Quote Originally Posted by Lady's Human View Post
Puck's a DAT.

More accurately, a CDAT.

Dunno if that's military or not.....Hmmmmmmmm.
For the non-military folks...

DAT = Dumb A$$ Tanker

C-DAT = Computerized Dumb A$$ Tanker (M1 series tanks have all kinds of blinky gadgets, laser beams and such....LOL)

We closed with and destroyed enemy forces using a combination of maneuver, firepower and shock effect. A lot of shock effect in my case. Bad guys who only have a rusty AK-47 tend to run away when the Cav shows up.


We're going to have to disagree on this one, Puck. I certainly see your point, however I feel that unless you've worn the uniform on duty, you have no call to be wearing it otherwise. I find it falls under the same heading as impersonating a police officer. As to the free speech aspect, I've got a somewhat narrower view of the First amendment than you do, and I don't think it applies here.

JMHO, of course.
Fair enough. The whole point of how I feel can be summed up thus.

My quote to Wom:

Should a person go to jail for simply saying they are a vet when they are not? NO. Should a person go to jail for committing perjury, by signing a document claiming benefits they are not entitled to? YES.
A guy BSing in a bar about being a soldier is a lot different than lying on a legal document and getting benefits to which they are not entitled.

Now ask me if I would respect a person who lies about being a soldier. Of course not. Do we want to open the can of worms that would be opened by allowing a law enforcement entity to prosecute people for telling untruths when they are under no legal obligation to do so?

Trust me here... I am not simply defending people who lie. Its bigger than that.