Re: Starting to build a tank [TANKS] Politics

[Rodolphe GREMEAUX <r.gremeaux-at-wanadoo.fr>]

Hi Guys,

don't get mad about me but here is a french point of view :

At the begining of the war, USA did sell weapons & supplies to both side 
of fighters.
If you sell weapons to both side of fighters what's your point in 
selling weapons to both side ?
money $$$ because you 're watching a war not being involved in.
because if you don't sell weapons you make no money but the war ends 
lack of weapons

At the end of WWI US of A got a lot of gold in the contry.

WW2 they (USA) manage to make money also, more money I think. They got a 
reason to get involved to the war since pearl harbor.

About the viet nam ? I'm not sure but that was a french problem at the 
begining ? called indochine. Full Metal Jacket is a good movie  ;-)
"In every goop there is an american trying to wake up !"
"I would'nt send 16000miles away american boys to a war that asian boys 
shouls do by them selves"

What else ?

First Iraki War with Father Georges BUSH in the early 90's
Iraqui invaded Kuweit that was an old iraki province before.
Kuweit called for help. That was said by the media in that time
(I was eleven years old and in london at that time) So i remember USA 
provide the most of the FREEDOMARMY composed also with French, British 
and so on.
So we may say, we all get involved for petrol.

The second iraki war...to finish the job : get rid of Sadam
or may be to allow the Bush family to dig for petrol in both kuweit and 
iraki country ?
Because to get rid of one man : a Team could/should do it. like the 
Israeli secret departemement.


Steve Edwards a écrit :
> Marmfam3-at-aol.com wrote:
> 
>> About the Lusatania, that wasn't the reason we went to war.  Think 
>> about it, a ship loaded with civilians, mostly women and children, 
>> sail strait into a zone of unrestricted submarine warfare (don't even 
>> go into the rumors/facts of it carrying munitions or it was a mine or 
>> anything like that).  What kind of people would allow that to happen?  
>> It was not an accident that the Lusitania was in those waters.   
>> Also the sinking of the Lusitania occurred May 7, 1915, while we 
>> declared war on April 16.1917.  In those two years we pressured and 
>> persuaded Berlin to restrict submarine warfare, attempted to negotiate 
>> "Peace without victory", Berlin resuming unrestricted sub warfare (Jan 
>> 31, 1917).
> 
> 
> 
> I'm ignorant of the dates... and, of course, there was much more to it 
> than just the Lusitania (which was mostly another one of those 
> convenient reasons). WWI has always been a bit of a mystery to me, from 
> an American perspective anyway. I can understand all of Europe getting 
> embroiled in it (old monarchies and alliances being what they are) but, 
> at that point in time, I'd be hard pressed to put my finger on a 
> national interest worthy of our involvement.
> 
> Lusitania = USS Maine = USS Maddox
> 
> Aside: the most recent theories surrrounding the "mysterious" sinking of 
> the Lusitania suggest that the first explosion was the German torpedo 
> (knocked a hole in her side, brought her to a halt, and gave her a list) 
> and the second explosion (suggested by the Americans as being a second 
> torpedo, and the Germans as being smuggled munitions) was caused by the 
> ignition of coal dust in the mostly-empty bunkers kicked up by the first 
> explosion (similar to a grain silo explosion).
> 
>> As to WWI Part II...it was the consequences of a harsh Treaty of 
>> Versailles imposed upon the Central Powers (mainly Germany) that 
>> helped fuel Hitler's madness and his campaign of world domination.  In 
>> a way we are to blame for WWII.
> 
> 
> 
> Agree with you on that first part, disagree with the second. Versailles 
> was an insult (and then some), and it may have made war inevitable, but 
> Hitler is still to blame for WWII.
> 
> "The fundamental falsehood on which the Versailles Treaty is built is 
> the theory that Germany was solely and entirely responsible for the war. 
> No fair-minded student of the war and its causes can accept this 
> contention; but the propaganda story of Germany's sole guilt has been 
> preached so persistently from pulpit, Press and Parliament that the bulk 
> of our people have come to regard it as an axiomatic truth which 
> justifies the provisions of the most brutal and unjust Treaty in the 
> world's history."
> 
> **********************Captain E. N. Bennett, speech at a Union of 
> Democratic Control <http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/FWWudc.htm> 
> (11th November, 1920)
> **********************
> http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/FWWversailles.htm
> 
>    - Steve "gotta luv the internet" Edwards
> 
> 
> 

-- 


Bonjour,

veuillez trouver ci-joint mon cv au format Word.
Mes pretentions salariales sont de 25-30k€

Salutations.

Rodolphe GREMEAUX
Administrateur Reseaux et Telephonie.
0147202708