OT: Words from a great man
Kurgan Gringioni
signifies in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are
not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.
This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the
sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its
children . . .This is not a way of life at all in any true sense.
Under the clouds of war, it is humanity hanging on a cross of iron."
- Dwight David Eisenhower, Supreme Commander, Allied Forces, WWII
"I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who
has seen its brutality, its stupidity."
- Dwight David Eisenhower, 1946
"A preventative war, to my mind, is an impossibility. I don't believe
there is such a thing, and frankly I wouldn't even listen to anyone
seriously that came in and talked about such a thing."
- Dwight David Eisenhower, 1953
"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition
of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-
industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced
power exists and will persist."
- Dwight David Eisenhower, President of the United States, 1959
Bill C
>
> "A preventative war, to my mind, is an impossibility. I don't believe
> there is such a thing, and frankly I wouldn't even listen to anyone
> seriously that came in and talked about such a thing."
>
> - Dwight David Eisenhower, 1953
>
I'd bet a boatload of money that most of Europe wishes they'd gone to
war with Germany somewhere between 1933 and '35.
Bill C
Phil Holman
"Bill C" <trito...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:1194389349.4...@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Wishful thinking reinforced by hindsight. It would never have happened;
"peace for out time" (Neville Chamberlain) was a much more powerful
lure.
Phil H
Proctologically Violated┊
"Phil Holman" <piholmanc@yourservice> wrote in message
news:POadnZuibr7Kaq3a...@comcast.com...
Might coulda used Bush back then.
With the advantage that likely no one in Germany would be able to decipher
his code.
Like the Navajo windtalkers.
--
------
Mr. P.V.'d (formerly Droll Troll), Yonkers, NY
Stop Corruption in Congress & Send the Ultimate Message:
Absolutely Vote, but NOT for a Democrat or a Republican.
Ending Corruption in Congress is the *Single Best Way*
to Materially Improve Your Family's Life.
The Solution is so simple--and inexpensive!
AND,
Make sure whomever you do vote for believes in
ABSOLUTE separation of Church & State--ferchrissakes
entropic3.14decay at optonline2.718 dot net; remove pi and e to reply--ie,
all d'numbuhs
>
> Phil H
>
Bill C
> "Bill C" <tritonri...@verizon.net> wrote in message
And Chamberlain is again an icon, and guiding political light. Same
mistakes, and attitude, different century. At least Chamberlain had
good reasons for his desperation to avoid confronting evil. I think
most of us can agree that the Nazis were evil.
Bill C
John Forrest Tomlinson
Dumbass: why are you giving aid and comfort to the enemy?
Phil Holman
No doubt about that, but if we had attacked them first, how do you think
the history books would portray us?
Phil H
Bill C
>
> - Show quoted text -
The victors write the books and there would've been 10s of millions
more alive to read them.
Bill C
Phil Holman
Maybe. American critique of a lack of action against what was at the
time, speculative Nazi aggression, makes for ........ errr, well, the
war started in 1939 and the US waited another 3 years for an invite from
the Japanese. What would you call that? I know what the Brits called it.
Phil H
Gunner Asch
<piholmanc@yourservice> wrote:
Ayup..2 yrs btw.
It was just another of a long string of Eurotrash bloodbaths between
inbred members of a large extended family who managed, like scum, to
rise to the top..the leaders of the various European countries (and I
include the UK in that list)
Wasnt the Royals original family name Sachs-Gotha?
Just another of a long long long line of butchery amoung the Family.
Then the Japs took a shot at America...and the rest is history.
Until that point...we were pretty much content to let the bastards
kill each other off.
Gunner
Da...@crockett.net
|
| It was just another of a long string of Eurotrash bloodbaths between
| inbred members of a large extended family who managed, like scum, to
| rise to the top..the leaders of the various European countries (and I
| include the UK in that list)
|
| Wasnt the Royals original family name Sachs-Gotha?
Flying Phil was a Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg, whilst
Little Libby was a Sachs-Coburg-Gotha
Making the Heir to the throne, the Dummy that was married to that Air
Headed Flibberty-Gibbert, a
Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg-Sachs-Coburg-Gotha
However, the Parliament, back in I think 1978, passed a Law ruling
that that Band of Brigands could call themselves Windsor
But as a footnote, Charlie Boy seems to have married a real Lady
second time around. Hopefully she can knock some sense into his
wooden head.
--
Davey Crockett - No 4Q to Reply
-
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.
--George Orwell
Pete
> The victors write the books and there would've been 10s of millions
> more alive to read them.
This is of course true - but you probably need to remember that the
Allies didn't believe that a significant number of Jews (and gays,
etc...) were being killed until the second half of 1944 (when they
found the concentration camps). Certainly no-one would have believed
that the Holocaust would take place in the 1930s.
Pete
Bill C
True, but by 1935 the Germans had basically torn up the Treaty of
Versailles, and just about everyone was aware that they were massively
rearming. Any time then would've been the time to act, massive
sanctions would've at least stalled their drive.
The other thing most people aren't aware of was that the German Army
was momentarily in trouble in Poland, and they were ready to pull back
for a while if it went badly.
The German spearhead overpenetrated and was actually surrounded, with
it's supply line cut for a bit. Unfortunately by that point the Polish
AF was already headed for Britain.
It had the makings of Dunlirk with no way out, but there was no help
coming for the Poles, so it's just a military footnote, and something
the Germans learned from.:
http://www.ww2.pl/The,1939,Campaign,22.html
Bill C
pyotr filipivich
Gunner Asch <gun...@NOSPAM.earthlink.net> wrote on Tue, 06 Nov 2007
23:55:29 -0800 in alt.machines.cnc :
>
>Ayup..2 yrs btw.
>
>It was just another of a long string of Eurotrash bloodbaths between
>inbred members of a large extended family who managed, like scum, to
>rise to the top..the leaders of the various European countries (and I
>include the UK in that list)
>
>Wasnt the Royals original family name Sachs-Gotha?
>
>Just another of a long long long line of butchery amoung the Family.
>
>Then the Japs took a shot at America...and the rest is history.
>
>Until that point...we were pretty much content to let the bastards
>kill each other off.
And sell stuff to all comers.
"Hey, why don't you and him fight?"
tschus
pyotr
--
pyotr filipivich
"Quemadmoeum gladuis neminem occidit, occidentis telum est. "
Lucius Annaeus Seneca, circa 45 AD
(A sword is never a killer, it is a tool in the killer's hands.)
Bill C
> Flying Phil was a Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg, whilst
> Little Libby was a Sachs-Coburg-Gotha
>
> Making the Heir to the throne, the Dummy that was married to that Air
> Headed Flibberty-Gibbert, a
> Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg-Sachs-Coburg-Gotha
>
> However, the Parliament, back in I think 1978, passed a Law ruling
> that that Band of Brigands could call themselves Windsor
>
> But as a footnote, Charlie Boy seems to have married a real Lady
> second time around. Hopefully she can knock some sense into his
> wooden head.
>
> --
> Davey Crockett - No 4Q to Reply
> -
> In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.
> --George Orwell
Die and you're under arrest! Britain's most stupid laws Tue Nov 6,
2:19 PM ET
LONDON (AFP) - Queen Elizabeth II's speech in the British parliament
Tuesday may have been routine but at least nobody got bored to death.
That would have been against the law.
<snipped>
2. It is an act of treason to place a postage stamp bearing the
British monarch upside-down (seven percent)
Bill C
cycl...@gmail.com
> "Bill C" <tritonri...@verizon.net> wrote in message
Indeed but which in the end cost the world more?
cycl...@gmail.com
> On Nov 6, 6:22 pm, "Phil Holman" <piholmanc@yourservice> wrote:
>
> > Wishful thinking reinforced by hindsight. It would never have happened;
> > "peace for out time" (Neville Chamberlain) was a much more powerful
> > lure.
>
> mistakes, and attitude, different century. At least Chamberlain had
> good reasons for his desperation to avoid confronting evil. I think
> most of us can agree that the Nazis were evil.
Too bad that most of us seem unable to agree that Islam's radical wing
is equally evil. I suppose we'll have to wait until the Democrats
demand a democracy in Pakistan, a radical Islamic government is
elected and passes an A-bomb off to terrorists or India drops one on
Pakistan to save themselves.
My guess is that Henry would then be claiming that he was always for
wars of prevention.
cycl...@gmail.com
The problem is that the Jews would be the radicals today and would
condemn the USA like American Jews do today.
Mark & Steven Bornfeld
>
> The problem is that the Jews would be the radicals today and would
> condemn the USA like American Jews do today.
>
How is this a problem?
Steve
--
Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS
http://www.dentaltwins.com
Brooklyn, NY
718-258-5001
Bill C
<bornfeldm...@dentaltwins.com> wrote:
> cyclin...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > The problem is that the Jews would be the radicals today and would
> > condemn the USA like American Jews do today.
>
> How is this a problem?
>
> Steve
>
> --
There's as much difference there as there is between Neo-cons and
Kucinich.
http://www.jta.org/cgi-bin/iowa/home/index.html
Good source of info here. The daily newsletter is "must" reading for
a different viewpoint, and links to regional sources in the M.E..
Bill C
Mark & Steven Bornfeld
Well, of course. The Western european nations so enamored of our
foreign policy aren't primarily Jewish. And, I'm not so proud to say,
Paul Wolfowitz and others of my faith have been prominent in this
administration.
There's a guy I ride with occasionally in Prospect Park. We'd never
talked politics, and that was a good thing, because when he and I
finally broached a political issue, it was like riding with a Jewish Kunich.
Yeah, most of us have no illusions about being a monolithic block.
http://www.tfdixie.com/parshat/korach/013.htm
William Asher
<snip>
>
> Dumbass: why are you giving aid and comfort to the enemy?
