[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: World Trade & More & a bit of hope for Jeff



> Once again Mark, your appalling lack of historical knowledge betrays you!
> FDR was one of our greatest war presidents.

Gregg:

You know, it's a funny thing...but just yesterday you called FDR a
socialist. Make up your mind. And once again, this is not the Civil War, or
in ANY way like any other war we've ever had to deal with. Your refusal to
understand that conditions, mindsets and weaponry have changed hobbles your
opinions as surely as if you were raised in a barrel. Which it frequently
sounds like you were.
And, for the record: none of your examples has anything to do with Browne.
He sure as Hell isn't a Lincoln or a Roosevelt! Or he might have gotten a
SINGLE percent point of the national vote! You only back him so you can
criticize both major parties without having to take any blame for what your
side does (because they never do anything).

> cow Billy-Boy "truth - what's that?" Clinton was a backwoods governor from
a
> dinky state.  He had no more wordly experience than FDR or Old Abe had!

And yet he kept this sort of thing from happening, something your sacred
Reagan, Bush I & II can't seem to do! Funny, that! And he was exactly as
truthful as Ron "I don't remember, or do I" Reagan, George "Iran-Contra, who
ME?" Bush and Duh-Bya "I wasn't arrested, well except that one time, oh and
that one too" Bush.
I guess you have to be from a "big" state to be good enough for Gregg to
want for President. And with that in mind you dare to write this:

> Stupid comment.

I'm used to them from you. No doubt your idea of combatting terrorism is to
arm the entire population of the US. Yeah, let's see them bullets a-flyin'
in that plane...
BTW, isn't it interesting that all those things you denied in our private
EMail have played out exactly as I said they would (and you said they
wouldn't)? SEE? Told Ya!

> Sounds like Gregg is either a military historian or a military hobbiest,
and
> that this is the conventional take on military history.

Keets:

He has a lot of knowledge but is completely caught up in the past and has no
conception of change. This is the most unconventional conflict in the
history of the world, and his 18th century opinions just don't reflect this.

> Of all the discussions I have not seen biological warfare mentioned.

Jaqueline:

We're all holding our breath (no joke intended) hoping that never happens.
That is their easiest choice, and I suppose we must be thankful they didn't
let out some horrible, "week-to-incubate" disease on NYC instead. You think
what happened was bad, imagine it spreading throughout the world in a matter
of days. Which it would have.

> You may be right that there are key personnel who direct the activities of
> the faithful and that removing them might hamstring the movement, but also
> it's possible that removing these would only allow the rise of less
> reasonable and more determined leaders.

Keets:

And we'll have to take them out too. "Cut off the head and the body
follows." Even the cells, despite what some say. We've been doing it the
other way around and it doesn't work. The leaders feel safe and have no
problem sending out their men to die. And after all, the only OTHER choice
is to destroy every single Arab nation, and as I posted yesterday they're
some terrorists in Denmark and France (OK, so France would be no great
loss)...we can't take out the entire world.

> Seems like Arafat would be a bad choice to make into an example, as he's
> been very careful to show support for the US in recent years.

All the while allowing his people to bomb innocents. Nope, he's got to go. A
recent bombing took out some Americans visiting Israel.

> I fervently hope you're right, and just to clarify, I didn't mean to imply
> a prediction that nukes will be used in this.

Alan:

I know...and unfortunately it's starting to look like the Afghans are not as
intelligent as it first appeared. They want to try Bin Laden in an "Islamic
court." Yeah, we can imagine...it's not a crime to kill Christians, right?

> They are not religion, for no religion preaches such hate!

Gregg:

Hey, I thought you were an historian! Forget the Crusades, did you?
Typical...

> Yeah, that idiot, Newsweek's retired general was on TV tonight, and he
said
> he didn't think it was much of a problem if a spot in the desert glowed
for
> 250,000 years.  Yeah, right.

Keets:

Like I said, one can only wish for a leader with more than a 91 IQ about
now...

> Personally, I'm searching for victory over fear of the unknown.  Anxiety
> rules over me now.  I can't sleep.  I'm having fits of anger against
unknown
> enemies.  I'm having fits of hyper-dramatic thoughts and words.

Jeff:

It's always easier to fear the unknown, but PLEASE remember that these are
no more than human beings...they have no powers you do not possess, and they
have a LOT less resources than we do. As one commentator said last night:
"They have the will but very little power, we have the power but do we have
the will?" I'd say Yes, we do IF we don't let it slip away. Already NATO
countries are starting to "define" their support for us. Not a good sign.
But they've twice caught terrorists in the act of trying to do something
BEFORE they were able to do it since Tuesday. The FBI just caught what looks
like two of the terrorists who aborted their mission.
The US military is on the ball, and doing what they are supposed to be
doing. Despite being "gutted by Clinton." Funny, all the closed bases came
from Bush Sr. and now Bush Jr. wants to close more, but "Clinton gutted the
military." Riiiiggghht!


"God may have mercy on you, but we won't."
        Senator John McCain


               Cheers                 ML