Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Laurie on May 29, 2007, 04:21:12 PM
-
It came to my attention this evening that a person in this community found somebody who had served in the armed forces a joke.
I was rather disgusted to see a guy mock a member of the game who had served in the communications services as 'you carried a radio' in an undermining manner. He had rather obsurd attitude to the two guys who were online saying that they had served.
This isnt a report of abuse or anything, if it was it wouldnt be on this board but in HTC inbox. I am just here to state my disgust for this person and my full 101% support for any man/woman who has or is serving and puting their life on the line for our sakes in any way shape or form.
Thankyou,
<>
-
Well put! "S"
-
Those that served in the armed forces know full well they served so that others had the right to be morons if they so choose.
-
Well lets see...I was a "gun bunny" in a "weekend warrior" unit and then a "puddle pirate" full time. A guy that "carries a radio" we used to call "targets" when I was a "weekend warrior".
As far as the guy being out of line with his comments??? It wouldn't have bothered me too much. I've been called all sorts of stuff by all sorts of people about the service I performed. The one constant I've always been able to count on is this. I KNOW what I've done for my country and so does everyone else who has ever served or has given a crap about this country. Everyone else I could give a crap about and their opinions don't count in my book.
to the guy who carries a radio and every other grunt, jarhead, professional bullet catcher, puddle pirate, airdog, Navy nanny, trash hauler, and whatever other funny or messed up name you can think of. You know who and what you are and so do I and your service is appreciated by this retired puddle pirate twidget.
-
gee he must really think highly of me, I spent my first two years testing salinity testers and fixing sound powered phones. that was of course in between cleaning our berthing space and the IC shop.
-
Storch, how often did you have to change the sound powered phone batteries?
-
I personally never did have to change my sound powered phone batteries but I did have to field that request often. what I did get was a BT punch and a bucket of condensate, the second request got me blue balled and a captain's mast for striking a petty officer. :D
-
Originally posted by Laurie
It came to my attention this evening that a person in this community found somebody who had served in the armed forces a joke.
Thankyou,
<>
The world is rife with morons. This community is not immune, sadly. As has been said so many times before, those who've made the supreme sacrifice to preserve our freedom, provide the means for idiots of which you speak to run their' foul mouths.
-
Seems to me this "Individual" must have either been alseep in or ditched History class in school. If it hadn't been for a group of people who "Carried Radios" in WWII, the Japanese would have dealt us a lot more losses than there were....I refer to the Navajo Code Talkers.
Anyone who serves is of the upmost in character and deserves our full, loyal support.....No matter how they serve!
-
Boy oh boy Id love to be able to take the time to reply in detail on this, but my B1B is fueled and ready to do touch and goes on the USS Nimitz this afternoon. Gotta run!
-
everyones important, someone has to cook the food, haul supplies, maintain the equipment.
-
Anyone in any capcity in any branch deserves our respect and gratitude. End of freaking story. I had a lot of uncles and one aunt who served in Nam and they got 0. hopefully those days are behind us. Support the troops. "Not the politicians" who put our Women and Men in harms way for illconceived ventures of misfortune. Afgahnistan Yes! Iraq No!
All ways Grateful !
Uber.
-
It's lots of fun to make jokes at the military's expense.
For instance, Military - Intelligence. Now thats funny.
Honor, Courage and Sacrifice are words that give us cause to reflect on what the United States military is. There has never been an army, at any time in history that embodies these three words like the US Military.
-
"Honor, Courage and Sacrifice are words that give us cause to reflect on what the United States military is. There has never been an army, at any time in history that embodies these three words like the US Military.
You havent watched the movie 'Zulu' have you?
I think saying that an american soldiers life is more worthy than any other's sacrifice or has shown more courage than any other person who has made an idenctical pledge is damn right arrogant and out of place in a bulletin board of such calibre.
A considerbaly large chunk of my anscestory did not give their lives for freedom and justice to be put on some second shelf to another.
MY family has given 17 men in the past 200 years to my country and i damned if im gonna see it put to second best for some sort of patriotic romantiscism.
Good day,
:furious
-
Originally posted by Laurie
Good day
And good point.
We should honor them all.
- oldman
-
... Except the Nazis. Nazis are bad apples.
-
Originally posted by Benny Moore
... Except the Nazis. Nazis are bad apples.
I am by no means a fan of the Germans or appeasement but not all german soldiers where nazi's. Yes all Nazi' should be left to rot in a cold dark cellar, but a few german soldiers actually sympathised with allies/jews.
As a group theyre still a bunch of bastards though.
Not sure wether you meant the whole german army or just members of the nazi party in your post,
-
laurie, do you know why WWI was fought?
-
A considerbaly large chunk of my anscestory did not give their lives for freedom and justice to be put on some second shelf to another.
Freedom ? Justice? You are kidding right? Sorry for the losses your family has incured, I know the feeling well. But that's the price of Empire.
-
Originally posted by storch
laurie, do you know why WWI was fought?
Yes i know a heck of a lot since i have got A* GCSE on WW1 and 2.
there was not one but many factors for the outbreak of war in 1914,
-In late july viceduke ferdinand was assinated under suspicous circumstances,
-Russia like other countris (england,france) had alliance 'chains' this meant, because of all the alliances and treatis of protection that if one country was invaded, it would be a spark and a chain of promises were kept and there we had a huge multi national conflict brewing,
-germany was rather envious of british and french sucsses
-Austria was collapsing and needed something to rekindle their countries flame,
-Italy wanted to expand
-Britain felt under threat from its top spot,
-France was scared of germany due to thier close proximity,
-Russia felt obliged to protect the serbs,
-the triple entente were paraniod of being over come whilst the triple alliance was agressive and hungry,
this from memory so please excuse lack of dates and deeper insight, i do not have my book on me.
-
Originally posted by Laurie
Yes i know a heck of a lot since i have got A* GCSE on WW1 and 2.
there was not one but amny factors for the outbreak of war in 1914,
-In late july viceduke ferdinand was assinated under suspicous circumstances,
-Russia like other countris (england,france) had alliance 'chains' this meant, because of all the alliances and treatis of protection that if one country was invaded, it would be a spark and a chain of promises were kept and there we had a huge multi national conflict brewing,
-germany was rather envious of british and french sucsses
-Austria was collapsing and needed something to rekindle their countries flame,
-Italy wanted to expand
-Britain felt under threat from its top spot,
-France was scared of germany due to thier close proximity,
-Russia felt obliged to protect the serbs,
-the triple entente were paraniod of being over come whilst the triple alliance was agressive and hungry,
N.B. some people get fed up of the planet america crap,
-
It had nothing to do with British Imperial Oil intersts in the middle east Storch.
Forget everything you know, or think you know...:noid
-
Originally posted by Stampf
Freedom ? Justice? You are kidding right? Sorry for the losses your family has incured, I know the feeling well. But that's the price of Empire.
No i am not. Is freeing the jews from ethnic cleansing not Justice?
Is fighting to save europe from control by a dictator not freedom?
If i am right in assuming you are from america it is ironic for you too comment on empires since you have lacked one. Your country is not the only one that has ahd a civil war you know........
-
I was a 'weekend warrior' who carried a radio :furious
-
Lets end this one on a pleasant note for once.....
Any person who volunteers in ANY Military, be it U.S., Britain, China.......Lower Slobovia....whatever..is a person who believes in what they are serving for and does it in spite of miserable pay, crappy hours, Jacked around benifits and to often, Politicians who have their heads up and locked.
They all command respect, loyalty and support.
-
it probably had nothing to do with germany building a navy to rival the royal navy either.
the fact is that wwi was started by england because the english of that period would not allow and rivalry from any continental power. especially not a sea power that could hamper the british empire.
tirpitz took the philosphies of mahan seriously and with his winsome ways convinced german farmers to fund that very expensive naval expansion. kaiser wilhelm being the petulant enfant terrible that he was wanted a navy simply because his uncle eddie had one. the die was cast.
