Please DO NOT ASK AGAIN WHY

The annoyance I wish to elaborate on tonight is the one regarding my writing abilities. You seem determined to hurt my feelings. Yes some of these sentences are sloppy, and I thought opining to be an err, but nonetheless I obviously made a mistake which I truly regret. When and if I decide to present you with your very own perfectly edited broadside you'll know it.

So that you clearly understand what is going on. I've lost all interest in debating on the topic of innocent dead Iraqi children of bovine-like families. In their place I've decided to argue about interesting subjects, as you've no abililty of creating subjects. As- and now I reiterate- all you seem capable of doing is relying on my given information, invectives, and subjects as
subjects for our debates. How consdierate of you, very giving. Maybe I'll decide to believe that you're working in the philanthropy industry.

Before we continue I'd like to know a bit about you so that I can then bash you for your flaws as you've preyed upon my vulnerabilities which I've set for you. Of course you denied this request before, and so I now can only expect you to honor it because I'm showing you to be the coward that you truly are. Showing to who I don't know because I doubt anyone is following this ridiculousness.

Of course, I find this anonymity situation to be very cowardly on your part.

Regarding your use of my invectives against me. It's pathetic, and I'm not surprised that you cannot comprehend why.

Regarding your writing. Yes, congratulations. You've spent years more than I writing and training, yet all you seem capable of is reiterations, which remind me of the way a child learns social skills. By the time I've spent as much time as you learning, your scholarliness will seem more base than it currently does.

If you think that you're a better writer than me then I challenge you to a poetry contest. I expect your next post to be your original work of any style.

If you are anything but an artless pedant you will meet this challenge, and we shall decide once and for all who is the boorish fool, and who is the greatest best.

 

If you think that you're a better writer than me then I also challenge you to a poety contest. I expect you to reply with an original piece of art. If not then surely you'll continue writing using smiley faces, retard.

 

I lived in Las Vegas in 1991. At that time, Nellis AFB in North Las Vegas was the home of the F117s (later moved to Tonapah I believe). As well as F16s and F15s which are still there AFAIK.

Right after the Gulf War I happened to be in a casino in which several supposed (self proclaimed) fighter pilots who said they just got back from the war were boasting about strafing civilians.

I was sickened.

I don't know if they were for real or not. They were all quite drunk and whooping it up at a crap table. Maybe they weren't even pilots. Maybe they were just some assholes who somehow got into the Air Force and their real job was cleaning latrines. I had no way of knowing.

But they were certainly AF guys. They were not however in uniform, and anything is possible. But they were in the right place to have been just back from the Gulf.

Personally, I knew a ton of guys that were in Vietnam. I never heard one single one of them ever saying they shot at, dropped bombs on, or in any way were aggressors toward civilians. And yet in THAT war, "civilians" were, in many cases, the enemy. Women and children DID fight with/for the Viet Cong. (Although in most cases they had little choice....a fact overlooked or more likely unknown by the anti-war protestors of the time).

It is hard to imagine an American pilot doing anything so criminally insane. I would think that with all the high standards required to become a pilot, a psychological profile would be part of the routine (I don't know this....just guessing).

But there are psychos all over the world. American soldiers, like any group of humans, cannot be 100% "right in the head".

So anything is possible. War crimes happen. They are committed by members of any army. Remember the My Lai massacre? One Lt. (Calley) took the fall pretty much. And even so, he was put under house arrest for a while. He may have served some real prison time as well...I really don't remember. But he was not prosecuted as a murderer.

War Sucks. Some aspects of it are more horrible than is imaginable. But while I admire our troops and know that our guys in the armed forces are virtually all heroes, there will always be a rotten apple somewhere.

My son is in the process of becoming a Navy officer. I have met and spoken with quite a few of his "mates". Every single one of them are the kinds of kids you would want your sisters and daughters to be with.

The kind of discipline it takes to stay in the program is beyond belief. I could write 50 pages of what he has told me about how easy it is to wash out. I won't. I don't need to. There are enough ET guys who are vets to know. Possibly even some who were officers (chances get much slimmer there).

