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: 8/31/2005 9:35:53 AM EDT
It's reached lake level.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 9:37:24 AM EDT

Originally Posted By THR-Thumper:
It's reached lake level.




Folks, think long and hard about this quote.

<---builds his house on a hill.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 9:38:27 AM EDT
The lake is higher than the gulf, right? Is water pouring out of the "bowl" into the gulf?
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 9:38:55 AM EDT
600-800' ASL for SE MI.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 9:40:27 AM EDT
The place is going to be one huge toxic swamp. A giant superfund site. Just bulldoze it.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 9:41:04 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Admiral_Crunch:
The lake is higher than the gulf, right? Is water pouring out of the "bowl" into the gulf?



Nope. The Gulf of Mexico is now protected from the water in New Orleans by the levee system.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 9:41:49 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 9:42:51 AM EDT
The tide went out.

I still vote for a big bass tournament at Lake N. Orleans in two years.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 9:43:15 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 9:43:19 AM EDT

Originally Posted By uncle_frank:
The place is going to be one huge toxic swamp. A giant superfund site. Just bulldoze it.



You mean Pat Robertson was right....????

"In 1998, Republican icon Pat Robertson warned that hurricanes were likely to hit communities that offended God. Perhaps it was Barbour’s memo that caused Katrina, at the last moment, to spare New Orleans and save its worst flailings for the Mississippi coast."



Link Posted: 8/31/2005 9:44:07 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TheRedGoat:
You are overlooking the floods that will be coming from the Mississippi itself over the next few days/weeks.

TRG



The storm went right up the Mississippi and Ohio river valley's, just a few more days for the water to arrive.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 9:45:23 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 9:52:42 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/31/2005 9:54:25 AM EDT by Admiral_Crunch]

Originally Posted By TheRedGoat:

Originally Posted By THR-Thumper:
Nope. The Gulf of Mexico is now protected from the water in New Orleans by the levee system.



Correct, NO is lower than the Gulf and the water must be pumped out, otherwise... it goes nowhere.

TRG



The street level in NO is lower than the gulf, but the water level isn't. If they punch a hole in the southern levy, the city should drain down to sealevel, right? Or would that cause mucho-bad currents as the lake drained "through" the city to the gulf? It would flush the Toxic Gumbo™, at least.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 9:53:52 AM EDT
I love New Orleans.

And it shall be rebuilt.

Get used to the idea, folks.

It's an idea called...America.



Eric The(BigEasy,Himself)Hun




No Eric, it's stupidity to rebuild. That superfund site that was once New Orleans is toast. I really don't see how they could bring it back to what it once was.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 9:57:22 AM EDT

Originally Posted By uncle_frank:
I love New Orleans.

And it shall be rebuilt.

Get used to the idea, folks.

It's an idea called...America.



Eric The(BigEasy,Himself)Hun




No Eric, it's stupidity to rebuild. That superfund site that was once New Orleans is toast. I really don't see how they could bring it back to what it once was.



New New Orleans... or Naw Nawlins
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 10:00:49 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Admiral_Crunch:

Originally Posted By TheRedGoat:

Originally Posted By THR-Thumper:
Nope. The Gulf of Mexico is now protected from the water in New Orleans by the levee system.



Correct, NO is lower than the Gulf and the water must be pumped out, otherwise... it goes nowhere.

TRG



The street level in NO is lower than the gulf, but the water level isn't. If they punch a hole in the southern levy, the city should drain down to sealevel, right? Or would that cause mucho-bad currents as the lake drained "through" the city to the gulf? It would flush the Toxic Gumbo™, at least.



They would have to patch up the levies on L. Ponchatrain before you could "drain" NO to sea level.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 10:01:45 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/31/2005 10:03:43 AM EDT by jaeger_1969]

Originally Posted By EricTheHun:
I love New Orleans.

And it shall be rebuilt.

Get used to the idea, folks.

It's an idea called...America.



Eric The(BigEasy,Himself)Hun



ETH,

What's with all this philosophical "We shall Overcome" stuff today. A terrible tragedy has happened, but putting NO back where it was is poor judgment, despite all the emotional attachments. Sheeesh!


Edited for spelling Nazi's.

Link Posted: 8/31/2005 10:04:54 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Admiral_Crunch:

Originally Posted By TheRedGoat:

Originally Posted By THR-Thumper:
Nope. The Gulf of Mexico is now protected from the water in New Orleans by the levee system.



Correct, NO is lower than the Gulf and the water must be pumped out, otherwise... it goes nowhere.

TRG



The street level in NO is lower than the gulf, but the water level isn't. If they punch a hole in the southern levy, the city should drain down to sealevel, right? Or would that cause mucho-bad currents as the lake drained "through" the city to the gulf? It would flush the Toxic Gumbo™, at least.



Wrong... Lake pontchartrain, and lake new orleans are at approximately sea level, allowing for tidal flow differences. If the lake has a higher average level, it is only a slight difference.

Also the southern levees do not protect the city from the gulf, they protect the city from the Mississippi River, which is HIGHER than the the lake(s). All that you would do by blowing a hole in that levee would be to partially reroute the river through the new lake New Orleans, and possibly create the 'big levee waterfalls'.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 10:06:27 AM EDT
why would anyone ever want to live there?
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 10:07:17 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/31/2005 10:07:29 AM EDT by TheRedGoat]
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 10:08:59 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 10:10:14 AM EDT
I've been to nawlins' twice. I think it would make a great national land fill.

Bob
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 10:10:35 AM EDT
Water world for some reason comes to mind.

wolf
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 10:13:04 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/31/2005 10:14:16 AM EDT by ryann]

Originally Posted By EricTheHun:

Originally Posted By uncle_frank:
No Eric, it's stupidity to rebuild.


Nonsense.

The City has weathered anything and everything that's been thrown at it for almost 300 years, Son, and it will be rebuilt.

From devastating fires, hurricanes, floods, race riots, occupation by a federal army, and Reconstruction.

It will be rebuilt and continue in fine form.

That superfund site that was once New Orleans is toast. I really don't see how they could bring it back to what it once was.

It shall be rebuilt even better.

'It's the American Way', remember?

Eric The(OldTimesThereAreNotForgotten)Hun



"Occupation by a federal army?"......You must be talking about the British, and the war of 1812.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 10:15:10 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/31/2005 10:16:18 AM EDT by giacutter]
Rebuild it? Fine. Move it to a new site, though. Make it a twin city with Baton Rouge. Or find a way to make it a Venice in America, as some on the board have suggested.

Building a city an average of 6 feet below sea level among three massive bodies of water is the height of stupidity.

Except for RE-building it there.

Many parts of NO were total hellholes, but for the most part, the people are among the friendliest in the country I have ever met, and it has a unique cultural environment I would be very sad to see lost.

Link Posted: 8/31/2005 10:26:11 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/31/2005 10:30:44 AM EDT by EricTheHun]
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 10:33:11 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/31/2005 10:38:48 AM EDT by ryann]

Originally Posted By EricTheHun:
Originally Posted By ryann:

"Occupation by a federal army?"......You must be talking about the British, and the war of 1812.

No.

The British Army never occupied New Orleans during the War of 1812.

They were stopped by General Andrew Jackson and his troops at the Battlfield near Chalmette.

The federal army occupied New Orleans beginning in 1862....until 1877.

Get off the Internet and read a history book sometime.

Eric The(Suggestive)Hun



No hero you read a history book, one that tells you the various states weren't sovereign nations, they were part of the whole and a nation doesn't occupy itself, rendering your assertion that NO was under federal occupation a LIE.
BTW, there'd have been no troops at all in NO if they hadn't thrown in with the scum that tried to destroy this country.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 10:34:17 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/31/2005 10:36:30 AM EDT by iamblades]

Originally Posted By EricTheHun:

Originally Posted By uncle_frank:
No Eric, it's stupidity to rebuild.


Nonsense.

The City has weathered anything and everything that's been thrown at it for almost 300 years, Son, and it will be rebuilt.

From devastating fires, hurricanes, floods, race riots, occupation by a federal army, and Reconstruction.

It will be rebuilt and continue in fine form.

That superfund site that was once New Orleans is toast. I really don't see how they could bring it back to what it once was.

It shall be rebuilt even better.

'It's the American Way', remember?

