The reason why the buck stops with Bush on global warming

Discussion in 'Your Bloody Soap Box' started by MountainPro, Oct 3, 2006.

  1. MountainPro

    MountainPro New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2004
    Messages:
    3,071
    Likes Received:
    1
    Global warming. Dismissed by the Bush admin as a hoax.

    Sadly, global waming exists, the ice caps are melting, tundra is disappearing, the seas are rising deserts are getting larger and warmer and the rate has excellerated disproportionately in the last 100 years. These are scientific facts.

    Why should a global problem be put at the door of one man?

    Basically something needs to be done because new scientific data collected in Siberia shows that the effects are a lot worse than feared.

    Only one man has the power to reverse the current situation. Only one man has the influence, the technology and the money to make his country the cleanest on the planet. No one else can do it for him and it must be done. We cannot ignore the desperate state of our planet because the industrial pollution that comes from the US effects all of us directly.

    Poisioned drinking water is Africa has recently been attributed to US pollution.

    Bush can reduce carbon dioxide and green-house gas emmisions, he can do it, he has the power and position to stop this in its tracks.

    Who are we supposed to look towards to stop the worlds biggest and richest polluter?
     
    Tags:


  2. Wurm

    Wurm New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,203
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nothing will be done about it during The Killer From Krawford's watch b/c he was installed to make sure any & all policies benefit corporations' bottom lines - period. Fuck the environment, fuck workers, fuck the health issues...nothing matters except more profits and getting as much of a "market share" (monopoly) as possible.

    Forcing corp's to clean up their acts would cost them a bit of their record profits, which of course is a no-no in Repig-land.

    Creating and enforcing tougher EPA vehicle emissions standards would mean lower gas sales for the oil corps. Nope - can't have that either, even though lower sales wouldn't put a dent in their record profits that they've enjoyed for the past few years.

    Their parasitic scorched Earth policy is not sustainable. But they'll worry about that only after they've run out of blood to suck.
     
  3. MountainPro

    MountainPro New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2004
    Messages:
    3,071
    Likes Received:
    1
    i agree with all you said but i havent really started out to bash Bush (for a change), i just want the usual apologists who play the predictable China card to realise that the responsibility is indeed with thier top man...first world countries have to lead the way in this issue and Bush is responsible for the first of those first world countries.
     
  4. Wurm

    Wurm New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,203
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well I dunno MP - if someone tells of a contemptible action by another and it's the truth, is that bashing? Seems to me the one that's committed the lousy deed has bashed himself, and others who observe or know about it may also be victims of the former's action.

    At any rate, I do agree on your main point.
     
  5. limerickman

    limerickman Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    16,130
    Likes Received:
    115
    Bush needs to follow the policies being applied here in Europe.
    The EU has enacted legislation which requires industry to reduce carbon emmissions/green house gases over the next decade.
    The EU target is to reduce emmissions by 20% from the current the level in the immediate future years and then to reduce again by a further 10%.
    These policies are wise policies, given the rate of CO2 emmission increases worldwide.

    Bush needs to follow Europe.

    George Monbiot's articles are well worth reading.
     
  6. Carrera

    Carrera New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2004
    Messages:
    4,856
    Likes Received:
    0
    Mountain Pro, China is now the greatest polluter. The U.S. has taken small steps in the right direction, urged on by Schwarzennegger. Much needs to be done but America has slowly woken up more to the issue.
    What we have to worry about now is India and China. Clearly it's not an issue you can lay at the feet of one individual but, by the same token, it's to be ignored at our peril.
    Have you seen all these cars and vehicles out on the roads now, so many you can't move hardly - drivers so lazy they won't even walk but prefer to drive at 3 miles an hour? It's suicide and it's lazy.
    Cars used to be few enough as not to cause any real environmental problem but the situation is out of control. Unless the whole globe wakes up to the problem, we're all sunk. We'll go the way of the dinosaurs for sure.

