Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion GroupsGeneral TopicsLow CarbWeightWatchers
WeightAdviser.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Weight Loss Forum / Low Carb / March 2004

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Quitting smoking stuff

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Luna - 16 Mar 2004 06:08 GMT
Ok, there are a quazillion good reasons to quit smoking, but the withdrawal
process kinda sucks.  I caved last night and smoked again, but today I
started the Nicorette gum which is helping a lot.  I did not feel sick and
tired today like I did when trying to go cold turkey.  I was able to run
around and play soccer with the kids at work for a whole hour!  And I
didn't start coughing and run out of breath!  I'm hoping the joy at being
able to exercise without coughing and choking will help offset any
potential weight gain from a lowered metabolism.  So far, the gum is also
helping me to not replace smoking with eating more.  One really cool thing
is, after dinner instead of chewing the Nicorette, I chewed a regular stick
of sugarless gum, and as the nicotine leaves my system I am getting groggy
and ready to go to sleep, and I'm so zonked now I'm not even considering
late-night snacking.   Oh, for those of you who may be concerned, I'm not
planning to just get addicted to the gum and chew it forever. I only chewed
5 pieces today, even though the directions said to chew at least 9.  I'm
all, whatever, I'm only going to chew what I need.

Signature

Michelle Levin
http://www.mindspring.com/~lunachick

I have only 3 flaws.  My first flaw is thinking that I only have 3 flaws.

Chrono-Z - 16 Mar 2004 09:05 GMT
Hah not bad! I'm up to about 3 packs of 5 piece chewing gum a day!

> Ok, there are a quazillion good reasons to quit smoking, but the withdrawal
> process kinda sucks.  I caved last night and smoked again, but today I
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> 5 pieces today, even though the directions said to chew at least 9.  I'm
> all, whatever, I'm only going to chew what I need.
carla - 16 Mar 2004 13:21 GMT
> I was able to run
> around and play soccer with the kids at work for a whole hour!  And I
> didn't start coughing and run out of breath!  I'm hoping the joy at being
> able to exercise without coughing and choking will help offset any
> potential weight gain from a lowered metabolism.

I think it's a truly remarkable thing about quitting smoking that the lungs
begin to heal so quickly.  It is really true that (barring extreme damage
such as emphysema or cancer) even a few days away from cigarettes noticeably
improves one's breathing.  I am glad you are enjoying it.  Good luck Luna,
I'm pulling for you!

carla
JC Der Koenig - 16 Mar 2004 14:51 GMT
Weak, weak, weak.

Signature

Most of us probably aren't in danger of smoking too little.

> Ok, there are a quazillion good reasons to quit smoking, but the withdrawal
> process kinda sucks.  I caved last night and smoked again, but today I
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> 5 pieces today, even though the directions said to chew at least 9.  I'm
> all, whatever, I'm only going to chew what I need.
Luna - 16 Mar 2004 16:36 GMT
Don't care, don't care, don't care.  I just want to stop smoking.  I don't
care whether I go about it in a "macho" way. I AM too weak to handle the
physical withdrawal symptoms at the same time as the pyschological
withdrawal.  I still constantly have the urge to smoke, so I still have to
be strong enough to fight that, I just don't have to feel like I have the
flu at the same time.

> Weak, weak, weak.
>
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
> > 5 pieces today, even though the directions said to chew at least 9.  I'm
> > all, whatever, I'm only going to chew what I need.

Signature

Michelle Levin
http://www.mindspring.com/~lunachick

I have only 3 flaws.  My first flaw is thinking that I only have 3 flaws.

Susan - 16 Mar 2004 16:46 GMT
lunachik wrote:

>Don't care, don't care, don't care.  I just want to stop smoking.  I don't
>care whether I go about it in a "macho" way. I AM too weak to handle the
>physical withdrawal symptoms at the same time as the pyschological
>withdrawal.  I still constantly have the urge to smoke, so I still have to
>be strong enough to fight that, I just don't have to feel like I have the
>flu at the same time.

My SIL, after years of failure to quit, has gotten control of withdrawal using
acupuncture.  I think you only need a couple of treatments.

For my DH, Zyban, lozenges and gum and/or patches do it.  He thought the Zyban
made a big difference.  The lozenges and gum get rid of the brain fog, so he
can function mentally.

Susan
Luna - 16 Mar 2004 17:04 GMT
> x-no-archive: yes
>
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
>
> Susan

I was prescribed Zyban (Wellbutrin, same drug, different name) for
depression once, but I had a bad reaction to it.

Signature

Michelle Levin
http://www.mindspring.com/~lunachick

I have only 3 flaws.  My first flaw is thinking that I only have 3 flaws.

JC Der Koenig - 16 Mar 2004 16:50 GMT
Just say no.

Signature

Most of us probably aren't in danger of eating too little. :)

Becky P.

> Don't care, don't care, don't care.  I just want to stop smoking.  I don't
> care whether I go about it in a "macho" way. I AM too weak to handle the
[quoted text clipped - 24 lines]
> > > 5 pieces today, even though the directions said to chew at least 9.  I'm
> > > all, whatever, I'm only going to chew what I need.
Luna - 16 Mar 2004 17:05 GMT
Ok, no.  No, I'm not going to stop using the gum just because you think I'm
weak.  ;o)

> Just say no.
>
[quoted text clipped - 35 lines]
> I'm
> > > > all, whatever, I'm only going to chew what I need.

Signature

Michelle Levin
http://www.mindspring.com/~lunachick

I have only 3 flaws.  My first flaw is thinking that I only have 3 flaws.

JC Der Koenig - 16 Mar 2004 17:08 GMT
I wrote that you were weak because you gave in and smoked a cigarette.

The gum is a whole 'nother issue.

