May 27, 2005

They Also Serve Who Stand Around In The Jungle For Sixty F'n' Years
— Ace

Two more Japanese WWII soldiers -- hold-outs, still fighting the war, in between watching re-runs of Matlock -- are found in the Philippines jungles.

Liberals whining about a quick end to this war -- featuring guys even more fanatical than Japanese suicide-torpedo pilots -- ought to bear in mind that some people just will not give up. Ever.

Sorry if that interferes with your plans to write nothing but columns about Will & Grace for the rest of your diminishing career, Maureen Dowd.

Thanks to both NickS and Brak.

Posted by: Ace at 10:18 AM | Comments (78)
Post contains 115 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Japanese have always shown far more persistence and (insane) courage than jihadis ever will.

Posted by: someone at May 27, 2005 10:23 AM (S22v9)

2 Well, konichi-wa, mo-fo.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at May 27, 2005 10:24 AM (pzen5)

3 Ace sez:

Liberals whining about a quick end to this war -- featuring guys even more fanatical than Japanese suicide-torpedo pilots -- ought to bear in mind that some people just will not give up. Ever.

But the story sez:

Last September, a Japanese national in the lumber business ran into the men in the mountains, the Japanese newspaper Sankei Shimbun reported. It was learned later that they wanted to go back to Japan but were afraid of facing a court-martial for withdrawing from action, the newspaper said.


I think if they withdrew from action, they actually gave up even before the war was really over, didn't they?

Sorry to call you on this one, Ace, but fabulous media stardom is NO EXCUSE for getting the sloppidoppies.

Posted by: The Claw at May 27, 2005 10:57 AM (74cXW)

4 They were fierce fighters, much like Al-Qaeda. And although these two, if the story is accurate, didn't fight to the death like many WWII Japanese soldiers, the shame in surrendering and facing their goverment to them would have been devastating.

Better to die in the jungle in the next century.

Posted by: BatMan at May 27, 2005 11:18 AM (uRfiJ)

5 It's possible that the disgrace might have been from giving up the fight, even if it was years after the war ended. Who knows?

I just hope they clear out all of the stragglers before my trip to the PI in December. It's bad enough worrying about the ROP blowing up my plane without having to worry about getting beat down by some crazy, old guy with a cane.

Posted by: digitalbrownshirt at May 27, 2005 01:30 PM (ipjUv)

6 U.S. Naval forces faced thousands of Japanese suicide pilots in a few short months, not a few of which landed.

Over 100,000 Japanese Army forces fought to their death in Okinowa, only 1500 remained of which many were wounded.

If the Iraq action occured during WWII, it would have been considered a minor battle. Today's MSM would have had us defeated at Hawaii.

Posted by: robert at May 27, 2005 02:46 PM (vns6Y)

7 These guys are men. Wish we had some like them and fewer girlie men like Kerry and Schumer.

Posted by: TJ Jackson at May 27, 2005 04:22 PM (DT110)

8 The people who said there would be a quick and to this war were conservatives, remember?

Cheney said we'd be greeted with flowers.

Pentagon officials said it would be a cake walk.

You were wrong, the liberals were right.

Again.

Posted by: Jackson at May 27, 2005 04:52 PM (TDv7o)

Posted by: John Anderson at May 27, 2005 05:10 PM (Vga64)

10 Actually, the war was over quickly. Mission Accomplished -- in a matter of days. We beat the Iraqi military, and conquered the country.

What is taking longer is the post-war responsibilities. Like creating democratic intstitutions. Like training Iraqis to defend themselves against domestic and foreign antagonists. Like thinning out the supply of suicide bombers.

The war in Iraq is over. The peace in Iraq will take time and patience.

Posted by: Michael at May 27, 2005 05:21 PM (pRtzm)

11 Michael , you are a crack up.

Now, tell me the one about the culture of life.

Posted by: Vince at May 27, 2005 05:51 PM (TDv7o)

12 There was once a little troll who thought he could...

Posted by: Dogstar at May 27, 2005 06:05 PM (KgeNY)

13 I'll be honest, I doubt this story is real, if only because of the number of years involved.

1974? That was wacky, but only 20 years. Anyone can stay deluded for 20 years. Hell, my parents thought they were still in love after 20 years. . . suckers.

