On Thu, 23 Feb 2006 07:25:35 -0600, Skipper wrote:


And if you wich to review the source material:

http://tinyurl.com/fe6k

LOL, Google is your friend, use it.

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1903panama.html

Another copy of the Hay-Bunau-Varilla Treaty, how quaint. Since you
avoided my question, I'll give you a hint. The P. in P. Bunau-Varilla
stands for Phillipe.

So, would you like to explain how an engineer with the failed French
attempt to build a canal, comes to sign a Panamanian Treaty with the US?
Yup, we stole it fair and square.

thunder wrote:

So, would you like to explain how an engineer with the failed French
attempt to build a canal, comes to sign a Panamanian Treaty with the US?
Yup, we stole it fair and square.

The French had a substantial stake in the Canal. There was a railroad
and legacy force to consider. Their compliance was required.

http://www.czbrats.com/Builders/FRCanal/failure.htm

--
Skipper

On Thu, 23 Feb 2006 07:52:39 -0600, Skipper wrote:

thunder wrote:

So, would you like to explain how an engineer with the failed French
attempt to build a canal, comes to sign a Panamanian Treaty with the US?
Yup, we stole it fair and square.

The French had a substantial stake in the Canal. There was a railroad and
legacy force to consider. Their compliance was required.

http://www.czbrats.com/Builders/FRCanal/failure.htm

So again, what Panamanian gave the US a right "in perpetuity"? Surely, a
Frenchman doesn't speak for the people of Panama.

Skipper wrote:

thunder wrote:

So, would you like to explain how an engineer with the failed French
attempt to build a canal, comes to sign a Panamanian Treaty with the US?
Yup, we stole it fair and square.

The French had a substantial stake in the Canal. There was a railroad
and legacy force to consider. Their compliance was required.

http://www.czbrats.com/Builders/FRCanal/failure.htm

Further, regarding you statement about "stealing it fair and square", in
truth, we bought it fair and square. First, we recognized the
Panamanians in their struggle for independance and offered to protect
them from invaders. Second, we made substantial contributions to their
floundering country by funding their government.

Alaska cost the US $7.2 Million. The Louisiana Purchase from France cost
the US $15 Million. The small Canal Zone strip was PURCHASED for $10
Million up front and a quarter-million dollars per year in perpetuity,
AND $40 million the the French, not inconsequential sums unless you're a
Democrat. Suppose we are lucky Carter didn't give away Alaska and the
Louisiana Purchase territories.

--
Skipper

thunder wrote:

The French had a substantial stake in the Canal. There was a railroad and
legacy force to consider. Their compliance was required.

http://www.czbrats.com/Builders/FRCanal/failure.htm

So again, what Panamanian gave the US a right "in perpetuity"? Surely, a
Frenchman doesn't speak for the people of Panama.

You must be a Dumbocrat.

--
Skipper