well there are SOME people that think America has great qualities
frank_black
Posts: 156
Dwight Shrute: I think one of the greatest things about modern America is the computerization of medical records. As a volunteer sheriff, I can look up anyone's psychiatric records or surgical histories. Yeast infections... there are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we’re downriver... from that old bread factory.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
-
thats kinda funny. on a serious note, I seem to be one of the few here who believe the title of your thread.0
-
jlew24asu wrote:thats kinda funny. on a serious note, I seem to be one of the few here who believe the title of your thread.
it's a tough crowd in here, i was just trying to lighten up the mood...i guess i'll leave you hardcore political fans alone
0 -
jlew24asu wrote:thats kinda funny. on a serious note, I seem to be one of the few here who believe the title of your thread.
No, you're not. You're just someone that doesn't handle other peoples opinions very well, and then state that because they don't agree with you that they are "al queda sympathyzer" and should "get out of the US".
But back to the main quote, Dwight is the man...0 -
ledvedderman wrote:No, you're not. You're just someone that doesn't handle other peoples opinions very well, and then state that because they don't agree with you that they are "al queda sympathyzer" and should "get out of the US".
But back to the main quote, Dwight is the man...
well when people think bush is WORSE then osama, I tend to get upset. hate bush all you want but worese then osama bin laden? sorry if you think that you shouldnt be living here. not many people have good things to say about america. I happen to believe its the greatest country in the world, and i'm PROUD to be an american0 -
jlew24asu wrote:well when people think bush is WORSE then osama, I tend to get upset. hate bush all you want but worese then osama bin laden? sorry if you think that you shouldnt be living here. not many people have good things to say about america. I happen to believe its the greatest country in the world, and i'm PROUD to be an american
When you see me post "Osama Bin Laden is much better than George Bush", than you can get upset.0 -
ledvedderman wrote:When you see me post "Osama Bin Laden is much better than George Bush", than you can get upset.
nah, you never upset me. thankfully you havent said that. others have0 -
jlew24asu wrote:well when people think bush is WORSE then osama, I tend to get upset. hate bush all you want but worese then osama bin laden?
So true jlew, it amazes me that fellow American citizens can actually believe that the leaders of this country will wake up in the morning and think how they can plot and plan- put countless lives in danger- exercise military force- just to put $$ in their and their friends pockets. Sure their are evil people in the world but get real .Don't Ignore The Rusted Signs
1998 Seattle 7-21
2000 Seattle 11-06
2003 Seattle Benaroya 10-22
2005 Gorge 9-1
2006 Gorge 7-230 -
old and in the way wrote:jlew24asu wrote:well when people think bush is WORSE then osama, I tend to get upset. hate bush all you want but worese then osama bin laden?
So true jlew, it amazes me that fellow American citizens can actually believe that the leaders of this country will wake up in the morning and think how they can plot and plan- put countless lives in danger- exercise military force- just to put $$ in their and their friends pockets. Sure their are evil people in the world but get real .
What has this administration to deserve our trust?
To even good men, greed and power can turn their hearts black. I think that is the case of this administration0 -
frank_black wrote:Dwight Shrute: I think one of the greatest things about modern America is the computerization of medical records. As a volunteer sheriff, I can look up anyone's psychiatric records or surgical histories. Yeast infections... there are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we’re downriver... from that old bread factory.
"... canine AIDS??""Of course it hurts. You're getting fucked by an elephant."0 -
old and in the way wrote:ledvedderman wrote:well when people think bush is WORSE then osama, I tend to get upset. hate bush all you want but worese then osama bin laden?
What has this administration to deserve our trust?
To even good men, greed and power can turn their hearts black. I think that is the case of this administration
so what are you implying? they want power and are greedy, hence "turning their hearts black". meaning they are capable of sitting in a room together and planning out the sept 9/11 attacks?
thats fine if you dont trust them, but would they kill thousands of innocent americans on our own soil?
I happen to trust the administration to defend us from what I believe is the true threat, el queda.
They also have managed to keep our economy extremely strong in the face of rising interest rates and record high gas prices.
People forget to remember that our country has NOT been attacked since 9/11. Bush is responsible for protecting americans. what would people say is el queda somehow managed to hit us once a year since 2001 on our soil. people would be screaming how bad a job he is doing at protecting us. or if the economy fell into a deep rescession due to his tax cuts that everyone hates. neither has happened.
2 things really bother me about Bush and his administration. One is the Iraq fiasco. there are alot of people to blame about this one. while I feel we should stay and fight el queda, I now feel that threat is nearly gone. its all sunni's and shiites and american soliders are almost caught in the crossfire instead of being the target. its time to help how we can and get the fuck out.
the other is Katrina. all the planning in the world didnt prepare us for that disaster. the blame starts with the local leaders and then to bush and Co. that was just all out bad on every level.0 -
jlew24asu wrote:old and in the way wrote:
People forget to remember that our country has NOT been attacked since 9/11.
