Favourite strange/ridiculous religious beliefs
03 Mar 2009, 4:07 pm
ruveyn wrote:
Henriksson wrote:
Well, I think you should start caring really soon, because America will not be able to hold it's superpower status much longer...
As long as we can deal with any enemy, we will be alright. Being a superpower is not the best thing, but being able to kill any deadly enemy is a good thing.
We have the nukes. We have the missiles, we have currently the best armed force in the world.
That will suffice.
ruveyn
Duck and cover.
_________________
Comprendre, c'est pardoner.
03 Mar 2009, 6:26 pm
ruveyn wrote:
Henriksson wrote:
Well, I think you should start caring really soon, because America will not be able to hold it's superpower status much longer...
As long as we can deal with any enemy, we will be alright. Being a superpower is not the best thing, but being able to kill any deadly enemy is a good thing.
We have the nukes. We have the missiles, we have currently the best armed force in the world.
That will suffice.
ruveyn
To no longer be a super power means that those things will no longer be effective. They will age without replacement, affording replacements will not be feasible. Other countries will develop more sophisticated things. You wont be on top.
Are you not getting what "You wont be a super power." really means?
_________________
davidred wrote...
I installed Ubuntu once and it completely destroyed my paying relationship with Microsoft.
03 Mar 2009, 6:40 pm
Fuzzy wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Henriksson wrote:
Well, I think you should start caring really soon, because America will not be able to hold it's superpower status much longer...
As long as we can deal with any enemy, we will be alright. Being a superpower is not the best thing, but being able to kill any deadly enemy is a good thing.
We have the nukes. We have the missiles, we have currently the best armed force in the world.
That will suffice.
ruveyn
To no longer be a super power means that those things will no longer be effective. They will age without replacement, affording replacements will not be feasible. Other countries will develop more sophisticated things. You wont be on top.
Are you not getting what "You wont be a super power." really means?
Our weapons have first priority. They will be maintained and upgraded even if we have to cut back to two meals a day.
We may be in financial trouble but our technical and technological status is quite sufficient to keep us armed an mean for another fifty years.
Money problems do not translate into technological problems in a one to one manner.
ruveyn
03 Mar 2009, 6:57 pm
MmeLePen wrote:
Sand wrote:
This quote from http://www.doug-long.com/hirosh2.htm which discussed the necessity of using the atomic bombs in WWII and which is considered by many experts today to have been a war crime.
"It didn't take long after the atomic bombings for questions to arise as to their necessity for ending the war and Japan's threat to peace. One of the earliest dissents came from a panel that had been requested by President Truman to study the Pacific war. Their report, The United States Strategic Bombing Survey, was issued in July 1946. It declared, "Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945 and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated." (Bernstein, ed., The Atomic Bomb, pg. 52-56)."
"It didn't take long after the atomic bombings for questions to arise as to their necessity for ending the war and Japan's threat to peace. One of the earliest dissents came from a panel that had been requested by President Truman to study the Pacific war. Their report, The United States Strategic Bombing Survey, was issued in July 1946. It declared, "Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945 and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated." (Bernstein, ed., The Atomic Bomb, pg. 52-56)."
Yeah - but in defense of Truman (and the scientists) he was tormented before and for the rest of his life. Just as it tormented many Japanese politicians and citizens when they bombed Pearl Harbor. War is hell. The decision to begin or end a war is monumentous.
Too bad we didn't learn from that worst case scenario. (Japan, however, mostly has.)
Let's just work and pray (whatever faith you are) so that we won't find out what a third nuke could do. (Go Hillary! Go Sarkozy!)
It has to been said that Japan has been warned. The Potsdam Agreement states in Annex II, b(3) "just as inevitably the utter devastation of the Japanese homeland." as warning of the consequence of not accepting the allied conditions.
I am also careful with the wording "crimes of war": Not all crimes during a war are "crimes of war". Those crimes are very specific class of crimes, and in the case of the two detonations of atomic bombs it is most like not a crime of war. The ICJ made two decisions in respect of the use of atomic weapons. In 1996 the court was split seven-to-seven with the casting vote of the president of the court:
Quote:
It follows from the above-mentioned requirements that the threat or use of nuclear weapons would generally be contrary to the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict, and in particular the principles and rules of humanitarian law;
However, in view of the current state of international law, and of the elements of fact at its disposal, the Court cannot conclude definitively whether the threat or use of nuclear weapons would be lawful or unlawful in an extreme circumstance of self-defence, in which the very survival of a State would be at stake;
However, in view of the current state of international law, and of the elements of fact at its disposal, the Court cannot conclude definitively whether the threat or use of nuclear weapons would be lawful or unlawful in an extreme circumstance of self-defence, in which the very survival of a State would be at stake;
If you read through the legal submissions from various states submitted to the court, you will see that the states, Lords and Creators of International Law, are far being clear regarding the legality of the use of nuclear weapons in a armed conflict. It is therefore not surprising the court unanimously stated:
Quote:
There is in neither customary nor conventional international law any specific authorization of the threat or use of nuclear weapons;
http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php ... se=93&k=09
---
I would be therefore very careful to call Hiroshima and Nagasaki "war crimes".
