Well, Obama said by _______ date he was going to COMPLETELY eliminate the USA's dependence on foreign oil and was going to do it w/o drilling on American soil as it was a Short term solution.

It will be interesting to see what he comes up with to put in my CTD tank so it will run and pull my trailer.... [duhhh]

Heck, even I can figgure this one out, its easy, just keep adding tax's untill nobody can afford it. Problem solved, no more dependece on foreign oil.

See how simple that was. [dummy]

DuaneW.

There will be plenty of #2 for your truck, just don't expect it to be cheap. No matter what anyone says or who is president, those days are gone

He's got lots of ideas about how he will fix every problem in America. It sounds great but I doubt any one president can make all those changes. It sure would be nice though......

Someone has got make the changes soon before we're forced into it.
Bottom line is it starts with citizens to support the changes, not the government.
My feeling is diesel will be around long after gasoline is extinct for transportation due to heavy trucks, construction and farmers need for the fuel.

160 billion dollars invested in alternative fuels? Not with my tax dollars bud! Let someone in the private sector come up with and market the idea. All I heard last night was

"Big Government"
"Big Government"
"Big Government"
"Big Government"
oh...and
"Big Government"

If he thinks he can get us off oil in 10 years ive got some prime ski resort land located in DALHART!

Tax and Tax and Tax and Tax unless he is planning on using some of that hot air he keeps blowing to heat peoples homes. If a business can't survive on it's own then it's a non-profitable business and we sure don't need to be throwing hard earned tax payer dollars at it. They tax, tax, tax and pork, pork, pork. It's fertilizer for all politicians big government ideas.

160 billion dollars invested in alternative fuels? Not with my tax dollars bud! Let someone in the private sector come up with and market the idea.

So far the cost of the Iraq war is approaching 600 billion of ours, yours and mine, our childrens and grandchildrens tax dollars. Plus over 4100 American deaths. Seems like it might be money well spent.

160 billion dollars invested in alternative fuels?This $160B is over ten years if it makes it any better.
Thing is with alternative energy is investors need insurance that their money isn't being thrown away if the price of oil crashes. Which it could easily be manipulated into if the petro-dictators and big oil see their current monopoly on energy threatened.

So far the cost of the Iraq war is approaching 600 billion of ours, yours and mine, our childrens and grandchildrens tax dollars. Plus over 4100 American deaths. Seems like it might be money well spent.

I had rather spend $600 billion over there where we can keep tabs on the ones who have sworn to kill us all than spend $600 on a 3rd generation welfare rat that is too lazy to work.

I'm sorry we lost a single life in the ME, but a lot more were lost in WW2 to keep us from speaking Japanese or German. But I guess that was OK with you?

I had rather spend $600 billion over there where we can keep tabs on the ones who have sworn to kill us all than spend $600 on a 3rd generation welfare rat that is too lazy to work.

I'm sorry we lost a single life in the ME, but a lot more were lost in WW2 to keep us from speaking Japanese or German. But I guess that was OK with you?

Here's a big news flash for ya................

The choice has never been between spending money on a war and spending it on a "welfare Rat".

Iraq was not the country that attacked us and we were not threatened with having to speak arabic. It may be hard to swallow, but Iraq did not attack us and had no intention to.

It's almost a Trillion dollars now and 4,100 lives. No real end in sight. How many more lives and how much more debt are you willing to throw away on a war that we started, against a country that did not attack us? Meanwhile, Bin Laden is fine and we stopped chasing him. And, by the way, he was the one that attacked us. In fact Bush says he doesn't think about him much and doesn't know where he is. We had a good idea where he was and stopped chasing him to do more in Iraq. Now the generals in Afghanistan want more troops because things are not going well and the only place they can come from is Iraq.

You may be willing to spend 600 billion on some disaster like this, but you don't have 600 billion. It's every citizen of this country, their children and grandchildren that will be paying for this for generations. It sounds like you are perfectly happy to keep spending other peoples money and other peoples lives on a war that we should not have started.

If you think the loss of lives and treasure are not a big deal and you think the war is justified maybe you should be over there. Iraq has been a monumental waste. And, by the way, it was planned in 1998 as part of the Project for a New American Century (look it up). Five years before we started it and three years before 911. It had nothing to do with 911.

Now, Iraq has billions in oil profits and is signing oil deals with countries other than us.

Obama was right all along. We should have pursued Bin Laden until we got him. We should have stayed out of Iraq. Bush's popularity has tanked because there is a huge groundswell of Americans that know we've been lied to, we've been put into debt, Americans have been killed for no good reason in Iraq and and the dollar is steadily weakening because of it.

I had rather spend $600 billion over there where we can keep tabs on the ones who have sworn to kill us all than spend $600 on a 3rd generation welfare rat that is too lazy to work.

I'm sorry we lost a single life in the ME, but a lot more were lost in WW2 to keep us from speaking Japanese or German. But I guess that was OK with you?

You can't see the differance between Iraq and WW2 [dummy]

There is only one reason we are in Iraq. So we can have a large, permanent military foot hold on the ground in the middle east, period.



