On Mar 25, 11:01*am, glidergeek wrote:
On Mar 24, 10:59*pm, Daryl wrote:









On 3/24/2012 11:16 PM, glidergeek wrote:

On Feb 11, 8:29 am, John *wrote:
Daryldhunt nospami70west3.com *wrote:
John Doe wrote:
Our special forces take risks like that
Wrong,

Bull****.

As dangerous as a Specops mission is,

You just contradicted yourself.

they are well thought out and executed and normally are highly
successful.

Well thought out and risky = difficult.

SF is rarely a bunch of hotdogs.

You mean like on TV? Of course not. Then again, Jeb Corliss
doesn't use a stuntman or props.

They know their job and do it probably beyond human capability

Are you in a movie?

but chance takers they aren't.

You are playing semantics. I'm not interested in playing semantics.

--

When it appears that it's impossible means they failed somewhere
along the way and their people die in the process. *When it looks
almost supernatural in the success, it's from superior planning
and execution of the mission. *Almost all missions have been
successful.

Then you should go away instead of coming here if your objective is to
challenge people if you don't get satisfaction to your question.
Likewise if you don't like the answer to your question don't ask it.

I didn't ask the original question. *And as for going away, are
you going to grab my left wrist that I am typing with and wrench
it to force me to go away?

--http://tvmoviesforfree.com
for free movies and Nostalgic TV. *Tons of Military shows and
programs.

Sorry Daryl I didn't mean you I meant the original poster. *He came
onto a usernet hiding behind a false name and a keyboard asked a
controversial question with the intent of starting **** and and
succeeded well. Lookit he sucked in at least 70 responses. He's
smiling thinking what a bunch of looser gliderpilots.

Actually, he sparked a very good discussion when you filter and ignore
the normal garbage.