NationStates Jolt Archive

To those of you who re elected Bush by a sizeable majority, thank you for living up to all the "Support our troops"signs. Your troops appreciate the show of support.

To those of you who re elected Bush by a sizeable majority, thank you for living up to all the "Support our troops" signs. Your troops appreciate the show of support.

As a Vietnam veteran, I know some of how you must feel and want to assure you that we did our best to stop the anti-military Kerry. Present ... ARMS!

I voted to keep Bush! Its about time...all those Kerry supporters now know the truth! Bush is in fact the better man!

Say it with Cadbury's Roses.

As a Vietnam veteran, I know some of how you must feel and want to assure you that we did our best to stop the anti-military Kerry. Present ... ARMS!

What a fruitcake.

To those of you who re elected Bush by a sizeable majority, thank you for living up to all the "Support our troops"signs. Your troops appreciate the show of support.
Yes we do, Thank you!

What a fruitcake.

Thank you! Coming from you, that's actually a compliment! :D

Enjoy your draft. Coming up, June 2005.
Enjoy the nuclear war against NK or Iran. Many of your "troops" will die horrible deaths. And I will not feel sad for the losses.

As a Vietnam veteran, I know some of how you must feel and want to assure you that we did our best to stop the anti-military Kerry. Present ... ARMS!


Vietnalm veteran? My ass..proove it.

Vietnalm veteran? My ass..proove it.

Now you sound like ChessSquares!

http://ParadigmAssociates.org/ParadigmFLH.html

Enjoy your draft. Coming up, June 2005.
Enjoy the nuclear war against NK or Iran. Many of your "troops" will die horrible deaths. And I will not feel sad for the losses.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH...... The democrats are the ones pushing the draft. Look to the people drafting the bill they are all democrats. These scare tactics don't work on anyone that knows anything. As for North Korea and Iran they don't have capability but when they do we'll have a shield up. OOOPS!

Vietnalm veteran? My ass..proove it.Go away. You are not wanted here. Take your hatred somewhere else.

Enjoy your draft. Coming up, June 2005.
Enjoy the nuclear war against NK or Iran. Many of your "troops" will die horrible deaths. And I will not feel sad for the losses.No draft. How many times do you need this spelled out for you. Go away.

GOD BLESS THE HEGEMON! My home sweet home!

Very very sad. I dont understand why the americans are supporting Bush. No one else would do.
A nuclear war would be the best for most americans to happen. Then theyre death and dont have to live in extrem poverty, what will come with 4 more years bush. Oh, and dont forget the destruction of the democracy. I guess the senate will even vote for the law, which forbids the senate and gives president ultimative power. Well, and then theyll read it the first time.

Enjoy your draft. Coming up, June 2005.
Enjoy the nuclear war against NK or Iran. Many of your "troops" will die horrible deaths. And I will not feel sad for the losses.
There will be no draft. We in the military do not want or need one. It was ENTIRELY Democrats pushing for one in Congress. As for a nuclear war, neither of those countries would risk one with us, it would be suicide for them.

Enjoy your draft. Coming up, June 2005.
Enjoy the nuclear war against NK or Iran. Many of your "troops" will die horrible deaths. And I will not feel sad for the losses.

We will enjoy them! Our troops that are killed will die with honor knowing that it was for a just cause. You pathetic has-beens in Europe offer nothing to this world but noise now. You're insignificant. You're irrelevant. One day, when you come whining to America to bail you out of your latest debacle, don't be surprised if we say no!

Very very sad. I dont understand why the americans are supporting Bush. No one else would do.
A nuclear war would be the best for most americans to happen. Then theyre death and dont have to live in extrem poverty, what will come with 4 more years bush. Oh, and dont forget the destruction of the democracy. I guess the senate will even vote for the law, which forbids the senate and gives president ultimative power. Well, and then theyll read it the first time.
It is clear from your post you are unfamiliar with America. Even our "extreme poverty" is far ahead of much of the world. Also here it is possible for even those to climb as high as they are willing to reach. You simply would have to ask the many thousands who still to this day risk their lives to come here.

And the ones who dont find anything then poverty, after theyve come to america....
Goto a Ghetto! You surely have one in your city....

It is clear from your post you are unfamiliar with America. Even our "extreme poverty" is far ahead of much of the world. Also here it is possible for even those to climb as high as they are willing to reach. You simply would have to ask the many thousands who still to this day risk their lives to come here.

Actually, a study was done several years ago. The average poor in America possess a higher standard of living than 85% of the world's populations. It's unbelievable! The greed and arrogance of some sickens me.

And the ones who dont find anything then poverty, after theyve come to america....
Goto a Ghetto! You surely have one in your city....
ANYONE here who is willing to do the work has the ability to succeed. I come from a family of below-poverty line, non college graduates. I made it through college, and now am an officer in the service of this country. All you have to do is be willing to put in the work.

I voted to keep Bush! Its about time...all those Kerry supporters now know the truth! Bush is in fact the better man!

Hardly. Bush is merely the man who took more votes.

We will enjoy them! Our troops that are killed will die with honor knowing that it was for a just cause. You pathetic has-beens in Europe offer nothing to this world but noise now. You're insignificant. You're irrelevant. One day, when you come whining to America to bail you out of your latest debacle, don't be surprised if we say no!

Redneck. War is a terrible thing, and I suspect that you have never experienced it firsthand. God help us if we develop a taste for war, because if we do then none but the Almighty will be able to save us.

Enjoy your draft. Coming up, June 2005.
Enjoy the nuclear war against NK or Iran. Many of your "troops" will die horrible deaths. And I will not feel sad for the losses.
Might I say that I once respected you. However, you have made it clear,that you hate my country. The fact that while hating my country, you were in favor of Kerry, combined with many who I saw with the same "coincidence" of logic, is what really made my, and many, decisions yesterday much easier.

It is a poor paradigm to think of Kerry support as being opposed to miltary/troop support and equate the Bush support with troop support. Although there was a strong push to equate this election with the war in Iraq by the media, the major factor in the choice of president seems to have revolved more around domestic issues like homosexual marriage. While I am sure some voted on the basis of Iraq, it is unwise to equate suppirt for Kerry with a lack of support for Troops.

Redneck. War is a terrible thing, and I suspect that you have never experienced it firsthand. God help us if we develop a taste for war, because if we do then none but the Almighty will be able to save us.
I agree. War is a terrible thing. No soldier develops a taste for it. All soldiers however recognize that it is sometimes necessary to fight for the cause of right.

It is a poor paradigm to think of Kerry support as being opposed to miltary/troop support and equate the Bush support with troop support. Although there was a strong push to equate this election with the war in Iraq by the media, the major factor in the choice of president seems to have revolved more around domestic issues like homosexual marriage. While I am sure some voted on the basis of Iraq, it is unwise to equate suppirt for Kerry with a lack of support for Troops.
That is true. However, by an overwhelming majority, the military preferred Bush. He is much more apt to provide the support we need, and much more likely to win(and thus wrap up)the war. It is by that token that it is supporting the troops. If we are to fight, give us a leader who will give us what we need to win and go home. That is what the American people did, even if for other reasons. Also, support for our troops does not end in Iraq, as in my post I did not even mention Iraq.

ANYONE here who is willing to do the work has the ability to succeed. I come from a family of below-poverty line, non college graduates. I made it through college, and now am an officer in the service of this country. All you have to do is be willing to put in the work.
USA, USN...?

Me, USA Enlisted.

:) GWB :)

He is a CinC!

USA, USN...?

Me, USA Enlisted.

:) GWB :)

He is a CinC!
USA :) Glad to have you

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that we have ensured all of our troops a job in military for a long time to come. Enjoy your next 15 years in the Middle East.

Personally, I think I'm leaving so that my children can actually avoid the military if they want to.

To those of you who re elected Bush by a sizeable majority, thank you for living up to all the "Support our troops"signs. Your troops appreciate the show of support.
"Support our troops" is not the same as "Support our President"

Not by a long shot.

"Support our troops" is not the same as "Support our President"

Not by a long shot.
Correct. Of course, the overwhelming majority of the troops supported Bush. When Clinton was in office of course, support our troops would have been NOT supporting the President, but of course that is old news now.

There will be no draft. We in the military do not want or need one. It was ENTIRELY Democrats pushing for one in Congress. As for a nuclear war, neither of those countries would risk one with us, it would be suicide for them.

When you said suicide for them, didn't you mean suicide for you? Invade North Korea you invade one of the largest, well equipped, best trained army's in the world. Invade North Korea, South Korea gets nuked. Invade North Korea, China helps them, China with their 4 million soldiers. Don't be such a blind, even if Bush had the guts to invade north Korea, he's not that stupid. Or is he.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that we have ensured all of our troops a job in military for a long time to come. Enjoy your next 15 years in the Middle East.

Personally, I think I'm leaving so that my children can actually avoid the military if they want to.

Well, we've been in Germany since WWII, and we're STILL there. Is this news to anyone?

USA :) Glad to have you
Thank you sir, same to you.

Redneck. War is a terrible thing, and I suspect that you have never experienced it firsthand. God help us if we develop a taste for war, because if we do then none but the Almighty will be able to save us.

Since you started with the name-calling...

DUMBASS! I agree that war is a terrible thing, but it's sometimes a necessary evil. We don't have a "taste for war"!

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that we have ensured all of our troops a job in military for a long time to come. Enjoy your next 15 years in the Middle East.

Personally, I think I'm leaving so that my children can actually avoid the military if they want to.

Then you should never have more children and might want to consider placing those you have up for adoption by couples somewhat less ... dense. Any child who becomes old enough to enlist can do so, or not, as he/she chooses. Try to understand this ... there is no draft ... there will, in almost certainty, never again BE a draft. Personally, if any of my own children wanted to join the military I would be very proud that I had raised responsible, caring children.

I truly pity your children, having to grow up around that sort of attitude, but I agree that you should leave.

Since you started with the name-calling...

DUMBASS! I agree that war is a terrible thing, but it's sometimes a necessary evil. We don't have a "taste for war"!
Now, lets not all lower ourselves. Calm the Flames!

When you said suicide for them, didn't you mean suicide for you? Invade North Korea you invade one of the largest, well equipped, best trained army's in the world. Invade North Korea, South Korea gets nuked. Invade North Korea, China helps them, China with their 4 million soldiers. Don't be such a blind, even if Bush had the guts to invade north Korea, he's not that stupid. Or is he.
I mean, as the reference was to nuclear war, that we have many thousands more warheads than either or a combination of those nations. As for their army...PLEASE do not try to lecture me there, that is after all an area I am much more familiar with than you I can guarantee. The Korean Army is huge, but equipped and trained in a 1960s 1970s model. The RoK army is capable against them even before you count for our air power and the US forces.
That said, it is interesting that just a few weeks ago,Democrat, Kerry-leaning people were saying"Why Iraq??What about Korea or Iran, they are more of a threat that Iraq was" I can find many quotes from the Kerry camp saying just that also. What is the problem?Now they worry that someone may actually have listened to them?It has been Bush saying that we would pursue diplomatic efforts with DPRK.

When you said suicide for them, didn't you mean suicide for you? Invade North Korea you invade one of the largest, well equipped, best trained army's in the world. Invade North Korea, South Korea gets nuked. Invade North Korea, China helps them, China with their 4 million soldiers. Don't be such a blind, even if Bush had the guts to invade north Korea, he's not that stupid. Or is he.

Oh. You mean kinda like that other army we had to face? You know ... the one that was the 4th largest in the world ... the one that was suppose to have "the mother of all battles" with us, but surrendered at the very first opportunity.

I don't call it support for the troops when the President that the voters just re-elected has consistently re-deployed units within weeks/months of coming home (or keeps them deployed for a longer period of time than he said he would deploy them), put in place policies that did not allow people who were up for retirement/dischargement from the military to leave, and has misrepresented or lied to the troops about what they are doing and why. These are not actions that support the troops.

