PDA

View Full Version : OT, but a good read, I hope it doesn't offend anyone.



IOWOLF
04-24-2006, 01:25 PM
:mad: WOULDN'T IT BE GREAT TO TURN ON THE TV AND HEAR ANY U.S. PRESIDENT,
DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN GIVE THE FOLLOWING SPEECH?


My Fellow Americans: As you all know, the defeat of Iraq regime has
been completed.

Since congress does not want to spend any more money on this war,
our mission in Iraq is complete.

This morning I gave the order for a complete removal of all American
forces from Iraq. This action will be complete within 30 days. It is
now to begin the reckoning.




Before me, I have two lists. One list contains the names of
countries which have stood by our side during the Iraq conflict.
This list is short. The United Kingdom, Spain, Bulgaria, Australia,
and Poland are some of the countries listed there.

The other list contains everyone not on the first list. Most of the
world's nations are on that list. My press secretary will be
distributing copies of both lists later this evening.

Let me start by saying that effective immediately, foreign aid to
those nations on List 2 ceases immediately and indefinitely. The
money saved during the first year alone will pretty much pay for the
costs of the Iraqi war.

The American people are no longer going to pour money into third
world Hellholes and watch those government leaders grow fat on
corruption.

Need help with a famine? Wrestling with an epidemic? Call France.

In the future, together with Congress, I will work to redirect this
money toward solving the vexing social problems we still have at
home. On that note, a word to terrorist organizations. Screw with us
and we will hunt you down and eliminate you and all your friends
from the face of the earth.



Thirsting for a gutsy country to terrorize? Try France, or maybe China.



I am ordering the immediate severing of diplomatic relations with
France, Germany, and Russia. Thanks for all your help, comrades. We
are retiring from NATO as well. Bon chance, mes amis.



I have instructed the Mayor of New York City to begin towing the
many UN diplomatic vehicles located in Manhattan with more than two
unpaid parking tickets to sites where those vehicles will be
stripped, shredded and crushed. I don't care about whatever treaty
pertains to this. You creeps have tens of thousands of unpaid
tickets. Pay those tickets tomorrow or watch your precious Benzes,
Beamers and limos be turned over to some of the finest chop shops in
the world. I love New York.



A special note to our neighbors. Canada is on List 2. Since we are
likely to be seeing a lot more of each other, you folks might want
to try not pissing us off for a change.


Mexico is also on List 2. President Fox and his entire corrupt
government really need an attitude adjustment. I will have a couple
extra tank and infantry divisions sitting around. Guess where I am
going to put em? Yep, border security.



Oh, by the way, the United States is abrogating the NAFTA treaty -
starting now.




We are tired of the one-way highway. Immediately, we'll be drilling
for oil in Alaska - which will take care of this country's oil needs
for decades to come. If you're an environmentalist who opposes this
decision, I refer you to List 2 above: pick a country and move
there. They care.


It is time for America to focus on its own welfare and its own
citizens. Some will accuse us of isolationism. I answer them by
saying, "darn tootin."




Nearly a century of trying to help folks live a decent life around
the world has only earned us the undying enmity of just about
everyone on the planet. It is time to eliminate hunger in America.
It is time to eliminate homelessness in America. To the nations on
List 1, a final thought. Thank you guys. We owe you and we won't
forget.



To the nations on List 2, a final thought: You might want to learn
to speak Arabic.


God bless America. Thank you and good night.



If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you are reading it in
English, thank a soldier.

malbenbut
04-24-2006, 01:42 PM
It doesn't offend me I'm English. It may offend the French but there again who cares if it does.
MBB

John Stevenson
04-24-2006, 01:47 PM
To the nations on
List 1, a final thought. Thank you guys. We owe you and we won't
forget.

Any chance you can have a word with airport security then and see if you can get list 1 countries down to something like a respectable two hours processing.
I know the UK is only a tiny country but we can get you thru in 30 minutes.

Thank you and have a nice day.

PS, It would also be nice to be able to keep our shoes on, lets face it we were wearing the same pair in the Gulf. ;)

Evan
04-24-2006, 01:50 PM
A special note to our neighbors. Canada is on List 2. Since we are
likely to be seeing a lot more of each other, you folks might want
to try not pissing us off for a change.

Bad taste Wolf. Maybe we should turn off the power, oil and gas. We just shipped home 4 more dead soldiers from Afganistan this weekend so the US can go do it's thing in Iraq.

SGW
04-24-2006, 02:04 PM
You call a simplistic, delusional fantasy a "good read"?

It's a comic-book-level view of the world.

PTSideshow
04-24-2006, 02:19 PM
But John the screeners in your country aren't trying to steal the change out of your luggage to fed their habits. :D

Dream on will never happen as long as those we elect can steal us blind and not be towed,stripped and shredded.
The cow from Michigan was just on the tube flapping lips about her bill to tax the oil companies on their profits. Which was a blatant plea for a bribe. She didn't have any money when she went to Washington now she a millionaire. She wasn't much of human being years ago when I meet her at a parade. Since I was with a insider in Mich politics all she wanted to know was were to go to press the most flesh and what was it that these local bumpkins wanted most so she could tell them she was going to work hard to get it for them.;) ;) ;)

Alistair Hosie
04-24-2006, 02:33 PM
highly irrational beligerent etc etc etc just like the wolf to try to start a war here on our site we promised neil a while ago faithfully we would stop all this crap so wolfie grow up and keep taking the prozac.

