| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
( OT ) ORigional Iraq coalition supporters (Not all sent troops)
John H wrote:
On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 07:58:51 -0500, Harry Krause wrote: Doug Kanter wrote: Marshall Islands - I *knew* someone was kickin' ass and takin' names in Iraq. "Jim" wrote in message ... Forty-eight countries are publicly committed to the Coalition, including: Afghanistan Albania Angola Australia Azerbaijan Bulgaria Colombia Costa Rica Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Georgia Honduras Hungary Iceland Italy Japan Kuwait Latvia Lithuania Macedonia Marshall Islands Micronesia Mongolia Netherlands Nicaragua Palau Panama Philippines Poland Portugal Romania Rwanda Singapore Slovakia Solomon Islands South Korea Spain Turkey Uganda Ukraine United Kingdom United States Uzbekistan This is a really funny list...are there Mongolian troops on horseback in Iraq? And how about those Macedonian swordsmen? What a fraud...the Bush Coalition.... And to be considered a "true" coalition, who must be added? I can't seem to get an answer to this question from you guys. A long list of countries willing to send troops for a long period of time, and on that list, many countries whose presence wasn't bought by the Bush-****ters with special concessions, deals, et cetera. You know, a real list of countries who really buy into the failed Bush doctrine. |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
( OT ) ORigional Iraq coalition supporters (Not all sent troops)
On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 09:19:41 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote: John H wrote: On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 07:58:51 -0500, Harry Krause wrote: Doug Kanter wrote: Marshall Islands - I *knew* someone was kickin' ass and takin' names in Iraq. "Jim" wrote in message ... Forty-eight countries are publicly committed to the Coalition, including: Afghanistan Albania Angola Australia Azerbaijan Bulgaria Colombia Costa Rica Czech Republic Denmark Dominican Republic El Salvador Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Georgia Honduras Hungary Iceland Italy Japan Kuwait Latvia Lithuania Macedonia Marshall Islands Micronesia Mongolia Netherlands Nicaragua Palau Panama Philippines Poland Portugal Romania Rwanda Singapore Slovakia Solomon Islands South Korea Spain Turkey Uganda Ukraine United Kingdom United States Uzbekistan This is a really funny list...are there Mongolian troops on horseback in Iraq? And how about those Macedonian swordsmen? What a fraud...the Bush Coalition.... And to be considered a "true" coalition, who must be added? I can't seem to get an answer to this question from you guys. A long list of countries willing to send troops for a long period of time, and on that list, many countries whose presence wasn't bought by the Bush-****ters with special concessions, deals, et cetera. You know, a real list of countries who really buy into the failed Bush doctrine. The question was, "Who?" John H On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay! |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
( OT ) ORigional Iraq coalition supporters (Not all sent troops)
Speculation as to what they offer
Afghanistan -- Afghans for the back of couches Albania ---- I Think they grow nuts Angola --- Don't they make sweaters (or is that angora) Australia -- Tough Troops Azerbaijan --- No idea -- suggestions please Bulgaria --- Caviar? Colombia --- Coffee? Costa Rica --- Coffee? Czech Republic --- They have troops there Denmark ---- Also troops maybe Mermaids? Dominican Republic --- Baseballs? El Salvador --- No idea Eritrea -- I'd have to work to find it on a map Estonia --- I think they have some support people there Ethiopia --- No idea Georgia ---- If the state Pretty women -- if the country maybe Muscle Honduras --- no idea Hungary --- A few troops Iceland --- Ski troops? Ice for drinks? Italy --- I think a few troops Japan -- Is thinking of backing out -- has done nothing yet Kuwait --- Parking for supplies Latvia --- Who knows Lithuania --- No idea Macedonia -- Those swordsmen Marshall Islands --- thought it a US territory Micronesia --- No idea Mongolia --- Those horsemen Netherlands --- some troops Nicaragua --- More coffee? Palau --- Coconuts? Panama --- Free Canal passage? Philippines --- Muslim infiltrates Poland --- some troops Portugal --- Wine? Romania --- Some troops Rwanda --- Diamonds? Singapore --- Street sweepers? Slovakia --- no idea Solomon Islands --- Wisdom? South Korea --- Talk of pulling out Spain --- About to pull out Turkey --- Won't even allow over flights Uganda --- No idea Ukraine --- Some troops United Kingdom --- Many troops, and lots of propaganda United States ---More troops than all others combined, bribes Uzbekistan -- I'd have to work to find it on a map |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
( OT ) ORigional Iraq coalition supporters (Not all sent troops)
Jim wrote:
Speculation as to what they offer Afghanistan -- Afghans for the back of couches Albania ---- I Think they grow nuts Angola --- Don't they make sweaters (or is that angora) Australia -- Tough Troops Azerbaijan --- No idea -- suggestions please Bulgaria --- Caviar? Colombia --- Coffee? Costa Rica --- Coffee? Czech Republic --- They have troops there Denmark ---- Also troops maybe Mermaids? Dominican Republic --- Baseballs? El Salvador --- No idea Eritrea -- I'd have to work to find it on a map Estonia --- I think they have some support people there Ethiopia --- No idea Georgia ---- If the state Pretty women -- if the country maybe Muscle Honduras --- no idea Hungary --- A few troops Iceland --- Ski troops? Ice for drinks? Italy --- I think a few troops Japan -- Is thinking of backing out -- has done nothing yet Kuwait --- Parking for supplies Latvia --- Who knows Lithuania --- No idea Macedonia -- Those swordsmen Marshall Islands --- thought it a US territory Micronesia --- No idea Mongolia --- Those horsemen Netherlands --- some troops Nicaragua --- More coffee? Palau --- Coconuts? Panama --- Free Canal passage? Philippines --- Muslim infiltrates Poland --- some troops Portugal --- Wine? Romania --- Some troops Rwanda --- Diamonds? Singapore --- Street sweepers? Slovakia --- no idea Solomon Islands --- Wisdom? South Korea --- Talk of pulling out Spain --- About to pull out Turkey --- Won't even allow over flights Uganda --- No idea Ukraine --- Some troops United Kingdom --- Many troops, and lots of propaganda United States ---More troops than all others combined, bribes Uzbekistan -- I'd have to work to find it on a map Most of these countries were bribed by Bush |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
