Thoughts on Peak Oil

Benedict said:
Your country seems far more polarised now, the difference in vision between the democrats and republicans seems vast these days.
Click to expand...
Outside of a difference of opinion on Iraq, I guess I'm not seeing a "vast" difference in vision. There's the traditional free beer (tax cuts coming from both parties...) and vague promises of change/consistency (depending on the speaker), but I don't see much vision at all from either side of the aisle, let alone enough to declare a vast difference.

Not trying to slam you--I'm honestly curious what you're seeing that leads you to that conclusion.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
13,550
Location
Illinois, USA
Benedict said:
LOL! How did you do the right thing exactly? How would having more coalition forces backing you have altered the fact that you created a massive power vacuum, devastated their infrastructure, dealt with the local population with such contempt and incompetence and utterly alienated the entire middle east, further destabilising an already volatile region?
Click to expand...

Removing a brutal dictator was the right thing. Even our top generals told Bush that we were two divisions short of being able to control the post-invasion country. A lot of the problems we see now are because there was a vacuum of power, and some other dumb decisions like disbanding the Iraqi army. More troops earlier on would have helped to stabilize the country and allow the new Iraqi government time to get it shit together.


Again, how was it worthwhile? The red scourge has since collapsed under the weight of its own massive flaws, what did the war accomplish?
Click to expand...

In 1964, no one had any idea that communism would collapse on its own. And it didn't really collapse on its own, not completely. The USSR basically went bankrupt trying to keep up with the military spending of the US.


the difference in vision between the democrats and republicans seems vast these days.
Click to expand...

My opinion is that they are too alike. The democrats, in general, only stopped supporting the Iraq war when it became unpopular (Hillary's famous 'I did my own intelligence on the WMD's' then later saying she was lied to by Bush comes to mind) and both parties just want to spend, spend, spend.

I think the constituency appears more polarized because the far right and far left have become a lot more vocal and gotten more media time.
 
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
4,354
Location
Austin, TX
dteowner said:
Outside of a difference of opinion on Iraq, I guess I'm not seeing a "vast" difference in vision. There's the traditional free beer (tax cuts coming from both parties...) and vague promises of change/consistency (depending on the speaker), but I don't see much vision at all from either side of the aisle, let alone enough to declare a vast difference.

Not trying to slam you--I'm honestly curious what you're seeing that leads you to that conclusion.
Click to expand...

Good question . . . Iraq itself is symbolic of their overall perspectives on the world and I think that a president who approaches the world problems like Obama is more comforting than McCain, who just seems like another macho republican who thinks they can solve everything with brute force rather than communication and cooperation . . . the promise of change over consistency is a massive difference, and although McCain is by no means as bad as bush he's not nearly as progressive as Obama.

It's hard to point to any specific policies really . . . which is why I used the word vision, the concept of america and its interaction with the world that comes across from Obama is just different to that which comes across from McCain. The thought processes and logic with which he approaches his challenges and his policies just seem the sign of a clearer and more enlightened mind, it's not a matter of Obama's promised this and McCain's promised that with clear differences, it's more amorphous than that.
 
Joined
Feb 2, 2007
Messages
2,351
Location
London
blatantninja said:
Your boy Clinton gave plenty of so-called corporate welfare as well, so do you hate him too?


.........the road to fascism is typically lined with depression, ala the Weimer Republic and Italy. Our military is less powerful in many ways than it was at the height of the Cold War and the corporate elite have less power than the Robber Barron days, so I guess by your definition we are farther away from Fascism than ever! Hooray!!
Click to expand...


I've never once supported or voted for the Clintons, in any way, shape or form. He and his wife are waffling, unprincipled, manipulative, ruthless, secretive, polarizing Neo-Liberal authoritarians. So you are blatantly and pathetically wrong in ASSuming I am in any way a Clinton supporter. If anything, I'm a political a mix of European/Scandinavian center-left, social-democratic principles combined with a sprinkling of Libertarianism, specially WRT foreign and social policy preferences. For you to assume that I back and faithfully support any and all (D)'s, regardless of their positions, policies and principles, is really quite stupid. But that's the faith-based Republican perspective : "vote (R), 100% of the time, cuz they're the GOOD guys". Inversely, the Neo-Cons erroneously assume that all Non-Neo-Cons employ the same blind, faith-based, conformist mindset

Any and all governmental corporate welfare, corporate coddling or corporate favoritism should be abolished. Obama won't even go that far, and like I said before, and I'll repeat dozens of thimes, "The 4-8 year Obama-as-President experiment hasn't happened yet, so the evidence is not in". There is no way I'm going to faithfully cheer him on if the application of his policies (which I simply view as the lesser evil to McCain's) hurt people and make them worse of than before he took office. I don't abide by cult-like allegiancse like the Neo-Cons do, so for you to assume that, really shows dogmatic Neo-Con tendencies. I started the tax thread because the Neo-Cons were (yet again) lying by claiming that Obama will raise the income taxes on Americans of all backgrounds.

The road to future Fascism does not by definition HAVE to include a preexisting economic depression. It may merely include a preexisting economic recession, or even none at all. All that has to be exhibited and documented is :

1) Aggressive/preemptive militarism

2) Nationalism

3) Blind allegiance to leaders

4) Foreign scapegoats / vilified targets.

5) Erosion of civil liberties and behavioural freedoms

6) Greatly increased domestic and/or international incarcertation rates

7) Employment of torture

8) Corporatism fused with government


And that's exactly what we have under Bush.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 16, 2008
Messages
52
Pal, if you can't manage to make a post without personal insults, do us all a favor and disconnect your keyboard. You're finally starting to put up posts with some actual thought, but you just can't seem to resist "ASSuming" that your childish games are being received as cleverness.

Now, perhaps you'd like to back up your statement with some facts for a change. Please name any two nations that have gone fascist without serious economic woes, "or even none at all".
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
13,550
Location
Illinois, USA
RPfan95 said:
I've never once supported or voted for the Clintons, in any way, shape or form. He and his wife are waffling, unprincipled, manipulative, ruthless, secretive, polarizing Neo-Liberal authoritarians. So you are blatantly and pathetically wrong in ASSuming I am in any way a Clinton supporter. If anything, I'm a political a mix of European/Scandinavian center-left, social-democratic principles combined with a sprinkling of Libertarianism, specially WRT foreign and social policy preferences. For you to assume that I back and faithfully support any and all (D)'s, regardless of their positions, policies and principles, is really quite stupid. But that's the faith-based Republican perspective : "vote (R), 100% of the time, cuz they're the GOOD guys". Inversely, the Neo-Cons erroneously assume that all Non-Neo-Cons employ the same blind, faith-based, conformist mindset

Any and all governmental corporate welfare, corporate coddling or corporate favoritism should be abolished. Obama won't even go that far, and like I said before, and I'll repeat dozens of thimes, "The 4-8 year Obama-as-President experiment hasn't happened yet, so the evidence is not in". There is no way I'm going to faithfully cheer him on if the application of his policies (which I simply view as the lesser evil to McCain's) hurt people and make them worse of than before he took office. I don't abide by cult-like allegiancse like the Neo-Cons do, so for you to assume that, really shows dogmatic Neo-Con tendencies. I started the tax thread because the Neo-Cons were (yet again) lying by claiming that Obama will raise the income taxes on Americans of all backgrounds.

The road to future Fascism does not by definition HAVE to include a preexisting economic depression. It may merely include a preexisting economic recession, or even none at all. All that has to be exhibited and documented is :

1) Aggressive/preemptive militarism

2) Nationalism

3) Blind allegiance to leaders

4) Foreign scapegoats / vilified targets.

5) Erosion of civil liberties and behavioural freedoms

6) Greatly increased domestic and/or international incarcertation rates

7) Employment of torture

8) Corporatism fused with government


And that's exactly what we have under Bush.
Click to expand...

You really, really need to seek professional help.
 
