My buddy who relocated to Costa Rica sent me the following as part of
his holiday greetings email:

"internet sessions and the "noticias" from el EEUU are depressing. I
spent my afternoon in a national park that contains public schools,
conservation programs, computer literacy, and foreign language--very
impressive. Languages, conservation, culture, national pride--all
because they have no military. This would make Dick Cheney crawl with
hate. I've split for the south and the beaches. No time for downloads today.

Desde Cafe de Internet Uvita, Puntarenas, CR.

Pura Vida

Harry, do you honestly mean that we (the U.S.) would be better off with no
military? Are you serious? If not, then why did you post this? Move to Costa
Rica if life is so miserable for you here... your friend did....

You are one seriously scary Democrat.....


--Mike

"HK" wrote in message
. ..
My buddy who relocated to Costa Rica sent me the following as part of his
holiday greetings email:

"internet sessions and the "noticias" from el EEUU are depressing. I spent
my afternoon in a national park that contains public schools, conservation
programs, computer literacy, and foreign language--very impressive.
Languages, conservation, culture, national pride--all because they have no
military. This would make Dick Cheney crawl with hate. I've split for the
south and the beaches. No time for downloads today.

Desde Cafe de Internet Uvita, Puntarenas, CR.

Pura Vida

On 21-Dec-2007, "Mike" wrote:

Harry, do you honestly mean that we (the U.S.) would be better off with no

military?

What's the difference? - we have a great military and no country.

Steve wrote:
On 21-Dec-2007, "Mike" wrote:

Harry, do you honestly mean that we (the U.S.) would be better off with no

military?

What's the difference? - we have a great military and no country.

No military no country.

Steve wrote:
On 21-Dec-2007, "Mike" wrote:

Harry, do you honestly mean that we (the U.S.) would be better off with no

military?

What's the difference? - we have a great military and no country.


Actually, all we have is a military that can take on and defeat some
third, fourth or fifth-rate countries in the world. We do not have a
military that could take on the Red Chinese or, in a few years, the
Russians.

What we don't have is the ability to defeat *some* third, fourth, or
fifth-rate countries and then rebuild them into something we like, which
was the fantasy of the idiots in the Bush Administration.

We got our butts handed to us in Vietnam by a practically non-country
armed with little more than the determination of its leaders and
followers. We fought to no better than a draw in Korea.

The last serious, bigtime war our military won was WW II, and that only
with the help of many allies around the world.

Our most successful military activity of the last 50 years was George
H.W. Bush's repulsion of Iraq from Kuwait. He, unlike his son, was smart
enough to know what to do, how to do it, who to involve and when to get
out.

On Dec 22, 10:00*am, HK wrote:
Steve wrote:
On 21-Dec-2007, "Mike" wrote:

Harry, do you honestly mean that we (the U.S.) would be better off with no

military?

What's the difference? - we have a great military and no country.

Actually, all we have is a military that can take on and defeat some
third, fourth or fifth-rate countries in the world. We do not have a
military that could take on the Red Chinese or, in a few years, the
Russians.

What we don't have is the ability to defeat *some* third, fourth, or
fifth-rate countries and then rebuild them into something we like, which
was the fantasy of the idiots in the Bush Administration.

We got our butts handed to us in Vietnam by a practically non-country
armed with little more than the determination of its leaders and
followers. We fought to no better than a draw in Korea.

The last serious, bigtime war our military won was WW II, and that only
with the help of many allies around the world.

Our most successful military activity of the last 50 years was George
H.W. Bush's repulsion of Iraq from Kuwait. He, unlike his son, was smart
enough to know what to do, how to do it, who to involve and when to get
out.

Oh, our military could win almost any war if lunatics like you would
just let them shoot back

wrote:
On Dec 22, 10:00 am, HK wrote:
Steve wrote:
On 21-Dec-2007, "Mike" wrote:
Harry, do you honestly mean that we (the U.S.) would be better off with no
military?
What's the difference? - we have a great military and no country.
Actually, all we have is a military that can take on and defeat some
third, fourth or fifth-rate countries in the world. We do not have a
military that could take on the Red Chinese or, in a few years, the
Russians.

What we don't have is the ability to defeat *some* third, fourth, or
fifth-rate countries and then rebuild them into something we like, which
was the fantasy of the idiots in the Bush Administration.

We got our butts handed to us in Vietnam by a practically non-country
armed with little more than the determination of its leaders and
followers. We fought to no better than a draw in Korea.

The last serious, bigtime war our military won was WW II, and that only
with the help of many allies around the world.

Our most successful military activity of the last 50 years was George
H.W. Bush's repulsion of Iraq from Kuwait. He, unlike his son, was smart
enough to know what to do, how to do it, who to involve and when to get
out.

Oh, our military could win almost any war if lunatics like you would
just let them shoot back


Yeah, that's the fantasy, you got it. There was plenty of "shooting
back" in Iraq and Vietnam. Our military defeated Iraq's military. Big deal.

On Dec 22, 10:17*am, HK wrote:
wrote:
On Dec 22, 10:00 am, HK wrote:
Steve wrote:
On 21-Dec-2007, "Mike" wrote:
Harry, do you honestly mean that we (the U.S.) would be better off with no
military?
What's the difference? - we have a great military and no country.
Actually, all we have is a military that can take on and defeat some
third, fourth or fifth-rate countries in the world. We do not have a
military that could take on the Red Chinese or, in a few years, the
Russians.

What we don't have is the ability to defeat *some* third, fourth, or
fifth-rate countries and then rebuild them into something we like, which
was the fantasy of the idiots in the Bush Administration.

We got our butts handed to us in Vietnam by a practically non-country
armed with little more than the determination of its leaders and
followers. We fought to no better than a draw in Korea.

The last serious, bigtime war our military won was WW II, and that only
with the help of many allies around the world.

Our most successful military activity of the last 50 years was George
H.W. Bush's repulsion of Iraq from Kuwait. He, unlike his son, was smart
enough to know what to do, how to do it, who to involve and when to get
out.

Oh, our military could win almost any war if lunatics like you would
just let them shoot back

Yeah, that's the fantasy, you got it. There was plenty of "shooting
back" in Iraq and Vietnam. Our military defeated Iraq's military. Big deal..- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Iraq is free, the surge is working, they are passing laws at least as
effectively as the current congress, oh yeah, and there has been less
individual attacks against innocent Americans during this
administration than there was in the last... 1 + 1 is still 2.

On Dec 22, 10:28*am, wrote:
On Dec 22, 10:17*am, HK wrote:





wrote:
On Dec 22, 10:00 am, HK wrote:
Steve wrote:
On 21-Dec-2007, "Mike" wrote:
Harry, do you honestly mean that we (the U.S.) would be better off with no
military?
What's the difference? - we have a great military and no country.
Actually, all we have is a military that can take on and defeat some
third, fourth or fifth-rate countries in the world. We do not have a
military that could take on the Red Chinese or, in a few years, the
Russians.

What we don't have is the ability to defeat *some* third, fourth, or
fifth-rate countries and then rebuild them into something we like, which
was the fantasy of the idiots in the Bush Administration.

We got our butts handed to us in Vietnam by a practically non-country
armed with little more than the determination of its leaders and
followers. We fought to no better than a draw in Korea.

The last serious, bigtime war our military won was WW II, and that only
with the help of many allies around the world.

Our most successful military activity of the last 50 years was George
H.W. Bush's repulsion of Iraq from Kuwait. He, unlike his son, was smart
enough to know what to do, how to do it, who to involve and when to get
out.

Oh, our military could win almost any war if lunatics like you would
just let them shoot back

Yeah, that's the fantasy, you got it. There was plenty of "shooting
back" in Iraq and Vietnam. Our military defeated Iraq's military. Big deal.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Iraq is free, the surge is working, they are passing laws at least as
effectively as the current congress, oh yeah, and there has been less
individual attacks against innocent Americans during this
administration than there was in the last... 1 + 1 is still 2.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Oh yeah, the Taliban did not have a predicted "surge" this summer,
they were much too busy dodging special forces to do much of anything
else, and we are addressing other threats like Iran and Korea, instead
of selling them our technology like the last admin... oh well, we all
know how that went

wrote:
On Dec 22, 10:17 am, HK wrote:
wrote:
On Dec 22, 10:00 am, HK wrote:
Steve wrote:
On 21-Dec-2007, "Mike" wrote:
Harry, do you honestly mean that we (the U.S.) would be better off with no
military?
What's the difference? - we have a great military and no country.
Actually, all we have is a military that can take on and defeat some
third, fourth or fifth-rate countries in the world. We do not have a
military that could take on the Red Chinese or, in a few years, the
Russians.
What we don't have is the ability to defeat *some* third, fourth, or
fifth-rate countries and then rebuild them into something we like, which
was the fantasy of the idiots in the Bush Administration.
We got our butts handed to us in Vietnam by a practically non-country
armed with little more than the determination of its leaders and
followers. We fought to no better than a draw in Korea.
The last serious, bigtime war our military won was WW II, and that only
with the help of many allies around the world.
Our most successful military activity of the last 50 years was George
H.W. Bush's repulsion of Iraq from Kuwait. He, unlike his son, was smart
enough to know what to do, how to do it, who to involve and when to get
out.
Oh, our military could win almost any war if lunatics like you would
just let them shoot back
Yeah, that's the fantasy, you got it. There was plenty of "shooting
back" in Iraq and Vietnam. Our military defeated Iraq's military. Big deal.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Iraq is free, the surge is working, they are passing laws at least as
effectively as the current congress, oh yeah, and there has been less
individual attacks against innocent Americans during this
administration than there was in the last... 1 + 1 is still 2.


Cripes. You sound like one of the Bush Admin apologists.

This line of yours is incredible:

" less individual attacks against innocent Americans during this
administration than there was in the last... 1 + 1 is still 2."

3000+ innocent Americans died on 9-11. That was during *this*
administration.