A message from General Patton's ghost-WARNING GRAPHIC IMAGES

Originally posted by cargo
The oleneo, care to answer me as to why I am included in you "blinded" comment? Care to provide me with an example?

Simply, your opinionated posts are self-evident enough to call you "blinded".

BHR. I was going to advise that you explain to Mr Oleneo here about the US weapon sales to Saddam and the US backed Mujahideen in Afghanistan against the Russians. And then he can talk of messes to clean up. But it's been covered here so much that I don't wish upon you the task of rehashing it again.

I'm going to bed. All this fighting for truth and justice is doing me in. Yawn.

Night Oleneo.

Originally posted by BillHicksRules
There is a phrase you should become quite used to from now on.
It is a simple one word phrase but I think it captures the mood right now.
It is "Whatever".

Cheers
BHR

This is my to you. Dang shame you won't step up. No wonders you Brits were losing the wars in WW 1 and WW 2 before we Americans stepped in to help.

Originally posted by the_oleneo

I'm not going to comment on the rest of your asinine post.

Islamic terrorism is a very real problem throughout Asia, the Middle East, Africa and the rest of the world, something that you're too blinded to see that.

Well, I am sorry you consider what I posted stupid. I suggest you read this post

www.abovetopsecret.com...

and get another perspective on Islam. They are not all out to get you, so maybe throttle back on the paranoia. I understand in a state of fear and self-righteous indignation you feel the need to lash out at anyone, but try and not be blinded by it.

Islam and Christianity have their clashes, but they were clashing long before 9/11 et al propaganda. You talk about Islamic terrorism being a major problem in certain parts of the world. I am sure that they see and identify the terrorism propogated by Bush and Co. in the name of Christianity as a more dangerous problem.

The russians may have real terrorism issues to deal with, that is granted. The US however has taken the slightest threat and made an industry out of it. Something not too difficult to do with a bunch of proto-pattons shouting down any voice of reason.

"You have voted LA_Maximus for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month."

True, ....true

Originally posted by the_oleneo

No wonders you Brits were losing the wars in WW 1 and WW 2 before we Americans stepped in to help.

As I understand it America's involvement in WWI and II was more akin to carpet-bagging than anything noble as just "helping out". You made a nice bit of money before, during and after each conflict, so cut the "You owe us" patting of your own backs.

Originally posted by cargo
BHR. I was going to advise that you explain to Mr Oleneo here about the US weapon sales to Saddam and the US backed Mujahideen in Afghanistan against the Russians. And then he can talk of messes to clean up. But it's been covered here so much that I don't wish upon you the task of rehashing it again.

95% of all the weapon sales Saddam received were from the Soviet Union, France, China Warsaw Pact countries. Only 1% of "weapon" sales provided to Saddam from the US were US military helicopters and light transport aircrafts between 1983 to 1987.

Straight from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute:
The listing of countries whose weapons were imported by Iraq between 1970s to 2004-
www.sipri.org...

The listing of weapons from other countries provided to Iraq between 1970s to 2004-
www.sipri.org...

Originally posted by cargo
I'm going to bed. All this fighting for truth and justice is doing me in. Yawn.

You ain't fighting for truth and justice at all, man. You're just fighting for propaganda gains and partisan blabbering.

Originally posted by csulli456
Yet another attempt to change my actual words.

Not changed a thing, simply qouteing them.

The US does not pride itself on pictures of Saddam in his underwear, or pictures of naked prisoners. The pride comes from knowing we have the biggest balls to take on these phucks. The question I asked remains the same. Do you have an answer? The only right they have is to a piece of bread and a cup of water. They are prisoners for a reason.

The biggest balls to attack a third world country with the help of over 48 countries?
Yeah I'm impressed.
The answer to your question is, we have always been the target of terrorists, extremists or not.

They have rights just as our soldiers have rights when they are prisnors.

Also like I previously stated I do not think ALL muslims are the threat, especially not the American and British soldiers risking life and limb to keep mine and your ass safe. Don`t rearrange my words.

You asked if mabye the entire muslim people in a country are our enemies, I was stateing WE have muslims here.

I said we need to clearly define the enemy not commit genocide. How come everytime someone disagrees they have to twist your words. I speak my mind and hold back on nothing.

You have defined the enemy, its a noun.
I have twisted nothing, I have simply replied to your statement.


[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]

Originally posted by the_oleneo
This is my

to you. Dang shame you won't step up. No wonders you Brits were losing the wars in WW 1 and WW 2 before we Americans stepped in to help.

Loseing?
Last time I checked in WW1 we had the worlds largest navy, germany couldnt go anywhere.
Last time I checked in WW2 the RAF stopped the germans and they gave up thier attempt to destroy the RAF and go and attack the russians.

Originally posted by howmuchisthedoggy
and get another perspective on Islam. They are not all out to get you, so maybe throttle back on the paranoia. I understand in a state of fear and self-righteous indignation you feel the need to lash out at anyone, but try and not be blinded by it.

I'm not blinded or paranoid, I'm simply acknowledging the greater reality of the problem with Islamic terrorism and the ability of truly devoted fanatics' willingness to carry out whatever actions under the guise and protection of the world's second largest faith.

Originally posted by howmuchisthedoggy
Islam and Christianity have their clashes, but they were clashing long before 9/11 et al propaganda. You talk about Islamic terrorism being a major problem in certain parts of the world. I am sure that they see and identify the terrorism propogated by Bush and Co. in the name of Christianity as a more dangerous problem.

That is exactly the problem I have with you people. To equate Christianity with Bush/co. on fighting Islamic terrorism is a truly ill-conceived and asinine view. You do not bother to take into consideration that many Christians in other parts of the world were subjected to extreme forms of persecution, murder, and slavery by Muslims. If you take your Bible to Saudi Arabia, they will confiscate it and burn it publicly. Pakistani Christians or their churches get assaulted, shot at, or bombed on an occasional basis in Pakistan. Same things are happening in Nigeria and India. It ain't easy being a Christian in a Muslim country. In America, Christians, Jews, Hindus and Muslims live in peaceful co-existence and in the environment of tolerance because the US Constitution forbade the government, federal to state, from establishing a national religion or prohibiting exercise of faith.

Originally posted by howmuchisthedoggy
The russians may have real terrorism issues to deal with, that is granted. The US however has taken the slightest threat and made an industry out of it. Something not too difficult to do with a bunch of proto-pattons shouting down any voice of reason.

I had to laugh at this sheer nonsense of your above comment. It's not worth a further comment from me.

Originally posted by devilwasp
Last time I checked in WW1 we had the worlds largest navy, germany couldnt go anywhere.

All the while, Germany's U-boats were sinking Allied-supported ships left and right.

Originally posted by devilwasp
Last time I checked in WW2 the RAF stopped the germans and they gave up thier attempt to destroy the RAF and go and attack the russians.

Technically, not quite. The Nazis continued to bombard Great Britain sparsely afterward. It was only under the full entry of the United States into the war by late 1941 and early 1942 that augmented UK's air defense against further Luftwaffe attacks.

Originally posted by devilwasp
Last time I checked in WW1 we had the worlds largest navy, germany couldnt go anywhere.
Last time I checked in WW2 the RAF stopped the germans and they gave up thier attempt to destroy the RAF and go and attack the russians.

Yah, can'r really say the US helped that much in WW1, they just added a few more numbers to the already massive armies on the Western Front.

However WW2 is entirely different; without the US, Europe and North Africa would have been lost probably around 1943. I believe after Dunkirk the Brits didn't even have enough small arms to arm the Home Army. The US through industrial capacity alone turned the tide, not to mention the hundreds of thousands of soldiers who died in Europe and the Pacific.
That's not to say Briatin and her Commonwealth didn't play a big role, they just wouldn't have been able to compete with the Nazi's without massive US help.

Originally posted by the_oleneo
All the while, Germany's U-boats were sinking Allied-supported ships left and right.

All the while RN and canadian forces where hunting these down.

Technically, not quite. The Nazis continued to bombard Great Britain sparsely afterward. It was only under the full entry of the United States into the war by late 1941 and early 1942 that augmented UK's air defense against further Luftwaffe attacks.

They continued to bomb sparesely I never said they stoped bombing.
No thats just your opinion of the situation.
The RAF had secured air superiority.

Originally posted by rogue1
Yah, can'r really say the US helped that much in WW1, they just added a few more numbers to the already massive armies on the Western Front.

Yes, they arrived late...as usual.

However WW2 is entirely different; without the US, Europe and North Africa would have been lost probably around 1943. I believe after Dunkirk the Brits didn't even have enough small arms to arm the Home Army. The US through industrial capacity alone turned the tide, not to mention the hundreds of thousands of soldiers who died in Europe and the Pacific.

They made a big profit, thats diffrent from helping.
Thats called lineing your pockets at others expense.
Also, the kriegs marine couldnt have landed thanks to the RN and the RAF.

That's not to say Briatin and her Commonwealth didn't play a big role, they just wouldn't have been able to compete with the Nazi's without massive US help.

They came in late as usual, they lined thier pockets before they joined.


[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]

[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]

Originally posted by SportyMB
"You have voted LA_Maximus for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month."

True, ....true

Thank You soldier and thanks to oleneo , XphilesPhan and Edsinger for trying to pound some sense into the Socialist in here.

The link I posted dissapeared, but its a shame we don't have Generals like Patton and MacArther anymore. These were some tough bastards who grabbed our enemies by the nose and kicked them in the a** until they said "Uncle"

Here is another tough SOB I like....

He led alot of deep bomber strikes into Nazi Germany and He commanded SAC for 9 years. Under his leadership plans were laid for the development and integration of America's current (ICBM) capability. We need more cigar-chomping SOB's like this to win our war.

I wonder if their extinct like the Dinosaurs? I sure hope not, we're not gonna win this war with PC Generals who are afraid of a bad write-up in the New York Times.

Maximu§



[edit on 123131p://444 by LA_Maximus]

Originally posted by devilwasp
The biggest balls to attack a third world country with the help of over 48 countries?
Yeah I'm impressed.

Like I said, THE BIGGEST BALLS. We are running this operation and we are the ones taking most of the casualties because we have the most soldiers there. The other 48 countries have balls enough to help the cause but we have the biggest.

Originally posted by Templarum
and it's an abomination that you would portray a man who was reprimanded for slapping a soldier as being apologetic for such savage behaviour.

I loved it when Patton slapped that cry-baby in the hospital!!

Here are soldiers lieing in bed with serious wounds and this Sissy is crying because of combat stress?...Hell, Im surprised Patton did'nt shoot him with his pearl handled 45's. Theres nothing worse than a coward....nothing!!

cept maybe a back-stabbing Liberal who Loves the enemy more than his own country.

Maximu§

Originally posted by csulli456
Like I said, THE BIGGEST BALLS. We are running this operation and we are the ones taking most of the casualties because we have the most soldiers there. The other 48 countries have balls enough to help the cause but we have the biggest.

Oh really?
So its all about who has more troops and who has the higher casualty figure now?
All this "working together" was all politcal BS and basically america is trying to say , "look at my groin!"

Jeez, now I see why most women like to think us men think with our genitals rather than our heads.

Originally posted by LA_Maximus


I loved it when Patton slapped that cry-baby in the hospital!!

Here are soldiers lieing in bed with serious wounds and this Sissy is crying because of combat stress?...Hell, Im surprised Patton did'nt shoot him with his pearl handled 45's. Theres nothing worse than a coward....nothing!!

cept maybe a back-stabbing Liberal who Loves the enemy more than his own country.

Maximu§

Have you been reading the british army 1914 hand book?
You know what WE did to "cowards" (Basically people loseing thier minds due to the horrors) , we strung them up and left them to die in no mans land.
German snipers killed them out of mercy, THEY showed more careing to troops than we did!
Combat stress is real, ask any medic...or anyone with medical experience what stress and shock can do.

[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]

Originally posted by LA_Maximus
Hell, Im surprised Patton did'nt shoot him with his pearl handled 45's. Theres nothing worse than a coward....nothing!!

The .45 was ivory handled, and there was only one.

www.pattonhq.com
Patton took violent offense at any reference to his pistols being pearl handled. He said, "Only a pimp in a New Orleans whorehouse or a tin-horn gambler would carry a pearl-handled pistol."

www.pattonhq.com...

Otherwise

Carry on.

I understand we have to be better then the rest of the world and need to handle unarmed prisoners without abusing them but to put a soldier who lays his life down for his country in jail because he humiliated someone who probably shot and killed or tortured some of his comrades is completely absurd. Can anyone else see that?

The vast majority of the prisoners were innocent and were not charged with anything and subsequently released but I suppose you must have some evidence that the US Military doesn't have regarding their guilt?

I think there is a minority of your armed forces who think it is ok, just like there is a minority of the US population such as yourself who are unable, unwilling or just too plain dumb to understand that torture is never acceptable behaviour from a civilised country such as yours. But then again your country still thinks it is right to execute its prisoners along with such other wonderful places to live such as china and saudi arabia. The true civilised countres around the rest of the world (Yes believe itr or not there is a world out side of the USA) long ago abolished the death penalty.

Originally posted by LA_Maximus


cept maybe a back-stabbing Liberal who Loves the enemy more than his own country.

This is where the hate in all the world comes from. People like you. You always want to take war over peace. You always look to the hardest way to solve a simple solution. Liberals hate America? We are fighting to keep war mongering fascist like yourself from blowing up the whole damn world and every body in it. Get a life and get off the war kick. You are wasting your time promoting a war that even your own republicans are now admitting is an invalid war.



Patton would have slapped Bush in the mouth and told him to sit down because there was no reason for war.