Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
10/20/2017 1:01:18 AM
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 7/25/2005 7:31:07 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/25/2005 7:32:31 PM EDT by sfikes2]
I have an "Army" wanna be, who strikes me as a total liar, saying that there are AK13's and AK15's in Iraq. I've never heard of either. Anyone know if this is real or bull crap? I'd love to call this guy out, says he was in Iraq and cant name any mojor unit that are deployed there.
Link Posted: 7/25/2005 7:40:08 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/25/2005 7:40:40 PM EDT by clange]

Originally Posted By sfikes2:
I have an "Army" wanna be, who strikes me as a total liar, saying that there are AK13's and AK15's in Iraq. I've never heard of either. Anyone know if this is real or bull crap? I'd love to call this guy out, says he was in Iraq and cant name any mojor unit that are deployed there.


1) I havent heard of those either.
2) Claims to have been there but cant give details? Hell, he's not even a good fake. At least good fakes learn some basic stuff and unit info.
Link Posted: 7/25/2005 9:05:24 PM EDT
Not only hae I not heard of those, he's full of crap.
Link Posted: 7/25/2005 9:28:00 PM EDT
If he truely is a fake, call him out, and expose him as a fake.
Have some fun with him. Get a couple of real vets to help expose him.

I have no respect for these guys that claim false millitary service...they are scum.

KyARguy

Link Posted: 7/25/2005 9:28:06 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/25/2005 9:45:06 PM EDT
What the hell is he talking about?

-Storm
Link Posted: 7/25/2005 9:59:28 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Kyarguy:
If he truely is a fake, call him out, and expose him as a fake.
Have some fun with him. Get a couple of real vets to help expose him.

I have no respect for these guys that claim false millitary service...they are scum.

KyARguy




I agree. Those type of guys dishonor the sacrifices of those who have served worse then a Hippy protester.
Link Posted: 7/25/2005 10:12:54 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/25/2005 10:14:21 PM EDT by Tiny]

What the hell is he talking about?

Could he be talking about a AK-103 and a AK-105?


2) Claims to have been there but cant give details? Hell, he's not even a good fake. At least good fakes learn some basic stuff and unit info.

He's full of shit!!


I agree. Those type of guys dishonor the sacrifices of those who have served worse then a Hippy protester.

I agree with this statement 100%
Link Posted: 7/26/2005 5:01:14 AM EDT
I hate guys like that,I had a guy try to tell me he was a marine sniper but he couldn't remember where he did any of his training.Not even basic training.I know thats one thing I'll never forget.
#$^%ing morons
Link Posted: 7/26/2005 5:16:21 AM EDT
I had a similar fucktard try and pull the same shit with me.

My cousin brought home some dude that claimed to be an ex Navy SEAL. Well, I asked what SEAL team he was on and of course his response was Team 6. So then I asked him what his BUD/S class was and he said he couldn't remember. Anyway, my entire family was kissing his ass all day while he was telling stories. One story was that he was in Mogadishu when the BHD shit was going down. I was skeptical because I don't remember reading that any Navy SEALs were involved in that operation. Anyway, he went on to say that he was even in the movie. He said he was portrayed as the guy with the cast that was about to cut off his cast so he could get in the fight. I couldn't take it anymore so I left. Anyway, I got on a website that will research if a guy is a SEAL or not (I think AuthtiSEAL). Anyway, after a few days, I was contacted saying that he was a fake and that the character in the movie BHD was in fact an ARMY Ranger. So a few weeks later he came around again and I exposed him. He was all red and embarrased and never showed his face again. Fucking puke! It is one thing to pretend you are a high roller to get a girl, but to pretend you served for our country...he deserves to be quartered!


Link Posted: 7/26/2005 5:23:47 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/26/2005 11:15:31 AM EDT by Jicky]
My first tour of Nam I was a Navy Ranger then I reuped and went into the Delta Seal's covert Op..
And then this one time at band camp my AK 6.2 jammed and I was captured by a horde of band geek's ( no offence band geek's) and was held and tortured by haveing a trumpet inserted in my rectum....

Wanna be's are usually goofy as shit and are easily cought in their lies....

Link Posted: 7/26/2005 7:52:55 AM EDT

Originally Posted By nugentgl:
I had a similar fucktard try and pull the same shit with me.

My cousin brought home some dude that claimed to be an ex Navy SEAL. Well, I asked what SEAL team he was on and of course his response was Team 6. So then I asked him what his BUD/S class was and he said he couldn't remember. Anyway, my entire family was kissing his ass all day while he was telling stories. One story was that he was in Mogadishu when the BHD shit was going down. I was skeptical because I don't remember reading that any Navy SEALs were involved in that operation. Anyway, he went on to say that he was even in the movie. He said he was portrayed as the guy with the cast that was about to cut off his cast so he could get in the fight. I couldn't take it anymore so I left. Anyway, I got on a website that will research if a guy is a SEAL or not (I think AuthtiSEAL). Anyway, after a few days, I was contacted saying that he was a fake and that the character in the movie BHD was in fact an ARMY Ranger. So a few weeks later he came around again and I exposed him. He was all red and embarrased and never showed his face again. Fucking puke! It is one thing to pretend you are a high roller to get a girl, but to pretend you served for our country...he deserves to be quartered!





