GWiz Posted February 16, 2011 Report Posted February 16, 2011 Heck...I recall the Canadian flag used to have a Union Jack on it. Same dumb-ass sh*t you see here changed that, too... Sure nice to have anudder "ol' TIMEer" join us (BC and myself) in edgecatin the muddled messes present on dis here for em, eh... Quote There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
Jack Weber Posted February 17, 2011 Report Posted February 17, 2011 Sure nice to have anudder "ol' TIMEer" join us (BC and myself) in edgecatin the muddled messes present on dis here for em, eh... As DoP can attest... I am in no need of that ejumakayshun you speak of.... Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
GWiz Posted February 17, 2011 Report Posted February 17, 2011 As DoP can attest... I am in no need of that ejumakayshun you speak of.... No prob Jack, I'm sure that you realize from our previous "conversations" my sentiments were NOT directed at you (even tho you're a Hamilton "pussy cat" lover, I can forgive you for that, at least until the season starts)... Quote There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
eyeball Posted February 17, 2011 Report Posted February 17, 2011 I didn't ask about results, I asked you what you would do different given the same circumstances, what approach to "dictators" in power would YOU take? I wouldn't approach them. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
GostHacked Posted February 17, 2011 Report Posted February 17, 2011 I wouldn't approach them. Agreed, the change has to come from within. Quote
eyeball Posted February 17, 2011 Report Posted February 17, 2011 The US has a long history of supporting dictators and other nasty type regimes. Of sticking their fingers in other people's pie to ensure that they get their slice. You are what you eat. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
WIP Posted February 17, 2011 Report Posted February 17, 2011 Now here we have an example of an obvious contradiction...please try to make up your mind when it comes to what you want "your" American presidents to do....and not do. Maybe we need a suggestion box in the Oval Office? In a nutshell, most of your country's foreign policy is devoted to doing what's best for the oil industry and keeping oil flowing through the MidEast and the Persian Gulf. And, what's left over is attention to taking care of the interests of other multinational corporations in Latin America and Asia. The U.S. wouldn't need a fraction of its present military budget, nor be meddling with supporting despots if it had started moving out of the oil-based economy when its own oil reserves started running out....back in the 70's. Imposing a form of corporate colonization on the world makes the massive military and the wars part of doing business. Quote Anybody who believers exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist. -- Kenneth Boulding, 1973
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 17, 2011 Author Report Posted February 17, 2011 In a nutshell, most of your country's foreign policy is devoted to doing what's best for the oil industry and keeping oil flowing through the MidEast and the Persian Gulf. Correct....this very obvious and stated policy is plain for all to see. Other nations, including Canada, benefit from this policy. And, what's left over is attention to taking care of the interests of other multinational corporations in Latin America and Asia. The U.S. wouldn't need a fraction of its present military budget, nor be meddling with supporting despots if it had started moving out of the oil-based economy when its own oil reserves started running out....back in the 70's. Well, it certainly would need a "fraction" for several other objectives (e.g. Cold War). Many "despots" had no oil to give. Imposing a form of corporate colonization on the world makes the massive military and the wars part of doing business. Correct....it's just the cost of doing business, which other nations help to finance because they benefit as well. PM Martin begged Bush for access to Iraqi oil services contracts...after the invasion was over. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Jonsa Posted February 17, 2011 Report Posted February 17, 2011 In a nutshell, most of your country's foreign policy is devoted to doing what's best for the oil industry and keeping oil flowing through the MidEast and the Persian Gulf. And, what's left over is attention to taking care of the interests of other multinational corporations in Latin America and Asia. The U.S. wouldn't need a fraction of its present military budget, nor be meddling with supporting despots if it had started moving out of the oil-based economy when its own oil reserves started running out....back in the 70's. Imposing a form of corporate colonization on the world makes the massive military and the wars part of doing business. that is a simplistic, biased and extremely narrow interpretation of American Foreign policy. Petroleum and the internal combustion engine are the very foundations of modern civilization and the bedrock of every economy on the planet and will remain so for the next decade or two. So naturally the securing of sources becomes a rather important component of EVERY country's governing strategy and policy (both internally and externally). Did you ever wonder during both gulf wars why japanese oil tankers were able to cruise thru the war zone without incident? Lamenting the snail like pace of "moving off an oil economy" is useless hand wringing which totally ignores the realities of how entrenched petroleum is in the global economy. The huge military budget of the US has much more to do with the artifacts of WWII namely the ascension of the military/industrial complex to economic/political prominence and the cold war. Haven't you noticed that there seems to be a war every 15 years or so with more than one started by deceiving the country? And you should be reminded that in virtually every instance of US military presence on foreign soil, America paid for that presence in blood and treasure and remained at the request and desire of local governments. Quote
GWiz Posted February 17, 2011 Report Posted February 17, 2011 that is a simplistic, biased and extremely narrow interpretation of American Foreign policy. Petroleum and the internal combustion engine are the very foundations of modern civilization and the bedrock of every economy on the planet and will remain so for the next decade or two. So naturally the securing of sources becomes a rather important component of EVERY country's governing strategy and policy (both internally and externally). Did you ever wonder during both gulf wars why japanese oil tankers were able to cruise thru the war zone without incident? Lamenting the snail like pace of "moving off an oil economy" is useless hand wringing which totally ignores the realities of how entrenched petroleum is in the global economy. The huge military budget of the US has much more to do with the artifacts of WWII namely the ascension of the military/industrial complex to economic/political prominence and the cold war. Haven't you noticed that there seems to be a war every 15 years or so with more than one started by deceiving the country? I agree, well put... And you should be reminded that in virtually every instance of US military presence on foreign soil, America paid for that presence in blood and treasure and remained at the request and desire of local governments. I agree on the main point somewhat but to me there's a BIG BUT... If we're talking about Afghanistan and Irag that "Blood and Treasure" pertaining to U.S. wars and interests has been PAID by other countries as well in support of U.S. interests, and to a MUCH SMALLER degree their own interests... A second concern I have is that in BOTH Iraq and even more so Afghanistan the jury is very much still out as to exactly what LEVEL OF SUCCESS will have been achieved in either country... I for one am less than pleased regarding the Karzai government and I'm not alone - - But he said the whole strategy could fail if Karzai does not do more to fight corruption in his brother's southern fiefdom. "We will be unable to succeed in Kandahar if we cannot eliminate a vast majority of corruption there and set up a legitimate governance structure," he told reporters. "If we can't do that there, then we will not be able to succeed. We can succeed militarily, but it's not going to work. That's just a fact." Asked if Ahmad Wali Karzai should be sidelined, Mullen said: "I think that's something that President Karzai's going to have to figure out ... addressing the corruption and governance issues in Kandahar. It's not for us to figure out." But a senior U.S. military official went further. "I'd like him out of there," the official said on condition of anonymity, talking of Ahmad Wali Karzai. "We'd rather not have a guy like that down there because he's so divisive. But there's nothing that we can do unless we can link him to the insurgency, then we can put him on the (target list) and capture and kill him," the official said. - http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/03/29/us-afghanistan-usa-mullen-idUSTRE62S0BG20100329 Then there's Iraq where a LOT of problems remain... Where events like those in Egypt will have a direct bearing on Iraq because of the "mix" of Shiite, Sunni and Kurds that make up the population of Iraq... An "age old" problem that remains and may or may not ever be resolved to the "satisfaction" of U.S. and "western" interests... eg - 2011 will be addressing problems in Iraq Wednesday, February 9th 2011 9:52 PM - Osama al-Najafi said in a press conference held after his meeting with the religious authority, Mohammed Isehaq Al-Fayad,at the presence of AKnews correspondent that "the visit aimed at identifying the real problems experienced by the province." "The religious authority, Mohammed Isehaq Al-Fayad talked about the people suffering and the problems in Iraq, gave a realistic diagnoses about thecorruption problem in the country, as well as talking about the high salaries of special grades." "I informed the religious authority that a law will be initiated in the parliament in the near future to reduce the salaries of special grades," stressing that "the views were close and consistent and we have benefited from them a lot." - Quote There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
Mr.Canada Posted February 18, 2011 Report Posted February 18, 2011 Former President Bush is a teetotaler. Meaning he doesn't drink alcohol. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
Sir Bandelot Posted February 18, 2011 Report Posted February 18, 2011 America even supported Joseph Stalin for a spell! She is the great harlot Quote
Jonsa Posted February 18, 2011 Report Posted February 18, 2011 (edited) I agree, well put... I agree on the main point somewhat but to me there's a BIG BUT... If we're talking about Afghanistan and Irag that "Blood and Treasure" pertaining to U.S. wars and interests has been PAID by other countries as well in support of U.S. interests, and to a MUCH SMALLER degree their own interests... I agree. The superpower has its "allies" and dependent nations that consider co-operation in some operations of "questionable" return a small price to pay for the perceived benefits of the relationship. Nevertheless, their contributions of blood and treasure cannot and for the most part are not ignored. A second concern I have is that in BOTH Iraq and even more so Afghanistan the jury is very much still out as to exactly what LEVEL OF SUCCESS will have been achieved in either country... I for one am less than pleased regarding the Karzai government and I'm not alone -- But he said the whole strategy could fail if Karzai does not do more to fight corruption in his brother's southern fiefdom. "We will be unable to succeed in Kandahar if we cannot eliminate a vast majority of corruption there and set up a legitimate governance structure," he told reporters. "If we can't do that there, then we will not be able to succeed. We can succeed militarily, but it's not going to work. That's just a fact." Asked if Ahmad Wali Karzai should be sidelined, Mullen said: "I think that's something that President Karzai's going to have to figure out ... addressing the corruption and governance issues in Kandahar. It's not for us to figure out." But a senior U.S. military official went further. "I'd like him out of there," the official said on condition of anonymity, talking of Ahmad Wali Karzai. "We'd rather not have a guy like that down there because he's so divisive. But there's nothing that we can do unless we can link him to the insurgency, then we can put him on the (target list) and capture and kill him," the official said. - http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/03/29/us-afghanistan-usa-mullen-idUSTRE62S0BG20100329 Karzai and his brother are corrupt, no question. You point out a recurring weakness in American policy, the necessity to deal with local powers-that-be. Expedience and percieved control trumps ethics. There are also the cultural aspects of foreign lands that seem to get ignored or misinterpreted time and time again. Then there's Iraq where a LOT of problems remain... Where events like those in Egypt will have a direct bearing on Iraq because of the "mix" of Shiite, Sunni and Kurds that make up the population of Iraq... An "age old" problem that remains and may or may not ever be resolved to the "satisfaction" of U.S. and "western" interests... eg - Agreed. Its a bit of a bitch when they just won't do what you want them to do, eh? Edited February 18, 2011 by Jonsa Quote
DogOnPorch Posted February 18, 2011 Report Posted February 18, 2011 She is the great harlot You'd have prefered the Soviet Union fall to Germany then? Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
GWiz Posted February 18, 2011 Report Posted February 18, 2011 You'd have prefered the Soviet Union fall to Germany then? Hmmm Hitler - Stalin, hmmm, tough call... psst, Russia not SU that happened BECAUSE Russia didn't fall... Quote There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
DogOnPorch Posted February 18, 2011 Report Posted February 18, 2011 Hmmm Hitler - Stalin, hmmm, tough call... psst, Russia not SU that happened BECAUSE Russia didn't fall... Great Britain would have been toast had Russia fallen. About 80% of Germany's fighting resources were tied-up fighting the Reds. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
GWiz Posted February 18, 2011 Report Posted February 18, 2011 Great Britain would have been toast had Russia fallen. About 80% of Germany's fighting resources were tied-up fighting the Reds. Yep, good thing he went East and not West... Hitler hated Stalin and Communism even more than the Jews... Good thing actually, if he had headed West this for'em would be in German... Quote There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
Sir Bandelot Posted February 19, 2011 Report Posted February 19, 2011 You'd have prefered the Soviet Union fall to Germany then? Yeah preferably before Stalin killed his 20 million. Quote
Jack Weber Posted February 19, 2011 Report Posted February 19, 2011 (edited) You'd have prefered the Soviet Union fall to Germany then? Imperial Germany under Bismarck and Kaiser Wilhelm 1 and 2,or NAZI Germany??? Because the two are quite different.. I am fan of Imperial Germany,and it's supremacy,as it relates to Europe... My family( Father's side) is originally Pomeranian...The City of Stettin,to be precise... Thanks to the subhumanoid Teutonic embarassment that is Herr Schickelgruber,Stettin is now part of Poland!!! And Pomerania no longer exists!!!! Edited February 19, 2011 by Jack Weber Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
Jack Weber Posted February 19, 2011 Report Posted February 19, 2011 (edited) Yeah preferably before Stalin killed his 20 million. You've got to be kidding me... You think Lennin was a step up from Stalin??? Edited February 19, 2011 by Jack Weber Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
Jack Weber Posted February 19, 2011 Report Posted February 19, 2011 Former President Bush is a teetotaler. Meaning he doesn't drink alcohol. Of course he used to drink...Alot!! And he kinda,sorta...Blew his brains out on nose candy.... Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
Yukon Jack Posted February 19, 2011 Report Posted February 19, 2011 (edited) "And Pomerania no longer exists!!!!" Just watched the Westminster Dog Show. I saw a Pomeranian who probably had a higher IQ than the originator of the quote above. Edited February 19, 2011 by Yukon Jack Quote
DogOnPorch Posted February 19, 2011 Report Posted February 19, 2011 Yeah preferably before Stalin killed his 20 million. Excellent. Here's a tune for you... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkV1ZbU7eqs Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
bloodyminded Posted February 19, 2011 Report Posted February 19, 2011 (edited) You've got to be kidding me... You think Lennin was a step up from Stalin??? Lenin was actually viewed with a great deal of trepidation by the original soviet Revolutionaries, who were democratically-minded (an almost forgotten fact): they felt (correctly, as it turns out) that he was an authoritarian and an elitist. Edited February 19, 2011 by bloodyminded Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
DogOnPorch Posted February 19, 2011 Report Posted February 19, 2011 Imperial Germany under Bismarck and Kaiser Wilhelm 1 and 2,or NAZI Germany??? Because the two are quite different.. I am fan of Imperial Germany,and it's supremacy,as it relates to Europe... My family( Father's side) is originally Pomeranian...The City of Stettin,to be precise... Thanks to the subhumanoid Teutonic embarassment that is Herr Schickelgruber,Stettin is now part of Poland!!! And Pomerania no longer exists!!!! We have similar ancestry (Stralsund/Volga Germany). Of course, I'm refering to Barbarossa and Herr Hitler. Sir B would have prefered a Nazi victory in WW2 which would have dealt with that wee missing Pomerania problem, eh? Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.