sex on the first date

[danielpalos]

Winterborn is right. Guile isn't necessarily used only by inferior forces. Check out the "ghost army" of WWII that was a bunch of speakers and inflatable tanks that were used to fake out the German troops.

Guile wasn't used because the Allies were inferior, it was used to direct the Germans to where they could be hit the hardest.

yes; there was, or they would have just invaded; and, it was merely Axis "bad management" that allowed the Allies to successfully carry out the invasion.

You are really going to sit there and claim that the Allied forces were inferior to the Axis forces? The Allies had superior numbers of men and machines. Greater numbers of men were all it took for you to say the Romans were superior.

How do you make the assessment that the Allied forces were inferior?

there was only concentration of force, not true force superiority.

The Allies had true force superiority. The Allies had more men, more tanks, more aircraft ect ect.

Once again, do you have any links to an expert who agrees with your claim?

Guiles is used by superior forces. This is a fact of warfare. The fact that you claimed it is military doctrine that only inferior forces use guile is a lie or your own ignorance. You pick which.

not during that invasion; and not in the Sicilian campaign, nor in North Africa in the beginning. force concentration is not true force superiority.

 

[danielpalos]

nope; the Romans proved that at Cannae. They should have won on general principle.

That does nothing to prove that guile is only used by an inferior force. In fact, it proves that a force can BE superior through the use of guile. The Romans had more men at Cannae, and yet they were defeated. So, obviously, they were not superior.

There have been many examples of smaller forces defeating larger forces. But you have yet to quote any evidence that it is military doctrine that guile is only used by an inferior force. Hell, you haven't even talked about what military holds that doctrine.

dear; there is simply no need for guile with a truly superior force.

It saves lives and saves resources. That alone makes it a valuable tactic.

Admit that you lied when you made the original statement about military doctrine. You obviously based it on your own limited views and not a knowledge of military history.

defensive war is usually a last resort and often fails to achieve the objective, without a master Tzu.

Irrelevant. Your original claim was that only inferior forces use guile, and that this is military doctrine. Who has a military that uses this doctrine?

it is Only irrelevant if you want to practice, "tactics of mistake" as recounted in our historical record.

 

[WinterBorn]

Winterborn is right. Guile isn't necessarily used only by inferior forces. Check out the "ghost army" of WWII that was a bunch of speakers and inflatable tanks that were used to fake out the German troops.

Guile wasn't used because the Allies were inferior, it was used to direct the Germans to where they could be hit the hardest.

yes; there was, or they would have just invaded; and, it was merely Axis "bad management" that allowed the Allies to successfully carry out the invasion.

You are really going to sit there and claim that the Allied forces were inferior to the Axis forces? The Allies had superior numbers of men and machines. Greater numbers of men were all it took for you to say the Romans were superior.

How do you make the assessment that the Allied forces were inferior?

there was only concentration of force, not true force superiority.

The Allies had true force superiority. The Allies had more men, more tanks, more aircraft ect ect.

Once again, do you have any links to an expert who agrees with your claim?

Guiles is used by superior forces. This is a fact of warfare. The fact that you claimed it is military doctrine that only inferior forces use guile is a lie or your own ignorance. You pick which.

not during that invasion; and not in the Sicilian campaign, nor in North Africa in the beginning. force concentration is not true force superiority.

The fact that the Allies did not have a superior force at every location in a world war does not change the fact that guile is often used by the superior force.

As I have repeatedly said, it conserves resources and saves lives. Both of which are goals in warfare and actually part of military doctrine for most militaries.

Once again, what military has a doctrine such as you claim?

 

[WinterBorn]

That does nothing to prove that guile is only used by an inferior force. In fact, it proves that a force can BE superior through the use of guile. The Romans had more men at Cannae, and yet they were defeated. So, obviously, they were not superior.

There have been many examples of smaller forces defeating larger forces. But you have yet to quote any evidence that it is military doctrine that guile is only used by an inferior force. Hell, you haven't even talked about what military holds that doctrine.

dear; there is simply no need for guile with a truly superior force.

It saves lives and saves resources. That alone makes it a valuable tactic.

Admit that you lied when you made the original statement about military doctrine. You obviously based it on your own limited views and not a knowledge of military history.

defensive war is usually a last resort and often fails to achieve the objective, without a master Tzu.

Irrelevant. Your original claim was that only inferior forces use guile, and that this is military doctrine. Who has a military that uses this doctrine?

it is Only irrelevant if you want to practice, "tactics of mistake" as recounted in our historical record.

