NationStates Jolt Archive

SUPREME COURT RULES COLLEGES THAT ACCEPT FEDERAL MONEY MUST ALLOW
MILLITARY RECUITERS ON CAMPUS

I don't think this was posted but as it the big caps said (it is from a breaking news email on March 6), College campuses that accept federal money must allow military recuiters on campus.

What do you think of this ruling?

Makes sense I suppose...

Eh, it's allowed over here and it's not really a problem. College/university students are (hopefully) educated enough to be able to make informed decisions without submitting to pressure. I have an issue with recruiting at high schools, but I see it as less of a problem at tertiary level.

The draft is a much more effective way of getting new material to use in an upcoming invasion.

The draft is a much more effective way of getting new material to use in an upcoming invasion.

And we all know that the draft is not coming back.

Doesn't stop me from going around and taking all the military recruitment propoganda off the bulletin boards and throwing it away. As long as they don't mind me standing right beside them telling the young man they're talking to not to join, I don't mind them tryin' to get people to join.

Hoorah.

Of course in practice it just means most if not all the liberal-minded and minority colleges will be swamped with military recruiters while you won't even see a Salvation Army recruiter at Ivy League universities.

Doesn't stop me from going around and taking all the military recruitment propoganda off the bulletin boards and throwing it away. As long as they don't mind me standing right beside them telling the young man they're talking to not to join, I don't mind them tryin' to get people to join.

Hoorah.

Hahahahaha. Freedom of speech rules. :)

And we all know that the draft is not coming back.
Never say never.

And we all know that the draft is not coming back.

Shrub also said "We are not into nation-building." And look what happened.

They'll try to call it something else, but it'll be a draft.

well when your in college they cant draft you, and the recruiters dont make you listen to them, If you really wanted to you could tell them to go to hell if they even look at you like they are going to talk to you. they are really just there to show another option, college isnt for everyone and people seem to realize that once they are in college, and then they want out of college, and the millitary will gladly take them, and then even pay for college if they want to continue later

but that said, the millitary also isnt for everyone, it is a lifestyle, and some people cant live it

Hahahahaha. Freedom of speech rules. :)

Damn skippy! I do it, too. I am the bane of any recruiter that shows up on my campus.

Doesn't stop me from going around and taking all the military recruitment propoganda off the bulletin boards and throwing it away. As long as they don't mind me standing right beside them telling the young man they're talking to not to join, I don't mind them tryin' to get people to join.

Hoorah.

and you think they will listen to your arguement of "dont join" over the arguement of the recruiters and all their benefits.

Shrub also said "We are not into nation-building." And look what happened.

They'll try to call it something else, but it'll be a draft.
That would be so f.ing cool!!!

Well, I'm sure the recruiters will feel right on home on my campus. Of course, they'll have to shout louder than the anti-war protestors, corner preachers, and College Republicans/Democrats that also recruit pretty actively here. Then of course, they'll have to make room for periodic demonstrations about abortion, Free Tibet, and mountaintop removal.

Trust me, as many recruiters come to our campus, we still won't care.

but that said, the millitary also isnt for everyone, it is a lifestyle, and some people cant live it

Long time ago, when the United States actually stood for the principles it proclaimed, the military was a lifestyle. But this day and age, with a hypocritical Republican chickenhawk administration that sends troops to die for their own financial interests while cutting down on the pension and benefits said troops receive, it's turning into a slow glorious suicide.

Take it as what you will, when they're willing to spin Pat Tillman's murder into a jingoistic bullshit.

and you think they will listen to your arguement of "dont join" over the arguement of the recruiters and all their benefits.

Some do, some don't.

So long as there is a voice telling them not to, then they have the freedom to choose. Otherwise, all they have is someone in a snappy uniform telling them about paid tuition and free medical care.

i see a marine recruiter everyday on my campus. they are everywhere...

well when your in college they cant draft you, and the recruiters dont make you listen to them, If you really wanted to you could tell them to go to hell if they even look at you like they are going to talk to you.

Actually they can but a student can get what you would call a student deferment but yea, they can draft you.

they are really just there to show another option, college isnt for everyone and people seem to realize that once they are in college, and then they want out of college, and the millitary will gladly take them, and then even pay for college if they want to continue later

but that said, the millitary also isnt for everyone, it is a lifestyle, and some people cant live it

And some family members have a hard time living with it.

Long time ago, when the United States actually stood for the principles it proclaimed, the military was a lifestyle. But this day and age, with a hypocritical Republican chickenhawk administration that sends troops to die for their own financial interests while cutting down on the pension and benefits said troops receive, it's turning into a slow glorious suicide.

And then you have democratic leaders who use the military to push stories off the front page that the president doesn't want there.

Take it as what you will, when they're willing to spin Pat Tillman's murder into a jingoistic bullshit.

And yet the US Military has re-opened the case :rolleyes:

And some family members have a hard time living with it.

if you live your life the way momma wants, you would still be 3 years old and living at home

And then you have democratic leaders who use the military to push stories off the front page that the president doesn't want there.

Now wait, you can't have it both ways-was Clinton not doing enough about terrorism and Iraq or was he "Waging the dog?" It has to be one or the other.

if you live your life the way momma wants, you would still be 3 years old and living at home

:confused:

:confused:
point is do everything your family wants you to do, will hold you back alot, you will end up living someone elses life. sometimes you have to do what it is you feel you should do. after all you learn the best by making your own mistakes

point is do everything your family wants you to do, will hold you back alot, you will end up living someone elses life. sometimes you have to do what it is you feel you should do. after all you learn the best by making your own mistakes

What im saying is that family members of those in the military have a hard time with their loved one or love ones always gone. Believe me, I know what that feels like :(

This doesn't really matter to me. If the military wants to go barking up the wrong tree for recruits, so be it. It's high school recruiting that really bothers me.

Does it really matter? My university has an ROTC program so have recruiters isn't that big a leap.

This doesn't really matter to me. If the military wants to go barking up the wrong tree for recruits, so be it. It's high school recruiting that really bothers me.
What's really interesting is that my school was mostly (like 90%) minority students, and military recruiters were everywhere. At every college fair, every branch would represent themselves. When I talked to friends at "whiter" or "higher class" high schools, they said they didn't see recruiters all that often if at all.

What's really interesting is that my school was mostly (like 90%) minority students, and military recruiters were everywhere. At every college fair, every branch would represent themselves. When I talked to friends at "whiter" or "higher class" high schools, they said they didn't see recruiters all that often if at all.

Interesting. When I was in high school, recruiter from all four branches cam around three times a school year to talk with seniors... INDIVIDUALLY.

I even had one of them call me on the phone and drop by my house a few times because I stupidly checked a box on my career day form that allowed my info to be given out.

Universities dont strike me as particularly fertile recruiting ground as it is, so this decision isnt so bad.

It was basically a principled stand against the military's anti-homosexual policy.

Universities dont strike me as particularly fertile recruiting ground as it is, so this decision isnt so bad.

It was basically a principled stand against the military's anti-homosexual policy.

Which will lead to a new form of draft-dodging: The Queer-Out.

:D :fluffle: :D

Interesting. When I was in high school, recruiter from all four branches cam around three times a school year to talk with seniors... INDIVIDUALLY.
FUCK?!
How much lesson time did you waste?

FUCK?!
How much lesson time did you waste?

It was always a day or two before a long break, so not much really. But still, yikes!

I tend to agree that this is just good give and take policy, but I'm curious about what exactly the argument the court made is (what existing laws they used).

I'm just fine with recruiters at colleges, just as long as I have the right to post anti-military propoganda next to their propoganda and have the right to organize protests that the U.S. government feels the need to use these pathological liars amongst it's youth. High Schools on the other hand, I feel the military deserves no special treatment at, as the students HAVE to be there.

Universities dont strike me as particularly fertile recruiting ground as it is, so this decision isnt so bad.

It was basically a principled stand against the military's anti-homosexual policy.I use the term discrimination when people ask about my view on the military’s stance on homosexuals, as they still let homosexuals into the military.

Hurray for easily accessible military asshats to mock!

It was always a day or two before a long break, so not much really. But still, yikes!
That's almost as sick as that thing about the Pentagon financing the boy scouts.

You know what, despite knowing all about Godwin, I feel compelled to just post this picture here. Should tell you all there is to know about children's activities having anything at all to do with the military. And that goes to Putin as well.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/35/12SSHJrecruit.jpg

I use the term discrimination when people ask about my view on the military’s stance on homosexuals, as they still let homosexuals into the military.

They're allowed in but if they are discovered to be gay, they are pointed towards the door.

Such a silly country, banning gay people from the military - shooting itself in the foot, at the same time. (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/11/14/attack/main529418.shtml)

Really, your whole country needs to just grow up.

Such a silly country, banning gay people from the military - shooting itself in the foot, at the same time. (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/11/14/attack/main529418.shtml)

Really, your whole country needs to just grow up.
I didn't realise gays were still banned from the military in America. What are they expecting, trouble in the showers?

What do you think of this ruling?
Meh. The US Army's been pimping thier "benefits" in my face since I was thirteen. I've fled.

I didn't realise gays were still banned from the military in America. What are they expecting, trouble in the showers?

Oh, they use some sort of lame excuse, like "unit cohesion" or some such, but it basically comes down to: fags are icky and we don't like them.

Oh, they use some sort of lame excuse, like "unit cohesion" or some such, but it basically comes down to: fags are icky and we don't like them.
lol, because when a unit is under heavy fire trying to capture an enemy position all the gays are obviously more interested in sleeping with the new private than keeping their head down.

I wonder if the application form has this?

Gender
[ ] Male
[ ] Female
[ ] Homosexual

I wonder if the application form has this?

Gender
[ ] Male
[ ] Female
[ ] Homosexual
:D There's that Simpsons joke about that:

Homer: What's this scribbled out bit?
Recruiter: Er, we're not allowed to ask you that anymore sir.
Homer: No, wait, I can still read it... "Are you a homosex...
Recruiter: I can't hear you! La la la!

Oh, they use some sort of lame excuse, like "unit cohesion" or some such, but it basically comes down to: fags are icky and we don't like them.

And yet they can serve if they don't tell anyone that they are gay.

Oh, they use some sort of lame excuse, like "unit cohesion" or some such, but it basically comes down to: fags are icky and we don't like them.

I remember reading about Rome's military for a classics class, and according to the author, homosexuality among soldiers was actually encouraged so that the men had closer bonds as a unit. That way, you could be sure that the guy standing next to you in battle was "watching your ass", so to speak.

I pose this question to all.

If we were to eliminate are military forces what would happen to the United States.

(special note I was in the United States Navy of my own free will, My older Brother is in the Army, and Yonger brother is in the Air Force. Please don't insult the soldiers and sailors)

I pose this question to all.

If we were to eliminate are military forces what would happen to the United States.

(special note I was in the United States Navy of my own free will, My older Brother is in the Army, and Yonger brother is in the Air Force. Please don't insult the soldiers and sailors)
A lot of very nasty people would go 'YIPPEE!' and do all kinds of things, whether it be a nation like North Korea or individual terrorists. I doubt any of the 'mainstream' nations would do anything.

I pose this question to all.

If we were to eliminate are military forces what would happen to the United States.

(special note I was in the United States Navy of my own free will, My older Brother is in the Army, and Yonger brother is in the Air Force. Please don't insult the soldiers and sailors)
Like was stated the major players probably would hold their hand but there would be all kinds of people gleefully trying to get back at us for all the things we used that now gone army for in the past.

And yet they can serve if they don't tell anyone that they are gay.

Just like straight people can serve if they don't tell anyone they're straight, or black people can serve if they don't tell anyone they're black. :rolleyes:

And what's even more pathetic about it is that the US military regularly serves alongside openly gay soldiers through NATO and its allies that don't ban gay people from serving in the military in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. I guess the fags aren't as icky if they're British, and can't tear the mighty US military asunder if they're called Anders instead of John.

I pose this question to all.

If we were to eliminate are military forces what would happen to the United States.

(special note I was in the United States Navy of my own free will, My older Brother is in the Army, and Yonger brother is in the Air Force. Please don't insult the soldiers and sailors)

1. Mexico sees this and decides to take advantage for some reason, invades. US becomes Mexican territory, but contested bitterly by militia's, armed police units and possibly British/Canadian military

2. Terrorists begin mass bombing/terror campaign that police cannot handle, bring government to knees, invade somehow.

3. Britain decides we want our former colony back, invades.

It's a fair enough ruling, I suppose

-snip-
Just like in Japan, hey?

Just like straight people can serve if they don't tell anyone they're straight, or black people can serve if they don't tell anyone they're black. :rolleyes:

It's a great loop hole for if you get drafted.

I'll be willing to kiss the guy behind me to avoid getting sent over to Iran. Life before Pride.

1. Mexico sees this and decides to take advantage for some reason, invades. US becomes Mexican territory, but contested bitterly by militia's, armed police units and possibly British/Canadian military

2. Terrorists begin mass bombing/terror campaign that police cannot handle, bring government to knees, invade somehow.

3. Britain decides we want our former colony back, invades.
Not with the some 10 million gun owners. And the national guard. We could do without a large chunk of our military, if we wanted to go back to self defense. Hell, we could most likely get by with just our nukes.

Just like in Japan, hey?

*Invades Japan*

Not with the some 10 million gun owners. And the national guard. We could do without a large chunk of our military, if we wanted to go back to self defense. Hell, we could most likely get by with just our nukes.

Yeah, I was joking...thought the Mexican and British options might have highlighted this, but apparently not.

Just like in Japan, hey?

The Japanese don't have a military? Odd, I wonder what happened to all those I was in maneuvers w/? I guess Godzilla wiped them all out.

That's almost as sick as that thing about the Pentagon financing the boy scouts.

You know what, despite knowing all about Godwin, I feel compelled to just post this picture here. Should tell you all there is to know about children's activities having anything at all to do with the military. And that goes to Putin as well.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/35/12SSHJrecruit.jpg

I'm 14, I'm in a military youth group, I want to go to the Naval Academy.
Fucking sue me.

I'm 14, I'm in a military youth group, I want to go to the Naval Academy.
Fucking sue me.

No, no, suing is such a US degeneration. We pity.

No, no, suing is such a US degeneration. We pity.

Why? Why do you hate the military? Politicians start wars, not the military

The Japanese don't have a military? Odd, I wonder what happened to all those I was in maneuvers w/? I guess Godzilla wiped them all out.
I suppose you could see it both ways. The JSDF is, just as the name suggests, only for self-defence, even moreso than the Bundeswehr.

Why? Why do you hate the military? Politicians start wars, not the military

The military does their dirty work. I can dislike the Don and his henchmen at the same time, rest assured.

I'm 14, I'm in a military youth group, I want to go to the Naval Academy.
Fucking sue me.
Know what? I won't.

But I will give you this delightful quote by Albert Einstein. You earned it, my friend.
"He who joyfully marches to music rank and file, has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice. This disgrace to civilization should be done away with at once. Heroism at command, how violently I hate all this, how despicable and ignoble war is; I would rather be torn to shreds than be a part of so base an action. It is my conviction that killing under the cloak of war is nothing but an act of murder."

The Japanese don't have a military? Odd, I wonder what happened to all those I was in maneuvers w/? I guess Godzilla wiped them all out.

They have a "National Defense Force," but no military, officially.

The military does their dirty work. I can dislike the Don and his henchmen at the same time, rest assured.

What dirty work would this be? Don't even say war crimes, because not all people in the military are war criminals. I thought liberals were supposed to be open minded and against stereotyping...I guess not.

What dirty would this be?
Might just have to do with all the killing going on...

I thought liberals were supposed to be open minded and against stereotyping...I guess not.
Why do you insist on putting us into your neat little American categories?

Might just have to do with all the killing going on...


Why do you insist on putting us into your neat little American categories?

I never knew liberal was an American category. Do you prefer leftist?

Know what? I won't.

But I will give you this delightful quote by Albert Einstein. You earned it, my friend.

I am not saying war is a good thing, it never is. But it is sometimes necessary, and sometimes unavoidable. Given, Iraq was a stupid move. But anyway, I find it interesting that you quote the same man who helped bring about the atomic bomb.

I never knew liberal was an American category.
Of course it is.

This is what "liberalism" is: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/liberalism/

This is what Americans have turned the word into in their country:
http://www.booknotes.org/Program/?ProgramID=1688

Do you prefer leftist?
How would you know? I could be a Christian conservative nutcase for all you know.
The Bible tells me that killing is wrong.

What dirty work would this be?

Oh, Vietnam, Venezuela, Guam, Bay of Pigs, Somalia, Iraq...

Don't even say war crimes, because not all people in the military are war criminals.

No, they're just henchmen to their power-projecting masters.

I thought liberals were supposed to be open minded and against stereotyping...I guess not.

Liberalism is a right-wing economic philosophy from the 19th century. This is an international forum. Your little US labels won't work here, and will not shield you from your own inability to retort.

They have a "National Defense Force," but no military, officially.

A NDF of 60 destroyers, 50,000 + troops and about 1000 military planes.

I am not saying war is a good thing, it never is. But it is sometimes necessary, and sometimes unavoidable. Given, Iraq was a stupid move.
Hey, I was referring more to the part about not using your brain, but just instinctively twitching your legs on command.

But anyway, I find it interesting that you quote the same man who helped bring about the atomic bomb.
Not on purpose, mind you, and only indirectly. I didn't quote Oppenheimer afterall.

It kind of makes sense; we give you something and we expect something in return...it's not like recruiters are drafting students against their will or imprisoning them for protesting wars or whatever.

If the federal government gives a school money, that school should be required to abide by the requirements of the government to get it...after all, the military is a federal department and so has equal standing with any other program within it.

Oh, Vietnam, Venezuela, Guam, Bay of Pigs, Somalia, Iraq...

The military did not start the conflicts in Vietnam, Venezuela, Guam, Bay of Pigs, Somalia or Iraq....Politicians did.

Know what? I won't.

But I will give you this delightful quote by Albert Einstein. You earned it, my friend.

From the man that encouraged the invention of the atomic bomb to use against the Nazi's.

"I made one great mistake in my life... when I signed the letter to President Roosevelt recommending that atom bombs be made; but there was some justification - the danger that the Germans would make them."

The military did not start the conflicts in Vietnam, Venezuela, Guam, Bay of Pigs, Somalia or Iraq....Politicians did.

I repeat: I can dislike the maffia Don and his henchmen at the same time, rest assured.

I repeat: I can dislike the maffia Don and his henchmen at the same time, rest assured.

It's not as if they can refuse, they are following orders. It is not one of those things you can blame the henchmen and the Don for.

It's not as if they can refuse, they are following orders.

That poor excuse didn't work in Nürnberg, and it won't work with me.

The military did not start the conflicts in Vietnam, Venezuela, Guam, Bay of Pigs, Somalia or Iraq....Politicians did.
Except for the Bay of Pigs. JFK just went along for the ride, he let the military make all the decisions, which was a big mistake.

Why would you be against the U.S. military? Why would you be against a force that is bringing a true change in the world. Iraq and Afghanistan are on their way to becoming democratic nations and having a secure future. Don't tell me that it's not worth all of the killing because that is like saying that all of the american revolutionaries shouldn't have fought and died because ending oppression for every future generation is not worth a human life. All you do by interfering with military recruiters is hurt yourself, your children, your family and your families children. If we can't stabilize iraq then the world is going to be in a world of hurt a few years down the road. So when you look back on your life are you going to be saying, i prevented the flourishing of the human race or that you allowed it even through your selfishness.

That poor excuse didn't work in Nürnberg, and it won't work with me.

Nürnberg was different, the orders they were "following" were not to fight the enemy in a combat situation, it was to commit genocide. If the military committed genocide, I would agree with you

Why would you be against the U.S. military? Why would you be against a force that is bringing a true change in the world. Iraq and Afghanistan are on their way to becoming democratic nations and having a secure future. Don't tell me that it's not worth all of the killing because that is like saying that all of the american revolutionaries shouldn't have fought and died because ending oppression for every future generation is not worth a human life. All you do by interfering with military recruiters is hurt yourself, your children, your family and your families children. If we can't stabilize iraq then the world is going to be in a world of hurt a few years down the road. So when you look back on your life are you going to be saying, i prevented the flourishing of the human race or that you allowed it even through your selfishness.

Well said, USMC... :)
How old are you, if you want I can send you a link to the military youth group I am in. It's a Navy group, but it explores the Marines too.

Iraq and Afghanistan are on their way to becoming democratic nations and having a secure future.

Iraq is on its way to be dominated by Iran or the United States, it's unclear which at this point, after having tens of thousands of its citizens slaughtered in an illegal war of barbaric aggression. Its government will not be anything but "democratic," and is already showing its highly brutal and repressive character.

Afghanistan is currently being dominated by reactionary warlords just as bad as the Taliban, if not worse. In fact the utter disaster the country has become has resulted in a surprising resurgence of that particular faction.

Iraq is on its way to be dominated by Iran or the United States, it's unclear which at this point, after having tens of thousands of its citizens slaughtered in an illegal war of barbaric aggression. Its government will not be anything but "democratic," and is already showing its highly brutal and repressive character.

