Lynndie England
peanut4040
something with a 54 number-- could be a W,, or a T,, or simply An A
with a five digit combination going left first,, or was it right
But I learned that the very worst time to be "right" is when Everyone
else is wrong. Lyndie was right... Let that sink in,,, Lynndie was
right. She helped protect my country. This is "my south"
If she needs a JM,,, I'm willing to travel..
Jerry K.
Dude - I'm not going to go into the why's and wherefores, ect, which
lead England to where she is curently at but England copped a plea -
later thrown out resulting in a mistrial - but still copped a plea, a
guilty plea to charges, and these charges involved alleged breaches in
military regulations regarding conspiracy, indecency, and the abuse of
prisoners.
"Right" in my book would be to fight it to the bitter end, no matter
the possible greater penalty - that would be "right" and principled.
But not particularly smart for her in the long run. It is my guess
that the plea she copped was the best solution for her at the time as
well as for the military court that tried her. It was not a "Yeah, I
did it and I'm proud of it and I'll take the consequences because I
was protecting my country and that's right..." If any sort of
thumbnail statement could be made regarding her plea, I would say it
was more along the lines of, "Yeah, I did it and I knew that it was
wrong - and I accept the consequences." As I said - this has lately
been thrown out - due to questions recently surfacing regarding
whether or not she actually knew if what she had earlier plead guilty
to was actually wrong.
So - several things - I'm not trying to trash England nor am I trying
to trash the military or even how it regulates itself. This isn't
about the charges she plead to nor is it even about actions either
committed or not committed in Iraq - this is about the "rightness" of
pleading guilty to a charge or the rightness of fighting it.
She copped a plea and did what was probably the best thing for her,
all things considered.
The following is suppostition and my opinion - my guess is that
England and others did what they did because they could. Because
while they probably knew in the back of their heads that such
behaviour is unacceptable in society (as well as being against
regulations) and probably would not wish such actions to be returned
upon themselves, friends, or family members - they did what they did
because they wanted to and believed it would not affect them. The
same "sort" of people run red lights in the middle of the night when
there's no one around to stop them or blow through stop signs when
there's apparently no other cars coming. Civilized people obey the
laws, follow the rules, and pay attention to the regulations which
they as citizens in most cases voluntarily follow or even as military
personnel who are sworn and obligated to follow military regulations,
and if the rules, laws, and regulations are disfunctional or even
inconvienent - there are mechanisms for changing them. Sure, someone
might feel like a dope for sitting at a red light at 3am when there's
no one around or stopping for a stop-sign when it's clear there's no
other car visible with right of way but the law is for everyone and it
is not to be ignored because it might be inconvienent at the time.
Just my opinion.
As for what she was charged with, multiple counts of conspiracy,
prisoner abuse, and indecency - she plead guilty, accepted the
judgement, and was set to be punished before a mistrial was declared.
I am glad that she will have another opportunity to make another plea
to the charges and have another day in court but I don't find her
"right" in the slightest.
...bsrp
...jlk
ynotssor
news:1115433240.9...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
> Lyndie was right... Let that sink in,,, Lynndie was
> right. She helped protect my country.
Timothy McVeigh was 1st Infantry Division ... it don't mean shit. He fucked
up too. You're only as good as your last jump.
peanut4040
other things.. other people. and their perception I don't know the
particulars of being there,,, its kinda like being on a bounce jump on
a five way. There was only five people "really" there-- and 3 out
of 5 of them will not be here 3 years from now........
I,, I ,, DIGRESSSSS--
i will stick with my opinon, be it right or wrong with "society"--
She did the "right" thing... she protected MY South. She protected
YOUR North, And Jimbos West,, and Snuffy's Texas--
but anyway,, ps,,, I'm still reading your words,, you have intelligent
words...
peanut4040
Jerry K. wrote:
> On 6 May 2005 19:34:00 -0700,
>
> the possible greater penalty -
>
> So - several things - I'm not trying to trash England nor am I trying
> to trash the military or even how it regulates itself.
> She copped a plea and did what was probably the best thing for her,
> all things considered.
>
.
>
> I am glad that she will have another opportunity to make another plea
> to the charges and have another day in court but I don't find her
> "right" in the slightest.
>
> ...bsrp
> ...jlk
you do not find her "right" ----that is okay because you have an
opinion and thank gawd we live in America where we can have opionis
that differ- I respect your opinion.. and we can agree to disagre,
no?
+For me, and where I have lived life before and today-- "Yhat woman"
could never have been more "right" in her life,, in respect to
protecting "my south" hehehe,, but what do I know? I would
haveeeeeee,,, done what?
Done what? what would we ALL have done? The objective is protecting
america, noUseless, useless."
- John Wilkes Booth, looking at this hands as he emerged fatally
wounded from a burning barn
protecting "my south" "your north"
Jerry K.
>Thanks for your comments Jerry. Yo made me think of other angles,,
>other things.. other people. and their perception I don't know the
>particulars of being there,,, its kinda like being on a bounce jump on
>a five way. There was only five people "really" there-- and 3 out
>of 5 of them will not be here 3 years from now........
>
>I,, I ,, DIGRESSSSS--
>
>i will stick with my opinon, be it right or wrong with "society"--
>She did the "right" thing... she protected MY South. She protected
>YOUR North, And Jimbos West,, and Snuffy's Texas--
>
>but anyway,, ps,,, I'm still reading your words,, you have intelligent
>words...
No worries and thanks - it's my belief that no one gets a
carte'blanche, King'sX, and a free pass simply because they were in
the military and keep in mind that England was tried, and will be
tried again, by a military court. McVeigh, Washington sniper John
Muhammad, UT Tower sniper Charles Whitman all protected and served our
country - and they all perpetrated terrible and illegal acts. Lee
Harvy Oswald for that matter. No free pass for them - the law is the
law. But I don't think their acts are representitve of the military
but only of themselves. Lots of people have served in the military
and are provenly capable of obeying regulations and have never faced a
courts-marshall - much less plead guilty to one.
England has the benefit of the doubt in that she was doing her job and
was protecting and serving our country while she was in Iraq but she
also plead guilty to doing things on the job which she knew was wrong
and not a part of her job, and clearly outside of the regulations she
had sworn to and was obligated to follow. I'm not saying hang her -
no one is - but if she is found guilty the next time around, the same
guilty that she plead the last time around, then punishment of some
sort will deservedly be meted out - and that is right - no matter her
background of having once protected and served her country.
That said - I'm a son of the South, born and raised and lucky enough
to be from Texas, by God. JB's out west but I don't know where he's
from originally. The dingleberry ain't from Texas - I think he
admitted Arkansas or some such and schooling in Californuia at some
point - not his fault - you gotta be lucky to be born here. He is in
that - like so many things - merely a pretender.
...bsrp
...jlk
Tom B
> I've been involved wayyyy back when,,,in a situation, involving
> something with a 54 number-- could be a W,, or a T,, or simply An A
> with a five digit combination going left first,, or was it right
>
I am surprised you still have all your fingers and toes.
Tom B
Jerry K.
>
>Jerry K. wrote:
>> On 6 May 2005 19:34:00 -0700,
>>
>> "Right" in my book would be to fight it to the bitter end, no matter
>> the possible greater penalty -
>
>>
>> So - several things - I'm not trying to trash England nor am I trying
>> to trash the military or even how it regulates itself.