03 Mar 2009, 7:11 pm
ruveyn wrote:
We have the nukes. We have the missiles, we have currently the best armed force in the world.
That will suffice.
That will suffice.
Nuclear weapons are not sources of power: A weapon which usable is a source of power, not a nuclear weapon. The problem of owing using nuclear weapons is in a fine manner described in the British political comedy "Yes Prime Minister":
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IX_d_vMKswE[/youtube]
That the French and British still keep theirs has more to do with dreams of former world dominations than with real power. If e.g. Switzerland would turn made, would we turn Zurich into a nuclear waste field? Unlikely, The EU would close the borders and the problem would be solved within a few days (the Germans the the French made ones a very small scale by imposing for three days strict border controls when Switzerland didn't follow the EU-"suggestions" regarding the term of Switzerland member ship in the Schengen-Treaty).
A convention force can be a source of power, but not the nuclear option.
03 Mar 2009, 7:14 pm
ruveyn wrote:
To no longer be a super power means that those things will no longer be effective. They will age without replacement, affording replacements will not be feasible. Other countries will develop more sophisticated things. You wont be on top.
Are you not getting what "You wont be a super power." really means?
Are you not getting what "You wont be a super power." really means?
Our weapons have first priority. They will be maintained and upgraded even if we have to cut back to two meals a day.
We may be in financial trouble but our technical and technological status is quite sufficient to keep us armed an mean for another fifty years.
Money problems do not translate into technological problems in a one to one manner. [/quote]
Financial trouble is not a primary source of trouble, but a symptom. Military is a very expensive luxury a state can maintain. The US on of spends the highest amounts of GDP of all industrial countries for the military.
03 Mar 2009, 8:55 pm
The US discovered (and did not learn) in Viet Nam what it is experiencing in Iraq and Afghanistan. That individual situations require specific responses. All of our "superior" weaponry has not been able to defeat the very primitive but very effective military actions of nations that are determined not to comply. The huge and highly overpriced superweapons that, despite their claims, simply do not work in current situations are a huge financial boon to the weapons suppliers who have scammed the government into dumping huge amounts of money into frightfully expensive projects that are mere papier mache bogeymen for sucking money from the Defense Department. The Anti-missile systems that do not work but are still being deployed, the thousands of nuclear bombs that nobody wants to use, the fighter planes of horrific expense that are useless against insurgents have not prevented the endless "war" against terrorism from sucking money and lives out of the USA for longer than it took to defeat the highly expert Nazi regime in WWII to no effect except to generate more resistance from people whose lives have been disrupted by what is callously offered as "collateral damage" than the original targets for these "smart" weaponry. As usual, the military is preparing for the last war which is obsolete.
03 Mar 2009, 10:25 pm
Sand wrote:
The US discovered (and did not learn) in Viet Nam what it is experiencing in Iraq and Afghanistan. That individual situations require specific responses. All of our "superior" weaponry has not been able to defeat the very primitive but very effective military actions of nations that are determined not to comply. The huge and highly overpriced superweapons that, despite their claims, simply do not work in current situations are a huge financial boon to the weapons suppliers who have scammed the government into dumping huge amounts of money into frightfully expensive projects that are mere papier mache bogeymen for sucking money from the Defense Department. The Anti-missile systems that do not work but are still being deployed, the thousands of nuclear bombs that nobody wants to use, the fighter planes of horrific expense that are useless against insurgents have not prevented the endless "war" against terrorism from sucking money and lives out of the USA for longer than it took to defeat the highly expert Nazi regime in WWII to no effect except to generate more resistance from people whose lives have been disrupted by what is callously offered as "collateral damage" than the original targets for these "smart" weaponry. As usual, the military is preparing for the last war which is obsolete.
All true - under the last regime. But cut us some slack and give us some time to correct course.
