deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jan 7, 2011 14:00:09 GMT -5
"we compete against them world wide."
-------------------------------------------------------
Handyman, sorry to say, we, nation, countries leaders, are not interested in that and neither are the posters here..it has been brought up as to POSSIBLE things we have to do , and rarly a comment or discussion on that, either agreeing or disagreeing , yet the posing on Bush this, bush did that, obama this, obama that..Pelosi this..Obama not born and other such..pages of comments.
|
|
ungenteel
Familiar Member
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 20:26:26 GMT -5
Posts: 560
|
Post by ungenteel on Jan 8, 2011 1:16:54 GMT -5
concern about a plane when we've mortgaged our financial to the Chinese?  |
|
Deleted
Joined: May 2, 2024 6:58:47 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2011 23:52:27 GMT -5
concern about a plane when we've mortgaged our financial to the Chinese? I wonder how many of those planes our interest payments are buying. |
|
|
|
Post by traelin0 on Jan 9, 2011 0:07:16 GMT -5
I wonder how many of those planes our interest payments are buying. Shhhh, listen to the chants of the mob. "We're #1! We're #1! We're #1!" The Chinese play chess. We play checkers. |
|
|
|
Post by stayput on Jan 9, 2011 0:15:22 GMT -5
I wonder how many of those planes our interest payments are buying. Shhhh, listen to the chants of the mob. "We're #1! We're #1! We're #1!" The Chinese play chess. We play checkers. I think that America should practice our new chant; We're #2! We're #2! |
|
|
|
Post by traelin0 on Jan 9, 2011 0:22:34 GMT -5
I think that America should practice our new chant; We're #2! We're #2! I understand your point, but unlike 99.9% of the electorate, I don't define myself by nation-state. I as a sovereign individual invest my capital wherever there is political stability and sound economic policy. |
|
zipity
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 0:32:17 GMT -5
Posts: 1,101
|
Post by zipity on Jan 9, 2011 0:36:58 GMT -5
I'm more concerned about the sub force they've built with our money. For that matter, the number of new al qaeda recruits we have trained with our purchases of Saudi oil.
|
|
|
|
Post by stayput on Jan 9, 2011 1:12:00 GMT -5
I find it really telling how the Chinese could come up with stealth anything. According to Nobama, when the Chinese and North Koreans hacked our Pentagon computers, they didn't get at anything of importance. Does anyone remember that? We were the only ones in the world with stealth technology, and now by a miracle, the Chinese have it?
|
|
|
|
Post by traelin0 on Jan 9, 2011 1:15:09 GMT -5
I find it really telling how the Chinese could come up with stealth anything. According to Nobama, when the Chinese and North Koreans hacked our Pentagon computers, they didn't get at anything of importance. Does anyone remember that? We were the only ones in the world with stealth technology, and now by a miracle, the Chinese have it? Don't you remember the situations where RTN "accidentally" leaked technology to the Chinese several years ago? Or the Hainan Incident? Or the leaks out of Los Alamos during the Clinton Admin (Wen Ho Lee)? The Chinese have brilliant (reverse) engineers. We not only give them the building blocks, but through our debt markets endeavors, we fund it. One can effectively boil it down to this: SS, Medicare, Medicaid, and foreign imperialism equals Chinese dominance. |
|
|
|
Post by stayput on Jan 9, 2011 1:27:23 GMT -5
I find it more telling how our most vital secrets of national security continuously get leaked when the DNC is in control of our government. Coincidence?
|
|
|
|
Post by traelin0 on Jan 9, 2011 1:30:42 GMT -5
I find it more telling how our most vital secrets of national security continuously get leaked when the DNC is in control of our government. Coincidence? Yes. All politicians of all stripes, and their electorate(s), for the past 20-30 years are to blame. Not one party. It theoretically wouldn't matter what's leaked if we didn't have so much dirty laundry to hide. Why are we using our valuable rare earth metals on unproductive stealth fighters anyways, when the private sector could be using those raw materials to better our economic strength? Remember, anything related to war is by definition a net negative in the intermediate to long term. |
|
|
|
Post by stayput on Jan 9, 2011 1:34:27 GMT -5
I'm going to go off on the deep end here, and state that I believe that the world is overpopulated, and I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the worlds leaders decided that a WWIII would be in every one's best interest.
