Today's Laugh
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 12:23:04 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 12:11:46 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 10:53:06 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

DSK wrote:
Dan J.S. wrote:
First, how do you respond the the fact you liberals want a draft.
1- I am not a liberal
2- "Liberals" don't want a draft, nor do I.
I want a draft.

I want the sons and daughters of rich Republican voters drafted and
sent
over to Iraq to die with the sons and daughters of the mostly poor.
Having a military force with 50,000 sons and daughters of wealthy
Republican families in it would tend to chill a simple-minded
President's desire to engage in imperialism.

All young men and women 18-25 should be entered in a draft pool. No
exemptions, except for serious disability.
Horse feathers.
Which part?

The first part. I don't think it makes any difference.

If only because of the Pentagon's propensity to hand out cushy jobs to
sons of prominent people - like Lt. Gore for example.

I agree with the second. :)

Oh, we'd surely need a mechanism to ensure the sons and daughters of
rich Republicans were killed or maimed in appropriate numbers.

Say what?

Now you can see where Harry Krause's mind is. He is a sick man.

Today's Laugh
 

P Fritz wrote:
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 10:53:06 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

DSK wrote:
Dan J.S. wrote:
First, how do you respond the the fact you liberals want a draft.

1- I am not a liberal
2- "Liberals" don't want a draft, nor do I.


I want a draft.

I want the sons and daughters of rich Republican voters drafted and sent
over to Iraq to die with the sons and daughters of the mostly poor.
Having a military force with 50,000 sons and daughters of wealthy
Republican families in it would tend to chill a simple-minded
President's desire to engage in imperialism.

All young men and women 18-25 should be entered in a draft pool. No
exemptions, except for serious disability.

Horse feathers.

Harry is just illustratig his total lack of understanding of the military.

And how many years did YOU serve, there, Fritzy??

Today's Laugh
 

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
Horse feathers.

Which part?


Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
The first part. I don't think it makes any difference.

If only because of the Pentagon's propensity to hand out cushy jobs to
sons of prominent people - like Lt. Gore for example.


How was he given a cushy job? Unlike many others, he actually *went* to
Viet Nam. And he also had the guts to be an official conscientious
objector, which limited the number & type of jobs the Army could give him.
There are not many worse spots they could legally have put him in.

That's aside from the fact that conscientious objectors are NOT popular in
the military, for obvious reasons, and life as one is fairly miserable.

Rancor against Al Gore is IMHO pretty much proof of a severely biased
attitude, and shows that one's opinions are chiefly formed by the farther
right wing propaganda.

How about this?
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/09/....ap/index.html

Page not found. Old article?

Today's Laugh... advice to young people
 

I wouldn't hesitate to advise any grandchildren of mine to join the
military if they asked me for my advice.

If they asked you why you recommend it, especially at this specific point
in
history, what would you tell them?


"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote
I would start out by explaining that life is an adventure.

Ha ha ha! Yes it sure is. Even when one does not join the military.

... Everyday
is a new series of events that lead to in multiple directions. Take
advantage of the training and skills offered by the military in
exchange for adding to your store of skills and ability so that
whatever direction your life takes, you are a little more prepared for
it.


That is a valid point for many young people, but not for others. For
example, for a young person intent on becoming a doctor, joining up has
been a good way of gaining some financial security while struggling up
that ladder, and because of the military's vested interest in having
good doctors on hand, it has also been a way past a door that might have
otherwise been closed.

All changed now.

I would say that you can pick what you want to do - Aircraft,
electronics, yada, yada, yada. If you really want to have some fun,
shoot for the elite specialties. Hell, even those pussy Navy types
can do good things for you.


OTOH the Navy doesn't give you all the fun of visiting exotic & foreign
lands, meeting the people, and killing them. And you don't get to sleep
in the swamp.


I would tell them that the discipline and camaraderie will stay with
them forever and give them something to fall back on when times get
tough.


Self discipline & focus is a big benefit that military training and
experience can offer. But again, not all kids need this, not all would
benefit from it. It's quite likely that a kid with some minor discipline
or behavioural 'issues' might end up having really serious problems.



I would say that yes, the chances of being killed by bad guys is
higher than being killed driving across town, but if you pay
attention, trust your buddies and follow the lead of your Senior NCOs
- stay sharp, you'll be just fine.


It improves the odds (and is a useful skill to carry forward in life),
but it's hardly a guarantee. Suicide bombers and IEDs don't care.


Last, I would say that will be bad times, but they will be more than
offset by the good times and those will be more than worthy of
remembering.


Doug Kanter wrote:
All true (almost), but to my son, I've said that if you're going to get your
guts blown out, make sure it's for a good cause.


"The United States has no right, no desire, and no intention to impose our
form of government on anyone else. That is one of the main differences
between us and our enemies."
-- Apparently he isn't counting the invasions, occupations and
nation-building endeavors in Afghanistan and Iraq, 2005 State of the Union
address, Washington, D.C., Feb. 2, 2005



The U.S. military has always been at least on the fringe of being a
mercenary force used to gouge greater profits out of exploited foreign
economies for politically favored companies. This was true in George
Washington's time, it's true now. There have been a fair number of times
when this has been only a slight tendency, then there have been times
(like now) when it is pretty much the primary mission.