Afghanistan is currently being dominated by reactionary warlords just as bad as the Taliban, if not worse. In fact the utter disaster the country has become has resulted in a surprising resurgence of that particular faction.

Any one who has been on the ground in either of these countries would know that you have not. You believe what you are told, these things are not occurring. The iraqi gov't has already shown that it is capable of suppressing civil war as it has just done (somehow the media forgot this part). You are told what the U.S. military is deciding to do and though you may think we are there to dominate i can tell you for a fact that we are not. We are not fighting a war to conquer but to allow the iraqis to live in a free, open and democratic society. If you had any security clearance i could back it up by hours of recordings of breifings.

How would you know what condition afghanistan is? I'm not going to say that it is perfect but it is highly improved since when we got there. Every afghanistan has a constant and plentiful source of water where there were deplorable conditions before we came. You would be surprised by the level of cooperation that we get from tribal leaders. They want security and truly want their people to succeed so they are willing to give us a chance.

Well said, USMC... :)
How old are you, if you want I can send you a link to the military youth group I am in. It's a Navy group, but it explores the Marines too.

Hey, you are on a truly honorable path in life and keep it up. I am currently a first Lt. in the marine corps if you ever want to talk you can email me at semperfi7601@hotmail.com

Any one who has been on the ground in either of these countries would know that you have not. You believe what you are told, these things are not occurring. The iraqi gov't has already shown that it is capable of suppressing civil war as it has just done (somehow the media forgot this part). You are told what the U.S. military is deciding to do and though you may think we are there to dominate i can tell you for a fact that we are not. We are not fighting a war to conquer but to allow the iraqis to live in a free, open and democratic society. If you had any security clearance i could back it up by hours of recordings of breifings.

How would you know what condition afghanistan is? I'm not going to say that it is perfect but it is highly improved since when we got there. Every afghanistan has a constant and plentiful source of water where there were deplorable conditions before we came. You would be surprised by the level of cooperation that we get from tribal leaders. They want security and truly want their people to succeed so they are willing to give us a chance.

Wait, you're in the Marines?

EDIT: Nevermind, didn't see your post...sorry

Any one who has been on the ground in either of these countries would know that you have not. You believe what you are told, these things are not occurring. The iraqi gov't has already shown that it is capable of suppressing civil war as it has just done (somehow the media forgot this part). You are told what the U.S. military is deciding to do and though you may think we are there to dominate i can tell you for a fact that we are not. We are not fighting a war to conquer but to allow the iraqis to live in a free, open and democratic society. If you had any security clearance i could back it up by hours of recordings of breifings.

How would you know what condition afghanistan is? I'm not going to say that it is perfect but it is highly improved since when we got there. Every afghanistan has a constant and plentiful source of water where there were deplorable conditions before we came. You would be surprised by the level of cooperation that we get from tribal leaders. They want security and truly want their people to succeed so they are willing to give us a chance.

Here here.

Well said USMC

Though I am not a Marine, Semper Fi.

Any one who has been on the ground in either of these countries would know that you have not. You believe what you are told, these things are not occurring. The iraqi gov't has already shown that it is capable of suppressing civil war as it has just done (somehow the media forgot this part). You are told what the U.S. military is deciding to do and though you may think we are there to dominate i can tell you for a fact that we are not. We are not fighting a war to conquer but to allow the iraqis to live in a free, open and democratic society. If you had any security clearance i could back it up by hours of recordings of breifings.

How would you know what condition afghanistan is? I'm not going to say that it is perfect but it is highly improved since when we got there. Every afghanistan has a constant and plentiful source of water where there were deplorable conditions before we came. You would be surprised by the level of cooperation that we get from tribal leaders. They want security and truly want their people to succeed so they are willing to give us a chance.

Yes.

Wait, you're in the Marines?

My guess would be yes with his nation having USMC in it.

My guess would be yes with his nation having USMC in it.

Yeah, I didn't see one of his posts that confirmed that

Why would you be against the U.S. military? Why would you be against a force that is bringing a true change in the world. Nothing.

Iraq and Afghanistan are on their way to becoming democratic nations and having a secure future. I'll agree with the latter. Not the former.

Don't tell me that it's not worth all of the killing because that is like saying that all of the american revolutionaries shouldn't have fought and died because ending oppression for every future generation is not worth a human life. Looks like I disagree completely, now. http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=182

2306 deaths (http://icasualties.org/oif/) isn't enough?
How about ~34,000 deaths (http://www.iraqbodycount.org/index.php?PHPSESSID=7cb38ef8922fce6a5e43465faa5a92be&submit3=Enter+Site)?

"How many deaths will it take, 'till he knows, that too many people have died?"

This isn't an American revolution, this is us screwing unnecissarily with the Middle East. Remember who put Saddam in power, and remember who sold weapons to Iraq.

Nothing.

I'll agree with the latter. Not the former.

Looks like I disagree completely, now. http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=182

2306 deaths (http://icasualties.org/oif/) isn't enough?
How about ~34,000 deaths (http://www.iraqbodycount.org/index.php?PHPSESSID=7cb38ef8922fce6a5e43465faa5a92be&submit3=Enter+Site)?

"How many deaths will it take, 'till he knows, that too many people have died?"

This isn't an American revolution, this is us screwing unnecissarily with the Middle East. Remember who put Saddam in power, and remember who sold weapons to Iraq.

Listen, you are not the one who is sacrificing over there. Once you go over there you kinda form an attachment to the afghani people (can't talk about iraq that much). You know deep down that you would die in a second for even one iraqi child. If no one ever died for a cause, then this world would be in horrid conditions. Absolutely NOBODY would have any freedoms besides the few that would be in power. I realize why you might not understand personal sacrafice for a good cause but at the very least, i ask you not to stand in the way of people who are willing to sacrafice for the greater good of the world.

Oh and by the way, i believe it was russia who sold iraq massive amounts of weapons. I believe we sold either $100,000 or $300,000 cant remember but it neither of those figures can even buy a good sized home in the states.

Listen, you are not the one who is sacrificing over there. Once you go over there you kinda form an attachment to the afghani people (can't talk about iraq that much). You know deep down that you would die in a second for even one iraqi child. If no one ever died for a cause, then this world would be in horrid conditions. Absolutely NOBODY would have any freedoms besides the few that would be in power. I realize why you might not understand personal sacrafice for a good cause but at the very least, i ask you not to stand in the way of people who are willing to sacrafice for the greater good of the world.

Oh and by the way, i believe it was russia who sold iraq massive amounts of weapons. I believe we sold either $100,000 or $300,000 cant remember but it neither of those figures can even buy a good sized home in the states.

Yes, and if you want to judge deaths by deaths (which isn't humane in the first place), take a minute for the 800,000 that died in Saddam's war with Iran

this is us screwing unnecissarily with the Middle East.

Listen, we tried the hands-off aproach for ten years, then we got attacked on 9/11. Now we are trying something different and it is showing much greater success. So unless you can propose a different way of handling the middle eastern population as a whole move along.

