| Author |
Message |
    
Blake
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - 03:09 pm: | 
|
I'm curious o'thunderous one, what you would consider a last resort. Are you opposed to any pre-emptive use of military force, or is there some scenario you would consider a last resort but still being pre-emptive?
You are impressed with France? How so? Oh, I see, they are right and America is wrong. Never mind. 
This belongs in that thar war thread, don't it? |
Blake
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - 03:12 pm: |
|
For the record on the titled topical subject, I don't buy the double standard complaint. Anyone percieved to not tow the line gets hammered by the press and by everyone else. I abhor playing the victim. Please don't make America a victim.
I just don't care for complainers of any sort I guess.  Did I just complain? D'OH!!  |
Thunderbox
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - 03:37 pm: |
|
No Blake thats not what is said. You only see black or white and forget there are many shades of grey between the two. By saying your either with us or against (you have said before) you are alienating all who don't or won't get bullied or sucked in by political pressure. I said "I am equally impressed with those countries that decided not to go to Iraq. Canada being one of the many who chose not to participate.
Blake, I see you have a question about last resorts. It is crystal clear that you are not the only person in your neck of the woods who doesn't understand that concept. Now you have a situation you can't get out of until it's fixed and they don't know how to fix it. Catch22 all over again.
By the way there is no need to call people names like o'thunderous one. You disrespect yourself when you do and certainly not all will be impressed. |
Polekat
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - 04:33 pm: |
|
"War is good for the defence budget" ,but taxes fund the budget and taxes for defense could be used for drug research, roads, social security and many other things that would benefit US tax payers. So, though defense spending is necessary, if circumstances permitted....we could use it at home to add to quality of our lives and it would help our economy. Still the US gives it's blood and wealth to help others less fortunate. |
Pcmodeler
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - 04:43 pm: |
|
In the past war was better for the economy because of the large numbers of equipment and support needed. Technology has done away with needing to produce a mass number of Sherman tanks and P-47's. Those that weren't fighting were working meaning money was coming in, companies were changing over their product lines in order to service government contracts, etc. That type of commitment from the country is no longer needed today. |
Ted
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - 05:05 pm: |
|
"The facts of the matter is that for the millions upon millions of dollars that Canada is taking from this tiny little Province we are not getting our fair share back. "
C'mon, Newfoundland along with the other atlantic provinces and Quebec have been national welfare recipients since they joined. Now that Nfld are reaping the benefits of oil ,they STILL want federal payments along with oil income!
Newfoundland didnt complain about Fed equalization while their only resource was cod.
jmo |
Road_thing
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - 07:05 pm: |
|
Guys, this isn't gonna political to the point of requiring custodial intervention, is it?
rt |
Reepicheep
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - 08:14 pm: |
|
Road thing, what do you mean full synthetic will flat spot your roller bearings? That only happens when your contact patch gets lubricated by WD40. Thats only a problem on high torque bikes, high horsepower ones don't have that issue.
Sincerely,
Bill "chum in the water" Kilgallon
(because *anything* is better then a political thread!) |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - 08:56 pm: |
|
go Aussies!
I remember when Mobile 1 first came out, my buddy hated it, cause the oil pressure in his 440 was zilch on the synthetic. Of course the stuff first came out in what? 2w10?
( rant deleted, thanks )
(Message edited by aesquire on January 11, 2005) |
Roadsurfr
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - 10:23 pm: |
|
Man! Another 75 degree day and I'll have to uncover my oil cooler. |
Blake
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - 10:30 pm: |
|
Dave L.,
Didn't mean the "o'thunderous one" with any ill will. Sorry. I thought it sounded kinda cool. Your handle is "Thunderbox" is it not? 
You sure wrote a lot. Didn't answer a damn one of my questions though. I'll repeat them for you while noting and respecting the points you just raised...
1. What you would consider a last resort wrt Saddam Hussein and his regime?
2. Are you opposed to any pre-emptive use of military force, or is there some scenario you would consider a last resort but still being pre-emptive? If so what is it?
3. How are you impressed by France and their decision to oppose the war?
Again... This belongs in that thar war thread, don't it? More of a personal reminder for myself to move all this later. <sigh> |
Blake
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - 10:33 pm: |
|
Oops, reading onwards I'm afeared of a BadWeB custodian slap. yelp.
Let's take it to the war thread okeedokee Thunder-monger? |
|
