J
Jackal
Guest
a
> real no brainer in my opinion.
>
> Ed Dolan - Minnesota
>
no brainer being the operative term?
> real no brainer in my opinion.
>
> Ed Dolan - Minnesota
>
no brainer being the operative term?
- Status
D
Dave Larrington
Guest
"Whale oil beef hooked" - T-shirt sported by Motörhead drummer Phil Taylor, "Top Of The Pops", 1980
Dave Larrington - http://legslarry.crosswinds.net/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================
Dave Larrington - http://legslarry.crosswinds.net/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================
J
Jackal
Guest
[email protected] (Edward Dolan) wrote in news:[email protected]:
> Jackal <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>> Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:
>>
>> >
>> > Edward Dolan wrote:
>> >>
>> >> No way this is going to be another Vienam nor is it going to cost many American lives. It is
>> >> something we can do on the cheap and the payoff will be tremendous - a whole new middle east
>> >> that will be much more to our liking. Read your history. War solves many otherwise unsolvable
>> >> problems.
>>
>>
>> You are one DREAMING mof'er.
>
> Now there is an intelligent comment. Even the benighted Tom Sherman does not stoop that low. Why
> do you think this second Gulf war is going to be any different than the first Gulf war? Or maybe,
> like the French, you would just as soon belly up and not have to take any hard decisions. The
> history of American arms since Vietnam has been nothing but glorious. Just one victory after
> another. But of course there are those who love defeat and who hate America. Jackal well
> describes yo
That glorious victory in Bosnia being your prime example? Jackal = I will gnaw on your bones
> Jackal <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>> Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:
>>
>> >
>> > Edward Dolan wrote:
>> >>
>> >> No way this is going to be another Vienam nor is it going to cost many American lives. It is
>> >> something we can do on the cheap and the payoff will be tremendous - a whole new middle east
>> >> that will be much more to our liking. Read your history. War solves many otherwise unsolvable
>> >> problems.
>>
>>
>> You are one DREAMING mof'er.
>
> Now there is an intelligent comment. Even the benighted Tom Sherman does not stoop that low. Why
> do you think this second Gulf war is going to be any different than the first Gulf war? Or maybe,
> like the French, you would just as soon belly up and not have to take any hard decisions. The
> history of American arms since Vietnam has been nothing but glorious. Just one victory after
> another. But of course there are those who love defeat and who hate America. Jackal well
> describes yo
That glorious victory in Bosnia being your prime example? Jackal = I will gnaw on your bones
J
Joshua Goldberg
Guest
UR not including Grenada in this series of Glorious Victories I hope.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Dave Larrington" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> > The history of American arms since Vietnam has been nothing but glorious. Just one victory after
> > another
>
> Which films have you been watching? I don't recall much glorious or victorious about the attempt
> to rescue the Tehran hostages, for example. Sample dialogue: "Of course you don't get dust storms
> in Iran at this
time
> of year!" Or are we not counting "police actions" (distinguishable by
lack
> of Bob Hope)?
>
> And for the record, it *is* possible to be anti-THIS-war without being pro-Saddam, to be
> pro-Iraqi-people without being anti-American and to believe one's elected leaders are a bunch of
> pond-slime without being anti-democratic.
>
> "There's a village in Texas missing its idiot" - banner spotted on London Anti-war march, February
> 15th 2003.
>
> Dave Larrington - http://legslarry.crosswinds.net/
> ===========================================================
> Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
> http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
> ===========================================================
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Dave Larrington" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> > The history of American arms since Vietnam has been nothing but glorious. Just one victory after
> > another
>
> Which films have you been watching? I don't recall much glorious or victorious about the attempt
> to rescue the Tehran hostages, for example. Sample dialogue: "Of course you don't get dust storms
> in Iran at this
time
> of year!" Or are we not counting "police actions" (distinguishable by
lack
> of Bob Hope)?
>
> And for the record, it *is* possible to be anti-THIS-war without being pro-Saddam, to be
> pro-Iraqi-people without being anti-American and to believe one's elected leaders are a bunch of
> pond-slime without being anti-democratic.
>
> "There's a village in Texas missing its idiot" - banner spotted on London Anti-war march, February
> 15th 2003.
>
> Dave Larrington - http://legslarry.crosswinds.net/
> ===========================================================
> Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
> http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
> ===========================================================
B
Bandjhughes
Guest
[email protected] (BraveNewWhirl) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> "brian hughes" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> > "Jim Verheul" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news[email protected]...
> > >
> > > I think that defining war as a political act shows an incredible disregard for human life.