Signature

Most of us probably aren't in danger of smoking too little.

> Ok, no.  No, I'm not going to stop using the gum just because you think I'm
> weak.  ;o)
[quoted text clipped - 38 lines]
> > I'm
> > > > > all, whatever, I'm only going to chew what I need.
Luna - 16 Mar 2004 17:15 GMT
Oh, yeah. That was a weak thing to do. Am I weak person because I have a
weak moment?  Is a weak person one who never fails, never messes up?  
Thanks, you're really making me think.  You're making me think of all the
times in the past when I tried to accomplish something, had a setback, and
let that be an excuse to give up completely.  I think I'm different now. I
have weak moments, I have setbacks, I let myself down sometimes.  But I
don't just give up because of it, I get right back on the horse and try
again.  

> I wrote that you were weak because you gave in and smoked a cigarette.
>
> The gum is a whole 'nother issue.

Signature

Michelle Levin
http://www.mindspring.com/~lunachick

I have only 3 flaws.  My first flaw is thinking that I only have 3 flaws.

DG511 - 16 Mar 2004 18:46 GMT
Luna, JC is viciously trying to undermine your confidence.  Why don't you
killfile him, at least for a while?  You're doing great, and anyone who tells
you otherwise is a jerk.

Daria
166/148/140
sugar-free since 2/1/04
low-carb since 2/17/04
JC Der Koenig - 16 Mar 2004 19:23 GMT
Go lose some weight fatty, she knows what she's doing.

Signature

Most of us probably aren't in danger of eating too little. :)

Becky P.

> Luna, JC is viciously trying to undermine your confidence.  Why don't you
> killfile him, at least for a while?  You're doing great, and anyone who tells
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> sugar-free since 2/1/04
> low-carb since 2/17/04
Luna - 17 Mar 2004 00:51 GMT
> Luna, JC is viciously trying to undermine your confidence.  Why don't you
> killfile him, at least for a while?  You're doing great, and anyone who tells
> you otherwise is a jerk.

Whatever.  Maybe he was trying to undermine my confidence, maybe not.  I
doubt it.  Either way, he can't do much to me at all if I don't take it
personally, and instead use his comments as a springboard for a more
philosophical discussion.

Signature

Michelle Levin
http://www.mindspring.com/~lunachick

I have only 3 flaws.  My first flaw is thinking that I only have 3 flaws.

JC Der Koenig - 17 Mar 2004 00:54 GMT
> > Luna, JC is viciously trying to undermine your confidence.  Why don't you
> > killfile him, at least for a while?  You're doing great, and anyone who tells
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> personally, and instead use his comments as a springboard for a more
> philosophical discussion.

Do you see "Twilight of the Idols" as a self-empowerment manual?
Luna - 17 Mar 2004 01:23 GMT
> > > Luna, JC is viciously trying to undermine your confidence.  Why don't
> you
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>
> Do you see "Twilight of the Idols" as a self-empowerment manual?

I have no idea what you're even talking about.  Is that anything like
"American Idol?" Because that show sucks.

Signature

Michelle Levin
http://www.mindspring.com/~lunachick

I have only 3 flaws.  My first flaw is thinking that I only have 3 flaws.

JC Der Koenig - 17 Mar 2004 02:15 GMT
> > > > Luna, JC is viciously trying to undermine your confidence.  Why don't
> > you
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> I have no idea what you're even talking about.  Is that anything like
> "American Idol?" Because that show sucks.

Philosophy.

Nietzsche.

Nevermind.
CarbAddict - 17 Mar 2004 14:14 GMT
>  From: JC Der Koenig (Wed, 17 Mar 2004 01:15:30 GMT)
> MsgId: <SEN5c.10331$111.6207@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> Nevermind.

Nice try, though. :)
Marsha - 17 Mar 2004 02:40 GMT
>>Do you see "Twilight of the Idols" as a self-empowerment manual?

> I have no idea what you're even talking about.  Is that anything like
> "American Idol?" Because that show sucks.

Hmmm...type "Twilight of the Idols" in Google.  Interesting.

Marsha/Ohio
bidkev - 17 Mar 2004 03:20 GMT
<snip>

> I have no idea what you're even talking about.  Is that anything like
> "American Idol?" Because that show sucks.

It's baiting you.
tcmedara - 17 Mar 2004 02:38 GMT
(snip)

>  Either way, he can't do much to me at all if I don't
> take it personally, and instead use his comments as a springboard for
> a more philosophical discussion.

Hahahahaha, that's good!  Using JC as a springboard for a more philosophical
discussion is like using a banana to build bridge!  Nothing says you can't
do it, but it's gonna be awfully hard to get started!

Seeing a reference to that dolt and the term philosophical in the same
sentence just cracks me up!

Thanks....and keep focused on quitting.  The hard part is almost over.
Another week and you won't want to give in.

Tom
Marsha - 17 Mar 2004 03:06 GMT
> (snip)
>
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>
> Tom

You don't get it, either, huh?  : )

Marsha/Ohio
tcmedara - 17 Mar 2004 03:52 GMT
> You don't get it, either, huh?  : )
>
> Marsha/Ohio

No, I get it, I just don't buy it.  JC makes an obscure reference to
Nietzsche and that makes him some sort of intellectual?  Unfortunately the
body of evidence demonstrates otherwise. He's consistently shown an
inability to rise to the occasion, and would rather exist in the
intellectual kiddie pool and amuse himself paddling in the urine-warmed
shallows of his own self-indulgence than subject himself to the more
challenging and often chillier currents of real intellectual intercourse.

That's why I thought any reference to JC as a philosophical springboard was
funny.  Sorta like bouncing on a bed of mud.  Get it?

Tom (prefers more Enlightenment thinkers)
JC Der Koenig - 17 Mar 2004 04:07 GMT
Learned how to do pushups yet?

Signature

Most of us probably aren't in danger of butching up in the Air Force.

> > You don't get it, either, huh?  : )
> >
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>
> Tom (prefers more Enlightenment thinkers)
tcmedara - 17 Mar 2004 04:15 GMT
> Learned how to do pushups yet?

See what I mean?

Thanks

Tom
Carmen - 17 Mar 2004 04:34 GMT
Hi,

> Learned how to do pushups yet?

Hey, airmen are invaluable to the United States military.  They make
the Coasties look tough.  ;-)

Take care,
Carmen
JC Der Koenig - 17 Mar 2004 04:39 GMT
> Hi,
>
> > Learned how to do pushups yet?
>
> Hey, airmen are invaluable to the United States military.  They make
> the Coasties look tough.  ;-)

Good to see you haven't lost your sense of humor.

Btw, coasties see more front line action than airmen. Smugglers don't always
give up right away.
Carmen - 17 Mar 2004 14:17 GMT
Hi,
JC wrote <to TCMedara>
> > > Learned how to do pushups yet?

Carmen wrote:
> > Hey, airmen are invaluable to the United States military.  They
> > make the Coasties look tough.  ;-)

JC wrote:
> Good to see you haven't lost your sense of humor.
>
> Btw, coasties see more front line action than airmen. Smugglers
> don't always give up right away.

Carmen wrote:
Need that sense of humor, otherwise I'd end up going bonkers and
taking the local Chuck E Cheese mouse hostage or something.  <G>

You're right about the Coast Guard.  I'd forgotten about smuggling
interdiction.  I guess the airmen pretty much make every other branch
look better.  If it were up to me I'd say the AF should be disbanded
and the slots and planes divided between the Navy and the Army.  The
entire plushy lifestyle the airmen are taught to expect makes for
lousy discipline, soft personnel and rotten inter-branch cooperation
when needed.  It's sad to think how many potentially good military
folks get ruined by going AF.

Take care,
Carmen
JC Der Koenig - 17 Mar 2004 14:24 GMT
> Hi,
> JC wrote <to TCMedara>
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
> when needed.  It's sad to think how many potentially good military
> folks get ruined by going AF.

Very well stated.
revek - 17 Mar 2004 23:26 GMT
If it were up to me I'd say the AF should be disbanded
> and the slots and planes divided between the Navy and the Army.

Kind of like it was in the begining, eh?
--
revek
The structure of the university was such that, to become a member of
the faculty, you merely found some obscure subject that nobody else
claimed to teach, set up an office, and showed up at meal times. If
you
were unlucky, you may attract students. - Terry Pratchett, The Last
Continent
Carmen - 18 Mar 2004 01:24 GMT
Hi,

>  If it were up to me I'd say the AF should be disbanded
> > and the slots and planes divided between the Navy and the Army.
>
> Kind of like it was in the begining, eh?

If people like Tom are indicative of what happens when there's a
separate AF then having an AF is counter-productive.  The pilots
around here are not afflicted with the poisonous sort of dissociation
from the ground troops that AF pilots have, nor are the air support
crews or the mechanics or etc.  They live among their fellow soldiers.
The aircraft exist to support and protect the ground troops, not the
other way 'round.  A separate AF allows airmen to forget that.
Unfortunately, the troops realize that the AF has become more about
how cushy the airmen's surroundings are, and less about the mission.
That doesn't breed respect for them as fellow warriors.

Take care,
Carmen
revek - 19 Mar 2004 21:47 GMT
> Hi,
>
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> from the ground troops that AF pilots have, nor are the air support
> crews or the mechanics or etc.

I wouldn't know.  My brother didn't talk to me about his service (I
was too young).  I was commenting on the fact that when the newfangled
flying things came out, each branch had it's own air component, and it
was only after WW2 that the AF was separated out as it's own branch.

They live among their fellow soldiers.
>  The aircraft exist to support and protect the ground troops, not the
> other way 'round.

I would agree to that.

A separate AF allows airmen to forget that.
> Unfortunately, the troops realize that the AF has become more about
> how cushy the airmen's surroundings are, and less about the mission.
> That doesn't breed respect for them as fellow warriors.

Well stuff like Catch 22 never helped the image-- isn't that where the
legend 'the army builds the stuff it needs and *then* builds an
officer's club with the leftover, but the AF does it the other way
around, which is why they've got the best, since they still need the
other stuff, it's easier getting it if you can prove you can't build
your latrines on what you have" was first printed?

Dad.   L. Colonel, Army Air Force WW2
Brother,  Captian, Air Force, 1960s
Brother,  (rank jammed in my frontal lobe and wont' come out) Navy,
late 50s
Uncle,   Sargeant, Army, Vietnam
Uncle,   (ditto on the jamming) Marines, WW2

I came within a micron of going Navy myself.  The recruiter wanted me
keenly, even mentioning officer school and intelligence, as if that
was an inducement.  Silly man.  I thought about, the pros certainly
looked good on paper, but ultimately it sounded  too much like home
for me.  ;)
--
revek
The whole of life is just like watching a film. Only it's as though
you
always get in ten minutes after the big picture has started, and
no-one
will tell you the plot, so you have to work it out all yourself from
the clues. - Terry Pratchett, Moving Pictures.
Carmen - 21 Mar 2004 21:57 GMT
Hi Revek,

> > Unfortunately, the troops realize that the AF has become more
> > about how cushy the airmen's surroundings are, and less about the
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> other stuff, it's easier getting it if you can prove you can't build
> your latrines on what you have" was first printed?

Believe it or not I haven't read Catch 22 so I don't know.  That would
explain why Air Force bases have so many luxuries though compared to
other branch's installations.

