|
Post by Iowafan1 on Jun 8, 2008 3:19:02 GMT -6
Iowafan, Just to be clear. WE live in the best country on earth. We have amazing opportunities here. People do come here to improve lives. We are all products of that. I will do anything to help make this country better. Now, on to some of your poor assumptions: 1. "libs feel we're in the worst economic times"..... not true. Maybe some feel that way, but I don't. I do think that our government (both sides) has been incredibly myopic, and that our current regime's arrogance may cost us allies and trading partners in the future. This is my opinion, but it isn't too far fetched. 2. Our standard of living, on the whole, is decidedly not number one in the world, regardless your mid night candy bar and coors infused delusions. 3. Our health coutcomes, on the whole, are decidedly not number one. 4. The previous two items aren't really debatable, despite your intention to do so. I will grant you that the very richest of Americans are truly living large, and that is part of the American dream, I understand. However, the dispartiy between working poor and very wealthy is really growing. Personally, I'm on the positive end of that, so it doesn't pinch me. However, this argument is based upon two different viewpoints. Yours, which asserts that we have the best standard of living may be true for you, as you seem to have made a nice living for yourself. Same for me. My argument is also true when you look at the OVERALL picture in America. This is what you're missing. Look, before you crack open another Coors and talk about a welfare state, stop. I'm not suggesting one. I'm pointing out some FACTS about our OVERALL picture in this country. Of note, I have not seen a ton of scandanavian immigrants the last few years. Mexican, yes. So, once again, your points are valid to a point, but they miss the mark, and therefore, miss my entire original point. I'm wondering if you're so brainwashed that you start typing before you finish reading others' posts?? www.cis.org/articles/2007/back1007.htmlImmigration statistics link 2000-2007. Racer, do you honestly think you're the only one who takes all the parameters you mentioned in to consideration when determining quality of life? I certainly do, Master Chief does and I would imagine that everyone else in the world does as well. That being said, after people consider these parameters, the overwhelming percentage of people emigrating from their places of birth choose to immigrate here. Find just one Country that people choose to immigrate to more than the USA or one Country that absorbs and welcomes new immigrants as much as the USA and you will have an argument. You can't play off immigration choices as "Iowafan1"s indoctrinated life experiences". It doesn't play. Immigration is factual more people want to visit and/or live in the United States than anywhere else in the world. They don't make those choices because our quality of life isn't top notch. As for me being "indoctrinated" toward the Conservative side of the aisle because I was a career Military man doesn't wash either. Damn Racer! You are ex Military yourself. When was the last time you had an "indoctrination" meeting to ensure you towed the Conservative line in the Military? I never had one. The Military doesn't indoctrinate you to be "Pro-American" or "Pro-Conservative". You generally join the Military because you already feel that way. You certainly reenlist or make it a career because you feel that way. I never had to be told by anyone to be +Pro-Conservative". I just so happen to believe that Conservative ideals are the best ideals to carry you through life and make our Country a better place. I readily admit to being an American flag waver and that I am Unconditionally loyal to USA, but its not blind loyalty. The USA has earned my loyalty whatever its faults may be. To say that the quality of life in the USA is second to none isn't a stretch at all. The immigration statistics make it a fact. As far as your affinity for praising Canada's medical system over the USA's, I'll repost the same links I post in another thread for my best friend Thunderhawk. There are thousands more, but here are a few: Canada's "wonderful" health care system: "For prompt attention and immediate treatment, thousands of Canadians flock to hospitals in Detroit, Seattle, Cleveland, Buffalo, N.Y, and Rochester, Minn. American facilities quietly alleviate the shortage pressures that