-
Originally posted by storch
the fact is that wwi was started by england because the english of that period would not allow and rivalry from any continental power. especially not a sea power that could hamper the british empire.
..um...
While this was clearly one of the reasons for the beginning of that most stupid of all wars, it was only one of many. It's very difficult to get most of the "civilized" world to start shooting at each other over one cause. Probably not even the Thirty Years War had so many different causes, each so pathetically insignificant.
It's always made me wish that when the major powers all started mobilization in July, 1914, they had just taken the hundred-or-so old men who started the war out into a field somewhere, given them clubs, and let them finish each other off. The world would be a much better place today.
- oldman
-
ya well that was by far the most obvious reason and in keeping with english tradition for the previous two centuries.
-
Originally posted by storch
it probably had nothing to do with germany building a navy to rival the royal navy either.
the fact is that wwi was started by england because the english of that period would not allow and rivalry from any continental power. especially not a sea power that could hamper the british empire.
tirpitz took the philosphies of mahan seriously and with his winsome ways convinced german farmers to fund that very expensive naval expansion. kaiser wilhelm being the petulant enfant terrible that he was wanted a navy simply because his uncle eddie had one. the die was cast.
yes it did, as i said, britain felt it was going to be pushed off its top spot,
things like naval supremacy come under this,
and it is also niave to blow away all the other reasons i gave to TRY and nitpick,
-
Originally posted by storch
the fact is that wwi was started by england because the english of that period would not allow and rivalry from any continental power. especially not a sea power that could hamper the british empire.
Facile nonsense. In no way, shape or form did England "start" the war.
You're describing reasons for political conflict, not for the firing of guns. There is a HUGE difference between the pressures that lead to conflict, and the actual opening of hostilities.
Don't think so? Consider the half century of Cold War! The struggle between communism and the free world had even more reason to erupt into a world war, than did World War I.
World War I STARTED because Germany and her allies picked up there guns and attacked their neighbors. The listed "reasons for war" cover the conflicts that applied political pressure, but the moral responsibility for turning those pressures into war lies solely on the Central Powers.
PS Just so you know, storch, "facile" means "shallow."
-
how can you possibly wade through life being so consistently mistaken.
just so you know simaril, that means that once again you're wrong.
-
Originally posted by storch
how can you possibly wade through life being so consistently mistaken.
just so you know simaril, that means that once again you're wrong.
yeah, I expected the response to be on the level of "nyah, nyah." I suppose you have the freedom to believe that England invaded germany and started the conflict if you so desire...but that kind of warped thinking means discussion is useless.
Like I said, shallow. :lol
-
let's look at the causes of the war.
1. the arms race: an arms race had existed starting back in the 1880s with the germanic plans to build a high seas fleet. the arms race was accellerated by the english launching the hms dreadnaught in 1906. the hms dreadnaught represented a quantum leap in naval technology. the launching of that single ship immediately renders all other capital ships of that time obsolete. think of the ballistic missles race between the US and the russians.
2. general mistrust: amongst the european powers. far more mistrust than what is exhibited between the euros today. germany would have to fight a war on two fronts. it was a matter of national survival that one opponent would have to be striken preemptively.
3. imperialism: the english had a two hundred plus year history of doing what ever was necessary to prevent any continental power from even remotely challenging their postion as the masters of the seas. both the english and the germans had bought mahanic theory completely. the english were looking for an excuse to sink the germans in a major battle in order for great britain to maintain it's command of the commerce lanes.
4. trade wars: world trade trebled between the years 1880 and 1913 with germany being the principal beneficiary at the expense of the british empire. though britain maintained an absolute lead in trade it's world total dropped to around 27% from 40%. meanwhile germany's trade grew a whopping 240% in the same time period, rising from 17% to 22%. part of the growth was due to the opening of the kiel canal which cut through the base of the jutland peninsula reducing the distance german fleets and merchant had to travel between the baltic and the north sea from 700 nautical miles to 60.