> > > There are a few parts of the world were your disregard
> seems
> > > to be shared, sadly. Admittedly, this disregard, both yours and others, seems to be for
> > > certain human life and not all human life. How do you, or they, draw the line? maybe its just
> > > easier for me to give all human life
> the
> > > same value.
> > >
> >
> > Actually defining war as a political act isn't a recent notion that I myself had. The Chineese
> > philosopher Sun Tzu wrote about it in his book "The Art of War" several thousand years ago. Carl
> > von Clausewitz the Prussian military strategious in the late 1700s wrote in depth about how
> > political objective is the goal, war is the means. Sun Tzu and Von Clausewitz are still required
> > readings in US military courses--and are still very much applicable today.
> >
>
> You are quite right about Clausewitz. Sun Tzu, however, said war was an act of stupidity.
Thanks. It has been quite a few years since I studied Sun Tzu and von Clausewitz and apparently I'm
convoluting them a little. I went back today and re-read Sun Tzu and realized his thesis wasn't so
much in the geo-political objectives of war, as was Clausewitz's, but rather how to succeed in war.
By the way what Sun Tzu actually wrote was "to subjugate the enemy's army without doing battle is
the highest of excellence." In other words, the best choice (if available) is to subdue the enemy
and win without actually fighting. He never mentioned war as an act of stupidity though.
news:<[email protected]>...
> "brian hughes" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> > "Jim Verheul" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news
[email protected]...> > >
> > > I think that defining war as a political act shows an incredible disregard for human life.
> > > There are a few parts of the world were your disregard
> seems
> > > to be shared, sadly. Admittedly, this disregard, both yours and others, seems to be for
> > > certain human life and not all human life. How do you, or they, draw the line? maybe its just
> > > easier for me to give all human life
> the
> > > same value.
> > >
> >
> > Actually defining war as a political act isn't a recent notion that I myself had. The Chineese
> > philosopher Sun Tzu wrote about it in his book "The Art of War" several thousand years ago. Carl
> > von Clausewitz the Prussian military strategious in the late 1700s wrote in depth about how
> > political objective is the goal, war is the means. Sun Tzu and Von Clausewitz are still required
> > readings in US military courses--and are still very much applicable today.
> >
>
> You are quite right about Clausewitz. Sun Tzu, however, said war was an act of stupidity.
Thanks. It has been quite a few years since I studied Sun Tzu and von Clausewitz and apparently I'm
convoluting them a little. I went back today and re-read Sun Tzu and realized his thesis wasn't so
much in the geo-political objectives of war, as was Clausewitz's, but rather how to succeed in war.
By the way what Sun Tzu actually wrote was "to subjugate the enemy's army without doing battle is
the highest of excellence." In other words, the best choice (if available) is to subdue the enemy
and win without actually fighting. He never mentioned war as an act of stupidity though.
G
Gary Mc
Guest
Kent Peterson <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
>
> I'm testing this stuff:
>
> http://www.soytek.com/cycling/cycleproducts.html
>
> It's a soy based chain lube system. Both the solvent and the wax seem pretty good.
>
The knock that I have heard on products like White Lightning is that they wash out easily if you are
riding in wet weather. Do you have any feel if this is true with Soytek?
Gary McCarty, Greenspeed GTO, Salt Lake City
news:<[email protected]>...
>
> I'm testing this stuff:
>
> http://www.soytek.com/cycling/cycleproducts.html
>
> It's a soy based chain lube system. Both the solvent and the wax seem pretty good.
>
The knock that I have heard on products like White Lightning is that they wash out easily if you are
riding in wet weather. Do you have any feel if this is true with Soytek?
Gary McCarty, Greenspeed GTO, Salt Lake City
S
Skip
Guest
"Dave Larrington" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
<snip>
> "There's a village in Texas missing its idiot" - banner spotted on London Anti-war march, February
> 15th 2003.
>
This banner was fairly typical of the protest signage I could see from the news coverage. And
probably fairly indicative of the political awarness of the protesters as a group. Anyway they
seemed to be having a good time so I suppose the rally was a success.
news:[email protected]...
<snip>
> "There's a village in Texas missing its idiot" - banner spotted on London Anti-war march, February
> 15th 2003.
>
This banner was fairly typical of the protest signage I could see from the news coverage. And
probably fairly indicative of the political awarness of the protesters as a group. Anyway they
seemed to be having a good time so I suppose the rally was a success.
