--
"The danger to America is not George W Bush, but a citizenry capable
of
entrusting a man like him with the presidency. It will be easier to
limit and undo the follies of a George W Bush presidency than to
restore
the necessary common sense and good judgment to an electorate willing
to
have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and
far
more serious than Mr. George W Bush, who is a mere symptom of what
ails
us. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the
vast
confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The republic can
survive a George W Bush. It is less likely to survive a multitude of
fools such as those who made him their president."


-- Author Unknown

On 12/7/2010 4:11 AM, harry wrote:
--
"The danger to America is not George W Bush, but a citizenry capable
of
entrusting a man like him with the presidency. It will be easier to
limit and undo the follies of a George W Bush presidency than to
restore
the necessary common sense and good judgment to an electorate willing
to
have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and
far
more serious than Mr. George W Bush, who is a mere symptom of what
ails
us. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the
vast
confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The republic can
survive a George W Bush. It is less likely to survive a multitude of
fools such as those who made him their president."


-- Author Unknown


Harry! George W. Bush is not The President of The United States anymore!
You can crawl out from under your rock, it's safe for now. :-)

TDD

On 12/7/2010 5:24 AM, The Daring Dufas wrote:
On 12/7/2010 4:11 AM, harry wrote:
--
"The danger to America is not George W Bush, but a citizenry capable
of
entrusting a man like him with the presidency. It will be easier to
limit and undo the follies of a George W Bush presidency than to
restore
the necessary common sense and good judgment to an electorate willing
to
have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and
far
more serious than Mr. George W Bush, who is a mere symptom of what
ails
us. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the
vast
confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The republic can
survive a George W Bush. It is less likely to survive a multitude of
fools such as those who made him their president."


-- Author Unknown


Harry! George W. Bush is not The President of The United States anymore!
You can crawl out from under your rock, it's safe for now. :-)

TDD

Penis envy, call it what you want, but Harry represents non-US citizens
that care more about what is happening here than their homeland.

Frank wrote in news:idl8rb$304$1
@news.eternal-september.org:



Penis envy, call it what you want, but Harry represents non-US citizens
that care more about what is happening here than their homeland.



That's because US politics is generally far more interesting than that
elsewhere.


--
Tegger

On Tue, 7 Dec 2010 13:29:52 +0000 (UTC), Tegger
wrote:

Frank wrote in news:idl8rb$304$1
:



Penis envy, call it what you want, but Harry represents non-US citizens
that care more about what is happening here than their homeland.



That's because US politics is generally far more interesting than that
elsewhere.

US policies tend to have a large effect on the world since we have the
military making the rest of the world safe for wealthy Americans to
invest in. Who really owns the US? I trust George Carlin for the
answer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYIC0...eature=related

On 12/7/2010 5:24 AM, The Daring Dufas wrote:
On 12/7/2010 4:11 AM, harry wrote:
--
"The danger to America is not George W Bush, but a citizenry capable
of
entrusting a man like him with the presidency. It will be easier to
limit and undo the follies of a George W Bush presidency than to
restore
the necessary common sense and good judgment to an electorate willing
to
have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and
far
more serious than Mr. George W Bush, who is a mere symptom of what
ails
us. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the
vast
confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The republic can
survive a George W Bush. It is less likely to survive a multitude of
fools such as those who made him their president."


-- Author Unknown


Harry! George W. Bush is not The President of The United States anymore!
You can crawl out from under your rock, it's safe for now. :-)

Sarah Palin is talking like she is going to run. Isn't it about the
same confederation of fools that would vote for her? I suppose the end
of Rome was a lot like this.

Jeff

TDD

On Dec 7, 2:00*pm, Jeff Thies wrote:
On 12/7/2010 5:24 AM, The Daring Dufas wrote:





On 12/7/2010 4:11 AM, harry wrote:
--
"The danger to America is not George W Bush, but a citizenry capable
of
entrusting a man like him with the presidency. It will be easier to
limit and undo the follies of a George W Bush presidency than to
restore
the necessary common sense and good judgment to an electorate willing
to
have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and
far
more serious than Mr. George W Bush, who is a mere symptom of what
ails
us. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the
vast
confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The republic can
survive a George W Bush. It is less likely to survive a multitude of
fools such as those who made him their president."

-- Author Unknown

Harry! George W. Bush is not The President of The United States anymore!
You can crawl out from under your rock, it's safe for now. :-)

* *Sarah Palin is talking like she is going to run. Isn't it about the
same confederation of fools that would vote for her? I suppose the end
of Rome was a lot like this.

* *Jeff





TDD- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Palin.
That's what worries the rest of the world.

BTW now the war in Afghanistan is coming to a close (ie another
country the USA has completely f***d up) I see the new war is coming
on nicely. ie Korea.
All we need now is a Tonkin incident to kick things off.

Then a lot more American boys can go off to die.
But that won't matter. You're rich arms manufacturers can get even
richer. And the bankers.
Got to keep the perpetual war going. (As1984)

I thought it was going to be Venezuela.

On 12/7/2010 8:00 AM, Jeff Thies wrote:
On 12/7/2010 5:24 AM, The Daring Dufas wrote:
On 12/7/2010 4:11 AM, harry wrote:
--
"The danger to America is not George W Bush, but a citizenry capable
of
entrusting a man like him with the presidency. It will be easier to
limit and undo the follies of a George W Bush presidency than to
restore
the necessary common sense and good judgment to an electorate willing
to
have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and
far
more serious than Mr. George W Bush, who is a mere symptom of what
ails
us. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the
vast
confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The republic can
survive a George W Bush. It is less likely to survive a multitude of
fools such as those who made him their president."


-- Author Unknown


Harry! George W. Bush is not The President of The United States anymore!
You can crawl out from under your rock, it's safe for now. :-)

Sarah Palin is talking like she is going to run. Isn't it about the same
confederation of fools that would vote for her? I suppose the end of
Rome was a lot like this.

Jeff

Sara Palin is not in any political office! If you are so smart, put up
an exceptional candidate who can sway the people to vote for him/her/it.
Present a candidate who can walk on water and breath life into a dead
moose, impress me. :-)

TDD

"dgk" wrote in message ...

US policies tend to have a large effect on the world since we have the
military making the rest of the world safe for wealthy Americans to
invest in. Who really owns the US? I trust George Carlin for the
answer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYIC0...eature=related

I don't know if Carlin was right about everything all the time, but just
offhand I can't recall any things he was wrong about.

"harry" wrote in message
...

Palin.
That's what worries the rest of the world.

You're speaking for the rest of the world now too?

BTW now the war in Afghanistan is coming to a close (ie another
country the USA has completely f***d up)

Afghanistan has been a pit of strife as long as it has existed, ask
Alexander the Great, or the former British Empire, or the former Soviet
Union. To depict it as a place the USA ****ed up (we're all big kids here,
you can spell it out) is really reaching. America is just the latest actor
on that sad stage.

Then a lot more American boys can go off to die.
But that won't matter. You're rich arms manufacturers can get even
richer.

Your own nation is the one of the world's leading arms exporters, being
edged out of fourth place by France in the past decade. And in case you
haven't noticed, your boys are dying in Afghanistan too.

"harry" wrote in message
...

"The danger to America is not George W Bush, but a citizenry capable of
entrusting a man like him with the presidency.

We could say the same of the British electorate and/or administration for
obeying Anthony Eden in 1956 or (in our own time) Tony Blair.

--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

The Daring Dufas wrote:


Harry! George W. Bush is not The President of The United States
anymore! You can crawl out from under your rock, it's safe for now.
:-)

But some wish he were.

Snif.

On 12/7/2010 10:44 AM DGDevin spake thus:

"harry" wrote in message
...

BTW now the war in Afghanistan is coming to a close (ie another
country the USA has completely f***d up)

Afghanistan has been a pit of strife as long as it has existed, ask
Alexander the Great, or the former British Empire, or the former Soviet
Union. To depict it as a place the USA ****ed up (we're all big kids here,
you can spell it out) is really reaching. America is just the latest actor
on that sad stage.

I'll buy that (your response), on the grounds that the wise, prudent and
long-range thing to do would to have never set foot in that place in the
first place.

But now, of course, Obama has made it *his* war. It's no longer Bush's
folly.


--
How To Access Wikileaks

These sites are still up as of 12/3/10:

http://wikileaks.de
http://wikileaks.fi
http://wikileaks.nl
http://wikileaks.eu
http://wikileaks.pl

And these IP addresses can be used:

http://213.251.145.96/
http://88.80.13.160/

On 12/7/2010 6:15 PM, David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 12/7/2010 10:44 AM DGDevin spake thus:

"harry" wrote in message
...

BTW now the war in Afghanistan is coming to a close (ie another
country the USA has completely f***d up)

Afghanistan has been a pit of strife as long as it has existed, ask
Alexander the Great, or the former British Empire, or the former
Soviet Union. To depict it as a place the USA ****ed up (we're all big
kids here, you can spell it out) is really reaching. America is just
the latest actor on that sad stage.