Tim

Sorry we don't agree. Iraq is the price you pay to have an ear on the radicals that have sworn to kill us all. Bin Laden may have been the one behind 9-11, and I'd love to see him caught, but eliminating him will not stop their jihad against us. I want the fighting and killing to stop, but I don't see any way to logically end our presence in the ME. The oil.....I think we should get our share, but I don't think our intent has ever been, with Iraq or any other country, to take over their natural resources.

If I was not so old, I would have been one of the first in line to go. I have close family and friends that have been there and some are going back. To the man and woman, they think it is the right thing to do. My BIL spent two years training and fighting with the Iraqi Army. He is a non-com and spent nearly all of his time with them, 24/7. The stories of pain and suffering and suppression the people shared with him are almost beyond anything most Americans would believe. Unfortunately, our hyped up media dwells on the negatives and not the positives.

Obama, I'm sure he is a good man with good intentions, but he has plans for a socialist, welfare state. His government wants to give everything away at the expense of those who have prospered. I already have to be very frugal to keep what I have and falling into his higher taxed category does not make me happy.

Project for a New American Century: Very interesting with a lot of debatable points.

It's a great country that let's us openly debate and criticize our government. :)

You can't see the differance between Iraq and WW2 [dummy]

You can't see the similarities? [dummy]

Raspy....
Very well put. It still amazes me how so many conservative republicans buy into and support the biggest borrow and spend spree lie in the history of our nation and the world and then go on to consider themselves conservative. They tout about how the dems are "going to raise my taxes". When a government taxes for the money it spends, without sending us on a borrowing mission to bankruptcy, that would be a good definition of fiscal conservation. I’ll take “tax and spend” any day before “borrow and spend”.

Let me say it again, no president in the history of this nation has spent more money than Bush. And no one has done it as irresponsibly as Bush. Cut the taxes of the most well to do among us, and spend money like a drunken sailor, and call your self conservative. If the occupation of Iraq is as important a mission as some of you on this board might think it is, than it's surely important enough that we raise taxes to pay for it, no? If your answer is no, then I would argue that it's not as important as you believe it to be.

And I certainly don’t think that republicans have a monopoly on borrow and spend. It has become a way of life in this country. From massive credit card debt, to the mortgage fiasco, which was hugely people refinancing their house every 12 to 24 months so they could borrow and spend money on crap, all they way up to the Bush fiasco.


There is only one reason we are in Iraq. So we can have a large, permanent military foot hold on the ground in the middle east, period.Tim
......That and so they can hand out huge no bid contracts to enrich the cronies and feed the Military Industial complex.

If the occupation of Iraq is as important a mission as some of you on this board might think it is, than it's surely important enough that we raise taxes to pay for it, no? If your answer is no, then I would argue that it's not as important as you believe it to be.
You obviously DO NOT understand economics or even recognize what those tax cuts have done.
Yes spending is up but tax REVENUES are up as well. Now you may ask how revenue can be up if tax rates are down and that would re affirm that you don't understand economics.
Reducing tax rates on businesses spurred growth, increased employment, and with that increased tax revenues!!!
History tells the story, every time we have a tax increase we subsequently end up losing tax revenues because businesses start making cuts in development. Those cuts usually start with layoffs.
As far as tax cuts for the rich....All of us that pay taxes got a tax cut.
The percentage of those tax cuts were higher for the lower end of the scale than the upper end.
Also when you look at the percentage of taxes paid the rich have always paid more that the poor and with the Bush tax cuts they carry even more of the burden than the poor.[dummy]

iraq is nothing compared to vietnam, but the motive was the same. the big difference is the mid east threat is real. compare real dollars not to mention the 57,000 plus lives lost and over 400,000 wounded.

even obama knows the war in iraq and afganistan will take a long time to be over. if you listened to his speech.

why would the usa want to catch osama bin laden, we trained him, he probably works for us. the 9-11 story has to many flaws. it accomplished it's real goal of loss of personal freedoms and more power to the government.

"in oil we trust" should be stamped on all of our money.

Understand economics - how do you run your household? Do not feed us this line of BS about understanding economics. If your bank account is significantly in the red - then there is something wrong with your line of economics.

Foothold in Iraq - I believe more than ever, because we will be there a long time. For those that want to go - feel free to go. There are a lot of fine folks that have been there several times and it is ruining their lives for nothing but to please Bush/Cheney and those that "think" it is to better those poor people - WHO WANT TO KILL YOU.

Pity the poor in this country as well as other countries. Why not help those countries in Africa or in Asia that under the military rule of cruel dictators? Or does your pity not extend to those people? If it does not - then maybe you should go to help out or die for your country, or better yet extend your services to those that are permanently disabled.

Hard core Republicans are just as socialist - their way or no way. BTW - Reagan and Bush devastated this country. Reagan broke the unions and Bush (who cannot utter a complete rational sentence) is bankrupting this nation with the war. Both have devastated the working class.

You better believe that there will be tax increase with either party in the White House or else the foreign investors will own us for a very long time. I am tired of being sold out, whether by a Rep or Dem, but the current administration has to go and not come back.

For those that want factual data or research - come live my life and I'll give it to you straight up.

