Football, being a real man, soldier-ing

Oneguy, You should worship me as a “real man”, if you think depositing semen into a large number of willing women by your age or younger, supports that title. (and that was before the days when you could just get on your smartphone and find the night’s hookup by swiping left, or however that goes)
But no family, right?(And the women on dating apps are usually ugly and crazier than average . I’m spoken for anyway).
But I get it. Your testosterone is pretty much what you have that makes you feel special.
Well, I can’t deny testosterone has done a lot for me.
That Guy if you’re only interested in denigrating, then your statements become worthless word plays divorced from reality and any interest in seeking understanding. All your energy seems focused on reinforcing your own certitude, rather than learning anything new. Easy to do when you reside within your own self-certain bubble.

 

I’d actually had something slightly loftier in mind with this thread, but when it’s a pissing contest it’s tough to get out of the gutter.

The real key I’d intended to work this conversation towards was PLURALISM – although now that I’ve taken the trouble to look it up, it turns our somewhat different from what I was taught way back. I’ve always thought Pluralism was about diverse groups of people living within society that respects each others’ strengths and weakness, we need the warrior as much as the worker, etc, etc. The idilic American melting pot and democratic process when people actually got involved and before we got too crowded and scared and hypnotized into becoming cogs in a machine.

https://www1.udel.edu/htr/Psc105/Texts/pluralism.html

Pluralism is the theory that a multitude of groups, not the people as a whole, govern the United States. These organizations, which include among others unions, trade and professional associations, environmentalists, civil rights activists, business and financial lobbies, and formal and informal coalitions of like-minded citizens, influence the making and administration of laws and policy. Since the participants in this process constitute only a tiny fraction of the populace, the public acts mainly as bystanders.
Unfortunately a part of me can’t help but agree that most voters seem too dumb and disinterested for the duty of voting competently & responsibility – but that gets us into a different can of worms, where all the solutions seem to promise even worse problems than the original problem.


Both pluralism as social diversity and this theory probably only work in small doses. As for voters being too dumb to vote competently…well that’s always been a big problem democracy hasn’t it — especially in an extremely diverse democracy like the USA.

So I guess it’s the shallow adulation of our military to the exclusion of everything else that has me irritated; tree hugger belong in Hell – warriors and football players and consumerism makes Merica Great, that sort of nonsense.
The over the top worship of the military since 2001 has been absurd, though it’s nowhere near as bad as it was 10 years ago. Most veterans (including myself) chalked it up to civilians just saying what they thought we wanted to hear and didn’t hold it against them. The military is pretty far removed from most Americans and people felt good about making some little effort to acknowledge there were two wars going on, but it quickly turned into a charade and now it’s just lame. Society has largely moved on from the GWOT and rightly so.

Sports is entertainment for a lot of people and there’s no harm in that. Ratings have been steadily declining over the past few years anyway.

America has always been more about brawn than brain but this stuff plays a small role in what most people see as important. I’d say financial freedom and personal freedom are probably what most Americans would place at the top.

So how would you suggest that civilians react to veterans? Pretend they didn’t do anything special? I can do that. Just so we don’t go to the other end of the spectrum e.g., full Viet Nam era spitting on them.

 

I do like football. Tho I think that the ones who get brain damage from it are undercompensated.

You’re experience is again wrong and outdated.

I have seen all kinds of relationships and it’s not the manly men that last. Also confidence is a skill/trait that anyone can develop. It’s not a “you have it or not”, but it being a turn on is across all groups.

Guy would you know the difference between a real woman and one who’s playing you for what she can get out of you?

 

I agree with Tim and Lausten, well said Xain!

Guy would you know the difference between a real woman and one who’s playing you for what she can get out of you?
(Posted a reply earlier but it went to the Trump news thread)

Yes, I’ve been there before.

So how would you suggest that civilians react to veterans? Pretend they didn’t do anything special? I can do that. Just so we don’t go to the other end of the spectrum e.g., full Viet Nam era spitting on them.
If you don’t know any personally but want to mention something, a “welcome home” is good enough.
You’re experience is again wrong and outdated.

I have seen all kinds of relationships and it’s not the manly men that last. Also confidence is a skill/trait that anyone can develop. It’s not a “you have it or not”, but it being a turn on is across all groups.


Lol OK.

I bet you have Guy. Bet it would be a blast spending an evening at the bar hearing all about it.
But of course, we know in the real world there are all sorts of women. Even including the hardened bike's mama, that like it a little rough and who would just as soon kick the shit out of a pansy-assed nice guy, as talk to his worthless arse.

They say it takes all types to make the world go around.

As for the soldier I like what you said:

If you don’t know any personally but want to mention something, a “welcome home” is good enough.
You know that's true. It's not fair to make grunts the scapegoat for chickenhawk politicians, whom them kids really wished they could be spitting at.

Get what I’m saying there? Does that make any sense?

Guy, you won’t let yourself believe that I can have the deepest respect for the effort, the disciple, the sacrifice, of soldiers.

Because it pisses you off that at the same time I must acknowledge and be aware that those soldiers were pawns, used and abused with contempt by their leaders. That the deed they were forced to do, have made our world and nation way more damaged that there was any need for.

Meaning I can respect and love the soldier, but don’t tell me what he was forced to participate in has won us any freedom - BULL SHIT !!! quite the opposite ! - it is rapidly turning our world into a even worse hell hole than nature is already setting up for us.

At least if we as a nation and people were reality based rationalists - we could face our real enemy, a planet that will be waging its own war upon humanity (AGW) - instead we’ve handed our government over to utter insane idiots like Trump and all them … …

yeah yeah, biker mama

Now don’t get me wrong, I know all sorts of girls ride bikes, so I’m not… oh never mind

That distinctive voice always feels good.

Guy, you won’t let yourself believe that I can have the deepest respect for the effort, the disciple, the sacrifice, of soldiers.

Because it pisses you off that at the same time I must acknowledge and be aware that those soldiers were pawns, used and abused with contempt by their leaders. That the deed they were forced to do, have made our world and nation way more damaged that there was any need for.


Who said anything about that?

I couldn’t care less what you think about the military.

Meaning I can respect and love the soldier, but don’t tell me what he was forced to participate in has won us any freedom – BULL SHIT !!! quite the opposite ! – it is rapidly turning our world into a even worse hell hole than nature is already setting up for us.
It’s not about our freedom.

Afghanistan war was about Osama Bin Ladin and was justified.

Iraq war was about protecting Israel and was not justified.

 

Going after Osama Bin Ladin didn’t need a war.

But then allowing 9/11 to unfold, because Cheney, Bush decided to ignore their National Security Experts.

Why were they never reprimanded for that gross failing?

Oh, and what the patriotic fuk you mean: “it’s not about freedom”

Jesus For Profits that’s what all the patriotic fireworks and advertisements and songs and politicians and businessmen keep telling us.

You just try screaming “It ain’t about Freedom” in some random Texan Bus Terminal, see what happens to you.

 

 

Going after Osama Bin Ladin didn’t need a war.
Yes it did — just not the war it grew into. Anybody who is really curious about the Afghanistan war should study the beginning years of the war (2001-2002) to see how close we came to finding OBL before completely dropping the ball by shifting focus to Iraq in 03.
But then allowing 9/11 to unfold, because Cheney, Bush decided to ignore their National Security Experts.

Why were they never reprimanded for that gross failing?


I think that gets too close to the 9/11 conspiracy theories — unless you’re talking about a general sense of government incompetence regarding national security and foreign policy. However, that was the norm in that post-Cold War, pre-9/11 era.

Feds thought there was a possibility of a terrorist attack on American soil because there had been recent attacks against US targets overseas, but that’s too vague to have made any useful predictions on where it could happen or how it could be carried out. The idea that Bush ignored the threat is nonsense.

The only preventive measures we could have taken with that information would be detaining all Middle Eastern visitors to the USA and spying on Arab-American communities, and that would’ve been very unpopular.

Oh, and what the patriotic fuk you mean: “it’s not about freedom”

Jesus For Profits that’s what all the patriotic fireworks and advertisements and songs and politicians and businessmen keep telling us.

You just try screaming “It ain’t about Freedom” in some random Texan Bus Terminal, see what happens to you.


Our “freedom” was doing fine, we weren’t suffering under tyranny. It’s not like Al Qaida took over the US government and instituted sharia law. GWOT was about preventing more 9/11’s from happening. At its core it was about saving American lives.

 

Wow.

Player guess secretly I’ve been giving you more credit than you deserve.

Now I guess you can write off the following as Fake News since you didn’t hear it on FOX.

‘The Attacks Will Be Spectacular’ An exclusive look at how the Bush administration ignored this warning from the CIA months before 9/11, along with others that were far more detailed than previously revealed.

By CHRIS WHIPPLE November 12, 2015

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/11/cia-directors-documentary-911-bush-213353

&

https://www.politico.eu/article/attacks-will-be-spectacular-cia-war-on-terror-bush-bin-laden/


 

The Deafness Before the Storm By KURT EICHENWALD SEPT. 10, 2012

IT was perhaps the most famous presidential briefing in history.

On Aug. 6, 2001, President George W. Bushreceived a classified review of the threats posed by Osama bin Laden and his terrorist network, Al Qaeda. That morning’s “presidential daily brief” — the top-secret document prepared by America’s intelligence agencies — featured the now-infamous heading: “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.” A few weeks later, on 9/11, Al Qaeda accomplished that goal.

On April 10, 2004, the Bush White House declassified that daily brief — and only that daily brief — in response to pressure from the 9/11 Commission, which was investigating the events leading to the attack. Administration officials dismissed the document’s significance, saying that, despite the jaw-dropping headline, it was only an assessment of Al Qaeda’s history, not a warning of the impending attack. While some critics considered that claim absurd, a close reading of the brief showed that the argument had some validity.

That is, unless it was read in conjunction with the daily briefs preceding Aug. 6, the ones the Bush administration would not release. …

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/11/opinion/the-bush-white-house-was-deaf-to-9-11-warnings.html


How about a couple time-lines?

Lie by Lie: A Timeline of How We Got Into Iraq Mushroom clouds, duct tape, Judy Miller, Curveball. Recalling how Americans were sold a bogus case for invasion. JONATHAN STEIN https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/12/leadup-iraq-war-timeline/

<a href="https://www.cnn.com/2013/07/27/us/september-11th-warning-signs-fast-facts/index.html">https://www.cnn.com/2013/07/27/us/september-11th-warning-signs-fast-facts/index.html</a></blockquote>
&nbsp;

&nbsp;

Of course none of that touches on how many of those 9/11 were Saudi citizens?

Hijackers by Airplane: American Airlines Flight 11 Mohamed Atta - Egypt, tactical leader of 9/11 plot and pilot Abdul Aziz al Omari - Saudi Arabia Wail al Shehri - Saudi Arabia Waleed al Shehri - Saudi Arabia Satam al Suqami - Saudi Arabia United Airlines Flight 175 Fayez Banihammad - United Arab Emirates Ahmed al Ghamdi - Saudi Arabia Hamza al Ghamdi - Saudi Arabia Marwan al Shehhi - United Arab Emirates, pilot Mohand al Shehri - Saudi Arabia American Airlines Flight 77 Hani Hanjour - Saudi Arabia, pilot Nawaf al Hazmi - Saudi Arabia Salem al Hazmi - Saudi Arabia Khalid al Mihdhar - Saudi Arabia Majed Moqed - Saudi Arabia United Airlines Flight 93 Saeed al Ghamdi - Saudi Arabia Ahmad al Haznawi - Saudi Arabia Ziad Jarrah - Lebanon, pilot Ahmed al Nami - Saudi Arabia

https://www.cnn.com/2013/07/27/us/september-11th-hijackers-fast-facts/index.htm


 

What We Know About Saudi Arabia’s Role in 9/11 The Saudi government still says it had no connection to the hijackers. Newly released classified information proves otherwise. BY SIMON HENDERSON | JULY 18, 2016

https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/07/18/what-we-know-about-saudi-arabias-role-in-911/

 

The FBI Is Keeping 80,000 Secret Files on the Saudis and 9/11
The secret ‘28 pages’ are just the start. The FBI has another 80,000 classified documents, many of which deal with Saudi connections to the 9/11 terror plot.

Shane Harris, 04.13.17

https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-fbi-is-keeping-80000-secret-files-on-the-saudis-and-911

https://www.thedailybeast.com/secret-saudi-911-files-finally-revealed-turns-out-there-are-29-pages-not-28


 

Go ahead google ‘9/11 attack Saudi connections’ for much more,

https://www.sun-sentinel.com/opinion/commentary/fl-op-com-graham-sept-11-sarasota-connection-saudi-20190517-vxac4q355ne53bbtn6bexj7yoi-story.html

 

 

Me no likey Saudis. They are almost as untrustworthy as Trump.

I think it’s easier to say thatguy doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

Wow.

Player guess secretly I’ve been giving you more credit than you deserve.

Now I guess you can write off the following as Fake News since you didn’t hear it on FOX.

‘The Attacks Will Be Spectacular’
An exclusive look at how the Bush administration ignored this warning from the CIA months before 9/11, along with others that were far more detailed than previously revealed.

By CHRIS WHIPPLE November 12, 2015

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/11/cia-directors-documentary-911-bush-213353

&

The Deafness Before the Storm
By KURT EICHENWALD SEPT. 10, 2012

IT was perhaps the most famous presidential briefing in history.

On Aug. 6, 2001, President George W. Bushreceived a classified review of the threats posed by Osama bin Laden and his terrorist network, Al Qaeda. That morning’s “presidential daily brief” — the top-secret document prepared by America’s intelligence agencies — featured the now-infamous heading: “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.” A few weeks later, on 9/11, Al Qaeda accomplished that goal.

On April 10, 2004, the Bush White House declassified that daily brief — and only that daily brief — in response to pressure from the 9/11 Commission, which was investigating the events leading to the attack. Administration officials dismissed the document’s significance, saying that, despite the jaw-dropping headline, it was only an assessment of Al Qaeda’s history, not a warning of the impending attack. While some critics considered that claim absurd, a close reading of the brief showed that the argument had some validity.

That is, unless it was read in conjunction with the daily briefs preceding Aug. 6, the ones the Bush administration would not release. …

How about a couple time-lines?

Lie by Lie: A Timeline of How We Got Into Iraq
Mushroom clouds, duct tape, Judy Miller, Curveball. Recalling how Americans were sold a bogus case for invasion.
JONATHAN STEIN


https://www.cnn.com/2013/07/27/us/september-11th-warning-signs-fast-facts/index.html</blockquote>
Yeah, I know about that stuff. Notice how these links say nothing about <strong>SPECIFIC TARGETS, </strong>but only that a threat on American soil was likely.  There’s not much you can do to prevent a potential attack without detailed information on possible targets other than sealing the borders, deploying the national guard and declaring martial law.