>
>
>> She copped a plea and did what was probably the best thing for her,
>> all things considered.
>>
> .
>>
>> I am glad that she will have another opportunity to make another plea
>> to the charges and have another day in court but I don't find her
>> "right" in the slightest.
>>
>> ...bsrp
>> ...jlk
>
>
>you do not find her "right" ----that is okay because you have an
>opinion and thank gawd we live in America where we can have opionis
>that differ- I respect your opinion.. and we can agree to disagre,
>no?
Absolutely.
>
>+For me, and where I have lived life before and today-- "Yhat woman"
>could never have been more "right" in her life,, in respect to
>protecting "my south" hehehe,, but what do I know? I would
>haveeeeeee,,, done what?
Just keep in mind she wasn't charged with the "crime" of serving her
country, nor was it ever argued that what she was charged with and her
serving her country were one in the same. She plead guilty to a
variety of acts which were clearly against military regulations and if
the regulations were not useful in service to one's country there are
mechanisms for changing the regulations but none of those mechanisms
include ignoring the regulations.
>
>Done what? what would we ALL have done? The objective is protecting
>america, noUseless, useless."
I give her the benefit of the doubt that her in the military and in
Iraq was in her country's service but that does not change, or even
mitigate the fact that she was charged with a variety of military
crimes while serving her country in Iraq and plead guilty to
committing these crimes as well as acknowledged that she knew they
were crimes at the time they were committed. Conspiracy, indecency,
and abuse of prisoners all fall outside of the regulations she had
sworn to and was obligated to follow as a member of the military.
>
>
>- John Wilkes Booth, looking at this hands as he emerged fatally
>wounded from a burning barn
>
>protecting "my south" "your north"
Booth was a murderer who at the time killed an unpopular President and
ran, rather than defend his action. Sherman was, perhaps, a more
aggregious criminal than Booth but this supposition makes Booth no
less a murderer. Right or wrong, Sherman did what he did while trying
to protect and serve his country. Interesting how that works out, eh?
...bsrp
...jlk
Tom B
> Jerry K. wrote:
>> So - several things - I'm not trying to trash England nor am I trying
>> to trash the military or even how it regulates itself.
There is one question the newsies have not persisted in asking. Where are
the junior officers that should have been in that jail, and if trials are
undertaken, should be standing as defendants? We have seen a General and a
couple of Colonels hands slapped, and some very junior NCO's hammered with
decade long sentences. But where are the Lieutenants and Captains? I suspect
the answer is they simply were not there, their places filled by CIA
civilians. And that is as good a way as I know of to fuck up Army discipline
and regulation.
How having a woman point and laugh at ones undersized pecker justifies 10
years in jail is beyond my understanding. Maybe we should defer to Peanut
for understanding. I hear it happens to him all the time.
Tom B
peanut4040
>
> How having a woman point and laugh at ones undersized pecker
justifies 10
> years in jail is beyond my understanding. Maybe we should defer to
Peanut
> for understanding. I hear it happens to him all the time.
>
> Tom B
smile,,, Bigger dan a PEANUTTTTTTTT,, FASTER dan a locamotive-- can
jump tall buildings with a single bound.
peanut4040
hehehehe,,, think i can get some disability?
Tom B
>
>> How having a woman point and laugh at ones undersized pecker
> justifies 10
>> years in jail is beyond my understanding. Maybe we should defer to
> Peanut
>> for understanding. I hear it happens to him all the time.
>
> jump tall buildings with a single bound.
FASTER? Nutman, perhaps you should have a long talk with Lucky. Your always
being much faster than her is not really a positive attribute. :)
bozo
> There is one question the newsies have not persisted in asking. Where
are
> the junior officers that should have been in that jail, >
As former military, I agree with Tom 100%. Spec 4s, PFCs and Corporals
dont not run prisons and units in the military. Where were the SGTS.
the Command Sgt Major.....the Lts......the Capts??????
These guys are just, or more, guilty of derelection of duty than these
low ranked kids. There is some serious coverup going on here.
Lynndie Englands most serious offense is that of being a dumbass
Charles Grainer is is guilty of the same offense and the fact that he
could have sex with Lynndie England YUUUCK !
bozo
the unknown flailer
Jerry K. wrote:
> On 6 May 2005 22:12:58 -0700, "peanut4040" <peanu...@aol.com>
wrote:
>
> >
> >Jerry K. wrote:
> >> On 6 May 2005 19:34:00 -0700,
>
> Booth was a murderer who at the time killed an unpopular President
and
> ran, rather than defend his action. Sherman was, perhaps, a more
> aggregious criminal than Booth but this supposition makes Booth no
> less a murderer. Right or wrong, Sherman did what he did while
trying
> to protect and serve his country. Interesting how that works out,
eh?
>
> ...bsrp
> ...jlk
Bullshit, Grant was a General....he just sent men to their death...The
war was effectivly over~Booth was a sore looser and back
shooter....Lincon was simply a back woods lawyer who became president
and spent his whole term trying to preserve the Union----ya unewducated
young idiot.
bigjim
Really, part of the job of NCO's and officers is to keep the troops in line.
If they relly want to sexually humiliate those people, they should send
Snuffy over there and throw them on a bunk with him.
Hedge
>
> Dude - I'm not going to go into the why's and wherefores, ect, which
> lead England to where she is curently at but England copped a plea -
>
Dude...It was rigged from the start. Who in the Jesus tap dancing
Keyriest is going to convict a soldier for perpetrating FRAT PRANKS on
the enemy????????? Do YOU READ ME PRIVATE?????????????
THEIR guys chop OUR guys hands and feet and GENITALS OFF and then soak
them in battery acid...(Them not their parts). Do you think my beloved
country is going to hang Lyndie England for this bull crap? ONLY if
Bill Clinton Or Hillary or maybe Al were in office.
The government needed to save face. They did. End of story.
You may now resume normal behavior.
the unknown flailer
The original intent of NCO's was to keep the ranks straight and kill
anyone who broke and ran, then over the years as infrantry tactics
changed....so did the NCO's job discripton....I can live with shooting
chickenshits for breaking ranks in the face of the enemy....My Advisory
team LT made me stop doing that DAMN ;(
Couldn't hit them in the back of their heads with the butt of yer
weapon either....but they wuz still skeerd with me standing behind them
for some reason. mussta been the sound of my zipper coming down or
bayonet locking on or something like that...All I know is I could move
them forward...might be why most officers don't like to lead from the
front either <wicked grin>
Jerry K.
wrote:
Yeah, I could see it now - embarassed detainess by the hundreds all
complaining about being forced to share their bunk with the dickless
wonder.
<cue cutn'paste or some such response assigning someone else in that
role>
...bsrp
...jlk
Jerry K.
<kam...@eastex.net> wrote:
>
>Jerry K. wrote:
>> On 6 May 2005 22:12:58 -0700, "peanut4040" <peanu...@aol.com>
>wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >Jerry K. wrote:
>> >> On 6 May 2005 19:34:00 -0700,
>> >protecting "my south" "your north"
>>
>> Booth was a murderer who at the time killed an unpopular President
>and
>> ran, rather than defend his action. Sherman was, perhaps, a more
>> aggregious criminal than Booth but this supposition makes Booth no
>> less a murderer. Right or wrong, Sherman did what he did while
>trying
>> to protect and serve his country. Interesting how that works out,
>eh?
>>
>> ...bsrp
>> ...jlk
>
>Bullshit, Grant was a General....he just sent men to their death...
He did that - but we're talking Sherman and his March to Savannah -
pay attention.
>The
>war was effectivly over~Booth was a sore looser and back
>shooter....Lincon was simply a back woods lawyer who became president
>and spent his whole term trying to preserve the Union----ya unewducated
>young idiot.
Lincoln was among many other things, a lawyer, author, patent holder,
Congressman, and President. To say he was simply a backwoods lawyer
is simple, in of itself, to the extreme and hugely sopped with
pretense - given your own regular pretensions of being some
"backwoods" person - nevermind your Californian eduation.
Booth was no more protecting his south than Sherman was simply
executing military objectives. In Ford's Theater it was personal and
vindictive and from Atlanta to Savannah, it was political and
psychological. Do your homework, numbnuts.
...bsrp
...jlk
Jerry K.
<kam...@eastex.net> wrote:
>
>bigjim wrote:
>> He's baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack!!!!!!!!
>>
>> Really, part of the job of NCO's and officers is to keep the troops
>in line.
>>
>> If they relly want to sexually humiliate those people, they should
>send
>> Snuffy over there and throw them on a bunk with him.
>
>
>The original intent of NCO's was to keep the ranks straight and kill
>anyone who broke and ran, then over the years as infrantry tactics
>changed....so did the NCO's job discripton....I can live with shooting
>chickenshits for breaking ranks in the face of the enemy....My Advisory
>team LT made me stop doing that DAMN ;(
Eheheheh - right - how many you wack before they told you to stop,
Jinnie. Lay some more unmitigated bs on us, why doncha?
>
>Couldn't hit them in the back of their heads with the butt of yer
>weapon either....but they wuz still skeerd with me standing behind them
>for some reason. mussta been the sound of my zipper coming down or
>bayonet locking on or something like that...All I know is I could move
>them forward...might be why most officers don't like to lead from the
>front either <wicked grin>
Right - it's clear they wouldn't follow you so you had to goad them on
from behind - just you and the officers back there, eh? Woo woulda
thought you and the officers had something like relative position
within the ranks in common - I'm not surprised.
...bsrp
...jlk
Jerry K.
>
>
>>
>> Dude - I'm not going to go into the why's and wherefores, ect, which
>> lead England to where she is curently at but England copped a plea -
>>
>
>Dude...It was rigged from the start. Who in the Jesus tap dancing
>Keyriest is going to convict a soldier for perpetrating FRAT PRANKS on
>the enemy????????? Do YOU READ ME PRIVATE?????????????
>
Sorry dude - it wasn't just frat pranks - the accusations also
included conspiracy and indecency - which, while certainly could be
considered frat prnaks, are also contrary to the military regulations
in place at the time. As for who was going to convict someone for
pranks? Good question but I think that the fact that she plead guilty
the first time around suggest that someone, somewhere considered it
entirely possible.
>THEIR guys chop OUR guys hands and feet and GENITALS OFF and then soak
>them in battery acid...(Them not their parts). Do you think my beloved
>country is going to hang Lyndie England for this bull crap?
Rhetorical claptrap, dude. What "Their Guys" do to us is beside the
point unless maybe you also would advocate flying civilian jetliners
full of innocent people into buildings occupied with more innocent
civilians as payback. I don't buy the "eye for an eye," bullcrap.
Peace through superior firepower is more my way of thinking but I
digress - your beloved country (also mine) is not going to "hang"
anyone but your (hopefully) beloved military (also mine) is going to
try England for conspiracy, prisoner abuse, and indecency. They will
either prove their case before the courts-marshall or they won't.
Don't like it? Talk to your Congressman and your Senators. Better
yet - join the military and as quick as you can, work real hard,
really quick, and do it with enough time to get yourself appointed to
the courtsmarshall proceedings so you can render a judgement that fits
what you have already preconceived.
>ONLY if
>Bill Clinton Or Hillary or maybe Al were in office.
Yeah - but they're not so that particular line of bitching has gotten
pretty stale, of late. The reality is, Bush has the Executive Branch
and his party has both Houses of Congress and England will be tried
(again) and found either guilty or innocent of the the military crimes
of prisoner abuse, indecency, and conspiracy. You can blame who you
want for whatever outcome but that said, whatever the outcome,
remember which party controls our Executive and Legistlative Branches
of government.
>
>The government needed to save face. They did. End of story.
And to think they were able to accomplish this without the help of
the Clintons or Gore.
>
>You may now resume normal behavior.
Thanks! Will do!
...bsrp
...jlk
the unknown flailer
Jerry K. wrote:
> On 8 May 2005 14:35:51 -0700, "the unknown flailer"
> <kam...@eastex.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >Jerry K. wrote:
> >> On 6 May 2005 22:12:58 -0700, "peanut4040" <peanu...@aol.com>
> >wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >Jerry K. wrote:
> >> >> On 6 May 2005 19:34:00 -0700,
> >> >protecting "my south" "your north"
> >>
> >> Booth was a murderer who at the time killed an unpopular President
> >and
> >> ran, rather than defend his action. Sherman was, perhaps, a more
> >> aggregious criminal than Booth but this supposition makes Booth no
> >> less a murderer. Right or wrong, Sherman did what he did while
> >trying
> >> to protect and serve his country. Interesting how that works out,
> >eh?
> >>
> >> ...bsrp
> >> ...jlk
> >
> >Bullshit, Grant was a General....he just sent men to their death...
>
> He did that - but we're talking Sherman and his March to Savannah -
> pay attention.
>
conflict....it was quite common for fast moving horse mounted soldiers
to scavage off the land....Sherman just did it in a big way...I ain't
no Yankee lover but if I had men and horses to feed I'da done it and
thought of it as taking care of my men----War is hell boy, you do well
if you can take care of your own....nothing else matters much but
survival....Wonder how them Yankees liked eating all them grits and
Mustard Greens HAW HAW HAW
>
> Lincoln was among many other things, a lawyer, author, patent holder,
> Congressman, and President. To say he was simply a backwoods lawyer
> is simple, in of itself
I always take into consideration who I'm talking to and try to keep it
simple for USPA people
- given your own regular pretensions of being some
> "backwoods" person - nevermind your Californian eduation.
Which consisted of two years of speech therapy cuz they mistook me for
a Okie kid due to my back woods drawl and the fact we picked
cotton...shit
I didn't care, it got me out of the fields
>
> Booth was no more protecting his south than Sherman was simply
> executing military objectives. In Ford's Theater it was personal and
> vindictive and from Atlanta to Savannah, it was political and
> psychological. Do your homework, numbnuts.
>
> ...bsrp
> ...jlk
Booth was a Thespian queer...Sherman was a field commander with vision.
