Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
That is exactly why you started this thread. You were looking for a fight.I've started this thread knowing full well some few here would show up to troll it
You count on it. It's the opening point you use to attack others. You said you expected it. You actually welcome it.all while ignoring the content, just seeking to make personal attacks on me
We are not ignorant of what Procrustes (Dante) is doing. You invite Liability to kick your ass. He does, and then you invite Him back to kick your ass again.Thing is here, neither you nor Liability (BackAgain), is ignorant of what you are doing
againAnd yet again the dainty refuses to man up and post on topic in his own idiot fail thread.
I’ll assist him because, clearly, he isn’t up to the simple matter of posting on topic:
Walz draws scrutiny for implying Afghanistan trip as congressman was military deployment
Tim Walz is drawing fresh scrutiny for implying a brief congressional trip to Afghanistan was a military deployment as part of his National Guard service in recently unearthed remarks.nypost.com
You know, after a certain point the topic SHOULD be “why can’t Walz be honest about his service?”
As I have noted in the past, I maintain he deserves some props for having served at all. But why does he lie about that service so frequently?
None of the dainty’s transparently fraudulent efforts to prop-up tiny Timmy would ever dare to address THAT question.
againYes. Again, troll shit boi. I will continue to post ON topic in your own fail thread until that glorious day arrives where you bother to do so, too.
Topic:
Tim Walz Under Fire For False Military Rank Claims - The American Digest
Wrong. Stop projecting.That is exactly why you started this thread. You were looking for a fight.
You count on it. It's the opening point you use to attack others. You said you expected it. You actually welcome it.
We are not ignorant of what Procrustes (Dante) is doing. You invite Liability to kick your ass. He does, and then you invite Him back to kick your ass again.
If you don't want conflict, stop posting threads knowing full well...
Yep. Once again the dainty chooses to be an off topic troll in his own fail thread.again
note: just search "again" with "Procrustes stretched"
www.zerohedge.com
againYep. Once again the dainty chooses to be an off topic troll in his own fail thread.
We all know why he runs away like a quivering pussy.
Back ON Topic:
National Guard Disputes Walz's Military Bio; CNN Calls Out 'Absolutely False' Claim Over Deployment | ZeroHedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
What can I do or say about this? I choose not to make it a partisan political attack or defense. I searched each of the 6 letters to see if any of these people would. I don't see that here. I do see some criticisms that go to what we know candidates and partisans have said. All six letters seem to have avoided what we mostly see here @ usmb and in the media in general.
I salute the patriotism, decency, virtue, and honor these six individuals display here.
But is about the election and campaigns.
Opinion - Letters to the Editor - August 18, 2024
Six veterans on Tim Walz’s and JD Vance’s military service
What do ‘stolen valor’ and ‘at war’ really mean? And what do veterans owe each other?
First of six:
As a military veteran, I find it both disheartening and deeply disturbing to see the disparaging comments made by one set of fellow veterans aimed at others who served honorably, claiming that difficult personal decisions constitute “stolen valor” or even traitorous behavior.
I served as a commissioned officer for 42 years, almost 34 of which I spent on active duty. I did not serve in direct combat nor formally deploy, though I did take assignments in 13 locations — two of them overseas — and numerous trips to combat zones in the Balkans, Kuwait, Iraq and Afghanistan. My career was punctuated by many choices I had to make to balance my service with personal demands.
My colleagues and I served alongside countless National Guard members and reservists, without whom we could not have delivered lifesaving and rehabilitative care during numerous wars and humanitarian crises. I remain in awe of these soldier-citizens who balanced jobs and family and community responsibilities with the demands of national service. The injuries, illnesses and wounds they suffered — most of which were the result of training or strenuous military jobs and not direct combat — often changed their lives forever. Many lost their lives.
For any of us fellow veterans to find fault with personal decisions made by these dedicated public servants about how and when they served is beyond unfortunate.
I did not have the opportunity to work with the Republican vice-presidential candidate, despite helping to care for many of his fellow Marines. I am grateful for his service. I accompanied then-Rep. Tim Walz and members of the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee to visit Afghanistan during Operation Enduring Freedom. Mr. Walz’s work ethic, communication skills and grasp of the tactical to the strategic were remarkable. As a retired Army National Guard senior noncommissioned officer, he understood the military and military families.
The military branches have clear guidance about the characterization of service in uniform, regardless of the length of time served or the component in which one served. “Honorable” best describes what all of us aspire to achieve and ought to be the sole descriptor for those who do so.
Eric B. Schoomaker, Silver Spring
The writer is a retired lieutenant general who served as Army surgeon general and the commanding general for the U.S. Army Medical Command.
But you are repeating spin. Try and deal with and stick with facts.The point is, walz dishonored his service by lying about it. He never carried a weapon in war and didn't retire as a sergeant major as he and kneepads have claimed. That say's a lot about their character.
.
And yet AGAIN the twatwaffle troll, the dainty, cannot control his urge to engage in off topic trolling — even in his own fail thread.again
note: just search "again" with "Procrustes stretched"
evrimagaci.org
Defining ‘stolen valor’
As a retired Navy captain, it saddens me that JD Vance is accusing Tim Walz of “stolen valor” apparently for not having personally served in Iraq. Mr. Vance is mistaken about the term, which actually means wearing combat ribbons although never having served in actual combat and pretending to be a combat veteran. Mr. Walz has never claimed to have served in Iraq, nor is his Army uniform decorated with combat ribbons he was never awarded. I respect both Mr. Vance and Mr. Walz for having served in the military and for earning the title of veteran.
It’s disingenuous for Mr. Vance to not only denigrate a fellow veteran for political gain but also to question the patriotism of a man who served as a U.S. Army command sergeant with more than two decades of honorable service to our county. Mr. Vance needs to apologize to Mr. Walz, and he owes our nation and the rest of our proud veterans an apology as well.
Reg Mitchell, Bethesda
It is people like you who are mischaracterizing things. Like you've just done here.So this letter mischaracterizes what Vance said. walz claimed to have carried a weapon IN WAR, which he never did. He could have said he carried a weapon DURING WAR TIME, which would have been accurate, but he chose to LIE.
.
The right to retire
Sen. JD Vance’s attack on the military record of Gov. Tim Walz is offensive to all veterans. As a Vietnam veteran, I learned that how, when, where — or even if — soldiers are sent into combat is a matter of pure chance, and that all of us soldiers endured the possibility of being called to this duty every day until our country permitted us to leave the military.
I served in combat but was permitted to leave after two years, which I did (with great relief). Mr. Walz was not called to combat for 24 years and had the right to resign before he was called, which he did. Mr. Vance and I could have extended our duties, but we chose not to. Mr. Walz and Mr. Vance both deserve a thank-you for their service.
No veterans who have honorably served our country should be judged for when or why they exercised their choice to leave the military when permitted to do so.
John Satorius, Minneapolis
What it means to be ‘at war’
A disappointing aspect of the flap over Gov. Tim Walz’s description of his military service is the failure of the media, including The Post, to explain what it means to “carry weapons of war at war.” This reflects a broader public failure to distinguish “war” from combat operations and to understand that the enemy gets a vote.
When I taught two generations of military officers at National Defense University and Air University, we studied the national security strategies issued by various presidents. Neither strategy documents nor joint doctrine uses the imprecise and misleading term “combat zone.”
What qualifies as a combat zone, after all? Did Northern Virginia on Sept. 10, 2001? Honolulu on Dec. 6, 1941? No, but those regions became combat zones the following days. What about the evening of 9/11? The men and women who patrolled the Potomac and Hudson by land, sea and air did not know if they were still in a combat zone, but they most assuredly carried weapons of war at war.
Despite the unfortunate American tendency to think of war in terms of “over there” and to assume that we will determine if and when combat operations take place, the armed forces after 9/11 did not share that illusion. They were (and still are, I hope) prepared for possible terrorist attacks, whether in the homeland or overseas. The base to which Mr. Walz deployed did not, as it turned out, become a “combat zone.” Other U.S. military bases did.