     
  7. Carrera

    Carrera New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2004
    Messages:
    4,856
    Likes Received:
    0
    We're also overpopulated. Vehicles weren't the problem in the sixties as they are today. There are just too many cars and lorries, nuclear tests, wars, industries and so on and the climate can't take all these emissions.
    The sad thing is if people don't solve the issue themselves, Mother Nature will react and run its course - tidal waves, hurricanes, floods and chaos. This is what Schwarzennegger has definitely grasped and he's trying to carry America with him.

     
  8. MountainPro

    MountainPro New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2004
    Messages:
    3,071
    Likes Received:
    1
    on the car issue, its rather shocking but its common to American drivers to think, hmmmm 25mpg, thats great fuel economy. (i have seen such comments on here)..

    I got news....its dreadful fuel economy!

    Even hybrids are being massively outclassed on fuel ecomony and CO emissions by smaller diesel powered peolpe carriers. Why a 5 litre V8 @ 280 bhp is needed to drive to the Macdonalds drive through 3 blocks away is an utter mystery. Its killing the planet....BUSH needs to educate his people. People listen to Bush for some reason. Once the technology is in place to do that you can then sell it to the rest of the world. You may find that green technology is more profitable than oil.

    The only way Bush will budge is if the bottom line is full up with $$$$. Thats the way.
     
  9. Wurm

    Wurm New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,203
    Likes Received:
    0
    b/c most Merkuns are too lazy or don't want to take the added time to walk or bike for short trips. It's much too easy to jump in the car instead.
     
  10. MountainPro

    MountainPro New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2004
    Messages:
    3,071
    Likes Received:
    1
    education may be the answer, they dont know the damage that is being done. They live in an environment where the media is king, adverts bombard thier every waking moment....when you live on the front line in Siberia, African desert or arctic widerness you'll see the massive damage done. This damage will effect the SUV drivers...not in 50 years time when thier arties have choked thier heart to death, but in 3,5, or 8 years time...

    in fact, thier effects have been felt already in New Orleans..

    who said that all it takes for evil to prosper is for good men to do nothing?...(a member on here)...well what the fcuk are you doing about global warming?
     
  11. Colorado Ryder

    Colorado Ryder New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    Messages:
    1,245
    Likes Received:
    0
    Are you the same person that drove a large SUV when you visited the US? Didn't you post a picture of you in front of a large SUV? Was it necessary to drive such a large SUV when you visited the US? Couldn't you have driven a hybrid or one of those wonderful small diesel powered cars?
     
  12. MountainPro

    MountainPro New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2004
    Messages:
    3,071
    Likes Received:
    1
    yep, it was me alright...i figured if you dont give a fuerk, why should i?

    also, i did enquire at 'chevvy world' but it turns out that you cant get a car with an engine smaller than a 4.2 liter in the USA (aparently) and i wasnt about to walk the 3,000 mile trip.

    education as i said was the key...

    so, youre in favour of the destruction of the planet?
     
  13. Colorado Ryder

    Colorado Ryder New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    Messages:
    1,245
    Likes Received:
    0
    You're the one that drove the large SUV. So does that mean that you're in favor of the destruction of the planet?

    And exactly why didn't you rent something smaller? say like a hybrid or a sub compact car?

    Nothing like being lectured to by a hypocrite.
     
  14. Wurm

    Wurm New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,203
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'll tell you MP, many of them - even if fairly aware of the long-term consequences - don't give a rat's anus. It's just too vague and detached for them. More tangible is the notion that, "Hey, I've got a new car and I'm damned well going to show it off! Now gimme that cell phone so I can pretend I've got the world by the balls!"

    Egocentrism, plain & simple.

    Meanwhile, a lot of whatever little expendable income they may have goes toward paying for it, which is something that I never could get behind myself, b/c a car is one of the worst investments you can make.
     
