This is really fucking sad
- Thread starter j_anderson
- Start date
I believe Women are not as picky as how a guy looks. If she really did love him before, she might still love him now.
How do you think some of these long hair freaks on dope, have G.F. Sure they look better if they shaved and cut their hair but some women can look past on how the guy looks.
I don't understand it, to me looks are 75% of what turns me on.
How do you think some of these long hair freaks on dope, have G.F. Sure they look better if they shaved and cut their hair but some women can look past on how the guy looks.
I don't understand it, to me looks are 75% of what turns me on.
The whole story is sad and no matter what one's feelings are on may different aspects involved - should make all of us pause. 
He was on 60 Minutes, or CNN... in a segment about a lack of benefits where needed from the VA
Is is a sad story, but there are many similar stories that go untold.. She must really love him. she stuck by him throughout his recovery from the time he returned from Iraq.
Is is a sad story, but there are many similar stories that go untold.. She must really love him. she stuck by him throughout his recovery from the time he returned from Iraq.
She tried...
....because she thought it was the right thing, but in reality it was a call well beyond the call of duty.
It is no surprise that they seperated....I just hope she was not cruel or unkind to him when the cameras went away.
She was very, very brave...heroic almost...to give it a try, but you can see that her heart is totally broken in those photos.
I do not know that I would be man enough to have married a woman in those circumstances, nor do I know that I would be man enough to want to live on if I were him. The final straw for me would be if my kid were to reject me...which given that they are only 4 years old...would be likely.
The horrors and tragedies of war are many...I have ALWAYS felt that it should be an ABSOLUTE REQUIREMENT that before a person is given the power to send others into combat they would have to have experienced it themselves...
....because she thought it was the right thing, but in reality it was a call well beyond the call of duty.
It is no surprise that they seperated....I just hope she was not cruel or unkind to him when the cameras went away.
She was very, very brave...heroic almost...to give it a try, but you can see that her heart is totally broken in those photos.
I do not know that I would be man enough to have married a woman in those circumstances, nor do I know that I would be man enough to want to live on if I were him. The final straw for me would be if my kid were to reject me...which given that they are only 4 years old...would be likely.
The horrors and tragedies of war are many...I have ALWAYS felt that it should be an ABSOLUTE REQUIREMENT that before a person is given the power to send others into combat they would have to have experienced it themselves...
For every story like this there's an opposite happy ending story.
A few weeks I watched A&E 48 hours, on it was a cop who looked just like him, his entire face
was "burned off" in a car accident.
His wife stayed with him and she said she loved him even more now.
A few weeks I watched A&E 48 hours, on it was a cop who looked just like him, his entire face
was "burned off" in a car accident.
His wife stayed with him and she said she loved him even more now.
Oh that's bound to be it. Not that the man of her dreams was horribly disfigured in an unnecessary war. Exactly how she pictured her wedding day.scouser1 said:
Thank goodness I've never experienced it with anyone close. But I've read and heard that psychologically burns are the worst of injuries much more so than amputations etc. . . in part because of the “gut” reaction of strangers.Papi Chulo said:
If they have not served then at least they cannot protect (prevent) their children from being sent to war. There should be no exemptions. All of Mitt Romneys five boys should be drafted. The participation rate in the war by the sons and daughters of members of Congress / Senate is laughable.
"Farming looks mighty easy when your plow is a pencil and you're a thousand miles from the corn field."
"In most communities it is illegal to cry "fire" in a crowded assembly. Should it not be considered serious international misconduct to manufacture a general war scare in an effort to achieve local political aims?"
“When people speak to you about a preventive war, you tell them to go and fight it. After my experience, I have come to hate war. War settles nothing.”
“I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity.”
Dwight Eisenhower
"Farming looks mighty easy when your plow is a pencil and you're a thousand miles from the corn field."
"In most communities it is illegal to cry "fire" in a crowded assembly. Should it not be considered serious international misconduct to manufacture a general war scare in an effort to achieve local political aims?"
“When people speak to you about a preventive war, you tell them to go and fight it. After my experience, I have come to hate war. War settles nothing.”
“I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity.”
Dwight Eisenhower
Yes...
That said, you reached a logical conclusion from my words, but read something I did not say. I said "seen combat" - I did not say "was a veteran".
Lots of combat reports, for example.
Also, it seems like a reasonable request that if a person has presidential aspirations (something that usually comes fairly early in life) they could seize an opportunity to make sure they had "seen combat"...for example, I could see politicians being embedded with troops for a period as a requirement so that they could then make informed and empathetic decisions about war.
It was a gross and broad statement, but I mean it with sincerity. It is an abomination in my mind that the current U.S. Administration has very few members who have actually been a part of war...or have any idea what it means to be a soldier. Interestingly enough, it appears the less experience they have with it, the more hawkish they are (Cheney comes to mind).
