Free speech
 

Paul Burridge wrote:
On Sat, 10 Dec 2005 18:29:27 +0000, Walt Davidson
wrote:

On Sat, 10 Dec 2005 15:03:35 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote:

nevermore wrote:
Walt must have been asleep in the back of the room when his
teacher talked about the Constitution.
Why would g3nyy's teacher have talked about The Constitution,
written by a bunch of previous rebel Enemies of the Crown?
Exactly!

I don't think it's so much that; it's more that American history is
just too short to be worth teaching (certainly by European standards).

I think I see your point: America defeats Britain in the Revolutionary
War. America defeats Britain in the War of 1812. America pulls
Britain's fat from the fire in WWI. America pulls Britain's fat from
the fire in WWII.

Post WWII finds the British Empire in eclipse. Six out for twenty-two
overs, Toad-in-a-hole and Bob's your uncle. Is that about it?

Dave K8MN

Free speech
 

"Walt Davidson" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 11 Dec 2005 04:41:44 GMT, Dave Heil
wrote:

America pulls
Britain's fat from the fire in WWI. America pulls Britain's fat from
the fire in WWII.

Pity nobody pulled your fat from the fire in Vietnam, OM.

And Britain is pretty much the only country foolish enough to try and
pull your fat from the fire in Iraq right now ...

73 de G3NYY

P.S. Thanks for your help in the Falklands. We sorted that one out
quite nicely for ourselves, OM.

--
Walt Davidson Email: g3nyy @despammed.com

And thanks for all the money you lot sent to the IRA.....

Free speech
 

Walt Davidson wrote:

Pity nobody pulled your fat from the fire in Vietnam, OM.

Don't forget that ten years previously, we had defeated
single-handedly a communist jungle insurgency.

However, there are some countries to which you cannot tender advice,
and so when their turn came, it was all 'search and destroy',
choppers, and defoliants. I still remember the news film of the final
days, with helicopters being shoved over the sides of the ships,
rotors still turning.

Having learned nothing from this, they are proceeding to demonstrate
they are learning nothing from the current, erm, liberation, blessing,
I forget the PC word for it.

How long ago it seems, since "Mission Accomplished" was declared.

from
Aero Spike

Dr B F Jones: "...No-one on my staff had any visibility of large quantities of intelligence which proved conclusively there were weapons of mass destruction..."

Free speech
 

"Spike" wrote in message
...

Walt Davidson wrote:

Pity nobody pulled your fat from the fire in Vietnam, OM.

Don't forget that ten years previously, we had defeated
single-handedly a communist jungle insurgency.

However, there are some countries to which you cannot tender advice,
and so when their turn came, it was all 'search and destroy',
choppers, and defoliants. I still remember the news film of the final
days, with helicopters being shoved over the sides of the ships,
rotors still turning.

Having learned nothing from this, they are proceeding to demonstrate
they are learning nothing from the current, erm, liberation, blessing,
I forget the PC word for it.

How long ago it seems, since "Mission Accomplished" was declared.

from
Aero Spike

Dr B F Jones: "...No-one on my staff had any visibility of large quantities
of intelligence which proved conclusively there were weapons of mass
destruction..."
.................

...and of course there are oodles of comments on the record made by Democrats
that concur that Saddam was a real and viable threat.
Who is D. F. Jones, anyway? Do some research and read the comments made by
Kerry, the Clintons, Fat Ted and many, many others.

Your weak argument has been proven false time after time after time....

Free speech
 

Dave Heil wrote:

I think I see your point: America defeats Britain in the Revolutionary
War.

Hmmm. There is no doubt that had Britain taken this war seriously it
would have won it.

America defeats Britain in the War of 1812.

Ho Ho! I suppose you'll be telling us next the White House was torched
by aliens?

America pulls
Britain's fat from the fire in WWI.

America came into the war when it was all but won and 3 years after it
started. Its troops played only a minor but crucial role. America saw
the potential for profit and a chance to increase its sphere of
influence for little effort, Britain on the other hand went to war in
defence of its allies.

America pulls Britain's fat from
the fire in WWII.

Once again America enters the war late and only for profit. Britain
entered the war yet again in defence of its Allies. America was the only
country to end the war richer than when it started.

Post WWII finds the British Empire in eclipse.

Indeed. Two world wars cost Britain an Empire.

Six out for twenty-two
overs, Toad-in-a-hole and Bob's your uncle. Is that about it?

No its about the dollar pure and simple. Why don't you go and research
how many wars of aggression America has waged? Name me one time America
has gone to war in defence of its allies please.

And as someone who lives in Northern Ireland I'd like to thank all you
Americans for financing decades of terror in my country, in particular
I'd like to thank the NYPD and the NYFD who openly financed and
supported the IRA. Boy didn't they just love it when it became their
turn to suffer at the hands of murderers?


--
Proud Holder of Old Nick's Deputy First Class Badge

Free speech
 

Walt Davidson wrote:
On Sun, 11 Dec 2005 04:41:44 GMT, Dave Heil
wrote:

America pulls
Britain's fat from the fire in WWI. America pulls Britain's fat from
the fire in WWII.

Pity nobody pulled your fat from the fire in Vietnam, OM.

Did you find anything untruthful in my statements above? There was
certainly no Britain assisting us in Vietnam. Nobody defeated the
United States militarily in Vietnam.

And Britain is pretty much the only country foolish enough to try and
pull your fat from the fire in Iraq right now ...

The British government is quite rightly involved in that which is in its
own self-interest. Wasn't Britain involved in marking up maps to create
the present day Iraq? It would have been nice if someone in charge had
known what tribal groups lived where, don't you think?

73 de G3NYY

P.S. Thanks for your help in the Falklands. We sorted that one out
quite nicely for ourselves, OM.

You actually *did* receive help in several forms during the "fighting"
in the Falklands.

If Great Britain could not wrest control of those islands from
Argentina, it should have held a going out of business sale.

Dave K8MN

Free speech
 

pointyhead wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

I think I see your point: America defeats Britain in the
Revolutionary War.

Hmmm. There is no doubt that had Britain taken this war seriously it
would have won it.

Sure, sure. Your historical revisionism is a needed face-saving measure.

America defeats Britain in the War of 1812.

Ho Ho! I suppose you'll be telling us next the White House was torched
by aliens?

Coventry was fire-bombed. Did you lose WWII? London endured waves of
buzz bomb and V2 attacks. Did you lose WWII?

The United States defeated Britain for the second time in the War of
1812. I'm sure that you can come up with a scenario in which Britain
could have won the war if only it had taken it seriously.

America pulls Britain's fat from the fire in WWI.

America came into the war when it was all but won and 3 years after it
started. Its troops played only a minor but crucial role. America saw
the potential for profit and a chance to increase its sphere of
influence for little effort, Britain on the other hand went to war in
defence of its allies.

All but won? Little had changed in the three years of WWI. It was
largely back and forth, back and forth in the same muddy fields.

America pulls Britain's fat from the fire in WWII.

Once again America enters the war late and only for profit.

There's more historical revisionism. That Marshall Plan was a big money
making scheme, was it?

Britain
entered the war yet again in defence of its Allies. America was the only
country to end the war richer than when it started.

....and I see that it chafes you. How rich you'd have been under German
domination!

Post WWII finds the British Empire in eclipse.

Indeed. Two world wars cost Britain an Empire.

I thought I'd pointed that out.

Six out for twenty-two overs, Toad-in-a-hole and Bob's your uncle. Is
that about it?

No its about the dollar pure and simple. Why don't you go and research
how many wars of aggression America has waged? Name me one time America
has gone to war in defence of its allies please.

I've already done so.

And as someone who lives in Northern Ireland I'd like to thank all you
Americans for financing decades of terror in my country, in particular
I'd like to thank the NYPD and the NYFD who openly financed and
supported the IRA.

I'll bet that if you bothered to research it, you'd find only a tiny
percentage of Americans who act as professional Irishmen donating to
that cause. I personally don't know anyone who provided even a dime.

Boy didn't they just love it when it became their
turn to suffer at the hands of murderers?

C'mon. You've got a bunch of grown men who wear bowler hats and their
Sunday best, marching in celebration of battles fought eons ago. Get
over it. You were fighting each other. That isn't what took place here
in 2001.

Dave K8MN

Free speech
 

Walt Davidson wrote:
On Sun, 11 Dec 2005 11:28:31 GMT, pointyhead
wrote:

America came into the war when it was all but won and 3 years after it
started. Its troops played only a minor but crucial role.

Had it not been for the fact that the Americans were caught with their
pants down at Pearl Harbor, they would never have entered the war at
all.

This has always been an American characteristic. More recently, it
was only after they were caught with their pants down in New York that
they decided to vent their indignation by launching an attack on the
first convenient Middle Eastern country that came to mind.

Does the phrase "Peace In Our Time" ring any bells?

Dave K8MN

Free speech
 

Dave Heil wrote:

Hmmm. There is no doubt that had Britain taken this war seriously it
would have won it.


Sure, sure. Your historical revisionism is a needed face-saving measure.

Ah yes of course, you'll be telling us next that America wasn't defeated
in Vietnam...oh wait. Whats next? Afghanistan attacked America? Weapons
of mass destruction in Iraq? No torture in Guantanamo?

America defeats Britain in the War of 1812.

Ho Ho! I suppose you'll be telling us next the White House was torched
by aliens?

Coventry was fire-bombed. Did you lose WWII? London endured waves of
buzz bomb and V2 attacks. Did you lose WWII?

The White House was torched after America declared war on Britain which
was already involved in a war against another dictator. Did you win the
war? No. America was suicide bombed. Have you won the "War against
terror"? NO!

The United States defeated Britain for the second time in the War of
1812.

Of course I can see now where you're coming from. America in yet another
war of aggression attacks Great Britain when it thinks its attention is
elsewhere and its forces weakened. Even though playing from home Crown
Forces successfully repulse the invasion of Canada and go on to burn the
nations capital. Having learned from this lesson America decides it is
safer to have the UK as an ally rather and an enemy and in future limits
its aggression to wars that are already mostly won or the invasion of
little 3rd world countries.

I'm sure that you can come up with a scenario in which Britain
could have won the war if only it had taken it seriously.

Yes I can see how an American would equate the buring of his capital and
seat of power along with several repulsed invasions of Canada as a victory.
Only a typical yank could equate the ending of the war as a victory.

America pulls Britain's fat from the fire in WWI.


America came into the war when it was all but won and 3 years after it
started. Its troops played only a minor but crucial role. America saw
the potential for profit and a chance to increase its sphere of
influence for little effort, Britain on the other hand went to war in
defence of its allies.


All but won? Little had changed in the three years of WWI. It was
largely back and forth, back and forth in the same muddy fields.

When the war ended the best army in the field was unquestionably the
British and it was largely the British who made the sweeping gains of
the last days. The Americans did bugger all even when the war was in
danger of being lost early in 1918.

America pulls Britain's fat from the fire in WWII.


Once again America enters the war late and only for profit.


There's more historical revisionism. That Marshall Plan was a big money
making scheme, was it?

Lease lend certainly was.

Britain entered the war yet again in defence of its Allies. America
was the only country to end the war richer than when it started.


...and I see that it chafes you. How rich you'd have been under German
domination!

What German domination? Unaided by America the UK thwarted for all time
Hitlers plans to invade.

Post WWII finds the British Empire in eclipse.


Indeed. Two world wars cost Britain an Empire.


I thought I'd pointed that out.

No you didn't. I pointed out that it took two world wars of selfless
British action to end the Empire.

Six out for twenty-two overs, Toad-in-a-hole and Bob's your uncle.
Is that about it?


No its about the dollar pure and simple. Why don't you go and research
how many wars of aggression America has waged? Name me one time
America has gone to war in defence of its allies please.


I've already done so.

No you haven't because if you had there'd by no way you'd label the
American War of 1812 a victory.

And as someone who lives in Northern Ireland I'd like to thank all you
Americans for financing decades of terror in my country, in particular
I'd like to thank the NYPD and the NYFD who openly financed and
supported the IRA.


I'll bet that if you bothered to research it, you'd find only a tiny
percentage of Americans who act as professional Irishmen donating to
that cause.

What are you saying? America is a ******* nation? That because of the
size of the Irish American vote successive Presidents did nothing to
stop it?

I personally don't know anyone who provided even a dime.

What you personally know or don't know does not change the facts. I'd be
willing to bet you don't know anyone who fought in the aggressive war of
1812 yet here you're clearly distorting the facts!

Boy didn't they just love it when it became their turn to suffer at
the hands of murderers?


C'mon. You've got a bunch of grown men who wear bowler hats and their
Sunday best, marching in celebration of battles fought eons ago. Get
over it. You were fighting each other. That isn't what took place here
in 2001.

Isn't this thread about battles that were fought eons ago in which you
have tried to distort history?! What we had here was a bunch of
murdering *******s who would not accept the democratic will of the
majority open expressed in free and fair elections who were funded and
armed by loony Americans and loony dictators. You should also remember
that the freedoms you and I enjoy would not exist but for the victories
celebrated by these marches.

--
Proud Holder of Old Nick's Deputy First Class Badge

Free speech
 

Walt Davidson wrote:

This has always been an American characteristic. More recently, it
was only after they were caught with their pants down in New York that
they decided to vent their indignation by launching an attack on the
first convenient Middle Eastern country that came to mind.


Dubya must have had help. It's a certainty he couldn't have
named a middle eastern country unaided. Maybe Bonzo is still
working as a presidential advisor? BTW it is not true that
Dubya is Bonzo's half-brother, he just walks that way for
other reasons.

vy 73

Andy, M1EBV

Free speech
 

Dave Heil wrote:

Walt Davidson wrote:

On Sun, 11 Dec 2005 04:41:44 GMT, Dave Heil
wrote:

America pulls Britain's fat from the fire in WWI. America pulls
Britain's fat from the fire in WWII.


Pity nobody pulled your fat from the fire in Vietnam, OM.


Did you find anything untruthful in my statements above? There was
certainly no Britain assisting us in Vietnam. Nobody defeated the
United States militarily in Vietnam.

Huh? They filmed all that US embassy stuff in Nevada did they?
All the body bags were full of marijuana, no one was killed?
In ten years time when the last Americans leave the smoking
ruins of Iraq to the gentle care of the Mullahs, that won't
be a defeat either.

It never ceases to amaze me how dumb Americans really are.


If Great Britain could not wrest control of those islands from
Argentina, it should have held a going out of business sale.


If America "could not wrest control of" Vietnam from a bunch
of guys in black pyjamas "it should have held a going out of
business sale" ?

Look forward to the post Iraq closing down sale.

2144 Americans have died to make Haliburton richer.
It never ceases to amaze me how dumb Americans really are.

vy 73

Andy, M1EBV

Free speech
 

Dave Heil wrote:


C'mon. You've got a bunch of grown men who wear bowler hats and their
Sunday best, marching in celebration of battles fought eons ago. Get

Of course no one in America would think of celebrating an
old battle on July 4th.

over it. You were fighting each other. That isn't what took place here
in 2001.


Oklahoma, 1995. C'mon..

It never ceases to amaze me how dumb Americans are.

vy 73

Andy, M1EBV

Free speech
 

After replacing Andy Cowley with a small shell script on Monday 12 Dec 2005
11:13, the following appeared on stdout:

It never ceases to amaze me how dumb Americans really are.

Take a look at their president. You'll be gobsmacked for days. ;-)
--
Seasonal radio wishes #14
Adverts for cheap amplifiers to be labelled "This is a transverter, which
allows you to transmit everywhere at once leading to revocation of your
licence and will most likely attenuate your power output on the wanted
band."

Owned
 

On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 11:13:13 GMT, Andy Cowley wrote:

It never ceases to amaze me how dumb Americans really are.

And we own Tony Blair, just as we previously owned Margaret Thatcher.
When we say "jump," Tony asks "How high?"

It never ceases to amaze me how dumb Brits really are.

Owned
 

Lloyd wrote:

On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 11:13:13 GMT, Andy Cowley wrote:


It never ceases to amaze me how dumb Americans really are.


And we own Tony Blair, just as we previously owned Margaret Thatcher.
When we say "jump," Tony asks "How high?"

ITYWF they are owned by Haliburton, Standard Oil and Exxon etc.
You lot get the body bags.

Here are some simple questions for you:

How much profit per body bag are American oil companies making
from Iraq?

What is the level of profit at which it is no longer worthwhile
to occupy Iraq?

Will U.S. taxpayers and parents go on financing the carnage
long enough for the oil companies to get all the gravy?


vy 73

Andy, M1EBV

Free speech
 

Andy Cowley wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

Walt Davidson wrote:

On Sun, 11 Dec 2005 04:41:44 GMT, Dave Heil
wrote:

America pulls Britain's fat from the fire in WWI. America pulls
Britain's fat from the fire in WWII.


Pity nobody pulled your fat from the fire in Vietnam, OM.


Did you find anything untruthful in my statements above? There was
certainly no Britain assisting us in Vietnam. Nobody defeated the
United States militarily in Vietnam.

Huh? They filmed all that US embassy stuff in Nevada did they?

Not any more than the Dunkirk footage was filmed at Weymouth.

All the body bags were full of marijuana, no one was killed?

Have you ever heard of a war where no one was killed? Have you ever
participated in a war?

In ten years time when the last Americans leave the smoking
ruins of Iraq to the gentle care of the Mullahs, that won't
be a defeat either.

Your stuff reads as if you've smoked the marijuana in the body bags.

It never ceases to amaze me how dumb Americans really are.

Yep, the place is a shambles and our citizens are real idiots. It isn't
at all like your little Garden of Eden.

If Great Britain could not wrest control of those islands from
Argentina, it should have held a going out of business sale.


If America "could not wrest control of" Vietnam from a bunch
of guys in black pyjamas "it should have held a going out of
business sale" ?

You must not know much about the history of that war or you could not
come to the conclusion that America was defeated militarily.

Look forward to the post Iraq closing down sale.

Is that something you'd look forward to?

2144 Americans have died to make Haliburton richer.

Is that what you believe?

It never ceases to amaze me how dumb Americans really are.

I accept that as your view, but perhaps your world likely extends only a
few square miles.

vy 73

and vy 73 to you too, Andrew.

Andy, M1EBV

None of your comments address the lack of need for a history of the
United States, do they?

Dave K8MN

Free speech
 

Andy Cowley wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:


C'mon. You've got a bunch of grown men who wear bowler hats and their
Sunday best, marching in celebration of battles fought eons ago. Get

Of course no one in America would think of celebrating an
old battle on July 4th.

1) We don't come to your neighborhood to do our celebrating.

2) We aren't celebrating a battle or a war; we're celebrating our
independence.

Get over it. You were fighting each other. That isn't what took place
here in 2001.


Oklahoma, 1995. C'mon..

You equate the actions of several individuals to what has taken place in
Northern Ireland? I'm afraid I'll have to dismiss that as rather silly.

It never ceases to amaze me how dumb Americans are.

I can see how you'd think that way. Really, I can. Thankfully, you
aren't in the majority where you live.

vy 73

....and vy 73 to you too, Andy.

Andy, M1EBV

Free speech
 

pointyhead wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

Hmmm. There is no doubt that had Britain taken this war seriously it
would have won it.


Sure, sure. Your historical revisionism is a needed face-saving measure.

Ah yes of course, you'll be telling us next that America wasn't defeated
in Vietnam...oh wait.

You're quite right. America was not militarily defeated in Vietnam.

Whats next? Afghanistan attacked America? Weapons
of mass destruction in Iraq? No torture in Guantanamo?

No, I'll likely bring up the recent widespread use of central heating in
the U.K.


America defeats Britain in the War of 1812.

Ho Ho! I suppose you'll be telling us next the White House was
torched by aliens?

Coventry was fire-bombed. Did you lose WWII? London endured waves of
buzz bomb and V2 attacks. Did you lose WWII?

The White House was torched after America declared war on Britain which
was already involved in a war against another dictator. Did you win the
war? No.

Yes.

America was suicide bombed. Have you won the "War against
terror"? NO!

I don't recall hearing that it is over.

The United States defeated Britain for the second time in the War of
1812.

Of course I can see now where you're coming from. America in yet another
war of aggression attacks Great Britain when it thinks its attention is
elsewhere and its forces weakened.

In another war of aggression? Hmmmmphhhhhft! You're living up to the
name under which you post.

Britain was stopping and seizing American ships and kidnapping their crews.

Even though playing from home Crown
Forces successfully repulse the invasion of Canada and go on to burn the
nations capital. Having learned from this lesson America decides it is
safer to have the UK as an ally rather and an enemy and in future limits
its aggression to wars that are already mostly won or the invasion of
little 3rd world countries.

Perhaps you've heard of the Battle of New Orleans. Thousands of
redcoats were running for their lives, tossing down their weapons as
they ran.

I'm sure that you can come up with a scenario in which Britain
could have won the war if only it had taken it seriously.

Yes I can see how an American would equate the buring of his capital and
seat of power along with several repulsed invasions of Canada as a victory.
Only a typical yank could equate the ending of the war as a victory.

Our capital was burred?

Most wars are over when they end.

At the end of the war, were British forces on U.S. land? Did British
ships attempt to seize American ships and their crews?

America pulls Britain's fat from the fire in WWI.


America came into the war when it was all but won and 3 years after
it started. Its troops played only a minor but crucial role. America
saw the potential for profit and a chance to increase its sphere of
influence for little effort, Britain on the other hand went to war in
defence of its allies.


All but won? Little had changed in the three years of WWI. It was
largely back and forth, back and forth in the same muddy fields.

When the war ended the best army in the field was unquestionably the
British and it was largely the British who made the sweeping gains of
the last days. The Americans did bugger all even when the war was in
danger of being lost early in 1918.

Did it turn out well for you? Could you have won the war without
American participation?

America pulls Britain's fat from the fire in WWII.


Once again America enters the war late and only for profit.


There's more historical revisionism. That Marshall Plan was a big
money making scheme, was it?

Lease lend certainly was.

Were you under the impression that America should have simply given
Britain military equipment? I'm sure that you're eternally grateful for
the support. How old are you, Pointy?

Britain entered the war yet again in defence of its Allies. America
was the only country to end the war richer than when it started.


...and I see that it chafes you. How rich you'd have been under
German domination!

What German domination? Unaided by America the UK thwarted for all time
Hitlers plans to invade.

Then you needed no lend-lease from America and you needed no American
troops. You could have done just dandy all by yourselves. Hitler and
his successors would have just smiled and waved at you from the beaches
of France for all eternity.

Post WWII finds the British Empire in eclipse.


Indeed. Two world wars cost Britain an Empire.


I thought I'd pointed that out.

No you didn't. I pointed out that it took two world wars of selfless
British action to end the Empire.

Right. All selfless action. There was no empire and colonies to
protect. There was just altruistic Britain doing its part to protect
its little brown, black and yellow subjects (and their riches).

