You wankers could learn from the French.
Wilbur Hubbard
society. They elected a conservative president. He says he wants to be
friends and wants to approach the good ole U.S.A without arrogance. It's
about time!
Now, why don't you Brit wankers do the same next time round? Do it
before you get taxed completely out of existence. Get rid of that
waffling wimp Blair and elect another Margaret Thatcher if you have to
but get with it before it's too late.
Wilbur Hubbard
Alisdair
"Wilbur Hubbard" <wilbur...@thefarm.invallid> wrote in message
news:Ykq%h.279676$JN6.1...@newsfe17.phx...
The Scots have already started, weren't you paying attention?
Adam H
What can I say - I drive an American car, work for a big (really big)
American company, have never voted Labour, would like to see another 'Iron
Lady or Man' in at number ten, but dislike much of the American culture.
I'm sure it won't take you Americans too long before you dislike the French
as much as we do......
A
Andy Champ
>
> The Scots have already started, weren't you paying attention?
>
government. It's called "The West Lothian Question".
Oh, and I suspect from the US point of view, M. Sarkozy will look pretty
left wing.
Andy
D Parker
"Adam H" <adam.t...@REMOVEntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:Nar%h.6636$8E....@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
Oh I think they may have started to. But for all the wrong reasons.. You
remember all those WMDs that the yanks said were in that little country in
the middle east. Remember the French said "no there isnt any" . And the
yanks said "oh yes there is" . Remember how the Yanks invited them to go to
war and the frogs said. "um, no thanks". It was then that the yanks spat
the dummy, even changing the name french fries to freedom fries. What a
bunch of wankers..
I also note that the yanks still havent appologised to the frogs over that
one. I doubt they will.
DP
Wilbur Hubbard
"D Parker" <nospamo...@hotmailnospam.com.> wrote in message
news:463e510e$0$9110$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
A lame, leftist attempt at re-writing history there, DP! French
intelligence denied Iraqi WMD because they were guilty helping them
develop them and selling them parts for them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osirak Educate yourself, mate.
Wilbur Hubbard
Alisdair
"Wilbur Hubbard" <wilbur...@thefarm.invallid> wrote in message
Please don't try and suggest wikipedia is an authoritative source, you'll
lose your credibility.
Steve Firth
> France finally woke up and rejected socialism
[snip]
> Now, why don't you Brit wankers do the same next time round?
Errm they did, when they voted for NuLabour. About as socialist as the
Republicans.
Or have you forgotten that Bliar took the UK into every theatre of war
faster than the Yanks?
D Parker
"Wilbur Hubbard" <wilbur...@thefarm.invallid> wrote in message
news:Dxs%h.318005$6P2....@newsfe16.phx...
>
Read on, mate. It was destroyed by the Yanks in Gulf War One!
So it seems the Frogs were right then eh? No WMD. No Reason to go to war.
Oh, unless your an oil baron!
DP
Steve Firth
> A lame, leftist attempt at re-writing history there, DP! French
> intelligence denied Iraqi WMD because they were guilty helping them
> develop them and selling them parts for them.
Really? And how many WMD have been discovered in Iraq?
Here's a hint, the number so far has been less than unity.
Wilbur Hubbard
> Read on, mate. It was destroyed by the Yanks in Gulf War One!
>
> So it seems the Frogs were right then eh? No WMD. No Reason to go to
> war. Oh, unless your an oil baron!
No, YOU read on. http://www.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/duelfer.html It's
lengthy but it proves that Saddam had an active WMD program going and he
could re-constitute his WMD in a short period of time if left alone like
you pacifists wanted to do.
Here's just a short introductory tease.
"Key Findings
Saddam Husayn so dominated the Iraqi Regime that its strategic intent
was his alone. He wanted to end sanctions while preserving the
capability to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction (WMD) when
sanctions were lifted.
• Saddam totally dominated the Regime’s strategic decision making. He
initiated most of the strategic thinking upon which decisions were made,
whether in matters of war and peace (such as invading
Kuwait),maintaining WMD as a national strategic goal, or on how Iraq was
to position itself in the international community. Loyal dissent was
discouraged and constructive variations to the implementation of his
wishes on strategic issues were rare. Saddam was the Regime in a
strategic sense and his intent became Iraq’s strategic policy.
• Saddam’s primary goal from 1991 to 2003 was to have UN sanctions
lifted, while maintaining the security of the Regime. He sought to
balance the need to cooperate with UN inspections—to gain support for
lifting sanctions—with his intention to preserve Iraq’s intellectual
capital for WMD with a minimum of foreign intrusiveness and loss of
face. Indeed, this remained the goal to the end of the Regime, as the
starting of any WMD program, conspicuous or otherwise, risked undoing
the progress achieved in eroding sanctions and jeopardizing a political
end to the embargo and international monitoring.
