let's fan the fires with this one:eek:

A textbook definition of cowardice (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15004160/)
(for anyone not aware of the Clinton/Fox Fiasco )

Some of us here have been saying so for years here, much to the scorn and derision of other forum members. Could it be that the US has finally woken up too?

Don't know how much of it is "woken up" and how much of it is "fed up", honestly.

And the "scorn" and "derision" only happen when you go on one of your Obsessive Compulsive tirades:D

Obsessive Compulsive tirades:D
If campaigning for the truth, freedom and equality etc. are obsessive compulsive tirades then I make no apology for them:cool: :p

Could it be that the US has finally woken up too?

Up yours again Rich,

The majority of Americans did NOT vote for that lying idiot in either election.

So I guess we didn’t need you to tell us after all.

If campaigning for the truth, freedom and equality etc. are obsessive compulsive tirades then I make no apology for them:cool: :phmmm...stronger hint, perhaps...

Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is a brain disorder, and more specifically, an anxiety disorder. OCD is manifested in a variety of forms, but is most commonly characterized by a subject's obsessive drive to perform a particular task or set of tasks, compulsions commonly termed rituals.

Psychoneurosis characterized by disturbing, unwanted, anxiety-provoking, intruding thoughts or ideas and repetitive impulses to perform acts that may be considered abnormal, undesirable or distasteful to the patient.

obsessions - recurring unwanted thoughts which are difficult to stop

compulsions - rituals of checking behaviour or repetitive actions which are carried out in an attempt to relieve the thoughts
now connect the dots...:cool:

Up yours again Rich,

The majority of Americans did NOT vote for that lying idiot in either election.

So I guess we didn’t need you to tell us after all.
Well Jenny it looks like I have to correct you yet again:rolleyes:
Bush was re-elected with a majority, please check your facts before engaging mouth, oh and try and keep a civil tongue when posting here, you're not at home you know!

hmmm...stronger hint, perhaps...

now connect the dots...:cool:
You're describing your President, not me:rolleyes:

Well Jenny it looks like I have to correct you yet again:rolleyes:
Bush was re-elected with a majority, please check your facts before engaging mouth, oh and try and keep a civil tongue when posting here, you're not at home you know!

That is my civil tongue Rich (better than you deserve I might add)

No Rich, I’m sure someone here has explained it to you more than once. Georgy Boy got elected by carrying the majority of votes in the winner take all larger states ( you remember the Electoral College).

In most states if you win the majority of votes ALL of the electoral college votes go to you. So you can easily win with a decided minority.

Tut, tut'

The voting patterns of the 2004 election showed little that commentators would not have predicted in terms of which group voted for which candidate. Those less well off tended to put their faith in John Kerry while those earning above average incomes supported George Bush. Minority groups went with Kerry while Bush received the majority of support from the white voters of America. Union members tended to go for Kerry.

:rolleyes:

ok...how about real numbers? True, GWB did win 286 Electoral Votes to John Kerry's 252.

However: (all numbers via US census 2004 & CNN election results)

Total population of the US 2004 = 293,655,404
segment of that which is 15yrs and older = 227,343,000
subtract from that, those in the 15-17 range = 12,821,000
that leaves a total population 18+ years of age = 214,522,000
GWB received 62,040,606 votes in the 2004 Presidential election = 28.92%

NO, Rich. The majority of Americans of voting age did NOT vote for W.

thus ends the math tutorial for the day:D

I also object to jsanders personal abuse, by all means attack a person's views, I have attacked Rich's views in the past, but just because a person has mad stupid etc opinions it does not make them mad stupid etc per se, besides I seem to remember somebody on a previous thread showing GWB did not have a minority vote, perhaps you can prive this to be incorrect.

Brian

ok...how about real numbers? True, GWB did win 286 Electoral Votes to John Kerry's 252.

However: (all numbers via US census 2004 & CNN election results)

Total population of the US 2004 = 293,655,404
segment of that which is 15yrs and older = 227,343,000
subtract from that, those in the 15-17 range = 12,821,000
that leaves a total population 18+ years of age = 214,522,000
GWB received 62,040,606 votes in the 2004 Presidential election = 28.92%

NO, Rich. The majority of Americans of voting age did NOT vote for W.

thus ends the math tutorial for the day:D

Nah,nah, sorry but you've left out the number that actually voted out of the equation. Bush won with an overall majority:rolleyes:

I am one of those who voted for Bush twice. The first time because I felt that Al Gore was a walking, talking joke of a tree-hugger with no credibility in the things he said he did. The second time was a tougher call, but I recall that again I was caught "in the balance" and had to weigh several factors, because both had lots of negatives. In the end, my 2nd vote for GWB was clearly a "lesser of two evils" vote. Sadly, it is only in the last couple of years that the really egregious viewpoints have come out. Knowing in 2004 what I know now, I might have voted differently. But hindsight is 20/20, my political crystal ball is somewhat more myopic.

Still, a very important number isn't the population of the USA or even the number of REGISTERED voters in the USA. What counts is the number of people who actually voted. When considering the actual voters, GWB won by a true majority. When considering the population eligible for voting, GWB still won by a plurality for which the true majority was "abstain."

Those who didn't vote either way can't complain now. However, I DID vote and am now unhappy with the choice. But I recall being unhappy with both alternatives at the time I voted, even if I can't remember the details.

I have no way to know what Sen. Kerry would have done. That's due to the myopicity of my crystal ball again. I can say with some satisfaction that GWB cannot be elected due to term limits.

Thank you Doc for a very clear and mature post reflecting the problems of all democracies, ie We vote for the lesser of the evils as we see it at the time.

Brian

Thank you Doc for a very clear and mature post reflecting the problems of all democracies, ie We vote for the lesser of the evils as we see it at the time.

Brian
Well I do apologise in advance for being somewhat pedantic here but the United States is not a democracy;)

Well if we are going to get pedantic I did say "we" not "you":rolleyes:

Brian

PS Off to see if Manure contiue to get stuffed in the second half TTFN

ok...we're talking around semantics now. What I said was:The majority of Americans of voting age did NOT vote for W.Which is not the same as:number that actually voted out of the equation. Bush won with an overall majority

Personally, I cannot stand the "lesser of two evils" approach, and they haven't yet put a "Hell no! Absolutely NOT!" box on the ballot along with the "yes" box, which means the only way I can cast a negative vote is through non selection.

oh, yeah...and griping everytime I get the chance that we've not seen a really stand out, viable candidate in how many years?

Brian

PS Off to see if Manure contiue to get stuffed in the second half TTFN
Well let's all hope we see them getting stuffed like that on regular basis:cool: :p

I also object to jsanders personal abuse, by all means attack a person's views, I have attacked Rich's views in the past, but just because a person has mad stupid etc opinions it does not make them mad stupid etc per se, besides I seem to remember somebody on a previous thread showing GWB did not have a minority vote, perhaps you can prive this to be incorrect.

Brian

Sorry Brian,

But if he can continue to abuse every aspect of American life and Americans, then I'm going to open ever counter of his with my new favorite one liner.

If Rich would just once lay off his incessant abuse, then I will refrain from personal attacks.

See Brian, I would not stoop to making general bad comments about the British, and in fact, I think personally attacking someone that deserves it is much preferred to making comments about his country.

Enough is way beyond enough.

Sorry Brian,

But if he can continue to abuse every aspect of American life and Americans, then I'm going to open ever counter of his with my new favorite one liner.

If Rich would just once lay off his incessant abuse, then I will refrain from personal attacks.

See Brian, I would not stoop to making general bad comments about the British, and in fact, I think personally attacking someone that deserves it is much preferred to making comments about his country.

Enough is way beyond enough.
Delusionary paranoia from the most powerful country on the planet:rolleyes:

The second time was a tougher call, but I recall that again I was caught "in the balance" and had to weigh several factors, because both had lots of negatives. In the end, my 2nd vote for GWB was clearly a "lesser of two evils" vote.

Sounds like Quebec politics. You vote for the guy you think is the LEAST dishonest.

The lesser of two evils is exactly what the moral majority goes with because we just try to make the best we can with what we've got and in four or eight years, we can change things up for a different trend but it always works out;

Democrat in office; split congress, split houses with majority Democrats = usually properous job markets nation wide, trade deficit decreases, timid war stances, scandals include caught lying, showing privates to governement clerks, housing market...doesn't care who is in office...jumps up and down all the time!?#?$!:D

Republican in office; split congress, split houses with majority Republican = usually down job markets nation wide, trade deficit growth, strong war stances, scandals include caught lying, cheating on taxes, illegal wire taps, housing market...doesn't care who is in office...jumps up and down all the time!?#?$! Simply doesn't give a crap!?#?$!:D...hmm a bit of a trend there...hmmm...not American, not European, very "human" in nature...hmmm...

If the U.S. system in anything was so bad, our accepted Motherland would not have mass immigrated here to develop and install such a system because they were fed up after what, at least 3 millenia of being told what to do by some old man or women who liked things just the way they were, suiting, them! Great conquerors in their own right but certainly laid the ground work for this little 230 year old slab of rock...

In fact, the indigenous peoples to first inhabit the recognized lands of the United States were, ASIATIC! So our American Indians actually fall into the class of peoples who actually immigrated here from Europe, because, they did!

At the classic time period in our history when what is now our political systems, social structures, arts, agriculture, slavery (yes, brought by Uncle Columbus and the kingdom of Spain!), etc...is 100% European in origin so thus, this ends the American bashing and debates for anti-US slander because we can truly and wholeheartedly blame Mother England, Spain, Scotland, Ireland, and Germany for her FIRST influences to what we have now in place that everyone else scorns us for...hmmm, there's that trend thing again...hmmm...very "human" in nature...hmmm...

So, like it or not, doesn't matter. You can't undo something 50,000 odd years old in the making because that is definitely SET in stone!

We can try to work together on most things and make things better or we can continue to point fingers until we run out of hands...

WE ARE YOU AND YOU ARE US so, lighten the hell up and help people or keep your close minded views to yourself because you are truly in the minority!:p

...look it up and read it all for yourself!: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States and http://www.picturesofengland.com/history/

I choose to be here in the U.S. and I have a great friend from Scotland who retains his citizenship but openly admits that the moral majority all over Europe simply don't understand the same kind of concepts that most people here don't understand either, like TRUE shared history, so let's teach each other and bring the learning curve up!

He's got a great attitude that blends perfectly; as much as he loves Scotland, his opportunity here is far greater and he knows the money he can make, the lifestyle he has, and the money he can share with family and friends back home simply would not be possible at home. No, it's not all about money but from this aspect, many things; pressures, lifestyle ease on his parents and friends are made drastically better because of his skills and opportunities to expand them here...hmmm...there's that trend thing again...PEACE!:cool:

Republican in office; split congress, split houses with majority Republican = usually down job markets nation wide, trade deficit growth, strong war stances, scandals include caught lying, cheating on taxes, illegal wire taps, housing market...doesn't care who is in office...jumps up and down all the time!?#?$! Simply doesn't give a crap!?#?$!:D...hmm a bit of a trend there...hmmm...not American, not European, very "human" in nature...hmmm...

:
No not European or "very human", mainly American

If the U.S. system in anything was so bad, our accepted Motherland would not have mass immigrated here to develop and install such a system because they were fed up after what, at least 3 millenia of being told what to do by some old man or women who liked things just the way they were, suiting, them! Great conquerors in their own right but certainly laid the ground work for this little 230 year old slab of rock...


You're still ruled by an old man with a history of megalomania and global domination. Which slab of rock is only 230n yrs old, by the way?

In fact, the indigenous peoples to first inhabit the recognized lands of the United States were, ASIATIC! So our American Indians actually fall into the class of peoples who actually immigrated here from Europe, because, they did!

Yes and Americans all but wiped them out

At the classic time period in our history when what is now our political systems, social structures, arts, agriculture, slavery (yes, brought by Uncle Columbus and the kingdom of Spain!), etc...is 100% European in origin so thus, this ends the American bashing and debates for anti-US slander because we can truly and wholeheartedly blame Mother England, Spain, Scotland, Ireland, and Germany for her FIRST influences to what we have now in place that everyone else scorns us for...hmmm, there's that trend thing again...hmmm...very "human" in nature...hmmm...


Yes but Europe woke up to the inhumanity of slavery and brought and end to it two centuries earlier than you, in fact the reason you demanded independance was to continue the practice.

We can try to work together on most things and make things better or we can continue to point fingers until we run out of hands...


When do you intend to start "working together"?

He's got a great attitude that blends perfectly; as much as he loves Scotland, his opportunity here is far greater and he knows the money he can make, the lifestyle he has, and the money he can share with family and friends back home simply would not be possible at home.

That's it MONEY, that's what America's about and maybe not so much rain

I still find it interesting as to how history will remember Geroge Bush. I am willing to bet that suprising as it may seem that he will be remembered well, as long as there is not another major terror attack on the US..

I still find it interesting as to how history will remember Geroge Bush. I am willing to bet that suprising as it may seem that he will be remembered well, as long as there is not another major terror attack on the US..
I think Bush will be remembered for

1) destroying the USA's relations with the rest of the world - solely for oil and personal "backhanders" (ref = fahrenheit 9/11).

2) Making the USA a laughing stock and the most hated country on the planet - yet keeping all this (via censorship) from the US people

3) allowing the creation any number of terrorist organisations who now have the pick of any country to kill innocent people - even the US government agrees ref (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/5382762.stm)

4) being a "world leader" who can't speak properly and probobly doesn't yet do joined up writing and has a childlike persona

5) being a religious freak and using that as excuses

Col

Well let's all hope we see them getting stuffed like that on regular basis:cool: :p

I deserved a bit of mickey taking I guess, After Manure's great goal all the fight went out of Benfica, typical continentals:D , and M U desreved the win.

Brian "From the home of the comeback kings"

Sorry Brian,

But if he can continue to abuse every aspect of American life and Americans, then I'm going to open ever counter of his with my new favorite one liner.

I could have sworn that in another thread J said that he was 46, but my eyes are dodgy so I guess it must have been 16.

brian

I also object to jsanders personal abuse, by all means attack a person's views, I have attacked Rich's views in the past, but just because a person has mad stupid etc opinions it does not make them mad stupid etc per se, besides I seem to remember somebody on a previous thread showing GWB did not have a minority vote, perhaps you can prive this to be incorrect.

Brian

Sadly, I've noticed that quite alot of our US colleagues resort to personal abuse. I've had it many times, as has Rich.

We just accept it as an American thing, I've decided its just a defensive trait - just one of those sad things really:rolleyes:

Col

2) Making the USA a laughing stock and the most hated country on the planet - yet keeping all this (via censorship) from the US people


Genuine question here:

Did the US not hold this position (in your eyes) before GWB?

You're still ruled by an old man with a history of megalomania and global domination.

... and you're ruled by one of his puppets :eek:

We just accept it as an American thing


What transposing the issue into a generic US trait? How original :rolleyes:

Brian "From the home of the comeback kings"
Sorry Bri, I always thought you came from Liverpool:confused:

... and you're ruled by one of his puppets :eek:
No, an idiot who's on his way out, voluntarily, before being thrown out:eek:

No, an idiot who's on his way out, voluntarily, before being thrown out:eek:

Oh yes, I've heard all about his great willingness to leave office.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5383408.stm

Tell me, has he actually set a date yet. Perhaps Georgey isn't done with him yet? :D

Oh yes, I've heard all about his great willingness to leave office.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5383408.stm

Tell me, has he actually set a date yet. Perhaps Georgey isn't done with him yet? :D
At leat he knows he's got to go or be thrown out, something that'll never happen to the chimp eh:rolleyes: :p

Genuine question here:

Did the US not hold this position (in your eyes) before GWB?

genuine answer here;

When I was little, anything American was a "must have", everything was so bright and brash and neon. The cars, the buildings, Elvis - the whole thing. We were so dowdy, America was the place with the panache to sell itself. We saw fantastic things on TV shows, places, big streets, nice houses, film stars, Las Vegas neon.

Vietnam changed my mind, I hated seeing napalm burning children running along the road, I hated the way the US soldiers got people to kneel in front of them, then shot them in the head.

But I like the rest of the world felt huge sadness on 11/9. Then Bush invaded Afghanistan and Iraq.:rolleyes: and all the sadness was destroyed by him.

So the US (in my eyes) before GWB was ok, in the sense it was accepted as having its "funny little ways" but it was put down to "ah well, thats Americans for you" - Clinton was ok, I liked him alot. Raygun was a bit of a joke but sort of likeable in a funny way. Smarmy Bush (senior) I didn't like because he was always on the take. JFK was really good but too popular which is why he had to be "eliminated". The others were a bit nondescript really. . . .Carter / LBJ etc.

Now that the US has created such death, danger and instability worldwide, I have reviewed my thoughts.

Col

No, an idiot who's on his way out, voluntarily, before being thrown out:eek:

But Bush knows exactly when he will leave, the office of President. Even if suddenly he turned into the best President the US had ever seen and gave everyone toffees that day is set. The only thing he can do is really mess up and be forced to resign. (At least that is my understanding of the US system).

Tony B Liar on the other had could in theory still be prime minister in 10 years time.

But Bush knows exactly when he will leave, the office of President. Even if suddenly he turned into the best President the US had ever seen and gave everyone toffees that day is set. The only thing he can do is really mess up and be forced to resign. (At least that is my understanding of the US system).

Tony B Liar on the other had could in theory still be prime minister in 10 years time.

Thank God for the 2 term limit.

Or George Washington.

The others were a bit nondescript really. . . .Carter / LBJ etc.

Now that the US has created such death, danger and instability worldwide, I have reviewed my thoughts.

Col

I find these two paragraphs really interesting.

Your concern is "death, danger and instability" and yet you describe "LBJ" as "nondescript". Forgive me, but that really doesn't make much sense.

Here is an interesting article (http://www.lies.com/wp/2003/10/20/us-deaths-in-vietnam-and-iraq-by-month/) comparing US casualties in Vietnam and Iraq. Make sure to view the final chart.

It doesn't begin to quantify civilian casualties.

Why is LBJ so "nondescript" to you while GWB is so monstrous?

Because he was a Democrat, obviously. :rolleyes:

Sounds like Quebec politics. You vote for the guy you think is the LEAST dishonest.

Why just Quebec politics?

Thank God for the 2 term limit.

Or George Washington.
What's Washington got to do with it?:confused:

No not European or "very human", mainly American - ..I'm truly shocked and in awe of the deep deep level of denial here and I can't go on...okay, I'm ready!?#?$!:p

You're still ruled by an old man with a history of megalomania and global domination. Which slab of rock is only 230n yrs old, by the way? - This old man is on his way out (good riddence) in about five weeks! Then, we all pick the next lesser of two evils! 230 years old since Europeans mass immigrated over here to create what you hate... In total, about 4.5billion years old like the rest of the rock, about the same age as your ideas!^&#$!:eek:

Yes and Americans all but wiped them out: Oh my God...so "Americans" was a race of people or something? Sorry, Rich, 2+2 does not equal 5, not matter what you've been taught...

Yes but Europe woke up to the inhumanity of slavery and brought and end to it two centuries earlier than you, in fact the reason you demanded independance was to continue the practice. - Again, history decided this for us all a long time ago with the kindom of Spain and Cristo Columbus...the fact that it lasted any time period was that "human" nature thing that you deny...Any race of people will exploit whatever they can as long as they can, and have!

When do you intend to start "working together"? - We can start as soon as you realize that 2+2 never equals 5 or anything else you want to throw a blanket over and come to the same conclusion as most everyone else, American, French, German, Japanese, whomever,...probably even Martian...FOUR my good man!:D

That's it MONEY, that's what America's about and maybe not so much rain - Our fair share of rain and money, you bet. It doesn't solve everything but you can buy your own kind of misery, which by all indications, you would, but peace man...you're entitled and it's people like you that drive the force that many people live by because we're all glad you have no power to change it!:D

Sorry Bri, I always thought you came from Liverpool:confused:
Just thinking of the Champions League final and the F A Cup final, as Manure and Plymouth weren't in them perhaps you took no notice.;)

Brian

Am I the only one who has difficulty following GML's posts?

Brian

What's Washington got to do with it?:confused:

George Washington stated as a guide line that presidents should not serve more than 2 terms.

GML - I find it amazing that in several threads you seem to blame the current situation on "the past" -

230 years old since Europeans mass immigrated over here to create what you hate...

All that shows (if its true) is that in 230 years, Americans have not changed anything and insist that the current faults (created by themselves) can be blamed on someone else.

Actually, that seems to fit with GWB's style of getting others to fight your wars for you - like arming the Taliban against the Ruskies and arming Israel to fight Palestinians, that way you don't get the blame for it.

Col

Am I the only one who has difficulty following GML's posts?

Brian
No Bri, I think we all are.

Col

George Washington stated as a guide line that presidents should not serve more than 2 terms.
so that was ignored then?

Col

No Bri, I think we all are.

Col
Thank you, I was beginning to wonder if senility, or worse the drink, was getting to me.

Brian

Thank you, I was beginning to wonder if senility, or worse the drink, was getting to me.


I think GML's username explains it quite well - "world champ"? that'll be the same world as in "world series" no doubt:rolleyes:

Col

I think GML's username explains it quite well - "world champ"? that'll be the same world as in "world series" no doubt:rolleyes:

Col

LOL

Brian

so that was ignored then?

Col

Only by Franklin Roosevelt during WWII, after that it became law.

Only by Franklin Roosevelt during WWII, after that it became law.

Although a couple of others tried (and failed) to get a third term.

IMO I believe it is one of the best laws in the US. It does safeguard against getting a manic for too long, or more importantly getting a dictatorship.

Just thinking of the Champions League final and the F A Cup final, as Manure and Plymouth weren't in them perhaps you took no notice.;)

Brian
OLdnews, Bri, old news:p

Although a couple of others tried (and failed) to get a third term.

IMO I believe it is one of the best laws in the US. It does safeguard against getting a manic for too long, or more importantly getting a dictatorship.
But the damage was done after just one year and isn't it odd that Americans don't trust their politicians and have to limit their term of office?:confused:

Why is LBJ so "nondescript" to you while GWB is so monstrous?
Far be it for me to defend LBJ, but it could be argued that he was drawn further into a war that had already started.
Bush on the other hand wanted a war in Iraq and was so obsessed with it that he totally ignored the warnings from Europe that an attack on American soil was imminent.

So if LBJ was drawn further into a war that was already started, why is the person that first escelated the war (JFK) seen by Colin as "really good?"

So if LBJ was drawn further into a war that was already started, why is the person that first escelated the war (JFK) seen by Colin as "really good?"
Cause he was murdered?:confused:

He was really good because he was murdered?

But the damage was done after just one year and isn't it odd that Americans don't trust their politicians and have to limit their term of office?:confused:


Unbelievable.

Are there no limits to which your demented mind will twist the facts?

Unbelievable.

Are there no limits to which your demented mind will twist the facts?
The facts are that your President is not allowed to serve more than two terms have I missed something that even you can't understand?

He was really good because he was murdered?
seen in a more sympathetic light, I suspect

The facts are that your President is not allowed to serve more than two terms have I missed something that even you can't understand?


George Washington and the rest of the Founding Fathers having been persecuted and taxed without representation for many years, by your fathers, were reluctant to let anyone have control over the country for more than eight.

After all your enlightened Euro thinking brought us WWI, WWII, and the Soviet Union. I guess there is something to throwing down the monarchs after all.

George Washington and the rest of the Founding Fathers having been persecuted and taxed without representation for many years, by your fathers, were reluctant to let anyone have control over the country for more than eight.

.

Like I said, you don't trust your politicians

After all your enlightened Euro thinking brought us WWI, WWII, and the Soviet Union. I guess there is something to throwing down the monarchs after all.
and your enlightened thinking brought you a civil war where Americans slaughtered Americands by the thousand and where the bitterness extends to this day and then of course there's 'Nam, the Phillipines, Texas, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Cuba etc. etc:rolleyes:

Like I said, you don't trust your politicians


and your enlightened thinking brought you a civil war where Americans slaughtered Americands by the thousand and where the bitterness extends to this day and then of course there's 'Nam, the Phillipines, Texas, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Cuba etc. etc:rolleyes:


You keep bringing up Texas. Texas won it independence from Mexico.

The Philippians? Didn't we liberate them from the Japanese?

Ah yes, the bitterness from the civil war, where we kept the Union from falling apart. Right.

Iran took some hostages from us a few years ago, other than that we haven’t had to kill any of them yet.

Afghanistan…well yes, we did arm them against the soviets, kind of like us keeping you Brits from speaking Russian, aye comrade?

Vietnam. Not much to say there. We should have let the French fight that one.

Cuba, I don’t think that it is in the league with even the smallest aerial bombardment from the 2nd world war or the gas from the first, but hey, a mouse and an elephant are both gray.

And last Iraq. Well I guess we all have our “Bay of Pigs”

The Philippians? Didn't we liberate them from the Japanese?


You stole them from the Spanish first


Iran took some hostages from us a few years ago, other than that we haven’t had to kill any of them yet.


You installed a puppet tihere prior to that to do your killing for you

Afghanistan…well yes, we did arm them against the soviets, kind of like us keeping you Brits from speaking Russian, aye comrade?


Like you kept us from speaking German:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Vietnam. Not much to say there. We should have let the French fight that one.


The French had already pulled out, had you kept your nose out there would have been just a quick civil war

Vietnam. Not much to say there. We should have let the French fight that one.

Cuba, I don’t think that it is in the league with even the smallest aerial bombardment from the 2nd world war or the gas from the first,

that's because Kennedy held back LeMay

And last Iraq. Well I guess we all have our “Bay of Pigs
Bay of Pigs was a minor incident, unlike Iraq

Am I the only one who has difficulty following GML's posts?

Brian

Sorry Brian...just trying to followup on the thread and the endless irreverance from Rich?$?!#:p

I'll take a little more time to followup so my comments can at least be followed better, even if they are still ignored or not read completely...we can't all be functional can we?...:D

GML - I find it amazing that in several threads you seem to blame the current situation on "the past" -

All that shows (if its true) is that in 230 years, Americans have not changed anything and insist that the current faults (created by themselves) can be blamed on someone else.

Actually, that seems to fit with GWB's style of getting others to fight your wars for you - like arming the Taliban against the Ruskies and arming Israel to fight Palestinians, that way you don't get the blame for it.

Col

I was just trying to bring some other readers up to speed but as I've quickly learned in my return here, some people just simply can't be helped.

You have also left many...many thoughts that bring back ancient ideals and excuse ridden stances that are just as old in their thinking and philosophies as the problems you point to as being "our" problems today.

*** Your GWB comment: I'm embarrassed for you! :o Relax, in about five weeks, you can continue to hate us all when we collectively elect someone else you can point your fingers at and mock but the U.S. will keep rolling because of that crazy thing I tried to explain to Rich; something very "human" in nature...Again, I'm glad you have no say in those matters or we'd all have our mickey's ripped out!#?$?!#...see, I can adjust to anything to make someone else feel comfortable, or at least try!

You guys still insist that anything that happens over here was at the consent and approval of EVERYONE here and I would have thought you were both far more intelligent than that but obviously, I was wrong!:p

What is it about that "blanket" approach of yours and those like you that is so overwhelmingly comfortable? I think it is simply the fact that it IS comfortable because expressing even a few more REALISTIC thoughts would require some more thought and some real thinking and you're just not interested in offering that effort or too lazy...fair enough...it takes all kinds...God Bless...:cool:

I think GML's username explains it quite well - "world champ"? that'll be the same world as in "world series" no doubt:rolleyes:

Col

Now come on, I'd expect a real stance from you at least. Anyone else, not worth mentioning here...

So, please tell us all what the problem is with, what I'm 101% sure you and your brood would refer to as being, our professional athletics..

It takes money and a lot of it on a scale that I'm sure would be attacked by you so get past that...

It takes an amazing committment that other nations simply aren't interested in investing the time and again, money so get past that,

It takes a genuine fan base that has proven loyalty in many other markets that again is lacking in most nations to offer competitive teams so get past that,

What's left, in essence, the U.S. and a few nations that have the guts to compete and the support of their people to persist...so, what's your point?

Unbelievable.

Are there no limits to which your demented mind will twist the facts?

No kidding! Our system, handed down from merry old England herself... but I know that's a sore spot for these guys so, anyway, it far outweighs having a puppet kingdom where a "royal" family makes absolutely no rules, no laws, pay no taxes, and that their people actually PAY to have sit on a throne...forever...as much respect as I have for the English people and their rich history, especially at the time when their kings and queens actually made decisions, it's views shared by these guys that makes things so difficult because they deny their own history...

Way to go jsanders!:cool:

Like I said, you don't trust your politicians

and your enlightened thinking brought you a civil war where Americans slaughtered Americands by the thousand and where the bitterness extends to this day and then of course there's 'Nam, the Phillipines, Texas, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Cuba etc. etc:rolleyes:

And you guys do trust your politicians?...come on, are we to believe that "human" nature to lie, cheat, and steal doesn't exist over there because YOU say so?

I'd go back to history but what the hell for???

So England's tyrannical oppression over Scotland and Wales for a thousand plus years...and France, and Spain, and Denmark, and Sweden, and Norway, and so on has no bearing at all on your ridiculous opinion over the U.S. who haven't oppressed anywhere near as many people in their history, even going back to the Neolithic Age!?$#?$! COME ON YOU GUYS...:rolleyes:

You stole them from the Spanish first

You installed a puppet tihere prior to that to do your killing for you

Like you kept us from speaking German:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

The French had already pulled out, had you kept your nose out there would have been just a quick civil war

that's because Kennedy held back LeMay

Bay of Pigs was a minor incident, unlike Iraq

Colin made it a very high point to try to remind me that my going back in history was pointless.

...Even though that's where the answers truly exist but anyway...

Now you return as our "History teacher"...you and Colin should start your own online History site and call it, naturally, "History for DUMMIES!" :p :rolleyes: :p :rolleyes: ...:D

call it, naturally, "History for DUMMIES!" :p :rolleyes: :p :rolleyes: ...:D
You've misspelt Americans

No kidding! Our system, handed down from merry old England herself...
It's nothing like our system we're a democracy

but I know that's a sore spot for these guys so, anyway, it far outweighs having a puppet kingdom where a "royal" family makes absolutely no rules, no laws, pay no taxes,
Her Majesty The Queen (god bless her) does pay income tax and has an income of her own, she recieves money from the government to enable her to carry out her duties. Unlike American politicians she's beyond corruption


Way to go jsanders!:cool
He was supposed to be gone yonks ago:rolleyes:

So, please tell us all what the problem is with, what I'm 101% sure you and your brood would refer to as being, our professional athletics..
1) your maths is out by 1%:rolleyes: obviously a product of US education, add on 1% and nobody will notice?

2) I never mentioned athletics

It takes money and a lot of it on a scale that I'm sure would be attacked by you so get past that...It takes an amazing committment that other nations simply aren't interested in investing the time and again, money so get past that,


But now that you have mentioned athletics, I agree that the performance enhancing drugs US athletes use must be fairly costly. Justin Gatlin obviously feels he is inferior without the aid of testosterone - now he has 8 years to think about it ref (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/08/23/SPGKOKNIN71.DTL)

It takes a genuine fan base that has proven loyalty in many other markets that again is lacking in most nations to offer competitive teams so get past that,Nice that the "genuine fans" support people who cheat and lie. A bit like supporting your government leaders.

What's left, in essence, the U.S. and a few nations that have the guts to compete and the support of their people to persist...so, what's your point?
I'm unclear what you mean by "whats your point":confused: I pointed out that your username indicated you are a "world champ" - I merely questioned which world you are referring to, the US world (of 2 countries USA and Canada) or the real world which contains reality

Col

George Washington and the rest of the Founding Fathers having been persecuted and taxed without representation for many years, by your fathers, were reluctant to let anyone have control over the country for more than eight.
Jenny, why wasn't it made law until after Roosevelt?

After all your enlightened Euro thinking brought us WWI, WWII, and the Soviet Union. I guess there is something to throwing down the monarchs after all.

the USSR was not part of Europe.

Afghanistan…well yes, we did arm them against the soviets, kind of like us keeping you Brits from speaking Russian
Thats a good one - the USA thinking about others? Come on Jenny, get a grip son, the USA always has a hidden agenda - it was a good chance to pop at the USSR without actually fighting - just like you're doing in Israel now.


So England's tyrannical oppression over Scotland and Wales for a thousand plus years...and France, and Spain, and Denmark, and Sweden, and Norway,

Try to find a history book that focuses on something other than the USA - read about the invasions from the Gauls, the Vikings, the Normans, the Spanish, the Romans etc etc, then you can discuss it properly.:rolleyes:

Colin made it a very high point to try to remind me that my going back in history was pointless.
I didn't say that - please read the posts properly if you are going to attempt a discussion - what I said was
All that shows (if its true) is that in 230 years, Americans have not changed anything and insist that the current faults (created by themselves) can be blamed on someone else.
Your references to the scrap of paper containing your rules is not cast in stone, you can't blame what you do today on others - which is what you elude to.

Col

1) your maths is out by 1%:rolleyes: obviously a product of US education

I'd still like to know how a product of UK education could describe the protagonists of the Vietnam war as thus:

JFK was really good but too popular which is why he had to be "eliminated". The others were a bit nondescript really. . . .Carter / LBJ etc.

Here's that chart again...

http://www.lies.com/images/entire_war_sm.gif

the USSR was not part of Europe.

Col

They sure wanted to be, Oh i remember now, we kept that from happening.

Something about war, death & charts comes accross as a bit belittling...:o

For Colin and Rich to understand you, you have to speak in a way they will understand, so belittling seems the way to go. :p

:confused:
When I was at school Moscow was in Europe, and therefore part of the USSR was in Europe,, when did it move?

Brian

Here's that chart again...
http://www.lies.com/images/entire_war_sm.gif


Sorry - you've lost me with the chart - what are you trying to prove? I got a headache trying to follow the cross-Atlantic war of words

:confused:
When I was at school Moscow was in Europe, and therefore part of the USSR was in Europe,, when did it move?

Brian
That was my memory as well, plus half (or so) of Europe belonged the them at one time anyway.

They sure wanted to be, Oh i remember now, we kept that from happening.
Here we go, next you'll be taking the credit for ending communist rule and replacing it with the Russian mafia:rolleyes:

I'd still like to know how a product of UK education could describe the protagonists of the Vietnam war as thus:



Here's that chart again...

http://www.lies.com/images/entire_war_sm.gif

Not really sure why you have such a problem with this Daniella

Nondescript
Lacking distinctive qualities; having no individual character or form

Can you give me a female name too, Rich? Pretty please?

Sorry - you've lost me with the chart - what are you trying to prove? I got a headache trying to follow the cross-Atlantic war of words

GWB is demonized 'cos of Iraq, Afghanistan etc etc.

Losses in Iraq pale in comparision to Vietnam.

I wanted to understand why LBJ and JFK aren't demonized too?
Why the discrepancy?

Not really sure why you have such a problem with this Daniella

Nondescript
Lacking distinctive qualities; having no individual character or form

Rule for GWB: Use of foreign policy to demonize allowed
Rule for LBJ: Use of foreign policy to demonize not allowed? :confused:

Rule for GWB: Use of foreign policy to demonize allowed
Rule for LBJ: Use of foreign policy to demonize not allowed? :confused:
No I was sure I'd already explained this to you, but here goes again, LBJ was drawn further into a war that he didn't start, after he'd bumped off JFK, of course.
Bush sought and got elected on a pledge to invade Iraq for a regime change

Can you give me a female name too, Rich? Pretty please?
Is there something you want to tell us?:eek: :p

GWB is demonized 'cos of Iraq, Afghanistan etc etc.

Losses in Iraq pale in comparision to Vietnam.

I wanted to understand why LBJ and JFK aren't demonized too?
Why the discrepancy?

Can I take a stab at this?

The rest of the world, ie Europe, was not dragged into Vietnam nor did any acts of terror flow from it, thus it can be ignored as a purelyUS thing, bit like raising tax on petrol(gas).

Brian

I still don't see why JFK isn't demonized. The only reason I got from you was that he was killed and therefore has gained sympathy in the history books.

I still don't see why JFK isn't demonized. The only reason I got from you was that he was killed and therefore has gained sympathy in the history books.

Is this a response to me or Rich or Col?

If me my point is that what he did did not have a negative effect on the UK and it is, I think, UK posters who are demonizing GWB and not others.

Brian

The rest of the world, ie Europe, was not dragged into Vietnam nor did any acts of terror flow from it, thus it can be ignored as a purelyUS thing, bit like raising tax on petrol(gas).


But surely Vietnam was a part of the Cold War which of course had global significance.

Is this a response to me or Rich or Col?

If me my point is that what he did did not have a negative effect on the UK and it is, I think, UK posters who are demonizing GWB and not others.

Brian

Sorry, it wasn't to you. I forgot to quote. It was actually to Rich. :o

Rule for GWB: Use of foreign policy to demonize allowed
Rule for LBJ: Use of foreign policy to demonize not allowed? :confused:


Was America as divided (at the start of Vietnam) as it is with Iraq. My understanding is that the anti-Vietnam protest did not start until about 66, 67, and really kicked in with conscription?

GWB seems to have built almost his whole presidency on the "War on Terror". It is almost the sole thing he will be remembered for (out side the US)

LBJ is hardly remembered at all.

I am sure if JFK was not shot history would have seen his presidency diffrently, and he would not be remembered in such a rose tinted way.

But surely Vietnam was a part of the Cold War which of course had global significance.
No it was an American war, we weren't so paranoid over socialism and justice

If me my point is that what he did did not have a negative effect on the UK and it is, I think, UK posters who are demonizing GWB and not others.


Wasn't it JFK who deployed nuclear warheads in the UK which resulted in the Cuban Missile Crisis?

Wasn't it JFK who deployed nuclear warheads in the UK which resulted in the Cuban Missile Crisis?
No, he deployed them in Turkey close to the Soviet border

No it was an American war, we weren't so paranoid over socialism and justice

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=8797

"I cannot emphasize, sitting in this position where I sit, how important this bill is. It provides military assistance to countries which are on the rim of the Communist world and under direct attack"

Vietnam not a part of the Cold war, that's a new one.

No, he deployed them in Turkey close to the Soviet border

...and Italy and the UK. He basically made your country a nuclear bullseye.

...and Italy and the UK. He basically made your country a nuclear bullseye.
"Fueled by concerns that the U.S. had more nuclear missiles than the Soviet arsenal, and, more importantly, that some of the American missiles were based a mere 150 miles from its boarders, in Turkey, the Soviet leadership grew increasingly desperate to somehow tip the balance of power in its favor."

There was never any mention of the Soviets at the time viewing your missiles on our soil as a menace and in any case we also had our own nuclear bombs since the early 50's

Been away to eat so will now try yo answer the points raised in response to my earlier post.

Vietnam going communist was not seen by the majority in th UK as effecting us to any degree , infact many of my contemoraries considered the Vietnam war to be a continuation of the Vietnamese war of Independence equating the Viet Cong to the Viet Minh, infact some cheered the US's bloody nose and thought it was their own fault for not supporting the French, but then post war American policy was to aid the fall of the European Empires.( I'm not going to enter a debate here about the rights and wrongs of that, I just state it as a percieved fact)

I support Rich's statements on the Cuban missile crises, as an aside we had a personal involvement in that (that might be a little OTT) as my eldest brother was in America training on Thor missile's electronics for the RAF , the first we knew was when his picture appeared in the local paper under the headline
"Local hero with his finger on the Nuclear trigger" , Spin has been around for a long time.:D

Brian

It's nothing like our system we're a democracy

Her Majesty The Queen (god bless her) does pay income tax and has an income of her own, she recieves money from the government to enable her to carry out her duties. Unlike American politicians she's beyond corruption

He was supposed to be gone yonks ago:rolleyes:

Absolutely, God bless her; she's the last of the classic period world rulers but the fact that she has no real say in your government and hasn't since her reign began (her mother had some real say and I applaud her reign as the last TRUE world ruler).

Still, the fact that she is paid very well to "carry out her duties" of simply being your Queen, is bogus!

"...she's beyond corruption" ...She's human. Especially in her reign and her Mother's if she didn't have direct knowledge of nefarious activities, I guarantee you that she was well aware they were happening...COME ON...you think she paid for Palace restorations with all her own money!#??$!

What do you think of either Charles or William as they ascend to the throne to become England's first King in over 100 years? And what do you think they might change or actually do for you and your countryman?

Always remember, as far as I'm concerned, when these folks dissappoint you with their actions, you are welcome to cross the pond and join the millions upon millions that beat you to it over the last 600+ years! :cool:

1) your maths is out by 1%:rolleyes: obviously a product of US education, add on 1% and nobody will notice?

2) I never mentioned athletics: You forget already...put the scotch down!#??$! - "Originally Posted by ColinEssex: I think GML's username explains it quite well - "world champ"? that'll be the same world as in "world series" no doubt Col" - So, I responded in kind...

But now that you have mentioned athletics, I agree that the performance enhancing drugs US athletes use must be fairly costly. Justin Gatlin obviously feels he is inferior without the aid of testosterone - now he has 8 years to think about it ref (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/08/23/SPGKOKNIN71.DTL)

Nice that the "genuine fans" support people who cheat and lie. A bit like supporting your government leaders.

I'm unclear what you mean by "whats your point":confused: I pointed out that your username indicated you are a "world champ" - I merely questioned which world you are referring to, the US world (of 2 countries USA and Canada) or the real world which contains reality

Col

That extra 1%...I knew you wouldn't understand that. I could have guessed a response was coming so I'll just say, that is the extra mental effort offered in some and sorely lacking in others...;)

Please, no geography lessons from you or Rich...you obviously live in your OWN WORLD, as we've all seen and read about!?#?$#!#:p

I'm absolutely with the opinion that drug enhanced athletes are losers and I don't support them at all, many here do not but you seem insistent on ignoring that very "human" nature thing because if you think some of your soccer players, weight lifters, swimmers, hell, probably even fencers aren't on something, you need to check a lot closer...look for hoof prints when they move!?#?!$!:p ;) :rolleyes:

Try to find a history book that focuses on something other than the USA - read about the invasions from the Gauls, the Vikings, the Normans, the Spanish, the Romans etc etc, then you can discuss it properly.:rolleyes:

Col

I would talk about those other groups but you can't even comprehend what happened and what easily could have happened in WWII without our help so why would I dig further into the past knowing full well, that would get turned around into, unbelieveably, the U.S.A.'s fault as well!?#?$!

If you ever get the chance, I'm sure you can find plenty of texts that feature, now prepare yourself...US, FRENCH, ENGLISH, SPANISH, RUSSIAN and many others joined TOGETHER to defeat Nazi Germany or are your books "slightly" different?:p

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d8/Tehran_Conference%2C_1943.jpg/280px-Tehran_Conference%2C_1943.jpg

Dates on which states joined the Allies:

Following the German invasion of Poland
Poland: 1939, 1 September
United Kingdom: 1939, 3 September
France: 1939, 3 September
Australia: 1939, 3 September
New Zealand: 1939, 3 September
Nepal: 1939, 4 September
Newfoundland: 1939, 4 September
Tonga: 1939, 4 September
South Africa: 1939, 6 September
Canada: 1939, 10 September

After the end of the Phony War
Norway: 1940, 9 April
Belgium: 1940, 10 May
Luxembourg: 1940, 10 May
Netherlands: 1940, 10 May
Free France: 1940, 18 June
Greece: 1940, 28 October
Kingdom of Yugoslavia: 1941, 6 April
Soviet Union: 1941, 22 June
Tannu Tuva: 1941, 25 June

After the attack on Pearl Harbor
Panama: 1941, 7 December
Philippines: 1941, 7 December
Costa Rica: 1941, 8 December
Dominican Republic: 1941, 8 December
El Salvador: 1941, 8 December
Haiti: 1941, 8 December
Honduras: 1941, 8 December
Nicaragua: 1941, 8 December
United States of America: 1941, 8 December
Republic of China: 1941, 9 December
Guatemala: 1941, 9 December
Cuba: 1941, 9 December
Provisional Government of the Republic of Korea (Govt. in exile): 1941, 9 December
Czechoslovakia (Govt. in exile) : 1941, 16 December
Mexico: 1942, 22 May
Brazil: 1942, 22 August
Ethiopia: 1942, 14 December
Iraq: 1943, 17 January
Bolivia: 1943, 7 April
Iran: 1943, 9 September
Italy: 1943, 13 October (formerly a member of the Axis)
Colombia: 1943, 26 November
Liberia: 1944, 27 January

After D-Day
Romania: 1944, 25 August (formerly a member of the Axis)
Bulgaria: 1944, 8 September (formerly a member of the Axis)
Finland September 19, 1944 (formerly a member of the Axis)
San Marino: 1944, 21 September
Albania: 1944, 26 October
Hungary: 1945, 20 January (formerly a member of the Axis)
Bahawalpur: 1945, 2 February
Ecuador: 1945, 2 February
Paraguay: 1945, 7 February
Peru: 1945, 12 February
Uruguay: 1945, 15 February
Venezuela: 1945, 15 February
Turkey: 1945, 23 February
Lebanon: 1945, 27 February
Saudi Arabia: 1945 March
Argentina: 1945, 27 March
Chile: 1945, 11 April
People's Republic of Mongolia: 1945, 9 August

I know it completely maddens you and some others here to see people get along but here's the ultimate proof that they did so even people like you could have the privilege of being irreverent, today!

Here's the Atlantic Charter link...study yourself because this laid the groundwork for a lot of what we have to do today; a promise over the years to two great men; President Franklin D. Roosevelt and BPM Sir Winston Churchill!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_Charter

Absolutely, God bless her; she's the last of the classic period world rulers but the fact that she has no real say in your government and hasn't since her reign began (her mother had some real say and I applaud her reign as the last TRUE world ruler).


Her mother had no more say than her, in fact she had less, she wasn't Queen

Still, the fact that she is paid very well to "carry out her duties" of simply being your Queen, is bogus!

No more bogus than Bush claiming to be the leader of the "free world":rolleyes:


"...she's beyond corruption" ...She's human. Especially in her reign and her Mother's if she didn't have direct knowledge of nefarious activities, I guarantee you that she was well aware they were happening...COME ON...

Which activities are you on about?

you think she paid for Palace restorations with all her own money!#??$!

No, why would she, does Bush pay for repairs to the white house?

What do you think of either Charles or William as they ascend to the throne to become England's first King in over 100 years? And what do you think they might change or actually do for you and your countryman?



They will continue where their mothers left off, ie beyond reproach and not in the back pocket of industry

Always remember, as far as I'm concerned, when these folks dissappoint you with their actions, you are welcome to cross the pond and join the millions upon millions that beat you to it over the last 600+ years!

We're not disappointed, still you've only two years left with the clown eh:rolleyes:

I would talk about those other groups but you can't even comprehend what happened and what easily could have happened in WWII without our help

I note from the rest of your post that you turned up late, why was that?:confused: :rolleyes:

What do you think of either Charles or William as they ascend to the throne to become England's first King in over 100 years? And what do you think they might change or actually do for you and your countryman?

I very much doubt that the Queen will be around for another 46 years. The Queens father was King and he died in 1951.

What do you think of either Charles or William as they ascend to the throne to become England's first King in over 100 years?

King Edward VII . . . . . . . . . .1901 - 1910
King George V . . . . . . . . . . . 1910 - 1936
King George VI . . . . . . . . . . .1936 - 1952

Suggest you read up on UK monarchy dates.:rolleyes: unless of course you are displaying your complete inability to subtract two numbers correctly.

Always remember, as far as I'm concerned, when these folks dissappoint you with their actions, you are welcome to cross the pond and join the millions upon millions that beat you to it over the last 600+ years!

I have no idea what you're babbling on about. :confused:

Col

ps - I never mentioned athletics. I am still trying to assertain what you are "world champ" of - apart from posting unreferenced "facts" that is:rolleyes:

Absolutely, God bless her; she's the last of the classic period world rulers
What's your feelings towards all the other nations with a monarchy? The UK is not the only one. (I will post a list should you be unable to find one)

I get the impression that just because you live in a dictatorship, there is a little envy there?

Col

now prepare yourself...US, FRENCH, ENGLISH, SPANISH, RUSSIAN and many others joined TOGETHER to defeat Nazi Germany or are your books "slightly" different?:p

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d8/Tehran_Conference%2C_1943.jpg/280px-Tehran_Conference%2C_1943.jpg

Dates on which states joined the Allies:

Following the German invasion of Poland
Poland: 1939, 1 September
United Kingdom: 1939, 3 September
France: 1939, 3 September
Australia: 1939, 3 September
New Zealand: 1939, 3 September
Nepal: 1939, 4 September
Newfoundland: 1939, 4 September
Tonga: 1939, 4 September
South Africa: 1939, 6 September
Canada: 1939, 10 September

After the end of the Phony War
Norway: 1940, 9 April
Belgium: 1940, 10 May
Luxembourg: 1940, 10 May
Netherlands: 1940, 10 May
Free France: 1940, 18 June
Greece: 1940, 28 October
Kingdom of Yugoslavia: 1941, 6 April
Soviet Union: 1941, 22 June
Tannu Tuva: 1941, 25 June

After the attack on Pearl Harbor
Panama: 1941, 7 December
Philippines: 1941, 7 December
Costa Rica: 1941, 8 December
Dominican Republic: 1941, 8 December
El Salvador: 1941, 8 December
Haiti: 1941, 8 December
Honduras: 1941, 8 December
Nicaragua: 1941, 8 December
United States of America: 1941, 8 December
Republic of China: 1941, 9 December
Guatemala: 1941, 9 December
Cuba: 1941, 9 December
Provisional Government of the Republic of Korea (Govt. in exile): 1941, 9 December
Czechoslovakia (Govt. in exile) : 1941, 16 December
Mexico: 1942, 22 May
Brazil: 1942, 22 August
Ethiopia: 1942, 14 December
Iraq: 1943, 17 January
Bolivia: 1943, 7 April
Iran: 1943, 9 September
Italy: 1943, 13 October (formerly a member of the Axis)
Colombia: 1943, 26 November
Liberia: 1944, 27 January

After D-Day
Romania: 1944, 25 August (formerly a member of the Axis)
Bulgaria: 1944, 8 September (formerly a member of the Axis)
Finland September 19, 1944 (formerly a member of the Axis)
San Marino: 1944, 21 September
Albania: 1944, 26 October
Hungary: 1945, 20 January (formerly a member of the Axis)
Bahawalpur: 1945, 2 February
Ecuador: 1945, 2 February
Paraguay: 1945, 7 February
Peru: 1945, 12 February
Uruguay: 1945, 15 February
Venezuela: 1945, 15 February
Turkey: 1945, 23 February
Lebanon: 1945, 27 February
Saudi Arabia: 1945 March
Argentina: 1945, 27 March
Chile: 1945, 11 April
People's Republic of Mongolia: 1945, 9 August

I know it completely maddens you and some others here to see people get along but here's the ultimate proof that they did so even people like you could have the privilege of being irreverent, today!



