Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
What Do You Want To See In The Next President?  
User currently offlineUAL747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 3582 times:

Personally, I'm really hoping for a democratic candidate for president this year. I think our country needs a fresh face and a more moderate and progressive regime in the white house. Personally, I'm worn out from the past 8 years. 9/11 took a toll on all of us and was a wake-up call as to who our REAL enemies are, but I think since then, everything has been handled in the completely wrong manner.

We've been at war with two nations in the past 8 years and the current war was one based on suspicion, not fact, and even the current administration is admiting that to some degree.

Our president, with all-due-respect, has the image of being a moron. Whether he is or isn't is a good question. I think perhaps he is a very smart man, but his mannerisms, decisions, and rhetoric are just plain ignorant sounding.

I think that our country needs to move away from the relgious/political climate that we live in right now. No offense to any religion, but the two don't mix well, and it makes the republican candidates sound mystical and archaic. I would think in a Nation which is a melting pot of cultures, and our successes have been based on that, to single out one religion as the moral code of which our troops and infrastructure should be based is politically wrong.

Religion is dangerous when used with politics, and I don't see why conservatives Christians think that they are immune to that as well. While our country was founded on Christian principles, we also developed this country to be free of religious bigotry and tolerant of other religions. Now, as to whether the founding fathers actually meant "tolerant of different religious "sects" or entirely different relgions is up for speculation, but we ARE based on the principle that each man/woman has religious freedom and that politics should be void of religion. What I find interesting is that conservative Christians want relgious/political ties in the US, but when it comes to Islam in lets say, Iran, it's defined as religious extremism, only because it is not Christianity. I also believe in Gay rights, and fundamentally, a Christian based politician cannot grant gays rights. Whether they personally believe in them or not, a conservative government will never allow it, no matter how soft the verbial padding is. To this day, I still haven't come to understand the "Log Cabin Republicans." Anyhoo....

Now onto a different topic. Social programs...I think that while the current administration sees problems with education, and promoted the "No Child Left Behind", our public schools are suffering. During college I was a substitute teacher at some local Oklahoma schools and our schools are pathetic. Not only at the local level, but at the national level.

I think there has been some sort of breakdown in the value of the education and a TREMENDOUS problem with the amount of funding that schools get. Oklahoma having the 2nd worst school system in the US and the 2nd to the lowest teacher pay in the US. Something has to happen. I'm all for starting social funding, whether it be through taxes, lotteries, or some other fund raising campaign to educate our children, and I think that a democrat president would be more keen on seeing that through than a conservative republican who is worried about increasing taxes. Our schools need to be cleaned out and started anew. Our over-worked and underpaid educaters all too often fail to spark interest in their students, tend to lose control of the classroom, and each passing hour of everyday, potential leaders in our youth are left behind in the dust with the rest of their friends, no future, no passion, no will. It is my opinion that teachers should be one of the highest paid civil servants as they are educating the future of this country. We need programs like music in school, interest clubs, and extracirricular activities to spark students' interest in something they can be passionate about and look forward to working with that passion in the future. Our classrooms have become too large in public school education. If you look at private schools, there is a reason you have to take entrance exams, they only offer a limited number of seats in each class to ensure quality education. I was fortunate enough to go to a private episcopal prep school before college, where the class size was small and the teachers attention was well divided. A teacher cannot adequately teach a 30 student classroom, let alone get control of them. While education is more of a "state" issue, it SHOULD be a priority to the federal government, end of story...

Healthcare is another problem we have in the US. It's simply TOO expensive with TOO little funding. Here's a sensitive subject for me. My family is in the healthcare industry, it is our primary income for our company. When we started, social healthcare was not that prevalent and we fortunately made TONS of money off of private pay patients. Then social healthcare programs started coming online and our profits went down the toilet. We had tremendous problems in the late 80's and early 90's because funding projects like medicare and medicaid did not have enough support. So basically, we had to lower OUR standards of healthcare for patients, reducing the patient/nurse/doctor ratios and offer a substandard product which increased lawsuits and the amount of insurance we had to carry for each of our facilities. Now don't get me wrong, I don't live in the past like my dad and grandpa do and wish we had all private pay patients, because today, no one can afford to be a private pay patient unless you are in the top 1% of income in the US, and even then, it is sometimes out of reach. As a company, we have had to come to accept that, and in our industry as well as other healthcare industries, we have come to a common knowledge that increased funding for social healthcare has to be the answer. We have many lobbyists who work for us on a state level that work closely with democrat politicians to increase the amount of money given to healthcare funding so that we, like other healthcare companies, can offer a quality product again, make a profit, while still affording the patient more than adequate care, lower our overhead and insurance costs, and retain clients to full capacity. Should EVERYONE be able to have adequate health care? Yes IMO, but we have to find a balanced way of doing so so that everyone benefits, both the patient and the healtcare provider, and everyone can afford it.

On foreign relations: I think the democrats would offer a more progressive and less suspicious look on foreign relations. It seems today that our politicians have "clearly" defined and I quote, "Those who are with us and those who are against us." I think that's the wrong approach to take and we used one event, 9/11, to define almost a decade of foreign policy. I think a democratic president would take a strong approach to monitoring nuclear advances by other nations, but also provide economic relief to those nations who need it. I don't think we should be at odds with Iran, Syria, and other Arab countries, but we should have close dialogue with what is an important and somewhat overlooked area of the world. When it comes to this part of politics, I think we've crapped in our own pants and ruined what should be a progressive stance on this part of the world. I onced learned in a geo-economic class that the quickest and easiest way to advert war is to retain economic relations with a possibly hostile nation. While we have our problems with China, it is working with them. The Chinese are probably more hard nosed about social issues than our own present government, but we could be at a huge stand off with them due to old ideologies that still exist on both sides of the Pacific, but we retain and continue to gain foreign trade and an economy with China, which has kept our nations peaceful for many years, and also earned us a partner into Asia. We could also do the same with Iran, Syria, and other nations. It worked immediately following World War II and I don't see why it couldn't work now. Give these oppressed people some money to start a business with, let their nations prosper and develop a middle class, and you will start to see the fruits of democracy spread throughout even the most oppressed nations.

While I still think we should be leaders in World Politics, we should lead by example, not force. I think we made a big mistake with the war in Iraq and I feel that it was started with false pretenses and false hopes. We were TOLD that there were nuclear weapons in Iraq, then we were told they transferred them to Syria, then we were told that they had capabilities of having nuclear weapons, and then we were told we were there to liberate the people of Iraq. As to the answer for the mess we are in now, I dunno. I'm hoping someone more brilliant that me can come up with an exit strategy as things just keep getting worse and worse. REmember two years ago when we were all excited about the new government in Iraq and "Misson Accomplished!"? Doesn't seem to be happening as it's either us, or someone else blowing up everything to hell. Please, PLEASE, someone tell me what good has come out of the war with Iraq? I understood the mission for the war in Afghanistan, and a mission that I feel has been lost in the clouds of Iraq.

On the Arab vs. Jews issue, I think we need to play a more moderate role, or if we are, we need to have a better PR campaign to show that we are moderate on the issue. I don't claim to understand or know a lot of about this issue, but only one fact is, that it's been going on for years and no one has been able to stop it. I think we need to support both sides and again, stop the closing off of societies and provide economic relief to those parties who are also moderate on the issue. Again, I think that economics and trade are the answers here, not only between Israel and Palestine, but Israel and the entire Arab community.

The issue of Islamic extremism also needs to be addressed. Again, if we can have dialogue, it's damned better than sitting on this side of the world barking "You are our Enemy" messages all over the airwaves, because it's only going to create the same sentiment on the other side of the world. Personally, I think this is a personal fight between oppressed people and the US as a whole. It's obvious because on one side we have random people fighting against the US, a non-cohesive army of displaced islamic fundamentalists. They don't represent any nation, just a group of people, and they are fighting against an Entity, the US namely. In all honesty, I don't think the average person in the US really gives 2 cents what happens in any of these countries, but you ask the oppressed Arab the same thing, and you get fiery and very personal answers. 1. I think it's because the war, whichever one you want to talk about, has always been faught on their soil and we, the US tend to look like a remote island with sunshine 24 hours a day with 75 dgree F weather, and 2. Our wealth and power throughout the world is, well, annoying to some. Do I think we should give up that power? No because in the grand scheme of things we have done the world some good, especially in the 20th century, and helped the world rebuild after almost destroying itself and making other people's lives better, but somehow, in our fury against the Muslim world, we have become less generous and created an underlying sense of hatred, not only toward Muslims and Arabs, but even Jews, because we somehow feel connected to this struggle through the 9/11 events, and we are starting to see the world in a much more diverse view due to instant media and information technology.....well, enough on that...

On immigration, I'm a liberal with a conservative opinion. This is probably the only place where I really don't align with liberal thought. In my definition, liberals would welcome legal immigration, and some would welcome immigration without document. Our Governor, Brad Henry in Oklahoma reluctantly signed a VERY stiff immigration bill in Oklahoma that I actually think is a good thing. It makes harboring, housing, and employing illegal immigrants a felony for anyone charged. This includes apartment complex's, banks, merchants, etc. So basically, you have papers, or no work. I would love to see a president take a REAL stand on illegal immigration as it is necessary for the integrity of our country's jobs. Having said that, I think we also have to re-educate the consumer, and that in itself is a daunting task. If we deal stiffly with immigration, then we will not have as cheap of goods as we do now. It is true that illegal immigrants take the jobs less desirable, giving us cheap labor. I feel we are in the middle of a gray area when it comes to consumer economics and immigration. We have not felt the big thud we are going to have soon. We have reached a post-industrial age in the US where we are a society of information, not production, (well, it seems to be headed that way to me). We produce a surplus of items at low cost due to the fact that we have increased technology to such advanced levels that our workers cannot find work at a decent wage, and 2, there is already a subculture labor force in the form of illegal immigrants ready to take those jobs. We've got to get back to the value of good old-fashioned work at better wages, and getting rid of illegal immigrants would be a great start to that.

Well, those are my general thoughts on my perfect candidate.

To start, I would start secret dialogue with Iran and send them a few Boeing 777 aircraft  Smile

So what do you want to see happen in the next 4-8 years? Please keep this civil as these topics tend to end up in fights. Only good educated opinions please  Smile

UAL

66 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDavid L From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 9523 posts, RR: 42
Reply 1, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 3542 times:

Can I assume you're not looking for answers like "a javelin"?

User currently offlineRJdxer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 3536 times:



Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
Our president, with all-due-respect, has the image of being a moron.

Thanks to copious amounts of help from the liberal media, 527 groups like Moveon.org and the like. Granted he is not a good orator, but that should be low on the list of any Chief Executive to begin with, If you are voting for someone based on their speaking ability, you are selling yourself quite short.

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
I think that our country needs to move away from the relgious/political climate that we live in right now.

It is? I am not a religious person but I don't feel that we are in that situation at all. As a matter of fact with the passing of Jerry Fawell and some others, the religious right has fewer voices now than in the past 30 years.

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
Religion is dangerous when used with politics, and I don't see why conservatives Christians think that they are immune to that as well.

I have yet to see a conservative Christian sue a local municipality for not putting a nativity scene up at Christmas. The opposite is sadly more numerous and much more vitriolic.

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
a Christian based politician cannot grant gays rights.

Neither can an atheist. You either have unalienable rights or you don't.

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
Oklahoma having the 2nd worst school system in the US and the 2nd to the lowest teacher pay in the US. Something has to happen. I'm

If the local school board can't get it's act together and solve the majority of these problems, then what is the federal government supposed to do? Schools should be a local concern.

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
Should EVERYONE be able to have adequate health care?

And everyone does have adequate healthcare. If they are below the poverty line there are programs to help them.

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
We could also do the same with Iran, Syria, and other nations.

And when it becomes apparent that those countries were just using talks as a ruse while they continued to develop weapons or fund terrorist plots as with NK?

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
It worked immediately following World War II and I don't see why it couldn't work now. Give these oppressed people some money to start a business with, let their nations prosper and develop a middle class, and you will start to see the fruits of democracy spread throughout even the most oppressed nations.

You are assuming that those countries would allow direct aid to their people. You are also assuming that the political leaders of those nations want a middle class type populace.

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
We were TOLD that there were nuclear weapons in Iraq,

We were? When?

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
and then we were told we were there to liberate the people of Iraq.

You were told we were going in to liberate the people of Iraq before the first troops set foot in Iraq.

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
REmember two years ago when we were all excited about the new government in Iraq and "Misson Accomplished!"? Doesn't seem to be happening as it's either us, or someone else blowing up everything to hell.

Mission Accomplished celebrated the end of major hostilities with Saddams army. We should still be impressed with the quickness at which not only was a functioning government set up in a former dictatorship, but that they were able to overcome significant cultural difference and agree on a Constitution. Several days ago there was a running gun battle in L.A. in which several gangs shot it out with AK47's. Does that mean that our government is going down the drain?

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
The issue of Islamic extremism also needs to be addressed. Again, if we can have dialogue,

How do you have a dialogue with a group whose opening stance is, "We want to kill you" and whose response to any entreaty is "Fine, but then we are going to kill you"?


Since there is no one running for President that has even a remote chance of winning that seriously believes in cutting down the size and scope of government, who is elected is of little concern to me.


User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21525 posts, RR: 55
Reply 3, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 3535 times:

A lot of stuff in there, so I'm only going to weigh in on this one for now:

Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
I think there has been some sort of breakdown in the value of the education and a TREMENDOUS problem with the amount of funding that schools get.

I think there's been a breakdown in priorities in education. If you look at the issues that higher levels of government have really gotten involved in, they're almost chiefly of the petty variety - the intelligent design vs. evolution debate, for instance. The ellimination of afterschool programs for lack of money, or the ellimination of music programs for lack of money, get almost no attention at all, which is a shame since they're far more important that specifically what kids are learning in science class. The education system of this country is a mess, and nobody has the political will to make the major changes that are necessary to fix it, partly because it's not an big election issue. I give Bush credit for trying with NCLB, but it has created more problems than it has solved, and we need to try a different track.

The education system in the US is unique in that there are no tracks that different students get shunted down as they progress (up until college). Everyone in the public school system gets the same education. While a noble idea, it runs into the problem that such an education has to be dumbed down to a certain level so that enough students can get through it, and thus will be wasting the time of those students who are above average at their level. They could get a better education at a private school, but if they don't have the money then that's not an option. Thus the system seems to work on the basic assumption that ability is pre-determined by income, which isn't the case. Perhaps we need to start creating something of a track system within the public school system so that we can effectively meet the needs of each subset of children, rather than just the needs of the average.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21525 posts, RR: 55
Reply 4, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 3527 times:



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 5):
Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
I think that our country needs to move away from the relgious/political climate that we live in right now.

It is?

It was. I'd agree that much of the momentum for a lot of that movement has been lost (fortunately), but back when the whole gay marriage amendment thing and Terri Schiavo thing were going down, there was a lot of religion in politics. Fortunately, McCain won't be nearly as receptive to the religious wing as Bush was, and they wouldn't try to align themselves with Hillary or Obama.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineAA777 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 2544 posts, RR: 28
Reply 5, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 3500 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 2):

Neither can an atheist. You either have unalienable rights or you don't.

That is absolute nonsense. An athiest has no coded moral reason to say that gays cannot get married or have a civil union, or adopt children etc. Conservative Christian groups do have a code- the Bible- and they use it to bring their RELIGIOUS beliefs into the broader public sphere. We don't live in a theocracy- or at least we aren't supposed to. Yet with GWB the power and influence of the religious right has expanded such that now many groups are on the verge of losing their inalienable rights. UAL747 is very correct in that we appear quite hypocritical as we denounce Islamic theocracies, yet domestically we have our own "Christian" agendas- like placing constitutional bans on gay marriage. But apparently its okay to be hypocritical.

