> At 10:56 PM 7/9/99 -0700, Antoine Compin wrote:
> > Let's not
> >blow it by being overly intransigeant: if we make it a case of
> >BLACK & WHITE, all or nothing, then surely we will end up with
> >nothing...
>
> >The key to a reasonable solution is, I believe to categorize or
> >classify vehicles, not only by age, but also by destination...
> >WWI, WWII, Korean War, Nam, Gulf War etc...Obviously the older
> >the materiel is, the lesser will it be perceived as a
> >Quote-threat-Unquote. Same variations of the "threat
> >perception" apply to soft-skinned vehicles versus armor...
>
> IOW, we should all fight for the guys who want jeeps but let the guys who
> want halftracks or tanks or HMMWVs fight their own battles for
> "unreasonable" items? No thanks: if you're willing to sacrifice my
> interests, why the hell should I fight for yours?
>
> Sorry if this is offensive, Antoine, but you seem to be entirely too ready
> to satisfy your own interests and offer others' up as sacrifices toward that
> end. There are no essential differences among your categories: they are
> all ex-MVs. They ALL need to be saved.
>
> Steve Allen
>
> ===
> To unsubscribe from the mil-veh mailing list, send the single word
> UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of a message to <mil-veh-request@skylee.com>.
===
To unsubscribe from the mil-veh mailing list, send the single word
UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of a message to <mil-veh-request@skylee.com>.