sherpa

Gracias, becasue I HATE writing them or reading them.

Just my view, but I have been posting it for weeks. Positioning Eisenhower and its task force in the northern Arabian Sea rather than the eastern Med gets their attention, if that is actually happening. Either way, I don't think Iran is a centralized , unified military command. i think there is the leadership of the "Islamic Republic" in the religious group in Tehran, and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, who seem to occasionally go their own way, especially in the Strait of Hormuz.

I like him. Never heard of him. Don't know a thing about him. But I like him, and he's never made a mistake about Midway. We'll see how that goes.

I'm saying that I posted that four Japanese carriers were destroyed at the same time. Someone else posted that this was not correct, and that Hiryu was not sunk until later. He was correct. It was a lazy post and I acknowledged it. You came in later. You can't remember it. That's why you incorrectly stated a claim above that I never made. I can remember. Quite clearly. None of that has anything to do with your absolutely puking Biblical and Roman Empire nonsense in this thread.

No. It wasn't you. It was someone else and you jumped on it a day later. You couldn't remember it. That's why you mistakenly stated that I thought it wasn't a multi day battle, (or some other nonsense I'm not going to look at). I do remember it. Nonetheless, this is a senseless, wasteful canard in this thread that you have exposed yourself, as always, as someone who points fingers and has no knowledge of what you are talking about. Stick to the "you love Putin stuff." It's goofy and juvenile, but doesn't expose you.

Just stop this nonsense. I certainly know the battle, and it has nothing to do with being in the Navy. Your memory is faulty, as usual. I got interested in it and read about it well after my service when I found out that Wade McClusky, a hero of the battle and for whom the best attack squadron in the Navy annual award was named for, was from Buffalo. "Shattered Sword" is a fantastic book, by the way. Anyway, to address yet another of your mistakes. I posted that four Japanese carriers were destroyed in ten minutes. Someone, absolutely not you, corrected me, pointing out that Hiryu was not sunk until a later strike. He was correct. I had lazily posted that all four were lost in the same attack. Go back to your preposterous Bible interpretation with your claim of Roman tolerance of a group they imprisoned, tortured and killed. It is far more laughable reading. What happened was

I was going to let this pass, as I do most things, but this is beyond the pale. I have not nor would "teach" anything here. History is history, and that is what happened. I have always been an ardent supporter of Israel and will continue to. I'm not sure how you get to the point that I am excusing Luther's views of the Jews. They were erroneous and despicable, and it was over 500 years ago. The guy had his serious issues, but he was dead right on his view of the papacy, the Roman Church and its practices at the time. I don't think the founding fathers should be excoriated for owning slaves. I don't judge people who lived centuries ago for what the beliefs were at the time. Either way, posting something of historic accuracy is in no way teaching, and certainly not advocating, which you seem to be subtly suggesting. Stay away from that suggestion, becasue it is absolute nonsense.

I never said Midway was not a "multi day" battle, or whatever you claim Never did that at all. You are screwing that up as well. Your "point" is ridiculous. The Gospels were written either by direct observers, parts of "John" for example, or people who were relaying the experiences of the original twelve, told to them, such as Mark, a companion of Peter, authoring his Gospel. The "Empire totally helped out the Christians?" OK, that's why they had them persecuted and tortured to the point during Nero's time of using them as human torches. Another preposterous claim, as the twelve were all eventually tortured and executed under the "Empire" as you call it, except John, who was exiled. You call that "help"? The Roman Empire had a history of allowing its' conquered, enslaved people to continue their religious practices as long as there was not threat in doing so to the "Pax Romana," and they paid their taxes. If that threat existed they would deal with it violently, as they ultimately did. Such is the case of Jesus. By the way, to answer your question, I take them as truth. I'll patiently await the next "Bible Study by Tibs," entitled : "How John the Baptist had Herod's head cut off," and "Jesus was going to have Pontius Pilate executed, but Judas came to his rescue."

There are some people whom I disagree with. There are many people whom I agree with. You sir, are in another class. I cannot believe how you repeatedly make silly statements that expose you as a fool. Completely ignorant claims. This latest post is not only complete ignorance, it is something most everybody who would ever post a view on this subject would absolutely know. Peter was not a Roman citizen. Absolutely not. None of the original Apostles were. The guy who you mis-identify as Peter was Paul. You've, not surprisingly, got the wrong guy. Paul, not one of the original twelve was a sanctioned by the Jerusalem church to persecute, imprison and kill Christians. He was a Roman citizen and it is a big deal in his ministry because he had certain rights that non Roman citizens did not. Again, I am in no way linking any of these historic events with the current situation between Hamas and Israel.

