Way off topic, but it has do to with the French [Archive]

WingFlaps

February 26th 08, 12:35 AM

On Feb 26, 8:41*am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> Tina > wrote in news:80235b82-304b-468a-9d04-
> :
>
> > The French government announced yesterday that it has raised its
> > terror alert level from "Run" to "Hide." The only two higher levels in
> > France are "Surrender" and "Collaborate." The rise was precipitated by
> > a recent fire that destroyed France's white flag factory, effectively
> > paralysing the country's military capability.
>
> Bull****. They did make an attempt and they did ask for help, which was not
> forthcoming, from the Brits, who made a halfhearted effort, and from the
> US, who sold them some equipment. Not to say there weren't some who
> welcomed the Germans....
>
> And it turns out they were right about Iraq... Of course, my magic eight
> ball had a better chance of getting it right that that twit in the white
> house..
>

Not only that, they're keeping MX with no cost to the US. Give them
some thanks!

Cheers

Bob Fry

February 26th 08, 12:55 AM

Meanwhile the Bush Administration raised its threat level from
Bomb-Into-Democracy to Nukem-and-let-God-sortem-out...and that's just
the Democrat Party. Furriners are ignored as useless, unless they
wear a turban, in which case the threat level is borrowed from the
English and French: 100-year-war.
--
Generosity is not giving me that which I need more than you do, but it
is giving me that which you need more than I do.
~ Kahlil Gibran

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

February 26th 08, 02:42 AM

WingFlaps > wrote in
:

> On Feb 26, 8:41*am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> Tina > wrote in news:80235b82-304b-468a-9d04-
>> :
>>
>> > The French government announced yesterday that it has raised its
>> > terror alert level from "Run" to "Hide." The only two higher levels
>> > in France are "Surrender" and "Collaborate." The rise was
>> > precipitated by a recent fire that destroyed France's white flag
>> > factory, effectively paralysing the country's military capability.
>>
>> Bull****. They did make an attempt and they did ask for help, which
>> was no
> t
>> forthcoming, from the Brits, who made a halfhearted effort, and from
>> the US, who sold them some equipment. Not to say there weren't some
>> who welcomed the Germans....
>>
>> And it turns out they were right about Iraq... Of course, my magic
>> eight ball had a better chance of getting it right that that twit in
>> the white house..
>>
>
> Not only that, they're keeping MX with no cost to the US. Give them
> some thanks!

Exaclty!

I'm there all the time and while they can be a bit standoffish, I've never
found them to live up to any of the poplular stereotypes around them.

Except, of course, their food is nearly as good as the italian's.

Bertie

Jay Honeck[_2_]

February 26th 08, 12:43 PM

> Meanwhile the Bush Administration raised its threat level from
> Bomb-Into-Democracy to Nukem-and-let-God-sortem-out...and that's just
> the Democrat Party. Furriners are ignored as useless, unless they
> wear a turban, in which case the threat level is borrowed from the
> English and French: 100-year-war.

It must be awful for you to watch Iraq succeeding, no? Sorta like a
slow-motion train...construction project...

:-)

Seriously, if something bad doesn't happen in Iraq (or somewhere), and soon,
Hillary doesn't stand a chance against Obama. With her perceived
superiority in foreign policy issues as the main defining difference between
them, (well, other than age, gender, experience, attitude, etc. -- but those
don't seem to matter), the lack of any foreign crises is truly hurting her
campaign.

I'll say this about the Democratic campaigns -- it's been a lot more fun to
watch than the Republicans. Heck, even French politics have been more fun
than watching Huckabee and whatsisname trying to beat McCain.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Robert M. Gary

February 26th 08, 05:27 PM

On Feb 26, 4:43*am, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:

> Seriously, if something bad doesn't happen in Iraq (or somewhere), and soon,
> Hillary doesn't stand a chance against Obama. * With her perceived
> superiority in foreign policy issues as the main defining difference between
> them, (well, other than age, gender, experience, attitude, etc. -- but those
> don't seem to matter), the lack of any foreign crises is truly hurting her
> campaign.

What is Hillary's experience with foreign crises? Monica? Seriously,
I'm honestly curious why the Hillary camp talks up her "experience".
What experiece do they refer to? She's a junior Senator (just like
Obama). The only difference between the two is that before being a US
Senator Obama was a state Senator and Hillary was First Lady. Is she
saying First Lady is better presidential experience than state
Senator? In a poker game is First Lady a better hand than state
Senator (not that I'm saying either one really has any true national
leadershiip experience)?

-robert

Martin Hotze[_2_]

February 26th 08, 05:29 PM

Tina schrieb:

> CLEAR!

Yeah, clear: You're an idiot!

#m
--
"I have to say the biggest threat comes from overseas, and one
of the places we are increasingly worried about is Europe."
Michael Chertoff (Homeland Security Secretary)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7190788.stm

gatt[_2_]

February 26th 08, 05:50 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:EPTwj.50800$yE1.50603@attbi_s21...

> I'll say this about the Democratic campaigns -- it's been a lot more fun
> to watch than the Republicans. Heck, even French politics have been more
> fun than watching Huckabee and whatsisname trying to beat McCain.

I'm not a Huckabee fan (which isn't to say I dislike him) but his appearance
on SNL Saturday Night had me laughing out loud:
PERFECT comedic timing: http://youtube.com/watch?v=xvSXpM5qGmg

-c

Mike Noel

February 26th 08, 05:57 PM

I guess Jay's idea of success is killing 10's of thousands of innocent
people including thousands of our troops, increasing the national debt by
over a trillion dollars, making the US look like a bully to the rest of the
world, and running our economy and military into the ground as an
inheritance for our children. And all of this in the name of removing a
cruel secular dictator who hated Bin Laden and replacing him with an Islamic
government that will ally itself with Iran. Wow, what a success!

--
Best Regards,
Mike

http://photoshow.comcast.net/mikenoel

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:EPTwj.50800$yE1.50603@attbi_s21...
>> Meanwhile the Bush Administration raised its threat level from
>> Bomb-Into-Democracy to Nukem-and-let-God-sortem-out...and that's just
>> the Democrat Party. Furriners are ignored as useless, unless they
>> wear a turban, in which case the threat level is borrowed from the
>> English and French: 100-year-war.
>
> It must be awful for you to watch Iraq succeeding, no? Sorta like a
> slow-motion train...construction project...
>
> :-)
>
> Seriously, if something bad doesn't happen in Iraq (or somewhere), and
> soon, Hillary doesn't stand a chance against Obama. With her perceived
> superiority in foreign policy issues as the main defining difference
> between them, (well, other than age, gender, experience, attitude, etc. --
> but those don't seem to matter), the lack of any foreign crises is truly
> hurting her campaign.
>
> I'll say this about the Democratic campaigns -- it's been a lot more fun
> to watch than the Republicans. Heck, even French politics have been more
> fun than watching Huckabee and whatsisname trying to beat McCain.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

[email protected]

February 26th 08, 07:22 PM

> It must be awful for you to watch Iraq succeeding, no? *Sorta like a
> slow-motion train...construction project...

Jay,

Just curious... What is your definition of "Iraq succeeding"? I must
admit, I've been watching... and I haven't been seeing anything I
would define as "success" -- Certainly not when the total costs of war
(in $$$ and lives and the global perception of our country) are
factored in...

-Cosmo

WingFlaps

February 26th 08, 07:33 PM

On Feb 27, 6:57*am, "Mike Noel" > wrote:
> I guess Jay's idea of success is killing 10's of thousands of innocent
> people including thousands of our troops, increasing the national debt by
> over a trillion dollars, making the US look like a bully to the rest of the
> world, and running our economy and military into the ground as an
> inheritance for our children. *And all of this in the name of removing a
> cruel secular dictator who hated Bin Laden and replacing him with an Islamic
> government that will ally itself with Iran. *Wow, what a success!
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Mike
>
> http://photoshow.comcast.net/mikenoel
>
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
>
> news:EPTwj.50800$yE1.50603@attbi_s21...
>
> >> Meanwhile the Bush Administration raised its threat level from
> >> Bomb-Into-Democracy to Nukem-and-let-God-sortem-out...and that's just
> >> the Democrat Party. *Furriners are ignored as useless, unless they
> >> wear a turban, in which case the threat level is borrowed from the
> >> English and French: 100-year-war.
>
> > It must be awful for you to watch Iraq succeeding, no? *Sorta like a
> > slow-motion train...construction project...
>
> > :-)
>
> > Seriously, if something bad doesn't happen in Iraq (or somewhere), and
> > soon, Hillary doesn't stand a chance against Obama. * With her perceived
> > superiority in foreign policy issues as the main defining difference
> > between them, (well, other than age, gender, experience, attitude, etc. -- *
> > but those don't seem to matter), the lack of any foreign crises is truly
> > hurting her campaign.
>
> > I'll say this about the Democratic campaigns -- it's been a lot more fun
> > to watch than the Republicans. *Heck, even French politics have been more
> > fun than watching Huckabee and whatsisname trying to beat McCain.
> > --

A dis

gatt[_2_]

February 26th 08, 07:37 PM

"Mike Noel" > wrote in message
. ..

>I guess Jay's idea of success is killing 10's of thousands of innocent
>people including thousands of our troops, increasing the national debt by
>over a trillion dollars, making the US look like a bully to the rest of the
>world, and running our economy and military into the ground as an
>inheritance for our children.

Increasingly hard to argue against those points except on one: Hussein was
a bully, and with regard to Afghanistan, most Americans don't view
themselves as "bullying" Al Qaeda anymore than they viewed themselves as
fighting WWII "bullying" after Pearl Harbor. They attacked us.

I will never regret my tax dollars being spent fighting AQ and the Taliban
anywhere in the world. I do, however, hold the war policy makers
accountable for NOT FINISHING THE FREAKIN' JOB before starting another one.
That's all.

-c

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

February 26th 08, 08:35 PM

"Mike Noel" > wrote in
:

> I guess Jay's idea of success is killing 10's of thousands of innocent
> people including thousands of our troops, increasing the national debt
> by over a trillion dollars, making the US look like a bully to the
> rest of the world, and running our economy and military into the
> ground as an inheritance for our children.

I thought that wa a given...

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

February 26th 08, 08:37 PM

"gatt" > wrote in
:

>
> "Mike Noel" > wrote in message
> . ..
>
>>I guess Jay's idea of success is killing 10's of thousands of innocent
>>people including thousands of our troops, increasing the national debt
>>by over a trillion dollars, making the US look like a bully to the
>>rest of the world, and running our economy and military into the
>>ground as an inheritance for our children.
>
> Increasingly hard to argue against those points except on one:
> Hussein was a bully, and with regard to Afghanistan, most Americans
> don't view themselves as "bullying" Al Qaeda anymore than they viewed
> themselves as fighting WWII "bullying" after Pearl Harbor. They
> attacked us.
>
> I will never regret my tax dollars being spent fighting AQ and the
> Taliban anywhere in the world. I do, however, hold the war policy
> makers accountable for NOT FINISHING THE FREAKIN' JOB before starting
> another one. That's all.

Well put.

bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

February 26th 08, 08:38 PM

wrote in news:76ae9787-dfe2-4e56-82bb-
:

>> It must be awful for you to watch Iraq succeeding, no? *Sorta like a
>> slow-motion train...construction project...
>
>
> Jay,
>
> Just curious... What is your definition of "Iraq succeeding"? I must
> admit, I've been watching... and I haven't been seeing anything I
> would define as "success" -- Certainly not when the total costs of war
> (in $$$ and lives and the global perception of our country) are
> factored in...
>

You do realise you're talking to someone that thinks aviation is like
Presbyterianism, right?

Bertie

Kloudy via AviationKB.com

February 26th 08, 09:28 PM

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

>
>I'm there all the time and while they can be a bit standoffish, I've never
>found them to live up to any of the poplular stereotypes around them.
>
Ditto!

The stand-offish folks I've met were primarily Parisians. Prolly ****ed that
I was wreckin' their language (Hey, at least I was making an attempt). The
folks down south like in Aix, Vence, Arles etc. were really jolly and a load
of fun to be around.
The most obnoxious people I have ever experienced in France (and Italy too i
guess) were Aussies, English and Americans. Total embarrassments.

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/aviation/200802/1

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

February 26th 08, 09:51 PM

"Kloudy via AviationKB.com" <u33403@uwe> wrote in
news:80538aaa1ce7e@uwe:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>
>>
>>I'm there all the time and while they can be a bit standoffish, I've
>>never found them to live up to any of the poplular stereotypes around
>>them.
>>
> Ditto!
>
> The stand-offish folks I've met were primarily Parisians. Prolly
> ****ed that I was wreckin' their language (Hey, at least I was making
> an attempt). The folks down south like in Aix, Vence, Arles etc. were
> really jolly and a load of fun to be around.
> The most obnoxious people I have ever experienced in France (and Italy
> too i guess) were Aussies, English and Americans. Total
> embarrassments.
>

'xactly. you meet dickheads from every country no matter where you go, and
I have no problem mocking nationalities, but the stuff people say about the
french simply isnt true and is largely politically inspired.

"The don't wanna fight, they must be sissies"

Bertie

Jim Stewart

February 26th 08, 10:35 PM

Airbus wrote:
> In article
> >,
> says...
>>
>> The French government announced yesterday that it has raised its
>> terror alert level from "Run" to "Hide." The only two higher levels in
>> France are "Surrender" and "Collaborate." The rise was precipitated by
>> a recent fire that destroyed France's white flag factory, effectively
>> paralysing the country's military capability.
>>
>>
>> This was taken from a much longer note that mentioned the Brit level
>> had gone from Annoyed to Peeved.
>>
>
>
> You laugh, bnut the French have one of the world's most sophisticated
> military industrial complexes. The US is proude of their Stealth Bomber,
> but the French have an entire Stealth Army!! No matter what is happening
> on the world scene they are completely invisible!!

Besides, if it weren't for the French we wouldn't
have cute words like fuselage, aileron, pitot, nacelle
or *cough* monocoque.

gatt[_2_]

February 26th 08, 11:41 PM

"Airbus" > wrote in message
...

>>This was taken from a much longer note that mentioned the Brit level
>>had gone from Annoyed to Peeved.
>>

> You laugh, bnut the French have one of the world's most sophisticated
> military industrial complexes. The US is proude of their Stealth Bomber,
> but the French have an entire Stealth Army!! No matter what is happening
> on the world scene they are completely invisible!!

LOL! Reminds me of the infamous Modesto Ninja Parade:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49fVYmO3yv0

"This is our forth straight year. We've never seen a ninja."
"A record crowd of 3,000 came out to not see the ninjas."

Airbus[_4_]

February 27th 08, 06:12 AM

In article
>,
says...
>
>
>The French government announced yesterday that it has raised its
>terror alert level from "Run" to "Hide." The only two higher levels in
>France are "Surrender" and "Collaborate." The rise was precipitated by
>a recent fire that destroyed France's white flag factory, effectively
>paralysing the country's military capability.
>
>
>This was taken from a much longer note that mentioned the Brit level
>had gone from Annoyed to Peeved.
>

You laugh, bnut the French have one of the world's most sophisticated
military industrial complexes. The US is proude of their Stealth Bomber,
but the French have an entire Stealth Army!! No matter what is happening
on the world scene they are completely invisible!!

[email protected]

February 27th 08, 07:08 AM

On Feb 26, 10:28*pm, "Kloudy via AviationKB.com" <u33403@uwe> wrote:
> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>
> >I'm there all the time and while they can be a bit standoffish, I've never
> >found them to live up to any of the poplular stereotypes around them.
>
> Ditto!
>
> The stand-offish folks I've met were primarily Parisians. Prolly ****ed that
> I was wreckin' their language (Hey, at least I was making an attempt). The
> folks down south like in Aix, Vence, Arles etc. were really jolly and a load
> of fun to be around.

You have to know that France consists of two distinct parts: France
and NonFrance.
NonFrance is mainly Paris and the Cote de Azur area. The NonFrench are
mostly obnoxious b*st*** who are only after your money. The good thing
about them is that they treat everybody like low life scum no matter
were you come from.
In France the people are nice, friendly and welcoming. And the food is
better too.

There are more pockets of NonFrance in France, easilly regonized. If
the license plates in the streets are>40% Brit and/or Dutch you have
hit some NonFrance. Better head back.

> The most obnoxious people I have ever experienced in France (and Italy too i
> guess) were Aussies, English and Americans. Total embarrassments.

Hey, you forgot the Dutch.

-Kees.

Tina

February 27th 08, 11:03 AM

I lifted the quotation from this rant: may as well keep it in context.

EUROPEAN TERRORIST PREPARATIONS:

The English are feeling the pinch in relation to recent terrorist
threats and have raised their security level from "Miffed" to
"Peeved." Soon, though, security levels may be raised yet again to
"Irritated" or even "A Bit Cross." Londoners have not been "A Bit
Cross" since the Blitz in 1940 when tea supplies all but ran out.

Terrorists have been re-categorized from "Tiresome" to a "Bloody
Nuisance." The last time the British issued a "Bloody Nuisance"
warning level was during the great fire of 1666.

Also, the French government announced yesterday that it has raised its
terror alert level from "Run" to "Hide." The only two higher levels in
France are "Surrender" and "Collaborate." The rise was precipitated by
a recent fire that destroyed France's white flag factory, effectively

paralysing the country's military capability.

It's not only the English and French that are on a heightened level of
alert. Italy has increased the alert level from "Shout Loudly and
Excitedly" to "Elaborate Military Posturing." Two more levels remain:
"Ineffective Combat Operations" and "Change Sides."

The Germans also increased their alert state from "Disdainful
Arrogance" to "Dress in Uniform and Sing Marching Songs." They also

have two higher levels: "Invade a Neighbour" and "Lose."

Belgians, on the other hand, are all on holiday as usual, and the only
threat they are worried about is NATO pulling out of Brussels.

The Spanish are all excited to see their new submarines ready to
deploy. These beautifully designed subs have glass bottoms so the new
Spanish navy can get a really good look at the old Spanish navy.

=

terry

February 27th 08, 11:18 AM

On Feb 27, 9:35*am, Jim Stewart > wrote:
> Airbus wrote:
> > In article
> > >,
> > says...
>
> >> The French government announced yesterday that it has raised its
> >> terror alert level from "Run" to "Hide." The only two higher levels in
> >> France are "Surrender" and "Collaborate." The rise was precipitated by
> >> a recent fire that destroyed France's white flag factory, effectively
> >> paralysing the country's military capability.
>
> >> This was taken from a much longer note that mentioned the Brit level
> >> had gone from Annoyed to Peeved.
>
> > You laugh, bnut the French have one of the world's most sophisticated
> > military industrial complexes. The US is proude of their Stealth Bomber,
> > but the French have an entire Stealth Army!! No matter what is happening
> > on the world scene they are completely invisible!!
>
> Besides, if it weren't for the French we wouldn't
> have cute words like fuselage, aileron, pitot, nacelle
> or *cough* monocoque.- Hide quoted text -
>
yeh but according to G.Dubbya the French dont even have a word for
entrepreneur.

Jay Honeck[_2_]

February 27th 08, 03:36 PM

> Just curious... What is your definition of "Iraq succeeding"? I must
> admit, I've been watching... and I haven't been seeing anything I
> would define as "success" -- Certainly not when the total costs of war
> (in $$$ and lives and the global perception of our country) are
> factored in...

Gosh, even the mainstream media here in America -- normally anything but
Bush allies -- have been documenting our success in Iraq over the last six
months (which tells you that it really started probably a year earlier,
given the "impartial journalists" in this country) -- and the non-mainstream
media have been taking note for far longer. It's hard to believe anyone
could actually ask this question anymore.

General Petraeus has found the right mix of "carrots and sticks" in working
with the various tribes in Iraq. He has worked hard to forge alliances with
the Iraqis to unite against the Al Queda operatives who were laying waste to
their country. Normal life has returned to most of Iraq, violence is down
to levels that would make large American inner cities envious, and real
progress has been made to eradicate AQ.

Schools are open, roads have been rebuilt, power plants are back on line,
telecommunications systems are working, commerce is growing, and the latest
polls show Iraqi citizens are increasingly happy with the way things are
going. Because of "the Surge", our troops are numerous enough to be out
amongst the citizens again, instead of cowering in safe havens, and are
providing a stable sense of law and order that normal Iraqis (and people all
over the world, for that matter) need and want.

By any measure, this is known as "success" -- and even the most rabid
Bush-bashers have been forced to admit it.

Both Obama and Clinton, with their calls for retreat, are looking more out
of step with reality every day -- but it's hurting Hillary's campaign the
worst. As Iraq fades from public view, and attention is focused on
domestic worries, Obama's message for "change" becomes more compelling.

Now, of course, you can argue that success took too long, and cost too many
lives, and we shouldn't have invaded, and any of a hundred other
postulations -- but the bottom line is this: At this point we need a
stable, peaceful, Iraq, allied with us against AQ and radical Islam. Gen.
Petraeus and the U.S. Army is making that happen, and -- although it's still
a tenuous situation -- it's a beautiful thing to see, after so much
bloodshed and waste.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Kloudy via AviationKB.com

February 27th 08, 05:50 PM

wrote:

>
>Hey, you forgot the Dutch.
>
>-Kees.
Nah, the flems were OK.

--
Message posted via http://www.aviationkb.com

Dallas

February 27th 08, 06:25 PM

On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 14:35:22 -0800, Jim Stewart wrote:

> Besides, if it weren't for the French we wouldn't
> have cute words like fuselage, aileron, pitot, nacelle
> or *cough* monocoque.

You forgot empanage.

--
Dallas

[email protected]

February 27th 08, 07:17 PM

On Feb 27, 10:36*am, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> > Just curious... *What is your definition of "Iraq succeeding"? *I must
> > admit, I've been watching... and I haven't been seeing anything I
> > would define as "success" -- Certainly not when the total costs of war
> > (in $$$ and lives and the global perception of our country) are
> > factored in...
>
> Gosh, even the mainstream media here in America -- normally anything but
> Bush allies -- have been documenting our success in Iraq over the last six
> months (which tells you that it really started probably a year earlier,
> given the "impartial journalists" in this country) -- and the non-mainstream
> media have been taking note for far longer. *It's hard to believe anyone
> could actually ask this question anymore.

The fact that you find it hard to believe that anyone would question
the value or success of the war speaks volumes about you clouded view
of reality.

>
> General Petraeus has found the right mix of "carrots and sticks" in working
> with the various tribes in Iraq. *He has worked hard to forge alliances with
> the Iraqis to unite against the Al Queda operatives who were laying waste to
> their country. *Normal life has returned to most of Iraq, violence is down
> to levels that would make large American inner cities envious, and real
> progress has been made to eradicate AQ.
>
Again, I must question your definition of progress... I read (almost)
daily reports of mass killings in Iraq. Which cities in America are
supposed to be envious?

> Schools are open, roads have been rebuilt, power plants are back on line,
> telecommunications systems are working, commerce is growing, and the latest
> polls show Iraqi citizens are increasingly happy with the way things are
> going. *Because of "the Surge", our troops are numerous enough to be out
> amongst the citizens again, instead of cowering in safe havens, and are
> providing a stable sense of law and order that normal Iraqis (and people all
> over the world, for that matter) need and want.
>
In other words, if things keep "improving", Iraq may someday get back
to levels of pre-invasion days. As far as the "increasingly happy"
Iraqi citizens, I'm not sure if that means last year they were 10%
happy and this year they are 15% happy? Please explain. Do you
really think I need and want the sense of law and order that normal
Iraqis currently possess?

> By any measure, this is known as "success" -- and even the most rabid
> Bush-bashers have been forced to admit it.
>
Again, the idea of success must take into account all costs, along
with the benefits. You say by any measure the outcome of this
analysis would be positive. Apparently the billions of $$$ spent,
along with the thousands of lives lost or ruined is a small/non-
existant factor in your analysis of the war. Do you stand by your
assertion that the war is a success "by any measure"? Are you really
that narrow-minded? And who are these "Bush-bashers" that were forced
to admit the success of the war? Can you back up that claim?

> Both Obama and Clinton, with their calls for retreat, *are looking more out
> of step with reality every day -- but it's hurting Hillary's campaign the
> worst. * As Iraq fades from public view, and attention is focused on
> domestic worries, Obama's message for "change" becomes more compelling.
>
I guess we'll have to wait for the next Pres. election to see who the
American public believes is "out of step with reality". Although I
must admit I've heard that description used quite a bit the past
couple of years when referencing are current Pres.

> Now, of course, you can argue that success took too long, and cost too many
> lives, and we shouldn't have invaded, and any of a hundred other
> postulations -- but the bottom line is this: *At this point we need a
> stable, peaceful, Iraq, allied with us against AQ and radical Islam. * Gen.
> Petraeus and the U.S. Army is making that happen, and -- although it's still
> a tenuous situation -- it's a beautiful thing to see, after so much
> bloodshed and waste.

Yes, I believe "success" (your word, not mine) took too long, cost too
many lives and $$$, and we shouldn't have invaded. And I (unlike you)
actually take those factors into account when I measure the level of
"success" of this war. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on how
successful we have been in creating a stable/peaceful Iraq - one that
is allied with us against QA and radical Islam.
I guess we can just look at your last sentence: You see beauty. I'm
afraid more than a few of us see bloodshed and waste.

> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

February 27th 08, 07:48 PM

"Kloudy via AviationKB.com" <u33403@uwe> wrote in news:805e36adba0cd@uwe:

> wrote:
>
>>
>>Hey, you forgot the Dutch.
>>
>>-Kees.
> Nah, the flems were OK.
>

In some places in Europe, especially Spain, tourism has grown into a
plague. An absolute infestation..

You gotta wonder why someone goes to another country and tries to make it
just like where they came from..

