Jl,

If you want a useless exercise try to explain a reason to the Oz. I gave
up.

I2 years of embargo. Maintaining two "No Fly Zones," misuse of" oil for
food funds, Gassing a complete village, by Chemical Al, not giving UN
Weapons Inspectors free access, Mass graves.

The thought of WMD, Which the whole world believed to be true. At least
the whole UN believed, was probably wrong
that is the only reason the Oz wants to hear
Good Luck, jl.

Ole Thom

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message ...
"Joe" wrote in message

Well several ways Donal. Most of todays bombs used in urban areas are
either Laser guided or GPS guided. Some are still wire guided.

Yeah!!! I love those precion laser guided Cluster Bombs!!

The percision dasiy cutters are nice to.
I hear a few Puffs the magic dragon are flying over some key towns as
well.


We have
airplanes circling over the battle field that can see the flea on a
camel jockey.

... yet can't make out an entire company of Canadian Allies on live practice
despite being told as much by HQ!


Most likely the equipment that your troops use to ID them as friendlys
was outdated or did not function. I hear thats SOP with the Canook
military.




Then there are space borne optics just as capable including IR and UV
and Lidar.

That can pin point non existant WMDs... with astonhising inaccuracy!


Did you see the sarin gas that was found last week?



We have other ways.. buts thats secret and if I told you.. Id have to
kill you.

That's okay Joe... the cat is out of the bag... we already know damn well
that the "Missle Shield System" couldn't hit a Hot Air Balloon even if
guided in by a GPS let alone any missle that might be fired. You guys want
us to agree to that POS in our Arctic... Bwahahahahahahahahahaaa!!!


Your Artic? Your out of your mind, Its our artic and we will do as we
please.



High Tech Weapons in U.S. hands............ it's like giving a loaded gun
to a Monkey!

Well at least we have high Tech weapons.

Where as your troops are using outdated garbage and junk. Lets face it
Mooron ....you rely on us to protect you.


Joe




CM

but they're not mutually exclusive terms CM, and are often synonymous.
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote
..as long as you don't confuse satire with sarcasm.

Bite Me... they Rhyme
"Scout" wrote in message
...
but they're not mutually exclusive terms CM, and are often synonymous.
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote
..as long as you don't confuse satire with sarcasm.

"Capt. Mooron" wrote


Protect us from what Joe? The only ones threatening us are you
guys!.....


Uh, oh, he's starting to catch on.

they do?

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
Bite Me... they Rhyme
"Scout" wrote in message
...
but they're not mutually exclusive terms CM, and are often synonymous.
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote
..as long as you don't confuse satire with sarcasm.

No... it was an auto-responder verification check.
Please indicate if you agree with the following.

1.]-Rhetoric vs Reason = not mutually exclusive / often synonymous
2.]-Sarcasm vs Satire = not mutually exclusive / often synonymous
3.]-Rhyme vs Reason = mutually exclusive / not synonymous

CM






"Scout" wrote in message
...
they do?

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
Bite Me... they Rhyme
"Scout" wrote in message
...
but they're not mutually exclusive terms CM, and are often synonymous.
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote
..as long as you don't confuse satire with sarcasm.

I'll have to think over all these choices. Meantime it'd be terrific if you
could help me out with this survey. Just indicate which best describes your
current state:
1. I'm drunk.
2. I'm high.
3. I'm depressed
4. I'm angry
5. I'm over-masturbated.
6. I'm Canadian

Thanks in advance.
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
No... it was an auto-responder verification check.
Please indicate if you agree with the following.

1.]-Rhetoric vs Reason = not mutually exclusive / often synonymous
2.]-Sarcasm vs Satire = not mutually exclusive / often synonymous
3.]-Rhyme vs Reason = mutually exclusive / not synonymous

CM






"Scout" wrote in message
...
they do?

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
Bite Me... they Rhyme
"Scout" wrote in message
...
but they're not mutually exclusive terms CM, and are often synonymous.
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote
..as long as you don't confuse satire with sarcasm.