• The introduction of the Oil-For-Food program (OFF) in late 1996 was a
key turning point for the Regime. OFF rescued Baghdad’s economy from a
terminal decline created by sanctions. The Regime quickly came to see
that OFF could be corrupted to acquire foreign exchange both to further
undermine sanctions and to provide the means to enhance dual-use
infrastructure and potential WMD-related development.
• By 2000-2001, Saddam had managed to mitigate many of the effects of
sanctions and undermine their international support. Iraq was within
striking distance of a de facto end to the sanctions regime, both in
terms of oil exports and the trade embargo, by the end of 1999. Saddam
wanted to recreate Iraq’s WMD capability—which was essentially destroyed
in 1991—after sanctions were removed and Iraq’s economy stabilized, but
probably with a different mix of capabilities to that which previously
existed. Saddam aspired to develop a nuclear capability—in an
incremental fashion, irrespective of international pressure and the
resulting economic risks—but he intended to focus on ballistic missile
and tactical chemical warfare (CW) capabilities.
• Iran was the pre-eminent motivator of this policy. All senior level
Iraqi offi cials considered Iran to be Iraq’s principal enemy in the
region. The wish to balance Israel and acquire status and infl uence in
the Arab world were also considerations, but secondary.
• Iraq Survey Group (ISG) judges that events in the 1980s and early
1990s shaped Saddam’s belief in the value of WMD. In Saddam’s view, WMD
helped to save the Regime multiple times. He believed that during the
Iran-Iraq war chemical weapons had halted Iranian ground offensives and
that ballistic missile attacks on Tehran had broken its political will.
Similarly, during Desert Storm, Saddam believed WMD had deterred
Coalition Forces from pressing their attack beyond the goal of freeing
Kuwait. WMD had even played a role in crushing the Shi’a revolt in the
south following the 1991 cease-fi re.
• The former Regime had no formal written strategy or plan for the
revival of WMD after sanctions. Neither was there an identifi able group
of WMD policy makers or planners separate from Saddam. Instead, his
lieutenants understood WMD revival was his goal from their long
association with Saddam and his infrequent, but firm, verbal comments
and directions to them."
Wilbur Hubbard
Jan
"Alisdair" <ne...@agurney.com> skrev i melding
news:f1ll0p$ji2$1$8300...@news.demon.co.uk...
D Parker
"Wilbur Hubbard" <wilbur...@thefarm.invallid> wrote in message
>
> "D Parker" <nospamo...@hotmailnospam.com.> wrote in message
> news:463e5de0$0$9092$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>> Read on, mate. It was destroyed by the Yanks in Gulf War One!
>>
>> So it seems the Frogs were right then eh? No WMD. No Reason to go to war.
>> Oh, unless your an oil baron!
>
> No, YOU read on. http://www.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/duelfer.html It's
> lengthy but it proves that Saddam had an active WMD program going and he
> could re-constitute his WMD in a short period of time if left alone like
> you pacifists wanted to do.
>
> Here's just a short introductory tease.
Snip the dribble.
Charles Duelfer (the author) is the clown who was the advisor to the
director of Central Intelligence on Iraqi Weapons -the same Bozo's that got
it WRONG in the first place.
Next!
DP
News f2s
"Alisdair" <ne...@agurney.com> wrote in message news:f1ll0p$ji2$1>> A lame,
>> intelligence denied Iraqi WMD because they were guilty helping them
>> develop them and selling them parts for them.
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osirak Educate yourself, mate.
>>
>> Wilbur Hubbard
>>
>
> Please don't try and suggest wikipedia is an authoritative source, you'll
> lose your credibility.
Hmmm. Have you read the article? Which elements of it do you disagree with?
And have you also checked the discussion covering the evolution of the
article (something you can't do with other encyclopedias). Perhaps one
should only quote from original material? Or shut up?
No, the only grounds for questioning WH's credibility is that he thinks
there's a connection between sailing and . . . what was this thread about?
JimB - Google 'jimb sail' or go www.jimbaerselman.f2s.com/
Compare the Cruise areas of Europe - new stuff on Sicily and Balearics
Quilljar
I have never understood American politics, although I do like the people.
However, I do not think it would be wise to take political advice from a
country that supported the IRA for so many years...
