Setanta wrote:Gernanda ? ! ? ! ? . . . damn you crack me up . . . it's really hard to take you seriously.
The point, which you are either too dense to see, or willfully ignore, is that war isn't about cool video game effects and jumping out of helicopters--it's about blood splattered everywhere from the explosion of an IED going off as a vehicle that Rummy was too goddamned cheap to armor was passing by.
Do you doubt me? I had a Drill Sergeant in basic that had his gold jump wings. That was the last combat jump in the US Army. They did do some jumping in Iraq, but they weren't combat jumps.
It wasn't that he was cheap. I know this to be true by the amount people such as yourself have done about how much money is being spent on the troops in Iraq. They didn't have them at the time because the supplier didn't have enough made. Besides and IED coming from the bottom of the vehicle will have no effect on how much armor the vehicle has. The armor only covers the sides and the windshield.
If that was all war was about then why do people join and serve. Why did we have a military during peacetime? Sorry your so against the military, maybe not the people but the military its self.
How typically idiotic. It's truly amazing how many DI's you appear to know, all of whom just happen to have precisely the information you need to support one of your feeble arguments. Your remarks about G-r-e-n-a-d-a were absurd because you can't even come close to a phonetic spelling of it, not on the basis of whether or not it were the last combat jump made by paratroops. When you can't do any better than that, you beggar your already rather witless arguments further.
We've been in Iraq more than two years. Troops have complained about a lack of body armor and vehicle armor for almost as long, and nothing has been done because Rummy is incompetent, and so is the Shrub. They are the ones who don't give a rats ass about the military. You are hardly in a position to judge what my opinion of the military is. Rummy ignored the good advice he was given, he has alienated the officer corps who do know what they are doing, and recruiting is taking a nose dive precisely because people are figuring out what war is all about.
Tell us some more tall tales about the wealth of information you get from the legions of DI's you know and then tell us another one about how soon you'll be posted overseas.
candidone1 wrote:CoastalRat wrote:Setanta wrote:Did your personal friend describe what sort of "rescue" was necessary from a hospital at which the staff have said there were no armed men?
Yes he did. And that is as much as I will say. You can take it or leave it. I am not about to attempt to convince you or anyone else as to the validity of what he told me. It would do very little good as y'all seem to have decided what you believe about this. Think what you will.
There may be some who are interested in your (friend's) story. Sometimes some massaging is necessary so as to not seem like you're playing make believe...and perhaps to defend an issue that seems to be getting hot.
You were the one who claimed to have privleged information, so in the future, if you choose to offer it up, be prepared to follow through with what you know.
Pretty easy to throw in the towel now...unless you doubt your friend's story.
Candidone, I am not about to attempt to justify what I have said here concerning this issue. If you wish to call that throwing in the towel, that is fine by me. As I said, you guys can believe what you want about the rescue or about my believability on what I have stated. Quite frankly, I don't much care.
As with most incidents, the truth of what happened probably lies somewhere between the way my friend tells it and the way some of you on this thread are attempting to paint it. I have learned that people view things from a different perspective and in most cases do not know everything, even though they may think they do. Or they have their own agenda for trying to portray something in a certain light (maybe like the good Dr. that was earlier mentioned). Or maybe like many of you here, you jump on the bandwagon of any news that will portray the Bush admin and our military in a bad light.
I think you just said something CoastalRat, but I got so dizzy going around in the circles that it led into that I don't have a clue what you are talking about.
I sometimes don't know myself, Intrepid. Of course, maybe I just enjoy being confusing.
glamorize
1. To make glamorous: tried to glamorize the bathroom with expensive fixtures. 2. To treat or portray in a romantic manner; idealize or glorify: a show that glamorizes police work.
Kind of ironic that the sentence used to describe glamorize sort of fits in with what many people are trying to explain about the commercials. It is not that the commercials are false, it is that the commercials are portray a romantic imagine of serving in the military WITHOUT showing the downsides. The commercials are only showing the positives - the idealized version of serving, not any of the other aspects. And then tend to exaggerate the positives.
I have many family members that joined the service and even at the recruiting offices they do this - and they stretch the truth big time. They will show and describes these great jobs you can have in the military and then you (and the majority of the recruits) get stuck with the crappy jobs. Believe me my lazy brother (just graduating from high school) would never had joined the Marines if they did not glamorize the job. He thought he was going to be doing this great job and be sitting in this beautiful area of the world. It was quite a rude awakening when he got trotted off to basic training.
And I am not someone against the military, but be real, they do glamorize it.
realistically, what company doesn't glamorize what they do? you see all the oil companies talking about what they are doing to help the environment...if that isn't glamorizing, i don't know what is. true we aren't talking about a regular company here, but they are doing what they need to do to get recruits.
if anyone joins honestly thinking, hey i will never have to go to war (and run and hide in canada when they get their orders), never have to protect my country abroad, i believe they are just seeing what they want to see, allowing themselves to be seduced by advertising. and who can blame the services for doing this while every other major corporation does it all the time? hell that's all the presidential elections are, glamorizing each candidate.
my brother in law served in the marines in bahrain when the barracks were bombed. he knew exactly what he was getting into when he signed up and gladly went for it knowing what he as in for. not to say anything bad about those who have relatives that did not realize what it could possibly be like, but we are subject to advertising every day...
my hats off to anyone in the military. thank god for them! i live in one of the most heavily populated military areas in the country (Norfolk, VA). i can't even count how many bases are here. and i thank every single military person when i see them.
got a little off subject there...sorry.
Not at all, Boss, you have made some good points.
Let's see, Fort Eustis, Fort Storey, Fort Monroe, The Norfolk Navy Ship Yard, the Norfolk Naval Station, Damneck Naval Air Station, Oceana Naval Air Station, the Newport News Ship Building and Drydock Company (civilian and military), the Naval Weapons Station, Langley Air Force Base . . . hell, there's a lot of 'em.
and i am so ashamed that people around here bitch about the jet noise from oceana. hey, if you don't want to hear it, don't move close to the base (move to montana or somewhere that there is plenty of wide open space). mr. d and i sit outside some nights and listen to them break the sound barrier...it is amazing.
there is little creek amphibious base too...i actually think we are the largest concentration of military in the country come to think of it. then again, our strategic position is quite nice.
When i was stationed at Fort Eustis, they used to try to get us to do "nuclear attack" drills. We'd laugh and refuse to participate. We would point out to them that in the event of a Soviet attack, everything east of King William county was going to be vaporized.
Dragon I agree with you 100% - honestly I have no problem with the glamorizing. But unfortunately for my brother he fell for it. He wouldn't listen to my parents - one of those I know better than you teenagers. In my opinion the service was the best thing for him at the time so I have no issues with it. But they definitely do glamorize it and you are a fool if you believe they are not.
When you sell a used car do you advertise it's good or bad points.
The service sells schooling and a career to the prospective recruit and tells them what they want to hear. Surprise, surprise.
yeah i agree they glamorize it 100%. unfortunately this world has become one of buyer beware. i don't blame them for doing it, they gotta do what they gotta do.
and set, i agree, why have an evacuation route over here in case of nuclear attack? we aint never gonna know what hit us...anyone attacking the US would be an idiot not to hit hampton roads first.
oh just to clarify myself...i don't believe they glamorize war itself, i think they glamorize the jobs that people do in the services.
hollywood plays a huge role in it too. i mean who wouldn't want to be james bond or triple X. and amazingly they never die! and they always get the girl. plus all of the video games.
again i digress
au1929 wrote:When you sell a used car do you advertise it's good or bad points.
The service sells schooling and a career to the prospective recruit and tells them what they want to hear. Surprise, surprise.
Cigarette companies portray, not the product or the health hazards of smoking, but the lifestyle people seem to have as smokers.
There is a reality that heavily contradicts the fantasy portrayed. I think what some of are trying to say is that something like the military and
war should be put out with a more balanced commercial, especially since it's a government run operation.
The commercials just really make the military out to be all fun and games and a way to advance yourself through school and acquire a meaningful education, whilst conveniently avoiding the issue of death and dismemberment.
and cigarette companies post everywhere that you can get lung cancer (except for the 2 second FDA imposed warning at the end?) and liquor companies advertise that overuse of their product can cause liver cancer? that just isn't good business.
the military does offer great training (so i hear, i have no firsthand knowledge) and my brother in law is getting his BA in criminology after serving in bahrain when we first went into afghanistan, and he is then using all that training to join the police force. yes, you take a chance when you join the military that you could die, but you have a better chance dying in a drunk driving incident (yet another thing that until recently liquor companies didn't advertise freely). And what do those other companies do for you in return? nada.
i don't think at all they make it out to be fun and games. i think they make it out to be a learning experience and a way to higher education. yes they avoid the whole death and dismemberment thing, but honestly a lot more people die from tobacco products and alcoholism every year and they certainly don't sponsor your education or future.
dragon49 wrote:and cigarette companies post everywhere that you can get lung cancer (except for the 2 second FDA imposed warning at the end?) and liquor companies advertise that overuse of their product can cause liver cancer? that just isn't good business.
Hmmm, so these industries are forced by the government to be honest in their marketing tactics...wouldn't it be fair to have the government do the same?
...unless, of course, it would bad for business.
What you'd get is a unintelligible disclaimer at the end of the ad . . .
[size=8]Beadvisedthatnotallrecruitswillqualifyforthejobtrainingopportunitiesanddutyassignmentsdescribed.Possiblesideeffectsofenlistmentincludebutarenotlimitedtodeath
dismembermentchemicaland/ornuclearpoisoningseverementalinstabilityinducedsociopathictendanciesandchronichalitosis.Notrecommendedfornursingmothersand
thosecapableofindependentthoughtandrationaljudgment.[/size]
good point, but my brother in law was well informed before he got shipped off that it was a possibility he wouldn't come back. they even made sure that he had his next of kin listed because they contacted my husband to make sure that his information was correct. i don't think they make any bones about the fact that if you are in combat, you could die. but again, i have never enlisted i am just going off of my brother in law's experience who was told BEFORE he signed on the dotted line that it was a possibility he could die fighting for his country.
and i wouldn't say that cigarette companies and liquor companies are honest in their advertising. is there anywhere in their advertising that second hand smoke can do extreme damage to a fetus if inhaled by mom-or that it does more damage than smoking in general? is there anywhere in their marketing that alcohol can cause fetal alcohol syndrome (i think its called that)? how many people die a year in drinking and driving accidents? i seriously doubt that more troops have died over the past two years than that.
anyone who joins the military thinking, hey its a time of peace, i am never going to have to risk my life for my country is ignorant. if you dont want to take that risk, don't join.
set-how long were you at fort eustis? did you know they are "realigning" it or maybe shutting it down? along with considering oceana for realignment? that upsets me. i love being surrounded by the military, half of my neighbors in my last house were seals and it made me feel very safe.
