Is this how we treat our heroes?

H

Homeland

New Member
GW8345 said:
Guess the Army did things differently or you didn't like your leaders because they made you dumb ass work and won't let you be a slacker.
Click to expand...

I'll get to my stuff in the next post, but I wanted to point this out. If you are going to say someone is dumb, you should at least use proper grammar when doing so. Otherwise, you resemble your remark. :lmao:
 
G

GW8345

Not White House Approved
Homeland said:
I'll get to my stuff in the next post, but I wanted to point this out. If you are going to say someone is dumb, you should at least use proper grammar when doing so. Otherwise, you resemble your remark. :lmao:
Click to expand...
Typical internet liberal, thinks someone's post is irrelevant because of a simple typo.
 
H

Homeland

New Member
GW8345 said:
So charging someone with something automatically means they are guilty, obviously you don't know how easy it is to charge someone with something in the military and in the military, you are automatically guilty until proven innocent, hence the reason people get removed from command positions. I was charged with sexual harassment when I was instructor because I flunked a female student, I was instantly removed from the classroom until the investigation was finished. Everyone knew she was lying and that she was dumber then Patrick on Sponge-bob, this happened right after Tailhook and if you were in the USN during that time you would know the climate then.

Also, you provided a link for three officers, what about the other 194 that were relieved of command, were they all "charged" with some crime? I wasn't say that all of them were innocent (if I did please show me where I said that), I said that there have been an awful lot of commanders relieve the past six years.
Click to expand...

I was in the Navy after tailhook and would agree with the climate at that time. I didn't realize we were speaking about people being relieved of their command 24 years ago. I also didn't realize you were HJNX as that is the person to whom I directed my comments. In any case, I provided names and reasons they were relieved of command. If you believe the military has planted child pornography on an officer in order to "charge" them, well so be it.

I also said the list goes on and on. Here you go for some more. Since you and HJNX, or you and you have all the names of those who were wrongly terminated, why not post the list of the 197 left so that we could look at their circumstances and judge for ourselves. Otherwise, don't make statements you aren't prepared to back up.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...ccb8a6-29fe-11e3-b139-029811dbb57f_story.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...bff076-d51e-11e2-bc43-c404c3269c73_story.html

http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/us-navy-commander-pleads-guilty-international-bribery-scandal

http://www.stripes.com/news/germany-based-army-officer-convicted-of-raping-three-daughters-1.285804

http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/..._sentenced_at_court_martial.html?id=290240731
 
H

Homeland

New Member
GW8345 said:
Also, you provided a link for three officers, what about the other 194 that were relieved of command, were they all "charged" with some crime? I wasn't say that all of them were innocent (if I did please show me where I said that), I said that there have been an awful lot of commanders relieve the past six years.
Click to expand...

:lmao: 200-3=197. Are you intellectually impaired?
 
H

Homeland

New Member
GW8345 said:
Typical internet liberal, thinks someone's post is irrelevant because of a simple typo.
Click to expand...

Could you point to one thing which makes me a liberal? Is that you shtick? Someone calls you out for being and idiot and they automatically are liberal? Okay, whatever. I'll take if it it makes you feel better, but that doesn't make you any less of an idiot. A typo is one thing, but if you are calling someone stupid, you might want to proof read what you wrote.
 
G

GW8345

Not White House Approved
Homeland said:
I was in the Navy after tailhook and would agree with the climate at that time. I didn't realize we were speaking about people being relieved of their command 24 years ago. I also didn't realize you were HJNX as that is the person to whom I directed my comments. In any case, I provided names and reasons they were relieved of command. If you believe the military has planted child pornography on an officer in order to "charge" them, well so be it.

I also said the list goes on and on. Here you go for some more. Since you and HJNX, or you and you have all the names of those who were wrongly terminated, why not post the list of the 197 left so that we could look at their circumstances and judge for ourselves. Otherwise, don't make statements you aren't prepared to back up.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...ccb8a6-29fe-11e3-b139-029811dbb57f_story.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...bff076-d51e-11e2-bc43-c404c3269c73_story.html

http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/us-navy-commander-pleads-guilty-international-bribery-scandal

http://www.stripes.com/news/germany-based-army-officer-convicted-of-raping-three-daughters-1.285804

http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/..._sentenced_at_court_martial.html?id=290240731
Click to expand...

Wow, you really do have the IQ of a hotdog.

I guess you can't follow a conversation very well, the 200 number HNJX was referring to was originally posted by me, hence the reason I responded to you.

and I'm not am not about to sit here and list all 197 names of those who were relieved of duty, if you want to go right ahead but it doesn't change the fact that 197 have been relieved of duty and I find it highly suspicious that all of them were relieved due to criminal activities.

And as far as stating things and not backing them up to your liking, you can piss off because I'm not going to satisfy your idiotic reasoning.

Again, you are the typical internet liberal, when ever someone doesn't back up something they post to your liking their facts are instantly invalidated.

Wow, didn't know a Major and an Ensign were that high up on the food chain, guess they commanded hundreds of personnel and were in charge of billions of dollars of equipment.

Obviously you don't know what we are talking about so why do you wander back over to the Daily Kos and let the adults talk.
 
G

GW8345

Not White House Approved
Homeland said:
:lmao: 200-3=197. Are you intellectually impaired?
Click to expand...
Again, you can't follow the conversation, I stated about 200, the actual number is 197, you posted three incidents were officers were relieved of duty for criminal activities, I asked about the other 194.

Now, if you want me to spell it out for you I would have to break out my son's crayons.
 
Last edited:
Midnightrider

Midnightrider

Well-Known Member
GW8345 said:
Wow, you really do have the IQ of a hotdog.

I guess you can't follow a conversation very well, the 200 number HNJX was referring to was originally posted by me, hence the reason I responded to you.

and I'm not am not about to sit here and list all 197 names of those who were relieved of duty, if you want to go right ahead but it doesn't change the fact that 197 have been relieved of duty and I find it highly suspicious that all of them were relieved due to criminal activities.

And as far as stating things and not backing them up to your liking, you can piss off because I'm not going to satisfy your idiotic reasoning.

Again, you are the typical internet liberal, when ever someone doesn't back up something they post to your liking their facts are instantly invalidated.
Wow, didn't know a Major and an Ensign were that high up on the food chain, guess they commanded hundreds of personnel and were in charge of billions of dollars of equipment.

Obviously you don't know what we are talking about so why do you wander back over to the Daily Kos and let the adults talk.
Click to expand...

you made a baselss claim and have refused to back it up, at all. Thats not "facts", thats you talking out your ass and getting called on it.
 
G

GW8345

Not White House Approved
Midnightrider said:
you made a baselss claim and have refused to back it up, at all. Thats not "facts", thats you talking out your ass and getting called on it.
Click to expand...

Baseless, for someone who claims they are so smart I find it hard to believe that you are incapable of doing a simple internet search.

Why don't you google "Obama Administration Relieves 197 Military Commanders" and see for yourself.

why don't you use that head for something besides for growing fungus.
 
CleanTheSlateInSMC

CleanTheSlateInSMC

Infidel
GW8345 said:
Again, you can't follow the conversation, I stated about 200, the actual number is 197, you posted three incidents were officers were relieved of duty for criminal activities, I asked about the other 194.

Now, if you want me to spell it out for you and clearer I would have to bread out my crayons.
Click to expand...

Where are you getting this 197 figure from?
 
Hijinx

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
Homeland said:
Is that you shtick?
Click to expand...


LMAO this is too good.

This dingbat just calls out GW 8345 for not putting an R at the end of his you, and then does the same fricking thing,.
Now who is the dummy.

This is a really cool thread the forum numbnuts are going wild in this one. Too funny.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top