Note to France ..

From : mopaman

Q: n o t e t o f r a n c e == http//images2.fotki.com/v21/photos/3/34606/125185/bellygirl-vi.jpg === would that be the same france that was the first to send fighter and bomber support into afghanstan to oust the taliban - and remains the second largest force on the ground there to this day that france destroying the talibans regime was necessary to fight terrorism. war in iraq was not it was a big mistake and it brought al qaeda where it wasnt. personnally i wouldt want a single french soldier to die for iraq or bushs war. as if the cowards would show up anyways. i doubt the french would die for anything other than being forced to use deodoant or take a shower occassionally. -- moparman remove clothes to reply .

Replies:

From : alex b

n o t e t o f r a n c e == http//images2.fotki.com/v21/photos/3/34606/125185/bellygirl-vi.jpg === would that be the same france that was the first to send fighter and bomber support into afghanstan to oust the taliban - and remains the second largest force on the ground there to this day that france destroying the talibans regime was necessary to fight terrorism. war in iraq was not it was a big mistake and it brought al qaeda where it wasnt. personnally i wouldt want a single french soldier to die for iraq or bushs war. as if the cowards would show up anyways. i doubt the french would die for anything other than being forced to use deodoant or take a shower occassionally. no need to say more thank you you have proved here the immensity of your stupidity ! .

From : mopaman

now you listen to me mopaman-im an advertising man not a red herring. ive got a job a secretary a mother two ex-wives and several bartenders that depend upon me and i dont intend to disappoint them all by getting myself slightly killed i got that and more. i did my 10 years and you should too.... -- moparman remove clothes to reply .

From : malev

on tue 29 jun 2004 010146 gmt mopaman scott.hendryx.clothes@sbcglobal.net wrote i got that and more. i did my 10 years and you should too.... ah .... an ex-convict. .

From : i am jacks utter apathy

now you listen to me mopaman-im an advertising man not a red herring. ive got a job a secretary a mother two ex-wives and several bartenders that depend upon me and i dont intend to disappoint them all by getting myself slightly killed n o t e t o f r a n c e == http//images2.fotki.com/v21/photos/3/34606/125185/bellygirl-vi.jpg === hwhi -- to ah now theres a machiavellian countenance... ooh a sextet of ale!- homer simpson .

From : xyzzy

mopaman wrote n o t e t o f r a n c e == http//images2.fotki.com/v21/photos/3/34606/125185/bellygirl-vi.jpg === would that be the same france that was the first to send fighter and bomber support into afghanstan to oust the taliban - and remains the second largest force on the ground there to this day that france destroying the talibans regime was necessary to fight terrorism. war in iraq was not it was a big mistake and it brought al qaeda where it wasnt. personnally i wouldt want a single french soldier to die for iraq or bushs war. as if the cowards would show up anyways. i doubt the french would die for anything other than being forced to use deodoant or take a shower occassionally. you do realize that if it werent for the french we wouldnt be calling them freedom fries. wed be calling them chips. hth. hand. .

From : malev

on tue 29 jun 2004 101730 -0400 xyzzy invalid@addr.net wrote many unnecessary quotes snipped you do realize that if it werent for the french we wouldnt be calling them freedom fries. wed be calling them chips. hey einstein an audio message specially for you http//tinyurl.com/2fy8l .

From : rick blaine

i guess that you just dont get what he meant by that. as in if it werent for the french at war with england during the american revolution america may not have prevailed. this is a common rebuttal to the french would not be free today if not for the allies defeating nazi germany. and its a pretty weak comparison. .

From : milesh

tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. .

From : malev

on 29 jun 2004 141255 edt milesh milesh@nounwantedspam.com wrote what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. here we go again. read the o/t posts in this ng over the past few years. .

From : jefferson n glapski

mopaman wrote n o t e t o f r a n c e == http//images2.fotki.com/v21/photos/3/34606/125185/bellygirl-vi.jpg === would that be the same france that was the first to send fighter and bomber support into afghanstan to oust the taliban - and remains the second largest force on the ground there to this day that france destroying the talibans regime was necessary to fight terrorism. war in iraq was not it was a big mistake and it brought al qaeda where it wasnt. personnally i wouldt want a single french soldier to die for iraq or bushs war. as if the cowards would show up anyways. i doubt the french would die for anything other than being forced to use deodoant or take a shower occassionally. you do realize that if it werent for the french we wouldnt be calling them freedom fries. wed be calling them chips. what do you call a hot dog i would bet you dont call it a frankfurter. i would bet you havent since wwi. i call fries fries. -- jefferson but its hard as hell not to be some kind of redneck bigot sometimes... -trevor zion bauknight most environmentalists think im a corporatist. -mike dahmus fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power. -benito mussolini .

From : tbone

jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in mopaman wrote n o t e t o f r a n c e == http//images2.fotki.com/v21/photos/3/34606/125185/bellygirl-vi.jpg === would that be the same france that was the first to send fighter and bomber support into afghanstan to oust the taliban - and remains the second largest force on the ground there to this day that france destroying the talibans regime was necessary to fight terrorism. war in iraq was not it was a big mistake and it brought al qaeda where it wasnt. personnally i wouldt want a single french soldier to die for iraq or bushs war. as if the cowards would show up anyways. i doubt the french would die for anything other than being forced to use deodoant or take a shower occassionally. you do realize that if it werent for the french we wouldnt be calling them freedom fries. wed be calling them chips. what do you call a hot dog i would bet you dont call it a frankfurter. i would bet you havent since wwi. i call fries fries. i guess that you just dont get what he meant by that. .

From : tbone

i guess that you just dont get what he meant by that. as in if it werent for the french at war with england during the american revolution america may not have prevailed. this is a common rebuttal to the french would not be free today if not for the allies defeating nazi germany. and its a pretty weak comparison. the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : mopaman

i guess that you just dont get what he meant by that. as in if it werent for the french at war with england during the american revolution america may not have prevailed. this is a common rebuttal to the french would not be free today if not for the allies defeating nazi germany. and its a pretty weak comparison. well what did you expect one thing the french do do well and thats stink!!! -- moparman remove clothes to reply .

From : mopaman

jefferson n. glapski wrote what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. 1776 battle of trenton and we waited until the 1940s to respond to this attack also i was not aware that the germans crossed the delaware to attack in trenton. seems to me some other guy crossed to attack. colonel rahl of germany was a blundering fool and a casualty of that battle. musta looked like a squirrel!! -- moparman remove clothes to reply .

From : jefferson n glapski

jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in mopaman wrote n o t e t o f r a n c e == http//images2.fotki.com/v21/photos/3/34606/125185/bellygirl-vi.jpg === would that be the same france that was the first to send fighter and bomber support into afghanstan to oust the taliban - and remains the second largest force on the ground there to this day that france destroying the talibans regime was necessary to fight terrorism. war in iraq was not it was a big mistake and it brought al qaeda where it wasnt. personnally i wouldt want a single french soldier to die for iraq or bushs war. as if the cowards would show up anyways. i doubt the french would die for anything other than being forced to use deodoant or take a shower occassionally. you do realize that if it werent for the french we wouldnt be calling them freedom fries. wed be calling them chips. what do you call a hot dog i would bet you dont call it a frankfurter. i would bet you havent since wwi. i call fries fries. i guess that you just dont get what he meant by that. no i guess i dont. after all the french also gave us traffic circles instead of roundabouts movers instead of forwarders and a bad case of the clap. if you can show disrespect to france im all for it. theyve earned it. -- jefferson but its hard as hell not to be some kind of redneck bigot sometimes... -trevor zion bauknight most environmentalists think im a corporatist. -mike dahmus fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power. -benito mussolini .

From : jefferson n glapski

i guess that you just dont get what he meant by that. as in if it werent for the french at war with england during the american revolution america may not have prevailed. this is a common rebuttal to the french would not be free today if not for the allies defeating nazi germany. and its a pretty weak comparison. the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. you southern bastards are funny. -- jefferson but its hard as hell not to be some kind of redneck bigot sometimes... -trevor zion bauknight most environmentalists think im a corporatist. -mike dahmus fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power. -benito mussolini .

From : jefferson n glapski

tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. 1776 battle of trenton -- jefferson but its hard as hell not to be some kind of redneck bigot sometimes... -trevor zion bauknight most environmentalists think im a corporatist. -mike dahmus fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power. -benito mussolini .

From : milesh

jefferson n. glapski wrote what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. 1776 battle of trenton and we waited until the 1940s to respond to this attack also i was not aware that the germans crossed the delaware to attack in trenton. seems to me some other guy crossed to attack. colonel rahl of germany was a blundering fool and a casualty of that battle. .

From : lein

mopaman wrote n o t e t o f r a n c e == http//images2.fotki.com/v21/photos/3/34606/125185/bellygirl-vi.jpg === would that be the same france that was the first to send fighter and bomber support into afghanstan to oust the taliban - and remains the second largest force on the ground there to this day that france destroying the talibans regime was necessary to fight terrorism. war in iraq was not it was a big mistake and it brought al qaeda where it wasnt. personnally i wouldt want a single french soldier to die for iraq or bushs war. as if the cowards would show up anyways. i doubt the french would die for anything other than being forced to use deodoant or take a shower occassionally. you do realize that if it werent for the french we wouldnt be calling them freedom fries. wed be calling them chips. hth. hand. more likely we would be calling them pomme frites. -- john leinaweaver .

From : malev

on 29 jun 2004 150449 edt milesh milesh@nounwantedspam.com wrote jefferson n. glapski wrote what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. 1776 battle of trenton and we waited until the 1940s to respond to this attack lazy bastards .

From : tbone

jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in mopaman wrote n o t e t o f r a n c e == http//images2.fotki.com/v21/photos/3/34606/125185/bellygirl-vi.jpg === would that be the same france that was the first to send fighter and bomber support into afghanstan to oust the taliban - and remains the second largest force on the ground there to this day that france destroying the talibans regime was necessary to fight terrorism. war in iraq was not it was a big mistake and it brought al qaeda where it wasnt. personnally i wouldt want a single french soldier to die for iraq or bushs war. as if the cowards would show up anyways. i doubt the french would die for anything other than being forced to use deodoant or take a shower occassionally. you do realize that if it werent for the french we wouldnt be calling them freedom fries. wed be calling them chips. what do you call a hot dog i would bet you dont call it a frankfurter. i would bet you havent since wwi. i call fries fries. i guess that you just dont get what he meant by that. no i guess i dont. after all the french also gave us traffic circles instead of roundabouts movers instead of forwarders and a bad case of the clap. i would think that the clap came from our own soldiers thinking with the wrong head. if you can show disrespect to france im all for it. theyve earned it. lol why because they were right and we were idiots as far as iraq goes. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack do you just like to argue with me japan attacked us first or did you not learn about pearl harbor in history class in high school. now after we declared war on them hitler declared war on us http//www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html which gave us every right to go into france with the uk to kick their asses. now when exactly did saddam attack us i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. neither was i but i did pay some attention in history class. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : doug sorensen

tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. when japan attacked pearl harbor we declared war on japan. then in accordance with germanys axis pact germany declared war on the u.s. from december 18 1942 to february 6 1943 german u-boats sank 25 ships off of the u.s. east coast. doug .

From : milesh

tbone wrote standard of living for most citizens has never been lower. and you know this how or is this just what you wish to believe .

From : milesh

jeff wrote and dont forget about the attempted iraqi assassination of bush the father. many discount the assassination attempt as being trivial because they dislike bush sr and w bush. thats pretty sad when partisan politics makes an assassination attempt on our president trivial. .

From : tbone

tbone wrote standard of living for most citizens has never been lower. and you know this how or is this just what you wish to believe yawn try watching the dude. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : lein

i guess that you just dont get what he meant by that. as in if it werent for the french at war with england during the american revolution america may not have prevailed. this is a common rebuttal to the french would not be free today if not for the allies defeating nazi germany. and its a pretty weak comparison. the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. we were attacjked because fdr made it a war for cheap oil. -- john leinaweaver .

From : lein

i guess that you just dont get what he meant by that. as in if it werent for the french at war with england during the american revolution america may not have prevailed. this is a common rebuttal to the french would not be free today if not for the allies defeating nazi germany. and its a pretty weak comparison. the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. we were attacjked because fdr made it a war for cheap oil. -- john leinaweaver .

From : timothy horrigan

tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. in 1941 they declared war on the us when the japanese did. and although the germans never tried to invade us they did send u-boats right up to the east coast and sank many merchants ships just off-shore. .

From : charles beauchamp

tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack do you just like to argue with me japan attacked us first or did you not learn about pearl harbor in history class in high school. now after we declared war on them hitler declared war on us http//www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html which gave us every right to go into france with the uk to kick their asses. now when exactly did saddam attack us hundreds of times through the decade long no fly zone... v/r beau i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. neither was i but i did pay some attention in history class. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : euro

snipped agreed. oil as well as a stable middle east is in our national interest. from that point of view bushs policy appears to be purely desastrous. euro i guess we should have russia return to the days of communism. there has been extreme turmoil in russia since the demise of communism. what does russia have to do with this euro .

From : charles beauchamp

jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in mopaman wrote n o t e t o f r a n c e == http//images2.fotki.com/v21/photos/3/34606/125185/bellygirl-vi.jpg === would that be the same france that was the first to send fighter and bomber support into afghanstan to oust the taliban - and remains the second largest force on the ground there to this day that france destroying the talibans regime was necessary to fight terrorism. war in iraq was not it was a big mistake and it brought al qaeda where it wasnt. personnally i wouldt want a single french soldier to die for iraq or bushs war. as if the cowards would show up anyways. i doubt the french would die for anything other than being forced to use deodoant or take a shower occassionally. you do realize that if it werent for the french we wouldnt be calling them freedom fries. wed be calling them chips. what do you call a hot dog i would bet you dont call it a frankfurter. i would bet you havent since wwi. i call fries fries. i guess that you just dont get what he meant by that. no i guess i dont. after all the french also gave us traffic circles instead of roundabouts movers instead of forwarders and a bad case of the clap. i would think that the clap came from our own soldiers thinking with the wrong head. why do you hate soldiers commie. if you can show disrespect to france im all for it. theyve earned it. lol why because they were right and we were idiots as far as iraq goes. france hasnt been right about anything since the 18th century v/r beau .

From : charles beauchamp

jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in mopaman wrote n o t e t o f r a n c e == http//images2.fotki.com/v21/photos/3/34606/125185/bellygirl-vi.jpg === would that be the same france that was the first to send fighter and bomber support into afghanstan to oust the taliban - and remains the second largest force on the ground there to this day that france destroying the talibans regime was necessary to fight terrorism. war in iraq was not it was a big mistake and it brought al qaeda where it wasnt. personnally i wouldt want a single french soldier to die for iraq or bushs war. as if the cowards would show up anyways. i doubt the french would die for anything other than being forced to use deodoant or take a shower occassionally. you do realize that if it werent for the french we wouldnt be calling them freedom fries. wed be calling them chips. what do you call a hot dog i would bet you dont call it a frankfurter. i would bet you havent since wwi. i call fries fries. i guess that you just dont get what he meant by that. no i guess i dont. after all the french also gave us traffic circles instead of roundabouts movers instead of forwarders and a bad case of the clap. i would think that the clap came from our own soldiers thinking with the wrong head. why do you hate soldiers commie. how old are you 10 how do you think that our soldiers got that bad case of the clap an act of god how is this in any way a hatred of soldiers it sounds more to me like a lack of intelligence on your part. if you can show disrespect to france im all for it. theyve earned it. lol why because they were right and we were idiots as far as iraq goes. france hasnt been right about anything since the 18th century i see that once again you are confirming that lack of intelligence. how many more of our young men and women have to die in iraq before you pull your head out of your ass and see that they all died for nothing. indeed they died for nothing.....iraq is free today....the perceived threat of wmd is gone...nothing. if that is nothing then wwii was just a minor neighborhood spat gone bad. v/r beau .

From : charles beauchamp

tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack do you just like to argue with me japan attacked us first or did you not learn about pearl harbor in history class in high school. now after we declared war on them hitler declared war on us http//www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html which gave us every right to go into france with the uk to kick their asses. now when exactly did saddam attack us hundreds of times through the decade long no fly zone... now that makes us the invading force and they are defending themselves nice try pinhead. incorrect since they were the belligerant power defeated in a war that they started and subject to the conditions of the cease fire which they signed. v/r beau .

From : napalm heart

charles beauchamp c.e.beauchamp@nospamcomcast.net wrote in message jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in message jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in message mopaman wrote mr. n seattledemocracy@hotmail.com wrote in message n o t e t o f r a n c e == http//images2.fotki.com/v21/photos/3/34606/125185/bellygirl-vi.jpg === would that be the same france that was the first to send fighter and bomber support into afghanstan to oust the taliban - and remains the second largest force on the ground there to this day that france destroying the talibans regime was necessary to fight terrorism. war in iraq was not it was a big mistake and it brought al qaeda where it wasnt. personnally i wouldt want a single french soldier to die for iraq or bushs war. as if the cowards would show up anyways. i doubt the french would die for anything other than being forced to use deodoant or take a shower occassionally. you do realize that if it werent for the french we wouldnt be calling them freedom fries. wed be calling them chips. what do you call a hot dog i would bet you dont call it a frankfurter. i would bet you havent since wwi. i call fries fries. i guess that you just dont get what he meant by that. no i guess i dont. after all the french also gave us traffic circles instead of roundabouts movers instead of forwarders and a bad case of the clap. i would think that the clap came from our own soldiers thinking with the wrong head. why do you hate soldiers commie. how old are you 10 how do you think that our soldiers got that bad case of the clap an act of god how is this in any way a hatred of soldiers it sounds more to me like a lack of intelligence on your part. if you can show disrespect to france im all for it. theyve earned it. lol why because they were right and we were idiots as far as iraq goes. france hasnt been right about anything since the 18th century i see that once again you are confirming that lack of intelligence. how many more of our young men and women have to die in iraq before you pull your head out of your ass and see that they all died for nothing. indeed they died for nothing.....iraq is free today....the perceived threat of wmd is gone...nothing. if that is nothing then wwii was just a minor neighborhood spat gone bad. v/r beau well said. ken .

From : milesh

tbone wrote do you just like to argue with me japan attacked us first or did you not learn about pearl harbor in history class in high school. now after we declared war on them hitler declared war on us http//www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html which gave us every right to go into france with the uk to kick their asses. now when exactly did saddam attack us lol weak argument. that was 1941. when did we enter the europe arena you need to read up on just what saddam said many times over the years. even though he was secular he asked for a jihad on the usa. call it what you may but it means war. .

From : ike

lein wrote i guess that you just dont get what he meant by that. as in if it werent for the french at war with england during the american revolution america may not have prevailed. this is a common rebuttal to the french would not be free today if not for the allies defeating nazi germany. and its a pretty weak comparison. the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. we were attacjked because fdr made it a war for cheap oil. too feed all those worthless gas-pigs liek the dodge hemi. worthless hunks of scrap almost cost us teh war by burning up gas faster then it could be made. and im sure all the smoke made an easy target from the air. -- yrs. ike ******************************************************** gm- mark of excellance! ******************************************************** .

From : tbone

france hasnt been right about anything since the 18th century i see that once again you are confirming that lack of intelligence. how many more of our young men and women have to die in iraq before you pull your head out of your ass and see that they all died for nothing. indeed they died for nothing.....iraq is free today hahahahahahahaha yea right. just because we say it doesnt make it so. it is also now filled with terrorists that didnt exist there prior to our unwarranted attack and the standard of living for most citizens has never been lower. ....the perceived threat of wmd is gone perceived because it never really existed to begin and it is becomming all to clear that we knew that all along and the proof has come at the cost of hundreds of our soldiers and thousands of iraq citizens lives. i do like the way the current administration has redefined the word lie to intelligence breakdown. you really need to pull your head out of your ass and stop comparing saddam to bin coward. saddam liked living the rich life style and was not about to launch a wmd against us and lose it all. if that is nothing then wwii was just a minor neighborhood spat gone bad. lol yea right. germany had taken over how many countries before we got involved. japan attacked and pretty much destroyed a key military installation before we declared war against them and both countries had enough power to possibly take over the world. now this compares with saddam how funny how we can spend billions of dollars over in iraq to wipe out someone who is really no threat to us while the one who actually attacked us still runs free. perhaps we should have dealt with that problem first but after all there are no oil fields in afghanistan and no way for the presidents buddies to make a shit load of money on no bid contracts over there. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack do you just like to argue with me japan attacked us first or did you not learn about pearl harbor in history class in high school. now after we declared war on them hitler declared war on us http//www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html which gave us every right to go into france with the uk to kick their asses. now when exactly did saddam attack us hundreds of times through the decade long no fly zone... now that makes us the invading force and they are defending themselves nice try pinhead. incorrect since they were the belligerant power defeated in a war that they started and subject to the conditions of the cease fire which they signed. yea and we the great us never signed a contract that we had no intention of following lol. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

lein wrote i guess that you just dont get what he meant by that. as in if it werent for the french at war with england during the american revolution america may not have prevailed. this is a common rebuttal to the french would not be free today if not for the allies defeating nazi germany. and its a pretty weak comparison. the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. we were attacjked because fdr made it a war for cheap oil. too feed all those worthless gas-pigs liek the dodge hemi. too bad gm never came up with anything that could touch it. worthless hunks of scrap almost cost us teh war by burning up gas faster then it could be made. and im sure all the smoke made an easy target from the air. actually the smoke hid us from air attacks since they couldnt see the ground but most of that smoke came from the burning hulks of gm and ford left by the hemi. ******************************************************** gm- great mistake! ******************************************************** .

