BUSH Debt
 

Schoonertrash wrote:

So what? Does it matter? Of course not. It hasn't mattered for well over
sixty years. Didn't matter under Clinton, Bush Sr. Reagain, Carter, Ford,
Johnson, Nixon (did I leave out anyone?), Eisenhower . . . correction . ..
Nixon did something to correct it partially and Kennedy tried to do so.

You should try some facts. Carter almost balanced the budget, and so did
Clinton. The main fiscal skulduggery used each time was to project foreign
balance of payments and use the Social Security surplus to reduce the size of
the liability balance.




Measured against GNP as a percentage it's nothing. That's the arguement
Doug used on me last time.

No, Doug most definitely did not say anything of the kind. Doug said something
more along the lines that national debt should be measured against GNP (or it's
counterpart GDP) to be meaningful, and for the US it's still quite small.


Once you invoke that you are home free.

Hardly.

What you seem to be saying is "Republican national debt is fine & wonderful, but
those Democrats just screw everything up and then lie about it."


....The
rest is just silliness like worrying about five or ten nukes in N. Korea.
Hell . . .I'm used to worrying about ten thousand plus of the things pointed
at me.

Ten nukes is definitely an improvement over ten thousand, but that hardly means
that we should relax and stop trying to do anything about those ten nukes. Ten
nukes is BIG problem amigo.


Neither do I worry about the National Debt or the annual budger
imbalances . .. .

You won't be happy when it erases your pension.

DSK

BUSH Debt
 

Clinton never came close to balancing the budget and raised the national
debt by a third or more. Raising the debt and not balancing the budget is
something he had in common with every other administration. Has nothing to
do with Democrat or Republican. The knee jerk blaming of the 'other side' of
the coin argument is meaningless. It's still the same coin. He also
refunded the national debt with short term, high interest bonds instead of
long term low interest bonds and and fudged the unemployment figures. .
...let's see. . .funded the Mexican bail out with the social security fund
and the railroad retirement fund Most of that money never left the US
though but went to pay off the loaning institutions such as the home
corporation of the then Treasury Secretary. Bet his stocks didn't suffer.
But on balance . . .. So what? Does it matter? Not really.

Carter . . . carter .. . carter . . oh yes wasn't he the one who presided
over double digit inflation, was more despised by the military than was
Clinton and holds the record for screwing up more foreign policy than any
other President in memory ('cept maybe Ford) ... thought so. Sorry, ten
nukes means little to me. How they got the ten nukes is of some
importance though. The fact that they (North Korea) even exists as a
government and how that happened has meaning to me. Bullets, bombs,
landmines, and seamines mean a great deal to me but I've managed to dodge
them all through the years ('cept for two). I guess you have to have been
there. Come to think of it the items in question were reportedly made by
out of scrap metal shipped to a supporter of the opposition under dear ole'
Tricky Dick. A pox on both your houses.

You are right about my pension and social security though. The one pitfall
of government employment, military, civilian, social security or otherwise
is this . . . . are you really going to get paid? Well so far so good ..
.. . Dec 1st is another question. Think that guy Rubin would loan some of
the money back?

Actually I have and abiding faith in the government Donkeys and Elephants
alike to keep the game going. They really don't have any other choice do
they?

And that's where I'll leave it . . .They really don't have any other choice.

BUSH Debt
 

"Schoonertrash" wrote in message
...
Carter . . . carter .. . carter . . oh yes wasn't he the one who presided
over double digit inflation, was more despised by the military than was
Clinton and holds the record for screwing up more foreign policy than any
other President in memory ('cept maybe Ford)

Are you stark raving mad?? No president has screwed up foreign policy as
much as Bush.

Before the invasion of Iraq, many countries supported the US in its foreign
policy. Now -- I doubt if any political leader in the free world would
support the US in a similiar venture.

Bush, and through the nationalistic support he received, has destroyed
America's credibility in the international community.

There was a report on TV tonight that said that 51% of Americans still
believe that the war in Iraq has something to do with 9/11. For Gawd's
sake!!! Bush has *admitted* that Saddam had nothing to do with bin Laden.
What on earth is wrong with all you whackos? Iraq had nothing to do with
international terrorism. The war has created a breeding ground for
terrorists that will be responsible for thousands of murders in the years to
come.

Bush isn't just a liar - he is a dangerous idiot. His actions have made
enormous profits for his family and friends. However, the rest of us will
pay dearly. So, while the executives of Haliburton, Carlyle and Bechtel
rejoice in their good fortune, the families of American soldiers (and Iraqi
civilians) must suffer enormous grief.

How many American families will get an "official" phone call tomorrow? ...
Or perhaps an official might visit them and personally deliver the bad news.
I bet that Fox won't show pictures of a young woman, with a baby in her
arms, opening the door to a well dressed army officer - who is bearing bad
news.

You may well rejoice that the deaths of Iraqi civilians somehow compensate
for the terrible events of 9/11. You may resign yourself to the fact that
some American soldiers will die in their attempts to punish the culpurts.
However, the world knows, and Bush has admitted, that Iraq had nothing to do
with 9/11.


Why are American soldiers dying? .... Why?



Regards


Donal
--

BUSH Debt
 

On Mon, 3 Nov 2003 23:44:45 -0000, "Donal"
wrote this crap:


"Schoonertrash" wrote in message
...
Carter . . . carter .. . carter . . oh yes wasn't he the one who presided
over double digit inflation, was more despised by the military than was
Clinton and holds the record for screwing up more foreign policy than any
other President in memory ('cept maybe Ford)

Are you stark raving mad?? No president has screwed up foreign policy as
much as Bush.

Except Carter.

