RadioBanter

RadioBanter (https://www.radiobanter.com/)
-   Shortwave (https://www.radiobanter.com/shortwave/)
-   -   WOW! This link was in my email from mII (https://www.radiobanter.com/shortwave/71694-re-wow-link-my-email-mii.html)

dxAce May 26th 05 06:03 PM

WOW! This link was in my email from mII
 


beerbarrel wrote:

http://www.forsakethetroops.info/

What a guy he really is!


He's a frickin 'tard boy from CanaDuh. They're all pretty much like that up
there.

dxAce
Michigan
USA



MnMikew May 26th 05 06:20 PM


"beerbarrel" wrote in message
...
http://www.forsakethetroops.info/


What a guy he really is!
_____________________
www.ReformUS.org


What do you expect from the skirt-wearing queef.



Michael Lawson May 26th 05 06:59 PM


"beerbarrel" wrote in message
...
http://www.forsakethetroops.info/


What a guy he really is!


Mr. Crook doesn't know history very well; those without
a military tend to get run over by those who do. He may
not like the Iraq war, but effectively disbanding the
military by eliminating all forms of recompense is akin
to asking to get clobbered over the head.

--Mike L.



running dogg May 26th 05 09:20 PM

Michael Lawson wrote:


"beerbarrel" wrote in message
...
http://www.forsakethetroops.info/


What a guy he really is!


Mr. Crook doesn't know history very well; those without
a military tend to get run over by those who do. He may
not like the Iraq war, but effectively disbanding the
military by eliminating all forms of recompense is akin
to asking to get clobbered over the head.

--Mike L.


I wouldn't go THAT far, but I DO think that the US military needs a
total, top down reconstruction. A modern guerilla insurgency (like the
one in Iraq) will run circles around a typical bureaucratic military
structure (like the US armed forces) because the big military
bureaucracy has absolutely no way of responding to the tactics of the
insurgents as fast as the insurgents can change said tactics. We need to
eliminate much of the bureaucracy (it's ridiculous that only 1 out of 4
active duty US soldiers are combat ready troops) and get more rapid
response strike force type units that can be dropped in to the middle of
an insurgent held area, adapt to insurgent tactics as fast as the
insurgents can change them without having to go through layers of
bureaucracy to do so, and live off the land while fighting outwards from
the middle to join other strike force units in a pincer action to cut
off insurgent cells from one another and force them to wither away. I
realize that in the US at least creating a more mobile, better
responding military that's more able to fight the wars of the future
(wars in which there are no front lines and the bad guys don't wear
uniforms) will mean a lot of entrenched bureaucrats having to give up
power, but the demands of the war on terror demand nothing less.


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Brian Hill May 26th 05 11:54 PM


"running dogg" wrote in message I wouldn't go THAT far, but
I DO think that the US military needs a
total, top down reconstruction. A modern guerilla insurgency (like the
one in Iraq) will run circles around a typical bureaucratic military
structure (like the US armed forces) because the big military
bureaucracy has absolutely no way of responding to the tactics of the
insurgents as fast as the insurgents can change said tactics.



Their not insurgents, they are terrorist. Anybody that deliberately kills
unarmed civilians is a f--king terrorist. But I guess anybody that agrees
with their activity might be inclined to label them insurgents but never the
less they are terrorist.

B.H.



FDR May 27th 05 01:01 AM


"Brian Hill" wrote in message
...

"running dogg" wrote in message I wouldn't go THAT far,
but I DO think that the US military needs a
total, top down reconstruction. A modern guerilla insurgency (like the
one in Iraq) will run circles around a typical bureaucratic military
structure (like the US armed forces) because the big military
bureaucracy has absolutely no way of responding to the tactics of the
insurgents as fast as the insurgents can change said tactics.



Their not insurgents, they are terrorist. Anybody that deliberately kills
unarmed civilians is a f--king terrorist.


So our jails are filled with terrorists, not murders?

But I guess anybody that agrees
with their activity might be inclined to label them insurgents but never
the less they are terrorist.

B.H.




FDR May 27th 05 01:02 AM


"running dogg" wrote in message
...
Michael Lawson wrote:


"beerbarrel" wrote in message
...
http://www.forsakethetroops.info/


What a guy he really is!


Mr. Crook doesn't know history very well; those without
a military tend to get run over by those who do. He may
not like the Iraq war, but effectively disbanding the
military by eliminating all forms of recompense is akin
to asking to get clobbered over the head.

--Mike L.


I wouldn't go THAT far, but I DO think that the US military needs a
total, top down reconstruction. A modern guerilla insurgency (like the
one in Iraq) will run circles around a typical bureaucratic military
structure (like the US armed forces) because the big military
bureaucracy has absolutely no way of responding to the tactics of the
insurgents as fast as the insurgents can change said tactics.


We now = British circa 1776. They = colonial army circa 1776.


We need to
eliminate much of the bureaucracy (it's ridiculous that only 1 out of 4
active duty US soldiers are combat ready troops) and get more rapid
response strike force type units that can be dropped in to the middle of
an insurgent held area, adapt to insurgent tactics as fast as the
insurgents can change them without having to go through layers of
bureaucracy to do so, and live off the land while fighting outwards from
the middle to join other strike force units in a pincer action to cut
off insurgent cells from one another and force them to wither away. I
realize that in the US at least creating a more mobile, better
responding military that's more able to fight the wars of the future
(wars in which there are no front lines and the bad guys don't wear
uniforms) will mean a lot of entrenched bureaucrats having to give up
power, but the demands of the war on terror demand nothing less.


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
=----




RHF May 27th 05 01:32 AM

BB,

m II May 27th 05 05:45 AM

beerbarrel wrote:
http://www.forsakethetroops.info/


What a guy he really is!
_____________________
www.ReformUS.org





Looks like you've been busy. Why did you have to murder him, you lying *******?
Free speech must really irritate you and your type.


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1404701/posts






mike

Honus May 27th 05 05:55 AM


"m II" wrote in message
news:%Bxle.12423$on1.4953@clgrps13...
beerbarrel wrote:
http://www.forsakethetroops.info/


What a guy he really is!
_____________________
www.ReformUS.org





Looks like you've been busy. Why did you have to murder him, you lying

*******?
Free speech must really irritate you and your type.


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1404701/posts


He's not dead. That was a hoax that he perpetrated himself.



m II May 27th 05 06:42 AM

Honus wrote:

Free speech must really irritate you and your type.


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1404701/posts



He's not dead. That was a hoax that he perpetrated himself.



So, he's as honourable as Fort?




mike

dxAce May 27th 05 12:33 PM



beerbarrel wrote:

On Fri, 27 May 2005 04:36:17 GMT, m II wrote:

beerbarrel wrote:

http://www.forsakethetroops.info/


What a guy he really is!
_____________________
www.ReformUS.org




Turning into a lying asshole now? I've NEVER emailed anyone on this newsgroup.
This is exactly the sort of dishonesty used to start the war on Iraq. I can't
expect any sort of moral values from your type..you mirror your leadership very
well.





mike


Now you are trying to wiggle out?

You know what you did.


One thing is certain... the two words, leadership and CanaDuh, do not go together.

dxAce
Michigan
USA



dxAce May 27th 05 12:46 PM



beerbarrel wrote:

On Fri, 27 May 2005 07:33:26 -0400, dxAce
wrote:



beerbarrel wrote:

On Fri, 27 May 2005 04:36:17 GMT, m II wrote:

beerbarrel wrote:

http://www.forsakethetroops.info/


What a guy he really is!
_____________________
www.ReformUS.org



Turning into a lying asshole now? I've NEVER emailed anyone on this newsgroup.
This is exactly the sort of dishonesty used to start the war on Iraq. I can't
expect any sort of moral values from your type..you mirror your leadership very
well.





mike

Now you are trying to wiggle out?

You know what you did.


One thing is certain... the two words, leadership and CanaDuh, do not go together.

dxAce
Michigan
USA


He is sorta starting to sound like Bryant...


Amazing, isn't it?

dxAce
Michigan
USA



Honus May 27th 05 03:13 PM


"m II" wrote in message
news:wryle.24695$tt5.5149@edtnps90...
Honus wrote:

Free speech must really irritate you and your type.


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1404701/posts



He's not dead. That was a hoax that he perpetrated himself.



So, he's as honourable as Fort?


As in Fortean?



dxAce May 27th 05 03:30 PM



m II wrote:

beerbarrel wrote:
http://www.forsakethetroops.info/


What a guy he really is!
_____________________
www.ReformUS.org


Looks like you've been busy. Why did you have to murder him, you lying *******?
Free speech must really irritate you and your type.


The only thing that's really irritating are dumb Canucky boys who don't seem to
know their true place in the world, let alone anything about shortwave.

Stuff a sock in it, boy.

dxAce
Michigan
USA



Michael Lawson May 27th 05 04:06 PM


"FDR" wrote in message
...

"running dogg" wrote in message
...
Michael Lawson wrote:


"beerbarrel" wrote in message
...
http://www.forsakethetroops.info/


What a guy he really is!

Mr. Crook doesn't know history very well; those without
a military tend to get run over by those who do. He may
not like the Iraq war, but effectively disbanding the
military by eliminating all forms of recompense is akin
to asking to get clobbered over the head.

--Mike L.


I wouldn't go THAT far, but I DO think that the US military needs

a
total, top down reconstruction. A modern guerilla insurgency (like

the
one in Iraq) will run circles around a typical bureaucratic

military
structure (like the US armed forces) because the big military
bureaucracy has absolutely no way of responding to the tactics of

the
insurgents as fast as the insurgents can change said tactics.


We now = British circa 1776. They = colonial army circa 1776.


No. During the WoI, one of the main goals of Washington's
army was to beat the British on the field so as to legitimize
the Revolution. Washington felt that employing
guerrilla tactics against the British, even if successful, would
not lend to the legitamacy of the Revolution as much as
being able to beat the British, then one of the finest militaries
of the time, on the field.

--Mike L.



Brian Hill May 27th 05 05:40 PM


"FDR" wrote in message
...

"Brian Hill" wrote in message



So our jails are filled with terrorists, not murders?


Do I really have to explain to you how stupid that statement is?

B.H.



running dogg May 27th 05 09:33 PM

Michael Lawson wrote:


"FDR" wrote in message
...

"running dogg" wrote in message
...
Michael Lawson wrote:


"beerbarrel" wrote in message
...
http://www.forsakethetroops.info/


What a guy he really is!

Mr. Crook doesn't know history very well; those without
a military tend to get run over by those who do. He may
not like the Iraq war, but effectively disbanding the
military by eliminating all forms of recompense is akin
to asking to get clobbered over the head.

--Mike L.

I wouldn't go THAT far, but I DO think that the US military needs

a
total, top down reconstruction. A modern guerilla insurgency (like

the
one in Iraq) will run circles around a typical bureaucratic

military
structure (like the US armed forces) because the big military
bureaucracy has absolutely no way of responding to the tactics of

the
insurgents as fast as the insurgents can change said tactics.


We now = British circa 1776. They = colonial army circa 1776.


No. During the WoI, one of the main goals of Washington's
army was to beat the British on the field so as to legitimize
the Revolution. Washington felt that employing
guerrilla tactics against the British, even if successful, would
not lend to the legitamacy of the Revolution as much as
being able to beat the British, then one of the finest militaries
of the time, on the field.


There are other differences. The colonials didn't kill civilians. Well,
there were a few atrocities, but nothing like the daily onslaught
against civilian populations that we see in Iraq. Also, there was no
religious component to the colonial rebellion; they wanted self rule and
freedom from taxes, not a religiously pure state. No suicide missions,
either.


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

m II May 28th 05 06:05 AM

dxAce wrote:

m II wrote:


beerbarrel wrote:

http://www.forsakethetroops.info/


What a guy he really is!
_____________________
www.ReformUS.org


Looks like you've been busy. Why did you have to murder him, you lying *******?
Free speech must really irritate you and your type.



The only thing that's really irritating are dumb Canucky boys who don't seem to
know their true place in the world, let alone anything about shortwave.

Stuff a sock in it, boy.

dxAce
Michigan
USA




shove it up your ass, retard.









dxAce May 28th 05 10:57 AM



beerbarrel wrote:

On Sat, 28 May 2005 05:05:33 GMT, m II wrote:

dxAce wrote:

m II wrote:


beerbarrel wrote:

http://www.forsakethetroops.info/


What a guy he really is!
_____________________
www.ReformUS.org

Looks like you've been busy. Why did you have to murder him, you lying *******?
Free speech must really irritate you and your type.


The only thing that's really irritating are dumb Canucky boys who don't seem to
know their true place in the world, let alone anything about shortwave.

Stuff a sock in it, boy.

dxAce
Michigan
USA




shove it up your ass, retard.







I don't think dxace wants to take up your hobbies!


I sure don't.

dxAce
Michigan
USA



Joel Rubin May 28th 05 04:10 PM

On Thu, 26 May 2005 12:53:31 -0400, beerbarrel
wrote:

http://www.forsakethetroops.info/


What a guy he really is!


It looks like they just sold the domain on Ebay. What will or won't be
up there remains to be seen.

As long as it isn't spammed or otherwise thrown at you why bother?

For every political opinion you might have there exist websites whose
contents will make you sick.

This, of course, is a consequence of Freedom of Speech. Freedom of
Speech doesn't mean Freedom of "Good" Speech.


dxAce May 28th 05 04:14 PM



Joel Rubin wrote:

On Thu, 26 May 2005 12:53:31 -0400, beerbarrel
wrote:

http://www.forsakethetroops.info/


What a guy he really is!


It looks like they just sold the domain on Ebay. What will or won't be
up there remains to be seen.

As long as it isn't spammed or otherwise thrown at you why bother?

For every political opinion you might have there exist websites whose
contents will make you sick.

This, of course, is a consequence of Freedom of Speech. Freedom of
Speech doesn't mean Freedom of "Good" Speech.


That's for sure.

dxAce
Michigan
USA



Eunty JEck May 30th 05 10:25 PM


"m II" wrote in message
news:5txle.23786$tt5.22359@edtnps90...
beerbarrel wrote:

http://www.forsakethetroops.info/


What a guy he really is!
_____________________
www.ReformUS.org




Turning into a lying asshole now? I've NEVER emailed anyone on this

newsgroup.
This is exactly the sort of dishonesty used to start the war on Iraq. I

can't
expect any sort of moral values from your type..you mirror your leadership

very
well.





mike


Who would believe a moron like you though?

AJ



Michael Lawson May 31st 05 07:18 PM


"running dogg" wrote in message
...
Michael Lawson wrote:


"FDR" wrote in message
...

"running dogg" wrote in message
...
Michael Lawson wrote:


"beerbarrel" wrote in message
...
http://www.forsakethetroops.info/


What a guy he really is!

Mr. Crook doesn't know history very well; those without
a military tend to get run over by those who do. He may
not like the Iraq war, but effectively disbanding the
military by eliminating all forms of recompense is akin
to asking to get clobbered over the head.

--Mike L.

I wouldn't go THAT far, but I DO think that the US military

needs
a
total, top down reconstruction. A modern guerilla insurgency

(like
the
one in Iraq) will run circles around a typical bureaucratic

military
structure (like the US armed forces) because the big military
bureaucracy has absolutely no way of responding to the tactics

of
the
insurgents as fast as the insurgents can change said tactics.

We now = British circa 1776. They = colonial army circa 1776.


No. During the WoI, one of the main goals of Washington's
army was to beat the British on the field so as to legitimize
the Revolution. Washington felt that employing
guerrilla tactics against the British, even if successful, would
not lend to the legitamacy of the Revolution as much as
being able to beat the British, then one of the finest militaries
of the time, on the field.


There are other differences. The colonials didn't kill civilians.

Well,
there were a few atrocities, but nothing like the daily onslaught
against civilian populations that we see in Iraq.


Tarleton took care of that. As did some of the "rouse up
the Indians against the colonists", as well.

Also, there was no religious component to the colonial rebellion;
they wanted self rule and freedom from taxes, not a religiously
pure state. No suicide missions, either.


There was some religious component to the WoI, but that's
because the world was different then. The religious
component was more obvious in the ACW than the WoI,
but the concept of things like Days of Prayer and the revival
movement of the 1760's had impacts.

As for suicide missions, you could consider The Turtle a
suicide mission, but not a religious one.

--Mike L.




All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:48 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com