This is true, Stinkle raises some good points about needing to defend our nation from hostile forces, you raise some good points about not stomping the world in the process.
There is a balance to be found.
Is Bush going to find that balance?
why aren't you a partisan sellout?
- Thread starter $tinkle
- Start date
There is a balance to be found.
Is Bush going to find that balance?
Will Kerry???
Sometimes the devil you know is preferable to the devil you don't. Kerry appears to me an unquantifiable variable, most likely by his own design. A man that stands for nothing is not worth standing with, in my opinion.
Vote for Kerry... he's not Bush!Originally posted by llkoolkeg
Will Kerry???
Sometimes the devil you know is preferable to the devil you don't. Kerry appears to me an unquantifiable variable, most likely by his own design. A man that stands for nothing is not worth standing with, in my opinion.
That remains the question. I'm not sure.Originally posted by llkoolkeg
Will Kerry???
Sometimes the devil you know is preferable to the devil you don't. Kerry appears to me an unquantifiable variable, most likely by his own design. A man that stands for nothing is not worth standing with, in my opinion.
I do like that Kerry is willing to address the USA Patriot Act, he isn't going to just leave Iraq in a lurch, and he has better plan on education.
we invoked democracy to defend our democracy. by now, i have loosened my grip on the hope you would understand.
i see.Originally posted by Changleen
That's all you have in mind isn't it? The American interest, nothing else. What about the rest of the world? It seems increasingly apparant that you don't give aabout anyone else. Why should we give a crap about you? That is so playground. Why don't you grow up and realise that unless the world can exist in peace then everyone is in a world of crap? It's pretty simple really!
so we should have gone along with the indefensible & hypocritical Durban conference on racism.
or the kyoto treaty.
you ever heard of Victor Davis Hanson? he has poignantly said:
post for our viewing pleasure the uniforms of the taleban &/| al-qaeda. Once you do this, you may be on your way to invoking the GC rules of engagement. Until then, you're being intellectually lazy.
having a short attention span day, are we?
you're tilting at windmills if you think israel "invaded" a land incorrectly echoed by so many as "palestine", belonging to "palestinians". Bone up on thousands of years of history before you start parroting that israel belongs to anyone else but the jews.
really? like having a plan for rooting out a viable & active terrorist threat named al-queda, but not acting on it like the clinton admininstration? You mean that hypocrisy?
You just said you ignore democracy when it suits you...????
If you seriously believe that, then you are a retard who is destined to spend the rest of his life in conflicts. Is that what you want? Try thinking ANYTHING through for just a little longer than you normally do.
I don't know about the Durban conference but Kyoto, even with it's flaws - YES! Instead Bush has ignored and repealed most of the decent environmental policy the US has ever created, started digging in Alaska, put the burden of cleaning up on the public purse rather than the people who cause the pollution and invested even more of America future in Fossil fuels. SENSIBLE!
What because 'God' gave it to them? Whatever. Religious rhetoric aside, I was trying to make the point that there's more than one way to look at every issue. Although you have demonstrated again and again that you don't seem to be capable of doing this. This, like the rest of your 'retorts' are just ways to avoid the issues I have brought to your attention.
It seems to me that when faced with rational arguments from a variety of sources you continually avoid the points being made.
Why?
Apparantly it IS that hard for you to accept.
You will never be told, but you can probably work it out.
$tink.... don't waste your time with ultra-liberal, United States/Israel bashing, Greenie weenie party, Euro-trash...
They can't vote anyway...
They can't vote anyway...
Thats it I am getting a yard stick for the pissing contest Stinkle and Changleen
Neither one of you can give an inch....that is cool. I do it too.
BTW - welcome Changleen, I don't remember you posting in here before this)
Rhino"I am the one who doens't proofread"fromWA
Neither one of you can give an inch....that is cool. I do it too.
BTW - welcome Changleen, I don't remember you posting in here before this)
Rhino"I am the one who doens't proofread"fromWA
at least this retard can read. Are you too busy grazing on crumbs caught in your overalls? Maybe your prayer flag which you wear as a do-rag is a bit taut.
know this: when the fight is brought to me, i'm not going to seek my neighbor's approval to respond, or try & reason w/ someone who wants to kick - and is still kicking - my ass. (the preceding was a metaphor for the war on terror)
if you don't know about the durban conf, then why are you trying to argue your global village position? Please list (not assert) the decent environmental policy the US has ever created, then follow with what bush has ignored/repealed. I'm no fan of the current administrations env policy, but your statement smacks of partisan rhetoric. If by "digging in alaska" you mean taking soil & geo samples, so what? We can't get off the saudi teet & not drill in our own land for the short term. It's not possible unless you want to pay $5/litre for petrol. I assume you mean anwar, but am unsure. Please play your cards face up.
i was making the point that on this issue, the anti-semites have it wrong, and their positions are not supported by the facts. What's that snappy comeback you keep nattering? "is that so hard to accept?"
retorts? You mean the way i quote your inconsistency & hypocrisy in the same thread? Or maybe it's my distraction tactic of quoting "convenient parts" of the GC:
still waiting on those uniforms.