You see his march as vindictive, I see it as brillant and give credit
shortening a very bloody war...Truman saved many American fighting men
by authorizing the A-bomb drops on Japan....I admire him also, cain't
go by what I admire though---were from different generations and
tribes, you and I. He shudda let Mac drop one on the Yalu river----fuck
a buncha Chicom
bastards up, wouldn't be having trouble with North Korea now I betcha &
we could use the troops loling around in South Korea freezing their
ass's off to line out the rest of the Arab world OR they could bring
back the draft and raise the age limit to catch your long haired
slacker ass up cuz ya missed the old selective service days ooooorah
<eg>
the unknown flailer
west coast and never smelt burnt gunpowder anywhere but the firing
range...A Speck 4 who hid out on a Navy base pretending Army EOD was
needed to retieve dummy torpedos and a South Beach Queer---of the 3
only the Florida punk understands a NCO's true duty...He must be going
up to Jacksonville and dating sailors to understand how the chain of
command should work HAW HAW HAW DAMN 0~;)
the unknown flailer
LOG IT; No one is innocent Jerry....Civilian populations always take a
beating in all out wars, most adversarys try to make sure its citizens
from the other side...towards the end of WW2 the 8th Airforce and their
Britt counterparts ran out of Military/industrial targets within
Germany and started bombing civlians back to the stone age to win the
war quicker, not much different than Shermans thinking if you ask me
> Peace through superior firepower is more my way of thinking but
> ...bsrp
> ...jlk
Yeah right, as long as it ain't yer young ass on the firing line I
assume? 0~;)
Jerry K.
<kam...@eastex.net> wrote:
It was fast moving to an extent but not entirely cavalry by a
longshot, though there were elements - one division. Sherman had over
60,000 veterans, infantry, artillery, and cavalry - mostly infantry -
moving roughly 10 miles a day and it operated with the intent of not
using its supply lines for victuals - the original orders to his
Generals was to scavenge wherever, appropriate whenever, and to
destroy infrastructure utterly if any resistance was met - nothing
wrong with that. He also had orders that only corps commanders on up
could decide what was resistance and to be destroyed or not and
Sherman also gave orders that the population were not to be
brutalized, nor was their infrastucture to be savaged if the populace
was cooperative - these latter orders were largely ignored and as
Commander, he was remembered for it, rightly or wrongly, as a
destroyer - though I did say at the outset that Sherman was protecting
and serving his country in the process - pay attention.
>>
>> Lincoln was among many other things, a lawyer, author, patent holder,
>> Congressman, and President. To say he was simply a backwoods lawyer
>> is simple, in of itself
>
>I always take into consideration who I'm talking to and try to keep it
>simple for USPA people
Yeah, right - nice angle, Jinnie - you say something stupid and beside
the point, it's pegged for what it is and all you can come up with is
essentially, "I meant to do that." Nice try but the, "You're not
reading between the lines," angle was, while a total contradiction to
this latest angle and not that much more believable, was a bit more
funny. Whether you just blunder out some flailing irony or flailing
false bravado - it's still flailing and btw - saying Lincoln was
"simply a back woods lawyer who became president," has nothing to do
with my suggestion that he was unpopular when Booth murdered him.
>
>- given your own regular pretensions of being some
>> "backwoods" person - nevermind your Californian eduation.
>
>Which consisted of two years of speech therapy cuz they mistook me for
>a Okie kid due to my back woods drawl and the fact we picked
>cotton...
Cleft-palette, I'm thinking. All that inbreeding. What are the odds
your family tree looks like a stump.
>shit
>I didn't care, it got me out of the fields
Nevermind your earlier gargling about how the only "real" Texans are
working in the fields, or some such.
>>
>> Booth was no more protecting his south than Sherman was simply
>> executing military objectives. In Ford's Theater it was personal and
>> vindictive and from Atlanta to Savannah, it was political and
>> psychological. Do your homework, numbnuts.
>>
>> ...bsrp
>> ...jlk
>
>Booth was a Thespian queer...
Who gives a rat's ass about that? Only you, apparently. Booth was a
murderer and a coward, pure and simple - anything else is just
window-dressing unless you got some other examples of thespian queers
assasinating heads of state.
>Sherman was a field commander with vision.
>You see his march as vindictive,
No, dummy - when Sherman marched to the Savanah he was an *Army*
Commander and had been for some time - commanding the Army of the West
succeeding Grant in 1864 and the Rmy of Tennesse before that. Sheesh
- do your homework and pay attention, dingleberry - I said Booth was
vindicative. I'll I've said about Sherman in Georgia was that his
March to Savannah was murderous, destructive, and he is remembered as
a destroyer.
>I see it as brillant and give credit
>shortening a very bloody war...
Militarily it was already pretty much a done deal but the politcal and
psychological effects are still present to an extent even now, 140
years down the line and - pay attention - I never said it was not
brilliant nor did I say it didn't shorten the war - but it was also
murderous and destructive on a mammoth scale. He lead the armies and
for that he is remembered.
>Truman saved many American fighting men
>by authorizing the A-bomb drops on Japan....I admire him also,
Truman was the product of the Missouri politcal machine and pretty
much a no-name until he got the nod for VP. That said, he came into
his own after FDR and became what I consider to be a great President
and as for nuking Japan, it was the right move.
> cain't
>go by what I admire though---
>were from different generations and
>tribes, you and I.
With the clear difference between the "two tribes," not that I think
you are representitive of any tribe, as self-centered as you are, that
this generation, such that it is - basically anyone slightly younger
than you on down by your reckoning but in reality - anyone other than
you by any other reckoning - has the ability to learn, comprehend,
and think things through. You're an idiot - as evidenced by how you
are so prone to speaking without thinking, and stepping in it on a
regular basis - "Sherman was a field commander" - jackass.
Fortunately - you don't represent any tribe but only yourself.
Figurtively and almost literally the "Dodo," incarnate.
>He shudda let Mac drop one on the Yalu river----fuck
>a buncha Chicom
>bastards up, wouldn't be having trouble with North Korea now I betcha &
>we could use the troops loling around in South Korea freezing their
>ass's off to line out the rest of the Arab world
Nice armchair quarterbacking, you got going there Jinnie. The LAST
thing anyone needed to do at the time was start lobbing nukes around.
Do your homework - it would have been a very bad idea. As for USFK,
around 37k, last time I checked and with around 150k in Iraq and about
18k in Afghanistan, nevermind forces in other parts of the middle
east, oh yeah - those 37k in Korea while certainly making a difference
and a nice addition for the troops already there - I'm sure that 37k
would automatically tip the scales more over into our favor, eh? No,
dummy - besides - whether a nuke woulda been tossed back in Korea 40
some odd years ago or not, the location would still be hugely
strategic - unless you're thinking with one nuke, there's no problem
throwing another and another until the whole theater (and all of
China) is so dead as to deny any further strategic importance. From
Hiroshima to sacking MacArthur - Truman was a great President and I
admire him. MacArthur was no slouch of a Commander but he was no
Commander in Chief - though he tried.
>OR they could bring
>back the draft and raise the age limit to catch your long haired
>slacker ass up cuz ya missed the old selective service days
Yeah, well spit in one hand and wish with the other, Jinnie - how's
that been going lately? Palm kinda wrinkled? How's the wish angle
been working for ya?
...bsrp
...jlk
Jerry K.
<kam...@eastex.net> wrote:
Trust Jinnie to hammer home the idea that dating sailors is bedrock to
the chain of command.
...bsrp
...jlk
Tom B
"Hedge" <flec...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1115589597....@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>> Dude - I'm not going to go into the why's and wherefores, ect, which
>> lead England to where she is curently at but England copped a plea -
>>
>
> Dude...It was rigged from the start. Who in the Jesus tap dancing
> Keyriest is going to convict a soldier for perpetrating FRAT PRANKS on
> the enemy
You might wish to purchase a newspaper. Several soldiers have already been
convicted, all with sentences just about as severe as the law allows, with
one drawing 11 years if memory serves.
