Why our government sucks even more!!??!!

[drivemusicnow]

Originally Posted by Shadow248

I think landshark and PA handled this comment well.

I do think that we will have to act with our military in the N. Korea situation. They've got this big head thing going on and really need to be reminded of where they stand. I don't think any kind of diplomacy will help...it seems like they just want to piss us off. Other than that, I think we can kinda stand back and watch things unfold for awhile, before we make any decisions about where action is needed.

You can't remain the toughest man in the gym without proving it every now and then.

Okay, so justifying going to war with a country because we need to instigate fear tactics?? why Iraq? why not north korea in the first place? what justifies Iraq over the other top twenty? Everyone always goes "TERRORISTS!!! its cause of them" but honestly if we were just going after "threats of terrorism to the US" we would have AT LEAST 8 other countries on the list before Iraq.

I'm not a politician, but neither are any of you. I think things need to be improved over how they are. I dont' know that we have the right to be world police, however when we are acting as such, we need to be the most "just and fair" world police possible. sooo, why Iraq??

When looking at international "unions" if you will, when something doesn't work (ie. the iraqi inspections and such), the process to create new policies, or to follow through with set "punishments" should be simpler than it is. Whether improving it requires disbanding the UN and creating something new, or working on new policy within the UN, i'm not sure.

And if you're worried about the US's image, starting wars that are widely disputed is usually not the best way to get more "pro US" people PA_SVX.

and one more thing. yes, blowing the hell out of iraq did open up some eyes. however it also had an opposite effect on other countries. like north korea.. they were fairly compliant until that point.

[Landshark]

Originally Posted by demonsvx

I do think we can improve our foriegn policy but in the case of Iraq I believe we jumped the gun as far as WMD.

as in, we should have waited until he had stockpiles of them? he had all the ingredients, and the means to produce them (and all the time in the world to hide them. ). if you had nothing to hide, why would you refuse inspections?

Yes I believe GW Bush has a personal thing against Saddam from the attempted assasination of his father but this is not how we should have done it.

do you really think the war was started because "he tried to kill mah Daddy!"? c'mon, there's way more to it than that, and much classified information that you and i, as average citizens, will never know about.

[mohrds]

Originally Posted by demonsvx

I do think we can improve our foreign policy but in the case of Iraq I believe we jumped the gun as far as WMD. Saddam had to go no question, but we had the means of getting him without a prolonged war.

Jumped the gun? That's the propaganda the press wants us to believe. There are lots of stories that aren't report in the mainstream.

Former weapons scientists that explained how they were each instructed to take home parts of the program so nothing was ever in the same place at the same time. How they met at different locations to work.

Weapons storage sites found disguised in the desert to elude satellite detection.

Links from Saddam to Al Queda going back decades, including weapons and arms deals.

[Shadow248]

Originally Posted by drivemusicnow

Okay, so justifying going to war with a country because we need to instigate fear tactics?? why Iraq? why not north korea in the first place? what justifies Iraq over the other top twenty? Everyone always goes "TERRORISTS!!! its cause of them" but honestly if we were just going after "threats of terrorism to the US" we would have AT LEAST 8 other countries on the list before Iraq.

Iraq had the money, connections, and will to build stockpiles of nuclear and non-nuclear weapons. They also had a history of supplying weapons to terrorists and helping them in other ways. Before the war, we had every reason to believe that they planned to build WMDs, or perhaps already had. We also were familiar with the country because of operation desert storm. Seemed like a great place to start.

Originally Posted by drivemusicnow

I'm not a politician, but neither are any of you. I think things need to be improved over how they are. I dont' know that we have the right to be world police, however when we are acting as such, we need to be the most "just and fair" world police possible.

I don't look at it as being "world police". Sure they can call it that to make it sound nicer. But I look at it as reminding everyone who's the biggest. I think we are pretty darn fair. We have the ability to build some of the most powerful weapons ever known to man, and we don't. Even when other countries who directly threaten us are building stockpiles of WMDs, we don't. Nor do we threaten them with our nuclear arms. Considering what we really could do to these countries, I think we are being pretty fair.

