Even The Army Says Chili WITH Beans - Page 1

General » General Discussion

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Even The Army Says Chili WITH Beans (Page 1 of 2)

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:18:51 AM EST

Figured a classic chili debate thread would break the "world is ending" and "sexless marrige" monotony

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:21:06 AM EST

[#1]

Chili with beans

Ergo, they added beans to chili. It's not chili.

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:22:49 AM EST

[#2]

The US Government says "with beans". That sounds pretty authoritative to me.

Case closed.

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:23:11 AM EST

[#3]

No beans please.

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:23:49 AM EST

[#4]

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:25:46 AM EST

[#5]

The army has a long history of feeding its soldiers slumgullion.

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:26:54 AM EST

[#6]

You mean the same Army that though this camo was great?

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:26:58 AM EST

[#7]

the army is pretty good at fucking stuff up

NO BEANS!

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:31:44 AM EST

[#8]

Quote History

Quoted:
Chili with beans

Ergo, they added beans to chili. It's not chili.

View Quote

They have to specify so the nancy boys dont whine

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:34:09 AM EST

[#9]

Quote History

Quoted:
Chili with beans

Ergo, they added beans to chili. It's not chili.

View Quote

Actually you are correct. Otherwise of beans were normally in it. It would just say chili.

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:34:59 AM EST

[#10]

Quote History

Quoted:
the army is pretty good at fucking stuff up

NO BEANS!

View Quote

Yep! the army is too cheap for real protein.

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:36:18 AM EST

[#11]

Chili doesn't have beans, but you can add beans to chili if you want, in that case you got chili with beans.

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:37:16 AM EST

[#12]

The Army of the Union

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:37:23 AM EST

[#13]

Hey dont hold me accountable for uniform scandles

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:37:44 AM EST

[#14]

Its Milspec now.

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:38:08 AM EST

[#15]

Quote History

Quoted:
Chili doesn't have beans, but you can add beans to chili if you want, in that case you got chili with beans.

View Quote

I'd go with that a reasonable compromise

My aunt made very tasty chili with beans and her hometown is Chili,WI

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:38:20 AM EST

[#16]

Bean soup? No thanks.

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:38:37 AM EST

[#17]

Quote History

Quoted:

Actually you are correct. Otherwise of beans were normally in it. It would just say chili.

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Chili with beans

Ergo, they added beans to chili. It's not chili.

Actually you are correct. Otherwise of beans were normally in it. It would just say chili.

Yep.

If beans were integral to a foodstuff being called chili there would be no need to point it out. It would be like saying 'Chili with chili peppers'.

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:38:51 AM EST

[#18]

Beans in chili is like having a bad case of herpes, you don't want that shit.

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:39:43 AM EST

[#19]

Quote History

Quoted:
You mean the same Army that though this camo was great?

https://www.milspecmonkey.com/articles/ENVG_2036m.jpg

View Quote

What camo, I don't see shit.

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:39:45 AM EST

[#20]

This is why I come here you guys can tear anything apart

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:41:09 AM EST

[#21]

If beans were a chili ingredient the label would say "chili" not "chili with beans".

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:42:50 AM EST

[#22]

The Army is good at killing people and breaking things. They are not good at food.

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:43:06 AM EST

[#23]

Chili??

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:43:16 AM EST

[#24]

Quote History

Quoted:
If beans were a chili ingredient the label would say "chili" not "chili with beans".

View Quote

Read above its so the nancy boys dont whine when they go to eat thier chili and find the magical fruit with it.

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:45:01 AM EST

[#25]

Quote History

Quoted:
Its Milspec now.

View Quote

Quick! Someone generate a chart of the various tiers of chili!

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:45:26 AM EST

[#26]

Quote History

Quoted:
The Army is good at killing people and breaking things. They are not good at food.

View Quote

You are correct , , But Chili gets beans , meat sauce has no beans

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:45:41 AM EST

[#27]

Quote History

Quoted:
The US Government says "with beans". That sounds pretty authoritative to me.

Case closed.

View Quote

The US Government is merely providing a warning that their "chili" has been adulterated with beans. If the beans weren't added it would simply be labeled as "chili".

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:47:47 AM EST

[#28]

Quote History

Quoted:

Quick! Someone generate a chart of the various tiers of chili!

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Its Milspec now.

Quick! Someone generate a chart of the various tiers of chili!

Texas Red =T1
Other beanless chilis =T2
Chili with silly ingredients such as beans, tofu, candy sprinkles=T3

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:51:24 AM EST

[#29]

The world is ending, dammit I miss everything.

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:54:44 AM EST

[#30]

Quote History

Quoted:
You mean the same Army that though this camo was great?

https://www.milspecmonkey.com/articles/ENVG_2036m.jpg

View Quote

That camo IS great! You totally can't see his right eye!

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:55:40 AM EST

[#31]

This from the same place that brought our Soldiers in Vietnam "Ham and Motherfuckers"?

Granted I know that was more DoD, but still, there are some things you dont do. Beans in Chili and 4 fingers of death are not right.

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:57:55 AM EST

[#32]

Quote History

Quoted:
If beans were a chili ingredient the label would say "chili" not "chili with beans".

View Quote

That's the only part the Army screwed up. The normal nomenclature is "chili con carne" (chili with meat). Meat is the optional ingredient--not beans. Leave it to the Army.

Posted: 10/21/2016 11:59:22 AM EST

[#33]

Quote History

Quoted:

Quick! Someone generate a chart of the various tiers of chili!

View Quote View All Quotes

View All Quotes

Quote History

Quoted:

Quoted:
Its Milspec now.

Quick! Someone generate a chart of the various tiers of chili!

Mk1 mod0 constipation

Posted: 10/21/2016 12:00:10 PM EST

[#34]

They have to mark the envelopes to tell the Soldiers what should be in the bag (or what the ingredients started as)..

Not necessarily what it looks, smells, and tastes like once you actually put it in your mouth.

Posted: 10/21/2016 12:00:37 PM EST

[#35]

And how many times in recent history would you say "the government" got it right?

Posted: 10/21/2016 12:03:05 PM EST

[#36]

legumes is good food.

Posted: 10/21/2016 12:08:03 PM EST

[#37]

Quote History

Quoted:

And how many times in recent history would you say "the government" got it right?

View Quote

Food wise, I would say that the cakes they served in the Mess Hall at the 120th AG Bn Mess Hall at Fort Jackson were pretty damn good. I especially liked the German Chocolate Cake.

Posted: 10/21/2016 12:11:51 PM EST

[#38]

The earliest reference I can find for Chili is in Wah-to-yah (and the Taos Trail) by Lewis Garrard from 1846. He clearly talks of being served Chili in the Taos Pueblo that had beans in it. So, it originally had beans. You can leave them out but them it ain’t really chili. Likewise you can leave the steak out of steak and baked potato. You might still call it steak and baked potato, but it’s really just a baked potato.

Posted: 10/21/2016 12:11:53 PM EST

[#39]

Beans and no Ted Cruz.

Posted: 10/21/2016 12:12:34 PM EST

[#40]

Take a step back here. They are saying Chili contains no beans, however due to nutritional value, they decided adding beans to chili was a sound choice for field food. No problems with that.

Chili has no beans, but you CAN add them, which then makes it Chili with beans. This should end the debate.

Posted: 10/21/2016 12:12:57 PM EST

[#41]

The Army is WRONG

Beans, rice, et al are FILLERS and NOT part of true chili, which is meat and sauce and spice.

If you add shit to chili that's fine, but it's FILLER, not the actual CHILI.

Posted: 10/21/2016 12:14:29 PM EST

[#42]

I like it either way but am cutting out most carbs so no beans.

.

Posted: 10/21/2016 12:15:45 PM EST

[#43]

Quote History

Quoted:
Take a step back here. They are saying Chili contains no beans, however due to nutritional value, they decided adding beans to chili was a sound choice for field food. No problems with that.

Chili has no beans, but you CAN add them, which then makes it Chili with beans. This should end the debate.

View Quote

You'd think that and I'm with you. But I'm guessing two more pages.

Posted: 10/21/2016 12:18:48 PM EST

[#44]

Taking cooking lessons from the Army? That's pretty scary.

Posted: 10/21/2016 12:19:26 PM EST

[#45]

If the Army says it, then you definitely know IT'S WRONG.

Posted: 10/21/2016 12:20:33 PM EST

[#46]

Doesn't the Army have an obesity problem ?

Wonder why.....

Posted: 10/21/2016 12:24:07 PM EST

[#47]

Quote History

Quoted:
You mean the same Army that though this camo was great?

https://www.milspecmonkey.com/articles/ENVG_2036m.jpg

View Quote

It was great camouflage!!!!

For like 4 remote locations found on Earth.

Posted: 10/21/2016 12:25:56 PM EST

[#48]

Quote History

Quoted:
The Army is WRONG

Beans, rice, et al are FILLERS and NOT part of true chili, which is meat and sauce and spice.

If you add shit to chili that's fine, but it's FILLER, not the actual CHILI.

View Quote

Yep, that's why it's called chili WITH BEANS, if it were just chili it would not have had beans. The beans are used to add filler and make it cheaper since beans are cheap calories.