Air France? Ptui!

Dave writes:

A-Ha, you fell right into my trap. You don't install democracy
by declaring martial law.


It seemed to have worked okay in Germany and Japan...

What was your point again?



Geoff

--
"Take my archetypes...please!" -- Henny Jungman

Geoff Miller wrote:
Dave writes:


A-Ha, you fell right into my trap. You don't install democracy
by declaring martial law.



It seemed to have worked okay in Germany and Japan...

What was your point again?

Wasn't Hitler elected into office?

"mrtravel" wrote in message
m...
Geoff Miller wrote:
Dave writes:


A-Ha, you fell right into my trap. You don't install democracy
by declaring martial law.



It seemed to have worked okay in Germany and Japan...

What was your point again?

Wasn't Hitler elected into office?

Wasn't under martial law.

Sarah Banick wrote:
"Tchiowa" wrote in message
oups.com...

Sarah Banick wrote:

Don't you understand?
The Russians were protecting the Russians
The Americans were protecting Europeans.
We weren't in danger of a German attack.

Nothing is ever that simple.

We were in danger of losing our major trading partners. All wars are
basically fought over economics.

What??????????????

We fought Japan because of economics? Attacking Pearl Harbor had
nothing to do with it? We fought Germany over trading partners?
Attacking our shipping and invading our allies had nothing to do with
it? Wars are primarily fought over religion and territorial conquest
and self defense when attacked.


Try to take it a little deeper than that.....we fight over religion because
we're afraid those other people are a threat to our way of life, which in
the western world includes our freedom to build a high standard of living,

Wrong. You started off well. We fight over religion because we believe
that God tells us to. Because we believe that we will have a better
afterlife or something like that. It has zero to do with economics.

which is ultimately based on trade (capitalism). And self-defense and
territorial conquest are clearly economic issues -- why else would a country
care if it loses that nice chunk of land with whatever its resources are?

Power. That and religion are the driving factors.

Sarah Banick wrote:
"Tchiowa" wrote in message
oups.com...

Sarah Banick wrote:
helped?

The Russians didn't help anyone but themselves.

You seem incapable of acknowledging the Russian contribution to the
defeat of Germany. What about the standard US tactic of accepting your
enemy's enemy as your friend?



Hi Padraig --

I'm sure by now you know that Americans are not taught about the full
extent
of Russia's contribution to WWII? When I was growing up the USSR was our
enemy, so we never really got too teary about all that relationship.

Maybe you should have gone to a better school. We were taught all about
it including the tens of millions of casualties among Russian
civilians.

I didn't pick it up until my formal education was finished, when I
started to
get passionate about European history. I saw an interesting article
several
weeks ago about how WWII spawned a massive number of movies...we all grew
up
with the myths that Americans are invincible.

Problem is, it's gonna take more than superior firepower to win this
current
war. And many don't understand that.

Actually we all do. The Left likes to pretend that no one understands
it so they can make statements like you just did and feel sanctimonious.


Yeah, yeah, yeah. I'm glad that everyone you know understands this--so
things should start to get better soon.

I don't understand why everyone resorts to name calling on this board.

"Name calling"? What was the "name" you're so offended about? "Left"?
It's interesting that those on the Left consider being identified as
"Left" is insulting.

If we're here to discuss things, discuss! But I lose total respect for those
who respond with what they consider insults. I'm not gonna play with you
anymore.

Stephen Farrow wrote:
Tchiowa wrote:
Stephen Farrow wrote:
Tchiowa wrote:
Stephen Farrow wrote:

Quiz for you. What happens when you increase spending and cut taxes?
Answer: The economy improves and tax collections rise. The US currently
has record high tax collections and a budget deficit that is so low
compared to GDP that we could qualify for the Eurozone while France
couldn't. All this despite the economic loss of 9/11 and the wars.

Keep trying, but you're losing when you disparage the Bush economic
record. It's stunningly good.

Sure, I guess, if you're wearing a blindfold.

Or if you can count. Full employment. Steady growth. Low deficit.

I note you did not dispute any of my specific points about the economy.
And for good reason. You can't.

No, it's simply that there's no point wasting time providing links for
someone who's *so* completely taken in by the smoke and mirrors.

I see. You can't be bothered with dealing with facts.

mrtravel wrote:
Geoff Miller wrote:

ant writes:

: Absolutely. Trade is a two-way street: other countries need our
: commerce as much as we need theirs.


You have a point. We'd all be lost without McDonalds.



If you really believe American trade is limited to McDonalds, you're
too ignorant to be allowed to participate in public debate.


So, Geoff.. Since you think King George has been so good for the
economy, what do you think of the huge increase in the National Debt
since he took office, due to his love of deficit spending?

The budget deficit as a percentage of GDP is among the lowest in the G7.

Stephen Farrow wrote:
Geoff Miller wrote:
Stephen Farrow writes:

: Did Bush inherit an economy in recesssion from the Clinton
: administration, or not? Yes or no?

Nope, you can't get over the tired tactic of blaming Clinton for
everything. Bzzt! Game over.


Sorry, not so fast. What did I blame Clinton for?

You have no debating tactic, it seems, other than pinning the failings
of your current administration on the Clinton one.

Very dishonest response. As he said, he did *not* blame Clinton or his
administration. The fact that Bush inherited an economy in recession is
just that: FACT. He didn't say it was anyone's fault. In fact it
wasn't. There was a bubble and just like all bubbles we loved it and
rode it until it burst. And that created a recession. The recession
ended in 2 quarters (which is pretty damn good as that is the *minimum*
amount of time that a recession can exist based on current definitions)
and the economy has grown steadily in every quarter since. No
exceptions. Whether Clinton did good or bad, or whether Bush 41 did
good or bad, or whether Kim Jung Il's hair is wierd, or anything else
is quite irrelevant to the simply point that the poster made. Bush's
economy has been *extremely* successful.

Dave wrote:

So what WAS Bush's intent on occupying Iraq? (this should be good, watch
this bush apologist squirm now)

His intent was quite clear from the beginning: to remove a dictator who
had invaded his neighbors, tried to assasinate an American president,
used WMDs to kill tens of thousands,

A-Ha, you fell right into my trap. You don't install democracy by declaring
martial law.

So what was the intention again?

Perhaps my intention should be to get Reading Comprehension lessons for
you.

Please show me where I said that the intention was "installing
democracy". That was at best a side benefit.

But while you're at it, your response shows a rather dismal knowledge
of history. Removing dictators using military force or declaring
martial law is sometimes an absolute prerequisite to democracy.

Tchiowa wrote:
mrtravel wrote:

Geoff Miller wrote:


ant writes:

: Absolutely. Trade is a two-way street: other countries need our
: commerce as much as we need theirs.



You have a point. We'd all be lost without McDonalds.



If you really believe American trade is limited to McDonalds, you're
too ignorant to be allowed to participate in public debate.


So, Geoff.. Since you think King George has been so good for the
economy, what do you think of the huge increase in the National Debt
since he took office, due to his love of deficit spending?


The budget deficit as a percentage of GDP is among the lowest in the G7.

I was comparing it to the previous administration, not the other
countries of G7