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

February 27th 08, 08:00 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:Frfxj.52109$9j6.29622@attbi_s22:

>
> Now, of course, you can argue that success took too long, and cost too
> many lives, and we shouldn't have invaded, and any of a hundred other
> postulations -- but the bottom line is this: At this point we need a
> stable, peaceful, Iraq, allied with us against AQ and radical Islam.
> Gen. Petraeus and the U.S. Army is making that happen, and -- although
> it's still a tenuous situation -- it's a beautiful thing to see, after
> so much bloodshed and waste.

You're an idiot.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

February 27th 08, 10:17 PM

Tina > wrote in news:2dc5ea2f-50ec-4ee9-9b57-
:

> I lifted the quotation from this rant: may as well keep it in context.
>
> EUROPEAN TERRORIST PREPARATIONS:
>
>
>
> The English are feeling the pinch in relation to recent terrorist
> threats and have raised their security level from "Miffed" to
> "Peeved." Soon, though, security levels may be raised yet again to
> "Irritated" or even "A Bit Cross." Londoners have not been "A Bit
> Cross" since the Blitz in 1940 when tea supplies all but ran out.
>
> Terrorists have been re-categorized from "Tiresome" to a "Bloody
> Nuisance." The last time the British issued a "Bloody Nuisance"
> warning level was during the great fire of 1666.
>
>
>
> Also, the French government announced yesterday that it has raised its
> terror alert level from "Run" to "Hide." The only two higher levels in
> France are "Surrender" and "Collaborate." The rise was precipitated by
> a recent fire that destroyed France's white flag factory, effectively
>
> paralysing the country's military capability.
>
>
>
> It's not only the English and French that are on a heightened level of
> alert. Italy has increased the alert level from "Shout Loudly and
> Excitedly" to "Elaborate Military Posturing." Two more levels remain:
> "Ineffective Combat Operations" and "Change Sides."
>
>
>
> The Germans also increased their alert state from "Disdainful
> Arrogance" to "Dress in Uniform and Sing Marching Songs." They also
>
> have two higher levels: "Invade a Neighbour" and "Lose."
>
>
>
> Belgians, on the other hand, are all on holiday as usual, and the only
> threat they are worried about is NATO pulling out of Brussels.
>
>
>
> The Spanish are all excited to see their new submarines ready to
> deploy. These beautifully designed subs have glass bottoms so the new
> Spanish navy can get a really good look at the old Spanish navy.
>
> =
>
Oh yeah, much better.

Bertie

LWG

February 27th 08, 10:31 PM

Funny, I haven't heard of the government putting people through industrial
shredders lately. Nor have I heard of sports teams being forced to crawl
across broken bottles because they lost. Haven't heard about
government-sponsored rape rooms, either. If you cannot appreciate the
enormous progress we have made so far, I suggest you become better informed.
Baghdad is safer than the closest major metropolitan area to where I live.

The problem with our country is exemplified by your attitude. We no longer
value freedom, ours or any one else's. Because we don't value it, there is
nothing we are willing to sacrifice. From the days of Kennedy's vow to
"bear any burden, pay any price" we have devolved to ignoring -- or wanting
to ignore -- the rest of the world. And we still represent the best the
world has to offer. Nobody but Canada, England or the Dutch have any
willingness to lift a finger to help us or anyone else.

Most people do not want freedom, all they seek is a benevolent master. Our
country was the all-too-brief exception.

>In other words, if things keep "improving", Iraq may someday get back
>to levels of pre-invasion days. As far as the "increasingly happy"
>Iraqi citizens, I'm not sure if that means last year they were 10%
>happy and this year they are 15% happy? Please explain. Do you
>really think I need and want the sense of law and order that normal
>Iraqis currently possess?

Jay Honeck[_2_]

February 28th 08, 03:47 AM

> I guess we can just look at your last sentence: You see beauty. I'm
> afraid more than a few of us see bloodshed and waste.

I see a goal that is within reach.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

February 28th 08, 04:21 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in news:j9qxj.53146$yE1.41114
@attbi_s21:

>> I guess we can just look at your last sentence: You see beauty. I'm
>> afraid more than a few of us see bloodshed and waste.
>
> I see a goal that is within reach.

Of course you do!

Bertie

tim

February 28th 08, 09:17 AM

> Increasingly hard to argue against those points except on one: Hussein was
> a bully, and with regard to Afghanistan, most Americans don't view
> themselves as "bullying" Al Qaeda anymore than they viewed themselves as
> fighting WWII "bullying" after Pearl Harbor. They attacked us.

Who in Afghanistan attacked you?

What was the nationality of those involved in 9/11?

WingFlaps

February 28th 08, 09:25 AM

On Feb 28, 4:36*am, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:

>
> Now, of course, you can argue that success took too long, and cost too many
> lives, and we shouldn't have invaded, and any of a hundred other
> postulations -- but the bottom line is this: *At this point we need a
> stable, peaceful, Iraq, allied with us against AQ and radical Islam. *

Sounds a bit like the Iraq that existed before the US told Saddam it
was OK to bring Kuwait back into greater Iraq doncha think?

Cheers

Gig 601XL Builder[_2_]

February 28th 08, 02:23 PM

tim wrote:
>> Increasingly hard to argue against those points except on one: Hussein was
>> a bully, and with regard to Afghanistan, most Americans don't view
>> themselves as "bullying" Al Qaeda anymore than they viewed themselves as
>> fighting WWII "bullying" after Pearl Harbor. They attacked us.
>
>
> Who in Afghanistan attacked you?
>
> What was the nationality of those involved in 9/11?

It was very clear at the time that the masterminds behind the 9/11
attacks were in Afghanistan. It was also clear that AQ was training in
Afghanistan. Hell, the Afghanistan government didn't even deny it.

We told them very clearly that they either turn those responsible over
or we would come in and get them. They basically said, "bring it" so we did.

Did we get all of them? No. But we did pretty well. And last time I
checked there hasn't been a terrorist attack on US soil since.

Gig 601XL Builder[_2_]

February 28th 08, 02:38 PM

WingFlaps wrote:

>
> Sounds a bit like the Iraq that existed before the US told Saddam it
> was OK to bring Kuwait back into greater Iraq doncha think?
>
> Cheers

Bull$hit myth.

In late July 1990, as negotiations between Iraq and Kuwait stalled, Iraq
massed troops on Kuwait’s borders and summoned American Ambassador April
Glaspie to an unanticipated meeting with Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.
Two transcripts of that meeting have been produced, both of them
controversial. In them, Saddam outlined his grievances against Kuwait,
while promising that he would not invade Kuwait before one more round of
negotiations. In the version published by The New York Times on
September 23, 1990, Glaspie expressed concern over the troop buildup to
Saddam Hussein:

"We have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border
disagreement with Kuwait. I was in the American Embassy in Kuwait during
the late ’60s. The instruction we had during this period was that we
should express no opinion on this issue and that the issue is not
associated with America. James Baker has directed our official spokesmen
to emphasize this instruction. We hope you can solve this problem using
any suitable methods via [Chadli] Klibi [then Arab League General
Secretary] or via President Mubarak. All that we hope is that these
issues are solved quickly. With regard to all of this, can I ask you to
see how the issue appears to us?

"My assessment after 25 years' service in this area is that your
objective must have strong backing from your Arab brothers. I now speak
of oil. But you, Mr. President, have fought through a horrific and
painful war. Frankly, we can see only that you have deployed massive
troops in the south. Normally that would not be any of our business. But
when this happens in the context of what you said on your national day,
then when we read the details in the two letters of the Foreign
Minister, then when we see the Iraqi point of view that the measures
taken by the U.A.E. and Kuwait is, in the final analysis, parallel to
military aggression against Iraq, then it would be reasonable for me to
be concerned. And for this reason, I received an instruction to ask you,
in the spirit of friendship -- not in the spirit of confrontation --
regarding your intentions.

"I simply describe the position of my Government. And I do not mean that
the situation is a simple situation. But our concern is a simple one."

Rich Ahrens[_2_]

February 28th 08, 03:53 PM

Dallas wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 14:35:22 -0800, Jim Stewart wrote:
>
>> Besides, if it weren't for the French we wouldn't
>> have cute words like fuselage, aileron, pitot, nacelle
>> or *cough* monocoque.
>
> You forgot empanage.

And you misspelled it.

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

February 28th 08, 03:54 PM

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:

> Did we get all of them? No. But we did pretty well. And last time I
> checked there hasn't been a terrorist attack on US soil since.

One thing I've always found interesting when someone puts out the "we
haven't been attacked since" card is that no one in the national media
to my knowledge anyway, has even come close to suggesting something so
basic to common sense that it defies explanation.

Anyone with half a strategic brain has to at least consider the fact
that the reason could very well be that they don't WANT to attack us
again...at least not yet.

Attacking us again would be counter productive to the gains they have to
be seeing happening as we speak through the splitting up of the country
into war and anti-war factions with politicians from both sides fighting
with each other for "control" of the government.

Even the common man in the street can see if they just open their brains
up and THINK, that attacking us again while all this is going on would
serve to UNITE the country rather than divide it!

I could be wrong, but this seems plausible to me. Why do something that
nails a few thousand people and really ****es off the rest of the people
, when you can sit back and let the idiot politicians divide and destroy
the country for you?

--
Dudley Henriques

Gig 601XL Builder[_2_]

February 28th 08, 04:16 PM

Dudley Henriques wrote:
> Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
>
>> Did we get all of them? No. But we did pretty well. And last time I
>> checked there hasn't been a terrorist attack on US soil since.
>
>
> One thing I've always found interesting when someone puts out the "we
> haven't been attacked since" card is that no one in the national media
> to my knowledge anyway, has even come close to suggesting something so
> basic to common sense that it defies explanation.
>
> Anyone with half a strategic brain has to at least consider the fact
> that the reason could very well be that they don't WANT to attack us
> again...at least not yet.
>
> Attacking us again would be counter productive to the gains they have to
> be seeing happening as we speak through the splitting up of the country
> into war and anti-war factions with politicians from both sides fighting
> with each other for "control" of the government.
>
> Even the common man in the street can see if they just open their brains
> up and THINK, that attacking us again while all this is going on would
> serve to UNITE the country rather than divide it!
>
> I could be wrong, but this seems plausible to me. Why do something that
> nails a few thousand people and really ****es off the rest of the people
> , when you can sit back and let the idiot politicians divide and destroy
> the country for you?
>

If you believe AQ their goal with the 9/11 attack, the attack on the USS
Cole and their other actions was to get us and other western nations out
of the Mid-East. They failed, in fact the outcome was exactly the
opposite. And I can understand why they thought the way they did. During
the Clinton administration they attacked the WTC, the Cole and other
targets and the only response from the US was to launch a few cruise
missiles. They had no reason to think that 9/11 would have been any
different. Let's face it, there is no way in hell they thought those
towers would have fallen the way they did.

Please keep in mind that my post was about Afghanistan not Iraq. 20/20
hindsight is great and using it, attacking Iraq was probably a mistake.
The bigger mistake though was not putting enough boots on the ground to
keep AQ and other non-Iraqis out of Iraq once we did go in.

Jay Honeck[_2_]

February 28th 08, 05:48 PM

> I could be wrong, but this seems plausible to me. Why do something that
> nails a few thousand people and really ****es off the rest of the people ,
> when you can sit back and let the idiot politicians divide and destroy the
> country for you?

It's a plausible explanation, except for one thing: We're dealing with
people who strap explosives to mentally handicapped people and blow up
school buses. These aren't the sharpest sticks in the bunch, and I think
you're giving them more credit for strategic thinking than they deserve.

On the other hand, I think even the dumbest among them now realize that they
only have to wait for President Barrack Hussein Obama to win next November
and they win. Why rock the boat now?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

February 28th 08, 05:54 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:ltCxj.53957$yE1.49034@attbi_s21:

>> I could be wrong, but this seems plausible to me. Why do something
>> that nails a few thousand people and really ****es off the rest of
>> the people , when you can sit back and let the idiot politicians
>> divide and destroy the country for you?
>
> It's a plausible explanation, except for one thing: We're dealing
> with people who strap explosives to mentally handicapped people and
> blow up school buses. These aren't the sharpest sticks in the bunch,
> and I think you're giving them more credit for strategic thinking than
> they deserve.
>
> On the other hand, I think even the dumbest among them now realize
> that they only have to wait for President Barrack Hussein Obama to win
> next November and they win. Why rock the boat now?

You are a moron, Jay.

A complete moron.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

February 28th 08, 06:12 PM

Gig 601XL Builder > wrote in
:

> Dudley Henriques wrote:
>> Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
>>
>>> Did we get all of them? No. But we did pretty well. And last time I
>>> checked there hasn't been a terrorist attack on US soil since.
>>
>>
>> One thing I've always found interesting when someone puts out the "we
>> haven't been attacked since" card is that no one in the national
>> media to my knowledge anyway, has even come close to suggesting
>> something so basic to common sense that it defies explanation.
>>
>> Anyone with half a strategic brain has to at least consider the fact
>> that the reason could very well be that they don't WANT to attack us
>> again...at least not yet.
>>
>> Attacking us again would be counter productive to the gains they have
>> to be seeing happening as we speak through the splitting up of the
>> country into war and anti-war factions with politicians from both
>> sides fighting with each other for "control" of the government.
>>
>> Even the common man in the street can see if they just open their
>> brains up and THINK, that attacking us again while all this is going
>> on would serve to UNITE the country rather than divide it!
>>
>> I could be wrong, but this seems plausible to me. Why do something
>> that nails a few thousand people and really ****es off the rest of
>> the people , when you can sit back and let the idiot politicians
>> divide and destroy the country for you?
>>
>
>
> If you believe AQ their goal with the 9/11 attack, the attack on the
> USS Cole and their other actions was to get us and other western
> nations out of the Mid-East. They failed, in fact the outcome was
> exactly the opposite.

THe game isn't over yet, and that's only what they told you.

Their actual goal was to get you all running around like tortured
mice...

Bertie

Phil J

February 28th 08, 06:18 PM

On Feb 25, 1:41*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> Tina > wrote in news:80235b82-304b-468a-9d04-
> :
>
> > The French government announced yesterday that it has raised its
> > terror alert level from "Run" to "Hide." The only two higher levels in
> > France are "Surrender" and "Collaborate." The rise was precipitated by
> > a recent fire that destroyed France's white flag factory, effectively
> > paralysing the country's military capability.
>
> Bull****. They did make an attempt and they did ask for help, which was not
> forthcoming, from the Brits, who made a halfhearted effort, and from the
> US, who sold them some equipment. Not to say there weren't some who
> welcomed the Germans....
>
> And it turns out they were right about Iraq... Of course, my magic eight
> ball had a better chance of getting it right that that twit in the white
> house..
>
> Bertie

The French take a lot of heat about their surrender in World War II.
It wasn't exactly their finest hour, but they certainly weren't the
only country to surrender to the Germans. The Germans embarrassed
everybody at the start of that war. They could even have clobbered
the English army at Dunkirk if Hitler hadn't held back his generals,
and they certainly could have invaded and occupied England at any time
in the first few years of the war. Churchill was so concerned about
it that he ordered the English army to prepare to use poison gas to
defend England's beaches in the event of a German invasion.

What some Americans may not realize is that the Germans embarrassed
the U.S. as well. German submarines absolutely devastated our
shipping off the east coast of the United States in the early years of
the war. If you want to read an excellent book about the Battle of
the Atlantic, I recommend Black May by Michael Gannon.

As unprepared as American was at that time, if the U.S. had been part
of Europe, Germany could have rolled over us as well. Germany's use
of advanced technology and advanced tactics put them ahead of every
other country on the planet at that time.

Phil

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

February 28th 08, 06:34 PM

Phil J > wrote in
:

> On Feb 25, 1:41*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> Tina > wrote in news:80235b82-304b-468a-9d04-
>> :
>>
>> > The French government announced yesterday that it has raised its
>> > terror alert level from "Run" to "Hide." The only two higher levels
>> > in France are "Surrender" and "Collaborate." The rise was
>> > precipitated by a recent fire that destroyed France's white flag
>> > factory, effectively paralysing the country's military capability.
>>
>> Bull****. They did make an attempt and they did ask for help, which
>> was no
> t
>> forthcoming, from the Brits, who made a halfhearted effort, and from
>> the US, who sold them some equipment. Not to say there weren't some
>> who welcomed the Germans....
>>
>> And it turns out they were right about Iraq... Of course, my magic
>> eight ball had a better chance of getting it right that that twit in
>> the white house..
>>
>> Bertie
>
> The French take a lot of heat about their surrender in World War II.
> It wasn't exactly their finest hour, but they certainly weren't the
> only country to surrender to the Germans. The Germans embarrassed
> everybody at the start of that war. They could even have clobbered
> the English army at Dunkirk if Hitler hadn't held back his generals,
> and they certainly could have invaded and occupied England at any time
> in the first few years of the war. Churchill was so concerned about
> it that he ordered the English army to prepare to use poison gas to
> defend England's beaches in the event of a German invasion.
>
> What some Americans may not realize is that the Germans embarrassed
> the U.S. as well. German submarines absolutely devastated our
> shipping off the east coast of the United States in the early years of
> the war. If you want to read an excellent book about the Battle of
> the Atlantic, I recommend Black May by Michael Gannon.
>
> As unprepared as American was at that time, if the U.S. had been part
> of Europe, Germany could have rolled over us as well. Germany's use
> of advanced technology and advanced tactics put them ahead of every
> other country on the planet at that time.

Absolutely. The current anti french campaign ( for want of a better
word) is complete and utter BS.

Bertie

Jay Honeck[_2_]

February 28th 08, 07:16 PM

> As unprepared as American was at that time, if the U.S. had been part
> of Europe, Germany could have rolled over us as well. Germany's use
> of advanced technology and advanced tactics put them ahead of every
> other country on the planet at that time.

I don't think anyone makes fun of the French for surrendering to Hitler's
blitzkrieg. The Wehrmacht rolled over everything in its path, until Hitler
decided that they should winter in the Soviet Union. Bad move for them,
good for us.

No, what makes the French the butt of so many jokes was their collaboration
with the Nazis after the surrender. The Vichy government was an
abomination.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jim Logajan

February 28th 08, 07:18 PM

Phil J > wrote:
> Germany's use
> of advanced technology and advanced tactics put them ahead of every
> other country on the planet at that time.

Only part of that is true. At the start of the war German tanks were
generally regarded as inferior to their contemporaries. It was generally
superior tactics and training that won their battles. In fact at the outset
of the invasion of Russia, the Russian T-34 was superior in pretty much
every way to anything the Germans had. (I wasted part of my youth playing
board wargames such as Avalon Hill's "PanzerBlitz" and learned a bit about
the equipment and tactics of the era.)

Refs:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_tanks_in_World_War_II
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzerblitz

WingFlaps

February 28th 08, 07:55 PM

On Feb 29, 3:38 am, Gig 601XL Builder >
wrote:
> WingFlaps wrote:
>
> > Sounds a bit like the Iraq that existed before the US told Saddam it
> > was OK to bring Kuwait back into greater Iraq doncha think?
>
> > Cheers
>
> Bull$hit myth.
>
> In the version published by The New York Times on
> September 23, 1990, Glaspie expressed concern over the troop buildup to
> Saddam Hussein:
>
> "We have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border
> disagreement with Kuwait. I was in the American Embassy in Kuwait during
> the late '60s. The instruction we had during this period was that we
> should express no opinion on this issue and that the issue is not
> associated with America".

Yes that's about the core of the problem but this quote is not what
was actually said but rather the carefully spun recollections of a
(failed) diplomat. Despite this seeming indifference to the rising
tension between the corrupt Kuwait and Iraq, in June 1990 General
Norman Schwarzkopf was conducting sophisticated war games pitting
thousands of U.S. troops against Iraqi armored divisions. Some say
that the US wanted the war as an excuse to bring the Arab states into
line -I doubt we will ever know the real truth.

My point was that before Iraq was destroyed, Iraq was a modern,
secular state, with most advanced status of women in the region, non-
sectarian Universities and extensive religious freedoms, high rates of
economic growth, and some of the highest standards of living, health
and literacy rates in the Arab world. Free speech was allowed, as long
as it was not directed against the regime.

Cheers

WingFlaps

February 28th 08, 08:05 PM

On Feb 29, 4:54*am, Dudley Henriques > wrote:

>
> I could be wrong, but this seems plausible to me. Why do something that
> nails a few thousand people and really ****es off the rest of the people
> , when you can sit back and let the idiot politicians divide and destroy
> the country for you?
>

Too right! The only "terror" I see is being generated by the
governrnent against it's own citizens. Daily terror alert level?
Homeland security? When the UK was under terrorist attacks by the IRA,
it was business as usual but with increased vigilance. One should not
do what the terrorist wants -which is to disrupt your economy and
cause fear and disquiet.

Cheers

Phil J

February 28th 08, 08:15 PM

On Feb 28, 1:16*pm, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> > As unprepared as American was at that time, if the U.S. had been part
> > of Europe, Germany could have rolled over us as well. *Germany's use
> > of advanced technology and advanced tactics put them ahead of every
> > other country on the planet at that time.
>
> I don't think anyone makes fun of the French for surrendering to Hitler's
> blitzkrieg. *The Wehrmacht rolled over everything in its path, until Hitler
> decided that they should winter in the Soviet Union. * Bad move for them,
> good for us.
>
> No, what makes the French the butt of so many jokes was their collaboration
> with the Nazis after the surrender. * The Vichy government was an
> abomination.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

Yeah, the collaboration is part of it. But I think the French had an
extra-embarrassing surrender because they had invested so much in
their "impregnable" Maginot line. When the Germans simply went around
it, it really made the French look like fools.

Phil

WingFlaps

February 28th 08, 08:16 PM

On Feb 29, 6:48*am, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>*We're dealing with
> people who strap explosives to mentally handicapped people

Jay, your thinking illustrates why such problems exist. You need to
try to understand that these are passionate believers in their cause.
No more or less. The suicide bombers are not mentally handicapped and
their goal is to enact retribution against their enemy. Wouldn't the
US call them freedom fighters if they were were working for your
interests? Did you know that your #1 enemy was a US sponsored "freedom
fighter" before he was cut off and left out to dry? That might have
made him realize something don't you think?

Cheers

Phil J

February 28th 08, 08:31 PM

On Feb 28, 1:18*pm, Jim Logajan > wrote:
> Phil J > wrote:
> > Germany's use
> > of advanced technology and advanced tactics put them ahead of every
> > other country on the planet at that time.
>
> Only part of that is true. At the start of the war German tanks were
> generally regarded as inferior to their contemporaries. It was generally
> superior tactics and training that won their battles. In fact at the outset
> of the invasion of Russia, the Russian T-34 was superior in pretty much
> every way to anything the Germans had. (I wasted part of my youth playing
> board wargames such as Avalon Hill's "PanzerBlitz" and learned a bit about
> the equipment and tactics of the era.)
>
> Refs:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_tanks_in_World_War_IIhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzerblitz

Definitely, not every weapon they had was superior. But their
combination of fast motorized infantry supported with armor and dive-
bombers and their Blitzkrieg tactics made them pretty hard to beat.
Their fighter aircraft weren't too shabby either, especially the
FW-190.

Phil

Jay Honeck[_2_]

February 28th 08, 09:08 PM

>Jay, your thinking illustrates why such problems exist. You need to
>try to understand that these are passionate believers in their cause.
>No more or less. The suicide bombers are not mentally handicapped and
>their goal is to enact retribution against their enemy.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6889106/

If strapping explosives to kids with Down's Syndrome isn't sick, I don't
know what is.

Wing, you really need to keep up here. Your defense of the insurgency is
way out of step with the current reality on the ground in Iraq. Two years
ago, you may have been correct. Now, however, more and more the people of
Iraq have turned against the operatives that have so desecrated and
decimated their country -- and Al Qaeda has responded with increasingly
desperate (and immoral) behavior.

Which has only helped our cause. When the insurgency started violating
Islamic law, they lost.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Steven P. McNicoll

February 28th 08, 09:29 PM

"Phil J" > wrote in message
...
>
> Definitely, not every weapon they had was superior. But their
> combination of fast motorized infantry supported with armor and dive-
> bombers and their Blitzkrieg tactics made them pretty hard to beat.
> Their fighter aircraft weren't too shabby either, especially the
> FW-190.
>

The Blitzkrieg days were long gone by the time the Fw 190 appeared on the
scene.

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

February 28th 08, 09:37 PM

Jay Honeck wrote:

> It's a plausible explanation, except for one thing: We're dealing with
> people who strap explosives to mentally handicapped people and blow up
> school buses. These aren't the sharpest sticks in the bunch, and I
> think you're giving them more credit for strategic thinking than they
> deserve.

Well....don't forget that the strategic thinking doesn't happen at the
suicide bomber level. That's a bit above their pay grade I would imagine.
The bombers are simply the "tools" of the movement. The "thinking" comes
much higher up, and these people are the chess players.

I have always believed that 9-11 was devised by the chess players to
create the exact result it has achieved. I've never for a moment
believed that those buildings were brought down to destroy the buildings
or kill the people. That to me was simply the "tool" designed to open
the door that the "thinkers" believed would split the United States wide
open politically which it and the events post 9-11 certainly has done.

Now that the country has been split like it has, the scenario for the
"thinkers" has changed. Another attack would undue what they have
achieved and re-unite the country against them.
In other words, using the immortal phrases of one Kenny Rogers,
"You got to know when to hold up!!"

To me, the terrorist strategy is glaringly apparent. You first split the
country, then you let it destroy itself from within. You sit back and
watch. It's the old divide and conquer all over again, only this time it
smells of camel crap :-)

--
Dudley Henriques

gatt[_2_]

February 28th 08, 09:42 PM

"Tina" > wrote in message
...

>
> The Germans also increased their alert state from "Disdainful
> Arrogance" to "Dress in Uniform and Sing Marching Songs." They also
>
> have two higher levels: "Invade a Neighbour" and "Lose."

> Belgians, on the other hand, are all on holiday as usual, and the only
> threat they are worried about is NATO pulling out of Brussels.

> The Spanish are all excited to see their new submarines ready to
> deploy. These beautifully designed subs have glass bottoms so the new
> Spanish navy can get a really good look at the old Spanish navy.

The old sailors in my workgroup here are roaring. What I'd really like to
hear is, what do the other countries joke about Americans.

Anybody know any "How many Americans does it take to screw in a light bulb"
jokes? Let 'em fly.

-c
(Oregon)

Gig 601XL Builder[_2_]

February 28th 08, 09:46 PM

WingFlaps wrote:
> On Feb 29, 3:38 am, Gig 601XL Builder >
> wrote:
>> WingFlaps wrote:
>>
>>> Sounds a bit like the Iraq that existed before the US told Saddam it
>>> was OK to bring Kuwait back into greater Iraq doncha think?
>>> Cheers
>> Bull$hit myth.
>>
>> In the version published by The New York Times on
>> September 23, 1990, Glaspie expressed concern over the troop buildup to
>> Saddam Hussein:
>>
>> "We have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border
>> disagreement with Kuwait. I was in the American Embassy in Kuwait during
>> the late '60s. The instruction we had during this period was that we
>> should express no opinion on this issue and that the issue is not
>> associated with America".
>
> Yes that's about the core of the problem but this quote is not what
> was actually said but rather the carefully spun recollections of a
> (failed) diplomat. Despite this seeming indifference to the rising
> tension between the corrupt Kuwait and Iraq, in June 1990 General
> Norman Schwarzkopf was conducting sophisticated war games pitting
> thousands of U.S. troops against Iraqi armored divisions. Some say
> that the US wanted the war as an excuse to bring the Arab states into
> line -I doubt we will ever know the real truth.

Of course Schwartzkopf was war gaming US v Iraq. He was also war gaming
US v Iran, US & Israel v just about anyone with a towel on their head.
What do you expect the commander of CentCom to do when there isn't a war
on?

>
> My point was that before Iraq was destroyed, Iraq was a modern,
> secular state, with most advanced status of women in the region, non-
> sectarian Universities and extensive religious freedoms, high rates of
> economic growth, and some of the highest standards of living, health
> and literacy rates in the Arab world. Free speech was allowed, as long
> as it was not directed against the regime.
>

I think that last sentence says a bunch.

Kloudy via AviationKB.com

February 28th 08, 10:01 PM

gatt wrote:

>
>Anybody know any "How many Americans does it take to screw in a light bulb"
>jokes? Let 'em fly.
>
>-c
>(Oregon)

Q: How many surrealists does it take to change a light bulb?

A: Two, one to hold the giraffe, and the other to fill the bathtub with
brightly colored machine tools.

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/aviation/200802/1

Gig 601XL Builder[_2_]

February 28th 08, 10:06 PM

WingFlaps wrote:
Did you know that your #1 enemy was a US sponsored "freedom
> fighter" before he was cut off and left out to dry? That might have
> made him realize something don't you think?
>
> Cheers

Cut off? Really? We helped OBL when his war against the USSR. Had we
jumped in right after they left and tried to make Afghanistan into a US
client state, which no Afghan wanted us to do in the first place, the
USSR would have had to react.

Flydive

February 28th 08, 10:07 PM

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:

>
> Did we get all of them? No. But we did pretty well. And last time I
> checked there hasn't been a terrorist attack on US soil since.

And how many in the 30 previous years?

Jim Logajan

February 28th 08, 10:15 PM

Dudley Henriques > wrote:
> Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
>
>> Did we get all of them? No. But we did pretty well. And last time I
>> checked there hasn't been a terrorist attack on US soil since.
>
>
> One thing I've always found interesting when someone puts out the "we
> haven't been attacked since" card is that no one in the national media
> to my knowledge anyway, has even come close to suggesting something so
> basic to common sense that it defies explanation.
>
> Anyone with half a strategic brain has to at least consider the fact
> that the reason could very well be that they don't WANT to attack us
> again...at least not yet.

They may simply lack the capability to do anything credible, so rather
than do something anemic, they don't try.

I believe Osama et al have been pretty clear on their motivation for the
9/11 attacks and I believe many people have not bothered to read their
alleged grievances because they are considered the rantings of "crazy
terrorists." For the record, here are the main points and what I think
can be concluded from them:

(From the "Full text: bin Laden's 'letter to America'":)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/nov/24/theobserver

"As for the second question that we want to answer: What are we calling
you to, and what do we want from you?
....
(1) The first thing that we are calling you to is Islam.
....
(2) The second thing we call you to, is to stop your oppression, lies,
immorality and debauchery that has spread among you.
....
(3) What we call you to thirdly is to take an honest stance with
yourselves - and I doubt you will do so - to discover that you are a
nation without principles or manners, and that the values and principles
to you are something which you merely demand from others, not that which
you yourself must adhere to.

(4) We also advise you to stop supporting Israel, and to end your
support of the Indians in Kashmir, the Russians against the Chechens and
to also cease supporting the Manila Government against the Muslims in
Southern Philippines.

(5) We also advise you to pack your luggage and get out of our lands. We
desire for your goodness, guidance, and righteousness, so do not force
us to send you back as cargo in coffins.

(6) Sixthly, we call upon you to end your support of the corrupt leaders
in our countries. Do not interfere in our politics and method of
education. Leave us alone, or else expect us in New York and Washington.

(7) We also call you to deal with us and interact with us on the basis
of mutual interests and benefits, rather than the policies of sub dual,
theft and occupation, and not to continue your policy of supporting the
Jews because this will result in more disasters for you.

If you fail to respond to all these conditions, then prepare for fight
with the Islamic Nation.
...."

See that "get out of our lands," "leave us alone," and the desire for
respect buried in (5), (6), and (7)?

Now contrast those 7 conditions with their lack of attacks on anything
in South America, Australia, Japan, and a lot of other countries (which
would seem to fail to meet their conditions of (1) through (3)). So the
important "trigger" points seem to be buried in the last three: don't
mess with them and they don't mess with you. A good basis for thuggery,
to be sure, but the U.S. often deals with unpleasant countries by
adopting the "don't mess with us and we wont mess with you."

So in my very humble opinion, everything seems to suggest that
disengaging from the region will have no negative affects on our
security (except oil I suppose) and has a reasonable chance to improve
it, based on the motivations Al Qaeda appears to have exhibited.

Here are some maps showing pre and post Al Qaeda attacks around the
world:

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&om=1&msa=0&msid=100547042535873345331.0004384ce0e13337be966&ll=14.604847,63.984375&spn=91.237243,105.46875&z=3&source=embed
(Corresponding article:
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/09/alqaeda_map.html )

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/17/TerroristAttacksAlQaeda.png

Bertie the Bunyip

February 28th 08, 10:18 PM

On 28 Feb, 19:16, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> > As unprepared as American was at that time, if the U.S. had been part
> > of Europe, Germany could have rolled over us as well. *Germany's use
> > of advanced technology and advanced tactics put them ahead of every
> > other country on the planet at that time.
>
> I don't think anyone makes fun of the French for surrendering to Hitler's
> blitzkrieg. *The Wehrmacht rolled over everything in its path, until Hitler
> decided that they should winter in the Soviet Union. * Bad move for them,
> good for us.
>
> No, what makes the French the butt of so many jokes was their collaboration
> with the Nazis after the surrender. * The Vichy government was an
> abomination.

You're an idiot, Jay.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip

February 28th 08, 10:19 PM

On 28 Feb, 21:08, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> >Jay, your thinking illustrates why such problems exist. You need to
> >try to understand that these are passionate believers in their cause.
> >No more or less. The suicide bombers are not mentally handicapped and
> >their goal is to enact retribution against their enemy.
>
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6889106/
>
> If strapping explosives to kids with Down's Syndrome isn't sick, I don't
> know what is.

Taking the left half of the bell curve and strapping them to Abrahms
tanks?

Bertie

Gig 601XL Builder[_2_]

February 28th 08, 10:25 PM

Dudley Henriques wrote:

> To me, the terrorist strategy is glaringly apparent. You first split the
> country, then you let it destroy itself from within. You sit back and
> watch. It's the old divide and conquer all over again, only this time it
> smells of camel crap :-)
>
>

I think you are giving them way too much credit.

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

February 28th 08, 10:29 PM

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
> Dudley Henriques wrote:
>
>> To me, the terrorist strategy is glaringly apparent. You first split
>> the country, then you let it destroy itself from within. You sit back
>> and watch. It's the old divide and conquer all over again, only this
>> time it smells of camel crap :-)
>>
>>
>
> I think you are giving them way too much credit.

Could be. I'm only a "man in the street" with one opinion and I'm
certainly not in the loop where the factual data lies.
I'm afraid history will have to play itself out on this one.

--
Dudley Henriques

February 28th 08, 11:59 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote:

>By any measure, this is known as "success" -- and even the most rabid
>Bush-bashers have been forced to admit it.

You are delusional.

LWG

February 29th 08, 12:08 AM

That's a possibility, but I don't see it that way. Your hypothesis suggests
that there is a master strategy on the part of the adversary. I think that
since 9/11 we have effectively neutralized OBL. We don't have his scalp,
but his C&C has been destroyed.

Did the attacks in Spain galvanize the people against Radislam? Did the 7/7
attacks unite the British people in support of Blair? Which countries in
Europe are truly helping us in the fight against Radislam?

I think they would have done as much to us as they possibly could. The
bipartisan agreement between the D's and R's after 9/11 lasted a few months.
What did they have to lose by attacking again? My thesis is that Radislam
views us as weak, cowardly and vulnerable. An attack -- any attack -- would
have supported their view.

> One thing I've always found interesting when someone puts out the "we
> haven't been attacked since" card is that no one in the national media to
> my knowledge anyway, has even come close to suggesting something so basic
> to common sense that it defies explanation.
>
> Anyone with half a strategic brain has to at least consider the fact that
> the reason could very well be that they don't WANT to attack us again...at
> least not yet.

LWG

February 29th 08, 12:10 AM

Please pay attention. The last two *were* reported to be mentally
handicapped women unaware of what they were doing.

> You need to
>try to understand that these are passionate believers in their cause.
>No more or less. The suicide bombers are not mentally handicapped and
>their goal is to enact retribution against their enemy. Wouldn't the
>US call them freedom fighters if they were were working for your
>nterests? Did you know that your #1 enemy was a US sponsored "freedom
>fighter" before he was cut off and left out to dry? That might have
>made him realize something don't you think?

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

February 29th 08, 12:12 AM

LWG wrote:
> That's a possibility, but I don't see it that way. Your hypothesis suggests
> that there is a master strategy on the part of the adversary. I think that
> since 9/11 we have effectively neutralized OBL. We don't have his scalp,
> but his C&C has been destroyed.
>
> Did the attacks in Spain galvanize the people against Radislam? Did the 7/7
> attacks unite the British people in support of Blair? Which countries in
> Europe are truly helping us in the fight against Radislam?
>
> I think they would have done as much to us as they possibly could. The
> bipartisan agreement between the D's and R's after 9/11 lasted a few months.
> What did they have to lose by attacking again? My thesis is that Radislam
> views us as weak, cowardly and vulnerable. An attack -- any attack -- would
> have supported their view.
>
>
>> One thing I've always found interesting when someone puts out the "we
>> haven't been attacked since" card is that no one in the national media to
>> my knowledge anyway, has even come close to suggesting something so basic
>> to common sense that it defies explanation.
>>
>> Anyone with half a strategic brain has to at least consider the fact that
>> the reason could very well be that they don't WANT to attack us again...at
>> least not yet.
>
>
You could be right. I could be right. Who really knows? History will no
doubt sort this thing out for all of us.

--
Dudley Henriques

LWG

February 29th 08, 12:13 AM

Except that they lost the news cycle. Iraq is not the divisive issue it was
18 months ago.

L'audace, toujours l'audace.

> To me, the terrorist strategy is glaringly apparent. You first split the
> country, then you let it destroy itself from within. You sit back and
> watch. It's the old divide and conquer all over again, only this time it
> smells of camel crap :-)

Dudley Henriques[_2_]

February 29th 08, 12:28 AM

LWG wrote:
> Except that they lost the news cycle. Iraq is not the divisive issue it was
> 18 months ago.
>
> L'audace, toujours l'audace.
>
>> To me, the terrorist strategy is glaringly apparent. You first split the
>> country, then you let it destroy itself from within. You sit back and
>> watch. It's the old divide and conquer all over again, only this time it
>> smells of camel crap :-)
>
>
Oh I don't know. Just in our family we have division. It's not just the
war that was affected. It's the whole liberal/conservative thing :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

WingFlaps

February 29th 08, 12:46 AM

On Feb 29, 1:10*pm, "LWG" > wrote:
> Please pay attention. *The last two *were* reported to be mentally
> handicapped women unaware of what they were doing.
>

See the word "reported". Now try to stop looking foolish:

"BAGHDAD, Feb 21 (Reuters) - The U.S. military conceded on Thursday it
did not know if two women who carried out bombings in Baghdad that
killed almost 100 people were mentally handicapped, casting doubt on
earlier assertions."

Do you really want to be a sucker who can be manipulated? No? Then
engage your brain and _try_ to recognize the spin you are being fed
all day.

Cheers

WingFlaps

February 29th 08, 12:53 AM

On Feb 29, 10:08*am, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> >Jay, your thinking illustrates why such problems exist. You need to
> >try to understand that these are passionate believers in their cause.
> >No more or less. The suicide bombers are not mentally handicapped and
> >their goal is to enact retribution against their enemy.
>
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6889106/
>
> If strapping explosives to kids with Down's Syndrome isn't sick, I don't
> know what is.
>

What is sad that you so readily believe such a (unsubstantiated)
story.

Cheers

Phil J

February 29th 08, 01:31 AM

On Feb 28, 3:29*pm, "Steven P. McNicoll" >
wrote:
> "Phil J" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
> > Definitely, not every weapon they had was superior. *But their
> > combination of fast motorized infantry supported with armor and dive-
> > bombers and their Blitzkrieg tactics made them pretty hard to beat.
> > Their fighter aircraft weren't too shabby either, especially the
> > FW-190.
>
> The Blitzkrieg days were long gone by the time the Fw 190 appeared on the
> scene.

You're right. I was thinking it was introduced earlier, but it didn't
come along till 1941.

One of the more surprising (to me) pieces of technology developed by
the Germans was the radio-controlled glide bomb used against
shipping. They were dropped from a bomber and flown into the target
by radio control. They also had radar-guided glide bombs, and near
the end of the war they were even working on a television-guided bomb,
but it was not perfected.

They weren't a factor in the war, but I think some of the most amazing
stuff designed in World War II was the asymmetrical aircraft by Blohm
and Voss. Definitely "outside of the box" thinking.

Phil

Jay Honeck[_2_]

February 29th 08, 03:27 AM

> So in my very humble opinion, everything seems to suggest that
> disengaging from the region will have no negative affects on our
> security (except oil I suppose)

Wow, you say that like oil isn't the driving force behind the world economy.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck[_2_]

February 29th 08, 03:30 AM

> Two into the WTC.
> One into the Pentagon.
>
> Why not the White House, and Congress?

Don't forget the plane that was brought down by the passengers. That one
was supposedly aimed at the Washington, possibly the White House.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck[_2_]

February 29th 08, 03:37 AM

>> The Spanish are all excited to see their new submarines ready to
>> deploy. These beautifully designed subs have glass bottoms so the new
>> Spanish navy can get a really good look at the old Spanish navy.
>
> The old sailors in my workgroup here are roaring.

Same here.

My son has decided that he probably shouldn't tell that joke when he visits
Spain next month...

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Just go look it up!

February 29th 08, 11:27 AM

On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 06:10:04 +0100 (CET), Nomen Nescio
> wrote:

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
>From: "Jay Honeck" >
>
>>Don't forget the plane that was brought down by the passengers. That one
>>was supposedly aimed at the Washington, possibly the White House.
>
>I suppose that's questionable since the plane never made it.
>But I think you missed my point.
>If you were going to take out the WTC, the Pentagon, and Congress (or the
>White House).
>Which one would you hit FIRST?

UAL 93 took off 45 minutes late.

Neil Gould

February 29th 08, 11:56 AM

Recently, Dudley Henriques > posted:

> Jay Honeck wrote:
>
>> It's a plausible explanation, except for one thing: We're dealing
>> with people who strap explosives to mentally handicapped people and
>> blow up school buses. These aren't the sharpest sticks in the
>> bunch, and I think you're giving them more credit for strategic
>> thinking than they deserve.
>
> Well....don't forget that the strategic thinking doesn't happen at the
> suicide bomber level. That's a bit above their pay grade I would
> imagine. The bombers are simply the "tools" of the movement. The
> "thinking" comes much higher up, and these people are the chess
> players.
>
> I have always believed that 9-11 was devised by the chess players to
> create the exact result it has achieved. I've never for a moment
> believed that those buildings were brought down to destroy the
> buildings or kill the people. That to me was simply the "tool"
> designed to open the door that the "thinkers" believed would split
> the United States wide open politically which it and the events post
> 9-11 certainly has done.
>
> Now that the country has been split like it has, the scenario for the
> "thinkers" has changed. Another attack would undue what they have
> achieved and re-unite the country against them.
> In other words, using the immortal phrases of one Kenny Rogers,
> "You got to know when to hold up!!"
>
> To me, the terrorist strategy is glaringly apparent. You first split
> the country, then you let it destroy itself from within. You sit back
> and watch. It's the old divide and conquer all over again, only this
> time it smells of camel crap :-)
>
Well said, and the only thing that surprises me (somewhat) is how well
this tactic worked on us. One way that I see it is that some people saw a
way to profit from the situation, and did all they could to play into the
hands of those "strategic thinkers".

I don't think it's a coincidence that most of those 9/11 participants were
from a country that we consider an ally. Or that we've essentially
eliminated that country's competition in the region. Or that we've set up
and funded "private armies" that will have an existance far beyond our
formal military involvements in the region. Or that those same "patriots"
have managed to get us to pay them to "offshore" their existance, so they
really don't care how bad things get for the rest of us because life can
be quite comfy in may other places in the world. The only question that
remains is whether we are up to what it will take to change this course.

--
Neil

Gig 601XL Builder[_2_]

February 29th 08, 02:07 PM

Flydive wrote:
> Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
>
>>
>> Did we get all of them? No. But we did pretty well. And last time I
>> checked there hasn't been a terrorist attack on US soil since.
>
>
> And how many in the 30 previous years?

WTF?

How many times had Japan attacked us in the 30 years prior to 12/7/41?

Steven P. McNicoll

February 29th 08, 02:16 PM

"Phil J" > wrote in message
...
>
> Yeah, the collaboration is part of it. But I think the French had an
> extra-embarrassing surrender because they had invested so much in
> their "impregnable" Maginot line. When the Germans simply went around
> it, it really made the French look like fools.
>

Why does that make the French look like fools? If the Germans had gone
THROUGH their "impregnable" Maginot line the French would surely have looked
like fools, but forcing the Germans to circumvent the line was one of the
reasons for building it. The French expected the Maginot Line to be
bypassed and had therefore massed the majority of their army on the Belgian
border. The Germans rolled over those troops rather easily. The few
Maginot fortifications which were actually attacked by the Germans held up
rather well.

Stefan

February 29th 08, 02:34 PM

Jay Honeck schrieb:

> No, what makes the French the butt of so many jokes was their
> collaboration with the Nazis after the surrender. The Vichy government
> was an abomination.

Of course it never dawned upon you that the governement was not "the
French"? Ever heard of something like the Résistence?

Steven P. McNicoll

February 29th 08, 02:38 PM

"Flydive" > wrote in message
...
>
> And how many in the 30 previous years?
>

Well, let's see, there was the WTC bombing in 1993, the Empire State
Building shootings in 1997, hmmm, that's all I can recall. Do I win?

Phil J

February 29th 08, 06:56 PM

On Feb 29, 8:16*am, "Steven P. McNicoll" >
wrote:
> "Phil J" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
> > Yeah, the collaboration is part of it. *But I think the French had an
> > extra-embarrassing surrender because they had invested so much in
> > their "impregnable" Maginot line. *When the Germans simply went around
> > it, it really made the French look like fools.
>
> Why does that make the French look like fools? *If the Germans had gone
> THROUGH their "impregnable" Maginot line the French would surely have looked
> like fools, but forcing the Germans to circumvent the line was one of the
> reasons for building it. *The French expected the Maginot Line to be
> bypassed and had therefore massed the majority of their army on the Belgian
> border. *The Germans rolled over those troops rather easily. *The few
> Maginot fortifications which were actually attacked by the Germans held up
> rather well.

The purpose of the line was to prevent the Germans from invading
France, or at least hold them back long enough that the French could
mobilize their army to repel them. The line did succeed in forcing
the Germans to move some of their invasion force through Belgium. But
the French didn't believe the Germans could invade through the
Ardennes forest, so they left a gap in the Maginot line there. The
Germans sent a majority of their invasion force through that gap,
which allowed them to swing north and flank the French defenders
massed on the Belgian border. Because of this the Maginot line is
generally considered a failure, and leaving the Ardennes gap is
considered a huge blunder by the French. Obviously, this is all 2020
hindsight.

Phil

george

February 29th 08, 07:19 PM

On Mar 1, 3:38 am, "Steven P. McNicoll" >
wrote:
> "Flydive" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
> > And how many in the 30 previous years?
>
> Well, let's see, there was the WTC bombing in 1993, the Empire State
> Building shootings in 1997, hmmm, that's all I can recall. Do I win?

There were the attacks on embassies and the hijackings

Steven P. McNicoll

February 29th 08, 07:32 PM

"george" > wrote in message
...
>
> There were the attacks on embassies and the hijackings
>

True dat. I limited my count to attacks on the US itself by groups of
Middle East origin.

gatt[_2_]

February 29th 08, 10:42 PM

> wrote in message
...

>NonFrance is mainly Paris and the Cote de Azur area. The NonFrench are
>mostly obnoxious b*st*** who are only after your money. The good thing
>about them is that they treat everybody like low life scum no matter
>were you come from.

Ah, yeah. Out here we call that Dallas. *duck*

gatt[_2_]

February 29th 08, 10:55 PM

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
...

> The Blitzkrieg days were long gone by the time the Fw 190 appeared on the
> scene.

They'd have probably just used them for strafing and busting up formations,
wouldn't they? They couldn't have hung long in a turn fight with
Spitfires.
As I understood it, they sort of took the bull-in-a-china-cabinet approach
to things.

My grandfather's bombardier recalled slugging it out with one attacking them
head-on, watching pieces off the FW's cowl fly off and seeing an exposed
piston working as the plexiglass of the B-17 exploded all around him.
(They crashed in Sampigny, France.)

-c

gatt[_2_]

February 29th 08, 11:14 PM

"WingFlaps" > wrote in message
...

>Did you know that your #1 enemy was a US sponsored "freedom
>fighter" before he was cut off and left out to dry? That might have
>made him realize something don't you think?

That the U.S. is a potential ally if Afghanistan is invaded?

-c

gatt[_2_]

February 29th 08, 11:17 PM

"Gig 601XL Builder" > wrote in message
...
> Dudley Henriques wrote:
>
>> To me, the terrorist strategy is glaringly apparent. You first split the
>> country, then you let it destroy itself from within. You sit back and
>> watch. It's the old divide and conquer all over again, only this time it
>> smells of camel crap :-)
>>

> I think you are giving them way too much credit.

Maybe, but, at least certain members of their leadership have demonstrated
themselves to be extremely cunning, including ObL. It think underestimating
them is what got us tangled with them in the first place.

Specifically, we shouldn't have underestimated Al Qaeda in the 1990s.

-c

Jay Honeck[_2_]

March 1st 08, 05:02 AM

> Of course it never dawned upon you that the governement was not "the
> French"? Ever heard of something like the Résistence?

Sure.

So?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

March 1st 08, 07:28 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:tMDxj.1303$TT4.589@attbi_s22:

>
> I don't think

Obviously

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

March 1st 08, 07:29 AM

Phil J > wrote in
:

> On Feb 28, 1:16*pm, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>> > As unprepared as American was at that time, if the U.S. had been
>> > part of Europe, Germany could have rolled over us as well.
>> > *Germany's use of advanced technology and advanced tactics put them
>> > ahead of every other country on the planet at that time.
>>
>> I don't think anyone makes fun of the French for surrendering to
>> Hitler's blitzkrieg. *The Wehrmacht rolled over everything in its
>> path, until Hit
> ler
>> decided that they should winter in the Soviet Union. * Bad move for
>> them
> ,
>> good for us.
>>
>> No, what makes the French the butt of so many jokes was their
>> collaboratio
> n
>> with the Nazis after the surrender. * The Vichy government was an
>> abomination.
>> --
>> Jay Honeck
>> Iowa City, IA
>> Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
>> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
> Yeah, the collaboration is part of it. But I think the French had an
> extra-embarrassing surrender because they had invested so much in
> their "impregnable" Maginot line. When the Germans simply went around
> it, it really made the French look like fools.

People who live in glass houses.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

March 1st 08, 07:29 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in news:xr5yj.3282$TT4.2505
@attbi_s22:

>> Of course it never dawned upon you that the governement was not "the
>> French"? Ever heard of something like the Résistence?
>
> Sure.
>
> So?

Moron

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

March 1st 08, 07:54 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:f6Lxj.54584$yE1.32939@attbi_s21:

>>> The Spanish are all excited to see their new submarines ready to
>>> deploy. These beautifully designed subs have glass bottoms so the
>>> new Spanish navy can get a really good look at the old Spanish navy.
>>
>> The old sailors in my workgroup here are roaring.
>
> Same here.
>
> My son has decided that he probably shouldn't tell that joke when he
> visits Spain next month...
>

I'll be sure to tell customs for him.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

March 1st 08, 07:56 AM

Wolfgang Schwanke > wrote in -
berlin.de:

> American terrorist preparations:
>
> level 1: ban nasal hair trimmers
> level 2: invade some innocent country on a different continent and bomb
> it to cinders because they can't locate the right one on a map
> level 3: have some more skyscrapers bombed by the people ****ed off
> from what happened in level 2
> level 4: post racist jokes to usenet

American jokes aren't racist?