5. the balkans mess: pretty much as it is today. the serbs assasinate the ruler elect (as it were) of the austro-hungarian empire.
if memory serves me the austrians declare war and germany backs their ally.
I'm willing to be further educated, point out how this series of events could be considered germany's fault?
-
Storchie:
None of those factors remotely forced germany to do anything. They had the enlarging fleet. They had increased trade. They had the huge land army. Their ally declared war on a weak country, but Austria-Hungary didnt HAVE to do even that. When they did, though, they knew their action would trigger mutual defense pacts.
Bluntly, they did it anyway because they wanted to have a war.
Germany did not have to set foot in the neutral territory of Belgium. Germany did not have to attack France. They did it because they wanted to, and because they thought they would Win -- and thereby be treated as a superpower.
It's obvious that Germany's ambitions made england uncomfortable, and its obvious there was an arms race. And your citing of the nuclear arms race MAKES my point for me (thanks by the way)...the nuclear arms race was even more intense and prolonged, but there was no nuclear war. In the same way, there didnt have to be a World War as the last century ioened. Austria-Hungary and Germany chose to make one.
There's just no way to say that the war was England's fault -- at least no way that's rational. England chose political/economic methods; Germany invaded France.
-
ok this is enough. give me your address i'm invading you.
-
:lol
Just so theres no penetration -- territorial or otherwise!
-
Originally posted by storch
if memory serves me the austrians declare war and germany backs their ally.
I'm willing to be further educated, point out how this series of events could be considered germany's fault?
Generally people think that the single critical event was Germany's "blank check" to Austria, saying "go on ahead and invade Serbia, if Russia attacks you we'll back you up." Austria, and everyone else, knew that Austria couldn't defeat Russia without German help.
Probably Austria, of all countries, bore the most responsibility for starting the war. But it wouldn't have become a WORLD war if it wasn't for the interlocking alliances that were the brain child of old Otto von.
Given the total screw-up that all the most clever diplomats of Europe got themselves into, it's no wonder that the populations of Europe welcomed Woodrow Wilson so enthusiastically in 1919.
- oldman
-
Man this thread went south in a hurry lol! Interesting history perspectives here though............Bottom line war is a dirty wet business. All empires fall.
The Capatalist empire is falling and the Zealot Muslim empire is being born.
It is history repeating itself over and over again. All the reasons for war are moot and futile. Now the threat is a mass assimilation to a belief doctrine or perish.....How many time has the world seen this? How many times has the world branded an upstart a terrorist. How many times has that terrorist seen themselves a freedom fighter. How many times has a government covertly funded a jihad to promote their ideals?? Point......
The reasons are irrellevent. It is all a matter of persepctive all of them right and all of them wrong. It only matters what side of the fence you are standing on at the time, to skew your perspective. War is a intrinsic last response of man to promote his ideals.............How do you change that??:noid
-
Originally posted by Oldman731
Generally people think that the single critical event was Germany's "blank check" to Austria, saying "go on ahead and invade Serbia, if Russia attacks you we'll back you up." Austria, and everyone else, knew that Austria couldn't defeat Russia without German help.
Probably Austria, of all countries, bore the most responsibility for starting the war. But it wouldn't have become a WORLD war if it wasn't for the interlocking alliances that were the brain child of old Otto von.
Given the total screw-up that all the most clever diplomats of Europe got themselves into, it's no wonder that the populations of Europe welcomed Woodrow Wilson so enthusiastically in 1919.
- oldman
yes the 'alliance chain' which i stated but storch seem to over look.
-
Originally posted by storch
how can you possibly wade through life being so consistently mistaken.
just so you know simaril, that means that once again you're wrong.
storchie stop digging your hole deeper.
;)