> 
> The fact that he portrayed war crimes as the rule rather than the exception IS an indictment against the military as a whole.
> 
> ...


----------



## nt250 (Sep 19, 2006)

Dr Grump said:


> I don't care if you were there before, during or after Kerry. I'm only interested if you were there WITH HIM. That was your criterion when chastising Jillian about her opinion regarding Bush. If you served on a swift boat or out on the ocean with Kerry I stand corrected.
> 
> I don't presume ANYTHING with what you have seen. Never have, never did. I agree re Kerry and Bush being apples and watermelons. I'd even go as far to say both are not worth crap...



Here's the problem I have with the whole Bush/Kerry military service argument:

Bush, who never made his service an issue, is always judged by much tougher standards than Kerry, who did make it an issue.  Kerry based his whole campaign on it.  But nobody in the media, or on the left, ever scrutinized Kerry's record to the same extent that Bush's record was examined.

Bush signed the 180 and all his records were released long before the election of 2004.  Kerry refused to sign the 180 and it was a known fact that there were at least 100 pages of his record that were not made public.  When challenged, which was rare, Kerry claimed he would sign it.  But never did sign it during the campaign.  He apparently did sign it in 2005 and nothing outrageous was found, like the speculation that he received a dishonorable discharge which was reviewed and upgraded to an honorable discharge in 1978.

But consider this:  we know that George W. Bush had a dentists appointment on a Saturday in Alabama, but nobody knows why John Kerry did not get an honorable discharge from the Navy Reserves until 1978, a full 6 years after his first tour should have ended.  A tour that he never completed.  He never re-upped.  By 1970 Kerry was no longer in the Navy, yet his official disharge took 8 more years.

It's the contrast in coverage of the two men.  The media poured over every document they could find about Bush's Guard service.  But nobody on the left (which includes the media) cared that Kerry refused to release his records, and nobody asked about all the contradictions that are in the records he did release.

The Swiftees were treated like scum.  Nightline, one of the best news programs on television, sent a team of reporters to Vietnam to interview old men about Kerry's "tour of duty" and used those interviews to try and make John O'Neil look bad.  He wiped the floor with Ted Koppel.

The election of 2004 showed the mainstream media for the biased, liberal, tool it is.  Just in it's blatantly one sided coverage of the two candidates military service alone.


----------



## 1549 (Sep 20, 2006)

> He's a political hack and liar.



Wednesday is not yet old, but word out of Iraq is that another 28 people have been killed in Baghdad bombings.  Bush's needless invasion of Iraq, the ill planned occupation and the consequences of it all dwarf your claims of "politcal hackery".


----------



## trobinett (Sep 20, 2006)

1549 said:


> Wednesday is not yet old, but word out of Iraq is that another 28 people have been killed in Baghdad bombings.  Bush's needless invasion of Iraq, the ill planned occupation and the consequences of it all dwarf your claims of "politcal hackery".



1549, have you ever heard the term "deflection"?


----------



## Avatar4321 (Sep 20, 2006)

1549 said:


> Wednesday is not yet old, but word out of Iraq is that another 28 people have been killed in Baghdad bombings.  Bush's needless invasion of Iraq, the ill planned occupation and the consequences of it all dwarf your claims of "politcal hackery".



by what standards was the invasion needless and the occupation ill planned? It looks pretty good to me and if you dont think Saddam needed to be taken out then I dont know who does.


----------



## 1549 (Sep 20, 2006)

Avatar4321 said:


> by what standards was the invasion needless and the occupation ill planned? It looks pretty good to me and if you dont think Saddam needed to be taken out then I dont know who does.



-Castro is a terrible man and has done horrible things to his people, he is still in power.
-China has gone through terrible dictators, we did not invade China...and they have since opened up their economic system and become a trade partner.
-The USSR killed more of its citizens than Saddam Hussein could have dreamed of.  The USSR died with time, not by the barrel of a US gun.

Saddam Hussein was a bad man, the world is full of them.  You and I both know that if Saddam Hussein was the ruthless dictator of a random Southern Pacific nation he would still be in power today.  He was overthrown primarily because he is a risk to our oil supplies.  Others have suggested that this administration is enfatuated with dominating the middle east and its wealthy black gold...I think this theory takes it too far.

In regards to WMD's: Outside of the conservative blogosphere, there were none.  A government panel said the intelligence was: "dead wrong" and suggested sweeping changes to prevent further intel failures.  The best our chief weapons inspector could come up with: "Distant technical analysts mistakenly identified evidence and drew incorrect conclusions".  The bloggers are looking for anything to suggest the existence of weapons, but our government learned of their mistake in 2003.  It is not an issue of "damn we thought Saddam had them...maybe they were taken away"...US weapons inspectors found upon further review that Saddam was not even capable of making them.  The report can only conclude that it is something Saddam may have pursued if UN sanctions were lifted.

The bad intelligence leads to new questions.  Was our intel community so gung-ho for war that they set Bush to fail?  Perhaps they knowingly jumped to conclusions because they watned to see the Iraq war.  Maybe it was the other way around?  The intel community could have been conservative in their estimates, but Bush was anxious for war and decided to roll with it.  Either way, I do not think that Bush or the intelligence community were too certain about Iraq's WMD's.  But, they knew the public would buy into it.  When thousands of lives are going to be lost...you should be 100% certain the cause is righteous.

That is why the invasion was needless.  Here is why the occupation was ill planned:

Saddam Hussein is a Sunni muslim.  The Sunni's are a minority in Iraq, they make up 25-35% of the population.  The shi'ites are the majority, they make up 60-70% of the population.  Under most natural circumstances, wealth and power is balanced across a country or (for better or worse) the majority has the edge in wealth/power.  In a few rare cases, a minority group will take control of a nation: this is what happened in Iraq.

When a minority group is more wealthy and more powerful than the majority, disaster awaits.  Violence may manifest itself while the minority is in power or it could be held off until the minority is toppled.  Any country that has an economic dominant minority is more or less a barrel of gun powder.  When we invaded Iraq, we threw a match into that barrel.  In the past, the ensuing violence has resulted in mass genocide of the minorities.  Unfortunately, this is not a rare phenomen.  Mass killings (though not always on a genocidal level) and civil war have followed the fall of nearly every single economic dominant minority in modern history.  It almost seems to be human nature--perhaps a revenge complex.

To think Iraq could go through a natural transition into a democracy is laughable.  If the evolution of nations is viewed as chemistry, the U.S. is trying to pour vinegar into baking soda without creating the reaction.  It is not going to work.  We are seeing the death toll of sectarian violence climb by the hour.  Hopefully the presence of our troops will prevent anything on the scale of genocide, but a civil war may be inevitable.  A civil war means that the new government will be completely worthless (what can it do if its own people are at war with eachother?) and it means we will be tied down for years to come.  

Sorry for the length of this post.


----------



## trobinett (Sep 20, 2006)

1549 said:


> -Castro is a terrible man and has done horrible things to his people, he is still in power.
> -China has gone through terrible dictators, we did not invade China...and they have since opened up their economic system and become a trade partner.
> -The USSR killed more of its citizens than Saddam Hussein could have dreamed of.  The USSR died with time, not by the barrel of a US gun.
> 
> ...



Hey, no worries about the length mate.  The "meat and potatoes" of the post though is WITHOUT merit.

Things change, shit happens, people die, rivers jump their banks,  ME countries become democracies, it could happen.  We just gave the bastards a shove.

So whats wrong with a civil war, it cleared the air around these parts.  Might do the same thing for the wackos in Iraq.

ALL governments are worthless, some more than others, whats your point?

Hell, if our military wasn't there, they'd be somewhere else.  Might as well get some oil for our trouble.:dev1:


----------



## jillian (Sep 20, 2006)

trobinett said:


> Hey, no worries about the length mate.  The "meat and potatoes" of the post though is WITHOUT merit.
> 
> Things change, shit happens, people die, rivers jump their banks,  ME countries become democracies, it could happen.  We just gave the bastards a shove.
> 
> ...



I don't care if they have their civil war, but it's not our military's responsibility to be in the middle of it. Why should their lives be risked because shi'ites and sunnis can't get it together?


----------



## trobinett (Sep 20, 2006)

jillian said:


> I don't care if they have their civil war, but it's not our military's responsibility to be in the middle of it. Why should their lives be risked because shi'ites and sunnis can't get it together?



Their WON'T be a civil war Jillian, not as long as our military is there, got it?

