Dave Smith > wrote:

>Steve Pope wrote:

>> Dave Smith > wrote:

>>> But where is your cite for French nuclear disasters.

>> Algeria? South Pacific?
>>
>> Of course these were not "disasters" in the sense that
>> something unplanned happened.
>>
>>> BTW.... your air force lost an A bomb off our west coast.
>>
>> Your heavy-water reactor emits cancerous isotopes. Gives
>> new meaning to the phrase "Can Do"...

>There are a lot of people upset about the isotope shortage from its
>shutdown.

I'm down with a society free from artificial isotopes.

Steve

Steve Pope wrote:
> Dave Smith > wrote:
>
>> But where is your cite for French nuclear disasters.
>
> Algeria? South Pacific?
>
> Of course these were not "disasters" in the sense that
> something unplanned happened.
>
>> BTW.... your air force lost an A bomb off our west coast.
>
> Your heavy-water reactor emits cancerous isotopes. Gives
> new meaning to the phrase "Can Do"...
>
> S.
Also remember the rainbow warrior
if an irradiated bit of Pacific Island doesn't suggested enough

J. Clarke wrote:
> On 2/21/2010 7:20 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>> gloria.p wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> And if they decide to shut downt their programs? And would you want
>>>>> to live on top of a French reactor?
>>>>
>>>> Yeah. You don't want another Three Mile Island accident.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I's cite Chernobyl instead. Nothing nearly as awful happened at TMI.
>>
>> But where is your cite for French nuclear disasters.
>> BTW.... your air force lost an A bomb off our west coast.
>
> Where is your cite for the French Navy surviving a war?
google potluck/french military victories

atec 77 wrote:

>>> But where is your cite for French nuclear disasters.
>>> BTW.... your air force lost an A bomb off our west coast.
>>
>> Where is your cite for the French Navy surviving a war?
> google potluck/french military victories

Better yet, where did the US ever have a single single handed against a
significant enemy? Panama? Grenada?

Dave Smith wrote:
> atec 77 wrote:
>
>>>> But where is your cite for French nuclear disasters.
>>>> BTW.... your air force lost an A bomb off our west coast.
>>>
>>> Where is your cite for the French Navy surviving a war?
>> google potluck/french military victories
>
> Better yet, where did the US ever have a single single handed against a
> significant enemy? Panama? Grenada?
I suspect they did quite well against the British

Dave Smith wrote:

> Where did the US ever have a single single handed against a significant
> enemy? Panama? Grenada?

If you write this as a coherent question, maybe I can provide the data you
request.

Bob

On 2/21/2010 8:18 PM, atec 77 wrote:
> J. Clarke wrote:
>> On 2/21/2010 7:20 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>>> gloria.p wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And if they decide to shut downt their programs? And would you want
>>>>>> to live on top of a French reactor?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah. You don't want another Three Mile Island accident.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I's cite Chernobyl instead. Nothing nearly as awful happened at TMI.
>>>
>>> But where is your cite for French nuclear disasters.
>>> BTW.... your air force lost an A bomb off our west coast.
>>
>> Where is your cite for the French Navy surviving a war?
> google potluck/french military victories

Finds nothing about the French Navy surviving a war.

On 2/21/2010 8:36 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> atec 77 wrote:
>
>>>> But where is your cite for French nuclear disasters.
>>>> BTW.... your air force lost an A bomb off our west coast.
>>>
>>> Where is your cite for the French Navy surviving a war?
>> google potluck/french military victories
>
> Better yet, where did the US ever have a single single handed against a
> significant enemy? Panama? Grenada?

You mean as opposed to a "coalition" in which the other members were
mostly there for form's sake?

