BMW M3 Forum (E90 E92)

BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Go Back   M3Post - BMW M3 Forum > BIMMERPOST Universal Forums > Off-Topic Discussions Board > Politics/Religion
 
GT Haus
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      06-13-2008, 12:07 PM   #1
e90im
Brigadier General
e90im's Avatar
United_States
121
Rep
3,120
Posts

 
Drives: f30
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA

iTrader: (8)

"We don't have a clue where Osama Bin Laden is or even may be,

http://deepbackground.msnbc.msn.com/...3/1138296.aspx
__________________
'13 f30 328i | P7ACA | S563A | S4DLA | Jet Black |

f30 e92 tt S5 e92 350z e90
Appreciate 0
      06-13-2008, 12:30 PM   #2
spiz
New Member
1
Rep
17
Posts

 
Drives: M3
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: BX

iTrader: (0)

He At Brooklyn Lol
Appreciate 0
      06-19-2008, 08:30 PM   #3
Solonng
Captain
32
Rep
829
Posts

 
Drives: Monacco Blue 335i coupe
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Florida

iTrader: (0)

Hes partying with Obama trying to plot the destruction of America.
Appreciate 0
      06-19-2008, 08:40 PM   #4
NaTuReB0Y
Powered By 36DD
NaTuReB0Y's Avatar
United_States
122
Rep
7,381
Posts

 
Drives: 2006 E90
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Inland Empire

iTrader: (12)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Solonng View Post
Hes partying with Obama trying to plot the destruction of America.
Obama is related to Saddam Hussein.....not Bin Laden

you are misinformed just like g.w. bush
__________________
2006 E90 330i Jet Black | 20" WORK VS-XX | FK452 | H&R Sport on Koni Yellow | REMUS QUAD
Appreciate 0
      06-20-2008, 01:25 PM   #5
Neurorad
Major
Neurorad's Avatar
18
Rep
1,212
Posts

 
Drives: 330xi 6MT Blk/Blk SP
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Location, Location

iTrader: (0)

Didn't the US invade Iraq to find him?
Appreciate 0
      06-20-2008, 01:55 PM   #6
BKsBimmer
Lieutenant Colonel
BKsBimmer's Avatar
41
Rep
1,638
Posts

 
Drives: 2006 330xi Titanium Silver
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: USA / Silver Spring, Maryland

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2006 330xi  [5.00]
2006 330xi  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by NaTuReB0Y View Post
Obama is related to Saddam Hussein.....not Bin Laden

you are misinformed just like g.w. bush
Of course the Repubs would like us to think he's related to every terrorist we could possibly imagine but the actual truth is that he is related to Dick Cheney!

Sad, but true: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...101602362.html
__________________
_____________________________________
330xi/TiAg/Black/Alum/6sp/ZPP/ZSP/Nav/CA/CW/PDC/Sirius Satellite Radio/OEM Spoiler/Blacklines/19" Axis Hiro Hyper Silver/Toyo Proxes 4 Ultra High Performance all season F 235/35/19 R 265/30/19/10mm spacers F/15mm spacers R/M3 front bumber/M-tech rear bumper
Appreciate 0
      06-20-2008, 03:49 PM   #7
tek818
Lieutenant Colonel
tek818's Avatar
38
Rep
1,838
Posts

 
Drives: 2012 135i
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Los Angeles

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
2012 BMW 135i  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solonng View Post
Hes partying with Obama trying to plot the destruction of America.
:finger:
__________________
Appreciate 0
      06-20-2008, 07:00 PM   #8
Solonng
Captain
32
Rep
829
Posts

 
Drives: Monacco Blue 335i coupe
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Florida

iTrader: (0)

They're gay lovers! aww
Appreciate 0
      06-21-2008, 10:51 AM   #9
Bobby_Light
Major
Bobby_Light's Avatar
United_States
17
Rep
1,353
Posts

 
Drives: E36 M3
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SoCal

iTrader: (14)

More inept US intelligence. Surprised we found Hussein. Got lucky.

We have done exactly what Osama wanted us to - increase our presence in the Arab world and stir up more hostility/hatred against the US. We haven't been made safer. We have more enemies than ever. Al Queda wasn't in Iraq prior to the war. Now they are.

Appreciate 0
      06-21-2008, 10:57 AM   #10
Dubbedoutbimmer
Banned
United_States
21
Rep
1,313
Posts

 
Drives: 335XI Coupe Loaded w/body kit
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Boston

iTrader: (-1)

Send a message via AIM to Dubbedoutbimmer
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solonng View Post
Hes partying with Obama trying to plot the destruction of America.
wow .....just wow
Appreciate 0
      06-21-2008, 12:24 PM   #11
ganeil
Colonel
ganeil's Avatar
United_States
35
Rep
2,050
Posts

 
Drives: 328i Coupe
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Georgia

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby_Light View Post
More inept US intelligence. Surprised we found Hussein. Got lucky.

We have done exactly what Osama wanted us to - increase our presence in the Arab world and stir up more hostility/hatred against the US. We haven't been made safer. We have more enemies than ever. Al Queda wasn't in Iraq prior to the war. Now they are.
Where are you getting your information? Al Qaeda made a decision to confront us in Iraq. They decided to make it the central front in their war against us. The result of those decisions could not have been worse for them. They have been tactically defeated in every area of Iraq they have tried to establish a presence, Anbar, Diyala, Baghdad, Mosul.... More importantly, they have been rejected by the very people they claim to represent, Sunni Arabs. Their presence, ideology, and methods have alienated the Sunni in a way that nothing we could have done could have replicated. If anyone's fortunes have declined in the Arab world as a result of the Iraq War, it is bin Laden and al Qaeda. We are now, in bin Laden's words, the "strong horse."
__________________
_____________

1974 2002tii
1978 320i
2007 328i
Appreciate 0
      06-21-2008, 04:06 PM   #12
Bobby_Light
Major
Bobby_Light's Avatar
United_States
17
Rep
1,353
Posts

 
Drives: E36 M3
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SoCal

iTrader: (14)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganeil View Post
Where are you getting your information? Al Qaeda made a decision to confront us in Iraq. They decided to make it the central front in their war against us. The result of those decisions could not have been worse for them. They have been tactically defeated in every area of Iraq they have tried to establish a presence, Anbar, Diyala, Baghdad, Mosul.... More importantly, they have been rejected by the very people they claim to represent, Sunni Arabs. Their presence, ideology, and methods have alienated the Sunni in a way that nothing we could have done could have replicated. If anyone's fortunes have declined in the Arab world as a result of the Iraq War, it is bin Laden and al Qaeda. We are now, in bin Laden's words, the "strong horse."
Here's my point. Al Qaeda wasn't in Iraq prior to our invasion. Now they are. As long as we have a presence in the Arab world, we will have a threat of terrorism. If we removed our presence, we would be a lot safer. They don't hate us because we're democratic and free, they hate our presence in their backyard. The sooner we realize this, the safer we are as a nation. If they had bases in the US, we would be revolting like crazy.

The "threat" of terrorism is taking away our personal liberties at home which is exactly what terrorists want. Not to mention this war is making us bankrupt, causing rampant inflation, and slowly lowering our standard of living. We'll have to get out of the middle east (and elsewhere) at some time because we'll eventually run out of money. Can't borrow money with no ability to pay it back forever.
Appreciate 0
      06-21-2008, 04:07 PM   #13
dr335is
Brigadier General
54
Rep
4,975
Posts

 
Drives: Some Mazda junk...
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Dallas, TX

iTrader: (4)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganeil View Post
Where are you getting your information? Al Qaeda made a decision to confront us in Iraq. They decided to make it the central front in their war against us. The result of those decisions could not have been worse for them. They have been tactically defeated in every area of Iraq they have tried to establish a presence, Anbar, Diyala, Baghdad, Mosul.... More importantly, they have been rejected by the very people they claim to represent, Sunni Arabs. Their presence, ideology, and methods have alienated the Sunni in a way that nothing we could have done could have replicated. If anyone's fortunes have declined in the Arab world as a result of the Iraq War, it is bin Laden and al Qaeda. We are now, in bin Laden's words, the "strong horse."
WOW..sounds like they attacked us on our territory... Get real robot!

We defeated them tactically -- PATHETIC! Do you really believe we defeated them when they kill one of ours daily???

You live in your own world, the end!
Appreciate 0
      06-21-2008, 04:48 PM   #14
ganeil
Colonel
ganeil's Avatar
United_States
35
Rep
2,050
Posts

 
Drives: 328i Coupe
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Georgia

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby_Light View Post
Here's my point. Al Qaeda wasn't in Iraq prior to our invasion. Now they are. As long as we have a presence in the Arab world, we will have a threat of terrorism. If we removed our presence, we would be a lot safer. They don't hate us because we're democratic and free, they hate our presence in their backyard. The sooner we realize this, the safer we are as a nation. If they had bases in the US, we would be revolting like crazy.

