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
 
Evolve Automotive
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      06-23-2008, 12:43 PM   #23
ganeil
Colonel
 
ganeil's Avatar
 
Drives: 328i Coupe
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Georgia

Posts: 2,050
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby_Light View Post
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.
Are you actually arguing that Congress did not give its consent for military operations when it passed the two authorizations for the use of military force? Or, are you just upset that they did not title the authorizations a declaration of war?

Again there is nothing magical about the words "declare war." A declaration of war does not have a different standard for passage than the authorizations that were passed.

Other than your incorrect notion that the pretense for the war was false, what exactly is your issue with its legality?

Quote:
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?
I am not responsible for the reading habits of US Senators. I only have a tiny bit of influence over the two that I get to vote for.

The cases you cited are on appeal. Let's see what the higher courts have to say before we pass judgment based on the decision of individual district court judges.

I am still not sure what tactics bother you or what freedoms you feel you are being denied based on the Patriot Act. Do you feel that the government should have a greater burden to investigate someone suspected of being an agent of a foreign power or a terrorist than they do someone suspected of laundering money or defrauding Medicare? I do not. If the FBI can get a roving wiretap on a suspected Mafia boss, I want them to be able to do the same to a suspected terrorist.

Quote:
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.
So we should not have gone to war against Germany and Italy in the Second World War? How about Korea? Had the Soviets invaded western Europe, should we have stood by and done nothing?

Our military presence is one factor that incites them our commercial and political presence are others. Are you advocating that people other than those we elect should be able to decide our foreign policy? We should give the terrorists a veto on how we relate to other nations?

I simply disagree that the war in Iraq was/is a mistake. Saddam Hussein was a threat to us and our interests. We are safer now that he is no longer in a position to threaten us.

Quote:
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.
The United States of America has no way to pay its debts?!?! That you will just have to explain to me. Have we ever defaulted on a loan? Is there some reason people invest in government bonds other than to be paid back?

We are a nation of producers and consumers. We are the wealthiest nation in the world because we produce the most wealth. Simply because we consume more than we produce and have to import the difference is not indicative of a problem.

Quote:
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?
We have hundreds(?) of bases around the world because our elected representatives and the (generally representative) governments of those places agree that they are of mutual benefit. Why would you want to remove the troops that help keep the peace in Korea, the Sinai, or have provided the foundation for NATO and retask them to stop people from entering our country to make a better life for themselves?

Cost plus contracts are desirable in some cases as are fixed cost contracts. Either is also subject to abuse. Effective oversight is required in either case.

Yes, I am a retired soldier currently working as a defense contractor.

Quote:
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.
But the Constitution states no preference for a non-interventionist foreign policy, does it? Our current policies are the result of the Congress and the president working together just as the Constitution specifies.

Quote:
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.
So, the Communists in China should be able to invade Taiwan without any response from the US? What if they decide they want the Philippines as well? Japan? We have no interest in any area of the world other than our own land mass?

Quote:
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.

...

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.
The website you cite has the graph that shows the current debt to GDP ration is approximately where it was in the late 1950's and early 1960's.

Ciao!
__________________
_____________

1974 2002tii
1978 320i
2007 328i
ganeil is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      06-23-2008, 02:22 PM   #24
dr335is
Brigadier General
 
Drives: GTI
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Dallas, TX

Posts: 4,973
iTrader: (4)

Bobby,

Why are you wasting your time?
Both responses -- from you and from Ganeil are educated and well constructed. However, one is completely unrealistic. I simply cannot believe that even he believes in what he types, otherwise, he shoud seek some serious help...

All I can say is WOW...

Comparing China/Tibet (China's sovereign territory) example with the US invasion ot Korea, Vietnam, Iraq... INSANITY
"Why would you want to remove our bases around the world" even though the "host" countries want us out of there = INSANITY
"We're paying off our debts" yet it doubled in 8 years as compared to previous 30 years!!! = INSANITY
"Saddam Hussein was a threat to us and our interests. We are safer now that he is no longer in a position to threaten us." SH never hurt us, never attacked us and there is no proof he ever planned to do so. = INSANITY

The rest is a lane BULLSHIT
dr335is is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      06-23-2008, 02:51 PM   #25
Bobby_Light
Major
 
Bobby_Light's Avatar
 
Drives: E36 M3
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SoCal

Posts: 1,353
iTrader: (14)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganeil View Post
Are you actually arguing that Congress did not give its consent for military operations when it passed the two authorizations for the use of military force? Or, are you just upset that they did not title the authorizations a declaration of war?

Again there is nothing magical about the words "declare war." A declaration of war does not have a different standard for passage than the authorizations that were passed.

Other than your incorrect notion that the pretense for the war was false, what exactly is your issue with its legality?
I'm back!! Tried to PM you my response, but it was too long for a PM.

The Congress did not declare war as required by the Constitution. That means it is an undeclared war. There are no magical words, but there is a black and white magical procedure found in the Constitution that needs to take place to officially put this country into war. The Congress (those that vote to continue to fund the war) and the President are both at fault for continuing this unending, undeclared "war on terror."

