Why our Sons and Daughters must be Sacrificed for Iraq !!!

[Logical]

So the politicians can:

Deflect attention from the spiraling deficit
Deflect attention from the stagnant economy
Deflect attention from the impending Social Security Crisis
Deflect attention from the illegal immigration problem
Deflect attention from the failing public education system
Deflect attention from soaring medical care costs
Deflect attention from the lack of progress on tax reform
Allow the government to better control our lives by taking away our personal liberties
Deflect attention from our failure on our War against Al Quada and Bin Laden in particular
Deflect attention from them allowing Big Oil to rip off the consumer
So companies like Haliburton can be paid for their support of the political parties

It is a game of look over here at the distraction so you don't focus on the real problems. This is why our sons and daughters must die in Iraq. It has nothing to do with the War on Terror, bringing Democracy to Iraq ro any other bullshit we are being fed.

Vlad Logiclsav
(the fed up)

[kcfanintitanhell]

You forgot the ever-popular RAISE THE TERROR ALERT LEVEL!!!

[Brock]

Seriously, you need to adjust your meds.

[kcfanintitanhell]

Seriously, you need to adjust your meds.

Seriously, how many of those would you kindly respond to? He laid em out. and that's all you got?

[Logical]

Seriously, you need to adjust your meds.Brock, you will notice I was careful not to blame just Bush, his administration or any one political party. Please reconsider and give me thoughts on particular items instead of general disparagement.

[Logical]

You forgot the ever-popular RAISE THE TERROR ALERT LEVEL!!!I think that is another of the diversions but it is administration specific so I did not include it.

[jAZ]

Brock, you will notice I was careful not to blame just Bush, his administration or any one political party. Please reconsider and give me thoughts on particular items instead of general disparagement.
Seriously, has that EVER happened?

[jAZ]

Seriously, how many of those would you kindly respond to? He laid em out. and that's all you got?
That's not Brock's thing. It's never (as far as I've ever, ever seen) been his thing to actually engage in discussion on the substance of a topic. His entire role on the planet is to stand at the side of the road and throw rocks at the passing cars. I think he wishes he was Iowanian. But at least Iowanian is a) creative, and b) willing to engage on topic from time to time.

[recxjake]

So the politicians can:

Deflect attention from the spiraling deficit
Deflect attention from the stagnant economy
Deflect attention from the impending Social Security Crisis
Deflect attention from the illegal immigration problem
Deflect attention from the failing public education system
Deflect attention from soaring medical care costs
Deflect attention from the lack of progress on tax reform
Allow the government to better control our lives by taking away our personal liberties
Deflect attention from our failure on our War against Al Quada and Bin Laden in particular
Deflect attention from them allowing Big Oil to rip off the consumer
So companies like Haliburton can be paid for their support of the political parties

It is a game of look over here at the distraction so you don't focus on the real problems. This is why our sons and daughters must die in Iraq. It has nothing to do with the War on Terror, bringing Democracy to Iraq ro any other bullshit we are being fed.

Vlad Logiclsav


(the fed up)

you are almost to the point where you need medical attention...... do you even follow the news???

[Logical]

Seriously, has that EVER happened?In the early days yes, lately not that I can recall.

[Logical]

you are almost to the point where you need medical attention...... do you even follow the news???Wow how original, now you must borrow material from Brock?

[Taco John]

I can understand and sympathize with your frustration Jim. I've found that expressing it as such only draws more frustration. In the end, you've got to comfort yourself that we do have a volunteer army, and while you don't agree with how they're being used, they signed their lives over.

[Ugly Duck]

The withdrawl begins....

AP - Two of America's allies in Iraq are withdrawing forces this month and a half-dozen others are debating possible pullouts or reductions, increasing pressure on Washington as calls mount to bring home U.S. troops.

Bulgaria and Ukraine will begin withdrawing their combined 1,250 troops by mid-December. If Australia, Britain, Italy, Japan, Poland and South Korea reduce or recall their personnel, more than half of the non-American forces in Iraq could be gone by next summer.

Japan and South Korea help with reconstruction, but Britain and Australia provide substantial support forces and Italy and Poland train Iraqi troops and police. Their exodus would deal a blow to American efforts to prepare Iraqis to take over the most dangerous peacekeeping tasks and craft an eventual U.S. exit strategy.

"The vibrations of unease from within the United States clearly have an impact on public opinion elsewhere," said Terence Taylor of the International Institute for Strategic Studies in Washington. "Public opinion in many of these countries is heavily divided."

Now the nearly 160,000-member U.S. force in Iraq is supported by just under 24,000 mostly non-combat personnel from 27 countries. Britain has the second-largest contingent with 8,000 in Iraq and 2,000 elsewhere in the Gulf region.

In the spring, the Netherlands had 1,400 troops in Iraq. Today, there are 19, including a lone Dutch soldier in Baghdad.

Ukraine's remaining 876 troops in Iraq are due home by Dec. 31, fulfilling a campaign pledge by President Viktor Yushchenko. Bulgaria is pulling out its 380 troops after Dec. 15 parliamentary elections, Defense Minister Veselin Bliznakov said.

Struggling to shore up the coalition, Bush stopped in Mongolia on his recent Asia trip and praised its force of about 120 soldiers in Iraq as "fearless warriors."

Underscoring mounting opposition in nearly all coalition countries, a poll published in Japan's Asahi newspaper this week showed 69 percent of respondents opposed extending the mission, up from 55 percent in January.

A British drawdown would be the most dramatic.

Although Prime Minister Tony Blair's government insists there is no timetable and British forces will leave only when Iraqi troops can take over, Defense Secretary John Reid suggested last month that a pullout could begin "in the course of the next year."

South Korea, the second-largest coalition partner after Britain, is expected to withdraw about 1,000 of its 3,200 troops in the first half of 2006. The National Assembly is likely to vote on the matter this month.

Italy's military reportedly is preparing to give parliament a timetable for a proposed withdrawal of its 2,800 troops. Premier Silvio Berlusconi's government has said it plans to withdraw forces in groups of 300, but in accordance with the Iraqi government and coalition allies.

Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston, head of the Australian Defense Force, has said about 450 troops in the southern province of Muthanna could leave by May. Australia has about 900 troops and support staff across Iraq.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/12/01/international/i190857S11.DTL

[Logical]

I can understand and sympathize with your frustration Jim. I've found that expressing it as such only draws more frustration. In the end, you've got to comfort yourself that we do have a volunteer army, and while you don't agree with how they're being used, they signed their lives over.

That is true, thanks for the perspective TJ.

[Boyceofsummer]

I can understand and sympathize with your frustration Jim. I've found that expressing it as such only draws more frustration. In the end, you've got to comfort yourself that we do have a volunteer army, and while you don't agree with how they're being used, they signed their lives over.


that wish not to help themselves?


If we continue to use our all volunteer military for endless 'nation building' we risk having to consider drafting young Americans to service. Our volunteer military is at the breaking point. That includes the endless sacrifice of thier famlies and communities. Enough!

[patteeu]

The thread title screams estrogen imbalance, but the body of your OP whispers stockholm syndrome. Are you locked in memyselfI's basement domination chamber, Vlad?

I would respond to the substance of the post, but as far as I can tell, there isn't any. Is this a parody thread that I'm just not picking up on? I'm going to feel a little foolish if that's what it turns out to be.

[Amnorix]

Brock, you will notice I was careful not to blame just Bush, his administration or any one political party. Please reconsider and give me thoughts on particular items instead of general disparagement.


That would require a more than one sentence answer, and therefore is beyond his abilities.

[memyselfI]

you are almost to the point where you need medical attention...... do you even follow the news???

And yet a second coming from the RWNJ side.

What is funny is when faced with facts all they've got is abusive techniques like questioning the sanity and medical conditions of those they disagree with and 'gaslighting.' Then subsequently offering NO rebuttal other than their attack. We see it frequently from Radar Chief, Brock (I have him on ignore so I'm just seeing the response to him) and now their young disciple...

Gaslighting: The other person may deny that certain events occurred or that certain things were said. You know differently. The other person may deny your perceptions, memory and very sanity. It is this act of abuse which makes you begin to think you are crazy or losing your mind.

http://www.heart-2-heart.ca/women/page3.html

[memyselfI]

The thread title screams estrogen imbalance, but the body of your OP whispers stockholm syndrome. Are you locked in memyselfI's basement domination chamber, Vlad?

I would respond to the substance of the post, but as far as I can tell, there isn't any. Is this a parody thread that I'm just not picking up on? I'm going to feel a little foolish if that's what it turns out to be.

And yet another... :shake:

[patteeu]

What is funny is when faced with facts ...

If you can find a fact in Vlad's OP (other than the possible fact that Vlad is fed up), then I'm John Elway and you are Princess Di. It was a series of delusional opinions. (The "delusional" part of the previous sentence was opinion, the "opinions" part was fact.)

[memyselfI]

If you can find a fact in Vlad's OP (other than the possible fact that Vlad is fed up), then I'm John Elway and you are Princess Di. It was a series of delusional opinions. (The "delusional" part of the previous sentence was opinion, the "opinions" part was fact.)

Nope, I'm not the one disagreeing with him or questioning his mental capacity. That would be YOU. As such, it would be up to YOU to disprove his contentions rather than take the easy way out and question his sanity...

[patteeu]

Nope, I'm not the one disagreeing with him or questioning his mental capacity. That would be YOU. As such, it would be up to YOU to disprove his contentions rather than take the easy way out and question his sanity...

My post must have been confusing because your response seems to be a nonsequitor. If you can find a "fact" in Vlad's OP, I'll address it.

[jiveturkey]

So the politicians can:
Deflect attention from the spiraling deficitThis is a major issues that I think needs major attention so I'll agree with this one.

Deflect attention from the stagnant economyThe economy has been experiencing steady growth for a while now and I work in the employment business. I'm disagreeing.

Deflect attention from the impending Social Security CrisisThis issue isn't even on my radar screen so I'm going to continue to not care about it.

