All I can say is TRY IT!!!

While not ALL of our military endeavours have been totally HONORABLE...
the ones that counted WERE.

Japan
Germany
USSR
Afganistan
Iraq

An industrial machine that can out produce ANYTHING.

A finacial arm that can outright PURCHASE many small - medium sized
countries.

Then there's John Q. American... we also have one of the (if not THE)
most armed citizenry.

So go ahead, belly up to the bar and start your petty little insurgency.

We'll happy to SQUASH you like the little bug that you are.

Peace!

In article , Interious
wrote:

The supremely critical and high quality political thinking in this
group has led me to the question of whether the U.S. should be
abolished as a nation-state and be taken over by some world body such
as that perennially wise and August body--the U.N.
Perhaps the World Worker's Party or the World Communist Revolutionary
Party could do the heavy lifting.

If ever there was a demonic rogue presence on the face of this world,
it is the United States. The world would clearly be better off without
its 230 year existence. Ward Churchill agrees.

Your thoughts?

Interious

The United States, as we KNEW it, IS being abolished. Slightly less
than half the voting public seems to be for it.

Stark Raven wrote in news:131220031102281458%
:

The United States, as we KNEW it, IS being abolished. Slightly less
than half the voting public seems to be for it.

Which means that if Bush had close to 50% of the *vote* (with turnouts
of 30% being the average) then less than 15% of the US voting public is
giving him a mandate to decide the fate of the world. I'm sure Pan
will try to come up with an excuse as to why THIS 15% is more apt to
rule the world than any other 15%.

--
"The problem with the French is they have no
word for entrepreneur."

attributed to George W. Bush by Tony Blair
via Baroness Williams

On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 04:19:38 GMT, alzelt
wrote:



Dimitri wrote:

Beware the industrial Military complex.

Dwight D Eisenhower..

http://www.grannyd.com/military-industrial.htm

Dimitri


Just to bring you into the 21st century, D, it is now referred to as the
military-industrial-congressional complex.

a.k.a. 'the iron triangle'?

your pal,
blake

blake murphy wrote in
:

On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 04:19:38 GMT, alzelt
wrote:



Dimitri wrote:

Beware the industrial Military complex.

Dwight D Eisenhower..

http://www.grannyd.com/military-industrial.htm

Dimitri


Just to bring you into the 21st century, D, it is now referred to
as the military-industrial-congressional complex.

a.k.a. 'the iron triangle'?

More like the Mound of Mars (Mons Martiis) because somebody has to be
on top.

--
"The problem with the French is they have no
word for entrepreneur."

attributed to George W. Bush by Tony Blair
via Baroness Williams

On 12 Dec 2003 23:38:47 GMT, Michel Boucher
wrote:

Pan Ohco wrote in
:

http://www.crisismagazine.com/april2002/cover.htm

You're referring to an article that covers a small portion of the
relations, one that was particularly frought with turmoil.

Cut

A lovely and long dissertation about how benevolent the moors were
after they invaded spain and kill a substantial portion of it
inhabitants during its occupation.

And I see that your still using a tag line that you know is untruth.

I think that anyone reading the history of the crusades at the above
URL can understand.


Pan Ohco

On 13 Dec 2003 18:06:18 GMT, Michel Boucher
wrote:

Stark Raven wrote in news:131220031102281458%
:

The United States, as we KNEW it, IS being abolished. Slightly less
than half the voting public seems to be for it.

Which means that if Bush had close to 50% of the *vote* (with turnouts
of 30% being the average) then less than 15% of the US voting public is
giving him a mandate to decide the fate of the world. I'm sure Pan
will try to come up with an excuse as to why THIS 15% is more apt to
rule the world than any other 15%.

Well Michel I have never said that the US should rule the world. I
just said that you as a non American can not decide for us, what we
will do.

Of course I am not all knowing as you are.

Pan Ohco

"Pan Ohco" wrote in message
...
On 12 Dec 2003 23:38:47 GMT, Michel Boucher
wrote:

Pan Ohco wrote in
:

http://www.crisismagazine.com/april2002/cover.htm

You're referring to an article that covers a small portion of the
relations, one that was particularly frought with turmoil.

Cut

A lovely and long dissertation about how benevolent the moors were
after they invaded spain and kill a substantial portion of it
inhabitants during its occupation.

And I see that your still using a tag line that you know is untruth.

I think that anyone reading the history of the crusades at the above
URL can understand.


Pan Ohco

Thanks for posting a link to the real story of the crusades; we wouldn't
want anyone to think the christians were really evil hypocrites.

Jack Inquisition

Pan Ohco wrote in
:

Which means that if Bush had close to 50% of the *vote* (with
turnouts of 30% being the average) then less than 15% of the US
voting public is giving him a mandate to decide the fate of the
world. I'm sure Pan will try to come up with an excuse as to why
THIS 15% is more apt to rule the world than any other 15%.

Well Michel I have never said that the US should rule the world. I
just said that you as a non American can not decide for us, what
we will do.

But if what you will do has a direct impact on the quality of life
and the political and economic stability of other sovereign nations,
then you no longer have the right to act unilaterally without
expecting any criticism levelled at your actions. That is what the
UN was created to allow, a debate in a neutral area. You and I
cannot resolve this because you are dead set against accepting
criticism and I believe it is the only way you will grow up and join
the community of nations.

But the United Nations, created at the behest of the United States
among other founding nations for this very purpose, is the proper
forum to debate these matters and resolve them with the greatest (not
wealthiest) good in mind.

--
"The problem with the French is they have no
word for entrepreneur."

attributed to George W. Bush by Tony Blair
via Baroness Williams

Pan Ohco wrote in
:

On 12 Dec 2003 23:38:47 GMT, Michel Boucher
wrote:

Pan Ohco wrote in
m:

http://www.crisismagazine.com/april2002/cover.htm

You're referring to an article that covers a small portion of the
relations, one that was particularly frought with turmoil.

A lovely and long dissertation about how benevolent the moors were
after they invaded spain and kill a substantial portion of it
inhabitants during its occupation.

Really? Can you substantiate that with non-Catholic sources?
Something that hasn't been vetted by Cardinal Ratzinger would be a
good start.

And I see that your still using a tag line that you know is
untruth.

I think that anyone reading the history of the crusades at the
above URL can understand.

However, it was not a history, just a personal note on a topic for
which the author has a clear bias in favour of Christianity. Have
you ever read a Muslim history of the Crusades to balance your point
of view? Of course you haven't.

--
"The problem with the French is they have no
word for entrepreneur."

attributed to George W. Bush by Tony Blair
via Baroness Williams

"blake murphy" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 04:19:38 GMT, alzelt
wrote:



Dimitri wrote:

Beware the industrial Military complex.

Dwight D Eisenhower..

http://www.grannyd.com/military-industrial.htm

Dimitri


Just to bring you into the 21st century, D, it is now referred to as the
military-industrial-congressional complex.

a.k.a. 'the iron triangle'?

your pal,
blake

Or a 'right' triangle, as in wing.

Jack Pythagoras

In article , Michel Boucher
wrote:

The United States, as we KNEW it, IS being abolished. Slightly less
than half the voting public seems to be for it.

Which means that if Bush had close to 50% of the *vote* (with turnouts
of 30% being the average) then less than 15% of the US voting public is
giving him a mandate to decide the fate of the world. I'm sure Pan
will try to come up with an excuse as to why THIS 15% is more apt to
rule the world than any other 15%.

Right on, Michel. I'm not good with numbers, but the deciding per cent
was even less if you take into account that the actual decision came
from the Supreme Court. Wasn't it a 5 to 4 vote?

Of course I'm talking apples and oranges, but it seems fair if the
apples have the vote, but the oranges make the decision.

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 10:51:43 GMT, "Jack Schidt®"
wrote:


"Pan Ohco" wrote in message

Cut

A lovely and long dissertation about how benevolent the moors were
after they invaded spain and kill a substantial portion of it
inhabitants during its occupation.

And I see that your still using a tag line that you know is untruth.

I think that anyone reading the history of the crusades at the above
URL can understand.


Pan Ohco

Thanks for posting a link to the real story of the crusades; we wouldn't
want anyone to think the christians were really evil hypocrites.

Jack Inquisition

Didn't say that Jack.
Did say that there are faults on both side.

And if you read a history of the Inquisition, you will find that the
Inquisition was directed towards christians that were not christian
enough. ( Not judging just explaining)
Pan Ohco

Pan Ohco wrote in
:

And if you read a history of the Inquisition, you will find that
the Inquisition was directed towards christians that were not
christian enough. ( Not judging just explaining)

As well as Jews and Muslims who would not recant their heresies. I see
you read the rest of the Spanish Islam bit :-)

--
"The problem with the French is they have no
word for entrepreneur."

attributed to George W. Bush by Tony Blair
via Baroness Williams

On 14 Dec 2003 13:15:05 GMT, Michel Boucher
wrote:



A lovely and long dissertation about how benevolent the moors were
after they invaded spain and kill a substantial portion of it
inhabitants during its occupation.

Really? Can you substantiate that with non-Catholic sources?
Something that hasn't been vetted by Cardinal Ratzinger would be a
good start.

And I see that your still using a tag line that you know is
untruth.

I think that anyone reading the history of the crusades at the
above URL can understand.

However, it was not a history, just a personal note on a topic for
which the author has a clear bias in favour of Christianity. Have
you ever read a Muslim history of the Crusades to balance your point
of view? Of course you haven't.

Oh I must be wrong again.
All the territory outside of muslim home world, voluntarily joined the
muslim nation.
There was no invasions.

Michel some times you suspend logic in your writhing.

And your tag line still contains a lie ( which you know).


Pan Ohco