The pretense for the Iraq was weapons of mass destruction. There weren't any! Iraq was literally no threat to us. They had a weak military and no connection to 9/11 whatsoever. What are we there for?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganeil View Post
I am not responsible for the reading habits of US Senators. I only have a tiny bit of influence over the two that I get to vote for.

The cases you cited are on appeal. Let's see what the higher courts have to say before we pass judgment based on the decision of individual district court judges.

I am still not sure what tactics bother you or what freedoms you feel you are being denied based on the Patriot Act. Do you feel that the government should have a greater burden to investigate someone suspected of being an agent of a foreign power or a terrorist than they do someone suspected of laundering money or defrauding Medicare? I do not. If the FBI can get a roving wiretap on a suspected Mafia boss, I want them to be able to do the same to a suspected terrorist.
It doesn't phase you that Senators aren't even reading the bills they are voting on particularly ones that involve spying on Americans secretly. It blows my fucking mind that this is allowed.

I'm not a terrorist. The government can have a wiretap on my phone if they wanted to for no reason. Why would I like being spied on? I don't want to live in a police state. The Patriot Act is clearly controversial and many feel it is unconstitutional. I am not alone in that sentiment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganeil View Post
So we should not have gone to war against Germany and Italy in the Second World War? How about Korea? Had the Soviets invaded western Europe, should we have stood by and done nothing?

Our military presence is one factor that incites them our commercial and political presence are others. Are you advocating that people other than those we elect should be able to decide our foreign policy? We should give the terrorists a veto on how we relate to other nations?

I simply disagree that the war in Iraq was/is a mistake. Saddam Hussein was a threat to us and our interests. We are safer now that he is no longer in a position to threaten us.
We got into WWII because of Pearl Harbor. Japan attacked us remember. If we are not attacked or there is a clear imminent attack on us, we should remain home and protect ourselves. If our allies are attacked, we may be called upon to take action, but that would be on a case by case basis.

Why are we so prideful as a nation? If getting out of the Arab world would make us safer, then yes, the terrorists have "won". Isn't the safety of our people the most important thing? The people we have elected are complete morons and haven't done much to improve anything. The more the government sticks its nose into things, the more they screw things up. Terrible economy, huge national debt, soldiers dying, inflation, and removal of personal liberties. Thanks elected officials. Job well done.

Saddam had NO means of ever attacking the US. Their military was a fucking joke. They didn't have WMDs. Now we are less safe with more enemies and have a failing economy. Good move. We made Iraq safer for Iraqis, and it cost American taxpayer money and American lives to do so. That is a mistake.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganeil View Post
The United States of America has no way to pay its debts?!?! That you will just have to explain to me. Have we ever defaulted on a loan? Is there some reason people invest in government bonds other than to be paid back?

We are a nation of producers and consumers. We are the wealthiest nation in the world because we produce the most wealth. Simply because we consume more than we produce and have to import the difference is not indicative of a problem.
Yeah, America has no way to pay its debts. The only way to reduce debt is for the federal budget's expenditures to cease to exceed its revenues. It won't happen!! The government spends more money than it receives. The national debt used to financed with 30 year treasury bonds, now it's financed with 2 yr. T bills but we no longer owe ourselves, we owe foreign nations.

We consume everything and don't produce anything. We spend, spend, spend and don't save. We borrow money from Asia and print paper with no backing. It's phoney money that is why inflation is so high and our dollar is losing value.

This is TRUTH. Watch this.


We are quickly losing our status as the world's wealthiest nation. Wealthy nations have a strong currency; the dollar is FALLING and will continue to fall. China (a producer of goods) is going to eclipse us within ten years as the wealthiest country. They are what the US was one hundred years ago - a country that is on the rise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganeil View Post
We have hundreds(?) of bases around the world because our elected representatives and the (generally representative) governments of those places agree that they are of mutual benefit. Why would you want to remove the troops that help keep the peace in Korea, the Sinai, or have provided the foundation for NATO and retask them to stop people from entering our country to make a better life for themselves?

Cost plus contracts are desirable in some cases as are fixed cost contracts. Either is also subject to abuse. Effective oversight is required in either case.

Yes, I am a retired soldier currently working as a defense contractor.
We have 700-800 bases worldwide actually. Did you watch the video with the Iraqi lawmakers? They don't want us there; they don't need us. They can take care of themselves as can all other countries. Who wants another country's base in their country? If China has a base here, would that make us happy? Hell no. The thing is we think that spreading democracy and freedom around the world is what everyone wants. It's not!!! Other countries have different ideals and cultures.

Cost plus contracts are only desirable for the people getting rich off of them. These private firms are stealing Americans' money. It disgusts me.

Wow, a defense contractor. That explains your perspective. You probably want this war to go on forever - $$$$$$$. I thank you for your service in the military.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganeil View Post
But the Constitution states no preference for a non-interventionist foreign policy, does it? Our current policies are the result of the Congress and the president working together just as the Constitution specifies.

So, the Communists in China should be able to invade Taiwan without any response from the US? What if they decide they want the Philippines as well? Japan? We have no interest in any area of the world other than our own land mass?
The Constitution does not specify a direction to take with regard to foreign policy. Our founding father's were non interventionist, and I believe that is the proper direction for prosperity here at home.

