NationStates Jolt Archive

Don't bother. I just asked my mother (Former enlisted in the USAF) and she confirmed it. She worked in Personel/Admin.

somehow, I don't believe that.

You don't understand apparently! I can't go to a combat zone. I don't know why, I have a better chance of killing myself falling down a flight of stairs. Or by breathing.

I'd be fighting with the US military and not the Iraqi Military. I would be fighting for the United States and defending her from the evils of this planet. Saddam was an evil of this planet and a violator of International Law AND Human Rights so we eliminated him. Man, I wish I could go into combat but I guess I'll settle for doing my nation's duty in the Halls of Congress. We're brainwashed? The evils of this planet are greed. Greed for children = overpopulation, which will lead to the ultimate destruction of the human race unless we stop bitching about some guy and take on world-wide problems.

Don't bother. I just asked my mother (Former enlisted in the USAF) and she confirmed it. She worked in Personel/Admin.

You'll have to excuse me if I don't take you or her word for it. I'll still check I think. In fact perhaps I'll call my local recruiting office..however, I would probably have to also find something on the net, or you'd just call me a liar. So, perhaps I'll do both. After dinner though.. It's Taco night! ;)

Maybe because your thick skulled. I am in support of this war because of the following:

1. Violation of 17 UN Resolutions
2. Violation of a UN Cease-Fire
3: Violation of Human Rights
4: Supporting Terrorism

That is why I am in support of this Iraq War. I've said this many times before but apparently you haven't been listening.

Definition of Disingenuous: Corneliu demanding action in response to violations of anything established by the United Nations. Take a look at his Signature for proof.

:rolleyes:

Definition of Disingenuous: Corneliu demanding action in response to violations of anything established by the United Nations. Take a look at his Signature for proof.

:rolleyes:

If the UN doesn't want to do anything, fine. Leave it to those that will do something.

As someone who has just canceled his Senate campaign to volunteer for Iraq duty I got a present for you libs out there who are supporting Al Qaeda and hating anyone who is American.

The one finger salute.

(I would use a pic but I don't know where you guys get them at.)
Again, I gotta call you out on this one. Which libs are "supporting Al Qaeda"? Anyone who is against the Iraq War automarically "hate anyone who is American"?

Just because Bush has led America into a war that most people in the world disapprove of, doesn't mean they love Saddam, or Al Queda, or that they hate America. Please don't make unfounded parallels.

If the UN doesn't want to do anything, fine. Leave it to those that will do something.

You believe the United Nation is corrupt and obsolete and should be disbanded. So you calling for a response to violations of UN resolutions is disingenuous at best and hypocritical at worst. If you don't believe in the UN why the hell feel their resolutions are worth enforcing?

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

You believe the United Nation is corrupt and obsolete and should be disbanded. So you calling for a response to violations of UN resolutions is disingenuous at best and hypocritical at worst. If you don't believe in the UN why the hell feel their resolutions are worth enforcing?

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

1. It is most definitely corrupt
2. it is mostly obsolete. Has been since day one when they failed to prevent the 1st Arab/Israeli War. Didnt prevent the first Pakistani/Indian War either
3. Lets give reforms a chance first. Then disband it if they don't work and start over from scratch

To the disingenious and hypocritical comment:
They were violated, violated every single time, and the UN doesn't do a thing about them. Seems to be a habit dating all the way back to its founding.

As to believing in the UN, I believe in its ideals but apparently most nations on this planet no longer care about the ideals of the UN. If they did, we wouldn't be in this mess. If the UN had just passed its first test, I don't think the world would be as screwed up as it is now. Since they failed that first test, its been hell ever sense.

No, you're just too dense to get it. They both hate jews, they work toward bringing down Israel. Saddam and AQ both hate America, why would they not work together towards that goal? Are you denying that Sept 11th ringleader Mohammed Atta met with an Iraqi Intellegence agent at the Iraqi Embassy in Prague on April 8, 2001?
You are trying to validate something that even your government couldn't prove. No one has been able to connect Iraq with September 11, 2001. Nice try at rewriting history.

Definition of Disingenuous: Corneliu demanding action in response to violations of anything established by the United Nations. Take a look at his Signature for proof.

:rolleyes:
It truly is disingenuous to say the least. Someone sent me a telegram suggesting that I ask the Mods to have the siggy removed. I replied that I didn't really have a problem with it, because in the end, it really reflects on him, especially since he believes that the UN is not "democratic" because "most of its members are dictatorships"?

Kinda ironic huh?

If you did that CH, I would ask the mods to have you remove yours too. Tit for tat. :D

If you did that CH, I would ask the mods to have you remove yours too. Tit for tat. :D

Hey Corneliu, I posted something for ya a couple of pages ago. Probably got lost in the shuffle, but could you take a look at it? I look forward to hearing from you about it.

You are trying to validate something that even your government couldn't prove. No one has been able to connect Iraq with September 11, 2001. Nice try at rewriting history.

NorthernFox already knows he's on flimsy ground. My conversation with him went something like this:

NF: Skinheads and islamists work together, so Saddam and Osama must have worked together too!
Me: What evidence do you have that skinheads and islamists work together?
NF: Prove to me that they don't!

Oh I forgot to mention, yesterday I was kidnapped by aliens. If you don't believe me well then it's up to you to prove me wrong :rolleyes:

NorthernFox already knows he's on flimsy ground. My conversation with him went something like this:

NF: Skinheads and islamists work together, so Saddam and Osama must have worked together too!
Me: What evidence do you have that skinheads and islamists work together?
NF: Prove to me that they don't!

Oh I forgot to mention, yesterday I was kidnapped by aliens. If you don't believe me well then it's up to you to prove me wrong :rolleyes:

Even I saw that he was on eggshells with his arguements. I don't think the skinheads and islamists work together.

Bingo. Arab nations, by and large, produce propaganda instead of news. It must be a great boon to those regimes when Arabs tune into Western news agencies and hear that their government's bullshit is correct.
Following your thought to a conclusion....

So if "their government's bullshit is correct", then the news that Arab nations are producing, is in fact news and not propaganda?

Or do you object to "Western news agencies" reporting the news?

What is also a "great boon" to Arab nations is hearing that their countrymen are being held without trial, without recourse to the Geneva Conventions, without basic human rights, being tortured, and some dying, even though they might be innocent.

What is probably the greatest boon to the Arab nations is logging onto forums such as theseforums and reading posts from Americans suggesting that their country should be turned into a parking lot or glass. I am sure that they love being called "ragheads" or much worse, and that somehow, "their" religion is "evil".

Even this thread was ill conceived. What kind of message is being delivered? That American torture is not as bad as terrorist torture? Not a great selling feature to say the least.

Yeah I am sure that after reading some posts on here that the Arabs want to rush into the streets to embrace American style "democracy"?

Even this thread was ill conceived. What kind of message is being delivered? That American torture is not as bad as terrorist torture? Not a great selling feature to say the least.

Yeah I am sure that after reading some posts on here that the Arabs want to rush into the streets to embrace American style "democracy"?
Aren't we just the best role model for the world?

Dude, my father left 2 hours ago. Destination? Iraq! I wouldn't be saying anything if I were you. Have you gone? No I didn't think you have. I haven't gone either. Besides that, I'm technically ineligable to participate in combat because I'm my father's only son.




Great fucking news Corneliu!!!!!


You know, when someone comes up with a sob story about how they WANT to enlist, but the mean old recruiter-dudes won't let 'em, well goddamn it - I just feel like helping out!!!


I mean, sure I had read the stories (http://www.centcom.mil/operations/CJTF_180/Freedom_Watch/9-5-02FW.pdf) of father-son teams (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6863629/) in-theater, but it was hard to always tell if these were only children, all the children, unwanted children, or whatever.



So I went over to the Go Army (http://www.goarmy.com/ChatIndex.do#) site, enetered the chatroom to talk to a recruiter, and asked them if what you said was true.


And you will be thrilled to know that your mother is full of shit!!!


Because the recruiter sent me here (http://www.sss.gov/FSsurviv.htm) as a means of proving to me that an only son could indeed serve. The site (as the recruiter explained to me) relates to the regs regarding the draft, but hell - like he said - if they can FORCE your ass to go as the only child with a parent in-theater, you bet your ass you can volunteer! The only exception is that a person can ASK for an exemption due to the death, dismemberment, capture, or dissapearence of the other family member in the services, and that shit only is a guaranteed out in peacetime.


In other words, if you want in - pack your fucking bags and get your ass on the next bus to Basic. Assuming that you can pass the entrance exam of course.


Oh wait. Something just occured to me..... maybe it wasn't your mother with the issue of adherence to veracity...


Oh well.


Someone's credibility here sure just took a kick in the ass.... about all sorts of things.

Great fucking news Corneliu!!!!!


You know, when someone comes up with a sob story about how they WANT to enlist, but the mean old recruiter-dudes won't let 'em, well goddamn it - I just feel like helping out!!!

Dude, I know all of this. I know how many father son teams are over there. You don't understand the PAPERWORK involved if I want to go into a combat zone. And people say we need to save trees. :rolleyes:

I'm sorry I didn't read the whole thread, hope I'm not repeating something said already.
I couldn't help but notice that most of you guys are from the US.
I wonder how many of you have actually been living in a different country for at least a part of their lives. Did you ever bother considering what the rest of the world thinks about this subject? Why do you think that countless people are willing to give up their lives just to bother Americans? I know kamikaze bombers are truly brain-washed, but still they got a few millions supporters and I refuse to believe that every single one of them is utterly crazy in the head. They must have lived something that makes them feel like blowing up as many people as possible is better than keep on living. Ever wondered what that could be?

Dude, I know all of this. I know how many father son teams are over there. You don't understand the PAPERWORK involved if I want to go into a combat zone. And people say we need to save trees. :rolleyes:

ROTFLMFAO! You are sooooooooooooo busted!

Makes me wonder if anything you say is true or if the little gremlins that live in your head just make it up as you go! Is your father even in the military? Nice act you've been putting on for everyone Corneliu.. oh man! I can't believe you'd lie about such a thing. If I was in the service or anyone who's ever been in the service, I'd be some pissed off at you. What a slap in the face to all the real servicemen. Man, that's just so pathetic.

Dude, I know all of this. I know how many father son teams are over there. You don't understand the PAPERWORK involved if I want to go into a combat zone. And people say we need to save trees. :rolleyes:
oh my god! PAPERWORK!? AGH! screw the trees, go enlist.

Dude, I know all of this. I know how many father son teams are over there. You don't understand the PAPERWORK involved if I want to go into a combat zone. And people say we need to save trees. :rolleyes:


Oh, so when you said you COULDN'T go due to regs, you were just saying so out of concern...... for the fucking trees?

So instead you're in college purchasing and carrying around a small forrest worth of stupidly overpriced textbooks..... because you're a fucking ardent envirnomentalist?


Well, actually - it's for the best.