On 2/21/2010 8:18 PM, atec 77 wrote:
> Steve Pope wrote:
>> Dave Smith > wrote:
>>
>>> But where is your cite for French nuclear disasters.
>>
>> Algeria? South Pacific?
>>
>> Of course these were not "disasters" in the sense that
>> something unplanned happened.
>>
>>> BTW.... your air force lost an A bomb off our west coast.
>>
>> Your heavy-water reactor emits cancerous isotopes. Gives
>> new meaning to the phrase "Can Do"...
>>
>> S.
> Also remember the rainbow warrior
> if an irradiated bit of Pacific Island doesn't suggested enough

I forgot about the Rainbow Warrior incident, in which the French ended
up surrendering to Greenpeace.

atec 77 wrote:
> Dave Smith wrote:
>> atec 77 wrote:
>>
>>>>> But where is your cite for French nuclear disasters.
>>>>> BTW.... your air force lost an A bomb off our west coast.
>>>>
>>>> Where is your cite for the French Navy surviving a war?
>>> google potluck/french military victories
>>
>> Better yet, where did the US ever have a single single handed against
>> a significant enemy? Panama? Grenada?
> I suspect they did quite well against the British


Not entirely singlehanded. The British were doing fairly well but got
screwed at Yorktown when the French fleet came along and defeated the
British fleet. In the War of 1812 the US invaded Canada with the plan of
seizing what was then British territory. They lost. They had a
military objective and they did not achieve it. Most of the issues that
led to the war had already been resolved before it even started.

J. Clarke wrote:
> On 2/21/2010 8:36 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>> atec 77 wrote:
>>
>>>>> But where is your cite for French nuclear disasters.
>>>>> BTW.... your air force lost an A bomb off our west coast.
>>>>
>>>> Where is your cite for the French Navy surviving a war?
>>> google potluck/french military victories
>>
>> Better yet, where did the US ever have a single single handed against a
>> significant enemy? Panama? Grenada?
>
> You mean as opposed to a "coalition" in which the other members were
> mostly there for form's sake?

That, and the coalitions like WWI and WWII where the US tried to sit it
and and then jumped in tip the balance, after which they convinced
themselves they had won them single handed.

In article >, "atec 77
says...
>
> Dave Smith wrote:
> > atec 77 wrote:
> >
> >>>> But where is your cite for French nuclear disasters.
> >>>> BTW.... your air force lost an A bomb off our west coast.
> >>>
> >>> Where is your cite for the French Navy surviving a war?
> >> google potluck/french military victories
> >
> > Better yet, where did the US ever have a single single handed against a
> > significant enemy? Panama? Grenada?
> I suspect they did quite well against the British

Ironically (this thread so far didn't we get a bit of help from the French?

Scotty

--
Can I haz Cheezeburger?

On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 10:06:26 -0500, Dave Smith
> wrote:

> atec 77 wrote:
> > Dave Smith wrote:
> >> atec 77 wrote:
> >>
> >>>>> But where is your cite for French nuclear disasters.
> >>>>> BTW.... your air force lost an A bomb off our west coast.
> >>>>
> >>>> Where is your cite for the French Navy surviving a war?
> >>> google potluck/french military victories
> >>
> >> Better yet, where did the US ever have a single single handed against
> >> a significant enemy? Panama? Grenada?
> > I suspect they did quite well against the British
>
>
> Not entirely singlehanded. The British were doing fairly well but got
> screwed at Yorktown when the French fleet came along and defeated the
> British fleet. In the War of 1812 the US invaded Canada with the plan of
> seizing what was then British territory. They lost. They had a
> military objective and they did not achieve it. Most of the issues that
> led to the war had already been resolved before it even started.

Wasn't the war basically just another English/French battlefield
anyway?

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 10:08:10 -0500, Dave Smith
> wrote:

> That, and the coalitions like WWI and WWII where the US tried to sit it
> and and then jumped in tip the balance, after which they convinced
> themselves they had won them single handed.

Oh? My father, my uncle and my grandfather were in WWII but I *never*
got that impression from them. Canada must have a lopsided point of
view.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On 2/22/2010 10:08 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
> J. Clarke wrote:
>> On 2/21/2010 8:36 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>>> atec 77 wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> But where is your cite for French nuclear disasters.
>>>>>> BTW.... your air force lost an A bomb off our west coast.
>>>>>
>>>>> Where is your cite for the French Navy surviving a war?
>>>> google potluck/french military victories
>>>
>>> Better yet, where did the US ever have a single single handed against a
>>> significant enemy? Panama? Grenada?
>>
>> You mean as opposed to a "coalition" in which the other members were
>> mostly there for form's sake?
>
> That, and the coalitions like WWI and WWII where the US tried to sit it
> and and then jumped in tip the balance, after which they convinced
> themselves they had won them single handed.

They teach you that in that pathetic joke that England calls an
"education system", don't then.

Should have just let Stalin _have_ you lot.

On 2/22/2010 12:39 PM, sf wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 10:08:10 -0500, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
>
>> That, and the coalitions like WWI and WWII where the US tried to sit it
>> and and then jumped in tip the balance, after which they convinced
>> themselves they had won them single handed.
>
> Oh? My father, my uncle and my grandfather were in WWII but I *never*
> got that impression from them. Canada must have a lopsided point of
> view.

I'm getting the impression that British schoolbooks these days are
written by the same sort of idiots who write American schoolbooks. This
"US came into the war late and didn't do much" is being spouted all over
the place. They've gotta be getting it from some fairly widespread source.

On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 12:36:59 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

> "blake murphy" > wrote in message
>> no, it's very simple - you don't deserve a life sentence for stealing a
>> carton of cigarettes.
>
> Exactly, that is why the guillotine was invented! Smoking can kill you.

well, you could spare the state the expense of a lifetime incarceration and
let him kill himself.

your pal,
blake

On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 08:57:27 -0500, J. Clarke wrote:

> On 2/21/2010 8:18 PM, atec 77 wrote:
>> J. Clarke wrote:
>>> On 2/21/2010 7:20 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>>>> gloria.p wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And if they decide to shut downt their programs? And would you want
>>>>>>> to live on top of a French reactor?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yeah. You don't want another Three Mile Island accident.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I's cite Chernobyl instead. Nothing nearly as awful happened at TMI.
>>>>
>>>> But where is your cite for French nuclear disasters.
>>>> BTW.... your air force lost an A bomb off our west coast.
>>>
>>> Where is your cite for the French Navy surviving a war?
>> google potluck/french military victories
>
> Finds nothing about the French Navy surviving a war.

what the **** does that have to do with anything?

blake

sf wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 10:06:26 -0500, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
>
>> atec 77 wrote:
>>> Dave Smith wrote:
>>>> atec 77 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> But where is your cite for French nuclear disasters.
>>>>>>> BTW.... your air force lost an A bomb off our west coast.
>>>>>> Where is your cite for the French Navy surviving a war?
>>>>> google potluck/french military victories
>>>> Better yet, where did the US ever have a single single handed against
>>>> a significant enemy? Panama? Grenada?
>>> I suspect they did quite well against the British
>>
>> Not entirely singlehanded. The British were doing fairly well but got
>> screwed at Yorktown when the French fleet came along and defeated the
>> British fleet. In the War of 1812 the US invaded Canada with the plan of
>> seizing what was then British territory. They lost. They had a
>> military objective and they did not achieve it. Most of the issues that
>> led to the war had already been resolved before it even started.
>
> Wasn't the war basically just another English/French battlefield
> anyway?

Yep. Ironically, after American colonists had fought for so many years
against the French in North America, the rebels got the French to go to
war against Britain in support of them. The Spanish and Dutch were also
involved. The provided money and arms for the rebels, and the French
fleet was a significant factor in the British defeat in the revolution.

The War of 1812 arose from the Napoleonic wars. Americans were upset
about the British embargo on European ports and the impressment of
American sailors into the British navy, though many of those sailors
were actually British. That provided the incentive to go to war, though
there was a significant faction that simply wanted to take over Canada
and used those issues.

Some Americans claim they won, that they gained some sort of
international esteem. Others say it was a draw. The thing is that the
aim of the war was to take over Canada, and they failed to do that.

>

sf wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 10:08:10 -0500, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
>
>> That, and the coalitions like WWI and WWII where the US tried to sit it
>> and and then jumped in tip the balance, after which they convinced
>> themselves they had won them single handed.
>
> Oh? My father, my uncle and my grandfather were in WWII but I *never*
> got that impression from them. Canada must have a lopsided point of
> view.

The US was determined to stay out of WW II but got dragged win by the
attack on Pearl Harbor. My father had been over in England for more
than a year before the US joined its allies. WW I started in 1914, but
American troops did not arrive in France until June 1917 and were not on
the front until the end of October. Yet I frequently hear comments from
Americans about how they saved their asses in two wars, or that the
French would be speaking German if it wasn't for them.

On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:49:34 -0500, Dave Smith
> wrote:

> Some Americans claim they won, that they gained some sort of
> international esteem. Others say it was a draw. The thing is that the
> aim of the war was to take over Canada, and they failed to do that.

It's a damned shame too.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Feb 18, 9:32*pm, "J. Clarke" > wrote:
> Dave Smith wrote:
> > J. Clarke wrote:
>
> >>>> I have a theory that we'd have better government
> >>>> if random members of the public were drafted into
> >>>> public service, sort of like the jury system.
> >>> Sorry, but I can't agree with that. There are too many incompetent
> >>> people out there for that to work. We only have to look at some of
> >>> the jury decisions that have come out over the years to see how
> >>> nuts some people are.
>
> >> And how are those worse than all the "sending a signal" laws that
> >> have been enacted?
>
> > OK I'll bite. * What is a "sending a signal" law?
>
> Sixteen year olds are driving drunk, so to "send a signal" the drinking age
> is raised from 18 to 21 is one example. *Laws that have nothing to do with
> the offense at which they are directed and instead punish somebody else to
> "send a signal" to some group whose actions are already illegal.

A person between the ages of 18 and 20 is considered to have the
judgement capacity to volunteer to get killed, maimed or be
psychologically traumatized for the rest of his/her life by joining
the military, but cannot legally buy a bottle of beer. That instills
a contempt for the law, as well it should. A better message would be
that no one is going to get away with driving drunk, whatever their
age. A middle path would increase penalties for *inexperienced*
drivers--ones who have had their license for less than a specified
number of years--who are caught driving drunk. The 21 YO drinking age
is stupid.

--Bryan

Food Snob® wrote:

> A person between the ages of 18 and 20 is considered to have the
> judgement capacity to volunteer to get killed, maimed or be
> psychologically traumatized for the rest of his/her life by joining
> the military, but cannot legally buy a bottle of beer.

FWIW, when I was a teen the drinking age in Ontario was 21, but it was
18 in NY so we used to go "over the river" regularly, even though we
were under 18. There were several bars in downtown Niagara Falls NY
where we could drink without being asked for proof of age. The year
that I was to turn 21 the drinking age in Ontario dropped to 18. There
were a lot of bars in Niagara Falls that went out of business.

The drinking age in Ontario was raised to 19, but in NY it jumped to 21.
Now there is the exact opposite happening. The kids from NY are coming
to Ontario to drink.




> That instills
> a contempt for the law, as well it should. A better message would be
> that no one is going to get away with driving drunk, whatever their
> age. A middle path would increase penalties for *inexperienced*
> drivers--ones who have had their license for less than a specified
> number of years--who are caught driving drunk. The 21 YO drinking age
> is stupid.


Ontario has graduated licencing. You have to have a G1 (beginners)
licence for a year before you can do your road test for a G2 (8 months
if you take an accredited driving course). Then you have to wait another
year before you can get the full class G licence. Drivers with a G1 or
G2 licence must have zero blood alcohol.

Dave Smith > wrote:

> FWIW, when I was a teen the drinking age in Ontario was 21, but it was
> 18 in NY so we used to go "over the river" regularly, even though we
> were under 18. There were several bars in downtown Niagara Falls NY
> where we could drink without being asked for proof of age. The year
> that I was to turn 21 the drinking age in Ontario dropped to 18. There
> were a lot of bars in Niagara Falls that went out of business.

When I was a teen in New Jersey the drinking age was 21 there, but 18
in New York. Same as you, just on the southern border.
There is a lake called Greenwood Lake that straddles the border
between NY and NJ. The whole northern shore of that lake was
lined with bars and clubs. When the drinking age in NJ went down
to 18 those bars and clubs all folded up. Of course, now the age
is the same in both states.

Bill Ranck
Blacksburg, Va.

On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 14:11:27 -0500, Dave Smith
> wrote:

> Yet I frequently hear comments from
> Americans about how they saved their asses in two wars, or that the
> French would be speaking German if it wasn't for them.

Comments made by right wingers who dodged the Vietnam draft?

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Feb 22, 9:46*pm, sf > wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 14:11:27 -0500, Dave Smith
>
> > wrote:
> > Yet I frequently hear comments from
> > Americans about how they saved their asses in two wars, or that the
> > French would be speaking German if it wasn't for them.
>
> Comments made by right wingers who dodged the Vietnam draft?
>
Those Right wingers might be evil, but they weren't stupid. Working
class kids who consented to go to VietNam were chumps. I would have
handed the draft MFers a photo of me with a dick in my mouth.

--Bryan

On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 21:44:23 +0000 (UTC), wrote:

> When I was a teen in New Jersey the drinking age was 21 there, but 18
> in New York. Same as you, just on the southern border.
> There is a lake called Greenwood Lake that straddles the border
> between NY and NJ. The whole northern shore of that lake was
> lined with bars and clubs. When the drinking age in NJ went down
> to 18 those bars and clubs all folded up. Of course, now the age
> is the same in both states.

I don't think legal drinking age matters. Under aged drinkers can get
their hands on booze, even be served in bars if they pursue it enough.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

In article >, says...
>
> <unnecessary troll snipped>

Whooo boy... That doesn't even make any sense.

Scotty, dissappointed to say the least.

sf wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 21:44:23 +0000 (UTC), wrote:
>
>> When I was a teen in New Jersey the drinking age was 21 there, but 18
>> in New York. Same as you, just on the southern border.
>> There is a lake called Greenwood Lake that straddles the border
>> between NY and NJ. The whole northern shore of that lake was
>> lined with bars and clubs. When the drinking age in NJ went down
>> to 18 those bars and clubs all folded up. Of course, now the age
>> is the same in both states.
>
> I don't think legal drinking age matters. Under aged drinkers can get
> their hands on booze, even be served in bars if they pursue it enough.

It was pretty easy to get served in Niagara Falls NY when the drinking
age was 18 there. I used to go quite regularly from the time I was 15.
Those bars got busted once in a while and would be shut down for a week
or two, but then they would re-open and it was business as usual. My
brother (an ex-cop) was quite convinced that the cops were taking
bribes. He was in a bar there when a cop came in, had a beer and
accepted a handful of cash.

I got into a few bars here when I was 18 and the limit was 21, but I was
a big kid and looked older.

On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 14:11:27 -0500, Dave Smith wrote:

> sf wrote:
>> On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 10:08:10 -0500, Dave Smith
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> That, and the coalitions like WWI and WWII where the US tried to sit it
>>> and and then jumped in tip the balance, after which they convinced
>>> themselves they had won them single handed.
>>
>> Oh? My father, my uncle and my grandfather were in WWII but I *never*
>> got that impression from them. Canada must have a lopsided point of
>> view.
>
> The US was determined to stay out of WW II but got dragged win by the
> attack on Pearl Harbor. My father had been over in England for more
> than a year before the US joined its allies. WW I started in 1914, but
> American troops did not arrive in France until June 1917 and were not on
> the front until the end of October. Yet I frequently hear comments from
> Americans about how they saved their asses in two wars, or that the
> French would be speaking German if it wasn't for them.

i assumed the latter was what you were talking about. also, god forbid the
russians get any credit for defeating the germans in wwii.

your pal,
blake

blake murphy wrote:

>>> Oh? My father, my uncle and my grandfather were in WWII but I *never*
>>> got that impression from them. Canada must have a lopsided point of
>>> view.
>> The US was determined to stay out of WW II but got dragged win by the
>> attack on Pearl Harbor. My father had been over in England for more
>> than a year before the US joined its allies. WW I started in 1914, but
>> American troops did not arrive in France until June 1917 and were not on
>> the front until the end of October. Yet I frequently hear comments from
>> Americans about how they saved their asses in two wars, or that the
>> French would be speaking German if it wasn't for them.
>
> i assumed the latter was what you were talking about.


Yep.

> also, god forbid the
> russians get any credit for defeating the germans in wwii.


True. They too millions of casualties to push the Germans all the way
back to Berlin. On the other hand, had it not been for their special
little deal with Hitler in 1939, Germany might not have dared to invade
Poland, which was what started the whole thing.