|
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 01:50:55 -0500, thunder
wrote: I give Gorbachev quite a bit of credit, but it could be they both needed each other to succeed. http://www.slate.com/id/2102081/ I really would like to say ok, they would have needed each other. But why this rather pathetic claim as a Reagan-victory. The title of this article you mention "How Reagan won the cold war" is just a (another) example of swollen rhetorics overestimating ones own importance. In Europe, as far as I can overlook, sentiments are as I described. Gorbatsjov was a unique, intelligent USSR-leader with vision. The barking from the side made not much difference. This barking had been going on for ages, so why did it result precisely at that moment ? Correct, cause Gorbatsjov entered the building. I don't know why it is necessary to claim this historical event as a Reagan-victory without ANY attention to fi recent developments in the satellite-states, without attention to the immense internal production-problems, without any attention to the distinction between process and event. I do have some clue in mind though. Please bare with me for just another second of your lifetime. What would become of the world if the dominant american style would become less bombastic selfboasting and more diplomatic. I think it would prevent the ongoing war from expanding further. But you as republicans have enough problems on your hands.... All I want to add is don't be surprised if your attitude keeps "friends" and "allies" from giving you the aid you automatically think you're entitled to. Regards, Len. |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
|
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
|
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
|
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
Len wrote:
I differ with your statement: "Whatever president of the US, Eastern Europe would have changed like it did." My sources are the news, opinions and comments by america- watchers (of various bloodtypes). In terms of who deserves the most credit it is unmistakenly Gorbatsjov. Why is it there is such a need to blow up the part Reagan played? "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" The beginning of the end of the Cold War On June 12, 1987, President Ronald Reagan spoke the people of West Berlin at the base of the Brandenburg Gate, near the Berlin wall. Due to the amplification system being used, the President's words could also be heard on the Eastern (Communist-controlled) side of the wall. The address Reagan delivered that day is considered by many to have affirmed the beginning of the end of the Cold War and the fall of communism. On Nov. 9-11, 1989, the people of a free Berlin tore down that wall. Of all his speeches, Ronald Reagan's "tear down that wall," address may well become the "Great Communicator's" best remembered. The following is an excerpt from President Reagan's address. "In the 1950s, Khrushchev predicted: 'We will bury you.' But in the West today, we see a free world that has achieved a level of prosperity and well-being unprecedented in all human history. In the Communist world, we see failure, technological backwardness, declining standards of health, even want of the most basic kind--too little food. Even today, the Soviet Union still cannot feed itself. After these four decades, then, there stands before the entire world one great and inescapable conclusion: Freedom leads to prosperity. Freedom replaces the ancient hatreds among the nations with comity and peace. Freedom is the victor. "And now the Soviets themselves may, in a limited way, be coming to understand the importance of freedom. We hear much from Moscow about a new policy of reform and openness. Some political prisoners have been released. Certain foreign news broadcasts are no longer being jammed. Some economic enterprises have been permitted to operate with greater freedom from state control. "Are these the beginnings of profound changes in the Soviet state? Or are they token gestures, intended to raise false hopes in the West, or to strengthen the Soviet system without changing it? We welcome change and openness; for we believe that freedom and security go together, that the advance of human liberty can only strengthen the cause of world peace. There is one sign the Soviets can make that would be unmistakable, that would advance dramatically the cause of freedom and peace. "General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization: Come here to this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!'" -- Skipper |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 03:39:48 -0600, Skipper wrote:
Len wrote: I differ with your statement: "Whatever president of the US, Eastern Europe would have changed like it did." My sources are the news, opinions and comments by america- watchers (of various bloodtypes). In terms of who deserves the most credit it is unmistakenly Gorbatsjov. Why is it there is such a need to blow up the part Reagan played? "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" snipping the part where the communication The beginning of the end of the Cold War On June 12, 1987, President Ronald Reagan spoke the people of West Berlin at the base of the Brandenburg Gate, near the Berlin wall. Due to the amplification system being used, the President's words could also be heard on the Eastern (Communist-controlled) side of the wall. The address Reagan delivered that day is considered by many to have affirmed the beginning of the end of the Cold War and the fall of communism. On Nov. 9-11, 1989, the people of a free Berlin tore down that wall. Of all his speeches, Ronald Reagan's "tear down that wall," address may well become the "Great Communicator's" best remembered. The following is an excerpt from President Reagan's address. "In the 1950s, Khrushchev predicted: 'We will bury you.' But in the West today, we see a free world that has achieved a level of prosperity and well-being unprecedented in all human history. In the Communist world, we see failure, technological backwardness, declining standards of health, even want of the most basic kind--too little food. Even today, the Soviet Union still cannot feed itself. After these four decades, then, there stands before the entire world one great and inescapable conclusion: Freedom leads to prosperity. Freedom replaces the ancient hatreds among the nations with comity and peace. Freedom is the victor. "And now the Soviets themselves may, in a limited way, be coming to understand the importance of freedom. We hear much from Moscow about a new policy of reform and openness. Some political prisoners have been released. Certain foreign news broadcasts are no longer being jammed. Some economic enterprises have been permitted to operate with greater freedom from state control. "Are these the beginnings of profound changes in the Soviet state? Or are they token gestures, intended to raise false hopes in the West, or to strengthen the Soviet system without changing it? We welcome change and openness; for we believe that freedom and security go together, that the advance of human liberty can only strengthen the cause of world peace. There is one sign the Soviets can make that would be unmistakable, that would advance dramatically the cause of freedom and peace. "General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization: Come here to this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!'" Hi Skipper I don't argue here about the literal quality of the speech writers of mr. Reagan. My point is there was a mr Gorbatsjov to address this speech to. His presence in the Kremlin was a necessary and in my view sufficient condition for the cold war to end. And that doesn't apply to that speech you refer to or do you really think otherwise? Thunder, Reading your other postings I came to the conclusion I have mistakingly addressed you as a republican american. I'm sorry about any offence you may have felt. |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
Len wrote:
I don't argue here about the literal quality of the speech writers of mr. Reagan. My point is there was a mr Gorbatsjov to address this speech to. Occasionally, a good navigator needs to step back and assess his overall position. This might be a good time for you to undertake such an action. You might ask yourself if you'd be better off if there never was an America to rescue Europe from the depths not so long ago. -- Skipper |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
"Len" wrote in message ... On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 22:46:10 -0500, "Jeff Rigby" wrote: The true reason is they couldn't outspend us! We were ever advancing our military and delivery systems. Imagine if you will the soviet military mind when he learns that US attack subs have been consistently inside soviet protected waters for 10 years and most of the soviet subs have been shadowed undetected for much of that time. Regan began a policy of informing the Russians of these facts by allowing the soviet subs to detect our subs as we come up behind then by our pinging them (One ping is like a radar lock for aircraft). This gave away a tactical advantage but put pressure on the government. Along with pressure on the military Regan put the world press to use. IF you grew up in Poland you probably couldn't hear many of his speeches. He simply pointed out that the Soviet economic system didn't work, that educated people were trying to leave Russia while our country had to patrol it's borders to keep people out. I differ with your statement: "Whatever president of the US, Eastern Europe would have changed like it did." I think it would have taken another 10 years and would have been very brutal with many internal fights and quashing of rebellions. Regan policies and speeches created enough support for Gornatsjov (sp) that he could turn internal Russian politics on a different course instead of the self destructive one it was on. I'd be interested in where you get your news and the books that were used in your education system. We have many here in this country that have a similar view of world events and I'd like to pin down the sources of this. Jeff, My sources are the news, opinion-papers and comments by america- watchers (of various bloodtypes). The your sources are all biased opinion. Each news organization has a bias. Each person writing an op-ed peice for a newspaper has a bias. Each individual oberserving an event has a bias. In terms of who deserves the most credit it is unmistakenly Gorbatsjov. Why is it there is such a need to blow up the part Reagan played? Don't you think any president with a smart advisor would have done not exactly the same but would have added in the same amount? No, Reagan was the drivinig force in tearing down the iron curtain. Let me put it in another way: What would have become of this alleged "Reagan-directed-end-of-the-cold-war" if Gorbatsjow hadn't been there but another Brenzjnev-type or Chroestjow-type? A few more years and a few hundred thousand people behind the iron curtain would be dead. As another poster here said, Reagan was in the car, he wasn't the driver but he was in the car. I admit to that. But any us president would have been in that car. The winners write the history and the loosers complain about it. In the future it will be read that Reagan won the cold war throught the economic might of the USA and the democratic principles that it promoted. Fair or unfair this is what history will see. |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
