Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: palehorse74
in other words, you're FOS. I expected nothing less from you.Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: palehorse74
ok then, quit playing games. do tell us how exactly you were "initiated."Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Have you served in the military? If so, when, where, and with whom did you serve? Just curious...Originally posted by: Narmer
You also made the mistake of assuming that I'm uninitiated.
There's more than one way to be initiated.
No.
That's your opinion. I've alluded to my organization before and will not do so again.
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: palehorse74
in other words, you're FOS. I expected nothing less from you.Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: palehorse74
ok then, quit playing games. do tell us how exactly you were "initiated."Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Have you served in the military? If so, when, where, and with whom did you serve? Just curious...Originally posted by: Narmer
You also made the mistake of assuming that I'm uninitiated.
There's more than one way to be initiated.
No.
That's your opinion. I've alluded to my organization before and will not do so again.
WTH are you talking about?
why not? i'm not the one who brought the term "initiated" into the conversation, and now you're sitting there being obtuse.Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: palehorse74
in other words, you're FOS. I expected nothing less from you.Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: palehorse74
ok then, quit playing games. do tell us how exactly you were "initiated."Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Have you served in the military? If so, when, where, and with whom did you serve? Just curious...Originally posted by: Narmer
You also made the mistake of assuming that I'm uninitiated.
There's more than one way to be initiated.
No.
That's your opinion. I've alluded to my organization before and will not do so again.
now THAT was funny! :laugh: :beer:Originally posted by: cwjerome
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: palehorse74
in other words, you're FOS. I expected nothing less from you.Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: palehorse74
ok then, quit playing games. do tell us how exactly you were "initiated."Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Have you served in the military? If so, when, where, and with whom did you serve? Just curious...Originally posted by: Narmer
You also made the mistake of assuming that I'm uninitiated.
There's more than one way to be initiated.
No.
That's your opinion. I've alluded to my organization before and will not do so again.
WTH are you talking about?
The Salvation Army?
That's an interesting admission, that our presence in Iraq is not to serve the interests of the American people, but rather to serve the Iraqis and other troops. And all this time I thought the purpose of the military -- i.e., Department of Defense -- was to defend America. Instead we have thousands of dead Americans and upwards of a trillion dollars pissed away ... for what? Iraqis, Iraqis who largely want us gone? (Or to be precise, the remaining Iraqis who haven't been slaughtered and haven't fled their hell-hole country in desperation.) This seems especially absurd since five years ago Iraq was part of the so-called "Axis of Evil". Now we're allegedly dying for them.Originally posted by: palehorse74
I do not see it that way. Some of us would like to clean up the mess our government created, and we're doing pretty well in that regard in both Iraq and Afghanistan... at least for the moment. And any sacrifices we might make are either for the Iraqi's or the guy next to us - for the most part, we've tuned out the rest of the American people, and we know that we're not there to fight for them. That doesn't mean that we have no more reason to fight... rather, our priorities and purpose have shifted and adapted to the current mission.Originally posted by: shira
But what completely cheapens the sacrifice to the point of worthlessness is the fact that it's a all for nothing. The invasion was for nothing, the continuation of the war is for nothing, and all the dead and wounded American soldiers are for nothing, other than for George to save face.
Yep. And the Iraqis destroy them the next day, if not through hostile sabotage then through old-fashioned, American-style capitalistic entrepreneurialism.You probably wouldn't understand, because CNN wont show you any of the good things we're doing, but we're making positive changes every day... we really are.
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
That's an interesting admission, that our presence in Iraq is not to serve the interests of the American people, but rather to serve the Iraqis and other troops. And all this time I thought the purpose of the military -- i.e., Department of Defense -- was to defend America. Instead we have thousands of dead Americans and upwards of a trillion dollars pissed away ... for what? Iraqis, Iraqis who largely want us gone? (Or to be precise, the remaining Iraqis who haven't been slaughtered and haven't fled their hell-hole country in desperation.) This seems especially absurd since five years ago Iraq was part of the so-called "Axis of Evil". Now we're allegedly dying for them.Originally posted by: palehorse74
I do not see it that way. Some of us would like to clean up the mess our government created, and we're doing pretty well in that regard in both Iraq and Afghanistan... at least for the moment. And any sacrifices we might make are either for the Iraqi's or the guy next to us - for the most part, we've tuned out the rest of the American people, and we know that we're not there to fight for them. That doesn't mean that we have no more reason to fight... rather, our priorities and purpose have shifted and adapted to the current mission.Originally posted by: shira
But what completely cheapens the sacrifice to the point of worthlessness is the fact that it's a all for nothing. The invasion was for nothing, the continuation of the war is for nothing, and all the dead and wounded American soldiers are for nothing, other than for George to save face.