Maybe they should

Level 1. invade naeighbors to southeast.
Level 2 anschull the next nieghbors to souteast
Level 3 invade neighbors to east
Level 4 invade neighbors to west
Level 5 **** up everything else and go whining back to the vaterland.

Bertie
>
>
>

Stefan

March 1st 08, 02:13 PM

Jay Honeck schrieb:

>> Of course it never dawned upon you that the governement was not "the
>> French"? Ever heard of something like the Résistence?

> Sure.
>
> So?

Good grief, are you really so dim? It takes an awful lot of courage to
do what they did. I suspect the vast majority of those who enjoy dumb
jokes about "the French" wouldn't have that courage.

Jay Honeck[_2_]

March 2nd 08, 01:37 PM

>>> Of course it never dawned upon you that the government was not "the
>>> French"? Ever heard of something like the Résistence?
>
>> Sure.
>>
>> So?
>
> Good grief, are you really so dim? It takes an awful lot of courage to do
> what they did. I suspect the vast majority of those who enjoy dumb jokes
> about "the French" wouldn't have that courage.

Yes, we all know that some French resisted collaborating with the Nazis.
They were brave men and women who often died for their cause. All of which
has little to do with the topic, which was the Vichy government and the vast
majority of French who were content to wait it out.

If you're trying to say the Resistance acted as a moral counter-balance to
the vast majority of French who sat on their hands whilst under the yoke of
the most immoral regime in modern history, you'd be wrong.

But what else is new?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

March 2nd 08, 01:40 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:P4yyj.58112$yE1.5148@attbi_s21:

>>>> Of course it never dawned upon you that the government was not "the
>>>> French"? Ever heard of something like the Résistence?
>>
>>> Sure.
>>>
>>> So?
>>
>> Good grief, are you really so dim? It takes an awful lot of courage
>> to do what they did. I suspect the vast majority of those who enjoy
>> dumb jokes about "the French" wouldn't have that courage.
>
> Yes, we all know that some French resisted collaborating with the
> Nazis. They were brave men and women who often died for their cause.
> All of which has little to do with the topic, which was the Vichy
> government and the vast majority of French who were content to wait it
> out.
>
> If you're trying to say the Resistance acted as a moral
> counter-balance to the vast majority of French who sat on their hands
> whilst under the yoke of the most immoral regime in modern history,
> you'd be wrong.
>

Modern history is young yet, moron.

Bertie

[email protected]

March 2nd 08, 02:52 PM

On Mar 2, 8:37 am, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>
> Yes, we all know that some French resisted collaborating with the Nazis.
> They were brave men and women who often died for their cause. All of which
> has little to do with the topic, which was the Vichy government and the vast
> majority of French who were content to wait it out.
>
> If you're trying to say the Resistance acted as a moral counter-balance to
> the vast majority of French who sat on their hands whilst under the yoke of
> the most immoral regime in modern history, you'd be wrong.
>
> But what else is new?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

The list of countries with people that "sat on their hands whilst
under the yoke of the most immoral regime in modern history" includes
Poland, Denmark, Norway, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg,
Yugoslavia, and Greece.

The vast majority "sat on their hands" in each of those countries as
well.

The vast majority in any era in any place does nothing, because the
vast majority would rather live and does not have the means to resist
in any effective manner -- in France or elsewhere.

And before you get patriotic, bear in mind that the same was true for
the American Colonies -- the majority of colonists did not in any way
directly or indirectly support the Revolution.

Dan

Martin Hotze[_2_]

March 2nd 08, 07:46 PM

Jay Honeck schrieb:

> But what else is new?

Nothing. You're still an ignorant.

#m

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

March 2nd 08, 07:52 PM

Martin Hotze > wrote in news:fqf060$p1b$1
@kirk.hotze.com:

> Jay Honeck schrieb:
>
>> But what else is new?
>
> Nothing. You're still an ignorant.
>
> #m

That'd be "you're still ingnorant" or "you're an ignoramous" or You're as
ignorant as a toilet brush"

Not a grammar lame, just constructive cirticism..

Bertie

Martin Hotze[_2_]

March 2nd 08, 07:53 PM

schrieb:

> The vast majority "sat on their hands" in each of those countries as
> well.

You mean like one out of my family who was told to "shut up - else he
was to be deported". He protested that his 17 year old son was too young
for joining the Wehrmacht. Local politicians had to intervene at the
'Gauleiter' to calm things down.

****!

#m

WingFlaps

March 2nd 08, 08:17 PM

On Mar 3, 2:37*am, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:

>
> If you're trying to say the Resistance acted as a moral counter-balance to
> the vast majority of French who sat on their hands whilst under the yoke of
> the most immoral regime in modern history, you'd be wrong.
>
> But what else is new?

Well you've not shown yourself in a good light at all in this thread.
I think you should rethink you attitudes and preconceptions.

Cheers

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

March 2nd 08, 08:22 PM

WingFlaps > wrote in
:

> On Mar 3, 2:37*am, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>
>>
>> If you're trying to say the Resistance acted as a moral
>> counter-balance to
>
>> the vast majority of French who sat on their hands whilst under the
>> yoke o
> f
>> the most immoral regime in modern history, you'd be wrong.
>>
>> But what else is new?
>
> Well you've not shown yourself in a good light at all in this thread.
> I think you should rethink you attitudes and preconceptions.

If he's anything, he's consistent.

he's categorically incapable of rethinking anything.

He's a kook!

Bertie

Stella Starr

March 2nd 08, 09:13 PM

Jay Honeck wrote:
All of
> which has little to do with the topic, which was the Vichy government
> and the vast majority of French who were content to wait it out.
>
Actually, apparently...
"Recent research by the historian Simon Kitson has shown that, in spite
of extensive State Collaboration, Vichy led an ultimately unsuccessful
campaign to preserve the sovereignty of this southern zone by arresting
German spies...."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vichy_France

Egad. First music radio's replaced by bellowing idiots who shout lessons
in propagandized Social Studies as if their listeners are morons, now
flying chat turns into WW2 history class. Why are all the sources of
fun turning into so much work?

Jay Honeck[_2_]

March 2nd 08, 10:53 PM

> The list of countries with people that "sat on their hands whilst
> under the yoke of the most immoral regime in modern history" includes
> Poland, Denmark, Norway, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg,
> Yugoslavia, and Greece.

Right, but none of those countries were loudly proclaiming themselves to be
"world powers" and "leaders of the free world", as was the case with France
prior to WWII. Their collapse in the Battle of France was so complete,
quick, and unexpected that their national prestige will probably never
recover.

The truth is that France prissily regarded themselves as a major world power
long after the shine was off her apple. The amazing thing is that they
continue to display this attitude to this day.

Ya gotta admire their chutzpah, I suppose -- but it's what makes them the
butt of jokes here in America.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

G Paleologopoulos

March 2nd 08, 11:00 PM

>
>> The list of countries with people that "sat on their hands whilst
>> under the yoke of the most immoral regime in modern history" includes
>> Poland, Denmark, Norway, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg,
>> Yugoslavia, and Greece.
>

Somebody get their fkucking history straight and get Greece off this dip
**** list.
G, from Greece.

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

March 2nd 08, 11:02 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:HdGyj.58700$yE1.12710@attbi_s21:

>> The list of countries with people that "sat on their hands whilst
>> under the yoke of the most immoral regime in modern history" includes
>> Poland, Denmark, Norway, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg,
>> Yugoslavia, and Greece.
>
> Right, but none of those countries were loudly proclaiming themselves
> to be "world powers" and "leaders of the free world", as was the case
> with France prior to WWII. Their collapse in the Battle of France was
> so complete, quick, and unexpected that their national prestige will
> probably never recover.
>
> The truth is that France prissily regarded themselves as a major world
> power long after the shine was off her apple. The amazing thing is
> that they continue to display this attitude to this day.
>
> Ya gotta admire their chutzpah, I suppose -- but it's what makes them
> the butt of jokes here in America.

Nope, what makes them the butt of jokes iare morons like you.

Bertie

Jay Honeck[_2_]

March 2nd 08, 11:06 PM

>Well you've not shown yourself in a good light at all in this thread.
>I think you should rethink you attitudes and preconceptions.

I don't have attitudes and preconceptions -- but I do have a minor in
history from the University of Wisconsin, and another 30 years of World War
II studies under my belt. My father was a Captain in the US Army Air Corps
during the war, and was stationed in France and Germany in 1945. To assume
I'm not intimately familiar with France's wartime history and post-war
behavior is presumptuous.

Sorry if stating facts hurts your pride, but I calls 'em as I sees 'em. The
fact remains that the French were humiliated in 1940, many French acted
dishonorably under the Nazi yoke, and they have yet to fully come to terms
with their fate as a former world power.

Don't despair, however. WRT France not gracefully accepting their lessened
global position, they aren't alone. Every dominant world power eventually
faces the same fate, and the U.S.'s turn is coming.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

March 2nd 08, 11:08 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:fqGyj.5806$TT4.3619@attbi_s22:

>>Well you've not shown yourself in a good light at all in this thread.
>>I think you should rethink you attitudes and preconceptions.
>
> I don't have attitudes and preconceptions -- but I do have a minor in
> history from the University of Wisconsin,

Oow!

and another 30 years of
> World War II studies under my belt. My father was a Captain in the US
> Army Air Corps during the war, and was stationed in France and Germany
> in 1945. To assume I'm not intimately familiar with France's wartime
> history and post-war behavior is presumptuous.
>
> Sorry if stating facts hurts your pride, but I calls 'em as I sees
> 'em. The fact remains that the French were humiliated in 1940, many
> French acted dishonorably under the Nazi yoke, and they have yet to
> fully come to terms with their fate as a former world power.
>
> Don't despair, however. WRT France not gracefully accepting their
> lessened global position, they aren't alone. Every dominant world
> power eventually faces the same fate, and the U.S.'s turn is coming.

You're an idiot.

Bertie

Jay Honeck[_2_]

March 2nd 08, 11:16 PM

> Somebody get their fkucking history straight and get Greece off this dip
> **** list.
> G, from Greece.

Indeed. The Greeks, while no match for the Germans, managed to thoroughly
humiliate the Italians before falling under Axis occupation. For a brief
(if not entirely impartial) history of Greece in WWII, see:

http://www.ahistoryofgreece.com/worldwarII.htm
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

March 2nd 08, 11:19 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:_yGyj.5815$TT4.1156@attbi_s22:

>> Somebody get their fkucking history straight and get Greece off this
>> dip **** list.
>> G, from Greece.
>
> Indeed. The Greeks, while no match for the Germans, managed to
> thoroughly humiliate the Italians before falling under Axis
> occupation. For a brief (if not entirely impartial) history of
> Greece in WWII, see:
>
> http://www.ahistoryofgreece.com/worldwarII.htm

Slurp

Bertie

Matt Whiting

March 3rd 08, 01:01 AM

Jay Honeck wrote:
>> Well you've not shown yourself in a good light at all in this thread.
>> I think you should rethink you attitudes and preconceptions.
>
> I don't have attitudes and preconceptions -- but I do have a minor in
> history from the University of Wisconsin, and another 30 years of World
> War II studies under my belt. My father was a Captain in the US Army
> Air Corps during the war, and was stationed in France and Germany in
> 1945. To assume I'm not intimately familiar with France's wartime
> history and post-war behavior is presumptuous.
>
> Sorry if stating facts hurts your pride, but I calls 'em as I sees 'em.
> The fact remains that the French were humiliated in 1940, many French
> acted dishonorably under the Nazi yoke, and they have yet to fully come
> to terms with their fate as a former world power.
>
> Don't despair, however. WRT France not gracefully accepting their
> lessened global position, they aren't alone. Every dominant world power
> eventually faces the same fate, and the U.S.'s turn is coming.

Maybe sooner than we think as we are now outsourcing our military to
France! :-)

Matt

[email protected]

March 3rd 08, 01:18 AM

On Mar 2, 5:53 pm, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> > The list of countries with people that "sat on their hands whilst
> > under the yoke of the most immoral regime in modern history" includes
> > Poland, Denmark, Norway, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg,
> > Yugoslavia, and Greece.
>
> Right, but none of those countries were loudly proclaiming themselves to be
> "world powers" and "leaders of the free world", as was the case with France
> prior to WWII. Their collapse in the Battle of France was so complete,
> quick, and unexpected that their national prestige will probably never
> recover.
>
> The truth is that France prissily regarded themselves as a major world power
> long after the shine was off her apple. The amazing thing is that they
> continue to display this attitude to this day.
>
> Ya gotta admire their chutzpah, I suppose -- but it's what makes them the
> butt of jokes here in America.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.

Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in world
history.

My master's in History and I will be waiting.

Dan

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

March 3rd 08, 01:21 AM

Matt Whiting > wrote in
:

> Jay Honeck wrote:
>>> Well you've not shown yourself in a good light at all in this
>>> thread. I think you should rethink you attitudes and preconceptions.
>>
>> I don't have attitudes and preconceptions -- but I do have a minor in
>> history from the University of Wisconsin, and another 30 years of
>> World War II studies under my belt. My father was a Captain in the
>> US Army Air Corps during the war, and was stationed in France and
>> Germany in 1945. To assume I'm not intimately familiar with
>> France's wartime history and post-war behavior is presumptuous.
>>
>> Sorry if stating facts hurts your pride, but I calls 'em as I sees
>> 'em. The fact remains that the French were humiliated in 1940, many
>> French acted dishonorably under the Nazi yoke, and they have yet to
>> fully come to terms with their fate as a former world power.
>>
>> Don't despair, however. WRT France not gracefully accepting their
>> lessened global position, they aren't alone. Every dominant world
>> power eventually faces the same fate, and the U.S.'s turn is coming.
>
> Maybe sooner than we think as we are now outsourcing our military to
> France! :-)

And why not? If, as is often claimed, they are in fact making the things at
a loss and at the expense of the government, you can bankrupt them in
revenge by buying loads of 'busses.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

March 3rd 08, 01:22 AM

" > wrote in
:

> On Mar 2, 5:53 pm, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>> > The list of countries with people that "sat on their hands whilst
>> > under the yoke of the most immoral regime in modern history"
>> > includes Poland, Denmark, Norway, Belgium, the Netherlands,
>> > Luxembourg, Yugoslavia, and Greece.
>>
>> Right, but none of those countries were loudly proclaiming themselves
>> to be "world powers" and "leaders of the free world", as was the case
>> with France prior to WWII. Their collapse in the Battle of France
>> was so complete, quick, and unexpected that their national prestige
>> will probably never recover.
>>
>> The truth is that France prissily regarded themselves as a major
>> world power long after the shine was off her apple. The amazing
>> thing is that they continue to display this attitude to this day.
>>
>> Ya gotta admire their chutzpah, I suppose -- but it's what makes them
>> the butt of jokes here in America.
>> --
>> Jay Honeck
>> Iowa City, IA
>> Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
>> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>
> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in world
> history.
>
> My master's in History and I will be waiting.

That's a bit unfair, isn't it? Anyone who has read a pamphlet on world
history knows more than Jay...

Bertie
>

[email protected]

March 3rd 08, 02:25 AM

On Mar 2, 8:22 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> " > wrote :
>
>
>
> > On Mar 2, 5:53 pm, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> >> > The list of countries with people that "sat on their hands whilst
> >> > under the yoke of the most immoral regime in modern history"
> >> > includes Poland, Denmark, Norway, Belgium, the Netherlands,
> >> > Luxembourg, Yugoslavia, and Greece.
>
> >> Right, but none of those countries were loudly proclaiming themselves
> >> to be "world powers" and "leaders of the free world", as was the case
> >> with France prior to WWII. Their collapse in the Battle of France
> >> was so complete, quick, and unexpected that their national prestige
> >> will probably never recover.
>
> >> The truth is that France prissily regarded themselves as a major
> >> world power long after the shine was off her apple. The amazing
> >> thing is that they continue to display this attitude to this day.
>
> >> Ya gotta admire their chutzpah, I suppose -- but it's what makes them
> >> the butt of jokes here in America.
> >> --
> >> Jay Honeck
> >> Iowa City, IA
> >> Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
> >> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
> > Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
> > Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>
> > Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in world
> > history.
>
> > My master's in History and I will be waiting.
>
> That's a bit unfair, isn't it? Anyone who has read a pamphlet on world
> history knows more than Jay...
>
> Bertie
>
>

True, that.

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

March 3rd 08, 02:51 AM

" > wrote in
:

> On Mar 2, 8:22 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> " > wrote
>> innews:6a80bb93-cda8-459a-8763-c4a2e03d93a5@
60g2000hsy.googlegroups.co
>> m:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Mar 2, 5:53 pm, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>> >> > The list of countries with people that "sat on their hands
>> >> > whilst under the yoke of the most immoral regime in modern
>> >> > history" includes Poland, Denmark, Norway, Belgium, the
>> >> > Netherlands, Luxembourg, Yugoslavia, and Greece.
>>
>> >> Right, but none of those countries were loudly proclaiming
>> >> themselves to be "world powers" and "leaders of the free world",
>> >> as was the case with France prior to WWII. Their collapse in the
>> >> Battle of France was so complete, quick, and unexpected that their
>> >> national prestige will probably never recover.
>>
>> >> The truth is that France prissily regarded themselves as a major
>> >> world power long after the shine was off her apple. The amazing
>> >> thing is that they continue to display this attitude to this day.
>>
>> >> Ya gotta admire their chutzpah, I suppose -- but it's what makes
>> >> them the butt of jokes here in America.
>> >> --
>> >> Jay Honeck
>> >> Iowa City, IA
>> >> Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
>> >> "Your Aviation Destination"
>>
>> > Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>> > Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>>
>> > Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in
>> > world history.
>>
>> > My master's in History and I will be waiting.
>>
>> That's a bit unfair, isn't it? Anyone who has read a pamphlet on
>> world history knows more than Jay...
>>
>> Bertie
>>
>>
>
> True, that.
>

Careful! You're feding the troll!

You don't want a reprimand, do you?

bertie
>

Jay Honeck[_2_]

March 3rd 08, 04:05 AM

>> > My master's in History and I will be waiting.
>>
>> That's a bit unfair, isn't it? Anyone who has read a pamphlet on world
>> history knows more than Jay...
>>
>> Bertie
>
> True, that.

Oooh boy. Two anonymous mental giants -- one who claims to be a pilot, and
one who claims to be historian?

There goes the neighborhood...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

March 3rd 08, 04:15 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:RNKyj.59012$yE1.4893@attbi_s21:

>>> > My master's in History and I will be waiting.
>>>
>>> That's a bit unfair, isn't it? Anyone who has read a pamphlet on
>>> world history knows more than Jay...
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>
>> True, that.
>
> Oooh boy. Two anonymous mental giants -- one who claims to be a
> pilot, and one who claims to be historian?
>
> There goes the neighborhood

Aw, your little white bread world falling down around your ears?

Bertie

Jay Honeck[_2_]

March 3rd 08, 04:17 AM

> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>
> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in world
> history.

Wow, that's really impressive. Not.

Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's "place in
history" -- we're talking about their national behavior in World War II,
their current status as a former world power, and their current role as the
butt of much disparaging humor in America.

But it's well and good that you bring it up, since France's legitimate
history as a great power makes their current status more pathetic -- not
less -- and serves to further explain the reasons for their being the target
for jokesters in the US and elsewhere.

Are these jokes fair or appropriate? Often not. But the discussion is
about *why* these jokes exist, not whether or not they are legitimate.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

March 3rd 08, 04:18 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:4ZKyj.6120$TT4.1637@attbi_s22:

>> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>>
>> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in world
>> history.
>
> Wow, that's really impressive. Not.
>
> Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's "place in
> history" -- we're talking about their national behavior in World War
> II, their current status as a former world power, and their current
> role as the butt of much disparaging humor in America.

All of which says you're an asshole.

Bertie

mariposas rand mair fheal

March 3rd 08, 04:47 AM

In article >,
Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:

> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in
> news:4ZKyj.6120$TT4.1637@attbi_s22:
>
> >> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
> >> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
> >>
> >> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in world
> >> history.
> >
> > Wow, that's really impressive. Not.
> >
> > Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's "place in
> > history" -- we're talking about their national behavior in World War
> > II, their current status as a former world power, and their current
> > role as the butt of much disparaging humor in America.

why exactly am i suppose to be disparaging france?
this seems to have started after they said they were not going to fight in iraq
without real evidence that iraq was making nbc weapons

it sounds to me like i supposed to flush two hundred years
of friendship and mutual struggle down the toilet
because they were right about iraq

does that sum it up correctly

arf meow arf - everything thing i know i learned
from the collective unconscience of odd bodkins
nobody could do that much decoupage
without calling on the powers of darkness

Aratzio

March 3rd 08, 04:52 AM

On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 04:18:06 +0000 (UTC), in the land of
alt.usenet.kooks, Bertie the Bunyip > got double secret
probation for writing:

>"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
>news:4ZKyj.6120$TT4.1637@attbi_s22:
>
>>> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>>> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>>>
>>> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in world
>>> history.
>>
>> Wow, that's really impressive. Not.
>>
>> Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's "place in
>> history" -- we're talking about their national behavior in World War
>> II, their current status as a former world power, and their current
>> role as the butt of much disparaging humor in America.
>
>
>All of which says you're an asshole.
>
>
>Bertie

Can I be the ****head?

--

Miguel, once again stating the obvious:

Message-ID: >

"Yes, I must be impotent."

Aratzio

March 3rd 08, 04:56 AM

On Sun, 02 Mar 2008 20:47:30 -0800, in the land of alt.usenet.kooks,
mariposas rand mair fheal > got double secret
probation for writing:

>In article >,
> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>
>> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in
>> news:4ZKyj.6120$TT4.1637@attbi_s22:
>>
>> >> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>> >> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>> >>
>> >> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in world
>> >> history.
>> >
>> > Wow, that's really impressive. Not.
>> >
>> > Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's "place in
>> > history" -- we're talking about their national behavior in World War
>> > II, their current status as a former world power, and their current
>> > role as the butt of much disparaging humor in America.
>
>why exactly am i suppose to be disparaging france?
>this seems to have started after they said they were not going to fight in iraq
>without real evidence that iraq was making nbc weapons
>
>it sounds to me like i supposed to flush two hundred years
>of friendship and mutual struggle down the toilet
>because they were right about iraq
>
>does that sum it up correctly
>

Pretty much.

Nothing like having a handy French Fleet to bottle up Cornwallis on a
penninsula.

How would things have turned out if the French were not on our side in
the revolution?

--

Miguel, once again stating the obvious:

Message-ID: >

"Yes, I must be impotent."

miguel

March 3rd 08, 05:57 AM

On Sun, 02 Mar 2008 20:56:08 -0800, Aratzio >
wrote:

>On Sun, 02 Mar 2008 20:47:30 -0800, in the land of alt.usenet.kooks,
>mariposas rand mair fheal > got double secret
>probation for writing:
>
>>In article >,
>> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>
>>> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in
>>> news:4ZKyj.6120$TT4.1637@attbi_s22:
>>>
>>> >> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>>> >> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>>> >>
>>> >> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in world
>>> >> history.
>>> >
>>> > Wow, that's really impressive. Not.
>>> >
>>> > Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's "place in
>>> > history" -- we're talking about their national behavior in World War
>>> > II, their current status as a former world power, and their current
>>> > role as the butt of much disparaging humor in America.
>>
>>why exactly am i suppose to be disparaging france?
>>this seems to have started after they said they were not going to fight in iraq
>>without real evidence that iraq was making nbc weapons
>>
>>it sounds to me like i supposed to flush two hundred years
>>of friendship and mutual struggle down the toilet
>>because they were right about iraq
>>
>>does that sum it up correctly
>>
>
>Pretty much.
>
>Nothing like having a handy French Fleet to bottle up Cornwallis on a
>penninsula.
>
>How would things have turned out if the French were not on our side in
>the revolution?

We'd still be speaking english, I reckon.

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

March 3rd 08, 10:31 AM

mariposas rand mair fheal > wrote in
:

> In article >,
> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>
>> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in
>> news:4ZKyj.6120$TT4.1637@attbi_s22:
>>
>> >> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>> >> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>> >>
>> >> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in
>> >> world history.
>> >
>> > Wow, that's really impressive. Not.
>> >
>> > Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's "place
>> > in history" -- we're talking about their national behavior in World
>> > War II, their current status as a former world power, and their
>> > current role as the butt of much disparaging humor in America.
>
> why exactly am i suppose to be disparaging france?
> this seems to have started after they said they were not going to
> fight in iraq without real evidence that iraq was making nbc weapons
>
> it sounds to me like i supposed to flush two hundred years
> of friendship and mutual struggle down the toilet
> because they were right about iraq
>
> does that sum it up correctly
>

Apparently, This is what Jay's telling us and he seems to think he knows
what he's talking about.

He's minored in History at Wisconsin, you know.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

March 3rd 08, 10:32 AM

Aratzio > wrote in
:

> On Sun, 02 Mar 2008 20:47:30 -0800, in the land of alt.usenet.kooks,
> mariposas rand mair fheal > got double secret
> probation for writing:
>
>>In article >,
>> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>
>>> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in
>>> news:4ZKyj.6120$TT4.1637@attbi_s22:
>>>
>>> >> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>>> >> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>>> >>
>>> >> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in
>>> >> world history.
>>> >
>>> > Wow, that's really impressive. Not.
>>> >
>>> > Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's "place
>>> > in history" -- we're talking about their national behavior in
>>> > World War II, their current status as a former world power, and
>>> > their current role as the butt of much disparaging humor in
>>> > America.
>>
>>why exactly am i suppose to be disparaging france?
>>this seems to have started after they said they were not going to
>>fight in iraq without real evidence that iraq was making nbc weapons
>>
>>it sounds to me like i supposed to flush two hundred years
>>of friendship and mutual struggle down the toilet
>>because they were right about iraq
>>
>>does that sum it up correctly
>>
>
> Pretty much.
>
> Nothing like having a handy French Fleet to bottle up Cornwallis on a
> penninsula.
>
> How would things have turned out if the French were not on our side in
> the revolution?
>

We'd probably be speaking English right now if they hadn;t!