But that was 30 years ago. These guys would be ridiculously old. And ridiculously stupid.

Personally, I think this is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to run a really fucked up controlled experiment. Cruel, I know, but let's think up a few things we can pull on them:
-- We could tell them that Japan actually won the war, and by staying in the jungle they missed out on all the free post-war celebration geishas.
-- We could send somebody dressed as Gort to talk to them.
-- We could send them to Gitmo for a few months, just to convince them that America still means business, treaty or no treaty.

Cheers,
Dave at Garfield Ridge

Posted by: Dave at Garfield Ridge at May 27, 2005 06:51 PM (mrpxK)

14 Still fighting the war? And you think the liberal media lies?

Further, are you advocating eternal war for eternal peace? Very literary of you...

Posted by: KNS at May 27, 2005 06:59 PM (4BOZ/)

15 I'm about as conservative as anybody and I thought this war on terror would drag on for about 100 years. The short war theory is just a bullshit story that liberals trot out to pretend they still matter. When are we going to start rounding them up for the camps they keep crying about?

Posted by: digitalbrownshirt at May 27, 2005 07:12 PM (ipjUv)

16 I think we should give them a PS2 and some Medal of Honor games.

Posted by: Dogstar at May 27, 2005 07:31 PM (KgeNY)

Posted by: Dave at Garfield Ridge at May 27, 2005 08:00 PM (mrpxK)

18 Was said before, it's worth saying again:
It was WOLFOWITZ who claimed that occupying Iraq would be easy because it has no history of ethnic strife.

It was PERLE who said a square in Baghdad would be named for Bush, by this time LAST year.

It was the neo-con chickenhawks who didn't listen to the military, who didn't listen to those who had BEEN in a war, about what an occupation would be like.

It was the elite neocons who can't imagine THEIR kids serving in the military who made the bad decisions to get so many people killed.

It was the neocons who wrote the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) where they laid the plans for grabbing Iraq to build military bases, and then fabricated the pretexts of WMD as documented in the Downing Street memo.

It's the conservative bloggers like you who forget that Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11, who ignore that the surest way to create a suicide-bomber movement is to occupy a foreign country, who can't distinguish between a war to force military bases in a country and a war against militant Islam.

It's you knuckleheads who will cheer as the US attacks Syria or Iran, and thus give huge power to the Iranian ayatollahs over the pro-west movement there.

It's you idiots who have given OBL more of a following than he could have ever hoped for.

But at least you all are signing up to fight for your beliefs, right?

Right? RIGHT?!?

Posted by: tubino at May 27, 2005 08:18 PM (wO5Uv)

19 It amazes me how you dumbasses keep bringing up enlisting to fight for our beliefs. Many of us, including myself, are veterans, or currently in the military. My brother in law is in Bagdad right now. My oldest boy is planning on enlisting as soon as he graduates from high school.

So why don't you roll that anger up real tight and shove it where your boyfriend loves you the most?

Posted by: digitalbrownshirt at May 27, 2005 08:43 PM (ipjUv)

20 tubino, i admire your relentlessness.

whenever i see some half-baked, wingnut blog on daou making inane, lib'rul-bashing, knee-jerk, low-brow, testosterone-fueled, reality denying confessions of drooling ignorance and brutality, i find you there in the fray, fighting the good fight.

where i would give up and invite them to go back to suckling from their fathers, you patiently refute them point by point, like it ain't no thing.

you're one of the good ones, tubino.

Posted by: at May 27, 2005 08:45 PM (SJExc)

21 tubino, i admire your relentlessness.

whenever i see some half-baked, wingnut blog on daou making inane, lib'rul-bashing, knee-jerk, low-brow, testosterone-fueled, reality denying confessions of drooling ignorance and brutality, i find you there in the fray, fighting the good fight.

where i would give up and invite them to go back to suckling from their fathers, you patiently refute them point by point, like it ain't no thing.

you're one of the good ones, tubino.

Posted by: dave. at May 27, 2005 08:45 PM (SJExc)

22 shit. preview=post?

