Posted on 11/23/2007 10:27:30 AM PST by smoothsailing
Oops.
Actually, it is not an appropriate term to use when one refers to Marines, xzins.
Marine is the first, middle, and last name.
Good on ya, smooth, thanks : )
actually it is appropriate, freema.
It is similar to using the word “soldiering.” It is the generic term for any military member whether army, navy, af, or marine.
To say that Gen Mathis can soldier with the best of them is entirely appropriate.
The appropriate term to use when the name and rank of a member of the armed service is not known is:
soldier
You may technically be correct but in the real world, Marines should never be called soldiers any more than soldiers should be called sailors or Democrats called Americans.
Granted, Wikipedia is not always a reliable source, but I also checked this in other on-line and off-line dictionaries. Soldiers are most often associated with an army, especially in the US of A.
Xzins, I am a soldier, as are you.
Xzins, I know you are our fine Chappy, and I honor you as such.
However, a Marine is not a soldier, a Marine is a Marine.
Need I say more, Chappy?
Unless that person is a Marine ; )
Don’t make me break out that Marine Chaplin conversation LOL!
Charlie Company.
as in Chaplin.
: )
Chaplain
I was in the US Army and the US Marine Corps so I was a Soldier, but I am still a Marine. Confusing ain’t it?
i heard murtha avoiding an apology
on hannity.
murtha ought to be out of the u.s. congress.
Confusing ain't it?
Nah, not to me, at least.
I was an enlisted man and later an officer, we were called mustangs. All said and done, I always thought being an enlisted man was a better deal. Are you confused by that? I doubt it.
So, Semper Fi, grunt. LOL!!!!
Just for shats and giggles, I went into the kitchen and posed the question, “Are you called a soldier, if you’re a Mar...”. Didn’t even get it all out.
Brother answered, “NEVER.” Hubby looked at me like I had three eyes. That could’ve been the beer, though. ; )
That was the shats part.
The giggles part was, “I am ashamed you are even asking that question.”
So, of course, I told the dumbarse I knew the answer, I just wanted to see his response. LOL!
xzins, it’s a Marine thing.
I don’t question it, and I don’t correct it.
Did you hear it in the last few days? I’m not finding a bit o’ reporting on the question being raised at this press conference on the 20th.
I just guess I'm lucky 'cause I've known better for a damn long time! LOL!
I thought he was a supply officer...how did he get a decoration?
The appropriate term to use when the name and rank of a member of the armed service is not known is: soldier
I know a few sailors that might take offense at that.
Yeah, they’re real funny that way.
The hair on the back of my brother’s neck stood up. And he brought himself up straight as I tried to utter the last few words.
His two oldest boys had a little disagreement the other night out in the garage. They are both as big as bulls. He got in the middle to calm things down a bit. He wasn’t making progress fast enough for me. I got a bit mad myself and hit the garage door button. Nobody was amused but me. LOL! Later, I heard my mom remind him to plug the garage door back in. LOLOL!
Party is on!!!!!!
Shuffling Earmarks
Posted by: John Campbell at 11:34 AM
Recently, President Bush requested $196 billion to fund troops in Iraq, but so far the Democratic Leadership has been mired in disagreement on how or if those funds will be appropriated.
Earlier this week, Sens. Tom Coburn (R-OK), Jim DeMint (R-SC), and John McCain (R-AZ) called on Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to divert earmarks in the defense spending bill and transfer those funds to the troops in Iraq if necessary. The defense spending bill contains roughly 2,000 earmarks worth approximately $5 billion.
There is substantial disagreement over these funds; however the diversion of these funds is one way of closing the gap. The redirection of funds from earmarked projects could require permission from Congress, and it is a safe bet that Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) would not let this occur without a fight.
Some of you may remember my exchange with Chairman Murtha about an earmark for a Microbial paint shield that the Pentagon never requested. This single earmark is worth $2 million. Rep. Murtha could potentially lose this earmark in addition another $150 million more worth of earmarks if the funds are reassigned.
http://www.townhall.com/blog/g/fc4d6305-a357-44b6-a273-d208025a66f1
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.