> THEIR guys chop OUR guys hands and feet and GENITALS OFF and then soak
> them in battery acid...(Them not their parts). Do you think my beloved
> country is going to hang Lyndie England for this bull crap?
Well, the certainly did hang England's boyfriend out to dry.
Tom B
Jerry K.
<kam...@eastex.net> wrote:
Right, I follow and by extension the enemy currently fighting us has
every right to "chop OUR guys hands and feet and GENITALS OFF and then
soak them in battery acid," eh? It's just total war, afterall. Maybe
you should be bitching at hedgefleck for whining about how because the
enemy is lopping limbs and balls, this excuses England from being
charged with and and tried for conspiracy, indecency, and abusing
prisoners, all in contravention of standing military regulations, eh?
>
>
>> Peace through superior firepower is more my way of thinking but
>> ...bsrp
>> ...jlk
>
>Yeah right, as long as it ain't yer young ass on the firing line I
>assume?
Ass that you are, you assume wrong. If I'm on the firing line, you
can bet your ass I'm wanting peace and superior firepower.
- Feel free to accuse me of not being on the firing line, Jinnie and
we'll work that well-trod, but heartily amusing angle for a while, eh?
...bsrp
...jlk
Jerry K.
He got off light - he apparently knocked her up (shudder) - what if he
had married her?
...bsrp
...jlk
LORD OF THE SKY
"bozo" <sb...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1115557032.0...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
" There is some serious coverup going on here."
______________________________________
You are certainly right about that ,Jim.
The fact that we are discussing "Lynndie England " and as some like to
call it,"the fraternity prank photos", is certain evidence that there is a
major cover up and an almost sucessful attempt to divert the attention of
the American citizens away from finding the "Truth".
Here is a little "Truth" for the brain washed masses ; The pictures of
"torture " at Abu Graib which your government """ALLOWED"""" you to see
,were very mild compared to the hundreds of photographs which they decided
that you would not be """ALLOWED """"" to see.
Congressmen(men?) who saw the entire photo album were reportedly vomiting
and sleepless for days afterward.
You know.., you can tell the people about "homo" pyramids and it all
looks like a joke.
The thing is that when there are photos of actual rapes .. and of
people *BEATEN* to death during interrogations,
it ain't quite as funny.
"Allowed you to see",LOFL!!!
It's all even less humorous when you realise that these dead folks,
these fellow humans with wives and kids and dreams for the future , were
tortured to "*DEATH*" in an attempt to extract information which the
administration knew they couldn't possibly hold.
THERE WERE NO WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!
THE BUSH TEAM MADE THAT UP!!!!
So why did Amaul have to watch his son be raped in the ass?????
Amaul could not have provided any info.
THERE WERE NO WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!
THE BUSH TEAM MADE THAT UP!!!!
So why was an 83 year old grandmother "saddled and ridden like a donkey" ,
until she collapsed on the cold,concrete prison floor?
THERE WERE NO WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!
THE BUSH TEAM MADE THAT UP!!!!
So why have over 1500 American service men lost their lives?
Why have at least 10,000 been maimed ,and untold numbers been
psychologicaly damaged???
THERE WERE NO WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!
THE BUSH TEAM MADE THAT UP!!!!
Yes , you are right ,Jim.
You are "spot on".
There is a "cover-up".
It involves the very premise for waging war in Iraq.
It also involves the premise for waging war against Afghanistan.
Look ,Jim, there is ample evidence which suggests that the Bush
administration orchestrated the September 11th attacks.
Certainly and without any doubt they know who knew the 9-11 attacks were
about to occur.
Why don't you ask Bush and Cheney ;"who purchased the "put options" on
American Airlines and United Airlines and Morgan Stanley /Dean
in the days just previous to the attacks"?
Those "put options" can't be purchased anonymously.
I'm bettin' Osama didn't purchase them from his cave.
Someone bought those "put "options, Jim.
The government knows who.., but they aren't lettin' us in on that
secret.
Inquiring Minds Want to Know.
Dumb ass, blind, followers just waive the flag and walk in lockstep.
Ask me about the "Anthrax" scare.
"Treetop" a.k.a. LORD OF THE SKY
LORD OF THE SKY
"LORD OF THE SKY" <Suck my sphyncter,com> wrote in message
news:4040d$427effc1$97d5f25a$28...@ALLTEL.NET...
Note to the Bush Administration:
for $500,000 (Gold) in advance , I might silence myself .
OK ,definately NOT!!!!
But how about for 1 million I don't explain the anthrax scare to the
masses?
Deal, Dick??
Fuck you ,Cheney!
Like I'd deal with anyone I knew to be a criminal!
Hey Rec.
They did 9-11 you know.
the unknown flailer
> ...jlk
No difference, Calvary or Infantry it was called foraging and used by
both sides to feed mounts and men....FYI Artillary was drawn by horses
back then. See you could read history until yer lips turned blue and
you would still have no concept what it was like to be in the
field....either back then or now. So all you can do is misunderstand
and quibble to cover your lack of actual experiance...Sherman was in
hostile territory, marching to the sea. His lines of communication and
supply were nil to none, he had men and mounts to feed..And of course
being a smart tactician he thought
"hell take what you need and shit on the rest so it will be of no use
to the enemy" Mosby and his Confederate Raiders used to do the same
thing on a smaller scale when he got behind Union lines. The only
object of war it seems to me is to win---And whatever it takes worked
for me in the field.
War is hell, you have to lock mercy in a closet to be truely effective.
Public opinion rarelly supports that attitude but my philosophy in 1969
was "The Hell with the public, they ain't out here on the line with me,
I'll do what it takes to cut my loss's....and it worked for me, the
Hell with making Master Chief...I had already decided to hang it up
when I rotated stateside in 1970....My EOS fell just right...The other
lifers had to be careful, many had been selected to become Officers. I
told the Commander...."THE HELL WITH THAT, I already been a SA and on
mess cooking 6 months while a boot sailor....NO WAY I'M GOING TO START
OUT ON BOTTOM AGAIN AS A ENSIGN HOOYAH!" He just laughed and said "do
what you have to do. I don't want you reporting to me as a Ensign, it
might ruin my career
or even set the Navy back 10 years!" 0~;->
Jerry K.
<kam...@eastex.net> wrote:
So were the wagons - tell me something I didn't know next time.
>See you could read history until yer lips turned blue and
>you would still have no concept what it was like to be in the
>field....
Heh - it wasn't me pegging the General commanding both wings as field
general.
>either back then or now. So all you can do is misunderstand
>and quibble to cover your lack of actual experiance...Sherman was in
>hostile territory, marching to the sea. His lines of communication and
>supply were nil to none,
By design, btw but while I'll admit I wasn't there during his march to
Savannah - neither were you.
>he had men and mounts to feed..And of course
>being a smart tactician he thought
>"hell take what you need and shit on the rest so it will be of no use
>to the enemy"
The thinking was to a great deal, very strategic. Both politically
and psychologically. Do your homework. But then he did give orders
that infrastructure was not to be destroyed where there was no
resistance - largely ignored by the troops - and for this he is, as he
was the commanding general, remembered as a destroyer.
>Mosby and his Confederate Raiders used to do the same
>thing on a smaller scale when he got behind Union lines. The only
>object of war it seems to me is to win---And whatever it takes worked
>for me in the field.