Peter N
04-24-2006, 03:54 PM
I am ordering the immediate severing of diplomatic relations with
France......, Germany, and Russia. Thanks for all your help, comrades. We
are retiring from NATO as well. Bon chance, mes amis.



Fickle, fickle, fickle. Just a mere 230 years ago you were cursing the Brits and welcoming the French with open arms:D

I expect I will get flamed for saying this, but I actually quite like the French. There again, I am of Irish descent:)

Peter

Evan
04-24-2006, 03:56 PM
I am of Irish descent


Heh. You mean Danish...

bob308
04-24-2006, 04:08 PM
i like it i am tried of trying to help the world and then getting knicked in the theeth for it.

Alguy
04-24-2006, 04:21 PM
The govenment will not change, it has evolved in the Best government that lobbiests can buy. Nothing will change till the money situation changes.
allen

John Stevenson
04-24-2006, 05:08 PM
Fickle, fickle, fickle. Just a mere 230 years ago you were cursing the Brits and welcoming the French with open arms:D

I expect I will get flamed for saying this, but I actually quite like the French. :)

Peter

They are best fried with a slice of black pudding....

IOWOLF
04-24-2006, 05:44 PM
Fickle, fickle, fickle. Just a mere 230 years ago you were cursing the Brits and welcoming the French with open arms:D

I expect I will get flamed for saying this, but I actually quite like the French. There again, I am of Irish descent

Peter

;) And about 60 years ago we helped you Both out of a nasty spot.;)
My father was there,and has the scars to prove it.

This was meant to be seen as light hearted,Oh well F**K em if they can't take a joke, which is all it was.:p

Peter N
04-24-2006, 06:53 PM
Heh. You mean Danish...

Well true, this area was a little Viking province once but we sent 'em packing by serving them warm beer:D

Peter

Evan
04-24-2006, 06:59 PM
I seem to recall they took all the gold with them... :)

Your Old Dog
04-24-2006, 07:11 PM
Thanks IO, that's the message that many of us believe should be delivered. I've had enough of my nation playing door mat to the world. The mightest country on earth in several areas and we act like the weakest. I live on the border, I like the canucks, call it devided loyalty if you want.

topct
04-24-2006, 07:18 PM
"This was meant to be seen as light hearted,Oh well F**K em if they can't take a joke, which is all it was."

But spoken from a heavy heart.

And I don't get the joke thing.

mklotz
04-24-2006, 07:45 PM
This was meant to be seen as light hearted,Oh well F**K em if they can't take a joke, which is all it was.:p

It's ok, Wolfie. Don't worry about it. We won't think any the less of you for it.
After all, how could we?

Duct Taper
04-24-2006, 08:36 PM
I have read the message over a couple of times and really can't see anything wrong with if from an idealistic point of view. It would be nice to just live peacefully by ourselves.

Every American can identify with these problems, and few non-Americans or those of mixed citizenship have any concept of how true the message was.

The sad, or glad, thing is that none of it will ever come to pass. Why? Because we are Americans and we try to help. That's what we do. And if you are not Americans you will bitch and moan about us. Because that's what YOU do.

These are truths we have to accept.

I wasn't going to post on this thread but I figured better do it before it gets deleted ! Now I have to go copy the message so I can send it around to my countrymen who will understand it very well.

torker
04-24-2006, 09:05 PM
Very poor taste with the Canada thing.
My brother spent 9 years in the PPCLI. He got hurt pretty bad training to be a paratrooper. They made him "retire" early.
Two guys from his old outfit are dead now. Killed in Ahfganistan.
Two little towns just down the road from me have lost kids there also.
Getting to be more dead sent home all the time.
I don't get the joke but thanks for thinking of us anyway.
Russ

lane
04-24-2006, 10:25 PM
Nice Thought To Bad It Wont Happen

rfrey
04-24-2006, 10:36 PM
We just shipped home 4 more dead soldiers from Afganistan this weekend so the US can go do it's thing in Iraq.


We have to do more than die in our neighbour's fights, Evan. We have to thank them for the opportunity to do so.

Rod

TECHSHOP
04-24-2006, 11:31 PM
I like the PPCLI, I won't say more, but it goes back to the late 1980's/early 1990's. The same goes for the TA's and Para's (are they still called that) in the UK, and also for the ones with the Kangaroo (not the Crown or Maple leaf) on their army's flag.

I guess we all draw our own lines in the world, maybe I have started to stop caring where others do, but I still dislike polititians and their ways.

"The guard dies, but never surrenders."--Rougemont

speedy
04-25-2006, 02:17 AM
:mad: WOULDN'T IT BE GREAT TO TURN ON THE TV AND HEAR ANY U.S. PRESIDENT,
DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN GIVE THE FOLLOWING SPEECH?
My Fellow Americans: As you all know,



I gave up believing most all statements that self serving polititions make; to save myself a lot of disappointment :( .
So why would that statement lead you to believe that it was in your best interests any more than anything else that they utter?

It is ANZAC Day here. A day of remembrance; a day of elation and deep sadness, and every emotion in between. A day that is the glue that further unites our nation and that of the Aussies.
:) Thank you old Diggers, past and present:)

Ken

Norman Atkinson
04-25-2006, 04:21 AM
Hi Ken,
Greetings to all the Anzacs- Kiwis and Diggers alike.
Gallipoli and catching and throwing the turkish grenades back.
El Alamein when they went in under the artillery barrage with the Northumberland Fusliliers and were fighting hand to hand before the guns stopped.

Not wearing their fathers' spurs, eh?

Today, it's Kohima Day as well.

Saturday past- in 1949, another old man won his spurs.

Cheers, Ken.
God Bless.

Norm

bspooh
04-25-2006, 08:01 AM
I absolutely loved it, IOWOLF....Maybe a little harsh, but I would definetly vote for someone who would give this speech..

brent

Evan
04-25-2006, 08:53 AM
Now that is a scary thought. Anyone who thinks that the US can go it alone is living in the distant past. Isolationism isn't possible unless you want to live at the same standard of living as in the distant past. There is a reason the US has a massive trade deficit. The US is utterly dependent on trade with other countries and their willingness to extend credit. The US cannot afford the "adventures" is it currently undertaking and this is going to bite it on the butt, hard. Good luck.

micrometer50
04-25-2006, 09:35 AM
I'd like to see you show some numbers to back up some of this.Like Alaska oil will keep us going for how long? How much do we spend on aid to who and what do we get for it?

rfrey
04-25-2006, 10:55 AM
How much do we spend on aid to who and what do we get for it?

The U.S. spends 0.26% of GDP on foreign aid, the lowest of all industrialized nations except Japan. From 2000-2003 the US was last.

One-third of that aid goes to Israel. I'll leave it to you to determine if the U.S. gets anything for that.

Of the remaining 0.17% of GDP, over half is "tied" aid, that is, it's aid, but it must be spent buying materials from U.S. companies. So the money comes right back into the US economy.

You could cut all foreign aid, and it wouldn't even make a hiccup in the U.S. economy.

None of this is to suggest that the US people are stingy or ungenerous. Far from it: survey after survey says that most US citizens believe that around 20% of the US budget goes to foreign countries to help them, and most think that's appropriate if a little high. The reality is that well under 1% of the US budget leaves the country.

I hope those numbers help. Reasonable people need to put foreign aid in perspective: it doesn't make a difference because there just isn't that much of it. Cutting it all wouldn't change the US economy a gnat's whisker.

BobWarfield
04-25-2006, 10:56 AM
Anyone who thinks that the US can go it alone is living in the distant past. Isolationism isn't possible unless you want to live at the same standard of living as in the distant past. There is a reason the US has a massive trade deficit. The US is utterly dependent on trade with other countries and their willingness to extend credit. The US cannot afford the "adventures" is it currently undertaking and this is going to bite it on the butt, hard. Good luck.

And any country who thinks they can stop trading with the US or that their trade represents a "favor" done to the US also falls into the same category. The trade exists out of both sides acting in their own enlightened self-interest. That willingness to extend credit exists because the US financial markets offer the most benefit to those countries to put their financial assets, and for no other reasons. It isn't done by them through charity. We are mutually dependant on one another.

The note Wolf posted, while harsh, doesn't suggest anything more than that the US stop being nice when others won't be nice. It suggests not isolationism, but more a return to how two businesses would behave towards one another and an end to hand wringing attempts to curry favor with raw dollars. If the two businesses partner, both prosper. If they compete or oppose one another, they get ground down.

While its tone is a bit nasty, the actions advocated amount to an elimination of US charity towards nations that don't act favorably towards the US. I think the article is painfully shortsighted for not considering the substantial efforts made by others to help in Afghanistan, but other than that, I'm not sure I disagree all that much with what it advocates. More importantly, a substantial number of Americans also do not disagree and that is the piece the rest of the world needs to understand.

The interesting thing is that any slight affront to another group elicits these strong reactions, yet all the note really advocates is that America react similarly to various affronts. We're evidentally really not so different after all.

As to the adventures, to whatever extent they discourage further terrorism on our shores, they're worth the cost. It is interesting to note that while we cannot keep drugs and illegal aliens out of our country, we have not had a single fertilizer truck bomb explode here since 9/11. By contrast, these same terrorists seem to have no problem paralyzing the election process in Europe blowing up trains and whatever else they get up to. Even the French now seem to have substantial problems inside their borders despite their policies of appeasment. The cost of having such things happening regularly inside US borders would be that our financial markets would not be stable, those same countries would withdraw their credit, and we would be up that creek without a paddle.

The reason this hasn't happened is simple. Clearly the terrorists would have no trouble getting into the country (nobody else seems to), but these "adventures" make it clear to the leaders who fund such enterprises that they are going to wake up dead one morning if they're not careful who they're messing about with. You can't stop all the fanatics willing to strap on explosives, but there are many fewer fanatical leaders in the world willing to die for their cause. I notice Osama Bin Laden has not signed up for his trip to visit the virgins.


Best,

BW

Evan
04-25-2006, 10:57 AM
US trade deficit 1992= $39 billion
US Trade deficit 2005 $805 billion

The US imports about 50% of it's oil.

ANWR may contain about 10 billion barrels, maybe half of that recoverable as product. Even with that included the US has only about 2 to 3% of world oil reserves but is responsible for 1/4 of all consumption. ANWR can't and won't make a significant difference. It might be able to produce a million barrels per day. That is about 5% of US daily consumption of oil. So, instead of importing 50% of the oil used it would reduce it to 45%.

Evan
04-25-2006, 11:02 AM
'

The note Wolf posted, while harsh, doesn't suggest anything more than that the US stop being nice when others won't be nice.

How about the US stop being not nice when others are trying to playing fair? It looks like the US may have to finally pay back the 5 billion in duties they collected from Canadian lumber producers. The US didn't live up to their agreement and even broke their own laws in this matter. Why should other countries "be nice"" in the face of such action?

rfrey
04-25-2006, 11:12 AM
'
How about the US stop being not nice when others are trying to playing fair?

The astonishing thing about the current administration is not how they've treated their enemies: practically the whole world lined up behind the US as it went into Afghanistan. The shocking thing is how they've treated their allies. Canada committed practically our entire armed forces to Afghanistan and got treated like crap in return; everything from lumber to cattle to border crossing. Australia committed a similar level of resources and also has been trodden on. The only ally that seems to get any respect from Mr. Bush is Vicente Fox.

Duct Taper
04-25-2006, 11:33 AM
“rfrey” answered “micrometer50’s question on the level of US aid by quoting percentages. When talking about dollars of US aid, using percentages doesn’t tell the story. If you want more info here is a link to a newsblog that actually talks about US aid in real dollars: http://www.alertnet.org/thefacts/reliefresources/114564334927.htm

Here are some quotes from the article:

“In sheer dollar terms, the world’s biggest economy forks out far more official development assistance (ODA) – i.e. public money - than any other country. In 2005, its ODA stood at $27.5 billion, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). That’s more than double the amount given by the next highest donor, Japan.”

“Last year I asked Andrew Natsios, who was then head of the U.S. Agency for International Development, how the government justified keeping spending levels at such a paltry proportion of national wealth. He said the OECD ranking was misleading because it failed to take into account the private flow of dollars to the developing world – money contributed by foundations, universities, churches and charities. Natsios said if you cut America’s overall aid pie into two pieces representing private and public giving, the private piece would be about 80 percent of the total. In other countries, especially in Europe, private giving tends to be a far smaller slice than public.”

“It’s the nature of our social order and the structure of our society that we tend to have a very robust civil society that raises a lot of money privately,” he said.

If you want more info, try the link. There are other real sources out there too that are not just knee-jerk reactions that you will sometimes get on a discussion forum. Check them out.

rfrey
04-25-2006, 11:44 AM
If you want more info, try the link. There are other real sources out there too that are not just knee-jerk reactions that you will sometimes get on a discussion forum. Check them out.

Those are fair arguments, Duct Taper. I don't think it's fair to characterize looking at aid as a slice of GDP spending by government as a "knee-jerk" reaction, though. It's a standard way to measure foreign aid.

The question was, what does the US government get in return for its aid? Isn't it reasonable to answer that question by considering US government expenditures rather than private expenditures? I don't suppose those who propose cutting off all foriegn aid would also advocate prohibiting private citizens from donating to charities.

The article is based on on lobbyist's report, the Hudson report. It seems well researched, and I'll certainly agree that when untangling the gordian knot of foreign aid, private donations should be considered. The report did say that there was no good data on European private transfers to developing countries, so I'm not sure why Andrew Natsios says the US tends to be much higher -- we seem to not know where Europe stands on that.

My argument is not that the US is ungenerous or evil or any of that nonsense. I only suggest that foreign aid expenditures are a small part of the US budget, and cutting aid completely would not materially affect the US economy.

Rod

cam m
04-25-2006, 11:49 AM
Here's something that has been said elsewhere but in a somewhat bolder tone.
Nafta? Go ahead, do Canada a favor, scrap it. The U.S, only honors it when it is to their advantage - witness the BSE buls#$@ with Rcalf and the ongoing lawsuits despite the fact that the argument for the protectionism is not backed up by science. Witness the softwood lumber debacle - protectionism and theft by import duty in the face of international board of trade rulings AGAINST the US and according to a previous post here, their own laws. Witness the Crow rate argument re transportation subsidies of the Canadian rail system vs the Missouri/Missisippi shipping routes maintained by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Lack of support for the U.S. war on terrorism - tell it to the families of the Canadian troops mourning their dead in Afganistan so Geo Jr can play king of the heap in the middle East looking for WMD that appear to have magically disappeared under intensive searching. That's just the stuff from the last 20 years. The history goes back way farther than that
Face it Wolfie, the US plays bully of the Global playground, then whines that nobody likes them...

Peter N
04-25-2006, 12:02 PM
In other countries, especially in Europe, private giving tends to be a far smaller slice than public.”

“It’s the nature of our social order and the structure of our society that we tend to have a very robust civil society that raises a lot of money privately,” he said.

If you want more info, try the link. There are other real sources out there too that are not just knee-jerk reactions that you will sometimes get on a discussion forum. Check them out.

Not entirely true. Following the Asian tsunami the British public gave £372million pounds ($662million dollars) in donations to the disaster fund as opposed to £50million from the UK goverment. I think that the private giving to this disaster on both sides of the Pond embarassed both our Governments into being a bit more generous than their initial response promised.

However when a real tragedy strikes the world hard, like this tsunami, the terrible events of 9/11, or the ethiopian famine then it is my belief that we all become 'big' enough in these moments to open our hearts and our wallets and put aside the different opinions we may have on politics or war or religion and realise that we *have* to help each other live on this planet.

I'm sorry if that sounded a little sycophantic or honeyed, and my tone normally tends to be more light-hearted banter than deep thought, but if we could all retain some of the lucidity of thought that these moments bring to us then the World would be a much nicer place.

