what's crackin

[The SOB]

well, i havn't been on here in ages, so i felt like seeing what's going on around here. i graduated basic training 2 months ago, graduated from MCT wendsday, and am now starting my MOS schooling - class doesn't pick up for another month which sucks ass. anywho, just seeing who all is here that remembers me :). i'll be using the computer a lot more, so i might be here a little bit.

[Sacred Silence]

Hey man, good to see you again. You should drop by more often :D.

[The SOB]

i should, shoudln't i?

[Kyir]

No, it's cool if you don't.

[The SOB]

i would have to agree with you kyir, i mean, almost everyone here is garbage ;) by Marine standards

[Kyir]

Because Marine standards apply on the Internet -_-

Kill some commies for me.

[Cavour]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zb1mUA0DifQ

[Tama Drummer]

almost everyone here is garbage ;) by Marine standards

And what are these "Marine standards," out of curiosity?

[*Sanosuke*]

Oorah.

SEMPER FI SON!

[actgfin1234]

Marines are the guys who didn't score high enough on the ASVAB for the navy.

[ponefish]

Marines = Jacked

[uniquinous]

and then people wonder why I put things in goodbye threads like "well I'll look forward to the thread you decide to make every single time you're given leave enough to use the internet" :dry:

[CPC]

Welcome back Josh, what's up?

[Medemia]

Well, first and foremost, welcome back and thank you for fighting for our country. May God keep you safe wherever you go.

What is your MOS?

My son recently was diagnosed with something called "Oppositional Defiance Disorder" to go along with his autism. Sometimes I wonder if some people on here are ODD and like to fight just to fight...

[The SOB]

my MOS is 0811 Field Artillery Cannoneer

stationed in Lawton, Oklahoma - Fort Sill....

[~ElVeN~BlOoD~]

welcome back SOB
and i appreciate all you're doing for our country.

[BrownGuy]

well, i havn't been on here in ages, so i felt like seeing what's going on around here. i graduated basic training 2 months ago, graduated from MCT wendsday, and am now starting my MOS schooling - class doesn't pick up for another month which sucks ass. anywho, just seeing who all is here that remembers me :). i'll be using the computer a lot more, so i might be here a little bit.

It's SOB! :)

Long time no talkk. Nice to see your still around..hows the Marines going?


~Brown

[Josh Glenwell]

I love you.....

[Medemia]

my MOS is 0811 Field Artillery Cannoneer

stationed in Lawton, Oklahoma - Fort Sill....

Very cool. I was an RP with the Navy (which I hear no longer exists) so we got to work with the Marines all the time (RP was a Chaplain's assistant.) The Navy handles the Marines' Chaplain duties.

Good luck in school. It's hard but in the end, going through a school is better than being a grunt :D

[Jeffery]

Hahahaha

He's Neer.

[Coffin Fedder]

Oorah.

SEMPER FI SON!

It's kind of hard at times to be always faithful if

A. You get shot in the ass and you have a very well strong possibility of bleeding to death.

B. You just shot a gun, and about 150 towel heads have an idea of where you are and it's just you and your spotter.

[Lex]

my MOS is 0811 Field Artillery Cannoneer

stationed in Lawton, Oklahoma - Fort Sill....

Tinker > Ft. Sill

I've only been down to the Lawton area like once, but from what i remember there really isn't anything but fort sill.
Edit: and strip clubs

Anyway enjoy your stay in Oklahoma

[Jeffery]

Tinker > Ft. Sill

I've only been down to the Lawton area like once, but from what i remember there really isn't anything but fort sill.
Edit: and strip clubs

Anyway enjoy your stay in Oklahoma

So your saying there would be minimal civilian casualties if a certain someone goes nuts and bombs the place......

[uniquinous]

welcome back SOB
and i appreciate all you're doing for our country.
and what would that be, exactly?

[cs_zero]

and what would that be, exactly?

More than you, I'm sure.

[Medemia]

and what would that be, exactly?
This would be what I am talking about with ODD.

Any kid who basically volunteers his life (because they don't pay enough for the stuff these kids go through) deserves all the props they can get, especially in a time of war. I don't care what you feel about the war, the fact that these kids are following orders, going over to a zone where they can die, as some of their fellow soldiers and marines have, is heroic. As Colonel Jessep said in "A Few Good Men":
Better just to thank me.
Or pick up a gun and stand a post.

That, and...
YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH:bigsmile:

[uniquinous]

More than you, I'm sure.i'm saving lives here in America. wanna try to actually answer the question now?

Any kid who basically volunteers his life (because they don't pay enough for the stuff these kids go through) deserves all the props they can get, especially in a time of war. I don't care what you feel about the war, the fact that these kids are following orders, going over to a zone where they can die, as some of their fellow soldiers and marines have, is heroic. As Colonel Jessep said in "A Few Good Men":I think this is where the biggest misinterpretation of my views is (most likely because I don't present them clearly). When I asked that question, you should note that no one can actually answer it definitively. There's a lot of vague references, but no one says what the ultimate goal is. It speaks much more to the orders, than the person. You dismiss my feelings for the war, but they are essentially the reason I made that comment.

I recently attended a lecture of a soldier who came back from Iraq, speaking on war time medicine. Now this guy had seen quite a bit, and one of the take home messages he presented was that not every soldier is a warrior, and not every soldier is a hero. There's nothing heroic about picking up a gun and using it. Anyone can do that. There's more to it than that.

[Shiznit]

and then people wonder why I put things in goodbye threads like "well I'll look forward to the thread you decide to make every single time you're given leave enough to use the internet" :dry:

and what would that be, exactly?

God Uni... You're a party pooper.

Go take a pill, and only come back when you're not so mean. ;)

[uniquinous]

yes, i know - big bad party pooper. but i have yet to figure out why people say "take a pill"...

[meat.eater]

i'm saving lives here in America. wanna try to actually answer the question now?

I think this is where the biggest misinterpretation of my views is (most likely because I don't present them clearly). When I asked that question, you should note that no one can actually answer it definitively. There's a lot of vague references, but no one says what the ultimate goal is. It speaks much more to the orders, than the person. You dismiss my feelings for the war, but they are essentially the reason I made that comment.

I recently attended a lecture of a soldier who came back from Iraq, speaking on war time medicine. Now this guy had seen quite a bit, and one of the take home messages he presented was that not every soldier is a warrior, and not every soldier is a hero. There's nothing heroic about picking up a gun and using it. Anyone can do that. There's more to it than that.

Apply that logic to the Revolutionary War and imagine what would happen.

I dont care what the hell he's fighting for or if I agree with it. Key aspect: he's fighting. Not you. Don't be like that.

[Medemia]

Resputin is a liquid, not a pill. My son calls it "Gross" and so we ask him if he is ready for his "gross." He's gotten used to it although we are still iffy on it.

The hero is not about shooting the gun. The hero is one who stands up for others who cannot, or will not, do so themselves. Each member of the military is part of that. I was a secretary. I only shot a gun once in boot camp. But I consider myself a veteran who fought in a time of war. The support is necessary to run any organization. Likewise, the cannon gunners, the snipers, the medics, the chaplains, the bilge cleaners, fighter pilots and pay clerks are all part of the organization and are all important. They may not be what are considered the warriors but they are a part that deserves respect.

[Jeffery]

So what your saying is that SOMEONE has to fly those desks.....

[Angelic-Hotfox]

have you ever met the bird? lol maybe by random coincidence the two marines on TAO have met somewhere sometime.

[BaxVarlet]

towel heads

Keep your ignorance for real life, the internet has enough of it already.

[actgfin1234]

Resputin is a liquid, not a pill. My son calls it "Gross" and so we ask him if he is ready for his "gross." He's gotten used to it although we are still iffy on it.

The hero is not about shooting the gun. The hero is one who stands up for others who cannot, or will not, do so themselves. Each member of the military is part of that. I was a secretary. I only shot a gun once in boot camp. But I consider myself a veteran who fought in a time of war. The support is necessary to run any organization. Likewise, the cannon gunners, the snipers, the medics, the chaplains, the bilge cleaners, fighter pilots and pay clerks are all part of the organization and are all important. They may not be what are considered the warriors but they are a part that deserves respect.

The body cannot live without the head. Some would say i'm not in the military because I sit behind a computer all day. Guess who gets all the intelligence to the fleet? Guess who tells the ships where and when to go?

You are absolutely correct Med. And as much as I pick on the marines and other branches, we're all fighting the same fight.

Uniq, you're being completely ignorant with this opinion.

[BaxVarlet]

The body cannot live without the head.

http://eliedh.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/mike_headless-chicken.gif

[Tama Drummer]

The company I work for makes batteries for military vehicles, and my taxes support them.
So can I consider myself a veteran of war too?

[actgfin1234]

Yes

[Kyir]

My income's taxed and some it prolly pays for war.

Am I veteran yet?

[_Thunder_]

I pay taxes that go to war and stuff too... Am I a veteran yet? I need to know so I can get discounts and free gum. If you think thats the real reason I want to be a vet gtfo ;]

[shurtugal]

He's back :D

[uniquinous]

Apply that logic to the Revolutionary War and imagine what would happen. Great exercise. Someone would say "I appreciate what you (rev war soldier) is doing for this country", someone else would ask "and what is that?" and the reply would be "to remove tyranny and taxation without representation, and to provide an equal pursuit of happiness". In fact, I would point you another answer to that question:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and HappinessIt's actually quite easy to understand why soldiers fought that war. Yet again I will ask in this thread (since I have yet to hear an answer, despite people disagreeing with me): for what purpose are soldiers currently fighting?