--
Sincerely,
Quilljar
Gary
<X@X.X> wrote in message news:kevt33pnmhgb21hnu...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 7 May 2007 11:13:09 +0100, "Quilljar"
> <wykehill-...@yahoo.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>
>>> Wilbur Hubbard
>>
>>I have never understood American politics, although I do like the people.
>>However, I do not think it would be wise to take political advice from a
>>country that supported the IRA for so many years...
>
Anyway the yanks love a good war, helps test all their fancy new toys to see
if they can tell the difference between friend or foe when they use them!
Unfortunately, they havent succeeded yet.
gary
TonyB
> >
> >>> Wilbur Hubbard
> >>
> >>I have never understood American politics, although I do like the
people.
> >>However, I do not think it would be wise to take political advice from
a
> >>country that supported the IRA for so many years...
> >
> > Please don't feed the troll.
>
> Anyway the yanks love a good war, helps test all their fancy new toys to
see
> if they can tell the difference between friend or foe when they use them!
> Unfortunately, they havent succeeded yet.
FWIW we know Saddam *had* WMD, he used them on the Kurds, but it wasn't
proven that he had them at the time of the war, let alone that he was
threatening anyone with them. Therefore, the war was wrong and did not have
a UN mandate either. It's a bit like saying you'll attack your next door
neighbour because he once had a knife that he used on someone years ago.
But the question of oil arises. Iraq is a major producer of oil which the
west is desperate for. Don't let all this talk of renewable energy sources
fool you. It's not to save the planet or reduce carbon emissions, it is
simply so we will not be dependent on other countries for our oil supplies.
We cannot afford to be dictated to by those who hold the world's oil
sources.
That is why the war started.
Does it all make sense now Mr Hubbard?
TonyB
D Parker
"TonyB" <Nor...@soxclara.co.uk> wrote in message
news:A7mdncy14tK...@bt.com...
Perhaps if you add in the bit about Whos Daddy is in the Oil business ;-)
Then again, its unlikely WH will get it. He obviously thrives on US
propaganda er um National Pride and desire to make all nations free and blah
blah ..
DP
noboby
D Parker wrote:
>
> Then again, its unlikely WH will get it. He obviously thrives on US
> propaganda er um National Pride and desire to make all nations free and blah
> blah ..
>
No, he thrives of trolling and making all you guys look exceedingly
stupid by taking his bait!!!!!
Wilbur Hubbard
"noboby" <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:dkI%h.2469$MH3...@newsfe4-win.ntli.net...
And, just what's that there in your mouth? Bait! What a wanker! What a
hypocrite. It always amazes me the small-mindedness of those who aren't
interested in discussing things in a discussion group. Rather than just
ignoring things that don't interest them, they take the time to try to
make others ignore things with them.
Seems like some sort of a mental deficiency to me. Do people there in
Great Britain go into pubs and tell people to shut up if they hear a
conversation they aren't interested in? I hope not.
Wilbur Hubbard
D Parker
Looks like your on the hook too then sunshine! Stupid is as Stupid Does. F
Gump.
DP
Adam H
> Great Britain go into pubs and tell people to shut up if they hear a
> conversation they aren't interested in? I hope not.
Actually, yes.
A
Quilljar
> Great Britain go into pubs and tell people to shut up if they hear a
> conversation they aren't interested in? I hope not.
>
> Wilbur Hubbard
Sometimes it does one good to take a bit of bait!
We love a good conversation in a pub, but we don't take part when some
uninformed oaf shouts a lot of rude nonsense. That wouldn't BE a
conversation now would it?
--
Sincerely,
Quilljar
Duncan Heenan
"Gary" <gary...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:rc-dnTKJ3Pv...@pipex.net...
> snip <
> Anyway the yanks love a good war..............
No the Yanks love a one-sided war.
One which they can win remotely and with almost no US casualties (enemy,
allied and civilian dead and collateral damage don't count). The minute the
enemy fights back, the Yanks cry 'foul', pack up their toys and go home,
leaving a big, bloody mess.
Duncan Heenan
> snip <
>> But the question of oil arises. Iraq is a major producer of oil which the
>> west is desperate for. Don't let all this talk of renewable energy
>> sources
>> fool you. It's not to save the planet or reduce carbon emissions, it is
>> simply so we will not be dependent on other countries for our oil
>> supplies.
>> We cannot afford to be dictated to by those who hold the world's oil
>> sources.
>>
>> That is why the war started.
>>
>> Does it all make sense now Mr Hubbard?
>>
>> TonyB
>
> Perhaps if you add in the bit about Whos Daddy is in the Oil business ;-)
>
> Then again, its unlikely WH will get it. He obviously thrives on US
> propaganda er um National Pride and desire to make all nations free and
> blah blah ..