From : tbone

tbone wrote do you just like to argue with me japan attacked us first or did you not learn about pearl harbor in history class in high school. now after we declared war on them hitler declared war on us http//www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html which gave us every right to go into france with the uk to kick their asses. now when exactly did saddam attack us lol weak argument. that was 1941. when did we enter the europe arena you need to read up on just what saddam said many times over the years. even though he was secular he asked for a jihad on the usa. call it what you may but it means war. like i said miles you argue just for the sake of arguing even when it makes you look foolish. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in mopaman wrote n o t e t o f r a n c e == http//images2.fotki.com/v21/photos/3/34606/125185/bellygirl-vi.jpg === would that be the same france that was the first to send fighter and bomber support into afghanstan to oust the taliban - and remains the second largest force on the ground there to this day that france destroying the talibans regime was necessary to fight terrorism. war in iraq was not it was a big mistake and it brought al qaeda where it wasnt. personnally i wouldt want a single french soldier to die for iraq or bushs war. as if the cowards would show up anyways. i doubt the french would die for anything other than being forced to use deodoant or take a shower occassionally. you do realize that if it werent for the french we wouldnt be calling them freedom fries. wed be calling them chips. what do you call a hot dog i would bet you dont call it a frankfurter. i would bet you havent since wwi. i call fries fries. i guess that you just dont get what he meant by that. no i guess i dont. after all the french also gave us traffic circles instead of roundabouts movers instead of forwarders and a bad case of the clap. i would think that the clap came from our own soldiers thinking with the wrong head. why do you hate soldiers commie. how old are you 10 how do you think that our soldiers got that bad case of the clap an act of god how is this in any way a hatred of soldiers it sounds more to me like a lack of intelligence on your part. if you can show disrespect to france im all for it. theyve earned it. lol why because they were right and we were idiots as far as iraq goes. france hasnt been right about anything since the 18th century i see that once again you are confirming that lack of intelligence. how many more of our young men and women have to die in iraq before you pullyour head out of your ass and see that they all died for nothing. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack do you just like to argue with me japan attacked us first or did you not learn about pearl harbor in history class in high school. now after we declared war on them hitler declared war on us http//www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html which gave us every right to go into france with the uk to kick their asses. now when exactly did saddam attack us hundreds of times through the decade long no fly zone... now that makes us the invading force and they are defending themselves nice try pinhead. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : miles

euro wrote i see... yes youre right. i fear however that when iraq gets a really effective government chosen by the iraqi people it might not be the pro-western moderate kind of democracy that we could wish for but instead a pro-iranian theocracy... i dont think many expect a western style democracy. probably more like turkeys. .

From : jeff

tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack do you just like to argue with me japan attacked us first or did you not learn about pearl harbor in history class in high school. now after we declared war on them hitler declared war on us http//www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html which gave us every right to go into france with the uk to kick their asses. now when exactly did saddam attack us hundreds of times through the decade long no fly zone... v/r beau and dont forget about the attempted iraqi assassination of bush the father. i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. neither was i but i did pay some attention in history class. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : jeff

jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in mopaman wrote n o t e t o f r a n c e == http//images2.fotki.com/v21/photos/3/34606/125185/bellygirl-vi.jpg === would that be the same france that was the first to send fighter and bomber support into afghanstan to oust the taliban - and remains the second largest force on the ground there to this day that france destroying the talibans regime was necessary to fight terrorism. war in iraq was not it was a big mistake and it brought al qaeda where it wasnt. personnally i wouldt want a single french soldier to die for iraq or bushs war. as if the cowards would show up anyways. i doubt the french would die for anything other than being forced to use deodoant or take a shower occassionally. you do realize that if it werent for the french we wouldnt be calling them freedom fries. wed be calling them chips. what do you call a hot dog i would bet you dont call it a frankfurter. i would bet you havent since wwi. i call fries fries. i guess that you just dont get what he meant by that. no i guess i dont. after all the french also gave us traffic circles instead of roundabouts movers instead of forwarders and a bad case of the clap. i would think that the clap came from our own soldiers thinking with the wrong head. why do you hate soldiers commie. how old are you 10 how do you think that our soldiers got that bad case of the clap an act of god how is this in any way a hatred of soldiers it sounds more to me like a lack of intelligence on your part. if you can show disrespect to france im all for it. theyve earned it. lol why because they were right and we were idiots as far as iraq goes. france hasnt been right about anything since the 18th century i see that once again you are confirming that lack of intelligence. how many more of our young men and women have to die in iraq before you pull your head out of your ass and see that they all died for nothing. perhaps you ought to pull your head out of your ass and look around. yes some lives are going to be lost but there comes a time when one has to face the beast islam. the longer we wait the stronger the beast becomes. eliminating iraq is but eliminating one hand of the beast. the beast is now raging because we have moved before he reached his zenith. we need to strengthen out resolve and next ensure the beast knows we are watching that we will quickly move to defang the insideous abomination and are ready and willing to do what it takes. freedom is not free. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : milesh

tbone wrote lol weak argument. that was 1941. when did we enter the europe arena you need to read up on just what saddam said many times over the years. even though he was secular he asked for a jihad on the usa. call it what you may but it means war. like i said miles you argue just for the sake of arguing even when it makes you look foolish. no tbone when you are wrong you are wrong. when that happens you pull the old youll argue anything line. saddam never lived up to the terms of the cease fire and did declare war. .

From : tbone

tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack do you just like to argue with me japan attacked us first or did you not learn about pearl harbor in history class in high school. now after we declared war on them hitler declared war on us http//www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html which gave us every right to go into france with the uk to kick their asses. now when exactly did saddam attack us hundreds of times through the decade long no fly zone... v/r beau and dont forget about the attempted iraqi assassination of bush the father. which is about 60% of the real reason that we are really over there. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : janoscan

mopaman wrote n o t e t o f r a n c e == http//images2.fotki.com/v21/photos/3/34606/125185/bellygirl-vi.jpg === would that be the same france that was the first to send fighter and bomber support into afghanstan to oust the taliban - and remains the second largest force on the ground there to this day that france destroying the talibans regime was necessary to fight terrorism. war in iraq was not it was a big mistake and it brought al qaeda where it wasnt. personnally i wouldt want a single french soldier to die for iraq or bushs war. as if the cowards would show up anyways. i doubt the french would die for anything other than being forced to use deodoant or take a shower occassionally. you do realize that if it werent for the french we wouldnt be calling them freedom fries. wed be calling them chips. yep. real patriotic americans - especially the have-mores - should get rid of their french linen and purge all the french words from their vocabulary starting with this list http//french.about.com/library/bl-frenchinenglish-list.htm .

From : mopaman

tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack do you just like to argue with me japan attacked us first or did you not learn about pearl harbor in history class in high school. now after we declared war on them hitler declared war on us http//www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html which gave us every right to go into france with the uk to kick their asses. now when exactly did saddam attack us hundreds of times through the decade long no fly zone... now that makes us the invading force and they are defending themselves nice try pinhead. incorrect since they were the belligerant power defeated in a war that they started and subject to the conditions of the cease fire which they signed. yea and we the great us never signed a contract that we had no intention of following lol. theres that aol crap again. next thing someone will be poasting from a rsfcking webtv thingy. -- moparman remove clothes to reply .

From : tbone

jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in message mopaman wrote n o t e t o f r a n c e == http//images2.fotki.com/v21/photos/3/34606/125185/bellygirl-vi.jpg === would that be the same france that was the first to send fighter and bomber support into afghanstan to oust the taliban - and remains the second largest force on the ground there to this day that france destroying the talibans regime was necessary to fight terrorism. war in iraq was not it was a big mistake and it brought al qaeda where it wasnt. personnally i wouldt want a single french soldier to die for iraq or bushs war. as if the cowards would show up anyways. i doubt the french would die for anything other than being forced to use deodoant or take a shower occassionally. you do realize that if it werent for the french we wouldnt be calling them freedom fries. wed be calling them chips. what do you call a hot dog i would bet you dont call it a frankfurter. i would bet you havent since wwi. i call fries fries. i guess that you just dont get what he meant by that. no i guess i dont. after all the french also gave us traffic circles instead of roundabouts movers instead of forwarders and a bad case of the clap. i would think that the clap came from our own soldiers thinking with the wrong head. why do you hate soldiers commie. how old are you 10 how do you think that our soldiers got that bad case of the clap an act of god how is this in any way a hatred of soldiers it sounds more to me like a lack of intelligence on your part. if you can show disrespect to france im all for it. theyve earned it. lol why because they were right and we were idiots as far as iraq goes. france hasnt been right about anything since the 18th century i see that once again you are confirming that lack of intelligence. how many more of our young men and women have to die in iraq before you pull your head out of your ass and see that they all died for nothing. perhaps you ought to pull your head out of your ass and look around. yes some lives are going to be lost but there comes a time when one has to face the beast islam. lol what a complete load of shit. you really must be one small minded paranoid little coward. are you now saying that all of islamic beliefs or even the majority are out to kill us if you believe that then you are one dumb ass. btw saddam is not a religious zealot so if you are so scared of islam why are we wasting resources over there when we still have bin coward and the taliban to deal with the longer we wait the stronger the beast becomes. while this may be true we should be concentrating our forces on the ones that are the greatest threat and that is simply not happening. eliminating iraq is but eliminating one hand of the beast. yea sure. im still waiting for the proof of that and i bet that the cia would like some of that as well. the beast is now raging because we have moved before he reached his zenith. lol. the beast is now partying and flexing its muscles because we just opened up a huge area for it to grow in. saddam was a far greater threat to them than we ever could be because he acts on their level. if they fuck with him and he has some idea of who they are he will wipe out the entire area that they came from without a thought killing their families and friends and who knows how many other people on general principle and that they fear not the bs targeted strikes that tend to miss that we do. and if he actually catches one alive he will torture them just for the hell of it and that is something else that they fear not our country club humain treatments we provide. we need to strengthen out resolve and next ensure the beast knows we are watching that we will quickly move to defang the insideous abomination and are ready and willing to do what it takes. while this all sounds good it has nothing to do with the current situation. if we are really willing to do what it takes then our primary forces should be in afghanistan in strike teams looking for bin coward and killing anyone that agrees with his beliefs or is a member of the taliban even if it means secret insertions into other countries that harbor them. at least then the soldiers being wounded or killed will be doing it for something rather than random radom car bombs and sniper attacks for no purpous at all. freedom is not free. this has truly become so overused as to become nothing more than a meaningless copout statement when someones argument has no footing. while freedom is not free why is it that we are paying the cost for someone elses supposed freedom when they are not even our friends and what is the worth of our young men and wo

From : jeff

charles beauchamp c.e.beauchamp@nospamcomcast.net wrote in message tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack do you just like to argue with me japan attacked us first or did you not learn about pearl harbor in history class in high school. now after we declared war on them hitler declared war on us http//www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html which gave us every right to go into france with the uk to kick their asses. now when exactly did saddam attack us hundreds of times through the decade long no fly zone... v/r beau and dont forget about the attempted iraqi assassination of bush the father. which is about 60% of the real reason that we are really over there. somehow i just know youre going to tell me its because of oil. oil is only a part of it. agreed. oil as well as a stable middle east is in our national interest. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : jeff

mopaman wrote n o t e t o f r a n c e == http//images2.fotki.com/v21/photos/3/34606/125185/bellygirl-vi.jpg === would that be the same france that was the first to send fighter and bomber support into afghanstan to oust the taliban - and remains the second largest force on the ground there to this day that france destroying the talibans regime was necessary to fight terrorism. war in iraq was not it was a big mistake and it brought al qaeda where it wasnt. personnally i wouldt want a single french soldier to die for iraq or bushs war. as if the cowards would show up anyways. i doubt the french would die for anything other than being forced to use deodoant or take a shower occassionally. you do realize that if it werent for the french we wouldnt be calling them freedom fries. wed be calling them chips. yep. real patriotic americans - especially the have-mores - should get rid of their french linen and purge all the french words from their vocabulary starting with this list http//french.about.com/library/bl-frenchinenglish-list.htm the french in the past have attempted to purge american english from their vocabulary. .

From : tbone

tbone wrote lol weak argument. that was 1941. when did we enter the europe arena you need to read up on just what saddam said many times over the years. even though he was secular he asked for a jihad on the usa. call it what you may but it means war. like i said miles you argue just for the sake of arguing even when it makes you look foolish. no tbone when you are wrong you are wrong. thats it miles keep mking yourself look like an idiot regardless of the number of people telling you that. when that happens you pull the old youll argue anything line. funny you seem to be the one grasping at straws here. you asked for an attack from germany and were given a formal declaration of war and the sinking of many of our ships by germany by many people here and all you come back with is some half assed poor example bs. any way you look at it germanys technology and military strength along with that of japan was a true threat to this country and the rest of the world and we had no choice but to enter the war which btw we did not start. iraq is no real threat to us and we started that war for dubious reasons and there is no comparison between this one and wwii and if you think so then you and anyone else that does really is an idiot. saddam never lived up to the terms of the cease fire and did declare war. really show me a link pointing to a formal declaration of war from iraq against the us. you cant because it doesnt exist. since he is not a cleric or even all that religious his call for a holy war is nothing more than a joke cursing at this country and means nothing. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : milesh

tbone wrote yawn try watching the dude. i do. which to you watch the one that interprets it for you to your liking even cnn released a poll last month that stated over 50% of iraqis feel they were better off now than before. of course there are polls to show anything you want. so which do you watch .

From : milesh

tbone wrote funny you seem to be the one grasping at straws here. you asked for an attack from germany and were given a formal declaration of war and the sinking of many of our ships by germany by many people here and all you come back with is some half assed poor example bs. the usa did not enter the europe arena because of any declaration. that declaration was in 1941. when did we enter and why dang revisionists. really show me a link pointing to a formal declaration of war from iraq against the us. rofl. you want a scrap of paper and thats whats required lol. he declared war very publicly. .

From : jeff

tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack do you just like to argue with me japan attacked us first or did you not learn about pearl harbor in history class in high school. now after we declared war on them hitler declared war on us http//www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html which gave us every right to go into france with the uk to kick their asses. now when exactly did saddam attack us hundreds of times through the decade long no fly zone... v/r beau and dont forget about the attempted iraqi assassination of bush the father. which is about 60% of the real reason that we are really over there. somehow i just know youre going to tell me its because of oil. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

tbone wrote funny you seem to be the one grasping at straws here. you asked for an attack from germany and were given a formal declaration of war and the sinking of many of our ships by germany by many people here and all you come back with is some half assed poor example bs. the usa did not enter the europe arena because of any declaration. that declaration was in 1941. when did we enter and why dang revisionists. why dont you tell me why miles or are you going to cut this away as well and pretend that it doesnt exist like you did with the rest of the post really show me a link pointing to a formal declaration of war from iraq against the us. rofl. you want a scrap of paper and thats whats required yep and as usual you cannot back up your arguments. lol. he declared war very publicly. then prove it. and if so why did it take us so long to respond and why did our government half to lie to get us there -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack do you just like to argue with me japan attacked us first or did you not learn about pearl harbor in history class in high school. now after we declared war on them hitler declared war on us http//www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html which gave us every right to go into france with the uk to kick their asses. now when exactly did saddam attack us hundreds of times through the decade long no fly zone... v/r beau and dont forget about the attempted iraqi assassination of bush the father. which is about 60% of the real reason that we are really over there. somehow i just know youre going to tell me its because of oil. oil is only a part of it. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : euro

snipped agreed. oil as well as a stable middle east is in our national interest. from that point of view bushs policy appears to be purely desastrous. euro .

From : jeff

snipped agreed. oil as well as a stable middle east is in our national interest. from that point of view bushs policy appears to be purely desastrous. euro i guess we should have russia return to the days of communism. there has been extreme turmoil in russia since the demise of communism. .

From : jeff

jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in message mopaman wrote n o t e t o f r a n c e == http//images2.fotki.com/v21/photos/3/34606/125185/bellygirl-vi.jpg === would that be the same france that was the first to send fighter and bomber support into afghanstan to oust the taliban - and remains the second largest force on the ground there to this day that france destroying the talibans regime was necessary to fight terrorism. war in iraq was not it was a big mistake and it brought al qaeda where it wasnt. personnally i wouldt want a single french soldier to die for iraq or bushs war. as if the cowards would show up anyways. i doubt the french would die for anything other than being forced to use deodoant or take a shower occassionally. you do realize that if it werent for the french we wouldnt be calling them freedom fries. wed be calling them chips. what do you call a hot dog i would bet you dont call it a frankfurter. i would bet you havent since wwi. i call fries fries. i guess that you just dont get what he meant by that. no i guess i dont. after all the french also gave us traffic circles instead of roundabouts movers instead of forwarders and a bad case of the clap. i would think that the clap came from our own soldiers thinking with the wrong head. why do you hate soldiers commie. how old are you 10 how do you think that our soldiers got that bad case of the clap an act of god how is this in any way a hatred of soldiers it sounds more to me like a lack of intelligence on your part. if you can show disrespect to france im all for it. theyve earned it. lol why because they were right and we were idiots as far as iraq goes. france hasnt been right about anything since the 18th century i see that once again you are confirming that lack of intelligence. how many more of our young men and women have to die in iraq before you pull your head out of your ass and see that they all died for nothing. perhaps you ought to pull your head out of your ass and look around. yes some lives are going to be lost but there comes a time when one has to face the beast islam. lol what a complete load of shit. you really must be one small minded paranoid little coward. are you now saying that all of islamic beliefs or even the majority are out to kill us if you believe that then you are one dumb ass. btw saddam is not a religious zealot so if you are so scared of islam why are we wasting resources over there when we still have bin coward and the taliban to deal with no not all muslims are out to kill us but the ones out to kill us are muslims. its the islamic mindset. the longer we wait the stronger the beast becomes. while this may be true we should be concentrating our forces on the ones that are the greatest threat and that is simply not happening. so many muslims so little time. eliminating iraq is but eliminating one hand of the beast. yea sure. im still waiting for the proof of that and i bet that the cia would like some of that as well. iraq was a destabilizing force in the me. the beast is now raging because we have moved before he reached his zenith. lol. the beast is now partying and flexing its muscles because we just opened up a huge area for it to grow in. saddam was a far greater threat to them than we ever could be because he acts on their level. if they fuck with him and he has some idea of who they are he will wipe out the entire area that they came from without a thought killing their families and friends and who knows how many other people on general principle and that they fear not the bs targeted strikes that tend to miss that we do. and if he actually catches one alive he will torture them just for the hell of it and that is something else that they fear not our country club humain treatments we provide. there are many sadams in the me. but then again that is the destiny of the arabs. we need to strengthen out resolve and next ensure the beast knows we are watching that we will quickly move to defang the insideous abomination and are ready and willing to do what it takes. while this all sounds good it has nothing to do with the current situation. if we are really willing to do what it takes then our primary forces should be in afghanistan in strike teams looking for bin coward and killing anyone that agrees with his beliefs or is a member of the taliban even if it means secret insertions into other countries that harbor them. at least then the soldiers being wounded or killed will be doing it for something rather than random radom car bombs and sniper attacks for no purpous at all. freedom is not free. this has truly be

From : mopaman

mopaman wrote n o t e t o f r a n c e == http//images2.fotki.com/v21/photos/3/34606/125185/bellygirl-vi.jpg === would that be the same france that was the first to send fighter and bomber support into afghanstan to oust the taliban - and remains the second largest force on the ground there to this day that france destroying the talibans regime was necessary to fight terrorism. war in iraq was not it was a big mistake and it brought al qaeda where it wasnt. personnally i wouldt want a single french soldier to die for iraq or bushs war. as if the cowards would show up anyways. i doubt the french would die for anything other than being forced to use deodoant or take a shower occassionally. you do realize that if it werent for the french we wouldnt be calling them freedom fries. wed be calling them chips. yep. real patriotic americans - especially the have-mores - should get rid of their french linen and purge all the french words from their vocabulary starting with this list http//french.about.com/library/bl-frenchinenglish-list.htm the french in the past have attempted to purge american english from their vocabulary. they purge inglish and squat when they pee so whats else is new. -- moparman remove clothes to reply .

From : mopaman

jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in mopaman wrote n o t e t o f r a n c e == http//images2.fotki.com/v21/photos/3/34606/125185/bellygirl-vi.jpg === would that be the same france that was the first to send fighter and bomber support into afghanstan to oust the taliban - and remains the second largest force on the ground there to this day that france destroying the talibans regime was necessary to fight terrorism. war in iraq was not it was a big mistake and it brought al qaeda where it wasnt. personnally i wouldt want a single french soldier to die for iraq or bushs war. as if the cowards would show up anyways. i doubt the french would die for anything other than being forced to use deodoant or take a shower occassionally. you do realize that if it werent for the french we wouldnt be calling them freedom fries. wed be calling them chips. what do you call a hot dog i would bet you dont call it a frankfurter. i would bet you havent since wwi. i call fries fries. i guess that you just dont get what he meant by that. no i guess i dont. after all the french also gave us traffic circles instead of roundabouts movers instead of forwarders and a bad case of the clap. i would think that the clap came from our own soldiers thinking with the wrong head. why do you hate soldiers commie. if you can show disrespect to france im all for it. theyve earned it. lol why because they were right and we were idiots as far as iraq goes. france hasnt been right about anything since the 18th century v/r beau at least their not yeller pinco commi bastards oh wait well at least their not pinco!!! -- moparman remove clothes to reply .