I dont care what the hell he's fighting for or if I agree with it. Key aspect: he's fighting. Not you. Don't be like that.Oh I see. Because he's fighting he's a hero. Are these guys also hereos? :huh:
http://www.potawatomi.org/Communities/Common/Images/HtmlTextBoxUserImages/ent-FreestyleCageFight.jpg
http://grza.net/GIS/Mega%20Man%20Cosplay%20Group.jpg
http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1890000/images/_1890792_kids_fighting300.jpg
http://tacticsarena.com/units/scout_anim.gif http://tacticsarena.com/units/frostgolem_anim.gif
cuz that last one doesn't even have a face, and i'm pretty sure that's one of the many prerequisites to being a hero...

point being: fighting does not make anyone a hero. fighting makes you a fighter, or a soldier. all are not synonymous.

But I consider myself a veteran who fought in a time of war.and by "fight" you mean.... ? :huh:

The body cannot live without the head. Some would say i'm not in the military because I sit behind a computer all day. Guess who gets all the intelligence to the fleet? Guess who tells the ships where and when to go? see you worded it much better here. you're definitely in the military, and it's a group effort. you're just not... *fighting*, per se. You're ensuring others can do so with the best resources available.

Uniq, you're being completely ignorant with this opinion.howso? Why has no one, not a single person, been able to answer the above posed question? If you want to call me ignorant, please state why.

[Medemia]

The company I work for makes batteries for military vehicles, and my taxes support them.
So can I consider myself a veteran of war too?

My income's taxed and some it prolly pays for war.

Am I veteran yet?

I pay taxes that go to war and stuff too... Am I a veteran yet? I need to know so I can get discounts and free gum. If you think thats the real reason I want to be a vet gtfo ;]

Did you go to boot camp? Did you go through officer training? Did you sign on the bottom line and become property of the US government for an allotted time frame? Did you wear a uniform that stood for something bigger than your own life, be part of an organization headed by the commander-in-chief?

We live in a world where respect is no longer shown for who respect has been earned. I don't care what you feel about his policies, but the office of the President of the United States deserves respect. Police officers deserves respect. Teachers deserve respect. And veterans and current members of the military deserve respect because they do something you aren't doing. I'm actually offended that you guys are asking such a stupid question.

[shurtugal]

Bush deserves respect?

[Lex]

Bush deserves respect?

Stfu Canadian, don't hate on America.

[Medemia]

Bush deserves respect?

Yes. If not because of who he is at least for the office he holds.

[Tama Drummer]

Did you go to boot camp? Did you go through officer training? Did you sign on the bottom line and become property of the US government for an allotted time frame? Did you wear a uniform that stood for something bigger than your own life, be part of an organization headed by the commander-in-chief?

We live in a world where respect is no longer shown for who respect has been earned. I don't care what you feel about his policies, but the office of the President of the United States deserves respect. Police officers deserves respect. Teachers deserve respect. And veterans and current members of the military deserve respect because they do something you aren't doing. I'm actually offended that you guys are asking such a stupid question.

And I don't deserve respect, as someone who provides batteries and money (through taxes) to the military? If a secretary for the military deserves respect, why can't someone who helps pay that secretary and powers their vehicles get that same respect?

We're all people. Just because some people chose to make their career as part of the U.S. defense doesn't mean I need to hold them to a higher level than myself. I'm doing as much good for the country as they are.

[actgfin1234]

see you worded it much better here. you're definitely in the military, and it's a group effort. you're just not... *fighting*, per se. You're ensuring others can do so with the best resources available.


Wow uniq. You actually answered one of my posts with class. Thank you. Seriously.

[Jeffery]

Yes. If not because of who he is at least for the office he holds.
Or the hundreds of thousands of people he has personally ordered thee killing of.

[shurtugal]

Or the fact he helped raised gas prices...

[uniquinous]

We live in a world where respect is no longer shown for who respect has been earned.And what earns respect? Let's see...

Did you go to boot camp?Nope - that doesn't earn respect.
Did you go through officer training?Nope - that doesn't earn respect.
Did you sign on the bottom line and become property of the US government for an allotted time frame?Nope - that doesn't earn respect.
Did you wear a uniform that stood for something bigger than your own lifewell yes, I have. So does the kid who works at McDonalds. So again... no, uniforms do not earn respect
be part of an organization headed by the commander-in-chief?Nope. Back when Bill had that puppy, they clearly hired someone to pick up after it. Now, by your standards, he automatically earned respect.

And veterans and current members of the military deserve respect because they do something you aren't doing.I'm doing something you aren't doing. So does the janitor at Taco Bell. Do you see how the things you point to can be very easily applied to other circumstances to show why the original claim does not work? That's not to say that teachers and veterans should be disrespected - it's saying that the reasons you are giving don't work.

I'm actually offended that you guys are asking such a stupid question.You can be offended all you want, but it seems you still can't answer the question. What are these soldiers doing for our nation?

[Sodamoeba]

Did you go to boot camp? Did you go through officer training? Did you sign on the bottom line and become property of the US government for an allotted time frame? Did you wear a uniform that stood for something bigger than your own life, be part of an organization headed by the commander-in-chief?

We live in a world where respect is no longer shown for who respect has been earned. I don't care what you feel about his policies, but the office of the President of the United States deserves respect. Police officers deserves respect. Teachers deserve respect. And veterans and current members of the military deserve respect because they do something you aren't doing. I'm actually offended that you guys are asking such a stupid question.

All those people get paid...How many would do it without pay? Not nearly as many.

[meat.eater]

Great exercise. Someone would say "I appreciate what you (rev war soldier) is doing for this country", someone else would ask "and what is that?" and the reply would be "to remove tyranny and taxation without representation, and to provide an equal pursuit of happiness". In fact, I would point you another answer to that question:
It's actually quite easy to understand why soldiers fought that war. Yet again I will ask in this thread (since I have yet to hear an answer, despite people disagreeing with me): for what purpose are soldiers currently fighting?

Ah, so the entire country has to agree with the war in order for it to be legitimate? Or perhaps we only need your permission?

Are you really shallow enough to only salute a man who only represents your cause (welcome to democracy, you dont get your way. Either contribute regardless or shush up)? Are you really trying to convince me that concepts like respect and dignity are only earned in your eyes through situational politics? Not by the work, the sweat, the time, the blood sacrificed by these men and women in your name (regardless of your own selfish opinions of what you deem "right")? Your opinions dont matter. These people are risking their lives for you. That, by the simple action of what it represents (selflessness instead of selfishness, in case you didn't know), the simple fact that these people are even willing to FIRE a gun on your behalf... is something pretty incredible if you ask me.

Get your snobby nosed, bullcrap politics out of it. These are people, not ideas. Start treating them like it.

[ArcPaladinZero]

All those people get paid...How many would do it without pay? Not nearly as many.

That's what a draft is for. Why do you think males have to register at 18? Selective Service... ahem... violating my 13th amendment.

[uniquinous]

Ah, so the entire country has to agree with the war in order for it to be legitimate? Or perhaps we only need your permission?:confused: whoa there cowboy. While I do like this fiery side of you, I think your patriotism has gone to your head. I've not made a single claim about people agreeing with me regarding the legitimacy of the war, nor that anyone needs my permission. My question has been simple, and has remained unanswered.

Are you really shallow enough to only salute a man who only represents your cause (welcome to democracy, you dont get your way. Either contribute regardless or shush up)? Are you really trying to convince me that concepts like respect and dignity are only earned in your eyes through situational politics?That's not what I'm trying to convince you of at all... actually...

These people are risking their lives for you.FALSE! They are risking their lives, sure, but not for me. Not for you.

the simple fact that these people are even willing to FIRE a gun on your behalf... is something pretty incredible if you ask me. shooting civilians on my behalf for no reason whatsoever? that is pretty incredible... incredibly barbaric. shall I thank them now or later?


You threw my question back at me in regards to the revolutionary war, and I gave you a definitive answer. I have asked you and everyone else in this thread countless times now to offer a response with regards to this war. I have been called names, I have been condescended to, I have seen outrage, blind patriotism, defensiveness, unrelated truth, ignorance, and foolishness. And throughout all of these things, I have yet to receive an answer. Is the question truly that difficult?

Let me know when you can provide me with one.

[meat.eater]

:confused: whoa there cowboy. While I do like this fiery side of you, I think your patriotism has gone to your head. I've not made a single claim about people agreeing with me regarding the legitimacy of the war, nor that anyone needs my permission. My question has been simple, and has remained unanswered.

That's not what I'm trying to convince you of at all... actually...

FALSE! They are risking their lives, sure, but not for me. Not for you.

shooting civilians on my behalf for no reason whatsoever? that is pretty incredible... incredibly barbaric. shall I thank them now or later?


You threw my question back at me in regards to the revolutionary war, and I gave you a definitive answer. I have asked you and everyone else in this thread countless times now to offer a response with regards to this war. I have been called names, I have been condescended to, I have seen outrage, blind patriotism, defensiveness, unrelated truth, ignorance, and foolishness. And throughout all of these things, I have yet to receive an answer. Is the question truly that difficult?

Let me know when you can provide me with one.

I understand you want a response in regards to this war; I am telling you that this is an entirely different discussion so stop making it about that.
Paying respects to soldiers (PEOPLE) and agreeing with a war (IDEAL) are separate. I'm more than willing to have the ideal-based debate about the war with you, but we'll probably align on many points. This discussion, however, is about people.

What I'm saying is: I'm sorry you are unable to make the distinction. I'm sorry that you're so fervent in your disapprovals of the war that you blow off anything involved in it as inferior--simply based on situational politics of our time, not based on the representation of the US military and the people involved in it. I'm sorry that you can't shake a man in uniform's hand simply because you feel poorly about the situation in Iraq. It actually makes me quite sad.

