Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Argh I better step back to modquisition if needed. Will try not to argue further, but don't hold me to it.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:Worse than the global economic crisis?

War on two fronts?

10 tillion in debt to, amonst others, Communist China?

Wow! What did Obama do?

Global economic crisis was decades in the making, it didn't just happen the 8 years bush was in office (as much as the left wingers like to preach it did). We've been economically fething ourselves in the ass since the last economic crisis.

Afghan war is worst than the Iraq war and guess who pushed for Afghan? It sure as feth wasn't G.W

Obama's health care reform plan is going to add another trillion+, now he is looking to spend another 34B on having the country spend more on solar and other clean air energy alternatives. Not a bad thing from a "green planet" perspective but another debt we don't need right now.

Obama gets critcized for doing too much at one time. He's trying to do 4 things at once right now (deal with afghan, adopt a clean air bill, get socialist....i mean, public health care option and apparently stabilizing the economy) but he has done neither of those in 10 months. He has started work on them but hasn't actually completed any of them. It's like painting 4 armies at once. Yeah you are painting a lot of mini's but none of the armies are getting completed so to most people it will look like you haven't done much of anything at all.

He honestly has done nothing in 10 months and I don't say this because I don't like the guy. If McCain was doing what Obama did I would admit the same about him. Not all Conservatives kissed G.W's ass; my friends and I complained about some of what he did so don't think because he is Obama I don't like him. I don't like him because of what he stands for, his empty promises and the fact he is more worried about throwing our country further into debt than he is about helping to recover it.

Unemployment is expected to jump to 10.5% on average next year. Right now it's still over 9% and has been that way since he took office. That doesn't show me he is doing much.

dogma wrote:Admittedly, if I happened to be PoTUS, I would find a way to do that at least once a week; replacing the weed with some god-awful expensive, tax payer purchased, single malt scotch.

Agreed! Well...sans the dart throwing. Who needs a Beer Summit? Obviously a Scotch Summit would be far superior...

So you are judging him on four projects, all started, within the first year of his tenure?

What had Bush achieved in such a time period?

Also, please note the financial crisis, Iraq, Afghanistan etc are all inherited problems. There is no magic wand to wave to sort such things. And I do believe it was the Bush administration that spunked cash up the wall bailing out the Banks, thus creating your enormous deficit?

At least in the UK, we had the sense to buy the Banks. Dirty little socialist swampdonkey scum we might be, but at least our cash stands a chance of being made back in terms of Share Dividends and selling the bound to recover shares for a profit?

As for Social Healthcare. Welcome to the 21st Century. Sorry you skipped the 20th, but you'll like it here, because your Government does more for you than just send sons to war, and tax you. The UK NHS might be clunky, it might need a good going over to sort it out, but it's better than having your Wallet checked before your Pulse should you be squished in your day to day life.

Socialism is NOT Communism. It's a totally different kettle of fish, and one that has succeeded in Europe. Socialism is good, and I say should be expected from your Government. Otherwise, whats the point of a Government?

Fateweaver wrote:

Afghan war is worst than the Iraq war and guess who pushed for Afghan? It sure as feth wasn't G.W

Hmm, i'll just cover this for a moment.

Both were in retaliation for 9/11, carried out by Al Qaeda, who were based in Afghanistan... I fully backed the war there, it made sense to retaliate. The war in Iraq, the one GW wanted, made no fething sense and still doesn't, Bin Laden was a blood enemy of Saddam Hussein, when the first Gulf War was in it's opening stages, Bin Laden offered to kill Saddam for Bush senior. Saddam was a military dictator, opposed to virtually everything Bin Laden stands for.

The idea Iraq was harbouring terrorists and terror weapons was bull gak. The infrastructure of the country was in virtual collapse. What Iraq was and is, is a personal vendetta issue from the Bush dynasty and a wanton grab for oil wealth by his little cabal.

Afghanistan (and parts of Pakistan) need the taliban and al qaeda kicked soundly into touch, they are active terrorist organisations in a state of near governance. Iraq was just a mess and it's unlikely to get less messy now we kicked over the despot who was dealing death out on the religious nut jobs along with all the innocents.

And both of these charmers were armed by the republican right.

Also, it's entirely possible that the Taleban could have been shattered once and for all yonks ao, had the Iraq war not split forces over two fronts.

Take troops and equipment to Iraq, and you lose the ability to pile the pressure on the Taleban. This allows them time to regroup, rearm, and recruit. You also show yourself to be weak, as you lack the muscle to really put the squeeze on and hunt down Bin Liner.

And if memory serves (which it doesn't necessarily) the Taleban made themselves a target when they refused to send over Bin Laden for trial?

Frazzled wrote:
Saying the right track, track is propaganda is nonsense.

Just out of curiosity, has such a poll ever found that America is on the right track?

Frazzled wrote:
Its the WSJ poll out this morning. The Obama Administration statement recently that the stimulus "already did what its gonna do" and that unemployment could stay near the 10% range through 2010 should be sending thrills of terror through the Democratic Party. It does not bode well for the Democrats seat position in Congress.

Why? No one cares about national statistics when the election is local. I mean, poor economic performance doesn't necessarily decide Congressional elections. They aren't the same as Presidential concerns.

Frazzled wrote:
NATO just announced its not committing more troops unless follows McCrystal plan.

I'm surprised they even left open the option to commit more troops. I've expected a progressive NATO pullout for the last 3-4 months.

Frazzled wrote:
Iran's still making nuke material

That's more of an Israeli problem.

Frazzled wrote:
We gave up Eastern Europe to the Russians for nothing.

We did? To me it still seems like Poland is in NATO, and the Russian army is well within its borders.

Frazzled wrote:
Countries are actively trying to subvert the strength of the US dollar.

They've been trying to do that for quite some time. There are a great many people that aren't particularly happy with the fact that the dollar's status as world reserve currency artificially insulates its value.

Frazzled wrote:
Sarkozy is now challenging US going "WTF" in regards to Iran.

The same Sarkozy that opened trade negotiations with said nation? The same Sarkozy that has every bit of the personal duplicity that made De Gaulle so hated in the West?

Frazzled wrote:
The Taliban is still gaining strength and still killing Americans (wait i thought that wasn't possible).

Who cares? Afghanistan is not a winnable war. It never was. Its an ongoing occupation designed to take pressure off of Pakistan. There will be ebbs and flows in the conflict until we eventually leave.

Frazzled wrote:
Other than continuing our uber dominance of Nobel peace prizes, how is this doing better?

NATO is willing to commit more troops provided certain conditions are fulfilled, I consider the missile shield decision to be a vast improvement (the thing only had about a 37% success rate when firing at a target with a known launch site), and relations with Russia have begun to normalize.

Fateweaver wrote:Afghan war is worst than the Iraq war and guess who pushed for Afghan? It sure as feth wasn't G.W

IDK, mr. dood... The conflict in that region IS more intense. But, SOCOM was in Afghanistan first, infiltrating and gathering recon months before the infantry hit the ground. The public didn't know this until after the fact. What else don't we know?
Speaking of infantry, my bro was in Afghan watching his homie get blown apart by a RPG before Obama was a blip on the presidential radar... If not GW, then whom?

Fateweaver wrote:
Global economic crisis was decades in the making, it didn't just happen the 8 years bush was in office (as much as the left wingers like to preach it did). We've been economically fething ourselves in the ass since the last economic crisis.

Not quite. The tendency to view the economic climate that way is derived largely from the tendency to view history in terms of war. I've never really understood why we do that, outside the general tendency to conflate the notions of realism and pessimism.

Far be it for me to suggest that the last 30 years were actually pretty good all around. The one major issues was our failure to convert the massive collection of financial data that pooled inside our border into usable, physical assets (highways, railways, bridges, etc.).

Fateweaver wrote:
Afghan war is worst than the Iraq war and guess who pushed for Afghan? It sure as feth wasn't G.W

Well, it actually was. I mean, he did start the thing.

Fateweaver wrote:
Obama's health care reform plan is going to add another trillion+, now he is looking to spend another 34B on having the country spend more on solar and other clean air energy alternatives. Not a bad thing from a "green planet" perspective but another debt we don't need right now.

That's the bit about asset conversion I was talking about above. Right now we have international credit, in 30 or so years we won't. No amount of spending changes will alter the fact that our currency will not be the world reserve for much longer. We need to take advantage of that fact.

Fateweaver wrote:
and apparently stabilizing the economy

The economy is actually pretty stable. Its not really improving, but it also isn't getting worse.

Fateweaver wrote:
Unemployment is expected to jump to 10.5% on average next year. Right now it's still over 9% and has been that way since he took office. That doesn't show me he is doing much.

The government doesn't control unemployment. Not directly. Thus far, just about everything that can be done to remedy unemployment has been done. Its a matter of time at this point.

dogma wrote:[

Fateweaver wrote:
Afghan war is worst than the Iraq war and guess who pushed for Afghan? It sure as feth wasn't G.W

Well, it actually was. I mean, he did start the thing.

****incorrect. Al Qaeda started it.

Fateweaver wrote:
Obama's health care reform plan is going to add another trillion+, now he is looking to spend another 34B on having the country spend more on solar and other clean air energy alternatives. Not a bad thing from a "green planet" perspective but another debt we don't need right now.

That's the bit about asset conversion I was talking about above. Right now we have international credit, in 30 or so years we won't. No amount of spending changes will alter the fact that our currency will not be the world reserve for much longer. We need to take advantage of that fact.

Saying Obama hasn't done anything is just not fair.

He got the nobel peace prize! Woo! He got elected on what everyone thought he could do, now he's getting prestigious awards for what people think he can do! In addition, he is quite efficiently fething up the USA.

If he pulls out of Afghanistan all the soldiers that died there died for nothing, and he'll only serve to satisfy the bitching mothers and special interest-politicians who don't understand that soldiers do what they do knowing the risks. I can't stand the antiwar people, they have no clue what makes the world tick.

Also, Obama has succeeded in bending over for some of America's greatest enemies. Why does the peacemaker insist on taking it up the ass from Iran? Or Venezuela? He's throwing one of our only allies in the Middle East under the bus just so he can be best friends with Ahmadinejad. God help us all if Terrorists or Radical Muslims in Positions of Power start threatening us. Poor Obama won't have a fething clue what to do.

I find it interesting that everyone forgets that the Zelaya incident occurred because he was trying to extend his term of presidency.

Taken from http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE55R24E20090628

U.S. President Barack Obama and the European Union expressed deep concern after troops came for Zelaya, an ally of socialist Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, around dawn and took him away from his residence. He was whisked away to Costa Rica.

Zelaya, who took office in 2006 and is limited by the constitution to a four-year term that ends in early 2010, had angered the army, courts and Congress by pushing for an unofficial public vote on Sunday to gauge support for his plan to hold a November referendum on allowing presidential re-election.

A couple red flags stand out.

One. The closest ally of Chavez? Hm. The same Chavez that "championed the left in Latin America" and is one of the more satanic world leaders?
Two. The guy wants to extend his presidential term. Wasn't Hitler a dictator too? Mussolini? Stalin? Hussein?

And so Captain Peacemaker (who has already been nominated for the Prize) must defend his fellow Leftwinger in the name of peace and Socialism.

Just another day in the USSA.

Anyone wonder how Cash for Clunkers did?

A vehicle at 15 mpg and 12,000 miles per year uses 800 gallons a year of
gasoline.

A vehicle at 25 mpg and 12,000 miles per year uses 480 gallons a year.

So, the average "Cash for Clunkers" transaction will reduce US gasoline
consumption by 320 gallons per year.

They claim 700,000 vehicles – so that's 224 million gallons / year.

That equates to a bit over 5 million barrels of oil.

5 million barrels of oil is about ¼ of one day's US consumption.

And, 5 million barrels of oil costs about $350 million dollars at $70/bbl.

So, we all contributed to spending $3 billion to save $350 million.

How good a deal was that ???

They'll probably do a better job with health care, though!!

I'm sorry, I go to Church every Sunday and worship a real Messiah. You?

Rico...

Frazzled wrote:..and for G's sake shut Biden up.

Agreed

*snigger* real messiah *snigger*
Any jewish posters got an opinion on that?

(Bold Da Boss. Posting after 4 beers.)

Da Boss wrote:*snigger* real messiah *snigger*
Any jewish posters got an opinion on that?

(Bold Da Boss. Posting after 4 beers.)

I doubt they have time; if memory serves it's a requirement for young adults to serve in the Israeli military. Being the only Jewish country surrounded by Radical Muslims who would love to wipe them off the face of the Earth must have made Israel a bit edgy. If not that, must be Ahmadinejad's vow to destroy them.

If there are Jewish posters outside of Israel, I'd rather not get into a Theological debate. Let's be realistic - those never end.

Rico...

Niiiiiiice bait 'n' switch. Respect bro.
As far as I remember, my israeli ex was not too edgy. Except when I slagged her taste in anime. Then she got pretty mean.

And yeah, I'm sorry, I shouldn't have brought up the theological argument thingy, I just couldn't resist. I could blame the beer, but really it's because I'm a bollocks.

OH GOD NOES!!! SOME1 MENTIONED

SHE WHO MUST BE OBEYED!!!

OH GOD NOES!!!

Frazzled wrote:
Incorrect. Al Qaeda started it.

No, Bush did. Unless you want to consider Al Qaeda a sovereign nation which is capable of declaring war.

And hey, if we're gonna get into a pissing contest over who created the problem shouldn't we look at who actually funded the Afghani mujahideen during the 70's and 80's?

Frazzled wrote:
Are you serious?

Um, yes. Obviously there are limits to this, but we haven't reached them yet.

Frazzled wrote:
Didn't check the stock market before you said that did you now...

I take it you think daily fluctuations actually mean something?

Edit: Apparently I can't direct link to the YTD chart, so you'll have to click YTD on the graph.

Dow Jones YTD

AMEX YTD

S&P 500 YTD

NYSE YTD

Frazzled wrote:
Instead of trying to pass massive new tax schemes in the form of cap n tax, the healthcare debacle, the olympics, the democratic dream spending bill, 20 fundraisers and more golf than any other President previously how about

Nice work on channeling Glen Beck.

Frazzled wrote:
-Get rid of the remainder of the "stimulus plan" that has not been wasted yet.

As far as I know its all been allocated. Do you think it was wasted because you don't like the notion of stimulus, or because you don't know what stimulus is intended to do?

Frazzled wrote:
-Triple declining tax deduction for capital spending in the US.

You mean the capital spending tax deduction that was significantly increased under the Stimulus plan you so abhor?

Frazzled wrote:
-Personal: flat tax of 10% on revenues. No personal deductions. Eliminate government spending to match.
and for G's sake shut Biden up.

How about we cut the upper tax bracket to 20% and maintain the personal deductions policy?

Frazzled wrote:
Here's a tip, those who love the administration's "We got gobs of vaccine," to "we'll have some vaccine," to "we're gonna have gobs, and early!" to "sorry there's been delays" will love the healthcare system. People have died because these losers bungled the swine flu vaccine program and thats 100,0000% on their watch.

You do realize that the private sector is developing the vaccine, and the government only paid for it, right?

So, if your goal is to point out how bad the government would be at paying for healthcare (you know, cause they paid over a billion dollars to purchase enough vaccine for every person in the nation) I think you might want to choose a better example.

Rico wrote:
If he pulls out of Afghanistan all the soldiers that died there died for nothing, and he'll only serve to satisfy the bitching mothers and special interest-politicians who don't understand that soldiers do what they do knowing the risks. I can't stand the antiwar people, they have no clue what makes the world tick.

So, wait, what exactly are they dieing for now? US security? What happens if continuing to fight in Afghanistan has a negative impact on US security? Does pulling out still mean they died for nothing? More importantly, if the goal is to increase US security, and theirs deaths effectively served to increase US security, then haven't they already died for something?

Rico wrote:
Also, Obama has succeeded in bending over for some of America's greatest enemies. Why does the peacemaker insist on taking it up the ass from Iran? Or Venezuela? He's throwing one of our only allies in the Middle East under the bus just so he can be best friends with Ahmadinejad.

Last time I checked allegiance was based on the concept of a mutually beneficial agreement. How exactly do we benefit from a relationship with Israel?

Rico wrote:
God help us all if Terrorists or Radical Muslims in Positions of Power start threatening us. Poor Obama won't have a fething clue what to do.

Yeah, I mean, that would be terrible...if any of those nations actually possessed the capacity to do significant harm to the US.

Rico wrote:
I find it interesting that everyone forgets that the Zelaya incident occurred because he was trying to extend his term of presidency.

Except that isn't actually what happened. Zelaya proposed a referendum amendment to determine the popular support for an amendment to the constitution which would have allowed any given President to run for reelection. This amendment would not have been discussed formally until Zelaya was out of office, because it the referendum would not have actually been taken until the next Presidential election.

Zelaya, who took office in 2006 and is limited by the constitution to a four-year term that ends in early 2010, had angered the army, courts and Congress by pushing for an unofficial public vote on Sunday to gauge support for his plan to hold a November referendum on allowing presidential re-election.

I see you didn't actually read the passage you quoted. Bully for you.

Rico wrote:
One. The closest ally of Chavez? Hm. The same Chavez that "championed the left in Latin America" and is one of the more satanic world leaders?

Shockingly enough there are far more options with respect to the world order than 'bomb' and 'ignore'. There are also issues of diplomatic overture with the intent of isolating potentially harmful leaders from prior allies.

Rico wrote:
Two. The guy wants to extend his presidential term. Wasn't Hitler a dictator too? Mussolini? Stalin? Hussein?

Again, not what actually happened. Read what you're going to comment on.

Rico wrote:
And, 5 million barrels of oil costs about $350 million dollars at $70/bbl.

So, we all contributed to spending $3 billion to save $350 million.

So, you're comparing a one-time outlay of 3 billion USD to a progressive savings of 350 million USD without accounting for the obvious discrepancy of aggregation (and, of course, increased automotive sales)? I mean, you can claim that Cash 4 Clunkers didn't work, and I'm not saying it did, but that type of slip up isn't exactly helping your point.

Wordstorm.

Falconlance wrote:Wordstorm.

WordWorld!!!


Yeah, you can tell I'm a dad...