|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
174.160.83.123
In Reply to: RE: Replace our diplomats and generals with yes men... posted by Jay Buridan on November 17, 2024 at 15:00:24
Follow Ups:
... in some ways. Regardless of sexual or political preferences, some guys stand out above the rest. What they do with their bodies in the privacy of their own homes is no one else's business, unless they make it our business.I'm no "gatekeeper", but I do wish that some would be less "flamboyant" than they are. When we put our personal attributes on parade for all to see, we should expect a certain amount of ridicule in return.
Some things are better off left in the darkness. Not all things should be politicized. But at the same time, no one should feel forced to deliberately hide their personal attributes during the course of a normal day's work - at least not when attempts at modest behavior unduly interferes with survival.
IMO, flamboyancy degrades sexuality, most of the time. Heterosexual or homosexual, we're better off when we keep certain things "compartmentalized".
Edits: 11/18/24 11/18/24 11/18/24
Is that the answer you were looking for?Only an idiot puts his "philosophy" onto his skin.
Criminals do.
"Your" Pete should meet this babe... perhaps she would become his 4th wife.
Some good Christian... my ass...
Edits: 11/17/24 11/17/24 11/17/24
Call me old fashioned but I agree.
It's all about policies.
...we used to watch Fox when "your Pete" appeared there. And my first reaction was positive - I have high respect to military veterans. But it quickly became available that he had no depth. In essence he was Hannity Lite, just repeating the talking points.
He was OK doing the athletic stuff on their plaza, there was a bit of fun there, but he never developed any depth.
And this is the guy you want to "evaluate" our generals for job fitness???
The best he can do is judge their running and axe throwing skills.
Trump needs loyalty because he's going into a viper pit to clean house.
America has basically lost every war for decades. The military and military-industrial complex needs to be completely disassembled before and turned into an organization designed to WIN.
That "loyalty to the boss" idea is the most idiotic one that I have heard in long time.Great leaders don't need that horseshit ass licker 'loyalty", this is what the insecure scum seeks.
People, nominated to such important position must have only one kind of loyalty - to the Constitution and to the law.
Your character despises both, so he surrounds himself with sycophants, hoping they will shied him from public scrutiny.
Fat chance, buddy... fat chance. Most of these ass kissers will be jettisoned by their "master" the second they say anything he does not approve.
BTW, you never responded to my question on why did this "commander in chief" left his troops to an Iranian attack, and did not do ANYTHING in return?
How would YOU like to be one of those soldiers abandoned by that buffoon?
Edits: 11/18/24
So yes, he does, unfortunately need to go outside the corrupt system to find loyalty.
Biden has been funding Iran and demanding no strong attack on the ayatollahs. He's been the president--fraudulently of course.
And I will be applauding. This is not a fascist country, no matter how hard he is trying to turn it into one.
You have some strange ideas about the interaction between the government and The People.
The real fascists accuse the only democratically elected candidate of fascism.
We all know of other fascists who were elected.
"Combat" is not all about the swinging of maces and swords any longer. If certain women want to fight, I say let them.Smaller, lighter body types are sometimes better suited to the performing of certain types of physical actions. These actions might include climbing, crawling, running or cycling over long distances, or any activity that favors aerobic activity over muscular activity.
Smaller bodies don't require as much air, food, or drink as larger bodies do. Smaller bodies weigh less than larger bodies do. Smaller bodies can remain hidden more easily, etc, etc, etc...
As long as these women are well-suited to the roles they can perform well and they don't hamper or interfere with men who might be better suited to performing certain other types of roles, who should care that they might want to join in on the fun ?
What bugs me sometimes ?
When certain quantities of "feminine women" are allowed to sit back while expecting to reap all of the benefits of our wonderful military/industrial/consumerist complex, without ever having to think much about it. Maybe they should be physically supporting their own keep in the battlefield, instead of sitting back preening their Dolly Parton hairdos and filing their Vampira finger nails all day long ?
Makes you want to give their fat asses a swift kick or two, just to wake them up a little ? Oh wait, I forgot... they should be staying at home having babies in order to make sure they don't turn into uncontrollable "cat women"...
Not to say that there won't be certain times when men and women should not be together in combat. It might all depend on the type of combat at hand.
Edits: 11/18/24 11/18/24 11/18/24 11/18/24 11/18/24 11/18/24
Men are stronger, faster, bigger...you shouldn't base policy on exceptions. And for what? Making women canon fodder? That is not very nice of you. I respect, protect and hold the door for women. Not put a gun in their hand and tell them to go fight for me. Call me old fashioned.
But if they want to enlist, why not let them ? They know about the risks and the benefits, just like the men do.
There are lots of things they can do to support the armed services without getting in the way of men trying to do their jobs..
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: