New Orleans, the shame of America

that's bad, but Iraq is the shame of America. This one is just regular pork politics as usual.
Not that there is any excuse for it, but I don't think it can ever change. We finally got a conservative president and a conservative congress, and we are worse off than ever. I really thought it would be different once "my" party got into 100% power, and it was worse.
Now, I'm Libertarian. When they get elected and they do just as bad, I don't know where I'll go, maybe the Greens.
Nobody seems to be able to resist the temptation of so much money.
 
Lincoln said a true test of a mans character is how he reacts to power. As a Louisiannian I agree with Danny's title. However, this is no new, or unknown issue. New Orleans has always been a dirty little secret that America loves, and doesn't talk about.

Iraq may be one of our greatest strategic victories, only time will tell.
 
1. We dig a moat along the Mexican border.

2. We take the dirt and build up the New Orleans levy system.

3. We fill the moat with Florida alligators.

Win-win-win solution. Any other problems you want me to solve?

Note to Shadow -

Last I heard the half life of radioactive plutonium was 25,000 years and it only takes a couple of atoms of the stuff to kill you. What this means is that even a very crude dirty nuclear terrorist bomb, and we know the previous Iraqi regieme supported terrorists, would make a place unhabitable for twelves times the the length of time since Jesus was born until today.

Want to take that risk? I don't.

http://www.fas.org/nuke/intro/nuke/plutonium.htm
 
I guess if you're buying a $200 bottle of champagne at Hooters, you didn't *need* any relief money, did you?

Seems like FEMA can't win. Move slowly, be criticized. Do nothing, be criticized. Attempt to invent ways to help the helpless, be criticized.

How DO you give emergency aid to people without social security numbers, bank accounts, picture ID or proof of residence? Pretend you HAVE to do it, or be criticized.

FEMA's attempt to lend legitmate aid in an emergency was defeated by the bad in human nature. Show me some good intention that CAN'T be.

Like when we send free sacks of rice to starving countries and warlords SELL it for a profit. Almost exactly the same thing... isn't it?


Mike :mad:
 
DGG- You are correct about nukes. However, Saddam did not have nukes. He didn't have anything. Our own inteligence said he didn't have anything. But, we LIED about it, said he had something, and went in anyway. Who knows why?
If you and I meet on the street and you look at me funny, can I whip out my gun and shoot you? Can I tell the cops "I thought he had a shotgun behind his back and he was going to shoot me, so I shot him first"
Would this argument stand up when we looked, and you were unarmed?
How about when witnesses said you had both hands up in the air before I shot you, and they were plainly empty?
I don't think so.
But, we think it is OK to go after a country even if they are proven to have nothing. Why is that OK? I don't get it.
 
Look familar shadow?


124605680_486d987f0a.jpg
 
How about attacking because the UN is corrupt and sans nutz and refused to enforce its own sanctions because of an incipid mix of those two qualities. The nuclear threat was only one part of the reason to attack. A stable oil power is the main one. We didn't steal their oil, but we need SOMEONE over there stable enough to sell it to the world, so the entire global economy doesn't crash and burn.
 
That's a good point, Andy. I'm no economist (I was lucky enough to scrape by with a C). However, it has been explained to me that we don't need the OIL persay, as much as we need stability to make sure that oil is bought and sold with a standard U.S. dollar measurement. From what I have told, I'd imagine that's why we put up with OPEC.
I don't really understand the issue. I'm a simple man with a simple brain.

Jake
 
Actually the whole thing is connected.

Both Katrina and Iraq are massive government projects, requiring tremendous amounts of both administration, workers, and money.

Small government conservatives are not able to manage our own economy successfully, much less some sort of a massive undertaking like a natural disaster or a hurricane. That's what the whole "block grant" thing was about. Give them the money, and while you are giving it directly to them cut the amount and also cut the oversight. The things mentioned in the article are small potatos compared to the money wasted in Iraq.

The bottom line is if you want tax cuts but very little gov't help, and a lot of expensive military hardware, but not enough troops on the ground to maintain order and hold territory, and a lot of incentives to help corporations expand and be profitable, but not a lot of that money shared with the workers, and tough talk on crime control and punishment, but with cutting funds for community policing the Vote GOP.:thumbup:
 
45-70, no it does not look familiar. What is it?

Also, Andy, you really helped me make my point. There are lousy dictators who are horrible to their people all over the place, from North Korea to Africa. We leave all of them alone. We support some of them. But Saddam, well, Saddam has some oil so he has to go. And we say it is to "liberate the Iraqi people". Bull. It is the oil.
If we want to be the New Roman Empire, at least come out and declare it don't be hypocritical about it.
 
The_Shadow said:
If we want to be the New Roman Empire, at least come out and declare it don't be hypocritical about it.
Click to expand...

And just as the Roman Empire was brought down by the Vandals sweeping down from the north and the undermining of the middle class by the large amounts of slaves brought back from it's global conquests so will we be brought down by the large number of illegals coming in from the South, and the large amount of jobs outsourced to slave-like labor in other lands.