Of course its our responsibility, we shoved them, we want to see how they land.

If your in the military, your life is at risk, no one ever told you that?

Have another "hit" jillian.:bong420:


----------



## Gunny (Sep 20, 2006)

1549 said:


> Wednesday is not yet old, but word out of Iraq is that another 28 people have been killed in Baghdad bombings.  Bush's needless invasion of Iraq, the ill planned occupation and the consequences of it all dwarf your claims of "politcal hackery".



BR-549, aside from you being a mindless parrot for any left-wing propaganda, want to try and back any of your hackery with some FACTS?

_Needless_

Saddam was a tyrant.  He murdered his own people and the only thing that kept him from murdering the people of other Nations was the US.  His invasion of both Iran and Kuwait will suffice as evidence.

Saddam used chemical weapons on Iranians and Kurds.  This shows posession, intent and the willingness to use WMDs.  

If he in fact didn't have any WMDs at the time we invaded, then he was a big f-ing fool for acting as if he did for 13 years and giving inspectors the run-around, that led everyone, including most of you nitwit, side-switching libs to believe Saddam's posession of WMDs was a forgone conclusion.

But I don't believe you thought he had them because President Bush said so.  That would be too easy.  You believed it because President Clinton basically said the same thing, and y'all'd believe that MFer if he told you the sky was yellow. 

All you libs do is Monday morning quarterback.  You spout of crap just to be Bush-hating, simple as that.  Any logical-thinking person would know Saddam posessed and used WMDs, manufactured them AFTER the First Gulf War, and he surely wasn't going to abandon pursuing them just because the UN and the US said so.  What other UN Resolution did he adhere to?  

Saddam supported terrorism.  I don't CARE what you call it.  al Qaeda, Hezbolla, Fatwa ... who gives a rickety-rat's ass?  They're ALL scumbags and murderers and if he supported one, he supported them all.

You libs bitch about getting shaken down at the airports, well how does being snatched off the street and fed feet first into a tree shredder sound?  Just for the amusement of his sick whelps?  Yeah, you got it tough.

How'd you like to be burned alive or beheaded by Saddam's fleeing army just because you happened to be a Kuwaiti?  

How'd you like to deploy for 6 months only for it to turn into 13 months just because that nimrod decided to invade another nation to steal its oil?  Then spend six months at a whack five more times in 9 years babysitting his border?  That didn't cost the AMerican taxpayers much, did it?  

Of course not.  Becuase your boy BIllybob sent us over with half our shit broken and half the ammunition and supplies we should have had because he was too busy making the numbers in his ledger even out.

I guess what I'm really trying to say here is shut the fuck up and go educate yourself.  When you posess even a modicum of knowledge on the topic, THEN get back to me.


----------



## jillian (Sep 20, 2006)

trobinett said:


> Their WON'T be a civil war Jillian, not as long as our military is there, got it?
> 
> Of course its our responsibility, we shoved them, we want to see how they land.
> 
> ...



There already IS the start of a civil war. And it isn't our job to stop it even if we could, although we destabilized the country enough for it to happen.



> Sunnis, once dominant under Saddam Hussein, are now the core of an insurgency against the Shi'ite-led government. Maliki, hoping to defuse the rebellion, has included Sunnis in his national unity government.
> 
> But many Sunnis say Shi'ite militia operating within police forces are partly responsible for a wave of killings that have seen victims discovered bound, tortured, shot and dumped in the streets of Baghdad every day.
> 
> ...



http://www.itv.com/news/index_5d6af660b42b2022541fba5979721270.html

Better lay off that kool aid, trob... it clogs the arteries in the brain.


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 20, 2006)

GunnyL said:


> When you posess even a modicum of knowledge on the topic, THEN get back to me.



You first. You are just a Bush apologist...


----------



## manu1959 (Sep 20, 2006)

jillian said:


> There already IS the start of a civil war. And it isn't our job to stop it even if we could, although we destabilized the country enough for it to happen.
> 
> http://www.itv.com/news/index_5d6af660b42b2022541fba5979721270.html
> 
> Better lay off that kool aid, trob... it clogs the arteries in the brain.



just so i am clear for later...

dafur none of our business
somalia
east timor
israel
congo
name your location....NONE OF OUR BUSINESS?