This post is the ultimate proof that arguing with GML is a waste of time, the man is as thick as 2 short planks, Where does it list Spain as joining the fight against the nazis, it is recognised as one of Franco's achievements in that he kept Spain out of WW2, after the AXIS powers had helped him to power.

Brian

.. the man is as thick as 2 short planks,

Brian

:eek: :eek:

(Good 'un :p )

"Fueled by concerns that the U.S. had more nuclear missiles than the Soviet arsenal, and, more importantly, that some of the American missiles were based a mere 150 miles from its boarders, in Turkey, the Soviet leadership grew increasingly desperate to somehow tip the balance of power in its favor."

There was never any mention of the Soviets at the time viewing your missiles on our soil as a menace and in any case we also had our own nuclear bombs since the early 50's

I'll have to take your word for it as I wasn't alive at the time :D

but anyways, I'm not sure where that quote came from but the attempted arming of Cuba was, as your quote says, a part and parcel of the nuclear arms race. The United States HAD deployed nuclear arms in the UK, Italy and Turkey during JFK's presidency. There may have never been any mention of the US missiles being a 'menace' to the soviets but they were there - which means the UK WAS a part of the nuclear arms race.

Now Bri is saying that it wasn't perceived by the UK that it wasn't involved in the events I cite but in hindsight it actually was. UK RAF bases got used as stratagic military bases during JFK's presidency just as much as they do now. In fact even more so back then because of the 'mutually assured destruction' (MAD) factor.

arguing with GML is a waste of time, the man is as thick as 2 short planks,

I think thats clear enough:D ;)

Col

I'll have to take your word for it as I wasn't alive at the time :D

but anyways, I'm not sure where that quote came from but the attempted arming of Cuba was, as your quote says, a part and parcel of the nuclear arms race. The United States HAD deployed nuclear arms in the UK, Italy and Turkey during JFK's presidency. There may have never been any mention of the US missiles being a 'menace' to the soviets but they were there - which means the UK WAS a part of the nuclear arms race.

Now Bri is saying that it wasn't perceived by the UK that it wasn't involved in the events I cite but in hindsight it actually was. UK RAF bases got used as stratagic military bases during JFK's presidency just as much as they do now. In fact even more so back then because of the 'mutually assured destruction' (MAD) factor.

No, no, I keep telling you, we already had our own nuclear deterrent before Kennedy decided to butt his nose in, anyway it was just some old redundant airfields that we rented to you

No, no, I keep telling you, we already had our own nuclear deterrent before Kennedy decided to butt his nose in, anyway it was just some old redundant airfields that we rented to you

You don't think the deployment of American nuclear warheads by JFK in the UK had anything to do with the arms race of the cold war? :confused:

Here is an interesting article (http://www.americansc.org.uk/Online/Wilsonjohnson.htm)

with regard to the UK's perception of LBJ.

It actually seems to support the idea that LBJ isn't demonized because the UK declined hte US's invitations to war, unlike what occurs today. Could this be a valid answer to the discrepancy?

No, no, I keep telling you, we already had our own nuclear deterrent before Kennedy decided to butt his nose in, anyway it was just some old redundant airfields that we rented to you

History according to Rich.

The United States actually doesn't exist. It is still part of the UK and all of our government is merely British propaganda.

Long live the monarchy, hip hip Hoozay, Hoozay.

Here is an interesting article (http://www.americansc.org.uk/Online/Wilsonjohnson.htm)

with regard to the UK's perception of LBJ.



That's why Bliars running away now, the British did not support the illegal invasion of Iraq and will not forgive him for it:mad:

History according to Rich.

The United States actually doesn't exist. It is still part of the UK and all of our government is merely British propaganda.

Long live the monarchy, hip hip Hoozay, Hoozay.

Can somebody tell me what the bafoon's on about?:confused: :rolleyes:

That's why Bliars running away now

running away? :confused: In what event, the marathon? :p

No I was sure I'd already explained this to you, but here goes again, LBJ was drawn further into a war that he didn't start, after he'd bumped off JFK,

Oh realy?

Huh here's someting you may not know.

People seem to think this whole Halliburton thing is recent phenomena, actually it all started when a Texas construction firm starting supplying the majority of the war materials and services to the Vietnam effort.

Guess who? Brown and Root. And guess what else later it merged to become Halliburton.

But that was later, guess who owned a big chunk of Brown and Root?

Why it was little O’ll Lady Bird Johnson, surprise, surprise, surprise.

Oh realy?

Huh here's someting you may not know.

People seem to think this whole Halliburton thing is recent phenomena, actually it all started when a Texas construction firm starting supplying the majority of the war materials and services to the Vietnam effort.

Guess who? Brown and Root. And guess what else later it merged to become Halliburton.

But that was later, guess who owned a big chunk of Brown and Root?

Why it was little O’ll Lady Bird Johnson, surprise, surprise, surprise.
Why do you think I keep saying that Johnson had Kennedy bumped off?:rolleyes:

Here is an interesting article (http://www.americansc.org.uk/Online/Wilsonjohnson.htm)

with regard to the UK's perception of LBJ.

It actually seems to support the idea that LBJ isn't demonized because the UK declined hte US's invitations to war, unlike what occurs today. Could this be a valid answer to the discrepancy?

Yes Dan this was precisely the point that I was making, at no point did I deny the UK's involvement in the cold war per se, I also doubt that our nuclear deterrent would by itself have deterred the USSR. Also you will perhaps have noticed in my previous post that i referred to the fact that I had a brother in the RAF training on Thor missile technology at the time of the Cuban crisis, yes we discussed these issues in the Pubs and workplaces, we knew we were invoved.

Brian

with regard to the UK's perception of LBJ.

It actually seems to support the idea that LBJ isn't demonized because the UK declined hte US's invitations to war, unlike what occurs today. Could this be a valid answer to the discrepancy?
Vietnam was the USA's war. We were too busy with enjoying the 60's to bugger about napalming innocent children.

After the US secret services had JFK killed, I think Wilson decided to tell the USA where to go with its bloody war. Something Tony should have done as it serves no purpose other than to bring terror and bloodshed on a worldwide scale now.

Col

King Edward VII . . . . . . . . . .1901 - 1910
King George V . . . . . . . . . . . 1910 - 1936
King George VI . . . . . . . . . . .1936 - 1952

Suggest you read up on UK monarchy dates.:rolleyes: unless of course you are displaying your complete inability to subtract two numbers correctly.



I have no idea what you're babbling on about. :confused:

Col

ps - I never mentioned athletics. I am still trying to assertain what you are "world champ" of - apart from posting unreferenced "facts" that is:rolleyes:

...my fault...I know how much you guys like to "correct" everything to make it your own...I should have dug deeper...the blankets still remain thrown about so what's the difference...

Truly amazing...your focus varies like the wind...I like the obvious diversion away from my comments to something easy, like a username that makes no difference but you guys are classic for this tactic throughout the forum so, good for you, stick to your guns!?#?$!

...my fault...I know how much you guys like to "correct" everything to make it your own...I should have dug deeper...the blankets still remain thrown about so what's the difference...

Truly amazing...your focus varies like the wind...I like the obvious diversion away from my comments to something easy, like a username that makes no difference but you guys are classic for this tactic throughout the forum so, good for you, stick to your guns!?#?$!
:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

It was Kenny who asked about your username, a nice polite enquirey, I don't recall it getting a sensible response, now why does that not surprise me.

Brian

UK Posters:

http://www.digitalstoryteller.com/BTV99/_images/blah.gif

US Posters:

http://www.davidandgoliathtees.com/shop/images/products/5500.jpg


:eek: :D :D :D

History according to Rich.

The United States actually doesn't exist. It is still part of the UK and all of our government is merely British propaganda.

Long live the monarchy, hip hip Hoozay, Hoozay.
are you ok Jenny?:confused: you seem to have lost it mate:eek:

Col

Far too subtle for me Ken, the US looks like hot air, ok I can go with that:D , what's the UK solid facts?;)

Brian

Far too subtle for me Ken, the US looks like hot air, ok I can go with that:D , what's the UK solid facts?;)

Brian
.
.
.
.:p :p

...my fault...I know how much you guys like to "correct" everything to make it your own...I should have dug deeper...the blankets still remain thrown about so what's the difference...
Is there something in the USA's water today? both you and Jennifer are rambling incoherently:rolleyes:

Truly amazing...your focus varies like the wind...I like the obvious diversion away from my comments to something easy, like a username that makes no difference but you guys are classic for this tactic throughout the forum so, good for you, stick to your guns!?#?$!
if someone has a username exclaiming they are the world champ at something, then its fair to ask

1) which world are you referring to? - the USA one of 2 countries, or the real one.

2) what is your world championship in?

Col

What's your feelings towards all the other nations with a monarchy? The UK is not the only one. (I will post a list should you be unable to find one)

I get the impression that just because you live in a dictatorship, there is a little envy there?

Col

Talk about an absurd stretch Colin!?#?$?! - Based on a man that you clearly can't stand (GWB) and how stressed your opinion is of the U.S., we are certainly not a dictatorship. You are so blatantly confused and consumed with fear and hatred, it actually stinks...people reading on here can actually smell it...simmer down young man!?#?$!# Life isn't that hard!:eek:

A monarchy is only a few key steps away from a true dictatorship. It is the alternative that England chose in place of a dictatorship; forgive me if I don't research the exact date and time that this took place...

Envy, hardly...I'd repeat my previous posts but if they aren't fully researched with a stamp of approval from, apparently, you...I am rebuked so I'll decline.

This post is the ultimate proof that arguing with GML is a waste of time, the man is as thick as 2 short planks, Where does it list Spain as joining the fight against the nazis, it is recognised as one of Franco's achievements in that he kept Spain out of WW2, after the AXIS powers had helped him to power.

Brian

Don't blame me Bri...attack, pointlessly, the web master!#??$!:p

I simply copied this for the edification of others but I admit the mistake in that because you guys have clearly created much of your own account of how things actually happened around the world so I'll leave you to that...

Talk about an absurd stretch Colin!?#?$?! - Based on a man that you clearly can't stand (GWB) and how stressed your opinion is of the U.S., we are certainly not a dictatorship. You are so blatantly confused and consumed with fear and hatred, it actually stinks...people reading on here can actually smell it...simmer down young man!?#?$!# Life isn't that hard!:eek:
Well, the USA certainly dictates to the rest of the (real) world and dictates to its people what it can and can't see on TV, so what would you call it. Oh and don't say all that "freedom and democracy" old pony

A monarchy is only a few key steps away from a true dictatorship. It is the alternative that England chose in place of a dictatorship; forgive me if I don't research the exact date and time that this took place...
Then its your opinion and will be disregarded

Envy, hardly...I'd repeat my previous posts but if they aren't fully researched with a stamp of approval from, apparently, you...I am rebuked so I'll decline.
I'll refer you to my previous reply

Col

Don't blame me Bri...attack, pointlessly, the web master!#??$!:p



why do you put this after almost every post?

!#??$!

Col

Is there something in the USA's water today? both you and Jennifer are rambling incoherently:rolleyes:

if someone has a username exclaiming they are the world champ at something, then its fair to ask

1) which world are you referring to? - the USA one of 2 countries, or the real one.

2) what is your world championship in?

Col

...You are exhausting but that's fine...I'll keep on because some people here HAVE to oppose Bri/Rich/your irreverance!#??$!:p

jsanders is doing just fine and has my SUPPORT...something you guys share together in running after us but that's fine too...it takes all kinds even if you guys don't like the competition...

So, my user name stirs you; good...far too personal, rewarding, and wholesome to share with the irreverent lot here so...thanks but no...no way!

As far as the competitive aspects, I have described that in the Sports forum threads; RYDER CUP thread posts...something you guys should really check out so you know more about me before making such foolish remarks about a real experienced competitor; something I've seen very little from you...if it's there by all means, share...:D

Yes Dan this was precisely the point that I was making, at no point did I deny the UK's involvement in the cold war per se, I also doubt that our nuclear deterrent would by itself have deterred the USSR. Also you will perhaps have noticed in my previous post that i referred to the fact that I had a brother in the RAF training on Thor missile technology at the time of the Cuban crisis, yes we discussed these issues in the Pubs and workplaces, we knew we were invoved.

Brian

Yes, all points are noted which is why I don't understand your support of Rich's point with regards to the Cuban Missile Crisis. Why do you support the idea that there is no link between US missilies on UK soil with the crisis? All events were to do with the nuclear arms race not solely the deployment in Turkey. The UK played a part in 'MAD' as did Cuba.

My point? GWB is not hated for his policies themselves but because the UK is being made to adhere to them by their current leader.

(GWB) bashers:

Admittedly, Georgie has his issues but every now and again, he gets something right so when the local DC media asked him about some of the comments and commenters here, he sent the following::p

http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~g-b-dix...s/bushbird.gif

Don't worry, the "new" guy for you all to hate and blanket us with yet again will be proposed, voted on, elected, and sworn in shortly...November 7...so hurry up because time's running out to blame all the world's ill on us and Georgie!#$!:p

...You are exhausting but that's fine...I'll keep on because some people here HAVE to oppose Bri/Rich/your irreverance!#??$!:p
good for you

jsanders is doing just fine and has my SUPPORT...something you guys share together in running after us but that's fine too...it takes all kinds even if you guys don't like the competition...
competition?? I nearly choked then. . . :D :D

So, my user name stirs you; good...far too personal, rewarding, and wholesome to share with the irreverent lot here so...thanks but no...no way!
I really don't give a toss, its probobly like most American titles (world series?)
- overexaggerated and total crap:rolleyes: :D

As far as the competitive aspects, I have described that in the Sports forum threads; RYDER CUP thread posts...something you guys should really check out so you know more about me before making such foolish remarks about a real experienced competitor; something I've seen very little from you...if it's there by all means, share...:D so you've played golf? big deal - what do you want - a medal? get one of those purple heart things off ebay for $10

Col

...November 7...so hurry up because time's running out to blame all the world's ill on us and Georgie!#$!:p
the worldwide crisis GWB and the Yanks have created will go on for decades yet - there's plenty of time, in fact I don't think the USA will ever recover from being the most hated country on the planet.

Col

...I really don't give a toss, its probobly like most American titles (world series?)

...what do you want - a medal? get one of those purple heart things off ebay for $10

I think someone needs to give this thread a Fonzie hit, the record seems to be skipping...

the worldwide crisis GWB and the Yanks have created will go on for decades yet - there's plenty of time, in fact I don't think the USA will ever recover from being the most hated country on the planet.

Col

Oh I don't Col, when we get our gut from protecting you Euro pansies and become an introverted nation again.

What are you going to do when the Chinese, who by the way took your little Pacific Island away from you, start to run their, now forming, advanced navy up your butt?

You’ll be crying, "where are the Americans?", they save us from the frying pan all last century, they owe us.

You guys are a classic example of people resenting the ones that saved them.

It is prevalent in some of your finest literature.

Yes, all points are noted which is why I don't understand your support of Rich's point with regards to the Cuban Missile Crisis. Why do you support the idea that there is no link between US missilies on UK soil with the crisis? All events were to do with the nuclear arms race not solely the deployment in Turkey. The UK played a part in 'MAD' as did Cuba.

Let me see it was 62 correct? So I would be 21 along time ago and working from memory it semed to be the placement of missiles by Russia's own borders rather than by its satellites yhat tipped the russians into the Cuban adventure.


My point? GWB is not hated for his policies themselves but because the UK is being made to adhere to them by their current leader.

I actually was trying to make the same point and having a bit of a dig at R & C, but I guess that was missed

If me my point is that what he did did not have a negative effect on the UK and it is, I think, UK posters who are demonizing GWB and not others.

Brian

Brian

I think someone needs to give this thread a Fonzie hit, the record seems to be skipping...
.

http://www.oblongpictures.co.uk/img/fonzie.jpg

.
:p :p :p

What are you going to do when the Chinese, who by the way took your little Pacific Island away from you, start to run their, now forming, advanced navy up your butt?


You really do talk rubbish, the lease on the New Territories had expired, without them Hong Kong was non viable so we handed it over as well.

Brian

You really do talk rubbish, the lease on the New Terretories had expired, without them Hong Kong was non viable so we handed it over as well.

Brian

Yes but alas, outsmarted by them in any event. I don't know what effect it had on your tax base but it must have been tremendous.

Of course, not unlike our agreement in Panama. Which by the way the Chinese are controlling that as well.

http://www.thefatmanwalking.com/file_depot/0-10000000/20000-30000/20566/layout/77280/206262/stop_sign.jpghttp://www.geocities.com/billcavegc/fighting.gif

Please :) :)

Starting to exercise your new authority?:D

I hope your responibilities don't inhibit your posting, R & C need a real challenge, GML and J make too many basic errors to be a serious opponent for them.

Brian

Judging from all this animosity between the US & UK posters (it does not help that some posters seem to have very little undersanding of just about anything) I think we need a common enemy. Guess Iraq is too controversial – How about Finland,

Starting to exercise your new authority?:D

I hope your responibilities don't inhibit your posting, R & C need a real challenge, GML and J make too many basic errors to be a serious opponent for them.

Brian

I suppose I should understand why a grown man would waste valuable time blasting away at a another person that really could care less what their opinion is on anything... But I've done it as well so who am I to judge :o

http://nomadlife.org/uploaded_images/peace-sign-713031.jpg

Judging from all this animosity between the US & UK posters (it does not help that some posters seem to have very little undersanding of just about anything) I think we need a common enemy. Guess Iraq is too controversial – How about Finland,

Finland. Hum... We did spouses and kids. What's left? How about in-laws? :D :D

Let me see it was 62 correct? So I would be 21 along time ago and working from memory it semed to be the placement of missiles by Russia's own borders rather than by its satellites yhat tipped the russians into the Cuban adventure.

Yes, I'm not really disagreeing with you here. Rich tried to make out that the UK had nothing to do with the situation. I agree that Turkey may have been the final straw, I wasn't there to confirm ;), but the UK was most definitely a contributor to the arms race and thus partially culpable for the instability of the times.



I actually was trying to make the same point and having a bit of a dig at R & C, but I guess that was missed

My apologies, it was missed by me. The UK was not negatively impacted by JFK but that's only because of the MAD factor. What if Kruschev wasn't testing JFK's mettle or JFK hadn't been so resolute? What would have happened to the UK then?

I hope your responibilities don't inhibit your posting, R & C need a real challenge, GML and J make too many basic errors to be a serious opponent for them.

Brian

The others still have to earn a living so don't have the time :p

My apologies, it was missed by me. The UK was not negatively impacted by JFK but that's only because of the MAD factor. What if Kruschev wasn't testing JFK's mettle or JFK hadn't been so resolute? What would have happened to the UK then?

We wouldn't be having this debate. Would the total obliteration of this island have caused a tsunami type tidal wave?

Brian

The others still have to earn a living so don't have the time :p

I do wonder how some people manage to spend so much time on here during working hours.

Brian

We wouldn't be having this debate. Would the total obliteration of this island have caused a tsunami type tidal wave?

Brian

I think you miss my point.

The UK contributed to this 'MAD' global instability. It contributed by doing the exact same thing as it has done with Iraq and Afghanistan. Concur with and aid US foreign policy. With JFK it was almost complete annihilation. Where is the hatred of JFK from the UK as compared to GWB?

I think you miss my point.

The UK contributed to this 'MAD' global instability. It contributed by doing the exact same thing as it has done with Iraq and Afghanistan. Concur with and aid US foreign policy. With JFK it was almost complete annihilation. Where is the hatred of JFK from the UK as compared to GWB?

Sorry if I did but I was saying that if things had gone wrong with JFK then we wouldn't be here, however he won, and the world loves a winner.

Did the arms race lead to global instability? What would have happened if the US or Russia or Both had not developed overkill? perhaps a topic for another thread?

Brian

and the world loves a winner.

there lies the answer methinks :)



Did the arms race lead to global instability? What would have happened if the US or Russia or Both had not developed overkill? perhaps a topic for another thread?


Bob Dylan certainly thought so (http://www.bobdylan.com/songs/hardrain.html)... :p

Sorry if I did but I was saying that if things had gone wrong with JFK then we wouldn't be here, however he won, and the world loves a winner.

Brian

I have seen some very sobbering documentaries surrounding those events and they were quite the eye opener...:o

Do you think JFK was done in by LBJ or some other group? I often wonder why the truth never has seemed to surface...

http://www.thefatmanwalking.com/file_depot/0-10000000/20000-30000/20566/layout/77280/206262/stop_sign.jpghttp://www.geocities.com/billcavegc/fighting.gif

Please :) :)
Seconds out; Round Two

Oh I don't Col, when we get our gut from protecting you Euro pansies and become an introverted nation again.

.
We pansies fought off the might of the German war machine while you lot sat on your a** in front of the box:rolleyes:


.

It is prevalent in some of your finest literature.
When did you learn to read Josephine, or is that from the American media :confused:

.

Of course, not unlike our agreement in Panama.

You mean like when you decided to invade the country and carry out another regime change cause the leader there didn't like America running the country, just,like the current one:rolleyes:

http://nomadlife.org/uploaded_images/peace-sign-713031.jpg

Bloody left wing pacifist :mad: :p

Bloody left wing pacifist :mad: :p
.
.
.
;)

.
.
.
;)
I think you should be reported to the House Un-American Activities Committee
:p

We pansies fought off the might of the German war machine while you lot sat on your a** in front of the box:rolleyes:


.


When did you learn to read Josephine, or is that from the American media :confused:

Funny how you guys can make all kinds of personal attacks, misrepresent the fact, change history, and generally remain obtuse, while your countrymen have the nerve to say I'm getting the fundamentals wrong.

Bah...

You mean like when you decided to invade the country and carry out another regime change cause the leader there didn't like America running the country, just,like the current one:rolleyes:


No pots, when we build the canal the French failed at. Then we gave them a lease that ran out roughly at the same time as your lease in China.

Which I already knew was not a war effort, but I couldn't resist throwing it in.

We pansies fought off the might of the German war machine while you lot sat on your a** in front of the box:rolleyes:




Really? I always understood that a bad call from Hitler (something to do with air superiority and pride) kept them from blitzkrieging yawls pansy assess, as well as the Polls.

Yes I do agree you held them off but in the end without a combined effort by both the British and Americans that war would have gone to the Germans.

Starting to exercise your new authority?:D

I hope your responibilities don't inhibit your posting, R & C need a real challenge, GML and J make too many basic errors to be a serious opponent for them.

Brian

Name some. And not the ones supported by Rich's Metamorphosed History.

When did you learn to read Josephine, or is that from the American media :confused:

The finest literature, to which I was referring, was the collective works by Patrick O'Brian.

Oh what a talent that man had.

As insightful and comprehensive as any American writer.

Anyway he spoke often of individuals resenting there saviors, apparently quite a lot of British people suffer from this phenomenon. And having recently read some of his books I can certainly see where he got his inspiration.

The finest literature, to which I was referring, was the collective works by Patrick O'Brian.
.
I see. plagiarising somebody elses work, do you have any original thoughts of your own? :rolleyes:

And not the ones supported by Rich's Metamorphosed History.
That's the correct version and not the one taught in American schools

Really? I always understood that a bad call from Hitler (something to do with air superiority and pride) kept them from blitzkrieging yawls pansy assess, as well as the Polls.


Can you post in English so we can try and understand your comments.

Yes I do agree you held them off but in the end without a combined effort by both the British and Americans that war would have gone to the Germans.
You've forgotten Russia, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, The Free French, India, the various resistance factions,etc. etc.

Funny how you guys can make all kinds of personal attacks, misrepresent the fact, change history, and generally remain obtuse, while your countrymen have the nerve to say I'm getting the fundamentals wrong.


Which part of history are we supposed to have changed?:confused:

Which part of history are we supposed to have changed?:confused:

Just about anything you write about.

Just about anything you write about.
No, Josey, I post the truth, not the American version taught in schools over there

You've forgotten Russia, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, The Free French, India, the various resistance factions,etc. etc.
Thank you Rich!
Our brave but misguided soldiers have died for Ol' Blighty in many wars.
Then after WWII we decided to hitch our wagons to another star & have died for the US in several more invasions... uh I mean wars (I think)

Thank you Rich!
Our brave but misguided soldiers have died for Ol' Blighty in many wars.
Then after WWII we decided to hitch our wagons to another star & have died for the US in several more invasions... uh I mean wars (I think)
Ah yes but the British wars were for noble causes;)

Just about anything you write about.

Which the US is just as guilty of, if not more so - cross ref most US made films - U-571 springs instantly to mind.

However, kudos to the US movie makers who freely admit that 'Nam (for example) was NOT a victory.
(kudos removed for Saving Private Ryan for not mentioning the part the other allies played :( )

Whilst U571 was a distortion of history I am unsure as to whether Saving Private Ryan was to be the definitive story of the European land war.

All countries distort history, ask any Englishman who won the battle of Waterloo, but would he without the arrival of Blutcher's Prussians?

I just find it puzzling that the people on this forum, whom I assume to be intelligent, make the wildly exagerated claims that they do, especially the " you would all be speaking German if it wasn't for us", as if they rode to our rescue on their white stallions instead of having been forced into the war.

Brian

I just find it puzzling that the people on this forum, whom I assume to be intelligent, make the wildly exagerated claims that they do, especially the " you would all be speaking German if it wasn't for us", as if they rode to our rescue on their white stallions instead of having been forced into the war.
Thats what the Americans always think. They're here to save the world - not too sure when they'll start though, maybe when they can't screw it up any more.:rolleyes: ;)

GWL - the Roman occupation of Britain lasted nearly 400 years but we're not speaking Italian:rolleyes: why would we be speaking German if not for the USA?

Col

Thats what the Americans always think. They're here to save the world - not too sure when they'll start though, maybe when they can't screw it up any more.:rolleyes: ;)

GWL - the Roman occupation of Britain lasted nearly 400 years but we're not speaking Italian:rolleyes: why would we be speaking German if not for the USA?

Col

Nor do we speak French dispite 1066.. - Although I understand all laws in England are retified in French.

Nor do we speak French dispite 1066.. - Although I understand all laws in England are retified in French.

It could also be argued that our language is Germanic in origin anyway:eek:

It could also be argued that our language is Germanic in origin anyway:eek:
Beware of the Hun in the Sun..

Beware of the Hun in the Sun..
I don't read that Crap!;) :D

I just find it puzzling that the people on this forum, whom I assume to be intelligent, make the wildly exagerated claims that they do, especially the " you would all be speaking German if it wasn't for us", as if they rode to our rescue on their white stallions instead of having been forced into the war.


Hey! I hope you're not lumping me in there with that group. :mad:

I've always acknowledged the possibility that you could have been speaking Russian instead :eek: :p

I've always acknowledged the possibility that you could have been speaking Russian instead :eek: :p

American mythology again:rolleyes:

Hey! I hope you're not lumping me in there with that group. :mad:

I've always acknowledged the possibility that you could have been speaking Russian instead :eek: :p

ROTFLMAO

Oh my goodness. That's why they resent us so much. The truth stinks.

ROTFLMAO

The truth stinks.

As the saying goes, you wouldn't know the truth if it jumped up and bit you on the a**:rolleyes:

the Roman occupation of Britain lasted nearly 400 years but we're not speaking Italian:rolleyes:
Well the Romans of the time spoke Latin... isn't it still being taught in school there? :p

... isn't it still being taught in school there? :p
Only the posh ones:p

Well the Romans of the time spoke Latin...
I'm aware of that, but I amended it so the Yanks could understand it.
They have enough trouble with English, so bringing Latin into it would cause unknown confusion.:rolleyes: There's no point in making things too complicated.;)

Col

Hey! I hope you're not lumping me in there with that group. :mad:

I've always acknowledged the possibility that you could have been speaking Russian instead :eek: :p

Unlike Rich who appeared to take offence at this and Jsanders, whom I do include, who tried to milk it, it gave me a quiet chuckle, I think a bit of friendly banter is good , even when /if I lose.

Brian

Unlike Rich who appeared to take offence at this
Brian
I wasn't offended Bri, merely succinct :cool: :D

Unlike Rich who appeared to take offence at this and Jsanders, whom I do include, who tried to milk it, it gave me a quiet chuckle, I think a bit of friendly banter is good , even when /if I lose.

Brian

I'm glad you took it the right way Bri :)

He was really good because he was murdered?


Actually it was Harry Truman who started the whole Indo-China mess.
He was talked into supplying arms, uniforms, aircraft and the transport ships that allowed the French to return to Vietnam after WW2.

He was never shown a document written by FDR to the extent that the French were 2nd raters and deserved to lose their empire.