What sources of information are objectively credible?

potroastV2 · Dec 9, 2015

Jesus, I actually watched a few seconds of that crap!

When a grown man makes his voice go up to a woman's high pitch like that, to act like he's fuming, it just makes HIM the pussy.

Just another lifer jarhead.

:mrgreen:

god1 · Dec 9, 2015

rollitup said:
Jesus, I actually watched a few seconds of that crap!

When a grown man makes his voice go up to a woman's high pitch like that, to act like he's fuming, it just makes HIM the pussy.

Just another lifer jarhead.

Yeah, that's it, make fun of the Jarhead's that have given up their lives for your worthless ass all these years.

Doesn't seem worthwhile does it?

.

MuyLocoNC · Dec 9, 2015

rollitup said:
Jesus, I actually watched a few seconds of that crap!

When a grown man makes his voice go up to a woman's high pitch like that, to act like he's fuming, it just makes HIM the pussy.

Just another lifer jarhead.

First off, he was US Army, not Marines.

Getting past that, I doubt you would have made it a week into his time of service.

Unfortunately for sizzlechest cowards like yourself, they don't have a MOS for sitting around, brushing your hair, Goldilocks.

Harrekin · Dec 10, 2015

see4 said:
Huh? No. Fox Business brought these guests on as points of fact. They are not. Fox Business used these guests as substance for some agenda they had at the moment. Fox Business can only be trusted for displaying the stock ticker that runs across the screen, that's it.

Even at that, I'd imagine they get that wrong most of the time.

Bloomberg is better for watching tickers.

potroastV2 · Dec 10, 2015

MuyLocoNC said:
First off, he was US Army, not Marines.

Getting past that, I doubt you would have made it a week into his time of service.

Unfortunately for sizzlechest cowards like yourself, they don't have a MOS for sitting around, brushing your hair, Goldilocks.

Wrong again, redneck!

When the Vietnam War was raging, I dropped out of college to enlist, because I thought it was the patriotic thing to do. I did four years in the service, and then went back to college when I got out. So I know what a jarhead is.

:mrgreen:

MuyLocoNC · Dec 10, 2015

rollitup said:
Wrong again, redneck!

When the Vietnam War was raging, I dropped out of college to enlist, because I thought it was the patriotic thing to do. I did four years in the service, and then went back to college when I got out. So I know what a jarhead is.

So a former Lt Colonel who served in the U.S. Army is a "Jarhead" in your world? Just disregarding the fact that every other living soul in the military and out, use the term exclusively for Marines?

If your previous service claim is true, you just went up a notch in my book. That brings you to notch 1.

see4 · Dec 10, 2015

god1 said:
Yeah, that's it, make fun of the Jarhead's that have given up their lives for your worthless ass all these years.

Doesn't seem worthwhile does it?

.

Not since the American Civil War has a soldier "given up their lives" for anyone on American soil. Your claim inaccurately reflects the sacrifice of our military and who exactly they are making their sacrifice for.

MuyLocoNC · Dec 10, 2015

see4 said:
Not since the American Civil War has a soldier "given up their lives" for anyone on American soil. Your claim inaccurately reflects the sacrifice of our military and who exactly they are making their sacrifice for.

What about Pearl Harbor? Navy personnel are soldiers and plenty of them died on Hawaiian/American soil. I would contend the harbor is our soil as well. Soldiers and pilots were also killed on the U.S. Army Air Force bases during the attack.

2008 Navy members killed
218 Army soldiers/airman killed
109 Marines killed

Many more injured as well as civilian casualties.

Embassies are also considered American soil.

god1 · Dec 10, 2015

see4 said:
Not since the American Civil War has a soldier "given up their lives" for anyone on American soil. Your claim inaccurately reflects the sacrifice of our military and who exactly they are making their sacrifice for.

I know he's your buddy, but he says some really stupid stuff. I know we all do, but his bias just rubs me the wrong way.

I have a strong dislike for hypocrites, especially when they claim to have a dislike for authority but then use their position to quell opposing thought. Only because they can. He claims to have a strong dislike for "pigs" then behaves like one.

Now, I'm basing this on reports that he is the person that allowed Buck to get away with the crap that he did, and that others couldn't. If this is untrue, I stand corrected and expect somebody will set me straight.

.

see4 · Dec 10, 2015

MuyLocoNC said:
What about Pearl Harbor? Navy personnel are soldiers and plenty of them died on Hawaiian/American soil. I would contend the harbor is our soil as well. Soldiers and pilots were also killed on the U.S. Army Air Force bases during the attack.

