State pirates, not terrorists

Vince Brannigan wrote:

State pirates, not terrorists

Son, a pirate is a terrorist?

Use a normal dictionary, not the Brannigan dictionary for dopes.


(Son, you sure are stupid for claiming to be a teacher.)

you are having trouble reading

Dr. James West, Ph.D. wrote:

Vince Brannigan wrote:


State pirates, not terrorists


Son, a pirate is a terrorist.

Use a normal dictionary, not the Brannigan dictionary for dopes.


(Son, you sure are stupid for claiming to be a teacher.)
;-)

you are having trouble reading
I'm not surprised

"state" is an adjective
cf "state action"

A "state pirate" is a person acting under color of state authority but
in violation of the law of nations

They are pirates, not terrorists

Vince

On May 1, 11:39 am, Vince Brannigan <fire...@verizon.net> wrote:

Michae...@gmail.com wrote:

On May 1, 9:53 am, "Sean" <waz...@bro.org> wrote:

"Vince Brannigan" <fire...@verizon.net> wrote in message

news:buiSj.3832$lc6.881@trnddc04...

Peter Skelton wrote:

On Thu, 01 May 2008 00:45:36 GMT, Vince Brannigan
fire...@verizon.net> wrote:

Peter Skelton wrote:

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 19:35:57 GMT, Vince Brannigan
fire...@verizon.net> wrote:

Michae...@gmail.com wrote:

On Apr 30, 11:29 am, !Jones <p...@off.com> wrote:

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 07:59:35 -0700 (PDT), in alt.war.vietnam

Michae...@gmail.com wrote:

Humility, and an ability to admit prior mistakes would be a great
start ...
followed by a sincere apology for errors of the past, and asking
for
forgiveness ... and then dealing with these people in the middle
east with
honesty and integrity and good faith.

Wow you really are nuts. Can you name one time in history that a
country has stripped itself of its ability to defend itself and its
interests that has stopped an enemy (who was already attacking it)
from continuing those attacks. Sounds like suicide.

I'm not anti-US; however, I can certainly understand why some people
are. Essentially, the US is viewed by most of the world as
oppressive... in juxtaposition to our self-image as the protectors
of
human rights; we're seen as a very war-like country. The person to
whom you speak never said that we should "strip ourselves of our
ability to defend ourselves" [quote rephrased]. He or she suggested
that a little less national arrogance would be in order, though.

I tend to agree.

Jones

Sooo.... you are saying you want to have the rest of the world see us
a humbled? And you think this will deter further attacks?
I disagree. I want the rest of the world to see us as to strong to
fight. I don't particularly care if they love us as long as they
don't want to fight us.

Ironically, do you also wonder why some people would see your ideas
as
anti-american? That is when you propose ideas that involve harm
(perceived or otherwise) being done to the US/it allies/ and our
image.

The image of the USA as a swaggering bully is well entrenched. As a
result , no on really cares whether we get attacked. Swaggering
bullies go it alone.

How about gang leaders?

Peter Skelton

tony blair turned papist

This bully has no gang

Still, being boss of the gang, a big man on campus or someting of
the like seems to be an essential driver to the man. It's an
essential component to understanding what he does.

Peter Skelton

You are referring to Bush, not the USA.
Bush was born on third base and think he hit a triple. What Bush has is a
frat boy "rat pack".
Vince

Your leader is a reflection of the USA. Something about him, a resonance
attracted other people to vote for him .... twice.

Being a politician with a huge system behind him made a difference, but even
if he was slick, people still were willing to swallow it. There's great
strength and wisdom in the American people, overseas many people tend to
think it's been sleeping for way too long.

The Founding fathers wrote much about forming principles of the Nation. The
nation would be wise to re-read what they wrote and articulated about the
greater values, and international affairs. Especially Jefferson and Adams.

What if I told you that Jefferson (in response to terrorist type
actions by an enemy encouraged a plan against great internal
opposition (which was eventually implemented) that included US troops
attacking and capturing portions of a foreign country. Officially
this country had not declared war on US and these actions were taken
without the sanction of the UN Security Council (or its equivalent).
And which is most important, by these actions the US was able to
eliminate the terrorist threat.

Kind of sounds like the current situation doesn't it.

State pirates, not terrorists
and the law of war was different then

Vince


Pirates - were capturing and enslaving US citizens. Are you saying
this is better or worse then terrorist?

Really, what changes to US law with regards to war have been made
since then?

They were pirates. they took captives for ransom

Vince Brannigan wrote:
Dr. James West, Ph.D. wrote:

Vince Brannigan wrote:


State pirates, not terrorists


Son, a pirate is a terrorist.

Use a normal dictionary, not the Brannigan dictionary for dopes.


(Son, you sure are stupid for claiming to be a teacher.)
;-)

you are having trouble reading
I'm not surprised

"state" is an adjective
cf "state action"

A "state pirate" is a person acting under color of state authority
but in violation of the law of nations

They are pirates, not terrorists

Vince

Son, a pirate is a terrorist.

(Son, you sure are stupid for claiming to be a teacher.)

no they are not

Dr. James West, Ph.D. wrote:

Vince Brannigan wrote:

Dr. James West, Ph.D. wrote:

Vince Brannigan wrote:


State pirates, not terrorists



Son, a pirate is a terrorist.

Use a normal dictionary, not the Brannigan dictionary for dopes.


(Son, you sure are stupid for claiming to be a teacher.)
;-)


you are having trouble reading
I'm not surprised

"state" is an adjective
cf "state action"

A "state pirate" is a person acting under color of state authority
but in violation of the law of nations

They are pirates, not terrorists

Vince


Son, a pirate is a terrorist.

(Son, you sure are stupid for claiming to be a teacher.)
;-)

no they are not
a pirate is a pirate
A criminal to be sure
They take what they don't own Ships people whatever
They are thieves and kidnappers and murderers but not terrorists

Vince

Shrikeb...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:7b1dad8b-7ff3-4b65-a485-ddcb33d6a2f8@a9g2000prl.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 29, 8:41 pm, "Sean" <waz...@bro.org> wrote:





"Billzz" <billzzstr...@starband.net> wrote in message

news:51437$48175efc$9440b19b$12764@STARBAND.NET...

"Sean" <waz...@bro.org> wrote in message
news:481753b7$0$13945$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

Michae...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0ff908be-5aba-406b-83c0-b3db8045fb3a@a9g2000prl.googlegroups.com....

Better have the person who changes your depends also start reading
these posts because it is apparent that you no longer can.

We are fighting over there so we don't have them attack us over there
again. We are not fighting 9/11 we are preventing the next one.

LOL What's more scary than any potential terrorism, is that you and so
many others really believe what you just wrote.

Will we be successfully? I hope so. Of course stalinist liberals
like yourself are doing your utmost to make us fail. Almost makes me
wonder what side you are on.

If you really cared about your nation and it's people, you wouldn't be
so
damn gullible and ill-informed, and you sure wouldn't be spreading this
mindless propaganda based on illusions and spin, imho.

But that's life on planet earth isn;t it? :-)

Here's another "trick" question.

Can you describe the Worldwide Organisational Structure of the Al Queda
Terrorist Organisation and how it operates - and point to clear
evidence
to back up any claims as to it's existence and personell, and
connections?

Furthermore .. how does one go to War against something that isn't
really
there?

Here's a clue ... In Vietnam the USA was in a pitched battle to stop
the
Dominoe Theory from becoming a reality.

The problem .... it was just a "theory" ... it wasn't really real. How
can one win a war against some entity or word or theory that isn't even
real?

It was pretty real to the South Vietnamese, Laotians and Cambodians.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domino_theory

If it wasn't just a theory, then Vietnam would have invaded and brought
communism to laos, Cambodia, Thailand, Burma, and elsewhere immediately
after winning the war against America and the South.

Cambodia and Laos were indeed taken over by communists.

------------------------
Sean
And Vietnam had what exactly to do with that?

They were "friendly"? oh
goodness me what a disaster.

Did the world stop turning and revolving around the sun?

Was 60,000 US soldiers and 2 million Vietnamese lives really worth the
failed attempt to curtail Communism in SE asia .... post Colonial
French/British/German style?

-----------

Then, in 1979, Vietnam did invade Cambodia, to kick
out the Chinese communist regime and replace it with a Soviet
communist regime.  To be sure, the Chicoms were worse, but
still....

---------------

Sean:

To kick out the Khmer Rouge NOT the "chinese communist regime" there was NO
Chinese communist regime there, they were CAMBODIANS .....

Vietnam did what
no one else was prepared to do, USA included, after the world knew about the
Killing Fields.

The similarities between the Khmer Rouge and any other Communist style
system was like comparing an elephant with floating space .. iow zero.

Why do you guys get so hung up on labels, like communist and terrorist, and
then try and dumb down the reality of the nuances of life and politics to
play doe?   The world is one of colour, not black and white. [ ala America
all good and perfect, all else an axis of evil - sheesh ]

Vince Brannigan wrote:

Dr. James West, Ph.D. wrote:

Vince Brannigan wrote:

Dr. James West, Ph.D. wrote:

Vince Brannigan wrote:


State pirates, not terrorists



Son, a pirate is a terrorist.

Use a normal dictionary, not the Brannigan dictionary for dopes.


(Son, you sure are stupid for claiming to be a teacher.)
;-)


you are having trouble reading
I'm not surprised

"state" is an adjective
cf "state action"

A "state pirate" is a person acting under color of state authority
but in violation of the law of nations

They are pirates, not terrorists

Vince


Son, a pirate is a terrorist.

(Son, you sure are stupid for claiming to be a teacher.)
;-)

no they are not
a pirate is a pirate
A criminal to be sure
They take what they don't own Ships people whatever
They are thieves and kidnappers and murderers but not terrorists

No, son, a pirate is a terrorist. Use a dictionary ya fuckin dope.

Vinnie the Dope...ha ha ha!!!

Son, you sure are stupid for claiming to be a teacher.

when you get to 5th grade they will teach you

Vince Brannigan wrote:
Dr. James West, Ph.D. wrote:

Vince Brannigan wrote:


State pirates, not terrorists


Son, a pirate is a terrorist.

Use a normal dictionary, not the Brannigan dictionary for dopes.


(Son, you sure are stupid for claiming to be a teacher.)
;-)

you are having trouble reading
I'm not surprised

"state" is an adjective
cf "state action"

A "state pirate" is a person acting under color of state authority but
in violation of the law of nations

They are pirates, not terrorists

Vince

Son, a pirate is a terrorist.

(Son, you sure are stupid for claiming to be a teacher.)

In <F7-dnub-ookxtofvnz2dnuvz_g-dnz2d@toastnet>, on 05/01/2008
at 01:44 PM, "Dr. James West, Ph.D." <nada@nobull.com> said:




Vince Brannigan wrote:

Dr. James West, Ph.D. wrote:


Vince Brannigan wrote:


State pirates, not terrorists


Son, a pirate is a terrorist.

Use a normal dictionary, not the Brannigan dictionary for dopes.


(Son, you sure are stupid for claiming to be a teacher.)
;-)

you are having trouble reading
I'm not surprised

"state" is an adjective
cf "state action"

A "state pirate" is a person acting under color of state authority but
in violation of the law of nations

They are pirates, not terrorists

Vince


Son, a pirate is a terrorist.


The etymology of pirate, leads to the word fear. Thus, it could well be
used in place of the word terrorist, by a skilled writer; e.g., anyone not
insisting that pirate can only be used as a noun.

(Son, you sure are stupid for claiming to be a teacher.)
;-)

What if I told you that Jefferson (in response to terrorist type
actions by an enemy encouraged a plan against great internal
opposition (which was eventually implemented) that included US troops
attacking and capturing portions of a foreign country. Officially
this country had not declared war on US and these actions were taken
without the sanction of the UN Security Council (or its equivalent).
And which is most important, by these actions the US was able to
eliminate the terrorist threat.

Kind of sounds like the current situation doesn't it.

On May 1, 11:39 am, Vince Brannigan <fire...@verizon.net> wrote:
Michae...@gmail.com wrote:
On May 1, 9:53 am, "Sean" <waz...@bro.org> wrote:
"Vince Brannigan" <fire...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:buiSj.3832$lc6.881@trnddc04...
[snip]

Kind of sounds like the current situation doesn't it.
State pirates, not terrorists
and the law of war was different then

Vince

Pirates - were capturing and enslaving US citizens. Are you saying
this is better or worse then terrorist?

Really, what changes to US law with regards to war have been made
since then?