|
|
|
|
Post by traelin0 on Jan 9, 2011 1:37:07 GMT -5
I'm going to go off on the deep end here, and state that I believe that the world is overpopulated, and I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the worlds leaders decided that a WWIII would be in every one's best interest. You're not going off the deep end. This has been a topic of conversation among people who actually think for themselves for years now. It is no secret that humans tend to herd with like minds. Obama, George Bush, Wen Jiabao, Gordon Brown, etc. have more in common with each other than they do you or me or any "commoner". Ever read 1984? It's not farfetched at all, especially when you hear UN officials discussing the "problem" of overpopulation. |
|
|
|
Post by stayput on Jan 9, 2011 1:41:40 GMT -5
No. I can't say that I have read that. I am just adding up all of the parts and pieces that I see, and drawing a hypothetical conclusion based upon that data.
|
|
|
|
Post by traelin0 on Jan 9, 2011 1:43:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by stayput on Jan 9, 2011 1:46:09 GMT -5
Who IS Oceania?
|
|
|
|
Post by traelin0 on Jan 9, 2011 1:50:51 GMT -5
Us. Big Brother. Read the book. Orwell was prescient. |
|
burnsattornincan
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 23:05:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,398
|
Post by burnsattornincan on Jan 9, 2011 1:53:11 GMT -5
It's not farfetched at all, especially when you hear UN officials discussing the "problem" of overpopulation.
Well anyone in the west better not be affected by their plans. We are not the problem. It is third world countries such as China, India, Pakistan and most of Africa who are the problem
|
|
|
|
Post by traelin0 on Jan 9, 2011 1:55:48 GMT -5
Well anyone in the west better not be affected by their plans. We are not the problem. It is third world countries such as China, India, Pakistan and most of Africa who are the problemWe already have been...look at how abortion has been foisted upon the populace by the Margaret Sangers of the world. |
|
|
|
Post by stayput on Jan 9, 2011 2:00:04 GMT -5
I didn't see the links that you provided when I posted my question. Here's the other problem. With resources being finite, and the population continuing to rise, what alternative to war do we actually have? The Chinese could lose 500 million people, and still have too many people to feed. This doesn't even touch on the sheer numbers of Asia, let alone the west. What do we do?
Take us, for example. Do we wipe out all of Mexico, central, and south America and take over their land so as to spread our own population out? Do the strong nations wipe out the weak ones, so as to add resources vital to our survival? How do we address the worlds population problem?
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jan 9, 2011 2:01:17 GMT -5
I'm going to go off on the deep end here, and state that I believe that the world is overpopulated, and I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the worlds leaders decided that a WWIII would be in every one's best interest. Yeah...deep end here? a BIT  |
|
|
|
Post by traelin0 on Jan 9, 2011 2:03:56 GMT -5
I didn't see the links that you provided when I posted my question. Here's the other problem. With resources being finite, and the population continuing to rise, what alternative to war do we actually have? The Chinese could lose 500 million people, and still have too many people to feed. This doesn't even touch on the sheer numbers of Asia, let alone the west. What do we do?
Take us, for example. Do we wipe out all of Mexico, central, and south America and take over their land so as to spread our own population out? Do the strong nations wipe out the weak ones, so as to add resources vital to our survival? How do we address the worlds population problem? Nature has its own means whereby the herds are culled. There's no reason for Man to make it more painful. Additionally, all those resources being flushed down the toilet could have been used to advance our technology, such that we could be discovering...whatever. Zero point energy? Colonization in space? Who knows. Point being is that free markets represent the drive of billions of individuals to survive and/or thrive. Using our raw materials on welfare and war are net negatives, economically speaking. We will reap what we sow. |
|
|
|
Post by stayput on Jan 9, 2011 2:14:57 GMT -5
traelin0, that still does not speak to the basic math. Look at a map of the world. Technology will not solve the basic fact. There is a finite amount of land. A finite amount of resources. The land mass will never grow. The number of fish in the sea has not increased. And with an unending number of people using up those resources we will very soon be at critical mass (if we are not already) Period. There are just too many pie holes to shove food in.
