[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Your difficulties with Jenn are entirely your own doing. You've been
attacking her out of the blue since she started posting here.

You don't treat guys the same way. You didn't go after me or Shhhh for no
apparent reason. So we Normals believe you're a misogynist and/or a rutting
pig.

You brought on Jenn's enmity, Witless. She didn't start it; you did.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Feb 3, 12:42*pm, ScottW wrote:

Shhtard is simply an insecure
and intolerant person prone to childish insults rather than
any meaningful discourse when faced with disagreement.

LoL.

Here's another reason that I laugh at you, 2pid. You probably don't
(or you probably choose not to) recall a discussion we had on how
military planning works. I believe that was the first time I truly
understood the depths of your stupidity.

You had no understanding of how military planning works. You had (nor
do you *have*) any experience or training on how it works. But you had
(and have) "differing POVs and opinions" about it and seem to 'think'
that they're equally valid.

I'm very sorry, 2pid, but they're not. And pointing that out is not
"intolerance". LoL.

You brought on Jenn's enmity, Witless. She didn't start it; you did.

*You expect me to tolerate her turn to the dark side?

This isn't reality, 2pid, Try to remember that. LoL.

Unlike Jenn, I choose not to be silent.

In certain hypocritical instances perhaps not.

FWIW, I don't ask her to agree with me. I do expect her
to remain a civil adult. *Something you abandoned long
before our first encounter.

She is a civil adult, 2pid. So why does it matter to you whether or
not you can control Jenn? LoL.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Feb 3, 2:32*pm, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"George M. Middius" wrote in
messagenews:qa3ho4tguh5vfb7i4sgtgmd3fl6rp0bica@4ax .com

You don't treat guys the same way.

This disappoints Jenn, because she wants to be "One of the guys"

"Delusions of omnicssciencsese" noted.

You didn't go after me or Shhhh for no apparent reason.

Right, because both the Middiot and ****R gave you more than ample reason to
kick them around.

Is that what 2pid has been doing? Or you? LOL!

Any port in a storm, eh, GOIA? LOL!

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Feb 3, 9:41 pm, ScottW wrote:
On Feb 3, 6:18 pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:
On Feb 3, 12:42 pm, ScottW wrote:

Shhtard is simply an insecure
and intolerant person prone to childish insults rather than
any meaningful discourse when faced with disagreement.

LoL.

Here's another reason that I laugh at you, 2pid. You probably don't
(or you probably choose not to) recall a discussion we had on how
military planning works. I believe that was the first time I truly
understood the depths of your stupidity.

You had no understanding of how military planning works. You had (nor
do you *have*) any experience or training on how it works. But you had
(and have) "differing POVs and opinions" about it and seem to 'think'
that they're equally valid.

I'm very sorry, 2pid, but they're not. And pointing that out is not
"intolerance". LoL.

A strange conversation as I recall.

As we'll see, you don't recall very accurately.

Or perhaps you're not sharing your real feelings about it. Or perhaps
you're incapable of communicating what you really mean. We'll never
know. LoL.

You argued that my
comments were invalid as that simply isn't how it's done in
the military...while at the same time you were complaining
endlessly about the results the military was achieving using the
methods you claimed to be an expert in.

Um, no. That discussion started as to whether or not we could plan an
OTH contingency. I argued that we could do a staff study on it and
that there was no good reason not to. I showed you how the military
plans operations and included references. You argued that we couldn't/
shouldn't based on... based on... whatever it is that you based it on.
A 'differing POV' perhaps. LoL.

Are you confusing this 'discussion' with the one on how to fight
insurgencies? You know, the one where despite all of your bluster and
bravado and 'differing POVs' the senior military leadership agreed
with me and not you...again? LoL.

The military plans in a very consistent manner, 2pid. That planning
sequence has been learned with blood. You don't "go outside of the
box" concerning the planning sequence. It is designed so that you
don't miss something critical and so that you know where and what your
assumptions are.

You "go outside of the box" with solutions, 2pid. Schwarzkopf's "Hail
Mary" during the first Gulf War went through the exact sequence during
planning that I tried to teach you. You, however, had a 'differing
POV'. LoL.

Skipping steps (or "going outside of the box") in regards to the
military planning sequence has been shown many times to be fatal. But
what would you care? Your fat, self-centered, lazy sorry ass has never
been on the line. LoL.

Your ability to think out of the box of your training and
experience was nonexistant while you whined about the
results.

I have been commended on my "outside the box" thinking by superiors at
every step of my career, 2pid. Why do you suppose I was selected to go
to OCS? LoL.

What was it you did about that? Oh yes.
You quit.

No, I retired as a decorated veteran. Here's yet another example of
your military ignorance. LoL.

And now I'm on my way back in. Why? Because the Army asked me if I
would be willing to serve a little longer. It seems they're in need of
some experienced field-grade officers. I said "Yes". Ironic, huh,
2pid? My ass will be on the line while your fat ass is snug at
home...again. LoL.