On 11/11/2011 3:17 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 07:18:13 -0500, John
wrote:

On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 04:55:41 -0500, wrote:

On 11/10/2011 11:14 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 10/11/2011 7:21 PM, X ` Man wrote:

A classmate and colleague of my wife, Lt. Col. David E. Cabrera, was
killed recently in Afghanistan

RIP. Condolences to the family.

But if 0bama kept his promises he would still be alive.


I am just surprised Harry hasn't told us how worthless the guy was for
joining up. I mean, we all know the disdain he has for enlisted men and
women... Just ask John...

Nope. According to his comments, I was 'stupid', because I let myself get drafted.

Doesn't sound like an unreasonable position.

Most people try to have options. Allowing yourself to be drafted
removed options. You could have enlisted and made a better deal.

Of course, you DID get free school and socialized medicine in the
deal.

Didn't work out too badly for him, did it, gumdrop?

--
1-20-13 The end of an error

On 11/11/2011 2:35 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In aweb.com,
says...

On 11/11/2011 1:53 PM, Ombudsman wrote:
On 11/11/2011 7:33 AM, X ` Man wrote:

My disdain is for the military establishment generally, the
"corporation," so to speak, and not those who wear the uniform, with
certain exceptions to the latter, you being one of them.

Bull****. There are no exceptions in your contempt and scorn for
military folks.

And now you have besmirched the reputation of Lt. Col. David E. Cabrera
by associating his name with yours, Harry Krause. The former gave his
life for what he believed in, while you are a sniveling coward behind a
keyboard in Maryland, who never misses an opportunity to traduce the men
and women of the military.

You have repeatedly described this NG as a cesspool, and now you have
dragged Lt. Col. David E. Cabrera's name into the cesspool with you.

Despicable.

Hey. That's Harry the snowflake you are talking about. He was a BMOC in
his day. Actually he was the only MOC. The other men were off serving
their country in various ways.

"other men"? Are you saying that Harry is a man?
OK then---MALE. Happy now? Picky Picky Picky

--
1-20-13 The end of an error

On 11/11/2011 5:59 PM, Eisboch wrote:


"X ` Man" wrote in message
m...

On 11/11/11 7:18 AM, John H wrote:

Nope. According to his comments, I was 'stupid', because I let myself
get drafted.

My disdain is for the military establishment generally, the
"corporation," so to speak, and not those who wear the uniform, with
certain exceptions to the latter, you being one of them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

That's not the impression you leave here Harry. You may not like John or
agree with him politically
or for other reasons, but you've often posed questions like:

"How many innocent Vietnamese did you kill?" and other quips to that
effect.

That's foul ball, IMO. John, me or anyone else that served in the
military didn't make policy.
We did what we took an oath to do. You may disagree with that, I might
even disagree
today, 43 years later and 43 years wiser, but at the time we did what we
were required to do.
It's not a subject to be taken lightly.

BTW ... being Veterans Day and all, I happened to be listening to
another left-leaning spokesperson
going on and on about the military, it's personnel and the
disproportionate number of minorities,
undereducated and economically disadvantaged people that make up the
ranks because they have few other options.
You have also made similar claims.

I decided to do my own "fact checking" about these claims. Turns out,
it's BS.

Here's a few facts I discovered with very little Google effort:

Current active duty military personnel represent less than half of 1
percent of the US population.
That's a very small number doing the dirty work for the rest of the
population.

Less than 9 percent of the current US population are either currently
serving in the military or are military veterans.
Most people guess around 25 to 30 percent.

Here's one that may surprise you:

Contrary to popular belief or myth, the average person in today’s US
military is better educated than their
civilian peers as a group. One (1) percent of active duty service
members lack a high school diploma.
Over 20 percent of civilians over the age of 25 lack a high school
diploma. BTW ... 95 percent of military officers
hold at least a Bachelor’s Degree; many hold advanced postgrad degrees.

and:

Contrary to popular belief or myth, enlistees in today’s military are
not predominately from low income
families or backgrounds. Eleven (11) percent of enlistees come from the
poorest US neighborhoods. 25 percent
come from the wealthiest US neighborhoods. The rest fall somewhere between.

Eisboch


Thank you Dick...

On 11/11/11 5:59 PM, Eisboch wrote:


"X ` Man" wrote in message
m...

On 11/11/11 7:18 AM, John H wrote:

Nope. According to his comments, I was 'stupid', because I let myself
get drafted.