See, this is the fundamental difference 'tween you & I. I demonstrate where your argument is flawed, & you gush at fluff for regurgitating one sided stories from the beeb.
Please substantiate that claim.
Changleen, you're too new here to start slamming people. $tinkle's a respected member here, so if you wanna place to hang and debate, welcome, stick around, but if you start pissing people off on day one, you'll just get ignored.
And we already have someone to ignore, in a lovable way, so that position is filled.
And we already have someone to ignore, in a lovable way, so that position is filled.
I like republican fiscal policy (not Bush's though) but I hate their stance on abortion, minority rights, and all of the social stuff.
Thus, the Dems are the lesser of 2 evils :devil:
Thus, the Dems are the lesser of 2 evils :devil:
What? I never got that memo...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/3515502.stm
title: "Freed Afghans condemn Cuba prison"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/...ter/3504034.stm
title: "Guantanamo Briton 'was tortured'"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3506774.stm
title: "Guantanamo man condemns treatment"
i know, i know, the content may actually be fairly making claims for both sides.
Wha...????
Stinkle is a member all right...
yeah, like you've backed up your words
take a breather and find another thread.Whoa! Keep that ego in check... who said I was talking about you?! I was talking about ignoring ummbikesOriginally posted by N8
Wha...????
Speaking of whom, has anyone seen him around lately?
Originally posted by LordOpie
yeah, like you've backed up your words
Whoa! Keep that ego in check... who said I was talking about you?! I was talking about ignoring ummbikes
HAHA!!!
$tink.....
WHAT THE HELL DID WE DO TO DESERVE SEEING THAT...????
WHAT THE HELL DID WE DO TO DESERVE SEEING THAT...????
Oh, nice, more personal insults as a comeback.
That's just great. Kill and destroy first, ask questions later. Brilliant. Well, good luck with that. I'm sure the war on terror will be over really soon...
I meant, I'm not sure if it was right to be a part or not to be a part of it, not 'I've never heard of it'. Jeeze.
OK, I don't need to, plenty of other sensible people have been doing it for me... Just take a look at March for a start!
Have a read of this for a start It starts in 2001 and goeas all the way through to the present day.
Seriously, it's well known (you practically admit it yourself) that Bush has been the worst Pres. for the Environment pretty much ever! Alaska:
Click here
By 'cleverly' quoting from my point in different arguments? Hey look, If I cut and paste from what you've said I can make 'I am a sensible Libertarian' - which is clearly rubbish.
Dude, The Geneva convention was written to govern the conduct of warfare between civilized nations. I don't think the people who wrote it were anticipating that the most technologically advanced army in the world would be invading a country with a GDP lower than many of it's medium sized businesses.
Your argument is 'They didn't wear uniforms (they don't have a organised army or enough money to pay for them), so we don't have to obey the Geneva convention and can do what ever we like to them.' NICE! How utterly mature.
I could argue that the Geneva convention states that since they weren't wearing uniforms, they clearly weren't soldiers, so what were you doing fighting them in the first place?
This would obviously be ridiculous, though, so one would expect that as a civilized country you would attempt to apply the principles of the Geneva convention where possible, such as the rights of Prisoners of War. However, it seems as though the US ignored these principals (see all the links I posted above, if you bothered to read them) and despite being the invading force, acted like , well, however the hell they wanted.
Oh, you do? You demonstate your arguments? Is this some new meaning of demonstrate I am apparantly not familiar with? It seems to me I'm the one providing numerous independant sources to verify and back up my arguments, and rspond to your questions whereas all you do is avoid the argument and post a single link to the contents of the Geneva Convention, which you pick a single passage from, then attempt to use this one passage to justify your ignoring of all the rest of it and the principals on which it was founded. That is so full of sh*t I can't beleive it.
Please answer Yes or No to the following statements:
I believe that striking back at someone who has struck me is the correct way to proceed.
I really believe that if my enemy is not wearing a uniform I am within my rights to treat them however I like, ignoring all principals of international law.
I believe it is OK that my country consumes 25% of the world's resources, despite only having 2% of the worlds population.
I believe that my president labeling three countries and 107 million humans as 'Evil' over and over again is helpful and constructive in international affairs.
So give up all your conviences and move liberated self to Myazhutzastan...
Black, white...
Northern European countries have the worlds highest living standards and yet consume less than their 'fair percentage' of resources. It's not about 'giving up' conveniences, it's about sensible energy and environmental policy and not wasteful.
It would be easy for the US to drastically cut its guzzling of the worlds resources, but vested interests have power over your 'democracy', so nothing ever changes. The US continues to increase it's dependance on fossil fuels, create more non-biodegradable waste and frankly, not give a
about it.
The US has some reasons for high energy consumption. Chiefly, the vast land area it sits on.
I'd like to see some stats comparing per capita energy usage between the US and Canada. That comparision makes a lot more sense to me than per capita use between the US and the Netherlands.
I'd like to see some stats comparing per capita energy usage between the US and Canada. That comparision makes a lot more sense to me than per capita use between the US and the Netherlands.
Why is energy consumption size dependant? I presume you are talking about the need for transportation. As the largest and one of the most technologically advanced countries in the world, the US should be pioneering more effecient ways of environmentally friendly transportation, such as more trains and less reliance on fossil fuel.
Interesting Stats from here :
Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Marianne Lamont Horinko (Acting)
Total Energy Consumption (2001E): 96.2 quadrillion Btu (2002E): 97.9 quadrillion Btu (25% of world total energy consumption)
Energy-Related Carbon Emissions (2001E): 1,565 million metric tons of carbon (about 24% of world total carbon emissions)
Per Capita Energy Consumption (2001E): 341.8 million Btu
Per Capita Carbon Emissions (2001E): 5.5 metric tons of carbon
Energy Intensity (2002E): 10,805 Btu/$1995
Carbon Intensity (2002E): 0.17 metric tons of carbon/thousand $1995
Sectoral Share of Energy Consumption (2002E): Industrial (34%), Transportation (27%), Residential (21%), Commercial (18%)
Fuel Share of Energy Consumption (2002E): Oil (39%), Natural Gas (24%), Coal (22%), Nuclear (8%), Hydroelectricity (3%), Other "renewables" (3%)
Fuel Share of Carbon Emissions (2001E): Oil (44%), Coal (36%), Natural Gas (20%)
Renewable Energy Consumption (2002E): 5.9 quadrillion Btu (about 45% of which was conventional hydroelectric power)
Status in Climate Change Negotiations: Annex I country under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (ratified October 15th, 1992). Under the negotiated Kyoto Protocol (signed on November 12th, 1998 - not ratified), the United States agreed to reduce greenhouse gases 7% below 1990 levels by the 2008-2012 commitment period.
Major Environmental Issues: Air pollution resulting in acid rain in both the US and Canada; the US is the largest single emitter of carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels; water pollution from runoff of pesticides and fertilizers; very limited natural fresh water resources in much of the western part of the country require careful management; desertification.
This is 2001 Data, so it doesn't include Bush's dumping of Kyoto.
Interesting Stats from here :
Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Marianne Lamont Horinko (Acting)
Total Energy Consumption (2001E): 96.2 quadrillion Btu (2002E): 97.9 quadrillion Btu (25% of world total energy consumption)
Energy-Related Carbon Emissions (2001E): 1,565 million metric tons of carbon (about 24% of world total carbon emissions)
Per Capita Energy Consumption (2001E): 341.8 million Btu
Per Capita Carbon Emissions (2001E): 5.5 metric tons of carbon
Energy Intensity (2002E): 10,805 Btu/$1995
Carbon Intensity (2002E): 0.17 metric tons of carbon/thousand $1995
Sectoral Share of Energy Consumption (2002E): Industrial (34%), Transportation (27%), Residential (21%), Commercial (18%)
Fuel Share of Energy Consumption (2002E): Oil (39%), Natural Gas (24%), Coal (22%), Nuclear (8%), Hydroelectricity (3%), Other "renewables" (3%)
Fuel Share of Carbon Emissions (2001E): Oil (44%), Coal (36%), Natural Gas (20%)
Renewable Energy Consumption (2002E): 5.9 quadrillion Btu (about 45% of which was conventional hydroelectric power)
Status in Climate Change Negotiations: Annex I country under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (ratified October 15th, 1992). Under the negotiated Kyoto Protocol (signed on November 12th, 1998 - not ratified), the United States agreed to reduce greenhouse gases 7% below 1990 levels by the 2008-2012 commitment period.
Major Environmental Issues: Air pollution resulting in acid rain in both the US and Canada; the US is the largest single emitter of carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels; water pollution from runoff of pesticides and fertilizers; very limited natural fresh water resources in much of the western part of the country require careful management; desertification.
This is 2001 Data, so it doesn't include Bush's dumping of Kyoto.
ditto!Originally posted by N8
$tink.....
WHAT THE HELL DID WE DO TO DESERVE SEEING THAT...????