Eric The(OldTimesThereAreNotForgotten)Hun



The thing you aren't seeing is that the city HASN'T lasted 300 years in it's current location. It used to have miles and miles of buffer swamp surrounding it, which is all gone because of the straight jacket on the mississippi that prevents it from renewing them. The mississippi delta has lost well over 1000 square miles of landmass that used to act as a protective barrier for new orleans. Plus it was once upon a time above sea level, before the levees and the pumps, but now has sunk several feet below sea level, and sill continue to sink for the foreseeable future, at a rate of 3 feet a century.

Now, I appreciate the history, architecture and culture of the city as much as anyone, but the simple fact is that the city is not sustainable in its current form in its current location, no matter how much money we spend or how many times we rebuild it. It's a damn shame, but saying we'll rebuild it the same way, just bigger and better is not a viable solution, it will just make the next catastrophe worse. A 40 foot levee failing would be a lot more catastrophic than a 10 foot levee failing.

No matter how tall you build the levees, no matter how sophisticated the pumping system, they will fail eventually.

My personal idea is that we free up the Mississippi to do that is natural, and do what the dutch are starting to do, decide what is worth saving, save that, let the rest flood and build a floating city. Just imagine the kickass engineering job that could be done on a floating new new orleans for the money it will take to rebuild everything just the same, when we'll just have to do it all again sometime within our lifetime most likely
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 10:37:26 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/31/2005 10:45:00 AM EDT by _DR]
Lake level is Gulf level/Sea level @ 0 meters
The Mississipi River is a lot higher.





Link Posted: 8/31/2005 10:38:46 AM EDT

Originally Posted By EricTheHun:

Originally Posted By uncle_frank:
No Eric, it's stupidity to rebuild.


Nonsense.

The City has weathered anything and everything that's been thrown at it for almost 300 years, Son, and it will be rebuilt.

From devastating fires, hurricanes, floods, race riots, occupation by a federal army, and Reconstruction.

It will be rebuilt and continue in fine form.

That superfund site that was once New Orleans is toast. I really don't see how they could bring it back to what it once was.

It shall be rebuilt even better.

'It's the American Way', remember?

Eric The(OldTimesThereAreNotForgotten)Hun



Right on. The problem is the leadership of the city that turn down offers to bolster the levee system. What they need in addition are floodgates on the lakes (Borgne and Pontchaitrain) to protect against storm surge while still allowing barge traffic. Expensive but possible.

Link Posted: 8/31/2005 10:48:40 AM EDT

Originally Posted By ryann:

Originally Posted By EricTheHun:
Originally Posted By ryann:

"Occupation by a federal army?"......You must be talking about the British, and the war of 1812.

No.

The British Army never occupied New Orleans during the War of 1812.

They were stopped by General Andrew Jackson and his troops at the Battlfield near Chalmette.

The federal army occupied New Orleans beginning in 1862....until 1877.

Get off the Internet and read a history book sometime.

Eric The(Suggestive)Hun



No hero you read a history book, one that tells you the various states weren't sovereign nations, they were part of the whole and a nation doesn't occupy itself, rendering your assertion that NO was under federal occupation a LIE.
BTW, there'd have been no troops at all in NO if they hadn't thrown in with the scum that tried to destroy this country.



What about your post refutes that federal troops occupied New Orleans? Whatever your thoughts on the war, FEDERAL troops occupied the city, RIGHT?

And you apparently haven't read enough history to learn that many of the states that agreed to be united only did so with the understanding that they could leave the union at their leisure.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 10:52:05 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 11:08:56 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 11:46:30 AM EDT

Originally Posted By EricTheHun:
Sir, you are obviously a graduate of a renegade institute whose faculty and students contributed mightily to a vast criminal conspiracy which went under the name of Confederate States of America!

Or so, ryann might say.

But we know better.

Eric The(Incredible)Hun





yup.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 11:54:15 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 11:56:46 AM EDT
I cant help but think that this was nature restoring the natural balance to that area and it would be the height of stupidity to pour billions into reconstruction only to have it happen all over again during the next hurricane season or even this season which is just begining! How can you pump out a bowl thats below water level on three sides anyway?
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 12:33:36 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/31/2005 12:38:47 PM EDT by ryann]

Originally Posted By CITADELGRAD87:

Originally Posted By ryann:

Originally Posted By EricTheHun:
Originally Posted By ryann:

"Occupation by a federal army?"......You must be talking about the British, and the war of 1812.

No.

The British Army never occupied New Orleans during the War of 1812.

