quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: herfacechair

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

Also, "since you got out"? Are you fucking kidding me? The best case scenario for you is that you did "serve," but never combat deployed. The worst case scenario is that you never served. Based on your hatred for the troops, I'd say that you never served.

Now that is a interesting jump in your logic process....where do you get that I hate the troops.
I may feel that many are ignorant and ill informed some may be as dumb as a stone but nowhere have I mentioned any hatred for them...are you projecting?

That's not a jump, but consistent with what I get from reading your posts. This isn't the first thread where you and I have clashed. Your demeanor, as demonstrated in your posts, show that you hate the troops. You could say that you "don't" hate the troops all you want, I look at your conduct on these boards. You're not the only one that hates the troops here. What I've bolded in red in your quote? That gives your true position away, you hate the military.

The reality is that the troops have a first-hand account of what's going on in the military. When it comes to Iraq and Afghanistan? Those troops that deployed to those countries have a first hand account of what takes place in those countries. Military service gives them a vantage point that someone that isn't in the military doesn't have. What I've bolded in red above shows your reactions to the facts that they express based on their first hand experiences.

You, having only received filtered information from the frontlines, have no legs to stand on when accusing many service members being "dumb" or "ill informed." Based on what you've said here, I know for a fact that you're seriously ill informed. If I were to come up with one word describing your knowledge on the topic we're debating, I'd say, "clueless."

Strawman argument.

So your position is that there are no ignorant,ill informed or stupid people in the military...well except for the officer you say got beat up.

Strawman argument.

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

I knew 3 guys in Iraq. They sure are nothing like the OP. They are not as detailed.

All 3 could sum up Iraq in less then a paragraph.

quote:

ORIGINAL: EbonyWood

quote:

ORIGINAL: herfacechair

quote:

ORIGINAL: EbonyWood

quote:

ORIGINAL: herfacechair

Every woman that has sat on my face had a great time.

Any of them ever take the opportunity to take a huge dump?

They must have been tempted.

It's amusing how liberals react to someone exercising their freedom of speech. For instance, Al Pieda throwing custard cream pies at An Coulter. What's this clown's contribution? He reacts to the facts by symbolically throwing feces at me. Liberals are all about "the free exchange of ideas," as long as it's their ideas that get shared, and nothing dares challenge it. Dare challenge a liberal, and they'll try to find ways to "shut you up."

This clown isn't the only one though. I recently received a PM from a frustrated liberal attempting to shut me down; his message had a veiled threat.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

I've combat deployed to that country

What exactly does this term mean?

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

thompsonx: Not dense at all just making the point that looking at her apendages would be more fun than looking at yours...

quote:

Hence the fact that you're dense. She expressed her opinion that we were "involved" in a "pissing" contest. You, being a reject in real life, with women not wanting to have anything to do with you, started perving after her. That's the second woman on this thread that you perved after, wouldn't be surprised if you perved after many more woman on this board. Perhaps a change of attitude, as well as a change in focus in the bedroom, would let women overlook your ED problems.

It may have escaped your attention but this is a sexually explicit website...perving is what we do here

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

You'd have to be "blind" to make that comment. I read what you quoted from the UN charter. It didn't prove my argument wrong, all you did was show text written to address symmetrical warfare. The people writing that charter didn't realize that this was what they were doing. But in terms of 21st Century Warfare, that's precisely what they were doing.

Strawman argument + Red herring

Is it your position that churchill and roosevelt had no understanding of asymetrical warfare?

Strawman argument + Red herring.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

REAL Veterans know that I'm being truthful, and what I say happens in the military is actually what happens.

So only those vets who agree with you are "twue veterans" and all who disagree with you are nothing but lying posers.

That certainly makes it easier for you to claim you have proved something

quote:

ORIGINAL: herfacechair

Nope, not an agenda but a purpose. To give facts, using my first hand experience and research, to counter the massive misconception about Iraq that the opposition has.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


Strawman Argument.

KBR, which at the time was part of halliburton, was providing services for the u.s. govt in the sand box. That means that it was halliburton that was making money through a company that it had owned for more than forty years. Some how you refuse to see that obvious connection.

Halliburton owned kbr and kbr had the contract but halliburton somehow in your mind was not the benificiary of that contract....how does that work?

Strawman Argument

quote:

ORIGINAL: EbonyWood

quote:

ORIGINAL: herfacechair

Nope, not an agenda but a purpose. To give facts, using my first hand experience and research, to counter the massive misconception about Iraq that the opposition has.

And yet nothing, absolutely zero, in my entire post and your response, is about Iraq, so I believe you just condemned yourself out of your own mouth concerning your agenda.