Let me reiterate this again for you, if no one attacks us or an imminent attack is not foreseeable, we stay home. We are not the world's police. If something goes wrong somewhere that doesn't involve us or our closest allies, we stay home and protect our borders. End of story.

I think you're getting isolationism and non-interventionism mixed up.

"I believe our founding fathers had it right when they argued for peace and commerce between nations, and against entangling political and military alliances. In other words, noninterventionism.

Noninterventionism is not isolationism. Nonintervention simply means America does not interfere militarily, financially, or covertly in the internal affairs of other nations. It does not we that we isolate ourselves; on the contrary, our founders advocated open trade, travel, communication, and diplomacy with other nations.

Thomas Jefferson summed up the noninterventionist foreign policy position perfectly in his 1801 inaugural address: “Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations- entangling alliances with none.” Washington similarly urged that we must, “Act for ourselves and not for others,” by forming an “American character wholly free of foreign attachments.”"

http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2006/tst121806.htm

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganeil View Post
The website you cite has the graph that shows the current debt to GDP ration is approximately where it was in the late 1950's and early 1960's.

Ciao!
Let me tell you something about GDP. It's a phony figure. The government adjust for inflation when calculating these numbers, but they use phony numbers to calculate it because the inflation numbers they use are fraudulent (way lower than actual inflation). Wealth is not created by printing money.



Might want to read Peter Schiff's book
http://www.amazon.com/Crash-Proof-Ec.../dp/0470043601

Our wealth as a nation has decreased without a doubt. Our dollar is rapidly losing value, and foreign nations are buying our assets (not a good thing). Meanwhile, our national debt continues to grow and grow and grow. What do you think that does to the REAL debt to GDP ratio - more debt, lower ACTUAL GDP?

Another thing that is funny is that the Federal Reserve no longer reports M3 (not BMW M3) which is the entire supply of money within an economy. Why? Because it doesn't want the public to know how many phony dollars are actually in circulation so they can keep those printing presses running as if there was no consequence.
Bobby_Light is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      06-23-2008, 03:00 PM   #26
Bobby_Light
Major
 
Bobby_Light's Avatar
 
Drives: E36 M3
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SoCal

Posts: 1,353
iTrader: (14)

Quote:
Originally Posted by dr325i View Post
Bobby,

Why are you wasting your time?
Both responses -- from you and from Ganeil are educated and well constructed. However, one is completely unrealistic. I simply cannot believe that even he believes in what he types, otherwise, he shoud seek some serious help...

All I can say is WOW...

Comparing China/Tibet (China's sovereign territory) example with the US invasion ot Korea, Vietnam, Iraq... INSANITY
"Why would you want to remove our bases around the world" even though the "host" countries want us out of there = INSANITY
"We're paying off our debts" yet it doubled in 8 years as compared to previous 30 years!!! = INSANITY
"Saddam Hussein was a threat to us and our interests. We are safer now that he is no longer in a position to threaten us." SH never hurt us, never attacked us and there is no proof he ever planned to do so. = INSANITY

The rest is a lane BULLSHIT
I feel you. His responses make my blood boil that is why I can't help but respond. He is in a different world from you and I apparently.

He's a defense contractor. He wants this war to go on for eternity. Hell, let's attack Iran!
Bobby_Light is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      06-23-2008, 05:32 PM   #27
dr335is
Brigadier General
 
Drives: GTI
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Dallas, TX

Posts: 4,973
iTrader: (4)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby_Light View Post
I feel you. His responses make my blood boil that is why I can't help but respond. He is in a different world from you and I apparently.

He's a defense contractor. He wants this war to go on for eternity. Hell, let's attack Iran!
I wouldn't get upset over his lines -- he's nothing else but the war profiter not carrying about kids dying over there or his (or his neighbor's) kid's future...

He's not in a different world from you and I but from about 98% of world's population...
dr335is is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      06-23-2008, 05:41 PM   #28
ganeil
Colonel
 
ganeil's Avatar
 
Drives: 328i Coupe
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Georgia

Posts: 2,050
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby_Light View Post
I'm back!! Tried to PM you my response, but it was too long for a PM.

The Congress did not declare war as required by the Constitution. That means it is an undeclared war. There are no magical words, but there is a black and white magical procedure found in the Constitution that needs to take place to officially put this country into war. The Congress (those that vote to continue to fund the war) and the President are both at fault for continuing this unending, undeclared "war on terror."

The pretense for the Iraq was weapons of mass destruction. There weren't any! Iraq was literally no threat to us. They had a weak military and no connection to 9/11 whatsoever. What are we there for?
What is the practical difference you find in a joint resolution passed by both houses of Congress, one authorizing the use of military force and one declaring war? Are you merely concerned with the semantics or is there a meaningful distinction that you believe exists? The Congress was given the power to declare war as a check on the Executive's power as commander in chief. The founder's did not want the armed forces of this country committed without the expressed consent of both the Congress and the president. Clearly in the present case the Congress gave its consent by passing the AUMF's.

