Liberal Forum

Blackvegetable » 01 Aug 2025, 7:20 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 7:20 am

*Huey » 01 Aug 2025, 7:18 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 7:18 am

Sir, what does the name on the quote tell you?

As this evidence unambigously demonstrates, that doesn't mean anything.....to you....




 
 

 

I am sorry sir, I am not going to participate in your diversion.  You best bet is to do what most respected posters do.  Find that thread and bump the post.

Mr Veggie, I will be more than happy to discuss it with you when you bump the thread.  Sir, I apologize but I must point out you do not even have the integrity to post the thread title.

Just another item from your files of info you keep on other posters.  That is very concerning.
 

Blackvegetable » 01 Aug 2025, 7:22 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 7:22 am

*Huey » 01 Aug 2025, 7:17 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 7:17 am

Mr Vegetable, to be frank, if yo have to ask what the OP is about there is a good chance you don't have the intellectual arsenal to participate.



 

Stop running, Quimmie. 

What is this OP about?

 

Sir, I am pretty much finished with this thread.  I have successfully rebutted your promotion explanation and I am not going to participate in your diversion as YOU run, Sir.

*Huey » 01 Aug 2025, 7:23 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 7:23 am

I am sorry sir, I am not going to participate in your diversion.  

what is this OP about?


You're right.....this is quite enjoyable....

*Huey » 01 Aug 2025, 7:25 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 7:25 am

Sir, I am pretty much finished with this thread.  I have successfully rebutted 

Only in the retelling. 

You don't even know what this OP is about...

 

Blackvegetable » 01 Aug 2025, 7:27 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 7:27 am

*Huey » 01 Aug 2025, 7:25 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 7:25 am

Sir, I am pretty much finished with this thread.  I have successfully rebutted 

Only in the retelling. 

You don't even know what this OP is about...

 

 

Mr. Vegetable, I must point out I am not the individual demanding someone explain the OP to me.  ;)

As far as your promotion  bunk so what is in bold, below:

*Huey » 01 Aug 2025, 7:08 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 7:08 am

Blackvegetable » 01 Aug 2025, 6:59 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 6:59 am

*Huey » 01 Aug 2025, 6:56 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 6:56 am

As predicted, Mr Veggie can't explain where I was wrong.

Stop lying, little remf.

We're not talking about nominations, we are talking about promotions.

nod.
 


 

Stop lying, little remf.

Sir, when your daughter and grandchildren ask "what did you do when the troops were in combat?" your response will be "I was in a cubicle or behind a desk at home."

Do you think generals, when being promoted and taking on more responsibility, are not vetted?  

From google AI:

are generals vetted when promoted

Yes, generals and other senior military officers are thoroughly vetted during the promotion process. This vetting involves multiple stages, including review by promotion boards, background checks, and ultimately, approval by the Senate. The process aims to ensure that only the most qualified and ethical individuals are promoted to the highest ranks of the military. 

 

 

*Huey » 01 Aug 2025, 7:30 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 7:30 am

Mr. Vegetable, I must point out I am not the individual demanding someone explain the OP to me.  

As far as your promotion  bunk so what is in bold, below:

By your rule you persist in making my case.

I'm satisfied that you have no idea, but you insist on participating in order to divert and humiliate yourself.
 

*Huey » 01 Aug 2025, 7:30 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 7:30 am

Blackvegetable » 01 Aug 2025, 7:27 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 7:27 am

*Huey » 01 Aug 2025, 7:25 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 7:25 am

Sir, I am pretty much finished with this thread.  I have successfully rebutted 

Only in the retelling. 

You don't even know what this OP is about...

 


 

Mr. Vegetable, I must point out I am not the individual demanding someone explain the OP to me.  ;)

As far as your promotion  bunk so what is in bold, below:

*Huey » 01 Aug 2025, 7:08 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 7:08 am

Blackvegetable » 01 Aug 2025, 6:59 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 6:59 am

Stop lying, little remf.

nod.
 



 

Stop lying, little remf.

Sir, when your daughter and grandchildren ask "what did you do when the troops were in combat?" your response will be "I was in a cubicle or behind a desk at home."

Do you think generals, when being promoted and taking on more responsibility, are not vetted?  

From google AI:

are generals vetted when promoted

Yes, generals and other senior military officers are thoroughly vetted during the promotion process. This vetting involves multiple stages, including review by promotion boards, background checks, and ultimately, approval by the Senate. The process aims to ensure that only the most qualified and ethical individuals are promoted to the highest ranks of the military. 


 

 

 

 

Blackvegetable » 01 Aug 2025, 7:50 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 7:50 am

*Huey » 01 Aug 2025, 7:30 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 7:30 am

Mr. Vegetable, I must point out I am not the individual demanding someone explain the OP to me.  

As far as your promotion  bunk so what is in bold, below:

By your rule you persist in making my case.

I'm satisfied that you have no idea, but you insist on participating in order to divert and humiliate yourself.
 

 

I included what you deleted because by deleting you are running from proof of your defeat, Sir.

Have a wonderful day, Mr Vegetable.
 

*Huey » 01 Aug 2025, 7:57 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 7:57 am

I included 

No one cares about your diversion.

Tell me what you believe the OP is about.

Blackvegetable » 01 Aug 2025, 6:55 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 6:55 am

*Huey » 01 Aug 2025, 6:50 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 6:50 am

Perhaps Mr, Vegetable, you can explain where I was wrong.  But you won't.  You are all talk and no action, Sir.  So please don't divert with fluff and personal attacks.  

Nice meltdown.

