lol.......Chorcai wrote:
The armies are looking for fit people, ie non-smokers, whats the big deal. If you smoke you dont get in.
lol
lol
How bout the soldiers that protect all the people of their country do what they like...
cigarettes are still legal...at this point...
And how about... asshats in the govt don't decide what's good or bad for the soldiers.. common sense.
If smoking a cigarette calms their nerves or gives them some relief in the face of
the possibility of it being the last day on earth for the soldier... I think they deserve a smoke
cigarettes are still legal...at this point...
And how about... asshats in the govt don't decide what's good or bad for the soldiers.. common sense.
If smoking a cigarette calms their nerves or gives them some relief in the face of
the possibility of it being the last day on earth for the soldier... I think they deserve a smoke
Last edited by [TUF]Catbox (2009-07-12 17:25:54)
Love is the answer
Yes lol... w/eusmarine wrote:
lol.......Chorcai wrote:
The armies are looking for fit people, ie non-smokers, whats the big deal. If you smoke you dont get in.
lol
oh you know babe. you know.
Stick that babe shit up your hole.usmarine wrote:
oh you know babe. you know.
and stick your theory up your arse. you tell me what is "fit" for combat pls. i mean, i know, but i want to hear it from you.Chorcai wrote:
Stick that babe shit up your hole.usmarine wrote:
oh you know babe. you know.
Fit/in good shape/not over weight/non-smoker etc etc, I smoke and I know I wouldn't be able to keep up with someone who didnt smoke, now put 2 people in a combat area while lets say running for cover, or over a long distance haul who would get there 1st ? Who could last longer.... Any way whats the point you knew what I ment in the 1st place your just nit picking and as per norm pompus.usmarine wrote:
and stick your theory up your arse. you tell me what is "fit" for combat pls. i mean, i know, but i want to hear it from you.Chorcai wrote:
Stick that babe shit up your hole.usmarine wrote:
oh you know babe. you know.
I could see this coming to be honest, not that I agree with it. When doing my rather invasive health check for the military I passed every health and fitness test with flying colours, then:
"Do you smoke?"
"Not really. Every now and then."
"How often?"
"I dunno. On average I'd say one a month."
"Tsk tsk. Well you're going to be rather upset if you get cancer."
"... Well yeah. Wouldn't you be?"
I got the constant stink-eye 'cause I admitted that I smoke sometimes. This in the army where the cigarette-puffing GI is part of the whole image. Bloody Hell...
"Do you smoke?"
"Not really. Every now and then."
"How often?"
"I dunno. On average I'd say one a month."
"Tsk tsk. Well you're going to be rather upset if you get cancer."
"... Well yeah. Wouldn't you be?"
I got the constant stink-eye 'cause I admitted that I smoke sometimes. This in the army where the cigarette-puffing GI is part of the whole image. Bloody Hell...
[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
if you think smoking vs non smoking affects running for cover then you know jack.
The one that is more motivated in surviving. If someone is spraying bullets at them I am goddamn sure the smoker won't be any slower than the non-smoker.Chorcai wrote:
now put 2 people in a combat area while lets say running for cover, or over a long distance haul who would get there 1st ?
main battle tank karthus medikopter 117 megamegapowershot gg
I have a couple of buddies who smoke and they are fast as shit.Chorcai wrote:
Fit/in good shape/not over weight/non-smoker etc etc, I smoke and I know I wouldn't be able to keep up with someone who didnt smoke, now put 2 people in a combat area while lets say running for cover, or over a long distance haul who would get there 1st ? Who could last longer.... Any way whats the point you knew what I ment in the 1st place your just nit picking and as per norm pompus.usmarine wrote:
and stick your theory up your arse. you tell me what is "fit" for combat pls. i mean, i know, but i want to hear it from you.Chorcai wrote:
Stick that babe shit up your hole.
but dont ask me man. ive only been shot at like i dunno how many times. and i can tell you no matter what age, smoke, non smoker, gay, straight, liberal, repub, mormon, jew, black, white, w/e...........you run the same speed.
in non-combat then... my point still stands that a non-smoker will out run a smoker, is he not a more effective... yes.DeathUnlimited wrote:
The one that is more motivated in surviving. If someone is spraying bullets at them I am goddamn sure the smoker won't be any slower than the non-smoker.Chorcai wrote:
now put 2 people in a combat area while lets say running for cover, or over a long distance haul who would get there 1st ?
Now tell me what does non-combat running speed matter in combat situations? (Afterall, military trains for combat situations and non-combat performance matters shit all; you aren't going to be shot there)Chorcai wrote:
in non-combat then... my point still stands that a non-smoker will out run a smoker, is he not a more effective... yes.DeathUnlimited wrote:
The one that is more motivated in surviving. If someone is spraying bullets at them I am goddamn sure the smoker won't be any slower than the non-smoker.Chorcai wrote:
now put 2 people in a combat area while lets say running for cover, or over a long distance haul who would get there 1st ?
