Here we go.....

The jury is now in session biatches.


Tm, i fully agree on the fact there should be a cap on campaign spending. There is way to much over spending going on. How the fuck can one say 11.1 million dollars is not too much for a campaign? I mean if i saw a canidate with half decent views, and then heard he raised campaign money and gave it to a charity he would get my vote right off the bat. Better things can be done with this money they blow on self propaganda. I mean yes they need to get elected, but what ever happen to the "Best" person gets elected not the one with the most money.

Edit:
Also tm is that you in the avatar?

__________________

11.1 million is nothing. George Bush raised over 200 million dollars in his last campaign for president. I say 11.1 million dollars is not enough money to run a successful campaign for president.

__________________

heh bush was down in my city a few months back for a fund raising dinner in a rich ass neighborhood right next to our office building. they had all these cops posted everywhere. he raised a million bucks at that one dinner!

pr0az - i'm pretty sure that is him in his avatar. don't you recognize the marine haircut??

You are looking at it comparitively. If you were only ALLOWED to use 11 million dollars then it WOULD run a successful campaign, because there would be no other option.

And yes that is indeed me in my avatar. Not currently (was taken shortly before joining the marines), but i would probably look very similar if i could right now. But its ok, i welcome both "looks" for me haha. Either or doesn't matter to me, i miss my mohawk now and again, but then again i clearly remember how pissed off i used to get iwth having long hair when you weren't doing something with it which was 99% of hte time.

(in other news) I saw a kid with a mohawk(a decient one) and punk attire on. If i wasn't driving by i would have talked to him. If i see him again i'll ask him to come over and jam sometime haha. (that is if he plays music.)

But onto topic.
Politics blow. As those around me can see i get way too wrapped up in it when i start talking about it. Which is probably "more" negative than positive, purely looking at it from a personal stand point. I feel like once i get started its like an addiction to talk about, and to think about, and i feel i'm way too good to be addicted to something as such.

I think i make it fairly clear how my opinions are in regards to politics and things i think about in general. I'm one of those people that thinks that with some hard work and dedication you can achieve much. Sure there are other factors involved but regardless. I think its a sham to think that everybody else should be required to raise those who are too ignorant (by their own fault) to raise themselves up. Granted i wouldn't step in somebody's way if happens to be their desires or goals, but to require everybody else to step up and give some body who has like 8 kids money because they can't keep their stuff in their pants KNOWING they dont' have any money, is down right obscene.

__________________

McCain is huge on campaign finance reforms.....he has been embarrassing the senate with reform bills for a while<he co-writes them with a dem who's name i forget>.


one of the worst element of our government, the real unjustice, is the lobbyists.

our government serves corporations, both parties are equally guilty. trade negotiations and globalization issues<stuff like NAFTA, G8 summits,the fortune 500> is outside public discourse<how trade negotiations should be agreed upon, whether or not to trade with certain countries,holding american based corporations to a standard when they outsource jobs and operate abroad> during election campaigns.

itll never happen, a huge aspect of why is people dont really care and the appropriate questions are not asked and raise by the media, not in a conspiratorial sense, but the press doesnt want to anger thier sponsors.

the press, in america is more about selling audiences to advertising than anything nowadays, so.....

people get the society, the government they deserve, in a sense.

__________________

Meh, politics.

one thing i hate is the indifference to issues that WILL affect you,..........*cough* blizzard beast cough*

__________________

I didn't say I was indifferent. The "meh" was for the extreme boredom of talking about politics online.

Ahhhhh. Like i said i enjoy your posts hah.
Completely. I considered being a lobbyist. (years back, before i developed morality) hah

Its probably more accureately to say those who have successful lobbying effect and change policies that control buisness, economy, and the enviornment issues.

This is where once again the positives of having a free market economy has its draw backs. It contains many many positives, but there will always be money handed around by those who can give it. (money not being so much as bribes but money used in the form of lobbyists attempting to swing representatives towards their cause)

__________________

IN recent news kerry decides not to run. I'm not surprised. I was actually extremely surprised he was planning on doing it in the first place. I doubt the democrats would have supported him when it comes down to picking one to compete.

__________________

They totally blew it with Kerry in the last election. He was the worst candidate I've seen for either party other than maybe Dukakis.

__________________

whats funny is how massachusetts senators are portrayed as some sort of socialist ideologues and the state in general a liberal haven, much like the east bay/san fransisco area and hollywood dominated LA.

1>boston and the state doesnt hold a candle to those places and being the 3rd richest city/economy on the east coast, many powerful investment banks, weapons and gun manufacturers<not to mention connectifuck below us is like the heavyweight champ of gun companies>,a high tech institute that caters to military defense contracts<they are literally working on making soldiers invisible, battle suits like in sci-fi films>......i could seriously go on....

2>the massachusetts bay state colony was the closest thing to a theocracy outside of the papacy, we still have puritanical laws on the book that make evangelical utopian colorado, quiet 3rd riech southern california<was always traditionally conservative and overwhelmingly white till recently> look like rank motherfucking ametuers<however the fuck you spell that shit>


3>has a vast amount of business conservatives who are more socially left. the folks who do stem cell<based in boston> research are probably overwhelmingly conservative when it comes to economics, the same with the vast amount of doctors and med students<harvard> who want to compete for wages in private medicine.

the kennedys<who are more like a mythological caractatures>john kerry and mike dukakis are and were like clinton, centrists, not populists. limousine liberals, not overall/pajama wearing maoists.

john kerry got made out to look like howard dean for chistsakes, its funny how political election propaganda, thru the media, frames the perception of places......that arent accurate whatsoever.

like cuba for instance, for a more extreme example. like iran and venezuela now.

__________________

God damn mother (#&% son )#% freakin. BY GOD.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070124..._russia_weapons

This country just doesn't fucking get it. I swear Russia is one of the most ridiculous countries EVER. Is it in russian culture to just be completely shady and not give a fuck about .... anything but themselves and money?