Someone unwilling to even do the work to fill out enlistment forms to serve their country wouldn't make much of a fucking soldier anyway. I believe that they actually expect you to OVERCOME obstacles to attain your objectives.....


:p

No comment from Corneliu? Big Surprise Not!

http://www.ukstudentlife.com/Britain/Music/Pop/Busted.jpg

No comment from Corneliu? Big Surprise Not!

http://www.ukstudentlife.com/Britain/Music/Pop/Busted.jpg
haha, he's offline

haha, he's offline

Gee, wonder why he did that huh? :D

I mean if you're going to lie through your teeth, let this be a lesson to you, at least make sure it's a lie no one can easily verify..lol

Gee, wonder why he did that huh? :D

I mean if you're going to lie through your teeth, let this be a lesson to you, at least make sure it's a lie no one can easily verify..lol

Dammit you two, if he actually does go and enlist right now, and never answers MY question about the "School of Americas", I will be moderately annoyed with you!

BTW try to remain civil. I happen to like Corneliu, even if he occasionally allows himself to corner himself :)

Dammit you two, if he actually does go and enlist right now, and never answers MY question about the "School of Americas", I will be moderately annoyed with you!

BTW try to remain civil. I happen to like Corneliu, even if he occasionally allows himself to corner himself :)

Hehe, yeah, no worries, I always keep it civil. I just hate being lied to, as I'm sure most people do. I don't think you have to worry about him enlisting though.. seriously. ;)

BTW try to remain civil. I happen to like Corneliu, even if he occasionally allows himself to corner himself :)
maybe that's why his name is Corneliu because he corners himself!

maybe that's why his name is Corneliu because he corners himself!

Nah, I mean I'm being civil here, but lets be honest! If it was just a case of cornering himself, that could just imply he was not very good at debate, etc. He outright lied. There is really no way around that. He lied! He didn't corner himself, he lied and he got caught. Which means his credibility is now standing at ZERO! That's just the reality of it.

I am still waiting to hear why Corneliu lied to us? And how he expects any of us to believe a word he says in the future after this? Corneliu, the ball is in your court... ???????

Or how bout that American GI they had a couple months back? Where they forcefully held his mouth open and poured crude oil down it.

Oh wait, that's alright cause he deserves cause he's American.


Show me anyone on these boards that think that that is okay.


too many names to list. Try 50% of the people who have been posting on here.
This is absolutely no where near the truth. I just went through this entire thread and I found only 1 post that would come close to supporting your claim.

Particularly the liberals.
Do you honestly believe that liberals are cold hearted bastards that want to see bad things happen to US troops? The opposition from most liberals is due to an unwarranted war against Iraq over false pretences. Oppostion is also due to the premise of this thread that somehow, US torture is “benign, almost beneficent treatment” compared to that of “insane terrorists do with those they hold”. I think most “liberals” would agree that all torture is wrong and that you cannot qualify one form being better than the other, especially given the facts that prisoners from both sides of this war have died at the hands of their captors.
Don't try to change your tunes now. Its too late. You've been caught posting stuff like "Americans deserve to be beheaded." And "Americans in Iraq deserve to die".
I dare say, that most self respecting liberals would never post anything like this and I would like you to link any post that stated this. If anything, such a comment would come from an extremist (and they exist on both sides), and that person should be admonished by liberals and conservatives alike. People who think like that are just plain sick.

When you get caught in the act one time too many, it is way too late to change your tune claim "we don't think that". People posted it, and they defended it vigorously to the point of slandering their opponents (who knew way better) and flamebaiting to get their opponents deleted from this site.
Like I said, these types of posters exist on BOTH sides and are a very small minority. Again, they are not well, and should either be ignored or reported to the Mods.

Its way too late for many of you to claim that you don't support torture or murder of Americans cause by the vast majority of posts on here, that is precisely what is being promoted.
To be dead honest blunt with you, this is bullshit. Honestly speaking, I think you are making a mountain out of a mole him and being over dramatic. Please don’t confuse anti-war protestors as being anti-American. Sure, some are. Just like there are pro-war posters on here who hate the French, the Canadians, Europeans, Arabs, anti-war Americans, etc.

If posters on either side of an issue actually hate a person so much that they would like to see harm done to that other person, then IMHO those people are not well, and they have zero credibility in my books.

You all think this is just some academic debate. Its not.
You all claim the US is the most evil empire in history. It is not.
This is not true. Some claim that it is true but most do not.

You all claim Bush is the most evil leader in history. He is not.
This is not true. Some claim that it is true but most do not.

There are worse people even today. Course, some people posted that they thought Saddam should not have been deposed cause he was a "cool" person.
Obviously most people would not think Saddam is “cool”.

I've seen American troops demonized far too often on this forum.
There are some bad ass American troops, but there is also some bad ass terrorists. They exist on both sides. Denial will get you no where.

I've seen people posting their opinions (just that opinions, not facts) that Europe is better than America. That Europe can beat America.
This is an entirely different topic and is ego related. More bluster than substance, why worry about hypothetical situations?

You know what? It people like myself and every other American soldier that is keeping the Europeans a free people.
This I disagree with. I do think that Europe is capable of defending themselves.

The Europeans have almost no troops in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Because most Europeans were basically against the invasion of Iraq?

And its the Europeans and Canadians that are calling us baby killers and torturers.
Again I think you are being over dramatic. And while I don’t personally condone the killing of innocent Iraqis to “liberate” them, I don’t blame the troops that are following the orders of their government. I do blame the Bush administration for not going the whole nine yards for a peaceful solution.

And it ain't just the Europeans its the damn liberal athiest extremists here at home. The same people hiding out in their parents attics or some geeky university computer lab bashing Bush, bashing America, falsely accusing US troops of killing civilians on purpose. The same people who refuse to actually go to Iraq and see the truth in person. The same people who get all their info from Al Jazeera and other sites that promote Al Qaeda's false propaganda.
Quite the rant. Yes there are extremists and they are on both sides, and both sets of extremists give the good guys in the middle a bad name.

I for one, have never tortured anyone. I for one have never killed a single fucking civilian. In fact no one in my unit has.
Great and I hope that you and your guys never have to kill anyone and that none of your guys gets killed or injured.

Americans who protest against Bush's policy in Iraq are not just exercising free speech, they are giving aid and comfort to Bin Laden, to Zarqawi, to Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda is out there monitoring your response to everything. By your very posts you are telling them that you support them.
You are wrong. They do have the right to “free speech”.

Meanwhile, I have seen pro-war posters on here declaring that Iraq should be turned into a “parking lot” or “glass”. They have called Arabs every dirty name in the book, including “ragheads” and “scum”, and suggest that their religion is “evil”. Now those posters are a walking billboard for terrorist recruitment camps?

Hell, there have been people who have posted on here that they hoped Al Qaeda took over Iraq cause the Iraqis deserved it for supporting American "scum".
I would suggest that most people in opposition to this war are not cheering for the terrorists. Having said that, I no problem with an Iraqi from defending his country. It is his right to do so. If someone invades my country, I will defend her to the best of my ability and if you want to call me an insurgent or a terrorist it really doesn't matter.

I've seen people on here post that depriving a person of sleep for 48 hours is worse torture than electrical shock is. I've seen alot of you claiming that Guantanamo was way worse than the gulags.
ALL torture is wrong . Defending torture is wrong. Qualifying and quantifying torture is wrong. When Arabs find out that their countrymen are being tortured, held without rights, and being killed, then the US is “giving aid and comfort” to the terrorist cause.

And I've seen too many Democratic Senators committ treason by giving vocal support to the terrorists in Iraq.
I would like to see a link to this one. I don’t believe that they are “giving vocal support to the terrorists in Iraq”.

The entire point of posting this was to illustrate that most of those on here who are so critical of everything the US does have some hidden agenda. For anyone with any cognitive ability whatsoever, there is definitely, absolutely no comparison possible between the incidents described in the posted article and anything that has occured at Gunatanamo Bay. Yet here they are, folks, the America-haters, trying their best to "draw parallels" between what these insane terrorists do with those they hold ... most of whom are killed after having been tortured ... and the benign, almost benificient treatment of those incarcerated at Guantanamo.

I for one am sick to death of listening to these specious, dissimulating, contorted efforts to compare the two.


Again nice job. Your slowly becoming one of my heros

Again nice job. Your slowly becoming one of my heros
Thanks, but I'm no "hero." I just try to call it like I see it. Exercisin' mah free speech, don'tchasee? :D

You don't understand the PAPERWORK involved if I want to go into a combat zone. And people say we need to save trees.
ROTFLMFAO! You are sooooooooooooo busted!

Can't....stop....laughing....!!!!!!!

:D :D :D

Dude, I know all of this. I know how many father son teams are over there. You don't understand the PAPERWORK involved if I want to go into a combat zone. And people say we need to save trees. :rolleyes:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I'll never be able to take Corny seriously on any level now. C'mon...are you really someone's puppet, or something?

'Cause if this isn't a joke, it reads incredibly close to being one.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

On February 3, 1998 at 1:36 PM an American EA6B airplane of the US Marines, based at Aviano, Italy was taking off for a low-altitude training drill.
At 2:13 PM, this said airplane was impacting the cables of a cableway, truncating them.
No one of the twenty people aboard the cableway survived the impact.

Now, accidents like this happen every now and then. The worst part is that the aircraft pilot was flying especially low, because he was taking videos to impress folks back at home. He was completely absolved, didn't even got a suspension from active service.

I wonder if anyone of you guys in the US has even heard about this. I could cite at least another five such accidents which concluded with the absolution of American soldiers involved. And we're not talking about friendly fire, this was a peacetime drill over friendly territory. So think twice before you say Americans get court sentences for torturing or killing people while on military duty.

And still Italy is one of the United States staunchest allies, we've got troops fighting alongside with Americans in Iraq. And that's just to honour the alliance with the US, since most of the public opinion was against intervention in the war.

So far I've heard of no Italian terrorists blowing up Americans facilities. Therefore, I take that the death of a few people doesn't push the most unbalanced individual in a society to kamikaze bombing.
What has been going on in the Middle East to generate kamikaze in the hundreds? What has happened down there to piss them off so much? And why do they hold US responsible?

Oh, and guess what? I couldn't find a trace of the aforementioned incident in English on the Net. If that's not something close to censorship, I wouldn't know how to call it...

Apart from the fact that not one of the three ideologies you've mentioned have, in fact, been 'wiped out', 'terrorism' is not an ideology - it is rather a symptom of ongoing disparity and unaddressed issues, and outgrowth of fruitless dialogue.

I disagree. There is not a single Fascist or Nazi state in existance, and Communism is all but dead -- once Castro & Kim Jong Il die, all that will be left will be Laos & China... and those are hardly successes as Communist states go.
Terrorism is most ASSUREDLY an ideology: by violent means, they take a radical brand is Islam and seek to change the planet.

This does not excuse the actions of groups who employ terror methods to further their goals, of course. But it also does not confer upon these people the status of non-humans.

Nazis, the Klan, the Imperial Japanese, Stalinists, the followers of Pol Pot and these Terrorists are all inhuman animals. Period. They hold no value for life outside of (and within!) their ideologies.

These are not 'vermin'. These are people. Calling people vermin and treating them as such is not going far at all toward resolving conflict.

They *are* vermin who value your life no more than that of a fly. They hold your/our very idea of moderation and peaceful co-existance in contempt, and indeed all non-radical Islamic culture.
The only resolution with those that want to kill you is to kill them. I've been to Aushwitz & Birkenau, and my faith in that as a concept is unshakeable.

And isn't that what George Bush wants? An end to conflict and needless suffering? Or is it that he wants more suffering - much more suffering - and no end to war and conflict?

I hope you're kidding. There can be no end as long as there is oppression... and the Terrorists seek to oppress us all. Blowing up the Buddas in Afghanistan, prohibiting the flying of kites by children, forcing men to grow beards and women to wear burkhas... is this the world you want to live in??

As for Bush as a warmonger: If that's really true, don't you think he'd have moved against other nations by now? There's no reason why the US couldn't. It's shown great restraint in not using excessive force, and in not expanding the conflict into Syria, Pakistan or Iran.

Markreich, have you ever tryied considering the fact that Terrorism is not some kind of disease or genetic disorder?

As you said, it's an ideology. Which means someone invented it and is trying to make it widespread. And every single casualty, be them Americans, Iraqis or whatever else is just another emotional load recruiters can and will use for their purposes. True terrorists do it, and we do it ourselves all the time.

In a country with little or no access to free press, satellite TV or Internet it is fairly easy to manipulate people, that's why Terrorism can recruit so many people.

Think about it for a sec: All of your life you've been told that Americans are evil, but you don't quite believe it. Then they came and started bombing, and you start thinking that maybe that Osama guy wasn't all that wacky. Then a couple of your friends, or your sister, or little daughter dies by accident and finally you decide that's about time to do something, and you'll go any extent to do it.

(Works perfectly the other way: All of your life you've been told that Arabs are evil, but you don't quite believe it. Then they fly a couple of airplanes into the Twin Towers and you start wondering...)

Markreich, have you ever tryied considering the fact that Terrorism is not some kind of disease or genetic disorder?

As you said, it's an ideology. Which means someone invented it and is trying to make it widespread. And every single casualty, be them Americans, Iraqis or whatever else is just another emotional load recruiters can and will use for their purposes. True terrorists do it, and we do it ourselves all the time.

In a country with little or no access to free press, satellite TV or Internet it is fairly easy to manipulate people, that's why Terrorism can recruit so many people.

Think about it for a sec: All of your life you've been told that Americans are evil, but you don't quite believe it. Then they came and started bombing, and you start thinking that maybe that Osama guy wasn't all that wacky. Then a couple of your friends, or your sister, or little daughter dies by accident and finally you decide that's about time to do something, and you'll go any extent to do it.

(Works perfectly the other way: All of your life you've been told that Arabs are evil, but you don't quite believe it. Then they fly a couple of airplanes into the Twin Towers and you start wondering...)

By your logic, if that's true, we can either:

1. stop fighting, and hope they stop (you'll notice we weren't invading any Muslim countries and overthrowing their governments by force in Sept 2001)

2. kill them all

By your logic, if that's true, we can either:

1. stop fighting, and hope they stop (you'll notice we weren't invading any Muslim countries and overthrowing their governments by force in Sept 2001)

2. kill them all

I doubt someone got out of bed on morning and said "Hey, let's blast a few Americans out of existance". I'm sure their logic must be misguided in some way, but don't you think they had a reason, for how pale, insignificant and inappropriate, for killing themselves? So, probably, there were at least a few people who had a reason to be pissed at the US from before the beginning of the second Iraq War.

Right now I'm not sure it is even possible to stop fighting and go home. I don't know how things are going in Iraq to answer that question, but since everyone's saying something different, I doubt anyone has a credible answer.
I think the second invasion of the Iraq was wrong to begin with.

Why do you think they pulled out of Iraq in the first war without overthrowing Saddam? Simply put, there was no other political structure which could hold power there without destabilizing the whole country. Which is pretty much what happened since the fall of Baghdad.

Markreich, have you ever tryied considering the fact that Terrorism is not some kind of disease or genetic disorder?

It's not, it's a chosen path, just like a life of crime, dedication to a church, or going to work and raising a family.

As you said, it's an ideology. Which means someone invented it and is trying to make it widespread. And every single casualty, be them Americans, Iraqis or whatever else is just another emotional load recruiters can and will use for their purposes. True terrorists do it, and we do it ourselves all the time.

And that makes turning the calendar back to 1200AD good how??

In a country with little or no access to free press, satellite TV or Internet it is fairly easy to manipulate people, that's why Terrorism can recruit so many people.

Most of the suicide bombers in Iraq (and the majority of the insurgency) are foreign born, often from Syria, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan. This is an endemic problem spread by radical preachers, and is no more acceptable than a (to use an old example) Southern preacher going on about lynchings in 1820 Mississippi.

Think about it for a sec: All of your life you've been told that Americans are evil, but you don't quite believe it. Then they came and started bombing, and you start thinking that maybe that Osama guy wasn't all that wacky.

That's absurdly simplistic. Most Iraqis (as proven in the election!) want the US out, yes, but they hate the radicals more. You can't tell me that 100.000 US soldiers are keeping 28 million people down. The majority does NOT want a radical state, nor a return to a dictatorship.

Then a couple of your friends, or your sister, or little daughter dies by accident and finally you decide that's about time to do something, and you'll go any extent to do it.

I'll give you props for the 1 in 1000 this might actually be the case for. It in NO WAY explains the multitude of foreign fighters. http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/06/10/face.insurgency/

(Works perfectly the other way: All of your life you've been told that Arabs are evil, but you don't quite believe it. Then they fly a couple of airplanes into the Twin Towers and you start wondering...)

I don't consider anyone evil, except those the purpetrate evil. There are good and bad in every race and creed. When were Arabs EVER called evil by the US (pre OR post 9/11)? :rolleyes:

You say most of the suicde bombers are foreing fighter. That just moves the problem elsewhere, doesn't solve it.
I know many of them are probably undereducated and whipped to frenzy by fanatic preachers (one reason more while I find it abhorrent just to slay them to solve the problem), but they're still HUMANS like me and you. They feel more or less the same things and for the most part they had a family to leave behind as well. Yet they choose to put an end to their lives. I don't get it. I wouldn't kill myself just because a preacher tells me to. Would you do it? I don't think so.
What I don't get is what the heck is going on down there to make so many people commit suicide bombing. I can't figure out a set of conditions under which I would strap myself a dynamite belt and blow myself up.

You say most of the suicde bombers are foreing fighter. That just moves the problem elsewhere, doesn't solve it.

Actually, it just describes the enemy.

I know many of them are probably undereducated and whipped to frenzy by fanatic preachers (one reason more while I find it abhorrent just to slay them to solve the problem), but they're still HUMANS like me and you.

They were humans. Now they are anti-humans, as they seek to eradicate us and our culture of tolerance. You can't sustain warm fuzzies for peopel that want to kill you.

They feel more or less the same things and for the most part they had a family to leave behind as well. Yet they choose to put an end to their lives. I don't get it. I wouldn't kill myself just because a preacher tells me to. Would you do it? I don't think so.
What I don't get is what the heck is going on down there to make so many people commit suicide bombing. I can't figure out a set of conditions under which I would strap myself a dynamite belt and blow myself up.

And that's the gulf, no? Their midset is so far out of the civilized norm that they can't be reasoned with once the radical mindset has been set. Same thing with Nazis or KKK back in the day. You might be able to reform and ONE of them, if they're cut off from the clique. Maybe.

They were humans. Now they are anti-humans, as they seek to eradicate us and our culture of tolerance. You can't sustain warm fuzzies for peopel that want to kill you. Um… you've just described brainwashed Nazis as well… were German soldiers anti-human? Should we have killed all of them?

Oh, and guess what? I couldn't find a trace of the aforementioned incident in English on the Net. If that's not something close to censorship, I wouldn't know how to call it...


Not a fan of the pathetic "free" press or much of american policy these days, but you are WAY off base on this one. It was big news around North America at the time, however - as you might note - it was in 1998, and many news services just don't have archives online that go back that fucking far.

Still - it took me all of 10 fucking seconds to find: http://edition.cnn.com/US/9902/03/marines.cable.car/

using a simple google search with keywords "Aviano accident pilot cablecar".



So, while your other points may have some merit - you can toss your conspiracy theory out the window about some supposed news blackout.

Not a fan of the pathetic "free" press or much of american policy these days, but you are WAY off base on this one. It was big news around North America at the time, however - as you might note - it was in 1998, and many news services just don't have archives online that go back that fucking far.

Still - it took me all of 10 fucking seconds to find: http://edition.cnn.com/US/9902/03/marines.cable.car/

using a simple google search with keywords "Aviano accident pilot cablecar".



So, while your other points may have some merit - you can toss your conspiracy theory out the window about some supposed news blackout.


Sorry, I never wanted to imply there was some sort of conspiration. What I meant is just that those kind of things tend to pass under silence and more often than not the majority of the people would never even think possible that something like that happened.
That's the way things work here as well, it's not a peculiarity of any nation.
For example, the Italian government finally admitted they chose to patrol the area around Nassirya in Iraq to defend a multi-billion oil contract they had stipulated with Saddam. In my perfect world, something like that should make a government fall, yet this was a two line comment in the inner page of most daily newspapers.

And that's the gulf, no? Their midset is so far out of the civilized norm that they can't be reasoned with once the radical mindset has been set. Same thing with Nazis or KKK back in the day. You might be able to reform and ONE of them, if they're cut off from the clique. Maybe.

And that's why I say invading Iraq was the wrong thing to do to begin with. Maybe there was a slim chance of dialogue back then, maybe it would have been possible to wipe out the agitators without making them heroes and partisans in the eyes of their own people. What chances are really there now? Turn the middle east in a slab of glass? Keep on fighting forever? I don't know.

maybe that's why his name is Corneliu because he corners himself!

Actually, I didn't add the s for CORNELIUS! :rolleyes:

Um… you've just described brainwashed Nazis as well… were German soldiers anti-human? Should we have killed all of them?

I didn't say German soldiers. Nor am I saying all Arabs. Not even close.

However, most of the SS officers and Nazi party officials were indeed killed or given very, very long prison terms. Most famously by hanging the surviving elite at Nuremberg.

On February 3, 1998 at 1:36 PM an American EA6B airplane of the US Marines, based at Aviano, Italy was taking off for a low-altitude training drill.
At 2:13 PM, this said airplane was impacting the cables of a cableway, truncating them.
No one of the twenty people aboard the cableway survived the impact.