S
Skip
Guest
"Zippy the Pinhead" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> "Jim Verheul" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > Where does wax come from? I think its a petroleum product too.
>
> Wax comes from bees that are enslaved by cruel beekeepers who keep the intelligent little
> creatures in white boxes and steal the fruits of their labor, selling it to line their pockets
> with filthy cash.
>
> Bees have rights!
>
> Boycott wax! Burn clover! Kill Winnie the Pooh!
Right on brother Pinhead! Life if is waaay to good for beekeepers of large hives. I have it on good
authority that those bastards earn 500 times the average hourly rate of their worker bees.
Yeah, Boycott, Burn, and Kill! That'll get 'em.
>
> "Jim Verheul" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > Where does wax come from? I think its a petroleum product too.
>
> Wax comes from bees that are enslaved by cruel beekeepers who keep the intelligent little
> creatures in white boxes and steal the fruits of their labor, selling it to line their pockets
> with filthy cash.
>
> Bees have rights!
>
> Boycott wax! Burn clover! Kill Winnie the Pooh!
Right on brother Pinhead! Life if is waaay to good for beekeepers of large hives. I have it on good
authority that those bastards earn 500 times the average hourly rate of their worker bees.
Yeah, Boycott, Burn, and Kill! That'll get 'em.
K
Kent Peterson
Guest
On Thu, 20 Feb 2003, Gary Mc wrote:
> The knock that I have heard on products like White Lightning is that they wash out easily if you
> are riding in wet weather. Do you have any feel if this is true with Soytek?
In my experience Soytek is much better in that reguard than White Lightning but not as good as my
favorite messy wet lube, TriFlow.
Kent Peterson Issaquah WA USA http://www.halcyon.com/peterson/rando.html
> The knock that I have heard on products like White Lightning is that they wash out easily if you
> are riding in wet weather. Do you have any feel if this is true with Soytek?
In my experience Soytek is much better in that reguard than White Lightning but not as good as my
favorite messy wet lube, TriFlow.
Kent Peterson Issaquah WA USA http://www.halcyon.com/peterson/rando.html
D
Dave Larrington
Guest
If the Bushling *isn't* an idiot, he needs to learn to stop playing one on television...
Dave Larrington - http://legslarry.crosswinds.net/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================
Dave Larrington - http://legslarry.crosswinds.net/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================
B
Bravenewwhirl
Guest
> >
> > You are quite right about Clausewitz. Sun Tzu, however, said war was an act of stupidity.
>
> Thanks. It has been quite a few years since I studied Sun Tzu and von Clausewitz and apparently
> I'm convoluting them a little. I went back today and re-read Sun Tzu and realized his thesis
> wasn't so much in the geo-political objectives of war, as was Clausewitz's, but rather how to
> succeed in war. By the way what Sun Tzu actually wrote was "to subjugate the enemy's army
> without doing battle is the highest of excellence." In other words, the best choice (if
> available) is to subdue the enemy and win without actually fighting. He never mentioned war as
> an act of stupidity though.
It is so declared in many places in the text. Read the following:
III.1. Sun Tzu said: In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy's
country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good. So, too, it is better to
recapture an army entire than to destroy it, to capture a regiment, a detachment or a
company entire than to destroy them.
IV. 2. Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence
consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting.
IV.1. Thus the highest form of generalship is to balk the enemy's plans; the next best is to
prevent the junction of the enemy's forces; the next in order is to attack the enemy's army
in the field; and the worst policy of all is to besiege walled cities.
War is stupid.
> > You are quite right about Clausewitz. Sun Tzu, however, said war was an act of stupidity.
>
> Thanks. It has been quite a few years since I studied Sun Tzu and von Clausewitz and apparently
> I'm convoluting them a little. I went back today and re-read Sun Tzu and realized his thesis
> wasn't so much in the geo-political objectives of war, as was Clausewitz's, but rather how to
> succeed in war. By the way what Sun Tzu actually wrote was "to subjugate the enemy's army
> without doing battle is the highest of excellence." In other words, the best choice (if
> available) is to subdue the enemy and win without actually fighting. He never mentioned war as
> an act of stupidity though.
It is so declared in many places in the text. Read the following:
III.1. Sun Tzu said: In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy's
country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good. So, too, it is better to
recapture an army entire than to destroy it, to capture a regiment, a detachment or a
company entire than to destroy them.
IV. 2. Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence
consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting.
IV.1. Thus the highest form of generalship is to balk the enemy's plans; the next best is to
prevent the junction of the enemy's forces; the next in order is to attack the enemy's army
in the field; and the worst policy of all is to besiege walled cities.