They were stopped by General Andrew Jackson and his troops at the Battlfield near Chalmette.

The federal army occupied New Orleans beginning in 1862....until 1877.

Get off the Internet and read a history book sometime.

Eric The(Suggestive)Hun



No hero you read a history book, one that tells you the various states weren't sovereign nations, they were part of the whole and a nation doesn't occupy itself, rendering your assertion that NO was under federal occupation a LIE.
BTW, there'd have been no troops at all in NO if they hadn't thrown in with the scum that tried to destroy this country.



What about your post refutes that federal troops occupied New Orleans? Whatever your thoughts on the war, FEDERAL troops occupied the city, RIGHT?

And you apparently haven't read enough history to learn that many of the states that agreed to be united only did so with the understanding that they could leave the union at their leisure.



I refute that federal troops OCCUPIED New Orleans, based on the amazingly simple logic that you cannot OCCUPY the country you live in. Do you occupy your house? The term OCCUPY implies that they were foreign troops, when in fact they were more American than some of the vermin that tried to destroy America.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 12:38:01 PM EDT

Originally Posted By EricTheHun:
Originally Posted By ryann:

No hero you read a history book, one that tells you the various states weren't sovereign nations, they were part of the whole and a nation doesn't occupy itself, rendering your assertion that NO was under federal occupation a LIE.

If you had a dollar for every history book that you've likely read in the last 48 years, you likely couldn't afford a half-dozen Krispey-Kreme coughnuts!



It was as 'foreign' an occupation as this country has ever seen.

And it was a federal army, Krispey-Kreme Poster Boy!

It even referred to itself, as such...old news to most of us, but obviously breaking news for you!

BTW, there'd have been no troops at all in NO if they hadn't thrown in with the scum that tried to destroy this country.

It really wouldn't have mattered, would it?

Ask Maryland, who didn't throw in with the Confederacy, and yet was the first State to be occupied by 'foreign' troops....

'The only thing new in the world is the history you don't know.' ~ Harry S Truman.

Now, do you have anything to add about New Orleans?

Eric The(IThoughtNot!)Hun



Are troops occupying Georgia at Ft Benning? You have such a pathetic twist on history, you're not worth arguing with.
It's your arrogance and hatred of Northerners that causes you to call them Federal troops; if NO was in a Northern state, you'd be all over yourself talking shit about whats going on there.
I'm out, you're too much of an energy thief to debate.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 12:48:03 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ryann:

Originally Posted By CITADELGRAD87:

Originally Posted By ryann:

Originally Posted By EricTheHun:
Originally Posted By ryann:

"Occupation by a federal army?"......You must be talking about the British, and the war of 1812.

No.

The British Army never occupied New Orleans during the War of 1812.

They were stopped by General Andrew Jackson and his troops at the Battlfield near Chalmette.

The federal army occupied New Orleans beginning in 1862....until 1877.

Get off the Internet and read a history book sometime.

Eric The(Suggestive)Hun



No hero you read a history book, one that tells you the various states weren't sovereign nations, they were part of the whole and a nation doesn't occupy itself, rendering your assertion that NO was under federal occupation a LIE.
BTW, there'd have been no troops at all in NO if they hadn't thrown in with the scum that tried to destroy this country.



What about your post refutes that federal troops occupied New Orleans? Whatever your thoughts on the war, FEDERAL troops occupied the city, RIGHT?

And you apparently haven't read enough history to learn that many of the states that agreed to be united only did so with the understanding that they could leave the union at their leisure.



I refute that federal troops OCCUPIED New Orleans, based on the amazingly simple logic that you cannot OCCUPY the country you live in. Do you occupy your house? The term OCCUPY implies that they were foreign troops, when in fact they were more American than some of the vermin that tried to destroy America.



Really? Taking this and your next post, you see no difference between guys laying around the barracks at their assigned base and guys, say, in Iraq?

What do you think they were doing? I haven't seen their orders, but I'd wager they included the phrase occupy. They weren't there because there was a base there, they were sent there during the course of a war, to hold the real estate and control the population.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 12:51:09 PM EDT
Quick!

Someone start a USS Liberty thread.


Link Posted: 8/31/2005 12:53:18 PM EDT
It is hard to think about... " border=0>
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 12:54:03 PM EDT

Originally Posted By arowneragain:
Quick!

Someone start a USS Liberty thread.





Breakout the Windex margarita's and Popcorn, ETH is on a roll.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 12:57:57 PM EDT

Originally Posted By EricTheHun:
I love New Orleans.



Of course you do. Pimps, whores, and looters. What's not to love?
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 12:59:03 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/31/2005 1:01:19 PM EDT by ryann]

Originally Posted By CITADELGRAD87:

Originally Posted By ryann:

Originally Posted By CITADELGRAD87:

Originally Posted By ryann:

Originally Posted By EricTheHun:
Originally Posted By ryann:

"Occupation by a federal army?"......You must be talking about the British, and the war of 1812.

No.

The British Army never occupied New Orleans during the War of 1812.

They were stopped by General Andrew Jackson and his troops at the Battlfield near Chalmette.

The federal army occupied New Orleans beginning in 1862....until 1877.

Get off the Internet and read a history book sometime.

Eric The(Suggestive)Hun



No hero you read a history book, one that tells you the various states weren't sovereign nations, they were part of the whole and a nation doesn't occupy itself, rendering your assertion that NO was under federal occupation a LIE.
BTW, there'd have been no troops at all in NO if they hadn't thrown in with the scum that tried to destroy this country.



What about your post refutes that federal troops occupied New Orleans? Whatever your thoughts on the war, FEDERAL troops occupied the city, RIGHT?

And you apparently haven't read enough history to learn that many of the states that agreed to be united only did so with the understanding that they could leave the union at their leisure.



I refute that federal troops OCCUPIED New Orleans, based on the amazingly simple logic that you cannot OCCUPY the country you live in. Do you occupy your house? The term OCCUPY implies that they were foreign troops, when in fact they were more American than some of the vermin that tried to destroy America.



Really? Taking this and your next post, you see no difference between guys laying around the barracks at their assigned base and guys, say, in Iraq?

What do you think they were doing? I haven't seen their orders, but I'd wager they included the phrase occupy. They weren't there because there was a base there, they were sent there during the course of a war, to hold the real estate and control the population.



Umm the guys in Iraq with the US military aren't Iraqi citizens, they are occupiers of that country (and I'm glad they are, and in this case "occupier" isn't negative).
The Northern troops at the end of the civil war were American citizens in their own country, hence the term occupier in my lexicon doesn't apply anymore that a National Guard callout could be labeled an occupation.
Hook up with Eric the Hun, I'm sure he's got some propaganda for ya to bolster your flawed position.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 1:10:44 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/31/2005 1:14:04 PM EDT by wildearp]

Originally Posted By EricTheHun:

Originally Posted By uncle_frank:
No Eric, it's stupidity to rebuild.


Nonsense.

The City has weathered anything and everything that's been thrown at it for almost 300 years, Son, and it will be rebuilt.

From devastating fires, hurricanes, floods, race riots, occupation by a federal army, and Reconstruction.

It will be rebuilt and continue in fine form.

That superfund site that was once New Orleans is toast. I really don't see how they could bring it back to what it once was.

It shall be rebuilt even better.

'It's the American Way', remember?

Eric The(OldTimesThereAreNotForgotten)Hun



Think about the re-run next year.

Mix a hurricane with a floating city like mentioned above. WTF then? Bring in a tugboat and just move the city before the storm???? It WILL happen again.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 1:13:36 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/31/2005 1:18:28 PM EDT by CITADELGRAD87]
.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 1:18:04 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ryann:

Originally Posted By CITADELGRAD87:

Really? Taking this and your next post, you see no difference between guys laying around the barracks at their assigned base and guys, say, in Iraq?

What do you think they were doing? I haven't seen their orders, but I'd wager they included the phrase occupy. They weren't there because there was a base there, they were sent there during the course of a war, to hold the real estate and control the population.



Umm the guys in Iraq with the US military aren't Iraqi citizens, they are occupiers of that country (and I'm glad they are, and in this case "occupier" isn't negative).
The Northern troops at the end of the civil war were American citizens in their own country, hence the term occupier in my lexicon doesn't apply anymore that a National Guard callout could be labeled an occupation.
Hook up with Eric the Hun, I'm sure he's got some propaganda for ya to bolster your flawed position.


So...using your logic, there wasn't even really a war at all, because how can you declare or wage war on yourself?!?!?!

My position is not flawed, nor does it rest on mushy tenets like "when in fact they were more American than some of the vermin that tried to destroy America."

Whatever that means, it relies on YOUR interpretation, subjectively.

My "flawed" position relies on the clear meaning of writings prepared at the time of the events of which I speak.

You're correct, you ARE done here.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 1:28:13 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 1:41:19 PM EDT
The Battle of New Orleans.

The Battle of New Orleans
Music and lyrics by Jimmy Driftwood

In 1814 we took a little trip
along with Colonel Jackson
down the mighty Mississip.
We took a little bacon and
we took a little beans
And we caught the bloody British
in the town of New Orleans.

We fired our guns
and the British kept a'comin.
There wasn't nigh as many
as there was a while ago.
We fired once more and
they began to runnin' on
down the Mississippi
to the Gulf of Mexico.

We looked down the river
and we seed the British come.
And there must have been a hundred
of'em beatin' on the drum.
They stepped so high and
they made the bugles ring.
We stood by our cotton bales
and didn't say a thing.

We fired our guns and the
British kept a'comin.
There wasn't nigh as many
as there was a while ago.
We fired once more and
they began to runnin' on
down the Mississippi
to the Gulf of Mexico.

Old Hickory said
we could take 'em by surprise
If we didn't fire our muskets
til we looked 'em in the eye
We held our fire til
we seed their faces well.
then we opened up with squirrel guns
And really gave 'em ... well ~~~

We fired our guns and the
British kept a'comin.
There wasn't nigh as many
as there was a while ago.
We fired once more and
they began to runnin' on
down the Mississippi
to the Gulf of Mexico.

Yeah, they ran through the briars
and they ran through the brambles
And they ran through the bushes
where a rabbit couldn't go.
They ran so fast that the hounds
couldn't catch 'em on
down the Mississippi
to the Gulf of Mexico.

We fired our cannon til
the barrel melted down.
So we grabbed an alligator
and we fought another round.
We filled his head with cannon balls
and powdered his behind
and when we touched the powder off,
the gator lost his mind.

We fired our guns and the
British kept a'comin.
There wasn't nigh as many
as there was a while ago.
We fired once more and
they began to runnin' on
down the Mississippi
to the Gulf of Mexico.

Yeah, they ran through the briars
and they ran through the brambles
and they ran through the bushes
where a rabbit couldn't go.
they ran so fast that the hounds
couldn't catch 'em on
down the Mississippi
to the Gulf of Mexico.

Hup 2, 3, 4. Sound off 3, 4.... Hup 2, 3, 4.
Sound off 3, 4.... Hup 2, 3, 4

Link Posted: 8/31/2005 1:47:41 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CITADELGRAD87:

Originally Posted By ryann:

Originally Posted By CITADELGRAD87:

Really? Taking this and your next post, you see no difference between guys laying around the barracks at their assigned base and guys, say, in Iraq?

What do you think they were doing? I haven't seen their orders, but I'd wager they included the phrase occupy. They weren't there because there was a base there, they were sent there during the course of a war, to hold the real estate and control the population.



Umm the guys in Iraq with the US military aren't Iraqi citizens, they are occupiers of that country (and I'm glad they are, and in this case "occupier" isn't negative).
The Northern troops at the end of the civil war were American citizens in their own country, hence the term occupier in my lexicon doesn't apply anymore that a National Guard callout could be labeled an occupation.
Hook up with Eric the Hun, I'm sure he's got some propaganda for ya to bolster your flawed position.


So...using your logic, there wasn't even really a war at all, because how can you declare or wage war on yourself?!?!?!

My position is not flawed, nor does it rest on mushy tenets like "when in fact they were more American than some of the vermin that tried to destroy America."

Whatever that means, it relies on YOUR interpretation, subjectively.

My "flawed" position relies on the clear meaning of writings prepared at the time of the events of which I speak.

You're correct, you ARE done here.




"My "flawed" position relies on the clear meaning of writings prepared at the time of the events of which I speak...."

Oh yeah, and the writings you refer to are, I'm sure, shining beacons of objectivity.
You are correct, I'm done here as my work is complete.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 1:49:00 PM EDT

Originally Posted By TheRedGoat:
You are overlooking the floods that will be coming from the Mississippi itself over the next few days/weeks.

TRG



You beat me to it.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top