Oh wait.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

March 3rd 08, 10:33 AM

miguel > wrote in
:

> On Sun, 02 Mar 2008 20:56:08 -0800, Aratzio >
> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 02 Mar 2008 20:47:30 -0800, in the land of alt.usenet.kooks,
>>mariposas rand mair fheal > got double secret
>>probation for writing:
>>
>>>In article >,
>>> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in
>>>> news:4ZKyj.6120$TT4.1637@attbi_s22:
>>>>
>>>> >> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>>>> >> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in
>>>> >> world history.
>>>> >
>>>> > Wow, that's really impressive. Not.
>>>> >
>>>> > Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's
>>>> > "place in history" -- we're talking about their national behavior
>>>> > in World War II, their current status as a former world power,
>>>> > and their current role as the butt of much disparaging humor in
>>>> > America.
>>>
>>>why exactly am i suppose to be disparaging france?
>>>this seems to have started after they said they were not going to
>>>fight in iraq without real evidence that iraq was making nbc weapons
>>>
>>>it sounds to me like i supposed to flush two hundred years
>>>of friendship and mutual struggle down the toilet
>>>because they were right about iraq
>>>
>>>does that sum it up correctly
>>>
>>
>>Pretty much.
>>
>>Nothing like having a handy French Fleet to bottle up Cornwallis on a
>>penninsula.
>>
>>How would things have turned out if the French were not on our side in
>>the revolution?
>
> We'd still be speaking english, I reckon.
>

Merde!

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

March 3rd 08, 10:34 AM

Aratzio > wrote in
:

> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 04:18:06 +0000 (UTC), in the land of
> alt.usenet.kooks, Bertie the Bunyip > got double secret
> probation for writing:
>
>>"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
>>news:4ZKyj.6120$TT4.1637@attbi_s22:
>>
>>>> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>>>> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>>>>
>>>> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in world
>>>> history.
>>>
>>> Wow, that's really impressive. Not.
>>>
>>> Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's "place in
>>> history" -- we're talking about their national behavior in World War
>>> II, their current status as a former world power, and their current
>>> role as the butt of much disparaging humor in America.
>>
>>
>>All of which says you're an asshole.
>>
>>
>>Bertie
>
> Can I be the ****head?
>
If you like. We have a few already, but there's always room for another.

Bertie

[email protected]

March 3rd 08, 11:32 AM

On Mar 2, 11:17 pm, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> > Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
> > Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>
> > Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in world
> > history.
>
> Wow, that's really impressive. Not.
>
> Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's "place in
> history" -- we're talking about their national behavior in World War II,
> their current status as a former world power, and their current role as the
> butt of much disparaging humor in America.
>
> But it's well and good that you bring it up, since France's legitimate
> history as a great power makes their current status more pathetic -- not
> less -- and serves to further explain the reasons for their being the target
> for jokesters in the US and elsewhere.
>
> Are these jokes fair or appropriate? Often not. But the discussion is
> about *why* these jokes exist, not whether or not they are legitimate.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

Question: How do they practice "SAFE SEX" in Iowa?
Answer: They paint a red "X" on the cows that kick.

Aratzio

March 3rd 08, 01:57 PM

On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 10:32:19 +0000 (UTC), in alt.usenet.kooks, Bertie
the Bunyip > bloviated:

>Aratzio > wrote in
:
>
>> On Sun, 02 Mar 2008 20:47:30 -0800, in the land of alt.usenet.kooks,
>> mariposas rand mair fheal > got double secret
>> probation for writing:
>>
>>>In article >,
>>> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in
>>>> news:4ZKyj.6120$TT4.1637@attbi_s22:
>>>>
>>>> >> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>>>> >> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in
>>>> >> world history.
>>>> >
>>>> > Wow, that's really impressive. Not.
>>>> >
>>>> > Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's "place
>>>> > in history" -- we're talking about their national behavior in
>>>> > World War II, their current status as a former world power, and
>>>> > their current role as the butt of much disparaging humor in
>>>> > America.
>>>
>>>why exactly am i suppose to be disparaging france?
>>>this seems to have started after they said they were not going to
>>>fight in iraq without real evidence that iraq was making nbc weapons
>>>
>>>it sounds to me like i supposed to flush two hundred years
>>>of friendship and mutual struggle down the toilet
>>>because they were right about iraq
>>>
>>>does that sum it up correctly
>>>
>>
>> Pretty much.
>>
>> Nothing like having a handy French Fleet to bottle up Cornwallis on a
>> penninsula.
>>
>> How would things have turned out if the French were not on our side in
>> the revolution?
>>
>
>We'd probably be speaking English right now if they hadn;t!
>
>
>Oh wait.
>
>Bertie

The word yer lokin fer is "commonwealth"

Aratzio

March 3rd 08, 01:58 PM

On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 10:34:10 +0000 (UTC), in alt.usenet.kooks, Bertie
the Bunyip > bloviated:

>Aratzio > wrote in
:
>
>> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 04:18:06 +0000 (UTC), in the land of
>> alt.usenet.kooks, Bertie the Bunyip > got double secret
>> probation for writing:
>>
>>>"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
>>>news:4ZKyj.6120$TT4.1637@attbi_s22:
>>>
>>>>> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>>>>> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>>>>>
>>>>> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in world
>>>>> history.
>>>>
>>>> Wow, that's really impressive. Not.
>>>>
>>>> Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's "place in
>>>> history" -- we're talking about their national behavior in World War
>>>> II, their current status as a former world power, and their current
>>>> role as the butt of much disparaging humor in America.
>>>
>>>
>>>All of which says you're an asshole.
>>>
>>>
>>>Bertie
>>
>> Can I be the ****head?
>>
>If you like. We have a few already, but there's always room for another.
>
>
>Bertie

YAY!!!!!!

Royalist trash.

Gig 601XL Builder[_2_]

March 3rd 08, 03:07 PM

wrote:

>
> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>
> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in world
> history.
>
> My master's in History and I will be waiting.
>
>
> Dan
>
>

Well Rome used to rule the known world. It hasn't translated well into
modern military or even diplomatic power for Italy.

Daedalus

March 3rd 08, 05:12 PM

On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 04:18:06 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
wrote:

>"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
>news:4ZKyj.6120$TT4.1637@attbi_s22:
>
>>> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>>> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>>>
>>> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in world
>>> history.
>>
>> Wow, that's really impressive. Not.
>>
>> Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's "place in
>> history" -- we're talking about their national behavior in World War
>> II, their current status as a former world power, and their current
>> role as the butt of much disparaging humor in America.
>
>
>All of which says you're an asshole.
>
>
>Bertie

Why weren't the French involved in this conversation?

Jade

[email protected]

March 3rd 08, 05:36 PM

On Mar 3, 12:12 pm, Daedalus > wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 04:18:06 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
> >news:4ZKyj.6120$TT4.1637@attbi_s22:
>
> >>> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
> >>> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>
> >>> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in world
> >>> history.
>
> >> Wow, that's really impressive. Not.
>
> >> Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's "place in
> >> history" -- we're talking about their national behavior in World War
> >> II, their current status as a former world power, and their current
> >> role as the butt of much disparaging humor in America.
>
> >All of which says you're an asshole.
>
> >Bertie
>
> Why weren't the French involved in this conversation?
>
> Jade

They were.

Les gens d'Iowa sont des idiots.

Dan

miguel

March 3rd 08, 05:36 PM

On Mon, 03 Mar 2008 12:12:07 -0500, Daedalus >
wrote:

>On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 04:18:06 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
>wrote:
>
>>"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
>>news:4ZKyj.6120$TT4.1637@attbi_s22:
>>
>>>> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>>>> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>>>>
>>>> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in world
>>>> history.
>>>
>>> Wow, that's really impressive. Not.
>>>
>>> Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's "place in
>>> history" -- we're talking about their national behavior in World War
>>> II, their current status as a former world power, and their current
>>> role as the butt of much disparaging humor in America.
>>
>>
>>All of which says you're an asshole.
>>
>>
>>Bertie
>
>Why weren't the French involved in this conversation?
>
>Jade

Probably because they speak poopytalk.

miguel

March 3rd 08, 05:44 PM

On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 09:36:33 -0800 (PST), "
> wrote:

>On Mar 3, 12:12 pm, Daedalus > wrote:
>> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 04:18:06 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
>> >news:4ZKyj.6120$TT4.1637@attbi_s22:
>>
>> >>> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>> >>> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>>
>> >>> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in world
>> >>> history.
>>
>> >> Wow, that's really impressive. Not.
>>
>> >> Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's "place in
>> >> history" -- we're talking about their national behavior in World War
>> >> II, their current status as a former world power, and their current
>> >> role as the butt of much disparaging humor in America.
>>
>> >All of which says you're an asshole.
>>
>> >Bertie
>>
>> Why weren't the French involved in this conversation?
>>
>> Jade
>
>They were.
>
>Les gens d'Iowa sont des idiots.

Please observe the "No Poopytalk" rule on usenet.

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

March 3rd 08, 06:23 PM

Aratzio > wrote in
:

> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 10:32:19 +0000 (UTC), in alt.usenet.kooks, Bertie
> the Bunyip > bloviated:
>
>>Aratzio > wrote in
:
>>
>>> On Sun, 02 Mar 2008 20:47:30 -0800, in the land of alt.usenet.kooks,
>>> mariposas rand mair fheal > got double secret
>>> probation for writing:
>>>
>>>>In article >,
>>>> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in
>>>>> news:4ZKyj.6120$TT4.1637@attbi_s22:
>>>>>
>>>>> >> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>>>>> >> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in
>>>>> >> world history.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Wow, that's really impressive. Not.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's
"place
>>>>> > in history" -- we're talking about their national behavior in
>>>>> > World War II, their current status as a former world power, and
>>>>> > their current role as the butt of much disparaging humor in
>>>>> > America.
>>>>
>>>>why exactly am i suppose to be disparaging france?
>>>>this seems to have started after they said they were not going to
>>>>fight in iraq without real evidence that iraq was making nbc weapons
>>>>
>>>>it sounds to me like i supposed to flush two hundred years
>>>>of friendship and mutual struggle down the toilet
>>>>because they were right about iraq
>>>>
>>>>does that sum it up correctly
>>>>
>>>
>>> Pretty much.
>>>
>>> Nothing like having a handy French Fleet to bottle up Cornwallis on
a
>>> penninsula.
>>>
>>> How would things have turned out if the French were not on our side
in
>>> the revolution?
>>>
>>
>>We'd probably be speaking English right now if they hadn;t!
>>
>>
>>Oh wait.
>>
>>Bertie
>
> The word yer lokin fer is "commonwealth"
>

As i the imperial power raping the other country?

Sounds better than "chattel" I suppose.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

March 3rd 08, 06:24 PM

Aratzio > wrote in
:

> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 10:34:10 +0000 (UTC), in alt.usenet.kooks, Bertie
> the Bunyip > bloviated:
>
>>Aratzio > wrote in
:
>>
>>> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 04:18:06 +0000 (UTC), in the land of
>>> alt.usenet.kooks, Bertie the Bunyip > got double secret
>>> probation for writing:
>>>
>>>>"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
>>>>news:4ZKyj.6120$TT4.1637@attbi_s22:
>>>>
>>>>>> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>>>>>> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in
>>>>>> world history.
>>>>>
>>>>> Wow, that's really impressive. Not.
>>>>>
>>>>> Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's "place
>>>>> in history" -- we're talking about their national behavior in
>>>>> World War II, their current status as a former world power, and
>>>>> their current role as the butt of much disparaging humor in
>>>>> America.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>All of which says you're an asshole.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Bertie
>>>
>>> Can I be the ****head?
>>>
>>If you like. We have a few already, but there's always room for
>>another.
>>
>>
>>Bertie
>
> YAY!!!!!!
>
> Royalist trash.
>

Mmmmkay..

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

March 3rd 08, 06:27 PM

Gig 601XL Builder > wrote in news:13so54kfvgqqb93
@news.supernews.com:

> wrote:
>
>>
>> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>>
>> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in world
>> history.
>>
>> My master's in History and I will be waiting.
>>
>>
>> Dan
>>
>>
>
> Well Rome used to rule the known world. It hasn't translated well into
> modern military or even diplomatic power for Italy.
>

Yes, but they terrific coffee and very reasonably priced high quality
restaurants. Not to mention Alfa Romeos and the ability to look cool even
when riding a motor scooter.

What else could you want?

Bertie

[email protected]

March 3rd 08, 06:35 PM

On Mar 2, 11:17 pm, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> > Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
> > Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>
> > Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in world
> > history.
>
> Wow, that's really impressive. Not.
>
> Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's "place in
> history" -- we're talking about their national behavior in World War II,
> their current status as a former world power, and their current role as the
> butt of much disparaging humor in America.
>
> But it's well and good that you bring it up, since France's legitimate
> history as a great power makes their current status more pathetic -- not
> less -- and serves to further explain the reasons for their being the target
> for jokesters in the US and elsewhere.
>
> Are these jokes fair or appropriate? Often not. But the discussion is
> about *why* these jokes exist, not whether or not they are legitimate.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

So the "target of jokesters" supports your conclusion that...?

Sorry.. having a hard time keeping up.

::YAWN::

Kali

March 3rd 08, 06:35 PM

In >, Aratzio
said:
: On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 04:18:06 +0000 (UTC), in the land of
: alt.usenet.kooks, Bertie the Bunyip > got double secret
: probation for writing:
:
: >"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
: >news:4ZKyj.6120$TT4.1637@attbi_s22:
: >
: >>> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
: >>> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
: >>>
: >>> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in world
: >>> history.
: >>
: >> Wow, that's really impressive. Not.
: >>
: >> Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's "place in
: >> history" -- we're talking about their national behavior in World War
: >> II, their current status as a former world power, and their current
: >> role as the butt of much disparaging humor in America.
: >
: >
: >All of which says you're an asshole.
: >
: >
: >Bertie
:
: Can I be the ****head?

Please. If you weren't, then the sun wouldn't shine no more.

Kali
--
"If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called
research, would it?"
- Albert Einstein

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

March 3rd 08, 06:36 PM

Daedalus > wrote in
:

> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 04:18:06 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
> wrote:
>
>>"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
>>news:4ZKyj.6120$TT4.1637@attbi_s22:
>>
>>>> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>>>> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>>>>
>>>> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in world
>>>> history.
>>>
>>> Wow, that's really impressive. Not.
>>>
>>> Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's "place in
>>> history" -- we're talking about their national behavior in World War
>>> II, their current status as a former world power, and their current
>>> role as the butt of much disparaging humor in America.
>>
>>
>>All of which says you're an asshole.
>>
>>
>>Bertie
>
> Why weren't the French involved in this conversation?

Good point.

Bertie

[email protected]

March 3rd 08, 06:38 PM

On Mar 3, 1:35 pm, Kali > wrote:
> In >, Aratzio
> said:
> : On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 04:18:06 +0000 (UTC), in the land of
> : alt.usenet.kooks, Bertie the Bunyip > got double secret
> : probation for writing:
> :
> : >"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
> : >news:4ZKyj.6120$TT4.1637@attbi_s22:
> : >
> : >>> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
> : >>> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
> : >>>
> : >>> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in world
> : >>> history.
> : >>
> : >> Wow, that's really impressive. Not.
> : >>
> : >> Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's "place in
> : >> history" -- we're talking about their national behavior in World War
> : >> II, their current status as a former world power, and their current
> : >> role as the butt of much disparaging humor in America.
> : >
> : >
> : >All of which says you're an asshole.
> : >
> : >
> : >Bertie
> :
> : Can I be the ****head?
>
> Please. If you weren't, then the sun wouldn't shine no more.
>
> Kali
> --
> "If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called
> research, would it?"
> - Albert Einstein

Right.

What he said.

Off topic: Are you from Nigeria?

Dan

gatt[_2_]

March 3rd 08, 06:50 PM

"Stefan" > wrote in message
...
> Jay Honeck schrieb:
>
>>> Of course it never dawned upon you that the governement was not "the
>>> French"? Ever heard of something like the Résistence?

> Good grief, are you really so dim? It takes an awful lot of courage to do
> what they did. I suspect the vast majority of those who enjoy dumb jokes
> about "the French" wouldn't have that courage.

When my grandfather was shot down over Sampigny he went into a church and
gave the priest the cigarettes from his evasion kit to find him help. He
had flak buried in his skull.

When the Gestapo showed up a few hours later, they were smoking the
cigarettes my grandfather had given the priest. When they moved him to the
railroad to take him to Germany, his German captors pointed weapons at the
citizens who were trying to take a stab at him with a pitchforks. Not a
whole lot of love for the French in my grandfather's house.

Although the other waistgunner was kept hidden by a French family until the
end of the war and the pilot evaded with help from the Resistance, they
certainly weren't all so courageous.

-c

Aratzio

March 3rd 08, 07:15 PM

On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 18:23:45 +0000 (UTC), in alt.usenet.kooks, Bertie
the Bunyip > bloviated:

>Aratzio > wrote in
:
>
>> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 10:32:19 +0000 (UTC), in alt.usenet.kooks, Bertie
>> the Bunyip > bloviated:
>>
>>>Aratzio > wrote in
:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 02 Mar 2008 20:47:30 -0800, in the land of alt.usenet.kooks,
>>>> mariposas rand mair fheal > got double secret
>>>> probation for writing:
>>>>
>>>>>In article >,
>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in
>>>>>> news:4ZKyj.6120$TT4.1637@attbi_s22:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>>>>>> >> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in
>>>>>> >> world history.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Wow, that's really impressive. Not.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's
>"place
>>>>>> > in history" -- we're talking about their national behavior in
>>>>>> > World War II, their current status as a former world power, and
>>>>>> > their current role as the butt of much disparaging humor in
>>>>>> > America.
>>>>>
>>>>>why exactly am i suppose to be disparaging france?
>>>>>this seems to have started after they said they were not going to
>>>>>fight in iraq without real evidence that iraq was making nbc weapons
>>>>>
>>>>>it sounds to me like i supposed to flush two hundred years
>>>>>of friendship and mutual struggle down the toilet
>>>>>because they were right about iraq
>>>>>
>>>>>does that sum it up correctly
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Pretty much.
>>>>
>>>> Nothing like having a handy French Fleet to bottle up Cornwallis on
>a
>>>> penninsula.
>>>>
>>>> How would things have turned out if the French were not on our side
>in
>>>> the revolution?
>>>>
>>>
>>>We'd probably be speaking English right now if they hadn;t!
>>>
>>>
>>>Oh wait.
>>>
>>>Bertie
>>
>> The word yer lokin fer is "commonwealth"
>>
>
>As i the imperial power raping the other country?
>
>Sounds better than "chattel" I suppose.
>
>
>Bertie

Are ya saying the uglies in britain coulda stopped shrub?

Aratzio

March 3rd 08, 07:16 PM

On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 18:27:04 +0000 (UTC), in alt.usenet.kooks, Bertie
the Bunyip > bloviated:

>Gig 601XL Builder > wrote in news:13so54kfvgqqb93
:
>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>>> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>>>
>>> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in world
>>> history.
>>>
>>> My master's in History and I will be waiting.
>>>
>>>
>>> Dan
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Well Rome used to rule the known world. It hasn't translated well into
>> modern military or even diplomatic power for Italy.
>>
>
>Yes, but they terrific coffee and very reasonably priced high quality
>restaurants. Not to mention Alfa Romeos and the ability to look cool even
>when riding a motor scooter.
>
>What else could you want?
>
>
>Bertie

Beer

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

March 3rd 08, 07:46 PM

Aratzio > wrote in
:

> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 18:23:45 +0000 (UTC), in alt.usenet.kooks, Bertie
> the Bunyip > bloviated:
>
>>Aratzio > wrote in
:
>>
>>> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 10:32:19 +0000 (UTC), in alt.usenet.kooks, Bertie
>>> the Bunyip > bloviated:
>>>
>>>>Aratzio > wrote in
:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 02 Mar 2008 20:47:30 -0800, in the land of
alt.usenet.kooks,
>>>>> mariposas rand mair fheal > got double secret
>>>>> probation for writing:
>>>>>
>>>>>>In article >,
>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in
>>>>>>> news:4ZKyj.6120$TT4.1637@attbi_s22:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>>>>>>> >> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place
in
>>>>>>> >> world history.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Wow, that's really impressive. Not.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's
>>"place
>>>>>>> > in history" -- we're talking about their national behavior in
>>>>>>> > World War II, their current status as a former world power,
and
>>>>>>> > their current role as the butt of much disparaging humor in
>>>>>>> > America.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>why exactly am i suppose to be disparaging france?
>>>>>>this seems to have started after they said they were not going to
>>>>>>fight in iraq without real evidence that iraq was making nbc
weapons
>>>>>>
>>>>>>it sounds to me like i supposed to flush two hundred years
>>>>>>of friendship and mutual struggle down the toilet
>>>>>>because they were right about iraq
>>>>>>
>>>>>>does that sum it up correctly
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Pretty much.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nothing like having a handy French Fleet to bottle up Cornwallis
on
>>a
>>>>> penninsula.
>>>>>
>>>>> How would things have turned out if the French were not on our
side
>>in
>>>>> the revolution?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>We'd probably be speaking English right now if they hadn;t!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Oh wait.
>>>>
>>>>Bertie
>>>
>>> The word yer lokin fer is "commonwealth"
>>>
>>
>>As i the imperial power raping the other country?
>>
>>Sounds better than "chattel" I suppose.
>>
>>
>>Bertie
>
> Are ya saying the uglies in britain coulda stopped shrub?
>

Dunno, If he'd tried to invade Mawr-bay-uh, they'd have had a real fight
on their hands, though.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

March 3rd 08, 07:47 PM

Aratzio > wrote in
:

> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 18:27:04 +0000 (UTC), in alt.usenet.kooks, Bertie
> the Bunyip > bloviated:
>
>>Gig 601XL Builder > wrote in
>>news:13so54kfvgqqb93 @news.supernews.com:
>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>>>> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>>>>
>>>> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in
>>>> world history.
>>>>
>>>> My master's in History and I will be waiting.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well Rome used to rule the known world. It hasn't translated well
>>> into modern military or even diplomatic power for Italy.
>>>
>>
>>Yes, but they terrific coffee and very reasonably priced high quality
>>restaurants. Not to mention Alfa Romeos and the ability to look cool
>>even when riding a motor scooter.
>>
>>What else could you want?
>>
>>
>>Bertie
>
> Beer
>

Beer in Italy, not so good..

Bertie

Martin Hotze[_2_]

March 3rd 08, 08:00 PM

Jay Honeck schrieb:

> Are these jokes fair or appropriate? Often not. But the discussion is
> about *why* these jokes exist, not whether or not they are legitimate.

maybe because you only have a history of 'bout 500 years and you
personally don't see the fine details in history?

#m

PS: hopefully your kids are different.

[email protected]

March 3rd 08, 08:11 PM

On Mar 3, 3:00 pm, Martin Hotze > wrote:
> Jay Honeck schrieb:
>
> > Are these jokes fair or appropriate? Often not. But the discussion is
> > about *why* these jokes exist, not whether or not they are legitimate.
>
> maybe because you only have a history of 'bout 500 years and you
> personally don't see the fine details in history?
>
> #m
>
> PS: hopefully your kids are different.

Well there we go...Americans can't understand history given our short
existence.

Though last time I checked most of us came from places with recorded
histories.

Thank The Creator that we decided to drop the finer points of history
so prevalent in those much more refined and elderly countries -- finer
things such as class, caste, deference, stasis, putrefaction, rum,
sodomy, and the lash.

Dan

Gig 601XL Builder[_2_]

March 3rd 08, 08:27 PM

Martin Hotze wrote:
> Jay Honeck schrieb:
>
>> Are these jokes fair or appropriate? Often not. But the discussion
>> is about *why* these jokes exist, not whether or not they are legitimate.
>
> maybe because you only have a history of 'bout 500 years and you
> personally don't see the fine details in history?

Really? The USA just sprung from nothingness a few 100 years ago? This
is the kind of attitude that gets USAians to make jokes about Europeans.

You have no more claim on the long view of history just because your
ancestors didn't have the balls to go exploring or go in search of a
better life.

Aratzio

March 3rd 08, 09:03 PM

On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 19:47:03 +0000 (UTC), in alt.usenet.kooks, Bertie
the Bunyip > bloviated:

>Aratzio > wrote in
:
>
>> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 18:27:04 +0000 (UTC), in alt.usenet.kooks, Bertie
>> the Bunyip > bloviated:
>>
>>>Gig 601XL Builder > wrote in
>>>news:13so54kfvgqqb93 @news.supernews.com:
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>>>>> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>>>>>
>>>>> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in
>>>>> world history.
>>>>>
>>>>> My master's in History and I will be waiting.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Dan
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well Rome used to rule the known world. It hasn't translated well
>>>> into modern military or even diplomatic power for Italy.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Yes, but they terrific coffee and very reasonably priced high quality
>>>restaurants. Not to mention Alfa Romeos and the ability to look cool
>>>even when riding a motor scooter.
>>>
>>>What else could you want?
>>>
>>>
>>>Bertie
>>
>> Beer
>>
>
>Beer in Italy, not so good..
>
>Bertie

Wine, however, is superb.