Actually president George W. Bush is doing a great job. Many of the
furriners actually like him.


Hero@Horvath

I don't spend my money on food. I spend most of my money
on women, porn, booze, and recreation. The rest of it I just waste.

BUSH Debt
 

Horass needs to be excused. According to his boyfriends,
he likes to have a broom handle shoved up his butt and he
keeps forgetting to remove it.

"Horvath" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 3 Nov 2003 23:44:45 -0000, "Donal"
wrote this crap:


"Schoonertrash" wrote in message
...
Carter . . . carter .. . carter . . oh yes wasn't he the one who
presided
over double digit inflation, was more despised by the military than was
Clinton and holds the record for screwing up more foreign policy than
any
other President in memory ('cept maybe Ford)

Are you stark raving mad?? No president has screwed up foreign policy
as
much as Bush.

Except Carter.

Actually president George W. Bush is doing a great job. Many of the
furriners actually like him.


Hero@Horvath

I don't spend my money on food. I spend most of my money
on women, porn, booze, and recreation. The rest of it I just waste.

BUSH Debt
 

Donal wrote:

Are you stark raving mad?? No president has screwed up foreign policy as
much as Bush.

No, wait. Nixon came pretty close. Only U.S. President to lose a major war. He
also inspired more fear & loathing abroad than GWB, but it's a close call. Also,
Nixon actively took steps to send the economy down the tubes whereas GWB has
merely failed to stir up any kind of economic recovery (other than funneling
billions into his buddies pockets).

But then, to many people, facts are irrelevant.

DSK

BUSH Debt
 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 04 Nov 2003 11:06:58 -0500, DSK wrote:

Donal wrote:

Are you stark raving mad?? No president has screwed up foreign
policy as much as Bush.

No, wait. Nixon came pretty close. Only U.S. President to lose a major
war. He also inspired more fear & loathing abroad than GWB, but it's a
close call. Also, Nixon actively took steps to send the economy down
the tubes whereas GWB has merely failed to stir up any kind of
economic recovery (other than funneling billions into his buddies
pockets).

But then, to many people, facts are irrelevant.

DSK

From:
http://msnbc.com/news/966470.asp

NBC NEWS: MEET THE PRESS
Sunday, September 14, 2003
GUEST: Dick Cheney, vice president
Tim Russert, moderator

excerpt:
- -------------

MR. RUSSERT: Democrats have written you letters and are suggesting
profiteering by your former company Halliburton and this is how it was
reported: "Halliburton, the company formerly headed by Vice President
Cheney, has won contrast worth more than $1.7 billion under Operation
Iraqi Freedom and stands to make hundreds of millions more dollars
under a no-bid contract awarded by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
according to newly available documents. The size and scope of the
government contracts awarded to Halliburton in connection with the war
in Iraq are significantly greater than was previously disclosed and
demonstrate the U.S. military's increasing reliance on for-profit
corporations to run its logistical operations." Were you involved in
any way in the awarding of those contracts?

VICE PRES. CHENEY: Of course not, Tim. Tim, when I was secretary of
Defense, I was not involved in awarding contracts. That's done at a far
lower level. Secondly, when I ran Halliburton for five years and they
were doing work for the Defense Department, which frankly they've been
doing for 60 or 70 years, I never went near the Defense Department. I
never lobbied the Defense Department on behalf of Halliburton. The only
time I went back to the department during those eight years was to have
my portrait hung which is a traditional service rendered for former
secretaries of Defense. And since I left Halliburton to become George
Bush's vice president, I've severed all my ties with the company,
gotten rid of all my financial interests. I have no financial interest
in Halliburton of any kind and haven't had now for over three years.
And as vice president, I have absolutely no influence of, involvement
of, knowledge of in any way, shape or form of contracts led by the
Corps of Engineers or anybody else in the federal government, so...

MR. RUSSERT: Why is there no bidding?

VICE PRES. CHENEY: I have no idea. Go ask the Corps of Engineers. One
of the things to keep in mind is that Halliburton is a unique kind of
company. There are very few companies out there that have the
combination of the very large engineering construction capability and
significant oil field services, the first- or second-largest oil field
service company in the world, and they've traditionally done a lot of
work for the U.S. government and the U.S. military. That expertise has
stood the military in good stead over the years, but it's a great
company. There are fine people working for it.
I also have a lot of confidence in the people in the Department
of Defense. Nobody has produced one single shred of evidence that
there's anything wrong or inappropriate here, nothing but innuendo,
and-basically they're political cheap shots is the way I would describe
it. I don't know any of the details of the contract because I
deliberately stayed away from any information on that, but Halliburton
is a fine company. And as I say-and I have no reason to believe that
anybody's done anything wrong or inappropriate here.

- --------------------

I think I'd take Cheney's word on it over the Bush-haters. He doesn't
have any financial connection to Halliburton anymore, and he's already
made plenty of money as the CEO. He took a big pay cut to go back into
government. The "profiteering" nonsense is just politics, and most
people understand that. Halliburton is the only (American) company with
the experience to do the jobs in Iraq, while being shot at. It costs a
little more when they're shooting at you, for some reason. The job
applications from engineers are a little harder to come by.


two wheels


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQA/AwUBP6fq9dCBA23eyf45EQKiZgCg2nJL4mxeJ/p7vtu4u6SVfxaXrVkAoIv9
agkJ6WOEuFVYWPm3Dp2zSOBY
=EhVg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

BUSH Debt
 

He has no idea?????? He's the bleeping VP of the United States
and he HAS NO IDEA?

"two wheels" wrote in message
...
MR. RUSSERT: Why is there no bidding?

