War today, war tomorrow, war forever... that's how Obama rolls

abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
[video=youtube;pV7UYj-4mTE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pV7UYj-4mTE[/video]
I'll go ahead and put this here. Young conservative debates Chomsky on Afghanistan, it's a bit old, but not completely outdated. I don't mind bumping a thread about that war, lest we forget it is going on, now more than 11 years.
 
skunky33

skunky33

Active Member
It's ignorant to think that Bush or Obama actually come up with when wars are going to end. It's all long term strategies that we'll probably never know about. The same people who tell bush what to do, tell Obama what to do. How many advisors does the presidents have? It's just so fuckin stupid to think the president acts as some lone military strategist and "this guy over here would have gotten things done quicker" because he has an "R" in front of his name! The worst is when idiots act like with the snap of their fingers a president can fix the economy
 
ginwilly

ginwilly

Well-Known Member
skunky33 said:
It's ignorant to think that Bush or Obama actually come up with when wars are going to end. It's all long term strategies that we'll probably never know about. The same people who tell bush what to do, tell Obama what to do. How many advisors does the presidents have? It's just so fuckin stupid to think the president acts as some lone military strategist and "this guy over here would have gotten things done quicker" because he has an "R" in front of his name! The worst is when idiots act like with the snap of their fingers a president can fix the economy
Click to expand...
From what I can tell, both Bushney/Obama are listening to the same people.

What's cool about most things in this country is the way we are set up, we have 50 laboratories to experiment and find the best methods. If we look at what the states are doing economically and what works and what doesn't we can use this as guidance on a national level. For instance, if you looked at how Ill and Ind approached debts, deficits and jobs you see two contrasting ideologies with two contrasting results.

Another thing, because our economy is affected by perception as much as reality, the president absolutely can have a short term affect both positive or negative. Long term is obvious but since we have so much political turnover, they don't really focus on long term. I'm still not sure who is the worst, those that thing he can fix things with a snap of a finger or those who think 4 years is not long enough. If that's really true, let's amend the length of the presidential term.
 
canndo

canndo

Well-Known Member
gagekko said:
America will always be OWNED by the elite and the banksters as long as Americans are stupid enough to buy into the two party system - Republicans? Democrats? They are just different claws on the same vampire :(
Click to expand...
Nope. The two party system has nothing to do with it - three or four or no parties would result in the same elite and banksters running things. the problem lies in social distance - the distance between one segment of society - the one that runs things, and the other segment - those being "run". When pay differences are in the thousands of percents, when the rich and the powerful live far from where the middle class live there remaining out of touch, there will be serious problems.

I read a comparison pertaining to that.

One manager works in a building separate from where his employees work - he works across the street. Another manager works in the same building.

The heat goes out in the building where the people work. The first manager has to hear about it through a phone call from one of his employees and he is not directly affected. After the phone call, he picks the paper up and has his morning coffee. Another person from the other building calls and he finally notifies his maintenence guys, who have been waiting for his call but are not empowered to do anything without his direct say.


Now, the other manager is in the building - he gets to work, finds it is cold, reaches for the thermostat and discovers it isn't working. Which one is more likely to get his employees comfortable first?
 
C

Carthoris

Well-Known Member
canndo said:
Nope. The two party system has nothing to do with it - three or four or no parties would result in the same elite and banksters running things. the problem lies in social distance - the distance between one segment of society - the one that runs things, and the other segment - those being "run". When pay differences are in the thousands of percents, when the rich and the powerful live far from where the middle class live there remaining out of touch, there will be serious problems.

I read a comparison pertaining to that.

One manager works in a building separate from where his employees work - he works across the street. Another manager works in the same building.

The heat goes out in the building where the people work. The first manager has to hear about it through a phone call from one of his employees and he is not directly affected. After the phone call, he picks the paper up and has his morning coffee. Another person from the other building calls and he finally notifies his maintenence guys, who have been waiting for his call but are not empowered to do anything without his direct say.


Now, the other manager is in the building - he gets to work, finds it is cold, reaches for the thermostat and discovers it isn't working. Which one is more likely to get his employees comfortable first?
Click to expand...
Having more parties would allow the chance of someone winning the election who wasn't d-bag a or d-bag b. Better than it is now in any case.
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
Carthoris said:
Having more parties would allow the chance of someone winning the election who wasn't d-bag a or d-bag b. Better than it is now in any case.
Click to expand...
Actually, history indicates otherwise, not that I give a shit either.

Take the 2000 election, in which Nader's votes, had they gone to Gore, would have made the difference, things would be quite different.

Take Canada, where Harper, while not popular, has managed to keep an iron grip on power and has made some deeply unpopular decisions, such as the passage of NAFTA.

Don't get me started on Mexico.

We're better off with grassroots movements to influence the parties.
 
haight

haight

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
Actually, history indicates otherwise, not that I give a shit either.

Take the 2000 election, in which Nader's votes, had they gone to Gore, would have made the difference, things would be quite different.

Take Canada, where Harper, while not popular, has managed to keep an iron grip on power and has made some deeply unpopular decisions, such as the passage of NAFTA.

Don't get me started on Mexico.

We're better off with grassroots movements to influence the parties.
Click to expand...
Nuke the MFs
 
C

Carthoris

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
Actually, history indicates otherwise, not that I give a shit either.

Take the 2000 election, in which Nader's votes, had they gone to Gore, would have made the difference, things would be quite different.

Take Canada, where Harper, while not popular, has managed to keep an iron grip on power and has made some deeply unpopular decisions, such as the passage of NAFTA.

Don't get me started on Mexico.

We're better off with grassroots movements to influence the parties.
Click to expand...
They would be different, but in what way? Lefties don't have any better track record on human rights and running countries than the Righties. Maybe we would be another 5 trillion in debt or the country would be in hyperinflation, or maybe...

The last time aliens invaded Earth, they captured the most intelligent of us and forced us to mate continuously. Beat Oh yes...
—Professor Farnsworth, Futurama
[HR][/HR]
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
Carthoris said:
They would be different, but in what way? Lefties don't have any better track record on human rights and running countries than the Righties. Maybe we would be another 5 trillion in debt or the country would be in hyperinflation, or maybe...

The last time aliens invaded Earth, they captured the most intelligent of us and forced us to mate continuously. Beat Oh yes...
—Professor Farnsworth, Futurama
[HR][/HR]
Click to expand...
refer to post #20
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top