Our countries officers are really the cream of the crop. But again, there will always be aberrations. Regular enlistees are not held to as high standards. So yes, American soldiers can and do commit atrocities. Thankfully they are extremely rare.


RS

 

What goes arounc comes around, Brother Error404...

When we suffer the next 911 (and we will), we should not expect the sympathy of the Civilized World, who have had enough of our global campaign of self-interested mass-murder...

We should (collectively) blame ourselves for whatever hits our shores, for 'we are the people', and the IQ-deficient, mass murderer Bush is (unfortunately) our elected (give or take a few chaffs) leader...

 

Candle.....you know I love you like a BROTHER. But something is wrong with your dosage lately. Are you taking too much? Or not enough? Are you even looking at the labels on the vials?

Have a little more faith. We will prevail. And we have survived worse than Bush. He may be a little "deficient" but calling him a "mass murderer" is a bit over the top. We called LBJ that, and really in retrospect, he did what he thought was right. It wasn't, he realized it, and he dropped out. Along came Nixon, who was truly insane. And still he managed to wind down the shit.

No question Bush truly believes he is doing what must be done. His position is not unreasonable. His methods just suck, but his objectives are correct. We cannot let ourselves be seen as a soft target. A docile country that can be pounded into submission by terror.

As for Mr. Bush's "deficiency"....well, thankfully, as you said, "we the people" are really in charge. And if the very eloquent POTUS can't get things done, the next dude will get his shot. That's how it works.

President Bush: John.

Reporter: Thank you, Mr. President ... What would your biggest mistake be, would you say, and what lessons have you learned from it?

Bush: Hmm. I wish you would have given me this written question ahead of time, so I could plan for it. ... You know, I just, uh, I'm sure something will pop into my head here in the midst of this press conference, with all the pressure of trying to come up with an answer, but it hadn't yet. .. I, uh, hope I -- I don't want to sound like I've made no mistakes. I'm confident I have. I just haven't -- you just put me under the spot here, and maybe I'm not as quick on my feet as I should be in coming up with one.

Text: Suggestions for the next time Bush is asked about his mistakes...

Text: "Mission accomplished."

Text: "We found the weapons of mass destruction."

Text: "Bring 'em on."

Text: Credibility is on the ballot this November

Keep the faith brother Candle. We ARE the good guys! We will win. This is NOT Vietnam. We have a REASON to fight now.

Peace (anyway)
RS

 

I would never hurt a child. I have been trying to teach you a lesson by dealing you a verbal spanking of sorts. To point out that when you make abominable statements you cannot expect the rest of the world to ignore them. Eventually you will be called to defend them. In this case you failed. But, as you grow older and mature, you will (hopefully) refrain from putting your foot in your mouth as often. Not to mention learn some humility and common sense.

In other words, you concede defeat. The white flag is raised, presented and accepted.

As usual you give yourself far too much credit. The sole subject of yours that I have had any true interest in debating is the ridiculous statements you made regarding the dead children. That it went off in various directions due to your inability and frustrations to defend those statements is your fault, not mine.

As for responding to invectives, yes, I shall. You may still be a child, but not quite young enough to let insults fly without addressing them. Your parents obviously did not spank you enough when you were even less developed than you are now, if at all.

Believe what you will. It matters little to me.

You have clearly reached the point of desperation. Your pathetic yearning to salvage your dignity is on public display. Pleading for a straw on which to pin your hopes to direct further conjecture is such a sad, sad thing. Besides, I have readily admitted to faults, and to being wrong about many things in my life. But just for shits and giggles, what would you like to know about me? That is, other than what you have already decided you know about me?

