[OT] Nothing Learned From History

From: "Emmanuel Gustin" Emmanuel.Gustin@skynet.

Seems to me that comparing Dubyah to FDR is a huge insult
to FDR.

Then there is FDR's November 1944 Fenway Park speech:

"I am sure that any real American would have chosen, as this government did, to
fight when our own soil was made the object of an attack. As for myself, I
would choose to to do the same thing--again and again and again!

[emphases in original]




Chris Mark

"Chris Mark" wrote in message
...
From: "Emmanuel Gustin" Emmanuel.Gustin@skynet.

Seems to me that comparing Dubyah to FDR is a huge insult
to FDR.

Then there is FDR's November 1944 Fenway Park speech:

"I am sure that any real American would have chosen, as this government
did, to
fight when our own soil was made the object of an attack. As for myself,
I
would choose to to do the same thing--again and again and again!

[emphases in original]

Technically of course he was wrong. Hawaii was not a state until the 50s.

Those were the days when US Presidents were expected to be able to speak.
Sigh.

Less than a year later he was dead. He was a winning president though.

John

In article ,
"John Mullen" writes:
"Chris Mark" wrote in message
...
From: "Emmanuel Gustin" Emmanuel.Gustin@skynet.

Seems to me that comparing Dubyah to FDR is a huge insult
to FDR.

Then there is FDR's November 1944 Fenway Park speech:

"I am sure that any real American would have chosen, as this government
did, to
fight when our own soil was made the object of an attack. As for myself,
I
would choose to to do the same thing--again and again and again!

[emphases in original]

Technically of course he was wrong. Hawaii was not a state until the 50s.

So? It was, at teh time a U.S. territory, just as Oklahoma had been
only 30 or so years before then. It's population were U.S citizens,
the Territory was administered by the Federal Government, and they wer
subject to U.S. Laws and oblications. The same held/holds true for
the Philippines (Independance gained in 1946), Alaska, Guam, Puerto
Rico, and a few others.
While it may not have been a State, it was still U.S. soil.

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster

"Peter Stickney" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"John Mullen" writes:
"Chris Mark" wrote in message
...
From: "Emmanuel Gustin" Emmanuel.Gustin@skynet.

Seems to me that comparing Dubyah to FDR is a huge insult
to FDR.

Then there is FDR's November 1944 Fenway Park speech:

"I am sure that any real American would have chosen, as this government
did, to
fight when our own soil was made the object of an attack. As for
myself,
I
would choose to to do the same thing--again and again and again!

[emphases in original]

Technically of course he was wrong. Hawaii was not a state until the 50s.

So? It was, at teh time a U.S. territory, just as Oklahoma had been
only 30 or so years before then. It's population were U.S citizens,
the Territory was administered by the Federal Government, and they wer
subject to U.S. Laws and oblications. The same held/holds true for
the Philippines (Independance gained in 1946), Alaska, Guam, Puerto
Rico, and a few others.
While it may not have been a State, it was still U.S. soil.

Colony?

John

In article ,
"John Mullen" writes:
"Peter Stickney" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"John Mullen" writes:
"Chris Mark" wrote in message
...
From: "Emmanuel Gustin" Emmanuel.Gustin@skynet.

Seems to me that comparing Dubyah to FDR is a huge insult
to FDR.

Then there is FDR's November 1944 Fenway Park speech:

"I am sure that any real American would have chosen, as this government
did, to
fight when our own soil was made the object of an attack. As for
myself,
I
would choose to to do the same thing--again and again and again!

[emphases in original]

Technically of course he was wrong. Hawaii was not a state until the 50s.

So? It was, at teh time a U.S. territory, just as Oklahoma had been
only 30 or so years before then. It's population were U.S citizens,
the Territory was administered by the Federal Government, and they wer
subject to U.S. Laws and oblications. The same held/holds true for
the Philippines (Independance gained in 1946), Alaska, Guam, Puerto
Rico, and a few others.
While it may not have been a State, it was still U.S. soil.

Colony?

Territory, officially. I suppose we could was Talmudic about where
the dividing line is, but I've no desire to get into too much
hairsplitting about it. As far as the U.S is concerned, a citizen of
a Terretory is a full U.S. Citizen, carrying a U.S. Passport, and
these citizens, adn their homes, are entitled to the same protections
as any other U.S. Citizens. Colonys seem a bit more fuzzy. Consider
if you will, the status of ethnic Chinese living in Hong Kong when the
Brits pulled out, or the escapades of the Brit Foreign Office as they
tried to divest themselves of the Falklans in the decades preceding
the Argentine invasion. (It seems that the denizens of the Falklands,
while they may not have preferred to trod Britain's green and pleasant
fields, liked being British citizens much more than being Argentines.
This led to all manner of Parlimentary sticky wickets that made a
unilaterl handover suicidally impossible. One solution seriously
promosed by Her Majesty's Diplomats was to unilaterally revoke the
British Citizenship of the Kelpers.

BUt then we're not all that good at the Colonization game - we keep
giving the places back.

In some respects, it's an interesting question: When does a nation's
posession stop being a Colony and start being a peice of that country?
The French were convinced that Algeria was a full-fledged Department
of the French Republic. It took nearly a decade of bloody war to
convince them that the Algerians felt otherwise.

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster