U.S., France join in cease-fire call in Lebanon war..sm
Posted By: Democrat on 2006-08-06
In Reply to:
So we are back bumping elbows with France. If only we would have taken their advice on Iraq too.
LINK/URL: US and France JOIN in cease fire
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Cease fire.
No canned text for me. The tone of our posts are set by these my-way-of-the-highway / scorched earth approaches to opposite views. I have very exhilarating exchanges when the 2 parties are respectful, informed, flexible, open-minded, focused and on task, more interested in finding common ground than sowing the seeds of division, looking for solutions as opposed to validation and understanding that no political problems will ever be solved without bipartisan participation, mediation and compromise.
Plagiarizing and paraphrasing an opponent’s text and ideas and trying to throw them back at them does not an effective argument make. Furthermore, it is childish…like those playground disputes between children…“you did, no you did, no you did”…etc. It is not your ideas that I find so distasteful, it is your presentation. Not to be cliché, but you attract more bees with sugar than vinegar. I am not intolerant of Hannity…watch him frequently. Cannot have an effective debate without becoming familiar with the “cons” side of the argument.
On the bigot thing. Remember me? I’m the one who is hawking inclusion, supportive of minority interests, and has the audacity to suggest that Americans are not the only ones who just might deserve some equality, dignity, respect and basic human rights…even if they are illegal. I suppose it is a positive sign that you at least take offense. There’s hope for you yet.
On racial purity. You are really big on maintaining American cultural integrity and identity. But when it comes to extending the same consideration to our immigrants you go ballistic…clear off the map, at times. They can walk and chew gum at the same time…it is possible to preserve ones’ native culture AND be a good American. These are not two mutually exclusive concepts. If our democratic principles are all they are cracked up to be, it would not be so painful to see them behaving like Americans.
Going to go out on a limb here and to use and example. Mexican-Americans gathered together (right to assemble) waving their flag in protest (freedom of speech) of harsh immigration laws or working conditions in the maquilidoras are trying to bring these issues to the doorstep of the government who created those conditions (right to redress grievances). What could be more American than that? You cannot look at that crowd and distinguish between which among them are legal and which are not…after all, those are issues of ALL Mexican natives. Should we deny all of them these rights, implying that such rights are reserved for the REAL Americans? Being American is not simply a matter of a piece of paper, some arbitrary degree of language proficiency, some certain level of income or education. They should not be required to melt into the pot and disappear, renounce their birthrights and turn their backs on their own people just to qualify. Can’t have it both ways. If you want them to be Americans, then you have to LET them be Americans.
Ask yourself this question. If you saw 50,000 illegal Irish immigrants doing the same thing in NYC, would your reaction be the same? The bottom line is this: Our new wave of immigrants does not look like the ones from the past. You seemed to enjoy the DAR bridge party swapping stories of how they all came from different countries and cross bred with one another …even had a occasional Indian in the wood pile…and produced this great nation of mutts. But the breed was selectively white. If it was okay then, it should be okay now. The problem you are grappling with is that the results would produce all these mongrel shades of God-knows what. If this make you uncomfortable in the least little bit…if you are now feeling driven to slap me up side the head…that’s the voice of bigotry.
On elitism. Your posts are full of strict, literal reads and “tudes” as you call them. Sue me if I took a page from your book. At least you sort of tried to address the “academics,” still not calling it by name. If you could stop slaying the messenger long enough to hear the message, you would understand that there is nothing condescending about wanting to engage in informed debate that orients itself around reaching mutual respect and understanding. It has absolutely nothing to do with being angry or feeling superior. Think what you like, but I am neither of those. I simply enjoy using my language and have an affinity for broad vocabulary. It’s just who I am. Blame it on the docs. They certainly sent me to the dictionary too many times to count and I lingered there for a while, that’s all there is to it. This personal trait should not in any way exempt me from debate, nor should I be subjected to ridicule, name calling or unfounded accusations because of it.