Epic fail.

quote:

ORIGINAL: herfacechair

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: herfacechair

thompsonx: Just like your squid daddy leaving his post to show a certified welder how to do his job... REPEAT POINT

A fire watch assigned to a welder would be in that welder's vicinity, with a fire extinguisher. He has to be near the welder in order to quickly put a fire out if the welder starts a fire. When my dad did the welder's job, he was still in his station. This should've been obvious to you if you served. I just love the way you prove me right with your actions. If you served, your posts don't do you any justice.

You seem to know as little about welding as you do about being a soldier.

If we were to match that statement to reality, I'd have enough knowledge to be a professional welder.

However, your statement doesn't reflect reality. You don't have military experience to work from to determine both, how good or bad I am at being a soldier. Your posts here initially indicated that you didn't have a clue about welding, so you can't determine how much, or little, I'd know about welding. You have little to no military service under your belt, and you've demonstrated ignorance about what's entailed in a fire watch.

thompsonx: The firewatch guy is standing by with his fire extinguisher watching the sparks that are caused by the welder and making sure that they do not catch anything on fire.

What? Is there an echo in here? What I said in the post that you replied to:

"A fire watch assigned to a welder would be in that welder's vicinity, with a fire extinguisher. He has to be near the welder in order to quickly put a fire out if the welder starts a fire. When my dad did the welder's job, he was still in his station." - herfacechair

You're either learning from what I'm saying, or you've gotten busy with google.

thompsonx: Now when your squid daddy put on the welders helmet how was he able to see where the sparks went?

What I actually said, pay attention now:

"Like the time he was doing fire watch for a welder. He got tired of waiting on the welder. The welder was working slow as he was working by the hour. My dad grabbed the guy's torch and finished the job in minutes. Pissed the welder off." -- herfacechair

Where, in that statement, does it say that my dad put the welder's helmet on? Why use the welder's helmet when he had PPE for the task, like firewatch goggles? My dad had the fire extinguisher where he'd be able to grab it, after shutting the torch off. Had anything caught fire, he would've turned the torch off and use the fire extinguisher. But he got the job done real quick, took two to three minutes... when the welder tried to take half an hour to an hour.

thompsonx: The welder is a certified specialist and your daddy was neither certified nor the one contracted to do the job.

If you were in the department that my dad was attached to back then, you'd know how to use a welder's torch... as well as other ship's hull maintenance/repair tools. It didn't matter if he were the one contracted to do the job or not. He got the job done quick, and saved man hours that were being tied up with the welder taking forever to do something my dad did in two to three minutes.

Do continue to show how little you know about the military.

thompsonx: Yet he put down his fire extinguisher and put on the welders helmet and abandoned his post.

What I actually said:

"Like the time he was doing fire watch for a welder. He got tired of waiting on the welder. The welder was working slow as he was working by the hour. My dad grabbed the guy's torch and finished the job in minutes. Pissed the welder off." -- herfacechair

Where, in that statement, does it say that my dad put a welder's helmet on? He already had the safety goggles that the fire watch normally wears when they're assigned fire watch. My dad was both, with the welder and he had a fire extinguisher with him. He didn't abandon his post, he stayed at his post and did the welder's job. There's no marking on the floor, ahem, deck, for the firewatch to stand in. They usually select where they stand, or sit, when watching the welder. The only thing that matters is that they're within distance of the welder and his job. My dad met both requirements. Again, had a fire started, my dad would've turned the torch off and activated the fire extinguisher.

thompsonx: See even your "my daddy is so bitchin' stories" lack any semblance of veracity.

You demonstrated how little you know about the military with this one post. You played parrot, regurgitating what I previously told you, to sound like you "knew" what you were talking about. You don't make yourself look good faking your experience, then turning around and acting like you've "busted" me in the act of doing what you're actually doing.

As usual, you're taking what I say out of context, and addressing what you wanted me to say rather than what I actually said. My stories have been consistent, and they're factual. Your attempts to show that you know what you're talking about, with regards to a fire watch, are textbook and make you come across as a faker. You continue to demonstrate that you have little to no military experience.

thompsonx: This would be the same daddy that you claim did six years in viet nam?...yeah right Repeat Point

All you did was give your opinion that my dad "didn't" serve in Vietnam. I countered you with the facts, that he did 6 combat tours in Vietnam... I saw his old award orders for one of the combat tours that he did. Unlike you, my dad served. You could sit there, having never served, and fart the opinion that my dad "didn't" serve all you want, that doesn't change the fact that unlike you, he served in Vietnam.

I didn't say anything about years, I said that my dad did six combat tours in Vietnam. I'm deliberately leaving one key piece of information out, because I know what you're going to try to say in response. I'm sadistic that way.

quote:

thompsonx: You are an expert in the meaning of the u.n. charter.

Anybody could read the UN charter. When I say that it addresses symmetric realities, and not asymmetric realities, it's just me pointing reality out. It was designed to address threats that existed during World War II, these were symmetrical threats, not asymmetrical threats. Discussion of the UN in this thread fell under the symmetrical versus asymmetrical warfare part of this debate.

quote:

thompsonx: I am sure that would have made his gulivarian escapades in iraq much easier

Don't dismiss a mission out in sector as a "Gulliverian escapade." Your attitude on this post proves your hatred of the military.

quote:

ORIGINAL: herfacechair

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

I've combat deployed to that country

What exactly does this term mean?

If you were a veteran, you would've never asked that question, it would've been plainly obvious. Thanks for continuing to prove me right about you, that you never served.

quote:

ORIGINAL: herfacechair

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

You'd have to be "blind" to make that comment. I read what you quoted from the UN charter. It didn't prove my argument wrong, all you did was show text written to address symmetrical warfare. The people writing that charter didn't realize that this was what they were doing. But in terms of 21st Century Warfare, that's precisely what they were doing.

Strawman argument + Red herring

Is it your position that churchill and roosevelt had no understanding of asymetrical warfare?

Strawman argument + Red herring.

This is a strawman argument, as both of them dealt with a symmetrical war, and had good understanding of symmetrical war. Twenty First Century warfare isn't something that they needed to know... they came well before the paradigm shift in warfare happened. Your question is a red herring question as it has nothing to do with the thread.

quote:

thompsonx:by the "soldier"

There's no quotation about this, I'm a soldier. And, unlike you, I served.

Well of course you are.
You have spent more than 60 pages telling us so.
Everyone who wants to believe you does and those who are a little sceptical you attack with your "superlative rhetoric"

quote:

First, if you got some ass in the real world, you wouldn't be perving on this message board.

It is clear that you get more ass than a toilet seat

Second, you come across as a loser.

You seem to be quite an expert on loosers


The main reason you bitch about my advantages,


I was unaware of any advantages you had...pray tell enlighten us.


as well as my credentials,

For which we have your boastful words


is that what I've accomplished,

Did I miss that part? Just what have you accomplished besides making a fool out of yourself?

and what my Dad has done in his time, simply pisses you off.

Besides being a squid what exactly was it that he did?


You look back on your life and aren't happy, wouldn't be surprised if you had regrets.

Well there are some people I killed I probably should not have and some I did not that I should have but then that is life and one can only move forward and learn from their mistakes.


Then you look at me, and what I've accomplished in the real world, and that pisses you off even more. I've accomplished, in 2/3rds the length of your life, far more than what you've done your whole life.


When I look at you all I get is your avitar and that is just a rat with wings

So, to compensate for what little you've done in your life, you fabricate things. You fabricate your military "experiences." You claim that you did a combat tour to Vietnam.

Actually it was two and they were back to back, unlike your squid daddy who never did more than six months at a time in country.
You work overtime to try to make my dad something he isn't.

What I said about your squid daddy was that from what you posted he was short on discipline and that he was never in country more than six months straight.

You know why?

Deep down inside, you know that you don't match to either one of us.

Thank gawd for that.

He deployed to Vietnam when you stayed in the states and horsed around. If you were a veteran, and you put your uniform on, you'd look like a joke right next to my dad... had he ben alive and in his uniform. That bothers you to the core.

You tend to take issues with me mentioning what I've done, with regards to eating pussy.

Oh please do tell us more about your sexual exploits we are all on the edge of our chairs in rapt anticipation


This is you having issues with me getting something that you don't. You see, you're a loser. Women in your real world don't want anything to do with you because they see you as a loser.

How could they not when a rat with wings is my competition?

You're here perving on the women here,
Yeah! aint it kewel

quote:

ORIGINAL: herfacechair

quote:

ORIGINAL: EbonyWood

quote:

ORIGINAL: herfacechair

Nope, not an agenda but a purpose. To give facts, using my first hand experience and research, to counter the massive misconception about Iraq that the opposition has.

And yet nothing, absolutely zero, in my entire post and your response, is about Iraq, so I believe you just condemned yourself out of your own mouth concerning your agenda.

Epic fail.

Your statement has as much validity as Baghdad Bob's statement when he claimed that there were "no" Americans in Baghdad... after the world saw American forces take one block after another in Baghdad.

Your initial statement was a reaction to my constantly destroying the opposition with regards to the Iraq War, and other topics on this thread. Your use of "agenda" was made in a thread where I'm debating Iraq, Asymmetrical Warfare, and other topics. "Agenda" as used by a liberal, like you, implies attempt at propaganda. This isn't the same thing with me posting on here for a purpose. Two different things. So my mentioning Iraq, in a 60+page whose title contains the word IRAQ in it, does not constitute "epic fail."

You know what constitutes epic fail? You asking me why I see you as a liberal, and me responding with your own words incriminating yourself as a liberal. THAT'S epic fail. It's like what I told thompsonx, using your own words against you is like beating a man across the head with his own prosthetic limbs.