The ..2012.... Political thread
-
jaipur:
It's an example of the types of decisions made in the Oval Office. That is what is being considered for these candidates. I can't say with absolute certainty that it would never be considered. And that's the point: They don't follow the president around with the "football" for nothing. One of the three will get it next. The proposed invasion of Japan is common in any american history class...maybe you missed it: "Intelligence studies and military estimates made 50 years ago, and not latter-day speculation, clearly indicate that the battle for Japan might well have resulted in the biggest blood-bath in the history of modern warfare. Far worse would be what might have happened to Japan as a nation and as a culture. When the invasion came, it would have come after several months of fire bombing all of the remaining Japanese cities. The cost in human life that resulted from the two atomic blasts would be small in comparison to the total number of Japanese lives that would have been lost by this aerial devastation. "
and where is the Japanese point of view?
-
The_Fool:
That last election -- John Kerry did not have a plan -- he said with empty words -- but would not say what his plan was ... now there is another guy -- who seems to give good speeches -- but many times does not say what his plan is -- (same party ) ... B.O. At this time I do not plan on voting for the two who want to move the direction of this country to a socialist -type of agenda (my opinion only -- no cut and paste support -- or anything of the sort) However .... that only leaves a few standing -- and at this time I am not that convinced that they will do the job well either -- so it is an usure feeling about the whole thing so far
I get the same feeling, and I'm not american, maybe it's better so I don't have to worry over my vote. I would have to worry over my Spanish vote . You know, "go ahead, throw away your vote, vote for none of the two parties" . It's Democrazy... haha... PS: What is so special in Obama?. I try hard to see it but I don't. Bono talks good of him, Clooney so, ok, but I don't see anything, he doesn't say anything, and his web there's not anything that is out of the ordinary. (In his speeches he sounds like a good singer but without good songs...) That doesn't mean I'd prefer Clinton or a Rep. Only that I haven't find that special... well... he's black... that sure is a new thing for a President, but for the rest I don't see a thing. We're globalized, so the gov there influences here, and the gov here influences everywhere too. Like any gov change in Russia, China, France, UK or any... Cuba . But I don't think there's gonna be any CHANGE really.
-
21st Century Paul:
The_Fool:
That last election -- John Kerry did not have a plan -- he said with empty words -- but would not say what his plan was ... now there is another guy -- who seems to give good speeches -- but many times does not say what his plan is -- (same party ) ... B.O. At this time I do not plan on voting for the two who want to move the direction of this country to a socialist -type of agenda (my opinion only -- no cut and paste support -- or anything of the sort) However .... that only leaves a few standing -- and at this time I am not that convinced that they will do the job well either -- so it is an usure feeling about the whole thing so far
I get the same feeling, and I'm not american, maybe it's better so I don't have to worry over my vote. I would have to worry over my Spanish vote . You know, "go ahead, throw away your vote, vote for none of the two parties" . It's Democrazy... haha... PS: What is so special in Obama?. I try hard to see it but I don't. Bono talks good of him, Clooney so, ok, but I don't see anything, he doesn't say anything, and his web there's not anything that is out of the ordinary. (In his speeches he sounds like a good singer but without good songs...) That doesn't mean I'd prefer Clinton or a Rep. Only that I haven't find that special... well... he's black... that sure is a new thing for a President, but for the rest I don't see a thing. We're globalized, so the gov there influences here, and the gov here influences everywhere too. Like any gov change in Russia, China, France, UK or any... Cuba . But I don't think there's gonna be any CHANGE really.
Obama is a different kind of candidate and would represent real change for the US and the world. One of the major differences is that his campaign is financed by ordinary people and not big business/special interests. Hillary and especially McBush (McCain) campaigns are mainly paid for by special corporate interests. The main reason we have the Iraq War is the oil companys lobby. The reason we are in a health care crisis is because of the drug and insurance companys lobbyists. It's all because of the money. So, Obama is trying to get the special interest money out of Washington. If you go to his website you can see the countdown of individual people who have contributed over 1 MILLION, and a person is never counted twice...I asked. There are other differences bwt him and the other candidates but I think that would create the greatest change. The american people getting their government back Peace
-
Ok, I'm for Obama again! I think his wife is an incredibly neat person! She'd make a Great first lady! ...and I mean that seriously!
