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

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?

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.

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

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

Yes, I meant on the battlefield.

Phil

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

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?

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.

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.

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..!!!

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