- This topic has 1,260 replies, 39 voices, and was last updated 15 years ago by
ucodegen.
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 14, 2009 at 9:18 AM #469449October 14, 2009 at 9:46 AM #468652
briansd1
Guest[quote=surveyor]
Here’s the thing – Obama wanted the job. If he can’t do the job then he will be replaced. Simple as that. It has nothing to do whether he started it. He wanted the job he said he could do it and he better do it. Otherwise yes the blame falls on him. That’s how it works.
[/quote]oh, ok, it’s not the same as the Fall of Saigon was in 1975 under Gerald Ford, after Nixon, but LBJ (who was last in office in Jan 1969) was responsible for losing Vietnam kinda thing…. I get it.
surveyor, so remind me again who lost Vietnam? And as you said, who did Bin Laden learn the lesson from? Either Nixon or Ford (both Republicans) by my estimation.
October 14, 2009 at 9:46 AM #468834Guest[quote=surveyor]
Here’s the thing – Obama wanted the job. If he can’t do the job then he will be replaced. Simple as that. It has nothing to do whether he started it. He wanted the job he said he could do it and he better do it. Otherwise yes the blame falls on him. That’s how it works.
[/quote]oh, ok, it’s not the same as the Fall of Saigon was in 1975 under Gerald Ford, after Nixon, but LBJ (who was last in office in Jan 1969) was responsible for losing Vietnam kinda thing…. I get it.
surveyor, so remind me again who lost Vietnam? And as you said, who did Bin Laden learn the lesson from? Either Nixon or Ford (both Republicans) by my estimation.
October 14, 2009 at 9:46 AM #469194Guest[quote=surveyor]
Here’s the thing – Obama wanted the job. If he can’t do the job then he will be replaced. Simple as that. It has nothing to do whether he started it. He wanted the job he said he could do it and he better do it. Otherwise yes the blame falls on him. That’s how it works.
[/quote]oh, ok, it’s not the same as the Fall of Saigon was in 1975 under Gerald Ford, after Nixon, but LBJ (who was last in office in Jan 1969) was responsible for losing Vietnam kinda thing…. I get it.
surveyor, so remind me again who lost Vietnam? And as you said, who did Bin Laden learn the lesson from? Either Nixon or Ford (both Republicans) by my estimation.
October 14, 2009 at 9:46 AM #469267Guest[quote=surveyor]
Here’s the thing – Obama wanted the job. If he can’t do the job then he will be replaced. Simple as that. It has nothing to do whether he started it. He wanted the job he said he could do it and he better do it. Otherwise yes the blame falls on him. That’s how it works.
[/quote]oh, ok, it’s not the same as the Fall of Saigon was in 1975 under Gerald Ford, after Nixon, but LBJ (who was last in office in Jan 1969) was responsible for losing Vietnam kinda thing…. I get it.
surveyor, so remind me again who lost Vietnam? And as you said, who did Bin Laden learn the lesson from? Either Nixon or Ford (both Republicans) by my estimation.
October 14, 2009 at 9:46 AM #469479Guest[quote=surveyor]
Here’s the thing – Obama wanted the job. If he can’t do the job then he will be replaced. Simple as that. It has nothing to do whether he started it. He wanted the job he said he could do it and he better do it. Otherwise yes the blame falls on him. That’s how it works.
[/quote]oh, ok, it’s not the same as the Fall of Saigon was in 1975 under Gerald Ford, after Nixon, but LBJ (who was last in office in Jan 1969) was responsible for losing Vietnam kinda thing…. I get it.
surveyor, so remind me again who lost Vietnam? And as you said, who did Bin Laden learn the lesson from? Either Nixon or Ford (both Republicans) by my estimation.
October 14, 2009 at 11:40 AM #468757SHILOH
ParticipantSomeone told me recently that the prize was awarded so that Obama would be more easily manipulated by foreign governments. Specifically, to pressure the US to move forward with the plan to divide Israel.
