A Soldier

worth a read if you're bored Why Did the Chicken cross the Road? Coalition Provisional Authority: The fact that the Iraqi chicken crossed the road affirmatively demonstrates that decision-making authority has been transferred to the chicken well in advance of the scheduled June 30th transition of power. From now on the chicken is responsible for its own decisions. Halliburton: We were asked to help the chicken cross the road. Given the inherent risk of road crossing and the rarity of chickens, this operation will only cost the US government $326,004. Muqtada al-Sadr: The chicken was a tool of the evil Coalition and will be killed. US Army Military Police: We were directed to prepare the chicken to cross the road. As part of these preparations, individual soldiers ran over the chicken repeatedly and then plucked the chicken. We deeply regret the occurrence of any chicken rights violations. Peshmerga: The chicken crossed the road, and will continue to cross the road, to show its independence and to transport the weapons it needs to defend itself. However, in future, to avoid problems, the chicken will be called a duck, and will wear a plastic bill. 1st Cav: The chicken was not authorized to cross the road without displaying two forms of picture identification. Thus, the chicken was appropriately detained and searched in accordance with current SOP?s. We apologize for any embarr!@#$%^&*ment to the chicken. As a result of this unfortunate incident, the command has ins!@#$%^&*uted a gender sensitivity training program and all future chicken searches will be conducted by female soldiers. Al Jazeera: The chicken was forced to cross the road multiple times at gunpoint by a large group of occupation soldiers, according to eye-witnesses. The chicken was then fired upon intentionally, in yet another example of the abuse of innocent Iraqi chickens. Blackwater: We cannot confirm any involvement in the chicken-road-crossing incident. Translators: Chicken he cross street because bad she tangle regulation. Future chicken table against my request. U.S. Marine Corps: The chicken is dead. Navy: The chicken upon crossing the road was painted and lashed to the curb. Kerry: "The chicken crossed the road before it did not" Baghdad Bob: The chicken never crossed the road! He is safe in Baghdad, miles from the marauding vehicles of the infidel! THERE IS NO ROAD! USAF: "As you can see here in the target video, the bomb was locked onto the chicken...and there it goes...the chicken is still moving...still moving...and unfortunately passed out of the parameters of the guidance system so that the bomb completely missed it and hit the weasel instead. Gotta admit thought, it's impressive footage..."

OMFG you serious? i want to play it, you have an URL? heh

kids kids kids....

http://liberalslikechrist.org/ReaganRemembered.JPG http://www.jesusnorepublican.org/Reagan

Do you have a link of where you downloaded it off from?

Aileron, I disagree. What I learned so far about history is that every nation ruler will do the best he can to make his country better than others. This goes back as far to Otto Von Bismarck with his Realpolitik or Richelieu and Machiavel with the "Reason of State". If they can get the oil at a cheap price, the US will. They have a problem with energy anyways now. I invite you to read this link. "Virtuousness" is not a word that qualifies the US government as we speak right now. Take -*BAD WORD*- Cheney for exemple: former chairman and chief executive officer of Halliburton, an oilfield services firm. Isn't it a strange coincidence? The whole world knows Saddam Hussein is a tyran, and I believe that they used the "humanitarian" reason once they saw all the negative feedback they had from journalists. Today, if I ask you why you went to war, would you have an other argument than "to take off Saddam"? Democracy involves freedom of speach. People who live in countries that are ruled by dictators can't express their dissatisfaction on anything, otherwise they'd be dead the next day. Changing for a democracy would mean revolt against the elite who controls the population. Let's say you were this elite and you had both power and money. Would you give it up like that? Kind of a strange question to ask, I know, because I believe that like many others you seek justice, but it should show you what I mean. Let's not be naive. They won't stay poor.. but they won't get rich. As for Tascar, once again, you proved nothing but the fact that you are an -*BAD WORD*-. I'm wondering if next time, I should drag myself down to your level as for that's probably what you want, being the imbecile you are. But.. as they say: "Never argue with an idiot, they'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience."

What the -*BAD WORD*-? Did you ever? How is your so-called argument supposed to be linked into my idea that the coalition might put a puppet government into power to gain special advantages? Indeed... a puppet government maybe? Please read carefully before posting stupid comments. While I'm at it, I've re-read what you wrote about Dav's comment: I think BG summed it up pretty good

Are you claiming that a puppet government is to be put??

Indeed... a puppet government maybe?

With 53% of the population that voted...