Posted by: dave. at May 27, 2005 08:48 PM (SJExc)

23 Not very bright, are you mouthbreether?

Posted by: digitalbrownshirt at May 27, 2005 08:53 PM (ipjUv)

24 Not a mouthbrEEther but, at times when I am particularly winded from exercise, I do occasionally brEAthe through my mouth.

Posted by: KNS at May 27, 2005 08:59 PM (4BOZ/)

25 suck it, digitalbrowneye.

Posted by: dave. at May 27, 2005 09:25 PM (SJExc)

26 Those of you who are gung ho about the war in Iraq, are you of military age? If so, why havn't you enlisted and gone to fight the war you so strongly believe in? The army is desperate for recruits. The time has come for you to put your life where your mouth is. Or if you have children of military age, time to encourage them to enlist!

Posted by: Captain Video at May 27, 2005 10:00 PM (Qs6g6)

27 But at least you all are signing up to fight for your beliefs, right?

Not really. You misunderstand me if you think I'm all that enthusiastic about the invasion of Iraq.

On the other hand, I'm ready to sign up for the conquest of Canada. Oh yes. We never have settled the score left by the War of 1812. Count me in if we're mustering recruits to kick some Canuck ass.

Posted by: Michael at May 27, 2005 10:13 PM (pRtzm)

28 Conservatives whining about liberals regarding the US occupation of Iraq should keep in mind that the LARGEST popular demonstrations in the HISTORY of the WORLD occurred in protest of the INVASION -- BEFORE the invasion!!!

Millions of us knew that the arms inspectors ON THE GROUND were to be trusted over the spin of the Bush Amin. Millions of us knew -- even before seeing the footage in Moore's Fahrenheit 911 -- that the Bush Admin officials were denying any Iraqi WMD capability in 2001. Millions of us knew that the invasion of Iraq was illegal, pre-conceived, packaged and sold on lies, and completely naive about what an occupation would be like.

Molly Ivins predicted a very quick war followed by the peace from hell. Liberals like me argued that the US might be replaying the role of Israel in Lebanon, where an occupation gave birth to the Hamas movement.

Liberals were right about the likely consequences of the war, and now conservatives contort themselves to try to pin the blame on the very people who were prophetic in warning about it.

Posted by: tubino at May 28, 2005 02:33 AM (wO5Uv)

29 Looks like someone let that deformed sex offender guy get hold of a computer with internet access.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at May 28, 2005 03:31 AM (nx3sD)

30 Or maybe "tubino" and all his little friends is really Phil Spector.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at May 28, 2005 03:33 AM (nx3sD)

31 Ok, lets see if I can summarize tubino's logic; the war on terror is wrong because a million asshats carrying signs and chanting '60's slogans can't be wrong.

Well I hate to break it to ya, but you're on the wrong side of history. Again.

Posted by: BrewFan at May 28, 2005 03:57 AM (95UaF)

32 Let's see if I can summarize BrewFan's argument:

Even if the necon nightmare has made the US less safe, has inflamed the world against the US and strengthened enemies of the US, is breaking the US military to the point where North Korea thumbs its nose at the Bush admin, has destroyed US credibility in the world arena, is bankrupting the US for future military success, may result in civil war in Iraq, has meant that diversion of resources are causing Afghanistan to slip further into heroin-based corruption and chaos, etc. etc....

... even if all that is true, then conservatives can still blame the millions of people who took to the streets to warn against all that.

Remember that Onion Point-Counterpoint piece on the war when it started? Prophetic.

Posted by: tubino at May 28, 2005 04:21 AM (wO5Uv)

33 Ace, you are well on your way to another million hits. When the moonbats start flocking here, you know you've arrived.

Posted by: Dogstar at May 28, 2005 04:58 AM (KgeNY)

34 Tubino? Shouldn't you be under a bridge somewhere?

Posted by: El Miguel at May 28, 2005 05:40 AM (HU4Da)

35 Well, you may not like Turbino and dismiss all he says as Leftist-Hippie claptrap, you may still have total devotion to Dear Leader and his brilliant neocon advisors and think all you have to do is wave your Flag....but:

1. Rumsfeld's original plan to send in just 5,000 Special Forces as adequate to find the WMD, and temporarily hold Iraq until the noble peace loving Iraqis returned to their jobs and got the cheap oil flowing doesn't look like it quite worked out as intended.