No, in this election, support the troops is not a call for support the President. The voters should have supported the candidate that actually showed up for his tour of duty and has the records to prove it.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that we have ensured all of our troops a job in military for a long time to come. Enjoy your next 15 years in the Middle East.

Personally, I think I'm leaving so that my children can actually avoid the military if they want to.
There is no draft . There will be no draft. The Democrats were the ones TRYING to push that through, and they were defeated in the elections yesterday, in case you had not noticed.

I don't call it support for the troops when the President that the voters just re-elected has consistently re-deployed units within weeks/months of coming home (or keeps them deployed for a longer period of time than he said he would deploy them), put in place policies that did not allow people who were up for retirement/dischargement from the military to leave, and has misrepresented or lied to the troops about what they are doing and why. These are not actions that support the troops.

No, in this election, support the troops, is not a call for support the President. The voters should have supported the candidate that actually showed up for his tour of duty and has the records to prove it.

As to the troops, why not ask them? Seems to me like they were all pretty much relieved when Kerry conceded the election.

As to Kerry's military service ... look for records of his original discharge from the Navy to show up soon ... the one that was less than honorable but which was changed to "honorable" during the Carter amnesty. Film at eleven! :D

I don't call it support for the troops when the President that the voters just re-elected has consistently re-deployed units within weeks/months of coming home (or keeps them deployed for a longer period of time than he said he would deploy them), put in place policies that did not allow people who were up for retirement/dischargement from the military to leave, and has misrepresented or lied to the troops about what they are doing and why. These are not actions that support the troops.

No, in this election, support the troops, is not a call for support the President. The voters should have supported the candidate that actually showed up for his tour of duty and has the records to prove it.
You mean, a candidate who disgraced the service by throwing out his ribbons, calling his fellow veterans war criminals, and even last week, was fast to jump on a story of the troops he wishes to command being irresponsible, without ever listening to their side, in a story that finally was disproved, and for which he still has not apologized to said troops?
Ask the troops who they support, most of your information is inaccurate or exagerrated. The troops by a huge majority supported the current commander in chief.

Oh. You mean kinda like that other army we had to face? You know ... the one that was the 4th largest in the world ... the one that was suppose to have "the mother of all battles" with us, but surrendered at the very first opportunity.
Well, it seems the biggest problem in Iraq was not the army, but the insurgency or whatever you want to call it.

Soldiers are trained murderers in the service of the government, who are excused because they serve the government's interests.
A necessary evil, maybe.

Soldiers are trained murderers in the service of the government, who are excused because they serve the government's interests.
A necessary evil, maybe.
This deserves no reply, except to say it is one of the most shortsighted,uninformed,outrageous,factually incorrect,malicious...oh, I was not going to reply, excuse me.

Soldiers are trained murderers in the service of the government, who are excused because they serve the government's interests.
A necessary evil, maybe. :rolleyes: Go back to your cave, Osama.

Enjoy your draft. Coming up, June 2005.
Enjoy the nuclear war against NK or Iran. Many of your "troops" will die horrible deaths. And I will not feel sad for the losses.

Do me a favor, Gigatron. Wake me up when Germany does something again besides being an international rubber stamp of approval for France. Germany has been in decline since the merge with the East, and I see that you've got a massive case of sour grapes.

I slit my throat while reading this thread :)

now I'm bleeding to death ;)

it cant get any worse than this... general has hit rock bottom.

Do me a favor, Gigatron. Wake me up when Germany does something again besides being an international rubber stamp of approval for France. Germany has been in decline since the merge with the East, and I see that you've got a massive case of sour grapes.

damn right germany dosn't do much.. but its stagnated.. not declining.. any by the way the reason germany does not do anything is because if germany tries to speak out properly like france on an issue they don't agree with they get met with a barrage of WW1/2 remider crap and the time their nation was divided by the soviets and the west.. the west has its boot on germany's head..

I don't call it support for the troops when the President that the voters just re-elected has consistently re-deployed units within weeks/months of coming home (or keeps them deployed for a longer period of time than he said he would deploy them), put in place policies that did not allow people who were up for retirement/dischargement from the military to leave, and has misrepresented or lied to the troops about what they are doing and why. These are not actions that support the troops.

No, in this election, support the troops is not a call for support the President. The voters should have supported the candidate that actually showed up for his tour of duty and has the records to prove it.

I heard about all of this re-deploying of units garbage from JF'nK when he was on the campaign trail. Unfortunately, most of my friends are back already. They weren't "re-deployed" or heldover in some "backdoor draft" as JF'nK said.

Because of Kerry's loss,

My dad is staying in the military for a few more years and thus allows me to continue with my college education!

My dad is glad that Bush won as is my mom.

I applaud Kerry on a good campaign but it just wasn't ment to be.

I voted to keep Bush! Its about time...all those Kerry supporters now know the truth! Bush is in fact the better man!

I knew he was going to win all along, I too know that Bush was the better man and no one(not even MTV and puff daddy) can prevent Bush from winning....

damn right germany dosn't do much.. but its stagnated.. not declining.. any by the way the reason germany does not do anything is because if germany tries to speak out properly like france on an issue they don't agree with they get met with a barrage of WW1/2 remider crap and the time their nation was divided by the soviets and the west.. the west has its boot on germany's head..

That is indeed a part of it, but I maintain that they are declining. The unions are out of control. The East is still an economic basket case and a polluted nightmare. Poland, Hungary and even Slovakia are years ahead in the cleanup department. And the greying population is starting to put strains on their entitlement economy. Shoot, even their sports teams have gone downhill.

I'm not saying that Germany is weak. Far from it. I am saying, though, is that where Germany is in 2004 is NOT where is should be in relation to the rest of the world.

"Support our troops" is not the same as "Support our President"

Not by a long shot.

I have no idea what these people mean when they say "support our troops." I think it is code for "don't question the government." After all what exactly have Americans been asked to do to support our troops?

Bush is the first president in U.S. history to cut taxes in the middle of a war. This administration has tried to cut military pay and benifits, but they wouldn't dare take money out of the pockets of the richest 1%.

The wealthiest Americans aren't being asked to sacrifice for our troops.

