Hard Light Productions Forums

Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Bobboau on December 08, 2004, 07:34:52 pm

Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Bobboau on December 08, 2004, 07:34:52 pm
http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2004/s1261168.htm
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Rictor on December 08, 2004, 07:37:44 pm
I would hardly call it ownt.

If thats the worst criticism he has coming, after all he's done, well, he's a lucky man.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Flipside on December 08, 2004, 07:39:37 pm
Thing is, he has soldiers in Iraq who have finished their tour of duty, who they are keeping on and refuse to tell them when this rule will be relaxed.

What a morale booster that must be....
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Knight Templar on December 08, 2004, 07:42:06 pm
I'm suprised there hasn't been more "muntinous" behavior.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Jetmech Jr. on December 08, 2004, 07:43:06 pm
Quote
Today is not the first time the issue has boiled over. Two months ago 23 army reservists refused to deliver fuel to a base in Iraq because they said their vehicles weren't armoured and it was too dangerous.

The Pentagon which usually takes a tough line on mutinous behaviour instead was surprisingly mild in its response – just this week it decided not to court martial the soldiers but has ordered non judicial punishments like pay cuts and demotions.


Huh. Getting punished for not wanting to die because of lack of protection. :blah:
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Flipside on December 08, 2004, 07:43:05 pm
To be honest KT, I'm not sure we would find out even if there was...
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Bobboau on December 08, 2004, 07:47:43 pm
he usualy manages to doge tough questions with matrix like reflaxes, and he's constantly talking about how the guys over there have everything they could ever want,then out of no were one of the guys stands up and gives him a smack directly on live TV.

I think you'r underestemateing this, this is probly the first or at least biggest major critisism of the Bush administration from the troops I can think of, at the least it was probly the most effective.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Flipside on December 08, 2004, 08:10:21 pm
It is an extreme blow to the Whitehouse certainly, to have people see their army not as clean, efficient and well stocked, as they believe it to be, but actually having to scrape pieces of scrap metal together for armour, sort of takes the gleam off the American war machine...
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: NGTM-1R on December 08, 2004, 09:21:18 pm
Eh, field modifications. Everybody does 'em. To be honest, I'm surprised it wasn't done when they were Stateside. They'd have to scrounge the stuff up there, too.

If their vehicles aren't armored, though, they probably aren't supposed to getting near the enemy, so...
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Thrilla on December 08, 2004, 09:54:04 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Flipside
It is an extreme blow to the Whitehouse certainly, to have people see their army not as clean, efficient and well stocked, as they believe it to be, but actually having to scrape pieces of scrap metal together for armour, sort of takes the gleam off the American war machine...


Come by some of the reserve motorpools.  Most of our equipment is old or well used.  I HOPE they at least give us some updated equipment before we deploy.  

The whole stop loss sucks, but if you read the contract carefully it says that the government can change the contents of the contract to fit its needs.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Flipside on December 08, 2004, 10:02:41 pm
Yeah, I suppose that's one advantage of owning computer software, you learn to read the bloody small-print ;)

Seriously though, I hope they stock you out with better stuff too! Don't like the idea of anyone risking their lives, even fully armoured :(
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Turnsky on December 09, 2004, 01:39:33 am
i think i said it best on a chat i was on this morning..

[Rumsfeld] Move Zig. [/Rumsfeld]

edit: silly HTML tags :nervous:
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Grug on December 09, 2004, 04:21:16 am
woosh!
Over my head it goes...

Explaination...?
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: redmenace on December 09, 2004, 12:19:41 pm
What an ass
http://www.drudgereport.com/flashcp.htm

This is one reason I don't like reporters.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Flipside on December 09, 2004, 12:28:34 pm
Yes, because a GI would obey orders that he didn't agree with from a Press representative......

The only way a reporter could get a GI to ask those questions is because they are walking around every single day asking each other the same questions. All the reporter really did was give him the 'nudge' that was needed for him to say it in front of Rumsfield.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: redmenace on December 09, 2004, 12:47:44 pm
He hand picked the soldiers to take as escorts, then talked to the sergeant in order to pick them out of the crowd in order to ask questions.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Kazan on December 09, 2004, 12:49:00 pm
redmenace drudge is one of the most unreliable sources in existance
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Lynx on December 09, 2004, 01:02:07 pm
He's a bitter old fart. He reached the old fart stadium long ago. Old farts  shouldn't have anything to do with politics.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Gank on December 09, 2004, 01:02:30 pm
drudgereport, I cant really take a news site that has its first link going to the 3am girls in the mirror seriously.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: ionia23 on December 09, 2004, 01:04:01 pm
This is the logical consequence of having an idiot with an agenda for a Commander In Chief
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: redmenace on December 09, 2004, 01:04:40 pm
It is a leaked memo. I don't think he made it up, but it could be. That doesn't mean that he is not absurdly biased, because he[Matt Drudge] is. If this memo is a fake I am sure they will diffute it.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: redmenace on December 09, 2004, 01:09:38 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Gank
drudgereport, I cant really take a news site that has its first link going to the 3am girls in the mirror seriously.

Gank there in alphabetical order according to last name and typically numerics go before letters. :p

Quote
Originally posted by ionia23
This is the logical consequence of having an idiot with an agenda for a Commander In Chief

What do you mean by that?
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Flipside on December 09, 2004, 01:14:55 pm
Doesn't matter, the water is already muddy. That's how it works you see ;)

Now even if this isn't a fake, even if he DID hand-pick the soldiers and arrange for those questions to be asked, no matter what he did, that situation could not have happened, those questions would not have been asked unless they were in knocking around the camp and generally being asked by those soldiers in the first place.

I don't think you could get a GI to do something like that to Rumsfields face unless they really were having fears for their life, it goes against years of training to respect the chain of command and to endure difficult situations.

The fact is that if this reporter. the officers and men etc arranged to have this happen, if this is the case, just shows how urgent and life threatening they feel the situation to be.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: aldo_14 on December 09, 2004, 01:16:49 pm
Quote
Originally posted by redmenace

Gank there in alphabetical order according to last name and typically numerics go before letters. :p


The fact that it has any link to not only the Mirror but also the Sun makes it impossible to take it seriously as a reliable news source.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: redmenace on December 09, 2004, 01:31:34 pm
I am not refuting the fact that armored HVs were not planned for when they should have been. However, I am just pointing out the fact that these soldiers, even though their actions might have been good intentioned, didn't wholey act on their own, but were used by some scum bag reporter with an obvious agenda. But I will say this, hard questions should be asked of our leaders. I am happy they got an answer for their questions.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Gank on December 09, 2004, 01:47:37 pm
Eh, no they didnt. They got the brush off, like everybodys gets from rumsfeld. And if the reporter put them up to it, why did they all cheer when the question was asked? and why is the reporter a scum-bag for asking why US troops werent being protected properly?

And isnt it a bit daft complaining about reporters with agendas with only a single article from a reporter with an agenda to back it up?

And how reliable is a reporter who doesnt even know what year it is?
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Kazan on December 09, 2004, 01:50:32 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Gank
and why is the reporter a scum-bag for asking why US troops werent being protected properly?
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: redmenace on December 09, 2004, 01:57:01 pm
I have no problem with reporters asking questions. I have no problem with soldiers asking, why they were not protected? I have a problem with him "nudging" soldiers to do something to fulfill an agenda.

In short he is a scum bag for looking out for number #1. Not for asking important questions. He is a scum bag for manipulating people.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Kazan on December 09, 2004, 02:02:14 pm
reporter: "will you ask him this question please [yada yada]"
soldier: "sure"

and it doesn't require any agenda other than honesty to want to ask that sort of question

I think your calling them a "Scumbag with an agenda" is a subconscious attempt to supress both the freedom of the press and the freedom of speech because you've clearly demonstrated in the past that you've bought onto the "Be a good patriot, don't ask questions!" bull****

real nudge, especially with that type of question the soliders aren't going to ask it unless they've been asking themselves that for a while.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Gank on December 09, 2004, 02:02:47 pm
Umm, what exactly did he gain by the question being asked? Every news network in the US was there. How the hell is he looking after no.1? If  anything hes looking after the soldiers, but I guess thats too much for you to get your head around.

