Lucky... 0 #51 February 11, 2008 Quote Quote STFU back damn the "double STFU back" I stand correcteed and will now.........STFU Me too Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GQ_jumper 4 #52 February 11, 2008 I would say at least half of the returning vets I've talked to have reiterated that things are not going well in Iraq. All of the multi-war vets I've talked to (in person) have reiterated that. Granted, it has only been a handful that fall into that category, but there certainly isn't universal, or anything resembling universal approval of the war or the way it is going by the soldiers returning from fighting in it. Quote Ok shots back and forth at each others comments aside, how recently have you gotten to talk to people, what do they do for the military, and where in Iraq were they? The reason I ask is a lot of the people I know who have negative things to say about the progress are the ones who never leave the wire, yes it's true, some people spend 15 months in combat and never get their sorry asses off of a FOB. Yet they will proclaim to be experts on how things are going over there, the closest thing they have seen to a situation getting worse was they day the dining facility burned the meatloaf. Also, the general sentiment among troops that things are improving is more seen in those who have been multiple times, coming out of my second trip everyone had a negative opinion of what was happening because we were going otu and rolling people up nonstop, yet no matter how many people we captured the target list seemed to stay the same size. My most recent trip changed a lot of people's attitudes, look at all the news articles about how tribes are signing contracts and pledging support to help flush AQ out, they are fullfilling their obligations and a lot of the responsibility is being lifted off our shoulders. Their was a lot of belief in what we were doing at first, then it slowly dwindled and turned into a feeling that we were going nowhere and it's starting to turn around again. Obviously different parts of the country are seeing a different degree of success, but as a whole there have been huge steps in the right direction. I watched a target list for a certain province almost completely dissapear in less than a months time when villagers started stepping up and making the effort to take their fate into their own hands. And AQ has only helped us by conducting attacks on innocents, they shot themselves in the foot. You are right in saying that their will always be returning soldiers who don't believe in the progress, some people have horrible experiences, that's the nature of the beast, it doesn't matter how many miracles you accomplish its hard to see something as positive when your friends died next to you. However the people who get the opportunity to see things on a larger scale as well as get the opportunity to go out on the streets and work with the people who want to help the fight have a much different perspective on things.History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #53 February 11, 2008 Quote Quote Quote STFU back damn the "double STFU back" I stand correcteed and will now.........STFU Me too I'm about sick of the sarcasm from you two, both of you STFU!!! It's inapropriateNow if you'll excuse me, I'm going to STFU and go to the gymHistory does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andrewwhyte 1 #54 February 11, 2008 QuoteUntil Kallend's fatality numbers begin to fall propaganda suggesting a sea-change is just that, propaganda. Quote Fatality numbers are being used by those who are against the war, its all propaganda, but people coming home who have positive things to say about the way things are going, that isn't. those are personal experiences, and despite the fact that newspapers and politicians will twist everything they can to further their point it doesn't change the fact that things are moving forward over there. Personal stories are suspect not because people doubt the veracity of the opinion, but because by nature they are not inclusive (they are a sample of the 100,000+ stories out there), nor are they randomly picked; proponents and detractors alike highlight the stories that support their position. Fatality numbers, on the other hand are not samples, they are of the population as a whole. If you wish to dispute the veracity of the statistic itself, then do so, but to suggest that Kallend (an outspoken detractor) chose the number "2007=901" in particular for political reasons makes no sense; it is the only number available for 2007. If you wish to dispute the significance of the statistic "US DEATHS IN IRAQ BY YEAR" you can do that, but I think you will have a tough time convincing anyone. Personally I would listen to the argument "TOTAL DEATHS BY VIOLENCE IN IRAQ" is more significant, but since the estimates vary so widely I tend not to trust the veracity of those numbers regardless of source. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,120 #55 February 11, 2008 > some people spend 15 months in combat and never get their sorry > asses off of a FOB. Yet they will proclaim to be experts on how things are > going over there, the closest thing they have seen to a situation getting > worse was they day the dining facility burned the meatloaf. I had a good friend do the sort of job you described. He never "got his sorry ass off of a FOB" because he was a military air traffic controller, and indeed got a lot of shit from other soldiers (mainly Marines) about that. His direct experience with the violence there was limited to twice being within 100 yards of a mortar round landing in his area. After one such attack he watched a fellow soldier die from the wounds he sustained in such an attack. He, fortunately, was not injured. I don't think that's akin to "the dining facility burned the meatloaf" and I think his observations there do in fact speak to the level of violence one can expect over there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites livendive 8 #56 February 11, 2008 Quote Seriously, their reasons for hating each other are typically that pointless and insignificant, they have just been raised in a culture where violence is the answer to all, and their former leader only helped to further that attitude with his actions which were witnessed on a much larger scale. In that case, it's a damned good thing our peaceful invasion showed them a better alternative to violence, especially when the reason is completely non-existent (as opposed to pointless and insignificant). Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites warpedskydiver 0 #57 February 11, 2008 QuoteUsing individuals who have been killed in the war as ammo to further your argument is pretty fuckin low. To him it isn't, he could give a shit about you, me or any other soldier, or veteran. His usual position is merely being restated. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 23 #58 February 11, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteSo, I thought posting one of the reasons why made sense. Anybody seen this on the big 4? http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article3346386.ece It certainly seems that Iraq is back to normal. Year US Deaths 2003 486 2004 849 2005 846 2006 822 2007 901 Hey sir, when you get a war where spit wads and nerf balls are the ammo you will have a point!! Kallend was simply stating that the war shouldn't have fallen out of topic since deaths are still high, he wasn't talking means of fighting, as you are attemptng to morph. It is all about context. More died in training camps for WW2. Death count is a pointless meaningless emotional statement. Quite simple really"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 23 #59 February 11, 2008 Quote He wasn't addressing the argument, just the timing; reading is fundamental. Quote I now exactly what he was addressing, how bout you quit trying to take under-handed shots at everyone in the military. Thank you for your servcie. I too lost a friend over there. "America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #60 February 11, 2008 Quote Could it be that the economy and impending recession are taking the stage? Another strategy by Bush and the Republicans to draw voter attention away from Iraq. Those evil dogs. Quote There are so many things to worry about Indeed, and it sucks to know that somewhere, somebody may actually be happy. Such people clearly don't care about anything other than themselves, and must be made to join the society of equal misery among all. Quote so I would like to appalogize for all liberals for not bashing Bush or slamming his war-hobby Actually, I think you've hit it right on the head! "Appal-ogizing." HA! It IS appaling. Quote I just wonder how Viet Nam was There are a few million pages that have been written about the topic. Quote I wonder if there was a level of apathy after it dragged on for so long Yes. The times were so bad that Nixon was viewed as a "unifying force." And, your hero McGovern was put out there - too bad the population hated him. The guy only won Massachussetts and DC - the worst showing up till Mondale. Quote Let's analize Bush's accomplishments needing of worry: Gonna "analize" them? Wow! Talk about getting it up the wazoo!!! You are on FIRE!! 1) Iraq - yeah. He should have never gone in. 2) Iran potential - not gonna happen till we get out of Iraq. 3) Recession - There is concern, but the dominant thought among those in the know is it probably won't happen. 4) Doubled house prices and mortgage melddown - Bush had as much to do with that as Clinton did with the dot-com bust. Very, very little. 5) tripled gas prices - I seems to recall paying 2.39 per gallon once in 1996. Are we paying $7.00/gallon now? 6) 3.9 trillion in debt increase - okay. No arguing about that. By the way, how has the Dem Congress done at reeling it in? 7) Loss of Constitutional protections / wiretapping / Habeus Corpus / etc - thank goodness those Reagan and Bush appointees in the courts are ruling against the Admin left and right. 8) Am I forgetting a few? - Probably hundreds. Quote Perhaps you can contrast with other presidents, choose your favorite: Clinton. He's not my favorite, but in the top ten. Quote So maybe we're growing bored with hearing that 20 more kids are killed We've been that way since, oh, the late 70's. You don't know where I grew up, boy. Nobody ave a shit what was goign on in my neighborhood. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,150 #61 February 11, 2008 QuoteUntil Kalend's fatality numbers begin to fall propaganda suggesting a sea-change is just that, propaganda. Quote Fatality numbers are being used by those who are against the war, its all propaganda,. No, they are 901 DEAD AMERICANS in 2007, not propaganda. Propaganda is the White House saying for the umpteenth time that we have turned the corner.... 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 kallend 2,150 #62 February 11, 2008 Quote It is all about context. More died in training camps for WW2. Death count is a pointless meaningless emotional statement. Quite simple really Oh, well, 901 AMERICAN DEAD last year in Iraq is OK in YOUR world. Nothing to worry about.... 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 rushmc 23 #63 February 11, 2008 Quote Quote It is all about context. More died in training camps for WW2. Death count is a pointless meaningless emotional statement. Quite simple really Oh, well, 901 AMERICAN DEAD last year in Iraq is OK in YOUR world. Nothing to worry about. You missed me, your chum missed me"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites christelsabine 1 #64 February 11, 2008 A lack of .... what?? Just have a look at all those replies: Dashing everbody's brain out like there's no tomorrow - you guys are so funny We REALLY should come back to essential things: Bashing Bush as long as it's still possible, guys dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #65 February 11, 2008 QuoteNo, they are 901 DEAD AMERICANS in 2007, not propaganda. Propaganda is the White House saying for the umpteenth time that we have turned the corner. I must agree with kallend. Those are our men and women dying in that place. 900 of them last year. And they are dying at the same - or greater - pace as any other time during this conflict. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 23 #66 February 11, 2008 QuoteQuoteNo, they are 901 DEAD AMERICANS in 2007, not propaganda. Propaganda is the White House saying for the umpteenth time that we have turned the corner. I must agree with kallend. Those are our men and women dying in that place. 900 of them last year. And they are dying at the same - or greater - pace as any other time during this conflict. I do not disagree that even one death is significant and tragic. But the bs twist he aimed back had nothing of any significance to even think of replying to. One of his typical fish bait tosses"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andrewwhyte 1 #67 February 11, 2008 Quote Those are our men and women dying in that place. 900 of them last year. 901. The difference is not trivial. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,120 #68 February 11, 2008 >You're a joke Your one warning. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #69 February 11, 2008 QuoteQuote Those are our men and women dying in that place. 900 of them last year. 901. The difference is not trivial. No it is not. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #70 February 11, 2008 Quotehow recently have you gotten to talk to people Fairly steadily since troops began returning from tours. I always let them bring the subject up, so I know more vets than I've spoken with about the war. Quotewhat do they do for the military Many different things. Some have been combat arms, others have been REMFs. They have ranged fro EMs to E8s. I don't believe I've spoken to any officers on the topic. Quoteand where in Iraq were they? All over. It has been a fairly random sample of returning troops. QuoteThe reason I ask is a lot of the people I know who have negative things to say about the progress are the ones who never leave the wire, yes it's true, some people spend 15 months in combat and never get their sorry asses off of a FOB. Yet they will proclaim to be experts on how things are going over there, the closest thing they have seen to a situation getting worse was they day the dining facility burned the meatloaf. It has been my experience with wartime vets in general that the REMFs are usually the most vocal supporters, and the troops that actually see combat are the ones that express the senselessness of it all. The vets from this war don't seem any different. Oftentimes those that brag the most about all the action they saw never actually saw any. I've known few combat vets from any war that are very willing to talk about combat, at least not when they're sober and not to non-combat vets or civilians. They want to put that shit behind them, not relive it. Out of respect, I refrain from asking. If they want to talk, they will.