Peter

IOWOLF
04-25-2006, 12:12 PM
Awww, look what I have started,Can't we all just get along.;)

Frank Ford
04-25-2006, 12:31 PM
I believe the key to getting along on these forums (fora?) is quite basic:

NEVER post ANY:

1. Religious opinion
2. Political opinion
3. Negative comment about another user

Have you ever noticed that there's often an inverse relationship between how strongly someone states an opinion and how much he actually knows about the subject?

If you think there's ANYTHING you can post on this forum that will change my political or religious outlook, forget it! And, in return, I'll respect the fact that there's nothing I can post to change yours.

So simple, really. . .

Evan
04-25-2006, 12:58 PM
If you think there's ANYTHING you can post on this forum that will change my political or religious outlook, forget it! And, in return, I'll respect the fact that there's nothing I can post to change yours.

I might expect that the provision of facts not generally well known might make some difference to other's opinions. The US media does a very selective job of reporting. Recently a major ferry sunk here in British Columbia with 98 rescued and two lost. I was barely able to find any mention of it in any US news media online and not at all on places like CNN. No problem finding news about ferries sinking halfway around the world but nothing on this one.

The US media does not report all the news and that isn't just in regards to Canada or sinking ferries. If you rely on the US media and the information they give you will have a very warped perspective on world events.

Ries
04-25-2006, 01:17 PM
I have a question- who wrote that letter?
Did Iowolf?
Or did you get it somewhere on the internet?

I always like to know who exactly is speaking.
And I have to admit, I am more likely to pay attention to the genuine opinion of a poster, even if I dont agree with it, than a "dittohead" type reposting of somebody elses ideas.

I think the letter has a lot of feel good bluster in it, but as several people have pointed out, on almost every factual point, its inaccurate.
The total amount of foreign aid per year would pay for about 3 months of the admitted cost of the war, not even the black budget or otherwise shuffled under the table stuff.
The Anwar oil would about cover the Secret Service's Yukons for a year.
In fact, if we drilled more in Alaska, it might just about cover the amount that is leaking up there due to temperature swings and local conditions breaking pipelines.

Duct Taper
04-25-2006, 02:35 PM
Evan said "The US media does not report all the news and that isn't just in regards to Canada or sinking ferries. If you rely on the US media and the information they give you will have a very warped perspective on world events."

ABSOLUTELY CORRECT !!!
That is why it is really hard in the USA to get a true picture of what is happening. Between poor reporting and the ego-building of "news anchors" the news reports are neither "news" nor "reports". If you want to know the truth you really have to know where to search for it.

Peter N
04-25-2006, 02:49 PM
Call me biased :D but I always think the BBC is quite good.

The main portal page http://news.bbc.co.uk/ obviously carries a lot of UK news but also all of the major breaking stories worldwide.

The World page http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/default.stm additionally gives each major continent more in depth news from its own area.

The story Evan mentioned is here as well http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4839150.stm

Peter

Norman Atkinson
04-25-2006, 03:13 PM
Quote- and not on the Beeb!

It was 9-11 and the World was realising the enormity of the situation.
The US Government was still scratching its bum but money was already being spent to succour the rescue teams and the rescued. Half a million pounds had been wired from the Masonic United Grand Lodge of England to its brothers in New York. It wasn't a lot but more was ready when the need was known. Many brothers in the UK were in rescue teams and wanted to go and die with their brothers.
They knew the odds. We are only a small number in the UK but later the Floods and who knows what came - and more money was wired out from these funny people with somewhat bizarre rituals. The Tsunami came.We know the story but money was already there- to help. This is automatic or seems so.
It doesn't matter if one is male or female or what colour or creed.
Help is immediate and unstinting and arrives before being sought.
No, it doesn't appear on the Beeb or World TV. The money is there-waiting.

Of course, it's a secret

Norm

torker
04-25-2006, 03:23 PM
I don't think Jay wrote that. Seems to me I've seen it before.

IOWOLF
04-25-2006, 05:56 PM
:confused:
I have a question- who wrote that letter?
Did Iowolf?
Or did you get it somewhere on the internet?

I always like to know who exactly is speaking.
And I have to admit, I am more likely to pay attention to the genuine opinion of a poster, even if I dont agree with it, than a "dittohead" type reposting of somebody elses ideas.

I think the letter has a lot of feel good bluster in it, but as several people have pointed out, on almost every factual point, its inaccurate.
The total amount of foreign aid per year would pay for about 3 months of the admitted cost of the war, not even the black budget or otherwise shuffled under the table stuff.
The Anwar oil would about cover the Secret Service's Yukons for a year.
In fact, if we drilled more in Alaska, it might just about cover the amount that is leaking up there due to temperature swings and local conditions breaking pipelines.

Norman Atkinson
04-25-2006, 06:25 PM
Could you repeat that?

Norm

JRouche
04-25-2006, 06:27 PM
Call me biased :D but I always think the BBC is quite good.


I am not biased. I like the BBC news feed more than my local 2,4 and 7 mainliners. JRouche

IOWOLF
04-25-2006, 06:33 PM
Could you repeat that?

Norm

Could you repeat this,again?:p

Your Old Dog
04-25-2006, 07:34 PM
I won't likely phrase this right, or someone sitting high on a horse will opt to take it the wrong way but.........

I hope our Canadian friends who are wondering about there troops who were killed understand we lost a few too. I also hope they or any other free country isn't so stupid as to think this war on terror is a US problem. If you think that, you'll be next. Terrorism is a cancer on the human race and therefore everyones concern. You lost some troops, we lost more.