We're not talking about nominations, we are talking about promotions.

You are all talk and no action, Sir.  

Squeak, Chalk Outline.

So please don't divert with fluff and personal attacks.  

New rule, LowPoint? 

Nice meltdown.

 Shouldn't use terms you can't define...


 

 

 

Blackvegetable » 01 Aug 2025, 8:01 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 8:01 am

*Huey » 01 Aug 2025, 7:57 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 7:57 am

I included 

No one cares about your diversion.

Tell me what you believe the OP is about.

 

This is how a man does it.  Notice the links to entire quotes.

These are you words, Mr Vegetable:

We're not talking about nominations, we are talking about promotions.

Why are you calling YOUR words, and the rebuttal to YOUR words, a diversion?  You are a strange bird, sir.

*Huey » 01 Aug 2025, 8:07 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 8:07 am

This is how a man does it.  Notice the links to entire quotes.


 

A man doesn't run from, or alter, his words.

Nor does he fill pages with extraneous text he cannot comprehend in an effort to obscure the fact that he has no case and cannot make one.

*Huey » 01 Aug 2025, 8:07 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 8:07 am

Blackvegetable » 01 Aug 2025, 6:55 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 6:55 am

*Huey » 01 Aug 2025, 6:50 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 6:50 am

Perhaps Mr, Vegetable, you can explain where I was wrong.  But you won't.  You are all talk and no action, Sir.  So please don't divert with fluff and personal attacks.  

Nice meltdown.

We're not talking about nominations, we are talking about promotions.

You are all talk and no action, Sir.  

Squeak, Chalk Outline.

So please don't divert with fluff and personal attacks.  

New rule, LowPoint? 

Nice meltdown.

 Shouldn't use terms you can't define...


 


 

Blackvegetable » 01 Aug 2025, 8:01 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 8:01 am

*Huey » 01 Aug 2025, 7:57 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 7:57 am

I included 

No one cares about your diversion.

Tell me what you believe the OP is about.


 

This is how a man does it.  Notice the links to entire quotes.

These are you words, Mr Vegetable:

We're not talking about nominations, we are talking about promotions.

Why are you calling YOUR words, and the rebuttal to YOUR words, a diversion?  You are a strange bird, sir.

 

 

Blackvegetable » 01 Aug 2025, 8:09 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 8:09 am

*Huey » 01 Aug 2025, 8:07 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 8:07 am

This is how a man does it.  Notice the links to entire quotes.



 

A man doesn't run from, or alter, his words.

Nor does he fill pages with extraneous text he cannot comprehend in an effort to obscure the fact that he has no case and cannot make one.

 

Mr, Vegetable, no words were altered or ran from.   I posted as a man would.  No edits, no running and no questions.  You should take a lesson from that.

Sir, the only individual running is you.

*Huey » 01 Aug 2025, 8:13 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 8:13 am

Mr, Vegetable, no words were altered or ran from.   I posted as a man would.  No edits, no running and no questions.  You should take a lesson from that.

Sir, the only individual running is you.

This is about what a man does, and doesn't, do.

Sir, the only individual running is you.

From what?

You don't know what the thread is about.
 

Blackvegetable » 01 Aug 2025, 8:16 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 8:16 am

*Huey » 01 Aug 2025, 8:13 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 8:13 am

Mr, Vegetable, no words were altered or ran from.   I posted as a man would.  No edits, no running and no questions.  You should take a lesson from that.

Sir, the only individual running is you.

This is about what a man does, and doesn't, do.

Sir, the only individual running is you.

From what?

You don't know what the thread is about.
 

 

Sr, in the CONTEXT of posting another man's words I have made my point.. After you figured out what the OP is about?  You asked about it a lot

Blackvegetable » 01 Aug 2025, 7:08 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 7:08 am

That's not the question.

Of course it is. See, there's that "reading comprehension" problem you have that we were discussing earlier. here is that EXACT question.
viewtopic.php?p=2778108#p2778108   
 

 
 

 

Blackvegetable » 01 Aug 2025, 8:18 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 8:18 am

*Huey » 01 Aug 2025, 8:11 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 8:11 am

Mr Vegetable, I have no further interest in this aspect of he discussion 

Then run from more of your words.

Perhaps you should post using less of them.

 

I am. not running, SIr.  I am just not dwelling on your diversions.

MR-7 » 01 Aug 2025, 8:44 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 8:44 am

Of course it is. See, there's that "reading comprehension" problem you have that we were discussing earlier. here is that EXACT question.
viewtopic.php?p=2778108#p2778108 

No....it isn't...

The question is

"Why should a man deservedly reviled by military leadership insert himself into the promotion process?"
 

*Huey » 01 Aug 2025, 8:45 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 8:45 am

I am. not running, SIr.  I am just not dwelling on your diversions.

No, you definitely are, again.
 

*Huey » 01 Aug 2025, 8:44 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 8:44 am

Sr, in the CONTEXT of posting 

I'm looking for an answer to my question, not more gibberish from which you will run.

Blackvegetable » 01 Aug 2025, 8:46 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 8:46 am

The question is

 

Why did biden allow his generals to not leave the required "protection force" needed, during the withdrawal?
 

MR-7 » 01 Aug 2025, 9:30 am » wrote: ↑

01 Aug 2025, 9:30 am

Why did biden allow his generals to not leave the required "protection force" needed, during the withdrawal?

No....it isn't...

That's your excuse for the guy who 

at first negotiated a date, WITH the Taliban, to withdraw shortly after he left DC in disgrace...

then had a plan to do so, SPONTANEOUSLY, aborted by military leadership.