Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

[5mn_Major]

Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

Ya, guess I'd largely agree with Pio from a different perspective.

IMO you need to treat law as law regardless of the country involved. A spy from Russia is no better/worse than a spy from Israel and if you treat them differently, don't be surprised to see more spies from 'friendly' countries.

In the end, IMO we should really not go out of our way to give oversized rewards to countries where the relationship is just one way. I can see that you may want to use some funding in the foriegn relations toolkit...but at the end of the day, there needs to be a two way street of benefits. If not, then countries should be repositioned from huge beneficiaries to a more simple relationship thats just based on old fashioned friendship and mutual respect.

 

[huskyfan]

Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

Fire the military. Close the VA.

yeah! less government employees.

 

[walrus]

Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

Or, call him out for the bull**** practice of using the First Lady's campaign as some instance of massive government interference in the way he lives.

If Jon Stewart makes fun of the first lady its a ok
, correct?

 

[amherstblackbear]

Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

That's wonderful. I'm not questioning those who support it. I'm just saying that those who are against are hardly limited to the Gingrichs and Palins of the world.

But we're naturally more concerned with Gingrich and Palin because they're prominent public figures here, with the ability to shape opinion and policy, here.

I'm curious to know more about it. I don't doubt it's existence, but I'd be curious to actually see it (well, a translation of it). Ajami didn't actually cite the thing, and his most specific words about the question were: "building the mosque is a project of folly." That looks like it's just begging for spin.

But Kepler's right. All the other stuff is a sideshow. Do we want to stand on our principles? That's the issue for a lot of us.

 

[WeWantMore]

Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

But we're naturally more concerned with Gingrich and Palin because they're prominent public figures here, with the ability to shape opinion and policy, here.

Sure, I can see that. However, I'd argue that Gingrich and Palin's ability to shape opinion on the mosque has been drastically overstated, which is really what I was getting it.
I mean, I can't speak from personal experience, but I would guess the sway they have over public opinion in the Mideast is next to nil. And yet, 58% of them still think it's a bad idea. So, it's not like people only oppose the mosque because Gingrich blabs about it on TV or Sarah Palin tweets about it.

 

[amherstblackbear]

Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

Re: the other issue of today...

There used to be all sorts of debate about whether America was in decline. Then it was settled: we were. Then there was debate about what that would mean for international relations. Then the whole thing faded into obscurity.

RIP, academic study of international relations, 1972-1982.

Now, all that's old is new again. Color me skeptical.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

When that criminally weak sister* Jimmy Carter was president, we were in decline. Then we elected a "grade B actor who starred in a movie with an ape and was too stupid to be president" and suddenly we weren't in decline anymore.

*from "7 Days in May"

 

[amherstblackbear]

Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

Hehe, I can see how that would be an attractive story.

I think it started under Nixon, and was amplified by (1) 1973 oil crisis and (2) decision to float the dollar.

Reagan was in office when the talk died down, though it took a few years.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

Hehe, I can see how that would be an attractive story.

I think it started under Nixon, and was amplified by (1) 1973 oil crisis and (2) decision to float the dollar.

Reagan was in office when the talk died down, though it took a few years.

Hehe, I can see why libs are attracted to the America's in decine storyline. It puts us "in our place," "we deserve it" and now, maybe, "we'll start consuming only our 'fair share' of the world's resources."

 

[Tundra]

Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

The end comes when, through empire building, a desire to protect what it already has, some sort of manifest destiny complex, or similar reasons, that country overextends itself economically when it has to pour more and more resources into its military and military battles.

A good lesson for our country.

That's true. we're spending $1trillion this year on military related spending ($700billion dod, $25billion nuclear weapons under ED, $100billion supplemental budget for "war on terror", interest payments, Vet retirement,VA etc...)

About 4% of GDP and 17% of the total budget (if you take out the self taxed FICA (SS) and Medicaid ) it's much bigger %.
It's comparable to the Roman Empire of 3% of GDP and 70% or so of the total budget, but at least they were acquiring gold/slaves/land etc in the expansion phase of empire building.

We're number #1 in military spending and #1 in incarceration rate. 1.5million military personnel (probably 2million if you include civilian contractors, mercenary troops, auxiliary troops etc..).

That's why we should go back to conscription. so the pain of War will be felt by everyone and it'll be much "cheaper" financially when we "finish" war on terror.

 

[amherstblackbear]

Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

Hehe, I can see why libs are attracted to the America's in decine storyline. It puts us "in our place," "we deserve it" and now, maybe, "we'll start consuming only our 'fair share' of the world's resources."

geez, man, put down the boxing gloves once in a while, eh?

I was on your side of this one. That's what I meant when I joked about all that was old being new again. American decline was a bit of a fad back in the day, and it's becoming a fad again now.

There's not really a lot of doubt about the other part (that it dates to Nixon). Knowing that countries not named "USSR" could be a real threat to the US was a rude surprise. Having a US President fundamentally change the postwar, Bretton Woods economic system because the US couldn't afford it . . . was also a surprise. That's what set the whole America in decline talk the first time. It's not a crack against Nixon. If it were, then it wouldn't be decline, it would be a question of "What the heck is Nixon thinking?"

We should have one day a week at this place where the partisan filters go in the closet...

 

[Red Cloud]

Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

That's true. we're spending $1trillion this year on military related spending ($700billion dod, $25billion nuclear weapons under ED, $100billion supplemental budget for "war on terror", interest payments, Vet retirement,VA etc...)