He f**king deserves it..
Link Posted: 7/26/2005 8:06:23 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/26/2005 8:06:55 AM EDT by Quarterbore]
Sure... you can read all about it here...

ak15.com

Honest, I did have a plan for that website... just no time with the Bridgeport and I'm not talking...
Link Posted: 7/26/2005 9:21:55 AM EDT
Sounds like a driver I used to have. He was telling me that when he was in Vietnam he carried his personal Mossberg 500 that that the armorer had modified to accept 50 round detachable mags. He then went on to tell us stories of how he would blast away with OOO buck shot so fast that his "friends" thought he had an automatic shotgun. I lost a LOT of respect for him that day.

Brad
Link Posted: 7/26/2005 9:39:41 AM EDT

Sounds like a driver I used to have.


Did you grow up with John Kerry


Link Posted: 7/26/2005 1:00:35 PM EDT
Unforunatly, in my area and age group, the wannabes and the real thing are pretty mush the same croud.
Link Posted: 7/26/2005 3:29:06 PM EDT
SEAL Team Six was in Mogadishu during Operation Gothic Serpent. If you have ever read "Black Hawk Down" by Mark Bowden or "Battle of Mogadishu" by Matt Eversmann and Dan Schilling it mentions SEAL Team Six members Howie Wasden and John Gay. John Gay was wounded in Mogadishu but not fatally. He was hit in the hip but his Randall knife took the brunt of the hit. The guy still is probably full of sh!t about being in ST6 because those guys don't blow smoke about what they have done.
Link Posted: 7/26/2005 6:40:45 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/26/2005 6:48:46 PM EDT by sfikes2]
Small bit of intel here. I was at a tattoo shop that does my work. I have a piece on my right arm thats been slowly coming together as my "9-11" piece. This geek fukk, came in and saw my marine corps tat on the other arm, and gave me the "ak13" bull shit.

I saw him again today, and asked " why do they call it an ak" 13" ? he replied " thats how many rounds it shoots". I told him "dude, i fukking refuse to match wits with a clearly UN-ARMED opponent". it took him about 5 minutes of silence to ask me..." did you just call me stupid?"

Link Posted: 7/26/2005 7:23:03 PM EDT
Well, they DID make that one M-16 variant that was designed to use AK-47 magazines and was chambered for 7.62x39mm, but they only made a handful and then threw them in the storage bin because it wasn't worth the effort.
Link Posted: 7/26/2005 7:26:58 PM EDT
loadbearing - I did read BHD and don't remember any SEAL's there. However, I did read that about 6 years ago and have slept since then.
Link Posted: 7/26/2005 8:28:07 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/26/2005 8:28:55 PM EDT

Originally Posted By nugentgl:
loadbearing - I did read BHD and don't remember any SEAL's there. However, I did read that about 6 years ago and have slept since then.



I'm pretty sure he's right, there were a couple SEAL's there for some reason. If anyone knows why I'd love to know.
Link Posted: 7/26/2005 10:38:39 PM EDT

Originally Posted By TheFreepster:

Originally Posted By nugentgl:
loadbearing - I did read BHD and don't remember any SEAL's there. However, I did read that about 6 years ago and have slept since then.



I'm pretty sure he's right, there were a couple SEAL's there for some reason. If anyone knows why I'd love to know.



So the Navy could say they participated in the operation. Interservice competition. That's my guess.

Not trying to take anything away from the SEALS, as they were certainly more than qualified for that type of operation, and conducted themselves admirably.
Link Posted: 7/26/2005 10:54:32 PM EDT
The best I ever heard was when someone told me about the "AK-B2-Soviet-75" they had. He insisted that this was it's real, full name.
Link Posted: 7/27/2005 5:10:45 AM EDT
Link Posted: 7/27/2005 3:06:55 PM EDT

Anyone who mentions that they were in the military, whether they claim to be a seal or not, should be ignored.

If they are relying on such claims to bolster some random opinion, they are making the argument of appeal to authority-- which is a logical fallacy. (EG: I was in washington once, doesn't make me the president.)

Secondly, its unfortunate that the truth about what happened in mogadishu has never been allowed to be told. Most of the guys there don't know about it because what caused the somali's to hate us is something that happened before they showed up: We took out the top floors of a building in mogadishu where the tribal leaders were getting together to discuss the UN's proposal, and hammer out an agreement. When we did that, we ended any chance of a diplomatic solution, and deserved to get our asses kicked by those people. (We killed dozens of men, women and children in that pre-emptive attack, and yet, conveniently, the pentagon and the mainstream media never reported it. I wonder why?)

When you kill some guys father, its highly unlikely that he's going to take any overtures of diplomacy from you seriously.

The sad thing is, so many people will now flame me-- people who know nothing about what happened there, and don't want to know, but have limitless faith that we are good and black people are evil. (or "the enemy" if you're not racist.)

The somali's thru off a brutal dictator in the form of Said Barre, left to them by the British. After getting rid of that dictator, who starved them, impovereshed them, and destroyed thousands of lives... they decided they didn't want antoher government. Here comes amerrica-- invading a capitalist country, able to feed itself, at peace, and we start a civil war and attack them unprovoked to try and install our puppet, UN led government-- if you love the UN, you love americas actions in Somalia. If you're not a socialist, and oppose the UN, you have to oppose our actions in Somalia. The individual somali states are at peace, the country is capitalistic, and is about the only bright spot in economic development in africa. The UN is again trying to force them to accept a dictator, and they are likely to, once again unite in defense of their country.

When that happens, again you'll hear american news media calling their governors "warlords" and the people defending their homes from UN Tyrannny "Terrorists". Americans may be sent there again, to serve the cause of tyranny.

"Black Hawk Down" Was a brilliant piece of propaganda. But by only telling one side of the story, it portrays somali's a vicious thugs who had no cause to attack us.