VICE PRES. CHENEY: I have no idea. Go ask the Corps of Engineers. One
of the things to keep in mind is that Halliburton is a unique kind of
company. There are very few companies out there that have the
combination of the very large engineering construction capability and
significant oil field services, the first- or second-largest oil field
service company in the world, and they've traditionally done a lot of
work for the U.S. government and the U.S. military. That expertise has
stood the military in good stead over the years, but it's a great
company. There are fine people working for it.
I also have a lot of confidence in the people in the Department
of Defense. Nobody has produced one single shred of evidence that
there's anything wrong or inappropriate here, nothing but innuendo,
and-basically they're political cheap shots is the way I would describe
it. I don't know any of the details of the contract because I
deliberately stayed away from any information on that, but Halliburton
is a fine company. And as I say-and I have no reason to believe that
anybody's done anything wrong or inappropriate here.

- --------------------

I think I'd take Cheney's word on it over the Bush-haters. He doesn't
have any financial connection to Halliburton anymore, and he's already
made plenty of money as the CEO. He took a big pay cut to go back into
government. The "profiteering" nonsense is just politics, and most
people understand that. Halliburton is the only (American) company with
the experience to do the jobs in Iraq, while being shot at. It costs a
little more when they're shooting at you, for some reason. The job
applications from engineers are a little harder to come by.


two wheels

BUSH Debt
 

Hey, I liked Nixon... well, at least you knew he was a crook.
When he died, we all observed 18-1/2 minutes of silence.

Besides, he went to China.

"DSK" wrote in message
...
Donal wrote:

Are you stark raving mad?? No president has screwed up foreign policy
as
much as Bush.

No, wait. Nixon came pretty close. Only U.S. President to lose a major
war. He
also inspired more fear & loathing abroad than GWB, but it's a close call.
Also,
Nixon actively took steps to send the economy down the tubes whereas GWB
has
merely failed to stir up any kind of economic recovery (other than
funneling
billions into his buddies pockets).

But then, to many people, facts are irrelevant.

DSK

BUSH Debt
 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 10:30:06 -0800, "Jonathan Ganz"
wrote:

He has no idea?????? He's the bleeping VP of the United States
and he HAS NO IDEA?

It's not important stuff. It's maintenance and remodeling. What's the
big deal? Why would a VP have to get involved in that? Bigger
job--bigger numbers on the check--that's all.

two wheels



"two wheels" wrote in message
.. .
MR. RUSSERT: Why is there no bidding?

VICE PRES. CHENEY: I have no idea. Go ask the Corps of Engineers.
One of the things to keep in mind is that Halliburton is a unique
kind of company. There are very few companies out there that have
the
combination of the very large engineering construction capability
and significant oil field services, the first- or second-largest oil
field service company in the world, and they've traditionally done a
lot of work for the U.S. government and the U.S. military. That
expertise has stood the military in good stead over the years, but
it's a great
company. There are fine people working for it.
I also have a lot of confidence in the people in the
Department of Defense. Nobody has produced one single shred of
evidence that
there's anything wrong or inappropriate here, nothing but innuendo,
and-basically they're political cheap shots is the way I would
describe it. I don't know any of the details of the contract because
I
deliberately stayed away from any information on that, but
Halliburton is a fine company. And as I say-and I have no reason to
believe that anybody's done anything wrong or inappropriate here.

- --------------------

I think I'd take Cheney's word on it over the Bush-haters. He
doesn't have any financial connection to Halliburton anymore, and
he's already made plenty of money as the CEO. He took a big pay cut
to go back into government. The "profiteering" nonsense is just
politics, and most people understand that. Halliburton is the only
(American) company with the experience to do the jobs in Iraq, while
being shot at. It costs a little more when they're shooting at you,
for some reason. The job applications from engineers are a little
harder to come by.


two wheels


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQA/AwUBP6gJNdCBA23eyf45EQKNcQCffyFy0ddhAZFWxZJSD83RJU noZI8AnjG2
7WGc++2CpU+kCR0ynoyBJU1v
=97gn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

BUSH Debt
 

DSK wrote:

Donal wrote:

... No president has screwed up foreign policy as much as Bush.

No, wait. Nixon came pretty close....

JFK has them both beat hands down. He blew the Bay of Pigs, blew the
resulting missile crisis, screwed up Ike's plan in Nam then started the
Nam war to avoid loosing another country to communism, then ... need I
go on? And who can forget his famous al lib "I am a jelly pastry!!"?

But then, to many people, facts are irrelevant.

Yes, and that's why JFK remains popular.

BUSH Debt
 

Vito wrote:


JFK has them both beat hands down. He blew the Bay of Pigs,

Agreed, sort of, but then it was a pooch-screwing op from the start.
Committing US forces would have turned it into an even bigger mistake. Gee,
maybe that's what happens when Presidents listen to ill-informed
advisors.....

blew the
resulting missile crisis,

Pardon me? How did JFK 'blow' the Cuban missile crises?

Was there a nuclear war from escalating the exchange? Not that I recall...

Did the Russians pull their missiles out of Cuba? Yes, as much as can be
verified then & now.

screwed up Ike's plan in Nam then started the
Nam war to avoid loosing another country to communism,

Huh. Did Ike have a 'plan' in Viet Nam, other than to not let the Dulles
brothers nuke the place? You're right that Kennedy began committing forces
there, not a good idea in retrospect.

then ... need I
go on?

No, you need to go back.


And who can forget his famous al lib "I am a jelly pastry!!"?

Yep. But was that enough to justify shooting him?



But then, to many people, facts are irrelevant.

Yes, and that's why JFK remains popular.

I suggest the opposite.

The other day, somebody shoved a farcical hatchet piece on JFK at me. It
basically said that the whole PT-109 incident was fictional and was a
deliberate attempt by the Navy to boost JFK's future political career.

