The people who are asking why are we worried about insulting someone are the same people who were shocked when they flew planes into buildings. If your children were in the military and had to walk down the streets of afganistan you would'nt be so quick to insult somone from ten thousand miles away. Let these pilots get out of there planes and walk the streets of afganistan with this patch on.

The crusaders also slaughtered Jews. Bad symbol.

They also sacked Constantinople, modern day Istanbul for the geographically challenged, which was christian. Not saying I support one name over another, but the only religion they didn't "attack" would probably be the Mormons lol.

And the hatred and government sanctioned murder goes on. I hope some day some posters can let go of their hatred and bigotry to encounter the vein of life. Become a father and see how quickly life becomes more important than death.

Forrest Gump: "Stupid is as stupid does".

Remember when Spain joined us in our illegal invasion of Iraq to stupidly find WMD that werent even there?
Spanish troops were sent to Najaf the center of the shia religion in Iraq (the third most holy site in the world to Shia muslims) wearing the Cross Of St James aka "Moorkiller".

A row broke out in Spain yesterday after the country sent its first troops to patrol Iraq wearing on their shoulders the Cross of St James of Compostela - popularly known in Spain as "the Moor Killer".

Patches bearing the cross, the symbol of a saint who allegedly guided the medieval Christian re conquista of Spain from the Muslims, are to be worn by a 2,000-strong Spanish brigade in central Iraq who will patrol the sacred Shia city of Najaf.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/jul/25/spain.gilestremlett1

The only thing I can say is People Get A Life !!!

It is nothing more than a name and a Combat Patch . Look at my picture !! That Black Lion is the patch of the 28th Inf. Reg. Yes I am a Black Lion and very proud of it . The unit name and patch is something special to a combat vet . Let the U.S.M.C. keep it and wear it Proudly .

bob

Timmy the Toolman,

Why would you assume that just because someone is black that they are an american?

I've always found the assumption that anyone that is black is an African American funny, what if they are Jamaican Belgian?

Just refer to them a person. Or if you need to be more descriptive, a black person. I see no problem with calling a caucasian a white person.

I have this funny theory that the people who see no problem with this would be completely incensed if the positions were turned and Islamic symbol on jets flying over our country - say at a football game flyover. How about an Islamic prayer before a football game? I never ceased to be amazed by how people don't see what the net results of a double standard are.

"They’re being told, 'the enemy gets to have Allah in their fight. We need to get our Lord and Savior back into our fight'," said Weinstein."

I wouldn't be surprised if that isn't an almost verbatum quote of a statement that has been made internally within the squadron. I find that both pathetic and ironic. (Ironic because one of the main tennants of Christianity is the "singular" existence of the holy trinity - i.e.: Christians don't actually believe that Allah exists).

I often find myself believing that we'd all be so much better if religion were required to be personal and private. We'd have a lot less pointless wars over disagreements about whose supernatural being really exists.

Werewolves sounds 1000% more badass than 'Crusaders.'

In fact, I would bet a werewolf would stuff a Bible right down a crusaders throat just before he slapped him, made him cry to the cross, and then ripped his head off.

You might say, 'But Werewolves are fictitious!' Yeah? What is half of a 2000 year old book? Or do you really think that women were created from ribs?

As crazy and evil as they are, there are some simple truths to why these Muslim fundamentalists want to kill Americans.

The 60 years of occupation by American armed forces and the intelligence community, which has killed countless numbers of people, a good number of the innocent civilians. Which is growing EVERY day, the occupation and killing that is.

Along with that occupation and attempt to dominate the region for financial gains, there is the attempt to "Westernize" a region that doesn't want it. And the hypocrisy of trying to bring democracy there, when our government has fought so hard to destroy democracy globally.

And finally the American government support for Israel. Regardless of the argument if they belong there or not, the Israeli government is as big of a terrorist organization as the United States government in that region.

The American people are clouded and conditioned by the propaganda machine of our federal government. We're only taught half truths through this backwards, archaic school system. And they use commercials and slogans to condition us, the "bewildered herd" to support a domestic and foreign policy the people have no say or control over.

The Muslim fundamentalist's have already labeled the soldiers over there "Crusaders", this will only put fuel on the fire, and threaten the lives of American citizens serving over there, while the decision makers just roll along with their lives.

Nope. "Crusaders" and all that the name conjures up is off the wall in 2012 and naive to think otherwise.

GW Bush's reference to "The Crusades" in a speech after 9/11 was cringeworthy.

How utterly counter-productive. Are we possibly forgetting that the Jihadists are STILL, TO THIS DAY using Bush's 9/11 "Crusade" speech as a recruiting tool? And it works, too. Just what we need, more illiterate 15 year old suicide bombers full of religious fervor who don't even need the mullahs to tell them that it's all about religion, because we ourselves have told them it is. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Would like to remind the PC types that the only reason the Crusaders were in the Middle East was because they were sent there to protect the Christians on their "Haj" to Jerusalem. If the Muslims hadn't been killing them, there wouldn't have been a need to send troops.

So it was not presented to the people of Europe as a religious mandate to free Jerusalem from the savage Muslims - officially sanctioned by the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church? (Which was the only official Christian church at the time).

When I think about the amount of blood spilled over a patch of arid dirt (Jerusalem), it disgusts me...

They are uneducated and dirty dogs, and will bite anyone they think is a threat to their backward thinking. Wearing a red cape will not make them more aggressive. Their blind ignorance and hatred won't even notice.

The irony...

I'm getting damn tired of the US and the military having to kowtow to a bunch of radicals and the ignorant populations of backwards countries in the middle east.

OK ... leaving that aside. How about it's a blatantly Christian reference ... and not everyone in the unit is Christian? Or is that now to be a requirement to serving in the military? Should non-Christians be required to fight under symbolism that does not reflect their beliefs? It seems to me that is a violation of the Establishment Clause.

Just decided to play the "devil's advocate" -- pun intended.

It's just a name- these people need to chill out and mind their own

Felip:

They also sacked Constantinople, modern day Istanbul for the geographically challenged, which was christian. Not saying I support one name over another, but the only religion they didn't "attack" would probably be the Mormons lol.

Haha! One of the best comments in this thread...

Don't Be A Moron:

So it was not presented to the people of Europe as a religious mandate to free Jerusalem from the savage Muslims - officially sanctioned by the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church? (Which was the only official Christian church at the time).

I'm not sure how that is a counter to whoever it was you were quoting.

When I think about the amount of blood spilled over a patch of arid dirt (Jerusalem), it disgusts me...

Yeah, it is. But then again, people did dumb crap and still do dumb crap that often times has nothing to do with religion. People, in general, are just stupid and quick to kill.

MSG:

if you think they are going to be any more upset at us because of this symbol, than you haven't been paying attention. They don't need any more "excuses".

Hearts & Minds, sarge. Hearts and minds.

Drewbuddee:

Let these pilots get out of there planes and walk the streets of afganistan with this patch on.

This is probably the most important thing said in this thread. Pilots have the luxury of flying overhead, the ground troops are not quite as fortunate.

To modify a recent bit from Jon Stewart's Daily Show: "Hey, that ground soldier fights there..."

I think this is sorta like throwing gasoline on a fire to try to put it out, besides if you study your history, the "Great Crusades" were somewhat of a travisty, the "Crusaders"pretty much got their butts kicked by the Muslims and were sent back to Europe with their tails tucked, if that were not so, the "Holy lands" would be under Christian control now. I'm not taking up for the Muslims either, both religions have committed unthinkable atrocities upon each other and non religious people, they both need to "Tend to thine own affairs" and leave each other and the non religious people alone. Some of these people that say Christianity is under attack should look at the deeds of Christians, The great inquisitions, the Christian Temperance movemeny that caused prohibition, and the current attack by the GOP on womens health and reproductive rights, just to name a few attacks by Christian on peoples rights, and the list of Muslim attacks on individual rights is unending, Chritianity is not under attack, people are just now starting to defend themselve from religious attacks on our personal freedoms and I hope they continue to do so.

CC you truly need to read a history book. It was back and forth. Noone kicked anyones asses lol they kicked each others asses over a rock.

This statement alone sums up accepted ignorance

"They’re being told, 'the enemy gets to have Allah in their fight. We need to get our Lord and Savior back into our fight'," said Weinstein."

Allah is the name Muslims refer to GOD by. The same GOD that Christians worship.

JoeB-460595 Screw the Muslims!!! Since when are the rights of Americans determined be Islamic Militant Muslims? The answer: Since O'Bama became President and once a Muslim always a Muslim. That's just part of the Muslim Terrorist Manual (Bible) as created by the Dog Mohammad..

Maybe you should check the U.S. history in that region of the world. President Obama is hardly the first U.S. President to have relations in the Middle East, or Southwest Asia. Something else you and your supporters need to think about:

1. This has NOTHING to do with American rights, considering that the U.S. didn't even exist during the crusades.

2. President Obama is NOT Muslim.

3. Learn to think for yourself.

I completely understand the desire to recognize the heritage of the squadron and go back to using it's old nickname and symbology, particularly on a major anniversary of it's founding. However, in this day and age, the squadron commanding officer should have realized the political implications of returning to the use of a nickname and particularly the squadron emblem with obvious religious meaning. He should have recognized that there would be a major backlash and probably found another way of respecting the heritage of the squadron without reverting to these symbols. I do not think that the nickname "Crusaders" is the major part of this problem. While this was originally a term with strong religious meaning, it has become a far more secular term used to describe any person or group of people who fervently support a particular initiative or end goal. For example, referring to someone as a crusader for women's rights does not denote and religious content or motivation. The bigger problem is with the blatant religious symbology of the cross on the squadron emblem. This has not transitioned to a secular meaning as the nickname has and is still a very religious symbol that should not be used. I think that the return to the name "Crusaders" should be allowed to stand but a new squadron emblem developed to eliminate the religious symbology of the cross. This compromise would let all parties involved claim some degree of victory in the dispute and allow everyone to move on.

MSG(retired) I'm getting damn tired of the US and the military having to kowtow to a bunch of radicals and the ignorant populations of backwards countries in the middle east. We don't need their permission to name a military unit, and if you think they are going to be any more upset at us because of this symbol, than you haven't been paying attention. They don't need any more "excuses". They are uneducated and dirty dogs, and will bite anyone they think is a threat to their backward thinking. Wearing a red cape will not make them more aggressive. Their blind ignorance and hatred won't even notice.

You really need to check you own level of ignorance.

What exactly are you basing that stupid comment on? Some pieced together footage showing the absolute worst from a region? Consider this:

Some of the worlds best scientists, and doctors are from that region.

The region is the wealthiest on the planet

After the takeover of the U.S. embassy in 1979, clothweavers reassembled shredded C.I.A. documents. (just thought I'd throw that in there to open your eyes a little)

They are uneducated and dirty dogs, and will bite anyone they think is a threat to their backward thinking.

Really? So if someone threatened the U.S. what exactly would Americans do fight or flee?

JS in SD

In some ways I agree with your post . But in other ways, you and I are at opposite ends of the spectrum.

To many brave men have given their lives and blood while wearing that patch . Wearing it on your uniform pays respect to those who went on before you . If I were a Marine , you would have to kill me to get me to take it off. The ties to ones unit run very very deep . Would you ask a Screaming Eagle to take his off or the 3rd Heard to remove theirs or even the 1st Air Cav . to remove theirs ???? I think not.

bob

We have bent over backwards to appease these muslim nations when are we going to get it?They are going to continue to drain money from the United States as long as they can play their game not to mention the blood sweat and tears from our dedicated soldiers and their familys.If they really wanted and needed help they would not care what kind of clothes that help came in.Wise up America cause our government has become insensitive to the American people and the history of this great nation.We are falling from within.

