Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#41
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 17:16:01 +0000, Michael A. Terrell wrote:
Eeyore wrote: "Michael A. Terrell" wrote: Genome wrote: Go buy some viagra and then GFY. You lowlife, ****ed up moron. I had to watch as a family member died of cancer, and its something you never forget. Since you think cancer is so ****ing funny, you should die of Colon Rectal cancer, after a couple years of chemotherapy and radiation treatments that leave you so sick that you beg people to help you die. Yet despite all that, Thompson is happy to suggest that foreigners should die nasty painful deaths in order that US influence should prevail (plus keep the price of gas down) and he'll happily sacrifice a few of 'his own' to the same end too, whilst of course sitting pretty himself. Isn't that actually more cruel ? They need to up your meds, donkey. Speaking of that, how are your meds working, Michael? Cheers! Rich |
#42
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 01:52:57 +0100, Eeyore wrote:
Richard The Dreaded Libertarian wrote: Eeyore wrote: Jim Thompson wrote: The Demoncrats are out to show "W" as a failure. He *IS* a failure. Nah, he's quite successful at ****ing over the country. Well, he and his puppeteers. Who really does have their hand up GWB's backside ? Big Oil, isn't it obvious? Thanks, Rich |
#43
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
"Richard The Dreaded Libertarian" wrote in message news On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 14:56:59 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote: On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 19:59:00 GMT, "Genome" [snip] And your contribution was a son who shat his cancerous arse. And don't forget the autistic grandsprog. GFY. No more help from me. Ahhh! Finally!!! Thank GAWD!!!!!!! Cheers! Rich Actually he's quite a clever bloke - during his occasional lucid moments. |
#44
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 14:22:23 +1000, Lionel wrote:
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 08:17:21 -0700, Jim Thompson For Eeyore and Friends...... If you really lack the self-control & manners to overcome your obsession with posting massively off-topic trollbait in technical groups, you could at least be polite enough to put '[OT]' in the subject line. He's so tightly in the grip of neocon brain-lock, he wouldn't know "polite" if it jumped up and bit him in Fred Mertz pants. Thanks, Rich |
#45
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
ian field wrote: "Eeyore" wrote in message ian field wrote: It might be to the advantage of all coalition members to use this as an excuse to enter Iran With what troops ? Ending the supply of arms from Iran to Iraqi insurgents would not only save a lot of troops lives but also allow re-deployment of a huge number of troops currently kept busy cleaning up the problem after its already occurred. My point being however that there's currently no spare troops to hand to do so, no matter how well advised such a course of action might be (or not even) in the long term. Graham |
#46
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
Eeyore wrote:
My point being however that there's currently no spare troops to hand to do so, no matter how well advised such a course of action might be (or not even) in the long term. So, you expect us to believe that you are a world renowned expert in military strategy? -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida |
#47
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
"Jim Thompson" wrote
in message ALL Anglo-Saxons have lost their balls :-( But the Saxons much more so if it's any consolation. -- Reply in group, but if emailing add another zero, and remove the last word. |
#48
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
"Genome" wrote in message
And your contribution was a son who shat his cancerous arse. DNA I liked you better when you were incomprehensible. Maybe you shouldn't take the meds after all. -- Reply in group, but if emailing add another zero, and remove the last word. |
#49
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote: Eeyore wrote: My point being however that there's currently no spare troops to hand to do so, no matter how well advised such a course of action might be (or not even) in the long term. So, you expect us to believe that you are a world renowned expert in military strategy? If that's what tickles your fancy ! It rather seems to me that it's simply a statement of fact actually. Graham |
#50
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
Eeyore wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote: Eeyore wrote: My point being however that there's currently no spare troops to hand to do so, no matter how well advised such a course of action might be (or not even) in the long term. So, you expect us to believe that you are a world renowned expert in military strategy? If that's what tickles your fancy ! It rather seems to me that it's simply a statement of fact actually. Graham Actually, you're as believable as Rosie O’Donnell and her conspiracy theories about why the world trade center building collapse. You have no concept of WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR THE MISSION, so its simply more you you braying like an overfed jackass. -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida |
#51