What in your mind would be different had the Congress called the joint resolutions declarations of war?

Existing stockpiles of WMD were one of the reasons stated for removing the Ba'athist regime in Iraq. only one. The rest of the reasons remain operative to this day.

Quote:
It doesn't phase you that Senators aren't even reading the bills they are voting on particularly ones that involve spying on Americans secretly. It blows my fucking mind that this is allowed.

I'm not a terrorist. The government can have a wiretap on my phone if they wanted to for no reason. Why would I like being spied on? I don't want to live in a police state. The Patriot Act is clearly controversial and many feel it is unconstitutional. I am not alone in that sentiment.
I am disgusted by all manner of congressional behavior but it is not something I lose sleep over because there is very little to nothing I can do about it.

You clearly do not understand the Patriot Act if you believe the government can wiretap your phone for no reason. That simply cannot be done under any provision of the law in question.


Quote:
We got into WWII because of Pearl Harbor. Japan attacked us remember. If we are not attacked or there is a clear imminent attack on us, we should remain home and protect ourselves. If our allies are attacked, we may be called upon to take action, but that would be on a case by case basis.
We needed to wage war on Germany and Italy because Japan attacked us? That does not seem right. Germany attacked the Soviet Union but they did go to war against Japan, did they?

Would it not be more economical in dollars and more importantly in lives to forward deploy our forces to deter attacks against our allies? Do you think Saddam would have invaded Kuwait had there been a battalion or two of US forces in Kuwait as we maintained after the war? Do you think we should have waited for the Warsaw Pact to pour through the Fulda Gap before we tried to get forces across the Atlantic to respond?

Quote:
Saddam had NO means of ever attacking the US. Their military was a fucking joke. They didn't have WMDs. Now we are less safe with more enemies and have a failing economy. Good move. We made Iraq safer for Iraqis, and it cost American taxpayer money and American lives to do so. That is a mistake.
Saddam had long standing ties with multiple terrorist organizations, including those affiliated with al Qaeda. He also had a history of using WMD. I would think that if Sept 11 taught us anything it is that you do not need a conventional military to inflict great damage. Saddam may have disposed of most of his stockpiles of chemical weapons (remember we have recovered over 500 shells filled with mustard and sarin) but he retained the capability to restart production in as little as six months. What do you believe the effect of another attack on the US, this time using mustard gas would have had on our nation in the months after 9/11?

Quote:
Yeah, America has no way to pay its debts. The only way to reduce debt is for the federal budget's expenditures to cease to exceed its revenues. It won't happen!! The government spends more money than it receives. The national debt used to financed with 30 year treasury bonds, now it's financed with 2 yr. T bills but we no longer owe ourselves, we owe foreign nations.
If our debt is financed by 2 yr T-bills and we are not defaulting on them, then we ARE paying our debt. Do I believe we should reduced our budget deficit, of course. Do I think the current war has significantly limited our ability to do so, the answer is no.

Quote:
We consume everything and don't produce anything. We spend, spend, spend and don't save. We borrow money from Asia and print paper with no backing. It's phoney money that is why inflation is so high and our dollar is losing value.

We are quickly losing our status as the world's wealthiest nation. Wealthy nations have a strong currency; the dollar is FALLING and will continue to fall. China (a producer of goods) is going to eclipse us within ten years as the wealthiest country. They are what the US was one hundred years ago - a country that is on the rise.
I have to ask how old you are? Have you ever experienced real systemic inflation like we had in the 1970's?

I maybe wrong but I believe we are in fact the largest producer of manufactured goods in the world followed by Japan.

What makes you believe the dollar will continue to fall? Most experts I speak to believe this is a temporary circumstances that could be rectified by concerted actions by national banks. I do not know why the administration has not started the process to restore the value of the dollar but I wish they would.

Quote:
We have 700-800 bases worldwide actually. Did you watch the video with the Iraqi lawmakers? They don't want us there; they don't need us. They can take care of themselves as can all other countries. Who wants another country's base in their country? If China has a base here, would that make us happy? Hell no. The thing is we think that spreading democracy and freedom around the world is what everyone wants. It's not!!! Other countries have different ideals and cultures.
The wishes and desires of individual Iraqi lawmakers is not the same as the wishes and desires of the Iraqi government. We are currently negotiating the with the Iraqi government the size and scope of our presence in Iraq after the the UN authorization expires. Is that not the way it should work? The two governments negotiating and coming to an agreement?

Not all nations can take care of themselves. Could Belgium defend itself against Germany in 1939? Kuwait from Iraq in 1991?

Quote:
Cost plus contracts are only desirable for the people getting rich off of them. These private firms are stealing Americans' money. It disgusts me.
So you would be willing to sign a contract to feed US soldiers for a fixed price without knowing how many soldiers you were expected to feed? That is the type of situation that cost plus contracts are usually used in.

Quote:
Wow, a defense contractor. That explains your perspective. You probably want this war to go on forever - $$$$$$$. I thank you for your service in the military.
It is somewhat offensive for you to say that I would want this war or any war to go on longer than necessary so that I could make money. It is also factually untrue. The work I do and the company I work for is not dependent in any way on continuing combat operations. Even if it were, I have experienced combat, I have seen the actual effects of war and I hate them. The difference between us is I have also seen the alternative and sometimes that is worse.

Quote:
The Constitution does not specify a direction to take with regard to foreign policy. Our founding father's were non interventionist, and I believe that is the proper direction for prosperity here at home.

Let me reiterate this again for you, if no one attacks us or an imminent attack is not foreseeable, we stay home. We are not the world's police. If something goes wrong somewhere that doesn't involve us or our closest allies, we stay home and protect our borders. End of story.
Which founding fathers are you referring to? John Adams who presided over the quasi-war (undeclared BTW) with France? Thomas Jefferson who went to war (again undeclared) against the Barbary states? Madison who invaded Canada? Or, maybe Monroe who famously intervened in the whole of the western hemisphere with the Monroe Doctrine?

How prosperous you think we would be had the Soviet Union expanded its sphere of control over western Europe after WWII? Do you believe we would be richer without Japan or South Korea as a trading partners?

Quote:
Let me tell you something about GDP. It's a phony figure. The government adjust for inflation when calculating these numbers, but they use phony numbers to calculate it because the inflation numbers they use are fraudulent (way lower than actual inflation). Wealth is not created by printing money.

....
If you are going to dispute the widely accepted and peer reviewed statistics then there is little basis for further discussion. We will be left with nothing but personal experience and anecdotes, neither of which can form the basis for such a discussion.

Neither or I nor anyone else I have heard has claimed that wealth is created by printing money. It is created through the creation of goods and services that someone else is willing to trade something of value for. Something the US does better than any other nation on Earth.
__________________
_____________

1974 2002tii
1978 320i
2007 328i
ganeil is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      06-23-2008, 07:09 PM   #29
Robertbog
Lieutenant
 
Robertbog's Avatar
 
Drives: 335i
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Dallas

Posts: 526
iTrader: (1)

The last thing the CIA or Bush want is to find Osama. The entire point of it is to secure our future in the oil industry, because we need it. Obama gets elected, Bush attacks Iran; McCain gets elected, McCain attacks Iran.

BTWganeil:

Congress's aproval rating is 19% bush's is 29%. It's obviously not a democracy and we obviously have no control over the system. Dont worry a 1/3 of the world is retarded, which includes that 19% - friends and family who have their heads up their asses too.

Wake the fuck up and stop trying to ruin my future over your ignorance.

I dont even want to address any of your comments about experts, mass media, or any of the things you cant except. Half the media is ex CIA, the other half is contracted by 3rd party cooperation founded by guess who. The expert's payroll is from a company that needs them to say certain things, and whatever they say is just to not induce a scare, to hide from the truth.

Dont be so blind, it's ridiculous, smell the coffee, wake up, dont be a slave. Work, eat, sleep, raise your kids, buy a car, retire with savings, "Repeat after me: I am Free."
Robertbog is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      06-23-2008, 07:46 PM   #30
Bobby_Light
Major
 
Bobby_Light's Avatar
 
Drives: E36 M3
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: SoCal

Posts: 1,353
iTrader: (14)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganeil View Post
What is the practical difference you find in a joint resolution passed by both houses of Congress, one authorizing the use of military force and one declaring war? Are you merely concerned with the semantics or is there a meaningful distinction that you believe exists? The Congress was given the power to declare war as a check on the Executive's power as commander in chief. Congress never declared this war though. The founder's did not want the armed forces of this country committed without the expressed consent of both the Congress and the president.Congress has the power to declare war. Not the president.Clearly in the present case the Congress gave its consent by passing the AUMF's.

What in your mind would be different had the Congress called the joint resolutions declarations of war?

The US has declared war 5 times in it's history. The Iraq war is not one of those times. Congress has authorized the Iraq war only by funding it (dumb-asses). Either way we are in an unending war. Whether it was declared or not officially is no longer important. We are in it; no turning back.

Existing stockpiles of WMD were one of the reasons stated for removing the Ba'athist regime in Iraq. only one. The rest of the reasons remain operative to this day.

Did we find WMDs in Iraq? No. End of discussion

I am disgusted by all manner of congressional behavior but it is not something I lose sleep over because there is very little to nothing I can do about it. You should lose sleep. We have morons running this country.

You clearly do not understand the Patriot Act if you believe the government can wiretap your phone for no reason. That simply cannot be done under any provision of the law in question.I confused the Patriot Act with the Protect America Act that allows warrently domestic wiretapping. Luckily it expired on Feb 18th. Have no fear though. Bush very recently expanded his ability to spy on the public by amending the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). The amended bill allows for mass and untargeted surveillance of Americans' communications.

We needed to wage war on Germany and Italy because Japan attacked us? That does not seem right. Germany attacked the Soviet Union but they did go to war against Japan, did they?We attacked Japan after Pearl Harbor. Japan was an ally of Germany and Italy. Italy and Germany declared war on us. We declare war on Italy and Germany.