No, it is irrelevant. You made the claim that it is military doctrine that only an inferior force uses guile. That is absolutely bullshit. Whether a war is offensive or defensive does not change the fact that guile is often used by a superior force.

 

[danielpalos]

dear; there is simply no need for guile with a truly superior force.

It saves lives and saves resources. That alone makes it a valuable tactic.

Admit that you lied when you made the original statement about military doctrine. You obviously based it on your own limited views and not a knowledge of military history.

defensive war is usually a last resort and often fails to achieve the objective, without a master Tzu.

Irrelevant. Your original claim was that only inferior forces use guile, and that this is military doctrine. Who has a military that uses this doctrine?

it is Only irrelevant if you want to practice, "tactics of mistake" as recounted in our historical record.

No, it is irrelevant. You made the claim that it is military doctrine that only an inferior force uses guile. That is absolutely bullshit. Whether a war is offensive or defensive does not change the fact that guile is often used by a superior force.

yes, only an inferior force would need to use guile a truly superior force would not waste resources on guile.

 

[WinterBorn]

It saves lives and saves resources. That alone makes it a valuable tactic.

Admit that you lied when you made the original statement about military doctrine. You obviously based it on your own limited views and not a knowledge of military history.

defensive war is usually a last resort and often fails to achieve the objective, without a master Tzu.

Irrelevant. Your original claim was that only inferior forces use guile, and that this is military doctrine. Who has a military that uses this doctrine?

it is Only irrelevant if you want to practice, "tactics of mistake" as recounted in our historical record.

No, it is irrelevant. You made the claim that it is military doctrine that only an inferior force uses guile. That is absolutely bullshit. Whether a war is offensive or defensive does not change the fact that guile is often used by a superior force.

yes, only an inferior force would need to use guile a truly superior force would not waste resources on guile.

So you are claiming that a superior force would be willing to lose more men and waste more resources just to avoid using guile? That is nonsense.

Once again, what military has a doctrine such as you described?

 

[WinterBorn]

It saves lives and saves resources. That alone makes it a valuable tactic.

Admit that you lied when you made the original statement about military doctrine. You obviously based it on your own limited views and not a knowledge of military history.

defensive war is usually a last resort and often fails to achieve the objective, without a master Tzu.

Irrelevant. Your original claim was that only inferior forces use guile, and that this is military doctrine. Who has a military that uses this doctrine?

it is Only irrelevant if you want to practice, "tactics of mistake" as recounted in our historical record.

No, it is irrelevant. You made the claim that it is military doctrine that only an inferior force uses guile. That is absolutely bullshit. Whether a war is offensive or defensive does not change the fact that guile is often used by a superior force.

yes, only an inferior force would need to use guile a truly superior force would not waste resources on guile.

Once again you show your ignorance on the subject. The resources for guile are nominal. As an example, the Ghost Army (mentioned previously in this thread) had only 1,100 men. But they managed to draw larger forces towards them and away from areas of actual military operations. When this happened, our forces were able to move quickly and subdue areas more effectively. The Ghost Army operated effectively from just after D-Day until the end of the war.

 

[danielpalos]

yes; there was, or they would have just invaded; and, it was merely Axis "bad management" that allowed the Allies to successfully carry out the invasion.

You are really going to sit there and claim that the Allied forces were inferior to the Axis forces? The Allies had superior numbers of men and machines. Greater numbers of men were all it took for you to say the Romans were superior.

How do you make the assessment that the Allied forces were inferior?

there was only concentration of force, not true force superiority.

The Allies had true force superiority. The Allies had more men, more tanks, more aircraft ect ect.

Once again, do you have any links to an expert who agrees with your claim?

Guiles is used by superior forces. This is a fact of warfare. The fact that you claimed it is military doctrine that only inferior forces use guile is a lie or your own ignorance. You pick which.

not during that invasion; and not in the Sicilian campaign, nor in North Africa in the beginning. force concentration is not true force superiority.

The fact that the Allies did not have a superior force at every location in a world war does not change the fact that guile is often used by the superior force.

As I have repeatedly said, it conserves resources and saves lives. Both of which are goals in warfare and actually part of military doctrine for most militaries.

Once again, what military has a doctrine such as you claim?

dear; there is simply no need for guile with a truly superior force.

It saves lives and saves resources. That alone makes it a valuable tactic.

Admit that you lied when you made the original statement about military doctrine. You obviously based it on your own limited views and not a knowledge of military history.

defensive war is usually a last resort and often fails to achieve the objective, without a master Tzu.