As I have stated previously, this is the internet. Only a fool reveals personal information in cyberspace. And you have hardly posted your biography now, have you? Aside from the psychological abnormalities that you have revealed in your rantings, all I know about you - assuming you haven't lied about these as well - is that you "were raised in Marin county with the finest of everything," that you consider yourself a great artist of some sort, that you are a nature lover, that you own a non-profit corporation, are a sophomore in college, and are Jewish. If it makes you feel any better, I will impart the following: I was not raised with the finest of everything, I do not consider myself a great artist, I do not own a non-profit corporation, have graduated from college, have lived in eleven countries, was in the military for a few years, enjoy the outdoors, am fond of volleyball and basketball, used to play the drums (admittedly not that well), and I am not Jewish. All in all you now know more about me on a general level than I do you.

For what? I have never claimed that I am a great writer, only that you are subpar.

It's a shame you skipped those lessons.

Ah, you can predict the future, too. I have misgivings that you are truly capable of learning as you appear to believe that you already know it all.

ROFL! What next, a race on the monkey bars? A showdown building sand castles? Anyway, as evidenced throughout our exchanges, I am undoubtedly the better writer. But I make no claim to poetic greatness. You obviously do, so by all means post an original poem with which to validate yourself.

You may now rest your sphincter.

 

My goodness this thread is long.

I usually try to stay out of these exchanges but I thought I would offer my 2 cents. Much like making 2 cent on a trade in market when a roundtrip is 2 cents a share, it probably doesn’t mean $hit, but I think I'll write anyway?

Many apologies if someone has brought it up before. I read up to about page 12 but am sleepy as heck and got tired of scanning through all of the bad language and personal attacks to get to the main arguments. Many of you have very good ones not only that I have heard before, but also ones that I have not.

Although I have my own opinions, I always try to keep an open mind. One of the things that has helped me do that is to think about what would have unfolded if something that did happen actually hadn’t.

One example is 9/11. Had it not happened, we probably could have ignored Osama, Saddam probably could have been left alone also. But Osama would still have been preaching that Americans are infidels and continue to plot ways to change or punish them in a way that he felt was ideal. Saddam and the kids, who probably weren’t doing wonders for the Iraqis (personal opinion – you are welcome to ignore it), with or without WMD would continue to build up the Iraqi military.

So when does the anybody get to act on something? Intelligence on something that’s about to happen is never 100% complete. Sometimes it’s not 100% complete even after the fact as is seen many times in legal trials. Without commenting on the initial response to Afghanistan, if it was considered as a warning that perhaps the U.S. should be weary of people / countries that could potentially do it some harm then what else could it have done given what intelligence it had on Iraq? Perhaps 9/11 was the just the trigger/excuse to act on what intelligence already existed.

(I know that last little bit was getting kind of one sided. I may be getting worse but I’ll try to stay balanced.)

I’m going to draw a few parallels (as weak as they may be). In the case of dealing with Osama, I equate it to something similar to drinking and driving. Osama is welcome to talk about jihad and how Americans are infidels etc. It’s like driving with one drink in you system an hour after the fact. In each case, it’s a personal call, nothing illegal and chances are it will only be held against you if something really bad happens that might be your fault right afterwards. Fast forwarding through all of the in betweens, if you have tons of drinks, fire up the car and hit and kill a few families on your way to church, regardless of what your relationship is to that family, your ass is probably going to have to be punished. Just like Osama. He got to do his thing until it was too much for people to bear (9/11) and then it was time to do something about it.

Finally here’s where Saddam and Iraq come in. Now that the triggering accident has happened, law enforcers are probably going to be more sensitive to what people are thinking and try to tighten laws and punish offenders. Let’s say the above event did happen and the families are dead and the area is up in arms over drunk drivers and the law enforcement that let it happen. This time a different car is swaying and gets pulled over by a cop; different person too. There was reason to pull the person over, the car was swaying. There is no immediate danger as it is late at night and there are few cars and few people walking. Let’s say that the person has a history of having a few drinks but he has always been under the legal limit. Let’s even throw in a small fender bender with a parked car a few years back. No harm to any people in that past incident. The cops look into the car, the person seems a little inebriated, there are bottles of liquor all over the floor. Now lets say that the only breath detector is in town is at the police station which is an hour away. It’s being brought out to the site to test the suspect but the whole time the person is sobering up and desperately trying to shake off the buzz. If the cop decides to just forget the breath test and book him and suspend his license for drunk driving anyway and throw him in jail for not cooperating at the station, he runs the risk of being sued and the whole episode being on Dateline. If he doesn’t and next week the same person gets liquored up, and drives through a crowd of school kids. Then what happens. Now here’s the fun part. What happens when the public finds out about the incident from the week before? There was no liquor in the car. The person may have been on the way to a recycling depot weeks after the liquor was consumed. The car was swaying could have been bumps in the road. The person looking drunk could have been just tired. That’s no crime. What will the people think about that?

