American Warship threatens to open fire on unarmed civilian ship....in SCOTLAND!
- Thread starter MountainPro
- Start date
davidmc said:Yes, he is a Doctor & former Governor. He busted his butt to get where he is. Anyone on this thread who can beat those qualificationsI doubt it
Just saw some footage of him on the BBC : he seems to be a very capable guy as you say.
Impressed.
I have heard that their 1st orders of buisiness are increase in minimum wage, reduce student loan interest rates, allow our health service to shop for lower prices for drugs, work on alternative, clean, energy & associated independence (important, as pointed out on your thread), ethics reform, reformulation of iraq strategy on bipartisan basis, and maybe a couple of hearings to "air the place (Congress) out", in a manner of speaking.limerickman said:
I have a pic of me sitting with Dean at a coffee shop in the beginning of 2004. I don't think anyone doubts Deans qualifications as a individual, but he is not that well liked outside the east coast by his own Democrats.
What I watched during his run at the Presidency was his inability of explaining how he was going to engage the changes he spoke of. A major thrust of his was the health costs and medical insurance situatiuon we are facing in the US. Everything he said was true, but he had no solutions. Dean is great at pointing out problems, but he has no solutions.
The Democrats missed out with John Edwards. I firmly believe if Edwards was the canidate , they might have won.
All canidates look good if you want them to......
The past Presidential elections I was lucky to have a friend who is a poli sci guy. He is not interested in who wins, but how they win. He has changed my outlook at looking at how canidates look at getting elected. I was at a stop Dean was speaking at for the regional Democratic Committee.This was a stop to test the waters before he jumped in.
So Dean speaks, and I realize he has said nothing. Nothing...... So after the speech, I go upstairs to the coffee bar while the commies....errrr......I mean the Democrats conduct a meeting. There was Dean sitting there all by himself. So I sat with him...... Of course I asked him about Ben & Jerry.....
Here is where i didn't trust the media......
The article I posted here is about the meeting I was at. The crowd did not errupt. it was luke warm to him. Dean was not for Iowa. So ...... This article stated that Dean speech was his stock one...... he repeated the same speech over and over throughtout the year.
The Dems have some momenteum going..... but I believe to continue this throughout 2008 and win the big house, they need to change leadership. Dean did not direct the Dems to this victory. George Bush did that.
here is the article......
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dean seems to regain Iowa steam (Martin Sieff, 1/17/2004, UPI)
What I watched during his run at the Presidency was his inability of explaining how he was going to engage the changes he spoke of. A major thrust of his was the health costs and medical insurance situatiuon we are facing in the US. Everything he said was true, but he had no solutions. Dean is great at pointing out problems, but he has no solutions.
The Democrats missed out with John Edwards. I firmly believe if Edwards was the canidate , they might have won.
All canidates look good if you want them to......
The past Presidential elections I was lucky to have a friend who is a poli sci guy. He is not interested in who wins, but how they win. He has changed my outlook at looking at how canidates look at getting elected. I was at a stop Dean was speaking at for the regional Democratic Committee.This was a stop to test the waters before he jumped in.
So Dean speaks, and I realize he has said nothing. Nothing...... So after the speech, I go upstairs to the coffee bar while the commies....errrr......I mean the Democrats conduct a meeting. There was Dean sitting there all by himself. So I sat with him...... Of course I asked him about Ben & Jerry.....
Here is where i didn't trust the media......
The article I posted here is about the meeting I was at. The crowd did not errupt. it was luke warm to him. Dean was not for Iowa. So ...... This article stated that Dean speech was his stock one...... he repeated the same speech over and over throughtout the year.
The Dems have some momenteum going..... but I believe to continue this throughout 2008 and win the big house, they need to change leadership. Dean did not direct the Dems to this victory. George Bush did that.
here is the article......
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dean seems to regain Iowa steam (Martin Sieff, 1/17/2004, UPI)
Howard Dean's faltering campaign is hitting its stride again Saturday just when he needs it to in the last weekend before the Iowa caucuses. The audiences were smaller, the applause warm bit not ecstatic in recent days. But on Friday, the candidate and his audiences took fire again, right where he needed them to, in the heart of **** Gephardt country in north central Iowa.
It started Friday when Dean campaigned in the United Auto Workers stronghold of Newton, former Democratic Rep. Dave Nagel told United Press International.
"All of a sudden, the place erupts," Nagel said.
And it continued in Mason City Saturday. Dean organizers expected about 200 people for their first morning event at a shopping mall. But they got twice that. It was standing room only and packed to the seams. And when Dean lit into President George W. Bush and gave his stock stump speech the waves of applause rolled back at him.
"This should be Gephardt country," Nagel said." All of a sudden, the momentum's back with him."
In all likelihood, they're just padding crowds with the volunteers they have coming in to work the caucuses Monday, but the point is that they have that kind of organization in place. Only Gephardt has similar--or even better--and that means that barring a true meltdown it's still just a two man race. Posted by Orrin Judd at January 18, 2004 11:17 AM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It started Friday when Dean campaigned in the United Auto Workers stronghold of Newton, former Democratic Rep. Dave Nagel told United Press International.
"All of a sudden, the place erupts," Nagel said.
And it continued in Mason City Saturday. Dean organizers expected about 200 people for their first morning event at a shopping mall. But they got twice that. It was standing room only and packed to the seams. And when Dean lit into President George W. Bush and gave his stock stump speech the waves of applause rolled back at him.
"This should be Gephardt country," Nagel said." All of a sudden, the momentum's back with him."
In all likelihood, they're just padding crowds with the volunteers they have coming in to work the caucuses Monday, but the point is that they have that kind of organization in place. Only Gephardt has similar--or even better--and that means that barring a true meltdown it's still just a two man race. Posted by Orrin Judd at January 18, 2004 11:17 AM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
David - Invasion of a sovereign Nation is not the only way of "dealing" with an individual (and his associated cohorts, who have proved relatively few in number if you look at who has been charged under the terms of the tribunal).davidmc said:Correct. The League of Nations (Europe) drew out the borders on a table. The U.S. used them as a middle man in one of our super-power proxy wars against Iran much like we supported the muhajadeen against the, then, soviets. What I'm saying, all of that aside, is that he would've had to been dealt w/ eventually. Why not now
The rules seem to change according to how governments wish the public to view situations of which they are often very ignorant.
Pinochet was a despotic dictator, with no interest in what would generally be termed "democracy" (often proffered in debates here on why it was necessary to invade Iraq). He achieved his position of power in Chile through assistance from those who maintain that installing democracy is a valid reasqon for one (or more) Nations to invade another. He maintained his position for a long time, with assistance from those very same government/s, through carrying out actions that in no way could be considered democratic.
Was invasion the only option open for correcting a situation which the global policemen decided was untenable (although they have chosen to ignore / support plenty of other despotic regimes)? Did the Iraqi people really ask for the carnage that has become their lot?
Was it really the only way of achieving the removal of someone who was instated with the support of those who chased him down?
Would it not have been better to assist the Iraqi people in removing their own problem, if it really was the biggest item on the agenda?
Neither the invasion of Iraq, nor the invasion of Afghanistan, seem to have provided the people with what any of us would term an acceptable level of security to go about their daily jobs.
As you are aware, David, I spent some time working in Afghanistan back in the 1990's. I think the invasion there was extremely short-sighted if there was ever an intention of being able to leave the place with a level of security greater than that which has been its fate for the last few millenia. The Taliban melted away, and the causes (and sources) for their existence remain as strong as ever. Nothing has changed, just a lot of people have died.
The Dem's will have to prove themselves. I heard on the radio that Emmanuel stated that the legislation is already crafted for all of the proposed reforms such as implementing the 9/11 commission recommendations & instituting a "pay as you go" (don't put anything forward unless it is in the budget)legislative process that has been sorely lacking in the last Congress. The other items on the agenda are on my previous post. Again, they will have to prove their mettle.wolfix said:
Just what is to be gained by bombing Afghanistan? In what service is this necessary evil committed? The capture of Osama bin Laden?
