VimyJ wrote:No WMD and no AQ in Iraq. Let's not forget the official reasons given to congress and the nation.
A nation with an average attention span measured in seconds, and a media system setup to keep it that way.
The French are at it again
BMW_Dave wrote:There are many fine state business schools in the U.S. that don't cost 26 K/yr.
State Universities? I guess the US is also socialist by your own definition.
Canada is more left than the US but can hardly be termed socialist. The USSR was a socialist state. Swedish taxes are just over 50% if I remember correctly yet the citizens of the Scandinavian states enjoy standards of living as high or higher than those found in NA. They live longer and are better educated. Careful how you throw stones when living in a glass house.
Then please just vote for John Kerry, as I am sure you will, in November. There are many here that have differing philosophies and opinions. I guess we who disagree are just ignorant...you sound very elitist, Kerry's your man.VimyJ wrote:Iraq had nothing to do with American freedom or any threat thereto. That is the whole point.
The French among those were smart enough to oppose the out and out power play (or was it "Mom and apple pie") that is Iraq. The administration has blown $10s of billions.
No WMD and no AQ in Iraq. Let's not forget the official reasons given to congress and the nation. Over 800 US dead.
Interesting times ahead.
This thread is inappropriate for this board.
BMW_Dave wrote:Then please just vote for John Kerry, as I am sure you will, in November. There are many here that have differing philosophies and opinions. I guess we who disagree are just ignorant...you sound very elitist, Kerry's your man.
This thread is inappropriate for this board.
Then unsubscribe from it and ignore it, BMW guy on a Nissan/Infiniti forum. No one tied a piano has tied a piano to your a$$.
If elitist means "one who keeps his eye on the ball" then that's me.
VimyJ wrote:State Universities? I guess the US is also socialist by your own definition.
Canada is more left than the US but can hardly be termed socialist. The USSR was a socialist state. Swedish taxes are just over 50% if I remember correctly yet the citizens of the Scandinavian states enjoy standards of living as high or higher than those found in NA. They live longer and are better educated. Careful how you throw stones when living in a glass house.
O.K this is the very last one even if you call my mother names..LOL!
Canada ..socialized medicine...gross subsidies of education...etc, etc. The USSR was a comunist state...individuals were not allowed to own property. Sorry if I was mistaken re Sweden tax rates...I had a Swedish friend here in the 80's...he reported at that time that taxes were approx 80%. He had multiple degrees, all paid for by the govt.
Lastly, yes I am concerned that we are becoming a socialist country...I don't believe in grants for college...loans maybe...but not grants. If I wanted to be "taken care of from cradle to grave", I would go live in a Scandanavian country. It's "my money"...and I am weary of the federal govt taking an inordinate amount of it at the point of a gun. Think Liberterian...our founding fathers did.
Are you in favor of Socialism Vinny?
When I first signed up for the board Vinny, I sold BMW's, I own and drive a '97 J30. I like Infiniti's because their original design philosophy was to be the "Japanese BMW", you know RWD, don't dampen the exhaust note like Lexus, etc. I'm not mad...you obviously are.
Taxed 80 cents on the dollar? Please.
I got a plan. Go get in your 30 000 car and drive down to your local ghetto, ask the 6 year old who was born into poverty whether or not they'd like a better health care system or education.
Cold_Zero - no doubt the french govt. and others probably did have some doubts because of what they sold to iraq,
but the people didn't oppose the war for this reason,
I got a plan. Go get in your 30 000 car and drive down to your local ghetto, ask the 6 year old who was born into poverty whether or not they'd like a better health care system or education.
Cold_Zero - no doubt the french govt. and others probably did have some doubts because of what they sold to iraq,
but the people didn't oppose the war for this reason,
yashin wrote: S13guy, you think this is all a big crazy theory.
You took my post out of context, i was actually intrigued by your post and googled it. the theory makes sense, and I do believe a corporation empire is in the making ready to make HUGE profits off other countries. I also know that organizations like the World Bank and the IMF are pretty much responsible for most of the world's poverty. Yeah i believe a lot of stuff that doesnt make sense so blah blah bla. BUt one thing is for sure guys, dont think the US will remain a superpower for long.
