 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Ford / Ford Mustang / June 2007a.s raped at the pumps Options
Any company that is making $4 million to $5 million a second is raping the compliant public that does not have an alternative. Maybe this is the catalyst that will create a viable alternative. The new Tesla totally electric using batteries similar to a cell phones is one possibility. > Any company that is making $4 million to $5 million a second > is raping the compliant public that does not have an > alternative. Maybe this is the catalyst that will create > a viable alternative. The new Tesla totally electric using > batteries similar to a cell phones is one possibility. The days of the gasoline engine in this country are numbered, IMO. The public is already getting their collective minds right regarding hybrids, electrics etc. Once the general public starts voting with their wallets and buy fuel efficient and/or alternative fuel cars I think the shift will occur quicker than anyone could have imagined. The one good thing about all this global warming hype (yes I said hype) is its intended phase out of gasoline powered vehicles. Personally, I would love to buy an electric car that gets 300-400 miles on a charge. Especially if it can recharge to 80% capacity in less than ten minutes. Keep in mind that you're hearing this wish from a die hard gear head. We need to reduce our dependence on oil for a number of reasons. Mainly it is economic because China, India and the rest of the Third World will be pressuring the oil markets for decades to come. The developed countries need to use technology to pull ourselves from the oil feeding frenzy. The public wants this to happen, IMO. I know I do. These high gas prices might just be the catalyst to get the ball rolling. Europe's, Canada's, Japan's etc. economies aren't based enough on free market principles to make the change occur. Our is, and if the public is given the right alternatives they will force the change to occur. Hybrid cars are the first step of the change and the public has accepted them and more models are coming. Once a market develops we will see more investment occurring by the big automakers to fill a demand for hybrid, and eventually, electric based cars. If $4-$5 per gallon gas accelerates this process then at least something good will have come from our pain at the pump. >> Any company that is making $4 million to $5 million a second >> is raping the compliant public that does not have an [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] >accelerates this process then at least something good will have come >from our pain at the pump. I agreed until the last paragraph. The public has not accepted hybrids or they would be buying them at a much faster rate. According to the latest reports, the public is not happy with several attributes, although they support the concept. Battery life is still a problem, as is battery weight. Battery disposal is another problem the public is concerned with. Alternative fuels is another question mark. The tide is turning, but considerably slower that hoped for. The demographics will have a greater impact than price. Younger people are more open to change and new technologies. I still have the feeling that Mother Nature will rise up and, in one way or another, wipe out masses of people around the globe; resetting the clock in a manner of speaking. Either a pandemic or major war, or some natural disaster(s) (quakes, tsunamis, vulcanism... something). Historically, mankind is well overdue for several calamities which may well reduce the demand for oil. And it may just be a shortage, manmade or natural, which leads us down that path. >>> Any company that is making $4 million to $5 million a second >>> is raping the compliant public that does not have an [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] >well reduce the demand for oil. And it may just be a shortage, manmade >or natural, which leads us down that path. Or that calamity will strike in the Oil Fields and demand will far out strip capacity & availability.  SignatureOn a hot summer night, would you offer your throat to the wolf with the red roses?" "Yes." "I bet you say that to all the boys! >>> Any company that is making $4 million to $5 million a second >>> is raping the compliant public that does not have an [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > fuels is another question mark. The tide is turning, but considerably > slower that hoped for. Hybrids are selling well. Their numbers are increasing every year and even Chevy sells a hybrid pickup now. I equate hybrids somewhat to the death of carburetors and the advent of computer controlled engines. Many thought it was the the end of the automobile as we knew it when it was actually the beginning of a great new era. Hybrids aren't the final solution, IMO, just the first step in an evolution to electric based cars. When I say electric based it doesn't necessarily means battery powered. It could mean fuel cell technology etc. AS for disposal of batteries that is a minor problem. Just look at all the waste a gasoline based car generates. There are hundreds of gallons of used fluids, pollution out the tailpipe, etc. I would wager that an electric based car has far less harmful waste over its lifetime. Disposing of one or two sets of batteries would be simple and likely could be recycled to a great extent. > The demographics will have a greater impact than price. Younger people > are more open to change and new technologies. True but people in my age group are the ones buying the hybrids. Even my 58 year old brother is thinking of getting one this year or next. It comes down to reliability and economics, IMO. If the hybrids deliver more mpg at a decent cost they will sell across all age groups. Toyota is now selling the Preius is now selling in the low $20k range. It gets a combined city/highway rating of 55 mpg. It gets 55 mpg in city driving conditions! I personally know the owner of two Toyota dealerships and he says they can't get enough Prius' on their lots. They are sold before they are taken off the truck in most cases. Toyota being the smart ones are ramping up production to sell as may as they can for the MSRP. This is just the beginning of the hybrid revolution, IMO. Since it looks like gasoline prices will remain high indefinitely I think the hybrids will become the norm and not the exception until a full electric becomes viable. The major automakers could have a decent full electric today if they believed there was a market for it. I think the hybrids are their test of the viability of an electric car. > I still have the feeling that Mother Nature will rise up and, in one > way or another, wipe out masses of people around the globe; resetting [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > well reduce the demand for oil. And it may just be a shortage, manmade > or natural, which leads us down that path. Now that is another discussion entirely. As I have said before, our arrogance as a species is laughable. Well over 99% of all species to exist on the Earth have suffered extinction and somehow we think we are different. If we are lucky we might EVOLVE into something that survives but I doubt it. >This is just the beginning of the hybrid revolution, IMO. Since it >looks like gasoline prices will remain high indefinitely I think the >hybrids will become the norm and not the exception until a full electric >becomes viable. The major automakers could have a decent full electric >today if they believed there was a market for it. I think the hybrids >are their test of the viability of an electric car. I don't disagree that the change is coming, just that it has a heck of a long way to go. >> I still have the feeling that Mother Nature will rise up and, in one >> way or another, wipe out masses of people around the globe; resetting [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >different. If we are lucky we might EVOLVE into something that survives >but I doubt it. We'll get wiped out and cocroaches will have plenty of vehicles to drive. Speaking of which.... There is a roach which lives inside things like televisions, and feeds on the wiring etc. Bet they will love the new cars. :0) >> This is just the beginning of the hybrid revolution, IMO. Since it >> looks like gasoline prices will remain high indefinitely I think the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I don't disagree that the change is coming, just that it has a heck of > a long way to go. I don't know about that. I think the technology is available today with the exception of the batteries. If there