Tipping in USA/Canada
in [Airline Travel]
|
From: Mr. Travel on 24 Dec 2007 02:20 Greg Procter wrote: > Mr Travel wrote: > >>Greg Procter wrote: >> >> >>>"Mr. Travel" wrote: >>> >> >>>>Are you suggesting England is not beyond N. America? >>> >>> >>> >>>No, that's your story. >> >>You claom the poem never made it outside the US, when it was written in >>England. > > > > There was a war on - servicemen's poems rarely got international airing > at that time. > Was the poem published in Europe? Yes. =
From: Mr. Travel on 24 Dec 2007 02:29 Craig Welch wrote: > Greg Procter <procter(a)ihug.co.nz> said: > > >>Mr Travel wrote: >> >>>Greg Procter wrote: >>> >>>>"Mr. Travel" wrote: >>> >>>>>There was no war declared by either side in the conflict. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>That seems to be an entirely yank concept! (see brainwashing) >>> >>>Great, please report the evidence that either side declared war on the >>>other. >> >> >>You really can't be _that_ stupid??? >> >>A B52 load of bombs deliberately dropped on a foreign nation constitutes >>a declaration of war in anyone's book - unless of course you can >>convince the recipients that it was an accidental deliberate act. >>(Huhh???) > > > In that case, the US declared war on Iran when it shot down that > Airbus? > > China declared war on the US when its J-8IIM flew into the P-3C > Orion? > Anothe rexample Did the USSR or South Korea declare war when the Soviet Union shot down the 747, KAL flight 007? Yeah, I know, with a number like 007, it had to be a spy plane.
From: Mr. Travel on 24 Dec 2007 02:32 Greg Procter wrote: > Craig Welch wrote: > >>Greg Procter <procter(a)ihug.co.nz> said: >> >> >>>Mr Travel wrote: >>> >>>>Greg Procter wrote: >>>> >>>>>"Mr. Travel" wrote: >>>> >>>>>>There was no war declared by either side in the conflict. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>That seems to be an entirely yank concept! (see brainwashing) >>>> >>>>Great, please report the evidence that either side declared war on the >>>>other. >>> >>> >>>You really can't be _that_ stupid??? >>> >>>A B52 load of bombs deliberately dropped on a foreign nation constitutes >>>a declaration of war in anyone's book - unless of course you can >>>convince the recipients that it was an accidental deliberate act. >>>(Huhh???) >> >>In that case, the US declared war on Iran when it shot down that >>Airbus? > > > That was definitely an act of war by most narions standards - an > everyday act for the USa. OK dipshit. Forget the US. Did Iran declare war on the US when that happened?
From: TMOliver on 24 Dec 2007 11:40 "Greg Procter" <procter(a)ihug.co.nz> wrote in message news:476EBC86.40922A28(a)ihug.co.nz... > Mr Travel wrote: >> >> Greg Procter wrote: >> >> > "Mr. Travel" wrote: >> > >> >>Jeff wrote: >> >> >> >>>"Craig Welch" <craig(a)pacific.net.sg> wrote in message >> >>>news:5k7jm3p9oqljfhauogac946kt3mgg23bts(a)4ax.com... >> >>> >> >>> >> >>>>"Mr. Travel" <mtravel(a)a.a> said: >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>>>It is possible to be against a country without being in a war with >> >>>>>them. >> >>>>> >> >>>>>For example, look at Iran and North Korea. >> >>>>>We aren't at war with them. >> >>>>>By your logic, that means we are their friend. >> >>>> >> >>>>The US is still at war with North Korea. >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>>Actually, there is no "war" between the U.S. and North Korea. This >> >>>was a UN >> >>>action and the armastice (sp??) is between North and South Korea. >> >> >> >>As mentioned on M*A*S*H many times, it was a police action. >> > >> > >> > You were slaughtering Koreans to stop them from reuniting their own >> > country. >> >> You really don't read much, do you? > > > I not only read but I also think about what I read. > Are you suggesting the US actions in Korea were _not_ intended to keep > Korea divided??? The efforts, sponsored by the UN and under the UN flag involved force contributions from all sorts of places, Australia to be sure and even New Zealand. I suspect even the history books provided to New Zealand's kids might mention that it was N. Korea's troops that invaded S. Korea across the 38th Parallel, a "Truce Line" established in 1945 between the Soviet and Allied* Zones of Occupation. (*New Zealand being one of those Allies) Yes, the goal was to keep Korea divided, protecting the folks in the at least semi-democratically governed South from being over-run by the forces of the "Peoples Republic of North Korea", a Soviet and Chinese client state in which even in recent years millions still starve because of the totalitarian government's commitment to the maintenance of a over-sized military, attempts to build long range missiles, and what was undeniably an attempt to develop nuclear weapons. When the cast of Monte Python spoke of a "Gormless Twit", it sure must have been you to whom they were referring. TMO
From: Greg Procter on 25 Dec 2007 15:35
"Mr. Travel" wrote: > > Greg Procter wrote: > > > Mr Travel wrote: > > > >>Greg Procter wrote: > >> > >> > >>>"Mr. Travel" wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>>Jeff wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>"Craig Welch" <craig(a)pacific.net.sg> wrote in message > >>>>>news:5k7jm3p9oqljfhauogac946kt3mgg23bts(a)4ax.com... > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>"Mr. Travel" <mtravel(a)a.a> said: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>It is possible to be against a country without being in a war with them. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>For example, look at Iran and North Korea. > >>>>>>>We aren't at war with them. > >>>>>>>By your logic, that means we are their friend. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>The US is still at war with North Korea. > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>Actually, there is no "war" between the U.S. and North Korea. This was a UN > >>>>>action and the armastice (sp??) is between North and South Korea. > >>>> > >>>>As mentioned on M*A*S*H many times, it was a police action. > >>> > >>> > >>>You were slaughtering Koreans to stop them from reuniting their own > >>>country. > >> > >>You really don't read much, do you? > > > > > > > > I not only read but I also think about what I read. > > Are you suggesting the US actions in Korea were _not_ intended to keep > > Korea divided??? > > They were intended on keeping the Chinese and Russia supported > communists from taking over the south. So you agree that the intention was to keep the country divided! Why do you stupidly argue when you agree??? |