Phax wrote: And for the record, America isn't even a democracy. It's a Republic.
ahem, the US is a Democratic-Republic, which is why Al Gore didnt win the 2000 election. The peoples vote holds a lot of weight but not as much as the electorial colleges'.
on another note Iraq Is the biggest remodling contract right now. This is just the 1st step. Then the US will invade other " Rogue states" such as Libya and Lebanon and make them "democratic". After we kick their *** then the construction companies step in making huge profits during the countries remodeling. Its killing 2 birds with one stone. Everytime we invade a country we are gonna establish permanent military bases for National security (expanding (corporate) empire) and make huge profits off the reconstruction phase.
oh and c'mon guys, keep the gloves on and the blows above the belt :boxing
BMW_Dave wrote: What is America doing for the world you arrogant ungrateful jerk...covering their a**es as usual!!!!!!!!! France and the United Nations can kiss my a**! They are pompous idealists who don't have a clue as to when diplomacy stops and the "Big Stick" comes out...we are not imperialistic...if we were, we would have conquered the whole world by now....but we will only "play nice" for so long...I am sick and tired of the mealy mouthed nations of the world criticizing our policies when we bear the burden of being the most powerful nation on earth! Like it or not, we are the world's policemen...freedom and strength carry a heavy price!
You just have to google " Project for a new american century", go ahead and educate yourself. THEY EVEN HAVE A FREAKIN WEBSITE http://www.newamericancentury.org THAT CLEARLY STATES THEIR INTENTIONS. and dont give me that " if it isn't .gov blah blah blah" crap because its not (officially) sponsored by the gov't.
And the U.S. cannot conquer the world. I think Russia, Germany, France & China would have something to say about that.
S13GUY wrote:The peoples vote holds a lot of weight but not as much as the electorial colleges'.
Sometime in my lifetime, I'd like to see a one person, one vote presidental election where the winner is the person with 51% of the vote. We have the technology to do it. Anyone could go and do it at the grocery store. Just send it across the ATM network. That's secure right? I mean, the average American entrusts nearly their entire economy to the ones and zeros that transfer across those wires. If it's good enough to secure the banking system, it's good enough to secure my vote for president.
BMW_Dave wrote:Think Liberterian...our founding fathers did.
My prediction for 2004 is, the only thing the Liberterian's are going to do is sway enough of the democratic voters away from Kerry, to ensure that Bush wins a second term.
If I had to choose between two candidates to lead us into a future with a draft (coming to a community near you in 2005-6), I want a President who VOLUNTEERED to serve in COMBAT.
S13GUY wrote:You just have to google " Project for a new american century", go ahead and educate yourself. THEY EVEN HAVE A FREAKIN WEBSITE http://www.newamericancentury.org THAT CLEARLY STATES THEIR INTENTIONS.
And incase you're too lazy to go look, the KEYWORDS which CAUGHT my :rolleyes <---- (eye) were
non-profit
for education
"making the case for global leadership"
Which equates to those inclined to consider such things.. ONE WORLD ORDER.
That's just if you're into the conspiracy angle though...
I'm glad that there are people out there, making the case for global leadership that is based on American principals and morals. That's not imperialistic... it's simply, helpful?
As much as people want to bag on Saddam, you have to recognize one thing. He played the game of power very well. We are currently dealing with a big mess in Iraq, because we had extremely flawed intelligence.
George Bush Sr. knew not to invade Iraq after the first Gulf War.
Norman Schwartzkofph <or however you spell it> knew not to invade Iraq after the first Gulf War.
COLIN POWELL knew not to invade Iraq after the first Gulf War.
As bad as he was, Saddam was a stablizing force in the region. He might have kept stability by killing lots of people. In a place with extremely diverse, tribal / ethnic structure, he managed to "unify" and a RELATIVELY large area. An area defined post WW2, by the British of all people.
Now that Saddam is gone, there are all the factions that he kept down. We knew very little about them, because he was keeping them smothered. Those guys are the ones who want power, and they're not all that inclined to work with US (United States).
If we pull out, it will most likely degenerate into severe civil war that will make Beruit look pretty. The police are constantly under attack, to the point of having their stations overrun. There is nothing like the National Guard over there, to come in and quiet down the Iraqi equivalent of South Central LA when it pops off.
George Bush Sr. knew not to invade Iraq after the first Gulf War.
Norman Schwartzkofph <or however you spell it> knew not to invade Iraq after the first Gulf War.
COLIN POWELL knew not to invade Iraq after the first Gulf War.
As bad as he was, Saddam was a stablizing force in the region. He might have kept stability by killing lots of people. In a place with extremely diverse, tribal / ethnic structure, he managed to "unify" and a RELATIVELY large area. An area defined post WW2, by the British of all people.