Those who are able to afford college or have better financial or job opportunities and don't have to rely on the military aren't asked to give their service to the country.

America's young people aren't being asked to sacrifice for our troops.

American consumption of fuel is at an all time high with SUVs and trucks getting bigger every year, further increasing American dependency on foreign oil. There is no government program to encourage fuel conservation.

America's consumers aren't being asked to sacrifice for our troops.

I think "support our troops" means sitting on our fat asses, cheering on FOX News, driving Humvees, and calling anyone who has the timerity to question authority unpatriotic.

I have no idea what these people mean when they say "support our troops." I think it is code for "don't question the government." After all what exactly have Americans been asked to do to support our troops?

Supporting our troops by sending them care packages, cards, phone cards, etc etc etc.

Bush is the first president in U.S. history to cut taxes in the middle of a war. This administration has tried to cut military pay and benifits, but they wouldn't dare take money out of the pockets of the richest 1%.

My dad is in the Military and we received a PAY RAISE!!! That's right a PAY RAISE meaning that my dad receives more money. Ironic isn't it? As for Taxes, my family's taxes went down and we are NOT in the top 1%! Stop spouting the democratic line since you obviously have no idea that the tax cuts were aimed at EVERYONE!

The wealthiest Americans aren't being asked to sacrifice for our troops.

And yet, members of CONGRESS have CHILDREN overseas fighting! Care to explain this?

Those who are able to afford college or have better financial or job opportunities and don't have to rely on the military aren't asked to give their service to the country.

And yet, alot of them are signing up to serve.

America's young people aren't being asked to sacrifice for our troops.

No, just asked to give their lives for their country.

American consumption of fuel is at an all time high with SUVs and trucks getting bigger every year, further increasing American dependency on foreign oil. There is no government program to encourage fuel conservation.

True but yet there are now implementing certain Miles/gallon on these types of vehicals to make them more gas effecient. Not to mention, hybred cars are starting to come out.

America's consumers aren't being asked to sacrifice for our troops.

Now that is bull! How many people buy stuff and then ship it overseas? More than you know.

I think "support our troops" means sitting on our fat asses, cheering on FOX News, driving Humvees, and calling anyone who has the timerity to question authority unpatriotic.

Then you are very very diluted individual!

This deserves no reply, except to say it is one of the most shortsighted,uninformed,outrageous,factually incorrect,malicious...oh, I was not going to reply, excuse me.
Are you telling me you are not trained to kill? God damn it,learn this first,its the most important skill a soldier needs.

I knew he was going to win all along, I too know that Bush was the better man and no one(not even MTV and puff daddy) can prevent Bush from winning....
Well he was the most popular man at least.

I have no idea what these people mean when they say "support our troops." I think it is code for "don't question the government." After all what exactly have Americans been asked to do to support our troops?


um buying the ribbon
The proceeds go for financial support of the troups/their families

So yeah I guess they are supporting them lol

When you said suicide for them, didn't you mean suicide for you? Invade North Korea you invade one of the largest, well equipped, best trained army's in the world. Invade North Korea, South Korea gets nuked. Invade North Korea, China helps them, China with their 4 million soldiers. Don't be such a blind, even if Bush had the guts to invade north Korea, he's not that stupid. Or is he.

China would be more willing to help us than North Korea. They hate the idea of North Korea having nuclear weapons. China wants to stay the only nuclear power in the pacific(except for Russia if you count them).

Consider the following:

With 130,000 soldiers still in the heat of battle in Iraq and more fighting and dying in Afghanistan, the Bush administration sought this year to cut $75 a month from the “imminent danger” pay added to soldiers’ paychecks when in battle zones. The administration sought to cut by $150 a month the family separation allowance offered to those same soldiers and others who serve overseas away from their families. Although they were termed “wasteful and unnecessary” by the White House, Congress blocked those cuts this year, largely because of Democratic votes.

This year’s White House budget for Veterans Affairs cut $3 billion from VA hospitals—despite 9,000 casualties in Iraq and as aging Vietnam veterans demand more care. VA spending today averages $2,800 less per patient than nine years ago.

The administration also proposed levying a $250 annual charge on all Priority 8 veterans—those with “non-service-related illnesses”—who seek treatment at VA facilities, and seeks to close VA hospitals to Priority 8 veterans who earn more than $26,000 a year.

Until protests led to a policy change, the Bush administration also was charging injured GIs from Iraq $8 a day for food when they arrived for medical treatment at the Fort Stewart, Georgia, base where most injured are treated.

In mid-October, the Pentagon, at the request of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, announced plans to shutter 19 commissaries—military-run stores that offer discounted food and merchandise that helps low-paid enlisted troops and their families get by—along with the possiblility of closing 19 more.

At the same time, the Pentagon also announced it was trying to determine whether to shutter 58 military-run schools for soldiers’ children at 14 military installations.

The White House is seeking to block a federal judge’s award of damages to a group of servicemen who sued the Iraqi government for torture during the 1991 Gulf War. The White House claims the money, to come from Iraqi assets confiscated by the United States, is needed for that country’s reconstruction.

The administration beat back a bipartisan attempt in Congress to add $1.3 billion for VA hospitals to Bush’s request of $87 billion for war and reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Consider the following:

With 130,000 soldiers still in the heat of battle in Iraq and more fighting and dying in Afghanistan, the Bush administration sought this year to cut $75 a month from the “imminent danger” pay added to soldiers’ paychecks when in battle zones. The administration sought to cut by $150 a month the family separation allowance offered to those same soldiers and others who serve overseas away from their families. Although they were termed “wasteful and unnecessary” by the White House, Congress blocked those cuts this year, largely because of Democratic votes.

This year’s White House budget for Veterans Affairs cut $3 billion from VA hospitals—despite 9,000 casualties in Iraq and as aging Vietnam veterans demand more care. VA spending today averages $2,800 less per patient than nine years ago.


The administration also proposed levying a $250 annual charge on all Priority 8 veterans—those with “non-service-related illnesses”—who seek treatment at VA facilities, and seeks to close VA hospitals to Priority 8 veterans who earn more than $26,000 a year.

