Flash: OBAMA IS PRESIDENT!!!

[Kptlt. Neuerburg]

Thats right Obama is now the President of the United States!!!! HAPPY TIMES ARE HERE AGAIN!:yep:

[Stealth Hunter]

Flash: Old News



Sorry, but it had to be done.:smug:

[kiwi_2005]

Just listening to Obama speak now on the 6pm news here. All i can say is WOW! I never thought he would make president. America you rock! :up:

Democrats / Republican whats the difference between the two.
Here we have two main parties National & Labour. National is more the pro american, support the Anzac's, less Politically correct. Labour is more save the whales, tree huggers, gobal warming, make peace not war. Labour has been in govenment for about 4 elections now:nope:

So Democrats and republicians anyone care to explain what is the difference between the two...:hmm:

[stabiz]

Preferably non of the hardliners.

[SUBMAN1]

Just listening to Obama speak now on the 6pm news here. All i can say is WOW! I never thought he would make president. America you rock! :up:

Democrats / Republican whats the difference between the two.
Here we have two main parties National & Labour. National is more the pro american, support the Anzac's, less Politically correct. Labour is more save the whales, tree huggers, gobal warming, make peace not war. Labour has been in govenment for about 4 elections now:nope:

So Democrats and republicians anyone care to explain what is the difference between the two...:hmm:Something similar to your Labour vs. National, though the line is so blurred, I can't tell myself lately. Repubs would follow your National. Demo's, your Labour.

The way you describe it, it sounds nearly identical in policy.

Though statistically, demo's like to go to war more.

-S

[baggygreen]

Just listening to Obama speak now on the 6pm news here. All i can say is WOW! I never thought he would make president. America you rock! :up:

Democrats / Republican whats the difference between the two.
Here we have two main parties National & Labour. National is more the pro american, support the Anzac's, less Politically correct. Labour is more save the whales, tree huggers, gobal warming, make peace not war. Labour has been in govenment for about 4 elections now:nope:

So Democrats and republicians anyone care to explain what is the difference between the two...:hmm:It's pretty similar kiwi, dems are labour, reps are national.

Just like across the se in oz Labor are the dems and Liberals are the reps.

[Onkel Neal]

Just listening to Obama speak now on the 6pm news here. All i can say is WOW! I never thought he would make president. America you rock! :up:

Democrats / Republican whats the difference between the two.
Here we have two main parties National & Labour. National is more the pro american, support the Anzac's, less Politically correct. Labour is more save the whales, tree huggers, gobal warming, make peace not war. Labour has been in govenment for about 4 elections now:nope:

So Democrats and republicians anyone care to explain what is the difference between the two...:hmm:

Republicans are like your Nationals, Democrats are like your Labor.

[Thomen]

Just listening to Obama speak now on the 6pm news here. All i can say is WOW! I never thought he would make president. America you rock! :up:

Democrats / Republican whats the difference between the two.
Here we have two main parties National & Labour. National is more the pro american, support the Anzac's, less Politically correct. Labour is more save the whales, tree huggers, gobal warming, make peace not war. Labour has been in govenment for about 4 elections now:nope:

So Democrats and republicians anyone care to explain what is the difference between the two...:hmm:
Republicans are like your Nationals, Democrats are like your Labor.

Don't they flip sides/policies every couple decades or so? Never really understood that.

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Obama is President.:down: :down: :down: :down: :down: :down:

I think I'm going to throw up.

[Ishmael]

Obama is President.:down: :down: :down: :down: :down: :down:

I think I'm going to throw up.

Sorry, I just can't help this.:

http://img240.imageshack.us/img240/9789/asshandedgop1do2.jpg

Here in New Mexico, where I registered 267 new voters personally, we also have Dem. Senator Tom Udall, and sweep of all three Congressional seats with Martin Heinrichs, Harry Teague and Ben Lujan.

I met Lt. Gov. Diane Denish last week with Teague and Udall. There's talk here of gov. Bill possibly moving up to Sec. of State and Sen. Jeff Bingaman as Secretary of Energy. I suggested to Denish she might consider Amb. Joe Wilson as a candidate to fill Bingaman's seat if he goes into the Obama cabinet. As a former Bush 41 Charge d'Affaires in Baghdad with vast experience in foreign service, it would make a good bipartisan choice and put a good man in the Senate for the Foreign Affairs or Intelligence Committees. Of course, my nominee for Attorney General would be David Iglesias.

[Onkel Neal]

Oh! rubbing it in, eh? :)

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Sorry, I just can't help this.:

http://img240.imageshack.us/img240/9789/asshandedgop1do2.jpg



Gloat as much as you like and enjoy the day.

A five to seven percent margin of victory certainly does not constitute any sort of demonstration that the Republicans have had their asses handed to them.

It remains to be seen if Obama can live up to his big pep-rally rhetoric.

Hopefully, it is more than just blind/pseudo optimism created by a man who felt absolutley at home saying anything he felt he needed to, to wedge himself into the presidency.

[Wolfehunter]

Goodluck Americans I hope you made the wise choice.

[kiwi_2005]

Sorry, I just can't help this.:

http://img240.imageshack.us/img240/9789/asshandedgop1do2.jpg


Gloat as much as you like and enjoy the day.

A five to seven percent margin of victory certainly does not constitute any sort of demonstration that the Republicans have had their asses handed to them.

It remains to be seen if Obama can live up to his big pep-rally rhetoric.

Hopefully, it is more than just blind/pseudo optimism created by a man who felt absolutley at home saying anything he felt he needed to, to wedge himself into the presidency.

Send Obama a GWX copy with the message 'You think you have a tough road ahead, you simply haven't play GWX'.... :arrgh!:

[UnderseaLcpl]

Well, it would seem that I have underestimated the Democratic electorate of this country. I had complete confidence that McCain would win, as much as I dislike him. Egg on my face:oops:

However, I would caution that Democratic presidencies combined with Democratic congress have yielded some of the greatest economic and social hardships this country has faced in the past century.


Right now, this country can ill-afford vast expenditures on social programs, as well as the inevitable continuing expenditures on Iraq, whatever the Dems may say about it. The combination of the banking system with the Federal government to the extent we know today is a recipe for a disaster of heretofore unseen proportions if mishandled. And that is the key. No matter who is president, it will only take one selfish plutocrat or bumbling fool to plunge this nation into an economic abysss that will take centuries (and wars) to recover from.

It would seem that America has been willing to give its' "leadership", since we evidently have such a thing, despite the efforts of our founders, the power to govern the currency, and the welfare of the people. Let us hope that it doesn't work out as disastrously as it has for every other nation that tried it.

One way or the other, It would appear that Barack Obama is now my commander-in-chief. With any luck, we won't have to deal with the situation we had last time there wasa Democratic president, congress, and a fiscal crisis. :nope:

[Christopher Snow]

Not yet. I still hold out hope Obama will be found to be Constitutionally ineligible to hold office.

[If you wonder what I'm blathering on about, ask yourself why KENYA is partying so hard tonight.]

A KENYAN born citizen CANNOT become POTUS (President of the United States) But don't tell them that until the party is over....

Only a "natural born US citizen" can.

Nor can and an INDONESIAN citizen become POTUS. Or even a "naturalized US citizen from Indonesia."

No. Only a "natural born US citizen" can. This is the same reason the current governor of California can never become POTUS--because he NOT a NATURAL BORN US citizen.

(And, yes...just in case you wondered: I AM talking about Barack Obama--it's alledged he might be either Kenyan born or Indonesian educated, either of which should make him ineligible to be POTUS under the terms of the US Constitution.

[Supreme Court decision probably upcoming].

Why does it matter? It's because this one, elected official is the ONLY one who will be in command of the US military (and all it's might). It's because he, ALONE, will be Commander-in-Cheif (and so he must be loyal ONLY to the United States (he can have no split/dual loyalties).

See "Article 2" of the US constitution (look for better sources, btw, than "Wikipedia")


CS

[PeriscopeDepth]

I thought all the political mud slinging would at least slow down with the election being over, not reach epic proportions. Maybe another week will do it?

PD

[baggygreen]

Not yet. I still hold out hope he will be found to be Constitutionally ineligible to hold office.

[If you wonder what I'm blathering on about, ask yourself why KENYA is partying so hard tonight.]

A KENYAN born citizen CANNOT become POTUS (President of the United States) But don't tell them that until the party is over....

Only a "natural born US citizen" can.

Nor can and an INDONESIAN citizen become POTUS. Or even a "naturalized US citizen from Indonesia."

No. Only a "natural born US citizen" can. This is the same reason the current governor of California can never become POTUS--because he NOT a NATURAL BORN US citizen.

(And, yes...just in case you wondered: I AM talking about Barack Obama)

Why does it matter? It's because this one, elected official is the ONLY one who will be in command of the US military (and all it's might). It's because he, ALONE, will be Commander-in-Cheif (and so he must be loyal ONLY to the United States (he can have no split/dual loyalties).

See "Article 2" of the US constitution (look for better sources, btw, than "Wikipedia")


CSMate, Obama has done nothing but create suspicion by refusing to produce solid evidence that he's a born citizen. Makes you wonder why he wouldn't simply whip out a copy??

Regardless, I suspepct that anything that represents him in a negative light will not see the light of day for at least a year, and even then there would be very little attention. Things like his birth cerrtificate will never see the light of day. Why? There are lots of people wondering...

It is simply beyond me to understand why he flatly refuses to produce it if he is, as he claims, born in the states.

[PeriscopeDepth]

His birth certificate has never seen the light of day? Really?

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/10/federal-judge-dismisses-obama.php

PD

[Christopher Snow]

It's not beyond my understanding if he has something to hide (and I think he does).

He hasn't produced any of his school records either, of course. Nor any records of how his schooling was financed.

But since the Mainsteam Media here in the US (THE MSM) has given him a free pass, he hasn't had to do so.

He's certainly HAS created suspicion by refusing to be forthcoming (but apparently not enough suspicion, because he was, nonetheless, elected tonight--too bad for the rest of the American Electorate--they deserve whatever they get, IMO, for failing to exercise "due diligence.").

I would agree, that, based on the pace of American jurisprudence (my sister is a lawyer, so I'm quite familiar with it), it will, indeed be a year, or more before there is any chance of the real truth being discovered and known to all.

So I won't wait--I'm bailing out now.


CS

[Christopher Snow]

His birth certificate has never seen the light of day? Really?

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/10/federal-judge-dismisses-obama.php

PD
No, not yet it hasn't.

Judge Surrick did NOT request or require of Barack Obama that he produce a "certified, vault copy" of his birth certificate, no. And despite Berg request that he do so (so, as yet, Obama has still been given a free pass on the question--AND DESPITE the provisions and requrements of Article 2 of the original US Constitution, Obama has STILL not yet been required to show he truly IS a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN by producing evidence of a "certified vault copy" of his birth certificate---read the decision and you will realize I am right).

Or, more correctly, Berg himself is right: Because he has not yet been required to produce proof his IS eligible to be POTUS, we are headed for a real "Constitutional Crisis" over the matter.

As far seeing as our forefathers were, I suspect they failed to imagine a scenario in which a citizen honestly contesting a candidates eligibility could possibly be ruled "not to have standing to do so."

I think it would have caused Franklin himself a heart-attack.

[Personally, I think Ben Franklin would be rolling over in his grave at the idea such a challenge would be disallowed on a mere technicality, but then...our forefathers were real men...and we are but poorly raised children by comparison.]

Iin answer to your exact question: No. As of today his birth certificate has not yet seen the light of day. No.

Judge Surrick DENIED the request to produce (and see) it.

He denied it because he decided Berg did not "have standing" to demand to see it.

FWIW, it's my own belief Obama is still hiding his BC because he cannot prove he IS a Natural Born US citizen--I believe he CANNOT prove he was born in Hawaii (but that's just my own view).

-------

I read earlier tonight that one of the third party presidential or vice-presidential candidates has now filed his own lawsuit (and presumably as a candidate who had LOST this election, he WOULD, indeed, have standing to demand to see this birth certificate...so we'll see how that plays out).

www.americasright.com (http://www.americasright.com) or www.obamacrimes.com (http://www.obamacrimes.com) for more info.

For my part I have no personal stake in any of these cases--I only hope Obama WILL be found to be ineligible to be POTUS in the end (because I believe he IS ineligible).

[I wear my own "tinfoil hat" just above my periscope :D ]


CS

[Biggles]

Good for you America. IMHO that is.:yep:

[PeriscopeDepth]

His birth certificate has never seen the light of day? Really?

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/10/federal-judge-dismisses-obama.php

PD
Surrick did NOT request or require of Barack Obama that he produce a "certified, vault copy" of his birth certificate, no.

So, in answer to your exact question: No. As of today his birth certificate has never seen the light of day. No.

Judge Surrick DENIED the request to produce (and see) it.

He denied it because Berg did not "have standing."

-------

I read earlier tonight that one of the third party candidates had filed his own lawsuit (and presumably as a candidate who had LOST this election, he WOULD have standing...so we'll see.

www.americasright.com (http://www.americasright.com) or www.obamacrimes.com (http://www.obamacrimes.com) for more info.

For my part I have no stake in any of these cases--only hope Obama WILL be found to be ineligible to be POTUS in the end.

[I wear my own "tinfoil hat" just above my periscope :D ]


CS
I can't believe you actually think this guy isn't an American citizen. I'm fairly sure a few people have looked very hard to find these sorts of things by now. You could certainly hope for that outcome. But in this day and age, a rational man has to realize that Obama not being a US citizen is not likely. Possible yes, but it's a REAL, REAL long shot.

http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/5626

PD

[Jimbuna]

Here's hoping the US have made the right choice :hmm:

[Christopher Snow]

I think he is not...or at least suspect he is not...a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN, within the meaning of Article 2 of the original, unaltered US constitution, yes.