The "threat" of terrorism is taking away our personal liberties at home which is exactly what terrorists want. Not to mention this war is making us bankrupt, causing rampant inflation, and slowly lowering our standard of living. We'll have to get out of the middle east (and elsewhere) at some time because we'll eventually run out of money. Can't borrow money with no ability to pay it back forever.
First of all, the notion that al Qaeda was not in Iraq prior to the war has been disproved time and again. Abu Musab al Zarqawi was in Baghdad and al Qaeda was present in northern Iraq before the war, this is confirmed by the Senate Select Committee Report just released. It is also irrelevant. They decided to fight us in Iraq and they have paid the price.

We have a presence in the Gulf because it is in our national interest to do so. Are you suggesting we would be safer if our ships stopped cruising the Gulf? What about the Red Sea? The Mediterranean ? Al Qaeda believes Spain is rightfully part of the Caliphate, should we force them from NATO?

They hate us and attack us because we are a force, possibly THE force that stands between them and their goals.

As for this war bankrupting us, are you serious? This war has cost less than 1% of GDP over the past 6+ years. Do you actually believe that minuscule portion of national wealth is responsible for the current slow growth?

Exactly which personal liberties have you lost?
__________________
_____________

1974 2002tii
1978 320i
2007 328i
Appreciate 0
      06-21-2008, 05:26 PM   #15
Bobby_Light
Major
Bobby_Light's Avatar
United_States
17
Rep
1,353
Posts

 
Drives: E36 M3
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SoCal

iTrader: (14)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganeil View Post
First of all, the notion that al Qaeda was not in Iraq prior to the war has been disproved time and again. Abu Musab al Zarqawi was in Baghdad and al Qaeda was present in northern Iraq before the war, this is confirmed by the Senate Select Committee Report just released. It is also irrelevant. They decided to fight us in Iraq and they have paid the price.

We have a presence in the Gulf because it is in our national interest to do so. Are you suggesting we would be safer if our ships stopped cruising the Gulf? What about the Red Sea? The Mediterranean ? Al Qaeda believes Spain is rightfully part of the Caliphate, should we force them from NATO?

They hate us and attack us because we are a force, possibly THE force that stands between them and their goals.

As for this war bankrupting us, are you serious? This war has cost less than 1% of GDP over the past 6+ years. Do you actually believe that minuscule portion of national wealth is responsible for the current slow growth?

Exactly which personal liberties have you lost?
Ever heard of the Patriot Act? The government's ability to spy on our personal lives is expanding. Big brother is watching, you just don't see it. The power of the executive branch has been expanded greatly over the term of this administration. That scares me.

There might have been very small cells of Al Qaeda in Iraq, but they weren't actively performing terrorist acts. I don't believe shit our government says anyway; they tweak data to put them in a better light (take the rate of inflation for instance). Remember how sure they were about the presence of WMDs in Iraq? They certainly could be wrong about an Al Qaeda presence before this undeclared war. Al Qaeda has a real presence in Iraq now.

What is our national interest in the Middle East? Is it oil? Al Qaeda attacks us because we are a FORCE. What are you talking about? We are in their territory for no reason. They want us out that's why they attack us. What exactly are their goals?

Consider the costs of war...
$4,681 per household.
$1,721 per person.
$341.4 million per day!!!

http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home

Over $530 billions dollars in total. That's absurd. Yeah, this war is making a huge difference on this country - lives lost, money spent, inflated currency. We are talking billions of dollars monthly at this point. We are borrowing money from Asia and literally printing money to finance this war which further devalues our currency. If we didn't print money, our stimulus checks would have bounced. We have bases all over the world while our borders are being breached by illegal immigrants.

I am obviously for a non-interventionist foreign policy. I want our troops home from our bases around the world. I don't think we need to be the world's police. Empires end when they are stretched beyond their means. We are getting to that point now.
Appreciate 0
      06-21-2008, 06:55 PM   #16
dr335is
Brigadier General
54
Rep
4,975
Posts

 
Drives: Some Mazda junk...
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Dallas, TX

iTrader: (4)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganeil View Post
First of all, the notion that al Qaeda was not in Iraq prior to the war has been disproved time and again. Abu Musab al Zarqawi was in Baghdad and al Qaeda was present in northern Iraq before the war, this is confirmed by the Senate Select Committee Report just released. It is also irrelevant. They decided to fight us in Iraq and they have paid the price.

We have a presence in the Gulf because it is in our national interest to do so. Are you suggesting we would be safer if our ships stopped cruising the Gulf? What about the Red Sea? The Mediterranean ? Al Qaeda believes Spain is rightfully part of the Caliphate, should we force them from NATO?