Until protests led to a policy change, the Bush administration also was charging injured GIs from Iraq $8 a day for food when they arrived for medical treatment at the Fort Stewart, Georgia, base where most injured are treated.

In mid-October, the Pentagon, at the request of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, announced plans to shutter 19 commissaries—military-run stores that offer discounted food and merchandise that helps low-paid enlisted troops and their families get by—along with the possiblility of closing 19 more.

At the same time, the Pentagon also announced it was trying to determine whether to shutter 58 military-run schools for soldiers’ children at 14 military installations.

The White House is seeking to block a federal judge’s award of damages to a group of servicemen who sued the Iraqi government for torture during the 1991 Gulf War. The White House claims the money, to come from Iraqi assets confiscated by the United States, is needed for that country’s reconstruction.

The administration beat back a bipartisan attempt in Congress to add $1.3 billion for VA hospitals to Bush’s request of $87 billion for war and reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan.


lol where did you copy and paste that from? care to give a linky? (hey dont get me wrong I am actualy rather centeral I always like learning about things)

China would be more willing to help us than North Korea. They hate the idea of North Korea having nuclear weapons. China wants to stay the only nuclear power in the pacific(except for Russia if you count them).
Still NK is a dictatoship full of elite-soldiers and country that wouldn't hesitate to use ABC-weapons, whatever genious plan of attack US/China has it would be suicide, espicially by China (on further thoughts we might just count them out, those ABC-weapons you know).

lol where did you copy and paste that from? care to give a linky? (hey dont get me wrong I am actualy rather centeral I always like learning about things)

Happy to oblige those on the quest for knowledge. See In These Times http://www.inthesetimes.com/comments.php?id=465_0_2_0_C

Also, check out the story in the SF Chronical (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2003/08/14/MN94780.DTL) or the Center for American Progress (http://www.kintera.com/AccountTempFiles/cf/{E9245FE4-9A2B-43C7-A521-5D6FF2E06E03}/bushtroops.htm) for a side-by-side comparison of claims vs. facts.

If those are too liberal for you read the article in The Army Times (http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-2386496.php) titled An act of ‘betrayal:’ In the midst of war, key family benefits face cuts.

Happy to oblige those on the quest for knowledge. See In These Times http://www.inthesetimes.com/comments.php?id=465_0_2_0_C

Also, check out the story in the SF Chronical (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2003/08/14/MN94780.DTL) or the Center for American Progress (http://www.kintera.com/AccountTempFiles/cf/{E9245FE4-9A2B-43C7-A521-5D6FF2E06E03}/bushtroops.htm) for a side-by-side comparison of claims vs. facts.

If those are too liberal for you read the article in The Army Times (http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-2386496.php) titled An act of ‘betrayal:’ In the midst of war, key family benefits face cuts.

Amazing that you quote the San Fran Times! They are very liberal as is the Center for American Progress. And as for the Army Times, the article was from a year ago and as far as I know, those cuts did not happen.

Amazing that you quote the San Fran Times! (by the way it is the SF Chronical) They are very liberal as is the Center for American Progress. And as for the Army Times, the article was from a year ago and as far as I know, those cuts did not happen.

Yes, I know. You probably only accept FOX News, the Washington Times (not the Post, horror of horrors), and Rush Limbaugh as actual news sources. Everyone else just makes up the facts, right? The nice thing about applying a ideological filter to every source is that you don't actually have to bother reading anything that doesn't reinforce opinions you already hold. There is no need to actually attempt to refute the facts of an argument. All you have to do is point and say "liberal" and that ends the discussion.

By the way, The Army Times (the Army's newspaper too liberal for you?) wrote, "...(this is) the latest in a string of actions by the Bush administration to cut or hold down growth in pay and benefits, including basic pay, combat pay, health-care benefits and the death gratuity paid to survivors of troops who die on active duty."

The point was the Bush administration attempted to cut military pay, not that they were allowed to get away with it.

Yes, I know. You probably only accept FOX News, the Washington Times (not the Post, horror of horrors), and Rush Limbaugh as actual news sources.

In that you would be wrong. I read both of the local papers, one is liberal, the other conservative. I do read the Washington Post online and I do not accept Rush Limbaugh as actual news source. Limbaugh is a commentator. Get the difference right!

Everyone else just makes up the facts, right? The nice thing about applying a ideological filter to every source is that you don't actually have to bother reading anything that doesn't reinforce opinions you already hold.

I will give you this but I can turn the tables on you and say the exact samething as your opening statement points out. You made assertions about me that were totally inaccurate. I do get my news from other sources. BTW, do you just read things from Liberal sources or do you read things from conservative sources too and get the other side of the story?

There is no need to actually attempt to refute the facts of an argument. All you have to do is point and say "liberal" and that ends the discussion.

And you can point and say "Conservative" and that ends the discussion from your pov.

By the way, The Army Times (the Army's newspaper too liberal for you?) wrote, "...(this is) the latest in a string of actions by the Bush administration to cut or hold down growth in pay and benefits, including basic pay, combat pay, health-care benefits and the death gratuity paid to survivors of troops who die on active duty."

BTW, I don't read the Army Times! I don't even like the Army. And as I stated before, it hasn't happened as to my knowledge. I've seen no bill on this come up in congress and trust me, I keep up with what my Senators and my Congressman vote for. If I don't like how they voted, I send them an email. So I do know that this has not come up for a vote! BTW, my dad is in the military.

The point was the Bush administration attempted to cut military pay, not that they were allowed to get away with it.

And as I stated, I've seen no bill come across the Congress stating what you have just stated.

I think it's fascinating that both the Bush administration and the Blair government have the cheek to declare the latest civilian casualty figures (now estimated at 100,000) as "based on poor intelligence". Where have we heard that before !

Still at least they can be assured we all know that they were probably all terrorists, in some way. Just when the war on terror was going so well...

What a fruitcake.
what an angsty fruitcake you are.

What a fruitcake.
Fruitcakes aren't allowed in the military.