2. 200 billion later, oil hasn't quite paid for the war as Wofowitz said it would, has it??

3. After 9/11, when patriotism was high, Bush said we could do our part by shopping a lot and enjoying our tax cuts....and do something nice for a neighbor...but only if it was all convenient for us and involved no sacrifice. Now we have a recruiting disaster in the Marines, Army, and Reserves that threatens the concept of the volunteer military.

4. In the midst of this war, Rumsfeld thinks it is a perfect time to relocate up to 200,00 military personnel and their families with BRAC to save 2 billion a year better spent on Iraq and new desperately needed recruiting incentives. Oddly, most of the relocations are to the Southern states and the ring around the Imperial City, as Europe, Alaska, the Midwest, and the Northeast are drained of military jobs. Bush has less bombers, fighter planes, Naval ships, and men than Clinton handed him, plus an extra trillion in debt...

5. The oft-mentioned neocons have finally shut up about moving on to invade Syria to get the "vast hidden stockpiles" of Iraqi WMD after 2 years, and finally shut up about invading The Country That Must Never BE Criticized last remaining threats - Iran and Saudi Arabia. Even they have realized there is a limit to American gullibility. Children or grandchildren of the top 50 neocons now in the military? Still zero.

Posted by: Cedarford at May 28, 2005 05:42 AM (HoSBk)

36 KNS: Just for the record, the "mouthbreether" comment was directed at your buddy Dave. It's the gmail account he listed.

Cedarford: My question on #5 is "If Bush is in bed with the Saudis like I've been hearing for the last 6 years, why would anybody on this side consider invading Saudi Arabia? The argument seems like it would cancel itself out.

Posted by: at May 28, 2005 06:20 AM (ipjUv)

37 Dear "May", the Bushies are split on Saudi Arabia. On one side you have the Bush Sr., James Baker III, and Kissinger types who love their monarch friends nad have been getting fat off them for years. On the other side you have the neocons who wish to impliment the Israeli Likud "Clean Break" plan which calls for American blood and treasure to be used to make the world safe for Israel through invasions and regime change. As Michael Ledeen gleefully chanted up to around 6 months ago:

"First Iraq, then Syria, then Iran, then Saudi Arabia. Faster, America, faster!"

The neocon's plan for Greater Israel foundered on Blair's insistance the Road Map be followed and neocons with no military experience finding invading and holding Iraq was not such a cakewalk after all..

As for Bush - Pappy ush and Baker III seem to have regained the upper hand over the Israel 1st forces within the Bushie ranks, as evidenced by Bush's recent hand-holding and tip-toeing through the bluebonnets with a comely Saudi Prince. Rice, like Powell before, is also showing she is no Zionist lackey..

Posted by: Cedarford at May 28, 2005 08:57 AM (HoSBk)

38 "The Country That Must Never BE Criticized last remaining threats"

Not quite, Cedarford. As long as you still draw breath, the Zionists will sleep uneasily in their greasy, cash-lined beds. Right?
Thank god good Aryan haters like you are around to keep up the fight against the perfidy of Zion.

Yuk.

Posted by: Knemon at May 28, 2005 09:12 AM (QaHR7)

39 Josh Marshall has a nice take on the whole accountability issue.

Can any of you offer a counter-example? Reward for being right, points off for being catastrophically wrong?

Posted by: at May 28, 2005 09:19 AM (wO5Uv)

40 So tubino, how does it feel to make common cause with an anti-semitic fascist? Nice job regurgitating the DNC talking points memos. I suspect if you ever had an original thought it would die of loneliness.

May, if you ever catch cedarford in a lie (which is quite often) he will simply make something else up. The one common element you'll find in his screeds is his hatred for all things Jewish.

Posted by: BrewFan at May 28, 2005 09:19 AM (95UaF)

41 "Rice, like Powell before, is also showing she is no Zionist lackey.."

