<p>Why are you [TN] still posting here with us small-minded adults when you have the much smarter set on your forum?</p>
<p>TN,</p>
<p>Again, because I poise a question that would be a good business school question, you jump all over me with this silly liberal label. Weak.</p>
<p>Could you park the liberal label stuff and explain to the class why an opportunity like sponsoring the WC telecasts to the troops wouldn’t be a great idea at a relative low cost to HB? What is goodwill worth? Why do corporations sponsor ballbarks, ballgames and stadiums? </p>
<p>Who has the better marketing opportunity HB or FIFA? Does FIFA need America to be successful? Does HB need America to be successful? Who benefits the most from sponsoring the games for our troops? </p>
<p>It does have bearing on the discussion as it seems that you and a few others put down capitalism at it’s best, if it doesn’t fit your mindset. </p>
<p>As far as the death, what’s your point? Do you also feel that way about African children who because their countries produce no oil, draw no interest? </p>
<p>You’re more than welcome to worship at the feet of HB. I’ll venture to guess your a Walmart kinda guy as well.</p>
<p>[rant] SHUT UP!..There, I said it. I’m tired of hearing about “Liberals,” “wars for oil,” “conservatives,” “evil Halliburton,” etc., etc. Please find a way to debate without using the over-hyped, over-used sound clips. I see this on too many forums. It’s always the “dumb” conservatives vs. the “hippy” liberals, ENOUGH! [end rant]</p>
<p>If anything, we should be angry with AFN and FIFA for not being able to compromise.</p>
<p>Back to the matter at hand. FIFA wanting to charge the US military for showing the games. Without prejudice of liberal vs. conservative or anything else.</p>
<p>FIFA is an organization with better representation than the UN. Probably serves a better purpose than the UN. </p>
<p>USSF, which is US Soccer, a member of FIFA should have stepped up to the plate for the US service men and women. Even if US Soccer had to contribute funds to appease FIFA. </p>
<p>This is a minor contribution for what the military has provided for this country. This is a minor contribution based upon the fan support US military is providing currently in Germany.</p>
<p>Regardless of the situation I still feel it is poor form for FIFA not make available, not just to the US military, but all national military programs friend and foe alike entrusted with securing their nations borders the telecast exclusive their private network. </p>
<p>I am sure it is not the matter of the money but the principle as to why it was not provided. Once they commit to paying once, who is to say that they will not be held hostage in the future.</p>
<p>From a wishy-washy, moderate, centrist, fiscally conservative, socially liberal republican: </p>
<p>thanks to all for a stimulating discussion!!</p>
<p>Switzerland doesn’t like to make friends. They ignore when bad stuff happens like France getting run over by tanks (is that REALLY that bad after all). They gotta stay neutral…and giving free FIFA to Soldiers would be supporting a foreign military and they could…ummm…ummm be seen as enemies of Taliban maybe…HAHAHA… They just have their own safety at heart, ya know (just kidding, they deserve soccer even though the game sort of sucks compared to REAL football).</p>
<p>“They ignore when bad stuff happens like France getting run over by tanks (is that REALLY that bad after all).” </p>
<p>You can thank Rupert Murdoch for the wildly popular pastime of putting the French down. Murdoch’s British media outlets generally show contempt for the European Union. Murdoch publications and video news outlets worldwide tend to adopt anti-French, pro-Israeli positions which are reinforced in the US by his Fox News Network, to be parroted by the faithfull in this country.</p>
<p>Ragman, a brief study of European history and geo-politics will reveal exactly why Switzerland has a tradition of neutrality (at least on the face of things) and it has everything to do with self-preservation.</p>
<p>I don’t agree with all current french foreign and domestic policy (just like i don’t agree with everything we do), but we were there when they needed us the most, and they were there when we needed them the most. They have their system and must live with it, as we do ours.</p>