Hey David 183, what history book did you read? Apparently the ones public schools supplied you, if you just read those you would think the crusades was an overwhelming success and the Native Americans were a bunch of ignorant savages and God literally told the whites to murder them and steal their lands, which is another example of religious atrocities.

We have bent over backwards to appease these muslim nations....

Yeah, bullet appeasements in exchange for natural gas, oil, and pipelines.

...when are we going to get it?

Probably when we get out of their country and stop killing their sons and daughters might be a good guess.

Christian Soldiers marching off to war.... God Bless

No CC i can do a quick google search. If you think Christians crusaded on muslims and muslims didn't crusade on christians your just nuts period. Spains still dealing with the Muslim invaders.

As an agnostic that firmly believes in separation of Church and State... let 'em have the name. Did the entire team agree on it? Was it a unanimous decision by Christian men that empowers them to keep fighting and raises their morale? Then I say let them have it. That's what our enemy is doing, emboldening themselves using their faith, and if they're true believers, well, let them have it. Our boys and girls out there in the middle of combat NEED a morale boost, since our politicians won't call them back home.

For all those screaming and whining about the name... well, you grab a gun and march off into war. They're fighting so you don't have to. Show some frecking respect to the men and women that are over there dying because you don't have to. Besides, there is no "PR" in the war zone, there's a code of ethics. Kill only combatants, do not take the lives of the innocent, fight with honor, integrity, and never leave a soldier behind. I have yet to hear of them not upholding this code, so shoot, give 'em a treat...

@ JS in SD-

I agree with you that the term 'crusaders' is no longer a word with a single religious meaning. But, I don't agree that the USMC should be allowed to keep the name. Everything in context. That name paired with that symbol placed on the uniforms and vehicles of a fighting force sent to that place...can only be interpreted in one way. It's fuel on a fire.

One of the more stupid causes perpetrated by ignorant left wing liberals! How dare we in this country even think about the possibility that we might upset a Muslim somewhere by using the name Crusader! Funny how many Muslims in the Arab world could care less about upsetting Christians in their neck of the woods or here for that matter. VMFA-122 and the Marine Corps have a long and honorable tradition associated with their squadron name. Let it stay as it is. The name Crusader also refers to one of the most famous aircraft in Navy and Marine Corps history. The Chance-Vought F-8 Crusader fighter jet, the Navy and Marine's first supersonic carrier jet fighter that gained fame in the skies over Vietnam. What's next, are the libs going to insist that we go back and change the name of that aircraft in the history books just to further appease potentially unhappy Muslims? Would not surprise me in the least. What a joke!

I want to change my name to confused. OK, I understand that we are now a peace keeping force but ....

we just scrape and bow? Don't hurt their feelings? 9-11. anyone remember that? I'm thinking that fear has always been a great motivator in adversarial situations. Marines handing out candy bars and gameboys to kids is great . Standing tall and hard is neccesary to win a fight. They came here. They killed innocents. Am I the only one confused?

This compromise would let all parties involved claim some degree of victory in the dispute and allow everyone to move on.

JD -- not a bad notion. But we all know that too many people have become so extremist in their political and religious views that "compromise" is now a dirty word. If you don't believe me, just look at all the vitriol JUST in this thread! People don't think for themselves, they just parrot someone else's thoughts.

I find it very interesting that almost EVERY post up here is regarding how the Muslims would view this -- but none seem to look at the greater Constitutional issue of the Establishment Clause!

Kaci, words obviously spoken by someone who knows little or nothing about the military or the U.S. Marine Corps in particular! Grow up!

If the Marines are a embarrassment then I am proud to be embarrassed....Semper Fi

I-belive, as a retired FMF Hospital Corpsman, I only have one word in response. Amen!

I hear it has been determined that the Marine Corps cannot use the term "Werewolves" as it violates the civil rights of lycanthropists worldwide. They'll have to find another name. Hey, that sounds about as stupid as the issue using the name Crusader! Enough said.

Beth - ". . . greater issue of the Establishment Clause!"

Do you mean the first amendment?"

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Is this what you refer to as the "Establishment Clause?" If it is, then I am confused.

I served in a unit in the "Golden Dragons", 1 Battalion, 14th Infantry in Vietnam which used a dragon as a totem. It's LRP unit was called "the Dragon's Teeth". Dragons are referenced throughout WORLD history often as mythological, but in some places today as a part of a religion. Should the totem of the 1/14 be changed?

There are some units that reference a devil, such as (United_States) "the Red Devils" and Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 232 aka Red Devils. By your logic, these units should also change these totems also?

I think not.

Re-read and examine American history circa the Revolutionary War. Dig in because the facts are there to explain why the Constitutional Convention wrote and added that part of the first amendment. In its simplest terms, the framers of our nation did not want anyone to create a "Church of the United States of America" similar to the Church of England. It is clear in historical records of the time that meant freedom OF religion not freedom from religion. And when I say dig in, I mean really dig in, dig deep with focus, because these documents are hard to find, as many have been purchased and destroyed so as to leave historians very little evidence to refute "Separationists".

Wow...this article really brought out the bigoted morons.

Such a stupid idea to return to using the "Crusaders" name & that insignia. Consider two high school football teams meeting, one team demographically black, one team demographically white, and the black team's cheerleaders coming up with a chant "These white wimps are lesbian losers!" We are a melting pot country, with servicemen & servicewomen of a broad range of religious perspectives -- Native American, Jewish, Muslim, Christian, etc., & atheist. Regardless on which side one takes, everyone should recognize that the Crusades were a terrible tarnish on human history. Sometimes celebrating a group's past tradition should be tempered by recognizing flaws in the past. The group should find a new banner & new name to rally under. The guy who reinstituted this name & banner should be educated or even demoted.