Now, accidents like this happen every now and then. The worst part is that the aircraft pilot was flying especially low, because he was taking videos to impress folks back at home. He was completely absolved, didn't even got a suspension from active service.

I wonder if anyone of you guys in the US has even heard about this. I could cite at least another five such accidents which concluded with the absolution of American soldiers involved. And we're not talking about friendly fire, this was a peacetime drill over friendly territory. So think twice before you say Americans get court sentences for torturing or killing people while on military duty.

And still Italy is one of the United States staunchest allies, we've got troops fighting alongside with Americans in Iraq. And that's just to honour the alliance with the US, since most of the public opinion was against intervention in the war.

So far I've heard of no Italian terrorists blowing up Americans facilities. Therefore, I take that the death of a few people doesn't push the most unbalanced individual in a society to kamikaze bombing.
What has been going on in the Middle East to generate kamikaze in the hundreds? What has happened down there to piss them off so much? And why do they hold US responsible?

Oh, and guess what? I couldn't find a trace of the aforementioned incident in English on the Net. If that's not something close to censorship, I wouldn't know how to call it...

And this has something to do with this thread how? This is very old news and Yes I've heard about it.

And that's why I say invading Iraq was the wrong thing to do to begin with. Maybe there was a slim chance of dialogue back then, maybe it would have been possible to wipe out the agitators without making them heroes and partisans in the eyes of their own people. What chances are really there now? Turn the middle east in a slab of glass? Keep on fighting forever? I don't know.

Or Afghanistan? If you have a skunk in the yard, you don't just close one hole.
Dialogue? When and with whom? :confused:

Not forever. Just the next few (2-5) years.

And this has something to do with this thread how? This is very old news and Yes I've heard about it.

Maybe old news, but at least it's true, unlike you who just comes here and makes shit up. I'm actually quite surprised to see you back so soon after getting caught lying your ass off yesterday. Ah well, some have no shame.

Maybe old news, but at least it's true, unlike you who just comes here and makes shit up. I'm actually quite surprised to see you back so soon after getting caught lying your ass off yesterday. Ah well, some have no shame.

Dude, I do have to sleep! :rolleyes:

As for lying, I didn't. I'm not legally allowed in a warzone. That is a fact. However, I can sign a waver form and go to a combat zone. However, I believe in rules and rules need to be followed. Therefore, under those rules, I'm not going to enlist because I can't go into combat.

Dude, I do have to sleep! :rolleyes:

As for lying, I didn't. I'm not legally allowed in a warzone. That is a fact. However, I can sign a waver form and go to a combat zone. However, I believe in rules and rules need to be followed. Therefore, under those rules, I'm not going to enlist because I can't go into combat.

Bullshit! You lied and got caught. Don't try to even justify it to me and I'm going to assume many others here. You've lost whatever credibility you had here. Nothing you say will be taken seriously anymore. So, is your father really even in the military? Are you and Formal one in the same? Ah no matter, whatever you'd say I wouldn't believe you anyway.

Oh and I believe THIS (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=427134) is for you!

Great fucking news Corneliu!!!!!


You know, when someone comes up with a sob story about how they WANT to enlist, but the mean old recruiter-dudes won't let 'em, well goddamn it - I just feel like helping out!!!


I mean, sure I had read the stories (http://www.centcom.mil/operations/CJTF_180/Freedom_Watch/9-5-02FW.pdf) of father-son teams (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6863629/) in-theater, but it was hard to always tell if these were only children, all the children, unwanted children, or whatever.



So I went over to the Go Army (http://www.goarmy.com/ChatIndex.do#) site, enetered the chatroom to talk to a recruiter, and asked them if what you said was true.


And you will be thrilled to know that your mother is full of shit!!!


Because the recruiter sent me here (http://www.sss.gov/FSsurviv.htm) as a means of proving to me that an only son could indeed serve. The site (as the recruiter explained to me) relates to the regs regarding the draft, but hell - like he said - if they can FORCE your ass to go as the only child with a parent in-theater, you bet your ass you can volunteer! The only exception is that a person can ASK for an exemption due to the death, dismemberment, capture, or dissapearence of the other family member in the services, and that shit only is a guaranteed out in peacetime.


In other words, if you want in - pack your fucking bags and get your ass on the next bus to Basic. Assuming that you can pass the entrance exam of course.


Oh wait. Something just occured to me..... maybe it wasn't your mother with the issue of adherence to veracity...


Oh well.


Someone's credibility here sure just took a kick in the ass.... about all sorts of things.

Perhaps you need to be reminded just how full of shit you are.

Bullshit! You lied and got caught.

I didn't lie. I can't serve in a combat zone because I am my father's only son. I could sign a form to wave such a restriction but since it is restricted, I"m not going to.

Don't try to even justify it to me and I'm going to assume many others here.

I don't have to justify anything to you or to anyone else.

You've lost whatever credibility you had here.

You have too!

Nothing you say will be taken seriously anymore.

Nothing new around here. I'm not taken seriously because I'm a conservative. Have a nice day.

So, is your father really even in the military?

Yes he is. Lt. Colonel in the USAF!

Are you and Formal one in the same? Ah no matter, whatever you'd say I wouldn't believe you anyway.

We are 2 seperate people.

Oh and I believe THIS (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=427134) is for you!

How very immature.

You can't possibly think you can take us for the idiots you're trying to take us for.. do you?

All:

Please (and I mean everyone) please cut out the personal crap before this thread gets locked.

You can't possibly think you can take us for the idiots you're trying to take us for.. do you?

I'm not lying about a single damn thing hun. I can join but I'll be restricted to the back lines unless I sign a form. Since that is legally cheating, no.

I'm not lying about a single damn thing hun. I can join but I'll be restricted to the back lines unless I sign a form. Since that is legally cheating, no.

No you won't!

Click (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9103154&postcount=266)

Or Afghanistan? If you have a skunk in the yard, you don't just close one hole.
Dialogue? When and with whom? :confused:

Not forever. Just the next few (2-5) years.

I'd probably shoot a skunk, might consider about shooting my neighbour's dog if he proves really pesky (and I'd go to jail for that). Definitely not going to shoot my neighbour dead if he proves annoying. And even if I'm dead sure he wants to kill me, there's still a few options I might consider before moving into his house and shooting him dead myself. And even if I did that, I'd still wonder why he wanted me to die so much, which seems to be a question seldom asked and rarely answered.
I'm actually fairly worried by the fact that you seem to consider people (we agree on this, deranged in the extreme and possibly bordering on the insane, but still people) at the same level as skunks.

And I sincerely hope you're right when you say this will all be over in a few years. We'll have paid a dear price to topple Saddam, but I can even agree with you on this. I'm afraid things will turn into a kind of gangrene, like Palestine has been for the last decades, not a few years.

No you won't!

Click (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9103154&postcount=266)

First story doesn't say if he was his only son or not :rolleyes:

I could dissect this whole second story it isn't even funny.

The next person that insults my mother gets an earful. I also stated that she was AIR FORCE and NOT ARMY! :rolleyes: Can someone take a hint here.

And this selective service I already know about :rolleyes:

This is nothing new here. I know I'm not lying about a thing here. Some people here assume I'm talking about the Army. I guess no one can figure out that I"ve mentioned AIR FORCE a time or two.

I also stated that she was AIR FORCE and NOT ARMY! :rolleyes: Can someone take a hint here.

Nope, wrong again. I phoned the local recruiting office and LM did his homework even more than I did. I asked, you're lying and you keep lying. It doesn't matter what branch of the services you're in, you can enlist. Your excuse last night was the poor trees.. haha. You lied and got caught , no way around it Corneliu.

PROOF (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9103154&postcount=266)

Nope, wrong again. I phoned the local recruiting office and LM did his homework even more than I did. I asked, you're lying and you keep lying. It doesn't matter what branch of the services you're in, you can enlist. Your excuse last night was the poor trees.. haha. You lied and got caught , no way around it Corneliu.

Since he's a recruiter, I don't trust everything a recruiter says because their jobs is to get recruits. Army apparently not doing their jobs properly. However, my mother worked in Admin and Personel while in the Air Force. She has more experience with this than a recruiter and knows precisely what form I would have to sign. Can a recruiter tell you that? No I don't think so :rolleyes:

Now I'm off because I have to get ready to go to the Save Our Base Rally that starts in 1hr and 40 minutes.

I'd probably shoot a skunk, might consider about shooting my neighbour's dog if he proves really pesky (and I'd go to jail for that). Definitely not going to shoot my neighbour dead if he proves annoying. And even if I'm dead sure he wants to kill me, there's still a few options I might consider before moving into his house and shooting him dead myself. And even if I did that, I'd still wonder why he wanted me to die so much, which seems to be a question seldom asked and rarely answered.

So... how about the real question: do you shoot people trying to kill you? Or that have already killed your kin?

I'm actually fairly worried by the fact that you seem to consider people (we agree on this, deranged in the extreme and possibly bordering on the insane, but still people) at the same level as skunks.

That's doing a disservice to the skunks.
Humans are the highest form of life (that we know of), and that any of us would actively work to devolve the society and kill people randomly... for no reason other than dogma, is anathema.
If the other side does not believe that there should be any other side but theirs, they must be eliminated. They don't tolerate you, you cannot afford to tolerate them.
Even Bush (again, not my favorite prez) tolerates and understands other sides. He may not LIKE that France isn't with us in Iraq, but we're not going to invade Paris, either.

And I sincerely hope you're right when you say this will all be over in a few years. We'll have paid a dear price to topple Saddam, but I can even agree with you on this. I'm afraid things will turn into a kind of gangrene, like Palestine has been for the last decades, not a few years.

I'm hoping it doesn't go that route. My suspicion is that after Saddam is tried, and IF they ever capture Al-Zaquari & bin Laden that the whole thing will ease. Just like how anti-Allied sabotage decreased after the Nuremberg trials. (Japan, obviously was a different story, as the Emperor co-operated with McArthur).
Personally, I'd love to see us out of there next year. But I don't see it. At best, I see a 50% reduction over the next 2-5 years (as the Iraqi gov't gets stronger), with permanent bases in Iraq for 10-30 years.

Since he's a recruiter, I don't trust everything a recruiter says because their jobs is to get recruits. Army apparently not doing their jobs properly. However, my mother worked in Admin and Personel while in the Air Force. She has more experience with this than a recruiter and knows precisely what form I would have to sign. Can a recruiter tell you that? No I don't think so :rolleyes:

Now I'm off because I have to get ready to go to the Save Our Base Rally that starts in 1hr and 40 minutes.

I don't believe a word you say.. Oh that's right we should take the word of you, a caught liar over that of a real life recruiter.. I think not. I also highly doubt your mother said anything to you. I'm not even sure after catching you lying if your father is even in the military, or that you are even going to a save the base rally. See once you get caught lying once, everything you say is suspect. As is the case now.

Goddamn this is entertainment value.

Heh.

Oh and whoever it was a few pages back who said that terrorists, fascists and communists weren't human:

By making the evil acts of men the evil acts of monsters, you are falling into a terrible trap - a trap that allows one to subconsciously discount the evil acts of days gone by as aberrations, while turning a blind eye to the rumblings of the present day. You can call Hitler a monster all you want, you can pretend Pol Pot was Freddy from Elm Street, it doesn't matter.

If you don't get it through your thick skull that their terrible acts were unfortunately, embarrasingly human, and actively guard against their ilk, there's a damn good chance we'll all live to see another 'monstrous' figure emerge among us. There's things we as humans should be proud of, and there's things we ought to ashamed about. But shame doesn't mean we should forget. IT means we desperately need to remember - so that we don't fall into that same trap again.

Terrorists are humans. So is everyone else. Monsters live only in fairy-tales. Break the chain of the looming strong-man.

Humans are the highest form of life (that we know of), and that any of us would actively work to devolve the society and kill people randomly... for no reason other than dogma, is anathema.

And you are sure it's just dogma? It isn't. It's revenge, it's hatred it's frustration and it's fuelled by a culture of martyrdom and total war. Dogma never had that much power. There is always another drive, dogma is merely the excuse.

In this case people had no love for the US anyway. Many see it as morally degenerate and no-one likes someone they despise telling them how to live their life. Especially when that is backed up by bombing and invasion. Whatever it is what it looks like is the important thing.

Goddamn this is entertainment value.

Heh.

Oh and whoever it was a few pages back who said that terrorists, fascists and communists weren't human:

By making the evil acts of men the evil acts of monsters, you are falling into a terrible trap - a trap that allows one to subconsciously discount the evil acts of days gone by as aberrations, while turning a blind eye to the rumblings of the present day. You can call Hitler a monster all you want, you can pretend Pol Pot was Freddy from Elm Street, it doesn't matter.

If you don't get it through your thick skull that their terrible acts were unfortunately, embarrasingly human, and actively guard against their ilk, there's a damn good chance we'll all live to see another 'monstrous' figure emerge among us. There's things we as humans should be proud of, and there's things we ought to ashamed about. But shame doesn't mean we should forget. IT means we desperately need to remember - so that we don't fall into that same trap again.

Terrorists are humans. So is everyone else. Monsters live only in fairy-tales. Break the chain of the looming strong-man.

Well said there!

Goddamn this is entertainment value.

Heh..

Hehe, yeah eh..lol But what is most odd is the way he keeps lying after being caught. As we say around these parts, not the sharpest tool in the shed.

Do you think that maybe his sister and him are the same person? It was brought up to me before. I dismissed it more or less cause I didn't know. But given these turn of events...I'm thinking maybe.. ;)

I wish I could go over there and help our soldiers beat the hell out of those pagan bastards.

I called the local recruiter.

Apparently, the law that I was referring too no longer exists. It did at one point but did no longer. So what you were saying about this is correct.

However, I continued to ask questions. Because of a medical condition I have, and yes I do legally have a diagnosed medical condition, I am still ineligable for military service. :(

Because of a medical condition I have, and yes I do legally have a diagnosed medical condition, I am still ineligable for military service. :(

Ohhhhhhhhhhhh, now you have a medical condition.. uh huh, sure, it's called "Lyingitis" *LOL*

If the other side does not believe that there should be any other side but theirs, they must be eliminated. They don't tolerate you, you cannot afford to tolerate them.


Is that a call to the utter eradication of sentient life in the Universe, is it self contradictory or are my logic skills lacking?

Sorry, but maybe I missed the point.
Because they're beating people and torturing people that makes it ok for it to happen in Guantanamo? Sorry, but you can't defeat an enemy by stooping to their position. How can you say what you're doing is any better than what they're doing?

so... allegations of abuse in Guantanamo are as bad as SUBSTANTIATED abuse in Iraq?

Since when were mere allegations recognized as truth automatically? The Left here in America (Durbin, for example) are making a leap of abstraction in assuming confirmation of unverified reports.

Other allegations about Guantanamo are that it is fairly serene. They're certainly being fed very well. If you hate America, you might believe the former... i'm not going to jump to any conclusions.

as for torture:
A woman rubbing her body against a terrorist is not torture. lol

Ohhhhhhhhhhhh, now you have a medical condition.. uh huh, sure, it's called "Lyingitis" *LOL*

Actually.. no! :rolleyes:

That wasn't even funny. I really do have a medical condition that does make me medically ineligible for military duty.

Since when were mere allegations recognized as truth?

I believe since the USA invaded Iraq based on "allegations" that turned out to be wrong.. go figure!

I believe since the USA invaded Iraq based on "allegations" that turned out to be wrong.. go figure!

Has all of Iraq been searched? All of it?

No?

Then those allegations cannot yet have been disproved.

Assuming that there are no longer any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq:

The majority of Iraqis have shown that they're happy about what we accomplished in taking out Saddam and giving them the vote. Is there a problem with that?

Actually.. no! :rolleyes:

That wasn't even funny. I really do have a medical condition that does make me medically ineligible for military duty.

Why didn't you say that from the start? See even if it is true, we can't believe you now, first it was the "only son" excuse, we proved that wrong, so then it was "save the trees" which is quite frankly laughable.. so today you're back to "only son" which was already proved false. When all else fails.. you come up with a "medical condition" excuse me if I find that a little hard to believe.

Actually.. no! :rolleyes:

That wasn't even funny. I really do have a medical condition that does make me medically ineligible for military duty.

Oh, then share. By all means, do let us know what prevents you from being anything other than an armchair quarterback.

Has all of Iraq been searched? All of it?

No?

Then those allegations cannot yet have been disproved.

Assuming that there are no longer any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq:

The majority of Iraqis have shown that they're happy about what we accomplished in taking out Saddam and giving them the vote. Is there a problem with that?

That's debatable at best. The people who do this for a living, as in the professionals.. say there is and was no WMD in Iraq. Should we make more unfounded speculation or listen to the people on the ground who's job it was to find them? I vote for the pro's..

As for the Iraqi people and how they feel about us being there, that's even more debatable.

Oh, then share. By all means, do let us know what prevents you from being anything other than an armchair quarterback.

Why should I tell you when you won't believe me even if I do tell you.

Why didn't you say that from the start?

You never asked!

See even if it is true, we can't believe you now, first it was the "only son" excuse, we proved that wrong, so then it was "save the trees" which is quite frankly laughable..

Ok, I admit that I found my save the tree line funny too. I was also using material that was 23 years out of date. You can't debate an issue if your 23 Years behind the times.

so today you're back to "only son" which was already proved false. When all else fails.. you come up with a "medical condition" excuse me if I find that a little hard to believe.

I understand where you are coming from. I also stated that I have been using outdated information. The information I had came from my mom who has been out of the service 23 years. I don't know when the rules changed. I already admitted that I was wrong. However, I am not lying when I say that I have a medical condition that excludes me from the military.

Since when were mere allegations recognized as truth?

Try talking the the Afghani and Pakistani warlords being paid 5K US for each and every Kuwaiti national hoodwinked into captivity with the lure of a village feast. There allegations, hell their outright lies are recognized by the US money-men as truth. After all, they keep buying the Kuwaitis.

Is that a call to the utter eradication of sentient life in the Universe, is it self contradictory or are my logic skills lacking?

I'd say your logic skills are lacking.
Are all sentient life not tolerant of other points of view?
Remember, we're discussing rabid individuals that would shoot you dead just for *being* a tolerant scion of Western culture...

Hey look guys. Ease up on the kid.


He got nailed for fibbing (or just ignorance - despite all the vaunted expertise of his parents), and will have to live with that. You can comfort yourself with the knowledge that every time - from here to eternity - that he says "but my professor said...", you can respond with "oh - was that just as accurate as what your mommy said about military service? Or was it only as accurate as Dan Rather's news team?"

Have fun with it.


Now his current reason is unassailable as it is unprovable - which may or may not be by design. Although one must wonder at the intellect of someone so incapacitated as to be unfit for duty calling out all those who have issues with him to some juvenile round of fisticuffs as he did in that other thread, but that is another subject.


The fact is that you've made your points.








Besides - if "anal cysts" could keep Rush Limbaugh out of 'Nam, and if Dickwad Cheney had "other things to do", then surely Corny can use whatever excuse he wants too?

Why should I tell you when you won't believe me even if I do tell you.


There's a non-starter for you. Stop being so defensive - after all, you're the one who painted himself into such a tight little corner. I do find it incredibly hard to believe that after all the other reasons you've provided, none of which have proved substantial, that suddenly you recall that you have the right sort of medical condition to preclude service.

If I don't believe you, it's very little to do with my generosity, and much to do with the consistency and veracity of your assertions. Best put up or shut up, Cornfed.

Hey look guys. Ease up on the kid.


He got nailed for fibbing (or just ignorance - despite all the vaunted expertise of his parents), and will have to live with that. You can comfort yourself with the knowledge that every time - from here to eternity - that he says "but my professor said...", you can respond with "oh - was that just as accurate as what your mommy said about military service? Or was it only as accurate as Dan Rather's news team?"

Have fun with it.


Now his current reason is unassailable as it is unprovable - which may or may not be by design. Although one must wonder at the intellect of someone so incapacitated as to be unfit for duty calling out all those who have issues with him to some juvenile round of fisticuffs as he did in that other thread, but that is another subject.


The fact is that you've made your points.








Besides - if "anal cysts" could keep Rush Limbaugh out of 'Nam, and if Dickwad Cheney had "other things to do", then surely Corny can use whatever excuse he wants too?

Fair enough and I agree. :)

I'd say your logic skills are lacking. Is all sentient life not tolerant of other points of view?

By that standard Bush would have to be put down, along with much of the 'right' and 'left' extremes of this board because they have made it quite clear that they can't. I'd be going down with them because sometimes I can't live with peoples POV's either.

There's a non-starter for you. Stop being so defensive - after all, you're the one who painted himself into such a tight little corner.

And admitted that I was wrong and that my information was out of date!

I do find it incredibly hard to believe that after all the other reasons you've provided, none of which have proved substantial, that suddenly you recall that you have the right sort of medical condition to preclude service.

Considering that I asked the recruiter about it, I do have a medical condition that precludes me from military service :(

If I don't believe you, it's very little to do with my generosity, and much to do with the consistency and veracity of your assertions. Best put up or shut up, Cornfed.

Insults get you nowhere but an insult hurled back. I already stated that I was wrong regarding the info that I had. I already admitted that. I also stated that it was 20+ years out of date.

Hey look guys. Ease up on the kid.


He got nailed for fibbing (or just ignorance - despite all the vaunted expertise of his parents), and will have to live with that. You can comfort yourself with the knowledge that every time - from here to eternity - that he says "but my professor said...", you can respond with "oh - was that just as accurate as what your mommy said about military service? Or was it only as accurate as Dan Rather's news team?"

Have fun with it.