Last edited by DeathUnlimited (2009-07-12 17:59:43)
main battle tank karthus medikopter 117 megamegapowershot gg
Yeah, when they're on their pension it'll matter then. But at a young age it wont make much of a difference.Chorcai wrote:
in non-combat then... my point still stands that a non-smoker will out run a smoker, is he not a more effective... yes.DeathUnlimited wrote:
The one that is more motivated in surviving. If someone is spraying bullets at them I am goddamn sure the smoker won't be any slower than the non-smoker.Chorcai wrote:
now put 2 people in a combat area while lets say running for cover, or over a long distance haul who would get there 1st ?
I dont know much about current military and the like, since I am just a kid... but if someone does want to have a smoko then they should be able to. If on base, however, maybe the smoker could go outside to a more isolated area if a non-smoker doesnt want them to smoke around them... but Im sure that non-smokers wouldnt actually give a sheeet.
noice 
Personally I never smoked a sig in my life, but still I'm against all this 'anti-smoking campain bullshit'. First they take your sigs, second your drinks - what next? Every person has a right to decide either to smoke or not to smoke, no matter of profession. And espesially in military, where you get major stress all the time. Just don't smoke near non-smokers, say like 1-2 methers away from me and we are good.
Last edited by Longbow (2009-07-13 03:31:50)
lol'dlowing wrote:
I said look at a stat, I didn't say kill everyone at the age of 32Macbeth wrote:
I see where this is goingjsnipy wrote:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e … poster.jpg
also i think smokers actually make the NHS money anyway, because of the absurd taxes we have on smokes vs the cost of treating smoking related illness.
not sure where i read that, ill search around some
Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
GI Bill v 2.0??ATG wrote:
This is just another attempt to have people be less inclined to join the military. Like Obama wants.
Smoking is more dangerous than ied's don't you know?
At one time soldiers were issued smokes, because any comfort is good comfort for those who have killed for us or held the intestines of their buddy from falling out
Why anyone would want to serve this nation...oh wait, that's what they want; a disheartened spiritually defeated military.
Hope and change baby, at work.
Obamas a smoker too...
ya lets link anything remotely stupid or hypocritical our entire national government does to the president
Chirst almighty
PS if anyone anywhere wants to ban fucking tobacco then they should also support banning fast food. How fuckin idiot are people these days?
Last edited by Spearhead (2009-07-13 18:34:11)
Well, admittedly, this witch hunt against smoking is getting rather old. It's starting to become like that movie "Thank You for Smoking."
People have managed to turn it into a social stigma. The only reason people arent raising hell to ban McDonalds and alcohol is because, 1. Practically everybody does it and 2. It hurts peoples feelings to tell them that they're either a fatass or a drunkTurquoise wrote:
Well, admittedly, this witch hunt against smoking is getting rather old. It's starting to become like that movie "Thank You for Smoking."
If theres ONE issue it hurts to be politically correct in, its banning shit. I dont even know if it qualifies for the "political correctness" tag. Probably just idiotic.
Thanks Pentagon and DoD and all you non smoking health freaks out there I'm pissed now. brb goin outside to smoke
heh heh... About the only positive to come out of this is that, if we do manage to decrease smoking throughout society, we'll have less related costs for a socialized healthcare system.Spearhead wrote:
People have managed to turn it into a social stigma. The only reason people arent raising hell to ban McDonalds and alcohol is because, 1. Practically everybody does it and 2. It hurts peoples feelings to tell them that they're either a fatass or a drunkTurquoise wrote:
Well, admittedly, this witch hunt against smoking is getting rather old. It's starting to become like that movie "Thank You for Smoking."
If theres ONE issue it hurts to be politically correct in, its banning shit. I dont even know if it qualifies for the "political correctness" tag. Probably just idiotic.
Thanks Pentagon and DoD and all you non smoking health freaks out there I'm pissed now. brb goin outside to smoke
whatever the smokers say here, smoking makes not sence at all. it does NOT releave any tensions it didn't create in the first place, while the damage it causes to the population and, hence, the economy is enormous. whoever's trying to ban it - in army or anywhere else - more power to them.
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
Shahter wrote:
whatever the smokers say here, smoking makes not sence at all. it does NOT releave any tensions it didn't create in the first place, while the damage it causes to the population and, hence, the economy is enormous. whoever's trying to ban it - in army or anywhere else - more power to them.
Tell that to Humphrey Bogart
huh? that's supposed to be a joke or..?Macbeth wrote:
Tell that to Humphrey Bogart
anyway, i was burning through 1.5 to 2 packs a day for ten years, kiddo. it's been two years since i quit, so you better beleave me on this one. nobody, not a single person i know who quit smoking, regrets it. tobacco is a poison, plain and simple. all it does is screw your system up, NOTHING else. all the excuses that smokers come up with are just that - excuses for their inability to overcome the addiction.
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
I don't doubt that. I've never liked smoking either, but I always question when government bans you from using a recreational substance.Shahter wrote:
huh? that's supposed to be a joke or..?Macbeth wrote:
Tell that to Humphrey Bogart
anyway, i was burning through 1.5 to 2 packs a day for ten years, kiddo. it's been two years since i quit, so you better beleave me on this one. nobody, not a single person i know who quit smoking, regrets it. tobacco is a poison, plain and simple. all it does is screw your system up, NOTHING else. all the excuses that smokers come up with are just that - excuses for their inability to overcome the addiction.
I think the government too often oversteps its bounds on things like this.