Listen, you are not the one who is sacrificing over there. Once you go over there you kinda form an attachment to the afghani people (can't talk about iraq that much). You know deep down that you would die in a second for even one iraqi child. If no one ever died for a cause, then this world would be in horrid conditions. Absolutely NOBODY would have any freedoms besides the few that would be in power. I realize why you might not understand personal sacrafice for a good cause but at the very least, i ask you not to stand in the way of people who are willing to sacrafice for the greater good of the world.
Listen, I am not going to sacrifice myself for a lie. In fact, that's why I support the troops fighting this war, because I believe Bush isn't telling the families of those who have loved ones exactly as to why they were sent into battle. If you want to believe you're out there doing great things for Iraqis/ Afghanis, go straight ahead, I'm not stopping you. And I'm sure you are, but don't forget that you were sent there on false pretenses. We didn't initailly invade Iraq for the sole purpose of freeing the Iraqis from an evil dictator that the CIA helped put in power in the first place and you can't forget that.

Listen, we tried the hands-off aproach for ten years, then we got attacked on 9/11. Now we are trying something different and it is showing much greater success. So unless you can propose a different way of handling the middle eastern population as a whole move along.
Listen, no we didn't. We've been screwing with the Mid East for over fifty years now. Read up on some history before you try to argue about why you think they attacked us.

Oh, Vietnam, Venezuela, Guam, Bay of Pigs, Somalia, Iraq...

Kinda goes hand-in-hand with world war I, wwii, ensuring the integration of the public schools in the 50s-60s, providing support for disasters like the tsunami, and cleaning up that whole "ethnic-cleansing" mess in the balkans during the 90s...
(also noticed who really started vietnam, somalia, and the bay of pigs... it's a bi-partisan effort. And Guam? We've controlled guam since 1898 after the Battle of Guam with the Spanish. And Venezuela... despite the assertions of the fellow running the place, i don't think we've landed there yet.)


No, they're just henchmen to their power-projecting masters.

Ad-hominem, not worth responding.


Liberalism is a right-wing economic philosophy from the 19th century. This is an international forum. Your little US labels won't work here, and will not shield you from your own inability to retort.

your little dodge of the assertion that you are stereotyping won't work here either. And asserting that one definition of a word is the definition of the word is misleading and well, wrong. I believe my good friends at miriam-webster can help you locate the definition that was alluded to:
liberal:
of, favoring, or based upon the principles of liberalism
liberalism:
political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties

Listen, I am not going to sacrifice myself for a lie. In fact, that's why I support the troops fighting this war, because I believe Bush isn't telling the families of those who have loved ones exactly as to why they were sent into battle. If you want to believe you're out there doing great things for Iraqis/ Afghanis, go straight ahead, I'm not stopping you. And I'm sure you are, but don't forget that you were sent there on false pretenses. We didn't initailly invade Iraq for the sole purpose of freeing the Iraqis from an evil dictator that the CIA helped put in power in the first place and you can't forget that.

Ummm, yes we did. Every plan we had in place was to eliminate saddams regime, not to get oil or any other propaganda that you have been fed. I dont care what politicians say but we were fighting to eliminate saddam and that is a fact. I am not an expert on the CIA or how it operates so i can't say a lot about that but i'm sure that if we did have an expert in that arena here he would be able to largely discredit that. Politicians get themselves in big trouble by telling us what our mission is and telling civilians an often twisted version in order to shore up support. But this is necessary, although unfourtunately, because it is the only way to win a war and complete your objectives in a democratic society. So when you say we went to war for lies, think about why you got these "lies" in the first place.

Listen, you are not the one who is sacrificing over there. Once you go over there you kinda form an attachment to the afghani people (can't talk about iraq that much). You know deep down that you would die in a second for even one iraqi child. If no one ever died for a cause, then this world would be in horrid conditions. Absolutely NOBODY would have any freedoms besides the few that would be in power. I realize why you might not understand personal sacrafice for a good cause but at the very least, i ask you not to stand in the way of people who are willing to sacrafice for the greater good of the world.

Oh and by the way, i believe it was russia who sold iraq massive amounts of weapons. I believe we sold either $100,000 or $300,000 cant remember but it neither of those figures can even buy a good sized home in the states.

Actually,I believe he has family in the service.

Listen, I am not going to sacrifice myself for a lie. In fact, that's why I support the troops fighting this war, because I believe Bush isn't telling the families of those who have loved ones exactly as to why they were sent into battle. If you want to believe you're out there doing great things for Iraqis/ Afghanis, go straight ahead, I'm not stopping you. And I'm sure you are, but don't forget that you were sent there on false pretenses. We didn't initailly invade Iraq for the sole purpose of freeing the Iraqis from an evil dictator that the CIA helped put in power in the first place and you can't forget that.

Actually, acording to Saddam's number 2 Air Chief, the WMD that they were accused of having were flown to Syria.

Ummm, yes we did. Every plan we had in place was to eliminate saddams regime, not to get oil or any other propaganda that you have been fed. I dont care what politicians say but we were fighting to eliminate saddam and that is a fact. I am not an expert on the CIA or how it operates so i can't say a lot about that but i'm sure that if we did have an expert in that arena here he would be able to largely discredit that. Politicians get themselves in big trouble by telling us what our mission is and telling civilians an often twisted version in order to shore up support. But this is necessary, although unfourtunately, because it is the only way to win a war and complete your objectives in a democratic society. So when you say we went to war for lies, think about why you got these "lies" in the first place.
Wow.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10537837&postcount=26
Start there.

We weren't given that one single reason, we were given many reasons all at different times. The Bush Administration isn't as pure and truthful as FOX News portrays them as and as you might think.

Wow.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10537837&postcount=26
Start there.

We weren't given that one single reason, we were given many reasons all at different times. The Bush Administration isn't as pure and truthful as FOX News portrays them as and as you might think.

For starters, Fox News never portrayed him as pure and truthful. So that's a bold face lie.

Actually, acording to Saddam's number 2 Air Chief, the WMD that they were accused of having were flown to Syria.
Yeah, I did read that a while back. That some woman, I believe ( the #2 Air Chief?) said that she was ordered to transport the weapons elsewhere, but if Bush isn't going to take onto that as his great vindicator, I won't either :p I was really surprised when that came out thinking FOX News and Bush would be jumping all over that, but they really didn't.

Listen, no we didn't. We've been screwing with the Mid East for over fifty years now. Read up on some history before you try to argue about why you think they attacked us.

No we haven't. As i understand from my peers with more experience, we were never to take the initiative and interact at all with the nations we nearby. We have given the people of the middle east ample time to overthrow their oppressive governments and create a more stable situation. I know many arab people who say that we should just allow them to workout a solution to their problems but that will not work because it has not in the past. Despite what you think, we were quite offhands from late '92 until '01. They attacked us because of an ideaology that, in a nutshell, promotes ignorance and hatred. We did not create that ideaology. It is just the modern islamic leaders that are using this ideaology in order to stay in power by blaming all of their problems on americans when it is really their incompetence. If we show them a glimpse of what the modern world is really like they will crave it and freedom has a chance at succeeding in the arab world.

For starters, Fox News never portrayed him as pure and truthful. So that's a bold face lie.
Well, I'm just running off the stereotype. ;) And after he was elected (2000), they did repeat stuff like "This President has the right vision for the future, and the will to do great changes," although he didn't really do anything until 9/11 besides give tax cuts.

