Wikileaks
 

On Aug 23, 2:23*pm, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...
On Aug 23, 1:17 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:





wrote in message

....
On Aug 21, 4:26 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"The Daring Dufas" wrote in
...

On 8/21/2010 2:25 PM, JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Higgs wrote in message
...
On Aug 21, 9:20 am, wrote:
I see the CIA is after the Wikileaks man.
First he is accused of rape& then the charge is withdrawn.
They'll think of something else.

Steve Walker wrote:

The pressure to shut Wikileaks down has been immense, how very
convenient that this allegation should now come to light.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-11047025
*
*

Swedish authorities say they have issued an arrest warrant for
Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, on accusations of rape and
molestation...
*
*
Warrant cancelled without explanation......

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11049316

They'll think up something else.

Yeah, they were bound to cook up something. Hope he can keep ahead of
them.

===========

If the CIA does as good a job as they did with their WMD "findings",
Assange
has nothing to worry about. :-)

Farm it out to The Mossad, they'll stop him.

TDD

There's no reason to stop him.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

So, you're OK with this scum freely handing out classified information
that helps the enemy, puts US and coaltion soldiers at risk and will
likely cost Afghan civilians their lives? He should wind up doing 20
years in jail along with the private that is the likely source of the
information, who at least is in the brig awaiting trial. And if he
had a mysterious accident along the way, that might be a good thing
too.

===========

Let's call his deeds "Reason #3" for all these bad things which may
happen.
I don't see Reason #3 as being any worse than reasons #1 and #2. If I need
to explain those other reasons, you're not qualified to speak about this.-
Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The information is years old & of no benifit to anyone.
Except it's interesting to know what war crimes the USA has been
commiting. *Reasons to ut Bush and Bliar on tial.

===========

Bush was too dumb to blame for this. Wolfowitz & Rumsfeld should be the
first in the pillories. Wolfowitz in particular is like a tumor that won't
go away.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I thought he was dumb too
Bush, so I'm told went to Yale. Assuming he passed his exams, he's
not dumb. That leaves evil.

Wikileaks
 

On Aug 23, 3:50*pm, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:
"AZ Nomad" wrote in message

...

On Mon, 23 Aug 2010 08:44:41 -0400, Jim Elbrecht
wrote:

Assange is the lowest of the low. *For nothing other than personal
gain he has jeopardized hundreds, or thousands of lives, and made the
entire mission of the US in Afghanistan a more difficult one.

Bull****. *I'd be impressed if you could name a *single* life affected
by the leak. *Other than politicians.

Hopefully, it will affect the lives of the clowns who didn't implement the
best possible incryption. Probably the same types of clowns who let this
happen:

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009...rcept-drone-vi...

I love it when my tax dollars pay for nothing.

We have a retard here broke into every military computer in the USA.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardia...kend7.weekend2

Wikileaks
 

On Aug 24, 3:30*am, aemeijers wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message
...
DGDevin wrote:
To liberals, ending the war is the goal (for reasons passing
understanding), so the loss of a few lives is irrelevant.
You mean like the loss of 4,400+ American lives (not to mention those
of allies and Iraqis) for the goal of finding WMDs that didn't exist?
Just how immoral an act is starting a war on false pretenses?
We NEED a war every ten to fifteen years to keep the tip of the spear
sharp.

That's cool. But we need new rules. Any elected slob who votes for a war -
all their eligible living relatives go into combat first, and they're given
the most dangerous possible jobs. The ones no soldier wants.

Why make the relatives suffer just because they are unlucky enough to
have a politician in the family? I say we bring back the custom of *the
kings and general leading from the front lines.

--
aem sends...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

YOU never had that custom.

Wikileaks
 

On Aug 24, 5:33*am, "DGDevin" wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message

...





We NEED a war every ten to fifteen years to keep the tip of the spear
sharp.

Those that died were, to the man or woman, volunteers. They signed up
knowing the risk of death or serious injury, much like a mountain climber,
sky diver, race car driver, or Ralph, the guy who married my ex-wife. They
assumed these risks for the opportunity to kill people and blow things up
(Ralph, are you listening?).

It is, of course, regrettable that they died, but they died doing
something they loved. Fully 85% of those who have served in Iraq or
Afghanistan re-enlisted at the first opportunity. (The remaining 15%
retired, were invalided out, or married harridans.)

These folks are our warrior class. Waging war is what they were born to
do, what they trained to do, what they NEED to do. They do it for their
country's sake, for their family's sake, for honor's sake, for glory's
sake.

This is something the cowards that dwell among us cannot understand and
will not accept.

What a repugnant interpretation. *So the lives of thousands of young
Americans can be thrown away for what was at best a mistake, at worst a
calculated lie. *And you figure that's okay because the bravery of those who
died somehow excuses their pointless sacrifice. *Presumably the tens of
thousands wounded (physically and mentally) and the enormous damage to the
military, the national economy, and national prestige around the world would
also be dismissed as insignificant. *Needless to say those who dismiss such
a waste of life are safe at home, in no danger of being sent overseas
themselves. *What's that phrase? *Ah yes, "chicken hawk"--someone who is
never dismayed by the spilling of other people's blood during the sharpening
of that spear....- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Aha! A sensible American at last. You are exactly right.

Wikileaks
 

On Mon, 23 Aug 2010 20:01:52 -0500, "HeyBub"
wrote Re Wikileaks:

We NEED a war every ten to fifteen years to keep the tip of the spear sharp.

Those that died were, to the man or woman, volunteers. They signed up
knowing the risk of death or serious injury, much like a mountain climber,
sky diver, race car driver, or Ralph, the guy who married my ex-wife. They
assumed these risks for the opportunity to kill people and blow things up
(Ralph, are you listening?).

