Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7891011 LastLast
Results 161 to 180 of 202

Thread: Romney wants to get rid of PBS......

  1. #161

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by palmetto defender View Post
    Temper tantrum? No, just words of disgust. Because most were punks and the older ones aholes.
    I fought in it the Vietnam war. I am proud I served and have little use for the fairies who sat it out or ran away. You ever serve? I did on a volunteer basis. try making a contribution to our society and country. You might develop a little self respect.
    You contributed nothing to America by fighting in Vietnam. It was a war of choice pushed by politicians (on both sides) who made a critical error in foreign policy. This wasn't WWII or The Civil War, Vietnam posed no threat to our country. 58,000 soldiers lost their lives for no goddamn reason other than an irrational fear of communism spreading to a country half a world away. Congrats, you volunteered for a war with no purpose. Hip hop hurray. I wonder how many of those who were drafted would've choose to fight in 'Nam as opposed to staying here and not dying for nothing.

    And I would love to see you walk up to a person who lost in a loved one in Iraq or Afganistan and tell them those wars were a "duck hunt".

  2. #162
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeyStylez View Post
    You contributed nothing to America by fighting in Vietnam. It was a war of choice pushed by politicians (on both sides) who made a critical error in foreign policy. This wasn't WWII or The Civil War, Vietnam posed no threat to our country. 58,000 soldiers lost their lives for no goddamn reason other than an irrational fear of communism spreading to a country half a world away. Congrats, you volunteered for a war with no purpose. Hip hop hurray. I wonder how many of those who were drafted would've choose to fight in 'Nam as opposed to staying here and not dying for nothing.

    And I would love to see you walk up to a person who lost in a loved one in Iraq or Afganistan and tell them those wars were a "duck hunt".
    WHOA.

    Time out kid.

    EVERY person who dons the uniform DESERVES respect.

    I dont agree with Palmetto on 99% of the stuff he says but he has the right to say it and he gets AUTOMATIC respect for serving his country. He laid his life on the line. Argue if you want about the war itself. NEVER disrespect a man who will take up arms for his country. Because it means he will do it to defend you, me and everyone else no matter our differing philosophies.

  3. #163

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by FF2 View Post
    WHOA.

    Time out kid.

    EVERY person who dons the uniform DESERVES respect.

    I dont agree with Palmetto on 99% of the stuff he says but he has the right to say it and he gets AUTOMATIC respect for serving his country. He laid his life on the line. Argue if you want about the war itself. NEVER disrespect a man who will take up arms for his country. Because it means he will do it to defend you, me and everyone else no matter our differing philosophies.
    I'm not a kid.

    And I'm not disrespecting the guy. I'm merely pointing out that the war in Vietnam contributed nothing positive to our country. That's a fact whether you like it or not. Volunteering to fight in a country that posed no threat to us is not something to be celebrated, you just become a killing tool for those more rich and powerful than you. Not every war is based on a just cause, and if more soldiers realized this, we wouldn't have more situations like Vietnam and Iraq. I don't expect a 19 y.o. to know this, but at this point in his life he should know by now.

    And no, not EVERY person who wears the uniform deserves respect. MOST do, a few don't. Stop with the hero worship, this isn't elementary school.

    He has the right to say whatever he wants...and so do I.

  4. #164
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeyStylez View Post
    You contributed nothing to America by fighting in Vietnam.
    He served his country.

    The fact that the country may have been wrong does not change the valor and sacrifice of serving during Wartime.

    It's a rather obviosu mistake to judge the individuals service by the War. On an individual basis, it's exactly the same. In some ways, serving in Vietnam was far worse for the individuals than it was in WWII.

    It was a war of choice pushed by politicians (on both sides) who made a critical error in foreign policy.
    Which does not diminsih the personals elf-sacrifice of having served, honorable (I assume).

    This wasn't WWII or The Civil War
    Plenty of argument could be made that WWII was a European war, not a threat to the U.S. apart from where we put ourselves in the target sights. Yous eem to conveniently foeget the massive isolationist movement in the U.S. before Pearl, and that the entire War (till pearl) was viewed exactly the way you view Veitnam. Not a threat to us.