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
4,354
Location
Austin, TX
blatantninja said:
You really, really need to seek professional help.
Click to expand...

Are you still being pumped full of toxic, addictive pharmaceutical poisons by Dr. Mengele III so that you may remain oblivious to all the negative effects of Bush administration policy ? Well, apparently, YES you ARE.

You are a typical Neo-Con zombie/chicken-hawk/war-monger.
 
Joined
Jun 16, 2008
Messages
52
dteowner said:
Pal, if you can't manage to make a post without personal insults, do us all a favor and disconnect your keyboard. You're finally starting to put up posts with some actual thought, but you just can't seem to resist "ASSuming" that your childish games are being received as cleverness.

Now, perhaps you'd like to back up your statement with some facts for a change. Please name any two nations that have gone fascist without serious economic woes, "or even none at all".
Click to expand...

Listen here. If you can stop being such a right-wing maniac clinging faithfully to Bush policies, then maybe you'll be less blind to reality.
 
Joined
Jun 16, 2008
Messages
52
RPfan95 said:
Listen here. If you can stop being such a right-wing maniac clinging faithfully to Bush policies, then maybe you'll be less blind to reality.
Click to expand...
Can't back it up, can you? That's what I thought. You spout off, but have nothing of substance to add to the conversation. Get some facts or get lost.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
13,550
Location
Illinois, USA
This guy would be hilarious if it wasn't so sad.
 
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
4,354
Location
Austin, TX
Off-topic, but in the appreciation for moderators thread we said they hung back. They all said it was thanks to us being civil and not being lots of personal confrontations. Insults like : "You are a typical Neo-Con zombie/chicken-hawk/war-monger."
I don't think are really respected here.

(I'm not saying being a Neo-Con is bad. I'm saying insulting someone of being a zombie, and a chicken-hawk, whatever that may be, is bad)

Calling for mods...
 
Joined
Nov 13, 2006
Messages
9,195
Location
Manchester, United Kingdom
Corwin's threatened him several times in the other threads s/he's larded with his/her insults. I think one more egregious remark and that will be that. (I hope so, because s/he makes it impossible to have a rational discussion here.) S/He's still being given the opportunity to make any arguments in a non-personal, insult-laden manner, and of course that's something I hope s/he will pick up on.

IMO, calling someone a neo-con is actually a worse insult than calling them a zombie, though. ;)
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
7,834
Agreed. RPfan95 is the only person I have run into on this site that intentionally trys to insult people he disagrees with.
 
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
4,354
Location
Austin, TX
blatantninja said:
Agreed. RPfan95 is the only person I have run into on this site that intentionally trys to insult people he disagrees with.
Click to expand...
Crap. I'm going to have to try harder... :D
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
13,550
Location
Illinois, USA
Tastes like chicken? :)
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
7,834
Trolls will starve if ignored. And they do taste like chicken.
 
Joined
Aug 31, 2006
Messages
3,754
While we're on the whole 'taste' thing--someone has finally come up with the ultimate fuel source( a woman, of course.) I expect to see this added to the campaigns of both candidates: ( right after McCain figures out how to give away $300 million tax dollars for a better car battery and Obama finishes explaining the Enron Loophole.)

Liposuction: The Key to Energy Independence

I'm talking about liposuction, of course, and it's a mystery to me why it hasn't occurred to any of those geniuses who are constantly opining about fuel prices on MSNBC. The average liposuction removes about half a gallon of liquid fat, which may not seem like much. But think of the vast reserves our nation is literally sitting on!...

This is the humane alternative to biofuels derived directly from erstwhile foodstuffs like corn. Biofuels, as you might have noticed, are exacerbating the global food crisis by turning edible plants into gasoline. But we could put humans back in the loop by first turning the corn into Doritos and hence into liposuctionable body fat. There would be a reason to live again, even a patriotic rationale for packing on the pounds.
Click to expand...

Yes, it's the first alternative energy proposal I can get totally...behind. ;)
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
7,834
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom