Any and all varieties? I thought chow halls were in general pretty good. Sometimes field chow was a horrendous mess, but often they came up with decent stuff. And MREs improved dramatically from 2002 to 2005, in my opinion.

Palantas

I met a group of marines with stories about combat rations involving burger patties that self heated when in contact with water. Are those any good?

Military food...any and all varieties. The worst was when they ran out of food and I had to nasty slices of spam for dinner. Haven't eaten spam since.LJS9502_basic

I used to put spam boxes near the transmission of the tank and eat it when we stopped. Best thing ever. The only reason I don't eat spam anymore- is the embarrassment involved in buying it, you know, civilianly[?].

My brother does the exact same thing, He excuses himself by having OCD. When it pisses me off, I disconnect the power plug for his desktop.

I never realized what a fantastic brother I was. You should get someone like me who is easily annoyed with obsessive compulsives revelling in their oddities.

Straight with benefits

Capitan_Kid

Does that mean you sometimes like a finger up your bum?

[spoiler] And don't mod me, please. [/spoiler]

ROFL! I don't have a bum anymore. I had to put him out when he started panhandling out of my bathroom. He loved fingers, especially if they had jewelry loosely attached.

(And just to answer your real question: No, I don't)

These threads really do tend to get ugly :roll:

TehFuneral

It's the inherit incourtesy of some posters that enables them to completely ignore very politely phrased questions.

That, :|s and roll-eye smilies.

[QUOTE="grape_of_wrath"]

[QUOTE="SquirrelTamer"] That's not what the 4th geneva convention says thoughKC_Hokie

"...The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies." Art. 49, The fourth Geneva convention.

Yes, Israel doesn't even dispute that, It disputes article 49 being part of customary international law, as opposed to treaty law. Customary law being "obligatory" to all nations and treaty law being "obligatory" to signing nations.

Israel is not a signatory.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

Ace you clearly haven't been in this thread long enough.. Because OBVIOUSLy there is always a extremely evil bloodthirsty side, and another side that just wants to save and co-exist.. :roll: Its hilarious really, you would think these people haven't even opened up a history book of the region.. There were no absolute evil side or absolute good side in conflicts throught he ages..All sides have their selfish agendas, and sides for political and economic gain..

grape_of_wrath

I've been meaning to ask you this for a very long time- what the hell are the bolded above?

My curiosity seems to go forever unsated. *tear*

[QUOTE="grape_of_wrath"]

[QUOTE="SquirrelTamer"]

How is that a warcrime? That's not even war

SquirrelTamer

It's a land under belligerent occupation. Under the 4th Geneva convention- settlements of citizens belonging to the occupier are in violation of the convention.

Israel disputes the obligatory status of that clause. /and then I was the BBC

"...The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies." Art. 49, The fourth Geneva convention.

How is that a warcrime? That's not even war

SquirrelTamer

It's a land under belligerent occupation. Under the 4th Geneva convention- settlements of citizens belonging to the occupier are in violation of the convention.

Israel disputes the obligatory status of that clause. /and then I was the BBC

Balfour Declaration any one? Or how bout the numerous plans for the two state solution during the time? In which the Jewish side not only got the best land, but the land they got within the plans was still being lived in by a huge majority of Arabs.. And the restrictions you speak of only occured during the 40s in which Arab civil unrest was immense to a point they had to do something to prevent full blown revolution..

sSubZerOo

-Both of the bolded arguments are factually incorrect.

-The balfour declaration came out in 1917- and promised "a jewish homeland", which was later tanslated into "nothing".

-The last POIC was issued in 1939, and reasons were a bit more complex.