From : tbone

charles beauchamp c.e.beauchamp@nospamcomcast.net wrote in message tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack do you just like to argue with me japan attacked us first or did you not learn about pearl harbor in history class in high school. now after we declared war on them hitler declared war on us http//www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html which gave us every right to go into france with the uk to kick their asses. now when exactly did saddam attack us hundreds of times through the decade long no fly zone... now that makes us the invading force and they are defending themselves nice try pinhead. incorrect since they were the belligerant power defeated in a war that they started and subject to the conditions of the cease fire which they signed. yea and we the great us never signed a contract that we had no intention of following lol. theres that aol crap again. next thing someone will be poasting from a rsfcking webtv thingy. aol crap lol. why dont you try talking to a few american indians or visiting a few of these so-called federal cleanup sites. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : mopaman

charles beauchamp c.e.beauchamp@nospamcomcast.net wrote in message tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack do you just like to argue with me japan attacked us first or did you not learn about pearl harbor in history class in high school. now after we declared war on them hitler declared war on us http//www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html which gave us every right to go into france with the uk to kick their asses. now when exactly did saddam attack us hundreds of times through the decade long no fly zone... now that makes us the invading force and they are defending themselves nice try pinhead. incorrect since they were the belligerant power defeated in a war that they started and subject to the conditions of the cease fire which they signed. yea and we the great us never signed a contract that we had no intention of following lol. theres that aol crap again. next thing someone will be poasting from a rsfcking webtv thingy. aol crap lol. why dont you try talking to a few american indians or visiting a few of these so-called federal cleanup sites. i married a rsfcking indian what have you done to better amercia besides trash it every chance you get...moron. -- moparman remove clothes to reply .

From : tbone

jeff wrote and dont forget about the attempted iraqi assassination of bush the father. many discount the assassination attempt as being trivial because they dislike bush sr and w bush. it was discounted because nothing happened. please locate some information on this and post it here because i cant find any. thats pretty sad when partisan politics makes an assassination attempt on our president trivial. no what is sad is how desperate you are to make your loser argument valid. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

charles beauchamp c.e.beauchamp@nospamcomcast.net wrote in message tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack do you just like to argue with me japan attacked us first or did you not learn about pearl harbor in history class in high school. now after we declared war on them hitler declared war on us http//www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html which gave us every right to go into france with the uk to kick their asses. now when exactly did saddam attack us hundreds of times through the decade long no fly zone... v/r beau and dont forget about the attempted iraqi assassination of bush the father. which is about 60% of the real reason that we are really over there. somehow i just know youre going to tell me its because of oil. oil is only a part of it. agreed. oil as well as a stable middle east is in our national interest. i would put a stable middle east at the bottom of the list as it is less stable now than ever. i would revenge for daddy at the top of that list followed by big payouts for friends second. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

charles beauchamp c.e.beauchamp@nospamcomcast.net wrote in message charles beauchamp c.e.beauchamp@nospamcomcast.net wrote in message tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack do you just like to argue with me japan attacked us first or did you not learn about pearl harbor in history class in high school. now after we declared war on them hitler declared war on us http//www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html which gave us every right to go into france with the uk to kick their asses. now when exactly did saddam attack us hundreds of times through the decade long no fly zone... now that makes us the invading force and they are defending themselves nice try pinhead. incorrect since they were the belligerant power defeated in a war that they started and subject to the conditions of the cease fire which they signed. yea and we the great us never signed a contract that we had no intention of following lol. theres that aol crap again. next thing someone will be poasting from a rsfcking webtv thingy. aol crap lol. why dont you try talking to a few american indians or visiting a few of these so-called federal cleanup sites. i married a rsfcking indian having trouble typing are we how much of her heritage does she have left about none how much of her peoples land is still theirs i do believe that our government signed many contracts assuring them that we would take no more lol. what have you done to better amercia besides trash it every chance you get...moron. there is a big difference between bashing the country and understanding its faults... moron. i know that you would like to think that we are perfect but we are far from that. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : jeff

charles beauchamp c.e.beauchamp@nospamcomcast.net wrote in message tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack do you just like to argue with me japan attacked us first or did you not learn about pearl harbor in history class in high school. now after we declared war on them hitler declared war on us http//www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html which gave us every right to go into france with the uk to kick their asses. now when exactly did saddam attack us hundreds of times through the decade long no fly zone... v/r beau and dont forget about the attempted iraqi assassination of bush the father. which is about 60% of the real reason that we are really over there. somehow i just know youre going to tell me its because of oil. oil is only a part of it. agreed. oil as well as a stable middle east is in our national interest. i would put a stable middle east at the bottom of the list as it is less stable now than ever. i would revenge for daddy at the top of that list followed by big payouts for friends second. sure it is less stable now. you have to expect a period of extreme unstability once you remove an absolute dictator. it takes time to build a new government hold elections and learn self government. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : euro

snipped i see that once again you are confirming that lack of intelligence. how many more of our young men and women have to die in iraq before you pull your head out of your ass and see that they all died for nothing. indeed they died for nothing.....iraq is free today....the perceived threat of wmd is gone...nothing. if that is nothing then wwii was just a minor neighborhood spat gone bad. 1/ there is no freedom when there is no security for the persons. 2/ you may have perceived a threat of wmd because you have been such a naive/fool that you believed the propaganda you were served. dont take it that everyone is so naive/fool as you are and dont take it that everyone perceived a threat. euro .

From : euro

snipped agreed. oil as well as a stable middle east is in our national interest. from that point of view bushs policy appears to be purely desastrous. euro i guess we should have russia return to the days of communism. there has been extreme turmoil in russia since the demise of communism. what does russia have to do with this its a prime example what occurs when you remove a dictatorial governement and replace it with a semblance of a democratic one. its also difficult for the people who where once under strict control once you grant them freedom. it will take some time for iraq to have an effective government. i see... yes youre right. i fear however that when iraq gets a really effective government chosen by the iraqi people it might not be the pro-western moderate kind of democracy that we could wish for but instead a pro-iranian theocracy... history will tell. euro .

From : charles beauchamp

there is a big difference between bashing the country and understanding its faults... moron. i know that you would like to think that we are perfect but we are far from that. speak for yourself sissy. v/r beau .

From : tbone

charles beauchamp c.e.beauchamp@nospamcomcast.net wrote in message tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack do you just like to argue with me japan attacked us first or did you not learn about pearl harbor in history class in high school. now after we declared war on them hitler declared war on us http//www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html which gave us every right to go into france with the uk to kick their asses. now when exactly did saddam attack us hundreds of times through the decade long no fly zone... v/r beau and dont forget about the attempted iraqi assassination of bush the father. which is about 60% of the real reason that we are really over there. somehow i just know youre going to tell me its because of oil. oil is only a part of it. agreed. oil as well as a stable middle east is in our national interest. i would put a stable middle east at the bottom of the list as it is less stable now than ever. i would revenge for daddy at the top of that list followed by big payouts for friends second. sure it is less stable now. you have to expect a period of extreme unstability once you remove an absolute dictator. it takes time to build a new government hold elections and learn self government. it aint ever gonna happen. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : mopaman

charles beauchamp c.e.beauchamp@nospamcomcast.net wrote in message charles beauchamp c.e.beauchamp@nospamcomcast.net wrote in message tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack do you just like to argue with me japan attacked us first or did you not learn about pearl harbor in history class in high school. now after we declared war on them hitler declared war on us http//www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html which gave us every right to go into france with the uk to kick their asses. now when exactly did saddam attack us hundreds of times through the decade long no fly zone... now that makes us the invading force and they are defending themselves nice try pinhead. incorrect since they were the belligerant power defeated in a war that they started and subject to the conditions of the cease fire which they signed. yea and we the great us never signed a contract that we had no intention of following lol. theres that aol crap again. next thing someone will be poasting from a rsfcking webtv thingy. aol crap lol. why dont you try talking to a few american indians or visiting a few of these so-called federal cleanup sites. i married a rsfcking indian having trouble typing are we how much of her heritage does she have left about none how much of her peoples land is still theirs i do believe that our government signed many contracts assuring them that we would take no more lol. what have you done to better amercia besides trash it every chance you get...moron. there is a big difference between bashing the country and understanding its faults... moron. i know that you would like to think that we are perfect but we are far from that. your bullshit dont fly here dood shes an okie and gets lots of money from the gambling of white people. they have conquered us via our pocket books. now please talk to the french you belong with them... -- moparman remove clothes to reply .

From : jeff

snipped agreed. oil as well as a stable middle east is in our national interest. from that point of view bushs policy appears to be purely desastrous. euro i guess we should have russia return to the days of communism. there has been extreme turmoil in russia since the demise of communism. what does russia have to do with this its a prime example what occurs when you remove a dictatorial governement and replace it with a semblance of a democratic one. its also difficult for the people who where once under strict control once you grant them freedom. it will take some time for iraq to have an effective government. euro .

From : mopaman

snipped agreed. oil as well as a stable middle east is in our national interest. from that point of view bushs policy appears to be purely desastrous. euro i guess we should have russia return to the days of communism. there has been extreme turmoil in russia since the demise of communism. what does russia have to do with this its a prime example what occurs when you remove a dictatorial governement and replace it with a semblance of a democratic one. its also difficult for the people who where once under strict control once you grant them freedom. it will take some time for iraq to have an effective government. i agree with this poaster. the same will happen to cuban when castro finally bytes the bullete. -- moparman remove clothes to reply .

From : miles

euro wrote 2/ you may have perceived a threat of wmd because you have been such a naive/fool that you believed the propaganda you were served. that would make sense except for a small discrepency. many of the very people that fed us all that propaganda for years are now the very people against this war. .

From : jeff

charles beauchamp c.e.beauchamp@nospamcomcast.net wrote in message tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack do you just like to argue with me japan attacked us first or did you not learn about pearl harbor in history class in high school. now after we declared war on them hitler declared war on us http//www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html which gave us every right to go into france with the uk to kick their asses. now when exactly did saddam attack us hundreds of times through the decade long no fly zone... v/r beau and dont forget about the attempted iraqi assassination of bush the father. which is about 60% of the real reason that we are really over there. somehow i just know youre going to tell me its because of oil. oil is only a part of it. agreed. oil as well as a stable middle east is in our national interest. i would put a stable middle east at the bottom of the list as it is less stable now than ever. i would revenge for daddy at the top of that list followed by big payouts for friends second. sure it is less stable now. you have to expect a period of extreme unstability once you remove an absolute dictator. it takes time to build a new government hold elections and learn self government. it aint ever gonna happen. well thats yet to be seen. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : tbone

charles beauchamp c.e.beauchamp@nospamcomcast.net wrote in message charles beauchamp c.e.beauchamp@nospamcomcast.net wrote in message tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack do you just like to argue with me japan attacked us first or did you not learn about pearl harbor in history class in high school. now after we declared war on them hitler declared war on us http//www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html which gave us every right to go into france with the uk to kick their asses. now when exactly did saddam attack us hundreds of times through the decade long no fly zone... now that makes us the invading force and they are defending themselves nice try pinhead. incorrect since they were the belligerant power defeated in a war that they started and subject to the conditions of the cease fire which they signed. yea and we the great us never signed a contract that we had no intention of following lol. theres that aol crap again. next thing someone will be poasting from a rsfcking webtv thingy. aol crap lol. why dont you try talking to a few american indians or visiting a few of these so-called federal cleanup sites. i married a rsfcking indian having trouble typing are we how much of her heritage does she have left about none how much of her peoples land is still theirs i do believe that our government signed many contracts assuring them that we would take no more lol. what have you done to better amercia besides trash it every chance you get...moron. there is a big difference between bashing the country and understanding its faults... moron. i know that you would like to think that we are perfect but we are far from that. your bullshit dont fly here dood shes an okie and gets lots of money from the gambling of white people. they have conquered us via our pocket books. now please talk to the french you belong with them... like i said no land and no heritage how sad. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : euro

euro wrote 2/ you may have perceived a threat of wmd because you have been such a naive/fool that you believed the propaganda you were served. that would make sense except for a small discrepency. many of the very people that fed us all that propaganda for years are now the very people against this war. have fox and the bush administration suddenly become opposed to this war euro .

From : tbone

euro wrote that would make sense except for a small discrepency. many of the very people that fed us all that propaganda for years are now the very people against this war. have fox and the bush administration suddenly become opposed to this war rofl ahh the media the best source of disinformation but only if it disagrees with your own views. im referring to the majority of democratic leaders who fed us many years of what you call propaganda regarding iraq. bush said much the same thing as them but they changed their views in early 2001. russia germany france etc. also gave us over the years alot of what you now call propaganda. partisan politics at its worst. why is it that whenever something doesnt agree with your beliefs it is nothing more than partisan politics at its worst -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : milesh

tbone wrote why is it that whenever something doesnt agree with your beliefs it is nothing more than partisan politics at its worst because the arguments you made here are partisan in nature. you mentioned propaganda. i merely pointed out that the democrats for years said the same thing bush did that you now call propaganda. when the opinions of some change based on who said it thats partisan politics at its worst. .

From : tbone

tbone wrote why is it that whenever something doesnt agree with your beliefs it is nothing more than partisan politics at its worst because the arguments you made here are partisan in nature. you mentioned propaganda. i merely pointed out that the democrats for years said the same thing bush did that you now call propaganda. when the opinions of some change based on who said it thats partisan politics at its worst. i said no such thing. i said that the bush administration was outright lying. the democrats said that saddam was a dangerous man and that much is true but please show mw where the democratic party believed that we should go to war with iraq in lets say the entire bush presidency. you can spin it any way you want to miles but the facts are the facts and so far not a single reason given by the bush administration gave for going to war has proven to be even remotely true. no provable connections with bin coward no wmd no massive terrorist camps and no proven plans for an attack against us. iow all lies and typical right wing fear tactics. unfortunately even after he loses the election we will still have to deal with the shit he caused for the foreseeable future. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : miles

euro wrote that would make sense except for a small discrepency. many of the very people that fed us all that propaganda for years are now the very people against this war. have fox and the bush administration suddenly become opposed to this war rofl ahh the media the best source of disinformation but only if it disagrees with your own views. im referring to the majority of democratic leaders who fed us many years of what you call propaganda regarding iraq. bush said much the same thing as them but they changed their views in early 2001. russia germany france etc. also gave us over the years alot of what you now call propaganda. partisan politics at its worst. .

From : euro

euro wrote that would make sense except for a small discrepency. many of the very people that fed us all that propaganda for years are now the very people against this war. have fox and the bush administration suddenly become opposed to this war rofl ahh the media the best source of disinformation but only if it disagrees with your own views. im referring to the majority of democratic leaders who fed us many years of what you call propaganda regarding iraq. bush said much the same thing as them but they changed their views in early 2001. russia germany france etc. also gave us over the years alot of what you now call propaganda. partisan politics at its worst. thats not partisan politics and i dont view it as france germany or russia having changed their views. they pleaded for the resuming of un inspections but the difference with the us is that they decided to abide by the conclusions of un inspectors instead of pretending to know better than the specialists and making plenty of questionable statements every day. you know statements like ... the area in the south and the west and the north that coalition forces control is substantial. it happens not to be the area where weapons of mass destruction were dispersed. we know where they are. theyre in the area around tikrit and baghdad and east west south and north somewhat. donald rumsfeld | department of defense | march 30 2003 audio mp3 http//www.why-war.com/files/rumsfeldwmdclaim.mp3 or like we believe he has in fact reconstituted nuclear weapons. i think mr. el baradei frankly is wrong. cheney on march 16 2003 in an appearance on nbcs meet the press yes indeed there is a difference between governments who accept facts and independent conclusions and governments who prefer to wage propaganda in order to get international backing for a very precise and personal agenda. euro .

From : milesh

tbone wrote i said no such thing. i said that the bush administration was outright lying. the democratic party talked much about wmds saddams threats etc. pretty much the exact same thing bush said prior to the war. there is very little difference in what bush stated and what democratic leaders had been saying for quite some time. the point isnt whether you are for or against this war. you made the point regarding propaganda but fail to note that when the dems said it it wasnt considered propaganda. .

From : mike craney

bonenospam@nc.rr.com says... tbone wrote why is it that whenever something doesnt agree with your beliefs it is nothing more than partisan politics at its worst because the arguments you made here are partisan in nature. you mentioned propaganda. i merely pointed out that the democrats for years said the same thing bush did that you now call propaganda. when the opinions of some change based on who said it thats partisan politics at its worst. i said no such thing. i said that the bush administration was outright lying. the democrats said that saddam was a dangerous man and that much is true but please show mw where the democratic party believed that we should go to war with iraq in lets say the entire bush presidency. you can spin it any way you want to miles but the facts are the facts and so far not a single reason given by the bush administration gave for going to war has proven to be even remotely true. thats not accurate. the baseline neo con reasoning which was well stated but not reported in the mass media very well is that a geopolitical realignment of the region towards democratic institutions would decrease the probability of a 9/11 redux and increase the overall security of the united states. that argument is laid out in the security policy of the united states of america found on the whitehouse.gov website. no provable connections with bin coward no wmd no massive terrorist camps and no proven plans for an attack against us. iow all lies and typical right wing fear tactics. unfortunately even after he loses the election we will still have to deal with the shit he caused for the foreseeable future. well all polling trends show bush increasing his lead and job approval as the economy improves so i wouldnt count your presidents before theyre hatched..... mike .

From : tbone

tbone wrote i said no such thing. i said that the bush administration was outright lying. the democratic party talked much about wmds saddams threats etc. yea but when 5 or 10 years ago. they also believed the skilled inspectors sent over their something the bush admin refused to do although now we can see why. pretty much the exact same thing bush said prior to the war. no bush said that the wmds still existed and he knew where and that they were going to be used against us. the dems never said that and if you think that they did prove it. now i can see why he pushed so hard to get the war started so fast if we waited any longer the proof would have been to great for him to gey anyone to believe his lies and he would not be able o avenge the threat on daddy. there is very little difference in what bush stated and what democratic leaders had been saying for quite some time. the difference is time dude. when the dems and repubs were first saying it it was true and he was using them. but after he stopped and the inspectors were unable to find anything the dems backed off some while the right kept on full blast with the typical fear tactics. the point isnt whether you are for or against this war. no the point is the validity of the reasons why we are in it now at the cost of about 1000 dead soldiers and who knows how many more wounded. if the reasons were valid thats one thing but in this case.... you made the point regarding propaganda but fail to note that when the dems said it it wasnt considered propaganda. because when the dems were saying it so was the right and it was because it was true at the time. the problem that you continually fail to see is that later even after the proof came in that they were nowhere to be found the right wing kept the bs fear tactics going that an attack was imminent and the stockpiles were huge both lies. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : milesh

-- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving bonenospam@nc.rr.com says... tbone wrote why is it that whenever something doesnt agree with your beliefs it is nothing more than partisan politics at its worst because the arguments you made here are partisan in nature. you mentioned propaganda. i merely pointed out that the democrats for years said the same thing bush did that you now call propaganda. when the opinions of some change based on who said it thats partisan politics at its worst. i said no such thing. i said that the bush administration was outright lying. the democrats said that saddam was a dangerous man and that much is true but please show mw where the democratic party believed that we should go to war with iraq in lets say the entire bush presidency. you can spin it any way you want to miles but the facts are the facts and so far not a single reason given by the bush administration gave for going to war has proven to be even remotely true. thats not accurate. the baseline neo con reasoning which was well stated but not reported in the mass media very well is that a geopolitical realignment of the region towards democratic institutions would decrease the probability of a 9/11 redux and increase the overall security of the united states. that is only valid if a stable realignment is possible and that is not going to happen any time soon if ever. that argument is laid out in the security policy of the united states of america found on the whitehouse.gov website. no provable connections with bin coward no wmd no massive terrorist camps and no proven plans for an attack against us. iow all lies and typical right wing fear tactics. unfortunately even after he loses the election we will still have to deal with the shit he caused for the foreseeable future. well all polling trends show bush increasing his lead and job approval as the economy improves so i wouldnt count your presidents before theyre hatched..... we will see come election time. mike .

From : milesh

tbone wrote yea but when 5 or 10 years ago. uh no. all the way up until 2001. kerry and other dems continued to say the same thing as bush up to the early part of 2003. read kerrys speach on the matter in jan. 2003. no bush said that the wmds still existed so did the dems. you can think what you want based on partisan politics but nothing bush said was really . it was the same thing said over and over by the dems and others for years. the difference is time dude. when the dems and repubs were first saying it it was true and he was using them. but after he stopped and the inspectors were unable to find anything the dems backed off some while the right kept on full blast with the typical fear tactics. the dems reversed themselves only after 2000 and 2001. youre dilusional to suggest the dems made this reversal years prior to that. clinton himself made a public statement late last year saying that on the day he left office iraq had wmds. i know you never heard that. you never hear anything that contrasts your own partisan political view. because when the dems were saying it so was the right and it was because it was true at the time. great. then it was true up until at least early 2001. thats when the dems started reversing themselves. go back and read what the major dem leaders were saying in 1999 2000 and 2001. especially kerry all the way up to 2003. .