PS: Please don't respond to the snippets of the post that you choose to highlight or... interpret. Respond to my whole post. I had the courtesy to do so for you.

[Medemia]

The US has for decades stood by the policy that "The only thing necessary for evil to win is for good men to stand by and do nothing." It happened with Woodrow Wilson. It happened with FDR. It happened with Eisnenhower, increased with JFK, LBJ, Nixon and Reagan. We stood by for 8 years and only shot off missiles to divert from something else being shot off. The Bush doctrine has been in effect far longer than Bush has been alive. Why are we in Iraq and Afghanistan? Originally, it was to make sure we took the fight off of our land and onto the enemies. Now I think we are standing as the good guys in our eyes stopping evil from winning. And our military is the arm we are using to do what is right. So those in our military deserve a thank you for that. You may not agree with it but as meat said, the commander-in-chief doesn't need your permission. That's why we are a representative government instead of a direct democracy. Is that what you want for an answer?

As far as comparing our military men and women to the workers of McDonalds... nice. I will counter that those who wear the uniforms of McDonalds, Best Buy, Bank of America, and Chuck E. Cheese are not part of something bigger than themselves in the same way. They are part of a paycheck. Military personnel are grossly underpaid for the sacrifices they have to make. It is not an 8 - 5 job. It is a lifestyle. Each of those things that you say don't earn respect may not on their own, but they do as a whole. It is because they are willing to fight, to keep the peace, to follow orders that people have the right to be a disrespectful punk who likes to fight on these message boards. I thank God for the freedoms I have through the blood and sweat of those who have fought to make it so.

[Tubby]

Mhm...

NY - UK :p

[***Duo***]

Yes. If not because of who he is at least for the office he holds.

Then I suppose we should have given respect to the Führer as well?


-Duo

[uniquinous]

PS: Please don't respond to the snippets of the post that you choose to highlight or... interpret. Respond to my whole post. I had the courtesy to do so for you.a discourtesy, I assure you, is completely disregarding every point I've made to misinterpret them in your own 'response to the whole post'. :dry: How is it that your blind patriotism has prevented you from actually reading my words? I even told you that you had it wrong in the last post, and you disregarded that push in the right direction to continue with your incorrect assumption on my views.

I understand you want a response in regards to this war; I am telling you that this is an entirely different discussion so stop making it about that. Let's make it about that then. One answer. It's really not that difficult. You had no problem asking me that question about another war... yet now it's off limits? :confused: spare me the double standards, please.

Paying respects to soldiers (PEOPLE) and agreeing with a war (IDEAL) are separate. I'm more than willing to have the ideal-based debate about the war with you, but we'll probably align on many points. This discussion, however, is about people.There are indeed two separate yet linked ideas being discussed. It is actually you who hasn't been able to see the distinction in my points, but to reiterate, here they are:
1) we are not fighting a war for anything right now. It's hard to agree or disagree with 'nothing'. If you disagree, you need but answer the question: what are soldiers currently doing for this country in Iraq?
2) becoming a soldier does not immediately entail respect. respect is not earned by signing your life to the government. respect is not earned from killing people. respect is not earned because you made it through boot camp. respect CAN be earned in the armed services. a soldier CAN become a hero. they are not so by default. these are my views, and the views of several higher ranking soldiers who I heard lecture recently.

It comes as no surprise to me that the largest socioeconomic group that comprises the army basically between two uniforms, and decided not to go with McDonalds.

What I'm saying is: I'm sorry you are unable to make the distinction. I'm sorry that you're so fervent in your disapprovals of the war that you blow off anything involved in it as inferior--simply based on situational politics of our time, not based on the representation of the US military and the people involved in it. I'm sorry that you can't shake a man in uniform's hand simply because you feel poorly about the situation in Iraq. It actually makes me quite sad.Same thing, my turn:
What I'm saying is: I'm sorry you are unable to make the distinction. I'm sorry that you're so fervent in your blind patriotism that you blow off anything involved as different--simply based on what you believe is situational politics of our time, not based on the representation of my remarks. I'm sorry that you can't accurately interpret the words I type simply because you feel defensive about the situation in Iraq. It actually makes me quite sad.

The US has for decades stood by the policy that "The only thing necessary for evil to win is for good men to stand by and do nothing." and you will find few on this board who actively stand out against indifference past me. No one has made the claim that indifference is a good answer to anything.

Why are we in Iraq and Afghanistan? Originally, it was to make sure we took the fight off of our land and onto the enemies. Now I think we are standing as the good guys in our eyes stopping evil from winning.So right now we are "stopping evil from winning". That's the first answer I've gotten to my question, and I thank you for coming up with something, but.... it's a rather vague response, and I'd like you to tell me, in your own opinion, how you think we are "stopping evil from winning" today. What can they "win"? (this may seem obvious, I want to know your thoughts). How are we, the US, stopping them from "winning" that?
You may not agree with it but as meat said, the commander-in-chief doesn't need your permission. That's why we are a representative government instead of a direct democracy. congress didn't even declare war on this one...

As far as comparing our military men and women to the workers of McDonalds... nice. I will counter that those who wear the uniforms of McDonalds, Best Buy, Bank of America, and Chuck E. Cheese are not part of something bigger than themselves in the same way.They are part of a paycheck. Military personnel are grossly underpaid for the sacrifices they have to make. You think multibillion dollar international corporations aren't bigger than someone making minimum wage? :huh:

You think they aren't grossly underpaid for what they do? :huh:
Better yet: how much do you think a soldier ought to be paid? :huh:

Each of those things that you say don't earn respect may not on their own, but they do as a whole.Combined, none of the things you listed earn respect. There are a great many things a soldier can do to earn respect, but what you listed (wear a uniform, go through boot camp, sign life away) do not accomplish that, alone, nor combined.

It is because they are willing to fight, to keep the peace, to follow orders that people have the right to be a disrespectful punk who likes to fight on these message boards. I thank God for the freedoms I have through the blood and sweat of those who have fought to make it so.I am quite thankful for my freedoms here. But they were won a long time ago. See my response on the revolutionary war in this thread. Also, see Jeffery's response as to what was being attacked on 9/11.

[shurtugal]

http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml05/05027a.jpg

[BaxVarlet]

and you will find few on this board who actively stand out against indifference past me.

I think this sums up Uniq's argument perfectly. She's obviously better than everyone else, and does far more good than anyone else...so why does she have to respect anyone?

[uniquinous]

:dry: low sarcasm...

and on a slip no less (just woke up, give me a break). meant to say "more than". i'm not the only, i'm just the loudest (anyone disagree?)

[Jeffery]

:dry: low sarcasm...

and on a slip no less (just woke up, give me a break). meant to say "more than". i'm not the only, i'm just the loudest (anyone disagree?)
Those with the least to say often say it the loudest. (present company included)

[Sinyra]

for what purpose are soldiers currently fighting?

What are these soldiers doing for our nation?

these are the two versions of the one question you asked. so it's actually two.

despite what you have said, these are not at all simple questions. and yes, i agree that everyone have failed to really answer you comprehensively (because other questions like honor, heroism, and respect became an issue.) so here it goes:

QUESTION 1 The purpose of our soldiers currently fighting is to help stabilize a region that we have royally messed up. regardless of your views on whether or not we should have gone in there in the first place, the fact is that now it is worse of in terms of stability and they are fighting because it is viewed as our responsibility to at least try and help.

I suspect that you will answer this with something along the lines of, "how does killing people help?" but you and i both know that the army isn't just for that. they are attempting to help by providing protection, aiding rebuilding, improving medicine, etc...

whether this is being accomplished or not is a different question.

QUESTION 2 As to what they are doing for our nation; tricky. in terms of protecting the american people i am inclined to think that they aren't doing this in anyway directly. indirectly they have helped by overthrowing a dangerous super power and combating a seat of terrorism.

Personally I have issues with whether or not this is worth the cost in lives of both iraqis and americans, but again, different question.

also, angering other middle eastern nations is a consequence of our occupation and so the attempt at protection from potential threats may have backfired completely.

As a result of our occupation there are stereotypes of americans and american soldiers, both positive and negative, that are being reinforced. The humanitarian side of our armed forces, which does exist regardless of the inherent violence of an army, is helping to create a positive image in the middle east. however, the very negative view of americans was reinforced in the beginning of this whole thing and changing old hatreds is hard. more over, in the unfortunate event that there is a soldier who is unprincipled and they commit an atrocity, all good works are overshadowed.

the long term results cannot be predicted as yet.

there you go. sorry i couldn't give you a simple answer but as a stated before, these are not simple questions. but i feel i have answered them directly and comprehensively without addressing other related issues.

[meat.eater]

a discourtesy, I assure you, is completely disregarding every point I've made to misinterpret them in your own 'response to the whole post'. :dry: How is it that your blind patriotism has prevented you from actually reading my words? I even told you that you had it wrong in the last post, and you disregarded that push in the right direction to continue with your incorrect assumption on my views.

You certainly had a lot to say about my irrelevant stuff. Contradictory.

Let's make it about that then. One answer. It's really not that difficult. You had no problem asking me that question about another war... yet now it's off limits? :confused: spare me the double standards, please.

I'm not making this about a specific war. I've now told you 3 times (that's what situational politics means) that you ARE. And I find that a fundamental fault within you. I'm talking about the sentiments that we owe to people in uniform--regardless of these situational politics.
It's kind of like how you thank a doctor for doing his job, even though he may have just saved the life of Timothy McVeigh (figure that one may hit close to home?). It's a courtesy, uni. It let's them know that they arent representing us in vain (now's where you bring in situational politics again--but once again, it has nothing to do with it).

There are indeed two separate yet linked ideas being discussed. It is actually you who hasn't been able to see the distinction in my points, but to reiterate, here they are:
1) we are not fighting a war for anything right now. It's hard to agree or disagree with 'nothing'. If you disagree, you need but answer the question: what are soldiers currently doing for this country in Iraq?

1) Opinion (regardless of whether or not I may agree), and is irrelevant to the point that I am making. You're being situational again. Stop it.

2) becoming a soldier does not immediately entail respect. respect is not earned by signing your life to the government. respect is not earned from killing people. respect is not earned because you made it through boot camp. respect CAN be earned in the armed services. a soldier CAN become a hero. they are not so by default. these are my views, and the views of several higher ranking soldiers who I heard lecture recently.

2) Fundamental difference. Not going to judge you for it, but this is finally the topic that I've been trying to talk to you about. I think it's sad that you require a man who's willing to defend you with his life to "prove" his heroism to you (what does he need to do, kill Sadaam himself? Save an endangered panda? I was under the impression that a man offering his life instead of mine (ie: draft) was a pretty courageous act of heroism). Again, fundamental difference. I'm sorry you feel this way.

It comes as no surprise to me that the largest socioeconomic group that comprises the army basically between two uniforms, and decided not to go with McDonalds.

Perhaps people would rather stand for something and defend you than flip a burger. Shocking. The only thing more shocking is that you'd compare the two, like enlisting in the military is a cop-out for "real life" or is "low status." Pretty condescending. Even someone who works as McDonalds can be (and probably often do) work harder than you.
The same people who are enlisted in Iraq right now (if we may get situational for a minute), would be the same people repositioned to fight in a war that you deemed "necessary." The fact that they are willing is why they are heroes.
Nothing wrong with a little appreciation.

Same thing, my turn:
What I'm saying is: I'm sorry you are unable to make the distinction. I'm sorry that you're so fervent in your blind patriotism that you blow off anything involved as different--simply based on what you believe is situational politics of our time, not based on the representation of my remarks. I'm sorry that you can't accurately interpret the words I type simply because you feel defensive about the situation in Iraq. It actually makes me quite sad.

I'm the one who defined the distinction. All you did was say "SOMEONE ANSWER MY QUESTION" (which was an irrelevant question to what I was arguing) about 7 times.
It's not blind, it's recognizing and appreciating what our military has done, is doing and stands for. It's appreciating people who enlist in the military so everyone else doesn't have to--including you. It's appreciating the people who actually engage in foreign policy, rather than talking about it. I'm sorry you don't see where I'm coming from and are too preoccupied with the specific actions that you may not agree with rather than the specific people who make your life possible (PS: not all of our military is involved with Iraq--very few of it actually--different discussion). Yes, I'm being condescending. I find it sad.

You are the one who keeps bringing up Iraq. Not me. I have not even come close to mentioning situational politics or my stances on them in this discussion. I have not even come close to "feeling defensive about the situation in Iraq." You're talking to yourself, because you're unable to prevent yourself from dwelling on it.

[The SOB]

so yeah, umm... all i see here is uniq hating the military for some odd reason. in my opinion it's degrading because all she is talking about is that we're killing civilians and what not - i may be wrong uni, sorry if i am. but the way you're talking, in my eyes, you're degrading us. also, it's not our discision to go to war, it's the Commander-in-Chiefs decision, we're just fallowing orders. and to be honest, i would love to go to afgan or iraq. one reason is because of how much money i'll have if i return and because well, i wouldn't mind killing me a few haji's.

and speaking of civilians, you want to know why "civilians are dying?" it's because they don't fallow spacific instructions (law of war) as well as the stupid haji's disguise themselves as civilians and as well as the civilians having PVIED's. if you where to see some of the videos they showed us during MCT i think you would have a total different understanding..

[uniquinous]

these are the two versions of the one question you asked. so it's actually two.

despite what you have said, these are not at all simple questions. and yes, i agree that everyone have failed to really answer you comprehensively (because other questions like honor, heroism, and respect became an issue.) so here it goes:

QUESTION 1 The purpose of our soldiers currently fighting is to help stabilize a region that we have royally messed up. regardless of your views on whether or not we should have gone in there in the first place, the fact is that now it is worse of in terms of stability and they are fighting because it is viewed as our responsibility to at least try and help.

I suspect that you will answer this with something along the lines of, "how does killing people help?" but you and i both know that the army isn't just for that. they are attempting to help by providing protection, aiding rebuilding, improving medicine, etc...

whether this is being accomplished or not is a different question.

QUESTION 2 As to what they are doing for our nation; tricky. in terms of protecting the american people i am inclined to think that they aren't doing this in anyway directly. indirectly they have helped by overthrowing a dangerous super power and combating a seat of terrorism.

Personally I have issues with whether or not this is worth the cost in lives of both iraqis and americans, but again, different question.

also, angering other middle eastern nations is a consequence of our occupation and so the attempt at protection from potential threats may have backfired completely.

As a result of our occupation there are stereotypes of americans and american soldiers, both positive and negative, that are being reinforced. The humanitarian side of our armed forces, which does exist regardless of the inherent violence of an army, is helping to create a positive image in the middle east. however, the very negative view of americans was reinforced in the beginning of this whole thing and changing old hatreds is hard. more over, in the unfortunate event that there is a soldier who is unprincipled and they commit an atrocity, all good works are overshadowed.

the long term results cannot be predicted as yet.

there you go. sorry i couldn't give you a simple answer but as a stated before, these are not simple questions. but i feel i have answered them directly and comprehensively without addressing other related issues.that answer just blew me away. it was, by far, the best, most comprehensive, unbiased, and accurate account anywhere in this forum on the topic. thank you.

I'm not making this about a specific war. I've now told you 3 times (that's what situational politics means) that you ARE.Again, two issues. The one you keep dwelling on (respect for soldiers) has nothing to do with this war, or any other war. You continue to miss that point. Here it is again in slow motion: becoming a soldier does not by default automatically earn respect. Becoming a soldier does not by default automatically make you a hero. Becoming a soldier does not by default mean you are inherently a good person. Shooting people does not by default automatically earn respect or make a hero. These statements are true whether it is the revolutionary war, or the Lilliputian war. You can whine "situational politics" all you want over *this* issue, they are still true.

No where does that say soldiers should be disrespected. No where have I said that soldiers can't earn respect or become heroes, regardless of the situation.

It's kind of like how you thank a doctor for doing his jobNo... no its not. Don't equate killing people to saving lives, please. One requires boot camp and the ability to pull a trigger. The other involves decades of education and strict regulation. Now, which one do you suppose I believe earned respect from acquiring their title?

2) Fundamental difference. Not going to judge you for it, but this is finally the topic that I've been trying to talk to you about. I think it's sad that you require a man who's willing to defend you with his life to "prove" his heroism to youAh, now this *IS* situational: no one is defending me with their life, and no one has for a long while. *When* someone does, it will be a different discussion altogether. See sryna's wonderful explanation as to what soldiers are currently doing.

flip a burger. Shocking. The only thing more shocking is that you'd compare the two, like enlisting in the military is a cop-out for "real life" or is "low status." Pretty condescending.Pretty realistic, actually. Go do your homework.

Pentagon demographic data show that the military is leaning heavily for recruits on economically depressed, rural areas where youths' need for jobs may outweigh the risks of going to war.

In fiscal 2005, the Army took in its least qualified group of recruits in a decade, as measured by educational level and test results.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/03/AR2005110302528.html

LAST YEAR, AS U.S. CASUALTIES mounted in Iraq, only three residents in two neighborhoods of Manhattan's upper East Side - the city's richest area - joined the Army, Air Force or Navy.

Just a few blocks farther north, in a swath of East Harlem, 45 people enlisted.

At the same time, an astounding 113 joined in the Morrisania and Highbridge sections of the South Bronx.

Meanwhile, in two zip codes of Brooklyn's poverty-stricken East New York, 116 men and women joined the military.

And in the immigrant neighborhoods of Elmhurst and Corona in Queens, 73 signed up.

That's all according to the Pentagon's own personnel records
http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/2005/11/08/2005-11-08_racial_divide_evident_in_mil.html

Even someone who works as McDonalds can be (and probably often do) work harder than you. :confused: srsly? no u.

The same people who are enlisted in Iraq right now (if we may get situational for a minute), would be the same people repositioned to fight in a war that you deemed "necessary." The fact that they are willing is why they are heroes.
Nothing wrong with a little appreciation. Truth - nothing is wrong with appreciation. But again, fighting does not automatically by default make someone a hero. See my pictures of megaman and cage fighting, for the counterpwnz.

to be honest, i would love to go to afgan or iraq. one reason is because of how much money i'll have if i return and because well, i wouldn't mind killing me a few haji's.aaaaaaand i rest my case. thanks for that priceless soundbyte ;)

[Sinyra]

that answer just blew me away. it was, by far, the best, most comprehensive, unbiased, and accurate account anywhere in this forum on the topic. thank you.

you're welcome and thanks for the complement.

[meat.eater]

Again, two issues. The one you keep dwelling on (respect for soldiers) has nothing to do with this war, or any other war. You continue to miss that point. Here it is again in slow motion: becoming a soldier does not by default automatically earn respect. Becoming a soldier does not by default automatically make you a hero. Becoming a soldier does not by default mean you are inherently a good person. Shooting people does not by default automatically earn respect or make a hero. These statements are true whether it is the revolutionary war, or the Lilliputian war. You can whine "situational politics" all you want over *this* issue, they are still true.