Deflect attention from the illegal immigration problemI wonder which party is going to have the balls to actually do something about this. We hear a lot of talk but has there been any action?

Deflect attention from the failing public education systemMajor issue IMO. This country is full of stupid people and it's embarassing. I don't know how to fix it but I know that it will be tough.

Deflect attention from soaring medical care costsIt's strange that this doesn't get talked about more. I'm betting the the increases far exceed that of oil/gas.

Deflect attention from the lack of progress on tax reformI would love to see a simplification here but I doubt that the war is deflecting attention away from this issue. It just doesn't have a lot of support behind it.

Allow the government to better control our lives by taking away our personal libertiesMajor issue that scares the crap out of me. People that support this need to have the ovaries checked because they're acting like a bunch of women.

Deflect attention from our failure on our War against Al Quada and Bin Laden in particularI believe that we can fight two wars at one time.

Deflect attention from them allowing Big Oil to rip off the consumer so companies like Haliburton can be paid for their support of the political partiesIt's seems overly obvious that Haliburton is getting preferential treatment from this administration. It just seems strange.

[RINGLEADER]

Seriously, how many of those would you kindly respond to? He laid em out. and that's all you got?


Well he's just wrong about the stagnant economy. Like Jaz claiming that lowering tax rates doesn't increase tax revenues he's just wrong on that front unless he's defining "stagnant" in a different way than most economists. About half of the other points are equally subjective but he's right about more than one of the points he makes (deficits, immigration, etc., etc.).

It's a good example of how liberals, for some reason, can't be content with pointing out the facts that prove their position and instead have to carry everything further than the facts actually allow. For instance, saying the planners in Iraq (Bush, Rummy, and whoever else) screwed up the execution of the war in the immediate aftermath of the invasion is not only valid, it's provable. You don't need to manufacture reasons to be against the war...and I've never understood the left's willingness to do so as it cheapens their position.

If I was the chairman of the DNC I'd drop the whole "lied about WMDs" thing which most people don't believe and instead make it a question of who would have achieved victory quicker and with fewer casualties. As it stands they remain contorted with a position that attempts to distance themselves from the war while at the same time being unwilling to commit to those positions for fear of looking weak on defense. See John Kerry's press conference the other day for a great example of this conundrum.

[patteeu]

This is a major issues that I think needs major attention so I'll agree with this one.

You may agree that the deficit is spiraling, but surely you don't agree with Vlad that we are fighting in Iraq to deflect attention from this?

[jiveturkey]

You may agree that the deficit is spiraling, but surely you don't agree with Vlad that we are fighting in Iraq to deflect attention from this?I won't go that far. The war is more like another reason for the spiraling.

[Chief Faithful]

My post must have been confusing because your response seems to be a nonsequitor. If you can find a "fact" in Vlad's OP, I'll address it.

WOW! The only problem is 'nonsequitur' is too big a word for this group.

You are right there is nothing in the post to discuss because Vlad's list does not logically support Vlad's proposition that the Iraq war is purely a distraction for domestic issues. Nothing to discuss on this thread as it is just a forum to bash the President, which is getting old. It would be nice to actually have something to debate. These shouting matches just aren't worthy of attention.

[BIG_DADDY]

So the politicians can:

Deflect attention from the spiraling deficit
Deflect attention from the stagnant economy
Deflect attention from the impending Social Security Crisis
Deflect attention from the illegal immigration problem
Deflect attention from the failing public education system
Deflect attention from soaring medical care costs
Deflect attention from the lack of progress on tax reform
Allow the government to better control our lives by taking away our personal liberties
Deflect attention from our failure on our War against Al Quada and Bin Laden in particular
Deflect attention from them allowing Big Oil to rip off the consumer
So companies like Haliburton can be paid for their support of the political parties

It is a game of look over here at the distraction so you don't focus on the real problems. This is why our sons and daughters must die in Iraq. It has nothing to do with the War on Terror, bringing Democracy to Iraq ro any other bullshit we are being fed.

Vlad Logiclsav
(the fed up)

Yes and no. Is it being used in that manner as a byproduct of everything else, sure. Exclusively, far form it. This war is about a lot of things but every time I post about it nobody wants to respond. The right is too busy defending this loser and all the left wants to do is pound their chest scream the same old shit over over and over again.

[patteeu]

I won't go that far. The war is more like another reason for the spiraling.

Agreed. :toast:

[memyselfI]

My post must have been confusing because your response seems to be a nonsequitor. If you can find a "fact" in Vlad's OP, I'll address it.

I presume you mean non sequitur.

Logical's post states that in his view the war in a Iraq is happening to distract from the laundry list of problems he gave. You can disagree with his premise that the war is happening BECAUSE it's to distract from the problems but you cannot disagree that the list of problems he lists exists...

and you know this. Instead you choose to gaslight with the rest of your ilk.

[patteeu]

I presume you mean non sequitur.

Logical's post states that in his view the war in a Iraq is happening to distract from the laundry list of problems he gave. You can disagree with his premise that the war is happening BECAUSE it's to distract from the problems but you cannot disagree that the list of problems he lists exists...

and you know this. Instead you choose to gaslight with the rest of your ilk.

I do disagree with his premise. I also disagree with several of his other unsupported assertions:

The economy - The economy isn't stagnant, it's growing at a reasonably strong rate.

Illegal immigration - It's hard to believe the administration is trying to distract from the illegal immigration problem at a time when the President is in the midst of a series of appearances and speeches intended to bring attention to his immigration proposals.

Personal freedoms - The Patriot Act was passed before the Iraq war began. Jose Padilla was detained and held without charge before the Iraq war started. After the Iraq war began, the Patriot Act has been limited and Jose Padilla has been charged with a series of crimes and transferred from a military prison to a civilian prison.

GWoT and Bin Laden - The country widely viewed the GWoT as being successful despite the fact that Bin Laden was at large before we invaded Iraq. It's not credible to claim that the purpose of the Iraq war is to deflect attention for perceived failures that weren't in existence at the time the decision for war was taken.

Big Oil - The consumer isn't being ripped off by Big Oil so the Iraq war can't be intended to deflect attention from this nonfact. Profits aren't a bad thing in a capitalist society. Consumers aren't forced to pay for product that they think is overpriced.

Haliburton - There isn't one shred of evidence that there is any kind of quid pro quo between Iraq-related government contracts and political contributions coming from the companies that receive those contracts. The fact that Vlad resorts to crying "Haliburton" proves how far down lunatic-fringe road he has travelled. I bet he even has a registered account at DU these days.

As for the rest of his line items (deficit, social security, education, medical care costs, and lack of progress on tax reform), these are all long term issues that have nothing to do with the decision to get involved in Iraq. The notable exception is the contribution to the short-term deficit that is due to the cost of the Iraq operation, but when compared to the longterm impacts to the deficit of the pending entitlements crunch, this is trivial.

Next?

[Logical]

that wish not to help themselves?


If we continue to use our all volunteer military for endless 'nation building' we risk having to consider drafting young Americans to service. Our volunteer military is at the breaking point. That includes the endless sacrifice of thier famlies and communities. Enough!Extremely valid point.

[recxjake]

Extremely valid point.

yea, its that time of year again, lets start scaring the public about the DRAFT AGAIN!!!!!!!! AHHH NOOO...... come on libs, you know there is no basis for this kind of rhetoric, its disgusting

[Logical]

My post must have been confusing because your response seems to be a nonsequitor. If you can find a "fact" in Vlad's OP, I'll address it.

So you are denying the following facts

We have spiraling deficits
We have a stagnant economy
We have an impending Social Security Crisis
We have an illegal immigration problem
We have a failing public education system
We have soaring medical care costs
We have a lack of progress on tax reform
We have lost an alarming amount of personal liberties
We are failing on our War against Al Quada and Bin Laden in particular their numbers are growing and Bin Laden has not been captured or killed.
Big Oil in making obscene levels of revenue and profits

Ok this one might be disputed:
So companies like Haliburton can be paid for their support of the political parties

[Logical]

This is a major issues that I think needs major attention so I'll agree with this one.

The economy has been experiencing steady growth for a while now and I work in the employment business. I'm disagreeing.

Stagnant speak to more than just incremental growth, loss of major job segments to overseas markets offset the growth we have seen in the labor market for instance. Increases in inflation are most likely the cause of the minor economic growth being reported, I would bet real income has shrunk not grown.

This issue isn't even on my radar screen so I'm going to continue to not care about it.

You need to put it on your radar screen because they will fix it by taking major portions of your income in increased Social Security taxes if they do not address it. JMHO

I wonder which party is going to have the balls to actually do something about this. We hear a lot of talk but has there been any action?

Major issue IMO. This country is full of stupid people and it's embarassing. I don't know how to fix it but I know that it will be tough.

It's strange that this doesn't get talked about more. I'm betting the the increases far exceed that of oil/gas.

I would love to see a simplification here but I doubt that the war is deflecting attention away from this issue. It just doesn't have a lot of support behind it.

Tax reform is not just about simplification but about coming up with part of the solution to soaring deficits.

Major issue that scares the crap out of me. People that support this need to have the ovaries checked because they're acting like a bunch of women.

I believe that we can fight two wars at one time.

This point was not addressing that, but our failure to adequate address the true threat Al Quada and Bin Laden.

It's seems overly obvious that Haliburton is getting preferential treatment from this administration. It just seems strange.

[Brock]

http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/c/2y/_/_dji

Yeah, looks like a disastrously stagnant economy. ROFL

As far as I'm concerned, you baby boomers are the ones who will bust the bank on SS, I don't plan on drawing a dime from it, so I don't really care what happens to it.

[jiveturkey]

Vlad,
Thanks for the reply. Have you seen any numbers on inflation?

[Logical]

Well he's just wrong about the stagnant economy. Like Jaz claiming that lowering tax rates doesn't increase tax revenues he's just wrong on that front unless he's defining "stagnant" in a different way than most economists. About half of the other points are equally subjective but he's right about more than one of the points he makes (deficits, immigration, etc., etc.).....

Stagnant speaks to more than just incremental growth, loss of major job segments to overseas markets offset the growth we have seen in the labor market for instance. Increases in inflation are most likely the cause of the minor economic growth being reported, I would bet real net income has shrunk not grown.

[go bowe]

That's not Brock's thing. It's never (as far as I've ever, ever seen) been his thing to actually engage in discussion on the substance of a topic. His entire role on the planet is to stand at the side of the road and throw rocks at the passing cars. I think he wishes he was Iowanian. But at least Iowanian is a) creative, and b) willing to engage on topic from time to time.hey, that's my role, brock can't have it... :mad:

[patteeu]

So you are denying the following facts

We have spiraling deficits
We have a stagnant economy
We have an impending Social Security Crisis
We have an illegal immigration problem
We have a failing public education system
We have soaring medical care costs
We have a lack of progress on tax reform
We have lost an alarming amount of personal liberties
We are failing on our War against Al Quada and Bin Laden in particular their numbers are growing and Bin Laden has not been captured or killed.
Big Oil in making obscene levels of revenue and profits

Ok this one might be disputed:
So companies like Haliburton can be paid for their support of the political parties

I addressed all of these in post #31 although I figure you are just getting caught up after some restraint training in meme's dungeon so I realize you probably haven't seen it yet.

[penchief]

The thread title screams estrogen imbalance.

To a reactionary bootlicker like yourself, anytime someone applies their mind before their ego it becomes a matter of machismo, or the lack of as you put it.

[patteeu]

To a reactionary bootlicker like yourself, anytime someone applies their mind before their ego it becomes a matter of machismo, or the lack of as you put it.

ROFL Thanks honey. ;)

[Taco John]

that wish not to help themselves?


If we continue to use our all volunteer military for endless 'nation building' we risk having to consider drafting young Americans to service. Our volunteer military is at the breaking point. That includes the endless sacrifice of thier famlies and communities. Enough!



Well, I guess I'll have to take solace in the fact that I'm not young enough to be drafted, and the knowledge that when the 18-25 year olds were given the opportunity to say something about it, they instead chose to get in line for Star Wars. I don't like this war any more than anyone else, but when people who can effect the course of our nation for the better decide to let the government do their thinking for them, that's exactly what they'll get.

[Taco John]

http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/c/2y/_/_dji

Yeah, looks like a disastrously stagnant economy. ROFL

As far as I'm concerned, you baby boomers are the ones who will bust the bank on SS, I don't plan on drawing a dime from it, so I don't really care what happens to it.



I don't know man... The guy on the radio trying to sell me gold seems to think this thing is going broke any second now.

[Logical]

I do disagree with his premise. I also disagree with several of his other unsupported assertions:
The economy - The economy isn't stagnant, it's growing at a reasonably strong rate.

Stagnant speaks to more than just incremental growth, loss of major job segments to overseas markets offset the growth we have seen in the labor market for instance. Increases in inflation are most likely the cause of the minor economic growth being reported, I would bet real net income has shrunk not grown.


Illegal immigration - It's hard to believe the administration is trying to distract from the illegal immigration problem at a time when the President is in the midst of a series of appearances and speeches intended to bring attention to his immigration proposals.

First reread the thread header, it says politicians I purposely did not make this thread about the President, the admininistration or either single political party. The politicians all of them are letting this occupation continue because it diverts attention from the issues they are not addressing.
Personal freedoms - The Patriot Act was passed before the Iraq war began. Jose Padilla was detained and held without charge before the Iraq war started. After the Iraq war began, the Patriot Act has been limited and Jose Padilla has been charged with a series of crimes and transferred from a military prison to a civilian prison.
Barely and it was far too complex for the general public to understand what was being taken away from them, about the time reaction was surfacing bang we go to war against Iraq. Once again this thread is about almost all of the politicians letting this occupation continue because it diverts attention from the issues they are not addressing.
GWoT and Bin Laden - The country widely viewed the GWoT as being successful despite the fact that Bin Laden was at large before we invaded Iraq. It's not credible to claim that the purpose of the Iraq war is to deflect attention for perceived failures that weren't in existence at the time the decision for war was taken.
I totally disagree with you in fact DEnise and jAZ and Jettio amongst others were on here immediately talking about our being diverted from the real War on Terror and the fact we had failed to capture or kill Bin Laden. Even I who favored getting rid of Saddam talked of our failure against Al Quada and Bin Laden and that I feared Iraq make our failure impossible to overcome.
Big Oil - The consumer isn't being ripped off by Big Oil so the Iraq war can't be intended to deflect attention from this nonfact. Profits aren't a bad thing in a capitalist society. Consumers aren't forced to pay for product that they think is overpriced.
Now you are just being absurd, if you do not see reality I have no reason to even discuss the issue with you. Profits are not bad, excessive profits are bad Big Oil's profits are beyond excessive in scope.
Haliburton - There isn't one shred of evidence that there is any kind of quid pro quo between Iraq-related government contracts and political contributions coming from the companies that receive those contracts. The fact that Vlad resorts to crying "Haliburton" proves how far down lunatic-fringe road he has travelled. I bet he even has a registered account at DU these days.
If you cannot see reality (all the no compete contracts being awarded) then you are beyond redemption. Once again this thread is about almost all of the politicians letting this occupation continue because it diverts attention from the issues they are not addressing why are you being so defensive and trying to ignore obvious realities.
As for the rest of his line items (deficit, social security, education, medical care costs, and lack of progress on tax reform), these are all long term issues that have nothing to do with the decision to get involved in Iraq. ...
Next?
Again I don't see why you are being so defensive since this thread is about almost all of the politicians letting this occupation continue because it diverts attention from the issues they are not addressing.

