"John H." wrote in message
...
On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 21:02:49 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
. ..


I'm glad to see you now understand, apparently, what is meant by a
battalion
which is 'self-sufficient', i.e., can operate with no support.

Rest assured that one doesn't need military experience to understand this,
especially when the explanation is nothing but sarcasm.


I honestly was not trying to be sarcastic. I thought you wanted to know
how
individuals and units were trained, so I told you.

I certainly meant no sarcasm in any of the explanations.

Yeah, but you kept coming up with that 3 month bull****, which was in no way
connected with anything I said. Don't forget that your game became
transparent well over a year ago, John.

On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 21:25:03 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 21:02:49 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
...


I'm glad to see you now understand, apparently, what is meant by a
battalion
which is 'self-sufficient', i.e., can operate with no support.

Rest assured that one doesn't need military experience to understand this,
especially when the explanation is nothing but sarcasm.


I honestly was not trying to be sarcastic. I thought you wanted to know
how
individuals and units were trained, so I told you.

I certainly meant no sarcasm in any of the explanations.

Yeah, but you kept coming up with that 3 month bull****, which was in no way
connected with anything I said. Don't forget that your game became
transparent well over a year ago, John.


That question was asked yesterday on the Chris Mathews show. The question went
like, "It only takes three months or so to train an American soldier, why should
it take so long to train Iraqis?" I certainly meant no offense to you with the
'3 month bull****'. It just seems to be a common misunderstanding. Your initial
question was, "Perhaps someone else here can answer this question: Here in
America, if you enter Army boot camp on January 1, what is the shortest period
of time that must pass before the Army would consider you ready to be sent into
battle?"

The Army has to consider a 'unit' ready for battle, not just an individual
soldier.

I don't know to which 'game' you are referring.


--
John H

"It's not a *baby* kicking, beautiful bride, it's just a fetus!"
[A Self-obsessed Hypocrite]

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 21:25:03 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 21:02:49 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
m...


I'm glad to see you now understand, apparently, what is meant by a
battalion
which is 'self-sufficient', i.e., can operate with no support.

Rest assured that one doesn't need military experience to understand
this,
especially when the explanation is nothing but sarcasm.


I honestly was not trying to be sarcastic. I thought you wanted to know
how
individuals and units were trained, so I told you.

I certainly meant no sarcasm in any of the explanations.

Yeah, but you kept coming up with that 3 month bull****, which was in no
way
connected with anything I said. Don't forget that your game became
transparent well over a year ago, John.


That question was asked yesterday on the Chris Mathews show. The question
went
like, "It only takes three months or so to train an American soldier, why
should
it take so long to train Iraqis?" I certainly meant no offense to you with
the
'3 month bull****'. It just seems to be a common misunderstanding. Your
initial
question was, "Perhaps someone else here can answer this question: Here in
America, if you enter Army boot camp on January 1, what is the shortest
period
of time that must pass before the Army would consider you ready to be sent
into
battle?"

The Army has to consider a 'unit' ready for battle, not just an individual
soldier.

I don't know to which 'game' you are referring.

Read your paragraph about the Chris Mathews show. It had nothing whatsoever
to do with anything I said. I asked an honest, open ended question about
training duration. Your game involves pinning one person's words on another.

On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 02:08:41 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 21:25:03 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
...
On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 21:02:49 GMT, "Doug Kanter"

wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
om...


I'm glad to see you now understand, apparently, what is meant by a
battalion
which is 'self-sufficient', i.e., can operate with no support.

Rest assured that one doesn't need military experience to understand
this,
especially when the explanation is nothing but sarcasm.


I honestly was not trying to be sarcastic. I thought you wanted to know
how
individuals and units were trained, so I told you.

I certainly meant no sarcasm in any of the explanations.

Yeah, but you kept coming up with that 3 month bull****, which was in no
way
connected with anything I said. Don't forget that your game became
transparent well over a year ago, John.


That question was asked yesterday on the Chris Mathews show. The question
went
like, "It only takes three months or so to train an American soldier, why
should
it take so long to train Iraqis?" I certainly meant no offense to you with
the
'3 month bull****'. It just seems to be a common misunderstanding. Your
initial
question was, "Perhaps someone else here can answer this question: Here in
America, if you enter Army boot camp on January 1, what is the shortest
period
of time that must pass before the Army would consider you ready to be sent
into
battle?"

The Army has to consider a 'unit' ready for battle, not just an individual
soldier.

I don't know to which 'game' you are referring.

Read your paragraph about the Chris Mathews show. It had nothing whatsoever
to do with anything I said. I asked an honest, open ended question about
training duration. Your game involves pinning one person's words on another.


?????? "pinning words"

You asked about the shortest training time. The three months training time had
been mentioned on a liberal show the day before. *I* associated the two, and
wanted to make sure they weren't confused. No aspersions on you.
--
John H

"It's not a *baby* kicking, beautiful bride, it's just a fetus!"
[A Self-obsessed Hypocrite]