is a breakthrough in this area then electric cars that the masses will accept are just a few years off. Basically these hybrids are capable of being full blown viable electrics with he right battery technology applied. I think the advent of electric cars are going to be a God send to us gear heads. The performance possibilities are huge. Here's a video that I found entertaining: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7352118104883452737 >>> I still have the feeling that Mother Nature will rise up and, in one >>> way or another, wipe out masses of people around the globe; resetting [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > We'll get wiped out and cocroaches will have plenty of vehicles to > drive. Well, lizards had their day, mammals are having there day so it is the bugs turn next. > Speaking of which.... There is a roach which lives inside things like > televisions, and feeds on the wiring etc. Bet they will love the new > cars. :0) I know of a few rats that might give them some competition. >>>> Any company that is making $4 million to $5 million a second >>>> is raping the compliant public that does not have an [quoted text clipped - 70 lines] >being the smart ones are ramping up production to sell as may as they >can for the MSRP. However, the long-term durability, reliability, resale-ability and a couple of other cost of ownership issues are not fully known yet. It the urban areas the current hybrid technology appears to work. However, in more longer distances & a higher speeds the economy isn't quite there yet. Plus another major issue from my standpoint is that they are both uglier then sin & gots no balls. For me, and many other people, our vehicles must have a soul. They are an answer, but they aren't THE answer. SignatureOn a hot summer night, would you offer your throat to the wolf with the red roses?" "Yes." "I bet you say that to all the boys! >>>>> Any company that is making $4 million to $5 million a second >>>>> is raping the compliant public that does not have an [quoted text clipped - 78 lines] > > They are an answer, but they aren't THE answer. Hybrids are an evolutionary answer by allowing a first step into a different world of automotive technology. I have to hand to the automakers nowadays, they are making VERY durable and reliable vehicles across the board. I don't think the hybrids will be much different. The automakers can't afford them to not be reliable and durable. The problem totally electric cars have with driving range and refueling is the reason hybrids even exist. IMO, once the automakers feel the public wants totally electric cars they will put forth the R&D to develop viable technology and produce the cars. They just aren't willing to take the leap yet. Putting the hybrids in the market is them sticking their toes into the water to test the temperature. <snip> >Hybrids are an evolutionary answer by allowing a first step into a >different world of automotive technology. I have to hand to the >automakers nowadays, they are making VERY durable and reliable vehicles >across the board. I don't think the hybrids will be much different. >The automakers can't afford them to not be reliable and durable. If they are the evolutionary answer, then the question has been asked. Again I am speaking from the perspective of the US, but our mass transit system in the large majority of our country sucks. I've vacationed, lived & worked in numerous countries without ever needing to own an automobile. That isn't to say I didn't, still those weekend pleasure drives, but when cost is by the liter as opposed to the gallon, you learn the alternatives real fast. >The problem totally electric cars have with driving range and refueling >is the reason hybrids even exist. IMO, once the automakers feel the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >sticking their toes into the water to test the temperature. >\ In capitalism, it is supposed to be the market that drives what the manufacturers produce. Signature"On a hot summer night, would you offer your throat to the wolf with the red roses?" "Yes." "I bet you say that to all the boys! > <snip> >> Hybrids are an evolutionary answer by allowing a first step into a [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Again I am speaking from the perspective of the US, but our mass > transit system in the large majority of our country sucks. It depends on where you live. This is a big country and having mass transit for everyone isn't feasible or necessary. > I've vacationed, lived & worked in numerous countries without ever > needing to own an automobile. That isn't to say I didn't, still those > weekend pleasure drives, but when cost is by the liter as opposed to > the gallon, you learn the alternatives real fast. I like our model better because it gives the individual model freedom. IMO, there is a huge difference between needing and wanting an automobile. Sure, many people can live without a car but how does that impact the quality of their life? >> The problem totally electric cars have with driving range and refueling >> is the reason hybrids even exist. IMO, once the automakers feel the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > In capitalism, it is supposed to be the market that drives what the > manufacturers produce. Exactly, but the automakers are in the process of determining if the market currently exists. Capitalism is more a dance between consumers and producers. >> <snippage> >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > automobile. Sure, many people can live without a car but how does that > impact the quality of their life? In a lot of places in the world, you don't need a car to get from one place to another. I live near New York City and would largely get rid of my car if it weren't necessary for the occasional work purpose. I commute by rail (commuter rail and subway) for most of my getting-around needs and live close enough to the station to walk to it. I can walk to a grocery store, pharmacy, several restaurants, and, of course, the train to the city. My Cobra is nearly useless here and I'd be afraid of getting hit by something, so when I moved here, I left it at home and just took my beater. I'm also considering moving to Japan for a few months for work. I'd miss my car, but even if I were staying there for years, I doubt I'd have a car. It's mostly unnecessary - amazing what a good public transportation system will do. Those systems are relied upon so much that private organizations operate their own public transportation systems - and make money doing it. Imagine that working here. As for quality of life, I think for the average person, it might actually increase the quality of life. For more rural areas, a personal mode of transportation is necessary, but in highly populated areas, public transportation is good for the environment and your health. It gets people outdoors, walking, and gives them the ability to socially interact in person - something lacking these days, I think. In the spirit of the thread, I'm a gearhead as well but look forward to developments in electric cars (fuel cell especially, but battery is ok for now). The Tesla roadster is a step. Others will be made, I'm sure. If I had the time and resources, I'd be building a 4-motor (one per wheel) sports car just to see what kind of performance is possible with that configuration. I'll always like the feel of a V8 RWD 5-speed, but that's not to say I won't like something else in the future. JS >>> <snippage> > >> [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > that private organizations operate their own public transportation > systems - and make money doing it. Imagine that working here. In areas where people live more vertical than horizontal having a car doesn't make much sense. For where I live a car is an absolute necessity. > As for quality of life, I think for the average person, it might > actually increase the quality of life. For more rural areas, a personal [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > that configuration. I'll always like the feel of a V8 RWD 5-speed, but > that's not to say I won't like something else in the future. I really would like to have a viable electric car also. I am ready to make the switch. When some old fart, gear head like me is ready, I think it just might mean a sizable portion of our population might be ready too. ><snip> >> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >In capitalism, it is supposed to be the market that drives what the >manufacturers produce. True, but many consumers have no idea that they need something until the manufacturers and the advertisers convince them that they do :0) > weekend pleasure drives, but when cost is by the liter as opposed to > the gallon, you learn the alternatives real fast. try 95p/l or about £5 per gallon say $10 per gallon here in the UK ......enjoy your $3 per gallon while you can ! jim 1966 mustang coupe suzuki wagon r merc190e merc c180 suzuki gn125 http://www.photobox.co.uk/shared/photo.html?c_photo=1313534884 >> weekend pleasure drives, but when cost is by the liter as opposed to >> the gallon, you learn the alternatives real fast. > > try 95p/l or about £5 per gallon say $10 per gallon here in the UK > ......enjoy your $3 per gallon while you can ! jim IMO, we won't roll over and take it like you in Europe have over the decades. If it weren't for your governments you too could have cheap gasoline. We will find an alternative before we pay what Europe, Japan etc does. Nothing motivates Americans like money and reductions in our standard of living. ;) >>> weekend pleasure drives, but when cost is by the liter as opposed to >>> the gallon, you learn the alternatives real fast. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > etc does. Nothing motivates Americans like money and reductions in our > standard of living. ;) yes I agree we are a bunch of over governed over taxed losers...... >>>> weekend pleasure drives, but when cost is by the liter as opposed to >>>> the gallon, you learn the alternatives real fast. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > yes I agree we are a bunch of over governed over taxed losers...... You're definitely not losers. Just unmotivated to change the status quo. We suffer the same affliction here but once we are impacted personally in a negative way we are motivated to change things. IMO, you aren't the only ones over taxed and over governed. We are too. Just not to the same extent. >>>> weekend pleasure drives, but when cost is by the liter as opposed to >>>> the gallon, you learn the alternatives real fast. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >yes I agree we are a bunch of over governed over taxed losers...... Well unless your French, or German, your really not a loser. Just need a little help now & again :) However, Mien Gott have they got around to taxing your air yet? I hadn't seen a pay toilet in years until I got to the London train station. Signature"On a hot summer night, would you offer your throat to the wolf with the red roses?" "Yes." "I bet you say that to all the boys! >>> weekend pleasure drives, but when cost is by the liter as opposed to >>> the gallon, you learn the alternatives real fast. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >etc does. Nothing motivates Americans like money and reductions in our >standard of living. ;) As soon as most of the socialist government in Europe figure out how to tax the air their citizens breath, they will. Some of em have 90% income tax-brackets. Signature"On a hot summer night, would you offer your throat to the wolf with the red roses?" "Yes." "I bet you say that to all the boys! >>> weekend pleasure drives, but when cost is by the liter as opposed to >>> the gallon, you learn the alternatives real fast. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >etc does. Nothing motivates Americans like money and reductions in our >standard of living. ;) I tend to disagree. If the price is raised in steps over time, the public gripes loudly, but accepts it in the end. We do the same with taxes. And I would expect the left wingers to step in and force employers to pay their employees higher wages, or pay for their gas at a set rate per mile, or force the government to grant a tax deduction for mileage just as they do for interest on mortgages. >>>> weekend pleasure drives, but when cost is by the liter as opposed to >>>> the gallon, you learn the alternatives real fast. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > a set rate per mile, or force the government to grant a tax deduction > for mileage just as they do for interest on mortgages. The left wingers can't go too far or the Republicans will be back in control after the next national election. When gasoline prices go too high other options become economically more viable and with the global demand for oil increasing year after year I doubt we will ever see $2/gallon gasoline again. We don't have the same market controls as Europe, Canada, Japan etc. and the automakers don't want some young startup company(ies) stealing a market for electric cars right from under their noses. IMO, this is why you see the increase in the number of hybrid models which is really their real world R&D program. They are positioning themselves to make a jump to offering full electric cars in the advent that gas prices stay high or go even higher. I think the Japanese automakers know that electric powered cars are inevitable. I don't think they know if they will be based on rechargeable batteries, fuel cells or some other technology at this point. >> Any company that is making $4 million to $5 million a second >> is raping the compliant public that does not have an [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] >accelerates this process then at least something good will have come >from our pain at the pump. Yo -- Joe Rocket Scientist, where does the juice you charge up from come from? As the demand for electricity rises -- what will happen to its price? SignatureOn a hot summer night, would you offer your throat to the wolf with the red roses?" "Yes." "I bet you say that to all the boys! >>> Any company that is making $4 million to $5 million a second >>> is raping the compliant public that does not have an [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > come from? As the demand for electricity rises -- what will happen to > its price? If you are so smart then tell me. How many ways can you make a barrel of oil? How many ways can you generate electricity? If you are smart enough you'll get my drift. You act like this switch will occur over night. It won't. How much have we increased the capacity of the electrical generation and distribution system in this country over the last 50 years? You think we can't increase it further in the future? <snip> >> Yo -- Joe Rocket Scientist, where does the juice you charge up from >> come from? As the demand for electricity rises -- what will happen to [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >enough you'll get my drift. You act like this switch will occur over >night. It won't. Don't know -- I've never put the make on a barrel of oil. Electrical power is almost always generated by consuming another type of resource first though. However, neither issue was my greater point. Regardless of what we switch over to, and over what period of time, as long as we here in the states continue to always consume it as individuals like there is no tomorrow -- we are going to have an issue. It is simply a matter of trading one issue for another. >How much have we increased the capacity of the electrical generation and >distribution system in this country over the last 50 years? You think >we can't increase it further in the future? I happen to work in the energy generation, so instead of answering your question (since I suspect you don't know the answer). Simply riddle me this, when was the last time a new power station went online in the Republik of Kalifornia? SignatureOn a hot summer night, would you offer your throat to the wolf with the red roses?" "Yes." "I bet you say that to all the boys! > <snip> > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > individuals like there is no tomorrow -- we are going to have an > issue. It is simply a matter of trading one issue for another. Consumption will never decrease without so catastrophic outside influence on the consumer. I don't see this happening. If we are going to use energy then I think using a form that can be generated virtually anywhere using everything from coal, nuclear and oil fired power plants to wind farms, hydraulic, geothermal, solar, tides, ocean currents is the right direct for us to head into. Electricity gives every consumer the option to be a producer. They can feed the grid as well as feed off it. This isn't possible with oil as it is a one-way process. >> How much have we increased the capacity of the electrical generation and >> distribution system in this country over the last 50 years? You think [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > riddle me this, when was the last time a new power station went online > in the Republik of Kalifornia? Now you are talking about the influence of politics. It isn't that they can't be built but that