|
"Thom Stewart" wrote in message ... Donal, What a Stupid Statement that is! You have to be Irish to say something like that. How in the hell can a appointed representative be more democratic than a representative elected by the public. Easy! Donal, if you reply; please find out what Democracy means Let me try to explain my understanding of "Democracy". Democracy refers to a system of government where the will of the people is the supreme power. Most forms of government are based on a "Pyramid of Power". At the top of the pyramid, we have the chief executive officer. The CEO may have one of the following titles - "President", "Prime Minister", "El Dulce", "Emporer", "Fuhrer" ... etc. The real difference between a Democracy and a Dictatorship is where the real *power* lies. In a dictatorship, the dictator has ultimate authority - and the people have none. In a democracy, the people have ultimate authority - and the CEO (in theory) has very little. In a Democracy, the people elect representatives. These "representatives" should always vote according to their constituents' views. However, they tend to toe the party line, therefore they behave in an undemocratic manner. The "CEO" should be responsible to the representatives, however, in most democracies, the CEO has the ability to confer status upon the representatives. This means that the elected representatives will place more weight on the views of their leader than their voters. Bush wanted war. The Republican represantiteves supported him because they would not get promoted if they voted against him. The same thing happened in the UK. Here, most people were against the war. However, because Blair wanted war, the MP's voted for it. Regards Donal -- |
"Donal" wrote in message ...
"Thom Stewart" wrote in message ... Donal, SOS Snipped Bush wanted war. The Republican represantiteves supported him because they would not get promoted if they voted against him. Donal you moron. You under estimate the American people. We have had it with terroists, and threats. Saddam had to go. The same thing happened in the UK. Here, most people were against the war. However, because Blair wanted war, the MP's voted for it. Your Irish right?. Dont you vote in Ireland? Are you a British citizen or just a Gypsie meddelin in nunya? Joe Regards Donal -- |
On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 13:42:11 +1000, OzOne wrote this crap:
Ummm Joe, Saddam made no threats, it was all in GWB's mind! Tell that to the Kurds. Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now! |
"Joe" wrote in message om... "Donal" wrote in message ... "Thom Stewart" wrote in message ... Donal, SOS Snipped Bush wanted war. The Republican represantiteves supported him because they would not get promoted if they voted against him. Donal you moron. You under estimate the American people. We have had it with terroists, and threats. Saddam had to go. I bet that you cannot explain the connection berween Terrorists and Saddam. If you found the "terrorist" challenge too difficult, then I will offer you an easier test of your knowledge. I bet that you cannot give us a single exanple of a "threat" from Saddam. The same thing happened in the UK. Here, most people were against the war. However, because Blair wanted war, the MP's voted for it. Your Irish right?. Congratulations!! How long did that take you? Everybody else figured it out years ago!! Dont you vote in Ireland? No, I don't. Are you a British citizen or just a Gypsie meddelin in nunya? Uh . oh! What the heck is "nunya"? Regards Donal -- |
Horass is so stupid that he can't even copy a link.
-- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com "Horvath" wrote in message ... On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 23:03:12 +0100, "Donal" wrote this crap: I bet that you cannot explain the connection berween Terrorists and Saddam. Saddam's connections to bin Laden/al-Qaeda/911 Excerpts from 60 articles with links provided to each of the original articles http://www.pixelpages.net/intel/saddam-laden.htm Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now! |
"Joe" wrote
You under estimate the American people. We have had it with terroists, and threats. Absolutely. Now if we could just find any decent leadership ..... Saddam had to go. Why? He had zip to do with the terrorists who attacked us. In fact, they hated him and his secular government more than they hated us - and vice versa. Logically, from a pro-America standpoint, we should have paid Saddam to go after Al Quida. But no, Bush pulled assets away from the war on terror to go after Osama's other enemy, Saddam. Eliminating one of the terrorists' enemies makes zero sense from a pro- America standpoint, especially when we took pressure off our mutual enemy to do it. Now we're in a $trillion quagmire that looks more like 'nam every day and Osama is laughing up his sleeve |
"Horvath" wrote
Anybody who would gas his own people is a danger to everyone. Remember Waco??? |
In article ,
Vito wrote: "Horvath" wrote Anybody who would gas his own people is a danger to everyone. Remember Waco??? Yeah, but they deserved it... just kidding. Good point Vito. -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 09:04:35 -0400, "Vito" wrote
this crap: "Horvath" wrote Anybody who would gas his own people is a danger to everyone. Remember Waco??? Exactly! Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now! |
|
Perhaps but I have a girlfriend not a boyfriend.
