Don Henly, Dubya, & Linda Ronstadt

"* US *" wrote in message
...
Vietnam started with fewer deaths by far than the Iraq invasion.

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:36:40 GMT, "Jarg"
wrote:

When was the comparable period in Vietnam?

Jarg

You could know that already if you weren't effectively brain-dead.

Strictly speaking, there's no truly comparable period, as this conflict
has been escalated far-more rapidly than that one was. It is already
far worse.

You have to want to *waste* US troops to support Bush's war crimes.

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 02:43:15 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:

... extraordinarily light
casualties ...

The casualties in Iraq are already worse than those from the
comparable period in Vietnam.

There is no comparable period in Vietnam. This is not Vietnam 1965. This is
not the Cold War. Get over it.


The bushkultie isn't happy if too few US soldiers are killed ...

He imagines that travesty didn't start more slowly than this one.

From: * US *
Date: 8/12/2004 5:46 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:

Everyone knew Saddam was probably disarmed and the inspectors
were on the verge of confirming it when Bush forced them out.

Really? Then how come so many people including Al Bore were saying Saddam had
WMD as late as mid 2002?

"...a former Pentagon Air Force Traffic controller writes:
"All those years ago when I was in the Pentagon, this wouldn't have happened.
ATC Radar
images were (and are) available in the understructures of the Pentagon, and
any commercial
flight within 300 miles of DC that made an abrupt course change toward
Washington, turned
off their transponder, and refused to communicate with ATC, would have been
intercepted at
supersonic speeds within a max of 9 minutes by a Fighter out of Andrews.
Period. Why these
planes weren't, baffles me. If we could get fighters off the ground in 2
minutes then, we
could now." ..."

Why would the Pentagon need scope dopes? As an ATC he would need to control air
traffic. How could he do it and no one in federal ATC not know about it? What
would the above scope dope's chain of command be? For that matter who in the
Pentagon had authority to issue such a launch order on such short notice?

Do you always accept stories such as this on faith alone?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

In article ,
(BUFDRVR) wrote:

"...a former Pentagon Air Force Traffic controller writes

Uhhh? Not much need for a guy on the scope at the Pentagon.

ATC Radar
images were (and are) available in the understructures of the Pentagon

Interesting, I worked in the "understructures" of the Pentagon and I
never saw
an "ATC room". It amazes me the myths surrounding that building...

Or how some things got so mundane. I can remember more than once turning
too soon, and have a fairly bored guard say "no, this is the back
entrance to the National Military Command Center [1]. The Army Map Depot
is the next corridor down, on the left."

[1] Technically the National Military Intelligence Center at that level.


would have been intercepted at
supersonic speeds within a max of 9 minutes by a Fighter out of Andrews.

Maybe in 1958, but certainly not in 2001.

In either case, with how much fuel after a supersonic intercept? And
just how did a presumed Soviet get there from the north?

On 13 Aug 2004 02:04:38 GMT, IBM wrote:

* US * wrote in :

[snip]

Hope they don't use blackbox electronic voting systems to thwart
justice.

Its too late.
The fix is in.
Flee for your life.

There's nowhere that would be safe from the ultra-greedy once they're ultimately powerful.

True patriots in many states are working to prevent the use of such
devices.

Those would the folks in the tinfoil hats?

Hardly: they're professors at Harvard and MIT, among others ...

http://www.blackboxvoting.com
http://verifiedvoting.org
http://www.notablesoftware.com/evote.html

"...a former Pentagon Air Force Traffic controller writes:
"All those years ago when I was in the Pentagon, this wouldn't have
happened. ATC Radar images were (and are) available in the

"All those years ago".
Livin in the past.
That was then, this is now.


When did we stop paying for defense?


Why did Bush stand the air defenses down, when he'd been warned repeatedly that
an attack featuring aircraft used on landmarks was imminent?


It's a good idea to question the questionable.

* US * wrote in message ...
On 13 Aug 2004 02:04:38 GMT, IBM wrote:

* US * wrote in :

[snip]

Hope they don't use blackbox electronic voting systems to thwart
justice.

Its too late.
The fix is in.
Flee for your life.

There's nowhere that would be safe from the ultra-greedy once they're
ultimately powerful.

True patriots in many states are working to prevent the use of such
devices.

Those would the folks in the tinfoil hats?

Hardly: they're professors at Harvard and MIT, among others ...

http://www.blackboxvoting.com
http://verifiedvoting.org
http://www.notablesoftware.com/evote.html

"...a former Pentagon Air Force Traffic controller writes:
"All those years ago when I was in the Pentagon, this wouldn't have
happened. ATC Radar images were (and are) available in the

"All those years ago".
Livin in the past.
That was then, this is now.


When did we stop paying for defense?


Why did Bush stand the air defenses down, when he'd been warned repeatedly
that
an attack featuring aircraft used on landmarks was imminent?


It's a good idea to question the questionable.

You maintain the US air defenses were stood down that morning. Prove it.

How many airbases had fighter aircraft loaded and on alert the morning of
9/11?
How many actual aircraft, what types, and where?
More importantly, which specific units were 'stood down'.

Not just a list of air bases, or a list of squadrons that have a flying
mission. Specific units and aircraft, "on alert"

Find this out and get back to us.

Pete

From: * US *
Date: 8/12/2004 10:19 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:

On Fri, 13 Aug 2004 01:23:30 GMT, "Pete" wrote:

"All those years ago..." when we had many, many more aircraft and squadrons
on alert all up and down the east coast.

Bush got warnings of imminent attacks using aircraft on landmarks.

He should have done at least something other than stand down the air
defenses.

Aha!! You ARE maron!!

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

US wrote:

Bush got warnings of imminent attacks using aircraft on landmarks.

He should have done at least something other than stand down the air
defenses.

And I'm sure you'll show us documentation of "imminent" attacks and explain
what actions he took to "stand down the air defenses".


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

* US * wrote:

If you believe that standard procedures for US air defenses were
followed on 9/11, you're the one who need to substantiate that.

You continue to spout this crap without even a moderate clue what you're
talking about. The only east coast units on Air Defense alert on the morning of
9/11 were the F-15As from Otis ANG base in MA. The guard unit who you insinuate
was "stood down" was the ANG unit from Andrews who was indeed airborn on 9/11
(at least a two ship) practicing *air to ground* attacks. Why don't you provide
proof (beyond some tinfoil hat quote from a guy who claims the Pentagon has an
air traffic alert function) of what units were stood down on 9/11?


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

"IBM" wrote
"Billy Preston" wrote

[snip]

To claim that ATC operators conduct air defense, is bogus information,
by someone who has never been in the air defense business.

What?
Surely this cannot be?
I mean it was posted on the internet.
It must be true.
I'm sooooo confused.

A friend of mine was fired by Reagan after many years in ATC, and became
a Weapons Controller in AWACS after coming back active duty, and it was
interesting to see him switch from Air Defense, to Air Traffic Control (lost,
or emergency aircraft). In AWACS, you lose points if the planes don't
merge, and in ATC you lose points if they do :-)

Cessna 742, 235 for 20, Bullseye!

Say again for Cessna 742?

Oh sorry, altimeter 30.01 airport is 10 miles, fly a heading of 010, ident.

In article ,
(BUFDRVR) wrote:

* US * wrote:

If you believe that standard procedures for US air defenses were
followed on 9/11, you're the one who need to substantiate that.

You continue to spout this crap without even a moderate clue what you're
talking about. The only east coast units on Air Defense alert on the
morning of
9/11 were the F-15As from Otis ANG base in MA.

In fairness, also a two-ship at Langley, in VA but a significant
distance from DC/suburban Virginia. They launched following standing
orders that took them out over by the Atlantic. By the time they could
be directed to the DC area, they were too short on fuel to have had much
chance of identifying a specific target in a busy air corridor.

The point remains valid, confirmed by the 9/11 Commission Report, that
there were no air defense aircraft postured to meet the specific threat.
That is quite different than being "stood down". They had no rules of
engagement, local area intercept command, etc., for a threat that had
not been seriously considered.


The guard unit who you
insinuate
was "stood down" was the ANG unit from Andrews who was indeed airborn on
9/11
(at least a two ship) practicing *air to ground* attacks. Why don't you
provide
proof (beyond some tinfoil hat quote from a guy who claims the Pentagon
has an
air traffic alert function) of what units were stood down on 9/11?


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it
harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"