No to 1;2;3;4; & 6..... the obvious and suggested answer to 5 is always -"3
x day whether I'm gettin' it or not"....

Now please..... I'm trying to listen to the CBC Broadcast of " The
Revolutionary Death of the Medieval Cathars" while I simulantaneuously work
on a highly technical post construction report in a futile effort to elevate
my intellectual capacity so I can discuss a variety of subject matters on
par with both you and Bob!

Boy Oh Boy!!!... I can't wait for the scheduled 3 hours of Classical Music
on CBC at 2200hrs tonight!!

Yesiree... I'll be real smart soon!

CM

"Scout" wrote in message
...
I'll have to think over all these choices. Meantime it'd be terrific if
you could help me out with this survey. Just indicate which best describes
your current state:
1. I'm drunk.
2. I'm high.
3. I'm depressed
4. I'm angry
5. I'm over-masturbated.
6. I'm Canadian

Thanks in advance.
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
No... it was an auto-responder verification check.
Please indicate if you agree with the following.

1.]-Rhetoric vs Reason = not mutually exclusive / often synonymous
2.]-Sarcasm vs Satire = not mutually exclusive / often synonymous
3.]-Rhyme vs Reason = mutually exclusive / not synonymous

CM






"Scout" wrote in message
...
they do?

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
Bite Me... they Rhyme
"Scout" wrote in message
...
but they're not mutually exclusive terms CM, and are often synonymous.
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote
..as long as you don't confuse satire with sarcasm.

I disagree with #3. Rhyme can have reason and reason can often rhyme.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
No... it was an auto-responder verification check.
Please indicate if you agree with the following.

1.]-Rhetoric vs Reason = not mutually exclusive / often synonymous
2.]-Sarcasm vs Satire = not mutually exclusive / often synonymous
3.]-Rhyme vs Reason = mutually exclusive / not synonymous

CM






"Scout" wrote in message
...
they do?

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
Bite Me... they Rhyme
"Scout" wrote in message
...
but they're not mutually exclusive terms CM, and are often synonymous.
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote
..as long as you don't confuse satire with sarcasm.

Understood.
I'm working on a construction report myself, or an concrete estimation sheet
I should say.
You'll be pleased to know that I'm planning on taking a #2 (not referring to
my original list), possibly followed up with a #5 (from my list), and if
done my work in time for the Eagles (Phila) at 4 PM, I may dabble in #1
(definitely from my list and not to be confused with any sick and twisted
practices otherwise associated with #1).
Scout


"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
No to 1;2;3;4; & 6..... the obvious and suggested answer to 5 is
always -"3 x day whether I'm gettin' it or not"....

Now please..... I'm trying to listen to the CBC Broadcast of " The
Revolutionary Death of the Medieval Cathars" while I simulantaneuously
work on a highly technical post construction report in a futile effort to
elevate my intellectual capacity so I can discuss a variety of subject
matters on par with both you and Bob!

Boy Oh Boy!!!... I can't wait for the scheduled 3 hours of Classical Music
on CBC at 2200hrs tonight!!

Yesiree... I'll be real smart soon!

CM

"Scout" wrote in message
...
I'll have to think over all these choices. Meantime it'd be terrific if
you could help me out with this survey. Just indicate which best
describes your current state:
1. I'm drunk.
2. I'm high.
3. I'm depressed
4. I'm angry
5. I'm over-masturbated.
6. I'm Canadian

Thanks in advance.
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
No... it was an auto-responder verification check.
Please indicate if you agree with the following.

1.]-Rhetoric vs Reason = not mutually exclusive / often synonymous
2.]-Sarcasm vs Satire = not mutually exclusive / often synonymous
3.]-Rhyme vs Reason = mutually exclusive / not synonymous

CM






"Scout" wrote in message
...
they do?

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
Bite Me... they Rhyme
"Scout" wrote in message
...
but they're not mutually exclusive terms CM, and are often
synonymous.
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote
..as long as you don't confuse satire with sarcasm.

Yeah... I hear that... I'm workin' with a 35Mpa, 5-8 air entrainment and 50
to 75mm slump... start adding retardant and plastizer into the mix and.....
well needless to say at the curing temps here of 4c.... I'm looking forward
to what the 3 day breaks come in at. I'm going to take a break from report
writing so I can don the fall arrest gear and hang over the side of a bridge
to snap some progress photos.

Now they have me slated for supervisor on a mega project during the winter
and that kind of destroys my plans to get a lay-off and enjoy life on pogey
for a few months. I'll have to ask for a substantial raise [again] and see
if that dampens their resolve! :-D

CM


"Scout" wrote in message
...
Understood.
I'm working on a construction report myself, or an concrete estimation
sheet I should say.
You'll be pleased to know that I'm planning on taking a #2 (not referring
to my original list), possibly followed up with a #5 (from my list), and
if done my work in time for the Eagles (Phila) at 4 PM, I may dabble in #1
(definitely from my list and not to be confused with any sick and twisted
practices otherwise associated with #1).
Scout


"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
No to 1;2;3;4; & 6..... the obvious and suggested answer to 5 is
always -"3 x day whether I'm gettin' it or not"....

Now please..... I'm trying to listen to the CBC Broadcast of " The
Revolutionary Death of the Medieval Cathars" while I simulantaneuously
work on a highly technical post construction report in a futile effort to
elevate my intellectual capacity so I can discuss a variety of subject
matters on par with both you and Bob!

Boy Oh Boy!!!... I can't wait for the scheduled 3 hours of Classical
Music on CBC at 2200hrs tonight!!

Yesiree... I'll be real smart soon!

CM

"Scout" wrote in message
...
I'll have to think over all these choices. Meantime it'd be terrific if
you could help me out with this survey. Just indicate which best
describes your current state:
1. I'm drunk.
2. I'm high.
3. I'm depressed
4. I'm angry
5. I'm over-masturbated.
6. I'm Canadian

Thanks in advance.
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
No... it was an auto-responder verification check.
Please indicate if you agree with the following.

1.]-Rhetoric vs Reason = not mutually exclusive / often synonymous
2.]-Sarcasm vs Satire = not mutually exclusive / often synonymous
3.]-Rhyme vs Reason = mutually exclusive / not synonymous

CM






"Scout" wrote in message
...
they do?

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
Bite Me... they Rhyme
"Scout" wrote in message
...
but they're not mutually exclusive terms CM, and are often
synonymous.
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote
..as long as you don't confuse satire with sarcasm.

We'll require an example Jon!

....but at least, unlike Scout, you answered the questions!

CM

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
I disagree with #3. Rhyme can have reason and reason can often rhyme.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
No... it was an auto-responder verification check.
Please indicate if you agree with the following.

1.]-Rhetoric vs Reason = not mutually exclusive / often synonymous
2.]-Sarcasm vs Satire = not mutually exclusive / often synonymous
3.]-Rhyme vs Reason = mutually exclusive / not synonymous

CM






"Scout" wrote in message
...
they do?

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
Bite Me... they Rhyme
"Scout" wrote in message
...
but they're not mutually exclusive terms CM, and are often synonymous.
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote
..as long as you don't confuse satire with sarcasm.

I'm sorry, I thought you were just busting my stones.
Ok then.
#1 - agreed, since rhetoric implies persuasion via reasoning.
#2 - agreed, since I said it before I can't disagree with myself now.
#3 - disagree, since the case can be made for their coexistence (e.g., if I
want to convince you that we should sail tomorrow, I might reason with you
that the "pink sky at night is a sailor's delight" [assuming the sky is
indeed pink this particular night]. So my reasoning is both rhetorical and a
rhyming!
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
We'll require an example Jon!
...but at least, unlike Scout, you answered the questions!
CM

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
I disagree with #3. Rhyme can have reason and reason can often rhyme.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
No... it was an auto-responder verification check.
Please indicate if you agree with the following.

1.]-Rhetoric vs Reason = not mutually exclusive / often synonymous
2.]-Sarcasm vs Satire = not mutually exclusive / often synonymous
3.]-Rhyme vs Reason = mutually exclusive / not synonymous

CM






"Scout" wrote in message
...
they do?

