historyman12
Fugitive Iroh
IS IT JULY 14TH YET?
Posts: 4,822
|
Post by historyman12 on Jun 19, 2008 19:25:30 GMT -5
I'm an adamant supporter of Barack Obama. The reason being that he represents my sociopolitical views the best. I think that negotiation with Iran and North Korea should never be out of the question. *clears throat* Mahmoud Ahmedinajad (or however you spell that) has said: Our dear Imam (referring to Ayatollah Khomeini) said that the occupying regime must be wiped off the map and this was a very wise statement. We cannot compromise over the issue of Palestine. Is it possible to create a new front in the heart of an old front. This would be a defeat and whoever accepts the legitimacy of this regime has in fact, signed the defeat of the Islamic world. Our dear Imam targeted the heart of the world oppressor in his struggle, meaning the occupying regime. I have no doubt that the new wave that has started in Palestine, and we witness it in the Islamic world too, will eliminate this disgraceful stain from the Islamic world.[2] He wants to flatten all vestiges of the Jewish government in Israel. And threatened to nuke them. Just as the Soviet Union was wiped out and today does not exist, so will the Zionist regime soon be wiped out. This, my friends, sounds like a threat to me. Further: The 'Wipe Israel' phrase also appeared elsewhere: Iranian military parades in Ahmadinedjad's reign featured ballistic missiles adorned with slogans such as 'Israel must be uprooted and erased from history'. Who thinks this sounds like a good and peaceful neighbor? Anybody? Shocker. But that's not all. Those who think they can revive the stinking corpse of the usurping and fake Israeli regime by throwing a birthday party are seriously mistaken. Today the reason for the Zionist regime's existence is questioned, and this regime is on its way to annihilation." This man is a threat to the peace. "You should know that the criminal and terrorist Zionist regime which has 60 years of plundering, aggression and crimes in its file has reached the end of its work and will soon disappear off the geographical scene." *march of the Valykries begins to play* They have invented a myth that Jews were massacred and place this above God, religions and the prophets. The West has given more significance to the myth of the genocide of the Jews, even more significant than God, religion, and the prophets, (it) deals very severely with those who deny this myth but does not do anything to those who deny God, religion, and the prophet. If you have burned the Jews, why don't you give a piece of Europe, the United States, Canada or Alaska to Israel? Our question is, if you have committed this huge crime, why should the innocent nation of Palestine pay for this crime? How can you even pretend to negotiate with this guy? Hopefully, the news that the criminal of Sabra and Shatila has joined his ancestors is final. Okay, so this isn't exactly political, but I still think it shows this guy has a screw loose. "The Zionist regime is seeking baseless pretexts to invade Islamic countries and right now it is justifying its attacks with groundless excuses," Need I elaborate? On Aug 3rd, 2006, in a speech during an emergency meeting of Muslim leaders, Ahmadinejad called for "the elimination of the Zionist regime". The hate-hit-parade continues. He called Israel an "illegitimate regime" with "no legal basis for its existence" and accused the United States of using Israel as a proxy to control the region and its oil resources; "The Zionist regime is used to reach this objective. The sole existence of this regime is for invasion and attack." Okay, that's it for now. Tell me, who does this man remind you of? I'll spell it backwards. reltiH flodA Adolf Hitler Okay, I now lack the energy to post a lengthly response, so I will be a lazy jerk and simply post a massive link. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War_troop_surge_of_2007I'll pick specific stuff out later. Good point on the surface. HOWEVER, we have to do something in the interim. Unless we devote nearly all our time and energy to the development of alternate energy, bad idea on so many levels, it'll take years for us to fully convert. Until then, we need to cheapen what we have. We need to drill in Anwar, we need to drill in our territory, do we not? That is all.
|
|
o8jedi
Jet
Please, call me "o8"
Posts: 364
|
Post by o8jedi on Jun 20, 2008 0:06:35 GMT -5
He called Israel an "illegitimate regime" with "no legal basis for its existence" and accused the United States of using Israel as a proxy to control the region and its oil resources; "The Zionist regime is used to reach this objective. The sole existence of this regime is for invasion and attack." Note that I pared down the quote for the sake of me trying to address some key points. First-off, Iran. I think you're confusing "Israel" with "Jews." To be fair, though, Ahmadinejad does have a somewhat valid point. Israel's right to exist is questionable. In his mind, and in the minds of most of the Islamic world, the catalyst for the state of Israel's existence is the collective guilt and shock of the West over the Holocaust. While Ahmadinejad is a Holocaust denier, it is not that he's saying that it didn't happen. There's too much documentation to refute the argument that the Nazi regime did not plan, let alone carry out, a Final Solution to the Jewish Problem. He, and many other Holocaust deniers, merely claims that the numbers are inflated to grab at the sympathies of the West. Whether or not these claims are true is not relevant. To be honest, I feel that the state of Israel, as it exists today, is in dire need of reform. It is as if Israel is doing everything in its power to tick off their neighbors from building walls into Palestinian-controlled regions, effectively redrawing the borders, to apartheid-like registration of Palelstinians within Israel. It is no wonder that most of the Islamic world wants it gone. After all, why should Palestine pay for the sins of Germany? Also, what is meant by "wiping Israel off the map" is just that: the state of Israel should cease to exist. It does not mean that Jews are a blight on humanity. This is one problem with America: we associate Jews with Israel. In Tehran, there is a guaranteed allotment of seats for Jews on the Iranian Parliament. As well as guaranteed seats for Christians. Both of these religions are protected under law because the Koran says that Jews and Christians are spiritual brothers to Muslims. Do you know which Middle-Eastern country, apart from Israel, has the highest population of Jews? Iran. I look forward to your specific stuff because I have no idea what point you're trying to make. Is it that to leave would result in Iraq being an even bigger ****hole? Is it that the surge is working? Is it both? To be fair, I don't know diddly about tactics and combat. Frankly, I don't think many people here do either. However, I did find a quote in that same article: Success? Perhaps on the surface, but the fact of the matter is that the current government of Iraq is hardly doing anything towards securing their position in power. If there is going to be stability there, some group will gain power and stay in power. If we want the present government to be that, they need an incentive to take the reigns. Perhaps, I dunno, a decreased American presence? Like it or not, it is necessary to wean Iraq from America. Still, my original point still stands: Invading Iraq was a mistake to begin with. It is time that we cash in and try and regain what credibility we still have. I recognize the need for interim results and, like Obama, I don't feel that "Free Gas Day" will cut it. Now, unless you know something that I don't, I feel that our oil problem is not merely a matter of supply and demand. It is more far-reaching than that. First off, our economy is shot. Since oil is traded in US$, prices naturally become higher. Then you have the practices of the domestic oil companies, who, despite the crap economy and a consistent demand for fuel, are making record profits. I'm convinced that there is definitely some price gauging going on. Not only will something need to be done about correcting this issue by our next president, the economy will need to get going again. And again, the person who I think has the best option is Barack Obama. We are in a time where we need to make an investment in the future. It may get a bit expensive, but the foundation will be laid to carry the United States on.
|
|
historyman12
Fugitive Iroh
IS IT JULY 14TH YET?
Posts: 4,822
|
Post by historyman12 on Jun 20, 2008 8:34:46 GMT -5
He called Israel an "illegitimate regime" with "no legal basis for its existence" and accused the United States of using Israel as a proxy to control the region and its oil resources; "The Zionist regime is used to reach this objective. The sole existence of this regime is for invasion and attack." First-off, Iran. I think you're confusing "Israel" with "Jews." To be fair, though, Ahmadinejad does have a somewhat valid point. Israel's right to exist is questionable. In his mind, and in the minds of most of the Islamic world, the catalyst for the state of Israel's existence is the collective guilt and shock of the West over the Holocaust. While Ahmadinejad is a Holocaust denier, it is not that he's saying that it didn't happen. There's too much documentation to refute the argument that the Nazi regime did not plan, let alone carry out, a Final Solution to the Jewish Problem. He, and many other Holocaust deniers, merely claims that the numbers are inflated to grab at the sympathies of the West. Whether or not these claims are true is not relevant. You're still missing the point "You should know that the criminal and terrorist Zionist regime which has 60 years of plundering, aggression and crimes in its file has reached the end of its work and will soon disappear off the geographical scene." This isn't just a general statement. He is saying that this country as we know it, will cease to exist. Let's put this together with another lovely quote. The 'Wipe Israel' phrase also appeared elsewhere: Iranian military parades in Ahmadinedjad's reign featured ballistic missiles adorned with slogans such as 'Israel must be uprooted and erased from history'. He has also said Those who think they can revive the stinking corpse of the usurping and fake Israeli regime by throwing a birthday party are seriously mistaken. Today the reason for the Zionist regime's existence is questioned, and this regime is on its way to annihilation." Annihilation, dissapear of the geographical scene, and ballistic missiles. Let's sit down and think about this shall we? He can't just be saying this as a an empty prediction can he? I mean, he's saying Israel is ON IT'S WAY TO ANNIHILATION. That means it's going to be made into nothingness. It's people will die. And he has ballistic missiles. He is threatening and predicting violence against Israel. Not just the peaceful dissolution of the state. Really? So, ignoring these facts. During the time of the British Mandate, the Balfour Declaration, signed in 1917, stated that the government of the United Kingdom supported the establishment of a "Jewish national home" in Palestine. This exacerbated tensions between the Arabs living in Mandate Palestine and the Jews who emigrated there during the Ottoman period. Signed in January 1919, the Faisal-Weizmann Agreement promoted Arab-Jewish cooperation on the development of a Jewish National Homeland in Palestine and an Arab nation in a large part of the Middle East, though this event had little to no effect on the conflict. This is a mandate from 1919. 20 years before World War II. And on Israel's attempts to aggravate her neighbors: Shortly after the British mandate expired: Over the next few days, approximately 1,000 Lebanese, 5,000 Syrian, 5,000 Iraqi, 10,000 Egyptian troops invaded Israel. Don't think Israel started this one. 1967, six day war Israel admittedly launched the first strike, however, it is now largely considered pre-emptive, rather than baseless. The cassus belli? Egyptian. The fighting in the Six-Day War of 1967 began with a strike by Israel, which many consider preemptive, against Egypt and Syria following the breakdown of international diplomatic efforts to solve the crisis begun by the Egyptian closure of the Straits of Tiran on May 21-22, 1967 (thus "blocking all shipping to and from Eilat ... a casus belli" according to a possible interpretation of international law) Yom Kippur War. Started by Egypt and Syria. The 1973 Yom Kippur War began when Egypt and Syria launched a surprise joint attack, on the Jewish day of fasting, in the Sinai and Golan Heights. Operation Litani, Israeli. 1982 Lebanon War Palestinian/Israeli. NOTE. NOT AN ATTACK ON LEBANON ITSELF. The 1982 Lebanon War began when Israel attacked Lebanon, justified by Israel as an attempt to remove the Fatah militants led by Yasser Arafat from Southern Lebanon (where they had established, during the country's civil war, a semi-independent enclave used to launch terrorist attacks on Israeli civilians). Gulf War Israel was neutral. Saddam bombed it. Israel did nothing. To draw Israel into the confrontation and fracture the multinational coalition, Iraq launched 39 Scud missiles on Israeli cities and on Israel's nuclear facilities near Dimona. However, under strong pressure from the U.S., which feared direct Israeli involvement would threaten the unity of the coalition, Israel did not retaliate against Iraq and the multinational coalition ousted Iraqi forces from Kuwait. First Intifada Palestinian The First Intifada, 1987-1993, began as an uprising of Palestinians, particularly the young, against the Israeli military occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip after the failure of the PLO to achieve any kind of meaningful diplomatic solution to the Palestinian issue. Second Intifada Palestinian The al-Aqsa Intifada began in late September, 2000, around the time Israeli opposition leader Ariel Sharon and a large contingent of armed bodyguards visited the Temple Mount/Al-Haram As-Sharif complex in Jerusalem and declared the area eternal Israeli territory. Widespread riots and attacks broke out among Palestinians and Arab citizens of Israel in Jerusalem and many major Israeli cities, and spread throughout the West Bank and Gaza Strip. They went to their Holy of Holies, declared it their's so Palestinians attack them. Seriously. Whose fault? 2006 Israel Lebanon War Both The conflict began when Hezbollah militants fired rockets at Israeli border towns as a diversion for an anti-tank missile attack on two armored Humvees patrolling the Israeli side of the border fence. Of the seven Israeli soldiers in the two jeeps, two were wounded, three were killed, and two were captured and taken to Lebanon. Five more were killed in a failed Israeli rescue attempt. Israel responded with massive airstrikes and artillery fire on targets in Lebanon, which damaged Lebanese civilian infrastructure, including Beirut's Rafic Hariri International Airport which Israel alleged that Hezbollah used to import weapons, an air and naval blockade, and a ground invasion of southern Lebanon. Hezbollah then launched more rockets into northern Israel and engaged the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) in guerrilla warfare from hardened positions.[22] Let me show you the casualty totals 10,418 Insurgents 1,270 suicide bombers total: 11,592 to 12,807+ listed on a representative list of reports 19,000 Killed Detainees: 21,000 Iraqi Security Forces (post-Saddam, Coalition allies) Police/military killed: 10,020 (6,490 police and 3,530 Military) Coalition dead (3,937 US, 143 UK, 136 other): 4,216 Several thousand more insurgent dead than coalition. And then there's the 21,000 detainees. Tell me again, who's taking high casualties? A US general says on August 28, 2006 violence has fallen in Baghdad by nearly a half since July, although he acknowledged a spike in bombings in the past 48 hours. "Insurgents and terrorists are hitting back in an attempt to offset the success of the Iraqi government and its security forces", Maj Gen William Caldwell told reporters. After meeting Iraqi Defence Minister Abdul-Qader Mohammed Jassim al-Mifarji, UK Defence Minister Des Browne said Iraq was moving forward. "Each time I come, I see more progress", he said. On September 21, 2006, Italian troops handed security control of the Dhi Qar province to Iraqi forces, making Dhi Qar the second of the country's 18 provinces to come under complete local control. At a ceremony in Nasiriyah marking the handover, Italian Defense Minister Arturo Parisi told Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki "The Italian contingent is going back. The mission is accomplished - the security of the province is in your hands." Italy has about 1,600 troops in the country, mostly in Nasiriyah, and that force is expected to be withdrawn by year’s end. Dhi Qar is populated mainly by Shiite Muslims and has not experienced the sectarian violence that has plagued other provinces of Iraq. On December 20, 2006, U.S. forces handed over control of the southern province of Najaf to Iraqi security forces. Najaf is the third Iraqi province to be turned over to Iraqi forces, but the first such handover by U.S. troops. U.S. forces will remain on standby in case the security situation deteriorates. "If we don't handle the responsibility, history will destroy us", Iraq's national security adviser, Mouwafak al-Rubaie, said at a ceremony in a stadium in Najaf city, the provincial capital. "Transferring responsibility is an indication of the increased capacity of the Iraqi police and the Iraqi army", Maj. Gen. Kurt Cichowski said at the ceremony. On September 3, 2006, Iraq says it has arrested the country's second most senior figure in Al-Qaeda, "severely wounding" an organization the US military says is spreading sectarian violence that could bring civil war. John Murtha believes it. U.S. Rep. John Murtha (D-PA), an outspoken congressional critic of the Iraq war, said he saw signs of significant military progress during a brief trip to the Middle East. "I think the 'surge' is working." September 11, 2007: General David Petraeus reported to the United States Congress on the progress of the Iraqi troop surge. In his report, he stated that the surge had largely met its military goals. July 15, 2007: A White House interim report assessed that 7 of the 18 Iraqi benchmarks have yet to be satisfactorily met, with one additional benchmark meeting with mixed success. The remaining ten benchmarks were assessed as being unsatisfactorily met. Congress differs A report by the GAO, a congressional research arm states that Iraq has not satisfied 11 of the 18 benchmarks, and an additional three have mixed results. I wouldn't call either bipartisan Before the surge even started June 13, 2007: Top US congressional Democrats tell President George W. Bush that his Iraq troop "surge" policy was a failure. June 15, 2007: The troop surge operations begin. The U.S. military reports that 28,000 troops required for the surge have arrived in Iraq and that the surge operations can now commence. "All the forces initially identified as part of the surge have completed their strategic movements into theatre in Iraq," Sorry, couldn't resist. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Sec_Violence.jpgen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Attack_Trends.jpgen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:ISFDeaths.jpgI don't know, seems to be going okay to me. McCain '08.
|
|
o8jedi
Jet
Please, call me "o8"
Posts: 364
|
Post by o8jedi on Jun 20, 2008 11:45:50 GMT -5
*list of conflicts Israel has had since its inception* Well, if you lost your home and Europe has redrawn the map yet again, you'd want to return it to order, too. Militarily speaking, you're right. Israel has done nothing to warrant its attempted eradication. The Middle East has largely been stepped upon and pushed to the side at the whim of European powers for around 200 years, if not more. Israel, to them, is a geopolitical monument to Imperialism. The fact that it exists as a reminder of how the West treats them is enough to bring some people to arms. What brings the rest is what they do under the guise of the usual practices of running a country, like the aforementioned encroachment. The sad thing about the many liberation fronts is that anger blinds them to what a "target" is. At least with a country, they are expected to have clear, defined targets. Should an Israeli-Iranian war happen, and I hope it does not, we should expect clearly defined goals from the Iranian army and not total war. If there are civilian casualties it will either be A) an accident, or B) from an Iranian sympathetic, but independent, group like Hamas. To be fair, though, the main reason why Iran is rattling its saber and puffing out its chest and seeking the Bomb is because they are effectively surrounded by the United States and they are afraid of what we will do. Here is a map of Iran. Now, to the East, we have Americans in Afghanistan and allies (or at least they claim to be) in Pakistan. In the west, Americans are in Iraq and allies in Turkey. To the South in the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman, we have several ships stationed, primarily as support for Iraq and Afghanistan. It's only natural for them to say, "If you try to invade, we're taking as many as you ****ers with us." Furthermore, Iran, for all its boasting and talking, is not stupid. It is precisely this attitude towards them that caused this situation in the first place. They know that a strike to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth will result in even nastier retaliations. Even Saddam knew better than to get in the way of America. Still, look what that got him. And what that got us. Bush was right when he said that "this is a different kind of war." Success in Iraq cannot be measured in simple things like a cessation of hostilities. Although it is excellent to see that there is some self determination, the general consensus is, as I pointed out in my last post, that the combatants are committing a false retreat. It may appear to be working, but they are biding their time. The only way to defeat this is to allow self determination to run its course. You boast about how little our casualties are in comparison to the insurgency. For all intents and purposes, it seems to me that those figures are so close together, we might as well be even. And you neglect to include the amount of civilian dead. According to iraqbodycount.org, there are anywhere from 84,910 to 92,614 civilians killed since the war began. Kinda puts things in perspective, no? My point is this: Ending the war in Iraq is not about stopping fighting. It is to ensure that the people of Iraq can assume responsibility for themselves. Having the Americans do it for them is like giving a starving man the most advanced fishing equipment in the world, but failing to teach him how to actually fish. With Obama's benchmark plan, we've got the means to teach them how to fish.
|
|
|
Post by Grimmjow of the Funk on Jun 21, 2008 8:12:16 GMT -5
now I canvass for the DNC for the grassroots campaign as my job and of course we back Obama and Democrats across the nation. i'd just like to point out that Drilling offshore and in alaska would not help the economy at all. the problem is that this oil is not just all ready under ground once we take it out it will be ok. it gonna take about three years to refine and be prepared and there isn't even that much. the fact is we are using way to much oil that the only way to lower gas prices is to find an alternative fuel source. that is why Obama is against it. now o8 has a good point so i'm not gonna go into to that but what i'm afraid about McCain is his flip flopping. he was for tax cuts now he is against tax cuts or now he is for waterboarding. how can a guy who got tortured in vietnam vote for torture. guess it wasn't that bad then. and it is funny that fox news gave Kerry so much crap for flip flopping and now their own candidate is doing it and i see nothing. but what pisses me off the most is not even McCain. it is the smears that are coming from blogs and news stations like the "Terrorist Fist Bump" or Obama is a Muslim. and it is all FOX News. it just make me have less and less respect for republicans.
|
|
asian malaysian
Avatar Kyoshi
Let me hear you say this ship is bananas! B-A-NA-N-A-S!
Posts: 1,308
|
Post by asian malaysian on Jul 8, 2008 8:35:05 GMT -5
The buzz over the campaign seems much more muted than it used to be. Whats up?
|
|
o8jedi
Jet
Please, call me "o8"
Posts: 364
|
Post by o8jedi on Jul 8, 2008 9:48:15 GMT -5
Because we know who the two primary players are: McCain and Obama. There's no conflict left like when Hillary was still in it.
|
|
historyman12
Fugitive Iroh
IS IT JULY 14TH YET?
Posts: 4,822
|
Post by historyman12 on Jul 8, 2008 11:52:11 GMT -5
i'd just like to point out that Drilling offshore and in alaska would not help the economy at all. the problem is that this oil is not just all ready under ground once we take it out it will be ok. it gonna take about three years to refine and be prepared and there isn't even that much. Well, the U.S. actually does have a fair share of oil reserves in the Anwar and offshore and even in the continent. Further, it would take even longer to find a good alternative resource, refine it, turn it into an effective fuel source. Uh...not exactly. Supply and demand. Let's figure we have...simplified, 10 barrels of oil and 40 people. A gallon of gas is 4.00. Now, we have 20 barrels of oil and 40 people. The supply has doubled, and the demand will stay constant, or, the way things are going now, will decrease. Thus, prices will fall. Basic economics. Supply and demand, Grimmjow. Well, just as a technicality, McCain went from against the Bush tax cuts to for them. Further, I don't believe he has come out in favor of waterboarding, so if you have a source I'd appreciate it. Further, waterboarding is not on the same level as what he has gone through. It will not permanently debilitate a person, as the torture McCain suffered in the Hanoi Hilton did. To this day, he walks with a limp and cannot use his right arm fully. People have covered the McCain flip-flops, I've seen some of it in the NY Times, and on NBC/CBS. Further, Obama has flip-flopped. 1. He first was in favor of the DC gun ban, he know has reversed his opinion. 2. On March 19th, 2008, Barack Obama said this: In order to end this war responsibly, I will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. We can responsibly remove one to two combat brigades each month. If we start with the number of brigades we have in Iraq today, we can remove all of them in 16 months. Barrack now: When I go to Iraq and I have a chance to talk to some of the commanders on the ground, I'm sure I'll have more information and will continue to refine my policies. Now, John F. (Flip Flop) Kerry defending Obama: Barack Obama has a plan for ending the war. John McCain has a plan for continuing the war, and he has said so very clearly dozens and dozens of times. What the McCain campaign is trying to do is take the normal statement of anybody smart enough to be president of the United States and is ready to be president, he says he'll refine -- may refine tactically what you might decide to do over the course of that withdrawal and how you protect American troops and how you in fact get the Iraqi army to stand up faster, but it is no change whatsoever in his fundamental determination to end the war. So, Obama, flip-flopper? Just a thought: Barack Obama has had a whopping 143 days in the Senate. Not since he was elected. 143 whole days of actually being in the building serving. Cheri Jacobus, who is a brilliant woman, a Republican strategist, she lives in Washington, she's worked on Capitol Hill, posted a little blurb: "Just how much Senate experience does Barack Obama have in terms of actual work days? Not much. From the time Barack Obama was sworn in as a United State Senator, to the time he announced he was forming a Presidential exploratory committee, he logged--143 days" 143. John F. Kennedy had more experience than that. J. DANFORTH "DAN" QUAYLE HAD MORE EXPERIENCE THAN THIS GUY. 1976 Race for U.S. House of Representatives — 4th District o Dan Quayle (R), 54% o Ed Roush (D) (inc.), 45% 1978 Race for U.S. House of Representatives — 4th District o Dan Quayle (R) (inc.) 1980 Race for U.S. Senate o Dan Quayle (R), 54% o Birch Bayh (D) (inc.), 46% 1986 Race for U.S. Senate o Dan Quayle (R) (inc.), 61% o Jill Long (D), 39% So. Where does Barack Obama get his support? Or any experience WHAT-SO-BLOODY-EVER?
|
|
o8jedi
Jet
Please, call me "o8"
Posts: 364
|
Post by o8jedi on Jul 8, 2008 15:39:25 GMT -5
If we're talking about the experience needed for the Presidency, I'd like to point out a C-student at Yale who was largely AWOL during his time with the National Guard and was either a senior partner or the CEO of three companies that tanked under his watch. That man became President. His name: George W. Bush. (Doubts? Google it.) Compared to him, even Dan "Potatoe" Quayle appears to be a Rhodes Scholar.
Regarding the McCain's support of the Bush tax cuts, I would like to point out something I saw on CNN earlier today. McCain has made the promise that the federal budget would be balanced by the end of his first term (he initally said second term, for the record). According to several projections, it could happen by fiscal year 2012 because the Bush tax cuts, as it stands right now, would end around 2010 and another benefit, which the name eludes me as of the moment, would apply to more people. And McCain wants to close the benefit and make the tax cuts permanent. Habeda-what?!
Yet again, the gas situation is not about supply and demand. The causes are far-greater than that and an increase in supply will do little to abate it.
|
|
Zink
Ty Lee
"Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love." 1 John 4:8
Posts: 4,279
|
Post by Zink on Jul 8, 2008 16:01:01 GMT -5
Wait, so because John Kerry defends Obama, Obama's a flip-flopper by association?
Here's a revolutionary idea, guys: vote for the canadite most likely to be a good president. What John Kerry says about Obama doesn't effect his ability to lead the nation. Obama wants to talk to the generals before planning a withdrawal? Gasp! How dare he try to make an educated decision!
Geez.
(And we're going to run out of gas eventually. Might as well find dependable alternative fuel before we need it, rather than after.)
|
|
asian malaysian
Avatar Kyoshi
Let me hear you say this ship is bananas! B-A-NA-N-A-S!
Posts: 1,308
|
Post by asian malaysian on Jul 8, 2008 20:33:14 GMT -5
i'd just like to point out that Drilling offshore and in alaska would not help the economy at all. the problem is that this oil is not just all ready under ground once we take it out it will be ok. it gonna take about three years to refine and be prepared and there isn't even that much. Well, the U.S. actually does have a fair share of oil reserves in the Anwar and offshore and even in the continent. Further, it would take even longer to find a good alternative resource, refine it, turn it into an effective fuel source. Uh...not exactly. Supply and demand. Let's figure we have...simplified, 10 barrels of oil and 40 people. A gallon of gas is 4.00. Now, we have 20 barrels of oil and 40 people. The supply has doubled, and the demand will stay constant, or, the way things are going now, will decrease. Thus, prices will fall. Basic economics. Supply and demand, Grimmjow. What the world's largest oil producers have been saying is that price of oil has nothing to do with oil supply and has more to do with price speculation and duties imposed on oil by certain countries. Greater effort should be spent on alternatives fuels instead of squeezing the last drops out of a depleting and non renewable energy source which also happens to be at the heart of most the world's biggest conflicts today.
|
|
historyman12
Fugitive Iroh
IS IT JULY 14TH YET?
Posts: 4,822
|
Post by historyman12 on Jul 9, 2008 8:40:57 GMT -5
Wait, so because John Kerry defends Obama, Obama's a flip-flopper by association? No. He's a flip-flopper because He first was in favor of the DC gun ban, he now has reversed his opinion following the Supreme Court Decision. There was an NY Times opinion piece "New and Unimproved" claiming Obama has gone too conservative (yeah right) alleging that he flip-flopped on the gun ban, and he changed his opinion, in 4, count them, 4, f-o-u-r months on Iraq. On March 19th, 2008, Barack Obama said this: In order to end this war responsibly, I will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. We can responsibly remove one to two combat brigades each month. If we start with the number of brigades we have in Iraq today, we can remove all of them in 16 months. Barrack now: When I go to Iraq and I have a chance to talk to some of the commanders on the ground, I'm sure I'll have more information and will continue to refine my policies. Sounds somewhere in the flip-flop zone to me. I don't know about you, but I don't want to vote for a candidate who changes his mind in four months, on two separate issues. And if John Kerry allies with a candidate that is usually a good indicator of where he stands. That's a good point, but I never said not to look for alternative fuels, I only said it was dumb to only look for alternative fuels, and totally ignore resources that are right in our face.
|
|
|
Post by chaobender482 on Jul 9, 2008 10:01:39 GMT -5
Because we know who the two primary players are: McCain and Obama. There's no conflict left like when Hillary was still in it. But then again we still have the issue of the election being called off, but that is a long shot, it is just that from the looks of this, it seems the Economy and Gas issues seem to be peak topics, but also given if this war we have now was a mistake in terms of causing a likely depression to be on the horizon?
|
|
o8jedi
Jet
Please, call me "o8"
Posts: 364
|
Post by o8jedi on Jul 9, 2008 12:54:33 GMT -5
No. He's a flip-flopper because He first was in favor of the DC gun ban, he now has reversed his opinion following the Supreme Court Decision. Not like he has much of a choice. I mean, the Supreme Court struck it down. He, like everyone else in the country, has to acknowledge the fact that handguns are permitted for the general populace in the District. There was an NY Times opinion piece "New and Unimproved" claiming Obama has gone too conservative (yeah right) alleging that he flip-flopped on the gun ban, and he changed his opinion, in 4, count them, 4, f-o-u-r months on Iraq. Valid use of sources, however one should note that opinion pieces are just that: Opinions. But I digress. I don't know about you, but I don't want to vote for a candidate who changes his mind in four months, on two separate issues. And if John Kerry allies with a candidate that is usually a good indicator of where he stands. Yet another area where we differ. Willingness to change one's mind after appropriate input from prudent sources, like seeking advice from commanding officers in Iraq, is something that I see as a trait of a rational mind. After all, look where "sticking to our guns" has got us: A war in a country that posed little threat to the US to begin with, an economy that, for all intents and purposes, is in recession, and a completely shattered reputation both here and abroad. That's a good point, but I never said not to look for alternative fuels, I only said it was dumb to only look for alternative fuels, and totally ignore resources that are right in our face. On the other hand, we are not in a position right now to increase our oil production, let alone process it. I can speak from personal experience that, while many oil refineries still operate in the US, a lot more of them have closed down and have been dismantled because of our downturn in production. It's not like we can fire them back up. We have to bring them back up to code or, in some cases, rebuild them. It's a very tall order indeed for something like McCain is proposing.
|
|
historyman12
Fugitive Iroh
IS IT JULY 14TH YET?
Posts: 4,822
|
Post by historyman12 on Jul 9, 2008 19:36:41 GMT -5
No. He's a flip-flopper because He first was in favor of the DC gun ban, he now has reversed his opinion following the Supreme Court Decision. Not like he has much of a choice. I mean, the Supreme Court struck it down. He, like everyone else in the country, has to acknowledge the fact that handguns are permitted for the general populace in the District. Well, that's not exactly what I meant. I meant he now agrees with the decision. Plenty of people can and do disagree with Supreme Court decisions. Roe vs. Wade, Dred Scott, etc. etc. Good point, but the opinion isn't that the positions changed. The opinion is that it was bad. Look where else, "Sticking to our guns" got us: The Country itself. A unified nation, and an end to slavery. The end of World War I, ending pointless bloodshed. The defeat of Hitler and Tojo. And last, but not least, The fall of the Soviet Union. And, further, the recession has little to do with the war, it started as a Long Island sup-prime mortgage crisis, which spread to the rest of the nation. And, honestly, I don't see the point of European nations disliking us. They'll come running back to us once they need help. (just kidding) Honestly though, France, Germany, and Italy are all becoming slightly more conservative. Actually one Frenchman, decrying the smoking restrictions, bemoaned that France was becoming to liberal like the U.S. That's a good point, but I never said not to look for alternative fuels, I only said it was dumb to only look for alternative fuels, and totally ignore resources that are right in our face. On the other hand, we are not in a position right now to increase our oil production, let alone process it. I can speak from personal experience that, while many oil refineries still operate in the US, a lot more of them have closed down and have been dismantled because of our downturn in production. It's not like we can fire them back up. We have to bring them back up to code or, in some cases, rebuild them. It's a very tall order indeed for something like McCain is proposing.[/quote] The same goes for alternative resources. Imagine having to first hammer out alt. fuel technologies, then build refineries, or whatever processing it needs to go through, and finally being able to ship it out as a usable fuel. I say we do both, alternative fuel, and oil. I must say, I very much enjoy debating here as opposed to Yahoo answers, where 75% of the comments are: "Lololol, Obama's a mentally challenged person he'll let gays, Muslims and Jews take over the world!!!!!!!!!1!! And he's black!!111!!!!" or "Omg McCain's going to make the U.S. a dictatorship!!!!!!1!!!!! And he has cancer!!!!!11!!!!! No seriously, that's what it's like there. For DH, where intelligent debate rules!
|
|