Now his current reason is unassailable as it is unprovable - which may or may not be by design. Although one must wonder at the intellect of someone so incapacitated as to be unfit for duty calling out all those who have issues with him to some juvenile round of fisticuffs as he did in that other thread, but that is another subject.


The fact is that you've made your points.








Besides - if "anal cysts" could keep Rush Limbaugh out of 'Nam, and if Dickwad Cheney had "other things to do", then surely Corny can use whatever excuse he wants too?

"Dickwad" Cheney? Are you referring to Vice President of the United States of America Cheney?
Your disrespect for others is incredible. Have you no class?? No upbringing?? No self-respect?? Are you one of those people who can only make himself look good by trying to belittle others?? Shame on you!

By that standard Bush would have to be put down, along with much of the 'right' and 'left' extremes of this board because they have made it quite clear that they can't. I'd be going down with them because sometimes I can't live with peoples POV's either.

There's a big difference with "not being able to live with other people's POVs", and blowing them up for it.

And as soon as Bush starts assassinating the DEMs, invades France, or whatever, I would agree. But until then, it's still *rational* discourse. :)

"Dickwad" Cheney? Are you referring to Vice President of the United States of America Cheney?
Your disrespect for others is incredible. Have you no class?? No upbringing?? No self-respect?? Are you one of those people who can only make himself look good by trying to belittle others?? Shame on you!

I believe since I have seen LM on the forum his style of writing is by design as he would say. Also, Dickwad Cheney is pretty accurate way of describing him. I could think of worse.. I think LM was being kind to be honest.

Hey look guys. Ease up on the kid.

That's the same sort of thing I hear whenever Eutrusca or Sanctaphrax make asses of themselves, too. I'm tired of being the leftie who's supposed to let the hawks off the hook all the time.

What's it get me? More grief. Never the scintilla of an apology, a retraction, an admission of telling falsehoods, nothin'. But you can bet your bottom dollar I'll be on the receiving end of further BS by tonight.

Feh. Lying, craven cowards all. Bomb out the world while hiding under your beds.

"Dickwad" Cheney? Are you referring to Vice President of the United States of America Cheney?
Your disrespect for others is incredible. Have you no class?? No upbringing?? No self-respect?? Are you one of those people who can only make himself look good by trying to belittle others?? Shame on you!


*yawn*

Maybe YOU'RE here to "make yourself look good", frankly I could give a rats ass what other people here think of me. I'm just not that fucking vain.

Shame on me?

lol.


And here's a thought. Try reading some of the bile from some supposedly "respected" editorialists on the right with names like Anne, Rush, and Bill, and come on back whining about my voicing my own opinions in a less-than-polite way. If it's OK for Anne to call all liberals traitors, it's OK for me to call her a hateful bitch. And with some of Dickwads much-spewed opinions being out in the public domain, well frankly I don't feel any need to respect HIM at all either, nor do I susbscribe to that fatuous notion that I must feign respect because of some position he holds.


If it's any consolation to you, I think that John Kerry was a spineless, pompous, vacillating windbag too - so it ain't a partisan thing for me.

And if that isn't any consolation - deal with it. Because I frankly don't give a damn.

I believe since I have seen LM on the forum his style of writing is by design as he would say. Also, Dickwad Cheney is pretty accurate way of describing him. I could think of worse.. I think LM was being kind to be honest.

You've proven yourself to be the type of lunatic I descibed. Congratulations! How proud you must be!

That's the same sort of thing I hear whenever Eutrusca or Sanctaphrax make asses of themselves, too. I'm tired of being the leftie who's supposed to let the hawks off the hook all the time.

What's it get me? More grief. Never the scintilla of an apology, a retraction, an admission of telling falsehoods, nothin'. But you can bet your bottom dollar I'll be on the receiving end of further BS by tonight.

Feh. Lying, craven cowards all. Bomb out the world while hiding under your beds.

Not all of us. I certainly went and shot at Iraqis before it was cool. I also don't care what happens to people we take prisoner.

If this were not war to the knife, a war for the very survival of Western civilization, then I would care. But it is war to the knife, and I really don't care what we do to them.

*yawn*

Maybe YOU'RE here to "make yourself look good", frankly I could give a rats ass what other people here think of me. I'm just not that fucking vain.

Shame on me?

lol.


And here's a thought. Try reading some of the bile from some supposedly "respected" editorialists on the right with names like Anne, Rush, and Bill, and come on back whining about my voicing my own opinions in a less-than-polite way. If it's OK for Anne to call all liberals traitors, it's OK for me to call her a hateful bitch. And with some of Dickwads much-spewed opinions being out in the public domain, well frankly I don't feel any need to respect HIM at all either, nor do I susbscribe to that fatuous notion that I must feign respect because of some position he holds.


If it's any consolation to you, I think that John Kerry was a spineless, pompous, vacillating windbag too - so it ain't a partisan thing for me.

And if that isn't any consolation - deal with it. Because I frankly don't give a damn.

Sounds a bit like the pot calling the kettle black.

The hole you're digging just keeps getting deeper, doesn't it pal?

Another point:
Proponents of the war argue that we've freed Iraqi civilians from Baathist torture and murder. But now civilians are simply being tortured and murdered by insurgents instead. So that justification is out the window...

so... you're blaming the US for the actions of the insurgents?
-----------
Proponents of the war argue that we've freed Iraqi civilians from Baathist torture and murder.

We have. They have elected a new government. The insurgents are outlaws in that they are fighting against the votes of Iraqis... they're fighting (I guess...) to keep the power they had under Saddam. And we're fighting to uphold the vote and crush said insurgents.

Someone I work with recently spent 6 months in Iraq. He said that over 90% of the Iraqis he talked to were happy that he and the US were there, were happy to see Saddam gone. THAT is justification.

Your argument assumes that the insurgency is the US's fault. LOL. Saddam's goons were doing things like this -- torturing and killing Iraqi civilians -- before the US took Saddam otu. Now they've stepped it up because they fear losing their power to the other 80% of the country. Regardless, they'll be hunted by us or by the Iraqi people after we're gone... and they've dug their own graves by acting as outlaws.

You've proven yourself to be the type of lunatic I descibed. Congratulations! How proud you must be!


Hey look, if you are of the mindset that those who choose public life should be coddled, deified, and treated with respect no matter what they do, then you are - of course - welcome to that viewpoint.



Some of us, however, demand more of our public figures that to be grudging allowed to suck their collective asses while telling them how fucking brilliant they are, and then turning around so they can have their way with us - all the while screaming out our thanks as they bugger up us and our countries.


Lunatic? No, the lunatic is the person who just smiles, nods their head, and offers up sloppy seconds without pausing to see if they got given the clap the first time around....

so... you're blaming the US for the actions of the insurgents?

Prior to the illegal invasion, occupation and the commandeerment of the natural resources of the formerly-sovereign nation of Iraq, there was no insurgency. The insurgency is a reaction to the continued, unwelcome presence of a foreign power.

So, indirectly, yes - the US is responsible for the actions of the insurgents. If America wasn't there, the insurgency would not exist right now.

The hole you're digging just keeps getting deeper, doesn't it pal?


What hole? The hole of your opinion of me?


lmfao!


Ooohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, gosh - how much do you think I care abuot that?

No offense Dork, but if the term "Dickwad Cheney" offends you, then you are going to be offended a whole lot on this board. I suggest you develop a thicker skin, because you sure as hell are gonna need it.

Prior to the illegal invasion, occupation and the commandeerment of the natural resources of the formerly-sovereign nation of Iraq, there was no insurgency. The insurgency is a reaction to the continued, unwelcome presence of a foreign power.

So, indirectly, yes - the US is responsible for the actions of the insurgents. If America wasn't there, the insurgency would not exist right now.

Interestingly, the "insurgency" is at least half composed of people who aren't even Iraqi.

Some of the people released from Guantanamo (out of the more than 240 released) went to Iraq and ended up being shot to death shortly after arriving.

Apparently, most are killed trying to cross the Syrian border at night. Not a good thing to try, when Apache helicopters can see in the dark. I've already seen a couple of videos of hapless insurgents caught in the dark, having no idea where the 30mm cannon fire is coming from.

It makes Iraq into one huge ant trap - or roach motel.

Not a pretty thing, and not very ethical, but it does have the salient effect of rousing up those who would really want to eventually fight us, making them come to Iraq, and letting us kill them.

Well, i would like to know the medical condition Corneliu has. If he's not gonna say, must be pretty embarrassing cos he just keeps referring to it as his "medical condition".

Well, i would like to know the medical condition Corneliu has. If he's not gonna say, must be pretty embarrassing cos he just keeps referring to it as his "medical condition".

If there was a draft, Mirchaz, what medical condition would you have?

And then rousing up the next batch until the middle east is depopulated... Or the US government runs out of aviation fuel and 30-mil shells.

Hey look, if you are of the mindset that those who choose public life should be coddled, deified, and treated with respect no matter what they do, then you are - of course - welcome to that viewpoint.



Some of us, however, demand more of our public figures that to be grudging allowed to suck their collective asses while telling them how fucking brilliant they are, and then turning around so they can have their way with us - all the while screaming out our thanks as they bugger up us and our countries.


Lunatic? No, the lunatic is the person who just smiles, nods their head, and offers up sloppy seconds without pausing to see if they got given the clap the first time around....

I see that you demand alot from your public officials. I think we should. You should also demand a little more from yourself. Babbling that dribble doesn't do much for me or anybody else for that matter.

If there was a draft, Mirchaz, what medical condition would you have?

None actually. I was cleared by the Surgeon General to join the Air Force in July last year. I didn't because i found a job. and now i'm closing on the age of eligibility.

I see that you demand alot from your public officials. I think we should. You should also demand a little more from yourself. Babbling that dribble doesn't do much for me or anybody else for that matter.


He demands of the publico fficials and makes no reference to himself. He is in no position to be answerable to anyone else, the US government is answerable to the nation.

And, I have to say I'm dead in line with him. The statement may be crude but it's quite accurate in the essentials.

And then rousing up the next batch until the middle east is depopulated... Or the US government runs out of aviation fuel and 30-mil shells.

Eventually, you start having a gross impact on the population of young men.

And a lot of the ones who stayed home get the idea that it's futile. Especially when they never hear of their brothers again, other than rumors and stories.

It wears them down, too, to be in a war. But they are logistically poor, and fighting against a large industrial machine optimized for killing. Ever wonder why the Palestinians have to take a break from intifada every once in a while? Because it exhausts their population to keep that sort of frenzy up.

Believe me, this is hurting them A LOT more than it hurts us.

None actually. I was cleared by the Surgeon General to join the Air Force in July last year. I didn't because i found a job. and now i'm closing on the age of eligibility.

I guess I'm sensitive. I've already been over there (back in the days before it was cool).

Has all of Iraq been searched? All of it?

No?

Then those allegations cannot yet have been disproved.

Bush recalled the WMD hunters last year, so the military isn't even looking anymore. If you think they are still hidden somewhere, then by all means phone up your local congressman and get the search back on. Otherwise stop berating people for suggesting there are no WMD in Iraq.

Undoubtedly the Iraqi Resistance has killed and maimed to oust the US occupation and sabotage the new regime there, but torture never justifies torture, no matter what religion/philosophy you embrace. If we have to become our enemy in order to defeat him, then we're already doom. The fact that so many conservatives can justify what happens at Abu Ghreib, Bagram Air Base, Guantanamo and god knows where else, by saying its not "as bad" as what the insurgents might be doing, shows that were already in serious trouble as a country, the fact that the freedom-loving people of the US, the people who were until recently jealous of their liberty, can justify torture in their own minds...and pour scorn on people who do not agree with them, demonstates that we've become morally bankrupt. Gandhi said, "An eye for an eye and the whole world will be blind" and its as true today as it ever was.

Just because a hillbilly/conservative/republican/know-nothing/racist says that "there is NO comparison" between what the insurgents do and what the US does, does not make it true.

During WWII, these same people would have justified GESTAPO tactics against the French because the French resistance sometimes exploded German railways, tortured collaborators or otherwise use violence against the German occupation.

What is going to happen to any of our prisoners overseas, if the US refuses to abide by the Geneva Convention and/or uses torture on our prisoners?

Remember that one day, the fate you inflict on others through your words and thoughts will come back to haunt you, one way or another.

You justify torturing Iraqis and Afghans today, tomorrow you'll find yourself on the wrong side of an interrogation room, but remember, its OK becuase Iraqi insurgents do it too.

And shame on conservatives for blaming the messenger over the torture at Guantanamo, Shame on them for deriding and ridiculing people who oppose their views, shame on them for trying to cow their opponents. Shame on you for shaming our country in the eyes of the world.

PS: the so-called "Jihadist Manual" sounds unbelievably contrived. They don't give sappy titles to them like that, and what kind of criminal organization (aside from cartoon characters) sets in print things like "How to pick the best hostage"?

And then rousing up the next batch until the middle east is depopulated... Or the US government runs out of aviation fuel and 30-mil shells.

And in other news, the US is now force-feeding the planet McDonalds for every meal.

C'mon now. The Middle East (Iraq/Afghanistan) is NOT the US's pet Darfur. :rolleyes:

I guess I'm sensitive. I've already been over there (back in the days before it was cool).

nodnod. i understand. I'm not being beligerent to the troops who have served and who are currently serving. In fact, i applaud them and gratuitous(if that's the right word) that they went over there. I still question my decision not to join, but i have less than 6 months before i turn 27, and the recruiter told me to come back if i change my mind before then. My problem is that i don't have enough credit hours to become an officer, and i don't know if i could take orders from a punk kid. I would actually like to serve under the intelligence(sp) portion, but the thought of military police or being a PJ appealed to me too. But they just took too long to get my eyesight approved (had lasik surgery) and i had found a job when they finally told me it was. Told them too bad. (recruiter was funny, they'd switched recruiters on me 3 times too, when he found out what was going on he said "Shit", i almost laughed out loud at that one).

but my beef is with Corneliu, normally i support him in his arguments cos i agree with them, but this not joining stuff he's been spouting hasn't fallen into place properly. So i'd like to know the medical condition he has, because if it was me in his boots, that's the first thing i would have said, instead of "i can't join because i'm my only fathers son." And instead of actually saying what it is, he just keeps repeating "my medical condition precludes me" or some such.

But anyway, thanks for serving WL.

so... you're blaming the US for the actions of the insurgents?

Do you believe then that there would be insurgents blowing people up in Iraq right now if the US hadn't invaded?

Our actions bear direct responsibility for the insurgency and the daily terrorist attacks. I don't see how one could argue otherwise. The truth is simple: had there been no invasion, there would be no insurgency.

Your argument assumes that the insurgency is the US's fault. LOL. Saddam's goons were doing things like this -- torturing and killing Iraqi civilians -- before the US took Saddam out. Now they've stepped it up because they fear losing their power to the other 80% of the country.

And you are assuming that the Baathists are the ones mainly responsible for setting off car bombs and attacking our soldiers. This proves to me that you know nothing about the insurgency.

I see that you demand alot from your public officials. I think we should. You should also demand a little more from yourself. Babbling that dribble doesn't do much for me or anybody else for that matter.



Well, if you want to try and get all "literary critic" on my ass, let me respond to your delicate fucking intellectual snobbery by pointing out that the word you were looking for is "drivel", not "dribble". One does not normally write with drool.


I write with a certain deliberate choice of language in order to elicit a specific visceral response. As you yourself have demonstrated so aptly to the rest of the class - it works.


Don't like it?


Well then if and when I violate the board's TOS feel free to whine to the Mods about it. Until then, read my posts or don't. As I mentioned before...


I REALLY DON'T GIVE A RAT'S ASS!!!

Do you believe then that there would be insurgents blowing people up in Iraq right now if the US hadn't invaded?

Our actions bear direct responsibility for the insurgency and the daily terrorist attacks. I don't see how one could argue otherwise. The truth is simple: had there been no invasion, there would be no insurgency.

And you are assuming that the Baathists are the ones mainly responsible for setting off car bombs and attacking our soldiers. This proves to me that you know nothing about the insurgency.

There have been "insurgents" for decades. Why did Osama try to blow up the WTC in 1993?

There have been "insurgents" for decades. Why did Osama try to blow up the WTC in 1993?

Ahhh. Got proof of that, do you?

Mind you - I uh, "won't accept" links to FoxNews, neocon blogs or Rush Limbaugh. Credible sources only, please.

(LMAO)

Ahhh. Got proof of that, do you?

Mind you - I uh, "won't accept" links to FoxNews, neocon blogs or Rush Limbaugh. Credible sources only, please.

(LMAO)

i think the world trade center attack of 1993 is widely publicized and doesn't matter which news channel it was depicted on at the time. (of course, if your post was in jest, disregard mine :P)

Ahhh. Got proof of that, do you?

Mind you - I uh, "won't accept" links to FoxNews, neocon blogs or Rush Limbaugh. Credible sources only, please.

(LMAO)

Are you kidding?
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/Northeast/02/26/wtc.bombing/

http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/africa/9808/28/bin.laden.connection/

PS: the so-called "Jihadist Manual" sounds unbelievably contrived. They don't give sappy titles to them like that, and what kind of criminal organization (aside from cartoon characters) sets in print things like "How to pick the best hostage"?

Sounds like something Martha Stewart would come up with: "Ten easy steps to becoming a better insurgent" :D

Well, if you want to try and get all "literary critic" on my ass, let me respond to your delicate fucking intellectual snobbery by pointing out that the word you were looking for is "drivel", not "dribble".
dribble:
(v) to come or issue in piecemeal or desultory fashion
(n) the act of dribbling

...Though I must admit 'drivel' has more punch to it.

I REALLY DON'T GIVE A RAT'S ASS!!!
What a lovely sentiment.

Undoubtedly the Iraqi Resistance has killed and maimed to oust the US occupation and sabotage the new regime there, but torture never justifies torture, no matter what religion/philosophy you embrace. If we have to become our enemy in order to defeat him, then we're already doom. The fact that so many conservatives can justify what happens at Abu Ghreib, Bagram Air Base, Guantanamo and god knows where else, by saying its not "as bad" as what the insurgents might be doing, shows that were already in serious trouble as a country, the fact that the freedom-loving people of the US, the people who were until recently jealous of their liberty, can justify torture in their own minds...and pour scorn on people who do not agree with them, demonstates that we've become morally bankrupt. Gandhi said, "An eye for an eye and the whole world will be blind" and its as true today as it ever was.

Just because a hillbilly/conservative/republican/know-nothing/racist says that "there is NO comparison" between what the insurgents do and what the US does, does not make it true.

During WWII, these same people would have justified GESTAPO tactics against the French because the French resistance sometimes exploded German railways, tortured collaborators or otherwise use violence against the German occupation.

What is going to happen to any of our prisoners overseas, if the US refuses to abide by the Geneva Convention and/or uses torture on our prisoners?

Remember that one day, the fate you inflict on others through your words and thoughts will come back to haunt you, one way or another.

You justify torturing Iraqis and Afghans today, tomorrow you'll find yourself on the wrong side of an interrogation room, but remember, its OK becuase Iraqi insurgents do it too.

And shame on conservatives for blaming the messenger over the torture at Guantanamo, Shame on them for deriding and ridiculing people who oppose their views, shame on them for trying to cow their opponents. Shame on you for shaming our country in the eyes of the world.

PS: the so-called "Jihadist Manual" sounds unbelievably contrived. They don't give sappy titles to them like that, and what kind of criminal organization (aside from cartoon characters) sets in print things like "How to pick the best hostage"?

Prove that we're torturing them before you make such accusations.

Recently an Army officer talked on a cable news program about the food those bastards get to eat. He said for dinner they get things like Orange glazed chicken.

AH, THE HORROR!

If we were really torturing them, they'd be eating dirt or potato skins.

Dobbsworld

if you're only watching CBS/NBC/ABC/CNN etc... you're missing the conservative viewpoint.

happen to catch the CBS Evening News article on the 50-cal rifle?

Totally, TOTALLY biased toward liberals and against the NRA.

They're shameless in their bias, and nobody calls them out on it. Meanwhile, libs bitch about the conservatives' ONE television medium.

if you're only watching CBS/NBC/ABC/CNN etc... you're missing the conservative viewpoint.


Do you honestly believe the CORPORATE News Network is liberal? I assure you their namesake is not an exaggeration.

If we were really torturing them, they'd be eating dirt or potato skins.

Nice. Because they're not being fed gruel, they're not really being tortured.

Recently an Army officer talked on a cable news program about the food those bastards get to eat. He said for dinner they get things like Orange glazed chicken.

I see, so this was an officer in the catering corps who said this? This officer's comments can be independently verified? No? If not, then this amounts to heresay.

Of course, you could go the whole nine yards, feed 'em "dirt or potato skins", and officially claim your place alongside the now-defunct Soviet Union among the major-league assholes of History.

Dobbsworld

if you're only watching CBS/NBC/ABC/CNN etc... you're missing the conservative viewpoint.

happen to catch the CBS Evening News article on the 50-cal rifle?

Totally, TOTALLY biased toward liberals and against the NRA.

They're shameless in their bias, and nobody calls them out on it. Meanwhile, libs bitch about the conservatives' ONE television medium.

I can't frickin' AVOID the conservative viewpoint, man!! I hear it whether I care to or NOT! It is omnipresent, if unwanted.

WTF is it with you people thinking YOUR point of view is the one being frickin' SIDE-LINED all the time??

SHEESH!

Dobbsworld

if you're only watching CBS/NBC/ABC/CNN etc... you're missing the conservative viewpoint.

happen to catch the CBS Evening News article on the 50-cal rifle?