Right but the argument wasn't about what it takes to win but only
about how Sherman is remembered along the 250 miles or so from Atlanta
to the sea.
>War is hell, you have to lock mercy in a closet to be truely effective.
Which is interesting in that while Sherman did say that, his orders to
his commanders in the field were, certainly as compared with how these
orders were followed, quite merciful.
>Public opinion rarelly supports that attitude but my philosophy in 1969
>was "The Hell with the public, they ain't out here on the line with me,
>I'll do what it takes to cut my loss's....and it worked for me,
Oh, if you look at the periodicals and letters out of the north at the
time - they were all for it - as were the northern troopers, for that
matter.
>the
>Hell with making Master Chief...I had already decided to hang it up
>when I rotated stateside in 1970....My EOS fell just right...The other
>lifers had to be careful, many had been selected to become Officers. I
>told the Commander...."THE HELL WITH THAT, I already been a SA and on
>mess cooking 6 months while a boot sailor....NO WAY I'M GOING TO START
>OUT ON BOTTOM AGAIN AS A ENSIGN HOOYAH!" He just laughed and said "do
>what you have to do. I don't want you reporting to me as a Ensign, it
>might ruin my career
>or even set the Navy back 10 years!"
Probably came down from Rickover's desk - all for the greater good -
there was a war on, ya know.
...bsrp
...jlk
peanut4040
peanut4040 wrote:
> smile,,, toes and fingers good,,, dick going a little south,
> hehehehe,,, think i can get some disability?
uhmmm,,, maybe should have mentioned female organs going south?
yes,, getttin old sucks, hehehehehe-- you can't do near as much drugs
as you used to, heheheheh
the unknown flailer
> ...jlk
That could cover anything because like most self centered little twits
you don't know a hell of a lot....You advoided military service so you
have no field experiance...your a yellow cickenshit coward or else ya
don't think enough of your country to serve....I did over a decade of
military service and have more field experiance than sea time....with
Foreign troops true
but its still field experiance. The Navy made its river combat advisors
go to school till our brains ran out our ears, forced us to study Lenn,
Marx and Mao.....study Chicom and Russian tactics both sea and land
then sicked us on them thru third partys...I saw the writing on the
wall and studyed Clatzwit, Tzu and the great Civil war Generals tactics
on both sides on my own....Believe it or not, that old out dated shit
was usefull in the field
because it taught me mainly how to think and think outside the box then
blend all kind of sneaky shit into my tactical thinking. I had no
choice but to die was my thought at the time. So let the M'fers pay
dearly, Still get a woodyb when Putan bows up over there in Russia,
they were the cause of all the world problems and the main reason for
the draft...still think we artta bomb the back stabbig bastards back to
the stone age. Ya just cain't trust a Russian, the fukkers are probably
supplying the Terrorists. Russians or any worthless bastard draging
down my country gets caught in Polk County after dark, their gonna
swing from a limb grrrrr
Jerry K.
<kam...@eastex.net> wrote:
Shit, Jinnie - I knew Sherman wasn't a field general during his march
to Savannah - and I wasn't even there.
>You advoided military service so you
>have no field experiance...
Yeah, well you didn't fight in the War Between the States either so
blow the whole military service angle out your ass - unless I suppose
your truncated career in the military gives you some insight that
denies the suggestion that Sherman is remembered from Atlanta to
Savannah as a destroyer?
>your a yellow cickenshit coward or else ya
>don't think enough of your country to serve....
So you'd like to believe but this still does not come even close to
denying the idea that Sherman was not a field general during the march
to Savannah, but Commander of the Army of the West - and remembered as
a destroyer for it.
>I did over a decade of
>military service and have more field experiance than sea time....with
>Foreign troops true
>but its still field experiance.
And this field experience gives you some insight which makes you think
that Sherman was a field General on the way to Savannah and not
remembered as a destroyer? No wonder you got your ass kicked out.
>The Navy made its river combat advisors
>go to school till our brains ran out our ears, forced us to study Lenn,
>Marx and Mao.....study Chicom and Russian tactics both sea and land
>then sicked us on them thru third partys...I saw the writing on the
>wall and studyed Clatzwit, Tzu and the great Civil war Generals tactics
>on both sides on my own....Believe it or not, that old out dated shit
>was usefull in the field
Hmmm - and do you suppose that other people might also have read that
catalogue as well? That shit has certainly been usefull in hammering
your ass into the corner but then, most of the time I just rely on
that one Nancy Drew book I read back in the late 60's to handle most
of your blundering attempts. That and Charlotte's Web. I thought
about using some of the stuff from that Curious George book but it
would make you blub and I may be amoral but I'm not mean.
>because it taught me mainly how to think and think outside the box
Wooo - nice platitude. What's next? "I'm okay and you're okay." or
some such?
>then
>blend all kind of sneaky shit into my tactical thinking. I had no
>choice but to die was my thought at the time. So let the M'fers pay
>dearly, Still get a woodyb when Putan bows up over there in Russia,
>they were the cause of all the world problems and the main reason for
>the draft...
heheh - yep - FDR was certainly think of the commies as the A-Number
One reason for the draft - back in 1940. I've said it before and I'll
say it again - do your homework, jackass.
>still think we artta bomb the back stabbig bastards back to
>the stone age.
Nothing like a little nuclear fallout to keep inflation down, eh?
>Ya just cain't trust a Russian, the fukkers are probably
>supplying the Terrorists. Russians or any worthless bastard draging
>down my country gets caught in Polk County after dark, their gonna
>swing from a limb
Ah, how soon we forget...
"Yeah? Well I like the Russians..."
...stepped in it again.
...bsrp
...jlk
the unknown flailer
> >> >> Commander, he was remembered for it, rightly or wrongly, as a
> >> >> destroyer - though I did say at the outset that Sherman was
> >> >protecting
> >> >> and serving his country in the process - pay attention.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> ...bsrp
> >> >> ...jlk
He was trying to win a war...Generals back then didn't often agree,
lines of communication were slower so you had more fudge area in the
disobeying general orders cataglory, that must have been
wonderfull.....Theres nothing more irritating than some fat cigar
chomping asshole in another A.O. or setting so far back he's in a
armchair at HQ trying to micromanage on the radio...I'd be slapping the
mike against my flack jacket going "YOUR BREAKING UP, SAY AGAIN!" or
just key the mike and hang it next to the heaviest weapon firing. ;)
Course I was a asshole back then also, just younger, my main saving
grace was ~That I had ceased to give a shit~ I do believe. anyway back
to the civil war
> >> >No difference, Calvary or Infantry it was called foraging and
used
> >by
> >> >both sides to feed mounts and men....FYI Artillary was drawn by
> >horses
> >> >back then.
> >>
> >> So were the wagons - tell me something I didn't know next time.
> >>
> >> ...bsrp
> >> ...jlk
> >
> >That could cover anything because like most self centered little
twits
> >you don't know a hell of a lot....
>
> Shit, Jinnie - I knew Sherman wasn't a field general during his march
> to Savannah - and I wasn't even there.
Don't Quibble, he was a General and in the field. He pre planed the
operation and rode along...No doubt, It was his intent to demoralize
the local populance on his push for Savanna. His men and horses needed
supplys so why not just loosen the grip on his foragers...just a matter
of hinting to your Officers to back off and let the men have their way.
