| Author | Message | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 789 Registered: 1-2002 |
Maybe we should ask the fromage-eating surrender monkeys to handle the NK problem for us. | ||
| wm hart (Whart)
Member Username: Whart Post Number: 752 Registered: 12-2001 |
Dunno much, and not much has been reported. A little blurb on CNN.com, to the effect that NK is threatening to withdraw from the armistice that ended that war.(This was, as i just had to remind myself, the thing that established the DMZ, and apparently brought about a cessation of hostilities.) I would assume that if a treaty ended it, withdrawal from that treaty would theoretically place the parties back in dispute. Guess, what with all the Michael Jackson news, Joe Millionaire, and the like, there just hasn't been alot of attention paid to this.Excellent topic for a first year law student, though, willie! | ||
| wm hart (Whart)
Member Username: Whart Post Number: 750 Registered: 12-2001 |
Robert C: True. But at that time, we were being accused of unilateral action, to protect our oil interests, even though we had the backing and participation of those countries. Do you think they did it for us, or for their own self-interest? | ||
| William H (Countachxx)
Intermediate Member Username: Countachxx Post Number: 1999 Registered: 2-2001 |
Bill can you tell us more about the armistice with NK ? What it was supposed to do & what happens now that NK has backed away ? Thanks, W | ||
| ross koller (Ross)
Member Username: Ross Post Number: 714 Registered: 3-2002 |
art, and the rest of you wringing your hands in worry over how many iraqis we might kill when we rid the world of sadam.....wake up and smell the coffee.....it really won't matter what you and france, and germany etc think about the potential war in iraq because we are going in, come hell or high water. all of us who believe this is the right thing to do are wasting time discussing with you ad nauseum and trying to convince you when you refuse to see the light. people who hate us now will hate us just as much whether or not we attack. people who want to do us harm will still want to do us harm. we don't need to care and we shouldn't care. we will do what we think is right and to hell with the those who don't agree. 3 years from now, all of those people will have already forgotten this issue and will be onto the next one where they can hurl abuse at the usa for some other bs. | ||
| Bart Duesler (The_bart)
New member Username: The_bart Post Number: 12 Registered: 1-2003 |
You do know that Euro-Disney can no longer have fireworks. The other night when Euro-Disney had their nightly show, the France Army surrendered. | ||
| Robert Callahan (Rcallahan)
New member Username: Rcallahan Post Number: 44 Registered: 7-2002 |
Bill. to be the devils advocate, France,Germany, and Russia all helped us with troops in the last gulf war. Bob | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 556 Registered: 5-2001 |
Now I'm watching my windows AND floors! | ||
| wm hart (Whart)
Member Username: Whart Post Number: 749 Registered: 12-2001 |
Just to stir things up a little, would we be justified in taking military action in, say Saudi Arabia (let's not call it a war, but, say a "police action")? And, according to some "news" i heard, North Korea is withdrawing from the armistice that ended the Korean "conflict." Does that mean that we are at war with North K.? And if rescinding a "cease fire" is as good as a declaration of war, hasn't Saddam done this much already? Leave aside, for the moment, the repercussions of "increased" terrorism if we offend our militant muslim brothers, or the (additional) enmity we will suffer from the world community (they largely hate us already). If i remember my Texas law, its based on the maxim that "He deserved killin'." When was the last time France, or Russia, or Germany did something for us? | ||
| Horsefly (Arlie)
Member Username: Arlie Post Number: 770 Registered: 5-2002 |
Maybe Saddam Hussein and Bin Laden can be exiled to Never Never Land! | ||
| Jeff (Jeff_m)
Junior Member Username: Jeff_m Post Number: 83 Registered: 9-2002 |
Hey Art, I guess you would send your kids over to Michael Jacksons for a nice sleepover weekend since he has never been convicted of anything. | ||
| Horsefly (Arlie)
Member Username: Arlie Post Number: 769 Registered: 5-2002 |
Cosgrove, what do you mean "halfway across the world"? Forget about the burglar coming through the window, didn't you know that Saddam and his boys have been digging a tunnel through the earth and are about to come up through your floor? | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 555 Registered: 5-2001 |
You know what is really sad? Some madman halfway across the world who doesn't know, or even care, that we exist, has us fighting among ourselves. Let's not get too carried away with this or he wins. | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 554 Registered: 5-2001 |
And we have all seen how jurys can behave. | ||
| Rob Lay (Rob328gts)
Board Administrator Username: Rob328gts Post Number: 3575 Registered: 12-2000 |
Here in Texas, where the gun laws are probably the most liberal, the real threat isn't the criminal court, but the civil court. You can shoot someone at night stealing from your property. Of course you can shoot someone if they pull a gun on you. The problem is the family of the person you knock off can sue you and then it's up to the jury whether a "reasonable" person would of used deadly force. | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 553 Registered: 5-2001 |
I love all you guys but I'm going to have to ride Nebula's coattail on this one. | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 552 Registered: 5-2001 |
I would like to chime in here about the burgler thing. I for one would MUCH rather face a jury then hope that the guy crawling thru my window SHOWS me his weapon first. Get my point? | ||
| Robert Callahan (Rcallahan)
New member Username: Rcallahan Post Number: 43 Registered: 7-2002 |
Nebula, Your arguement was that the US planes have been fired upon while conducting "Legal" patoling of his airspace. You have now been noticed that it is NOT legal to patrol iraq or any other airspace just because the US and maybe Britain wants to. | ||
| BobD (Bobd)
Intermediate Member Username: Bobd Post Number: 1020 Registered: 3-2001 |
How many soldiers does it take to guard Paris? The French don't know, they have never tried. -unknown author | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 968 Registered: 6-2001 |
Arlie: The problem with your example is how do you define a trespasser or a burgler? That distinction has caused more than its share of angst. Kids have been shot because they've entered the wrong house. That was my reasoning about your example. Art | ||
| Horsefly (Arlie)
Member Username: Arlie Post Number: 768 Registered: 5-2002 |
Hey Art, we DO agree about some things. The Gulf of Tonkin stuff, government "misinformation" etc. I hear you loud and clear on all that. I think everybody could use a fair dose of "Doubting Thomas". But I think that I was clear on my burglar analogy. I said "burglar", not "tresspasser". I think that most courts have ruled that once an intruder crosses the threshold and intrudes INSIDE your home, it becomes a whole different story. Did not Saddam Hussein and his troops intrude INSIDE Kuwait back in 1991? I think that they would love to go back if they had the advantage. And like all the Arabic countries, they hate Israel and probably would enjoy entering Tel-Aviv as conquering heroes. But I pity the poor Arabic soul that attempts to do so. As for Nikita Kruschev backing down: I don't think it was so much that he "backed down", it was just that Kruschev had no real justification for putting those ICBMs in Cuba in the first place. There was no way that Kruschev could make anybody in the U.N. view those ICBMs as self defense. Putting those missles in Cuba was a purely aggressive maneuver. An attacking animal will always fight harder when it is defending its own life. Nothing is stronger that the survival instinct. When it came right down to it, I think Kruschev knew that we as a nation would be willing to fight harder to SURVIVE than he was willing to fight to CONQUER. What was it that the Japanese Admirial said about the United States after Pearl Harbor? "I fear we have awakened a sleeping giant". | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 966 Registered: 6-2001 |
Nebula: When you can connect the dots, I'll listen to you. Right now the only thing I see is tirade. You have the basic facts right (almost: the terrorists have been attacking both Germany and France for quite a while), but you haven't connected the terrorists and Saddam with clear and convincing proof. Your anger, angst, etc. are evidence that despite repeated requests, you can't seem to make the proper connection, perhaps because there isn't any. Art | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Junior Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 228 Registered: 11-2002 |
Art, British planes also patrol the no-fly zone. I guess that the US and UK are so tiny and insignificant that it doesn't matter though, right? I mean, when you said "No one else on the UN accepts it," I guess you were referring to: 1. France (scary AND powerful!) 2. Germany (with NO military to speak of) 3. Russia (with that Oh-So-Solid infrastructure and government) 4. China (Big and powerful, like a fat man with heart disease) 5. Japan (again, no military to speak of, and three recessions in ten years) Art, the US could take on the world ALONE and win. Add to that, the might of the UK, and it's NO CONTEST. The fact is, without the US or UK, the UN does not exist. I'm sick of pandering to the philosophies of nations THAT DO NOT MATTER. If they mattered, they would be getting attacked by extremist muslims. If they mattered, their GNP would be larger than California's. If they mattered, then I'd care what they think. The fact is, terrorists did not attack France. Terrorists did not attack Germany. Terrorists did not attack Russia, China, or Japan. Terrorists did, however, fly two airplanes into the WTC, killing 3000 people. Terrorists did, however, fly one plane into the Pentagon, kill 300 people. Terrorists did, however, attempt to fly another plane into God knows what, but were foiled by some brave dudes on board. These terrorists were acting under the same philosophy that Saddam caters to: hatred of the US. Not hatred of France, Germany, Russia, or China. Hatred of the US. Saddam and ALL the ragheads who burn effigies of America are DAMN F*CKIN' LUCKY that they are not charred ashes on one big sheet of glass. Saddam and the extreme muslim carpet-pilots are DAMN LUCKY that we haven't already invaded. Saddam and his stinky-ass Hooka-smookin' camel-jokies are DAMN LUCKY that America did not respond by laying waste to ALL THAT IS THE MIDDLE EAST. And now, Saddam and his oily, greasy, back-stabbing croonies are DAMN LUCKY that Americans like YOU are buying his propoganda. Thanks, Art. Great job. Saddam's not only happy you support his politics, but he's damn happy that you burn gas in that airplane and F355 of yours. From Saddam to the Chambers family, THANKS! You da man! | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 962 Registered: 6-2001 |
Arlie: No good analogies. The burglar is the best, but even then not really close. The courts have held that you can't just shoot a trespasser (at least in California). You have to have a basis for using deadly force, such as brandishing a weapon, etc. England and the UK had clear and convincing evidence of Hitler's intentions as early as 1937: Mien Kauf, Kristal Night, his attacks without provocation against his neighbors, his public statements regarding the German destiny, his behavior towards the Jew, all of the above would have led someone to be convinced he was a clear and present danger to the UK. Where is that kind of evidence here? I suggest to you that no such evidence exists, or at least none which my government believes I am capable of understanding. I have been there before: I got drafted (I did end up in a reserve unit) and served time in the U.S. Army because we ramped up over Viet Nam over lies: Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. Additionally we know that the government lies: read the Pentagon Papers, and you can see that when our government decides that something has to be done, they will, Republican and Democrat alike, look you straight in the face, and tell you things that they know are false. I choose to make up my own mind, and look at the government as one who will, if their needs are such, lie to me straight up. As for Cuba, that was probably the biggest mistake Kennedy ever made. He got lucky because Nikda K. (sp) backed down. Kennedy thought that there were no tactical nukes in Cuba, but there were. Had the Soviets not backed down, and had Kennedy invaded Cuba, there would have been the largest blood bath this hemisphere had ever seen. Kennedy based his plan upon CIA information, which later proved to be eroneous. All the more reason to use extreme care about going to war over expected behavior, rather than actual behavior. Art | ||
| Matt Lemus (Mlemus)
Intermediate Member Username: Mlemus Post Number: 2274 Registered: 8-2002 |
That's funny Art. | ||
| Ernesto (T88power)
Intermediate Member Username: T88power Post Number: 1248 Registered: 2-2001 |
The only thing I know is that Saddam is laughing is ass off in one of his Palaces about all these people (and countries) protecting and defending him left and right... especially all those demonstrations this weekend - that should really bring a smile to his face! Ernesto | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 961 Registered: 6-2001 |
Nebula: The no fly zone has not been accepted by anyone else at the UN. From the Iraqi perspective, we are illegally entering their airspace. We have also attacked, on occassion, dual use facilities, causing civilan deaths. The attempt to kill George Senior was in 91! So you think we should go to war over that! Take a look at this site, good for laughs: http://www.coxar.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/ Art | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 551 Registered: 5-2001 |
I mean, as long as he's doing it legally... | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 550 Registered: 5-2001 |
So he only tries to kill Americans, legally? Was it a legal assasination attempt on Bush? | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Junior Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 227 Registered: 11-2002 |
No legal basis? Let's go back in time: (lights dim) Schwartzkopf: Hey, Saddam! What up, dog? Hussein: You infidel pig! You destroyed my Republican guard! Now you come to Bahgdad to destroy me! Schwartzkopf: Look, my bro. Just chill. See, we're willin' to forget this ever happened, assuming you go ahead and agree to a few things. (Saddam grins and rubs his greasy hands) Hussein: Like what? What do you want? Schwartzkopf: Well, you can't invade other countries and murder thousands of innocents. Hussein: Hmmmmm.....ok. Schwartzkopf: You also cannot build up another army, OR any WMD. Hussein: (grinning slyly) No problem. Schwartzkopf: Finally, you have to allow US planes to patrol a No-Fly Zone that we'll establish to keep you under control. Hussein: So, if I do these things, you won't kill me, eh? Schwartzkopf: You got it. We'll let you live. Hussein: (spits in hand) Deal! Does anyone remember this taking place about ten years ago? | ||
| Robert Callahan (Rcallahan)
New member Username: Rcallahan Post Number: 42 Registered: 7-2002 |
Nebula, The US on its own set up the "No Fly Zone", There is NO legal basis for it. BTW, if Iraq flew it's ac over the US, I would hope we would at least try to shoot them down. | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 548 Registered: 5-2001 |
Shooting at American planes is certainly proof that he intends to kill Americans, right? | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Junior Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 226 Registered: 11-2002 |
Art, 1. Saddam attempted to kill Bush Sr. in 1991 with a failed assasination attempt. 2. Saddam has fired on US planes legally patrolling the Iraqi no-fly zone 600+ times since 1998. That's 1201 (two pilots per plane, of course) Americans that Saddam has attempted to kill. There's your proof. Have you changed your tune? | ||
| Robert Callahan (Rcallahan)
New member Username: Rcallahan Post Number: 40 Registered: 7-2002 |
Arlie, Idi Amin is alive and well living in Saudi Arabia (I actually have seen him there). Hey, isn't that where 15 out of 19 hijackers came from? Maybe we should bomb Saudi Ariabia! | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 547 Registered: 5-2001 |
Very well stated. | ||
| Horsefly (Arlie)
Member Username: Arlie Post Number: 766 Registered: 5-2002 |
Did England have any "clear and convincing" evidence that Adolph Hitler was going to attack them during WWII? On December 6th, 1941, did the United States have any "clear and convincing" evidence that the Japanese Air Force was going to bomb Pearl Harbor the next day? Bad guys don't offer up "clear and convincing" evidence that they are going to attack. Fidel Castro allowed the Soviet Union to install inter-continental ballistic missles in Cuba in 1962. We didn't actually have any "clear and convincing" evidence that Kruschev and Castro were ACTUALLY going to push the button to launch those missles at the United States, did we? If you were to re-write history, would you allow those ICBMs to remain pointed at the United States simply because we didn't actually have any "clear and convincing" evidence that they would be fired at the United States? Fortunately, President Kennedy took a firm stance. The mere presence of those ICBMs was proof enough of what they were there for. If a burglar breaks into your house, I assume that you will not attempt to kill the burglar because you don't have any "clear and convincing" evidence that he intends to kill you. He's just there to steal your property, and you wouldn't want to "over react" and harm the nice fellow. | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 546 Registered: 5-2001 |
Does anyone think maybe Bush etc. knows something we don't? Everything we know about Iraq is not necessarily everything they know about Iraq. Isn't that a distinct possibility? Who on this chat line has been sitting in on their meetings and can therefore inform the rest of us what is really going on? | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 960 Registered: 6-2001 |
Arlie does have a point, but remember that Japan is a great country and was a world contender before we bombed them. After the war, we loaned them money, equipment, management skills, and because they had a population willing to work, with sufficient technical knowledge, they made good on their prospects. Germany did the same, for the same reasons. We have been occupying various latin countries for a time (Panama, etc.) but they haven't quite gotten with the program as well. I think that if we attempt to do that in Iraq, the people there won't rise to the same level as the Japanse and Germans (both of whom seem to disagree with us over the use of force in Iraq). My point is simple: don't kill others until you have direct, firm proof that those people mean to kill you. In my humble opinion, no such proof has been forthcoming. Period. Provide me with the proof, and my tune will change. What I have heard is the Saddam is bad. So What. Prove he intends to kill Americans with clear and convincing evidence, and I'll change. I will not change until that level of proof is provided, because I disagree with this change in our stragedy, because we will kill those who shouldn't be killed. Where's the beef? Art | ||
| Horsefly (Arlie)
Member Username: Arlie Post Number: 765 Registered: 5-2002 |
My main question is this: Does Idi Amin figure into the picture anywhere? One shouldn't be discussing ruthless dictators like Adolph Hitler, Emperor Hirihito, Momar Quadafi, Saddam Hussein, Stalin, Lenin, and a host of others without mentioning the long lost poster boy of African dictators, Idi Amin Dada. What's he been up to lately? Last I heard, he was hanging out in Sudan. | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 545 Registered: 5-2001 |
I will have to admit that Arlie has a point there. Considering Japan's current economic and technological position in the world, leveling them 50 years ago probably wasn't such a bad thing for us (not to mention the fact that they had it coming then anyway). | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Junior Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 225 Registered: 11-2002 |
Arlie - great point about Japan. And since the BBC had to use the "entire history of the world", let's take a look at the Qing Dynasty in China. That dynasty was formed by pointing their "bayonettes" at the current ruling party and taking over. The Qing dynasty, for the BBC's info, was one of the most stable and peaceful (Pax Sinica, anyone?) dysnatsies in China's long history. It lasted for 2 and a half centuries, which is longer than any nation currently in existence today has lasted. Oops. I guess they forgot about that one AND Japan. Oh yeah, and GERMANY. Didn't the Nazi party fall to the bayonettes of Allied forced? As far as I know, the German governemnt has been fairly stable for the past 50 years. | ||
| Horsefly (Arlie)
Member Username: Arlie Post Number: 764 Registered: 5-2002 |