I'll buy that (your response), on the grounds that the wise, prudent and
long-range thing to do would to have never set foot in that place in the
first place.

But now, of course, Obama has made it *his* war. It's no longer Bush's
folly.



The best thing to use Afghanistan for is a nuclear test range where the
nuke powers in the world should test their underground and air burst
atomic weapons. I suppose a mission could go into the place every few
years to measure the effect of radiation on the surviving life forms.
It would resemble a Mad Max movie in there after It's sealed off. :-)

TDD

On Tue, 07 Dec 2010 21:19:22 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 12/7/2010 6:15 PM, David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 12/7/2010 10:44 AM DGDevin spake thus:

"harry" wrote in message
...

BTW now the war in Afghanistan is coming to a close (ie another
country the USA has completely f***d up)

Afghanistan has been a pit of strife as long as it has existed, ask
Alexander the Great, or the former British Empire, or the former
Soviet Union. To depict it as a place the USA ****ed up (we're all big
kids here, you can spell it out) is really reaching. America is just
the latest actor on that sad stage.

I'll buy that (your response), on the grounds that the wise, prudent and
long-range thing to do would to have never set foot in that place in the
first place.

But now, of course, Obama has made it *his* war. It's no longer Bush's
folly.



The best thing to use Afghanistan for is a nuclear test range where the
nuke powers in the world should test their underground and air burst
atomic weapons. I suppose a mission could go into the place every few
years to measure the effect of radiation on the surviving life forms.
It would resemble a Mad Max movie in there after It's sealed off. :-)

What, you want to make Afghanistan a nicer place for the Taliban?

On 12/7/2010 11:20 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Tue, 07 Dec 2010 21:19:22 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 12/7/2010 6:15 PM, David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 12/7/2010 10:44 AM DGDevin spake thus:

"harry" wrote in message
...

BTW now the war in Afghanistan is coming to a close (ie another
country the USA has completely f***d up)

Afghanistan has been a pit of strife as long as it has existed, ask
Alexander the Great, or the former British Empire, or the former
Soviet Union. To depict it as a place the USA ****ed up (we're all big
kids here, you can spell it out) is really reaching. America is just
the latest actor on that sad stage.

I'll buy that (your response), on the grounds that the wise, prudent and
long-range thing to do would to have never set foot in that place in the
first place.

But now, of course, Obama has made it *his* war. It's no longer Bush's
folly.



The best thing to use Afghanistan for is a nuclear test range where the
nuke powers in the world should test their underground and air burst
atomic weapons. I suppose a mission could go into the place every few
years to measure the effect of radiation on the surviving life forms.
It would resemble a Mad Max movie in there after It's sealed off. :-)

What, you want to make Afghanistan a nicer place for the Taliban?

Wow! What a good idea for a SciFi movie: "Mutant Ninja Taliban
Warriors". It will blow up the box office! :-)

TDD

On Dec 7, 5:35*pm, The Daring Dufas
wrote:
On 12/7/2010 8:00 AM, Jeff Thies wrote:





On 12/7/2010 5:24 AM, The Daring Dufas wrote:
On 12/7/2010 4:11 AM, harry wrote:
--
"The danger to America is not George W Bush, but a citizenry capable
of
entrusting a man like him with the presidency. It will be easier to
limit and undo the follies of a George W Bush presidency than to
restore
the necessary common sense and good judgment to an electorate willing
to
have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and
far
more serious than Mr. George W Bush, who is a mere symptom of what
ails
us. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the
vast
confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The republic can
survive a George W Bush. It is less likely to survive a multitude of
fools such as those who made him their president."

-- Author Unknown

Harry! George W. Bush is not The President of The United States anymore!
You can crawl out from under your rock, it's safe for now. :-)

Sarah Palin is talking like she is going to run. Isn't it about the same
confederation of fools that would vote for her? I suppose the end of
Rome was a lot like this.

Jeff

Sara Palin is not in any political office! If you are so smart, put up
an exceptional candidate who can sway the people to vote for him/her/it.
Present a candidate who can walk on water and breath life into a dead
moose, impress me. :-)

TDD- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Tch. There are too many politicians these days get voted in for their
celebrity status rather then real ability. (Hollywood politicians
now!) That's why the OP is true. Over here too. (UK)
Walk on water? Are you mad? Are there that many meece in America in
need of rescusitation?

On Dec 7, 1:52*pm, dgk wrote:
On Tue, 7 Dec 2010 13:29:52 +0000 (UTC), Tegger
wrote:

Frank wrote in news:idl8rb$304$1
:

Penis envy, call it what you want, but Harry represents non-US citizens
that care more about what is happening here than their homeland.

That's because US politics is generally far more interesting than that
elsewhere.

US policies tend to have a large effect on the world since we have the
military making the rest of the world safe for wealthy Americans to
invest in. Who really owns the US? I trust George Carlin for the
answer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYIC0...eature=related

Watched the you tube thing. That man is spot on. What you need is a
new revolution.

On Dec 7, 6:44*pm, "DGDevin" wrote:
"harry" *wrote in message

...

Palin.
That's what worries the rest of the world.

You're speaking for the rest of the world now too?

BTW now the war in Afghanistan is coming to a close (ie another
country the USA has completely f***d up)

Afghanistan has been a pit of strife as long as it has existed, ask
Alexander the Great, or the former British Empire, or the former Soviet
Union. *To depict it as a place the USA ****ed up (we're all big kids here,
you can spell it out) is really reaching. *America is just the latest actor
on that sad stage.

Then a lot more American boys can go off to die.
But that won't matter. You're rich arms manufacturers can get even
richer.

Your own nation is the one of the world's leading arms exporters, being
edged out of fourth place by France in the past decade. *And in case you
haven't noticed, your boys are dying in Afghanistan too.


What made Bush think he could do any better than the might of the USSR
situated right next door? That is where he is deranged. What made the
USA help out the Mujahadeen back in the 80's?

Yes that is the sad bit. Thanks to B-liar, now conning Amercans out
of money with lecture tours & worth millions.

On Dec 8, 3:19*am, The Daring Dufas
wrote:
On 12/7/2010 6:15 PM, David Nebenzahl wrote:





On 12/7/2010 10:44 AM DGDevin spake thus:

"harry" wrote in message
....

BTW now the war in Afghanistan is coming to a close (ie another
country the USA has completely f***d up)

Afghanistan has been a pit of strife as long as it has existed, ask
Alexander the Great, or the former British Empire, or the former
Soviet Union. To depict it as a place the USA ****ed up (we're all big
kids here, you can spell it out) is really reaching. America is just
the latest actor on that sad stage.

I'll buy that (your response), on the grounds that the wise, prudent and
long-range thing to do would to have never set foot in that place in the
first place.

But now, of course, Obama has made it *his* war. It's no longer Bush's
folly.

The best thing to use Afghanistan for is a nuclear test range where the
nuke powers in the world should test their underground and air burst
atomic weapons. I suppose a mission could go into the place every few
years to measure the effect of radiation on the surviving life forms.
It would resemble a Mad Max movie in there after It's sealed off. :-)

TDD- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Duf. Hollywood!!!

On Dec 8, 12:15*am, David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 12/7/2010 10:44 AM DGDevin spake thus:

"harry" *wrote in message
....

BTW now the war in Afghanistan is coming to a close (ie another
country the USA has completely f***d up)

Afghanistan has been a pit of strife as long as it has existed, ask
Alexander the Great, or the former British Empire, or the former Soviet
Union. *To depict it as a place the USA ****ed up (we're all big kids here,
you can spell it out) is really reaching. *America is just the latest actor
on that sad stage.

I'll buy that (your response), on the grounds that the wise, prudent and
long-range thing to do would to have never set foot in that place in the
first place.

But now, of course, Obama has made it *his* war. It's no longer Bush's
folly.

--
How To Access Wikileaks

These sites are still up as of 12/3/10:

* *http://wikileaks.de
* *http://wikileaks.fi
* *http://wikileaks.nl
* *http://wikileaks.eu
* *http://wikileaks.pl

And these IP addresses can be used:

* *http://213.251.145.96/
* *http://88.80.13.160/

Well, he could hardly just walk away from it in all fairness.
Are you trying to transferr the blame for the Bush war to Obama now as
well as the Bush recession? Short memory you Yanks have.

On 12/7/2010 11:30 PM harry spake thus:

On Dec 8, 12:15 am, David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 12/7/2010 10:44 AM DGDevin spake thus:

"harry" wrote in message
...

BTW now the war in Afghanistan is coming to a close (ie another
country the USA has completely f***d up)

Afghanistan has been a pit of strife as long as it has existed,
ask Alexander the Great, or the former British Empire, or the
former Soviet Union. To depict it as a place the USA ****ed up
(we're all big kids here, you can spell it out) is really
reaching. America is just the latest actor on that sad stage.

I'll buy that (your response), on the grounds that the wise,
prudent and long-range thing to do would to have never set foot in
that place in the first place.

But now, of course, Obama has made it *his* war. It's no longer
Bush's folly.

Well, he could hardly just walk away from it in all fairness.
Are you trying to transferr the blame for the Bush war to Obama now as
well as the Bush recession? Short memory you Yanks have.

No, you blithering idiot.

Of course Obama didn't *start* the war in Afghanistan.

But once in office, he had a stark choice to make. He *chose* to
prosecute the war. He *greatly* increased the number of drone attacks,
both in Afghanistan and Pakistan (with the resulting increased civilian
casualties). So yes, it's now HIS war, not Bush's. And he deserves the
blame for the folly of continuing it. He wasn't forced to do so, the
blatherings of mainstream commentators aside.


--
Comment on quaint Usenet customs, from Usenet:

To me, the *plonk...* reminds me of the old man at the public hearing
who stands to make his point, then removes his hearing aid as a sign
that he is not going to hear any rebuttals.

On 12/8/2010 1:27 AM, harry wrote:
On Dec 8, 3:19 am, The Daring
wrote:
On 12/7/2010 6:15 PM, David Nebenzahl wrote:





On 12/7/2010 10:44 AM DGDevin spake thus:

"harry" wrote in message
...

BTW now the war in Afghanistan is coming to a close (ie another
country the USA has completely f***d up)

Afghanistan has been a pit of strife as long as it has existed, ask
Alexander the Great, or the former British Empire, or the former
Soviet Union. To depict it as a place the USA ****ed up (we're all big
kids here, you can spell it out) is really reaching. America is just
the latest actor on that sad stage.

I'll buy that (your response), on the grounds that the wise, prudent and
long-range thing to do would to have never set foot in that place in the
first place.

But now, of course, Obama has made it *his* war. It's no longer Bush's
folly.

The best thing to use Afghanistan for is a nuclear test range where the
nuke powers in the world should test their underground and air burst
atomic weapons. I suppose a mission could go into the place every few
years to measure the effect of radiation on the surviving life forms.
It would resemble a Mad Max movie in there after It's sealed off. :-)

TDD- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Duf. Hollywood!!!

The Mad Max movie didn't come out of Hollywood you silly man. :-)

TDD

On 12/8/2010 1:13 AM, harry wrote:
On Dec 7, 5:35 pm, The Daring
wrote:
On 12/7/2010 8:00 AM, Jeff Thies wrote:





On 12/7/2010 5:24 AM, The Daring Dufas wrote:
On 12/7/2010 4:11 AM, harry wrote:
--
"The danger to America is not George W Bush, but a citizenry capable
of
entrusting a man like him with the presidency. It will be easier to
limit and undo the follies of a George W Bush presidency than to
restore
the necessary common sense and good judgment to an electorate willing
to
have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and
far
more serious than Mr. George W Bush, who is a mere symptom of what
ails
us. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the
vast
confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The republic can
survive a George W Bush. It is less likely to survive a multitude of
fools such as those who made him their president."

-- Author Unknown

Harry! George W. Bush is not The President of The United States anymore!
You can crawl out from under your rock, it's safe for now. :-)

Sarah Palin is talking like she is going to run. Isn't it about the same
confederation of fools that would vote for her? I suppose the end of
Rome was a lot like this.

Jeff

Sara Palin is not in any political office! If you are so smart, put up
an exceptional candidate who can sway the people to vote for him/her/it.
Present a candidate who can walk on water and breath life into a dead
moose, impress me. :-)

TDD- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Tch. There are too many politicians these days get voted in for their
celebrity status rather then real ability. (Hollywood politicians
now!) That's why the OP is true. Over here too. (UK)
Walk on water? Are you mad? Are there that many meece in America in
need of rescusitation?

Well, the messiah would have to walk on water to get to the dead moose
that Sara Palin just killed. :-)

TDD

In article
,
harry wrote:

What you need is a
new revolution.

We all want to change the world.

On Dec 8, 7:38*am, David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 12/7/2010 11:30 PM harry spake thus:





On Dec 8, 12:15 am, David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 12/7/2010 10:44 AM DGDevin spake thus:

"harry" *wrote in message
....

BTW now the war in Afghanistan is coming to a close (ie another
*country the USA has completely f***d up)

Afghanistan has been a pit of strife as long as it has existed,
ask Alexander the Great, or the former British Empire, or the
former Soviet Union. *To depict it as a place the USA ****ed up
(we're all big kids here, you can spell it out) is really
reaching. *America is just the latest actor on that sad stage.

I'll buy that (your response), on the grounds that the wise,
prudent and long-range thing to do would to have never set foot in
that place in the first place.

But now, of course, Obama has made it *his* war. It's no longer
Bush's folly.

Well, he could hardly just walk away from it in all fairness.
Are you trying to transferr the blame for the Bush war to Obama now as
well as the Bush recession? * Short memory you Yanks have.

No, you blithering idiot.

Of course Obama didn't *start* the war in Afghanistan.

But once in office, he had a stark choice to make. He *chose* to
prosecute the war. He *greatly* increased the number of drone attacks,
both in Afghanistan and Pakistan (with the resulting increased civilian
casualties). So yes, it's now HIS war, not Bush's. And he deserves the
blame for the folly of continuing it. He wasn't forced to do so, the
blatherings of mainstream commentators aside.

--
Comment on quaint Usenet customs, from Usenet:

* *To me, the *plonk...* reminds me of the old man at the public hearing
* *who stands to make his point, then removes his hearing aid as a sign
* *that he is not going to hear any rebuttals.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The consequences of losing this war once started would be extremely
grave. Just pulling out was never an option.

On Dec 8, 8:17*am, The Daring Dufas
wrote:
On 12/8/2010 1:27 AM, harry wrote:





On Dec 8, 3:19 am, The Daring
wrote:
On 12/7/2010 6:15 PM, David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 12/7/2010 10:44 AM DGDevin spake thus:

"harry" wrote in message
...

BTW now the war in Afghanistan is coming to a close (ie another
country the USA has completely f***d up)

Afghanistan has been a pit of strife as long as it has existed, ask
Alexander the Great, or the former British Empire, or the former
Soviet Union. To depict it as a place the USA ****ed up (we're all big
kids here, you can spell it out) is really reaching. America is just
the latest actor on that sad stage.

I'll buy that (your response), on the grounds that the wise, prudent and
long-range thing to do would to have never set foot in that place in the
first place.

But now, of course, Obama has made it *his* war. It's no longer Bush's
folly.

The best thing to use Afghanistan for is a nuclear test range where the
nuke powers in the world should test their underground and air burst
atomic weapons. I suppose a mission could go into the place every few
years to measure the effect of radiation on the surviving life forms.
It would resemble a Mad Max movie in there after It's sealed off. :-)

TDD- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Duf. Hollywood!!!

The Mad Max movie didn't come out of Hollywood you silly man. :-)

TDD- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Ah yes. You're right. I assumed it was Hollywood, it has all the
characteristics.

On Dec 8, 8:20*am, The Daring Dufas
wrote:
On 12/8/2010 1:13 AM, harry wrote:





On Dec 7, 5:35 pm, The Daring
wrote:
On 12/7/2010 8:00 AM, Jeff Thies wrote:

On 12/7/2010 5:24 AM, The Daring Dufas wrote:
On 12/7/2010 4:11 AM, harry wrote:
--
"The danger to America is not George W Bush, but a citizenry capable
of
entrusting a man like him with the presidency. It will be easier to
limit and undo the follies of a George W Bush presidency than to
restore
the necessary common sense and good judgment to an electorate willing
to
have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and
far
more serious than Mr. George W Bush, who is a mere symptom of what
ails
us. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the
vast
confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The republic can
survive a George W Bush. It is less likely to survive a multitude of
fools such as those who made him their president."

-- Author Unknown

Harry! George W. Bush is not The President of The United States anymore!
You can crawl out from under your rock, it's safe for now. :-)

Sarah Palin is talking like she is going to run. Isn't it about the same
confederation of fools that would vote for her? I suppose the end of
Rome was a lot like this.

Jeff

Sara Palin is not in any political office! If you are so smart, put up
an exceptional candidate who can sway the people to vote for him/her/it.

On Dec 8, 1:07*pm, Smitty Two wrote:
In article
,

*harry wrote:
*What you need is a
new revolution.

We all want to change the world.

Don't we just.

On 12/8/2010 7:04 AM harry spake thus (referring to the war in Afghanistan):

The consequences of losing this war once started would be extremely
grave. Just pulling out was never an option.

Most honest observers conclude that this war is *already* lost, so the
point is moot. It's just a matter of time before we limp out of there.


--
Comment on quaint Usenet customs, from Usenet:

To me, the *plonk...* reminds me of the old man at the public hearing
who stands to make his point, then removes his hearing aid as a sign
that he is not going to hear any rebuttals.

On 12/8/2010 7:07 AM harry spake thus:

On Dec 8, 8:17 am, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

The Mad Max movie didn't come out of Hollywood you silly man. :-)

Ah yes. You're right. I assumed it was Hollywood, it has all the
characteristics.

Well, "Hollywood" is really a state of mind, a way of viewing/molding
the world, not necessarily a geographic location.


--
Comment on quaint Usenet customs, from Usenet:

To me, the *plonk...* reminds me of the old man at the public hearing
who stands to make his point, then removes his hearing aid as a sign
that he is not going to hear any rebuttals.

"David Nebenzahl" wrote in message
.com...

I'll buy that (your response), on the grounds that the wise, prudent and
long-range thing to do would to have never set foot in that place in the
first place.

I feel the invasion was justified (which is not the same thing as wise) in
that Bin Laden was operating from there, although it's notable that when he
was cornered at Tora Bora the pleas of the CIA/Special Forces team leader to
have Army Rangers dropped in behind Bin Laden so he couldn't escape to
Pakistan were ignored by Washington.¹ However I see little chance of a
stable democracy being established in Afghanistan in the foreseeable future,
maybe it would have been different if the resources poured into Iraq had
gone to Afghanistan instead. But then there is the problem of leaving
Afghanistan putting more pressure on Pakistan, and Pakistan has nukes we
don't want kicking around loose.

But now, of course, Obama has made it *his* war. It's no longer Bush's
folly.

Indeed. Sooner or later they'll have to pretend things are stable enough to
pull out, that constant drain of blood and money can't be sustained forever.
Among other things it's too bad they backed a national leader for
Afghanistan who is massively corrupt and apparently a bit crazy.

Of course if Obama had ordered an immediate withdrawal when he took office
the right would be screaming that he had abandoned Afghanistan, that the war
could have been won if only he'd shown more guts and so on. I can't help
but think of Nixon, who inherited a war he was eventually smart enough to
get out of but only after long years of more slaughter.

¹Jawbreaker: The Attack on Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda: A Personal Account by the
CIA's Key Field Commander, by Gary Berntsen

"harry" wrote in message
...


What made Bush think he could do any better than the might of the USSR
situated right next door?

Well, actually he did. The Taliban was destroyed and/or fled, and didn't
really bounce back for four or five years. Unfortunately the U.S. and its
allied had put Afghanistan so far on the back burner that those precious
years were lost and the Taliban stepped back into almost a power vacuum,
stronger than ever. It's kind of like home repair, you have to finish the
job or there is little point in even starting.

"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...

Harry! George W. Bush is not The President of The United States
anymore! You can crawl out from under your rock, it's safe for now.
:-)

But some wish he were.

Yeah, then we could have a third war going in Iran, no doubt another
invasion that would pay for itself as Iraq was going to do.

On 12/8/2010 12:53 PM, David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 12/8/2010 7:07 AM harry spake thus:

On Dec 8, 8:17 am, The Daring Dufas wrote:

The Mad Max movie didn't come out of Hollywood you silly man. :-)

Ah yes. You're right. I assumed it was Hollywood, it has all the
characteristics.

Well, "Hollywood" is really a state of mind, a way of viewing/molding
the world, not necessarily a geographic location.


The Aussies I know don't view the world in a Hollywood manner by
any means. :-)

TDD

On 12/8/2010 9:08 AM, harry wrote:
On Dec 8, 8:20 am, The Daring
wrote:
On 12/8/2010 1:13 AM, harry wrote:





On Dec 7, 5:35 pm, The Daring
wrote:
On 12/7/2010 8:00 AM, Jeff Thies wrote:

On 12/7/2010 5:24 AM, The Daring Dufas wrote:
On 12/7/2010 4:11 AM, harry wrote:
--
"The danger to America is not George W Bush, but a citizenry capable
of
entrusting a man like him with the presidency. It will be easier to
limit and undo the follies of a George W Bush presidency than to
restore
the necessary common sense and good judgment to an electorate willing
to
have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and
far
more serious than Mr. George W Bush, who is a mere symptom of what
ails
us. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the
vast
confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The republic can
survive a George W Bush. It is less likely to survive a multitude of
fools such as those who made him their president."

-- Author Unknown

Harry! George W. Bush is not The President of The United States anymore!
You can crawl out from under your rock, it's safe for now. :-)

Sarah Palin is talking like she is going to run. Isn't it about the same
confederation of fools that would vote for her? I suppose the end of
Rome was a lot like this.

Jeff

Sara Palin is not in any political office! If you are so smart, put up
an exceptional candidate who can sway the people to vote for him/her/it.
Present a candidate who can walk on water and breath life into a dead
moose, impress me. :-)

TDD- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Tch. There are too many politicians these days get voted in for their
celebrity status rather then real ability. (Hollywood politicians
now!) That's why the OP is true. Over here too. (UK)
Walk on water? Are you mad? Are there that many meece in America in
need of rescusitation?

Well, the messiah would have to walk on water to get to the dead moose
that Sara Palin just killed. :-)

TDD- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

That woman will kill you all if she gets in power. :-)

Perhaps she will nuke The UK first. :-)

TDD

On 12/8/2010 1:26 PM The Daring Dufas spake thus:

On 12/8/2010 12:53 PM, David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 12/8/2010 7:07 AM harry spake thus:

On Dec 8, 8:17 am, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

The Mad Max movie didn't come out of Hollywood you silly man.
:-)

Ah yes. You're right. I assumed it was Hollywood, it has all the
characteristics.

Well, "Hollywood" is really a state of mind, a way of
viewing/molding the world, not necessarily a geographic location.

The Aussies I know don't view the world in a Hollywood manner by any
means. :-)

But then they're not in the Australian film industry, are they?


--
Comment on quaint Usenet customs, from Usenet:

To me, the *plonk...* reminds me of the old man at the public hearing
who stands to make his point, then removes his hearing aid as a sign
that he is not going to hear any rebuttals.

On 12/8/2010 4:58 PM, David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 12/8/2010 1:26 PM The Daring Dufas spake thus:

On 12/8/2010 12:53 PM, David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 12/8/2010 7:07 AM harry spake thus:

On Dec 8, 8:17 am, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

The Mad Max movie didn't come out of Hollywood you silly man.
:-)

Ah yes. You're right. I assumed it was Hollywood, it has all the
characteristics.

Well, "Hollywood" is really a state of mind, a way of
viewing/molding the world, not necessarily a geographic location.

The Aussies I know don't view the world in a Hollywood manner by any
means. :-)

But then they're not in the Australian film industry, are they?



The "Australian film industry" and the "American film industry" are not
the same. The "Australian prison system" and the "American prison
system" are not the same either but like the film industries they share
some common traits but they're not the same. Why is that hard to comprehend?

TDD

On 12/8/2010 3:08 PM The Daring Dufas spake thus:

On 12/8/2010 4:58 PM, David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 12/8/2010 1:26 PM The Daring Dufas spake thus:

On 12/8/2010 12:53 PM, David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 12/8/2010 7:07 AM harry spake thus:

On Dec 8, 8:17 am, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

The Mad Max movie didn't come out of Hollywood you silly
man. :-)

Ah yes. You're right. I assumed it was Hollywood, it has all
the characteristics.

Well, "Hollywood" is really a state of mind, a way of
viewing/molding the world, not necessarily a geographic
location.

The Aussies I know don't view the world in a Hollywood manner by
any means. :-)

But then they're not in the Australian film industry, are they?

The "Australian film industry" and the "American film industry" are not
the same. The "Australian prison system" and the "American prison
system" are not the same either but like the film industries they share
some common traits but they're not the same. Why is that hard to comprehend?

Where did I say they were the same?

What I'm getting at is that there might be *similarities*, based on the
products of each (like the aforementioned "Mad Max" series). Which
wouldn't be surprising, given Hollywood's 800 lb. gorilla dominance of
world cinema.


--
Comment on quaint Usenet customs, from Usenet:

To me, the *plonk...* reminds me of the old man at the public hearing
who stands to make his point, then removes his hearing aid as a sign
that he is not going to hear any rebuttals.

On 12/8/2010 5:17 PM, David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 12/8/2010 3:08 PM The Daring Dufas spake thus:

On 12/8/2010 4:58 PM, David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 12/8/2010 1:26 PM The Daring Dufas spake thus:

On 12/8/2010 12:53 PM, David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 12/8/2010 7:07 AM harry spake thus:

On Dec 8, 8:17 am, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

The Mad Max movie didn't come out of Hollywood you silly
man. :-)

Ah yes. You're right. I assumed it was Hollywood, it has all
the characteristics.

Well, "Hollywood" is really a state of mind, a way of
viewing/molding the world, not necessarily a geographic
location.

The Aussies I know don't view the world in a Hollywood manner by
any means. :-)

But then they're not in the Australian film industry, are they?

The "Australian film industry" and the "American film industry" are not
the same. The "Australian prison system" and the "American prison
system" are not the same either but like the film industries they share
some common traits but they're not the same. Why is that hard to
comprehend?

Where did I say they were the same?

What I'm getting at is that there might be *similarities*, based on the
products of each (like the aforementioned "Mad Max" series). Which
wouldn't be surprising, given Hollywood's 800 lb. gorilla dominance of
world cinema.



Perhaps you are alluding to the LaLa Land syndrome where some people
believe movies are real life and the way the world really works. Is
that it? That seems to be the belief of my friend Harry from The UK.

TDD