----------



## Dr Grump (Sep 20, 2006)

manu1959 said:


> just so i am clear for later...
> 
> dafur none of our business
> somalia
> ...



You can add Iran and China to that list if you like...


----------



## LuvRPgrl (Sep 21, 2006)

Bullypulpit said:


> Anbar province in Iraq is, for all intents and purposes, no longer under US control. Iraq's Prime Minister, you know the one we installed, is sucking up to Iran's bat-shit crazy President. And things were going so well...



We installed? Is that what all those purple fingers were all about?

Uh, news alert. Circa 1770's, General George Washington's army is discouraged, and seems defeated. Beat back, and losing control of over 80% of the colonies, Britian is pounding its chest, and gleefully proclaiming victory.
The winter at Valley Forge appears to be nothing more than a moving cemetary for the Yankee troops. All is lost, no hope left. Follow the democrats, turn and burn, retreat and defeat.

Uh, how did that one turn out, ol BULLY?


----------



## LuvRPgrl (Sep 21, 2006)

1549 said:


> -Castro is a terrible man and has done horrible things to his people, he is still in power..


We did try to take him out. Unfortunately, JFK really blew that one.
-





1549 said:


> -China has gone through terrible dictators, we did not invade China...and they have since opened up their economic system and become a trade partner..


We forced them into better human rights conditions by refusing to allow them into the WTO until they submitted to our demands.


1549 said:


> --The USSR killed more of its citizens than Saddam Hussein could have dreamed of.  The USSR died with time, not by the barrel of a US gun..


Actually it did, they barrels were nukes. 



1549 said:


> -Saddam Hussein was a bad man, the world is full of them.  You and I both know that if Saddam Hussein was the ruthless dictator of a random Southern Pacific nation he would still be in power today.  He was overthrown primarily because he is a risk to our oil supplies. .


wrong. Go read and study when it became official US policy for regime change in Iraq. It will also shed light on the fact that the timing had nothing to do with oil. IN fact, oil in the ME is much less a concern to our national security than most would think. The country we get most of our oil from isnt even in the ME. Try and guess who it is.



1549 said:


> -Others have suggested that this administration is enfatuated with dominating the middle east and its wealthy black gold...I think this theory takes it too far..


Their suggestions are wrong, and have absolutely no merit in evidence, or truth. Mere suggestions or accusations mean nothing without substance to back them.



1549 said:


> -In regards to WMD's: Outside of the conservative blogosphere, there were none..


wrong again. I guess the former top general of Saddam who emphatically stated he saw them shipped to Syria, is to be ignored? Thereis other hard evidence to show your claim to be in error.



1549 said:


> -A government panel said the intelligence was: "dead wrong" and suggested sweeping changes to prevent further intel failures..


Ewww, a govt panel. Those panels are usually wrong. Just like the whiz kids of Macnamra in the Kennedy admin. whose panel made some stark and dizzingly bad judgement calls in Vietnam. Some of their decisions included policies that led to the M16 massive failures in combat. Up to half of the guns had stopped working while in combat and led to many deaths.



1549 said:


> -The best our chief weapons inspector could come up with: "Distant technical analysts mistakenly identified evidence and drew incorrect conclusions". .


Oh, were those the inspectors that werent allowed to enter certain areas until saddams men were done "preparing" it for days? Those inspectors were pure boneheads.



1549 said:


> -The bloggers are looking for anything to suggest the existence of weapons, but our government learned of their mistake in 2003.  It is not an issue of "damn we thought Saddam had them...maybe they were taken away"...US weapons inspectors found upon further review that Saddam was not even capable of making them.  The report can only conclude that it is something Saddam may have pursued if UN sanctions were lifted..


How could UN sanctions (which were being skirted anyways by France, German and Russia, in essence, they didnt exist) but even if they did, how would that prevent saddam from maintaining and creating more weapons?



1549 said:


> -The bad intelligence leads to new questions.  Was our intel community so gung-ho for war that they set Bush to fail?  Perhaps they knowingly jumped to conclusions because they watned to see the Iraq war. .


Maybe you are jumping to conclusions



1549 said:


> -Maybe it was the other way around?.


 You seem confused here.!!


1549 said:


> - The intel community could have been conservative in their estimates, but Bush was anxious for war and decided to roll with it..


Or maybe neither is true. Since you arent even certain which you believe, its obvious there is no evidence to support either, hence, why even bring it up? 