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
Bite Me... they Rhyme
"Scout" wrote in message
...
but they're not mutually exclusive terms CM, and are often
synonymous.
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote
..as long as you don't confuse satire with sarcasm.

Excellent!

Taking question 3 as the control.... it would follow that my initial
response to jl was in effect not only justified, but followed in rhyme &
reason to his comment.

Thusly.... my reply to you that it 'rhymes' was not entirely out of bounds
or incorrect.

Mooron logic.... not for the faint of heart or those who think within the
box. :-D

CM


"Scout" wrote in message
...
I'm sorry, I thought you were just busting my stones.
Ok then.
#1 - agreed, since rhetoric implies persuasion via reasoning.
#2 - agreed, since I said it before I can't disagree with myself now.
#3 - disagree, since the case can be made for their coexistence (e.g., if
I want to convince you that we should sail tomorrow, I might reason with
you that the "pink sky at night is a sailor's delight" [assuming the sky
is indeed pink this particular night]. So my reasoning is both rhetorical
and a rhyming!
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
We'll require an example Jon!
...but at least, unlike Scout, you answered the questions!
CM

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
I disagree with #3. Rhyme can have reason and reason can often rhyme.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
No... it was an auto-responder verification check.
Please indicate if you agree with the following.

1.]-Rhetoric vs Reason = not mutually exclusive / often synonymous
2.]-Sarcasm vs Satire = not mutually exclusive / often synonymous
3.]-Rhyme vs Reason = mutually exclusive / not synonymous

CM






"Scout" wrote in message
...
they do?

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
Bite Me... they Rhyme
"Scout" wrote in message
...
but they're not mutually exclusive terms CM, and are often
synonymous.
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote
..as long as you don't confuse satire with sarcasm.

ah I see now. You see, I didn't read jl's post.
You may take pride in the fact that while I may not read all others, I
typically read (most of) your posts. Hence, I was not aware of the reference
(i.e., I took it out of context).
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
Excellent!

Taking question 3 as the control.... it would follow that my initial
response to jl was in effect not only justified, but followed in rhyme &
reason to his comment.

Thusly.... my reply to you that it 'rhymes' was not entirely out of bounds
or incorrect.

Mooron logic.... not for the faint of heart or those who think within the
box. :-D

CM


"Scout" wrote in message
...
I'm sorry, I thought you were just busting my stones.
Ok then.
#1 - agreed, since rhetoric implies persuasion via reasoning.
#2 - agreed, since I said it before I can't disagree with myself now.
#3 - disagree, since the case can be made for their coexistence (e.g., if
I want to convince you that we should sail tomorrow, I might reason with
you that the "pink sky at night is a sailor's delight" [assuming the sky
is indeed pink this particular night]. So my reasoning is both rhetorical
and a rhyming!
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
We'll require an example Jon!
...but at least, unlike Scout, you answered the questions!
CM

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
I disagree with #3. Rhyme can have reason and reason can often rhyme.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
No... it was an auto-responder verification check.
Please indicate if you agree with the following.

1.]-Rhetoric vs Reason = not mutually exclusive / often synonymous
2.]-Sarcasm vs Satire = not mutually exclusive / often synonymous
3.]-Rhyme vs Reason = mutually exclusive / not synonymous

CM






"Scout" wrote in message
...
they do?

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
Bite Me... they Rhyme
"Scout" wrote in message
...
but they're not mutually exclusive terms CM, and are often
synonymous.
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote
..as long as you don't confuse satire with sarcasm.

Scout's example works for me.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
Excellent!

Taking question 3 as the control.... it would follow that my initial
response to jl was in effect not only justified, but followed in rhyme &
reason to his comment.

Thusly.... my reply to you that it 'rhymes' was not entirely out of bounds
or incorrect.

Mooron logic.... not for the faint of heart or those who think within the
box. :-D

CM


"Scout" wrote in message
...
I'm sorry, I thought you were just busting my stones.
Ok then.
#1 - agreed, since rhetoric implies persuasion via reasoning.
#2 - agreed, since I said it before I can't disagree with myself now.
#3 - disagree, since the case can be made for their coexistence (e.g., if
I want to convince you that we should sail tomorrow, I might reason with
you that the "pink sky at night is a sailor's delight" [assuming the sky
is indeed pink this particular night]. So my reasoning is both rhetorical
and a rhyming!
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
We'll require an example Jon!
...but at least, unlike Scout, you answered the questions!
CM

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
I disagree with #3. Rhyme can have reason and reason can often rhyme.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
No... it was an auto-responder verification check.
Please indicate if you agree with the following.

1.]-Rhetoric vs Reason = not mutually exclusive / often synonymous
2.]-Sarcasm vs Satire = not mutually exclusive / often synonymous
3.]-Rhyme vs Reason = mutually exclusive / not synonymous

CM






"Scout" wrote in message
...
they do?

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
Bite Me... they Rhyme
"Scout" wrote in message
...
but they're not mutually exclusive terms CM, and are often
synonymous.
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote
..as long as you don't confuse satire with sarcasm.

I thank you... and wish to inform you that I usually do read most of your
posts as well.... for the wit, and rhetorical value... or at the very least
a balanced counterpoint to debate.

CM

"Scout" wrote in message
...
ah I see now. You see, I didn't read jl's post.
You may take pride in the fact that while I may not read all others, I
typically read (most of) your posts. Hence, I was not aware of the
reference (i.e., I took it out of context).
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
Excellent!

Taking question 3 as the control.... it would follow that my initial
response to jl was in effect not only justified, but followed in rhyme &
reason to his comment.

Thusly.... my reply to you that it 'rhymes' was not entirely out of
bounds or incorrect.

Mooron logic.... not for the faint of heart or those who think within
the box. :-D

CM


"Scout" wrote in message
...
I'm sorry, I thought you were just busting my stones.
Ok then.
#1 - agreed, since rhetoric implies persuasion via reasoning.
#2 - agreed, since I said it before I can't disagree with myself now.
#3 - disagree, since the case can be made for their coexistence (e.g.,
if I want to convince you that we should sail tomorrow, I might reason
with you that the "pink sky at night is a sailor's delight" [assuming
the sky is indeed pink this particular night]. So my reasoning is both
rhetorical and a rhyming!
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
We'll require an example Jon!
...but at least, unlike Scout, you answered the questions!
CM

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
I disagree with #3. Rhyme can have reason and reason can often rhyme.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
No... it was an auto-responder verification check.
Please indicate if you agree with the following.

1.]-Rhetoric vs Reason = not mutually exclusive / often synonymous
2.]-Sarcasm vs Satire = not mutually exclusive / often synonymous
3.]-Rhyme vs Reason = mutually exclusive / not synonymous

CM






"Scout" wrote in message
...
they do?

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
Bite Me... they Rhyme
"Scout" wrote in message
...
but they're not mutually exclusive terms CM, and are often
synonymous.
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote
..as long as you don't confuse satire with sarcasm.

Jon.. I'm proud of you... that's 2 posts from you out of 2 dozen without a
gay word.

Keep up the good work!

CM


"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
Scout's example works for me.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
Excellent!

Taking question 3 as the control.... it would follow that my initial
response to jl was in effect not only justified, but followed in rhyme &
reason to his comment.

Thusly.... my reply to you that it 'rhymes' was not entirely out of
bounds or incorrect.

Mooron logic.... not for the faint of heart or those who think within
the box. :-D

CM


"Scout" wrote in message
...
I'm sorry, I thought you were just busting my stones.
Ok then.
#1 - agreed, since rhetoric implies persuasion via reasoning.
#2 - agreed, since I said it before I can't disagree with myself now.
#3 - disagree, since the case can be made for their coexistence (e.g.,
if I want to convince you that we should sail tomorrow, I might reason
with you that the "pink sky at night is a sailor's delight" [assuming
the sky is indeed pink this particular night]. So my reasoning is both
rhetorical and a rhyming!
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
We'll require an example Jon!
...but at least, unlike Scout, you answered the questions!
CM

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
I disagree with #3. Rhyme can have reason and reason can often rhyme.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
No... it was an auto-responder verification check.
Please indicate if you agree with the following.

