Options
OT: Rick Reilly's latest article
purelyPSA
Posts: 712 ✭✭
OK, now I'm really furious. This week's SI came today, and of course it had Pat Tillman on the cover, with a very nice article within. However, it was Rick Reilly's article that has set me off. In it, he recounts the story of Tillman and another soldier who has perished in the Middle East, a man by the name of Todd Bates. He contrasts their two tales, and the whole thing is sad and rather poignant.
Then comes this whizbang paragraph at the end:
"Both did their duty for the country, but I wonder if their country did its duty for them. Tillman died in Afghanistan, a war with no end in sight and not enough troops to finish the job. Bates died in Iraq, a war that began with no just cause and continues with no just reason."
WHAT?? Instead of honoring the dead, Reilly turned his article into a political billboard. You have got to be kidding me. I hit the freaking ceiling. I sent this letter off to SI:
Dear Sir:
Normally I just disregard the political messages that Rick Reilly often weaves into his commentaries - after all, it is his column, and he can fill it any way he sees fit. However, the way Reilly seizes on the Pat Tillman tragedy to further his own political agenda is sickening, especially when contrasted to the humility Tillman exemplified in life. Reilly using Tillman's death to push his opinion of the Iraq war is as distasteful to me as the sellers on eBay hawking Tillman memorabilia at greatly inflated prices the days after the tragedy. How is selling something, be it a political agenda or a football card, the best way to eulogize anyone?
Sincerely,
Steve Creason
Last month, the guy outs a criminal and helps Pete Pihos, and now he thinks this is fine and dandy. Talk about a professional 180. I forwarded the letter to Rick's SI email, with an explanation for my displeasure. I wonder what, if anything, will be said, or even if it will be read. However, I thought that I'd get this off my chest as one more example of profiteering on death. Rick should be ashamed.
Then comes this whizbang paragraph at the end:
"Both did their duty for the country, but I wonder if their country did its duty for them. Tillman died in Afghanistan, a war with no end in sight and not enough troops to finish the job. Bates died in Iraq, a war that began with no just cause and continues with no just reason."
WHAT?? Instead of honoring the dead, Reilly turned his article into a political billboard. You have got to be kidding me. I hit the freaking ceiling. I sent this letter off to SI:
Dear Sir:
Normally I just disregard the political messages that Rick Reilly often weaves into his commentaries - after all, it is his column, and he can fill it any way he sees fit. However, the way Reilly seizes on the Pat Tillman tragedy to further his own political agenda is sickening, especially when contrasted to the humility Tillman exemplified in life. Reilly using Tillman's death to push his opinion of the Iraq war is as distasteful to me as the sellers on eBay hawking Tillman memorabilia at greatly inflated prices the days after the tragedy. How is selling something, be it a political agenda or a football card, the best way to eulogize anyone?
Sincerely,
Steve Creason
Last month, the guy outs a criminal and helps Pete Pihos, and now he thinks this is fine and dandy. Talk about a professional 180. I forwarded the letter to Rick's SI email, with an explanation for my displeasure. I wonder what, if anything, will be said, or even if it will be read. However, I thought that I'd get this off my chest as one more example of profiteering on death. Rick should be ashamed.
0
Comments
George Bush used the deaths of the firemen and police officers who sacrificed their lives on 9/11 to further a political agenda-- and, in fact, he's still doing that, as you surely know if you've seen any of his campaign bits. Is that also in poor taste? And if so, under what circumstances do you think one should be allowed to use the death of a countryman as a rallying point for a cause?
link
The title of a kid's article is this: Pat Tillman got what he deserved.
I won't rant too much because I've already done that on the other board. However, as a former Marine, I'm infuriated. Freedom of speech my a$$. These people don't realize why they have that freedom. It's from people like Tilman. Don't get me wrong, his death is no more tragic than any other member of the Armed Forces that made the ultimate sacrifice. It is, however, different. Not many people are willing to give up millions for something they truly believe in. That is, I guess, why I'm so pissed at this article demeaning his death and his choices. Yet, if noone made those decisions, we would be a communist country, taking orders from a leader, and definately would have no freedom of speech. So to all those who gave the ultimate, as well as those still defending the cause, thank you.
Chris
I didn't read the article, so I'll take your word re: the bait and switch. If this is how it was presented I agree it was in very poor taste.
You're right; that article by Rene Gonzalez is one for the wall. By the way, I'm laying 2:1 that before this thread dies someone will post something that's a least vaguely anti-hispanic.
If so, why are you surprised?
If not, will you cancel your subscription?
I'm sure there were bleeding heart liberals belly-aching during WW II, but do you hear from them much today? One thing these utopia-loving journalistic pukes don't understand is "Don't mess with American Patriotism." It's a losing battle every time.
"Anytime people die in a war, their countrymen have the right--and some would say the obligation-- to question whether the war in which they died is a just one."
BULL HOCKEY!!!
Last I checked, (1) it's an all-volunteer military, (2) the volunteers know what they were getting in to, (3) we live in a republic where we elect representatives (senators and presidents) to represent us. If you don't like it, complain at the ballot box or write your congressman to introduce bill(s) of impeachment.
But do not (DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES) question the war while it's underway and our men and women are in harm's way. The enemy, especially the one currently faced, sees this as a weakness. Instead, crawl into your hole and shut up.
<< <i>Isn't SI printed by Time Magazine, owned by Time Warner, former company of Ted (Fonda) Turner
If so, why are you surprised?
If not, will you cancel your subscription??. >>
Geez, TG, you're right...all magazines, newspapers, radio & television stations hire people who will 'think like they do'. Sports Illustrated is a bastion of left-minded liberalism and they won't tolerate anyone else! I don't agree with Reilly AT ALL, but let's not be stupid.
<< <i>I'm sure there were bleeding heart liberals belly-aching during WW II, but do you hear from them much today? One thing these utopia-loving journalistic pukes don't understand is "Don't mess with American Patriotism." It's a losing battle every time. >>
Damn you sound like something the M*A*S*H scriptwriters jotted down for Major Frank Burns! I'm not necessarily against the war--and pretty conservative by nature but to compare WWII with Iraq is like comparing coconuts and cucumbers. And by the way, preserving freedom is what WW2 was about. Yes that means freedom of the press, Mr. Stalin-gun. And being a 'patriot' isn't about being 'liberal' or 'conservative'.
<< <i>
Last I checked, (1) it's an all-volunteer military, (2) the volunteers know what they were getting in to, (3) we live in a republic where we elect representatives (senators and presidents) to represent us. If you don't like it, complain at the ballot box or write your congressman to introduce bill(s) of impeachment.
But do not (DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES) question the war while it's underway and our men and women are in harm's way. The enemy, especially the one currently faced, sees this as a weakness. Instead, crawl into your hole and shut up. >>
I defy you to look up the phrase "shut up" in the Bill of Rights or Constitution. Those who disagree with you have as much right to free speech as you do. Do we really have to tell you this? But then Major Burns put it best. "The way I see it, unless we each conform, unless we obey orders, unless we follow our leaders blindly, there is no possible way we can remain free." Right Gunner?
<< <i>
Last I checked, (1) it's an all-volunteer military, (2) the volunteers know what they were getting in to, (3) we live in a republic where we elect representatives (senators and presidents) to represent us. If you don't like it, complain at the ballot box or write your congressman to introduce bill(s) of impeachment.
But do not (DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES) question the war while it's underway and our men and women are in harm's way. The enemy, especially the one currently faced, sees this as a weakness. Instead, crawl into your hole and shut up. >>
Yes, I agree! Lets do away with freedom of speech and freedom of the press!!
UNITED WE STAND!
GO MARLINS! Home of the best fans in baseball!!
MASH the movie was a classic.
MASH the TV show was for sissies.
Just a sh** load of politically correct liberal preaching.
Major Burns and his ilk were the true heros who went out and 'saved our bacon'.
The 'heros' of the TV show were a couple of whining cowards ...
"How about a little fire Scarecrow ?"
I'm all for freedom of speech & press. I'm for and can quote the other nine rights in the Bill. But Reilly didn't use any common sense. Put yourself if this place: Your son or daughter is over there, obeying his/her commander in chief, general, sergeant and platoon leader. Do you want to read Reilly's carp now or when your kid comes home? Timing is everything.
Folks...this is a perfect LIBERAL reaction.
Instead of being outraged that anyone would write something so horrible, our fellow board member
is nervously pacing the floor waiting for someone to post something insensitive to the person who wrote this trash.
The fact that he is hispanic however, ends up only mattering to the person who nervously awaits someone posting
something insensitive.
Priceless
Boopotts: Do you have a sack? Your self-loathing is fine, but please dont project on the rest of us white folks. Weez try not b racist.
I am sure all of our fellow hispanic collectors will sleep well tonight knowing a white hysteric is "gaurding their honor".
Loves me some shiny!
LINK
Dissent, especially about war, is the most important right we have, the right we are ostensibly trying to grant to the people of Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. "Do not (DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES) question the war while it's underway and our men and women are in harm's way." Why not? The enemy sees this as weakness? So what? The enemy in question sees everything about our way of life as weakness, and they still have enough fear of the military to stage only a guerrilla war. There is no reason not to dissent about a war that should never have been started in the first place, a war started by a small group for the benefit of a small group, at the cost of a large group. The fact that I write in opposition of the war does not affect one soldier in the execution of his or her duty, nor is it intended to. The fact that these duties are no being prolonged and extended farther than anyone predicted does. The fact that these soldiers are dying in senseless attacks does. The fact that there is really no end in sight does. I shouldn't question the war? Honestly, this is America. Love it or leave it.
2005 Origins Old Judge Brown #/20 and Black 1/1s, 2000 Ultimate Victory Gold #/25
2004 UD Legends Bake McBride autos & parallels, and 1974 Topps #601 PSA 9
Rare Grady Sizemore parallels, printing plates, autographs
Nothing on ebay
When it comes to the issue of supporting our troops, you either get it, or you don't.
Tillman and our American soldiers are heroes- that is an absolute! I support our trips 100% and feel that thet are underpaid and given a lack of respect that they deserve. More of the tax payers money should go to the support of our troops overseas. (but Bush won't raise taxes!) I support a tax increase just to support the troops (we should call it a freedom tax and the wealthy should pay more than the poor). I think some of us just look at things differently. Running out into gunfire and paying the price of death must have a reason. The author of the article has searched for that reason and I guess he could not find one. Neither can I!
I support the war - in fact- the world is safer without Saddam in Iraq and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Perhaps this is the reason Tillman died! However, now what- what are we fighting for now. That I am unsure of (perhaps Halliburton's interest in making billions).
I do not trust George Bush running a billion dollar war. He lacks the intelligence and leadership to bring this war to an end. His original plan has spiraled out of control. Our troops are in jeopardy. There is no plan. There was poor planning from the beginning. Bush is no soldier- he does not understand war. Neither does Cheney. A bunch of rich boys (Bush/Cheney) asking true heroes (soldiers) to defend our freedoms and democracy without a plan. And worst of all- the American public lets them get away with it. Colin Powell knows it- 5 years from now Powell is going to write a book that exposes this whole big scam.
and now the one simple freedom (that doesn't cost me anything!) I enjoy most in my most stressful life.. listening to Howard Stern every morning for 20 minutes on my way to work- is being taken away from me. UGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG!
That speaks volumes. I know all I need to know about you now.
Helionut, all I can say to you is, "Party on," because you are clueless and must have had your brains washed by some leftist-leaning, media-infested think-tank.
The war in Iraq and Afghanistan is just. (What, was Kosovo not as well?)
It is declared and it's against terrorism and states that sponsor it. (Syria and Iran are next, so batton down your hatches.)
Halliburton isn't making squat. They've got truck drivers who've been captured.
You pay $2.00 for a gallon of gas, while France & Germany pay $5.00.
Tokyo Rose, Jane Fonda and now Helionut.
<< <i>Way to go, Ripken. Quoting a TV show. What a putz. Get a life, a real life. >>
Your comments were such a perfect match it was hard to resist.
<< <i> I'm all for freedom of speech & press. >>
Unless you disagree, right?
Again, like you I think Reilly is off-base. Tillman joined because he believed in the cause. But your preference for silencing all who disagree with war (or anything else YOU support) isn't what this country is about.
<< <i>Way to go, Ripken. Quoting a TV show. What a putz. Get a life, a real life.
I'm all for freedom of speech & press. I'm for and can quote the other nine rights in the Bill. But Reilly didn't use any common sense. Put yourself if this place: Your son or daughter is over there, obeying his/her commander in chief, general, sergeant and platoon leader. Do you want to read Reilly's carp now or when your kid comes home? Timing is everything. >>
That's the great thing about America, you 'putz'.
If you don't want to read Reillys article, YOU DON'T HAVE TO! But don't tell the rest of the country how to live just because you disagreed with his viewpoint.
Gotta love the irony of this guy ripping on others for making their point with a tv show, listening to Howard Stern, etc when he has a photoshopped picture in his sig with W holding a can of Whoop Ass.
BRING'EM ON, right?
rofl
GO MARLINS! Home of the best fans in baseball!!
I personally want them to come home. I don't want anymore to come back in boxes or crippled for life over their search for WMDs or whatever excuse W has now. Unless you're actually taking money out of your pocket right now to support the families in your neighborhood of soldiers overseas, don't tell me how you're supporting the troops more than I am.
GO MARLINS! Home of the best fans in baseball!!
"War on terror" is a noble idea, and I admit I thought for minute that Bush might actually have the makings of greatness while listening to that speech. But a noble idea as a piece of rhetoric is not a legal mechanism. And declaring war on terror by waging war on people is not the way to win such a war. People fight people. You fight ideas with other ideas.
While I agree the world is safer by a tiny increment with Saddam and Al-qaeda toppled (though the families of soldiers and civilians killed after their ouster might beg to differ), this doesn't mean the world is safe. Osama Bin Laden (remember him?) is still out there, as are untold thousands of would-be Bin Ladens. Of the countries named in the Axis of Evil, we went after the one which was by far the weakest segment. North Korea should've been the target. And they should be next, especially since it's been revealed that their nuclear weapons program is much farther along than previously suspected. If we are going to have a doctrine of pre-emption, let's pre-empt a real threat. Or Saudi Arabia. They seem to be playing the "keep your friends close and your enemies closer" game, and they're going to be trouble somewhere down the line, 50 or 60 years from now when the oil starts to run out. The trouble with starting a pre-emptive war on terror is that sooner or later, we are going to have to take over the world, and put it under strict martial law. There are terroristic elements everywhere, from Kuala Lumpur to Riyadh to Belfast to Oklahoma. Is that something you are willing to support? Please clearly explain why, or why not.
The bottom line is that there are separate issues involved that some people can't seem to keep separate. I am against the war, and I do support the troops. War is an idea, like terrorism. Troops are people. While I believe it is right that people might die for an idea, this particular incarnation of this idea is not it. I think the war was started for the wrong reasons. Nominally, it was to force compliance of UN 1441 if you recall, though I'm sure there it was in no small part also for the possiblity of installing a friendly regime that would allow easier access to the natural resources. Once the bombs started falling, the job description changed to a more palatable one, wiping out those who would threaten democracy and the adherents of it while restoring a standard of living to Iraqis that befits a country of its wealth. And I think that a good way of supporting the troops is to give them as much real support as possible. We should have 300,000 troops in there, not 130,000. There should've been another 300,000 troops from other nations. That would've gone a long way to ensure security since, obviously, our current force and the Iraqis will have a hard time keeping the opposition in hand. Then get them out of that hellhole as soon as possible. The very best way to support them is to get them out of harm's way.
BTW, I'm clueless? When you talk about Halliburton not making squat, you're right. They're not making squat. They're making money hand over fist. Look at their stock in the last 16 months. Yes, investors jumped that ship as soon as the war started because they knew Halliburton was going to turn into a de facto charity case and go broke from the losses incurred in donating their services and materiel to the effort. Talk about clueless.
2005 Origins Old Judge Brown #/20 and Black 1/1s, 2000 Ultimate Victory Gold #/25
2004 UD Legends Bake McBride autos & parallels, and 1974 Topps #601 PSA 9
Rare Grady Sizemore parallels, printing plates, autographs
Nothing on ebay
it appears your mind works very similar to George Bush- it is neanderthal in the way it rationalizes. Helionaut makes a good point in saying that one can support troops but not necessarily support the war. Just remember...George Bush ain't the word of GOD!
I would fight for my country in Iraq (too old) but it doesn't mean I believe we are doing the right thing in this war.
John Kerry was willing to put his life on the line in Vietnam, but he didn't believe it was worth it.
Republicans want to fight, fight, fight, but when it comes to raising taxes to support the soldiers so they can adequately defend themselves, its NO, NO, NO - "I ain't paying for that!" The hypocrisy is incredible. Give me a break
BigHurt-- This is a distinction which if far beyond the intellectual scope of some of the participants in this thread. You might as well be discussing Immanual Kant.
Basilone - come out to the 2006 National before you say that. It's in Orange County, California - where the airport is named after John Wayne.
helionaut - while you're talking about the massive profits Halliburton is making, please tell Daniel Gross from that noted right-wing ezine, Slate. By the way, the federal courts have said for decades that Congress need not use "magic words" for a declaration of war, and that the authorization to use broad military force against a country satisfies the Constitutional requirement for a declaration of war. The Korean War wasn't a Republican plot.
Nick
Reap the whirlwind.
Need to buy something for the wife or girlfriend? Check out Vintage Designer Clothing.
<< <i>The bottom line is that there are separate issues involved that some people can't seem to keep separate. >>
That does sum it up, at least in regard why this is such a debatable topic. Interesting that those who loathe this writer are actually giving her credence by pushing her story into the limelight. Some insensitive no-name amateur might become the national rage, do you think she's fretting over it?
The media loves the horserace, black and white, and pro and con stances. Don't make it so easy for them. Per usual, the middle road is usually the best taken. The ultra right view is usually scary and ethnocentric, the ultra left simply illogical. Carpet-bomb those who don’t support Red, White & Blue…No. Drop daisies and peace medallions and wait for the Infidel to give you a hug…No.
To those hardliners who still use phrases like "if you don't support our troops, you don't support our country", please put the gun down for a moment and think. I know it’s difficult to believe, but throughout history rulers with misguided intentions have sent good-natured boys to die in battle. Just ask yourself: is it possible to feel for the troops, for life, and to not agree with those who sent them to die?
I simply do not like this writer because of what I think she was trying to accomplish, and the fact that she accomplished it.
Instead of being outraged that anyone would write something so horrible, our fellow board member
is nervously pacing the floor waiting for someone to post something insensitive to the person who wrote this trash.
The fact that he is hispanic however, ends up only mattering to the person who nervously awaits someone posting
something insensitive.
Priceless
Boopotts: Do you have a sack? Your self-loathing is fine, but please dont project on the rest of us white folks. Weez try not b racist.
I am sure all of our fellow hispanic collectors will sleep well tonight knowing a white hysteric is "gaurding their honor".
Carew-- Reread my earlier post. I agreed that the article by Gonzalez was ridiculous. Sorry if I'm not outraged by the behavoir of a priveledged, mealy mouthed college student who's attending a small, liberal arts university. Seeing this type of sentiment arise from a school like Alleghany doesn't outrage me any more than seeing a semi literate holy roller pipe bombing an aboriton clinic. I'm used to it, which for me means I'm not outraged-- that doesn't mean I agree with it.
Also, I ask that in the future you don't try to 'read something' into my posts. I know, I know-- behind every blind turn there's another Lenin-loving, bong-ripping liberal trying to corrupt this great nation, and it's up the valiant and honorable flag-wavers like yourself to protect the innocent from the vile clutches of the left, etc. etc. But it might make you look better-- not to mention smarter-- if you were sure the person you're so eager to chastise was actually a liberal.
Stop slapping your race in the face.
I talked with several of my hispanic friends...they told me that they appreciate you sticking up for them,
but they have a long tradition of taking care of themselves.
Loves me some shiny!
<< <i>Nominally, it was to force compliance of UN 1441 if you recall, though I'm sure there it was in no small part also for the possiblity of installing a friendly regime that would allow easier access to the natural resources. >>
That doesn't make any sense. We already have plenty of allies with plenty of oil and gas is still expensive. That sounds like a left wing conspiracy.
Also remember that Saddam and his sons were sick, evil people who needed to be wiped off the face of the planet. Everything from Saddam driving nails into the skulls of his political opponents to his son raping 12 year old girls. The human rights violations were endless. I would happily pull the trigger myself.
And besides, how long were we supposed to let him get away with violating the cease fire that he signed in 1991? Since he violated the cease fire, then technically, the gulf war of 1991 was still underway.
There is a reason that in 200 years, we became the most powerful force in the history of the world. It's because we don't put up with the crap that other countries, like France, will let go on and on. It's a lot like raising a child. If you show weakness and compromise, they will walk all over you.
But on a lighter note, I do agree that everything in life needs a balance. Extreme in either direction is not a good thing. Sort of like dieting. Low carbs is good (or so I've heard), but 0 carbs will kill you and high carbs make you fat, so you need a balance. It's the same in other aspects of life.
In one corner: the Pro don't question the political decisions by government, Con SGC, pro card restoration, but not with water based solution, anti-modern card (except for Heritage) crowd
In the other: Love Joe Orlando, like SGC, but not BVG, pro modern card as an investment, anti MW, no need for a military because it's all about bunnies and flowers, GAI is the next thing crowd.
Okay...go at it!
<< <i>There is a reason that in 200 years, we became the most powerful force in the history of the world. It's because we don't put up with the crap that other countries, like France, will let go on and on. >>
That's right, man! We don't kowtow to these two-bit dictators. Won't see us turning a blind eye to human rights abuses or WMD aspirations.
On the afternoon of 9/11/01, I told a number of people that 6 well-placed atomic bombs would do the trick against terrorism (Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, N.Korea. Quaddafi knew it and he backed down.) Of course, that's not "politically correct" in our day. So we wait and muddle through the old fashioned way. Because we have the highest trained, most well-equipped and best military in the history of the world (even after the cuts of the Clinton years), we will prevail.
Either get on board or run for Congress yourself.
Helio, stay in Texas. That way your vote won't have any impact on the upcoming election. I'd be worried if a lot of people like you moved to the rust belt where it's gonna be close in November.
GO MARLINS! Home of the best fans in baseball!!
GO MARLINS! Home of the best fans in baseball!!
Go go go Topps Gun...
Bomb everyone, everything. Kill, kill, kill. Our way or the highway baby. Never mind that every great power in history has risen and fallen, it's different this time. We're America, invincible, we don't need anyone. Those dumb foreigners, a good A-Bomb is what they need. "Smoke 'em out, hunt 'em down."
Does this kind of rhetoric put a smile on your face? When the media conveys images of those bad brownies, does your blood just boil and trigger finger itch with excitement? When GBush uses God to justify his decisions are you one to bow your head, thank Jesus your a Westerner, say a prayer in the name of humanity (as long as they're American humans), and two seconds later think of creative ways to annihilate all that isn't white and right (politically too I suppose.)
Am I assuming too much? If you're a believer in profiling than your responses and choice of icon paint a very typical picture.
“We don’t see things as they are, we see them as we are.” - Anis Nin
Ever wonder what fostered all that frustration and hardliner attitude?
Please keep posting and tell us how you really feel, because everytime you do the laughter behind your back increases. Bet you have one of those "My kid can beat up your kid" bumper stickers. Oh, by the way, God bless. You can relate to that right?
Pre-emptive action against the vague concept of "terror" with no end in sight.
The silencing of any dissenting voice in wartime.
The positive values of the deaths of Americans on gas prices.
And now the arbitrary use of nuclear weapons.
Just want to be clear.
Wabbittwax, I was referring to the idea that a pro-American government in Iraq would allow for even greater profits for oil companies, not that there was no other way to get it. As for formal declaration of war not being needed, it's still there. It has been circumvented for 50 years, but this new path is the most dangerous yet. America has supported terrorists and terrorist states in the past, some of the same ones we're fighting against now, when it suited our purposes. They just weren't called terrorists then. But that's against nations, as you said. Al-Qaeda is not a country. Islamic Jihad is not a country, nor is the IRA , or the KKK. When these sorts of groups hide within so many countries, even countries that are our allies, where does that leave us? Military force won't be usable in every case, and that's where diplomacy has to come into play. Diplomacy is not this administration's strong suit.
There are lots of sick and evil people in the world, some of them currently running countries. While it is unquestionable that the people of Iraq will be better off after the war, is America? Is the world in general? Even the most optimistic observer would have to say that there is no shortage of current and potential terrorists, despots, and just plain evil scum in the world, and their gurus have plenty more fuel for those fires. If you go down that path, morally you would have to take out every one of them, and keep taking them out when new ones arise. While in a perfect world, we could do that with impugnity and global support (a perfect world except for the presence of these people in the first place), this world is not that one. At some point a line is drawn. Who will be left out in the cold?
2005 Origins Old Judge Brown #/20 and Black 1/1s, 2000 Ultimate Victory Gold #/25
2004 UD Legends Bake McBride autos & parallels, and 1974 Topps #601 PSA 9
Rare Grady Sizemore parallels, printing plates, autographs
Nothing on ebay
McArthur or was it Patton got booted after saying we should have kept marching past Berlin into Russia. Had we done so, there would have been no cold war and that 16 year period of betterment mentioned above might have lasted a while longer.
That's OK, Reagan took care of the Rooskies. Peace through strength. Anybody want to question those deficits of the 80's now?
So Bush-43 runs up a few bills. Big deal. Still our debt as a % of GDP is less than Reagan's. The Cold War lasted 40 years. I'll wager we whup terrorism in less time.
Unless Jesus comes back first. But then, I'd be right either way.
<< <i>“We don’t see things as they are, we see them as we are.” - Anis Nin >>
You realize that Ms. Nin was a writer of women's erotica...right?
Many of life's most interesting quotes come from unexpected sources,
"Bart, Lisa, you both tried your hardest and failed miserably. The
lesson is, never try." - Homer Simpson
And others are to be expected,
<< <i>Unless Jesus comes back first. But then, I'd be right either way.
- ToppsGun
Please produce the evidence you must surely have that proves I'm white.
anybody know of any good tamborine players?
<< <i>Hmmm. Let's see. Were we (and the world) better from 1946 to say....1962? [Yep.]
McArthur or was it Patton got booted after saying we should have kept marching past Berlin into Russia. Had we done so, there would have been no cold war and that 16 year period of betterment mentioned above might have lasted a while longer.
That's OK, Reagan took care of the Rooskies. Peace through strength. Anybody want to question those deficits of the 80's now?
So Bush-43 runs up a few bills. Big deal. Still our debt as a % of GDP is less than Reagan's. The Cold War lasted 40 years. I'll wager we whup terrorism in less time.
Unless Jesus comes back first. But then, I'd be right either way.
Worst. Analogies. EVER!
What you lack in brains, you more than make up for in just randomly spouting anything that comes to your mind, no matter how little sense it makes.
Congrats!
GO MARLINS! Home of the best fans in baseball!!
maybe he's on vacation
The biggest difference in America today vs. 60 years ago? We were united then. There was no political commentary to purposely derail the national spirit. We backed our troops, period. From Rosie the Riveter to zinc pennies to the USO.
Here's another bad analogy for you: Average lives lost per year in Vietnam conflict...about 6,000 (over 9 years). Tune in to Nightline tonight as Ted Koppel reads the names of all 700 lost in Iraq conflict. Keep in mind, Ted's aim is not so much to honor the dead, but to break the will of the American people. Bad miscalulation, Ted.
By the way, would you be happier if 1,000 more troops died in this war? Sounds like 600 just doesn't do much for you.
GO MARLINS! Home of the best fans in baseball!!
Yes, you must have missed that part. But then, I'd expect as much from a man who can't see that the low-rent shenanigans of Saddam Hussein posed as much of- if not more of- a threat to the free world as the Third Reich. Hitler developing an A-Bomb would have been bad news, but it can't compare to the possible threat of Saddam Hussein catapulting gunny sacks full of camel turds into Kuwait City. Talk about a 'dirty bomb'!!
And as far as the nation being united is concerned, it's no accident that WWII happened before our military spent 18 years screwing around in a giant rice paddy halfway around the globe. After the quagmire that was Vietnam I'd expect more Americans to be a bit more cautious about the necessity for war-- especially when it's some dippy little playboy recently installed as president that's clamouring for combat. Of course, he's never really 'seen' combat, since he was off snorting party-lines while his National Guard unit was training-- but hey! I bet he and Cheney have mixed in the occasional game of Stratego!
Ah, but I digress. Operation 'Unresolved Family Issues' is now into it's second year, and by all accounts everything's going peachy. As our resident sage toppsgun has insinuated, a few hundred casualties is a small price to pay for the opportunity to invade some impoverished rat-hole of a nation located in the middle of a Christ-forsaken desert. I mean, you never know- we let guys like Saddam go, and pretty soon falafal stands could start popping up like mushrooms on the street corners of Cheyenne. And after that, where would it end? Chick peas on our Ceaser salads? Garbanzo beans sneaking into the Wendy's chili vat? No way-- not for me. Which puts me firmly in toppsgun's camp; either shut up or raise a few million and run for congress. Yeah, sure, a million bucks sounds like a lot, but you do have 6 months to raise it-- you shake down a couple homos at the local Y, return a few cans.. hell, you should be there in no time!!
Isn't this the collectors of sports cards forum?
We should all know better than to debate religion or politics on here...here's a good site for posting political stuff.
BTW....I'm an Native American/Irish-Polish, drug addicted, alcoholic, atheist, and I don't vote! I hope I didn't offend anyone like me. I think I'm in the minority around here.
Post here
Also....TG.... General MacArthur wanted to nuke North Korea. Truman was affraid China would react and gave Mac the boot. (no pun intended)
RG58....Kerry was gung ho about Vietnam and wanted to be like his hero, the real JFK. Later changed, after a half tour/6months. He realized what a big lie the whole war was.
______________
1961 topps 100%