Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread

Moderators: The Talent, Hacksaw, bluetick, puterbac, 10ac

puterbac
Senior
Posts: 1219
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2011 12:11 pm
College Hoops Affiliation: Tennessee
Preferred Barbecue Style: Tomato!
Mascot Fight: Bear/Grizzly/Etc

Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread

Post by puterbac » Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:24 pm

Professor Tiger wrote:
So women should continue to be banned from those roles because of something that hasn't happened yet?
Something that hasn't happened yet? Please. It is a fact that infantry soldiers in Afghanistan hump rucks every day up and down very steep mountains all the time. It is also a fact that very females are physically capable of doing that. A lot of males can't do that either. Infantry standards are there for a reason. If you can't do it, you are likely to get yourself and others around you killed. I am not in favor of getting soldiers killed in some stupid social engineering experiment just because "it hasn't happened yet."

I'd be fine with the Army saying, to be an infantryman, you must be able to do certain things that mean life or death in combat. One of those things is the ability to carry a lot of weight up and down mountains. If male infantrymen can't do do that, then they can't be infantrymen. If female infantrymen can't do that, then they can't be infantrymen.

But we all know that fair, objective standards will go straight out the window. The Army will say either "female infantrymen will be required to carry less weight over shorter distances and up less steep slopes than males" or "all infantrymen will infantrymen will be required to carry less weight over shorter distances and up less steep slopes than before female infantrymen arrived."

Either way, it is a weakening of the Army for no reason other than to let liberals feel good about themselves.

War is not an affirmative action activity.
Excuse me but PT nails it.

Auggie and DSL are aware that GI Jane was a movie and pure fiction aren't they?

puterbac
Senior
Posts: 1219
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2011 12:11 pm
College Hoops Affiliation: Tennessee
Preferred Barbecue Style: Tomato!
Mascot Fight: Bear/Grizzly/Etc

Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread

Post by puterbac » Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:27 pm

AugustWest wrote:"The bravest of the brave in Stalingrad were the young women medical orderlies, who constantly went out under heavy fire to retrieve the wounded and drag them back. Sometimes they returned fire at the Germans. Stretchers were out of the question, so the orderly either wriggled herself under the wounded soldier and crawled with him on her back, or else she dragged him on a groundsheet or cape."

The Second World War: Antony Beevor pg 444.
Dragging the wounded back through the dirt, mud, etc? To quote Arnold in True LIes...I could get an infection.

Was that cause they couldn't carry them? Thank you I will be here all week.

I have no doubt that women can be just as brave as men when situations call for it. None. That doesn't mean squat when it comes to meeting physical requirements and also have the same rules apply uniformly to all women as they do all men.

User avatar
AugustWest
Senior
Posts: 3200
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 8:33 pm
College Hoops Affiliation: North Carolina State
Preferred Barbecue Style: Vinegar!
Mascot Fight: Bear/Grizzly/Etc

Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread

Post by AugustWest » Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:32 pm

Puter, I have three boys. Your girls need to head to the post office on their 18th birthday. Get 'em in the gym and lift some weights.
U*NC is the cleanest most honest athletic program on the planet. I am jealous of their deserved success, and I'm a mewling cunt.

puterbac
Senior
Posts: 1219
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2011 12:11 pm
College Hoops Affiliation: Tennessee
Preferred Barbecue Style: Tomato!
Mascot Fight: Bear/Grizzly/Etc

Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread

Post by puterbac » Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:10 am

AugustWest wrote:Puter, I have three boys. Your girls need to head to the post office on their 18th birthday. Get 'em in the gym and lift some weights.
Yeah well you pay for the costs of the weddings and we'll talk.

User avatar
sardis
All-American
Posts: 6476
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 1:25 pm
College Hoops Affiliation: Villanova
Preferred Barbecue Style: Vinegar!
Mascot Fight: Bear/Grizzly/Etc

Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread

Post by sardis » Tue Jan 29, 2013 8:04 am

Johnette's Daddy wrote:What?

No comments about:

El Partido Gran Viejo?

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics ... linter-gop

If President Obama wanted to pick the perfect wedge issue to split the Republican Party, he could hardly have improved on a comprehensive overhaul of the nation's immigration laws.

Not that he has an ulterior motive in advocating for action on Capitol Hill. But it works out the same way.

That was evident Monday, as conservatives reacted to the news that a bipartisan group of senators had agreed on a blueprint for comprehensive changes in immigration laws. The fissures among Republicans were popping up all over.

On one hand, you had Al Cardenas, leader of the American Conservative Union and a Cuban-American immigrant himself, welcoming the initiative:

"Congratulations to both sides of the aisle in forging a responsible framework today. Difficult days lay ahead in working out specifics on the legislation itself, but the Senate is off to a good start and I encourage the House to follow suit."

On the other, you had Republican Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, who referred to the framework as an "amnesty," one of the most detested words in the conservative lexicon.

"No one should be surprised that individuals who have supported amnesty in the past still support amnesty. When you legalize those who are in the country illegally, it costs taxpayers millions of dollars, costs American workers thousands of jobs and encourages more illegal immigration."

That, my friends, is a wedge issue, in 3-D.

The rifts in the Republican Party over a proposal that would give an estimated 11 million undocumented people a path to become legal Americans were reminiscent of the cleavages exposed in 2006 and 2007, the last time a major immigration overhaul was attempted.

Democrats, at least some of them, insist that it's not their aim to drive Republicans apart.

"We do not want immigration as a wedge issue," Sen. Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat, said at a Capitol Hill news conference with a bipartisan group of Senate colleagues.

But for Obama and congressional Democrats, pushing for a comprehensive immigration overhaul is low risk, high reward. It fulfills a pledge the president and his party made in the 2012 general election.

If they succeed — still a big if — that could significantly boost the energy of an important part of the Democratic base heading into the 2014 midterm elections: Latinos who gave the president more than 70 percent of their support in November.

It would obviously be the kind of second-term achievement that would expand Obama's legacy and could enhance Vice President Biden's claim for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2016.

For Republicans, however, the political dynamics are far more complicated and perilous. It's definitely high risk, with an uncertain reward.

GOP support for a bipartisan agreement would mesh with one of the supposed lessons of the 2012 election, that antagonizing Latino voters going forward is a dubious strategy if the goal is to win a larger share of the vote from that ever more important demographic. Many Latino voters were, after all, upset by Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney's talk of illegal immigrants "self-deporting."

That may help explain why Romney's running mate, Rep. Paul Ryan, who is widely expected to compete for his party's 2016 presidential nomination, said he agrees with the pathway to citizenship laid out by Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, a member of the bipartisan working group, and himself a likely presidential contender.

But many conservatives join Smith in opposing the prospect of supplying illegal immigrants with a way to become legal, even if it's an onerous path. For them it's rewarding lawbreakers, pure and simple. (It also doesn't help that most of the new citizens would — presumably — tilt Democratic, based on Hispanic political affiliations currently.)

What further compounds matters for many conservatives is the inclusion of Sen. John McCain of Arizona among the "Gang of Eight" senators who reached the framework. McCain was heavily involved in the 2006-2007 effort that triggered a backlash from conservatives. And as his party's 2008 presidential nominee, McCain did nearly as poorly as Romney in attracting Latino voters.

The Republican split on immigration only adds to the headaches facing House Speaker John Boehner, the Ohio Republican. The speaker, who didn't take a public position on the Senate plan Monday, has enough problems getting his House GOP conference to march in unison on issues on which Republicans roughly agree, like the need for fiscal discipline.

On immigration, he could really wind up getting buffeted by the turbulence, especially if he has to rely largely on Democrats to ultimately pass legislation.

Meanwhile, if the House Republicans wind up thwarting immigration overhaul as they did in 2006 — before they lost control of the House, only to regain control four years later — it would hand Democrats a potentially powerful political cudgel heading into the 2014 midterm elections.
Everyone agrees with immigration reform to allow a better path to citizenry. The devil will be in the details.

User avatar
AugustWest
Senior
Posts: 3200
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 8:33 pm
College Hoops Affiliation: North Carolina State
Preferred Barbecue Style: Vinegar!
Mascot Fight: Bear/Grizzly/Etc

Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread

Post by AugustWest » Tue Jan 29, 2013 8:55 am

puterbac wrote:
AugustWest wrote:Puter, I have three boys. Your girls need to head to the post office on their 18th birthday. Get 'em in the gym and lift some weights.
Yeah well you pay for the costs of the weddings and we'll talk.
ain't that like a liberal. Asked to do their part and wants a hand out.
U*NC is the cleanest most honest athletic program on the planet. I am jealous of their deserved success, and I'm a mewling cunt.

User avatar
Toemeesleather
Senior
Posts: 3220
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 8:43 am

Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread

Post by Toemeesleather » Tue Jan 29, 2013 9:12 am

Women in combat is some sort of sign of progress? I have lived too long.
I saw a werewolf drinking a pina colada at Trader Vic's.

User avatar
hedge
Legend
Posts: 26760
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:09 am
College Hoops Affiliation: North Carolina
Preferred Barbecue Style: Vinegar!
Mascot Fight: Bear/Grizzly/Etc

Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread

Post by hedge » Tue Jan 29, 2013 9:29 am

You won't get any disagreement from me on that last part...
I want someone's ass blistered in the middle of Thanksgiving Square.

User avatar
AlabamAlum
Legend
Posts: 10074
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 9:12 am
College Hoops Affiliation: Alabama
Preferred Barbecue Style: Tomato!
Mascot Fight: Bear/Grizzly/Etc
Location: SixToe, Alabama
Contact:

Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread

Post by AlabamAlum » Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:12 am

I see both sides of the debate. It's like the Biddle test that firefighters and medics had to go through. Very low pass rate - especially for women - so in many cities women sued to have the test watered down so that they could pass it.


Unfortunatley, I see standards for infantrymen being watered down, too. That's not saying that women have no place in the armed forces, but we must realize that there are some assignments that very few men will pass, and even fewer women, and be okay with that.


It's like saying that because so few Cornell grads get a good score on the MCAT, that we should dumb it down so more of their grads can become MDs.
"The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity."
— Abraham Lincoln
__________________________________________

Yes, I still miss Coach Bryant.

User avatar
aTm
Muad'Dib
Posts: 8831
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 12:25 am
College Hoops Affiliation: Texas A&M
Preferred Barbecue Style: Tomato!
Mascot Fight: Big Cat/Tiger/Lion/Etc
Location: Inner Loop, Houston, TX

Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread

Post by aTm » Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:24 am

Soon it'll be our battle robots vs their battle robots
Sure, I could have stayed in the past. I could have even been king. But in my own way, I am king.

User avatar
aTm
Muad'Dib
Posts: 8831
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 12:25 am
College Hoops Affiliation: Texas A&M
Preferred Barbecue Style: Tomato!
Mascot Fight: Big Cat/Tiger/Lion/Etc
Location: Inner Loop, Houston, TX

Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread

Post by aTm » Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:25 am

Preceded by the current era which is moving to our battle robots vs their people.
Sure, I could have stayed in the past. I could have even been king. But in my own way, I am king.

User avatar
hedge
Legend
Posts: 26760
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:09 am
College Hoops Affiliation: North Carolina
Preferred Barbecue Style: Vinegar!
Mascot Fight: Bear/Grizzly/Etc

Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread

Post by hedge » Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:26 am

Women can't be expected to be as good at video games as men...
I want someone's ass blistered in the middle of Thanksgiving Square.

User avatar
aTm
Muad'Dib
Posts: 8831
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 12:25 am
College Hoops Affiliation: Texas A&M
Preferred Barbecue Style: Tomato!
Mascot Fight: Big Cat/Tiger/Lion/Etc
Location: Inner Loop, Houston, TX

Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread

Post by aTm » Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:27 am

True
Sure, I could have stayed in the past. I could have even been king. But in my own way, I am king.

User avatar
crashcourse
Senior
Posts: 3545
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 7:18 pm
College Hoops Affiliation: Kansas State
Preferred Barbecue Style: Vinegar!
Mascot Fight: Croc/Gator/Etc

Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread

Post by crashcourse » Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:56 am

so whats the military solution to 23% of woimen saying they have been sexually assulted in a combat zone. lets bring in more women!
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics ... ult/61386/

you can say what you want but after spending 21 years in the army and my last 10 in units that were deployed for long periods of time with females bunking right next to you we are opening up a big can of worms. combat readiness is affected by having females on the front lines. Females get horny out there and throwing them in with a platoon or squad of male 20-30y/o's is asking for nothing but trouble. and they know how to use that to their advantage. whether it be trumped up charges, outright blackmail or just a case of falling in love those frontline females are going to be a major headache. plus they call on sick call 3x the rate of meales so you cant depend on them being there

User avatar
aTm
Muad'Dib
Posts: 8831
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 12:25 am
College Hoops Affiliation: Texas A&M
Preferred Barbecue Style: Tomato!
Mascot Fight: Big Cat/Tiger/Lion/Etc
Location: Inner Loop, Houston, TX

Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread

Post by aTm » Tue Jan 29, 2013 11:24 am

Plus they are awful drivers, amirite?
Sure, I could have stayed in the past. I could have even been king. But in my own way, I am king.

Big Orange Junky
Junior
Posts: 632
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 12:17 pm
College Hoops Affiliation: Tennessee

Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread

Post by Big Orange Junky » Tue Jan 29, 2013 11:28 am

hedge wrote:"And yes I would want the TBI, FBI and every other agency held to the same standard I am."

Do you therefor agree that you should be held to the same standards as they are in terms of training, background checks, etc?
On another note with regards to the "training and background checks".

I have had my background checked by the medical school, then the residency program, then the federal gubment for working in the VA, then the Tennessee board of medical examiners, then the American Board of Surgery, and finally the American College of Surgeons. I went through over 20 years of training all to use a scalpel.

Should everyone that buys a scalpel be held to that standard? Of course not because they aren't using it for the same thing I am that's why you can go out and by them all you want, just go pick them up at the local store, no background check required, no training required.

Same for the police, the training and background checks are for the profession, not for the tool. That's what I was very poorly trying to get at in the last post about it.

User avatar
hedge
Legend
Posts: 26760
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:09 am
College Hoops Affiliation: North Carolina
Preferred Barbecue Style: Vinegar!
Mascot Fight: Bear/Grizzly/Etc

Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread

Post by hedge » Tue Jan 29, 2013 2:12 pm

You didn't do much better that time...
I want someone's ass blistered in the middle of Thanksgiving Square.

User avatar
Professor Tiger
All-American
Posts: 9889
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:26 pm
College Hoops Affiliation: Auburn
Preferred Barbecue Style: Tomato!
Mascot Fight: Big Cat/Tiger/Lion/Etc

Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread

Post by Professor Tiger » Tue Jan 29, 2013 8:47 pm

crashcourse wrote:so whats the military solution to 23% of woimen saying they have been sexually assulted in a combat zone. lets bring in more women!
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics ... ult/61386/

you can say what you want but after spending 21 years in the army and my last 10 in units that were deployed for long periods of time with females bunking right next to you we are opening up a big can of worms. combat readiness is affected by having females on the front lines. Females get horny out there and throwing them in with a platoon or squad of male 20-30y/o's is asking for nothing but trouble. and they know how to use that to their advantage. whether it be trumped up charges, outright blackmail or just a case of falling in love those frontline females are going to be a major headache. plus they call on sick call 3x the rate of meales so you cant depend on them being there
Correct. Plus, a lot of those females in war zones will try their best to get pregnant because they know it is their quick ticket home with no questions asked. Of course, the females' often frantic attempts to get pregnant is a big morale boost for the males soldiers in their unit.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident… by the — you know — you know the thing.” - Democrat Presidential Candidate Joe Biden

User avatar
Professor Tiger
All-American
Posts: 9889
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:26 pm
College Hoops Affiliation: Auburn
Preferred Barbecue Style: Tomato!
Mascot Fight: Big Cat/Tiger/Lion/Etc

Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread

Post by Professor Tiger » Tue Jan 29, 2013 8:55 pm

I heard an interesting story on the radio (shockingly on NPR) where they interviewed several female soldiers asking their opinion on the new rules putting them in direct combat roles. To my surprise, some of them said, "If this means that the Army can put me in an infantry unit without my consent, I'm NOT reenlisting."

This latest example of liberal social engineering was intended to put more women into combat units. But it may have the unintended consequence of incentivizing female soldiers to leave the Army or not join in the first place.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident… by the — you know — you know the thing.” - Democrat Presidential Candidate Joe Biden

User avatar
Dr. Strangelove
Senior
Posts: 2179
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 10:11 pm
College Hoops Affiliation: Cornell
Preferred Barbecue Style: Tomato!
Mascot Fight: Bear/Grizzly/Etc

Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread

Post by Dr. Strangelove » Tue Jan 29, 2013 9:37 pm

crashcourse wrote:so whats the military solution to 23% of woimen saying they have been sexually assulted in a combat zone. lets bring in more women!
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics ... ult/61386/

you can say what you want but after spending 21 years in the army and my last 10 in units that were deployed for long periods of time with females bunking right next to you we are opening up a big can of worms. combat readiness is affected by having females on the front lines. Females get horny out there and throwing them in with a platoon or squad of male 20-30y/o's is asking for nothing but trouble. and they know how to use that to their advantage. whether it be trumped up charges, outright blackmail or just a case of falling in love those frontline females are going to be a major headache. plus they call on sick call 3x the rate of meales so you cant depend on them being there
So to summarize: women in the military are untrustworthy, lazy, will fuck the nearest available male, will commonly resort to blackmail, and are overall pieces of shit.

Post Reply