I knew this when I joined up. I'd make sure that any young person who
asked my advice had a reasonable knowledge of history, as well as
knowledge of the nature of the beast to which he was offering his throat.

DSK

Today's Laugh
 

How about this?
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/09/....ap/index.html


Doug Kanter wrote:
Page not found. Old article?


Oops... it was a couple weeks after Katrina... maybe the "liberal biased
media" yanked it... the story was about how Al & Tipper organized &
financed an evacuation of a number of critical patients from N'awluns.

DSK

Today's Laugh
 

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
How about this?
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/09/....ap/index.html


Doug Kanter wrote:
Page not found. Old article?

Oops... it was a couple weeks after Katrina... maybe the "liberal biased
media" yanked it... the story was about how Al & Tipper organized &
financed an evacuation of a number of critical patients from N'awluns.

DSK


Those assholes! :-)

Today's Laugh
 

wrote:

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 12:23:04 -0400, Harry Krause

Oh, we'd surely need a mechanism to ensure the sons and daughters of
rich Republicans were killed or maimed in appropriate numbers.


Say what?

Overstated on my part. I should have said EXPOSED to the same
possibilites of being shot or maimed as the sons and daughters of the
mostly low-income families whose kids now serve. I don't want any of
them killed or maimed, but...if someone has to drive an unarmed gasoline
truck, let it be a US senator's son.


Bull. You said what you meant and only backed off when you were challenged.

Today's Laugh
 

" *JimH*" wrote in message
. ..

wrote:

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 12:23:04 -0400, Harry Krause

Oh, we'd surely need a mechanism to ensure the sons and daughters of
rich Republicans were killed or maimed in appropriate numbers.


Say what?

Overstated on my part. I should have said EXPOSED to the same
possibilites of being shot or maimed as the sons and daughters of the
mostly low-income families whose kids now serve. I don't want any of
them killed or maimed, but...if someone has to drive an unarmed gasoline
truck, let it be a US senator's son.


Bull. You meant what you said and only backed off when you were
challenged.



Oops. Slight edit.

Today's Laugh
 

On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 16:29:11 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 12:23:04 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 12:11:46 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 10:53:06 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

DSK wrote:
Dan J.S. wrote:
First, how do you respond the the fact you liberals want a draft.
1- I am not a liberal
2- "Liberals" don't want a draft, nor do I.
I want a draft.

I want the sons and daughters of rich Republican voters drafted and sent
over to Iraq to die with the sons and daughters of the mostly poor.
Having a military force with 50,000 sons and daughters of wealthy
Republican families in it would tend to chill a simple-minded
President's desire to engage in imperialism.

All young men and women 18-25 should be entered in a draft pool. No
exemptions, except for serious disability.
Horse feathers.
Which part?

The first part. I don't think it makes any difference.

If only because of the Pentagon's propensity to hand out cushy jobs to
sons of prominent people - like Lt. Gore for example.

I agree with the second. :)

Oh, we'd surely need a mechanism to ensure the sons and daughters of
rich Republicans were killed or maimed in appropriate numbers.

Say what?

A little sick...

--
John H

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant:
It's just that they know so much that isn't so."

Ronald Reagan

Today's Laugh
 

Rancor against Al Gore is IMHO pretty much proof of a severely biased
attitude, and shows that one's opinions are chiefly formed by the
farther right wing propaganda.


Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
Quit getting your boxers in a bunch Doug - he was what he was - a son
of a Southern Senator who was tossed into the military for no other
reason than the fact that it wouldn't look good for the future Senator
Gore to have been a CO. He was given a nice safe job where he couldn't
get himself into trouble and it worked exactly as planned.

Like it or not, that's exactly the way it was.


Actually, you're very wrong. Look up the facts, you won't believe me. Al
Gore's father, the Senator, did NOT want Al to go into the Army and was
on record as being vocally against the war from pretty early on.

I think it's likely that Gore did get some preferential treatment. I
also think it's likely that he encountered a heck of a lot of rancor &
abuse from guys who thought he was 1- a pussy for being a conscientious
objector in the first place and 2- a traitor for his father's public
stance against the war.

So in short, since you've fallen hook line & sinker for the right-wing
propaganda (which they've spent millions of dollars on, so maybe it's
nice that they didn't waste all that money), I hope that you'll never
ever try to connect the dots. It will make you dissatisfied with your
opinions & statements.

BTW becoming a corpsman was a good option for draftee consientious
objectors, but you had to agree to a longer term of service than college
grad officer types like Gore were obligated for. If Gore had become a
corpsman, there really wouldn't be as much room for criticism, would there?

And a lot of 'pecker checkers' got hassled, big time, for being cont obj'rs.

DSK

Today's Laugh
 

On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 17:59:59 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 12:41:28 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 12:23:04 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 12:11:46 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 10:53:06 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

DSK wrote:
Dan J.S. wrote:
First, how do you respond the the fact you liberals want a draft.
1- I am not a liberal
2- "Liberals" don't want a draft, nor do I.
I want a draft.

I want the sons and daughters of rich Republican voters drafted and sent
over to Iraq to die with the sons and daughters of the mostly poor.
Having a military force with 50,000 sons and daughters of wealthy
Republican families in it would tend to chill a simple-minded
President's desire to engage in imperialism.

All young men and women 18-25 should be entered in a draft pool. No
exemptions, except for serious disability.
Horse feathers.
Which part?
The first part. I don't think it makes any difference.

If only because of the Pentagon's propensity to hand out cushy jobs to
sons of prominent people - like Lt. Gore for example.

I agree with the second. :)
Oh, we'd surely need a mechanism to ensure the sons and daughters of
rich Republicans were killed or maimed in appropriate numbers.

Say what?

Overstated on my part. I should have said EXPOSED to the same
possibilites of being shot or maimed as the sons and daughters of the
mostly low-income families whose kids now serve. I don't want any of
them killed or maimed, but...if someone has to drive an unarmed gasoline
truck, let it be a US senator's son.

Thank you for clarifying that. It is appreciated.

Nice to see Harry is still sucking up to someone, especially someone with some
sense.

--
John H

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant:
It's just that they know so much that isn't so."

Ronald Reagan

Today's Laugh
 

On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 14:29:18 -0400, " *JimH*" wrote:


wrote:

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 12:23:04 -0400, Harry Krause

Oh, we'd surely need a mechanism to ensure the sons and daughters of
rich Republicans were killed or maimed in appropriate numbers.


Say what?

Overstated on my part. I should have said EXPOSED to the same
possibilites of being shot or maimed as the sons and daughters of the
mostly low-income families whose kids now serve. I don't want any of
them killed or maimed, but...if someone has to drive an unarmed gasoline
truck, let it be a US senator's son.


Bull. You said what you meant and only backed off when you were challenged.


Agreed.

--
John H

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant:
It's just that they know so much that isn't so."

Ronald Reagan

Today's Laugh
 

On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 16:32:43 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"P Fritz" wrote in message
...

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 10:53:06 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

DSK wrote:
Dan J.S. wrote:
First, how do you respond the the fact you liberals want a draft.

1- I am not a liberal
2- "Liberals" don't want a draft, nor do I.


I want a draft.

I want the sons and daughters of rich Republican voters drafted and sent
over to Iraq to die with the sons and daughters of the mostly poor.
Having a military force with 50,000 sons and daughters of wealthy
Republican families in it would tend to chill a simple-minded
President's desire to engage in imperialism.

All young men and women 18-25 should be entered in a draft pool. No
exemptions, except for serious disability.

Horse feathers.

Harry is just illustratig his total lack of understanding of the military.




So, Fruitz, you're saying that preferential treatment is an integral and
permanent aspect of the military?


Do you think OCS, ROTC, and West Point officers are treated the same?

--
John H

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant:
It's just that they know so much that isn't so."

Ronald Reagan

Today's Laugh
 

"PocoLoco" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 16:32:43 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"P Fritz" wrote in message
...

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 10:53:06 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

DSK wrote:
Dan J.S. wrote:
First, how do you respond the the fact you liberals want a draft.

1- I am not a liberal
2- "Liberals" don't want a draft, nor do I.


I want a draft.

I want the sons and daughters of rich Republican voters drafted and
sent
over to Iraq to die with the sons and daughters of the mostly poor.
Having a military force with 50,000 sons and daughters of wealthy
Republican families in it would tend to chill a simple-minded
President's desire to engage in imperialism.

All young men and women 18-25 should be entered in a draft pool. No
exemptions, except for serious disability.

Horse feathers.

Harry is just illustratig his total lack of understanding of the
military.




So, Fruitz, you're saying that preferential treatment is an integral and
permanent aspect of the military?


Do you think OCS, ROTC, and West Point officers are treated the same?

I'm in no mood for your games today. You know what I meant. If not, expend
the energy to read through the entire thread.

Today's Laugh
 

"PocoLoco" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 16:32:43 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"P Fritz" wrote in message
...

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 10:53:06 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

DSK wrote:
Dan J.S. wrote:
First, how do you respond the the fact you liberals want a draft.

1- I am not a liberal
2- "Liberals" don't want a draft, nor do I.


I want a draft.

I want the sons and daughters of rich Republican voters drafted and
sent
over to Iraq to die with the sons and daughters of the mostly poor.
Having a military force with 50,000 sons and daughters of wealthy
Republican families in it would tend to chill a simple-minded
President's desire to engage in imperialism.

All young men and women 18-25 should be entered in a draft pool. No
exemptions, except for serious disability.

Horse feathers.

Harry is just illustratig his total lack of understanding of the
military.




So, Fruitz, you're saying that preferential treatment is an integral and
permanent aspect of the military?


Do you think OCS, ROTC, and West Point officers are treated the same?

As typical, the liebrals just don't get it.




--
John H

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant:
It's just that they know so much that isn't so."

Ronald Reagan

Today's Laugh
 

"P Fritz" wrote in message
...

"PocoLoco" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 16:32:43 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"P Fritz" wrote in message
...

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 10:53:06 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

DSK wrote:
Dan J.S. wrote:
First, how do you respond the the fact you liberals want a draft.

1- I am not a liberal
2- "Liberals" don't want a draft, nor do I.


I want a draft.

I want the sons and daughters of rich Republican voters drafted and
sent
over to Iraq to die with the sons and daughters of the mostly poor.
Having a military force with 50,000 sons and daughters of wealthy
Republican families in it would tend to chill a simple-minded
President's desire to engage in imperialism.

All young men and women 18-25 should be entered in a draft pool. No
exemptions, except for serious disability.

Horse feathers.

Harry is just illustratig his total lack of understanding of the
military.




So, Fruitz, you're saying that preferential treatment is an integral and
permanent aspect of the military?


Do you think OCS, ROTC, and West Point officers are treated the same?

As typical, the liebrals just don't get it.

Moron. If you've received training ahead of other new arrivals, you *should*
be treated differently. Having a parent in congress, or is the president's
personal attorney is not comparable with the things you mentioned.

Today's Laugh
 

On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 20:48:47 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"P Fritz" wrote in message
...

"PocoLoco" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 16:32:43 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"P Fritz" wrote in message
...

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 10:53:06 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

DSK wrote:
Dan J.S. wrote:
First, how do you respond the the fact you liberals want a draft.

1- I am not a liberal
2- "Liberals" don't want a draft, nor do I.


I want a draft.

I want the sons and daughters of rich Republican voters drafted and
sent
over to Iraq to die with the sons and daughters of the mostly poor.
Having a military force with 50,000 sons and daughters of wealthy
Republican families in it would tend to chill a simple-minded
President's desire to engage in imperialism.

All young men and women 18-25 should be entered in a draft pool. No
exemptions, except for serious disability.

Horse feathers.

Harry is just illustratig his total lack of understanding of the
military.




So, Fruitz, you're saying that preferential treatment is an integral and
permanent aspect of the military?


Do you think OCS, ROTC, and West Point officers are treated the same?

As typical, the liebrals just don't get it.

Moron. If you've received training ahead of other new arrivals, you *should*
be treated differently. Having a parent in congress, or is the president's
personal attorney is not comparable with the things you mentioned.


The answer to your question is 'yes'. Is it right? No. And, that includes
preferential treatment based on race or sex.

--
John H

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant:
It's just that they know so much that isn't so."

Ronald Reagan

Today's Laugh
 

DSK wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:

There's no requirement that one answer a ringing phone.


Agreed.

A direct quote from my grandfather- "That telephone is in this house for
MY convenience, not theirs."

I often don't answer the phone because I'm busy. OTOH if I'm not doing
anything, discouraging telemarketing is a useful task and benefits our
society. Plus it can be fun.

DSK


One of the auto dialers called me once with some pre-approved credit
card deal. I gave them some fake info. Then they asked me for my phone
number. Since they called *me* I simply said "Oh, I don't have a phone.
They disconnected it when I couldn't pay the bill." The caller didn't
hesitate and asked me if I could give him my number at work.

Telemarketers can be fun when you are in the right mood.

Dan

Today's Laugh
 

"Dan Krueger" wrote in message
.net...
DSK wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:

There's no requirement that one answer a ringing phone.


Agreed.

A direct quote from my grandfather- "That telephone is in this house for
MY convenience, not theirs."

I often don't answer the phone because I'm busy. OTOH if I'm not doing
anything, discouraging telemarketing is a useful task and benefits our
society. Plus it can be fun.

DSK


One of the auto dialers called me once with some pre-approved credit card
deal. I gave them some fake info. Then they asked me for my phone
number. Since they called *me* I simply said "Oh, I don't have a phone.
They disconnected it when I couldn't pay the bill." The caller didn't
hesitate and asked me if I could give him my number at work.

Telemarketers can be fun when you are in the right mood.

Dan

All I did was join the Do Not Call register and I have not been bothered
since.

Today's Laugh
 

In article ,
says...

I would say that yes, the chances of being killed by bad guys is
higher than being killed driving across town, but if you pay
attention, trust your buddies and follow the lead of your Senior NCOs
- stay sharp, you'll be just fine.

If your grandchild weren't as smart as you'd like and couldn't
specialize in something that'd keep them out of combat, how could you
possibly advise them to put themselves in harm's way for an idiotic war
such as the one we're presently engaged?

I certainly wouldn't want that on my conscience, especially if they
ended up being shooting practice for some freakin' insurgent in Baghdad.

jps

Today's Laugh
 

"PocoLoco" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 20:48:47 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"P Fritz" wrote in message
...

"PocoLoco" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 16:32:43 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"P Fritz" wrote in message
...

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 10:53:06 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

DSK wrote:
Dan J.S. wrote:
First, how do you respond the the fact you liberals want a
draft.

1- I am not a liberal
2- "Liberals" don't want a draft, nor do I.


I want a draft.