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,150 #71 February 11, 2008 Quote Quote Quote It is all about context. More died in training camps for WW2. Death count is a pointless meaningless emotional statement. Quite simple really Oh, well, 901 AMERICAN DEAD last year in Iraq is OK in YOUR world. Nothing to worry about. You missed me, your chum missed me Your statement: "More died in training camps for WW2. Death count is a pointless meaningless emotional statement. Quite simple really" is shallow, callous, and a disservice to the troops. Your subsequent response shows that you actually meant it. You should be ashamed.... 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 jcd11235 0 #72 February 11, 2008 Quote4) Doubled house prices and mortgage melddown - Bush had as much to do with that as Clinton did with the dot-com bust. Very, very little. I have to disagree here. The Fed kept lowering interest rates during Bush II's first term. This, in combination with some unethical practices on the part of some lenders and some unwise purchasing decisions on the part of home buyers contributed greatly to the current mortgage crisis. Bush certainly is not solely responsible, but he (alone or via his administration) played a significant role in creating the problem. Quote5) tripled gas prices - I seems to recall paying 2.39 per gallon once in 1996. In late 1995 I was paying under $2.00 per gallon in Hawaii, where gasoline was significantly more expensive than on the mainland, where it was about $1.20-$1.30. I certainly don't recall a $1.00 (or more) increase in price per gallon in a year's time during that time period. Gas prices may not have tripled in the past seven years, but they have doubled, or close to it.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 23 #73 February 11, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Quote It is all about context. More died in training camps for WW2. Death count is a pointless meaningless emotional statement. Quite simple really Oh, well, 901 AMERICAN DEAD last year in Iraq is OK in YOUR world. Nothing to worry about. You missed me, your chum missed me Your statement: "More died in training camps for WW2. Death count is a pointless meaningless emotional statement. Quite simple really" is shallow, callous, and a disservice to the troops. Your subsequent response shows that you actually meant it. You should be ashamed. Ashamed? No, just embarassed for you because of your lack of open minded understanding. Or, do you do it with purpose?It is you that should be ashamed sir. It is you."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #74 February 11, 2008 Quotehe (alone or via his administration) played a significant role in creating the problem Then would you say that Clinton's administration pleayed a significant role in the creating of the dot-com bust? After all, Enron was named by Forbes as America's Most Innovative Company for six years running! Was it not during Clinton's watch that the sham accounting and investing was being done? Indeed, was not the economic climate for these fraudulent accounting practices displayed throughout the 1990's? The collapse happened just before 9/11. And the dot-com bubble started bursting in 2000 - leading to three non-consecutive uarters of negative growth between summer 2000 and fall, 2001. The interest rates were low. Unemployment low. Tax revenues peaked. Was Clinton responsible? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #75 February 11, 2008 QuoteThen would you say that Clinton's administration pleayed a significant role in the creating of the dot-com bust? After all, Enron was named by Forbes as America's Most Innovative Company for six years running! Was it not during Clinton's watch that the sham accounting and investing was being done? Indeed, was not the economic climate for these fraudulent accounting practices displayed throughout the 1990's? The collapse happened just before 9/11. And the dot-com bubble started bursting in 2000 - leading to three non-consecutive uarters of negative growth between summer 2000 and fall, 2001. The interest rates were low. Unemployment low. Tax revenues peaked. Was Clinton responsible? If there were any similarities between the two things, you might have a point. Unfortunately, there isn't. Bush and his administration were directly responsible for lowering the interest rates far beyond the point that the market would suggest they be. There was a lot of criticism for about those decisions at the time, that it would lead to problems. How exactly did the Clinton administration cause Enron to recognize unearned income? Was Slick Willy (insert blowjob joke here) supposed to personally audit every American company to make sure they followed GAAP?Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next Page 3 of 5 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
GQ_jumper 4 #53 February 11, 2008 Quote Quote Quote STFU back damn the "double STFU back" I stand correcteed and will now.........STFU Me too I'm about sick of the sarcasm from you two, both of you STFU!!! It's inapropriateNow if you'll excuse me, I'm going to STFU and go to the gymHistory does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrewwhyte 1 #54 February 11, 2008 QuoteUntil Kallend's fatality numbers begin to fall propaganda suggesting a sea-change is just that, propaganda. Quote Fatality numbers are being used by those who are against the war, its all propaganda, but people coming home who have positive things to say about the way things are going, that isn't. those are personal experiences, and despite the fact that newspapers and politicians will twist everything they can to further their point it doesn't change the fact that things are moving forward over there. Personal stories are suspect not because people doubt the veracity of the opinion, but because by nature they are not inclusive (they are a sample of the 100,000+ stories out there), nor are they randomly picked; proponents and detractors alike highlight the stories that support their position. Fatality numbers, on the other hand are not samples, they are of the population as a whole. If you wish to dispute the veracity of the statistic itself, then do so, but to suggest that Kallend (an outspoken detractor) chose the number "2007=901" in particular for political reasons makes no sense; it is the only number available for 2007. If you wish to dispute the significance of the statistic "US DEATHS IN IRAQ BY YEAR" you can do that, but I think you will have a tough time convincing anyone. Personally I would listen to the argument "TOTAL DEATHS BY VIOLENCE IN IRAQ" is more significant, but since the estimates vary so widely I tend not to trust the veracity of those numbers regardless of source. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,120 #55 February 11, 2008 > some people spend 15 months in combat and never get their sorry > asses off of a FOB. Yet they will proclaim to be experts on how things are > going over there, the closest thing they have seen to a situation getting > worse was they day the dining facility burned the meatloaf. I had a good friend do the sort of job you described. He never "got his sorry ass off of a FOB" because he was a military air traffic controller, and indeed got a lot of shit from other soldiers (mainly Marines) about that. His direct experience with the violence there was limited to twice being within 100 yards of a mortar round landing in his area. After one such attack he watched a fellow soldier die from the wounds he sustained in such an attack. He, fortunately, was not injured. I don't think that's akin to "the dining facility burned the meatloaf" and I think his observations there do in fact speak to the level of violence one can expect over there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites livendive 8 #56 February 11, 2008 Quote Seriously, their reasons for hating each other are typically that pointless and insignificant, they have just been raised in a culture where violence is the answer to all, and their former leader only helped to further that attitude with his actions which were witnessed on a much larger scale. In that case, it's a damned good thing our peaceful invasion showed them a better alternative to violence, especially when the reason is completely non-existent (as opposed to pointless and insignificant). Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites warpedskydiver 0 #57 February 11, 2008 QuoteUsing individuals who have been killed in the war as ammo to further your argument is pretty fuckin low. To him it isn't, he could give a shit about you, me or any other soldier, or veteran. His usual position is merely being restated. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 23 #58 February 11, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteSo, I thought posting one of the reasons why made sense. Anybody seen this on the big 4? http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article3346386.ece It certainly seems that Iraq is back to normal. Year US Deaths 2003 486 2004 849 2005 846 2006 822 2007 901 Hey sir, when you get a war where spit wads and nerf balls are the ammo you will have a point!! Kallend was simply stating that the war shouldn't have fallen out of topic since deaths are still high, he wasn't talking means of fighting, as you are attemptng to morph. It is all about context. More died in training camps for WW2. Death count is a pointless meaningless emotional statement. Quite simple really"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 23 #59 February 11, 2008 Quote He wasn't addressing the argument, just the timing; reading is fundamental. Quote I now exactly what he was addressing, how bout you quit trying to take under-handed shots at everyone in the military. Thank you for your servcie. I too lost a friend over there. "America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #60 February 11, 2008 Quote Could it be that the economy and impending recession are taking the stage? Another strategy by Bush and the Republicans to draw voter attention away from Iraq. Those evil dogs. Quote There are so many things to worry about Indeed, and it sucks to know that somewhere, somebody may actually be happy. Such people clearly don't care about anything other than themselves, and must be made to join the society of equal misery among all. Quote so I would like to appalogize for all liberals for not bashing Bush or slamming his war-hobby Actually, I think you've hit it right on the head! "Appal-ogizing." HA! It IS appaling. Quote I just wonder how Viet Nam was There are a few million pages that have been written about the topic. Quote I wonder if there was a level of apathy after it dragged on for so long Yes. The times were so bad that Nixon was viewed as a "unifying force." And, your hero McGovern was put out there - too bad the population hated him. The guy only won Massachussetts and DC - the worst showing up till Mondale. Quote Let's analize Bush's accomplishments needing of worry: Gonna "analize" them? Wow! Talk about getting it up the wazoo!!! You are on FIRE!! 1) Iraq - yeah. He should have never gone in. 2) Iran potential - not gonna happen till we get out of Iraq. 3) Recession - There is concern, but the dominant thought among those in the know is it probably won't happen. 4) Doubled house prices and mortgage melddown - Bush had as much to do with that as Clinton did with the dot-com bust. Very, very little. 5) tripled gas prices - I seems to recall paying 2.39 per gallon once in 1996. Are we paying $7.00/gallon now? 6) 3.9 trillion in debt increase - okay. No arguing about that. By the way, how has the Dem Congress done at reeling it in? 7) Loss of Constitutional protections / wiretapping / Habeus Corpus / etc - thank goodness those Reagan and Bush appointees in the courts are ruling against the Admin left and right. 8) Am I forgetting a few? - Probably hundreds. Quote Perhaps you can contrast with other presidents, choose your favorite: Clinton. He's not my favorite, but in the top ten. Quote So maybe we're growing bored with hearing that 20 more kids are killed We've been that way since, oh, the late 70's. You don't know where I grew up, boy. Nobody ave a shit what was goign on in my neighborhood. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,150 #61 February 11, 2008 QuoteUntil Kalend's fatality numbers begin to fall propaganda suggesting a sea-change is just that, propaganda. Quote Fatality numbers are being used by those who are against the war, its all propaganda,. No, they are 901 DEAD AMERICANS in 2007, not propaganda. Propaganda is the White House saying for the umpteenth time that we have turned the corner.... 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 kallend 2,150 #62 February 11, 2008 Quote It is all about context. More died in training camps for WW2. Death count is a pointless meaningless emotional statement. Quite simple really Oh, well, 901 AMERICAN DEAD last year in Iraq is OK in YOUR world. Nothing to worry about.... 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 rushmc 23 #63 February 11, 2008 Quote Quote It is all about context. More died in training camps for WW2. Death count is a pointless meaningless emotional statement. Quite simple really Oh, well, 901 AMERICAN DEAD last year in Iraq is OK in YOUR world. Nothing to worry about. You missed me, your chum missed me"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites christelsabine 1 #64 February 11, 2008 A lack of .... what?? Just have a look at all those replies: Dashing everbody's brain out like there's no tomorrow - you guys are so funny We REALLY should come back to essential things: Bashing Bush as long as it's still possible, guys dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #65 February 11, 2008 QuoteNo, they are 901 DEAD AMERICANS in 2007, not propaganda. Propaganda is the White House saying for the umpteenth time that we have turned the corner. I must agree with kallend. Those are our men and women dying in that place. 900 of them last year. And they are dying at the same - or greater - pace as any other time during this conflict. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 23 #66 February 11, 2008 QuoteQuoteNo, they are 901 DEAD AMERICANS in 2007, not propaganda. Propaganda is the White House saying for the umpteenth time that we have turned the corner. I must agree with kallend. Those are our men and women dying in that place. 900 of them last year. And they are dying at the same - or greater - pace as any other time during this conflict. I do not disagree that even one death is significant and tragic. But the bs twist he aimed back had nothing of any significance to even think of replying to. One of his typical fish bait tosses"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andrewwhyte 1 #67 February 11, 2008 Quote Those are our men and women dying in that place. 900 of them last year. 901. The difference is not trivial. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,120 #68 February 11, 2008 >You're a joke Your one warning. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #69 February 11, 2008 QuoteQuote Those are our men and women dying in that place. 900 of them last year. 901. The difference is not trivial. No it is not. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #70 February 11, 2008 Quotehow recently have you gotten to talk to people Fairly steadily since troops began returning from tours. I always let them bring the subject up, so I know more vets than I've spoken with about the war. Quotewhat do they do for the military Many different things. Some have been combat arms, others have been REMFs. They have ranged fro EMs to E8s. I don't believe I've spoken to any officers on the topic. Quoteand where in Iraq were they? All over. It has been a fairly random sample of returning troops. QuoteThe reason I ask is a lot of the people I know who have negative things to say about the progress are the ones who never leave the wire, yes it's true, some people spend 15 months in combat and never get their sorry asses off of a FOB. Yet they will proclaim to be experts on how things are going over there, the closest thing they have seen to a situation getting worse was they day the dining facility burned the meatloaf. It has been my experience with wartime vets in general that the REMFs are usually the most vocal supporters, and the troops that actually see combat are the ones that express the senselessness of it all. The vets from this war don't seem any different. Oftentimes those that brag the most about all the action they saw never actually saw any. I've known few combat vets from any war that are very willing to talk about combat, at least not when they're sober and not to non-combat vets or civilians. They want to put that shit behind them, not relive it. Out of respect, I refrain from asking. If they want to talk, they will.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,150 #71 February 11, 2008 Quote Quote Quote It is all about context. More died in training camps for WW2. Death count is a pointless meaningless emotional statement. Quite simple really Oh, well, 901 AMERICAN DEAD last year in Iraq is OK in YOUR world. Nothing to worry about. You missed me, your chum missed me Your statement: "More died in training camps for WW2. Death count is a pointless meaningless emotional statement. Quite simple really" is shallow, callous, and a disservice to the troops. Your subsequent response shows that you actually meant it. You should be ashamed.... 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 jcd11235 0 #72 February 11, 2008 Quote4) Doubled house prices and mortgage melddown - Bush had as much to do with that as Clinton did with the dot-com bust. Very, very little. I have to disagree here. The Fed kept lowering interest rates during Bush II's first term. This, in combination with some unethical practices on the part of some lenders and some unwise purchasing decisions on the part of home buyers contributed greatly to the current mortgage crisis. Bush certainly is not solely responsible, but he (alone or via his administration) played a significant role in creating the problem. Quote5) tripled gas prices - I seems to recall paying 2.39 per gallon once in 1996. In late 1995 I was paying under $2.00 per gallon in Hawaii, where gasoline was significantly more expensive than on the mainland, where it was about $1.20-$1.30. I certainly don't recall a $1.00 (or more) increase in price per gallon in a year's time during that time period. Gas prices may not have tripled in the past seven years, but they have doubled, or close to it.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 23 #73 February 11, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Quote It is all about context. More died in training camps for WW2. Death count is a pointless meaningless emotional statement. Quite simple really Oh, well, 901 AMERICAN DEAD last year in Iraq is OK in YOUR world. Nothing to worry about. You missed me, your chum missed me Your statement: "More died in training camps for WW2. Death count is a pointless meaningless emotional statement. Quite simple really" is shallow, callous, and a disservice to the troops. Your subsequent response shows that you actually meant it. You should be ashamed. Ashamed? No, just embarassed for you because of your lack of open minded understanding. Or, do you do it with purpose?It is you that should be ashamed sir. It is you."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #74 February 11, 2008 Quotehe (alone or via his administration) played a significant role in creating the problem Then would you say that Clinton's administration pleayed a significant role in the creating of the dot-com bust? After all, Enron was named by Forbes as America's Most Innovative Company for six years running! Was it not during Clinton's watch that the sham accounting and investing was being done? Indeed, was not the economic climate for these fraudulent accounting practices displayed throughout the 1990's? The collapse happened just before 9/11. And the dot-com bubble started bursting in 2000 - leading to three non-consecutive uarters of negative growth between summer 2000 and fall, 2001. The interest rates were low. Unemployment low. Tax revenues peaked. Was Clinton responsible? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #75 February 11, 2008 QuoteThen would you say that Clinton's administration pleayed a significant role in the creating of the dot-com bust? After all, Enron was named by Forbes as America's Most Innovative Company for six years running! Was it not during Clinton's watch that the sham accounting and investing was being done? Indeed, was not the economic climate for these fraudulent accounting practices displayed throughout the 1990's? The collapse happened just before 9/11. And the dot-com bubble started bursting in 2000 - leading to three non-consecutive uarters of negative growth between summer 2000 and fall, 2001. The interest rates were low. Unemployment low. Tax revenues peaked. Was Clinton responsible? If there were any similarities between the two things, you might have a point. Unfortunately, there isn't. Bush and his administration were directly responsible for lowering the interest rates far beyond the point that the market would suggest they be. There was a lot of criticism for about those decisions at the time, that it would lead to problems. How exactly did the Clinton administration cause Enron to recognize unearned income? Was Slick Willy (insert blowjob joke here) supposed to personally audit every American company to make sure they followed GAAP?Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next Page 3 of 5 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