From : mike craney

bonenospam@nc.rr.com says... subject re note to france .. from tbone t-bonenospam@nc.rr.com alt.religion.islam rec.sport.football.college soc.culture.french soc.culture.usa -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving bonenospam@nc.rr.com says... tbone wrote why is it that whenever something doesnt agree with your beliefs it is nothing more than partisan politics at its worst because the arguments you made here are partisan in nature. you mentioned propaganda. i merely pointed out that the democrats for years said the same thing bush did that you now call propaganda. when the opinions of some change based on who said it thats partisan politics at its worst. i said no such thing. i said that the bush administration was outright lying. the democrats said

From : jeff

is true but please show mw where the democratic party believed that we should go to war with iraq in lets say the entire bush presidency. you can spin it any way you want to miles but the facts are the facts and so far not a single reason given by the bush administration gave for going to war has proven to be even remotely true. thats not accurate. the baseline neo con reasoning which was well stated but not reported in the mass media very well is that a geopolitical realignment of the region towards democratic institutions would decrease the probability of a 9/11 redux and increase the overall security of the united states. that is only valid if a stable realignment is possible and that is not going to happen any time soon if ever. ...........actually chaos serves as well as stability does. it just requires us to stay engaged primarly with air forces. mike that argument is laid out in the security policy of the united states of america found on the whitehouse.gov website. no provable connections with bin coward no wmd no massive terrorist camps and no proven plans for an attack against us. iow all lies and typical right wing fear tactics. unfortunately even after he loses the election we will still have to deal with the shit he caused for the foreseeable future. . 222 285056 wyec.82438$hq1.41052@svr29..prodigy.com snipped agreed. oil as well as a stable middle east is in our national interest. from that point of view bushs policy appears to be purely desastrous. euro i guess we should have russia return to the days of communism. there has been extreme turmoil in russia since the demise of communism. what does russia have to do with this its a prime example what occurs when you remove a dictatorial governement and replace it with a semblance of a democratic one. its also difficult for the people who where once under strict control once you grant them freedom. it will take some time for iraq to have an effective government. i see... yes youre right. i fear however that when iraq gets a really effective government chosen by the iraqi people it might not be the pro-western moderate kind of democracy that we could wish for but instead a pro-iranian theocracy... history will tell. euro that is entirely possible. however if it is the will of the people to have a dictatorial government then they as the iranians do have to live their decision. the problem that enters into the equation is if the theocracy cannot or will not exist within the bounds of international cooperation. right now iran is bordering on this position. what we have now in iraq as appears to me is that the majority of the people are waiting to see which way the wind is going to blow. we went into iraq and are now forcing freedom of choice on a people who do not appear ready to accept the freedom. .

From : mike craney

joekingyou@pacbll.net says... snipped agreed. oil as well as a stable middle east is in our national interest. from that point of view bushs policy appears to be purely desastrous. euro i guess we should have russia return to the days of communism. there has been extreme turmoil in russia since the demise of communism. what does russia have to do with this its a prime example what occurs when you remove a dictatorial governement and replace it with a semblance of a democratic one. its also difficult for the people who where once under strict control once you grant them freedom. it will take some time for iraq to have an effective government. i see... yes youre right. i fear however that when iraq gets a really effective government chosen by the iraqi people it might not be the pro-western moderate kind of democracy that we could wish for but instead a pro-iranian theocracy... history will tell. euro that is entirely possible. however if it is the will of the people to have a dictatorial government then they as the iranians do have to live their decision. the problem that enters into the equation is if the theocracy cannot or will not exist within the bounds of international cooperation. right now iran is bordering on this position. what we have now in iraq as appears to me is that the majority of the people are waiting to see which way the wind is going to blow. we went into iraq and are now forcing freedom of choice on a people who do not appear ready to accept the freedom. right. one of the things that westerners find annoying to an extent about the middle easterners is that theyre more politically pragmatic than we are willing to accept a wider range of governmental options as long as they have the option to keep their heads down and make a decent living. right now they know theres a new sheriff in town -- theyre waiting to see what the sheriff wants to do so they can adapt. mike .

From : markzoom

tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. the us entered ww2 a few years late. if anyone deserves the most credit for defeating the nazis it would be the russians who did by far the most defeating and also paid by far the highest human price. m.k. .

From : jeff

joekingyou@pacbll.net says... snipped agreed. oil as well as a stable middle east is in our national interest. from that point of view bushs policy appears to be purely desastrous. euro i guess we should have russia return to the days of communism. there has been extreme turmoil in russia since the demise of communism. what does russia have to do with this its a prime example what occurs when you remove a dictatorial governement and replace it with a semblance of a democratic one. its also difficult for the people who where once under strict control once you grant them freedom. it will take some time for iraq to have an effective government. i see... yes youre right. i fear however that when iraq gets a really effective government chosen by the iraqi people it might not be the pro-western moderate kind of democracy that we could wish for but instead a pro-iranian theocracy... history will tell. euro that is entirely possible. however if it is the will of the people to have a dictatorial government then they as the iranians do have to live their decision. the problem that enters into the equation is if the theocracy cannot or will not exist within the bounds of international cooperation. right now iran is bordering on this position. what we have now in iraq as appears to me is that the majority of the people are waiting to see which way the wind is going to blow. we went into iraq and are now forcing freedom of choice on a people who do not appear ready to accept the freedom. right. one of the things that westerners find annoying to an extent about the middle easterners is that theyre more politically pragmatic than we are willing to accept a wider range of governmental options as long as they have the option to keep their heads down and make a decent living. isnt that like turning your head while the mafia does their dirty deeds right now they know theres a new sheriff in town -- theyre waiting to see what the sheriff wants to do so they can adapt. mike .

From : euro

tbone wrote why is it that whenever something doesnt agree with your beliefs it is nothing more than partisan politics at its worst because the arguments you made here are partisan in nature. you mentioned propaganda. i merely pointed out that the democrats for years said the same thing bush did that you now call propaganda. when the opinions of some change based on who said it thats partisan politics at its worst. with the little reserve that bush and his administration had also changed their position. before sept. 11th they didnt consider saddam hussein as a threat. so do at least the following statements show - he saddam hussein has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. he is unable to project conventional power against his neighbours. powell february 2001 - we are able to keep arms from him. his military forces have not been rebuilt. condoleezza rice july 2001 but then suddenly bush and the main members of his administration made daily approximative statements once mixing saddam hussein with al-qaeda once suggesting that saddam hussein had prohibited weapons including nuclear ones. under the us pressure saddam hussein accepted un inspections to resume and this was a good result. but while un inspections did not show that saddam hussein had prohibited weapons approximative statements were still made including in the state of union speech including at the un security council by colin powell. repeating lies and distortions of facts with the purpose of misleading public opinions and foreign governments is propaganda. live with it. it has nothing to do with anyone changing position. euro ------------------------------ to occupy iraq would instantly shatter our coalition turning the whole arab world against us and make a broken tyrant into a latter-day hero ... assigning young soldiers to a fruitless hunt for a securely entrenched dictator and condemning them to fight in what would be an un-winnable urban guerilla war. it could only plunge that part of the world into even greater instability. george bush snr in a world transformed 1998 .

From : milesh

euro wrote - he saddam hussein has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. he is unable to project conventional power against his neighbours. powell february 2001 - we are able to keep arms from him. his military forces have not been rebuilt. condoleezza rice july 2001 great you quoted some reps. how quickly people forget what the dems and world leaders had been saying all along. these quotes are not 5 to 10 years old as tbone stated. there are scores of similar quotes from the majority of the more prominent dems of this country. saddams existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to america now. saddam has used chemical weapons before both against iraqs enemies and against his own people. he is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against u.s. forces and u.s. facilities in the middle east. -- john rockefeller oct 10 2002 i will be voting to give the president of the united states the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm saddam hussein because i believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security. -- john f. kerry oct 2002 i am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...i saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out. -- clintons secretary of defense william cohen in april of 2003 this december will mark three years since united nations inspectors last visited iraq. there is no doubt that since that time saddam hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. reports indicate that biological chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-gulf war status. in addition saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the united states and our allies. -- from a december 6 2001 letter signed by bob graham joe lieberman harold ford & tom lantos among others the last un weapons inspectors left iraq in october of 1998. we are confident that saddam hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons but has not yet achieved nuclear capability. -- robert byrd october 2002 what is at stake is how to answer the potential threat iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of wmd. baghdads regime did use such weapons in the past. today a number of evidences may lead to think that over the past four years in the absence of international inspectors this country has continued armament programs. -- jacques chirac october 16 2002 .

From : mike craney

joekingyou@pacbll.net says... joekingyou@pacbll.net says... snipped agreed. oil as well as a stable middle east is in our national interest. from that point of view bushs policy appears to be purely desastrous. euro i guess we should have russia return to the days of communism. there has been extreme turmoil in russia since the demise of communism. what does russia have to do with this its a prime example what occurs when you remove a dictatorial governement and replace it with a semblance of a democratic one. its also difficult for the people who where once under strict control once you grant them freedom. it will take some time for iraq to have an effective government. i see... yes youre right. i fear however that when iraq gets a really effective government chosen by the iraqi people it might not be the pro-western moderate kind of democracy that we could wish for but instead a pro-iranian theocracy... history will tell. euro that is entirely possible. however if it is the will of the people to have a dictatorial government then they as the iranians do have to live their decision. the problem that enters into the equation is if the theocracy cannot or will not exist within the bounds of international cooperation. right now iran is bordering on this position. what we have now in iraq as appears to me is that the majority of the people are waiting to see which way the wind is going to blow. we went into iraq and are now forcing freedom of choice on a people who do not appear ready to accept the freedom. right. one of the things that westerners find annoying to an extent about the middle easterners is that theyre more politically pragmatic than we are willing to accept a wider range of governmental options as long as they have the option to keep their heads down and make a decent living. isnt that like turning your head while the mafia does their dirty deeds im not a middle easterner nor was i condoning this pov so i cant respond. but yes i suppose. mike .

From : euro

euro wrote - he saddam hussein has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. he is unable to project conventional power against his neighbours. powell february 2001 - we are able to keep arms from him. his military forces have not been rebuilt. condoleezza rice july 2001 great you quoted some reps. how quickly people forget what the dems and world leaders had been saying all along. these quotes are not 5 to 10 years old as tbone stated. there are scores of similar quotes from the majority of the more prominent dems of this country. saddams existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to america now. saddam has used chemical weapons before both against iraqs enemies and against his own people. he is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against u.s. forces and u.s. facilities in the middle east. -- john rockefeller oct 10 2002 i will be voting to give the president of the united states the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm saddam hussein because i believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security. -- john f. kerry oct 2002 i am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...i saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out. -- clintons secretary of defense william cohen in april of 2003 this december will mark three years since united nations inspectors last visited iraq. there is no doubt that since that time saddam hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. reports indicate that biological chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-gulf war status. in addition saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the united states and our allies. -- from a december 6 2001 letter signed by bob graham joe lieberman harold ford & tom lantos among others the last un weapons inspectors left iraq in october of 1998. we are confident that saddam hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons but has not yet achieved nuclear capability. -- robert byrd october 2002 what is at stake is how to answer the potential threat iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of wmd. baghdads regime did use such weapons in the past. today a number of evidences may lead to think that over the past four years in the absence of international inspectors this country has continued armament programs. -- jacques chirac october 16 2002 your quotes prove that there has indeed been some propaganda on the issue. the last quote prove that some governments have been wiser than others and finally decided to trust the un inspectors. history proved them right. now i can also recall you such quotes as those ... the area in the south and the west and the north that coalition forces control is substantial. it happens not to be the area where weapons of mass destruction were dispersed. we know where they are. theyre in the area around tikrit and baghdad and east west south and north somewhat. donald rumsfeld | department of defense | march 30 2003 audio mp3 http//www.why-war.com/files/rumsfeldwmdclaim.mp3 or we believe he has in fact reconstituted nuclear weapons. i think mr. el baradei frankly is wrong. cheney on march 16 2003 in an appearance on nbcs meet the press yes indeed there is a difference between governments who accept facts and independent conclusions and governments who prefer to wage propaganda in order to get international backing for a very precise and personal agenda. euro .

From : dddd

people will believe what is politically expedient for them to believe. when an election is at stake the party out of power will believe one thing and the party in power will believe the exact opposite. if the parties positions were to change their beliefs would change accordingly. the same with the belief systems in other countries. if it is politically expedient for the foreign government france in this case to believe that there are no weapons of mass destruction in iraq that is what they will believe. if it were politically expedient to believe the opposite that is what they would believe. facts are irrellevant. dddd euro wrote - he saddam hussein has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. he is unable to project conventional power against his neighbours. powell february 2001 - we are able to keep arms from him. his military forces have not been rebuilt. condoleezza rice july 2001 great you quoted some reps. how quickly people forget what the dems and world leaders had been saying all along. these quotes are not 5 to 10 years old as tbone stated. there are scores of similar quotes from the majority of the more prominent dems of this country. saddams existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to america now. saddam has used chemical weapons before both against iraqs enemies and against his own people. he is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against u.s. forces and u.s. facilities in the middle east. -- john rockefeller oct 10 2002 i will be voting to give the president of the united states the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm saddam hussein because i believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security. -- john f. kerry oct 2002 i am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...i saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out. -- clintons secretary of defense william cohen in april of 2003 this december will mark three years since united nations inspectors last visited iraq. there is no doubt that since that time saddam hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. reports indicate that biological chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-gulf war status. in addition saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the united states and our allies. -- from a december 6 2001 letter signed by bob graham joe lieberman harold ford & tom lantos among others the last un weapons inspectors left iraq in october of 1998. we are confident that saddam hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons but has not yet achieved nuclear capability. -- robert byrd october 2002 what is at stake is how to answer the potential threat iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of wmd. baghdads regime did use such weapons in the past. today a number of evidences may lead to think that over the past four years in the absence of international inspectors this country has continued armament programs. -- jacques chirac october 16 2002 your quotes prove that there has indeed been some propaganda on the issue. the last quote prove that some governments have been wiser than others and finally decided to trust the un inspectors. history proved them right. now i can also recall you such quotes as those ... the area in the south and the west and the north that coalition forces control is substantial. it happens not to be the area where weapons of mass destruction were dispersed. we know where they are. theyre in the area around tikrit and baghdad and east west south and north somewhat. donald rumsfeld | department of defense | march 30 2003 audio mp3 http//www.why-war.com/files/rumsfeldwmdclaim.mp3 or we believe he has in fact reconstituted nuclear weapons. i think mr. el baradei frankly is wrong. cheney on march 16 2003 in an appearance on nbcs meet the press yes indeed there is a difference between governments who accept facts and independent conclusions and governments who prefer to wage propaganda in order to get international backing for a very precise and personal agenda. euro .

From : jerry

tbone wrote i said no such thing. i said that the bush administration was outright lying. the democrats said that saddam was a dangerous man and that much is true but please show mw where the democratic party believed that we should go to war with iraq in lets say the entire bush presidency. you can spin it any way you want to miles but the facts are the facts and so far not a single reason given by the bush administration gave for going to war has proven to be even remotely true. no provable connections with bin coward no wmd no massive terrorist camps and no proven plans for an attack against us. iow all lies and typical right wing fear tactics. unfortunately even after he loses the election we will still have to deal with the shit he caused for the foreseeable future. ----remarks of senator john kerry on iraq october 09 2002 us senate with respect to saddam hussein and the threat he presents we must ask ourselves a simple question why why is saddam hussein pursuing weapons that most nations have agreed to limit or give up why is saddam hussein guilty of breaking his own cease-fire agreement with the international community why is saddam hussein attempting to develop nuclear weapons when most nations dont even try and responsible nations that have them attempt to limit their potential for

From : jefferson n glapski

tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. the us entered ww2 a few years late. if anyone deserves the most credit for defeating the nazis it would be the russians who did by far the most defeating and also paid by far the highest human price. m.k. are you stupid paying a high price in terms of dying doesnt mean anything except your ineffectiveness in war. the russians entered wwii against the germans late too. if youll care to remember they were allied with the nazis when they were splitting up poland. that helped the nazis. -- jefferson but its hard as hell not to be some kind of redneck bigot sometimes... -trevor zion bauknight 95% of the 100 rudest people ive encountered in the last year have been middle-aged black women. it just strikes me as unfortunately disproportionate... -trevor zion bauknight as i predicted the general assembly will vote to take down the flag from the dome of the state house and the boycott organized by the naacp will continue because they wont be happy until the memory of the confederacy is erased from our cultural landscape. im holding out hope that removal of the flag and subsequent continuation of economic sanctions will reveal the naacp for what it is; but somehow i doubt it... -trevor zion bauknight all this over the supposed moral outrage over an institution slowly dying of its own weight anyway and countenanced in the north even after the so-called emancipation proclamation. -trevor zion bauknight i hope it isnt racist of me to point out that some white southerners even some slave owners treated blacks as fellow human beings. the evil of legal ownership was indeed still present and resulted in a feeling of superiority among whites but not all of them were cruel and harsh. many of them were simply doing what they learned was proper. remember that the south was and is an extremely religious section and the fact remains that slavery is sanctioned and its details legislated by the christian god according to the old testament. -trevor zion bauknight im not sure i see any factual errors there however. -trevor zion bauknight commenting on the following anti-semitic webpage http//www.muslimedia.com/archives/features98/slaves.htm .

From : markzoom

tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. the us entered ww2 a few years late. if anyone deserves the most credit for defeating the nazis it would be the russians who did by far the most defeating and also paid by far the highest human price. m.k. are you stupid no but you are obviously unable to face the reality that the russians made a far greater contribution to defeating the nazis than the precious usay. paying a high price in terms of dying doesnt mean anything except your ineffectiveness in war. it still means they made the biggest contribution. russia fought and defeated the most and the best german troops. the russians entered wwii against the germans late too. if youll care to remember they were allied with the nazis when they were splitting up poland. that helped the nazis. they also defeated most of the germans. the western front was a tea party compared to the eastern one. now get it through your head that it is not the usay but russia who deseves the biggest credit for defeating the nazis if any single country does. you just cant hack not being the bestest can you. m.k. -- jefferson but its hard as hell not to be some kind of redneck bigot sometimes... -trevor zion bauknight 95% of the 100 rudest people ive encountered in the last year have been middle-aged black women. it just strikes me as unfortunately disproportionate... -trevor zion bauknight as i predicted the general assembly will vote to take down the flag from the dome of the state house and the boycott organized by the naacp will continue because they wont be happy until the memory of the confederacy is erased from our cultural landscape. im holding out hope that removal of the flag and subsequent continuation of economic sanctions will reveal the naacp for what it is; but somehow i doubt it... -trevor zion bauknight all this over the supposed moral outrage over an institution slowly dying of its own weight anyway and countenanced in the north even after the so-called emancipation proclamation. -trevor zion bauknight i hope it isnt racist of me to point out that some white southerners even some slave owners treated blacks as fellow human beings. the evil of legal ownership was indeed still present and resulted in a feeling of superiority among whites but not all of them were cruel and harsh. many of them were simply doing what they learned was proper. remember that the south was and is an extremely religious section and the fact remains that slavery is sanctioned and its details legislated by the christian god according to the old testament. -trevor zion bauknight im not sure i see any factual errors there however. -trevor zion bauknight commenting on the following anti-semitic webpage http//www.muslimedia.com/archives/features98/slaves.htm .

From : euro

people will believe what is politically expedient for them to believe. when an election is at stake the party out of power will believe one thing and the party in power will believe the exact opposite. if the parties positions were to change their beliefs would change accordingly. the same with the belief systems in other countries. if it is politically expedient for the foreign government france in this case to believe that there are no weapons of mass destruction in iraq that is what they will believe. if it were politically expedient to believe the opposite that is what they would believe. facts are irrellevant. dddd in other terms when the us government believes one thing it is because of botched intelligence but when the french government thinks otherwise it is because it is politically expedient to... it can never happen to be that the us government believed one thing because it was politically expedient to and the french government believed otherwise because of reliable intelligence... hmmmm... euro .

From : euro

snipped then kerry goes on to say should the resolve of our allies wane to pursue this matter until an acceptable inspection process has been reinstituted which i hope will not occur and which i am pleased to say at this moment does not seem to have even begun the united states must not lose its resolve to take action. wow ........... does that mean if the un doesnt act the us should go at it alone thats what he said........... yes thats what kerry said. and what bush did consisted to ignore that the un had taken action and go to war with no international backing interrupting the acceptable and accepted by the us in resolution 1441 inspection process. euro .