>
He's only thinking of the children.
--
Bill Asher
Pete
Assuming by 'Islam's radical wing' you mean the terrorists and their
fanboys, I don't think anyone disagrees that they're evil.
However, you and I clearly have a big difference of opinion as to how
many there are compared to the rest of Islam. I'd guess you probably
take a typical right-wing view, which as far as I can see is that
anyone who prays to Allah is a terrorist-in-waiting. I'd be inclined
to the opinion that really very few Muslims are of that opinion (but
there are a hell of a lot of Muslims, and a small fraction of an
enormous number is still a fairly large number, which is why they
cause such a problem).
I think the chances of Pakistan electing that sort of extremist
government is pretty small, same way there are still neo-Nazis in
Germany today causing problems, but there is no chance of them getting
any kind of election result (there aren't that many compared to all
the other Germans).
Iraq is a different matter, Iraq clearly does want to democratically
elect a kill-the-infidel government: but that's got more to do with
the US having fucked up so spectacularly there, and in any case the
first choice of 'infidel' would be whichever of Shi'a and Sunni is a
minority locally if the US weren't there.
Pete
J. Carroll
I've forgotten who wrote this but it's worth reading.
I can't figure out why the White House is so shocked by this. For any White
House policy wonks who may be reading, here's a quick primer, including
things that Dumbya later admitted he didn't know about the Arabs before he
invaded:
The Muslim world split into the Sunni and Shia sects 1375 years ago (632 AD,
for the mathematically challenged in the White House) and have been sworn
enemies ever since. It turned into an honest-to-goodness "blood feud" in
680 AD when the Shia leader, Hussein (ironic, isn't it?) was killed and
decapitated by a Sunni force during a battle near modern-day Karbala.
Like Saddam Hussein (no relation to the above, that we know of) and roughly
80% of the Muslim world, the members of the Saudi Royal Family are of the
Sunni Sect. So are the vast majority of the insurgents that we're fighting
against in Iraq.
The Iranians and virtually every member of the puppet government we've
installed in Iraq are Shia.
So, in essence, we've aligned ourselves with the religious sect that
controls only one other Muslim country . . . our latest boogeyman, Iran.
We've aligned ourselves with the Shia in Iraq (as have, of course, the
Iranians), in opposition to the sect that dominates Saudi Arabia, Kuwait,
Syria, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates . . . basically every Muslim country
except for Iran.
We've put ourselves right into the middle of a blood feud that's been going
on for nearly 1400 years. We've taken the same side as one of our sworn
enemies, and have lined up on the other side of the fence from the nations
we rely for most of our oil supply. And the Bush Administration is
surprised that the Saudis are critical?
I'm not sure whether it was a member of the administration or one of their
pet pundits who said it, but there was a comment from someone on the right
around the time of the invasion that the idea that Sunnis and Shia didn't
get along was some sort of "urban legend" or "pop sociology". I'd like to
buy that guy a beer, because it provided me with one of the heartiest laughs
I've had this century.
--
JC
chester
cy
>
> Too bad that most of us seem unable to agree that Islam's radical wing
> is equally evil. I suppose we'll have to wait until the Democrats
> demand a democracy in Pakistan, a radical Islamic government is
> elected and passes an A-bomb off to terrorists or India drops one on
> Pakistan to save themselves.
I personally think it is more dangerous and evil than the nazis. They
are greater in number and spread all over. But to address it by invading
another country and killing a bunch of them and installing a puppet
government is an absurd solution. Even if we wanted to, we can't kill
them all, so our aggression just fuels the fire (much like gasoline) and
makes the situation worse, and worse, and worse.
Bill C
So we should all just convert now?
Bill C
Scott
> "Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired
> signifies in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are
> not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.
> This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the
> sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its
> children . . .This is not a way of life at all in any true sense.
> Under the clouds of war, it is humanity hanging on a cross of iron."
>
> - Dwight David Eisenhower, Supreme Commander, Allied Forces, WWII
>
> "I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who
> has seen its brutality, its stupidity."
>
> - Dwight David Eisenhower, 1946
>
> there is such a thing, and frankly I wouldn't even listen to anyone
> seriously that came in and talked about such a thing."
>
> - Dwight David Eisenhower, 1953
>
> of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-
> industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced
> power exists and will persist."
>
> - Dwight David Eisenhower, President of the United States, 1959
More great words from the Old Testament:
"They will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into
pruning hooks. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will
they train for war anymore."
or the opposite:
"Beat your plowshares into swords, and your pruning hooks into spears:
let the weak say 'I am strong.' "
My favorite is the more modern followup:
"Those who beat their swords into ploughshares will plow for those who
don't."
Michael Press
<1194430226....@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>,
Pete <peter...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Why not? Stalin had already killed 10-20 million.
--
Michael Press
Phil Holman
"Gunner Asch" <gun...@NOSPAM.earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:lkr2j354p3je2rh3t...@4ax.com...
The royals were castrated centuries ago. They are nothing more than
pampered artefacts to keep the tourist industry booming.
It's a pity the US couldn't apply the same restraint about getting
involved in several other foreign conflicts.
Phil H
Carl Sundquist
"Phil Holman" <piholmanc@yourservice> wrote in message
news:6OKdnaxgsr-E86_a...@comcast.com...
>
> "Gunner Asch" <gun...@NOSPAM.earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:lkr2j354p3je2rh3t...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 6 Nov 2007 18:13:41 -0800, "Phil Holman"
>> <piholmanc@yourservice> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Bill C" <trito...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>>>news:1194397461.1...@o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>>> On Nov 6, 7:46 pm, "Phil Holman" <piholmanc@yourservice> wrote:
>>>>> "Bill C" <tritonri...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>>> news:1194391817.6...@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> > On Nov 6, 6:22 pm, "Phil Holman" <piholmanc@yourservice> wrote:
>>>>> >> "Bill C" <tritonri...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>>> >>news:1194389349.4...@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>>>>>
>>>>> >> > On Nov 6, 1:28 pm, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com>
>>>>> >> > wrote:
Dirtbag,
Having to troll by bringing in the alt.machines.cnc crowd and nutjob Gunnar
isn't much of a challenge and isn't much of a triumph.
Tom Kunich
news:1194461439.4...@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
Pete, I wonder if you're even a real person. There are claimed to be 1.5
BILLION Muslims in the world today. If one one-hundreth of one percent are
extremists capable of turning into terrorists that is 150,000 possible
suicide bombers.
And that number grows larger with every passing day. By the way - some
authorities claim that as much as 5% of the Islamic community could be
extremists since direct interpretation of the Koran would point that way in
the first place. You HAVE read the Koran and the Sunnah haven't you? And you
do understand that Muslims believe that only a recitation of the original
Koran in Arabic is the correct word of God?
So, by ALL means explain to me why you'd suppose that I'd need to believe
that there are somehow MORE terrorists and extremists than there actually
are? The real question is why do you believe that they are harmless to you
personally?
> I think the chances of Pakistan electing that sort of extremist
> government is pretty small, same way there are still neo-Nazis in
> Germany today causing problems, but there is no chance of them getting
> any kind of election result (there aren't that many compared to all
> the other Germans).
I hate to point this out but what has happened in Somalia? What has happened
in Iran which was the most free of all Islamic nations under the Shah? What
do you suppose will happen in Algeria? Though it would probably be a bit
comical to watch France's reaction to radical Muslims on their own borders
not to mention from within.
> Iraq is a different matter, Iraq clearly does want to democratically
> elect a kill-the-infidel government: but that's got more to do with
> the US having fucked up so spectacularly there, and in any case the
> first choice of 'infidel' would be whichever of Shi'a and Sunni is a
> minority locally if the US weren't there.
I hate to point this out Pete, but perhaps you really ought to actually know
what you're talking about before you write it. It was the military
governments under various dictators that eliminated real opposition in Iraq
and left as the only alternative the fanatically religious portions of the
population as the only one's willing to fight for power.
What's more, an Islamic government in Iraq would shortly put them back in
the shape they were before the invasion.
And you really have to consider what you're saying before you write it since
you look like a dope if you believe that we invaded Iraq for Iraq's sake and
not to put a military presence betwixt a growing Islamic extremism threat.
As a point of history - do you suppose that France supported the
independence movement in the 13 colonies because you all had such a strong
belief in individual freedoms?
Tom Kunich
news:SVnYi.14723$4V6....@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net...
>
> Like Saddam Hussein (no relation to the above, that we know of) and
> roughly
> 80% of the Muslim world, the members of the Saudi Royal Family are of the
> Sunni Sect. So are the vast majority of the insurgents that we're
> fighting
> against in Iraq.
>
> The Iranians and virtually every member of the puppet government we've
> installed in Iraq are Shia.
In case you didn't bother to mention - the Shia are the majority in Iraq and
the Sunni have ruled by force since the late 50's.
I do find it impressive that someone who thinks himself educated would think
of George Bush as stupid or uneducated. Even if he were are you so stupid
yourself to suppose that he doesn't have a bit better advice from experts
better than you?
Tom Kunich
Notice that since the Iraqis held their first ever election that was pretty
much on the up and up people like this horse's ass tells us that we
installed a puppet government. For record levels of ignorance it's pretty
hard to beat Liberals.
Tom Kunich
news:1194470459.8...@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
>
> "Those who beat their swords into ploughshares will plow for those who
> don't."
And there's been quite a few examples of exactly that happening. But
according to many here if we just are very nice to others they're just
naturally be very nice to us.
b...@mambo.ucolick.org
Did this sentence make more sense before it was
translated from German?
Ben
Phil Holman
<cycl...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1194451874.9...@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
face of the Earth so it will cost less in the long run. Do you see a
political problem with that?
Phil H
William Asher
@corp.supernews.com:
It seems to me that the people who are telling you to beat your plows
into swords are telling you to do that so that you will be the one to lay
down your life to keep them from having to be plowing anything. You're
going to have to plow regardless, and it is easier to do it with a plow
than a sword.
The parking on the left, is now parking on the right, and the beards have
all grown longer overnight.
Hit it boys:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rp6-wG5LLqE
YYYEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!
--
Bill Asher
J. Carroll
> "J. Carroll" <no...@haha.cam> wrote in message
> news:SVnYi.14723$4V6....@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net...
>>
>> Like Saddam Hussein (no relation to the above, that we know of) and
>> roughly
>> 80% of the Muslim world, the members of the Saudi Royal Family are
>> of the Sunni Sect. So are the vast majority of the insurgents that
>> we're fighting
>> against in Iraq.
>>
>> The Iranians and virtually every member of the puppet government
>> we've installed in Iraq are Shia.
>
> In case you didn't bother to mention - the Shia are the majority in
> Iraq and the Sunni have ruled by force since the late 50's.
I did "bother" Einstein.
>
> I do find it impressive that someone who thinks himself educated
> would think of George Bush as stupid or uneducated. Even if he were
> are you so stupid yourself to suppose that he doesn't have a bit
> better advice from experts better than you?
Apparently not.
'We Will, In Fact, Be Greeted As Liberators'
-- VP Dick Cheney
From Meet the Press, March 16 2003
"I think they're in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency."
--Vice President Dick Cheney,
on the Iraq insurgency, June 20, 2005
"It's hard to conceive that it would take more forces to
provide stability in post-Saddam Iraq than it would take
to conduct the war itself and to secure the surrender of
Saddam's security forces and his army. Hard to imagine."
--Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz,
testifying before Congress Feb. 27, 2003
"We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and
east, west, south and north somewhat."
--Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld,
when asked about weapons of mass destruction
in an ABC News interview, March 30, 2003
"We know he's been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons,
and we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons."
--Vice President Dick Cheney,
"Meet The Press" March 16, 2003
"Oh, no, we're not going to have any casualties."
--President GW Bush,
discussing the Iraq war with Christian broadcaster Pat
Robertson,
after Robertson told him he should prepare the American
people
for the reality of war casualties
"Five days or five weeks or five months, but it certainly isn't going to
last any longer than that," he said. "It won't be a World War III."
--Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld,
claiming the Iraq war wouldn't last long.
Nov. 14, 2002
--
JC
Howard Kveck
"b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <b...@mambo.ucolick.org> wrote:
I seem to recall him saying in the not too distant past that people who used the
word "neocon" were actually anti-semites.
--
tanx,
Howard
Faberge eggs are elegant but I prefer Faberge bacon.
remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?
Da...@crockett.net
|
|
| Assuming by 'Islam's radical wing' you mean the terrorists and their
| fanboys, I don't think anyone disagrees that they're evil.
|
Islam has no "Radical Wing"
Just ask the Serbs who have 1300 years experience with Muslims
They all belong in MuslimReich ot wherever they came from
Not in White Mens' lands
Pete
> In article
> <1194430226.766655.64...@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>,
>
> Pete <petersr1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On 7 Nov, 01:04, Bill C <tritonri...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > The victors write the books and there would've been 10s of millions
> > > more alive to read them.
>
> > This is of course true - but you probably need to remember that the
> > Allies didn't believe that a significant number of Jews (and gays,
> > etc...) were being killed until the second half of 1944 (when they
> > found the concentration camps). Certainly no-one would have believed
> > that the Holocaust would take place in the 1930s.
>
> Why not? Stalin had already killed 10-20 million.
Source?
In any case, certainly the West didn't believe that at the time
either. It's fairly well documented fact that the belief of most
German Jews when the Nuremberg Laws (1935) came in that that was about
as far as Hitler would go; they didn't believe he would stay in power
very long, and they didn't believe he would get much worse, so most of
them stayed in Germany (and a reasonable fraction of those who stayed
would've had no trouble getting out).
Pete
Pete
> "Pete" <petersr1...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
And your point is...? I already said that.
> And that number grows larger with every passing day. By the way - some
> authorities claim that as much as 5% of the Islamic community could be
> extremists since direct interpretation of the Koran would point that way in
> the first place. You HAVE read the Koran and the Sunnah haven't you? And you
> do understand that Muslims believe that only a recitation of the original
> Koran in Arabic is the correct word of God?
The Jews say essentially the same thing about the Torah in Hebrew.
'Some authorities' basically means your favourite right-wing TV
personality, so you'll excuse me if I ignore that. I'd also point out
that direct interpretation of the Bible would point in a similarly
unpleasant direction, and just like with Islam, most Christians choose
to ignore most of the silly suggestions.
> So, by ALL means explain to me why you'd suppose that I'd need to believe
> that there are somehow MORE terrorists and extremists than there actually
> are? The real question is why do you believe that they are harmless to you
> personally?
I don't, but I also think there is a difference between a large number
quite capable of causing problems, and a very large number capable of
getting democratic representation. If you want to disagree, fine, but
don't go off on another side-track.
> > I think the chances of Pakistan electing that sort of extremist
> > government is pretty small, same way there are still neo-Nazis in
> > Germany today causing problems, but there is no chance of them getting
> > any kind of election result (there aren't that many compared to all
> > the other Germans).
>
> I hate to point this out but what has happened in Somalia? What has happened
> in Iran which was the most free of all Islamic nations under the Shah? What
> do you suppose will happen in Algeria? Though it would probably be a bit
> comical to watch France's reaction to radical Muslims on their own borders
> not to mention from within.
There isn't and hasn't been democracy in Somalia, so what's your
point?
In Iran there was no democratic election, instead a misguided US
decided that Khomeini was 'a saint' and supported him when the Shah
went (against a relatively moderate Islamic group). I suppose at least
we can say that the US screwing up in the Middle East is nothing new.
> > Iraq is a different matter, Iraq clearly does want to democratically
> > elect a kill-the-infidel government: but that's got more to do with
> > the US having fucked up so spectacularly there, and in any case the
> > first choice of 'infidel' would be whichever of Shi'a and Sunni is a
> > minority locally if the US weren't there.
>
> I hate to point this out Pete, but perhaps you really ought to actually know
> what you're talking about before you write it. It was the military
> governments under various dictators that eliminated real opposition in Iraq
> and left as the only alternative the fanatically religious portions of the
> population as the only one's willing to fight for power.
Iraq was also never democratic (we handed over to a puppet monarchy,
they got dumped by a series of dictators in a series of coups).
Hussein was in no sense a religious man; he made gestures when he
wanted to get support from his religious neighbours and then went back
to suppressing any organisation that wasn't his: and that certainly
included both sects of Islam.
> What's more, an Islamic government in Iraq would shortly put them back in
> the shape they were before the invasion.
It would be a very different sort of crap, but still crap, yes.
> And you really have to consider what you're saying before you write it since
> you look like a dope if you believe that we invaded Iraq for Iraq's sake and
> not to put a military presence betwixt a growing Islamic extremism threat.
Iraq was never an Islamic extremist threat with Hussein in power.
Which is why the first time round Hussein was left in power, despite
the fact that it would've been easier to go and capture Baghdad (where
most of the Iraqi army wasn't).
Pete
Bill C
>
> "It's hard to conceive that it would take more forces to
> provide stability in post-Saddam Iraq than it would take
> to conduct the war itself and to secure the surrender of
> Saddam's security forces and his army. Hard to imagine."
> --Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz,
> testifying before Congress Feb. 27, 2003
>
>
I'll just steal a conversation from friends at another NG:
> Obviously not. The area of Iraq stands around 437,000 sq km,
> quite comparable to Germany's 357,000 or France's 550,000.
Thank you for the correction, Eric. And now I know exactly what
statement and how I misread it to get the error I typed. See,
http://www.arab.de/arabinfo/iraq.htm (the bit about the neutral
zone).
Too much hurry.
Still, despite the area being roughly equivalent, the numbers of
occupying troops 1946-1949 never fell below 500,000 for a third of
Germany (and indeed got to be near twice that in the early 1960s).
That's roughly twice to four times the minimums General Shinseki
envisioned would be sufficient to police and rebuild postwar Iraq
("something in the order of several hundred thousand soldiers").
What we got today, of course, in contrast to that is 145,000 active
duty
troops, plus 126,000 contractors not under Army chain of command,
quite
possibly, to use your words, "most of them ... [providing] more
classical civilian support" rather than duties "similar to those
asked
of military." Less than four isn't close to several. That's quite a
shortfall.
It's worked out well, right??
Bill C
Bill C
> "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote in news:13j4u6pieh7hle0
> @corp.supernews.com:
>
> >news:1194470459.8...@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> "Those who beat their swords into ploughshares will plow for those who
> >> don't."
>
> > And there's been quite a few examples of exactly that happening. But
> > according to many here if we just are very nice to others they're just
> > naturally be very nice to us.
>
> It seems to me that the people who are telling you to beat your plows
> into swords are telling you to do that so that you will be the one to lay
> down your life to keep them from having to be plowing anything. You're
> going to have to plow regardless, and it is easier to do it with a plow
> than a sword.
>
> The parking on the left, is now parking on the right, and the beards have
> all grown longer overnight.
>
> Hit it boys:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rp6-wG5LLqE
>
> YYYEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!
>
> --
> Bill Asher
Bill,
Is that the "Better Red than Dead", "better a live Slave, than dead
free Man" bit?
I'll pass on that.
"Fill the unforgiving minute with sixty seconds worth of distance
run."
"A brave heart and a courteous tongue. They shall carry thee far
through the jungle, manling."
"When you're left wounded on Afganistan's plains and the women
come out to cut up what remains, Just roll to your rifle and blow out
your brains, And go to your God like a soldier"
All Kipling Quotes, and yeah he showed up.
We know the price we pay, and choose to pay it, so you can do as you
choose to. Including shitting on us, because that's what makes America
great.
This is also why I detest 99% of recruiters, and the garbage the
military is doing today. Kids should be told right up front, in no
uncertain terms, what they are getting into, BEFORE they sign up.
http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,155801,00.html?ESRC=eb.nl
WASHINGTON - Veterans make up one in four homeless people in the
United States, though they are only 11 percent of the general adult
population, according to a report released Nov. 8.
Now for a quiz, actually I'd love the help since I'm having a brain
fart. There's a quote, and I thought it was more Kipling about a few
facing the darkness so the others don't have to, in reference3 to
soldiers and their countires, but for the life of me I can't find it
now.
Bill C
And yes I would go back if I could, and was called. In my stead my
nephews and friends are gone. One generation to the next, in service.
You pay it forward if you can.
Da...@crockett.net
|
| On Nov 7, 3:37 am, <Da...@Crockett.Net> wrote:
|
| > Flying Phil was a Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg, whilst
| > Little Libby was a Sachs-Coburg-Gotha
| >
| > Making the Heir to the throne, the Dummy that was married to that Air
| > Headed Flibberty-Gibbert, a
| > Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg-Sachs-Coburg-Gotha
| >
| > However, the Parliament, back in I think 1978, passed a Law ruling
| > that that Band of Brigands could call themselves Windsor
| >
| > But as a footnote, Charlie Boy seems to have married a real Lady
| > second time around. Hopefully she can knock some sense into his
| > wooden head.
| >
| > --
| > Davey Crockett - No 4Q to Reply
| > In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.
| > --George Orwell
|
| http://tinyurl.com/3c5r37
|
| Die and you're under arrest! Britain's most stupid laws Tue Nov 6,
| 2:19 PM ET
|
| LONDON (AFP) - Queen Elizabeth II's speech in the British parliament
| Tuesday may have been routine but at least nobody got bored to death.
| That would have been against the law.
|
| <snipped>
| 2. It is an act of treason to place a postage stamp bearing the
| British monarch upside-down (seven percent)
|
| Bill C
There are even crazier ones:
In France you can't call a pig Napoleon
In the city of York, UK, it is legal to murder a Scotsman within the
ancient city walls, but only if he is carrying a bow and arrow.
In Ohio, USA, it's illegal to get a fish drunk.
There were quite a number listed in a newsfeed yesterday as the UK is
reviewing old laws with a view to repealing them.
Yes, looking back it was Der Spiegel
http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0%2c1518%2c515905%2c00.html
which is nothing but a propaganda machine these days and would be much
better employed leading the campaign to get Eva Herman her job back
instead of trying to figure out if they could hang a paragraph 130
round her neck as well as tying the can to her ass.
--
Davey Crockett
-
Free Ernst Zundel Now
Da...@crockett.net
| <bornfeldm...@dentaltwins.com> wrote:
| > cyclin...@gmail.com wrote:
| >
| > > condemn the USA like American Jews do today.
| >
| >
| > Steve
| >
| > --
| I'm not sure how "American Jews" can be lumped as a monolithic bloc.
| There's as much difference there as there is between Neo-cons and
| Kucinich.
|
| http://www.jta.org/cgi-bin/iowa/home/index.html
|
| Good source of info here. The daily newsletter is "must" reading for
| a different viewpoint, and links to regional sources in the M.E..
|
Yes, I agree wholeheartedly. I get both JTA and Ha'aretz
But did you clock this one in yesterday's JTA? ::
"A thousand Orthodox rabbis are sending an emissary to Atlanta to pray for rain"
William Asher
> And yes I would go back if I could, and was called. In my stead my
> nephews and friends are gone. One generation to the next, in service.
> You pay it forward if you can.
I have nothing but respect for the military and nothing except scorn for
militarism.
--
Bill Asher
Da...@crockett.net
| | http://www.jta.org/cgi-bin/iowa/home/index.html
| |
| | Good source of info here. The daily newsletter is "must" reading for
| | a different viewpoint, and links to regional sources in the M.E..
| |
|
|
| Yes, I agree wholeheartedly. I get both JTA and Ha'aretz
|
| But did you clock this one in yesterday's JTA? ::
| "A thousand Orthodox rabbis are sending an emissary to Atlanta to pray for rain"
As a followup to my post above, some some additional balace might be
added by taking a look at Uruknet, Bill
Subscription is down at the center bottom of the page and you receive
english bulletins with an occasional Italian summary thrown in for
luck or whatever
Matt Stawicki
wrote:
>On 8 Nov, 02:39, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
<snip>
>> And that number grows larger with every passing day. By the way - some
>> authorities claim that as much as 5% of the Islamic community could be
>> extremists since direct interpretation of the Koran would point that way in
>> the first place. You HAVE read the Koran and the Sunnah haven't you? And you
>> do understand that Muslims believe that only a recitation of the original
>> Koran in Arabic is the correct word of God?
>
>The Jews say essentially the same thing about the Torah in Hebrew.
>
>'Some authorities' basically means your favourite right-wing TV
>personality, so you'll excuse me if I ignore that. I'd also point out
>that direct interpretation of the Bible would point in a similarly
>unpleasant direction, and just like with Islam, most Christians choose
>to ignore most of the silly suggestions.
Such as??
I don't recall Jesus saying anything about how we, as Christians,
should kill anyone who doesn't believe in God.
Matt
Michael Press
<1194515447....@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
Pete <peter...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On 7 Nov, 23:04, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > In article
> > <1194430226.766655.64...@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > Pete <petersr1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 7 Nov, 01:04, Bill C <tritonri...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > > > The victors write the books and there would've been 10s of millions
> > > > more alive to read them.
> >
> > > This is of course true - but you probably need to remember that the
> > > Allies didn't believe that a significant number of Jews (and gays,
> > > etc...) were being killed until the second half of 1944 (when they
> > > found the concentration camps). Certainly no-one would have believed
> > > that the Holocaust would take place in the 1930s.
> >
> > Why not? Stalin had already killed 10-20 million.
>
> Source?
My point exactly. It is still not widely understood
seventy years later. When Iosif Vissarionovich
Dzhugashvili purged, it was not only a few party
members. Dzhugashvili's manufactured a Soviet wide
famine and denial of aid to the Ukraine is generally
recognized as genocide. I mean the Ukraine! It's like
Iowa, but they had a killing famine. Figure five
million killed in the Ukraine famine. His usual scheme
was to round up a population and force them off their
land. They would be marched across vast tracts of
territory to their new place. Never mind if they died on
the march.
For lagniappe, fewer than 9000 of the 90000 German
prisoners of war captured at Stalingrad returned home.
He continued his killing ways after WWII, up until 1953.
<http://freedomspeace.blogspot.com/2005/04/how-many-did-stalin-really-murder.html>
--
Michael Press
Bill C
There we are in whole hearted agreement. The LAST ones to want a fight
are the real professionals who are likely to be on the sharp end,
especially those who've been there before.
As for, to steal fro Hackworth, "The Perfumed Princes in the
Pentagon", and their chickenhawk bosses they are scum.
I'm sure you've seen the stuff both Howard and I have posted and it's
endless.
Just check out the current headlines at SFTT:
http://www.sftt.org/
The current batch, both in DOD, and the Civilians are , if not the
worst bunch of scumbags ever to occupy those offices, pretty damned
close.
The whole thing is a cesspool of corruption, influence peddling, ass
kissing, lies that are getting people killed and their friends rich.
I've beaten this to death, and our ability to protect the country is
under more threat from "privatization", outsourcing, corruption within
both DOD and the military, than it is from 95% of the peace groups.
Unfortunately when Hillary gets elected she's bringing back Wesley
Clark who's exactly the same type of scumbag, just a different flavor.
Bill C
Donald Munro
> I don't recall Jesus saying anything about how we, as Christians, should
> kill anyone who doesn't believe in God.
The Conquistadors and the inquisition seemed to be under that impression.
Pete
Yes - but I think there's still a lot of debate as to what the numbers
actually are (and yes, I did know about the Ukraine - along with the
manufactured famine he ordered that anyone stealing food should be
shot in sight!)
> <http://freedomspeace.blogspot.com/2005/04/how-many-did-stalin-really-...>
I think that doesn't really help your argument. Yes, he killed at
least 20 million by 1953, probably a lot more - but before WWII
started, 10 million seems unlikely and 20 million is far too high.
Most of his killing was during and after the war (forced relocations
were almost entirely during and after the war). Incidentally, you'll
find some people go up even as high as 60 million.
The West didn't want to believe that Stalin was doing any such thing,
though - although some of that was probably realpolitik (e.g. the
Katyn massacre).
Pete
Da...@crockett.net
Then you'll love this little ditty sung by the army and by us kids in
the streets as we waved our Union Jacks and dumped our gas masks as
the troops marched off to battle or the POWs were marched off to their
work details passing our schoolyard which bordered the main road.
Onward Christian Soldiers,
You have nought to fear.
Israel Hore-Belisha
Will lead you from the rear.
Clothed by Monty Burton,
fed on Lyons pies;
Die for Jewish freedom
As a Briton always dies
Despite the anti-semite allusions, there was no malice in it. It was
solely a silly dsitty like the "Hitler has only got one ball, Goring
has two but very small, Himmler has something similar but poor old
Goebels has no balls at all" that we also used to sing and over time
we learned Erika, Das Hakenkreuzlied and Horst Wassel and used to sing
them in the scholyard.although Lily Merleen was ever popular with us
in those days somewhat as the Germans loved British songs if you ever
saw "Das Boot" (the submarikers film (http://www.dasboot.com/prologue.htm)
My main point is that there was no malice on either side and the German
lads appeared much happier to be going to work in some farmer's field
or British factory rather than freezing their Ghoulies camping in the
Stalingrad snows. And if the POWs had managed to liberate a few eggs or
a few pork chops, on the way bach, they always gave them to us and in
fact many of the German lads settled in the area after armistice
having somehow found girlfriends or friendly farmers who would give
them regular work.
