Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 2002 SLK 32 AMG, bone stock. 1987 190E 2.3-16 valve (destroyed). 2005 E320 new toy.
Location: Near Washington, DC
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
"rewriting history to suit your own agenda" -- that is two unprovoked slaps in seven words -- nicely done. Poor little you -- initiating unprovoked personal attacks, then boohooing when I dare to defend myself."
You want to defend yourself from what you perceive to be a personal attack, knock yourself out. If you considered that a personal attack, you must live in a very small world indeed. In fact, if you see that post as a personal attack, what the hell are you doing moderating on the OT forum? That's damn near all that happens here. Believe me if I chose to attack you personally, I'm very good at it, I guarantee you'll know that you've been attacked, I promise you that..... and I will not have to use foul language to do it either, though I have no qualms about returning the kind language aimed at me.
"Is this how you talk to people in real life? I have no idea what you're rambling on about and I don't give a rat's ass."
If you don't know, and don't care, why do you continue to respond? No I don't normally talk to people this way, but people don't normally talk to me the way you have either.
"My simple statement that you decided to go ballistic over was that the mentality toward the armed services in this country was very different during the Vietnam era (say 65 - 71) and W.W.II. We were not defending America in Vietnam, and that was the difference, or so it seems to me. If you disagree -- fine, please do so without resorting to cheapshots."
We were defending a country that requested our help, and it escalated into a Democracy vs. Communism Confrontation when the Russians moved in to support the North. Of course you probably weren't old enough to be aware of what was going on at that point in time. I on the other hand was there, I lived through it, and have done some considerable research to try and find the truth as to what that was all about. I'm still looking, but I appear to have a better
understanding then those that are here.
It would also appear that all you know is what you have read or been told. Clearly I don't know that for a fact, I can only go by what you write. Yes, I do disagree with you, and the way you presented your argument. Something you might want to
keep in mind is how you read what I write may very well NOT be the way I wrote it. Without the tone and inflection of speech, lots is left in the open for the reader to jump to conclusions, and it appears as though you have done just that. I would strongly suggest that you give the writer, any writer, the benefit of the doubt, and allow what YOU read may NOT have been the intent.
"Negotiating with Obama is like playing chess with a pigeon, the pigeon knocks over all the pieces, on the board and then struts around like it won the game."
"They have gun control in Cuba. They have universal health care in Cuba. So why do they want to come here?"
Paul Harvey 8/31/94
"The only people who have quick answers don't have the responsibility of making the decisions."
Justice Clarence Thomas