The people spoke. The brains are now in charge. Hillary, Biden, Panetta (hometown boy), Mitchell, et al are on the case. Oh, and Gates is a new man.
_________________
Comprendre, c'est pardoner.
03 Mar 2009, 11:49 pm
MmeLePen wrote:
Sand wrote:
The US discovered (and did not learn) in Viet Nam what it is experiencing in Iraq and Afghanistan. That individual situations require specific responses. All of our "superior" weaponry has not been able to defeat the very primitive but very effective military actions of nations that are determined not to comply. The huge and highly overpriced superweapons that, despite their claims, simply do not work in current situations are a huge financial boon to the weapons suppliers who have scammed the government into dumping huge amounts of money into frightfully expensive projects that are mere papier mache bogeymen for sucking money from the Defense Department. The Anti-missile systems that do not work but are still being deployed, the thousands of nuclear bombs that nobody wants to use, the fighter planes of horrific expense that are useless against insurgents have not prevented the endless "war" against terrorism from sucking money and lives out of the USA for longer than it took to defeat the highly expert Nazi regime in WWII to no effect except to generate more resistance from people whose lives have been disrupted by what is callously offered as "collateral damage" than the original targets for these "smart" weaponry. As usual, the military is preparing for the last war which is obsolete.
All true - under the last regime. But cut us some slack and give us some time to correct course.
The people spoke. The brains are now in charge. Hillary, Biden, Panetta (hometown boy), Mitchell, et al are on the case. Oh, and Gates is a new man.
They already have enough rope and it looks like they are winding it into a hangman's knot for national suicide. I wish I had your optimistic confidence.
05 Mar 2009, 1:05 pm
Sand wrote:
MmeLePen wrote:
Sand wrote:
The US discovered (and did not learn) in Viet Nam what it is experiencing in Iraq and Afghanistan. That individual situations require specific responses. All of our "superior" weaponry has not been able to defeat the very primitive but very effective military actions of nations that are determined not to comply. The huge and highly overpriced superweapons that, despite their claims, simply do not work in current situations are a huge financial boon to the weapons suppliers who have scammed the government into dumping huge amounts of money into frightfully expensive projects that are mere papier mache bogeymen for sucking money from the Defense Department. The Anti-missile systems that do not work but are still being deployed, the thousands of nuclear bombs that nobody wants to use, the fighter planes of horrific expense that are useless against insurgents have not prevented the endless "war" against terrorism from sucking money and lives out of the USA for longer than it took to defeat the highly expert Nazi regime in WWII to no effect except to generate more resistance from people whose lives have been disrupted by what is callously offered as "collateral damage" than the original targets for these "smart" weaponry. As usual, the military is preparing for the last war which is obsolete.
All true - under the last regime. But cut us some slack and give us some time to correct course.
The people spoke. The brains are now in charge. Hillary, Biden, Panetta (hometown boy), Mitchell, et al are on the case. Oh, and Gates is a new man.
They already have enough rope and it looks like they are winding it into a hangman's knot for national suicide. I wish I had your optimistic confidence.
Sorry - but I completely disagree. But maybe we're looking at different news sources. What's an example?
Everyday we are making diplomatic progress.
But for now, its all opinion and predictions. Only time and history will tell.
_________________
Comprendre, c'est pardoner.
05 Mar 2009, 1:38 pm
MmeLePen wrote:
Sand wrote:
MmeLePen wrote:
Sand wrote:
The US discovered (and did not learn) in Viet Nam what it is experiencing in Iraq and Afghanistan. That individual situations require specific responses. All of our "superior" weaponry has not been able to defeat the very primitive but very effective military actions of nations that are determined not to comply. The huge and highly overpriced superweapons that, despite their claims, simply do not work in current situations are a huge financial boon to the weapons suppliers who have scammed the government into dumping huge amounts of money into frightfully expensive projects that are mere papier mache bogeymen for sucking money from the Defense Department. The Anti-missile systems that do not work but are still being deployed, the thousands of nuclear bombs that nobody wants to use, the fighter planes of horrific expense that are useless against insurgents have not prevented the endless "war" against terrorism from sucking money and lives out of the USA for longer than it took to defeat the highly expert Nazi regime in WWII to no effect except to generate more resistance from people whose lives have been disrupted by what is callously offered as "collateral damage" than the original targets for these "smart" weaponry. As usual, the military is preparing for the last war which is obsolete.
All true - under the last regime. But cut us some slack and give us some time to correct course.
The people spoke. The brains are now in charge. Hillary, Biden, Panetta (hometown boy), Mitchell, et al are on the case. Oh, and Gates is a new man.
They already have enough rope and it looks like they are winding it into a hangman's knot for national suicide. I wish I had your optimistic confidence.
Sorry - but I completely disagree. But maybe we're looking at different news sources. What's an example?
Everyday we are making diplomatic progress.
But for now, its all opinion and predictions. Only time and history will tell.
See http://www.counterpunch.org/smith03042009.html
05 Mar 2009, 2:45 pm
Sand wrote:
MmeLePen wrote:
Sand wrote:
MmeLePen wrote:
Sand wrote:
The US discovered (and did not learn) in Viet Nam what it is experiencing in Iraq and Afghanistan. That individual situations require specific responses. All of our "superior" weaponry has not been able to defeat the very primitive but very effective military actions of nations that are determined not to comply. The huge and highly overpriced superweapons that, despite their claims, simply do not work in current situations are a huge financial boon to the weapons suppliers who have scammed the government into dumping huge amounts of money into frightfully expensive projects that are mere papier mache bogeymen for sucking money from the Defense Department. The Anti-missile systems that do not work but are still being deployed, the thousands of nuclear bombs that nobody wants to use, the fighter planes of horrific expense that are useless against insurgents have not prevented the endless "war" against terrorism from sucking money and lives out of the USA for longer than it took to defeat the highly expert Nazi regime in WWII to no effect except to generate more resistance from people whose lives have been disrupted by what is callously offered as "collateral damage" than the original targets for these "smart" weaponry. As usual, the military is preparing for the last war which is obsolete.
All true - under the last regime. But cut us some slack and give us some time to correct course.
The people spoke. The brains are now in charge. Hillary, Biden, Panetta (hometown boy), Mitchell, et al are on the case. Oh, and Gates is a new man.
They already have enough rope and it looks like they are winding it into a hangman's knot for national suicide. I wish I had your optimistic confidence.
Sorry - but I completely disagree. But maybe we're looking at different news sources. What's an example?
Everyday we are making diplomatic progress.
But for now, its all opinion and predictions. Only time and history will tell.
See http://www.counterpunch.org/smith03042009.html
Ooooooooooo - Dennis Kucinich. Sorry - but he's like the token Green Party-esque hippie in Congress. We keep him around to appease the peace-lovers - like my mom. This website looks like something she'd read. I betcha she's already checked those books out of her public library, read them, and returned them three weeks early.
I respect their commitment and cause - but its not realistic or practical.
Seriously, I am thankful for having that far left voice represented - just like I TRY to be thankful for wingnuts on the right like Lindsey Graham. Its the heart of our checks and balances - which is why I believe Obama and his team aren't going to crash and burn our country. (or the world, for that matter)
_________________
Comprendre, c'est pardoner.
05 Mar 2009, 3:00 pm
MmeLePen wrote:
Sand wrote:
MmeLePen wrote:
Sand wrote:
MmeLePen wrote:
Sand wrote:
The US discovered (and did not learn) in Viet Nam what it is experiencing in Iraq and Afghanistan. That individual situations require specific responses. All of our "superior" weaponry has not been able to defeat the very primitive but very effective military actions of nations that are determined not to comply. The huge and highly overpriced superweapons that, despite their claims, simply do not work in current situations are a huge financial boon to the weapons suppliers who have scammed the government into dumping huge amounts of money into frightfully expensive projects that are mere papier mache bogeymen for sucking money from the Defense Department. The Anti-missile systems that do not work but are still being deployed, the thousands of nuclear bombs that nobody wants to use, the fighter planes of horrific expense that are useless against insurgents have not prevented the endless "war" against terrorism from sucking money and lives out of the USA for longer than it took to defeat the highly expert Nazi regime in WWII to no effect except to generate more resistance from people whose lives have been disrupted by what is callously offered as "collateral damage" than the original targets for these "smart" weaponry. As usual, the military is preparing for the last war which is obsolete.
All true - under the last regime. But cut us some slack and give us some time to correct course.
The people spoke. The brains are now in charge. Hillary, Biden, Panetta (hometown boy), Mitchell, et al are on the case. Oh, and Gates is a new man.
They already have enough rope and it looks like they are winding it into a hangman's knot for national suicide. I wish I had your optimistic confidence.
Sorry - but I completely disagree. But maybe we're looking at different news sources. What's an example?
Everyday we are making diplomatic progress.
But for now, its all opinion and predictions. Only time and history will tell.