Quoting David L (Reply 1):
We were TOLD that there were nuclear weapons in Iraq,

We were? When?

Please, dont pretend like you dont know what he was talking about. Bush, Rumsfeld, and Sec of State Powell (at the time) all talked incessantly about the "Weapons of Mass Desctruction" and Iraq's supposed "Intent" to acquire Nuclear weapons. These allegations were false, clearly. If we launch an invasion and dont find a shred of evidence to support any of the allegations that were once pushed upon the people of the United States- to create fear, and therefore support, for this ill-fated war. If you really don't believe me- watch these clips of President Bush himself as well as Colin Powell making the case for war at the United Nations.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkOCIfNQXP0&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYBA9JD5oW4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-C3svWjJUY&feature=related

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 2):
Mission Accomplished celebrated the end of major hostilities with Saddams army. We should still be impressed with the quickness at which not only was a functioning government set up in a former dictatorship, but that they were able to overcome significant cultural difference and agree on a Constitution.

A functioning government? With frequent suicide bombings taking place? What are you talking about? Meanwhile, there are fears that a swift US pullout from Iraq will send it into further turmoil. Clearly some people aren't happy there. Furthermore we see that the trend of suicide bombings is far from over. At the moment we are experiencing a downturn, but it has not even reached a 'record low'. Just shy of 4,000 American soldiers dead to date. I dont even want to mention the estimates of Iraqis killed.... at least 100,000 killed. And by the way, the "Mission Accomplished" publicity stunt- what a shame. Tasteless use of the soldiers who actually did go out and fight the wars, and who did get injured, and lose lives. Bush should be ashamed of himself, that he sent them all out based on lies and deception. And then he used them to gain publicity and support.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/3b/DoD_PERSONNEL_%26_PROCUREMENT_STATISTICS_-_Personnel_%26_Procurement_Reports_and_Data_Files_-_GLOBAL_WAR_ON_TERRORISM_-_OPERATION_IRAQI_FREEDOM_by_month_March_19%2C_2003_through_September_1%2C_2007_-_killed_in_action%2C_died_of_wounds%2C_accidents.jpg/800px-DoD_PERSONNEL_%26_PROCUREMENT_STATISTICS_-_Personnel_%26_Procurement_Reports_and_Data_Files_-_GLOBAL_WAR_ON_TERRORISM_-_OPERATION_IRAQI_FREEDOM_by_month_March_19%2C_2003_through_September_1%2C_2007_-_killed_in_action%2C_died_of_wounds%2C_accidents.jpg

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 2):

How do you have a dialogue with a group whose opening stance is, "We want to kill you" and whose response to any entreaty is "Fine, but then we are going to kill you"?

You need to have a dialogue with yourself, and figure out why it is that terrorist activity takes place at all. It's not because we are "free" or that they care that women can dress provocatively here, or that we are christians. Its because the US foreign policy for years is about keeping power, using other people for our benefit. Our politics are filthy- the problem is that the vast, vast majority of Americans do not know, and do not care to know the truth. As long as we have a bedtime story and are told that everything is hunky-dory, we're more than glad not to ask questions. But really our foreign policy now simply generates more hatred and terror around the world...

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 2):
Several days ago there was a running gun battle in L.A. in which several gangs shot it out with AK47's. Does that mean that our government is going down the drain?

A raging gun battle in one small part of L.A. is quite unlikely to cause civil unrest across the rest of the United States. There is simply no comparing a gun battle in LA to what's going on in Iraq.

-AA777


User currently offlineSingapore_Air From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 13738 posts, RR: 19
Reply 6, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 3493 times:

Breasts, blonde hair, Armani suits, botox and the surname Clinton.


Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 3485 times:



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 2):
Quoting UAL747 (Thread starter):
Our president, with all-due-respect, has the image of being a moron.

Thanks to copious amounts of help from the liberal media,

He hasn't need any help, RJ. Stop blaming everyone else for this presidents' shortcomings. They're painfully obvious. Except to the blind followers.


User currently offlineRJdxer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 3472 times:



Quoting AA777 (Reply 5):
that gays cannot get married or have a civil union, or adopt children etc.

Just where exactly in the Constitution does it say that who you marry or adopting children is an unalienable right?So and atheist, or an agnostic like me can oppose those and not bring religion into the discussion.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 5):
Bush, Rumsfeld, and Sec of State Powell (at the time) all talked incessantly about the "Weapons of Mass Desctruction"

But not actual nuclear weapons. There has been enough misinformation on both sides.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 5):
and Iraq's supposed "Intent" to acquire Nuclear weapons

That is what he should have said.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 5):
A functioning government? With frequent suicide bombings taking place? What are you talking about?

How many provinces have been turned back over to the Iraqis to control, do you even have an idea of how many there are in total?

Quoting AA777 (Reply 5):
the moment we are experiencing a downturn,

I find it amusing when there is an "upturn" it is described as the whole country melting down into civil war yet when things are going well it some how can only be described as temporary.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 5):
Bush should be ashamed of himself, that he sent them all out based on lies and deception

If you would care to show where he wantonly lied or deliberately misled the troops I will forward it on to Senator Reid and Speaker Pelosi since they would like to have that evidence.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 5):
But really our foreign policy now simply generates more hatred and terror around the world...

Yep, if we left them alone they certainly wouldn't come here and attack us would they?