Incidentally I have quite a collection of various artists performing
Lili Marleen in a variety of languages if anyone is interested from a
purely historical rather than a political viewpoint
Vera Lynn, Marlene Dietrich, and even thr Brit Propaganda version by
Lucy Mannheim to the following lyrics::
http://azurservers.com/rec/LucyMannheim_anti-Hitler_version_BBC_1943.mpeg
1
Ich muß heut' an Dich schreiben,
Mir ist das Herz so schwer.
Ich muß zu Hause bleiben
Und lieb Dich doch so sehr.
Du sagst, Du tust nur Deine Pflicht,
Doch trösten kann mich das ja nicht.
Ich wart an der Latern
Deine Lili Marleen
2.
Was ich still hier leide,
Weiß nur der Mond und ich.
Einst schien er auf uns beide,
Nun scheint er nur auf mich.
Mein Herz tut mir so bitter weh,
Wenn ich an der Laterne steh'
Mit meinem eignen Schatten
Deine Lili Marleen
3.
Vielleicht fällst Du in Rußland,
Vielleicht in Afrika,
Doch irgendwo da fällst Du,
So will's Dein Führer ja.
Und wenn wir doch uns wiederseh'n,
Oh möge die Laterne steh'n
In einem ander'n Deutschland!
Deine Lili Marleen
4.
Der Führer ist ein Schinder,
Das seh'n wir hier genau.
Zu Waisen macht er Kinder,
Zur Witwe jede Frau.
Und wer an allem schuld ist, den
Will ich an der Laterne seh'n!
Hängt ihn an die Laterne!
Deine Lili Marleen.
Just in the interest of pure history I will post them on a website if
anyone might be interested
--
Davey Crockett
Kurgan Gringioni
>
> Iraq was never an Islamic extremist threat with Hussein in power.
> Which is why the first time round Hussein was left in power, despite
> the fact that it would've been easier to go and capture Baghdad (where
> most of the Iraqi army wasn't).
Dumbass -
Agreed, and one thing the Hussein-was-an-extremist camp *always* fails
to mention is that in the 1991 Gulf War, he had mustard and nerve gas
which he used on the Kurds in 1988. He didn't use that stuff even
though we booted him out of Kuwait at a cost of 300,000+ casualties to
his army.
Osama bin Laden would use that stuff the first chance he got.
Saddam Hussein was a rational player. He wanted to stay in power. He
didn't use that stuff while we were killing his soldiers. He was a
brutal Stalinist dictator, but he wasn't an Islamist nutjob. An
Islamist nutjob would've used the gas.
thanks,
K. Gringioni.
Kurgan Gringioni
> On Nov 6, 1:28 pm, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "A preventative war, to my mind, is an impossibility. I don't believe
> > there is such a thing, and frankly I wouldn't even listen to anyone
> > seriously that came in and talked about such a thing."
>
> > - Dwight David Eisenhower, 1953
>
> I'd bet a boatload of money that most of Europe wishes they'd gone to
> war with Germany somewhere between 1933 and '35.
Dumbass -
How predictable.
A few things wrong with that idea.
1) At that point Germany was simply rearming.
2) France and England's big error wasn't in refraining from attacking
Germany, it was in appeasing Germany, as in handing over
Czechoslavakia.
3) The error which set all that in motion was the Treaty of
Versailles, with its punitive measures, set up conditions for a
resentful Germany which allowed an intensely nationalistic figure like
Hitler to come to power. It is accepted in historical circles that
because of this WW2 was merely a continuation of WW1. The Marshall
Plan of post-WW2 is a better example of how to treat the vanquished.
4) Even after handing over Czechoslavakia, France and England were
still more powerful than Germany, but they tried fighting WW2 (the age
of armor) with WW1 tactics. They had more armor than Germany, but they
dispersed it as an infantry support tool rather than concentrate it
into enemy-line-piercing-and-wreaking-havoc-in-the-rear divisions. By
using those antiquated tactics, when Guderian drove through the
Ardennes, they had no armored divisions with which to stop him on his
drive for Paris.
Finally, did you read the credential of the man whose words you doubt?
Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces, WW2. Why do you doubt him? He
knows a little more about the subject at hand than all of us put
together.
thanks,
K. Gringioni.
Da...@crockett.net
Current estimates of thr Ukrainian Holocaust are at 10 million Christians
http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=9JAiUcqy3lM
Plus about another 60 million Christians in Russia proper and her satellites
Bill C
I agree with everything you said, but having made the Treaty of
Versailles, over massive American resistance, they needed to act
sooner.
As far as his wisdom, that's lost in time. It's not even a blip on
the radar today. This is the man who ordered the massive firebombing
of cities that were supporting the effort against us. Now we wring our
hands when the teenager carrying the mortar shells for the crew
shelling civilians gets shot, and we prosecute and crucify our own
people. The few times anyone tries to pint this out they are screamed
down by the HRW, Amnesty, MoveOn folks.
I have no illusions that we would have a prayer against a large
determined enemy today that was smart enough, and determined enough to
stick to unconventional warfare using civilians. We have proven to be
the eunuch in the whorehouse on that one. In Vietnam, and now in the
M.E..
Patton would've been in jail after his first month on the job today,
and we have more people ready to appease, negotiate, and help the
nutcases form "legitimate" governments today than ever before.
You agree with Ike that we should fight to win? Then Iran is next on
the list, and it becomes a totally non-functional state with all it's
infrastructure destroyed. After that we depopulate the Pakistan/Afghan
border area.
Summary executions for those caught fighting out of uniform or
providing support need to happen again, as they did then.
It's not that we can't remove them from being effective, it's that we
wont. We want them all to LOVE us. Fuck that.
Stop throwing kids away, and extending everyones agony by letting
people like Al-Sadr walk free.
Bill C
Either get the hell out or go after the people calling the shots, and
the "civilians" fighting us.
Da...@crockett.net
Kurgan, take a little look here.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2007/110107Kurds.htm
It's quite possible that the Kurds were simply collateral damage with
neither side deliberately gassing them whilst losing no sleep over the
incident when tey learned about it afterwards
But even had eithr the Iraqi or Irani side deliberately gassed them,
they would have had a sterling mentor.
Winston Churchill was the first to gas Kurds back in 1917
--
Davey Crockett
Matt Stawicki
Yeah..well, Catholic's have always been good at twisting God's word
around to suit their needs.
I wasn't asking what "religion", or which religious zealots think they
need to kill non believers. There are plenty of those wacko's around,
and they're not the believers they think they are.
Pete said:
>I'd also point out
>that direct interpretation of the Bible would point in a similarly
>unpleasant direction, and just like with Islam, most Christians choose
>to ignore most of the silly suggestions.
And I asked:
>Where in the bible does Jesus direct us to kill anyone who doesn't believe in God?
Matt
Michael Press
<1194551173.8...@t8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
Pete <peter...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Oh. Now you do not deny it. Now we are negotiating numbers.
I will open with fifty-million.
--
Michael Press
Scott
> "Scott" <hendricks_sc...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1194470459.8...@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > "Those who beat their swords into ploughshares will plow for those who
> > don't."
>
> And there's been quite a few examples of exactly that happening. But
> according to many here if we just are very nice to others they're just
> naturally be very nice to us.
Everyone knows the answer to the question, what's the oldest
profession. Prostitute. But, what's the second oldest profession?
Soldier. If it were as simple as the rodney king-ish 'why can't we
all just get along', then why is the one constant in the history of
mankind warfare?
Bill C
> * William Asher <*...@yahoo.com> a écrit profondement:
Yeah I'd like them. I've got a bunch of old stuff on vinyl. WW1
ditties, patriotic, stuff, etc...
bill c
Pete
> Pete <petersr1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On 8 Nov, 19:17, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > > My point exactly. It is still not widely understood
> > > seventy years later. When Iosif Vissarionovich
> > > Dzhugashvili purged, it was not only a few party
> > > members. Dzhugashvili's manufactured a Soviet wide
> > > famine and denial of aid to the Ukraine is generally
> > > recognized as genocide. I mean the Ukraine! It's like
> > > Iowa, but they had a killing famine. Figure five
> > > million killed in the Ukraine famine. His usual scheme
> > actually are (and yes, I did know about the Ukraine - along with the
> > manufactured famine he ordered that anyone stealing food should be
> > shot in sight!)
>
> Oh. Now you do not deny it. Now we are negotiating numbers.
> I will open with fifty-million.
I think you already 'opened' in your previous post, where you
suggested 5 million died in the Ukraine (which is high end of possible
IMO). As to total numbers, I'm really not interested in arguing. If
that's what your 50 million is meant to be, then it's in the range
serious historians have put forwards, and I'm not going to try to
claim I know better than them.
Pete
Mark & Steven Bornfeld
Damn, I know I don't pay attention, but I've no idea where you're
from--were you in Palestine during the war for independence?
Yesterday I was listening to the NPR station in NY (WNYC) and there was
a program with the German chanteuse Ute Lemper playing old records of
the Weimar period, and speaking specifically of her feelings about
Marlene Dietrich. Fascinating.
Steve
--
Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS
http://www.dentaltwins.com
Brooklyn, NY
718-258-5001
J. Carroll
I'll see your 50 million and raise you one cross posting maniac - Cliff <G>
LOL
--
JC
Bill C
Here's the latest, to go with the homeless, VA, Denial of benefits
crap:
http://tinyurl.com/yv4b82
WASHINGTON - The Labor Department on Thursday sought to defend its
record of helping reservists who are denied their old civilian jobs
when they come back from war.