( OT ) ORigional Iraq coalition supporters (Not all sent troops)
"John H" wrote in message
... And to be considered a "true" coalition, who must be added? I can't seem to get an answer to this question from you guys. A long list of countries willing to send troops for a long period of time, and on that list, many countries whose presence wasn't bought by the Bush-****ters with special concessions, deals, et cetera. You know, a real list of countries who really buy into the failed Bush doctrine. The question was, "Who?" John H John, you're missing the point. It's not a question of who, or how many more must be added. The question is one of ideology and/or material support. Please edit the list and describe what all these countries have contributed, other than allowing their names to be placed on the list. |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
( OT ) ORigional Iraq coalition supporters (Not all sent troops)
On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 17:08:26 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote: "John H" wrote in message .. . And to be considered a "true" coalition, who must be added? I can't seem to get an answer to this question from you guys. A long list of countries willing to send troops for a long period of time, and on that list, many countries whose presence wasn't bought by the Bush-****ters with special concessions, deals, et cetera. You know, a real list of countries who really buy into the failed Bush doctrine. The question was, "Who?" John H John, you're missing the point. It's not a question of who, or how many more must be added. The question is one of ideology and/or material support. Please edit the list and describe what all these countries have contributed, other than allowing their names to be placed on the list. The point is that no matter who or how many or how much, it would not be enough. When you are opposed to an administration, nothing it does will be right. Let's review some common topics: Money for higher education -- not enough Money for health care -- not enough Money for port security -- not enough Money for job retraining -- not enough Money for police and fire departments -- not enough Money for lower education -- not enough Money for prescription medicines -- not enough Money from the wealthy -- not enough Money from the middle class -- not enough Money for railroad security -- not enough Money for metro security -- not enough Money for welfare programs -- not enough Repaying national debt -- not enough Reducing the deficit -- not enough So just what is enough? If you answer honestly, there will never be enough of anything until a Democrat is in power. When everything we earn is given to the government and then doled out in welfare programs. John H On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay! |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
( OT ) ORigional Iraq coalition supporters (Not all sent troops)
John H wrote:
On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 17:08:26 GMT, "Doug Kanter" wrote: "John H" wrote in message . .. And to be considered a "true" coalition, who must be added? I can't seem to get an answer to this question from you guys. A long list of countries willing to send troops for a long period of time, and on that list, many countries whose presence wasn't bought by the Bush-****ters with special concessions, deals, et cetera. You know, a real list of countries who really buy into the failed Bush doctrine. The question was, "Who?" John H John, you're missing the point. It's not a question of who, or how many more must be added. The question is one of ideology and/or material support. Please edit the list and describe what all these countries have contributed, other than allowing their names to be placed on the list. The point is that no matter who or how many or how much, it would not be enough. When you are opposed to an administration, nothing it does will be right. Let's review some common topics: Money for higher education -- not enough Money for health care -- not enough Money for port security -- not enough Money for job retraining -- not enough Money for police and fire departments -- not enough Money for lower education -- not enough Money for prescription medicines -- not enough Money from the wealthy -- not enough Money from the middle class -- not enough Money for railroad security -- not enough Money for metro security -- not enough Money for welfare programs -- not enough Repaying national debt -- not enough Reducing the deficit -- not enough So just what is enough? If you answer honestly, there will never be enough of anything until a Democrat is in power. When everything we earn is given to the government and then doled out in welfare programs. John H On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay! Tax cuts for the rich - plenty of money for that. |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
( OT ) ORigional Iraq coalition supporters (Not all sent troops)