billvon 3,120 #55 February 11, 2008 > some people spend 15 months in combat and never get their sorry > asses off of a FOB. Yet they will proclaim to be experts on how things are > going over there, the closest thing they have seen to a situation getting > worse was they day the dining facility burned the meatloaf. I had a good friend do the sort of job you described. He never "got his sorry ass off of a FOB" because he was a military air traffic controller, and indeed got a lot of shit from other soldiers (mainly Marines) about that. His direct experience with the violence there was limited to twice being within 100 yards of a mortar round landing in his area. After one such attack he watched a fellow soldier die from the wounds he sustained in such an attack. He, fortunately, was not injured. I don't think that's akin to "the dining facility burned the meatloaf" and I think his observations there do in fact speak to the level of violence one can expect over there. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #56 February 11, 2008 Quote Seriously, their reasons for hating each other are typically that pointless and insignificant, they have just been raised in a culture where violence is the answer to all, and their former leader only helped to further that attitude with his actions which were witnessed on a much larger scale. In that case, it's a damned good thing our peaceful invasion showed them a better alternative to violence, especially when the reason is completely non-existent (as opposed to pointless and insignificant). Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warpedskydiver 0 #57 February 11, 2008 QuoteUsing individuals who have been killed in the war as ammo to further your argument is pretty fuckin low. To him it isn't, he could give a shit about you, me or any other soldier, or veteran. His usual position is merely being restated. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #58 February 11, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteSo, I thought posting one of the reasons why made sense. Anybody seen this on the big 4? http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article3346386.ece It certainly seems that Iraq is back to normal. Year US Deaths 2003 486 2004 849 2005 846 2006 822 2007 901 Hey sir, when you get a war where spit wads and nerf balls are the ammo you will have a point!! Kallend was simply stating that the war shouldn't have fallen out of topic since deaths are still high, he wasn't talking means of fighting, as you are attemptng to morph. It is all about context. More died in training camps for WW2. Death count is a pointless meaningless emotional statement. Quite simple really"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #59 February 11, 2008 Quote He wasn't addressing the argument, just the timing; reading is fundamental. Quote I now exactly what he was addressing, how bout you quit trying to take under-handed shots at everyone in the military. Thank you for your servcie. I too lost a friend over there. "America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #60 February 11, 2008 Quote Could it be that the economy and impending recession are taking the stage? Another strategy by Bush and the Republicans to draw voter attention away from Iraq. Those evil dogs. Quote There are so many things to worry about Indeed, and it sucks to know that somewhere, somebody may actually be happy. Such people clearly don't care about anything other than themselves, and must be made to join the society of equal misery among all. Quote so I would like to appalogize for all liberals for not bashing Bush or slamming his war-hobby Actually, I think you've hit it right on the head! "Appal-ogizing." HA! It IS appaling. Quote I just wonder how Viet Nam was There are a few million pages that have been written about the topic. Quote I wonder if there was a level of apathy after it dragged on for so long Yes. The times were so bad that Nixon was viewed as a "unifying force." And, your hero McGovern was put out there - too bad the population hated him. The guy only won Massachussetts and DC - the worst showing up till Mondale. Quote Let's analize Bush's accomplishments needing of worry: Gonna "analize" them? Wow! Talk about getting it up the wazoo!!! You are on FIRE!! 1) Iraq - yeah. He should have never gone in. 2) Iran potential - not gonna happen till we get out of Iraq. 3) Recession - There is concern, but the dominant thought among those in the know is it probably won't happen. 4) Doubled house prices and mortgage melddown - Bush had as much to do with that as Clinton did with the dot-com bust. Very, very little. 5) tripled gas prices - I seems to recall paying 2.39 per gallon once in 1996. Are we paying $7.00/gallon now? 6) 3.9 trillion in debt increase - okay. No arguing about that. By the way, how has the Dem Congress done at reeling it in? 7) Loss of Constitutional protections / wiretapping / Habeus Corpus / etc - thank goodness those Reagan and Bush appointees in the courts are ruling against the Admin left and right. 8) Am I forgetting a few? - Probably hundreds. Quote Perhaps you can contrast with other presidents, choose your favorite: Clinton. He's not my favorite, but in the top ten. Quote So maybe we're growing bored with hearing that 20 more kids are killed We've been that way since, oh, the late 70's. You don't know where I grew up, boy. Nobody ave a shit what was goign on in my neighborhood. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #61 February 11, 2008 QuoteUntil Kalend's fatality numbers begin to fall propaganda suggesting a sea-change is just that, propaganda. Quote Fatality numbers are being used by those who are against the war, its all propaganda,. No, they are 901 DEAD AMERICANS in 2007, not propaganda. Propaganda is the White House saying for the umpteenth time that we have turned the corner.... 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 kallend 2,150 #62 February 11, 2008 Quote It is all about context. More died in training camps for WW2. Death count is a pointless meaningless emotional statement. Quite simple really Oh, well, 901 AMERICAN DEAD last year in Iraq is OK in YOUR world. Nothing to worry about.... 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 rushmc 23 #63 February 11, 2008 Quote Quote It is all about context. More died in training camps for WW2. Death count is a pointless meaningless emotional statement. Quite simple really Oh, well, 901 AMERICAN DEAD last year in Iraq is OK in YOUR world. Nothing to worry about. You missed me, your chum missed me"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites christelsabine 1 #64 February 11, 2008 A lack of .... what?? Just have a look at all those replies: Dashing everbody's brain out like there's no tomorrow - you guys are so funny We REALLY should come back to essential things: Bashing Bush as long as it's still possible, guys dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #65 February 11, 2008 QuoteNo, they are 901 DEAD AMERICANS in 2007, not propaganda. Propaganda is the White House saying for the umpteenth time that we have turned the corner. I must agree with kallend. Those are our men and women dying in that place. 900 of them last year. And they are dying at the same - or greater - pace as any other time during this conflict. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 23 #66 February 11, 2008 QuoteQuoteNo, they are 901 DEAD AMERICANS in 2007, not propaganda. Propaganda is the White House saying for the umpteenth time that we have turned the corner. I must agree with kallend. Those are our men and women dying in that place. 900 of them last year. And they are dying at the same - or greater - pace as any other time during this conflict. I do not disagree that even one death is significant and tragic. But the bs twist he aimed back had nothing of any significance to even think of replying to. One of his typical fish bait tosses"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andrewwhyte 1 #67 February 11, 2008 Quote Those are our men and women dying in that place. 900 of them last year. 901. The difference is not trivial. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,120 #68 February 11, 2008 >You're a joke Your one warning. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #69 February 11, 2008 QuoteQuote Those are our men and women dying in that place. 900 of them last year. 901. The difference is not trivial. No it is not. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #70 February 11, 2008 Quotehow recently have you gotten to talk to people Fairly steadily since troops began returning from tours. I always let them bring the subject up, so I know more vets than I've spoken with about the war. Quotewhat do they do for the military Many different things. Some have been combat arms, others have been REMFs. They have ranged fro EMs to E8s. I don't believe I've spoken to any officers on the topic. Quoteand where in Iraq were they? All over. It has been a fairly random sample of returning troops. QuoteThe reason I ask is a lot of the people I know who have negative things to say about the progress are the ones who never leave the wire, yes it's true, some people spend 15 months in combat and never get their sorry asses off of a FOB. Yet they will proclaim to be experts on how things are going over there, the closest thing they have seen to a situation getting worse was they day the dining facility burned the meatloaf. It has been my experience with wartime vets in general that the REMFs are usually the most vocal supporters, and the troops that actually see combat are the ones that express the senselessness of it all. The vets from this war don't seem any different. Oftentimes those that brag the most about all the action they saw never actually saw any. I've known few combat vets from any war that are very willing to talk about combat, at least not when they're sober and not to non-combat vets or civilians. They want to put that shit behind them, not relive it. Out of respect, I refrain from asking. If they want to talk, they will.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,150 #71 February 11, 2008 Quote Quote Quote It is all about context. More died in training camps for WW2. Death count is a pointless meaningless emotional statement. Quite simple really Oh, well, 901 AMERICAN DEAD last year in Iraq is OK in YOUR world. Nothing to worry about. You missed me, your chum missed me Your statement: "More died in training camps for WW2. Death count is a pointless meaningless emotional statement. Quite simple really" is shallow, callous, and a disservice to the troops. Your subsequent response shows that you actually meant it. You should be ashamed.... 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 jcd11235 0 #72 February 11, 2008 Quote4) Doubled house prices and mortgage melddown - Bush had as much to do with that as Clinton did with the dot-com bust. Very, very little. I have to disagree here. The Fed kept lowering interest rates during Bush II's first term. This, in combination with some unethical practices on the part of some lenders and some unwise purchasing decisions on the part of home buyers contributed greatly to the current mortgage crisis. Bush certainly is not solely responsible, but he (alone or via his administration) played a significant role in creating the problem. Quote5) tripled gas prices - I seems to recall paying 2.39 per gallon once in 1996. In late 1995 I was paying under $2.00 per gallon in Hawaii, where gasoline was significantly more expensive than on the mainland, where it was about $1.20-$1.30. I certainly don't recall a $1.00 (or more) increase in price per gallon in a year's time during that time period. Gas prices may not have tripled in the past seven years, but they have doubled, or close to it.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 23 #73 February 11, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Quote It is all about context. More died in training camps for WW2. Death count is a pointless meaningless emotional statement. Quite simple really Oh, well, 901 AMERICAN DEAD last year in Iraq is OK in YOUR world. Nothing to worry about. You missed me, your chum missed me Your statement: "More died in training camps for WW2. Death count is a pointless meaningless emotional statement. Quite simple really" is shallow, callous, and a disservice to the troops. Your subsequent response shows that you actually meant it. You should be ashamed. Ashamed? No, just embarassed for you because of your lack of open minded understanding. Or, do you do it with purpose?It is you that should be ashamed sir. It is you."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #74 February 11, 2008 Quotehe (alone or via his administration) played a significant role in creating the problem Then would you say that Clinton's administration pleayed a significant role in the creating of the dot-com bust? After all, Enron was named by Forbes as America's Most Innovative Company for six years running! Was it not during Clinton's watch that the sham accounting and investing was being done? Indeed, was not the economic climate for these fraudulent accounting practices displayed throughout the 1990's? The collapse happened just before 9/11. And the dot-com bubble started bursting in 2000 - leading to three non-consecutive uarters of negative growth between summer 2000 and fall, 2001. The interest rates were low. Unemployment low. Tax revenues peaked. Was Clinton responsible? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #75 February 11, 2008 QuoteThen would you say that Clinton's administration pleayed a significant role in the creating of the dot-com bust? After all, Enron was named by Forbes as America's Most Innovative Company for six years running! Was it not during Clinton's watch that the sham accounting and investing was being done? Indeed, was not the economic climate for these fraudulent accounting practices displayed throughout the 1990's? The collapse happened just before 9/11. And the dot-com bubble started bursting in 2000 - leading to three non-consecutive uarters of negative growth between summer 2000 and fall, 2001. The interest rates were low. Unemployment low. Tax revenues peaked. Was Clinton responsible? If there were any similarities between the two things, you might have a point. Unfortunately, there isn't. Bush and his administration were directly responsible for lowering the interest rates far beyond the point that the market would suggest they be. There was a lot of criticism for about those decisions at the time, that it would lead to problems. How exactly did the Clinton administration cause Enron to recognize unearned income? Was Slick Willy (insert blowjob joke here) supposed to personally audit every American company to make sure they followed GAAP?Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next Page 3 of 5 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
kallend 2,150 #62 February 11, 2008 Quote It is all about context. More died in training camps for WW2. Death count is a pointless meaningless emotional statement. Quite simple really Oh, well, 901 AMERICAN DEAD last year in Iraq is OK in YOUR world. Nothing to worry about.... 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
rushmc 23 #63 February 11, 2008 Quote Quote It is all about context. More died in training camps for WW2. Death count is a pointless meaningless emotional statement. Quite simple really Oh, well, 901 AMERICAN DEAD last year in Iraq is OK in YOUR world. Nothing to worry about. You missed me, your chum missed me"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #64 February 11, 2008 A lack of .... what?? Just have a look at all those replies: Dashing everbody's brain out like there's no tomorrow - you guys are so funny We REALLY should come back to essential things: Bashing Bush as long as it's still possible, guys dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #65 February 11, 2008 QuoteNo, they are 901 DEAD AMERICANS in 2007, not propaganda. Propaganda is the White House saying for the umpteenth time that we have turned the corner. I must agree with kallend. Those are our men and women dying in that place. 900 of them last year. And they are dying at the same - or greater - pace as any other time during this conflict. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #66 February 11, 2008 QuoteQuoteNo, they are 901 DEAD AMERICANS in 2007, not propaganda. Propaganda is the White House saying for the umpteenth time that we have turned the corner. I must agree with kallend. Those are our men and women dying in that place. 900 of them last year. And they are dying at the same - or greater - pace as any other time during this conflict. I do not disagree that even one death is significant and tragic. But the bs twist he aimed back had nothing of any significance to even think of replying to. One of his typical fish bait tosses"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrewwhyte 1 #67 February 11, 2008 Quote Those are our men and women dying in that place. 900 of them last year. 901. The difference is not trivial. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #68 February 11, 2008 >You're a joke Your one warning. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #69 February 11, 2008 QuoteQuote Those are our men and women dying in that place. 900 of them last year. 901. The difference is not trivial. No it is not. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #70 February 11, 2008 Quotehow recently have you gotten to talk to people Fairly steadily since troops began returning from tours. I always let them bring the subject up, so I know more vets than I've spoken with about the war. Quotewhat do they do for the military Many different things. Some have been combat arms, others have been REMFs. They have ranged fro EMs to E8s. I don't believe I've spoken to any officers on the topic. Quoteand where in Iraq were they? All over. It has been a fairly random sample of returning troops. QuoteThe reason I ask is a lot of the people I know who have negative things to say about the progress are the ones who never leave the wire, yes it's true, some people spend 15 months in combat and never get their sorry asses off of a FOB. Yet they will proclaim to be experts on how things are going over there, the closest thing they have seen to a situation getting worse was they day the dining facility burned the meatloaf. It has been my experience with wartime vets in general that the REMFs are usually the most vocal supporters, and the troops that actually see combat are the ones that express the senselessness of it all. The vets from this war don't seem any different. Oftentimes those that brag the most about all the action they saw never actually saw any. I've known few combat vets from any war that are very willing to talk about combat, at least not when they're sober and not to non-combat vets or civilians. They want to put that shit behind them, not relive it. Out of respect, I refrain from asking. If they want to talk, they will.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #71 February 11, 2008 Quote Quote Quote It is all about context. More died in training camps for WW2. Death count is a pointless meaningless emotional statement. Quite simple really Oh, well, 901 AMERICAN DEAD last year in Iraq is OK in YOUR world. Nothing to worry about. You missed me, your chum missed me Your statement: "More died in training camps for WW2. Death count is a pointless meaningless emotional statement. Quite simple really" is shallow, callous, and a disservice to the troops. Your subsequent response shows that you actually meant it. You should be ashamed.... 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
jcd11235 0 #72 February 11, 2008 Quote4) Doubled house prices and mortgage melddown - Bush had as much to do with that as Clinton did with the dot-com bust. Very, very little. I have to disagree here. The Fed kept lowering interest rates during Bush II's first term. This, in combination with some unethical practices on the part of some lenders and some unwise purchasing decisions on the part of home buyers contributed greatly to the current mortgage crisis. Bush certainly is not solely responsible, but he (alone or via his administration) played a significant role in creating the problem. Quote5) tripled gas prices - I seems to recall paying 2.39 per gallon once in 1996. In late 1995 I was paying under $2.00 per gallon in Hawaii, where gasoline was significantly more expensive than on the mainland, where it was about $1.20-$1.30. I certainly don't recall a $1.00 (or more) increase in price per gallon in a year's time during that time period. Gas prices may not have tripled in the past seven years, but they have doubled, or close to it.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #73 February 11, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Quote It is all about context. More died in training camps for WW2. Death count is a pointless meaningless emotional statement. Quite simple really Oh, well, 901 AMERICAN DEAD last year in Iraq is OK in YOUR world. Nothing to worry about. You missed me, your chum missed me Your statement: "More died in training camps for WW2. Death count is a pointless meaningless emotional statement. Quite simple really" is shallow, callous, and a disservice to the troops. Your subsequent response shows that you actually meant it. You should be ashamed. Ashamed? No, just embarassed for you because of your lack of open minded understanding. Or, do you do it with purpose?It is you that should be ashamed sir. It is you."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #74 February 11, 2008 Quotehe (alone or via his administration) played a significant role in creating the problem Then would you say that Clinton's administration pleayed a significant role in the creating of the dot-com bust? After all, Enron was named by Forbes as America's Most Innovative Company for six years running! Was it not during Clinton's watch that the sham accounting and investing was being done? Indeed, was not the economic climate for these fraudulent accounting practices displayed throughout the 1990's? The collapse happened just before 9/11. And the dot-com bubble started bursting in 2000 - leading to three non-consecutive uarters of negative growth between summer 2000 and fall, 2001. The interest rates were low. Unemployment low. Tax revenues peaked. Was Clinton responsible? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #75 February 11, 2008 QuoteThen would you say that Clinton's administration pleayed a significant role in the creating of the dot-com bust? After all, Enron was named by Forbes as America's Most Innovative Company for six years running! Was it not during Clinton's watch that the sham accounting and investing was being done? Indeed, was not the economic climate for these fraudulent accounting practices displayed throughout the 1990's? The collapse happened just before 9/11. And the dot-com bubble started bursting in 2000 - leading to three non-consecutive uarters of negative growth between summer 2000 and fall, 2001. The interest rates were low. Unemployment low. Tax revenues peaked. Was Clinton responsible? If there were any similarities between the two things, you might have a point. Unfortunately, there isn't. Bush and his administration were directly responsible for lowering the interest rates far beyond the point that the market would suggest they be. There was a lot of criticism for about those decisions at the time, that it would lead to problems. How exactly did the Clinton administration cause Enron to recognize unearned income? Was Slick Willy (insert blowjob joke here) supposed to personally audit every American company to make sure they followed GAAP?Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