That's not what your boyfriend told me. And Horvath is obviosly hanging out with him! RB |
In article ,
Horvath wrote: On 20 Sep 2004 12:07:23 -0700, (Jonathan Ganz) wrote this crap: You are a useless idiot, aren't you? Perhaps but I have a girlfriend not a boyfriend. That's not what your boyfriend told me. This is just about the gayest thing you've ever typed. -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
In article ,
Bobsprit wrote: Perhaps but I have a girlfriend not a boyfriend. That's not what your boyfriend told me. And Horvath is obviosly hanging out with him! Now I hate to break it to him, but whomever he was hanging out with has no relationship with me. -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
.....And Booby sweeps in from left field and scores ... a three pointer!
Cheers Bobsprit wrote: Perhaps but I have a girlfriend not a boyfriend. That's not what your boyfriend told me. And Horvath is obviosly hanging out with him! RB |
OzOne wrote: On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 09:02:10 -0400, "Vito" scribbled thusly: "Joe" wrote You under estimate the American people. We have had it with terroists, and threats. Absolutely. Now if we could just find any decent leadership ..... Saddam had to go. Why? He had zip to do with the terrorists who attacked us. In fact, they hated him and his secular government more than they hated us - and vice versa. Logically, from a pro-America standpoint, we should have paid Saddam to go after Al Quida. But no, Bush pulled assets away from the war on terror to go after Osama's other enemy, Saddam. Eliminating one of the terrorists' enemies makes zero sense from a pro- America standpoint, especially when we took pressure off our mutual enemy to do it. Now we're in a $trillion quagmire that looks more like 'nam every day and Osama is laughing up his sleeve AND Bush says he'd do it all again EXACTLY the same! Surely no-one is that stupid! Sadly some people are, and it is a distinct possibility he will be re-elected by his peers. Cheers |
Horvath wrote: (Jonathan Ganz) This is just about the gayest thing you've ever typed. -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
|
In article ,
Scott Vernon wrote: Horvath wrote: anything related to Scotty This is just about the gayest thing you've ever typed. -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
In article ,
Horvath wrote: On 20 Sep 2004 16:45:56 -0700, (Jonathan Ganz) wrote this crap: That's not what your boyfriend told me. This is just about the gayest thing you've ever typed. And that's not very gay, is it? I didn't start that thread about butt connectors. Perhaps but you keep mentioning it. -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
"The Difference" Vito,
The money is coming from another country. A foreign country. The Difference could make that country a belligerent nation, eligible to be attacked. None of the families of our troops received money from foreign sources. Those nation that help us were called Allies. Do you see the difference? Ole Thom |
Oz,
There were over one thousand ground to air missiles fired at UN overflights. Ole Thom |
Oz,
There were over one thousand ground to air missiles fired at UN overflights. Ole Thom |
Vito,
Using your logic, the Germans didn't have a right to torpedo American ships before Dec 1941? Ole Thom |
"felton" wrote
Saddam's connections to bin Laden/al-Qaeda/911 Excerpts from 60 articles with links provided to each of the original articles http://www.pixelpages.net/intel/saddam-laden.htm Or you could go by the 9/11 Commission Report, which confirmed that there wasn't any connection. Much as Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld would like us to believe it, bin Laden and Saddam are not the same person and there was no connection. But there were "links". For example Usama was trying to kill Saddam and vice vera. That's a "link". To some minds that means Saddam perp'd 9/11. |
"Thom Stewart" wrote in message
... Vito, Using your logic, the Germans didn't have a right to torpedo American ships before Dec 1941? Huh??? |
"Vito" wrote in message ...
"Joe" If you pay a family 75.000 USD reward because one of the Kids vaporized himself or herself in a crowd in Isreal.... I think that might count as supporting terrorist. If you were a Palistinian who's wife and kids had just been killed in an Israeli rocket attack on the house next door you might see it as supporting patriotism. I will never see murdering civilians as patroitism. What threat is a bus full of citizens to your country? The japs thought the same thing, and they had suicide bombers as well.. but at least they attacked ligit targets of war. Don't get me wrong, the Japs used to be the lowest form of brainwash hirohito worshipping assholes with a serious inferiorty complex, but they seem somewhat honorable... compared to the jihad camel jockey head choppin dirtbags cowards we are dealing with today. Both groups are evil.. and wrong. Joe |
In article , OzOne wrote:
On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 00:31:54 +0100, "Donal" scribbled thusly: Joe doesn't read widely, believes everything Bush says and Fox reports and lives in fear of any culture other than that of the BigMac. If nothing else, perhaps he should see Going Upriver: The Long War of John Kerry. It starts October 1st. Bring a Republican. -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
Back when it became obvious that the Communists would win the forthcoming
reunification election in Vietnam, JFK's Whiz Kids asked senior military leaders to prepare options for a military solution in 'nam should we decide to cancel the election. The options presented were 1) Nuke the USSR (We had a first strike capability in those days), 2) A naval blockade coupled with bombing the roads and rail lines in China. Note that the men who'd fought WW2 and Korea never even considered an invasion. Asked why, they explained that we'd beat the Axis and the Chinese in Korea by destroying their factories and/or transportation infrastructure thus keeping supplies from reaching their troops, and Ho's factories were in the USSR and his supply lines were in China. They were appalled by McNamara's suggestion of a grunt on grunt war because "they make new soldiers faster than we can make bullets". But JFK's Whizzers were smarter than generals cuz they were Ivy League! So they scraped the barrel for somebody who'd agree and went ahead and blew $billions and 1000 of American lives - and failed because, guess what, the Vietnamese made soldiers faster than we made bullets. As predicted, we won every battle but lost the war. Meanwhile, the USSR consolidated it's hold on Cuba and moved into South America! We are currently buying war surplus ammo from Israel and the UK, the dudes who perped 9-11 still elude us, and militant Islam grows stronger worldwide. Anybody see a similarity between JFK's folly and GWB's misadventure? |
The economy is doing better. Bushes tax cuts are working just like it
worked for Ronald Regan. Clinton cause the recession and the dot.com bubble burst. This must be the new math. Clinton caused the dot.com blowout? You're really well studied! RB |
I guess your one of the assholes that thinks Saddam was a good guy...
Just mis-understood. No, he just knows that Bush wasn't a good guy either. RB |
What a dumb ass statement. If you are living near or hanging around
a terrorist bomb factory, and you have kids. The smart thing to do no matter what is move. I would rather have my kids living in a tent shelter in the desert than to be a risk of vaporation. Joe has simply NO CLUE. RB |
No kidding Donal. The war on Terror is against any country that
supports in anyway terrorist anywhere. We can not afford to wait to be struck again by anyone. But should these wars be waged at all costs, by lying to Americans and the rest of the world? Nope. RB |
Vito wrote:
Back when it became obvious that the Communists would win the forthcoming reunification election in Vietnam Excuse me Vito, are you really into gardening? Is that why you continue to spout this horse **** even after I've showed a dozen or more references showing that it is just plain NOT even close to true? We are currently buying war surplus ammo from Israel and the UK More total malarkey. The U.S. arms industry supplies about 70% of the ammunition used in the world. Vito, you should stop snorting Drano or else stick to talking sailing. Anytime you try to talk about history or economics, you seem to lapse into Ebonics. DSK |
In article ,
Dave wrote: On 30 Sep 2004 13:17:16 -0700, (Jonathan Ganz) said: Because it would be political suicide. And why is that you ask? Just a constructive suggestion g. As I've noted before, Jonathan, you haven't much of an ear for irony. You, on the other hand, have a facility for the absurd. Woof doggie!! -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
In article ,
Jonathan Ganz wrote: In article , Dave wrote: On 30 Sep 2004 13:17:16 -0700, (Jonathan Ganz) said: Because it would be political suicide. And why is that you ask? Just a constructive suggestion g. As I've noted before, Jonathan, you haven't much of an ear for irony. You, on the other hand, have a facility for the absurd. Woof doggie!! You sure did a slick job of editing my post. Perhaps we should stop calling you Mr. Poodle and start calling you Slick Doggie. -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
In article ,
Dave wrote: On 30 Sep 2004 14:41:29 -0700, (Jonathan Ganz) said: You sure did a slick job of editing my post. Perhaps we should stop calling you Mr. Poodle and start calling you Slick Doggie. Simply omitted another of your incessant repetitions of the party line. BTW, I'm sure everyone but you has noticed that you can't seem to resist responding to my every post. On the other hand I choose my targets a bit more selectively. I leave it to the reader to decide which behavior more resembles that of a puppy dog. I'm sure they have! Dogs need to be trained, and sometimes it takes a while. BTW, I never said you were a puppy dog. I said you were a grown up (well, that is a stretch) poodle. -- Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m) http://www.sailnow.com "If there's no wind, row." |
"DSK" wrote in message
... Vito wrote: Back when it became obvious that the Communists would win the forthcoming reunification election in Vietnam Excuse me Vito, are you really into gardening? Is that why you continue to spout this horse **** even after I've showed a dozen or more references showing that it is just plain NOT even close to true? Yada Yada yada - I suppose no reunification elections were ever scheduled, that the partitioning was to be permanent, or that the Diem regime was going to beat Ho by a landslide. We are currently buying war surplus ammo from Israel and the UK More total malarkey. The U.S. arms industry supplies about 70% of the ammunition used in the world. Never the less we are buying (back?) small arms ammo from Israel and the UK. |
Vito wrote:
Yada Yada yada - I suppose no reunification elections were ever scheduled, Nope. that the partitioning was to be permanent, Nope ... or that the Diem regime was going to beat Ho by a landslide. Yep. For one thing, about 4 million refugees fled North Viet Nam in the mid 1950s, came to the Sotuh, and having seen the Viet Minh gov't in action, would never have voted for it. In fact, one of the big disputes that they argued over was that the North insisted that refugees could not be allowed to vote. Needless to say, there were very few if any refugees fleeing the South to the North. Real history does not lend itself to neat ideological explanations (for the most part) but spinning out fantasy and calling it history will not explain a damn thing. .... The U.S. arms industry supplies about 70% of the ammunition used in the world. Never the less we are buying (back?) small arms ammo from Israel and the UK. That may be true. I've heard of crazier things being done with our tax money. DSK |
wrote
Since the rise of terrorism, you will never see another nuke generating plant constructed in the U.S.A. The existing ones, even including de-commissioned plants, have become a major security problem, and it is virtually impossible to protect them adequately. I agree there will never be another for any number of reasons including hysteria and stupidity but not that they are difficult, let alone impossible to protect. That's an urban legend. Engineering analysis shows that the containment domes are impregnable to anything short of an A-bomb and AFAIK no terrorists have enough a-bombs to waste on power plants. Beyond that the few I've seen would be as easy to defend as any airport or government facility. |
"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
... We don't need nuke plants, although I don't have a huge problem with that. There are better, less intrusive ways to do the same thing. Please elaborate. I know of none that don't yield a net loss of energy. Some suggest solar panels til they find how much they cost. Others like windmills - ditto. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:02 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com