Yes I do.

To your point: People HAVE been looking for quite a while now, yes. And they have been generally stymied by any, and all legal blocks which could be thrown up to thwart them.

The practice of law (even in the US) is usually ugly. Quite bloody, even.

I believe his US citizenship was renounced by his mother, Ann Dunham, and his Indonesion father, Lolo Sotero, when he was relocated to Indonesia at age 5.

At best, then, he would only have been able to RECLAIM his US citizenship (thereby becoming a naturalized citizen, and one ineligible to hold the office of POTUS) if he took steps to do so at age 18 (and evidence suggests he did NOT do so, which means he is still an Indonesian citizen today, and is, in fact, ineligible even to hold the office of US Senator from Illinois--I suspect he is a true "illegal alien") .

Please note that he has gone out of his way NOT to make pertinent information available on this subject. He has NOT produced any of his birth records (as John McCain so willingly did when queried on the same issue)--he has been ANYTHING but forthcoming on the matter...and think there is a reason.

-------------

FWIW, there is at least some chance too (and some suspicion even on my own part that he IS, indeed, an American citizen after all...because he might WELL have been parented by a US father. But it willl require a paternity test (genetic test) to prove or disprove it, and so far, Obama has not been forthcoming here either (oh, what a surprise)).

Thia second theory suggests he is NOT the son of Kenyan National (UK citizen) Barack Obama Sr. at all (and, moreover, he probably knows it).

If you have ever seen a photo of "Barack Obama Sr." you will have a hard time (I think) conjuring up a picture of ANY "white mother" who could be paired with him to produce Obama Jr.s as a child.

[yes, I realize this sounds as if I've gone even further off the "very deepest end".. ..but bear with me. It should, at least, amuse you. :D]

Barack's mother, Ann Dunham was seventeen when she (allegedly) had a sexual relationship with an American Civil Rights activist, one "Frank Marshall Davis."

Davis was a close friend of the Dunham family, and he lived very close by too in Seattle.

Moreover, Davis was not immune to this sort of temptation--he had yet another alleged relationship with girl of merely thirteen, I gather.

Anyway, the theory goes that Davis fathered Obama Jr by Ann Dunham...but because Davis was already married to a white woman, and because he was a well known civil-rights leader, the three families: Dunham, Davis, and Obama together, all agreed to register Obama as Baracks "father of record" on his birth certificate, rather than compromise Frank Davis himself.

Ok...it sounds completely wacko, I agree...

....until you actually SEE pictures of Barcack Obama Sr. and Frank Marshall Davis, set side-by-side. At that point, and in my view, this "wacko theory" becomes completely plausible.

And as to WHY would it have been covered up in the first place? Because Frank Marshall Davis, American Civil Rights activist was an AVOWED MARXIST/COMMUNIST!

Hey...it's not my theory, but just one I stumbled upon (at the "hillaryclintonforum.net")

So....take it as just another "conspiracy theory," if that's your tendency.

Write me off as just another wacko too, if you must :D (but hopefully, you'll realize I've been trying to be somewhat fair and objective too...so maybe you won't.

----------

And yet, I cannot help but notice a STRONG resemblance between this "alledged father" Frank Marshall Davis and Obama Jr...while at the same time failing to find ANY POSSIBLE resemblance between "Obama Sr." and his supposed son (at least any that could occur between one single generation).

Moreover, I would be willing to be a fairly large sum of cash on a paternity test to this effect too.

I'm sorry, but I just cannot conjure up a picture/imagine ANY white woman who could have produced the son I know as Barack Obama Jr, from that father.

But I can easily see resemblances between Davis and Obama (the decending lines under the nose, the raised seam through the center of the upper lip, the overall shape of the head, the mutual furrowed brow, skin tone....yadda yadda yadda.....

See for yourselves:

Barack Obama Sr. photo: http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://bp3.blogger.com/_Bmqw646nwsE/R7Gtx8dBKNI/AAAAAAAACVk/931E7p5QYqQ/s400/barack%252Bsr_.jpg&imgrefurl=http://wenjaz2.blogspot.com/2008/02/barack-obamas-mom-and-dad-and-michelle.html&h=400&w=264&sz=25&hl=en&start=9&um=1&usg=__QkDJy1wAibmgyZceJYVLnclcOEc=&tbnid=ZgLmswSNnMoZ9M:&tbnh=124&tbnw=82&prev=/images%3Fq%3DBarack%2BObama%2BSr.%26um%3D1%26hl%3D en%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dcom.ubuntu:en-US:official%26sa%3DX

Frank Marshall Davis photo:
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.blackpast.org/files/blackpast_images/Davis_Frank_Marshall.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.blackpast.org/%3Fq%3Daah/davis-frank-marshall-1905-1987&h=500&w=404&sz=25&tbnid=5lIE2fMTaLgJ::&tbnh=130&tbnw=105&prev=/images%3Fq%3DFrank%2BMarshall%2BDavis%2Bphoto&usg=__jeQseAkZPq5agB4WJBOZH9OBOq0=&sa=X&oi=image_result&resnum=3&ct=image&cd=1


CS

[Bewolf]

So Obama has won, and big time at that. Can't say I am dissapointed, even though it will get more rough in Europe now considering Afghanistan. But that's something I am more then willing to take if it means the US comes back into the club of nations respecting human rights and global rules.

Voting Obama alone raised the US reputation by a big margin practically overnight. You guys voted a black president. Big kudos to that, I did not see that coming. Basicly threw a ot of clichés out of the window into the faces of those thinking the US was still too racist. That alone was worth it already, if not anything else.

If I were you, and that includes republicans, I'd be grateful for this already. And that Obama, unlike Bush, also embraces the other party. From an outsiders view, national unity is more then needed in the US right now to tackle the problems. I personally want to see the US come to it's former glory again, it's moreal authority and it's leadership role in the west. For sure better then Russia or China as an alternative. And now that Bush is gone, there is a real possibility of this beeing achieved. McCain was a good man, I respect him, even if he got sucked into his partys habits lately, which ultimately was his downfall. For this reason he would simply be seen as Bush 2.0 abroad.

For what it's worth, americas self healing still works. That was the case after the McCarthy years, and I am very positive this is in effect now. Good times ahead.

Gratulations to Obama.

[Konovalov]

This citizen thing has been discussed here before in earlier threads and has not been shown to me as a compelling argument against Senator Obama. Apart from the flimsy claim itself it looks like a desperate act by a small minority who do not wish to see Senator Obama elected as President of the United States of America.

But lets say that the claim that Obama is not a US citizen was true. Why did the Clinton camp kill off the Obama challenge during the Democratic primary or why didn't Senator McCain bring this out as the October surprise that would bring him victory yesterday?

Quite frankly this whole question of Obama's citizenship is a conspiracy theory on par with man never landing on the moon or that the 9/11 Twin Towers attack was an insidwe job by the CIA and Mossad.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/citizen.asp

[UnderseaLcpl]

Here's hoping the US have made the right choice :hmm:

I hope so as well, but I'm not optimistic about it. Can I stay with you for a couple of days before I continue on to Switzerland?:D

[Christopher Snow]

So Obama has won, and big time at that. Can't say I am dissapointed, even though it will get more rough in Europe now considering Afghanistan. But that's something I am more then willing to take if it means the US comes back into the club of nations respecting human rights and global rules.

Voting Obama alone raised the US reputation by a big margin practically overnight. You guys voted a black president. Big kudos to that, I did not see that coming. Basicly threw a ot of clichés out of the window into the faces of those thinking the US was still too racist. That alone was worth it already, if not anything else.

If I were you, and that includes republicans, I'd be grateful for this already. And that Obama, unlike Bush, also embraces the other party. From an outsiders view, national unity is more then needed in the US right now to tackle the problems. I personally want to see the US come to it's former glory again, it's moreal authority and it's leadership role in the west. For sure better then Russia or China as an alternative. And now that Bush is gone, there is a real possibility of this beeing achieved. McCain was a good man, I respect him, even if he got sucked into his partys habits lately, which ultimately was his downfall. For this reason he would simply be seen as Bush 2.0 abroad.

For what it's worth, americas self healing still works. That was the case after the McCarthy years, and I am very positive this is in effect now. Good times ahead.

Gratulations to Obama.

If Obama takes and holds office for more than a few months (lawsuits notwithstanding), I think you will have cause to regret your enthusiasm this night.

I think you in the EU will very quickly come to realize the AMERICAN SECURITY RUG has been pulled right out from under you.

It won't be long before the Russians realize it too (and begin to press westward.)

Here's a hint for you (oh too late to DO anything about it, but that's the way the real world works I suppose: A SOCIALIST US will NOT be able to support it's end of NATO.

Which means you in the EU are SCREWED. We will no longer have the actual economic strength (let alone the willingness) to support you..and you will not have planned (or put aside savings) in the eventuality of our "failure to provide for your safety."

So the Russians can march right in...and we can't do anything about it (moreover, Obama wouldn't, even if he could--it would be too unpopular for a new President, don't you know...)

...or....

you can hope the Russians aren't feeling their oats.

Do you feel lucky? Do ya?


CS

[TheSatyr]

You must not know much about Obama if you think he also embraces the Republican party...only ONCE did he ever co write a bill with a Republican...and it was defeated...other than that he just voted "present" or occasionally voted with the rest of the Democrats.

This is the first time in my life I've ever been ashamed of my Country. You elected a marxist,terrorist loving empty suit as President...just because he was black. They must be dancing in the streets in the Gaza Strip and in Tehran tonight.

Course it was inevitable when that idiot McCain was picked by the Republicans.

Sad that the best overall candidate (Hillary Clinton),was sabotaged by her own party,just so they could get a puppet in the White House.

[Konovalov]

Indeed Mik. :yep:

[Christopher Snow]

Here's hoping the US have made the right choice :hmm:
I hope so as well, but I'm not optimistic about it. Can I stay with you for a couple of days before I continue on to Switzerland?:D

For my part, I'm liquidating all my US assets and heading to Canada. Northwest Territories.

I'm also taking my "Guns and my Bibles." I even plan to cling to both of them (never mind that I have never owned either one until now :D).

What else is there though? And where else could I go anyway.

NZ and AUS are my only two other choices, the way I see it....


CS

[Skybird]

Gloat as much as you like and enjoy the day.

A five to seven percent margin of victory certainly does not constitute any sort of demonstration that the Republicans have had their asses handed to them.

Bad loser, eh? Election the past two times were much closer, and the Democrats defeat with law files and scandals and narrow margin and what else there was, really was blown up. but the other way around is not so pleasant, hm?

----

However, by electoral votes it is a very clear and decisive victory for Obama, and the democratic vote at least is not so close as the last times. I think, this is needed, for whoever would have become president, probbaly no president before, with the maybe exception of WWII, has to face such a big heap of troubles lying ahead of gim. There is the mortgage left by bush, the loss of trust and reputation internationally, several desperately needed inner reforms, a polarised society with some unforgiving Republican camps, there are many wounds to heal and the need of reaching out hands again. A weak president would have found that impossible maybe, so a strong vote for the new one really was in need.

As American, i would think the far better choice has won. As a European I would have preferred MacCain, it would have been easier for Europe to refuse demands he would have made, namely on defense and war participation, than it will be with Obama. However, Europe will make demands in return as well, namely on energy and climate issues. with Obama relations will be less empotional and hateful as it was 4 and 5 years ago, and the tone of relations will become better, no doubt, but I am just waiting for the unbelieving eyes here in europe when he starts making the demands that over here most people do not seem to expect coming.

Russia is not happy. Obama does not fit their schemes, and they fear he could turn out to be as hard a rock to move and as patriotic and motivating for americans, like Kennedy was. Kennedy they also have not in good memory, for obvious reasons. For russia, Obama appears as the greater risk, compared to McCain, who may be a cold warrior, but that is a scheme they are familiar with.

What will become of the Republicans. McCain is unlikely to become the next leader of the party, he is too old, and now he is burnt. Palin? She has a small camp supporting her,e but beyond that I cannot see her being allowed to play a major role, she has build her bad reputation, and she is simply dumb. Her ambitions are higher than her abilities, and if that will be enough to carry her to higher flight levels remains to be seen, I doubt it. Who else is there? There were several surprise defeats in senate and house elections as well, and currently the Republicans appear to be headless. Maybe they would be wise to form a new leadership and practice a radical exchnage of generation, like the Democrats did with Obama, and then not hunkering down with steel helmets and engaging in ideological trench warfare, but accept Obama's hand for cooperation and healing of america''s wide gap between the two. Obama for the time to come does not need them, the democratic victory is total and complete, but I tell you that he will try to offer his hand to the Republicans as far as is possible without giving up major projects of himself. The reds would be well-advised to accept it. Else they could kick themselves into the offsides for many years to come. Overly ambitious individuals in their rows they better keep under tight control, therefor.

[Christopher Snow]

[quote=TheSatyr]You must not know much about Obama if you think he also embraces the Republican party...only ONCE did he ever co write a bill with a Republican...and it was defeated...other than that he just voted "present" or occasionally voted with the rest of the Democrats.

This is the first time in my life I've ever been ashamed of my Country. You elected a marxist,terrorist loving empty suit as President...just because he was black. They must be dancing in the streets in the Gaza Strip and in Tehran tonight.

[FWIW, I'm competely ashamed too...so I hope you weren't aiming this at me (because I disown/disavow it completely--I wouldn't have sold my vote (to Obama) for 100 Trillion Dollars)/aka "everything I ever wanted on this earth for myself or all of my family." No.]

Course it was inevitable when that idiot McCain was picked by the Republicans.