There is something you and I have in common. We are 2 American gals coming from opposite ends of the political spectrum, locked into the extreme divisions that plague our fellow citizens from shore to shore. If we cannot find our way past this kind of bickering in which we both find ourselves ensconced, we all are in big trouble.
Believe it or not, Sam, I actually enjoy our posts. Okay, go ahead if you like. Send me to the therapist again. Call me masochist, bipolar, schizo, whatever. I just think we could do better than this.
Speaking of therapy, I have a life-long friend, an endearing street thug / bad boy from younger days, who grew up and became a therapist. He works with drug addicts, adult children of alcoholics (being one himself) and dysfunctional families. He said something to me that made a lot of sense. One of the first challenging pieces of advice he throws out to a new patient is to “try to keep things in the third person,” in an effort to “dial back” nonproductive confrontations with family members. I thought he was crazy at first, but I started trying this with my husband and to my surprise, it really did seem to help us to better understand one another, even after 18 years. That is what I will be trying to do next time you and I visit the water cooler. If you want to chill on the immigrant dialog for a while, that works for me.
Thanks for the good luck wishes on the job search. Hope I can find a decent company that is not just another maquilidora masquerading as an MTSO!
Boy, your cease fire didn't last long....LOL
Just in case you are interested, and I doubt you are, I wrote this BEFORE you wrote your cease fire, not AFTER. Which makes your cease fire ring all the more hollow, especially in the face of this..."Okay you want to keep the gloves off..." LOL. And if this dialing it back a notch...yes, frankly, I would suggest you go back and talk to that family friend because you haven't got the third person thing down yet. Every post flies in the face of what you try to say. You ARE angry. You DO need to feel superior. You want what you want, I want what I want. I make specific examples of specific Americans I have personal knowledge of who immigrated from Mexico and that is their experience, and the experience of many others. But you could care less. If it doesn't illustrate your point, you don't care about it. You don't care that it costs your fellow citizens millions every year to support illegal immigrants...money that could be going to the needs of citizens of this country. And where do you get that illegals don't stay anyway? Got any of those 4-letter words to support that?
Yes, my feelings extend to ANY nationality illegal immigrant. Why on earth do you think I hate Mexicans? I don't hate ANYONE. I just want them to come here legally like other immigrants have, get a green card, go through the process, become citizens if that is what they choose to do, or go back home when their visas expire. Draw and quarter me for that if you like. I couldn't, at this point, care LESS.
Again you completely missed the fact that I grew up and went to school with Mexican immigrant children and knew their families and keep in touch today. I have no problem with Mexicans. It is a fact that the biggest problem we have with immigration is from Mexico...welll duhhh...we share a border with them. Much easier for them to immigrate illegally, much easier because of the porous border for folks to get in that we don't really want to get in. But of course, you would
As to it takes a long time to become a citizen, yada yada yada...well, good things come to those who wait. It has always taken a long time to become a citizen. Since there are millions here who are citizens, obviously they thought it was worth the wait. Excuses, excuses, excuses. It is the LAW. Do you pick and choose what laws you want upholded and those you don't?
You say NONE of them want to change who we are or what we are. Did I miss the part where you were named national spokesperson for illegal immigrants? You don't even realize you said the same thing I said. Yes, they come here for a better life. That's fine. If I immigrated to Canada for a better life, I would not carry the American flag down their streets in protest, out of respect if nothing else, but I suppose that is something that does not matter to you either...it certainly is not present in your rants. If I immigrated to Canada to a part where they spoke predominantly French, I would learn French. I would be embracing of their culture. Because I chose to make that my country and my home. I would not have to be asked to do so. But obviously I am the exception and not the rule.
Again with the languages. I don't care how many languages are spoken here. My sole point is that for preservation and protection of the United States of America we should be united...and you don't see that either. I belive what I believe, you believe what you believe. And never the twain shall meet, it would appear. Does not make me wrong, does not make you wrong. I will hold my hopes for the America I long for and you hold the hopes for the America you long for. The years to come will tell the tale. And if all this comes back to bite you years down the road...and we are too old to care...that little voice in the back of your head that said "I told you so..." That will be me.
