Which pro athlete do you dislike the most?

Discussion in 'The Bike Cafe' started by Pendejo, May 10, 2007.

  1. Wurm

    Wurm New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,203
    Likes Received:
    0
    You've got to be kidding. That statement doesn't even pass the laugh test.

    OK, I'll give you the shortened version, but this is by no means the entirely of the problem nor the extent of the evidence.

    It's too bad that you and others don't like the taste in your mouth when someone calls your disingenuous position to the mat: "I support the troops but not the war!" That's horseshit and you know it. It's like saying, "I support my kids coz they don't go on every armed robbery, just one here or there", after your adult son or daughter has committed such crimes - and continues to do so unabated. What the hell does that mean?! That you still love your child? Of course you do. But you damned sure don't think of them like you used to, and you wish someone would stop them (and wonder why they don't stop themselves), and you're ashamed of them, and you wish none of it had ever happened.

    What if, after they're caught, you say, "Well, I still support my children...they're not doing robberies all the time." What the hell does that mean?! Are you saying that what your kids did was understandable? Acceptable? That it was just 2 of your kids that did this out of 5 or 8? That their acts weren't such a great thing but "oh well, shit happens"? That they were just hurting who they thought (or were told) were "bad guys" anyway so it doesn't matter? Or is it really that you would rather just equivocate and obfuscate and not have to face the truth?

    I can "support, prove, or otherwise base" my position on the fact that if anyone is supporting the US military's current directives (partially described by Gen. Batiste below) as laid down by Sec. Def. Rumsfeld, and given the green light by Atty. Gen. Gonzales and the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces - which has not seen a significant recanting or revision since Sec. Def. Gates took office - then they are in essence supporting illegal and extremely immoral acts according to every other treaty and tribunal ever agreed to by civilized humans. If you're a "troop", or a sailor, airman, or a bottle washer employed by the US military or its direct support services, you eventually in some form or degree must be part of carrying out said directives. If you were not of some use to this illegal occupation, you would not be employed by it for long.

    So I'll put it point blank: What the fuck is your problem that you can't figure that out?? :confused:

    Yes, there are those that try hard not to do the dirty stuff, but they look the other way. Or have been told by buddies of some incident, but it goes unreported or not acted upon by the officers. There are some that figure they're just carrying out orders.

    Then there are those that flat out refuse once they see what is expected of them in the field, or go AWOL, or don't show up for re-deployment. There are now thousands of them.

    Here's an exchange in an interview presented today by Amy Goodman with Gen. Bastiste, (I would suggest everyone that reads this thread also watches the video of the interview, or at least reads the transcript. http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/05/25/1456251 ):

    That is commendable of Gen. Batiste and his colleagues at the time. At least the guys in 1st I.D. knew what was expected of them by their direct commanders. But they also knew that the official policy of their gov't was in conflict with their direct commanders, so whose orders do they follow, especially when "no one's looking"?

    But that's only one Army division and concerns just one aspect (treatment of prisoners). The interview goes on about the massacre at Haditha and how the military attempted to cover it up, when Goodman said, "This is one example that we know about, because there was film, although it was raised for months before. It was when Time magazine brought the film to the military that it could no longer be denied."

    Exactly. What other performances do we not know about, given the fact that the US command has effectively tossed the Geneva Convention out the window? Granted, the General goes on to say, "It did not reflect the vast majority of our great soldiers and Marines, which is not to say that a very small percentage make mistakes.", but from the dozens of reports I've seen thus far, I'd say he's downplaying this for the sake of having his views accepted in certain circles, (ie: not to speak out too much). He also goes on to say, "On a different level, I think Haditha represents the incredible frustration and friction that’s in the military today, under-strengthed, under-resourced in Iraq, trying to accomplish a task that required over three times the number of coalition troops without the right capability. So you see the frustration building in our great soldiers and Marines. Unacceptable behavior, there’s no excuse for it."

    What the General hasn't talked much about is the dozens and dozens of "little Hadithas" that have occurred and are happening nearly every day, all across Iraq. Maybe not the outright slaughter or the scale that was a case like Haditha or Falluja or Abu Gharaib, but other illegalities and what can be considered war crimes. Like kicking doors in and rounding up everyone in the room/building - kids, women, old folks - some getting seriously injured or killed in the effort. Shooting/bombing before knowing who it is. Rapes. Pillaging and/or destruction of property of innocents. Permanent contamination of the landscape from depleted uranium ordnance. On and on.

    I really don't care what the Neo Cons put into the MCA to cover their asses, because I know it was and is an illegal document from the git.

    You think you know something, alienator? You don't know shit. I can't count how many formerly- and currently-deployed military personnel I've either heard in interviews or speeches, or talked to and corresponded with personally that have told of similar experiences about their tour in Iraq (and A'stan). Quite a few of them were getting their rocks off in the process, actually enjoying it, and driven by a mob mentality. Or after a few scenes they became desensitized to the whole mess and simply continued on. This is not merely a tiny fraction of troops going Postal from war stress. It is official gov't policy to put down and control a culture by any means Bu$hCo deems necessary for the profits of oil.

    Period. Full fucking stop.

    This may give some clues, for one example. Perhaps the General wasn't aware of this info before the interview, (but somehow, I suspect he knows quite a lot more than he's letting on):

    Common sense tells me that more than 1/3 of soldiers thinking torture is OK is not "just a few bad eggs". Now, do you want to try and pick that apart to say that one should support the troops, the 2/3 that don't think that way? I wonder what percentage already committed torture and have changed their minds, or lied about it, or how many haven't but might in the future when and if ordered to.

    How much of this shit is going unreported would you say, when 2/3 of the Marines and 1/2 of the Army won't tell if they've seen it? No excuse that it's just "some" troops here either. And of those that would tell, believe me from what I know those guys are weeded out ASAP or humiliated or sanctioned in some way, and not sent on certain "missions". Maybe you can whip out your Golden Slide Rule and extrapolate a number from this that would give you an engineering hard on? Knock yourself out.

    Less than 1/2 of the Army troopies would treat prisoners by the book, (you know, the book that Alberto & Rummy cooked marshmallows with at Dubya's ranch). Well, let's make sure we support that 49% or so, before they wise up and join the majority, eh?

    Wait, maybe first you should 'splain again to n2t what a majority and a minority is?

    But we have some good news here for all you Troop Supporters! This survey says that geez...only 10% admitted to abusing civilians! Well that's great, because as a rough figure that means only about 15,000 troops have had a fun night on the town running amok doing who knows what bedlam. Not counting of course those thousands that have been rotated in and out of Iraq, or those of the 90% that don't want Mommy and Girly back home to know how much fun they had pistol-whipping some "Islamists". Or fragging their crummy little shacks.

    Here's the deal --

    I cannot support a US military that conducts itself officially in anything close to that manner. This is not the honorable institution that I was once part of. I never said "all" personnel in the military today were evil, that's your hype. But somebody is implementing the Order of Battle that was decreed by the Pentagon. Those somebodies are not small in number, from the division commanders (generals), to the brigade light colonels, to the company commanders (captain), the chopper pilots (warrant officer), the sargeants, specialists, privates, and everyone in between.

    Gen. Batiste is but one of the voices, there are many more and growing. This situation in many important ways is not at all like Vietnam. For one thing, Johnson and Nixon did not toss out the Geneva Conventions or Nuremburg Laws as a matter of overweening, unilateral, win-at-any-cost official policy, and they had a conscript military.

    I do know that when you're a member of the Army, (and I would say the same about most other MOS' in the other services as well) you're really not an individual. You're a spoke in a much larger wheel, and like it or not, you're going on whatever ride that wheel wants to take. Therefore, even for your small part, you are a part of whatever happens. However, you exist in that wheel as an individual mind, and you can make an individual decision.
     