Regardless of whether they are "democratic" or not i htink russia will always be an enemy to a civilized global world. They have NOTHING to give to the world but military weapons, nuclear warheads, and vodka all of which are extremely dangerous.

If you didn't read it, russia has sent yet another shipment of "hi tech" mobile missle defense systems to... who other than IRAN in order to protect their nuclear intrests.

I now have a chechnyan friend here. (just came here like 2 years ago) and we definately had a good talk about russia the other night.

Fuck russia. Period. (except i have solid respect for their navy)

__________________

Man its not Russia just more of the people in power. Honestly those people in power over there in their so called "democratic" country are people who were involved in the communist government. ?Puton? their current president was apart of there secret service police crap during the communist days.Those people are broke over there due to the political corruption they have to endure. Why not sell old ass nuclear weapons you have sitting around in fields, before someone steals more of them. Russia has 2 nuclear war heads !MISSING! as we speak that they know about, god only knows how many they really have missing. Shit might as well sell them to someone we know who is a threat and we know they have them...dont get me wrong im not supporting it.

The whole world is showing their stupidity by letting this all go on.

Iran, i would just blow them off the fucking map for the trouble they cause.

A) All we ask is not to fuck with nuclear material right now, they do it
B)They make counterfeit US money and flood the shit into the market.

Anyway i wouldn't blow them off the map but the western countrys really need to pull there shit togeather and and get with these guys to discuss the issues at hand. They have so much fucking oil why in hell would they want nuclear energy. I mean nuclear energy in the way way way way long run will be much cheaper, but oil in those countries runs for about 5-20 cents a gallon. They want nuclear energy to make nuclear bombs end of story....

__________________

How about claiming to want peaceful nuclear energy (this is a very legimate and good cause) yet they turn around say say isreal will SOON be whiped off the map? AND RUSSIA IS SUPPLING NUCLEAR MATERIALS AND DEFENSE?

I just don't fucking understand this entire situation.

once again peopel WAY too fucking tied to money and could only careless how the effects will only escalate to extreme bullshit.

If there is something i've learned its that i really don't like russia. I don't trust them now and i probably never will. I actually don't eve really feel comfortable around russians either. (i've seen a few walking around on campus) Mostly older people "professors" i assume.

I mean i'll be honest. I'm not going to lie about Americas military. Believe what you want or you hear on the news, we could absolutely abliterate Iran and Russia. (there would be no incentive to russia, other than to finally do the one two knock out) But i'll tell you what although they may have been a "formidable" enemy before, russia couldn't stand a fucking chance if we were to go "head to head" or ANYTHING they produce. They don't even have money, they just sell off all the build up shit they made to whoever and ANYBODY who will buy it. The chinese jacked all their shit and made their own stuff off of it. (Can we see a pattern between piracy in china and the rulers? No fucking wonder they pirate everything, they even pirate weapons and vehicles and call them their own)

Btw just like any other products anything china builds is ridiculous cheap... haha go fucking figure. That country is one big stereotype.

__________________

Russia is stupid, but I do enjoy their stereotypes.

__________________

Especially teh sex slaves!!

Oh my god speaking of which that reminds me. One of my Geology tas is from china. So she has a heavy accent. She was telling use the prefixes of different time periods.

And one is Mezo.

Oh my god you can only imagine what went hrough my head when she said that. I was waiting for horny afterwards.
Mezo horny. hahahah She said it perfect.

__________________

mezo haha

I remeber i was at national guard camp and we had this asia guy there and i had fire guard so i was forced to carry a red flash light around with me, i flashed it on the dude and said "say sucky sucky 5 dollas", he said it fucking perfect and with the red light on him, seem like he was sitting on a beed in the red light district of asia.

Anyway yea i mean we can kill all of them, but why waste a million dollar bomb on a 5 cent country is what the political figures in our good democracy would say. I mean we dont know alot about russia Tm, we just know there politics are fucked up..so i cant say i dont trust them, also ive seen very hot girls from russia MAKES ME LIKE THEM a little . Cant say the same for romania tho Damn do they have some ugly ass he/she looking thing over there ruff.

I mean its all good though, im just more tired of all the whining from the governments across the west about all this nuclear bullshit. They whine but then they want someone else to handle the problem. From what i understand France should have a bigger mouth than they do on "Paper" they have the 3rd biggest nuclear arsenal. I hate the french more than i do the russians .. Snobby basterds.

The only reason russia exist is because we let them. Blame your good military for that Tm. Instead of rebuilding germany we shoould have gave them weapons to run into Russia and destroy it .

As for china, china sucks. They fuck with the japs alot...Remeber awhile back when the Jap naval ship ran a chinese sub out of its waters?...Countries over there just cant seem to leave well enough alone. Their parts do suck as aswell. They dont have alot of machinary though from what i hear they do alot of stuff by HAND.

__________________

I'm not sure what you mean by "we don't know much about the russians"

because if you've NEVER believed me about anything since you've read my posts read my lips. We know ALOT about the russians. I can tell you so much about their tactics, their abilities and so much more it would make your head spin.

Even today ALL of our material is written with a russian battle in mind. Sure there is plenty of OJT stuff with terrorism but when you go to your school from the first day on they tell you everything and anything about russians.

I've seen spy satelite information, photos, read things. Trust me if there is ANYBODY on this globe we know enough about its the russians. (for good reason, they try that shit on us.)

__________________

BY GOD the sensational propaganda!

"At the rally, 12-year-old Moriah Arnold stood on her toes to reach the microphone and tell the crowd: "Now we know our leaders either lied to us or hid the truth. Because of our actions, the rest of the world sees us as a bully and a liar."

The sixth-grader from Harvard, Mass., organized a petition drive at her school against the war that has killed more than 3,000 U.S. service-members, including seven whose deaths were reported Saturday."

On both the people/person who wrote the article and the people using this girl.

WHAT THE FUCK DOES A 12 YEAR OLD KNOW ABOUT ANYTHING? Especially politics, international issues, and public/local/international relations. i find things like this pretty disqusting and sick. "Yes lets use a 12 year old girl as a spokesman for our cause, because shes so innocent and young."

Pah, bullshit i call it.

__________________

I wonder how many adults in the rest of the world agree with that shamefully exploited, evil, propagandist twelve year old?

(I tell you what though, there's something here I JUST DO NOT AGREE WITH. The name Moriah. What a fucking travesty. Who names all these circus-freak American children, Rip Taylor?)

My political thesis - "Leo Strauss was a fat, useless, shallow, myopic, dickless cretin."

__________________

Ah ha! A revelation as to where some of your sarcasm comes from. I bet you'd love to have his eyebrows.

There's a lot of brainwashed youth. You know that. It's been going on since day one.

Jane Fonda jumping back on the bandwagon is irritating. Hubby asked me why there wasn't a sniper rifle around when you need one.

__________________

I'm confused why jane fonda wasn't convicted of treason. I mean what kind of fucking clear case for that do you need?

I'm not even going to begin to jump into her shit.

yeah there is definately alot of brainwashed youth and those on their way to being one.

__________________

majority are "high society" brainwashed youth.....

__________________

Yeah, or middle classed. The ones that don't have to worry about mama's boyfriend beating the crap out of them. The lower classed people don't give a rat's ass because they're trying to survive themselves where ever they may be. The rich ones think their money can buy them out of anything so they don't care. Then you have the ones that want the publicity.

I've heard various stories about Jane Fonda so I don't know which is factual. I never liked the bitch anyway. Too pompous and she ain't all that.

__________________

so are we on the premise that anyone who opposes the war is a traitor?

people cant express disillusionment towards the democratic party who authorized the war?<when they had a majority>



some free country we live in

__________________

No are you high? She was indirectly/directly responsible for beatings and deaths of pow prisoners in the vietnam war. She was a huge fucking pawn by the vietnamese government to perpetuate their illusionary treatment of pows. I'm not even going to fucking go into this.

If the only thing she had done was "oppose the war" she wouldn't be who she is today. You need ot look some shit up.

__________________

yea, she seems like a real bitch...
http://www.1stcavmedic.com/jane_fonda.htm

theres some pics of her laughing it up with NVA in the 70s

i really hate when celebrities take it upon themselves to become political activists. just because your famous, doesn't mean you are smart and know what is right. its like that "bono" guy from u2....from time to time i see headlines like : "bono urges UN to increase aid in (insert region/country here)" i urge bono to go back to the recording studio and fuck off.

i guess theres nothing wrong with a celeb using their fame to promote issues..no way around it either..but some of these people just need to come back down to earth and realize they too are just another human being like the rest of us. maybe i'm just bitter because i'm not rich and famous.

i was refering to the other folks at the rally. couple hundred thousand, if i recall from reading news this morning.

some war vets in there as well.

__________________

And just because you make money doesn't mean your in the know it all, stick to what you fucking know. Raise awareness. People take their opinions just way too seriously.

Hence why i really enjoy and i think i am now going to watch. Team america.

Makes fun of everybody, and i throughly enjoy them making fun of shit movie stars.

__________________

Oh ok.
<100,000 is the estimates i've heard. Just a couple tens of thousands.

There is nothing wrong with protesting. In fact i hope there was a mixed crowd at the thing protesting and advocating both sides. I owuldn't have minded going hell i'm right fucking there as it is.

But it would have been a bitch and a half to get there for sure.

I just don't like how sides manipulate events for their own cause. For instance wording used by associate press and all these people. You can clearly see who is pro or against anything. Its really annoying because of the "colored" language they use in their writing. But what i'm refering to is how people will be like look the entire country is against this because a large demonstration was done.

This also leads to other times were people are like look at these statistics these clearly shows this, when in reality it shows a small percentage of an entire whole. (done in studies and all that) and they interpret how they see fit. You see this alot in global warming.

__________________

Sean Penn was at this recent rally right beside her and Cindy Sheehan was there, too.
I don't disagree with voicing opinion about wars. I do think that the reasons we're there are what's important and supporting the troops will get the mission accomplished faster.
As far as famous people, Reagan was and so is Arnold. It depends on how you use that monetary power and knowledge.

__________________

Actors spend all their time using illusion (film/TV) to manipulate our emotions, so are particularly well-suited to see how and when our emotions are being manipulated using illusion, so they come out all the time and point out how thin and obvious the manipulation is. They are dealing in their domain, but their problem is that whatever insight they may have is completely lost on 99% of anyone. So we get a lot of simplified bullshit instead, more or less exactly the same stuff they're coming out against. When you see them on TV talking about their various causes, they're acting as much as any movie you may have seen.

It's turned into a race to the simplest, most compelling story possible, basically either 'an idiot with his heart in the right place defies the odds and succeeds' or 'broken people band together to overcome adversity' (and yes, these are expressed an awful lot in movies and TV, aren't they?). Don't look for any of the complexity you know exists in the real world wherever people with these recent bastardizations of once rich political ideologies crawl out. And if you find yourself buying into anything they say (and most of you claiming to be above shit have bought into one of the bleached out versions of reality for sale here and hopefully will find yourself in this manner some distant day), you'll notice that you don't exist in three dimensions.

In any case, if people in general have the right to say what they think about politics using whatever forum is available to them - such as an internet forum - celebrities have the same right. And if people in this country don't have that right, then what, exactly, are we fighting a war for?

For treason the clear case you need is that somebody gave important secrets to an enemy nation. Jane Fonda has never, ever had any important secrets to give, so it would be very difficut for her to commit treason.