The Civil War...geez. It was all ABOUT preserving unity. If it had not been fought to preserve the union we would be two countries today fighting back and forth across the border like Iran and Iraq for example. Slavery was only part of the issue of the civil war. But a brilliant man (and Republican I might add) Abraham Lincoln saw the folly in splitting the union, and another fine man, Robert E. Lee, saw the same folly...but chose to be a Virginian before an American, though it broke his heart to do so (to use his own words), and we see where that led. After the civil war and the slaves were freed, we came back together as a country, stronger than before, and never since have Americans chosen to be anything but Americans first. So far. That is what I would like to preserve. That is all I am talking about. Unity. Read up on the civil war. Read up on Abraham Lincoln and Robert E. Lee. Both great men with great vision. The Civil War was about unity.
As to now who's arrogant? I am about the most UN-arrogant person you would ever meet. I wouldn't know how to be verbally condescending and you have it down to a fine art. For someone who is not angry and not needing to feel superior, your posts say the opposite.
All this aside, keep safe during the bad weather coming up. I know hurricanes don't go inland very far too often, praying that it won't get to you. Hoping tornados spawned won't get to either. Keep your head down and live to verbally slice and dice me another day. :)
fighting fire with fire doesn't work
We have been hitting each other over the head with clubs since Early Man. The American military has killed innocents, too. I do not think Americans are more deserving of anything than anyone else who inhabits this planet. We are all human beings with families and feelings and lives. Perhaps its time to drop the weapons and communicate for a change.
fight fire with fire
We need to **take it there** more often and louder. We have been too quiet, too politically correct and where has it gotten us? The republicans have been smearing democrats and each election has had nothing but dirty tricks from the republicans. This past election, Kerry tried to be on the up and up, not personally attacking..What did the republicans do? Secretly paid for a group to smear Kerry and his Vietnam War record. When Bush was asked, he said he had nothing to do with the group. Baloney! It was backed by the republican party. That is the way Rove and Bush are, they smear their opponents. Time to fight fire with fire. No more Mr. Nice Guy.
Wow. Never cease to be amazed...sm
But I can appreciate a person who says what's on their mind and not dance around the issue, however wrong she may be.
Outlaw abortion so we can have more cheap labor and then we won't need the Mexicans ~ That's what she's saying here. She's already chalked up the aborted to cheap labor.
Some of us are aghast - the Lebanon Solidarity letter sm
Lebanon solidarity letter:
The US-backed Israeli assault on Lebanon has left the country numb, smoldering and angry. The massacre in Qana and the loss of life is not simply disproportionate. It is, according to existing international laws, a war crime.
The deliberate and systematic destruction of Lebanon's social infrastructure by the Israeli air force was also a war crime, designed to reduce that country to the status of an Israeli-US protectorate.
The attempt has backfired, as people all over the world watch aghast. In Lebanon itself, 87 percent of the population now support Hezbollah's resistance, including 80 percent of Christian and Druze and 89 percent of Sunni Muslims, while 8 percent believe the US supports Lebanon.
But these actions will not be tried by any court set up by the international community since the United States and its allies that commit or are complicit in these appalling crimes will not permit it.
It has now become clear that the assault on Lebanon to wipe out Hezbollah had been prepared long before. Israel's crimes had been given a green light by the United States and its ever-loyal British ally, despite the overwhelming opposition to Blair in his own country.
The short peace that Lebanon enjoyed has come to an end, and a paralyzed country is forced to remember a past it had hoped to forget. The state terror inflicted on Lebanon is being repeated in the Gaza ghetto, while the international community stands by and watches in silence. Meanwhile the rest of Palestine is annexed and dismantled with the direct participation of the United States and the tacit approval of its allies.
We offer our solidarity and support to the victims of this brutality and to those who mount a resistance against it. For our part, we will use all the means at our disposal to expose the complicity of our governments in these crimes. There will be no peace in the Middle East while the occupations of Palestine and Iraq and the temporarily paused bombings of Lebanon continue.