  2. n2t

    n2t New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2007
    Messages:
    74
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think there are alot more good people in the services than you give credit for. Running away from the war by going to canada etc isn't a comendable action imho. If you're in, you took and oath and made a promise. There are alot of ways to get out or be discharged without running away. You know this is a reality when you join, and only a fool would think that they are going to agree with all the ideas put forth by their leaders so I consider awol to be nothing more than imaturity at best or blatant cowardace and dishonesty at worse. I'm not sure why it's hard to support a being yet dissapprove of a concept this seems simple to me. As for the child referance..where you say 3 of the 8 kids or whatever didn't rob anyone. So what you go home and incarserate the 5 kids who didn't do anything? There are bad cops, bad soldiers, and bad people they exist, if you judge everyone by the worst you're going to have a mildly skewed version of the truth. Seems however that you have your own agenda and are going to ram it down our throats if we like it or not. Reminds me alot of what some people say about Bush, you don't have oil stock do you?
     
  3. limerickman

    limerickman Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    16,131
    Likes Received:
    115
    I thought that all Aussies would be SW fans ????
    The man is a genius, I think.

    I don't know much about him personally to say whether I like him or dislike him though.
     
  4. Wurm

    Wurm New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,203
    Likes Received:
    0
    We can go back and forth indefinitely on this, so I'll state my position one last time. You, alienator, and anyone else are free to take it any way you wish or not at all. I know that my style can come off as outspoken or harsh, and I'm not out to make enemies, but I've never pretended diplomacy as my forte. I'd rather zero in on real-life facts and motives as best as can be determined and have them scrutinized in the light of day - not smokescreens, platitudes, and bullshit.

    First, did you watch the video interview with Gen. Batiste? I'm willing to bet that you didn't bother, because you don't want to hear any dissent no matter how "nicely" it is delivered.

    "support a being yet dissapprove of a concept"? It would be better if it were just a "concept", but the in-your-face reality in Iraq is much more than a "concept". It is actually happening.

    "...So what you go home and incarserate the 5 kids who didn't do anything?" If the actions of that group of kids has been institutionalized as a policy as it has been with the US military, then yes, the entire group needs to be stopped. It does no good to take out part of the group when those that remain will be free to commit the same crimes as a matter of standing policy.

    There are good people in the military, I never said there wasn't - so you can stop trying to characterize me with that lie right here, right now. I know or have known and worked with plenty of decent and well-meaning military personnel. Good people can be made to do bad things however, and the things that too many of those good people have done in Iraq have changed many of them permanently.

    I agree that when you join up you take an oath and you should honor it to the best of your ability. But there is a limit IMO, and your military oath is not a free ticket to no-holds-barred mayhem, or an excuse to support such mayhem that has been laid down illegally as an official policy. I also believe that each person's situation must be considered individually when it comes to whether what is expected of them violates long-held laws and agreements. This is a war of aggression, there is nothing "defensive" about it, and America's military has become a rogue force or nearly so. This is not just my opinion, it is widely accepted critique. In an age of instant communications and easily accessible knowledge, no one has the excuse that they didn't know or can't get hold of the info they need before they join any such enterprise.

    Perhaps this is why the services have not met or had an extremely difficult time of meeting their recruitment goals these last few years, why they've lowered entry standards to unheard of levels, why outright lies and 'bait & switch' tactics are used by recruiters, and why there has been inhuman troop re-deployments, with many ordered to do 3 or 4 tours.

    But the larger public is not going to see a helluva lot about these sort of facts on the tube every day. That just wouldn't be good for the Empire's agenda. Examples: why do you think Bu$hCo has banned coverage of the caskets returning to Dover AFB, when in every other war that has been the norm? "Embedded" reporters? Brutality and arrest of non-violent, lawful anti-war protesters?

    What we have seen is constant hammering of "We support R troops!" and "Merka good, turrurrurists bad" and "we're makin' progress in Iraq". This is nothing but mindless sound-bite sloganeering intended for mass consumption, yet does nought to address the real problems.

    When you are told to follow a clearly illegal policy, and that policy is well known beforehand, then where does the responsibility lie? Were the German officers & troops correct in carrying out Hitler's policies? But the Nazi-era Wehrmacht and Luftwaffe were conscripts forced at the point of a gun, while the US military is volunteer. I consider AWOL or Conscientious Objection under the current circumstances to be necessary and quite commendable.

    It is not a hero that ignores the accepted laws of warfare in blind obedience to an oath. It doesn't take bravery to shoot/assault/destroy non-combatants and their lands. It is no mark of respect to invade a sovereign nation that has not attacked you.

    The best way now to avoid this whole conundrum IMO is not to enter the military or its support services, and/or try to end the insanity that is the Bu$hCo war machine. When US foreign and military policy is put back to where it should be, I have no problem with people joining up and in fact, I think it's one of the best things that a young person could do for him/herself. I agree with Gen. Batiste when he hinted that there should be a requirement for a certain amount of national service, and it doesn't need to be exclusively military. IMO, it should include the rich kids and the middle-class kids, males and females, I would say for a mandatory 2-year hitch completed sometime before age 25, and no exception for hiding out at a college. I guarantee you then we wouldn't be witnessing such disgusting debacles like Iraq.

    My "agenda" on this issue is to stop the unnecessary, illegal, and heinous reality of what is taking place in Iraq and elsewhere, and what Bu$hCo has done to our military in general. It is not simply an opposition to a "concept".
     
  5. n2t

    n2t New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2007
    Messages:
    74
    Likes Received:
    0
    Idk I mean I seriously fundamentaly dissagree with some of your statements. To me they just don't make any sense. Such as saying AWOL and Conciencious Objector status is ok in a volenteer only military. Now if it's a draft, you have no choice and are being forced in ala Ali, I completely understand those options...you never wanted to be there and had no idea it was going to happen. But if you volenteered and took the oath, what when you get a paycheck to sit on base it's cool but when you have to do something it's not? Do you give back all the money you were payed to be an asset in case of a conflict? As for the war policies etc. I take most things with a grain of salt and assume that there is information out there of which I am not aware. I'm willing to bet that alot of descisions are made on the information I don't know. Idk about all that not meeting recruitment goals stuff you're saying either. We just got threw two bouts of force shaping where we had to many people and were actualy allowing people to simply get out by choice and kicking out people for any infraction we could find. Yet another reason that awol is crap. If you didn't want to go all you had to do was say so, "I don't want to deploy or fight or stuff can I go home to mommy" sure have fun. Punishing the 5 kids that did nothing since three did is like jailing people because they have the ability to break a law. You have choices in war and in life. Do what's right or don't it's that simple. I've never smoked, done a drug, and I've been drunk one time. Doing the right thing (for yourself mind you as I have no problem with others doing some of these actions) is not hard. Not bending to peer preasure is not hard, and after having seen some of every branch come through where I was stationed I can honestly say I've seen way more good than bad and I think even if you don't support the war or polacies behind it there are still alot of good men and women worth supporting out there in the sand.
     
  6. kyperman

    kyperman New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    61
    Likes Received:
    0
    I've never been asked.
     
  7. kyperman

    kyperman New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    61
    Likes Received:
    0
    Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah....
     
  8. Wurm

    Wurm New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,203
    Likes Received:
    0
    Rather than having your head explode from attempting to read (or type) more than 2 lines of text, why don't you go back to watching SportsCenter and Deal Or No Deal?
     
  9. kyperman

    kyperman New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    61
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't get SC and don't care for Howie Mandel. Frankly, if I want to read a novel, I will go to the library, not a message board thats supposed to be about the sport of biking. Thats what I was trying to say...lets talk bikes and leave politics to the talking heads on TV.
     
  10. Wurm

    Wurm New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,203
    Likes Received:
    0
    A quick glance at the front page of "The Bike Cafe" will show a dozen or so non-cycling topics. You should hit all of those and bitch about it. In fact, this thread itself is a general sports topic, not a cycling topic.
     
  11. tyboy

    tyboy New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2007
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    2
    You seem like an a## Several of my family members are in the military
     
  12. Aussie_Girl87

    Aussie_Girl87 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2007
    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    0
    Cant decide between Anthony Mundine or Lleyton Hewitt
     
  13. Wurm

    Wurm New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,203
    Likes Received:
    0
    Big f#cking deal. I was in the military too. So was Eisenhower. So was Hitler.
     
