On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 19:25:45 -0700 (PDT), True North
wrote:

On Monday, 22 September 2014 23:17:07 UTC-3, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 19:47:47 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:



On 9/22/14 7:08 PM, wrote:

On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 17:49:23 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"

wrote:



On 9/22/2014 5:36 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 9/22/14 2:37 PM, John H wrote:



BTW, they found the Afghans, trying to visit Canada.





Oh, thank goodness. I thought for a moment there that our nation's

security would have to be defended by the likes of you and the other

mustered out and useless old military farts on rec.boats.



Whew!











The difference being that if called upon, we would.



You, on the other hand, would high-tail it down to a local community

college and sign up for basket weaving 101.





This may actually be more troubling than they have been making out.

This is the second group of Afghans who have been missing and turned

up near the same border crossing..









And, then again, it may be less troubling than it seems.



Considering the canadian border is the main conduit for terrorists

into this country, it should attract a little attention.

That's a misconception.
not one of your Seept 11 terrorists came from Canada...they all entered the US by other means... such as student visas.

===

There have been others however that did come through Canada, or
attempted it. I particularly remember one well publicized case in the
Pacific North West where a wannabe terrorist was intercepted at the
border with a significant quantity of explosives in his car. Having
spent some time in the Great Lakes and St Lawrence River valley
regions, it is clearly obvious that the border is difficult to fully
protect.

On Monday, September 22, 2014 5:36:32 PM UTC-4, F*O*A*D wrote:

Oh, thank goodness. I thought for a moment there that our nation's

security would have to be defended by the likes of you and the other

mustered out and useless old military farts on rec.boats.



Whew!

Or narcissitic ****s like you that dream of owning silencers......

On 9/22/14 10:47 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 21:44:18 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 9/22/14 9:37 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 18:08:52 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:


Oh, yeah, you boys were really at risk during your enlistments... Paper
cuts and all...

Climbing in the superstructure in a North Atlantic storm in December
is a tad more dangerous that drowning from a beer bong in the dorm.


If those were your choices, you made the wrong choice.


Yeah I suppose I could have dodged the draft and sat around the frat
drinking beer and smoking dope. How was it?

I would not have traded my experience for your choice.



I don't know "how it was," as I didn't dodge the draft or drink much
beer. I didn't like beer all that much back then, and I don't like it
all that much now.

The majority of military-aged young men were *not* drafted during our
debacle in Vietnam. There were many, of course, who enlisted in order to
avoid the draft. Weren't you one of those?

On 9/23/2014 6:29 AM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/22/14 10:47 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 21:44:18 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 9/22/14 9:37 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 18:08:52 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:


Oh, yeah, you boys were really at risk during your enlistments...
Paper
cuts and all...

Climbing in the superstructure in a North Atlantic storm in December
is a tad more dangerous that drowning from a beer bong in the dorm.


If those were your choices, you made the wrong choice.


Yeah I suppose I could have dodged the draft and sat around the frat
drinking beer and smoking dope. How was it?

I would not have traded my experience for your choice.



I don't know "how it was," as I didn't dodge the draft or drink much
beer. I didn't like beer all that much back then, and I don't like it
all that much now.

The majority of military-aged young men were *not* drafted during our
debacle in Vietnam. There were many, of course, who enlisted in order to
avoid the draft. Weren't you one of those?

What about dope? I'll bet you did a lot of that.

On 9/23/14 11:12 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 06:29:38 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 9/22/14 10:47 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 21:44:18 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 9/22/14 9:37 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 18:08:52 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:


Oh, yeah, you boys were really at risk during your enlistments... Paper
cuts and all...

Climbing in the superstructure in a North Atlantic storm in December
is a tad more dangerous that drowning from a beer bong in the dorm.


If those were your choices, you made the wrong choice.


Yeah I suppose I could have dodged the draft and sat around the frat
drinking beer and smoking dope. How was it?

I would not have traded my experience for your choice.



I don't know "how it was," as I didn't dodge the draft or drink much
beer. I didn't like beer all that much back then, and I don't like it
all that much now.

The majority of military-aged young men were *not* drafted during our
debacle in Vietnam. There were many, of course, who enlisted in order to
avoid the draft. Weren't you one of those?

I could have quite easily kept a 2-S for enough years to get to the
point where my lottery was a good bet. ... like you.
At the time I joined the Coast Guard it was seen as an option where I
might actually be able to do something. Johnson had just promised us
he would never send our boys off to fight in a war and I had little
interest in being in the Sargent Bilko army. In 1964 being in the army
was sitting in Fumbuck somewhere painting the rocks in front of the
officer's club. My buddy who did get drafted was in Germany, learning
how to play golf because he was bored out of his mind.



Whatever floated your boat.

I didn't keep my 2-S in order to avoid being drafted into the military
or to learn a trade. I went to college to continue getting a
well-rounded, formal education, and to date, formally and informally,
some well-rounded girls.

I didn't give any thought to the military then, and I really don't give
much thought to it now, other than to resent the trillions of dollars
we're wasting on it. World War II was a necessity for the survival of
the Western world. I'm not sure any of our wars since were necessary.

On 9/23/2014 11:31 AM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/23/14 11:12 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 06:29:38 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 9/22/14 10:47 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 21:44:18 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 9/22/14 9:37 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 18:08:52 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:


Oh, yeah, you boys were really at risk during your enlistments...
Paper
cuts and all...

Climbing in the superstructure in a North Atlantic storm in December
is a tad more dangerous that drowning from a beer bong in the dorm.


If those were your choices, you made the wrong choice.


Yeah I suppose I could have dodged the draft and sat around the frat
drinking beer and smoking dope. How was it?

I would not have traded my experience for your choice.



I don't know "how it was," as I didn't dodge the draft or drink much
beer. I didn't like beer all that much back then, and I don't like it
all that much now.

The majority of military-aged young men were *not* drafted during our
debacle in Vietnam. There were many, of course, who enlisted in order to
avoid the draft. Weren't you one of those?

I could have quite easily kept a 2-S for enough years to get to the
point where my lottery was a good bet. ... like you.
At the time I joined the Coast Guard it was seen as an option where I
might actually be able to do something. Johnson had just promised us
he would never send our boys off to fight in a war and I had little
interest in being in the Sargent Bilko army. In 1964 being in the army
was sitting in Fumbuck somewhere painting the rocks in front of the
officer's club. My buddy who did get drafted was in Germany, learning
how to play golf because he was bored out of his mind.



Whatever floated your boat.

I didn't keep my 2-S in order to avoid being drafted into the military
or to learn a trade. I went to college to continue getting a
well-rounded, formal education, and to date, formally and informally,
some well-rounded girls.

I didn't give any thought to the military then, and I really don't give
much thought to it now, other than to resent the trillions of dollars
we're wasting on it. World War II was a necessity for the survival of
the Western world. I'm not sure any of our wars since were necessary.



Several administrations (both Democratic and Republican) have obviously
thought otherwise, including the current one now.

You are very good at being the Monday morning quarterback with a leftist
agenda ... that's about it. It's always "safe" to be against something.
It's a lot tougher to *do* something.

On 9/23/14 1:09 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 9/23/2014 11:31 AM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/23/14 11:12 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 06:29:38 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 9/22/14 10:47 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 21:44:18 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 9/22/14 9:37 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 18:08:52 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:


Oh, yeah, you boys were really at risk during your enlistments...
Paper
cuts and all...

Climbing in the superstructure in a North Atlantic storm in December
is a tad more dangerous that drowning from a beer bong in the dorm.


If those were your choices, you made the wrong choice.


Yeah I suppose I could have dodged the draft and sat around the frat
drinking beer and smoking dope. How was it?

I would not have traded my experience for your choice.



I don't know "how it was," as I didn't dodge the draft or drink much
beer. I didn't like beer all that much back then, and I don't like it
all that much now.

The majority of military-aged young men were *not* drafted during our
debacle in Vietnam. There were many, of course, who enlisted in
order to
avoid the draft. Weren't you one of those?

I could have quite easily kept a 2-S for enough years to get to the
point where my lottery was a good bet. ... like you.
At the time I joined the Coast Guard it was seen as an option where I
might actually be able to do something. Johnson had just promised us
he would never send our boys off to fight in a war and I had little
interest in being in the Sargent Bilko army. In 1964 being in the army
was sitting in Fumbuck somewhere painting the rocks in front of the
officer's club. My buddy who did get drafted was in Germany, learning
how to play golf because he was bored out of his mind.



Whatever floated your boat.

I didn't keep my 2-S in order to avoid being drafted into the military
or to learn a trade. I went to college to continue getting a
well-rounded, formal education, and to date, formally and informally,
some well-rounded girls.

I didn't give any thought to the military then, and I really don't give
much thought to it now, other than to resent the trillions of dollars
we're wasting on it. World War II was a necessity for the survival of
the Western world. I'm not sure any of our wars since were necessary.



Several administrations (both Democratic and Republican) have obviously
thought otherwise, including the current one now.

You are very good at being the Monday morning quarterback with a leftist
agenda ... that's about it. It's always "safe" to be against something.
It's a lot tougher to *do* something.





Yeah, we've really "done something" with our military in Vietnam, Iraq,
Afghanistan, Panama, Grenada, et cetera.

On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 13:35:41 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

Yeah, we've really "done something" with our military in Vietnam, Iraq,
Afghanistan, Panama, Grenada, et cetera.

===

Having been to Grenada and enjoyed it immensely, I'd have to say that
it was a good investment.

On 9/23/2014 2:43 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 13:35:41 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:



Yeah, we've really "done something" with our military in Vietnam, Iraq,
Afghanistan, Panama, Grenada, et cetera.

I tend to agree with you on Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. We only
made a mediocre problem worse.
It is easy to argue that Grenada put a stake in the heart of Cuban
adventurism in the region and that wasn't a bad thing.
We tossed a drug dealing dictator out of Panama.
I don't know enough to say whether their liberal democratic government
is a success but you should like them.
We don't hear of much bad coming out of there other than screw ups and
massive cost overruns with the canal renovations but that is typical
with government projects
A big political concern is that they could become a client state of
China.



Interesting that 35 years after the end of hostilities, Vietnam/US
relations have warmed considerably. Vietnam's primary concern now is
China and views the USA as an ally.

Furthermore, Vietnam isn't the backwards nation that North Vietnam was
in the 1960's. A taste of some freedom and capitalism spoiled the
North's influence forever.

On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 21:37:46 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 18:08:52 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:


Oh, yeah, you boys were really at risk during your enlistments... Paper
cuts and all...

Climbing in the superstructure in a North Atlantic storm in December
is a tad more dangerous that drowning from a beer bong in the dorm.

He considers Hillary to have been at risk from the ' sniper fire' when
she landed in Iraq. Of course, Harry was at risk when on his 'secret'
trip to Vietnam, probably along with John Kerry.