Lawmakers said the system is broken; one senator called the procedures
for veterans seeking help a confusing "Walter Reed-like nightmare."
Trot our asses into a made up war,Don't plan for said war, give us
shit to fight with, deny us our promised benefits on return, rake the
profits off our deaths and dismemberments.
Yep Bush is a "PATRIOT"
and we are morons because most of us would show up again if called.
Bill C
Bill C
> Stop throwing kids away, and extending everyones agony by letting
> people like Al-Sadr walk free.
> Bill C
> Either get the hell out or go after the people calling the shots, and
> the "civilians" fighting us.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
KARBALA, Iraq (AFP) - Police on Thursday accused the Mahdi Army
militia of radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr of carrying out a four-year
killing spree in Iraq's central shrine city of Karbala which left
hundreds dead.
The killings and other gross human rights violations were carried out
by the militiamen in their attempt to impose Sharia law on the people
of Karbala, the police directorate of Karbala province said in a
statement.
Yep, we should definitely be negotiating with, and legitimising him!
Appeasement is alive and well. Where's the outcry, and protests from
the human rights/leftists demanding he be brought before the Hague?
Not gonna be any outcry. They support Mugabe and Chavez too.
Bill C
Bill C
Not a word from HRW about this though they are all over western
leaning Georgia:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7084262.stm
Gunmen fire on Venezuela protest
Some of the gunmen opened fire on students from motorcycles
Gunmen in Venezuela have opened fire on students returning from a
peaceful march in Caracas against President Hugo Chavez's planned
consitutional reforms
No protest of Castro, Che, Mao or any of their offspring from the
left despite their record of torture, muder, and brutality. They do
protest those who support the west though.
Bill C
http://hrw.org/
J. Carroll
Get back to me when any of that lot are in an American uniform or listing
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue as their permanent address, and listen George -
Dick warned you about light fingering Jenna's BlackBerry to post your drivel
to the net.
Give it back or the bottle of scotch won't be in the dresser where he leaves
it for you tonight and the guy schlepping coke to the residence will be in
jail.
--
JC
Bill C
>
> - Show quoted text -
You are a moron aren't you? Nope, that's not in question. You are.
Hillary will be shortly.
Bill C
Bill C
>
> - Show quoted text -
I need to add a bit of clarification. The right wing has backed
shitloads of scumbags, and protected them, but those scumbags didn't
hate the US and were at least sorta working with us. The left backs
scumbags who make no secret they hate us and everything in US history.
Bill C
Kurgan Gringioni
>
> Yep, we should definitely be negotiating with, and legitimising him!
Dumbass -
Is your head up your fucking ass or what?
The reason that guy has to be accounted for is WE KICKED OUT SADDAM
HUSSEIN, the guy who kept al Sadr in check.
Containment was working on Saddam Hussein, just like it worked for the
Soviet Union. The cumulative effect of a decade of international
economic sanctions/US bombings was such that he no offensive firepower
left in his army, was a threat to no other country and he was using
all his resources to feed/pay his Mukhbarat/army and stay in power.
The reason Bush Sr. didn't kick him out is that his replacement was
likely to be no different than him. We're finding out now that his
replacement could be worse. It's simply the nature of the region.
Containment was the far superioir option, but Bush Jr. just couldn't
resist.
thanks,
K. Gringioni.
Mike Jacoubowsky
>> are greater in number and spread all over. But to address it by invading
>> another country and killing a bunch of them and installing a puppet
>> government is an absurd solution.
More accurately, we didn't install a puppet government, but rather put in
place a mechanism that installed, by "popular" vote, an inappropriate
government. It's a part of the world that has never successfully unified
under anything other than a strong dictatorial power, using threats,
coercion and punishment to establish order. Democracy, as we know it, just
doesn't work there. Why anyone thought otherwise is beyond me.
But seriously, the fact that they had an election at all, and that people
got to have a taste of democracy... that was an amazing thing. I was
surprised it could be pulled off. For a period of time, it appeared that
Bush's strategy wasn't so far-fetched. Unfortunately, it was a very short
period of time, after which the euphoria went away and the various factions
got down to the day-to-day business of maintaining and increasing power by
killing off other sects. As has been the case in that part of the world
since biblical times.
--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
"Bill C" <trito...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:1194468445.5...@o38g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 7, 3:36 pm, chester <ches...@hotmeal.com> wrote:
>> cy
>>
>>
>>
>> > Too bad that most of us seem unable to agree that Islam's radical wing
>> > is equally evil. I suppose we'll have to wait until the Democrats
>> > demand a democracy in Pakistan, a radical Islamic government is
>> > elected and passes an A-bomb off to terrorists or India drops one on
>> > Pakistan to save themselves.
>>
>> I personally think it is more dangerous and evil than the nazis. They
>> are greater in number and spread all over. But to address it by invading
>> another country and killing a bunch of them and installing a puppet
>> government is an absurd solution. Even if we wanted to, we can't kill
>> them all, so our aggression just fuels the fire (much like gasoline) and
>> makes the situation worse, and worse, and worse.
>
> So we should all just convert now?
> Bill C
>
Kurgan Gringioni
No they didn't.
They should've contained him, like we did with the Soviet Union. The
Soviet Union, with 19,000 nuclear warheads, was a thousand times the
threat Hitler ever was. They could have set life on the planet back by
millions of years.
Luckily, we didn't try a nuclear "preventative war" like some were
advocating to Eisenhower. Containment worked. It didn't work on
Germany because they didn't try it. They appeased AH and gave him the
illusion that the harder he pushed, the more he would gain.
Michael Press
<1194558070.1...@k35g2000prh.googlegroups.com>
,
Pete <peter...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On 8 Nov, 21:29, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > Pete <petersr1...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 8 Nov, 19:17, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > > > My point exactly. It is still not widely understood
> > > > seventy years later. When Iosif Vissarionovich
> > > > Dzhugashvili purged, it was not only a few party
> > > > members. Dzhugashvili's manufactured a Soviet wide
> > > > famine and denial of aid to the Ukraine is generally
> > > > recognized as genocide. I mean the Ukraine! It's like
> > > > Iowa, but they had a killing famine. Figure five
> > > > million killed in the Ukraine famine. His usual scheme
> > > Yes - but I think there's still a lot of debate as to what the numbers
> > > actually are (and yes, I did know about the Ukraine - along with the
> > > manufactured famine he ordered that anyone stealing food should be
> > > shot in sight!)
> >
> > Oh. Now you do not deny it. Now we are negotiating numbers.
> > I will open with fifty-million.
>
> I think you already 'opened' in your previous post, where you
> suggested 5 million died in the Ukraine (which is high end of possible
> IMO). As to total numbers, I'm really not interested in arguing.
You were arguing numbers with "Yes - but I think there's
still a lot of debate as to what the numbers actually are."
--
Michael Press
J. Carroll
You'd have to be a little clear first.
You're not.
--
JC
Ryan Cousineau
Kurgan Gringioni <kgrin...@hotmail.com> wrote:
MAD only works with nukes. Arguably, the USSR was symmetrically
"containing" the US at the same time. They fought little border
skirmishes by proxy.
Of course, it turned out our allied states mostly prospered, and theirs
mostly withered. North Korea and South Korea are only the most apparent
example, but East Germany and West Germany were similarly stark.
The US was in a strongly isolationist for the decade or so before Pearl
Harbor. They weren't going to fight Germany for any reason. Even after
Pearl Harbor, it's arguable that going to war in Europe was largely a
war on slight pretexts.
> Luckily, we didn't try a nuclear "preventative war" like some were
> advocating to Eisenhower. Containment worked. It didn't work on
> Germany because they didn't try it. They appeased AH and gave him the
> illusion that the harder he pushed, the more he would gain.
It didn't work on Germany because the UK and France didn't try it, but
even then I'd be interested in hearing from you at which point it had to
be done. I'd say that even going to war over Czechoslovakia would have
been too late, not too early. Also, the US didn't have nukes, so the
threat of massive retaliation for an invasion was not manifest.
I'm too lazy to go and dig out Churchill's first book on WWII to be
reminded of when he thought the decisive moment was. If Carl Fogel read
this group, he'd probably reply...
ObBike: bicycles probably only mattered in the Japanese invasion of
Singapore, a pretty minor sideshow in the ebb and flow of World War 2.
--
Ryan Cousineau rcou...@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"My scenarios may give the impression I could be an excellent crook.
Not true - I am a talented lawyer." - Sandy in rec.bicycles.racing
Da...@crockett.net
Cry me a Fucking River
25 per cent of Brit Veterans are sleeping in the streets - their jobs
gone to "immigrants" and their houses gone to "asylum seekers" whilst
they get added to a waiting list ten years long.
And, since the Government pays totally inadequate compensation for
injury/disability the squaddies have to take out private insurance
which has just been increased by quite a percentage and demands a 50
percent surcharge the minute a grunt gets posted to "active" duty
Not satisfied with sending tha lads to war, they now have to pay for
the privilege.
Then some raghead (Shit be upon his name) at a gas station refused to
serve an officer in uniform because it was 'against his religion" or
some shit Now Davey is a pacifist and deadly against any
non-defensive war, but in that situation would have buttonholed a
Sergeant and said, "Bonfire Night Job required, Sarge, civvy clothes,
no names, no pack drill right?. And make sure you use the raghead for
the Guy"
|CITE]
“AN ASIAN WORKER at a BP filling station provoked fury by
turning away a soldier because he was in uniform. The shocked Army
officer – wearing combat fatigues – was told to go away and change
before he could buy beer from the service station shop. But witnesses
(they would be other reagheads) claimed the snub was due to the
attendant’s antiwar views. “
|/CITE]
|CITE]
The world-famous Red Arrows have been banned from appearing at the
2012 London Olympics because they are deemed "too British".
Organisers of the event say that the Arrows military background might
be "offensive" to other countries taking part in the Games. The
display team have performed at more than 4000 events worldwide, but
the Department of Culture, Media and Sport have deemed the display
team "too militaristically British". Red Arrows pilots were said to be
"outraged", as they had hoped to put on a truly world class display
for the Games, something which had never been seen before. Being axed
from a British-based event for being "too British" is an insult - the
Arrows are a symbol of Britain.
|CITE]
|CITE]
The military accommodation in Britain has been condemned as "worse
than Afghanistan", and is believed to be a contributing factor in the
forces' manpower crisis.