About 4% of GDP and 17% of the total budget (if you take out the self taxed FICA (SS) and Medicaid ) it's much bigger %.
It's comparable to the Roman Empire of 3% of GDP and 70% or so of the total budget, but at least they were acquiring gold/slaves/land etc in the expansion phase of empire building.

We're number #1 in military spending and #1 in incarceration rate. 1.5million military personnel (probably 2million if you include civilian contractors, mercenary troops, auxiliary troops etc..).

That's why we should go back to conscription. so the pain of War will be felt by everyone and it'll be much "cheaper" financially when we "finish" war on terror.

I admit it, I laughed.

 

[Tundra]

Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

Hehe, I can see why libs are attracted to the America's in decine storyline. It puts us "in our place," "we deserve it" and now, maybe, "we'll start consuming only our 'fair share' of the world's resources."

Nah it's just a cycle of economic power and we're hastening in the name of multi-national business interest. I think only thing left is power of consumption and maybe brain power:new ideas. And we still have lot of raw material resources, just not the value added manufacturing sector.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

That's true. we're spending $1trillion this year on military related spending ($700billion dod, $25billion nuclear weapons under ED, $100billion supplemental budget for "war on terror", interest payments, Vet retirement,VA etc...)

About 4% of GDP and 17% of the total budget (if you take out the self taxed FICA (SS) and Medicaid ) it's much bigger %.
It's comparable to the Roman Empire of 3% of GDP and 70% or so of the total budget, but at least they were acquiring gold/slaves/land etc in the expansion phase of empire building.

We're number #1 in military spending and #1 in incarceration rate. 1.5million military personnel (probably 2million if you include civilian contractors, mercenary troops, auxiliary troops etc..).

That's why we should go back to conscription. so the pain of War will be felt by everyone and it'll be much "cheaper" financially when we "finish" war on terror.

Let's just focus on the nonsense about reinstating conscription. In the Vietnam days lefties nearly tore this country apart because of the draft. So we ended it. Now some of them (including John Kerry) are advocating bringing it back, presumably to reignite the fires of anti-war activism. The phrase du jour is "spread the pain."

The fact that it would be grotesquely expensive and would detract from rather than enhance our preparedness is apparantly of no concern. We now have the finest military in our history and in the history of the world. Why would we want to screw that up?

BTW, we're no longer fighting a "war on terror," we're fighting a war against "man caused disasters," I wish you'd get your Chamberlainesque nomenclature straight.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

geez, man, put down the boxing gloves once in a while, eh?

I was on your side of this one. That's what I meant when I joked about all that was old being new again. American decline was a bit of a fad back in the day, and it's becoming a fad again now.

There's not really a lot of doubt about the other part (that it dates to Nixon). Knowing that countries not named "USSR" could be a real threat to the US was a rude surprise. Having a US President fundamentally change the postwar, Bretton Woods economic system because the US couldn't afford it . . . was also a surprise. That's what set the whole America in decline talk the first time. It's not a crack against Nixon. If it were, then it wouldn't be decline, it would be a question of "What the heck is Nixon thinking?"

We should have one day a week at this place where the partisan filters go in the closet...

Whatever you say. Just watch that talk about closets.

 

[Bakunin]

Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

Suffice that if we were in Japan's shoes, with a big brother holding the military umbrella and allowing us to concentrate on making useful products that people would like to buy, we'd be in a lot better shape.

Which is ironic given the fact Japan is in awful shape right now (their economy has been stagnant for years, and their future isn't looking that good either due to an aging population).

 

[Tundra]

Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

Let's just focus on the nonsense about reinstating conscription. In the Vietnam days lefties nearly tore this country apart because of the draft. So we ended it. Now some of them (including John Kerry) are advocating bringing it back, presumably to reignite the fires of anti-war activism. The phrase du jour is "spread the pain."

The fact that it would be grotesquely expensive and would detract from rather than enhance our preparedness is apparantly of no concern. We now have the finest military in our history and in the history of the world. Why would we want to screw that up?

BTW, we're no longer fighting a "war on terror," we're fighting a war against "man caused disasters," I wish you'd get your Chamberlainesque nomenclature straight.

If it's worth fighting, if the cause is just, conscription wouldn't have any bearing on the war effort.

our military is the most expensive in the history of the world... so I really hope it's also the best.

Gotcha. war on MCD ... hmm that could also work for war on obesity.

 

[Patman]

Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

Which is ironic given the fact Japan is in awful shape right now (their economy has been stagnant for years, and their future isn't looking that good either due to an aging population).

details... don't you know they are electronic gods.

 

[Patman]

Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

What will our current president do?

We're trading him for three months of WHAT?!?!?!

I think this whole settlement nonsense is ridiculous... if accept the notion of the formation of a Palestinian state then you cannot support this settlement nonsense. Trading Pollard for 3 months of anything is down right stupid.

edit: I'm of the opinion that the entire west bank should be evacuated at gun point... i don't see why Israel gets to pick and choose a carving out of the west bank... I think Jerusalem should belong to Israel because I don't trust Muslim stewardship of any part of Jerusalem... even as a shared international city. They've been treating Bethlehem like crap... I'd expect no less elsewhere.

 

[amherstblackbear]

Re: Obama XV: Now, with 20% more rage

Gotcha. war on MCD ... hmm that could also work for war on obesity.

Re that graph, the funniest part might actually be Russia. China you can see. But Russia is just delusional. On the other hand, Russian pols don't have much of anything to sell to their constituents *but* nationalism, so maybe it *does* make sense.