Surge Propaganda facade crumbles as troops tell it like it is - Page 14 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #131 of 170 (permalink) Old 08-23-2007, 01:50 PM
RNT
BenzWorld Member
 
RNT's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jul 2007
Vehicle: 1985 Mercedes 380SE Metallic Navy Blue
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 394
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
mcBear...no one really cares about your rating analysis of lovely Christiane vs. Fox. Don't you have anything to do besides post this silliness? How about telling us some war stories?
RNT is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #132 of 170 (permalink) Old 08-23-2007, 02:01 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNT
I'm sure that most 8th graders could answer that question for you. If you don't understand why militaries are necessary, perhaps you should try to get some education.. I would suggest you avoid FTL's history teacher, though.
You are confusing "why militaries are necessary" and "use of military to promote a political agenda". They are NOT always the same thing.

In the case of Afghanistan, they are. The military is necessary to prosecute the objectives in the GWOT. You will note that there has been minimum if any protest against the actions in Afghanistan from the Left anywhere in America [excepting that small minority that believes there should never be violence anytime/anywhere]. Americans see it as a necessary battle.

In the case of Iraq, they are NOT the same thing. Iraq was not involved in the GWOT, nor were elements of international terrorist organizations within the confines of Iraq. We invaded Iraq without probable cause, based on false information, decade old WMD information and sketchy motives. The GWOT only became an issue after the power vacuum was created after Saddam's ouster and piss poor planning failed to accommodate the results. The ensuing quagmire is the result of using the military to promote a political agenda.

You will note that the majority of the people can tell the difference, hence the protests and opposition to Iraq, yet full support of Afghanistan. Funny how folks have been able, through history to separate reality from BS.

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #133 of 170 (permalink) Old 08-23-2007, 02:06 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNT
mcBear...no one really cares about your rating analysis of lovely Christiane vs. Fox. Don't you have anything to do besides post this silliness? How about telling us some war stories?
No one really cares? You read it.
FeelTheLove is offline  
post #134 of 170 (permalink) Old 08-23-2007, 02:07 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNT
mcBear...no one really cares about your rating analysis of lovely Christiane vs. Fox. Don't you have anything to do besides post this silliness? How about telling us some war stories?
You are da man who claimed Fox had such "high viewer ratings". I was just insuring that you had all the correct facts to make an INFORMED comment.

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #135 of 170 (permalink) Old 08-23-2007, 02:34 PM
RNT
BenzWorld Member
 
RNT's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jul 2007
Vehicle: 1985 Mercedes 380SE Metallic Navy Blue
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 394
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
lkj u9[
RNT is offline  
post #136 of 170 (permalink) Old 08-23-2007, 02:50 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
So where did the copy go. Something deleted.

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #137 of 170 (permalink) Old 08-23-2007, 03:00 PM
RNT
BenzWorld Member
 
RNT's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jul 2007
Vehicle: 1985 Mercedes 380SE Metallic Navy Blue
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 394
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
gtrc
RNT is offline  
post #138 of 170 (permalink) Old 08-23-2007, 03:11 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 2014 E250 Bluetec 4-Matic, 1983 240D 4-Speed
Location: USA
Posts: 9,257
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNT
Show me my post where I have stated I support any political policy and I will respond to your comment. Thanks. Hope you are feeling better.
How about these:

Post #19:

There is "nothing" as most intelligent people recognize propaganda articles, especially those printed in the NYT, (and especially those written by "soldiers").
Sorry your hopes are dashed by such limited comments, FTL...
Your characterization of the perspective of the article by these soldiers as "propaganda" is a statement that you believe their perspective is not factual. The only other perspective being forwarded to counter theirs is Bush's. Sure sounds like you are supporting the present Bush political agenda. If you didn't intend that to be the meaning, I give you a D+ in writing skills. Go back to school and learn to compose your thoughts clearly.

Post #33:
Soldiers with differing points of view are well known and are only silent to the NYT, which is deaf to anything positive about Bush, Republicans, our military or the USA.
Complaining about the NYT being deaf to anything positive about Bush, Republicans our military or the USA is a strange way of supporting the troops with the message that the political agenda du jour is failing.
Post #35:
Do you think the NYT supports the soldiers who support the war? Do you support the soldiers who support the war? Easy questions for those who claim to support the troops, no?
More inappropriate whining about the NYT. Carefully selected wording to leading to your big question, to which you got plenty of straight answers but won't deign us with a response to the flip side. But, if your intent was to voice support for troops who don't support the war because you don't support the war, well, I would say you failed.
Post #39:
These soldiers have a point of view. That point of view is different than other's points of view. The NYT prints onlt one point of view when it suits their agenda.
Do you support the troops who support the war? (2nd request)
More unsupported aspersions cast at the NYT, which you concede later. Needlessly repeating your previous question is an indication of poor reading comprehension skills too. I give you a C- in that subject.
Post #44:
That seems like a long winded way of saying you don't really support the troops. No matter, others will fight to keep you safe and free.
Already addressed by others, but a clear indication that you are on the verge of declaring your allegiance to the political policies being pursued by the present resident in the White House. When you repeat the phrases he and his administration stooges chant incessantly, you sound like one of them, just in case you didn't know that.
Post #47:
Referring to our troops as "bait" is another indication you do not support our troops. I support our troops as a former military officer should.
Our first bit of information that you are a former military officer in this thread. As a former military officer you are free to disagree with the President now. Yet you choose not to express those feelings. In case you didn't get it, until you do express such a disagreement, you have provided a preponderance of evidence that you are an advocate of the Bush Administration policies. These are political policies that, whether you like the words or not, puts our sons in Iraq to act as bait to draw all kind of despicable, evil, deranged, terrorist and religious fanatic to Iraq, a country that did nothing to threaten us, and in the process completely destroying their country as well as a historically important site of development of human civilization, so we can "fight them over there so we don't have to fight them over here."

And, you need to learn to be less emotionally affected by my diction. In no way does describing the way our President is using our troops in Iraq indicate I do not support them. Your sensitivity may preclude your being capable of making much of a contribution in a less controlled environment than what you are apparently used to, which is not a sign of a successful military officer. Anything about your change of status you want to tell us about?
Post #63:
I support all the troops as long as they do there duty, obey their orders and comply with the laws and regulations set forth in the UCMJ. Soldiers found guilty of aiding and abetting our enemies in wartime, should be punished in accordance with the UCMJ.
More evidence of your substandard writing skills. Make that grade a D. This burst of mental stress ejecta shows you feel the soldiers who authored the subject article did not comply with the UCMJ regulations you cite. As such you think they, who are apparently not being muzzled by threats of UCMJ legal recourse, should be punished. That is a strong feeling for an American who may be old enough to have known men who fought Nazis. Are you suggesting the UCMJ precludes soldiers from speaking up when their superior officers present them with a mission they think is immoral, and contrary to the publicized and politicized story? I do not believe the UCMJ makes speaking out when there is ample evidence of incompetence from above, untruths being promulgated for political purposes and that the role our soldiers amounts to little more than bait, putting them at odds with the general population. I don't believe the UCMJ is a tool to cover up political failures, and would hate to see active military officers use it that way. But, I believe this post makes your perspective on the issue most apparent.
Post #65:
I will respond to any question providing the questioner can articulate a question or premise that does not contain an insulting or childish comment.. That also is bad form. Actually it is very bad form. Tsk, tsk..
Please let me know when you feel comfortable answering my pending question: "Do you support the troops who support the war?"...Thanks.
Nice to see you are so concerned with pomp and circumstance and less so with substance. Is that a set of priorities you acquired becoming a former military officer? It fits well with the Bush Administration. Given the exodus of his advisors you might qualify, so keep your head up. And your inability to read and comprehend is real career limiting feature. You should work on that. I would say we need to change that grade to D as well.
Post #67:

It would appear from your comments that the US Military is your enemy. And Possibly the Iraqis, the Kurds and others seeking to defeat the terrorists.
Sure seems like you bought the story about "fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them over here" hook, line, and sinker. Are you still suggesting you have not endorsed the Bush Administration's political agenda?

Post #89:
Jayhawk....Lefties have always been the same. Whiners with no sense of responsibility. Mama's boys. Nothing new. I agree that Bush gave a great speech.
I think you characterized "lefties" as something less than a complete male example of the human species. Hmmm. In any case it adds to the preponderance of evidence.
Post #100:
Jimmah...What's pitiful is people who feel the need to use "handjob" in comments to express their point of view. Considering that you felt compelled to use "handjob" three times in one post to express yourself, one can only conclude that you are in need of counseling. Because of this odd behavior, I can no longer consider you to be an "A" level posting responder.
What was the intent of "Jimmah...?" Was it attempt to include some kind of bad form, childish insult in your post? I have been called much worse by real people with better than D grade verbal, reading and writing skills. This is but an internet forum with all kinds of creeps lurking and some participating in the discussions. I'm used to things like this. But, forgive yourself before you do something drastic. I would hate for you to become so obsessed with your fall from grace that you can't answer simple questions. As you appear to have become by the term "handjob." Hey, it is an innocent term from long ago in my past. Haven't had a handjob applied by an eager young woman in more than thirty five years. So, as you can imagine its use does not bring up such vivid and real images for me anymore. I apologize if you were unable resume normal, albeit sub par, mental functions like reading thereafter. Sorry for not considering that
handjobs may play a much more important role in the life of an ex-military officer.

Overall, it seems you don't stand for much of anything, if you aren't an advocate of the President's strategy to use our troops as bait. Maybe you are a flip-flopper? If the bait analogy not the strategy, please tell us what the strategy is, since every other utterance from the Oval Office has had a half life of a few months. The "bait" strategy seems to accurately describe what is actually going on there from the beginning- you see something else that would match the reality of the nearly 5 years as well?

Jim
JimSmith is offline  
post #139 of 170 (permalink) Old 08-23-2007, 03:25 PM
RNT
BenzWorld Member
 
RNT's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jul 2007
Vehicle: 1985 Mercedes 380SE Metallic Navy Blue
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 394
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
So, show me where my comments say I support any particular political policy. You do understand what I'm saying, do you not?

Thanks for your time compiling all my posts.
RNT is offline  
post #140 of 170 (permalink) Old 08-23-2007, 03:30 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 2014 E250 Bluetec 4-Matic, 1983 240D 4-Speed
Location: USA
Posts: 9,257
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNT
So, show me where my comments say I support any particular political policy. You do understand what I'm saying, do you not?

Thanks for your time compiling all my posts.
Your support for the Bush political agenda in the Middle East is way clearer than your support for any soldiers. I know you have tried to avoid making an outright statement, but this is not a hearing before a panel convened according to the UCMJ. We get to peg you by your innuendo and nuanced statements. Of which there were plenty. Jim
JimSmith is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Similar Threads
    Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
    The Weather Channel ..Propaganda ? BNZ Off-Topic 53 06-04-2007 10:35 AM
    For the troops GHM Off-Topic 2 04-24-2007 05:02 PM
    Bush Propaganda for Iraq and US That Guy Off-Topic 2 04-10-2006 04:11 PM
    Propaganda: Table's Turned Shabah Off-Topic 9 02-07-2006 12:00 PM
    Propaganda the way it should be Shabah Off-Topic 62 12-07-2005 06:52 AM

    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome