tod evans
Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2008
- Messages
- 36,071
Ok, thanks for conceding that you have no logic backing up your blathering.
This is objectively false. We know for a fact that under this change, a victim who is raped by his or her commanding officer can ask someone other than the rapist that the rapist be prosecuted. You should consider retracting this objectively false statement, unless you want to be known as an unrepentant liar.
I thought you might have actually had an argument on this one, and was interested to see what you might produce here. However, we can now see you were simply talking out of your ass. Whereas I would contend that this measure will get more convictions of psychotic government-employed rapists, which should lead to more dishonorable discharges and fewer pensions for government rapists. I think we should save taxpayer dollars by not giving money to government rapists. Why are you for giving free money to government rapists?
Lookie here punk boy.....
Shove your condescending tone right up your ass!
If you think things will change then keep sucking on that state dick.
No amount of feel good legislation is going to change how the military functions, ask present duty folks, ask vets, or keep believeing fantasy if that suits your fancy.
Once again just in case your self righteous pompous self missed it the first time;" Shove your condescending tone right up your ass!"
Last edited:
Even a lot of male Marines don't see it, you go through Boot and end up associating WM's with vaguely Chewbacca-esque frazzled recruits and their thoroughly frightening Drill Instructors, and so seeing a woman in your own uniform has a goggle effect. Nevermind we certainly looked as bad or worse. 
do get a lot more since it's so much easier to be prissy with that branch.