How come there is no national disgust in the murder of innocents by our Gov?

[JakeStarkey]

You attacked a fellow service member, public poagybait, first. You are a disgrace to all that is good in the American service. For shame on you. You make Tammy Duckworth look like the Queen of the East, compared with your self serving cauterwauling. I doubt very much that you are a combat vet, because none would act like you on the board.

Shut the fuck up, troop, until you square yourself away. Dismissed!

Oh, for crying out loud, pubic poagybait

Talk to Tammy Duckworth and she will tell you to flip off

What a disgrace you are to the flag, pubic

You were a Boiler Technician on a Kitty Hawk-class aircraft carrier? Did you ever set foot in Iraq? Did you ever have a round shot over your head? I did three combat patrols a day in the Al Anbar Provence and you’re thanking your lucky stars that you got out alive while claiming the mantle of knowledgeable combat veteran? Get the hell out of here you freaking POG! Quit using your veteran’s status on a boat to make definitive deductions of the real Iraq I saw with my own eyes in the most violent provence in the country, of which, we sucessfully pacified with the help of the local Iraqis!

Why don't you attack the rationality of my argument? Military personnel are not above criticism by virtue of their service and if they are faking the funk, as a combat veteran myself, I am happy to call them on it!

 

[Publius1787]

You attacked a fellow service member, public poagybait, first. You are a disgrace to all that is good in the American service. For shame on you. You make Tammy Duckworth look like the Queen of the East, compared with your self serving cauterwauling. I doubt very much that you are a combat vet, because none would act like you on the board.

Shut the fuck up, troop, until you square yourself away. Dismissed!

Oh, for crying out loud, pubic poagybait

Talk to Tammy Duckworth and she will tell you to flip off

What a disgrace you are to the flag, pubic

Why don't you attack the rationality of my argument? Military personnel are not above criticism by virtue of their service and if they are faking the funk, as a combat veteran myself, I am happy to call them on it!

Well, if the truth of my service were dependent on your opinion of my combat service then I suppose that I would be up the creek. Being that it does not, however, I think I am in good shape. Nevertheless, your thought police experiment (i.e. I cant make a honest rational argument about another veteran *REDICULOUS NOTION*) has failed and I will argue on the merits no matter how distastful truth and reason may sound to you. In turth, my argument stands valid dispite my service, or, prove me otherwise. There is one thing I know for sure, however, its hard to know Iraq from a boat.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You attempted the thought police experiment, pubic poagybait, and got it shoved up your ass.

 

[impalero]

I find it ironic that those that go against the status quo are the traitors.
The status quo consists of selling ourselves to Commie China, and destroying this country in the process to make others richer.
The status quo consists of stealing my tax dollars to baby sit other countries, when it should be their responsibility. Stealing my tax dollars to enrich the defense industry, and to protect FOREIGN financial and corporate markets.

The traitors are the ones that sell their country out for 2 pieces of silver.

 

[Publius1787]

You attempted the thought police experiment, pubic poagybait, and got it shoved up your ass.

I attacked the authentic credentials being offered in a rational manner that goes against his Iraqi bonafidies. Thats not thought police. If it were it would not be allowed in court arguments. No duh huh? You made a rule that a veteran may not attack another veteran. Thats thought police. That places an artifical stigma on anyone who makes a similar argument dispite the validity of their claim.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

I will repost my statement so you can have the proper opportunity to respond. Being that my entire response addressed your argument in the entirity I would figure that you would try to refute the information presented. However, you just abandoned your arguement and made the above statement.

Since you're running-around-in-circles, anyhow, go ahead and....

....defend the Vichy French....

....in Vietnam.​

You abandoned your argument. I addressed you line by line on your own merits no less! You refused to follow up not me.

Then, try some o' this....​

.....from HERE.