It is, of course, regrettable that they died, but they died doing something
they loved. Fully 85% of those who have served in Iraq or Afghanistan
re-enlisted at the first opportunity. (The remaining 15% retired, were
invalided out, or married harridans.)

These folks are our warrior class. Waging war is what they were born to do,
what they trained to do, what they NEED to do. They do it for their
country's sake, for their family's sake, for honor's sake, for glory's sake.

This is something the cowards that dwell among us cannot understand and will
not accept.

Well said. And the pay isn't too bad considering the paucity of
civilian alternatives available e.g. a married E-5, with six years of
service, stationed at San Diego, CA and deployed to Iraq would get

Base Pay: $2,205.30
Housing Allowance: $1535
Food Allowance: $267.18
Family Separation Allowance: $250
Hazardous Duty Pay: $225
Hardship Duty Pay: $100
Total: $4,582.48 per month, or $54,989.76 per year, Fed (and maybe
state) tax-free
--
Work is the curse of the drinking class.

Wikileaks
 

"harry" wrote in message
...
On Aug 23, 2:23 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:
"harry" wrote in message

...
On Aug 23, 1:17 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:





wrote in message

...
On Aug 21, 4:26 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"The Daring Dufas" wrote in
...

On 8/21/2010 2:25 PM, JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Higgs wrote in message
...
On Aug 21, 9:20 am, wrote:
I see the CIA is after the Wikileaks man.
First he is accused of rape& then the charge is withdrawn.
They'll think of something else.

Steve Walker wrote:

The pressure to shut Wikileaks down has been immense, how very
convenient that this allegation should now come to light.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-11047025
*
*

Swedish authorities say they have issued an arrest warrant for
Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, on accusations of rape and
molestation...
*
*
Warrant cancelled without explanation......

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11049316

They'll think up something else.

Yeah, they were bound to cook up something. Hope he can keep ahead
of
them.

===========

If the CIA does as good a job as they did with their WMD
"findings",
Assange
has nothing to worry about. :-)

Farm it out to The Mossad, they'll stop him.

TDD

There's no reason to stop him.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

So, you're OK with this scum freely handing out classified information
that helps the enemy, puts US and coaltion soldiers at risk and will
likely cost Afghan civilians their lives? He should wind up doing 20
years in jail along with the private that is the likely source of the
information, who at least is in the brig awaiting trial. And if he
had a mysterious accident along the way, that might be a good thing
too.

===========

Let's call his deeds "Reason #3" for all these bad things which may
happen.
I don't see Reason #3 as being any worse than reasons #1 and #2. If I
need
to explain those other reasons, you're not qualified to speak about
this.-
Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The information is years old & of no benifit to anyone.
Except it's interesting to know what war crimes the USA has been
commiting. Reasons to ut Bush and Bliar on tial.

===========

Bush was too dumb to blame for this. Wolfowitz & Rumsfeld should be the
first in the pillories. Wolfowitz in particular is like a tumor that won't
go away.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I thought he was dumb too
Bush, so I'm told went to Yale. Assuming he passed his exams, he's
not dumb. That leaves evil.

=============

Read Bob Woodward's "Plan Of Attack". About the best that can be said about
Bush is that he actually fretted about civilian casualties, and he was aware
of how we couldn't repeat a previous mistake: Hanging the Kurds out to dry
so they could be attacked again by Saddam.

Wikileaks
 

"DGDevin" wrote in message
m...
"HeyBub" wrote in message
...

We NEED a war every ten to fifteen years to keep the tip of the spear
sharp.

Those that died were, to the man or woman, volunteers. They signed up
knowing the risk of death or serious injury, much like a mountain
climber, sky diver, race car driver, or Ralph, the guy who married my
ex-wife. They assumed these risks for the opportunity to kill people and
blow things up (Ralph, are you listening?).

It is, of course, regrettable that they died, but they died doing
something they loved. Fully 85% of those who have served in Iraq or
Afghanistan re-enlisted at the first opportunity. (The remaining 15%
retired, were invalided out, or married harridans.)

These folks are our warrior class. Waging war is what they were born to
do, what they trained to do, what they NEED to do. They do it for their
country's sake, for their family's sake, for honor's sake, for glory's
sake.

This is something the cowards that dwell among us cannot understand and
will not accept.

What a repugnant interpretation. So the lives of thousands of young
Americans can be thrown away for what was at best a mistake, at worst a
calculated lie. And you figure that's okay because the bravery of those
who died somehow excuses their pointless sacrifice. Presumably the tens
of thousands wounded (physically and mentally) and the enormous damage to
the military, the national economy, and national prestige around the world
would also be dismissed as insignificant. Needless to say those who
dismiss such a waste of life are safe at home, in no danger of being sent
overseas themselves. What's that phrase? Ah yes, "chicken hawk"--someone
who is never dismayed by the spilling of other people's blood during the
sharpening of that spear....


It was interesting to read about how Tenet was repeatedly asked if CIA
documents about WMD ever contain firm statements instead of being filled
with words like "probable", "likely", etc. He was asked to scrub those words
away as much as possible.

Wikileaks
 

harry wrote:
-

I thought he was dumb too
Bush, so I'm told went to Yale. Assuming he passed his exams, he's
not dumb. That leaves evil.

How is killing Mohammadens evil? The Bush administration can be remembered
for low unemployment, no inflation, 26 consecutive quarters of economic
growth, no further attacks on the U.S. or U.S. interests abroad, and a
record stock market. This in spite of Katrina, two wars, and 9-11. For the
first six years, everything was swell. In 2006 the Democrats took over
Congress and things started to plummet. Then the Democrats gained the
presidency and everything went to hell.

Including three terrorist attacks on U.S. territory.

Bush may have been dumb, but he, like Reagan, was a genius in who he picked
to actually run things.

In the current administration only ONE person has a background in the
private sector (Treasury Secretary Geithner). The rest are from politics and
government (including FIVE governors) or academia.

Wikileaks
 

On Aug 23, 3:00*pm, AZ Nomad wrote:
On Mon, 23 Aug 2010 13:58:29 -0400, Jim Elbrecht wrote:
AZ Nomad wrote:
On Mon, 23 Aug 2010 08:44:41 -0400, Jim Elbrecht wrote:

Assange is the lowest of the low. *For nothing other than personal
gain he has jeopardized hundreds, or thousands of lives, and made the
entire mission of the US in Afghanistan a more difficult one.

Bull****. *I'd be impressed if you could name a *single* life affected
by the leak. *Other than politicians.
How has it affected a single politician? * *What was the *new* news in
them- other than the specifics that had been redacted to save lives?

Do you know what the phrase "other than" means?

babble snipped


Yes we do. Do you know what the qualifier "politician" means in your
statement? The scum Assange listed names of civilians that were
cooperating and helping the coalition forces. And suppose we accept
your incorrect premise that he only listed names of politicians. It's
OK for you for this scum to put politicians lives at risk?

Wikileaks
 

"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...
harry wrote:
-

I thought he was dumb too
Bush, so I'm told went to Yale. Assuming he passed his exams, he's
not dumb. That leaves evil.

How is killing Mohammadens evil? The Bush administration can be remembered
for low unemployment, no inflation, 26 consecutive quarters of economic
growth, no further attacks on the U.S. or U.S. interests abroad, and a
record stock market. This in spite of Katrina, two wars, and 9-11. For the
first six years, everything was swell. In 2006 the Democrats took over
Congress and things started to plummet. Then the Democrats gained the
presidency and everything went to hell.

The bill for those wars would've come due no matter who followed Bush. You
know that. Or maybe you don't.


In the current administration only ONE person has a background in the
private sector (Treasury Secretary Geithner). The rest are from politics
and government (including FIVE governors) or academia.


Where do you think "the rest" should have come from?

Wikileaks
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

We NEED a war every ten to fifteen years to keep the tip of the spear
sharp.


That's cool. But we need new rules. Any elected slob who votes for a
war - all their eligible living relatives go into combat first, and
they're given the most dangerous possible jobs. The ones no soldier
wants.

We don't have a conscript army - of relatives or anybody. Our warrior class
are volunteers. They WANT to kill people!

So, I ask you, is it better for them to be killing people far away or here
at home?

Wikileaks
 

On Aug 23, 9:34*pm, aemeijers wrote:
DGDevin wrote:
wrote in message
....

This scum freely handed out classified information
that helps the enemy, puts US and coaltion soldiers at risk and will
likely cost Afghan civilians their lives and to you he's a hero? * He
should wind up doing 20
years in jail along with the private that is the likely source of the
information, who at least is in the brig awaiting trial. * It is a
good window into your value system though.

That information is classified is meaningless--the posted announcement
that the officers mess dining hall will be closed Monday afternoon so
the floor can be waxed is a classified document, pretty much everything
the military puts on paper is classified at some level. *Gazillions of
documents end up classified not because they need to be secret, but
because that's how bureaucrats do things, and sometimes they do it to
cover their asses.

I agree that if people die because Wikileaks released documents
identifying those people then Wikileaks should be held to account for
that. *Believing that your cause is just does is not a blank check to do
anything you please, although I suspect that is not a view Mr. Assange
holds based on his history.

And we have a winner! Way too much stuff is classified, including stuff
that has no legitimate reason to be. Perhaps if they only classified
stuff that really needed to be, people would take it more seriously?

(And yes, I have seen my share of red-bordered cover sheets and login
screens...)

--
aem sends...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I'd say we have a loser. Again, what you're advocating is that every
individual has the right to decide on their own what is classified and
what is not and should be published. There are many obvious problems
to that approach. And contrary to the other posters claim, it;s not
customary to classify mess hall hours. To cite some of the obvious
problems that should be apparent to anyone with a brain, let's look at
this case. You have a private and an internet buffoon deciding what
should and should not be classified. They have no access to the big
picture of what possible ramifications any of that information has to
national security. Let's say some pin head decided to leak info
during WWII that happened to contain some of the various equipment
being shipped to Oak Ridge, TN or Los Alamos, NM. To the private, or
the likes of Assange, it would be meaningless. But to a foreign
intelligence service that information would be priceless.

Wikileaks
 

On 8/24/2010 9:27 AM, JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
wrote in message
m...
harry wrote:
-

I thought he was dumb too
Bush, so I'm told went to Yale. Assuming he passed his exams, he's
not dumb. That leaves evil.

How is killing Mohammadens evil? The Bush administration can be remembered
for low unemployment, no inflation, 26 consecutive quarters of economic
growth, no further attacks on the U.S. or U.S. interests abroad, and a
record stock market. This in spite of Katrina, two wars, and 9-11. For the
first six years, everything was swell. In 2006 the Democrats took over
Congress and things started to plummet. Then the Democrats gained the
presidency and everything went to hell.

The bill for those wars would've come due no matter who followed Bush. You
know that. Or maybe you don't.


In the current administration only ONE person has a background in the
private sector (Treasury Secretary Geithner). The rest are from politics
and government (including FIVE governors) or academia.


Where do you think "the rest" should have come from?


Seems that you haven't caught on for some reason that you are trying to
reason with someone who doesn't stand for anything and just writes stuff
to crank people?