Would you attack somali helicopters that were in the states trying to hunt down the governor of your state? Or the head of your household?

Sorry about the rant... it just cheeses me off hearing people talk about how seals serve our country.... unthinking you never consider that the US military might be used for bad ends, and thus, even when used for evil it will get your support. And that's not only a shame, its unamerican.

Link Posted: 7/27/2005 3:39:50 PM EDT

and deserved to get our asses kicked by those people


Don't EVER say that any member of the United States military deserves to get his ass kicked for doing what he is told. You don't have to like what happened there in Somalia, but do not ever wish any of our fighting men and women any harm.
Link Posted: 7/28/2005 9:25:47 PM EDT


"just following orders" didn't work for tha nazis. Its not working for the poor fools who followed orders and tortured people at abu grahib and gitmo. (It sure would be nice to see a courtmartial up the chain of command on that one... or do you guys think that illegal orders from the president should be protected? You think the grunts should have to take all the heat?)

Bottom line is, the first order given is to take the oath to defend the constitution... anyone acting contrary to the constitution is a criminal. You go to an illegal and unconstitutional war, you deserve to get your ass kicked.

You go participate in mass murder in contravertion of US law and the constitution, you're a criminal and you don't deserve respect nor sympathy.

This is the reason the founding fathers did not want a standing military, because they knew it could be used for immoral purposes.

If you don't have the integrity to refuse to support criminal behaviour, you haven't earned the right to lecture me on anything, boy.

Link Posted: 7/28/2005 10:56:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DonGalt:

"just following orders" didn't work for tha nazis. Its not working for the poor fools who followed orders and tortured people at abu grahib and gitmo. (It sure would be nice to see a courtmartial up the chain of command on that one... or do you guys think that illegal orders from the president should be protected? You think the grunts should have to take all the heat?)

Bottom line is, the first order given is to take the oath to defend the constitution... anyone acting contrary to the constitution is a criminal. You go to an illegal and unconstitutional war, you deserve to get your ass kicked.

You go participate in mass murder in contravertion of US law and the constitution, you're a criminal and you don't deserve respect nor sympathy.

This is the reason the founding fathers did not want a standing military, because they knew it could be used for immoral purposes.

If you don't have the integrity to refuse to support criminal behaviour, you haven't earned the right to lecture me on anything, boy.




Somebody get a mod in here, we've got a TROLL!

Ben
Link Posted: 7/30/2005 10:26:51 AM EDT

Originally Posted By DonGalt:

"just following orders" didn't work for tha nazis. Its not working for the poor fools who followed orders and tortured people at abu grahib and gitmo. (It sure would be nice to see a courtmartial up the chain of command on that one... or do you guys think that illegal orders from the president should be protected? You think the grunts should have to take all the heat?)

Bottom line is, the first order given is to take the oath to defend the constitution... anyone acting contrary to the constitution is a criminal. You go to an illegal and unconstitutional war, you deserve to get your ass kicked.

You go participate in mass murder in contravertion of US law and the constitution, you're a criminal and you don't deserve respect nor sympathy.

This is the reason the founding fathers did not want a standing military, because they knew it could be used for immoral purposes.

If you don't have the integrity to refuse to support criminal behaviour, you haven't earned the right to lecture me on anything, boy.




Link Posted: 7/30/2005 11:25:32 AM EDT

Originally Posted By DonGalt:

Its not working for the poor fools who followed orders and tortured people at abu grahib and gitmo.



When was there ever charges brought against someone for torture in Gitmo?
Link Posted: 7/30/2005 11:39:37 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/30/2005 11:40:19 AM EDT by TheRedHorseman]

Originally Posted By DonGalt:

"just following orders" didn't work for tha nazis. Its not working for the poor fools who followed orders and tortured people at abu grahib and gitmo. (It sure would be nice to see a courtmartial up the chain of command on that one... or do you guys think that illegal orders from the president should be protected? You think the grunts should have to take all the heat?)

Bottom line is, the first order given is to take the oath to defend the constitution... anyone acting contrary to the constitution is a criminal. You go to an illegal and unconstitutional war, you deserve to get your ass kicked.

You go participate in mass murder in contravertion of US law and the constitution, you're a criminal and you don't deserve respect nor sympathy.

This is the reason the founding fathers did not want a standing military, because they knew it could be used for immoral purposes.

If you don't have the integrity to refuse to support criminal behaviour, you haven't earned the right to lecture me on anything, boy.




how is this war unconstitutional? I would very much like to know how I am a crimminal. am I also a crimminal for going to Bosnia? as a veteran, I do have the right to lecture you on war. you have no fucking idea as to what really goes on over there. do you honestly believe that we should let terror go unchecked? do you believe that dying in a terrorist bombing is a good thing? or are you still hung up on the fact that we went into Iraq with the same bad intel that EVERYONE ELSE IN THE WORLD HAD AND UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF A RESOLUTION MADE BY BILL CLINTON? we took out the dictatorship there and are now rebuilding what we can in hope of giving these people a better life. the Iraqi people are thankful for it, and I am proud to have played a part in bringing them this better life even if it is a side benefit of what we originally went in for.

go back to democratic underground, they like your kind there.
Link Posted: 7/31/2005 2:24:15 AM EDT

You can lecture me on war, but its clear you know nothing of the constitution, nor do you respect it enough to even read it. "Only congress may declare war"... "powers cannot be delegated". No declaration of war has been made.