On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 17:41:56 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote: John H wrote: On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 17:08:26 GMT, "Doug Kanter" wrote: "John H" wrote in message ... And to be considered a "true" coalition, who must be added? I can't seem to get an answer to this question from you guys. A long list of countries willing to send troops for a long period of time, and on that list, many countries whose presence wasn't bought by the Bush-****ters with special concessions, deals, et cetera. You know, a real list of countries who really buy into the failed Bush doctrine. The question was, "Who?" John H John, you're missing the point. It's not a question of who, or how many more must be added. The question is one of ideology and/or material support. Please edit the list and describe what all these countries have contributed, other than allowing their names to be placed on the list. The point is that no matter who or how many or how much, it would not be enough. When you are opposed to an administration, nothing it does will be right. Let's review some common topics: Money for higher education -- not enough Money for health care -- not enough Money for port security -- not enough Money for job retraining -- not enough Money for police and fire departments -- not enough Money for lower education -- not enough Money for prescription medicines -- not enough Money from the wealthy -- not enough Money from the middle class -- not enough Money for railroad security -- not enough Money for metro security -- not enough Money for welfare programs -- not enough Repaying national debt -- not enough Reducing the deficit -- not enough So just what is enough? If you answer honestly, there will never be enough of anything until a Democrat is in power. When everything we earn is given to the government and then doled out in welfare programs. John H On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay! Tax cuts for the rich - plenty of money for that. Read the post and you'll see that your response is inane. John H On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay! |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
( OT ) ORigional Iraq coalition supporters (Not all sent troops)
"John H" wrote in message ... On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 17:41:56 -0500, Harry Krause wrote: John H wrote: On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 17:08:26 GMT, "Doug Kanter" wrote: "John H" wrote in message ... And to be considered a "true" coalition, who must be added? I can't seem to get an answer to this question from you guys. A long list of countries willing to send troops for a long period of time, and on that list, many countries whose presence wasn't bought by the Bush-****ters with special concessions, deals, et cetera. You know, a real list of countries who really buy into the failed Bush doctrine. The question was, "Who?" John H John, you're missing the point. It's not a question of who, or how many more must be added. The question is one of ideology and/or material support. Please edit the list and describe what all these countries have contributed, other than allowing their names to be placed on the list. The point is that no matter who or how many or how much, it would not be enough. When you are opposed to an administration, nothing it does will be right. Let's review some common topics: Money for higher education -- not enough Money for health care -- not enough Money for port security -- not enough Money for job retraining -- not enough Money for police and fire departments -- not enough Money for lower education -- not enough Money for prescription medicines -- not enough Money from the wealthy -- not enough Money from the middle class -- not enough Money for railroad security -- not enough Money for metro security -- not enough Money for welfare programs -- not enough Repaying national debt -- not enough Reducing the deficit -- not enough So just what is enough? If you answer honestly, there will never be enough of anything until a Democrat is in power. When everything we earn is given to the government and then doled out in welfare programs. John H On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay! Tax cuts for the rich - plenty of money for that. Read the post and you'll see that your response is inane. Harry is just reading from the Democrats Talking Points. |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
( OT ) ORigional Iraq coalition supporters (Not all sent troops)
"John H" wrote in message
... On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 17:08:26 GMT, "Doug Kanter" wrote: "John H" wrote in message .. . And to be considered a "true" coalition, who must be added? I can't seem to get an answer to this question from you guys. A long list of countries willing to send troops for a long period of time, and on that list, many countries whose presence wasn't bought by the Bush-****ters with special concessions, deals, et cetera. You know, a real list of countries who really buy into the failed Bush doctrine. The question was, "Who?" John H John, you're missing the point. It's not a question of who, or how many more must be added. The question is one of ideology and/or material support. Please edit the list and describe what all these countries have contributed, other than allowing their names to be placed on the list. The point is that no matter who or how many or how much, it would not be enough. When you are opposed to an administration, nothing it does will be right. Let's review some common topics: Money for higher education -- not enough Money for health care -- not enough Money for port security -- not enough Money for job retraining -- not enough Money for police and fire departments -- not enough Money for lower education -- not enough Money for prescription medicines -- not enough Money from the wealthy -- not enough Money from the middle class -- not enough Money for railroad security -- not enough Money for metro security -- not enough Money for welfare programs -- not enough Repaying national debt -- not enough Reducing the deficit -- not enough So just what is enough? If you answer honestly, there will never be enough of anything until a Democrat is in power. When everything we earn is given to the government and then doled out in welfare programs. John H Your response leaves the original subject behind completely. Please describe what each country on the list has contributed, other than agreeing to be on the list, and perhaps agreeing not to vote against us in the future at the U.N.? |
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| (OT) Some in Bush's 'coalition of the willing' are suddenly losingtheir will | General | |||
| ) OT ) Bush's "needless war" | General | |||
| Credible journalism or a touch of bias -- OT | General | |||
| OT--U.N. Unanimously Adopts Iraq Resolution | General | |||
Hybrid Mode