*

INTERVIEW WITH GENERAL ANDREW GOODPASTER​

"Well, France of course was an ally, we were trying to develop NATO at the time and the French were pressing us very strongly to assist them in Vietnam. The other side of that from the NATO side, General Eisenhower was our first NATO commander and he was pressing the French very strongly to give Vietnam its independence and he thought when Marshall Tavsenin went out to Vietnam, that he was a man who had sufficient strength and authority and respect in France, that he would be able to do it. He always regarded it as a real tragedy that Marshal Dulatte died very soon thereafter and there was no one then who had the strength to make the decision to give Vietnam its independence. Eisenhower felt always that that should be the policy of the United States and when he came in as President, that's what he supported."

 

[Publius1787]

Since you're running-around-in-circles, anyhow, go ahead and....



....in Vietnam.​

You abandoned your argument. I addressed you line by line on your own merits no less! You refused to follow up not me.

Then, try some o' this....​

.....from HERE.

*

INTERVIEW WITH GENERAL ANDREW GOODPASTER​

"Well, France of course was an ally, we were trying to develop NATO at the time and the French were pressing us very strongly to assist them in Vietnam. The other side of that from the NATO side, General Eisenhower was our first NATO commander and he was pressing the French very strongly to give Vietnam its independence and he thought when Marshall Tavsenin went out to Vietnam, that he was a man who had sufficient strength and authority and respect in France, that he would be able to do it. He always regarded it as a real tragedy that Marshal Dulatte died very soon thereafter and there was no one then who had the strength to make the decision to give Vietnam its independence. Eisenhower felt always that that should be the policy of the United States and when he came in as President, that's what he supported."

Still abandoning your old arguments?

 

[JakeStarkey]

What and where the other guy fought is immaterial. Your combat credentials are immaterial. And you did not come across rationally. You were in a rage. You were going to try to demonize him with "I am a combat vet" as if that means anything.

Pubic Poagybait, it means nothing.

You attempted the thought police experiment, pubic poagybait, and got it shoved up your ass.

I attacked the authentic credentials being offered in a rational manner that goes against his Iraqi bonafidies. Thats not thought police. If it were it would not be allowed in court arguments. No duh huh? You made a rule that a veteran may not attack another veteran. Thats thought police. That places an artifical stigma on anyone who makes a similar argument dispite the validity of their claim.

 

[LibertyLemming]

You nerds have dereailed this thread into a bunch of useless blabber

 

[freedombecki]

Oh, for crying out loud, pubic poagybait

Talk to Tammy Duckworth and she will tell you to flip off

What a disgrace you are to the flag, pubic

I was on the JFK as a BT, a now defunct rate.

You were a Boiler Technician on a Kitty Hawk-class aircraft carrier? Did you ever set foot in Iraq? Did you ever have a round shot over your head? I did three combat patrols a day in the Al Anbar Provence and you’re thanking your lucky stars that you got out alive while claiming the mantle of knowledgeable combat veteran? Get the hell out of here you freaking POG! Quit using your veteran’s status on a boat to make definitive deductions of the real Iraq I saw with my own eyes in the most violent provence in the country, of which, we sucessfully pacified with the help of the local Iraqis!

I don't think so, Jake. You're being mean to a veteran who served his country under terrible conditions. I'm sorry to see it done for any reason, least of all political ones.

 

[BallsBrunswick]

Thanks for the laugh, I really needed that. The over simplification of your statement has to be record for understatement and totally ignoring the facts.

Lets look at the facts that allowed that 25 cent bullet to be fired.
1. Did the soldiers involved in the raid on OBL not come from an established base in Afghanistan? I wonder how that little sucker got there?
2. The equipment used was in Afghanistan, as was the support personnel for that equipment. I wonder how they got there?
3. We lost a helicopter costing many millions of dollars to have the ability to fire that 25 cent bullet, that I think your counting against Bush's 4 trillion dollar war.

So you want to tell me again how your dear leader did all this with a 25 cent bullet?

1. So you're saying the American military isn't able to get a special forces team into any part of the world? It was only because of a nearly decade long pointless war that we were able to execute such an efficient operation?

2. Again, it took a nearly decade long pointless war in Afghanistan to get such a precise strike in Pakistan?

3. Okay, I'll give you the helicopter. Still the entire cost of that operation and training against the entire cost of the Iraqi and Afghanistan war? Especially since your fellow Texan said the man responsible for 9/11 wasn't a priority in his middle east strategy?

Your point is retarded and you said that just because you're bitter as evidenced by your Dear Leader comment. By the way, do you notice only bitter conservatives use that phrase? But still the 4 trillion dollar Bush Wars were sold to us on needing to get Osama and his cohorts and that was accomplished by a 25 cent bullet approved by Obama who bet his Presidential future on it and won.

Yes the US has the technology to project military power anywhere in the world, but a carrier based operation would not have had the advantages a land based operation had. Pakistani early warning systems would have more than likely detected the task force long before they reached their target. Of course they could have use a cruise missile but then there would have been no way to recover OBL's remains.

If you can't admit that having assets in the area contributed to the success of that mission, that's ok, Maobama made a call he had to make, had it gotten out he had the opportunity and didn't take it, would have been more disastrous than failure. Also if you think they didn't continue to look for OBL the whole of Bush's presidency then your delusional.

BTW the "your dear leader" comment appears to be as applicable to you as anyone, evidenced by your statement of what in your opinion Maobama did with a 25 cent bullet. Then you can add your acceptance of Maobamas claims they were only using the best intel available on Benghazi, yet when Bush relied on the intel provided by every major agency in the world on Iraq, that just not sufficient. Hypocrite much?

1. So you admit that we could've nailed Osama without two decade long pointless wars that cost about 4 trillion dollars in Bush's era? That's big of you.

2. Haha, Bush gave up on getting Osama in 2006 by dissolving the CIA unit tasked with getting him and publicly claiming he wasn't interested in getting Osama anymore. While Obama made it a priority to get Osama and risked his Presidency on the operation. You are denying history if you think otherwise.

3. Blah blah blah, off you go into conservative never never land instead of staying on the topic. Two wars were done because of something we were told Osama Bin Laden was responsible for. Those two wars cost 4 trillion dollars and those two wars did not achieve the main goal of killing Osama. Yet a 25 cent bullet from the gun of a special operative on a covert mission authorized by President Obama accomplished that.

 

[Publius1787]

Oh, for crying out loud, pubic poagybait

Talk to Tammy Duckworth and she will tell you to flip off

What a disgrace you are to the flag, pubic

You were a Boiler Technician on a Kitty Hawk-class aircraft carrier? Did you ever set foot in Iraq? Did you ever have a round shot over your head? I did three combat patrols a day in the Al Anbar Provence and you’re thanking your lucky stars that you got out alive while claiming the mantle of knowledgeable combat veteran? Get the hell out of here you freaking POG! Quit using your veteran’s status on a boat to make definitive deductions of the real Iraq I saw with my own eyes in the most violent provence in the country, of which, we sucessfully pacified with the help of the local Iraqis!

I don't think so, Jake. You're being mean to a veteran who served his country under terrible conditions. I'm sorry to see it done for any reason, least of all political ones.

He tried to make the comparison of Muj activity in Iraq to people defending their country. I showed he doesent know squat about Iraq though he was using his "sitting on a boat status" to make an assumption not congruent with his service there. Terrible conditions? The JFK was not terrible conditions! I took 13 showers throughout my whole deployment because the mortor attacks kept draining our water supply. Now quit with the "no veteran may criticize another veteran" thought police BS.

 

[Publius1787]

What and where the other guy fought is immaterial. Your combat credentials are immaterial. And you did not come across rationally. You were in a rage. You were going to try to demonize him with "I am a combat vet" as if that means anything.