the Canadian system inevitably creates. They act as a safety valve without which the Canadian system would labor under much greater strain. The American safety valve also may help explain the popularity of the Canadian health- care system. If a short trip across the border permits Canadians to escape some visible shortcomings of their system, they may learn to live with it, no matter how unsatisfactory it is. Unfortunately, for millions of Canadians, there is no escape; they wait patiently on long waiting lists and in overcrowded waiting rooms.".......Hans Stennholz, Ph.D...."Will Corporate America Copy Canada's Calamity?" Even Brian Mulroney had his medical care in the USA. There are thousands of links directed at the Canadian health care fiasco, but I'm busy and only have time to throw a few up for you. Here goes...... www.canadafreepress.com/2004/klaus071204.htmwww.ecumedical.com/about_us.htmlwww.healthcarebs.com/2008/03/01/canadian-cardiac-patients-rushing-to-us/www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/h/hillarys-health-care-plan.htmwizbangblog.com/content/2007/07/2....care-system.phpwww.canada.com/montrealgazette/st....44329e1&k=98040www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/2006/10/04/miscarriage-apology.htmlmarketplace.publicradio.org/displ....d_waiting_room/www.thestar.com/article/250707www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2002/10/11/bc_emerg021011.htmlwww.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/2006/07/26/miscarriage.htmlcupe.ca/s44f3302f7c125/privatization__the_ewww.cbc.ca/canada/story/2005/04/28/coroner050428.htmlnews-alert.blogspot.com/2008/02/o....estminster.htmlwww.canada.com/calgaryherald/news....3c33f88&k=36972sfcmac.wordpress.com/2008/05/27/c....ingand-waiting/forum.canadianparents.com/ubbthre....t&Number=583214www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=20320www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=15524cdhc.ncpa.org/commentaries/canadians-wait-longer-for-medical-carewww.insure.com/articles/healthinsurance/canadian-medical-care.htmlwww.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=2812www.realclearpolitics.com/article....t_card_for.htmlgetinnowhealth.com/www.onthefencefilms.com/commentary/stuart/krugman.htmlwww.elderweb.com/home/node/2636blog.acton.org/archives/2220-Will....-Canadians.htmlYou're still good in my book Racer!
|
|
|
Post by Iowafan1 on Jun 8, 2008 3:26:59 GMT -6
By the way Racer.....that avatar picture of you looks like it was taken on a flight deck. When and where? I was the CVW-17 Airwing Maintenance Chief on board the Connie (CV-64) and the USS Saratoga (CV-60). Did Sara'a last four cruises prior to it's decommissioning after the 92 med cruise. Never experienced shore duty and I made 13 cruises during my career, so maybe we cruised together? Just wondering.
|
|
|
Post by Solar Stud on Jun 8, 2008 5:24:23 GMT -6
Greetings from Guam. Iowafan is right, visiting and spending time in other countries without doubt gives you an appreciation for what we have and take for granted everyday. Pulling out of Iraq before they have a working government and a solid defense is a bad idea. I am not defending how we got to this point, just looking at the best way ahead. McCain gets the vote based on that issue. We have a few professors onboard right now from the U of W giving cultural awareness briefs. One is an Iraqi professor that is praying for a McCain victory based on Obamas platform. He is way to worried about what the affect that Iran is going to have on his country without our presence there. Interesting stuff to learn. Hey Master Chief, I did my first tour in Guam with VQ-1 at NAS Agana way back when. Great place. Guam is to Japan what Hawaii is to Americans. Make sure you attend a fiesta and try the Chicken Kelaguen while you're there! I spent four years on Guam...99-03. Got my golf handicap down to 6 (no fooling)...wonderful paradise.
|
|
|
Post by Master Blaster on Jun 8, 2008 5:38:00 GMT -6
Hey Master Chief, I did my first tour in Guam with VQ-1 at NAS Agana way back when. Great place. Guam is to Japan what Hawaii is to Americans. Make sure you attend a fiesta and try the Chicken Kelaguen while you're there! I spent four years on Guam...99-03. Got my golf handicap down to 6 (no fooling)...wonderful paradise. Guam is hot as hell. And you are right about the numerous Japanese. I am one of the few americans at the hotel right now. I'll have to try the chicken....
|
|
|
Post by socal on Jun 8, 2008 8:53:58 GMT -6
1) I don't agree with how we got involved, we did not think it all the way through prior to invading. I do think that action against that country was warranted, given there blatent attacks on our patrols of the no-fly zone, the blatent disregard for over 8 years of UN sanctions, the persecution and genicide of the Kurdish people, the brutal dictatorship that Saddam ran. 2) It is absolutely imparative that we leave that country when the time is correct, not before then. What happens five years from now if a year from now all our troops are removed? Obama won't try and address that issue. 3) If you believe that he can conduct talks with Iran's leadership and believe anything that guy says, I want what you are smoking. Where is Saudi Arabia and the help they promised now that the Saddam threat has been eliminated? Hell, they condemn some of the actions we are currently doing now. Why are they not helping with troops? 4) JM has at least thought it through and acknowledges the undesirable truth that is Iraq. It ain't great news, but it is what needs to be done to maintain stability in the region. Without us, what happens to the region? 5) What if Iran invades or at the very least gets involved with helping to rebuild the country and influence the Iraqi gov't? 6) I believe in common sense and vote who I think best faces that truth and acts accordingly. McCain wins on that accord. 1) I understand that you're not as up on recent news, but two stories over the past week have provided an amazing amount of additional evidence that it wasn't a case of "thinking it all the way through"... there were absolute cases of Bush & Co. making false statements (lying) about WMD evidence. Not adhering to strictly enforced No-Fly zones, or bypassing UN sanctions --- is not nearly enough of a reason to invade a country & kill a few hundred thousand of their people. Don't rewrite history to make you more comfortable. When you have some time, Google Hans Blix (Chief UN inspector)... Here is a link discussing some of the lies by the Bush admin: tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/06/todays_must_read_348.php... and remember, Saddam gassed the Kurds in 88 (& 91?) (During Reagan & Daddy Bush's term - when he was our friend and we sold him the gas to do so). 2) I'll give you a quote from just over one year ago: www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/06/AR2007060602291.htmlWhile nobody knows exactly what will happen should we leave, it's now a proven fact - that even with our presence there for an extended period of time, many bad things happen. Every false line in the sand given by this administration (the Iraqis have trained X troops, elections will result in Y, etc.) have proven absolutely hollow 6 months, 1yr, 2yrs, etc. following those pronouncements. I'm sure you know the adage: Continuing to perform the same action over & over, but expecting a different result... 3) If you are meaning speaking with Ahmedinejad... you may be correct. But he has exactly zero power to influence Iranian policy or their military. That power falls to the Supreme Leader (Ali Khameni)... whom is both much more religious & much less outspoken in his offensive rhetoric. Re: Saudi Arabia... I think you & I both know the main reasons why a regime with an eerily similar history to that of Saddam - isn't acted against. 4) JM hasn't thought it through. Democracy by its definition - cannot be forced externally. It's quite a silly thought to think a country of a few hundred years in age, can tell a society a few millennia in age - how to survive & get along with their neighbors. 5) Iran HAS been involved in rebuilding the country & influencing the Iraqi government. I can't begin to name the countless examples (I'll dig if you'd like)... here's one: matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/03/the_stakes_2.php... basically, WE ARE ALREADY backing Iranian organizations in Iraq, and have been doing so for quite some time. This even discounts the wonderful story of the "Iraqi" ex-patriate that we paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to every month & whom was seated next to Laura Bush during the 2003 or 2004 State of the Union... whom turns out to have been feeding us lines from the Iranians & under their control (Ahmed Chalabi). 6) Common sense is relative. See my definition of "insanity" in the last line of #2.
|
|
|
Post by Norm "racerhawk" Parker on Jun 8, 2008 12:34:18 GMT -6
By the way Racer.....that avatar picture of you looks like it was taken on a flight deck. When and where? I was the CVW-17 Airwing Maintenance Chief on board the Connie (CV-64) and the USS Saratoga (CV-60). Did Sara'a last four cruises prior to it's decommissioning after the 92 med cruise. Never experienced shore duty and I made 13 cruises during my career, so maybe we cruised together? Just wondering. The avatar is GW Bush. Sorry! gotta run. busy today...
|
|
|
Post by Master Blaster on Jun 8, 2008 20:55:57 GMT -6
I've said many times that Iraq II was probably a dumb move. We acted without thought for follow through. Iran influence without our presence would be gigantic. Democracy for this country is not the right answer, but neither is leaving without ensuring that at the very least Iraq has become at least a nuetral country able to stand on its own. Probably the right answer for a government is something similar to the Saudi Arabia government. Iran scares the hell out of me. A country that openly calls for the extermination of Isreal, one of our staunchest allies. If I were running, I'd pull back the troops to locally established bases, cut back the numbers some and provide training and support to the local government. Also would try and get the infastructure of the country back up and running with basics. I'll discuss my views on Bush come Jan when he is no longer the CIC. At least Hillary is out of the picture.
|
|
|
Post by HawksStock on Jun 8, 2008 21:02:08 GMT -6
then let isreal have iran, master cheif, why should we spend a cent on them.
|
|
|
Post by Master Blaster on Jun 8, 2008 21:10:51 GMT -6
Because they are our allies. We made a commitment to help and protect them. And if Isreal takes out Iran, well, the middle east will go from interesting to a nightmare in a very short amount of time. Nobody will be able to afford oil if that happens.
|
|
|
Post by mattahawk on Jun 8, 2008 21:31:10 GMT -6
Because they are our allies. We made a commitment to help and protect them. And if Isreal takes out Iran, well, the middle east will go from interesting to a nightmare in a very short amount of time. Nobody will be able to afford oil if that happens. You got that right MC. Israel don't need anyones help, I don't think, taking out Iran but they are our ally and if they go to war you can bet we will be right there beside them. That is actually the one thing I liked about hillary. She said if Iran messed with Israel we would wipe them off the face of the earth. She actually gained a little respect after that. Meanwhile Obama wants to smoke a peace pipe and talk about brotherly love.
|
|
|
Post by socal on Jun 8, 2008 22:07:29 GMT -6
Because they are our allies. We made a commitment to help and protect them. And if Isreal takes out Iran, well, the middle east will go from interesting to a nightmare in a very short amount of time. Nobody will be able to afford oil if that happens. Remember, you're talking about Iran - a country with the GNP similar to the GDP for the State of Illinois. They (Iran) aren't boogeymen, with leaders that hold no value on their own lives. Israel has enough of an arsenal (and the historical tenacity to go after leaders that killed their people)... to take care of themselves against the likes of Iran.
|
|
|
Post by socal on Oct 9, 2008 11:39:52 GMT -6
Bumping an old discussion... Interesting insights that now seem quite old.....
|
|
|
Post by mattahawk on Oct 9, 2008 20:58:51 GMT -6
Yeah, Iran is according to one news channel, about 6 months from acquiring nukes. If they get much closer I think Israel is going to pull the plug on Iran. $4 gasoline will be a bargain. I honestly think they will pull the trigger by next spring.
|
|
|
Post by socal on Oct 9, 2008 21:03:16 GMT -6
I always wondered what you did... now I know. You're obviously a physicist.
Due to your obviously intimate knowledge of nukular weapons manufacturing.
|
|
|
Post by mattahawk on Oct 10, 2008 8:00:53 GMT -6
I always wondered what you did... now I know. You're obviously a physicist. Due to your obviously intimate knowledge of nukular weapons manufacturing. Hey, how did you know? I am guessing you are a some type of mathematical genius due to your ability to add 2 + 2 ? So what you don't have the balls to disagree that Israel won't wait for economic sanctions to take effect against Iran? Let me guess, you don't know what to say so you don't say anything?
|
|
|
Post by socal on Oct 10, 2008 8:32:45 GMT -6
I always wondered what you did... now I know. You're obviously a physicist. Due to your obviously intimate knowledge of nukular weapons manufacturing. Hey, how did you know? I am guessing you are a some type of mathematical genius due to your ability to add 2 + 2 ? So what you don't have the balls to disagree that Israel won't wait for economic sanctions to take effect against Iran? Let me guess, you don't know what to say so you don't say anything? I'll spell it out for the idiots in the audience... ECONOMIC SANCTIONS HAVE BEEN IN PLACE FOR IRAN FOR CLOSE TO 30 FRIGGIN' YEARS NOW. (unless you're an offshore subsidiary to Halliburton or another oil company of course, then you can do business with Iran) www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7119752/Similar to our petulant disagreements with Cuba, those countries continue to exist & trade with everyone else on Earth BUT us. (We're sure showing them...) PS - let me make one guess as to what that news station was that you mentioned with "Iran is according to one news channel, about 6 months from acquiring nukes." PPS - When was that statement made? Because I heard that same statement from multiple news sources that were simply parroting the Administration's line starting 2+ years ago. PPPS - Unfortunately for the administration (like you and your news source, that continues to fail at whatever argument you attempt)... The most recent Iran NIE's said: "Tehran halted an alleged nuclear weapons program in fall 2003, and that it remained halted as of mid-2007. The estimate further judged that US intelligence did not know whether Iran intended "to develop nuclear weapons," but that "Iran probably would be technically capable of producing enough HEU [highly enriched uranium] for a weapon sometime during the 2010-2015 time frame" if it chose to do so." Again, having the uranium is one thing - knowing what to do with it is another. Perhaps you could enlist your genius help to them... You'd only fuck it up & make it a longer "non next 6 month" window... Here's a link for you to print up & bring with you: www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/intro/u-centrifuge.htm
|
|
|
Post by Norm "racerhawk" Parker on Oct 16, 2008 6:10:57 GMT -6
Dear Goober, Have you been watching what's going on in the world lately? McNasty has been contraditcting himself left and right, and so have most republicans. You folks talk about small government and low taxes, yet that is a lie. For a couple of enormous reasons: 1. The bailout. Socializing our banking system may be necessary at this point, but please quit beating the "we're for small government" drum. It's just, well, a lie. Where does that bailout money come from? 2. The ill-conceived war. How many trillions by the end, and what was accomplished? I'm sure you'll say we "spread" freedom. So, the republican candidate here is not ideologically consistent, and intellectually dishonest. Meh. Obama whining about the economy is like Castro complaining about human rights. Nobody claims the economy is perfect, but we didn't build this... i30.photobucket.com/albums/c317/bguy77/ForeignGNPasUSStates.jpgwith a bunch of neo-marxist, pro-union, anti-business policies. Americans have no idea how good the center right regimes of the post WWII era have made things in the US. Seriously, try going to any left or center-left country (France, Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, etc.) and seeing how those people live. Amen Auto.....you hit the nail on the head. The libs keep chasing the car that they believe is a complete government takeover of our lives and complete substanance for those who choose not to support themselves. "From those to have the most to those who have the least". When they finally catch that car and we are france, they'll regret chasing it in the first place. I have been fortunate enough to travel throughout most of the world....the good, the bad and the absolutely horrendous....the developed and the completely undeveloped and will say without a doubt that all these Countries around the world that the libs want us to emulate don't hold a shadow to us. See the Greendex for proof. There is a good reason why the majority of immigrants, legal and illegal, want to immigrate here and its not because they want to go to the America the libs want us to be....its because they want to go to the America we used to be and still have remnants of. Once the libs start taking trips around the world, they would realize just how good we got it here. Kind of like taxes. If the libs had to write a check for their taxes every month, they would be reborn after the first check and would be demanding that our tax rates come down and that most of these government giveaway programs be shut down.
|
|
|
Post by Norm "racerhawk" Parker on Oct 16, 2008 6:18:47 GMT -6
Because they are our allies. We made a commitment to help and protect them. And if Isreal takes out Iran, well, the middle east will go from interesting to a nightmare in a very short amount of time. Nobody will be able to afford oil if that happens. You make a lot of good points, but we cannot be the only country of the world in this effort. We simply don't have the resources to be an eternal world police force, in my opinion. It would seem that the Bush doctrine (I know what that means even if the republican VP candidate doesn't) will prove to be very, very expensive and largely ineffective. One could argue that the jury's still out on that one, but is the correct thing to take pre-emptive action on countries that we believe may do bad things? I think our experience in Iraq has displayed vividly that this is a disastrous policy.
|
|
|
Post by iammrhawkeyes on Oct 16, 2008 10:00:57 GMT -6
[ I'll spell it out for the idiots in the audience... ECONOMIC SANCTIONS HAVE BEEN IN PLACE FOR IRAN FOR CLOSE TO 30 FRIGGIN' YEARS NOW. (unless you're an offshore subsidiary to Halliburton or another oil company of course, then you can do business with Iran) www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7119752/Similar to our petulant disagreements with Cuba, those countries continue to exist & trade with everyone else on Earth BUT us. (We're sure showing them...) PS - let me make one guess as to what that news station was that you mentioned with "Iran is according to one news channel, about 6 months from acquiring nukes." PPS - When was that statement made? Because I heard that same statement from multiple news sources that were simply parroting the Administration's line starting 2+ years ago. PPPS - Unfortunately for the administration (like you and your news source, that continues to fail at whatever argument you attempt)... The most recent Iran NIE's said: "Tehran halted an alleged nuclear weapons program in fall 2003, and that it remained halted as of mid-2007. The estimate further judged that US intelligence did not know whether Iran intended "to develop nuclear weapons," but that "Iran probably would be technically capable of producing enough HEU [highly enriched uranium] for a weapon sometime during the 2010-2015 time frame" if it chose to do so." Again, having the uranium is one thing - knowing what to do with it is another. Perhaps you could enlist your genius help to them... You'd only f**k it up & make it a longer "non next 6 month" window... Here's a link for you to print up & bring with you: www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/intro/u-centrifuge.htmPS I didn't realize that you were biased against Memri TV. A fine organization. PPS June 20, 2008 by IAEA Director Dr. Muhammad Elbaradei. To be precise, it was 6-12 months to produce one nukular weapon. PPS Looks like your NIE estimate is a year old. Were you in that time machine again? The only thing that the estimate has done, at least temporarily, is take our military option bargaining chip off of the table. Nice work. www.memritv.org/clip/en/1797.htm
|
|