<12>Posted: 2 years ago by subobisis: yum Score: [-] 119 [+]. Posted: 2 years ago by AutumnLotus: They're hot. Score: [-] 129 [+]. Posted: 2 years ago by Galoot: Someone's got a fetish. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Score: [-] 110 [+]. Posted: 2 years ago by spocksmyhomeboy: so how do i join this squad??? Score: [-] 86 [+]. Posted: 2 years ago by yoornotme: My thoughts while viewing these:
They all have such beautiful hair!
Do they shower with their guns? (Edit: I don't mean like that, pervs. Look at the pic of the women going to/from the shower.. They have their towels and their guns)
Isn't it kind of a bad idea to keep a bunch of females together in a place where there are a bunch of guns? Think of a cat fight, but with AKs.
Do they have a manicurist in the army?! Look at those nails!
That last picture was kinda funny. Score: [-] 122 [+]. Posted: 2 years ago by jovawell: In the true essence of the words "beautiful but deadly." I suppose with the thorough and proper combat training, they are where they are now... Score: [-] 104 [+]. Posted: 2 years ago by julea: do they have a 'hot' requirement?
Well, this is my take on the war. It sucks, because they take the gorgeous young men (and women, apparently), make them hotter, (training), and then send them out there to be blown up.
Goddamn, Bush, have a little sympathy for us young people with no one pretty to look at here at home! :( Score: [-] 61 [+]. Posted: 2 years ago by spocksmyhomeboy:
there not listering word shes saying they just like the fact she has a long hard thing in her hand Score: [-] 52 [+]. Posted: 2 years ago by rambler: Wow!
"Make love, not war!" is what came to mind immediately. Score: [-] 89 [+]. Posted: 2 years ago by 2manyusernames: These are great pictures. I've seen them before.
They are a bit more than a year old. I am assuming they are a smaller selection from this thread: (haven't looked the entire 24-page thread, dial-up is a b***h)
Yes, many of them are hot. Still I didn't post them here because we have a rule that we aren't supposed to post "hot babes" type of links.
I don't care one way or the other. I like hot babes, even lukewarm babes but we need to be consistent. Either we do or do not allow safe-for-work babes and dudes Score: [-] 33 [+]. Posted: 2 years ago by Lunarcadia: Beautiful yet deadly, came to mind. Score: [-] 26 [+]. Posted: 2 years ago by fugazi: Apartheid came to mind...
so did the idea of mandatory military service and little children throwing rocks at tanks that were destroying their homes...
Shabra and Shatila Jenin
so did AIPAC Score: [-] 11 [+]. Posted: 2 years ago by donteatpoop: I like the part where they gave me a boner. Score: [-] 62 [+]. Posted: 2 years ago by tigertony: Now 2manusernames, you know these pics were posted strictly for educational purposes. Score: [-] 48 [+]. Posted: 2 years ago by TraumaMamma: Pffft. I can do this....
They are pretty hot! Score: [-] 68 [+]. Posted: 2 years ago by donteatpoop: Well 2many, in this case I don't agree with you. I understand where you're coming from with this, but this wasn't exactly a link to "hot babes". The photography was the key here. I think you'll agree that these are high quality pictures, regardless of the subjects.
It just so happens that the first two people to respond mentioned how "hot" they were. The camera angles and attention to detail in most of these images was done quite well and it is in the photography section. Had this been placed under "sex" I would totally be with you on that. Score: [-] 48 [+]. Posted: 2 years ago by hypnotode:
«2manyusernames : These are great pictures. I've seen them before.
I didn't post them here because we have a rule that we aren't supposed to post "hot babes" type of links.
So which is it? Are they great pictures, or "hot babes"? I don't know about you, but being a "babe", I am not particularly interested in seeing OR posting pictures of "hot babes". I enjoyed the photography, the underlying dichotomy of life / death that I saw in the images. Guess I'll have to be a little dirtier-minded next time. Score: [-] 69 [+]. Posted: 2 years ago by rambler:
«hypnotode : So which is it? Are they great pictures, or "hot babes"? I don't know about you, but being a "babe", I am not particularly interested in seeing OR posting pictures of "hot babes". I enjoyed the photography, the underlying dichotomy of life / death that I saw in the images. Guess I'll have to be a little dirtier-minded next time.
Well, I think the pictures were technically good, not magic, but good. Yes, I also see that dichotomy you refer to. And you don't need to be dirty-minded to recognise beautiful people (or "hot babes", however you may want to describe them). I thought the girls were good-looking and I have no objection to seeing them here. It's not like they were clad in bikini's and draped over sportcars, or big motorbikes, to assist in the sales of those vehicles...
/ducking to avoid the inevitable incoming criticisms now... Score: [-] 79 [+]. Posted: 2 years ago by 2manyusernames:
«donteatpoop : Well 2many, in this case I don't agree with you. I understand where you're coming from with this, but this wasn't exactly a link to "hot babes". The photography was the key here. I think you'll agree that these are high quality pictures, regardless of the subjects.
It just so happens that the first two people to respond mentioned how "hot" they were. The camera angles and attention to detail in most of these images was done quite well and it is in the photography section. Had this been placed under "sex" I would totally be with you on that.
Yeah, that's what you tell your wife when she's asking why you are looking at images of girls, but these are not professional photographs of women who happen to be attractive.
No they are amateur snapshots of ladies who are attractive. It isn't the artistic quality that is making them popular and spread then around the net, but their feminine subject matter. Well that and the fact that they are military women, but that just adds to the feminine appeal
Like I said, I thought they were good, that is why I posted the link of the original source of them.
It is just that the next time someone posts shots of attractive women it will be hard to vote it down because of the rules. It will look like the rules don't apply to everyone.
Actually, I would vote that we relax the no-babes rule to allow quality images of fully-clad women (and guys), in other words no bikini shots, but images like this would be fine. Score: [-] 59 [+]. Posted: 2 years ago by TraumaMamma:
«rambler : Well, I think the pictures were technically good, not magic, but good. Yes, I also see that dichotomy you refer to. And you don't need to be dirty-minded to recognise beautiful people (or "hot babes", however you may want to describe them). I thought the girls were good-looking and I have no objection to seeing them here. It's not like they were clad in bikini's and draped over sportcars, or big motorbikes, to assist in the sales of those vehicles...
/ducking to avoid the inevitable incoming criticisms now...
I agree you don't have to be dirty minded to see beauty in people. To me, beauty is confidence in ones self, amongst other things. As Rambler stated, they weren't selling anything, but rather being themselves and were fully clothed. They were just being themselves.
I love to see women cops, firefighters, hunters, etc...
Girl power, baby! Remember Rosie the riveter? She's my next tattoo, btw!
