 | | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
"Bill Farkas" <kfar@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:Fq5B2D.I06@lugnet.com... (...) we in (...) staying (...) with the (...) Marines (...) Well, I wasn't going to mention the debacle that was Viet Nam, but since you brought it up... First, I (...) (25 years ago, 19-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
"James Powell" <wx732@freenet.victoria.bc.ca> wrote in message news:Fq6DA5.5Gu@lugnet.com... (...) planet (...) be (...) Forces (...) Let's take these one at a time. 1) This *is* a family forum, so please use appropriate language. 2) Don't confuse (...) (25 years ago, 19-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | My [blank] is bigger than your [blank] (was Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
(...) While this is an interesting debate, may I remind you that this is a family forum? I'd rather you used more powerful rhetoric and less pungent words to get your point across... thanks. (25 years ago, 19-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
(...) Watch your mouth soldier boy. =) Regards, Kurt (25 years ago, 19-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
(...) My reference to Viet Nam was soley to point out the non-beach landing aspect, not that they were a main force. I agree with your assessment of the debacle over there, but that was due to politicians and not tacticians. Viet Nam had far more to (...) (25 years ago, 19-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
|
(...) Hey now, try to stay on-topic in off-topic, soldier;-) -John (25 years ago, 1-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