Horseshit.
A quick Wikipedia search will tell you this:
"The Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline (or TAP) is a proposed natural gas pipeline being developed by the Asian Development Bank. The pipeline will transport Caspian Sea natural gas from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan, into Pakistan and the Indian Ocean. The Afghan government is expected to receive 8% of the project's revenue. TAP will be constructed alongside the highway running from Herat to Kandahar, and then via Quetta and Multan in Pakistan. The cost of this international infrastructure is estimated at US$3.5 billion (2005 figures). Proponents of the project see it as a modern continuation of the Silk Road. Original project started in March 1995 when inaugural memorandum of understanding between the governments of Turkmenistan and Pakistan for a pipline project was signed. In August 1996, the Central Asia Gas Pipeline, Ltd. (CentGas) consortium for construction of pipeline, led by Unocal was formed. On 27 October 1997 CentGas incorporated in formal signing ceremonies in Ashgabat, Turkmenistan by several international oil companies along with the Government of Turkmenistan. In January 1998 the Taliban, selecting CentGas over a Brazilian competitor, signed an agreement that allowed the proposed project to proceed. In June 1998, Russian Gazprom relinquishes its 10% stake in project. Unocal withdrawn from the consortium on 8 December 1998.
The new deal on the pipeline was signed on 27 December 2002 by the leaders of Turkmenistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan. Signing the agreement was made possible by the invasion of Afghanistan by United States military forces a year prior, which overthrew the Taliban government controlling most of Afghanistan. Building the pipeline was cited by some critics of the Bush administration as a motivation for the invasion. Some people have even said that if you take a map of U.S. military bases in Afghanistan and a map of the proposed pipeline they are very close together, suggesting that bases are positioned to protect oil interests. However, since then the project has essentially stalled; construction of the Turkmen part is supposed to start in 2006, but the overall feasibility is questionable since the southern part of the Afghan section runs through territory which continues to be under de facto Taliban control."
-----------
That last sentence is why the US is still in A'stan, because they have not yet managed to put the entire length of pipeline under control.
Rumsfeld has mused aloud that OBL may never be captured. Finding the Saudi exile, he said, is "like finding a needle in a haystack". Does it make sense then to put millions of Afghans at risk of starvation, to force them from their homes, to kill thousands, to pursue a goal whose achievement is as likely as finding a needle in a haystack?
Rumsfeld of course has never mentioned the relationship that A'stan's next-door-neighbor, Pakistan - their intelligence service (ISI) and president Gen. Musharraf - and the CIA, has had with OBL, nor the Pakistani role in 9-11, for example when ISI chief Lt. Gen. Mahmud Ahmad ordered a payment of $100,000. to be wired to Mohammed Atta, the alleged lead terrorist of 9-11.
The Taliban, it should be recalled, offered to hand OBL over to a third country for prosecution, if Washington would present evidence that OBL had ordered the 9-11 attacks. Bush fired back, "No negotiations." The bombing began soon after.
Earlier, Washington backed off a promise made by Colin Powell to present its evidence that OBL was behind the attacks on DC and NY. To date, the White House has presented no evidence at all. And while Tony Blair presented a 70-point brief to justify UK's participation in the attack on A'stan, it turned out that the brief had not a single shred of concrete evidence linking OBL to the 9-11 murders. Blair later admitted that what evidence he had wouldn't stand up in court. Which means, he, and his master GWB, are killing innocent civilians, and adding to the misery of millions more, to pursue a man they have little hope of capturing, for whom they have no evidence was behind 9-11.
Could anyone therefore be blamed for concluding the war on A'stan is a fraud? The fact is, boys & girls, that there ISN'T any War on Terra - but there IS a war for oil.
Horseshit.