"Cheney was of military age and a supporter of the Vietnam War but he did not serve in the war, applying for and receiving five draft deferments. In an interview with George C. Wilson that appeared in the April 5, 1989 issue of The Washington Post, when asked about his deferments the future Defense Secretary said, "I had other priorities in the '60s than military service."[12] While Cheney was eligible for the draft, as he said during his confirmation hearings in 1989, he was not called up because the Selective Service System was only taking older men. On January 19, 1966, when his wife was about 10 weeks pregnant, Mr. Cheney applied for 3-A status, the "hardship" exemption, which excluded men with children or dependent parents. It was granted. In January 1967, Cheney turned 26 and was no longer eligible for the draft.[13]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Cheney
I wonder how many guys in Iraq right now on their second FORCED tour of duty have "children or dependent parents", or wives at home expecting.
...yes...and no.Anderson said:
That said, you reached a logical conclusion from my words, but read something I did not say. I said "seen combat" - I did not say "was a veteran".
Lots of combat reports, for example.
Also, it seems like a reasonable request that if a person has presidential aspirations (something that usually comes fairly early in life) they could seize an opportunity to make sure they had "seen combat"...for example, I could see politicians being embedded with troops for a period as a requirement so that they could then make informed and empathetic decisions about war.
It was a gross and broad statement, but I mean it with sincerity. It is an abomination in my mind that the current U.S. Administration has very few members who have actually been a part of war...or have any idea what it means to be a soldier. Interestingly enough, it appears the less experience they have with it, the more hawkish they are (Cheney comes to mind).
"Cheney was of military age and a supporter of the Vietnam War but he did not serve in the war, applying for and receiving five draft deferments. In an interview with George C. Wilson that appeared in the April 5, 1989 issue of The Washington Post, when asked about his deferments the future Defense Secretary said, "I had other priorities in the '60s than military service."[12] While Cheney was eligible for the draft, as he said during his confirmation hearings in 1989, he was not called up because the Selective Service System was only taking older men. On January 19, 1966, when his wife was about 10 weeks pregnant, Mr. Cheney applied for 3-A status, the "hardship" exemption, which excluded men with children or dependent parents. It was granted. In January 1967, Cheney turned 26 and was no longer eligible for the draft.[13]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Cheney
I wonder how many guys in Iraq right now on their second FORCED tour of duty have "children or dependent parents", or wives at home expecting.
Last edited:
This then puts a higher standard on the children of Presidents, Senators, and Representatives than the rest of society.sailorsix said:
If, as we frequently hear, although I don't know if you feel this way, "it isn't right" for those on the lower rungs of 'society', how does it suddenly become right for those on the upper rungs of 'society'? It also implies that we should break the rules.
If for example 'B' the son of 'A' went through University in the 1980's he wasn't in ROTC, as 'B' approached graduation he investigated commissioning programs, 'B' was never selected it wasn't that 'B' wasn't smart enough rather that 'B' had an advanced degree and the there wasn't a billet for someone with 'B's' qualifications. 'B' went to work in the "Pinstriped Suit 9-5 world" but kept looking and honestly 'B' had never liked being in the woods in the rain so he wasn't interested in the Infantry. Finally 'B' was selected for a specialized commissioning program "B" was about to be commissioned when Congress cut the budget "B" was offered the choice of getting out or going enlisted "B" chose to get out and back to suits and 9-5. 9/11 occurs, 'B' looks again - you're too old and we have younger and equally smart people. It's now 2007 'A' chooses to run for and is elected President. 'B' is now over the age to be Commissioned (and lets say for enlisted service as well) but because 'A' is now president 'B' should be forced to serve? Does this seem just, or is yours merely a "knee jerk reaction."
It was indeed a while ago, but in the U.S. a great many at the very top of the social heap volunteered during both the First and Second World Wars. I know a National Guard/Army Reserve Officer, from a very distinguished (non-military) family who not only volunteered as a Company Grade Officer to go to Vietnam, but turned around as a Field Grade Officer and went back twice more! To I might add be called a "baby killer" when he returned home.
* all of the above is based on real people's experiences.
President Clinton likewise “skated around” his Vietnam draft status, while in his Senior Year and already selected for a Rhodes Scholarship, he pulled strings and was admitted to the ROTC program at the University of Arkansas on deferred status - on the oral statement that upon his return from Oxford he was planing to attend the University of Arkansas Law School and would take his ROTC training at that time. As we all know President Clinton instead attended the Yale Law School, and never made any effort to enroll in an ROTC program. However by this time he was older and therefore had obtained a new draft classification.MLAM said:
Doesn’t sound any different than Vice-President Cheney, indeed it would seem that if anything President Clinton was more deceitful.
its the reality of looks I guess... you build a relationship with someone that you are attracted to physically at first and things build on from there. But for his face to change from A to Z you can't blame her for seeing something else if she does. But what I am wondering is what does the guy feel like, more than the girl.
Lets see Somalia - remember Black Hawk down in part caused by the fact there was no armor - a decision which came down from Washington. Then there was Serbia, hey lets blow up a Orthodox Christian Country to protect Moslems - who then can come to the U.S. and try to make a terrorist attack on a U.S. Army Base, oh, and at the same time we can bomb the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade.MLAM said:
It really doesn't change your point except to say who are you going to find. There seems to be much nostalgia for WJC but he was never in combat. And in fact I don't believe there is a single current Democratic contender for President who has been in combat.