Originally Posted by drivemusicnow

When looking at international "unions" if you will, when something doesn't work (ie. the iraqi inspections and such), the process to create new policies, or to follow through with set "punishments" should be simpler than it is. Whether improving it requires disbanding the UN and creating something new, or working on new policy within the UN, i'm not sure.

Well the UN is largely useless, so I would say big changes need to be made, or else the world will revert back to a pre-UN state, and I don't think anyone wants that.

Originally Posted by drivemusicnow

And if you're worried about the US's image, starting wars that are widely disputed is usually not the best way to get more "pro US" people PA_SVX.

Might I remind you that Saddam used similiar psychology in Iraq, and the general population was "pro-Saddam". At least outwardly.

Originally Posted by drivemusicnow

and one more thing. yes, blowing the hell out of iraq did open up some eyes. however it also had an opposite effect on other countries. like north korea.. they were fairly compliant until that point.

No, they were just waiting for the right time. Might I remind you of the Japanese and the Pearl Harbor incident. Timing.

[Royal Tiger]

Ask the french and Polish how well the whole deplomacy thing worked out in 1939. If Chamberlin had jumped on Germany in 1937 or 1938, there wouldn't have been a WWII on the scale we saw in Europe. As for the world police thing, we give more of our hard earned currency to more nations then anybody else on the planet. That buys us the first chair in the orchastra. If our society wasn't run by a resource that just happens to be in the armpit of the world, we could ignore them all together like Africa. But oil is needed. I'm for a hydrogen society someday, but there is no way we'll see it in the next 20 years.

[Noir]

Originally Posted by drivemusicnow

Okay, so justifying going to war with a country because we need to instigate fear tactics?? why Iraq? why not north korea in the first place? what justifies Iraq over the other top twenty? Everyone always goes "TERRORISTS!!! its cause of them" but honestly if we were just going after "threats of terrorism to the US" we would have AT LEAST 8 other countries on the list before Iraq.

Answers to your questions:

Originally Posted by PA_SVX

If our society wasn't run by a resource that just happens to be in the armpit of the world, we could ignore them all together like Africa. But oil is needed.

Originally Posted by drivemusicnow

I'm not a politician, but neither are any of you. I think things need to be improved over how they are. I dont' know that we have the right to be world police, however when we are acting as such, we need to be the most "just and fair" world police possible. sooo, why Iraq??

What may be 'just and fair' in your book may not just in someone else's. Whose standard will you be using?

Originally Posted by drivemusicnow

When looking at international "unions" if you will, when something doesn't work (ie. the iraqi inspections and such), the process to create new policies, or to follow through with set "punishments" should be simpler than it is. Whether improving it requires disbanding the UN and creating something new, or working on new policy within the UN, i'm not sure.

International 'unions' require the participation of it's members. What can you do other than exclude them from your little treehouse club? So you take away foreign aid. You quit trading with them. Other than that, what else can you do? Yep, you've guess it...if they don't follow your orders and you're scared of them, you go spank 'em. The Big Bad Bully Tactic r0xx0rs!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally Posted by drivemusicnow

And if you're worried about the US's image, starting wars that are widely disputed is usually not the best way to get more "pro US" people PA_SVX.

and one more thing. yes, blowing the hell out of iraq did open up some eyes. however it also had an opposite effect on other countries. like north korea.. they were fairly compliant until that point.

Well the rest of the world hates us anyway. The only way they will ever become 'pro US' is if we decide to give all our riches away until we degenerate into a 4th world country.

[Noir]

Originally Posted by mohrds

Back on topic,

In Milwaukee we recently had this exact issue.
Doug

This is nothing new. It's been happening in Atlanta (more than likely quite a few places) but people just haven't realized it's been happening. Corruption's a beautiful thing and the rich has more power than teh po'.

[NapaBavarian]

Holly cr@p!!!

[demonsvx]

Also to get back on subject, yes it is sad that you can have your home taken away at any given moment for the sake of economics. I hope no one has to suffer this kind of abuse as the poor suffer enough. I think they should focus on what the community needs not on corporate wants. I dont want my home to be bulldozed as I and millions of other Americans worked hard to build our homes. There are great programs out there to help the poor. Im sure these people wouldnt want us to come to there super rich neighborhoods and do the same. Government grants helped me build my home and Im very thankful of that Yes there are other issues in our country that desperately need the government and OUR help. World issues are important but we alone cannot do it all. No I dont know why we really went to Iraq WMDs maybe, its my opinion. Also I used to be a STRONG BUSH FOLLWER but some of his decisions have pushed me away. Is there a better leader for us, possibly and for the Bush supporters keep on believing in him as your leader, thats your rights as Americans. I hope I didnt hurt anyones feelings by doing this thread, that is not my intention, Im just ranting I guess Thank you

[Noir]

Originally Posted by demonsvx

Also to get back on subject, yes it is sad that you can have your home taken away at any given moment for the sake of economics. I hope no one has to suffer this kind of abuse as the poor suffer enough. I think they should focus on what the community needs not on corporate wants. I dont want my home to be bulldozed as I and millions of other Americans worked hard to build our homes. There are great programs out there to help the poor. Im sure these people wouldnt want us to come to there super rich neighborhoods and do the same. Government grants helped me build my home and Im very thankful of that Yes there are other issues in our country that desperately need the government and OUR help. World issues are important but we alone cannot do it all. No I dont know why we really went to Iraq WMDs maybe, its my opinion. Also I used to be a STRONG BUSH FOLLWER but some of his decisions have pushed me away. Is there a better leader for us, possibly and for the Bush supporters keep on believing in him as your leader, thats your rights as Americans. I hope I didnt hurt anyones feelings by doing this thread, that is not my intention, Im just ranting I guess Thank you

teh rich > teh poor

this ain't ever goin' change. i've watched certain parts of Atlanta get zoned as historic so that certain developers couldn't buy the property to bulldoze them, only to be changed back a few years later and sold to the 'buddies' of the politicians to bulldoze. they paid those people who lived there $60k or so a plot and are selling new houses for $450-$500k. you know damn well they didn't spend $400k for those houses. i'm estimating they spent about $175-$200k tops building those homes. all i got to say is 'i wanna be rich'.

we went to iraq to secure our interests. that is all. whether it be for the good of the people, for oil, for wmd, whatever.

for the better leaders, as you can see from the last election you have dumb and dumber. you lose either way.

[drivemusicnow]

Originally Posted by Noir

we went to iraq to secure our interests. that is all. whether it be for the good of the people, for oil, for wmd, whatever.

for the better leaders, as you can see from the last election you have dumb and dumber. you lose either way.

THAT'S exactly what i have a problem with... we don't KNOW why we went to war.. teh gov't has given us different answers at different times. said one thing while actually going for another. thats rediculous.

Yeah. we really need to get out of this BS with candidates... I do think It'd be interesting to try what Cali did... X number of signitures on a paper gets you candidacy, and then you are given X number of dollars to spend on your campaign... sure would change the political forcast.. (oh yeah, and we might have the governator as the presidentator... uh presedater?umm hmmm...)

as is obvious that won't happen. however i really would like to know how to move towards at least a 3 party system.

[Landshark]

Originally Posted by drivemusicnow

I do think It'd be interesting to try what Cali did... X number of signitures on a paper gets you candidacy, and then you are given X number of dollars to spend on your campaign... sure would change the political forcast.. (oh yeah, and we might have the governator as the presidentator... uh presedater?umm hmmm...)

yeah, we need a "salary cap" on campaign spending......TV, radio, newspaper - spend it how you like, but don't go over.

[mohrds]

Back on topic, this is a great parody article I read on a blog.

Developers Use Eminent Domain to Acquire White House

President Bush was stunned today when he was told by his Housing and Urban Development Director that he & Laura would have to vacate the White House no later than noon on Monday. The HUD Director said he made his best effort to stop the acquisition of the White House but did not have adequate legal staff to challenge the developer’s avalanche of lawsuits. Eventually, he was forced to give in to the Washington D. C. Council’s decision. He continued, “The White House is considered a private residence since it the President’s primary residence. So, according to the Supreme Court decision, it falls under the same eminent domain rules as all other residential property. I do not think this is what the SCOTUS intended but you know what they say about unintended consequences of government action. We tried to stop them by getting the White House put on the historical site register but somehow the approval got held up in a Senate Committee.”

The President initially became highly agitated because he thought the Vice President had forgotten to tell him that he had been impeached. But, his Chief of Staff, put the news in terms the President understood. Mr. President, “It’s like a bar closing. You don’t have to go home, but you can’t stay here”. The President will operate from Crawford, Texas in the short term until new office space can be found. HUD Director Jackson said, “The President has directed us to look at West Virginia as a new Executive Branch location because he wants to build a baseball field just like the one in the movie Field of Dreams. We think West Virginia is a little remote but the President said, “If we build it, they will come”. It will probably work out just fine because it will substantially decrease our security costs. Also, we can acquire large blocks of cheap land directly adjacent to multi-lane super highways that don't go anywhere and have absolutely no traffic on them. Funny thing about West Virginia, everything seems to be named after Senator Byrd.”

A spokesman for Donald Trump said, “The White House property was acquired by China Global Development Corporation (CGDC) in a partnership with Trump Corporation. CGDC provided all the financing. Trump Corporation will provide the architecture and construction oversight for a new ultra-luxury high-rise condominium complex that will include a hotel and casino. The building will fit in with the classic Washington architecture but our tower will be the tallest in the District. It is expected to be built and fully occupied by wealthy lobbyists by the end of 2006 with the casino opening in early 2007. This will be a high profile project and will be managed by the next winner of the Apprentice TV show.” When asked about plans for the White House he said, “We considered preserving the White House but the land is too valuable so we are just going to knock it down and build a parking structure on that space."

When pressed for details on how the acquisition was made one day after the Supreme Court gutted the eminent domain law a Chinese spokesman from CGDC said, “We hired Jack Abramoff to put this deal together over a year ago. He knows everybody in Washington and knows how to grease the skids. Of course, we had a back-up plan in case the D.C. Council didn’t vote our way.” When asked about the back-up plan he said, “Jack worked out a deal with the Fuhgahwee Indian tribe and the Bureau of Indians Affairs to have the land reclassified as an “Indian Reservation”. Once it was reclassified as tribal land, we could build whatever we wanted, based on a 99 year lease Jack negotiated with the tribe.”

Councilman Marion Barry who is well known for his classic quotations said, “This project will generate a lot of new tax revenue for D.C. which means the D.C. Council will be extremely powerful because we will be have a lot more money to spend. This is just the first project that Jack has in the queue. Jack is in a little trouble right now. But, I am sure he will make a come back, just like I did. In this town power is about more than money & I don't know any other lobbyist that has trained Israeli snipers that owe him favors, if you know what I'm saying. Washington will be a much different place when Jack & I get done with it.”

[SVXphile]

Mohrds....check THIS out!

http://www.freestarmedia.com/hotellostliberty2.html

You know what they say about paybacks!

PS Come to think of it, almost everything here IS named for Byrd!

Don

[demonsvx]

They should place a memorial honoring his great decision complete with a scale model of his home. HAHAHAHAHAHAH thats funny if I do say so myself. Serves him right to mess with our basic rights. I wonder after they build the hotel if pro-constitution activists get a discount