A quick Wikipedia search will tell you this:
"The Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline (or TAP) is a proposed natural gas pipeline being developed by the Asian Development Bank. The pipeline will transport Caspian Sea natural gas from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan, into Pakistan and the Indian Ocean. The Afghan government is expected to receive 8% of the project's revenue. TAP will be constructed alongside the highway running from Herat to Kandahar, and then via Quetta and Multan in Pakistan. The cost of this international infrastructure is estimated at US$3.5 billion (2005 figures). Proponents of the project see it as a modern continuation of the Silk Road. Original project started in March 1995 when inaugural memorandum of understanding between the governments of Turkmenistan and Pakistan for a pipline project was signed. In August 1996, the Central Asia Gas Pipeline, Ltd. (CentGas) consortium for construction of pipeline, led by Unocal was formed. On 27 October 1997 CentGas incorporated in formal signing ceremonies in Ashgabat, Turkmenistan by several international oil companies along with the Government of Turkmenistan. In January 1998 the Taliban, selecting CentGas over a Brazilian competitor, signed an agreement that allowed the proposed project to proceed. In June 1998, Russian Gazprom relinquishes its 10% stake in project. Unocal withdrawn from the consortium on 8 December 1998.
The new deal on the pipeline was signed on 27 December 2002 by the leaders of Turkmenistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan. Signing the agreement was made possible by the invasion of Afghanistan by United States military forces a year prior, which overthrew the Taliban government controlling most of Afghanistan. Building the pipeline was cited by some critics of the Bush administration as a motivation for the invasion. Some people have even said that if you take a map of U.S. military bases in Afghanistan and a map of the proposed pipeline they are very close together, suggesting that bases are positioned to protect oil interests. However, since then the project has essentially stalled; construction of the Turkmen part is supposed to start in 2006, but the overall feasibility is questionable since the southern part of the Afghan section runs through territory which continues to be under de facto Taliban control."
-----------
That last sentence is why the US is still in A'stan, because they have not yet managed to put the entire length of pipeline under control.
Rumsfeld has mused aloud that OBL may never be captured. Finding the Saudi exile, he said, is "like finding a needle in a haystack". Does it make sense then to put millions of Afghans at risk of starvation, to force them from their homes, to kill thousands, to pursue a goal whose achievement is as likely as finding a needle in a haystack?
Rumsfeld of course has never mentioned the relationship that A'stan's next-door-neighbor, Pakistan - their intelligence service (ISI) and president Gen. Musharraf - and the CIA, has had with OBL, nor the Pakistani role in 9-11, for example when ISI chief Lt. Gen. Mahmud Ahmad ordered a payment of $100,000. to be wired to Mohammed Atta, the alleged lead terrorist of 9-11.
The Taliban, it should be recalled, offered to hand OBL over to a third country for prosecution, if Washington would present evidence that OBL had ordered the 9-11 attacks. Bush fired back, "No negotiations." The bombing began soon after.
Earlier, Washington backed off a promise made by Colin Powell to present its evidence that OBL was behind the attacks on DC and NY. To date, the White House has presented no evidence at all. And while Tony Blair presented a 70-point brief to justify UK's participation in the attack on A'stan, it turned out that the brief had not a single shred of concrete evidence linking OBL to the 9-11 murders. Blair later admitted that what evidence he had wouldn't stand up in court. Which means, he, and his master GWB, are killing innocent civilians, and adding to the misery of millions more, to pursue a man they have little hope of capturing, for whom they have no evidence was behind 9-11.
Could anyone therefore be blamed for concluding the war on A'stan is a fraud? The fact is, boys & girls, that there ISN'T any War on Terra - but there IS a war for oil.
Where in my post did I say he wasnt a "capable guy"? It was an impersonation of a politcian. All politicians get goofed on. Lighten up, Lim!limerickman said:
thebluetrain said:
I never said, that you said that Dean wasn't a capable guy.
I didn't know that he managed the Democratic campaign for the 2006 elections.
That's what I was remarking upon.
Similar threads