See http://www.counterpunch.org/smith03042009.html
Ooooooooooo - Dennis Kucinich. Sorry - but he's like the token Green Party-esque hippie in Congress. We keep him around to appease the peace-lovers - like my mom. This website looks like something she'd read. I betcha she's already checked those books out of her public library, read them, and returned them three weeks early.
I respect their commitment and cause - but its not realistic or practical.
Seriously, I am thankful for having that far left voice represented - just like I TRY to be thankful for wingnuts on the right like Lindsey Graham. Its the heart of our checks and balances - which is why I believe Obama and his team aren't going to crash and burn our country. (or the world, for that matter)
That Kucinich remarked that Obama is keeping 50,000 troops on in Iraq indefinitely seems to negate totally with you the fact that a very large contingent of the US Military will remain in Iraq by Obama's order. Does your mind blank out when Kucinich's name arises? Or do you simply refuse to believe that Obama has ordered this? Or do you consider this to be a negligible number of troops?
05 Mar 2009, 3:10 pm
Sand wrote:
MmeLePen wrote:
Sand wrote:
MmeLePen wrote:
Sand wrote:
MmeLePen wrote:
Sand wrote:
The US discovered (and did not learn) in Viet Nam what it is experiencing in Iraq and Afghanistan. That individual situations require specific responses. All of our "superior" weaponry has not been able to defeat the very primitive but very effective military actions of nations that are determined not to comply. The huge and highly overpriced superweapons that, despite their claims, simply do not work in current situations are a huge financial boon to the weapons suppliers who have scammed the government into dumping huge amounts of money into frightfully expensive projects that are mere papier mache bogeymen for sucking money from the Defense Department. The Anti-missile systems that do not work but are still being deployed, the thousands of nuclear bombs that nobody wants to use, the fighter planes of horrific expense that are useless against insurgents have not prevented the endless "war" against terrorism from sucking money and lives out of the USA for longer than it took to defeat the highly expert Nazi regime in WWII to no effect except to generate more resistance from people whose lives have been disrupted by what is callously offered as "collateral damage" than the original targets for these "smart" weaponry. As usual, the military is preparing for the last war which is obsolete.
All true - under the last regime. But cut us some slack and give us some time to correct course.
The people spoke. The brains are now in charge. Hillary, Biden, Panetta (hometown boy), Mitchell, et al are on the case. Oh, and Gates is a new man.
They already have enough rope and it looks like they are winding it into a hangman's knot for national suicide. I wish I had your optimistic confidence.
Sorry - but I completely disagree. But maybe we're looking at different news sources. What's an example?
Everyday we are making diplomatic progress.
But for now, its all opinion and predictions. Only time and history will tell.
See http://www.counterpunch.org/smith03042009.html
Ooooooooooo - Dennis Kucinich. Sorry - but he's like the token Green Party-esque hippie in Congress. We keep him around to appease the peace-lovers - like my mom. This website looks like something she'd read. I betcha she's already checked those books out of her public library, read them, and returned them three weeks early.
I respect their commitment and cause - but its not realistic or practical.
Seriously, I am thankful for having that far left voice represented - just like I TRY to be thankful for wingnuts on the right like Lindsey Graham. Its the heart of our checks and balances - which is why I believe Obama and his team aren't going to crash and burn our country. (or the world, for that matter)
That Kucinich remarked that Obama is keeping 50,000 troops on in Iraq indefinitely seems to negate totally with you the fact that a very large contingent of the US Military will remain in Iraq by Obama's order. Does your mind blank out when Kucinich's name arises? Or do you simply refuse to believe that Obama has ordered this? Or do you consider this to be a negligible number of troops?
Its premature to say what will happen. Obama is not pledging or promising anything - at the same time, he's not looking to "win" the war in Iraq - unlike the previous administration and guys like McCain.
My point is, you, the liberal press, the conservative press, the mainstram press - need to give them more than a month and a half to solve the situation in Iraq and Afghanistan.
When we get in trouble is when we make decisions based on "principal" - not reality - and then refuse to modify our position. Kucinich is just as pig-headed as Bush - but with better intentions. (IMHO)
Obama and his team are way more methodical and are barely scraping the surface of data. Give them time to assimilate the data and re-form our relations with the rest of the world.
And if after all that - we are "promising" or "pledging" 50K troops in Iraq - we can decide who screwed up or lied.
_________________
Comprendre, c'est pardoner.
05 Mar 2009, 9:02 pm
MmeLePen wrote:
Sand wrote:
MmeLePen wrote:
Sand wrote:
MmeLePen wrote:
Sand wrote:
MmeLePen wrote:
Sand wrote:
The US discovered (and did not learn) in Viet Nam what it is experiencing in Iraq and Afghanistan. That individual situations require specific responses. All of our "superior" weaponry has not been able to defeat the very primitive but very effective military actions of nations that are determined not to comply. The huge and highly overpriced superweapons that, despite their claims, simply do not work in current situations are a huge financial boon to the weapons suppliers who have scammed the government into dumping huge amounts of money into frightfully expensive projects that are mere papier mache bogeymen for sucking money from the Defense Department. The Anti-missile systems that do not work but are still being deployed, the thousands of nuclear bombs that nobody wants to use, the fighter planes of horrific expense that are useless against insurgents have not prevented the endless "war" against terrorism from sucking money and lives out of the USA for longer than it took to defeat the highly expert Nazi regime in WWII to no effect except to generate more resistance from people whose lives have been disrupted by what is callously offered as "collateral damage" than the original targets for these "smart" weaponry. As usual, the military is preparing for the last war which is obsolete.
All true - under the last regime. But cut us some slack and give us some time to correct course.
The people spoke. The brains are now in charge. Hillary, Biden, Panetta (hometown boy), Mitchell, et al are on the case. Oh, and Gates is a new man.
They already have enough rope and it looks like they are winding it into a hangman's knot for national suicide. I wish I had your optimistic confidence.
Sorry - but I completely disagree. But maybe we're looking at different news sources. What's an example?
Everyday we are making diplomatic progress.
But for now, its all opinion and predictions. Only time and history will tell.
See http://www.counterpunch.org/smith03042009.html
Ooooooooooo - Dennis Kucinich. Sorry - but he's like the token Green Party-esque hippie in Congress. We keep him around to appease the peace-lovers - like my mom. This website looks like something she'd read. I betcha she's already checked those books out of her public library, read them, and returned them three weeks early.
I respect their commitment and cause - but its not realistic or practical.
Seriously, I am thankful for having that far left voice represented - just like I TRY to be thankful for wingnuts on the right like Lindsey Graham. Its the heart of our checks and balances - which is why I believe Obama and his team aren't going to crash and burn our country. (or the world, for that matter)
That Kucinich remarked that Obama is keeping 50,000 troops on in Iraq indefinitely seems to negate totally with you the fact that a very large contingent of the US Military will remain in Iraq by Obama's order. Does your mind blank out when Kucinich's name arises? Or do you simply refuse to believe that Obama has ordered this? Or do you consider this to be a negligible number of troops?
Its premature to say what will happen. Obama is not pledging or promising anything - at the same time, he's not looking to "win" the war in Iraq - unlike the previous administration and guys like McCain.
My point is, you, the liberal press, the conservative press, the mainstram press - need to give them more than a month and a half to solve the situation in Iraq and Afghanistan.
When we get in trouble is when we make decisions based on "principal" - not reality - and then refuse to modify our position. Kucinich is just as pig-headed as Bush - but with better intentions. (IMHO)
Obama and his team are way more methodical and are barely scraping the surface of data. Give them time to assimilate the data and re-form our relations with the rest of the world.
And if after all that - we are "promising" or "pledging" 50K troops in Iraq - we can decide who screwed up or lied.
I was delighted that Obama was elected over McCain but I have to judge him over his moves. This item (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... id=topnews) is not speculation or rumor. It is news. It is a definite move and Obama must be judged on his moves. It is not good.
His choice of Geithner to dump more tons money down the black hole of Wall Street finance which only weakly supports the present economic fiasco is not speculation or rumor, it is a move on which he must be judged. The banks are not using the money to lend because nobody is investing in an economy in a precipitous downslide. The Dow is very indicative of that. Obama is not helping and now is when he must use the power he was voted in to apply. There is no time for him to flounder with the old hacks from Clinton's reign. These problems cannot wait for an indecisive executive to play games and learn the ropes. He is obviously an intelligent man with lots of background. I don't see it in action.
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
|
Delusions of Grandeur - Religious/Christian
in Bipolar, Tourettes, Schizophrenia, and other Psychological Conditions |
29 Mar 2024, 8:25 pm |
| Strange fishy behavior going on in Florida |
31 Mar 2024, 10:14 pm |
| Thousands of Strange White Rocks Found on Mars |
04 Apr 2024, 7:53 pm |
| Least favourite Nintendo characters |
01 May 2024, 11:12 am |