[I disagree here--I think McCain is a a true Patriot and a man of Honor. But at the same time, I think he was also (because he IS a good and decent man) too willing to believe the same of his political opponent.

There was a clip a couple of weeks back where a woman (at a McCain rally) took the mic..and said she was afraid of Obama: "He's a Muslim," she said...

McCain stopped her, and said something like "No...he's a good and decent man."

I LIKE John McCain. And so I can easily see why he would have wanted to think that about Obama.

But I think he was wrong at that moment too. I think he was unwilling...(because he IS the sort of man who wants to think the best of his fellow man)...to even suspect anything worse of his opponent than he would have thought of himself.

In this he failed us. He SHOULD have suspected worse.

I think the woman who challenged him was completely right, and I think McCain was wrong.

JM was simply ...UNABLE to face the truth of what his opponent actually IS.

God will forgive him for his error. I only hope God will also keep the rest of us from paying a severe price for his mistake at the same time.

But somehow I suspect God won't. Revalation and all that.....


CS

[Skybird]

However, I would caution that Democratic presidencies combined with Democratic congress have yielded some of the greatest economic and social hardships this country has faced in the past century.



Relax, he can't mess it up any worse than 8 years of Republican ruling have done. the worst thing that could happen is that things stay as bad as they are. But that he will not follow Republican ideology's agenda, is clear - with that you have to live, no matter how you call it.

Try to think beyond party horizon's and ideological tunnel-views! ;) Wait what good he will do (or not), and how many or how few are affected by it.

[Rilder]

I wasn't bribed by either side so I didn't vote, I hated all the candidates.

[Skybird]

You must not know much about Obama if you think he also embraces the Republican party...only ONCE did he ever co write a bill with a Republican...and it was defeated...other than that he just voted "present" or occasionally voted with the rest of the Democrats.

This is the first time in my life I've ever been ashamed of my Country. You elected a marxist,terrorist loving empty suit as President...just because he was black. They must be dancing in the streets in the Gaza Strip and in Tehran tonight.

[FWIW, I'm competely ashamed too...so I hope you weren't aiming this at me (because I disown/disavow it completely--I wouldn't have sold my vote (to Obama) for 100 Trillion Dollars)/aka "everything I ever wanted on this earth for myself or all of my family." No.]

Course it was inevitable when that idiot McCain was picked by the Republicans.

[I disagree here--I think McCain is a a true Patriot and a man of Honor. But at the same time, I think he was also (because he IS a good and decent man) too willing to believe the same of his political opponent.

There was a clip a couple of weeks back where a woman (at a McCain rally) took the mic..and said she was afraid of Obama: "He's a Muslim," she said...

McCain stopped her, and said something like "No...he's a good and decent man."

I LIKE John McCain. And so I can easily see why he would have wanted to think that about Obama.

But I think he was wrong at that moment too. I think he was unwilling...(because he IS the sort of man who wants to think the best of his fellow man)...to even suspect anything worse of his opponent than he would have thought of himself.

In this he failed us. He SHOULD have suspected worse.

I think the woman who challenged him was completely right, and I think McCain was wrong.

JM was simply ...UNABLE to face the truth of what his opponent actually IS.

God will forgive him for his error. I only hope God will also keep the rest of us from paying a severe price for his mistake at the same time.

But somehow I suspect God won't. Revalation and all that.....


CS

You forget that he nevertheless allowed his campaing to spill out truckloads of hateful slanderings, putting Obama in one bag with bin Laden, with the KGB, with Islamism in special and terrorism in general, not to mention those evil wicked socialists, and allowing manipulative attributions being constructed about him that hardly can be topped in destructiveness and intention to personally hurt the man. MacCain either campaigned with split tongue, or he did not have his campaign waggon under control and was not master in his house. MacCain waged a very destructive, negative campaign, and I think that helped the Blues - people didn'T like it, like most people are of the opinion that the goal does not justify any means.

[Bewolf]

If Obama takes and holds office for more than a few months (lawsuits notwithstanding), I think you will have cause to regret your enthusiasm this night.

I think you in the EU will very quickly come to realize the AMERICAN SECURITY RUG has been pulled right out from under you.

It won't be long before the Russians realize it too (and begin to press westward.)

Here's a hint for you (oh too late to DO anything about it, but that's the way the real world works I suppose: A SOCIALIST US will NOT be able to support it's end of NATO.

Which means you in the EU are SCREWED. We will no longer have the actual economic strength (let alone the willingness) to support you..and you will not have planned (or put aside savings) in the eventuality of our "failure to provide for your safety."

So the Russians can march right in...and we can't do anything about it (moreover, Obama wouldn't, even if he could--it would be too unpopular for a new President, don't you know...)

...or....

you can hope the Russians aren't feeling their oats.

Do you feel lucky? Do ya?

CS

Right, let's tackle this with a bit more common sense, kay?

First of all, in case of the US, it is not so much about US support for Europe against Russia. Russia has a gross domestic budget comparable to Portugal. They are big with sabre rattling, just like in the cold war era, but there is not much substance behind it to pose a real threat, especially with Russia's number 1 money maker, oil, going to the bottom right now and the country's economy beeing in big big trouble thanks to their Georgia adventure, which caused investors to leave the country, amplified by the financial crisis. Russia has some very basic and deep running domestic problems and is in no state to pose a serious threat within the next 10 years minimum as long no madman with a twitchy finger comes to power. But in such a case it really does not matter what a state the US is in anyways.

What is going to happen is that Obama will ask the Europeans for more support in Afghanistan. And given the current and ongoing debates in Germany about the Afghanistan deployment, and I think ppl here are slowly becoming aware we are fighting a real war there, I expect german and european policy to change to a more agressive stance there, which should help the US quite a bit. As you can see, it is not so much about support from the US to Europe, but vice versa. The US currently is in no condition, from a military POV, to make annother commitment anyways.

What you need to realize is the following. The US lost big time in the last 8 years. I do not know how much this got to the US population, but the world has seen the US becoming a ruthless, almost criminal country from its former status as a beacon of light for the west. Bush utterly corruped and destroyed the picture the world has had of the United States, and this plays a huge role in actual politics, how well the US is recieved and how open other nations are to US leadership and proposals. This does not go for it's allies alone, but to all of the world. The US simply lost respect and authority big time, to a degree much worse then any military debacle in Iraq or Afghanistan could have achieved alone. To regain this morale authority, a capital not as obvious as purely economic or military might, should be the US highest priority. It's more subtle then raw power, but in the end so much more effective in making a country's interest succesfull when it comes to behind the door talks and more importantly, acceptance of the population of any given country.

Now, I am not into US domestic politics too much. I have my personal stances which I am more then willing to make clear, but I seriously do not care "that" much if the US is socialist, social democratic or purely capitalistic. It's your choice what a country you want to live in and it's system. But, from an international POV, voting Obama into Office propably was the biggest gain in international respect the US ever got in one night. You got a huge bonus here after the Bush years, and the world will be willing to listen once again. Bush practically played no role anymore on the international stage. Nobody took him even remotely serious. That to change should even be in the interest of republicans.

[Skybird]

I think major parts of the german population already are aware of a war happening in Afghanistan, Bewolf, and just politicians are trying to hide the truth that already has escaped into the open. And yet most Germans, 75-90%, are against any military engagement there at all. I can't see politicians stopping soon to weasel around, and I think the question of increased military engagement in Afghanistan is set to become a very hot issue over here - politicians do not worry about Afghanistan being lost so much, they are concerned about losing their voters. Obama or MacCain, it does not matter, on the Afghanistan issue Germany and America are set on collision course. Obama probably will make higher demands than the german are wqilling to accept, and the Germans are willing to engage a birt more, but not to the level Obama demands. even more so when it was said in campaigning that a higher increase of european engagement over there would allow america to withdraw troops and save it's ressources for being spend at home. Remember that that was taken very queer over here, some months ago?

[Jimbuna]

Here's hoping the US have made the right choice :hmm:

I hope so as well, but I'm not optimistic about it. Can I stay with you for a couple of days before I continue on to Switzerland?:D

No problem....just remember to bring your sidearm :lol:

[Bewolf]

I think major parts of the german population already are aware of a war happening in Afghanistan, Bewolf, and just politicians are trying to hide the truth that already has escaped into the open. And yet most Germans, 75-90%, are against any military engagement there at all. I can't see politicians stopping soon to weasel around, and I think the question of increased military engagement in Afghanistan is set to become a very hot issue over here - politicians do not worry about Afghanistan being lost so much, they are concerned about losing their voters. Obama or MacCain, it does not matter, on the Afghanistan issue Germany and America are set on collision course. Obama probably will make higher demands than the german are wqilling to accept, and the Germans are willing to engage a birt more, but not to the level Obama demands. even more so when it was said in campaigning that a higher increase of european engagement over there would allow america to withdraw troops and save it's ressources for being spend at home. Remember that that was taken very queer over here, some months ago?

I don't know. It's a question of cause and effect, I think. First of all, the question is why most folks here are opposed to the war. Digging into the topic it should be quite obvious why it is so important to win this war, not just for the immidiate future, but in the long run, for Germany's and the whole western worlds stance in the region and ultimately for ideals the west claims to have. It is not about saving a few farmers or making Al Quaida run away, but to keep a promise made to the world when we entered that country. Losing out of this may further undermine western values and ultimately ourselves.

I am optimistc more ppl are aware of that then obvious at first glance, on a concious or subconcious level. The problem are the polititans themselves, who are not able to cope with the issue in a mature and proffessional way, dealing with the german population not on an eye to eye level, but as you said, fearing for their votes. I do not think they are aware it may not be the war itself bringing ppl to such an opposition, but their treatment of the subject matter, their dishonesty and escapism, coupled with the fact they treat killed german soldiers there not as young men that died for principles, but merely accidents.

Nevertheless, reading newspapers and magazines, forums and having real life discussions bout it, I think this stance is about to change. I read more and more about that little pesky german word "Krieg". It's named for what it is finally, and that I consider a first step into the right direction. What happens next will be seen. But it is a fact we can't go on as we did before in the future. Either we pull out, with all the consequences negative or positive, or we make a real comitment, with all the hardship and sacrifices that may mean. The world is a rough place, and Germany and Europe as a whole better wake up from their self chosen isolation and ignorance. With that I mean the ppl themselves who take their lives and privileges as a granted birthright. At least in this agree to the US.

[Skybird]

I would keep two things separate, the (now dead) beacon of democracy project of the (now dead neocon) US, and the far more modest goals proclaimed by the europeans going into Afghanistan initially, and separately from the US operations. And last but not least it lies in american repsonsibility that the situation nafter the initial kick-out of the Taleban detoriated again, for the US left Afghanistan to itself again too soon, and too weak. That crippled all goals the europeans intiially had, by encouraging the Taleban to come back in strength.

I always called it a mistake of NATO to goi into Afghanistan. I alwys called it a mistake for Germany to go into afguhnaistan, for those idiotic historic reasons they have given, concering WWI and how close the history of Germany and Afghanistan always has been tied, bullsh!t.

The political establishement has no realsitic vision for Afghnaistan, and it planlessly stumbles around in blindness, hopiung for some fair cleaning the situation for them. Either

a.) the principle of absolute reaslism takles over the poltical decision-making and there is a clear willingness to call this a war and defining clear conditions for what is considered to be a win, and under what conditions bare being brought hokme again, then eventually, dspite the folly of the whole operation I am willing to accept an unlimited effort of doing what is needed to wage that war (but I doubt that Germany has the logistical capacity and that the BW is financed well-enough to maintain such a huge mission: we talk of clear and open war on almost the other side of the planet), and then still I am notz sure the war can be won, for a war in Afghnaistan in my view necessarily includes more or less war in and with Pakistan as well;

or b.) the troops pull out and are brought home. Since the current german psoitions is a mixture of refusing to see reality and dancing on eggs, I demand the immediate and complete withdrawal of the BW forces. I am not willing to risk the lives of men and women in the Bundeswehr for nothing more than this crappy political conception - better the absence of any realistic conception - that currently form thiscarricature of a government's posture on the Afghan issue.

How schizophrenic the german view of things is you can see in their absurd, hilarious rules of engagement. A symptom the naval operation at the Somali coats alöso is suffering from, pirates are quoted with saying that they laugh when they see the germans on patrol, becasue they are being forbidden to take action of any kind that goes beyond observing and writing a report. You can assault a ship right under their eyes, and the germans will watch and write a report, that's all. Great.

One thing I do not accept: to vaguely refer to alleged German responsibilities towards a follish NATO mission, or a vague idea of an alleged "shared history" we should have with Afghanistan. This latter stuff get'S blown up beyond realistic scale, and since Afghnaistan (and even more: its corruopt leaders) wanted something from Germany, Karzai did his best to hammer this history thing home, and many philantropists in Germany even were not too stupid not to believe it.

[Christopher Snow]

Tip of the day : fearmongering is useful BEFORE the election, not after.
I have'nt the slightest interest in what's "useful."

Even if the EU all woke up an and realized I was 100% right today... :D....it would still be far too late to be "useful"...or to make them (even if they were all suddenly willling) into an "ontensible ally"

I'm just telling them "I told you so, you dorks" in advance for the sake of saying so. I'm recording my meaningless "expertise" before history overtakes all of us and sweeps us underneath the wave of it's carpet.

That's ALL I can possibly hope to gain from it, unless you think realizing uh-oh....maybe you were right after all, Snow" would have some sort of defensive value (I don't. It might be amusing, but it would also be a complete waste of time to hope for it--we would still all be smashed.)

I'll take it further: A SOCIALIST US is entirely doomed--it cannot defend itself without a strong, CAPITALIST country to back it up (and the Chinese will only laugh).

I plan to liqudate my US assets ASAP. After which I will move to Canada.