-
PHILLIP:
jaipur:
It's an example of the types of decisions made in the Oval Office. That is what is being considered for these candidates. I can't say with absolute certainty that it would never be considered. And that's the point: They don't follow the president around with the "football" for nothing. One of the three will get it next. The proposed invasion of Japan is common in any american history class...maybe you missed it: "Intelligence studies and military estimates made 50 years ago, and not latter-day speculation, clearly indicate that the battle for Japan might well have resulted in the biggest blood-bath in the history of modern warfare. Far worse would be what might have happened to Japan as a nation and as a culture. When the invasion came, it would have come after several months of fire bombing all of the remaining Japanese cities. The cost in human life that resulted from the two atomic blasts would be small in comparison to the total number of Japanese lives that would have been lost by this aerial devastation. "
and where is the Japanese point of view?
Their point of view was called pearl harbor. Sounds like you need some history courses.
-
There is a mix of serious and fun - and off the wall things in politics .... (at home) If I have just enough to pay the bills or slightly not enough and have to bum money somehow .... then I have to get my budget in order. I do not go out and buy a boat, an expensive painting, a new car, and put a new addition on to my house. [the reason for that above] for the country - if things are as bad as stated financially -- then it is time to get the budget on track and in order. So why are the politicians promising more things that of course cost more money!! Your money Tax tax tax up they must go --- the government should not be in place to create more government and grow and grow --- they are going beyond their meaning. promises of many new programs have a price
-
mustangsally10:
mustangsally10:
Here is interesting article that you will need to read as it includes the projected amount of the US deficit in January 2009 to be about 400 billion usd http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/budget_deficit/ And here is US Dept clock: http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/ which is kind of fun to watch if you enjoy watching dept grow by the seconds And not to be outdone here is the Cost of Iraq War Clock which also shows the cost of the war as it increases by the second http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home All brought to you courtesy of the Republican Pary of the US and the US taxpayers Peace
according to the Congressional Research Service the Iraq War is costing US taxpayers $222,222 PER MINUTE That is something to be scared of... The Cost of Iraq War Clock above is interesting because you can set it to tell you how much of a share of cost your state is paying
Speaking of the US economy here is the breakdown of the costs for the Iraq occupation take a look at the cost per second U.S. Spending on Iraq and Afghanistan by Month, Week, Day, Hour, Minute, & Second by Travis Sharp [contact information] Updated February 25, 2008 U.S. SPENDING ON IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN BY MONTH, WEEK, DAY, HOUR, MINUTE, & SECOND (based on adjusted DOD FY 2007 obligations) Iraq Afghanistan Total Per Month $10.3 billion $2 billion $12.3 billion Per Week $2.4 billion $469 million $2.9 billion Per Day $343 million $67 million $410 million Per Hour $14 million $2.8 million $17 million Per Minute $238,425 $46,296 $284,722 Per Second $3,973 $771 $4,745 SOURCE: Data from Amy Belasco, ?The Cost of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Other Global War on Terror Operations Since 9/11,? Congressional Research Service (updated February 8, 200. Totals may not add due to rounding. The direct cost of the Iraq occupation to satisfy McBushs wet dream of 100 years in Iraq : $12,531,618,000,000. sorry about the alignment on the figures obviously 1st figures Iraq, 2nd Afghanistan and 3rd Total. Almost impossible to balance a budget looking at the combination of figures above...looks pretty bleak. The Republicans have throw the US citizens under the bus. ps...There is a new book coming out by Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz called THE THREE TRILLON DOLLAR WAR. In it he calculates all costs including rehab costs for injured soldiers which is massive. He calculates from the figures above the amount each US household pay for the Iraq War each month. That is $138.00 usd Here is link for info re book: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/feb/28/iraq.afghanistan
-
jaipur:
PHILLIP:
jaipur:
It's an example of the types of decisions made in the Oval Office. That is what is being considered for these candidates. I can't say with absolute certainty that it would never be considered. And that's the point: They don't follow the president around with the "football" for nothing. One of the three will get it next. The proposed invasion of Japan is common in any american history class...maybe you missed it: "Intelligence studies and military estimates made 50 years ago, and not latter-day speculation, clearly indicate that the battle for Japan might well have resulted in the biggest blood-bath in the history of modern warfare. Far worse would be what might have happened to Japan as a nation and as a culture. When the invasion came, it would have come after several months of fire bombing all of the remaining Japanese cities. The cost in human life that resulted from the two atomic blasts would be small in comparison to the total number of Japanese lives that would have been lost by this aerial devastation. "
and where is the Japanese point of view?
Their point of view was called pearl harbor. Sounds like you need some history courses.
Sounds like you need some manners. To bad you could not prove your point. :
-
The point was proven. Simply because you don't agree with it does not disprove it. As I said originally whether you thought it was "right" or "wrong" isn't the point....how tyou think hese candidates would have responded in that scenario is.