2008 Navy members killed
218 Army soldiers/airman killed
109 Marines killed

Many more injured as well as civilian casualties.

Embassies are also considered American soil.

I stand corrected, WWII is another example.

Troops that fought in Desert Storm and Iraqi Freedom (and the like) were not fighting to protect the safety of American's on US soil. They were fighting wars based on lies, politics and greed. Nothing more.

see4 · Dec 10, 2015

god1 said:
I know he's your buddy, but he says some really stupid stuff. I know we all do, but his bias just rubs me the wrong way.

I have a strong dislike for hypocrites, especially when they claim to have a dislike for authority but then use their position to quell opposing thought. Only because they can. He claims to have a strong dislike for "pigs" then behaves like one.

Now, I'm basing this on reports that he is the person that allowed Buck to get away with the crap that he did, and that others couldn't. If this is untrue, I stand corrected and expect somebody will set me straight.

.

Why does his bias differ from your bias? He has an opinion on something, and so do you. He justifies his with an explanation, and so have you. However we aren't debating his bias, we are debating whether US troops, Jarheads in particular, are fighting currently to protect our "freedoms". My contention is they are not. They are fighting, troops are losing their lives because President Bush and his dumb dumb cabinet convinced the constituent of politicians to go to a war based on lies, political agenda and money.

see4 · Dec 10, 2015

rollitup said:
Jesus, I actually watched a few seconds of that crap!

When a grown man makes his voice go up to a woman's high pitch like that, to act like he's fuming, it just makes HIM the pussy.

Just another lifer jarhead.

He sounds like a whiney Ross Perot with his balls in a vise.

He's not a jarhead, he's a Republican. Much much dumber.

god1 · Dec 10, 2015

see4 said:
Why does his bias differ from your bias? He has an opinion on something, and so do you. He justifies his with an explanation, and so have you. However we aren't debating his bias, we are debating whether US troops, Jarheads in particular, are fighting currently to protect our "freedoms". My contention is they are not. They are fighting, troops are losing their lives because President Bush and his dumb dumb cabinet convinced the constituent of politicians to go to a war based on lies, political agenda and money.

Fair enough, I was attempting to explain why I responded to him at all.

To be clear, it's not that he has a bias, it's his hypocritical behavior that irritates me. He claims to have a strong dislike for "cops and pigs" but then assumes said behavior.

His pigsty, he can do as he sees fit.

Re your troop claim; they go where they're ordered to go. Their sacrifice is for home land and occupants. Whether you want to interpret that as a direct reflection on your freedom or not is your choice.

Your beef is with our country's administrative branch and governing process in general.

see4 · Dec 10, 2015

god1 said:
Re your troop claim; they go where they're ordered to go. Their sacrifice is for home land and occupants. Whether you want to interpret that as a direct reflection on your freedom or not is your choice.

Your beef is with our country's administrative branch and governing process in general.

You are absolutely correct, troops do what they are told, all the way up the MCoC. The Joint Chiefs of Staff, the highest ranking military official, is told what to do. Which means you cannot fault them for their actions (unless criminal) -- but at the same time, you can't give them praise for something they haven't done.

I am no more safe today than I was 14 years ago. Homeland Security has done a decent job protecting our soil and its inhabitants from terrorists in the sky, but that's about it. The troops spread out all over the world are not protecting my personal safety nor are they protecting my freedom. And when I was in the military jumping out of planes practicing my Flight Paramedic skills, I was not protecting anyone's freedoms either.

The fine young men and women who served during WWII, the Spanish-American War and the Civil War were fighting for my safety and my freedom. Today's jarheads are fighting for the almighty dollar, whether they want to or not. Because they have to do what they are told.

MuyLocoNC · Dec 11, 2015

see4 said:
You are absolutely correct, troops do what they are told, all the way up the MCoC. The Joint Chiefs of Staff, the highest ranking military official, is told what to do. Which means you cannot fault them for their actions (unless criminal) -- but at the same time, you can't give them praise for something they haven't done.

I am no more safe today than I was 14 years ago. Homeland Security has done a decent job protecting our soil and its inhabitants from terrorists in the sky, but that's about it. The troops spread out all over the world are not protecting my personal safety nor are they protecting my freedom. And when I was in the military jumping out of planes practicing my Flight Paramedic skills, I was not protecting anyone's freedoms either.

The fine young men and women who served during WWII, the Spanish-American War and the Civil War were fighting for my safety and my freedom. Today's jarheads are fighting for the almighty dollar, whether they want to or not. Because they have to do what they are told.

While I agree with much of the content in your post, I think you're discounting the very real and tangible effect of letting your dogs off the chain every once in awhile as a reminder to those who would seek to harm us, that retribution will be swift and excessive. You kill 3000 of ours, we spend 10+ years killing between 1.3 - 4 million of yours and anyone else that lives in your vicinity. While it may not deter the maniacal zealots (nothing will short of death will), it does send a very clear message to the rest of the world. Something along the lines of you mess with the bull, you get the horns.

We may disagree on much about the war on terror, but I would strongly disagree that the show of excessive and frightening force abroad doesn't contribute to the defense of our own soil.

see4 · Dec 11, 2015

MuyLocoNC said:
While I agree with much of the content in your post, I think you're discounting the very real and tangible effect of letting your dogs off the chain every once in awhile as a reminder to those who would seek to harm us, that retribution will be swift and excessive. You kill 3000 of ours, we spend 10+ years killing between 1.3 - 4 million of yours and anyone else that lives in your vicinity. While it may not deter the maniacal zealots (nothing will short of death will), it does send a very clear message to the rest of the world. Something along the lines of you mess with the bull, you get the horns.

We may disagree on much about the war on terror, but I would strongly disagree that the show of excessive and frightening force abroad doesn't contribute to the defense of our own soil.

In general we live in a civil society, and every once and a while some jackass comes along ruins the party and sticks his dick in the mashed potatoes. That party pooper right now are the radical Muslims highly regarded in the Islamic state; where ever they may be. With the birth of ISIS I would actually tend to agree with you, that our military presence should be stronger now than ever before. If we had this discussion 3 years ago, I'd completely disagree.

I take it you've never read the book, "The Art of War" -- having done so, you'd know Sun Tzu would highly disapprove of the United States military actions.

"The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting."
"Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a hundred battles without disaster."
"Know thy self, know thy enemy, a thousand battles, a thousand victories."

It's no coincidence many successful war time officers read this book, along with some of the most successful executives around the world.

Hot tempers never get people anywhere good.

MuyLocoNC · Dec 11, 2015

see4 said:
In general we live in a civil society, and every once and a while some jackass comes along ruins the party and sticks his dick in the mashed potatoes. That party pooper right now are the radical Muslims highly regarded in the Islamic state; where ever they may be. With the birth of ISIS I would actually tend to agree with you, that our military presence should be stronger now than ever before. If we had this discussion 3 years ago, I'd completely disagree.

I take it you've never read the book, "The Art of War" -- having done so, you'd know Sun Tzu would highly disapprove of the United States military actions.

"The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting."
"Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a hundred battles without disaster."
"Know thy self, know thy enemy, a thousand battles, a thousand victories."

It's no coincidence many successful war time officers read this book, along with some of the most successful executives around the world.

Hot tempers never get people anywhere good.

It's funny you should mention that book, I have an annotated collectors edition. One of my favorite reads, right up there with my signed copy of Tao of Jeet Kune Do. I was going to post a few quotes that back up my theory, I'm just too tired and you probably already know them. He also didn't have the ability to bombard his enemies into the Stone Age from great distances. I think a great many of his tactics would have evolved significantly after due consideration to technological advances in warfare.

But, I dig the argument.

see4 · Dec 11, 2015

MuyLocoNC said:
It's funny you should mention that book, I have an annotated collectors edition. One of my favorite reads, right up there with my signed copy of Tao of Jeet Kune Do. I was going to post a few quotes that back up my theory, I'm just too tired and you probably already know them. He also didn't have the ability to bombard his enemies into the Stone Age from great distances. I think a great many of his tactics would have evolved significantly after due consideration to technological advances in warfare.

But, I dig the argument.

Valid point. What he dealt with then is nothing as it is now. Similar to how our Founding Fathers viewed guns and militia when drafting the Constitution.

And yea, Sun Tzu never had to deal with Jihadists.

Great book nonetheless.

What sources of information are objectively credible?

potroastV2

Well-Known Member

god1

Well-Known Member

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member

Harrekin

Well-Known Member

potroastV2

Well-Known Member

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member

see4

Well-Known Member

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member

god1

Well-Known Member

see4

Well-Known Member

see4

Well-Known Member

see4

Well-Known Member

god1

Well-Known Member

see4

Well-Known Member

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member

see4

Well-Known Member

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member

see4

Well-Known Member

Similar threads