Beth - ". . . greater issue of the Establishment Clause!"

Do you mean the first amendment?"

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Is this what you refer to as the "Establishment Clause?" If it is, then I am confused.

Frankly, if you don't KNOW what the "Establishment Clause" is, then you really should be the one "digging deeper". I also never mentioned "separation" -- you did.

If you want to "dig deeper" -- start with one of the major writers of the Constitution ... James Madison.

A few of my favorites.

And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in showing that religion and Government will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.

Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise, every expanded prospect.

And, since YOU brought up "separation" ...

The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe with blood for centuries.

So, I'm sorry, I would rather "listen" to what Madison had to say on the subject than you .. especially considering he was there at the time!

Bah. Werewolves STILL sounds better than Crusaders. Werewolves > Crusaders.

Check Knights Templar Wikipedia

John 1132824, maybe you should read your history a little more. The two orders that made up the "Knights Templar" were formed explicitly for the protection of pilgrims in the 'Outremer', or lands outside of Jerusalem. Originally called “Poor Knights ofChrist and the Temple of Solomon”, they later became a wealthy and powerful organization. The Order was finally dissolved because the French King Philip IV owed so much money to them he wanted a way of getting out of his debt and collaborated, under threat of military intervention against the Papacy, with Pope Clement to disband the order, arresting, torturing and killing as many as could be found.

The “Crusaders” were not “genocidal maniacs” as you say; they were just soldiers, and while yes they were brutal and committed atrocities of war, it was no more so than any other army of the time, which included slaughter, rape, pillage and even cannibalism. The “Crusades” were nothing more than a means to liberate territory captured during the tyrannical invasions of North Africa, Spain, Portugal and Southern France, as well as the Illyrian Peninsula, Greece, Macedon, and other now central European countries (Bulgaria, Croatia to
name a few) by Muslim armies; who's atrocities such as burning, impaling, crucifying, massacring (prisoners and civilians) and destroying whole towns whilst “spreading” their “faith” through Jihad are well documented. In fact their Jihad conquered nearly 60% of what was Christian territory and annihilated up to 50% of the then Christian population, of the world. Who are the genocidal maniacs??

Sorry John, you are totally all mixed up...

Thanks Brit...you've got it right..

Brit got it right. Why is it forgotten that these lands including Turkey were Christian long before The Muslim "prophet" was even born? As for the Crusaders colonizing Muslim land, that is backwards. The Crusaders were defending Christian and Jewish land that was under attack from the Muslims. The muslim armies advanced almost to Notre Dame before the Christian countries woke up and defended themselves. The Muslim faith has always ben spread by brute force and a convert or die mentality.

I'm sure all the Muslims in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere are reading your comments with interest - those that can read. The point, to me, is that someone on the ground somewhere is going to have to deal with the ramifications of this decision. It is another example of American men and women, willing to defend their country, being entrusted to people who make stupid decisions. Even those who just want to go on with their day-to-day existence and bother no one are going to be insulted and inflamed by this.

I'd like to pin this symbol on you tough talkers and drop you into some of these regions.

In one of the first Crusades, when the poor, backwards western Europeans got to exotic Christian Byzantium, they sacked the villages and slaughtered the people because they looked and acted different. And don't forget the crusade of the innocent, where children were led by a raving mad monk. The Crusades came out of the apocalyptic fervor that swelled around the year 1000 and continued well past that date as religious zealots thought Christ would return. This was reinvigorated by the Black Plague a few centuries later.

As far as eastern Christians go, many of them at this time were Nestorian Christians and considered heretics by western Rome. And the Christians who stopped the Moors in France were Arian Franks, also considered heretics by Rome. Neither Nestorians nor Arians would be considered acceptable Christians by mainstream Christians because neither group accepted the Trinity. Muslims, by the way, were also viewed as heretics more than a different faith during the early Middle Ages.

Werewolves was the name of the Nazi commando unit that worked behind Allied lines after D-Day.

So which name is more offensive?

Cut the bullsh*t. Some of you in this mini-thread have it right, a few others not-so-much.

Once Mohammed died around 660 A.D., within a generation the Muslims were - by brutal force - attacking surrounding lands and killing those who did not convert. The Muslims (called the Mohammedans) ransacked all of northern Africa (which was Christian), as well into much of Asia Minor. After 400 years (yes, FOUR CENTURIES) of Muslim bullying and killing all across the crossroads of the Old World, and even advancing well into southern Europe as far as Italy, the Christians finally undertook the first Crusade, c. 1100 A.D.

The reality is, war and conflict brings out bad in many, and even the Catholic Church became aware of non-Christians killing and stealing from others during the Crusades (e.g. killing Jews) under the guise of the mission of "the Crusades." Don't twist history or the context of the real effort and those who seedily take advantage of a time or process for other agenda. Plus, only the first Crusade proved successful by Christian Europe. All the others pretty much failed, and that's why the misery called Islam remains in so much of Africa and western parts of Asia.

In a quick nutshell, it was the Muslims that are the direct cause of that "horrible time" known as the Crusades.

Apparently it's better to blame the bullied for their reaction rather than call-out the bully in the first place.

right on gimmeabreakoradrink!

Actually, there was not that much difference between the Crusaders and the Mohammedans, when it came to brutality and indifference to human life. You may remember that it was during the First Crusade in 997 that the Crusaders coined the term "kill them all, let God sort them out."

And no, the crusades were not about relief for Christians under attack by Muslims, because the Church couldn't care less about non-European, usually not-white people who actually practiced a form of Christianity that was considered to be heresy by the Catholic Church.. They were about taking control of the "Holy Land," which the Catholic Church claimed for itself regardless of who lived there; it was about looting the riches for both personal and ecclesiastic profit; and during the later crusades, it was about getting the knights -- most of whom were younger sons who did not stand to inherit, and who were trained for battle and not much more -- out of Europe, where they were causing tremendous problems; also a reason for the invention of the Code of Chivalry with its attached tournaments and war games: gave them something to do, so they'd stop raiding farms and villages for run and profit.

That should read FUN AND PROFIT.

So funny how you all mention the Crusaders as "liberators." I don't think Muslims feel the same way.

THere is a fine line between liberator and terrorist.

roc, I use to work on the F-8 electrical systems one tough jet.

I started out on F-4 and F-105. I worked transit alert and took care of anything that came in that didnt belong to base. Had a few RF-8's come through. Nice Bird! Couple of the very last ones with the larger engine and extra stabalizers came through.

Plane Captained the F4. Also worked on the A4,A7 A6, kinda miss those days.

Same here, liked those A-4's. F-4 if it aint leaking its empty one Awesome work horse!

Love the smell of hydraulic leaks in the morning.

The feel of jet blast in your face!

The SS flag was similar but not the same as the Germans. It was just as similar to Camaro and Chevelles SS. What font do you want the SNIPER SQUADRON to use?

Oh NOOOO! Mr. Bill, My 67 Chevelle has a Nazi Symbol. Wonder then what 3 9 6 could mean. Oh well Ill still drive it and CRANK Rush 2112!

Dude, I had a 67 . White with Black stripes. Not a true SS but I loved her like my first born.

We've taken care of every thing. The words you hear the songs you sing. The pictures that give pleasure to your eyes. One for all and all for one. Work together common sons. Never need to wonder how or why.

Bought mine 1978 while stationed in the desert in Cal. Black over red. Had her before my wife and still have her! Not the wife.

Awesome. I've had 3 . an 2 wives

Gotta say I think I love RUSH as much as I love Chevelles. And no woman can make me get rid of RUSH it is burned into my brain.

One chevelle for me! Can always get another wife!

I got a wife for you, I'll take the Chevelle. ah, ah

Sorry no deal, had a 70 big block also, sold that when wife went to school. See where that trade got me.

I'll see you my 69 SS Camaro with 4 barrel Holly

302?

350

Sorry

They don't make them like they use too

The irony: Everything that you just typed is the same way SOME in that region feel about Americans.

Sorry Joe but we don't knell on rugs

I don't knell on anything, but I do kneel for my prayers. (just have a mac instead of an AK)

White Devils might be challenged as being racist. But Infidels is a great name for any group. A school team. A military unit. A band. I love it... Even a bar.....

Infidel's Karaoke Klub. Ladies night, Wednesdays. Happy Hour 4:00 to 6:00 nitely.

I'm alright with White Devils on two conditions:

1) They must paint Ace Ventura's face (with the devil styled hair) on the vertical stabilizers of the F-18s

2) They must use the proper Wachutu terminology - "Equinsu Ocha" (sp?)

Just stand in front of a camera and tell the whole lot of them to "bring it on"

Seeing as how that worked so well by the last president you voted for.

And how brave YOU are ! All naked sitting behind your computer, eating ding dongs and drinking mountain dew.

Redneck is as redneck does.

bumblebee tuna Darthczop

maybe they could paint Shikaka on the nose of the aircraft and their motto could be:

"Pride is an abomination. One must forego the self to obtain total spiritual creaminess, and avoid the chewy chunks of degradation."

Rational, so how are those ding dongs?

Did you hear about the high school in Utah that wanted to call themselves "Cougars" just like BYU, but it was voted down by the school board? The reason being, is that it was thought it might offend older women, since cougar is a slang term for an older woman who likes to date younger men. Now that's polical correctness carried to a whole new level!

Bunny with scope cross hairs over it? Wait PETA wouldnt like it.

I think you're all missing the important part of the story. So the name pokes the Muslims in the eye - not the smartest thing to do but MEH.

Here's the important subtle bit you are all missing: the more insidious part of this story is the evangelization of our troops. Brainwashing individuals to go to war in the name of "our god" is the problem here. It makes it way too easy to start the next war or continue the current one indefinitely if you make it about "my god is good and yours is bad so I'm gonna kill you". That is how genocides get going.

Read up on the army's Comprehensive Soldier Fitness (CSF) test. Here's an excerpt of a story about it:

The U.S. Army is administering a mental health and fitness test to soldiers that civil rights groups say unconstitutionally requires active-duty soldiers to believe in "God" or a "higher power" in order to rank as "spiritually fit" enough to serve in the military.

If you fail the "spiritual component" of the test, you're not exactly disqualified from the army, they just make you take "remedial" instruction.

Apparently the army has figured out that this works so well for the people trying to kill us, that they have decided to employ the same tactic to justify our wars. If that doesn't scare the s#!t out of you, you are either christian or braindead.

"...that there was nothing left for us to do but to take them all, and to educate the Filipinos, and uplift and civilize and Christianize them, and by God’s grace do the very best we could by them, as our fellow-men for whom Christ also died." - President McKinley speaking about the Phillipine-American war.

Even thought there's supposed to be a separation of church and state, it's not practiced by our leadership.

This was a 7-14 year war, depending on the historian, that most Americans know nothing about because we're only taught His-Story instead of history.

Read up on the army's Comprehensive Soldier Fitness (CSF) test. Here's an excerpt of a story about it:

JM -- could you please post the link to that? I'd like to read the entire story. Thanks.

Beth,

There are a bunch of places that talk about this if you type "Comprehensive Soldier Fitness" into google. The top two are the army sites which has precious little information. The link below is a bit (maybe a lot) left leaning, but give the article a read and make up your own mind.

truth-out.org/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=268:army’s-“spiritual-fitness”-test-comes-under-fire

roc, wasn't it a bunny that the Knights searching for the Holy Grail ran into?

Thanks JM. Quite long, but quite interesting as well!

wlee, not afraid of a little bunny are you?

You saw what happened to those knights.

Superskunk - There is no such thing as separation of church in the Constitution. Rather than repeat myself, I refer you to my earlier posted reply to Beth. I mean really, find out what is actually in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the other amendaments before you use a term that is meaningless. BTW, no, I am not one of those.

Equal Rights and Equal Responsibility

I don't recall referencing the Constitution, Bill of Rights, or the other amendments, did I miss something Wretched ?

I was just pointing out a moment in American history where a President used god and religion as a reason for war.

I'm all for personal responsibility and civic virtue !

Even thought there's supposed to be a separation of church and state, it's not practiced by our leadership.

Then what is your basis for this statement? Sure looks like an implied reference to how SCOTUS has interpreted the First Amendment. An interpretation by the way that was not applied until 1947. Long after McKinley was dead. And I see no mention of God or religion in McKinley's letter to Congresss asking for a declaration of war and no mention of either in the declaration that was passed.

No Matter what they used some whining crybaby would bitch!

Rush fan look up a couple of posts.

@azrancher, very well said! Having served in the "Spearhead" division (I sure hope it doesn't offend the spartans...), and "Old Ironsides" (I'm sure someone is offended...), I find it absolutely ridiculous that this political correctness has reached the point where, as Kid Rock put it, "got me feeling guilty for being white!". Here's a thought to all of you pathetic liberals, how about shutting up for a while, and let the grown ups take care of things? I've found that liberals in general, are much like eunics. They can watch it, and even criticize it, but they can't do it! Silly libs, paychecks are for workers...

Careful, you'll be labeled a "birther" here on MSNBC and Newsvine

what the hell does that have to do with this article?

LOL

Just like a true republican. You have been proven wrong over and over again and still repeat the same irrational behavior.

The Einstein theory of insanity in its fruition !

ROFL !!!!!!!!!

Nothing. Leroy just forgot to put on his teatarded tinfoil hat this morning.

Oh, Good Lord....

We should ground the CRUSADERS and replace them with 40,000 Hells Angels. See how they like them apples.

Ahem excuse me but it has been PROVEN that when you offend the people we have been fighting they use it to recruit more and more and more soldiers against us.

Make it a holy war and they don't even need to try and persuade young people to strap bombs to themselves. This vicious cycle is only gonna be accelerated by this blowhard nonsense.

Just let it go, change the name, and spare untold number of additional American or ally soldier lives....

If you were rational you would be able to understand this.

@ Rational, quantify how it has been proven? Bet you can't. And actually, when we offended th Iraqi's in Baghdad with loudspeakers broadcasting their flaws in their manhood, they actually walked right into machine gun fire. If you are fighting against someone, by the very nature of it, offending them is the least concern. Hell, you are trying to KILL them! If you were someone with any experience, you would be able to understand this. Because unlike your moniker, war is not rational.

D McMillen, here's how I would quantify it.

The American government spends $700 BILLION of OUR hard earned dollars on the most advanced, well armed military machine the world has ever seen.

Compared to say China, who has quite the impressive military the American government wants no part of, yet they spend nowhere NEAR that amount ! 5 years ago America spent $500 billion on military, China spent around $60 billion. Last year America spent $700 billion on military, and China spent about $115 billion.

So with that being said, showing you the difference between the top two spenders on military globally, and acknowledging that America is the most well armed and advanced military on the planet, why can't the American military defeat an enemy using rocks and sticks ? (I'm fully aware that they don't use rocks and sticks, just using sarcasm to make a point, that the weapons they use are old and outdated at best)

Superskunk, giving you the benefit of a doubt here, it's called politics. If you remember WW2 we dropped a couple nukes on Japan because we didn't care about world opinion, times have changed.

First of all wlee, I don't quite understand your point.

Secondly, stop using "we", the American public has no say in our federal governments decisions, so "we" were never included on the decision of nuking anyone.

"we" are conditioned to believe that what our federal government does with the military is always right, using meaningless slogans like "Support Our Troops" and "The War on Terror" to name a few.

"we" were staunchly against American involvement in WW1, so much so that Woodrow Wilson ran for President on the platform of keeping America out of it. 6 months after he's elected the federal government created the Creel Committee to use propaganda and lies to convince the general public that American involvement in the war was necessary. And shortly after that America was at war.

The domestic and foreign policies of this country keep churning along in the same general direction, regardless of which party is in office, and the general public has NO influence.

Superskunk, I believe the people did support the ending of the war any way possible, and if you can't figure out my point you're beyond help

Your argument of "it's called politics" in response to my post is what I didn't understand. It was very vague.

Which war are you referring to ?

Superskunk, I was referring to the Afghan war. During WW2 we weren't to worried about killing civilians , some politics were still involved but not like today, such as no raids during the night on peoples homes, shoot only when shot at, no chasing across border

That's partially true.

The American public did want the war to end during WW2. The public wasn't told that they were nuking non military sites. The public wasn't told that over 100,000 Japanese civilians would be killed.

I don't think the public would have supported using the nuclear weapon if they knew those facts. Not that it would have mattered since the government does what they want, even if it's against the general public's wishes.

And after dropping the bombs, and the end of the war when they went in to investigate, it was discovered that the Japanese were only a few months away from surrender before the bombs were dropped.

Politics shouldn't be involved in Afghanistan, because American troops shouldn't be there. If there's no troops there, then no need for politics !

Superskunk, the Military didn't know that at the time and estimated a lot more would be killed if an invasion was necessary. We wouldn't be in Afghanistan if not for 9/11. I'm all for pulling out now. As far as our Govt. goes Dem or Repub. all the same only out for the party

I understand your point, I just always assumed that America was advanced socially and intellectually enough by now to not accept the slaughtering of over one hundred thousand innocent people as an acceptable excuse to "save lives".

I'll be here all day if we start debating Afghanistan / 9/11 issue.

The rest I'm with you on my friend.

Super, that didn't quite match the posting. He said that it is a proven fact that if you insult the enemy, their recruiting #'s go up. I was saying that I wanted to see how he would prove that using a quantifiable measure. How that got wrapped up into military expenditures and combat effectiveness in Afghanistan, I don't know. As to the effectiveness, I would take a look at the Soviet Unions little "adventure" in the same area during the 70's and early 80's. They didn't fare too well either. Hard to beat an entrenched enemy with support of a good amount of the population, especially in that terrain. I do agree that Afghanistan is an exercise in futility now. Sooner we get out of that mess, the better.

>>Just let it go, change the name, and spare untold number of additional American or ally soldier lives....<<

So - You're saying that if we are nice to the islamists who want to kill us, that they will be nice to us in return??? AHAHAHAhahahahahahah - ohhh, that's rich . . . . They view our "kindness" as weakness. They really do!!

D McMilli,

I got what you were saying in your post, I was using the endless number of "insurgents" as the measuring stick for the provocation and the offense taken by these uneducated easily manipulated poor people, which they use to help recruit the next generation. That's how long our elected officials have had the people of this nation enslaved by continual warfare. Think about a generation growing up with military occupation here in America.

I know I took a round about way, but you wanted it quantified, right ? (jk)

I was going to bring up the Soviet "adventure", but is was our tax dollars that paid for the weapons and the training of the "rebels" of that time. Later these same "rebels" were fine gentlemen like Jallaludin Haqqani and Osama Bin Laden, you lay down with dogs, you get fleas. And our Congress that approved billions to finance these "rebels", couldn't give a few million to help re-build the country.

That leaves prime territory for crazy people like the fine gents mentioned above to start their training camps, recruiting poor, homeless kids.

Ok, I see what you are getting at, and I agree, we create our own enemies, Saddam, Bin Laden, etc. I am all for getting all our troops the hell out of that region. As far as I can tell from the latest news reports, Iraq is still the cesspool it was when I was there back in 2003. Still trying to figure out what we accomplished there, and it did leave me with a almost instinctual dislike of Arabs, but we never learn from history. We could have all examined British efforts in the "captain Lawrence of Arabia" days to see what it is like to deal with people in that region.

thank you.

I appreciate your service Mr. Eaton, thank you.

However, freedom is not why our government is occupying the Middle East, or why they have over 700 bases outside the US.

Superskunk, anyone of these countries could ask us to leave anytime they wanted, they choose not to for monetary reasons. You seem not to appreciate our military just sayin

I appreciate the service members within our military, but since the global hatred towards America is based on the way our military is used, and since the military is the primary reason this country is in debt and economic turmoil, I DO NOT appreciate or approve the way our military is used.

And since I pay for it, I'm going to call a spade a spade.

Your seriously naive or devoid of historic information if you think it's as easy as asking America to leave.

Iran tried to ask the UK to leave back in the 50's because the Brits were stealing their oil. The UK asked for US assistance and what happened was the CIA overthrow of a democratically elected leader of Iran, who was replaced with a US/UK puppet, the Shah.

Superskunk , nice excuse, never said it would be easy , said it could be done.

It's not an excuse, it's reality.

I completely and totally agree with you that it can be done, and should be done. The problem is part of my point, what you and I know, and the general public know is best for this country doesn't matter to the trust that's in control of the domestic and foreign policies of the US.

The so called elected officals act in the interests of the special interest groups, corporations, and money trust that run the show and pay the most.

They believe that they know better than us, and we are the "bewildered herd" and they are our "shepherds".

Now that we can agree on.

I can somewhat agree with you, but I can never blame the men and women, American citizens fighting and dying in our armed forces.

I blame the elected officials who use war as a means of profit and domination.

Those kids are just doing what they are trained and told to do.

And WW2 was an honorable war, full of soldiers that were heroes until our government employed some of the worst Nazi intelligence and scientific community members to continue their genocidal tactics in the name of America.

Is this the same bunch of dipwads that want to change our uniforms to allow those ratty headscarves? No, wait, that's the muslim affairs group. I prefer the uniform as it is. If the muslims want to join, then join, don't try to change our uniforms to suit your religion. At present, noone can wear any religious symbol with the uniform (unless it's hidden under the uniform) and those cheesy rags would definitely be seen. Even the chaplains are not allowed to wear any religious symbols unless they are conducting services. So the muslims nor anyone else has the right to complain about symbols when they clearly want their own to be very visible. Semper Fi Marines from an old Navy WAVE.

the non christians in the unit offend you and think you're an infidel? cause that is who the name should be changed for and not realizing that makes you look and sound stupid. would you be for forcing christians to serve in a unit named "devils" or "godless"? no, you wouldn't and that's hypocrisy.

@HATR_HURTER F.Y.I. Christians serve in many units in the U.S. military that have pagan/devil nicknames/insignia. YOU are the one who seems stupid!

Back in the F-8 days?

yeah, cause you didn't fight for people's rights or freedoms. you fought so people could be forced to be in a military unit that has a named linked to one religion. you're making a mockery of your own service elvis.

The blazon would be: Argent, a cross bottonne'e gules.

Read books and learn.

Crusaders, Nazis, what's the difference, really....

While not the most artfully written statement, it is not without merit. German troops went into batlle in WWII with belt buckles that read: Gott mit uns (meaning God with us).

An THAT is the problem with reverting the name back to crusaders - how can one be against a war ordained by god?

And before you get your panties tied in a knot; no, I'm not calling our military Nazi's.

The American federal government employed Nazi intelligence and scientists after WW2.

Operation Paperclip

Superskunk, so did the Russians, what's your point?

Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realize that America empolying Nazi's and using Nazi tactics (torture and murder) in Korea and Italy weren't a big deal ?

By you thinking that's not an issue proves my point.

The propaganda machine of the US federal government works !

You must be one of the millions of Americans that's overstimulated, de-sensitized, and "Supports Our Troops".

Superskunk ,I guess you forgot Space Exploration as well as other advancements from their scientist. You seem to want to put all of your thoughts on the negative. Yes I do support our troops, that doesn't mean I support all of their tactics. You obviously never served, and only view things with one eye.

Do I enjoy technology, yes, but the human race uses technology more for destruction than good.

I'd rather have never gone to space if it meant not using Nazi's to kill hundreds of thousands of Korean men, women, and children. Because that is what happened by employing the Nazi's.

You also obviously didn't understand my putting "Support Our Troops" in quotes.

"Support Our Troops" is a slogan, it's a meaningless part of the propaganda. Asking someone if they support our troops, is not a question.

I'll ask you two questions, both of them similar and meaningless.

1) Do you support our troops ?

2) Do you support the people of Iowa ?

You'd most likely not even think about it, as I used to, and answer "yes" to question number one.

You'd most likely look at me like I'm nuts in regards to question numer two, and respond with something along the lines of "What kind of question is that ? Support them how ? What am I supporting ?"

Get it ? It's all a facade, an empty slogan to keep us from asking the real questions. Do you support America's foreign policy ? If you knew all that our government has done to destroy democracy and peoples lives around the globe, you'd most likely say no.

Ever Served?

Superskunk, your missing all the good we do all over the world, of course we're not perfect, but compared to the rest of the world, i believe we're pretty darn good. Support the troops isn't an empty slogan, it comes from the disrespectful way our Troops from Vietnam were treated on their return, troops unlike today who were drafted as well as enlisted sent off fulfilling their obligation to their nation

Since ending fascism in WW2, I'm hard pressed to find much good this government has done in OUR names. And they even put a black eye on that with Operation Paperclip.

There is quite the long list of foreign and domestic "bad" that our elected officials have done.

Here's some foreign countries our federal government and intelligence community have done bad things in.

1940's - Italy, Korea, Greece

1950's - Iran, Guatemala, North Vietnam, Hungary, Laos, Haiti

1960's - Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Congo, Brazil, Indonesia, Greece(again), Bolivia, Uruguay

1970's - Cambodia, Bolivia(again), Haiti(again), Cambodia, Chile, Australia, Angola, Afghanistan, El Salvador, Nicaragua

1980's - El Salvador(again), Iraq, Haiti(again), Panama

In most of these cases out intelligence community destroyed up and coming democracies and replaced them with dictators or military leadership that oppresses the people in the best case scenarios, tortured and murdered the people in the worst case.

Superskunk, the list of countries we've helped is to long to print. Over half the countries you've listed we've also helped, even our enemies from WW2we've helped. To think that we would support the anti American side of a country is naive and would be counter productive. In Iran we supported the Shaw, I'm sorry but I didn't see any Democracy replace him

Do I really have to list itemized examples ?!?!?

smh

that's right! force them to have a religous symbol that not all of them adhere to. you'd be for forcing christian's into a unit called "the devil's army" too right? no? why not? oh, cause you're a hypocrite who only believes in forcing non christians into unit's with christian emblems and names.

Hatr, the symbol was used from1958 to 2008 and guess what no one had a problem with it BTW there was a special unit called the Devil's Brigade and I'm sure there were Christians in that unit. The name of the units have nothing to do with the religion of the personnel.

Cmdr. Weigel -

You can safely ignore Mr. Hurter. He's a harmless bufoon.

They are not killing people in America.

I find your ignorance disturbing. No armies are in your country, you are not being invaded. Your civilians are not being killed.

How would you like it if China would invade the US and start shooting up the place because they're killing Christian Extremists? Chinese tanks rolling in the streets, civilians being killed as collateral damage.

Patrick,I'm with you all the way! Islam is the greatest scourge this world has ever seen, and every one of us needs to stop this hate filled, ignorant, corrupt culture disguised as a religion from thier demands. It's time for all Americans and Europeans to take back our beautiful countries!

Bahahahahaa

Listen to this BS ! Seriously ? Sounds like 1930s Germany all over again

Way to go Seig HEIL !

lololol and Islamists are the extremists here ?

Brilliant, Patrick, Jack. I'm sure you were meaning to be heavily ironic, right? Are you writing those posts from the actual Crusades?

if muslims are murdering christians and no one is saying anything about then how did you find out it was happening? think about it and get back to me.

So lets pretend that the majority of terrorism isn't being done by Islamic extremist

The US government seems to have trouble defining terrorism. But if you look in Websters it's quite clear.

terrorism - The use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.

The reason the US government has trouble defining a word they love to use so much is because if you follow the traditional definition, the American government are the real terrorists over the last 100 or so years.

It's just like the embryo/fetus definition argument. The real definitions are quite clear, just changed around to support the pro-choice argument.

Superskunk, so you are saying that Islam is a political organization?

Exactly wlee, exactly

Superskunk, you know you just offended a sheet load of Muslims.

That's ignorant as hell.

Who is the one who is invading other countries? Is it the "christian" americans? Or the "islamic" countries?

Who has armies in whose country? Who is killing civilians and who is defending themselves from invading soldiers?

I'll bet you lost your lunch money a lot in school, didn't you

Read it again Lord - the man did 4 yrs in country & you're calling him a wuss. Better to be silent & thought a fool, than to speak out and be known one.

For my two cents, I prefer my war old school - kill them all, including their cattle and burn their crops. But, I'm wrong apparently - we are going for the "good guy" thing; and in that vein, Templar symbolism & Crusader moniker are definitely provocative.

I'm not concerned about the zealots - they are fired up no matter what; but the regular folks that also happen to be Muslim - why do I want to piss them off?

They've been stirred for quite awhile now and appeasing them will only make it worse.

Very rational and intelligent post, Charlton.