    Vietnam posed no threat to our country.
    Conversely, the argument for Vietnam was that we were fighting Communism, i.e. the Soviet Union, not the Veitnamese. Now I don;t expect much agreement from you on the value of that fight, but the argument does exist.

    58,000 soldiers lost their lives for no goddamn reason other than an irrational fear of communism spreading to a country half a world away.
    As you see it. Others see it as one set peince int he greater conflict, a conflict we won in the end, in no small part by showing that the U.S. would fight and die to stop Communism from spreading (as best as it could), making it far less appealing to fence-sitting nationstates.

    Congrats, you volunteered for a war with no purpose. Hip hop hurray.
    Sorry, but someone who would say this to a U.S. War Vet is kinda a dick. You have the right to say it, aye, and I have the right to think you're a dick and an ******* for saying it.

    And I would love to see you walk up to a person who lost in a loved one in Iraq or Afganistan and tell them those wars were a "duck hunt".
    The Wars (the actual Wars) in both locations were just that. We rolled in, and rolled them.

    The long-standing occupation afterwards must be seperated from the War portion in those nations, as they are very different animals. The occuption in both is, best as I know, as bad as Vietnam was, just less fatal. Alot more crippled, but live.

  5. #165
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    13,563
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeyStylez View Post
    You contributed nothing to America by fighting in Vietnam. It was a war of choice pushed by politicians (on both sides) who made a critical error in foreign policy. This wasn't WWII or The Civil War, Vietnam posed no threat to our country. 58,000 soldiers lost their lives for no goddamn reason other than an irrational fear of communism spreading to a country half a world away. Congrats, you volunteered for a war with no purpose. Hip hop hurray. I wonder how many of those who were drafted would've choose to fight in 'Nam as opposed to staying here and not dying for nothing.

    And I would love to see you walk up to a person who lost in a loved one in Iraq or Afganistan and tell them those wars were a "duck hunt".
    Trash

  6. #166
    Board Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Brooklyn Heights
    Posts
    2,462
    Quote Originally Posted by FF2 View Post
    WHOA.

    Time out kid.

    EVERY person who dons the uniform DESERVES respect.

    I dont agree with Palmetto on 99% of the stuff he says but he has the right to say it and he gets AUTOMATIC respect for serving his country. He laid his life on the line. Argue if you want about the war itself. NEVER disrespect a man who will take up arms for his country. Because it means he will do it to defend you, me and everyone else no matter our differing philosophies.
    I assume this concept applies to the soldiers of the Third Reich? The North Koreans? The Israelis? How about those in the present Syrian army killing their fellow countrymen? Those guys too?

    Or do we reserve this respect for just the volunteers? Or just our guys?

  7. #167
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Un-Pleasantville
    Posts
    6,525
    Oh great. The Paulbots have arrived.

  8. #168
    Quote Originally Posted by Ha Ha Ha View Post
    I assume this concept applies to the soldiers of the Third Reich? The North Koreans? The Israelis? How about those in the present Syrian army killing their fellow countrymen? Those guys too?

    Or do we reserve this respect for just the volunteers? Or just our guys?
    That's up to you.

    If you want to bash U.S. soldiers, party on.

  9. #169
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    5,569
    Lot of dicks in this thread.

    Well, really just one. Maybe two.

  10. #170

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    He served his country.

    The fact that the country may have been wrong does not change the valor and sacrifice of serving during Wartime.

    It's a rather obviosu mistake to judge the individuals service by the War. On an individual basis, it's exactly the same. In some ways, serving in Vietnam was far worse for the individuals than it was in WWII.



    Which does not diminsih the personals elf-sacrifice of having served, honorable (I assume).



    Plenty of argument could be made that WWII was a European war, not a threat to the U.S. apart from where we put ourselves in the target sights. Yous eem to conveniently foeget the massive isolationist movement in the U.S. before Pearl, and that the entire War (till pearl) was viewed exactly the way you view Veitnam. Not a threat to us.