October 14, 2009 at 11:40 AM #468941ParticipantSomeone told me recently that the prize was awarded so that Obama would be more easily manipulated by foreign governments. Specifically, to pressure the US to move forward with the plan to divide Israel.
October 14, 2009 at 11:40 AM #469299ParticipantSomeone told me recently that the prize was awarded so that Obama would be more easily manipulated by foreign governments. Specifically, to pressure the US to move forward with the plan to divide Israel.
October 14, 2009 at 11:40 AM #469372ParticipantSomeone told me recently that the prize was awarded so that Obama would be more easily manipulated by foreign governments. Specifically, to pressure the US to move forward with the plan to divide Israel.
October 14, 2009 at 11:40 AM #469583ParticipantSomeone told me recently that the prize was awarded so that Obama would be more easily manipulated by foreign governments. Specifically, to pressure the US to move forward with the plan to divide Israel.
October 14, 2009 at 11:41 AM #468727ucodegen
Participantucodegen, if your research is correct, maybe this is a gotcha moment for you. You can inform FOX that the Washington Post lied and you’ll be famous. You can then go on the talk circuit making speeches to conservatives.
Don’t want to inflame the radicals. I consider it a possible typo until otherwise proven. Also take a look at what they consider the 110th Congress on McCains bio page under roles in congress.. “· 110th Congress: Senator, Arizona, Republican. Jan. 4, 2007, to Jan. 3, 2011.” Huh?
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/m000303/
Though I may inform the Washington post to double check their numbers and correct the page.. make it ‘pages’ since that last one is repeated several times for different senators.I think that Germany has coal. I believe the Germans invented the liquification of coal.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germ…Correct term is had. Most of it is gone/used up. It was located in the disputed territories between France and Germany, which I believe France now possesses. From what I remember, it was Anthracite/High Bituminous and not Lignite. The new coal reserves that you are pointing to, brown coal, is not as desirable except for possibly gassification. It also has less than half the energy content than ‘black’ coal and the water content makes extracting all of that energy difficult. If you notice, most of these exploratory areas are located in the ‘east’ Germany area that was finally returned to Germany from Russian control.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lignite
The fact that Germany is a signer of the Kyoto Protocol, brings question as to how effectively they may be able to exploit these reserves. (And also noted by the article you also referenced.)
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,593296,00.html
Maybe it’s just me, but if the Europeans don’t want us to preemptively defend them from Iraq, we shouldn’t do it then bitch that they don’t appreciate it.
As I said before, and why I mentioned that it would be interesting to see what happened if we didn’t. I’m also not ‘bitching’ that they don’t appreciate it. Other than some lack of economic stability, it might have been worth not getting involved. Again, that is one of the ‘what-if’s..
France has a pretty good military as well, perhaps even as good as the Brits.
They are not even close to the Brits. I have seen both practice at Red Flag @ Nellis. There is a world of difference in attitude they bring. The Brits are all business and the French use it as a dating tool when off base. The condition that they keep the jets in is completely different. I have seen French Mirage(s) with indications of damage from after-burner blowouts used on exercises, with the replacement panels still not painted. I also saw yellow segments in the afterburner flames indicating poor fuel regulation to the afterburner (which can also cause blowouts) on the French Mirages when they throttled up on the line for takeoff.
As far at NATO is concerned, we contribute the most (25-30% as I recall) but not the bulk of the defense organization’s budget and troops.
Was recently 25%, now 22%.
US = 22%, Japan=16.624%, Germany=8.577%, UK=6.642%, France=6.301%, Italy=5.079%, Canada=2.977%, Spain=2.968%, China=2.667%, Mexico=2.257%, all others=23.908%
This is only contribs to the budget and does not include peacekeeping force.October 14, 2009 at 11:41 AM #468909Participantucodegen, if your research is correct, maybe this is a gotcha moment for you. You can inform FOX that the Washington Post lied and you’ll be famous. You can then go on the talk circuit making speeches to conservatives.
Don’t want to inflame the radicals. I consider it a possible typo until otherwise proven. Also take a look at what they consider the 110th Congress on McCains bio page under roles in congress.. “· 110th Congress: Senator, Arizona, Republican. Jan. 4, 2007, to Jan. 3, 2011.” Huh?