Pubic Poagybait, it means nothing.

You attempted the thought police experiment, pubic poagybait, and got it shoved up your ass.

I attacked the authentic credentials being offered in a rational manner that goes against his Iraqi bonafidies. Thats not thought police. If it were it would not be allowed in court arguments. No duh huh? You made a rule that a veteran may not attack another veteran. Thats thought police. That places an artifical stigma on anyone who makes a similar argument dispite the validity of their claim.

He used his service to legitimize his opinion of how the Muj were just trying to defend their country. I raised the BS flag knowing that if he had ever been there he would have seen otherwise. That’s not immaterial.

 

[OKTexas]

1. So you're saying the American military isn't able to get a special forces team into any part of the world? It was only because of a nearly decade long pointless war that we were able to execute such an efficient operation?

2. Again, it took a nearly decade long pointless war in Afghanistan to get such a precise strike in Pakistan?

3. Okay, I'll give you the helicopter. Still the entire cost of that operation and training against the entire cost of the Iraqi and Afghanistan war? Especially since your fellow Texan said the man responsible for 9/11 wasn't a priority in his middle east strategy?

Your point is retarded and you said that just because you're bitter as evidenced by your Dear Leader comment. By the way, do you notice only bitter conservatives use that phrase? But still the 4 trillion dollar Bush Wars were sold to us on needing to get Osama and his cohorts and that was accomplished by a 25 cent bullet approved by Obama who bet his Presidential future on it and won.

Yes the US has the technology to project military power anywhere in the world, but a carrier based operation would not have had the advantages a land based operation had. Pakistani early warning systems would have more than likely detected the task force long before they reached their target. Of course they could have use a cruise missile but then there would have been no way to recover OBL's remains.

If you can't admit that having assets in the area contributed to the success of that mission, that's ok, Maobama made a call he had to make, had it gotten out he had the opportunity and didn't take it, would have been more disastrous than failure. Also if you think they didn't continue to look for OBL the whole of Bush's presidency then your delusional.

BTW the "your dear leader" comment appears to be as applicable to you as anyone, evidenced by your statement of what in your opinion Maobama did with a 25 cent bullet. Then you can add your acceptance of Maobamas claims they were only using the best intel available on Benghazi, yet when Bush relied on the intel provided by every major agency in the world on Iraq, that just not sufficient. Hypocrite much?

1. So you admit that we could've nailed Osama without two decade long pointless wars that cost about 4 trillion dollars in Bush's era? That's big of you.

2. Haha, Bush gave up on getting Osama in 2006 by dissolving the CIA unit tasked with getting him and publicly claiming he wasn't interested in getting Osama anymore. While Obama made it a priority to get Osama and risked his Presidency on the operation. You are denying history if you think otherwise.

3. Blah blah blah, off you go into conservative never never land instead of staying on the topic. Two wars were done because of something we were told Osama Bin Laden was responsible for. Those two wars cost 4 trillion dollars and those two wars did not achieve the main goal of killing Osama. Yet a 25 cent bullet from the gun of a special operative on a covert mission authorized by President Obama accomplished that.

1. No I didn't say that at all, having assets on the ground in Afghanistan and Pakistan, both military and intelligence enabled us to finally locate OBL and have the personnel and equipment at the ready to mount a mission to get him. Tell me how would a mission to get him have been mounted without assets in Afghanistan?

2. I don't know how old your are but you seem to keep confusing the reasons for the Afghan and Iraq wars. 9/11 was the reason for Afghanistan and Saddam refusing to comply with UN resolutions was the reason for Iraq. You keep say Bush was a liar, yet you readily take his word on OBL, have you ever considered what Bush said about OBL was simply misinformation in an attempt to get him out in the open?

3. Like I said both wars were not because of 9/11, and yes Maobama use bases of operations and intelligence systems put in place by Bush policies to get OBL, would they have ever had that shot without the Bush policies, we'll never know will we.