You have no idea if they were written by Roman citizens. In fact, you have no idea who wrote them at all. They were written for different groups. Mark was written for Romans, and is the the experiences as told by Peter. Luke was written for Greeks. John was written for everyone, and was probably written by John himself. Matthew was written for Jews. They didn't have to "blame" a religious sect. There is ample historical evidence of the events. All but one died a horrible tortured death because of their beliefs. I'd suggest that argues pretty strongly for their veracity. Why would someone spend their entire life professing something, being imprisoned in some cases, beaten in others and suffering a horrible death promoting a lie? Your last sentence is particularly insightful. "Who cares is some Jew killed another Jew 2000 years ago?" It is perhaps the single most important event in history.

You and I are at vastly different places regarding this, and that is fine. I couldn't care less. You seem to believe, against scriptural evidence, that Jesus was killed against God's plan, suggesting that people who believe that dismiss the power of God. In stating that, you are placing human emotions and assuming human motivations on God, and denying the most famous verses in the Bible: "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned..." That implies knowledge and consent. The historical evidence is that the leadership of the Jews, believing that Jesus was a heretic being empowered by the devil, with a rapidly growing and threatening following, trumped up charges against him and convinced the Roman rulers to kill him based on sedition nonsense, which was a capital offense. The Romans could not care less about blasphemy against Judaism, but during the time of massive influx of devout Jews during Passover wanted to prevent a riot. That's how it happened, and that has nothing to do with Judaism today, nor the problems that Israel faces with neighbors funded, supplied, trained and motivated by a third party intent on killing them all. Nothing.

Jesus was sacrificed as a means to redeem and reestablish God's relationship with man. It was the fulfillment of countless Old Testament prophesy, and never figured out until his resurrection. The leadership of the Jews at the time had it done becasue he was a threat to their authority and livelihood. They had no legal ability for execution, so they convinced their Roman masters to crucify him on faked sedition charges. The sacrifice was complete and required no additional "works" from man. Kind of funny how this conversation of Jewish "additions" to Old testament law, rejected by Jesus and leading to his crucifixion, comes up on the exact date of the anniversary of the formal rejection of further "additions," also known as the Reformation. Absolutely none of this has anything to do with the most barbarous, inhumane treachery I have ever heard of that was committed by Hamas against the Israelis on Oct 7.

I get really tired of fools making foolish claims. I never claimed Johnson was "a man of the Bible." Can you provide this? Judaism, as practiced during the time of Jesus had been corrupted. There are countless examples of this in the New Testament as Jesus' ministry evolves and especially in His confrontations with the Pharisees, eventually causing them to insist that the Romans kill him. If you think the claim is "laughable." any literate individual can read the book and come to no other conclusion/

I'll reply to you, since I can't figure out the English in his response. Being in charge does not mean you "allowed" something, as was the claim, anymore than being in charge of anything means you "allow" a crime. Netanyahu is going to lose his job over this, as these things always happen. that, in no way ever indicates he "allowed" it. That is crazy stuff.

He "allowed" it? Did Roosevelt "allow" Pearl Harbor? Did Bush "allow" 9/11. This is pure idiocy.

An absolutely asinine post. I have no view of the new Speaker of the House. A preposterous claim. I have no anti Semitic cell in my body, but I am a student of the Bible, have been for years and am extremely familiar with what happened then, and that in no sane way relates to Judaism today. This is Tiberius level of senselessness.,

It "surprises" you becasue you are misinterpreting it. The Old Testament is not being denied of diminished. It is a historical story of the preparation of a people who were ultimately supposed to welcome and introduce a Messiah who would reestablish man's relationship with God. Many rules were provided them to separate them from the rest of civilization. They also invented a bunch of their own rules and traditions that were not given them. Judaism as was being practiced during Christ's life had been adjusted and corrupted. The best example of this is how they turned the Temple. (God's place on earth), into a commercial enterprise profit center. There are many others. The arrival of Jesus was fulfillment of the "law," as he said, and he established a new covenant, as he stated. There are scores of versus in the New Testament that proclaim this, and end many ceremonial and purity rules the Jews had established. Ultimately, the Jewish leaders of the day denied his divinity and had him killed. From the resurrection, a core of believers spread the Gospel establishing the "New Covenant."

I'm not advocating for one side or the other, but to claim they don't have a choice is inaccurate. They have a choice, The issue is whether the government is to pay for transportation for exercising that choice.

You can forget about this crazy theory. The reason I am familiar with this stuff is because I was a Naval Aviator. I completed two carrier cruises. After that, you do your "shore duty." In my case I got selected for the Pacific Fleet Adversary Squadron. That is the best flying job in the Navy because you usually have to do that shore duty tour as an instructor of some sort either training student pilots or recently winged aviators in their assigned carrier aircraft. Back seat stuff. In the Adversaries you fight seasoned aviators from the Navy, Air Force and a number of other countries. It is full speed bad ass fun all the time. Went to Topgun and got designated an Adversary Instructor, which allows you to run these things and brief/debrief them. You also serve as enemy air in a host of complex exercises. In addition to that, while in the Adversaries, I was also on the LAWS, (Light Attack Weapons School) staff, and I was responsible for training experienced carrier pilots on the AIM Sidewinder missile and Soviet air to air missiles and SAMS, as well as fighting them in the exercises they plan and fly. You learn a lot and get very familiar with strike planning, Navy Fleet air defense, Air Force doctrine, and the tactics and capabilities of foreign air forces. Doing the airline career, and commuting from here to NY, Chicago and Miami for years, you spend a lot of time with copilots who flew in the two Gulf Wars, are still in the reserves, and ride in the jumpseats all the time, which allows you to stay up to speed on what is going on. I have many friends who stayed in, two made it to extremely senior positions. Both were Commanders of the US Pacific Fleet and eventually all military forces in the Pacific. One of them ran the entire Naval Air forces during the second Gulf war and who probably would have been appointed Chairman of the Joint Chiefs if Obama wasn't elected. Name available on request. Still have many friends who were involved in the F-35 program, some interesting stories there, but I have to admit that since retirement, I have lost contact with guys who fly the thing and because it is such a revolutionary platform in many ways, I don't know how they are tactically deploying it. It has a lot of advanced capability. Anyway, not from Lewiston. South Buffalo/West Seneca Courier Express paper boy.

Of course it is full of Jesus saying that various things would be better than denying a relationship with God. Jesus never recommended nor endorsed any of that. He merely pointed out, by exaggeration to the people he was talking to, in a manner they would understand, how separating oneself from fellowship with God was worse than the examples he provided. Show me where he ever commanded eyes be plucked out or hands cut off.

Do you understand the difference between the Old Testament and the New? Nobody does burnt offering sacrifices anymore. Nobody recommends animal sacrifice or blood atonement. The point is moot. The Old Testament stuff ended over 2000 year ago and is irrelevant. Interesting from a historical standpoint, as it is the story of a people preparing for something. But that something occurred, and has been moved on from, with the exception of a very small group.

Time to pay attention. Back on about page 20 of this thread, I mentioned to keep an eye on where these carriers go. If we send one to waters of the Northern Arabian Sea off Oman, it would be very noteworthy. New media reported, universally, that Eisenhower was going to deploy to join Ford in the eastern Med. I mentioned that the thing to watch for was if we deployed a carrier to Fifth Fleet in the Arabian Sea. Here's my quote from the US Navy Birthday thread on October 14: "On a related note, USS Eisenhower was supposed to get underway yesterday from Norfolk, but it has been delayed at least a day. All of the high visibility networks were claiming that it was going to join Ford in the eastern Med, but the Navy never discusses ship movements. She could certainly do that, or backfill the waters near Italy where Ford was supporting the Ukrainian thing, or she could sail through the Suez and join 5th fleet in the northern Indian Ocean to keep Iran in check. I can't imagine the alert level if she transits the Suez." Well.....Guess what? If current reposts are true, and they may not be, Eisenhower is sailing through the Suez the Northern Arabian Sea, as I suggested. This is extremely significant. https://news.usni.org/2023/10/23/uss-dwight-d-eisenhower-midway-across-atlantic-en-route-to-the-middle-east THE PENTAGON – The Dwight D. Eisenhower Carrier Strike Group is in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean as it heads to the Middle East, instead of joining the Gerald R. Ford Carrier Strike Group in the Eastern Mediterranean. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin directed the Ike Carrier Strike Group to U.S. Central Command on Sunday. If this is to be believed, guess where it's going, though they don't mention it.

Great. Saves me time.

We are bombing dark skinned people? If you are talking about Hamas, who are not "dark skinned," we are not doing that. If you're talking about the Syrian strikes, there have been about 30 attacks on US troops by Iranian militia, (read surrogates), in the last three weeks. Should we not respond and simply let this continue? Should we simply ask our deployed forces to absorb these?

Not a chance. By the way, you post that phrase a lot, aimed at a lot of people. Realize how silly it is? You have zero chance to ever bring about any emotion from me, other than laughter and disdain.