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/m000303/
Though I may inform the Washington post to double check their numbers and correct the page.. make it ‘pages’ since that last one is repeated several times for different senators.I think that Germany has coal. I believe the Germans invented the liquification of coal.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germ…Correct term is had. Most of it is gone/used up. It was located in the disputed territories between France and Germany, which I believe France now possesses. From what I remember, it was Anthracite/High Bituminous and not Lignite. The new coal reserves that you are pointing to, brown coal, is not as desirable except for possibly gassification. It also has less than half the energy content than ‘black’ coal and the water content makes extracting all of that energy difficult. If you notice, most of these exploratory areas are located in the ‘east’ Germany area that was finally returned to Germany from Russian control.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lignite
The fact that Germany is a signer of the Kyoto Protocol, brings question as to how effectively they may be able to exploit these reserves. (And also noted by the article you also referenced.)
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,593296,00.html
Maybe it’s just me, but if the Europeans don’t want us to preemptively defend them from Iraq, we shouldn’t do it then bitch that they don’t appreciate it.
As I said before, and why I mentioned that it would be interesting to see what happened if we didn’t. I’m also not ‘bitching’ that they don’t appreciate it. Other than some lack of economic stability, it might have been worth not getting involved. Again, that is one of the ‘what-if’s..
France has a pretty good military as well, perhaps even as good as the Brits.
They are not even close to the Brits. I have seen both practice at Red Flag @ Nellis. There is a world of difference in attitude they bring. The Brits are all business and the French use it as a dating tool when off base. The condition that they keep the jets in is completely different. I have seen French Mirage(s) with indications of damage from after-burner blowouts used on exercises, with the replacement panels still not painted. I also saw yellow segments in the afterburner flames indicating poor fuel regulation to the afterburner (which can also cause blowouts) on the French Mirages when they throttled up on the line for takeoff.
As far at NATO is concerned, we contribute the most (25-30% as I recall) but not the bulk of the defense organization’s budget and troops.
Was recently 25%, now 22%.
US = 22%, Japan=16.624%, Germany=8.577%, UK=6.642%, France=6.301%, Italy=5.079%, Canada=2.977%, Spain=2.968%, China=2.667%, Mexico=2.257%, all others=23.908%
This is only contribs to the budget and does not include peacekeeping force.October 14, 2009 at 11:41 AM #469269Participantucodegen, if your research is correct, maybe this is a gotcha moment for you. You can inform FOX that the Washington Post lied and you’ll be famous. You can then go on the talk circuit making speeches to conservatives.
Don’t want to inflame the radicals. I consider it a possible typo until otherwise proven. Also take a look at what they consider the 110th Congress on McCains bio page under roles in congress.. “· 110th Congress: Senator, Arizona, Republican. Jan. 4, 2007, to Jan. 3, 2011.” Huh?
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/m000303/
Though I may inform the Washington post to double check their numbers and correct the page.. make it ‘pages’ since that last one is repeated several times for different senators.I think that Germany has coal. I believe the Germans invented the liquification of coal.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germ…Correct term is had. Most of it is gone/used up. It was located in the disputed territories between France and Germany, which I believe France now possesses. From what I remember, it was Anthracite/High Bituminous and not Lignite. The new coal reserves that you are pointing to, brown coal, is not as desirable except for possibly gassification. It also has less than half the energy content than ‘black’ coal and the water content makes extracting all of that energy difficult. If you notice, most of these exploratory areas are located in the ‘east’ Germany area that was finally returned to Germany from Russian control.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lignite
The fact that Germany is a signer of the Kyoto Protocol, brings question as to how effectively they may be able to exploit these reserves. (And also noted by the article you also referenced.)
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,593296,00.html
Maybe it’s just me, but if the Europeans don’t want us to preemptively defend them from Iraq, we shouldn’t do it then bitch that they don’t appreciate it.
