If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Way off topic, but it has do to with the French
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. |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Way off topic, but it has do to with rednecks
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 |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Way off topic, but it has do to with rednecks
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. |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Way off topic, but it has do to with rednecks
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" |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Way off topic, but it has do to with rednecks
"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 |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Way off topic, but it has do to with rednecks
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 |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Way off topic, but it has do to with the French
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 |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Way off topic, but it has do to with the French
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 |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Way off topic, but it has do to with the French
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" |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Way off topic, but it has do to with the French
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_...n_World_War_II http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzerblitz |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Off-topic, but in need of help | Alan Erskine | Aviation Photos | 20 | January 5th 07 06:21 AM |
Off-topic, but in need of help | dennis | Aviation Photos | 0 | January 4th 07 10:40 PM |
Almost on topic... | Richard Lamb | Home Built | 22 | January 30th 06 06:55 PM |
French but on topic... | ArVa | Military Aviation | 2 | April 16th 04 01:40 AM |
off topic | Randall Robertson | Simulators | 0 | January 2nd 04 01:29 PM |