War is stupid.
D
Doug Huffman
Guest
*PLONK*
"Dave Larrington" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> If the Bushling *isn't* an idiot, he needs to learn to stop playing one on television...
>
> Dave Larrington - http://legslarry.crosswinds.net/
> ===========================================================
> Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
> http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
> ===========================================================
"Dave Larrington" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> If the Bushling *isn't* an idiot, he needs to learn to stop playing one on television...
>
> Dave Larrington - http://legslarry.crosswinds.net/
> ===========================================================
> Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
> http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
> ===========================================================
S
Skip
Guest
"Doug Huffman" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> *PLONK*
Everybody's gotta get plonked. Bob Dylan said that.
> "Dave Larrington" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > If the Bushling *isn't* an idiot, he needs to learn to stop playing one
on
> > television...
> >
Good one Larry. I suspect you missed a big money making opportunity (not that you are necessarily
looking for one) by not using your anti-Bush creativity to produce and sell signs with your
"slogans" to the protesters.
Didn't see any *Saddam's an Idiot, Comply Now, or Give Up Your Stash* kinds of signs. Obviously they
wouldn't have sold well. Wrong demographic that day.
> *PLONK*
Everybody's gotta get plonked. Bob Dylan said that.
> "Dave Larrington" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > If the Bushling *isn't* an idiot, he needs to learn to stop playing one
on
> > television...
> >
Good one Larry. I suspect you missed a big money making opportunity (not that you are necessarily
looking for one) by not using your anti-Bush creativity to produce and sell signs with your
"slogans" to the protesters.
Didn't see any *Saddam's an Idiot, Comply Now, or Give Up Your Stash* kinds of signs. Obviously they
wouldn't have sold well. Wrong demographic that day.
B
Brian Hughes
Guest
"BraveNewWhirl" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> > >
> > > You are quite right about Clausewitz. Sun Tzu, however, said war was an act of stupidity.
> >
> > Thanks. It has been quite a few years since I studied Sun Tzu and von Clausewitz and apparently
> > I'm convoluting them a little. I went back today and re-read Sun Tzu and realized his thesis
> > wasn't so much in the geo-political objectives of war, as was Clausewitz's, but rather how to
> > succeed in war. By the way what Sun Tzu actually wrote was "to subjugate the enemy's army
> > without doing battle is the highest of excellence." In other words, the best choice (if
> > available) is to subdue the enemy and win without actually fighting. He never mentioned war as
> > an act of stupidity though.
>
> It is so declared in many places in the text. Read the following:
>
> III.1. Sun Tzu said: In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy's
> country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good. So, too, it is better
> to recapture an army entire than to destroy it, to capture a regiment, a detachment or a
> company entire than to destroy them.
>
> III. 2. Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme
> excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting.
>
> III.3. Thus the highest form of generalship is to balk the enemy's plans; the next best is to
> prevent the junction of the enemy's forces; the next in order is to attack the enemy's
> army in the field; and the worst policy of all is to besiege walled cities.
>
> War is stupid.
True. However, again, Sun Tzu never said "war is an act of stupidity"
news:[email protected]...
> > >
> > > You are quite right about Clausewitz. Sun Tzu, however, said war was an act of stupidity.
> >
> > Thanks. It has been quite a few years since I studied Sun Tzu and von Clausewitz and apparently
> > I'm convoluting them a little. I went back today and re-read Sun Tzu and realized his thesis
> > wasn't so much in the geo-political objectives of war, as was Clausewitz's, but rather how to
> > succeed in war. By the way what Sun Tzu actually wrote was "to subjugate the enemy's army
> > without doing battle is the highest of excellence." In other words, the best choice (if
> > available) is to subdue the enemy and win without actually fighting. He never mentioned war as
> > an act of stupidity though.
>
> It is so declared in many places in the text. Read the following:
>
> III.1. Sun Tzu said: In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy's
> country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good. So, too, it is better
> to recapture an army entire than to destroy it, to capture a regiment, a detachment or a
> company entire than to destroy them.
>
> III. 2. Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme
> excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting.
>
> III.3. Thus the highest form of generalship is to balk the enemy's plans; the next best is to
> prevent the junction of the enemy's forces; the next in order is to attack the enemy's
> army in the field; and the worst policy of all is to besiege walled cities.
>
> War is stupid.
True. However, again, Sun Tzu never said "war is an act of stupidity"
T
Tom Sherman
Guest
Edward Dolan wrote:
> That was not what happened in the first Gulf war. In fact, the media created such an uproar over
> the Iraqi casualities (the highway of death) that we had to cease and desist from the war before
> it had been properly won. The Iraqi casualities should have been ignored in the interest of
> prosecuting the war to a successful conclusion, but of course those who hate all wars, no matter
> how justified, were able to bamboozle the Bush administration into prematurely halting the war.
> Now we are going to have to do it all over again because of this weakness in the American will. I
> hope and trust that Bush Jr. will have more guts than his father and will know how to see a war
> through to a successful conclusion. By the way, the solution to the terrorist problem is to out
> terrorist the terrorists. All that is required in order to accomnplish this is guts and will,
> qualities that are sorely lacking, with a few exceptions, in this newsgroup as far as I can tell.
The President Appointee of the United States is George Walker Bush, while his father is George
Herbert Walker Bush, so there is no Bush Jr.
Terrorism can be stopped with terrorism - all that is needed is efficient enough techniques that
everyone on both side is killed, so there is no one left to fight.
P.S. I hope you have that plastic bucket handy to collect the contents of the upper portion of your
gastric-intestinal tract.
Tom Sherman - Recumbent Pedant Curmudgeon
Hatred is a feeling which leads to the extinction of values. - José Ortega y Gasset
> That was not what happened in the first Gulf war. In fact, the media created such an uproar over
> the Iraqi casualities (the highway of death) that we had to cease and desist from the war before
> it had been properly won. The Iraqi casualities should have been ignored in the interest of
> prosecuting the war to a successful conclusion, but of course those who hate all wars, no matter
> how justified, were able to bamboozle the Bush administration into prematurely halting the war.
> Now we are going to have to do it all over again because of this weakness in the American will. I
> hope and trust that Bush Jr. will have more guts than his father and will know how to see a war
> through to a successful conclusion. By the way, the solution to the terrorist problem is to out
> terrorist the terrorists. All that is required in order to accomnplish this is guts and will,
> qualities that are sorely lacking, with a few exceptions, in this newsgroup as far as I can tell.
The President Appointee of the United States is George Walker Bush, while his father is George
Herbert Walker Bush, so there is no Bush Jr.
Terrorism can be stopped with terrorism - all that is needed is efficient enough techniques that
everyone on both side is killed, so there is no one left to fight.
P.S. I hope you have that plastic bucket handy to collect the contents of the upper portion of your
gastric-intestinal tract.
Tom Sherman - Recumbent Pedant Curmudgeon
Hatred is a feeling which leads to the extinction of values. - José Ortega y Gasset
T
Tom Sherman
Guest
Edward Dolan wrote:
>
> Forget the irony Tom Sherman and the attempts at humor. These are not your strong suits. Better to
> stick to your usual pedantry, attention to irrelevant detail and all your asides which never go
> anywhere except to confuse and confound. Also, I thought you were a civil engineer, not a
> preacher. If I get any more moral messages from you I am going to upchuck. You have no credentials
> to be preaching to anyone since you can't seem to think clearly about the most elementary things,
> such as the question of war or peace with Sadamm's Iraq - a real no brainer in my opinion.
Ed,
I suggest that you have a bucket handy before reading further. Avoid facing your computer, as the
acid in vomit may cause significant damage to electronic devices.
Personal attacks as a response to a stated position are usually a sign that the attacker's position
is indefensible.
There is no question about whether or not the US will go to war against Iraq, as the US has been
waging war against Iraq for the last 12 or so years. The question is whether or not the war is
escalated into a full-scale invasion of Iraq by the US and any other countries it can bribe or
browbeat into going along.
Tom Sherman - Recumbent Curmudgeon
>
> Forget the irony Tom Sherman and the attempts at humor. These are not your strong suits. Better to
> stick to your usual pedantry, attention to irrelevant detail and all your asides which never go
> anywhere except to confuse and confound. Also, I thought you were a civil engineer, not a
> preacher. If I get any more moral messages from you I am going to upchuck. You have no credentials
> to be preaching to anyone since you can't seem to think clearly about the most elementary things,
> such as the question of war or peace with Sadamm's Iraq - a real no brainer in my opinion.
Ed,
I suggest that you have a bucket handy before reading further. Avoid facing your computer, as the
acid in vomit may cause significant damage to electronic devices.
Personal attacks as a response to a stated position are usually a sign that the attacker's position
is indefensible.
There is no question about whether or not the US will go to war against Iraq, as the US has been
waging war against Iraq for the last 12 or so years. The question is whether or not the war is
escalated into a full-scale invasion of Iraq by the US and any other countries it can bribe or
browbeat into going along.
Tom Sherman - Recumbent Curmudgeon
T
Tom Sherman
Guest
Joshua Goldberg wrote:
>
> UR not including Grenada in this series of Glorious Victories I hope.
I would rank the small group of Cuban construction workers in Grenada as the same level of military
opponent as the Wehrmacht and Japanese Navy were circa 1942.
Tom Sherman - Recumbent Curmudgeon
>
> UR not including Grenada in this series of Glorious Victories I hope.
I would rank the small group of Cuban construction workers in Grenada as the same level of military
opponent as the Wehrmacht and Japanese Navy were circa 1942.
Tom Sherman - Recumbent Curmudgeon
T
Tom Sherman
Guest
Edward Dolan wrote:
>
> Jackal <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >
> > You are one DREAMING mof'er.
>
> Now there is an intelligent comment. Even the benighted Tom Sherman does not stoop that low. Why
> do you think this second Gulf war is going to be any different than the first Gulf war? Or maybe,
> like the French, you would just as soon belly up and not have to take any hard decisions. The
> history of American arms since Vietnam has been nothing but glorious. Just one victory after
> another. But of course there are those who love defeat and who hate America. Jackal well
> describes you.
I distinctly remember the glorious US victories in Lebanon in the early 1980's and in Somalia in the
early 1990's. The opponents of the US military inflicted some casualties using low-tech methods,
soon after which the US forces were withdrawn.
Tom Sherman - Recumbent Pedant Curmudgeon
If we are an arrogant nation, they will resent us, if we're a humble nation, but strong, they'll
welcome us. - G.W. Bush, 2000 Inaugural Speech
>
> Jackal <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >
> > You are one DREAMING mof'er.
>
> Now there is an intelligent comment. Even the benighted Tom Sherman does not stoop that low. Why
> do you think this second Gulf war is going to be any different than the first Gulf war? Or maybe,
> like the French, you would just as soon belly up and not have to take any hard decisions. The
> history of American arms since Vietnam has been nothing but glorious. Just one victory after
> another. But of course there are those who love defeat and who hate America. Jackal well
> describes you.
I distinctly remember the glorious US victories in Lebanon in the early 1980's and in Somalia in the
early 1990's. The opponents of the US military inflicted some casualties using low-tech methods,
soon after which the US forces were withdrawn.
Tom Sherman - Recumbent Pedant Curmudgeon
If we are an arrogant nation, they will resent us, if we're a humble nation, but strong, they'll
welcome us. - G.W. Bush, 2000 Inaugural Speech
T
Tom Sherman
Guest
Edward Dolan wrote:
>
> I didn't say anything about using nuclear weapons, but it would not be a bad idea to use nuclear
> weapons if Saddam uses his biological and chemical weapons....
And to hell with the innocent Iraqi civilians who die in the resulting thermonuclear holocast.
> You can rest assured that if he had them he would use them. But of course, you are not in a
> postion to influence Saddam any which way whatever. If you were in his kingdom, your hands be cut
> off and your tongue removed after which you would be as subservient as any of his subjects. You
> can only post to this news group with your assinine opinions on everything under the sun. You are
> indefatigable and a trial and tribulation to all the rest of us. Christ, give it a rest!
Jesus Christ was a pacifist, so I can certainly understand why a warmonger would wish that he would
give his philosophy a rest.
Tom Sherman - Recumbent Curmudgeon
Jesus was the most active resister known perhaps to history. His was nonviolence par excellence. -
Mohandas Gandhi
>
> I didn't say anything about using nuclear weapons, but it would not be a bad idea to use nuclear
> weapons if Saddam uses his biological and chemical weapons....
And to hell with the innocent Iraqi civilians who die in the resulting thermonuclear holocast.
> You can rest assured that if he had them he would use them. But of course, you are not in a
> postion to influence Saddam any which way whatever. If you were in his kingdom, your hands be cut
> off and your tongue removed after which you would be as subservient as any of his subjects. You
> can only post to this news group with your assinine opinions on everything under the sun. You are
> indefatigable and a trial and tribulation to all the rest of us. Christ, give it a rest!
Jesus Christ was a pacifist, so I can certainly understand why a warmonger would wish that he would
give his philosophy a rest.
Tom Sherman - Recumbent Curmudgeon
Jesus was the most active resister known perhaps to history. His was nonviolence par excellence. -
Mohandas Gandhi
- Status