[recxjake]

ugh inflation is not high at all

[go bowe]

you are almost to the point where you need medical attention...... do you even follow the news???hey, wreckster...

on behalf of all of us in need of medical attention,

please go eat shit and die...

thank you... :) :) :)

[patteeu]

Big Oil - The consumer isn't being ripped off by Big Oil so the Iraq war can't be intended to deflect attention from this nonfact. Profits aren't a bad thing in a capitalist society. Consumers aren't forced to pay for product that they think is overpriced.

Now you are just being absurd, if you do not see reality I have no reason to even discuss the issue with you. Profits are not bad, excessive profits are bad Big Oil's profits are beyond excessive in scope.

I'm sorry I mistook your OP to be aimed directly at the President instead of at all politicians. My bad on that score. I still think the whole thing is hogwash, but I was wrong about that part of it.

Now, I'm most curious about your take on Big Oil. From what I saw, Big Oil's profits represented a reasonable profit margin of about 10% of revenues. Slightly increased over last year's margins, but very moderate by US business standards. How that is considered "beyond excessive" is beyond me.

[Logical]

I'm sorry I mistook your OP to be aimed directly at the President instead of at all politicians. My bad on that score. I still think the whole thing is hogwash, but I was wrong about that part of it.

Now, I'm most curious about your take on Big Oil. From what I saw, Big Oil's profits represented a reasonable profit margin of about 10% of revenues. Slightly increased over last year's margins, but very moderate by US business standards. How that is considered "beyond excessive" is beyond me.There are two measures of reasonable and a 10% profit on grossly excessive revenues is not reasonable. Defense contractors do not make 10% on items like B2 bombers and Aircraft Carriers.

[Rausch]

The only aspect of "this is just like Vietnam" I agree with is that our gubment isn't willing to do what is necessary to win, and as a result people are getting killed for no ****ing reason...

[patteeu]

There are two measures of reasonable and a 10% profit on grossly excessive revenues is not reasonable. Defense contractors do not make 10% on items like B2 bombers and Aircraft Carriers.

If you think defense contractors should be a model for American business you're crazy. Big Oil doesn't sign a contract to charge a consumer $1.00 per gallon and then when you get to the pump they tell you that schedule delays and design issues are going to force them to charge you $2.00 per gallon despite the initial agreement.

Maybe you can explain to me how Big Oil's revenues were "grossly excessive?" Do you understand how much the cost of crude oil rose during the period in question?

The price of light, sweet crude oil on NYMEX was under $25/barrel in September 2003. By August 11, 2005, the price had been above $60/barrel for over a week and a half. A record price of $70.85 per barrel was reached on August 29, 2005.

Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_price_increases_of_2004_and_2005)

When the cost of your fundamental raw material rises by nearly 200% in less than 2 years and you experience the costly disruptions of hurricanes Katrina and Rita, your cost profile skyrockets. The only way you keep a business in the black when your costs rise is to raise your prices.[1] Higher prices generate higher revenues when you have the good fortune of selling a product that is subject to relatively inelastic demand.

------------
[1] It might not be the only way, but it's the only way I can think of off the top of my head.

[DanT]

The only aspect of "this is just like Vietnam" I agree with is that our gubment isn't willing to do what is necessary to win, and as a result people are getting killed for no ****ing reason...

What was our government unwilling to do in Vietnam that would have been necessary to win and what is it unwilling to do in Iraq, in your estimation?

[Logical]

...
When the cost of your fundamental raw material rises by nearly 200% in less than 2 years and you experience the costly disruptions of hurricanes Katrina and Rita, your cost profile skyrockets. The only way you keep a business in the black when your costs rise is to raise your prices.[1] Higher prices generate higher revenues when you have the good fortune of selling a product that is subject to relatively inelastic demand.
....

In a fair market with competition rising costs mean lower profits, profits certainly do not go up. You just explained why it is easy to see we are being ripped off by big oil and the politicians are allowing it by not regulating them. They are not competing so they can make exorbitant profits using exorbitant costs as an excuse.

[Logical]

The only aspect of "this is just like Vietnam" I agree with is that our gubment isn't willing to do what is necessary to win, and as a result people are getting killed for no ****ing reason...Brad, I did not say this was just like Vietnam are you responding to someone else? There are similarities but it certainly is not just like Vietnam.