<p>As far as soccer goes, I can barely stand to watch it, but Iam “enlightened” enough to know that a heck of a lot more people watch soccer than American Football on this planet, so I am smart enough to know it’s probably the “real” football.</p>
<p>“From a wishy-washy, moderate, centrist, fiscally conservative, socially liberal republican” No unfortunately you are more than slightly off base. Offering a practical proposal to the situation.</p>
<p>Leave the Swiss out of this, they sit on sidelines for a practical reason. You must admire a country able to avoid conflict through 2 World Wars. Maybe the French could consider this option for the next global conflict.</p>
<p>My suggestion was for the US Soccer to intercede and if FIFA would not relent on requesting money, have US Soccer pony it up in support of our troops. Believe me they have plenty of it. </p>
<p>It is simply a bad precedent to start to have to pay for programming. Remember life before cable or satellite? Fewer choices but it was free.</p>
<p>Actually they are both the real football. I won’t give the history lesson on it. If truly that curious google.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That “smarter set” includes you, you know. As a moderator, even.</p>
<p>As for why I’m still here, I don’t know. It’s obvious that standing up for the military isn’t all that appreciated here, so maybe I’ll just stick to helping the kids in the USNA forum and leave the adults to discussing how awful the situation their kids are getting into is.</p>
<p>I’m utterly sick of it. Enjoy your one-sided media stories and your delusions. </p>
<p>I’m going back to what I originally came here for. Cheers.</p>
<p>“It’s obvious that standing up for the military isn’t all that appreciated here”</p>
<p>I don’t recall anyone here putting the military down (???)</p>
<p>In fact, the objective of having leaders (of any party) that make good decisions and the healthy debate of what is happening around us is ALWAYS in the military’s best interest (particularly the interests of our own sons and daughters who will most certainly be going to war in a few years).</p>
<p>As a republican I am encouraged as I see the political base of the neo-conservatives being eroded as the religious right which allowed them to take over becomes more and more disillusioned with the conservative leadership. They are realizing that the social agenda of the far right will never be pushed through the Congress (the people) and that the most they will get is lip service to their most important issues (gay marriage ammendment, etc). I look forward to the mantra of the party returning to fiscal responsibility coupled with a social conscience instead of what I have to live with now. I HATE voting for Democrats, but I will if I have to.</p>
<p>Overall, I would venture to say that “news” media world wide, regardless of left/right editorial tendencies, reports more negative than positive by a landslide. It’s just human nature I guess, to gosip about bad instead of good. We just have to live with it.</p>
<p>There is LOTS of good stuff happening in IRAQ but there is no way that media outlets or their readers/viewers want to see an equal number of good stories along with the bad ones because people are just too darn pessimistic/cynical.</p>
<p>Someday…The History Channel and Discovery Channel and National Geographic…etc will hopefully set the story straight from other than lifes lost, bombs detonated, mosques desecrated…etc perspectives only.</p>
<p>My $.01 for now…</p>
<p>Zman forever!!!</p>
<p>Opie: Watch it or you will be accused of making ad hominem attacks. [You have to look at earlier threads to appreciate the reference.]</p>
<p>Z: Sometimes you just come out of nowhere with a comment. I surmise that is what some find aggravating about your posts. This has nothing to do with standing up for the military.
USNA09 is fond of posting articles. That’s her thing. I think its a bit tiresome, but, hey, nothing more or less than the other junk that gets posted herein.</p>
<p>The article she posted was not critical of the military and had nothing to do with a “liberal” bias on the part of the media. [How would you have reported this same information?] Yet, USNA09 gets jumped on as if the article were part of a nefarious plot to disclose specific troop locations. I still have trouble understanding how this article was liberally biased.</p>
<p>As mentioned earlier, the difficulty of the internet is understanding what in the heck people arer trying to say.
For example, you reference my quote and follow it up with “The smarter set includes you, you know. As a moderator, even.” Are you referring to me? [The “you” in your statement.] What are you talking about? Am I a moderator in this new discussion thread? I don’t even recall even signing up for it. . . so, what in the heck are you talking about. [Or, did TN or somebody hijack “Bill0510” as C23 tried to do with a private message to one of the participants?]</p>
<p>The point, I think, is that the media does serve a purpose in this country. Surely you would agree with this statement wouldn’t you? Asking whether a prisoner has been beaten is not evidence of a liberal bias. How the answer is reported, however, may be evidence of a bias. Yet, according to Z/TN’s world, just asking the question is bad and evidence of a liberal mentality. I agree, I want somebody to ask the questions. [Just as the “media” is asking questions about $1B in Katrina overspending. Or is this further evidence of the liberal media overreacting?]</p>
<p>TN said he was sick of this archaic, unmoderated discussion forum. Yet, he still comes back. It seems he comes back just make his driveby comments. WARNING: YOU ARE ARGUING WITH A 20-YEAR OLD. [TN] WOULD YOU SPEND THIS MUCH TIME TALKING TO A 20-YEAR OLD IN A PARTY? If he really is going to the USAFA, he won’t be around much more anyway.</p>
<p>For you to implicitly accuse the adults of not appreciating standing up for the military is an irresponsible statement. A statement the Z of several months ago would have made. I have given my child to the military. My father is a veteran. For many reasons, children of my generation did not tend towards the military but that does not mean we have not served our country in other capacities. It most certainly does not mean that standing up for the military is not appreciated. </p>
<p>If the tone, intonation, inflection, etc. of your intentions did not properly cross over, then re-think what you wrote. If I misread what you wrote, then I accept being chastised.</p>
<p>bill0510, I don’t know what you are talking about but I never went on any forum and tried to take the name ‘Bill0510’ or anything of the sort. </p>
<p>P.S. You said the Earth ISN’t 6000 years old. Please try to argue that with some of the Jesus-frea, err, Christians in this forum that still THINK THAT even though science has proven them wrong over and over and over again.</p>
<p>Oh…LOL! And I suppose you think you are “Andy”. Not likely. I find it particularly amusing that you keep refering to the same few posts in which you are “brought to justice”. Maybe you should go back and read them in FULL. :D</p>
<p>Wait, Bill, you just insulted my age, if I’m reading correctly. What on earth does age have to do with any of this? Why do you continuously come back to that? Is that really the best you can do? Do you need a feeling of superiority because you’re older than I? Is that how you “win” this failing argument of yours?</p>
<p>Oh no, I’m younger than you AND you can’t come back with anything other than this fact. I feel so inferior. Crap. I sure wish I was old and bitter like you.</p>
<p>TN, you got a kick out of it when he insulted my age, but now when the tables turn you start to see different, huh.</p>
<p>Wait…</p>
<p>The universe ISN’T 6,000 years old??</p>
<p>:(</p>
<p>Lighten up everyone…things just got too serious!!!</p>
<p>Its refreshing to finally read rational and intelligent posts on this forum. Thank you Opie and Shogun for making an effort to enlighten others. NPR, Jim Lehrer, The New York Times, and people like you give me hope that reason prevails in America.</p>
<p>To be ignorant is to enjoy bliss.</p>
<p>Thankfully there exist better men to do the work that no one else will complete and shoulder the burden that none will hold.</p>
<p>And while you sit pecking away at your keyboards, somewhere in Iraq a real man is cleaning his rifle, listening to the sounds of the desert, and having no reservations about his mission.</p>
<p>So I will go discuss what needs discussed with those who this country needs. I will leave you to your endless toiling. Rock in your chairs, old ones, for the world need not that you succeed in your goal, but that you stay out of the way of ours.</p>
<p>-TacticalNuke out</p>
<p>TN,</p>
<p>Some of those “real men” are women, and no one understands more about their sacrifice than the “old ones” who’s mothers and fathers they are.</p>
<p>Knowing what “burden to shoulder” is an important part of life.</p>
<p>Ideology without the experience of life is empty vessel.</p>
<p>Ahhh, someone old and wise once said that “youth is wasted on the young…”</p>
<p>May you keep your powder dry and your mind open.</p>