I voted to keep Bush! Its about time...all those Kerry supporters now know the truth! Bush is in fact the better man!
Notice how quickly the Democrats turned on Kerry once he lost the election. There is no sense of loyalty among them.

Yes, I know. You probably only accept FOX News, the Washington Times (not the Post, horror of horrors), and Rush Limbaugh as actual news sources. Everyone else just makes up the facts, right? The nice thing about applying a ideological filter to every source is that you don't actually have to bother reading anything that doesn't reinforce opinions you already hold. There is no need to actually attempt to refute the facts of an argument. All you have to do is point and say "liberal" and that ends the discussion.

By the way, The Army Times (the Army's newspaper too liberal for you?) wrote, "...(this is) the latest in a string of actions by the Bush administration to cut or hold down growth in pay and benefits, including basic pay, combat pay, health-care benefits and the death gratuity paid to survivors of troops who die on active duty."

The point was the Bush administration attempted to cut military pay, not that they were allowed to get away with it.

I am in the military and have been in since 2001 and every year my pay has gone up. So I would have to say you're full of crap.

I am in the military and have been in since 2001 and every year my pay has gone up. So I would have to say you're full of crap.

And I would have to say that your masterful use of the language and eloquent argument demonstrates you have obviously chosen the right career path.

And I would have to say that your masterful use of the language and eloquent argument demonstrates you have obviously chosen the right career path.


Wow he brings up personal experiences on a given subject that you don’t have a way to refute

So you criticize his grammar/spelling.

Honestly are you trying to be this petty or does it come naturally? (I honestly want to know)

Wow he brings up personal experiences on a given subject that you don’t have a way to refute

So you criticize his grammar/spelling.

Honestly are you trying to be this petty or does it come naturally? (I honestly want to know)


???

We are having a discussion about Republicans using patriotism, military service, and religion to shut up opponents. My comment had to do with the witty retort "you're full of crap," not grammer or spelling. What your comment had to do with only you know.

And I would have to say that your masterful use of the language and eloquent argument demonstrates you have obviously chosen the right career path.
Your hatred of those who defend this country is duly noted.

???

We are having a discussion about Republicans using patriotism, military service, and religion to shut up opponents. My comment had to do with the witty retort "you're full of crap," not grammer or spelling. What your comment had to do with only you know.


Hmmm even so like you said you were having as you say an argument but rather then refute his experience you went around it by (rather then grammer) slamming his eloquence


Oh well logic flaws

Your hatred of those who defend this country is duly noted.

Thank you for making my point. I have argued facts, supplying documentation for my statements, and have assumed those who disagree with me do so out of geniune belief. I do not question their patriotism, morality, or depth of religious belief.

However, without offering anything in the way of an intellectual response, your answer is that I hate those in military service. You have no answer to my argument, so I must hate America.

Thank you for making my point. I have argued facts, supplying documentation for my statements, and have assumed those who disagree with me do so out of geniune belief. I do not question their patriotism, morality, or depth of religious belief.

However, without offering anything in the way of an intellectual response, your answer is that I hate those in military service. You have no answer to my argument, so I must hate America.

Your answer to his personal experience … no argument :-)

Silly accusing someone of argument logical flaw when you yourself are very guilty of it (as we all are)


Silly

Your answer to his personal experience … no argument :-)

Silly accusing someone of argument logical flaw when you yourself are very guilty of it (as we all are)


Silly

Answer to his personal experience? What on earth are you babbling about? Why would I question his personal experience? It had nothing to do with the argument I was making. He has received pay raises. Well, fine. I never claimed he did not. Please reread my post and show me where I claimed the military pay was cut.

By the way, The Army Times (the Army's newspaper too liberal for you?) wrote, "...(this is) the latest in a string of actions by the Bush administration to cut or hold down growth in pay and benefits, including basic pay, combat pay, health-care benefits and the death gratuity paid to survivors of troops who die on active duty."

The point was the Bush administration attempted to cut military pay, not that they were allowed to get away with it.

By the way you have asked me to document my statements, which I happily did, providing multiple sources, to which you obviously had no answer. You have apparently imposed no such standard on other posters, nor yourself.

I honestly cannot follow your line of thinking.

Still NK is a dictatoship full of elite-soldiers and country that wouldn't hesitate to use ABC-weapons, whatever genious plan of attack US/China has it would be suicide, espicially by China (on further thoughts we might just count them out, those ABC-weapons you know).
"Elite soldiers"?Not in North Korea. Most of their soldiers are starving.

And I would have to say that your masterful use of the language and eloquent argument demonstrates you have obviously chosen the right career path.
Ok, I chose to only quote this one,but I read all of your posts. As to this one, the military is in general more educated than the rest of the population in general, and here you are making a thinly veiled attempt to imply otherwise.
As to your other assertion, yes, I have heard that too, obviously I also read the Army times. I do not know the story behind it, as in most cases Republicans in general are more pro-military,but it was one reason this year I came close to going back in my family's direction and voting Dem. I still didn't though because as I said in general the Republican party is there for us more than the Dems,but it was closer this year than most because of the article you mentioned.

USA :) Glad to have you
USAf Reporting in.

Takrai, is this the thanks I get for resurrecting your thread? I think if Gactimus made it through basic he is tough enough to take a little gentle ribbing about his rhetorical skills on an Internet bulletin board.

Are you telling me you are not trained to kill? God damn it,learn this first,its the most important skill a soldier needs.

I don't know about the rest of the soldiers here, but the first thing i learned how to do was maintain disciplin followed by how to survive.

Takrai, is this the thanks I get for resurrecting your thread? I think if Gactimus made it through basic he is tough enough to take a little gentle ribbing about his rhetorical skills on an Internet bulletin board.
touche' BUT I did agree with the other part you posted,so give me some credit :)

Ogiak, you have ignored my statements in refute of yours.

Have you conceded the point or don't you have something to refute what I just said?

I don't know about the rest of the soldiers here, but the first thing i learned how to do was maintain disciplin followed by how to survive.

You are right. They drill disipline into your skulls first then teach you how to survive in many situations. Even people that don't serve on the front lines get the same type of training for the most part.