Wikileaks
 

In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:

That's cool. But we need new rules. Any elected slob who votes for a war -
all their eligible living relatives go into combat first, and they're given
the most dangerous possible jobs. The ones no soldier wants.

The problem with that theory is that jobs no soldier wants tends to be
those behind the lines. Soldiers would much rather be in combat than the
warehouse or other establishments of the REMF.

--
I want to find a voracious, small-minded predator
and name it after the IRS.
Robert Bakker, paleontologist

Wikileaks
 

"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message
m...
In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:

That's cool. But we need new rules. Any elected slob who votes for a
war -
all their eligible living relatives go into combat first, and they're
given
the most dangerous possible jobs. The ones no soldier wants.

The problem with that theory is that jobs no soldier wants tends to be
those behind the lines. Soldiers would much rather be in combat than the
warehouse or other establishments of the REMF.


Then, change my theory. Either way, I want our elected slobs to suffer
deeply for their decisions. Same as everyone else whose kids come home in a
box.

Wikileaks
 

DGDevin wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message
...

We NEED a war every ten to fifteen years to keep the tip of the spear
sharp.

Those that died were, to the man or woman, volunteers. They signed up
knowing the risk of death or serious injury, much like a mountain
climber, sky diver, race car driver, or Ralph, the guy who married
my ex-wife. They assumed these risks for the opportunity to kill
people and blow things up (Ralph, are you listening?).

It is, of course, regrettable that they died, but they died doing
something they loved. Fully 85% of those who have served in Iraq or
Afghanistan re-enlisted at the first opportunity. (The remaining 15%
retired, were invalided out, or married harridans.)

These folks are our warrior class. Waging war is what they were born
to do, what they trained to do, what they NEED to do. They do it for
their country's sake, for their family's sake, for honor's sake, for
glory's sake.

This is something the cowards that dwell among us cannot understand
and will not accept.

What a repugnant interpretation. So the lives of thousands of young
Americans can be thrown away for what was at best a mistake, at worst
a calculated lie.

Yes. And the reason doesn't have to be a mistake or lie; it could be a whim.
When Teddy Roosevelt sent the White Fleet around the world, it was merely a
gesture of machismo. When John J. Pershing invaded Mexico, everybody knew he
would never capture the bin Laden of the time. In both those endeavors,
lives were lost in what today's leftists would call "pointless."

I hold that if the President said, "What the heck, let's invade the
Vatican," the response of the military would be "Saddle up!" or "Hoo-Rah!"
depending on the branch. The Navy, of course, would look toward refurbishing
surplus Swift Boats to navigate the Tiber.

Rational people may disagree over the merits of waging war in some
particular instance, but those opposed simply cannot offer as a legitimate
reason for their opposition the loss or injury of our combatants.

And you figure that's okay because the bravery of
those who died somehow excuses their pointless sacrifice. Presumably
the tens of thousands wounded (physically and mentally) and the
enormous damage to the military, the national economy, and national
prestige around the world would also be dismissed as insignificant.

Absolutely correct. You see, their efforts were not "pointless" to them.
Their efforts are "pointless" only to the "This is the World" and "Kumbya"
madrigal singers (and these singers are not working out of a hymnal).

Needless to say those who dismiss such a waste of life are safe at
home, in no danger of being sent overseas themselves. What's that
phrase? Ah yes, "chicken hawk"--someone who is never dismayed by the
spilling of other people's blood during the sharpening of that
spear....

I am only suggesting that our warriors WANT to go to war. So why not let
them if so doing serves some political goal, no matter how slight that goal
might be?

I agree there probably are "chicken hawks," but I don't know of any.
Personally, I'm too old and feeble to be of much use in today's conflicts.
But back when I was young and strong, I did what I could.

Wikileaks
 

Caesar Romano wrote:
On Mon, 23 Aug 2010 20:01:52 -0500, "HeyBub"
wrote Re Wikileaks:

We NEED a war every ten to fifteen years to keep the tip of the
spear sharp.

Those that died were, to the man or woman, volunteers. They signed up
knowing the risk of death or serious injury, much like a mountain
climber, sky diver, race car driver, or Ralph, the guy who married
my ex-wife. They assumed these risks for the opportunity to kill
people and blow things up (Ralph, are you listening?).

It is, of course, regrettable that they died, but they died doing
something they loved. Fully 85% of those who have served in Iraq or
Afghanistan re-enlisted at the first opportunity. (The remaining 15%
retired, were invalided out, or married harridans.)

These folks are our warrior class. Waging war is what they were born
to do, what they trained to do, what they NEED to do. They do it for
their country's sake, for their family's sake, for honor's sake, for
glory's sake.

This is something the cowards that dwell among us cannot understand
and will not accept.

Well said. And the pay isn't too bad considering the paucity of
civilian alternatives available e.g. a married E-5, with six years of
service, stationed at San Diego, CA and deployed to Iraq would get

Base Pay: $2,205.30
Housing Allowance: $1535
Food Allowance: $267.18
Family Separation Allowance: $250
Hazardous Duty Pay: $225
Hardship Duty Pay: $100
Total: $4,582.48 per month, or $54,989.76 per year, Fed (and maybe
state) tax-free

Most soldiers find out rather quickly they can change their state of
residence to Texas or Florida where there is no state income tax. If they
somehow miss that bit of trivia, when they transition through Fort Hood in
Texas on their way to the Gulf, they find out in line two.

Wikileaks
 

"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...
DGDevin wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message
...

We NEED a war every ten to fifteen years to keep the tip of the spear
sharp.

Those that died were, to the man or woman, volunteers. They signed up
knowing the risk of death or serious injury, much like a mountain
climber, sky diver, race car driver, or Ralph, the guy who married
my ex-wife. They assumed these risks for the opportunity to kill
people and blow things up (Ralph, are you listening?).