Some people will believe anything, as long as it caters to their ignorance
& prejudices.

DSK

BUSH Debt
 

"two wheels" wrote in message
The "profiteering" nonsense is just politics, and most
people understand that. Halliburton is the only (American) company with
the experience to do the jobs in Iraq, while being shot at. It costs a
little more when they're shooting at you, for some reason. The job
applications from engineers are a little harder to come by.

Wow, .... you really are stupid, aren't you?

In fact, I admire the degree of stupidity that you are willing to display in
a public forum.


Regards


Donal
--

BUSH Debt
 

Not important??? Not important because of the potential billions
of $$ at stake. Not important because of the appearance of a
conflict of interest. Not important, except if it's a blow job in
the White House. That's damn important. I mean who really
gives a **** about a couple of billion dollars. Clearly, a lot of
right wing freaks give a heck of a lot about a blow job... probably
because they can't get any at home.

"two wheels" wrote in message
...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 10:30:06 -0800, "Jonathan Ganz"
wrote:

He has no idea?????? He's the bleeping VP of the United States
and he HAS NO IDEA?

It's not important stuff. It's maintenance and remodeling. What's the
big deal? Why would a VP have to get involved in that? Bigger
job--bigger numbers on the check--that's all.

two wheels



"two wheels" wrote in message
.. .
MR. RUSSERT: Why is there no bidding?

VICE PRES. CHENEY: I have no idea. Go ask the Corps of Engineers.
One of the things to keep in mind is that Halliburton is a unique
kind of company. There are very few companies out there that have
the
combination of the very large engineering construction capability
and significant oil field services, the first- or second-largest oil
field service company in the world, and they've traditionally done a
lot of work for the U.S. government and the U.S. military. That
expertise has stood the military in good stead over the years, but
it's a great
company. There are fine people working for it.
I also have a lot of confidence in the people in the
Department of Defense. Nobody has produced one single shred of
evidence that
there's anything wrong or inappropriate here, nothing but innuendo,
and-basically they're political cheap shots is the way I would
describe it. I don't know any of the details of the contract because
I
deliberately stayed away from any information on that, but
Halliburton is a fine company. And as I say-and I have no reason to
believe that anybody's done anything wrong or inappropriate here.

- --------------------

I think I'd take Cheney's word on it over the Bush-haters. He
doesn't have any financial connection to Halliburton anymore, and
he's already made plenty of money as the CEO. He took a big pay cut
to go back into government. The "profiteering" nonsense is just
politics, and most people understand that. Halliburton is the only
(American) company with the experience to do the jobs in Iraq, while
being shot at. It costs a little more when they're shooting at you,
for some reason. The job applications from engineers are a little
harder to come by.


two wheels


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQA/AwUBP6gJNdCBA23eyf45EQKNcQCffyFy0ddhAZFWxZJSD83RJU noZI8AnjG2
7WGc++2CpU+kCR0ynoyBJU1v
=97gn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

BUSH Debt
 

I'll give him the missile crisis. He didn't blink even if he
screwed it up to begin with.

"Vito" wrote in message
...
DSK wrote:

Donal wrote:

... No president has screwed up foreign policy as much as Bush.

No, wait. Nixon came pretty close....

JFK has them both beat hands down. He blew the Bay of Pigs, blew the
resulting missile crisis, screwed up Ike's plan in Nam then started the
Nam war to avoid loosing another country to communism, then ... need I
go on? And who can forget his famous al lib "I am a jelly pastry!!"?

But then, to many people, facts are irrelevant.

Yes, and that's why JFK remains popular.

BUSH Debt
 

Well said.

Cheers MC

Jonathan Ganz wrote:

Not important??? Not important because of the potential billions
of $$ at stake. Not important because of the appearance of a
conflict of interest. Not important, except if it's a blow job in
the White House. That's damn important. I mean who really
gives a **** about a couple of billion dollars. Clearly, a lot of
right wing freaks give a heck of a lot about a blow job... probably
because they can't get any at home.

BUSH Debt
 

On Tue, 04 Nov 2003 11:06:58 -0500, DSK wrote
this crap:

Donal wrote:

Are you stark raving mad?? No president has screwed up foreign policy as
much as Bush.

No, wait. Nixon came pretty close. Only U.S. President to lose a major war.

Which war did we lose?

He
also inspired more fear & loathing abroad than GWB, but it's a close call. Also,
Nixon actively took steps to send the economy down the tubes whereas GWB has
merely failed to stir up any kind of economic recovery (other than funneling
billions into his buddies pockets).

You haven't seen the stock market recently.


Hero@Horvath

I don't spend my money on food. I spend most of my money
on women, porn, booze, and recreation. The rest of it I just waste.

BUSH Debt
 

Thanks.

"The_navigator©" wrote in message
...
Well said.

Cheers MC

Jonathan Ganz wrote:

Not important??? Not important because of the potential billions
of $$ at stake. Not important because of the appearance of a
conflict of interest. Not important, except if it's a blow job in
the White House. That's damn important. I mean who really
gives a **** about a couple of billion dollars. Clearly, a lot of
right wing freaks give a heck of a lot about a blow job... probably
because they can't get any at home.

BUSH Debt
 

Horass, I know you're pretty stupid, but even the mentally
retarded have come to understand that we lost the Vietnam
war.

"Horvath" wrote in message
...
No, wait. Nixon came pretty close. Only U.S. President to lose a major
war.

Which war did we lose?

He
also inspired more fear & loathing abroad than GWB, but it's a close
call. Also,
Nixon actively took steps to send the economy down the tubes whereas GWB
has
merely failed to stir up any kind of economic recovery (other than
funneling
billions into his buddies pockets).

