Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • olyclimber

      WELCOME TO THE CASCADECLIMBERS.COM FORUMS   02/03/18

      We have upgraded to new forum software as of late last year, and it makes everything here so much better!  It is now much easier to do pretty much anything, including write Trip Reports, sell gear, schedule climbing related events, and more. There is a new reputation system that allows for positive contributors to be recognized,  it is possible to tag content with identifiers, drag and drop in images, and it is much easier to embed multimedia content from Youtube, Vimeo, and more.  In all, the site is much more user friendly, bug free, and feature rich!   Whether you're a new user or a grizzled cascadeclimbers.com veteran, we think you'll love the new forums. Enjoy!
Sign in to follow this  
prole

What's Up With Ft. Lewis?

Recommended Posts

Think Calley did 3 ott years of house arrest after tricky Dick intervened.

 

Math might be bad but that's three days at home for every murder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kinda thinking this one might be executed.

 

Lots of enlisted and NCO's did more time than Lt. Calley for far less than murdering somewhere between 347 and 504 unarmed civilians.

 

Calley got off lightly in comparison to what may happen to Sergeant _______.

Yah, I'm thinking the same thing about this latest guy in KDH. He's looking down the multiple barrels of a firing squad. The UCMJ still provides for firing squads, doesn't it?

 

Calley got life, but only served, like, 3 or 4 years before he got released. If you call getting off of house arrest being released... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Think Calley did 3 ott years of house arrest after tricky Dick intervened.

 

Math might be bad but that's three days at home for every murder.

i won't be surprised in the least if the current man of the hour gets sentenced to little more than x-box arrest - my lai is but one of far too many drumbeats in the tune of american hypocrisy - calley is a bloodbrother to col chivington, and if you play the odds, not the last of the line

 

for extra credit, what equally reprehensible atrocity occurred the same date as my lai, but exactly 20 years later and served both as the justification for another unpopular american war, as well as executing the man that war dethroned? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
for extra credit, what equally reprehensible atrocity occurred the same date as my lai, but exactly 20 years later and served both as the justification for another unpopular american war, as well as executing the man that war dethroned? :)

You must be talking about Ol' Saddam gassing the Kurds, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i don't understadn people who don't like history - it makes the greatest comedy! it'd be funnier still, if'n it wasn't so goddamn tragic...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kev

 

I've got to agree with Ak on this. it doesn't matter if its a war, conflict, occupation.

 

I hear you. I was only correcting another persons post to accurately reflect our current situation. To me that is a very important piece of the puzzle. To call it war is to continue the brainwashing. IMO.

 

And to say that AK has more perspective is wrong. He has a different perspective. One that I respect but very different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

care to share your defintion of "war" then? i teach an elective class called "the history of war" and that's the assignment on day 1 :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
care to share your defintion of "war" then? i teach an elective class called "the history of war" and that's the assignment on day 1 :)

 

I'm getting the feeling Kev would not pass your class...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
care to share your defintion of "war" then? i teach an elective class called "the history of war" and that's the assignment on day 1 :)

 

I'm getting the feeling Kev would not pass your class...

weeeell, it IS an elective - unlike the standard 10% failure rate of my core classes, i think i've only had one dipshit work hard enough to fail the war class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
War is aid.

i think all climbing is aid, and all human interactions are war :)

 

just so long as there's never a ceasefire, status quo ante bellum solution to the war on christmas :rawk:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
care to share your defintion of "war" then? i teach an elective class called "the history of war" and that's the assignment on day 1 :)

 

From an ST post of mine back shortly after the start of the Iraq War that details my view on what armed conflict / war should mean:

 

There are simple measures which could be instituted relative to putting how we go to war on a sane and rational footing:

 

- Allow the President to dispatch up to 20k troops to any two discontiguous conflicts for six months on their signature alone with a one week notice to Congress.

 

- Within that one week Congress can overide with the same margin required to override a veto.

 

- The day the President want's a third dispatch, a contiguous dispatch, one body more than 20k in any one conflict, or wants one more day past six months in any one conflict, they will need to seek a formal Declaration of War agreed to by Congress by the same margin required to override a veto.

 

- The day a passed Declaration of War is signed by the President the following will occur: non-exempt military draft lottery for ages 18-35, freeze on the fed rate, freeze on wholesale prices, 15% national war sales tax, 15% war tax on capital gains.

 

- Those protocols would remain in effect until the day troop levels are below 20k and the Congress rescinds the Declaration of War by the same margin required to override a veto.

 

Do that, and there will be precious few wars started, corporations and republicans will become anti-war protesters overnight, and what wars do get past those hurtles will be staggeringly brief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
care to share your defintion of "war" then? i teach an elective class called "the history of war" and that's the assignment on day 1 :)

 

From an ST post of mine back shortly after the start of the Iraq War that details my view on what armed conflict / war should mean:

 

There are simple measures which could be instituted relative to putting how we go to war on a sane and rational footing:

 

- Allow the President to dispatch up to 20k troops to any two discontiguous conflicts for six months on their signature alone with a one week notice to Congress.

 

- Within that one week Congress can overide with the same margin required to override a veto.

 

- The day the President want's a third dispatch, a contiguous dispatch, one body more than 20k in any one conflict, or wants one more day past six months in any one conflict, they will need to seek a formal Declaration of War agreed to by Congress by the same margin required to override a veto.

 

- The day a passed Declaration of War is signed by the President the following will occur: non-exempt military draft lottery for ages 18-35, freeze on the fed rate, freeze on wholesale prices, 15% national war sales tax, 15% war tax on capital gains.

 

- Those protocols would remain in effect until the day troop levels are below 20k and the Congress rescinds the Declaration of War by the same margin required to override a veto.

 

Do that, and there will be precious few wars started, corporations and republicans will become anti-war protesters overnight, and what wars do get past those hurtles will be staggeringly brief.

yeah, pretty much sure you'd pass the class joe :grin:

 

your proposal makes a far better constitutional amendment than the anti-gay n' flag-burning types, and i'd be happy to support it

 

reading "the proud tower" by barbara truchman at the moment, about the 20 years before ww1, and it really is fascinating to see in america today the same arguments and sensibilities as then - amazing to think there ever was a time in this country when being steadfastly opposed to the building of a warship or creating of a standing army was considering the apotheosis of patriotism

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are Mitt's kids going to enlist invest when he takes us to war with Iran?
(fixed it fer ya)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually think Kev made a good point. It is important to distinguish between war and armed conflict if for no other reason that to highlight the fact that the nature of conflict is different now than it was historically. Conflict is now so much more likely to involve ideologies and non-governmental actors. The U.S.'s "war" against terrorism, Taliban, El-Quaeda, etc., for example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Conflict is now so much more likely to involve ideologies and non-governmental actors. The U.S.'s "war" against terrorism, Taliban, El-Quaeda, etc., for example.

bullshit. government and nation-states themselves are quite new inventions. more typically its been tribes/religions/sects/etc. that have divided warring group, and continous warfare has been the norm throughout history (and indeed, even advanced primates like chimps seem in constant combat w/ their neighbors)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I actually think Kev made a good point. It is important to distinguish between war and armed conflict if for no other reason that to highlight the fact that the nature of conflict is different now than it was historically. Conflict is now so much more likely to involve ideologies and non-governmental actors. The U.S.'s "war" against terrorism, Taliban, El-Quaeda, etc., for example.

That's why I structure the executive powers in the post above the way I have - it gives the President enough authority to deal with terrorism and smaller regional conflicts, but puts constraints around it on congressional 'veto', force levels, and time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Conflict is now so much more likely to involve ideologies and non-governmental actors. The U.S.'s "war" against terrorism, Taliban, El-Quaeda, etc., for example.

bullshit. government and nation-states themselves are quite new inventions. more typically its been tribes/religions/sects/etc. that have divided warring group, and continous warfare has been the norm throughout history (and indeed, even advanced primates like chimps seem in constant combat w/ their neighbors)

 

I think you can at least say the nation v nation paradigm has dominated since as long as the U.S. has been a nation, if not since the dawn of nation-states. Look at every war/conflict the U.S. has ever been involved in. Until Afghanistan (except for perhaps some covert and / or minor police actions in Latin America) every conflict has been against another nation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, there was the war against the Barbary Pirates but that was probably a one-off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×