Wow.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10537837&postcount=26
Start there.

We weren't given that one single reason, we were given many reasons all at different times. The Bush Administration isn't as pure and truthful as FOX News portrays them as and as you might think.

My point was, in case you missed it, was that they weren't being honest to you. But they did have a reason for being dishonest. They needed to shore up support so that the good cause could be acheived.

What do you think of this ruling?
Like you care what I think.

Yeah, I did read that a while back. That some woman, I believe ( the #2 Air Chief?) said that she was ordered to transport the weapons elsewhere, but if Bush isn't going to take onto that as his great vindicator, I won't either :p I was really surprised when that came out thinking FOX News and Bush would be jumping all over that, but they really didn't.

So because they didn't, it makes it false?

Like you care what I think.

Actually I do now do you have something to add to this or are you going to pop in, say this and leave?

No we haven't. As i understand from my peers with more experience, we were never to take the initiative and interact at all with the nations we nearby. We have given the people of the middle east ample time to overthrow their oppressive governments and create a more stable situation.
:confused:
1)Creation of Israel in the middle of Muslim holy land.
2)Aid to Taliban to fight Soviets.
3)Helping Saddam's Ba'th party rise to power in Iraq.
4)Selling guns to Iran and Iraq and watching them fight each other.
5)Invading Iraq.

I know many arab people who say that we should just allow them to workout a solution to their problems but that will not work because it has not in the past. Despite what you think, we were quite offhands from late '92 until '01. They attacked us because of an ideaology that, in a nutshell, promotes ignorance and hatred. Total Bullshit. Islam does not promote ignorance or hatred. In fact, they promote peace until someone attacks their religion. The only reason it appears that way now is because of the above reasons. Again, read up on some history and you'll see why the Muslim world might be a little angry with us.

We did not create that ideaology. It is just the modern islamic leaders that are using this ideaology in order to stay in power by blaming all of their problems on americans when it is really their incompetence. If we show them a glimpse of what the modern world is really like they will crave it and freedom has a chance at succeeding in the arab world. Why are we so concerned about the Middle East? OIL!!! They know damn well about the "modern world." Again, read up on some history, please.

So because they didn't, it makes it false?
Not necissarily, but if it were indeed the big break they were looking for, there's no doubt in my mind they would've been all over it. I believe that some WMDs had been flown out at one point, but if Bush isn't going to look into those facts at all and just keep spouting the same rhetoric, so will I.

Actually I do now do you have something to add to this or are you going to pop in, say this and leave?
No, I'll come back later and add something. I don't actually do requests.

My point was, in case you missed it, was that they weren't being honest to you. But they did have a reason for being dishonest. They needed to shore up support so that the good cause could be acheived.
Sort of like how the Nazis wanted to convince Germans that they were making the world "pure," which they thought was a "good cause"?

:confused:
1)Creation of Israel in the middle of Muslim holy land.

Britain and the UN actually did this

2)Aid to Taliban to fight Soviets.

Not precisely accurate.

3)Helping Saddam's Ba'th party rise to power in Iraq.

To a point. But I think your forgetting that he said 1992-2001

4)Selling guns to Iran and Iraq and watching them fight each other.

We didn't want either side winning that war.

[qyite]5)Invading Iraq.[/quote]

A good thing.

Total Bullshit.

Again, he said 1992-2001 so no it isn't BS. Though I would have to call it myself since we did launch Operation Desert Fox in 1998..

Islam does not promote ignorance or hatred. In fact, they promote peace until someone attacks their religion. The only reason it appears that way now is because of the above reasons. Again, read up on some history and you'll see why the Muslim world might be a little angry with us.

Tell me when did we attack their religion? We haven't attacked their religion.

Why are we so concerned about the Middle East? OIL!!!

To a point yes I will agree.

They know damn well about the "modern world." Again, read up on some history, please.

If they did then they know that life for their citizens would be better when not under a dictatorship.

Sort of like how the Nazis wanted to convince Germans that they were making the world "pure," which they thought was a "good cause"?

That would be essentially correct yes. Just liked they blamed the Jews for causing World War 1 when they didn't.

Britain and the UN actually did this
True, that's why they're upset at the West in general (hence London and Madrid bombings) and they see the U.S. as the leading power for the West because, well, we are.
Not precisely accurate.
Not quite, but it's another brick in the wall.

To a point. But I think your forgetting that he said 1992-2001
And I believe he forgot when I said the past 50 years.

We didn't want either side winning that war.
Yes, but the facts are undeniable. We sold arms to two countries and watched them kick the shit out of each other while we laughed and gave money to the Contras.
A good thing.Well I'm sure you're well aware that that's where we disagree. (Again) :p

Again, he said 1992-2001 so no it isn't BS. Though I would have to call it myself since we did launch Operation Desert Fox in 1998..
Yes we were, but since the '93 WTC bombings, that was sort of the point of no return, where no inactivity could curb hatred for the West.


Tell me when did we attack their religion? We haven't attacked their religion.
Well we have in a way by putting Israel where it is and then blatantly supporting our little kid in the Mid East. But yeah, the fundamentalists have blown it out of proportion as well.
If they did then they know that life for their citizens would be better when not under a dictatorship.
Well see once our troops are gone, if Bush's actions will be vindicated. There's no way to tell now, and for the sake of humanity, I hope I'm wrong, but I'd rather be pleasantly surprised, than horribly disapointed.

That would be essentially correct yes. Just liked they blamed the Jews for causing World War 1 when they didn't.
Exactly.

Listen, you are not the one who is sacrificing over there. Once you go over there you kinda form an attachment to the afghani people (can't talk about iraq that much). You know deep down that you would die in a second for even one iraqi child. If no one ever died for a cause, then this world would be in horrid conditions. Absolutely NOBODY would have any freedoms besides the few that would be in power. I realize why you might not understand personal sacrafice for a good cause but at the very least, i ask you not to stand in the way of people who are willing to sacrafice for the greater good of the world.

Oh and by the way, i believe it was russia who sold iraq massive amounts of weapons. I believe we sold either $100,000 or $300,000 cant remember but it neither of those figures can even buy a good sized home in the states.
You are doing it in "our" name with "our" money ... we have a vested intrest in making sure it is what we feel is right

The events that had a direct influence on me occurred in 1982, and the subsequent events, when the US permitted the Israelis to invade Lebanon with the aid of the American sixth fleet.

In those critical moments, I was overwhelmed by ideas that are hard to describe, but they awakened a powerful impulse to reject injustice and gave birth to a firm resolve to punish the oppressors. As I was looking at those destroyed towers in Lebanon, I was struck by the idea of punishing the oppressor in the same manner and destroying towers in the US, to give it a taste of what we have tasted and to deter it from killing our children and women.

-Osama Bin Laden

The events that had a direct influence on me occurred in 1982, and the subsequent events, when the US permitted the Israelis to invade Lebanon with the aid of the American sixth fleet.

In those critical moments, I was overwhelmed by ideas that are hard to describe, but they awakened a powerful impulse to reject injustice and gave birth to a firm resolve to punish the oppressors. As I was looking at those destroyed towers in Lebanon, I was struck by the idea of punishing the oppressor in the same manner and destroying towers in the US, to give it a taste of what we have tasted and to deter it from killing our children and women.

