enough Goff (and this thread)
b_rieux at yahoo.com
Thu Jul 24 23:35:02 MDT 2003
Xenon Zi-Neng Yuan <wenhuadageming at comcast.net>:
>>if you're going to accuse me in a public forum of
using a pseudonym,
am i supposed to do?<<
Why don't you start by proving you are a real person?
Or better yet, give the keyboard back to mommie and
>Am I implying or are you inferring?
>>why the verbal gymnastics? for the sake of
argument, i say both.
you started this thread such: "Stan the airborne
leftist reaching out
the service people to sell his book. I totally
It's the cart before the horse."<<
First, I think Stan doesn't know much of what he
asserts authority about. Second, I disagree with his
program. As I said before, if you like what he writes
so much, go to another list. He doesn't write for this
>>well, if recitation was so important to you:
xenon recites, "americans are going to have to get
beyond their own
american firsterism - it's communal, it's
serves our oppressors."<<
Oh, this so clever dear little Xenon. And they let
troll bait like you and your drinking buddy on the
list instead of throwing you off for being underaged
on an adult forum?
>>A totally sophomoric move--please cite something to
>sound more convincing.
i cited the links, and you refused. i concede i
could've done more,
frankly i am not going to spend too much more time on
Yeah, why should we ask you to start now after all
>>and if you are unwilling to spare a moment to even
just skim through
very brief articles/essays, why should i bother?<<
Well, for a start, I'm not even sure what it is in Rad
Goff's treatment of things that you understand.
>>am i underestimating them? what, because i called
them "kooks"? perhaps you are overestimating them?
plenty of the upper echelon in the military
have expressed their dislike of rumsfeld, a higher
profile case being recently "ousted" member of the
joint chiefs, gen. shinseki. sure,
rummy et al may be able to machinate a continued hold
on on their position,so i don't underestimate them or
the system that protects them in that
regard. but i still say they're out of their minds
(such as thinking that "smart weapon"-centric bombing
will solve everything - i agree, "nasty
work" indeed). you cite that rummy had been for the
past two years trying to de-emphasize the reserves
and NG, but that plan sure fell flat on
it's face in light of the current reality of
occupation, now didn't it? <<
Actually, because you haven't noticed, let me point
out to you how Rummy violated the Powell doctrine. His
idea of the US forces is more special forces centric,
and he doesn't mind using troops as pawns on the chess
board. In other words, he doesn't mind seeing a few
die, unlike Powell who would use smart weapons again
and again, along with all the dumb ones, before
sacrificing one drop of precious AMERICAN blood.
I think you know as much about the US forces reserves
and NGB as you do the other topics. Very little.
Perhaps you ought to read someone else besides Stan?
speculated that many on the list were unaware of this,
as well as of the "military town" phenomenon. i threw
in my bit since i found it ironic that
this is a stan goff-related thread and yet at least
for me personally his writings were amongst the many
that brought to light precisely those things
you postulated folks here were clueless about.<<
He also said that the M-60 machine gun was no longer
in use among American forces, which just goes to show
how much all of you don't know, including Stan.
>>barring some extraordinary circumstance, this is my
last post to this
thread. xzy <<
Would that it were your last post on the list.
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
More information about the Marxism