From : jefferson n glapski

jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. the us entered ww2 a few years late. if anyone deserves the most credit for defeating the nazis it would be the russians who did by far the most defeating and also paid by far the highest human price. m.k. are you stupid no but you are obviously unable to face the reality that the russians made a far greater contribution to defeating the nazis than the precious usay. your argument is that they made the contribution because they were killed. wrong. did every french whore who got her head shaved make their contribution by distracting the nazis from war too paying a high price in terms of dying doesnt mean anything except your ineffectiveness in war. it still means they made the biggest contribution. russia fought and defeated the most and the best german troops. dying in a battlefield doesnt mean a fucking thing. make a different argument. the russians entered wwii against the germans late too. if youll care to remember they were allied with the nazis when they were splitting up poland. that helped the nazis. they also defeated most of the germans. the western front was a tea party compared to the eastern one. now get it through your head that it is not the usay but russia who deseves the biggest credit for defeating the nazis if any single country does. you just cant hack not being the bestest can you. why are you ignoring that in 1939 the soviets were allied with nazis the western front was japan. get it straight. -- jefferson but its hard as hell not to be some kind of redneck bigot sometimes... -trevor zion bauknight 95% of the 100 rudest people ive encountered in the last year have been middle-aged black women. it just strikes me as unfortunately disproportionate... -trevor zion bauknight as i predicted the general assembly will vote to take down the flag from the dome of the state house and the boycott organized by the naacp will continue because they wont be happy until the memory of the confederacy is erased from our cultural landscape. im holding out hope that removal of the flag and subsequent continuation of economic sanctions will reveal the naacp for what it is; but somehow i doubt it... -trevor zion bauknight all this over the supposed moral outrage over an institution slowly dying of its own weight anyway and countenanced in the north even after the so-called emancipation proclamation. -trevor zion bauknight i hope it isnt racist of me to point out that some white southerners even some slave owners treated blacks as fellow human beings. the evil of legal ownership was indeed still present and resulted in a feeling of superiority among whites but not all of them were cruel and harsh. many of them were simply doing what they learned was proper. remember that the south was and is an extremely religious section and the fact remains that slavery is sanctioned and its details legislated by the christian god according to the old testament. -trevor zion bauknight im not sure i see any factual errors there however. -trevor zion bauknight commenting on the following anti-semitic webpage http//www.muslimedia.com/archives/features98/slaves.htm .

From : lein

lein wrote i guess that you just dont get what he meant by that. as in if it werent for the french at war with england during the american revolution america may not have prevailed. this is a common rebuttal to the french would not be free today if not for the allies defeating nazi germany. and its a pretty weak comparison. the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. we were attacjked because fdr made it a war for cheap oil. too feed all those worthless gas-pigs liek the dodge hemi. too bad gm never came up with anything that could touch it. yet when you go to any hotrod show youre bound to find chevy engines in non-chevys. on the otherhand i cant recall ever seeing a hemi in something other than mopar. .

From : lein

tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. the us entered ww2 a few years late. if anyone deserves the most credit for defeating the nazis it would be the russians who did by far the most defeating and also paid by far the highest human price. m.k. are you stupid no but you are obviously unable to face the reality that the russians made a far greater contribution to defeating the nazis than the precious usay. how so did the americans fly russian aircraft or receive material help from russia paying a high price in terms of dying doesnt mean anything except your ineffectiveness in war. it still means they made the biggest contribution. russia fought and defeated the most and the best german troops. the russians entered wwii against the germans late too. if youll care to remember they were allied with the nazis when they were splitting up poland. that helped the nazis. they also defeated most of the germans. the western front was a tea party compared to the eastern one. now get it through your head that it is not the usay but russia who deseves the biggest credit for defeating the nazis if any single country does. you just cant hack not being the bestest can you. moving an army across the atlantic is hardly a tea party. do you think russia could land hundreds of thousands of their troops across an ocean .

From : dddd

people will believe what is politically expedient for them to believe. when an election is at stake the party out of power will believe one thing and the party in power will believe the exact opposite. if the parties positions were to change their beliefs would change accordingly. the same with the belief systems in other countries. if it is politically expedient for the foreign government france in this case to believe that there are no weapons of mass destruction in iraq that is what they will believe. if it were politically expedient to believe the opposite that is what they would believe. facts are irrellevant. dddd in other terms when the us government believes one thing it is because of botched intelligence but when the french government thinks otherwise it is because it is politically expedient to... it can never happen to be that the us government believed one thing because it was politically expedient to and the french government believed otherwise because of reliable intelligence... hmmmm... euro that is not what i meant. i am condemning both governments. either one will believe what is politically expedient for it to believe. read the first sentence of my post and that applies to everyone. dddd .

From : tbone

lein wrote i guess that you just dont get what he meant by that. as in if it werent for the french at war with england during the american revolution america may not have prevailed. this is a common rebuttal to the french would not be free today if not for the allies defeating nazi germany. and its a pretty weak comparison. the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. we were attacjked because fdr made it a war for cheap oil. too feed all those worthless gas-pigs liek the dodge hemi. too bad gm never came up with anything that could touch it. yet when you go to any hotrod show youre bound to find chevy engines in non-chevys. perhaps because compared to ford or dodge they are dirt cheep. on the otherhand i cant recall ever seeing a hemi in something other than mopar. thats because nothing short of a mopar could handle the massive power and then there is that cost thing again. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : markzoom

tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. the us entered ww2 a few years late. if anyone deserves the most credit for defeating the nazis it would be the russians who did by far the most defeating and also paid by far the highest human price. m.k. are you stupid no but you are obviously unable to face the reality that the russians made a far greater contribution to defeating the nazis than the precious usay. how so did the americans fly russian aircraft or receive material help from russia no russia did however defeat most of the german army and paid the biggest price too. here it is so that even you can understand it http//users.erols.com/mwhite28/ww2-loss.htm paying a high price in terms of dying doesnt mean anything except your ineffectiveness in war. it still means they made the biggest contribution. russia fought and defeated the most and the best german troops. the russians entered wwii against the germans late too. if youll care to remember they were allied with the nazis when they were splitting up poland. that helped the nazis. they also defeated most of the germans. the western front was a tea party compared to the eastern one. now get it through your head that it is not the usay but russia who deseves the biggest credit for defeating the nazis if any single country does. you just cant hack not being the bestest can you. moving an army across the atlantic is hardly a tea party. compared to the eastern front it is a pleasure cruise. do you think russia could land hundreds of thousands of their troops across an ocean how is this supposed to be relevant i dont quite see how moving a comparatively small army across an ocean qualifies as the biggest contribution in defeating the nazis. when they finished their cruise they only faced the leftovers that werent up to fighting the russians in the east which is where most of the crack troops went about 3/4 of the german army. m.k. .

From : markzoom

jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. the us entered ww2 a few years late. if anyone deserves the most credit for defeating the nazis it would be the russians who did by far the most defeating and also paid by far the highest human price. m.k. are you stupid no but you are obviously unable to face the reality that the russians made a far greater contribution to defeating the nazis than the precious usay. your argument is that they made the contribution because they were killed. quite a lot of them werent killed. my argument is that they defeated the most german troops and the best german troops. they also paid the biggest human price too. quite clearly they made the biggest contribution in both respects. you have absolutely no argument. wrong. did every french whore who got her head shaved make their contribution by distracting the nazis from war too wtf have french tarts got to do with it beyond giving the yanks the clap they got from germans. paying a high price in terms of dying doesnt mean anything except your ineffectiveness in war. it still means they made the biggest contribution. russia fought and defeated the most and the best german troops. dying in a battlefield doesnt mean a fucking thing. make a different argument. i just did dipstick. they defeated most of the german army. that includes the best german troops too. hehehe. its pathetic to watch a yank have a tantrim for not being the biggest bestest and firstest. the russians entered wwii against the germans late too. if youll care to remember they were allied with the nazis when they were splitting up poland. that helped the nazis. they also defeated most of the germans. the western front was a tea party compared to the eastern one. now get it through your head that it is not the usay but russia who deseves the biggest credit for defeating the nazis if any single country does. you just cant hack not being the bestest can you. why are you ignoring that in 1939 the soviets were allied with nazis because we are talking about who made the greatest contribution in ultimately defeating the nazis which is quite clearly the russians. the western front was japan. get it straight. no dipstick. the western front may be japan to the yanks but in the ww2 european theatre the western front means west of germany which is what we are talking about. the world is round and a-fucking-merika aint the middle of it see. m.k. -- jefferson but its hard as hell not to be some kind of redneck bigot sometimes... -trevor zion bauknight 95% of the 100 rudest people ive encountered in the last year have been middle-aged black women. it just strikes me as unfortunately disproportionate... -trevor zion bauknight as i predicted the general assembly will vote to take down the flag from the dome of the state house and the boycott organized by the naacp will continue because they wont be happy until the memory of the confederacy is erased from our cultural landscape. im holding out hope that removal of the flag and subsequent continuation of economic sanctions will reveal the naacp for what it is; but somehow i doubt it... -trevor zion bauknight all this over the supposed moral outrage over an institution slowly dying of its own weight anyway and countenanced in the north even after the so-called emancipation proclamation. -trevor zion bauknight i hope it isnt racist of me to point out that some white southerners even some slave owners treated blacks as fellow human beings. the evil of legal ownership was indeed still present and resulted in a feeling of superiority among whites but not all of them were cruel and harsh. many of them were simply doing what they learned was proper. remember that the south was and is an extremely religious section and the fact remains that slavery is sanctioned and its details legislated by the christian god according to the old testament. -trevor zion bauknight im not sure i see any factual errors there however. -trevor zion bauknight commenting on the following anti-semitic webpage http//www.muslimedia.com/archives/features98/slaves.htm .

From : jefferson n glapski

jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. the us entered ww2 a few years late. if anyone deserves the most credit for defeating the nazis it would be the russians who did by far the most defeating and also paid by far the highest human price. m.k. are you stupid no but you are obviously unable to face the reality that the russians made a far greater contribution to defeating the nazis than the precious usay. your argument is that they made the contribution because they were killed. quite a lot of them werent killed. my argument is that they defeated the most german troops and the best german troops. they also paid the biggest human price too. quite clearly they made the biggest contribution in both respects. you have absolutely no argument. without dispute the soviets took it up the ass in the getting killed department. biggest human price prove that bullshit. biggest contribution in both respects getting killed isnt a contribution at all. you havent made one fucking argument that the soviets actually killed the most german troops and the best german troops. also make sure you make your argument that the soviets did this with their own military hardware too. and also take into account that the soviets were allied with the nazis which had the undoubtable effect of strengthening the national socialists. yes i know italy was allied with the national socialists too. you want to argue that they helped or hindered national socialism wrong. did every french whore who got her head shaved make their contribution by distracting the nazis from war too wtf have french tarts got to do with it beyond giving the yanks the clap they got from germans. paying a high price in terms of dying doesnt mean anything except your ineffectiveness in war. it still means they made the biggest contribution. russia fought and defeated the most and the best german troops. dying in a battlefield doesnt mean a fucking thing. make a different argument. i just did dipstick. they defeated most of the german army. that includes the best german troops too. hehehe. its pathetic to watch a yank have a tantrim for not being the biggest bestest and firstest. im not a yank you stupid fuck. an argument isnt simply making an assertion. for example you fuck pigs. i have provided no evidence that you fuck pigs on a nightly basis. i have provided no evidence that you enjoy the pleasures of swine morning day and night. does this mean you think i have successfully argued that you fuck pigs the russians entered wwii against the germans late too. if youll care to remember they were allied with the nazis when they were splitting up poland. that helped the nazis. they also defeated most of the germans. the western front was a tea party compared to the eastern one. now get it through your head that it is not the usay but russia who deseves the biggest credit for defeating the nazis if any single country does. you just cant hack not being the bestest can you. why are you ignoring that in 1939 the soviets were allied with nazis because we are talking about who made the greatest contribution in ultimately defeating the nazis which is quite clearly the russians. asserting something without evidence isnt an argument. the western front was japan. get it straight. no dipstick. the western front may be japan to the yanks but in the ww2 european theatre the western front means west of germany which is what we are talking about. the world is round and a-fucking-merika aint the middle of it see. your eurocentric piece of shit do you know what ww stands for world war. not european theater war even though it is the fucking europeans that start wars but a world war. and from where i stand japan is to the west and euroland is to the east. -- jefferson but its hard as hell not to be some kind of redneck bigot sometimes... -trevor zion bauknight 95% of the 100 rudest people ive encountered in the last year have been middle-aged black women. it just strikes me as unfortunately disproportionate... -trevor zion bauknight as i predicted the general assembly will vote to take down the flag from the dome of the state house and the boycott organized by the naacp will continue because they wont be happy until the memory of the confederacy is erased from our cultural landscape. im holding out hope that removal of the flag and subsequent continuation of economic sanctions will reveal the naacp for what it is; but someho

From : euro

people will believe what is politically expedient for them to believe. when an election is at stake the party out of power will believe one thing and the party in power will believe the exact opposite. if the parties positions were to change their beliefs would change accordingly. the same with the belief systems in other countries. if it is politically expedient for the foreign government france in this case to believe that there are no weapons of mass destruction in iraq that is what they will believe. if it were politically expedient to believe the opposite that is what they would believe. facts are irrellevant. dddd in other terms when the us government believes one thing it is because of botched intelligence but when the french government thinks otherwise it is because it is politically expedient to... it can never happen to be that the us government believed one thing because it was politically expedient to and the french government believed otherwise because of reliable intelligence... hmmmm... euro that is not what i meant. i am condemning both governments. either one will believe what is politically expedient for it to believe. read the first sentence of my post and that applies to everyone. dddd i understand your point but i still cant understand why it apparently didnt come to your idea that france could have taken position on iraq independently from national interests. the arguments that france put forward against the invasion of iraq were very rational ones 1/ iraq was not an imminent threat - and that was partly supported by frances own intelligence. when france asked the us to share intelligence leading the bush administration to contrary conclusions it only received hardly polite rebuttals. 2/ democracy-building in iraq would be a lengthy difficult and bloody process. 3/ the muslim world would perceive a u.s.-led intervention lacking the explicit blessing of the united nations as illegitimate -- and thus would incite even greater anger toward america. these claims were fully founded and have actually proved to be. it is possible that the conclusion from those claims concurred with frances own national interests but i find it a bit deceiving to just claim that france acted only on the basis of her national interests. euro .

From : markzoom

jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. the us entered ww2 a few years late. if anyone deserves the most credit for defeating the nazis it would be the russians who did by far the most defeating and also paid by far the highest human price. m.k. are you stupid no but you are obviously unable to face the reality that the russians made a far greater contribution to defeating the nazis than the precious usay. your argument is that they made the contribution because they were killed. quite a lot of them werent killed. my argument is that they defeated the most german troops and the best german troops. they also paid the biggest human price too. quite clearly they made the biggest contribution in both respects. you have absolutely no argument. without dispute the soviets took it up the ass in the getting killed department. biggest human price prove that bullshit. you just agreed it in the previous line. biggest contribution in both respects getting killed isnt a contribution at all. that rather depends on how they are killed. if someone dies defending his comrades or family would you say he didnt make a contribution in fact if anyone dies in combat you are saying its not a contribution. you havent made one fucking argument that the soviets actually killed the most german troops and the best german troops. its a widely known historical fact. go learn some history ignoramus. you can start here http//users.erols.com/mwhite28/ww2-loss.htm i will flatter you by assuming that you are able to use a search engine to find information. also make sure you make your argument that the soviets did this with their own military hardware too. ah yes the yanks supplied them some materiell. note they wanted to be paid for it. as it turns out the russians didnt pay much to the dismay of american profiteers. since the yanks wanted paying you can hardly call that an american contribution even less the biggest contribution in defeating the nazis. and also take into account that the soviets were allied with the nazis which had the undoubtable effect of strengthening the national socialists. yes i know italy was allied with the national socialists too. you want to argue that they helped or hindered national socialism irrelevant. we are discussing who made the biggest contribution in defeating the nazis. wrong. did every french whore who got her head shaved make their contribution by distracting the nazis from war too wtf have french tarts got to do with it beyond giving the yanks the clap they got from germans. paying a high price in terms of dying doesnt mean anything except your ineffectiveness in war. it still means they made the biggest contribution. russia fought and defeated the most and the best german troops. dying in a battlefield doesnt mean a fucking thing. make a different argument. i just did dipstick. they defeated most of the german army. that includes the best german troops too. hehehe. its pathetic to watch a yank have a tantrim for not being the biggest bestest and firstest. im not a yank you stupid fuck. why are you behaving like one then wankface an argument isnt simply making an assertion. for example you fuck pigs. i have provided no evidence that you fuck pigs on a nightly basis. i have provided no evidence that you enjoy the pleasures of swine morning day and night. does this mean you think i have successfully argued that you fuck pigs i wrongly assumed you actually had a clue of where the germans deployed the most and best troops and where they sustained the highest casualties. i suggest you actually go learn before you shoot your mouth off. the russians entered wwii against the germans late too. if youll care to remember they were allied with the nazis when they were splitting up poland. that helped the nazis. they also defeated most of the germans. the western front was a tea party compared to the eastern one. now get it through your head that it is not the usay but russia who deseves the biggest credit for defeating the nazis if any single country does. you just cant hack not being the bestest can you. why are you ignoring that in 1939 the soviets were allied with nazis because we are talking about who made the greatest contribution in ultimately defeating the nazis which is quite clearly the russians. asserting something without evidence isnt an argument. see above. learn some history btw. youll find that each countr

From : dddd

this subject needs to be put to sleep quietly and with no fanfare. nothing is to be gained from the discussion. dddd jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. the us entered ww2 a few years late. if anyone deserves the most credit for defeating the nazis it would be the russians who did by far the most defeating and also paid by far the highest human price. m.k. are you stupid no but you are obviously unable to face the reality that the russians made a far greater contribution to defeating the nazis than the precious usay. your argument is that they made the contribution because they were killed. quite a lot of them werent killed. my argument is that they defeated the most german troops and the best german troops. they also paid the biggest human price too. quite clearly they made the biggest contribution in both respects. you have absolutely no argument. without dispute the soviets took it up the ass in the getting killed department. biggest human price prove that bullshit. you just agreed it in the previous line. biggest contribution in both respects getting killed isnt a contribution at all. that rather depends on how they are killed. if someone dies defending his comrades or family would you say he didnt make a contribution in fact if anyone dies in combat you are saying its not a contribution. you havent made one fucking argument that the soviets actually killed the most german troops and the best german troops. its a widely known historical fact. go learn some history ignoramus. you can start here http//users.erols.com/mwhite28/ww2-loss.htm i will flatter you by assuming that you are able to use a search engine to find information. also make sure you make your argument that the soviets did this with their own military hardware too. ah yes the yanks supplied them some materiell. note they wanted to be paid for it. as it turns out the russians didnt pay much to the dismay of american profiteers. since the yanks wanted paying you can hardly call that an american contribution even less the biggest contribution in defeating the nazis. and also take into account that the soviets were allied with the nazis which had the undoubtable effect of strengthening the national socialists. yes i know italy was allied with the national socialists too. you want to argue that they helped or hindered national socialism irrelevant. we are discussing who made the biggest contribution in defeating the nazis. wrong. did every french whore who got her head shaved make their contribution by distracting the nazis from war too wtf have french tarts got to do with it beyond giving the yanks the clap they got from germans. paying a high price in terms of dying doesnt mean anything except your ineffectiveness in war. it still means they made the biggest contribution. russia fought and defeated the most and the best german troops. dying in a battlefield doesnt mean a fucking thing. make a different argument. i just did dipstick. they defeated most of the german army. that includes the best german troops too. hehehe. its pathetic to watch a yank have a tantrim for not being the biggest bestest and firstest. im not a yank you stupid fuck. why are you behaving like one then wankface an argument isnt simply making an assertion. for example you fuck pigs. i have provided no evidence that you fuck pigs on a nightly basis. i have provided no evidence that you enjoy the pleasures of swine morning day and night. does this mean you think i have successfully argued that you fuck pigs i wrongly assumed you actually had a clue of where the germans deployed the most and best troops and where they sustained the highest casualties. i suggest you actually go learn before you shoot your mouth off. the russians entered wwii against the germans late too. if youll care to remember they were allied with the nazis when they were splitting up poland. that helped the nazis. they also defeated most of the germans. the western front was a tea party compared to the eastern one. now get it through your head that it is not the usay but russia who deseves the biggest credit for defeating the nazis if any single country does. you just cant hack not being the bestest can you. why are you ignoring that in 1939 the soviets were allied with nazis because we are talking about who made the great

From : david loewe jr

on 2 jul 2004 034209 -0700 markzoom@digiverse.net markzoom wrote tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. the us entered ww2 a few years late. if anyone deserves the most credit for defeating the nazis it would be the russians who did by far the most defeating and also paid by far the highest human price. m.k. are you stupid no but you are obviously unable to face the reality that the russians made a far greater contribution to defeating the nazis than the precious usay. i guess this guy is unfamiliar with the myriad convoys sent to the soviet union by the us which were escorted by the uk and us. the sovs would have had a devil of a time defeating the huns without that aid. paying a high price in terms of dying doesnt mean anything except your ineffectiveness in war. it still means they made the biggest contribution. russia fought and defeated the most and the best german troops. the russians entered wwii against the germans late too. if youll care to remember they were allied with the nazis when they were splitting up poland. that helped the nazis. they also defeated most of the germans. the western front was a tea party compared to the eastern one. now get it through your head that it is not the usay but russia who deseves the biggest credit for defeating the nazis if any single country does. you just cant hack not being the bestest can you. -- one of the busiest areas of feminist research today is the gender critique of the sciences. ... students are taught ... that newtons law of mechanics and einsteins relativity are gender-laden. regarding the latter sandra harding says that the only remedy is to reinvent science and theorizing itself to make sense of womens social experience. - christina hoff sommers .