It is, of course, regrettable that they died, but they died doing
something they loved. Fully 85% of those who have served in Iraq or
Afghanistan re-enlisted at the first opportunity. (The remaining 15%
retired, were invalided out, or married harridans.)

These folks are our warrior class. Waging war is what they were born
to do, what they trained to do, what they NEED to do. They do it for
their country's sake, for their family's sake, for honor's sake, for
glory's sake.

This is something the cowards that dwell among us cannot understand
and will not accept.

What a repugnant interpretation. So the lives of thousands of young
Americans can be thrown away for what was at best a mistake, at worst
a calculated lie.

Yes. And the reason doesn't have to be a mistake or lie; it could be a
whim. When Teddy Roosevelt sent the White Fleet around the world, it was
merely a gesture of machismo. When John J. Pershing invaded Mexico,
everybody knew he would never capture the bin Laden of the time. In both
those endeavors, lives were lost in what today's leftists would call
"pointless."

I hold that if the President said, "What the heck, let's invade the
Vatican," the response of the military would be "Saddle up!" or "Hoo-Rah!"
depending on the branch. The Navy, of course, would look toward
refurbishing surplus Swift Boats to navigate the Tiber.

Rational people may disagree over the merits of waging war in some
particular instance, but those opposed simply cannot offer as a legitimate
reason for their opposition the loss or injury of our combatants.

And you figure that's okay because the bravery of
those who died somehow excuses their pointless sacrifice. Presumably
the tens of thousands wounded (physically and mentally) and the
enormous damage to the military, the national economy, and national
prestige around the world would also be dismissed as insignificant.

Absolutely correct. You see, their efforts were not "pointless" to them.
Their efforts are "pointless" only to the "This is the World" and "Kumbya"
madrigal singers (and these singers are not working out of a hymnal).

Needless to say those who dismiss such a waste of life are safe at
home, in no danger of being sent overseas themselves. What's that
phrase? Ah yes, "chicken hawk"--someone who is never dismayed by the
spilling of other people's blood during the sharpening of that
spear....

I am only suggesting that our warriors WANT to go to war. So why not let
them if so doing serves some political goal, no matter how slight that
goal might be?

I agree there probably are "chicken hawks," but I don't know of any.
Personally, I'm too old and feeble to be of much use in today's conflicts.
But back when I was young and strong, I did what I could.



Science says your entire theory is a crock of ****. Have a nice day.

Wikileaks
 

In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:


The bill for those wars would've come due no matter who followed Bush. You
know that. Or maybe you don't.


Yeah but the bill would have come due no matter what Bush did
in the Middle East. Most of what we are seeing today is the result of
20+ years of cheap money, overspending by both corporate and private
interests. If anything we are largely victims of our own irrational
exuberance, to coin a phrase. Americans tend to think that "this time is
different" and the gravy train will never end, so too many of us
(government, personal and business) start to act like it.
Government spends thinking that tax rev will grow to the sky,
household borrow for all sorts of strange things, as did corporations,
etc.
We had a very long (and bipartisan) growth spurt where even the
recessions were light. So we, I think largely related to the American
confidence (or overconfidence), got ahead of ourselves.
Much of the recession so far is mathematical in that we are
returning to the mean. If you have a long period of growth, you have to
have a long period of no, limited growth. There is no infinity on either
side of the question.
Every once in awhile, Mr. Greenspan still shows occassional flashes
of brilliance. I think he sized up the situation quite nicely.
""They [financial crises] are all different, but they have one
fundamental source," he said. "That is the unquenchable capability of
human beings when confronted with long periods of prosperity to presume
that it will continue."

--
I want to find a voracious, small-minded predator
and name it after the IRS.
Robert Bakker, paleontologist

Wikileaks
 

"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message
m...
In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:


The bill for those wars would've come due no matter who followed Bush.
You
know that. Or maybe you don't.


Yeah but the bill would have come due no matter what Bush did
in the Middle East. Most of what we are seeing today is the result of
20+ years of cheap money, overspending by both corporate and private
interests. If anything we are largely victims of our own irrational
exuberance, to coin a phrase. Americans tend to think that "this time is
different" and the gravy train will never end, so too many of us
(government, personal and business) start to act like it.
Government spends thinking that tax rev will grow to the sky,
household borrow for all sorts of strange things, as did corporations,
etc.
We had a very long (and bipartisan) growth spurt where even the
recessions were light. So we, I think largely related to the American
confidence (or overconfidence), got ahead of ourselves.
Much of the recession so far is mathematical in that we are
returning to the mean. If you have a long period of growth, you have to
have a long period of no, limited growth. There is no infinity on either
side of the question.
Every once in awhile, Mr. Greenspan still shows occassional flashes
of brilliance. I think he sized up the situation quite nicely.
""They [financial crises] are all different, but they have one
fundamental source," he said. "That is the unquenchable capability of
human beings when confronted with long periods of prosperity to presume
that it will continue."


......while shopping for crap they don't need, never needed, and never will
need.

Wikileaks
 

In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:


Then, change my theory. Either way, I want our elected slobs to suffer
deeply for their decisions. Same as everyone else whose kids come home in a
box.

So you want the death penalty applied to the relatives of politicians
solely and utterly for the sins of the fathers (or mothers)? Why not
just take them out and shoot them instead of making them be where they
don't want to be and needlessly endangering the lives of the real
soldiers?

--
I want to find a voracious, small-minded predator
and name it after the IRS.
Robert Bakker, paleontologist

Wikileaks
 

In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:


.....while shopping for crap they don't need, never needed, and never will
need.