Six out for twenty-two overs, Toad-in-a-hole and Bob's your uncle.
Is that about it?


No its about the dollar pure and simple. Why don't you go and
research how many wars of aggression America has waged? Name me one
time America has gone to war in defence of its allies please.


I've already done so.

No you haven't because if you had there'd by no way you'd label the
American War of 1812 a victory.

It's quite simple. America stopped Britain from seizing its ships and
crews. America tossed British forces out of the United States. How
much clearer need it be?

And as someone who lives in Northern Ireland I'd like to thank all
you Americans for financing decades of terror in my country, in
particular I'd like to thank the NYPD and the NYFD who openly
financed and supported the IRA.


I'll bet that if you bothered to research it, you'd find only a tiny
percentage of Americans who act as professional Irishmen donating to
that cause.

What are you saying? America is a ******* nation?

That's Brit-think. We Americans trace our ancestry to many different
lands, yet we're all Americans. I had great-grandparents who were Irish
and German, Irish and English, English and English and French and
English. I've had neighbors who were descended from Poles, Russians,
Spaniards, Italians, Serbs, Ukrainians and Czechs. Who are you to refer
to those people as a ******* nation?

That because of the
size of the Irish American vote successive Presidents did nothing to
stop it?

Do you believe that America has a large Irish-American population which
votes as a bloc? It that were true and they had any power, we'd likely
have had nothing but Kennedys as presidents.

I personally don't know anyone who provided even a dime.

What you personally know or don't know does not change the facts.

We'll likely not know. You haven't provided any facts.

I'd be
willing to bet you don't know anyone who fought in the aggressive war of
1812 yet here you're clearly distorting the facts!

At the war's end, were British ships stopping and seizing American ships
and crews? Were there any British forces on the U.S. mainland?

Boy didn't they just love it when it became their turn to suffer at
the hands of murderers?


C'mon. You've got a bunch of grown men who wear bowler hats and their
Sunday best, marching in celebration of battles fought eons ago. Get
over it. You were fighting each other. That isn't what took place
here in 2001.

Isn't this thread about battles that were fought eons ago in which you
have tried to distort history?!

Not to my knowledge. Did you have any comments about Paul's remarks
concerning the lack of necessity for writing of American history?

What we had here was a bunch of
murdering *******s who would not accept the democratic will of the
majority open expressed in free and fair elections who were funded and
armed by loony Americans and loony dictators.

You had a bunch of loonies on both sides, fighting each other over whose
brand of Christianity was right and proper and over who could belong to
the exclusive club where all political power resides. You have
Africans, long-accustomed to being lectured about the evils of
tribalism, laughing at you.

You should also remember
that the freedoms you and I enjoy would not exist but for the victories
celebrated by these marches.

We're not equals, Pointy. I have many more freedoms than you and am not
under the yoke of a socialist state, at least not yet. We don't
celebrate battles. We celebrate our independence and freedom. One
battle which we commemorate, Pearl Harbor Day (not a holiday), was a
defeat for the United States. Nobody here dresses up, wears banners,
carries placards and marches into the neighborhood of the defeated and
rubs their noses in it. We don't have a perfect system but it is the
most free, egalitarian, bountiful country on the planet.

Dave K8MN

Free speech
 

"Dave Heil" wrote something.

I'll be happy when some terrorist blows up the whitehouse!

Free speech
 

Dave Heil wrote:

Andy Cowley wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:

If Great Britain could not wrest control of those islands from
Argentina, it should have held a going out of business sale.


If America "could not wrest control of" Vietnam from a bunch
of guys in black pyjamas "it should have held a going out of
business sale" ?


You must not know much about the history of that war or you could not
come to the conclusion that America was defeated militarily.


Could you point out where I or you restricted this to 'militarily'?
I don't think the NVA won because they had prettier cheerleaders,
did they?

America left Vietnam under fire. They have not yet returned. What
kind of defeat was it?

Andy

Free speech
 

Dave Heil wrote:

Andy Cowley wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:


C'mon. You've got a bunch of grown men who wear bowler hats and their
Sunday best, marching in celebration of battles fought eons ago. Get


Of course no one in America would think of celebrating an
old battle on July 4th.


1) We don't come to your neighborhood to do our celebrating.

ER, um. Yes, you do. You also come to our neighbourhood with cargoes
of people for onward shipment to torture camps in eastern Europe.

2) We aren't celebrating a battle or a war; we're celebrating our
independence.


Have you heard of the War of Independence, aka the Revolutionary War?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Revolutionary_War

cf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Williamite_war_in_Ireland



I can see how you'd think that way. Really, I can. Thankfully, you
aren't in the majority where you live.


You really should visit Europe and research the facts. Your dumb
confidence in our support is misplaced.

Andy

Free speech
 

Dave Heil wrote:

[snip for brevity]
I've made numerous snips throughout this...

Ah yes of course, you'll be telling us next that America wasn't
defeated in Vietnam...oh wait.


You're quite right. America was not militarily defeated in Vietnam.

Let me use your American logic - at the end of the war which America ran
away from after being soundly trounced by little dudes in pointy hats
and sandals, were there any American troops in Vietnam. I didn't think
so either.

Whats next? Afghanistan attacked America? Weapons of mass destruction
in Iraq? No torture in Guantanamo?


No, I'll likely bring up the recent widespread use of central heating in
the U.K.

Well it would make a welcome change from the wholesale bull spread by
you and your fellow country men.

Coventry was fire-bombed. Did you lose WWII? London endured waves
of buzz bomb and V2 attacks. Did you lose WWII?


The White House was torched after America declared war on Britain
which was already involved in a war against another dictator. Did you
win the war? No.


Yes.

No you did not. Great Britain was not militarily defeated and still had
a presence in North and for that matter South America.

America was suicide bombed. Have you won the "War against terror"? NO!


I don't recall hearing that it is over.

Oh I wouldn't call the wholesale massacre of virtually unarmed peasantry
and civilians a war at all. You think you'd have learned by now not to
get into a guerilla war but no..

Of course I can see now where you're coming from. America in yet
another war of aggression attacks Great Britain when it thinks its
attention is elsewhere and its forces weakened.


In another war of aggression? Hmmmmphhhhhft! You're living up to the
name under which you post.

Please, go and read real American history, you know, the sort without
stars and stripes around the pages and discover how many wars of
aggression America has waged.

Britain was stopping and seizing American ships and kidnapping their crews.

I'm sorry, America was supplying an enemy combatant for profit. (Does
anything ever change?) But I suppose you think we should have let that
continue?

Perhaps you've heard of the Battle of New Orleans. Thousands of
redcoats were running for their lives, tossing down their weapons as
they ran.

Yes I have. Perhaps you've heard of the Battle of Washington? No? Me
neither. Why is that? Wasn't so much a battle as a humiliation was it? I
suppose the troops there who were not militarily defeated were involved
in a giant pincer movement to the south in and around the New Orleans
area which the fast moving President Munro was in a hurry to personally
supervise?

Yes I can see how an American would equate the buring of his capital
and seat of power along with several repulsed invasions of Canada as a
victory.
Only a typical yank could equate the ending of the war as a victory.


Our capital was burred?

Oh dear! You've typo flamed me! You've just lost any credibility you
might have had.

Most wars are over when they end.

At the end of the war, were British forces on U.S. land? Did British
ships attempt to seize American ships and their crews?

At the end of the war in which Great Britain was not militarily defeated
and which was ended by treaty Great Britain retained a presence in North
and South America unlike you lot in Vietnam.

When the war ended the best army in the field was unquestionably the
British and it was largely the British who made the sweeping gains of
the last days. The Americans did bugger all even when the war was in
danger of being lost early in 1918.


Did it turn out well for you? Could you have won the war without
American participation?

Yes. But it would have taken longer, The biggest contribution American
forces made was psycological... ie the Germans knew they now had no
chance in a war of attrition.

Lease lend certainly was.


Were you under the impression that America should have simply given
Britain military equipment? I'm sure that you're eternally grateful for
the support. How old are you, Pointy?

Old enough to know that rationing here did not end until the 50's when
we'd cleared our debt caused by saving Americas and the worlds ass when
we fought alone.

What German domination? Unaided by America the UK thwarted for all
time Hitlers plans to invade.


Then you needed no lend-lease from America and you needed no American
troops. You could have done just dandy all by yourselves. Hitler and
his successors would have just smiled and waved at you from the beaches
of France for all eternity.

Hello? I don't remember America selling us any Spitfires during the
Battle of Britain, do you? Now, given that by the time you lot decided
it was time to come on board and really make some money we'd already won
the Battle of Britain, turned the tide in Africa and Russia was turning
back the Nazi hordes, Britain with the Commonwealth and Russia would
have won the war without America. It might have taken longer but it
would have been won. And lets get something else straight, Russia did
way more than America to secure allied victory in the second world war.

I thought I'd pointed that out.


No you didn't. I pointed out that it took two world wars of selfless
British action to end the Empire.


Right. All selfless action. There was no empire and colonies to
protect. There was just altruistic Britain doing its part to protect
its little brown, black and yellow subjects (and their riches).

Well last time I checked neither Belgium or Poland were part of the
Empire neither was its citizenry brown, yellow or black. But you knew
that didn't you?

No you haven't because if you had there'd by no way you'd label the
American War of 1812 a victory.


It's quite simple. America stopped Britain from seizing its ships and
crews. America tossed British forces out of the United States. How
much clearer need it be?

No it's not simple. Britain imposed an embargo on France, France did
likewise on Britain, America could just as readily have declared war on
France but didn't. Why? Because America saw the chance for territorial gain.

I'll bet that if you bothered to research it, you'd find only a tiny
percentage of Americans who act as professional Irishmen donating to
that cause.


What are you saying? America is a ******* nation?


That's Brit-think.

Not it's not. I'm not a Brit, in fact I first heard the term used by a Scot.

We Americans trace our ancestry to many different
lands,

So does my dog.

I had great-grandparents who were Irish
and German, Irish and English, English and English and French and
English. I've had neighbors who were descended from Poles, Russians,
Spaniards, Italians, Serbs, Ukrainians and Czechs. Who are you to refer
to those people as a ******* nation?

You're right. Mongrel is a better term.

That because of the size of the Irish American vote successive
Presidents did nothing to stop it?


Do you believe that America has a large Irish-American population which
votes as a bloc? It that were true and they had any power, we'd likely
have had nothing but Kennedys as presidents.

Oh come now! You know as well as I do that what pass for politicans over
there are always afraid of upsetting big blocs of voters be they Irish,
Jewish, Italian or whatever.

I personally don't know anyone who provided even a dime.


What you personally know or don't know does not change the facts.


We'll likely not know. You haven't provided any facts.

I don't need to provide them, they are well documented. Only a fool or
an American would deny it. Which are you? At a guess I'd say both.

I'd be willing to bet you don't know anyone who fought in the
aggressive war of 1812 yet here you're clearly distorting the facts!


At the war's end, were British ships stopping and seizing American ships
and crews? Were there any British forces on the U.S. mainland?

Was GB militarily defeated? No. Was the war ended by treaty? Yes. Did
Britain retain a presence in North America? Yes.

Isn't this thread about battles that were fought eons ago in which you
have tried to distort history?!


Not to my knowledge.

What, like all these battles were recent?

Did you have any comments about Paul's remarks
concerning the lack of necessity for writing of American history?

I'm sorry, I haven't seen that to which you refer.

What we had here was a bunch of murdering *******s who would not
accept the democratic will of the majority open expressed in free and
fair elections who were funded and armed by loony Americans and loony
dictators.


You had a bunch of loonies on both sides, fighting each other over whose
brand of Christianity was right and proper and over who could belong to
the exclusive club where all political power resides.

Not true. But I'd except such a simplistic view from an American.

Africans, long-accustomed to being lectured about the evils of
tribalism, laughing at you.

Can you imagine how outraged we were when we saw black Americans being
left to drown in New Orleans simply because they were black? Can you
imagine how hard we laughed we you lot elected a simpleton - though it
has to be said, not for the first time - as President?

You should also remember that the freedoms you and I enjoy would not
exist but for the victories celebrated by these marches.


We're not equals, Pointy.

No we're not. Not by any stretch of the imagination. I live in a caring
compassionate, real democracy - not one that money buys. I have freedoms
you can only dream about especially in the wake of things like "The
Patriot Act", "Homeland Security Bill" (I think I've got my titles right
but you'll understand if I haven't - it's hard to keep up with all the
suppression)

We don't have a perfect system but it is the
most free, egalitarian, bountiful country on the planet.

We have a saying over here Dave, "Your arse is out the window" and yours
most certainly is. Take the blinkers off and have a look at the real world.

--
Proud Holder of Old Nick's Deputy First Class Badge

Free speech
 

If, and when, a truthful account of American history is written, I'm
sure Andy will read it. In the meantime, I suppose you will keep on
thinking the Hollywood version is correct.
===========================================

The last truthful Hollywood historian was Charlie Chaplin.

World History will be written by the nation which posesses the
greatest collection of Weapons of Mass Destruction and persists in
using them.
----

Free speech
 

In message , Andy Cowley
writes
Dave Heil wrote:

Andy Cowley wrote:

Dave Heil wrote:

If Great Britain could not wrest control of those islands from
Argentina, it should have held a going out of business sale.


If America "could not wrest control of" Vietnam from a bunch
of guys in black pyjamas "it should have held a going out of
business sale" ?
You must not know much about the history of that war or you could
not come to the conclusion that America was defeated militarily.

The army which retires first from the battlefield is generally
considered to have lost.

Mike
--
M.J.Powell

Free speech
 

The army which retires first from the battlefield is generally
considered to have lost.
===================================

True! But in those days the Americans were frightened of World
opinion. They could have dropped a hydrogen bomb on Hanoi - but
they didn't.

These days it depends only on what is in American interests. Sod the
rest of the world.
===========================================