The stock market does not the economy make.

You haven't seen the stock market recently.


Hero@Horvath

I don't spend my money on food. I spend most of my money
on women, porn, booze, and recreation. The rest of it I just waste.

BUSH Debt
 

On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 22:24:16 -0800, "Jonathan Ganz"
wrote this crap:

Horass, I know you're pretty stupid, but even the mentally
retarded have come to understand that we lost the Vietnam
war.

Really? I don't recall their invasion? Did it happen in California?
I didn't see it on the news. If they beat us, why is there no sign of
it?


Hero@Horvath

I don't spend my money on food. I spend most of my money
on women, porn, booze, and recreation. The rest of it I just waste.

BUSH Debt
 

DSK wrote:

Vito wrote:

blew the resulting missile crisis,

Pardon me? How did JFK 'blow' the Cuban missile crises?

He let Kruchev bluff him into pulling back our own bases in Turkey and
elsewhere.
According to Kruchev (years later of course) that's exactly what he
wanted and the whole thing was a bluff to get it. He'd never have gone
to war over Castro because the US had a sizable first strike capability
at the time.

screwed up Ike's plan in Nam then started the
Nam war to avoid loosing another country to communism,

Huh. Did Ike have a 'plan' in Viet Nam, ...

Actually, a very good one. Ho worked for us during WW2 and became Prime
Minister of all Vietnam after that war. When the French tried to return
he had Japanese troops, placed under his temporary command by the treaty
signed aboard Missouri, inter them and send them home. But the Japs
left, the French returned and Ho's pleas that we take over a we did in
the Philippines went unanswered. So he whipped the frogs himself, but
then didn't know what to do. He knew that people in western democracies
lived better than folks under communism but commies had helped him when
we wouldn't. His buddy Ike proposed a solution: temporarily split the
country, communist north and capitalist south, then after a few years (5
IIRC) let the people decide in a reunifying election. Ike's scheme was
to pour so much $$$ into the south, as we were doing in Germany, that
capitalism would easily win. Unfortunately the Diems set up a
dictatorship (vs a democracy) in the south that had majority Buddhists
lighting themselves off and diverted all the US aid $$ to their own
Swiss bank accounts and by the time anybody noticed JFK was president.
Despite CIA warnings, JFK dawdled until election polls were showing
commies by a landslide. Then he whacked Diem and had his replacement
refuse to hold the election, which triggered an uprising, then left for
Dallas neer to return. His Whiz Kids decided to send US troops to buy
time to recover Ike's plan but *never ever win* else we'd be perceived
as "just like the French". That got a lot of American and Vietnamese
kids killed but that didn't matter - few of them were Harvard grads,
right? So now you know why the US military never won the Vietnam war.
Ever hear about SEAL 1 and the Tonkin Gulf Incident?

Yep. But was that enough to justify shooting him?

If you made a list of all the people you would NOT want ****ed at you at
that time you'd find that JFK had crapped on all of them. He was Irish
Mafia. He screwed up the plan to put the mob back in charge of Cuba, and
got a bunch of CIA types killed. He P'd off the KKK. He tried to fire J
Edgar. Etc. Would you want the *old* CIA, Mafia, KKK and FBI all wishing
you dead?


But then, to many people, facts are irrelevant.

Yes, and that's why JFK remains popular.

I suggest the opposite.

I'd disagree. His luster may be tarnished but the average dude in the
street ranks him right up there with Reagan ... which suggests *most*
people will believe anything,, as long as it caters to their ignorance &
prejudices.

The other day, somebody shoved a farcical hatchet piece on JFK at me. It
basically said that the whole PT-109 incident was fictional and was a
deliberate attempt by the Navy to boost JFK's future political career.

That's sad. He f'd up and got his boat ran over but then he performed
heroically to save what he could of the situation. Give him that, and
the space program and the end of Jim Crow.

BUSH Debt
 

Pardon me? How did JFK 'blow' the Cuban missile crises?

Vito wrote:
He let Kruchev bluff him into pulling back our own bases in Turkey and
elsewhere.
According to Kruchev (years later of course) that's exactly what he
wanted and the whole thing was a bluff to get it. He'd never have gone
to war over Castro because the US had a sizable first strike capability
at the time.

Oh yeah, right.... and Kruschev always tells the truth, 100%... here is a fine
how-de-do, in order to smear a US President you accept Communist propaganda...
that's really 'conservative' isn't it.



Huh. Did Ike have a 'plan' in Viet Nam, ...

Actually, a very good one. Ho worked for us during WW2 and became Prime
Minister of all Vietnam after that war. When the French tried to return
he had Japanese troops, placed under his temporary command by the treaty
signed aboard Missouri, inter them and send them home. But the Japs
left, the French returned and Ho's pleas that we take over a we did in
the Philippines went unanswered. So he whipped the frogs himself, but
then didn't know what to do. He knew that people in western democracies
lived better than folks under communism but commies had helped him when
we wouldn't.

So far, an interesting mix of near-truth and total fantasy. Ho Chi Mihn (an
alias, the man's real name is believed to be Ngyen Ai Quoc) did not 'become
Prime Minister of all Vietnam.' No such office then or now. His command of th
elargest & best armed insurgent group put him in position to assume power. He
never worked for us. Some of the Vietnamese insurgent groups worked with the
OSS and returned downed fliers during WW2. But the Communist insurgents never
coopoerated with the Allies reliably, in fact they executed a couple of US and
British personnel, and turned over some others to the Japanese. It was a very
hit-or-miss thing.