Totally, TOTALLY biased toward liberals and against the NRA.

They're shameless in their bias, and nobody calls them out on it. Meanwhile, libs bitch about the conservatives' ONE television medium.

CBS: conservative.

NBC: conservative.

ABC: conservative.

CNN: conservative.

Where's this so-called 'liberal media conspiracy' beaming its' traitorous signals from? Orbital mind-control lasers??

CBS: conservative.

NBC: conservative.

ABC: conservative.

CNN: conservative.

Where's this so-called 'liberal media conspiracy' beaming its' traitorous signals from? Orbital mind-control lasers??

uh, what news channel was dan rather on? Which news channels seemed to have more news for kerry and against bush than vice versa?

Which news channels seemed to have more news for kerry and against bush than vice versa?

I think that's more of a matter of perception than anything else. I know that when I watch American news, it all seems pretty conservative and pro-Bush to me.

CBS: conservative.

NBC: conservative.

ABC: conservative.

CNN: conservative.

Where's this so-called 'liberal media conspiracy' beaming its' traitorous signals from? Orbital mind-control lasers??

CBS, up until Dan Rather was forced to retire, was, and admitted to being, liberal.

This was backed up by the statements of retired CBS reporters, as well as current ones.

Additionally, the ONLY network to hold off on declaring Bush the winner in the last election (refraining from "calling it") was CBS - even though the math showed that there was no way Kerry could win.

You could tell that Dan desperately wanted Kerry to pull something out. And he looked heartbroken when it didn't happen.

and admitted to being, liberal.

You say that like it's a BAD thing. It's not, it's just a different point of view. Perhaps not yours, but enough people believe in the ideals of liberalism for it to be viable. I disagree with almost everything conservative (except fiscal policy) but I don't condemn someone because I don't happen to share their political ideology. Nor should you. So you disagree.. I agree to disagree personally. I'm not even sure there is a wrong or right answer, just different points of view.

You say that like it's a BAD thing. It's not, it's just a different point of view.

i didnt' perceive him as saying it like it's a bad thing, just that they admitted to being liberal.

CBS: conservative.

wrong

NBC: conservative.

Wrong!

ABC: conservative.

Wrong

CNN: conservative.

wrong a forth time. Do you have proof that all of these are conservative?

Where's this so-called 'liberal media conspiracy' beaming its' traitorous signals from? Orbital mind-control lasers??

NYT, LAT, SFC, ABC, CNN, NBC, CBS, MSNBC (though not as much)

The only conservative medium I know about is talk radio and FNC.

You say that like it's a BAD thing. It's not, it's just a different point of view. Perhaps not yours, but enough people believe in the ideals of liberalism for it to be viable. I disagree with almost everything conservative (except fiscal policy) but I don't condemn someone because I don't happen to share their political ideology. Nor should you. So you disagree.. I agree to disagree personally. I'm not even sure there is a wrong or right answer, just different points of view.

It's not the being, it's the claim of being Objective when working from a definite slant, or bias, that is objectionable. CBS, NBC, ABC, all claim to have no bias. Fox News really doesn't. Fox gets tarred for being a "Conservative Mouthpiece" while CBS gets a "pass"-but CBS is just as, if not more, slanted and biased, and has been for decades.

It's fine to have a point of view-so long as you are up-front about having it, giving warning to your audience ahead of time. Not doing so is called Deceptive Propoganda, and, when used by advertisers, is illegal, and considered unethical. This deceptiveness about their Bias is why CBS and other "Mainstream" networks get so much flack, and why respect domestically for them has declined. FDR mentioned you can't fool all the people, all the time-and it's true, you can't. Fox gets away with what they do, because they don't pretend to be anything other than what they are. This also applies to Rush, Michelle Malkin, etc. etc.
Their attempts at persuasion are open, direct, and undisguised, rather than being covert, dirty, and indirect manipulations.

It's not the being, it's the claim of being Objective when working from a definite slant, or bias, that is objectionable. CBS, NBC, ABC, all claim to have no bias. Fox News really doesn't. Fox gets tarred for being a "Conservative Mouthpiece" while CBS gets a "pass"-but CBS is just as, if not more, slanted and biased, and has been for decades.

Ah, I see what you mean.. Yes, Fox News I swear sometimes is working for the RNC..lol (Although that shouldn't really surprise anyone as Rupert Murdoch owns it and is a signatory member of PNAC) and CBS can have a bit of a liberal slant as well. CNN seems to be quite centrist, MSNBC seems to give equal time to both sides.. On one hand they have "The Countdown" with Keith Olbermann..who appears pretty liberal. but then again they also have "Scarborough Country" with Joe Scarborough who is very conservative. As for ABC, NBC, I've never seen them have a slant one way or the other. Same with CNN to be honest. The only real opinion show on CNN is "Crossfire" and again it gives both sides their chance. I think whoever thought up the idea that the media is liberal in this country was a wing-nut..lol And we won't even get into the conservative slant of "Clearwater" ;)

.....

how was your base thing?

how was your base thing?

We did impress Former General Newton. We have land for base expansion. That was one of the things they stated. Hopefully, the base gets taken off that list.

I think we succeeded but we still have a few more days yet. The board meets in Baltimore on the 8th of July and apparently a bunch of people are getting a bus and going down there.

I had a lot of fun at the Save our Base rally :)

Marching for things is so fucking liberal. I hope you didn't march much Corneliu :) Just rallying I hope.

Marching for things is so fucking liberal. I hope you didn't march much Corneliu :)

LOL! No was just at a rally to keep my father's base open. I gave up marching in a parade a few years ago :D

Marching for things is so fucking liberal. I hope you didn't march much Corneliu :)

Hehe how true.. protesting in general in so very liberal. Perhaps Corneliu is starting to leave the "dark side" LMAO! :p

Hehe how true.. protesting in general in so very liberal. Perhaps Corneliu is starting to leave the "dark side" LMAO! :p

Who the hell said it was a protest? It was a rally and not a protest.

Who the hell said it was a protest? It was a rally and not a protest.

Rally, protest, march... whatever, a rose by any other name is still a rose..


Come into the light Corneliu... ;)

Rally, protest, march... whatever, a rose by any other name is still a rose..


Come into the light Corneliu... ;)

In truth, your right that it doesn't matter what its called. I think its one of those things that crosses the political spectrum. :D

Anyway, hopefully we can save the base otherwise, the town is going to go into economic turmoil and that's no joke.

LOL! No was just at a rally to keep my father's base open. I gave up marching in a parade a few years ago :D
Well, whatever you did, I hope you had a blast. I don't like your stances at all, I don't like your way of debating,.... but somehow, I like you. If someone is boneheaded enough in my country, they make a Prime Minister out of them.

EDIT: you have a future. :)

Well, whatever you did, I hope you had a blast. I don't like your stances at all, I don't like your way of debating,.... but somehow, I like you. If someone is boneheaded enough in my country, they make a Prime Minister out of them.

hehe

Yea, I had a blast. My congressman and my state senator (not the federal senators) were also there. Not to mention the Governor of the State of Pennsylvania (not a friend of his but he was cool) were also there.

We still have work to do but I think we have a pretty good chance of keeping this base open. Can't say the same for the other 2 bases here though :(

I stand by my earlier statement that all American news broadcasters are conservative news broadcasters. Look, I get my news primarily from CBC and BBC. I know you perceive 'brand X conservative news reporting' to be more liberal than 'brand Y conservative news reporting', but those subtleties are lost on non-Americans.

I've watched the news on all of the networks mentioned previously. Trust an outsiders' considered opinion: All your news has a palpably conservative bias. Of course, you aren't fully aware of just how innately conservative your media really is, because as Americans, you've been born & bred to be innately conservative.

I stand by my earlier statement that all American news broadcasters are conservative news broadcasters. Look, I get my news primarily from CBC and BBC. I know you perceive 'brand X conservative news reporting' to be more liberal than 'brand Y conservative news reporting', but those subtleties are lost on non-Americans.

I've watched the news on all of the networks mentioned previously. Trust an outsiders' considered opinion: All your news has a palpably conservative bias. Of course, you aren't fully aware of just how innately conservative your media really is, because as Americans, you've been born & bred to be innately conservative.

You might be able to say that now. But back when Dan Rather was running CBS news, you couldn't. Their ratings were so bad because of their liberal slant that now they're swinging conservative out of fear that they'll go under.

You say that like it's a BAD thing. It's not, it's just a different point of view. Perhaps not yours, but enough people believe in the ideals of liberalism for it to be viable. I disagree with almost everything conservative (except fiscal policy) but I don't condemn someone because I don't happen to share their political ideology. Nor should you. So you disagree.. I agree to disagree personally. I'm not even sure there is a wrong or right answer, just different points of view.

I didn't say it was a bad thing. But they denied it for so many years, and then Cronkite broke the ice and the rest of them admitted it - after years of saying that they weren't biased.

What's bad is that they denied it for 30 years and then finally admit, "well, yeah, we were completely liberal and we tried hard to be"

You might be able to say that now. But back when Dan Rather was running CBS news, you couldn't. Their ratings were so bad because of their liberal slant that now they're swinging conservative out of fear that they'll go under.

No, this goes back more than a few months, Legs. I'm talking about a bigger picture - American news, as far back as I remember (coverage of Kent State is the earliest memory I have of American news reporting) has always presented events, issues and personalities with a decidedly pro-establishment, pro-authority, pro-business/development, pro-military skew.

No, this goes back more than a few months, Legs. I'm talking about a bigger picture - American news, as far back as I remember (coverage of Kent State is the earliest memory I have of American news reporting) has always presented events, issues and personalities with a decidedly pro-establishment, pro-authority, pro-business/development, pro-military skew.

Well, if you're external to the US, it probably does look pretty uniform. But to a USian, most media favor the Democratic Party and call that "mainstream".

Ratings have plummeted for all but Fox over the past five years, so everyone is swinging over to make the Republicans happy.

One of the biggest reasons we lost the Vietnam War was the CBS Evening News and its portrayal of the US idiocy there. When Cronkite said that the war could not be won, more people believed that than they believed the President. He might as well have been the President. Later, he said that he felt it was his duty to try to derail the US effort in Vietnam.

Funny, I don't recall anyone electing Cronkite.

Funny, I don't recall anyone electing Cronkite.

Perhaps not, but it wasn't just per-chance he was coined as "The most trusted man in America" either.

As he was unelected, he had less at stake in helping to maintain a pointless intervention than the administration of the day.

EDIT: Is this where things are headed? Should news anchors be publicly-elected figures?

As he was unelected, he had less at stake in helping to maintain a pointless intervention than the administration of the day.

EDIT: Is this where things are headed? Should news anchors be publicly-elected figures?

I think that's what the ratings system is for.

Right now, if you're a "liberal" network in the US, your ratings suck, especially on cable - which is where advertisers want to advertise, because people who don't have cable generally aren't spending a lot of money.