  14. road monkey

    road monkey New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2007
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    Orlando f*cking Bloom.
    Oh, wait...
    Atheletes... :eek:
    Ummmmm...
    Any NASCAR driver. Or 'pro' poker player, even though they aren't even atheletes. God I hate 'pro' poker.
     
  15. JohnO

    JohnO New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2003
    Messages:
    1,495
    Likes Received:
    0
    Some of you should be familiar with this, or at least the hindquarters...

    What about Curlin? Doped to the forelocks with Butte, and a filly beat him in the Belmont.
     
  16. BigUgly

    BigUgly New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2007
    Messages:
    131
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm a huge Montral Canadiens fan so any Toronto Maple Leaf player I hate. Individually though I think Roger Clemmons is a money sucking pig.
     
  17. linck

    linck New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2006
    Messages:
    38
    Likes Received:
    2
    Vijay Singh he was so arrogant when he won number one and it took Tiger what a month to get it back. I just don't like his attitude or the way he carries himself. I know youe thinking Tiger is arrogant too. I would have to disagree there is a difference between arrogance and assured confidence
     
  18. linck

    linck New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2006
    Messages:
    38
    Likes Received:
    2
    I am in the military and you have no Idea what goes on in day to day combat. The army of the 80's, give me a break they were an affront to the professional soldier. Undisiplined and not ready for war. Oh but they sure could look good in garrison. Thankfully we did not have a major conflict during that time period or there would have been catastrophic casualties. The current Military population does a job that your army of the 80's would have failed miserably at. The current day soldier is the ultimate pentahthelete. Able to carry heaqvy loads in extreme heat and cold able to jump from planes out of helicopters or any other means of insertion hit the ground with afore mentioned load and sprint hundreds of meters while dodging bullets, simultaneously placing precision fire on the enemy. Keeping collateral damage to a minimum. Sure sorry excuse for soldiers did some stuff they should not have done. They also recieved their medicine for their actions. And Quite frankly to imply that american soldiers are uneducated back woods country folk just shows how uneducated you actually are. In my current unit 90% of the NCO's have college degrees I am half way to my bachelors. Alot of my peers are on their way to their masters. You were probably a failure as a soldier so are bitter at the organization. That's OK I'm here to give you the freedom to express you opinion no matter how skewed or misguided it might be. I believe you should be upset with admistration and not bad mouth all soldiers. You were after all one of them. Soldiers don't write policy, we don't push the spear we are just the sharp point at the tip of the spear. The bottom line is that your era of military was the worst example of soldiering, (except for garrison,, man you all looked pretty), the majority of you did drugs for crying out loud.I know this because my father was in during that time period and tells me stories of what it was like. you have absolutely no idea what goes on in todays army the soldier of today is intelligent, adaptable, and extremely efficient. that's my two sense. if you want to know the real deal ask a soldier, not a reporter.

    "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night
    only because rough men stand ready to do
    violence on their behalf"
    George Orwell

    This includes you

     
  19. kyperman

    kyperman New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    61
    Likes Received:
    0
    Here's my short list...


    1. Michael Jordon...he is just so full of himself.
    2. Kobe Bryant...raped a girl and walked away.
    3. Lance Armstrong...I know, save it, I have heard it. What he has in natural talent, he lacks in personal morals.
    4. Anyone on the Colorado Avalanche, Claude L most of all.
    5. Patrick Roy
    6. Mike Tyson.
    7. Roger Clemens.
    8. Jerry Sloan, head coach of the Utah Jazz
    9. Scottie Pippen, overrated, nothing without MJ.
    10. Matt Millen, President of the Detroit Lions.
     
  20. n2t

    n2t New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2007
    Messages:
    74
    Likes Received:
    0
    Jerry Sloan? The guy is the longest tenured coach in any pro sport. And he's good at it. How can you hate sloan??????
     
Loading...
Loading...