Now that Saddam is gone, there are all the factions that he kept down. We knew very little about them, because he was keeping them smothered. Those guys are the ones who want power, and they're not all that inclined to work with US (United States).
If we pull out, it will most likely degenerate into severe civil war that will make Beruit look pretty. The police are constantly under attack, to the point of having their stations overrun. There is nothing like the National Guard over there, to come in and quiet down the Iraqi equivalent of South Central LA when it pops off.
and who do you think these people are? Cheney, Libby,Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz etc... the list goes on. Its Pax Americana propaganda at its slickest. They have Imperialism written on all their asses.Phax wrote: I'm glad that there are people out there, making the case for global leadership that is based on American principals and morals. That's not imperialistic... it's simply, helpful?
this is an excerpt from a site: http://www.thirdworldtraveler.....html
"The first step towards the establishment of this Pax Americana is, and has always been, the removal of Saddam Hussein and the establishment of an American protectorate in Iraq. The purpose of this is threefold: 1) To acquire control of the oilheads so as to fund the entire enterprise; 2) To fire a warning shot across the bows of every leader in the Middle East; 3) To establish in Iraq a military staging area for the eventual invasion and overthrow of several Middle Eastern regimes, including some that are allies of the United States."
go on, click on the link, you know you wanna
EDIT: P.S.- Dont expect the U.S. to "pull out" anytime soon
Phax wrote: You don't see America declaring war on poverty.
no, In 1964, President Lyndon Johnson declared war on domestic poverty.
BMW_Dave wrote:I want to apologize for getting so worked up over this issue...if I remember correctly, this is the "Nissan Infiniti Car Owner's Forum". It is obvious that there are people here on the left, the right, and some in the middle. I grew up in the South (yes I still capitalize it) and I am very conservative in my views...that does not mean that I am trying to get your kids to pray in school or anything of that sort. I actually lean more towards Libertarianism these days, so I guess I am getting wiser.
If anyone wants to email me personally on these subjects, you will find my address on my profile. This is not the place for political discussion... I just get tired of America bashing...some dissension is good, but never ever forget the prices that were paid for you to have that freedom. God bless America.
Peace out...
uhh this is the general chat forum, its open to anything (i.e. religion, politics, hoes etc...)
And why is it God Bless America? I have never understood that. Why not God Bless the World? Are we saying screw everyone else??
BMW_Dave wrote: The USSR was a comunist state...individuals were not allowed to own property.
Are you in favor of Socialism Vinny?
The USSR never achieved their communist state. They were true socalists which was a step on the way to commumism. They were stuck forever at the "dictatorship of the proletariat".
Since I was never a fan of the USSR (I did have grudging respect for their hockey teams), it can't be said that I'm in favor of Socialism. However, a national health care plan is long over due for the US. Just like the "socialist" Interstate Highway System made transportation of goods more efficient, a "socialist" healthcare system would make healthcare more efficient. The US spends the greatest percentage of GDP on healthcare in the world yet the US is way down the list in lifespan because many don't have access to healthcare.
Are you in favor of early death?
BTW, there are no "n"s in Vimy.
VimyJ wrote:The USSR never achieved their communist state. They were true socalists which was a step on the way to commumism. They were stuck forever at the "dictatorship of the proletariat".
Since I was never a fan of the USSR (I did have grudging respect for their hockey teams), it can't be said that I'm in favor of Socialism. However, a national health care plan is long over due for the US. Just like the "socialist" Interstate Highway System made transportation of goods more efficient, a "socialist" healthcare system would make healthcare more efficient. The US spends the greatest percentage of GDP on healthcare in the world yet the US is way down the list in lifespan because many don't have access to healthcare.
Are you in favor of early death?
BTW, there are no "n"s in Vimy.
My apologies for misspelling your name...I have seen it many times and until your last post, I truly thought there were 2 n's. I never noticed the "m".
The USSR's hockey teams were nothing more than subsidized "professionals". If we had been allowed to take the All-Stars from our professional teams back in the days when the Olympics were for "amateurs", we would have kicked their butts every year. The fact that we did beat them in '84 with amateurs was an incredible feat...I reveled in it.
As far as the "Interstate Highway System", I would hardly call that a socialist undertaking... although I do think it and other projects of the like should be funded by user taxes, which they are to some degree through gasoline taxes, tolls, etc. If you remember, it was started by Dwight Eisenhower, and it had a dual purpose:1. Obviously for people to quickly be able to travel from state to state on fast safe roadways.2. Primary purpose though was to enable the quick movement of troops, materials ,etc. around the country in time of war or nat'l crisis.
Am I in favor of early death...typical leftist question...make it an "emotional" issue...starving sick babies, etc. A nat'l health plan, no I don't favor another "socialist" program which we all know. if run by the federal bureaucrats will become yet another bloated, mismanaged, venture and be yet another drain on every American's pocketbooks.
Let's see...Social Security...originally concieved by FDR as a "forced savings program" intended to "supplement" one's personal savings. People now expect to live off of it...most get back far more than they ever put in, which they should have if it was truly a "trust fund", those monies would have been accruing interest over all the years and dare I say that many could retire as millionaires. My father died at the age of 53 and paid the max in every year of his working life...that money, along with interest, was his, and should have been left to his estate.
I am of the opinion that Democrats on the whole (and Republicans are getting almost as bad) see taxes as "their money", and we, the proletariat, are just too stupid to know how to best spend it...yes, that is what I call "elitism" and it "pi**es me off! It's kind of like Northerners who think Southerners are all stupid hillbillys.
I believe in individual liberties and responsibilities. I believe all drugs should be made legal...the billions we have spent on the "drug war" give people a warm fuzzy feeling that we are doing something to curb usage, etc. It has been a dismal failure.If you want to shoot heroin, it should be your right to do so as long as you don't infringe on my individual liberties. But, don't come to me for help when you become addicted and are strung out. Actions have consequences...If you pick up one end of the stick, you pick up the other. Tough love...we need more of it.
It is obvious we are at opposite ends of the political spectrum, Vimy...I don't know what your background is but I do know that by and large, Southerners, not being used to "being taken care of" by unions, big political machines such as Daly had/has in Chicago, etc., pretty much just want to be left to their own devices.
It is my opinion that the Democratic party in their zeal to "protect the "children", the "elderly", the "less fortunate" (that term really frosts me) have achieved their goal...that is to create a society that is so dependent on government that they have lost much of their self-worth, dignity, and most tragically, their "self reliance". But hey, they have created a constituency that is beholden to them forever. I don't really think they care that much about the people, just their votes and helping to create a larger federal government "daddy".
If it was up to me, anyone recieving an "entitlement" would not be allowed to vote, it is a conflict of interest.
I am tired of the Constitution being bastardized and watered down by leftists who think they know "what's best for me".
You are right though, we are creeping slowly down that slippery slope to socialism, and it concerns me greatly.
It has been proven time and time again that when the American people are alowed to keep more of "their money", the economy is more robust, and people that want to work have more opportunities open to them.
Now...let me see if I can get that piano untied from my a** and get back to work!
I don't care to get into a political debate but I would call myself a progressive centerist pragmatist.
The most titanic sports match between East and West was the 72 Summit Series between Team Canada and the CCCP. It is where I gained great respect for Soviet Hockey. No matter how they ran their team, the Russians played excellent hockey. Canada was on the ropes but dug down deep and won the deciding game in the last minute. A victory for the Free World against the Communist Bear.
The "Miracle on Ice" occured during the 1980 Lake Placid Olympics. That was the upset of the century and underlined how great the actual "game" of hockey really is. That US team rose up and gelled at the exact right time. All Westerners loved that stunning result, me included.
BTW, that US team had a lot of really good talent who went on to fine carreers in the NHL. It not like they didn't have a chance to win but absolutely no one knew that at the time including Team USA. That uncertainty is what really makes hockey teams come together. The CCCP was certain they would win. D'oh!
BTW, I'm a huge hockey aficianado in case you hadn't noticed.
The most titanic sports match between East and West was the 72 Summit Series between Team Canada and the CCCP. It is where I gained great respect for Soviet Hockey. No matter how they ran their team, the Russians played excellent hockey. Canada was on the ropes but dug down deep and won the deciding game in the last minute. A victory for the Free World against the Communist Bear.
The "Miracle on Ice" occured during the 1980 Lake Placid Olympics. That was the upset of the century and underlined how great the actual "game" of hockey really is. That US team rose up and gelled at the exact right time. All Westerners loved that stunning result, me included.
BTW, that US team had a lot of really good talent who went on to fine carreers in the NHL. It not like they didn't have a chance to win but absolutely no one knew that at the time including Team USA. That uncertainty is what really makes hockey teams come together. The CCCP was certain they would win. D'oh!
BTW, I'm a huge hockey aficianado in case you hadn't noticed.