[patteeu]

In a fair market with competition rising costs mean lower profits, profits certainly do not go up. You just explained why it is easy to see we are being ripped off by big oil and the politicians are allowing it by not regulating them. They are not competing so they can make exorbitant profits using exorbitant costs as an excuse.

It's not lack of competition that is the key here, it's the inelasticity of the demand for oil that keeps these companies profitable in the face of rising costs.

[Logical]

It's not lack of competition that is the key here, it's the inelasticity of the demand for oil that keeps these companies profitable in the face of rising costs.The inelasticity comes from the fact the byproducts are required to live in the US, get to work, heat your home, generate electricity, etc, etc. Under such conditions it is incumbent for the US government to regulate the market and profits to protect the consumer in the abscence of competition.

[Cochise]

While, in extreme circumstances where a product could have a crippling effect on our economy in an emergency I might be able to be sold on some kind of government price intervention, I can't help but think about what happened the last time we did that. I'd rather have gas that is expensive, that people work hard to conserve, than cheap gas I can't find or wait for hours to get like bread in the former Soviet Union or something.

We need to do more in terms of conservation, fuel efficiency, domestic production and exploration, alternative fuels. If the government controlled prices in the very short term in an extreme circumstance I might be ok with that, but it's only addressing the symptom and not the root which is OPEC.

If anyone devises a plan for "War on OPEC" that will dissolve the cartel they should be president for life :shake:

[Rausch]

Brad, I did not say this was just like Vietnam are you responding to someone else?

The media drum beating.

[Rausch]

What was our government unwilling to do in Vietnam that would have been necessary to win and what is it unwilling to do in Iraq, in your estimation?

Putting politics above winning the war.

You can't go here, can't fire until fired upon, and other stupid ****ing rules of engagement.

Winning the hearts and minds is put above winning the war.

We didn't coddle Germany, Japan, or Italy. We kicked their ass and they're all better for it.

And I don't mind paying to rebuild the area but it seems pretty ****ing stupid to start the rebuild before the war is even over.

And Bush isn't helping. He speaks loudly and carries a little stick...

[Cochise]

Putting politics above winning the war.

You can't go here, can't fire until fired upon, and other stupid ****ing rules of engagement.

Winning the hearts and minds is put above winning the war.

We didn't coddle Germany, Japan, or Italy. We kicked their ass and they're all better for it.


I agree 100%.

It blows my mind that the military needs approval from Washington to do something they need to do and may not get it because if they do, some stuffed shirt, former used car salesman congressman from new hampshire will have a media blitz on CNN the next day crying that we were insensitive.

The military being run by beurocrats is like a company picking it's board of directors from the janitoral staff.

[DanT]

Putting politics above winning the war.

You can't go here, can't fire until fired upon, and other stupid ****ing rules of engagement.

Winning the hearts and minds is put above winning the war.

We didn't coddle Germany, Japan, or Italy. We kicked their ass and they're all better for it.

And I don't mind paying to rebuild the area but it seems pretty ****ing stupid to start the rebuild before the war is even over.

And Bush isn't helping. He speaks loudly and carries a little stick...

Thanks for the reply, Rausch.

The United States remains in Iraq at the invitation of the Iraqi government. (http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Jun2004/n06162004_200406169.html) The United States is not in a war with the Iraqi Army, nor is it at war with any other nation's army. I'm not sure who you think owns the ass which the United States ought to kick in Iraq. Do you think we are at war with the people of Iraq? If so, then where does Iraq's sovereignty reside, with the Iraqi government or with the Iraqi people?

[Logical]

Thanks for the reply, Rausch.

The United States remains in Iraq at the invitation of the Iraqi government. (http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Jun2004/n06162004_200406169.html) The United States is not in a war with the Iraqi Army, nor is it at war with any other nation's army. I'm not sure who you think owns the ass which the United States ought to kick in Iraq. Do you think we are at war with the people of Iraq? If so, then where does Iraq's sovereignty reside, with the Iraqi government or with the Iraqi people?Dan, respectfully I do not believe the people running Iraq's so called government actually at this time represent the entire country at best not much more than 2/3rds the rest feel disenfranchised and many are what are making up the large and growing insurgency. To decide where Iraqi sovereignty resides is a near impossible task at this point in time.

[patteeu]

The inelasticity comes from the fact the byproducts are required to live in the US, get to work, heat your home, generate electricity, etc, etc. Under such conditions it is incumbent for the US government to regulate the market and profits to protect the consumer in the abscence of competition.

I'm well aware of what causes the inelastic demand here. Have you shifted your argument away from "Big Oil is ripping us off and making obscene revenues and profits?" Because I'm not seeing anything to back it up.

[Logical]

I'm well aware of what causes the inelastic demand here. Have you shifted your argument away from "Big Oil is ripping us off and making obscene revenues and profits?" Because I'm not seeing anything to back it up.Not in the least, I am sticking to my contention that 10% on this amount of revenue is obscene, either they voluntarily lower their prices to lower their profits or they should be regulated so the government can do it for them.

[Rausch]

The United States is not in a war with the Iraqi Army, nor is it at war with any other nation's army. I'm not sure who you think owns the ass which the United States ought to kick in Iraq. Do you think we are at war with the people of Iraq?

Answer to first question: we need to kick the **** out of syria and Iran.

Period.

Yes, Iran has nukes. Proven. Over and done. They have them.

We are in this war to win it or we are worried about stepping on the neighbors grass.

If the neighbor's grass is a problem we never should have gone into Iraq.

Right now we're nuts deep in a truckstop whore thinking "Wait, could I get AIDS?"

For better or worse we are already there. FINISH IT.

Second Question: No, we are not at war with Iraq.

The people of Iraq love us.

The region around Iraq hates us like you can't imagine...

[Boyceofsummer]

Answer to first question: we need to kick the **** out of syria and Iran.

Period.

Yes, Iran has nukes. Proven. Over and done. They have them.

We are in this war to win it or we are worried about stepping on the neighbors grass.

If the neighbor's grass is a problem we never should have gone into Iraq.

Right now we're nuts deep in a truckstop whore thinking "Wait, could I get AIDS?"

For better or worse we are already there. FINISH IT.

Second Question: No, we are not at war with Iraq.

The people of Iraq love us.

The region around Iraq hates us like you can't imagine...


You’re delusional.

[Loki]

Your delusional.

how do you figure?

[patteeu]

Not in the least, I am sticking to my contention that 10% on this amount of revenue is obscene, either they voluntarily lower their prices to lower their profits or they should be regulated so the government can do it for them.

Wow. 10% is obscene? LOL You can't regulate your way to a free lunch.

[DanT]

Answer to first question: we need to kick the **** out of syria and Iran.

Period.

Yes, Iran has nukes. Proven. Over and done. They have them.

We are in this war to win it or we are worried about stepping on the neighbors grass.

If the neighbor's grass is a problem we never should have gone into Iraq.

Right now we're nuts deep in a truckstop whore thinking "Wait, could I get AIDS?"

For better or worse we are already there. FINISH IT.

Second Question: No, we are not at war with Iraq.

The people of Iraq love us.

The region around Iraq hates us like you can't imagine...

The United States isn't in a war against a national army in Iraq. On this point, it seems to me that we both agree. The United States is in a 4th-generation war (http://www.d-n-i.net/second_level/fourth_generation_warfare.htm) in Iraq, one against forces that are not organized by governments. There's a big difference between fighting a war against a country's army and attacking a country because of the political and religious views and the behaviors of some of that country's inhabitants.

[Logical]

Wow. 10% is obscene? LOL You can't regulate your way to a free lunch.Nice try, 10% as a standalone figure is not obscene, 10% on the revenues of this magnitude, just like on an Aircraft Carrier or B2 bomber's revenues are obscene.

[Cochise]

Your delusional.

Your

Your is the second person possessive adjective, used to describe something as belong to you. Your is nearly always followed by a noun.

What is your name?

Is this your pen?

Your book is on the table.

You're

You're is the contraction of "you are" and is often followed by the present participle.

You're illiterate.

Are you sure you're not on drugs?

I think you're delusional


Hope this helps clear that up.

[Cochise]

BTW - LMAO at voluntary reduction of profits.

[Area 51]

Near KC they have a hospital for people like you.

Osawatomie.

[Boyceofsummer]

Your

Your is the second person possessive adjective, used to describe something as belong to you. Your is nearly always followed by a noun.

What is your name?

Is this your pen?

Your book is on the table.

You're

You're is the contraction of "you are" and is often followed by the present participle.

You're illiterate.

Are you sure you're not on drugs?

I think you're delusional


Hope this helps clear that up.

You’re anal.

You’re a prick.

I was in a hurry.

You voted for a war-mongering liar?

You’re right.


I think I get it now.

[Logical]

BTW - LMAO at voluntary reduction of profits.You do understand I don't believe it will happen without the threat of regulation right? That is why Congress needs to start the process towards regulating Big Oil.

[Rausch]

You voted for a war-mongering liar?

You’re right.


I think I get it now.


I don't think he's a liar.

I do believe I voted for an idiot.

Anyone who thinks Bush II is capable of a grand consipiracy is the true idiot....

[penchief]

I don't think he's a liar.

I do believe I voted for an idiot.

Anyone who thinks Bush II is capable of a grand consipiracy is the true idiot....

I might have to agree with you on this.

I do think President Cheney is a liar, though.

[memyselfI]

I might have to agree with you on this.

I do think President Cheney is a liar, though.

President Cheney and his Chief of staff. Condi is trying to tell Europe the CIA flights are voluntary, first class, and unpainful. ROFL So far, not to many takers.

[Logical]

I don't think he's a liar.

I do believe I voted for an idiot.

Anyone who thinks Bush II is capable of a grand consipiracy is the true idiot....

Hey Brad in case you have not caught it this thread is about politicians not just Bush. Didn't want you to think I overestimate the intelligence of our grand poobah.