Yes, Cedarford, someday... Someday... Someday we will finish the glorious work of the devoted few, the visionaries, the selfless ones who dedicated themselves to making the world free of the dreaded Juden.

Heydrich, Hoess, Himmler, Borman, Mengele, Franz, Wirth, Stangl, Eichmann... They are our inspiration. Their sacrifices shall not have been in vain.

Posted by: Dogstar at May 28, 2005 09:30 AM (KgeNY)

42 Uh, nice dodge y'all.

So not one example of accountability?

Not one person can address any single thing I have said? Not one refutation?

Looks like not one of you can face up to what you've caused.

Typical conservatards. All huff and dodge.

Posted by: tubino at May 28, 2005 10:25 AM (wO5Uv)

43 Um, how exactly would any of us want to talk to you? We're mainly here for the Star Wars stuff and Dusty. Ok, some of us are here for the haikus and flaming.

But, seriously, what have you got to offer us? For example, have you ever shit yourself in public, wearing your daughter's pants?

We're a very demanding bunch. Not just anyone can hold our interest.

Posted by: Dogstar at May 28, 2005 10:37 AM (KgeNY)

44 Can any of you offer a counter-example? Reward for being right, points off for being catastrophically wrong?

OK, tubino, I'll give you one (and only one) example of accountability:

Your link doesn't work, so all the conservatards are ignoring you.

Posted by: Michael at May 28, 2005 10:37 AM (pRtzm)

45 Tubino, never ever expect honest refutation from today's conservatives. They are on the bandwagon and can't give you reasons why other than it's popular and they want to hang with the 'in' crowd. They're smart enough to know they know squat so can't refute truth except with the faulty logic of personal attacks thinking it makes them right. I've done this enough to know. They don't argue any points. They set up the anti-American, commie pinko straw man and then knock him down. The fact that their fields were planted in sand is beyond them.

Posted by: KNS at May 28, 2005 10:51 AM (4BOZ/)

46 Okay, here's the Josh Marshall URL in tiny form:
http://tinyurl.com/9bace

And another freebie:
http://tinyurl.com/crqj4

Have a great weekend.

Posted by: tubino at May 28, 2005 11:27 AM (wO5Uv)

47 While we're on the hypocrisy roll:

http://www.armchairsubversive.com/

Do any of you find that list problematic, at all?

No? Just Republican business as usual?

Posted by: tubino at May 28, 2005 11:33 AM (wO5Uv)

48 You guys still here?

Posted by: digitalbrownshirt at May 28, 2005 11:48 AM (ipjUv)

49 Do any of you find that list problematic, at all?

Of course the list is problematic. So is the fact that Teddy Kennedy is not in prison for murder, and Bill Clinton got away with perjury (almost, he did get disbarred).

What's you're point?

Posted by: Michael at May 28, 2005 12:25 PM (pRtzm)

50 Point? You ask someone to make a point after YOU compare perjury about a private matter to PEDOPHILIA?

Okay, here's a point.

There is no statute of limitations on war crimes.

None.

Your repugnican heros can rape kids, can run up the credit card (national debt) for the kids to pay, can even make the middle class pay in taxes to replace their Soc Sec surplus that Bush gave to the wealthy, but there's still the war crimes.

That's something to live for, right there.

Posted by: tubino at May 28, 2005 02:58 PM (wO5Uv)

51 tubino, the reason no one wants to engage you moonbats is illustrated perfectly by that link you posted to armchairsubversive. Do you really believe that a list of pedophiles who are Democrats couldn't be compiled and be of equal length? Your comments are specious and I don't have the time or inclination to humor you. Now do us all a favor and run back to the DU fever swamp where you belong.

Posted by: BrewFan at May 28, 2005 03:14 PM (95UaF)

52 p.s. take cedarford with you

Posted by: BrewFan at May 28, 2005 03:15 PM (95UaF)

53 Spewie -

Your time is over. The world and America are moving on.

Hillary or someone like her is coming to clean the Augean Stables of all the 8 years of neocon, theocrat, and Bushism failure.

By all measures, it will be a hefty job to repair America's finances, it's military, it's reputation abroad, and restore the stock markets and the promise of a good job with affordable health care.