"Len" wrote in message ... On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 03:39:48 -0600, Skipper wrote: Len wrote: I differ with your statement: "Whatever president of the US, Eastern Europe would have changed like it did." My sources are the news, opinions and comments by america- watchers (of various bloodtypes). In terms of who deserves the most credit it is unmistakenly Gorbatsjov. Why is it there is such a need to blow up the part Reagan played? "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" snipping the part where the communication The beginning of the end of the Cold War On June 12, 1987, President Ronald Reagan spoke the people of West Berlin at the base of the Brandenburg Gate, near the Berlin wall. Due to the amplification system being used, the President's words could also be heard on the Eastern (Communist-controlled) side of the wall. The address Reagan delivered that day is considered by many to have affirmed the beginning of the end of the Cold War and the fall of communism. On Nov. 9-11, 1989, the people of a free Berlin tore down that wall. Of all his speeches, Ronald Reagan's "tear down that wall," address may well become the "Great Communicator's" best remembered. The following is an excerpt from President Reagan's address. "In the 1950s, Khrushchev predicted: 'We will bury you.' But in the West today, we see a free world that has achieved a level of prosperity and well-being unprecedented in all human history. In the Communist world, we see failure, technological backwardness, declining standards of health, even want of the most basic kind--too little food. Even today, the Soviet Union still cannot feed itself. After these four decades, then, there stands before the entire world one great and inescapable conclusion: Freedom leads to prosperity. Freedom replaces the ancient hatreds among the nations with comity and peace. Freedom is the victor. "And now the Soviets themselves may, in a limited way, be coming to understand the importance of freedom. We hear much from Moscow about a new policy of reform and openness. Some political prisoners have been released. Certain foreign news broadcasts are no longer being jammed. Some economic enterprises have been permitted to operate with greater freedom from state control. "Are these the beginnings of profound changes in the Soviet state? Or are they token gestures, intended to raise false hopes in the West, or to strengthen the Soviet system without changing it? We welcome change and openness; for we believe that freedom and security go together, that the advance of human liberty can only strengthen the cause of world peace. There is one sign the Soviets can make that would be unmistakable, that would advance dramatically the cause of freedom and peace. "General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization: Come here to this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!'" Hi Skipper I don't argue here about the literal quality of the speech writers of mr. Reagan. My point is there was a mr Gorbatsjov to address this speech to. His presence in the Kremlin was a necessary and in my view sufficient condition for the cold war to end. And that doesn't apply to that speech you refer to or do you really think otherwise? Reagan's speech writers tried to get "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" out of the speech and everytime Reagan proof read the speech he put the sentence back in. Thunder, Reading your other postings I came to the conclusion I have mistakingly addressed you as a republican american. I'm sorry about any offence you may have felt. We are all Americans, some of us lean left and other lean right but make no mistake we are all Americans first. |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
"jps" wrote in message ... In article , says... And yet, when the fecal matter hits the rotating cooling device, who does the world look to? Where do immigrants want to immigrate to? New Zealand? And how may get in each year? |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
"jps" wrote in message ... In article , says... Doug Kanter wrote: "Bert Robbins" wrote: Len, I do not think that a lot of the Americans on this newsgroup can comprehend what an "Ugly American" really is. Why don't you paint a picture for us of an "Ugly American." You are a stupid little man. And you are such a class act, Kanter. And where might that leave you? Oh yeah, in Derby. I'm sorry Dougie, I mised your dig at me. I'll try and do a better job of looking out for your insightful responses in the future. |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 02:46:05 GMT, Don White wrote: Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 19:39:29 -0500, " *JimH*" wrote: Personally, I'd vote for supporting Canada's entire military budget, but only if they bomb Quebec back into the stone age. ~~ mutter - French speaking dorks - mutter ~~ Better be careful. Just this weekend I saw the top Quebecer in Parliament talk about Quebec having it's own army. How many miles from Quebec border to your town? Trust me on this - if Quebec gets it's own "army", they will surrender as soon as they are formed. They speak French after all. :) The best French troops were not even French. |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
Jim C.
You are wearing blinders if you don't think Canada benefits from a strong US Military. "Jim Carter" wrote in message ... "NOYB" wrote in message nk.net... It's because of its neighbor to the south that Canada doesn't have to spend a lot of money on its military. Instead of buying all of those natural resources from you guys, what's to stop China from marching onto Canadian soil and just taking it? Canada does not rely on the US Military. We do not have the "enemies" that you have. We are a nation that uses diplomacy. China does not have the bad manners that other countries have. They do not march in and take over countries. ;-) Jim |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 07:31:57 -0500, "Bert Robbins" wrote: ~~ snippage ~~ In terms of who deserves the most credit it is unmistakenly Gorbatsjov. Why is it there is such a need to blow up the part Reagan played? Don't you think any president with a smart advisor would have done not exactly the same but would have added in the same amount? No, Reagan was the drivinig force in tearing down the iron curtain. Actually, history was on both their sides. The borders were already porous as a screened hatch in a submarine, the economies of the various Baltic states were becoming more Westernized with a healthy open black market fueled by some really good smugglers (a story of whom has never been written but I wish would be), Poland and Hungary had already become democratized - the forces of history. They were in the right place in the right time for it all to come crashing down. The fact that Reganites took credit for it is an accident of that same history. I suspect that the Pope deserves a big chunk of the credit for motivating people. Some of his comments on Communism during that period were very similar to Martin Luther King's on racism here. |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 13:22:42 +0000, Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
Someday, I really hope that the story of the Smuggling Monks is told. It's a very interesting by-product of that time and one that, fifty years from now, will become celebrated as important. I have no special knowledge of it other than somebody I know who knows somebody, etc, but that's going to be a fun read. I've never heard anything about them. Hopefully, someone will write it down before it's lost to history. What country are we talking about? Poland? |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
"Smith Smithers" wrote in message ... Jim C. You are wearing blinders if you don't think Canada benefits from a strong US Military. The only benefit that is possible is that Canada sells some excellent military equipment to the USA. Jim |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 08:04:31 -0500, Smith Smithers wrote:
Jim C. You are wearing blinders if you don't think Canada benefits from a strong US Military. Sometimes, just sometimes, I wonder if we benefit from a strong military. ;-) Bullets or butter? World's policeman doesn't come without a cost. |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 02:46:05 GMT, Don White wrote: Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 19:39:29 -0500, " *JimH*" wrote: Personally, I'd vote for supporting Canada's entire military budget, but only if they bomb Quebec back into the stone age. ~~ mutter - French speaking dorks - mutter ~~ Better be careful. Just this weekend I saw the top Quebecer in Parliament talk about Quebec having it's own army. How many miles from Quebec border to your town? Trust me on this - if Quebec gets it's own "army", they will surrender as soon as they are formed. They speak French after all. :) And the French battle flag is plain white :-) |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
Harry,
Even someone with your limited mental capacity can see the need for a strong military. You can disagree with the use of the military, but I don't believe anyone would recommend the US do away with it's military. You have amazed me with your logic in the past, so you might just recommend we do disarm the military. "Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Jim Carter wrote: "Smith Smithers" wrote in message ... Jim C. You are wearing blinders if you don't think Canada benefits from a strong US Military. The only benefit that is possible is that Canada sells some excellent military equipment to the USA. Jim Simps like "Smithers" believe the United States is the bastion of freedom and democracy in the world. Since the ascent of Bush, the United States has become a pariah, and I'd bet there are Canadians who wish they could move their country away from the USA so as to avoid any missiles aimed at the USA that miss. |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
Harry Krause wrote:
Simps like "Smithers" believe the United States is the bastion of freedom and democracy in the world. Since the ascent of Bush, the United States has become a pariah, and I'd bet there are Canadians who wish they could move their country away from the USA so as to avoid any missiles aimed at the USA that miss. Can we assume you'd clime up on that missile launcher to congratulate them as GI Jane Fonda did? -- Skipper |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
Harry Krause wrote:
There's no doubt Bush sets the standard for stupid, selfish, and shortsighted. That award goes to the special interests of the Looney Left. -- Skipper |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Skipper wrote: Harry Krause wrote: Simps like "Smithers" believe the United States is the bastion of freedom and democracy in the world. Since the ascent of Bush, the United States has become a pariah, and I'd bet there are Canadians who wish they could move their country away from the USA so as to avoid any missiles aimed at the USA that miss. Can we assume you'd clime up on that missile launcher to congratulate them as GI Jane Fonda did? -- Skipper Yawn. One Jane Fonda has done more good than you and every single member of your close and extended family. For the Vietcong maybe. |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
Harry Krause wrote:
I'd bet there are Canadians who wish they could move their country away from the USA so as to avoid any missiles aimed at the USA that miss. Can we assume you'd clime up on that missile launcher to congratulate them as GI Jane Fonda did? One Jane Fonda has done more good than you and every single member of your close and extended family. Yep, that kinda says it all. -- Skipper |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 09:20:42 -0500, thunder wrote: On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 13:22:42 +0000, Shortwave Sportfishing wrote: Someday, I really hope that the story of the Smuggling Monks is told. It's a very interesting by-product of that time and one that, fifty years from now, will become celebrated as important. I have no special knowledge of it other than somebody I know who knows somebody, etc, but that's going to be a fun read. I've never heard anything about them. Hopefully, someone will write it down before it's lost to history. What country are we talking about? Poland? And others - a lot of the Baltic States as well. I've only heard the story through a friend who is tight with some Special Ops/CID types and it's supposedly all true. I'll email you something off list and relate a few of the tales. Make it a double, if you don't mind. |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
And if we had listened to Carter we sure as hell wouldn't be in the
pickle we are in today with most of the world hating our collective guts. (And with good reason, I might add; we are the ugly Americans.) We wouldn't have this chickenhawk AWOL deserter presidummy for one thing. We might be somewhere on the road to self-sufficiency and conservation regarding our energy needs, for another, instead of only worrying how we can return value to the BP & Exxon shareholders. This administration is a lot like others before them, only more stupid, selfish and shortsighted. Capt. Jeff |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... I've only heard the story through a friend who is tight with some Special Ops/CID types and it's supposedly all true. I'll email you something off list and relate a few of the tales. Make it a double, if you don't mind. Could you make that a triple. I would love to read it too! Jim |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
Harry Krause wrote:
Simps like "Smithers" believe the United States is the bastion of freedom and democracy in the world. Since the ascent of Bush, the United States has become a pariah, and I'd bet there are Canadians who wish they could move their country away from the USA so as to avoid any missiles aimed at the USA that miss. Bingo!...That was the problem with the 'Star Wars' program.The US would intercept Soviet missles over Canadian territory. Why would we want that? |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
"Don White" wrote in message ... Harry Krause wrote: Simps like "Smithers" believe the United States is the bastion of freedom and democracy in the world. Since the ascent of Bush, the United States has become a pariah, and I'd bet there are Canadians who wish they could move their country away from the USA so as to avoid any missiles aimed at the USA that miss. Bingo!...That was the problem with the 'Star Wars' program.The US would intercept Soviet missles over Canadian territory. Why would we want that? Plutonium from the destroyed missile would be ingested by Northern pike, make them glow at night, and that would be fantastic for remote fly-in fishing lodges, which are always looking for a new way to attract new business. |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... Plutonium from the destroyed missile would be ingested by Northern pike, make them glow at night, and that would be fantastic for remote fly-in fishing lodges, which are always looking for a new way to attract new business. Doug, have you been to one of our fly in fishing lodges? They are fantastic! Great fishing! Tasty food! Jim |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
