In article . com>,
"ravenlynne" > wrote:

> > If young men and women like your friends would stop volunteering to
> > fight in Iraq, what would the United States lose? Damned if I know!
>
> Not that this is the appropriate forum for this discussion, but:
>
> They'd just reinstitute the draft and force men to go. There is no
> escape. Luckily my husband has been lucky so far.....He's a naval
> musician and there's not much need for him over there yet.

That would be fine. That way, even the sons and daughters of
congressmen, including Bush's two daughters would be eligible to serve.
As it is now, you don't see the children of most politicians serving in
Iraq, nor the offspring of the very wealthy.

"Stan Horwitz" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> Dan Abel > wrote:
>
>> In article >,
>> Stan Horwitz > wrote:
>>
>>
>> > If young men and women like your friends would stop volunteering to
>> > fight in Iraq, what would the United States lose? Damned if I know! On
>> > the other hand, if people would stop volunteering to kill or be killed
>> > in Iraq, we would have fewer corpses being shipped to Dover, Delaware
>> > and the United States' VA hospitals would be less crowded.
>> >
>> > The war in Iraq is Bush's ego trip and failed oil grab. I see no reason
>> > to thank anyone for enabling Bush to continue his disastrous foreign
>> > policy. The truly patriotic thing for your friends to do is to stay out
>> > of Iraq, get educated, and become productive citizens.
>> >
>> > That's just my personal opinion, mind you!
>>
>> I don't agree. I worked for the US Army for three years (as a
>> civilian), and it was very clear that decisions about who to go to war
>> with are always made by civilians. The people who voluntarily join the
>> military (or get drafted) are just following orders.
>>
>> The people of the US elected GWB, and they are to blame for this, not
>> the soldiers.
>
> You have a point, only where soldiers who signed up before GWB invaded
> Iraq are concerned. Those who signed up after the Iraq war began do not
> get my sympathy.

This is taking a lot more self-control than I thought I could muster, but
I'm going to take the high road by just saying that regardless of you
opinion of them, those Americans are still out there 24 & 7, near and far,
protecting your right to say what you will. They were there before you
entered this world and they will be there long after you leave.

On 22 Nov 2006 15:11:41 -0800, "Sheldon" > wrote:

>
>sf wrote:
>> On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 08:58:12 -0800, "Dave Bugg" >
>> wrote:
>> >2. If someone wants to join the military for employment, so what? There is
>> >not a damned thing wrong with that. Military service is a noble pursuit.
>>
>> Certainly, but I don't advocate it as a default position - especially
>> in war time.... it has something to do with life, death and permanent
>> serious injuries.
>>
>> >3. What has this to do with the the reason for my original reply?
>>
>> What's wrong with you Dave? It's *not* the soliders' fault we're at
>> war and I didn't say it was.
>
>What's wrong with you... it's much more simplistic... ask yourself if
>you'd rather be speaking arabic or more likely have your head lopped
>off.

Oh, get over it. That's not even an option except among reactionary
rednecks with the IQ of a worm.

>Were it not for those who served in the big wars your kids would
>likely not have been born because you would have been in a mass
>kraut/gook grave.

WooHoo.... waving the flag and wrapping yourself up in it doesn't make
you anywhere near right.

>You are seriously mentally difficient... I know
>insects with a far higher IQ than yours.

Word's out that you aren't a candidate for the Nobel Prize either.

> Even though there are plenty
>of krauts/gooks who have US citizenship, in a NY minute each and every
>one of them wish for another opportunity. The US made a big mistake in
>not dropping another dozen atom bombs on Japan,

Oh, yeah.... we say that every time we buy electronics and autos.

>and done the same to
>the friggin' kraut bundt *******s. There ain't a jap/gook or a kraut
>on this planet today who ain't gleeful about the arab mother****ers
>trying to take over the US.
>

Watch out, your red neck is showing and it isn't a pretty sight.

>Bush is an idiot not becaue he attacked Afghanistan and Iraq, but
>because he didn't bomb ALL the arabs into total and absolute
>annilation, shoulda taken no more than 24 hours... by noon of 09/12/01
>shoulda been not a living moslem on planet Earth, but what would you
>expect from the typical castrated texan.
>
That carrier pigeon still hasn't delivered that message to you? The
message is that the 9/11 terrorists were Saudi, not Iraqi.

