Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Oops...




http://www.wftv.com/news/local/us-army- ... D=ref_fark

What are the tax payers paying for this information?

Chizzang wrote:Oops...




http://www.wftv.com/news/local/us-army- ... D=ref_fark

Yup, another Liberal using their government position to blurt out their idiotic ideology and false information.

And, of course, the Liberal hack that retweeted it was exposed as simply another fool believing, and spreading, stupid Liberal lies.

The Army quickly took it down and said an employee had meant to post it on their personal twitter account.

Of course, with our military's consistent inability to provide accurate data on the enemy, the Twit Tweet was probably done by the same guy that said we'd be out of Iraq in 6 months.

Gil Dobie wrote:What are the tax payers paying for this information?

Since when did tax dollars and the US Military ever matter..?



We pay for tanks by the hundreds that will never leave the warehouse they sit in today
We pay for bombers that will never fly

JSO will believe it.

Chizzang wrote:

Gil Dobie wrote:What are the tax payers paying for this information?

Since when did tax dollars and the US Military ever matter..?



We pay for tanks by the hundreds that will never leave the warehouse they sit in today
We pay for bombers that will never fly

Which bombers are you speaking of???


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Col Hogan wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
Since when did tax dollars and the US Military ever matter..?



We pay for tanks by the hundreds that will never leave the warehouse they sit in today
We pay for bombers that will never fly

Which bombers are you speaking of???


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And why are we still flying 1950's KC 135 Strato-tankers?

Col Hogan wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
Since when did tax dollars and the US Military ever matter..?



We pay for tanks by the hundreds that will never leave the warehouse they sit in today
We pay for bombers that will never fly

Which bombers are you speaking of???

You can't be serious Col..?
The B2 for starters - some reports say we couldn't get 3 in the air if we tried

https://warisboring.com/america-has-20- ... .resr2pxhh

Col Hogan wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
Since when did tax dollars and the US Military ever matter..?



We pay for tanks by the hundreds that will never leave the warehouse they sit in today
We pay for bombers that will never fly

Which bombers are you speaking of???


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We spent 1.5 trillion dollars on a F-35

Chizzang wrote:

Gil Dobie wrote:What are the tax payers paying for this information?

Since when did tax dollars and the US Military ever matter..?



We pay for tanks by the hundreds that will never leave the warehouse they sit in today
We pay for bombers that will never fly

Just wanted to know how it compared to $1500 hammers.

"The Army quickly responded that the tweet was inadvertently sent by an employee who intended to post to a personal Twitter account."

Total fail. What the Army should have said, "The tweet was sent out by employee (insert name here) who has been fired." (If civilian) or court marshalled (if military).

BDKJMU wrote:"The Army quickly responded that the tweet was inadvertently sent by an employee who intended to post to a personal Twitter account."

Total fail. What the Army should have said, "The tweet was sent out by employee (insert name here) who has been fired." (If civilian) or court marshalled (if military).

......who has been deployed to Afghanistan.

BDKJMU wrote:"The Army quickly responded that the tweet was inadvertently sent by an employee who intended to post to a personal Twitter account."

Total fail. What the Army should have said, "The tweet was sent out by employee (insert name here) who has been fired." (If civilian) or court marshalled (if military).

*court martialed.

Cluck U wrote: And, of course, the Liberal hack that retweeted it was exposed as simply another fool believing, and spreading, stupid Liberal lies.

And what basis do you have for saying it's a lie? The guy does lie an awful lot. I guess an average of once per 3 minutes seems like a high frequency. But Trump does lie pretty repeatedly. So repeatedly it's hard to keep up with.

Reminds me of listening to Rush Limbaugh today and him telling people not to listen to fact checking. You've got this OBVIOUS problem with a Republican candidate who lies at what I think is an unprecedented frequency even by the standards of politicians and you've got a bunch of people in denial about that fact.

Ivytalk wrote:JSO will believe it.

I think once every 3 minutes may be an exaggeration. But I also think Trump lies at a frequency that is unprecedented for an major Party Presidential candidate during my lifetime. Can I prove that? No. But it's what I think.