It was a bitter war and when you went back then.....it was for the
duration or death, whichever came first....I immagine those Union
soldiers had been living like animals for quite a while by then...Shit,
no need to order them to do it, just stand back and do nothing as the
reports come in. I often lost control of my Tooy's when their dander
was up. Actually had to rifle butt them or physically pull them off a
defeated enemy a few times. They would just kind of space out
sometimes. Getting them to cease fire could be a bitch also. Ya know
when your adversary is dead, he's dead no use wasting ammo or wearing
yourself out bayoneting him. You just have to learn to let go and move
on before the enemy troops moving towards the sound of your weapons get
there when your on foot. Hit and run, hit and run- back to the boat was
my policy or "I AIN'T NEVER LETTING YOU CRAZY LITTLE M'FERS OFF THE
BOAT AGAIN! if you don't straighten up and fly right!"
>
> >You advoided military service so you
> >have no field experiance...
>
> Yeah, well you didn't fight in the War Between the States either so
> blow the whole military service angle out your ass - unless I suppose
> your truncated career in the military gives you some insight that
> denies the suggestion that Sherman is remembered from Atlanta to
> Savannah as a destroyer?
No but being experienced, I have more insite on what he might have been
thinking and doing
>
> >your a yellow cickenshit coward or else ya
> >don't think enough of your country to serve....
>
> So you'd like to believe but this still does not come even close to
> denying the idea that Sherman was not a field general during the
march
> to Savannah, but Commander of the Army of the West - and remembered
as
> a destroyer for it.
>
> ...bsrp
> ...jlk
I'll just stand on my last statement ya young yellowbelly but thanks
for the input <grin>
the unknown flailer
just hated their ideology.
Hell I didn't even hate the VC or NVA.....they were just doing their
job like me, thats all it was "a job" In fact I admired the little
bastards, they were tough. As for the russians
you just cain't trust them. Look at Putan, he was a KGB Officer, no way
I think he will watch our backs. My main complaint against the russians
now is "everything is for sale"
Its their culture man.....money talks integrity walks...The USPA is
pretty close to that philosophy and the rest of America is closing the
gap. Another problem id I trained for the final conflict to many years
and it never came about-might be some flusteration involved there. I
run France down to but the individual Frenchman is often quite
noble....Its their Government that gives them a bad rep...I can
understand why Muslins hate us as individuals, they have us mixed up
with Government policy and we are cuz Citizens voted the dumb bastards
who picked the people making Foreign policy mistakes in to office
AND our foreign policy mistakes have talen place over time, I'm not
blaming one Administration or the other. Americans tend to be arrogant,
I think you young USPA
people are a classic example of that...have a nice day city boy.. 0~;-)
Jerry K.
<kam...@eastex.net> wrote:
Yep but that makes him no less a destroyer in the eyes of the people
from Atlanta to Savanah and didn't I say at the outset that he was
also serving his country? Just like England. Pay attention.
>Generals back then didn't often agree,
>lines of communication were slower so you had more fudge area in the
>disobeying general orders cataglory, that must have been
>wonderfull.....Theres nothing more irritating than some fat cigar
>chomping asshole in another A.O. or setting so far back he's in a
>armchair at HQ trying to micromanage on the radio...I'd be slapping the
>mike against my flack jacket going "YOUR BREAKING UP, SAY AGAIN!" or
>just key the mike and hang it next to the heaviest weapon firing. ;)
>Course I was a asshole back then also, just younger, my main saving
>grace was ~That I had ceased to give a shit~ I do believe. anyway back
>to the civil war
Civil War? Gee, in times past you'd be railing it was to be called
something else. What happened to that adopted pretensie, Jinnie?
>
>> >> >No difference, Calvary or Infantry it was called foraging and
>used
>> >by
>> >> >both sides to feed mounts and men....FYI Artillary was drawn by
>> >horses
>> >> >back then.
>> >>
>> >> So were the wagons - tell me something I didn't know next time.
>> >>
>> >> ...bsrp
>> >> ...jlk
>> >
>> >That could cover anything because like most self centered little
>twits
>> >you don't know a hell of a lot....
Hell, Jinnie - who here pegged Sherman on his march to Savannah as a
"field general?"
>>
>> Shit, Jinnie - I knew Sherman wasn't a field general during his march
>> to Savannah - and I wasn't even there.
>
>Don't Quibble, he was a General and in the field.
Who's quibbling now? Hell, Burnside and Custer weres generals in the
field, too but that don't make 'em Sherman.
>He pre planed the
>operation and rode along...No doubt, It was his intent to demoralize
>the local populance on his push for Savanna. His men and horses needed
>supplys so why not just loosen the grip on his foragers...
Why not is a good question in that he had orders in place which gave
limits - limits which were mostly ignored and for this, as the
commanding gneral, he was remembered along that two to three hundred
miles as a destroyer.
>just a matter
>of hinting to your Officers to back off and let the men have their way.
Which you only suppose, nevermind that his orders, which are not
suppostional but a matter of record, still exist and instruct to the
contrary.
>It was a bitter war and when you went back then.....it was for the
>duration or death, whichever came first....
No, terms of service certainly existed at the time.
>I immagine those Union
>soldiers had been living like animals for quite a while by then...Shit,
>no need to order them to do it, just stand back and do nothing as the
>reports come in.
And even if this suppostion actually occurred, this does nothing to
suggest that Sherman is not remembered as a destroyer from Atlanta to
Savannah.
>I often lost control of my Tooy's when their dander
>was up. Actually had to rifle butt them or physically pull them off a
>defeated enemy a few times. They would just kind of space out
>sometimes. Getting them to cease fire could be a bitch also. Ya know
>when your adversary is dead, he's dead no use wasting ammo or wearing
>yourself out bayoneting him. You just have to learn to let go and move
>on before the enemy troops moving towards the sound of your weapons get
>there when your on foot. Hit and run, hit and run- back to the boat was
>my policy or "I AIN'T NEVER LETTING YOU CRAZY LITTLE M'FERS OFF THE
>BOAT AGAIN! if you don't straighten up and fly right!"
I think you were too close to the siuation to know the truth.
>>
>> >You advoided military service so you
>> >have no field experiance...
>>
>> Yeah, well you didn't fight in the War Between the States either so
>> blow the whole military service angle out your ass - unless I suppose
>> your truncated career in the military gives you some insight that
>> denies the suggestion that Sherman is remembered from Atlanta to
>> Savannah as a destroyer?
>
>No but being experienced, I have more insite on what he might have been
>thinking and doing
Nevermind the idea that what he was thinking and doing at the time
still resulted in Sherman being remembered as a destroyer from Atlanta
to the sea.
>>
>> >your a yellow cickenshit coward or else ya
>> >don't think enough of your country to serve....
>>
>> So you'd like to believe but this still does not come even close to
>> denying the idea that Sherman was not a field general during the
>march
>> to Savannah, but Commander of the Army of the West - and remembered
>as
>> a destroyer for it.
>>
>> ...bsrp
>> ...jlk
>
>I'll just stand on my last statement ya young yellowbelly but thanks
>for the input
Anytime - your last statement didn't accomplish much - certainly
didn't makes for anything close to a relevant argument but no problem
- such is the nature of things as you step in it.
...bsrp
...jlk
Jerry K.