I hope you see the parallels. Maybe it’s just the 22 hours that I’ve been awake is just playing tricks on me. If you don’t, say so and I’ll complete the thought when I have time.

Now here goes the full out opinion, or what seems like an opinion to me.

So for all you who don’t want anything done in Iraq, when would be a good time. Osama was only thinking about it. Heck, Saddam was probably too. When’s a good time to take proactive or reactive action? Would it make it better if Saddam/Iraq (I have no idea how) takes out West Virginia? What would the American President’s response to all of the cries asking why nothing was done when we had so much information? What if the tragedy happens in another developed nation? Is it good enough that the UN says that the weapons inspectors were there doing their best to find the proof to take action? Should the people of Iraq just be left alone now that the perceived threat to the US has been neutralized?

2 pages of rambling… enough for now… I’ve written enough to make myself happy even though there’s lots more where it came from… I know it’s coming so I might as well invite it… LET ME HAVE IT!…. Tell me I’m an idiot. Tell me I’m a moron. I have no idea what I’m talking about. I’m actually drinking and typing. Here I’ll start us off…

Je$u$ F*%king Ch(eye)st DTK!
WTF are you talking about?
Did your mother hold you under water while you were a child?
Did you fail to qualify for the Special (mental) Olympics?
If your as UGLY as you are DUMB then you should post your picture to accompany the horrific ones we already have on this thread!!!

Bring it on baby….


PS - Back on the topic of the original post... There are always civilian casualties. Bad things happen to good and innocent people all the time. Different people people will have their opinions and those who still need to ask will continue to do so.

 

Not an unreasonable assumption. But nonetheless your post is no less coherent than most from those who are bright eyed and bushy tailed and at their very best

Better and more noble to flame yourself with humor than to wait for the seemingly more and more frequent personal attacks. Good move. Preemptive. (Like our war in Iraq) LOL

Peace,
RS

 

DTK - Well done, well said and clearly thought out. Clearly an adult analogy.

 

"I would never hurt a child. I have been trying to teach you a lesson by dealing you a verbal spanking of sorts. To point out that when you make abominable statements you cannot expect the rest of the world to ignore them. Eventually you will be called to defend them. In this case you failed. But, as you grow older and mature, you will (hopefully) refrain from putting your foot in your mouth as often. Not to mention learn some humility and common sense. "

A verbal spanking, what a joke. You mimic my every thought. If I were to go through this post and point out for you, every response of yours that is a direct result of affectation, maybe then you'd see how utterly stupid is the idea
that you're verbally spanking me. What you're doing is spurring my, through your confusion, already ridiculously oversized, confidence.

"In other words, you concede defeat. The white flag is raised, presented and accepted."

You lost the dead children debate days ago, and my attempt at instilling logic in your illogical brain is a waste of my time. If I haven't already received your recognition of your defeat then I'm probably not going to. And so, I've now explained to you one of the basic understandings of our debate.

It seems to me that your best strategy is to pretend that your logic is still the most logical, and to pretend that we've not yet had the debate. If this isn't your strategy then you're as idiotic as I think you're.



"As usual you give yourself far too much credit. The sole subject of yours that I have had any true interest in debating is the ridiculous statements you made regarding the dead children. That it went off in various directions due to your inability and frustrations to defend those statements is your fault, not mine."


The dead children debate ended days ago, you're just too slow to realize this. We debated the dead children and you lost on all points yet refuse to remember and admit defeat. Why would I feel the need to argue this point again. Therefore I've moved on to what I consider a basis for your defeat, namely your illogic. You're beginning to act like a schizophrenic.

"As for responding to invectives, yes, I shall. You may still be a child, but not quite young enough to let insults fly without addressing them. Your parents obviously did not spank you enough when you were even less developed than you are now, if at all."

My parents didn't believe in such primitive modes of instruction. Your's did?

"Believe what you will. It matters little to me."

Another infantile statement.

"You have clearly reached the point of desperation. Your pathetic yearning to salvage your dignity is on public display. Pleading for a straw on which to pin your hopes to direct further conjecture is such a sad, sad thing. Besides, I have readily admitted to faults, and to being wrong about many things in my life. But just for shits and giggles, what would you like to know about me? That is, other than what you have already decided you know about me?"

I want to better understand your problems so that I may point them out to you, enlighten you and help you more than I've already done. You're a far better entity now that you poses my ideas and tactics then you were previously without. If you are in any way a noble entity, you'll thank me.

Do you believe in god?
Do you practice a religion?
Where were you born and where were you raised?
A summary of your education.
Are you married?
Do you have children?
What state do you live in?
Do you have siblings?
What is your racial identity?





"As I have stated previously, this is the internet. Only a fool reveals personal information in cyberspace. And you have hardly posted your biography now, have you? Aside from the psychological abnormalities that you have revealed in your rantings, all I know about you - assuming you haven't lied about these as well - is that you "were raised in Marin county with the finest of everything," that you consider yourself a great artist of some sort, that you are a nature lover, that you own a non-profit corporation, are a sophomore in college, and are Jewish. If it makes you feel any better, I will impart the following: I was not raised with the finest of everything, I do not consider myself a great artist, I do not own a non-profit corporation, have graduated from college, have lived in eleven countries, was in the military for a few years, enjoy the outdoors, am fond of volleyball and basketball, used to play the drums (admittedly not that well), and I am not Jewish. All in all you now know more about me on a general level than I do you."

"For what? I have never claimed that I am a great writer, only that you are subpar."



You and everyone else know damn well who between us is more intelligent, and who the better writer is.

"It's a shame you skipped those lessons."

It's horrifying that your entire personality is a generic outcome of cowardice, insecurity, and artlessness. It's pathetic that you allow this after I tell you it's so. It's grotesque that your ability of introspection is at the level of an adolescent. It's too bad that you need to use my subjects, my ideas, as fodder for your replies. It's uninspiring that I need to explain to you your flaws after I've only known you, and through electronic posts, for a short while. It's a shame that you're willing to continue to use lopsided logic after I've exploded your misconceptions.

"Ah, you can predict the future, too. I have misgivings that you are truly capable of learning as you appear to believe that you already know it all. "

I know more than you.

"ROFL! What next, a race on the monkey bars? A showdown building sand castles? Anyway, as evidenced throughout our exchanges, I am undoubtedly the better writer. But I make no claim to poetic greatness. You obviously do, so by all means post an original poem with which to validate yourself."

No, you bash this very challenge because you're an artless person incapable of poetry. Incapable of art. Incapable of originality. Incapable of anything that isn't ordinary. You're a military idiot. You probably believe in god. You cannot admit your flaws. You cannot admit defeat. You mimic me like a child using my invectives against me. You reason that all this is acceptable because you're moderately educated and can write- even though you write using other people's ideas.

You're a follower, a liar- you lie to yourself- a coward, brainwashed, and your logic is based on antiquated ethics. You cannot write better than me. You're erudition may be so that you can edit my papers and mimic my ideas but in no way are you a better writer than I. I will defeat you in any artistic display, be it essay writing, poetry, or visual art.

Your fear of meeting my challenge leads me to believe that you're scared to meet this challenge because you are completely devoid of poetry, art in any sense.

"You may now rest your sphincter."

This is a perfect example of what type of creativity you're capable of.