 

[JakeStarkey]

That there can only be your opinion that characterizes all vets who served? Tammy Duckworth would disagree with you. freedombecki defended you only because she agrees with you, not because you are a combat vet.

There is going to be disagreement over Iraq, as there was over Vietnam. If you demonize those who disagree with you using "vet" as a standard, you will be in the very small minority. However, you will do as you wish. And, Publius1787, thank you for your service.

What and where the other guy fought is immaterial. Your combat credentials are immaterial. And you did not come across rationally. You were in a rage. You were going to try to demonize him with "I am a combat vet" as if that means anything.

Pubic Poagybait, it means nothing.

I attacked the authentic credentials being offered in a rational manner that goes against his Iraqi bonafidies. Thats not thought police. If it were it would not be allowed in court arguments. No duh huh? You made a rule that a veteran may not attack another veteran. Thats thought police. That places an artifical stigma on anyone who makes a similar argument dispite the validity of their claim.

He used his service to legitimize his opinion of how the Muj were just trying to defend their country. I raised the BS flag knowing that if he had ever been there he would have seen otherwise. That’s not immaterial.

 

[beagle9]

I find it ironic that those that go against the status quo are the traitors.
The status quo consists of selling ourselves to Commie China, and destroying this country in the process to make others richer.
The status quo consists of stealing my tax dollars to baby sit other countries, when it should be their responsibility. Stealing my tax dollars to enrich the defense industry, and to protect FOREIGN financial and corporate markets.

The traitors are the ones that sell their country out for 2 pieces of silver.

Mixing the issues is a tactic and a distraction, and so this speaks nothing to the specific issues that surrounded specific wars, and the reasoning behind those wars, and as well ultimately what they were actually being fought for..

 

[beagle9]

All kinds of claims can be made here, but what is the real truth ?

 

[JakeStarkey]

beagle9 just described what beagles do: distract and speak nothing to the problem.

I find it ironic that those that go against the status quo are the traitors.
The status quo consists of selling ourselves to Commie China, and destroying this country in the process to make others richer.
The status quo consists of stealing my tax dollars to baby sit other countries, when it should be their responsibility. Stealing my tax dollars to enrich the defense industry, and to protect FOREIGN financial and corporate markets.

The traitors are the ones that sell their country out for 2 pieces of silver.

Mixing the issues is a tactic and a distraction, and so this speaks nothing to the specific issues that surrounded specific wars, and the reasoning behind those wars, and as well ultimately what they were actually being fought for..

 

[Publius1787]

That there can only be your opinion that characterizes all vets who served? Tammy Duckworth would disagree with you. freedombecki defended you only because she agrees with you, not because you are a combat vet.

There is going to be disagreement over Iraq, as there was over Vietnam. If you demonize those who disagree with you using "vet" as a standard, you will be in the very small minority. However, you will do as you wish. And, Publius1787, thank you for your service.

What and where the other guy fought is immaterial. Your combat credentials are immaterial. And you did not come across rationally. You were in a rage. You were going to try to demonize him with "I am a combat vet" as if that means anything.

Pubic Poagybait, it means nothing.

He used his service to legitimize his opinion of how the Muj were just trying to defend their country. I raised the BS flag knowing that if he had ever been there he would have seen otherwise. That’s not immaterial.

Still, if you attach your service to an opinion your service better have something to do with that opinion. Please don't thank me. I served because I loved my job and my country. It was very self fulfilling and I do nothing altruistic in nature. I did if for my own sake and that of my family.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Hmmm, you write as a high functioning autistic, which would explain some things about your personality. He served, you served, Alan West served, and I and many on the board served at various times and places. So qualification of opinion by vet service is only a personal mind game, I think, and I am not impressed with it. Certainly not with your viciousness toward the guy on the AC. I carried an M14 and an M16 in infantry units, and I don't think that carries any more significance than an air jock. But, hey, that's me.