I haven't been dwelling on it; you're the one who started this argument by saying that a soldier is not a hero based on your opinions of Iraq. I was the one that SAID it was two issues, arguing that I believe the respect for a soldier is a separate issue, yet you still fought using the notion of Iraq! You made zero mention of your fundamental belief in soldiers as a whole until I called you out on it saying that the questions at issue were different. Every mention you made of it had to do with Iraq. So, thank you for finally agreeing with me that the respect of a soldier has nothing to do with situational politics and illustrating why it is you dont hold a soldier in high standards regardless of that. All I was trying to do was make you put Iraq aside and not allow you to use it to dilute your entire opinion of the US military.
That's what I was getting at. It's a fundamental difference. The fact remains that those people are enlisted in the military so you dont have to be. You owe them something.

No... no its not. Don't equate killing people to saving lives, please. One requires boot camp and the ability to pull a trigger. The other involves decades of education and strict regulation. Now, which one do you suppose I believe earned respect from acquiring their title?

Glass half empty approach, I suppose. I have no problem equating the military killing people to protecting the united states (ie: saving lives). I know you have the urge to bring in Iraq again, but again I'm not talking about that. Apparently you dont.
As for my personal opinion, I dont value people's "success" based on their schooling and their education. I value it on what they choose to do and how they do it. If you think you're better than someone because you have a degree (keep in mind, I'm getting a degree as well), and they are in the army, I find that actually sad. If you think you're better than someone who works at McDonalds because you have a degree and they're trying to get by and feed their family, I find that sad. You may contribute more to the necessity of society (in which case I'd put the army on the top of that "necessity" list), but you are by no means better.
You're asking me to compare someone who risks their lives for my country and somebody who saves lives for my country. I am not willing to make that comparison. They are even. If you claim the doctor is more valuable, then you are saying the lives of the people you save are more valuable than that of a soldiers. And that is not a mindset I will ever adopt.

Ah, now this *IS* situational: no one is defending me with their life, and no one has for a long while. *When* someone does, it will be a different discussion altogether. See sryna's wonderful explanation as to what soldiers are currently doing.

Do you have any idea what the military does? Do you have any idea how many US embassy's across the world are policed by our military? Do you have any idea how much research is completed within our military? Do you have any idea how many people (other than people in Iraq) die in our military, even currently? Do you know how much peace keeping our military does with the 40-some-odd wars that exist on earth at any given time? Do you know how much intelligence the military uncovers to prevent terrorist attacks or other wars from breaking out?
I don't think (obviously) you appreciate what the united states military is. To you, it is an extension of the arm of the commander in chief to exercise at his will... but you're conveniently forgetting everything else that being involved in the military stands for... simply because of these "situational politics" that are happening right now. I'm inviting you to stop.

Pretty realistic, actually. Go do your homework.

So you're one of those people who judges someone economic status as a reason to join the military--while I'm one of those people who appreciates and perceives a raise in status for anyone who chooses to use that path in life.
You choose to view the military as a means to an end--for poor people to get work.
I choose to view the military as rewarding the people courageous enough to enlist in it by providing them economic help.

You're kind of reminding me of the people who bring signs in protest of the war when a plane carrying soldiers returns home. You'd rather say "that was pointless, you shouldn't do this" than "welcome home." It's icky.

There's a group of bikers in my home town called "Freedom Riders" (or freedom bikers?). They ride to funerals of soldiers and set up a line with their bikes to block off the soldiers funeral (funeral, for christ sake) from the protesters of the war. Those men are heroes. Those protesters are pretty much the lowest form of American existence that I can comprehend. (FYI: I'm not calling you one of them, I'm just meandering at this point.)

Truth - nothing is wrong with appreciation. But again, fighting does not automatically by default make someone a hero. See my pictures of megaman and cage fighting, for the counterpwnz.

You seem to be stuck on the concept of the action of fighting. Military combat is much different than choosing to punch someone in the face, and you very well know it. War has been a necessity for foreign policy since the dawn of civilization, regardless of whether it's "good" or not.
The fact remains that these men are willing to fight. And that willingness makes it so you don't have to. I call that heroism. You may define it otherwise, but I'm done with this. You've eventually made your stance clear (it wasnt, fyi--you just assumed people knew what the hell these questions were (regardless of their relevance) and didn't say much else but "answer my question" for several pages--not a very productive way to argue. You didn't say anything about your view on a stand alone soldier until I pretty much forced you to), and I disagree with it. End of story.

[uniquinous]

You made zero mention of your fundamental belief in soldiers as a whole until I called you out on it saying that the questions at issue were different.

You didn't say anything about your view on a stand alone soldier until I pretty much forced you toorly!? i see wut u did there. let's take a look at what axually happened. chronologically:
I recently attended a lecture of a soldier who came back from Iraq, speaking on war time medicine. Now this guy had seen quite a bit, and one of the take home messages he presented was that not every soldier is a warrior, and not every soldier is a hero. There's nothing heroic about picking up a gun and using it. Anyone can do that. There's more to it than that.You're right, I did use the word "Iraq" (despite the fact that it had nothing to do with his or my point. Strike one for you, meaty.
point being: fighting does not make anyone a hero. fighting makes you a fighter, or a soldier. all are not synonymous. looks like I didn't mention Iraq here.... that's 2... Your response to this:
Are you really shallow enough to only salute a man who only represents your cause [] Are you really trying to convince me that concepts like respect and dignity are only earned in your eyes through situational politics?
That's not what I'm trying to convince you of at all... actually...So, you mangled and mixed the two points, and I even corrected you... and you disregarded it. Let's continue:

I understand you want a response in regards to this war; I am telling you that this is an entirely different discussion so stop making it about that. How is it that your blind patriotism has prevented you from actually reading my words? I even told you that you had it wrong in the last post, and you disregarded that push in the right direction to continue with your incorrect assumption on my views.

Paying respects to soldiers (PEOPLE) and agreeing with a war (IDEAL) are separate. I'm more than willing to have the ideal-based debate about the war with you, but we'll probably align on many points. This discussion, however, is about people.There are indeed two separate yet linked ideas being discussed. It is actually you who hasn't been able to see the distinction in my points, but to reiterate, here they are:
1) we are not fighting a war for anything right now. It's hard to agree or disagree with 'nothing'. If you disagree, you need but answer the question: what are soldiers currently doing for this country in Iraq?
2) becoming a soldier does not immediately entail respect. respect is not earned by signing your life to the government. respect is not earned from killing people. respect is not earned because you made it through boot camp. respect CAN be earned in the armed services. a soldier CAN become a hero. they are not so by default. these are my views, and the views of several higher ranking soldiers who I heard lecture recently.So the first block is me stating yet again you aren't understanding what I'm saying. The second response is me agreeing that there are two issues, and going on to say that two issues HAD BEEN DISCUSSED the entire time in the thread previous to and including when you entered the discussion. Your response?

I'm the one who defined the distinction.WRONG! Just because you couldn't follow the discussion previously doesn't mean your epiphany means you are suddenly stearing anyone else in the right direction.

All of this leads to two conclusions: 1) there are indeed (and always have been) two issues being discussed. The first of which was in regards to what we are doing in Iraq currently, the second developing afterwards in regards to respecting soldiers.

So, thank you for finally agreeing with me that the respect of a soldier has nothing to do with situational politics and illustrating why it is you dont hold a soldier in high standards regardless of that. All I was trying to do was make you put Iraq aside and not allow you to use it to dilute your entire opinion of the US military.Thank you for bringing the drama llama because you couldn't keep up with the thread. I'll respond to the rest of your comments later.


EDIT: if you still believe I made any reference to not respecting soldiers specifically because that I believe we're not doing anything in Iraq for this country, point it out.

[uniquinous]

As for my personal opinion, I dont value people's "success" based on their schooling and their education. I value it on what they choose to do and how they do it. If you think you're better than someone because you have a degree (keep in mind, I'm getting a degree as well), and they are in the army, I find that actually sad.You find a lot sad. You also like to put words in my mouth lately. Go reread. There is a difference between a decade of education and experience in one field, compared to 6 months of boot camp in another. Show me an experienced soldier with shiny medal or rank, and we have a different story. Until then, keep feeling sad at things I've never said.

If you think you're better than someone who works at McDonalds because you have a degree and they're trying to get by and feed their family, I find that sad.Sad again? Someone needs a happy pill... People who went and got a degree also try to "get by and feed their family". They just did more to go about it, and most likely got a better return on their efforts. My family was poor when I was younger - I have little sympathy for people who stay that way. I'm guessing you've lead a cushy upper-middle class lifestyle, so I can see how it's so easy for you to be so sad talking about a class you've never experienced.

You're asking me to compare someone who risks their lives for my country and somebody who saves lives for my country. I am not willing to make that comparison.I've asked for no such thing. In fact, you were the original person who brought up the comparison in the first place: "It's kind of like how you thank a doctor for doing his job, even though he may have just saved the life of Timothy McVeigh (figure that one may hit close to home?)." http://tacticsarena.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1524745&postcount=66

no one is defending me with their lifeDo you have any idea how many US embassy's across the world are policed by our military?I thought it was obvious I was still talking about Iraq (ya know, the other topic that existed in this thread before you got here which you can't seem to acknowledge), but even still: Name the last US embassy that has had a US soldier defend me with their life.

Do you have any idea how much research is completed within our military?Please explain how that research means someone is defending me with their life.

Do you have any idea how many people (other than people in Iraq) die in our military, even currently?Same question. Starting to see a trend?

Our army does wonderful things in this world. In the past, many soldiers have defended the US with their lives. In Iraq, currently, that's not the case. I am unaware of that being the case in any other area of the world. That doesn't mean the military isn't doing good work. It just means you don't actually read what I type, and instead make foolish assumptions.

So you're one of those people who judges someone economic status as a reason to join the military--while I'm one of those people who appreciates and perceives a raise in status for anyone who chooses to use that path in life. They are one in the same. If someone feels they will achieve a "raise in status" (as you say) from joining the military, then their socioeconomic status is the reason. But look at SOB - he's a good representative: he's doing it for the money. The numbers don't lie. You can complain as much as you want about this point - the facts are clear: lower socioeconomic class has a stronger pull towards the military.

You seem to be stuck on the concept of the action of fighting. Military combat is much different than choosing to punch someone in the face, and you very well know it.Of course I do. Apparently you don't tho (or you misspeak), for when you say things like "I dont care what the hell he's fighting for or if I agree with it. Key aspect: he's fighting." you focus on the fighting aspect of things. Fighting, in and of itself, does not denote honor, courage, bravery, heroism, etc. This was yet another concept you missed. But, as you just corrected, it's "military combat", which alludes to some (dare I say) "situational" form of fighting. :eek:

The fact remains that these men are willing to fight. And that willingness makes it so you don't have to. I call that heroism.The fact remains that janitors are willing to scrub toilets. And that willingness makes it so you don't have to. And it has nothing to do with heroism. Signing up to fight does not infer heroism by default. Let's go with an example:

10 soldiers enlist in the armed forces, 7 of whom are there for the money and to just kill people (just like SOB), 2 are there purely out of duty to serve their country, 1 doesn't quite know. Are they equally heroes because they signed up? 5 of those 10 go on to exhibit great leadership abilities, and earn medals/promotions for it. 4 do the bare minimum needed. 1 likes to shoot civilians, even if unarmed, and later throws a puppy off a cliff. Are all 10 still heroes? brave? Do all 10 still deserve respect? The same amount of respect? You let me know.

[shurtugal]

10 soldiers enlist in the armed forces, 7 of whom are there for the money and to just kill people (just like SOB), 2 are there purely out of duty to serve their country, 1 doesn't quite know. Are they equally heroes because they signed up? 5 of those 10 go on to exhibit great leadership abilities, and earn medals/promotions for it. 4 do the bare minimum needed. 1 likes to shoot civilians, even if unarmed, and later throws a puppy off a cliff. Are all 10 still heroes? brave? Do all 10 still deserve respect? The same amount of respect? You let me know.

90% of all "facts" are made up. If I remember correctly.

[meat.eater]

orly!? i see wut u did there. let's take a look at what axually happened. chronologically:

Yes, let's look at this chronologically:

1) Argument began with you saying : http://www.tacticsarena.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1523604&postcount=24. Situational politics.
2) http://www.tacticsarena.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1523678&postcount=27. Situational politics. Final paragraph has reference to the argument I wanted to have, but you were focusing on Iraq.
3) http://www.tacticsarena.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1523686&postcount=30. Not situational politics. Trying to emphasize that he's fighting so you dont have to.
4) http://www.tacticsarena.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1524218&postcount=42. Situational politics for the first part. Unfair comparison of "fighting" for the second part. But you did finally get un-situational. Because I brought in that argument. Hell, my entire POINT is that they are 2 different arguments and that I dont feel they should influence one another. You're finally starting to see that. Your response to me THREE times was "answer my question" (which was not a question that I needed to answer).

So, you mangled and mixed the two points, and I even corrected you... and you disregarded it.

My response was in direct response to a quote that you posted about the revolutionary war by comparing it to Iraq. I didn't mix the points, I was stating that you are making an argument for soldier heroism based on Iraq (which, actually, is[/] mixing the points) and I was calling that out as something I disagreed with. Remember: [B]the question that you so desperately wanted answered was: 'What is fighting in Iraq doing for me/our nation/Iraq'? That was the BASIS for your arguing in the former part of this thread. I was pointing out that this question (which you asked me in the quote that I quoted) was not valid to the discussion I was having. You refused to concede to that until this post: http://www.tacticsarena.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1524412&postcount=60. See #2 of your list (still SURROUNDED by mention of Iraq). Even posts #55 and #56 of this thread was still me trying to steer you away from Iraq.

Disclaimer: None of this matters anymore. We're no longer talking about Iraq. I dont care how you perceive that we arrived at this point.

Onto what we should actually be discussing:

You find a lot sad. You also like to put words in my mouth lately. Go reread. There is a difference between a decade of education and experience in one field, compared to 6 months of boot camp in another. Show me an experienced soldier with shiny medal or rank, and we have a different story. Until then, keep feeling sad at things I've never said.

I didn't put word into your mouth at all. You just affirmed exactly what I just said. You're ranking people in terms of your perceived worth. Even in this very post. Whether you find it a logical way of thinking or not, that's what you're doing. You're comparing a decade of education and "6 months of boot camp" and following it up by saying that unless they've been at it as long as you have in your field to get a shiny metal, they are inferior. If this is not how you're intending to be, please enlighten me, because it's certainly coming off that way. If it is how you're intending it to be, yes, I find it sad.

Sad again? Someone needs a happy pill... People who went and got a degree also try to "get by and feed their family". They just did more to go about it, and most likely got a better return on their efforts. My family was poor when I was younger - I have little sympathy for people who stay that way. I'm guessing you've lead a cushy upper-middle class lifestyle, so I can see how it's so easy for you to be so sad talking about a class you've never experienced.

Who's the one making assumptions? My socioeconomic status is actually playing no role in this discussion for me (though if you need to know--both of my parents were on unemployment and in separate households for the majority of my childhood). Apparently it is for you. Once again you're ranking people, this time by class. I don't rank people's value (which is what I was talking about) to our nation by their class. Perhaps you do. I dont know.
Applying this logic, I'm not rating the socioeconomic class of the people in the military, I'm ranking their value, and their contribution. That's why I view people in the military with the highest regard, much higher than those who are flipping hamburgers (as hardworking as they may be), as opposed to being kind of a bigot and making generalizations about their class status.

I've asked for no such thing. In fact, you were the original person who brought up the comparison in the first place: "It's kind of like how you thank a doctor for doing his job, even though he may have just saved the life of Timothy McVeigh (figure that one may hit close to home?)." http://tacticsarena.com/forum/showpo...5&postcount=66

Good point. I guess my point is that I find it silly to hold anyone to a higher value than someone in the military. Yes. I am equating them. You took offense at that last time.

I thought it was obvious I was still talking about Iraq (ya know, the other topic that existed in this thread before you got here which you can't seem to acknowledge)

Thats because I dont think it's valid. But we're beating a dead horse.

Name the last US embassy that has had a US soldier defend me with their life.
Please explain how that research means someone is defending me with their life.
Same question. Starting to see a trend?

Really? Okay.
Researching weapons prevents people who may not be so nice to us from having militant advantages. That's defending you.
Soldiers dying, not just in Iraq, are dying from militant forces that aren't very nice to the US... that's defending you.
Keeping peace within other country's so larger wars dont break out is defending you.
Patrolling our borders is defending you.
Intercepting intelligence is defending you.
I asked 6 questions... you responded to 3. If you dont think our military secures you (which is perhaps a more accurate word--you seem to interpret "defend" as a very active role of doing something, rather than preventing other things from happening), I think you should probably assess what it is our military does. Every ounce of work that the military does is with the objective of security and peace. Which, believe it or not, affect you.

They are one in the same. If someone feels they will achieve a "raise in status" (as you say) from joining the military, then their socioeconomic status is the reason. But look at SOB - he's a good representative: he's doing it for the money. The numbers don't lie. You can complain as much as you want about this point - the facts are clear: lower socioeconomic class has a stronger pull towards the military.

Yes. At the same time, SOB takes a lot more pride in what he does because he's doing something respectful. It is this respectful act that raises his status, not the money.

Of course I do. Apparently you don't tho (or you misspeak), for when you say things like "I dont care what the hell he's fighting for or if I agree with it. Key aspect: he's fighting." you focus on the fighting aspect of things. Fighting, in and of itself, does not denote honor, courage, bravery, heroism, etc. This was yet another concept you missed. But, as you just corrected, it's "military combat", which alludes to some (dare I say) "situational" form of fighting.

Sorry I didn't clarify when I said "I dont care what he's fighting for," I should have said "I dont care what he's engaging in military combat for." Semantics. I figured you would have made that connection.
My point, and god I feel like I've said this 600 times, is that the fact he is willing to engage in military combat in representation of our country is what makes him a hero. Not the fighting itself. Excuse me. Military combat.

The fact remains that janitors are willing to scrub toilets. And that willingness makes it so you don't have to. And it has nothing to do with heroism. Signing up to fight does not infer heroism by default. Let's go with an example:

Since scrubbing toilets is such a governmental necessity that involves people risking their lives. You're fishing.

10 soldiers enlist in the armed forces, 7 of whom are there for the money and to just kill people (just like SOB), 2 are there purely out of duty to serve their country, 1 doesn't quite know. Are they equally heroes because they signed up? 5 of those 10 go on to exhibit great leadership abilities, and earn medals/promotions for it. 4 do the bare minimum needed. 1 likes to shoot civilians, even if unarmed, and later throws a puppy off a cliff. Are all 10 still heroes? brave? Do all 10 still deserve respect? The same amount of respect? You let me know.

Innocent until proven guilty. The fact that one would enlist in the army puts them in great respect with me, regardless of why. Obviously, if one turns out terribly and likes killing innocent civilians... he's going to be held accountable for his actions (and he'll likely be throw out--at which time, why would I have respect for getting thrown out?). Those who do the bare minimum are still doing the bare minimum so other people who are less willing or more afraid or equipped to do so don't have to do the bare minimum.

[uniquinous]

Yes, let's look at this chronologically:

1) Argument began with you saying : http://www.tacticsarena.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1523604&postcount=24. Situational politics.The very argument you insisted wasn't part of the discussion. Interesting!

