BubberMiley Posted September 17, 2012 Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 You know you've made an excellent point when so many from the other point of view seek to condemn it! You know you've made an excellent point when others disagree? How profound. But I don't think the "left" has a monopoly on opposition to nuclear power, and neither does it uniformly oppose it. It's probably the only hope we have of reducing carbon emissions. I'm worried how Japan thinks it will be able to move past it, and what they have in store to replace it. Sorry for not falling into your remedial stereotypes though. I know that makes debate a lot easier for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paolo Posted September 17, 2012 Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 I'm a USA resident employed at a Nuclear power plant. The more I work the more perplexed I stay. The equipment is excellent, the personnel are OK but the guarding is just a mockery! Could you ever fancy that some stranger is able to easily intrude into the guarded parking lot adjoining the NPP territory? That is exactly what has recently occurred here. Some Chinese guy with a poor command of American English happened to easily enter the parking on his bike! He lost his way actually and just made a try to find out where he was at the moment. It's both ridiculous and alarming! Now fancy, it could have been some Islamic terrorist, some live bomb or sort of it!! Now I'm inclined to believe that nuclear stuff from USA nuclear facilities can really get into the arms of terrorists. Why not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted September 17, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 Looks like the Obama administration isn't up to speed yet... But... I wonder what colour the sky is in Obama's world? Thanks for constantly being late to the game, I posted this stuff a couple pages back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted September 17, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 The issue with any such analogy is that you're basically equating the Muslim world with mindless creatures who will reflexively respond to a given stimulus in a predictable manner. Wave a flag in front of a bull and the bull will charge. But Muslims are supposed to be thinking, intelligent people, not mindless creatures of instinct. Therein lies the difficulty. But that is exactly how some that are now against this type of analogy, are the same that would use that kind of analogy regarding these types of situations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted September 17, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 I can never figure out why left-wingers seem to have problems with nuclear power, and with the U.S. having nuclear-tipped missiles in Europe (remember the nuclear freeze demonstrations) but have no problem with Iran having weapons. There are mysteries in life. Chernobyl and Fukushima (which is still a total disaster) are the reasons people have problems with nuclear power. Fukishima alone has done more damage than an Iranian nuclear strike would ever do. So no it's not much of a mystery. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted September 17, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 More evidence that you take your life into your own hands when you become a foreign diplomat for the US stationed in a Muslim-dominated country. Things as bad as people claim them under Gadaffi, were still much much better than the current situation the west helped to create. Same thing happened in Iraq and STILL happening in Iraq. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted September 17, 2012 Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 I can never figure out why left-wingers seem to have problems with nuclear power, and with the U.S. having nuclear-tipped missiles in Europe (remember the nuclear freeze demonstrations) but have no problem with Iran having weapons. There are mysteries in life. Your premise is all wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkman Posted September 17, 2012 Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 Things as bad as people claim them under Gadaffi, were still much much better than the current situation the west helped to create. Same thing happened in Iraq and STILL happening in Iraq. So maybe Obama was wrong to push regime change there? I always thought it odd that they single out Libya and ignored all the rest. Syria's case is much worse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bud Posted September 17, 2012 Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 (edited) So maybe Obama was wrong to push regime change there? I always thought it odd that they single out Libya and ignored all the rest. Syria's case is much worse. you're so consumed with this right/left, republicans/democrats bs that you can't comprehend that there are people who condemn actions done by different groups. Edited September 17, 2012 by bud Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted September 17, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 So maybe Obama was wrong to push regime change there? I always thought it odd that they single out Libya and ignored all the rest. Syria's case is much worse. I believe the real threat from Libya was a monetary one. To be more specific Libya was about to offer another trading market for oil using the gold Dinar. Many african leaders had signed on to this. This would have given some control of the world oil market to Africa which is a direct threat to the US petro-dollar. You cannot trade oil on the world market without using the US currency. So even though the USA does not control the oil in all countries, it controls the currency oil is traded in. Obama was definitely wrong, more to say the people who gather the intelligence for Obama were wrong. Once again, we were sold 'humanitarian' reasons, which was absolutely false. Libya also did not have a central bank tied into the global ponzi scheme that is the global financial market. As far as I understood, Libya was debt free and all the money from the nationalized oil production went back into Libya and back to the people. It's what helped paid for the aquifer system. It's what helped Libya become the so called 'Jewel of Africa'. People were educated and healthy. Now all that is destroyed. I would put money on it that the numbers of people opposed to Gadaffi were in the acute minority. But remember it was Italy and France that had an issue with Libya regarding the oil trade. And once the no fly zones kicked in, both of them backed out and let the rest of NATO handle Libya. NATO messed up a country and put it into complete turmoil bythe same people that NATO helped arm and fund to oust Gadaffi. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted September 17, 2012 Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 Chernobyl and Fukushima (which is still a total disaster) are the reasons people have problems with nuclear power. Fukishima alone has done more damage than an Iranian nuclear strike would ever do. So no it's not much of a mystery. yes, I don't like nuclear weapons but I'm okay if canada had some, if you want a military deterrence nukes will do it...another chernobyl or fukishima is what I don't want built in our country or anywhere if at all possible... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted September 17, 2012 Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 So maybe Obama was wrong to push regime change there? I always thought it odd that they single out Libya and ignored all the rest. Syria's case is much worse. Any time you "push regime change" in a place you know nothing about you are really just rolling the dice, and you dont know what the result will be or how much blowback you will get and what it will be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted September 17, 2012 Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 So maybe Obama was wrong to push regime change there? I always thought it odd that they single out Libya and ignored all the rest. Syria's case is much worse. syria is much better armed, it's military more professional and dangerous than libya's...why does the US suck up to china but shitte on cuba?...because it can and profit(china)trumps human rights... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted September 17, 2012 Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 Where there are extremists. That's the point of the article. Wasn't responding to your article, was responding to the OP. On another note, anyone who participated in violence in response/protest to the film is a fool, and believes in a foolish ideology of whatever variant of Islam they think they adhere to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BubberMiley Posted September 17, 2012 Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 On another note, anyone who participated in violence in response/protest to the film is a fool... Everyone agreed with that point from the start. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted September 17, 2012 Report Share Posted September 17, 2012 (edited) On another note, anyone who participated in violence in response/protest to the film is a fool as much a fool as those who made the film or those who believe the film is accurate...fools everywhere on both sides of the issue... Edited September 17, 2012 by wyly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted September 18, 2012 Report Share Posted September 18, 2012 (edited) Things as bad as people claim them under Gadaffi, were still much much better than the current situation the west helped to create. Same thing happened in Iraq and STILL happening in Iraq. Was Germany better off after Hitler was gone? Economically, it was a mess. Was that the issue?I guess it depends what you call better. because it is the 16th anniversary of the Abu Salim prison massacre. On June 29, 1996 the murder of 1270 prisoners was carried out by the Qaddafi regime. It was seven years before people found out, as family members continued to bring money and food for the dead prisoners, and the prison continued to accept them. This is the first year they will be able to openly commemorate that tragedy without fear of government repression. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/06/30/1104200/-Is-Libya-better-off-than-it-was Not saying war for oil is a good thing ... but neither was Ghadaffi. Edited September 18, 2012 by jacee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted September 18, 2012 Report Share Posted September 18, 2012 Moonlight Graham, on 16 September 2012 - 10:18 PM, said: More evidence that you take your life into your own hands when you become a foreign diplomat for the US stationed in a Muslim-dominated country. Jacee Where there are extremists. That's the point of the article. Wasn't responding to your article, was responding to the OP. On another note, anyone who participated in violence in response/protest to the film is a fool, and believes in a foolish ideology of whatever variant of Islam they think they adhere to. Agreed.Just making the point that all " Muslim dominated countries" shouldn't be vilified because of the actions of a few extremists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted September 18, 2012 Report Share Posted September 18, 2012 I'm not sure what's so hard for you folks to understand. The bigger and better armed you are, and the less well armed your potential enemies, the stronger and more secure your position (in general). Iran has aligned itself to stand against Western interests, and so we don't want it to have weapons that pose a threat to us or our allies. It's really pretty simple and straightforward. Some people are too f*****g stupid to understand that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted September 18, 2012 Report Share Posted September 18, 2012 Jones is not taking any blame or responsibility for his obvious provocation actions. So, if he wants to take a serious look at violent Islam, maybe he should try a different approach. Now because of the showing, two embassies were attacked, one in Cairo and the other in Benghazi and one US citizen was killed.... Jones says he is not responsible for their actions, but yet making a film critical of Islam provoking the unstable conditions in both Egypt and Libya got Americans killed. Let's see if I get this. In France, a murderer attacked a synagogue in Toulouse, killing seven innocent students. See Link 1 and Link 2. Did the French Ambassador to Israel even once fear a random, senseless attack on his embassy by enraged Israelis? Do the Polish and German ambassador to Israel fear random, senseless revenge attacks? Maybe Israel would get the support in the world that the Islamists enjoy if they began engaging in random violence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted September 18, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 18, 2012 Let's see if I get this. In France, a murderer attacked a synagogue in Toulouse, killing seven innocent students. See Link 1 and Link 2. Did the French Ambassador to Israel even once fear a random, senseless attack on his embassy by enraged Israelis? Do the Polish and German ambassador to Israel fear random, senseless revenge attacks? Maybe Israel would get the support in the world that the Islamists enjoy if they began engaging in random violence. Um I thought we cleared this up some pages ago that Jones is not even part of this equation. We can dispense with the notion that this film is the cause of these attacks. That much seems evident now. These attacks were coordinated and planned. And the operation seems to be quite complex giving it happened in Egypt and Libya at the same time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted September 18, 2012 Report Share Posted September 18, 2012 Um I thought we cleared this up some pages ago that Jones is not even part of this equation. We can dispense with the notion that this film is the cause of these attacks. That much seems evident now. These attacks were coordinated and planned. And the operation seems to be quite complex giving it happened in Egypt and Libya at the same time. Al Qaeda is the king of multiple senseless coordinated operations. My point is that there is a "civilized world" and a savage world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted September 18, 2012 Report Share Posted September 18, 2012 Just making the point that all " Muslim dominated countries" shouldn't be vilified because of the actions of a few extremists. No they certainly shouldn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BubberMiley Posted September 18, 2012 Report Share Posted September 18, 2012 My point is that there is a "civilized world" and a savage world. Have you ever had another point? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted September 18, 2012 Report Share Posted September 18, 2012 as much a fool as those who made the film or those who believe the film is accurate...fools everywhere on both sides of the issue... Oh they're fools ... with the right to express bigotry freely. But they aren't criminals like those who committed the violence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.