I want the sons and daughters of rich Republican voters drafted
and
sent
over to Iraq to die with the sons and daughters of the mostly
poor.
Having a military force with 50,000 sons and daughters of
wealthy
Republican families in it would tend to chill a simple-minded
President's desire to engage in imperialism.

All young men and women 18-25 should be entered in a draft pool.
No
exemptions, except for serious disability.

Horse feathers.

Harry is just illustratig his total lack of understanding of the
military.




So, Fruitz, you're saying that preferential treatment is an integral
and
permanent aspect of the military?


Do you think OCS, ROTC, and West Point officers are treated the
same?

As typical, the liebrals just don't get it.

Moron. If you've received training ahead of other new arrivals, you
*should*
be treated differently. Having a parent in congress, or is the
president's
personal attorney is not comparable with the things you mentioned.


The answer to your question is 'yes'. Is it right? No. And, that
includes
preferential treatment based on race or sex.

The whole point is that a draft is completely unecessary, and would
serioulsy harm the effectiveness of the military. As usual, the leibrals
want to politicize the military and make it politcallt correct.......they
just don't get it.



--
John H

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant:
It's just that they know so much that isn't so."

Ronald Reagan

Today's Laugh
 

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 05:26:35 GMT, "Bryan"
wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
I saw a military recruitment TV commercial the other day, in which a
parent was sort of asked, "if your child asks about going in the
military,
what would you say?" kind of thing. Those weren't the exact words, but
close enough. The idea was that parents should have "information" so
they
can answer their kids' questions and help them decide upon the
military.

This newsgroup and it's political discussions has caused me to think
about
something that never crossed my mind. I need to ask my father (retired
air
force pilot) why he and my grandfather (army, infantry) never encouraged
me
to join the military. It will be interesting to know if my father thinks
his grandson should join the military.

I wouldn't hesitate to advise any grandchildren of mine to join the
military if they asked me for my advice.

If they asked you why you recommend it, especially at this specific point
in history, what would you tell them?

A reccomendation requires that someone ask about the course of action first.
And, the person asking for the reccomendation has already given thought to
the course of action and has not dismissed dismissed the course of action
already. So, if my child or grandchild asked for my reccomendation about
joining the military I would say yes I reccomend that you join the military.

Today's Laugh
 

In article ,
says...
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 22:58:19 -0700, jps wrote:

In article ,
says...

I would say that yes, the chances of being killed by bad guys is
higher than being killed driving across town, but if you pay
attention, trust your buddies and follow the lead of your Senior NCOs
- stay sharp, you'll be just fine.

If your grandchild weren't as smart as you'd like and couldn't
specialize in something that'd keep them out of combat, how could you
possibly advise them to put themselves in harm's way for an idiotic war
such as the one we're presently engaged?

Um...so what? What's smart got to do with it? Lot's of "smart"
people are combat soldiers. Lot's of "smart" people are fighter
jocks, helicopter pilots, SEALS, RECONN, Rangers...it's a uninformed
comment.

I certainly wouldn't want that on my conscience, especially if they
ended up being shooting practice for some freakin' insurgent in Baghdad.

Conscience has nothing to do with it. It's all about Fate and how
your particular hand is dealt. Would your "conscience" be affected if
you sent your grandchild down to the corner 7-11 for a gallon of milk
and said child was run over by a bus?

I'm into making my own luck and my own fate.

If the moon's alignment has something to do with it, fine. I'm not
counting on it.

jps

Today's Laugh
 

In article ,
says...
On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 13:02:29 -0700, jps wrote:

In article ,
says...
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 22:58:19 -0700, jps wrote:

In article ,
says...

I would say that yes, the chances of being killed by bad guys is
higher than being killed driving across town, but if you pay
attention, trust your buddies and follow the lead of your Senior NCOs
- stay sharp, you'll be just fine.

If your grandchild weren't as smart as you'd like and couldn't
specialize in something that'd keep them out of combat, how could you
possibly advise them to put themselves in harm's way for an idiotic war
such as the one we're presently engaged?

Um...so what? What's smart got to do with it? Lot's of "smart"
people are combat soldiers. Lot's of "smart" people are fighter
jocks, helicopter pilots, SEALS, RECONN, Rangers...it's a uninformed
comment.

I certainly wouldn't want that on my conscience, especially if they
ended up being shooting practice for some freakin' insurgent in Baghdad.

Conscience has nothing to do with it. It's all about Fate and how
your particular hand is dealt. Would your "conscience" be affected if
you sent your grandchild down to the corner 7-11 for a gallon of milk
and said child was run over by a bus?

I'm into making my own luck and my own fate.

You don't make your own fate - your number has already been drawn,
its' just a question of when it's played.

All you are doing is playing a role.

If the moon's alignment has something to do with it, fine. I'm not
counting on it.

Nothing to do with the moon - it's like philosophy or something. :)

That's like nature/nurture. Some claim it's all one, some claim it's
all the other. Those of us who are moderate in our views think it's
somewhere between, eh?

It's my view that I have lots of input into my fate, it's an interactive
thing. You are welcome to consider your fate predetermined.

I don't.

jps

Today's Laugh
 

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
. ..

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 05:26:35 GMT, "Bryan"
wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
I saw a military recruitment TV commercial the other day, in which a
parent was sort of asked, "if your child asks about going in the
military,
what would you say?" kind of thing. Those weren't the exact words, but
close enough. The idea was that parents should have "information" so
they
can answer their kids' questions and help them decide upon the
military.

This newsgroup and it's political discussions has caused me to think
about
something that never crossed my mind. I need to ask my father (retired
air
force pilot) why he and my grandfather (army, infantry) never encouraged
me
to join the military. It will be interesting to know if my father
thinks
his grandson should join the military.

I wouldn't hesitate to advise any grandchildren of mine to join the
military if they asked me for my advice.

If they asked you why you recommend it, especially at this specific point
in history, what would you tell them?

A reccomendation requires that someone ask about the course of action
first. And, the person asking for the reccomendation has already given
thought to the course of action and has not dismissed dismissed the course
of action already. So, if my child or grandchild asked for my
reccomendation about joining the military I would say yes I reccomend that
you join the military.


Considering the shallowness of your intellect, a simple yes or no is
probably all your grandchildren would expect. Then, they'd go ask the large
flower pot in the corner and get a more in-depth answer.

Today's Laugh
 

*JimH* wrote:

"Dan Krueger" wrote in message
.net...

DSK wrote:


Harry Krause wrote:


There's no requirement that one answer a ringing phone.


Agreed.

A direct quote from my grandfather- "That telephone is in this house for
MY convenience, not theirs."

I often don't answer the phone because I'm busy. OTOH if I'm not doing
anything, discouraging telemarketing is a useful task and benefits our
society. Plus it can be fun.

DSK


One of the auto dialers called me once with some pre-approved credit card
deal. I gave them some fake info. Then they asked me for my phone
number. Since they called *me* I simply said "Oh, I don't have a phone.
They disconnected it when I couldn't pay the bill." The caller didn't
hesitate and asked me if I could give him my number at work.

Telemarketers can be fun when you are in the right mood.

Dan


All I did was join the Do Not Call register and I have not been bothered
since.


I did the same when it first was available. Some telemarketers choose
ignore it.

Dan

Today's Laugh
 

"Dan Krueger" wrote in message
k.net...
*JimH* wrote:

"Dan Krueger" wrote in message
.net...

DSK wrote:


Harry Krause wrote:


There's no requirement that one answer a ringing phone.


Agreed.

A direct quote from my grandfather- "That telephone is in this house for
MY convenience, not theirs."

I often don't answer the phone because I'm busy. OTOH if I'm not doing
anything, discouraging telemarketing is a useful task and benefits our
society. Plus it can be fun.

DSK


One of the auto dialers called me once with some pre-approved credit card
deal. I gave them some fake info. Then they asked me for my phone
number. Since they called *me* I simply said "Oh, I don't have a phone.
They disconnected it when I couldn't pay the bill." The caller didn't
hesitate and asked me if I could give him my number at work.

Telemarketers can be fun when you are in the right mood.

Dan


All I did was join the Do Not Call register and I have not been bothered
since.

I did the same when it first was available. Some telemarketers choose
ignore it.

Dan

Then get their name, number and document the call. Then send the
information to your State's Attorney General.

You may be eligible for monetary retribution for the violation. We have
collected over $900 so far for violations of that law.

Today's Laugh
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 00:06:41 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
m...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 05:26:35 GMT, "Bryan"
wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
I saw a military recruitment TV commercial the other day, in which a
parent was sort of asked, "if your child asks about going in the
military,
what would you say?" kind of thing. Those weren't the exact words,
but
close enough. The idea was that parents should have "information" so
they
can answer their kids' questions and help them decide upon the
military.

This newsgroup and it's political discussions has caused me to think
about
something that never crossed my mind. I need to ask my father
(retired
air
force pilot) why he and my grandfather (army, infantry) never
encouraged
me
to join the military. It will be interesting to know if my father
thinks
his grandson should join the military.

I wouldn't hesitate to advise any grandchildren of mine to join the
military if they asked me for my advice.

If they asked you why you recommend it, especially at this specific
point
in history, what would you tell them?

A reccomendation requires that someone ask about the course of action
first. And, the person asking for the reccomendation has already given
thought to the course of action and has not dismissed dismissed the
course
of action already. So, if my child or grandchild asked for my
reccomendation about joining the military I would say yes I reccomend
that
you join the military.

Considering the shallowness of your intellect, a simple yes or no is
probably all your grandchildren would expect. Then, they'd go ask the
large
flower pot in the corner and get a more in-depth answer.

Hey - my flower pot with the mini-palm tree talks to me all the time.

That's you, though. :)

Today's Laugh
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 00:55:36 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 00:06:41 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
news:lpqdnWFcwvdr98fenZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@comcast. com...

~~ snippage ~~

A reccomendation requires that someone ask about the course of action
first. And, the person asking for the reccomendation has already given
thought to the course of action and has not dismissed dismissed the
course
of action already. So, if my child or grandchild asked for my
reccomendation about joining the military I would say yes I reccomend
that
you join the military.

Considering the shallowness of your intellect, a simple yes or no is
probably all your grandchildren would expect. Then, they'd go ask the
large
flower pot in the corner and get a more in-depth answer.

Hey - my flower pot with the mini-palm tree talks to me all the time.

That's you, though. :)

True - but it is also in contact with Martians from Venus.

Martians from Venus you ask?

Well, it's a long story...

I'm prepared to believe you, with no evidence or further explanation
necessary. I think "Men in Black" was a scientific documentary, not fiction.

Today's Laugh
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 12:55:47 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 00:55:36 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
m...
On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 00:06:41 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
news:lpqdnWFcwvdr98fenZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@comcas t.com...

~~ snippage ~~

A reccomendation requires that someone ask about the course of
action
first. And, the person asking for the reccomendation has already
given
thought to the course of action and has not dismissed dismissed the
course
of action already. So, if my child or grandchild asked for my
reccomendation about joining the military I would say yes I
reccomend
that
you join the military.

Considering the shallowness of your intellect, a simple yes or no is
probably all your grandchildren would expect. Then, they'd go ask the
large
flower pot in the corner and get a more in-depth answer.

Hey - my flower pot with the mini-palm tree talks to me all the time.

That's you, though. :)

True - but it is also in contact with Martians from Venus.

Martians from Venus you ask?

Well, it's a long story...

I'm prepared to believe you, with no evidence or further explanation
necessary. I think "Men in Black" was a scientific documentary, not
fiction.

Expect to be visited shortly.

Then again, you won't remember it will you?

Unfortunate.

Maybe there'll be evidence in the garden. Stolen or scorched eggplant, or
missing basil. Do aliens like pesto?

Today's Laugh
 

*JimH* wrote:


All I did was join the Do Not Call register and I have not been bothered
since.

I did the same when it first was available. Some telemarketers choose
ignore it.

Dan


Then get their name, number and document the call. Then send the
information to your State's Attorney General.

You may be eligible for monetary retribution for the violation. We have
collected over $900 so far for violations of that law.



I've asked them for their information. Somehow the call is disconnected
and they never call back.

Today's Laugh
 

In article ,
says...
On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 16:57:34 -0700, jps wrote:

In article ,
says...
On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 13:02:29 -0700, jps wrote:

In article ,
says...
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 22:58:19 -0700, jps wrote:

In article ,
says...

I would say that yes, the chances of being killed by bad guys is
higher than being killed driving across town, but if you pay
attention, trust your buddies and follow the lead of your Senior NCOs
- stay sharp, you'll be just fine.

If your grandchild weren't as smart as you'd like and couldn't
specialize in something that'd keep them out of combat, how could you
possibly advise them to put themselves in harm's way for an idiotic war
such as the one we're presently engaged?

Um...so what? What's smart got to do with it? Lot's of "smart"
people are combat soldiers. Lot's of "smart" people are fighter
jocks, helicopter pilots, SEALS, RECONN, Rangers...it's a uninformed
comment.

I certainly wouldn't want that on my conscience, especially if they
ended up being shooting practice for some freakin' insurgent in Baghdad.

Conscience has nothing to do with it. It's all about Fate and how
your particular hand is dealt. Would your "conscience" be affected if
you sent your grandchild down to the corner 7-11 for a gallon of milk
and said child was run over by a bus?

I'm into making my own luck and my own fate.

You don't make your own fate - your number has already been drawn,
its' just a question of when it's played.

All you are doing is playing a role.

If the moon's alignment has something to do with it, fine. I'm not
counting on it.

Nothing to do with the moon - it's like philosophy or something. :)

That's like nature/nurture. Some claim it's all one, some claim it's
all the other. Those of us who are moderate in our views think it's
somewhere between, eh?

On that we totally agree. It is a combination of both and anybody who
has adopted children will tell you that.

It's my view that I have lots of input into my fate, it's an interactive
thing. You are welcome to consider your fate predetermined.

I don't.

So you don't plan on death then? You don't have life insurance
policies betting that you will live longer than the actuaries say you
will?

Wow, what' s your secret? And how do I get some of whatever it is
that is going to prevent you from becoming worm food?

Fate isn't just one's demise.

jps

Today's Laugh
 

Hey - my flower pot with the mini-palm tree talks to me all the time.


Doug Kanter wrote:
That's you, though. :)


You're just jealous because the voices like ME better!

DSK

Today's Laugh
 

In article ,
says...
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 00:22:41 -0700, jps wrote:

In article ,
says...
On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 16:57:34 -0700, jps wrote:

In article ,
says...
On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 13:02:29 -0700, jps wrote:

In article ,
says...
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 22:58:19 -0700, jps wrote:

In article ,
says...

I would say that yes, the chances of being killed by bad guys is
higher than being killed driving across town, but if you pay
attention, trust your buddies and follow the lead of your Senior NCOs
- stay sharp, you'll be just fine.

If your grandchild weren't as smart as you'd like and couldn't
specialize in something that'd keep them out of combat, how could you
possibly advise them to put themselves in harm's way for an idiotic war
such as the one we're presently engaged?

