This War. . .- Page 2

Posted: 10/28/04 at 5:03pm

As someone who WAS in the military, I'm also intrigued by the ten year service length. Most people who stay in past their initial enlistment - especially if they actually stay in TEN years - go on to fulfill twenty to get the retirement. I'm curious as to why the end after ten years, and if that has something to do with the bitterness.

Posted: 10/28/04 at 5:03pm

Ten years was about six too many.

Problem is the first four sucked.

I'm negative about it now because it's work experience that is basically useless and I have no pension of any kind from those ten years.

So I would say, do SIX years and ONLY stay in beyond that if you're going to do 20.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 10/28/04 at 5:03pm

Goth, may I remind you what Shakespeare wrote: "Mark you this, Bassanio, the devil can cite Scripture for his purpose."

And Rodney, PM me your snail-mail address. I'd like to send you a complimentary copy of WILL THEY EVER TRUST US AGAIN: Letters From the War Zone, the current bestseller by your favorite patriot, Michael Moore.

But the heart of the book is not really BY Michael Moore. The book consists of letters from the brave men and women of our armed forces who have been lied to by a TRUE traitor to this country's ideals: a man named George W. Bush.

I'd like very much for you to read this book. Before Tuesday if possible.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 10/28/04 at 5:06pm

"Goth, may I remind you what Shakespeare wrote: "Mark you this, Bassanio, the devil can cite Scripture for his purpose."

Well then perhaps you would like to explain Jeremiah 50 to me.

Posted: 10/28/04 at 5:06pm

Joey, I wondered when you'd sick you nose in this conversation.

If the troops don't have what they need it's because of Democrats like Kerry voting everything down.

Zel Miller:

"Listing all the weapon systems that Senator Kerry tried his best to shut down sounds like an auctioneer selling off our national security but Americans need to know the facts.

The B-1 bomber, that Senator Kerry opposed, dropped 40% of the bombs in the first six months of Operation Enduring Freedom.

The B-2 bomber, that Senator Kerry opposed, delivered air strikes against the Taliban in Afghanistan and Hussein's command post in Iraq.

The F-14A Tomcats, that Senator Kerry opposed, shot down Khadifi's Libyan MIGs over the Gulf of Sidra. The modernized F-14D, that Senator Kerry opposed, delivered missile strikes against Tora Bora.

The Apache helicopter, that Senator Kerry opposed, took out those Republican Guard tanks in Kuwait in the Gulf War. The F-15 Eagles, that Senator Kerry opposed, flew cover over our Nation's Capital and this very city after 9/11.

I could go on and on and on: Against the Patriot Missile that shot down Saddam Hussein's scud missiles over Israel, Against the Aegis air-defense cruiser, Against the Strategic Defense Initiative, Against the Trident missile, against, AGAINST, AGAINST!"

[PalJoey]

Posted: 10/28/04 at 5:07pm

So would you like to read their letters, Eric?

[badkarma719]

Posted: 10/28/04 at 5:09pm

in the words of Margret Cho

It's just a penis contest between George and Sadam


whos is bigger





who's is oilier

















who's got the Forskin

Posted: 10/28/04 at 5:10pm

You talking to me? Do you REALLY think I'm going to any personal information?

[WindyCityActor]

Posted: 10/28/04 at 5:11pm

Jeremiah 50?

Good Grief! Diving into the OLD Testament?!

Gotta love that "Eye for an Eye" mentality!

I'll stick with the New Testament, "Love Thy Neighbor" Mindset.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 10/28/04 at 5:11pm

Goth I'll pass on the Jeremiah 50 exegesis. My Jewish tradition teaches that there can be no ONE interpretation of a bible portion. The Talmud is based on the idea that "On the one hand THIS ... while on the other hand THAT."

Posted: 10/28/04 at 5:11pm

On second thought, why don't you send them to me, I ran out of toilet paper last night.

[mominator]

Posted: 10/28/04 at 5:12pm

ewww thanks badkarma there is a thought I could so do without!

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 10/28/04 at 5:13pm

quoting Zell Miller? THAT is going off the deep end. It was shown that night that Miller's comments were off and that Cheney himself opposed most of those weapons when he was Defense Secretary.

OIL

[Gothampc]

Posted: 10/28/04 at 5:16pm

"Goth I'll pass on the Jeremiah 50 exegesis."

I figured you'd pass. You're very good at bashing other people's viewpoints when you can't figure them out.


"I'll stick with the New Testament, "Love Thy Neighbor" Mindset." Windy, Jews don't believe in the New Testament.

Posted: 10/28/04 at 5:18pm

"As someone who WAS in the military, I'm also intrigued by the ten year service length. Most people who stay in past their initial enlistment - especially if they actually stay in TEN years - go on to fulfill twenty to get the retirement. I'm curious as to why the end after ten years, and if that has something to do with the bitterness."

Initially I enlisted for SIX years because of the program I was in (two years of school at the beginning)

When Six was coming to an end, I was not financially or educationally prepared to get out, PLUS I was up for shore duty.

In the Navy you do a certain number of years on a ship, then a certain number in a shore job.

So then I became an instructor (people go to Boot Camp, then to tech school. I taught tech school) Instructor Billets are for FOUR years.

So, Six plus four equals ten.

I got out because by the end of the four years at shore duty I had prepared myself to get out and make twice as much working at a white collar job. Had I stayed in, they would've sent me back to one of the coasts, which I didn't want to do, and back to an engine room, which I REALLY didn't want to do, all for a whoping $22k a year.

Another ten, to get the pension, whould've meant five at sea, then three at shore (probably another cross-country move), then two more at sea (another cross country move)


Like I said in the other post, my main regret is that I don't get any kind of pension for it and that I did ten instead of six.

answer the question Grant?
Updated On: 10/28/04 at 05:18 PM

Posted: 10/28/04 at 5:32pm

Rodney - yes, it did.

Goth - the only reason to go into the meaning of any part of the Bible is based on how you feel about it in general. I feel it is a work of some men to control and codify the lives of the rest of the people. Nothing more, nothing less. I think they were intelligent in that they preyed upon the fears and superstitions of those they were attempting to control - and it has worked exceedingly well. The interesting aspect of using mythology and superstition to base anything on is that it can't be argued with rationally - you either accept them or you don't. That has been translated into a current political philosophy of 'you're either with us or you're against us.'

Ultimately, neither of us is in a position to say the other is right or wrong. However, while your beliefs are allowing you to willingly participate in actions and decissions that affect everyone - including non-believers - my approach to reality will not interfer with your ability to maintain your belief system and make personal life choices for yourself accordingly.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 10/28/04 at 5:32pm

Where did I bash anyone, Goth? No where. There you go again, accusing me of things I haven't done.

"Methinks the lady doth PROJECT too much..."

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 10/28/04 at 5:54pm

For those curious about Jeremiah 50 and would like to offer interpretations, click the link.

PS - It is the New American Standard Bible. God only knows which bible is correct.

Get it?

"God only knows"?

hee hee
Jeremiah 50

Updated On: 10/28/04 at 05:54 PM

Posted: 10/28/04 at 5:59pm

For those wishing to investigate a different line of thinking - or perhaps to consider them both:

http://www.xs4all.nl/~wichm/christmyth.html