
07-15-2008, 12:01 PM
|
|
Green Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 321
|
|
Re: Nuclear and the Presidential Race 08
You're right, Stav, they could find billions to pour into Iraq (which of course has the oil), but they can't be bothered to work out a solution on the energy crisis. Why is that? I think murdering harmless people and children and throwing an entire country in chaos gets them just a bit stiffer than dealing with energy.
|

07-16-2008, 03:02 AM
|
 |
Green Member
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 353
|
|
Re: Nuclear and the Presidential Race 08
Well, the country was already in chaos for one thing. We just added to that. We didn't go about retaliation for 911 in a proper manner. This led to spending too much money that was needless. If we would have done it the right way, we would have had extra money to take care of the environment.
|

07-16-2008, 04:56 AM
|
 |
Green Member
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 374
|
|
Re: Nuclear and the Presidential Race 08
there is nothing like a good war to deflect public attention away from unpopular politics and the crisis at home... nobody wants to be called 'unpatriotic'
It also worked for Thatcher in the Falklands!
|

07-16-2008, 12:55 PM
|
|
Green Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 321
|
|
Re: Nuclear and the Presidential Race 08
I like the scene in the Errol Flynn Robin Hood movie. Maid Marian says, "You speak treason!" Robin Hood says, "Fluently."
You've got to be looked at as unpatriotic and/or treasonous sometimes, for the good of your country. Peace!
|

07-16-2008, 04:00 PM
|
 |
Green Member
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 353
|
|
Re: Nuclear and the Presidential Race 08
You definitely got that right! A war will deflect public attention every time. But it does not change the situation in the least. We not only have to defend ourselves but we have to take care of our planet. It seems that sometimes those two things conflict.
|

07-16-2008, 05:58 PM
|
|
Green Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 227
|
|
Re: Nuclear and the Presidential Race 08
It's such a horrible tactic to adopt but the problem is how well war really does work to distract from other, pressing problems. It's even more than looking after the 'home-front' as well -- it's really an issue that should be looked at as enormously important.
|

07-17-2008, 11:23 AM
|
 |
Green Member
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 374
|
|
Re: Nuclear and the Presidential Race 08
it's an ancient and standard tactic... get the revolting peasants into uniform and march them off to be blasted to bit by 'enemies'.. it rids you of the troublemakers, and also gets the rest of the peasants busy hating the 'enemy' and paying no attention to what their leaders are up to elsewhere... double whammy..
|

07-17-2008, 11:40 AM
|
|
Green Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 227
|
|
Re: Nuclear and the Presidential Race 08
Very true. As long as problems can be diverted toward an external threat then the general population is far too busy concerned with 'greater threats' than what's going on all around them. Sad but true.
|

07-18-2008, 03:28 AM
|
 |
Green Member
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 353
|
|
Re: Nuclear and the Presidential Race 08
Well, it really isn't working too well anymore. Population started looking elsewhere with Vietnam. Now to Iraq and Iran. I understand why we went to. But we shouldn't just done it real quick and then got out. The worst thing about war is that the innocent die as well as the guilty.
Wouldn't it be great if the idiots who started wars could fight the wars themselves and nobody else? Just stick them on a deserted island and the one who's alive in a week wins!
|

07-18-2008, 08:55 AM
|
 |
Green Member
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 374
|
|
Re: Nuclear and the Presidential Race 08
that sounds like a plan roguegal.. i would vote for that!
but you are wrong about people looking.... maybe a few do... people like some on here... but the great majority really don't..
|
|