Understand economics - how do you run your household? Do not feed us this line of BS about understanding economics. If your bank account is significantly in the red - then there is something wrong with your line of economics.
Evidently you don't get it.
Look at the numbers yourself. Tax REVENUE went up when President Bush cut tax RATES!! BTW my bank account has never been better!! Way better than when Clinton was in office.
Foothold in Iraq - I believe more than ever, because we will be there a long time. For those that want to go - feel free to go. There are a lot of fine folks that have been there several times and it is ruining their lives for nothing but to please Bush/Cheney and those that "think" it is to better those poor people - WHO WANT TO KILL YOU.
Uhhh.....HUH????

Pity the poor in this country as well as other countries. Why not help those countries in Africa or in Asia that under the military rule of cruel dictators? Or does your pity not extend to those people? If it does not - then maybe you should go to help out or die for your country, or better yet extend your services to those that are permanently disabled.
Again I must ask...WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT???
This has nothing to do with cutting tax rates and increasing tax revenues!!

Hard core Republicans are just as socialist - their way or no way.
Do you know what a socialist is??
one who advocates or practices socialism;

any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

BTW - Reagan and Bush devastated this country. Reagan broke the unions
That's a good thing....Unions are much like socialists. See definition ABOVE.
and Bush (who cannot utter a complete rational sentence) is bankrupting this nation with the war. Both have devastated the working class.
Spoken like a true liberal partisan!! No truth to it but very partisan!!

For those that want factual data or research - come live my life and I'll give it to you straight up.
Maybe you're doing something wrong or maybe you should change occupations??

i don't believe that pity of the poor in this country, africa or asia is the answer to help our economy, certainly not mine. it means more of my income will go to aid the monstrous welfare system that we already have, not to mention thinking that by sending my dollars to a country that historically has been at war with themselves for hundreds possibly thousands of years, that all of a sudden these people will all get along and start being productive?

I must have missed something.

160 billion dollars invested in alternative fuels? Not with my tax dollars bud! Let someone in the private sector come up with and market the idea. All I heard last night was

"Big Government"
"Big Government"
"Big Government"
"Big Government"
oh...and
"Big Government"

If he thinks he can get us off oil in 10 years ive got some prime ski resort land located in DALHART!


Not to mention "thank you, thank you, thank you..." about 50 times. (I don't have a DVR so i c didn't count them.)

Also as for the Reagan union comment-That was a good thing he did, someone needs to do some more union cut downs, UAW is driving the price of vehicles higher and higher while QC drops lower and lower, and it's the same with almost every other union out there. Don't get me wrong, there was a time and place for unions but it's not in the modern workforce.

Not to mention "thank you, thank you, thank you..." about 50 times. (I don't have a DVR so i c didn't count them.)

Also as for the Reagan union comment-That was a good thing he did, someone needs to do some more union cut downs, UAW is driving the price of vehicles higher and higher while QC drops lower and lower, and it's the same with almost every other union out there. Don't get me wrong, there was a time and place for unions but it's not in the modern workforce.


Hmmm, AMR is union up here.

I took a 30k per year pay cut to be a union employee, go figure.
As an executive board member of my local (IAFF), I can tell you that there is not a week that goes by we are not at odds with management, I can't even begin to comment on the things they do. Hence my comments in other threads about "inept leadership". This is the time and place for unions.


Tim

the gap between the wealthy and the average worker is spreading.
construction workers today are making the same wages as twenty years ago out here in CA.
having unions is a delima, when the unions were strong the man of the house could support a family, own a home. prior to the unions and as it is today it takes both the husband and wife to hold at least full time jobs and those making minimum wage they may be holding two jobs each. the people making the money are at the top with the megabonuses not the workers. with the corporate owner shuffles and the stock investors driving the market it has driven the prices up on everything. it isn't the farmers that drive the prices on food goods, it isn't the assemblers in the plants that drive prices, it is wall street. but they would have you believe it is the base workers that are destroying the economy and they take and take and take.

every once in awhile we are thrown a few crumbs. but for every crumb they take two or three. it isn't the american people that have bankrupted the country.

how much do you make and how much did you make twenty years ago in real money?

Yes or no, have you ever worked in a union before?

Not to mention "thank you, thank you, thank you..." about 50 times. (I don't have a DVR so i c didn't count them.)

Also as for the Reagan union comment-That was a good thing he did, someone needs to do some more union cut downs, UAW is driving the price of vehicles higher and higher while QC drops lower and lower, and it's the same with almost every other union out there. Don't get me wrong, there was a time and place for unions but it's not in the modern workforce.

To blame the union for raising prices of vehicle is just a convenient way of bashing unions. What happens every year? Cost of living goes up, prices of goods go up, all while companies try to make more money. For a union to not try and get their wages up and better benifits and pensions is just like a public company trying to drive their share price down. Trying to bite the hand that feeds.

