yall
-
Posts
3,322 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by yall
-
-
Just heard on the radio, that two high ranking Iraqi generals may have been involved in the killings. Story still developing..............
Hmmm... where are the people questioning the source here?
Don't misinterpret, I'm not saying that you are lying about having heard this on the radio, but I don't see anyone saying "bah! that's just the warmongers. It's not even on NBC right now, how could it possibly be true!"
And this development, even if it proves to be true, doesn't rule out Iranian involvement. If these generals were Shiites they could very well be working with the Iranians. If they were Sunni's however, almost surely they were not.
-
Well, I'm hoping that if enough members are interested, SDS will make one for us...
Of course it might just be you, me, /dev/null, BlueFire, and Fez though...
-
When I woke up this morning, I was hoping there would be another thread bashing WGR...Thankfully you came through!
For a group who hates 550, you guys sure listen a lot....
I enjoy parts of their programming. I could listen to Howard Simon all day long. He has always been one of my favorite radio personalities. I just wish they'd dump the afternoon crew. Hell, bring back Brinson baby!
Edit: And for clarification, the reason I don't care for Schopp anymore, is how rude and dismissive he can be with callers. Yeah, I'm sure they get tired of hearing the same people call in with silly opinions or comments, but he just gets too high and mighty with people.
Example: Yesterday they were asking for people to call in with their opinions about who they would like to see the Sabres matched up against or avoid in the first round of the playoffs. At least once they phrased the question as "call in and let us know is there someone you want the Sabres to play in the first round..."
Some dude called and said he really had no preference as he felt the Sabres were good enough to take on anyone in the 1st round. A reasonable opinion, and it answered their question. They wanted to know "is there someone" and the guys answer was "no there is not, and here is why...". But before he had a chance to fully explain his position, which ostensibly may have been more than "the Sabres are good" Schopp disconnected him and then went on to berate him for not calling in with anything of substance.
-
This is my favorite part so far:
"Assistant Attorney General John Grossman called the light boards "bomblike" devices and said that if they had been explosive they could have damaged transportation infrastructure in the city."
Yeah and if my shoes were made of VX gas, they could kill people...
"OMFG... look out for yall's shoes!!!"
-
With all of the gaming related posts we have, I was thinking we should have a video game related sub-forum. Many of the posts just seem out of place in the consumer forum.
What do you guys think?
-
How do you shoot down those uav's. Anyone? Help.
EMP device maybe?
Dunno, haven't played SC in a while...
This makes me think we should have a gaming sub forum.
-
I loved their very well thought out alternative to uses for the money. My favorite was "let's make beer cheaper". Second place was "let's use it to reduce the price hike". My recommendation would have been to use part of it to buy plane tickets to send those bozo's somewhere else.
Oh, and by the way guys, don't be too proud of having the number 1 rated sports station in the nation. Good ratings are easy to come by when you have ZERO competition.That would be like Time Warner bragging that they have more cable subscribers than anyone else in Erie county. You go girl!
-
Ah, yes, now your evidence is unnamed sources saying the Pentagon is "seriously" looking at Iran, and Al-Maliki saying he is "sure Iran is behind some attacks" (tacked on to the same article as before, but with a new headline...the evidence is truly mounting).
Theories by unnamed sources and assurances from al-Maliki. Let's go to war.
The issue is that we're not interested in the truth...we're more interested in finding a way, any shred of evidence will do, to go to war. That is the issue I have with the drum-beaters, and that is the issue I have with your initial post.
For starters, it's not my evidence. I made no claim as to the veracity of the evidence cited by any official. I merely showed reports that officials said they had evidence. There is a huge difference.
And once again I said "if this was true"...
Do you understand what that means? I'm not sure you do, because I have repeatedly explained the same thing several times.
Let me sum it up for you:
If the Iranian government was involved in the murder of US troops, the US should enagage the Iranians. Notice the "if" part. That doesn't mean "it seems as though they may have" nor does it mean "I want them to have done this so we can bomb them". It simply means "if they actually did it". Why can't you comprehend this?
-
That you were already musing about leveling another country based on an erroneous Drudge Inflamma-line (that linked to nothing, then dissappeared) speaks for itself.
Gimme a break, are you still harping on this? Most major news outlets are carrying this story, and you are still hung up on the drudgereport? What makes you say that it's erroneous, the fact that it is no longer on the web site? Yeaterday's news isn't there either, does that make it wrong?
I was musing on leveling another country based upon a report that links said country to the ambush, abduction, and execution of 5 US soldiers. Like I said "if" it were true, there should be some retalition.
What don't you get? Are you just trying to be difficut or troll for an argument?
