GW caused the Hurricanes in Fl.

Now its getting plain funny. Stuff like this just gives the Republicans free votes. How can you debate this absurdity. Does every democrat also believe in the tooth fairy, Santa, UFO's, the grassy knoll and on and on and on. Obviously if it'll get em a vote or two they'll convince themselves to say anything. Just what we need while fighting a War, a bunch of mentally Ill democratSS that believe anything McAullife tells em. Mitch

Wrong button, sorry. "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:869gd.14727$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> Now its getting plain funny. Stuff like this just gives the Republicans > free votes. > > How can you debate this absurdity. Does every democrat also believe in > the tooth fairy, Santa, UFO's, the grassy knoll and on and on and on. > Obviously if it'll get em a vote or two they'll convince themselves to say > anything. Just what we need while fighting a War, a bunch of mentally Ill > democratSS that believe anything McAullife tells em. > > > Mitch >

Mitch_A wrote:

Quoted text (13 lines)

> Now its getting plain funny. Stuff like this just gives the Republicans > free votes. > > How can you debate this absurdity. Does every democrat also believe in the > tooth fairy, Santa, UFO's, the grassy knoll and on and on and on. Obviously > if it'll get em a vote or two they'll convince themselves to say anything. > Just what we need while fighting a War, a bunch of mentally Ill democratSS > that believe anything McAullife tells em. > > > Mitch > >

take your OT BS and shove it up your ass

Mitch_A wrote: > Wrong button, sorry. That 'wrong button' is the one on the front of your PC! You know, the one that turns it on? The one the helpline talked you through! 'Sorry' doesn't cut it either, you spamming twat!

I cant see why anyone in america even bothers to vote, the whole campaign from both sides is mind meltingly stupid. No proper debates, everything is scripted and the only facts that matter are dirt, mudslinging, soundbites and dirt. Its the biggest pile of steaming horse poo ive ever seen

Get the fuck out of r.a.s Mitch. rms

I apologized for hitting the wrong button but if youre too much of a asswipe to accept that then you have issues only your own suicide will solve. ..l.. Buh-Bye Mitch "rms" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:bs9gd.856$[email hidden]... > Get the fuck out of r.a.s Mitch. > > rms >

Mitch_A wrote: > I apologized for hitting the wrong button but if youre too much of a asswipe > to accept that then you have issues only your own suicide will solve. > that's like saying 'sorry i murdered the wrong person'! You shouldn't have been spamming in the fist place!

we dont need your crap here "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:869gd.14727$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> Now its getting plain funny. Stuff like this just gives the Republicans > free votes. > > How can you debate this absurdity. Does every democrat also believe in > the tooth fairy, Santa, UFO's, the grassy knoll and on and on and on. > Obviously if it'll get em a vote or two they'll convince themselves to say > anything. Just what we need while fighting a War, a bunch of mentally Ill > democratSS that believe anything McAullife tells em. > > > Mitch >

Was this the thoughtful, intelectual exchange of ideas that Al Gore was hoping for when he invented the internet? ;)

"Mitch_A" wrote: > Wrong button, sorry. Could have been worse, Mitch. Might have been a post to alt.sex.with.chickens.whilst.wearing.rubber.knickers you sent to r.a.s :)

We dont need your crap ANYWHERE.. "fredrickson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:RFbgd.50159$[email hidden]... > we dont need your crap here >

Hehehe. Youve outed me Tony ;) "Tony Rickard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:picgd.1503$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> "Mitch_A" wrote: > >> Wrong button, sorry. > > Could have been worse, Mitch. Might have been a post to > alt.sex.with.chickens.whilst.wearing.rubber.knickers you sent to r.a.s :) > >

Hehehe. Youve outed me Tony ;) >> Wrong button, sorry. > Could have been worse, Mitch. Might have been a post to > alt.sex.with.chickens.whilst.wearing.***.knickers you sent to r.a.s :)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6354133/ Mitch, you're a great guy, but Asshole Bush and Co. ought to be tortured/shot/blown up/dismembered/beheaded (instead of others) for killing 100,000 inncocent men, women and children ("Most individuals reportedly killed by coalition forces were women and children,") and mutilating tens of thousands more for..............nothing. They lied, and keep on lying. Sounds rough, but an eye for an eye you know. -- David G Fisher ---Never more embarrassed to be called an American than in 2004 "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:869gd.14727$[email hidden]... > Now its getting plain funny. Stuff like this just gives the Republicans > free votes. > > How can you debate this absurdity. Does every democrat also believe in the > tooth fairy, Santa, UFO's, the grassy knoll and on and on and on. Obviously > if it'll get em a vote or two they'll convince themselves to say anything. > Just what we need while fighting a War, a bunch of mentally Ill democratSS > that believe anything McAullife tells em. > > > Mitch > >

GAWD David thats really sad and about psychotic... Dont let the door hit you on the ass as you leave the USA then. Not a single fact either... Liberating 30 million people from an evil dictator is nothing? How many has Saddam killed? 500 million? Oh but they dont matter do they... If we continue this discussion David we will not like each other any longer. Politically we are opposite, neither will convince the other of anything so why destroy a friendship over politics? I posted on this forum accidentally. Mitch "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (17 lines)

> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6354133/ > > Mitch, you're a great guy, but Asshole Bush and Co. ought to be > tortured/shot/blown up/dismembered/beheaded (instead of others) for > killing > 100,000 inncocent men, women and children ("Most individuals reportedly > killed by coalition forces were women and children,") and mutilating tens > of > thousands more for..............nothing. > > They lied, and keep on lying. > > Sounds rough, but an eye for an eye you know. > > -- > David G Fisher ---Never more embarrassed to be called an American than in > 2004

OOOps that should read 500K not Million. "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:WGhgd.1979$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (34 lines)

> GAWD David thats really sad and about psychotic... Dont let the door hit > you on the ass as you leave the USA then. Not a single fact either... > Liberating 30 million people from an evil dictator is nothing? How many > has Saddam killed? 500 million? Oh but they dont matter do they... > > If we continue this discussion David we will not like each other any > longer. Politically we are opposite, neither will convince the other of > anything so why destroy a friendship over politics? I posted on this > forum accidentally. > > Mitch > > > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... >> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6354133/ >> >> Mitch, you're a great guy, but Asshole Bush and Co. ought to be >> tortured/shot/blown up/dismembered/beheaded (instead of others) for >> killing >> 100,000 inncocent men, women and children ("Most individuals reportedly >> killed by coalition forces were women and children,") and mutilating tens >> of >> thousands more for..............nothing. >> >> They lied, and keep on lying. >> >> Sounds rough, but an eye for an eye you know. >> >> -- >> David G Fisher ---Never more embarrassed to be called an American than in >> 2004 > >

As much as I dislike Gore he did get Congress to pass the Gore Bill (90') to create the National Research and Education Network. Obviously not the internet but it should still get acknowledged. Mitch "mcewena" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Was this the thoughtful, intelectual exchange of ideas that Al Gore was > hoping for when he invented the internet? ;) >

Dan Leach wrote: > I cant see why anyone in america even bothers to vote, the whole campaign > from both sides is mind meltingly stupid. No proper debates, everything is > scripted and the only facts that matter are dirt, mudslinging, soundbites > and dirt. Its the biggest pile of steaming horse poo ive ever seen > > That's what happens when you try to obfuscate things, drawing attention away from the core issues, hide the truth from the masses... Slagging is an excellent way of drawing attention away. And I hope Kerry wins it. ---A---

The competition on killing innocent people has since long been won by the US, so your argument is forfeit. Sorry. ---A--- Mitch_A wrote:

Quoted text (42 lines)

> OOOps that should read 500K not Million. > > "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:WGhgd.1979$[email hidden]... > >>GAWD David thats really sad and about psychotic... Dont let the door hit >>you on the ass as you leave the USA then. Not a single fact either... >>Liberating 30 million people from an evil dictator is nothing? How many >>has Saddam killed? 500 million? Oh but they dont matter do they... >> >>If we continue this discussion David we will not like each other any >>longer. Politically we are opposite, neither will convince the other of >>anything so why destroy a friendship over politics? I posted on this >>forum accidentally. >> >>Mitch >> >> >>"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >>news:[email hidden]... >> >>>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6354133/ >>> >>>Mitch, you're a great guy, but Asshole Bush and Co. ought to be >>>tortured/shot/blown up/dismembered/beheaded (instead of others) for >>>killing >>>100,000 inncocent men, women and children ("Most individuals reportedly >>>killed by coalition forces were women and children,") and mutilating tens >>>of >>>thousands more for..............nothing. >>> >>>They lied, and keep on lying. >>> >>>Sounds rough, but an eye for an eye you know. >>> >>>-- >>>David G Fisher ---Never more embarrassed to be called an American than in >>>2004 >> >> > >

If it werent for the USA you would have a Nazi based Europe and a fully communist Asia still to this day. But noone ever is thankful for that and instead takes shots at the USA, whose actions during World War II and after allows you the ability to even have your opinion posted in a public forum today. I guess you are right. We should have let Hitler keep Europe and let Russia, China, and Japan fight over the rest and stayed completely out of the conflict and not sacrificed a single American in the process. That was our mistake. "Asgeir Nesoen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:cltgju$gk3$[email hidden]... > The competition on killing innocent people has since long been won by the > US, so your argument is forfeit. Sorry. > > ---A--- >

The US came into WW2 after EVERYONE else on both sides fought heroically for years, and lost many lives. The US was not there from the beginning. People like you act as if the Allies did nothing to save themselves. You couldn't be more wrong. I love it when people say things like this, and especially when they rip France and say France wouldn't exist without the USA. The USA WOULD NOT exist if it weren't for France during the Revolutionary War. We conveniently forget that enormously important fact. LOL. -- David G Fisher "Phillip Malphrus, Jr." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > If it werent for the USA you would have a Nazi based Europe and a fully > communist Asia still to this day. But noone ever is thankful for that and > instead takes shots at the USA, whose actions during World War II and after > allows you the ability to even have your opinion posted in a public forum > today. I guess you are right. We should have let Hitler keep Europe and let > Russia, China, and Japan fight over the rest and stayed completely out of > the conflict and not sacrificed a single American in the process. That was > our mistake. > > > "Asgeir Nesoen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:cltgju$gk3$[email hidden]... > > The competition on killing innocent people has since long been won by the > > US, so your argument is forfeit. Sorry. > > > > ---A--- > > > >

Youre re-writing history David. The War began on Sept 1st 1939 and by June of 1940 England was the only European nation still fighting against Germany. Not trying to denigrate any of those countries its just that historical facts are just that, facts, not to be used as a political tool for the subversive left :-) If it wasnt for the Brits during the Battle of Britain the US would not have had a base from which to launch an invasion. The Luftwaffe was developing a long range bomber that would reach New York. German scientists were first to understand the theory of splitting an atom. We can only guess where we would be today had England and America appeased instead of defended and attacked. Were at that point now in our War against Terrorists whether you agree or not. England was our Enemy during the revolutionary war, what does that have to do with anything? Had they won the USA wouldnt exist either. As far as Im concerned France took sides and they did not side with America. Dave, get on Teamspeak early tomorrow and Ill let you convince me to vote for Kerry. One honest, valid reason why I should give him my vote. Mitch "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (19 lines)

> The US came into WW2 after EVERYONE else on both sides fought heroically > for > years, and lost many lives. The US was not there from the beginning. > People > like you act as if the Allies did nothing to save themselves. You couldn't > be more wrong. > > I love it when people say things like this, and especially when they rip > France and say France wouldn't exist without the USA. > > The USA WOULD NOT exist if it weren't for France during the Revolutionary > War. > > We conveniently forget that enormously important fact. LOL. > > > -- > David G Fisher >

Mitch_A wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Youre re-writing history David. The War began on Sept 1st 1939 and by June > of 1940 England was the only European nation still fighting against Germany. > Not trying to denigrate any of those countries its just that historical > facts are just that, facts, not to be used as a political tool for the > subversive left :-) > > If it wasnt for the Brits during the Battle of Britain the US would not have > had a base from which to launch an invasion.

Not forgetting the Poles, the Free French, the Royal Canadian Air Force, etc., and the US nationals who chose to sign up for the RAF, of course. Or the various resistance movements in occupied European territories, including France. It's not at all fair to say that after France was taken, the only people left fighting the Germans were the British (Wales and Scotland also having provided aircrew and troops of course). -- Phil http://www.usefilm.com/photographer/31307.html

"Mitch_A" wrote... > Youre re-writing history David. The War began on Sept 1st 1939 > and by June of 1940 England was the only European nation still > fighting against Germany. Not strictly true: Dutch, Belgian, Polish and original French government were exiled, but whatever part of their armies they had left after the Blitzkrieg were put under British command and continued to fight the Germans throughout the war. Also, there was partisan action against the occupying forces throughout the Balkan and the north of Spain. The blunt truth is that, almost without exception, everyone had underestimated the strike capability of the German army and, more importantly, that it's new make up and tactics made a mockery of the static defenses our conservative militaries relied upon. Which makes it all the more amazing the Germans sought to stop an allied invasion through a more advanced, yet similar system at the end of the war. But this as an aside. Not even the US could have stopped Europe from getting overrun, as it only really mobilised after Pearl Harbour. That said, without US supplies and technology the Battle of Britain, while probably still not being lost, would have become an even more close run thing, crippling Britain even more than it did. To tie this all back in to the current situation. If you go comparing the two conflicts, it does baring in mind that in WWII a fully mobilised nation with a booming economy, lead by an unsavoury person, struk out and forcibly claimed territories having the resources it so badly needed to sustain its growth (and was denied by the Versailles treaties). In the current situation, the so called leaders of the free world (individual freedom to organise your life and your society as you see fit are big concepts in your country, right?), already having and consuming more resources than they'll ever need, invaded a country on the edge of economic and social collapse(*) for reasons unknown other than it was lead by an unsavoury person (those given were later found to be unfounded and we never believed them in the first place). Predictably (at least I and 82% of my countrymen predicted it), a swift military victory was followed by the population and the different factions in Iraq stabbing their liberators (and I do mean liberators, because, let's face it, life under Saddam was no bed of roses for the bulk of the population) in the back and waging a very dirty war on the invading troups and everyone remotely associated with them. A war which can't be won by conventional tactics/warfare, BTW. But, you know, the deed is done and I truly feel sorry for the coalition troops in the field. In fact, I have never felt worse about being right in al my life. Let's just leave it at that. In a year, maybe two, they'll send a Belgian peacekeeping force in to get drunk with the locals and sort the whole thing out, don't worry. ;-)) Jan. =--- (*): the one saving grace about this whole deal is the US invasion stopped the Saddam regime from possibly playing along with the UN and, after a while, getting the embargos lifted, thus building up enough resources to become a real threat.

> Let's just leave it at that. In a year, maybe two, they'll send a Belgian > peacekeeping force in to get drunk with the locals and sort the whole > thing out, don't worry. ;-)) Just so they don't get ideas *cough* Belgian Congo *cough* Rwanda *cough* *cough* rms

"Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:OZzgd.3995$[email hidden]... > Not strictly true: Dutch, Belgian, Polish and original French government > were exiled, but whatever part of their armies they had left after the > Blitzkrieg were put under British command and continued to fight the > Germans throughout the war. Also, there was partisan action against the > occupying forces throughout the Balkan and the north of Spain. Yes they did and for that were ALL grateful even to this day (they were after all the greatest generation). That said though they were a force with little ability to wage war against Hitlers war machine. > > The blunt truth is that, almost without exception, everyone had > underestimated the strike capability of the German army and, more > importantly, that it's new make up and tactics made a mockery of the > static defenses our conservative militaries relied upon. The Maginauo?? line. What a joke. One of these days Im going to go see all this wonderful history for myself. > > Which makes it all the more amazing the Germans sought to stop an allied > invasion through a more advanced, yet similar system at the end of the > war. But this as an aside. > We all know that in hindsight that had Hitler not invaded Russia at that point in time and continued his chirade with Stalin, things would have been much different. > Not even the US could have stopped Europe from getting overrun, as it only > really mobilised after Pearl Harbour. That said, without US supplies and > technology the Battle of Britain, while probably still not being lost, > would have become an even more close run thing, crippling Britain even > more than it did. > The US was a different place in the 30's. Our Federal Gov had almost no impact on its citizens daily lives compared to today. Isolationism was the trend of the day. Although Pearl Harbor is what actually started the war, our war machine was in full preparations since 36'. The writing was on the wall and may actually have been promted by FDR's oil embargo of Japan. > To tie this all back in to the current situation. If you go comparing the > two conflicts, it does baring in mind that in WWII a fully mobilised > nation with a booming economy, lead by an unsavoury person, struk out and > forcibly claimed territories having the resources it so badly needed to > sustain its growth (and was denied by the Versailles treaties). The Versailles treaty had about as much tooth as the 17 Sanctions had on Saddam.

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > In the current situation, the so called leaders of the free world > (individual freedom to organise your life and your society as you see fit > are big concepts in your country, right?), already having and consuming > more resources than they'll ever need, invaded a country on the edge of > economic and social collapse(*) for reasons unknown other than it was lead > by an unsavoury person (those given were later found to be unfounded and > we never believed them in the first place).

Saddam knew we were coming. A suprise invasion would likely shown us he did have them. We ALL know he had them at some point because he showed the world he would not hesitate to use them and did twice. All the more reason to liberate the Iraqis.

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > Predictably (at least I and 82% of my countrymen predicted it), a swift > military victory was followed by the population and the different factions > in Iraq stabbing their liberators (and I do mean liberators, because, > let's face it, life under Saddam was no bed of roses for the bulk of the > population) in the back and waging a very dirty war on the invading troups > and everyone remotely associated with them. A war which can't be won by > conventional tactics/warfare, BTW.

Overwhleming number. I didnt predict that and neither did GW. Id hoped we would secure the countries borders much quicker to prevent the infiltration of the insurgents but thats a big country with long borders. War isnt perfect and its much easier to see mistakes in hindsight. I never for once assumed the Baath Party would go down without a fight though. I didnt think they'd have very much support by the avg citizen either. > > But, you know, the deed is done and I truly feel sorry for the coalition > troops in the field. In fact, I have never felt worse about being right in > al my life. Having been an 11Bravo Airborne Infantry 82nd AB Div member (Hoooah, Airborne) I can tell you War for the troop isnt nearly as bad as civilians may think. Thats why we volunteer and what we train for and expect to happen :-) Our troops have done a wonderful job in the ME and liberating 30 million while losing 1100 is a victory by any historical standard (most Soldiers accept death for a noble cause and these Soldiers were heroes). The Abu-Gharaib incidents while ugly and indefenceable was/is being dealt with and the perptrators are being punished. This is a War not a hollywood movie. We didnt cut off anyones head that Im aware of either. > > Let's just leave it at that. In a year, maybe two, they'll send a Belgian > peacekeeping force in to get drunk with the locals and sort the whole > thing out, don't worry. ;-)) This is why Im so passionate about re-electing GW Bush. This action MUST be given an opportunity to succeed (or the all the lives lost were wasted) and I would say at least 4 years. Do you remember the Marshall Plan and how long it took? IIRC 49'ish till things settled down? I honestly dont think Kerry (based on his 20 year Senate record) has the moral character or intestinal fortitude to see this DIFFICULT situation through. Kerry, as history has shown uses public opinion polls and a *world test* instead of morals, character and WHATS RIGHT to make his decisions. This is UN_ACCEPTABLE!

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > Jan. > =--- > (*): the one saving grace about this whole deal is the US invasion stopped > the Saddam regime from possibly playing along with the UN and, after a > while, getting the embargos lifted, thus building up enough resources to > become a real threat.

This IS the issue. Oil for Food scam IS a major part of that issue. Do I agree with Bush on everything? Hardly, but its all about priorities this election and the War on Terror must be faught with ALL resources. I dont think the Anti-War crowd fully realize they give strength to our enemy with this behavior which harms many more people than if we were ALL on the same side. PS, very well thought out and framed argument Jan and I did enjoy reading it :) You racing Atlanta? Mitch > >

See my next post first paragraph. Mitch "Phil Newnham" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:cluhtn$qt7$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (21 lines)

> Mitch_A wrote: >> Youre re-writing history David. The War began on Sept 1st 1939 and by >> June of 1940 England was the only European nation still fighting against >> Germany. Not trying to denigrate any of those countries its just that >> historical facts are just that, facts, not to be used as a political tool >> for the subversive left :-) >> >> If it wasnt for the Brits during the Battle of Britain the US would not >> have had a base from which to launch an invasion. > > Not forgetting the Poles, the Free French, the Royal Canadian Air Force, > etc., and the US nationals who chose to sign up for the RAF, of course. Or > the various resistance movements in occupied European territories, > including France. It's not at all fair to say that after France was taken, > the only people left fighting the Germans were the British (Wales and > Scotland also having provided aircrew and troops of course). > > -- > Phil > > http://www.usefilm.com/photographer/31307.html

"rms" wrote... > > <snip> > Just so they don't get ideas *cough* Belgian Congo *cough* > Rwanda *cough* *cough* We had terrible chain of command and discipline issues in Rwanda, combined with idiocy in the field (10 paracommandos surrendered their weapons and allowed themselves to be butchered... wot?!?). I thought it was pretty bad watching from sidelines, then this Canadian General came out and told the inside story and I found out it was about 10 times as bad as I thought. Not good, not good at all and, I'm ashamed to say, not many heads rolled for it at the court martials here. Ok, so Rwanda was a spectacular cock-up, but remind me what, in a military sense, we did wrong in Congo? Jan. =---

In article <FWBgd.2315$[email hidden]>, naman- [email hidden] says... > <snip>

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > This IS the issue. Oil for Food scam IS a major part of that issue. > > Do I agree with Bush on everything? Hardly, but its all about priorities > this election and the War on Terror must be faught with ALL resources. I > dont think the Anti-War crowd fully realize they give strength to our enemy > with this behavior which harms many more people than if we were ALL on the > same side. >

Mitch I can't say I agree with that statement one bit. What you are suggesting is that we should all accept what our governments tell us and that by not doing so we are somehow fuelling the terrorists' struggle. Come on now. That's what all governments would love, to have the population blindly accept that they are doing the right thing, all the time. There's currently a serial documentary running over here in the UK, called 'The Power of Nightmares' which goes into great detail about how governments of the day (and mainly focusing on the US) have used this fear of an evil enemy to direct everybody's focus so that the country doesn't become too weak and ineffectual. In order to do so they have to keep feeding this fear to the masses that they are all under attack or liable to be attacked at any moment. 9/11 was a sad day indeed, but since that day how many attacks have there been on the US? And how much of what went before was because of Saddam Hussein and Iraq? The US and the UK have manipulated what happened on 9/11 to inject fear into their people. To create a kind of paranoia almost that we were on the verge of terrorist attack after terrorist attack. Do you really believe that to be the case? And do you really believe that Iraq was potentially behind what had already taken place and is likely to insue in the future? Unfortunately I don't and it disappoints me that governments of this day can feel that they can get away with 'lying' so blatently about such things. It sure shows what they think of their people. They don't even think they're worth telling the truth to. Let's give them plenty of sleepless nights and they'll go along with anything we tell them. Now that's what I call frightening. -- Pete Ives Remove All_stRESS before sending me an email

Mitch_A wrote:

Quoted text (13 lines)

> "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:OZzgd.3995$[email hidden]... > > >>Not strictly true: Dutch, Belgian, Polish and original French government >>were exiled, but whatever part of their armies they had left after the >>Blitzkrieg were put under British command and continued to fight the >>Germans throughout the war. Also, there was partisan action against the >>occupying forces throughout the Balkan and the north of Spain. > > Yes they did and for that were ALL grateful even to this day (they were > after all the greatest generation). That said though they were a force with > little ability to wage war against Hitlers war machine.

The Poles and the Free French flew with the British in the Battle of Britain. When we were down to our last few aircraft and pilots, they were among them, and they were an important part of the Few. The French resistance helped a lot to disrupt and destroy supply lines and made life much more difficult for the occupying forces in France. They also helped spy on the enemy, which was all part of the effort.

Quoted text (7 lines)

>>The blunt truth is that, almost without exception, everyone had >>underestimated the strike capability of the German army and, more >>importantly, that it's new make up and tactics made a mockery of the >>static defenses our conservative militaries relied upon. > > The Maginauo?? line. What a joke. One of these days Im going to go see all > this wonderful history for myself.

The Magino line (no, I don't know how to spell it either, but that's what I remember from school) was actually really fantastically well constructed, with one oversight. The French believed that Hitler would respect Holland's and Belgium's declarations of independence, and did not build the line along the border with Belgium. Hitler ignored the declarations, swept through Holland and Belgium, and swept up the Magino line from the one direction it did not expect attack - behind. -- Phil http://www.usefilm.com/photographer/31307.html

On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 12:20:34 +0100, Peter wrote: > The US and the UK have manipulated what happened on 9/11 to inject fear > into their people. To create a kind of paranoia almost that we were on > the verge of terrorist attack after terrorist attack. Do you really > believe that to be the case? And do you really believe that Iraq was > potentially behind what had already taken place and is likely to insue > in the future? Couldn't agree more. I've read various detailed accounts of what happened and who did what (or didn't do) minute by minute on the morning of 9/11, and at best it's a massive failure of GWB and his staff to respond appropriately while events unfolded; at its worst, it's something far worse than that. A population in fear is far easier to rule than a clear-thinking one, and after the demise of the "communist empire" a void clearly needed filling. Cheers, uwe -- mail replies to Uwe at schuerkamp dot de ( yahoo address is spambox) Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.schuerkamp.de/ Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E) GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61

If you really study war history, you'll see that the true turning point in the war was not when the US engaged, it was Stalingrad, 6th german army turned into PoW. 80 % of the total number of german casulaties/wounded took place BEFORE the D-day. 72% of the total number of german casulaties/wounded took place at the Eastern Front. So, if it weren't for the *Russian army*, suffering more than 20 million victims, Europe would not be what it is today. We all know that the US had vast production fasilities unmatched by *any* coalition of this world, and we all know US didn't engaged *before* Pearl Harbour and Oil tankers being sunk at the east coast by german subs. I think you americans (I am not generalizing! ;-) ought to do yourself a favour and stop imagining that you are the saviours of this world. Ask a south-american what took place on september 11th! That was when a rightfully elected leader (Allende) were replaced and later shot by CIA supported troops. ---A--- Phillip Malphrus, Jr. wrote:

Quoted text (21 lines)

> If it werent for the USA you would have a Nazi based Europe and a fully > communist Asia still to this day. But noone ever is thankful for that and > instead takes shots at the USA, whose actions during World War II and after > allows you the ability to even have your opinion posted in a public forum > today. I guess you are right. We should have let Hitler keep Europe and let > Russia, China, and Japan fight over the rest and stayed completely out of > the conflict and not sacrificed a single American in the process. That was > our mistake. > > > "Asgeir Nesoen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:cltgju$gk3$[email hidden]... > >>The competition on killing innocent people has since long been won by the >>US, so your argument is forfeit. Sorry. >> >>---A--- >> > > >

I couldnt disagree more Uwe. Americans Manipulated? Are you kidding? I think Europe has been manipulated into thinking this way. Although 9-11 gets the headlines it was hardly the first or only attack against the USA by terrorists. Americans arent *lead* by fear or paranoia but rather by commons sense and the knowledge that the terrorist went one step too far and would continue pushing the envelope until we as Americans decided enough is enough. Perhaps appeasement is OK in Europe but historically its a failure everytime just ask your Grandpa about what Europe did when uncle hitler came rolling through, heck just look at the Balkans for recent history of appeasement. The failure can hardly be blamed on GWB. We must go back much farther than his presidency to see the entire scope of terrorism and blame. I blame the Terrorists and their hatred. Everyone acts like the Worlds Intelligence agencies were just sitting around ignoring the facts, the reality was getting any kind of Intel out of Iraq was nearly impossible, not only for this administration but previous as well. This lack if Intel cannot be blamed on ANYONE except Saddam and his secret security forces. This has NOTHING to do with filling a void that communism left despite that spin. Conspiracy theorist are we? I really think your media has conditioned you all to accept ITS version while ignoring reality because you all have the same impotent arguments. Im very clear thinking, part of that clear thinking includes the absolute fact that Americans are HATED throughout the World and our Country is at WAR with those who wish to strike us. France, Germany, China and Russia have showed Americans very clearly that the Useless Nations and the Security Council are a corrupt, toothless organization that has done more harm in the World than good. That said you have the audacity to say its all GWB's fault and paranoid Americans are being manipulated???? Mitch "Uwe Sch�rkamp" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (29 lines)

> On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 12:20:34 +0100, Peter wrote: > >> The US and the UK have manipulated what happened on 9/11 to inject fear >> into their people. To create a kind of paranoia almost that we were on >> the verge of terrorist attack after terrorist attack. Do you really >> believe that to be the case? And do you really believe that Iraq was >> potentially behind what had already taken place and is likely to insue >> in the future? > > Couldn't agree more. I've read various detailed accounts of what > happened and who did what (or didn't do) minute by minute on the > morning of 9/11, and at best it's a massive failure of GWB and his > staff to respond appropriately while events unfolded; at its worst, > it's something far worse than that. > > A population in fear is far easier to rule than a clear-thinking one, > and after the demise of the "communist empire" a void clearly needed > filling. > > Cheers, > > uwe > > > -- > mail replies to Uwe at schuerkamp dot de ( yahoo address is spambox) > Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.schuerkamp.de/ > Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E) > GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61

On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 17:09:28 GMT, Mitch_A wrote: > I couldnt disagree more Uwe. Americans Manipulated? Are you kidding? I > think Europe has been manipulated into thinking this way. > Hi Mitch, thanks for your reply. Please pick up a copy of "Ishmael" by Daniel Quinn and let me know what you think. I know it's a rather terse reply to an elaborate post of yours, but reading this book might help further the cause of this argument and give you more insight on "how things came to be this way". All the best, Uwe -- mail replies to Uwe at schuerkamp dot de ( yahoo address is spambox) Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.schuerkamp.de/ Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E) GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61

"Uwe Sch�rkamp" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 17:09:28 GMT, Mitch_A wrote: > > I couldnt disagree more Uwe. Americans Manipulated? Are you kidding?I

Quoted text (15 lines)

> > think Europe has been manipulated into thinking this way. > > > > Hi Mitch, > > thanks for your reply. Please pick up a copy of "Ishmael" by Daniel > Quinn and let me know what you think. I know it's a rather terse reply > to an elaborate post of yours, but reading this book might help > further the cause of this argument and give you more insight on "how > things came to be this way". > > > All the best, > > Uwe

Here's three of the most damning GWB articles I've read in the last 24 hours. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6364551/site/newsweek/ http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/31/opinion/main652488.shtml http://www.guerrillanews.com/articles/article.php?id=761

On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 14:40:55 -0500, David G Fisher wrote: > Here's three of the most damning GWB articles I've read in the last 24 > hours. > > http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6364551/site/newsweek/ MSnbc damning GWB??? Thanks for shooting down my favourite conspiracy theory ;-) "War president", tsk tsk. A nation in fear. This will be my last post in this thread, having taken it to private email with those involved. Cheers & all the best, Uwe -- mail replies to Uwe at schuerkamp dot de ( yahoo address is spambox) Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.schuerkamp.de/ Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E) GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61

After reading this it all stands clear before me: All this cooks down to one single thing: Where we place ourselves in this world. If you place yourself on top of everything you'll see terrorists everywhere, and call them evil, and you won't have the slightest idea why they attack you. If you place yourself on the bottom you think those on top get every damn bit they deserve because they have inflicted so much pain and suffering through their political military actions. One thing that americans tend to forget in the discussion is the fact that we have had terrorist attacks in europe during most of the 20th century, and that we have had to adjust our foreign policy accordingly, because it became apparent that our foreign policy created people who were willing to sacrifice their lives for a cause. Now, there are two courses of action when you realize this: You can 1) start a world wide war on everything that even resembles a terrorist, because you have to be utterly and thoroughly paranoid in order to fight such a threat efficiently, or you can 2) start evaluating and analyze your own foreigh policy in order to eliminate the factors that creates suicide bombers, and adjust accordingly. Again, if you place yourself on top of the world you'll say: "why should we adjust to *anything* of this world", if you place yourself on the bottom you'll say: "We will *force* them to adjust, and we'll gladly sacrifice our own lives in the process". It's a matter of self image, self deceit and dillusion. Very simply put. Broaden your mind, get a perspective based on moral and ethical issues instead of world position, and you'll see what I mean. Time will proove it. ---Asgeir--- Mitch_A wrote:

Quoted text (79 lines)

> I couldnt disagree more Uwe. Americans Manipulated? Are you kidding? I > think Europe has been manipulated into thinking this way. > > Although 9-11 gets the headlines it was hardly the first or only attack > against the USA by terrorists. Americans arent *lead* by fear or paranoia > but rather by commons sense and the knowledge that the terrorist went one > step too far and would continue pushing the envelope until we as Americans > decided enough is enough. > > Perhaps appeasement is OK in Europe but historically its a failure everytime > just ask your Grandpa about what Europe did when uncle hitler came rolling > through, heck just look at the Balkans for recent history of appeasement. > > The failure can hardly be blamed on GWB. We must go back much farther than > his presidency to see the entire scope of terrorism and blame. I blame the > Terrorists and their hatred. Everyone acts like the Worlds Intelligence > agencies were just sitting around ignoring the facts, the reality was > getting any kind of Intel out of Iraq was nearly impossible, not only for > this administration but previous as well. This lack if Intel cannot be > blamed on ANYONE except Saddam and his secret security forces. > > This has NOTHING to do with filling a void that communism left despite that > spin. Conspiracy theorist are we? > > I really think your media has conditioned you all to accept ITS version > while ignoring reality because you all have the same impotent arguments. > > Im very clear thinking, part of that clear thinking includes the absolute > fact that Americans are HATED throughout the World and our Country is at WAR > with those who wish to strike us. > > France, Germany, China and Russia have showed Americans very clearly that > the Useless Nations and the Security Council are a corrupt, toothless > organization that has done more harm in the World than good. That said you > have the audacity to say its all GWB's fault and paranoid Americans are > being manipulated???? > > > Mitch > > > > > "Uwe Sch�rkamp" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > >>On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 12:20:34 +0100, Peter wrote: >> >> >>>The US and the UK have manipulated what happened on 9/11 to inject fear >>>into their people. To create a kind of paranoia almost that we were on >>>the verge of terrorist attack after terrorist attack. Do you really >>>believe that to be the case? And do you really believe that Iraq was >>>potentially behind what had already taken place and is likely to insue >>>in the future? >> >>Couldn't agree more. I've read various detailed accounts of what >>happened and who did what (or didn't do) minute by minute on the >>morning of 9/11, and at best it's a massive failure of GWB and his >>staff to respond appropriately while events unfolded; at its worst, >>it's something far worse than that. >> >>A population in fear is far easier to rule than a clear-thinking one, >>and after the demise of the "communist empire" a void clearly needed >>filling. >> >>Cheers, >> >>uwe >> >> >>-- >>mail replies to Uwe at schuerkamp dot de ( yahoo address is spambox) >>Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.schuerkamp.de/ >>Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E) >>GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61 > > >

"Asgeir Nesoen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:cm7grr$a7t$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (30 lines)

> After reading this it all stands clear before me: > All this cooks down to one single thing: Where we place ourselves in > this world. If you place yourself on top of everything you'll see > terrorists everywhere, and call them evil, and you won't have the > slightest idea why they attack you. If you place yourself on the bottom > you think those on top get every damn bit they deserve because they have > inflicted so much pain and suffering through their political military > actions. > > One thing that americans tend to forget in the discussion is the fact > that we have had terrorist attacks in europe during most of the 20th > century, and that we have had to adjust our foreign policy accordingly, > because it became apparent that our foreign policy created people who > were willing to sacrifice their lives for a cause. > > Now, there are two courses of action when you realize this: You can 1) > start a world wide war on everything that even resembles a terrorist, > because you have to be utterly and thoroughly paranoid in order to fight > such a threat efficiently, or you can 2) start evaluating and analyze > your own foreigh policy in order to eliminate the factors that creates > suicide bombers, and adjust accordingly. > > Again, if you place yourself on top of the world you'll say: "why should > we adjust to *anything* of this world", if you place yourself on the > bottom you'll say: "We will *force* them to adjust, and we'll gladly > sacrifice our own lives in the process". > > It's a matter of self image, self deceit and dillusion. Very simply put. > Broaden your mind, get a perspective based on moral and ethical issues > instead of world position, and you'll see what I mean. Time will proove

it. > > ---Asgeir--- Your approach is the right way. Unforutnately, there is a tiny % of Americans who think the way you and other Europeans do. We just don't have enough people with the wisdom or intelligence to understand that approach. At least not yet. Our views and reactions are very naieve, childish, emotional and unjustifiably arrogant. Maybe in another 50 years.......... I don't care if saying that offends anyone in this country. Where I live has very little to do with the people unfortunately. BTW, OBL is in complete control of Bush, this administration, and many in this country. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6387377/ -- David G Fisher

David G Fisher wrote: <snipped my own stuff> > > Your approach is the right way. Unforutnately, there is a tiny % of > Americans who think the way you and other Europeans do. We just don't have > enough people with the wisdom or intelligence to understand that approach. > At least not yet. Our views and reactions are very naieve, childish, > emotional and unjustifiably arrogant. Maybe in another 50 years.......... I *think* it will happen sooner than this, simply because we will run out of oil and gas much sooner than the medias think. The western corporate worlds without oil is totally crippled and simply unable to make money, let alone profit. Gas prices are already running wild, and there is no solution to that because the rate of newly discovered and exploited gas sources is much smaller than the decline of the already exploited ones and demand. We run out of gas first, and then we'll start using oil instead, then the oil prices will go wild. What amazes me is the total lack of focus on this, not even progressive news medias address it; a society without oil needs to be based and built on entirely different grounds, and it will be an extremely painful process since the peoples will do anything to change things, and the elite in power will do anything NOT to change things. > > I don't care if saying that offends anyone in this country. Where I live has > very little to do with the people unfortunately. > > BTW, OBL is in complete control of Bush, this administration, and many in > this country. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6387377/ I wouldn't say OBL is in complete control, I would say that OBL just plays it along the self-inflicted cul-de-sac of US. The fragility of the economy of US is immense since it has a terrible dependancy of fossile fuels. And it can't possibly last! China wants oil, as does India, I would say max 10 years from now until people in US must leave their cars at home each morning, since oil will be too expensive for their already-too-low vages. The powers in charge are there to make money, not to do the right thing for US and americans. ---A---

Attack articles by democratic operatives wont convince me of anything. "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (32 lines)

> > "Uwe Sch�rkamp" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... >> On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 17:09:28 GMT, Mitch_A wrote: >> > I couldnt disagree more Uwe. Americans Manipulated? Are you kidding? > I >> > think Europe has been manipulated into thinking this way. >> > >> >> Hi Mitch, >> >> thanks for your reply. Please pick up a copy of "Ishmael" by Daniel >> Quinn and let me know what you think. I know it's a rather terse reply >> to an elaborate post of yours, but reading this book might help >> further the cause of this argument and give you more insight on "how >> things came to be this way". >> >> >> All the best, >> >> Uwe > > Here's three of the most damning GWB articles I've read in the last 24 > hours. > > http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6364551/site/newsweek/ > > http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/31/opinion/main652488.shtml > > http://www.guerrillanews.com/articles/article.php?id=761 > >

Expert Geologist too eh? LOL... "Asgeir Nesoen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:cm840c$ll5$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (47 lines)

> David G Fisher wrote: > <snipped my own stuff> >> >> Your approach is the right way. Unforutnately, there is a tiny % of >> Americans who think the way you and other Europeans do. We just don't >> have >> enough people with the wisdom or intelligence to understand that >> approach. >> At least not yet. Our views and reactions are very naieve, childish, >> emotional and unjustifiably arrogant. Maybe in another 50 years.......... > > I *think* it will happen sooner than this, simply because we will run out > of oil and gas much sooner than the medias think. The western corporate > worlds without oil is totally crippled and simply unable to make money, > let alone profit. > > Gas prices are already running wild, and there is no solution to that > because the rate of newly discovered and exploited gas sources is much > smaller than the decline of the already exploited ones and demand. We run > out of gas first, and then we'll start using oil instead, then the oil > prices will go wild. > > What amazes me is the total lack of focus on this, not even progressive > news medias address it; a society without oil needs to be based and built > on entirely different grounds, and it will be an extremely painful process > since the peoples will do anything to change things, and the elite in > power will do anything NOT to change things. > >> >> I don't care if saying that offends anyone in this country. Where I live >> has >> very little to do with the people unfortunately. >> >> BTW, OBL is in complete control of Bush, this administration, and many in >> this country. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6387377/ > > I wouldn't say OBL is in complete control, I would say that OBL just plays > it along the self-inflicted cul-de-sac of US. The fragility of the economy > of US is immense since it has a terrible dependancy of fossile fuels. And > it can't possibly last! China wants oil, as does India, I would say max 10 > years from now until people in US must leave their cars at home each > morning, since oil will be too expensive for their already-too-low vages. > > The powers in charge are there to make money, not to do the right thing > for US and americans. > > ---A---

"Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:o3Phd.37757$[email hidden]... > Attack articles by democratic operatives wont convince me of anything. you sir are retarded

No reasoned argument, eh? LOL... "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:U4Phd.37758$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Expert Geologist too eh? LOL... > > > "Asgeir Nesoen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:cm840c$ll5$[email hidden]... > > David G Fisher wrote: > > <snipped my own stuff>

No reasoned argument, eh? LOL...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Expert Geologist too eh? LOL... > > <snipped my own stuff>

The arguing is done. Time to try and mend differences and work together to try and bring about a positive out of all these negatives thrown about so easily for the last year. I hope GWB wins but if he doesnt Ill pledge my allegiance to Kerry as President and hope he is able to Win this war on Terrorists and Terrorism, the true enemy of peace and freedom. Mitch "Mark Davisons" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:4187efa0$0$36790$[email hidden]... > No reasoned argument, eh? LOL... >

In this country, we will wait until it's past the crisis point before we actually do anything about it. We don't believe we should have to inconvenience ourselves for the greater good. The world revolves around us. Bush's big plan is to drill for oil in Alaska, which would give the US six months worth of oil, wouldn't be available for ten years, and could cause a disaster in that region. Whether it's the depletion of fossil fuels, the destruction of the environment, or overpopulation, the majority of people in this country aren't going to do a damn thing until it's too late. -- David G Fisher "Asgeir Nesoen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:cm840c$ll5$[email hidden]... > David G Fisher wrote: > <snipped my own stuff> > > > > Your approach is the right way. Unforutnately, there is a tiny % of > > Americans who think the way you and other Europeans do. We just don't have > > enough people with the wisdom or intelligence to understand that approach. > > At least not yet. Our views and reactions are very naieve, childish, > > emotional and unjustifiably arrogant. Maybe in another 50 years.......... > > I *think* it will happen sooner than this, simply because we will run > out of oil and gas much sooner than the medias think. The western > corporate worlds without oil is totally crippled and simply unable to > make money, let alone profit. > > Gas prices are already running wild, and there is no solution to that > because the rate of newly discovered and exploited gas sources is much > smaller than the decline of the already exploited ones and demand. We > run out of gas first, and then we'll start using oil instead, then the > oil prices will go wild. > > What amazes me is the total lack of focus on this, not even progressive > news medias address it; a society without oil needs to be based and > built on entirely different grounds, and it will be an extremely painful > process since the peoples will do anything to change things, and the > elite in power will do anything NOT to change things. > > > > > I don't care if saying that offends anyone in this country. Where I live has > > very little to do with the people unfortunately. > > > > BTW, OBL is in complete control of Bush, this administration, and many in > > this country. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6387377/ > > I wouldn't say OBL is in complete control, I would say that OBL just > plays it along the self-inflicted cul-de-sac of US. The fragility of the > economy of US is immense since it has a terrible dependancy of fossile > fuels. And it can't possibly last! China wants oil, as does India, I > would say max 10 years from now until people in US must leave their cars > at home each morning, since oil will be too expensive for their > already-too-low vages. > > The powers in charge are there to make money, not to do the right thing > for US and americans. > > ---A---

On Tue, 02 Nov 2004 20:51:36 GMT, Mitch_A wrote: > I hope GWB wins but if he doesnt Ill pledge my allegiance to Kerry as > President and hope he is able to Win this war on Terrorists and Terrorism, > the true enemy of peace and freedom. Gaah, I said I wouldn't post in this one any more, but I'm really beginning to wonder what you've been having for lunch these past fews weeks, Mitch ;-) This isn't a war, whatever your government is trying to tell you, and as such cannot be won. It's going to be won much like the "other wars" were won in the US (or world wide, for that matter): the "war on hunger", the "war on poverty", and the "war on drugs". Sounds familiar, doesn't it? All the best, uwe -- mail replies to Uwe at schuerkamp dot de ( yahoo address is spambox) Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.schuerkamp.de/ Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E) GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61

Well, my point is that it is never "too late". The effects of late action will be much more severe, yes, but things will collapse, and then things will be rebuilt. The survivors will think differently. Hopefully. Americans have a strong optimism, they think everything in the world will be ok if their intention is good. And they think that their belief in their country will make things proceed well for US. It won't. ---A--- David G Fisher wrote:

Quoted text (11 lines)

> In this country, we will wait until it's past the crisis point before we > actually do anything about it. We don't believe we should have to > inconvenience ourselves for the greater good. The world revolves around us. > > Bush's big plan is to drill for oil in Alaska, which would give the US six > months worth of oil, wouldn't be available for ten years, and could cause a > disaster in that region. > > Whether it's the depletion of fossil fuels, the destruction of the > environment, or overpopulation, the majority of people in this country > aren't going to do a damn thing until it's too late.

"Asgeir Nesoen" wrote... >> <snip> Thanks Asgeir and Dave for pointing out the obvious, but, unfortunately, your average American doesn't believe fossil fuels will run out. If not in our (I intend to live to a point where gasoline and coal will no longer be available... just to die laughing) generation, then the next; which I think is short term thinking with regard to Roman and Egyptian civilatiations to begin with. 500 years from now, if the human race still exists, people will refer to us as an embarrasment. Jan. =---

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 01:40:10 GMT, Jan Verschueren wrote: > 500 years from now, if the human race still exists, people will refer to us > as an embarrasment. > Jan, remember we're only one culture of the tens of thousands that have existed on this planet. Granted, we're a pretty large culture, but by no means humanity itself, in spite of what mother culture tells you every day through tales, media, schooling, higher education, songs, movies, books, whatever. <quinn plug>Read "Ishmael" by Dan Quinn, a most excellent work on this topic.</quinn plug ;-> Cheers, uwe -- mail replies to Uwe at schuerkamp dot de ( yahoo address is spambox) Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.schuerkamp.de/ Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E) GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61