Would it not be more economical in dollars and more importantly in lives to forward deploy our forces to deter attacks against our allies? Do you think Saddam would have invaded Kuwait had there been a battalion or two of US forces in Kuwait as we maintained after the war? Do you think we should have waited for the Warsaw Pact to pour through the Fulda Gap before we tried to get forces across the Atlantic to respond?So you want troops all over the world JUST IN CASE there is an attack against our allies? That's ridiculous.

Saddam had long standing ties with multiple terrorist organizations, including those affiliated with al Qaeda. He also had a history of using WMD. I would think that if Sept 11 taught us anything it is that you do not need a conventional military to inflict great damage. Saddam may have disposed of most of his stockpiles of chemical weapons (remember we have recovered over 500 shells filled with mustard and sarin) To date, however, Coalition forces have found mainly degraded artillery shells. On June 21, 2006, United States Senator Rick Santorum claimed that "We have found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, chemical weapons." According to the Washington Post, he was referring to 500 such shells "that had been buried near the Iranian border, and then long forgotten, by Iraqi troops during their eight-year war with Iran, which ended in 1988." That night, "intelligence officials reaffirmed that the shells were old and were not the suspected weapons of mass destruction sought in Iraq after the 2003 invasion." The shells had been uncovered and reported on in 2004. but he retained the capability to restart production in as little as six months. What do you believe the effect of another attack on the US, this time using mustard gas would have had on our nation in the months after 9/11?Are you serious? Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Get it right. Iraq was not going to come over here to gas us. They didn't have the ability to do so. They didn't have WMDs!

If our debt is financed by 2 yr T-bills and we are not defaulting on themprinting money to pay for them, borrowing from Asia, Asia buying up all of our currency, then we ARE paying our debt. When was the last time you heard about a reduction in our national debt. You never do because it doesn't happen. It grows and grows and grows. If we were paying back our debts, we would be decreasing the national debt. If you pay down your mortgage, you have less debt. Not more!Do I believe we should reduced our budget deficit, of course. Do I think the current war has significantly limited our ability to do so, the answer is no.You're insane. The war is a huge expenditure. $530+ billion. That's huge.

I have to ask how old you are? Have you ever experienced real systemic inflation like we had in the 1970's? I'm 27. You're older, big deal. Not wiser apparently. The inflation here will be worse than what occurred in the 70s. Watch. We have an idiot running the printing press and lowering interest rates when he should be increasing them.

I maybe wrong but I believe we are in fact the largest producer of manufactured goods in the world followed by Japan.Wrong. We have a trade deficit. Look at the clothes in your closet. Made in China. In the 70s we were the world's largest creditor. No longer. We are the world's BIGGEST debtor. That is not the sign of a powerful country.

What makes you believe the dollar will continue to fall? Most experts I speak to believe this is a temporary circumstances that could be rectified by concerted actions by national banks. I do not know why the administration has not started the process to restore the value of the dollar but I wish they would. Most "experts" you speak to are morons then. The dollar will continue to fall and not just in the short term. Hard times are ahead. We are borrowing and spending. Not producing and saving. There is no other place for the dollar to go as long as Bernanke can print money. If you increase the money supply, inflation happens which raises prices and devalues our money. We don't want MORE government action. They are the ones who got us into this mess!!!!!!!! Let the market correct itself. We need a recession to regain a base from which to grow again.

The wishes and desires of individual Iraqi lawmakers is not the same as the wishes and desires of the Iraqi government. The lawmakers are a part of the governmnet. Is Congress (our lawmakers) not part of the government? We are currently negotiating the with the Iraqi government the size and scope of our presence in Iraq after the the UN authorization expires. Is that not the way it should work? The two governments negotiating and coming to an agreement?Now you're for negotiating and coming to an agreement. We should have handled things diplomatically in the first place instead of plunging ourselves into an unending war. We marched into Iraq, we can march out.

Not all nations can take care of themselves. Could Belgium defend itself against Germany in 1939? Kuwait from Iraq in 1991? Let the countries above allies come to their defense. We are not the world police.

So you would be willing to sign a contract to feed US soldiers for a fixed price without knowing how many soldiers you were expected to feed? That is the type of situation that cost plus contracts are usually used in.It is a source for abuse. There is no cap on how much they can spend. They have a printing press and it keeps printing money with no end. This is not sound policy no matter how you look at it. Halliburton blew up cars if they need an oil change because if they bought a new one they get paid more. The executives stay at lavish resorts in the middle east and have huge meal catered. The more they spend the more they get paid. Ridiculous. All on my dime and your dime.

It is somewhat offensive for you to say that I would want this war or any war to go on longer than necessary so that I could make money. You are certainly not against the war.It is also factually untrue. The work I do and the company I work for is not dependent in any way on continuing combat operations. Even if it were, I have experienced combat, I have seen the actual effects of war and I hate them.I hate war too. That is why I am against it. The difference between us is I have also seen the alternative and sometimes that is worse.

Which founding fathers are you referring to? John Adams who presided over the quasi-war (undeclared BTW) with France? Thomas Jefferson who went to war (again undeclared) against the Barbary states? Or, maybe Monroe who famously intervened in the whole of the western hemisphere with the Monroe Doctrine? I do not support Nation Building. I am not a scholar regarding the above so I will not comment.

How prosperous you think we would be had the Soviet Union expanded its sphere of control over western Europe after WWII? We handled the Soviet Union diplomatically - without war. Do you believe we would be richer without Japan or South Korea as a trading partners?I am all for trade/commerce/travel among nations as I said in my previous reply.

If you are going to dispute the widely accepted and peer reviewed statistics then there is little basis for further discussion. They are clearly not widely accepted. I gave you a "peer" who called bullshit on them. Jim Rogers and Peter Schiff are well aware that the numbers produced by the government are fraudulent. They are also very respected, and have a majority of their investments out of the dollar. They have said this publicly many times. We will be left with nothing but personal experience and anecdotes, neither of which can form the basis for such a discussion.Believe whatever numbers you wish. I am getting my investments out of the dollar and into foreign investments as will other foreign nations and smart investors. Here is a good video so you can understand what is going on. THE DAY THE DOLLAR SET -


Neither or I nor anyone else I have heard has claimed that wealth is created by printing money. It is created through the creation of goods and services that someone else is willing to trade something of value for. Something the US does better than any other nation on Earth.We used to. No longer the case. We have a trade deficit. Too many malls not enough factories.
I hereby DECLARE that I am done with this conversation. For real this time.
Bobby_Light is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      06-23-2008, 09:38 PM   #31
ganeil
Colonel
 
ganeil's Avatar
 
Drives: 328i Coupe
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Georgia

Posts: 2,050
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby_Light View Post
The US has declared war 5 times in it's history. The Iraq war is not one of those times. Congress has authorized the Iraq war only by funding it (dumb-asses). Either way we are in an unending war. Whether it was declared or not officially is no longer important. We are in it; no turning back.
Maybe you missed this but in October of 2002 the Congress passed and the President signed the Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq which stated in part;
AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
(a) AUTHORIZATION.—The President is authorized to use the
Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary
and appropriate in order to—
(1) defend the national security of the United States against
the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and
(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council
resolutions regarding Iraq...."
This was not a funding bill for troops already engaged in combat. It was a an explicit endorsement of military action against Iraq before the first troops crossed into Iraq.

Quote:
I confused the Patriot Act with the Protect America Act that allows warrently domestic wiretapping. Luckily it expired on Feb 18th. Have no fear though. Bush very recently expanded his ability to spy on the public by amending the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). The amended bill allows for mass and untargeted surveillance of Americans' communications.
You are confused about more than just the terms of the Patriot Act. Nothing in FISA or its recent amendments allows for the untargeted surveillance of an American's domestic communications.

Quote:
We attacked Japan after Pearl Harbor. Japan was an ally of Germany and Italy. Italy and Germany declared war on us. We declare war on Italy and Germany.
But neither Germany nor Italy ever attacked the US did they?

Quote:
So you want troops all over the world JUST IN CASE there is an attack against our allies? That's ridiculous.
No, I want our elected representatives to evaluate the world situation and in consultation with our allies make an informed determination of where a forward deployment of our forces is in the national interest.

Quote:
Are you serious? Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Get it right. Iraq was not going to come over here to gas us. They didn't have the ability to do so. They didn't have WMDs!
Where did I claim or even intimate that Iraq had anything to do with 9/11? But keep attacking that strawman if it makes you feel better.

What changed after 9/11 is the level of threat we were willing accept without actively confronting. Iraq had a history of using WMD, a history of supporting international terrorists, and a history of plotting attacks against American targets. It had also proven itself immune to pressure from the international community. That created a threat that the people we elect to decide such things determined was no longer acceptable.

Quote:
You're insane. The war is a huge expenditure. $530+ billion. That's huge.
Huge in relation to what exactly? The GDP? The overall federal budget? $530 billion is a large number no doubt but you need to put it some perspective. In the context we are talking about it is by no measure big, never mind huge.

Quote:
I'm 27. You're older, big deal. Not wiser apparently. The inflation here will be worse than what occurred in the 70s. Watch. We have an idiot running the printing press and lowering interest rates when he should be increasing them.
I'll tell you what, when inflation, unemployment, and the prime rate are each in double figures you can PM and tell me how right you were. Until then...

Quote:
Wrong. We have a trade deficit. Look at the clothes in your closet. Made in China. In the 70s we were the world's largest creditor. No longer. We are the world's BIGGEST debtor. That is not the sign of a powerful country.
Having a trade deficit is not mutually exclusive with being the worlds top manufacturer. I personally never considered a textile industry indicative of a world class economy.

Quote:
Most "experts" you speak to are morons then.
They have a proven track record on such matters that I know and trust. Do you?

Quote:
The lawmakers are a part of the governmnet. Is Congress (our lawmakers) not part of the government?
Part of the government but NOT the government. Maybe you are not familiar with the way parliamentary systems work but not every member of parliament is a member of the ruling coalition or can speak for the government. Do individual congressmen set the foreign policy for the US?

Quote:
Now you're for negotiating and coming to an agreement. We should have handled things diplomatically in the first place instead of plunging ourselves into an unending war. We marched into Iraq, we can march out.
I have no objection with negotiating with other governments as long as there is a reasonable chance they will keep to their agreements. Saddam's record in such matters was such that no agreement was worth the paper it was printed on.

Quote:
Let the countries above allies come to their defense. We are not the world police.
I thought you were against alliances? Are you saying we should announce before hand all the countries we will aid if invaded? Isn't that what led the north Koreans to believe they were free to take the south?

Quote:
It is a source for abuse.
Of course it is. So are fixed cost contracts. Effective oversight is essential for any contract whether cost plus or fixed cost.

Quote:
I do not support Nation Building. I am not a scholar regarding the above so I will not comment.
So you would have opposed the Marshall Plan after WWII? We should have overthrown the Taliban and then walked away from Afghanistan?

You may want to read up before you throw around the "founders as non-interventionists" next time.

Quote:
We handled the Soviet Union diplomatically - without war.
I am sure the Koreans, the Vietnamese, the Salvadorans, Afghans, etc... will be happy to learn the Cold War ended without war. Do you honestly believe the Cold War would have followed the same path had we not stationed forces in Europe?

Quote:
I am all for trade/commerce/travel among nations as I said in my previous reply.
Unless a small minority objects and flies airplanes in buildings, then you say to hell with trade, commerce, and travel and go hide behind the ocean here in Fortress Americana.

Quote:
Believe whatever numbers you wish. I am getting my investments out of the dollar and into foreign investments as will other foreign nations and smart investors.
Good luck with your investments.

Quote:
We used to. No longer the case. We have a trade deficit. Too many malls not enough factories.
What is your obsession with a trade deficit?
__________________
_____________

1974 2002tii
1978 320i
2007 328i
ganeil is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      06-23-2008, 09:40 PM   #32
ganeil
Colonel
 
ganeil's Avatar
 
Drives: 328i Coupe
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Georgia

Posts: 2,050
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robertbog View Post
The last thing the CIA or Bush want is to find Osama. ...
Do the voices in your head always agree with each other? If not, how do you decide which to listen to?
__________________
_____________

1974 2002tii
1978 320i
2007 328i
ganeil is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      06-23-2008, 10:50 PM   #33
Robertbog
Lieutenant
 
Robertbog's Avatar
 
Drives: 335i
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Dallas

Posts: 526
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganeil View Post
Do the voices in your head always agree with each other? If not, how do you decide which to listen to?
Is fucking reason totally not a real thing for you? Does not believing in a cooperate machine make me crazy, I'm sorry let's pop you full of meds to make you "better". The CIA and Bush's father both know, and have released reports on the necessity of the Middle East for oil in the future. It isnt something the GOP nor the CIA nor the Bush's want to fuck up and it's definitely not something they deny either. Also where the fuck do you get off thinking the CIA does nothing? What the fuck do they do then? What the fuck are their meetings about with the Joint Chiefs and or the President?

You obviously know the answer, it's obviously not things that they release reports about. That's just to god damn complicated for some people out of georgia.


Stop avoiding being confronted. Be a man in a democracy, not an idiot. For all of our sakes please.
Robertbog is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      06-23-2008, 10:58 PM   #34
ganeil
Colonel
 
ganeil's Avatar
 
Drives: 328i Coupe
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Georgia

Posts: 2,050
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robertbog View Post
Is fucking reason totally not a real thing for you? Does not believing in a cooperate machine make me crazy, I'm sorry let's pop you full of meds to make you "better". The CIA and Bush's father both know, and have released reports on the necessity of the Middle East for oil in the future. It isnt something the GOP nor the CIA nor the Bush's want to fuck up and it's definitely not something they deny either. Also where the fuck do you get off thinking the CIA does nothing? What the fuck do they do then? What the fuck are their meetings about with the Joint Chiefs and or the President?

You obviously know the answer, it's obviously not things that they release reports about. That's just to god damn complicated for some people out of georgia.


Stop avoiding being confronted. Be a man in a democracy, not an idiot. For all of our sakes please.
Can someone please translate into English? Anyone, please?
__________________
_____________

1974 2002tii
1978 320i
2007 328i
ganeil is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      06-23-2008, 11:02 PM   #35
Robertbog
Lieutenant
 
Robertbog's Avatar
 
Drives: 335i
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Dallas

Posts: 526
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganeil View Post
Can someone please translate into English? Anyone, please?
Exactly my point. Cant wait to pick up after whatever you leave behind.
Robertbog is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      06-24-2008, 05:07 AM   #36
Negotiator
Lieutenant
 
Negotiator's Avatar
 
Drives: 07 GTI
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Fairfax, VA

Posts: 539
iTrader: (0)

You're dumb.

P.S
Props on not capitalizing god.
Negotiator is offline   Ukraine
0
Reply With Quote
      06-24-2008, 06:48 AM   #37
dr335is
Brigadier General
 
Drives: GTI
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Dallas, TX

Posts: 4,973
iTrader: (4)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganeil View Post
Do the voices in your head always agree with each other? If not, how do you decide which to listen to?
WOW, look who's talking!
dr335is is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
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 01:30 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