Economic 101 would tend to disagree with you. Since you need both a
willing buyer and a willing seller, the buyer, by definition, gets more
utility from the purchase than from hanging on to the money. It is
hardly your place to decide what is crap for a few hundred million
others.

--
I want to find a voracious, small-minded predator
and name it after the IRS.
Robert Bakker, paleontologist

Wikileaks
 

"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message
m...
In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:


.....while shopping for crap they don't need, never needed, and never
will
need.

Economic 101 would tend to disagree with you. Since you need both a
willing buyer and a willing seller, the buyer, by definition, gets more
utility from the purchase than from hanging on to the money. It is
hardly your place to decide what is crap for a few hundred million
others.


There's an awful lot of brand new unopened stuff at garage sales.

Wikileaks
 

"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message
m...
In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:


Then, change my theory. Either way, I want our elected slobs to suffer
deeply for their decisions. Same as everyone else whose kids come home in
a
box.

So you want the death penalty applied to the relatives of politicians
solely and utterly for the sins of the fathers (or mothers)?

Yes. I'm an asshole that way.


Why not
just take them out and shoot them instead of making them be where they
don't want to be and needlessly endangering the lives of the real
soldiers?

That takes away the element of surprise. Most people like surprises.

Wikileaks
 

In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:

"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message
m...
In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:


.....while shopping for crap they don't need, never needed, and never
will
need.

Economic 101 would tend to disagree with you. Since you need both a
willing buyer and a willing seller, the buyer, by definition, gets more
utility from the purchase than from hanging on to the money. It is
hardly your place to decide what is crap for a few hundred million
others.


There's an awful lot of brand new unopened stuff at garage sales.

Which, of course, has absolutely nothing to do with my argument.

--
I want to find a voracious, small-minded predator
and name it after the IRS.
Robert Bakker, paleontologist

Wikileaks
 

"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:

"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message
m...
In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:


.....while shopping for crap they don't need, never needed, and never
will
need.

Economic 101 would tend to disagree with you. Since you need both a
willing buyer and a willing seller, the buyer, by definition, gets more
utility from the purchase than from hanging on to the money. It is
hardly your place to decide what is crap for a few hundred million
others.


There's an awful lot of brand new unopened stuff at garage sales.

Which, of course, has absolutely nothing to do with my argument.


This is about psychology, isn't it? Many people have conditioned themselves
to feel happy when they buy stuff. Doesn't matter whether they need it or
not. At some point, adults outgrow this. Most adults, that is.

Wikileaks
 

On Aug 24, 2:23*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
harry wrote:

-



I thought he was dumb too
Bush, so I'm told went to Yale. *Assuming he passed his exams, he's
not dumb. That leaves evil.

How is killing Mohammadens evil? The Bush administration can be remembered
for low unemployment, no inflation, 26 consecutive quarters of economic
growth, no further attacks on the U.S. or U.S. interests abroad, and a
record stock market. This in spite of Katrina, two wars, and 9-11. For the
first six years, everything was swell. In 2006 the Democrats took over
Congress and things started to plummet. Then the Democrats gained the
presidency and everything went to hell.

Including three terrorist attacks on U.S. territory.

Bush may have been dumb, but he, like Reagan, was a genius in who he picked
to actually run things.

In the current administration only ONE person has a background in the
private sector (Treasury Secretary Geithner). The rest are from politics and
government (including FIVE governors) or academia.

Er you're re-writing history again.
Bush is the one who destroyed the US economy. possibly for ever.
Millions of Americans have lost their jobs and their homes.
Bush is the one who launched an illegal war based on lies.
Makes him evil in my book.
And Bliar.

Wikileaks
 

On Aug 24, 2:27*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

We NEED a war every ten to fifteen years to keep the tip of the spear
sharp.

That's cool. But we need new rules. Any elected slob who votes for a
war - all their eligible living relatives go into combat first, and
they're given the most dangerous possible jobs. The ones no soldier
wants.

We don't have a conscript army - of relatives or anybody. Our warrior class
are volunteers. They WANT to kill people!

So, I ask you, is it better for them to be killing people far away or here
at home?

They want a job. They are the illiterates of American society. The
jobs they might have had were stolen by the Chinese and the greed and
rapacity of the American consumer.

Wikileaks
 

On Aug 24, 2:40*pm, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,

*"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
That's cool. But we need new rules. Any elected slob who votes for a war -
all their eligible living relatives go into combat first, and they're given
the most dangerous possible jobs. The ones no soldier wants.

* The problem with that theory is that jobs no soldier wants tends to be
those behind the lines. Soldiers would much rather be in combat than the
warehouse or other establishments of the REMF.

--
* I want to find a voracious, small-minded predator
and name it after the IRS.
Robert Bakker, paleontologist

This is due the brainwashing from Hollywood. As sub standards they
believe all this crap fed to them from an early age. They are as
brainwashed as anyone from North Korea.

Wikileaks
 

"harry" wrote in message
...
On Aug 24, 2:40 pm, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
That's cool. But we need new rules. Any elected slob who votes for a
war -
all their eligible living relatives go into combat first, and they're
given
the most dangerous possible jobs. The ones no soldier wants.

The problem with that theory is that jobs no soldier wants tends to be
those behind the lines. Soldiers would much rather be in combat than the
warehouse or other establishments of the REMF.

--
I want to find a voracious, small-minded predator
and name it after the IRS.
Robert Bakker, paleontologist

This is due the brainwashing from Hollywood. As sub standards they
believe all this crap fed to them from an early age. They are as
brainwashed as anyone from North Korea.

===========


To make matters worse, there's a portion of the human brain which isn't
fully developed until the mid-20s. It helps people make the connection
between their decisions and the resulting consequences. Many soldiers aren't
in a position to understand what they're getting into.