They hate us and attack us because we are a force, possibly THE force that stands between them and their goals.

As for this war bankrupting us, are you serious? This war has cost less than 1% of GDP over the past 6+ years. Do you actually believe that minuscule portion of national wealth is responsible for the current slow growth? Exactly which personal liberties have you lost?
2 leaders and a few Al Qaeda members (never actually proven) -- THat is still LESS than how many Al Qaeda members reside in the USA!!!

Your claims are pathetic...

And for the second -- if it is just a chunk of change as you claim (including "MARE" 4500 lives lost on our side and hundreds of thousands innocent over there, and plus how many hundreds of thousands family lives altered in this country???) -- why didn't your draft dodger leader invest the same 1% into healthcare, education, or ANY HUMANE thing??? WHy didin't he invest into helping Katrina survivors just that 1% -- a trillion dollars put to New Orleans area would have built 5 Million homes!!! a whole city!
Or, why are poor still dying in this country because they cannot afford health care since $1T is simply a chunk of change for us???

You keep proving how mindless, how cruel and unpatriotic and how wrongly programmed you are. WAKE UP!
Appreciate 0
      06-21-2008, 08:43 PM   #17
ganeil
Colonel
ganeil's Avatar
United_States
35
Rep
2,050
Posts

 
Drives: 328i Coupe
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Georgia

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby_Light View Post
Ever heard of the Patriot Act? The government's ability to spy on our personal lives is expanding. Big brother is watching, you just don't see it. The power of the executive branch has been expanded greatly over the term of this administration. That scares me.
Sure, I have heard of the Patriot Act. I have even read it. How about you?

I would recommend you look at the wartime powers of Lincoln, Wilson, and FDR and then explain how Presidential power has increased under Bush.

My original question still stands, what personal liberties have you lost?

Quote:
What is our national interest in the Middle East? Is it oil? Al Qaeda attacks us because we are a FORCE. What are you talking about? We are in their territory for no reason. They want us out that's why they attack us. What exactly are their goals?
Of course oil is a very important interest of ours in the Middle East. Do you deny that it is or should be? Oil is what fuels our economy and the world's economy.

Al Qaeda has made no secret of what its aspirations are: they want the House of Saud overthrown, they want all western influences removed from the Islamic world, and they want to reestablish the Caliphate. They see us as the prime impediment to these goals coming to fruition.

Quote:
Consider the costs of war...
$4,681 per household.
$1,721 per person.
$341.4 million per day!!!

Over $530 billions dollars in total. That's absurd. Yeah, this war is making a huge difference on this country - lives lost, money spent, inflated currency. We are talking billions of dollars monthly at this point. We are borrowing money from Asia and literally printing money to finance this war which further devalues our currency. If we didn't print money, our stimulus checks would have bounced. We have bases all over the world while our borders are being breached by illegal immigrants.
So, this war is costing us each less than a buck and a quarter a day and you think it is bankrupting us? I spend more than that on Diet Coke a day. We have a $13 Trillion economy, $530 billion dollars over six years simply cannot have any meaningful effect on that economy.

If you want to fight against the growth of government spending, I am on your side. Waging war, national defense, and maintaining a military force is one of the few legitimate federal government responsibilities. There are plenty of government programs that can and should be cut or eliminated that would have a much greater positive effect on the economy.

Quote:
I am obviously for a non-interventionist foreign policy. I want our troops home from our bases around the world. I don't think we need to be the world's police. Empires end when they are stretched beyond their means. We are getting to that point now.
What exactly is a "non-interventionist foreign policy?" Is it one that pretends we have no interests around the world? Or, one that simply accepts that we do have interests but chooses to do nothing when those interests are threatened?

Tell me were we stretched beyond our means in 1960 when we spent twice what we are now on national defense as a percentage of GDP?
__________________
_____________

1974 2002tii
1978 320i
2007 328i
Appreciate 0
      06-21-2008, 08:51 PM   #18
e90im
Brigadier General
e90im's Avatar
United_States
121
Rep
3,120
Posts

 
Drives: f30
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA

iTrader: (8)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby_Light View Post
More inept US intelligence. Surprised we found Hussein. Got lucky.

We have done exactly what Osama wanted us to - increase our presence in the Arab world and stir up more hostility/hatred against the US. We haven't been made safer. We have more enemies than ever. Al Queda wasn't in Iraq prior to the war. Now they are.