Tariq Ali
Mona Abaza
Matthew Abraham
Gilbert Achcar
Etel Adnan
Aziz el-Azmeh
Nadia Baghdadi
John Berger
Timothy Andres Brennan
Michaelle Browers
Noam Chomsky
Alexander Cockburn
Dan Connell
Mahmoud Darwish
Richard Falk
Eduardo Galeano
Irene Gendzier
Charles Glass
Yassin al Haj Saleh
Emilie Jacir
Assaf Kfoury
Elias Khouri
Yitzhak Laor
Ken Loach
Jennifer Loewenstein
Karma Nabulsi
John Pilger
Harold Pinter
Richard Powers
Tanya Reinhart
Eric Rouleau
Arundhati Roy
Sandra Shattuck
William Thelin
Gore Vidal
Howard Zinn
Stephen Zunes
The rest will be back when Israel is through bombing Lebanon.nm
z
Amnesty International's press release on Lebanon....sm
http://web.amnesty.org/pages/lbn-220805-feature-eng
UN: Israel's use of cluster bombs in Lebanon completely immoral
UN denounces Israel cluster bombs The UN's humanitarian chief has accused Israel of completely immoral use of cluster bombs in Lebanon.
UN clearance experts had so far found 100,000 unexploded cluster bomblets at 359 separate sites, Jan Egeland said.
Israel has repeated its previous insistence that munitions it uses in conflict comply with international law.
Earlier, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert rebuffed UN chief Kofi Annan's calls for a swift end to Israel's air and sea blockade of Lebanon.
After talks with Mr Annan, Mr Olmert said the siege would only be lifted once the ceasefire terms were fully implemented.
This included the release of two Israeli soldiers whose capture by Hezbollah militants sparked the conflict.
But a Lebanese Hezbollah cabinet minister said there would be no unconditional release of the soldiers - the pair would only be freed as a result of a prisoner exchange with Israel.
|
Every day, people are maimed, wounded and killed by these weapons - it shouldn't have happened
Jan Egeland
UN humanitarian chief |
UN efforts to rid Lebanon of cluster bombs have been under way since the conflict ended. Earlier estimates from UN experts had suggested a total of about 100 cluster bomb sites.
Mr Egeland described the fresh statistics as shocking new information.
What's shocking and completely immoral is: 90% of the cluster bomb strikes occurred in the last 72 hours of the conflict, when we knew there would be a resolution, he said.
The UN ceasefire resolution which ended the month-long conflict between Israel and Hezbollah was agreed by the Security Council on Friday, 11 August, and came into effect on Monday, 14 August.
Mr Egeland added: Cluster bombs have affected large areas - lots of homes, lots of farmland. They will be with us for many months, possibly years.
Every day, people are maimed, wounded and killed by these weapons. It shouldn't have happened.
Mr Egeland said his information had come from the UN Mine Action Co-ordination Centre, which had undertaken assessments of nearly 85% of the bombed areas in Lebanon.
Earlier this week the US state department launched an inquiry into whether Israel misused US-made cluster bombs in Lebanon during the conflict.
A senior White House official told the BBC that the investigation would focus on whether US-made weapons were used against non-military targets.
Blockade defended
At their talks in Jerusalem, Mr Annan and Mr Olmert discussed the deployment of UN troops in Lebanon as well as the continuing blockade.
The UN chief said he hoped Israel would withdraw from southern Lebanon once 5,000 UN peacekeepers were on the ground in the coming days and weeks.
The BBC's Jill McGivering, in Jerusalem, said Mr Annan and Mr Olmert emerged from their meeting with little sign of the gap between them having narrowed.
Mr Annan's Jerusalem talks followed a visit to Lebanon as part of a regional tour aimed at bolstering the truce between Israel and Hezbollah.
After his talks in Israel, Mr Annan flew to the West Bank for talks with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.
At a joint press conference in Ramallah, Mr Annan said that more than 200 Palestinians had been killed since the end of June, and the violence had to stop.
Mr Annan has now arrived in Jordan for talks with King Abdullah II, after which he is expected to proceed to Syria.
Yeah...almost asridiculous as yours, I admit...so shall we cease and desist and stick to real issues
nm
France is burning.
Radical fundamentalist Muslims are rotting Europe from the inside out. They know it and they are actually starting to admit it. But their country had to burn before they took their cowardly unappreciative heads out of their hairy armpits. France especially should be ashamed of their actions. If ever a country should show some appreciation for the tens of thousands who died to liberate them...but then, they are French. The only country in the world where every citizen can say *I surrender* in ten different languages. Phooey on them.
Protests going on all over France like this.
http://www.nj.com/newsflash/index.ssf?/base/international-2/124092166956780.xml&storylist=health
More on that note....France, that non...
judgmental open-minded country....their Prez says France cannot accept Burqas...this is just part of it....PARIS — President Nicolas Sarkozy said the Muslim burqa would not be welcome in France, calling the full-body religious gown a sign of the "debasement" of women.
In the first presidential address to parliament in 136 years, Sarkozy faced critics who fear the burqa issue could stigmatize France's Muslims and said he supported banning the garment from being worn in public.
"In our country, we cannot accept that women be prisoners behind a screen, cut off from all social life, deprived of all identity," Sarkozy said to extended applause at the Chateau of Versailles, southwest of Paris.
"The burqa is not a religious sign, it's a sign of subservience, a sign of debasement — I want to say it solemnly," he said. "It will not be welcome on the territory of the French Republic."
Hmmmm. Oh my. Muslims world wide (not to mention the 5 million that live in France) are going to LOVE that.
And people say WE aren't open-minded? LOL. Where is the French version of the ACLU?? Hey...they can borrow ours. HEY, Sarkozy...take THEM ALL. :-) lol
France is getting universal healthcare right...
Great post piglet. I so agree with what you all had to say in support of changing our current system. Canada probably has the worst universal healthcare system, and yet the average Canadian lives 3 years longer than the average American. People always point to the flaws in their system and just assume that we will make all the same mistakes. Of course their system has flaws, just as our system has many fatal flaws. England and France actually have great universal healthcare systems. Here is an article I found about France's successful program:
"France's model healthcare system
By Paul V. Dutton | August 11, 2007
MANY advocates of a universal healthcare system in the United States look to Canada for their model. While the Canadian healthcare system has much to recommend it, there's another model that has been too long neglected. That is the healthcare system in France.
Although the French system faces many challenges, the World Health Organization rated it the best in the world in 2001 because of its universal coverage, responsive healthcare providers, patient and provider freedoms, and the health and longevity of the country's population. The United States ranked 37.
The French system is also not inexpensive. At $3,500 per capita it is one of the most costly in Europe, yet that is still far less than the $6,100 per person in the United States.
An understanding of how France came to its healthcare system would be instructive in any renewed debate in the United States.
That's because the French share Americans' distaste for restrictions on patient choice and they insist on autonomous private practitioners rather than a British-style national health service, which the French dismiss as "socialized medicine." Virtually all physicians in France participate in the nation's public health insurance, Sécurité Sociale.
Their freedoms of diagnosis and therapy are protected in ways that would make their managed-care-controlled US counterparts envious. However, the average American physician earns more than five times the average US wage while the average French physician makes only about two times the average earnings of his or her compatriots. But the lower income of French physicians is allayed by two factors. Practice liability is greatly diminished by a tort-averse legal system, and medical schools, although extremely competitive to enter, are tuition-free. Thus, French physicians enter their careers with little if any debt and pay much lower malpractice insurance premiums.
Nor do France's doctors face the high nonmedical personnel payroll expenses that burden American physicians. Sécurité Sociale has created a standardized and speedy system for physician billing and patient reimbursement using electronic funds.
It's not uncommon to visit a French medical office and see no nonmedical personnel. What a concept. No back office army of billing specialists who do daily battle with insurers' arcane and constantly changing rules of payment.
