A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

A question about the Transall C160



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old September 27th 03, 07:16 PM
Skysurfer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Brian wrote :

Where are the claimed weapons of Mass Destruction the Iraqi's
supposedly had????


There :

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3144980.stm
  #22  
Old September 27th 03, 07:25 PM
Alan Minyard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 04:09:24 GMT, "Brian"
wrote:

Jeez, talk about yesterdays views - get off the France bashing already and
get back into life - I supposed you have stopped eating French Fries too?


France is an enemy nation.

Al Minyard
  #23  
Old September 27th 03, 07:27 PM
Alan Minyard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 00:47:24 -0400, "George Z. Bush"
wrote:


"Ragnar" wrote in message
link.net...

"Brian" wrote in message
. net...
Jeez, talk about yesterdays views - get off the France bashing already and
get back into life - I supposed you have stopped eating French Fries too?

And yes, France does have an Army - one that is very strong with very good
equipment - the Le Clerc being comparable to the vaunted M1.


How many battles has the Le Clerc been in?

France is an independant country and that in itself was one reason for
deciding to withdraw from NATO - so they could pursue their own course of
action.


Umm, they didn't "pull out" of NATO. They very conveniently stayed in just
enough to whine about stuff but far enough out to never actually do any
work.


Actually, they did pull out of NATO. By March 1966, deGaulle had withdrawn
France from NATO and its command structure because he felt that France needed to
be independent of joint security considerations, which would not have been
possible had they remained in NATO. As an example, they would have been unable
to bar the presence of missiles from their soil that were under foreign (to
them) control, which was a step that de Gaulle actually took. They remained out
of NATO until Mitterand brought them back in during the early '90s, although I
am not sure of that date or time period.

George Z.




No, they only pulled out of the security accords, they stayed in NATO
as a hanger on. They only rejoined the security accords when it became
clear that the US had won the cold war.

Al Minyard
  #24  
Old September 27th 03, 09:24 PM
Brian
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Not intelligently, no.

--
Brian - harpoon at thegrafixguy dot com
"C Knowles" wrote in message
news
Ever get your question answered?

"Brian" wrote in message
news:Bz6db.436620$Oz4.244338@rwcrnsc54...
Anyone have any data in regards to the types of military vehicles and

number
carried that could fit inside the plane for air transport?

Looking at the French Army vehicle mainly - thanks in advance

Brian






  #25  
Old September 27th 03, 11:20 PM
tscottme
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Peter Kemp peter_n_kempathotmaildotcom wrote in message
...


To be fair the weapons used were not the *deterrent*. That arrived
once they had a significant number of them and they weren't all
scheduled for use.

Peter Kemp


I'm sure that fine distinction is very important, in your mind.

--

Scott
--------
"Interestingly, we started to lose this war only after the embedded
reporters pulled out. Back when we got the news directly from Iraq,
there was victory and optimism. Now that the news is filtered through
the mainstream media here in America, all we hear is death and
destruction and quagmire..." Ann Coulter
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2003/091703.htm


  #26  
Old September 27th 03, 11:28 PM
tscottme
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Skysurfer wrote in message
. 0.138...
tscottme wrote :

3,000 dead from an unforeseen sneak attack versus 15,000 dead from
summer heat. Which one sounds like a real condemnation of a
government?


I remind you Paris is at 49° of latitude and New-York at 40° of
latitude. Highest temperature was 42°C (i.e. 108°F).


I'd say losing 400 valuable troops to destroy the
Taliban and Saddam sounds like a trade worth making. France
looses more than that to soccer riots.


I thought France was in the fight against terrorism in Afghanistan
...

The real question will be who will be the first French
leader to propose surrender to the Arab League.


You should look at the Finsburry Park Mosque in London ...


In backward America we have these super-secret government agents called
"weather forecasters" that spy on the enemy. We use an antiquated
device called "air conditioner" and survive 120 degree weather in large
parts of the country. In France they convince themselves nothing
unpleasant will happen and then surrender 15,000 victims. Typical,
wouldn't you say?

Tell me, if France doesn't contribute to fighting terrorism how is
anyone to notice. I'm sure the French think their token contribution
is the key to everything, it isn't.

--

Scott
--------
"Interestingly, we started to lose this war only after the embedded
reporters pulled out. Back when we got the news directly from Iraq,
there was victory and optimism. Now that the news is filtered through
the mainstream media here in America, all we hear is death and
destruction and quagmire..." Ann Coulter
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2003/091703.htm


  #27  
Old September 27th 03, 11:29 PM
tscottme
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Alan Minyard wrote in message
...
On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 04:09:24 GMT, "Brian"
wrote:

Jeez, talk about yesterdays views - get off the France bashing

already and
get back into life - I supposed you have stopped eating French Fries

too?

France is an enemy nation.

Al Minyard


Not for the terrorists.

--

Scott
--------
"Interestingly, we started to lose this war only after the embedded
reporters pulled out. Back when we got the news directly from Iraq,
there was victory and optimism. Now that the news is filtered through
the mainstream media here in America, all we hear is death and
destruction and quagmire..." Ann Coulter
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2003/091703.htm


  #28  
Old September 27th 03, 11:38 PM
tscottme
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Brian wrote in message
et...
Scott,

ASSuming again - I am not French, only interested in a particular

French
built aircraft and its airlift capabilities.

I am an American by birth, served my time in the US Army in the late

80s. I
served to protect your rights and my rights to stand up for the USA or

put
her in her place - whatever views we have - we have the right to them
whether we agree or not - at least we agree to disagree.

In regards to your statement of the Afghani's and Iraqi's being

grateful -
some yes, but not all - on Nightline Thursday night, an Iraqi said "at

least
under Saddam the electricity was on... things were better under

Saddam."

I am not saying Saddam was man of the year material or even a nice

person,
however, the made up lies of Bush and Blair (six months later and no

WMDs)
was no reason to invade the country. The lies are leading many to

believe
that the attack on Iraq was nothing more than revenge for embarrassing

daddy
Bush and/or control of the oil interests in Iraq to counter OPEC.

American
wanna drive and any prez who can provide cheap fuel is going to gain

points.

Now in regards to Afghanistan, the Taliban (the leadership in power at

the
time) made a choice not to surrender Osama - I do not feel bad for

them.
Hide a criminal and you get cast in the same lot as an accessory.

While I do not agree with Osama's choice of target (personally, I

would have
chosen the Capitol Building or White House or even a large refinery),

I can
understand their methods.

How else do you fight a giant? You can't trade punches in a

traditional
battlefied sense and expect to win. That has been proven twice in

Iraq.

Events in Somalia, Vietnam, Beruit and our responses as a country have

shown
the American's weak link (public opinion) make it bloody enough and

drawn
out and despite the revenge hawks, the majority will clamor for the US

to
pull out - and we usually do. Leaving behind a nice void to be filled

by
whomever has the biggest arsenal in the region.

The development of the terrorist (aka. Partisan (if this were WW II

and
being conducted against German occupying forces), mujahadeen (if they

were
fighting against the Red menace), or VC (if they are fighting for a

belief
other than the mighty dollar or the Red White and Blue capitalistic
Democracy)) is completely dependant upon what the US leadership has in

its
mind - both the Taliban and Saddam were US allies when the Russians or
Iranians were a concern. Now that the Cold War is over, US abandoned

their
friends as they were the unclean masses used only as cannon fodder

when
needed.

The US Government, in its infinite wisdom, by following the US foreign
policies determined by the presidents after WWII created 95% of the

hatred
felt worldwide against the US.

The US did not support Israel until AFTER the Soviets started

supporting the
Arab states - Remember the 56 war? Only US weapons in use by the

Israeli's
were stuff bought from Europe (mostly WWII surplus). It wasn't until

the
sixties that the US sent billions in weapons to counter the Red

menace.

The Marshall Plan after WWII was only issued to the chosen countries

who
agreed to kiss the ass of the USA in return for the rebuilding

assistance -
did Yugoslavia or Albania recieve any aid form the US - Nope not a

dime.
(Yugoslavia only got a little assistance in the fifties as an attempt

to
swing them to the west).

There are several examples of the US can do that but no one else can

since
the the end of WWII - it is this attitude and the RAPE of foriegn

markets to
make the little guy dependant on the US that has caused so much hatred

world
wide as well as disgust among our own close allies.

Some day, some one will come around and gather enough forces to kick

the
knees out from under the US so that she does land hard on her ass and
possibly knock some sense into the country as a whole.

America is not ALL THAT. There are better places in the world - some

with
higher taxes but more personal freedoms, others with better economies,
others with better health care, others with better eduction, others

with a
lower crime rate.

Yes, on the other hand, there are more places that are worse than

America -
N. Korea, Mexico, Haiti, Dominican Republic and so on. America's

greatness
is only military any more - hell we don't even follow the Statue of

Liberty
any more - "Give us your weak" - talk about hypocracy!

Well enough of the rant

Brian - harpoon at thegrafixguy dot com


So unanimous agreement among the civilian population is your standard
for success? How Hitlerian of you.

If only you and the other flaming Leftists could get as worked up about
those attacking the US as you do about those defending it, we might
actually accomplish something. You and I know that'll never happen.
You should be smart enough to go to these much better places.

Wouldn't it be easier for you to leave than to turn the most successful
country into a middling failure like the places you prefer. Typical
socialist, your preferences are more important than all others. Are you
sure you're not French? Your arrogance says otherwise.
--

Scott
--------
"Interestingly, we started to lose this war only after the embedded
reporters pulled out. Back when we got the news directly from Iraq,
there was victory and optimism. Now that the news is filtered through
the mainstream media here in America, all we hear is death and
destruction and quagmire..." Ann Coulter
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2003/091703.htm


  #29  
Old September 27th 03, 11:40 PM
tscottme
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Alan Minyard wrote in message
...

No, they only pulled out of the security accords, they stayed in NATO
as a hanger on. They only rejoined the security accords when it became
clear that the US had won the cold war.

Al Minyard


That's what NATO always needed, more freeloaders. NATO appears to be a
military Ponzi scheme.

--

Scott
--------
"Interestingly, we started to lose this war only after the embedded
reporters pulled out. Back when we got the news directly from Iraq,
there was victory and optimism. Now that the news is filtered through
the mainstream media here in America, all we hear is death and
destruction and quagmire..." Ann Coulter
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2003/091703.htm


  #30  
Old September 28th 03, 09:57 AM
Skysurfer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

tscottme wrote :

In backward America we have these super-secret government agents
called "weather forecasters" that spy on the enemy. We use an
antiquated device called "air conditioner" and survive 120 degree
weather in large parts of the country.


Can't you read ? Most of the death occured in northern France.
Have you seen the latitude of Paris compared to New York ?
What if there were a snow storm in Miami ??

Tell me, if France doesn't contribute to fighting terrorism how is
anyone to notice.


Can't you read ? There are french soldiers in Afghanistan.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
GPT (Gulfport MS) ILS 14 question A Lieberman Instrument Flight Rules 18 January 30th 05 05:51 PM
VOR/DME Approach Question Chip Jones Instrument Flight Rules 47 August 29th 04 05:03 AM
Question Charles S Home Built 4 April 5th 04 09:10 PM
Tecumseh Engine Mounting Question jlauer Home Built 7 November 16th 03 02:51 AM
Question about Question 4488 [email protected] Instrument Flight Rules 3 October 27th 03 02:26 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.