Wikileaks
 

On Aug 24, 2:43*pm, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:
"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message

m...

In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:

That's cool. But we need new rules. Any elected slob who votes for a
war -
all their eligible living relatives go into combat first, and they're
given
the most dangerous possible jobs. The ones no soldier wants.

*The problem with that theory is that jobs no soldier wants tends to be
those behind the lines. Soldiers would much rather be in combat than the
warehouse or other establishments of the REMF.

Then, change my theory. Either way, I want our elected slobs to suffer
deeply for their decisions. Same as everyone else whose kids come home in a
box.

I would like to point out that the Queens son and grandson have both
been in combat. Her grandson is now in training to fly attack
helicopters.
You need to get rid of republicanism and return to monarchy.
The Queen has commitment to our country.
Bush (and possibly Obama, we'll see) are only interested in strutting
the world stage and personal aggrandisment.

Wikileaks
 

On Aug 24, 2:48*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
DGDevin wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message
...

We NEED a war every ten to fifteen years to keep the tip of the spear
sharp.

Those that died were, to the man or woman, volunteers. They signed up
knowing the risk of death or serious injury, much like a mountain
climber, sky diver, race car driver, or Ralph, the guy who married
my ex-wife. They assumed these risks for the opportunity to kill
people and blow things up (Ralph, are you listening?).

It is, of course, regrettable that they died, but they died doing
something they loved. Fully 85% of those who have served in Iraq or
Afghanistan re-enlisted at the first opportunity. (The remaining 15%
retired, were invalided out, or married harridans.)

These folks are our warrior class. Waging war is what they were born
to do, what they trained to do, what they NEED to do. They do it for
their country's sake, for their family's sake, for honor's sake, for
glory's sake.

This is something the cowards that dwell among us cannot understand
and will not accept.

What a repugnant interpretation. *So the lives of thousands of young
Americans can be thrown away for what was at best a mistake, at worst
a calculated lie.

Yes. And the reason doesn't have to be a mistake or lie; it could be a whim.
When Teddy Roosevelt sent the White Fleet around the world, it was merely a
gesture of machismo. When John J. Pershing invaded Mexico, everybody knew he
would never capture the bin Laden of the time. In both those endeavors,
lives were lost in what today's leftists would call "pointless."

I hold that if the President said, "What the heck, let's invade the
Vatican," the response of the military would be "Saddle up!" or "Hoo-Rah!"
depending on the branch. The Navy, of course, would look toward refurbishing
surplus Swift Boats to navigate the Tiber.

Rational people may disagree over the merits of waging war in some
particular instance, but those opposed simply cannot offer as a legitimate
reason for their opposition the loss or injury of our combatants.

And you figure that's okay because the bravery of
those who died somehow excuses their pointless sacrifice. *Presumably
the tens of thousands wounded (physically and mentally) and the
enormous damage to the military, the national economy, and national
prestige around the world would also be dismissed as insignificant.

Absolutely correct. You see, their efforts were not "pointless" to them.
Their efforts are "pointless" only to the "This is the World" and "Kumbya"
madrigal singers (and these singers are not working out of a hymnal).

Needless to say those who dismiss such a waste of life are safe at
home, in no danger of being sent overseas themselves. *What's that
phrase? *Ah yes, "chicken hawk"--someone who is never dismayed by the
spilling of other people's blood during the sharpening of that
spear....

I am only suggesting that our warriors WANT to go to war. So why not let
them if so doing serves some political goal, no matter how slight that goal
might be?

I agree there probably are "chicken hawks," but I don't know of any.
Personally, I'm too old and feeble to be of much use in today's conflicts..
But back when I was young and strong, I did what I could.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Your "warriors" were whipped and thrown out of Vietnam. They were
whipped and thrown out of Iraq. They will be whipped in Afghanistan
too.
All these countriea have/will end(ed) up with governments hostile to
the USA and the West.
Not one tenth of the men their grandfathers were.
Pointless illegal wars costing the American taxpayer millions not to
mention the lives of it's citizens. All for babbling half wits like
you.
And the f***g Jews these days.
And republican arms manufacturers.

Wikileaks
 

"harry" wrote in message
...
On Aug 24, 2:43 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:
"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message

m...

In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:

That's cool. But we need new rules. Any elected slob who votes for a
war -
all their eligible living relatives go into combat first, and they're
given
the most dangerous possible jobs. The ones no soldier wants.

The problem with that theory is that jobs no soldier wants tends to be
those behind the lines. Soldiers would much rather be in combat than the
warehouse or other establishments of the REMF.

Then, change my theory. Either way, I want our elected slobs to suffer
deeply for their decisions. Same as everyone else whose kids come home in
a
box.

I would like to point out that the Queens son and grandson have both
been in combat. Her grandson is now in training to fly attack
helicopters.
You need to get rid of republicanism and return to monarchy.
The Queen has commitment to our country.
Bush (and possibly Obama, we'll see) are only interested in strutting
the world stage and personal aggrandisment.

========


"Your man's got cohones" (Bush, to one of Blair's aides)

Jeez....

Wikileaks
 

On Aug 24, 2:57*pm, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,

*"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:

The bill for those wars would've come due no matter who followed Bush. You
know that. Or maybe you don't.

* * * * *Yeah but the bill would have come due no matter what Bush did
in the Middle East. Most of what we are seeing today is the result of
20+ years of cheap money, overspending by both corporate and private
interests. If anything we are largely victims of our own irrational
exuberance, to coin a phrase. Americans tend to think that "this time is
different" and the gravy train will never end, so too many of us
(government, personal and business) start to act like it.
* * *Government spends thinking that tax rev will grow to the sky,
household borrow for all sorts of strange things, as did corporations,
etc.
* * *We had a very long (and bipartisan) growth spurt where even the
recessions were light. So we, I think largely related to the American
confidence (or overconfidence), got ahead of ourselves.
* * *Much of the recession so far is mathematical in that we are
returning to the mean. If you have a long period of growth, you have to
have a long period of no, limited growth. There is no infinity on either
side of the question.
* * *Every once in awhile, Mr. Greenspan still shows occassional flashes
of brilliance. I think he sized up the situation quite nicely.
* *""They [financial crises] are all different, but they have one
fundamental source," he said. "That is the unquenchable capability of
human beings when confronted with long periods of prosperity to presume
that it will continue."

--
* I want to find a voracious, small-minded predator
and name it after the IRS.
Robert Bakker, paleontologist

Now all that is true.

Wikileaks
 

On Aug 24, 3:00*pm, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:
"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message

m...





In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:

The bill for those wars would've come due no matter who followed Bush.
You
know that. Or maybe you don't.

* * * * Yeah but the bill would have come due no matter what Bush did
in the Middle East. Most of what we are seeing today is the result of
20+ years of cheap money, overspending by both corporate and private
interests. If anything we are largely victims of our own irrational
exuberance, to coin a phrase. Americans tend to think that "this time is
different" and the gravy train will never end, so too many of us
(government, personal and business) start to act like it.
* * Government spends thinking that tax rev will grow to the sky,
household borrow for all sorts of strange things, as did corporations,
etc.
* * We had a very long (and bipartisan) growth spurt where even the
recessions were light. So we, I think largely related to the American
confidence (or overconfidence), got ahead of ourselves.
* * Much of the recession so far is mathematical in that we are
returning to the mean. If you have a long period of growth, you have to
have a long period of no, limited growth. There is no infinity on either
side of the question.
* * Every once in awhile, Mr. Greenspan still shows occassional flashes
of brilliance. I think he sized up the situation quite nicely.
* ""They [financial crises] are all different, but they have one
fundamental source," he said. "That is the unquenchable capability of
human beings when confronted with long periods of prosperity to presume
that it will continue."

.....while shopping for crap they don't need, never needed, and never will
need.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Now I never thought I'd hear an American say that but it's true. I
observed it myself. But a large part of America is so boring that
the women have nothing to do but shop. The men have nothing to do but
drink beer and talk about guns. I have to say I couldn't really
blame them.

Wikileaks
 

On Aug 24, 3:00*pm, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,

*"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:

Then, change my theory. Either way, I want our elected slobs to suffer
deeply for their decisions. Same as everyone else whose kids come home in a
box.

* So you want the death penalty applied to the relatives of politicians
solely and utterly for the sins of the fathers (or mothers)? Why not
just take them out and shoot them instead of making them be where they
don't want to be and needlessly endangering the lives of the real
soldiers?

--
* I want to find a voracious, small-minded predator
and name it after the IRS.
Robert Bakker, paleontologist

Ah, these are the people that find out the hard way that Hollywood is
********. The good guy gets killed. The bad guy is smarter and is
more motivated. Hey, just maybe he wasn't the bad guy after all. The
bad guy lives in the White house.

Wikileaks
 

On Aug 24, 3:05*pm, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,

*"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:

.....while shopping for crap they don't need, never needed, and never will
need.

* Economic 101 would tend to disagree with you. Since you need both a
willing buyer and a willing seller, the buyer, by definition, gets more
utility from the purchase than from hanging on to the money. It is
hardly your place to decide what is crap for a few hundred million
others.

--
* I want to find a voracious, small-minded predator
and name it after the IRS.
Robert Bakker, paleontologist

Crap is something you don't need. I buy crap too. But nobody buys
more crap than Americans. In more senses than one.
I think the posh word is "disposable income".

Wikileaks
 

On Aug 24, 3:08*pm, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:
"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message

m...

In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:

.....while shopping for crap they don't need, never needed, and never
will
need.

*Economic 101 would tend to disagree with you. Since you need both a
willing buyer and a willing seller, the buyer, by definition, gets more
utility from the purchase than from hanging on to the money. It is
hardly your place to decide what is crap for a few hundred million
others.

There's an awful lot of brand new unopened stuff at garage sales.

Gifts.........If you don't open them, you can send to someone else.
(The box may be MT. It doesn't matter. :-)

Wikileaks
 

In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:

I would like to point out that the Queens son and grandson have both
been in combat. Her grandson is now in training to fly attack
helicopters.

While I more than respect the service of the Monarchy, it has
little if nothing to do with your thoughts since the Queen has no real
say any more in who goes to war and who doesn't. If you had brought up
the PM's son or family members of Parliament (which might actually be a
better comparator since REgimental ties being a big part of the British
social fabric in some areas) then I might be impressed.
But again, this is also a few orders of magnitude different from
volunteering and being pushed to slaughter merely because of parentage.

--
I want to find a voracious, small-minded predator
and name it after the IRS.
Robert Bakker, paleontologist

Wikileaks
 

"harry" wrote in message
...
On Aug 24, 3:08 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:
"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message

m...

In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:

.....while shopping for crap they don't need, never needed, and never
will
need.

Economic 101 would tend to disagree with you. Since you need both a
willing buyer and a willing seller, the buyer, by definition, gets more
utility from the purchase than from hanging on to the money. It is
hardly your place to decide what is crap for a few hundred million
others.

There's an awful lot of brand new unopened stuff at garage sales.

Gifts.........If you don't open them, you can send to someone else.
(The box may be MT. It doesn't matter. :-)

============

Someone bought those gifts because they felt obligated, not because they had
any idea what was a good gift for the recipient. Happens all the time. In
December, there's a holiday based on this bull****.