It takes years to repair barracks, and problems have been ignored. It
has been claimed that the MOD is taking money from the estates budget
to make up shortfalls elsewhere.
There are record numbers of army and airmen leaving early, and the
forces are around 6000 under strength.
The majority of military accommodation was sold to a private company,
Annington Homes in 1996 on a PFI leaseback deal. Annington, part of
the investment company Terra Firma leases the majority of its houses
back to the Ministry of Defence for use by its military personnel, but
those that are no longer required by the MoD are sold off by
Annington.
At one barracks, drains were overflowing and repairs were unattended,
at one barracks NCOs were sleeping eight to a room with the minimum of
privacy and little storage space. Soldiers from one regiment were said
to have better accommodation in Afghanistan than the soldiers at home
in the UK.
|/CITE]
AND GET THIS BULLSHIT::::::::
|CITE]
A severely injured soldier, who suffered the worst injuries of any
soldier to survive, has received less in compensation than an RAF
typist with an injured thumb.
Ben Parkinson was blown up by a mine in Afghanistan, suffering a total
of 37 horrendous injuries. The 23 year old has lost both legs,
suffered serious damage to his pelvis, spine, skull, ribcage, hands
and spleen. He was in a coma for several months.
Ben's mother would like to buy him a bungalow to allow her to care for
him, but the severely-injured paratrooper has only been awarded
£152,150 in compensation. This is just over half the maximum award for
an injured soldier, and is less than one third of the amount
(£484,000) given to an RAF typist who suffered with repetitive strain
injury in her thumb!
Ben's mother plans to challenge the award in the High Court, but does
not qualify for Legal Aid.
Veterans' groups have condemned the award - saying that the military
covenant, which guarantees troops fair treatment in return for risking
their lives, is being broken.
Ben is expected to spend at least a year in a military rehabilitation
centre before he can return home, when he will need daily care in a
specially-adapted home. Only three of his injuries were taken into
account when assessing the compensation payout, thanks to red tape the
rest of his horrific injuries count for nothing! He spent three months
in a coma, contracted MRSA during one of several operations and cannot
take liquids by mouth. He will spend time at Headley Court in Surrey
as part of his rehabilitation.
Contrast Ben's treatment with the compensation paid out to others -
convicted fraudster slips in shower at Wayland Prison in Norfolk,
awarded £248,000 after claiming he was rendered impotent, he later
fathered a daughter; a teacher was awarded £330,000 after an intruder
entered the classroom, she was not harmed; prisoner tries to kill
himself and is awarded £575,000 and £750,000 paid to heroin addicts
who claimed that having their treatment cut short amounted to
"torture".
It is time that this government and the legal system, got their
priorities right.
|/CITE]
Now Davey comes from a Military family, and Davey too tried being a
Soldier Boy for a while but found the Bullshit too much for anyone
with a brain bigger than a pea so they moved him into Intelligence
based solely on the fact that they needed somebody who spoke Greek in
Cyprus. Had they even asked Davey, he would have told them that the
Greek and Latin noted in his dossier was schoolboy stuff, but they
never asked.And the Major Davey reported to said that he really ought
to snd Davey bck, but would keep him since it had taken six months to
even find anybody as unqualified as Davey for the job.
Anyway, Davey didn't complain as he got made up to the Captain's rank
that the posting demanded and happily spent a year chasing Grivas
around the Cyprus hills and watching Sergeants lob grenades down wells
where "terrorists" had sought refuge. Hmmm. and Davey always thought
you had to demand that suspects surrender before sending them to
Vallhalla. Taking this point up with Sarge on the first occasion Davey
witnessed this ungentlemanly behaviour, he queried the three
challenges demanded under rules of war, but Sarge said "I did, Sir,
but you must not have heard me?"
Davey even had an illustrious idiot for a Grandfather who he never had
the pleasure of meeting, one soldier boy by the name of Edward Elers
Delaval Henderson, who was stupid enough to lead a bayonet charge,
planted these 90 years or so in Mesopotamia (Iraq) whose sole
remaining claim to fame is the VC after his name on the
Memorial. But damn right they don't know where the medal is - and
they're not going to find out either - because Davey has it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Elers_Delaval_Henderson
Now where the Fuck is Queen Victoria when you need her?
--
Davey Crockett
Tom Kunich
news:1194517396....@v29g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>
> 'Some authorities' basically means your favourite right-wing TV
> personality, so you'll excuse me if I ignore that.
By all means Pete, DO tell me who my favorite "right wing" TV personality
is. And by "ignoring that" I suppose you're implying that you haven't read
the Koran nor it's ancillary texts. So feel free to comment on that
religions from a basis of complete and utter ignorance.
> I'd also point out
> that direct interpretation of the Bible would point in a similarly
> unpleasant direction, and just like with Islam, most Christians choose
> to ignore most of the silly suggestions.
Psst - your ignorance is showing. Apparently you haven't read the Bible
either. What I always find fascinating is that the people who know the least
about something always seem to talk the most about it.
>> So, by ALL means explain to me why you'd suppose that I'd need to believe
>> that there are somehow MORE terrorists and extremists than there actually
>> are? The real question is why do you believe that they are harmless to
>> you
>> personally?
>
> I don't, but I also think there is a difference between a large number
> quite capable of causing problems, and a very large number capable of
> getting democratic representation.
Now is that only made sense you might have made a point. Funny thing is that
it makes no sense whatsoever. Of course if you HAD bothered to actually read
the Koran you'd probably know why you make no sense.
> Iraq was never an Islamic extremist threat with Hussein in power.
Strange how you like vicious dictators for life.
Da...@crockett.net
|
| Yeah I'd like them. I've got a bunch of old stuff on vinyl. WW1
| ditties, patriotic, stuff, etc...
| bill c
|
Will do, prolly later today as I'm gonna ride soon as it gets light in
another hour os so here
Is your email addy good so I can notify you?
Tom Kunich
news:473361df$0$1766$ec3e...@news.usenetmonster.com...
> Matt Stawicki wrote:
>> I don't recall Jesus saying anything about how we, as Christians, should
>> kill anyone who doesn't believe in God.
>
> The Conquistadors and the inquisition seemed to be under that impression.
Strange - so did the Mongols. Were they Christians too?
I wonder if there's really the slightest grey matter hidden beneath your
scalp. I wonder that because you offer the 1st grade example of really
stupid replies just about every time.
Tom Kunich
news:1194546152....@s15g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
>
> Agreed, and one thing the Hussein-was-an-extremist camp *always* fails
> to mention is that in the 1991 Gulf War, he had mustard and nerve gas
> which he used on the Kurds in 1988. He didn't use that stuff even
> though we booted him out of Kuwait at a cost of 300,000+ casualties to
> his army.
I always like to see postings from someone that can't read the newspapers.
> Osama bin Laden would use that stuff the first chance he got.
So - you believe that Osama bin Laden can't get mustard gas - do you
actually KNOW what mustard gas is?
> Saddam Hussein was a rational player. He wanted to stay in power.
Psst - BECAUSE he didn't use that stuff he remained in power. Why is it that
you can't even understand the stuff that happens in front of your face.
Tom Kunich
news:CeOYi.3268$852...@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net...
>
> Democracy, as we know it, just doesn't work there.
Yeah, it takes us really smart white boys to get it right.
Tom Kunich
>
> A few things wrong with that idea.
>
> 1) At that point Germany was simply rearming.
Which was against the treaty they signed.
> 2) France and England's big error wasn't in refraining from attacking
> Germany, it was in appeasing Germany, as in handing over
> Czechoslavakia.
Did you ever hear of the Spanish Civil War?
> 3) The error which set all that in motion was the Treaty of
> Versailles, with its punitive measures, set up conditions for a
> resentful Germany which allowed an intensely nationalistic figure like
> Hitler to come to power.
Nice grade school textbook recitation that ignores the fact that ALL such
treaties were like that at the time.
> It is accepted in historical circles
I'm sure that you travel in "historical circles."
> Finally, did you read the credential of the man whose words you doubt?
> Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces, WW2. Why do you doubt him? He
> knows a little more about the subject at hand than all of us put
> together.
I suggest that you haven't a clue about General Eisenhower or anything about
him.
Tom Kunich
>
> They should've contained him, like we did with the Soviet Union. The
> Soviet Union, with 19,000 nuclear warheads, was a thousand times the
> threat Hitler ever was. They could have set life on the planet back by
> millions of years.
You can't even understand WW II. I suggest you not talk about present day
wars. Let's see - is it just me or are you telling us that they could have
contained a power that took Norway, Denmark, Belgium, Luxembourg, and
finally France in two months?
Tom Kunich
news:rcousine-87102F.18540908112007@[74.223.185.199.nw.nuvox.net]...
>
> The US was in a strongly isolationist for the decade or so before Pearl
> Harbor. They weren't going to fight Germany for any reason. Even after
> Pearl Harbor, it's arguable that going to war in Europe was largely a
> war on slight pretexts.
You mean the pretext that Germany had declared war on the US?
Tom Kunich
news:Xns99E1D1A76...@130.133.1.4...
>
> It seems to me that the people who are telling you to beat your plows
> into swords are telling you to do that so that you will be the one to lay
> down your life to keep them from having to be plowing anything.
Asher - there's no need to demonstrate to us that you're an abject coward
who would rather be enslaved than have to fight anyone. I already took that
for granted after reading your previous trash postings.
Mike Jacoubowsky
>
> Yeah, it takes us really smart white boys to get it right.
But evidently not the one making that remark.
Could you please include the parts of my post that you apparently don't
agree with?
--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
William Asher
news:13j7qh3...@corp.supernews.com:
That is so harsh. And just when I was beginning to think you were
starting to respect me.
How sharper than a serpent's tooth it is to have a thankless Kunich.
--
Bill Asher
Pete
> "Pete" <petersr1...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1194517396....@v29g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
> > 'Some authorities' basically means your favourite right-wing TV
> > personality, so you'll excuse me if I ignore that.
>
> By all means Pete, DO tell me who my favorite "right wing" TV personality
> is. And by "ignoring that" I suppose you're implying that you haven't read
> the Koran nor it's ancillary texts. So feel free to comment on that
> religions from a basis of complete and utter ignorance.
If you want to give a name rather than saying 'some authorities' I'll
listen. Otherwise it sounds like you're inventing this 5% figure
yourself and trying to invoke a mysterious 'authority' to cover that.
I haven't read the Koran in full. I have read parts (in translation).
> Psst - your ignorance is showing. Apparently you haven't read the Bible
> either. What I always find fascinating is that the people who know the least
> about something always seem to talk the most about it.
I have in fact read the Bible. Did you want to ask any specific
questions?
Yes, there is a difference between the texts, not least because one
was written substantially in the aftermath of a war while the other
was edited by Constantine for use as a stabilising influence on the
Roman Empire. However the Koran does not say 'kill the infidel'. Right
near the start there is a chapter which says (over several lines of
making it absolutely clear) that if an unbeliever doesn't want to
believe then believers should accept that, for example.
> > Iraq was never an Islamic extremist threat with Hussein in power.
>
> Strange how you like vicious dictators for life.
I didn't say I liked him, or that he was all sweetness and light. You
claimed he was an Islamic extremist threat, which is clearly false.
This argument has now gone:
you: 'Hussein was an Islamic extremist.'
me: 'Not true, with reasons.'
you: 'Hussein was an evil man and therefore I was right all along.'
You've done something similar with the democracy bit of the argument
as well. If you're wrong on a point, accept it and move on (or keep
arguing if you insist). Don't move on to a related but different topic
(where I might agree with you) and then claim that being right on that
topic means you were right about everything.
Pete
Pete
> In article <1194570041.105384.298...@t8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
> Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> The US was in a strongly isolationist for the decade or so before Pearl
> Harbor. They weren't going to fight Germany for any reason. Even after
> Pearl Harbor, it's arguable that going to war in Europe was largely a
> war on slight pretexts.
I think most people consider it acceptable to go to war when the other
guy declares war on you.
> > Luckily, we didn't try a nuclear "preventative war" like some were
> > advocating to Eisenhower. Containment worked. It didn't work on
> > Germany because they didn't try it. They appeased AH and gave him the
> > illusion that the harder he pushed, the more he would gain.
>
> It didn't work on Germany because the UK and France didn't try it, but
> even then I'd be interested in hearing from you at which point it had to
> be done. I'd say that even going to war over Czechoslovakia would have
> been too late, not too early. Also, the US didn't have nukes, so the
> threat of massive retaliation for an invasion was not manifest.
If you're looking for a right time, probably the reoccupation of the
Ruhr is the closest you'll find to one. At that point France had a
huge military superiority and could easily have pushed the German
troops back - indeed they had orders to retreat as fast as possible if
the French did anything. But basically there wasn't going to be a
right time: the Treaty of Versailles was far too punitive. Hitler's
rise to power wasn't in any sense smooth; in the late 1920s he was
losing ground due to the economy temporarily going well (lots of US
loans, mainly). He was happy to wait because he knew that there would
be a crash (even without the Depression, it wasn't a stable economy -
too much money flowing out to pay the Versailles debt).
Pete
Donald Munro
>> Strange how you like vicious dictators for life.
>
> I didn't say I liked him, or that he was all sweetness and light. You
> claimed he was an Islamic extremist threat, which is clearly false.
Pete wrote:
> This argument has now gone:
> you: 'Hussein was an Islamic extremist.' me: 'Not true, with reasons.'
> you: 'Hussein was an evil man and therefore I was right all along.'
>
> You've done something similar with the democracy bit of the argument as
> well. If you're wrong on a point, accept it and move on (or keep arguing
> if you insist). Don't move on to a related but different topic (where I
> might agree with you) and then claim that being right on that topic means
> you were right about everything.
The Kunich bot is a sample application for many of the logical fallacies
listed in:
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mathew/logic.html
Bill C
Your right. Humpty Dumpty's broke and you want to put him back
together again? You deal with what IS, and right now it's a total
clusterfuck, handwringing about Hussein doesn't move the situation
forward.
You've also been right on the money about the democracy bit too.
Pakistan is going to look a lot like Gaza shortly, except with nukes.
My guess is that Bhutto gets elected, but a shitload of extremists get
elected too.
Bill C
Donald Munro
>>> I don't recall Jesus saying anything about how we, as Christians,
>>> should kill anyone who doesn't believe in God.
Donald Munro wrote:
>> The Conquistadors and the inquisition seemed to be under that
>> impression.
Tom Kunich wrote:
> Strange - so did the Mongols. Were they Christians too?
What do the Mongols have to do with the price of eggs or the OP's
original statement ?
> I wonder if there's really the slightest grey matter hidden beneath your
> scalp. I wonder that because you offer the 1st grade example of really
> stupid replies just about every time.
Here is some recommended reading for your benefit (I am a non profit
charitable organization just like LIVEDRUNK(tm):
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0130102024
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mathew/logic.html
Bill C
>
> - Show quoted text -
I'm pretty sure that the folks at St. Cyr, and the government were
convinced that they'd established unbreachable containment with all
the money they spent on massive fortifications, and they were right
too. Hitler just went around them. A frontal assault would've been
suicidal.
Almost noone in the allied sphere had any clue it what was coming or
possible, other than Patton and Billy Mitchell and they were both
treated as nutcases or worse. The rest were comfortable with WW1
thinking.
The old maxim that "Every battle plan is perfect, until the first
shot is fired." applied perfectly.
Bill C
Bill C
>
> Cry me a Fucking River
>
> 25 per cent of Brit Veterans are sleeping in the streets - their jobs
> gone to "immigrants" and their houses gone to "asylum seekers" whilst
> they get added to a waiting list ten years long.
>
> And, since the Government pays totally inadequate compensation for
> injury/disability the squaddies have to take out private insurance
> which has just been increased by quite a percentage and demands a 50
> percent surcharge the minute a grunt gets posted to "active" duty
>
> Not satisfied with sending tha lads to war, they now have to pay for
> the privilege.
>
Yeah Davey
I've been following that too. The vet thing might be even more fucked
up there than here, but it's a mess here too, and my wife is caught up
in it.
Due to a bunch of injuries she took a medical discharge, because the
Army wouldn't go over 20% disability. The cutoff for retirement is 30%
or more. The Veterans Administration review immediately after she got
out put her ay 40%. The services, and the Army in particular have been
doing this to save money since Bush Sr. was Pres. They finally are
looking at taking assessment away from DOD and retrocatively instating
the VAs evaluations back to 2000 which will give my wife back a bunch
of benefits. It's not even the money, it's being run off the
reservation after being repeatedly injured, several of which are
chronic and getting worse and getting a "screw you" for it. She's
still working for the military now as a civilian because she chose to,
in spite of what they did, because she can help other people in the
system.
Bill C
Steven Bornfeld
> * Bill C <***@verizon.net> a écrit profondement:
> |
>
> | Yeah I'd like them. I've got a bunch of old stuff on vinyl. WW1
> | ditties, patriotic, stuff, etc...
> | bill c
> |
> Will do, prolly later today as I'm gonna ride soon as it gets light in
> another hour os so here
>
> Is your email addy good so I can notify you?
>
I'd love to be notified to, Davey. Remove "mung" from my addy to reply.
Thanks,
Steve
Da...@crockett.net
Davey smells a rat here
That Bhutto woman was kicked out of her position twice already for
corruption and seems to be attracting a pretty nasty following.
I think possibly the CIA had a hand in the "Bring her Back" campaign
but can't figure out what the US government has to gain except that
perhaps she might be more malleable than Pervez Musharraf
An additional point, for what it might, or might not, be worth is that
she is half Kurd.
But for fighting terrorism, Musharraf is the only game in town so the
next month or two promises to be interesting.
--
Davey Crockett
Pete
> I'm pretty sure that the folks at St. Cyr, and the government were
> convinced that they'd established unbreachable containment with all
> the money they spent on massive fortifications, and they were right
> too. Hitler just went around them. A frontal assault would've been
> suicidal.
> Almost noone in the allied sphere had any clue it what was coming or
> possible, other than Patton and Billy Mitchell and they were both
> treated as nutcases or worse. The rest were comfortable with WW1
> thinking.
> The old maxim that "Every battle plan is perfect, until the first
> shot is fired." applied perfectly.
'Containment' is usually a euphemism for: kick crap out of them until
they have a pitiful force left, then stay around to give follow-up
kicks every time they try to rebuild, and ensure the economy stays in
the hole so this isn't too often or expensive. Would have been
possible up until 1934-ish with the Nazis; but then it would've meant
staying around for probably decades with Stalin laughing, so whether
things would have been better in the long run are debatable (i.e.
probably not, we'd have had a war anyway and quite possibly a worse
one).
Pete