Quote:
|
I would think not. As I recall, the AVG did not fly its first combat missions against the Japanese until the week following the attack on Pearl Harbor.
|
what year did their boss get his job as a "banker/farmer" in china?
Quote:
|
The 1990's retroactive reinstatement of the Group's status of US servicemen was for the seven months between December 1941 and July 1942.
|
The reinstatement was for "no break in service", which covers from each persons "resignation" till the units disbandment.
Quote:
|
Of course, Obama is the topic of every thread in GT, so maybe I'm wrong
|
Well for balance since its history and Blair and Bush both said "let history be the judge of that" we can without a shadow of a doubt say that their stated aims for the war were lies, their "objectives" were mere fantasies and the outcome so far is pretty much exactly what was predicted by those who pointed out the obvious while Bush and Blair were still spouting their crazy plans.
Though of course the finer details of their ballsup will be fleshed out in the next few decades.
Or alternatively you could just look at the piece see that its written by a Murdoch&Barclay regular and write it off the same as you would an Al-Asqa publication.
Quote:
|
In an attempt to get beyond the Trollsman/MH circle jerk I found this article which seems to illuminate the topic fairly well:
|
Well since the drive by troll wants to illuminate the topic lets take a really good example.
History WIKI and sources
How many of the six large frigates the US authorised in 1794 got built?
how many were rated as 44s?
how many could be described as sister ships?
What did the WIKI say?
How many claims were made using WIKI as a link to back up those claims yet were contradicted by the very link provided as a source of the claims?
Good example really as the Constitution is a big part of a nations history and is on the local history tour as the big star, so really someone in that nation let alone anyone local should have the story of its basic history down pretty well.