I have been reading some posts from this thread, shaking my head. This is
going far to far, IMO.

Children(addressing all of you). This is not a Pentax or photo related
subject, can you please stop behaving like .....
And if you insist on picking up the large cannons, go outside, and finish
(no please here). 

I'm not adding a smilie. Simply because I'm serious. 


Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
 
Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds 
(Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel J. Matyola [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 22. august 2005 15:30
> To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
> Subject: Re: The Photographer's Rights
> 
> So your point is that the Japanese were justified in bombing Pearl
> Harbor so that they could continue the rape of Nanking?  Interesting
> perspective.
> 
> Kevin Waterson wrote:
> 
> >This one time, at band camp, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>Launching a war simply because you want to (maybe just for political
> reasons)
> >>
> >>
> >I think all wars are fought for political reasons.
> >
> >
> >
> >>and convincing others it is a good thing, is certainly different from
> >>responding to an outright attack (Pearl Harbor). Or even rushing to the
> defense of
> >>one's allies.
> >>
> >>But I shouldn't have said that much. And I'll stop here.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Toooo late :)
> >Pearl Harbour was the result of failed US foreign policy.
> >The United States and the United Kingdom reacted to Japanese military
> actions
> >in China by imposing a scrap metal boycott followed by an oil boycott, a
> freeze
> >of assets and the closing of the Panama Canal to Japanese shipping. The
> only
> >choice for Japan was to seek oil in South East Asia and with the the
> Americans
> >firmly entrenched in Pearl Harbour they had to neutralize the American
> fleet
> >or cave into their demands to get out of China.
> >It was anything but an un-provoked or "outright" attack, it was a
> response to
> >American policy.
> >
> >Kind regards
> >Kevin
> >
> >
> 



Reply via email to