as an Englishman who is currently in the USA on business i feel i must ask this.
As many people are aware the USA army is responsible for most friendly fire incidents in the middle east, killing more allies than enemies. I have a theory as follows.
I believe that the USA army is secretly buying its guns from fairground owners who have bent the barrels to prevent you from winning prizes e.g fluffy toys.These guns are then given to the USA troops who quite obviously cant hit a barndoor with a banjo.
Does anyone agree?
2007-08-28
23:13:06
·
20 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
Maxxed50-we do not have to "jazz" our culture up my old son.
We have one, but you Americans can only steal other peoples.
2007-08-28
23:29:30 ·
update #1
MAXP-my story will remain untold.
As an American i really dont think you are in a position to talk to me about cowardice.
2007-08-28
23:32:49 ·
update #2
Wow...Sid...you're back!
As a parent of US Army members, I take issue with your claim. But like all your previous claims in your old hairless persona, you have no evidence. So you're still a wanker.
2007-08-31 08:45:16
·
answer #1
·
answered by ? 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
That must be one hell of a business trip. You've been here over a month.
Will you be wrapping things up soon?
Need help packing for the return trip?
I have a suggestion for the so-called 'coalition troops'.
Particularly the Dutch. Bring bullets next time and, instead of cavorting with the enemy, see if you can join the side that is actually fighting them.
Perhaps then you will be out of the line of fire.
In Uruzgan Province, where the Taliban operate openly, a Dutch-led task force has mostly shunned combat. Its counterinsurgency tactics emphasize efforts to improve Afghan living conditions and self-governance, rather than hunting the Taliban’s fighters. Bloodshed is out.
British General Sir Richard Dannatt:
"The army is certainly stretched. And when I say that we can't deploy any more battle groups at the present moment, that's because we're trying to get a reasonable balance of life for our people"
Way to tough it out Richie
2007-08-29 06:34:24
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Hmm, barndooor with a banjo, interesting euphemism. No i don't fully agree with your theory about the guns being carny cast-offs, the soldiers perhaps, but not the guns. I've, as of late, been wondering exactly how friendly this fire truly is. Perhaps it isn't the barrel that's bent, but the mind of our young men and women over there that's been misshapen.
2007-08-29 06:29:44
·
answer #3
·
answered by Justin G 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
The Illuminati won't allow this - that's obviously the type of thing you believe, right? Your statements are so outrageous, they detract from whatever negative comment you wish to make. It's almost as bad as the poor spelling that detracts from a message, as the reader pauses and thinks, "what?". And who would want to waste a perfectly good banjo on a barn door?
2007-08-29 06:23:13
·
answer #4
·
answered by marconprograms 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Seeing as you like to repeat yourself, so will I, Killing the English is a long standing tradition with us Yanks, going back to the Revolution. In fact we have the constitutional right to have guns,specifically to shoot the English. A constitutional right we don't use nearly enough. I'm sure those friendly fire victims will be held in higher regard then those brave Brits who allowed themselves to be taken by the Iranians. I guess enjoying that candy they got will give them something to eat while they wait for their pants to dry. So much for that stiff upper lip. Your lip is now as stiff as other parts of the English male anatomy.
2007-08-29 06:54:50
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
probably not. i seriousy doubt there are enough fair owners to stockpile the soldiers in iraq. and as far as thge friendly fire incidents, with the high amount of liberal media bias and the constant and i do mean CONSTANT grandstanding from the pelosi/reid regime, if there were any way to score points justified or not against our soldiers defending us in iraq by blowing friendly fire out of preportion, nancy would be there in a flash.
2007-08-29 06:17:32
·
answer #6
·
answered by koalatcomics 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
No thats not it exactly but good analogy. It's more like they are just pretending to fight a good fight without getting killed so they can buy some time waiting on the real war to start with Iran. Don't worry you boys will probably get to help too.
2007-08-29 06:22:47
·
answer #7
·
answered by Enigma 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Sydney, all I want to know is exactly where are you taking all these business trips? Because where you are in this country will certainly reflect a lot in your "ahem" weirdly altered state of true affairs.
2007-08-29 08:02:13
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is true that Americans are involved in most of the friendly fire accidents since the English usually throw their rifles down and run like scared little girls at the first sign of danger.
Weren't you here on vacation last week, what is your story and who would hire someone like you.
2007-08-29 06:29:14
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
Sid,...you slack-jawed moron,...here's my theory---since England can't manage to do a blessed thing without the aid of the United States and since it's track record of losing runs back to the American revolution...your trying as hard as you can to make us look follish to make your own lame culture seem better and brighter. Have a nice day.
2007-08-29 06:24:30
·
answer #10
·
answered by maxxed50 2
·
1⤊
2⤋