[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Earth Changes Summary - June 2025: Extreme Weather, Planetary Upheaval, China’s Tofu-Dreg High-Speed Rail Station Ceiling Suddenly Floods, Steel Bars Snap Russia Moves to Nationalize Country's Third Largest Gold Mining Firm Britain must prepare for civil war | David Betz The New MAGA Turf War Over National Intelligence Happy fourth of july The Empire Has Accidentally Caused The Rebirth Of Real Counterculture In The West Workers install 'Alligator Alcatraz' sign for Florida immigration detention center The Biggest Financial Collapse in China’s History Is Here, More Terrifying Than Evergrande! Lightning Cash Jordan NYC Courthouse EMPTIED... ICE Deports 'Entire Building Trump Sparks Domestic Labor Renaissance: Native-Born Workers Surge To Record High As Foreign-Born Plunge Mister Roberts (1965) WE BROKE HIM!! [Early weekend BS/nonsense thread] I'm going to send DOGE after Elon." -Trump This is the America I grew up in. We need to bring it back MD State Employee may get Arrested by Sheriff for reporting an Illegal Alien to ICE RFK Jr: DTaP vaccine was found to have link to Autism FBI Agents found that the Chinese manufactured fake driver’s licenses and shipped them to the U.S. to help Biden... Love & Real Estate: China’s new romance scam Huge Democrat shift against Israel stuns CNN McCarthy Was Right. They Lied About Everything. How Romans Built Domes My 7 day suspension on X was lifted today. They Just Revealed EVERYTHING... [Project 2029] Trump ACCUSED Of MASS EXECUTING Illegals By DUMPING Them In The Ocean The Siege (1998) Trump Admin To BAN Pride Rainbow Crosswalks, DoT Orders ALL Distractions REMOVED Elon Musk Backing Thomas Massie Against Trump-AIPAC Challenger Skateboarding Dog

Editorial
See other Editorial Articles

Title: Tom007 report ( I am heaving weeping as I post)
Source: [None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: May 29, 2007
Author: me
Post Date: 2007-05-29 23:29:04 by tom007
Keywords: None
Views: 956
Comments: 77

Adam just got out of surgery and things were not as good as we had hoped. The skin grafts were not healing on his buttocks and turns out he took a nasty piece of shrapnal through the right butt cheek and it left a tube of a wound which is not healing. The surgeon took pretty much all of his right butt cheek off but did not have to go to bone. Adam will have to have a colostomy bag put in place on Thursday but only as a way to prevent contamination to the wound. The surgeon thinks he will only need it 6-12 months. Hopefully this will help him conquer the fever. Tomorrow we will find out how the arm burns are doing but right now not much hope for saving his fingers. The good news, the lower back and all the head skin grafts are doing well. I am glad to have you all as my family, it gives me strength to share our burden with you all.

Love you all,

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 76.

#55. To: tom007, BeAChooser (#0)

I notice that the Pentagon and MSM only report the deaths of American troops, but fail to report the devastating and life ruining injuries of young men like Adam.

Succubus, this should be your ass. I notice you've no comment on this thread yet you post article after article defending this evil debacle. You really are a loathesome bastard.

Nostalgia  posted on  2007-05-31   10:16:08 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Succubus, this should be your ass. I notice you've no comment on this thread yet you post article after article defending this evil debacle. You really are a loathesome bastard.

Well stated, and well DESERVED!

So, oozer - just how many relatives or friends do YOU have over in Iraq/Afghanistan? I'm sure the answer is zero, just like all the other government cronies whose only real concerns/ties to this "war" on an undefinable "enemy" are how much profit they reap from their investments in the various "war machine" companies.

General Smedley Butler had it right when he said that the best way to assure that wars would ONLY be fought if absolutely necessary, and then a swift victory and an end to the war brought about in very short order would be a law mandating that immediately upon declaration of war, ALL legislators, ALL parties of the administration, and ALL executives of ALL war-supply/contractor companies have their salaries reduced to the same amount as a Private-First-Class in the army makes for the length of the war...

innieway  posted on  2007-05-31   11:44:55 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

General Smedley Butler had it right when he said that the best way to assure that wars would ONLY be fought if absolutely necessary, and then a swift victory and an end to the war brought about in very short order would be a law mandating that immediately upon declaration of war, ALL legislators, ALL parties of the administration, and ALL executives of ALL war-supply/contractor companies have their salaries reduced to the same amount as a Private-First-Class in the army makes for the length of the war...

Who here disagrees that war is terrible? Not me. Who here is so naive as to think noone ever profits from war or preparing for war. Not me. But I hate to tell you this, Smedley doesn't offer a doable alternative. His idea of conscripting "officers and the directors and the high- powered executives of our armament factories and our munitions makers and our shipbuilders and our airplane builders and the manufacturers of all the other things that provide profit in war time as well as the bankers and the speculators" simply isn't going to happen. Not on our side. Not on anyones. So his solution is absolutely worthless in the real world.

His notion that "workers in these plants get the same wages - all the workers, all presidents, all executives, all directors, all managers, all bankers - yes, and all generals and all admirals and all officers and all politicians and all government office holders - everyone in the nation be restricted to a total monthly income not to exceed that paid to the soldier in the trenches!", is also not going to happen. As nice as it may sound to you, it is a worthless suggestion. He and you might as well recommend we discover the genie in the bottle and make the end of war one of our wishes. Both have the same chance of happening. ZERO.

Furthermore, he claims that kings and tycoons and masters of business and all those workers in industry and all our senators and governors and majors aren't running any risk of being killed or of having their bodies mangled or their minds shattered. Well that may have been true in 1917 and even until the early 30's but the world isn't the same now. 9/11 proved that Washington ... indeed any American city and any American ... is a potential target. You and I sitting here typing back and forth are potential targets. This is a war on TERRORISM and the other side considers even women and children to be fair game. This isn't the early 20th century ... its the early 21st century when smallpox, VX, radiological bombs and even hijacked aircraft delivered by terrorists against CIVILIANS are the weapons of the bad guys. And they would love nothing better than to repeat what happened on 9/11.

Smedley says "give capital and industry and labor thirty days to think it over and you will find, by that time, there will be no war." My question to you is how do you propose to make Hitler, Osama, Saddam or those bombing Iraqi civilians do the same? Again, Smedley's solution is simply not practical in this modern world where wars can be won or lost in 100 hours and where capital, industry and labor are the targets.

And what Smedley had to offer about the causes of war mostly don't apply to 21st century conflicts (nor even the late 20th century ones). Do you think that Osama flew planes into building in NYC for profit? No. Do you think Saddam's motivations were profit? If you believe that then YOU haven't read anything about or by them.

Smedley's notion of having a plebiscite made up of those who would fight decide if we go to war is counter to the principles on which this country was founded. Why should YOU or I (assuming I'm not one of those would be called to fight) have nothing to say about the matter in this era when all of us are on the front lines? The fact is we are NOT disenfranchised ... which is really what you are claiming. This is a REPUBLIC and the decision to go to war is made by our REPRESENTATIVES. What part of REPUBLIC don't you understand? The founders of this country made it a REPUBLIC for very good reasons ... so that our government wouldn't be led by "mobs". I don't want decisions as important as going to war to be made by what would essentially amount to a poll taken by ABC because the voters in this country have already shown they don't make good decisions that way. War should be entered upon only after serious and prolonged consideration ... something many people in this country (and I would hazard many people in the service) are simply not able to do. Polls are half the reason we got Bill Clinton. And may get Hillary.

Furthermore, note that most members of the military ... volunteers one and all ... have been and continue to be supportive of this war and it's objectives. So would you really be willing to let the decision be made by them? I rather doubt it. In which case, this argument is just another debating *tactic* from your side of the aisle. You've no intention of following the lead of those who are doing the fighting. Your side of this debate has demonstrated that since the beginning of the war when those fighting were uniformly supportive of the effort ... and you weren't.

Smedley goes on to write "a third step in this business of smashing the war racket is to make certain that our military forces are truly forces for defense only." ROTFLOL! Again, Smedley is sadly out of date. His advice applies to a different century ... perhaps not even the 20th century. This "expert" doesn't know the number one rule ... a good offense is the best defense. In this day and age, given the terrible consequences of allowing even a few of the enemies weapons to reach your homeland, this has never been truer. For that reason, I and most people want the war on terrorism fought somewhere OTHER than our streets. For this reason I and others are not willing to allow the other guy to get in the first punch ... because the first punch might be fatal to me and millions of my fellow citizens. Therefore, if it looks like the other guy is going to attack, I'm all for taking away his toys. And that is precisely the situation we had in Iraq and may have in Iran.

And although I read the rest of Smedley's essay, I'm not going to bother addressing anything more specifically. I'm simply going to suggest that if YOU really believe Smedley's solution is workable, why don't you take a copy of the article over to Iraq and use it to convince the insurgents to disarm and stop killing thousands of their own citizens in terrorists acts (along with many of our soldiers).

BeAChooser  posted on  2007-05-31   18:41:08 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

This "expert" doesn't know the number one rule ... a good offense is the best defense. In this day and age, given the terrible consequences of allowing even a few of the enemies weapons to reach your homeland, this has never been truer. For that reason, I and most people want the war on terrorism fought somewhere OTHER than our streets. For this reason I and others are not willing to allow the other guy to get in the first punch ... because the first punch might be fatal to me and millions of my fellow citizens. Therefore, if it looks like the other guy is going to attack, I'm all for taking away his toys. And that is precisely the situation we had in Iraq and may have in Iran.

Israel is a good example of this kind of thinking, a country can not just go around demolishing other countries and the people who live in them just because that other country *might* some day have the technology for nuclear weapons.

Look at North Korea, they have nukes, did some tests and failed miserably. It's not like nukes are easy to make precisely enough to work. And oddly no one says anything anymore about North Korea being a danger, yet now Iran must be wiped out and they don't have nuclear weapons.

Iran would never nuke Israel even if it had the capabilities, they know it would be suicidal to do so. But Israel tends to over-react, they become paranoid and threaten to destroy the Others, then when the Others become understandably agitated and angry over it, Israel becomes outraged and says these enemies must really be destroyed. It's a no-win situation.

Diana  posted on  2007-06-02   9:38:17 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

#77. To: Diana, BeAChooser (#76)

Therefore, if it looks like the other guy is going to attack, I'm all for taking away his toys.

Isn't this what HItler did to the Soviets with Operation Barbrossa in 1941?

I do believe a bunch of those fellows in Germany were hung for this at Nuremburg.

If history repeats itself, Bush, Cheney, Rummy and the neowhores had better get in the bunker and stay there. No great loss either way.

BTP Holdings  posted on  2007-06-02 09:46:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]