PirateKing
█▀█▀█ █ █
oh i forgot this was a political thread.....well im outta here bitches. PeaCE.:hatsoff:
Chris Matthews: What has the Republican Party done for The People...
- Thread starter HELLRAISER
- Start date
You and BlueBalls hit it spot on. Every comment about anything can be construed as offensive if you are looking to use offense as the end-all argument ender.
LOL...no comment...:hatsoff:
I like how Bush inherited a budget surplus from Clinton and turned it into a massive deficit for Obama to inherit 
This is the political non-sense that never seems to end ...
Anyone with a basic understanding of economic knew 2000 was a horrible year for businesses. In fact, had it not been for a slight growth in Q2, the recession would have been official before Clinton left office.
Looking at a "snapshot" of the deficit/surplus versus actual rates of rates of change in the is exactly like using algebra versus calculus. The rate of change in the deficit (rate of rate of change in debt) was in a massive, steep dive at the end of 2000.
In fact, even Clinton agrees that some of the current economic issues were the result of changes by the Republican Congress around 1996-1997 (both Clinton and W. agree here). Remember, Clinton may have been President from 1993-2000, but Congress was controlled by Republicans 1995+.
So, who get praise/fault here? The Republican Congress? Or Clinton? And before you think it was Clinton from 1993-1994, I highly recommend you look at the Democrat's and Clinton's own OMB statements at the end of 1994.
In reality, it was the 100% false wealth that came crashing down in 2000, just like again in 2007. Tens of trillions of dollars suddenly no longer existed, making past statements and revenue false. Enron and other companies did not happen during W.
That's the problem, and hardly Clinton or W.'s fault. We've been outsourcing and switching to a consumer-based economy since the late '80s. Until the US dollar tanks and has serious inflation, it's not going to correct itself.
Which is what happened in the late '70s through early '80s. You think it's bad now? Give it a few more years. And then we'll have the Obama v. W. "who started it / who made it worse" debates. In reality, it's this political non-sense that pisses me off.
Because Americans want to blame leaders for their own stupidity as both consumers and business decision makers. And consumers who solely blame the business decision makers need to ask themselves why businesses have outsourced. Again, look in the mirror -- Americans want cheap shit.
The surplus was destroyed right after W. got in, with job losses hitting in March/April of 2001. This was not W.'s doing at all.I like how Bush inherited a budget surplus from Clinton and turned it into a massive deficit for Obama to inherit
Anyone with a basic understanding of economic knew 2000 was a horrible year for businesses. In fact, had it not been for a slight growth in Q2, the recession would have been official before Clinton left office.
Looking at a "snapshot" of the deficit/surplus versus actual rates of rates of change in the is exactly like using algebra versus calculus. The rate of change in the deficit (rate of rate of change in debt) was in a massive, steep dive at the end of 2000.
In fact, even Clinton agrees that some of the current economic issues were the result of changes by the Republican Congress around 1996-1997 (both Clinton and W. agree here). Remember, Clinton may have been President from 1993-2000, but Congress was controlled by Republicans 1995+.
So, who get praise/fault here? The Republican Congress? Or Clinton? And before you think it was Clinton from 1993-1994, I highly recommend you look at the Democrat's and Clinton's own OMB statements at the end of 1994.
In reality, it was the 100% false wealth that came crashing down in 2000, just like again in 2007. Tens of trillions of dollars suddenly no longer existed, making past statements and revenue false. Enron and other companies did not happen during W.
That's the problem, and hardly Clinton or W.'s fault. We've been outsourcing and switching to a consumer-based economy since the late '80s. Until the US dollar tanks and has serious inflation, it's not going to correct itself.
Which is what happened in the late '70s through early '80s. You think it's bad now? Give it a few more years. And then we'll have the Obama v. W. "who started it / who made it worse" debates. In reality, it's this political non-sense that pisses me off.
Because Americans want to blame leaders for their own stupidity as both consumers and business decision makers. And consumers who solely blame the business decision makers need to ask themselves why businesses have outsourced. Again, look in the mirror -- Americans want cheap shit.
PirateKing
█▀█▀█ █ █
Re: This is the political non-sense that never seems to end ...
its easier to just to blame bush. Anyways the defecit created from spending on the Iraq war certaintly didnt help. Doesnt really matter who erased the surplus he plunged us way into the negative.
The surplus was destroyed right after W. got in, with job losses hitting in March/April of 2001. This was not W.'s doing at all.
Anyone with a basic understanding of economic knew 2000 was a horrible year for businesses. In fact, had it not been for a slight growth in Q2, the recession would have been official before Clinton left office.
Looking at a "snapshot" of the deficit/surplus versus actual rates of rates of change in the is exactly like using algebra versus calculus. The rate of change in the deficit (rate of rate of change in debt) was in a massive, steep dive at the end of 2000.
In fact, even Clinton agrees that some of the current economic issues were the result of changes by the Republican Congress around 1996-1997 (both Clinton and W. agree here). Remember, Clinton may have been President from 1993-2000, but Congress was controlled by Republicans 1995+.
So, who get praise/fault here? The Republican Congress? Or Clinton? And before you think it was Clinton from 1993-1994, I highly recommend you look at the Democrat's and Clinton's own OMB statements at the end of 1994.
In reality, it was the 100% false wealth that came crashing down in 2000, just like again in 2007. Tens of trillions of dollars suddenly no longer existed, making past statements and revenue false. Enron and other companies did not happen during W.
That's the problem, and hardly Clinton or W.'s fault. We've been outsourcing and switching to a consumer-based economy since the late '80s. Until the US dollar tanks and has serious inflation, it's not going to correct itself.
Which is what happened in the late '70s through early '80s. You think it's bad now? Give it a few more years. And then we'll have the Obama v. W. "who started it / who made it worse" debates. In reality, it's this political non-sense that pisses me off.
Because Americans want to blame leaders for their own stupidity as both consumers and business decision makers. And consumers who solely blame the business decision makers need to ask themselves why businesses have outsourced. Again, look in the mirror -- Americans want cheap shit.
its easier to just to blame bush. Anyways the defecit created from spending on the Iraq war certaintly didnt help. Doesnt really matter who erased the surplus he plunged us way into the negative.
Re: This is the political non-sense that never seems to end ...
Then again, Americans are now against the Afganistan war too -- something Obama has always supported. Furthermore, it's ironic to see the left go from complaining about W. not making the distinction between Afganistan and Iraq to doing the same thing now.
Understand that the US took on both A) nearly tens of trillions of dollars in lost value as a result of the .COM bust, and B) an immediate 400B and multiple trillions of after-shocks from 9/11. These were not W.'s fault at all, but Clinton had little to do with them as well.
The two things W. is actually responsible for are: C) Open two war fronts, D) build up and lose over tens of trillions of dollars in the housing bust.
After the loss of factories in the late '80s, we had the loss of stock wealth in the late '90 and now we've had the loss of even mortgage wealth in the late '00s. There is nothing left in the US but commodities. It's been worse every single time.
This is our own, damn fault. We're now undergoing what the British did after Suez. But unlike the British, there is no "US" to secure world resources for us. China is not our friend and has their own growing mouths to feed, and is willing to side with genocidal governments to get it.
Which is why I have been advocating, since the '90s, that the US needs to focus on only the Americas. It's the only feasible future for us. And yes, this means the EU is fucked as a result of loss of the US protectorate. The US has numerous resources the EU does not, and can get out of the Americas when it does not.
I do, however, see a rebirth of the greater British Commonwealth as a result though. How far it will go, I don't know. Canada and Australia have already expressed interests in removing themselves from it -- especially the latter.
Sorry, but until Americans recognize the world we've built for ourselves, we'll continue to fuck ourselves.
I don't disagree at all.
Then again, Americans are now against the Afganistan war too -- something Obama has always supported. Furthermore, it's ironic to see the left go from complaining about W. not making the distinction between Afganistan and Iraq to doing the same thing now.
Or we plunged way into the negative during his administration.
Understand that the US took on both A) nearly tens of trillions of dollars in lost value as a result of the .COM bust, and B) an immediate 400B and multiple trillions of after-shocks from 9/11. These were not W.'s fault at all, but Clinton had little to do with them as well.
The two things W. is actually responsible for are: C) Open two war fronts, D) build up and lose over tens of trillions of dollars in the housing bust.
After the loss of factories in the late '80s, we had the loss of stock wealth in the late '90 and now we've had the loss of even mortgage wealth in the late '00s. There is nothing left in the US but commodities. It's been worse every single time.
This is our own, damn fault. We're now undergoing what the British did after Suez. But unlike the British, there is no "US" to secure world resources for us. China is not our friend and has their own growing mouths to feed, and is willing to side with genocidal governments to get it.
Which is why I have been advocating, since the '90s, that the US needs to focus on only the Americas. It's the only feasible future for us. And yes, this means the EU is fucked as a result of loss of the US protectorate. The US has numerous resources the EU does not, and can get out of the Americas when it does not.
I do, however, see a rebirth of the greater British Commonwealth as a result though. How far it will go, I don't know. Canada and Australia have already expressed interests in removing themselves from it -- especially the latter.
Mariahxxx
Official Checked Star Member
i read earlier in the post that "killing civilian would be wrong" by dropping bombs on the mountains of Afghanistan and Pakistan. however, those cowardly pieces of shit use those civilians as shields and those civilians believe in the causes of those terrorists or they don't speak up against them. they do nothing while their people are put in the bills eye of the rest of the world. they hide them. why is bin Laden still free with a $50 million reward? he is hiding among the poorest people on earth yet no one will turn him in?
They wear no uniform, they hide among children and families and they don't believe any of us are innocents because we are not Muslim. Why show them compassion? if we don't take it to them on their terms we will continue to be targeted and we will lose this fight.
They wear no uniform, they hide among children and families and they don't believe any of us are innocents because we are not Muslim. Why show them compassion? if we don't take it to them on their terms we will continue to be targeted and we will lose this fight.
Mariahxxx
Official Checked Star Member
oh and I love hearing about the "surplus" that Clinton left us. I ask this to you libs,,,,who was the majority in congress 6 of the 8 years of Clinton? Newt was a major reason for Bill's legacy. Bill signed every single Repub economic bill. who wrote those? NOT Bill or Hillary!
Please, at least give credit where it's due. Bill didn't do nearly what you guys claim he did. He was pulled left but he went right more than 70% of the time when it came to budget and THAT's why there was surplus.
Please, at least give credit where it's due. Bill didn't do nearly what you guys claim he did. He was pulled left but he went right more than 70% of the time when it came to budget and THAT's why there was surplus.
meesterperfect
Hiliary 2020
yeah either that or the white christian terrorists will get us first.
for real, i dont know if bombing them into oblivion will stop them.
best to just cut ties with ALL people in that region.
for real, i dont know if bombing them into oblivion will stop them.
best to just cut ties with ALL people in that region.
PirateKing
█▀█▀█ █ █
The way i see it dropping bombs on the mountains is like.....well i cant think of an analogy. but its overkill is what i was gonna say. like i said earlier theres about 1,000 Al queda at best and they are spread sporatically across the middle east and northern africa, with an estimate of about 100 in afghansitan. dropping bombs is hardly going to do anything. A Troop surge isnt really the right approach to it either if they are hiding. A situation like this requires counter-terrorist tactics. You know, assasination missions as such.
I think the word you are grasping for is Mercy. Merely choosing not to kill innocent civillians is setting the bar fairly low for compassion.
Quote:
True Christian compassion, say the Gospels, should extend to all, even to the extent of loving one's enemies.
From the section titled christian compassion here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compassion
I have to say you are quite precise on who knows what about whom up there in the mountains, even unto who should get the hammer. I'm wondering where you get your intelligence?
PirateKing
█▀█▀█ █ █
Well said. its unfortunate that these days the true christian way is twisted by the belief that those who do not accept christianity are inferior and deserve to be exterminated.
Mariahxxx
Official Checked Star Member
i don't mean bombs that are just going to explode...I mean dirty bombs that will contaminate the entire regions for decades so that they cannot hide. You warn them prior to doing it and you setup high security check points to monitor everyone evacuating. you use intel from drones and satellite images to monitor everything and if anyone is left that isn't passed through or picked up then you do it. it's been discussed and there was supposedly an attempt to detonate one of the taliban's own bio bombs so it would be their own catastrophe but it didn't work.
if you delete their hiding places then you seriously reduce their chances of hiding much longer.
if you delete their hiding places then you seriously reduce their chances of hiding much longer.
Mariah what you propose would almost certainly lead to an all out nuclear exchange between us and the russians.As the line went from the character General Black in the classic movie "fail safe" about nuclear weapons when they were discussing limited nuclear war "once those things start dropping you won't be able to limit a damn thing".Radiation and fallout does not confine itself to boundaries.Thats been the box we have been in since at least the mid 60s, we and the russians have spent all this money on nukes but can't ever dare use them, for if we do the world as we know it along with most of the people will be gone in short order.
PirateKing
█▀█▀█ █ █
what he said. anyways when it comes to biological weapons theres the consequence of long term environmental damage and psychological/physical effects it has on the civilians. We have never really tested the dirty bomb. Also i should bring up that using biological weapons like agent orange during the vietnam war turned out to be a bad idea.
For a moment lets just pretend that these scenario plays out perfectly and all the bad guys die. Do you think that would be the end of it? Or perhaps there may might be repercussions from this action. For instance scapegoating innocent muslims and fucking up their homeland has been a runaway success in Palestine. And by success I mean a complete clusterfuck that will never ever be resolved.
Have you perhaps considered why this option has never been attempted?
1) It would spike a recruitment drive for the radical elements that we are currently combatting. It would spike monetary support for these elements also. In short, they will have plenty more places to hide with plenty more peolpe wanting to hide them.
2) It would increase the likliehood that those nations that currently "drag their feet" in helping us (Pakistan, Saudi Arabi, etc) would give up even that level of support. And in the case of Pakistan a possible realignment with contrary objectives to our own.
3) Current allies in the war on terror would be outraged. If you think that a diplomatic weakness is not a problem then you are naive. Think of how business gets done in the world. It would be a problem for US trade.
4) Nations that are not currently enemies but have dark ambitions would now have a useful precedent to follow when dealing with "Problems" of their own. (ie China, Russia)
And on and on and on. There is no magic military option that will solve this problem. There are however, a milliion and one ways to fuck it up. This would be one of them.
No way.
Mariahxxx
Official Checked Star Member
I didn't say nuclear. I meant a bio bomb. something that would make those hills uninhabitable for 20 or 30 years.
the reason that Afghanistan is so hard to win is because of the terrain. if you flush them from the hidey holes then it becomes a much different game.
the reason that Afghanistan is so hard to win is because of the terrain. if you flush them from the hidey holes then it becomes a much different game.
Similar threads
