What war did you fight in? The Civil War? :-)

S.Simon


"Thom Stewart" wrote in message ...
Thanks Joe,

Doug , I return your Salute! You younger Vets deserve your share of real
credit,

In my war, we knew who the enemy was and where to find him. It was the
Leaders of the Military's job to defeat him, It was a hard, costly war
but it had a direction and a goal. TOTAL VICTORY!!

That, I believe was the last war fought that way. You younger Vets have
never had that option. Politics have entered our lives and God help me
for saying this, but I don't think anyone can know what a final victory
is anymore.

I do salute the Military of today. They have it tougher than we did.

Thanks Joe and everyone who serviced and services. To all OUR VETS----

GOD BLESS AMERICA; And "I'LL DRINK TO THAT!!"

Ole Thom

"Thom Stewart" wrote...
Thanks Joe,

Doug , I return your Salute! You younger Vets deserve your share of real
credit,

In my war, we knew who the enemy was and where to find him. It was the
Leaders of the Military's job to defeat him, It was a hard, costly war
but it had a direction and a goal. TOTAL VICTORY!!

That, I believe was the last war fought that way.

I dunno about that, Thom. War is always a military means to a political solution for an economic problem. It's a loose
term for any large group of people attempting to impose their collective will on another group by force. An old fashioned
word for terrorism might be sabotage, and every country has tried it's hand at sending saboteurs into 'enemy' territory.

The enemy we are currenty fighting (outside of those enemies of the Constitution that we have, Lord help us, elected over
ourselves) uses terrorism or sabotage because that is the only way they have to fight. They are so poor & so desparate
that they have no other means. Therefor they have no big, obvious, economically valuable targets for our military to go
after.

We have two huge strategic problems, and no leader of any industrialized country has AFAIK addressed either.

1- the terrorists are irrational and cannot agree on their own goals, so there is no hope of making 'peace' with them on
any terms

2- the terrorists make very handy agents for behind-the-scenes economic groups who profit by the destruction of
competitors assets

I wish I had some answers myself, contemplating the whole situation makes me very sad.



I do salute the Military of today. They have it tougher than we did.

In some ways, it's not so bad. Cell phones & email make it easy for today's servicemen to keep in daily contact with
their families. Equipment is much better & more reliable. Living conditions are also a lot better, although it seems to
me (and I thought about this a lot back in my day) that the US always chooses to fight in most horrible climates &
terrains we can find.




Thanks Joe and everyone who serviced and services. To all OUR VETS----

GOD BLESS AMERICA; And "I'LL DRINK TO THAT!!"

I'll drink to that, too, Thom!

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

Some have very clear goals. It is usually their means of achieving it
that they cannot agree on. While many would like to kill all Americans
as vermin, other wish to scare you to an honest, open negotiation table.
That you lump them together reveals your lack of diplomatic smarts. The
US's second major problem is that you gain no respect on their eyes as
you, yourself, carry out acts of terrorism and support terrorist
countries/regimes -when it suits you.

Cheers MC

DSK wrote:


"Thom Stewart" wrote...

Thanks Joe,

Doug , I return your Salute! You younger Vets deserve your share of real
credit,

In my war, we knew who the enemy was and where to find him. It was the
Leaders of the Military's job to defeat him, It was a hard, costly war
but it had a direction and a goal. TOTAL VICTORY!!

That, I believe was the last war fought that way.


I dunno about that, Thom. War is always a military means to a political solution for an economic problem. It's a loose
term for any large group of people attempting to impose their collective will on another group by force. An old fashioned
word for terrorism might be sabotage, and every country has tried it's hand at sending saboteurs into 'enemy' territory.

The enemy we are currenty fighting (outside of those enemies of the Constitution that we have, Lord help us, elected over
ourselves) uses terrorism or sabotage because that is the only way they have to fight. They are so poor & so desparate
that they have no other means. Therefor they have no big, obvious, economically valuable targets for our military to go
after.

We have two huge strategic problems, and no leader of any industrialized country has AFAIK addressed either.

1- the terrorists are irrational and cannot agree on their own goals, so there is no hope of making 'peace' with them on
any terms

2- the terrorists make very handy agents for behind-the-scenes economic groups who profit by the destruction of
competitors assets

I wish I had some answers myself, contemplating the whole situation makes me very sad.



I do salute the Military of today. They have it tougher than we did.


In some ways, it's not so bad. Cell phones & email make it easy for today's servicemen to keep in daily contact with
their families. Equipment is much better & more reliable. Living conditions are also a lot better, although it seems to
me (and I thought about this a lot back in my day) that the US always chooses to fight in most horrible climates &
terrains we can find.



Thanks Joe and everyone who serviced and services. To all OUR VETS----

GOD BLESS AMERICA; And "I'LL DRINK TO THAT!!"


I'll drink to that, too, Thom!

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

The navigator© wrote:

Some have very clear goals. It is usually their means of achieving it
that they cannot agree on. While many would like to kill all Americans
as vermin, other wish to scare you to an honest, open negotiation table.
That you lump them together reveals your lack of diplomatic smarts.