__________________
'13 f30 328i | P7ACA | S563A | S4DLA | Jet Black |

f30 e92 tt S5 e92 350z e90
Appreciate 0
      06-22-2008, 02:25 AM   #19
Bobby_Light
Major
Bobby_Light's Avatar
United_States
17
Rep
1,353
Posts

 
Drives: E36 M3
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SoCal

iTrader: (14)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganeil View Post
Sure, I have heard of the Patriot Act. I have even read it. How about you?

I would recommend you look at the wartime powers of Lincoln, Wilson, and FDR and then explain how Presidential power has increased under Bush.

My original question still stands, what personal liberties have you lost?
Wilson and Roosevelt at least sought Congressional approval prior to entering WWI and WWII. The Iraq war is an unconstitutional, undeclared war that we entered under false pretenses. The executive branch should only have those powers granted to it by the Constitution.

I have not read the Patriot Act cover to cover. Most don't. Hell, some Senators complained they didn't even have a chance to read it prior to voting on it because it was rushed through Congress shortly after 9/11.

The Patriot Act violates the First and Fourth Amendment of the Constitution.

"Why the Patriot Act's expansion of records searches is unconstitutional
Section 215 of the Patriot Act violates the Constitution in several ways. It:

Violates the Fourth Amendment, which says the government cannot conduct a search without obtaining a warrant and showing probable cause to believe that the person has committed or will commit a crime.

Violates the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech by prohibiting the recipients of search orders from telling others about those orders, even where there is no real need for secrecy.

Violates the First Amendment by effectively authorizing the FBI to launch investigations of American citizens in part for exercising their freedom of speech.

Violates the Fourth Amendmentby failing to provide notice - even after the fact - to persons whose privacy has been compromised. Notice is also a key element of due process, which is guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment."

Taken from: http://www.aclu.org/safefree/general...s20030403.html

The Patriot Act indeed infringes on MY rights given to me by the Constitution. The government can now legally spy on you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganeil View Post
Of course oil is a very important interest of ours in the Middle East. Do you deny that it is or should be? Oil is what fuels our economy and the world's economy.
I understand oil's very important roll in the world's economy. Doesn't mean we have to have a military foothold in the middle east. We are the biggest consumer of oil in the world. If we didn't have a military presence in the middle east, do you think that would result in lesser share of oil? I don't think so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganeil View Post
Al Qaeda has made no secret of what its aspirations are: they want the House of Saud overthrown, they want all western influences removed from the Islamic world, and they want to reestablish the Caliphate. They see us as the prime impediment to these goals coming to fruition.
Yeah, exactly. We need to get our American selves out of the Islamic world. I appreciate you supporting my point. If we remove our presence from their backyard, we will be safer as a nation. The threat of terrorism will not subside until we leave for good.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganeil View Post
So, this war is costing us each less than a buck and a quarter a day and you think it is bankrupting us? I spend more than that on Diet Coke a day. We have a $13 Trillion economy, $530 billion dollars over six years simply cannot have any meaningful effect on that economy.
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

When you are already $9 trillion in debt, $530 billion isn't helping your cause. What could we do with $530 BILLION here at home? Improve education, secure borders, enhance our failing bridges/roads, etc. The thing about debts are that you have to pay them back. Why doesn't this register with our government? We spend money like we have it. You just can't fire up the printing press time and time again to cover our asses. You wonder why oil is going so high? Because our dollar isn't worth anything and has no purchasing power. If we were still on the gold standard, oil would be about $3.50 a BARREL.



Quote:
Originally Posted by ganeil View Post
If you want to fight against the growth of government spending, I am on your side. Waging war, national defense, and maintaining a military force is one of the few legitimate federal government responsibilities. There are plenty of government programs that can and should be cut or eliminated that would have a much greater positive effect on the economy.
I am for small government and drastic cuts in government spending. I think we should have a strong military, but one that stays here within our borders and doesn't have to police the world. I don't know when our title as world police started, but it needs to stop. Have you heard of the Cost Plus program? Check out my thread I started that no one on this board seemed to give a shit about but is very important.

http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=149203

Defense spending needs to be curtailed. Other government agencies and programs should be eliminated completely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganeil View Post
What exactly is a "non-interventionist foreign policy?" Is it one that pretends we have no interests around the world? Or, one that simply accepts that we do have interests but chooses to do nothing when those interests are threatened?

Tell me were we stretched beyond our means in 1960 when we spent twice what we are now on national defense as a percentage of GDP?
A non-interventionist foreign policy is one that is based on the Constitution. Peace is a winner. War is a loser. This isn't a pacifist nor an isolationist foreign policy. The US should protect itself fully from an imminent threat or a direct attack and use violence against (this threat of) violence. The proper authority should always declare war (Congress). We should never be the aggressor (first strike). We have no right to go to a foreign nation and try to impose our democratic principles on them. We are not the world's freedom police.

In 1960, we didn't have a $9 trillion national debt financed with T bills. We are all over the world, and regardless of what you think great empires fall when they are stretched too thin. I believe we are at that point. We are no longer financially capable of supporting our empire.
Appreciate 0
      06-22-2008, 08:40 AM   #20
ganeil
Colonel
ganeil's Avatar
United_States
35
Rep
2,050
Posts

 
Drives: 328i Coupe
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Georgia

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby_Light View Post
Wilson and Roosevelt at least sought Congressional approval prior to entering WWI and WWII. The Iraq war is an unconstitutional, undeclared war that we entered under false pretenses. The executive branch should only have those powers granted to it by the Constitution.
I would call your attention to the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists and the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 as evidence that the current conflict is both legal and constitutional. The Constitution grants the Congress the power to declare War but it lays out no specific framework or form that such a declaration need take. There is no constitutional magic that is imbued in the words. "We declare war." vice "We authorize force be used."

In fact, it could be argued that every time Congress appropriates money to be used for combat operations, they are ratifying that conflict and issuing a de facto declaration of war.

Quote:
I have not read the Patriot Act cover to cover. Most don't. Hell, some Senators complained they didn't even have a chance to read it prior to voting on it because it was rushed through Congress shortly after 9/11.

The Patriot Act violates the First and Fourth Amendment of the Constitution.

"Why the Patriot Act's expansion of records searches is unconstitutional
Section 215 of the Patriot Act violates the Constitution in several ways. It:

....

The Patriot Act indeed infringes on MY rights given to me by the Constitution. The government can now legally spy on you.
First, you were given no rights by the Constitution, the Constitution merely protects your innate rights from government actions.

Second, you really should read any law before you proclaim it unconstitutional. If you had read the Patriot Act and understood how it relates to existing federal law, you would see that your fears are not justified.

Are you aware that under Section 215 a federal judge must approve the request to obtain records to be used in a national security investigation?

That any gag order placed must also be done by a federal judge?

That the delayed notification procedures must be authorized by a federal judge?

That the search and wiretap provisions of the Patriot Act merely merely puts terrorism and espionage on the same level as federal crimes such as health care fraud, money laundering, and drugs?:

The government has always been allowed to spy on you. It simply needed to follow certain rules. Those rules are still in place.

Quote:
I understand oil's very important roll in the world's economy. Doesn't mean we have to have a military foothold in the middle east. We are the biggest consumer of oil in the world. If we didn't have a military presence in the middle east, do you think that would result in lesser share of oil? I don't think so.
I believe that it would have been extremely dangerous and would have had disastrous economic consequences had we allowed Iran to continue to threaten shipping in the Gulf during their war with Iraq or allowed Iraq's conquest of Kuwait to stand. Those two events more than anything else led to an increased American military presence in the region. Should we have ignored those situations and simply hoped that things worked out? I don't think so.

Quote:
Yeah, exactly. We need to get our American selves out of the Islamic world. I appreciate you supporting my point. If we remove our presence from their backyard, we will be safer as a nation. The threat of terrorism will not subside until we leave for good.
It s not only our military presence they object to though. It is our political, economic, cultural, etc... influence as well. Should we stop selling Coca Cola, close our embassies, restrict the broadcast of CNN to appease them as well? Should we demand that Turkey and Spain leave NATO? How about our peace keeping force in the Sinai?


Quote:
When you are already $9 trillion in debt, $530 billion isn't helping your cause. What could we do with $530 BILLION here at home? Improve education, secure borders, enhance our failing bridges/roads, etc. The thing about debts are that you have to pay them back. Why doesn't this register with our government? We spend money like we have it. You just can't fire up the printing press time and time again to cover our asses. You wonder why oil is going so high? Because our dollar isn't worth anything and has no purchasing power. If we were still on the gold standard, oil would be about $3.50 a BARREL.
How is $9 trillion in debt in a $13 trillion economy unreasonable? Do you have a mortgage? Is the outstanding balance greater or less than your annual income?


Quote:
I am for small government and drastic cuts in government spending. I think we should have a strong military, but one that stays here within our borders and doesn't have to police the world. I don't know when our title as world police started, but it needs to stop. Have you heard of the Cost Plus program? Check out my thread I started that no one on this board seemed to give a shit about but is very important.

Defense spending needs to be curtailed. Other government agencies and programs should be eliminated completely.
I am not sure what you mean by world police. We intervene when our elected representatives feel it is in our national interest to do so. Sometimes it is simply for humanitarian reasons other times for economic reasons, and sometimes for security reasons.

You will get no argument from me that the defense acquisition system is in need of reform, I live in that system. Cost plus contracting has its dangers but so too does the alternative. Proper oversight by government auditors is required regardless of the type of contract that is awarded

Quote:
A non-interventionist foreign policy is one that is based on the Constitution. Peace is a winner. War is a loser. This isn't a pacifist nor an isolationist foreign policy. The US should protect itself fully from an imminent threat or a direct attack and use violence against (this threat of) violence. The proper authority should always declare war (Congress). We should never be the aggressor (first strike). We have no right to go to a foreign nation and try to impose our democratic principles on them. We are not the world's freedom police.

In 1960, we didn't have a $9 trillion national debt financed with T bills. We are all over the world, and regardless of what you think great empires fall when they are stretched too thin. I believe we are at that point. We are no longer financially capable of supporting our empire.
The Constitution includes guidance on foreign policy? Where is that exactly?

Politics like nature abhors a vacuum. If we were to remove ourselves, as you suggest, from the role we currently play in the world, which nation would you like to see step in?

Our debt is fractionally higher today than it was in 1960 as a percentage of GDP but it is also lower than it has been during other times of war.

I would also disagree with you on why empires of the past have failed but I do not see much use in it that if we are in fact an empire, we are unlike any the world has seen before.
__________________
_____________

1974 2002tii
1978 320i
2007 328i
Appreciate 0
      06-22-2008, 08:42 AM   #21
!Xoible
Banned
United_States
555
Rep
46,037
Posts

 
Drives: ....
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: .

iTrader: (4)

Garage List
2008 M3  [3.50]
2007 335i  [4.50]
2008 528i  [4.00]
2006 Infiniti - G35 ...  [4.00]
he's in texas in GW's farm chillaxing and vacationing. they best friends after they got teach other a shit load of business
Appreciate 0
      06-22-2008, 03:17 PM   #22
Bobby_Light
Major
Bobby_Light's Avatar
United_States
17
Rep
1,353
Posts

 
Drives: E36 M3
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SoCal

iTrader: (14)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganeil View Post
I would call your attention to the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists and the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 as evidence that the current conflict is both legal and constitutional. The Constitution grants the Congress the power to declare War but it lays out no specific framework or form that such a declaration need take. There is no constitutional magic that is imbued in the words. "We declare war." vice "We authorize force be used."

In fact, it could be argued that every time Congress appropriates money to be used for combat operations, they are ratifying that conflict and issuing a de facto declaration of war.
War Powers Clause of the Constitution

Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the United States Constitution, sometimes referred to as the War Powers Clause, vests in the Congress the exclusive power to declare war. That seems pretty clear to me.

You would think that prior to sending people's sons and daughters over to a foreign nation (under false pretense), we would at least take the proper steps to get the consent of the Congress as required by law.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganeil View Post
First, you were given no rights by the Constitution, the Constitution merely protects your innate rights from government actions.

Second, you really should read any law before you proclaim it unconstitutional. If you had read the Patriot Act and understood how it relates to existing federal law, you would see that your fears are not justified.

Are you aware that under Section 215 a federal judge must approve the request to obtain records to be used in a national security investigation?

That any gag order placed must also be done by a federal judge?

That the delayed notification procedures must be authorized by a federal judge?

That the search and wiretap provisions of the Patriot Act merely merely puts terrorism and espionage on the same level as federal crimes such as health care fraud, money laundering, and drugs?:

The government has always been allowed to spy on you. It simply needed to follow certain rules. Those rules are still in place.
Tell the Senators who voted the Patriot Act into law to read it prior to voting. They DIDN'T even read this important piece of legislation and admitted it openly. Atrocious.

Hmmm...Why would a federal court name some provisions of the Patriot Act unconstitutional?

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/09/26...act/index.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...090601438.html

The Patriot act infringes on my rights that are supposed to be protected by the Constitution. That pisses me off. I am not a criminal and don't deserve treatment as one. I want my privacy. These sort of tactics are that of a police state, not of a free nation. Your freedoms are being taken away and you are sticking up the government that is doing it. Whose side are you on? Are you Big Brother?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganeil View Post
I believe that it would have been extremely dangerous and would have had disastrous economic consequences had we allowed Iran to continue to threaten shipping in the Gulf during their war with Iraq or allowed Iraq's conquest of Kuwait to stand. Those two events more than anything else led to an increased American military presence in the region. Should we have ignored those situations and simply hoped that things worked out? I don't think so.

It s not only our military presence they object to though. It is our political, economic, cultural, etc... influence as well. Should we stop selling Coca Cola, close our embassies, restrict the broadcast of CNN to appease them as well? Should we demand that Turkey and Spain leave NATO? How about our peace keeping force in the Sinai?
Did we just rewind to the Gulf War? If there is no attack upon us directly and there is no threat of attack upon us, we should stay out.

Our military presence in their region is the driving factor behind their disgust for us. We are killing them in their backyard. If appeasing them makes us safer, so be it. Protecting our citizens at home should be priority one. Mistakes should be corrected, not continued. The current war in Iraq is a mistake. Don't be so prideful. It's like talking to McCain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganeil View Post
How is $9 trillion in debt in a $13 trillion economy unreasonable? Do you have a mortgage? Is the outstanding balance greater or less than your annual income?
The thing about a mortgage is you are required to pay it back. We HAVE NO WAY TO pay back our debts. We are spending way beyond our means. If the government was in the private sector, it could not secure a loan. Luckily Asia is there to bail us out by lending money and the Federal Reserve has no problem firing up the printing press to print more money further devaluing our currency.

We are a nation of consumers, not producers. This lack of production hurts us dearly cause we are forced to import a lot of what we consume. The stimulus check we received is going largely into the pockets of the Chinese because Americans are buying their goods wherever we go because they produce goods.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganeil View Post
I am not sure what you mean by world police. We intervene when our elected representatives feel it is in our national interest to do so. Sometimes it is simply for humanitarian reasons other times for economic reasons, and sometimes for security reasons.

You will get no argument from me that the defense acquisition system is in need of reform, I live in that system. Cost plus contracting has its dangers but so too does the alternative. Proper oversight by government auditors is required regardless of the type of contract that is awarded
We have hundreds of bases around the world. Why? We have immigrants illegally entering our country. We need our troops here to protect our borders. We should not be involved in other countries civil affairs and conflicts.

The Cost Plus program is atrocious. Seriously makes me angry. So you work in or have ties to the defense department in some manner?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganeil View Post
The Constitution includes guidance on foreign policy? Where is that exactly?

Politics like nature abhors a vacuum. If we were to remove ourselves, as you suggest, from the role we currently play in the world, which nation would you like to see step in?

Our debt is fractionally higher today than it was in 1960 as a percentage of GDP but it is also lower than it has been during other times of war.

I would also disagree with you on why empires of the past have failed but I do not see much use in it that if we are in fact an empire, we are unlike any the world has seen before.
Yeah, the constitution does dictate the powers of each branch with regard to foreign policy. The Constitution divides foreign policy powers between the President and the Congress so that both share in the making of foreign policy.

We don't need another nation to step in anywhere if we were to bring all of our troops home. Let each nation defend themselves. Why do we spend our taxpayers money for the defense of other nations? I know Iraqies want us home already. This was discussed recently with Iraq lawmakers in Washington. The lawmakers said our best move would be to get out of Iraq.



We flat out don't need to have a presence all over the world.

Our debt only being fractionally higher as a percentage of GDP is pure bologna. Our Debt-To-GDP Ratio has grown considerably under the Bush Administration.

"Mr. Bush II inherited a shrinking government and debt in 2001. With his first budget he managed to increase the debt to GDP ratio to 60.0%, by cutting taxes but not spending. By 2004 this ratio had risen to 63.7%, as a result of additional tax cuts but no significant corresponding cuts in spending. Government estimations (which are notoriously low) predict that the debt to GDP ratio will grow to 69.3% by 2008, two percent higher than the previous peak in 1996. Mr. Bush will completely wipe out the gains we made under a fiscally responsible Democratic President.

No matter how you choose to look at the massive debt that the liberal spending Republicans are generating, it is creating an oppressive burden on this nation. (Even the conservative Mr. Greenspan agrees with that conclusion.) Under Republican leadership the debt has doubled in size relative to the GDP. To call the doubling of our debt insignificant is at best demonstrating a gross misunderstanding of the situation."

Source: http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm

I am done bickering back and forth. We are likely the only people reading our responses as these have gotten way too long and are definitely off topic. I'm sure we can argue some other time on another topic.

Last edited by Bobby_Light; 06-22-2008 at 03:28 PM. Reason: typo
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:34 PM.




m3post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST