Moderator: Moderators
From 1971 to 1973 my unit was attached to the United States Middle East force based in Bahrain. Today the island of Diego Suarez is employed instead.Wyvern wrote:I'm willing to do some homework, all I need is one bit of info from you and that is what unit were you attached to in '72-'73.Believe my words or reject them out of hand. All I ask is that the reader do his or her homework. Dig a little.
Yes but I was asking what unit you were attached to not where you served in order to do that homework. For example I was in the navy so we didn't have unit designations like the other services but still I can say I served at Naval Hospital Oakland and was attached to the USHS Mercy. I know its been a long time since you served and if you do not remember that's okay too.richardP wrote:From 1971 to 1973 my unit was attached to the United States Middle East force based in Bahrain. Today the island of Diego Suarez is employed instead.Wyvern wrote:I'm willing to do some homework, all I need is one bit of info from you and that is what unit were you attached to in '72-'73.Believe my words or reject them out of hand. All I ask is that the reader do his or her homework. Dig a little.
It is an abuse of our fellow citizens in uniform to put them in the role of a Roman Legionnaire, whose mission is offensive conquest to protect the "vital interests" (oil flow) of a corporate Empire. At least the Roman soldiers got land to farm as a reward for service. The massive shedding of US middle class jobs that started during the Bush occupancy has become a de facto draft.Our soldiers are to be honored. They have earned it.
The Pentagon and corporate CEOs who profit from war are to be despised.
They have earned that as well.
Employment increased during much of Bush's term, and has spiked sharply upward during Obama's: http://perotcharts.com/2009/02/unemploy ... uary-2009/DeBunkem wrote:It is an abuse of our fellow citizens in uniform to put them in the role of a Roman Legionnaire, whose mission is offensive conquest to protect the "vital interests" (oil flow) of a corporate Empire. At least the Roman soldiers got land to farm as a reward for service. The massive shedding of US middle class jobs that started during the Bush occupancy has become a de facto draft.Our soldiers are to be honored. They have earned it.
The Pentagon and corporate CEOs who profit from war are to be despised.
They have earned that as well.
Correct me if I am wrong but I think you meant to say unemployment.East of Eden wrote:Employment increased during much of Bush's term, and has spiked sharply upward during Obama's: http://perotcharts.com/2009/02/unemploy ... uary-2009/DeBunkem wrote:It is an abuse of our fellow citizens in uniform to put them in the role of a Roman Legionnaire, whose mission is offensive conquest to protect the "vital interests" (oil flow) of a corporate Empire. At least the Roman soldiers got land to farm as a reward for service. The massive shedding of US middle class jobs that started during the Bush occupancy has become a de facto draft.Our soldiers are to be honored. They have earned it.
The Pentagon and corporate CEOs who profit from war are to be despised.
They have earned that as well.
Do you think the price and availability of oil is unrelated to employment?
Yes, it would have been better put with 'unemployment'.Wyvern wrote:Correct me if I am wrong but I think you meant to say unemployment.East of Eden wrote:Employment increased during much of Bush's term, and has spiked sharply upward during Obama's: http://perotcharts.com/2009/02/unemploy ... uary-2009/DeBunkem wrote:It is an abuse of our fellow citizens in uniform to put them in the role of a Roman Legionnaire, whose mission is offensive conquest to protect the "vital interests" (oil flow) of a corporate Empire. At least the Roman soldiers got land to farm as a reward for service. The massive shedding of US middle class jobs that started during the Bush occupancy has become a de facto draft.Our soldiers are to be honored. They have earned it.
The Pentagon and corporate CEOs who profit from war are to be despised.
They have earned that as well.
Do you think the price and availability of oil is unrelated to employment?
This is entirely dependant on how you define what a mercenary is. The articles sources cite numbers from 70,000 to the authors own number of 250,000. To get that high number the author considers every civilian contractor in the country to be a mercenary. In general a mercenary is a soldier for hire, but the majority of contractors in Afghanistan provide services for the american military and are not combatants.DeBunkem wrote:There are currently more mercenaries in Afghanistan than soldiers. I'm not sure about US troops, but I would think that commercial mercenaries are counted in the employment figures.