Quoting AA777 (Reply 5):
Furthermore we see that the trend of suicide bombings is far from over.

According to whom?

Quoting AA777 (Reply 5):
A raging gun battle in one small part of L.A. is quite unlikely to cause civil unrest across the rest of the United States. There is simply no comparing a gun battle in LA to what's going on in Iraq.

Yet if a bomb goes off in Baghdad somehow the people living in northern Iraq are affected.

I have a bet outstanding with Falcon, I will offer the same to you , that if elected, one year after his inauguration President Obama will still have troops in Iraq.


User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week ago) and read 3468 times:



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 8):
I have a bet outstanding with Falcon, I will offer the same to you , that if elected, one year after his inauguration President Obama will still have troops in Iraq.

You do? News to me.

I wouldn't bet against that, RJ. But I will bet you by that time he's begun a withdraw. He won't, nor can he, I don't believe, pull all troops out at once, but I do think the process will begin within a year, unless someone convinces him otherwise.


User currently offlineJetblueguy22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 2756 posts, RR: 4
Reply 10, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week ago) and read 3465 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR



Quoting AA777 (Reply 5):
Conservative Christian groups do have a code- the Bible- and they use it to bring their RELIGIOUS beliefs into the broader public sphere.

Well lets see here. The majority of our country considers themselves christians. And the Bible is the code set by God. And since Christians believe the Earth was created by God bringing the Bible into the "broader public sphere" makes sense since its the word of God.
Blue
P.S. As long as it isn't a democrat I'm happy. And I know many don't care about my opinion because I'm 15 but honestly I can really care less.



You push down on that yoke, the houses get bigger, you pull back on the yoke, the houses get bigger- Ken Foltz
User currently offlineUAL747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week ago) and read 3460 times:



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 8):
I have a bet outstanding with Falcon, I will offer the same to you , that if elected, one year after his inauguration President Obama will still have troops in Iraq.

Well, I hope it is Hillary, but nonetheless, we will probably HAVE to have troops in Iraq for a long time. Prez Bush started something in Iraq that will be the Vietnam of the 21st century. It's sad, but we are going to be there for a long time. Doesn't matter if we started it or they did, we are going to be there for an extended period which is going to require a huge amount of civil and military loss on the sides of the US and Iraq. We are killing innocent civilians by the dozen every day and we are killing innocent soldiers, who have to do what the prez and next prez tell them to do....even if the new president is totally against the war. We have made a huge mess in Iraq and no one can deny that. Can you give me any proof that the world is safer and better off without Iraq and Saddam Hussein? I was sickened by the fact that he was hanged, because I don't believe in death for any crime, and maybe that's the liberal in me, but what good, oh please tell me, is going to come out of Iraq and the current war? Please, TELL ME!


UAL


User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week ago) and read 3444 times:

1. A president who doesn't hide everything and his/her administration does from the American people. Secrecy IS needed some of the time, but not all of the time.

2. A president that doesn't pander to the wealthiest of Americans and corporations, and thinks of everyone else as an afterthought.

3. A president who doesn't treat allies and friends like dirt when they exercise their soverign right to disagree with us. We need a president who treats our friends with respect, not bully them.

4. A president who doesn't simply threaten those who would be our enemies, but one who will think of force as a last option, not as a first.

5. A president who will see the oppostion in this nation not as an enemy, but Americans who also want to move the nation forward, but simply may have different ideas as to how to do so, and people who should be inculded in discussion on the future of this nation.

6. One who is respected, not simply mocked and feared.


User currently offlineRJdxer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week ago) and read 3433 times:



Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 9):
You do? News to me.

The original thread has been deleted but I made reference to it again here..

Will We See A Brokered DNC Convention?
Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 25):
I think the fact McCain wants to stay in Iraq ad infinum will also hurt him, and will be an advantage for Obama.

I think if Senator Obama is elected President you are going to be sorely disappointed within the first few months of his administration. My bet from the other thread still stands unanswered which pretty much tells me what I need to know when you spout this stuff.


Withdrawls are supposed to commence this summer and if the security situation dictates will continue through the fall and into the winter till levels are back to pre-surge. If the security situation continues to improve further withdrawls will be announced. My offered bet was for you to name your price, I have the money in my hand, President Obama will still have troops in Iraq. His advisers will tell him on inauguration day that if he pulls out too quickly the situation will deteriorate and his administration will bear the blame for failure. You have yet to respond.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 12):
A president who will see the oppostion in this nation not as an enemy, but Americans who also want to move the nation forward, but simply may have different ideas as to how to do so, and people who should be included in discussion on the future of this nation.

I'll let the others slide because they are ridiculous in their own right but I would like you to name one time the President has come out in public and been anything less than magnanimous or complimentary to anyone on the other side of the aisle. Just one time. I can quote numerous times Senator Reid or Speaker Pelosi have used insulting language towards this President or called him unsavory names in public. He has invited the democratic leadership to countless meetings, both before and after they became the majority and been rebuffed by them or had his ideas ridiculed by them as they were on their way out of the White House. There are a lot of things this President could have done differently but being more civil or accommodating to the opposition is not one of them. I will await quotes and sources, unless all you have is opinion.


User currently offlineFXramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 7191 posts, RR: 86
Reply 14, posted (6 years 5 months 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 3405 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Ability to spell potato.

How many more 'presidental' speculation threads must we read before 4 Nov.?

 no 


User currently offlineDavid L From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 9523 posts, RR: 42
Reply 15, posted (6 years 5 months 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 3391 times:



Quoting AA777 (Reply 5):
Quoting David L (Reply 1):
We were TOLD that there were nuclear weapons in Iraq,

We were? When?

Please, dont pretend like you dont know what he was talking about.

And please don't pretend I said that.  Smile


User currently offlineRicciPettit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (6 years 5 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 3383 times:

Will Smith, he would "make this look good".

Reckon we would ever see Arnie make a go for it?


User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 17, posted (6 years 5 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3363 times:



Quoting AA777 (Reply 5):
AA777

Good post AA777.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 5):
But really our foreign policy now simply generates more hatred and terror around the world...

Sad but true.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 7):
He hasn't need any help, RJ. Stop blaming everyone else for this presidents' shortcomings. They're painfully obvious. Except to the blind followers.

 rotfl  Succinct, witty and accurate, what more could we ask for?


User currently offlineRJdxer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (6 years 5 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3337 times:



Quoting UAL747 (Reply 11):
Can you give me any proof that the world is safer and better off without Iraq and Saddam Hussein?

Can you give me assurance that he would not have threatened us one day?

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 11):
I was sickened by the fact that he was hanged,

Yes, I'm sure that all those that he had tortured and raped feel the same way. I'm also sure that all those he had killed collectively rolled over in thier mass unmarked graves.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 17):
Sad but true.

The Utopian speaks.


User currently offlineAA777 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 2544 posts, RR: 28
Reply 19, posted (6 years 5 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3331 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 8):

But not actual nuclear weapons. There has been enough misinformation on both sides.

You are grasping at straws... UAL's original point was that Iraq's "threat" was drummed up by the United States by false intelligence.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 8):

I find it amusing when there is an "upturn" it is described as the whole country melting down into civil war yet when things are going well it some how can only be described as temporary.

Look at that graph and tell me that any downturn in sectarian violence HASNT been temporary....

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 8):

If you would care to show where he wantonly lied or deliberately misled the troops I will forward it on to Senator Reid and Speaker Pelosi since they would like to have that evidence.

He doesnt have to lie to the troops. Sadly for them, they have to do what he says, regardless of his reasoning or the veracity thereof. He lied to his citizens...the people who put their trust in him to actually protect them. That would be yourself, myself, and 300 million others. No offense, but I think you are kidding yourself if you think this war was not planned and that you were not misled by this President before the war started. There was no connection between Al Qeada and Saddam Hussien, as has been stated by the GWB administration. Furthermore there were no WMD found in Iraq. I dont think there is much more to say. His entire premise for going to war proved to be false.... and clearly its not really about the freedom of the Iraqis.... if it were, we'd be in Sudan, and numerous other places where people are being oppressed.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 8):

Yep, if we left them alone they certainly wouldn't come here and attack us would they?

They wouldnt come here if the US had better foreign policy around the world to begin with. Terrorism doesn't come about just because "people dont like us" on a whim. There have been some major injustices in the world, and we've angered people enough to feel they have to resort to this to gain attention. Sad, but true.

-AA777


User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21407 posts, RR: 54
Reply 20, posted (6 years 5 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3329 times:



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 18):
Can you give me assurance that he would not have threatened us one day?

The abortion of the UN inspections (which have turned out to have been highly successful in verifying and containing Saddam's capabilities) was only "justified" with an immediate threat emanating from Iraq which could not even allow for the few weeks the inspections had needed.

Simply abandon this crashed and burned line of argumentation.

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 18):
The Utopian speaks.

Well, on our side we've ticked off the correct predictions one by one. What about your own record?


User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21525 posts, RR: 55
Reply 21, posted (6 years 5 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3324 times:



Quoting RJdxer (Reply 18):
Can you give me assurance that he would not have threatened us one day?

No, but there are plenty of countries that could possibly threaten us one day who we're not at war with. In fact, we're best buddies with some of them.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineLTU932 From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 13864 posts, RR: 50
Reply 22, posted (6 years 5 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3314 times:



Quoting RicciPettit (Reply 16):
Reckon we would ever see Arnie make a go for it?

No. Ahhnullt was born an Austrian citizen, so even if he does have the US citizenship now, he's ineligible to run for President.

As for me, if I was an American citizen, I'd like to see a president, who goes out to the people during whatever sex scandal there is, and tells them that his sex life is none of their goddamn business.  Wink

Seriously, the next US president should be wise in his handling of major issues such as Iraq and Afghanistan, he should be open to the issue of gay rights (particularly gay marriage), he should not be influenced by the religious wing, he should be a good speaker (IMO one of the necessary requirements to be a politician is that he or she knows how to speak, unlike Bush who can't put a single sentence together without stuttering and sudden rephrasing if he isn't reading from a piece of paper or a teleprompter), and he should get rid of this culture of fear that started after 9/11 by not creating more paranoia than there already is.


User currently offlineCsavel From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 1362 posts, RR: 4
Reply 23, posted (6 years 5 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3310 times:

I want

A president who is fiscally conservative but socially libertarian.

A president who wants to get gov't out of BOTH my pocketbook and my bedroom

A president who tells the American people AND businesses that government is the solution to everything

A president who will end farm welfare and corporate welfare in general.

A president who knows, and is familiar with science

A president who isn't so afraid of being called a "flip-flopper" that he will never EVER change his mind or policies even when there is ample evidence that the policies failed

A president who will encourage freedom elsewhere but will deliberately step back in places where we've interfered in other countries affairs so their march to freedom can come on their terms

A president who cares about the environment as the "commons" of the country and the world. Read up on the tragedy of the commons.

A president who realizes that even absent global warming, fossil fuels have no future and we need to re-engineer our economy before it is re-engineered for us

A president who won't sugar coat pabulum to Americans because it is easier

A president who won't use 9/11 or terrorism in a cynical way to scare us into giving up our freedoms

A president who can speak at least one foreign language fluently (I think Kennedy was the last one. He spoke passable French)

Simly put, a presiden who has no shot of ever getting elected.



I may be ugly. I may be an American. But don't call me an ugly American.
User currently offlineRJdxer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (6 years 5 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 3290 times:



Quoting AA777 (Reply 19):
You are grasping at straws

Nope, tired of hearing the facts misinterpreted. You complain later in your post that the Administration claimed AQ and Saddam were in cahoots together, which is false, yet when the actual wmd's thought to be in Iraq are misstated I am some how grasping at straws.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 19):
UAL's original point was that Iraq's "threat" was drummed up by the United States by false intelligence.

Correct. But that is not what he said and I corrected him. You seem to have a problem when the correct information is put out.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 19):
He lied to his citizens...

Where and when? Lie implies knowledge of the truth.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 19):
No offense, but I think you are kidding yourself if you think this war was not planned and that you were not misled by this President before the war started

If you would care to quote where and when he talked about invading Iraq prior to 9/11 feel free to do so.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 19):
was no connection between Al Qeada and Saddam Hussien, as has been stated by the GWB administration

I think you unwittingly hit on the truth here. You are correct that the Bush administration never stated that there was a direct connection between AQ and Saddam. They did state that the two groups had met but not that one had anything more to do with the other prior to the Iraq invasion.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 19):
Furthermore there were no WMD found in Iraq.

Correct, but the information at the time, regardless of what Klaus, Barogue, and few of the other Utopians would have us believe was that he did indeed have them. Numerous Senators, Congressmen, a former President and Vice President, and various other world leaders and UN officials all agreed on that. What they disagreed on was what course of action to take. Of course those that had back room deals going on with Saddam didn't want to see him kicked out of power since that took money out of their pockets.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 19):
His entire premise for going to war proved to be false.

WMD's were not his entire premise for going to war, feel free to google his State of the Union speech, 2003, and his hes statement just prior to commencing military activities in March of 2003.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 19):
and clearly its not really about the freedom of the Iraqis.... if it were, we'd be in Sudan, and numerous other places where people are being oppressed.

Sudan is an actual civil war.

Quoting AA777 (Reply 19):
Terrorism doesn't come about just because "people dont like us" on a whim. There have been some major injustices in the world, and we've angered people enough to feel they have to resort to this to gain attention. Sad, but true.

Again, OBL declared war on the United States in the 90's. We ignored that threat and stood by while two of our embassies were blown up, a naval ship attacked, and several other plots were foiled and did nothing. Foreign policy is dictated towards sovereign states, not individuals unless that individual is the dictator and represents the State. OBL and AQ see us as infidels, they don't like us period. Until you can wrap your mind around that, you're wasting time and lives.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 20):
Simply abandon this crashed and burned line of argumentation.

Believe what you wish. It's not your country at war. We might not even be there if your country had been a little more vigilant prior to 9/11.

Quoting Klaus (Reply 20):
Well, on our side we've ticked off the correct predictions one by one. What about your own record?

Yep, you've proved hindsight is always 20/20. No matter what the final outcome you will always find fault with us going there so what you think of our record is of no concern.


25 LTU932 : Slightly OT, but your points remind me of part of a speech Helmut Kohl once made regarding such issues. I quote and translate (translation in parenth
26 Post contains images Klaus : Rubbish. Everybody agreed to have Iraq checked for the existence of WMDs. That's what the UN inspections were for. But there was no even halfway plau
27 Klaus : And 16 years of stagnation and climbing debt followed. I'd look for a different witness if I was you.
28 Allstarflyer : My answer succinctly - a relinquishing of usurped powers to Congress (and even more). Powers granted or simply taken by this administration should be
29 RJdxer : Your opinion. Oil for food, the tip of the iceberg. Remind me where the 9/11 hijackers were recruited from and did the early formation of their plans
30 UAL747 : [quote=RJdxer,reply=29] You really don't see any of the errors of the last 7 years do you? Or is it that you are so politically blind that you just ov
31 RJdxer : Nope, we should have done this after the first gulf war, we made a mistake by not doing it during President Clintons second term, I'm glad we finally
32 Klaus : Oh. Wow. Now that must justify everything. It is sad watching you defend the indefensible. I'd look for an actual way out of this mess if I was you.
33 Post contains links AA777 : This is nonsense- there were many articles written about how high ranking officials in Washington literally pressured intelligence agents/ agenices t
34 RJdxer : Fortunately for us, you don't live here. Again, prior to 9/11 Iraq was not even on the radar and this President was being criticized for not being en
35 AA777 : I'd venture to say that the Germans (and French too) are on the ball. There havent been any attacks there, any any attempts have been thwarted. And b
36 Post contains images Klaus : As we know by now, Iraq was front and center to the Bush administration right from the start. 9/11 just provided an apparent "opportunity". So the to
37 RJdxer : How many times doe we have to go over this? Senate and House intelligence select committees, which meet behind closed doors, had every opportunity to
38 Post contains images Klaus : At least one FBI field agent had specific information about the peculiar flight training some of the attackers were taking. Had there been more atten
39 RJdxer : Which if the FBI had done over here just based on flying, the liberals would have had a field day over. Passengers on a recent NW flight are finding
40 Post contains images Klaus : Rubbish. Training everything except takeoff and landing is suspicious by itself, as the field agent correctly determined. But I see: It's the fault o
41 Post contains images Falcon84 : Amazing. Common sense is now reduce to "ridiculous" to you. No wonder the far right has us so fucked up in this nation. That's if you don't want to b
42 Post contains images Toast : The next president of which country? Ghana? The Maldives? Vanuatu? There are a lot of elections in the world this year, you know... Well, my ideal ca
43 LTU932 : I'm bloody well aware that Kohl eventually failed with his economic policies and we ended up with a then higher than ever unemployment rate. I was ju
44 RJdxer : Really, then why are we still not allowed to profile young Muslim men boarding aircraft for extra security? Have a bunch of 80 yr old grandmas blown
45 LTU932 : Even if they do elect another moderate president, what can he do? He's still outranked by the Supreme Leader of Iran, who can reject whatever policy
46 Falcon84 : You confuse "loathing of policy" with "hate". Hate is reserved for people like Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, the jackasses who run Hezbollah and H
47 Post contains images Klaus : That does somewhat damage its value for a quote, don't you think?
48 AA777 : Is it getting better? I'm not so sure. You cannot say so with certainty either. The aforementioned graph shows peaks and valleys of violence. I have
49 Post contains images Klaus : Then there would have been absolutly no justification to force an abortion of the UN inspections - but you're still defending exactly that! You think
50 RJdxer : No, your posting in relation to this President and his administration couldn't be more clear. I never said you didn't. All I said is that I will not
51 Falcon84 : It's obviously NOT CLEAR to you: read what I wrote. It explains it. There is no hate. There is intense dislike of policy, and what his administration
52 Klaus : Yep. I've never provided any coherent argument. Ever. In my life. You could not be more right.
53 RJdxer : Luke warm? He invited former Vice President Gore to the White House to congratulate him on his Nobel Prize. When the Cinton's portraits were ready to
54 Falcon84 : He invited all of the American Nobel winners. Mr. Gore wasn't invited to talk shop, was he? Formality. Every president invites the one before to have
55 Post contains links Baroque : Not only that but cos you have a German name, you obviously have a relationship to an Axis, so you could well be part of the Axis of Evil. Well, tota
56 RJdxer : As usual, no answer. You cannot name a single time that this President has spoken badly of the opposition. You also cannot name a single time that on
57 AA777 : You look at that list and tell me that its SMART to let people carry things like that on there. You dont have to be a terrorist to have major problem
58 UAL747 : See, this is the fault in the argument that "weapons were sent to Syria" that was toted around on the tongues of repulicans after we initially invade
59 Post contains links and images AGM100 : http://www.breitbart.tv/html/52534.html Dear Lord ... I promise to be good all this year if you will only please let Obama win Tex/OH.
60 Post contains links RJdxer : And he could have, if he were the ogre you make him out to be, excluded the frmr VP. Yes, just as he asked not only his father but fmr President Clin
61 AA777 : And they did convene, and the evidence was presented- and the US decided to go against the United Nations Inspections findings. Which indicates a pol
62 Baroque : My my, did the Wash Post really say that about Bush? My link is down. But then I suppose it is true. Did not know about the acid though.
63 RJdxer : Evidently since you've still yet to agree that there were other reasons for the Iraqi invasion besides eliminating his WMD's even though the Presiden
64 AA777 : The humanitarian reasons are pure nonsense. If we invaded every nation that had torturous rulers, we would have a lot of troops all over the world. I
65 Post contains links RJdxer : Perhaps you don't remember the 90's. Which is why we haven't spent a dime trying to help rebuild the country. Perhaps you can one day ask fmr. Presid
66 AA777 : I have never mentioned my distaste for this president simply because he is a Republican. It never was about partisan politics for me- as I have previ
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Indiana Jones 4: What Plane Do You Want To See? posted Thu Jan 17 2008 02:32:58 by Columba
What Do You Want To Do In Life? posted Mon Aug 20 2001 04:23:38 by DeltaOwnsAll
What Do You Want To Work With When You Grow Up? posted Mon Oct 1 2007 17:01:06 by B747forever
High-School Musical On Ice -Do You Want To See It? posted Thu Aug 23 2007 19:52:36 by Vio
What Do You Eat And Drink In The Sport Stadium? posted Tue Oct 17 2006 20:41:03 by Sabena332
So, What Do You Want To Be? posted Wed Oct 20 2004 11:11:29 by ZKSUJ
What Do You Want To Be Invented? posted Fri Jun 27 2003 19:07:52 by Flyingbronco05
What Do You Want To Do Before You Die? posted Fri May 11 2001 13:46:47 by Aussiemite
Who Do You Want To Be President In 2008? posted Wed Oct 24 2007 13:51:53 by CJAContinental
What Do You Want For The Holidays posted Sat Nov 26 2005 20:22:05 by Airbus3801