Um...so what? What's smart got to do with it? Lot's of "smart"
people are combat soldiers. Lot's of "smart" people are fighter
jocks, helicopter pilots, SEALS, RECONN, Rangers...it's a uninformed
comment.

I certainly wouldn't want that on my conscience, especially if they
ended up being shooting practice for some freakin' insurgent in Baghdad.

Conscience has nothing to do with it. It's all about Fate and how
your particular hand is dealt. Would your "conscience" be affected if
you sent your grandchild down to the corner 7-11 for a gallon of milk
and said child was run over by a bus?

I'm into making my own luck and my own fate.

You don't make your own fate - your number has already been drawn,
its' just a question of when it's played.

All you are doing is playing a role.

If the moon's alignment has something to do with it, fine. I'm not
counting on it.

Nothing to do with the moon - it's like philosophy or something. :)

That's like nature/nurture. Some claim it's all one, some claim it's
all the other. Those of us who are moderate in our views think it's
somewhere between, eh?

On that we totally agree. It is a combination of both and anybody who
has adopted children will tell you that.

It's my view that I have lots of input into my fate, it's an interactive
thing. You are welcome to consider your fate predetermined.

I don't.

So you don't plan on death then? You don't have life insurance
policies betting that you will live longer than the actuaries say you
will?

Wow, what' s your secret? And how do I get some of whatever it is
that is going to prevent you from becoming worm food?

Fate isn't just one's demise.

Ah, so you admit it exists then?

I don't deny fate, but apparently, unlike you, I think it's malleable
just like luck.

Fate to me is the combination of our natural behavior (what we were when
we came out) and what we make of it. Some portion of a person's fate
(the odds or success or failure) is indeed predetermined but in my view
each person has a lot of say (as in breadth of possibilities) in how
their path is played out.

Think Colin Powell and Ted Kazinsky.

jps

Today's Laugh
 

In article ,
says...
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 11:43:52 -0700, jps wrote:

In article ,
says...
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 00:22:41 -0700, jps wrote:

In article ,
says...
On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 16:57:34 -0700, jps wrote:

In article ,
says...
On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 13:02:29 -0700, jps wrote:

In article ,
says...
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 22:58:19 -0700, jps wrote:

In article ,
says...

I would say that yes, the chances of being killed by bad guys is
higher than being killed driving across town, but if you pay
attention, trust your buddies and follow the lead of your Senior NCOs
- stay sharp, you'll be just fine.

If your grandchild weren't as smart as you'd like and couldn't
specialize in something that'd keep them out of combat, how could you
possibly advise them to put themselves in harm's way for an idiotic war
such as the one we're presently engaged?

Um...so what? What's smart got to do with it? Lot's of "smart"
people are combat soldiers. Lot's of "smart" people are fighter
jocks, helicopter pilots, SEALS, RECONN, Rangers...it's a uninformed
comment.

I certainly wouldn't want that on my conscience, especially if they
ended up being shooting practice for some freakin' insurgent in Baghdad.

Conscience has nothing to do with it. It's all about Fate and how
your particular hand is dealt. Would your "conscience" be affected if
you sent your grandchild down to the corner 7-11 for a gallon of milk
and said child was run over by a bus?

I'm into making my own luck and my own fate.

You don't make your own fate - your number has already been drawn,
its' just a question of when it's played.

All you are doing is playing a role.

If the moon's alignment has something to do with it, fine. I'm not
counting on it.

Nothing to do with the moon - it's like philosophy or something. :)

That's like nature/nurture. Some claim it's all one, some claim it's
all the other. Those of us who are moderate in our views think it's
somewhere between, eh?

On that we totally agree. It is a combination of both and anybody who
has adopted children will tell you that.

It's my view that I have lots of input into my fate, it's an interactive
thing. You are welcome to consider your fate predetermined.

I don't.

So you don't plan on death then? You don't have life insurance
policies betting that you will live longer than the actuaries say you
will?

Wow, what' s your secret? And how do I get some of whatever it is
that is going to prevent you from becoming worm food?

Fate isn't just one's demise.

Ah, so you admit it exists then?

I don't deny fate, but apparently, unlike you, I think it's malleable
just like luck.

Fate to me is the combination of our natural behavior (what we were when
we came out) and what we make of it. Some portion of a person's fate
(the odds or success or failure) is indeed predetermined but in my view
each person has a lot of say (as in breadth of possibilities) in how
their path is played out.

Think Colin Powell and Ted Kazinsky.

I think we agree more than disagree.

In my view, you only have so many choices to make. At any given nexus
or confluence of events, you can go right, left or foreward but you
can't backup - what's happened happened and you move on from there.

Where I think we diverge is in the number of choices. I don't believe
that anyone is given an infinite amount of choice. Now having said
that, one can make the most of the choice (or decision or what one had
been handed) and do well - I just don't believe there in an infinite
amount of choice available.

We make choices every day. You can diverge from your fate (trajectory)
at any moment. Our lives are the result of choices we make every day.
Each one has the capability of altering our fate to some degree, some
more than others.

I don't think of your definition as fate, I think of it as probability.

jps