AS to this so-called "intelligence" it was well known at the time that it was false, just look at the whole plame scandal. If Iraqis are happy to have us there, they wouldn't be supporting an insurgency( and if you know anything about warfighting, you know that you can't have a gaurilla war without local support, so these claims that its outside "terrorists" are just silly.)

I like how you made the claim that we're fighting terrorists in Iraq, when this claim is even more discredited than the claim that Iraq had nukes. And of course, you switch back and forth- terrorists, intelligence, they love us, we're liberating them. All are lies, and you know it, but you can't stand behind any of them.

And all of this is irrelevant anyway-- as the war violates the constitution.

If you have no respect for the constitution, how can you complain when your gun rights are taken away?

PS- for those who can do nothing but call me a troll, I take that as proof that I'm right. If I was wrong, you'd have a counter argument. I resepct Mr. ignorant about war but wants to lecture me for at least taking the time to trot out these tired old lies-- at least they are entertaining.

If the facts mean nothing to you, what kind of nobleness can you claim to have?

Many tens of thousands have been killed by "collatoral damage"... these are non-terrorists. These are civilians. And the only honest assesment of it is murder.

Link Posted: 7/31/2005 2:47:14 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/31/2005 2:49:30 AM EDT by Mr45auto]

Originally Posted By Brad76:
Sounds like a driver I used to have. He was telling me that when he was in Vietnam he carried his personal Mossberg 500 that that the armorer had modified to accept 50 round detachable mags. He then went on to tell us stories of how he would blast away with OOO buck shot so fast that his "friends" thought he had an automatic shotgun. I lost a LOT of respect for him that day.

Brad



I'd like to see that shotty

Btw, Don lay off the crack pipe.
Link Posted: 7/31/2005 6:44:43 AM EDT
We had a guy up here several years ago that We met that claimed He was a seal. He had class pics,uniforms and seemed very legit for a year or so Then He made a mistake. He told us one day about a battle in kuwait were he got awarded the navy cross. To My knowledge that medal was not awarded during the first gulf war so I started to dig. I got his social security number had friend of mine who is a MP do some digging and it turns out that he was on a sub during the gulf war, talked to his cheif and also talked to Daryl Young a former seal and author that hunts these type off asholes down. Well He left town soon after We confronted Him and last I heard He was down in Mississippi pulling the same shit telling everyone that He is a seal
Link Posted: 7/31/2005 6:47:36 AM EDT

Originally Posted By dalesimpson:

and deserved to get our asses kicked by those people


Don't EVER say that any member of the United States military deserves to get his ass kicked for doing what he is told. You don't have to like what happened there in Somalia, but do not ever wish any of our fighting men and women any harm.

a BIG plus 1
Link Posted: 7/31/2005 7:49:06 AM EDT

Originally Posted By DonGalt:

If Iraqis are happy to have us there, they wouldn't be supporting an insurgency( and if you know anything about warfighting, you know that you can't have a gaurilla war without local support, so these claims that its outside "terrorists" are just silly.)




Not nessesarily true. If I remember correctly it's estimated that only about 30% of the population supported indepenadnce during the American revolution. If you apply the same rough figure to Iraq today, a bulk of the population could be "greeting us as liberators" but there could still be plenty to support an insurgency. On the other hand it could be said that a bulk of the population was pro-Saddam, but there would have been plenty of of support for them to overthrow him on their own. It's really anyone's guess. I've said before and I'll say it again, war supporters and war protesters are one in the same.
Link Posted: 7/31/2005 5:58:58 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DonGalt:
"Only congress may declare war"... "powers cannot be delegated". No declaration of war has been made.



There was a declared war. All except 2 congressmen voted for it (one abstained, the other opposed.)


AS to this so-called "intelligence" it was well known at the time that it was false, just look at the whole plame scandal. If Iraqis are happy to have us there, they wouldn't be supporting an insurgency( and if you know anything about warfighting, you know that you can't have a gaurilla war without local support, so these claims that its outside "terrorists" are just silly.)



The insurgency is only in a 50 square mile area, populated by the people that Saddam Hussein catered to exclusively. To say the entire Iraqi people don't want us there, is like saying that because criminals use guns, all gun-owners are criminals.

Many other world governments all agreed that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. The only people who didn't want to admit that were the French, Germans and Russians; and that was only to avoid the embarrassment of the US going in and finding that they had all sold military equipment to them after the 1st Gulf War.


I like how you made the claim that we're fighting terrorists in Iraq, when this claim is even more discredited than the claim that Iraq had nukes. And of course, you switch back and forth- terrorists, intelligence, they love us, we're liberating them. All are lies, and you know it, but you can't stand behind any of them.


We are fighting terrorists. The group that takes most of the credit is an Al-Qaeda backed group. run by a Jordanian.


And all of this is irrelevant anyway-- as the war violates the constitution.


Once again see the first section of the post.


PS- for those who can do nothing but call me a troll, I take that as proof that I'm right. If I was wrong, you'd have a counter argument. I resepct Mr. ignorant about war but wants to lecture me for at least taking the time to trot out these tired old lies-- at least they are entertaining.


You asked for a counter-argument, and here it is. I'm still waiting to hear from you and your "facts."


Originally Posted By DonGalt:

Its not working for the poor fools who followed orders and tortured people at abu grahib and gitmo.



When was there ever charges brought against someone for torture in Gitmo?

Link Posted: 7/31/2005 6:27:20 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/31/2005 6:31:12 PM EDT by JohnTheTexican]

Originally Posted By Swindle1984:
Well, they DID make that one M-16 variant that was designed to use AK-47 magazines and was chambered for 7.62x39mm, but they only made a handful and then threw them in the storage bin because it wasn't worth the effort.



Did it look something like this (except with a happy switch)?

Link Posted: 7/31/2005 6:35:34 PM EDT

Originally Posted By JohnTheTexican:

Originally Posted By Swindle1984:
Well, they DID make that one M-16 variant that was designed to use AK-47 magazines and was chambered for 7.62x39mm, but they only made a handful and then threw them in the storage bin because it wasn't worth the effort.



Did it look something like this (except with a happy switch)?

tinypic.com/9r83s4.jpg



Only in that both are AR-15/M-16's that use AK mags. Didn't really look the same.

They made them originally so special force's guys could pick up enemy magazines and ammo and keep fighting. Then they realized the stupidity of it all and just abandoned the project.

Or at least that's what the article included with the picture said.
Link Posted: 7/31/2005 10:51:18 PM EDT
I agree with DonGalt in that the U.S. had no right to intrude into Somalia. That's violating the soverignity of a nation and is an act of war. Of course Somalis will shoot at the invaders. That doesn't make them terrorists. If the Somalis were terrorists, then so too were America's founding fathers who participated in the Boston Tea Party and fought the British. Ridiculous? Yeah.

Many Americans don't recognize propoganda these days. Sure, they'll recognize old propoganda posters from WW1 and WW2 that literally demonized the enemy (for example, Japanese soldiers with fangs and claws). But tell them that the U.S. government uses propoganda and information warfare TODAY and they'll be dumbstruck. "The U.S. government would never lie, mislead, or manipulate us!"

These days, "terrorism" is used as a blanket statement against America's perceived enemies. Yet the U.S.-supported death squads in El-Salvador and Nicaragua weren't terrorists, they were "freedom fighters." A lot of "freedom" was dispensed in the form of entire villages machetted to death.

How about the "Axis of Evil," for that matter? Iraq, Iran, and North Korea had nothing to do with 9/11. They had nothing to do with the Bali bombings, the Madrid bombings, or the recent London bombings. Now, Iran is in the sights of the American military. Why? Seriously, why? Have they attacked America? No? Then why? What excuse will it be this time? Lack of a democracy? WMDs? Iran is far more democratic than Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait, all of which have dictatorships that America continues to support. As for WMDs, why is Iran to be singled out? Israel has nukes, Pakistan has nukes, India has nukes, and North Korea has nukes. Iran MIGHT have nukes or the interest of making a few. Suddenly, they cannot be tolerated.

Unless you live under a dictatorship, patriotism doesn't mean that you blindly remain loyal to your government. True patriotism means acting in your country's best interests, which includes holding your government accountable.
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 2:26:19 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/1/2005 2:28:28 AM EDT by natedogg42]
You fucking assclown democrats are all the same with your bullshit irrelevant arguements. No one is fucking saying that Saddam Hussein perpetrated 9/11 but you try to make it appear as though that is OUR argument then you attempt to demonstrate how easily our position is defeated.

Well sweetheart that isn't the position of the majority of Americans that continue to support the war despite the media and the Democratic talking points.

What the fuck are you trying to talk about Abu Ghraib for? Are you that fucking stupid that you don't understand that the people higher up in the chain of command might actually not know about some minor incidents taking place many layers of command below them?

The Brigadier General that was in the highest up in the Abu Ghraib "scandal" got the axe (figuratively) because it was her command. I think that there is a good chance that we went too high with that one. IIRC she had command of 5 fucking prisons scattered throughout Iraq and all of the abuse took place in ONE FUCKING cell block of ONE FUCKING prison.

Please excuse George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld for not personally being in every fucking cell block in that country twenty four hours a day. You fucking pathetic liberals make me sick. When that one cocksucker threw a grenade in the tent of his battalion commanders right before the invasion, is that also George Bush's fault? After all, that soldier was under George Bush's ultimate command. According to the fucked up liberal sense of "logic" we should go on a witch hunt as far up the chain of command everytime some terrorist murder has panties put on his head. Fuck that. You know the PEOPLE are by law one step above the president. Well shit, I guess we have to hunt down The People and prosecute them for not being in Cell Block X of Abu Ghraib Prison, Iraq, 24 hours a fucking day.

As far as Guantanamo (sp) Bay goes, you fucking liberals keep trying to invent a scandal at that place. Your dumbass leaders throw a thousand unsubstantiated rumors into the press without any fucking proof and then insist that an investigation is needed to substantiate all of the bullshit they just made up. Furthermore, they will use the existance of an investigation to alledge that there obviously had to be severe violations for an investigation to take place and demand that the base be closed, our soldiers prosecuted...and for what? So that you can try to piss on George Bush's legacy? Does is mean that much to you that you are willing to fuck the greatest most generous nation in the history of the world because you are upset that your pathetic ideology of stupidity isn't being accepted by the American populace.

What the fuck are you trying to bring the Plaime scandal up for? Joe Wilson has been discredited time and time again as a liar and a complete fraud. If you are trying to use his outright falsifications as a justification for your stupidity you might as well stop right there; we've heard enough. By the way, because the news probably doesn't spread quickly in liberal ciricles, Britain stands by the intelligence to this day that Saddam was infact attempting to purchase uranium in Niger. The 9/11 report sided with the British and basically told Wilson to fuck off.

No one even claimed Iraq had nukes you dumbshit. The claim was that Iraq had "WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION." That claim would appear to be false (except for the 54 chemical weapons found by the Iraq Survey Group...read the fucking report its in there, google through it for quick answers, its a few hundred pages long). Iraq couldn't have had nukes because of Israel's actions in 1984. You idiot.

