please stop bashing France

"Franck" wrote in message
...
It is my understanding that large numbers of people think that
UFOs are manned by space aliens, that Elvis is alive or that
72 virgins await them in heaven for dying while killing westerners.

not the same thing, in this case, it's based on proof, and fact

Hmm, you mean like a court of law?

In article ,
"John Mullen" wrote:

"Chad Irby" wrote in message

Unless you mean Chile.

Chili genocide refers to killing all of the peppers.

And also one in which you managed to avoid answering the point the OP was
making. Which you still haven't done.

....because the original poster went back and agreed that "genocide" was
the wrong term...

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

Uzytkownik "Declan O'Reilly" napisal w wiadomosci
What is GROM anyways

I know that its english translation is storm , but what exactly is the
unit. Is it a desant unit modeled after old soviet formations , or is it
more like an american ranger unit.
Well, there are 2 equally probable stories about the GROM name.. one, is
that it is derived from the name GROMoslaw Czempinski. This is a Polish
Military Inteligence guy that brought out CIA operatives form Iraq in 1991.
As a thank-you-very-much gesture the USA bankrolled the creation of GROM.
The second version is that GROM is an abbreviation from Grupa Reagowania
Operacyjno Mobilnego (something like Operations and Mobility Reaction
Group). This does not make any sense both in Polish and in English language.
I think that the first version is true.

Secondly, GROM is a SAS, DELTA type of unit. That is long range recce, with
a dedicated counter terrorist capability. AFAIK it is divided along the SAS
lines in boat, mobility freefall and mountaint troop. We know that in Iraq
the boat troop helped the SEALs to take over some oil infrastructure on the
Persian Gulf and in Umm Qasr. We don't know what the others did. Right now a
GROM detachement is under the command of the Joint Special Forces Command
and are involved with the Task Force, which hunts for Saddam.

I think that GROM has much to learn from the SAS and the US Special Forces.
In this business the experience is the key. Haiti, Yugoslavia, Macedonia and
Iraq (place where GROM operated) earned some of it for the Unit, but much
more is needed.

About the Ranger. I think you can compare Polish and US units as the
following (basic roles on the battlefield):
(Polish=US)
GROM=Delta
1st Commando Regiment, 2nd Recce Regiment=US Special Forces Groups
6th Airborne Brigade, 25th Air Cav Brigade= 101, 82 Airborne Division

I would think that 6th Airborne Brigade can be compared to the US Rangers,
that is much better that the regular airborne infantry and not as good as
Commando Regiment. Rangers in my understanding are very but very good shock
infantry supporting SF units and capable of limited SFtype operations on
their own.


Also what your guys did was outstanding , plus your government for
sending them , it says more to send troops to a combat theater , than
all the words in the UN.
thank you
take care
lekomin inc

Franck wrote:

without vioaling US Law.

lol, incredible

Actually, I think that's pretty close to it in a nutshell.

Congress was attempting to play a game that would restrict US support
for a right wing (sometimes oppressive) pro-US government (El Salvador)
and attempted undermining of an anti-US government (Nicaragua), while
at the same time, not outright causing, or being seen to cause, the
loss of said pro-US government by efforts of said pro-Soviet/Socialist one.
You know, typical Cold War stuff.

Congress cut off funding for such US efforts, but in such an indecisive way
(the legislation is open to a variety of interpretations because of this
attempt to remain politically non-responsible for anything bad that might
come of [in]action), that Olie North and company devised a way to get funding
independent of Congress, by making a deal with the Iranians for spare parts
for US weaponry (F-14???).

As Olie put it, the concept was "kind of neat".

Now was Reagan involved? Probably (although Reagan haters will paint him
as asleep during policy decisions except when they are dastardly evil, in
which case he's a detail man).

But this was hardly a pro-Iranian turn of US national policy at that time.


SMH

"Stephen Harding" wrote in message
...
Franck wrote:

without vioaling US Law.

lol, incredible

Actually, I think that's pretty close to it in a nutshell.

Isreali Generals were already making identical sales to Iran prior to the
CIA intervening for a cycle. It is not as though Iran got anything they
would no0t have gotten otherwise. The Israeli equipments were comming
directly from Pentagon stores, as part of a $3 billion per year Camp David
accord payout.

Congress was attempting to play a game that would restrict US support
for a right wing (sometimes oppressive) pro-US government (El Salvador)
and attempted undermining of an anti-US government (Nicaragua), while
at the same time, not outright causing, or being seen to cause, the
loss of said pro-US government by efforts of said pro-Soviet/Socialist
one.
You know, typical Cold War stuff.

The court's later found Congress had exceeded her authority.

Congress cut off funding for such US efforts, but in such an indecisive
way
(the legislation is open to a variety of interpretations because of this
attempt to remain politically non-responsible for anything bad that might
come of [in]action), that Olie North and company devised a way to get
funding
independent of Congress, by making a deal with the Iranians for spare
parts
for US weaponry (F-14???).

Same deal Israel was already doing.

As Olie put it, the concept was "kind of neat".

Now was Reagan involved? Probably (although Reagan haters will paint him
as asleep during policy decisions except when they are dastardly evil, in
which case he's a detail man).

The CIA was GHWB's baby. If GHWB had not forgotten the US Marshal's Service
is not the CIA, he might have had two terms.

But this was hardly a pro-Iranian turn of US national policy at that time.

I think Shia killing Shia was US policy in those days.

In article ,
says...
In article t, "Tank
Fixer" wrote:

In article ,
says...

If ou want info or example on the French cultural scene, I'd be glad to
help.


France has no culture,

Not true.
A vile calumny.
France has a living and vibrant culture.
I mean how else do you explain the holes in Roquefort cheese?


I stand corrected......


--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.

In article ,
ess says...
On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 03:54:40 GMT, Tank Fixer wrote:

In case no one has mentioned it lately.

Your sentence no verb.


I know, it was a bland statement..


Thank you for you're support.

"Thank you for you are support."??


Ohhh grammar flames....



It is too bad it took nearly 50 years for Poland to gain it's freedom.

"It is too bad it took nearly 50 years for Poland to gain it is
freedom."??

I wonder how long it'll take for ****wit to learn elementary
grammar. Perhaps ****wit's as cultureless as it thinks the French
are.

Do poofy limp wristed folks from the UK that have nothing better than to
post spelling and grammar flames to usnet.

Appologies to those denizens of the UK who do not fit the above
description...

--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.

In article ,
ess says...
On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 10:11:35 -0400, Stephen Harding wrote:
phil hunt wrote:

On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 03:54:40 GMT, Tank Fixer wrote:

In case no one has mentioned it lately.

Your sentence no verb.

Thank you for you're support.

"Thank you for you are support."??

It is too bad it took nearly 50 years for Poland to gain it's freedom.

"It is too bad it took nearly 50 years for Poland to gain it is
freedom."??

I wonder how long it'll take for ****wit to learn elementary
grammar. Perhaps ****wit's as cultureless as it thinks the French
are.

Quick! Get to your Oxford English Dictionary and look up the definition
for the word "ANAL"!

It will make you a better person.

I wouldn't have made my comment if the OP hadn't said France has no
culture. Calling someone cultureless while being aparently unable to
construct grammatically correct sentences in inviting derision.


Oh my, I didn't know we had a literacy test her on usnet.
How very Alabama of you...


--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.

In article , says...

I am Polish but my opinions about the French are biased. On one hand, we
"the Polish people" love Napoleon

The nice thing is Napolian wasn't French, he was Corsican...



--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 05:26:05 GMT, Tank Fixer wrote:

Do poofy limp wristed folks

I note that you are a bigot. Not that I'm surprised.

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(Email: , but first subtract 275 and reverse
the last two letters).