Dumb Wars

KazooSkinsFan · Post by **KazooSkinsFan** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 11:22 am

Sir_Monk wrote:
And the son thing pissed me off given my brother and cousin were in Iraq and at least one soldier in Iraq was on the forum, but we should shut up and blame Bush because he is the father of a soldier.

Nothing impresses me more then people who hide behind their family members while they themselves have never served.

This can be read different ways, not sure what it means exactly.

But any fair reading of history would yield two parties who got us here regardless of who served or if their families did or if no one in their family did.

This position would make sense:

- I am a Democrat and have come to the realization we should be out of the Middle East. Maybe we are more to blame, maybe Republicans are. But we need to go FORWARD and create exit plan to get out of the middle east and STOP proping up bad governments and providing artificially cheap oil to our economy as BOTH parties have done. We need to trust our economy and free enterprise to get us out of this mess government has gotten us into. And challenge Republicans to stop being part of the problem as well and help get us out.

That is NOT their position, which is.

- We are doing nothing wrong
- We never did except when Bush lied
- We should be in Afghanistan and all over the middle east being targets of terrorists and should do nothing to take the battle to them but sit there and wait for them to attack us. Then give constitutional rights to the terrorists attacking us, only reply in proportion and accept the blame our presence causes us
- We should hysterically oppose gas even going up with inflation
- It is all the Republicans fault, we accept no responsibility for our own actions.

That is what I am opposed to.

Sir_Monk · Post by **Sir_Monk** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 12:34 pm

This can be read different ways, not sure what it means exactly.

But any fair reading of history would yield two parties who got us here regardless of who served or if their families did or if no one in their family did.

This position would make sense:

- I am a Democrat and have come to the realization we should be out of the Middle East.

If I am reading you correctly, you are assuming this is my position?

I was just simply pointing out that you are not serving in the military and when it is convenient you hide behind the fact that your brother and cousin served in Iraq to make your argument.

KazooSkinsFan · Post by **KazooSkinsFan** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 1:07 pm

Sir_Monk wrote:If I am reading you correctly, you are assuming this is my position?

I was just simply pointing out that you are not serving in the military and when it is convenient you hide behind the fact that your brother and cousin served in Iraq to make your argument.

Actually I didn't assume you have any position, I said I didn't know what you meant. Which is why I said I didn't know what you meant.

OK, so in your clarification you are saying that when a Democrat said his son was in the military and then just went on a partisan Democrats spiel you were OK with that.

When I told him he wasn't the only one with military in his family I was hiding behind my brother and cousin.

He used his son in a positive assertion in his argument, you are OK with that.

I used it as passive regardless right is right, having military in the family doesn't affect truth and you were not OK with that.

Got it. Point noted.

Sir_Monk · Post by **Sir_Monk** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 2:47 pm

OK, so in your clarification you are saying that when a Democrat said his son was in the military and then just went on a partisan Democrats spiel you were OK with that.

Sure, I just wonder what your objection is, since you have used your family members to back up your arguments, what’s wrong with using his?

KazooSkinsFan · Post by **KazooSkinsFan** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 3:25 pm

Sir_Monk wrote:
OK, so in your clarification you are saying that when a Democrat said his son was in the military and then just went on a partisan Democrats spiel you were OK with that.

Sure, I just wonder what your objection is, since you have used your family members to back up your arguments, what’s wrong with using his?

First, he brought up his family and I just said mine is in the military too. Then you come to me and say I do why can't he? How does that even make sense? :hmm:

Second on usage, he said his son is in the military and went on a spiel of partisan Democratic talking points blaming Republicans for the war.

I said my brother and cousin are too, but I blame BOTH parties for the mess in the middle east and our involvement in it. I didn't have horse. I wasn't advocating anybody. I am just arguing against fingerpointers and if there were Republicans in this discussion blaming the mess on Democrats it would be the same. How is that even using my brother and cousin since I'm not advocating anything except opposing party politicos blaming the other?

Countertrey · Post by **Countertrey** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 7:18 pm

My son is serving, and has served in Iraq. My son-in-law is serving. I do not need to hide behind either one... I served for 32 years.

I have spoken with many soldiers (I know no Marines) serving in or recently returned from Iraq. These include regular Army, National Guard and Army Reserve.

A specialist in demagoguery has apparently detemined that I have spoken for 1.5 million in the military. I make no claim to know the opinion of every service member, despite his hyperbole. However, I know very few who would agree with the statement "our presence in Iraq is futile, and we should draw down ASAP". Most that I know would, in fact, strongly disagree. I know this, because of my conversations with them, including with my son.

ATV · Post by **ATV** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 7:35 pm

So much for not speaking for the troops.