As I said before, and why I mentioned that it would be interesting to see what happened if we didn’t. I’m also not ‘bitching’ that they don’t appreciate it. Other than some lack of economic stability, it might have been worth not getting involved. Again, that is one of the ‘what-if’s..
France has a pretty good military as well, perhaps even as good as the Brits.
They are not even close to the Brits. I have seen both practice at Red Flag @ Nellis. There is a world of difference in attitude they bring. The Brits are all business and the French use it as a dating tool when off base. The condition that they keep the jets in is completely different. I have seen French Mirage(s) with indications of damage from after-burner blowouts used on exercises, with the replacement panels still not painted. I also saw yellow segments in the afterburner flames indicating poor fuel regulation to the afterburner (which can also cause blowouts) on the French Mirages when they throttled up on the line for takeoff.
As far at NATO is concerned, we contribute the most (25-30% as I recall) but not the bulk of the defense organization’s budget and troops.
Was recently 25%, now 22%.
US = 22%, Japan=16.624%, Germany=8.577%, UK=6.642%, France=6.301%, Italy=5.079%, Canada=2.977%, Spain=2.968%, China=2.667%, Mexico=2.257%, all others=23.908%
This is only contribs to the budget and does not include peacekeeping force.October 14, 2009 at 11:41 AM #469343Participantucodegen, if your research is correct, maybe this is a gotcha moment for you. You can inform FOX that the Washington Post lied and you’ll be famous. You can then go on the talk circuit making speeches to conservatives.
Don’t want to inflame the radicals. I consider it a possible typo until otherwise proven. Also take a look at what they consider the 110th Congress on McCains bio page under roles in congress.. “· 110th Congress: Senator, Arizona, Republican. Jan. 4, 2007, to Jan. 3, 2011.” Huh?
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/m000303/
Though I may inform the Washington post to double check their numbers and correct the page.. make it ‘pages’ since that last one is repeated several times for different senators.I think that Germany has coal. I believe the Germans invented the liquification of coal.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germ…Correct term is had. Most of it is gone/used up. It was located in the disputed territories between France and Germany, which I believe France now possesses. From what I remember, it was Anthracite/High Bituminous and not Lignite. The new coal reserves that you are pointing to, brown coal, is not as desirable except for possibly gassification. It also has less than half the energy content than ‘black’ coal and the water content makes extracting all of that energy difficult. If you notice, most of these exploratory areas are located in the ‘east’ Germany area that was finally returned to Germany from Russian control.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lignite
The fact that Germany is a signer of the Kyoto Protocol, brings question as to how effectively they may be able to exploit these reserves. (And also noted by the article you also referenced.)
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,593296,00.html
Maybe it’s just me, but if the Europeans don’t want us to preemptively defend them from Iraq, we shouldn’t do it then bitch that they don’t appreciate it.
As I said before, and why I mentioned that it would be interesting to see what happened if we didn’t. I’m also not ‘bitching’ that they don’t appreciate it. Other than some lack of economic stability, it might have been worth not getting involved. Again, that is one of the ‘what-if’s..
France has a pretty good military as well, perhaps even as good as the Brits.
They are not even close to the Brits. I have seen both practice at Red Flag @ Nellis. There is a world of difference in attitude they bring. The Brits are all business and the French use it as a dating tool when off base. The condition that they keep the jets in is completely different. I have seen French Mirage(s) with indications of damage from after-burner blowouts used on exercises, with the replacement panels still not painted. I also saw yellow segments in the afterburner flames indicating poor fuel regulation to the afterburner (which can also cause blowouts) on the French Mirages when they throttled up on the line for takeoff.
As far at NATO is concerned, we contribute the most (25-30% as I recall) but not the bulk of the defense organization’s budget and troops.
Was recently 25%, now 22%.
US = 22%, Japan=16.624%, Germany=8.577%, UK=6.642%, France=6.301%, Italy=5.079%, Canada=2.977%, Spain=2.968%, China=2.667%, Mexico=2.257%, all others=23.908%
This is only contribs to the budget and does not include peacekeeping force. -
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.