Excuse, me, it seems you have a problem with reading comprehension. Is English your native language?

I did not "lump them together" other than in the sense that they cannot agree, which you seconded. So how does this 'reveal'
anything at all about my 'diplomatic smarts,' aside from which I'm not a diplomat at all.



The
US's second major problem is that you gain no respect on their eyes as
you, yourself, carry out acts of terrorism and support terrorist
countries/regimes -when it suits you.

Since you have no respect for the US to start with, why bother with trying to impress the likes of you?

DSK

Still not raised your debating skill beyond the schoolyard? Or are you
just as stupid as you appear to be? Let me repost your statement:

"1- the terrorists are irrational and cannot agree on their own goals,
so there is no hope of making 'peace' with them on
any terms "

Cheers MC

DSK wrote:


The navigator© wrote:


Some have very clear goals. It is usually their means of achieving it
that they cannot agree on. While many would like to kill all Americans
as vermin, other wish to scare you to an honest, open negotiation table.
That you lump them together reveals your lack of diplomatic smarts.


Excuse, me, it seems you have a problem with reading comprehension. Is English your native language?

I did not "lump them together" other than in the sense that they cannot agree, which you seconded. So how does this 'reveal'
anything at all about my 'diplomatic smarts,' aside from which I'm not a diplomat at all.




The
US's second major problem is that you gain no respect on their eyes as
you, yourself, carry out acts of terrorism and support terrorist
countries/regimes -when it suits you.


Since you have no respect for the US to start with, why bother with trying to impress the likes of you?

DSK

The navigator© wrote:

Still not raised your debating skill beyond the schoolyard? Or are you
just as stupid as you appear to be? Let me repost your statement:

"1- the terrorists are irrational and cannot agree on their own goals,
so there is no hope of making 'peace' with them on
any terms "

And you then said:



Some have very clear goals. It is usually their means of achieving it
that they cannot agree on

In other words, they cannot agree. As I said.

Thank you and good night. Don't forget to take your medicine before beddie-byes.

DSK

GOALS GOALS GOALS -not means of achieving them!

God are you stupid.

Cheers MC

DSK wrote:

The navigator© wrote:


Still not raised your debating skill beyond the schoolyard? Or are you
just as stupid as you appear to be? Let me repost your statement:

"1- the terrorists are irrational and cannot agree on their own goals,
so there is no hope of making 'peace' with them on
any terms "


And you then said:


Some have very clear goals. It is usually their means of achieving it
that they cannot agree on


In other words, they cannot agree. As I said.

Thank you and good night. Don't forget to take your medicine before beddie-byes.

DSK

SHUT UP you foreigner! Americans are talking.

Scotty


"The_nagitattor" wrote ...
Some have very clear goals. It is usually their means of achieving it
that they cannot agree on. While many would like to kill all Americans
as vermin, other wish to scare you to an honest, open negotiation table.
That you lump them together reveals your lack of diplomatic smarts. The
US's second major problem is that you gain no respect on their eyes as
you, yourself, carry out acts of terrorism and support terrorist
countries/regimes -when it suits you.

Cheers MC

DSK wrote:


"Thom Stewart" wrote...

Thanks Joe,

Doug , I return your Salute! You younger Vets deserve your share of
real
credit,

In my war, we knew who the enemy was and where to find him. It was the
Leaders of the Military's job to defeat him, It was a hard, costly war
but it had a direction and a goal. TOTAL VICTORY!!

That, I believe was the last war fought that way.


I dunno about that, Thom. War is always a military means to a political
solution for an economic problem. It's a loose
term for any large group of people attempting to impose their collective
will on another group by force. An old fashioned
word for terrorism might be sabotage, and every country has tried it's
hand at sending saboteurs into 'enemy' territory.

The enemy we are currenty fighting (outside of those enemies of the
Constitution that we have, Lord help us, elected over
ourselves) uses terrorism or sabotage because that is the only way they
have to fight. They are so poor & so desparate
that they have no other means. Therefor they have no big, obvious,
economically valuable targets for our military to go
after.

We have two huge strategic problems, and no leader of any industrialized
country has AFAIK addressed either.

1- the terrorists are irrational and cannot agree on their own goals, so
there is no hope of making 'peace' with them on
any terms

2- the terrorists make very handy agents for behind-the-scenes economic
groups who profit by the destruction of
competitors assets

I wish I had some answers myself, contemplating the whole situation
makes me very sad.



I do salute the Military of today. They have it tougher than we did.


In some ways, it's not so bad. Cell phones & email make it easy for
today's servicemen to keep in daily contact with
their families. Equipment is much better & more reliable. Living
conditions are also a lot better, although it seems to
me (and I thought about this a lot back in my day) that the US always
chooses to fight in most horrible climates &
terrains we can find.



Thanks Joe and everyone who serviced and services. To all OUR VETS----

GOD BLESS AMERICA; And "I'LL DRINK TO THAT!!"


I'll drink to that, too, Thom!

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

But you are on MY planet.

Cheers MC

Scott Vernon wrote:

SHUT UP you foreigner! Americans are talking.

Scotty


"The_nagitattor" wrote ...

Some have very clear goals. It is usually their means of achieving it
that they cannot agree on. While many would like to kill all Americans
as vermin, other wish to scare you to an honest, open negotiation table.
That you lump them together reveals your lack of diplomatic smarts. The
US's second major problem is that you gain no respect on their eyes as
you, yourself, carry out acts of terrorism and support terrorist
countries/regimes -when it suits you.

Cheers MC

DSK wrote:


"Thom Stewart" wrote...


Thanks Joe,

Doug , I return your Salute! You younger Vets deserve your share of

real

credit,

In my war, we knew who the enemy was and where to find him. It was the
Leaders of the Military's job to defeat him, It was a hard, costly war
but it had a direction and a goal. TOTAL VICTORY!!

That, I believe was the last war fought that way.


I dunno about that, Thom. War is always a military means to a political

solution for an economic problem. It's a loose

term for any large group of people attempting to impose their collective

will on another group by force. An old fashioned

word for terrorism might be sabotage, and every country has tried it's

hand at sending saboteurs into 'enemy' territory.

The enemy we are currenty fighting (outside of those enemies of the

Constitution that we have, Lord help us, elected over

ourselves) uses terrorism or sabotage because that is the only way they

have to fight. They are so poor & so desparate

that they have no other means. Therefor they have no big, obvious,

economically valuable targets for our military to go

after.

We have two huge strategic problems, and no leader of any industrialized

country has AFAIK addressed either.

1- the terrorists are irrational and cannot agree on their own goals, so

there is no hope of making 'peace' with them on

any terms

2- the terrorists make very handy agents for behind-the-scenes economic

groups who profit by the destruction of

competitors assets

I wish I had some answers myself, contemplating the whole situation

makes me very sad.



I do salute the Military of today. They have it tougher than we did.


In some ways, it's not so bad. Cell phones & email make it easy for

today's servicemen to keep in daily contact with

their families. Equipment is much better & more reliable. Living

conditions are also a lot better, although it seems to

me (and I thought about this a lot back in my day) that the US always

chooses to fight in most horrible climates &

terrains we can find.




Thanks Joe and everyone who serviced and services. To all OUR VETS----

GOD BLESS AMERICA; And "I'LL DRINK TO THAT!!"


I'll drink to that, too, Thom!

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

WRONG, the world belongs to US.


"The_navigator©" wrote in message
...
But you are on MY planet.

Cheers MC

Scott Vernon wrote:

SHUT UP you foreigner! Americans are talking.

Scotty


"The_nagitattor" wrote ...

Some have very clear goals. It is usually their means of achieving it
that they cannot agree on. While many would like to kill all Americans
as vermin, other wish to scare you to an honest, open negotiation table.
That you lump them together reveals your lack of diplomatic smarts. The
US's second major problem is that you gain no respect on their eyes as
you, yourself, carry out acts of terrorism and support terrorist
countries/regimes -when it suits you.

Cheers MC

DSK wrote:


"Thom Stewart" wrote...


Thanks Joe,

Doug , I return your Salute! You younger Vets deserve your share of

real

credit,

In my war, we knew who the enemy was and where to find him. It was
the
Leaders of the Military's job to defeat him, It was a hard, costly
war
but it had a direction and a goal. TOTAL VICTORY!!

That, I believe was the last war fought that way.


I dunno about that, Thom. War is always a military means to a political

solution for an economic problem. It's a loose

term for any large group of people attempting to impose their
collective

will on another group by force. An old fashioned

word for terrorism might be sabotage, and every country has tried it's

hand at sending saboteurs into 'enemy' territory.

The enemy we are currenty fighting (outside of those enemies of the

Constitution that we have, Lord help us, elected over

ourselves) uses terrorism or sabotage because that is the only way they

have to fight. They are so poor & so desparate

that they have no other means. Therefor they have no big, obvious,

economically valuable targets for our military to go

after.

We have two huge strategic problems, and no leader of any
industrialized

country has AFAIK addressed either.

1- the terrorists are irrational and cannot agree on their own goals,
so

there is no hope of making 'peace' with them on

any terms

2- the terrorists make very handy agents for behind-the-scenes economic

groups who profit by the destruction of

competitors assets

I wish I had some answers myself, contemplating the whole situation

makes me very sad.



I do salute the Military of today. They have it tougher than we did.


In some ways, it's not so bad. Cell phones & email make it easy for

today's servicemen to keep in daily contact with

their families. Equipment is much better & more reliable. Living

conditions are also a lot better, although it seems to

me (and I thought about this a lot back in my day) that the US always

chooses to fight in most horrible climates &

terrains we can find.




Thanks Joe and everyone who serviced and services. To all OUR
VETS----

GOD BLESS AMERICA; And "I'LL DRINK TO THAT!!"


I'll drink to that, too, Thom!

Fresh Breezes- Doug King