Irrelevant. Your original claim was that only inferior forces use guile, and that this is military doctrine. Who has a military that uses this doctrine?

it is Only irrelevant if you want to practice, "tactics of mistake" as recounted in our historical record.

No, it is irrelevant. You made the claim that it is military doctrine that only an inferior force uses guile. That is absolutely bullshit. Whether a war is offensive or defensive does not change the fact that guile is often used by a superior force.

defensive war is usually a last resort and often fails to achieve the objective, without a master Tzu.

Irrelevant. Your original claim was that only inferior forces use guile, and that this is military doctrine. Who has a military that uses this doctrine?

it is Only irrelevant if you want to practice, "tactics of mistake" as recounted in our historical record.

No, it is irrelevant. You made the claim that it is military doctrine that only an inferior force uses guile. That is absolutely bullshit. Whether a war is offensive or defensive does not change the fact that guile is often used by a superior force.

yes, only an inferior force would need to use guile a truly superior force would not waste resources on guile.

So you are claiming that a superior force would be willing to lose more men and waste more resources just to avoid using guile? That is nonsense.

Once again, what military has a doctrine such as you described?

defensive war is usually a last resort and often fails to achieve the objective, without a master Tzu.

Irrelevant. Your original claim was that only inferior forces use guile, and that this is military doctrine. Who has a military that uses this doctrine?

it is Only irrelevant if you want to practice, "tactics of mistake" as recounted in our historical record.

No, it is irrelevant. You made the claim that it is military doctrine that only an inferior force uses guile. That is absolutely bullshit. Whether a war is offensive or defensive does not change the fact that guile is often used by a superior force.

yes, only an inferior force would need to use guile a truly superior force would not waste resources on guile.

Once again you show your ignorance on the subject. The resources for guile are nominal. As an example, the Ghost Army (mentioned previously in this thread) had only 1,100 men. But they managed to draw larger forces towards them and away from areas of actual military operations. When this happened, our forces were able to move quickly and subdue areas more effectively. The Ghost Army operated effectively from just after D-Day until the end of the war.

dear, you only show your bias.

It is your straw man argument; you tell me.

A truly superior force has the equivalent to a concentration of force on any given front.

 

[WinterBorn]

You are really going to sit there and claim that the Allied forces were inferior to the Axis forces? The Allies had superior numbers of men and machines. Greater numbers of men were all it took for you to say the Romans were superior.

How do you make the assessment that the Allied forces were inferior?

there was only concentration of force, not true force superiority.

The Allies had true force superiority. The Allies had more men, more tanks, more aircraft ect ect.

Once again, do you have any links to an expert who agrees with your claim?

Guiles is used by superior forces. This is a fact of warfare. The fact that you claimed it is military doctrine that only inferior forces use guile is a lie or your own ignorance. You pick which.

not during that invasion; and not in the Sicilian campaign, nor in North Africa in the beginning. force concentration is not true force superiority.

The fact that the Allies did not have a superior force at every location in a world war does not change the fact that guile is often used by the superior force.

As I have repeatedly said, it conserves resources and saves lives. Both of which are goals in warfare and actually part of military doctrine for most militaries.

Once again, what military has a doctrine such as you claim?

It saves lives and saves resources. That alone makes it a valuable tactic.

Admit that you lied when you made the original statement about military doctrine. You obviously based it on your own limited views and not a knowledge of military history.

defensive war is usually a last resort and often fails to achieve the objective, without a master Tzu.

Irrelevant. Your original claim was that only inferior forces use guile, and that this is military doctrine. Who has a military that uses this doctrine?

it is Only irrelevant if you want to practice, "tactics of mistake" as recounted in our historical record.

No, it is irrelevant. You made the claim that it is military doctrine that only an inferior force uses guile. That is absolutely bullshit. Whether a war is offensive or defensive does not change the fact that guile is often used by a superior force.

Irrelevant. Your original claim was that only inferior forces use guile, and that this is military doctrine. Who has a military that uses this doctrine?

it is Only irrelevant if you want to practice, "tactics of mistake" as recounted in our historical record.

No, it is irrelevant. You made the claim that it is military doctrine that only an inferior force uses guile. That is absolutely bullshit. Whether a war is offensive or defensive does not change the fact that guile is often used by a superior force.

yes, only an inferior force would need to use guile a truly superior force would not waste resources on guile.