From : david loewe jr

on tue 29 jun 2004 101730 -0400 xyzzy invalid@addr.net wrote you do realize that if it werent for the french we wouldnt be calling them freedom fries. wed be calling them chips. the hg wells character in time after time calls them pomme frits. -- what can you do when your dreams come true and its not quite like you planned what have you done to be losing the one you held it so tight in your hand don henley & glenn frey .

From : david loewe jr

on 29 jun 2004 141255 edt milesh milesh@nounwantedspam.com wrote tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. you do know that nazi germany declared war on the usa in december of 1941 correct -- quantum particles the dreams that stuff is made of. - david moser .

From : david loewe jr

on wed 30 jun 2004 151756 gmt tbone t-bonenospam@nc.rr.com wrote tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack do you just like to argue with me japan attacked us first or did you not learn about pearl harbor in history class in high school. now after we declared war on them hitler declared war on us http//www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html which gave us every right to go into france with the uk to kick their asses. now when exactly did saddam attack us hundreds of times through the decade long no fly zone... now that makes us the invading force and they are defending themselves nice try pinhead. incorrect since they were the belligerant power defeated in a war that they started and subject to the conditions of the cease fire which they signed. yea and we the great us never signed a contract that we had no intention of following lol. not unless we had the power to make it not stick... hth hand -- youre free to be as much of an asshole as you wish -- as long as im not paying for it. - todd masco .

From : jefferson n glapski

jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. the us entered ww2 a few years late. if anyone deserves the most credit for defeating the nazis it would be the russians who did by far the most defeating and also paid by far the highest human price. m.k. are you stupid no but you are obviously unable to face the reality that the russians made a far greater contribution to defeating the nazis than the precious usay. your argument is that they made the contribution because they were killed. quite a lot of them werent killed. my argument is that they defeated the most german troops and the best german troops. they also paid the biggest human price too. quite clearly they made the biggest contribution in both respects. you have absolutely no argument. without dispute the soviets took it up the ass in the getting killed department. biggest human price prove that bullshit. you just agreed it in the previous line. no i did not. biggest human price doesnt equate to lives lost. biggest contribution in both respects getting killed isnt a contribution at all. that rather depends on how they are killed. if someone dies defending his comrades or family would you say he didnt make a contribution in fact if anyone dies in combat you are saying its not a contribution. the act of dying isnt a contribution. defending against the nazis is. those are two separate acts. you havent made one fucking argument that the soviets actually killed the most german troops and the best german troops. its a widely known historical fact. go learn some history ignoramus. you can start here http//users.erols.com/mwhite28/ww2-loss.htm i will flatter you by assuming that you are able to use a search engine to find information. you made the assertion. you do the fucking work. you can do better than a cartoon i hope. also make sure you make your argument that the soviets did this with their own military hardware too. ah yes the yanks supplied them some materiell. note they wanted to be paid for it. as it turns out the russians didnt pay much to the dismay of american profiteers. since the yanks wanted paying you can hardly call that an american contribution even less the biggest contribution in defeating the nazis. profiteers stuck in the 15th century huh usury is an evil thing too! and also take into account that the soviets were allied with the nazis which had the undoubtable effect of strengthening the national socialists. yes i know italy was allied with the national socialists too. you want to argue that they helped or hindered national socialism irrelevant. we are discussing who made the biggest contribution in defeating the nazis. and the soviets helped the nazis so it is quite irrelevant. while great britain and canada were fighting the nazis stalin and hitler were jerking each other off. did stalin stroking hitler help defeat the nazis wrong. did every french whore who got her head shaved make their contribution by distracting the nazis from war too wtf have french tarts got to do with it beyond giving the yanks the clap they got from germans. paying a high price in terms of dying doesnt mean anything except your ineffectiveness in war. it still means they made the biggest contribution. russia fought and defeated the most and the best german troops. dying in a battlefield doesnt mean a fucking thing. make a different argument. i just did dipstick. they defeated most of the german army. that includes the best german troops too. hehehe. its pathetic to watch a yank have a tantrim for not being the biggest bestest and firstest. im not a yank you stupid fuck. why are you behaving like one then wankface behaving like one do certain races act in a certain way racist prick. an argument isnt simply making an assertion. for example you fuck pigs. i have provided no evidence that you fuck pigs on a nightly basis. i have provided no evidence that you enjoy the pleasures of swine morning day and night. does this mean you think i have successfully argued that you fuck pigs i wrongly assumed you actually had a clue of where the germans deployed the most and best troops and where they sustained the highest casualties. i suggest you actually go learn before you shoot your mouth off. prove it son. thats all i am asking for. make a fucking argument or shut the fuck up. the russians entered wwii aga

From : markzoom

this subject needs to be put to sleep quietly and with no fanfare. nothing is to be gained from the discussion. dddd one thing is. people should realise that every country including their own over-glorifies its own past in the history it teaches to its children. m.k. jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. the us entered ww2 a few years late. if anyone deserves the most credit for defeating the nazis it would be the russians who did by far the most defeating and also paid by far the highest human price. m.k. are you stupid no but you are obviously unable to face the reality that the russians made a far greater contribution to defeating the nazis than the precious usay. your argument is that they made the contribution because they were killed. quite a lot of them werent killed. my argument is that they defeated the most german troops and the best german troops. they also paid the biggest human price too. quite clearly they made the biggest contribution in both respects. you have absolutely no argument. without dispute the soviets took it up the ass in the getting killed department. biggest human price prove that bullshit. you just agreed it in the previous line. biggest contribution in both respects getting killed isnt a contribution at all. that rather depends on how they are killed. if someone dies defending his comrades or family would you say he didnt make a contribution in fact if anyone dies in combat you are saying its not a contribution. you havent made one fucking argument that the soviets actually killed the most german troops and the best german troops. its a widely known historical fact. go learn some history ignoramus. you can start here http//users.erols.com/mwhite28/ww2-loss.htm i will flatter you by assuming that you are able to use a search engine to find information. also make sure you make your argument that the soviets did this with their own military hardware too. ah yes the yanks supplied them some materiell. note they wanted to be paid for it. as it turns out the russians didnt pay much to the dismay of american profiteers. since the yanks wanted paying you can hardly call that an american contribution even less the biggest contribution in defeating the nazis. and also take into account that the soviets were allied with the nazis which had the undoubtable effect of strengthening the national socialists. yes i know italy was allied with the national socialists too. you want to argue that they helped or hindered national socialism irrelevant. we are discussing who made the biggest contribution in defeating the nazis. wrong. did every french whore who got her head shaved make their contribution by distracting the nazis from war too wtf have french tarts got to do with it beyond giving the yanks the clap they got from germans. paying a high price in terms of dying doesnt mean anything except your ineffectiveness in war. it still means they made the biggest contribution. russia fought and defeated the most and the best german troops. dying in a battlefield doesnt mean a fucking thing. make a different argument. i just did dipstick. they defeated most of the german army. that includes the best german troops too. hehehe. its pathetic to watch a yank have a tantrim for not being the biggest bestest and firstest. im not a yank you stupid fuck. why are you behaving like one then wankface an argument isnt simply making an assertion. for example you fuck pigs. i have provided no evidence that you fuck pigs on a nightly basis. i have provided no evidence that you enjoy the pleasures of swine morning day and night. does this mean you think i have successfully argued that you fuck pigs i wrongly assumed you actually had a clue of where the germans deployed the most and best troops and where they sustained the highest casualties. i suggest you actually go learn before you shoot your mouth off. the russians entered wwii against the germans late too. if youll care to remember they were allied with the nazis when they were splitting up poland. that helped the nazis. they also defeated most of the germans. the western front was a tea party compared to the eastern one. now get it through your head that it is not the usay but russia who deseves the biggest credit for defeating the nazis if any single country does. you just cant

From : markzoom

on 2 jul 2004 034209 -0700 markzoom@digiverse.net markzoom wrote tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. the us entered ww2 a few years late. if anyone deserves the most credit for defeating the nazis it would be the russians who did by far the most defeating and also paid by far the highest human price. m.k. are you stupid no but you are obviously unable to face the reality that the russians made a far greater contribution to defeating the nazis than the precious usay. i guess this guy is unfamiliar with the myriad convoys sent to the soviet union by the us which were escorted by the uk and us. the sovs would have had a devil of a time defeating the huns without that aid. this guy is providing you with an answer to the question who made the biggest contribution to defeating the nazis. the answer is russia who sacrificed over 10 million soldiers lives defeating the most and best of the german troops and driving them back all the way to berlin. the yank supplied materiell you talk about was not a contribution it was a $$$ sale on which payment russia defaulted. the reason why usayians remain largely ignorant that it was in fact russia who did the most defeating of germans is because of the later cold war propaganda that suppressed any positive reporting of the eeeeevil communists. i have better things to do than un-brainwashing morons with nazioinalistic delusions of the superiority of their particular country so you dipsticks can go and learn some real history or stay stooopid i dont really care. bye m.k. paying a high price in terms of dying doesnt mean anything except your ineffectiveness in war. it still means they made the biggest contribution. russia fought and defeated the most and the best german troops. the russians entered wwii against the germans late too. if youll care to remember they were allied with the nazis when they were splitting up poland. that helped the nazis. they also defeated most of the germans. the western front was a tea party compared to the eastern one. now get it through your head that it is not the usay but russia who deseves the biggest credit for defeating the nazis if any single country does. you just cant hack not being the bestest can you. .

From : jefferson n glapski

on 2 jul 2004 034209 -0700 markzoom@digiverse.net markzoom wrote jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. the us entered ww2 a few years late. if anyone deserves the most credit for defeating the nazis it would be the russians who did by far the most defeating and also paid by far the highest human price. m.k. are you stupid no but you are obviously unable to face the reality that the russians made a far greater contribution to defeating the nazis than the precious usay. i guess this guy is unfamiliar with the myriad convoys sent to the soviet union by the us which were escorted by the uk and us. the sovs would have had a devil of a time defeating the huns without that aid. this guy is providing you with an answer to the question who made the biggest contribution to defeating the nazis. the answer is russia who sacrificed over 10 million soldiers lives defeating the most and best of the german troops and driving them back all the way to berlin. once again being a loser and dying is not a contribution. that is always your first and only reason that the soviets contributed the most. not once have you even tried to prove the assertion that these were the best of the german troops. nor have you tried to prove your assertion that it was the soviets and not the weather that killed the nazis. the yank supplied materiell you talk about was not a contribution it was a $$$ sale on which payment russia defaulted. the reason why usayians remain largely ignorant that it was in fact russia who did the most defeating of germans is because of the later cold war propaganda that suppressed any positive reporting of the eeeeevil communists. if the fucking soviets never paid for something then it was an american contribution. yet amazingly you are the only one that has this great information oracle! i have better things to do than un-brainwashing morons with nazioinalistic delusions of the superiority of their particular country so you dipsticks can go and learn some real history or stay stooopid i dont really care. nazi refered to nationalism and socialism. get it right. -- jefferson but its hard as hell not to be some kind of redneck bigot sometimes... -trevor zion bauknight 95% of the 100 rudest people ive encountered in the last year have been middle-aged black women. it just strikes me as unfortunately disproportionate... -trevor zion bauknight as i predicted the general assembly will vote to take down the flag from the dome of the state house and the boycott organized by the naacp will continue because they wont be happy until the memory of the confederacy is erased from our cultural landscape. im holding out hope that removal of the flag and subsequent continuation of economic sanctions will reveal the naacp for what it is; but somehow i doubt it... -trevor zion bauknight all this over the supposed moral outrage over an institution slowly dying of its own weight anyway and countenanced in the north even after the so-called emancipation proclamation. -trevor zion bauknight i hope it isnt racist of me to point out that some white southerners even some slave owners treated blacks as fellow human beings. the evil of legal ownership was indeed still present and resulted in a feeling of superiority among whites but not all of them were cruel and harsh. many of them were simply doing what they learned was proper. remember that the south was and is an extremely religious section and the fact remains that slavery is sanctioned and its details legislated by the christian god according to the old testament. -trevor zion bauknight im not sure i see any factual errors there however. -trevor zion bauknight commenting on the following anti-semitic webpage http//www.muslimedia.com/archives/features98/slaves.htm .

From : miles

dddd wrote people will believe what is politically expedient for them to believe. when an election is at stake the party out of power will believe one thing and the party in power will believe the exact opposite. if the parties positions were to change their beliefs would change accordingly. the same with the belief systems in other countries. if it is politically expedient for the foreign government france in this case to believe that there are no weapons of mass destruction in iraq that is what they will believe. if it were politically expedient to believe the opposite that is what they would believe. facts are irrellevant. that is a concept that few seem to realize nor accept as true. you rarely hear one politician agree with the opposing party on a even minor issues during campaign times. outside of that time they quite often do agree on many issues. .

From : markzoom

markzoom wrote the us entered ww2 a few years late. if anyone deserves the most credit for defeating the nazis it would be the russians who did by far the most defeating and also paid by far the highest human price. cant argue with ya there. i was in russia back in 1979 and visited one of their war memorials as well as toured some of the historical war sites. i had not realized just how close to moscow the germans had come. phew at last someone who isnt ignorant. why doesnt anyone else know this m.k. .

From : jerry

markzoom wrote cant argue with ya there. i was in russia back in 1979 and visited one of their war memorials as well as toured some of the historical war sites. i had not realized just how close to moscow the germans had come. phew at last someone who isnt ignorant. why doesnt anyone else know this m.k. i suspect just about everyone around here knows this. problem is it wasnt the russians that stopped the advance on moscow .......... it was mother nature herself. jerry .

From : milesh

jerry wrote i suspect just about everyone around here knows this. problem is it wasnt the russians that stopped the advance on moscow .......... it was mother nature herself. i believe thats only partly true. germany underestimated the winter effects russia did not. for awhile russia was bogged down by the winter as well. some armies had to switch to using horses. in nov. and dec. of 1941 russia trained 9 new armies for winter warfare. the winter didnt beat germany. germany beat itself by not preparing for it as well as russia did. .

From : miles

markzoom wrote the us entered ww2 a few years late. if anyone deserves the most credit for defeating the nazis it would be the russians who did by far the most defeating and also paid by far the highest human price. cant argue with ya there. i was in russia back in 1979 and visited one of their war memorials as well as toured some of the historical war sites. i had not realized just how close to moscow the germans had come. .

From : jeff barnesmarkzoom

jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. the us entered ww2 a few years late. if anyone deserves the most credit for defeating the nazis it would be the russians who did by far the most defeating and also paid by far the highest human price. m.k. are you stupid no but you are obviously unable to face the reality that the russians made a far greater contribution to defeating the nazis than the precious usay. your argument is that they made the contribution because they were killed. quite a lot of them werent killed. my argument is that they defeated the most german troops and the best german troops. they also paid the biggest human price too. quite clearly they made the biggest contribution in both respects. you have absolutely no argument. without dispute the soviets took it up the ass in the getting killed department. biggest human price prove that bullshit. you just agreed it in the previous line. no i did not. biggest human price doesnt equate to lives lost. what do you suggest it relates to biggest contribution in both respects getting killed isnt a contribution at all. that rather depends on how they are killed. if someone dies defending his comrades or family would you say he didnt make a contribution in fact if anyone dies in combat you are saying its not a contribution. the act of dying isnt a contribution. defending against the nazis is. those are two separate acts. what do you think the russian troops were doing you havent made one fucking argument that the soviets actually killed the most german troops and the best german troops. its a widely known historical fact. go learn some history ignoramus. you can start here http//users.erols.com/mwhite28/ww2-loss.htm i will flatter you by assuming that you are able to use a search engine to find information. you made the assertion. you do the fucking work. sorry ignoramus youll have to cure your own lack of knowledge. you can do better than a cartoon i hope. that particular graphical map alone would give anyone with half a brain some inkling of where most of the casualties and fighting happened http//users.erols.com/mwhite28/ww2-loss.htm also make sure you make your argument that the soviets did this with their own military hardware too. ah yes the yanks supplied them some materiell. note they wanted to be paid for it. as it turns out the russians didnt pay much to the dismay of american profiteers. since the yanks wanted paying you can hardly call that an american contribution even less the biggest contribution in defeating the nazis. profiteers stuck in the 15th century huh usury is an evil thing too! the point is that you cannot regard a sale as a contribution. even the yank shipments to the bitish were lend/lease. and also take into account that the soviets were allied with the nazis which had the undoubtable effect of strengthening the national socialists. yes i know italy was allied with the national socialists too. you want to argue that they helped or hindered national socialism irrelevant. we are discussing who made the biggest contribution in defeating the nazis. and the soviets helped the nazis so it is quite irrelevant. the russians stalin wanted an alliance against hitler before that and chamberlain declined it. bushs grandaddy was a big chum of the nazis toobtw. while great britain and canada were fighting the nazis stalin and hitler were jerking each other off. did stalin stroking hitler help defeat the nazis the yanks were jerking themselves off until the war was 3/4 over. wrong. did every french whore who got her head shaved make their contribution by distracting the nazis from war too wtf have french tarts got to do with it beyond giving the yanks the clap they got from germans. paying a high price in terms of dying doesnt mean anything except your ineffectiveness in war. it still means they made the biggest contribution. russia fought and defeated the most and the best german troops. dying in a battlefield doesnt mean a fucking thing. make a different argument. i just did dipstick. they defeated most of the german army. that includes the best german troops too. hehehe. its pathetic to watch a yank have a tantrim for not being the biggest bestest and firstest. im not a yank you stupid fuck. why are you behaving like one then wankface behaving like on

From : jefferson n glapski

jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in message tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. the us entered ww2 a few years late. if anyone deserves the most credit for defeating the nazis it would be the russians who did by far the most defeating and also paid by far the highest human price. m.k. are you stupid no but you are obviously unable to face the reality that the russians made a far greater contribution to defeating the nazis than the precious usay. your argument is that they made the contribution because they were killed. quite a lot of them werent killed. my argument is that they defeated the most german troops and the best german troops. they also paid the biggest human price too. quite clearly they made the biggest contribution in both respects. you have absolutely no argument. without dispute the soviets took it up the ass in the getting killed department. biggest human price prove that bullshit. you just agreed it in the previous line. no i did not. biggest human price doesnt equate to lives lost. what do you suggest it relates to many things. replacing one way of life with another for instance. and in that specific instance the soviets had very little to lose unless you consider the slave state in which stalin killed tens of millions of people worth protecting. whether it would be better or worse than the nazi slave state is an open question. biggest contribution in both respects getting killed isnt a contribution at all. that rather depends on how they are killed. if someone dies defending his comrades or family would you say he didnt make a contribution in fact if anyone dies in combat you are saying its not a contribution. the act of dying isnt a contribution. defending against the nazis is. those are two separate acts. what do you think the russian troops were doing make your own argument. you simply mentioned they died. all we know about fatalaties is that they died. you havent made one fucking argument that the soviets actually killed the most german troops and the best german troops. its a widely known historical fact. go learn some history ignoramus. you can start here http//users.erols.com/mwhite28/ww2-loss.htm i will flatter you by assuming that you are able to use a search engine to find information. you made the assertion. you do the fucking work. sorry ignoramus youll have to cure your own lack of knowledge. you make the assertion you do the work to back up your argument. that is basic. or you could simply continue your tryst with logical fallacy after logical fallacy. you can do better than a cartoon i hope. that particular graphical map alone would give anyone with half a brain some inkling of where most of the casualties and fighting happened http//users.erols.com/mwhite28/ww2-loss.htm also make sure you make your argument that the soviets did this with their own military hardware too. ah yes the yanks supplied them some materiell. note they wanted to be paid for it. as it turns out the russians didnt pay much to the dismay of american profiteers. since the yanks wanted paying you can hardly call that an american contribution even less the biggest contribution in defeating the nazis. profiteers stuck in the 15th century huh usury is an evil thing too! the point is that you cannot regard a sale as a contribution. even the yank shipments to the bitish were lend/lease. you cant regard it as a sale if no payment took place. one of many soviet thefts. and also take into account that the soviets were allied with the nazis which had the undoubtable effect of strengthening the national socialists. yes i know italy was allied with the national socialists too. you want to argue that they helped or hindered national socialism irrelevant. we are discussing who made the biggest contribution in defeating the nazis. and the soviets helped the nazis so it is quite irrelevant. the russians stalin wanted an alliance against hitler before that and chamberlain declined it. bushs grandaddy was a big chum of the nazis toobtw. quick which country entered into a pact with the nazis the soviets. note that this pact held for 1/3 of the war. and please prove the assertion that bushs grandfather was a big chum of the nazis. while great britain and canada were fighting the nazis stalin and hitler were jerki

From : markzoom

markzoom wrote markzoom wrote cant argue with ya there. i was in russia back in 1979 and visited one of their war memorials as well as toured some of the historical war sites. i had not realized just how close to moscow the germans had come. phew at last someone who isnt ignorant. why doesnt anyone else know this m.k. i suspect just about everyone around here knows this. problem is it wasnt the russians that stopped the advance on moscow .......... it was mother nature herself. jerry suuure couldnt possibly have had anything to do at all with the millions of russian soldiers hey the usay won the war on the eastern front right. m.k. cry and bitch all you want. you mean you still suffer from the pathetic delusion that the us contributed more than anyone else to the defeat of adolf doesnt change any facts how about you actually go and learn some facts ignorant fuckwit. and certainly wont help you and your country become something you can only dream of wit

From : jerry

jerry you dont even know what my country is you poor deluded hick. you sound like one of the 80% of clueless yanks who have never even been abroad. m.k. . 222 285338 ketgc.7591$r36.5309@read2..pas.earthlink.net markzoom wrote you dont even know what my country is you poor deluded hick. you sound like one of the 80% of clueless yanks who have never even been abroad. doesnt matter little man .............. your constant crying and complaining tells the whole story that youre not american. i dont really gives a rats ass what shit hole you come from. when you grow up maybe we will let you come visit us some time. that is provided you learn to use a spoon cook your food before eating it and take a bath now and then. jerry .

From : jefferson n glapski

markzoom wrote the us entered ww2 a few years late. if anyone deserves the most credit for defeating the nazis it would be the russians who did by far the most defeating and also paid by far the highest human price. cant argue with ya there. i was in russia back in 1979 and visited one of their war memorials as well as toured some of the historical war sites. i had not realized just how close to moscow the germans had come. phew at last someone who isnt ignorant. why doesnt anyone else know this m.k. not too many people get their information from soviet museums. not too many people got their from tass or pravda either. and yes i did check out several soviet bloc museums in 1977 - 60th anniversary of the glorious october revolution comrade! -- jefferson but its hard as hell not to be some kind of redneck bigot sometimes... -trevor zion bauknight 95% of the 100 rudest people ive encountered in the last year have been middle-aged black women. it just strikes me as unfortunately disproportionate... -trevor zion bauknight as i predicted the general assembly will vote to take down the flag from the dome of the state house and the boycott organized by the naacp will continue because they wont be happy until the memory of the confederacy is erased from our cultural landscape. im holding out hope that removal of the flag and subsequent continuation of economic sanctions will reveal the naacp for what it is; but somehow i doubt it... -trevor zion bauknight all this over the supposed moral outrage over an institution slowly dying of its own weight anyway and countenanced in the north even after the so-called emancipation proclamation. -trevor zion bauknight i hope it isnt racist of me to point out that some white southerners even some slave owners treated blacks as fellow human beings. the evil of legal ownership was indeed still present and resulted in a feeling of superiority among whites but not all of them were cruel and harsh. many of them were simply doing what they learned was proper. remember that the south was and is an extremely religious section and the fact remains that slavery is sanctioned and its details legislated by the christian god according to the old testament. -trevor zion bauknight im not sure i see any factual errors there however. -trevor zion bauknight commenting on the following anti-semitic webpage http//www.muslimedia.com/archives/features98/slaves.htm .

From : markzoom

markzoom wrote cant argue with ya there. i was in russia back in 1979 and visited one of their war memorials as well as toured some of the historical war sites. i had not realized just how close to moscow the germans had come. phew at last someone who isnt ignorant. why doesnt anyone else know this m.k. i suspect just about everyone around here knows this. problem is it wasnt the russians that stopped the advance on moscow .......... it was mother nature herself. jerry suuure couldnt possibly have had anything to do at all with the millions of russian soldiers hey the usay won the war on the eastern front right. m.k. .

From : jerry

markzoom wrote markzoom wrote cant argue with ya there. i was in russia back in 1979 and visited one of their war memorials as well as toured some of the historical war sites. i had not realized just how close to moscow the germans had come. phew at last someone who isnt ignorant. why doesnt anyone else know this m.k. i suspect just about everyone around here knows this. problem is it wasnt the russians that stopped the advance on moscow .......... it was mother nature herself. jerry suuure couldnt possibly have had anything to do at all with the millions of russian soldiers hey the usay won the war on the eastern front right. m.k. cry and bitch all you want. doesnt change any facts and certainly wont help you and your country become something you can only dream of with envy. jerry .

From : jerry

milesh wrote jerry wrote i suspect just about everyone around here knows this. problem is it wasnt the russians that stopped the advance on moscow .......... it was mother nature herself. i believe thats only partly true. germany underestimated the winter effects russia did not. for awhile russia was bogged down by the winter as well. some armies had to switch to using horses. in nov. and dec. of 1941 russia trained 9 new armies for winter warfare. the winter didnt beat germany. germany beat itself by not preparing for it as well as russia did. well if you want to get down to the core the truth is the german generals were afraid to tell hitler the truth and as a result reinforcements and needed supplies were never sent to the german troops. that and the harsh winter along with the russians resistance is what done in the german army. you dont train a army in two months to beat a seasoned fighting force such as the germans had but you can throw or i should say sacrifice millions of young boys and old men while letting the bitter cold whittle down the enemy. that was stalins idea of a new army. jerry .

From : theguy

on wed 07 jul 2004 142026 gmt jerry jlrice1655@earthlink.net wrote markzoom wrote you dont even know what my country is you poor deluded hick. you sound like one of the 80% of clueless yanks who have never even been abroad. doesnt matter little man .............. your constant crying and complaining tells the whole story that youre not american. i dont really gives a rats ass what shit hole you come from. when you grow up maybe we will let you come visit us some time. that is provided you learn to use a spoon cook your food before eating it and take a bath now and then. jerry jerry; for a guy that likes to throw stones at others for arguing you are a study in hypocrisy. every argument that you are involved in which seems to be just about every thread you post to turns personal and ends in your ridiculous profanity laced tirades. worse yet you come across like a moron. i am pretty proud to be an american so why dont you leave the us v. the world arguments to someone with a brain. that way you wont embarrass the rest of us good americans. .

From : tbone

on wed 07 jul 2004 142026 gmt jerry jlrice1655@earthlink.net wrote markzoom wrote you dont even know what my country is you poor deluded hick. you sound like one of the 80% of clueless yanks who have never even been abroad. doesnt matter little man .............. your constant crying and complaining tells the whole story that youre not american. i dont really gives a rats ass what shit hole you come from. when you grow up maybe we will let you come visit us some time. that is provided you learn to use a spoon cook your food before eating it and take a bath now and then. jerry jerry; for a guy that likes to throw stones at others for arguing you are a study in hypocrisy. every argument that you are involved in which seems to be just about every thread you post to turns personal and ends in your ridiculous profanity laced tirades. worse yet you come across like a moron. i am pretty proud to be an american so why dont you leave the us v. the world arguments to someone with a brain. that way you wont embarrass the rest of us good americans. well said. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : markzoom

markzoom wrote you dont even know what my country is you poor deluded hick. you sound like one of the 80% of clueless yanks who have never even been abroad. doesnt matter little man hehehe sure doesnt fatso. .............. your constant crying and complaining tells the whole story that youre not american. you must be pretty dumb not to have worked that out from the start. heres something new for you the rest of the world gets internet too. i dont really gives a rats ass what shit hole you come from. hmm not surprisingly you know zilch about culture either. when you grow up maybe we will let you come visit us some time. you poor dumb colonial. what makes you think we want to visit your fake nouveau riche soon likely to become nouveau poor third world country that is provided you learn to use a spoon cook your food before eating it and take a bath now and then. jerry we europeans taught you how to do all of that shame you still know zilch about food thats why most of you over there are heaving blobs of stinking blubber. m.k. .

From : jerry

theguy wrote for a guy that likes to throw stones at others for arguing you are a study in hypocrisy. every argument that you are involved in which seems to be just about every thread you post to turns personal and ends in your ridiculous profanity laced tirades. worse yet you come across like a moron. i am pretty proud to be an american so why dont you leave the us v. the world arguments to someone with a brain. that way you wont embarrass the rest of us good americans. it wasnt a argument but a debate on russia until this american hating moron turned it into his simply minded shit. why am i not surprised you and tbone would come to his defense. now....where is the profanity oh you mean the word shit gee golly did i hurt your little ears. as for someone with a brain that absolutely leaves you and tbone out so who do you suggest. if either of you ever do post something informative or positive in this group maybe ill stop and listen but until that day happens you can stick it where the sun doesnt shine. btw this quote from above from you every argument that you are involved in which seems to be just about every thread you post to means if you want to study hypocracy then take a good look at yourself. jerry .

From : jerry

tbone wrote on wed 07 jul 2004 142026 gmt jerry jlrice1655@earthlink.net wrote markzoom wrote you dont even know what my country is you poor deluded hick. you sound like one of the 80% of clueless yanks who have never even been abroad. doesnt matter little man .............. your constant crying and complaining tells the whole story that youre not american. i dont really gives a rats ass what shit hole you come from. when you grow up maybe we will let you come visit us some time. that is provided you learn to use a spoon cook your food before eating it and take a bath now and then. jerry jerry; for a guy that likes to throw stones at others for arguing you are a study in hypocrisy. every argument that you are involved in which seems to be just about every thread you post to turns personal and ends in your ridiculous profanity laced tirades. worse yet you come across like a moron. i am pretty proud to be an american so why dont you leave the us v. the world arguments to someone with a brain. that way you wont embarrass the rest of us good americans. well said. of course you think so both of you are moronic echoes of each other.... as you should be because only the two of you will back the other. jerry .

From : theguy

on thu 08 jul 2004 025212 gmt jerry jlrice1655@earthlink.net wrote tbone wrote on wed 07 jul 2004 142026 gmt jerry jlrice1655@earthlink.net wrote markzoom wrote you dont even know what my country is you poor deluded hick. you sound like one of the 80% of clueless yanks who have never even been abroad. doesnt matter little man .............. your constant crying and complaining tells the whole story that youre not american. i dont really gives a rats ass what shit hole you come from. when you grow up maybe we will let you come visit us some time. that is provided you learn to use a spoon cook your food before eating it and take a bath now and then. jerry jerry; for a guy that likes to throw stones at others for arguing you are a study in hypocrisy. every argument that you are involved in which seems to be just about every thread you post to turns personal and ends in your ridiculous profanity laced tirades. worse yet you come across like a moron. i am pretty proud to be an american so why dont you leave the us v. the world arguments to someone with a brain. that way you wont embarrass the rest of us good americans. well said. of course you think so both of you are moronic echoes of each other.... as you should be because only the two of you will back the other. jerry lol. jerry you are a hoot. a pretty stupid one but none the less a hoot. .

From : theguy

on thu 08 jul 2004 024959 gmt jerry jlrice1655@earthlink.net wrote theguy wrote for a guy that likes to throw stones at others for arguing you are a study in hypocrisy. every argument that you are involved in which seems to be just about every thread you post to turns personal and ends in your ridiculous profanity laced tirades. worse yet you come across like a moron. i am pretty proud to be an american so why dont you leave the us v. the world arguments to someone with a brain. that way you wont embarrass the rest of us good americans. it wasnt a argument but a debate on russia until this american hating moron turned it into his simply minded shit. why am i not surprised you and tbone would come to his defense. now thats pretty paranoid jerry. maybe you need therapy. no let me take back the maybe. i never came to his defense. i dont even know what his argument is. i just dropped in because you are spazzing out so badly again. now....where is the profanity oh you mean the word shit gee golly did i hurt your little ears. as for someone with a brain that absolutely leaves you and tbone out so who do you suggest. waa-waaa spaz. hey how did tbone ever come into what i said fact is he never did you just have to spit back at anyone that you can. jerry you are just embarrassing period. if either of you ever do post something informative or positive in this group maybe ill stop and listen but until that day happens you can stick it where the sun doesnt shine. btw this quote from above from you every argument that you are involved in which seems to be just about every thread you post to means if you want to study hypocracy then take a good look at yourself. gee jerry that sounds good that is it would sound good if it had come from a 10 year old. then again maybe it did. jerry .

From : tbone

tbone wrote on wed 07 jul 2004 142026 gmt jerry jlrice1655@earthlink.net wrote markzoom wrote you dont even know what my country is you poor deluded hick. you sound like one of the 80% of clueless yanks who have never even been abroad. doesnt matter little man .............. your constant crying and complaining tells the whole story that youre not american. i dont really gives a rats ass what shit hole you come from. when you grow up maybe we will let you come visit us some time. that is provided you learn to use a spoon cook your food before eating it and take a bath now and then. jerry jerry; for a guy that likes to throw stones at others for arguing you are a study in hypocrisy. every argument that you are involved in which seems to be just about every thread you post to turns personal and ends in your ridiculous profanity laced tirades. worse yet you come across like a moron. i am pretty proud to be an american so why dont you leave the us v. the world arguments to someone with a brain. that way you wont embarrass the rest of us good americans. well said. of course you think so both of you are moronic echoes of each other.... as you should be because only the two of you will back the other. whats the matter jerry does it bother you that it is still one more than will back you. -- if at first you dont succeed youre not cut out for skydiving .

From : markzoom

theguy wrote for a guy that likes to throw stones at others for arguing you are a study in hypocrisy. every argument that you are involved in which seems to be just about every thread you post to turns personal and ends in your ridiculous profanity laced tirades. worse yet you come across like a moron. i am pretty proud to be an american so why dont you leave the us v. the world arguments to someone with a brain. that way you wont embarrass the rest of us good americans. it wasnt a argument but a debate on russia until this american hating moron turned it into his simply minded shit. eeer it was me who mentioned russia deserving the most credit for beating adolf in the first place. why am i not surprised you and tbone would come to his defense. now....where is the profanity oh you mean the word shit gee golly did i hurt your little ears. as for someone with a brain that absolutely leaves you and tbone out so who do you suggest. if either of you ever do post something informative or positive in this group maybe ill stop and listen but until that day happens you can stick it where the sun doesnt shine. btw this quote from above from you every argument that you are involved in which seems to be just about every thread you post to means if you want to study hypocracy then take a good look at yourself. jerry well id rather talk to a rare american with brains than an ignoramus like you. m.k. .

From : theguy

on 8 jul 2004 004000 -0700 markzoom@digiverse.net markzoom wrote theguy wrote for a guy that likes to throw stones at others for arguing you are a study in hypocrisy. every argument that you are involved in which seems to be just about every thread you post to turns personal and ends in your ridiculous profanity laced tirades. worse yet you come across like a moron. i am pretty proud to be an american so why dont you leave the us v. the world arguments to someone with a brain. that way you wont embarrass the rest of us good americans. it wasnt a argument but a debate on russia until this american hating moron turned it into his simply minded shit. eeer it was me who mentioned russia deserving the most credit for beating adolf in the first place. why am i not surprised you and tbone would come to his defense. now....where is the profanity oh you mean the word shit gee golly did i hurt your little ears. as for someone with a brain that absolutely leaves you and tbone out so who do you suggest. if either of you ever do post something informative or positive in this group maybe ill stop and listen but until that day happens you can stick it where the sun doesnt shine. btw this quote from above from you every argument that you are involved in which seems to be just about every thread you post to means if you want to study hypocracy then take a good look at yourself. jerry well id rather talk to a rare american with brains than an ignoramus like you. m.k. oh great. your just giving him a big atomic wedgy with that kind of talk and your just encouraging him to continue to cry his style of the blues. dont blame me when he responds to that. .

From : jerry

markzoom wrote eeer it was me who mentioned russia deserving the most credit for beating adolf in the first place. no shit stupid ............ who did you thing was being discussed.... jerry .

From : markzoom

jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in jefferson n. glapski jeffersonweare@pennstateglapski.com wrote in message tbone wrote the allies as you call them does not translate to americans alone and we were in it then because we were also attacked and were defending ourselves as well. what year did germany attack the usa and where was this attack i wasnt born at the time so i may not be as informed as some of the old geezers here. the us entered ww2 a few years late. if anyone deserves the most credit for defeating the nazis it would be the russians who did by far the most defeating and also paid by far the highest human price. m.k. are you stupid no but you are obviously unable to face the reality that the russians made a far greater contribution to defeating the nazis than the precious usay. your argument is that they made the contribution because they were killed. quite a lot of them werent killed. my argument is that they defeated the most german troops and the best german troops. they also paid the biggest human price too. quite clearly they made the biggest contribution in both respects. you have absolutely no argument. without dispute the soviets took it up the ass in the getting killed department. biggest human price prove that bullshit. you just agreed it in the previous line. no i did not. biggest human price doesnt equate to lives lost. what do you suggest it relates to many things. replacing one way of life with another for instance. and in that specific instance the soviets had very little to lose unless you consider the slave state in which stalin killed tens of millions of people worth protecting. whether it would be better or worse than the nazi slave state is an open question. in this instance it relates to people actually dying in battle. human price relates to human lives not monetary or material value. biggest contribution in both respects getting killed isnt a contribution at all. that rather depends on how they are killed. if someone dies defending his comrades or family would you say he didnt make a contribution in fact if anyone dies in combat you are saying its not a contribution. the act of dying isnt a contribution. defending against the nazis is. those are two separate acts. what do you think the russian troops were doing make your own argument. you simply mentioned they died. all we know about fatalaties is that they died. i dont need to make my own argument your logic is too pathetic. you havent made one fucking argument that the soviets actually killed the most german troops and the best german troops. its a widely known historical fact. go learn some history ignoramus. you can start here http//users.erols.com/mwhite28/ww2-loss.htm i will flatter you by assuming that you are able to use a search engine to find information. you made the assertion. you do the fucking work. sorry ignoramus youll have to cure your own lack of knowledge. you make the assertion you do the work to back up your argument. that is basic. or you could simply continue your tryst with logical fallacy after logical fallacy. below i give you thousands of links to cure your terminal ignorance. you can do better than a cartoon i hope. that particular graphical map alone would give anyone with half a brain some inkling of where most of the casualties and fighting happened http//users.erols.com/mwhite28/ww2-loss.htm also make sure you make your argument that the soviets did this with their own military hardware too. ah yes the yanks supplied them some materiell. note they wanted to be paid for it. as it turns out the russians didnt pay much to the dismay of american profiteers. since the yanks wanted paying you can hardly call that an american contribution even less the biggest contribution in defeating the nazis. profiteers stuck in the 15th century huh usury is an evil thing too! the point is that you cannot regard a sale as a contribution. even the yank shipments to the bitish were lend/lease. you cant regard it as a sale if no payment took place. one of many soviet thefts. irrelevant. you cant claim that the yank materiell was a contribution because they wanted payment. and also take into account that the soviets were allied with the nazis which had the undoubtable effect of strengthening the national socialists. yes i know italy was allied with the national socialists too. you want to argue that they helped or hindered national socialism irrelevant. we are discussing who made the biggest contribution in defeating the nazis. and the soviets helped the nazis so it is quite irrelevant. the russians stalin wanted an alliance against hitler before t

From : markzoom

on 8 jul 2004 004000 -0700 markzoom@digiverse.net markzoom wrote theguy wrote for a guy that likes to throw stones at others for arguing you are a study in hypocrisy. every argument that you are involved in which seems to be just about every thread you post to turns personal and ends in your ridiculous profanity laced tirades. worse yet you come across like a moron. i am pretty proud to be an american so why dont you leave the us v. the world arguments to someone with a brain. that way you wont embarrass the rest of us good americans. it wasnt a argument but a debate on russia until this american hating moron turned it into his simply minded shit. eeer it was me who mentioned russia deserving the most credit for beating adolf in the first place. why am i not surprised you and tbone would come to his defense. now....where is the profanity oh you mean the word shit gee golly did i hurt your little ears. as for someone with a brain that absolutely leaves you and tbone out so who do you suggest. if either of you ever do post something informative or positive in this group maybe ill stop and listen but until that day happens you can stick it where the sun doesnt shine. btw this quote from above from you every argument that you are involved in which seems to be just about every thread you post to means if you want to study hypocracy then take a good look at yourself. jerry well id rather talk to a rare american with brains than an ignoramus like you. m.k. oh great. your just giving him a big atomic wedgy with that kind of talk and your just encouraging him to continue to cry his style of the blues. dont blame me when he responds to that. its an utter waste of time talking to such rednecked hicks. one has to grunt in their language. oh and dodge trucks are fuel-guzzling crap. any halfwitted bunch of morons can knock together an overweight tank and call it reliable but it takes skill to make economic vehicles. skill that is sadly lacking in the usay. m.k. .

From : jerry

theguy wrote now thats pretty paranoid jerry. maybe you need therapy. no let me take back the maybe. i never came to his defense. i dont even know what his argument is. i just dropped in because you are spazzing out so badly again. in other words like the resident troll you were just doing your normal. for someone that never posts anything and i do mean anything unless he is sniffing reds ass to see what he had for breakfast or is nipping at roys heels you are a real hoot. waa-waaa spaz. hey how did tbone ever come into what i said fact is he never did you just have to spit back at anyone that you can. jerry you are just embarrassing period. then learn to read a thread if that is even possible. gee jerry that sounds good that is it would sound good if it had come from a 10 year old. then again maybe it did. oh come on now you can do better than that. gee im being lectured by dumb and dumber and you even picked up an american bashing asshole to keep you both company. now you can have a real circle jerk.... jerry .

From : theguy

on fri 09 jul 2004 003831 gmt jerry jlrice1655@earthlink.net wrote theguy wrote now thats pretty paranoid jerry. maybe you need therapy. no let me take back the maybe. i never came to his defense. i dont even know what his argument is. i just dropped in because you are spazzing out so badly again. in other words like the resident troll you were just doing your normal. for someone that never posts anything and i do mean anything unless he is sniffing reds ass to see what he had for breakfast or is nipping at roys heels you are a real hoot. i will take it as a compliment that you are now quoting what i have said many times before jerry. id rather you got your own material but if you are going to emulate anyone then i am probably your best choice. waa-waaa spaz. hey how did tbone ever come into what i said fact is he never did you just have to spit back at anyone that you can. jerry you are just embarrassing period. then learn to read a thread if that is even possible. gee jerry that sounds good that is it would sound good if it had come from a 10 year old. then again maybe it did. oh come on now you can do better than that. gee im being lectured by dumb and dumber and you even picked up an american bashing asshole to keep you both company. now you can have a real circle jerk.... jerry jerry. well........... you really need to take a step back and look at yourself. just saying thats all. .

From : jerry

markzoom wrote i started the debate about russia until you turned it into an argument simpleton. no miles and i stated facts easily backed up. you simply blurted bullshit then started crying because you couldnt back up what you said. havent you got homework to do or something instead of butting into adult conversations you need to seriously catch up on your history lessons. if thats the best your little moronic brain can come up with then it is understandable why you havent a clue what you are talking about. jerry .

From : theguy

on fri 09 jul 2004 233726 gmt jerry jlrice1655@earthlink.net wrote markzoom wrote i started the debate about russia until you turned it into an argument simpleton. no miles and i stated facts easily backed up. you simply blurted bullshit then started crying because you couldnt back up what you said. havent you got homework to do or something instead of butting into adult conversations you need to seriously catch up on your history lessons. if thats the best your little moronic brain can come up with then it is understandable why you havent a clue what you are talking about. jerry actually he has pretty soundly beaten you in every facet of this argument. not that i expect you to admit that. maybe you dont even understand that. that is possible considering your limited ability to comprehend situational conversations. .

From : markzoom

markzoom wrote eeer it was me who mentioned russia deserving the most credit for beating adolf in the first place. no shit stupid ............ who did you thing was being discussed.... jerry quote jerry the dimwit it wasnt a argument but a debate on russia until this american hating moron turned it into his simply minded shit. i started the debate about russia until you turned it into an argument simpleton. havent you got homework to do or something instead of butting into adult conversations you need to seriously catch up on your history lessons. m.k. .

From : jerry

theguy wrote actually he has pretty soundly beaten you in every facet of this argument. not that i expect you to admit that. maybe you dont even understand that. that is possible considering your limited ability to comprehend situational conversations. really ............. prove it with facts to back up his claim the russian army were the ones that deserve credit that they alone are responsible for beating the germans in wwii. come on little man that was his claim and now you say he is correct so prove it........ i thought so. dont you ever get tired of presenting yourself as a moronic little troll boy. jerry .

From : theguy

on sat 10 jul 2004 031241 gmt jerry jlrice1655@earthlink.net wrote theguy wrote actually he has pretty soundly beaten you in every facet of this argument. not that i expect you to admit that. maybe you dont even understand that. that is possible considering your limited ability to comprehend situational conversations. really ............. prove it with facts to back up his claim the russian army were the ones that deserve credit that they alone are responsible for beating the germans in wwii. come on little man that was his claim and now you say he is correct so prove it........ i thought so. dont you ever get tired of presenting yourself as a moronic little troll boy. jerry oh great. now you sound just like budd. i guess you are just gonna be littlebudd now. now littlebudd read what you just wrote above then try to tell me that you really think that you are even close to a healthy normal human being. .

From : markzoom

markzoom wrote i started the debate about russia until you turned it into an argument simpleton. no miles and i this was the beginning of the discussion about russia quote me the us entered ww2 a few years late. if anyone deserves the most credit for defeating the nazis it would be the russians who did by far the most defeating and also paid by far the highest human price. m.k. stated facts easily backed up. you backed up zilch. there are 3 facts up there 1usay entered ww2 in europe late 2russia defeated the most and best of the german army 3and russia paid by far the highest human price. which of those 3 facts do you dispute why and back up your dispute with proof fuckhead. you simply blurted bullshit then started crying because you couldnt back up what you said. havent you got homework to do or something instead of butting into adult conversations you need to seriously catch up on your history lessons. if thats the best your little moronic brain can come up with then it is understandable why you havent a clue what you are talking about. jerry lets see what you know then kid what was barbarossa m.k. .

From : jerry

theguy wrote really ............. prove it with facts to back up his claim the russian army were the ones that deserve credit that they alone are responsible for beating the germans in wwii. come on little man that was his claim and now you say he is correct so prove it........ i thought so. dont you ever get tired of presenting yourself as a moronic little troll boy. jerry oh great. now you sound just like budd. i guess you are just gonna be littlebudd now. now littlebudd read what you just wrote above then try to tell me that you really think that you are even close to a healthy normal human being. wow ......... your really on a roll little man. so what is the translation of your reply .... i cant backup his claim anymore than he can so ill just continue with my troll mode. does your big brother the resident troll know you are attempting to take his place around here. doesnt really matter because for one thing you are not very good at it and second you really are very boring with your moronic childish talk. i think old redneck had you pegged correctly from the start. youre just a simply simon idiot with no life of your own so go play with you new little friend the american bashing dodge hating asshole that thinks he is going to get me into a argument with him. i see him down th

From : theguy

on 10 jul 2004 003343 -0700 markzoom@digiverse.net markzoom wrote markzoom wrote i started the debate about russia until you turned it into an argument simpleton. no miles and i this was the beginning of the discussion about russia quote me the us entered ww2 a few years late. if anyone deserves the most credit for defeating the nazis it would be the russians who did by far the most defeating and also paid by far the highest human price. m.k. stated facts easily backed up. you backed up zilch. there are 3 facts up there 1usay entered ww2 in europe late 2russia defeated the most and best of the german army 3and russia paid by far the highest human price. which of those 3 facts do you dispute why and back up your dispute with proof fuckhead. you simply blurted bullshit then started crying because you couldnt back up what you said. havent you got homework to do or something instead of butting into adult conversations you need to seriously catch up on your history lessons. if thats the best your little moronic brain can come up with then it is understandable why you havent a clue what you are talking about. jerry you have to understand. jerry operates on less than a full battery. this is sort of like the special olympics for jerry. you know sort of like mainstreaming. here he gets to talk with normal functioning adults. it is part of his therapy. the anger that he spews is regression. it is like a barometer for his doctors. it tells them whether or not his medicine is working. lately i would have to tell his doctors that his medicine has not been working so much. .

From : markzoom

on sat 10 jul 2004 031241 gmt jerry jlrice1655@earthlink.net wrote theguy wrote actually he has pretty soundly beaten you in every facet of this argument. not that i expect you to admit that. maybe you dont even understand that. that is possible considering your limited ability to comprehend situational conversations. really ............. prove it with facts to back up his claim the russian army were the ones that deserve credit that they alone are responsible for beating the germans in wwii. come on little man that was his claim and now you say he is correct so prove it........ i thought so. dont you ever get tired of presenting yourself as a moronic little troll boy. jerry oh great. now you sound just like budd. i guess you are just gonna be littlebudd now. now littlebudd read what you just wrote above then try to tell me that you really think that you are even close to a healthy normal human being. jerry the idiot cant even read. i never said the russians alone were responsible for defeating adolf. i said if any one country deserves the biggest credit for defeating adolf its russia. im getting bored with the simpleton you folks tie him up in knots. .

From : theguy

on sat 10 jul 2004 152256 gmt jerry jlrice1655@earthlink.net wrote theguy wrote really ............. prove it with facts to back up his claim the russian army were the ones that deserve credit that they alone are responsible for beating the germans in wwii. come on little man that was his claim and now you say he is correct so prove it........ i thought so. dont you ever get tired of presenting yourself as a moronic little troll boy. jerry oh great. now you sound just like budd. i guess you are just gonna be littlebudd now. now littlebudd read what you just wrote above then try to tell me that you really think that you are even close to a healthy normal human being. wow ......... your really on a roll little man. so littlebudd what is the fascination that you have with little man you call every one little man. do you have have a big guy complex or do you have a little man complex so bad that you just like to pretend that you are a big person huh littlebudd so what is the translation of your reply .... i cant backup his claim anymore than he can so ill just continue with my troll mode. now listen littlebudd. for the second time. i have no claims to back up here. i am not involved in this argument i am only here to make fun of your stupidity which you seem so proud to parade around in front of everyone here. can you follow that littlebudd can you get it this time littlebudd try man. try it right after your meds kick in and maybe you can get it. does your big brother the resident troll know you are attempting to take his place around here. well littlebudd you are on a magic journey once again. i dont have a big brother. i am not trying to take anyones place around here. i have my own place but then you know that. doesnt really matter because for one thing you are not very good at it and second you really are very boring with your moronic childish talk. right littlebudd. keep drinking and maybe it will be so. what i have done is pretty much shown you for the idiot that you are. i dont a lot of pride in that though littlebudd you make it so easy. i think old redneck had you pegged correctly from the start. excellent now i have you quoting redneck the littlepussy from pee-u-whallop. very good. so littlepussy is the one that you chose to rely upon for your credibility. excellent. i mean just excellent. two peas in a pod. together you two belong. yep. youre just a simply simon idiot with no life of your own oh no littlebudd. i have a life of my own. i have several. one of them is to mess with you too. its fun my friend. o go play with you new little friend the american bashing dodge hating asshole that thinks he is going to get me into a argument with him. i see him down there sniffing brown holes so maybe the two of you can get together and discuss tactics. youre really one sad little man john boy. oh btw as much as i disagreed and fought with budd he has more characterer have in your life time. yes i am sure littlebudd. lol. you are just one fucking mess man. but that makes you just so much more fun to mess with. jerry .

From : markzoom

on 10 jul 2004 003343 -0700 markzoom@digiverse.net markzoom wrote markzoom wrote i started the debate about russia until you turned it into an argument simpleton. no miles and i this was the beginning of the discussion about russia quote me the us entered ww2 a few years late. if anyone deserves the most credit for defeating the nazis it would be the russians who did by far the most defeating and also paid by far the highest human price. m.k. stated facts easily backed up. you backed up zilch. there are 3 facts up there 1usay entered ww2 in europe late 2russia defeated the most and best of the german army 3and russia paid by far the highest human price. which of those 3 facts do you dispute why and back up your dispute with proof fuckhead. you simply blurted bullshit then started crying because you couldnt back up what you said. havent you got homework to do or something instead of butting into adult conversations you need to seriously catch up on your history lessons. if thats the best your little moronic brain can come up with then it is understandable why you havent a clue what you are talking about. jerry you have to understand. jerry operates on less than a full battery. this is sort of like the special olympics for jerry. you know sort of like mainstreaming. here he gets to talk with normal functioning adults. it is part of his therapy. the anger that he spews is regression. it is like a barometer for his doctors. it tells them whether or not his medicine is working. lately i would have to tell his doctors that his medicine has not been working so much. ah ok. has he considered a career in the modern us army he sounds like cannon fodder material. m.k. .

From : jerry

theguy wrote so littlebudd what is the fascination that you have with little man you call every one little man. not at all ................. just little men like yourself. then again everyone thinks youre a little man. jerry .

From : markzoom

theguy wrote so littlebudd what is the fascination that you have with little man you call every one little man. not at all ................. just little men like yourself. then again everyone thinks youre a little man. jerry so youve asked everyone fatso m.k. .

From : theguy

on mon 12 jul 2004 023417 gmt jerry jlrice1655@earthlink.net wrote theguy wrote so littlebudd what is the fascination that you have with little man you call every one little man. not at all ................. just little men like yourself. then again everyone thinks youre a little man. jerry i dont know anyone that thinks that littlebudd. not even you. you copy most of the things that i have written here. i think you actually idolize me littlebudd. you just get your feelings hurt when i spurn your effections. sorry littlebudd. if you werent such a goofball i would be able to give you more attention. .

From : jerry

theguy wrote i dont know anyone that thinks that littlebudd. not even you. you copy most of the things that i have written here. i think you actually idolize me littlebudd. you just get your feelings hurt when i spurn your effections. sorry littlebudd. if you werent such a goofball i would be able to give you more attention. sure doesnt take much of a yank to get you to bite. cant you come up with something original or at least something to get you out of the pre-school section. maybe your new american bashing friend could help you ........ i see the trolling idiot sniffing and sniffing and no one will talk to him. come on now help out your little friend. btw yes i do think your a little man as does most everyone in this group. except for one no now make that two people. jerry .

From : theguy

on mon 12 jul 2004 205332 gmt jerry jlrice1655@earthlink.net wrote theguy wrote i dont know anyone that thinks that littlebudd. not even you. you copy most of the things that i have written here. i think you actually idolize me littlebudd. you just get your feelings hurt when i spurn your effections. sorry littlebudd. if you werent such a goofball i would be able to give you more attention. sure doesnt take much of a yank to get you to bite. cant you come up with something original or at least something to get you out of the pre-school section. maybe your new american bashing friend could help you ........ i see the trolling idiot sniffing and sniffing and no one will talk to him. come on now help out your little friend. btw yes i do think your a little man as does most everyone in this group. except for one no now make that two people. jerry im crushed littlebudd. but ill probably get over it. ok im over it. hey im curious you are a truck driver right .

From : yonzie

theguy theguy@myplace.com wrote on mon 12 jul 2004 205332 gmt jerry jlrice1655@earthlink.net wrote theguy wrote i dont know anyone that thinks that littlebudd. not even you. you copy most of the things that i have written here. i think you actually idolize me littlebudd. you just get your feelings hurt when i spurn your effections. sorry littlebudd. if you werent such a goofball i would be able to give you more attention. sure doesnt take much of a yank to get you to bite. cant you come up with something original or at least something to get you out of the pre-school section. maybe your new american bashing friend could help you ........ i see the trolling idiot sniffing and sniffing and no one will talk to him. come on now help out your little friend. btw yes i do think your a little man as does most everyone in this group. except for one no now make that two people. jerry im crushed littlebudd. but ill probably get over it. ok im over it. hey im curious you are a truck driver right jerry sure knows what the hell you are .

From : theguy

on mon 12 jul 2004 230915 -0600 yonzie yonzie@mac.com wrote theguy theguy@myplace.com wrote on mon 12 jul 2004 205332 gmt jerry jlrice1655@earthlink.net wrote theguy wrote i dont know anyone that thinks that littlebudd. not even you. you copy most of the things that i have written here. i think you actually idolize me littlebudd. you just get your feelings hurt when i spurn your effections. sorry littlebudd. if you werent such a goofball i would be able to give you more attention. sure doesnt take much of a yank to get you to bite. cant you come up with something original or at least something to get you out of the pre-school section. maybe your new american bashing friend could help you ........ i see the trolling idiot sniffing and sniffing and no one will talk to him. come on now help out your little friend. btw yes i do think your a little man as does most everyone in this group. except for one no now make that two people. jerry im crushed littlebudd. but ill probably get over it. ok im over it. hey im curious you are a truck driver right jerry sure knows what the hell you are yeah. littlebudd is certainly a very astute little individual yonzie. very deserving of your worship. hey btw wipe your mouth some of that chew is dripping on your chin again. .

From : jerry

theguy wrote hey im curious you are a truck driver right no im not a truck driver but what a odd if not a dumb question. some of the most honest and hardest working people ive known were truck drivers. you have a problem with people that drive trucks for a living little man. jerry .

From : theguy

on wed 14 jul 2004 033603 gmt jerry jlrice1655@earthlink.net wrote theguy wrote hey im curious you are a truck driver right no im not a truck driver but what a odd if not a dumb question. some of the most honest and hardest working people ive known were truck drivers. you have a problem with people that drive trucks for a living little man. jerry you just come across like one littlebudd. what do you do then come on i am just curious. i mean for a living littlebudd. i realize that for fun you like to pretend that you are normal. .

From : theguy

on 14 jul 2004 131859 edt milesh milesh@nounwantedspam.com wrote theguy wrote you like to pretend that you are normal. why be normal i assume that would be rhetorical brings up an interesting subject miles. certainly my time here on this ng while being quite successful has been anything but normal. i suppose normal is situationally dependant huh normal on the one hand can be boring and droll. on the other it can be safe and cautious. sometimes such as in medical tests normal can be a very good thing. a normal temperature is a good deal. but normalcy in terms of human conduct an be pretty darn boring and stupid. now in the context that i offered the term nuff said. .

From : milesh

theguy wrote you like to pretend that you are normal. why be normal .

From : jerry

theguy wrote on wed 14 jul 2004 033603 gmt jerry jlrice1655@earthlink.net wrote theguy wrote hey im curious you are a truck driver right no im not a truck driver but what a odd if not a dumb question. some of the most honest and hardest working people ive known were truck drivers. you have a problem with people that drive trucks for a living little man. jerry you just come across like one littlebudd. what do you do then come on i am just curious. i mean for a living littlebudd. i realize that for fun you like to pretend that you are normal. so now youre looking down your nose at truck drivers. every time you open your mouth you look the fool you really are and then you think you can talk about what is normal. -not- i think maybe i should just take a clue from everyone else around here and simply ignore you stupid ass. if you ever figure out how to say something more intelligent than a pre-school drop out maybe ill engage you again if i can stand to be as bored again as this has been. back to your sand box little man. jerry .

From : theguy

on wed 14 jul 2004 212040 gmt jerry jlrice1655@earthlink.net wrote theguy wrote on wed 14 jul 2004 033603 gmt jerry jlrice1655@earthlink.net wrote theguy wrote hey im curious you are a truck driver right no im not a truck driver but what a odd if not a dumb question. some of the most honest and hardest working people ive known were truck drivers. you have a problem with people that drive trucks for a living little man. jerry you just come across like one littlebudd. what do you do then come on i am just curious. i mean for a living littlebudd. i realize that for fun you like to pretend that you are normal. so now youre looking down your nose at truck drivers. every time you open your mouth you look the fool you really are and then you think you can talk about what is normal. -not- i think maybe i should just take a clue from everyone else around here and simply ignore you stupid ass. if you ever figure out how to say something more intelligent than a pre-school drop out maybe ill engage you again if i can stand to be as bored again as this has been. back to your sand box little man. jerry whooee. now that really got your panties in a bunch littlebudd. sorry. well maybe not really sorry. anyway heres looking our next engagement man. lol. .

From : redneck tookover hell

you have a problem with people that drive trucks for a living little man. the little guy just has problems with people who work for a living period jerry hes got short mans complex along with anal blindness another words he cant see his ass going to work politics the gentle art of getting votes from the poor and campaign funds from the rich. .

From : theguy

on 15 jul 2004 052135 gmt mopar440@aol.comnet.org redneck tookover hell wrote you have a problem with people that drive trucks for a living little man. the little guy just has problems with people who work for a living period jerry hes got short mans complex along with anal blindness another words he cant see his ass going to work nah my ass goes to work well over 40 hours each week littlepussy. unlike you idiots though it takes the rest of me with it though. do they have real jobs up there in pooh-whallop btw welcome to my thread. we havent talked for far too long. you must have missed me huh politics the gentle art of getting votes from the poor and campaign funds from the rich. .

From : yonzie

theguy theguy@myplace.com wrote on 15 jul 2004 052135 gmt mopar440@aol.comnet.org redneck tookover hell wrote you have a problem with people that drive trucks for a living little man. the little guy just has problems with people who work for a living period jerry hes got short mans complex along with anal blindness another words he cant see his ass going to work nah my ass goes to work well over 40 hours each week littlepussy. unlike you idiots though it takes the rest of me with it though. do they have real jobs up there in pooh-whallop btw welcome to my thread. we havent talked for far too long. you must have missed me huh miss you as much as having to pick dog shit off the lawn politics the gentle art of getting votes from the poor and campaign funds from the rich. .

From : redneck tookover hell

you must have missed me huh miss you as much as having to pick dog shit off the lawn got the rest of your teeth pulled yet so you can give us normal sized guys blow jobs little guy boner said that the top of your head was flat so he could set his beer there while you blew him but you kept biting politics the gentle art of getting votes from the poor and campaign funds from the rich. .

From : theguy

on 16 jul 2004 072055 gmt mopar440@aol.comnet.org redneck tookover hell wrote you must have missed me huh miss you as much as having to pick dog shit off the lawn got the rest of your teeth pulled yet so you can give us normal sized guys blow jobs little guy boner said that the top of your head was flat so he could set his beer there while you blew him but you kept biting you know littlepussy you are such a klutz. i have to spend my time here making fools out of several people on this ng. you on the other hand do me such a favor by making a bigger fool out of yourself than i could ever do. thank you. btw your little acronym that you seem to be so proud of redneck tookover hell what kind of fantasy is that you couldnt master safety match without burning your ass. i mena im just asking. what kind of a fucking fantasy world do you live in you gotta be a comic book fan right politics the gentle art of getting votes from the poor and campaign funds from the rich. .