As for the QC that comes from said unions, that also comes from the head company. Most of the automotive manufacturing is bolt this on, bolt that on. Look to the engineers that are building parts smaller to save on material, using cheaper materials, etc. You can polish a turd forever, and all you will end up with is a shiny turd. If the corporations aren't happy with the quality of their products, they have the ability to change that. To blame it strictly on the labour is just an easy excuse. Same thing happens up in the oil sands in Alberta. Labour (union and non union) are to blame for cost over runs and delays, not poor cost projections, unrealistic deadlines and shoddy parts that need to be modified/repaired before they are even in service.

heres a comment to those who "think" that the war is a lost cause. one of the newest articles on www.usmc.mil shows clearly the progression made in iraq. the al anbar province in the near future is going to be turned back over to the iraqi army to control completely for the most part. there will still be the MTT's there to provide assistance and such. ive been a grunt for the last 8 yrs, so ive gotten the chance to deploy to 3 different combat zones, and yes, there are lots of us that have come back from over there with "issues", my wife left me and was cheating on me while i was over there and im not right in the head, but it was well worth it, and id do it again in a heart beat, ive lost several friends, and my men, and ive lost iraqi soldiers, that have put their life on the line countless times for me, and im here today cause of them doing that. i resent the fact that some people will just assume that this war is over and is a loss. the war is costing around 600+ billion to the tax payers i believe, i dont know what the price for freedom is, someone please tell me. i just dont want the gutless american public and polititians doing to me and my bros what the past generation did to the korean and vietnam vets ie: pulled us away from the job before it was finished. that would really tick me off, what a slap in the face that would be. just my opinion though

Southern Pride,

Thanks for all you've done!

Negative opinions about the war have nothing to do with the brave and patriotic men and women fighting there. It's not about your success or failure at all. We all owe a tremendous debt to you and your kind. I admire your willinness to go where asked in the name of the US.

I don't want such efforts by our troops to be spent where they don't have to be.

I don't think the war will be "lost", I think it was a very bad idea in the first place and was sold to us under false pretense. It was planned in 1998 and sold, three years later, as part of 911. It was planned as a permanent American base with the biggest embasy in the world. We reduced our efforts against Bin Laden to invade Iraq. Now we have spent so many lives and so much treasure that many of us are concerned about what might happen if a real threat came up, or how our grandchildren will be paying for it. We're worried about all the broken bodies and shattered families caused by it. We hate that we were told we would be greeted with flowers over there and that it would be quick and then that we had "prevailed".

I don't want to downplay your efforts there, I want you to come home safely and for all of us to really see what it was about and make a more clearheaded decision about any future invasions. For us to go after our real enemies.

Please come home safely.

thanks raspy for the comments. i guess what i was tryin to say was that im not happy 100% with what the "administration has done", but i will support it, but besides the we shouldnt have gone over there argument, its too late for that. we have to finish the job, not finish "early", but when its done. i wish all yall could hear and see first hand the success stories, and im not talkin about onesies and twosies, success has happened all over that entire country and it never gets publicized. i have several friends over there from baghdad to al quiam on the syrian border and yes theres violence, but the overwhelming majority of marines are "complaining" that there isnt anything goin on, which is a good thing. in my mind i hope that what ive done will possibly prevent my future children to go and have to do. i had a older gentlman that i went to church with back home. he was a wwII vet in the army. he was in the infantry and made the push from D-Day to the Battle of the Bulge and to the end of the war. one of his granddaughters took him back over there, just them two and they toured from the beaches of normandy to germany, to belgium. it might seem like a lofty thought, but in my distorted mind, i hope some day to make it back to iraq and see how the country has progressed from where it was to what it can become and has already become. just something to think about.

I'd like to hear more of the good that has come from all of this.

Do you think relationships between the Iraqi public and the Americam public can ever be friendly? What is their general opinion of our efforts there and of all the deaths of innocent Iraqis? Do you hear any buzz about oil contracts with the US?

Thanks

Southern Pride,

Ditto what Raspy says. Thanks for your service! Unfortunately, it sounds like it has come at great personal cost to you and I hope that your situation improves greatly.

i dont know what the price for freedom is, someone please tell me. i just dont want the gutless american public and polititians doing to me and my bros what the past generation did to the korean and vietnam vets ie: pulled us away from the job before it was finished. that would really tick me off, what a slap in the face that would be. just my opinion though

Respectfully, I would remind people that we were free before the invasion and occupation of Iraq and did not need to have 4150 of our brave young men and women die, thousands more maimed for life, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis die and nearly 1 trillion dollars of borrowed money spent to retain this freedom. So, to answer your question, the price of freedom in this case was far less than what the current Bush administration has squandered. The invasion of Iraq was never about our freedom.

As far as "finishing the job", I have yet to hear anyone define the job. People on this board talk about winning the war. It's not even a war, it's a unending occupation of a sovereign nation with no detail of the end goal. So what does finishing the job look like?

Respectfully, I would remind people that we were free before the invasion and occupation of Iraq and did not need to have 4150 of our brave young men and women die, thousands more maimed for life, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis die and nearly 1 trillion dollars of borrowed money spent to retain this freedom. So, to answer your question, the price of freedom in this case was far less than what the current Bush administration has squandered. The invasion of Iraq was never about our freedom.

As far as "finishing the job", I have yet to hear anyone define the job. People on this board talk about winning the war. It's not even a war, it's a unending occupation of a sovereign nation with no detail of the end goal. So what does finishing the job look like?


Yes ... we were free before all of that. And our men & women overseas are there making sure that we STAY that way. Al Quida is everywhere ... Iraq is just another hotspot where the most good is being done. the "job" you speak of is not going to be done until Al Quida, as a functioning & dangerous operation is out of the picture or at least a minimal threat.

War for oil ... war to line someones pockets ... whatever :rolleyes:. There is always going to be someone profiting from it somehow... human nature, we are all greedy crooks. Don't be upset because it isn't YOU making the dough.

I would be and have been willing to do whatever needed to be done, spend whatever needed to be spent in an effort to make the lives of my children and their children safer.

PISTOL

i havent heard anything with regards to oil contracts. to be honest, i wish we were reaping the benefits of the plentiful crude thats over there. i would say to help fully understand the situation is to and im not bein rude, but to study up on the entire culture over there, and i mean over there as in that whole area. before each deployment we marines get a whole buttload of "culture classes", now that bein said much of it is just for a check in the box so to speak, but there has been a plethora of valuable info. stuff from learnin the language. at first the marine corps was teachin us "proper" arabic ie: egyptian style. but when you get over there there is so many different accents and dialecs just like here in the states. gen mattis made the famos quote treat every iraqi like "we are no better friend, no worse enemy" or another one that we used was "be friendly to every one, but have a plan to kill them". using those tools and just good ole common sense helped out a lot. the whole system is still set up by tribes. when you get in the "bed" so to speak with the top tribal leaders, you'll gain their trust which has taken a while, but is happening on a broad scale. i have more to fill in, but i gotta run.

Al Quida is everywhere ...

They sound like the Boogie man. Be afraid if you want, it's become very Patriotic to do so. But, if Al Quida is everywhere, why would you possibly believe throwing a trillion dollars into one location is going to eradicate them?

There is always going to be someone profiting from it somehow... human nature, we are all greedy crooks.
No, we are not all greedy crooks. Speak for yourself.

I would be and have been willing to do whatever needed to be done, spend whatever needed to be spent in an effort to make the lives of my children and their children safer.


The so called war on terror is an intelligence war, fought here at home. Throwing all the money in the world at defense contractors in Iraq and throwing all the young American lives away does not change that. When all the dust settles, it will still be about intelligence, always being one step ahead off any organization that wants to do harm to us here, within our borders.

Boogie man or whatever .... I have worked in areas separated by no more than chain link and constantine wire away from them and have seen first hand what they can & will do. It is not solely an intelligence war fought here at home (although much of it is), it was in a land half a world away ... with IED's and rocket launchers. If you aren't afraid ... then you aren't paying attention. This is what Obama's scariest problem is ... he has underestimated the enemy. We are not just chasing them down in the middle east ... SOCOM is very busy in Africa too these days.

As for us all being greedy crooks .... maybe that was too broad of a statement. If you are among the 1% of us who does not get paid for more than what you absolutely "need" to survive ... then this wouldn't apply to you.

I however, do have a greedy side to me and feel that I am in the 99% majority.

My .02 ... your mileage may vary,
PISTOL

Pistol,

You are right about all the danger with al Quaida. That's why it is so foolish to spend such a great amount of our resources in Iraq. We virtually let Bin Laden go so we could concentrate on Iraq and al Quaida was not in Iraq until we were.

Remember, the Iraq invasion was dreamed up by the neo-cons in 1998. Then Bush played it as part of 911 after 2001. Now the generals are asking for more troops in Afghanistan and they are not available because of Iraq. So if you are so worried about security, that game plan sounds very bad.

I would never be proud of war profiteering or feel secure in the fact that I was making a fortune from this fiasco just because I was part of a, so called, greedy majority. That is, at least, unpatriotic and shows the real intentions of those involved. Not only our troops have been killed, but many many innocent Iraqis have been bombed. If the cause is really so noble there is no room for profit, yet our vice president has made a fortune from it, all the time telling us "six more months" and Bush has never defined the mission in an honest way. He can't. It was planned in 1998 and sold as part of 911 in 2001.

I just have to ask: If the cause is so noble, and the cost in fortune and American lives is so high, and there is no end in sight, and we will only accept winning the war, just where does it all end? And at what cost? It's so easy to promote the war but when you look at the cost, we cannot sustain it, or at the very least there will have to be a huge tax increase to support it. Will the American public accept a large tax increase to continue a war that was not necessary in Iraq? Sooner or later we will leave and it won't be after al Quaida is snuffed out. Bin Laden is already winning because so many Americans are so scared of the boogeyman that they will allow Bush to spend us into financial collapse. And the sad part is, it's in a country not involved with 911. Are we really that much safer now that a trillion dollars has been committed? Meanwhile Bush says he doesn't know where Bin Laden is and doesn't think about it that much. Now there is a good security plan!

If this war in Iraq is as serious as some say it is, we'd better re-instate the draft, seriously gear up, drastically raise taxes and get on with it. Or we'd better fight it in a smart way and go after our true enemies where they really are.

You make a point of Obama underestimating the enemy, and at the same time, ignore that we invaded a country that had no intention, or ability to invade us. That we let Bin Laden go. We even gave his family a free pass out of here as they were on the only plane allowed to fly after 911. We depend on billions from China to support the dollar. And that we still send billions of dollars to Saudi Arabia, where the 911 terrorists came from. It may not be Obama that is underestimating the enemy. It might be a dangerously complacent US populace who places their trust in an incompetent president.

Does another country necessarily have to invade the USA to be a danger to the USA ??

NO

I'm not really sure where you get the information that Al Quida wasn't in Iraq until we were. They are pretty dug in for not being there before hand.

No doubt we have spend ungodly amounts of money, resources and lives on this war ... mainly (IMHO) because we have pussyfooted around taking care of that problem for far too long and now that it has grown and spread like a disease to all 4 corners of the earth, we have no choice but to spend that kind of money and invest that many lives to irradicate this Al Quida disease ... if we don't take care of it completely this time, it will come back to bite us in our "posterity" !! Just like it has before ...

Raspy, I thank you for your civil tongue and peaceful debate ... you are obviously a good American, and your ideas are well taken here !!

Cheers,
PISTOL

Pistol,

You are right about all the danger with al Quaida. ........... It may not be Obama that is underestimating the enemy. It might be a dangerously complacent US populace who places their trust in an incompetent president.

Exactly my point ..... if you as a citizen aren't scared ... you aren't paying attention. We, as a nation ARE as you say, very complacent.

THAT will be our downfall.

Cheers,
PISTOL

the whole al quaida thing makes me chuckle. its a pretty known fact that after we invaded afganistan, sadaam opened his doors to give safe haven to alquaida to come in and hide so to speak. i cant tell you how many foreigners from syria, saudi, jordan, and afghan, that we detained/killed. al quaida isnt held down to one country, their all over the area. one point i like to bring up to people about this war is "what have you had to give up personally or sacrifice because of the war". for most americans, they havent had to give up anything. i think of the people back in WWI and WWII and think of all the rationing that went on. for the most part, americans go on with their daily lives as if nothing has happened. we are fighting this war on two visible fronts, and on countless behind the scenes fronts, and we still live relatively comfortable. if we were under opression for years and years, i would hope that a country like the US would come to our rescue, and not leave until we were set free and back on our own two feet. the average terrorist regime lasts on average 7-13 years, except for a few that we all know. that seems like a long time, but its not in the grand scheme of things.

another thing that comes to my mind Raspy about the situation over there, is about the iraqi army. we have finally made milestones in changing their mindset in regards to getting rid of the old mentality of knowlege and money and possessions are power, therefore im not gonna share. operationally the iraqi army can sustain themselves. the biggest hurdle that we had and is somewhat across the board, is the logistical set up, and the administrative set up. it is being fixed and there have been tremendous advances have been made. ive seen this first hand. another example. when i arrived to ramadi in april of 06 it was the wild west. massive fire fights everyday and night. when we left it was tapering down considerably. there was an average of 6-12 fire fights a day wich tapered off to about 6 a week or less. i left in nov and by the early spring of 07 the iraqi's ran a 5k marathon throughout the city. we assisted but let the iraqi army, and police clean out the city ie: kill/capture/destroy the terrorists. now the al anbar wich went from the most violent area in iraq to now one of the most peaceful. baghdad is considerably much safer than it was this time last year. i have friends who work for black water, i dont want to mention any names, but they give me reports about every 3months when they rotate back for leave. knock on wood, but mortar, rocket, ied, and small arms attacks are basically non-existent in and around the city. the methods we are using are working, but they just didnt work overnight like "many" wanted. we cant give up hope yet:cool:

Pistol,

Thanks for your kind words.


Southern Pride,

It's good to, once again, get an inside view of things over there. It obviously is getting much better based on your reports, news and other sources. It seems that Patreas is very well educated and was the one who finally began to make some serious progress by reaching out to tribal leaders and demonstrating that we were willing to work with them. By helping them to see that al Quaida was not their friend, etc. What is your take on this?

Before that it was Bush and Cheney in fantasy land about it all and huge amounts of money flowing down a rat hole.

I'd also like to get your views on the "contractors", or should they be called mercenaries? There are about an equal number of them compared to US troops. I've heard that the generals complain it's like two armies playing with different rules. Should we just double our troop level and get Blackwater out of there? This is one of the areas I'm concerned about because of the cost involved and the euphemism "contractors" instead of private troops or whatever. Many unnecessary civilian deaths seem to be caused by them and that can't be good for improving our relationship with the Iraqi citizens. If we don't have enough troops we will have to enlist and train more, but that is not a good idea politically.

My underlying concerns, I guess, is that we have been lied to and strung along about this whole thing from day one. It has gone on and on in Iraq with no end in sight, while other hot spots slowly boil and prepare for a bigger problem. The real danger seems to have been somewhere else. The actual costs have been downplayed or hidden while they have grown to a level we can't sustain. Bush talks about a "war" but never convinces congress to declare one, declares that we have "prevailed" then gets bogged down for years more, and the public wants tax cuts and life as usual. On the political stage, it's argue, argue, argue. False accusations flying all around and a voting public more interested in picking a new President because of their views about who someone can be allowed to marry or if they might be more likely to raise taxes. Something is wrong with this picture!

There were so many mistakes made for so long, so much corruption, so much hidden costs and so little understanding of the culture there that it seemed like it was too much for us to take on and still fight the real battle somewhere else. The case was never made about the real mission. Now with things improving as they are, will we someday have a situation where we can be in Iraq, at the worlds biggest embassy and other bases, and use it for a springboard to other hot spots without being seen as occupiers? Will the Iraqis accept us as permanent neighbors in their land? Will the oil begin to flow in our direction?

I appreciate your views.

John, some interesting and good points being shared.

the changes that i speak of were actually started long before petraeus got in. they actually started with Gen Casey back in 2005. but once again you and not you in particular, but you as in the world/the US didnt know of this and for many reasons because i personally dont thing that the public should know our plans and how they are employed, but Gen Casey, who ive met, began with the help from every one, from the ground up the plans and procedures, and tactics that we are using now. i dont want to be specific, but they basically are that we recognize that the people of iraq are not all terrorists and we studied up on their culture in depth and began working with the locals. we kinda gave them "power" which they already had, and helped coddle the iraqi army and police along. this basically showed the local leaders that hey, your own people are runniing the show, but we are here to support and help in any way possible, if possible.

the contractor issue, i agree and kinda dissagree with you on that one. i will say this, that all the comodities that are provided are top notch. if it wasnt for them it would be bad living conditions over there. that being said, im a grunt, so i never really "lived" in those conditions all the time. be outside the wire for a month or so, come back for 2-3 days or even a week, and it is really nice to be able to get laundry done that youve been wearing for 2 or 3 weeks straight, and eat a hot meal, and check the internet, and call home, or work out, or play some video games. i will say that the way the war kicked off, noone could have mobilized quicker, more effieciently, and more effectively than halliburton/kbr did. yes they are making millions, but we get what we pay for.

now the other contractors; black water has only about 2000-2500 people over there in iraq. i personally believe that they serve a good purpose. they escort all the polititians, and "other dignitaries". i know i and my marines and many others wouldnt want to waste our time dealin with the polititians and all that other stuff. so they do come into play well with that. also, while they do have some military vehicles, they mostly ride around in crew cab power strokes, and suburbans, and other civilian type vehicles, that present a less militaristic foot print, and look less oppressive. sometimes they do "get in the way" so to speak, but its really not hurting the over all picture. yeah, they do make more money than the average troop over there, but they get no health care or benefits, and with the money that they are making over there, they have to spend 335 days outside the US to get the tax free benefit of it if they sign on for 1yr contracts. one of my best friends was making about 130k, but with his wifes combined income, they owed the gov almost $45k in taxes last year. you make a lot, but since your making a lot of money, our woonderful gov taxes the crap out of you for doing it.

also, yes, "they" have accidentally killed innocents. but as a whole, the military has done far worse damage in that department, and i know of this personally, unfortunately, but war is hell, as some say, and its not pretty and never goes according to plan. nothing goes according to plan over there. we constantly have to change and addapt. the terrorist arent stupid people and adapt quickly to our tactics. hope this helpsl a little more John.:cool:

It does help, and it's great to have your intelligent and calm views on things.

Thanks.

oh yeah, and of side note, ive had two of my closest iraqi sgts call me several times from their cell phones when they'd be on leave in baghdad throughout last year. they are really awesome men, and seriously believed in the big picture of turning their country around. there are thousands upon thousands that believe this and are tryin their hardest to do that. one of the big hurdles in the beginning was ridding out the older iraqi officers and senior enlisted that were in the army during sadaams reign. they were oppressed under his control, and now that they were freed and in charge, corruption was out of control. stealing, was ridiculous. but most of the bad older ones were removed, and replaced with the younger generation, which has worked much better, cause we were able to influence them much better.

i see you got a FXDXT. you do any rides. you been to rolling thunder or anything of that nature?? im headin out to tx either sunday early morn, or mon early morn. its about 1200 and some change miles one way. im excited about it. i love my scoot

Why does Obama continuously criticize Bush and McCain about the economy and never mentions the left wing house and senate? Does he really believe that it's a one man job to turn the economy around?

Why does Obama continuously criticize Bush and McCain about the economy and never mentions the left wing house and senate? Does he really believe that it's a one man job to turn the economy around?

Probably not. but enuf uneducated voters do.

Why does Obama continuously criticize Bush and McCain about the economy and never mentions the left wing house and senate? Does he really believe that it's a one man job to turn the economy around?

That's funny!

The Senate only has a one vote Dem majority. The Republicans vote lock step with the president and it takes a 60% margin to overcome a presidential veto.

Before the 2006 elections the Republicans not only set the agenda but had a clear majority and they worked with Bush to support whatever he wanted. Trying to blame the economic disaster on the Dems is a bit of a stretch.

Will you please explain how the House and Senate are "left wing" and how they caused the economic problems? I gotta hear this!

I would have to say 50% of the economic problems right now are energy related. Oh yea I forgot congress has helped in every way it's the evil oil companies fault

I would have to say 50% of the economic problems right now are energy related and a trickle down of oil prices. Oh yea I forgot congress has helped in every way it's the evil oil companies fault[duhhh]

Will you please explain how the House and Senate are "left wing" and how they caused the economic problems? I gotta hear this!

Ok,
During the Clinton administration the Republicans sent a bill to Clinton's desk which would have allowed us to drill in ANWR. Bill vetoed that bill!!
Early in the Bush administration the President asked for an energy package that would have allowed drilling in ANWR. The DEMs filibustered that bill so it never made it to the presidents desk!
Now with 4.00 per gallon gas causing our economy to weaken Pelosi, Reed, and Co. choose to NOT ALLOW a vote on an energy bill that would again have allowed increased drilling and instead took a vacation!!
Now high fuel prices aren't the only factor in our weakened economy but it's a heavy one.
Oh and it's easy to see that their left wing...they always vote against the right thing to do!![laugh]

Anyone hear Obama today? He was asked if he planned on taking guns away from law abiding citizens and after his usual dance around the subject line he said " even if I wanted to I don't have the votes in congress to do it"

capt,

Ok, so once again it's all Clintons fault, as usual, but what about the first six years of Bush when the Republicans had a nice majority in congress and did whatever Bush wanted? Bush also started out with a surplus.

Bush has borrowed and spent more, by far, than any president in history. And all approved by Congress because Bush asked for it. The debt ceiling, the debt itself and the deficit are all way out of control. Just some annoying facts that might not fit in the "it's all Clinton's fault" scenario.

Thanks for your response, but I could have predicted you would blame it all on Clinton, as usual, and I asked Crobtex to clarify what HE meant. I hope HE does.

capt,

Ok, so once again it's all Clintons fault, as usual, but what about the first six years of Bush when the Republicans had a nice majority in congress and did whatever Bush wanted? Bush also started out with a surplus.


Bush has borrowed and spent more, by far, than any president in history. And all approved by Congress because Bush asked for it. The debt ceiling, the debt itself and the deficit are all way out of control. Just some annoying facts that might not fit in the "it's all Clinton's fault" scenario.


Whatever Bush wanted huh? I don't know what Congress you are speaking of but I havn't seen anything get done in 8 years. For the first 6 years nearly everything that got to the floor either got filibustered to death or had so many earmarks and poison pills atached to it nobody would pass it. The republicans didn't have the backbone or the majoity #'s to put a stop to it.
What promises have been kept by Pelosi and Reed? They promised to end the war, said the people elected them to do so. That didn't happen. They also prommised to lower fuel prices that the evil oil men in the white house artificially inflated. I don't think I even need to state what has happened to oil prices in the last 2 years. Then there was that imigration plan that even old GW wanted, that worked out well for them too. I don't think I need to drag that out anymore.
What have they acomplished? Well they managed to make a big deal about some judges getting fired and drag that out forever. Clinton did the same thing when he was in office. They managed to stand by while one of their biggest suporters called Gen. Petraeus Gen. Betray us. They funded the war time and again, even though they prommised to end it imediately upon assuming control. They have gotten themselves a single digit approval rating that alone should speak for itself.
I havn't seen anyone on here that is a major Bush cheerleader I know I am not I am in no way happy with many of his plans. Too bad most of Barry H. Obama's suporters can only see one side of the coin

I think it has already been explained..................

capt,

Ok, so once again it's all Clintons fault, as usual, but what about the first six years of Bush when the Republicans had a nice majority in congress and did whatever Bush wanted?
Wrong again Raspy!!
It was Clinton's fault that we didn't get the energy bill during his term.
Do you deny that he vetoed the bill??
It was the DEMs in congress's fault for blocking a similar bill once Bush was in office.
Do you deny that they blocked the bill?
You do understand that unless one side can get 60 votes in the senate the other side can filibuster until the session is over? Thus the bill dies!!
Now yes the republicans can take some blame on this as well. They should have held 24hr sessions until the DEMs got worn out from their filibuster. That's where my disappointment with the republican congress lies.
Bush also started out with a surplus.
And a recession that started before he took office.
You don't remember the crash of the Tech market??
Then we had the hit from 9/11. Any reason to think this may have weakened the economy??
Bush has borrowed and spent more, by far, than any president in history. And all approved by Congress because Bush asked for it. The debt ceiling, the debt itself and the deficit are all way out of control. Just some annoying facts that might not fit in the "it's all Clinton's fault" scenario.
The debt and deficit isn't what we were talking about we were talking about the weakened economy and how it got that way. BUT the deficit can also be partially attributed to high fuel prices and the weakened economy.
Costs go up and folks stop spending on anything but the absolute necessity.
Companies layoff personnel because they can't afford to pay them and the higher price of fuel and everything else related to that, i.e. "Goods and Services" In connection when income and revenue go down for households and businesses so does tax revenues therefore the debt and deficit goes up.
Do you understand how that works?? It's really pretty simple math.

Thanks for your response, but I could have predicted you would blame it all on Clinton, as usual, and I asked Crobtex to clarify what HE meant. I hope HE does.
Your emotions must really have your head spinning. If you re read my posts I don't blame it all on Clinton. It's quite obvious that you're more interested in spinning than the actual truth.[nonono]

If this wasn't so pathetic, it would be funny. Obama let's his camp go rampant on snide remarks and innuendos and THEN denies that it is the way he feels or makes excuses for them. :rolleyes:

"Enough," Obama declared yesterday while campaigning in Norfolk, Va. "I don't care what they say about me. But I love this country too much to let them take over another election with lies and phony outrage and Swift boat politics. Enough is enough."