Moreover, in contrast to Canada and Britain, there are no waiting lists for elective procedures and patients need not seek pre-authorizations. In other words, like in the United States, "rationing" is not a word that leaves the lips of hopeful politicians. How might the French case inform the US debate over healthcare reform?
National health insurance in France stands upon two grand historical bargains -- the first with doctors and a second with insurers.
Doctors only agreed to participate in compulsory health insurance if the law protected a patient's choice of practitioner and guaranteed physicians' control over medical decision-making. Given their current frustrations, America's doctors might finally be convinced to throw their support behind universal health insurance if it protected their professional judgment and created a sane system of billing and reimbursement.
French legislators also overcame insurance industry resistance by permitting the nation's already existing insurers to administer its new healthcare funds. Private health insurers are also central to the system as supplemental insurers who cover patient expenses that are not paid for by Sécurité Sociale. Indeed, nearly 90 percent of the French population possesses such coverage, making France home to a booming private health insurance market.
The French system strongly discourages the kind of experience rating that occurs in the United States, making it more difficult for insurers to deny coverage for preexisting conditions or to those who are not in good health. In fact, in France, the sicker you are, the more coverage, care, and treatment you get. Would American insurance companies cut a comparable deal?
Like all healthcare systems, the French confront ongoing problems. Today French reformers' number one priority is to move health insurance financing away from payroll and wage levies because they hamper employers' willingness to hire. Instead, France is turning toward broad taxes on earned and unearned income alike to pay for healthcare.
American advocates of mandates on employers to provide health insurance should take note. The link between employment and health security is a historical artifact whose disadvantages now far outweigh its advantages. Economists estimate that between 25 and 45 percent of the US labor force is now job-locked. That is, employees make career decisions based on their need to maintain affordable health coverage or avoid exclusion based on a preexisting condition.
Perhaps it's time for us to take a closer look at French ideas about healthcare reform. They could become an import far less "foreign" and "unfriendly" than many here might initially imagine."
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial...lthcare_system/
I thought it was working in France? nm
.
Why should I comment on France - or avoid doing so?
We're not France. It's not like you can take a system from one culture and parachute it into another culture. This isn't Leggos, or buying off-the-rack clothes.
There are many, many factors to take into account when a society fashions something like government-paid healthcare because it will impact, and be impacted by, that society in many ways. We don't have the same culture that France has, we don't have the same tax rates, we have a different healthcare delivery system in place, and on it goes.
No, I won't be commenting about France, except to say that I watched an extensive documentary about government health systems around the world and neither England, Canada, France or Sweden were rated very highly in terms of efficiency or patient satisfaction. Japan's system was considered the best on most metrics, so if anything I would comment on that system - which I won't do either for the reasons mentioned above.
I agree. If not for the US, France would be speaking German. nm
nm
Have you studied the healthcare system in France?
I have not seen you remark on it once. It seems you are avoiding it. The young person who opts out is not an issue.
She said, *Yes, I will join.* Not that
No, YOU try to keep up. Better yet, LOOK up. Look straight above. It's in the headline of her post. You don't even have to open it up to see it.
Another example of taking the truth and totally twisting it to mean something else.
Yes, I will join does NOT mean would if possible.
Bottom line is she isn't going anywhere. It's just another inflated lie of hers, and anyone with half a brain knows it.
By the way, why are you answering for her (unless, of course, you ARE her and answering in the third person (which would actually explain a LOT).
LOL, may I join you?..nm
nm
Yep...and today he is holding a town hall in France...
yukking it up with Europe as his own country circles the drain....pittiiiffullll.
No. Latest news is that costs for France rising too
nm
Let me try this again. You're demanding that I comment about France for some reason.
Have it your way, though. I certainly have better things to do. Our side of this conversation is over. I'll continue to discuss this with others who don't have a "French fixation" though.
Yes, I will join. I was there once, I will go again. No problem at all. NM
Gee I think we should all join the bandwagon
I know of at least 100 parks around the area I can claim as my home and seeing as many homeless have no id there will be no way to check for legitimacy so I'll be just fine. In fact I live close to another state so this weekend I think we'll go on down there too. Let's see...100 parks nearby, that's at least 100 votes that I can therefore put towards McCain. There may even be more than than that. Plus, put that with my husbands votes he's going to submit that will give McCain 200 more votes (at least).