Whatever one’s political views, using imprecise terminology and sloppy language to discuss U.S. national security hurts us all.
Edwina S. Campbell, Sonoma, Calif.
The writer is a former U.S. Foreign Service officer and the author of multiple books about diplomacy.
But you are repeating spin. Try and deal with and stick with facts.
Of course, as we all plainly see (and the dainty only wishes he could conceal), is that the dainty is only trying to hide what Walz falsely claimed.Let's try to
What can I do or say about this? I choose not to make it a partisan political attack or defense. I searched each of the 6 letters to see if any of these people would. I don't see that here. I do see some criticisms that go to what we know candidates and partisans have said. All six letters seem to have avoided what we mostly see here @ usmb and in the media in general.
I salute the patriotism, decency, virtue, and honor these six individuals display here.
But is about the election and campaigns.
Opinion - Letters to the Editor - August 18, 2024
Six veterans on Tim Walz’s and JD Vance’s military service
What do ‘stolen valor’ and ‘at war’ really mean? And what do veterans owe each other?
First of six:
As a military veteran, I find it both disheartening and deeply disturbing to see the disparaging comments made by one set of fellow veterans aimed at others who served honorably, claiming that difficult personal decisions constitute “stolen valor” or even traitorous behavior.
I served as a commissioned officer for 42 years, almost 34 of which I spent on active duty. I did not serve in direct combat nor formally deploy, though I did take assignments in 13 locations — two of them overseas — and numerous trips to combat zones in the Balkans, Kuwait, Iraq and Afghanistan. My career was punctuated by many choices I had to make to balance my service with personal demands.
My colleagues and I served alongside countless National Guard members and reservists, without whom we could not have delivered lifesaving and rehabilitative care during numerous wars and humanitarian crises. I remain in awe of these soldier-citizens who balanced jobs and family and community responsibilities with the demands of national service. The injuries, illnesses and wounds they suffered — most of which were the result of training or strenuous military jobs and not direct combat — often changed their lives forever. Many lost their lives.
For any of us fellow veterans to find fault with personal decisions made by these dedicated public servants about how and when they served is beyond unfortunate.
I did not have the opportunity to work with the Republican vice-presidential candidate, despite helping to care for many of his fellow Marines. I am grateful for his service. I accompanied then-Rep. Tim Walz and members of the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee to visit Afghanistan during Operation Enduring Freedom. Mr. Walz’s work ethic, communication skills and grasp of the tactical to the strategic were remarkable. As a retired Army National Guard senior noncommissioned officer, he understood the military and military families.
The military branches have clear guidance about the characterization of service in uniform, regardless of the length of time served or the component in which one served. “Honorable” best describes what all of us aspire to achieve and ought to be the sole descriptor for those who do so.
Eric B. Schoomaker, Silver Spring
The writer is a retired lieutenant general who served as Army surgeon general and the commanding general for the U.S. Army Medical Command.
--------------------------------------------------
I've started this thread knowing full well some few here would show up to troll it, all while ignoring the content, just seeking to make personal attacks on me. Fine. It comes with the territory.
What is so pathetic and sad a thing is this happens when I am not really commenting beyond the OP. I'm sharing the heartfelt views of military veterans who have all spoken about honor.
I think of this: "If someone is ill mannered by ignorance, let it pass rather than point it out." - Erasmus in his 1534 essay De Civitate
Thing is here, Liability (BackAgain), is not ignorant of what he is doing.
It is people like you who are mischaracterizing things. Like you've just done here.
next
Misrepresent everything in service to the cult. Go ahead.I've never disputed his right to retire, the lies about his service is another topic altogether.
.
No Ballz Walz is a coward and all but a deserter. Per his own unit and commanding officer. Claiming to be on combat he was never close to. Claiming a rank he didn't have. Now you Dems love people running from military service. It'd be funny if you people weren't so predictable.
Posting without reading? Drive by posting? Okay.No Ballz Walz is a coward and all but a deserter. Per his own unit and commanding officer. Claiming to be on combat he was never close to. Claiming a rank he didn't have. Now you Dems love people running from military service. It'd be funny if you people weren't so predictable.
