<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Army Considering Fort Belvoir Amusement Park</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/army_considering_fort_belvoir_amusement_park/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/army_considering_fort_belvoir_amusement_park/</link>
	<description>Online Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 05:37:08 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: All Things Paintball &#187;</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/army_considering_fort_belvoir_amusement_park/comment-page-1/#comment-93993</link>
		<dc:creator>All Things Paintball &#187;</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Aug 2006 17:30:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/08/army_considering_fort_belvoir_amusement_park/#comment-93993</guid>
		<description>[...] Army Considering Fort Belvoir Amusement ParkOutside Beltway - Following closely on the heels of the forthcoming upgrade of the Vietnam Memorial ( frag your parents with authentic wacky paintball rifle!), the Army is pleased to announce that to pay for its somber, Medal of Honor-shaped national museum at [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Army Considering Fort Belvoir Amusement ParkOutside Beltway - Following closely on the heels of the forthcoming upgrade of the Vietnam Memorial ( frag your parents with authentic wacky paintball rifle!), the Army is pleased to announce that to pay for its somber, Medal of Honor-shaped national museum at [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DC Loser</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/army_considering_fort_belvoir_amusement_park/comment-page-1/#comment-93573</link>
		<dc:creator>DC Loser</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2006 12:10:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/08/army_considering_fort_belvoir_amusement_park/#comment-93573</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;As for traffic, it could be part of the development project to improve the traffic and access in the area. This is common for a developer to contribute to the infrastructure to support their project&lt;/blockquote&gt;. 


Obviously you don&#039;t live in DC.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>As for traffic, it could be part of the development project to improve the traffic and access in the area. This is common for a developer to contribute to the infrastructure to support their project</p></blockquote>
<p>. </p>
<p>Obviously you don't live in DC.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/army_considering_fort_belvoir_amusement_park/comment-page-1/#comment-93531</link>
		<dc:creator>Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2006 01:06:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/08/army_considering_fort_belvoir_amusement_park/#comment-93531</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Army rejects military theme park idea 
   
...&lt;/strong&gt;

The Army shot down a developer&#039;s proposal Tuesday to build a military theme park on a Virginia Army ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Army rejects military theme park idea </p>
<p>...</strong></p>
<p>The Army shot down a developer's proposal Tuesday to build a military theme park on a Virginia Army ...</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JKB</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/army_considering_fort_belvoir_amusement_park/comment-page-1/#comment-93523</link>
		<dc:creator>JKB</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Aug 2006 23:12:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/08/army_considering_fort_belvoir_amusement_park/#comment-93523</guid>
		<description>Sounds like a great idea to me.  Playing Army is fun for kids.  Except for painting the rides camouflage and adding explosion sounds, little would be different from other parks.  The parachute ride will still take you up and drop you, the roller coaster would still take you for a thrill ride.  It seems the thought that someone might actually see the Army as anything but bad is the problem some are having with this.  Let&#039;s face kids, even today, play army, not angry intellectual.  Or at least the kids of people who would visit the National Army Museum play army.

If you want to dissuade kids from glorifying war, let &#039;em play paintball war.  Nothing like finding out how painful little balls of paint are when your hit to make you appreciate not having lead shot at you.

Of course, there is always the risk that some small percentage of visitors will decide to test their metal serving their country when they come of age.  But, you know, there&#039;s risk in everything.

As for traffic, it could be part of the development project to improve the traffic and access in the area.  This is common for a developer to contribute to the infrastructure to support their project.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sounds like a great idea to me.  Playing Army is fun for kids.  Except for painting the rides camouflage and adding explosion sounds, little would be different from other parks.  The parachute ride will still take you up and drop you, the roller coaster would still take you for a thrill ride.  It seems the thought that someone might actually see the Army as anything but bad is the problem some are having with this.  Let's face kids, even today, play army, not angry intellectual.  Or at least the kids of people who would visit the National Army Museum play army.</p>
<p>If you want to dissuade kids from glorifying war, let 'em play paintball war.  Nothing like finding out how painful little balls of paint are when your hit to make you appreciate not having lead shot at you.</p>
<p>Of course, there is always the risk that some small percentage of visitors will decide to test their metal serving their country when they come of age.  But, you know, there's risk in everything.</p>
<p>As for traffic, it could be part of the development project to improve the traffic and access in the area.  This is common for a developer to contribute to the infrastructure to support their project.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DC Loser</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/army_considering_fort_belvoir_amusement_park/comment-page-1/#comment-93482</link>
		<dc:creator>DC Loser</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Aug 2006 19:13:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/08/army_considering_fort_belvoir_amusement_park/#comment-93482</guid>
		<description>Sigh...I recall when there used to be THREE world class resorts in Germany.  There&#039;s also the nice hotel in downtown Tokyo...

But seriously, my beef would be that the government is giving government land to a private business to develop the park, presumably to run as a private for-profit enterprise?  

If they&#039;re expecting 3 million visitors annually, then the traffic situation around the springfield &quot;mixing bowl&quot; interchange is going to become very interesting with the tourist traffic mixing with the commuters.  I&#039;m glad I don&#039;t live near that part of the county.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sigh...I recall when there used to be THREE world class resorts in Germany.  There's also the nice hotel in downtown Tokyo...</p>
<p>But seriously, my beef would be that the government is giving government land to a private business to develop the park, presumably to run as a private for-profit enterprise?  </p>
<p>If they're expecting 3 million visitors annually, then the traffic situation around the springfield "mixing bowl" interchange is going to become very interesting with the tourist traffic mixing with the commuters.  I'm glad I don't live near that part of the county.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Donald Sensing</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/army_considering_fort_belvoir_amusement_park/comment-page-1/#comment-93481</link>
		<dc:creator>Donald Sensing</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Aug 2006 19:07:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/08/army_considering_fort_belvoir_amusement_park/#comment-93481</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Are those complaining about this alleged “glorification” of war concerned about the Blue Angels and Thunderbirds traveling to sporting events and air shows wowing impressionable youngsters with the sexier side of the military?&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Uh, yes, they are.

Please don&#039;t tell them that DOD (Army is the executive) runs three world-class resorts, one in Germany, one at Disney World, the other on prime real estate at Waikiki.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Are those complaining about this alleged “glorification” of war concerned about the Blue Angels and Thunderbirds traveling to sporting events and air shows wowing impressionable youngsters with the sexier side of the military?</p></blockquote>
<p>Uh, yes, they are.</p>
<p>Please don't tell them that DOD (Army is the executive) runs three world-class resorts, one in Germany, one at Disney World, the other on prime real estate at Waikiki.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Spam filtering help</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/army_considering_fort_belvoir_amusement_park/comment-page-1/#comment-131409</link>
		<dc:creator>Spam filtering help</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/08/army_considering_fort_belvoir_amusement_park/#comment-131409</guid>
		<description>&lt;!--%kramer-pre%--&gt;Outside Beltway - NOTE: My spam filter automatically deletes any TrackBacks that do not actually link and refer to this post. Those doing it manually should ensure they have linked the post before sending the TrackBack ping.  Army Considering Fort Belvoir Amusement Park Outside Beltway - NOTE: My spam filter automatically deletes any TrackBacks that do not actually link and refer to this post. Those doing it manually should ensure they have linked the post before sending the TrackBack ping.&lt;!--%kramer-post%--&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!--%kramer-pre%-->Outside Beltway - NOTE: My spam filter automatically deletes any TrackBacks that do not actually link and refer to this post. Those doing it manually should ensure they have linked the post before sending the TrackBack ping.  Army Considering Fort Belvoir Amusement Park Outside Beltway - NOTE: My spam filter automatically deletes any TrackBacks that do not actually link and refer to this post. Those doing it manually should ensure they have linked the post before sending the TrackBack ping.<!--%kramer-post%--></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Spam filter software guide</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/army_considering_fort_belvoir_amusement_park/comment-page-1/#comment-131410</link>
		<dc:creator>Spam filter software guide</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/08/army_considering_fort_belvoir_amusement_park/#comment-131410</guid>
		<description>&lt;!--%kramer-pre%--&gt;MCPmag.com - Close behind were SurfControl E-Mail filter , which also sifts through Web content, and GFIMailEssentials for Exchange , which targets spam at the server level. Task: Enforce Strong Network Authentication Sometimes the most obvious   Army Considering Fort Belvoir Amusement Park Outside Beltway - NOTE: My spam filter automatically deletes any TrackBacks that do not actually link and refer to this post. Those doing it manually should ensure they have linked the post before sending the TrackBack ping.&lt;!--%kramer-post%--&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!--%kramer-pre%-->MCPmag.com - Close behind were SurfControl E-Mail filter , which also sifts through Web content, and GFIMailEssentials for Exchange , which targets spam at the server level. Task: Enforce Strong Network Authentication Sometimes the most obvious   Army Considering Fort Belvoir Amusement Park Outside Beltway - NOTE: My spam filter automatically deletes any TrackBacks that do not actually link and refer to this post. Those doing it manually should ensure they have linked the post before sending the TrackBack ping.<!--%kramer-post%--></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