-Osama Bin Laden
Thank you. Another brick in the wall...

Okay, here's no surprise:

I don't think the military should be allowed to recruit, period.

Okay, here's no surprise:

I don't think the military should be allowed to recruit, period.

Why?

The events that had a direct influence on me occurred in 1982, and the subsequent events, when the US permitted the Israelis to invade Lebanon with the aid of the American sixth fleet.

In those critical moments, I was overwhelmed by ideas that are hard to describe, but they awakened a powerful impulse to reject injustice and gave birth to a firm resolve to punish the oppressors. As I was looking at those destroyed towers in Lebanon, I was struck by the idea of punishing the oppressor in the same manner and destroying towers in the US, to give it a taste of what we have tasted and to deter it from killing our children and women.

-Osama Bin Laden

I am distinctly reminded of US rhetoric surrounding Afghanistan. "Give it a taste of what we have tasted," "deter it from killing our children and women," etc.

Any one who has been on the ground in either of these countries would know that you have not. You believe what you are told, these things are not occurring.

My apologies for my ignorance. I was not aware that the US did not in fact invade Iraq, and did not in fact slaughter tens of thousands of people, and does not in fact support a government that former US puppet Iyad Allawi accused of having a worse human rights record than Saddam Hussein, a government that seems to be running death squads with US funds.

All those are, naturally, Commie lies, spread by haters of freedom who are sympathetic to the terrorists.

The iraqi gov't has already shown that it is capable of suppressing civil war as it has just done (somehow the media forgot this part).

The Iraqi government has a distinct side in the civil war. The state apparatus is firmly on the side of the Shi'ite religious leadership, as is the US and Iran. It is currently fighting a low-level war against Sunni militias, attempting to assert its dominance.

You are told what the U.S. military is deciding to do and though you may think we are there to dominate i can tell you for a fact that we are not.

You cannot tell me any such thing for a "fact," because you do not run the US military.

We are not fighting a war to conquer but to allow the iraqis to live in a free, open and democratic society.

Yes, the same way the Soviets were intent upon liberating Afghanistan, Napoleon on spreading French republicanism, the Romans on extending Pax Romana, the British on enlightening the Indian savages, the Spanish on bringing salvation to the Native Americans, the white slave-owners in the South on "civilizing" the slaves, the Germans on protecting Europe from Judeo-Bolshevik aggression, and on and on and on....

When will we learn that all of that is nonsense? A huge number of cases of aggression in recorded history have included rhetoric about "liberation," and in pretty much every case of such rhetoric that was a vicious lie. The US has a particularly ample record in that department.

I am distinctly reminded of US rhetoric surrounding Afghanistan. "Give it a taste of what we have tasted," "deter it from killing our children and women," etc.
.

I dont remember that kind of rhetoric.

At any rate, the only real condemnation of the afghan invasion is that it didnt happen sooner.

Why?
Because I think that interested parties should have to seek them out to apply themselves. And I think applying should be an excruciatingly long (yet also reversible) process involving a great deal of paperwork, examinations, counselling, and still more paperwork and examinations.

Because I think that interested parties should have to seek them out to apply themselves. And I think applying should be an excruciatingly long (yet also reversible) process involving a great deal of paperwork, examinations, counselling, and still more paperwork and examinations.
Can never have too much info on what you are geting yourself into

Can never have too much info on what you are geting yourself into
There's a difference between providing info and proselytizing. One needn't sell it.

There's a difference between providing info and proselytizing. One needn't sell it.
I mean for the counciling side of it (your proposal) I dont think it would be bad to inform them of both sides

I mean for the counciling side of it (your proposal) I dont think it would be bad to inform them of both sides
Oh, sorry. Yeah, I'd like to make it far more of an informed decision - and yet one they can still back away from at any time in the process. Hence making it a long and drawn out affair. Anyway, there's at least this upshot for the military: they could be absolutely certain that the men and women who had completed the sign-up process were all equally sure of themselves in their chosen path.

Oh, sorry. Yeah, I'd like to make it far more of an informed decision - and yet one they can still back away from at any time in the process. Hence making it a long and drawn out affair. Anyway, there's at least this upshot for the military: they could be absolutely certain that the men and women who had completed the sign-up process were all equally sure of themselves in their chosen path.
Fuck we do that sort of thing for collages why not the military :p

The events that had a direct influence on me occurred in 1982, and the subsequent events, when the US permitted the Israelis to invade Lebanon with the aid of the American sixth fleet.

In those critical moments, I was overwhelmed by ideas that are hard to describe, but they awakened a powerful impulse to reject injustice and gave birth to a firm resolve to punish the oppressors. As I was looking at those destroyed towers in Lebanon, I was struck by the idea of punishing the oppressor in the same manner and destroying towers in the US, to give it a taste of what we have tasted and to deter it from killing our children and women.

-Osama Bin Laden
Too bad Bin Laden had nothing to do with 9/11 and said so himself on Al Jazera.

Too bad Bin Laden had nothing to do with 9/11 and said so himself on Al Jazera.
And when was this?

And when was this?
He gave them a statement a few days after the “attacks.” He essentially said that he was obeying the rules of the Taliban, which he lived under, and they didn’t allow him to conduct such operations.

As for the “confession tape” that was found in Afghanistan, there are numerous errors, and the man looks nothing like Bin Laden.

I dont remember that kind of rhetoric.

I do. I still hear it, or some variation, whenever I argue about the Afghan invasion.

Usually with the same generalization, the same transformation of the Enemy into a vague and irredeemably evil "Them" that encompasses anyone the US might happen to kill.

It's exactly the same logic of vengeance that Bin Laden uses.

He gave them a statement a few days after the “attacks.” He essentially said that he was obeying the rules of the Taliban, which he lived under, and they didn’t allow him to conduct such operations.

As for the “confession tape” that was found in Afghanistan, there are numerous errors, and the man looks nothing like Bin Laden.
Might you have any links?

I don’t have a problem with the Military recruiting at colleges, as long as they don’t interfere with the operation of the college or harass students who don’t want to join (see hazing the hippies for sheer joy of it). They should have the same access as any corporation or other future employer. Of course people who join the military to help pay for college while they’re there are in for a very rude surprise when they end up far from college in Iraq, but they really should pay closer attention to the news.

The Government pays a lot of coin to establish, maintain, and fund studies at Universities. Since corporations can do their head hunting on campus without paying a cent to them and pillaging university research for their corporate products, I don’t have a problem with military recruiters being there. The Government has paid for the privilege, should they choose to do so.

As for the gays in the military issue, whenever I trained on US army bases I saw more gay meeting arrangements scrawled on the bathrooms of their base malls than any place I’ve ever seen in my life. I felt I should read a few of them just to be certain I hadn’t picked the wrong time to go to the bathroom. I don’t think there’s any problem about admitting that there are gays in the US military, a whole lot of them. In Canada they crack down on you for fraternizing in uniform. You’re allowed to be openly gay in the military up here, but I never knew anyone who was ever took the opportunity to make any announcements about it. Whenever I’ve been training, I’m usually way too tired to be thinking of sex, until I’m out on the town on leave. When I trained with women I never found the muddy, khaki pajama look very sexy and shied away from dating women in the military.

The Bruce

Too bad Bin Laden had nothing to do with 9/11 and said so himself on Al Jazera.

Oh brother. I would love to know when he said that.

He gave them a statement a few days after the “attacks.” He essentially said that he was obeying the rules of the Taliban, which he lived under, and they didn’t allow him to conduct such operations.

As for the “confession tape” that was found in Afghanistan, there are numerous errors, and the man looks nothing like Bin Laden.

Links please? And I mean from credible sources.

I don’t have a problem with the Military recruiting at colleges, as long as they don’t interfere with the operation of the college or harass students who don’t want to join (see hazing the hippies for sheer joy of it). They should have the same access as any corporation or other future employer. Of course people who join the military to help pay for college while they’re there are in for a very rude surprise when they end up far from college in Iraq, but they really should pay closer attention to the news.

Actually, by law, they have to tell perspective recruits that if they join up, they could be shipped off to a warzone. If they complain about this well they should've been listening more closely. And it should be common sense that by joining the military, odds are your going to be shipped off somewhere at least once in your career.

The Government pays a lot of coin to establish, maintain, and fund studies at Universities. Since corporations can do their head hunting on campus without paying a cent to them and pillaging university research for their corporate products, I don’t have a problem with military recruiters being there. The Government has paid for the privilege, should they choose to do so.

I agree 100%

As for the gays in the military issue, whenever I trained on US army bases I saw more gay meeting arrangements scrawled on the bathrooms of their base malls than any place I’ve ever seen in my life. I felt I should read a few of them just to be certain I hadn’t picked the wrong time to go to the bathroom. I don’t think there’s any problem about admitting that there are gays in the US military, a whole lot of them.

There are yep. Its just when they are caught are they tossed out.

In Canada they crack down on you for fraternizing in uniform.

And the US doesn't?

Doesn't stop me from going around and taking all the military recruitment propoganda off the bulletin boards and throwing it away. As long as they don't mind me standing right beside them telling the young man they're talking to not to join, I don't mind them tryin' to get people to join.

Hoorah.


Hahahahaha. Freedom of speech rules.

When you start behaving like a 7 year old and taking down things you don't like or agree, that's not freedom of speech. That's vandalism. Freedom of speech as long as you agree eh?

When you start behaving like a 7 year old and taking down things you don't like or agree, that's not freedom of speech. That's vandalism. Freedom of speech as long as you agree eh?
Have you ever been on a campus?

SUPREME COURT RULES COLLEGES THAT ACCEPT FEDERAL MONEY MUST ALLOW
MILLITARY RECUITERS ON CAMPUS

I don't think this was posted but as it the big caps said (it is from a breaking news email on March 6), College campuses that accept federal money must allow military recuiters on campus.

What do you think of this ruling?
I think it was stupid that this issue ever had to come up in the first place. WTF is WRONG with these idiots? This is just another version of the spoiled-child psychology: "If you don't fight the war I want you to fight, I'm not going to let you recruit on my campus!" What utter and complete idiocy! :mad:

There's a difference between providing info and proselytizing. One needn't sell it.
So you're against corporations, businesses and non-profits recruiting as well?

Oh, sorry. Yeah, I'd like to make it far more of an informed decision - and yet one they can still back away from at any time in the process. Hence making it a long and drawn out affair. Anyway, there's at least this upshot for the military: they could be absolutely certain that the men and women who had completed the sign-up process were all equally sure of themselves in their chosen path.
And what makes you think they aren't now?

He gave them a statement a few days after the “attacks.” He essentially said that he was obeying the rules of the Taliban, which he lived under, and they didn’t allow him to conduct such operations.

As for the “confession tape” that was found in Afghanistan, there are numerous errors, and the man looks nothing like Bin Laden.
And of course you immediately believed Osama and concluded there was yet another vast government conspiracy designed to forever tarnish the reputation of an innocent terrorist. :rolleyes:

And of course you immediately believed Osama and concluded there was yet another vast government conspiracy designed to forever tarnish the reputation of an innocent terrorist. :rolleyes:

He does. He's already been debunked so many times in the last 48 hours, I do not know why he even bothers.

When you start behaving like a 7 year old and taking down things you don't like or agree, that's not freedom of speech. That's vandalism. Freedom of speech as long as you agree eh?
Just another example of the spoiled child approach people like this take toward something they don't like. They raise hell if anyone tries to limit their freedom to be an asshole in any way, then do their best to supress anything with which they don't agree. Spoiled children. Definitely.

He does. He's already been debunked so many times in the last 48 hours, I do not know why he even bothers.
He's a spoiled child use to getting his own way no matter how stupid.

Just another example of the spoiled child approach people like this take toward something they don't like. They raise hell if anyone tries to limit their freedom to be an asshole in any way, then do their best to supress anything with which they don't agree. Spoiled children. Definitely.
Agree with you on this one.

By the way, is it true that the military follows the following chain of unity: Unit, Corps, God, Country?

Have you ever been on a campus?

What does that have to do with anything? If a private university or college has a policy about posting material on a publicly accessible board, that's one thing, they are a private organization and have that right. However, a random student at a public university does not have the right there, or anywhere, to silence other voices. Doesn't matter if it's band camp or ROTC. Wait your turn to get on the soap box.

I think it was stupid that this issue ever had to come up in the first place. WTF is WRONG with these idiots? This is just another version of the spoiled-child psychology: "If you don't fight the war I want you to fight, I'm not going to let you recruit on my campus!" what utter and complete idiocy! :mad:

This isn't acceptable or even honest, eut.

The basis of the universities' refusal to allow military recruiters was the military's violation of the schools' anti-discrimination policies with regard to homosexuals.

This argument has been going on since before bush was in office.

Doesn't stop me from going around and taking all the military recruitment propoganda off the bulletin boards and throwing it away. As long as they don't mind me standing right beside them telling the young man they're talking to not to join, I don't mind them tryin' to get people to join.

Hoorah.
Weren't you once in the military?

Long time ago, when the United States actually stood for the principles it proclaimed
When was this? 1783-1792?

Read A People's History of the USA by Howard Zinn or something like that, and you'll see that the US has never been about freedom and all that.

And yet they can serve if they don't tell anyone that they are gay.
Are you agreeing or disagreeing with Fass here?

What dirty work would this be? Don't even say war crimes, because not all people in the military are war criminals. I thought liberals were supposed to be open minded and against stereotyping...I guess not.
Nice stereotype, assuming that all anti-militarists are "liberals".

I'll agree with the latter. Not the former.
You think that Afghanistan is closer to stable democracy than Iraq is?

This isn't an American revolution, this is us screwing unnecissarily with the Middle East. Remember who put Saddam in power, and remember who sold weapons to Iraq.
I don't see why making past mistakes means that they shouldn't ever be corrected.

I realize why you might not understand personal sacrafice for a good cause
Yay, socialism!

Why are we so concerned about the Middle East? OIL!!! They know damn well about the "modern world." Again, read up on some history, please.
Muslims are über-conservatives. When they see the modern world they are afraid.