I read that article at the BBC site. Here are two remarks from their article. "The majority of the 19 suicide hijackers came from Saudi Arabia, whose government has been accused in Washington political circles of not doing enough to counter Islamic fundamentalism among its population." Their own statement admits that Saudi Arabia was the home of 19 terrorists and that the Saudi government wasn't doing a whole lot to stop the situation. So that kind of puts another Arabic country in the same bed with all the others, doesn't it? That article also said: "There has never been in the history of the world a country in which a regime change happened at the bayonets of guns that has led to stability." So much for BBC intelligence. HELLO BBC, have you ever heard of JAPAN??? AS IN, THE UNITED STATES MILITARY VAPORIZED HIROSHIMA AND NAGASAKI DURING WWII, WON THE WAR, OCCUPIED THE COUNTRY, AND THEN RE-ESTABLISHED A GOVERNMENT THAT GREW TO BE AN INDUSTRIAL WORLD POWER. That sounds like plenty of stability to me. | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 959 Registered: 6-2001 |
I'd read this first: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2773759.stm | ||
| Horsefly (Arlie)
Member Username: Arlie Post Number: 763 Registered: 5-2002 |
Saddam update: Network news just said that Saddam has placed one of his top generals under house arrest in order to prevent him from starting a coup attempt. Looks like some of his boys may see the handwriting in the sand. Just like that U.N. inspector said, anybody in Saddam's inner circle who desent are quickly dealt with. | ||
| Martin - Cavallino Motors (Miami348ts)
Advanced Member Username: Miami348ts Post Number: 3853 Registered: 5-2001 |
If it reads: "pass this on to everybody you know", it means that a clever tele (insert internet spam)-company would like to use you to get your friends e-mail addresses so they can spam them as well. They post controversal stuff or those sobbing stories of the child with no brain, no arms, no legs and who desperately wants to run the NYC marathon. Bill Gates sends him 10c for every person that receives this e-mail. It must be true, I saw it on the internet. | ||
| Horsefly (Arlie)
Member Username: Arlie Post Number: 762 Registered: 5-2002 |
Nebula, you're wasting your time. People have already forgotten that Middle Eastern terrorists attacked New York City on 9/11/01. How can they be expected to remember that Sadam Hussein attacked Kuwait WAY BACK in 1991? People should have been listening to George Noory's (formerly Art Bell's) radio show on Friday night. He had a 2 hour interview with one of the former U.N. head honcho weapon's inspectors. He was well familiar with the shell game that Iraq has been playing through the years to hide their weapons programs. His bottom line was this: he said all the evidence indicates that Saddam Hussein HAS a nuclear weapon and HAS the capability to use it. I'll take the word of a U.N. weapons inspector that has been to Iraq as well as having interviewed numerous terrorists at Guantanamo Bay himself. He also told how Saddam's inner circle continuously rats on each other and how threats of intimidation and death are standard operating procedure. Real nice guys who I'm sure we can trust to tell the truth. I'll let the politically correct liberal whiners invite Saddam and his buddies over to dinner. I think we need to deliver them some "take out" directly to Baghdad!!! | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Junior Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 224 Registered: 11-2002 |
What exactly are you waiting for, Art? Saddam to come out and say "I hate America, and I am building a weapons and foreign policy program hell bent on it's destruction." Guess what, brainiac. HE ALREADY DID. In 1997. You, and France, have forgotten that. | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 958 Registered: 6-2001 |
Ernesto: The problem is that we don't know Iraq is harboring those connected with 911. My understanding is that Al Qaeda is in Northern Iraq, where our allies the Kurds have control of the country side. If you have better solid informaiton about that, please let me know. Art | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Junior Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 222 Registered: 11-2002 |
Don't try to convince Art. He's to busy flying his plane, driving his Ferrari, and complaining about the wealthy republicans of the US. Go figure. | ||
| Ernesto (T88power)
Intermediate Member Username: T88power Post Number: 1244 Registered: 2-2001 |
Well, if a country has sworn to be our enemy (like Iraq) and is developing weapons of mass destruction (like Iraq) and is harboring some of the terrorists responsible for 9/11 (like Iraq), then I think we should definitely do something about it. Of course, this is easy for me to say since I wont be going over there to risk my life. But I definitely think these people should be taken out, ASAP. Ernesto | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 955 Registered: 6-2001 |
Ernesto: If we had a crystal ball, you'd be right. We can't attack everyone that we think might cause us trouble, because the consequences of being wrong are great. Having seen people injuried in war, I don't even want to think about killing people when I am not absolutely sure it was in self defense. I point out to you the Illinois Death Row controversy: 5 - 10% of those on death row provably innocent (I haven't checked the %, but think that is what it turned out to be). Imagine that the death count was in the tens of thousands, and without proof of the necessity, would you want that on your head? I sure wouldn't, and I'm not even a Christian. Art | ||
| Ernesto (T88power)
Intermediate Member Username: T88power Post Number: 1243 Registered: 2-2001 |
Arthur, the same words you are saying were being said about Osama before the 9/11 attacks. No proof, no danger, no threat, etc etc. Do we have to wait until they take down the Empire State Building or release some bio weapon in the subway to do something? Can't we be a little proactive instead of reactive? | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 954 Registered: 6-2001 |
Mike: You do agree that at the present it appears that the UN will not authorize an attack on Iraq? If that is true, then it does appear that this was ill planned, and if done to completion, will cause the US quite a bit of trouble, including but not limited to anger in the Muslin world, angst with our allies, including but not limited to France, Germany, etc. My understanding is that if a vote for force were had in the security council, the vote would be 11 to 4 against us. Is that a result of good planning. A good point in this argument is today's news that our friends the Turks have decided to hold us up for an additional 28 Billion in aid as a price to allow us to use their land, airspace, etc. in this endeavor. Seems to me, that I would have made this deal long before I had no other choice about whether or not to attack, wouldn't you? Poor planning is a mark of a failure to see beyond a certain point. I've called my opposition idiots more than once. Fortunately for me, I've been able to put my facts where my mouth was, and gotten the results I've predicted at trial (not always, but more than I've been embarassed). Those are facts. I generally don't call those that don't agree with me idiots. I generally try to understand their position in order to defeat them. There's an old addage in the law, if you don't know how you can lose your case, you've already lost it. But, I do call a spade a spade, and here is what I've seen: 1. My government has told me that Iraq is connected to Al Qaeda, but has provided little or no proof of same, and what it has provided is questionable. My government has also told me that Iraq is connected to Terrorism. That is true, but misleading. Iraq has been a major suporter of various Palestinan groups who commit terror in support of their attempt to get a homeland, or destruction of Israel. While that sort of behavior is dispicable, I don't see how that is justification of the US attacking Iraq. If that were the case, we should be attacking Saudi Arabria also. Not likely. In short, I am unhappy with the way these things are playing out. I think that we will all suffer as a result of this endeavor. It could have been handled quite a bit better. Remember that someone with a lot more military smarts than I'll ever have said: this is an elective war. Source: General Clark on Meet the Press last Sunday. My personal opinion is that there is no such thing as a elective war. You either have to go to war, or you don't. Nothing in between. | ||
| Mike B (Srt_mike)
Junior Member Username: Srt_mike Post Number: 58 Registered: 12-2002 |
Arthur, your commentary is laughable. <<<< France may be doing us as great a favor as their help in our revolution. Not one of those idiots in charge of our country has evaluated the down side of this war of aggression in terms of the long term effect on our country. >>> You're resorting to calling them "idiots" and saying nobody has thought of the long term effects. Do you REALLY believe this? Is anyone who does not agree with you an idiot? Sounds like a case of bitterness that things aren't going your way. I see you are a lawyer... what do you think would happen in your next case if the prosecutor's tactic was to call your client an "idiot"? Do you think it would be effective? As a lawyer aren't you used to supporting a stance with facts and proving your assertions? Or do you say "well your honor anyone who thinks he did it is just an idiot"  <<< By making us wait, and obtain the entire world's support (if we can get it), they are requiring us to legitmitize our behavior.>>> You don't really believe this do you? Why should any one nation wait for support of the entire world before it acts in it's OWN best interests? Would you get the full support of FerrariChat before buying a new car? Or do you do what's best for you? So you think that if we don't have the full support of EVERY country our behaviour is illegitimate? Do you think France is a paragon of righteousness and would never do anything that is simply in it's own best interests? France is just doing what suits it today. It has nothing to do with legitimacy or anything of the sort. It's incredibly naieve to think the rest of the world is so enlightened and fair and the US is a rogue nation led by a cowboy leader. Global politics are just a LITTLE more complex than that, Arthur. <<< Hard for the autocrats in charge of the US at this time, but if the facts are there, it should be possible. Perhaps the main reason for this abuse is that we don't have any such facts, and are just after the oil for our friends? >>> What facts? The false facts that you presented before? I refuted them one by one - but you kept changing the focus of the argument. You said there was no link between Iraq and terrorism. You said a war would create many more Husseins and Bin Ladens. You claimed that a war on Iraq would force other countries to make nukes. None of that is based in fact - it is all opinion. When facts were presented contrary to your stance, you changed the argument to something that is not provable by fact ("it's all about oil anyway"). The US should never be a puppet for the world. Something like 65% of the population of the US supports a war on Iraq, and more than 50% are not happy about France's silly obstructionist attitude... so know that your beliefs are in the minority, and you make it quite clear in your posts that you are extremely biased and unable to view this situation objectively. You are a democratic liberal and therefore this makes you opposed to anything Bush or a republican administration would do, and therefore makes you a supporter of anyone who takes a stance against Bush and this administration. In other words, a lemming. Why not provide some FACTS to back up your stance rather than opinions and weak arguments that change like the weather? | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 542 Registered: 5-2001 |
I do not know who starts them but they get around because of idiots like me. | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 952 Registered: 6-2001 |
France may be doing us as great a favor as their help in our revolution. Not one of those idiots in charge of our country has evaluated the down side of this war of aggression in terms of the long term effect on our country. By making us wait, and obtain the entire world's support (if we can get it), they are requiring us to legitmitize our behavior. Hard for the autocrats in charge of the US at this time, but if the facts are there, it should be possible. Perhaps the main reason for this abuse is that we don't have any such facts, and are just after the oil for our friends? It also looks like our friends the Turks are trying to hold us up for more money. I'd like to know what Bush, et al has promised our "allies" in order to obtain their assistance. Bet went we do find out, we'll all be amazed and very, very angry. Art | ||
| Robin Overcash (Robin)
New member Username: Robin Post Number: 34 Registered: 1-2003 |
Hm you're right, the link doesn't work right. The link to the response to the Clinton administration freeing Atta is at the bottom of the Ollie North page. It was basically a case of mistaken identity. Two guys with similar names, but different countries of origin and 14 year age difference.. But yes, the Dems aren't doing so well on the PR front, but these nutcase emails going around don't help matters. Makes me wonder where these stories originate from and what their purpose is. They're obviously false, and obviously the perpetrators knew this. The only reason to create this kind of thing is to instill divisiveness. Now who would want that? -R | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 541 Registered: 5-2001 |
It takes this to create hatred towards liberals and Demos? Seems to me they do enough on their own to create animosity. That excerpt did not address the Clinton thing. Is that part completely untrue as well? I really do not know. | ||
| Robin Overcash (Robin)
New member Username: Robin Post Number: 33 Registered: 1-2003 |
"What about that other thing involving Atta and the Clinton administration?" Guess you didn't read the link from the Ollie North article: http://www.snopes.com/rumors/north.htm#atta I wonder how many peoples' political views are based on mass emails that don't contain an ounce of truth? Hint people: if you get an email that says "pass this on to everyone you know," you can be pretty sure it's false. What's sad about these things is not only do people believe them, but the facts are easily checked. North's testimony, the list of panel members, etc are all a matter of public record. That someone created this lie, knowing that anyone with an ounce of rationalism could look up the facts and dispute them, is a telling account of the state of human credulity. The only purpose for something like this is to create animosity and hatred for liberals and Democrats in a weak attempt at placing blame for something we have no control over (right wing conspiracy? heh). How are these lies any different from the lies being taught in extremist Muslim schools in the middle east? They both promote hatred of Americans. Thanks for spreading it... -R | ||
| ross koller (Ross)
Member Username: Ross Post Number: 701 Registered: 3-2002 |
the french are the greatest hypocrites that ever lived. heres another good one i heard yesterday: why do the brits and the americans want france involved in the war on iraq anyway? answer: they need somebody to teach sadam how to surrender. | ||
| John A. Suarez (Futureowner)
Member Username: Futureowner Post Number: 465 Registered: 3-2002 |
"Interesting. How could Saurez see an "erie" video clip that never existed? Ahh, the power of suggestion. " <----(insert foot in mouth here) Well, ••••. What I do know is that I did see this mentioned on one of the major news channels shortly after 9-11. I would imagine that what I saw was brief footage of Oliver North being questioned, and when it comes down to him mentioning Osama, they must have frozen the footage and had a panel discuss what now appear to be false words. | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 538 Registered: 5-2001 |
What about that other thing involving Atta and the Clinton administration? | ||
| Jon P. Kofod (95f355c)
Member Username: 95f355c Post Number: 443 Registered: 8-2001 |
Sorry for the redundant post. I failed to read Tillman's link. | ||
| Jon P. Kofod (95f355c)
Member Username: 95f355c Post Number: 442 Registered: 8-2001 |
Tommy, I don't like Al Gore one bit but you are incorrect on this matter. Your statement is total myth propogated on the internet. The person to whom North was referring to was Palestinian terrorist Abu Nidal. Al Gore was not even on the questioning committee during the hearings and at the time we were actually giving aid to bin Laden and his Afghan fighters against the Soviets. Believe me I would love it, if the story were true but it's pue baloney. | ||
| Jon P. Kofod (95f355c)
Member Username: 95f355c Post Number: 441 Registered: 8-2001 |
Dave, I agree with your assessment on the rural French and their general friendliness towards Americans but disagree somewhat with your assessment of the Parisians unless you are referring to the much older population. I spent some time in Paris in the early 90's and got the impression that they pretty much hate Americans. The ironic thing was that many times I would ask them something in English and they would act like the didn't understand or in most cases offer no help. But when I spoke German they were actually quite helpful. Even more ironic was that in some instances my wife, who speaks some German (but is not fluent like I am ) tried it as well but they sensed she was American (or at least not a native German) because of her accent and wouldn't respond. A friend who had been working in France for over 10 years later told me that although the Germans aren't on the French list of favorite folks, at least they were Europeans and not from across the continent in America. The people in the French countryside were extremely pleasant and not at all reflective of Paris. France has the relative importance within world affairs of Luxemburg except for that one measly UN vote which makes them feel important. We are talking about a country where 75% of the population aspires to working for the government. While France has 10% unemployment (likely 25% underemployment), a creaking economy that is uncompetitive within the EU and most of the free world, and a leader (Chirac) who doesn't have to face re-election, they are busy passing laws to cleanse the French language of "Americanized" words instead of reforming their sorry society. Next time the Germans start shopping for real estate again we should just hang up the phone on the French. In additon I found an interesting article about the personal friendship of Saddam and Chirac which started back in 1975. Very interesting read below: http://www.benadorassociates.com/article/123 Regards, Jon P. Kofod 1995 F355 Challenge #23 | ||
| Robert Callahan (Rcallahan)
New member Username: Rcallahan Post Number: 38 Registered: 7-2002 |
Tommy, What you posted is completly false. There is not one once of truth in it. Bob | ||
| Horsefly (Arlie)
Member Username: Arlie Post Number: 757 Registered: 5-2002 |
Interesting. How could Saurez see an "erie" video clip that never existed? Ahh, the power of suggestion. | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 537 Registered: 5-2001 |
I hope it is false. | ||
| Tillman Strahan (Tillman)
Member Username: Tillman Post Number: 382 Registered: 11-2001 |
The Osama/North story is nonsense: http://www.snopes.com/rumors/north.htm | ||
| John A. Suarez (Futureowner)
Member Username: Futureowner Post Number: 454 Registered: 3-2002 |
I have seen that clip of Oliver North before. Very erie. As for Atta, I am not surprised at all. | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 535 Registered: 5-2001 |
Remember This? It was 1987! At a lecture the other day they were playing an old news video of Lt.Col. Oliver North testifying at the Iran-Contra hearings during the Reagan Administration. There was Ollie in front of God and country getting the third degree, but what he said was stunning! He was being drilled by a senator; "Did you not recently spend close to $60,000 for a home security system?" Ollie replied, "Yes, I did, Sir." The senator continued, trying to get a laugh out of the audience, "Isn't that just a little excessive?" "No, sir," continued Ollie. "No? And why not?" the senator asked. "Because the lives of my family and I were threatened, sir." "Threatened? By whom?" the senator questioned. "By a terrorist, sir" Ollie answered. "Terrorist? What terrorist could possibly scare you that much?" "His name is Osama bin Laden, sir" Ollie replied. At this point the senator tried to repeat the name, but couldn't pronounce it, which most people back then probably couldn't. A couple of people laughed at the attempt. Then the senator continued. Why are you so afraid of this man?" the senator asked. "Because, sir, he is the most evil person alive that I know of", Ollie answered. "And what do you recommend we do about him?" asked the senator. "Well, sir, if it was up to me, I would recommend that an assassin team be formed to eliminate him and his men from the face of the earth." The senator disagreed with this approach, and that was all that was shown of the clip. By the way, that senator was Al Gore Also: Terrorist pilot Mohammad Atta blew up a bus in Israel in 1986. The Israelis captured, tried and imprisoned him. As part of the Oslo agreement with the Palestinians in 1993, Israel had to agree to release so-called "political prisoners." However, the Israelis would not release any with blood on their hands, The American President at the time, Bill Clinton, and his Secretary of State, Warren Christopher, "insisted" that all prisoners be released. Thus Mohammad Atta was freed and eventually thanked the US by flying an airplane into Tower One of the World Trade Center. This was reported by many of the American TV networks at the time that the terrorists were first identified. It was censored in the US from all later reports. If you agree that the American public must be made aware of this fact, pass this on. | ||
| Jerry W. (Tork1966)
Member Username: Tork1966 Post Number: 485 Registered: 7-2001 |
My wife and I were on the island of St. Barts (heavily pop. by French) a few years ago sitting at an outdoor restaurant having lunch when a couple around 30ish sat at the table next to us. They brought their stupid poodle with the dumb ribbons in it's hair, well groomed, etc. Unbeknownst to the couple, the poodle got into the woman's purse that was sitting on the ground next to her chair. Trying to alert them to the situation, my wife leaned over and said "excuse me", and in French (I forget the French words they used...not that it matters) they responded that they did not speak "English", with a tone like it was a bad thing to even know HOW to speak English. I said to my wife, "F*** those French pricks." There were no other people nearby that heard me so I did not offend anyone else. Within 2 minutes the dog had a hole chewed in the side of the Coach purse. I was so happy I could have stood on a mountain and shouted to the world. As we were leaving I heard the man speaking English. So not only were they faking not knowing English, I'm certain they heard AND UNDERSTOOD my comment. We laughed the rest of the day. They still hadn't noticed the dog when we left. We were contemplating staying until they did. | ||
| Horsefly (Arlie)
Member Username: Arlie Post Number: 756 Registered: 5-2002 |
You mean John McCain, the guy who spent years experiencing tyrany in a POW camp, yet he's the guy who is front and center in all the Pro gun control efforts in Washington? One would think that a guy who experiences evil first hand would want people to be free to own and use firearms to defend themselves against such evil. But he has camped out with the liberals for too long. I'm sure McCain would love England, they banned most all guns years ago, but of course during WWII they started BEGGING the United States for firearms to defend against an anticipated invasion by a madman named Adolph Hitler. How ironic. McCain supports a "get tough" policy against Saddam Hussein and terrorists, yet he would deny Joe Citizen the right to own a gun to defend himself against a burglar in his own neighborhood. Typical politician. | ||
| Greg (Greg512tr)
Junior Member Username: Greg512tr Post Number: 96 Registered: 2-2002 |
I liked John McCain's comment regarding France yesterday on Face the Nation. He said France is irrelevant. Like a 40's starlet trying to dine out on her looks and no longer having the face for it. | ||
| Rob Lay (Rob328gts)
Board Administrator Username: Rob328gts Post Number: 3560 Registered: 12-2000 |
Hey, my first car was a Le Car. It was so small I could stand through the tarp moon roof and reach the entire car to hand wax it. I'll try to find pictures. Anyone know anything about those cars? It said turbo on it, but it must of been negative 2 boost. | ||
| Matt Lemus (Mlemus)
Intermediate Member Username: Mlemus Post Number: 2222 Registered: 8-2002 |
What do you expect from the country that gave us "Le Car" and the subsiquent items such as "Le Bag" and "Le Shoe" | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 774 Registered: 1-2002 |
Excellent points, Bill. I don't know. However, it IS interesting to see France deride us for arrogance (now, THAT'S ironic, eh?) and colonialism and militarism, while they simultaneously send troops to Ivory Coast to militarily get involved in a local political situation in which they have no stake...but have fond memories of when that country was a French colony. Now, if you look at how many countries France has claimed/still claims as colonies (dozens), and compare it with the same criteria for the US (zero), I think you will get at the root of French hypocrisy... And then there's the French navy's spectacular victory against that unarmed Greenpeace ship a few years ago. Yee-haw! Vive le France! | ||
| wm hart (Whart)
Member Username: Whart Post Number: 747 Registered: 12-2001 |
Dave: i was thinking the same thing about individual frogs and i'm glad you said what you did. Does their political leadership reflect the general population's views, though? Why is it that they, as a people, seem to define their self interest in a way that consistently turns out wrong, if not evil? I mean, the Germans during WW II were only following orders, right? Just a bunch of crazies at the the top of the heap directing the butchering...Vichy France was just as bad. I know their culture tends to be xenophobic, they have an indiginous Arab population to contend with, and anything American, or "global" when it affects their culture is anathma. Still i have a hard time believing they can accuse Americans of the basest motives for starting a war and then, pretend to take high moral ground for their stance against it. | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 770 Registered: 1-2002 |
Rob, thanks for posting Andy Rooney's words here. I heard them, and was very moved. My father, too, was there to weatch that jacka$$ deGaulle play-act, and also heard the shots. But he was also there earlier, as a first-wave commando doing special ops on the eve of us liberating France. In fact, he won the COngressional Medal of Honor for his valor in that campaign & as a liberator of Buchenwald & Bergen-Belsen konzentrationslagern (concentration camps). It was actually awarded after the war, since he lost 2 CO's to combat, and never put in his medal deeds for himself--his 3rd CO had to piece it all together after the war! His view? Generally, the rural French are as good (and truly, to this day, grateful to Anerica) a people as you will find; same goes for Parisians during the struggle in the '40s (unknown today). But their leadership? As abysmal & cowardly as today. He tells a joke: How many Frenchmen does it take to defent Paris? Unknown. It has never been tried... ;) | ||
| Marq J Ruben (Qferrari)
Junior Member Username: Qferrari Post Number: 214 Registered: 2-2002 |
Good one, Steve.  | ||
| Willis Huang (Willis360)
Intermediate Member Username: Willis360 Post Number: 1125 Registered: 8-2001 |
Maybe it's time to switch the Michelin Pilot Sport on my 360 to Pirelli P-Zero. | ||
| Steve (V10_nut)
Junior Member Username: V10_nut Post Number: 51 Registered: 3-2002 |
"Going to war without the French is like going deer hunting without an accordion." Ross Perot | ||
| William H (Countachxx)
Intermediate Member Username: Countachxx Post Number: 1968 Registered: 2-2001 |
Maybe France still thinks its a superpower cus it has nuclear subs, weapons, aircraft carriers & a space program ? Paris may be the worlds most beautiful city, their art is great but in food, art & architecture & cars they take a back seat to the italians | ||
| Marq J Ruben (Qferrari)
Junior Member Username: Qferrari Post Number: 213 Registered: 2-2002 |
I applauded after I heard Andy Rooney's segment on '60 Minutes'. Nice post, Rob. Worthwhile reading. | ||
| William H (Countachxx)
Intermediate Member Username: Countachxx Post Number: 1967 Registered: 2-2001 |
France has been PO'd at the US since WW2 cus france was THE superpower in the 19th C along with the UK and now they are 2nd or 3rd fiddle and they want the old days of Napoleon back. That & they think Americans are all ignorant fat peasants | ||
| John A. Suarez (Futureowner)
Member Username: Futureowner Post Number: 452 Registered: 3-2002 |
Here is an email that has been going around: -------------------------------------------------- Complete Military History of France - Gallic Wars - Lost. In a war whose ending foreshadows the next 2000 years of French history, France is conquered by of all things, an Italian. - Hundred Years War - Mostly lost, saved at last by female schizophrenic who inadvertently creates The First Rule of French Warfare; "France's armies are victorious only when not led by a Frenchman." -Italian Wars - Lost. France becomes the first and only country to ever lose two wars when fighting Italians. - Wars of Religion - France goes 0-5-4 against the Huguenots - Thirty Years War - France is technically not a participant, but manages to get invaded anyway. Claims a tie on the basis that eventually the other participants started ignoring her. - War of Devolution - Tied. Frenchmen take to wearing red flowerpots as chapeaux. -The Dutch War - Tied -War of the Augsburg League/King William's War/French and Indian War Lost, but claimed as a tie. Three ties in a row induces deluded Frogophiles the world over to label the period as the height of French military power. -War of the Spanish Succession - Lost. The War also gave the French their first taste of a Marlborough, which they have loved every since. - American Revolution - In a move that will become quite familiar to future Americans, France claims a win even though the English colonists saw far more action. This is later known as "de Gaulle Syndrome", and leads to the Second Rule of French Warfare; "France only wins when America does most of the fighting." - French Revolution - Won, primarily due the fact that the opponent was also French. - The Napoleonic Wars - Lost. Temporary victories (remember the First Rule!) due to leadership of a Corsican, who ended up being no match for a British footwear designer. - The Franco-Prussian War - Lost. Germany first plays the role of drunk Frat boy to France's ugly girl home alone on a Saturday night. - World War I - Tied and on the way to losing, France is saved by the United States. Thousands of French women find out what it's like to not only sleep with a winner, but one who doesn't call her "Fraulein." Sadly, widespread use of condoms by American forces forestalls any improvement in the French bloodline. -World War II - Lost. Conquered French liberated by the United States and Britain just as they finish learning the Horst Wessel Song. - War in Indochina - Lost. French forces plead sickness, take to bed with the Dien Bien Flu - Algerian Rebellion - Lost. Loss marks the first defeat of a western army by a Non-Turkic Muslim force since the Crusades, and produces the First Rule of Muslim Warfare; "We can always beat the French." This rule is identical to the First Rules of the Italians, Russians, Germans, English, Dutch, Spanish, Vietnamese and Esquimaux. - War on Terrorism - France, keeping in mind its recent history, surrenders to Germans and Muslims just to be safe. Attempts to surrender to Vietnamese ambassador fail after he takes refuge in a McDonald's | ||
| Rob Lay (Rob328gts)
Board Administrator Username: Rob328gts Post Number: 3552 Registered: 12-2000 |
France's Unpaid Debt NEW YORK, Feb. 16, 2003 (CBS) A World War II veteran from U.S. visits cemetery at Omaha Beach in France (CBS/AP) (CBS) A weekly commentary by CBS News correspondent Andy Rooney. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You can't beat the French when it comes to food, fashion, wine or perfume, but they lost their license to have an opinion on world affairs years ago. They may even be selling stuff to Iraq and don't want to hurt business. The French are simply not reliable partners in a world where the good people in it ought to be working together. Americans may come off as international jerks sometimes but we're usually trying to do the right thing. The French lost WW II to the Germans in about 20 minutes. Along with the British, we got into the war and had about 150,000 guys killed getting their country back for them. We fought all across France, and the Germans finally surrendered in a French schoolhouse. You'd think that school building in Reims would be a great tourist attraction but it isn't. The French seem embarrassed by it. They don't want to call attention to the fact that we freed them from German occupation. I heard Steven Spielberg say the French wouldn't even let him film the D-Day scenes in �Saving Private Ryan� on the Normandy beaches. They want people to forget the price we paid getting their country back for them. Americans have a right to protest going to war with Iraq. The French do not. They owe us the independence they flaunt in our face at the U.N. I went into Paris with American troops the day we liberated it, Aug. 25, 1944. It was one of the great days in the history of the world. French women showered American soldiers with kisses, at the very least. The next day, the pompous Charles de Gaulle marched down the mile long Champs Elysee to the Place de la Concorde as if he had liberated France himself. I was there, squeezed in among a hundred tanks we'd given the Free French Army that we brought in with us. Suddenly there were sniper shots from the top of a building. Thousands of Frenchmen who had come to see de Gaulle scrambled to get under something. I got under an Army truck myself. The tank gunners opened fire on the building where the shots had come from, firing mindlessly at nothing. It was a wild scene that lasted, maybe, 10 minutes. When we go to Paris every couple of years now, I rent a car. I drive around the Place de la Concorde and when some French driver blows his horn for me to get out of his way, I just smile and say to myself, "Go ahead, Pierre. Be my guest. I know something about this very place you'll never know." The French have not earned their right to oppose President Bush's plans to attack Iraq. On the other hand, I have. | ||
| John A. Suarez (Futureowner)
Member Username: Futureowner Post Number: 451 Registered: 3-2002 |
So, it looks like France has finally pushed people over the edge. What are your thoughts on this? I heard that one restaurant are now calling french fries "Freedom Fries" !!! | ||
| Anonymous |
poker casino poker 680 |