|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: !Marine Corporal From A Bunker In Ramadi: "I Got A Message For That Douche Harry Reid" |
24 Apr 2007 09:16:36 AM |
|
|
On 24 Apr 2007 03:57:52 -0700, "editor@netpath.net"
<editor@netpath.net> wrote:
I think
Apparently not very well, since it's the Bush administration, not the
Democrats. who are fucking the troops over.
every Marine and soldier in Iraq wonders what he's fighting
for and risking his ***** for in Iraq when the Marie Antoinettes of the
Democrat Party back in Washington are stabbing him in the back.
Especially when it's not the kids of those Marie Antoinettes over
there next to him doing the fighting - but other redneck kids from Red
Nation.
No $4 to park! No $6 admission! http://www.INTERNET-GUN-SHOW.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: !Marine Corporal From A Bunker In Ramadi: "I Got A Message For That Douche Harry Reid" |
24 Apr 2007 07:48:09 AM |
|
|
On 24 Apr 2007 03:57:52 -0700, "editor@netpath.net"
<editor@netpath.net> wrote:
I think .......
No you don't
anyone stupid enough to buy into that propaganda
nonsense put out by whipped and beaten republicans, let
alone a dumb ***** who got caught making
late-night, crank, hang-up phone calls, doesn't show
much thinking ability.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: !Marine Corporal From A Bunker In Ramadi: "I Got A Message For That Douche Harry Reid" |
25 Apr 2007 04:57:03 PM |
|
|
On 24 Apr 2007 03:57:52 -0700, "editor@netpath.net"
<editor@netpath.net> wrote:
I think every Marine and soldier in Iraq wonders what he's fighting
for
The vast majority of Americans are asking the same question, and wish
we had an answer to give to our brave sons and daughters stuck there
by this Administration of malfeasants and incompetents.
--
"O Sybilli, si ergo
Fortibus es in ero
O Nobili! Themis trux
Sivat sinem? Causen Dux"
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: !Marine Corporal From A Bunker In Ramadi: "I Got A Message For That Douche Harry Reid" |
29 Apr 2007 09:07:56 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 17:57:03 -0400, raven1
<quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote:
On 24 Apr 2007 03:57:52 -0700, "editor@netpath.net"
<editor@netpath.net> wrote:
I think every Marine and soldier in Iraq wonders what he's fighting
for
The vast majority of Americans are asking the same question, and wish
we had an answer to give to our brave sons and daughters stuck there
by this Administration of malfeasants and incompetents.
Pfft. That's easy. Shrub's ego and boosting the amount of his stock
portfolios.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dr. Barry Worthington" |
|
| Title: Re: !Marine Corporal From A Bunker In Ramadi: "I Got A Message For That Douche Harry Reid" |
24 Apr 2007 09:08:53 AM |
|
|
On 24 Apr, 11:57, "edi...@netpath.net" <edi...@netpath.net> wrote:
I think every Marine and soldier in Iraq wonders what he's fighting
for and risking his ***** for in Iraq when the Marie Antoinettes of the
Democrat Party back in Washington are stabbing him in the back.
How so? Aren't they the ones who want to get him (and her) out of
there?
And what are we to construe regarding obsession with Marie Antoinette?
As far as I'm aware, she was a silly young woman, (or Queen) who
placed a strain on the royal budget, but she didn't send anyone to
fight in a foreign war.
Especially when it's not the kids of those Marie Antoinettes over
there next to him doing the fighting - but other redneck kids from Red
Nation.
The Red Nation? You do have some strange ideas! From what I can see,
it's your Republican politicians (for I cannot call them 'statesmen')
who send other people's children to fight.
No $4 to park! No $6 admission! http://www.INTERNET-GUN-SHOW.com
Do a lot of this kind of thing?
Dr. Barry Worthington
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kurt Nicklas" |
|
| Title: Re: !Marine Corporal From A Bunker In Ramadi: "I Got A Message For That Douche Harry Reid" |
25 Apr 2007 07:35:33 PM |
|
|
On Apr 24, 10:08 am, "Dr. Barry Worthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 24 Apr, 11:57, "edi...@netpath.net" <edi...@netpath.net> wrote:
Especially when it's not the kids of those Marie Antoinettes over
there next to him doing the fighting - but other redneck kids from Red
Nation.
The Red Nation? You do have some strange ideas! From what I can see,
it's your Republican politicians (for I cannot call them 'statesmen')
who send other people's children to fight.
Bollocks.
Of course it was democrat politicians who sent "other people's
children"
to bail your now pathetic island out of two world wars, "Doctor".
.
|
|
|
| User: "Felix D." |
|
| Title: Re: !Marine Corporal From A Bunker In Ramadi: "I Got A Message For That Douche Harry Reid" |
25 Apr 2007 08:36:04 PM |
|
|
"Kurt Nicklas" <nicklask@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:1177547733.453660.270210@b40g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 24, 10:08 am, "Dr. Barry Worthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 24 Apr, 11:57, "edi...@netpath.net" <edi...@netpath.net> wrote:
Especially when it's not the kids of those Marie Antoinettes over
there next to him doing the fighting - but other redneck kids from Red
Nation.
The Red Nation? You do have some strange ideas! From what I can see,
it's your Republican politicians (for I cannot call them 'statesmen')
who send other people's children to fight.
Bollocks.
Of course it was democrat politicians who sent "other people's
children"
to bail your now pathetic island out of two world wars, "Doctor".
Not to mention it was Truman that gave us the Korean War, while Kennedy
expanded the Vietnam war and Johnson saw it through.
I think the Dems are just pissed because this isn't one of "their" wars,
even though they voted for it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: !Marine Corporal From A Bunker In Ramadi: "I Got A Message For That Douche Harry Reid" |
25 Apr 2007 09:29:24 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 18:36:04 -0700, "Felix D." <#1Chekist@OGPU.org>
wrote:
"Kurt Nicklas" <nicklask@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:1177547733.453660.270210@b40g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 24, 10:08 am, "Dr. Barry Worthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 24 Apr, 11:57, "edi...@netpath.net" <edi...@netpath.net> wrote:
Especially when it's not the kids of those Marie Antoinettes over
there next to him doing the fighting - but other redneck kids from Red
Nation.
The Red Nation? You do have some strange ideas! From what I can see,
it's your Republican politicians (for I cannot call them 'statesmen')
who send other people's children to fight.
Bollocks.
Of course it was democrat politicians who sent "other people's
children"
to bail your now pathetic island out of two world wars, "Doctor".
Not to mention it was Truman that gave us the Korean War, while Kennedy
expanded the Vietnam war and Johnson saw it through.
I think the Dems are just pissed because this isn't one of "their" wars,
even though they voted for it.
In case you haven't noticed it, the Republican Party has been the
party of profligate spending since Ronald Reagan, and is now the party
of irresponsible, ill-conceived wars thanks to W. Oh, and I'd be
***** too, if I'd voted for a war based on either crap
intelligence or deliberate lies, you can take your pick. Personally, I
hope that Bush was deliberately deceptive; it's much scarier to
contemplate that our intelligence network got things so blatantly
wrong.
--
"O Sybilli, si ergo
Fortibus es in ero
O Nobili! Themis trux
Sivat sinem? Causen Dux"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Felix D." |
|
| Title: Re: !Marine Corporal From A Bunker In Ramadi: "I Got A Message For That Douche Harry Reid" |
27 Apr 2007 12:54:36 AM |
|
|
"raven1" <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in message
news:6530335q9nqemml8fe4kmkm29nkb3kuek3@4ax.com...
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 18:36:04 -0700, "Felix D." <#1Chekist@OGPU.org>
wrote:
"Kurt Nicklas" <nicklask@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:1177547733.453660.270210@b40g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 24, 10:08 am, "Dr. Barry Worthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 24 Apr, 11:57, "edi...@netpath.net" <edi...@netpath.net> wrote:
Especially when it's not the kids of those Marie Antoinettes over
there next to him doing the fighting - but other redneck kids from
Red
Nation.
The Red Nation? You do have some strange ideas! From what I can see,
it's your Republican politicians (for I cannot call them 'statesmen')
who send other people's children to fight.
Bollocks.
Of course it was democrat politicians who sent "other people's
children"
to bail your now pathetic island out of two world wars, "Doctor".
Not to mention it was Truman that gave us the Korean War, while Kennedy
expanded the Vietnam war and Johnson saw it through.
I think the Dems are just pissed because this isn't one of "their" wars,
even though they voted for it.
In case you haven't noticed it, the Republican Party has been the
party of profligate spending since Ronald Reagan, and is now the party
of irresponsible, ill-conceived wars thanks to W. Oh, and I'd be
***** too, if I'd voted for a war based on either crap
intelligence or deliberate lies, you can take your pick.
Sure, take your pick from all of these *lies*:
- - - -
Who Lied?
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S.
Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate,
air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to
the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction
programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman,Dianne Feinstein,
Barbara A. Mikulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9,
1998
"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last
visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has
reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological,
chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War
status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is
doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-
range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." -- From
a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford,
& Tom Lantos among others
"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while
retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We
cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." - Madeline Albright,
1998
"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all
weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its
agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are
confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and
biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to
build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence
reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet
achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002
"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with
the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in
the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past
four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has
continued armament programs." - Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002
"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat
Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use
them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and
all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." --
Bill Clinton in 1998
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that
Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons
stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also
given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members,
though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible
events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked,
Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and
chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he
succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security
landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American
security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002
"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in
1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a
warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those
trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of
2003
"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass
destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them
against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998
"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our
allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam
Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available
means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already
used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build
more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons,
and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John
Edwards, Oct 10, 2002
"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of
mass destruction." -- ***** Gephardt in September of 2002
"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we
should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to
weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction
has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will
continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam
Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for
the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Bob Graham,
December 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing
weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002
"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority
to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe
that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real
and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates
of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the
means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002
"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological
weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors
discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq
was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is
still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to
think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued
biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims
about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq
used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish
population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past,
there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt
that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass
destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002
"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the
proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave
importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the
development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to
countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection
process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998
"Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible
intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still
has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium
perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and
ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing
these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic
VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is
stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq
retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to
rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-UN
Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively
to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the
next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to
enriched uranium from foreign sources --something that is not that
difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always
underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of
mass destruction." - John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002
"Saddam's existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very
real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both
against Iraq's enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop
delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring
these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle
East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002
"Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration's policy towards
Iraq, I don't think there can be any question about Saddam's conduct. He has
systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every
significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his
chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has
refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of
international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying
time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United
Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are
simply the facts." -- Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002
.
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: !Marine Corporal From A Bunker In Ramadi: "I Got A Message For That Douche Harry Reid" |
27 Apr 2007 01:58:15 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 22:54:36 -0700, "Felix D." <#1Chekist@OGPU.org>
wrote:
"raven1" <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in message
news:6530335q9nqemml8fe4kmkm29nkb3kuek3@4ax.com...
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 18:36:04 -0700, "Felix D." <#1Chekist@OGPU.org>
wrote:
"Kurt Nicklas" <nicklask@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:1177547733.453660.270210@b40g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 24, 10:08 am, "Dr. Barry Worthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 24 Apr, 11:57, "edi...@netpath.net" <edi...@netpath.net> wrote:
Especially when it's not the kids of those Marie Antoinettes over
there next to him doing the fighting - but other redneck kids from
Red
Nation.
The Red Nation? You do have some strange ideas! From what I can see,
it's your Republican politicians (for I cannot call them 'statesmen')
who send other people's children to fight.
Bollocks.
Of course it was democrat politicians who sent "other people's
children"
to bail your now pathetic island out of two world wars, "Doctor".
Not to mention it was Truman that gave us the Korean War, while Kennedy
expanded the Vietnam war and Johnson saw it through.
I think the Dems are just pissed because this isn't one of "their" wars,
even though they voted for it.
In case you haven't noticed it, the Republican Party has been the
party of profligate spending since Ronald Reagan, and is now the party
of irresponsible, ill-conceived wars thanks to W. Oh, and I'd be
***** too, if I'd voted for a war based on either crap
intelligence or deliberate lies, you can take your pick.
Sure, take your pick from all of these *lies*:
What part of "EITHER crap intelligence or deliberate lies" did you
miss?
And why did Britain's intelligence community conclude that the Bush
Administration deliberately "sexed up" the data to bring us to war?
--
"O Sybilli, si ergo
Fortibus es in ero
O Nobili! Themis trux
Sivat sinem? Causen Dux"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Felix D." |
|
| Title: Re: !Marine Corporal From A Bunker In Ramadi: "I Got A Message For That Douche Harry Reid" |
27 Apr 2007 08:07:05 PM |
|
|
"raven1" <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in message
news:nj73339i12a8mn8d5jmt79hjqpki1bu24k@4ax.com...
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 22:54:36 -0700, "Felix D." <#1Chekist@OGPU.org>
wrote:
"raven1" <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in message
news:6530335q9nqemml8fe4kmkm29nkb3kuek3@4ax.com...
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 18:36:04 -0700, "Felix D." <#1Chekist@OGPU.org>
wrote:
"Kurt Nicklas" <nicklask@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:1177547733.453660.270210@b40g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 24, 10:08 am, "Dr. Barry Worthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 24 Apr, 11:57, "edi...@netpath.net" <edi...@netpath.net> wrote:
Especially when it's not the kids of those Marie Antoinettes over
there next to him doing the fighting - but other redneck kids from
Red
Nation.
The Red Nation? You do have some strange ideas! From what I can see,
it's your Republican politicians (for I cannot call them 'statesmen')
who send other people's children to fight.
Bollocks.
Of course it was democrat politicians who sent "other people's
children"
to bail your now pathetic island out of two world wars, "Doctor".
Not to mention it was Truman that gave us the Korean War, while Kennedy
expanded the Vietnam war and Johnson saw it through.
I think the Dems are just pissed because this isn't one of "their" wars,
even though they voted for it.
In case you haven't noticed it, the Republican Party has been the
party of profligate spending since Ronald Reagan, and is now the party
of irresponsible, ill-conceived wars thanks to W. Oh, and I'd be
***** too, if I'd voted for a war based on either crap
intelligence or deliberate lies, you can take your pick.
Sure, take your pick from all of these *lies*:
What part of "EITHER crap intelligence or deliberate lies" did you
miss?
So which is it? The one that fits your argument today?
.
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: !Marine Corporal From A Bunker In Ramadi: "I Got A Message For That Douche Harry Reid" |
30 Apr 2007 02:17:20 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 18:07:05 -0700, "Felix D." <#1Chekist@OGPU.org>
wrote:
"raven1" <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in message
news:nj73339i12a8mn8d5jmt79hjqpki1bu24k@4ax.com...
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 22:54:36 -0700, "Felix D." <#1Chekist@OGPU.org>
wrote:
"raven1" <quoththeraven@nevermore.com> wrote in message
news:6530335q9nqemml8fe4kmkm29nkb3kuek3@4ax.com...
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 18:36:04 -0700, "Felix D." <#1Chekist@OGPU.org>
wrote:
"Kurt Nicklas" <nicklask@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:1177547733.453660.270210@b40g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 24, 10:08 am, "Dr. Barry Worthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 24 Apr, 11:57, "edi...@netpath.net" <edi...@netpath.net> wrote:
Especially when it's not the kids of those Marie Antoinettes over
there next to him doing the fighting - but other redneck kids from
Red
Nation.
The Red Nation? You do have some strange ideas! From what I can see,
it's your Republican politicians (for I cannot call them 'statesmen')
who send other people's children to fight.
Bollocks.
Of course it was democrat politicians who sent "other people's
children"
to bail your now pathetic island out of two world wars, "Doctor".
Not to mention it was Truman that gave us the Korean War, while Kennedy
expanded the Vietnam war and Johnson saw it through.
I think the Dems are just pissed because this isn't one of "their" wars,
even though they voted for it.
In case you haven't noticed it, the Republican Party has been the
party of profligate spending since Ronald Reagan, and is now the party
of irresponsible, ill-conceived wars thanks to W. Oh, and I'd be
***** too, if I'd voted for a war based on either crap
intelligence or deliberate lies, you can take your pick.
Sure, take your pick from all of these *lies*:
What part of "EITHER crap intelligence or deliberate lies" did you
miss?
So which is it? The one that fits your argument today?
It depends. The quotes from Democrats that you gave pre-Bush were
based on their receiving crap intelligence, the ones post-Bush were
based on their being given either crap intelligence or deliberate
lies.
--
"O Sybilli, si ergo
Fortibus es in ero
O Nobili! Themis trux
Sivat sinem? Causen Dux"
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: !Marine Corporal From A Bunker In Ramadi: "I Got A Message For That Douche Harry Reid" |
26 Apr 2007 08:45:16 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 18:36:04 -0700, "Felix D." <#1Chekist@OGPU.org>
wrote:
Not to mention it was Truman that gave us the Korean War, while Kennedy
expanded the Vietnam war and Johnson saw it through.
I think the Dems are just pissed because this isn't one of "their" wars,
even though they voted for it.
You forgot we also were in charge for WWII, where the US became a
superpower and was the arsenal of liberty.
Oh, and Vietnam? The ball got started under Eisenhower, who refused
to support elections, supported the corrupt Diem government, and sent
in advisors.
--
Douglas Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
Jason Gastrich is praying for me on 8 January 2011
"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the
source of all true art and all science. He to whom this emotion is a
stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as
good as dead: his eyes are closed." - Albert Einstein
.
|
|
|
| User: "Felix D." |
|
| Title: Re: !Marine Corporal From A Bunker In Ramadi: "I Got A Message For That Douche Harry Reid" |
27 Apr 2007 12:55:40 AM |
|
|
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:bhk233l5s1h337c59d8c2igda1havsuja9@4ax.com...
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 18:36:04 -0700, "Felix D." <#1Chekist@OGPU.org>
wrote:
Not to mention it was Truman that gave us the Korean War, while Kennedy
expanded the Vietnam war and Johnson saw it through.
I think the Dems are just pissed because this isn't one of "their" wars,
even though they voted for it.
You forgot we also were in charge for WWII, where the US became a
superpower and was the arsenal of liberty.
Oh, and Vietnam? The ball got started under Eisenhower, who refused
to support elections, supported the corrupt Diem government, and sent
in advisors.
Go back earlier than that: Truman helped airlift the French back in to
Indochina.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dr. Barry Worthington" |
|
| Title: Re: !Marine Corporal From A Bunker In Ramadi: "I Got A Message For That Douche Harry Reid" |
26 Apr 2007 05:34:48 AM |
|
|
On 26 Apr, 01:35, Kurt Nicklas <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Apr 24, 10:08 am, "Dr.BarryWorthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 24 Apr, 11:57, "edi...@netpath.net" <edi...@netpath.net> wrote:
Especially when it's not the kids of those Marie Antoinettes over
there next to him doing the fighting - but other redneck kids from Red
Nation.
The Red Nation? You do have some strange ideas! From what I can see,
it's your Republican politicians (for I cannot call them 'statesmen')
who send other people's children to fight.
Bollocks.
Love your debating style!
Of course it was democrat politicians who sent "other people's
children"
to bail your now pathetic island out of two world wars, "Doctor".
Really? Well, if you read a decent history book you will find that
both Democrats and Republicans voted to declare war on the Kaiser's
Germany as a result of a little thing called the Zimmerman Telegram
(not to mention unrestricted U-Boat warfare that was claiming American
lies). You might also find that the German army was broken by August,
1918, which was before the bulk of the AEF arrived. (That is no
reflection upon the brave Americans who died at Chateu Theiry, but an
attempt to set the record straight.)
As to World War Two, America had no option. It was attacked by the
Japanese, and Nazi Germany declared war on your country shortly after.
Nothing to do with the Democrats or Britain....
Now please go away and let the grown-ups talk....
Dr. Barry Worthington
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kurt Nicklas" |
|
| Title: Re: !Marine Corporal From A Bunker In Ramadi: "I Got A Message For That Douche Harry Reid" |
26 Apr 2007 10:23:47 AM |
|
|
On Apr 26, 6:34 am, "Dr. Barry Worthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 26 Apr, 01:35, Kurt Nicklas <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Apr 24, 10:08 am, "Dr.BarryWorthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 24 Apr, 11:57, "edi...@netpath.net" <edi...@netpath.net> wrote:
Especially when it's not the kids of those Marie Antoinettes over
there next to him doing the fighting - but other redneck kids from Red
Nation.
The Red Nation? You do have some strange ideas! From what I can see,
it's your Republican politicians (for I cannot call them 'statesmen')
who send other people's children to fight.
Bollocks.
Love your debating style!
Yeah, I leave the toffee-nosed, condescending pretentiousness to the
likes of you, "Doctor".
Of course it was democrat politicians who sent "other people's
children"
to bail your now pathetic island out of two world wars, "Doctor".
Really? Well, if you read a decent history book you will find that
both Democrats and Republicans voted to declare war
Well, if you read anything about the start of the Iraq war you'll find
that both democrats and republicans voted to give the President the
option to attack.
on the Kaiser's
Germany as a result of a little thing called the Zimmerman Telegram
(not to mention unrestricted U-Boat warfare that was claiming American
lies).
I know about this, you condescending dolt.
You might also find that the German army was broken by August,
1918,
The British army was drafting children and the French were in mutiny.
Both
were broken. Another German offensive in the Fall of 1918 without
American
participation would have ended the war.
which was before the bulk of the AEF arrived.
Bunk. The busiest month for American arrivals was July.
(That is no
reflection upon the brave Americans who died at Chateu Theiry, but an
attempt to set the record straight.)
As to World War Two, America had no option.
America had PLENTY of options.
It was attacked by the
Japanese, and Nazi Germany declared war on your country shortly after.
Nothing to do with the Democrats or Britain....
Except for a democrat President who was doing all he could for Britain
BEFORE
we were at war.
Now please go away and let the grown-ups talk....
You're a joke.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dr. Barry Worthington" |
|
| Title: Re: !Marine Corporal From A Bunker In Ramadi: "I Got A Message For That Douche Harry Reid" |
27 Apr 2007 03:56:29 AM |
|
|
On 26 Apr, 16:23, Kurt Nicklas <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Apr 26, 6:34 am, "Dr.BarryWorthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 26 Apr, 01:35, Kurt Nicklas <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Apr 24, 10:08 am, "Dr.BarryWorthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 24 Apr, 11:57, "edi...@netpath.net" <edi...@netpath.net> wrote:
Especially when it's not the kids of those Marie Antoinettes over
there next to him doing the fighting - but other redneck kids from Red
Nation.
The Red Nation? You do have some strange ideas! From what I can see,
it's your Republican politicians (for I cannot call them 'statesmen')
who send other people's children to fight.
Bollocks.
Love your debating style!
Yeah, I leave the toffee-nosed, condescending pretentiousness to the
likes of you, "Doctor".
Actually, when I'm dealing with you, I feel impossibly smug......
Of course it was democrat politicians who sent "other people's
children"
to bail your now pathetic island out of two world wars, "Doctor".
Really? Well, if you read a decent history book you will find that
both Democrats and Republicans voted to declare war
Well, if you read anything about the start of the Iraq war you'll find
that both democrats and republicans voted to give the President the
option to attack.
Which has nothing to do with the point in hand, does it? But while you
are on the subject, I suppose that most Congressmen thought that they
had to give the President the benefit of the doubt. (That's the
problem with your constitution, in that a politician is also head of
state.) Even Bush, they though couldn't possibly be that stupid or
irresponsible. But you know what! He was. Nixon may have been a crook
and a bad President, but he wasn't that stupid....
on the Kaiser's
Germany as a result of a little thing called the Zimmerman Telegram
(not to mention unrestricted U-Boat warfare that was claiming American
lies).
I know about this, you condescending dolt.
But you original assertion clearly indicated that you did not.
You might also find that the German army was broken by August,
1918,
The British army was drafting children and the French were in mutiny.
The French army mutinies happened in 1917.
Both
were broken.
Tactically, the British army was at the peak of its efficiency in
1918. That's why it held the offensive, along with the French. You
should study the period in question.
Another German offensive in the Fall of 1918 without
American
participation would have ended the war.
The Germans were on the run by then.
which was before the bulk of the AEF arrived.
Bunk. The busiest month for American arrivals was July.
July 1918? There were very few American forces in place at the time of
the offensive. Even by July.
(That is no
reflection upon the brave Americans who died at Chateu Theiry, but an
attempt to set the record straight.)
As to World War Two, America had no option.
America had PLENTY of options.
What, pray?
It was attacked by the
Japanese, and Nazi Germany declared war on your country shortly after.
Nothing to do with the Democrats or Britain....
Except for a democrat President who was doing all he could for Britain
BEFORE
we were at war.
And what had that to do with Pearl Harbour? Or the Nazi declaration of
war?
Now please go away and let the grown-ups talk....
You're a joke.
And that is irony indeed.....
Dr. Barry Worthington
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kurt Nicklas" |
|
| Title: Re: !Marine Corporal From A Bunker In Ramadi: "I Got A Message For That Douche Harry Reid" |
27 Apr 2007 11:09:22 AM |
|
|
On Apr 27, 4:56 am, "Dr. Barry Worthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 26 Apr, 16:23, Kurt Nicklas <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Apr 26, 6:34 am, "Dr.BarryWorthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 26 Apr, 01:35, Kurt Nicklas <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Apr 24, 10:08 am, "Dr.BarryWorthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 24 Apr, 11:57, "edi...@netpath.net" <edi...@netpath.net> wrote:
Especially when it's not the kids of those Marie Antoinettes over
there next to him doing the fighting - but other redneck kids from Red
Nation.
The Red Nation? You do have some strange ideas! From what I can see,
it's your Republican politicians (for I cannot call them 'statesmen')
who send other people's children to fight.
Bollocks.
Love your debating style!
Yeah, I leave the toffee-nosed, condescending pretentiousness to the
likes of you, "Doctor".
Actually, when I'm dealing with you, I feel impossibly smug......
I think you feel impossibly smug when you get up in the morning,
"Doctor".
Of course it was democrat politicians who sent "other people's
children"
to bail your now pathetic island out of two world wars, "Doctor".
Really? Well, if you read a decent history book you will find that
both Democrats and Republicans voted to declare war
Well, if you read anything about the start of the Iraq war you'll find
that both democrats and republicans voted to give the President the
option to attack.
Which has nothing to do with the point in hand, does it?
Of course it does. You blamed the Iraq war on "Republican politicians"
who voted for it. When I suggested that American participation in the
world wars could be laid at the feet of democrat (presidents)
politicians
you stated that Republicans voted to go to war on those occasions.
When
I then pointed out that DEMOCRATS had voted for the Iraq war as well
you claim it "has nothing to do with the point". What a joke!
I think I'm beginning to feel a certain smuggness coming on, "Doctor".
on the Kaiser's
Germany as a result of a little thing called the Zimmerman Telegram
(not to mention unrestricted U-Boat warfare that was claiming American
lies).
I know about this, you condescending dolt.
But you original assertion clearly indicated that you did not.
Nonsense it did nothing of the sort.
You might also find that the German army was broken by August,
1918,
The British army was drafting children and the French were in mutiny.
The French army mutinies happened in 1917.
And they were incapable of any more offensives subsequent to that due
to
the continuing situation in the army.
Both
were broken.
Tactically, the British army was at the peak of its efficiency in
1918. That's why it held the offensive, along with the French.
Nonsense. Without American help the Germans would have broken through
in another
series of offensives in the Fall.
You
should study the period in question.
I have, "Doctor".
Another German offensive in the Fall of 1918 without
American
participation would have ended the war.
The Germans were on the run by then.
Nonsense.
which was before the bulk of the AEF arrived.
Bunk. The busiest month for American arrivals was July.
July 1918? There were very few American forces in place at the time of
the offensive. Even by July.
Nonsense. You should study the period again.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dr. Barry Worthington" |
|
| Title: Re: !Marine Corporal From A Bunker In Ramadi: "I Got A Message For That Douche Harry Reid" |
30 Apr 2007 03:51:32 AM |
|
|
On 27 Apr, 17:09, Kurt Nicklas <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Apr 27, 4:56 am, "Dr.BarryWorthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 26 Apr, 16:23, Kurt Nicklas <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Apr 26, 6:34 am, "Dr.BarryWorthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 26 Apr, 01:35, Kurt Nicklas <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Apr 24, 10:08 am, "Dr.BarryWorthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 24 Apr, 11:57, "edi...@netpath.net" <edi...@netpath.net> wrote:
Especially when it's not the kids of those Marie Antoinettes over
there next to him doing the fighting - but other redneck kids from Red
Nation.
The Red Nation? You do have some strange ideas! From what I can see,
it's your Republican politicians (for I cannot call them 'statesmen')
who send other people's children to fight.
Bollocks.
Love your debating style!
Yeah, I leave the toffee-nosed, condescending pretentiousness to the
likes of you, "Doctor".
Actually, when I'm dealing with you, I feel impossibly smug......
I think you feel impossibly smug when you get up in the morning,
"Doctor".
Of course I do! How could it be otherwise when there are people like
you around?
Of course it was democrat politicians who sent "other people's
children"
to bail your now pathetic island out of two world wars, "Doctor".
Really? Well, if you read a decent history book you will find that
both Democrats and Republicans voted to declare war
Well, if you read anything about the start of the Iraq war you'll find
that both democrats and republicans voted to give the President the
option to attack.
Which has nothing to do with the point in hand, does it?
Of course it does. You blamed the Iraq war on "Republican politicians"
who voted for it.
Er, no. They made the decision. They presented the (flawed)
justification.
When I suggested that American participation in the
world wars could be laid at the feet of democrat (presidents)
politicians
you stated that Republicans voted to go to war on those occasions.
Yes. Because there was an actual casus belli in both cases that anyone
could see and understand. In this other instance, Congress had to rely
on the word (and judgement of an idiot.)
When
I then pointed out that DEMOCRATS had voted for the Iraq war as well
you claim it "has nothing to do with the point". What a joke!
No, it hasn't. In the two other cases, Democrats (indeed everyone)
were aware of an actual threat.
I think I'm beginning to feel a certain smuggness coming on, "Doctor".
Quite unjustified, methinks....
on the Kaiser's
Germany as a result of a little thing called the Zimmerman Telegram
(not to mention unrestricted U-Boat warfare that was claiming American
lies).
I know about this, you condescending dolt.
But you original assertion clearly indicated that you did not.
Nonsense it did nothing of the sort.
Read it again....
You might also find that the German army was broken by August,
1918,
The British army was drafting children and the French were in mutiny.
The French army mutinies happened in 1917.
And they were incapable of any more offensives subsequent to that due
to
the continuing situation in the army.
Except the ones that they mounted in 1918, of course....
Both
were broken.
Tactically, the British army was at the peak of its efficiency in
1918. That's why it held the offensive, along with the French.
Nonsense. Without American help the Germans would have broken through
in another
series of offensives in the Fall.
Really? You know better than the German General Staff at the time?
They told the Kaiser that the game was up. You do talk some rubbish,
don't you?
You
should study the period in question.
I have, "Doctor".
Not very well, it seems.
Another German offensive in the Fall of 1918 without
American
participation would have ended the war.
The Germans were on the run by then.
Nonsense.
They were indeed.....
which was before the bulk of the AEF arrived.
Bunk. The busiest month for American arrivals was July.
July 1918? There were very few American forces in place at the time of
the offensive. Even by July.
Nonsense. You should study the period again.
Irony again?
Dr. Barry Worthington
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kurt Nicklas" |
|
| Title: Re: !Marine Corporal From A Bunker In Ramadi: "I Got A Message For That Douche Harry Reid" |
30 Apr 2007 05:24:39 AM |
|
|
On Apr 30, 4:51 am, "Dr. Barry Worthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 27 Apr, 17:09, Kurt Nicklas <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Apr 27, 4:56 am, "Dr.BarryWorthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 26 Apr, 16:23, Kurt Nicklas <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Apr 26, 6:34 am, "Dr.BarryWorthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 26 Apr, 01:35, Kurt Nicklas <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Apr 24, 10:08 am, "Dr.BarryWorthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 24 Apr, 11:57, "edi...@netpath.net" <edi...@netpath.net> wrote:
Especially when it's not the kids of those Marie Antoinettes over
there next to him doing the fighting - but other redneck kids from Red
Nation.
The Red Nation? You do have some strange ideas! From what I can see,
it's your Republican politicians (for I cannot call them 'statesmen')
who send other people's children to fight.
Bollocks.
Love your debating style!
Yeah, I leave the toffee-nosed, condescending pretentiousness to the
likes of you, "Doctor".
Actually, when I'm dealing with you, I feel impossibly smug......
I think you feel impossibly smug when you get up in the morning,
"Doctor".
Of course I do! How could it be otherwise when there are people like
you around?
"Doctor", I'm not "around" you when you get up. That's your own image
in the mirror, you silly git.
Of course it was democrat politicians who sent "other people's
children"
to bail your now pathetic island out of two world wars, "Doctor".
Really? Well, if you read a decent history book you will find that
both Democrats and Republicans voted to declare war
Well, if you read anything about the start of the Iraq war you'll find
that both democrats and republicans voted to give the President the
option to attack.
Which has nothing to do with the point in hand, does it?
Of course it does. You blamed the Iraq war on "Republican politicians"
who voted for it.
Er, no. They made the decision. They presented the (flawed)
justification.
Er, we're talking about voting here, "Doctor". Democrats voted for it
as well as
republicans. Now that I've proved you wrong you want to change the
argument. Typical.
When I suggested that American participation in the
world wars could be laid at the feet of democrat (presidents)
politicians
you stated that Republicans voted to go to war on those occasions.
Yes. Because there was an actual casus belli in both cases that anyone
could see and understand. In this other instance,
In this instance you want to change the subject.
Congress had to rely
on the word (and judgement of an idiot.)
As an proven idiot yourself you have no way to judge, seems to me.
When
I then pointed out that DEMOCRATS had voted for the Iraq war as well
you claim it "has nothing to do with the point". What a joke!
No, it hasn't. In the two other cases, Democrats (indeed everyone)
were aware of an actual threat.
I think I'm beginning to feel a certain smuggness coming on, "Doctor".
Quite unjustified, methinks....
Well, methinks you're certainly proof of what Lady Bracknell said:
'The whole theory of
modern education is radically unsound. Fortunately in England, at any
rate,
education produces no effect whatsoever.'
on the Kaiser's
Germany as a result of a little thing called the Zimmerman Telegram
(not to mention unrestricted U-Boat warfare that was claiming American
lies).
I know about this, you condescending dolt.
But you original assertion clearly indicated that you did not.
Nonsense it did nothing of the sort.
Read it again....
I did.
You might also find that the German army was broken by August,
1918,
The British army was drafting children and the French were in mutiny.
The French army mutinies happened in 1917.
And they were incapable of any more offensives subsequent to that due
to
the continuing situation in the army.
Except the ones that they mounted in 1918, of course....
With the help of the Americans.
Both
were broken.
Tactically, the British army was at the peak of its efficiency in
1918. That's why it held the offensive, along with the French.
Nonsense. Without American help the Germans would have broken through
in another
series of offensives in the Fall.
Really? You know better than the German General Staff at the time?
They told the Kaiser that the game was up.
Thank the Americans.
You do talk some rubbish,
don't you?
I do bow to you in the area of trash talk, "Doctor".
You
should study the period in question.
I have, "Doctor".
Not very well, it seems.
Better than you.
Another German offensive in the Fall of 1918 without
American
participation would have ended the war.
The Germans were on the run by then.
Nonsense.
They were indeed.....
Even if true the British and Frence weren't capable of pursuing
without American
help.
which was before the bulk of the AEF arrived.
Bunk. The busiest month for American arrivals was July.
July 1918? There were very few American forces in place at the time of
the offensive. Even by July.
Nonsense. You should study the period again.
Irony again?
No. Fact. Unvarnished. Get used to it,"Doctor".
.
|
|
|
| User: "gringo" |
|
| Title: Re: !Marine Corporal From A Bunker In Ramadi: "I Got A Message ForThat Douche Harry Reid" |
30 Apr 2007 01:14:15 PM |
|
|
Kurt Nicklas wrote:
On Apr 30, 4:51 am, "Dr. Barry Worthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 27 Apr, 17:09, Kurt Nicklas <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Apr 27, 4:56 am, "Dr.BarryWorthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 26 Apr, 16:23, Kurt Nicklas <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Apr 26, 6:34 am, "Dr.BarryWorthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 26 Apr, 01:35, Kurt Nicklas <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Apr 24, 10:08 am, "Dr.BarryWorthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 24 Apr, 11:57, "edi...@netpath.net" <edi...@netpath.net> wrote:
Especially when it's not the kids of those Marie Antoinettes over
there next to him doing the fighting - but other redneck kids from Red
Nation.
The Red Nation? You do have some strange ideas! From what I can see,
it's your Republican politicians (for I cannot call them 'statesmen')
who send other people's children to fight.
Bollocks.
Love your debating style!
Yeah, I leave the toffee-nosed, condescending pretentiousness to the
likes of you, "Doctor".
Actually, when I'm dealing with you, I feel impossibly smug......
I think you feel impossibly smug when you get up in the morning,
"Doctor".
Of course I do! How could it be otherwise when there are people like
you around?
"Doctor", I'm not "around" you when you get up. That's your own image
in the mirror, you silly git.
Of course it was democrat politicians who sent "other people's
children"
to bail your now pathetic island out of two world wars, "Doctor".
Really? Well, if you read a decent history book you will find that
both Democrats and Republicans voted to declare war
Well, if you read anything about the start of the Iraq war you'll find
that both democrats and republicans voted to give the President the
option to attack.
Which has nothing to do with the point in hand, does it?
Of course it does. You blamed the Iraq war on "Republican politicians"
who voted for it.
Er, no. They made the decision. They presented the (flawed)
justification.
Er, we're talking about voting here, "Doctor". Democrats voted for it
as well as
republicans. Now that I've proved you wrong you want to change the
argument. Typical.
they trusted the president. Typical of Democrats, who view republicons
through the filter of their own good character. But bush is not your
typical republicon, as bad as that is.
world wars could be laid at the feet of democrat (presidents)
politicians
you stated that Republicans voted to go to war on those occasions.
Yes. Because there was an actual casus belli in both cases that anyone
could see and understand. In this other instance,
In this instance you want to change the subject.
typical, that you cannot see the connection.
Congress had to rely
on the word (and judgement of an idiot.)
As an proven idiot yourself you have no way to judge, seems to me.
bush has a good laugh every day about you fools who support him. As he
once remarked,
"You can fools some of the people all of the time; those are the ones we
want to reach."
As his daddy once remarked,
"Sarah, if the American people had ever known the truth
about what we Bushes have done to this nation, we would
be chased down in the streets and lynched."
-George H. W. Bush, in an interview with
Sarah McClendon, June 1992
When
I then pointed out that DEMOCRATS had voted for the Iraq war as well
you claim it "has nothing to do with the point". What a joke!
No, it hasn't. In the two other cases, Democrats (indeed everyone)
were aware of an actual threat.
I think I'm beginning to feel a certain smuggness coming on, "Doctor".
Quite unjustified, methinks....
Well, methinks you're certainly proof of what Lady Bracknell said:
'The whole theory of
modern education is radically unsound. Fortunately in England, at any
rate,
education produces no effect whatsoever.'
on the Kaiser's
Germany as a result of a little thing called the Zimmerman Telegram
(not to mention unrestricted U-Boat warfare that was claiming American
lies).
I know about this, you condescending dolt.
But you original assertion clearly indicated that you did not.
Nonsense it did nothing of the sort.
Read it again....
I did.
first one must learn to read and comprehend above your third grade level.
You might also find that the German army was broken by August,
1918,
The British army was drafting children and the French were in mutiny.
The French army mutinies happened in 1917.
And they were incapable of any more offensives subsequent to that due
to
the continuing situation in the army.
Except the ones that they mounted in 1918, of course....
With the help of the Americans.
Both
were broken.
Tactically, the British army was at the peak of its efficiency in
1918. That's why it held the offensive, along with the French.
Nonsense. Without American help the Germans would have broken through
in another
series of offensives in the Fall.
Really? You know better than the German General Staff at the time?
They told the Kaiser that the game was up.
Thank the Americans.
You do talk some rubbish,
don't you?
I do bow to you in the area of trash talk, "Doctor".
You
should study the period in question.
I have, "Doctor".
Not very well, it seems.
Better than you.
Another German offensive in the Fall of 1918 without
American
participation would have ended the war.
The Germans were on the run by then.
Nonsense.
They were indeed.....
Even if true the British and Frence weren't capable of pursuing
without American
help.
which was before the bulk of the AEF arrived.
Bunk. The busiest month for American arrivals was July.
July 1918? There were very few American forces in place at the time of
the offensive. Even by July.
Nonsense. You should study the period again.
Irony again?
his understanding is limited to the idea that most women have a period
every month.
No. Fact. Unvarnished. Get used to it,"Doctor".
--
On the right,The John Birch Society's website editor recently opined of the Bush Administration's warrantless wiretap program: "This is to say that from the administration's perspective, the president is, in effect, our living constitution. This is, in a specific and unmistakable sense, fascist."
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dr. Barry Worthington" |
|
| Title: Re: !Marine Corporal From A Bunker In Ramadi: "I Got A Message For That Douche Harry Reid" |
30 Apr 2007 09:29:46 AM |
|
|
On 30 Apr, 11:24, Kurt Nicklas <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Apr 30, 4:51 am, "Dr.BarryWorthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 27 Apr, 17:09, Kurt Nicklas <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Apr 27, 4:56 am, "Dr.BarryWorthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 26 Apr, 16:23, Kurt Nicklas <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Apr 26, 6:34 am, "Dr.BarryWorthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 26 Apr, 01:35, Kurt Nicklas <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Apr 24, 10:08 am, "Dr.BarryWorthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 24 Apr, 11:57, "edi...@netpath.net" <edi...@netpath.net> wrote:
Especially when it's not the kids of those Marie Antoinettes over
there next to him doing the fighting - but other redneck kids from Red
Nation.
The Red Nation? You do have some strange ideas! From what I can see,
it's your Republican politicians (for I cannot call them 'statesmen')
who send other people's children to fight.
Bollocks.
Love your debating style!
Yeah, I leave the toffee-nosed, condescending pretentiousness to the
likes of you, "Doctor".
Actually, when I'm dealing with you, I feel impossibly smug......
I think you feel impossibly smug when you get up in the morning,
"Doctor".
Of course I do! How could it be otherwise when there are people like
you around?
"Doctor", I'm not "around" you when you get up.
You are implying that you do not exist?
That's your own image
in the mirror, you silly git.
Of course it is! I don't say "God, I'm better looking than Kurt
Niklas!" (I don't know what you look like.) But I am tempted to say "I
really am sophisticated, witty, and urbane compared to the likes of
Kurt Niklas!" And then I remove my tongue to its normal position....
Vanity of vanities....all is vanity and vexation of spirit.....at
least when you are around....
Of course it was democrat politicians who sent "other people's
children"
to bail your now pathetic island out of two world wars, "Doctor".
Really? Well, if you read a decent history book you will find that
both Democrats and Republicans voted to declare war
Well, if you read anything about the start of the Iraq war you'll find
that both democrats and republicans voted to give the President the
option to attack.
Which has nothing to do with the point in hand, does it?
Of course it does. You blamed the Iraq war on "Republican politicians"
who voted for it.
Er, no. They made the decision. They presented the (flawed)
justification.
Er, we're talking about voting here, "Doctor". Democrats voted for it
as well as
republicans. Now that I've proved you wrong you want to change the
argument. Typical.
My original assertion about the invasion of Iraq did not mention
voting. i was refering to their decision and attempt at justification
for that decision. Go and read it again!
When I suggested that American participation in the
world wars could be laid at the feet of democrat (presidents)
politicians
you stated that Republicans voted to go to war on those occasions.
Yes. Because there was an actual casus belli in both cases that anyone
could see and understand. In this other instance,
In this instance you want to change the subject.
No, you changed the subject and started talking about the two world
wars. I was thus able to mention that these had Republican support.
The difference is that both the Democrats and Republicans voted for a
legal declaration of war....
Congress had to rely
on the word (and judgement of an idiot.)
As an proven idiot yourself you have no way to judge, seems to me.
That is what they did. They gave Bush the benefit of the doubt and
supported him. Are you saying that this did not happen? Most people in
the World do think that He's an idiot, by the way....
When
I then pointed out that DEMOCRATS had voted for the Iraq war as well
you claim it "has nothing to do with the point". What a joke!
No, it hasn't. In the two other cases, Democrats (indeed everyone)
were aware of an actual threat.
I think I'm beginning to feel a certain smuggness coming on, "Doctor".
Quite unjustified, methinks....
Well, methinks you're certainly proof of what Lady Bracknell said:
'The whole theory of
modern education is radically unsound. Fortunately in England, at any
rate,
education produces no effect whatsoever.'
And what does that have to do with the price of fish?
on the Kaiser's
Germany as a result of a little thing called the Zimmerman Telegram
(not to mention unrestricted U-Boat warfare that was claiming American
lies).
I know about this, you condescending dolt.
But you original assertion clearly indicated that you did not.
Nonsense it did nothing of the sort.
Read it again....
I did.
And?
You might also find that the German army was broken by August,
1918,
The British army was drafting children and the French were in mutiny.
The French army mutinies happened in 1917.
And they were incapable of any more offensives subsequent to that due
to
the continuing situation in the army.
Except the ones that they mounted in 1918, of course....
With the help of the Americans.
Where? Name one American offensive prior to or immediately after
August, 1918.
Both
were broken.
Tactically, the British army was at the peak of its efficiency in
1918. That's why it held the offensive, along with the French.
Nonsense. Without American help the Germans would have broken through
in another
series of offensives in the Fall.
Really? You know better than the German General Staff at the time?
They told the Kaiser that the game was up.
Thank the Americans.
Why?
You do talk some rubbish,
don't you?
I do bow to you in the area of trash talk, "Doctor".
You
should study the period in question.
I have, "Doctor".
Not very well, it seems.
Better than you.
Then bloody well prove it! So far, I'm the only one to attempt an
historical narrative.
Another German offensive in the Fall of 1918 without
American
participation would have ended the war.
The Germans were on the run by then.
Nonsense.
They were indeed.....
Even if true the British and Frence weren't capable of pursuing
without American
help.
Really? What is your evidence for this?
which was before the bulk of the AEF arrived.
Bunk. The busiest month for American arrivals was July.
July 1918? There were very few American forces in place at the time of
the offensive. Even by July.
Nonsense. You should study the period again.
Irony again?
No. Fact. Unvarnished.
Well, let's have some unvarnished facts from you, then.
Get used to it,"Doctor"
Used to what? That you make assertions without any historical fact?
And why do people like you affect to disbelieve or despise a perfectly
honest academic title?
Dr. Barry Worthington
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: !Marine Corporal From A Bunker In Ramadi: "I Got A Message For That Douche Harry Reid" |
30 Apr 2007 10:09:35 AM |
|
|
On 30 Apr 2007 07:29:46 -0700, "Dr. Barry Worthington"
<shrbw@abertay.ac.uk> wrote:
Of course it is! I don't say "God, I'm better looking than Kurt
Niklas!" (I don't know what you look like.) But I am tempted to say "I
really am sophisticated, witty, and urbane compared to the likes of
Kurt Niklas!"
Archie Bunker is sophisticated, witty and urbane compared to the likes
of Knickers.
And then I remove my tongue to its normal position....
Vanity of vanities....all is vanity and vexation of spirit.....at
least when you are around....
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kurt Nicklas" |
|
| Title: Re: !Marine Corporal From A Bunker In Ramadi: "I Got A Message For That Douche Harry Reid" |
30 Apr 2007 11:02:06 AM |
|
|
On Apr 30, 10:29 am, "Dr. Barry Worthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 30 Apr, 11:24, Kurt Nicklas <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Apr 30, 4:51 am, "Dr.BarryWorthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 27 Apr, 17:09, Kurt Nicklas <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Apr 27, 4:56 am, "Dr.BarryWorthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 26 Apr, 16:23, Kurt Nicklas <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Apr 26, 6:34 am, "Dr.BarryWorthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 26 Apr, 01:35, Kurt Nicklas <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Apr 24, 10:08 am, "Dr.BarryWorthington" <s...@abertay.ac.uk>
wrote:
On 24 Apr, 11:57, "edi...@netpath.net" <edi...@netpath.net> wrote:
Especially when it's not the kids of those Marie Antoinettes over
there next to him doing the fighting - but other redneck kids from Red
Nation.
The Red Nation? You do have some strange ideas! From what I can see,
it's your Republican politicians (for I cannot call them 'statesmen')
who send other people's children to fight.
Bollocks.
Love your debating style!
Yeah, I leave the toffee-nosed, condescending pretentiousness to the
likes of you, "Doctor".
Actually, when I'm dealing with you, I feel impossibly smug......
I think you feel impossibly smug when you get up in the morning,
"Doctor".
Of course I do! How could it be otherwise when there are people like
you around?
"Doctor", I'm not "around" you when you get up.
You are implying that you do not exist?
I'm "implying" that it's you that you see when you get up.
It is, right?
That's your own image
in the mirror, you silly git.
Of course it is! I don't say "God, I'm better looking than Kurt
Niklas!" (I don't know what you look like.) But I am tempted to say "I
really am sophisticated, witty, and urbane compared to the likes of
Kurt Niklas!"
I think you believe that you are that compared to the likes of
everyone
with the temerity to tell you the truth about yourself, "Doctor".
And then I remove my tongue to its normal position....
i.e. pull it out of your nostril??
Vanity of vanities....all is vanity and vexation of spirit.....at
least when I'm around....
I corrected your spelling, "Doctor".
My original assertion about the invasion of Iraq did not mention
voting.
My original assertion about the world wars did not mention voting.
That was *your interpolation.
i was refering to their decision and attempt at justification
for that decision. Go and read it again!
Why should I, you arrogant twit?
When I suggested that American participation in the
world wars could be laid at the feet of democrat (presidents)
politicians
you stated that Republicans voted to go to war on those occasions.
Yes. Because there was an actual casus belli in both cases that anyone
could see and understand. In this other instance,
In this instance you want to change the subject.
No, you changed the subject and started talking about the two world
wars.
No, you changed the subject and started talking about who "planned"
the
war instead of who voted for it.
I was thus able to mention that these had Republican support.
The difference is that both the Democrats and Republicans voted for a
legal declaration of war....
LOL
Now you're going to move the goal posts AGAIN, "Doctor"? We're talking
about
a declaration of war now?!
Congress had to rely
on the word (and judgement of an idiot.)
As an proven idiot yourself you have no way to judge, seems to me.
That is what they did. They gave Bush the benefit of the doubt and
supported him. Are you saying that this did not happen?
So you've proved yourself wrong. How many times does that need to
happen for you?
When
I then pointed out that DEMOCRATS had voted for the Iraq war as well
you claim it "has nothing to do with the point". What a joke!
No, it hasn't. In the two other cases, Democrats (indeed everyone)
were aware of an actual threat.
I think I'm beginning to feel a certain smuggness coming on, "Doctor".
Quite unjustified, methinks....
Well, methinks you're certainly proof of what Lady Bracknell said:
'The whole theory of
modern education is radically unsound. Fortunately in England, at any
rate,
education produces no effect whatsoever.'
And what does that have to do with the price of fish?
What a strange answer. Do you think there is something fishy about
education
in England?
It does have a lot to do with your head being stuck up your *****
for no good reason, however, "Doctor".
on the Kaiser's
< | | | | | | | | | | |