I'm sorry for calling you a faeg... I love you too, please don't do that to us again. If we ever upset you again, we'll sacrafice Zod as an apology.
Changleen, if you dislike the USA so much, why are you here?
Interesting...????
Look Guys, don't get me wrong. I don't hate the USA. I actually quite like it!
I freaking live here for sake. The US has some of the most beautiful and varied geography in the world. I've met loads of really cool people.
What bothers me SO MUCH though, is George Bush's IDIOT policies, his obvious disregard for logic and your country and the world. I don't know why some people find it so hard to see, but take from me as a citizen of the 'outside' world - at no point in your history has the US as a whole been more hated, ridiculed, despised and just seen a hinderance to world peace than ever before. Why should this happen just because of one Guy and his buddy's desire to get even richer than they already are at the expense of anything, even world peace?
I watch American news, and I know a lot of it is owned and controlled by a few huge multinationals, who with the possible exception of NBC are republican friendly. Please trust me when I say, most news you get here is very very one sided. During the latest Iraq conflict, whole episodes in which Europe and Asia got really pissed off with American troops tactics WERE NOT EVEN REPORTED in your mainstream media. I know because I looked for it.
Look, what really bothers me is that America could be the greatest thing to happen to Planet Earth for a long time, but instead, under GW, it's turning the whole thing to ****. Sometimes I feel like he's TRYING to make enemies. What I also hate is that some people just refuse to see it. It's fine to love your country, it's fine to feel aggreaved by 9/11, it was an outrage no question about it, but PLEASE try and see the reasons behind it. Those guys didn't attack you for no reason, and what GW is doing about it IS NOT helping!
I freaking live here for
sake. The US has some of the most beautiful and varied geography in the world. I've met loads of really cool people.What bothers me SO MUCH though, is George Bush's IDIOT policies, his obvious disregard for logic and your country and the world. I don't know why some people find it so hard to see, but take from me as a citizen of the 'outside' world - at no point in your history has the US as a whole been more hated, ridiculed, despised and just seen a hinderance to world peace than ever before. Why should this happen just because of one Guy and his buddy's desire to get even richer than they already are at the expense of anything, even world peace?
I watch American news, and I know a lot of it is owned and controlled by a few huge multinationals, who with the possible exception of NBC are republican friendly. Please trust me when I say, most news you get here is very very one sided. During the latest Iraq conflict, whole episodes in which Europe and Asia got really pissed off with American troops tactics WERE NOT EVEN REPORTED in your mainstream media. I know because I looked for it.
Look, what really bothers me is that America could be the greatest thing to happen to Planet Earth for a long time, but instead, under GW, it's turning the whole thing to ****. Sometimes I feel like he's TRYING to make enemies. What I also hate is that some people just refuse to see it. It's fine to love your country, it's fine to feel aggreaved by 9/11, it was an outrage no question about it, but PLEASE try and see the reasons behind it. Those guys didn't attack you for no reason, and what GW is doing about it IS NOT helping!
simple fact is, we already had enemies, we will always have enemies... no matter what peace efforts we try. That's just human nature.
No one really likes the police, but they are necessary and the USA is the world's police, for better or worse. If not US, then who? The UN? France? China?
We may not always do the right thing for the right reason, but I believe that we do the right thing sometimes, even if by accident. And it's better to do something, than nothing.
Spring break man, I am at peace and spending time with my kids, working on my Heep, trying to chill before my last quarter of skool...Originally posted by LordOpie
Whoa! Keep that ego in check... who said I was talking about you?! I was talking about ignoring ummbikes
I'll be back with my witty banter and sophisticated political commentary in full by next week.
N8 take this time to learn some skillz so we can rumble next week. :devil:
It's dependent on size for the same reason cell service sucks in the US compared to Japan or Europe.
People really are scattered in North America. I work with some guys from Japan who after being here for 2 years still cannot wrap their heads around the size of the country. Shipping something cross county in Europe or Japan is like shipping from LA to San Francisco. I'll have to look at those stats when I get a chance.
Interestingly enough, the US and Canada are #4 and #5 for per capita oil consumption.
#1? Singapore...that surprised me, by a vast amout too...
I agree, but there's having enemies and then there's what seems like going out of your way to make more.
Yes, some sort of world 'police' force as you put it is necassary, but a police force cannot be effective without the mandate of those it polices. Currently the US does not have this mandate in the vast majority of the world, especially in the areas that need to be 'policed'. This is again, largely the fault of one GW. In that case it has to be the UN.
Yes, getting rid of Saddam was the right thing to do, although for entirely the wrong reasons.
Not always, although helping out with the various genocides in Africa, and removing some of the worlds other nasty dictators would be great though!