I agree, and think the same. But the perfect balance of anything is hardly ever achieved. lol@bacchus

I'd rather die forgotten than hatefully remembered. For someone who backed up death squads in El Salvador, funded Contras in Nicaragua while killing civilians and destroying oil refineries, announced the famous "Star Wars" project while relations between the Soviet Union and the US were calming down, invades Grenada and is part of the Iran-Contras scandal in 1986, he doesn't deserve much respect from me. But anyways, he must have done some cool things too.

umm lol ok. I thought being single and celibacy were the same. Or are they? :/

Nice comment coming from someone who argued about neocolonialism without knowing jack -*BAD WORD*- about it.

I disagree.. "-*BAD WORD*- friends", for exemple. No relationships involved and still, the person stays single

I suggest you try metal gear ctf worthless (team vs team zone, a bit like infantry)

Tascar, I love your humor! Wait, that's humor right?

Alright, there has been some misunderstanding from my part. I feel stupid of saying this, but I think you'll have most of the answers to your questions if you read nintendo's previous post. Otherwise, just post back, and I'll be glad to answer with the best I can :]

No, I do not believe in communism, nor socialism. :] I have read much on this system, and like someone said: "Communism is the exploitation of man by man. Capitalism is the opposite." What I was trying to point out was the fact that the USA are one of the last country that practices capitalism to one of its purest form. There is no perfect system, but there aught to be a problem when the world's only superpower thinks of its economy before its people. But hey, who am I to tell the government what to do? And you believe terrorists will rally togheter and start a conventional war like in 1939? Well, thank God you weren't born as an Iraqi then........... So did your government about the way they financed him between the Iran-Iraq war uh? Yeah, they probably did so. Iraq is the second country that possess the most oil the world. Countries are dependant on oil. Countries will import oil from other countries. They can't just say "-*BAD WORD*- off Iraq" and stop buying them oil. But what kind of weapons were you talking of? Would you mind give out some sources please? An ounce of respect? Wtf are you talking about? Saddam Hussein is a tyran, I never agreed on the way he ruled his country, but never will I agree on the way this problem was "solved out". Remember when GWB spoke about Iraq for the first time after Afghanistan? The world's attention turned toward this country. The UN sent inspectors. The UN was discussing onto doing something about Saddam. And then, what did your leader decided to do? Attack! We don't give a -*BAD WORD*- about the UN so let's just invade!The worst dictator? There was a lot of dictators during history, and let's not get into who was more bad than who. Now you are accusing me of supporting communism and Saddam? woohoo, go you! The US did it for oil, sorry. :/ You would already have it? lol. So, getting oil is as easy as getting your everyday milk? This is not about short-term projects, but rather longer ones. Imagine the US started "hauling that -*BAD WORD*- over barrel by barrel here to to United States", do you think world's opinion would have been leniant on that? You need to get informed on what the UN truly does.

Why not give us some examples tascar? This crap is closer to reality than you think. I thought you were the one that said in an earlier post that you were afraid terrorists get military equipement from the former the Soviet Union? Now what if they get nukes?

rofl. What about the marxist-leninist party?

LoL. And who's to win the federal elections in June?

party breaker ... >

wow, you're dumb 2. what? A bunch of people hiding in a desert are more dangerous than the largest country in the world with a -*BAD WORD*-load of ICBMs? you're dumb3. you're dumb 4. the key word being AFTER - before the Cuban missile crisis (which could have sent us into global nuclear war) we weren't sure who was in charge...that's why it happend - you're dumb5. so "war" and "attack" are the same thing now? you're dumb 6. ...with a -*BAD WORD*-load of ICBMs - you're dumb7. heheh, now you know about all the things it took to pacify them? I suppose the Cuban missile crisis was just a glitch in this understanding? you're dumb 8. different security risks, not more - the amount of weapons the USSR had didn't suddenly increase - you're dumb9. ha, do you really expect me to believe that? 10. wow, I bet you got paid pretty well for writing this dribble - gj lol suse, I disagree with you on some points 1. Read between the line, it's sarcasm. 2. Well, what is all of your weapons and army going to do against terrorists they just cannot find? Bomb the whole lot? Nah. 3. Again, sarcasm. 4. The direct line was made to increase security between both country and probably the whole word because both realised they did not want to rule over a parking lot... Not sure who was in charge? How come? 5. Weren't the attacks on the WTC a declaration of war to the United States? 6. And you are refering to..? 7. The US had to concede some things to USSR in order to have their missiles removed from Cuba 8. Where did he ever say Russia's weapons increased? He says he fears terrorists acquire dangerous weapons or missiles from the former Soviet Union. 9. Ehh.. yes? 10. Dribble? I'd rather say down-to-earth facts.

Very good article. Brings up some interesting points.