Quote
But it felt good to hand it off to the national press. I believe lives are at stake with so many soldiers going across the border riding with scrap metal as protection. It may be to late for the unit I am with, but hopefully not for those who come after.


Quote from the email. This guy is your idea of a scumbag? Tosser.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: redmenace on December 09, 2004, 02:38:37 pm
You don't think that this makes himself look good. Bah.
And Kazan it always comes down that ****....
This is just what I want isn't it
(http://www.staticfiends.com/galleries/government_galleries/0025.jpg)
and this
(http://www.holocaustchronicle.org/HolocaustScans/HiRes/1933/19330008000023)
And this
(http://fcit.coedu.usf.edu/holocaust/gifs2/66527.gif)

Kazan SHUT UP.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: SadisticSid on December 09, 2004, 02:48:27 pm
Oh piss off redmenace, posting pictures of Nazis doesn't help your ****ing case. The fact is that whatever the agenda of the reporter, the soldier in question had absolute free will to accept or refuse to ask the question and he did so to the cheers of his colleagues.

People manipulate each other all the time but you can't make someone do something totally against their will which is the false picture critics are trying to make. Bah.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Kazan on December 09, 2004, 02:51:41 pm
not all fascism looks like nazism genius

nazism is fascism, but fascism is not nazism
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: redmenace on December 09, 2004, 02:53:29 pm
I am offended by that prick.

He ALL THE ****ING TIME posts insults and implications. It is hardly argumentative and definatly not ethical. Therefore I am insulted.

And his opinion isn't even worth the paper I wipe my ass with.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Kazan on December 09, 2004, 02:57:02 pm
it's not ethical for you and a lot of other people to be creating and atmosphere of supression of the first ammendment BUT YOU DO IT


I'm just pointing out the similiarity, if you don't like that it's a fact stop acting that way
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Gank on December 09, 2004, 03:13:45 pm
Quote
Originally posted by redmenace
You don't think that this makes himself look good. Bah.


Well see hes not going around shouting he did it, so how the hell is it?  Hes not making himself look good, drudge is.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: redmenace on December 09, 2004, 08:49:35 pm
http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000735190
:D
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Ford Prefect on December 09, 2004, 09:32:01 pm
(http://nevadabenefits.com/support/images/gallery/crowd3.jpg)

Is it just me?
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: redmenace on December 09, 2004, 10:06:11 pm
oh my gosh oh my gosh oh my gosh we have facist on the loose. :p
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: aldo_14 on December 10, 2004, 03:17:30 am
Great way to deflect attention from the actual issue.......... who gives a **** whose idea the question was?

Surely you should look at the content; are troops having to salvage scrap to try and defend themselves (obviously if the rest of the troops applauded the question)?  How could that be acceptable to the worlds most technologically advanced military?
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: redmenace on December 10, 2004, 08:28:58 am
Did you not read the post I made? I think it is a good question. I would like to know also why most trucks don't have armor either. I just don't like what the reporter did. Aparently that is facism now also.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: aldo_14 on December 10, 2004, 08:32:47 am
Tis an editorial comment; I don't think what the reporter did or not say has any relevance whatsoever as long as the question was valid & honest.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: redmenace on December 10, 2004, 08:46:59 am
sorry for seeing as anything else than what you intended.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Gank on December 10, 2004, 12:02:48 pm
Thats a response to the email thats been published redmanace, not an attempt to glorify himself. It is pretty sad when you demonise someone for getting someone to ask a question which you say yourself needs to be asked.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Kazan on December 10, 2004, 01:10:47 pm
exactly - demonizing someone for asking a fücking question is attempting to supress free speech
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: redmenace on December 10, 2004, 03:02:52 pm
LMAO
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Kazan on December 10, 2004, 03:15:32 pm
so attempting to supress free speech is funny now
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Unknown Target on December 10, 2004, 03:21:12 pm
No, just you and your completely over the top opinions :p
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Kazan on December 10, 2004, 03:39:17 pm
if my statements seem over the top to you then you're a little out of touch with reality
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Unknown Target on December 10, 2004, 03:53:18 pm
*snickers* or maybe I'm in the reality everyone else is in.


Gasp, get this Kazan! Someone can agree with your points, but yet NOT want to go completely nuts like you do!

I read your posts like I read the radical conservative's posts: funny little things that even though they disagree/agree with my views, I realize that the person saying them is almost fanatical, so I shouldn't pay them too much mind.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Kazan on December 10, 2004, 03:54:38 pm
UT: i highly recommended you read up on comparative analysis of the similiarites between the current administration and the achetypal fascist regime
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Unknown Target on December 10, 2004, 03:55:49 pm
:rolleyes: Kazan, I already KNOW about the similarities. But I'm not going ballistic like you do in every thread!

I read about this great thing called restraint, and I decided to try it. If you want I'll pick you up a self-help book that probably talks about it.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: redmenace on December 10, 2004, 08:48:57 pm
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1471&u=/ibd/20041210/bs_ibd_ibd/2004129issues01&printer=1
This is obviously biased...

http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/breaking_10.html
Looks as if they have armored most of the humvees. But I will say they need to armor the convoy trucks as well.

UT: are you calling me a radical? :lol:

w00t: my 1500th post. :D
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Unknown Target on December 10, 2004, 09:26:47 pm
Red: I'm calling Kazan radical.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: redmenace on December 10, 2004, 09:29:00 pm
Kazan is just passionate. I actually respect that to.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Unknown Target on December 10, 2004, 09:29:57 pm
Kazan is passionate to the point of shutting out all other forms of opinion. Even if he doesn't agree with them, he should at least try to see it from the other side of the fence.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Rictor on December 10, 2004, 09:48:04 pm
'xactly
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Kazan on December 11, 2004, 06:42:59 am
UT: you assume I haven't already tried that and succeeded

you also assume that it doesn't always enrage a person more to know the motivation of the opposition
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Unknown Target on December 11, 2004, 09:30:43 am
No, I don't assume that. I assume that you think you're so high up on your moral post, that you refuse to admit that someone might have a legitimate reason for supporting the opposition, other than, according to you, trying to make the US into a pseudo-nazi Germany.

Take Liberator, for instance. I don't agree with him, in fact, I'm vehemetly opposed to any of his views. But unlike you, I don't go around accusing him of being "brainwashed" by his father, or trying to turn the US into a fascist country. I accept that he might believe something different for me, for reasons other than a personal vendetta against you and/or trying to overthrow the world order.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Kazan on December 11, 2004, 09:38:36 am
liberator is supporting the rise of fascism in america - that's a simple fact

i'm not going to tolerate it - i don't give a rats ****ing ass what his motiviations are, but in the case of him his motive for doing so is as vile as his actions
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Gank on December 11, 2004, 10:27:14 am
Quote
Originally posted by redmenace
Looks as if they have armored most of the humvees. But I will say they need to armor the convoy trucks as well.


http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/203200_armor10.html

Kinda related:
http://fairuse.1accesshost.com/news2/lost-arm.html
http://fairuse.1accesshost.com/news2/salon45.htm
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Unknown Target on December 11, 2004, 10:43:26 am
Quote
Originally posted by Kazan
liberator is supporting the rise of fascism in america - that's a simple fact

i'm not going to tolerate it - i don't give a rats ****ing ass what his motiviations are, but in the case of him his motive for doing so is as vile as his actions



You DO have to tolerate it Kazan! You are exactly like he is! You say that everyone can disagree, so long as they agree with you! You refuse to allow ANYONE to disagree with you, yet you keep spouting that THEY are taking away our freedoms. Maybe they are, but you're not any better!
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Kazan on December 11, 2004, 11:26:56 am
WRONG Unknown target - denouncing someones position is not taking away their right to think for themselves, or discouraging their right to free speech

"your opinion is wrong and harmful" != "asking questions is unamerican"
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Bobboau on December 11, 2004, 11:58:06 am
Kaz oftine sounds a lot like them (in the opposite direction of course), but the simple fact is that he is calling for less legislation of beliefes, so he is in no way (other than perhaps superficaly) like liberator and the rest of them.

Liberator ~ "the bible should be made into enforced law"
Kazan ~ "no, and you are and idiot"

se the diference?
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Unknown Target on December 11, 2004, 11:59:50 am
Yes, but the way Kazan handles itself not only speaks of fanatisism and uproffesionalism, but it also smacks of the very same behavior he denouces.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Kazan on December 11, 2004, 12:06:21 pm
because i have lost patience with them
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Unknown Target on December 11, 2004, 12:08:46 pm
Because you had no patience for disagreeing points to begin with.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Kazan on December 11, 2004, 12:10:10 pm
wrong, and it's both inobservant and insulting that you think so - you're soo busy being annoyed my righteous rage and condemnations that you won't see past my tone of voice to see what im saying
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Unknown Target on December 11, 2004, 12:13:25 pm
Would you like me to point out my proof of point in your last statement, or can you do that yourself?

For the record: I agree with your statements, I disagree with Liberator, but I'm not attacking your statements and your facts, I'm attacking the way you put them, and the way you handle others.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Gank on December 11, 2004, 12:49:56 pm
Poor ould Libby, he hasnt even posted in this thread and hes still getting bashed.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Janos on December 11, 2004, 01:01:14 pm
That's his destiny. He will appear soon.

Kaz, however, acts like his tinfoil is overheating and his heat sinks are malfunctioning. ALL THE TIME
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Kazan on December 11, 2004, 01:02:02 pm
you know it's really ****ing annoying when legitimate statements that are backed up with evidence are called "tinfoil hatting"

*wallops janos for being a moron*
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Janos on December 11, 2004, 01:05:32 pm
Then maybe you should back up your legitimate statements and not shout them out like "omg usa is a nazi regime you know it" and then bash on everyone who, even though they might not disagree with your point, disagree with your methods of output. It's not zen.

Oh, and
DEREK SMART
DEREK SMART
DEREK SMART
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: phreak on December 11, 2004, 01:16:18 pm
shut the hell up hes registered here
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Kazan on December 11, 2004, 01:17:50 pm
janos: refer to earlier threads where i did this (cited sources) and got listened to equally well

tell my why i should go through the effort of formulating a professional, source cited, argument when it's effect is no different than letting the fact that im pissed off show and not bothering to cite sources
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Janos on December 11, 2004, 01:50:25 pm
This thread doesn't count?
Ok here (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,28446.0.html).

You said your point. You are pissed off, that's fine and ok. No problem, understandanle. The fact that you are so pissed off that you just swing around is not.

And as you state, yourself, that:
Quote
tell my why i should go through the effort of formulating a professional, source cited, argument when it's effect is no different than letting the fact that im pissed off show and not bothering to cite sources

then you really can't blame people for not agreeing with you but rather get annoyed. Your own actions - which you, btw, acknowledge, lead to the conclusion that your political goals come out as inane ranting and ad hominems.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Unknown Target on December 11, 2004, 04:00:42 pm
Thank you Janos.

Kazan, notice that Janos, I, and most everyone else here state most of our opinions and refutes in calm manners. You curse like a sailor, go bonkers, scream, kick, and generally act like a two year old.
Not only that, but in you're so wrapped up in your
Quote
righteous rage and condemnations
that you can't see anything past your nose.

You're practically the liberal version of George W. with your my-way-or-the-highway attitude, and your intolerance for people who disagree with you.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: Ford Prefect on December 11, 2004, 06:40:52 pm
Kazan needs a dosage of ultra-transcendental Buddhism.
Title: Rumsfeld == ownt
Post by: aldo_14 on December 11, 2004, 06:51:14 pm
Empty vessels make most noise.