You then go on to point out where I discuss both topics, conveniently assuming that the non-situational point is mixed with Iraq. Make no mistake: this was your own misinterpretation. You entered the discussion, and you focused on both as if they were one, completely ignoring the majority of what you entered into, to nonetheless exclaim time after time "that's not what we're talking about". You were late to the party, it was what was being discussed.

My response was in direct response to a quote that you posted about the revolutionary war by comparing it to Iraq.This is yet another perfect example of where *you* brought up something (revolutionary war) (http://tacticsarena.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1523686&postcount=30) and somehow now claim *I* was the one that made the comparison. What kind of twisted straw man is that? :huh: I'll put that right next to you blaming me for comparing doctors to soldiers also :rolleyes:

I didn't mix the points, I was stating that you are making an argument for soldier heroism based on IraqShow me the quote. Show me where I specifically did that. It seems to be the entire basis of your claim. I've asked you to point it out in previous posts, and much like the question you can't seem to answer, it goes ignored.

I didn't put word into your mouth at all. You just affirmed exactly what I just said. You're ranking people in terms of your perceived worth. Even in this very post. Whether you find it a logical way of thinking or not, that's what you're doing. You're comparing a decade of education and "6 months of boot camp" and following it up by saying that unless they've been at it as long as you have in your field to get a shiny metal, they are inferior.I'm comparing worth in a field by time dedicated to it. I wasn't comparing 6 month boot camp soldier to me. I made an extreme example (would you prefer I said two decades? or three?) to 6 months. Yet you seem convinced this is some superficial subjective and overwhelmingly biased assumption. Tell me, meat, is there any profession that you can think of where someone with 6 months experience is more valuable than someone with 10 years experiences (given an average person in that field)? Consider yourself enlightened.

Who's the one making assumptions? both of my parents were on unemployment and in separate householdsI've known millionaires on unemployment. Answer me this: were you at any point in your life in the lower class? Even on unemployment I bet your family was above the poverty line. Don't even try to go there, please.

If you think you're better than someone who works at McDonalds because you have a degree and they're trying to get by and feed their family, I find that sad. You may contribute more to the necessity of society (in which case I'd put the army on the top of that "necessity" list), but you are by no means better.That's why I view people in the military with the highest regard, much higher than those who are flipping hamburgers (as hardworking as they may be).nice contradiction there, meaty. it seems a few posts ago everyone is equal regardless of position, and now the military is at the top of the totem pole. So the first quote would find the second quote sad, and your second quote would say your first post is from a bigot. Nice.

Thats because I dont think it's valid. But we're beating a dead horse. Your thoughts on its validity are irrelevant. It was an issue on the table, which you furthermore agitated with all your talk of "situational politics". When you finally realized they were separate issues, your method of dealing with it was pretending it didn't exist, or something to the equivalent of "I'm not listening!". So which is it, meat? Were you accusing "situational politics" because we *were* talking about Iraq also, or did you "think it was [not] valid"? You can't play both sides.

Researching weapons prevents people who may not be so nice to us from having militant advantages. That's defending you. Actually, that's offensive, not defensive. Besides, the claim is "defending with their life". Creating weapons doesn't require US soldiers to die.

Soldiers dying, not just in Iraq, are dying from militant forces that aren't very nice to the US... that's defending you.
Keeping peace within other country's so larger wars dont break out is defending you. I asked for specific examples and you gave me... the exact same useless vague "it must be happening somewhere!" response. Cite a specific or don't bother making up vague and in all likelihood untrue references.

I asked 6 questions... you responded to 3. If you dont think our military secures you (which is perhaps a more accurate wordNote the red. Note how I've never said that once in this entire thread. Note how I have in several posts mentioned that the military does secure us, last post not excluded: "Our army does wonderful things in this world. In the past, many soldiers have defended the US with their lives." Yet again: if you truly think I've said that anywhere in this or any other thread, quote it. You'll find it's just another blindly prideful mistake you've made.

(btw, if I missed some question you wanted answered, I apologize - please restate).

Yes. At the same time, SOB takes a lot more pride in what he does because he's doing something respectful. It is this respectful act that raises his status, not the money. And that is true, but that is irrelevant to what we were talking about. We were discussing the *reasons* people joined. You claimed 'status'. I pointed to SOB flat out stating "money and to kill", and then cited the numbers which show that money has a much stronger pull than status alone. Don't now try to act like it was about the reasons why it "raises status".

Sorry I didn't clarify when I said "I dont care what he's fighting for," I should have said "I dont care what he's engaging in military combat for." Not the fighting itself. Excuse me. Military combat. Ah now we're getting somewhere. So you agree that we can definitively say the following things inherently do not make a hero:
wearing a uniform
fighting
killing people
willingness to do things others won't
the point you missed for pages now is starting to click into place...

Since scrubbing toilets is such a governmental necessity that involves people risking their lives. You're fishing. adding to the point (above). half the things you mentioned (intercepting intelligence, building weapons, etc) similarly don't involve people risking their lives. Yes, you are guilty of "fishing" (but I was making a valid point in doing so).

Innocent until proven guilty. The fact that one would enlist in the army puts them in great respect with me, regardless of why. Obviously, if one turns out terribly and likes killing innocent civilians... he's going to be held accountable for his actions (and he'll likely be throw out--at which time, why would I have respect for getting thrown out?). Those who do the bare minimum are still doing the bare minimum so other people who are less willing or more afraid or equipped to do so don't have to do the bare minimum.Ah excellent excellent.

OK, so the actions of the naughty people "don't count" (innocent until proven guilty) until they are thrown out. This inherently infers that a soldier can do evil things and still be in the military (because s/he either hasn't been thrown out yet, or got away with it). The reverse is also true: a soldier can be in the military and do wonderfully heroic and brave things, yet not be acknowledged accordingly. Similarly, we have all manner of people in between these two extremes.

Now I can't help but notice you didn't answer whether they all deserve the *same* amount of respect, but I think my point can still be made: the military, much like domestic life, has its share of good and bad people. Both have heroes, leaders, followers, and criminals. What differentiates these groups, either in civilian life or in the military, is not demonstrated by a uniform, by the act of fighting, by doing things that someone else wouldn't do, or by killing people. No, what differentiates these groups is the significance and meaning behind their actions. It means the man who jumped onto a subway rail to save someone who fell is different than the soldier who made it through basic training, fought a little, and then deserted his comrades when things went sour (which one is the hero and why?). Now I do concede that there is a much greater chance of creating heroes in the military, but they are not formed by default because of title, uniform, or willingness to kill so that we don't have to. You don't sign up to become a hero, or for my respect, you earn it.

[meat.eater]

Oh. My god. This is so pointless. This has digressed far beyond any point that I intended to go with this discussion. This is ugly and a pointless "he said she said" battle regarding who said what first. I'm done even reading it.

Here's what it comes down to:

FACT: Your main argument for the entire first several pages of this thread was that you wanted to have people answer your question of "what are we doing in Iraq?" (EB: I appreciate all you're doing for our country./ UNI: and what would that be exactly?). That discourse reveals that you dont think anything the military is currently doing for our country deserves appreciation. Unless you were just being inherently vague.
FACT: My point is that I dont believe that this question is valid in terms of we recognize and appreciate what our military soldiers do for us. I define it differently. I honestly couldn't care less how you define it.
FACT: You finally realized that this is all I was saying (whether by my poor articulation or by your misinterpretation I do not know), and eventually said that yes, there are in fact 2 different arguments going on here. I'm not going to tell you how you wish to have people earn your respect. I will tell you that I think it's wrong. And I have.

That's ALL I wanted. Go walk off into the sunset feeling superior with this argument, as you apparently feel superior to everything else anyone in this country does already.

[uniquinous]

FACT: Your main argument for the entire first several pages of this thread was that you wanted to have people answer your question of "what are we doing in Iraq?" (EB: I appreciate all you're doing for our country./ UNI: and what would that be exactly?). That discourse reveals that you dont think anything the military is currently doing for our country deserves appreciation. This. Is. False. I've said it multiple times before, I'll say it again. There is no statement anywhere in this thread where I say that because of my first point (soldiers in Iraq aren't doing anything for *this* country now) that apparently all soldiers deserve no appreciation (something I haven't said whatsoever).

You have made that claim over and over. Each time, I have flat out told you it was incorrect, and invited you to point out where I said it. I have also, over the course of the last 3 posts, asked you to point out where I said other crazy ideas you have projected upon me (you have yet to do so for a single one). You can call this a "he said she said" all you want, but what is happening here is as follows:

FACT: you didn't actually read what I wrote to instead made things up
FACT: you have on several occasions created poor comparisons and then blamed me for making them, as clearly pointed out in my previous post (and then when called on it, try to brush it aside with a "he said she said" argument because you can't keep track of your own poor points)
FACT: despite pages of inviting you to quote me say the things you claim, you have still failed to produce a SINGLE citation.

I'm not going to tell you how you wish to have people earn your respect. I will tell you that I think it's wrong. And I have. wrong to earn respect? I'll live with that horrible idea.

Go walk off into the sunset feeling superior with this argument, as you apparently feel superior to everything else anyone in this country does already.I don't feel superior than anyone else in this country (yet another straw man you've created), but you sure are looking pretty inferior at the moment, meat.

Despite your third grade frustration and inability to follow your own comments (let alone mine), I continue to invite you to produce a single quote that says our military shouldn't be appreciated because of Iraq. (or any other imaginary idea your psychotic mind created)

[meat.eater]

and i appreciate all you're doing for our country.

and what would that be, exactly?

You can play the "I wasn't actually saying I don't appreciate what he's doing, I was just asking if you knew what h was doing" card all you want. But this is a pretty definitive claim that you dont appreciate what he's doing.

I think this is where the biggest misinterpretation of my views is (most likely because I don't present them clearly). When I asked that question, you should note that no one can actually answer it definitively. There's a lot of vague references, but no one says what the ultimate goal is. It speaks much more to the orders, than the person. You dismiss my feelings for the war, but they are essentially the reason I made that comment.

Yes, I did dismiss your feelings on the war, because that's not what I was talking about. I made ZERO reference to the war in Iraq.

Someone would say "I appreciate what you (rev war soldier) is doing for this country", someone else would ask "and what is that?" and the reply would be "to remove tyranny and taxation without representation, and to provide an equal pursuit of happiness".
It's actually quite easy to understand why soldiers fought that war. Yet again I will ask in this thread (since I have yet to hear an answer, despite people disagreeing with me): for what purpose are soldiers currently fighting?

You still push the specific war.

Get your snobby nosed, bullcrap politics out of it. These are people, not ideas. Start treating them like it.

I tell you to separate the two.

I've not made a single claim about people agreeing with me regarding the legitimacy of the war, nor that anyone needs my permission. My question has been simple, and has remained unanswered.

FALSE! They are risking their lives, sure, but not for me. Not for you.

shooting civilians on my behalf for no reason whatsoever? that is pretty incredible... incredibly barbaric. shall I thank them now or later?

You threw my question back at me in regards to the revolutionary war, and I gave you a definitive answer. I have asked you and everyone else in this thread countless times now to offer a response with regards to this war. I have been called names, I have been condescended to, I have seen outrage, blind patriotism, defensiveness, unrelated truth, ignorance, and foolishness. And throughout all of these things, I have yet to receive an answer. Is the question truly that difficult?

Let me know when you can provide me with one.

You STILL push the war.

I understand you want a response in regards to this war; I am telling you that this is an entirely different discussion so stop making it about that.
Paying respects to soldiers (PEOPLE) and agreeing with a war (IDEAL) are separate. I'm more than willing to have the ideal-based debate about the war with you, but we'll probably align on many points. This discussion, however, is about people.

What I'm saying is: I'm sorry you are unable to make the distinction. I'm sorry that you're so fervent in your disapprovals of the war that you blow off anything involved in it as inferior--simply based on situational politics of our time, not based on the representation of the US military and the people involved in it. I'm sorry that you can't shake a man in uniform's hand simply because you feel poorly about the situation in Iraq. It actually makes me quite sad.

I STILL tell you to separate the two.

Let's make it about that then. One answer. It's really not that difficult. You had no problem asking me that question about another war... yet now it's off limits? spare me the double standards, please.

You still push the war.


1) we are not fighting a war for anything right now. It's hard to agree or disagree with 'nothing'. If you disagree, you need but answer the question: what are soldiers currently doing for this country in Iraq?
2) becoming a soldier does not immediately entail respect. respect is not earned by signing your life to the government. respect is not earned from killing people. respect is not earned because you made it through boot camp. respect CAN be earned in the armed services. a soldier CAN become a hero. they are not so by default. these are my views, and the views of several higher ranking soldiers who I heard lecture recently.

You recognize that I'm not talking about the war.

What I'm saying is: I'm sorry you are unable to make the distinction. I'm sorry that you're so fervent in your blind patriotism that you blow off anything involved as different--simply based on what you believe is situational politics of our time, not based on the representation of my remarks. I'm sorry that you can't accurately interpret the words I type simply because you feel defensive about the situation in Iraq. It actually makes me quite sad.

Yet you still push the war.

I'm not making this about a specific war. I've now told you 3 times (that's what situational politics means) that you ARE. And I find that a fundamental fault within you. I'm talking about the sentiments that we owe to people in uniform--regardless of these situational politics.

One again, I tell you I'm not interested in talking about Iraq.

2) Fundamental difference. Not going to judge you for it, but this is finally the topic that I've been trying to talk to you about. I think it's sad that you require a man who's willing to defend you with his life to "prove" his heroism to you (what does he need to do, kill Sadaam himself? Save an endangered panda? I was under the impression that a man offering his life instead of mine (ie: draft) was a pretty courageous act of heroism). Again, fundamental difference. I'm sorry you feel this way.

I finally respond to something that has to do with what I've been talking about.

Ah, now this *IS* situational: no one is defending me with their life, and no one has for a long while. *When* someone does, it will be a different discussion altogether. See sryna's wonderful explanation as to what soldiers are currently doing.

You conveniently overlook the fact that I said "willing to defend your life" and replace it with "is defending your life."

Truth - nothing is wrong with appreciation. But again, fighting does not automatically by default make someone a hero. See my pictures of megaman and cage fighting, for the counterpwnz.

Huh...
Let's rewind:

and i appreciate all you're doing for our country.

and what would that be, exactly?

Let's move on.

This. Is. False. I've said it multiple times before, I'll say it again. There is no statement anywhere in this thread where I say that because of my first point (soldiers in Iraq aren't doing anything for *this* country now) that apparently all soldiers deserve no appreciation (something I haven't said whatsoever).

I never argued that you think all soldiers deserve no appreciation. I argued that I believe all soldiers deserve SOME appreciation. You disagree with this. You feel they have to prove something to you beyond enlisting. I appreciate the act of enlisting and being willing to fight as heroism. You're not going to change my mind. I think it's unfortunate that you wouldn't be able to walk up to a man in uniform and say "thanks" without examining his resume first. It's just how I feel.

wrong to earn respect? I'll live with that horrible idea.

Don't twist my words. A man earns my respect by the act of enlisting. It's still earning. It's just a different definition than yours.

[Shiznit]

This is entertaining. :confused:

[Sinyra]

entertaining? i'd say annoying is more like it. what was a decently intelligent argument is deteriorating to an i said you said thing. they are not proving anything except how stubborn they both are and how much they love crafting arguments. which, while cool, is grating. i liked it better when it was an actual discussion. :(

[Medemia]

entertaining? i'd say annoying is more like it.
You don't really know what annoying is. Have you ever had a kid ask you, "Are we there yet" for hours on end because he saw it on a commercial?

what was a decently intelligent argument is deteriorating to an i said you said thing.
I never said that. You said that. It wasn't me. Stop putting words in my mouth and telling people that I am you. I'm not you. You're Hulky. I'm not.

they are not proving anything except how stubborn they both are and how much they love crafting arguments.
Man: Ah. I'd like to have an argument, please.
Receptionist: Certainly sir. Have you been here before?
Man: No, this is my first time.
Receptionist: I see. Well, do you want to have the full argument, or were you thinking of taking a course?
Man: Well, what would be the cost?
Receptionist: Well, It's one pound for a five minute argument, but only eight pounds for a course of ten.
Man: Well, I think it's probably best if I start with the one and then see how it goes from there, okay?
Receptionist: Fine. I'll see who's free at the moment.
(Pause)
Receptionist: Mr. DeBakey's free, but he's a little bit conciliatory.
Ahh yes, Try Mr. Barnard; room 12.
Man: Thank you.
(Walks down the hall. Opens door.)

which, while cool, is grating. i liked it better when it was an actual discussion. :(
Angry man: WHADDAYOU WANT?
Man: Well, Well, I was told outside that...
Angry man: DON'T GIVE ME THAT, YOU SNOTTY-FACED HEAP OF PARROT DROPPINGS!
Man: What?
Angry man: SHUT YOUR FESTERING GOB, YOU TIT! YOUR TYPE MAKES ME PUKE! YOU VACUOUS TOFFEE-NOSED MALODOROUS PERVERT!
Man: Yes, but I came here for an argument!!
Angry man: OH! Oh! I'm sorry! This is abuse!
Man: Oh! Oh I see!
Angry man: Aha! No, you want room 12A, next door.
M: Oh...Sorry...
Angry man: Not at all! (under his breath) stupid git.

[Sinyra]

You don't really know what annoying is. Have you ever had a kid ask you, "Are we there yet" for hours on end because he saw it on a commercial?


I never said that. You said that. It wasn't me. Stop putting words in my mouth and telling people that I am you. I'm not you. You're Hulky. I'm not.


Man: Ah. I'd like to have an argument, please.
Receptionist: Certainly sir. Have you been here before?
Man: No, this is my first time.
Receptionist: I see. Well, do you want to have the full argument, or were you thinking of taking a course?
Man: Well, what would be the cost?
Receptionist: Well, It's one pound for a five minute argument, but only eight pounds for a course of ten.
Man: Well, I think it's probably best if I start with the one and then see how it goes from there, okay?
Receptionist: Fine. I'll see who's free at the moment.
(Pause)
Receptionist: Mr. DeBakey's free, but he's a little bit conciliatory.
Ahh yes, Try Mr. Barnard; room 12.
Man: Thank you.
(Walks down the hall. Opens door.)


Angry man: WHADDAYOU WANT?
Man: Well, Well, I was told outside that...
Angry man: DON'T GIVE ME THAT, YOU SNOTTY-FACED HEAP OF PARROT DROPPINGS!
Man: What?
Angry man: SHUT YOUR FESTERING GOB, YOU TIT! YOUR TYPE MAKES ME PUKE! YOU VACUOUS TOFFEE-NOSED MALODOROUS PERVERT!
Man: Yes, but I came here for an argument!!
Angry man: OH! Oh! I'm sorry! This is abuse!
Man: Oh! Oh I see!
Angry man: Aha! No, you want room 12A, next door.
M: Oh...Sorry...
Angry man: Not at all! (under his breath) stupid git.

lol. nice. :)

[shurtugal]

I have found out who Uniq secretly is; Yes Uniq, the secret is out. No more hiding, Barack Obama!