Furthermore, to suggest that an insurgency could not possibly exist in Iraq if the people are glad that we liberated them is bullshit. They are not happy to have us there, but the majority know that we must be there. There is local Sunni Muslim support for an "insurgency" carried out primarily by foreign fighters, chief among these are Saudis. Not every Iraqi citizen has to support the insurgency for it to exist. In fact, the insurgency is quite small when taking into account the number of citizens of Iraq. We have gangs here. Gang members support other members by lying and murdering, etc for them. This does not mean that every member of our society supports the gangbanger...you dumbshit.

The Shiites in particular were very happy that we liberated them. And while they yearn to rule their own country at this point, most realize that we must stay for a while to prop up their military so that it can survive on its own.

I am glad you can see that many civilians have been murdered since our invasion in Iraq. Many have sadly fallen victim as "collateral damage" as you speak by the American and coalition forces that were acting with the best of intentions in regards to the wellbeing of Iraqis in general. However, most of them have been murdered by the terrorist "insurgency." Many times the number killed since March of 2003 were killed by Saddam Hussein and would have continued to be killed by Saddam Hussein well into the future. The rate at which Saddam murdered people actually greatly outpaces the rate of total casaulties in Iraq since the beginning of "hostilities."

If you liberals really gave a shit about the Iraqi people you would have supported their liberation and AT LEAST not supported the "insurgency" with all your heart and soul. You bullshit can be smelled from miles away. Take your "concern" for human life elsewhere. It is clear that your ultimate goal is simply to make our Commander in Chief look bad. If it actions truely were so obviously horrible, they would not have to be paraded around by the leftist cronies.

It is ironic that you blame our soldiers and George Bush for the invasion of Iraq yet you preach so horribly about our action in Somalia and I do not see Bill Clinton's name.

Apparently "skypirate7" (who has only 25 posts and came quickly to DoucheBag's defense) does not understand that 9/11 was not simply an excuse to bring those that committed the crime to justice but a wake up call to the United States of America that said "IF YOU REFUSE TO ACKNOWLEDGE BREWING THREATS, YOU WILL GET BURNED." I for one am glad that our Commander in Chief has taken the threats seriously. If you've got so much of a fucking problem with the word "Terrorism" maybe you can get a job over at the BBC.

You are completely ignorant if you claim that Iran is not a terrorist threat and has never attacked us. You say that do not have weapons of mass destruction aswell. Personally, I don't think Iran has weapons of mass destruction at this time. But, they are very close (within a couple years) of developing nuclear warheads for their missiles which by the way can already reach South-Eastern Europe. Why is Iran singled out? Do you not understand what happened to our embassy in 1979?

Do you not understand that Iran was the chief (and still is a substantial) funder of Hezbollah when they blew up the Marine barracks in Beirut in 1983. Iran has never attacked us? I'll bet you 143 Marines don't think this will pass through the bullshit detector. You're damn right Iran with nuclear weapons can't be tolerated.

Fuck you all (liberals).
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 2:47:54 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/1/2005 2:57:42 AM EDT by mtchristman]

Originally Posted By DonGalt:

Secondly, its unfortunate that the truth about what happened in mogadishu has never been allowed to be told. Most of the guys there don't know about it because what caused the somali's to hate us is something that happened before they showed up: We took out the top floors of a building in mogadishu where the tribal leaders were getting together to discuss the UN's proposal, and hammer out an agreement. When we did that, we ended any chance of a diplomatic solution, and deserved to get our asses kicked by those people. (We killed dozens of men, women and children in that pre-emptive attack, and yet, conveniently, the pentagon and the mainstream media never reported it. I wonder why?)

So let me guess, you know this because #1 you were there, #2 your sisters boyfriends half uncle knew somebody who knew somebody that lased the building for the hit, #3 because the democratic underground said so. I will sleep soundly tonight knowing that you know why the somali's hate us.

When you kill some guys father, its highly unlikely that he's going to take any overtures of diplomacy from you seriously.

It's highly unlikely anybody is going to take your overtures of what happened as the truth.

The sad thing is, so many people will now flame me-- people who know nothing about what happened there, and don't want to know, but have limitless faith that we are good and black people are evil. (or "the enemy" if you're not racist.)

It's already been said and yes you are a troll. I do have limitless faith that we as Americans are a good people. And thanks for calling everybody out of the closet as racist if we don't agree with you.

The somali's thru off a brutal dictator in the form of Said Barre, left to them by the British. After getting rid of that dictator, who starved them, impovereshed them, and destroyed thousands of lives... they decided they didn't want antoher government. Here comes amerrica-- invading a capitalist country, able to feed itself, at peace, and we start a civil war and attack them unprovoked to try and install our puppet, UN led government-- if you love the UN, you love americas actions in Somalia. If you're not a socialist, and oppose the UN, you have to oppose our actions in Somalia. The individual somali states are at peace, the country is capitalistic, and is about the only bright spot in economic development in africa. The UN is again trying to force them to accept a dictator, and they are likely to, once again unite in defense of their country.

So we invaded a capitalist country that was at peace and able to feed itself. You've got to be kidding me. Your simply drinking the kool aid and completely misrepresenting the facts. You are a liar plain and simple. It's a well documented fact that Somalia had fell into chaos, couldn't feed it's people, and the warlords(don't even try to call them a government, they weren't elected and in no shape or form represented the people) were constantly at war with each other and the people.

When that happens, again you'll hear american news media calling their governors "warlords" and the people defending their homes from UN Tyrannny "Terrorists". Americans may be sent there again, to serve the cause of tyranny.

