Galen

karmicdebt: "Galen... an argument that deletes important facts sounds strong, but is weak to an experienced eye." "Unless you are listed and recognized as providing "low-income", HUD, Section 8 or any program that allowed you tax benefits, construction loans, or lower interest rates committing yourself to such, you most certainly can deny any applicant based on income, ability to pay, credit reports and past rental history. CT to CA..." At one time, we did rent to low-income people because we were in a 'Title' contract with the state. We certainly can use credit ratings, and ability to pay. However unless you are using that specific program you can not use income alone, it is listing among the Tenant-landlord laws of the state. For our California place, we did it ourselves for a few years, then let the manager take care of it and did not really stick my nose into it.

GarthP2000: "Uhhmm, so when laws were passed giving blacks and women the right to vote in 1865 and 1920 respectively, are we setting up laws that give blacks and women 'Special Treatment'?" Laws giving women and blacks the 'SAME' rights as others did NOT set them apart into a seperate caste in our society. Laws that SAY that they are a separate class and as such need to be protected do. The right to vote does not give a black more rights then anyone else, it is the seperate laws which state that you can not discriminate against a black that gives them special rights above and beyond all others. Given a group of un-described people that you must pick one for promotion, or to rent an apartment or anything else. That is fair, but make one black [or any special class] and suddenly everything is stacked against everyone else. a group of white men can be passed over without any need to prove and document why they were passed over. Pass over any one of the special castes and does it still work that way? Obviously you know this,

GarthP2000: "Tell me something Evan, why is it that equal treatment in society and under the law qualifies as 'special treatment'? Or treating someone as tho' there is something morally wrong with them because of their sexuality qualifies as equal treatment in the same context?" Anytime a law is made that sets a group of people apart and seperately guarantees that group with rights, then ther are getting 'Special Treatment'. I am a landlord. I can not discriminate based upon sexual preference. That is the law here in Connecticut. So as a group, homosexuals are 'protected', they are given a level of protection that non-group members do not enjoy. It is easy to say that we should never discriminate. Wonderful, but here on planet Earth, we must. I was once refused a lease for an apartment until I supplied a marriage license for Bonnie and I, in that state they could discriminate against un-married couples co-habitating and they did. Here in 2005 in Connecticut I can not discriminate against un-married couples co-habitating. Why? Because they are a protected caste of people. They get 'special treatment'. You can say that I should never discriminate, fine. Here I have one empty apartment, but lo, I have a stack of 20 applications. If you turn down anyone who is black, you better have a documented written reason for it, or else you can be sued. If you turn down an un-married couple, you better have some documented reason and that reason better not say anything about their marital status. Wait this guy has hazel eyes! One couple clearly makes more money than the other applicants, but no you can not discriminate based upon income levels. Why? you may ask, because as is this topic they are a protected caste of people, poor people get 'special treatment'. But please go ahead tell me on what basis are you going to determine which applicant will be allowed to sign a lease. Hmm, a Catholic church nearby, so select someone who is catholic since they would possibly attend the neighborhood church and stay in my apartment longer? No. Can not discriminte based upon religion. And remember that with: Blacks, indians, homosexuals, un-married couples, and poor people in that stack, you will need some documented reason for how you determined your choice. We MUST discriminate on some basis. Even if you say "first come, first served", you are discriminating based on timeliness. In this day, you need to have your explanation ready each time you tell someone that someone else has signed the lease.

Al Poole: "Great posts Galen....." Thanks. "I do think there are LOTS of stupid people too. But I think the law of "natural selection" has been impeded/tampered with. For example... had you jumped up and blown the "impulsive" idiots brains all over the steering wheel.... he would never have had an impulsive moment again." LOL, true. But at that point I was not in a condition to 'jump' up and do anything. :-) I do feel that we have really tampered with 'natural selection' though, in many arenas of life. "... In the old days stupid people paid for their stupidity... with loss of limb, or life. Not so today!!! Oh no no no no. THEY seldom pay... but the innocent pay in spades!!! How many STUPID drunk drivers kill and maim everyday on our streets. Sometimes a multiple repeat offender. Who pays for their stupidity??? The innocent!" And it was once argued that allowing motorized vehicles in public would lessen drunk-driving accidents! "Stupid people would simply die younger. Is it up to society to protect the right of stupid people to be stupid???? Maybe, but not at my expense." Or at least, after being wounded or mauled they would no longer be able to support a family, and thus they would never find a mate, thus they would never breed... I also see that we have tampered with the natural selection process, by modern medicines and vitamin fortified foods. Today we have healthy people reaching maturity and breeding, who 0ne hundred years ago would have never made it past adolescence. My Grandparents were raised in families of 13 - 18 children. Right here in America. In the hopes that a few would reach maturity. Depending on who you talk to, and which set of statistics you read, anywhere from 10%-80% of annual births resulted in something other than perfect health. Now as we breed with others who are survivors of childhood disorders and deficiencies, those numbers can only double. Soon what percentage of our population could be born, grow to maturity; without the intervention of modern medicine? We have became dependent upon modern medicine and it is expensive. If anything should happen to strip away our medical care system, how many of our nation would survive? :-)

LOL Either back away from the bong, one hour before you type; or share so we can read what you wrote. :-)

Hammeroni: "Hello Galen. Yep. He was on the USS Hardhead, and then on the James Monroe." Good boats both of them. "I'm embarassed, how could I lose a submarine, heh heh." Dont feel badly, the entire US Navy Surface Fleet [we call them 'Targets'] loses subs all the time. heh heh heh. As an MP serving in Europe, I have spoken with many Carrier sailors who had no idea that their battle-group was being guarded by a sub, and that while the group was in port partying their sub escort was still circling out in the Med waiting for them. One time on the George C. Marshall, during an operation with P-3 Orions [they were training themselves on attempting to find subs], We had noise-makers attached to our hull that rattled as we moved; we had to stay within a small 'box' for a week in terribly shallow water, while they flew over us trying to 'find' us. Eventually we ran on the surface, with our diesel engines running mis-tuned so we could produce a huge column of thick black smoke, we had our Radar going, and when we saw the Orions through our periscopes we radio contacted them and gave them direct visual bearings to our position. Then they 'found' us. Their Admiral radioed us and chewed out our Captain for not being at the right 'spot', and making a fool of his wonderful wing-nuts. Later of course we proved that we were at the correct place, but I guess the Admiral had to make a show of defending his Orion crews over the radio-waves. :-)

ex10: “Reason being, she has some gay friends. She says, she can't understand why all the Christians shun the gay kids at school.” Because many of them believe that homosexuality is a sin. “She says, if God is love, then why would he make some people homosexual, and then totally lock them out of any kind of Christian spirituality?” I must point out that you just made the statement that G-d makes people homosexual. Trefor- “Gays of any age often feel shunned and shut out of Christian spirituality.” I think that you are speaking from your experiences and what you saw as a teenager, Whereas today it is different. Truly I dont mean to offend you, sir. But today things are different. :-) Jbarrax- “God does not make people homosexual.” I agree. “… Human weakness and Satanic predation do that. Homosexuals can and do get delivered by the way. As much as the gay rights movement would like to bury this truth it has been documented. …” This is my understanding of the situation. There are many things that people need to be delivered from, and unfortunately many times some of them will make efforts to get deliverance, but it may or may not come for them. Why? I don’t know, I would guess that a part of the ‘human-condition’ includes that sometimes the thing we most want to be delivered from is the thing that eludes us the most. “The Christians who shun "gays" are not necessarily ignorant or hard-hearted. They're just fundamentalists." But 'love' wouldn't hurt them either. "... They shun gays because they believe the Bible, which clearly teaches that homosexuality is a particularly objectionable sin in the eyes of God. Fundamentalist Christians do not like the cultural push to take something that the Bible calls an "abomination" and turn it into an accepted lifestyle. We can argue all day about whether homosexuality is a natural or unnatural state--and we have--but the bottom line is, many people still accept the Bible as truth. And that means they cannot accept gays as normal healthy people. The only honest way to criticize these people is to prove that the Bible is wrong and cannot be trusted.” While I agree with this statement; I add: When Jesus taught his jewish followers: “... Let he who is without sin cast the first stone ...” I think the example for us is that we should NOT be casting stones. Homosexual behavior is still a sin, but so is the natural state of all men, we can all be delivered and we need to be loving and serving one another. Not focusing on who to shun. We are all sinners, before we were born again. Granted at the same time, we have been given guidelines on who is acceptable for our leadership, and clearly anyone walking in the paths of sinful ways should never be leaders within the church. “By the way, equating gay rights with civil rights offends a great many African Americans, myself included. It's not the same thing. .... ” I agree. One of our sons is currently attending High-school and I coach fencing there. I see a lot of teens acting out homosexually there. Some kids have approached Matthew and even told him that they can not be his friends because they are homosexual. One girl [Angelina] was hanging out with Matthew and had even came to our home numerous times, when Matt expressed interest in another girl, suddenly Angelina told him that she could no longer hang around Matthew because she [Angelina] is Bi-Sexual. ??? Anyway, these are teens, and teens are into clicks and groups. Right now it does seem that openly proclaiming yourself to be Homo-sexual or even Bi-sexual is a fad and done for popularity. There may well be the occasional teen who does not like the "queers", but that is just their way of separating into groups. Over-all Proclaiming yourself as such seems to be a common method of gaining popularity among others. I have seen a lot of teens ‘coupling’ as boy-girl, and girl-girl; holding each other, kissing, etc. I keep telling them that "fencing-time" is not "tonsil hockey time". [they usually look at me funny] It is common today for these kids to be acting out sexually and apparently to be experimenting. From what we were taught by the Social-Services in getting our Foster-License, It is very common for children to begin acting out, expressing themselves and to experiment with their own sexuality beginning at 12 years old. By the time they get 15-17 their thick into it. Upon my retirement from the US Navy, I was offered a job where the Navy would certify me as a High-School teacher and pay my salary to go into any High-School in America and to start-up a NJ-ROTC program. [All 20+ year retirees are offered this by the way, it is promoted as a great method of stepping into civilian life by picking any community and entering that community as a High-School teacher]. This High-school that Matthew attends, is filled everyday with young girls who look, dress and act like street-walking prostitutes. I only go there twice a week to coach fencing, and I am amazed at how many of these girls try to come-on to me. I am so glad that I chose not to accept a position as a teacher there. This is our young society today. :-)

GarthP2000: "Retirement? *Retirement*??" Retirement is not a bad thing. I like being on retirement, I fully encourage everyone to get a pension as soon as possible. :-)

Linda Z: "If I'd been a teacher dealing with that child, rather than calling the police (good Lord!)" No doubt this was following the School District's policy, as set by the administrator, and not really the teacher's decision. " ... I'd have locked the child in an empty room ..." And away to prison you would have gone. " ... with nothing but a pillow to sit on and called the mother to come get her." And it oftens takes until an hour after the end of school to even get a parent or guardian to respond to the school. "I can't imagine how frightening it must have been to a 5-year-old to be handcuffed and put in a police car. I'm all for some of that "scared straight" approach, but that seems over the top to me." Uhh? I have seen children given a garbage bag and told to put anything that is really important to them in it, as they are removed from their home. This is how Children's services Case-workers do it. I have even volunteered suit-cases, but was written-up for suggesting it. By State policy it must be as 'De-Humanizing' as possible. To communicate to the child that they are trash [at least that is the policy of Connecticut]. And if the reasoning the child is being removed included anything that the child may have done, it is common for the police to do the actual 'handling' of the child, once the child has loaded a garbage bag. So even though a case-worker is there and over-seeing the process, a police officer will still hand-cuff the child. :-) As a foster-parent, this has happened in my home, with foster-children. the youngest that I have seen was a 6year old boy.

krysilis: "The first place to start is with a full physical of the child. ..." I agree. "A full physical would include brain scans to ensure there is no underlying problem there." And more, I have seen children with genetic dis-orders that only a shrink could diagnose. [On the other hand, sometimes far too many kids get diagnosed with things, so there is room for balance.] "Those of you who say that a 5 year old girl cannot inflict damage in such a tantrum have never dealt with such a child." I agree. At what age do we suddenly say that such a child is now capable of doing wrong? 5? 7? 9? An 8 year old can be a sexual predator. Granted within that context they are only a threat to smaller children [or adults who are incapable of defending themselves], but still. "Blame the parents; blame the teacher; blame the child; blame the police....why?" If there is a biological problem then you cant really blame the parents too much. Teachers are not trained to recognize many of these conditions, and besides they are too busy. Police respond when they have been called [not un-like puppys]. Besides hand-cuffing does not hurt [unless you fight it], it may be frightening. Hand-cuffs are used to protect everyone. "It would have been better, perhaps, if the police had some other restraining device...wrap the girl in a small rug or blanket...even a straight jacket...but given what they had to work with....they did OK." NO, NO, NO, State Social Services departments have long recognized 'wrapping' or even tight holding as a form of specialized therapy, and you need an MD behind your name to do it with a child. One of our alligations of abuse centered on tying the arms of a large jacket around behind the children. Even though to the chidlren it was a game, they readily admited that they had been 'tied-up', and the investigatoin began ... "Which one of you 200 lb people would like to pick up this out of control child and carry her safely to the nearest exit? She was flailing around so much that if someone had....and she happened to break her arm flailing against a door jam or such other item....the police would be sued for causing bodily injury!" I agree.

Hammeroni: "I don't know why I keep thinking the Hardhead- that was an old puppy" Does tha tlist help? :-)

I can see the argument that more people should be more freely trained with firearms and armed. But I also see that WE have a lot of just plain stupid people. Find someone raping your child, and shoot him or her, fine. On one hand, we would experience a much higher rate of those deaths. But we would also have a lot of firearm-related deaths from people being stupid, too. Not to imply that many of those self-same stupid people dont die today, but the statistics would change. Some of those who today die from swallowing beer-caps, or fall out of trees when they saw through the limb they are standing on, etc; many of those kinds of 'stupid' deaths would shift over to firearms related deaths. Which is a biggy that the 'anti-firearms' people try to use as their arguments for restricting firearms.

LornaDoone: "Every American Citizen has the right to bear arms." Not meaning to start an argument. But that statement is not correct. There are in fact American Citizens whose 'right to bear arms' has been revoked. They simply no longer have the 'right' to bear arms. We also have areas [cities mostly] where that 'right' is deligated to governmental officials who determine whether or not they think that you should have the 'right' to bear arms. I have lived in areas where I had to 'apply' for a permit from the local Police Cheif, requesting permission to purchase and own a firearm. To my understanding the phrase: "right" is thought to mean somethign that can not be taken away from an individual, but in fact many of our "rights" as American Citizens do get taken away. Whereas "Privledge" is usually the phrase for something that can come and go. I am a member of the NRA, too. I know of people who have had their "right" totaly revoked. I personally have had my "right" severely restricted for periods of years at a time. And I have had to "request in writing" for permission to own, purchase, or transport firearms. :-) "Every person in American should be brought up with guns just as they are brought up with knives, baseball bats etc." I agree. "... If the fear of guns was gone and the same respect & knowledge of guns was taught we would have less killers on the loose. ..." I am not sure about that, maybe. I have seen many many stupid people, who simply do somthing frm impulse and really dont think about the consequences of what they do. Whether they smoke crack, or inject something made in a bath-tub, or have sex with someone they find passed out in an alley, or 'joy-ride', etc. "... I see kids 8 & up going hunting with rifles for deer etc., so if they can handle it all people can handle it." I do agree. "... Then we shoot the bad guys..........You screw with my family you are dead....Kids should be taught, the nuts will be out there with their guns, knives, "box cutters" anyway so what's all the bs with the anti-gun idiots." Lets all move to the Republic of Texas. :-) " ... All I can say is "we don't dial 911"." Well not until the problem has already been resolved at least. You really dont want to be burying the bad guys too, eventually the police will be investigating their disappearance. Better to be judged by 12, then carried by 6. But along with that is the assumption that you use good judgement and common sense. One time I was working as a Military-Police Watch-Commander in Europe. One guy that worked for me, a 19 year old, with lots of training and certifications, carrying a loaded pistol, and he had even been 'under-fire' with me previously. But one day, we had to wait at a pier for a ship to come into port, to give them a briefing about the local crime-rate and customs. I was walking along the pier and he was sitting in our 'Militare-Policia' car. He thought it would be funny to run me over. So he drove our vehicle at me from behind at maybe 25mph, hit me from behind, flipping me up over the hood, the windshield hit me and threw me up in the air, and I landed solidly on the pier behind vehicle, as he drove it back around in a circle, and walked over to me laughing. He thought it was the funniest thing, to watch me fly over the windshield. Now we were both armed, I was the only one wearing a bullet-proof vest though. But how do you over-come the stupidness of 'youth'? What 'screening' process can filter out that kind of lack-of-impulse-control? Yes I think he should have recieved 39 lashes, but such is not our society. Even with a society wherein everyone is raised with firearms, given training, and experience. Some portion of them will still, get an impulse to 'see what would happen if'. Now you know what would happen if .... and I know what would happen if. But just such a question, will take control of their minds, and ... I read about a group of marines, thankfully not at my base. Who were wondering just how strong their flak-vests were, and whether any of them were strong enough to puch a Kabar knife through such a flak-vest. After a few challenges were made, one young marine doned his vest and braced himself, while another young marine ran at him with knife and thrusted it through the first man's chest. Through the flak-vest and directly through his heart. There will always be some percentage of 'stupid'. :-)

We have been slowly running the CF&S class in our fellowship, I have been writing a segment by segment outline of everything discussed. And I hope to be able to post it sometime. :-)

Thank you, your sweet.

