In fj.life.in-japan E.F.Schelby <schelby@swcp.com> wrote:
> mtfester@netMAPSONscape.net wrote:

>>In fj.life.in-japan C.Brady <ch.brady@comcast.net> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 14:25:28 +0000 (UTC), mtfester@netMAPSONscape.net
>>> wrote:
>>
>>>>In fj.life.in-japan C.Brady <ch.brady@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 00:55:31 +0000 (UTC), mtfester@netMAPSONscape.net
>>>>> wrote:
>>
>>>>Indeed, that was a statement I refuted, you took exception to, and
>>>>produced the above "dictionary" definition. Now, you are trying to
>>>>modify both my statement, and yours, finding yourself inadequate to the
>>>>task of supporting your statement.
>>
>>> There is no point in continuing this discourse until a) you attempt to
>>
>>You were the one who jumped in on it, taking Ms Schelby's word for my
>>"America can do no wrong attitude".
>>
>>YOU were the one who claimed the Germans WERE in fact the victims of
>>WWII, contradicting my statement that they were not.
>>
>>Now, be a good troll and show me where I claimed the Germans never 
>>suffered.

> Why don't you know when to fold 'em? When to stop?

How many times are you 
1) gonna congratulate yourself on not responding
2) responding
3) telling yourself you've won whatever feeble points you're trying to
   make?

> It is actually not important what you think about the Germans and
> their civilian losses in WW II.

One might point out the same thing to you, but you insist on telling one
and all what you "think" about the Germans and their civilians losses.


> of a world supreme court. So you should leave those alone who have a
> more intimate knowledge of these matters.

That would not be you, of course.

> It may be that current US government officials call the Geneva
> Conventions "obsolete" or "quaint" so that they can ignore some of

That's nice and all, but has nothing to do with the situation under
discussion

Focus, please.

> them at their convenience, but the Geneva Conventions remain what
> they are nevertheless.

Yes; post-war conventions.

> Now if we follow your Shermanesque prescription for Germany, then

Excuse me, Ms Schelby, but when have I ever offered a "prescription" for
Germany?

You and Mr Hardy are awfully quick argue points not made by whoever
you're arguing with.

> ol'Poland: Iraq (no WMDs, no hand in 9/11). Is that what you want? 

Sorry; how  is what I "want" relevant, Ms Schelby?

Is your mental capacity truly so tiny that you cannot understand the
difference between what you want and how things are? 

> On the scale that befell Germany? I hope to god that this will
> never happen.

What befell Germany was the fault of the Germans.

Unlike what befell (eg) Poland, when the Germans quit their fighting,
most of the pain went away. A "healing" (to use one of your new age
terms) began.

When Poland quit fighting, the Germans slaughtered them like animals,
enslaved them, sorted them out by religion, gassed a buncha them, shot
them and essentially behaved like the Huns they were labelled in WWI.

> Ms.Brady stood up alone - like England! 

Oh, my goodness; such courage. To type on the internet, and to respond
to statments not made.

Truly, I am in awe.

> Please accept: no matter what you do you can not dictate or control
> the feelings and the minds of those who lived through these horrors.

Really? Gosh, I had never considered that.

> This debate isn't winnable. Kindly let things rest.

Is this where you quit again, only to come back whining about how the
poor Germans should have been left to their rapacious ways again?

Mike