they won't build them. After enough brown/black outs that will change. Everyone is an environmentalist until they can't make toast, get their email or watch their favorite TV show whenever they wish. >> <snip> >> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >the option to be a producer. They can feed the grid as well as feed off >it. This isn't possible with oil as it is a one-way process. And feet gives use the option of self-locomotion, I still don't get your point. >>> How much have we increased the capacity of the electrical generation and >>> distribution system in this country over the last 50 years? You think [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >make toast, get their email or watch their favorite TV show whenever >they wish. Now you are beginning to catch on. A couple of more iterative sessions and you might start to grasp the entire issue. No one single aspect of the overall problem can be solved with the expectation that the entire issue is resolved. One aspect of the issue you still haven't addressed is millions of people daily heading in one general direction in their own personal transportation device which while convenient for the occupant, isn't the most effective use of numerous natural resources. Signature"On a hot summer night, would you offer your throat to the wolf with the red roses?" "Yes." "I bet you say that to all the boys! >>> <snip> >>> [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > And feet gives use the option of self-locomotion, I still don't get > your point. I thought I made myself quite clear. Read it again allowing for the typos. ;) >>>> How much have we increased the capacity of the electrical generation and >>>> distribution system in this country over the last 50 years? You think [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > transportation device which while convenient for the occupant, isn't > the most effective use of numerous natural resources. You're not going to change the world. You don't stand a chance. The best you can hope for is to change the course of direction a few degrees every so often. Getting the consumer to use a form of energy that doesn't pollute at their end allows a much better chance of making big improvements in pollution reduction by focusing on the production end, IMO. Then you're not doing the equivalent of herding cats. <snip> >You're not going to change the world. You don't stand a chance. The >best you can hope for is to change the course of direction a few degrees >every so often. Getting the consumer to use a form of energy that >doesn't pollute at their end allows a much better chance of making big >improvements in pollution reduction by focusing on the production end, >IMO. Then you're not doing the equivalent of herding cats. Just because I can't change it all by myself, doesn't mean I'm going to give up trying to convince others that numerous courses of action that the USA is currently on is wrong. Consuming every resource in sight while polluting the ones we leave behind cannot be a good course of action. Don't get me wrong, I have muscle cars, motorcycles, and even guns -- so some sh.t screaming liberal tree-hugger I am not. However, if we don't go on a diet pretty soon, there is going to be nothing left to eat. I like mass-transportation when the highways are so damn congested I can barely move & the price of a gallon is north of $3.00. Signature"On a hot summer night, would you offer your throat to the wolf with the red roses?" "Yes." "I bet you say that to all the boys! ><snip> >> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >I like mass-transportation when the highways are so damn congested I >can barely move & the price of a gallon is north of $3.00. It may seem that we are consuming ever resource in sight, but if you consider how much has been set aside to be untouched, we are actually doing better than most nations. It's like trees. According to many sources, we have more forested land today than we had in the 1800s. We have far better water than most of the world. So, in some things we have headed in the right direction... although the tree huggers tend to carry things a bit too far. We'll have to see if we can do it right with other resources. Naturally, none of this means we are not the most wasteful nation, just that for a long time we have taken steps to protect some of what we have.... at least so the next life form will have something good to start with. :0) > <snip> >> You're not going to change the world. You don't stand a chance. The [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > to give up trying to convince others that numerous courses of action > that the USA is currently on is wrong. Sometimes a battle is better fought in little skirmishes than an all out frontal assault. As I have said before, it will be economics that dictates our move away from burning fossil fuels and not some environmental enlightening of the public. > Consuming every resource in sight while polluting the ones we leave > behind cannot be a good course of action. We aren't consuming every resource in sight. There is plenty of iron, limestone, granite, wood, water, tillable land, oxygen in the air and even oil for the next 100 years. Last time I flew from Washington, DC to San Diego I was amazed at just how much green, unoccupied land there is east of the Rockies. Here in Virginia unoccupied land is abundant. Now for some reason humans love to coagulate in areas where they shouldn't like Phoenix, Las Vegas, even Southern California. One day they may have to move or limit the population in these areas but there are plenty of other places for them to set up camp. > Don't get me wrong, I have muscle cars, motorcycles, and even guns -- > so some sh.t screaming liberal tree-hugger I am not. However, if we > don't go on a diet pretty soon, there is going to be nothing left to > eat. We're eating what we like are used to and what is easy to catch at the moment. Changing your diet can be easy if one just looks around at what else is available on the menu. Plus, when your favorite dish is gone, or too expensive, then you have no choice than to order something else. Either way you won't starve. > I like mass-transportation when the highways are so damn congested I > can barely move & the price of a gallon is north of $3.00. I use it sometimes here in the Washington, DC area. Mostly to save hassle more than money. >> <snip> >>> You're not going to change the world. You don't stand a chance. The [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >dictates our move away from burning fossil fuels and not some >environmental enlightening of the public. It is always economics, regardless of the subject. It is a long row to hoe enlightening our public. >> Consuming every resource in sight while polluting the ones we leave >> behind cannot be a good course of action. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >they may have to move or limit the population in these areas but there >are plenty of other places for them to set up camp. I'm in Virginia as well, and while there is vacant land -- it is vacant for a reason. >> Don't get me wrong, I have muscle cars, motorcycles, and even guns -- >> so some sh.t screaming liberal tree-hugger I am not. However, if we [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >I use it sometimes here in the Washington, DC area. Mostly to save >hassle more than money. Believe it or not that is how I feel as well. Easier to kick back on a train, bus or whatever and read a book then sit in your car & watch the idiots do battle. We used to have a regular card on-going game on the train I commuted on from Jersey into NYC. It was my entertainment part of the day. Signature"On a hot summer night, would you offer your throat to the wolf with the red roses?" "Yes." "I bet you say that to all the boys! > On Sat, 19 May 2007 21:03:42 -0400, Michael Johnson <cds@erols.com> >>> Regardless of what we switch over to, and over what period of time, as [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > And feet gives use the option of self-locomotion, I still don't get > your point. Point is oil is a finite recourse, controlled in a total monopoly by an elite few people on the planet. There are absolutely no such limitations on, or control of electricity production. A junior high school kid can produce electricity, the top 1000 energy minds on the planet can't produce a drop of oil, the best they can do is optimize the location and collection methods of the oil that is already there. >> On Sat, 19 May 2007 21:03:42 -0400, Michael Johnson <cds@erols.com> >>>> Regardless of what we switch over to, and over what period of time, as [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > drop of oil, the best they can do is optimize the location and collection > methods of the oil that is already there. At least someone got my point. Hell, Ed Bagley, Jr. can generate enough electricity to make toast from peddling a bicycle on his back porch. >>> On Sat, 19 May 2007 21:03:42 -0400, Michael Johnson <cds@erols.com> >>>>> Regardless of what we switch over to, and over what period of time, as [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > At least someone got my point. Hell, Ed Bagley, Jr. can generate enough > electricity to make toast from peddling a bicycle on his back porch. Now there's an idea, hook all the exercise equipment up to the grid, eliminate obesity and provide abundant cheap clean electrical power all at the same time :-))) >>>> On Sat, 19 May 2007 21:03:42 -0400, Michael Johnson <cds@erols.com> >>>>>> Regardless of what we switch over to, and over what period of time, as [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] >eliminate obesity and provide abundant cheap clean electrical power all at >the same time :-))) AND improve the view! LOL :0) >>>> On Sat, 19 May 2007 21:03:42 -0400, Michael Johnson <cds@erols.com> >>>>>> Regardless of what we switch over to, and over what period of time, as [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > eliminate obesity and provide abundant cheap clean electrical power all at > the same time :-))) How about liposuction for the masses? Imagine the biodiesel potential. >>>>> On Sat, 19 May 2007 21:03:42 -0400, Michael Johnson <cds@erols.com> >>>>>>> Regardless of what we switch over to, and over what period of time, as [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > >How about liposuction for the masses? Imagine the biodiesel potential. If you can run a vehicle off the used grease from McDucks, and taking into account the excess weight carried by most Americans, the government might want to cover liposuction and help with both problems.... be PROACTIVE :0) >>>>>> On Sat, 19 May 2007 21:03:42 -0400, Michael Johnson <cds@erols.com> >>>>>>>> Regardless of what we switch over to, and over what period of time, [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > government might want to cover liposuction and help with both > problems.... be PROACTIVE :0) I'll never buy another new car in my lifetime. If I did, I'd have to add a plumber and sewer specialist to the contacts on my cellphone, along with my mechanic. dwight >> problems.... be PROACTIVE :0) > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >dwight I sold the last new car I plan to ever buy. And I just junked my beater, which I will have to replace with something economical. But, I figure the 65 Fastback is going to be my last really nice car. I can work on it. Parts are plentiful. And I don't need a $10K computer analyzer to figure out what is wrong with it. >>> Any company that is making $4 million to $5 million a second >>> is raping the compliant public that does not have an [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] >come from? As the demand for electricity rises -- what will happen to >its price? Shouldn't you attribute the siggy quote to Meatloaf? >>>> Any company that is making $4 million to $5 million a second >>>> is raping the compliant public that does not have an [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > >Shouldn't you attribute the siggy quote to Meatloaf? Why? You know who said it. Anyhow, he didn't write the lyrics and that who the attribution should go to if given. Now I could say sung by Meatloaf, or Author unknown by me, or just do as I do and enclose it in quotes which give the average intelligent reader an idea that I'm not the one who said/wrote it. Answer all of your questions? Signature"On a hot summer night, would you offer your throat to the wolf with the red roses?" "Yes." "I bet you say that to all the boys! >>>>> Any company that is making $4 million to $5 million a second >>>>> is raping the compliant public that does not have an [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > >Answer all of your questions? No. You missed the question about whether or not you realized I was kidding you. :0) A just made a deal with myself the other day. In part it says "The next new car I buy will NOT burn gasoline." I don't really care what the alternative is but this is the last time I will be held hostage by those greedy bastards. I'm thankful that I had the good luck to purchase fuel efficient cars when I had the opportunity and the wisdom to hang on to them long after they were paid for. (1995 Mercury Tracer with 175000 miles still getting 32 mpg: 1988 Mustang GT 'vert with 277000 miles getting 22 mpg: 1985 BMW K100 motorcycle with 55000 miles getting 42 mpg; all purchased new. Its been a fun ride.) > Any company that is making $4 million to $5 million a second > is raping the compliant public that does not have an > alternative. Maybe this is the catalyst that will create > a viable alternative. The new Tesla totally electric using > batteries similar to a cell phones is one possibility. >A just made a deal with myself the other day. In part it says "The next new >car I buy will NOT burn gasoline." I don't really care what the alternative [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >> a viable alternative. The new Tesla totally electric using >> batteries similar to a cell phones is one possibility. Simple question..... whatever the replacement for gasoline turns out to be.... who do you think will control it? If it's not big oil, then it's just liable to be the big power company. Instead of Mobile or BP or whoever holding you hostage, it's just going to be another big outfit holding you hostage. Different band.... same tune..... >>A just made a deal with myself the other day. In part it says "The next >>new [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > or whoever holding you hostage, it's just going to be another big > outfit holding you hostage. Different band.... same tune..... Except you can generate your own electricity, it will be vastly different... >>> A just made a deal with myself the other day. In part it says "The next >>> new [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Except you can generate your own electricity, it will be vastly different... Exactly. There are multitudes of ways to generate electricity that can be owned and operated by the end user. Plus, anyone that generates more than they need can feed the electrical grid and get paid for it. I read an article the other day were the oil executives said that all this talk about biofuels, etc. means they are very hesitant to invest in new oil refineries. Reading between the lines this is a threat to the rest of us to stop all this talk about alternative fuels or we will continue to rape you at the gas pump. That or they plan to get in all the gouging they can until the switchover is made. IMO, the government can end this nonsense with one simple act. Mandate that all oil companies have enough refining capacity to meet a certain percentage of the national demand for oil related products AND give them the permits to build it. Then require a certain amount of storage capacity of refined products to act as a shock absorber to the supply and demand variations. I'm not saying we need to control the pricing just the on-hand supply to buffer price increases on the crude oil supply side and spikes in demand on the other side. This way the price fluctuates to long term supply and demand instead of these current oil company inflicted (and, IMO, artificial) supply shortages. This also gives them something to spend some of their record profits on. >>>> A just made a deal with myself the other day. In part it says "The >>>> next new [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] > (and, IMO, artificial) supply shortages. This also gives them something > to spend some of their record profits on. Amen! SNIP >> Except you can generate your own electricity, it will be vastly different... > >Exactly. There are multitudes of ways to generate electricity that can >be owned and operated by the end user. Plus, anyone that generates more >than they need can feed the electrical grid and get paid for it. And you don't think major corporations will find a way? Whether by control of basic component manufacturing, licensing, etc? I don't say that individuals can't produce their own power, but, somehow or other, big companies will find a way to capiitalize. It may not be the old oil companies. It may be totally new ones. >I read an article the other day were the oil executives said that all >this talk about biofuels, etc. means they are very hesitant to invest in >new oil refineries. Reading between the lines this is a threat to the >rest of us to stop all this talk about alternative fuels or we will >continue to rape you at the gas pump. That or they plan to get in all >the gouging they can until the switchover is made. Even most biofuels need some form of refining. I'd be willing to bet that even while saying this, they are exploring the possibilities.... >IMO, the government can end this nonsense with one simple act. Mandate >that all oil companies have enough refining capacity to meet a certain [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >company inflicted (and, IMO, artificial) supply shortages. This also >gives them something to spend some of their record profits on. Would they not have to repeal or exempt the environmental resrictions? Then you'd have all the tree huggers up in arms. One move I think would go a LONG way to easing the problem would be to break up the oil companies. All these mergers have left it to very few to control the prices for the many. (While we're at it, we need to break up ma bell again!) Some may recall the days when there were many oil companies and we had gas wars to attract customers. Today you can have four stations on an intersection and they are really only one company. > SNIP >>> Except you can generate your own electricity, it will be vastly different... [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > big companies will find a way to capiitalize. It may not be the old > oil companies. It may be totally new ones. Generating electricity is an inherently easy process compared to producing oil based products. All you need is a magnet and some copper wire and a force to drive the rotating assembly. That is the beauty of using electricity as a power source. The real trick right now is improving battery technology. I don't think the big corporations could stop every potential manufacturer from making solar, geothermal, wind etc. generation systems. Also, much of the R&D in this area is being done by smaller companies. >> I read an article the other day were the oil executives said that all >> this talk about biofuels, etc. means they are very hesitant to invest in [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Even most biofuels need some form of refining. I'd be willing to bet > that even while saying this, they are exploring the possibilities.... IMO, biofuels are DOA. Depleting our top soil for the sake of creating fuel for our cars is a REALLY bad idea and this is coming from someone who is far from a tree hugger. Plus, it is a very energy intensive operation in itself. Especially, when compared to solar, wind, geothermal etc. methods of producing electricity. >> IMO, the government can end this nonsense with one simple act. Mandate >> that all oil companies have enough refining capacity to meet a certain [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Would they not have to repeal or exempt the environmental resrictions? > Then you'd have all the tree huggers up in arms. That is why I capitalized the *AND*. ;) > One move I think would go a LONG way to easing the problem would be to > break up the oil companies. All these mergers have left it to very few [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > have four stations on an intersection and they are really only one > company. Breaking them up would be another solution I could go along with. Breaking up the AT&T/Bell did spur fantastic competition in the telecommunications industry while drastically lowering prices for the consumer. Doing this to the oil industry though is an order of magnitude more serious though. If it is done wrong it could have catastrophic effects on our economy, if not the entire world's economy. It is kind of like poking the bear, if you get my drift. Plus, our politicians aren't nearly smart enough, especially the current crop of Democrats, to pull it off. Do you want Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi steering that ship?!?! I sure as hell wouldn't. I think giving only third party investors (i.e. no current major oil company entities) permits to build refineries might accomplish the same thing. There are plenty of crude oil producers, just not enough refineries and storage capacity within our own borders. >> SNIP Yep.... Recall the VW bugs that had the JC Whitney turning key suction cupped on the back? And all the jokes about running on extension cords? I can just see it all coming true. Next it'll be two strips of metal X inches apart with a slot running down the middle and some CalTrans guy (with his 10 supervisors) standing alongside the road with a hand controller..... welcome back slot cars. :0) >>> SNIP > Yep.... Recall the VW bugs that had the JC Whitney turning key suction [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > standing alongside the road with a hand controller..... welcome back > slot cars. :0) I don't put anything past those yahoos that run your state. Luckily there are a few other states you can migrate to, if necessary. >>>> SNIP >> Yep.... Recall the VW bugs that had the JC Whitney turning key suction [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >I don't put anything past those yahoos that run your state. Luckily >there are a few other states you can migrate to, if necessary. Since I come from one of the original land grand families in California (granny used to attend a founders luncheon and receive a plaque or medal every year from the govornor), it's rather hard to give up on the state. A lot of the people yes, but not the state. I've lived in plenty of other places from Maine to Florida, Florida to Alaska, as well as other countries, and this state is still the place I like the best. Ex-in-laws once said that besides the fact that nobody is from California and the ones that are here are wall to wall, the place doesn't have four seasons. I said, it does all year long. It just depends on which way you want to drive and what you want to do. Not too many places can I go snow skiing (well, sit in the lodge in front of the fire place with an Irish coffee) or surfing, or dune busting, mountain climbing, etc any day of the year. So, I guess I will be staying until the Mexican Army drives us out.... although I will likely be one of those who hunkers down in some adobe walled citadel until we're over run. :0) On the other hand, we have so many electric generation wind mills that we're just liable to have the whole state slide further inland if those propellers get to turning too fast. <snip> >Breaking them up would be another solution I could go along with. >Breaking up the AT&T/Bell did spur fantastic competition in the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >Democrats, to pull it off. Do you want Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi >steering that ship?!?! I sure as hell wouldn't. Only one entity broke up Ma Bell/AT&T, and that was -- ta-da Mom's herself. There were bigger fish to be fried. Exactly when was the last time that anything was done correctly with Governmental intervention? Signature"On a hot summer night, would you offer your throat to the wolf with the red roses?" "Yes." "I bet you say that to all the boys! > <snip> >> Breaking them up would be another solution I could go along with. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Exactly when was the last time that anything was done correctly with > Governmental intervention? The Civil War? >> <snip> >>> Breaking them up would be another solution I could go along with. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > The Civil War? Yor not from around these parts, are ya boy..... Signature"Humor is in the eye of the beholder. Some beholders are flat-out blind." - Dwight >>> <snip> >>>> Breaking them up would be another solution I could go along with. [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Yor not from around these parts, are ya boy..... Does Virginia count? I hear a lot of Y'alls in conversations and General Lees old home isn't too far away. >> <snip> >>> Breaking them up would be another solution I could go along with. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > >The Civil War? Well they won, but I doubt highly if it was done right, or even needed to be done. Personally I'm a rather big proponent of "States Rights" and often wonder what the country might be like today if each state had more of a say in its own internal affairs. Unlike a lot of people, I know that slavery was not the primary issue in the Civil War. Signature"On a hot summer night, would you offer your throat to the wolf with the red roses?" "Yes." "I bet you say that to all the boys! >>> <snip> >>>> Breaking them up would be another solution I could go along with. [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > Unlike a lot of people, I know that slavery was not the primary issue > in the Civil War. Economics is behind most wars. >>>> <snip> >>>>> Breaking them up would be another solution I could go along with. [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > >Economics is behind most wars. Heck, historically, the US Economy, as well as nearly all nations, past and present, has been based on war. >>>>> <snip> >>>>>> Breaking them up would be another solution I could go along with. [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > Heck, historically, the US Economy, as well as nearly all nations, > past and present, has been based on war. Nothing like a good old fashioned World War to pull us out of an economic depression. ;) >>>>>> <snip> >>>>>>> Breaking them up would be another solution I could go along [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > Nothing like a good old fashioned World War to pull us out of an > economic depression. ;) This isn't a WW that we're in now, but it's certainly draining the hell out of this country - physically, financially, and mentally. >>>>>>> <snip> >>>>>>>> Breaking them up would be another solution I could go along [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] >This isn't a WW that we're in now, but it's certainly draining the hell >out of this country - physically, financially, and mentally. It may not be a declared ww as recognized under the Geneva Conventions, however, when one group declares jihad against all non-Muslims, and people are killed in many countries around the globe; from the US, middle east, Malasia, Philipines, etc; many would say it is... especially the families of the dead and dismembered. The only real thing lacking to make it fit the conventional definition, is for the terrorists and extremists to actually represent one nation. This is the same kind of grab for power and resources, and effort to force one groups views upon others, conducted by WW2 Germany and Japan. Which is not to say the USA has not been guilty of the same. The Christians, particularly Catholics, have been guilty of the same thing as these jihadists, when, in their zeal for the spread of Christianity, they destroyed cultures and histories of "nations" such as the Inca and Aztec, not to mention the Crusades. Which is not a condemnation nor rejection of Christianity, but a recognition of the wrongs committed by one group in the name of religion. Those were not defined as WWs either, but they had the same sort of impact upon the cultures they destroyed. I've been told that Vietnam was not a war, but a "police action". Tell that to the soldiers and their families of those who died on both sides. How does the dictionary define it? war Pronunciation: 'wor Function: noun Usage: often attributive Etymology: Middle English werre, from Anglo-French werre, guerre, of Germanic origin; akin to Old High German werra strife; akin to Old High German werran to confuse 1 a (1) : a state of usually open and declared armed hostile conflict between states or nations (2) : a period of such armed conflict (3) : STATE OF WAR b : the art or science of warfare c (1) obsolete : weapons and equipment for war (2) archaic : soldiers armed and equipped for war 2 a : a state of hostility, conflict, or antagonism b : a struggle or competition between opposing forces or for a particular end <a class war> <a war against disease> c : VARIANCE, ODDS 3 Sounds pretty much like what we have going on around the globe right now. >>>>>>>> <snip> >>>>>>>>> Breaking them up would be another solution I could go along [quoted text clipped - 72 lines] > Sounds pretty much like what we have going on around the globe right > now. The current war in the Middle East has been raging for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. Up to September 11th, 2001 the American public didn't care about it. Now they have our attention but that is fading fast. Like most things we will be lulled into a false sense of security and then they will manage to improve on their last performance. Our enemies can see that time is on their side by the way the Democrats are using the war as a political tool at the expense of our security. At the rate we are turning to Jello I would say we will be hit hard in the next 5-10 years. The next time I bet we can multiple the dead of 9-11 by a factor of 10-100. If they think we over reacted on 9-11 just wait until they kill 100k people. The nukes will come out over something that big. These terrorists are willing to kill us by the millions and given the right strategy they can accomplish their goals. There are so many ways they can screw with us that we can't even begin to defend ourselves from all of them. They have shown themselves to be very smart, resourceful and patient which is an extremely dangerous combination. If we aren't on the offensive in this war then we are just sitting ducks waiting for their next move. We have seen what being reactionaries gets us..... 3,000 civilians within our own borders dead in a single morning. What will the encore be? >>>>>>>>> <snip> >>>>>>>>>> Breaking them up would be another solution I could go along [quoted text clipped - 100 lines] > being reactionaries gets us..... 3,000 civilians within our own > borders dead in a single morning. What will the encore be? Guys, all I said was that this "thing" we're currently in (courtesy of the present administration) is draining the hell out of this country - physically, financially, and mentally. But since the floodgates are now open, here's my take in a nutshell: We stuck our nose where we shouldn't have, and now there's no easy or obvious solution. In the meantime, a shitload of our resources are being drained from the country in record time. With tongue in cheek (at least this week), the solution is to give the entire populations of Iraq, Iran, and Saudi Arabia a week to leave, then nuke all three places with pilotless planes. End of story. But here's my real question: What would be different if we never went into Iraq in the first place? Would the world be any better or worse? I certainly don't think America is any better for it. >>>>>>>>>> <snip> >>>>>>>>>>> Breaking them up would be another solution I could go along [quoted text clipped - 102 lines] > present administration) is draining the hell out of this country - > physically, financially, and mentally. IMO, this war has been politicized by both sides to the extent the average citizen can't know the real situation. The Republicans have gone the the "War on Terror" well too many times and the Democrats see their anti war stance as a way to get elected. Neither side has anywhere close to a clear majority on the issue and don't represent the thinking of the true majority. The fact is this action in Iraq, from a historical perspective, is minor in what it has cost the country. Both in lives lost and money spent. This, IMO, is part of the problem. In WWII the entire country knew the stakes and EVERYONE sacrificed. The stakes are nearly as high in this war but since the enemy in not a country but an ideology propagated by people that ignore borders and have no value of human life. Unfortunately, I think things are going to get much worse before they get better and we will eventually suffer a loss beyond our current ability to comprehend. > But since the floodgates are now open, here's my take in a nutshell: We > stuck our nose where we shouldn't have, and now there's no easy or obvious [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Saudi Arabia a week to leave, then nuke all three places with pilotless > planes. End of story. What about all that oil? That is why we are there to begin with. Otherwise we wouldn't give a sh.t about them. If Africa had massive oil fields we would be there instead of Iraq. ;) > But here's my real question: What would be different if we never went into > Iraq in the first place? Would the world be any better or worse? I > certainly don't think America is any better for it. That question has no answer. It could be worse, the same or better. If the terrorists weren't attracted to Iraq like moths to a flame for the last several years where would they have gone and what would they have done? They certainly couldn't have passed the time in Afghanistan like before 9-11. Maybe they would have overthrown the government in Pakistan or been plotting and executing the next mass murder of Americans within our own borders. BTW, I think we have screwed up terribly in Iraq. I also think if we had done it right we could have set the stage for a great transformation in the Middle East with Iraq leading the way. I do put the responsibility of the failures there squarely on President Bush. The buck stops with him and he didn't get the job done. I don't think he has a clue about how to make things better there. Hopefully the next president has some diplomatic skills along with some better insight to start turning things around. Leaving there in a rush would be a total disaster, IMO. >>>>>>>>>>> <snip> >>>>>>>>>>>> Breaking them up would be another solution I could go along [quoted text clipped - 106 lines] > IMO, this war has been politicized by both sides to the extent the > average citizen can't know the real situation. True for the "average" citizen. For anyone with a few smarts, however, it's not too difficult to see what's going on. > The Republicans have > gone the the "War on Terror" well too many times and the Democrats see > their anti war stance as a way to get elected. Neither side has > anywhere close to a clear majority on the issue and don't represent > the thinking of the true majority. I'd venture to say that the true majority think the Iraq situation was a mistake and we need to leave there now. Even the troops over there are questioning why they are there: http://tinyurl.com/2krwqn > The fact is this action in Iraq, from a historical perspective, is > minor in what it has cost the country. Both in lives lost and money [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > they get better and we will eventually suffer a loss beyond our > current ability to comprehend. Considering that this isn't a "world war", over $1 trillion is minor? I think not. In this day and age, the general public doesn't "feel" the war as it did in the past through sacrifice (except, of course, for those families who've lost loved ones). We simply substitute money (and huge debt) for sacrifice. Dubya's putting everything on his MasterCard. Depending on the outcome of the next election, things could get _very_ much worse. >> But since the floodgates are now open, here's my take in a nutshell: >> We stuck our nose where we shouldn't have, and now there's no easy or [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Otherwise we wouldn't give a sh.t about them. If Africa had massive > oil fields we would be there instead of Iraq. ;) Great point! :) After the massive "cleansing", we simply go in and create new U.S. territories that control the oil. But seriously, don't we get most of our oil elsewhere these days? >> But here's my real question: What would be different if we never went >> into Iraq in the first place? Would the world be any better or [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > government in Pakistan or been plotting and executing the next mass > murder of Americans within our own borders. Of course this is all speculation, but I seriously think that nothing in the long run would've really changed had we stayed home and watched TV instead of going hunting. > BTW, I think we have screwed up terribly in Iraq. Well, d-oh! ;) Who thinks we're doing a simply bang-up job there nowadays? > I also think if we > had done it right we could have set the stage for a great > transformation > in the Middle East with Iraq leading the way. At this point, the two main problems are that (a) we are trying to force a country to "be a certain way" when they really don't want to, and (b) we are smack in the middle of a civil war there. > I do put the > responsibility of the failures there squarely on President Bush. The > buck stops with him and he didn't get the job done. I don't think he > has a clue about how to make things better there. Agree. > Hopefully the next > president has some diplomatic skills along with some better insight to > start turning things around. Leaving there in a rush would be a total > disaster, IMO. Disagree. If we are to stay there, we need the support of the rest of the intelligent world. If we don't have that support, we need to exit pronto. If things go to hell in a handbasket once we've left, it would only be a matter of time before the rest of the world is banding together. 2 cents, of course... ;) <snip> >> IMO, this war has been politicized by both sides to the extent the >> average citizen can't know the real situation. > >True for the "average" citizen. For anyone with a few smarts, however, >it's not too difficult to see what's going on. But, the "average" citizen just doesn't have all that much smarts. >I'd venture to say that the true majority think the Iraq situation was a >mistake and we need to leave there now. Even the troops over there are >questioning why they are there: http://tinyurl.com/2krwqn Just because starting something maybe a mistake, that is no reason to not clean up the mess you made when starting it. Troops always question why they are were ever they're at (usually among themselves). For most there are also only two good duty stations. The one they just left, and the one they are going to. If a GI ain't bitchin about something he/she ain't happy. Pretty much anyone who has ever served will tell you that. >Considering that this isn't a "world war", over $1 trillion is minor? I >think not. In this day and age, the general public doesn't "feel" the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Depending on the outcome of the next election, things could get _very_ >much worse. Well the term "World War" has always be pretty much a misnomer. Even during "The Great War", it didn't originally have a number, and WW II there were plenty of countries who sat it out. Oh and you are wrong about G.W. putting everything on his Mastercard. His in storage with the rest of his personal belongings. He's using yours right now. >Great point! :) After the massive "cleansing", we simply go in and >create new U.S. territories that control the oil. But seriously, don't >we get most of our oil elsewhere these days? Yeah we do. Additionally, anyone who knows their history knows that no one other country has ever successfully occupied another. >Of course this is all speculation, but I seriously think that nothing in >the long run would've really changed had we stayed home and watched TV >instead of going hunting. Actually, if we had gone "hunting" their might have been a better end result. >Well, d-oh! ;) Who thinks we're doing a simply bang-up job there >nowadays? G-Dub? However, that being said, I don't think the average American has any clue at all at some of the things that we have done over there & in Afghanistan of a positive nature. Our press is real good about printing positive things. >At this point, the two main problems are that (a) we are trying to force >a country to "be a certain way" when they really don't want to, and (b) >we are smack in the middle of a civil war there. Yeah regardless of how anyone wants to paint it we created a "Power Vacuum" that numerous people have been trying to fill for their own personal agenda almost from day one. I think long-term we will either see another Dictator rise to power, or the country being divided up into smaller bite-size chucks. >> I do put the >> responsibility of the failures there squarely on President Bush. The >> buck stops with him and he didn't get the job done. I don't think he >> has a clue about how to make things better there. > >Agree. Of course he doesn't have a clue on how to get things done over there. It is one of the problems intrinsic in a civilians controlled military in a war zone. I'm quite sure there is more then one General floating around who has some ideas on how to get things done. >> Hopefully the next >> president has some diplomatic skills along with some better insight to [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >only be a matter of time before the rest of the world is banding >together. I think you missed his point. In order to get the support you are talking about is going to take someone with massive diplomatic skills. Personally I don't think that person is going to win the election though. Also, prior to getting the "World" on the same page, we need to get our own country there. Signature"On a hot summer night, would you offer your throat to the wolf with the red roses?" "Yes." "I bet you say that to all the boys! > <snip> >>> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >> > But, the "average" citizen just doesn't have all that much smarts. Read the line above yours. Anyone with a few smarts is not the "average citizen&q |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message