ViperPilot

Yeah really, why do we have to be "world police"? God, American audacity...

I'm pretty sure it's based off a true story...I read somewhere that it was about some couple on a honeymoon that really had this happen to them. Edit: Oops, well I guess Grue got to it first

I've been diving for 7 years...it didn't bother me.

Isolationism can be good to an extent, but for some of us, you can't just let some stuff go. Some things have to be delt with, no matter how terrible of a situation it is. Of course we all have our own degrees of what level is bad enough to warrant stepping in.

Nice, Hurlburt's pretty cool...but screw humidity. I've heard the AF doesn't let you jump while at UPT. So, you may be out of luck for a little over a year or so. That's just hersey though, so you'll have to check. I would call someone in AETC...but yeah, they can be total dicks about stuff sometimes, so I wouldn't doubt it if they canned your jumping for a while. Sucks, but shit, what you'll be doing is definitely worth it.

And the even worse thing is that it's based on a true story.

For the ones who go back to the wrong side...well, just more targets.

Change doubtable to guaranteed and you got yourself a deal!

You're basing your opinion of 'assumed role" off of Iraq, in which case the people who weren't all for us going in were the ones saying, "13 years isn't enough time, lets give Saddam more time...just one more chance." Well, how smart is that statement?

Multitudes of parents support their children's decision to go into the military and subsequently Iraq/Afghanistan (at this point). Not every parent selfishly complains constantly about having their son or daughter back. Sure they would rather them be home and safe, but they understand what they're doing and are proud of it. Not all parents see the need to complain about how unfair it is that their kid is having to serve overseas...and if they do, they're idiots and need to get with the program and realize what military service entails.

Well, that's your's and her's opinion. We all have our own ideas of what's worth war, what's worth fighting for, and what's worth dying for. The above is your's, but does not mean it's fact. The justification of war does not lie on one woman's opinion. She just disagrees with it, but because she does so does not mean that the war is unjustifiable, she just sees it that way.

Well, it's not much to say France, Germany and the lot. With their ties to oil in Iraq, it's a no brainer they didn't want us to go in there and fuck up their oil deals. Oh well Chirac/Schroeder, suck it up. Ex: French wanted to reclaim their colony in Vietnam, so please America, help. Well, we all see how popular that one was. Ex: Why isn't the US doing anything about the genocide? Why!!! Ok, so we go in, lose some good men and kill around 1000 and get out, for obvious reasons. Gee America, you reall fucked up, what the hell were you thinking, why didn't you solve the problem? The point is, as a country, we're criticized a lot, sometimes regardless of which stance/action we take. People expect us to be world police, but then they don't. I guess the biggest example of this bitching is what you brought up earlier... "Who said America is the world's police." Then right along w/ that statement comes... "Hey, genocide...America fix this." "Hey disaster...America, do something." "Hey we're getting the shit kicked out of us, America come save us." See the point? We're asked to be world police, we're criticized for acting like world police. That's the point I'm making.

They usually don't have a problem with it...depending on your job. You just have to get a generic safety briefing and then your commander signs off. Hopefully there's a DZ somewhat nearby. What's your girlfriend doing at Sheppard?

Every other state in the world (obviously a bit of an exageration, but nonetheless, multiple states). The US doesn't intervene, people bitch, the US intervenes, people bitch. It's just a never-ending cycle.

It's a fact that the Sunnis hate the Shiites, and will probably remain so for a very long time, if not indefinately. However, that's not an excuse to just says, "fuck it, let 'em all burn." None of these discussions are about right and wrong, they're about opinions. In my opinion, would it have been more right to just leave the Iraqi people in a shithole that, despite the war, was worse before? Of course people can argue the deaths caused by war, but guess what, Saddam and his henchman weren't as nice as war, they were a lot worse. So not only did war get Saddam out, who deserves what he's gotten so far, but it gave the people at least some hope. As bleak as it may seem sometimes, there is some hope, where as there was none under Saddam's rule. So, I guess we have to ask ourselves, is the action taken by the US worth it, or should we have just given the Iraqi people, and ourselves to some extent, the one finger salute? Bring on the bashing...

Seems to me it would be better to have this. That way there are less cases of people having unplanned pregnancies, and thus there will be less abortions. Doesn't that make sense, especially for pro-life people? I think of myself as relatively pro-life...maybe on the fence a bit, and I strongly believe that birth control is fine, and a good practice.

Really? I know some Catholics who use the old calendar method, but thought that was a personal choice, not a religious requirement. Either way, stupid IMO; people should do what they want w/ this issue, not what some guy in a hat tells them to.

Well, I consider myself a good Christian and my fiancee uses birth control...religious idiots I guess.

What's their reasoning for legislating against it? Seems pretty stupid to me.

Really sorry to hear about your dad Spence. My prayers are with you. Keep strong man.

Isn't it pretty easy to get birth control nowadays? All you have to do is go to a doc and get a prescription. Maybe I am just missing something, but it doesn't seem like it could get much easier than that.

Kallend, can you find figures of how much was actually borrowed vs how much was cut in taxes? I'd just like to see that, not calling you a liar. Either way, I still stand by the fact that I sure as hell do not plan on paying ungodly amounts of taxes, thus I wouldn't vote for her. If I actually got more back from paying more taxes, then maybe I'd consider it, but considering the Democrats tend to spend increased taxes on social programs...well screw that. Screw welfare and the dying SS program, they don't need more wasted on them. I don't feel I would personally see any benefits from paying more taxes to Hilary, thus I'm not going to do it...i.e. not vote for her.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA....the last line is the best, ROFL. Alex, your stock just tripled in my book!

Well, that is a good point. I just didn't think you could go that long w/o knowing, but guess you can. Sometimes abortion just seems to be a very case-by-case situation. I would think generally you would know before the 3rd month and should make a decision, and if you haven't by then, tough luck (if you decide you don't want it later of course). But I guess things should be different for women like your sister who don't even know until into the 2nd trimester. It's just a sticky situation IMO.

I'm refering to all abortions after the first trimester. If a woman hasn't made the choice to abort the fetus by the end of the 3rd trimester, then she should have no choice but to have the baby...unless the doctors say there's a good chance of it killing her, in which case it would be ok for her to still make the decision. Basically, it's just apathy if you haven't made the choice after 3 months. It's bullshit for people to go "hey I actually don't want this kid" at the 7 month period, or any period after 3 months.