Not that it will do me much good either.


CS

[AVGWarhawk]

Sorry, I just can't help this.:

http://img240.imageshack.us/img240/9789/asshandedgop1do2.jpg


Gloat as much as you like and enjoy the day.

A five to seven percent margin of victory certainly does not constitute any sort of demonstration that the Republicans have had their asses handed to them.

It remains to be seen if Obama can live up to his big pep-rally rhetoric.

Hopefully, it is more than just blind/pseudo optimism created by a man who felt absolutley at home saying anything he felt he needed to, to wedge himself into the presidency.

For once, KL and I agree on something. Obama needs to deliver. I'm thinking the wheels are about to fall off the delivery truck. This happens with every President. Obama will be no different. Yet, his shoes are a bit bigger to fill being his rhetoric was just outlandish to say the least.

[Bewolf]

I would keep two things separate, the (now dead) beacon of democracy project of the (now dead neocon) US, and the far more modest goals proclaimed by the europeans going into Afghanistan initially, and separately from the US operations. And last but not least it lies in american repsonsibility that the situation nafter the initial kick-out of the Taleban detoriated again, for the US left Afghanistan to itself again too soon, and too weak. That crippled all goals the europeans intiially had, by encouraging the Taleban to come back in strength.

I always called it a mistake of NATO to goi into Afghanistan. I alwys called it a mistake for Germany to go into afguhnaistan, for those idiotic historic reasons they have given, concering WWI and how close the history of Germany and Afghanistan always has been tied, bullsh!t.

The political establishement has no realsitic vision for Afghnaistan, and it planlessly stumbles around in blindness, hopiung for some fair cleaning the situation for them. Either

a.) the principle of absolute reaslism takles over the poltical decision-making and there is a clear willingness to call this a war and defining clear conditions for what is considered to be a win, and under what conditions bare being brought hokme again, then eventually, dspite the folly of the whole operation I am willing to accept an unlimited effort of doing what is needed to wage that war (but I doubt that Germany has the logistical capacity and that the BW is financed well-enough to maintain such a huge mission: we talk of clear and open war on almost the other side of the planet), and then still I am notz sure the war can be won, for a war in Afghnaistan in my view necessarily includes more or less war in and with Pakistan as well;

or b.) the troops pull out and are brought home. Since the current german psoitions is a mixture of refusing to see reality and dancing on eggs, I demand the immediate and complete withdrawal of the BW forces. I am not willing to risk the lives of men and women in the Bundeswehr for nothing more than this crappy political conception - better the absence of any realistic conception - that currently form thiscarricature of a government's posture on the Afghan issue.

How schizophrenic the german view of things is you can see in their absurd, hilarious rules of engagement. A symptom the naval operation at the Somali coats alöso is suffering from, pirates are quoted with saying that they laugh when they see the germans on patrol, becasue they are being forbidden to take action of any kind that goes beyond observing and writing a report. You can assault a ship right under their eyes, and the germans will watch and write a report, that's all. Great.

One thing I do not accept: to vaguely refer to alleged German responsibilities towards a follish NATO mission, or a vague idea of an alleged "shared history" we should have with Afghanistan. This latter stuff get'S blown up beyond realistic scale, and since Afghnaistan (and even more: its corruopt leaders) wanted something from Germany, Karzai did his best to hammer this history thing home, and many philantropists in Germany even were not too stupid not to believe it.



I'd like to agree to you in that Europe follows another route then the US. The problem though, as far as I can see this, is that other parts of the world regard to the US and Europe, practically all of NATO, as one block, not much seperated from each other. That means, whatever the US does, it will have an effect for Europe purely by association, american hypocrisis becomes western hypocrisis and eventually...german hypocrisis, even if we ourselves know the differences.

Another problem, as far as my understanding for the situation goes, is the following. European countries as they are now do not have a big stance on the international stage where giants like Russia, the US, India or China try to put through their interests. This situation will become worse with the gradual decline of the US and the raise of China and the far east in general. Now I do not believe the world will become a better place. The situation as it is reminds me more of the europea nation states close to the 20ths century. Bickering, nationalism and the continuation of diplomatic politics with military means will once again become the norm. The world has been in kind of a slumber after the end of the cold war and now reemerges in a shape known from before WW2. Europe needs to get its act together as a whole to play a role in that. So far the population more or less reminds me of the US before WW1, isolisationist, the worlds problems are not ours, let others take care of it.

This simply does not fly, that is one lesson history proved already. I am not pro war, far from it. But I consider war a sad reality in this world, one that should be avoided whereever possible, but not at all costs.

Now to your points, I agree to all of them, especially the last one. We don't do this just for NATO, even though we do have a certain responsebility in this regard. I am not a fan of another german "Sonderweg". We had that, it didn't work out. But beeing in an alliance may force us to commit even if we do not like it. This is the basis of cooperation everyhwere.

Nevertheless, a real war should be very carefully considered. For good or worse, Germany chose to participate in this war. We can't pull out now just so with a "Eh, sorry, we tried, didn't work, cheerio" and leave the ppl there behind to get once again killed and opressed by the Taliban. And that does not just apply to Karzai and his crowies. One thing is for sure, should we leave, and the Taliban come back, a lot of common folks there will bite the dust, if not worse. And I am not sure this is a path Germany should go. Especially in light of the stance our troops down there have, which basicly comes down to "Let us just do the job". A much more mature view then either the polititans nor the population here has. From my POV we don't have another option but to name the child by it's name and get the job done the right way. Anything else will mean: more deaths, more terror, more hypocrisis on the human level, less influence, tainted values and a loss of direction on a western nationwide level. It will have a very negative psychological impact on all sides. The chance to not get involved passed a long time ago. Debating that is wasted energy, I fear, but should serve as good example for future issues.

[Bewolf]

Tip of the day : fearmongering is useful BEFORE the election, not after.
I have'nt the slightest interest in what's "useful."

Even if the EU all woke up an and realized I was 100% right today... :D....it would still be far too late to be "useful" to either "ontensible ally."

I'm just telling them "I told you so, you dorks" in advance.

That's ALL I can possibly hope to gain from it, unless you think an "uh-oh....maybe you were ritght after all" would have some sort of value (I don't. It might be amusing, but it would also be a complete waste of time.)

I'll take it further: A SOCIALIST US is also doomed.

I plan to liqudate my US assets ASAP. After which I will move to Canada.

Still don't think any of that will save me either.


CS

Dude! Canada is more socialist then the US will ever be even with Obama. Get your act together!

[Christopher Snow]

CS[/quote]
Dude! Canada is more socialist then the US will ever be even with Obama. Get your act together![/quote]

Oh, I know it.

I'm not stupid.

The one thing Canada DOES have going for it (over the US...well two things actually...are: 1) The new president isn't actively looking to strip your few remaining assests from you in Canada (or if he is, I've, so far, missed it...and) 2) Your country offers more opportunities to physically hide out it. To go competely "Survivalist," as it were. :D

Not that I'm any good at that sort of thing, mind you.

It would just be a last desperate act...by a completely desperate man (me).

I wouldn't necessarily expect to get away with it. But if I'm going to die anyway, I might as well die trying.

Eh?


CS

[joegrundman]

CS,

i appreciate you're a bit excited at the moment, but do try to get a grip soon, mkay?

[Hanomag]

Golly... I can feel the change already... are the troops back?? :doh:

[Christopher Snow]

CS,

i appreciate you're a bit excited at the moment, but do try to get a grip soon, mkay?

Tried. Failed. Can't.

Any other suggestions before I liquidate my assets and head north?


CS :D

[Skybird]

I would keep two things separate, the (now dead) beacon of democracy project of the (now dead neocon) US, and the far more modest goals proclaimed by the europeans going into Afghanistan initially, and separately from the US operations. And last but not least it lies in american repsonsibility that the situation nafter the initial kick-out of the Taleban detoriated again, for the US left Afghanistan to itself again too soon, and too weak. That crippled all goals the europeans intiially had, by encouraging the Taleban to come back in strength.

I always called it a mistake of NATO to goi into Afghanistan. I alwys called it a mistake for Germany to go into afguhnaistan, for those idiotic historic reasons they have given, concering WWI and how close the history of Germany and Afghanistan always has been tied, bullsh!t.

The political establishement has no realsitic vision for Afghnaistan, and it planlessly stumbles around in blindness, hopiung for some fair cleaning the situation for them. Either

a.) the principle of absolute reaslism takles over the poltical decision-making and there is a clear willingness to call this a war and defining clear conditions for what is considered to be a win, and under what conditions bare being brought hokme again, then eventually, dspite the folly of the whole operation I am willing to accept an unlimited effort of doing what is needed to wage that war (but I doubt that Germany has the logistical capacity and that the BW is financed well-enough to maintain such a huge mission: we talk of clear and open war on almost the other side of the planet), and then still I am notz sure the war can be won, for a war in Afghnaistan in my view necessarily includes more or less war in and with Pakistan as well;

or b.) the troops pull out and are brought home. Since the current german psoitions is a mixture of refusing to see reality and dancing on eggs, I demand the immediate and complete withdrawal of the BW forces. I am not willing to risk the lives of men and women in the Bundeswehr for nothing more than this crappy political conception - better the absence of any realistic conception - that currently form thiscarricature of a government's posture on the Afghan issue.

How schizophrenic the german view of things is you can see in their absurd, hilarious rules of engagement. A symptom the naval operation at the Somali coats alöso is suffering from, pirates are quoted with saying that they laugh when they see the germans on patrol, becasue they are being forbidden to take action of any kind that goes beyond observing and writing a report. You can assault a ship right under their eyes, and the germans will watch and write a report, that's all. Great.

One thing I do not accept: to vaguely refer to alleged German responsibilities towards a follish NATO mission, or a vague idea of an alleged "shared history" we should have with Afghanistan. This latter stuff get'S blown up beyond realistic scale, and since Afghnaistan (and even more: its corruopt leaders) wanted something from Germany, Karzai did his best to hammer this history thing home, and many philantropists in Germany even were not too stupid not to believe it.



I'd like to agree to you in that Europe follows another route then the US. The problem though, as far as I can see this, is that other parts of the world regard to the US and Europe, practically all of NATO, as one block, not much seperated from each other. That means, whatever the US does, it will have an effect for Europe purely by association, american hypocrisis becomes western hypocrisis and eventually...german hypocrisis, even if we ourselves know the differences.

Another problem, as far as my understanding for the situation goes, is the following. European countries as they are now do not have a big stance on the international stage where giants like Russia, the US, India or China try to put through their interests. This situation will become worse with the gradual decline of the US and the raise of China and the far east in general. Now I do not believe the world will become a better place. The situation as it is reminds me more of the europea nation states close to the 20ths century. Bickering, nationalism and the continuation of diplomatic politics with military means will once again become the norm. The world has been in kind of a slumber after the end of the cold war and now reemerges in a shape known from before WW2. Europe needs to get its act together as a whole to play a role in that. So far the population more or less reminds me of the US before WW1, isolisationist, the worlds problems are not ours, let others take care of it.

This simply does not fly, that is one lesson history proved already. I am not pro war, far from it. But I consider war a sad reality in this world, one that should be avoided whereever possible, but not at all costs.

Now to your points, I agree to all of them, especially the last one. We don't do this just for NATO, even though we do have a certain responsebility in this regard. I am not a fan of another german "Sonderweg". We had that, it didn't work out. But beeing in an alliance may force us to commit even if we do not like it. This is the basis of cooperation everyhwere.

Nevertheless, a real war should be very carefully considered. For good or worse, Germany chose to participate in this war. We can't pull out now just so with a "Eh, sorry, we tried, didn't work, cheerio" and leave the ppl there behind to get once again killed and opressed by the Taliban. And that does not just apply to Karzai and his crowies. One thing is for sure, should we leave, and the Taliban come back, a lot of common folks there will bite the dust, if not worse. And I am not sure this is a path Germany should go. Especially in light of the stance our troops down there have, which basicly comes down to "Let us just do the job". A much more mature view then either the polititans nor the population here has. From my POV we don't have another option but to name the child by it's name and get the job done the right way. Anything else will mean: more deaths, more terror, more hypocrisis on the human level, less influence, tainted values and a loss of direction on a western nationwide level. It will have a very negative psychological impact on all sides. The chance to not get involved passed a long time ago. Debating that is wasted energy, I fear, but should serve as good example for future issues.
The alternative then would be to go to real war. just to carry on with this german schizophrenia we have right now, is unacceptable for me, the worst of all options. Either wage war, then behave accordingly and support it as that, or let it be. The German government tries to dance at several parties at the same time, trying to please every host by that - and right that is the reason why it fails at each of them. so: war, or pull out. the status quo is unacceptable for me.

But if you vote for war, then do it in strength. and then find out how to pay for that without taking new debts (obviously you cannot buy more than you can afford by your income), and how to swing thousands of troops over there without being in vulnerable dependance on good will and logistical dependance of over a doizen clans and nations both NATO members and non-mmebers. Finally secure the supply line without being that dependant, last but not least on Russia :D

I have tremedous probpems with imaging all that. the BW is not designed to be a war-solid global intervention force, like the US wants to understand NATO after 1989. It's structures are not meant for that. So, while I understand your way of reasoning, I am still not willing to follow your thoughts, but want the troops out of that maze over there.

[Bewolf]

Again, absolutely agreed to most of your points. The current path is a complete no go. It is hypocritical, hides the facts, it is unhonest to the population and majorly unfair to our troops. I also fully understand where you are coming from. I just fear a quick pullout, as attractive as it may appear in the immidiate future, will cause more problems then it will solve in the long run. We got dragged into an immense pile of a mess. Now we have to deal with it and it really does not matter who is at fault or how we ended up there in the first place. These are questions that have to be sorted out to prevent something similiar to happen once we solved this issue one way or another.

[Christopher Snow]

Prediction: Germany will bail completely out of Afghanistan at the first opportunity.

Obama, for his part, will reinstitute the US draft quite soon. He will withdraw US forces ASAP from Iraq....(which should thrill all you EU types)...and he'll build instead in Afgh in a show of force.

Which won't intimidate anyone, and from which he will then gradually back down.

["A Strategic Withdrawal," he'll call it]

At which point the Russians will begin to exert a "creeping pressure" of their own in from the east.

Ukraine first...then Georgia (or maybe the other way round)....

You in the EU will WANT to raise the alarm at this point...and you will try....but who can help you?

Well WE can't. How could we? We're nearly bankrupt, with everyone over here suddenly on the dole---we've just gone socialist, remember, so everyone here is expecting (demanding!) his free handout....we've got to deal with all that first.....

.....you in the EU you are screwed. Too bad for you.

[But at least you got what you all wished for--"No more George W Bush!"]

Emergency measures taken on your side of the pond! No more 8 weeks of paid vacation (cut quickly now to only two weeks)....and no more 35 hour work weeks (it's thrust suddenly to 45, or even 50, and against great protests).

Still too little to late. You never did build up any meaningful military reserves (because you counted on us to provide them for all these years), so you have nothing to fall back on.....

Too bad for you.


CS

[Bewolf]

Prediction: Germany will bail completely out of Afghanistan at the first opportunity.

Obama, for his part, will reinstitute the US draft quite soon. He will withdraw US forces ASAP from Iraq....(which should thrill all you EU types)...and he'll build instead in Afgh in a show of force.

Which won't intimidate anyone, and from which he will then gradually back down.

["A Strategic Withdrawal," he'll call it]

At which point the Russians will begin to exert a "creeping pressure" of their own in from the east.

Ukraine first...then Georgia (or maybe the other way round)....

You in the EU will WANT to raise the alarm at this point...and you will try....but who can help you?

Well WE can't. How could we? We're nearly bankrupt, with everyone over here suddenly on the dole---we've just gone socialist, remember, so everyone here is expecting (demanding!) his free handout....we've got to deal with all that first.....

.....you in the EU you are screwed. Too bad for you.

[But at least you got what you all wished for--"No more George W Bush!"]

Emergency measures taken on your side of the pond! No more 8 weeks of paid vacation (cut quickly now to only two weeks)....and no more 35 hour work weeks (it's thrust suddenly to 45, or even 50, and against great protests).

Still too little to late. You never did build up any meaningful military reserves (because you counted on us to provide them for all these years), so you have nothing to fall back on.....

Too bad for you.

CS
Oh, I suppose then you dug yourself into german politics and culture deep enough to make such a qualified prediction, hm? My respect, you'd be the first american I met actually caring and informing himself about other countries internal affairs.

To get something clear...I am not thrilled about an Iraq drawout, nor is anybody else I know. But the killing has to stop, and more important, the deaths of civilians, especially in cases of "colatoral" damage. Nothing hurts western intentions more then the deaths of innocents by western bombs.
As with Afghanistan, this will cause more problems then it will solve. This is neither in US nor in european interests. It will be very interesting to see how Obama is going to tackle this problem.

And if Russia gets bold, then that is foremost the fault of the US in getting involved in such wars in the first place. For Russia US involvement in the middle east is a present right from heaven itself. It binds US ressources, takes away US capability in countering russian endeavors and undermines US authority in general. A McCain with his sabre rattling is the best Russia could hope for, it would play right into their stratetigc interests to brand the US as a hypoctitic agressor and legitimite their ow actions. Or do you think Russia would have dared to march into Georgie with a strong US with all it's forces ready opposing it? Hardly.

So, please stop your fear mongering. We know very well what we owe the US in beeing involved in Europe for so long, but we also know it was by far not an act of pure altruism, but of US strategic interests. And something else to ponder..Germany had the opportunity to unite, the offer from the russian side was on the table, for the price of beeing neutral in the cold war. Instead western Germany chose to stick to the western allies and wait 50 years for reunification, despite beeing the premier battlefield and facing utter destruction in case war broke out. This is by far not as one sided as american folks tend to make it out. I won't even go into the military contribution Germany would have made in such a scenario. Unthankfulness? Hardly a european phenomennon alone.

So, please cut back your emotional rethorics and come back to the facts, yes? I am more then willing to discuss any of your points, as long they are at least remotely based on reality.

[Kapitan_Phillips]

http://img.timeinc.net/time/daily/2007/0712/schwarzenegger_int_1221.jpg

2012 :smug:

[Onkel Neal]

Voting Obama alone raised the US reputation by a big margin practically overnight. You guys voted a black president. Big kudos to that, I did not see that coming. Basicly threw a ot of clichés out of the window into the faces of those thinking the US was still too racist. That alone was worth it already, if not anything else.



So, when we were electing white presidents, we were racist, now that we have a black (technically, he's just as white as he is black :roll: ) president, we are ok?

Yeah, so when is Germany going to stop practicing racism and elect their first black chancellor/president? ;)

(Just teasing ya)

[AVGWarhawk]

Here's hoping the US have made the right choice :hmm:
I hope so as well, but I'm not optimistic about it. Can I stay with you for a couple of days before I continue on to Switzerland?:D
No problem....just remember to bring your sidearm :lol:

Jim,

What really was the right choice? We, as Americans, are equally screwed no matter the outcome of the election. No matter the decisions Obama makes, I believe he does look at it deeply and with clarity. If he runs the country like his campaign (which was brilliant) we should be in good shape. One can say running for government is very different when you finally get into government. That is very true. However, Obama seemed very sincere and he accomplished this goal of winning without resorting to going across racial and political boundries. That would indicate the people voted for the man, not his skin (all though a lot voted because of his African American heritage. That is a given on both sides of the race) and I would like to see the numbers between the races of voters. Although I think his campaign has been orchastrated, it was done well. So, I give the guy a chance. I do not agree with some of his policies but I have to respect the position he has obtained. We move forward.

[Bewolf]

Voting Obama alone raised the US reputation by a big margin practically overnight. You guys voted a black president. Big kudos to that, I did not see that coming. Basicly threw a ot of clichés out of the window into the faces of those thinking the US was still too racist. That alone was worth it already, if not anything else.


So, when we were electing white presidents, we were racist, now that we have a black (technically, he's just as white as he is black :roll: ) president, we are ok?

Yeah, so when is Germany going to stop practicing racism and elect their first black chancellor/president? ;)

(Just teasing ya)

Darnit, you guys certainly know how to warp a big compliment into some kind of offense! Seriously do I need to explain myself in this? In case it was some kind of arrogance you read in my post you feel bugged about, and I can see where this may have come from, I apologize. But take an honest compliment as that, please.

[Christopher Snow]

You sound like a very old person scared sh!tless because life changes, even so slightly. You realise you don't make much sense ?

Semi-accurate.

I am an old(er) person (48), and I am scared nearly "****less," yes.

I have lost nearly all faith in the future, that would be true too.

I guess that makes you right. Congrats.


CS

[Zachstar]

Here's hoping the US have made the right choice :hmm:
I hope so as well, but I'm not optimistic about it. Can I stay with you for a couple of days before I continue on to Switzerland?:D
For my part, I'm liquidating all my US assets and heading to Canada. Northwest Territories.

I'm also taking my "Guns and my Bibles." I even plan to cling to both of them (never mind that I have never owned either one until now :D).

What else is there though? And where else could I go anyway.

NZ and AUS are my only two other choices, the way I see it....


CS

PLEASE!! GO!!! And let the door hit you on the way out!

[Biggles]

Here's hoping the US have made the right choice :hmm:
I hope so as well, but I'm not optimistic about it. Can I stay with you for a couple of days before I continue on to Switzerland?:D
No problem....just remember to bring your sidearm :lol:

Jim,

What really was the right choice? We, as Americans, are equally screwed no matter the outcome of the election. No matter the decisions Obama makes, I believe he does look at it deeply and with clarity. If he runs the country like his campaign (which was brilliant) we should be in good shape. One can say running for government is very different when you finally get into government. That is very true. However, Obama seemed very sincere and he accomplished this goal of winning without resorting to going across racial and political boundries. That would indicate the people voted for the man, not his skin (all though a lot voted because of his African American heritage. That is a given on both sides of the race) and I would like to see the numbers between the races of voters. Although I think his campaign has been orchastrated, it was done well. So, I give the guy a chance. I do not agree with some of his policies but I have to respect the position he has obtained. We move forward.


:up: :up: :up: :up: :up:

Oh yeah, Skybird, sorry about that earlier. I know he isn't the president yet, but unless something...unfortunate happens, then he'll be for sure:) But could be good to remember, that any mistakes/achievements from the presidentpost for the coming months would come from George.

[edit] woopsie, that was in the other thread, ah hell, I've already said it now:P

[Zachstar]

Prediction: Germany will bail completely out of Afghanistan at the first opportunity.

Obama, for his part, will reinstitute the US draft quite soon. He will withdraw US forces ASAP from Iraq....(which should thrill all you EU types)...and he'll build instead in Afgh in a show of force.

Which won't intimidate anyone, and from which he will then gradually back down.

["A Strategic Withdrawal," he'll call it]

At which point the Russians will begin to exert a "creeping pressure" of their own in from the east.

Ukraine first...then Georgia (or maybe the other way round)....

You in the EU will WANT to raise the alarm at this point...and you will try....but who can help you?

Well WE can't. How could we? We're nearly bankrupt, with everyone over here suddenly on the dole---we've just gone socialist, remember, so everyone here is expecting (demanding!) his free handout....we've got to deal with all that first.....

.....you in the EU you are screwed. Too bad for you.

[But at least you got what you all wished for--"No more George W Bush!"]

Emergency measures taken on your side of the pond! No more 8 weeks of paid vacation (cut quickly now to only two weeks)....and no more 35 hour work weeks (it's thrust suddenly to 45, or even 50, and against great protests).

Still too little to late. You never did build up any meaningful military reserves (because you counted on us to provide them for all these years), so you have nothing to fall back on.....

Too bad for you.


CS

You do realize you sound like you are scared drunk right?

[Onkel Neal]

Voting Obama alone raised the US reputation by a big margin practically overnight. You guys voted a black president. Big kudos to that, I did not see that coming. Basicly threw a ot of clichés out of the window into the faces of those thinking the US was still too racist. That alone was worth it already, if not anything else.


So, when we were electing white presidents, we were racist, now that we have a black (technically, he's just as white as he is black :roll: ) president, we are ok?

Yeah, so when is Germany going to stop practicing racism and elect their first black chancellor/president? ;)

(Just teasing ya)

Darnit, you guys certainly know how to warp a big compliment into some kind of offense! Seriously do I need to explain myself in this? In case it was some kind of arrogance you read in my post you feel bugged about, and I can see where this may have come from, I apologize. But take an honest compliment as that, please.

Like I said, I was just messin' with you. :) But it does get old hearing other people nagging us to death about things like racism, when it's no different there, or other places. Just wait until you have a Muslim or Jewish candidate running for chanclellor and winning (disclaimer, for all I know Germany may already have had 10 Muslim/Jewish chancellors, I don't keep up with her politics).

Well, at least now the US leads Europe again, fall back into line now, y'all hear? :lol:

Edit: Of course, if ONE crazy lunstic shoots the new President, we will all be gun-crazy racists again. I hope nothing happens to Obama!!

[Kapitan_Phillips]

lmfao at all that smurf

[Onkel Neal]

You sound like a very old person scared sh!tless because life changes, even so slightly. You realise you don't make much sense ?

Semi-accurate.

I am an old(er) person (48), and I am scared nearly "****less," yes.

I have lost nearly all faith in the future, that would be true too.

I guess that makes you right. Congrats.


CS

Snow, don't let this upset you. We survived four years of Carter, who was a mirror image of Obama. We can manage to stagger through Obama. Who knows, maybe he will surprise us and accomplish some productive, American value objectives.

If not, remember, Marxism always fails in the end, be patient.

[Hanomag]

http://img.timeinc.net/time/daily/2007/0712/schwarzenegger_int_1221.jpg

2012 :smug:

Sure why not...? :up:

[Christopher Snow]

Prediction: Germany will bail completely out of Afghanistan at the first opportunity.

Obama, for his part, will reinstitute the US draft quite soon. He will withdraw US forces ASAP from Iraq....(which should thrill all you EU types)...and he'll build instead in Afgh in a show of force.

Which won't intimidate anyone, and from which he will then gradually back down.

["A Strategic Withdrawal," he'll call it]

At which point the Russians will begin to exert a "creeping pressure" of their own in from the east.

Ukraine first...then Georgia (or maybe the other way round)....

You in the EU will WANT to raise the alarm at this point...and you will try....but who can help you?

Well WE can't. How could we? We're nearly bankrupt, with everyone over here suddenly on the dole---we've just gone socialist, remember, so everyone here is expecting (demanding!) his free handout....we've got to deal with all that first.....

.....you in the EU you are screwed. Too bad for you.

[But at least you got what you all wished for--"No more George W Bush!"]

Emergency measures taken on your side of the pond! No more 8 weeks of paid vacation (cut quickly now to only two weeks)....and no more 35 hour work weeks (it's thrust suddenly to 45, or even 50, and against great protests).

Still too little to late. You never did build up any meaningful military reserves (because you counted on us to provide them for all these years), so you have nothing to fall back on.....

Too bad for you.

CS
Oh, I suppose then you dug yourself into german politics and culture deep enough to make such a qualified prediction, hm? My respect, you'd be the first american I met actually caring and informing himself about other countries internal affairs.
Nah! Don't give me any undeserved credit. I neither dug in deep[ly], nor should you give me credit for doing so [let's not fool either of ourselves--I don't care much at all for German politics, nor do you expect me to].

