armygas

Title of Article: US Troops Terrorize Baghdad In “Operation Law And Order” Source: as stated above Just to amuse myself, let us dissect this article, did you actually read this article? First let's look at the source shall we?? About Countercurrents.org http://www.countercurrents.org came online on 27th March 2002. 'Countercurrents' is a non profit organisation and the site is financed by our personal income and the small contributions received from the readers. http://www.countercurrents.org is an alternative news site. "We bring out what the mainstream media fails to tell you, or hides from you. These are the things that really matter. The things which may determine the fate of planet earth! The future of our children! In a word, the survival of the species!" Countercurrents.org stands for peace and justice. Our sympathies are with all those who are engaged in struggles for economic, political, social, cultural, gender, environmental ….. justice. Our aim is to strengthen all these movements. Our conviction is that the driving force of social change is these small counter movements and struggles! Countercurrents.org PB No. 5 Kumaranalloor PO Kerala India 686 016 Not too impressed............ Second, the article said we would terrorizing them, yet not once does it mention any "atrocity" on the US Military's part all it does is just recapitulate the Operation's Mission Statement. "The aim of Operation Law and Order is to move into strongholds of resistance throughout Baghdad, arrest or kill insurgents, and occupy the neighborhoods", where are all the atrocities to follow the title of the article?? Third, the only atrocities I see in the article: "Early Monday, an attack by three suicide car bombers killed two American soldiers and eight Iraqi officers at an Iraqi police headquarters that is being used as a US base in Tarmiya, 25 miles north of Baghdad. The US military also confirmed that 17 US troops had been injured in what it referred to as a “coordinated attack.” Attacks on such vulnerable bases—and the deaths of more US troops—can be expected to increase as the US counterinsurgency operation proceeds. The death toll of US troops now stands at 3,144. The vast majority of Iraqis see the American military as their enemy and occupier. Recent polls show that the majority of Iraqis believe that killing American soldiers is justified. If this journalist was actually there in Iraq, they might get some facts and decrease the likely chance of erroneous reporting. American officials have released no estimate on the total number of arrests and casualties in the Baghdad operation. Fifth, again the only atrocities I see in the article, who is terrorizing them again.....cuz I don't see in the article any atrocities committed by the US Military in that article to justify the title? While in the initial days of the operation sectarian violence and deaths appeared to decline, by Sunday the death toll was nearing the 100-per-day Baghdad residents have come to expect. Three car bombs exploded in mainly Shia areas of the city, killing at least 67 and injuring more than 120." That article doesn't shed a favorable light on that journalist organization and don't know if they have even heard of the Journalism Code of Ethics http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp Not a great source, what is the impact factor for that journal again? VERIFY BEFORE YOU TESTIFY!!!!... dang that sounds better each time.

Whatever...

Actually I provide Anesthesia (when I am not in the lab) to our service members. But anyhoot, He posted the same crap in three different places on here.........and not once but twice he tried to call me out......"Homey don't play dat!!!!!" VERIFY BEFORE YOU TESTIFY!!! (hehehehe, kinda like that....)

The funny thing is the answer is on this site in my profile, all he had to do was click on it, instead he attacks the man. For the Record!! 1. I am an Active Duty Officer in the United States Army. 2. I am a veteran of Operation Desert Storm 1990-1991, and Operation Iraqi Freedom 2003. 3. I am a Nurse Anesthetist 4. I am a Graduate Fellow who had just finished his 2nd year in a Neuroscience PhD program. VERIFY BEFORE YOU TESTIFY!!!!

Whatever dude, I don't think I ever said that again you are untruthful and deceitful. Why do you insist on doubting me when I gave you all the information you needed to check my story in my previous post? Just plain lack of effort on your part and I guess your more comfortable just accepting your own point of view that its "everyone elses" fault. I gave you a compliment in another thread and you still basically called me a liar, what is wrong with you? I am done wasting my time with you (integrity is a big deal to me and you seem to have none accusing everyone of being untruthful). As you know as a PhD (I'll take one out of your book....."if you really are" LOL......at least I am verifiable like I said just google my name, you'll find me I have the courage to present who I am); Ahem, again as you know as a "PhD", your actions towards others are typically an outward projection of your own personality flaws. I know my flaws, I expect people to be civil and honest and get piXXed when they don't. Again, you have no idea of what your talking about, again you call me a liar, again WHAT IS WRONG with you DO YOUR HOMEWORK, goto http://www.usuhs.mil and see how IT IS POSSIBLE to be on ACTIVE DUTY and still be a GRADUATE STUDENT. Man, I feel like I am talking to my four year old daughter........... EDIT a few minutes later: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA do you know what I just realized? My homepage with my information is listed on my user profile here and you didn't even take the time to look at that before generating your false hypothesis, are you that error prone in your own work? Do you always state a hypothesis without the proper research?

We have been in Iraq for how long? I was deployed during the initial assault during OIF1. I deployed in 2003 for 9 months and returned, then started my program in 2005 (see how its possible yet?) Again, I give you a compliment and you call me a liar, you are just foolish and pathetic. BTW I am almost 40 years old and have been around and done many things, goto http://www.usuhs.mil and you will see how it is possible to get a Neuroscience PhD while on ACTIVE DUTY, don't start waving your hands and doubting people before you have researched the issue, you know better, again you are foolish and pathetic in this capacity by thinking someone is untruthful without having a clue about background. Do you know what I just realized???? You didn't even look at my webpage that is part of my user profile and still called me a liar......I mean its right there plain as day, my CV is on it......talk about rushing to judgment..................

Whatever, dude, I have been serving proudly since 1988. Basic Training at Fort Jackson, SC in '88........Officer Basic Course in Fort Sam Houston in '00.......Advanced Officer Course in '05.....oh and 2 deployments in support of Operation Desert Storm '91 and Operation Iraqi Freedom '03. I can post pictures of me when I was there if you want, in fact got em on my website, wanna see? You don't have to look very hard to find me, just google my username---you will find me. That's it, keep dismissing everyone (but yourself) and calling people liars........ what a maroon you are sometimes!!

That is an excellent description, I just finished my second year in a Neuroscience PhD program and the didactic portion had classes that included molecular and cell biology, neuroanatomy, membrane and endocrine physiology, medical pharmacology, immunology, genetics, biochemistry, Advanced Laboratory techniques, and Research Lab rotations (we select our PI and lab after the third rotation). I hope to qualify into candidacy officially on Thursday as I will be taking my oral examination (written was successful). So I gotta say nice description from a current PhD student.

That will be a question for the next administration, so choose wisely. "The United States is embedded in Iraq for the foreseeable future. Quick exits from a failed policy and a failing Iraq have emotional appeal but will probably be very hard to achieve, absent a catastrophic change in the situation. Given the nature of U.S. commitments and the investment already made in our political and military partnership with the Iraqi state, the next administration, of either party, will face the Iraq file in 2009, and will likely be working on ways to limit and downscale U.S. involvement there for the better part of the next presidential term." http://www.aspeninstitute.org/atf/cf/%7BDEB6F227-659B-4EC8-8F84-8DF23CA704F5%7D/LaipsonPaper.pdf

Right now...............

One of the few things in my perspective in her favor is the fact she "states" she will support a dramatic increase in funding Autism research.

Infidelity is not our [the public's] business. That is between the person and their spouse/partner.

OK, nice try at an insult, BTW I have been in the conflict twice (TWO deployments)... can you say the same???? I am not a fan of the war, but I will do my job to the best of my abilities. The problem is our leaders decided to "pick a fight" and it must be finished. The hornets nest is stirred and now must be exterminated. You said "yeah, a few people will die [in the US]", almost as if you wished for it. I for one certainly do not think thats acceptable. No death is acceptable however our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan don't have that option, they must kill or die (have you ever been in that situation?) Hey guys, I got no problem with whatever person you all put into office...but remember you have to deal with them for the term, there are no "recalls" for the presidency so be sure you get it right the first time or else decisions get made that you don't agree with then you start "blaming" everyone except yourselves for the vote. I keep hearing how bad things are........................well then quit complaining about the situation, get organized, and do something about the having a role in the next person you put into office.

Here is a good explanation on why it may happen: http://athena.louisville.edu/~pprowe01/research_interests.html One feature of nicotine's effects is that, immediately following exposure to nicotine, there is a loss of activity towards the drug. This phenomenon is known as desensitization. One possible consequence of the desensitization process is that long-term nicotine use appears to cause the body to maintain additional nicotinic receptors upon which the neurotransmitter, acetylcholine, acts in an attempt to counteract the loss of activity. This increased number of receptors is called receptor upregulation.

That depends on the dose, nicotine in large doses is a ganglionic blocking agent and will depress neurons as it will continue to keep acetylcholine receptors depolarized (much like succinylcholine at the NMJ). But at small doses it is a stimulant via an initial receptor depolarization but the quantities in the synapse are not sufficient to continue to activate the receptor (thus allowing it to reset and reactivate).