Yep. And the Iraqis destroy them the next day, if not through hostile sabotage then through old-fashioned, American-style capitalistic entrepreneurialism.You probably wouldn't understand, because CNN wont show you any of the good things we're doing, but we're making positive changes every day... we really are.
I have a friend over there in a civilian role that takes him to our bases all over the country. He's interesting to talk to because he's proud of what he's doing to support the troops, but is disgusted and frustrated with the mismanagement, incompetence, profiteering, and unmitigated waste of our operations there, as well as with the general malfeasance of the Iraqis we're trying to help. He's heard horror stories from all over the country of major projects that we completed, only to have them destroyed or rendered useless within a few days. He says there was a review of our projects there that showed less than 10% of them were still usable. They were either damaged by attacks or scavenged for profit by the Iraqis who were supposed to manage them. Maybe one of these days I'll start a thread listing some of the examples he's given.
Originally posted by: JD50
And our tax dollars were never meant to be spent on foreign aid, are you in favor of giving absolutely no foreign aid?
Meanwhile beloved patriot is thinking of ways to blow you up.Originally posted by: palehorse74
And any sacrifices we might make are either for the Iraqi's ..
It's ridiculous for you to take what I stated as the ground-truth, from a troop's perspective, and apply that to our overall strategic purposes in Iraq.Originally posted by: Bowfinger
That's an interesting admission, that our presence in Iraq is not to serve the interests of the American people, but rather to serve the Iraqis and other troops. And all this time I thought the purpose of the military -- i.e., Department of Defense -- was to defend America. Instead we have thousands of dead Americans and upwards of a trillion dollars pissed away ... for what? Iraqis, Iraqis who largely want us gone? (Or to be precise, the remaining Iraqis who haven't been slaughtered and haven't fled their hell-hole country in desperation.) This seems especially absurd since five years ago Iraq was part of the so-called "Axis of Evil". Now we're allegedly dying for them.Originally posted by: palehorse74
I do not see it that way. Some of us would like to clean up the mess our government created, and we're doing pretty well in that regard in both Iraq and Afghanistan... at least for the moment. And any sacrifices we might make are either for the Iraqi's or the guy next to us - for the most part, we've tuned out the rest of the American people, and we know that we're not there to fight for them. That doesn't mean that we have no more reason to fight... rather, our priorities and purpose have shifted and adapted to the current mission.Originally posted by: shira
But what completely cheapens the sacrifice to the point of worthlessness is the fact that it's a all for nothing. The invasion was for nothing, the continuation of the war is for nothing, and all the dead and wounded American soldiers are for nothing, other than for George to save face.
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Meanwhile beloved patriot is thinking of ways to blow you up.Originally posted by: palehorse74
And any sacrifices we might make are either for the Iraqi's ..
that's funny to you?Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Meanwhile beloved patriot is thinking of ways to blow you up.Originally posted by: palehorse74
And any sacrifices we might make are either for the Iraqi's ..
:laugh::laugh::laugh:
Originally posted by: palehorse74
that's funny to you?Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Meanwhile beloved patriot is thinking of ways to blow you up.Originally posted by: palehorse74
And any sacrifices we might make are either for the Iraqi's ..
:laugh::laugh::laugh:
/sick
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: JD50
And our tax dollars were never meant to be spent on foreign aid, are you in favor of giving absolutely no foreign aid?