Are you telling me you are not trained to kill? God damn it,learn this first,its the most important skill a soldier needs.
The quote I was replying to, said we are trained murderers, not trained killers, there being a difference.
Also it is clear you are no soldier if you think the most important skill a soldier needs is killing, and if you are, you should kneel down and pray I never find you in my command.

Answer to his personal experience? What on earth are you babbling about? Why would I question his personal experience? It had nothing to do with the argument I was making. He has received pay raises. Well, fine. I never claimed he did not. Please reread my post and show me where I claimed the military pay was cut.



By the way you have asked me to document my statements, which I happily did, providing multiple sources, to which you obviously had no answer. You have apparently imposed no such standard on other posters, nor yourself.

I honestly cannot follow your line of thinking.


Ok lets do this the simple way


You said



Happy to oblige those on the quest for knowledge. See In These Times http://www.inthesetimes.com/comments.php?id=465_0_2_0_C

Also, check out the story in the SF Chronical (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/artic.../14/MN94780.DTL) or the Center for American Progress (http://www.kintera.com/AccountTempFiles/cf/{E9245FE4-9A2B-43C7-A521-5D6FF2E06E03}/bushtroops.htm) for a side-by-side comparison of claims vs. facts.

If those are too liberal for you read the article in The Army Times (http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?...925-2386496.php) titled An act of ‘betrayal:’ In the midst of war, key family benefits face cuts.


In the links for your proof of bushes fund cutting


Gactimus

Came back with


I am in the military and have been in since 2001 and every year my pay has gone up. So I would have to say you're full of crap.

Refuting your evidence with personal experience (which is evidence in and of itself) so logical

You came back with
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gactimus
I am in the military and have been in since 2001 and every year my pay has gone up. So I would have to say you're full of crap.


And I would have to say that your masterful use of the language and eloquent argument demonstrates you have obviously chosen the right career path.


In this case you didn’t argue the point … you just make fun of his use of language and career choice

Not an argument just bashing … I made fun of you for that
But obviously you don’t understand why

I am in the military and have been in since 2001 and every year my pay has gone up. So I would have to say you're full of crap.
Glad to have you. You are lucky you were not in during the term of Clinton, ask around your unit:)

And I would have to say that your masterful use of the language and eloquent argument demonstrates you have obviously chosen the right career path.

I know that you are offline but i'm hoping you will comeback and maybe see this. I'm also hoping that when you see this you will answer it. Anyways what exactley did you mean by this. I believe we have already had this conversation in another thread and you left as it started turning sour for you. Whether this was by chance or by design i'm not sure but i you could explain this statment i would much appreciate it.

Takrai

Hey did our boy Ogiek ever go back to our other thread and answer?

Takrai

Hey did our boy Ogiek ever go back to our other thread and answer?
;)No

While I would love nothing better than to spend my entire day bringing liberal enlightenment to the masses in the NS forum, my students will not allow it. I peek in when I can, but in my absence you will have to settle for your regular diet of unchallenged conservative dogma.

I see the whole gang is back together again.

While I would love nothing better than to spend my entire day bringing liberal enlightenment to the masses in the NS forum, my students will not allow it. I peek in when I can, but in my absence you will have to settle for your regular diet of unchallenged conservative dogma.

ahhh we love you to ogiek. :fluffle: Hehe anyways all kidding aside. I enjoy talking with you you know a lot of stuff. I'm a history buff but idon't know as much as i would like. I like most of your aurguments i just think you need to work on you delivery a little bit.

"My answer is bring 'em on." —President George W. Bush, challenging militants attacking U.S. forces in Iraq

Saying Bush supports the troops is like saying a CEO supports his factory workers.

Bush sees the army as a machine, and all of the soldiers are the gears. Im just glad my father was able to leave the USAF in time.

ahhh we love you to ogiek. :fluffle: Hehe anyways all kidding aside. I enjoy talking with you you know a lot of stuff. I'm a history buff but idon't know as much as i would like. I like most of your aurguments i just think you need to work on you delivery a little bit.

Arrogance is my chief failing.

Arrogance is my chief failing.
I think arrogence is all of our chief failings. I know i stuggle with it.

"My answer is bring 'em on." —President George W. Bush, challenging militants attacking U.S. forces in Iraq

Saying Bush supports the troops is like saying a CEO supports his factory workers.

Bush sees the army as a machine, and all of the soldiers are the gears. Im just glad my father was able to leave the USAF in time.

Better a machine than a hooptie, ala Clinton.

(For those of you not familiar: a hooptie is a beater car you keep running, but put no money into.)

I resurect thee.

To those of you who re elected Bush by a sizeable majority, thank you for living up to all the "Support our troops"signs. Your troops appreciate the show of support.


Since when is 3 million votes out of 100 million a "sizeable" majority.

Sorry, guys, but it was damn close. Deal with it.

Since when is 3 million votes out of 100 million a "sizeable" majority.

Sorry, guys, but it was damn close. Deal with it.

52% to 47% Bush over Kerry and all the absentee ballots aren't even cast yet! Get used to it! Kerry got shelled as did the democratic party.

BTW, losing by 3 million votes is a sizable majority in this country.

Better a machine than a hooptie, ala Clinton.

(For those of you not familiar: a hooptie is a beater car you keep running, but put no money into.)

Oh, I thought that this was about supporting the troops, not military build up.

But I concede to you that our military has grown much larger under Bush, we can now all say that we spend 1400 dollars a year on an army.

52% to 47% Bush over Kerry and all the absentee ballots aren't even cast yet! Get used to it! Kerry got shelled as did the democratic party.

BTW, losing by 3 million votes is a sizable majority in this country.
Yes, let's celebrate in the fact that people elected a man supported by terrorists and globally known for pissing people off. Let's celebrate in the fact that people elected a man on his platform to limit civil liberties and take away civil rights of gays, muslims, and everyone who doesn't agree with him. Oh, yes, I'm definitely happy to "get used to" the fact that this country has essentially told Bush meddling in the Middle East is a good thing, and given Europe zero respect.