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

March 3rd 08, 09:06 PM

Aratzio > wrote in
:

> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 19:47:03 +0000 (UTC), in alt.usenet.kooks, Bertie
> the Bunyip > bloviated:
>
>>Aratzio > wrote in
:
>>
>>> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 18:27:04 +0000 (UTC), in alt.usenet.kooks, Bertie
>>> the Bunyip > bloviated:
>>>
>>>>Gig 601XL Builder > wrote in
>>>>news:13so54kfvgqqb93 @news.supernews.com:
>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>>>>>> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in
>>>>>> world history.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My master's in History and I will be waiting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dan
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Well Rome used to rule the known world. It hasn't translated well
>>>>> into modern military or even diplomatic power for Italy.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Yes, but they terrific coffee and very reasonably priced high
quality
>>>>restaurants. Not to mention Alfa Romeos and the ability to look cool
>>>>even when riding a motor scooter.
>>>>
>>>>What else could you want?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Bertie
>>>
>>> Beer
>>>
>>
>>Beer in Italy, not so good..
>>
>>Bertie
>
> Wine, however, is superb.
>
Yeah, I love Italy. I get there a good bit and never tire of it. Though
the weather around Milan is a bit depressing this time of year.
And talk about history! It's everywhere..

Bertie

[email protected]

March 3rd 08, 09:35 PM

On Mar 3, 4:06 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> Aratzio > wrote :
>
>
>
> > On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 19:47:03 +0000 (UTC), in alt.usenet.kooks, Bertie
> > the Bunyip > bloviated:
>
> >>Aratzio > wrote in
> :
>
> >>> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 18:27:04 +0000 (UTC), in alt.usenet.kooks, Bertie
> >>> the Bunyip > bloviated:
>
> >>>>Gig 601XL Builder > wrote in
> >>>>news:13so54kfvgqqb93 @news.supernews.com:
>
> >>>>> wrote:
>
> >>>>>> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
> >>>>>> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>
> >>>>>> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in
> >>>>>> world history.
>
> >>>>>> My master's in History and I will be waiting.
>
> >>>>>> Dan
>
> >>>>> Well Rome used to rule the known world. It hasn't translated well
> >>>>> into modern military or even diplomatic power for Italy.
>
> >>>>Yes, but they terrific coffee and very reasonably priced high
> quality
> >>>>restaurants. Not to mention Alfa Romeos and the ability to look cool
> >>>>even when riding a motor scooter.
>
> >>>>What else could you want?
>
> >>>>Bertie
>
> >>> Beer
>
> >>Beer in Italy, not so good..
>
> >>Bertie
>
> > Wine, however, is superb.
>
> Yeah, I love Italy. I get there a good bit and never tire of it. Though
> the weather around Milan is a bit depressing this time of year.
> And talk about history! It's everywhere..
>
> Bertie

Yes, but do you have a minor in history? If not, hush yersef.

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

March 3rd 08, 09:46 PM

" > wrote in
:

> On Mar 3, 4:06 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> Aratzio > wrote
>> :
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 19:47:03 +0000 (UTC), in alt.usenet.kooks,
>> > Bertie the Bunyip > bloviated:
>>
>> >>Aratzio > wrote in
>> :
>>
>> >>> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 18:27:04 +0000 (UTC), in alt.usenet.kooks,
>> >>> Bertie the Bunyip > bloviated:
>>
>> >>>>Gig 601XL Builder > wrote in
>> >>>>news:13so54kfvgqqb93 @news.supernews.com:
>>
>> >>>>> wrote:
>>
>> >>>>>> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>> >>>>>> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>>
>> >>>>>> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in
>> >>>>>> world history.
>>
>> >>>>>> My master's in History and I will be waiting.
>>
>> >>>>>> Dan
>>
>> >>>>> Well Rome used to rule the known world. It hasn't translated
>> >>>>> well into modern military or even diplomatic power for Italy.
>>
>> >>>>Yes, but they terrific coffee and very reasonably priced high
>> quality
>> >>>>restaurants. Not to mention Alfa Romeos and the ability to look
>> >>>>cool even when riding a motor scooter.
>>
>> >>>>What else could you want?
>>
>> >>>>Bertie
>>
>> >>> Beer
>>
>> >>Beer in Italy, not so good..
>>
>> >>Bertie
>>
>> > Wine, however, is superb.
>>
>> Yeah, I love Italy. I get there a good bit and never tire of it.
>> Though the weather around Milan is a bit depressing this time of
>> year. And talk about history! It's everywhere..
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Yes, but do you have a minor in history? If not, hush yersef.
>
Hey, I watched Mr Peabody and Sherman... I is edjahmuhcated.

Bertie

[email protected]

March 3rd 08, 09:52 PM

On Mar 3, 4:46 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> " > wrote :
>
>
>
> > On Mar 3, 4:06 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> Aratzio > wrote
> >> :
>
> >> > On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 19:47:03 +0000 (UTC), in alt.usenet.kooks,
> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > bloviated:
>
> >> >>Aratzio > wrote in
> >> :
>
> >> >>> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 18:27:04 +0000 (UTC), in alt.usenet.kooks,
> >> >>> Bertie the Bunyip > bloviated:
>
> >> >>>>Gig 601XL Builder > wrote in
> >> >>>>news:13so54kfvgqqb93 @news.supernews.com:
>
> >> >>>>> wrote:
>
> >> >>>>>> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
> >> >>>>>> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>
> >> >>>>>> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in
> >> >>>>>> world history.
>
> >> >>>>>> My master's in History and I will be waiting.
>
> >> >>>>>> Dan
>
> >> >>>>> Well Rome used to rule the known world. It hasn't translated
> >> >>>>> well into modern military or even diplomatic power for Italy.
>
> >> >>>>Yes, but they terrific coffee and very reasonably priced high
> >> quality
> >> >>>>restaurants. Not to mention Alfa Romeos and the ability to look
> >> >>>>cool even when riding a motor scooter.
>
> >> >>>>What else could you want?
>
> >> >>>>Bertie
>
> >> >>> Beer
>
> >> >>Beer in Italy, not so good..
>
> >> >>Bertie
>
> >> > Wine, however, is superb.
>
> >> Yeah, I love Italy. I get there a good bit and never tire of it.
> >> Though the weather around Milan is a bit depressing this time of
> >> year. And talk about history! It's everywhere..
>
> >> Bertie
>
> > Yes, but do you have a minor in history? If not, hush yersef.
>
> Hey, I watched Mr Peabody and Sherman... I is edjahmuhcated.
>
> Bertie

Rocky and Bullwinkle + Schoolhouse Rock > any minor, I say.

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

March 3rd 08, 10:02 PM

" > wrote in
:

> On Mar 3, 4:46 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> " > wrote
>> innews:e93d50cb-3551-4794-be1f-d1f4c1b550e0
@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.c
>> om:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Mar 3, 4:06 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> Aratzio > wrote
>> >> :
>>
>> >> > On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 19:47:03 +0000 (UTC), in alt.usenet.kooks,
>> >> > Bertie the Bunyip > bloviated:
>>
>> >> >>Aratzio > wrote in
>> >> :
>>
>> >> >>> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 18:27:04 +0000 (UTC), in alt.usenet.kooks,
>> >> >>> Bertie the Bunyip > bloviated:
>>
>> >> >>>>Gig 601XL Builder > wrote in
>> >> >>>>news:13so54kfvgqqb93 @news.supernews.com:
>>
>> >> >>>>> wrote:
>>
>> >> >>>>>> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War,
>> >> >>>>>> the Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>>
>> >> >>>>>> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place
>> >> >>>>>> in world history.
>>
>> >> >>>>>> My master's in History and I will be waiting.
>>
>> >> >>>>>> Dan
>>
>> >> >>>>> Well Rome used to rule the known world. It hasn't translated
>> >> >>>>> well into modern military or even diplomatic power for
>> >> >>>>> Italy.
>>
>> >> >>>>Yes, but they terrific coffee and very reasonably priced high
>> >> quality
>> >> >>>>restaurants. Not to mention Alfa Romeos and the ability to
>> >> >>>>look cool even when riding a motor scooter.
>>
>> >> >>>>What else could you want?
>>
>> >> >>>>Bertie
>>
>> >> >>> Beer
>>
>> >> >>Beer in Italy, not so good..
>>
>> >> >>Bertie
>>
>> >> > Wine, however, is superb.
>>
>> >> Yeah, I love Italy. I get there a good bit and never tire of it.
>> >> Though the weather around Milan is a bit depressing this time of
>> >> year. And talk about history! It's everywhere..
>>
>> >> Bertie
>>
>> > Yes, but do you have a minor in history? If not, hush yersef.
>>
>> Hey, I watched Mr Peabody and Sherman... I is edjahmuhcated.
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Rocky and Bullwinkle + Schoolhouse Rock > any minor, I say.
>

Got my science degree from Clyde Crashcup!

Bertie

Aratzio

March 3rd 08, 11:09 PM

On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 21:06:35 +0000 (UTC), in alt.usenet.kooks, Bertie
the Bunyip > bloviated:

>Aratzio > wrote in
:
>
>> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 19:47:03 +0000 (UTC), in alt.usenet.kooks, Bertie
>> the Bunyip > bloviated:
>>
>>>Aratzio > wrote in
:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 18:27:04 +0000 (UTC), in alt.usenet.kooks, Bertie
>>>> the Bunyip > bloviated:
>>>>
>>>>>Gig 601XL Builder > wrote in
>>>>>news:13so54kfvgqqb93 @news.supernews.com:
>>>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>>>>>>> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in
>>>>>>> world history.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My master's in History and I will be waiting.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dan
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well Rome used to rule the known world. It hasn't translated well
>>>>>> into modern military or even diplomatic power for Italy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Yes, but they terrific coffee and very reasonably priced high
>quality
>>>>>restaurants. Not to mention Alfa Romeos and the ability to look cool
>>>>>even when riding a motor scooter.
>>>>>
>>>>>What else could you want?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Bertie
>>>>
>>>> Beer
>>>>
>>>
>>>Beer in Italy, not so good..
>>>
>>>Bertie
>>
>> Wine, however, is superb.
>>
>Yeah, I love Italy. I get there a good bit and never tire of it. Though
>the weather around Milan is a bit depressing this time of year.
>And talk about history! It's everywhere..
>
>
>Bertie
>
>

My nephew was stationed at Aviano. My brother and I went over and
spent 2 weeks at the time of the kid's 21st Bday.

I could live around there.

Rich Ahrens[_2_]

March 4th 08, 12:18 AM

Phil J wrote:
> Churchill was so concerned about it that he ordered the English army
> to prepare to use poison gas to defend England's beaches in the event
> of a German invasion.

The old ******* was fond of poison gas in general. Ask the Kurds and
Pashtuns, for instance. "I do not understand the squeamishness about the
use of gas. I am strongly in favour of using poison gas against
uncivilised tribes."

Rich Ahrens[_2_]

March 4th 08, 12:32 AM

wrote:
> On Mar 2, 11:17 pm, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>>> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>>> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>>> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in world
>>> history.
>> Wow, that's really impressive. Not.
>>
>> Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's "place in
>> history" -- we're talking about their national behavior in World War II,
>> their current status as a former world power, and their current role as the
>> butt of much disparaging humor in America.
>>
>> But it's well and good that you bring it up, since France's legitimate
>> history as a great power makes their current status more pathetic -- not
>> less -- and serves to further explain the reasons for their being the target
>> for jokesters in the US and elsewhere.
>>
>> Are these jokes fair or appropriate? Often not. But the discussion is
>> about *why* these jokes exist, not whether or not they are legitimate.
>> --
>> Jay Honeck
>> Iowa City, IA
>> Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
>> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
> Question: How do they practice "SAFE SEX" in Iowa?
> Answer: They paint a red "X" on the cows that kick.

Q: How do you know when your staying at the Alexis Park Inn?
A: When you call the front desk and say "I've gotta leak in my sink" and
the person at the front desk says "go ahead."

Rich Ahrens[_2_]

March 4th 08, 12:37 AM

Rich Ahrens[_2_]

March 4th 08, 12:41 AM

Nomen Nescio wrote:
> And you don't have to be a genius to realize that Congress has the
> highest concentration of "tools" in the country.

Outside of Iowa, that is.

[email protected]

March 4th 08, 12:41 AM

On Mar 3, 7:32 pm, Rich Ahrens > wrote:
> wrote:
> > On Mar 2, 11:17 pm, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> >>> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
> >>> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
> >>> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in world
> >>> history.
> >> Wow, that's really impressive. Not.
>
> >> Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's "place in
> >> history" -- we're talking about their national behavior in World War II,
> >> their current status as a former world power, and their current role as the
> >> butt of much disparaging humor in America.
>
> >> But it's well and good that you bring it up, since France's legitimate
> >> history as a great power makes their current status more pathetic -- not
> >> less -- and serves to further explain the reasons for their being the target
> >> for jokesters in the US and elsewhere.
>
> >> Are these jokes fair or appropriate? Often not. But the discussion is
> >> about *why* these jokes exist, not whether or not they are legitimate.
> >> --
> >> Jay Honeck
> >> Iowa City, IA
> >> Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
> >> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
> > Question: How do they practice "SAFE SEX" in Iowa?
> > Answer: They paint a red "X" on the cows that kick.
>
> Q: How do you know when your staying at the Alexis Park Inn?
> A: When you call the front desk and say "I've gotta leak in my sink" and
> the person at the front desk says "go ahead."

ouch...harsh!

Phil J

March 4th 08, 12:59 AM

On Mar 3, 6:18*pm, Rich Ahrens > wrote:
> Phil J wrote:
> > Churchill was so concerned about it that he ordered the English army
> > to prepare to use poison gas to defend England's beaches in the event
> > of a German invasion.
>
> The old ******* was fond of poison gas in general. Ask the Kurds and
> Pashtuns, for instance. "I do not understand the squeamishness about the
> use of gas. I am strongly in favour of using poison gas against
> uncivilised tribes."

Yeah, Churchill didn't really see a moral difference between using
high explosives and using poison gas.

In World War II, the U.S. got involved as well. In 1943 a U.S.Liberty
ship called the John Harvey carried a shipment of liquid mustard gas
to the port of Bari, Italy. It was to be held in reserve in case the
Germans decided to use poison gas. Because the shipment was top
secret, the ship had to wait with all the others to unload. They
waited in the harbor for five days. At the time, the Allied
authorities were convinced that the Luftwaffe wasn't a threat in that
area, so they kept the harbor fully lighted at night so they could
continue unloading ships. A formation of 105 Ju-88s snuck in under
radar and attacked the port, and it was the worst Allied loss of
shipping in a bombing raid since Pearl Harbor. The John Harvey
exploded and released the liquid mustard gas which mixed with oil on
the water. Over 600 were treated for exposure, and 69 died. The
whole thing was hushed up by the English and American governments
because they were afraid the Germans would start using poison gas if
they knew the Allies were working with it.

AFAIK poison gas was never actually used by either side in World War
II, thank God.

Phil

[email protected]

March 4th 08, 01:16 AM

On Mar 3, 7:59 pm, Phil J > wrote:
> On Mar 3, 6:18 pm, Rich Ahrens > wrote:
>
> > Phil J wrote:
> > > Churchill was so concerned about it that he ordered the English army
> > > to prepare to use poison gas to defend England's beaches in the event
> > > of a German invasion.
>
> > The old ******* was fond of poison gas in general. Ask the Kurds and
> > Pashtuns, for instance. "I do not understand the squeamishness about the
> > use of gas. I am strongly in favour of using poison gas against
> > uncivilised tribes."
>
> Yeah, Churchill didn't really see a moral difference between using
> high explosives and using poison gas.
>
> In World War II, the U.S. got involved as well. In 1943 a U.S.Liberty
> ship called the John Harvey carried a shipment of liquid mustard gas
> to the port of Bari, Italy. It was to be held in reserve in case the
> Germans decided to use poison gas. Because the shipment was top
> secret, the ship had to wait with all the others to unload. They
> waited in the harbor for five days. At the time, the Allied
> authorities were convinced that the Luftwaffe wasn't a threat in that
> area, so they kept the harbor fully lighted at night so they could
> continue unloading ships. A formation of 105 Ju-88s snuck in under
> radar and attacked the port, and it was the worst Allied loss of
> shipping in a bombing raid since Pearl Harbor. The John Harvey
> exploded and released the liquid mustard gas which mixed with oil on
> the water. Over 600 were treated for exposure, and 69 died. The
> whole thing was hushed up by the English and American governments
> because they were afraid the Germans would start using poison gas if
> they knew the Allies were working with it.
>
> AFAIK poison gas was never actually used by either side in World War
> II, thank God.
>
> Phil

"Poison gas" was used extensively during the Great War. One of the
post-war conclusions was that it was more trouble than it was worth
and had only limited tactical value. The environmental conditions had
to be just so, and often the burden placed on friendly troops reduced
their own combat effectiveness.

The reason the Axis was so reluctant to employ such weapons was more
practical than moral -- contrary prevailing winds, and a tactical
emphasis on the offensive made gas unattractive as a battlefield
weapon.

The only great unknown is why the Germans didn't use it in the last
throes of the Reich.

There are very few weapons which use cannot be justified in one
extremity or the other.

Despite all the bad press, MAD worked, and kept the nuclear option the
untapped resource.

Dan

Phil J

March 4th 08, 03:00 AM

On Mar 3, 7:16*pm, " > wrote:
>
> "Poison gas" was used extensively during the Great War. One of the
> post-war conclusions was that it was more trouble than it was worth
> and had only limited tactical value. The environmental conditions had
> to be just so, and often the burden placed on friendly troops reduced
> their own combat effectiveness.
>
> The reason the Axis was so reluctant to employ such weapons was more
> practical than moral -- contrary prevailing winds, and a tactical
> emphasis on the offensive made gas unattractive as a battlefield
> weapon.
>
> The only great unknown is why the Germans didn't use it in the last
> throes of the Reich.
>

That is a mystery.

> There are very few weapons which use cannot be justified in one
> extremity or the other.
>

I suppose there is always the "desperate times call for desperate
measures" argument. But the kind of horrible, painful death you get
from poison gas just seems to put it into a different category.

> Despite all the bad press, MAD worked, and kept the nuclear option the
> untapped resource.
>
> Dan-

Except for Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But as bad as they were, more
Japanese were killed by the incendiary bombs we dropped than by the
atomic bombs.

There were plans being made in the American military to use atomic
bombs to soften up the beaches if it became necessary to invade
Japan. They didn't realize the effects the radiation would have had
on our troops when they came ashore. That would have been a
catastrophe for both sides.

Surprisingly (to me), the most expensive weapon system America
developed during World War II was not the atomic bomb. It was the
B-29 that dropped it.

Phil

Jim Logajan

March 4th 08, 03:30 AM

Phil J > wrote:
> On Mar 3, 7:16*pm, " > wrote:
>>
>> "Poison gas" was used extensively during the Great War. One of the
>> post-war conclusions was that it was more trouble than it was worth
>> and had only limited tactical value. The environmental conditions had
>> to be just so, and often the burden placed on friendly troops reduced
>> their own combat effectiveness.
>>
>> The reason the Axis was so reluctant to employ such weapons was more
>> practical than moral -- contrary prevailing winds, and a tactical
>> emphasis on the offensive made gas unattractive as a battlefield
>> weapon.
>>
>> The only great unknown is why the Germans didn't use it in the last
>> throes of the Reich.
>>
>
> That is a mystery.

Hitler was temporarily blinded by mustard gas in WWI. So that may have had
some influence (excepting the use of gas in concentration camps - Hitler
suggested using poison gas on Jews in Mein Kampf, where he also recounted
his experience in WWI with mustard gas.) In fact Wikipedia claims a cite in
support of the following statement:

"One notable poison gas casualty of the Great War was Adolf Hitler, who was
temporarily blinded. As a result, Hitler adamantly refused to authorise the
use of poison gas on the battlefield during World War II, for fear of
retaliation.[32]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_poison_gas_in_World_War_I

Trivia: Hitler allegedly originally wore a "Kaiser" style mustache at the
start of WWI but was ordered to clip it to the now-infamous "Toothbrush"
style so it would fit under the respirator masks used during mustard gas
attacks. Reference:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toothbrush_moustache

Tina

March 4th 08, 03:39 AM

Was gas not used in the concentration camps?

On Mar 3, 7:59*pm, Phil J > wrote:
> On Mar 3, 6:18*pm, Rich Ahrens > wrote:
>
> > Phil J wrote:
> > > Churchill was so concerned about it that he ordered the English army
> > > to prepare to use poison gas to defend England's beaches in the event
> > > of a German invasion.
>
> > The old ******* was fond of poison gas in general. Ask the Kurds and
> > Pashtuns, for instance. "I do not understand the squeamishness about the
> > use of gas. I am strongly in favour of using poison gas against
> > uncivilised tribes."
>
> Yeah, Churchill didn't really see a moral difference between using
> high explosives and using poison gas.
>
> In World War II, the U.S. got involved as well. *In 1943 a U.S.Liberty
> ship called the John Harvey carried a shipment of liquid mustard gas
> to the port of Bari, Italy. *It was to be held in reserve in case the
> Germans decided to use poison gas. *Because the shipment was top
> secret, the ship had to wait with all the others to unload. *They
> waited in the harbor for five days. *At the time, the Allied
> authorities were convinced that the Luftwaffe wasn't a threat in that
> area, so they kept the harbor fully lighted at night so they could
> continue unloading ships. *A formation of 105 Ju-88s snuck in under
> radar and attacked the port, and it was the worst Allied loss of
> shipping in a bombing raid since Pearl Harbor. *The John Harvey
> exploded and released the liquid mustard gas which mixed with oil on
> the water. *Over 600 were treated for exposure, and 69 died. *The
> whole thing was hushed up by the English and American governments
> because they were afraid the Germans would start using poison gas if
> they knew the Allies were working with it.
>
> AFAIK poison gas was never actually used by either side in World War
> II, thank God.
>
> Phil

Jay Honeck[_2_]

March 4th 08, 05:00 AM

> So the "target of jokesters" supports your conclusion that...?
>
> Sorry.. having a hard time keeping up.
>
> ::YAWN::

For a supposedly educated man, you sure have a short attention span.

Oh, well. If you wish to continue this slightly interesting discussion, let
me know. It's a topic of great interest.

Meanwhile, back to flying.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck[_2_]

March 4th 08, 05:05 AM

>>> Well you've not shown yourself in a good light at all in this thread.
>>> I think you should rethink you attitudes and preconceptions.
>>
>> I don't have attitudes and preconceptions -- but I do have a minor in
>> history from the University of Wisconsin,
>
> Where everyone majors in drinking...

You say that like it was a bad thing...

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck[_2_]

March 4th 08, 05:10 AM

> Oh, well. If you wish to continue this slightly interesting discussion,
> let me know. It's a topic of great interest.

Whoo-weee. Don't even *try* to parse that paragraph.

Yet another reason not to post after a QB meeting...

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

March 4th 08, 07:36 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:UH4zj.7552$TT4.6644@attbi_s22:

>> So the "target of jokesters" supports your conclusion that...?
>>
>> Sorry.. having a hard time keeping up.
>>
>> ::YAWN::
>
> For a supposedly educated man, you sure have a short attention span.
>
> Oh, well. If you wish to continue this slightly interesting
> discussion, let me know. It's a topic of great interest.
>
> Meanwhile, back to flying.

Yeah, right. Look at what's talkin.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

March 4th 08, 07:36 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:gR4zj.7561$TT4.2072@attbi_s22:

>> Oh, well. If you wish to continue this slightly interesting
>> discussion, let me know. It's a topic of great interest.
>
> Whoo-weee. Don't even *try* to parse that paragraph.
>
> Yet another reason not to post after a QB meeting...
>
> ;-)

Oh brother.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

March 4th 08, 09:37 AM

Aratzio > wrote in
:

>
> My nephew was stationed at Aviano. My brother and I went over and
> spent 2 weeks at the time of the kid's 21st Bday.
>
> I could live around there.

Yeah. i don't know of Aviano. Whart part? I haven;t been in the south much
except for just quick visits, but I'd like to see more of that part.
Sorrento, Sicily and so on.. So many places, so little time..

Bertie
>

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

March 4th 08, 09:40 AM

Rich Ahrens > wrote in
use.com:

> wrote:
>> On Mar 2, 11:17 pm, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>>>> Perhaps your minor in history didn't cover The Great War, the
>>>> Napoleonic Wars, or the Seven Year's War.
>>>> Look those up and then come back and discuss France's place in
>>>> world history.
>>> Wow, that's really impressive. Not.
>>>
>>> Try to keep up, please? We weren't talking about France's "place
>>> in history" -- we're talking about their national behavior in World
>>> War II, their current status as a former world power, and their
>>> current role as the butt of much disparaging humor in America.
>>>
>>> But it's well and good that you bring it up, since France's
>>> legitimate history as a great power makes their current status more
>>> pathetic -- not less -- and serves to further explain the reasons
>>> for their being the target for jokesters in the US and elsewhere.
>>>
>>> Are these jokes fair or appropriate? Often not. But the discussion
>>> is about *why* these jokes exist, not whether or not they are
>>> legitimate. --
>>> Jay Honeck
>>> Iowa City, IA
>>> Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
>>> "Your Aviation Destination"
>>
>> Question: How do they practice "SAFE SEX" in Iowa?
>> Answer: They paint a red "X" on the cows that kick.
>
> Q: How do you know when your staying at the Alexis Park Inn?
> A: When you call the front desk and say "I've gotta leak in my sink"
> and the person at the front desk says "go ahead."
>

Bwawhahwhahwhhahwhahw!

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

March 4th 08, 09:43 AM

Jim Logajan > wrote in
:

> Phil J > wrote:
>> On Mar 3, 7:16*pm, " > wrote:
>>>
>>> "Poison gas" was used extensively during the Great War. One of the
>>> post-war conclusions was that it was more trouble than it was worth
>>> and had only limited tactical value. The environmental conditions
>>> had to be just so, and often the burden placed on friendly troops
>>> reduced their own combat effectiveness.
>>>
>>> The reason the Axis was so reluctant to employ such weapons was more
>>> practical than moral -- contrary prevailing winds, and a tactical
>>> emphasis on the offensive made gas unattractive as a battlefield
>>> weapon.
>>>
>>> The only great unknown is why the Germans didn't use it in the last
>>> throes of the Reich.
>>>
>>
>> That is a mystery.
>
> Hitler was temporarily blinded by mustard gas in WWI. So that may have
> had some influence (excepting the use of gas in concentration camps -
> Hitler suggested using poison gas on Jews in Mein Kampf, where he also
> recounted his experience in WWI with mustard gas.) In fact Wikipedia
> claims a cite in support of the following statement:
>
> "One notable poison gas casualty of the Great War was Adolf Hitler,
> who was temporarily blinded. As a result, Hitler adamantly refused to
> authorise the use of poison gas on the battlefield during World War
> II, for fear of retaliation.[32]"
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_poison_gas_in_World_War_I
>
> Trivia: Hitler allegedly originally wore a "Kaiser" style mustache at
> the start of WWI but was ordered to clip it to the now-infamous
> "Toothbrush" style so it would fit under the respirator masks used
> during mustard gas attacks. Reference:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toothbrush_moustache
>

Wow. You would wonder how he came upon that style, allright. I suppose I
always just assumed it was fashionable in it's day.

Bertie

[email protected]

March 4th 08, 11:11 AM

On Mar 4, 12:00 am, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> > So the "target of jokesters" supports your conclusion that...?
>
> > Sorry.. having a hard time keeping up.
>
> > ::YAWN::
>
> For a supposedly educated man, you sure have a short attention span.
>
> Oh, well. If you wish to continue this slightly interesting discussion, let
> me know. It's a topic of great interest.
>
> Meanwhile, back to flying.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

Hunh? What?

Did you say something?

Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]

March 4th 08, 11:15 AM

" > wrote in
:

> On Mar 4, 12:00 am, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>> > So the "target of jokesters" supports your conclusion that...?
>>
>> > Sorry.. having a hard time keeping up.
>>
>> > ::YAWN::
>>
>> For a supposedly educated man, you sure have a short attention span.
>>
>> Oh, well. If you wish to continue this slightly interesting
>> discussion, let me know. It's a topic of great interest.
>>
>> Meanwhile, back to flying.
>> --
>> Jay Honeck
>> Iowa City, IA
>> Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
>> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
> Hunh? What?
>
> Did you say something?
>

Careful. You'll end up in his "killfile" Bwahahwahwhahwhhahw!

Bertie

[email protected]

March 4th 08, 11:38 AM

On Mar 3, 10:00 pm, Phil J > wrote:

> I suppose there is always the "desperate times call for desperate
> measures" argument. But the kind of horrible, painful death you get
> from poison gas just seems to put it into a different category.

True, yet in the Pacific, there seemed to be no concern about horror
-- flamethrowers weren't very nice.

> Except for Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But as bad as they were, more
> Japanese were killed by the incendiary bombs we dropped than by the
> atomic bombs.

True, and all the revisionists should remember that.

> There were plans being made in the American military to use atomic
> bombs to soften up the beaches if it became necessary to invade
> Japan. They didn't realize the effects the radiation would have had
> on our troops when they came ashore. That would have been a
> catastrophe for both sides.

Not by those manufacturing the bombs -- we only had two, and we used
them. The inventory didn't increase until long after the Japanese
surrender.

> Surprisingly (to me), the most expensive weapon system America
> developed during World War II was not the atomic bomb. It was the
> B-29 that dropped it.
>
> Phil

Per unit, or overall? That doesn't seem right -- there were tens of
thousands working at Oak Ridge....

Atomic bombs were dropped on those two Japanese cities, but MAD was
not yet a strategic consideration --- the Japanese couldn't retaliate
in kind.

MAD doctrine evolved as the US and USSR realized the potential within
each arsenal (MAD wasn't formulated as a doctrine until McNamara in
the 60s).

Dan

John of Aix

March 4th 08, 12:52 PM

miguel wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Mar 2008 12:12:07 -0500, Daedalus >
> wrote:

>> Why weren't the French involved in this conversation?
>>
>> Jade
>
> Probably because they speak poopytalk.

Pauvre con avec ton langage enfantin. Toi, évidemment, tu ne piges rien
que l'amerloque et, sans doute, t'exprime comme un crétin dans cette
'langue', ainsi tu te sens obligé de montrer à quel point tu es inculte
avec l'utilisation des mots qu'on laisse tomber après la crèche.

C'est un anglais qui te parle, car ici on Europe on considère la culture
d'être une bonne chose.

[email protected]

March 4th 08, 12:57 PM

On Mar 4, 7:52 am, "John of Aix" > wrote:

> > Probably because they speak poopytalk.
>
> Pauvre con avec ton langage enfantin. Toi, évidemment, tu ne piges rien
> que l'amerloque et, sans doute, t'exprime comme un crétin dans cette
> 'langue', ainsi tu te sens obligé de montrer à quel point tu es inculte
> avec l'utilisation des mots qu'on laisse tomber après la crèche.
>
> C'est un anglais qui te parle, car ici on Europe on considère la culture
> d'être une bonne chose.

Bravo!

Aratzio

March 4th 08, 02:52 PM

On Tue, 4 Mar 2008 09:37:32 +0000 (UTC), in alt.usenet.kooks, Bertie
the Bunyip > bloviated:

>Aratzio > wrote in
:
>
>
>>
>> My nephew was stationed at Aviano. My brother and I went over and
>> spent 2 weeks at the time of the kid's 21st Bday.
>>
>> I could live around there.
>
>
>Yeah. i don't know of Aviano. Whart part? I haven;t been in the south much
>except for just quick visits, but I'd like to see more of that part.
>Sorrento, Sicily and so on.. So many places, so little time..
>
>
>Bertie
>>

North east, north of Venice and just south of the Alps. We were
staying in the town of Pordenone.

Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]

March 4th 08, 03:29 PM

Aratzio > wrote in
:

> On Tue, 4 Mar 2008 09:37:32 +0000 (UTC), in alt.usenet.kooks, Bertie
> the Bunyip > bloviated:
>
>>Aratzio > wrote in
:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> My nephew was stationed at Aviano. My brother and I went over and
>>> spent 2 weeks at the time of the kid's 21st Bday.
>>>
>>> I could live around there.
>>
>>
>>Yeah. i don't know of Aviano. Whart part? I haven;t been in the south
>>much except for just quick visits, but I'd like to see more of that
>>part. Sorrento, Sicily and so on.. So many places, so little time..
>>
>>
>>Bertie
>>>
>
> North east, north of Venice and just south of the Alps. We were
> staying in the town of Pordenone.
>
Ah, nice. Not so much this time of the year. That damp off the Alps is
chilly1

Bertie

miguel

March 4th 08, 04:22 PM

On Tue, 4 Mar 2008 13:52:19 +0100, "John of Aix"
> wrote:

>miguel wrote:
>> On Mon, 03 Mar 2008 12:12:07 -0500, Daedalus >
>> wrote:
>
>>> Why weren't the French involved in this conversation?
>>>
>>> Jade
>>
>> Probably because they speak poopytalk.
>
>Pauvre con avec ton langage enfantin. Toi, évidemment, tu ne piges rien
>que l'amerloque et, sans doute, t'exprime comme un crétin dans cette
>'langue', ainsi tu te sens obligé de montrer à quel point tu es inculte
>avec l'utilisation des mots qu'on laisse tomber après la crèche.
>
>C'est un anglais qui te parle, car ici on Europe on considère la culture
>d'être une bonne chose.
>
Usenet would be generally improved if all poopytalkers like John of
Aix would Remove Themselves Altogether.

miguel

March 4th 08, 04:23 PM

On Tue, 4 Mar 2008 04:57:55 -0800 (PST), "
> wrote:

>On Mar 4, 7:52 am, "John of Aix" > wrote:
>
>> > Probably because they speak poopytalk.
>>
>> Pauvre con avec ton langage enfantin. Toi, évidemment, tu ne piges rien
>> que l'amerloque et, sans doute, t'exprime comme un crétin dans cette
>> 'langue', ainsi tu te sens obligé de montrer à quel point tu es inculte
>> avec l'utilisation des mots qu'on laisse tomber après la crèche.
>>
>> C'est un anglais qui te parle, car ici on Europe on considère la culture
>> d'être une bonne chose.
>
>Bravo!

Translation: Excellent Poopytalk There!

Why would anybody post in a dead language, anyway?

Rich Ahrens[_2_]

March 4th 08, 04:27 PM

Jay Honeck wrote:
>>>> Well you've not shown yourself in a good light at all in this thread.
>>>> I think you should rethink you attitudes and preconceptions.
>>>
>>> I don't have attitudes and preconceptions -- but I do have a minor in
>>> history from the University of Wisconsin,
>>
>> Where everyone majors in drinking...
>
> You say that like it was a bad thing...

And you demonstrate it with every post.

Phil J

March 4th 08, 06:23 PM

On Mar 4, 5:38*am, " > wrote:

> > Surprisingly (to me), the most expensive weapon system America
> > developed during World War II was not the atomic bomb. *It was the
> > B-29 that dropped it.
>
> > Phil
>
> Per unit, or overall? That doesn't seem right -- there were tens of
> thousands working at Oak Ridge....
>

I was just talking about the development costs, not the production
costs. It was 2 billion for the atomic bomb versus 3 billion for the
B-29.

> Atomic bombs were dropped on those two Japanese cities, but MAD was
> not yet a strategic consideration --- the Japanese couldn't retaliate
> in kind.
>

You're right. We probably wouldn't have used them if the Japanese
could have done the same in response.

> MAD doctrine evolved as the US and USSR realized the potential within
> each arsenal (MAD wasn't formulated as a doctrine until McNamara in
> the 60s).
>
> Dan

MAD has been pretty successful in preventing large hot wars so far.
Still, if you look out across the next thousand years, it is hard to
imagine that nuclear weapons won't still exist on this planet, if not
something even worse. What are the odds that they will never be used?

Phil

Phil J

March 4th 08, 06:25 PM

On Mar 3, 9:39*pm, Tina > wrote:
> Was gas not used in the concentration camps?

Yes, I meant on the battlefield.

Phil

[email protected]

March 4th 08, 09:30 PM

On Mar 4, 1:23 pm, Phil J > wrote:

> > Per unit, or overall? That doesn't seem right -- there were tens of
> > thousands working at Oak Ridge....
>
> I was just talking about the development costs, not the production
> costs. It was 2 billion for the atomic bomb versus 3 billion for the
> B-29.

Amazing!

> MAD has been pretty successful in preventing large hot wars so far.
> Still, if you look out across the next thousand years, it is hard to
> imagine that nuclear weapons won't still exist on this planet, if not
> something even worse. What are the odds that they will never be used?
>
> Phil

MAD only works when both side have the ability to reason.

This is why Iran and other Islamist regimes and groups should be
prevented form possessing Nukes.

Dan

Martin Hotze[_2_]

March 4th 08, 10:33 PM

Gig 601XL Builder schrieb:

> You have no more claim on the long view of history just because your
> ancestors didn't have the balls to go exploring or go in search of a
> better life.

hmm, America was discovered by Martians?

Dan[_10_]

March 4th 08, 10:35 PM

On Mar 4, 5:33 pm, Martin Hotze > wrote:
> Gig 601XL Builder schrieb:
>
> > You have no more claim on the long view of history just because your
> > ancestors didn't have the balls to go exploring or go in search of a
> > better life.
>
> hmm, America was discovered by Martians?

Damn right.

Gig 601XL Builder[_2_]

March 4th 08, 10:47 PM

Martin Hotze wrote:
> Gig 601XL Builder schrieb:
>
>> You have no more claim on the long view of history just because your
>> ancestors didn't have the balls to go exploring or go in search of a
>> better life.
>
> hmm, America was discovered by Martians?

Nope Europeans with balls. The rest stayed home.

Sovereign

March 4th 08, 11:04 PM

miguel a écrit :
> On Tue, 4 Mar 2008 13:52:19 +0100, "John of Aix"
> > wrote:
>
>> miguel wrote:
>>> On Mon, 03 Mar 2008 12:12:07 -0500, Daedalus >
>>> wrote:
>>>> Why weren't the French involved in this conversation?
>>>>
>>>> Jade
>>> Probably because they speak poopytalk.
>> Pauvre con avec ton langage enfantin. Toi, évidemment, tu ne piges rien
>> que l'amerloque et, sans doute, t'exprime comme un crétin dans cette
>> 'langue', ainsi tu te sens obligé de montrer à quel point tu es inculte
>> avec l'utilisation des mots qu'on laisse tomber après la crèche.
>>
>> C'est un anglais qui te parle, car ici on Europe on considère la culture
>> d'être une bonne chose.
>>
> Usenet would be generally improved if all poopytalkers like John of
> Aix would Remove Themselves Altogether.

Usenet would improve if assholes like you would fade away..!!! Go back
to your trailers park, don't forget to get your meds and have a good
sleep..!!!

miguel

March 4th 08, 11:32 PM

wrote:

>miguel a écrit :

NO POOPYTALK!

>> "John of Aix" wrote:
>>> miguel wrote:
>>>> Daedalus wrote:

>>>>> Why weren't the French involved in this conversation?

>>>> Probably because they speak poopytalk.

>>> Pauvre con avec ton langage enfantin. Toi, évidemment, tu ne piges rien
>>> que l'amerloque et, sans doute, t'exprime comme un crétin dans cette
>>> 'langue', ainsi tu te sens obligé de montrer à quel point tu es inculte
>>> avec l'utilisation des mots qu'on laisse tomber après la crèche.

>>> C'est un anglais qui te parle, car ici on Europe on considère la culture
>>> d'être une bonne chose.

>> Usenet would be generally improved if all poopytalkers like John of
>> Aix would Remove Themselves Altogether.

>Usenet would improve if assholes like you would fade away..!!! Go back
>to your trailers park, don't forget to get your meds and have a good
>sleep..!!!

I'd sleep a lot better of you poopytalkers would Remove Your Poopytalk
from Usenet Altogether.

miguel

miguel

March 4th 08, 11:36 PM

On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 15:32:58 -0800, miguel > wrote:

>wrote:
>
>>miguel a écrit :
>
>NO POOPYTALK!
>
>>> "John of Aix" wrote:
>>>> miguel wrote:
>>>>> Daedalus wrote:
>
>>>>>> Why weren't the French involved in this conversation?
>
>>>>> Probably because they speak poopytalk.
>
>>>> Pauvre con avec ton langage enfantin. Toi, évidemment, tu ne piges rien
>>>> que l'amerloque et, sans doute, t'exprime comme un crétin dans cette
>>>> 'langue', ainsi tu te sens obligé de montrer à quel point tu es inculte
>>>> avec l'utilisation des mots qu'on laisse tomber après la crèche.
>
>>>> C'est un anglais qui te parle, car ici on Europe on considère la culture
>>>> d'être une bonne chose.
>
>>> Usenet would be generally improved if all poopytalkers like John of
>>> Aix would Remove Themselves Altogether.
>
>>Usenet would improve if assholes like you would fade away..!!! Go back
>>to your trailers park, don't forget to get your meds and have a good
>>sleep..!!!
>
>I'd sleep a lot better of you poopytalkers would Remove Your Poopytalk
>from Usenet Altogether.
>
>miguel

PS: I don't suppose you poopytalking morons have ever figured out why
the BIBLE is in ENGLISH, not French Poopytalk.

Dan[_10_]

March 4th 08, 11:36 PM

On Mar 4, 6:36 pm, miguel > wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 15:32:58 -0800, miguel > wrote:
> >wrote:
>
> >>miguel a écrit :
>
> >NO POOPYTALK!
>
> >>> "John of Aix" wrote:
> >>>> miguel wrote:
> >>>>> Daedalus wrote:
>
> >>>>>> Why weren't the French involved in this conversation?
>
> >>>>> Probably because they speak poopytalk.
>
> >>>> Pauvre con avec ton langage enfantin. Toi, évidemment, tu ne piges rien
> >>>> que l'amerloque et, sans doute, t'exprime comme un crétin dans cette
> >>>> 'langue', ainsi tu te sens obligé de montrer à quel point tu es inculte
> >>>> avec l'utilisation des mots qu'on laisse tomber après la crèche.
>
> >>>> C'est un anglais qui te parle, car ici on Europe on considère la culture
> >>>> d'être une bonne chose.
>
> >>> Usenet would be generally improved if all poopytalkers like John of
> >>> Aix would Remove Themselves Altogether.
>
> >>Usenet would improve if assholes like you would fade away..!!! Go back
> >>to your trailers park, don't forget to get your meds and have a good
> >>sleep..!!!
>
> >I'd sleep a lot better of you poopytalkers would Remove Your Poopytalk
> >from Usenet Altogether.
>
> >miguel
>
> PS: I don't suppose you poopytalking morons have ever figured out why
> the BIBLE is in ENGLISH, not French Poopytalk.

That would be Hebrew and Greek, miguel.

That's an English name, isn't it -- miguel?

Dan

miguel

March 5th 08, 12:00 AM

Dan wrote:
>miguel wrote:
>> miguel wrote:
>Some poopytalker:
>> >>miguel a écrit :

>> >NO POOPYTALK!

>> >>> "John of Aix" wrote:
>> >>>> miguel wrote:
>> >>>>> Daedalus wrote:

>> >>>>>> Why weren't the French involved in this conversation?

>> >>>>> Probably because they speak poopytalk.

>> >>>> Pauvre con avec ton langage enfantin. Toi, évidemment, tu ne piges rien
>> >>>> que l'amerloque et, sans doute, t'exprime comme un crétin dans cette
>> >>>> 'langue', ainsi tu te sens obligé de montrer à quel point tu es inculte
>> >>>> avec l'utilisation des mots qu'on laisse tomber après la crèche.

>> >>>> C'est un anglais qui te parle, car ici on Europe on considère la culture
>> >>>> d'être une bonne chose.

>> >>> Usenet would be generally improved if all poopytalkers like John of
>> >>> Aix would Remove Themselves Altogether.

>> >>Usenet would improve if assholes like you would fade away..!!! Go back
>> >>to your trailers park, don't forget to get your meds and have a good
>> >>sleep..!!!

>> >I'd sleep a lot better of you poopytalkers would Remove Your Poopytalk
>> >from Usenet Altogether.

>> PS: I don't suppose you poopytalking morons have ever figured out why
>> the BIBLE is in ENGLISH, not French Poopytalk.

>That would be Hebrew and Greek, miguel.

It's good it was translated from its original English into Hebrew and
Greek. The Hebrewers and Greeks ought to know about God too.

>That's an English name, isn't it -- miguel?

100% american, thank you.

Jim Stewart

March 5th 08, 12:09 AM

miguel wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 15:32:58 -0800, miguel > wrote:
>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> miguel a écrit :
>> NO POOPYTALK!
>>
>>>> "John of Aix" wrote:
>>>>> miguel wrote:
>>>>>> Daedalus wrote:
>>>>>>> Why weren't the French involved in this conversation?
>>>>>> Probably because they speak poopytalk.
>>>>> Pauvre con avec ton langage enfantin. Toi, évidemment, tu ne piges rien
>>>>> que l'amerloque et, sans doute, t'exprime comme un crétin dans cette
>>>>> 'langue', ainsi tu te sens obligé de montrer à quel point tu es inculte
>>>>> avec l'utilisation des mots qu'on laisse tomber après la crèche.
>>>>> C'est un anglais qui te parle, car ici on Europe on considère la culture
>>>>> d'être une bonne chose.
>>>> Usenet would be generally improved if all poopytalkers like John of
>>>> Aix would Remove Themselves Altogether.
>>> Usenet would improve if assholes like you would fade away..!!! Go back
>>> to your trailers park, don't forget to get your meds and have a good
>>> sleep..!!!
>> I'd sleep a lot better of you poopytalkers would Remove Your Poopytalk
>>from Usenet Altogether.
>> miguel
>
> PS: I don't suppose you poopytalking morons have ever figured out why
> the BIBLE is in ENGLISH, not French Poopytalk.

Well, it was in Latin long before it was in
English and Latin is way closer to French
than English...

miguel

March 5th 08, 12:18 AM

Jim Stewart wrote:
>miguel wrote:
>> miguel wrote:
>>> Some poopytalker wrote:
>>>> miguel a écrit :

>>> NO POOPYTALK!

>>>>> "John of Aix" wrote:
>>>>>> miguel wrote:
>>>>>>> Daedalus wrote:
>>>>>>>> Why weren't the French involved in this conversation?
>>>>>>> Probably because they speak poopytalk.
>>>>>> Pauvre con avec ton langage enfantin. Toi, évidemment, tu ne piges rien
>>>>>> que l'amerloque et, sans doute, t'exprime comme un crétin dans cette
>>>>>> 'langue', ainsi tu te sens obligé de montrer à quel point tu es inculte
>>>>>> avec l'utilisation des mots qu'on laisse tomber après la crèche.
>>>>>> C'est un anglais qui te parle, car ici on Europe on considère la culture
>>>>>> d'être une bonne chose.
>>>>> Usenet would be generally improved if all poopytalkers like John of
>>>>> Aix would Remove Themselves Altogether.
>>>> Usenet would improve if assholes like you would fade away..!!! Go back
>>>> to your trailers park, don't forget to get your meds and have a good
>>>> sleep..!!!
>>> I'd sleep a lot better of you poopytalkers would Remove Your Poopytalk
>>>from Usenet Altogether.
>>> miguel

>> PS: I don't suppose you poopytalking morons have ever figured out why
>> the BIBLE is in ENGLISH, not French Poopytalk.

>Well, it was in Latin long before it was in
>English and Latin is way closer to French
>than English...

I don't know where you get your information, but the very first
version of the Bible was the King James Version.

miguel

Dan[_10_]

March 5th 08, 12:27 AM

On Mar 4, 7:18 pm, miguel > wrote:

>
> I don't know where you get your information, but the very first
> version of the Bible was the King James Version.
>
> miguel

Wrong.

There were at least six English versions of the Bible before the KJV:

Anglo-Saxon manuscript -- 995 AD
Wycliff -- 1380 AD
Tyndale --1534 AD
Great Bible -- 1539 AD
Geneva -- 1557 AD
Rheims -- 1582 AD

And then the 1st Edition of the King James, published in 1611.

Anything else you need to be corrected on?

Dan

Dan[_10_]

March 5th 08, 12:30 AM

On Mar 4, 7:00 pm, miguel > wrote:
>
> It's good it was translated from its original English into Hebrew and
> Greek. The Hebrewers and Greeks ought to know about God too.

You mean the Jews? They wrote the books of the Law and the Prophets
which were included in the Bible as the Old Testament.

The common language of the Roman world was Greek, thus the language of
choice for most writers of the New Testament.

Only much later was this entire collection translated into other
languages (since they did not exist at the time of the original
manuscripts), such as English.

Dan

miguel

March 5th 08, 12:51 AM

On Tue, 4 Mar 2008 16:27:28 -0800 (PST), Dan >
wrote:

>On Mar 4, 7:18 pm, miguel > wrote:
>
>>
>> I don't know where you get your information, but the very first
>> version of the Bible was the King James Version.
>>
>> miguel
>
>Wrong.
>
>There were at least six English versions of the Bible before the KJV:
>
>Anglo-Saxon manuscript -- 995 AD
>Wycliff -- 1380 AD
>Tyndale --1534 AD
>Great Bible -- 1539 AD
>Geneva -- 1557 AD
>Rheims -- 1582 AD
>
>And then the 1st Edition of the King James, published in 1611.
>
>Anything else you need to be corrected on?

Obviously somebody has fed you some very bad information (probably
Satan).

Jim Stewart

March 5th 08, 12:55 AM

miguel wrote:
> Jim Stewart wrote:
>> miguel wrote:
>>> miguel wrote:
>>>> Some poopytalker wrote:
>>>>> miguel a écrit :
>
>>>> NO POOPYTALK!
>
>>>>>> "John of Aix" wrote:
>>>>>>> miguel wrote:
>>>>>>>> Daedalus wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Why weren't the French involved in this conversation?
>>>>>>>> Probably because they speak poopytalk.
>>>>>>> Pauvre con avec ton langage enfantin. Toi, évidemment, tu ne piges rien
>>>>>>> que l'amerloque et, sans doute, t'exprime comme un crétin dans cette
>>>>>>> 'langue', ainsi tu te sens obligé de montrer à quel point tu es inculte
>>>>>>> avec l'utilisation des mots qu'on laisse tomber après la crèche.
>>>>>>> C'est un anglais qui te parle, car ici on Europe on considère la culture
>>>>>>> d'être une bonne chose.
>>>>>> Usenet would be generally improved if all poopytalkers like John of
>>>>>> Aix would Remove Themselves Altogether.
>>>>> Usenet would improve if assholes like you would fade away..!!! Go back
>>>>> to your trailers park, don't forget to get your meds and have a good
>>>>> sleep..!!!
>>>> I'd sleep a lot better of you poopytalkers would Remove Your Poopytalk
>>> >from Usenet Altogether.
>>>> miguel
>
>>> PS: I don't suppose you poopytalking morons have ever figured out why
>>> the BIBLE is in ENGLISH, not French Poopytalk.
>
>> Well, it was in Latin long before it was in
>> English and Latin is way closer to French
>> than English...
>
> I don't know where you get your information, but the very first
> version of the Bible was the King James Version.

Google Vulgate

Dan[_10_]

March 5th 08, 01:09 AM

On Mar 4, 7:51 pm, miguel > wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Mar 2008 16:27:28 -0800 (PST), Dan >
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Mar 4, 7:18 pm, miguel > wrote:
>
> >> I don't know where you get your information, but the very first
> >> version of the Bible was the King James Version.
>
> >> miguel
>
> >Wrong.
>
> >There were at least six English versions of the Bible before the KJV:
>
> >Anglo-Saxon manuscript -- 995 AD
> >Wycliff -- 1380 AD
> >Tyndale --1534 AD
> >Great Bible -- 1539 AD
> >Geneva -- 1557 AD
> >Rheims -- 1582 AD
>
> >And then the 1st Edition of the King James, published in 1611.
>
> >Anything else you need to be corrected on?
>
> Obviously somebody has fed you some very bad information (probably
> Satan).

Must be so. I'll ask him...

Miguel? Is it so??

miguel

March 5th 08, 01:22 AM

Jim Stewart wrote:
>miguel wrote:
>> Jim Stewart wrote:
>>> miguel wrote:
>>>> miguel wrote:
>>>>> Some poopytalker wrote:
>>>>>> miguel a écrit :
>>
>>>>> NO POOPYTALK!
>>
>>>>>>> "John of Aix" wrote:
>>>>>>>> miguel wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Daedalus wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Why weren't the French involved in this conversation?
>>>>>>>>> Probably because they speak poopytalk.
>>>>>>>> Pauvre con avec ton langage enfantin. Toi, évidemment, tu ne piges rien
>>>>>>>> que l'amerloque et, sans doute, t'exprime comme un crétin dans cette
>>>>>>>> 'langue', ainsi tu te sens obligé de montrer à quel point tu es inculte
>>>>>>>> avec l'utilisation des mots qu'on laisse tomber après la crèche.
>>>>>>>> C'est un anglais qui te parle, car ici on Europe on considère la culture
>>>>>>>> d'être une bonne chose.
>>>>>>> Usenet would be generally improved if all poopytalkers like John of
>>>>>>> Aix would Remove Themselves Altogether.
>>>>>> Usenet would improve if assholes like you would fade away..!!! Go back
>>>>>> to your trailers park, don't forget to get your meds and have a good
>>>>>> sleep..!!!
>>>>> I'd sleep a lot better of you poopytalkers would Remove Your Poopytalk
>>>> >from Usenet Altogether.
>>>>> miguel
>>
>>>> PS: I don't suppose you poopytalking morons have ever figured out why
>>>> the BIBLE is in ENGLISH, not French Poopytalk.
>>
>>> Well, it was in Latin long before it was in
>>> English and Latin is way closer to French
>>> than English...
>>
>> I don't know where you get your information, but the very first
>> version of the Bible was the King James Version.
>
>Google Vulgate

Why would I want to look at masturbation pictures?

miguel

March 5th 08, 01:23 AM

On Tue, 4 Mar 2008 17:09:09 -0800 (PST), Dan >
wrote:

>On Mar 4, 7:51 pm, miguel > wrote:
>> On Tue, 4 Mar 2008 16:27:28 -0800 (PST), Dan >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Mar 4, 7:18 pm, miguel > wrote:
>>
>> >> I don't know where you get your information, but the very first
>> >> version of the Bible was the King James Version.
>>
>> >> miguel
>>
>> >Wrong.
>>
>> >There were at least six English versions of the Bible before the KJV:
>>
>> >Anglo-Saxon manuscript -- 995 AD
>> >Wycliff -- 1380 AD
>> >Tyndale --1534 AD
>> >Great Bible -- 1539 AD
>> >Geneva -- 1557 AD
>> >Rheims -- 1582 AD

>> >And then the 1st Edition of the King James, published in 1611.

>> >Anything else you need to be corrected on?

>> Obviously somebody has fed you some very bad information (probably
>> Satan).

>Must be so. I'll ask him...

>Miguel? Is it so??

No, man. I exorcise regularly.

Dan[_10_]

March 5th 08, 02:47 AM

On Mar 4, 8:23 pm, miguel > wrote:

> >Must be so. I'll ask him...
> >Miguel? Is it so??
>
> No, man. I exorcise regularly.

That's cool, man.

You any kin to Cheech and Chong?

Jes wonderin'

Dan

Dylan Smith

March 5th 08, 11:51 AM

On 2008-03-02, Jay Honeck > wrote:
> Indeed. The Greeks, while no match for the Germans, managed to thoroughly
> humiliate the Italians before falling under Axis occupation. For a brief
> (if not entirely impartial) history of Greece in WWII, see:

The Italians weren't entirely hard to humiliate in WWII - the tiny
island of Malta humiliated the might of the Italian air force with three
Fairey Swordfish.

--
From the sunny Isle of Man.
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.

Jay Honeck[_2_]

March 5th 08, 03:15 PM

> The Italians weren't entirely hard to humiliate in WWII - the tiny
> island of Malta humiliated the might of the Italian air force with three
> Fairey Swordfish.

True, the Italians were pathetically clumsy in WWII. It's interesting to
note that despite this performance there are few in America who make
"Italian jokes" the way we poke fun at the French.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Dan[_10_]

March 5th 08, 03:25 PM

On Mar 5, 10:15 am, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> > The Italians weren't entirely hard to humiliate in WWII - the tiny
> > island of Malta humiliated the might of the Italian air force with three
> > Fairey Swordfish.
>
> True, the Italians were pathetically clumsy in WWII. It's interesting to
> note that despite this performance there are few in America who make
> "Italian jokes" the way we poke fun at the French.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

Which part of "America?" Iowa? Iowa City? Where?

Those of us from New York (that's that big city on the East Coast
that's still part of America) have heard jokes made about and told on
every race, creed, color, and shape of mankind.

It's how you knew you'd arrived.

Dan

Gig 601XL Builder[_2_]

March 5th 08, 03:39 PM

Jay Honeck wrote:
>> The Italians weren't entirely hard to humiliate in WWII - the tiny
>> island of Malta humiliated the might of the Italian air force with three
>> Fairey Swordfish.
>
> True, the Italians were pathetically clumsy in WWII. It's interesting
> to note that despite this performance there are few in America who make
> "Italian jokes" the way we poke fun at the French.

As a second generation Italian-American on my fathers side I've heard
plenty. But the reason you don't hear as many is because the Italians
don't think they are great warriors.

The best isn't really a joke though. When, during the first Persian Gulf
War, a bunch of Iraqis supposedly surrendered to an Italian news crew
the joke was that they had taken more POWs than the entire Italian Army
during WWII.

Dan[_10_]

March 5th 08, 03:59 PM

On Mar 5, 10:39 am, Gig 601XL Builder >
wrote:

> As a second generation Italian-American on my fathers side I've heard
> plenty. But the reason you don't hear as many is because the Italians
> don't think they are great warriors.
>
> The best isn't really a joke though. When, during the first Persian Gulf
> War, a bunch of Iraqis supposedly surrendered to an Italian news crew
> the joke was that they had taken more POWs than the entire Italian Army
> during WWII.

Keep in mind, Jay has a minor in History, but...

One reason the Italians had no great desire for battle wasn't a
particular lack of courage or combativeness -- Italians can be as
pusillanimous as any people.

The fact was the "Italian nation" was still in formation at the time
of WW2. The federation of City States that were united only after
Napoleon (A Frenchman, no less) completely reset the political
organization of the peninsula.

Italian nationalists pushed for unification all through the 19th
century, but what appeal this had for the common Italian is lost. All
we have are individual recollections, and those Immigrant Italians I
have known are very clear that they are from Naples or Sicily or
Calabria.

While Mussolini had grand fascist visions of restoration of the Roman
Empire, apparently -- in most cases -- his enlistees did not share his
grand vision, and fought with less than alacrity.

This does not mean Italians are "Unsuited for war." All men (in the
generic sense) are unsuited for war. What makes them suited is some
combination of impulse, desire, conviction, training, and purpose.

Provide that, and you can lead Frenchmen to Moscow.

Dan

Steven P. McNicoll

March 5th 08, 04:02 PM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:LOyzj.9517$TT4.6235@attbi_s22...
>
> True, the Italians were pathetically clumsy in WWII. It's interesting to
> note that despite this performance there are few in America who make
> "Italian jokes" the way we poke fun at the French.
>

Perhaps because the Italians don't have the arrogance of the French.

Jay Honeck[_2_]

March 5th 08, 05:08 PM

> Which part of "America?" Iowa? Iowa City? Where?
>
> Those of us from New York (that's that big city on the East Coast
> that's still part of America) have heard jokes made about and told on
> every race, creed, color, and shape of mankind.

Allow me to rephrase that, please. Although there are jokes about EVERY
ethnic group, the types of jokes we hear about Italians (and just about
everyone else) are far different in tone from those told about the French.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"
"Dan" > wrote in message
...
> On Mar 5, 10:15 am, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>> > The Italians weren't entirely hard to humiliate in WWII - the tiny
>> > island of Malta humiliated the might of the Italian air force with
>> > three
>> > Fairey Swordfish.
>>
>> True, the Italians were pathetically clumsy in WWII. It's interesting
>> to
>> note that despite this performance there are few in America who make
>> "Italian jokes" the way we poke fun at the French.
>> --
>> Jay Honeck
>> Iowa City, IA
>> Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
>> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
> Which part of "America?" Iowa? Iowa City? Where?
>
> Those of us from New York (that's that big city on the East Coast
> that's still part of America) have heard jokes made about and told on
> every race, creed, color, and shape of mankind.
>
> It's how you knew you'd arrived.
>
>
> Dan

Jay Honeck[_2_]

March 5th 08, 05:13 PM

> Provide that, and you can lead Frenchmen to Moscow.

Exactly. And it is precisely because the French have fallen so far that
they are now thought of so poorly.

Combine that with their inexplicable arrogance in the face of irrelevance,
and you have comic fodder.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Dan[_10_]

March 5th 08, 05:28 PM

On Mar 5, 12:13 pm, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> > Provide that, and you can lead Frenchmen to Moscow.
>
> Exactly. And it is precisely because the French have fallen so far that
> they are now thought of so poorly.
>
> Combine that with their inexplicable arrogance in the face of irrelevance,
> and you have comic fodder.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

We have comic fodder right here, and it's from Iowa, not France.

Who "thinks of them so poorly"?

Specifics really mess up broad generalizations, don't they?

Dan

Rich Ahrens[_2_]

March 5th 08, 05:34 PM

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:LOyzj.9517$TT4.6235@attbi_s22...
>> True, the Italians were pathetically clumsy in WWII. It's interesting to
>> note that despite this performance there are few in America who make
>> "Italian jokes" the way we poke fun at the French.
>>
>
> Perhaps because the Italians don't have the arrogance of the French.

Or they don't compete with Americans in arrogance, to put it another way...

Phil J

March 5th 08, 07:03 PM

On Mar 5, 11:13*am, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> > Provide that, and you can lead Frenchmen to Moscow.
>
> Exactly. *And it is precisely because the French have fallen so far that
> they are now thought of so poorly.
>
> Combine that with their inexplicable arrogance in the face of irrelevance,
> and you have comic fodder.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

I've also heard some pretty good Iowa jokes. Here's a sampling:

Q: What's considered a solid hour's reading in Iowa?

A: The back of a cereal box.

Did you hear that Ford is recalling all vehicles sold in Iowa? They
have to change the dimmer switch back to the floor like it used to be
due to all the Iowans losing control of their cars when their foot
gets caught in the steering wheel.

Q: Why do they bring a bag of manure to a wedding in Iowa?

A: It keeps the flies off the bride!

I'm not sure why people make fun of Iowa that way, but I am sure there
must be very good reasons Iowans deserve it. Just like with the
French!

Phil

Dan[_10_]

March 5th 08, 08:35 PM

Dan[_10_]

March 5th 08, 08:37 PM

On Mar 5, 12:34 pm, Rich Ahrens > wrote:
>
> Or they don't compete with Americans in arrogance, to put it another way...

Don't confuse "arrogance" with "superiority"

Dan

Rich Ahrens[_2_]

March 5th 08, 08:58 PM

Dan wrote:
> On Mar 5, 12:34 pm, Rich Ahrens > wrote:
>> Or they don't compete with Americans in arrogance, to put it another way...
>
> Don't confuse "arrogance" with "superiority"

I rest my case.

Martin Hotze[_2_]

March 5th 08, 09:03 PM

Jay Honeck schrieb:
>> Provide that, and you can lead Frenchmen to Moscow.
>
> Exactly. And it is precisely because the French have fallen so far that
> they are now thought of so poorly.
>
> Combine that with their inexplicable arrogance in the face of irrelevance,
> and you have comic fodder.

and your knowledge about the French comes from where? From your minor in
history? Have you ever been outside your country?

#m

Dan[_10_]

March 5th 08, 09:11 PM

On Feb 28, 2:18 pm, Jim Logajan > wrote:
> Phil J > wrote:
> > Germany's use
> > of advanced technology and advanced tactics put them ahead of every
> > other country on the planet at that time.
>
> Only part of that is true. At the start of the war German tanks were
> generally regarded as inferior to their contemporaries. It was generally
> superior tactics and training that won their battles. In fact at the outset
> of the invasion of Russia, the Russian T-34 was superior in pretty much
> every way to anything the Germans had. (I wasted part of my youth playing
> board wargames such as Avalon Hill's "PanzerBlitz" and learned a bit about
> the equipment and tactics of the era.)
>
> Refs:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_tanks_in_World_War_IIhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzerblitz

Not exactly.

The T-34 was produced en masse, had a weak main gun, and had very
little room inside for the crew. German tanks were better made and
better gunned.

But -- all Wermacht maintenance was depot level -- throw a rod? Send
the whole tank back to the fatherland by rail.

The US forward deployed maintenance philosophy helped defeat the far
superior German armor. They would blast four of our tanks -- the next
day three would reappear.

The Soviet maintenance and refit was not as efficient, but the sheer
numbers of T-34s helped swing the tide.

The main innovation that German armored units employed that helped
facilitate blitzkrieg was small unit communications (radios). The
French had better (on paper) tanks then the PKZW Mk IV, but the French
employed their tanks as infantry support while the Germans used
penetrate and exploit tactics.

The German Tiger tank was not exceeded in potential by Allied armor
until the deployment of the M-1 Abrams.

Now *that's* a tank.

Dan
(retired US Army Armor Officer)

Dan[_10_]

March 5th 08, 09:13 PM

On Mar 5, 3:58 pm, Rich Ahrens > wrote:
> Dan wrote:
> > On Mar 5, 12:34 pm, Rich Ahrens > wrote:
> >> Or they don't compete with Americans in arrogance, to put it another way...
>
> > Don't confuse "arrogance" with "superiority"
>
> I rest my case.

You like that?

I thought that would elicit a response.

Catch and release.

Jim Stewart

March 5th 08, 10:10 PM

Dan wrote:
> On Feb 28, 2:18 pm, Jim Logajan > wrote:
>> Phil J > wrote:
>>> Germany's use
>>> of advanced technology and advanced tactics put them ahead of every
>>> other country on the planet at that time.
>> Only part of that is true. At the start of the war German tanks were
>> generally regarded as inferior to their contemporaries. It was generally
>> superior tactics and training that won their battles. In fact at the outset
>> of the invasion of Russia, the Russian T-34 was superior in pretty much
>> every way to anything the Germans had. (I wasted part of my youth playing
>> board wargames such as Avalon Hill's "PanzerBlitz" and learned a bit about
>> the equipment and tactics of the era.)
>>
>> Refs:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_tanks_in_World_War_IIhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzerblitz
>
> Not exactly.
>
> The T-34 was produced en masse, had a weak main gun, and had very
> little room inside for the crew. German tanks were better made and
> better gunned.
>
> But -- all Wermacht maintenance was depot level -- throw a rod? Send
> the whole tank back to the fatherland by rail.
>
> The US forward deployed maintenance philosophy helped defeat the far
> superior German armor. They would blast four of our tanks -- the next
> day three would reappear.
>
> The Soviet maintenance and refit was not as efficient, but the sheer
> numbers of T-34s helped swing the tide.
>
> The main innovation that German armored units employed that helped
> facilitate blitzkrieg was small unit communications (radios). The
> French had better (on paper) tanks then the PKZW Mk IV, but the French
> employed their tanks as infantry support while the Germans used
> penetrate and exploit tactics.
>
> The German Tiger tank was not exceeded in potential by Allied armor
> until the deployment of the M-1 Abrams.
>
> Now *that's* a tank.

Too bad there will be no more tank battles...

Gig 601XL Builder[_2_]

March 5th 08, 10:16 PM

Jim Stewart wrote:

>
> Too bad there will be no more tank battles...
>
>

Now that's wishful thinking.

Jay Honeck[_2_]

March 5th 08, 10:36 PM

>I'm not sure why people make fun of Iowa that way, but I am sure there
>must be very good reasons Iowans deserve it. Just like with the
>French!

Pretty good! But you forgot this one:

What does "IOWA" stand for?

Idiots
Out
Walking
Around

You see, unlike the French (and several folks in this thread), I have
something called "a sense of humor". I suggest you guys find one -- it
makes the world much more fun!

Besides, I'm not from Iowa...

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck[_2_]

March 5th 08, 10:44 PM

> And what was France's contribution during WW1?

They helped win it -- but who cares?

Answer: No one. Past gallantry is trumped by recent ignobility.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck[_2_]

March 5th 08, 10:55 PM

> and your knowledge about the French comes from where? From your minor in
> history? Have you ever been outside your country?

Marty, as your posts over the year have proven time and time again, you are
living proof that leaving your country has taught you nothing. Or do you
think that by visiting three cities in the US you now "know" America better
than if you had actually spent time in school *studying* American history?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck[_2_]

March 5th 08, 11:08 PM

> Just like the undeserved stereotypes of blacks, Mexicans, Poles, Gypsies,
> Jews, Catholics etc. etc. etc., the nasty perceptions are only perpetuated
> by the ignorant people who persist in displaying how small they really are
> by repeating them.

Actually, no. You're confusing a national stereotype (the French People)
with prejudicial views against individuals within a race or nationality
(Poles, Jews, etc.) To my knowledge, no one regards individuals of French
descent to be inferior or dumb -- if anything, individually the French are
seen as suave and debonair -- but as a nation they are commonly ridiculed
due to their recent (post-1938) behavior.

This is a subtle yet important difference that makes the two attitudes
apples and oranges.

(And, just so you know this shouldn't be taken personally, my mother's
family is of French descent.)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Dan[_10_]

March 5th 08, 11:21 PM

On Mar 5, 5:10 pm, Jim Stewart > wrote:

> > The German Tiger tank was not exceeded in potential by Allied armor
> > until the deployment of the M-1 Abrams.
>
> > Now *that's* a tank.
>
> Too bad there will be no more tank battles...

Don't be so sure. While it's unlikely we will see mass tank battles
such as Kursk, the Tank will continue to dominate the battlefield.

When I was in OCS playing infantry grunt we were assaulted by a
platoon of tanks. Everyone knew it was "war games", but let me tell
you - nothing, but nothing gets the pucker up like 63 tons rolling at
you at 50 MPH, main gun and coax pointing in your direction.

At that moment, my choice of branch was clear -- armor.

Though I completed my 21 years as an infantry Company Commander, and
learn to respect the havoc wreaked by one grunt and a LAW, I think
reports of the tank's demise are greatly exaggerated.

Dan

Dan[_10_]

March 5th 08, 11:23 PM

On Mar 5, 5:44 pm, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> > And what was France's contribution during WW1?
>
> They helped win it -- but who cares?
>
> Answer: No one. Past gallantry is trumped by recent ignobility.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

So what's the time frame? Only within Jay's cognizance of events?

One thing you've displayed is the prototypical American's short view
of history.

Dan

Dan[_10_]

March 5th 08, 11:25 PM

On Mar 5, 6:08 pm, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> > Just like the undeserved stereotypes of blacks, Mexicans, Poles, Gypsies,
> > Jews, Catholics etc. etc. etc., the nasty perceptions are only perpetuated
> > by the ignorant people who persist in displaying how small they really are
> > by repeating them.
>
> Actually, no. You're confusing a national stereotype (the French People)
> with prejudicial views against individuals within a race or nationality
> (Poles, Jews, etc.) To my knowledge, no one regards individuals of French
> descent to be inferior or dumb -- if anything, individually the French are
> seen as suave and debonair -- but as a nation they are commonly ridiculed
> due to their recent (post-1938) behavior.
>
> This is a subtle yet important difference that makes the two attitudes
> apples and oranges.
>
> (And, just so you know this shouldn't be taken personally, my mother's
> family is of French descent.)
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

Jay -- please READ what you write before hitting "POST."

One definition of education is the ability to discriminate and not
have reason overwhelmed by vague generalizations.

Are you seriously a clod, or are you "jes funnin?"

Dan

Bertie the Bunyip

March 6th 08, 01:49 AM

On 6 Mar, 00:11, Wolfgang Schwanke > wrote:
> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote :
>
> > Wolfgang Schwanke > wrote in
> :
>
> >> American terrorist preparations:
>
> >> level 1: ban nasal hair trimmers
> >> level 2: invade some innocent country on a different continent and
> >> bomb it to cinders because they can't locate the right one on a map
> >> level 3: have some more skyscrapers bombed by the people ****ed off
> >> from what happened in level 2
> >> level 4: post racist jokes to usenet
>
> > American jokes aren't racist?
>
> You be the judge.

OK, you're a raccist fjukkwit.

>I just thought they deserved an equal opportunity.

of course you did. Fairplay is the hallmark of your trade.

>
> > Maybe they should
>
> > Level 1. invade naeighbors to southeast.
> > Level 2 *anschull the next nieghbors to souteast
> > Level 3 *invade neighbors to east
> > Level 4 invade neighbors to west
> > Level 5 **** up everything else and go whining back to the vaterland.
>
> Tina did that one already.

Tina's German?
>
> I also like this onehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9NUKwHEWEg
>
> But can't you come up with a different stereotype for a change?

I should be asking you that, shouldn't I?

Bertie

Phil J

March 6th 08, 03:41 AM

On Mar 5, 4:36*pm, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> >I'm not sure why people make fun of Iowa that way, but I am sure there
> >must be very good reasons Iowans deserve it. *Just like with the
> >French!
>
> Pretty good! *But you forgot this one:
>
> What does "IOWA" stand for?
>
> Idiots
> Out
> Walking
> Around
>

I didn't forget it. I just didn't think it was very funny.

> You see, unlike the French (and several folks in this thread), I have
> something called "a sense of humor". * I suggest you guys find one -- it
> makes the world much more fun!
>
> Besides, I'm not from Iowa...
>
> ;-)
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

Oh, so you are just joking when you say the French are arrogant,
irrelevant, etc. Is that the sense of humor we should adopt?

I like a good joke, and I found the original post pretty clever. But
I only take it as a joke, and I don't take the underlying stereotypes
seriously. Your posts attempt to show why the jokes and stereotypes
are actually justified. I didn't find the original joke offensive,
but your posts I definitely find offensive.

Phil

Jay Honeck[_2_]

March 6th 08, 04:03 AM

>I like a good joke, and I found the original post pretty clever. But
>I only take it as a joke, and I don't take the underlying stereotypes
>seriously. Your posts attempt to show why the jokes and stereotypes
>are actually justified. I didn't find the original joke offensive,
>but your posts I definitely find offensive.

Your hypersensitivity aside, I'm trying to explain to you WHY the French are
the butt of jokes in America. Whether you choose to listen or not is
irrelevant, and we haven't even begun to discuss whether I believe the jokes
are justified.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck[_2_]

March 6th 08, 04:04 AM

> Are you seriously a clod, or are you "jes funnin?"

So, may I presume that you have nothing further to contribute to the
conversation?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jim Logajan

March 6th 08, 05:15 AM

"Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>>I like a good joke, and I found the original post pretty clever. But
>>I only take it as a joke, and I don't take the underlying stereotypes
>>seriously. Your posts attempt to show why the jokes and stereotypes
>>are actually justified. I didn't find the original joke offensive,
>>but your posts I definitely find offensive.
>
> Your hypersensitivity aside, I'm trying to explain to you WHY the
> French are the butt of jokes in America.

But they aren't the butt of jokes in America. At least not where I live.

In fact I seem to recall something about an attempt to rename "french
fries" to "freedom fries" that made the U.S. the butt of jokes around the
world. (Oh yeah - the work of Republican Walter Jones of NC. Eventually
became a critic of the Iraq war and said he wished the "fries" episode had
never happened.)

Jim Stewart

March 6th 08, 05:47 AM

Wolfgang Schwanke wrote:

> You still don't get it. Cultural stereotypes are little jokes we tell
> about each other to have some fun. They're not real, we're just pulling
> each other's legs. And it's the job of the one who tells them to invent
> them. So for example it would be your job to invent an anti-German one.
> But you didn't, you just repeated the same old same old one. Lame.
> Meanwhile it's our job to come up with anti-American ones, which is
> what I did. It's your job not to get uppity about it, especially not as
> you do it to everyone else, but to lay back and enjoy it.

Exactly. Have you ever read the whole 'Blinkenlights'
story?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blinkenlights

Martin Hotze[_2_]

March 6th 08, 05:53 AM

Jay Honeck schrieb:
> Or do you
> think that by visiting three cities in the US you now "know" America better
> than if you had actually spent time in school *studying* American history?

Yes, I do. Else I'd still think that you are alltogether ignorant idiots
- like many people think here about Americans. So now I only think that
- as everywhere else - only a minority are ignorant idiots, but one
hears not too much of the other folks with a clue.

It's just like in this group: one reads too much from you and one might
think that all here are like you.

Besides it was more than 3 cities. But as you have not answered my
question I am sure that you never have been abroad and that you don't
hold a valid passport. It's typically for your ignorance that you try to
insult if you're out of arguments.

My only hope is that your kids are different and that they sometime try
to search for their names, so they will find your postings on this group
and they hopefully will see what an ignorant you are. You said your son
makes a trip to spain (?): hopefully he get's an idea of how things work
"in the rest of the world".

#m