George W Bush Is A War Criminal

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
101

[quote]vroom wrote:
No shortage of soldiers? How would you explain the “backdoor draft”? [/quote]

There is no “backdoor draft” going on. They are calling up certain people with certain skill sets – specifically military police and trainers.

As to “stop loss” measures, see this:

December 06, 2004
HOW SOON THEY FORGET

Big news tonight that a group of soldiers are suing the government because although their terms of enlistment are up, they aren’t being released due to stop loss.

Prepare to hear the phrase “backdoor draft” all over again.

But here’s what amazes me about this: the reason for stop loss may or may not be in part to play a numbers a game; but it’s also to make sure that units about to deploy or already deployed are frozen in place, to make sure that unit cohesion isn’t altered by having people coming and going when service contracts come due, making it necessary to replace those individuals.

The services didn’t randomly wake up one morning and decide that freezing units in place during war time might be a fun thing to try. As I’ve noted repeatedly, something the press always misses, since they pretty much stopped paying attention to the military after Vietnam except for a month here and a month there (and six months during Desert Shield/Storm) is that the military has spent twenty-five years obsessing over what went wrong in Vietnam and how they could make sure it would never go wrong again.

And one thing that made everyone’s list was the one year tour of duty. It meant that every unit was made up of people who were at different stages of their tour, rookies mixed in with veterans, people who didn’t really know what they were doing with people who were risk averse because they were close to going home, people who were tightly bonded mixed in with people who barely knew one another’s names, people close to their half-way point leave, people just back from leave – it was a disaster. And based on that disaster the move was made from deployments for individuals to deployments for entire units. No longer would an individual go to war for a set period of time. Now an individual was assigned to a unit and he or she would deploy with his or her unit for as long as that unit deployed. (Which was still less than World War II, when troops, and units, had deployed for the duration.) But units simply cannot be guaranteed in advance that they will deploy for a specific period of time and have that be honored no matter what during time of war – the needs of the military have to come first.

But the only alternative is to have some people, whose terms of service end before the unit is to come home, leave early, and be replaced by people unknown to the rest of the unit, with far less experience than the rest of the unit. It doesn’t replicate the Vietnam experience, but it comes close enough that the military just isn’t going to play. Not when it doesn’t take but a few people in critical slots to throw everyone off and put a number of people of risk.

And that’s the part of stop loss the press never explains.

You’re correct – I won’t agree. We have leaders who put together strategy and let us know what’s needed. I will take them at their word rather than assume you and Elk know how best to utilize resources.

If you’re fully aware of comparative advantage then you should have no doubts – provided there’s not a shortage of manpower. Which there is not. See above.

[quote] It’s not that I don’t see your argument and point, but I don’t agree with it. The war is a much more focused and intense event, with the ability for one average person to have a measurable impact, whereas the economy simply isn’t.

In every day real on-the-job life it is very difficult to have an impact on something as large as the economy.

One bullet aimed at the right person at the right time however can have a huge, direct and immediate impact. Even something as simple as being alert or befriending an ally with access to information can be huge. Given your rations to local children may even tip the tide in terms of befriending the Iraqi people. The ability to have a real impact is at least there. [/quote]

You’re basically making a chaos theory argument, with the smallest imput having the chance to make a big impact. However, this applies equally to small and large processes – in other words, it applies to the economy as well as to the battlefield. Hell, it applies to non-job-related activities at home as well.

But even aside from the chaos theory argument, you’re still arguing that you know better how to employ resources than the planners, and still ignoring comparative advantage.

Look, let’s examine for a second what would happen to an average college-educated person who signed up now. He would become an officer, and presumably would receive training for the type of work they need done over there. He would also get normal OCS training. So for some number of months, he is completely unproductive, as he is no longer economically productive, and he is not doing anything of import for the GWOT. However, not even the military would disregard his previous training – if someone with a lot of computer skills such as yourself signed up, he would end up doing something related to computers, not driving a truck. Someone like me would be assigned to be a lawyer. I might think I would make a good intelligence person, but I have no language skills other than English, and I have a law degree, so since the army understands comparative advantage and would not wish to overlook the inherent value of existing skills and education, I would be a lawyer. This isn’t a situation like Russia in WWII in which they’re looking for bodies for the front, and we have an all-volunteer professional army conducting the combat operations – and doing so quite well.

[quote] Even going back a layer, driving the truck that brings food to the front line soldiers will have much more impact than helping one business litigate another to death. However, perhaps you are helping the US with respect to interpretation of the constitution or something with expertise that cannot be replaced?

It is possible, but it is also rare.[/quote]

BTW, I don’t do litigation. Neither prosecution nor defense. I also don’t interpret the Constitution generally, as I don’t deal with the government except to file things with the SEC or state secretaries of state. I’ve never filed a brief, nor been to court. I incorporate companies, help them get funding, help form venture capital funds, make employment contracts, implement option plans, craft corporate governance plans, etc.

That’s where my skills lie, and doing that is how I can best help grow the economy and help to keep our machine running. That’s my highest-value contribution with the situation as it is currently.

Note, that’s the argument – not that anyone in particular is irreplacable.

102

Boston,

It is a numbers game.

How many people are there in the US participating in the economy? How many hundred million?

How many people are there in the US participating in the Iraqi incursion? How many hundred thousand?

Your level of participation is at least three orders of magnitude higher if you are participating in the Iraqi situation.

Finally, the Iraqi event is a crucial situation with great impact, the economy is not in a crucial situation of great world impact.

Comparatively, it is much easier to impact the war effort… chaos theory notwithstanding.

103

[quote]vroom wrote:
Finally, the Iraqi event is a crucial situation with great impact, the economy is not in a crucial situation of great world impact.
[/quote]

Our economy has more impact on the world situation than probably any other single factor in the world.

Are you on something, vroom?

104

Didn’t our strong economy ultimately defeat the Soviet Union? Most historians think it did.

A strong economy is the engine that allows a dominant military to be possible. Civilian control of the military is what allows it to be used in a benevolent manner. Thank God that it is the US military that dominates the battlefield. Do you think the old USSR or China would have been so kind as to rebuild countries and foster freedom.

This whole military argument about who served and who didn’t is a bit annoying to me. I served for 6 years and saw ground combat in Desert Storm. I wouldn’t wish combat experience on anyone. I view it as a necessary evil in the world. Certainly not something to be relished. People in our military do their duty, when called upon. Always have.

I never tried to belittle anyone who didn’t serve…hell it’s voluntary now.

I don’t think military service gives me any validation with my arguments. I sincerely doubt that my comments and opinions are given any more wieght around here then any other conservative.

105

Without reading every post in this thread I may repeat what someone else has already expressed. If I do, then I apologize in advance.

Legally, Bush is obviously not a war criminal. They have covered their own asses very carefully, so by the book, as we can all see, what they are doing is perfectly legal. However I will posit this little thought… “A rose is a rose by any other name.” Regardless of how you classify prisoners taken during combat, they are human beings. Our principles were designed to treat other human beings with dignity, and anything short of that is a violation of ethics. It may be legal, but no matter how you “spin” it is still wrong, and it still damages our relationship with the people we are trying to win over.

106

Rainjack, you old dog, good to hear an insult from you! I was wondering when you would join your fellow warlords on the attack. Now get to the gym and hit those rear delts!

Vroom, Canadian, American, fuck that bullshit, you’re truly a great example of a human being!
(I’m not just saying that because your liberal either)

Boston, I may not be as eloquent, proper, or educated, as you, but I say what I feel from my heart and what I have said regarding you is the way I see it. Just my opinion nothing more or less. Now go look up some more flowering reports on all the wonderful things going on in Iraq.

107

naturalatlas82, are you talking about al-queda, or Iraq? not the same thing …

108

[quote]vroom wrote:
Boston,

It is a numbers game.

How many people are there in the US participating in the economy? How many hundred million?

How many people are there in the US participating in the Iraqi incursion? How many hundred thousand?

Your level of participation is at least three orders of magnitude higher if you are participating in the Iraqi situation.

Finally, the Iraqi event is a crucial situation with great impact, the economy is not in a crucial situation of great world impact.

Comparatively, it is much easier to impact the war effort… chaos theory notwithstanding.[/quote]

vroom:

While the numbers game idea is interesting, it doesn’t at all address the other points – and it specifically doesn’t deal with the idea of how the military would utilize someone, or where needs lie.

As to the economy, I think others pointed out the problems above quite well.

I’ll just stick with trusting our military leaders in terms of resource allocation.

109

[quote]Elkhntr1 wrote:

Boston, I may not be as eloquent, proper, or educated, as you, but I say what I feel from my heart and what I have said regarding you is the way I see it. Just my opinion nothing more or less. Now go look up some more flowering reports on all the wonderful things going on in Iraq. [/quote]

Elk,

Trust me – I value your opinion on the subject at the precise level it merits.

And, just because you asked:

http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?pt=ZCk3tSUC4Epl1RBMSKbESR%3D%3D

Bright Side
by Andrew Sullivan

Only at TNR Online | Post date 12.07.04

Something very strange is happening in the news from Iraq: It’s not all bad. Don’t get me wrong. It’s not all good, either–not by any means. Chances for a successful election on January 30 are decidedly iffy. The insurgency is still wreaking barbarism across the country. But in the past few weeks, the case for despair has unmistakably weakened a notch. ( Opinion & Reviews - Wall Street Journal )

Take the little-heralded breakthrough the week before Thanksgiving, when Iraq’s major Western creditors agreed to forgive 80 percent of Iraq’s debt. Yes, that includes those prickly states in “Old Europe,” like France and Germany. Imagine if a president-elect Kerry had announced such a breakthrough. It would have made headlines across the globe. But Bush consigliere James Baker pulled it off–and who wants to celebrate him?

And there was an even less-noticed development this past month: the relative silence across Iraq after the devastating coalition assault on Falluja. The military campaign led to the deaths of thousands, including civilians caught in the crossfire, and left much of the city in rubble. It included the awful imagery of a scared U.S. Marine blowing a wounded Iraqi’s head off, a scene replayed endlessly on Arab television. Did the rest of Iraq rise up in protest, as happened in the spring during a similar aborted attack on Falluja? Not even close. The Kurds and the Shia understand that their interest today lies in a successful election. They’re not unhappy to see Sunni and Baathist rebels get pummeled by American arms. In that, you see the beginning of the new Iraqi reality: a place where 80 percent of the country wants the democratic transition to succeed.

The coalition has learned a critical tactic in neo-imperial governance: divide and rule. From the Romans to the Brits, it has long been a useful strategy. By working with the grain of Iraqi ethnic tension, specifically the pent-up hostility of Kurds and Shia toward the Sunnis, who for decades ran the country, the United States has been able to gain leverage against the largely Sunni insurgency. So as Sunni Falluja was pummeled, the Shia were quiet and Kurdish troops actually took part in the operation. Yes, it’s a potentially dangerous ploy. Pushing the division too far could lead to civil war. But there’s some good news here as well: In a recent poll of 2,210 Iraqis, a full two-thirds of those surveyed said the prospect of a civil war was “not realistic.”

Then came the real prize: a desperate and angry tape from Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, fugitive leader of what he now calls Al Qaeda in Iraq, lashing out at Muslim clerics for not supporting the jihad. “You have let us down in the darkest circumstances and handed us over to the enemy,” Zarqawi vented. “You have stopped supporting the holy warriors. Hundreds of thousands of the nation’s sons are being slaughtered at the hands of the infidels because of your silence.” Those are not confident words.

It may well be that greater numbers of trained Iraqi soldiers and police, relentless military pressure on the insurgents, and the prospect of a real election have begun to turn the tide on terrorism in Iraq. Last week saw more hopeful signs. The Bush administration is increasing coalition troop strength to 150,000 before the election, several Kurdish and Sunni parties backtracked on their threat to boycott the election, and the Sunni president of the country, Ghazi al-Yawer, backed the January 30 election date. There’s a sliver of democratic momentum here.

Reconstruction money is finally finding a way to make a difference in the country, after the process was stymied by endless bureaucratic logjams. Unemployment is slowly declining, and electricity production is at a postwar high. Per capita income for this year is now $780, up from around $500 in 2003 ( http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/opinion/200411/kt2004112517250354330.htm ). The Shia insurgent Muqtada al Sadr has joined the political system. The Iraqi government has even agreed to meet with some Sunni dissidents in Jordan to discuss how to bring them into the electoral process. Yes, the Sunnis are still dangerously alienated. But check out the enthusiasm of some for their new-found freedom. Take the intrepid bloggers at Iraq the Model, Omar and Ali. They set up their own party, the “Iraqi Pro-Democracy Party,” and went to get it registered, convinced they might suffer for it:

http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/archives/2004_11_01_iraqthemodel_archive.html#110142042453515033

[Begin Iraq blog excerpt] We contacted some friends and people who believed in the same principles we believe in and we told them about our plan. Some people didn't like it but we still managed to gather more than 800 people who stated that they are not afraid of saying in public that they want to overthrow the government and do whatever it takes. We heard about other groups trying to do the same and we decide to unite our efforts with theirs but first we had to make the first step alone. The group chose me, my brother Mohammed and a friend of ours to go to the authorities and talk to them, as we were still hoping to do this peacefully without unnecessary bloodshed unless they refused. We knew of course that it might well lead to our death but then the rest of us would carry on using the hard way.

We reached the government main headquarter and entered without much difficulty. We went to one of these offices as we didn't know were to go as this was our first time there. One of the government employees asked us what was our need. We said our prayers and told him that we want to change the regime. He asked us to wait until he call for the man in charge and I said to myself, "that's it, they're calling the Mukhabarat" the guy came back with another man who, after greeting us asked about our group. We handed him a file that contained our goals and a list of the people who supported us. He took it and told us to come back in 3 days after they study it.

"Study it!?" I said to myself "they're not going to hang us? Maybe they are letting the small fish to capture the large one?" anyway we went back and spent 3 difficult nights full of worries and nightmares. [End Iraq blog excerpt]

The party is now one of 156 registered for the elections. Yes, we can worry about the dangers of Sunni estrangement, the small signs of civil war, the unsecular aspirations of the Shia party slate, and so on. But then you read a story like Ali’s, and you tell yourself to buck up. We saw in Afghanistan and Ukraine what an actual election process can do to awaken a democratic spirit, to convince people they truly can control their own destiny. Why should we discount the same from occurring in Iraq?

Sure, the odds for success are still long. There will never be an excuse for the Bush administration’s undermanning of the occupation, or its reckless disbandment of the Iraqi army, or its being blindsided by a highly predictable insurgency. Many Sunni political parties may still boycott the election. And violence may spike as the election nears. But we are seeing signs that Bush’s error-strewn perseverance is starting to pay off. The election itself will perhaps tell us more, providing the crucible in which a new Iraq can either be born or die a long and painful death. We can and should hope. The polls, after all, show that a vast majority of Iraqis intend to vote. Why discount the chances of an Afghanistan-like experience in which the silent majority finally finds a way to tell the theocrats, terrorists, and propagandists whose country Iraq truly is? Why bet against democracy? Sixty-five percent of Iraqis surveyed tell us they are optimistic about their future.

Maybe it’s time we joined their ranks.

Andrew Sullivan is a senior editor at TNR

Now do go have fun hunting ostriches… at least I presume that must be what you’re up to, given the general quality of your info.

110

I read the exchanges between elk and barrister, and everything that followed, with great interest(actually turned out to be a much more worthwhile thread than how it started) and have a few thoughts.

First, I was not in the military(BTW I whole-heartedly support the war in Iraq, Afghanistan or anyplace else where there will be body bags filling up with terrorists). However, I do have some similar experiences to some of our military brothers and sisters as I am a law enforcement officer.

I get lots of opinions from people about my job. I dont dismiss them outright, even if I find them disagreeable, just because the person was never law enforcement and didnt put on body armor every day they went to work. I consider what they have to say and realize that they can have a perfectly valid opinion even if they never walked in my boots.
This was the big problem I had with all of the stuff Elk posted - its a cheap way out. If I may respectfully ask, what did you do in the service elk? If you didnt see the kind of combat that posters like hedo and ranger, then their opinions must automatically trump yours because they have been someplace where you have not(and they are clearly opposite of you on many of these issues).
Granted, there are certain things I really won’t entertain. Those are largely issues that require the type of training and experience we have in my business. I heard it put this way once to a pissed off citizen by a sergeant…“you wouldnt tell your dentist what type of drill to use, would you?” So if there are military guys here, who have experience relevant to their gripes, then its fair to say that their opinions on strategic and tactical issues are more relevant than the rest of ours.

But thats not what we are talking about.
We’re in the realm of broader principles and ideas…a place for thinking people, regardless of their individual lot in life.

Instead, this turned into a “you really dont support the war, and have no right to say you do, unless you go over to Iraq and participate.” Thats absurd. To illustrate:

Vroom and Elk, despite what I feel about your opinions, I’m sure you are both decent men. Im sure you oppose people molesting children, men horribly beating their wives, criminals assaulting, raping and killing others. If you were put into a position by circumstance to stop such things from occurring, Im sure you would try to do so. Now how fair would it be of me to say that you really dont oppose these things and dont have a belief in a peaceful society in general if you never became a law enforcement officer so you could have a much better chance to pursue these beliefs? I would say that is completely unfair. But that is what you both have been doing here.
That kind of thinking degenerates into
comments like “you’re chickenshit”(although vroom tried to dress it up better than that).

With that said, Im going to suggest that anyone interested read the books of Col. David Grossman(“On Combat” and “On Killing”) specifically. With all of the tactical value these books have for people in warrior professions, they serve another prupose. You will never look at human aggression the same again, and I think you owe it to yourself to examine these studies before you make a decision on any war we ever chose to engage in.

111

Yes Boston, I’ll go ostrich hunting you just keep cheerleading for a war that you, yourself, don’t have the balls to get involved in, other then donating to charity that is.

112

[quote]Elkhntr1 wrote:
Yes Boston, I’ll go ostrich hunting you just keep cheerleading for a war that you, yourself, don’t have the balls to get involved in, other then donating to charity that is.[/quote]

BTW, you got the ostriches joke right? You know, those big birds with their heads stuck in the sand…

I imagine I didn’t quite succeed in making an amusing mental picture of you with your head stuck in the ground, ignoring reality, but oh well – That was just me being funny – almost as funny as you above when you subbed “conservative” in when you meant “coward,” but I’m obviously not blessed with your comedic talents.

I shall have to ponder for awhile how I can express myself as eloquently as “chickenshit.” That was really funny. I’m sure I’ll be stuck on that all afternoon.

Anyway Elk, at least no one can ever take the honor of your service away from you. No matter what else you do or say. For that you will always deserve thanks. Enjoy yourself – I’m going to add the value of your opinion to a $1.39 and go get a coffee.

113

JD430-

If I thought this war was justified, I would probably be in agreement with you and others on this forum. As is apparent, I believe this war was based on lies and in no way needed to happen to ensure the future security of America.

On many levels this lie that so many Americans are buying into infuriates me! The people who started it and are ulitmately going to profit from it don’t sacrifice anything yet they will reap the profits. And again, who sacrifices who pays with blood with their lives the middle class and the poor.

I know, I know, its an all volunteer army, but that doesn’t mean their expendable because they signed up for duty. So, on the one hand if you are a war supporter you buy into the ‘This is the battle for good and evil’ ‘We are taking it to them before they get here’ If I honestly believed that, whether or not I had served before, I would definitley feel like now would be the time to do it if I was able bodied.

If it offends some, I apologize, but I do feel it is reprehensible how some can rah, rah, rah, and talk military strategy and so forth, while others are dying as we type. Also, call me crazy, but my belief is if something this critical is going down and I believed in it heart and soul, it would be my duty to get involved! Not comment on the action and go play golf on Saturday.

In summary, this war to me is a lie I don’t buy into the ‘were there so they won’t be here’ line. I do believe much like Vietnam we are going to pull out in a few years? With some profits being made by Halliburton and other corporations and a huge loss in life both American and non terrorist Iraqi’s. I do believe we have given the terrorists a vast amount of ammo to keep on recruiting members and hating Americans. The worst thing is the lie, if you believe it its all good, if you don’t its a very scary thing that this could happen and it scares me more then the terrorists do!

114

JD

Good post and well thought out.

Hedo

115

Hey elk,

I asked you a direct question. Is everyone who supports this war and is not a veteran a coward?

By the way, you run off at the mouth about “if I believed in this war I’d be serving” crap.

Hey, tough guy, if you believe this war is so unjust and based on lies, why aren’t you in Iraq acting as a human shield?

Why aren’t you lying naked in front of Halliburton protesting?

Why isn’t there a tent in front of the White House with you in permanent residence?

You are on this site an AWFUL lot for being so Anti-Iraq war.

Thanks,

JeffR

116

So jeffy, if I think the war is unjust, I have to go to Iraq and be a humanshield, or lie naked in front of Halliburton, or pop up a tent in front of the Whitehouse? I may be a little crude and unpolished you’re just plain retarded! You c’mon tough guy you’re for the war get your ass over there and help with the fighting!

117

Boston,

Boston, the military would utilize one by putting them in harms way. Either risking death or killing others or supporting those that do so. It doesn’t take a supreme level of skill to pull a trigger or deliver supplies. They have this thing called training that prepares one to be a soldier.

Now, I’m not criticizing the military, they design it that way on purpose so everybody can be effective. Relax. Given the relatively small numbers of soldiers in place it is very clear that it is easy to have a measurable impact in Iraq if you see action even once.

How many people, in their entire lives, truly have an impact on the economy? I’d wager that nobody blathering in these threads has ever done anything economically significant, no matter how well off they are or how big a company they created has become. The great thing about a free economy is that needs will be filled by someone, whether or not it is you.

I think you should look into the marginal benefit of one more civilian in the economy versus one more soldier in Iraq before you dismiss the “numbers game”. Especially given that your skills are not all that special or irreplaceable.

Again, I’m not arguing the principle doesn’t exist, but it doesn’t apply to general schmo’s like you and I and the rest of us in here. We aren’t that special even if we’d like to think so.

The other nitwits are of course correct that the economy is important. However, they are incorrect in thinking that individually their contribution matters. Given the number of people participating, not to mention capital equipment and business entities, one person is truly insignificant.

I’m certainly not arguing that the economy isn’t powerful or that it isn’t important or that it didn’t crush the old Soviet Union. However, surely these nitwits are aware that it is only in the macro sense that it has power. No, trying to convert my claim into one that the economy is not important is just silly.

You place your trust in people who refuse to admit adversity, pretend everything is going well when it isn’t and who are unwilling to assume any responsibility for out of control situations after they lay out the ground rules that allow it to happen.

Good for you.

What you will continue to do is talk about general principles and convince yourself you are doing something useful with respect to the war against terrorism when you are doing no more or less than I am. Isn’t that a crock. Your neighborhood “ultra-liberal” is able to offer just as much contribution to the effort as you are.

The reality is that I imagine you are patriotic, as I consider myself to be. I’d guess that you really don’t feel the US is in any dire threat. Hell, more people die every year by violent crimes than die in a year in Iraq or in a year via terrorist attacks.

Unless something dramatic were to change there is no danger to the US or the US way of life. There is no need for you to interrupt your job and be inconvenienced by risking your life for something that isn’t vital to the survival of your country.

Just admit you aren’t personally vital to the economy of your nation and that you aren’t contributing jack-shit to the war effort other than giving to charity and I’ll stop bugging you about it.

Good effort! Woohoo, if it wasn’t for you and JeffR we’d be lost.

118

elk wrote:

“So jeffy, if I think the war is unjust, I have to go to Iraq and be a humanshield, or lie naked in front of Halliburton, or pop up a tent in front of the Whitehouse? I may be a little crude and unpolished you’re just plain retarded!”

Come on tough guy!!!

You talk a big game. How about doing something to stop the “lies” and the exploitation of Iraq by Halliburton?

Are you a “chickenshit?”

If the war is SO DAMN UNJUST, why aren’t YOU stopping it?

Too busy sipping your Nattie-light?

JeffR

119

Vroom

“Nitwits”???

“Never done anything economically worthwhile no matter what they created”??

Little condescending don’t you think?

When you attack your opponents after having your arguments refuted I think it weakens your argument further. I mean after all it is a political discussion board. Arguing is what we do.

120

Hedo,

I’m referring to the fact that no matter how much pride we may take in our accomplishments, and I personally take a lot of pride in my career accomplishments, it really isn’t the hill of beans we’d like it to be.

To think otherwise would be hubris.

Do you really think any of us arguing in here have shaped our nation? That we are more than a cog in a machine? I’d hate to bust your bubble, but none of us are as important as we may like to think we are – excepting of course our importance to those close to us.

If Bill Gates was in here wasting his time arguing with us, he might be able to claim he accomplished something, but he’s busy ruling the world, he doesn’t have time to chit-chat with us riff-raff does he? Like I keep saying, there are exceptions, but those exceptions are not you and I.

Oh the wounded pride and punctured self-importance…