Like most of ATPN, he probably desires his country to serve HIM.Originally posted by: palehorse74
Don't worry, nobody here would ever expect you to understand the desire to serve your nation.Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: palehorse74
I'm actually on vacation at the moment (woohoo!) I'm not heading back out until spring of '08. (I have some advanced schools to knock out before I go downrange again)...Originally posted by: Narmer
Originally posted by: palehorse74
It's a sad price that each of us who serves knows we might have to pay. Whenever you reduce it to a political talking point, you effectively cheapen the sacrifices we make.Originally posted by: Narmer
What's the bonus when they come back in a bodybag or with limbs missing?
It's not political. It's an honest question. Do they (or their families) get a bonus when the men die or are severly injured beyond repair? As for you, are you in Iraq or at home?
As for the bonuses, your question is ridiculous and is quite obviously a smart-assed attempt to make a political statement using the death and dismemberment of the troops.
There is no "death bonus." However, there is a decent amount of insurance money paid out to the spouses or families of servicemen and women who pay the ultimate price. Up to $400k.
Have I told you today how much you make me sick?
Do you honestly think I give a damn what you think of me? Anyway, thanks for answering. The death bonus is 400k. Therefore, if you die, your family will get a nice downpayment to a new house or the Maybach, their choice. Apparently the "all-volunteer" army needs some incentives to "volunteer". To me it's the old bait-n-switch, cause once you sign that paper, they own you for only $20k. Now that's a bargain.
Originally posted by: palehorse74
It's ridiculous for you to take what I stated as the ground-truth, from a troop's perspective, and apply that to our overall strategic purposes in Iraq.Originally posted by: Bowfinger
That's an interesting admission, that our presence in Iraq is not to serve the interests of the American people, but rather to serve the Iraqis and other troops. And all this time I thought the purpose of the military -- i.e., Department of Defense -- was to defend America. Instead we have thousands of dead Americans and upwards of a trillion dollars pissed away ... for what? Iraqis, Iraqis who largely want us gone? (Or to be precise, the remaining Iraqis who haven't been slaughtered and haven't fled their hell-hole country in desperation.) This seems especially absurd since five years ago Iraq was part of the so-called "Axis of Evil". Now we're allegedly dying for them.Originally posted by: palehorse74
I do not see it that way. Some of us would like to clean up the mess our government created, and we're doing pretty well in that regard in both Iraq and Afghanistan... at least for the moment. And any sacrifices we might make are either for the Iraqi's or the guy next to us - for the most part, we've tuned out the rest of the American people, and we know that we're not there to fight for them. That doesn't mean that we have no more reason to fight... rather, our priorities and purpose have shifted and adapted to the current mission.Originally posted by: shira
But what completely cheapens the sacrifice to the point of worthlessness is the fact that it's a all for nothing. The invasion was for nothing, the continuation of the war is for nothing, and all the dead and wounded American soldiers are for nothing, other than for George to save face.
After all, you guys tell us every day that we're not fighting for you.
No sweetie, I didn't. Once again you've failed miserably at accurately parsing written English. To save yourself humiliation in the future, here's what I suggest: glance at what I wrote, write a snarky reply, assume that you've failed to address what I actually said, re-read what I wrote, write a slightly more thoughtful response, assume that you've failed again, repeat until your response has a reasonable connection to the words I actually wrote. Cheers.Originally posted by: JD50
You're the one that tried to make that asinine point, eat your own cookie.Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: JD50
And our tax dollars were never meant to be spent on foreign aid, are you in favor of giving absolutely no foreign aid?
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
No sweetie, I didn't. Once again you've failed miserably at accurately parsing written English. To save yourself humiliation in the future, here's what I suggest: glance at what I wrote, write a snarky reply, assume that you've failed to address what I actually said, re-read what I wrote, write a slightly more thoughtful response, assume that you've failed again, repeat until your response has a reasonable connection to the words I actually wrote. Cheers.Originally posted by: JD50
You're the one that tried to make that asinine point, eat your own cookie.Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: JD50
And our tax dollars were never meant to be spent on foreign aid, are you in favor of giving absolutely no foreign aid?
In other words, you won't stand by what you said, cutting and running as it were?Originally posted by: palehorse74
It's ridiculous for you to take what I stated as the ground-truth, from a troop's perspective, and apply that to our overall strategic purposes in Iraq.Originally posted by: Bowfinger
That's an interesting admission, that our presence in Iraq is not to serve the interests of the American people, but rather to serve the Iraqis and other troops. And all this time I thought the purpose of the military -- i.e., Department of Defense -- was to defend America. Instead we have thousands of dead Americans and upwards of a trillion dollars pissed away ... for what? Iraqis, Iraqis who largely want us gone? (Or to be precise, the remaining Iraqis who haven't been slaughtered and haven't fled their hell-hole country in desperation.) This seems especially absurd since five years ago Iraq was part of the so-called "Axis of Evil". Now we're allegedly dying for them.Originally posted by: palehorse74
I do not see it that way. Some of us would like to clean up the mess our government created, and we're doing pretty well in that regard in both Iraq and Afghanistan... at least for the moment. And any sacrifices we might make are either for the Iraqi's or the guy next to us - for the most part, we've tuned out the rest of the American people, and we know that we're not there to fight for them. That doesn't mean that we have no more reason to fight... rather, our priorities and purpose have shifted and adapted to the current mission.Originally posted by: shira
But what completely cheapens the sacrifice to the point of worthlessness is the fact that it's a all for nothing. The invasion was for nothing, the continuation of the war is for nothing, and all the dead and wounded American soldiers are for nothing, other than for George to save face.
After all, you guys tell us every day that we're not fighting for you.
Care to explain how "any of the good things we're doing" really count when the Iraqis destroy most of them in a few days?Yep. And the Iraqis destroy them the next day, if not through hostile sabotage then through old-fashioned, American-style capitalistic entrepreneurialism.You probably wouldn't understand, because CNN wont show you any of the good things we're doing, but we're making positive changes every day... we really are.
I have a friend over there in a civilian role that takes him to our bases all over the country. He's interesting to talk to because he's proud of what he's doing to support the troops, but is disgusted and frustrated with the mismanagement, incompetence, profiteering, and unmitigated waste of our operations there, as well as with the general malfeasance of the Iraqis we're trying to help. He's heard horror stories from all over the country of major projects that we completed, only to have them destroyed or rendered useless within a few days. He says there was a review of our projects there that showed less than 10% of them were still usable. They were either damaged by attacks or scavenged for profit by the Iraqis who were supposed to manage them. Maybe one of these days I'll start a thread listing some of the examples he's given.
Sorry dear, I call my kids "sweetie", and I don't swing that way. I just wanted to express the appropriate level of respect for your regular diversions and evasions ... just like the ones above. You didn't address anything I said or contribute anything on-topic to the thread. I believe you kids call that trolling?Originally posted by: JD50
Sweetie? Sorry, I don't swing that way, enjoy your cookie.Originally posted by: Bowfinger
No sweetie, I didn't. Once again you've failed miserably at accurately parsing written English. To save yourself humiliation in the future, here's what I suggest: glance at what I wrote, write a snarky reply, assume that you've failed to address what I actually said, re-read what I wrote, write a slightly more thoughtful response, assume that you've failed again, repeat until your response has a reasonable connection to the words I actually wrote. Cheers.Originally posted by: JD50
You're the one that tried to make that asinine point, eat your own cookie.Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: JD50
And our tax dollars were never meant to be spent on foreign aid, are you in favor of giving absolutely no foreign aid?
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Sorry dear, I call my kids "sweetie", and I don't swing that way. I just wanted to express the appropriate level of respect for your regular diversions and evasions ... just like the ones above. You didn't address anything I said or contribute anything on-topic to the thread. I believe you kids call that trolling?Originally posted by: JD50
Sweetie? Sorry, I don't swing that way, enjoy your cookie.Originally posted by: Bowfinger
No sweetie, I didn't. Once again you've failed miserably at accurately parsing written English. To save yourself humiliation in the future, here's what I suggest: glance at what I wrote, write a snarky reply, assume that you've failed to address what I actually said, re-read what I wrote, write a slightly more thoughtful response, assume that you've failed again, repeat until your response has a reasonable connection to the words I actually wrote. Cheers.Originally posted by: JD50
You're the one that tried to make that asinine point, eat your own cookie.Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: JD50
And our tax dollars were never meant to be spent on foreign aid, are you in favor of giving absolutely no foreign aid?
Anyway, I'm done with you. Get back to me when you're interested in adding something of value. Buh bye.
I believe the primary purpose of our military is to defend the United States from direct threats. I also believe it is sometimes appropriate to use the military to assist in the defense of our allies, to work under the auspices of the United Nations, and to provide resources and expertise in disasters. I do NOT believe it is appropriate to use our military for wars of aggression, for imperialistic adventures, or for enriching American companies.Originally posted by: JD50
I asked you a direct question, one that you still have not answered. You seem to think that our military should never be used for anything unless we are directly attacked.
Perhaps so, but they would disapprove of many things about today's United States, e.g., the growth of government and the erosion of our civil liberties. I certainly do not oppose foreign aid in principle, though the devil is always in the details.We have been using our military for other things for a very very long time. I thought you might be referring to the fact that the founders of this country probably didn't want our military used for anything besides self defense. They would probably also disapprove of the billions of dollars that we send over seas as well, which is why I asked you about that.
That is not obvious at all. Yes, the usual administration propagandists parrot that point as if it is irrefutably true. Then again, they have no remaining credibility. They've been wrong about virtually everything else about their misadventure in Iraq. It's safe to assume they're wrong about this as well.Maybe I assumed to much and you just pulled this statement "And all this time I thought the purpose of the military -- i.e., Department of Defense -- was to defend America" out of your ass, because its pretty obvious that leaving Iraq right now would not be in the best interest of our country or Iraq.
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: JD50
And our tax dollars were never meant to be spent on foreign aid, are you in favor of giving absolutely no foreign aid?
You're the one that tried to make that asinine point, eat your own cookie.
where did I say that I didn't mean it? You simply took what I described as the ground-truth, from my perspective as a troop, and tried to make it into some grandiose over-arching statement regarding the US presence in iraq. In other words, you spun it to suit your needs.Originally posted by: Gaard
Originally posted by: palehorse74
It's ridiculous for you to take what I stated as the ground-truth, from a troop's perspective, and apply that to our overall strategic purposes in Iraq.Originally posted by: Bowfinger
That's an interesting admission, that our presence in Iraq is not to serve the interests of the American people, but rather to serve the Iraqis and other troops. And all this time I thought the purpose of the military -- i.e., Department of Defense -- was to defend America. Instead we have thousands of dead Americans and upwards of a trillion dollars pissed away ... for what? Iraqis, Iraqis who largely want us gone? (Or to be precise, the remaining Iraqis who haven't been slaughtered and haven't fled their hell-hole country in desperation.) This seems especially absurd since five years ago Iraq was part of the so-called "Axis of Evil". Now we're allegedly dying for them.Originally posted by: palehorse74
I do not see it that way. Some of us would like to clean up the mess our government created, and we're doing pretty well in that regard in both Iraq and Afghanistan... at least for the moment. And any sacrifices we might make are either for the Iraqi's or the guy next to us - for the most part, we've tuned out the rest of the American people, and we know that we're not there to fight for them. That doesn't mean that we have no more reason to fight... rather, our priorities and purpose have shifted and adapted to the current mission.Originally posted by: shira
But what completely cheapens the sacrifice to the point of worthlessness is the fact that it's a all for nothing. The invasion was for nothing, the continuation of the war is for nothing, and all the dead and wounded American soldiers are for nothing, other than for George to save face.
After all, you guys tell us every day that we're not fighting for you.
You didn't mean it? Maybe you should clarify. It appears you (& your buds) know that you're not fighting for your fellow Americans. (That's what you said)
Then do it on your own dime, because you work for me and that's not what I'm paying you for.Originally posted by: palehorse74
[ ... ]
And yes, we know who we're fighting for, and it sure as hell ain't folks like you. we fight for our buddies and for a better Iraq - two things that you couldn't care less about. ...