"Jim Carter" wrote in message ... "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... Plutonium from the destroyed missile would be ingested by Northern pike, make them glow at night, and that would be fantastic for remote fly-in fishing lodges, which are always looking for a new way to attract new business. Doug, have you been to one of our fly in fishing lodges? They are fantastic! Great fishing! Tasty food! Jim I'd like to, but I will not set foot in a single engine plane unless I have first hired two suspicious men who will kill the pilot's family if the plane crashes. I don't trust mechanics, except mine. |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
"Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... I'd like to, but I will not set foot in a single engine plane unless I have first hired two suspicious men who will kill the pilot's family if the plane crashes. I don't trust mechanics, except mine. You don't have to go by single engine plane. Some Outfitters have twin Otters on floats. A great aircraft. My brother had a Cessna 185 on floats but he traded that for a 210. He didn't like the statistics of float planes. Jim |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
Don White wrote:
That was the problem with the 'Star Wars' program.The US would intercept Soviet missles over Canadian territory. Why would we want that? Most of Canada a few miles north of the US border is desolate tundra. Would you rather that *fundamentalist* missile come down on New York? -- Skipper |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
"Skipper" wrote in message ... Most of Canada a few miles north of the US border is desolate tundra. Would you rather that *fundamentalist* missile come down on New York? Skipper Now here is one ignorant American. Skipper, did you not take a geography course in school? You have better take a look at the map of Canada to see where the tundra is located. I can give you some help. It's more than 1000 miles north of the Canada/USA border Jim |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
Jim Carter wrote:
"Skipper" wrote in message ... Most of Canada a few miles north of the US border is desolate tundra. Would you rather that *fundamentalist* missile come down on New York? Skipper Now here is one ignorant American. Skipper, did you not take a geography course in school? You have better take a look at the map of Canada to see where the tundra is located. I can give you some help. It's more than 1000 miles north of the Canada/USA border Jim As stated, a few miles. BTW, are you also saying a good percentage of the Canadian population does not live hugging the US border? -- Skipper |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
Jim Carter wrote:
"Skipper" wrote: Most of Canada a few miles north of the US border is desolate tundra. Would you rather that *fundamentalist* missile come down on New York? Skipper Now here is one ignorant American. Skipper, did you not take a geography course in school? Urban = 0.03%??? http://www.canadainfolink.ca/physical.htm -- Skipper |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
"Skipper" wrote in message ... As stated, a few miles. BTW, are you also saying a good percentage of the Canadian population does not live hugging the US border? Skipper Skipper, now you need to take a reading course too. You had better go over what I wrote, one more time. So a few miles, to you, is about 1,000 miles, correct? How big was your boat? 22 feet? Do you know how much that is? Jim |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
"Skipper" wrote in message ... Jim Carter wrote: Now here is one ignorant American. Skipper, did you not take a geography course in school? Urban = 0.03%??? http://www.canadainfolink.ca/physical.htm Skipper Are you now trying to tell me that you don't know what "urban" means Skipper? It means Cities and Towns. Jim |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
Jim Carter wrote:
So a few miles, to you, is about 1,000 miles, correct? Yep. -- Skipper |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
"Jim Carter" wrote in message ... "Smith Smithers" wrote in message ... Jim C. You are wearing blinders if you don't think Canada benefits from a strong US Military. The only benefit that is possible is that Canada sells some excellent military equipment to the USA. Those are US companies doing a nice thing for our norther friends by keeping you employed. |
a bystanders view on the us noise that is made here
"Skipper" wrote in message ... Harry Krause wrote: I'd bet there are Canadians who wish they could move their country away from the USA so as to avoid any missiles aimed at the USA that miss. Can we assume you'd clime up on that missile launcher to congratulate them as GI Jane Fonda did? One Jane Fonda has done more good than you and every single member of your close and extended family. Yep, that kinda says it all. What good did the ChiComs do for the Tibetans? Oh, that's right there is no mor Tibet. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:20 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com