The guy just lies constantly. Like the other night during the debate when Clinton said something about him thinking Climate Change is a hoax by the Chinese and he denied it and you can readily look up an image of him Tweeting that. Or him saying the NFL calle dhim to express concern over the debates conflicting with Monday night football then having the NFL say "no we didn't."

Or him saying that he intervened when that Miss Universe babe was in danger of losing her crown due to weight gain then seeing that in 1997 the Miss Universe officials said she was never in danger of that. I could go on and on but it's like that all the time. He just lies and lies and lies and lies.

It may not be once very three minutes but it's pretty damned frequent. It's like he just says whatever comes into his head at the time given the situation at the time whether it's true or not. It's a consistent behavior.

JohnStOnge wrote:
Reminds me of listening to Rush Limbaugh today and him telling people not to listen to fact checking. You've got this OBVIOUS problem with a Republican candidate who lies at what I think is an unprecedented frequency even by the standards of politicians and you've got a bunch of people in denial about that fact.

Yup.


Trump himself said that he should shoot someone on 5th Avenue in broad daylight and he wouldn't lose any voters.

His supporters are going to support him no matter what at this point.

Skjellyfetti wrote:

JohnStOnge wrote:
Reminds me of listening to Rush Limbaugh today and him telling people not to listen to fact checking. You've got this OBVIOUS problem with a Republican candidate who lies at what I think is an unprecedented frequency even by the standards of politicians and you've got a bunch of people in denial about that fact.

Yup.


Trump himself said that he should shoot someone on 5th Avenue in broad daylight and he wouldn't lose any voters.

His supporters are going to support him no matter what at this point.

Hillary said she could bomb minorities and support governments that openly kill gays and she wouldn't lose any votes. Her supporters, even gays and minorities, are going to support her no matter what at this point.

JohnStOnge wrote: It may not be once very three minutes but it's pretty damned frequent. It's like he just says whatever comes into his head at the time given the situation at the time whether it's true or not. It's a consistent behavior.

It takes Hillary longer to get the lies, due the the lag in the feed from her earpiece.

JohnStOnge wrote:

Ivytalk wrote:JSO will believe it.

I think once every 3 minutes may be an exaggeration. But I also think Trump lies at a frequency that is unprecedented for an major Party Presidential candidate during my lifetime. Can I prove that? No. But it's what I think.

The guy just lies constantly. Like the other night during the debate when Clinton said something about him thinking Climate Change is a hoax by the Chinese and he denied it and you can readily look up an image of him Tweeting that. Or him saying the NFL calle dhim to express concern over the debates conflicting with Monday night football then having the NFL say "no we didn't."

Or him saying that he intervened when that Miss Universe babe was in danger of losing her crown due to weight gain then seeing that in 1997 the Miss Universe officials said she was never in danger of that. I could go on and on but it's like that all the time. He just lies and lies and lies and lies.

It may not be once very three minutes but it's pretty damned frequent. It's like he just says whatever comes into his head at the time given the situation at the time whether it's true or not. It's a consistent behavior.

At least his lies are short.

Cluck U wrote:

Skjellyfetti wrote:


Yup.


Trump himself said that he should shoot someone on 5th Avenue in broad daylight and he wouldn't lose any voters.

His supporters are going to support him no matter what at this point.

Hillary said she could bomb minorities and support governments that openly kill gays and she wouldn't lose any votes. Her supporters, even gays and minorities, are going to support her no matter what at this point.

No shit.

And, Trump has literally had a dictator camp out on his lawn in a tent....

Chizzang wrote:

Gil Dobie wrote:What are the tax payers paying for this information?

Since when did tax dollars and the US Military ever matter..?



We pay for tanks by the hundreds that will never leave the warehouse they sit in today
We pay for bombers that will never fly

and yet to you, the military becoming political is the same thing and you see no issue with that

You're smarter than that- frankly I'm disappointed

On a side note, the military once told me I was drinking too much and taking home ugly chicks. When the military talks i listen


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

89Hen wrote: At least his lies are short.

That's because he has the attention span of a gnat.

And, actually, they may be short in terms of substance but he keeps on with them indefinitely so in that sense they are very long.