They should waste their time speaking out about how our good democracy isn't giving POW'S the constitutional rights. These rights are suppose to be given to them by the constitution.

__________________

Treason doesn't neccesarily always involve espionage. Thats the more commonly thought of way.

But according to dictionary.com treason is defined as.

"1. the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign.
2. a violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or to one's state.
3. the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith; treachery."

I would imagine she most definately committed #3 on that list and quite possibly #2.

And proaz what in the hell are you talking about? haha

__________________

Yeah, what are you talking about? They gave Doritos to Saddam when he was a POW. I'd say that was more democratic than what I'd have given him.

__________________

I have a feeling hes being sarcastic and refering to their ignorance. (celebrities.)

(i hope) cause then its a funny post. If not, then hes stupid.

__________________

Ya never know unless there's smilies.

__________________

I know right! Emoticons have no purpose....

__________________

Better?

edit:
it was sarcasim

__________________

*Jordan fades back, swoosh, and thats the game!*

I knew it all along.

__________________

Here's treason according to Article III of the Constitution (which, unlike the dictionary, carries legal weight in this country):

'Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.'

So I wasn't right (though I can't think of a treason case that wasn't to do with espionage). However, Jane Fonda has only waged war against the US metaphorically ('publicity war') and has given no aid or comfort to any enemy that's more substantial than 'somebody who won't do anything agrees with me,' so unless we amend the Constitution to cover metaphorical uses of the word 'war' (in which case I suppose every drug dealer would be a traitor) and extent 'aid or comfort' to cover non-substantial, petty things, I'd still say you're whining about the fact that somebody you don't like has a right to voice her opinion, however noxious it may be.

Though, to make sure people are clear about my opinions on Jane Fonda, I'll say that the best treatment of her is in the film A Letter to Jane and the book The Unbearable Lightness of Being.

Again, I'll remind you that the whole reason we think we should be fighting this war has to do with the fact that people have the right in this country to say all sorts of things. If we abandon that, suddenly our moral high ground disappears and we have to acknowledge that we're really just asserting our imperial power and punishing the regions that won't submit, which sounds much less pleasant.

I don't feel this is correct. There is no ideal or political right to justify moral high ground during war/battle/conflict. You either win or lose, history will record it, and it is always less pleasantly recorded for the loser. All citizens of the US have the right to say whatever they want, agree, or disagree but last I checked most of America no longer wants to fight a war; even though the US is at a very critical point in history. As the last super power we can bring the war elsewhere or it well come here. In time it would come here but by then the point of no return is long gone and everyone would be asking, "why wasn't something done about this"?

I think good number of the US want war victories like they want there food, rights, luxuries, and the Afgan war. Fast, kinda cheap, total satisfaction, and done without them seeing it being made so they have the misbelief of it being clean. Just as soon as something isn't right though they think they can just leave, cut ties, and just forget it. That might work great for the US citizen that eats out all the time and has enjoyed demanding instant satisfacftion thier whole life, but the best things in life are almost never cheap, almost always take time, conflict, heartache, and personal sacrifice.

I'm drinking some so forgive me if I've made some fatal logic error in that analogy. I just feel that finishing the so called "Iraq war" is important. I think its done already. The US is done with the primary mission in Iraq. America has completed many missions in the war on terror and I feel is in the lead to victory so long as heat is maintained where ever it is needed. The problem now isn't that Iraq is at war with the US, more than that Iraq is at war with itself and we have promised to help restore order. It isn't just American service members being killed everyday, but I have noticed that is what the news only reports everyday... just the body counts... but who sitting on thier ass eating McDonalds gives a fuck about actually winning at this point right? They want want something to bitch and whine about nomatter how nice life might be.

Rant over

__________________

I don't believe war in the abstract requires a moral high ground. However, this particular war has been approached with those terms from the beginning, in part because we don't seem to like the 'people who look like them hurt us so we'll hurt them' story. So we replaced it partially with the 'our way of life is just and good and theirs is unjust and bad, but can be good with our help.' Rhetoric is overwhelming with moral evaluations, not 'fuck those assholes, they tried to fuck us up' as the be-all, end-all. Even if that's the truth, we need the other story to deal with what we're doing.

That being the case, we're fighting a war to support a mode of life in which somebody like Jane Fonda can be safe and free to say and do whatever the fuck she wants. That's the foundation on which this particular war has been justified, and without it you'd be hard-pressed to say why we should be fighting without abandoning our national narrative, without which it's hard to be a well-defined, modern nation (and without that it's hard to say what exactly is being fought to preserve). Fortunately we're all also free to ignore her, which is surprisingly easy.

You are insightful. Do you know that? I'm compelled to disagree with you for hours just for the sake of hearing what you have to say and learning all I can.

I guess there are no acute solutions for the US at this point no matter how things are turned. I just hope that in time the US can survive it's choices in play no matter the story behide it, eventually have its victories realized, and people like Jane will get a clue. The US has to change and adjust with the rest of the world if it wants to remain a super power. I believe most of all more American people need to be willing to actually make those changes instead of resist them.

Its kinda funny how Americans have the freedom to basically send Freedom to hell in a ham basket. It would be major irony if the ideal of popular sovereignty that created this country also killed it.

__________________

"...people need to be willing to actually make those changes instead of resist them. "

Isn't that one of the things we're trying to accomplish with the Iraqi's, too. That they get along with each other instead of one trying to overpower the other to destruction?

__________________

Honestly this war could just end up being another Vietnam. Look at Russia when it was still a super power and how the Afgans kept them at bay for a couple of years untill they pulled out. I think a different War plan needs to go into effect.

__________________

Once again i'm not talking about Jane Fondas right to protest wars. If you read what i said i said:



She had a direct effect in the torture and mal treatment of prisoners. Its possible one could "argue" her "actual" hand in what she did but i personally think that is bullshit. She handed over notes from pow's and completely and totally fucked them over. Like i said i really don't want to get into this, but i didn't say a word about her protesting did i? Infact i made a post about not being against somebody protesting even if its against my beliefs. (No offense but Its also easy for you (PST) to feel its easy to ignore her but i'm sure there are those who have been effected by her deeply that would probably say otherwise) ALTHOUGH in saying that shes not a very popular person for obvious reasons, which at least gives me slight gratification, granted its been so many years since what happened happened with her people only forget and move on. (instant gratification kinda thing like Soul was saying)

Next your right about changing our story if thats the case. Even though it shouldn't be a war of words it most often is. I'm not exactly sure of the true importance of "naming" why you're doing something if you just say something else and do the same action, its still the same action.

Although in saying that I understand there is inherent importance to the reasons behind doing something, and obviously in a war there is still this justification. I've felt the entire time they've should have changed stories but then again we can always critize and say how they should have done it better even though its probable that it wasn't the case before. (as obvious anyways). But there is most definately something signifcant about the fact of what soul said about length of the way the people want it. You look at lengthy wars in the past and it was purely obvious that hte war was needed every minute of every single day. Obviously at the time of the entrance in the war it was planely obvious that we needed to (in the eyes of most people). The whole point i'm getting at is humans do not like to attempt to achieve somewhat hazy goals that are far off in the future with little to no gain until the very very end. You can look at this fact in all aspects of our life and even in child rearing. This where i'm supposed to make the argument i let those who need to make the choices make the choices but they are just as prone to this kind of stuff as anybody else.

So.? We'll always be fucked.


Proaz you bring up something that i talked to a chechnyan who was talking about how he feels its similar. (only in the fact that they are imbedded and civilians in city territory and how its probable that we won't be able to win)
Although there is significant differences between Iraq and the war of the Russians and Chechnyans. Although one difference ("advantage" maybe)
is that the russians just literally used any and all measures to destroy the cities and everything. (Chechnya looks like shit now)

__________________

Thats the thing Russia just basically destroyed the place without remorse. They still had to pull out.

__________________

Yeah well i mean i don't feel like spending too much time talking about it, but there appears to be some factors as to why. I mean talk about a seemingly useless war/conflict. Obviously nobody wants a part of your own country to leave although maybe in this case that might be different haha. Talk about an extreme morale downer. Years of war with no results except destroyed cities and an entire people against you.

__________________

What Jane Fonda did to the POWs is repeat a lie about them she believed to be true; this is pretty bad, but it's not what you're saying it is. She was responsible for covering up the beatings and deaths of POWS but not for the beatings and deaths themselves. Huge difference. Not a very admirable thing to do - and she's not a very admirable person - but it didn't cause shit to happen - directly or indirectly - and it's very far off from treason as defined by our Constitution. You'd have a better case with the dyke-bombing plans, but even then you'd have to twist 'aid or comfort' to mean something unusual. See what a bitch the law is?

The war of words has always been necessary, but a modern nation needs a national character and national qualities to be able to exist and justify itself in doing virtually anything. More than that, without it war loses much of its nobility, soldiers become dudes with guns, and the exceptional state in which they're allowed to do things that aren't acceptable in everyday life loses its force. So it's a non-trivial thing.

im not a military strategist so this could just be speculation, but as this war is more or less fighting against guerillas, shouldn't this have just been an operation with very hi skilled special ops soldiers, seeing as it is more of a hunt than a fight?

__________________

It's not just fighting guerillas, it's about maintaing order and the like - and for that you need conventional forces, and lots of them. At least, that's my completely unprofessional opinion.

Ok lets set one thing completely and totally in stone forever.

Special operations people i'd say 99.99999999% of the time are never tasked with "taking people out" or "hunting people" or even "killing people."

Special operators are tasked with intelligence gathering missions. I.E. Seals are deployed to take soil and water samples of beach heads, marine Snipers are deployed in front of the forward end of marines to give accurate pictures of whats up ahead, Marine Corps Counter Intelligence is deployed to cities to blend in with culture, take pictures, and conduct interrogations.

The one thing special operations units are not capable, is conducting any real "combat."

Annnnnnyways. to pst. I can understand the idea that her being ridiculously stupid and brainwashable doesn't neccesarily merit "capital punishment" but maybe negligance. I don't see how you can say she isn't indirectly responsible for anything, when she is the reason some pows were beaten and possiibly killed. Because she ran her fat mouth to the viet cong. Thats indirect. Other than that for the most part i'm in complete agreement with the rest that you had to say.

banking off what Blizzard said. its not like a small faction of people its just completely "anarchy." The need more or less is a large body to maintain and instill order in the country. Which includes finding and capturing insurgents, terrorists, or anyone else who opposes peaceful negotations. Politics is very well playign a part in this too, as many of the chosen iraqi officials are being backed by extremists leaders and organizations.

__________________

are you so sure about that? i happen to disagree. special forces are capable of many things

If you're saying that people got killed because she said that the US planned to bomb dykes - which I honestly believe is conflating two events (that she did that and that she denied that POWs were systematically tortured and killed by the Vietnamese), but I'll try to answer you anyway - she's still significantly less culpable than whoever gave her the information and the photographic evidence (unless it was the Vietnamese, who aren't capable of treason against the US). That said, if I'm wrong about you conflating distinct events and that's exactly what happened, then you're right, she was indirectly responsible (unless, again, the Vietnamese gave her the evidence, in which case she's still just dangerously naive). In any case, fuck Jane Fonda (30 years ago).

Yeah, Special Ops aren't really any good for regular combat (hence the name). But you all might recall that the original war plan, as proposed by Rumsfeld, called for way fewer troops than most specialists recommended; and if you know a bit more, you might recall that Rumsfeld came out of a comfortable retirement to reorganize the military into a more agile unit according to a virtual enterprises model (DOD'd been doing research into this because of the absurdity of weapons development). One which he obviously didn't really understand, as his war plan seemed to equate smaller with better indiscriminately.

However, a terrorist organization does operate according to an agile virtual enterprise model (meaning that there is no central organization but rather a bunch of groups held together by a common goal, with old parties falling to the wayside and being replaced as necessary to serve this end, making the organization, as noted, 'agile'), which does mean that something other than conventional warfare is called for. We just haven't figured out what. I'm assuming it has something to do with that model of operations (that would be logical), but I don't really know.

Oh, and, to be clear , I'm both saying that Jane Fonda's a cunt and that I would have liked to fuck her when she was still young.

Xgraf *cough* thats my job *cough* *cough* i'm tasked with a CI team in DC *cough*

Yes i know all about the missions and goals and operations of ALL "special forces" the services own. I'm not refering to the CIA or other departments who have... lets say.. "classified" individuals. Although one could say everybody who is in the intel field especially operators are on a very "classified" level, and thats something i'm not going to get into. (for planely obvious reasons)

But refering to the last portion of PSTs post.

Hell yeah thats the prime number one job of the Marines and they've started establishing and changing every other branch to be much more like we are. That is on call, multi-duty, and self sustaining. We are "specialists" with very tight and specific missions in goal. We are trained to do things like humanitarian operations, noncombatant evacuatitons.

I'm going to attempt to walk through your post a banking a little better using your words of choice i.e. virtual enterprise. I wasn't 100% sure what you were getting at so i looked it up. The only thing i got was from dictionary.com and wikipedia with the same answers.

"A Virtual enterprise (VE) is a temporary alliance of enterprises that come together to share skills or core competencies and resources in order to better respond to business opportunities, and whose cooperation is supported by computer networks."

Taking from that i would imagine it has something to do with groups coming together with similar cause to create better communications and probably better success as a result. Sound about right? Maybe? hah

I just erased an entire paragraph because i'm slightly confused by your meaning/purpose behind the statement "(DOD'd been doing research into this because of the absurdity of weapons development)"

I guess before i say anythign else i would probably require another input on this statement.

__________________

So i'm gonna go on "record" and say that after doing some research i haven't found evidence to "prove" or truly "disprove" many stories i've been told in the past regarding Jane Fonda.

ALTHOUGH i did come across an intresting article about the "Urban Legends" of Jane fonda. I read probably about half of it. But i did see an intresting paragraph refering to the conversation we are currently having.

I'd copy and paste the paragraph but they have right and left clicking unavailable.. assholes.

Since i can't copy and paste here is an image on i.
Btw the website is.
http://www.snopes.com/military/fonda.asp

Now commenting on it. I think the whole paragraph is good. Bouncing back to my case as it would regards to treason. She most definately comfort and aided the enemy which is a treason offense. Black and white.

I think this is a good article to end this debate about her and put this bullshit to rest.
I think we can come to agreement shes a fucking piece of shit person / human being who at a minimum diserves to get kicked in the ovaries. POWs weren't mistreated in Vietnam my ass.

I find it funny that in this article at the end each time shes attempted to "applogize for some things she had done" she was attempting to release a movie. you

Attached Images

fondatxt.jpg (87.9 KB, 91 views)

__________________

A virtual enterprise is just an assortment of groups brought together for a common cause. I think the prime example of how a virtual enterprise works is in the movie industry: a defined number of roles are filled by specialists brought in for the project who will likely separate on its completion. Each role is filled as well as possible given the demands of the project from the pool of people out there, rather than that of people under contract to a given studio, and they stay and work together until the project ends. That's a virtual enterprise.

The Department of Defense used to have a lab researching virtual enterprises because the process of developing a new weapon is ridiculously inefficient. It usually takes around 15 years to design and produce a new tank or a new troop carrier; technologies, however, roll over every three or four years. The companies who will be involved are cemented into place at the beginning of the process, but their expertise might be made obsolete a fraction of the way through it. So the way weapons are designed is much worse than the regular civilian business model, which is already very bad, and the DoD invested in research (the non-classified results of which are available here ). Which, as I said, has been utilized elsewhere in the military.

When I say that terrorists operate under a virtual enterprise model, I mean that individual cells have their own leadership, their own support system, their own manner of operating, etc, united by little more than a common aim and without an organizing structure. This makes them highly adaptive (each group might approach every aspect of its work differently, there being no prescribed method for anything) and lacking in a head we can remove and watch the body crumple, which is more or less the opposite of your traditional national army. This, I think, means that the tactics evolved to fight something like your traditional national army don't do much good, but every sign is that we're still treating this as some kind of traditional war.

And I know what the Marine Corps is and does. If I'd been friends with fewer Marines growing up (though, thanks to the war, I have fewer Marine friends now), I'd probably be one now.

Out for the night.

I guess not. The only treasonable offense there would be the one the site claims she didn't do. The paragraph you cited specifically claims that she caused beatings, but the only beatings the article as a whole claims she was responsible for it also claims are bullshit rumors - in other words it draws conclusions contrary to the evidence it presents. The article also pretends that Tokyo Rose wasn't pardoned 30 years ago, or for that matter that a country we have and one we haven't declared war on are legally equivalent. So, once again: piece of shit? Yes. Traitor? No.

Now I really am out.

Army Special Forces do combat missions....

__________________

Once again why i attempted to put this to rest. THATS NOT WHAT SPECIAL FORCES DO. Jesus christ.

Combat missions are things like, patrols, raids, and other things REQUIRING lots of people. Not small teams.

Small team missions are designed ONLY to fireback and retreat. I might as well give up, no matter how many times i explain the purpose of special forces and special operations people will never get it. Its too overblown by the media industry and especially movie and video games.

Yes seals blow up buildings, Marine Force Recon engage groups of people, Marine snipers assinate people, and Army Special forces conduct combat mission.

I give up.

__________________

This is an interesting thread.
I thought I'd mention a book I'd gotten quite a number of years ago that was written by a POW of the Hanoi Hilton. There's a little bit about the book here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_Hell_was_in_Session

__________________

haha, im just saying man i've heard stories from my bros who are in the Army about special forces dudes. I don't know anything about the Marines.

__________________

i think you are mixing it up because, yes they do see combat sometimes, but they don't just go there to fuck shit up. unless you are just messing with tm

i'm sure they've had some situations where they had to kill or be killed, but they try to avoid detection as much as possible...ie not running in screaming with guns blasting.

my friends dad at lejeune was a really good marine sniper. not sure of his rank or first name, but the last name is morris. hes on at least one of the covers of the "death from afar" series of books. he retired and went up to richmond to train police to shoot. my friend said his dad never talked about what he did when he was deployed..and i sure as hell didn't ask him.

edit...i give myself the homer award. i guess i quoted you from the previous page thinking it was the last post.

Like what? I'll tell you what is and isn't a combat mission. Returning fire and engaging people isn't neccesarily a combat mission.

Its not just the marines, but every service branch. The main purpose of special forces is for intelligence purposes. Gathering intelligence, sometimes doing things like rescues of individuals (jessica lynch), and or nabbing of people to interrogate (which is intel).

I'm just saying most people can't part witht he idea that special forces don't do the extremeeeeee stuff that people make them out to do. They do train hard as hell JUST INCASE. This is also why they carry light small weapons.

If they did combat missions they would need things like anti-tank weapons, crew served weapons and stuff liek that. They pack way way way too light for things like that.

__________________

Thats exactly what i'm talking about haha. do they see combat? YES. haha

They're not from splinter cell and all that.
Snipers are definately a different bunch all together. They MOSTLY do intel gathering things, but they also do kind of side things. They don't liek sit on a hill top with like 2 of them and just pick people off. Thats not their job. (most might think it is).

The way the marine corps has it set up is 3 types of units, and the main difference between them is how far they are set up to go.

Marine snipers are the closest. They go just outside the reach of the main force.
Marine DIVISION recon goes further than that. The area of operations. Kind like most of Iraqish depending. (in size)
Marine FORCE recon basically has the entire area of INTREST. This is a huge fucking boundry. Basically all of the middle east. (just an example)

The other services somewhat have similar goals and missions but this is how we break it down. They all for the most part do similar or the same things, but some with slightly different taskings. Although the further you go out the higher up you need to be to authorize or task these people.

So for instance Marine snipers might be tasked by a company sized element where as to get intelligence collected by Force recon you'll probably need to go all the way up to a MEF element (about half the size force of the marines currently over there) in order to the task done.

__________________

therangers are a special forces? and they do carry heavy automatic guns do they not? i thought they were our, AMERICA FUCK YEAH KICK ASS , team

__________________

I'm going to say no. Oh let me correct myself before i added raid and i really didn't mean raid as thats something special ops do. They do this but not like, capture kind of stuff. Raids are usually done TO get individuals or hostages.

Let me FURTHER correct myself in that some special forces missions (Depending on the unit) do do "combat TYPE" missions but it goes along with the raid thing. Basically they might raid say... a house and what not. Its a much more specific purpose mission. ALTHOUGH they're making the entire military do this now because like pst said you gotta do different things to fight this kind of enemy. Specialized skills. But majority of the time, like 99% of the time special forces dont' do this kind of thing. They work hand in hand with intel collections. Thats their main and primary focus. Me saying that THEY NEVER DO COMAT MISSIONS OMG is farcy, but its not like what people think "combat missions" are. I'm just trying to get out that hollywood and the general public blows way out of proportion what they do. It mostly consists of looking at shit with binoculars or listening to frequencies on radios and shit like that to go back and give the information to intel shops who prepare and brief a commander.

If somebody honestly wants me to go into the entire intel process i'll be more than happy to talk about what it is i do.

First of all lets be technical we might as well learn a little something about classification of military things.
This is the types of machine guns

Heavy, medium, light. Ok everybody knows this.

Heavy, is fucking big and its not a one person carry weapon. This is basically your 50 cal machine gun. Its a large crew served weapon. Crew served meaning more than one person is maning this weapon. Such as a spotter and a gunner. Its carried by multiple people and each part (the 50 cal, the barrels, and tripod) are all carried by differnt people. Each piece is beyond heavy as fuck. It is seriously no fucking joke how heavy this weapon is. This is NOT carried by special forces. Especially rangers.

Medium is also a crew served weapon. The military uses the 240g which replaced the M60. This weapon is carried by 2 people. The weapon and the tripod. It requires 2 people to operate it. A spotter/loaded and a gunner. This is also NOT carried by special forces, and or Rangers. This weapon too is so bulky and heavy as fuck.

Light machine gun. This is your 240 saws, mp5s and other things like that. This IS carried by your special forces and your rangers.

The reason why special force doesn't carry heavy equipment is because for obvious reasons, they deploy from the air, out of helicopters into water and out of boats. These weapons take serious time and planning into positioning. What most peopel don't understand is special forces need to move, be light and not be scene or heard really. Get in and get out. Trust me you can't do that with carrying your gear plus a 100 pound extra fucking weapon with you, its impossible and just down right stupid. Thats what the main force is used for.

__________________

Hahaha, what? The US military puts sub-machine guns in the same category as support weapons?

To my understanding of things, Rangers and suchlike are a lot of the time used to support and reinforce special forces. At least, that's what I remember reading.

how about in somalia, the rangers were there, and although they were there for capturing key enemies, they did carry m60's

__________________

Well i was actually refering more to the 240 and not the MP5. I should have clarified that a bit more.

The 240 is a multi use. Not just support. Maybe before but not anymore.

__________________

Eh, your average elements and missions don't require medium machine guns. Also they usually have tactical versions of some weapons. Such as the 249 saw.

You're also comparing the then and the now, the structure of the military has ages beyond ages changed since like 5 years ago alone.

__________________

So what uses does it have now?

Assault roles. Hence why they make them with those grip handles now. Room clearing and so on.

__________________

Support is a part of assault, no? And room clearing with an LMG? That sounds pretty ridiculous.

Eh yes and no. I can't really explain it well cause i'm not a grunt or VERY knowledge able in infantry tactics. Take my word for it that the 249 saw is HEAVILY imbeded with small units. They do support roles YES but they also take active roles in carrying out objectives. The 240 is the weapon of choice for support roles. Heavy caliber, highly reliable and can lay ALOT of firepower down. The 249 is completely portable and small, its basically an M16 with auto capabilities.

Trust me 249 saws are HEAVILY used in room clearing and also special operations missions. Its a light weapon that has automatic capability. You can put alot of rounds down range.

__________________

It's a feeble attempt at being "individual" when in reality everyone here looks and sounds the same. I'm sick and tired of the oddball name trend that was started by pathetic Hollywood.

__________________

Great fucking song is LAX by Big D and the kids table. (a ska/punk band)

It completely rips and destroys that entire fucking state apart, especially with like names. For example..

"and all your fucking stupid names
Blair and Tavis, that's fucking lame
Z-A-C does not spell Zack,
what the fuck is with all that?"

__________________

Nah, I think Prince started it.

__________________

haha i know a kid named prince. Although he was born in west africa, and i think he actually is fairly rich too haha.

He ws a fucking little shit who definately acted like he owned everything.

__________________

Hey....nothing new here!

__________________

That's it, if I have a daughter, I'm naming her Morbid Angel!

__________________

lol My son has their tattoo! Better keep him away from her though. He has a motto that's scary.

"Fuck babies. Lift weights."

__________________

That IS scary. I can see him using babies as weight for wrist curls.

__________________

for some reason i saw something like that out of reading that as the motto.

Lift babies what?

__________________

Ok, maybe some help with your first language is in order: He might lift weights to work on his wrist strength using babies...! It was a complete joke, and I'm amazed you haven't died from drinking Clorox yet.

Just kidding man.

__________________

haha nah i mean i basically mixed the first part with the 2nd part. I've read its common to do that, and i do that shit ALOT haha.

Oh well lifting babies sounds cool. Hell the good thing is... if you just lift your child overtime it continues to grow and you continue to go up in weight with those curls.... so i guess over time the baby will make you stronger and shit ton stronger. Especially when its like 160 pounds haha. 15 years of curling with a growing dumbell i think you could get up to 160 hahaha.

__________________

any of you blokes from the uk know whats up with blair? i thought he said he'd be out of office by the end of the year? i just heard him on bbc talking about someone whos time to go has come...i thought that was him? maybe he's pulling a bush and staying the course.

Speaking of uk.

I guess the brits like Al Gore so much they'll show his "dramatic" documentary in their schools.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070202...warming_film_dc

I've seen a few global warming documentaries. Overall i think they generally are lame and its clear how much bias is in it.

Best documentary i've watched yet, is the PBS one on Wal-Mart. Appears very unbaised, because still I come out of it not quite sure which side is best. It attempts to explore which is, and its kind of a haze.

__________________

Yeah, I've been using my son as a weight lifting apparatus since he was born. He's three now, so he's getting pretty fuckin heavy.

__________________

The old story was if a farmer lifts a calf every day from day one he'll be able to lift it when it's full grown. He'd have to have some mighty long arms, I bet.

Yeah, walpurgis' babies & weights remark didn't come out the way he expected, but it was funny. It's in the fitness thread somewhere.

__________________

so....

bringing this thread back.

the only person who i known to serve in iraq/afganistan died recently.

a girl who lived down the street from where i grew up, known her from a very young age, not so much from jr high onwards. we were the same age.

someone who pretty much did everything you are supposed to in life, went to college, served in the air force, probably never used drugs, was probably destined to fly commercial jets<big $$$> or join NASA or persuing a career as a proffessional earning alot of dough at something that takes a modicom of talent, skill and intelligence.

3 tours, flying bombers and stuff.............died while flying a helicopter....total accident.....somewhere in iraq, i believe.

a week before going home, 3rd tour completed.

__________________

That sucks man. War isn't all glory in dying in battle, accidents happen and it seems to suck most of all. Sounded like a good chick. Not exactly how this relates to politics... But the cost of freedom is definately felt by nearly everyone.

__________________

war is politics, just by another means. perhaps a more direct means.

basically i had nowhere else to post this, the rtt is low-brow fare, i wont be seen parleying with the likes in there.

__________________

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...nationworld-hed

Cool.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl...cs/4532217.html

Double cool.

__________________

If things were done that were for "personal" intrests vice actual intelligence then definately double cool.

Accurate dissemination of intelligence collected or lack thereof is a key componet to the intel process.

__________________

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/ne...icle1386812.ece

russia, china, and india meeting to try and bring about their influence in the world politics arena. they basically want to use their pull to make it so the us is not calling all the shots (pretty much) in regards to world issues, ie the middle east/oil/nuclear energy and weapons.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070217..._smoking_ban_dc

I give germany another like 10 years and it'll be another fascist regimes. It appears the citizens in this country are too stupid to make intelligent and adult decisions regarding their own health with known risks.

__________________

haha, godamn..what a terrible law. I believe they are taking smoking laws way too seriously these days. Hell, especially stepping out in frigid winter weather to have a godamn cigarette because you can't smoke in any bar/establishment. The "smoking rooms" they implemented into bars made sense, but now the law here is a total ban.

..and drinking usually leads to smoking more cigarettes.

__________________

I just see them and Europe making more and more laws under the guise of protecting its citizens which either says their citizens are retarded or it makes it at least LOOK like their citizens are complete and total morons.

Apparently they still need the state to run every motion of their lives.

__________________