Our country HAD NOT been attacked on our own soil by anyone other than an American since the WTC bombing on 1993, 3 months after Bill Clinton took office. That is over 8 years we were not attacked at home, but do you see anyone giving Clinton praise from preventing another attack.0 -
jlew24asu wrote:so what are you implying? they want power and are greedy, hence "turning their hearts black". meaning they are capable of sitting in a room together and planning out the sept 9/11 attacks?
thats fine if you dont trust them, but would they kill thousands of innocent americans on our own soil?
I happen to trust the administration to defend us from what I believe is the true threat, el queda.
They also have managed to keep our economy extremely strong in the face of rising interest rates and record high gas prices.
People forget to remember that our country has NOT been attacked since 9/11. Bush is responsible for protecting americans. what would people say is el queda somehow managed to hit us once a year since 2001 on our soil. people would be screaming how bad a job he is doing at protecting us. or if the economy fell into a deep rescession due to his tax cuts that everyone hates. neither has happened.
2 things really bother me about Bush and his administration. One is the Iraq fiasco. there are alot of people to blame about this one. while I feel we should stay and fight el queda, I now feel that threat is nearly gone. its all sunni's and shiites and american soliders are almost caught in the crossfire instead of being the target. its time to help how we can and get the fuck out.
the other is Katrina. all the planning in the world didnt prepare us for that disaster. the blame starts with the local leaders and then to bush and Co. that was just all out bad on every level.
read the wolfowizt doctrine written in the early 90's, then read pnac's policy paper from 9/00. it clearly states their goals and ambitionsstandin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way0 -
jlew24asu wrote:did you have a point?
yes, that if you actually read what they actually SAY their goals and plans are then maybe you wouldn't be so in the dark.
you act dismissive that they want power, yet they outline a plan for pretty much world domination and control over the resources...hell, they even say it's our dutystandin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way0 -
jlew24asu wrote:I have read their goals and plans, and they dont scare or intimidate me like they do you.
what were they?standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way0 -
jlew24asu wrote:I have read their goals and plans, and they dont scare or intimidate me like they do you.
But you disagree that these mens hearts are turned black with the thought of power and world domination?0 -
El_Kabong wrote:what were they?
The PNAC Web site states the group's "fundamental propositions", which are
"American leadership is good both for America and for the world"
"such leadership requires military strength, diplomatic energy and commitment to moral principle"
"too few political leaders today are making the case for global leadership."
The PNAC also made a statement of principles at their 1997 inception.
As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world's pre-eminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?
The PNAC advocates "a policy of military strength and moral clarity" which includes
A significant increase of US military spending.
Strengthening ties with US allies and challenging regimes hostile to US interests and values.
Promoting the cause of political and economic freedom outside the US.
Preserving and extending an international order friendly to US security, prosperity and principles.
The PNAC and its members had long called for the United States to abandon the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty between the US and the Soviet Union, from which the US withdrew in 2002. The PNAC also proposes to control the new "international commons" of space and "cyberspace" and pave the way for the creation of a new military service — U.S. Space Forces — with the mission of space control. In 1998, Donald Rumsfeld chaired a bipartisan commission on the US Ballistic Missile Threat toward advancement of these goals. It is unclear how "space control" will affect US adherence to the Outer Space Treaty. President George W. Bush stated in his address to the nation on September 11, 2006 that the war on terror "will set the course for this new century and determine the destiny of millions across the world."0 -
jlew24asu wrote:The PNAC Web site states the group's "fundamental propositions", which are
"American leadership is good both for America and for the world"
"such leadership requires military strength, diplomatic energy and commitment to moral principle"
"too few political leaders today are making the case for global leadership."
The PNAC also made a statement of principles at their 1997 inception.
As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world's pre-eminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?
The PNAC advocates "a policy of military strength and moral clarity" which includes
A significant increase of US military spending.
Strengthening ties with US allies and challenging regimes hostile to US interests and values.
Promoting the cause of political and economic freedom outside the US.
Preserving and extending an international order friendly to US security, prosperity and principles.
The PNAC and its members had long called for the United States to abandon the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty between the US and the Soviet Union, from which the US withdrew in 2002. The PNAC also proposes to control the new "international commons" of space and "cyberspace" and pave the way for the creation of a new military service — U.S. Space Forces — with the mission of space control. In 1998, Donald Rumsfeld chaired a bipartisan commission on the US Ballistic Missile Threat toward advancement of these goals. It is unclear how "space control" will affect US adherence to the Outer Space Treaty. President George W. Bush stated in his address to the nation on September 11, 2006 that the war on terror "will set the course for this new century and determine the destiny of millions across the world."
they also said:
this administrations plans in 92 <well, not the administration per se, just cheney, rummy, wolfowitz, perle, libby, addington....>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfowitz_Doctrine
Wolfowitz Doctrine is a pseudo-name given to the initial version of the Defense Planning Guidance for the 1994-99 fiscal years (dated Feb 18, 1992) authored by U.S. Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Paul Wolfowitz and his deputy Scooter Libby.
Not intended for public release, it was leaked to The New York Times on March 7th, 1992 and sparked a public controversy about U.S. foreign and defense policy. The document was widely criticized as imperialist as the document outlined a policy of unilateralism and pre-emptive military action to suppress potential threats from rogue nations and prevent any other nation from rising to superpower status.
The doctrine announces the U.S’s status as the world’s only remaining superpower following the collapse of the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War and proclaims its main objective to be retaining that status.
"Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to general global power."
U.S. Primacy
The doctrine establishes the U.S’s leadership role within the new world order.
"The U.S. must show the leadership necessary to establish and protect a new order that holds the promise of convincing potential competitors that they need not aspire to a greater role or pursue a more aggressive posture to protect their legitimate interests. In non-defense areas, we must account sufficiently for the interests of the advanced industrial nations to discourage them from challenging our leadership or seeking to overturn the established political and economic order. We must maintain the mechanism for deterring potential competitors from even aspiring to a larger regional or global role."
Unilateralism
The doctrine downplays the value of international coalitions.
"Like the coalition that opposed Iraqi aggression, we should expect future coalitions to be ad hoc assemblies, often not lasting beyond the crisis being confronted, and in many cases carrying only general agreement over the objectives to be accomplished. Nevertheless, the sense that the world order is ultimately backed by the U.S. will be an important stabilizing factor."
Pre-emptive Intervention
The doctrine stated the U.S’s right to intervene when and where it believed necessary.
"While the U.S. cannot become the world's policeman, by assuming responsibility for righting every wrong, we will retain the preeminent responsibility for addressing selectively those wrongs which threaten not only our interests, but those of our allies or friends, or which could seriously unsettle international relations."
Oil
The doctrine clarified the strategic value of the Middle East and Southwest Asia.
"In the Middle East and Southwest Asia, our overall objective is to remain the predominant outside power in the region and preserve U.S. and Western access to the region's oil."
most of these same ppl's vision for america as stated in their september 2000 policy paper
http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf
btw, the head writer also wrote a book called Of Paradise and Power: America and Europe in the New World Order
On Space:
CONTROL THE NEW INTERNATIONAL COMMONS OF SPACE AND CYBERSPACE, and pave the way for the creation of a new military service “ U.S. Space Forces“ with the mission of space control.
the United States must field a global system of missile defenses, divine ways to control the new international commons of space and cyberspace.
Control of space and cyberspace. Much as control of the high seas “ and the protection of international commerce“ defined global powers in the past, so will control of the new international commons be a key to
world power in the future:
Given the advantages U.S. armed forces enjoy as a result of this unrestricted use of space, it is shortsighted to expect potential adversaries to refrain from attempting to offset to disable or offset U.S. space capabilities. And with the proliferation of space know-how and related technology around the world, our adversaries will inevitably seek to enjoy many of the same space advantages in the future. Moreover, space commerce is a growing part of the global economy.
on Nukes:
But what should finally drive the size and character of our nuclear forces is not numerical parity with Russian capabilities but maintaining American strategic superiority and, with that superiority, a capability to deter possible hostile coalitions of nuclear powers. U.S. nuclear superiority is nothing to be ashamed of; rather, it will be an essential element in preserving American leadership in a more complex and chaotic world.
...................................................................
On Iraq:
Indeed, the United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.
...................................................
On paying for the weapons and bombs:
A sensible plan would add $15 billion to $20 billion to total defense spending annually through the Future Years Defense Program; this would result in a defense topline increase of $75 billion to $100 billion over that period, a small percentage of the $700 billion onbudget surplus now projected for that same period. We believe that the new president should commit his administration to a plan to achieve that level of spending within four years.
................................................................
On where to find this money:
New circumstances make us think that the report might have a more receptive audience now than in recent years. For the first time since the late 1960s the federal government is running a surplus. For most of the 1990s, Congress and the White House gave balancing the federal budget a higher priority than funding national security. In fact, to a significant degree, the budget was balanced by a combination of increased tax revenues and cuts in defense spending. The surplus expected in federal revenues over the next decade, however, removes any need to hold defense spending to some preconceived low level.
they even state:
Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event like a new Pearl Harbor.standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way0 -
again, they dont scare or intimidate me. they will in no way effect my life or make it worse. these people that scare you have been around a long time. get over it0
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.9K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.1K The Porch
- 275 Vitalogy
- 35.1K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.2K Flea Market
- 39.2K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help