Forum Settings
       
1 2 Next »
Reply To Thread

Janie, Get Your GunFollow

#52 Jan 24 2013 at 3:00 PM Rating: Good
******
44,016 posts
Remember when Fox News and The Washington Post went out of their ways to point out how many insurgents Jessica Lynch shot when she was ambushed? Ahh, good times.

The real answer was 0.

Edited, Jan 24th 2013 4:00pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#53 Jan 24 2013 at 4:54 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
9,023 posts
I just hope people don't confuse equality with fairness, else women will get the short end of the stick. I somehow don't believe the women had a "fair say" in this decision. In my experience, most women don't want to be treated like men.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#54gbaji, Posted: Jan 24 2013 at 6:56 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) FTFY
#55 Jan 24 2013 at 6:58 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,767 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Remember when Fox News and The Washington Post went out of their ways to point out how many insurgents Jessica Lynch shot when she was ambushed?


Actually no. I don't remember that at all. Did you see them do this? Or did you read about it in an assuredly unbiased source?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#56 Jan 24 2013 at 7:00 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
But Fox News has the mostest viewers in the world ever! It's the most popular news for everyone!

I love the conservative dissonance between bragging about how many listeners Limbaugh has or how many viewers Fox has and then the gasping sobs over how mean the "mainstream media" is Smiley: laugh

gbaji wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
Remember when Fox News and The Washington Post went out of their ways to point out how many insurgents Jessica Lynch shot when she was ambushed?
Actually no. I don't remember that at all.

Is this another "I don't get my news from anywhere" moment or a joke?

Edited, Jan 24th 2013 7:01pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#57 Jan 24 2013 at 7:03 PM Rating: Good
******
44,016 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
Remember when Fox News and The Washington Post went out of their ways to point out how many insurgents Jessica Lynch shot when she was ambushed?
Actually no. I don't remember that at all.
Is this another "I don't get my news from anywhere" moment or a joke?
I'm guessing he'll go with Fox News is biased against Fox News.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#58 Jan 24 2013 at 7:23 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,767 posts
Jophiel wrote:
But Fox News has the mostest viewers in the world ever! It's the most popular news for everyone!

I love the conservative dissonance between bragging about how many listeners Limbaugh has or how many viewers Fox has and then the gasping sobs over how mean the "mainstream media" is Smiley: laugh


I'm sorry. Could you find a quote of me or any other conservative on this forum saying that? I have *never* said that Fox news had the most viewers in the world (or the US for that matter). It is the most viewed cable news channel. Nothing more. But, as I have stated numerous times on this forum, cable news is not even remotely close to the most commonly viewed TV news. The broadcast news shows have vastly more viewers and thus have a vastly greater impact on the opinions of those who view. Far more people get their news regularly by watching whatever evening news show happens to come on after whatever prime time shows they watch than watch any form of cable news.

But don't let facts get in the way of a good strawman.

Quote:
gbaji wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
Remember when Fox News and The Washington Post went out of their ways to point out how many insurgents Jessica Lynch shot when she was ambushed?
Actually no. I don't remember that at all.

Is this another "I don't get my news from anywhere" moment or a joke?


I honestly don't recall ever hearing/seeing anyone in the media make any specific notice of how many people (insurgents or otherwise) Jessica Lynch may or may not have killed. Hence my response. Perhaps somewhere in the liberal echo chamber someone made a big point of out claiming how much attention certain news sources were giving to this and that's where this idea came from? So I'm going with selection bias on this one. Strange how many things that liberals think conservatives make a big deal about actual conservatives have never even heard of. At some point you might want to question where you're getting your information.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#59 Jan 24 2013 at 7:24 PM Rating: Good
******
44,016 posts
Nailed it.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#60 Jan 24 2013 at 7:31 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,767 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
Remember when Fox News and The Washington Post went out of their ways to point out how many insurgents Jessica Lynch shot when she was ambushed?
Actually no. I don't remember that at all.
Is this another "I don't get my news from anywhere" moment or a joke?
I'm guessing he'll go with Fox News is biased against Fox News.


And that's what stuck in someone's mind and created some great scandal about how many insurgents she killed? Seriously!?

I do recall stories about how the rescue of Lynch was gussied up to make it seem more daring and dramatic, but if the one part in all this that stuck in someone's mind was about how many people she may have shot when being captured, I think someone's focusing on the wrong part of the issue.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#61 Jan 24 2013 at 7:32 PM Rating: Excellent
******
44,016 posts
gbaji wrote:
I do recall stories about how the rescue of Lynch was gussied up to make it seem more daring and dramatic, but if the one part in all this that stuck in someone's mind was about how many people she may have shot when being captured, I think someone's focusing on the wrong part of the issue.
Or someone is capable of remembering more than one thing at a time. You should try it sometime.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#62 Jan 24 2013 at 7:36 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
29,436 posts
I do recall stories about how the rescue of Lynch was gussied up to make it seem more daring and dramatic, but if the one part in all this that stuck in someone's mind was about how many people she may have shot when being captured, I think someone's focusing on the wrong part of the issue.

Right, the main part of the issue was the attempt to manufacture action movie heroes to sell a ****** war. The Pat Tillman effect, if you will.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#63 Jan 24 2013 at 7:41 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
But don't let facts get in the way of a good strawman.

"Strawman"? I was openly mocking your little "Everything but Fox is so scary liberal!" pity party. I'm sorry that went over your head.

Quote:
At some point you might want to question where you're getting your information.

True. I'll stop reading news stories and stuff to learn about the world around me. From what I understand, I'm really just supposed to just make stuff up and declare it to be true and say my awesome powers of logic showed me the light so I don't need so fancy-pants "reporter" to be telling me information about what's in the world... Smiley: laugh
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#64 Jan 24 2013 at 7:47 PM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
29,436 posts
True. I'll stop reading news stories and stuff to learn about the world around me. From what I understand, I'm really just supposed to just make stuff up and declare it to be true and say my awesome powers of logic showed me the light so I don't need so fancy-pants "reporter" to be telling me information about what's in the world..

No, no, no. You're supposed to extrapolate your own personal experience as a 40 something white guy in Chicagoland to any other situation that exists. Was it cold today? Global warming is ********* Ever been pulled over for no reason in a rich neighborhood? No? What's all this racial profiling made up whining about *really*? Do you watch Downton Abbey? Then rich people are benevolent daddy figures looking out for the good of their servants.

Also, Matthew Dies in the finale.

Spoilers behind.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#65 Jan 24 2013 at 8:19 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Joke's on you, I only bother to watch Archer and Mad Men.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#66 Jan 24 2013 at 9:09 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
*****
19,984 posts
Speaking of which, when is Al'Gorzeera supposed to start broadcasting?
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#67 Jan 24 2013 at 9:37 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,767 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
I do recall stories about how the rescue of Lynch was gussied up to make it seem more daring and dramatic, but if the one part in all this that stuck in someone's mind was about how many people she may have shot when being captured, I think someone's focusing on the wrong part of the issue.

Right, the main part of the issue was the attempt to manufacture action movie heroes to sell a sh*tty war. The Pat Tillman effect, if you will.


Was the main part of the issue about an attempt to manufacture some data about how many insurgents she killed before being captured? Cause that sure seems to have been a minor footnote at best. Unless you followed a news source that attempted to make that into a big deal, that is. Hence my point.


And let me also point out that to whatever degree the capture of Lynch was overdramatized appears to have originated with the Washington Post, hardly a conservative source. So I'm not sure what the point anyone's trying to make is. That the media sometimes exaggerates? I'm sorry, was that supposed to be a shocking revelation. I guess I don't understand why anyone thought this was an important enough fact to retain for like 6 years in order to pull it out in the middle of this particular thread. Even if I had read those stories at the time (which I didn't), I would never have considered them relevant enough to pay much mind to, and certainly would not have hung on to it like some kind of major issue.


Maybe I just have a better media filter than most? Dunno. Seems like some people around here are suckers for media hype, or for media hyping over media hype. Me? I recognize it for what it is and pay attention to the stuff that actually matters.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#68 Jan 24 2013 at 9:43 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,767 posts
Jophiel wrote:
True. I'll stop reading news stories and stuff to learn about the world around me. From what I understand, I'm really just supposed to just make stuff up and declare it to be true and say my awesome powers of logic showed me the light so I don't need so fancy-pants "reporter" to be telling me information about what's in the world... Smiley: laugh


The difference is whether you allow the reporter to interpret the information in the world around you for you, without bothering to think about those facts yourself. I trim out the exaggeration and editorializing and look only at the facts that are presented. Most people read the subtext and suggestion and form their opinions based on that instead. It's why I can come into a thread where 30 people have read a linked article and are discussing how it says X, only to read it, declare "it doesn't actually say X, it says Y", and then all 30 insist simultaneously that they were not fooled by the writing *and* that X is somehow true anyway.

Yeah. Good times. Cheney was involved in the decision to grant Halliburton that contract all along, right? Suckers!
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#69 Jan 25 2013 at 7:16 AM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
29,436 posts

Was the main part of the issue about an attempt to manufacture some data about how many insurgents she killed before being captured? Cause that sure seems to have been a minor footnote at best. Unless you followed a news source that attempted to make that into a big deal, that is. Hence my point.


That's not a point, fuckstick. That's lack of perception on your part. *Everyone else* understood the implication and knew that the "how many people she shot" part was a simple stand in for the fact that the GOP has, in the past, tried to romanticize a women at the front lines by making her into an action hero. Because that's how fucking language works, idiot. We have a shared common experience, we all saw the news coverage, then someone alludes to part of it. *Everyone except you* understands this instantly.

Where's the disconnect, little fella? You either 1. Are close to autistic in your inability to understand simple cultural shorthand or 2. Are being deliberately faux ignorant to try and argue a point. I'd assume it was 2, but then there's NO ******* POINT. So I'm going to have to assume 1.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#70 Jan 25 2013 at 7:54 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,075 posts
gbaji wrote:

I trim out the exaggeration and editorializing and look only at the facts that are presented. Most people read the subtext and suggestion and form their opinions based on that instead.
This is getting old.

'Most' people are quite capable of making decisions for themselves about the validity or level of bias in the information they receive. In fact, I'd wager a guess that you're not even up to 'average' in your ability to do the same.

Get over yourself already.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#71 Jan 25 2013 at 8:54 AM Rating: Good
******
44,016 posts
gbaji wrote:
The difference is whether you allow the reporter to interpret the information in the world around you for you, without bothering to think about those facts yourself. I trim out the exaggeration and editorializing and look only at the facts that are presented.
"Three out of ten thousand targets hit, sixty shots taken: MASS MURDER RAMPAGE OH MY GOD!"
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#72 Jan 25 2013 at 9:44 AM Rating: Good
Supreme Lionator
*****
14,174 posts
RedPhoenixxx wrote:
Kavekk wrote:
Did you go through with the Norway plan in the end? I'm thinking about jumping ship after graduation.


Why would you want to do that? Graduates get to work for poundland for free, we're about to leave the EU,the whole country is being run by Serco, hamburgers are made of horsemeat, and the only real concern of the media is that our favourite **** prince likes to play videos games. How could it be better anywhere else?


Foreign wizards, according to Osborne's next report.

Haha, just kidding, we both know he's gonna blame it on the snow.
____________________________
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”
#73gbaji, Posted: Jan 25 2013 at 6:31 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Or 3. Your perception of the importance that the Right placed on this is false. I'm not feigning ignorance, I simply never saw the level of importance placed on this either directly or in conversations with actual conservatives as you did. Given that your perception likely derived from being told by liberal sources about how much weight conservatives put on this, I'll suggest again that it's you who have been fed a false narrative. You bought it because it fits your previously held assumptions about what conservatives care about and don't care about, so it never occurs to you that it might be a complete fabrication (or at least a gross exaggeration).
#74 Jan 25 2013 at 6:48 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
31,767 posts
Elinda wrote:
'Most' people are quite capable of making decisions for themselves about the validity or level of bias in the information they receive.


Then why don't they use that capability and perhaps consider the possibility that when CNN or MSNBC runs a story about how much Fox News and the GOP are exaggerating the heroics of Lynch during her capture, that they should not just assume that this is true, but should perhaps actually go look and see how much weight conservatives are really putting in this. It's just amazing to me how often liberals insist that as a conservative I really care more about X, or Y, or Z because that's all conservatives talk about, while I'm sitting there wondering what the **** they're talking about because I don't actually care much about those things, nor do any conservatives I talk to, nor do any right leaning sources I hear/see/read.

It doesn't take long as a conservative to come to the conclusion that liberals really have no freaking clue what conservatives actually care about, what we think, or why we hold the positions we do. Liberal viewpoints are so prevalent in media that conservatives are well aware of what liberals think. But since conservative viewpoints aren't as prevalent (you really have to intentionally go looking for them), many liberals depend solely on liberal media sources to tell them what conservatives think. As you might expect, this is quite often not accurate at all.

Quote:
In fact, I'd wager a guess that you're not even up to 'average' in your ability to do the same.


And yet, I filtered out media coverage about the details (like whether she shot anyone) of Lynch's capture as unimportant while others thought it was so important that they held onto that factoid all these years and are sure that it was not because they themselves placed too much importance on it, but because someone else (conservatives in this case) did. Which is really really strange if you stop and think about it.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#75 Jan 25 2013 at 8:37 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
And yet, I filtered out media coverage about the details (like whether she shot anyone) of Lynch's capture as unimportant while others thought it was so important that they held onto that factoid all these years and are sure that it was not because they themselves placed too much importance on it, but because someone else (conservatives in this case) did. Which is really really strange if you stop and think about it.

You have a shitty memory? I mean, I also remember the Super Chicken theme but probably not because the liberal media told me it was really important for discrediting conservatives.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#76 Jan 25 2013 at 11:27 PM Rating: Excellent
gbaji wrote:
But because maybe I was actually watching the Fox news coverage instead of the MSNBC coverage about the Fox News coverage I actually got a more correct impression of what really happened than you did.
Yeah, except...

gbaji wrote:
I don't get my news from anywhere


Were you lying then, or are you lying now? Because it's one or the other.


EDIT: Extraneous "r".

Edited, Jan 26th 2013 10:32pm by Bijou
____________________________
Allegory wrote:
Bijou your art is exceptionally creepy. It seems like their should be something menacing about it, yet no such tone is present.
#77 Jan 26 2013 at 12:02 AM Rating: Excellent
******
44,016 posts
gbaji wrote:
I'm not feigning ignorance,
I don't believe you feign it either.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#78 Jan 28 2013 at 7:53 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,023 posts
So, I saw on the news yesterday that women will have to apply for positions and units (i.e. special forces) still reserve the right to deny women. That's a good balance of fair and equality.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#79 Jan 28 2013 at 8:56 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
14,981 posts
Almalieque wrote:
units (i.e. special forces) still reserve the right to deny women.


The articles I read said those units would have to make the case as to why they wanted to deny them.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#80 Jan 28 2013 at 11:55 PM Rating: Good
****
6,755 posts
Almalieque wrote:
So, I saw on the news yesterday that women will have to apply for positions and units (i.e. special forces) still reserve the right to deny women. That's a good balance of fair and equality.


Actually, that suspiciously sounds like the process for men....
____________________________
Some people are like slinkies, they aren't really good for anything, but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down the stairs.
#81 Jan 29 2013 at 2:29 AM Rating: Good
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,923 posts
And I have no problem with units holding women entrants to the exact same fitness requirements (length and time of runs, weight carrying, no of sit-ups etc) as men.

There are reasons why a very smart/talented person of lesser fitness might be an asset to a unit, but when the issue is an elite unit like special forces, then the entrance requirements demand the best of the best, including outstanding strength, stamina and flexibility.
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#82 Jan 29 2013 at 4:17 AM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
29,436 posts
when the issue is an elite unit like special forces, then the entrance requirements demand the best of the best, including outstanding strength, stamina and flexibility.

Not really. You have to be a good shot and determined. Most the physical testing revolves around the determined part. No one cares if you're a triathlete if you can go three days without food and still hit a target from 1000 yards.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#83 Jan 29 2013 at 4:30 AM Rating: Excellent
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,923 posts
So fat reserves are a plus?
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#84 Jan 29 2013 at 6:12 AM Rating: Good
Repressed Memories
******
20,582 posts
America's civilian super soldier program is halfway complete.
#85 Jan 29 2013 at 8:06 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Almalieque wrote:
So, I saw on the news yesterday that women will have to apply for positions and units (i.e. special forces) still reserve the right to deny women. That's a good balance of fair and equality.

We need more fairness and equality in the form of special forces units comprised entirely of **** women.

"Fox", as in we're a bunch of foxy chicks. "Force", as in we're a force to be reckoned with. "Five", as in there's one... two ... three... four... five of us.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#86 Jan 29 2013 at 8:10 AM Rating: Good
******
44,016 posts
Kakar wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
So, I saw on the news yesterday that women will have to apply for positions and units (i.e. special forces) still reserve the right to deny women. That's a good balance of fair and equality.
Actually, that suspiciously sounds like the process for men....
Probably because it is.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#87 Jan 29 2013 at 8:30 AM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
*****
19,984 posts
Aripyanfar wrote:
So fat reserves are a plus?

Actually, yeah. To a point, of course; that is, like triatheletes and other extreme stamina needs, some amount of reserves are beneficial. Enough reserves to hibernate through a Siberian winter, probably not so much.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#88 Jan 29 2013 at 6:08 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,023 posts
Kakar wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
So, I saw on the news yesterday that women will have to apply for positions and units (i.e. special forces) still reserve the right to deny women. That's a good balance of fair and equality.


Actually, that suspiciously sounds like the process for men....


It sounds like you're confusing simply being in combat arms vs Special Forces. That is the same process for special units, but it is NOT the same for combat arms units. There are a lot of men in combat arms that shouldn't be there. They eventually get kicked out or changed to another job.

In the Army, you may request to be in what you want, but more times than not, it comes down to the "needs of the Army", so you might end up in the Infantry. Simply being a guy doesn't qualify you, but sending a woman there is setting her up for failure as the odds are against her. Allowing a capable woman to join the Infantry is totally fair in my opinion.

Aripyanfar wrote:
And I have no problem with units holding women entrants to the exact same fitness requirements (length and time of runs, weight carrying, no of sit-ups etc) as men.


That wont happen. At least at the Army level, any time soon.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#89 Jan 29 2013 at 6:19 PM Rating: Good
Supreme Lionator
*****
14,174 posts
Quote:
It sounds like you're confusing simply being in combat arms vs Special Forces. That is the same process for special units, but it is NOT the same for combat arms units. There are a lot of men in combat arms that shouldn't be there. They eventually get kicked out or changed to another job.


Nice try, buddy. We've all seen the US army in action.
____________________________
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”
#90 Jan 29 2013 at 7:48 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
31,767 posts
Aripyanfar wrote:
There are reasons why a very smart/talented person of lesser fitness might be an asset to a unit, but when the issue is an elite unit like special forces, then the entrance requirements demand the best of the best, including outstanding strength, stamina and flexibility.


Nope. If that was true then Doctors Jackson and McKay would never had made the cut! Smiley: schooled
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#91 Jan 29 2013 at 9:01 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,023 posts
Kavekk wrote:
Quote:
It sounds like you're confusing simply being in combat arms vs Special Forces. That is the same process for special units, but it is NOT the same for combat arms units. There are a lot of men in combat arms that shouldn't be there. They eventually get kicked out or changed to another job.


Nice try, buddy. We've all seen the US army in action.

Sure you have....Smiley: rolleyes
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#92 Jan 30 2013 at 8:10 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,075 posts
gbaji wrote:
Aripyanfar wrote:
There are reasons why a very smart/talented person of lesser fitness might be an asset to a unit, but when the issue is an elite unit like special forces, then the entrance requirements demand the best of the best, including outstanding strength, stamina and flexibility.


Nope. If that was true then Doctors Jackson and McKay would never had made the cut! Smiley: schooled
Who are Doctors Jackson and Mckay?
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#93 Jan 30 2013 at 8:30 AM Rating: Good
******
44,016 posts
Carl Weathers.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#94 Jan 30 2013 at 4:51 PM Rating: Excellent
****
7,810 posts
Elinda wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Aripyanfar wrote:
There are reasons why a very smart/talented person of lesser fitness might be an asset to a unit, but when the issue is an elite unit like special forces, then the entrance requirements demand the best of the best, including outstanding strength, stamina and flexibility.


Nope. If that was true then Doctors Jackson and McKay would never had made the cut! Smiley: schooled
Who are Doctors Jackson and Mckay?

Stargate...DUH!
____________________________
People don't like to be meddled with. We tell them what to do, what to think, don't run, don't walk. We're in their homes and in their heads and we haven't the right. We're meddlesome. ~River Tam

Sedao
#95 Jan 30 2013 at 5:56 PM Rating: Good
Encyclopedia
******
31,767 posts
We're going to have to put Elinda in the sci-fi penalty box for that one. Sheesh!
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
1 2 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 64 All times are in CDT