Take care,
Carmen
tcmedara - 18 Mar 2004 00:41 GMT
> You're right about the Coast Guard.  I'd forgotten about smuggling
> interdiction.  I guess the airmen pretty much make every other branch
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> Take care,
> Carmen

LOL You two are a howl!  An anti-social dolt who couldn't hack it in the
military and an NCO's wife have figured out how to restructure our military
for the new millenium.  Wow, its all clear to me now.  Maybe we should book
you both as visiting professors at the National Defense University (where
joint - or "inter-branch" as you so quaintly put it -- operations are
routinely studied) Quick email Rumsfeld, I'm sure he'd love to know the
results of your exhaustive research!

Seriously Carmen, JC's just an idiot so I have fun watching his brain
shrink, but I took you for someone smart enough to avoid topics you're ill
equipped to discuss.  It's funny to read, but disappointing in a way.  JC's
too stupid to move out of the realm of repetition and juvenile insult, he's
got a limited toolkit when it comes to original thought.  You've
demonstrated an actual working intellect, why resort to silliness now?
Repeating lame platitudes for the sake of a cheap jab is beneath you,
really.  I can play the same game, but it's just not as much fun as real
intelligent discourse, is it?  Stick to low carb.

Tom
JC Der Koenig - 18 Mar 2004 00:46 GMT
Are you even in the real AF, or do you just play at it on the weekends?

Signature

Most of us probably aren't in danger of eating too little. :)

Becky P.

> > You're right about the Coast Guard.  I'd forgotten about smuggling
> > interdiction.  I guess the airmen pretty much make every other branch
[quoted text clipped - 27 lines]
>
> Tom
Carmen - 18 Mar 2004 01:06 GMT
> LOL You two are a howl!  An anti-social dolt who couldn't hack it in
> the military and an NCO's wife have figured out how to restructure
> our
> military for the new millenium.  Wow, its all clear to me now.

Ah, now the picture gets clearer on this end as well.  You're an
officer, aren't you?  Most likely a junior one.  If so, I do hope
there's a competent non comm to keep you straight.  If he or she is
good you won't even know they're doing it.  It takes a long time to
develop a good non comm (Sarge has been doing this for 21 years in
June) so if you are an officer, and your evals are good you'd be wise
to thank whoever it is that's gotten you there.  They're worth their
weight in gold.

Carmen
tcmedara - 18 Mar 2004 03:07 GMT
>> LOL You two are a howl!  An anti-social dolt who couldn't hack it in
>> the military and an NCO's wife have figured out how to restructure
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>
> Carmen

Again, off the mark and out of your league.  Put your hubby on and we might
be able to have an intelligent conversation on the subject.  Nothing
personal, but any advice you have to give me on the value of NCOs in an
organizaiton is worth about what I'm paying for it.  Seriously Carment, why
do you feel the need to pursue this line of discussion?  It's like me
offering my opinion at a brain surgeons' convention, I'd be out of my
league.  Like I said before, go for the cheap jab if you feel like it.   I
find it kinda funny to watch people stray boldly into the vast expanse of
their own ignorance.  I expect it from JC 'cause it's all he's got.  You
strike me as smarter than that.   I've heard more inter-service sniping in a
single week than you've probably heard in your life -- and I've given my
fair share as well.  There's not much you can spout that I haven't heard and
laughed about years ago.  It cuts both ways, too.  I won't bother to go down
that road because it would be wasted effort in this audience.  Stick to the
LC discussion, or at least one's where you're not in over your head.  Leave
the NG fool role for JC, he's pretty much got it covered.

Go Air Force!.....I'll leave it at that.

Here, address these topics if you must:  Smoking is bad, Low carb is a great
means to control one's eating habits, calories matter, it's okay to splurge
once in a while as long as you don't use it as an excuse to stuff your hole,
no matter what or how you eat exercise needs to be a part of your lifestyle.

Tom
Carmen - 18 Mar 2004 03:45 GMT
Tom:
> >> LOL You two are a howl!  An anti-social dolt who couldn't hack it
> >> in the military and an NCO's wife have figured out how to
> >> restructure our military for the new millenium.  Wow, its all
> >> clear to me now.

Carmen:
> > Ah, now the picture gets clearer on this end as well.  You're an
> > officer, aren't you?  Most likely a junior one.  If so, I do hope
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> > worth
> > their weight in gold.

Tom:
> Again, off the mark and out of your league.  Put your hubby on and
> we might be able to have an intelligent conversation on the subject.
>  Nothing
> personal, but any advice you have to give me on the value of NCOs in
> an organizaiton is worth about what I'm paying for it.  Seriously
> Carment, why do you feel the need to pursue this line of discussion?

Carmen:
In our marriage the wife is allowed to have her own opinions.  The
discussion is relevant and that's why you're tap-dancing now.  If you
want to end the discussion do so honestly.  The tactic of offering to
fight the husband for something the wife said is passe.
If you'll recall it was you who got into the earlier discussion in the
first place by intimating that JC wasn't as patriotic as you because
you did some time in Iraq and he didn't.  That was *way* out of line,
especially since your deployment was AF, meaning it was short and a
far cry from the deployments done by the majority of the other service
members who went.  Who did your perimeter guard Tom?  Marines or Army?
Did you even make it to Iraq or did you sit in Kuwait?

Tom:
> It's like me offering my opinion at a brain surgeons' convention,
> I'd be out of
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> he's got.
> You strike me as smarter than that.

Carmen:
And yet you do not counter points, you merely continue to proclaim
that I'm ignorant.  I'm not stupid Tom.  I've made valid points and
you've failed to address them.

Tom:
> I've heard more inter-service
> sniping in a single week than you've probably heard in your life --
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> go down that road because it would be wasted effort in this
> audience.

Carmen:
Since it would have to be based upon falsities I dare say it would be
wasted.

Tom:
> Stick to the LC discussion, or at least one's where you're not in
> over your head.
>  Leave the NG fool role for JC, he's pretty much got it covered.

Carmen:
Evade discussing facts all you wish.  I'll continue to say what needs
to be said when it needs to be said.  I do not take direction from the
likes of you.

Tom:
> Go Air Force!.....I'll leave it at that.

Carmen:
That's a meaningless mantra, requiring no thought.  But I'm the one
who isn't engaging in intelligent coversation.  Sure.

Tom:
> Here, address these topics if you must:  Smoking is bad, Low carb is
> a great means to control one's eating habits, calories matter, it's
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> of your
> lifestyle.

Carmen:
Those are good subjects for you to discuss - after you've been low
carbing for a while.  *I'll* discuss what I please.

Carmen
JC Der Koenig - 18 Mar 2004 04:33 GMT
> If you'll recall it was you who got into the earlier discussion in the
> first place by intimating that JC wasn't as patriotic as you because
> you did some time in Iraq and he didn't.  That was *way* out of line,

Btw, I never wrote that I didn't spend time in Iraq. Although it has nothing
to do with my patriotism, I was there back in 91/92. Also spent some time
with the AF at Khobar Towers. I was well impressed with their accomodations,
if not their military discipline.
Carmen - 18 Mar 2004 16:53 GMT
Hi,

> > If you'll recall it was you who got into the earlier discussion in
> > the first place by intimating that JC wasn't as patriotic as you
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> time with the AF at Khobar Towers. I was well impressed with their
> accomodations, if not their military discipline.

It's been a while since I thought about Khobar Towers.  I remember the
pictures on the news of the open scar on the place.  Ugly.  The sad
thing is to this day AF security doesn't impress me.  About six months
ago some friends and I were doing some geocaching at night on an AF
base a couple of hours south of here.  We were doing virtuals
(consists of following the GPSr to the coordinates then gathering
information from the source site) with flashlights around the display
aircraft in full view of the gate guards (about 300 feet or so from
them).  It wasn't until approximately 20 minutes later that one of
them finally got in his truck, drove over to us and then asked what we
were doing.  Since we'd been discussing how pathetic they were for
some time already (one guy was former Army and one guy was retired
Navy) we just said "Research" and kept doing what we were doing.  Know
what?  The guy just said "Okay" and drove back to the gate.  Didn't
ask for ID - *nothing*.  We could have been terrorists, and we were
hanging around what is a visitor's center during the day and it's
right by a gate.  What if we had been terrorists and we planted an
explosive device set to detonate during peak influx hours at the gate?
Just sad.

Take care,
Carmen
JC Der Koenig - 18 Mar 2004 16:59 GMT
> Hi,
>
[quoted text clipped - 29 lines]
> explosive device set to detonate during peak influx hours at the gate?
>  Just sad.

For as smart as they're supposed to be, they sure don't seem to learn from
their mistakes. I believe it's mostly an attitude problem.
Carmen - 19 Mar 2004 15:39 GMT
Hi,

> > Hi,
> >
[quoted text clipped - 48 lines]
> learn from their mistakes. I believe it's mostly an attitude
> problem.

We (Sarge and I and our ham radio buddies) are going to be in that
area again on Saturday.  If there are other caches on base maybe we'll
arrange to see if they're still on their backsides.
They are a well educated branch by and large, but common sense-wise
there's room for improvement.

Take care,
Carmen
JC Der Koenig - 19 Mar 2004 16:50 GMT
> They are a well educated branch by and large, but common sense-wise
> there's room for improvement.

I concur.
tcmedara - 18 Mar 2004 05:11 GMT
?
> Carmen:
> In our marriage the wife is allowed to have her own opinions.  The
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> members who went.  Who did your perimeter guard Tom?  Marines or Army?
>  Did you even make it to Iraq or did you sit in Kuwait?

Have all the opinions you like.  However, just because you hold an opinion
on a topic doesn't mean it's well informed.  Your comments show your
knowledge comes from anecdotes and association, not actual experience --
particularly regarding the AF.  I'm not tap dancing, I just don't value your
opinion.  Don't take it personally.  I have no desire to argue, or "fight"
with you or your husband.  My comment about your husband was merely to say
that, in a military discussion,  I have more respect for his opinion as a
military member than that of someone who is obviously not.  Your opinion is
your own, value it.  Just don't mistake it for more than it is.

I do recall the earlier discussion with the JC very well, but I don't think
you do.  For the record, JC brought up the subject of miltary service when
he called me a REMF -- a Vietnam era term for Rear Echelon Mother f.cker --
my reply was that unless he was posting from downtown Baghdad, he's got
nothing on me.  Patriotic or not, some idiot sitting on his a.s in Texas is
in no place to say anything negative.  Particularly since he has no clue
what I do or where I have been.  I explained that to you before.  Google on
it if you don't believe me, or look here:  http://tinyurl.com/29hqx.  I
agree, questioning someone's patriotism is out of line.   For you to now
imply the AF some how "easier" is just as much out of line.  What the hell
do you know about what I did or how I lived?   Consider your own double
standard.  Are  *you* questioning my patriotism now? (not that it matters,
btw).  Repeating platitudes you overheard about how "easy" the AF has it
doesn't mean they're true (back to that opinion thing).  To rate who has it
harder is a pointless endevour and real military people don't take it
seriously.  We joke about it a lot, but there's usually an underlying mutual
respect.   If you haven't lived it, don't pretend to understand.

> Tom:
>> It's like me offering my opinion at a brain surgeons' convention,
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> that I'm ignorant.  I'm not stupid Tom.  I've made valid points and
> you've failed to address them.

I'm not sure you've made a point.  You've made a few humorous jabs at the
Air Force, but little in the way of substantiated points.  I never said you
were stupid -- just the opposite -- I gave you credit for your demonstrated
intelligence, just not on this topic.  I'm questioning why you are going
down this road to begin with.  Unfortunately, you've wandered into an area
where your knowledge level obvioulsy is far different from my own.  What I
know is based on over 20 years of training, education, and near daily
experience in the military.  Not bragging about it, it's just fact.
Whatever points you've made appear to be based on hearsay and gossip.  I've
chosen not to address your points because it would be a either fruitless
exercise or one requiring more effort than I care to expend.  I don't read
ADSL-C to discuss military doctrine or policy.

> Tom:
>> I've heard more inter-service
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> Since it would have to be based upon falsities I dare say it would be
> wasted.

Are you calling me a liar pre-emptively?  Are you saying know what I'm going
to say will be false even before I say it? Are you saying that no other
service is open to any sort of criticism?  That's just naive.  You might
want to reword that.

> Tom:
>> Stick to the LC discussion, or at least one's where you're not in
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> to be said when it needs to be said.  I do not take direction from the
> likes of you.

I'm not sure what "facts" your referring too?  Was it when you said:

"The entire plushy lifestyle the airmen are taught to expect makes for
lousy discipline, soft personnel and rotten inter-branch cooperation
when needed.  It's sad to think how many potentially good military
folks get ruined by going AF."

Or was it your silly little generalization about "disassociation with ground
troops"?  Or when you said " The aircraft exist to support and protect the
ground troops, not the  other way 'round."  That's a lot of ill- informed
assertion, and awfully shy of facts.  Not much to respond to except it's
obvious you know little about the military and less about the Air Force.

> Tom:
>> Go Air Force!.....I'll leave it at that.
>
> Carmen:
> That's a meaningless mantra, requiring no thought.  But I'm the one
> who isn't engaging in intelligent coversation.  Sure.

Meaningless mantra was the whole point.  As were your comment abouts about
the AF.  This conversation has been lacking in intelligence since JaCkass
made the lame push-up jab and you threw in the silly comment about the
Coasties.  Not a whole lot of intelligence from the outset in my book.
That's why I'm wondering why you chose to engage in it.  Am I giving you to
much credit?

> Tom:
>> Here, address these topics if you must:  Smoking is bad, Low carb is
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> Those are good subjects for you to discuss - after you've been low
> carbing for a while.  *I'll* discuss what I please.

I'm not stopping you from discussing anything.  I too will discuss what I
please.  That's the beauty of usenet, aint it :) I also try to stick to
topics I know about,  differentiate fact from opinion, and avoid subjects I
know nothing about.  I'm merely suggesting that you stick to your strengths.
Trying to debate the relative merits of specific services is not something I
find productive in real life with other military members, let alone with
civilians on usenet.   For now, you're showing up with a knife to a
gunfight.  I just choose not to play.

Oh yeah.  I've already stated that I'm an active duty member in the AF with
over 20 years in uniform.  I'm not gonna tell you what I do or where I work.
It's neither relevent nor appropriate for usenet. Leave it at that.

Tom
JC Der Koenig - 18 Mar 2004 05:28 GMT
These AF types sure are sensitive. They probably have training for that.

Signature

Most of the Air Force probably isn't in danger of butching up too much.

> ?
> > Carmen:
[quoted text clipped - 152 lines]
>
> Tom
Carmen - 18 Mar 2004 16:35 GMT
Tom,

> For the record, JC brought up the subject of miltary service when
> he called me a REMF -- a Vietnam era term for Rear Echelon Mother
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> he has no
> clue what I do or where I have been.

> Oh yeah.  I've already stated that I'm an active duty member in the
> AF with over 20 years in uniform.  I'm not gonna tell you what I do
> or where
> I work. It's neither relevent nor appropriate for usenet. Leave it
> at that.

You must think me quite stupid.  No wonder you didn't mention what you
do.  I know full well what a REMF is, and TPOC stuff is hardly front
line troop-care sort of slotting - now is it?  No.  You sit on your
backside in VA and just deal in paperwork abstractions while others do
the work that matters.  Any interactions you've had with other branch
reps vis-a-vis DoDIIS was nothing more than a meeting of other pogues
like yourself - branch immaterial.  The big comfort for me turns out
to be that even though you're a major, you haven't been placed in a
position where you can make too many decisions that affect troops.
I do hope you recover from the three *grueling* months you spent in
Iraq (fall in Iraq with its 80 degree temps).  Since it turns out
you're mostly a poseur you really aren't worth my time.  Bugger off
pogue.

Carmen
JC Der Koenig - 18 Mar 2004 16:39 GMT
> Tom,
>
[quoted text clipped - 27 lines]
> you're mostly a poseur you really aren't worth my time.  Bugger off
> pogue.

Now that's a "bad a.s bitch".
tcmedara - 19 Mar 2004 02:13 GMT
> Tom,
>
> You must think me quite stupid.

I didn't up to this point, but now I think I gave you too much credit.

>No wonder you didn't mention what you
> do.  I know full well what a REMF is, and TPOC stuff is hardly front
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> reps vis-a-vis DoDIIS was nothing more than a meeting of other pogues
> like yourself - branch immaterial.

Passing off Google derived tidbits like you know what you're talking about
is as laughable as it is sad.  Unfortunately your attempted use of those
little tidbits just serves to proves how little you really know.  As far as
where I am now and what I do, you still don't have a clue, and frankly it's
immaterial.  We all have to pull some ocassional staff time, but that hardly
defines a person or the entire service.  Frankly it's not very fun, but it's
all part of the process.   Last I checked, there were staff jobs in every
service.  Perhaps you try and actually understand something before you spout
off about it.  Trying to discuss this with you is like a discussion of
particle physics with 1st graders.  Not sure why I'm doing it.

The big comfort for me turns out
> to be that even though you're a major, you haven't been placed in a
> position where you can make too many decisions that affect troops.

Wrong again on several counts

> I do hope you recover from the three *grueling* months you spent in
> Iraq (fall in Iraq with its 80 degree temps).  Since it turns out
> you're mostly a poseur you really aren't worth my time.

Still wrong.  Obviously you're confusing assertion with fact.  Think what
you want, but you still don't have a clue what I do or where I've been.  As
I said before, it's not appropriate information for usenet.  Guess all you
want, but don't confuse it with reality.  Your judgement of what constitutes
a "worthwhile" military deployment is irrelevent.  Unless you've done it,
you won't understand.  To comment on it just demonstrates how little you
really know.  Confusing duration and living conditions with the relative
worth of one's actions demonstrates how idiotic your understanding really
is.  Continuing to cling to unsubstantiated impressions to substantiate your
shallow conclusions demonstrates what an intellectual lightweight you really
are.  Try verifying what you know rather than asserting what you may have
heard.  Yes, I do now think you're stupid.  At least you called that part of
it right.

>Bugger off
> pogue.

Resort to vulgar insult.  Nice.  The last bastion of the ignorant.  If you
can't make your point, then throw the verbal bomb and run away, right?  I
expect as much from JaCkass, but now I see you're in the same class.  Too
bad.  I'd been enjoying the debate up until this point.   I'll just take
that as a concession.  Now go out and learn something.

> Carmen
Luna - 17 Mar 2004 04:47 GMT
> > You don't get it, either, huh?  : )
> >
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>
> Tom (prefers more Enlightenment thinkers)

Um, I didn't mean philosophical as in discussing philosophers.  I meant
like, he calls me weak, so instead of being all "Am not!  Neener neener
neener I'm killfiling you!" I considered what he was saying on a
philosophical level, as in: is a person who has a weak moment by definition
a weak person?  That's what I meant by philosophical as opposed to
personal.

Signature

Michelle Levin
http://www.mindspring.com/~lunachick

I have only 3 flaws.  My first flaw is thinking that I only have 3 flaws.

tcmedara - 17 Mar 2004 04:58 GMT
> Um, I didn't mean philosophical as in discussing philosophers.  I
> meant like, he calls me weak, so instead of being all "Am not!
> Neener neener neener I'm killfiling you!" I considered what he was
> saying on a philosophical level, as in: is a person who has a weak
> moment by definition a weak person?  That's what I meant by
> philosophical as opposed to personal.

I just thought the irony was funny.  And BTW, I think it's great your
kicking the nicotine monkey.  I know that bastard can turn into a gorilla
pretty quickly and work you over pretty well.   Support helps.  Keep it up
and stay focused.

Tom
JC Der Koenig - 17 Mar 2004 04:59 GMT
> Um, I didn't mean philosophical as in discussing philosophers.  I meant
> like, he calls me weak, so instead of being all "Am not!  Neener neener
> neener I'm killfiling you!" I considered what he was saying on a
> philosophical level, as in: is a person who has a weak moment by definition
> a weak person?  That's what I meant by philosophical as opposed to
> personal.

A person who has a weak moment is human, all too human.
Luna - 17 Mar 2004 05:04 GMT
> > Um, I didn't mean philosophical as in discussing philosophers.  I meant
> > like, he calls me weak, so instead of being all "Am not!  Neener neener
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> A person who has a weak moment is human, all too human.

word

Signature

Michelle Levin
http://www.mindspring.com/~lunachick

I have only 3 flaws.  My first flaw is thinking that I only have 3 flaws.

bidkev - 17 Mar 2004 07:59 GMT
<snip>

> A person who has a weak moment is human, all too human.

You're pretty tough then?
JC Der Koenig - 17 Mar 2004 14:20 GMT
> <snip>
>
> > A person who has a weak moment is human, all too human.
>
> You're pretty tough then?

It was an oblique reference to Nietzsche, idiot.
bidkev - 17 Mar 2004 23:29 GMT
>> <snip>
>>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
> It was an oblique reference to Nietzsche,

I'd never have guessed

> idiot.

Bugger! You've got my number!
revek - 16 Mar 2004 23:17 GMT
I think I'm different now. I have weak moments, I have
> setbacks, I let myself down sometimes.  But I don't just give up
> because of it, I get right back on the horse and try again.

Recognizing your weak moments and not letting them stop you is the
hallmark of a grownup.  And in my opinion, is the number one marker
for success in anything, including getting control of your weight.

--
revek
The thing I want to know is, if you tell your brain not to do stuff
like that and it keeps doing it anyway, does that mean your mind has a
mind of its own? And if it does, then who's in charge here, anyway?
-Jed, Armageddon Summer (Yolen)
FOB - 16 Mar 2004 23:35 GMT
There you go, just say no to JC.  Most physical addictions should be
withdrawn from gradually rather than cold turkey and the gum will let you do
that while you are dealing with changing the mental habit.

In news:lunachick-20180E.11050316032004@news03.east.earthlink.net,
Luna <lunachick@NOSPAMmindspring.com> stated
| Ok, no.  No, I'm not going to stop using the gum just because you
| think I'm weak.  ;o)
[quoted text clipped - 44 lines]
| I have only 3 flaws.  My first flaw is thinking that I only have 3
| flaws.
JC Der Koenig - 16 Mar 2004 23:58 GMT
Funny how it's always the WFFIDs that rationalize bad habits and weak will.

Signature

Most of us probably aren't in danger of butching up too much.

> There you go, just say no to JC.  Most physical addictions should be
> withdrawn from gradually rather than cold turkey and the gum will let you do
[quoted text clipped - 50 lines]
> | I have only 3 flaws.  My first flaw is thinking that I only have 3
> | flaws.
Luna - 17 Mar 2004 01:05 GMT
sh.t, man.  Accept it.  Humans are weak.  We are all weak to some extent or
another, even you.  Recognizing weaknesses and developing strategies for
dealing with them is much more likely to lead to success than trying to
pretend you're some sort of superhuman who never needs any help.  

I am like you in some ways, in that I have no patience for people who whine
about their problems without taking steps to solve them.  But, unlike you,
once someone IS taking steps, is making an effort to succeed, I do have
patience and respect for them even if they make mistakes or have weak
moments along the way, as long as they don't let those moments be an excuse
to give up completely.

You seem to hold people up to perfectionist standards, and view any moment
of weakness as a harbinger of absolute final failure.  I like you as a
person and I worry that if you are that hard on _yourself_ that you could
be setting yourself up for a hard fall. So if you have a weak moment, if
you ever cave into temptation to do something that isn't good for you,
please don't label yourself as "weak willed" and tear yourself down.  That
kind of labeling can lead to hating yourself and feeling like you're not
worth the effort it takes to be healthy.  I don't want to see that happen
to you.

> Funny how it's always the WFFIDs that rationalize bad habits and weak will.

Signature

Michelle Levin
http://www.mindspring.com/~lunachick

I have only 3 flaws.  My first flaw is thinking that I only have 3 flaws.

JC Der Koenig - 17 Mar 2004 01:18 GMT
"The secret to my happiness:

A yes, a no, a straight line, a goal."

Signature

Most of us probably aren't in danger of philosophizing too little.

> sh.t, man.  Accept it.  Humans are weak.  We are all weak to some extent or
> another, even you.  Recognizing weaknesses and developing strategies for
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
>
> > Funny how it's always the WFFIDs that rationalize bad habits and weak will.
revek - 17 Mar 2004 23:24 GMT
> There you go, just say no to JC.  Most physical addictions should be
> withdrawn from gradually rather than cold turkey and the gum will let
> you do that while you are dealing with changing the mental habit.

Really?  Because I found that the mental compulsion to light up was
far far stronger than the physical component.  That lasted about a
week or so after I removed the patch.  Which I only removed after I
had conquered the need to light up every time I sat at the computer,
read a book, had a cup of coffee, cleaned house, blah blah blah
fishcakes, and that itself took about 2 months to 'fix'.

I agree that you should only work on one aspect of addiction at a
time.

Some tips that helped a lot for me:
1.  breathe deep and hold as if you're dragging on the cig when you
get a craving.  I've found what I thought was a craving for a cig was
often my lungs desiring more air and excercise (maybe it was a
'healing itch"-- but it worked).
2.  remove all nicotine and residue from your home.  It's not enough
to throw out the pack and wash the ashtray (or it wasn't for me).  The
whole living area has to be de-oderized-- carpets, furniture,
curtains, walls.  Breathing clean air removes one of the worst craving
triggers.

Smoke free for almost 5 years now.

--
revek
Frequent lock ups are a symptom of not enough memory but only in the
way that nosebleeds are a symptom of gunshot wounds to the head.
FOB - 17 Mar 2004 23:38 GMT
I think the degree of physical addiction is definitely a YMMV thing.

In news:c3ajch$25qdar$1@ID-190183.news.uni-berlin.de,
revek <tanirevek@yahoo.com> stated
| Really?  Because I found that the mental compulsion to light up was
| far far stronger than the physical component.  That lasted about a
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
| Frequent lock ups are a symptom of not enough memory but only in the
| way that nosebleeds are a symptom of gunshot wounds to the head.
martymkm@webtv.net - 16 Mar 2004 17:30 GMT
Don't care, don't care, don't care. I just want to stop smoking. I don't
care whether I go about it in a "macho" way. I AM too weak to handle the
physical withdrawal symptoms at the same time as the pyschological
withdrawal. I still constantly have the urge to smoke, so I still have
to be strong enough to fight that, I just don't have to feel like I have
the flu at the same time.

--------------------------------

Luna, have you heard about the nicotine nasal sprays they have out now?
They are supposedly better for you overall than the patches or gum, and
satisfy you quicker.

HTH; Marty
Irv Finkleman - 16 Mar 2004 21:43 GMT
> Ok, there are a quazillion good reasons to quit smoking, but the withdrawal
> process kinda sucks.  I caved last night and smoked again, but today I
> started the Nicorette gum ....

Hi Michelle,
           If you recall, when you first started I mentioned that you should
carry the Nicorette gum as a backup.  Now you know!  Don't worry about what they
say you should consume -- just take one whenever you need one.  After you think
you've quit, still carry some with you for a full year -- that's what I did, and
I've been off for ten years come Easter weekend!

    Good Luck and keep it up!

Irv
Signature

--------------------------------------
Diagnosed Type II Diabetes March 5 2001
Beating it with diet and exercise!
297/215/210 (to be revised lower)
58"/43"(!)/44" (already lower too!)
--------------------------------------
Visit my HomePage at http://members.shaw.ca/finkirv/
Visit my very special website at http://members.shaw.ca/finkirv4/
Visit my CFSRS/CFIOG ONLINE OLDTIMERS website at http://members.shaw.ca/finkirv5/
--------------------
Irv Finkleman,
Grampa/Ex-Navy/Old Fart/Ham Radio VE6BP
Calgary, Alberta, Canada

 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2012 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.