<kam...@eastex.net> wrote:
>That boat won't float Jerry, I don't hate the Russians individually,
>just hated their ideology.
Which ideology?
>Hell I didn't even hate the VC or NVA.....they were just doing their
>job like me, thats all it was "a job" In fact I admired the little
>bastards, they were tough.
Nevermind their ideology.
>As for the russians
>you just cain't trust them.
Every one?
>Look at Putan, he was a KGB Officer, no way
Hell, Bush the elder was CIA and Nixon and Carter were both Navy, for
that matter.
>I think he will watch our backs. My main complaint against the russians
>now is "everything is for sale"
This ideology is the one that chaps your ass?
>Its their culture man.....money talks integrity walks...The USPA is
>pretty close to that philosophy and the rest of America is closing the
>gap.
Got news for ya - everything has been either for sale or for the
taking in America since before it's founding. Your efforts were for
sale and you got paid - got some introspective self-loathing going
on?
>Another problem id I trained for the final conflict to many years
>and it never came about-might be some flusteration involved there.
Hell - you were paid for your efforts - it was out of your control
anyway. I mean - you coulda done what it takes to make the coming of
the final conflict more in your control but that was up to you.
>I
>run France down to but the individual Frenchman is often quite
>noble....Its their Government that gives them a bad rep...
What you got against their ideology?
>I can
>understand why Muslins hate us as individuals,
Some might but for the rest, I think it's just a matter of war and
fighting the enemy.
>they have us mixed up
>with Government policy and we are cuz Citizens voted the dumb bastards
>who picked the people making Foreign policy mistakes in to office
>AND our foreign policy mistakes have talen place over time,
What happened to no one is innocent?
>I'm not
>blaming one Administration or the other. Americans tend to be arrogant,
>I think you young USPA
>people are a classic example of that...have a nice day city boy..
Right - how dare people skydive and/or prosecute wars on foreign soil
without your participation? Arrogance, is all.
...bsrp
...jlk
the unknown flailer
Jerry K. wrote:
> On 10 May 2005 04:22:52 -0700, "the unknown flailer"
> <kam...@eastex.net> wrote:
>
> >That boat won't float Jerry, I don't hate the Russians individually,
> >just hated their ideology.
>
> Which ideology?
>
> >Hell I didn't even hate the VC or NVA.....they were just doing their
> >job like me, thats all it was "a job" In fact I admired the little
> >bastards, they were tough.
>
> Nevermind their ideology.
They payed lip service to communism to get the weapons...I suppose
unkle Ho and the other higher ups might have believed it and been party
members
because they were educated in France but you have to take into
consideration they hated China, had fought them centurys earlier had
been occupied for a while and a French colony of slave labor before WW2
then occupied by the nips durning WW2. The French wanted their colony
back after the war, the Vietmanese wanted their country to be free of
foreign domination, so I see it more as a Nationalist and Civil War.
Two things our own countrys been through....so their true ideology was
Vietnams autonomy. I could dig it-...Unfortunatly Communism was the
booger man in that part of the Century and some over educated state
department asshole developed the domino theroy, the French got their
ass kicked trying to re occupy and hold so away we go. I have nothing
against them, my country sent me.....like I said, it was just a job...I
remember a sign over the entrance to one of our training ranges...It
said "Our business is killing and business is good!" Just a job man,
nothing personal as far as I was concerned...I've always been rather
pragmatic ;)P
>
> >As for the russians
> >you just cain't trust them.
>
> Every one?
>
> >Look at Putan, he was a KGB Officer, no way
>
> Hell, Bush the elder was CIA and Nixon and Carter were both Navy, for
> that matter.
Nothing wrong with that, those two were from different political partys
The Russians only had one party and it was developed by a despot named
Joseph Stalin. Putan was a member of that party, had to be a good
member to raise to a Major in the KGB....I wouldn't trust the
peckerwood.
> >I think he will watch our backs. My main complaint against the
russians
> >now is "everything is for sale"
>
> This ideology is the one that chaps your ass?
Yah Communism is supposedly gone over there...I think the party boss's
are still runing a lot of shit....Slav's have lived under one Feudal
system or another since the middle age's...they have a peasant
mentality, having done without through last Century they learned to
survive by graft alone.
Moneys and a better lifestyle the most important thing in their life,
kinda like you big city people...I will say this for the old USSR
though,
they kept the Mafia in control.....now its everybody for theirself a
real fuck your buddy operation, everythings for sale and I'm setting
out here in the woods thinking what about that nuclear stockpile they
had? Then I read ITR's that the large military and scientific community
they had lost their perks and remain unpaid since the collapse of the
USSR. I just don't appreciate the bastards...the few times I met
Rooskie NCO's I liked them
because they were mostly crazy peasants like me, we knocked back
shooters of Vodka and exchanged souvenirs but I had the safety off on
my piece...
Just didn't trust the bastards, had trained to fight them to many
years...
Yeah I might just be frustrated...ya know how ya get the blue balls
when a chick works you up then don't give you any? Thats me and the
Russians hahaha hoo wee before you start, know this; ~they were the
chicks~ 0-;)P
> >Its their culture man.....money talks integrity walks...The USPA is
> >pretty close to that philosophy and the rest of America is closing
the
> >gap.
>
> Got news for ya - everything has been either for sale or for the
> taking in America since before it's founding. Your efforts were for
> sale and you got paid - got some introspective self-loathing going
> on?
>
> >Another problem id I trained for the final conflict to many years
> >and it never came about-might be some flusteration involved there.
>
> Hell - you were paid for your efforts - it was out of your control
> anyway. I mean - you coulda done what it takes to make the coming of
> the final conflict more in your control but that was up to you.
>
> >I
> >run France down to but the individual Frenchman is often quite
> >noble....Its their Government that gives them a bad rep...
>
> What you got against their ideology?
Their big city people are total assholes just like yawl, no saving
graces whatsoever...the small town and rual people are mostly allright,
very hospitable...their government is really fucked up, worse than
ours...a real den of iggnorant bureaucrats.
>
> >I can
> >understand why Muslins hate us as individuals,
>
> Some might but for the rest, I think it's just a matter of war and
> fighting the enemy.
Most of the fighters are illiterate, they follow religious leaders with
hidden agenda's rather than Alla or what the Koran teachs...in fact,
most of the shit they pull is diametrically opposed to the Korans
teaching. When they die as martyrs, I'm willing to give good odds they
ain't going to end up in Paradise but on the other hand I believed in
the Constitution
and swore a oath to defend it, then wacked people on that principle
alone
so we might not be that different, just a job man, don't mean nothing
heh heh heh
>
> >they have us mixed up
> >with Government policy and we are cuz Citizens voted the dumb
bastards
> >who picked the people making Foreign policy mistakes in to office
> >AND our foreign policy mistakes have taken place over time,
>
> What happened to no one is innocent?
No one is, read those 4 lines again kid
>
>
> >I'm not
> >blaming one Administration or the other. Americans tend to be
arrogant,
> >I think you young USPA
> >people are a classic example of that...have a nice day city boy..
>
> Right - how dare people skydive and/or prosecute wars on foreign soil
> without your participation? Arrogance, is all.
> ...bsrp
> ...jlk
Notttttt, I'm out of both for sure - no longer corrupted by the greed,
politics and poor leadership of city people, maybe I will see Paradice
yet HONK HONK drive on dilbert 0~;)P