UUUmmmm good kool aid.

"Black Hawk Down" Was a brilliant piece of propaganda. But by only telling one side of the story, it portrays somali's a vicious thugs who had no cause to attack us.

"Blackhawk Down" was a brilliant movie based very closely on exactly what happened to a group of brave men. Some of whom gave the ultimate sacrifice trying to help a downtrodden starving people. Don't try and tell us your a patriot who knows all of these dark secrets and the rest of us are idiots because we can't handle the truth of all your make believe secrets. I don't care what you are fighting for or what side you are on you are a vicious thug when you drag dead American soldiers thru the streets naked.

Would you attack somali helicopters that were in the states trying to hunt down the governor of your state? Or the head of your household?

If a certain senator from New York gets elected I would help.

Sorry about the rant... it just cheeses me off hearing people talk about how seals serve our country.... unthinking you never consider that the US military might be used for bad ends, and thus, even when used for evil it will get your support. And that's not only a shame, its unamerican.

It cheeses me off when people don't support our troops. The cause is not the point. Wrong or right they deserve are support even if you don't agree with the reason BOY!


Link Posted: 8/1/2005 3:56:01 AM EDT

Originally Posted By DonGalt:

"just following orders" didn't work for tha nazis. Its not working for the poor fools who followed orders and tortured people at abu grahib and gitmo. (It sure would be nice to see a courtmartial up the chain of command on that one... or do you guys think that illegal orders from the president should be protected? You think the grunts should have to take all the heat?)

Who was just following orders anyway. Your talking about isolated incident's at abu grahib that most normal people wouldn't even consider torture. Fuck'em, I say we get the real torture on and break out the rack. Our guys go through worse crap than that at our own e&e schools. If there is even a remote chance that torture might save an American life then I'm all about watching the next reality tv show showing some raghead terrorist with a battery strapped to his sack. If a terrorist injures a soldier then I say we execute 20 imans spewing hate speech.

What illegal orders from the president Mister Constitution? Only you asshat, antibush liberals seem to see all these illegal orders and conspiracies. Did you forget or just choose to ignore the fact that congress did vote overwhelmingly to goto war. Or are you pulling a Kerry and gonna give us the old if I knew then what I know now bullshit.


Bottom line is, the first order given is to take the oath to defend the constitution... anyone acting contrary to the constitution is a criminal. You go to an illegal and unconstitutional war, you deserve to get your ass kicked.

In your mind it's an illegal and unconstitutional war. Once again mister constitution get your facts straight.

You go participate in mass murder in contravertion of US law and the constitution, you're a criminal and you don't deserve respect nor sympathy.

MASS MURDER, you got to be fucking kidding! What saddam did was mass murder, what pol pot did was mass murder, what stalin did was mass murder, what hitler did was mass murder, what our troops are doing is NOT mass murder you stupid fucking hippy. I can't even believe your trying to perpetuate the myth that our troops are mass murdering. You see alot of stupid shit on the internet but this one takes the cake. You've shown your true colors as a leftwing fruitcake who will do anything to undermine a just war.

This is the reason the founding fathers did not want a standing military, because they knew it could be used for immoral purposes.

Where are you getting your history lessons?

If you don't have the integrity to refuse to support criminal behaviour, you haven't earned the right to lecture me on anything, boy.

You've been lectured and owned BOY!

Link Posted: 8/1/2005 7:17:50 AM EDT
WOW! just back from a long vacation, and readthat last post. While this topic wasnt any where near what my post is about, i will say that i DO NOT disagree with the idea that what it says is possible. I cant speak on a level high enough to challenge or agree.

I hope that this man will not be flamed for posting his oppinion if not the possible truth.

With that, lets get back to pee pee-ing on fakers legs.


"Fokker out!"
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 10:39:43 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/1/2005 10:42:12 PM EDT by skypirate7]

Apparently "skypirate7" (who has only 25 posts and came quickly to DoucheBag's defense) does not understand that 9/11 was not simply an excuse to bring those that committed the crime to justice but a wake up call to the United States of America that said "IF YOU REFUSE TO ACKNOWLEDGE BREWING THREATS, YOU WILL GET BURNED." I for one am glad that our Commander in Chief has taken the threats seriously. If you've got so much of a fucking problem with the word "Terrorism" maybe you can get a job over at the BBC.

You are completely ignorant if you claim that Iran is not a terrorist threat and has never attacked us. You say that do not have weapons of mass destruction aswell. Personally, I don't think Iran has weapons of mass destruction at this time. But, they are very close (within a couple years) of developing nuclear warheads for their missiles which by the way can already reach South-Eastern Europe. Why is Iran singled out? Do you not understand what happened to our embassy in 1979?

Do you not understand that Iran was the chief (and still is a substantial) funder of Hezbollah when they blew up the Marine barracks in Beirut in 1983. Iran has never attacked us? I'll bet you 143 Marines don't think this will pass through the bullshit detector. You're damn right Iran with nuclear weapons can't be tolerated.

Fuck you all (liberals).




Calm down and get your head out of your ass. First of all, I'm not a liberal and I'm not a democrat. I'm actually quite conservative. In fact, if you were truly conservative, you wouldn't support an administration cracking down on your constitutional freedoms and civil liberties, or an administration with a reckless budget that has turned a surplus into a deficit and gives tax-breaks to the wealthy.

As for your talking points:

Preemptive attacks are absolute bullshit. The Japanese bombed us at Pearl Harbor because they thought we might become a threat. Does that justify their actions? I dare you, Mr. High and Mighty "conservative" cheer-leader, to tell me that the Japanese were justified in their preemptive attack. Anyway, it turns out that we did become a threat to the Japanese, but that's because THEY BOMBED US. Hence, our retaliation was justified.

So guess what? If we bomb Iran for no reason other than Karl Rove looked into his crystal ball and said "Iran will be a threat in the future," then we have become the antagonist. Iran will fight back, and they will be justified.

Throughout history, the general rules of war judge those who attack a peaceful country to be the bad guy. Claiming that the peaceful country was "evil" and would one day become a "threat" just doesn't cut it. Imagine if during the Cold War, the Soviets launched a preemptive nuclear attack against the USA, claiming that America would become a threat and they had to do something. Sorry, that's bullshit and unexcusable aggression.

I wonder what you'd tell a court if you murdered your neighbor for looking at you with an angry face. "Oh, he was evil and was plotting against me, so I had to kill him."

Just as you have the right to defend yourself from someone breaking into your home and attacking you, America has the right to DEFEND itself. However, America DOES NOT have the right to attack other nations on the basis of preemptively neutralizing perceived threats.

Finally, I'm well aware of what happened at the American Embassy in Iran. Do you remember what happened before it though? Just in case you don't, I'll give you a quick history lesson. The Iranians had a democratic government under Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh. Prior to that, Iran had been under British and Russian occupation. Mossadegh, thinking that Iran was truly free from imperial rule, made the mistake of pissing off the British and nationalizing British oil fields. He thought that the natural resources of Iran should start helping Iranians for a change. Oops.

In 1953, a CIA-engineered coup threw out Mossadegh and put the Shah of Iran (Shah Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi) into power. In return for the US support the Shah agreed, in 1954, to allow an international consortium of British (40%), American (40%), French (6%), and Dutch (14%) companies to run the Iranian oil facilities for the next 25 years, with profits shared equally. In other words, no control or profits went to Iran.

The Shah of Iran ruled with an iron-fist. It was an American-backed puppet dictatorship, pure and simple. Naturally, the Iranians were pissed off. Finally, the power of the people was too much and the 1979 Iranian Revolution forced the Shah to flee the country. After being under oppression for so long, the Iranians were angry. Naturally, they vented some of their anger upon America, who backed the Shah's regime. That's when they took the staff of the American Embassy hostage. What did they want in return? They wanted the USA to return the Shah so he could stand trial. Of course, that didn't happen.

Anyway, it comes as no surprise that the new Iranian government nationalized the oil fields. Once again, Iran had control over its own resources. And once again, that pissed off America. They convinced Saddam Hussein, another one of their puppets (who they also had a hand in bringing to power by backing the Baath party's takeover in the 1950's), to attack Iran. They figured that the new Iranian government was weak and that Saddam would be able to crush it so America could then conveniently install a new pro-American regime. Well, things didn't go so well. Iran routed the Iraqi forces and was soon on the offensive. Now, Iraq itself was in danger of falling. If the Iranians controlled the Iraqi oilfields... well, America couldn't let that happen. So they gave Saddam chemical weapons. He used them on the Iranians. It worked. There was a cease-fire, and the war was over. And many years later, America used WMDs as the primary reason to invade Iraq. Oh, such irony.

In conclusion, yes, I'm well aware of what happened to the American Embassy. Hopefully, you are now aware of how much America fucked Iran over in the past.
Link Posted: 8/2/2005 5:48:33 AM EDT
Back on topic, I've never heard of the AK-13. He probably meant the AK-103.
Link Posted: 8/2/2005 10:08:59 AM EDT
Bah. All you ninnies imagine that we have to be "RIGHT".

"RIGHT" is nice. I like it. But it takes the bronze medal behind "ALIVE" and "AHEAD".

Any other line of thinking is pie in the sky, head in the sand bullshit. Theoretical asshattery.
Link Posted: 8/2/2005 1:30:12 PM EDT
IBTL. Don Gatti is a .

Even God despised Don Galt.




Ben
Link Posted: 8/2/2005 2:41:14 PM EDT
sheesh guys, go to your rooms! Nope the guy stood behind the AK13 and 15 story. said they were "mini-versions of and AK and they shoot 13 rounds". laghin my ass off, i called him out yesterday, he got pissy and left the shop.
Link Posted: 8/2/2005 3:39:00 PM EDT
I truly support every man and woman regardless of race, nationality, branch of service, or religious or political background who has to put on that uniform and leave the safety and security to put themselves in harms way to protect us from those who wish to do us harm. I was in full support of going after bin Laden after the USS Cole and going into Afghanistan after 9/11. I am a card carrying Republican who voted for George W twice. I admit, at first I didn't agree with the war in Iraq because it looked like he was finishing up what his dad had started and it looked suspicious when no weapons of mass destruction had been found. But I saw photos of what Saddam had did to the Kurds and from that point I found it to be just. Saddam was a real terrorist and if given the chance I am sure he would have supplied Serin and VX gas to terrorist networks to strike at America and her true Allies. I believe that those who kept Saddam supplied after the first Gulf War also helped him to move his stash of bio and chem weapons to Syria to keep UN inspectors from finding it. As far as Iran being a terrorist country well remember back to the 70's and 80's when they funded terror groups like Hamas, the PLO, and Abu Jihad against the "Great Satan" aka the US. Or lets not forget about North Korea sending its own advisors into Sudan and Colombia to train Marxist rebels. They all seek to destroy America and our allies but when a natural disaster occurs they look to us for help with humanitarian aid and money.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top