The Kings and Royal families want us to think that by passing laws to concentrate wealth we are practicing democracy. Nothing could be further from the truth.
 
You keep addressing the oil conspiracy, and nuclear issues, and I'll keep pointing to the raping of the oil for food program by liberal governments in the Urpeen toilet, in collusion with Saddam. 12 years of sanctions ignored. Nothing. 12 years of history where war was being debated. I made your point? Oil is the major natural resource that runs the world economy. Did we steal it?? No we didn't, but we want to be able to buy it from level headed governments who aren't out to kill our way of life. Does that sound like Rome? No Rome would have killed the women and children and enslaved the men. They'd have stonlen EVERYTHING. They'd have salted the land and left it barren.

you guys are exaggerating
 
aproy1101 said:
12 years of sanctions ignored. Nothing. 12 years of history where war was being debated. I made your point? Oil is the major natural resource that runs the world economy. Did we steal it?? No we didn't, but we want to be able to buy it from level headed governments who aren't out to kill our way of life. you guys are exaggerating
Click to expand...

Hmm, 12 years of sanctions resulted in no WMD. ;)

We want to buy it from "level headed governments not out to kill our way of life" ?? Last I checked a good % age of the the 9/11 hijackers AND international terrorists were from Saudi Arabia, not Iraq, and most of their money comes from there too. Level headed gov'ts like them? And we are friends with Libya now who downed Pan Am Flight 103? Come on! Get real:rolleyes:
 
hollowdweller said:
Hmm, 12 years of sanctions resulted in no WMD. ;)

We want to buy it from "level headed governments not out to kill our way of life" ?? Last I checked a good % age of the the 9/11 hijackers AND international terrorists were from Saudi Arabia, not Iraq, and most of their money comes from there too. Level headed gov'ts like them? And we are friends with Libya now who downed Pan Am Flight 103? Come on! Get real:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

That was my point exactly.:thumbup: Thanks. Look at the region. Iraq under Saddam, Saudis, Iran... No good strong democratic ally in the region. We needed to create one. We have. Now the Saudis and Iranian-Crazies (soon to be bombed I hope) will have less leverage over us because there will be a stable trading partner.;)

Also, I wasn't aware the sanctions were designed to produce WMD. Whats your point?:D
 
My point was the Saudis are a source of terrorisim not a level headed govt. Sanctions and weapons inspections in the 90's produced the desired result everything we know about Iraq's WMD indicates they were destroyed after the 91 war.

Also your infer that a democracy will naturally produce a stable country friendly to the US. If the Palestinian elections have shown us anything it is that that is not the case. I sincerely hope it DOES in Iraq, but I don't think that history has shown us it WILL
 
The Palastinians are a special 'Biblical' case. There will never be peace there IMHO. Theres too much religious mumbojumbo getting in the way of the peace process.

Again, as the Saudis are unstable, and Iran is unstable, and Iraq WAS unstable it is a good strategy to get just ONE of them on the right track.

"Sanctions and weapons inspections in the 90's produced the desired result everything we know about Iraq's WMD indicates they were destroyed after the 91 war." HD

Desired results?? He kept the capabilities even if the weapons were destroyed, defied the sanctions constantly, remained an iron fisted dictator in defiance of the world, and corrupted the UN. Was that our intentions?


We've destroyed a great thread with this tired old argument HD. LOL. You and I just love going at it over this, but lets get back to Danny's argument. To which I say a respectful phooey.
 
Iraq WAS unstable? Sure looks unstable to me!
And, if the Romans would have salted the land, well we used depleted uranium shells on it, and for a few centuries now the land will not produce healthy food. Iraqis can look forward to a short life punctuated by cancer thanks to their "liberators". Open your eyes. We did nobody any good in this one, and I am sorry to say it because I love my country. I just cannot say "my country, right or wrong". We did what was good for business. That is all we did, and now business is booming. Oil? Where is the cheap Iraqi oil? My pump prices are high as a kite
 
we can theorize all we like on this but one of the biggest issues to me, is that every "good reason" given to us to go there, start up this "war" (it's not really a war), and have all this hoo hah, was based on deceit. we were lied to at every turn. even now, they just aren't telling us the truth. everything is covered in shit imho.

we went into a sovereign territory, even if it was a cesspool, bombed them back to the stoneage, murdered pretty much the entire ruling class there, managed to get the head guy alive (don't hear much from him now), and have lost countless lives - not to mention the ones we can count, and the ones that live - many maimed and terribly traumatized - not just our, theirs too... for what? maybe in 10 or 15 years some good will come of this - all i can say is, it had better.

lie, cheat, steal, get the job done, regardless of the cost, the ends justify the means.

and for those of y'all who like to take such statements as "anti patriotic" or "not supporting our boys", well, so be it, but my thoughts on this are about as patriotic as you can get, coming from a long line of military volunteers; and our boys are doing the only job they can with what they have. i do not envy them. honestly, i had wished they never had gone, and i certainly hope they can come back and not be villified when this is all over.

bladite
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top