|11th Feb 2005, 12:51 PM||#1|
un armored vehicles/political debate
the whole thing with vehicles and armor is just a political move to shut up civilians and the media.
the soldier was practicly paid by the reporter to ask that question. that and they were reservists.
last i checked, active duty takes precedence over reservists.
ask any infantryman if they perfer vehicles with little/no armor, or vehicles that have max armor.
90% will say no/little armor.
why? YOU CANT FSKING MOVE in the damned thing, that and you can hardly see since you have 6 inches of metal in the way.
im sure rukee, and mike can attest to this.
on the politics.
everyone is corrupt, democrats are whiny bitches, republicans are on a power trip, and indepentands dont exsist cause the previous 2 and screaming so much no one hears the minority.
UP, UP, DOWN, DOWN, LEFT, RIGHT, LEFT, RIGHT, B, A, START. i am now uber
|11th Feb 2005, 01:18 PM||#2|
What the hell are you going on about?
Qualthwar: "Friends don't let friends map drunk."
Homer: "Marge, Im pulling an all-nighter for my little girl. Put on a pot of coffee, drink it, and start making burgers."
A quitter never wins, and dont trust whitey.
-Best viewed in 1024X768, or perhaps not at all.
|11th Feb 2005, 02:18 PM||#3|
Aren't you a little late with that rant?
<Evil_Cope> no, its the pain of shame that is added to a "papercut".