Join the Army and BYOB
(In this case, the *B* stands for body armor.)
From: http://www.optruth.org/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=258&Itemid=66
Body Armor Reimbursement |
| Print | |
OEF/OIF Vets: Did you buy your own body armor, helmet, or other protective gear? The Pentagon has finally agreed to reimburse you. Read this article, and get paid back.
October 5, 2005: Once again, Operation Truth’s Online Army helped ensure that those who are risking their lives for this nation get the support they need. After receiving over 5,000 messages from Operation Truth members, the Senate approved an amendment offered by Senator Christopher Dodd, ordering the Secretary of Defense to follow the law and reimburse Troops who were forced to buy their own protective equipment for use in the war in Iraq.
Feeling the pressure from the Senate move, the Department of Defense immediately announced that it will end its stalling and pay Troops back, starting immediately.
OEF/OIF Troops: Here’s what you need to know to get paid back.
Requirements:
1) The equipment must be on a list of critical safety or health equipment that was in short supply. This list includes combat helmets, ballistic eye protection, hydration systems, and tactical vests, including body armor and body armor inserts. Other equipment, like scopes, are likely to be added soon.
2) With receipts, you’ll be reimbursed for an item’s actual purchase price and shipping cost(up to $1,100 per item). If you don’t have receipts, you will be reimbursed a standard estimated cost for each item. Here's a partial list of estimated costs:
3) All reimbursed items become property of the U.S. government and must be turned in to the unit logistics officer, unless they were destroyed in combat or are otherwise no longer available for good reason.
Here’s what you have to do:
Submit Department of Defense Form 2902, Claim for Reimbursement for Privately Purchased Protective, Safety or Health Equipment used in Combat form to your chain of command. If you’ve separated from the service, you can submit this form to an authorizing official designated by their former service at an address on the form. All claims must be submitted by Oct. 3, 2006.
|
Skinheads don't join the military.
They have their own militia. If you or anyone at the NYT knew how the military works, there is a quite extensive questionnaire before you are inducted and questioning regarding subversive groups. KKK is one of them. The KKK has actually greatly dwindled in size. Add to that the fact that the majority of the military now is made of minorities and you get the picture. Skinheads would not rape a woman of color. It's not what they do. In fact, it is the antithesis of what they do. They might kill them, but rape them...no way. Educate yourself. You just look foolish when you continue to downgrade our military this way.
Thank you for your honesty and join you in your prayer. nm
nm
I could join the three people who watch
...and if I ever have reason to visit you in the loony bin, I'm sure I'll have that opportunity.
you can come join my newly formed
Repo Party, our only objective so far is to get our country back and adhere to the constitution. I guess that so far is a party of 3! and they are both related to me.
I am praying for Obama too. I join you in prayer. nm
ljdksj
I agree. Wish Obama would go join Hollywood
nm
It would seem to me that when two neighboring states governors join forces
and declare a state of emergency, that the President would have to pay attention. It's lunacy for him not to. Yes, I totally agree with you in that our borders must become better secured and that's why I posted the petition. If you want to see more about illegal immigration also visit www.numbersusa.com
War Hero Murtha wouldn't join military now
US Rep. Murtha says he wouldn't join military now
03 Jan 2006 01:00:32 GMT
Source: Reuters
|
WASHINGTON, Jan 2 (Reuters) - Rep. John Murtha, a key Democratic voice who favors pulling U.S. troops from Iraq, said in remarks airing on Monday that he would not join the U.S. military today.
A decorated Vietnam combat veteran who retired as a colonel after 37 years in the U.S. Marine Corps, Murtha told ABC News' Nightline program that Iraq absolutely was a wrong war for President George W. Bush to have launched.
Would you join (the military) today?, he was asked in an interview taped on Friday.
No, replied Murtha of Pennsylvania, the top Democrat on the House of Representatives subcommittee that oversees defense spending and one of his party's leading spokesmen on military issues.
And I think you're saying the average guy out there who's considering recruitment is justified in saying 'I don't want to serve', the interviewer continued.
Exactly right, said Murtha, who drew White House ire in November after becoming the first ranking Democrat to push for a pullout of U.S. forces from Iraq as soon as it could be done safely.
At the time, White House spokesman Scott McClellan equated Murtha's position with surrendering to terrorists.
Since then, Bush has decried the defeatism of some of his political rivals. In an unusually direct appeal, he urged Americans on Dec. 18 not to give in to despair over Iraq, insisting that we are winning despite a tougher-than-expected fight.
Murtha did not respond directly when asked whether a lack of combat experience might have affected the decision-making of Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and their former top deputies.
Let me tell you, war is a nasty business. It sears the soul, he said, choking up. And it made a difference. The shadow of those killings stay with you the rest of your life.
Asked for comment, a Defense Department spokesman, Lt. Col. John Skinner, said: We have an all-volunteer military. People are free to choose whether they serve or not.
Our freedom of speech in this country allows all of us the opportunity to voice an opinion. It's one of our great strengths as a nation, he added in an e-mailed reply.
The White House had no immediate comment.
![src=http://www.alertnet.org/images/spacer.gif]()
they had to join a community service organization to graduate?
x
Join the club - apparently I'm a 'bible-thumping christianist' lol
But you do have a good plan.
Let's all wait until after the damage is done before we try to inform ourselves about an issue.
Yeah. Real good plan.
fire with fire
Tired of dirty fighting? It is the republican party who was the dirty fighters, not the democrats. and they continue to be dirty fighters and will win again and again if we dont stand up to them. Fight fire with fire. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. In the political spectrum that is America, you dont get anywhere for being the up and up person, the good guy, you win with dirty tricks. If you dont realize that, you need to step back when it comes to politics..I bemoan the situation, for sure, but I will fight fire with fire and the democrats will win once again..and, clue to you, check on Bushs right hand man, Rove, look at his extremely dirty politics and then ask yourself can we ever win against something like that by being nice? I dont think so and the country depends on the liberals getting the country back on track. I will do everything it takes, of course, everything that is legal. I dont break the law like Rove and libby are now being shown that they did.
Please fire them all. sm
People are losing their jobs, homes, and on the streets - and a mouse gets 35 million.
Where there is smoke there is fire!!
xx
Well sh1t fire...ain't that the truth!
In America, anyone can be President. That's one of the risks we take.
Fire-and-brimstone campaign
You can go to your fire-and brimstone rallies, wallow in your misery, and try to think of more ways to smear the finest candidate this Country has seen in decades.
I will go to the joyful rallies, full of hope for the future of this great Country.
No smoke, no fire, only mirrors. LOL!
.
Who's God? Your God? My God? Earth, Wind and Fire?
x
Okay. Where is the petition to fire that CNN reporter
nm
Call me what you want, just don't call me late for dinner. LOL....
GP, I like your sense of humor.
You call it hysteria, some call it concern for the
nm
They will think whatever they need to think to stoke the fire that feeds their hatred. nm
If she had the proper and legal authority to fire him --
then why didn't she just do it instead of them telling the other guy to do it - then there would not be a problem.
Also, this inquiry was started before she was running for the VP slot - so it was not something they cooked up to get her after she got picked by McCain.
Ever heard of jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire? (nm)
x
Not bickering. Holding feet to fire. Like GP...
and I agreed to. Have a good night!
The fire safety argument is a lot of hooey.
Is it more of a fire hazard just because more than 15 people meet on a regular basis than if someone has a single party for 30 people?
As long as you and the other wiccans are clothed and no open-burning laws are being broken (in a residential area, that would be a fire hazard) I would have no particular problem with your rituals. Depending on the time of day/night and loudness of chanting, it might constitute a disturbance of the peace, same as a loud barbecue party in the neighborhood. But with the basic concept of your meeting, no big deal.
|