-
McBush I like it. Do you think McBush and his mistress would swear in front of a grand jury under oath that his did not have sex with this woman like Clinton was forced to do. That he did not give political favors for sex. Has her body turned up floating anywhere? She certainly has not made any public appearances . I guess this is old news thanks to the contol of the American airwaves by the Rep party. Wow they even took away freedom of the press. Powerful evil people.
-
mustangsally10:
21st Century Paul:
The_Fool:
That last election -- John Kerry did not have a plan -- he said with empty words -- but would not say what his plan was ... now there is another guy -- who seems to give good speeches -- but many times does not say what his plan is -- (same party ) ... B.O. At this time I do not plan on voting for the two who want to move the direction of this country to a socialist -type of agenda (my opinion only -- no cut and paste support -- or anything of the sort) However .... that only leaves a few standing -- and at this time I am not that convinced that they will do the job well either -- so it is an usure feeling about the whole thing so far
I get the same feeling, and I'm not american, maybe it's better so I don't have to worry over my vote. I would have to worry over my Spanish vote . You know, "go ahead, throw away your vote, vote for none of the two parties" . It's Democrazy... haha... PS: What is so special in Obama?. I try hard to see it but I don't. Bono talks good of him, Clooney so, ok, but I don't see anything, he doesn't say anything, and his web there's not anything that is out of the ordinary. (In his speeches he sounds like a good singer but without good songs...) That doesn't mean I'd prefer Clinton or a Rep. Only that I haven't find that special... well... he's black... that sure is a new thing for a President, but for the rest I don't see a thing. We're globalized, so the gov there influences here, and the gov here influences everywhere too. Like any gov change in Russia, China, France, UK or any... Cuba . But I don't think there's gonna be any CHANGE really.
Obama is a different kind of candidate and would represent real change for the US and the world. One of the major differences is that his campaign is financed by ordinary people and not big business/special interests. Hillary and especially McBush (McCain) campaigns are mainly paid for by special corporate interests. The main reason we have the Iraq War is the oil companys lobby. The reason we are in a health care crisis is because of the drug and insurance companys lobbyists. It's all because of the money. So, Obama is trying to get the special interest money out of Washington. If you go to his website you can see the countdown of individual people who have contributed over 1 MILLION, and a person is never counted twice...I asked. There are other differences bwt him and the other candidates but I think that would create the greatest change. The american people getting their government back Peace
hmmm... okey if he is independent from the big companies... then he could bring new proposals... as the others are not independent, but again I do not see them. For instance, is there anything he would like to do about Iraq different to the others?
-
appletart2:
McBush I like it. Do you think McBush and his mistress would swear in front of a grand jury under oath that his did not have sex with this woman like Clinton was forced to do. That he did not give political favors for sex. Has her body turned up floating anywhere? She certainly has not made any public appearances . I guess this is old news thanks to the contol of the American airwaves by the Rep party. Wow they even took away freedom of the press. Powerful evil people.
: If you want to be taken seriously.......stop reading the blogs..
-
jaipur:
The point was proven. Simply because you don't agree with it does not disprove it. As I said originally whether you thought it was "right" or "wrong" isn't the point....how tyou think hese candidates would have responded in that scenario is.
No matter how you color it, you did not prove your point. There's still time, you have 50 years of history to look into. I'll be waiting, but I'm sure you won't come through.
-
PHILLIP:
jaipur:
The point was proven. Simply because you don't agree with it does not disprove it. As I said originally whether you thought it was "right" or "wrong" isn't the point....how tyou think hese candidates would have responded in that scenario is.
No matter how you color it, you did not prove your point. There's still time, you have 50 years of history to look into. I'll be waiting, but I'm sure you won't come through.
I am not coloring anything. It seems you might be unfortunately. You requested that I "back up" the view on the invasion of japan. And so I did for your benefit. That was not from the 1990s but from the period in which it occurred. In my neighborhood, that's called "proof". You're the one who said that there wasn't any. Obviously there is. Presidents make decisions on what is known at the time, not 50 or 60 years after the fact. And as I suggested originally in my post, thinking about these 2008 candidates, what would they do three months into their term as Truman was with that scenario is what is relevant here, not whether you agree or disagree with what was actually done. How a voter views the candidates and what choice they believe that candidate would make helps in guiding their choice. As there is usually a guy with an attache case following the president wherever they go, it seems to be a reasonable approach.