--
See return address to reply by email

"Green Mtn. Griller" > wrote in message
news:jra9h.7061$LH2.3158@trndny04...
>
> "Stan Horwitz" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In article >,
>> Dan Abel > wrote:
>>
>>> In article >,
>>> Stan Horwitz > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> > If young men and women like your friends would stop volunteering to
>>> > fight in Iraq, what would the United States lose? Damned if I know! On
>>> > the other hand, if people would stop volunteering to kill or be killed
>>> > in Iraq, we would have fewer corpses being shipped to Dover, Delaware
>>> > and the United States' VA hospitals would be less crowded.
>>> >
>>> > The war in Iraq is Bush's ego trip and failed oil grab. I see no
>>> > reason
>>> > to thank anyone for enabling Bush to continue his disastrous foreign
>>> > policy. The truly patriotic thing for your friends to do is to stay
>>> > out
>>> > of Iraq, get educated, and become productive citizens.
>>> >
>>> > That's just my personal opinion, mind you!
>>>
>>> I don't agree. I worked for the US Army for three years (as a
>>> civilian), and it was very clear that decisions about who to go to war
>>> with are always made by civilians. The people who voluntarily join the
>>> military (or get drafted) are just following orders.
>>>
>>> The people of the US elected GWB, and they are to blame for this, not
>>> the soldiers.
>>
>> You have a point, only where soldiers who signed up before GWB invaded
>> Iraq are concerned. Those who signed up after the Iraq war began do not
>> get my sympathy.
>
> This is taking a lot more self-control than I thought I could muster, but
> I'm going to take the high road by just saying that regardless of you
> opinion of them, those Americans are still out there 24 & 7, near and far,
> protecting your right to say what you will. They were there before you
> entered this world and they will be there long after you leave.

You're pretending not to know that some wars have a good reason, and some
don't. Stop pretending.

Green Mtn. Griller wrote:
those Americans are still out there 24 & 7, near and far,
> protecting your right to say what you will.


There's a logical disconnect. Are you suggesting that anyone in Iraq
was campaigning against free speech in the U.S.? That's the only way
U.S. soldiers in Iraq could be protecting my right to say what I wanted
here. Or that anyone in Iraq was planning on attacking the U.S? I
don't get what you're saying.


--Lia

Stan Horwitz wrote:
> In article .com>,
> "Kris" > wrote:
>
> > Well said! I have a friend in Iraq and another waiting for it. We need
> > to be thankful to them.

I say thanks the *savages*, especially the ones killed by tthe blankets
given by the *civilized*.

Stan Horwitz wrote:
> In article . com>,
> "ravenlynne" > wrote:
>
> > > If young men and women like your friends would stop volunteering to
> > > fight in Iraq, what would the United States lose? Damned if I know!
> >
> > Not that this is the appropriate forum for this discussion, but:
> >
> > They'd just reinstitute the draft and force men to go. There is no
> > escape. Luckily my husband has been lucky so far.....He's a naval
> > musician and there's not much need for him over there yet.
>
> That would be fine. That way, even the sons and daughters of
> congressmen, including Bush's two daughters would be eligible to serve.
> As it is now, you don't see the children of most politicians serving in
> Iraq, nor the offspring of the very wealthy.

Of course not.
x
x
x
x
x

x
x

Julia Altshuler wrote:
> Green Mtn. Griller wrote:
> those Americans are still out there 24 & 7, near and far,
> > protecting your right to say what you will.
>
>
> There's a logical disconnect.

I was about to say that

> Are you suggesting that anyone in Iraq
> was campaigning against free speech in the U.S.?

> That's the only way
> U.S. soldiers in Iraq could be protecting my right to say what I wanted
> here. Or that anyone in Iraq was planning on attacking the U.S? I
> don't get what you're saying.

I don't either but they still use that line again and gain and call it
"objective" thinking in another ng.

Stan Horwitz wrote:
> In article >,
> "Dave Bugg" > wrote:
>
> > sf wrote:
> >
> > > People aren't exactly flooding the military so they can fight in Iraq.
> > > That's why some soldiers are doing their second, third or more tour of
> > > duty over there.
> > >
> > > http://www.zogby.com/NEWS/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1075
> > > http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14999341/#storyContinued
> > > http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...ep26,1,4149783.
> > > story?coll=la-headlines-world
> > > ( http://tinylink.com/?tOoGSHOdIL )
> >
> > The repeated tours have little to do with military recruitment, it has to do
> > with the current Bush doctrine of commiting limited numbers of troops to the
> > Iraqi theater. That's why McCain is so insistent on increasing troop levels
> > to Iraq. The fracked up notion of Bush, and the departing Rumsfield, that
> > you can use small levels of deployed troops to remove the enemy in one area,
> > then leave and move the troops to the next hot spot is crap. You have to
> > have the number of troops needed to take AND HOLD disputed ground. Trying to
> > win this action "on the lean" is unexcusable.
>
> I heard a news story just the other day about the National Guard (or it
> might have been the Reserves), you lose all your benefits if you leave.

Back in my home country, when the enployees refuse to move to the new
capital and tried to quit the job, they were not allowed. Unlike here,
they wear green uniform and wave guns on the people's head openly








>
> So if you go fight a tour in Iraq, then decide to drop out when your
> tour of duty is over, you get no benefits at all. There's a bit of a
> movement in congress to fix that situation, but I have no idea how much
> momentum it is gathering.

Stan Horwitz wrote:
>
> > The people of the US elected GWB, and they are to blame for this, not
> > the soldiers.
>
> You have a point, only where soldiers who signed up before GWB invaded
> Iraq are concerned. Those who signed up after the Iraq war began do not
> get my sympathy.


How is that? They signed up for the armed forces. They accepted
government pay to train to be soldiers. There was always the
understanding that they could be called upon to put that training
to use. I have little sympathy for people who train in the safety
of their home bases and then refuse to go and serve in combat
when the need arises.

On 23 Nov 2006 07:34:24 -0800, "Amanda" >
wrote:

>Back in my home country, when the enployees refuse to move to the new
>capital and tried to quit the job, they were not allowed. Unlike here,
>they wear green uniform and wave guns on the people's head openly

You've got me curious now.... which country do you call home? Your
grammar seems to be American style (what little I've seen of it), so
I'll assume you were educated here.

--
See return address to reply by email

alan wrote:
>
> On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 21:51:40 -0500, Dave Smith wrote:
>
> > Dave Bugg wrote:
>
> >> A backdoor method of blaming the soldiers. **** YOU!!!!
> >
> >
> > Ouch. Getting a little touchy there are we.
>
> YOU are SOOOOO STUPID!
>
> go Dave Bugg!
>
> dove smith you suck! your opinions are some what like a set of numb nutz!
> 5,000 posts of stupidity!

With a little luck, maybe you can be the first one on your block
to have your kid come home in a box. Your idiotic response
indicates the gene pool filter needs to run for a while.

Your president lied to you about Iraq and your soldiers are
paying for his personal agenda while his friends get rich. The
company that the vice president used to run, and which was
awarded untenedered contracts, has been caught fleecing the
government with improper billing worth many millions of dollars
several times.

On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 04:08:56 GMT, "Green Mtn. Griller"
> wrote:

>
>"Green Mtn. Griller" > wrote in message
>news:l2O8h.5683$7a2.3141@trndny06...
>><snip>
>> Our son is a Seabee in the U.S. Navy and is preparing to
>>go to Iraq after the New Year. Please remember all of our service members.
>>Thanks and I hope everyone has a great T-Day!
>>
>> No offense to non-U.S. readers, I know Thursday is just another Thursday
>> to you! :-)
>>
>
>My apologies to all who read this post, I should have known better. All I
>wanted to do is remind people that there are fathers, sons, mothers,
>daughters, etc. that won't be able to spend this time with their families.
>I did not want to start a political slugfest or dredge up bad memories. To
>those who took the post as it was intended, thank you and I hope that all of
>your loved ones can spend time together. To those who felt it necessary to
>use it as a soapbox to spout your political viewpoints, well...my opinion of
>you was expressed much more eloquently by others, than I could have
>conveyed.
>
You can't help but worry about a son or daughter (your own or a
friend's) that is going into an area of conflict. One of my friend's
daughters volunteered for the army and volunteered to go to Kosovo
during the height of the conflict over there. We worried about her
safety, but she came home in one piece. Another friend's son flies a
Harrier for the Marines and has volunteered for duty in Iraq. Even
though he's fairly safe up in the air, we worry about him anyway.

Was your son able to come home for Thanksgiving? I hope so!
Have a good one.


--
See return address to reply by email

Amanda wrote:
> Julia Altshuler wrote:

>>There's a logical disconnect.
>
>
> I was about to say that


In retrospect, what we should have said is: You can get anything you
want at Alice's restaurant.


--Lia

> That would be fine. That way, even the sons and daughters of
> congressmen, including Bush's two daughters would be eligible to serve.
> As it is now, you don't see the children of most politicians serving in
> Iraq, nor the offspring of the very wealthy.

They don't draft women, only men...and you'd have a icicle's chance in
hell of any bush child going...

> My apologies to all who read this post, I should have known better. All I
> wanted to do is remind people that there are fathers, sons, mothers,
> daughters, etc. that won't be able to spend this time with their families.
> I did not want to start a political slugfest or dredge up bad memories. To
> those who took the post as it was intended, thank you and I hope that all of
> your loved ones can spend time together. To those who felt it necessary to
> use it as a soapbox to spout your political viewpoints, well...my opinion of
> you was expressed much more eloquently by others, than I could have
> conveyed.

No apologies necessary to me! I share your thoughts and appreciate
them. I am very thankful that my sailor husband is sitting on our
couch playing video games this thanksgiving...more thankful than I can
describe without getting extremely weepy. Have a happy thanksgiving to
you!

ravenlynne wrote:
s is the appropriate forum for this discussion, but:
>
> They'd just reinstitute the draft and force men to go. There is no
> escape. Luckily my husband has been lucky so far.....He's a naval
> musician and there's not much need for him over there yet.


It's 2006. If they reinstate the draft they should be
conscripting women and sending them into combat too. Women
wanted equality. Equal rights, equal opportunity, equal pay.....
equal responsibility.

"Amanda" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Julia Altshuler wrote:
>> Green Mtn. Griller wrote:
>> those Americans are still out there 24 & 7, near and far,
>> > protecting your right to say what you will.
>>
>>
>> There's a logical disconnect.
>
> I was about to say that
>
>> Are you suggesting that anyone in Iraq
>> was campaigning against free speech in the U.S.?
>
>> That's the only way
>> U.S. soldiers in Iraq could be protecting my right to say what I wanted
>> here. Or that anyone in Iraq was planning on attacking the U.S? I
>> don't get what you're saying.
>
> I don't either but they still use that line again and gain and call it
> "objective" thinking in another ng.
>

Here's something the Bush-bots can't explain:

There've been terrorist rings busted up in England, Spain, Buffalo NY and
another place I can't recall. Might've been the Netherlands. How did our
presence in Iraq aid law enforcement personnel in rounding up these
terrorists?

On Nov 23, 7:31 am, "Amanda" > wrote:
I
> > don't get what you're saying.I don't either but they still use that line again and gain and call it
> "objective" thinking in another ng.

Would that be the one where you've been posting antisemitic propaganda?

sf wrote:
> On 23 Nov 2006 07:34:24 -0800, "Amanda" >
> wrote:
>
> >Back in my home country, when the enployees refuse to move to the new
> >capital and tried to quit the job, they were not allowed. Unlike here,
> >they wear green uniform and wave guns on the people's head openly
>
> You've got me curious now.... which country do you call home?

The little oasis in SE Asia run by degenrate Than Shew's SPDC.


>Your
> grammar seems to be American style (what little I've seen of it), so
> I'll assume you were educated here.
>
> --
> See return address to reply by email

"Amanda" > wrote in message
ps.com...
>
> sf wrote:
>> On 23 Nov 2006 07:34:24 -0800, "Amanda" >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Back in my home country, when the enployees refuse to move to the new
>> >capital and tried to quit the job, they were not allowed. Unlike here,
>> >they wear green uniform and wave guns on the people's head openly
>>
>> You've got me curious now.... which country do you call home?
>
> The little oasis in SE Asia run by degenrate Than Shew's SPDC.
>

You KNOW a leader is trash when he gives himself a title like this:

Chairman of the State Peace and Development Council of the Union of Myanmar
Commander-in-Chief of Defence Services Senior General Than Shwe

In article .com>,
"ravenlynne" > wrote:

> > That would be fine. That way, even the sons and daughters of
> > congressmen, including Bush's two daughters would be eligible to serve.
> > As it is now, you don't see the children of most politicians serving in
> > Iraq, nor the offspring of the very wealthy.
>
> They don't draft women, only men...and you'd have a icicle's chance in
> hell of any bush child going...

Who's "they"? My mother was drafted.

--
Dan Abel

Petaluma, California, USA

Sheldon wrote:

> sf wrote:
> > On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 08:58:12 -0800, "Dave Bugg" >
> > wrote:
> >
> > >sf wrote:
> > >
> > >> Unfortunately, being a soldier is sometimes the only viable
employment
> > >> option left for a young man (or woman) in certain parts of the
> > >> country. The US has been bleeding entry level white collar and
> > >> manufacturing jobs for years and it's time we recognized it.
> > >
> > >1. While some may choose to join the military because of the
employment, it
> > >is a small fraction of the total.
> >
> > Oh? Maybe at the officer level, but not at the grunt level.
> >
> > >2. If someone wants to join the military for employment, so what? There
is
> > >not a damned thing wrong with that. Military service is a noble
pursuit.
> >
> > Certainly, but I don't advocate it as a default position - especially
> > in war time.... it has something to do with life, death and permanent
> > serious injuries.
> >
> > >3. What has this to do with the the reason for my original reply?
> >
> > What's wrong with you Dave? It's *not* the soliders' fault we're at
> > war and I didn't say it was.
>
> What's wrong with you... it's much more simplistic... ask yourself if
> you'd rather be speaking arabic or more likely have your head lopped
> off. Were it not for those who served in the big wars your kids would
> likely not have been born because you would have been in a mass
> kraut/gook grave. You are seriously mentally difficient... I know
> insects with a far higher IQ than yours. Even though there are plenty
> of krauts/gooks who have US citizenship, in a NY minute each and every
> one of them wish for another opportunity. The US made a big mistake in
> not dropping another dozen atom bombs on Japan, and done the same to
> the friggin' kraut bundt *******s.


We also should have bombed the Russians to smithereens while we had out
"atomic advantage" in the late 40's, the destruction of those goonish thugs
would have saved the world a *lot* of heartbreak...


There ain't a jap/gook or a kraut
> on this planet today who ain't gleeful about the arab mother****ers
> trying to take over the US.
>
> Bush is an idiot not becaue he attacked Afghanistan and Iraq, but
> because he didn't bomb ALL the arabs into total and absolute
> annilation, shoulda taken no more than 24 hours... by noon of 09/12/01
> shoulda been not a living moslem on planet Earth, but what would you
> expect from the typical castrated texan.


Thank you, I could not agree with you more...

--
Best
Greg

"Sheldon" > wrote in message
oups.com...

> Bush is an idiot not becaue he attacked Afghanistan and Iraq, but
> because he didn't bomb ALL the arabs into total and absolute
> annilation, shoulda taken no more than 24 hours... by noon of 09/12/01
> shoulda been not a living moslem on planet Earth, but what would you
> expect from the typical castrated texan.
>
> Sheldon
>

We tried that in Vietnam. It didn't work. It doesn't work. It doesn't work
in terms of the effects of the bombs on physical objects. It doesn't work in
terms of its effect on people, who only become more determined in the face
of this sort of thing.

Any Air Force big shot will confirm what I've just taught you, unless he's a
liar.

Now, go to the nurse's station and get your meds.