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote: Eeyore wrote: "Michael A. Terrell" wrote: Eeyore wrote: My point being however that there's currently no spare troops to hand to do so, no matter how well advised such a course of action might be (or not even) in the long term. So, you expect us to believe that you are a world renowned expert in military strategy? If that's what tickles your fancy ! It rather seems to me that it's simply a statement of fact actually. Actually, you're as believable as Rosie O’Donnell and her conspiracy theories about why the world trade center building collapse. You have no concept of WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR THE MISSION I know exactly what would be required and an important element is MORE TROOPS ! Ours are almost completely tied up with existing commitments. If USAans are prepared to die for US for a change do let me know. Somehow I suspect you lot wouldn't be up for that. Graham |
#52
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
"Eeyore" wrote in message ... "Michael A. Terrell" wrote: Eeyore wrote: "Michael A. Terrell" wrote: Eeyore wrote: My point being however that there's currently no spare troops to hand to do so, no matter how well advised such a course of action might be (or not even) in the long term. So, you expect us to believe that you are a world renowned expert in military strategy? If that's what tickles your fancy ! It rather seems to me that it's simply a statement of fact actually. Actually, you're as believable as Rosie O'Donnell and her conspiracy theories about why the world trade center building collapse. You have no concept of WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR THE MISSION I know exactly what would be required and an important element is MORE TROOPS ! Ours are almost completely tied up with existing commitments. If USAans are prepared to die for US for a change do let me know. Somehow I suspect you lot wouldn't be up for that. Graham From what I've seen, the Americans would like nothing better than a good excuse to enter Iran with a very large tanker full of whoopass! |
#53
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
ian field wrote: "Eeyore" wrote If USAans are prepared to die for US for a change do let me know. Somehow I suspect you lot wouldn't be up for that. From what I've seen, the Americans would like nothing better than a good excuse to enter Iran with a very large tanker full of whoopass! Bring 'em on ! ;~) I'll believe it when I see it though. Graham. |
#54
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 00:01:24 +0100, Eeyore
wrote: Jim Thompson wrote: The Demoncrats are out to show "W" as a failure. He *IS* a failure. --- Well, let's see... He's the President of the United States of America, and you are...? Close to nothing, it seems to me. -- JF |
#55
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 00:10:37 +0100, Eeyore
wrote: ian field wrote: It might be to the advantage of all coalition members to use this as an excuse to enter Iran and put a stop once and for all of the supply of armaments to Iraqi insurgents. If indeed that's a significant issue. After the WMD fiasco is anything that US 'Intelligence' says believable ? --- I'd certainly put a lot more credence in what US Intelligence has to say than in the **** _you_ perpetually spew, dumb ass. -- JF |
#56
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 00:11:12 +0100, Eeyore
wrote: ian field wrote: It might be to the advantage of all coalition members to use this as an excuse to enter Iran With what troops ? --- Ever hear of "conscription", dumb ass? -- JF |
#57
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
John Fields wrote: Well, let's see... He's the President of the United States of America, and you are...? I'm a famous character. In ten years from now, GWB will be thankfully forgotten whilst I'll still be a popular and much loved character in several children's books and a film or two. Graham |
#58
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 01:52:57 +0100, Eeyore
wrote: Richard The Dreaded Libertarian wrote: Eeyore wrote: Jim Thompson wrote: The Demoncrats are out to show "W" as a failure. He *IS* a failure. Nah, he's quite successful at ****ing over the country. Well, he and his puppeteers. Who really does have their hand up GWB's backside ? --- Thank God _you_ don't, otherwise we'd really be in deep ****. -- JF |
#59
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
"Eeyore" wrote in message ... John Fields wrote: Well, let's see... He's the President of the United States of America, and you are...? I'm a famous character. In ten years from now, GWB will be thankfully forgotten whilst I'll still be a popular and much loved character in several children's books and a film or two. Graham Mad donkey disease! |
#60
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 14:22:23 +1000, Lionel
wrote: On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 08:17:21 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote: For Eeyore and Friends...... If you really lack the self-control & manners to overcome your obsession with posting massively off-topic trollbait in technical groups, you could at least be polite enough to put '[OT]' in the subject line. --- Speaking of trollbait, PKB? -- JF |
#61
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
John Fields wrote: Eeyore wrote: ian field wrote: It might be to the advantage of all coalition members to use this as an excuse to enter Iran With what troops ? --- Ever hear of "conscription", dumb ass? Conscripts make lousy soldiers you IDIOT. Graham |
#62
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] For Eeyore and Friends
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 15:25:16 +1000, Lionel
wrote: On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 01:05:03 -0400, Chuck Harris wrote: Lionel wrote: On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 08:17:21 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote: For Eeyore and Friends...... If you really lack the self-control & manners to overcome your obsession with posting massively off-topic trollbait in technical groups, you could at least be polite enough to put '[OT]' in the subject line. With a title like "For Eeyore and Friends" you couldn't figure that out? Not if I didn't already know that the loon was obsessed with those people. It's junk like that that makes a group unreadable & useless to new people. --- Calling someone a "loon" is hardly aspiring to the manners and politeness you keep parroting that you practice. Besides, netkopp, since when have you become the arbiter of what's readable and useful for new people? If you have such a problem with the way things are going in these groups and you have soooo... much experience with newsgroups in general, why don't you start your own moderated group where, I'm sure, everyone will flock to in order to find an environment more to their liking. Plus, we'll be well rid of you. -- JF |
#63
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] For Eeyore and Friends
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 10:12:03 -0400, Chuck Harris
wrote: Lionel wrote: On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 07:57:46 -0400, Chuck Harris wrote: Lionel wrote: On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 01:05:03 -0400, Chuck Harris wrote: Lionel wrote: On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 08:17:21 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote: For Eeyore and Friends...... If you really lack the self-control & manners to overcome your obsession with posting massively off-topic trollbait in technical groups, you could at least be polite enough to put '[OT]' in the subject line. With a title like "For Eeyore and Friends" you couldn't figure that out? Not if I didn't already know that the loon was obsessed with those people. It's junk like that that makes a group unreadable & useless to new people. You don't give "new people" much credit. Really? How could someone new to the group be expected to know that a thread with the subject line: "For Eeyore and Friends" consists of nothing but the cheapest kind of political flamebait? Despite knowing the names of the OP & his target de jeur, I - perhaps naively - assumed it'd contain /some/ sort of electronics content. Don't you really mean that it's junk like that that makes me want to play net cop? I don't know you well enough to have the faintest idea what sort of thing makes you feel like playing net cop, Chuck. Read the sentence. It starts: Don't you really mean..." The object of the sentence, "me", is someone named Lionel. As to not giving "new people" enough credit, how many of these posts did you have to read before you figured out that they were off topic? One or two messages should suffice. I would imagine the typical user looking for a schematic or design would have something in mind before he started searching these groups. The only folks that would be fooled into reading this off topic trash are those that were looking for something that "Eeyore" might like. --- Indeed. Also, someone new coming to the group might be doing so because they have a question they need answered or a problem they need to have solved, in which case they'd more than likely post and wait for replies to that subject. Unfortunately, someone like Graham (and now this "Lionel" goon) would more than likely get on their case and try to derail the thread with their asinine antics. -- JF |
#64
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] For Eeyore and Friends
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 00:43:19 +1000, Lionel
wrote: On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 10:12:03 -0400, Chuck Harris wrote: Lionel wrote: On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 07:57:46 -0400, Chuck Harris wrote: Lionel wrote: On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 01:05:03 -0400, Chuck Harris wrote: Lionel wrote: On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 08:17:21 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote: For Eeyore and Friends...... If you really lack the self-control & manners to overcome your obsession with posting massively off-topic trollbait in technical groups, you could at least be polite enough to put '[OT]' in the subject line. With a title like "For Eeyore and Friends" you couldn't figure that out? Not if I didn't already know that the loon was obsessed with those people. It's junk like that that makes a group unreadable & useless to new people. You don't give "new people" much credit. Really? How could someone new to the group be expected to know that a thread with the subject line: "For Eeyore and Friends" consists of nothing but the cheapest kind of political flamebait? Despite knowing the names of the OP & his target de jeur, I - perhaps naively - assumed it'd contain /some/ sort of electronics content. Don't you really mean that it's junk like that that makes me want to play net cop? I don't know you well enough to have the faintest idea what sort of thing makes you feel like playing net cop, Chuck. Read the sentence. It starts: Don't you really mean..." The object of the sentence, "me", is someone named Lionel. As to not giving "new people" enough credit, how many of these posts did you have to read before you figured out that they were off topic? One or two messages should suffice. I would imagine the typical user looking for a schematic or design would have something in mind before he started searching these groups. The only folks that would be fooled into reading this off topic trash are those that were looking for something that "Eeyore" might like. Alternatively, the obnoxious idiots who think that they're entitled to shove their political rants in other peoples faces could simply keep them to themselves, or at least tag them with [OT], the way polite people do with their off-topic chatter. --- _Really_ polite people refrain from calling those with whom they disagree "obnoxious idiots", and the obnoxious idiots who don't refrain, and _do_ complain about them, often prolong the life of an otherwise exhausted thread by providing fuel for the fire. -- JF |
#65
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] For Eeyore and Friends
John Fields wrote: _Really_ polite people refrain from calling those with whom they disagree "obnoxious idiots" Given that you say far worse, that clearly makes you impolite. Graham |
#66
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 08:57:12 +0100, Eeyore
wrote: "Michael A. Terrell" wrote: Eeyore wrote: My point being however that there's currently no spare troops to hand to do so, no matter how well advised such a course of action might be (or not even) in the long term. So, you expect us to believe that you are a world renowned expert in military strategy? If that's what tickles your fancy ! It rather seems to me that it's simply a statement of fact actually. --- You seem to think that everything you say is simply a statement of fact, when in actuality it's mostly just opinionated garbage. -- JF |
#67
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 10:15:04 -0500, John Fields
Gave us: On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 14:22:23 +1000, Lionel wrote: On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 08:17:21 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote: For Eeyore and Friends...... If you really lack the self-control & manners to overcome your obsession with posting massively off-topic trollbait in technical groups, you could at least be polite enough to put '[OT]' in the subject line. --- Speaking of trollbait, PKB? The idiot hangs out in the KookTard group, so what would you expect. All the idiots over there do is **** over other groups with floods of their baby bull****. And they actually think they are superior. Sure... to a Dung beetle... maybe. After The Lionel Tard adds the kooktard group to his relpies (like you know he will) you can prepare for the flood of their sub-human stupidity. |
#68
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] For Eeyore and Friends
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 17:01:47 +0100, Eeyore
Gave us: John Fields wrote: _Really_ polite people refrain from calling those with whom they disagree "obnoxious idiots" Given that you say far worse, that clearly makes you impolite. Since the dialog between you and John is typically tit-for-tat, you are referring to a different circumstance. Show me where John has ever attacked a new poster or any on topic poster that didn't act like the ass that the LionelTard does. |
#69
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 11:04:08 -0500, John Fields
Gave us: On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 08:57:12 +0100, Eeyore wrote: "Michael A. Terrell" wrote: Eeyore wrote: My point being however that there's currently no spare troops to hand to do so, no matter how well advised such a course of action might be (or not even) in the long term. So, you expect us to believe that you are a world renowned expert in military strategy? If that's what tickles your fancy ! It rather seems to me that it's simply a statement of fact actually. --- You seem to think that everything you say is simply a statement of fact, when in actuality it's mostly just opinionated garbage. I firm;y believe that there were WMDs, and that they were spirited off to Syria, and that those trailers we saw pics of WERE in fact mobile chem/bio weapon facilities. Why would they have posted perimeter and guards around them if they were mere "aspirin factories"? Our job is not complete, and it won't be till the trash has been taken out. |
#70
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] For Eeyore and Friends
MassiveProng wrote: Eeyore Gave us: John Fields wrote: _Really_ polite people refrain from calling those with whom they disagree "obnoxious idiots" Given that you say far worse, that clearly makes you impolite. Since the dialog between you and John is typically tit-for-tat, you are referring to a different circumstance. Show me where John has ever attacked a new poster or any on topic poster that didn't act like the ass that the LionelTard does. If that's what he meant he should have said so IMHO. Graham |
#71
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 16:07:48 +0100, Eeyore
wrote: John Fields wrote: Well, let's see... He's the President of the United States of America, and you are...? I'm a famous character. In ten years from now, GWB will be thankfully forgotten whilst I'll still be a popular and much loved character in several children's books and a film or two. --- In ten years, neither Bush will have been forgotten while you'll still be merely posing as a much-loved cartoon character wondering why so little of it comes your way. -- JF |
#72
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 16:07:48 +0100, Eeyore
wrote: John Fields wrote: Well, let's see... He's the President of the United States of America, and you are...? I'm a famous character. --- No, you're not. You're merely _posing_ as a cartoon character. -- JF |
#73
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
MassiveProng wrote: I firm;y believe that there were WMDs, Your opinion isn't shared by the weapons inspectors. They were actually there and you're just guessing. Guess whose opinion I take more seriously ? and that they were spirited off to Syria, and that those trailers we saw pics of WERE in fact mobile chem/bio weapon facilities. UK weapons inspector Dr David Kelly (he of the 'sexed-up dossier' claim) for example found an alleged Iraqi mobile chemical wepaons lab to be a facility for launching weather balloons. Why would they have posted perimeter and guards around them if they were mere "aspirin factories"? Cite ? Graham |
#74
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
John Fields wrote: Eeyore wrote: I'm a famous character. --- No, you're not. You're merely _posing_ as a cartoon character. God, I *love* Usenet ! Graham |
#75
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 16:18:05 +0100, Eeyore
wrote: John Fields wrote: Eeyore wrote: ian field wrote: It might be to the advantage of all coalition members to use this as an excuse to enter Iran With what troops ? --- Ever hear of "conscription", dumb ass? Conscripts make lousy soldiers you IDIOT. --- They're what saved your ass in WW2, dumb ass. -- JF |
#76
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] For Eeyore and Friends
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 17:01:47 +0100, Eeyore
wrote: John Fields wrote: _Really_ polite people refrain from calling those with whom they disagree "obnoxious idiots" Given that you say far worse, that clearly makes you impolite. --- I never said _I_ was polite, did I, dumb ass? -- JF |
#77
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
Eeyore wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote: Eeyore wrote: "Michael A. Terrell" wrote: Eeyore wrote: My point being however that there's currently no spare troops to hand to do so, no matter how well advised such a course of action might be (or not even) in the long term. So, you expect us to believe that you are a world renowned expert in military strategy? If that's what tickles your fancy ! It rather seems to me that it's simply a statement of fact actually. Actually, you're as believable as Rosie O’Donnell and her conspiracy theories about why the world trade center building collapse. You have no concept of WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR THE MISSION I know exactly what would be required and an important element is MORE TROOPS ! Ours are almost completely tied up with existing commitments. If USAans are prepared to die for US for a change do let me know. Somehow I suspect you lot wouldn't be up for that. Graham What's wrong, Donkey? You don't even have the balls to call us AMERICANS? Why should we be willing to die for a bunch of fat, lazy and stupid losers? If we ignore what's going on, the UK is likely to be the first to have Muslim nuclear warhead detonated on their soil. If you aren't willing to defend yourself, why should we? -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida |
#78
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
Eeyore wrote:
John Fields wrote: Eeyore wrote: ian field wrote: It might be to the advantage of all coalition members to use this as an excuse to enter Iran With what troops ? --- Ever hear of "conscription", dumb ass? Conscripts make lousy soldiers you IDIOT. Then you are saying that we should just build a HUGE pile of dead donkeys to block Iran's path? Its simply a statement of fact, dumbASS. -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida |
#79
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
MassiveProng wrote:
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 11:04:08 -0500, John Fields Gave us: On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 08:57:12 +0100, Eeyore wrote: "Michael A. Terrell" wrote: Eeyore wrote: My point being however that there's currently no spare troops to hand to do so, no matter how well advised such a course of action might be (or not even) in the long term. So, you expect us to believe that you are a world renowned expert in military strategy? If that's what tickles your fancy ! It rather seems to me that it's simply a statement of fact actually. --- You seem to think that everything you say is simply a statement of fact, when in actuality it's mostly just opinionated garbage. I firm;y believe that there were WMDs, and that they were spirited off to Syria, and that those trailers we saw pics of WERE in fact mobile chem/bio weapon facilities. Why would they have posted perimeter and guards around them if they were mere "aspirin factories"? Our job is not complete, and it won't be till the trash has been taken out. Don't leave any rabid donkeys laying around. -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida |
#80
Posted to alt.binaries.schematics.electronic,sci.electronics.design
|
|||
|
|||
For Eeyore and Friends
Eyesore wrote:
John Fields wrote: Eeyore wrote: I'm a famous character. --- No, you're not. You're merely _posing_ as a cartoon character. God, I *love* Usenet ! Graham Sure you do. Its the only place in the universe that you can prove how stupid you are, every time you hit "SEND". -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
hi friends | Metalworking | |||
hi friends | Home Repair |