Watered Garden: "You know what is weird to me in all of this? The women I heard and knew who so diligently taught the doctrine of submitting women were gals with great big cojones! Their husbands might teach how they had their women in subjection, but they were only the head of the household as long as the wife said so!" I think that it takes an extremely confident woman and maybe with big cojones too, to teach, beleive and desire to be in subjeciton to her husband. On the other hand, a 'person' can only be in charge, if and when everyone else agrees. I can not be the head, simply because I say so. Bonnie is very strong, and independant. I would be a fool to not recognize her wisdom and talents. I seem to be limited in explaining this except to give the example of the military. A Commanding Officer is only made the greater, when everyone working for him is in top condition, and has the best training, and is confident. For him to ignore, or belittle, or insult, or do anything to subtract from his sub-ordinates; only subtracts from him. If a married couple is to become 'one-flesh', they need to look at themselves as being a single-household too. Maybe? The better any member is, the better the whole. I dont see how a strong woman could possibly detract from the greatness of a household. :-) "I think this doctrine has done me personally more harm than any other. Oddly enough, it is not a doctrine to which my husband subscribes. I know a lot of times he wishes I'd just go do something instead of asking him to make the decision." So make decisions. I have gone away for months at a time, many times during my marriage. Bonnie msut be able to make daily decisions on her own without me. She has bought houses in my name, cars, whatever she has needed to be able to better function. And that is okay. I trust her. I fill-out a new Power-of-attorney every couple years so she always carrys a fresh one. We talk, we each offer advice to the other, if there is something that Bonnie does not feel comfortable deciding then she asks me. No big deal. :-)

excathedra: "he would say I'M IN CHARGE HERE DAMN IT. I'M DOING THE DISHES, I'M DOING THE LAUNDRY..... and on and on" Even in the military, there are many times that as you deligate various jobs out to others to do, many of those jobs are still things that you do yourself. It 'seems' that a common image, is that someone 'in charge' to is be a bossy butt-hole sending everyone else off to do everything. But, come on now, who would realistically put their neck-out on the line for someone like that? From my limited observations, a 'good' leader is among other things still very busy himself, commonly the most busy guy around. I have no objections to being in charge and still scrubbing the floors, doing laundry, meeting with school principals, even washing the dog; I dont see that these things in any way subtract from my being the 'head'. :-)

I am the head of our household, and I have my wife's permission to say so, and to think so. :-)

I'm sorry, he could not remember the names of what boats his buddy had been on, so I posted a list of some of the U.S. boats. Did I post too much? :-) If I over-stepped proper due-bounds I apologize.