  15. MountainPro

    MountainPro New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2004
    Messages:
    3,071
    Likes Received:
    1
    in America, you are not given the choice, its SUV or its stay at home and watch TV....destruction of the plant it is then..
    it was for 7 people....one big gas giuzzler was better that two smaller gas guzzlers

    if you had a lean, efficient 60+ mpg 7 seater i would have taken it. Its like going to prison and expecting to champagne and caviar for lunch. Nope, you get what you are given, the choice is taken from you.
     
  16. Carrera

    Carrera New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2004
    Messages:
    4,856
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think Colorado Rider's point is Americans tend to be blamed for everything yet you can see attitudes are starting to change in the U.S. with California leading the way.
    We all know America is guilty of polluting the planet but the buck doesn't stop with Bush. I think the real damage has been caused by nuclear testing (the Russians exploded the biggest bomb ever called the Tsar). Disasters like Chernobyl haven't helped either.
    There's nothing up with you driving your gas-gorging vehicle through the U.S. but the problem is you're just one of billions of people doing the same thing. We're overpopulated if you ask me. If there were fewer people driving these vehicles the environment could handle it.
    Where I live we have a collection of vintage cars from the twenties or thirties. In those days, you could drive your vehicle in the countryside, there were no traffic jams, and driving was a fun activity. Nowadays the situation has gone way out of control and Bush can't solve it on his own. All countries have to act and act fast.
    Back to Colorado Rider's point, though. I think that at least the Yanks aren't slaughtering seals and whales as the Japanese are doing. If you really want to get angry, spare a thought too for those whales the Japanese are determined to massacre out of sheer, shameless greed.

     
  17. Colorado Ryder

    Colorado Ryder New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    Messages:
    1,245
    Likes Received:
    0
    The only car you could rent was a large SUV? We don't have a choice in America? America is all about choices. You can choose to drive a big ass gas guzzler or drive a piece of shit electric hybrid car. Or anything that falls in between.

    Sure you would have. You wanted the SUV and you rented the SUV. I don't understand why after you drove one that you are now chastising others that drive them. After all, if you're so concerned about the planet you would have never driven the SUV.
     
  18. Wurm

    Wurm New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,203
    Likes Received:
    0
    More strawman arguments, Carrera? :rolleyes:

    No one is saying that Bush can or should solve the problem on his own, but he won't even take the first steps for Kyoto.

    Overpopulated - perhaps so. But the car mfg's can certainly produce far more efficient vehicles to offset the amount of vehicles being used. But they won't.

    Whales and seals (or the lack of) doesn't cause pollution.
     
  19. MountainPro

    MountainPro New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2004
    Messages:
    3,071
    Likes Received:
    1
    i cant believe youre bleating on about the fact i drove an SUV. Trust me, try renting a car in SoCal these days and the salesmen are so pushy, you'll come away with what they want to rent to you, not what you want to hire from them. We went to about 4 different businesses and yes, there were chioces, Big SUVs, small SUVs, short SUVs, long SUVs, white SUVs, black SUVs, the chioce was indeed endless...

    basically this illustrated my point perfectly. Why dont you guys try clean living for a while, you might find the SUVs arent the dogs bollocks after all.

    Bush can begin to get the ball rolling on this issue, i am not saying that he can solve it, he just needs to get industry in line and change the hearts and minds of the American public.
     
  20. jhuskey

    jhuskey Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2003
    Messages:
    10,604
    Likes Received:
    339
    I hate posting to such subjects..why? There is no winning the debate, but I am just a whore for controvesy.
    Large companies in the US use 1940's technology for pollution control and how do they get by the EPA? Some companies have become over compliant and have leaped ahead of present pollution laws.
    So now the polluters buy up their credits of those companies and apply them to their companies.
    A loophole to pollute and this has been going on for some time.
    Every gram of CO2 that is expelled into the atmosphere aids global warming.
    So pollution,overpopulation of the entire world,deforestation especially in the Amazon, contribute to the problem.
    A balance will need to be achieved, and will be one way or another.
    We can control our population and pollution growth or mother nature will do it for us.
     
Loading...
Loading...