>
> DP
stockpile of WMD's anywhere, and is the only country eve to have used
nuclear weapons, which it did twice, on civilians both times, killing about
400,000 in all.
Duncan Heenan
"Adam H" <adam.t...@REMOVEntlworld.com> wrote in message
usually the village bore blocking the bar while going on interminably about
his views on the world, and polluting the air with his fags. In these
circumstances, yes I do ask him to have his conversation elsewhere.
LeeShore
<pleasenospammersduncanhee...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> "Gary" <garye...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>
> news:rc-dnTKJ3Pv...@pipex.net...
>
> > snip <
> > Anyway the yanks love a good war..............
>
> No the Yanks love a one-sided war.
> enemy fights back, the Yanks cry 'foul', pack up their toys and go home,
> leaving a big, bloody mess.
Now this sounds just like the Americas Cup. To try and get on topic.
But then they didn't pack up they just changed the rules every time it
looked like someone else had a chance of winning.
D Parker
"Duncan Heenan" <pleasenospamme...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in
message news:46402...@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
Yep. If it wasnt so serious it would be funny. How would you like to be
known as the Country that can kill more people than anyone on the planet.
Not a great title really.
DP
D Parker
You forgot to mention. Profit.
DP
Sandy Morton
Heenan <pleasenospamme...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> I go in to the pub to get a drink, but have trouble doing so
> because there usually the village bore blocking the bar while
> going on interminably about his views on the world, and polluting
> the air with his fags. In these circumstances, yes I do ask him to
> have his conversation elsewhere.
No fags in pubs in Scotland now - just plenty of other smells which
were hidden before!
Duncan Heenan
"LeeShore" <lees...@fsmail.net> wrote in message
news:1178612431....@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
Ha ha! Love it!
toad
> In article <46402575$...@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com>, Duncan
>
> Heenan <pleasenospammersduncanhee...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> > I go in to the pub to get a drink, but have trouble doing so
> > because there usually the village bore blocking the bar while
> > going on interminably about his views on the world, and polluting
> > the air with his fags. In these circumstances, yes I do ask him to
> > have his conversation elsewhere.
>
> No fags in pubs in Scotland now
I beg to differ:
Dennis Pogson
> France finally woke up and rejected socialism and all the ills it
> causes society. They elected a conservative president. He says he
> wants to be friends and wants to approach the good ole U.S.A without
> arrogance. It's about time!
>
> Now, why don't you Brit wankers do the same next time round? Do it
> before you get taxed completely out of existence. Get rid of that
> waffling wimp Blair and elect another Margaret Thatcher if you have to
> but get with it before it's too late.
>
> Wilbur Hubbard
Old Mother Hubbard
Went to the cupboard
But found that the cupboard was bare!
Small wonder if she was married to Wilbur!
Erik Egerer
Old Mother Hubbard
Went to the cupboard
To give the poor doggie a bone.
But when she bent down
The dog came around
And gave her a bone of his own.
Keith
LeeShore <lees...@fsmail.net> writes
As is their right as the holders, I believe.
Let's hope they retain the 'leeward line' rule for the match race proper
and not merely limit it to the prelims.
Can you imagine, in 'round the cans', the requirement to round the buoy
(line, in this case) the *opposite* side to the boat immediately in
front of you?
Wunnerful stuff. I wonder if some gung-ho Racing Committee will actually
try it...
--
Keith replace nospam with ilf0rd
Andy Champ
"Britannia rules the waves, but America waives the rules.". Can't find
out who wrote it, back in the '30s...
Andy
Sandy Morton
> I beg to differ:
> http://www.five.tv/media/image/7775225.jpg
LOL
--
A T (Sandy) Morton
on the Bicycle Island
In the Global Village
http://www.millport.net
toad
You've got the quote wrong. It was closer to:
"Britannia no longer rules the waves but she certainly waives the
rules."
IIRC it was an African, but I have no idea who.
Martin Schöön
>
> "Britannia rules the waves, but America waives the rules.". Can't
> find out who wrote it, back in the '30s...
>
America's Cup description?
:-)
--
Martin Schöön "Problems worthy of attack
show their worth by hitting back."
Piet Hein
Andy Champ
>
> You've got the quote wrong. It was closer to:
>
> "Britannia no longer rules the waves but she certainly waives the
> rules."
>
> IIRC it was an African, but I have no idea who.
>
I may well have. However, there are 7 Google hits for my quote, and
none for yours...
There is an Anarchist song "Wave Britannia, Britannia Waives the Rules"
but AFAIK this is unrelated to the AC.
Andy