    Conversely, the argument for Vietnam was that we were fighting Communism, i.e. the Soviet Union, not the Veitnamese. Now I don;t expect much agreement from you on the value of that fight, but the argument does exist.



    As you see it. Others see it as one set peince int he greater conflict, a conflict we won in the end, in no small part by showing that the U.S. would fight and die to stop Communism from spreading (as best as it could), making it far less appealing to fence-sitting nationstates.



    Sorry, but someone who would say this to a U.S. War Vet is kinda a dick. You have the right to say it, aye, and I have the right to think you're a dick and an ******* for saying it.



    The Wars (the actual Wars) in both locations were just that. We rolled in, and rolled them.

    The long-standing occupation afterwards must be seperated from the War portion in those nations, as they are very different animals. The occuption in both is, best as I know, as bad as Vietnam was, just less fatal. Alot more crippled, but live.
    You absolutely have the right to think what you want. As do I. Some may call me a d*ck for what I said, but I know full well I'm an @sshole, so whatever. I don't care. You stick to the facts and your opinions, and it makes for interesting debate.

    I'm combining the war AND the occupation, since to me they go hand in hand. One was necessary but badly managed, the other illegal and unwarranted. The loss of life was greater in Vietnam, but I really don't think the families of those 4,000 killed in combat give a ****.

    BTW I believe that had JFK been alive, Vietnam would've never happened. For some in power, his death sure was rather convenient.

  11. #171
    Quote Originally Posted by FF2 View Post
    beacuse it's just silly politics to mention PBS. It's meaningless. utterly meaningless. It's waste of time, not meant to save money but its just Romney pandering.

    Make 2 less bombs that will never see the light of day anyway.

    I'll take Nature and Frontline.
    I disagree. There's a basic principle being articulated for government spending: "should we be borrowing money to pay for this." I think that's the appropriate test unless and until we get to a balanced budget. It's the same test private citizens should be using for their own spending (at a minimum; really, people should be saving as well). PBS was an example of that; an example that makes his base happy, sure, but an appropriate one as well.

    Of course, reasonable minds can disagree about what expenditures are really worth borrowing to fund, and about which expenditures should be first on the chopping block.

    But on PBS, I have not heard a democrat say "yes, we should be borrowing to fund it, and here's why"

    Nor have I heard "no, we shouldn't be borrowing to fund it, but we won't need to if we cut the following other areas first"

    Instead, what I've heard is "it's such a small expense, who cares?"

    Guess what? When you're in debt, every penny counts, and small savings add up. If you're only looking at big ticket items, you'll likely never achieve anything - since big ticket items are typically both the most important and most politically damaging to cut.

  12. #172
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeyStylez View Post
    BTW I believe that had JFK been alive, Vietnam would've never happened.
    Normally a guy living in his mom's basement will fare a little better than you when taking on a whole message board.

    http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk...dy_vietnam.htm

    Maybe it's time to apologize to your mother about whatever happened. Unresolved tensions are spilling over into your cyber life - and not in a good way.

  13. #173
    Quote Originally Posted by Jungle Shift Jet View Post
    Why should anyone have to justify or explain to libs the desire of our forebears to, in a time of peace and prosperity that had not been known for nearly 2 decades, to have as many kids as they wanted and to spoil them as they themselves had never been, as if it was a sin or a crime?
    For one thing, because, financially speaking, "having as many babies as you want to" is no different than "having as many houses as you want to" - great, so long as you can afford it.

    For another thing, because spoiling children is bad parenting, regardless of the underlying psychological factors that led to it.

  14. #174
    Quote Originally Posted by FF2 View Post
    WHOA.

    Time out kid.

    EVERY person who dons the uniform DESERVES respect.

    I dont agree with Palmetto on 99% of the stuff he says but he has the right to say it and he gets AUTOMATIC respect for serving his country. He laid his life on the line. Argue if you want about the war itself. NEVER disrespect a man who will take up arms for his country. Because it means he will do it to defend you, me and everyone else no matter our differing philosophies.

  15. #175
    Quote Originally Posted by Ha Ha Ha View Post
    I assume this concept applies to the soldiers of the Third Reich? The North Koreans? The Israelis? How about those in the present Syrian army killing their fellow countrymen? Those guys too?

    Or do we reserve this respect for just the volunteers? Or just our guys?
    None of the above. The third reich because it was an obviously criminal regime. The Syrians because shooting civilians is never justifiable. The North Koreans and Israelis because (the differences in justifications between those two armies aside) there is no question of "volunteering" in either place - at least to start. Career soldiers in Israel - or volunteers in the UK, etc. - deserve every bit of the respect for volunteering to put their lives on the line in defense of their fellow citizens and in just causes.

  16. #176
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeyStylez View Post
    You contributed nothing to America by fighting in Vietnam. It was a war of choice pushed by politicians (on both sides) who made a critical error in foreign policy. This wasn't WWII or The Civil War, Vietnam posed no threat to our country. 58,000 soldiers lost their lives for no goddamn reason other than an irrational fear of communism spreading to a country half a world away. Congrats, you volunteered for a war with no purpose. Hip hop hurray. I wonder how many of those who were drafted would've choose to fight in 'Nam as opposed to staying here and not dying for nothing.

    And I would love to see you walk up to a person who lost in a loved one in Iraq or Afganistan and tell them those wars were a "duck hunt".
    You are a dolt. Here's what I contributed: I did a good job of commanding men in combat and lost not one of them due to stupidity or mistakes made by me. Men are alivge today because of what I did. That's not to say none of my men were not killed, but not due to my error.
    And Vietnam was necessary. You have to stand somewhere. It was part of a continuing strategy which ultimately propelled us to the lone superpower.
    BTW, more men ( as a %) volunteered during the Vietnam War than during WWII.
    The Civil war was a war of choice as you know. Unnecessary.

    Now go back to your gay bar.

  17. #177
    Quote Originally Posted by FF2 View Post
    WHOA.

    Time out kid.

    EVERY person who dons the uniform DESERVES respect.

    I dont agree with Palmetto on 99% of the stuff he says but he has the right to say it and he gets AUTOMATIC respect for serving his country. He laid his life on the line. Argue if you want about the war itself. NEVER disrespect a man who will take up arms for his country. Because it means he will do it to defend you, me and everyone else no matter our differing philosophies.
    Unexpected source. Thank you. We actually agree on a fair amount of football related items. LOL.

  18. #178
    Quote Originally Posted by palmetto defender View Post
    Unexpected source. Thank you. We actually agree on a fair amount of football related items. LOL.
    here's the deal....people of course are allowed to have any opinion they want,,,and are free to voice them. But we all have to remember WHY we have that freedom. The old cliche of freedom not being free rings true. We would all be talking Japanese, German or Russian if not for the US Soldier.

    hate the war...not the soldier.

    NOW...GFY!

  19. #179
    Quote Originally Posted by Ha Ha Ha View Post
    I assume this concept applies to the soldiers of the Third Reich? The North Koreans? The Israelis? How about those in the present Syrian army killing their fellow countrymen? Those guys too?

    Or do we reserve this respect for just the volunteers? Or just our guys?
    You should read all quiet on the Western Front. The soldier for any country for the most part deserves respect. Putting your life on the line for your country, your fellow citizens is something that should always be respected.


    Being an American Citizen where our military is under the command of a civilian government under the review of it's citizens, that has peacefully changed hands going into a third century now makes our military personal something special in that they are putting their life on the line for principles rather then simply treasure and power.

  20. #180
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    6,275
    Quote Originally Posted by Winstonbiggs View Post
    You should read all quiet on the Western Front. The soldier for any country for the most part deserves respect. Putting your life on the line for your country, your fellow citizens is something that should always be respected.


    Being an American Citizen where our military is under the command of a civilian government under the review of it's citizens, that has peacefully changed hands going into a third century now makes our military personal something special in that they are putting their life on the line for principles rather then simply treasure and power.
    As a Vet myself I would like to add that even though the liberals will never admit it the American military and American soldiers do more humanitarian missions than "war" missions.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us