Why not post something meaningful instead of "duh well the drudge report doesnt have it on their website any more so it's obviously an error".
I bet you think the Iraqi Prime Minister is erroneous as well...
Maybe he didn't actually say any of this and CNN is just grossly misquoting him:http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/01/31/...main/index.html
-
Sounds a little like that offensive tackle described in the book "Blind Side." Surprising what lengths kids go to to be successful. Makes me feel a little ashamed at how good life has been to me. I coached hockey (kids) and ran a hockey league for a few years and looking back I think working with kids like that is the thing I'm most proud of in my life.
There is nothing to be ashamed of, especially since it sounds like you decided to give something back so to speak.
-
I'm staring at the Yahoo News page right now and their top Iraq story is about how the US botched the training of the Iraqis...whoops, now it's about another car bomb going off. They have a video of ABC titled "Enemy in Iraq really Iran" up (whoops, it's now been re-titled "Iran and Iraq, What's Next?"), and you can bet that's just loaded with facts. [/sarcasm] CNN is, well, CNN. It's not even on the front page of FoxNews.
Are you saying I'm lying, and that it in fact was not up earlier? Yahoo changes it's top stories, which you just proved. If you look under the "more" section I'm sure you'll find a link there. But is that all you have? Is your only point "not everyone is reporting it"?
You started the thread. You titled the thread. You were the first poster in the thread to suggest this warranted military action. What conclusion am I supposed to infer from that?1. Link a lie to a emotional event
2. Disseminate "intelligence" based on conjecture and speculation to two media sources
3. Rely on public to virally spread inflammatory, factless headline
4. Retract story when it's already percieved as fact by the vast majority
5. Use that lie to reinforce another lie.
6. Invade Iran
Once again, I said it warranted military action "if" it turned out to be true.
Why can you not quote that part? Do I have to quote myself? I guess I do... here goes... Please read it this time and try not to completely ignore what I have said:
"I'll wait until I see this on NBC before jumping to conclusions, but if this is true (and I mean really true not "oops WMD" true) then Iran should be lit the f*ck up like a christmas tree. "
-
I did read the OP. You say you're not going to jump to conclusions, then you start jumping to conclusions. You've already accomplished what they intended anyway...you took a Drudge headline (that erroneously claimed there was an NBC story) that disseminated factless speculations and passed it along. The Drudge headline is now gone, but the Iran-Iran-Iran echo is still wafting through the intertubes.
You claim that IF TRUE, this warrants military action. The title of your thread is "Looks like Iran might need those missles..." How knee-jerk is that?
What conclusion did I jump to? Please elaborate? Apparently you can't even understand the word "might". Please read before you quote and jump to conclusions yourself.
And if you are wary of the drudgereport, that's fine, as CNN and Yahoo both are running the story right now.
-
What "fact"? There's not a single substantiated fact at all in that CNN story. So, now we're invading countries on unverifiable leaked intelligence, speculation and "leading theories"? Oh, wait....
Let's see...
1. Leaked "secret US military report"...check
2. Iran-Iran-Iran-Iran-Iran...check
3. Providing intelligence to muslim extremists...check
4. "sophisticated weaponry"...check
Yup. They've got all the buzz words and foggy "facts" lined up. They've got their manufactured "they struck us first" reasoning set. They've leaked it to Drudge and CNN, so that's their two sources (that all other lazy journalists will site...next up, spread a rumour to the Associated Press about "iranian documents"). They've been spending weeks dictating to anyone and everyone why they have the legal authority to go to war without Congess' approval. Very convenient.
I would think that after having been through this once before in the not-so-distant past that people would take a step back and start to ask for actual proof rather than knee-jerk themselves headlong into another black hole that will swallow up thousands of US lives and billions of more dollars simply so a fool can try and save his legacy.
Try reading the OP as well as re-reading what you have quoted...
Notice words such as "likely" and "probably" and also notice the "oops WMD" part of the OP.
I'm not taking this particular report as complete truth just yet, but given what facts we do have (Irans's support of Hezbollah, their comments about Israel, their flagrant violation of UN nuke policies, Iranian agents being captured in Iraq.. all FACT) there is strong reason to believe that there is some truth to this, and it warrant further investigation.
Should it turn out to be true, some type of military action is warranted.
-
In OH, one has to "opt out" - otherwise they use your SSN.
I'm pretty sure in this day and age, having your name, address, age, etc - finding out credit info is quite possible. Illegal or not. I don't think the fellow on the TV was relating the story just for yucks...
Like I said, if your state has SSN on the drivers license, it's a no brainer. But you do need an SSN (or a Federal Tax ID number) to do a credit check with any of the bureaus (Equifax, Experian, D&B, etc..).
-
Where would the US launch it's aircraft from? If it plans to sail a fleet into the gulf then it needs to worry about Iran's anti-ship missiles (SN 22 Sunburns as well as hundreds of exocets). If it's going to use bases in neighbouring countries then I think it would need those countries permission as well as the permission of countries whose airspace they were overflying.
You are aware that we just sent 2 carrier groups to the Gulf right?
-
The US support of the Contras is slightly more recent than the battle of Hastings.
If they captured them and executed them in cold blood, then that is indeed different. However, the quote you provided just says they were killed "in a deadly ambush". I think troops being killed in an ambush (and most especially when they are occupying another country) would certainly come under the definition of "combat deaths".
I think you're being somewhat unrealistic if you honestly believe the US can completely cripple Iran militarily without many civilian deaths, though I suppose that would depend on what your definition of "many" is.
There were many articles last week stating that they were ambushed, captured, and then executed at another site.
Iran's military can be easily crippled by sinking their naval vessles, and hitting their airfields. We don't need to worry about taking out their armor and SAM sites which are probably kept in heavily populated areas. Some surgical strikes are all we need to just remind them that they should sit this one out.
-
"Lit the f*ck up like a Christmas tree".
So how many Iranian civilians would you like to see killed as retaliation for an attack that killed five US soldiers? Five hundred? Five thousand? Five million? Assuming Iran is supporting Iraqi rebels, it is not doing anything the US has not done many times in many different countries for decades. Should the US have been "lit up like a Christmas tree" for their support of the Contras in Nicaragua? Silly me, I forgot that when the US does this sort of thing it's "good", whereas if anyone else does it, it's "evil".
Why not bring up the battle of Hastings while you are at it?
The fact is there is a good chance (CNN is now reporting it as well) that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard disguised themselves, kidnapped US soldiers, and then executed them. Am I to understand you feel there should be no military action against a country that murders our troops?
We aren't talking accidental or combat deaths here, this is a government potentially sanctioning the murder of our troops. A goverment that funds terrorist organizations in Palestine. This isn't just funding some rebels. If you can't see the difference you must be blind.
I would like to see zero Iranian civies killed, but there is always collateral damage. And besides, we can completely cripple Iran militarily without many civilian deaths at all.
-
From www.drudgereport.com:
"NBC NEWS confirms a secret U.S. military report that says 'Iranian Agents' may be behind a deadly ambush in Karbala, Iraq that left five American soldiers dead. The report also claims the Iranian revolutionary guard is providing intelligence on U.S. and Iraqi military to Shiite extremists, in addition to sophisticated weaponry. Developing... "
I'll wait until I see this on NBC before jumping to conclusions, but if this is true (and I mean really true not "oops WMD" true) then Iran should be lit the f*ck up like a christmas tree.
-
He was born in my hometown. His sister was the secretary at my highschool.
Hire him!
-
They do it, and I'm not sure how without you knowing. But beyond that in VA they no longer print your SSN on the drivers liceense so they can't do that anymore.
Maybe in Ohio they also print the SSN on a drivers license, which would give just about anyone the ability to run a credit check on you.
If that's true, then yeah StuckinCincy is totally right and people should be wary of this scam. It's still hella illegal though unless you somehow unknowingly sign a form giving them permission to do a credit check. And if they have tricked you into signing said form it's still illegal, although much harder to prove they did anything wrong.
-
I was reminded of this a few days ago - one of the local tv station's consumer spots...
Some car dealers have been asking to make a copy of your driver's license before they will let you take one of their cars for a test drive - concerned about theft etc. And I can appreciate that.
Then they run a credit check on you. Beyond you giving them personal info, another problem can happen - the credit inquiries if frequent cause the credit reporting agencies to take notice, to the point of reducing your rating.
So if a dealer asks, refuse and tell the salesman that he should come along for the ride. If he won't and still wants your info, go shop elsewhere...
I'm not sure that is entirely true. You can't really run a credit check without a social security number, and it's illegal to run a credit check on someone without their consent.
Having worked as a car salesman, I can attest that they like to take your license but for different reasons. It's another way to try and keep you there, but I'm pretty sure what you are describing is not only illegal, but hard to do without the SSN.
-
Had that argument with my sister-in-law over Thanksgiving, actually. She apparently thinks corporate America and the FDA lie and can't be trusted, unless they put the word "organic" on a package. I could put an "organic" label on my car, and it would mean as much.
How do you know the fairie isn't building model airplanes and sniffin' glue?
-
Good news!
-
Hell yeah I'll install it.... once SP 2 is released!
Brett Favre To Return....
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
I wish we would play them again this year. But at the same time, I'd hate Aaron Schobel to have a guilty conscience for assaulting an elderly person.