>LOL, so you are a nut case calling for a military dictatorship to replace free elections in America.
Umm, you misunderstand; it was a question. Let me restate/rephrase it:
What would you advise if the government were to exclude legally and/or politically a group of people based on some feature such as: religion, prior military service, political-stance, or ‘genetic-heritage’?
{ Legal abridgment of rights is actually rather routine, consider: people being denied 2nd amendment rights for mere allegations of ‘domestic abuse,’ people having their property seized by the police because “it could have been used in a crime”/”it could have been bought with drug-money” (oft before trial), and the recent up-surge in invasive SWAT home-invasions, the USSC’s ruling that the Constitution’s prohibition on Ex Post Facto Law applies only to criminal law... not things like making felons unable to buy arms, even if they served their time, and retroactive tax laws “perfectly legal.”}
>It sure saves time when you just speak plainly and honestly.
There was a misunderstanding in our communications, see above.
>I still don’t know why you insist on me being the one to bother with your ravings, can’t you confess, or rage to one of the non military veterans around here?
What ravings?
Oh, and I _AM_ a veteran... here’s my view/analysis on things concerning the military [or at least the oath]:
https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0ATyjMtQJe7iWZHY2OTh0bV8yNWM3YjM1Y2M5&hl=en
I’m not interested in joining in some long discussion with you, I don’t know what led you to believe that I am interested in what you think.
See post 166.
If you are looking for a chat buddy, then look for someone that wants to chat with you, I’m not that guy.