Countertrey · Post by **Countertrey** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:10 pm

What's wrong? A little truth bother you? You're afraid of it, aren't you? This is an area I know a great deal of, and, no matter how you spin it, you know NOTHING of. NOTHING. Nor will you ever. I know soldiers. You don't. You can't dispute that, and have no means of combating it. What a shame.

Were you one of those wads who were out burning a soldier in effigy in Portland the other day? I'm sure they support the troops, too.

ATV · Post by **ATV** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:30 pm

Nope. Wasn't me. Although I used to live in Portland not too long ago - Beautiful city.

Anyhow, those current and former members of the military that I mentioned still haven't received your memorandum (the one explaining how you're now their spokesman). Do you know if that was mailed Express?

Oh, by the way, did you manage to mail one out to her?....

Sir_Monk · Post by **Sir_Monk** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 10:18 pm

Countertrey - I wont not argue about the particular view point of every service member. But I think the alarming number of IRR call ups, along with the ease at which E-5 and E-6 is now attainable in most job fields in the Army speaks to the fact that most people are not going past their initial or second enlistment. These Soldiers may or may not agree with the war but are not sticking around to find out. Worse still are the holes in many National Guard Units. Off hand, I know two particular Guard units preparing to deploy who have to pool almost entirely from other states or from the IRR to get their troop level to an adequate number.

In any event when I do go into combat what really matters to me is not the politics behind it, but those with me coming back safe.

DesertSkin · Post by **DesertSkin** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 10:51 pm

Sir_Monk wrote:But I think the alarming number of IRR call ups, along with the ease at which E-5 and E-6 is now attainable in most job fields in the Army speaks to the fact that most people are not going past their initial or second enlistment. These Soldiers may or may not agree with the war but are not sticking around to find out. Worse still are the holes in many National Guard Units. Off hand, I know two particular Guard units preparing to deploy who have to pool almost entirely from other states or from the IRR to get their troop level to an adequate number.

I'm not exactly sure that this is exactly accurate. I commanded at the Troop/Company level for 24 months with 12 of it being in Iraq. Re-enlistment was never easier then it was in Iraq and my Squadron met the re-enlistment goal by 140%. Additionally, I had 80% of my stop-lose soldiers reenlist while in theator. The "ease" of getting to SGT/SSG is more MOS specific and includes policies that the NCO Corps has asked for.
I'm also currently working with NG units that are mobilizing to go to Iraq and every personnel shortage they had was quickly filled with a volunteer from another unit.

In any event when I do go into combat what really matters to me is not the politics behind it, but those with me coming back safe.

Well hopefully it's if, not when, but if it happens, your dead on. That mindset and disclipine keep Soliders alive.

ATV: It's unfortunate this isn't in Smack. How many tears have you truely shed for the Iraqi's????? No need to answer cause I know it's not even close to those that I've shed for them. Stop looking for evidence involving Soldiers to support your beliefs, because you, sir, have no idea what they are going through or what they think. There is no conceiveable way for there to be an accurate pool of Soldiers sentiments because they don't have the time and don't really care about a pool. And I will speak on behalf on those I have served with, "In Iraq, politics don't matter. Let me accomplish the mission, and get my brother/sisters and myself home safely." Anyone who has the time to particpate and put actual thought into a poll, could be doing something else for their brother/sisters or family, and has too much time on their hands.

ATV · Post by **ATV** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:54 am

Anyone who has the time to particpate and put actual thought into a poll, could be doing something else for their brother/sisters or family, and has too much time on their hands.

Oh, ok, I get it then. So there's not "too much time on their hands" for the troops to philosophize with one another about such things as whether their mission is actually helping Iraqi's or helping Americans, but when it comes to responding to polls they "could be doing something else for their brother/sisters or family". Fascinating.

Tell me, when these supposed troops sit around all day responding to lounge banter on football mesage boards, is this because they wouldn't rather be doing something else for their brother/sisters or family?

Countertrey · Post by **Countertrey** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 5:30 pm

Could we please have this thread moved to smack?

Tell me, when these supposed troops sit around all day responding to lounge banter on football mesage boards, is this because they wouldn't rather be doing something else for their brother/sisters or family?

This needs to be addressed, and that cannot be done in the Lounge.

KazooSkinsFan · Post by **KazooSkinsFan** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 5:50 pm

ATV wrote:Tell me, when these supposed troops sit around all day responding to lounge banter on football mesage boards, is this because they wouldn't rather be doing something else for their brother/sisters or family?

I'm thinking the troops have time to do normal things like respond to lounge banter on football message boards that's a good thing. Maybe it's just me. What would you rather be doing?

I wish our politicians wouldn't send them places like the Middle East, but they are kicking ass over there. God bless our troops. And God bless the U.S.A.

ATV · Post by **ATV** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 6:35 pm

Oh yea? Well, God bless our troops with a cherry on top.

Patriotism is usually the refuge of the scoundrel. He is the man who talks the loudest. - Mark Twain

Patriot: the person who can holler the loudest without knowing what he is hollering about. - Mark Twain

The soul and substance of what customarily ranks as patriotism is moral cowardice--and always has been. - Mark Twain

ATV · Post by **ATV** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 6:39 pm

Could we please have this thread moved to smack?

"Could we please have this thread moved to smack because I wouldn't rather be doing something else for my brother/sisters or family."

Fios · Post by **Fios** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 7:11 pm

Countertrey wrote:Could we please have this thread moved to smack?

Tell me, when these supposed troops sit around all day responding to lounge banter on football mesage boards, is this because they wouldn't rather be doing something else for their brother/sisters or family?

This needs to be addressed, and that cannot be done in the Lounge.

If you want a Smack thread, please, by all means, start a Smack thread.

KazooSkinsFan · Post by **KazooSkinsFan** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 7:15 pm

ATV wrote:
Could we please have this thread moved to smack?

"Could we please have this thread moved to smack because I wouldn't rather be doing something else for my brother/sisters or family."

I'm just asking what you would rather be doing for your brothers/sisters or your family. I'm not saying anything about people spending time on the site, you're doing that. So I'm asking you what you mean by questioning others for what you do yourself.

Oh, and God bless America!

skinz74 · Post by **skinz74** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 7:20 pm

ATV wrote:Oh yea? Well, God bless our troops with a cherry on top.

Patriotism is usually the refuge of the scoundrel. He is the man who talks the loudest. - Mark Twain

Patriot: the person who can holler the loudest without knowing what he is hollering about. - Mark Twain

The soul and substance of what customarily ranks as patriotism is moral cowardice--and always has been. - Mark Twain

Your posting is an insult to rhetoric. Your previous post is one of the most insulting things I've read on this site...and I've seen some bad ones. Why don't you do patriotism a favor and curl up w/ Mr. Twain's good book while the rest of us go defend your ability to mock us. These words fall upon ignorant ears, though...so I leave you to what you've read about while I go live through it.

KazooSkinsFan · Post by **KazooSkinsFan** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 7:22 pm

ATV wrote:Oh yea? Well, God bless our troops with a cherry on top.

Patriotism is usually the refuge of the scoundrel. He is the man who talks the loudest. - Mark Twain

Patriot: the person who can holler the loudest without knowing what he is hollering about. - Mark Twain

The soul and substance of what customarily ranks as patriotism is moral cowardice--and always has been. - Mark Twain

All I said was God bless our troops and God Bless the USA. How is that taking refuge or hollering about Patriotism? Do you think Mark Twain meant he was opposed to saying God bless the USA?

KazooSkinsFan · Post by **KazooSkinsFan** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 7:47 pm

Countertrey wrote:Could we please have this thread moved to smack?

Tell me, when these supposed troops sit around all day responding to lounge banter on football mesage boards, is this because they wouldn't rather be doing something else for their brother/sisters or family?

This needs to be addressed, and that cannot be done in the Lounge.

Per Fios, I opened another forum in smack on the subject.

ATV · Post by **ATV** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 8:44 pm

Super Duper God Bless America, glory be thy name (with a cherry on top).

I am now, officially, MORE patriotic (and holy) than you.

So, Kazoo - Why do you hate America? I'm not sure you should be entitled to debate with someone who loves this country as much as I do.

DesertSkin · Post by **DesertSkin** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 8:50 pm

Tell me, when these supposed troops sit around all day responding to lounge banter on football mesage boards, is this because they wouldn't rather be doing something else for their brother/sisters or family?

Who are you refering to here??? I haven't read every thread, but I don't know of any poster in this site currently in Iraq, so your point has missed me because it has no supporting evidence. Maybe a link could help me. :lol:

KazooSkinsFan · Post by **KazooSkinsFan** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 11:48 pm

ATV wrote:Super Duper God Bless America, glory be thy name (with a cherry on top).

I am now, officially, MORE patriotic (and holy) than you.

So, Kazoo - Why do you hate America? I'm not sure you should be entitled to debate with someone who loves this country as much as I do.

OK, you got me. What are you talking about?

Post by **admin** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 7:38 am

Why do you guys have to ask a moderator to move a thread to smack FOR YOU? Is it really that difficult to click on the 'New Topic' button when you're in smack? Or to copy and paste a snippet from someone's post to include in a smack post? Why should the moderator have to do it?

If you've got something that you want to say in smack, start a thread there... it isn't that difficult.

But somehow if the moderator doesn't, then you guys don't know how to respond or react? Or you feel that how you react or respond won't be your fault because you 'didn't start it'.

HUH?

You guys can end the seneseless bickering and rhetoric in the public forums willingly, or we can make the decision for you. Our way will unfortunately likely involve you not posting at all.

figure out which side of the fence you sit on because you're going to be pushed one way or the other in the absolute immediate future.