As for us using more fuel, of course we do. We have far more use for it as the worlds dominant country on almost every front. Camels don't burn a lot of fuel and folks living in tents don't frequently have big rigs parked in the driveway. We use that fuel to ship medicine, food and our wares all over the planet. The folks who make that stuff need that fuel to go to work.

Just for the record, not all Americans beleive everything coming from the Left. What the hell we savin the oil for anyway? The Chinese? Fossil fuel..... how many freaking many creatures would have had to roam the earth to make all the fossil to make all the fuels we've burned to date let alone what's left in the earth. Some believe the earth is rejuvinating this fuel from within.

And if you don't have global warming then you'd have global cooling. If it stayed the same temp all the worlds weather system would stagnate and we'd be dead anyway.

Got a lot of Canadian friends here in this country but getting tired of hearing about their dead like ours don't count for ****. We're all in this together, like it or not.

Mad Scientist
04-25-2006, 11:05 PM
Great article. Yes it is a little simplistic as some have already stated and no it will never happen. But it is the underlying thought that matters. It is too bad we don’t have politicians with the courage to stand up and tell us what they really think; rather then what they think we want to hear. They find it’s safer to spout some politically correct garbage then to find the courage to just tell us the truth. Thus we are treated to such pearls wisdom as “I voted against that bill even though I first voted for it.”

They pass a “patriot act” to protect us. Yet in reality it takes away our rights and freedoms. At airports it allows strip searches of 80 year old grandmothers in wheelchairs, but we dare not search some scruffy looking mid-easterner for fear of “offending” him or his “peaceful religion” that is intent on world domination. Meanwhile at the same time our borders are virtually wide open allowing anyone to walk in. The fact that this is utter insanity is lost on these mental midgets.

It is said that we control the government and if we don’t like its direction we can vote for the other party, the only problem with this is, aside from the rhetoric, there is very little difference between them, it is like comparing twiddle dee to twiddle dum. But unfortunately even this requires too much effort for many people and they don’t what to be bothered with it, who cares if some buildings and planes are blown up, so long as they can keep watching the newest TV soap opera. Anyway if something really important happens, such as a movie star getting divorced for the 25th. time, they trust the news media will keep them informed. :(


[Question authority before authority questions you.]

Evan
04-26-2006, 02:22 AM
Just a few questions... (these are NOT rhetorical questions)

How do you "win" a war on terror?

How do you know when you have won?

If you declare victory and someone blows up another car bomb somewhere was that a lie?

Does anyone actually think it is possible to win a "war on terror"?

Will someone in charge, at some point, decide it isn't possible to "win"? What then?

How do you explain the "war on terror" if you are forced to admit you can't win?

If admitting that isn't an option and winning isn't possible then what?

Does/should the "war on terror" become an institutional activity of the government to justify actions that would not normally be acceptable to the population?

Have you read the book 1984?

Millman
04-26-2006, 02:39 AM
Evan, extremely good questions. Doubt if you'll get any answers. I'm very opionionated about guarding our borders, keeping out invaders. I'll wait to see if you get any answers, instead of opinions.

Your Old Dog
04-26-2006, 07:02 AM
Hell, questions are cheap. Got a bunch of'em myself.



Just a few questions... (these are NOT rhetorical questions)

How do you "win" a war on terror? **Does that mean you do nothing?**

How do you know when you have won? **How many turns of the rag will go around our heads?**

If you declare victory and someone blows up another car bomb somewhere was that a lie? **When will you decide to try to put some perspective to what the media won't?**

Does anyone actually think it is possible to win a "war on terror"? ** Anyone realize the ramifications of loosing the war on terror?**

Will someone in charge, at some point, decide it isn't possible to "win"? What then? **Then what, sit down at a "Peace Table" with some radical Islamic zealots?**

How do you explain the "war on terror" if you are forced to admit you can't win? **How can we be expected to when we aren't the ones setting the rules?**

If admitting that isn't an option and winning isn't possible then what? **How many colors do the rags come in and how hard is it to learn sanc script?**

Does/should the "war on terror" become an institutional activity of the government to justify actions that would not normally be acceptable to the population? **What purpose for governments if first reason for existance isn't to protect it's citizens?**

Have you read the book 1984? **Did you watch TV on September 11th, 2001?** **Do you think that can only happen in New York?** **Do you value your freedom at all?** **Is there anything worth fighting for even if you know you can't/won't/may not or don't have the stomach for winning?**

Evan
04-26-2006, 09:31 AM
Those are easy questions. Yes, no, yes, yes.

How about the hard ones?

mochinist
04-26-2006, 10:13 AM
Nice thread IOWOLF lol. Here is some porn to lighten up everyones day.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v471/mochinist/toothbrushsex.jpg

Duct Taper
04-26-2006, 10:20 AM
Evan, you can't win a war on terror because the terrorists will never stop until they are dead and you can't kill all of them.

You can only LOSE a war on terror if you sit back and don't fight. And you will lose BIG.

TECHSHOP
04-26-2006, 11:04 AM
Some Westers, including my President, have argued that the West does not have a problems with Islam but only with violent Islamist extremists. Fourteen hundreded years of history demonstrate otherwise. The relations between Islam and Christianity, both Orthodox ans Western, have often been stormy.

Across the centuries the fortunes of the two religions have risen and fallen in a sequence of momentous surges, pause, and countersurges. The Causes of this ongoing pattern of conflict flow from the nature of the two religions and the civilizations based on them. Conflict is, on one hand, a product of the difference, particularly the Muslim concept of Islam as a way of life transcending and uniting religion and politics verses the Western Christian concept of the seperate realms of God and Caesar. The conflict also stems, from their similarities. Both are monotheistic religions, which, unlike polytheistic ones, cannot easily assimilate additional deities, and which see the world in dualistic, us-and-them terms. Both are universalistic, claiming to be the one true faith to which all humans can adhere. Both are missionary religions believing that their adherents have an obligation to convert nonbelievers to that one true faith. From its origins Islam expanded by conquest and when the opportunity existed Christianity did also. The parallel concepts of "jihad" and "crusade" not only resemble each other but distinguish these two faiths from other major world religions. Islam and Christianity, along with Judaism, also have teleological views of history in contrast to the cyclical or static views prevalent in other civilizations.

The level of violent conflict betwwen Islam and Christianity over time has been influenced by demographic growth and decline, economic developments, technological change, and intensity of religious commitment.

The underlying problem for the West is not Islamic fundamentalism. It is Islam, a different civilization whose people are convinced of the superiority of their culture and are obsessed with the inferiority of their power. The problem for Islam is not the CIA or the US DOD. It is the West, a different civilization whose people are convinced of the universality of their culture and believe that their superior, if declining, power imposes on them the obligation to extend that culture throughout the world. These are the basic ingredients that fuel conflicts between Islam and the West.

TECHSHOP
04-26-2006, 11:15 AM
While I was typing the my privious post the radio news said that a few Kiwi soldiers have fallen in the Sinai Peninsula, to a car bomb.

My heart is heavy once again...

Mad Scientist
04-26-2006, 08:59 PM
Even wrote:
“How do you "win" a war on terror?”
Simple, you can’t.
“How do you explain the "war on terror" if you are forced to admit you can't win?”
You cannot have a war on terror. Terrorism is “not” an ideology; it “is” a tactic of war.
“If admitting that isn't an option and winning isn't possible then what?”
You go after those who are using this “tactic” of war.
“Does/should the "war on terror" become an institutional activity of the government to justify actions that would not normally be acceptable to the population?”
Yes/no. Just read the "so-called" patriot act! :mad:

Mad Scientist
04-26-2006, 09:03 PM
Techshop:

You have done your homework. Well stated!
The reason there are violent Islamist extremists is because Islam “is” a violent religion, of course it is not politically correct to say so! But if you doubt this just READ the Quran.

Qur’an 9:5 “Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.”

Qur’an 8:39 “Fight them until all opposition ends and all submit to Allah.”

Qur’an 33:26 “Allah made the Jews leave their homes by terrorizing them so that you killed some and made many captive. And He made you inherit their lands, their homes, and their wealth. He gave you a country you had not traversed before.”

Qur’an 8:59 “The infidels should not think that they can get away from us. Prepare against them whatever arms and weaponry you can muster so that you may terrorize them. They are your enemy and Allah’s enemy.”

Qur’an 8:7 “Allah wished to confirm the truth by His words: ‘Wipe the infidels out to the last.’”

Qur’an 8:73 “The infidels aid one another. Unless you do the same there will be anarchy in the land. Those who accepted Islam and left their homes to fight in Allah’s Cause are good Muslims.”

Qur’an 47:33 “Believers, obey Allah, and obey the Messenger. Do not falter; become faint-hearted, or weak-kneed, crying for peace.”

Qur’an 5:51 “Believers, take not Jews and Christians for your friends.”

And this is only a very small sample of the preverbal iceberg.


[The right is wrong. The left is stupid.]

JRouche
04-26-2006, 09:49 PM
Re-thunk.... No holy wars for me....So solly....JRouche

Mad Scientist
04-26-2006, 10:09 PM
JRouche:
They are quotes from a book called the “prophet of doom.” The author used a compellation of twelve different translations, so yes I would expect differences. But when you consider that the original is very poorly written, bad grammar, words missing, sentences that don’t make sense, then it make sense that all the translation will be slightly different.

Prophetofdoom.net

Another good book is the Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam.

Jack Burns
04-27-2006, 01:19 AM
This alleged 'war on terrorism' is unwinable simply because it's impossible to declare victory over an imaginary enemy who cannot surrender and that’s exactly how the neocons pulling Bush’s strings planned this criminal fiasco all along.

http://www.st911.org/

http://www.question911.com/

http://www.physics911.ca/Main_Page

Schutzhund
04-27-2006, 02:27 AM
"imaginary enemy"... maybe in your world.

In my world we call them "terrorists".

You know...like the ones that flew civilian aircraft into the WTC, The Pentagon, and the field in Pennsylvania.

Or did I "imagine" that too?

Jack Burns
04-27-2006, 05:25 AM
Schutzhund

With all due respect, did you trouble yourself to peruse even one of the links provided before firing off an obvious knee-jerk response to circumstances you clearly do not understand? If not, perhaps you can explain why World Trade Center Building 7 -- a broad-based, block-long, 43-story, steel building fully two blocks away from the Twin Towers – was ordered demolished by its lessee, Larry Silverstein, at 5:30 that very afternoon even though it sustained only minor collateral damage resulting in a few small isolated fires. Perhaps you can also explain how a building that size can be rigged for controlled demolition in mere hours when it normally takes highly experienced engineers weeks or even months to bring down far lesser structures. What I’m trying to say here is please don’t be fooled any longer by this utterly corrupt government and their mainstream media lap-dogs; the official version of the events surrounding 911 simply do not square with the accumulated evidence and that is something we should all be deeply concerned about.

SJorgensen
04-27-2006, 06:48 AM
WOW,
How did I miss this discussion? I've got to read all the posts. One point that I would like to make is that if Islamists were hateful and violent in general, we would have had more problems than 9/11 in the United States. And the lack of attacks isn't due to our being without a soft underbelly. Cheney would have you believe that HE and BUSH has PROTECTED us. That is crap. It has been several years since the 9/11 attack in the US and there are 1,300 million of them and the population of 293 million of us, and many of those are muslim Yet no attack has been attempted in our country even after the atrocities of Abu Graib. Virtually no "coyotes" (those who deliver illegal immigrants from Mexico) have been prosecuted. Attorney General Gonzales has been publically scolded on this because he REFUSES to enforce the LAW!

We have invaded and occupied the center of where civilization began, and then tortured and humiliated their youth and released them back to join militias against us. We train and arm them only to find them using this against us. We can not “install” a government, because they understand that is what we want to do and it is not new to them. Any American support will get them killed and that is what the majority wants. They want to run their own country and they will not accept another puppet government.

Still, if they were disposed against us in general, we would have suffered greater harm. There should be little doubt about that. These are peaceful people regardless of some of the (prior) obscure tenants of their religion. Even Christian tenants have threatening passages.

The real threat is from the neocons and the Bush administration. Let’s dump them. They should be tried and convict and imprisoned for their crimes of subversion of congress, and then let’s get back to peace and good diplomatic work.

We can not ask the world to NOT seek nuclear weapons, when we defer opposition to countries like North Korea because they have nuclear weapons and then we also ignore all violations of international anti-proliferation treaties by Israel, and we seek NEW TACTICAL nuclear weapons like "bunker buster" weapons. It is astronomically absurd and stupid to ask the worlds nations to ignore this. And at the very same time our president chooses to expose a CIA agent Valerie Plame who was a covert agent working on anti-proliferation issues. Bush knowingly exposes the wife of a brave and honorable and LONG SERVING Ambassador. Bush put Joseph Wilson’s family’s life in jeopardy, and he did this only for political revenge for Wilson’s exposing a lie. Valerie was innocent and she was serving her country honorably and Bush exposed her and he destroyed her career and he ended her service to our nation in this most important capacity. I’m proud that I have met Joe Wilson and that he has moved to my state. Joe is a GREAT American, and if you learn more about him you will agree with me. Compared to Wilson, Bush is a P.O.S.. Bush has committed crimes against America and he has violated the laws of the United States and he has violated international laws. Bush has much to answer for. George Bush’s own father once said that anyone who would knowingly expose the identity of a CIA agent would be a TRAITOR to the United States. Of course that was President of the United States George Herbert Walker Bush.

I believe that Margie Schoedinger was honest and believable when she accused Bush of rape. She was shot in the head in Harris County, TX about a year later. I have talked to her sister, and she too believes that she was murdered and she couldn't get them to investigate. Margies proximity to Bush was the first clue when I started looking at this. Time will tell. Sooner or later evidence will come out that Bush knew Margie. When that becomes public it will be a new ballgame. I haven't been able to find a picture of this woman. I'm very interested to see if she was a very attractive black woman. She was married to a white man and I also talked to him. He sounded physically scared. He didn't want to say anything, poor guy.

Duct Taper
04-27-2006, 08:10 AM
Well, there goes the thread......

Your Old Dog
04-27-2006, 08:43 AM
Well, there goes the thread......


On that I think we can all agree!!!

Who's got the tin foil?

lynnl
04-27-2006, 10:31 AM
.......<deleted>.......

lynnl
04-27-2006, 10:41 AM
That's too funny! :D

yf
04-27-2006, 11:22 AM
Jack Burns:

Tower seven, like all of the World Trade Center, was built on a common foundation with one structure supporting all the buildings and the underground shopping plaza.

If you had ever been there in person and seen it, you would understand why tower seven collapsed several hours later.

The foundation structure was 6 stories deep below grade, with parking areas integrated on the six levels. The main columns of the 2 towers were braced by the horizontal members which extended clear across the entire 11 acre site and also were integrated into the structures of towers 3,4,5,6 and seven.
When towers 1 and 2 collapsed, it took out a major portion of the supporting structure of tower seven. The underground fires did the rest and several hours later it came down.

Believe what you want.

I was there many times and saw it with my own eyes.

IOWOLF
04-27-2006, 11:38 AM
OK, LOCK THIS THREAD, Craig.

Jack Burns
04-27-2006, 12:12 PM
yf

And if you truly believe that a relatively brief 1200 degree hydrocarbon/air fire is in anyway capable of melting, let alone significantly weakening, massive amounts of cold steel then I've got a dandy little propane cutting torch you just might interested in buying. May I respectfully suggest that you and others so disposed at least review all the relevant evidence before drawing your final conclusion?

In any case, I'm off to Cleveland now and look forward to seeing how this thread develops over the next few days.

Kind regards,

Jack

mochinist
04-27-2006, 12:30 PM
OK, LOCK THIS THREAD, Craig.How bout not starting threads like these in the first place.