1.]-Rhetoric vs Reason = not mutually exclusive / often synonymous
2.]-Sarcasm vs Satire = not mutually exclusive / often synonymous
3.]-Rhyme vs Reason = mutually exclusive / not synonymous

CM






"Scout" wrote in message
...
they do?

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
Bite Me... they Rhyme
"Scout" wrote in message
...
but they're not mutually exclusive terms CM, and are often
synonymous.
Scout

"Capt. Mooron" wrote
..as long as you don't confuse satire with sarcasm.

"Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
...
Horass.. I'm proud of you... that's 2 posts from you out of 2 dozen
without a gay word.

Keep up the good work!

CM

Oz The Text I'm replying to is the one you keep posting ; that the USA
is not the whole world.
OT
P/S I don't give a damn is you reply or not. I'm finished with this
Post. Period.

Capt. Neal® wrote:



Read Mr. Bush's famous speech where he elucidated
the Bush doctrine that states if you are a country and
your government supports terrorists then your government
will be held accountable. Pretty simply. One would thing
even a knuckleheaded liberal might comprehend.

But the USA supports terrorism...

Cheers

On 23 Nov 2004 14:43:53 -0800, (Joe) wrote
this crap:


Why do we have to reinstate a draft?

So I can make lots of money.





Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now!

"Horvath" wrote
And no terrorists were found in Fallujah?



Sure ... they were free to come and go as they please now Saddam is gone.

And now they'll be free to come and go forever thanks to G.Witless.

"Vito" wrote in message

Prolly but I think Bush will hold a sham election that'll almost certainly
select a radical government then cut and run.

We'll know in a few months

This is what I can't understand...... nothing will be gained and yet a very
high price was paid.

The cloak of morality is ill afforded a conqueror. To win you must make the
battle decisive, the subjugation ruthless and the history written to
reflect your glory.

This new kinder, gentler face to war is totally wrong. It attempts to paint
good versus bad.... instead of winner versus loser.

I'd be really impressed if the USA went into Palestine!

I mean really.... that is the root of the cancer in the middle east. Or is
it Israel?

CM

Capt. Mooron wrote:
This is what I can't understand...... nothing will be gained and yet a very
high price was paid.

But truly, you don't understand.... something very great was gained!

1- Halliburton and a select group of gov't contractors have reaped (and
will continue to reap) billions of dollars

2- a small select group has used the natural emotional illogic of a
large number of voters to get a tighter grip on power

Surely both of those things are worth 1,200+ young lives, especially
when a large number of them are from poor & less-well-connected
families, who would only have ended up in jail or dead in car accidents
anyway.



The cloak of morality is ill afforded a conqueror. To win you must make the
battle decisive, the subjugation ruthless and the history written to
reflect your glory.

Yes but you have to wait a hundred years or so for the "glory" to
overcome the curses & pledges of vengeance from the defeated, and for
the peasants to have sweated off the crushing debt load.




I'd be really impressed if the USA went into Palestine!

I mean really.... that is the root of the cancer in the middle east. Or is
it Israel?

Several people within the Bush Administration have decided that Israel
is the 51st state, and that the problem with the Sharon gov't is that it
is not extremist enough. I would not joke about the Bush clan wanting to
invade Palestine.

DSK

"Dave" wrote in message
I think both you and Vito need to do a bit of reading. Each of you has a
far
too simplistic notion of the events leading up to, and following, the
partition of Palestine. There is plenty of blame to go around on all sides
of the issue.

I think the best route there is to sell all of them weapons.... let them
duke it out and when the dust settles deal with whoever is still standing.
Either take them out for some bogus non payment or settle on a deal for
compensation. That's when you move in... take over oil production or
anything of value and start selling weapons to the next conflict area. In 20
years you will have effectively taken over the world and hold no blame. You
guys call yourself Capitalists.. Bah!

CM

Dave wrote:
I think both you and Vito need to do a bit of reading. Each of you has a far
too simplistic notion of the events leading up to, and following, the
partition of Palestine.

Dave, while I don't claim to be perfect or all-knowing, I can certainly
claim to have read a heck of a lot of history. College level books on
the Middle East would overload Scotty's biggest truck.

When trying to explain stuff you gotta start with the basics!


... There is plenty of blame to go around on all sides
of the issue.


You're right. I did not mean to imply that the Israelis are blameless;
in fact one of my consistent criticisms of the Bush Administration is
that they have given the Sharonist gov't a blank check to act
unilaterally & aggressively. Not only that, but copying some of their
tactics. Bad idea... not just IMHO but the results are coming in all the
time.

Regards
Doug King

Hey, Mooron, you should read a book called 'Market Forces' by Richard
Morgan. ISBN 0 575 07567 8.

It's based on this exact idea. Dunno if I'd buy it, tho - not one of
his better books IMO. Borrow it from a library or get a used copy.

PDW

In article , Capt.
Mooron wrote:

"Dave" wrote in message
I think both you and Vito need to do a bit of reading. Each of you has a
far
too simplistic notion of the events leading up to, and following, the
partition of Palestine. There is plenty of blame to go around on all sides
of the issue.

I think the best route there is to sell all of them weapons.... let them
duke it out and when the dust settles deal with whoever is still standing.
Either take them out for some bogus non payment or settle on a deal for
compensation. That's when you move in... take over oil production or
anything of value and start selling weapons to the next conflict area. In 20
years you will have effectively taken over the world and hold no blame. You
guys call yourself Capitalists.. Bah!

CM

Dave wrote:

I was thinking a bit further back. Things like dynamiting Palestinian
homes
in some areas of Jerusalem following the partition, and massacres of
entire
villages on the part of both sides. Remember that Begin got his start as
head of an Israeli terrorist group.


No no, he was a "freedom fighter." Actually, Begin's career as a
terrorist was back pre-1947, wasn't it? Any armed group not representing
a recognized nation can be termed "terrorist."

IMHO the Arabs started the violence, not that it matters now. There was
no incentive for Jews... what were they going to do, murder the
occupants of a house, move in, and pretend that everything is normal?
The pre-Balfour Zionist movement bought... and paid cash for... more
land than now comprises the state of Israel. Of course, some of it was
in the same spirit that we "bought" land from the Indians.

But at some point you have to accept the status quo. IMHO it is
incumbent upon the Arabs states to recognize Israel. It is also
incumbent on Israel to live up to their side of any peace deals... so
far they have done so about as much as the Bush Administration respects
the Geneva Convention.

To have a good neighbor, you have to *be* a good neighbor.

Regards
Doug King

Capt. Neal® wrote:
Peter and his like have grown up in a world where they
could be comfortable never raising a hand to defend the
freedom they enjoy.

So, tell us all a few of the details of your military career in which
you defended freedom.

DSK

I served my time in the Army. I am an honorably discharged Viet Nam
era vet. I served as a military policeman.

What are your credentials?

CN


"DSK" wrote in message . ..
Capt. Neal® wrote:
Peter and his like have grown up in a world where they
could be comfortable never raising a hand to defend the
freedom they enjoy.

So, tell us all a few of the details of your military career in which
you defended freedom.

DSK

Crapt. Neal® wrote:
What are your credentials?

I'm smart enough to know that you're full of malarkey.

DSK

Look it up, then, I'm sure my military records are not classified.
(Though where I served might well be)

CN


"DSK" wrote in message . ..
Crapt. Neal® wrote:
What are your credentials?

I'm smart enough to know that you're full of malarkey.

DSK

Yeah, you served on a barstool.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message
...


Look it up, then, I'm sure my military records are not classified.
(Though where I served might well be)

CN


"DSK" wrote in message
. ..
Crapt. Neal® wrote:
What are your credentials?

I'm smart enough to know that you're full of malarkey.

DSK