<sf> wrote in message ...
> On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 04:08:56 GMT, "Green Mtn. Griller"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>"Green Mtn. Griller" > wrote in message
>>news:l2O8h.5683$7a2.3141@trndny06...
>>><snip>
>>> Our son is a Seabee in the U.S. Navy and is preparing to
>>>go to Iraq after the New Year. Please remember all of our service
>>>members.
>>>Thanks and I hope everyone has a great T-Day!
>>>
>>> No offense to non-U.S. readers, I know Thursday is just another Thursday
>>> to you! :-)
>>>
>>
>>My apologies to all who read this post, I should have known better. All I
>>wanted to do is remind people that there are fathers, sons, mothers,
>>daughters, etc. that won't be able to spend this time with their families.
>>I did not want to start a political slugfest or dredge up bad memories.
>>To
>>those who took the post as it was intended, thank you and I hope that all
>>of
>>your loved ones can spend time together. To those who felt it necessary
>>to
>>use it as a soapbox to spout your political viewpoints, well...my opinion
>>of
>>you was expressed much more eloquently by others, than I could have
>>conveyed.
>>
> You can't help but worry about a son or daughter (your own or a
> friend's) that is going into an area of conflict. One of my friend's
> daughters volunteered for the army and volunteered to go to Kosovo
> during the height of the conflict over there. We worried about her
> safety, but she came home in one piece. Another friend's son flies a
> Harrier for the Marines and has volunteered for duty in Iraq. Even
> though he's fairly safe up in the air, we worry about him anyway.
>
> Was your son able to come home for Thanksgiving? I hope so!
> Have a good one.
>
>
> --
> See return address to reply by email

No, he wasn't, but we all knew that he wouldn't be able to well in advance.
Thank you for asking! In the past, some holidays he's been able to come
home, some he hasn't; it goes with the territory, he knows it and we know
it. All the best to your Marine friend! Hope you all had a wonderful
Turkey Day!

chefhelen wrote:

> Ditto what Jani said Dave.
>
> helen

Thanks.

--
Dave
www.davebbq.com

"Little Malice" > wrote in message
...
> One time on Usenet, "Dave Bugg" > said:
>
> <snip>
>
>> If y'all have frustrations with any politician regarding policy, KEEP
>> YOUR
>> ANGER AND FRUSTRATION FOCUSED ON THEM. Don't you dare start twisting the
>> focus onto the soldiers who serve. That's what happened during Vietnam.
>> And
>> the result was a generation of warriors who felt hated and despised when
>> all
>> they did was serve their country.
>
> I was small child during the Vietnam war, so let me say now what
> I couldn't say back then -- thank you for your service, Dave...
>
> --
> "Little Malice" is Jani in WA
> ~ mom, Trollop, novice cook ~


Ditto what Jani said Dave.

helen

"chefhelen" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Little Malice" > wrote in message
> ...
>> One time on Usenet, "Dave Bugg" > said:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> If y'all have frustrations with any politician regarding policy, KEEP
>>> YOUR
>>> ANGER AND FRUSTRATION FOCUSED ON THEM. Don't you dare start twisting the
>>> focus onto the soldiers who serve. That's what happened during Vietnam.
>>> And
>>> the result was a generation of warriors who felt hated and despised when
>>> all
>>> they did was serve their country.
>>
>> I was small child during the Vietnam war, so let me say now what
>> I couldn't say back then -- thank you for your service, Dave...
>>
>> --
>> "Little Malice" is Jani in WA
>> ~ mom, Trollop, novice cook ~
>
>
> Ditto what Jani said Dave.
>
> helen
>

The men and women in the armed forces take an oath to 'protect and defend
the Constitution of the United States of America'. They are not
representatives of whatever imbecile happens to hold office at any given
time. I firmly believe that if an elected official were either a) required
to do military duty or b) send their children to do battle that there would
be a lot less warmongering going on. To those who put on the uniform of
service to your country I say thank you. To the elected politicians who
send them into harm's way - pfffft.
-ginny

Virginia Tadrzynski wrote:

> The men and women in the armed forces take an oath to 'protect and
> defend the Constitution of the United States of America'.

That's part of it. Here's the full text:

I, _______, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the
Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic;
that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this
obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and
that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which
I am about to enter. So help me God.

--
Dave
www.davebbq.com