Hammeroni: :-) No need to be embareassed, a lot of boats have sailed under the oceans. Did you know that during WWII, our boats numbered less than 10% of our Navy. And that the Submarine Fleet accounted for greater than 90% of all enemy sunk tonnage. Pretty cool to think that under 10%, did over 90% of all the work! heh heh heh To my knowledge there has been: hammerhead (there have been 2 of these guys), steelhead, bullhead, hardhead, and loggerhead. Dont know of any other 'heads' that were submarine names. Here is a partial listing of U.S. boats [starting in 1900]: USS HOLLAND (SS-1) USS A-1 [ex- Plunger] (SS-2) USS A-2 [ex-Adder] (SS-3) USS A-3 [ex-Grampus] (SS-4) USS A-4 [ex-Moccasin] (SS-5) USS A-5 [ex-Pike] (SS-6) USS A-6 [ex-Porpoise] (SS-7) USS A-7 [ex-Shark] (SS-8) USS C-1 [ex-Octopus] (SS-9) USS B-1 [ex-Viper] (SS-10) USS B-2 [ex-Cuttlefish] (SS-11) USS B-3 [ex-Tarantula] (SS-12) USS C-2 [ex-Stingray] (SS-13) USS C-3 [ex-Tarpon] (SS-14) USS C-4 [ex-Bonita] (SS-15) USS C-5 [ex-Snapper] (SS-16) USS D-1 [ex-Narwhal] (SS-17) USS D-2 [ex-Grayling] (SS-18) USS D-3 [ex-Salmon] (SS-19) USS G-1 [ex-Seal] (SS-19.5) USS F-1 [ex-Carp] (SS-20) USS F-2 [ex-Barracuda] (SS-21) USS F-3 [ex-Pickerel] (SS-22) USS F-4 [ex-Skate] (SS-23) USS E-1 [ex-Skipjack] (SS-24) USS E-2 [ex-Sturgeon] (SS-25) USS G-4 [ex-Thrasher] (SS-26) USS G-2 [ex-Tuna] (SS-27) USS H-1 [ex-Seawolf] (SS-28) USS H-2 [ex-Nautilus] (SS-29) USS H-3 [ex-Garfish] (SS-30) USS G-3 [ex-Turbot] (SS-31) USS K-1 [ex-Haddock] (SS-32) USS K-2 [ex-Cachalot] (SS-33) USS K-3 [ex-Orca] (SS-34) USS K-4 [ex-Walrus] (SS-35) USS K-5 (SS-36) USS K-6 (SS-37) USS K-7 (SS-38) USS K-8 (SS-39) USS L-1 (SS-40) USS L-2 (SS-41) USS L-3 (SS-42) USS L-4 (SS-43) USS L-5 (SS-44) USS L-6 (SS-45) USS L-7 (SS-46) USS M-1 (SS-47) USS L-8 (SS-48) USS L-9 (SS-49) USS L-10 (SS-50) USS L-11 (SS-51) USS T-1 [ex-Schley/ex-AA1] (SS-52) USS N-1 (SS-53) USS N-2 (SS-54) USS N-3 (SS-55) USS N-4 (SS-56) USS N-5 (SS-57) USS N-6 (SS-58) USS N-7 (SS-59) USS T-2 [ex-AA2] (SS-60) USS T-3 [ex-AA3] (SS-61) USS O-1 (SS-62) USS O-2 (SS-63) USS O-3 (SS-64) USS O-4 (SS-65) USS O-5 (SS-66) USS O-6 (SS-67) USS O-7 (SS-68) USS O-8 (SS-69) USS O-9 (SS-70) USS O-10 (SS-71) USS O-11 (SS-72) USS O-12 (SS-73) USS O-13 (SS-74) USS O-14 (SS-75) USS O-15 (SS-76) USS O-16 (SS-77) USS R-1 (SS-78) USS R-2 (SS-79) USS R-3 (SS-80) USS R-4 (SS-81) USS R-5 (SS-82) USS R-6 (SS-83) USS R-7 (SS-84) USS R-8 (SS-85) USS R-9 (SS-86) USS R-10 (SS-87) USS R-11 (SS-88) USS R-12 (SS-89) USS R-13 (SS-90) USS R-14 (SS-91) USS R-15 (SS-92) USS R-16 (SS-93) USS R-17 (SS-94) USS R-18 (SS-95) USS R-19 (SS-96) USS R-20 (SS-97) USS R-21 (SS-98) USS R-22 (SS-99) USS R-23 (SS-100) USS R-24 (SS-101) USS R-25 (SS-102) USS R-26 (SS-103) USS R-27 (SS-104) USS S-1 (SS-105) USS S-2 (SS-106) USS S-3 (SS-107) USS S-4 (SS-109) USS S-5 (SS-110) USS S-6 (SS-111) USS S-7 (SS-112) USS S-8 (SS-113) USS S-9 (SS-114) USS S-10 (SS-115) USS S-11 (SS-116) USS S-12 (SS-117) USS S-13 (SS-118) USS S-14 (SS-119) USS S-15 (SS-120) USS S-16 (SS-121) USS S-17 (SS-122) USS S-18 (SS-123) USS S-19 (SS-124) USS S-20 (SS-125) USS S-21 (SS-126) USS S-22 (SS-127) USS S-23 (SS-128) USS S-24 (SS-129) USS S-25 (SS-130) USS S-26 (SS-131) USS S-27 (SS-132) USS S-28 (SS-133) USS S-29 (SS-134) USS S-30 (SS-135) USS S-31 (SS-136) USS S-32 (SS-137) USS S-33 (SS-138) USS S-34 (SS-139) USS S-35 (SS-140) USS S-36 (SS-141) USS S-37 (SS-142) USS S-38 (SS-143) USS S-39 (SS-144) USS S-40 (SS-145) USS S-41 (SS-146) USS H-4 (SS-147) USS H-5 (SS-148) USS H-6 (SS-149) USS H-7 (SS-150) USS H-8 (SS-151) USS H-9 (SS-152) USS S-42 (SS-153) USS S-43 (SS-154) USS S-44 (SS-155) USS S-45 (SS-156) USS S-46 (SS-157) USS S-47 (SS-158) USS S-48 (SS-159) USS S-49 (SS-160) USS S-50 (SS-161) USS S-51 (SS-162) USS BARRACUDA [ex-V1] (SS-163) USS BASS [ex-V2] (SS-164) USS BONITA [ex-V3] (SS-165) USS ARGONAUT [ex-V4] (SS-166) USS NARWHAL [ex-V5] (SS-167) USS NAUTILUS [ex-V6] (SS-168) USS DOLPHIN [ex-V7] (SS-169) USS CACHALOT [ex-V8] (SS-170) USS CUTTLEFISH [ex-V9] (SS-171) USS PORPOISE (SS-172) USS PIKE (SS-173) USS SHARK (SS-174) USS TARPON (SS-175) USS PERCH (SS-176) USS PICKEREL (SS-177) USS PERMIT (SS-178) USS PLUNGER (SS-179) USS POLLACK (SS-180) USS POMPANO (SS-181) USS SALMON (SS-182) USS SEAL (SS-183) USS SKIPJACK (SS-184) USS SNAPPER (SS-185) USS STINGRAY (SS-186) USS STURGEON (SS-187) USS SARGO (SS-188) USS SAURY (SS-189) USS SPEARFISH (SS-190) USS SCULPIN (SS-191) USS SQUALUS (SS-192) USS SWORDFISH (SS-193) USS SEADRAGON (SS-194) USS SEALION (SS-195) USS SEARAVEN (SS-196) USS SEAWOLF (SS-197) USS TAMBOR (SS-198) USS TAUTOG (SS-199) USS THRESHER (SS-200) USS TRITON (SS-201) USS TROUT (SS-202) USS TUNA (SS-203) USS MACKEREL (SS-204) USS MARLIN (SS-205) USS GAR (SS-206) USS GRAMPUS (SS-207) USS GRAYBACK (SS-208) USS GRAYLING (SS-209) USS GRENADIER (SS-210) USS GUDGEON (SS-211) USS GATO (SS-212) USS GREENLING (SS-213) USS GROUPER (SS-214) USS GROWLER (SS-215) USS GRUNION (SS-216) USS GUARDFISH (SS-217) USS ALBACORE (SS-218) USS AMBERJACK (SS-219) USS BARB (SS-220) USS BLACKFISH (SS-221) USS BLUEFISH (SS-222) USS BONEFISH (SS-223) USS COD (SS-224) USS CERO (SS-225) USS CORVINA (SS-226) USS DARTER (SS-227) USS DRUM (SS-228) USS FLYING FISH (SS-229) USS FINBACK (SS-230) USS HADDOCK (SS-231) USS HALIBUT (SS-232) USS HERRING (SS-233) USS KINGFISH (SS-234) USS SHAD (SS-235) USS SILVERSIDES (SS-236) USS TRIGGER (SS-237) USS WAHOO (SS-238) USS WHALE (SS-239) USS ANGLER (SS-240) USS BASHAW (SS-241) USS BLUEGILL (SS-242) USS BREAM (SS-243) USS CAVALLA (SS-244) USS COBIA (SS-245) USS CROAKER (SS-246) USS DACE (SS-247) USS DORADO (SS-248) USS FLASHER (SS-249) USS FLIER (SS-250) USS FLOUNDER (SS-251) USS GABILAN (SS-252) USS GUNNEL (SS-253) USS GURNARD (SS-254) USS HADDO (SS-255) USS HAKE (SS-256) USS HARDER (SS-257) USS HOE (SS-258) USS JACK (SS-259) USS LAPON (SS-260) USS MINGO (SS-261) USS MUSKALLUNGE (SS-262) USS PADDLE (SS-263) USS PARGO (SS-264) USS PETO (SS-265) USS POGY (SS-266) USS POMPON (SS-267) USS PUFFER (SS-268) USS RASHER (SS-269) USS RATON (SS-270) USS RAY (SS-271) USS REDFIN (SS-272) USS ROBALO (SS-273) USS ROCK (SS-274) USS RUNNER (SS-275) USS SAWFISH (SS-276) USS SCAMP (SS-277) USS SCORPION (SS-278) USS SNOOK (SS-279) USS STEELHEAD (SS-280) USS SUNFISH (SS-281) USS TUNNY (SS-282) USS TINOSA (SS-283) USS TULLIBEE (SS-284) USS BALAO (SS-285) USS BILLFISH (SS-286) USS BOWFIN (SS-287) USS CABRILLA (SS-288) USS CAPELIN (SS-289) USS CISCO (SS-290) USS CREVALLE (SS-291) USS DEVILFISH (SS-292) USS DRAGONET (SS-293) USS ESCOLAR (SS-294) USS HACKLEBACK (SS-295) USS LANCETFISH (SS-296) USS LING (SS-297) USS LIONFISH (SS-298) USS MANTA (SS-299) USS MORAY (SS-300) USS RONCADOR (SS-301) USS SABALO (SS-302) USS SABLEFISH (SS-303) USS SEAHORSE (SS-304) USS SKATE (SS-305) USS TANG (SS-306) USS TILEFISH (SS-307) USS APOGON (SS-308) USS ASPRO (SS-309) USS BATFISH (SS-310) USS ARCHERFISH (SS-311) USS BURRFISH (SS-312) USS PERCH (SS-313) USS SHARK (SS-314) USS SEALION (SS-315) USS BARBEL (SS-316) USS BARBERO (SS-317) USS BAYA (SS-318) USS BECUNA (SS-319) USS BERGALL (SS-320) USS BESUGO (SS-321) USS BLACKFIN (SS-322) USS CAIMAN (SS-323) USS BLENNY (SS-324) USS BLOWER (SS-325) USS BLUEBACK (SS-326) USS BOARFISH (SS-327) USS CHARR (SS-328) USS CHUB (SS-329) USS BRILL (SS-330) USS BUGARA (SS-331) USS BULLHEAD (SS-332) USS BUMPER (SS-333) USS CABEZON (SS-334) USS DENTUDA (SS-335) USS CAPITAINE (SS-336) USS CARBONERO (SS-337) USS CARP (SS-338) USS CATFISH (SS-339) USS ENTEMEDOR (SS-340) USS CHIVO (SS-341) USS CHOPPER (SS-342) USS CLAMAGORE (SS-343) USS COBBLER (SS-344) USS COCHINO (SS-345) USS CORPORAL (SS-346) USS CUBERA (SS-347) USS CUSK (SS-348) USS DIODON (SS-349) USS DOGFISH (SS-350) USS GREENFISH (SS-351) USS HALFBEAK (SS-352) USS GOLET (SS-361) USS GUAVINA (SS-362) USS GUITARRO (SS-363) USS HAMMERHEAD (SS-364) USS HARDHEAD (SS-365) USS HAWKBILL (SS-366) USS ICEFISH (SS-367) USS JALLAO (SS-368) USS KETE (SS-369) USS KRAKEN (SS-370) USS LAGARTO (SS-371) USS LAMPREY (SS-372) USS LIZARDFISH (SS-373) USS LOGGERHEAD (SS-374) USS MACABI (SS-375) USS MAPIRO (SS-376) USS MENHADEN (SS-377) USS MERO (SS-378) USS SANDLANCE (SS-381) USS PICUDA (SS-382) USS PAMPANITO (SS-383) USS PARCHE (SS-384) USS BANG (SS-385) USS PILOTFISH (SS-386) USS PINTADO (SS-387) USS PIPEFISH (SS-388) USS PIRANHA (SS-389) USS PLAICE (SS-390) USS POMFRET (SS-391) USS STERLET (SS-392) USS QUEENFISH (SS-393) USS RAZORBACK (SS-394) USS REDFISH (SS-395) USS RONQUIL (SS-396) USS SCABBARDFISH (SS-397) USS SEGUNDO (SS-398) USS SEA CAT (SS-399) USS SEA DEVIL (SS-400) USS SEA DOG (SS-401) USS SEA FOX (SS-402) USS ATULE (SS-403) USS SPIKEFISH (SS-404) USS SEA OWL (SS-405) USS SEA POACHER (SS-406) USS SEA ROBIN (SS-407) USS SENNET (SS-408) USS PIPER (SS-409) USS THREADFIN (SS-410) USS SPADEFISH (SS-411) USS TREPANG (SS-412) USS SPOT (SS-413) USS SPRINGER (SS-414) USS STICKLEBACK (SS-415) USS TIRU (SS-416) USS TENCH (SS-417) USS THORNBACK (SS-418) USS TIGRONE (SS-419) USS TIRANTE (SS-420) USS TRUTTA (SS-421) USS TORO (SS-422) USS TORSK (SS-423) USS QUILLBACK (SS-424) USS TRUMPETFISH (SS-425) USS TUSK (SS-426) USS CORSAIR (SS-435) USS ARGONAUT (SS-475) USS RUNNER (SS-476) USS CONGER (SS-477) USS CUTLASS (SS-478) USS DIABLO (SS-479) USS MEDREGAL (SS-480) USS REQUIN (SS-481) USS IREX (SS-482) USS SEA LEOPARD (SS-483) USS ODAX (SS-484) USS SIRAGO (SS-485) USS POMODON (SS-486) USS REMORA (SS-487) USS SARDA (SS-488) USS SPINAX (SS-489) USS VOLADOR (SS-490) USS AMBERJACK (SS-522) USS GRAMPUS (SS-523) USS PICKEREL (SS-524) USS GRENADIER (SS-525) USS BARRACUDA [ex-K1/SSK1] (SST-3) USS BASS [ex-K2/SSK-2] (SS-551) USS BONITA [ex-K3/SSK-3] (SS-552) USS DOLPHIN (AGSS-555) USS TANG (SS-563) USS TRIGGER (SS-564) USS WAHOO (SS-565) USS TROUT (SS-566) USS GUDGEON (SS-567) USS HARDER (SS-568) USS ALBACORE (AGSS-569) USS MACKEREL [ex-T1] (SST-1) USS MARLIN [ex-T2](SST-2) USS SAILFISH (SS-572) USS SALMON (SS-573) USS GRAYBACK (SSG-574) USS DARTER (SS-576) USS GROWLER (SSG-577) USS BARBEL (SS-580) USS BLUEBACK (SS-581) USS BONEFISH (SS-582) USS NAUTILUS (SSN-571) USS SEAWOLF (SSN-575) USS SKATE (SSN-578) USS SWORDFISH (SSN-579) USS SARGO (SSN-583) USS SEADRAGON (SSN-584) USS SKIPJACK (SSN-585) USS SCAMP (SSN-588) USS SCORPION (SSN-589) USS SCULPIN (SSN-590) USS SHARK (SSN-591) USS SNOOK (SSN-592) USS TRITON (SSN-586) USS HALIBUT (SSN-587) USS THRESHER (SSN-593) USS PERMIT (SSN-594) USS PLUNGER (SSN-595) USS BARB (SSN-596) USS POLLACK (SSN-603) USS HADDO (SSN-604) USS JACK (SSN-605) USS TINOSA (SSN-606) USS DACE (SSN-607) USS GUARDFISH (SSN-612) USS FLASHER (SSN-613) USS GREENLING (SSN-614) USS GATO (SSN-615) USS HADDOCK (SSN-621) USS TULLIBEE (SSN-597) USS STURGEON (SSN-637) USS WHALE (SSN-638) USS TAUTOG (SSN-639) USS GRAYLING (SSN-646) USS POGY (SSN-647) USS ASPRO (SSN-648) USS SUNFISH (SSN-649) USS PARGO (SSN-650) USS QUEENFISH (SSN-651) USS PUFFER (SSN-652) USS RAY (SSN-653) USS SAND LANCE (SSN-660) USS LAPON (SSN-661) USS GURNARD (SSN-662) USS HAMMERHEAD (SSN-663) USS SEA DEVIL (SSN-664) USS GUITARRO (SSN-665) USS HAWKBILL (SSN-666) USS BERGALL (SSN-667) USS SPADEFISH (SSN-668) USS SEAHORSE (SSN-669) USS FINBACK (SSN-670) USS PINTADO (SSN-672) USS FLYING FISH (SSN-673) USS TREPANG (SSN-674) USS BLUEFISH (SSN-675) USS BILLFISH (SSN-676) USS DRUM (SSN-677) USS ARCHERFISH (SSN-678) USS SILVERSIDES (SSN-679) USS WILLIAM H. BATES (SSN-680) USS BATFISH (SSN-681) USS TUNNY (SSN-682) USS PARCHE (SSN-683) USS CAVALLA (SSN-684) USS L. MENDEL RIVERS (SSN-686) USS RICHARD B. RUSSELL (SSN-687) USS LOS ANGELES (SSN-688) USS BATON ROUGE (SSN-689) USS PHILADELPHIA (SSN-690) USS MEMPHIS (SSN-691) USS OMAHA (SSN-692) USS CINCINNATI (SSN-693) USS GROTON (SSN-694) USS BIRMINGHAM (SSN-695) USS NEW YORK CITY (SSN-696) USS INDIANAPOLIS (SSN-697) USS BREMERTON (SSN-698) USS JACKSONVILLE (SSN-699) USS DALLAS (SSN-700) USS LA JOLLA (SSN-701) USS PHOENIX (SSN-702) USS BOSTON (SSN-703) USS BALTIMORE (SSN-704) USS CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI (SSN-705) USS ALBUQUERQUE (SSN-706) USS PORTSMOUTH (SSN-707) USS MINNEAPOLIS/ST. PAUL (SSN-708) USS HYMAN G. RICKOVER (SSN-709) USS AUGUSTA (SSN-710) USS SAN FRANCISCO (SSN-711) USS ATLANTA (SSN-712) USS HOUSTON (SSN-713) USS NORFOLK (SSN-714) USS BUFFALO (SSN-715) USS SALT LAKE CITY (SSN-716) USS OLYMPIA (SSN-717) USS HONOLULU (SSN-718) USS NARWHAL (SSN-671) USS GLENARD P. LIPSCOMB (SSN-685) USS PROVIDENCE (SSN-719) USS PITTSBURGH (SSN-720) USS CHICAGO (SSN-721) USS KEY WEST (SSN-722) USS OKLAHOMA CITY (SSN-723) USS LOUISVILLE (SSN-724) USS HELENA (SSN-725) USS NEWPORT NEWS (SSN-750) USS SAN JUAN (SSN-751) USS PASADENA (SSN-752) USS ALBANY (SSN-753) USS TOPEKA (SSN-754) USS MIAMI (SSN-755) USS SCRANTON (SSN-756) USS ALEXANDRIA (SSN-757) USS ASHEVILLE (SSN-758) USS JEFFERSON CITY (SSN-759) USS ANNAPOLIS (SSN-760) USS SPRINGFIELD (SSN-761) USS COLUMBUS (SSN-762) USS SANTA FE (SSN-763) USS BOISE (SSN-764) USS MONTPELIER (SSN-765) USS CHARLOTTE (SSN-766) USS HAMPTON (SSN-767) USS HARTFORD (SSN-768) USS TOLEDO (SSN-769) USS TUCSON (SSN-770) USS COLUMBIA (SSN-771) USS GREENEVILLE (SSN-772) USS CHEYENNE (SSN-773) USS SEAWOLF (SSN-21) USS CONNECTICUT (SSN-22) PCU JIMMY CARTER (SSN-23) VIRGINIA (SSN-774) TEXAS (SSN-775) USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN (SSBN-602) USS ALABAMA (SSBN-731) USS ALASKA (SSBN-732) USS ALEXANDER HAMILTON (SSBN-617) USS ANDREW JACKSON (SSBN-619) USS BENJAMIN FRANKLIN (SSBN-640) USS CASIMIR PULASKI (SSBN-633) USS DANIEL BOONE (SSBN-629) USS DANIEL WEBSTER (SSBN-626) USS ETHAN ALLEN (SSBN-608) USS FLORIDA (SSBN-728) USS FRANCIS SCOTT KEY (SSBN-657) USS GEORGE BANCROFT (SSBN-643) USS GEORGE C. MARSHALL (SSBN-654) USS GEORGE W. CARVER (SSBN-656) USS GEORGE WASHINGTON (SSBN-598) USS GEORGIA (SSBN-729) USS HENRY CLAY (SSBN-625) USS HENRY L. STIMSON (SSBN-655) USS HENRY M. JACKSON (SSBN-730) USS JAMES K. POLK (SSBN-645) USS JAMES MADISON (SSBN-627) USS JAMES MONROE (SSBN-622) USS JOHN ADAMS (SSBN-620) USS JOHN C. CALHOUN (SSBN-630) USS JOHN MARSHALL (SSBN-611) USS KAMEHAMEHA (SSBN-642) USS KENTUCKY (SSBN-737) USS LAFAYETTE (SSBN-616) USS LEWIS & CLARK (SSBN-644) USS LOUISIANA (SSBN-743) USS MAINE (SSBN-741) USS MARIANO G. VALLEJO (SSBN-658) USS MARYLAND (SSBN-738) USS MICHIGAN (SSBN-727) USS NATHAN HALE (SSBN-623) USS NATHANAEL GREENE (SSBN-636) USS NEBRASKA (SSBN-739) USS NEVADA (SSBN-733) USS OHIO (SSBN-726) USS PATRICK HENRY (SSBN-599) USS PENNSYLVANIA (SSBN-735) USS RHODE ISLAND (SSBN-740) USS ROBERT E. LEE (SSBN-601) USS SAM HOUSTON (SSBN-609) USS SAM RAYBURN (SSBN-635) USS SIMON BOLIVAR (SSBN-641) USS STONEWALL JACKSON (SSBN-634) USS TECUMSEH (SSBN-628) USS TENNESSEE (SSBN-734) USS THEODORE ROOSEVELT (SSBN-600) USS THOMAS A. EDISON (SSBN-610) USS THOMAS JEFFERSON (SSBN-618) USS ULYSSES S. GRANT (SSBN-631) USS VON STEUBEN (SSBN-632) USS WEST VIRGINIA (SSBN-736) USS WILL ROGERS (SSBN-659) USS WOODROW WILSON (SSBN-624 USS WYOMING (SSBN-742) Keep in mind that this list does not show the 'Turtle' -first sub to fire upon a foreign enemy, or any of the 'David' series of boats [of which we only have tin-type photograghs and diary accounts following the destruction of the cities by Northern agressors]. :-)

Hammeroni: LOL "I was wondering about that. My friend who was in sub service- nice guy, but about all he can take of me is about twenty minutes a week- and it's been decades since he was locked up in one of those tin cans with a bunch of other guys.." LOL " ... about all he can take of me is about twenty minutes a week ..." Are you sure it is not you? :-) I read this and just had to rib you. I think that your friend and myself, have together heard every possible conversation that men could ever have together, a thousand times. [or so it does seem to us]. LOL "I think the ladies do have a little more to offer, and are much prettier to look at." I do prefer such as well. They are much more cushiony too. "Makes sense to me, anyway.." Sure. P.S. Your freind? What boats?

Steve!: "One big thing to remember is that you have to incorporate your cost of benefits into your rate." I agree. One structural-engineer that is drawing up a set of plans for me now, estimated the over-all job at one price. Then on the estimate he also included his hourly rates for any additional things not already discussed, that he may have to perform. Gee, a simple concrete outer-wall foundation to support a steel building [40ft X 60ft] $3000. All because I dont want a concrete slab. :-)

Steve!: "Galen - it's not about fixing the cars, it's *all about* the commiserating." Isn't that what women do when they get together and watch a 'chick-flick'? "Haven't you ever heard of "male bonding"?" I have spent so many years locked up with other guys, I just dont have much desire to do that any more. Even when I was under-water, I was much happier looking up words in a Strong's and comparing usages. Rather than bragging about my female conquests, or how far I could spit, or how long my p---s is. :-)

Anywhere in the arms of my beloved Bonnie lass. In our basement, soaking in the jacuzzi is just fine with me. :-)

ChasUFarley: Very good post, imho. :-) "I talk about the past so that I remember where I came from and so I can be thankful about where I am now. It keeps me grounded in reality because I don't ever want to go backwards..." "I thought that was probably the most reasonable answer to my question. I also realized that some talked about it because they needed to connect with others with similar experiences. (Then there was the ones who just wanted to hear their own voices all the time...) (but anywho....)" "My point is: People will move on when they're good-n-ready. It's a pattern in life that keeps repeating itself...." That sounds about right. :-) "I've seen a lot of posters come and go from these boards in the five years I've been here... I've seen MANY sorta "chill" after they finally get to talk about whatever was eating at them - some have had a lot of anger, hurt and resentment... I think of this forum as a tool - it gets us from one place to another and hopefully we can make some new friends or reconnect with some old ones along the way. Life is too short for enemies." Many people do have a need for socialization. Someone else to sound-off on. From this past return stateside, we returned to an area where we had been 12 years earlier, but most people that we knew are gone. I went to a lodge meeting, but everyone there is elderly, using walkers and hearing aids; I just am not ready to surround myself with that crowd, besides they have all known each other for 50+ years. We did get very active among foster-parent support-groups, but since we forfeited our foster-license we dropped out of that crowd. Here [on GS-Cafe] we can talk about: weather, news, sports, children, health, etc; with others that did share some common background. That is nice. I am sorry that some did get hurt, but it is still a common link that we share. "After I left and started posting, the forums were my therapy and way to talk with others who had been thru similar experiences as my own. For me now, it's a way to stay in touch, hopefully connect with people who are just discovering the forums and to keep tabs on some friends who are still innies... My life was TWI for 12 years. The forums are only a facet of my life today." To me [living in my little world] that sounds healthy. :-) I just returned from a trip to Maine, and I am catching up on my e-mail. I will be spending much of the summer away from telephone service, internet and TV; so I should really be weaning myself off GS now. In the mean time, I do 'like' coming here. Friends that were in Twigs with me, generally lurk here and then go away, I am told that over-all they find it too negative. But then they have been stationary for many years now and have established networks of local friends, churches and clubs. :-)