So now that we are done with that bit of nonsense:

For Russia US involvement in the middle east is a present right from heaven itself. It binds US ressources, takes away US capability in countering russian endeavors and undermines US authority in general. A McCain with his sabre rattling is the best Russia could hope for, it would play right into their stratetigc interests to brand the US as a hypoctitic agressor and legitimite their ow actions. Or do you think Russia would have dared to march into Georgie with a strong US with all it's forces ready opposing it?
Hardly.

[Yes I think Russia would have marched westward, straight into Georgia, regardless of which US forces opposed it (and even against McCain) . I do also think they WILL march westward in similar fashion against Obama, and I think neither one could...or would really do that much to stop it. We have no forces to speak of in reserve, and they know it.

It's too bad YOUR countries don't seem to know it].

So, I think you are very much screwed, and it's only a matter of time until the Russians begin to test this idea (it's not fear mongering--it's a WARNING, not that there is much point to it (but it's the best I can do for you).

If you cannot build up your forces, then I suggest you, personally, be ready to "bug out" at short notice.

Get Liquid. Sell stocks buy Gold (and get that gold overseas, into the safest haven you can).

Think like a German citizen (a non-nazi) would have in 1935.

Short of using NUKES against them, I don't think we can really help you. So, as I said before, you let us know what you want us to do (and then Obama will decide either to back you up with nukes or let you be run over--I'm not sure which way he will go. Are YOU confident either way?)

So, please stop your fear mongering. We know very well what we owe the US in beeing involved in Europe for so long, but we also know it was by far not an act of pure altruism, but of US strategic interests. And something else to ponder..Germany had the opportunity to unite, the offer from the russian side was on the table, for the price of beeing neutral in the cold war. Instead western Germany chose to stick to the western allies and wait 50 years for reunification, despite beeing the premier battlefield and facing utter destruction in case war broke out. This is by far not as one sided as american folks tend to make it out. I won't even go into the military contribution Germany would have made in such a scenario. Unthankfulness? Hardly a european phenomennon alone.

So, please cut back your emotional rethorics and come back to the facts, yes? I am more then willing to discuss any of your points, as long they are at least remotely based on reality.[/quote]

[The facts? Ok. The reality for me is that I am selling all my US investments and heading for Canada].

In the long-run, I really don't think that will do me much more good than sitting there in Germany will do you over there...but it's all really I CAN do, realistically.


CS

[Christopher Snow]

You do realize you sound like you are scared drunk right?

Half right anyway. I am very scared (and I'm not kidding).

FWIW, I don't own any guns. Or even a single Bible.

Yet.


CS

[jbt308]

Doesn't it frighten anyone in the least that he doesn't even qualify for security clearance? He is such a liability, he couldn't qualify to be his own Secret Service Agent!

I'll tell you what, if you can refrain from gloating today, I won't tell you I told you so for the next 4 years.

[Christopher Snow]

Snow, don't let this upset you. We survived four years of Carter, who was a mirror image of Obama. We can manage to stagger through Obama. Who knows, maybe he will surprise us and accomplish some productive, American value objectives.

If not, remember, Marxism always fails in the end, be patient.

Neal, thanks. I appreciate your attempt at giving me a "chin up."

Thank you.

What scares me so much now is that, every time in the past we had a solid US (a capitalist US) to back everyone else up.

But now we don't. WE have no backup.

The way I see it I have to get out (with everything I have) before Jan 20.

And I'm not very good at "panic flight."


CS

[AVGWarhawk]

Doesn't it frighten anyone in the least that he doesn't even qualify for security clearance? He is such a liability, he couldn't qualify to be his own Secret Service Agent!

I'll tell you what, if you can refrain from gloating today, I won't tell you I told you so for the next 4 years.

This is part of the orchastrated point that I have been making. Some very influencial people wanted this to happen. They had power enough to squelch all but one news media station (fox). Squelch others in Washington and specifically squelching Hillary Clinton. Let's face it, she was not the stalwart Obama supported she said she would be. What, two stump speechs after his nomination. This election seemed very contrived. As I have stated before, we knew more about Joe the Plumber in under two weeks than we did about Obama in two years. If you look at the squelching of everything about Obama, it is utterly amazing how the glazing over took place with the media. Personally, I blame the media for poor coverage and accurate reporting concerning Obama. The election was almost to perfect. In hindsight, Obama's campaign would probably screamed racism if the media went after him like others who ran for president. Just another bye for Obama.

I suggest Brag write a book on what looks to me like a conspiracy.

[Bewolf]

Voting Obama alone raised the US reputation by a big margin practically overnight. You guys voted a black president. Big kudos to that, I did not see that coming. Basicly threw a ot of clichés out of the window into the faces of those thinking the US was still too racist. That alone was worth it already, if not anything else.


So, when we were electing white presidents, we were racist, now that we have a black (technically, he's just as white as he is black :roll: ) president, we are ok?

Yeah, so when is Germany going to stop practicing racism and elect their first black chancellor/president? ;)

(Just teasing ya)
Darnit, you guys certainly know how to warp a big compliment into some kind of offense! Seriously do I need to explain myself in this? In case it was some kind of arrogance you read in my post you feel bugged about, and I can see where this may have come from, I apologize. But take an honest compliment as that, please.
Like I said, I was just messin' with you. :) But it does get old hearing other people nagging us to death about things like racism, when it's no different there, or other places. Just wait until you have a Muslim or Jewish candidate running for chanclellor and winning (disclaimer, for all I know Germany may already have had 10 Muslim/Jewish chancellors, I don't keep up with her politics).

Well, at least now the US leads Europe again, fall back into line now, y'all hear? :lol:

Edit: Of course, if ONE crazy lunstic shoots the new President, we will all be gun-crazy racists again. I hope nothing happens to Obama!!

Point taken and agreed. I suppose it will be interesting once we do have a serious turkish candidate for the chancelor office.
But, that is the issue here. Racism may always play a role. But the astonishing fact is, that other criteria eventually were more important. And that is all one can ask for. I will be more then happy should this take place in Germany as well and an eventual turkish candidate here gets voted for his concepts, not his cultural background, however debateable that is. Time will tell.

Until that is the case, take pleasure in the fact the world recogized the US progress in this and don't take it offensivly if ppl comment on it in a very positive way. A compliment is a compliment, no more, no less.

[Bewolf]

Prediction: Germany will bail completely out of Afghanistan at the first opportunity.

Obama, for his part, will reinstitute the US draft quite soon. He will withdraw US forces ASAP from Iraq....(which should thrill all you EU types)...and he'll build instead in Afgh in a show of force.

Which won't intimidate anyone, and from which he will then gradually back down.

["A Strategic Withdrawal," he'll call it]

At which point the Russians will begin to exert a "creeping pressure" of their own in from the east.

Ukraine first...then Georgia (or maybe the other way round)....

You in the EU will WANT to raise the alarm at this point...and you will try....but who can help you?

Well WE can't. How could we? We're nearly bankrupt, with everyone over here suddenly on the dole---we've just gone socialist, remember, so everyone here is expecting (demanding!) his free handout....we've got to deal with all that first.....

.....you in the EU you are screwed. Too bad for you.

[But at least you got what you all wished for--"No more George W Bush!"]

Emergency measures taken on your side of the pond! No more 8 weeks of paid vacation (cut quickly now to only two weeks)....and no more 35 hour work weeks (it's thrust suddenly to 45, or even 50, and against great protests).

Still too little to late. You never did build up any meaningful military reserves (because you counted on us to provide them for all these years), so you have nothing to fall back on.....

Too bad for you.

CS
Oh, I suppose then you dug yourself into german politics and culture deep enough to make such a qualified prediction, hm? My respect, you'd be the first american I met actually caring and informing himself about other countries internal affairs.
Nah! Don't give me any undeserved credit. I neither dug in deep[ly], nor should you give me credit for doing so [let's not fool either of ourselves--I don't care much at all for German politics, nor do you expect me to].

So now that we are done with that bit of nonsense:

For Russia US involvement in the middle east is a present right from heaven itself. It binds US ressources, takes away US capability in countering russian endeavors and undermines US authority in general. A McCain with his sabre rattling is the best Russia could hope for, it would play right into their stratetigc interests to brand the US as a hypoctitic agressor and legitimite their ow actions. Or do you think Russia would have dared to march into Georgie with a strong US with all it's forces ready opposing it?
Hardly.

[Yes I think Russia would have marched westward, straight into Georgia, regardless of which US forces opposed it (and even against McCain) . I do also think they WILL march westward in similar fashion against Obama, and I think neither one could...or would really do that much to stop it. We have no forces to speak of in reserve, and they know it.

It's too bad YOUR countries don't seem to know it].

So, I think you are very much screwed, and it's only a matter of time until the Russians begin to test this idea (it's not fear mongering--it's a WARNING, not that there is much point to it (but it's the best I can do for you).

If you cannot build up your forces, then I suggest you be ready to "bug out" at short notice.

Short of using NUKES against them, I don't think we can help you. So, as I said before, you let us know what you want us to do (and then Obama will decide either to back you up with nukes or let you be run over--I'm not sure which way he will go. Are YOU confident either way?)

So, please stop your fear mongering. We know very well what we owe the US in beeing involved in Europe for so long, but we also know it was by far not an act of pure altruism, but of US strategic interests. And something else to ponder..Germany had the opportunity to unite, the offer from the russian side was on the table, for the price of beeing neutral in the cold war. Instead western Germany chose to stick to the western allies and wait 50 years for reunification, despite beeing the premier battlefield and facing utter destruction in case war broke out. This is by far not as one sided as american folks tend to make it out. I won't even go into the military contribution Germany would have made in such a scenario. Unthankfulness? Hardly a european phenomennon alone.

So, please cut back your emotional rethorics and come back to the facts, yes? I am more then willing to discuss any of your points, as long they are at least remotely based on reality.
[The facts? Ok. The reality for me is that I am selling all my US investments and heading for Canada].

In the long-run, I really don't think that will do me much more good than sitting there in Germany will do you over there...but it's all really I CAN do, realistically.


CS
look, Germany, Europe and Russia have certain expiriences with each other. Yanno...for like over a thousand years already. We know each other quite well. And we pretty much know what to expect. That comes with history and living right next to each other. Russia is no danger currently. They may try to tinker around with energy exports and will try to expand their sphere of influence over to the Ukraine and other former soviet states. The balitcs are in danger as well and the rest of Europe has to make a clear commitment there. But everything beyond that is quite illusionary at the moment. Putin is no madman, he needs Europe for cash alone. And the russian military and economy is in no state to pose any life threatening danger to european independence anytime soon. If you are of another opinion or disagree, that is your right. I won't try to convince you if you made up your mind already.

[Christopher Snow]

... see next post

[Christopher Snow]

This is part of the orchastrated point that I have been making. Some very influencial people wanted this to happen. They had power enough to squelch all but one news media station (fox).

Ok, I'll disagree right off the bat with this.

FWIW, I spent the last month ghosting (guesting) a the "hillaryclintonforum.net", where I learned a LOT of things. Those PUMA's were all passionate about HRC. And yet....

....sqelching of any of the media was a complete NON issue (in fact, the general complaint was "why can't we shut down MSNBC?", etc, or "why can't we shut down Huffpo (the Huffington Post?)"

The ONLY positive suggestion I ever heard in this regard was "well....just boycott them.!"

Usually something done on the part of individual memembers only, and not as part of an organized effort (in fact, I cannot think of even ONE organized effort.)


Squelch others in Washington and specifically squelching Hillary Clinton. Let's face it, she was not the stalwart Obama supported she said she would be. What, two stump speechs after his nomination. This election seemed very contrived. As I have stated before, we knew more about Joe the Plumber in under two weeks than we did about Obama in two years. If you look at the squelching of everything about Obama, it is utterly amazing how the glazing over took place with the media. Personally, I blame the media for poor coverage and accurate reporting concerning Obama. The election was almost to perfect. In hindsight, Obama's campaign would probably screamed racism if the media went after him like others who ran for president. Just another bye for Obama.

I suggest Brag write a book on what looks to me like a conspiracy.[/quote]


I would beg to differ as regards the perception of HRC in that same forum. In fact there were a couple of threads offered up after election was clinched which went: This might get me banned (from the forum) but I'm ANGRY with Hillary and Bill for supporting him (Obama).

By their count HRC gave 67 (I think) speeches for BHO, while Bill gave 41.

I'm not kidding.

I was never anything more than a guest in that forum, but I'm quite sure this is true.

My numbers are at least close if not exact. So I suggest you check them there before writing that book (lest either of you be sued for malfeasance). :D

The HRCF, btw, were strong for McCain/Palin, but were also very disgusted with the MSM.

They did agree that the MSM was generally unfair in its' reporting, btw.

So maybe we ALL have that in common.


CS

[Sea Demon]

Christopher. This is just part of the cycle. Don't let it affect you. What Obama has proposed as change in his campaign will not work. Simply put, his brand of government is incompatible with a free nation. I'm willing to give this guy a chance, and watch very vigilantly. But I expect the worst actually. Obama's campaign was a completely fraudulent display. I watched some of the people last night in the crowd and just stood back and shook my head. They have alot of expectations. Expectations Obama cannot fill. If he does what his voters want.....he will most assuredly fail. The more I think about it, the more I'm realizing that this may be the start of a painful Carter era. And look what was brought on the scene after that.

[Kptlt. Neuerburg]

To all of the Obama haters out there, now look just because he is now the president does not mean you just go and say the countrys is going to fail. Personally in a way I feel soory for Obama since he has to go and clean up the mess that Bush felt behind. Even if McCain was elected it still would not be easy, as the US ecnomy is in the toilet!!! I am glad that Obama made it because he will bring change. If McCain was he would let things stay the way that they are now, so those of you here who are of age to retire do you really think that McCain was telling the truth about what he was "going to do", I don't! And to Mr. Snow, you stated that Obama was not a US born citizen well you are WRONG!!!!! John McCain is the one who is not a US born citizen, McCain was born in a Naval Air Station inside of the Panama Canal Zone so techniclly he is not a US born citizen.:huh: Don't belive me well look here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McCain. So who's not a US born citizen now Mr. Snow. Obama was born in Hawaii and most of his family are US citizens which would make him one as well.:know: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama

[Kapitan_Phillips]

To be honest, I've never understood why the United States limits presidential candidates to strictly US born people. I can understand needing to be a naturalised citizen, and the necessity for a political background such as governor, but surely it should be left to the voters who goes into office.

What happens when a foreign born politician has great ideas, but is restricted from enacting them?

[AVGWarhawk]

To be honest, I've never understood why the United States limits presidential candidates to strictly US born people. I can understand needing to be a naturalised citizen, and the necessity for a political background such as governor, but surely it should be left to the voters who goes into office.

What happens when a foreign born politician has great ideas, but is restricted from enacting them?

Rules is rules as held up by the Constitution. Then again, Washington has a way of bending the Constitution's rules to fit their need. Nice, huh?

[Letum]

Who would have guessed someone who spent $600 million on advertising would
win the election. No doubt he will be working closely with his large, industrial
contributors when it comes to policy making.
As for any substantial differences: we shall see in time, but I will be surprised if
differences in the perception of the US leader are matched by any departure from
US policy as it has been since 2001.

[AVGWarhawk]

Who would have guessed someone who spent $600 million on advertising would
win the election. No doubt he will be working closely with his large, industrial
contributors when it comes to policy making.
As for any substantial differences: we shall see in time, but I will be surprised if
differences in the perception of the US leader are matched by any departure from
US policy as it has been since 2001.

Amen.

[GoldenRivet]

its not a perfect system but its the best in america :88)

Im not opposed to Obama being president... even if i was it wouldnt matter.

However i am concerned about what his tax agenda is, i have mixed feelings about his stance on stem cell research and im very nervous about what his victory means for not only my brand new small business, but also what it means to my ever increasing obligation to financially support the ghettos.

I didnt like where i was in life 3 or 4 years ago, so i devised a plan to change that before i hit 30.

so far the plan has worked, and im on a road to success.

i just dont understand why some of these people in the "ghettos" are unable to do the same?

I mean i made $12,000 on a good year for God's sake... how much worse can it get next to homelessness??? and you honestly mean to try to sell me the garbage that there is nothing these people can do to better themselves? that my money has to be given to them without argument.

:nope:

only time will tell

[Onkel Neal]

I didnt like where i was in life 3 or 4 years ago, so i devised a plan to change that before i hit 30.

so far the plan has worked, and im on a road to success.

i just dont understand why some of these people in the "ghettos" are unable to do the same?

I mean i made $12,000 on a good year for God's sake... how much worse can it get next to homelessness??? and you honestly mean to try to sell me the garbage that there is nothing these people can do to better themselves? that my money has to be given to them without argument.

Of course, you are succeeding purely because you are lucky. ;) It has nothing to do with your initiative, determination, making good choices, doing without some luxuries, sacrifice, hard work. You just got lucky, man. You need to pay more in taxes to those hard working people who aren't as lucky as you. :rotfl:

[Ishmael]

I want a return to the Rule of Law with NO ONE above the law. The past 8 years were an exercise in the flouting of the rule of law, evisceration of liberties and a winking at Republican and corporate corruption. Obama, as a Constitutional Scholar with a deep sense of history, can bring that about. When you have people like Warren Buffet, Colin Powell and Paul Volcker working for the Obama team, that bodes well for the nation. I want CLEAN, HONEST government. I can think of no better way to achieve that and provide true bipartisanship than enlisting the many Republicans who were thrown under the bus by the Bush administration to restore accountability. That's why I suggested Joe Wilson, David Iglesias and others like Carol Lam be brought onto the team. They were honest Republicans who paid the price for showing integrity under pressure. Iglesias was fired for refusing to bring charges against corrupt Dems here in NM prematurely. Because of that, they laid their cases out correctly and obtained convictions against those same corrupt Dems. It's corruption I hate, not Republicans.

As for Arnie and the native-born citizen requirement, that means Arnie's children can grow up to become President. You have a higher regard for the nation when the bones of your ancestors lie in it's ground.

[Sea Demon]

its not a perfect system but its the best in america :88)

However i am concerned about what his tax agenda is, i have mixed feelings about his stance on stem cell research and im very nervous about what his victory means for not only my brand new small business, but also what it means to my ever increasing obligation to financially support the ghettos.

I didnt like where i was in life 3 or 4 years ago, so i devised a plan to change that before i hit 30.

so far the plan has worked, and im on a road to success.

i just dont understand why some of these people in the "ghettos" are unable to do the same?

I mean i made $12,000 on a good year for God's sake... how much worse can it get next to homelessness??? and you honestly mean to try to sell me the garbage that there is nothing these people can do to better themselves? that my money has to be given to them without argument.

:nope:

only time will tell

The bad thing is, it's not only people in the ghettos. An alarming number of Americans believe that they are owed a living. They look at the US government as a means to guarantee their economic security. They use the government as their own means to plunder the private property of the self-sufficient, and refuse to accept responsibility in their own lives. You should see how I used to live when I was in college. Dirt poor is putting it mildly. Yet, I always voted for economic freedom (even then) and understood that government was an impediment to securing financial success. You work your way out. In the case of the many who voted for Obama, it has been all about "what is in it for me". Look at that Peggy the Mooch. She believes if she "helps" Obama, Obama is gonna "help" her. Apparently this loser believes she won't have to pay for her gas or her roof over her head. In the end, she will see Obama won't be able to deliver. The word Pathetric doesn't even sum it up.

[Sea Demon]

It's corruption I hate, not Republicans.


How bout' Dem corruption? There is plenty of that up there.

[Kptlt. Neuerburg]

I want CLEAN, HONEST government. I can think of no better way to achieve that and provide true bipartisanship than enlisting the many Republicans who were thrown under the bus by the Bush administration to restore accountability. That's why I suggested Joe Wilson, David Iglesias and others like Carol Lam be brought onto the team. They were honest Republicans who paid the price for showing integrity under pressure. Iglesias was fired for refusing to bring charges against corrupt Dems here in NM prematurely. Because of that, they laid their cases out correctly and obtained convictions against those same corrupt Dems. It's corruption I hate, not Republicans.

As for Arnie and the native-born citizen requirement, that means Arnie's children can grow up to become President. You have a higher regard for the nation when the bones of your ancestors lie in it's ground. Ishmael as I truly agree with you on the subject of a clean and honest government, it hard to find some clean and honest people in that government. That is why TR must be rollin' around in his grave!

[Jimbuna]

Here's hoping the US have made the right choice :hmm:
I hope so as well, but I'm not optimistic about it. Can I stay with you for a couple of days before I continue on to Switzerland?:D
No problem....just remember to bring your sidearm :lol:

Jim,

What really was the right choice? We, as Americans, are equally screwed no matter the outcome of the election. No matter the decisions Obama makes, I believe he does look at it deeply and with clarity. If he runs the country like his campaign (which was brilliant) we should be in good shape. One can say running for government is very different when you finally get into government. That is very true. However, Obama seemed very sincere and he accomplished this goal of winning without resorting to going across racial and political boundries. That would indicate the people voted for the man, not his skin (all though a lot voted because of his African American heritage. That is a given on both sides of the race) and I would like to see the numbers between the races of voters. Although I think his campaign has been orchastrated, it was done well. So, I give the guy a chance. I do not agree with some of his policies but I have to respect the position he has obtained. We move forward.

Can't disagree with a word of your text.

If I'm to be totally honest though, it's just that having been so close to some of the decision makers in politics in my time, I've learned not to take any of them too seriously....and certainly NEVER trust them.

What I do dwell on and take serious though is the consideration I give to the potential consequences of some of their actions/decisions.

I tend to subscribe to the words once spoken by a wise man (Billy Connolly a Scottish comedian actually) :lol:

"Don't vote, it only encourages the bastids".

I think it is too often the case that (in voting terms)....your damned if you do and your damned if you don't.

[PeriscopeDepth]

Christopher Snow,

I have to hand it to you. You have an extreme viewpoint, are as you say "scared ****less" and have the ability to express your viewpoint again and again.

Without really being rude. And even consciously working some humor into your posts.

In all seriousness, while I may not agree with your posts I can read them without throwing up and sometimes even had a funny grin on my face.

Excellent job! Not something one often sees on such a politicized (polarized) forum. :D

PD

[GlobalExplorer]

Can say we in good ol' Germany are all very happy with your choice. I know things look a lot different on your side of the pond. But look, even if you hate the guy, owing to Obama it is a lot less likely that people will spit out before you or make a fist when you leave your beloved country, just because now he will be President of the United States. I know that sounds harsh, but our love for your country has suffered dramatically in the last years, but we are inclined to like the USA, so here many people are happy about the new start. You should have done that 4 years ago actually, what waste of time, money and reputation these Bush years have been for you.

I have collegues from Syria, even they have new hope, unbelieveable when they were so bitter yesterday about your disrespect of their borders and the million or so refugees from Iraq. They want to return to normality like everyone else.

Alas, I didn't want to end on a negative note. When you see it from outside of the USA, it's really a great day today. I know it might not be yours, but from my point of view Obama is the ideal American, no matter if his ass is black or white.

[AngusJS]

If not, remember, Marxism always fails in the end, be patient.

Yes, because Obama and the Democrats have stated repeatedly that 1) capitalism has created a working class which owns nothing but its labor; 2) the internal contradictions of capitalism will lead to ever-increasing crises, which will eventually completely divide the world into the proletariat and the owner class and spark a revolution; 3) during this revolution, the proletariat will seize the means of production, ushering in a new mode of economic organization - communism; and 4) it is the duty of Marxists to prepare the workers for this day.

That's the Democratic platform. You can read about it on Obama's website and everything.

:roll:
:damn: :damn: :damn:

[Sea Demon]

Can say we in good ol' Germany are all very happy with your choice.

As they say, Be Careful what you wish for...........

[August]

Why do you Euro guys keep insisting that the US President controls our economy? He doesn't, and he never did. The closest government agency that comes to controlling the economy is the US Congress and even they only have a partial effect on it that takes years to become evident.

[GlobalExplorer]

Why do you Euro guys keep insisting that the US President controls our economy? He doesn't, and he never did. The closest government agency that comes to controlling the economy is the US Congress and even they only have a partial effect on it that takes years to become evident.

Bush raised your national deficit by 3 trillion, that's three million millions, or ~10.000$ for each one of you, has that nothing to do with the economy? The United States is broke, so much that you must now borrow money from China, that's the reality mate.

[August]

Bush raised your national deficit by 3 trillion, that's three million millions, or ~10.000$ for each one of you, has that nothing to do with the economy? The United States is broke, so much that you must now borrow money from China, that's the reality mate.

Bush raised nothing, not taxes, not the deficit, not the price of gas. Congress controls the national purse strings, not the executive.

[GlobalExplorer]

If not, remember, Marxism always fails in the end, be patient.

Yes, because Obama and the Democrats have stated repeatedly that 1) capitalism has created a working class which owns nothing but its labor; 2) the internal contradictions of capitalism will lead to ever-increasing crises, which will eventually completely divide the world into the proletariat and the owner class and spark a revolution; 3) during this revolution, the proletariat will seize the means of production, ushering in a new mode of economic organization - communism; and 4) it is the duty of Marxists to prepare the workers for this day.

That's the Democratic platform. You can read about it on Obama's website and everything.

:roll:
:damn: :damn: :damn:

: link or it's not true :

Btw point 1) is obvious, 2) is debatable, it's only with the other predictions about klassenkampf and communist utopia when Karl Marx lost his mind.

[Bort]

http://img.timeinc.net/time/daily/2007/0712/schwarzenegger_int_1221.jpg

2012 :smug:

Unconstitutional.

[Task Force]

I hope obama dose the job as president good.:yep: Im not gona say anything bad about him untill he dose something bad, he might be one of the countrys best presidents. We realy dont know yet.:up:

[GlobalExplorer]

Bush raised your national deficit by 3 trillion, that's three million millions, or ~10.000$ for each one of you, has that nothing to do with the economy? The United States is broke, so much that you must now borrow money from China, that's the reality mate.
Bush raised nothing, not taxes, not the deficit, not the price of gas. Congress controls the national purse strings, not the executive.
Technically, you should be right. Ok, if that's what you mean, if I say Bush I mean his administration and his party. We have a different system here, governed more by parties than by the head representatives, so we tend to set them equal, sorry for that.

But if it is so, who runs your country actually? So far I believed it was a presidential democracy.

@Mikhayl, I really don't know the answer, this forum keeps me dumbfounded.

[GoldenRivet]

http://img.timeinc.net/time/daily/2007/0712/schwarzenegger_int_1221.jpg

2012 :smug:
Unconstitutional.

you obviously didnt see "demolition man"

[Sea Demon]

http://img.timeinc.net/time/daily/2007/0712/schwarzenegger_int_1221.jpg

2012 :smug:
Unconstitutional.
you obviously didnt see "demolition man"

You guys can have the governator. He's been bad for our state.

[jbt308]

Bush raised your national deficit by 3 trillion, that's three million millions, or ~10.000$ for each one of you, has that nothing to do with the economy? The United States is broke, so much that you must now borrow money from China, that's the reality mate.
Bush raised nothing, not taxes, not the deficit, not the price of gas. Congress controls the national purse strings, not the executive.
Technically, you should be right. Ok, if that's what you mean, if I say Bush I mean his administration and his party. We have a different system here, governed more by parties than by the head representatives, so we tend to set them equal, sorry for that.

But if it is so, who runs your country actually? So far I believed it was a presidential democracy.

@Mikhayl, I really don't know the answer, this forum keeps me dumbfounded.
This isn't an easy question to answer, because it's so involved.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_government

The Constitution is the law of the land for most people that still believe in it. Other's inject rights that aren't there, but that's another story.

The President is the head of the Executive Branch of the government.
Congress and Senate of parts of the Legislative Branch of the government
The Supreme Court are the ultimate judges of the land, the Judicial Branch.

The government is run on a system of checks and balances between all three branches. The Congress can create a law, the executive approves it, it becomes law, but if the Supreme court rules it unconstitutional, it is repealed.

Similarly, the President can create legislation, but it has to meet with approval from the legislature. If he can't get approval there, then it will most likely die.

In a nut shell, every branch of the national government has a modicum of power over the other, so that you can't get into a situation where one branch can dominate. Now, if a super-majority situation occurs, you've got, what amounts to, 1 party rule, which is definitely not a good thing.

The people elect all the officials in Washington, whether they be President, Senator or Representative. The Supreme Court Justices are appointed by the President and sit for life. These appointments must be approved by Congress.

The national system is basically mimicked on the state level, but instead of President's, we have Governors. And each state has their own Constitution. The basic legal systems runs this way. If a law or right isn't explicitly stated in the US Constitution, it can be "lawified" at the state level. Which means that States can, in a sense, over-ride certain laws that are passed at a federal level.

For instance. By law, Abortion in America is legal. However, if the state of Florida wanted to outlaw it, and the people of the state voted for it, then it could become illegal in the state of Florida. We have our own referendums on the state level that will allow the citizens to modify the State Constitution. To amend the US Constitution, the Amendment has to pass, unanimously by all the states by our Representatives in Congress.

Check out the wiki page, it's pretty informative. Or do some research on your own. It's quite different than the majority of systems throughout the world. We have a Representative Democracy, a Republic.

One last thing, someone said of Mccain that he was born on an airbase in Panana, while that is true, US Military Bases, Consulates, and Embassies are considered US soil by law. Anyone born there is considered a Natural Born US Citizen. Naturalized and Natural Born are two seperate meanings. My mother, who is from Czechoslovakia is a Naturalized Citizen. I am a Natural Born citizen because I was born in the United States. She cannot run for President, but I can. I have yet to see evidence as to where Mr. Obama was born, and it irks me that he refuses to release that information. Something so simple.

[Sailor Steve]

The country is going to hell in a handbasket, and has been for the past 200 years. Just ask anybody who was on the losing side of any election since 1788.

As a historian, I see this as an amazing time, one that I wasn't sure would ever come, and am glad to have lived to witness.

I disagree with Obama politically, but I also disagree with McCain, which is why I wrote in a non-candidate of my own choosing. But Clinton didn't destroy the country, and neither did Bush, despite claims to the contrary by opponents of both men. If real evidence comes to light concerning Obama's qualifications, then that will take place in its own time. Meanwhile, all the "not-a-natural-born-citizen" talk is just that, the talk of people who are predisposed to hate the man and are doing everything they can to destroy his presidency before it has a chance to prove itself one way or the other.

I'm willing to give him the chance to show his stuff (not like I have any real choice in the matter) before I change my opinion, which is that things are going to go on pretty much as they always have, with one side trying to convert the country to what they think is best, and the other side doing everything they can to stop it for the very same reason.

Most of what I see here is politics and rhetoric - also pretty much the same as always.

[Sailor Steve]

Sorry, double post.
... see next post
You edited your posts. Didn't you see the button under 'Edit' that says 'Delete'?

[jbt308]

I agree, and I don't disparage a man for trying to make things for the better. But the truth is, I can't say I agree with anything Obama stands for, nor his party. I just don't. Nothing wrong with that, that's what makes the country work to a certain extent, the free flow of ideas.

And I don't think to say that just because you're trying to find facts, important facts ,on a person that that is necessarily an avenue to which destroy someone. Hell, being a Natural Born Citizen it's a constitutional pre-requisite for the office of the President of the United States. What pisses me off is how the simple fact of questioning and fact finding has become some sort of hate-crime just because Obama happens to be 1/2 black. God knows we know everything there is to know about Palin, Mccain and Joe the Frickin Plumber, but ask Obama for his birth certificate is tantamount to societal treason!

People need to grow thicker skins, grow up and take off the rose colored glasses. You need to earn my respect, it's not an inherent right and not given up easily.

[Skybird]

I'm willing to give him the chance to show his stuff (not like I have any real choice in the matter) before I change my opinion, which is that things are going to go on pretty much as they always have, with one side trying to convert the country to what they think is best, and the other side doing everything they can to stop it for the very same reason.
I fear that Obama's space for action is incredibly small, due to the bad state of the economy, the finacial situation with the stellar debts, and two wars also costing money. This really handcuffs his freedom to act.

There is no guarantee that he will succeed with all that he promised, and in his victory speech you already see that he is aware of problematic situation. but I thzink that MaCCain made a much weaker figure during campaign when it came to economics, and had no clear line, while Obama gives me the impression that he is more thorough and more competent in the matter. Of the two, he has the better chances I think to get some needed things moving (that's why I said as an American I would have preferred him). but a guarantee it is not. the heritage that Bush leaves behind after 8 years, is very, very huge and pressing.

As you said, let's give Obama a fair chance, and I am even willing to accept that europe will need to invest and sacrifice some things as well to assist him, even if it is only to support him, but is not reflecting our view on things. Because it would be better for all of us if he succeeds indeed. Wishing him bad, like some here do, for simple reasons of bipartisanship, is stupid and self-damaging, and - what might be especially important to Americans doing so - it is antipatriotic and puts ideology and party above country. Give the man a fair chance. It can only become better, at worst, things stay as miserable as they are.

You are a historian? Hobby, or professionally? If the latter, where do you work, in what function, and what are your fields of special interest?

[Onkel Neal]

That's the Democratic platform. You can read about it on Obama's website and everything.

Really? Can you come up with a link? I want to see that for myself.

[Biggles]

I must say, Obama is one hell of a speaker:yep:

[Bewolf]

Sorry, double post. ... see next post You edited your posts. Didn't you see the button under 'Edit' that says 'Delete'?

Thanks for the hint, I actually missed that option. http://www.smilies.4-user.de/include/Verlegen/smilie_verl_027.gif

[Wolfehunter]

It shows how crooked your government is to allow Non pureborn americans to run your country.

They have just spit on your constitution and you helped them do it too.:hmm:

Not very promissing future for you guys.:-? What does your constitution mean now? Does it have any worth in the modern America?

The way I see it is that document is just a piece of paper of historical value.. nothing more.:nope:

Real shame.

[Kapitan_Phillips]

http://img.timeinc.net/time/daily/2007/0712/schwarzenegger_int_1221.jpg

2012 :smug:
Unconstitutional.

Perhaps. But you cant say it wouldnt be awesome :p

[baggygreen]

Problem KP - when he's in an assassination attempt, he'll be blocking the secret service guards, returning fire and going after the assassin himself!:arrgh!:

[Kapitan_Phillips]

Problem KP - when he's in an assassination attempt, he'll be blocking the secret service guards, returning fire and going after the assassin himself!:arrgh!:

SEE YOU AT DAH PAHTY RICHTAH!

[Christopher Snow]

The reason for the "natural born" clause in the US Constitution is to ensure that the commander-in-chief of our armed forces owes allegience only to the United States, and not to any other country or soveriegn.

The document was authored at a time when a significant proportion of the population still DID feel it owed allegience to European countries (primarily England--I'm sure a number of those "newly minted" US citizens certainly still did feel they were subjects of King George III even after America won it's independence, so the clause was put in there to assuage worries that a newly elected President might secretly want to reunify his new country with England (and might take steps to do so)).

Remember, it was all brand new back then, and our founding fathers were very much "making it all up as they went along."

It's still vitally important today, IMO, for a different reason--the CIC is in control of a nuclear arsenal that could destroy the world.


CS

[Christopher Snow]

Periscope Depth:

Thank you. I realize I sound like I've gone half off the deep end, and I'm trying really hard not to send my own little tugboat under, so if I only sound "half crazy," maybe I can stilll rescue the situation after all (I'm still terrified, but I'm battling with it).

To anyone I offended last night, I apologize. I was certainly not in complete control of my emotions (I'm doing only marginally better tonight), and I'm sure I was out of line more than a few times.

Hopefully no one took it too personally.

-----------

I do value the chance to talk to people who are more educated (than most) on military matters, and world history, which is part of why I came in here last night to rage at the walls instead of going somewhere else.

It's pretty hard to explain to average Americans today (particularly those under thirty) that awful things CAN happen in this world, that strong and sustainable forces of terror can be unleashed, and that it can potentially happen even here in this country. Few really understand, for example, that Hitler was actually a "National Socialist," and that he was actually ELECTED into office (admittadly, not by a majority) before he began to consolidate power and kill off dissent.

Yes, some do know he was a "Nazi," but far too few over here realize that the word IS the short form of "National Socialist," and that his politics and economic ideology lay to the far left (or what would be described as far left in US terms).

These days skinheads--"neo-nazis" (and therefore all Nazis in general it seems in the eyes of far too large a portion of the general public) are typically thought of as coming from the far right-wing...from the Republican end of the political spectrum, and not the left at all. A much greater proportion of those in this forum will know that this is completely backwards, but it's difficult to explain to the average "man on the street" in this country (our educators have let us down in a big way on this, IMO).

It might be correct to label those small far-fringe groups as "right-wing" only because their ecomomic ideology is the complete opposite from Hitler's, to the extent they even have one at all--they are really just racists, and not at all the same economic and political "Nazis of old."

I THINK many more of you in here will see the distinction, and will realize that if the "Old Nazism" that swept Europe in the 1930's were to rear its ugly head again (this time in the US), that it would, indeed, come from the political far-left once again (and not from the far right at all), but I'm sure there are some, even in here, who do not understand this truth.

AND THAT POSSIBILITY is what really scares the hell out of me. I think we are closer now, after this election, than at any time since the Great Depression to seeing this happen here in the US.

Thanks for listening.


CS

[August]

Technically, you should be right. Ok, if that's what you mean, if I say Bush I mean his administration and his party. We have a different system here, governed more by parties than by the head representatives, so we tend to set them equal, sorry for that.

But if it is so, who runs your country actually? So far I believed it was a presidential democracy.

jbt308 pretty much nails it. We're actually quite different from the Parliamentary systems that most Europeans are used to.

[AngusJS]

Global Explorer & Neal:

Sorry for the confusion; I meant that as sarcasm. I was trying to show how different Democratic ideology is from Marxism. Believing in raising taxes and increasing government regulation does not a Marxist make.

Global Explorer, in what way is point 2 debatable? I read a fair piece of Marx back in the day, but don't remember much. :nope:

[Christopher Snow]

Sorry, double post. ... see next post You edited your posts. Didn't you see the button under 'Edit' that says 'Delete'?

I did not see it last night, no (tunnel vision), but I have tried it twice today, without success.

Probably need to have cookies enabled...or maybe it's because I can only boot my PC using a Linux Live CD.

In any case, it's not working here (but thanks for the tip, just the same).


CS

[AngusJS]

Periscope Depth:

Yes, some do know he was a "Nazi," but far too few over here realize that the word IS the short form of "National Socialist," and that his politics and economic ideology lay to the far left (or what would be described as far left in US terms).
CS
If Nazism is a left wing phenomenon, how do you explain this chart?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/07/Pru.PNG

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Elections_in_Weimar_Germany

It tracks parliamentary elections in Prussia from 1919 to 1933. The SPD experiences a general decline in seats, the communist KPD remains the same, and the centrist parties essentially remain the same.

The conservative/right wing DNVP, WP and DVP however all lose massive amounts of votes in 1932 and even disappear entirely, almost as if voters from those conservative/right wing parties were flocking to another -the NSDAP.

Why would right wing voters vote for the Nazis, if the Nazis weren't right wing?

[Christopher Snow]

Periscope Depth:

Yes, some do know he was a "Nazi," but far too few over here realize that the word IS the short form of "National Socialist," and that his politics and economic ideology lay to the far left (or what would be described as far left in US terms).
CS
If Nazism is a left wing phenomenon, how do you explain this chart?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/07/Pru.PNG

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Elections_in_Weimar_Germany

It tracks parliamentary elections in Prussia from 1919 to 1933. The SPD experiences a general decline in seats, the communist KPD remains the same, and the centrist parties essentially remain the same.

The conservative/right wing DNVP, WP and DVP however all lose massive amounts of votes in 1932 and even disappear entirely, almost as if voters from those conservative/right wing parties were flocking to another -the NSDAP.

Why would right wing voters vote for the Nazis, if the Nazis weren't right wing?
Understand that this is the first time I've ever seen the chart, so it will take me some time to come to grips even with the basic "cast of players." If I remember this thread, I willl try to get back with you once I've done so.

Meanwhile...let me postulate that "right and left" in terms of German Politics in the 20's and 30's MIGHT not translate well into US politics in 2008 (as regards definitions of "right" and "left)."

I will also say that, from my US perspective, Socialism and Communism are not terribly dissimilar to one another, in principle. I'm sure you will disagree, but know that this is generally my view. From my perspective, both theologies lie far off to the left...

That's the best I can do for now.


CS

[JHuschke]

All I can say is :shifty: