Text 9737, 271 rader
Skriven 2005-03-06 21:39:13 av John Hull (1:379/1.99)
Kommentar till en text av Howie Coombe
Ärende: HAVE YOU SEEN CATCH 22 OR
=================================
06 Mar 05 17:03, Howie Coombe wrote to John Hull:
HC> Dear John, in regards to this message to Me.
>> 02 Mar 05 18:56, Howie Coombe wrote to John Hull:
>> HC> Dear John, in regards to this message to Garry Braswell.
>>>> 27 Feb 05 22:01, Gary Braswell wrote to THURSTON ACKERMAN:
>>>> GB> THURSTON ACKERMAN -> GARY BRASWELL wrote:
>>>> GB>>> THURSTON ACKERMAN -> JOHN HULL wrote:> aid to Sudan and
>>>> GB>>> other areas
>>>> JH>>>>> What more do you want?
>>>> TA>>>> Thanks you for asking John. I want US to return to our rule
>>>> TA>>>> of law
>>>> GB>>> A pre-emptive attack is always on the table and should be.
>>>> GB>>> If we
>>>> TA>> Where is the information that Iraq was going to invade the
>>>> TA>> USA?
>>>> GB> None of course, but that does not mean preemptive attacks
>>>> GB> should be
>>>> TA>>>> History teachs that war is an institution of the Old World.
>>>> TA>>>> They
>>>> GB>>> War is almost as old as mankind. War used to be mostly
>>>> GB>>> migrations.
>>>> TA>> I understand that. Some of my Anglo ancestor came here
>>>> TA>> becaause they
>>>> TA>>>> We the People believe otherwise (after our europeon
>>>> TA>>>> immigrant
>>>> GB>>> Migration again.
>>>> TA>>>> We defeated the Soviet-commonists without "shock and owe"
>>>> GB>>> What world were you living in? Korea and Vietnam were
>>>> GB>>> surrogate
>>>> TA>> I am reasonably sure I have been living and fighting in this
>>>> TA>> world
>>>> Most of the French troops at Dien Bienphu were Foreign Legion.
>> HC> And you know this because you were there?.
>> It is documented history,
HC> Aha.
>> that's how.
HC> And you believe everything you read in History books?, or only in
HC> Conservative Patriotic History Books?. Typical conservative
HC> mindset.
Most of the history books you find in schools are full of revisionist crap.
I'll bet yours are no different than ours in that respect. There are many
different sources one can use to get the real story, and cross reference it to
make sure it isn't some jackoffs wet dream of what happened.
>>>> They didn't cut and run.
>> HC> I put it to you that if you were there you were on there side
>> HC> and as
>> I put it to you that you need to do some serious reading.
HC> Some people who know me would suggest the exact opposite, i spend
HC> too much time reading.
>> Your grasp of history is woefully inadequate.
HC> My Grasp of History is just as strong as yours, it is just
HC> different, broader.
Only if you include the PC versions.
>>>> They were overrun by superior forces.
>> HC> Superior or just stubborn?.
>> Both.
HC> On this we can agree.
>>>> The French lost Indochina because they underestimated the
>>>> willingness of
>> HC> Patriotism can make a person do, say and think some crazy
>> HC> things,
HC> No Comment?, i will that as an agreement on your part.
Don't ever make the mistake of putting words in my mouth. If I don't answer
something, all you can assume is that I didn't answer it. Period. Some things
don't deserve an answer, however.
>>>> GB> And we were facing the USSR and China behind both wars. Stalin
>>>> There were Russian pilots flying MIGs in both Korea and Vietnam
>>>> against
>> HC> And again i suppose you are talking from personal knowledge?.
HC> No Further Comment?, i would suggest you spend less time
HC> retreating to your conservative history books.
>>>> We had downed aircrew in Vietnam who were interrogated by Russian
>> HC> Were you one of them?.
>> Again, documented history.
HC> There are some things books can not tell you.
Oh, please. You weren't there either, and anybody who doubts the word of
people who were (as prisoners, for example) and who SAW those Russian officers
is a damn fool.
>>>> GB> In Vietnam there were Chinese soldiers on the ground and the
>>>> GB> USSR
>>>> GB> I'm sure Vern could probably shed more light on the Chicom
>>>> GB> guys. One
>>>> GB> And sorry to hear of your son.
>>>> GB> The French tried to re-establish their colonies after WWII. We
>>>> We supported the French for one reason,
>> HC> Which was?, We were mad?, He was white and the other bloke was
>> HC> not?.
HC> No Comment?, i suspect some of the answers to the question were
HC> the ones i gave above.
You like to answer your own questions, don't you? That way, you always get the
answer you want.
>>>> and one reason only.
>> HC> Yes?.
HC> Only 1 reason?.
>>>> It was vitally important to Truman and the rest to keep DeGaule in
>>>> our
>> HC> America Supported France because America wanted to make an
>> Go ahead and doubt it,
HC> Oh i will doubt it, or at least i will doubt it is the only
HC> reason, my history books tell me that.
>> it won't change the fact that its true.
HC> It may be true, it may be nothing but the truth, but i doubt it is
HC> the whole truth.
>>>> That meant making concessions to France by giving them back
>>>> Indochina
>> HC> Whithout asking the Indochinese?, yes that does sound like
>> HC> America.
>> That's right,
HC> Parhaps it is but it should not be.
>> because when WWII started,
HC> Yes?.
>> France owned Indochina.
HC> I know they did but that is irrelivent, After The Japanese were
HC> kicked out of Indochina the people who were responsible for
HC> kicking Japan out of Indochina should have and could have saved
HC> themselves the bother of Korea and Vietnam by holding 2
HC> referendums in those 2 countrys on independance.
No, it isn't irrelevant. Indochina was the price DeGaulle demanded for French
participation in NATO. Truman wanted NATO because it was the only way to
counter the growing Soviet threat in eastern Europe. Legally, France still
owned Indochina, and we had nothing to say about it since we weren't the only
ones backing that plan. The Brits were on board with it as well to ensure that
NATO became a reality.
But, you go ahead and believe whatever revisionist garbage you want to. Won't
change the facts, though, and you know it.
>> In fact,
HC> Yes?.
>> Saigon was known as the Paris of the Orient.
HC> I know this, indeed i have read and seen some of the evidence of
HC> the truth of this discription.
>>>> In order to do that,
>> HC> Yes?.
HC> No Further Comment?, Fair Enough.
>>>> though,
>> HC> Yes?.
HC> No Further Comment?, Fair Enough.
>>>> we had to pay the cost of their logistics.
>> HC> At no cost to them?, i doubt that?.
>> You have a lot of doubts,
HC> Yes i do, Where America is concerned.
>> don't you? I have a lot of solid belifs though too, anyway TTFN.
You choose to believe only what people say is bad about the US. You've made
that abundantly clear. You have access to the internet which gives you the
ability to find out what the truth is, yet you persist in ignoring what
knowledgeable people have told you and sources to find answers because of your
anti-American attitudes.
I have a great deal of respect for the Aussie people as a whole, and I know
from meeting many of them over the years that they don't think like you. But,
you are a minority and we all know where you come from.
John
America: First, Last, and Always!
Go to www.madgorilla.us for all your Domain Name Services at the lowest rates.
--- Msged/386 TE 05
* Origin: (1:379/1.99)
|