1549 said:


> -Either way, I do not think that Bush or the intelligence community were too certain about Iraq's WMD's..


Knowledge of saddams possesions of weapons preceded the Bush Admin.
  But, they knew the public would buy into it..[/QUOTE]
You mean the clintons knew the public would buy into it? They claimed he had them. Hillary, Kerry, and a long list of Dems claimed he had them LONG before President Bush provided it as JUST ONE OF THE MANY reasons to attain regime change. Or have you convientally forgotten the many speeches made by them.


1549 said:


> -When thousands of lives are going to be lost...you should be 100% certain the cause is righteous..


thousands of lives had already been lost prior to invading Iraq. Of course the cause is rightous.



1549 said:


> -That is why the invasion was needless.  Here is why the occupation was ill planned:.


Nope, it wasnt needless. Having Iraq in its current state is still much better than under saddam. Kurds are placing ads in America, THANKING us for ousting saddam. Maybe you havent seen them.



1549 said:


> -Saddam Hussein is a Sunni muslim.  The Sunni's are a minority in Iraq, they make up 25-35% of the population.  The shi'ites are the majority, they make up 60-70% of the population.  Under most natural circumstances, wealth and power is balanced across a country or (for better or worse) the majority has the edge in wealth/power. .


WRONG. The minority in a country will hold and control most of the wealth. How many Bill Gates are there?something like over 80 percent of our tax revenues are paid by less than 5 percent of our population. 


1549 said:


> -In a few rare cases, a minority group will take control of a nation: this is what happened in Iraq..


RARE cases? hahhahahhahhaha, 



1549 said:


> -When a minority group is more wealthy and more powerful than the majority, disaster awaits.  Violence may manifest itself while the minority is in power or it could be held off until the minority is toppled.  Any country that has an economic dominant minority is more or less a barrel of gun powder.  When we invaded Iraq, we threw a match into that barrel.  In the past, the ensuing violence has resulted in mass genocide of the minorities.  Unfortunately, this is not a rare phenomen.  Mass killings (though not always on a genocidal level) and civil war have followed the fall of nearly every single economic dominant minority in modern history.  It almost seems to be human nature--perhaps a revenge complex.. .


. Nice OPINIONS. Kinda short on evidence,examples or facts.



1549 said:


> -To think Iraq could go through a natural transition into a democracy is laughable..


Yes, just as its laughable that the US could throw off the shackles of the worlds most powerful force, the BRITISH. 



1549 said:


> -If the evolution of nations is viewed as chemistry, the U.S. is trying to pour vinegar into baking soda without creating the reaction. .


which is why it shouldnt be viewed as chemistry. If my marriage were viewed as chemistry, it would mean my wife and I shouldnt be married. And my kids shouldnt be in my home, acccording to chemistry.



1549 said:


> -It is not going to work. .


Defeatist. Thats what they told Washington.



1549 said:


> -We are seeing the death toll of sectarian violence climb by the hour. . Hopefully the presence of our troops will prevent anything on the scale of genocide, but a civil war may be inevitable.  A civil war means that the new government will be completely worthless (what can it do if its own people are at war with eachother?) and it means we will be tied down for years to come. .


lots of errors in that paragraph. Of course, faulty premise above, faulty conclusions here for you. 



1549 said:


> -Sorry for the length of this post.


.me too


----------



## trobinett (Sep 21, 2006)

jillian said:


> There already IS the start of a civil war. And it isn't our job to stop it even if we could, although we destabilized the country enough for it to happen.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Every country in that part of the world is starting a civil war, the difference in Iraq?  As long as we're there, it won't go any further.

As to laying off the kool aid, good advice jillian, I suggest you take it.


----------



## 1549 (Sep 21, 2006)

GunnyL said:


> I guess what I'm really trying to say here is shut the fuck up and go educate yourself.  When you posess even a modicum of knowledge on the topic, THEN get back to me.



I think you may be incapable of engaging in argumentative discussions.

Anyways, 

Are "lib bitches" a pack of monday morning quarterbacks?  The first Bush and Schwartzkopf both said that an invasion of Iraq would be a mistake.  Conservatives seemed more willing to forget this when 2003 rolled around.  Liberals have been against the war since Saturday, monday morning merely vindicated our beliefs.



> How'd you like to deploy for 6 months only for it to turn into 13 months just because that nimrod decided to invade another nation to steal its oil? Then spend six months at a whack five more times in 9 years babysitting his border? That didn't cost the AMerican taxpayers much, did it?



That is all pretty shitty...but tax fees and deployment durations from the first Gulf war were not factors in choosing to invade Iraq. 



> You libs bitch about getting shaken down at the airports, well how does being snatched off the street and fed feet first into a tree shredder sound? Just for the amusement of his sick whelps? Yeah, you got it tough.



Au contraire.  I do not mind airport security.  Of course the Saddam regime was brutal and terrible, but do not kid yourself, the US has never/will never send 3,000 troops to their death for humanitarian reasons. 

LuvPRgrl: I am not going to address all your points, I am a little short on time...just a few quick things:



> Actually it did, they barrels were nukes.



If our nukes did anything, they made the USSR spend more money than they should have.  But that probably did not matter because the soviet system was not user friendly for citizens.  It was a bureaucracy beyond the meaning of the word.  The simple fact is that a nation can not survive when people have to wait months for something as common as a pair of shoes.  Soviet ideology destroyed the Soviet Union.



> Oh, were those the inspectors that werent allowed to enter certain areas until saddams men were done "preparing" it for days? Those inspectors were pure boneheads.



It was the U.S. weapons inspector that led the investigation of WMD's in Iraq following the fall of Saddam's government.



> Nope, it wasnt needless. Having Iraq in its current state is still much better than under saddam. Kurds are placing ads in America, THANKING us for ousting saddam. Maybe you havent seen them.



Having Iraq in its current state is better for the Kurds.  Whether or not it is better for the rest of Iraqis and better for the U.S. is still to be determined.



> WRONG. The minority in a country will hold and control most of the wealth. How many Bill Gates are there?something like over 80 percent of our tax revenues are paid by less than 5 percent of our population.



This is an ethnicitiy issue.  When I say a minority holds the wealth, I mean that a minority ethnic group holds the wealth (as the Sunnis did in Iraq), and when they are toppled, the majority ethnic group tends to strike back with genocide.  The most prominent example is Rwanda.



> RARE cases? hahhahahhahhaha,



See above...it might clarify.



> Nice OPINIONS. Kinda short on evidence,examples or facts.



I had to write a few papers on it last year...the best source is Amy Chua.  Her book World On Fire is an excellent source of info on the subject.


----------



## trobinett (Sep 21, 2006)

1549 posts:



> I had to write a few papers on it last year...the best source is Amy Chua. Her book World On Fire is an excellent source of info on the subject.



GOSH, Amy Chua?

How wonderful, next time I'm looking for reference material I'll be sure and "check it out".

Check this out 1549.

You want REAL LIFE information, listen to people like Gunny, but listen with your EARS, not your mouth.

You want to write a paper on some kind of school project, fine, use Ms Chua, do YOU understand the difference?


----------



## LuvRPgrl (Sep 22, 2006)

Well, guess what. Amy Chua is soooooo far off the mark its incredible. I bet she has never even visited any of the countries she writes about. Just learns about them by reading. Kinda like that liberal idiot who proclaimed that the soldiers in Iraq didnt really know what is going on there, that they are just stupid high school grads, and that he, with a degree from university, and reads seven newspapers a day, has a much better grasp on the reality of what is going on in Iraq, than do the US soldiers. I think he even really believes it.

ANyways, Amy's premise is way off for one reason. The countries she talks about are NOT FREE and OPEN economies, nor are they hardly even democracies. The problem is blatant out and out corruption in all of them. The politicians are in cahoots with the business leaders and they supress the poor. I know this for a fact, I have been to the Philippines 15 times in the last year. The Philippines is one of the countries she cites. The corruption there is unbelievable. I was even tempted to bribe a few public officials to get my wife's visa process going a bit quicker. But bribing a govt official is so foreign to me I just couldnt do it.

Even the great middle class in America didnt prosper until the govt corruption was basically eliminated. Yea, I know, its still there, but relatively speaking, we have a fairly non corrupt govt and system.

So, she is analyzing countries that are only democracies and free market economies on the face of things. TRUE free market democracies, like Canada and much of Western Europe and America of course, dont have the problems the countries she describes, have.


----------

