Archaeologica.org

True RS, but they are not all in the forces are they?
I've known lads heading for a jail who were straightened out by the forces, but I'm not suggesting it always works.

Hear, hear!
That can't be repeated enough, imo:

Here was have a lying president who wants to keep us afraid of terrorists (I predict another attack on U.S. soil in the not so distant future..must keep us AFRAID)...so we will continue to back his little war...if we are afraid we will look the other way while more and more civil liberties fade away. I've got the stupid notion in my head that Bush has no intention of stepping down as president because that is how he is acting.

And again:

Here was have a lying president who wants to keep us afraid of terrorists (I predict another attack on U.S. soil in the not so distant future..must keep us AFRAID)...so we will continue to back his little war...if we are afraid we will look the other way while more and more civil liberties fade away. I've got the stupid notion in my head that Bush has no intention of stepping down as president because that is how he is acting.

And again:

Here was have a lying president who wants to keep us afraid of terrorists (I predict another attack on U.S. soil in the not so distant future..must keep us AFRAID)...so we will continue to back his little war...if we are afraid we will look the other way while more and more civil liberties fade away. I've got the stupid notion in my head that Bush has no intention of stepping down as president because that is how he is acting.

Banana republic.

Digit wrote:True RS, but they are not all in the forces are they?
I've known lads heading for a jail who were straightened out by the forces, but I'm not suggesting it always works.

It worked that way for my cousin, Digit. He was growing up on the streets, involved in ever escalating crimes and one day standing in the court, the judge said, either you go to the marines or prison. Your choice. He went in a 17 year old punk kid and returned 18 months later from the Corps a changed man.

I know it doesn't always work that way and I realize recruiters are under pressure to meet quotas. It one of the unfortunate side effects of an all volunteer army during a time of war that unscrupulous people will act in unscrupulous ways.

As to, Clubs comments about raping Iraqi's or Abu Ghraib, that is a much more difficult moral delimma. Yes it could be said that these perpetrators are just morally depraved recruits and possibly of the same ilk that the recruiters are overlooking in their rush to meet quota. But there is a certain pyschology to war that tends to muddle clear thinking. When you see the immorality of human beings splattered over a landscape, it is difficult to draw a line between moral and immoral; just and unjust; truth and lies. I am not justifying or making excuses for the perpetrators. Just making the comment that it very complex.

I'd rather be invaded by the US forces than some of the others Monk.
I think it right to point out that for every 'crime' committed b y US forces the Iragis are much much worse.
Currently a Moslem's worst enemy is likely to be another Moslem not a Yank!

Forum Monk wrote:
He was growing up on the streets, involved in ever escalating crimes and one day standing in the court, the judge said, either you go to the marines or prison. Your choice. He went in a 17 year old punk kid and returned 18 months later from the Corps a changed man.

So the Marines are a therapy/punishment organisation for 'people like that'?
Strange. I was always under the impression the Marines were there for us, law-abiding citizens (who pay their wages and equipment). To protect us from criminals and dimwits (from other countries).

So you reject a useful spin off?
Any young man or woman with a bad record who volunteers to fight for their country is on an upward path. That's good.

Digit wrote:So you reject a useful spin off?

If that spin-off is counterproductive to the primary goal: increased protection, then it is NOT useful. Quite the contrary. It is dangerous.

We'll pay the price.

Agreed. IF.

What does any of this have to do with THIS ?
(The original post)

" Hi there. I was wondering if anyone can tell me a little more about what I read on here; that is, that the Bering Strait "land bridge" theory of how the first Americans got here isn't sounding so good... (cant remember where I read it). The peopling of the Americas is a fascinating topic.

What are some of the other theories? Boats, I suppose? Ice? "

Did we ever give this poor guy a list of the possibilities?

Absolutely nothing! We are just a group of happy wanderers!

kbs2244 wrote:What does any of this have to do with THIS ?
(The original post)

" Hi there. I was wondering if anyone can tell me a little more about what I read on here; that is, that the Bering Strait "land bridge" theory of how the first Americans got here isn't sounding so good... (cant remember where I read it). The peopling of the Americas is a fascinating topic.

What are some of the other theories? Boats, I suppose? Ice? "

Did we ever give this poor guy a list of the possibilities?

Incomplete of course. We should have added teleportation.

kbs2244 wrote: Did we ever give this poor guy a list of the possibilities?

Not sure. Isn't this the thread where R/S introduced his "Solutrean Walkabout" hypothesis. If so we discussed ice and water routes. Including directly across the ocean and skipping along the ice shelf staying close to potential camp grounds.

Ah, the wonders of civilization!
{To borrow from another threads argument)
Would we have the internet without it?
Enough of this.
I an going out by my pool with a civilized drink and a civilized nap.

kbs2244 wrote: I an going out by my pool with a civilized drink and a civilized nap.

The real definition of civilized is when you stop in the middle of an intense battle to have your afternoon tea.

Strange. I was always under the impression the Marines were there for us, law-abiding citizens (who pay their wages and equipment). To protect us from criminals and dimwits (from other countries).

I recall when Clinton announced his Don't Ask - Don't Tell policy for gays in the military that one conservative pundit noted that in his view parents of future recruits would be very reluctant to send their boys into an army which allowed homosexuals to serve.

Are those parents more or less likely to want their children in an army in which the guy sharing his foxhole could well be some drugged-up gangbanger from the south side of Chicago?

The All-Volunteer Military apparently works great as long as we do nothing with it aside from an occasional two-day "trophy war." A serious military committment comes along and the whole thing begins to break down.

It is a major problem.