Another fabrication is that the Japanese forces remaining in Vietnam after VJ
Day were placed under Ho's command. They were under the British overall, and
kept their own officers. They were never ever given orders by Vietnamese, nor
would they have accepted such.


His buddy Ike proposed a solution: temporarily split the
country, communist north and capitalist south, then after a few years (5
IIRC) let the people decide in a reunifying election.

Ahem. That was a UN plan, not Ike's.


.... Ike's scheme was
to pour so much $$$ into the south, as we were doing in Germany, that
capitalism would easily win. Unfortunately the Diems set up a
dictatorship (vs a democracy) in the south that had majority Buddhists
lighting themselves off and diverted all the US aid $$ to their own
Swiss bank accounts and by the time anybody noticed JFK was president.

Another mix of near-truth and bizarre fantasy. If you can read, I suggest you
start with a good history text on SE Asia.



.... So now you know why the US military never won the Vietnam war.

There are several reasons why we didn't win (it was pretty close to a tie,
actually, but what is that worth?)


Ever hear about SEAL 1 and the Tonkin Gulf Incident?

umm, yes. What about it?



Yep. But was that enough to justify shooting him?

If you made a list of all the people you would NOT want ****ed at you at
that time you'd find that JFK had crapped on all of them. He was Irish
Mafia. He screwed up the plan to put the mob back in charge of Cuba, and
got a bunch of CIA types killed. He P'd off the KKK. He tried to fire J
Edgar. Etc. Would you want the *old* CIA, Mafia, KKK and FBI all wishing
you dead?

If I were President (which I don't want to be) I'd tread somewhat lightly here
but most of these people (especially Hoover and the KKK) *ought* to have been
stomped & flushed.


The other day, somebody shoved a farcical hatchet piece on JFK at me. It
basically said that the whole PT-109 incident was fictional and was a
deliberate attempt by the Navy to boost JFK's future political career.

That's sad. He f'd up and got his boat ran over

It's a Navy captains job to put his ship & crew in danger. To call the PT-109
collision a ****-up shows a lack of understanding what goes on out there.
Granted, it was not a stellar performance in attack maneuvering....

but then he performed
heroically to save what he could of the situation. Give him that, and
the space program and the end of Jim Crow.

Agreed. Plus all that other stuff.

DSK

BUSH Debt
 

Besides, the missiles in Turkey were outdated at the time
of removal. Obviously, we didn't need them.

"DSK" wrote in message
...
Pardon me? How did JFK 'blow' the Cuban missile crises?

Vito wrote:
He let Kruchev bluff him into pulling back our own bases in Turkey and
elsewhere.
According to Kruchev (years later of course) that's exactly what he
wanted and the whole thing was a bluff to get it. He'd never have gone
to war over Castro because the US had a sizable first strike capability
at the time.

Oh yeah, right.... and Kruschev always tells the truth, 100%... here is a
fine
how-de-do, in order to smear a US President you accept Communist
propaganda...
that's really 'conservative' isn't it.



Huh. Did Ike have a 'plan' in Viet Nam, ...

Actually, a very good one. Ho worked for us during WW2 and became Prime
Minister of all Vietnam after that war. When the French tried to return
he had Japanese troops, placed under his temporary command by the treaty
signed aboard Missouri, inter them and send them home. But the Japs
left, the French returned and Ho's pleas that we take over a we did in
the Philippines went unanswered. So he whipped the frogs himself, but
then didn't know what to do. He knew that people in western democracies
lived better than folks under communism but commies had helped him when
we wouldn't.

So far, an interesting mix of near-truth and total fantasy. Ho Chi Mihn
(an
alias, the man's real name is believed to be Ngyen Ai Quoc) did not
'become
Prime Minister of all Vietnam.' No such office then or now. His command of
th
elargest & best armed insurgent group put him in position to assume power.
He
never worked for us. Some of the Vietnamese insurgent groups worked with
the
OSS and returned downed fliers during WW2. But the Communist insurgents
never
coopoerated with the Allies reliably, in fact they executed a couple of US
and
British personnel, and turned over some others to the Japanese. It was a
very
hit-or-miss thing.

Another fabrication is that the Japanese forces remaining in Vietnam after
VJ
Day were placed under Ho's command. They were under the British overall,
and
kept their own officers. They were never ever given orders by Vietnamese,
nor
would they have accepted such.


His buddy Ike proposed a solution: temporarily split the
country, communist north and capitalist south, then after a few years (5
IIRC) let the people decide in a reunifying election.

Ahem. That was a UN plan, not Ike's.


.... Ike's scheme was
to pour so much $$$ into the south, as we were doing in Germany, that
capitalism would easily win. Unfortunately the Diems set up a
dictatorship (vs a democracy) in the south that had majority Buddhists
lighting themselves off and diverted all the US aid $$ to their own
Swiss bank accounts and by the time anybody noticed JFK was president.

Another mix of near-truth and bizarre fantasy. If you can read, I suggest
you
start with a good history text on SE Asia.



.... So now you know why the US military never won the Vietnam war.

There are several reasons why we didn't win (it was pretty close to a tie,
actually, but what is that worth?)


Ever hear about SEAL 1 and the Tonkin Gulf Incident?

umm, yes. What about it?



Yep. But was that enough to justify shooting him?

If you made a list of all the people you would NOT want ****ed at you at
that time you'd find that JFK had crapped on all of them. He was Irish
Mafia. He screwed up the plan to put the mob back in charge of Cuba, and
got a bunch of CIA types killed. He P'd off the KKK. He tried to fire J
Edgar. Etc. Would you want the *old* CIA, Mafia, KKK and FBI all wishing
you dead?

If I were President (which I don't want to be) I'd tread somewhat lightly
here
but most of these people (especially Hoover and the KKK) *ought* to have
been
stomped & flushed.


The other day, somebody shoved a farcical hatchet piece on JFK at me.
It
basically said that the whole PT-109 incident was fictional and was a
deliberate attempt by the Navy to boost JFK's future political
career.

That's sad. He f'd up and got his boat ran over

It's a Navy captains job to put his ship & crew in danger. To call the
PT-109
collision a ****-up shows a lack of understanding what goes on out there.
Granted, it was not a stellar performance in attack maneuvering....

but then he performed
heroically to save what he could of the situation. Give him that, and
the space program and the end of Jim Crow.

Agreed. Plus all that other stuff.

DSK

BUSH Debt
 

Dumbass, you don't have to invaded to lose a war. For example,
Germany?

Dumbass, there's no sign of it now. Obviously, you were either
not around during that time or you were just as stupid as you
are now.

Dumbass, but I repeat myself.

"Horvath" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 22:24:16 -0800, "Jonathan Ganz"
wrote this crap:

Horass, I know you're pretty stupid, but even the mentally
retarded have come to understand that we lost the Vietnam
war.

Really? I don't recall their invasion? Did it happen in California?
I didn't see it on the news. If they beat us, why is there no sign of
it?


Hero@Horvath

I don't spend my money on food. I spend most of my money
on women, porn, booze, and recreation. The rest of it I just waste.

BUSH Debt
 

On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 09:50:42 -0800, "Jonathan Ganz"
wrote this crap:

Dumbass, you don't have to invaded to lose a war. For example,
Germany?

We beat Germany in WW2 after we invaded their country, and destroyed
their military, and their government, dumbass.

Dumbass, there's no sign of it now. Obviously, you were either
not around during that time or you were just as stupid as you
are now.

Dumbass, but I repeat myself.

"Horvath" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 22:24:16 -0800, "Jonathan Ganz"
wrote this crap:

Horass, I know you're pretty stupid, but even the mentally
retarded have come to understand that we lost the Vietnam
war.

Really? I don't recall their invasion? Did it happen in California?
I didn't see it on the news. If they beat us, why is there no sign of
it?


Hero@Horvath

I don't spend my money on food. I spend most of my money
on women, porn, booze, and recreation. The rest of it I just waste.


Hero@Horvath

I don't spend my money on food. I spend most of my money
on women, porn, booze, and recreation. The rest of it I just waste.

BUSH Debt
 

Who entered Germany first -US, British, Russians or Free french?

Cheers MC

The Captains Nemesis wrote:

On 6 Nov 2003 00:04:54 GMT, Horvath wrote:


On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 09:50:42 -0800, "Jonathan Ganz"
wrote this crap:


Dumbass, you don't have to invaded to lose a war. For example,
Germany?

We beat Germany in WW2 after we invaded their country, and destroyed
their military, and their government, dumbass.



Bwaaaahahahahhahahaaa!
without any help from anyone.

Lucky shot you guys capturing that Enigma machine eh?


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

BUSH Debt
 

We beat Germany?? I bet you're going to tell me the same
thing about Japan. I guess you never heard of the battle of
Waterloo. Dumbass.

"Horvath" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 09:50:42 -0800, "Jonathan Ganz"
wrote this crap:

Dumbass, you don't have to invaded to lose a war. For example,
Germany?

We beat Germany in WW2 after we invaded their country, and destroyed
their military, and their government, dumbass.

Dumbass, there's no sign of it now. Obviously, you were either
not around during that time or you were just as stupid as you
are now.

Dumbass, but I repeat myself.

"Horvath" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 22:24:16 -0800, "Jonathan Ganz"
wrote this crap:

Horass, I know you're pretty stupid, but even the mentally
retarded have come to understand that we lost the Vietnam
war.

Really? I don't recall their invasion? Did it happen in California?
I didn't see it on the news. If they beat us, why is there no sign of
it?


Hero@Horvath

I don't spend my money on food. I spend most of my money
on women, porn, booze, and recreation. The rest of it I just waste.


Hero@Horvath

I don't spend my money on food. I spend most of my money
on women, porn, booze, and recreation. The rest of it I just waste.

BUSH Debt
 

On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 14:05:27 +1300, The_navigator©
wrote this crap:

Who entered Germany first -US, British, Russians or Free french?

The US crossed the Rhine, and entered Germany first.


Hero@Horvath

I don't spend my money on food. I spend most of my money
on women, porn, booze, and recreation. The rest of it I just waste.

BUSH Debt
 

Vito wrote:
He let Kruchev bluff him into pulling back our own bases in Turkey and elsewhere.
According to Kruchev .....

Oh yeah, right.... and Kruschev always tells the truth, 100%... here is a fine
how-de-do, in order to smear a US President you accept Communist propaganda...
that's really 'conservative' isn't it.

JFK DID close the bases in Turkey and we DID have a massive first strike
capability that Kruschev was very much aware of so I believe Kruschev
this time. At least he never claimed to be a jelly donut (c:

Huh. Did Ike have a 'plan' in Viet Nam, ...

Actually, a very good one. Ho worked for us during WW2 and became Prime
Minister of all Vietnam after that war. When the French tried to return
he had Japanese troops, placed under his temporary command by the treaty
signed aboard Missouri, inter them and send them home. But the Japs
left, the French returned and Ho's pleas that we take over a we did in
the Philippines went unanswered. So he whipped the frogs himself, but
then didn't know what to do. He knew that people in western democracies
lived better than folks under communism but commies had helped him when
we wouldn't.

So far, an interesting mix of near-truth and total fantasy. Ho Chi Mihn (an
alias, the man's real name is believed to be Ngyen Ai Quoc) did not 'become
Prime Minister of all Vietnam.' No such office then or now.