One doesn't have to be a Leftist to long for a competent Centrist Republican or Democrat to end a radical Republican regime that is headed by a guy that will be remembered historically as being in the same etchelon as Hoover, Jimmy Carter, and Gerry Ford.

Posted by: Cedarford at May 28, 2005 03:24 PM (6krEN)

54 tub:

On the way out the door, why don't you contemplate the fact that accused conservatives of ad hominem attacks, and postured as the proponent of reasoned debate.

Your problem here is not that your link didn't work, and not that you're wrong.

You're just dull.

Posted by: Michael at May 28, 2005 03:35 PM (pRtzm)

55 BrewFan:

Cedarford, on the other hand, is frequently wrong and constantly engages in ad hominem attacks, but HE IS NOT DULL.

In fact, he is consistently hilarious, occasionally makes a good point, and generally enlivens the discussion even if only by providing flame-bait.

Admit it. You would miss Cedarford if he dropped out. C'mon, admit it.

Posted by: Michael at May 28, 2005 03:44 PM (pRtzm)

56 I know I'd miss Cedarford, the other guys are just boring. Once we round up the lefties to send them off to the camps I keep hearing about, I want to keep Cedarford as a pet. Being a responsible pet owner, I'm afraid he'll have to be neutered first, but I'm sure he'll understand.

Posted by: digitalbrownshirt at May 28, 2005 03:49 PM (ipjUv)

57 Once we round up the lefties to send them off to the camps I keep hearing about, I want to keep Cedarford as a pet.

digitalbrownshirt:

Let's put the camps in China, where they can work for slave wages to do our tax returns and answer calls to the IT helpdesk.

Posted by: Michael at May 28, 2005 04:05 PM (pRtzm)

58 "...radical Republican regime that is headed by a guy that will be remembered historically as being in the same etchelon as Hoover, Jimmy Carter, and Gerry Ford."

The funny thing is I don't think cedarford believes this; the asshole gene just kicks it up a notch when hes exposed as the moron he really is.

Michael, to answer your question, If cedarford left I would miss him like I'd miss a bad case of jungle rot.

Posted by: BrewFan at May 28, 2005 04:39 PM (95UaF)

59 Hi,
So on Memorial Day, I guess any discussion of the g-d sacrifice being made by soldiers in Iraq because of a pack of lies would be...

according to you all...

DULL.

Figures. I'll go back to the reality-based community, you all just keep watching the teevee. You're trained to expect life to have punchlines and a neat wrap-up.

Posted by: tubino at May 28, 2005 05:01 PM (wO5Uv)

60 Michael, to answer your question, If cedarford left I would miss him like I'd miss a bad case of jungle rot.

Aww, BrewFan, in your own special way, you're showing the love. You would miss Cedarford, I just know it.

BTW, has your mother broken in those new Army boots yet? Last I heard, she was getting blisters.

On a more serious subject involving the fate of Western Civilization -- at the half, Spurs 56 --- Suns 39.

Posted by: Michael at May 28, 2005 05:37 PM (pRtzm)

61 At the end of the third quarter: Spurs 80 -- Suns 63.

Posted by: Michael at May 28, 2005 06:03 PM (pRtzm)

62 I'm a Mavericks fan, so at this point I just don't care anymore.

Hey, tubi, Memorial Day is the day after tomorrow. If you weren't such a dumbass, you'd be able to read a fucking calendar.

Like you give a shit about any dead soldier. I had friends killed in the last Gulf War, so don't fucking tell me what to think or do for Memorial Day .

Posted by: digitalbrownshirt at May 28, 2005 06:15 PM (ipjUv)

63 It would be a hefty job repairing Cedarford's grammar. . . "it's" means "it is".

It's not a possessive.

Posted by: at May 28, 2005 06:35 PM (mrpxK)

64 To be fair to Cedarford, I make that same mistake pretty regularly. I also say ain't, but that's just the Okie creeping in.

Posted by: digitalbrownshirt at May 28, 2005 06:41 PM (ipjUv)

65 If you want to do something for Memorial Day, consider adding your name to the petition.

http://tinyurl.com/amysr

Tubino

Posted by: tubino at May 28, 2005 06:57 PM (wO5Uv)

66 Why do some people like to display their ignorance?

digitalbrownshirt, I said a discussion on Memorial Day WOULD BE ....

Conditional tense, may be use for the future. E.g. for Christmas I would like a horse. Maybe you can read a calendar, but you are unfamiliar with the basics of the English language.

Jeez. I pity you. Another grammar example: Go spit on someone's grave for Memorial Day if that's what makes you happy, but *I* would not do it.

Posted by: tubino at May 28, 2005 07:02 PM (wO5Uv)

67 Still boring, tubi.

Posted by: digitalbrownshirt at May 28, 2005 07:06 PM (ipjUv)

68 Final score: Spurs 102 -- Suns 92. Western Civilization is safe for the moment.

Posted by: Michael at May 28, 2005 07:07 PM (pRtzm)

69 Hey, what have you got in mind with that horse?

Posted by: at May 28, 2005 07:07 PM (ipjUv)

70 For the horse...probably best not to ask someone with red-state values:

http://www.newshounds.us/2005/05/06/bizarre_sex_habits_of_the_extreme_rightwing.php

Posted by: at May 28, 2005 07:15 PM (4BOZ/)

71 It's funny you mention that. The first time I ever heard of something like that was when a guy got arrested for horse humping in the town I grew up in. I didn't realize that California was a red state though.

Posted by: digitalbrownshirt at May 28, 2005 07:35 PM (ipjUv)

72 Look, the rules of engagement with horses have been clear since Catherine the Great.

You have to pay the horse up front. Carrots and sugar cubes are acceptable. Non-payment suggests consensual sex, which is a big EWWWW in red-state land.

Did you all catch that story where in the divorce papers the wife claims her (republican leader) husband would PAY her for sex? $2K for a BJ.

Now THAT's the kind of I-bought-you sex I expect from red-staters. So PAY THE HORSE.

Posted by: tubino at May 28, 2005 07:42 PM (wO5Uv)

73 California may not be a red state but there are plenty with red-state values there, especially in the central values and on the outskirts of the major metropolitan areas. Orange County, Fresno, and much of the outlying Sacramento area are prime examples...from one Californian to another (albeit displaced, in the case of the former).

Posted by: KNS at May 28, 2005 09:45 PM (4BOZ/)

74 "Look, the rules of engagement with horses have been clear since Catherine the Great. You have to pay the horse up front. Carrots and sugar cubes are acceptable. Non-payment suggests consensual sex, which is a big EWWWW in red-state land. "

Finally, we've hit upon a topic of which tubino seems to have some expertise. This shouldn't be a suprise, however, based upon the quality and temperment of his previous comments. It would appear at some point in his life he's been 'mare slapped' somewhere in the vicinity of his ass which resulted in serious brain damage.

Posted by: BrewFan at May 29, 2005 04:34 AM (95UaF)

75 FYI, the original point of the thread, the Japanese soldier thing, might be a fake out to attract tourists. It does seem pretty unbelievable....

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,15445473%255E2703,00.html

Posted by: arminius at May 30, 2005 04:36 AM (NJ69K)

76 It wouldn't be the first time a hoax was generated from that part of the world. Anybody remember them finding the last remaining prehistoric tribe? They had photos of people in a cave around a fire wearing skins or something. It looked really stupid. But, National Geographic bought into it and made it a cover story. lol!

Posted by: at May 30, 2005 06:11 AM (zemt/)

77 There is a street in Mosul named for then- Major General David Petraeus, our division commander at the time. There's also a Screaming Eagle Boulevard.

Posted by: SGT Dan at May 30, 2005 04:20 PM (qBHie)

78 There's also a Screaming Eagle Boulevard.

And there's the rest of us, on this Memorial Day, who thank God for those that defend our liberty. God Bless them, and defend them!

Posted by: Michael at May 30, 2005 06:58 PM (pRtzm)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
114kb generated in CPU 0.18, elapsed 1.1518 seconds.
62 queries taking 1.0524 seconds, 314 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.