-
jaipur:
PHILLIP:
jaipur:
It's an example of the types of decisions made in the Oval Office. That is what is being considered for these candidates. I can't say with absolute certainty that it would never be considered. And that's the point: They don't follow the president around with the "football" for nothing. One of the three will get it next. The proposed invasion of Japan is common in any american history class...maybe you missed it: "Intelligence studies and military estimates made 50 years ago, and not latter-day speculation, clearly indicate that the battle for Japan might well have resulted in the biggest blood-bath in the history of modern warfare. Far worse would be what might have happened to Japan as a nation and as a culture. When the invasion came, it would have come after several months of fire bombing all of the remaining Japanese cities. The cost in human life that resulted from the two atomic blasts would be small in comparison to the total number of Japanese lives that would have been lost by this aerial devastation. "
and where is the Japanese point of view?
Their point of view was called pearl harbor. Sounds like you need some history courses.
so in the wars USA are always the "good ones" and the others are "the bad ones"... like American movies characters... there's is good and bad in every nation. Nobody (outsides the USA) believes now in the "saviour legend" of the USA, even after hundred of Hollywood movies. What is the next country that is supposed to attack you so you can start another war? After Vietnam, Afganistan, Korea, Japan, Iraq... ok, some country in Asia.
-
-
21st Century Paul:
jaipur:
PHILLIP:
jaipur:
It's an example of the types of decisions made in the Oval Office. That is what is being considered for these candidates. I can't say with absolute certainty that it would never be considered. And that's the point: They don't follow the president around with the "football" for nothing. One of the three will get it next. The proposed invasion of Japan is common in any american history class...maybe you missed it: "Intelligence studies and military estimates made 50 years ago, and not latter-day speculation, clearly indicate that the battle for Japan might well have resulted in the biggest blood-bath in the history of modern warfare. Far worse would be what might have happened to Japan as a nation and as a culture. When the invasion came, it would have come after several months of fire bombing all of the remaining Japanese cities. The cost in human life that resulted from the two atomic blasts would be small in comparison to the total number of Japanese lives that would have been lost by this aerial devastation. "
and where is the Japanese point of view?
Their point of view was called pearl harbor. Sounds like you need some history courses.
so in the wars USA are always the "good ones" and the others are "the bad ones"... like American movies characters... there's is good and bad in every nation. Nobody (outsides the USA) believes now in the "saviour legend" of the USA, even after hundred of Hollywood movies. What is the next country that is supposed to attack you so you can start another war? After Vietnam, Afganistan, Korea, Japan, Iraq... ok, some country in Asia.
72 interventions since the second world war
2 mins 50 secs. Later in another interview Johns questions got too diificult , the interview was suddenly ended and John asked to leave. The British Government are no better......this is a disgrace If everyone would turn off sky / fox news....we may all get a better picture. -
moggy:
72 interventions since the second world war
2 mins 50 secs. Later in another interview Johns questions got too diificult , the interview was suddenly ended and John asked to leave. The British Government are no better......this is a disgrace If everyone would turn off sky / fox news....we may all get a better picture.The Shame of the world.
-
21st Century Paul:
moggy:
72 interventions since the second world war
2 mins 50 secs. Later in another interview Johns questions got too diificult , the interview was suddenly ended and John asked to leave. The British Government are no better......this is a disgrace If everyone would turn off sky / fox news....we may all get a better picture.The Shame of the world.
I am ashamed to be English watching the second one. I DID know about it, but i didnt realise that it was done under a Labour Government. It seems like 'old 'Labour were no better than 'new ' labour ( but NL are still contining the lies from the 60s) When something happens to my dog (which i hope is a long time ) i am going to get a rail pass , and do some traveling around Europe....i am sick of this country. I visited Bacelona about 4 years ago....loved it The Israel - Palestinian problem may become a major item in the election, with what is going on.....45 Palestians blown up, and Isreal threatening a holocaust.
-
Well, recently has been the USA but I can talk about what Spain did in America, and all the indians killed. And the leaders of all that had their face of the paper money!. That has been the only good thing of having euros, not using anymore that paper money. And Russia and Germany and every country has a bad story behind. That's what built them... land is not given for free... it was for Israel... and still they are in war for it. What can I say... I hate politics. I'm glad now Spain is not part of something like that... we didn't enter World War II cause we had a Civil War then... I'm not very glad of being Spanish either. Milions were killed in that civil war and there's a lot of anger even now about it. No country is good no-one is saviour, there's not "bad guys" in power, no "good guys" either, it's the same everywhere and all it's history repeated. Bruce Springsteen is gonna sing a song... about a man who went "to kill the yellow man"- Born in the USA
Bruce's for President!