allthumbs

all kidding aside...you were the best As the videographer for that little match-up, I must say that Trask must have been a gymnast in his early years and minx definitely learned a few things riding horses as a young lass.

I quit responding to FDA -- He drools

I tried for a whole page to get MY point across, but you horndogs and dogettes always want to talk about sex.

as long as he barks when i tell him to he can keep his spots, right trask After the third drink all I remember was ridin' you hard and puttin' you away wet.

oh what are you laughing at muffy? he's right for a change trask you were fantastic but you're still an idiot. but you love me anyway doncha?

goat, don't you have some farm animal to go fellate?

all kidding aside...you were the best

and my taste in women is sketchy at best

minx - kiss my ass

I think that the biggest problem in the Middle East is that there is no strong central government anywhere in the Middle East to include the areas formerly known as Persia - with the possible exception of Saddam Hussein. Think about it. Afghanistan was a breeding ground for terrorism because there was NO central government. Pakistan is almost as bad. Mushareef might say one thing, but his intelligence structure and part of his army are doing another. And what is really scary is those folks DO have nukes. Iran is run by religious leaders - never a good thing. No public administration talent whatsoever. Plus it looks like they will have nukes soon, too. Jordan is weak. Palestine is a joke. Saudi Arabia is teetering on the edge of a power struggle that the Saudi family may not be able to long control - and once again we are on the wrong side of THAT argument. Egypt is probably the most stable of Arab countries - that and Oman and the UAE. But those last two are enlightened despot governments focused on the people of those countries. Yemen is torn by civil war and will continue to be for another decade. It is also a breeding ground for terrorism. The one common denominator here is a weak government is ripe for exploitation by organizations like Al Qaeda. Somalia HAS to be where Osama is hanging towel lately. It's a frickin mess. Did any of you watch 60 Minutes Sunday? Those Korean college students are clueless. Kim Jung Il would just as soon kill them as look at them. But they think it is all a big joke. So I think we should just withdraw from Korea. Hell, I don't own a KIA or a Hyundai, so what do I care. Maybe these people will learn. And when Kim Jung Il does strike we'll see what the rest of the world does - besides wring their hands in panicked confusion. I am so sick of us being the torch of freedom for an uncaring world who despises us. I have only an old Anglo-Saxon word for them.

Backing off of Iraq is quite plausible if we did it right. And as to the problems in Europe... all we'd have to say would be directly to our allies - and what we would say is - "OK - then this is your problem, you deal with it. Don't call us, we'll call you. If someone attacks Turkey we'll come help the Turks who took a risk for us. Otherwise, piss off." We also need to pull our troops (2 divisions) out of Germany. That has helped bolster their economy from the first day of the Marshall Plan until today. We also probably ought to pull out of NATO. It is an organization that has outlived its usefulness. I'm not preaching isolation. I am saying that it is time that the nations of western Europe ponied up to the bar and did their fair share of providing for the common defense of Europe. It just ain't our job no more!!!

wtf? no shares in the US Postal Service?

Personally I don't think we should go to war with Iraq. Our allies have basically accused us of lying. Muslims think we are waging war on Islam. And people think we are nuts because Saddam is harmless. He's not bothering anyone in France. He's not bothering anyone in Germany. So what is the big deal? So I say, leave Saddam alone. Let him be. We should continue to monitor him with TR-1 over flights. Maybe we ought to dust off a couple of SR-71 Blackbirds and let them fly over Iraq. Position a few spy satellites. Why? Because Iraq was so insistent that we not fly over them with the TR-1 (what the news is calling the U-2) until recently. Apparently they had something to hide, but no longer? Now, and again this is personal conjecture, I think we are about to wage war on the wrong country. I think we need to wipe the Saudi family off the map. There is another oppressive regime that is afraid of loosing power! The entire family and all their cousins (read the officer corps of the much vaunted crack force known as the Saudi National Guard)(please note the last comment in parenthesis in tongue and cheek sarcasm) need to be wiped from the face of this earth. Just my personal opinion. Maybe we could get Saddam to help us - nah - I think he is related to the Saudis.

I am of the mind to use them. Anybody have any thoughts on the matter? Pro or Con? What do people think about the fallout, both physical and political? I guess that my position is that in a war, winning is the thing. I don't have a problem nuking the enemy. Matter of fact, I think that should be the first resort, not the last. Why waste American lives if we don't have to? I wonder where people get the idea that our tactical nukes are so radiological. The only radiation emitted is during the initial blast - gamma rays that dissipate almost immediately. These weapons were designed that way so that our troops could occupy the terrain almost immediately after impact. Our nuclear weapons are not area denial weapons or area destruction weapons - they are point destruction weapons. In other words, they are used against specific targets. And they are not dirty - they just make a bigger boom than conventional weapons. Thermo baric weapons kill, but they also destroy by causing over pressurization at the point of impact or above the point of impact. Over pressurization collapses buildings, bridges, etc. Used properly they can cause double destruction - where the over pressurization causes destruction, and then the sudden depressurization caused by the burning of the atmosphere around the point of impact creates a vacuum sucking debris back into the point of impact. And lastly, and I have said this before - it is our stated national policy that if WMDs are used against us, we will retaliate in kind. Since we have renounced the use of chemical and biological weapons, we can only respond with nuclear weapons. In a tit-for-tat scenario, our nukes would be used against troop concentrations and logistical facilities.

"The hills are alive, with the sound of music"

"Book em' Dano"

damn, that's pretty country

I amend my statement.... you are stupid sk

you know what moron, guys like you act so fucking tough, and put down nice looking gals like the one in the green, and act like you got someone better...like you're fucking hot playboy material. get a clue

that chick in the green has some nice taas

BJ, are you fucking nutz? just listen to yourself. there's nothing better than hangin with women. now go to your corner and think about it.

unless you have tits, you're not staying at my place

you two should get a room

that dude's sportin wood

hey allison, would you two fight and talk dirty too? i really dig that