$98 per barrel oil

Jay Honeck wrote:
What is your theory as to why we did this? I can think of a few, but
I'm not sure which are truly valid in the final analysis.

Uh, Matt -- reality check he You're asking a troll who specializes
in lame, one-sentence insults to provide thoughtful analysis of a
complex socio-economic and geopolitical question that has occupiedj --
and will continue to occupy -- historians and scholars for decades.

Good luck.

Entertainment, Jay, entertainment! You just have to have the right
expectations. :-)

Matt

Mxsmanic wrote:
Gig 601XL Builder writes:

The fact that there were no attacks just proves how good we were at
protecting it.

The fact that no elephants pass through my apartment just proves how
effective my refrigerator is at keeping them out.


So is it your opinion that had the US not sworn to protect Western Europe
during the cold war the USSR would probably still not ever attemped to take
over Western Europe?

Matt Whiting wrote in news:dAK_i.804$2n4.24532
@news1.epix.net:

Jay Honeck wrote:
What is your theory as to why we did this? I can think of a few, but
I'm not sure which are truly valid in the final analysis.

Uh, Matt -- reality check he You're asking a troll who specializes
in lame, one-sentence insults to provide thoughtful analysis of a
complex socio-economic and geopolitical question that has occupiedj --
and will continue to occupy -- historians and scholars for decades.

Good luck.

Entertainment, Jay, entertainment! You just have to have the right
expectations. :-)


Yeah, you got me there. You adopt a troglidyte political position in the
hop of snagging lefties.



You're a master troll. I bow at your feet.


Bertie

Gig 601XL Builder writes:

So is it your opinion that had the US not sworn to protect Western Europe
during the cold war the USSR would probably still not ever attemped to take
over Western Europe?

I don't know. Would the US have attempted to take over Warsaw Pact countries
if the USSR had not been protecting them?

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Gig 601XL Builder writes:

So is it your opinion that had the US not sworn to protect Western
Europe during the cold war the USSR would probably still not ever
attemped to take over Western Europe?

I don't know. Would the US have attempted to take over Warsaw Pact
countries if the USSR had not been protecting them?




Good grief.


Bertie

Matt,

I don't think there is any universal consensus on this topic.


I agree. However, the number of serious historians agreeing with Jay's
view of things is really, really small.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Thomas Borchert wrote in
:

Matt,

I don't think there is any universal consensus on this topic.


I agree. However, the number of serious historians agreeing with Jay's
view of things is really, really small.


Fox news, OTOH....



Bertie

Bertie,

Fox news, OTOH....


I believe the correct spelling is: Fox "news".

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Thomas Borchert wrote in
:

Bertie,

Fox news, OTOH....


I believe the correct spelling is: Fox "news".


Are those inverted?

Bertie

Wolfgang Schwanke wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote in
:

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Gig 601XL Builder writes:

So is it your opinion that had the US not sworn to protect Western
Europe during the cold war the USSR would probably still not ever
attemped to take over Western Europe?

I don't know. Would the US have attempted to take over Warsaw Pact
countries if the USSR had not been protecting them?

Good grief.

Mx has a point. The situation was symmetrical, i.e. from their POV the
Warsaw Pact thought they were "protecting" themselves from an imminent
attack by NATO.



Problem is, none of his points come from anywhere but Wikipedia.

His "viewpoint" is pretty meaningless considering it's viewed through his
rectum.



Bertie