So you are claiming that a superior force would be willing to lose more men and waste more resources just to avoid using guile? That is nonsense.

Once again, what military has a doctrine such as you described?

Irrelevant. Your original claim was that only inferior forces use guile, and that this is military doctrine. Who has a military that uses this doctrine?

it is Only irrelevant if you want to practice, "tactics of mistake" as recounted in our historical record.

No, it is irrelevant. You made the claim that it is military doctrine that only an inferior force uses guile. That is absolutely bullshit. Whether a war is offensive or defensive does not change the fact that guile is often used by a superior force.

yes, only an inferior force would need to use guile a truly superior force would not waste resources on guile.

Once again you show your ignorance on the subject. The resources for guile are nominal. As an example, the Ghost Army (mentioned previously in this thread) had only 1,100 men. But they managed to draw larger forces towards them and away from areas of actual military operations. When this happened, our forces were able to move quickly and subdue areas more effectively. The Ghost Army operated effectively from just after D-Day until the end of the war.

dear, you only show your bias.

It is your straw man argument; you tell me.

A truly superior force has the equivalent to a concentration of force on any given front.

LMAO!!!

So now you are saying a superior force will have a superior concentration of force everywhere within the theater of war? That is just laughable. If a superior force has twice the number of men and resources, there can still be places where the inferior force enjoys a superior concentration of force. To claim otherwise is simply ignorant.

And there was no straw man in my post. I used a legitimate example of the use of guile by a superior force.

But, yet again, please tell us what military has a doctrine such as you describe.

 

[WinterBorn]

You originally said: "only inferiors who know they are not equal have to resort to guile. this is accepted military doctrine that applies to real life situations in non-warfare scenarios."

You posted this as if it were fact. It is obviously not. Unless you can tell us what military has such a doctrine.

 

[danielpalos]

there was only concentration of force, not true force superiority.

The Allies had true force superiority. The Allies had more men, more tanks, more aircraft ect ect.

Once again, do you have any links to an expert who agrees with your claim?

Guiles is used by superior forces. This is a fact of warfare. The fact that you claimed it is military doctrine that only inferior forces use guile is a lie or your own ignorance. You pick which.

not during that invasion; and not in the Sicilian campaign, nor in North Africa in the beginning. force concentration is not true force superiority.

The fact that the Allies did not have a superior force at every location in a world war does not change the fact that guile is often used by the superior force.

As I have repeatedly said, it conserves resources and saves lives. Both of which are goals in warfare and actually part of military doctrine for most militaries.

Once again, what military has a doctrine such as you claim?

defensive war is usually a last resort and often fails to achieve the objective, without a master Tzu.

Irrelevant. Your original claim was that only inferior forces use guile, and that this is military doctrine. Who has a military that uses this doctrine?

it is Only irrelevant if you want to practice, "tactics of mistake" as recounted in our historical record.

No, it is irrelevant. You made the claim that it is military doctrine that only an inferior force uses guile. That is absolutely bullshit. Whether a war is offensive or defensive does not change the fact that guile is often used by a superior force.

it is Only irrelevant if you want to practice, "tactics of mistake" as recounted in our historical record.

No, it is irrelevant. You made the claim that it is military doctrine that only an inferior force uses guile. That is absolutely bullshit. Whether a war is offensive or defensive does not change the fact that guile is often used by a superior force.

yes, only an inferior force would need to use guile a truly superior force would not waste resources on guile.

So you are claiming that a superior force would be willing to lose more men and waste more resources just to avoid using guile? That is nonsense.

Once again, what military has a doctrine such as you described?

it is Only irrelevant if you want to practice, "tactics of mistake" as recounted in our historical record.

No, it is irrelevant. You made the claim that it is military doctrine that only an inferior force uses guile. That is absolutely bullshit. Whether a war is offensive or defensive does not change the fact that guile is often used by a superior force.

yes, only an inferior force would need to use guile a truly superior force would not waste resources on guile.

Once again you show your ignorance on the subject. The resources for guile are nominal. As an example, the Ghost Army (mentioned previously in this thread) had only 1,100 men. But they managed to draw larger forces towards them and away from areas of actual military operations. When this happened, our forces were able to move quickly and subdue areas more effectively. The Ghost Army operated effectively from just after D-Day until the end of the war.

dear, you only show your bias.

It is your straw man argument; you tell me.

A truly superior force has the equivalent to a concentration of force on any given front.

LMAO!!!

So now you are saying a superior force will have a superior concentration of force everywhere within the theater of war? That is just laughable. If a superior force has twice the number of men and resources, there can still be places where the inferior force enjoys a superior concentration of force. To claim otherwise is simply ignorant.

And there was no straw man in my post. I used a legitimate example of the use of guile by a superior force.

But, yet again, please tell us what military has a doctrine such as you describe.

yes, that is why it is a truly superior force, not just a technically superior force.

 

[WinterBorn]

The Allies had true force superiority. The Allies had more men, more tanks, more aircraft ect ect.

Once again, do you have any links to an expert who agrees with your claim?

Guiles is used by superior forces. This is a fact of warfare. The fact that you claimed it is military doctrine that only inferior forces use guile is a lie or your own ignorance. You pick which.

not during that invasion; and not in the Sicilian campaign, nor in North Africa in the beginning. force concentration is not true force superiority.

The fact that the Allies did not have a superior force at every location in a world war does not change the fact that guile is often used by the superior force.

As I have repeatedly said, it conserves resources and saves lives. Both of which are goals in warfare and actually part of military doctrine for most militaries.

Once again, what military has a doctrine such as you claim?

Irrelevant. Your original claim was that only inferior forces use guile, and that this is military doctrine. Who has a military that uses this doctrine?

it is Only irrelevant if you want to practice, "tactics of mistake" as recounted in our historical record.

No, it is irrelevant. You made the claim that it is military doctrine that only an inferior force uses guile. That is absolutely bullshit. Whether a war is offensive or defensive does not change the fact that guile is often used by a superior force.

No, it is irrelevant. You made the claim that it is military doctrine that only an inferior force uses guile. That is absolutely bullshit. Whether a war is offensive or defensive does not change the fact that guile is often used by a superior force.

yes, only an inferior force would need to use guile a truly superior force would not waste resources on guile.

So you are claiming that a superior force would be willing to lose more men and waste more resources just to avoid using guile? That is nonsense.

Once again, what military has a doctrine such as you described?

No, it is irrelevant. You made the claim that it is military doctrine that only an inferior force uses guile. That is absolutely bullshit. Whether a war is offensive or defensive does not change the fact that guile is often used by a superior force.

yes, only an inferior force would need to use guile a truly superior force would not waste resources on guile.

Once again you show your ignorance on the subject. The resources for guile are nominal. As an example, the Ghost Army (mentioned previously in this thread) had only 1,100 men. But they managed to draw larger forces towards them and away from areas of actual military operations. When this happened, our forces were able to move quickly and subdue areas more effectively. The Ghost Army operated effectively from just after D-Day until the end of the war.

dear, you only show your bias.

It is your straw man argument; you tell me.

A truly superior force has the equivalent to a concentration of force on any given front.

LMAO!!!

So now you are saying a superior force will have a superior concentration of force everywhere within the theater of war? That is just laughable. If a superior force has twice the number of men and resources, there can still be places where the inferior force enjoys a superior concentration of force. To claim otherwise is simply ignorant.

And there was no straw man in my post. I used a legitimate example of the use of guile by a superior force.

But, yet again, please tell us what military has a doctrine such as you describe.

yes, that is why it is a truly superior force, not just a technically superior force.

I see you are steadfastly refusing to answer the question. What a surprise.

And your semantics are just a dodge. Let me know when you are man enough to admit when you are wrong.

 

[ChrisL]

What? What thread am I on here?

 

[danielpalos]

not during that invasion; and not in the Sicilian campaign, nor in North Africa in the beginning. force concentration is not true force superiority.

The fact that the Allies did not have a superior force at every location in a world war does not change the fact that guile is often used by the superior force.

As I have repeatedly said, it conserves resources and saves lives. Both of which are goals in warfare and actually part of military doctrine for most militaries.

Once again, what military has a doctrine such as you claim?

it is Only irrelevant if you want to practice, "tactics of mistake" as recounted in our historical record.

No, it is irrelevant. You made the claim that it is military doctrine that only an inferior force uses guile. That is absolutely bullshit. Whether a war is offensive or defensive does not change the fact that guile is often used by a superior force.

yes, only an inferior force would need to use guile a truly superior force would not waste resources on guile.

So you are claiming that a superior force would be willing to lose more men and waste more resources just to avoid using guile? That is nonsense.

Once again, what military has a doctrine such as you described?

yes, only an inferior force would need to use guile a truly superior force would not waste resources on guile.

Once again you show your ignorance on the subject. The resources for guile are nominal. As an example, the Ghost Army (mentioned previously in this thread) had only 1,100 men. But they managed to draw larger forces towards them and away from areas of actual military operations. When this happened, our forces were able to move quickly and subdue areas more effectively. The Ghost Army operated effectively from just after D-Day until the end of the war.

dear, you only show your bias.

It is your straw man argument; you tell me.

A truly superior force has the equivalent to a concentration of force on any given front.

LMAO!!!

So now you are saying a superior force will have a superior concentration of force everywhere within the theater of war? That is just laughable. If a superior force has twice the number of men and resources, there can still be places where the inferior force enjoys a superior concentration of force. To claim otherwise is simply ignorant.

And there was no straw man in my post. I used a legitimate example of the use of guile by a superior force.

But, yet again, please tell us what military has a doctrine such as you describe.

yes, that is why it is a truly superior force, not just a technically superior force.

I see you are steadfastly refusing to answer the question. What a surprise.

And your semantics are just a dodge. Let me know when you are man enough to admit when you are wrong.

not at all; it is a self-evident truth.

 

[danielpalos]

What? What thread am I on here?

what about after sex on the first date (for free sample purposes) and it seems to work out, for now; is it ok to help out with "husbandly choring" in exchange and barter for "wifely choring"?

 

[WinterBorn]

The fact that the Allies did not have a superior force at every location in a world war does not change the fact that guile is often used by the superior force.

As I have repeatedly said, it conserves resources and saves lives. Both of which are goals in warfare and actually part of military doctrine for most militaries.

Once again, what military has a doctrine such as you claim?

No, it is irrelevant. You made the claim that it is military doctrine that only an inferior force uses guile. That is absolutely bullshit. Whether a war is offensive or defensive does not change the fact that guile is often used by a superior force.

So you are claiming that a superior force would be willing to lose more men and waste more resources just to avoid using guile? That is nonsense.

Once again, what military has a doctrine such as you described?

Once again you show your ignorance on the subject. The resources for guile are nominal. As an example, the Ghost Army (mentioned previously in this thread) had only 1,100 men. But they managed to draw larger forces towards them and away from areas of actual military operations. When this happened, our forces were able to move quickly and subdue areas more effectively. The Ghost Army operated effectively from just after D-Day until the end of the war.

dear, you only show your bias.

It is your straw man argument; you tell me.

A truly superior force has the equivalent to a concentration of force on any given front.

LMAO!!!

So now you are saying a superior force will have a superior concentration of force everywhere within the theater of war? That is just laughable. If a superior force has twice the number of men and resources, there can still be places where the inferior force enjoys a superior concentration of force. To claim otherwise is simply ignorant.

And there was no straw man in my post. I used a legitimate example of the use of guile by a superior force.

But, yet again, please tell us what military has a doctrine such as you describe.

yes, that is why it is a truly superior force, not just a technically superior force.

I see you are steadfastly refusing to answer the question. What a surprise.

And your semantics are just a dodge. Let me know when you are man enough to admit when you are wrong.

not at all; it is a self-evident truth.

Considering the amount of evidence to the contrary, it is obviously not a self-evident truth. But at least you answered the question of whether you knew much about military doctrines or tactics.

 

[ChrisL]

What? What thread am I on here?

what about after sex on the first date (for free sample purposes) and it seems to work out, for now; is it ok to help out with "husbandly choring" in exchange and barter for "wifely choring"?

I don't have any idea what you are talking about, like usual.

 

[danielpalos]

What? What thread am I on here?

what about after sex on the first date (for free sample purposes) and it seems to work out, for now; is it ok to help out with "husbandly choring" in exchange and barter for "wifely choring"?

I don't have any idea what you are talking about, like usual.

yes, like usual. that really is worth less in the non-porn sector.

 

[ChrisL]

What? What thread am I on here?

what about after sex on the first date (for free sample purposes) and it seems to work out, for now; is it ok to help out with "husbandly choring" in exchange and barter for "wifely choring"?

I don't have any idea what you are talking about, like usual.

yes, like usual. that really is worth less in the non-porn sector.

Drop dead.

 

[danielpalos]

What? What thread am I on here?

what about after sex on the first date (for free sample purposes) and it seems to work out, for now; is it ok to help out with "husbandly choring" in exchange and barter for "wifely choring"?

I don't have any idea what you are talking about, like usual.

yes, like usual. that really is worth less in the non-porn sector.

Drop dead.

just lousy people skills and claiming women really are not that worthless for pay purposes in the non-porn sector, chic?