I don't think it's much to brag about, that people were more worried about men fucking each other, than Bush fucking this country and other countries.

Oh, I thought that this was about supporting the troops, not military build up.

But I concede to you that our military has grown much larger under Bush, we can now all say that we spend 1400 dollars a year on an army.
The army has not grown larger. We receive respect from the Republicans, we generally receive better pay and efficient supplies. Clinton sent us into many deployments, but never properly supplied us.

Yes, let's celebrate in the fact that people elected a man supported by terrorists and globally known for pissing people off. Let's celebrate in the fact that people elected a man on his platform to limit civil liberties and take away civil rights of gays, muslims, and everyone who doesn't agree with him. Oh, yes, I'm definitely happy to "get used to" the fact that this country has essentially told Bush meddling in the Middle East is a good thing, and given Europe zero respect.

I don't think it's much to brag about, that people were more worried about men fucking each other, than Bush fucking this country and other countries.
You should try to get a better grip on the facts. We have freed Iraq from a dictator who killed hundreds of thousands of his own people, and raped and murdered Kuwaitis. Afghanistan has just had their first free election in history. Iraq's is coming up. The majority of Iraqis welcome US presence, and are quite aware of the European countries food for oil scandal with the former dictator, which left them starving while Saddam and the European and UN administrations in charge of overseeing it were piling up riches. Given the facts on the ground, I am glad we do not have a president who listened to the French and Germans whine about involvement, even more so once the food for oil scandal was made public and the reasons became more clear.

Your hatred of those who defend this country is duly noted.
You got it right there what an army should be for. Defending your country. Not invading other people's for no good reason. Sorry, but the US Army should be back in America, not off on a jaunt 'round the Middle East.

I'm British and I respect those people in the British Army, but not those who are off fighting in Iraq. Well, not the ones who enjoy it like most of the Americans seem to. The ones that enjoy invading other people's countries are just stunted little bullies. No I do not hate America, no I do not hate Britain, no I do not hate the armed forces of either as a rule. I have nothing but the utmost respect for those willing to up arms and fight for their country (I'm considering joining up myself when I finish college), but when I see the US Army charging into Middle-Eastern countries just because George Bush doesn't like them, I can't get past the image of school bully Chuck Squarejaw pinching little Mohammed's sweets.

The army has not grown larger. We receive respect from the Republicans, we generally receive better pay and efficient supplies. Clinton sent us into many deployments, but never properly supplied us.

Took the words right out of my mouth.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH...... The democrats are the ones pushing the draft. Look to the people drafting the bill they are all democrats. These scare tactics don't work on anyone that knows anything. As for North Korea and Iran they don't have capability but when they do we'll have a shield up. OOOPS!

wait, scare tactics? kind of like GW has been doing to the american public for the past 2 and half years, and one of the main reasons he won the election? oh ok.

wait, scare tactics? kind of like GW has been doing to the american public for the past 2 and half years, and one of the main reasons he won the election? oh ok.

Proof that he used scare tactics?

To those of you who re elected Bush by a sizeable majority, thank you for living up to all the "Support our troops"signs. Your troops appreciate the show of support.No, Thank you for doing what I never could do. For putting your life on the line for our Freedom and safety. For putting up with Wars that make you seem unpopular in the eyes of the world. For giving unselfishly to aid others even when they will stab you in the back when it's turned. For you and all those that came before you... back to the Minutemen who faced a supior force but still fought. THANK YOU.

you are all friggin' idiots. neither bush nor kerry was well suited to lead this nation. kerry was probably the better candidate between the two. then again, i'm for gay rights, for abortion, and pretty much disagree with most of the republicans' stand points. there will most likely be a nuclear war if the US continues the same way that we are headed. maybe not with NK or with Iraq, but most definitely with some powerful country.....say....Afganistan? maybe, since 9/11 was tied with Al Quida in Afganistan, we should have gone there before Iraq? maybe? you think?

OUR COUNTRY IS DOOMED THANKS TO YOU STUPID BUSH SUPPORTERS!

you are all friggin' idiots. neither bush nor kerry was well suited to lead this nation. kerry was probably the better candidate between the two. then again, i'm for gay rights, for abortion, and pretty much disagree with most of the republicans' stand points. there will most likely be a nuclear war if the US continues the same way that we are headed. maybe not with NK or with Iraq, but most definitely with some powerful country.....say....Afganistan? maybe, since 9/11 was tied with Al Quida in Afganistan, we should have gone there before Iraq? maybe? you think?

OUR COUNTRY IS DOOMED THANKS TO YOU STUPID BUSH SUPPORTERS!

Where have you been the last 3 years? First of all, we DID go to Afghanistan and have killed or captured about 75% of the original al-Quida leadership.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._invasion_of_Afghanistan

Another news flash. We have helped to enable them to hold their first elections last month.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200410/s1216940.htm

And guess what!! 41% of the registered voters were WOMEN!

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-10/09/content_380834.htm

There were disputes on the validity of the election, but it has finally been settled.

The Taliban is all but destroyed.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=153343

and you know what else? The SAME thing is going to happen in Iraq. Democracy is hard work, but it's worth it.

you are all friggin' idiots. neither bush nor kerry was well suited to lead this nation. kerry was probably the better candidate between the two. then again, i'm for gay rights, for abortion, and pretty much disagree with most of the republicans' stand points. there will most likely be a nuclear war if the US continues the same way that we are headed. maybe not with NK or with Iraq, but most definitely with some powerful country.....say....Afganistan? maybe, since 9/11 was tied with Al Quida in Afganistan, we should have gone there before Iraq? maybe? you think?

OUR COUNTRY IS DOOMED THANKS TO YOU STUPID BUSH SUPPORTERS!
What universe do you live in?Afghanistan was gone into before Iraq...My whole point with Kerry supporters was that many of them, while I honestly believe they did what they thought was right, did so for misguided reasons such as this.Just because they heard somewhere that we should have taken care of Afghanistan,al Q, etc...
Well, another newsflash...We have arrested the vast majority of al Qaeda, and done so in 102 nations worldwide, including,but hardly limited to, Afghanistan.