My disdain is for the military establishment generally, the
"corporation," so to speak, and not those who wear the uniform, with
certain exceptions to the latter, you being one of them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

That's not the impression you leave here Harry. You may not like John or
agree with him politically
or for other reasons, but you've often posed questions like:

"How many innocent Vietnamese did you kill?" and other quips to that
effect.

That's foul ball, IMO. John, me or anyone else that served in the
military didn't make policy.
We did what we took an oath to do. You may disagree with that, I might
even disagree
today, 43 years later and 43 years wiser, but at the time we did what we
were required to do.
It's not a subject to be taken lightly.

- - -

It is perfectly reasonable to question those who took place in horrific
events because they were following orders. The so-called "Nuremberg
defense" is not an operable option. All we did in Vietnam, really, is
prop up a right-wing dictatorship until it finally fell. Once Buddhist
monks starting setting themselves on fire to protest the government we
were supporting, you have to ask yourself, "What the hell am I doing here?"

Vietnam was not WW II. We weren't on the side of the angels.

On 11/11/11 6:41 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 17:59:34 -0500, wrote:


I decided to do my own "fact checking" about these claims. Turns out, it's
BS.

Here's a few facts I discovered with very little Google effort:

Current active duty military personnel represent less than half of 1 percent
of the US population.
That's a very small number doing the dirty work for the rest of the
population.

Less than 9 percent of the current US population are either currently
serving in the military or are military veterans.
Most people guess around 25 to 30 percent.

Here's one that may surprise you:

Contrary to popular belief or myth, the average person in today’s US
military is better educated than their
civilian peers as a group. One (1) percent of active duty service members
lack a high school diploma.
Over 20 percent of civilians over the age of 25 lack a high school diploma.
BTW ... 95 percent of military officers
hold at least a Bachelor’s Degree; many hold advanced postgrad degrees.

and:

Contrary to popular belief or myth, enlistees in today’s military are not
predominately from low income
families or backgrounds. Eleven (11) percent of enlistees come from the
poorest US neighborhoods. 25 percent
come from the wealthiest US neighborhoods. The rest fall somewhere between.

Eisboch

They probably have better health care, too, since they have access to
free medical care. And that thing about education, that is free or
highly discounted, too, so I guess more people can afford it. Plus, if
you are in the military, you can get credit for "life experiences,"
that's pretty easy, too.

It appears to me that the"Heritage Foundation" is the source of your
data. I would not consider them either "fair" or "balanced" or
accurate.

I would consider these statistics more reliable:
http://www.census.gov/population/www...ry-Service.pdf


The Heritage Foundation? hehehe. If it said the sun were shining at high
noon, I'd look out the window to be sure.

wrote in message ...

On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 17:59:34 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


I decided to do my own "fact checking" about these claims. Turns out,
it's
BS.


It appears to me that the"Heritage Foundation" is the source of your
data. I would not consider them either "fair" or "balanced" or
accurate.

I would consider these statistics more reliable:
http://www.census.gov/population/www...ry-Service.pdf

---------------------------------------------------------

The Heritage Foundation is one of the web sites I read (because it popped up
in the Google search) however knowing it's reputation among
some, I also searched for and read several others including the Department
of Defense military personnel and demographics
statistics. The numbers vary only slightly.

Eisboch

"X ` Man" wrote in message
m...

On 11/11/11 6:41 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 17:59:34 -0500, wrote:


I decided to do my own "fact checking" about these claims. Turns out,
it's
BS.



The Heritage Foundation? hehehe. If it said the sun were shining at high
noon, I'd look out the window to be sure.

------------------------------------------------

I'll repeat my response to whoever "You.Don’t.Need@ToKnow" is:

The Heritage Foundation is one of the web sites I read (because it popped up
in the Google search) however knowing it's reputation among
some, I also searched for and read several others including the Department
of Defense military personnel and demographics
statistics. The numbers vary only slightly.

Interestingly, as I was on my laptop doing the search, I had "Morning Joe"
on the television and was half listening to it.
At one point Joe Scarborough started reciting some of the same statistics I
found. Now, I know Joe is a Republican, but I
don't think he's exactly a "right-winger".

Eisboch

"X ` Man" wrote in message
m...

On 11/11/11 5:59 PM, Eisboch wrote:


"X ` Man" wrote in message
m...

On 11/11/11 7:18 AM, John H wrote:

Nope. According to his comments, I was 'stupid', because I let myself
get drafted.

My disdain is for the military establishment generally, the
"corporation," so to speak, and not those who wear the uniform, with
certain exceptions to the latter, you being one of them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

That's not the impression you leave here Harry. You may not like John or
agree with him politically
or for other reasons, but you've often posed questions like:

"How many innocent Vietnamese did you kill?" and other quips to that
effect.

That's foul ball, IMO. John, me or anyone else that served in the
military didn't make policy.
We did what we took an oath to do. You may disagree with that, I might
even disagree
today, 43 years later and 43 years wiser, but at the time we did what we
were required to do.
It's not a subject to be taken lightly.

- - -

It is perfectly reasonable to question those who took place in horrific
events because they were following orders. The so-called "Nuremberg
defense" is not an operable option. All we did in Vietnam, really, is
prop up a right-wing dictatorship until it finally fell. Once Buddhist
monks starting setting themselves on fire to protest the government we
were supporting, you have to ask yourself, "What the hell am I doing here?"

Vietnam was not WW II. We weren't on the side of the angels.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Explain that to a 19-21 year old brought up under the influence of the 50's
and early 60's.
I for one didn't know what the "Nuremberg Defense" was, let alone able to
spell it.

Eisboch

On 11/11/11 7:11 PM, Eisboch wrote:


"X ` Man" wrote in message
m...

On 11/11/11 6:41 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 17:59:34 -0500, wrote:


I decided to do my own "fact checking" about these claims. Turns out,
it's
BS.



The Heritage Foundation? hehehe. If it said the sun were shining at high
noon, I'd look out the window to be sure.

------------------------------------------------

I'll repeat my response to whoever "You.Don’t.Need@ToKnow" is:

The Heritage Foundation is one of the web sites I read (because it
popped up in the Google search) however knowing it's reputation among
some, I also searched for and read several others including the
Department of Defense military personnel and demographics
statistics. The numbers vary only slightly.

Interestingly, as I was on my laptop doing the search, I had "Morning
Joe" on the television and was half listening to it.
At one point Joe Scarborough started reciting some of the same
statistics I found. Now, I know Joe is a Republican, but I
don't think he's exactly a "right-winger".

Eisboch


Joe is a decent right-winger, meaning he is a sort of old fashioned, not
insane right winger. He's mellowed some since his terms in the U.S.
Congress. The military demographics started changing some during the
Bush Administration, when job creation fell into the gutter.

On 11/11/11 7:15 PM, Eisboch wrote:


"X ` Man" wrote in message
m...

On 11/11/11 5:59 PM, Eisboch wrote:


"X ` Man" wrote in message
m...

On 11/11/11 7:18 AM, John H wrote:

Nope. According to his comments, I was 'stupid', because I let myself
get drafted.

My disdain is for the military establishment generally, the
"corporation," so to speak, and not those who wear the uniform, with
certain exceptions to the latter, you being one of them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

That's not the impression you leave here Harry. You may not like John or
agree with him politically
or for other reasons, but you've often posed questions like:

"How many innocent Vietnamese did you kill?" and other quips to that
effect.

That's foul ball, IMO. John, me or anyone else that served in the
military didn't make policy.
We did what we took an oath to do. You may disagree with that, I might
even disagree
today, 43 years later and 43 years wiser, but at the time we did what we
were required to do.
It's not a subject to be taken lightly.

- - -

It is perfectly reasonable to question those who took place in horrific
events because they were following orders. The so-called "Nuremberg
defense" is not an operable option. All we did in Vietnam, really, is
prop up a right-wing dictatorship until it finally fell. Once Buddhist
monks starting setting themselves on fire to protest the government we
were supporting, you have to ask yourself, "What the hell am I doing here?"

Vietnam was not WW II. We weren't on the side of the angels.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------


Explain that to a 19-21 year old brought up under the influence of the
50's and early 60's.
I for one didn't know what the "Nuremberg Defense" was, let alone able
to spell it.

Eisboch


Come on, you went to a first-rate high school full of really bright
kids. I know, because I dated a lot of them. :) There were few
intellectual slouches I encountered among my buddies, male and female,
at Amity Regional. You were just entering high school, I bet, when that
terrific Spencer Tracey movie, Judgment at Nuremberg, came out. I'm sure
you saw it...everyone did. It's one of the best movies ever made.