Calling all Belgians

On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 02:51:44 GMT, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com
wrote:

You'll have to forgive me here but exactly what did Karl Rove have to do
with anything in that article? Are you so hatefilled that the merest MENTION
of his name sends you into fits of blithering idiocy?

Hatefilled - now that is something the ****ant understands...

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

On Apr 17, 12:37 am, Bret wrote:


More details hehttp://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=588156

This is just one of several cracks in the wall.

Bret- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I'm not sure that's a crack, or anything else for that matter. I've
heard non-stop whining about Republican Vote fraud, stolen elections,
etc...from the Democrats and major bitching about Republicans not
doing enough to investigate these incidents. This **** has come from
Howard Dean head of the DNC so why is it any different for Republicans
to bitch about, what they saw as, a whitewash by a Clinton appointed
atty into voter fraud.
Can't have it both ways, but everyone seems to want to.
Bill C

On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 13:38:44 GMT, Bob Schwartz
wrote:

Heh!

Tailor made. Almost two weeks and still rolling. Curtis seems
to have burned out but the rest of the regulars are still
going strong.

Bob Schwartz

Waiting for a second wind.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

On Apr 17, 8:07 am, Bill C wrote:
On Apr 16, 8:14 pm, Jack Hollis wrote:

Just wanted to add this into the discussion in which you insist our
troops, equipment, munitions, etc...not being stretched incredibly
thin:

http://tinyurl.com/3drprd

Quoted:

04-12-2007

The Train Wreck Is Here, Now



By Paul Connors

The years of neglect and wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have finally
netted the U.S. Armed Forces what those in the know have been warning
about for years, namely massive equipment shortages that will require
costly re-capitalizations. The service most immediately affected, that
also faces the most near term adverse effects is the U.S. Army.

The ostrich-like ignorance and repudiation of a very real need for
continued defense appropriations and acquisition is the dual
responsibility of both the executive and legislative branches of the
government and blame is not the purview of any one administration. The
melt-down started during the latter part of the first Bush
administration, continued with a vengeance under the Clinton
administration and despite the attacks of 9/11 and added global
responsibilities for the U.S. military, stayed on its disastrous
course in the current administration. In the latter case, the blame
needs to be apportioned equally between the administration and
Congress; the administration, because the President chose and retained
a complete failure as his first Secretary of Defense and the Congress
for continuing to "nickel and dime" procurement of vitally needed
hardware.

These guys over there have NO clue though, right?
IMO SFTT is easily the most honest and has the most experienced and
credible writers on any US military site we have. They have an agenda,
but don't hide the warts and screwups either.
Bill C

On 17 Apr 2007 05:04:12 -0700, Bill C wrote:

You don't think that part of Iran's current deterrent is the massive
arming of Hamas and Hizbullah? You don't think they could make things
incredibly difficult in Lebanon, the Palestinian territories, Iraq,
and Israel?

I don't think that Iran can do anything more than they are doing.
Israel is quite capable of handling anything that Hezbollah or Hamas
throw at them and you can throw in Syria as well.

You must know better than the IDF because they are preparing for
round 2 with Hizbullah right now, as the UN does nothing about the re-
arming which Hizbullah freely admits it's doing in violation of the
UN.

I'm sure that Israel will be well prepared for war with Hezbollah. The
result will be the same as every other time. Hezbollah attacks,
Israel kicks their ass and Hezbollah claims victory.


Without US support Taiwan is gone in days at most. I've seen
stimates as that are as high as 20,000 missiles that the Chinese have
eployed in the area. Once again, a no warning first wave, wipes out
ost of the air force infrastructure and then it's pretty much over.

You have no idea what you're talking about.


Tell me how we replace our 4th largest oil supplier with no problem,
especially since Iraq isn't up to speed yet and that production is
vulnerable also. You gonna get OPEC to just increase production? Good
Luck.
Bill C

How does the US replace it's fourth leading supplier of oil? Simple,
buy it from other countries.

Unless Venz decides not to see their oil to anyone, there will be no
drop in supply.

"Howard Kveck" wrote in message
...

Funny thing, Tom, all those reasons you cite as not being the reasons
are the
ones you spouted off until right about now.

With all those citations who could argue with you?

So you're full of ****. Furthermore,
why are you blathering about "the radicals" when they were ***not*** in
Iraq back
in '03?

http://www.husseinandterror.com/

"The public evidence of Saddam Hussein's cooperation with and support for
global terrorists is abundant and clear. The Baathist government's contacts
and collaboration with terrorists in general, al-Qaeda in particular, and
even the September 11 conspirators should make all Americans highly grateful
that President Bush led an international effort to remove Saddam Hussein
from power."

"Let's start with money. At a minimum, we know that Saddam Hussein's
government supported terrorism by paying "bonuses" of up to $25,000 to the
families of Palestinian homicide bombers. How do we know this? Tariq Aziz,
Hussein's own deputy prime minister, was stunningly candid about the
Baathist government's underwriting of terrorist killings in Israel."

Kveck, you are a lying son of a bitch because that's what you want to be.

"Curtis L. Russell" wrote in message
...

And, oh by the way, the person I mostly sit around with for the last
20 plus years has been my wife, and it isn't called 'patting each
other on the back' - its called 'back rubs' and it is a non-violent
way to communicate between spouses. Not that I expect you to
understand or anything...

Yeah, I've heard that story before from you gays.

"Bret" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Apr 16, 8:51 pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:
"Bret" wrote in message

ups.com...

On Apr 16, 5:04 pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:

I'd settle for Rove being further exposed for what he is and then
removed from power. Though I believe he's committed crimes, I don't
really care if he's even prosecuted.

And I see that in a decade the historians will be in agreement that
the
move
into Afghanistand AND Iraq was the turning point in the war on Islamic
Extremism.

The subject was the crimes of Rove. Here's one example from today's
NYT:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/16/opinion/16mon4.html

You'll have to forgive me here but exactly what did Karl Rove have to do
with anything in that article? Are you so hatefilled that the merest
MENTION
of his name sends you into fits of blithering idiocy?

More details he
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=588156

This is just one of several cracks in the wall.

"Now we know" With evidence like that who needs facts?

"said a source with knowledge of the situation." More really solid evidence
there.

No wonder you're so sure of yourself.

And just out of curiosity - do you or do you not approve of voter fraud?

"Bill C" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Apr 17, 12:37 am, Bret wrote:


More details hehttp://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=588156

This is just one of several cracks in the wall.

Bret- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I'm not sure that's a crack, or anything else for that matter. I've
heard non-stop whining about Republican Vote fraud, stolen elections,
etc...from the Democrats and major bitching about Republicans not
doing enough to investigate these incidents. This **** has come from
Howard Dean head of the DNC so why is it any different for Republicans
to bitch about, what they saw as, a whitewash by a Clinton appointed
atty into voter fraud.
Can't have it both ways, but everyone seems to want to.

Well, we agree on that. Somehow these people are trying to imply that if
Rove pushed to prosecute voter fraud that somehow he would be responsible if
a prosecuting attorney was overly zealous or even crooked.

And I still have heard one single criticism of Bill Clinton personally
firing 92 Federal prosecutors while 2 of them were actively investigating
Clinton's Arkansas administrations corruption leading STRAIGHT to the
Governor's office.

"Michael Press" wrote in message
...
In article
. com,
" wrote:

It turns out that it doesn't matter what you, I,
Tom or even gwhite think about government intervention
in this matter. New Orleans is a strategically
important port, and not just for shrimp boats and
the nation's supply of jambalaya, but because of the
mouth of the Mississippi, and the Gulf oil industry.
There is going to be a city there no matter how
hydrologically unsound it may be. The only question
is whether it gets rebuilt in a manner to screw people
over unnecessarily or not.

When I said nobody was interested in building up the
levees, it was not a rhetorical throwaway. Nobody in
New Orleans was interested in building a robust levee
system. Everybody knew the levees would fail. It is
not the federal government's responsibility to tell
Louisiana what to do. If the local governments wanted
to build proper levees they would have done it. That
after the fact _nobody_ said they wanted to build
levees and the federal government refused to help
proves that nobody wanted to build the levees. The
ports are all at sea level. They did not flood. What
exactly is the federal government's interest?

Again and again we get back to the actual point that New Orleans and
Mississippi WAS given funds to improve the levees and they CHOSE to spend it
on other things.

Why is it that so many here don't understand that the Feds CANNOT tell the
states how they will spend Federal Grant money? They can only make
generalizations about the money being for the port and that sort of thing.