"I find your overwhelming curiousity quite morbid. What is it you REALLY want to know?" Just an answer to part of my original question and thank you for being forthcoming so far. What was your induction month/year? "Would it give you a thrill if I told you I was at My Lei and killed women and little children?" No. "That I am really Lt. Calley?" No. "Are you sitting there now tearing wings off of insects?" Nope.
I am afraid if you need to know more about me, you should tell me something about yourself. A good start would be your age, gender and social security number. Looking forward to hearing from you, rs7
rs7, i have to apologize, i inadvertently kept referring to you as r7. may have to buy some glasses as old age comes creeping up, hmm. anyway, i wouldn't worry to much about about max's trial shots at inquisition methods. we ascertained earlier that there most certainly is no material justification to his attempts, as you do not need to have been a soldier let alone have been involved in warfare to be able to imagine death or mutilation on the one hand, or come to an educated assessment of strategic diplomatic, geopolitical and economic consequences of war on the other. and that, very obviously, is also why your combat background is absolutely immaterial to the content of your posts. all max is trying to do is get off some cheap shots at those who disagree with his and W's position, said position being characterized, inter alia, by splendid isolation, by trying to undermine their credibility and integrity through dissembling and spin spinning merrily away. brent scowcroft, national security advisor to presidents gerald ford & george bush senior: Don't Attack Saddam It would undermine our antiterror efforts http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110002133
great post, rs7. Senior lawmakers from both parties -- including Sens. John McCain and Richard Durbin, and House Minority Whip Nancy Pelosi -- who have been given a peek at some of this latest evidence of Iraq's ability to unleash weapons of mass destruction on the world have reacted with yawns and shrugs. "I heard nothing that was new, compelling, or that I have not heard before," said House Democratic Caucus Chairman Robert Menendez, while McCain termed his top-secret Rumsfeld briefing "a joke." It doesn't help matters that the White House has ignored repeated congressional requests to have the CIA produce a National Intelligence Estimate, the agency's most comprehensive level of analysis, on the threat posed by Iraq. Why the hesitancy? Are the president's men afraid that the results won't jibe with their doomsday -- "we're in imminent danger" -- party line? What makes it even harder to trust without verifying is that Team Bush doesn't exactly have the greatest track record when it comes to telling the truth. Back in 1990, when the first President Bush and then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney were trying to sell an invasion of Iraq to the world, one of the key selling points was top-secret Pentagon satellite photos that purportedly showed 250,000 Iraqi troops ready to storm across the border into the oil fields of Saudi Arabia. It sounded ominously convincing, until some Soviet satellite pictures taken at the same time surfaced, revealing an utter absence of Iraqi troops. Twelve years later, the same Dick Cheney is assuring us that today Saddam "constitutes as grave a threat as can be imagined." Color me unconvinced. http://www.ariannaonline.com/columns/files/092602.html
Oh, I don't know, vvv . . . what would give you that idea? 1. who appointed you inquisitor in chief doubting others? 2. so who did appoint you a modern day mcarthy or inquisitor in chief?? 3. why don't you just apply for the position of national chief inquisitor for hiomeland defense, 4. your instrumentalized attack on r7's credibility 5. how, pray, should r7 be able to, hmm, verify his claims on a public board? what difference does it make to the material content of his message? 6. his military background has zero, nada, to do with the material content of his message. 7. all you're doing here is a cheap attempt to undermine the credibility of others 8. you do not need to have been a soldier let alone have been involved in warfare to be able to imagine death or mutilation 9. that is why r7's background of having or having not been a combat veteran is absolutely immaterial to the content of his posts 10. not going all out and making the accusation, no, just subtly implying that r7 lied about being a vet, when you know and i know that there is not a chance in a million to prove or disprove that point 11. as for r7, oh dear, we are moving in a circle here. 12. challenging the integrity of people here by pretending to desire knowledge of issues that cannot be proven in a board like this, and that have no relevance to the contents of r7's posts. 13. yes, and thoroughly right those allegations are too. 14. we ascertained earlier that there most certainly is no material justification to his attempts, as you do not need to have been a soldier let alone have been involved in warfare . . .
spin spinning happily away as ever... and, oh yes, very valid points in your post about yourself. no doubt. unfortunately, during all your time consuming spin activities, you haven't yet seem to have found an opportunity to answer my question i wrote earlier: i do wonder, though, what with max's insistence on delving into others private backgrounds just to shed some doubt on the material content of their messages, if the dear boy, now that we have verified his gender, is actually planning on applying for a tour of duty himself? or if he would prefer to be a couch potato warrior, getting his thrills from watching manipulated tv coverage of the war that makes it magically appear surgically precise and clean, with a remote control as his only weapon and a beer or two his only consolation for a missed opportunity to hmm, go kick some ass. but, then again, how could he prove his reply to us? oh dear. brent scowcroft, national security advisor to presidents gerald ford & george bush senior: Don't Attack Saddam It would undermine our antiterror efforts http://www.opinionjournal.com/edito...ml?id=110002133