kallend 2,147 #51 October 26, 2007 Define "Lefty". Left of what?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #52 October 26, 2007 Quote Define "Lefty". Left of what? How pedantic. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #53 October 26, 2007 Quote Quote Define "Lefty". Left of what? How pedantic. Evasion! How can anyone answer you question without knowing what you mean by the term used. Are US Democrats automatically lefties? How about fiscal conservatives who are social liberals?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #54 October 26, 2007 Do you, perhaps, recall this quote? QuoteI don't think that the main problem in the USA is that they have a lot of guns, I think it is the manner in which they view their guns, and their willingness to use them in any situation that could remotely be construed as self defense. You seem to have no problem with using the same logic as long as it suits your purpose.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #55 October 26, 2007 Quote Quote Quote Define "Lefty". Left of what? How pedantic. Evasion! How can anyone answer you question without knowing what you mean by the term used. Are US Democrats automatically lefties? How about fiscal conservatives who are social liberals? Wow. Another Rush Limbaugh technique. LOL Off the irony scale. Instead of "lefty", how about "liberals"? Still to vague? How about people who describe themselves a liberals? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,594 #56 October 26, 2007 Ok, then I'll take that back. Still doesn't have any effect on how bad your argument is, or that you still haven't even acknowledged that you made a mistake in confusing most X are Y with most Y are X. Are you going to come up with any actual evidence that most lefties are anti military or just keep asserting it?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #57 October 26, 2007 Quote Quote Quote Quote Define "Lefty". Left of what? How pedantic. Evasion! How can anyone answer you question without knowing what you mean by the term used. Are US Democrats automatically lefties? How about fiscal conservatives who are social liberals? Wow. Another Rush Limbaugh technique. LOL Off the irony scale. Instead of "lefty", how about "liberals"? Still to vague? How about people who describe themselves a liberals? That works - a well defined SET.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #58 October 26, 2007 Quote Ok, then I'll take that back. Still doesn't have any effect on how bad your argument is, or that you still haven't even acknowledged that you made a mistake in confusing most X are Y with most Y are X. Are you going to come up with any actual evidence that most lefties are anti military or just keep asserting it? I'm trying to see if I can use the "Lefty Protocol", yes... As I said above...it works as a generality, but the standard of "proof" that you are willing to accept is equally unobtainable short of a poll with 100% compliance.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #59 October 26, 2007 Quote Quote Ok, then I'll take that back. Still doesn't have any effect on how bad your argument is, or that you still haven't even acknowledged that you made a mistake in confusing most X are Y with most Y are X. Are you going to come up with any actual evidence that most lefties are anti military or just keep asserting it? I'm trying to see if I can use the "Lefty Protocol", yes... As I said above...it works as a generality, but the standard of "proof" that you are willing to accept is equally unobtainable short of a poll with 100% compliance. I think we'd accept a statistically significant sample. Otherwise, I'd call BS on your claim. Here's you first data point: I'm sure you consider me a lefty (correct?). Next week I go to the Chicago Navy/Marine Corps Ball as an invited guest for the 17th year in a row, on account of my SUPPORT for their training activities. I have a nice plaque on my office wall from the US Navy thanking me for my efforts, too, and a similar one from the US Army Training Command.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #60 October 26, 2007 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Define "Lefty". Left of what? How pedantic. Evasion! How can anyone answer you question without knowing what you mean by the term used. Are US Democrats automatically lefties? How about fiscal conservatives who are social liberals? Wow. Another Rush Limbaugh technique. LOL Off the irony scale. Instead of "lefty", how about "liberals"? Still to vague? How about people who describe themselves a liberals? That works - a well defined SET. According to this graph: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Liberal_opinions_copy.jpg Twice as many liberals favor lowering defense spending as liberals who oppose it. While this doesn't prove they are anti-military, it's still pretty telling. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #61 October 26, 2007 Quote Define "Lefty". Left of what? Good point. I'd submit that most who consider themselves something other that liberal are in fact by definition, liberal. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #62 October 26, 2007 Quote It's not a false argument in the Bay Area. It is indeed a false argument. The claim is that the left is anti military. That's a very broad statement that is made in an effort to give the impression that the other party is pro military. I don't know why Daly doesn't want the airshow. Maybe he has a point about safety or maybe HE is indeed anti-militay (which I doubt but it's possible and if it's true then he's stupid). But the critical comments of a few people on specific circumstances does not paint an entire block of people. I'm not anti military but I think that waterboarding, abu gharaib, premeditated retribution murders, and beating someone over two days in the legs so hard that they die is a very bad thing. Do I blame the entire military for these actions? Hell no. Do I blame the guilty? Damn straight. And Royd, the effort to cut off funding is not an attempt to leave soldiers stranded and you know you're simply playing a talking point. It's about bringing them home. When congress cuts off funds for transport back home then you might have a point. And if I wanted to make an inaccurate blanket statement then I think I have more proof on my side that the right hates the military by: Sending them into unnecessary wars and asking them to do jobs that they aren't trained for. Poorly equipping them. Overextending them through stop loss. Hiding coffins from the press. Conditions at Walter Reed. Soldiers having to sue for medical benefits. Calling traumatic brain injury a pre-existing condition. Essentially, abusing the military to a point through over use and under supply to a point that it will take three to four years to recover. Need I say more? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #63 October 26, 2007 Quote According to this graph: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Liberal_opinions_copy.jpg Twice as many liberals favor lowering defense spending as liberals who oppose it. While this doesn't prove they are anti-military, it's still pretty telling. I'm all for lowering defense spending. But I want the waste cut out. Do that and you can give every soldier a raise and a personal armored vehicle and STILL save money. But when you have a state dept or a Pentagon that can't even tell you where they spent BILLIONS, you have a real problem. Throwing money at the defense budget and supplying the troops are two entirely different things. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #64 October 26, 2007 QuoteQuote It's not a false argument in the Bay Area. It is indeed a false argument. The claim is that the left is anti military. That's a very broad statement that is made in an effort to give the impression that the other party is pro military. I don't know why Daly doesn't want the airshow. Maybe he has a point about safety or maybe HE is indeed anti-militay (which I doubt but it's possible and if it's true then he's stupid). But the critical comments of a few people on specific circumstances does not paint an entire block of people. I'm not anti military but I think that waterboarding, abu gharaib, premeditated retribution murders, and beating someone over two days in the legs so hard that they die is a very bad thing. Do I blame the entire military for these actions? Hell no. Do I blame the guilty? Damn straight. And Royd, the effort to cut off funding is not an attempt to leave soldiers stranded and you know you're simply playing a talking point. It's about bringing them home. When congress cuts off funds for transport back home then you might have a point. And if I wanted to make an inaccurate blanket statement then I think I have more proof on my side that the right hates the military by: Sending them into unnecessary wars and asking them to do jobs that they aren't trained for. Poorly equipping them. Overextending them through stop loss. Hiding coffins from the press. Conditions at Walter Reed. Soldiers having to sue for medical benefits. Calling traumatic brain injury a pre-existing condition. Essentially, abusing the military to a point through over use and under supply to a point that it will take three to four years to recover. Need I say more? Yes. Are you pro-military or not? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #65 October 26, 2007 Quote Yes. Are you pro-military or not? Pro. We absolutely need a well equipped, well trained military and we need to use it wisely. Shooting all of the rounds out of your magazine doesn't make you well armed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #66 October 26, 2007 QuoteQuote Yes. Are you pro-military or not? Pro. We absolutely need a well equipped, well trained military and we need to use it wisely. Shooting all of the rounds out of your magazine doesn't make you well armed. Would you support the US moving to a subcontracted military such as Blackwater? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #67 October 26, 2007 The US wouldn't need Blackwater if it would abstain from senselss nation building missions after invading a country on false pretenses. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #68 October 26, 2007 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Define "Lefty". Left of what? How pedantic. Evasion! How can anyone answer you question without knowing what you mean by the term used. Are US Democrats automatically lefties? How about fiscal conservatives who are social liberals? Wow. Another Rush Limbaugh technique. LOL Off the irony scale. Instead of "lefty", how about "liberals"? Still to vague? How about people who describe themselves a liberals? That works - a well defined SET. According to this graph: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Liberal_opinions_copy.jpg Twice as many liberals favor lowering defense spending as liberals who oppose it. While this doesn't prove they are anti-military, it's still pretty telling. What does it tell? I think we do not need a military as large as it is currently. OTOH I think a smaller military, in line with the actual threats against the nation, should be the best trained and best equipped (and in my small way I help train future officers and have done research for the Navy and Army on armor and armor penetrators). Does that make me pro or anti?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #69 October 26, 2007 QuoteThe US wouldn't need Blackwater if it would abstain from senselss nation building missions after invading a country on false pretenses. Non-sequitor. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #70 October 26, 2007 QuoteThe US wouldn't need Blackwater if it would abstain from senselss nation building missions after invading a country on false pretenses. So, are you pro-military or not? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #71 October 26, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuote Yes. Are you pro-military or not? Pro. We absolutely need a well equipped, well trained military and we need to use it wisely. Shooting all of the rounds out of your magazine doesn't make you well armed. Would you support the US moving to a subcontracted military such as Blackwater? No. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #72 October 26, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Yes. Are you pro-military or not? Pro. We absolutely need a well equipped, well trained military and we need to use it wisely. Shooting all of the rounds out of your magazine doesn't make you well armed. Would you support the US moving to a subcontracted military such as Blackwater? No. Why not? We would have a better trained, better equipped,soldier, which is what you said you wanted. We would be able to phase out the costs of VA Hospitals, educational benefits, medical benefits, retirement benefits, the cost of maintaining military bases and equipment etc. We could also get competitive estimates on what it would cost to invade a country like Iran before we act. Then the American people could look over the costs and make a decision as to whether it's worth it. Private Armies like Blackwater have very good performance records. They have never lost a Diplomat or Politician they were hired to protect. Plus they are better equiped with more state of the art weapons than our current Govt. run Military. . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #73 October 26, 2007 QuoteSo, are you pro-military or not Without a definition of pro-military it is impossible to answer that question. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #74 October 26, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Yes. Are you pro-military or not? Pro. We absolutely need a well equipped, well trained military and we need to use it wisely. Shooting all of the rounds out of your magazine doesn't make you well armed. Would you support the US moving to a subcontracted military such as Blackwater? No. Why not? We would have a better trained, better equipped,soldier, which is what you said you wanted. We would be able to phase out the costs of VA Hospitals, educational benefits, medical benefits, retirement benefits, the cost of maintaining military bases and equipment etc. We could also get competitive estimates on what it would cost to invade a country like Iran before we act. Then the American people could look over the costs and make a decision as to whether it's worth it. . To make an informed decision you need the costs AND the benefits. As long as an administration lies or tells half truths about its intelligence, the benefits part of the equation is absent.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #75 October 26, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Yes. Are you pro-military or not? Pro. We absolutely need a well equipped, well trained military and we need to use it wisely. Shooting all of the rounds out of your magazine doesn't make you well armed. Would you support the US moving to a subcontracted military such as Blackwater? No. Why not? We would have a better trained, better equipped,soldier, which is what you said you wanted. We would be able to phase out the costs of VA Hospitals, educational benefits, medical benefits, retirement benefits, the cost of maintaining military bases and equipment etc. We could also get competitive estimates on what it would cost to invade a country like Iran before we act. Then the American people could look over the costs and make a decision as to whether it's worth it. . To make an informed decision you need the costs AND the benefits. As long as an administration lies or tells half truths about its intelligence, the benefits part of the equation is absent. I'm assuming you are talking about the last two administrations. Having a private military wouldn't change that at all. But, your response really has nothing to do with the question anyway. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