The Emperor Bao Dai (sp?) established a Brit-type constitutional
monarchy with Ho as everybody calls him) as PM.

His command of the largest & best armed insurgent group put him in position to assume power.

Yup, that's why BD appointed him PM.

He never worked for us. Some of the Vietnamese insurgent groups worked with the
OSS and returned downed fliers during WW2.

Where do you suppose he got the $$$ and equipment needed to have "the
largest & best armed insurgent group" if not from OSS?

But the Communist insurgents never coopoerated with the Allies reliably, in fact they executed a couple
of US and British personnel, and turned over some others to the Japanese. It was a very
hit-or-miss thing.

AFAIK there were no "Communist insurgents" worth mentioning in 'Nam *at
the time* but yes, some groups (like Ho's) were more reliable than
others.

Another fabrication is that the Japanese forces remaining in Vietnam after VJ
Day were placed under Ho's command. They were under the British overall, and
kept their own officers. They were never ever given orders by Vietnamese, nor
would they have accepted such.

Read the treaty. Under it, Jap forces were to report to local
governments and act as military/police to maintain order until local
forces could be reestablished. In 'nam that was the emperor and his PM.
Then think again: Brits had no significant role in what'd been French
Indo-China before WW2 nor thereafter.

His buddy Ike proposed a solution ....

Ahem. That was a UN plan, not Ike's.

Typical knee jerk liberal notion (c: It was Ike's plan, accepted by Ho
and only then by the UN.

.... Ike's scheme was
to pour so much $$$ into the south, as we were doing in Germany, that
capitalism would easily win. Unfortunately the Diems set up a
dictatorship (vs a democracy) in the south that had majority Buddhists
lighting themselves off and diverted all the US aid $$ to their own
Swiss bank accounts and by the time anybody noticed JFK was president.

... I suggest you start with a good history text on SE Asia.

Naw, I've been fortunate enough to know some of the people who lived and
*made* that history. Why believe some soft-headed author vs first hand
info?

There are several reasons why we didn't win ...

There is only one root reason and that is that the people who started
and micromanaged that war never intended to "win"; they were a bunch of
ivory-tower egg heads trying to put off the election until Ike's plan
could work.

Ever hear about SEAL 1 and the Tonkin Gulf Incident?

umm, yes. What about it?

Then you know all about how McNamara & Co created the GoT incident and
there's no need to say more.

It's a Navy captains job to put his ship & crew in danger. To call the PT-109
collision a ****-up shows a lack of understanding what goes on out there.
Granted, it was not a stellar performance in attack maneuvering....

Prefacing BS with fact is a worn out debating tactic. Getting your boat
ran over *accidentally* is called a ****-up "out there". Seek out some
USN Officers who have little gold stars indicating command and ask them
how "career enhancing" that'd be.

BUSH Debt
 

Vito wrote:


JFK DID close the bases in Turkey

Yep... some of them.

and we DID have a massive first strike
capability that Kruschev was very much aware of

Yep again. Which JFK did not give up.


so I believe Kruschev
this time.

That makes you a willing participant in what Lenin (real name Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov) fondly called
'dialectic materialism.' Look it up.


At least he never claimed to be a jelly donut (c:

Good point.



The Emperor Bao Dai (sp?) established a Brit-type constitutional
monarchy with Ho as everybody calls him) as PM.

Never happened. Bao Dai *did* appoint Diem as his Prime Minister at one point, not Uncle Ho. The Communist
insurgents perceived the Emperor as a French colonialist puppet (which he most likely was).



His command of the largest & best armed insurgent group put him in position to assume power.

Yup, that's why BD appointed him PM.

You need to do some reading, or perhaps talk to somebody who actually knows history instead of making it up.



He never worked for us. Some of the Vietnamese insurgent groups worked with the
OSS and returned downed fliers during WW2.

Where do you suppose he got the $$$ and equipment needed to have "the
largest & best armed insurgent group" if not from OSS?

Umm... from the Comintern? Russia's support of the Viet Mihn (and several other South East Asian insurgent
groups) is well documented. Ho Chi Mihn studied in Moscow. He was a well travelled man, he also spent time in
Paris & New York.




AFAIK there were no "Communist insurgents" worth mentioning in 'Nam *at
the time*

In that case, you don't know squat.

The insurgency against the French started before the French so much as completed their conquest of Viet Nam.
There were self-proclaimed Communist insurgents & revolutionaries in Viet Nam in the 1920s.

Again, you need to learn some real history instead of the made-up kind.




Read the treaty. Under it, Jap forces were to report to local
governments and act as military/police to maintain order until local
forces could be reestablished. In 'nam that was the emperor and his PM.
Then think again: Brits had no significant role in what'd been French
Indo-China before WW2 nor thereafter.

No, but they had the largest military force in the area.

http://www.historychannel.com/tdih/vietnam/0926.html



....Prefacing BS with fact is a worn out debating tactic...

Is that why you fall back on insults & fantasy?

DSK

BUSH Debt
 

And, Horass pushed to the head of the line in front of the
bra counter so he could get first pick on a bra that would
truly fit him.

"Horvath" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 14:05:27 +1300, The_navigator©
wrote this crap:

Who entered Germany first -US, British, Russians or Free french?

The US crossed the Rhine, and entered Germany first.


Hero@Horvath

I don't spend my money on food. I spend most of my money
on women, porn, booze, and recreation. The rest of it I just waste.

BUSH Debt
 

DSK wrote:

....Prefacing BS with fact is a worn out debating tactic...

Is that why you fall back on insults & fantasy?

When did I do that?