|
|
|
|
Post by traelin0 on Jan 9, 2011 2:28:07 GMT -5
traelin0, that still does not speak to the basic math. Look at a map of the world. Technology will not solve the basic fact. There is a finite amount of land. A finite amount of resources. The land mass will never grow. The number of fish in the sea has not increased. And with an unending number of people using up those resources we will very soon be at critical mass (if we are not already) Period. There are just too many pie holes to shove food in. Are you telling me that we put a man on the moon in the 1960s, and we couldn't have used our natural resources and a return to free markets to colonize space or make breakthroughs in zero point energy? OK so we are where we are. Let Mother Nature figure it out. But in the meantime, how about we actually give free markets a try, since that means there would be billions of us trying to figure out solutions, instead of glorified English majors in DC? World war is so Anglosphere 20th century. Does anyone with two functioning neurons think that Obama and his ilk, or Bush and his cronies, know better than engineers on how to innovate? The aforementioned clowns would have to write a position paper on how to screw in a light bulb. Then they'd have to figure out the means to regulate it! |
|
|
|
Post by stayput on Jan 9, 2011 2:43:32 GMT -5
traelin0, I do not disagree with your take on either Bush or Obama, nor any of the educated idiots in Washington. However, how can you sit there and seriously say " OK so we are where we are. Let Mother Nature figure it out."? Unless science can create the "Messiah basket", feeding 5,000 on a loaf of bread and a couple of fish, there are just too many people on this earth. Pretty soon, I wouldn't be surprised to see that one scene from the movie Solent Green. You have to let the government kill you, and then you get to watch a movie showing you what the open fields use to look like. Read more: notmsnmoney.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=politics&action=display&thread=1136&page=2#ixzz1AWQo85BP |
|
|
|
Post by traelin0 on Jan 9, 2011 2:48:19 GMT -5
traelin0, I do not disagree with your take on either Bush or Obama, nor any of the educated idiots in Washington. However, how can you sit there and seriously say " OK so we are where we are. Let Mother Nature figure it out."? Unless science can create the "Messiah basket", feeding 5,000 on a loaf of bread and a couple of fish, there are just too many people on this earth. Pretty soon, I wouldn't be surprised to see that one scene from the movie Solent Green. You have to let the government kill you, and then you get to watch a movie showing you what the open fields use to look like. The objective is to end the warfare/welfare cycle ASAP, before it destroys futurity. I am hoping the dollar collapses before we begin another cycle...I also think it will. Mother Nature is more powerful than any bureaucrat or citizen and she WILL win out, eventually. A dollar crisis could be mostly limited to the Boomers, provided we don't dig ourselves in an even bigger hole. War would destroy futurity. Who dies in war? Wars are fought by the young and plotted by the old. Which generation is more important for survival? We can't have it both ways anymore. We are the largest debtor nation in the history of the world, so we have to choose between the Boomers or the Millennials onwards. So what's our choice? Our parents or our children? It's a no-brainer for me. |
|
|
|
Post by stayput on Jan 9, 2011 3:10:41 GMT -5
traelin0, here's a whole scenario laid out based solely upon world data. North Korea is starving/freezing, and attacks S. Korea both conventionally and nuclear. China decides to take back Taiwan, and settle old scores with Japan. The radical elements of Pakistan take over the government, and nuke/invade India to settle old land/other disputes. India retaliates. Iran takes full advantage of world crisis and with Syria (possibly others) nukes Israel and Egypt. Russia, not wanting to let a good crisis go to waste, attacks all former Soviet controlled nations. America is in civil strife, and has to deal with Venezuela. Venezuela now has N. Korean short range nukes pointed at the U.S., and then there is the ex-pats in Mexico, and central America under siege, so America makes a clean sweep starting at Mexico and heading to Venezuela.
Just a partial hypothetical mind you.
|
|
|
|
Post by traelin0 on Jan 9, 2011 3:14:27 GMT -5
So long as I'm out of here by the time that scenario went down, I don't care. If people are really stupid enough to sacrifice the blood of America's future for the miscreants in Washington, then you can basically refer to us as the New Brits. Generational historians have argued that a big part of the British Empire's sunset was its imperialism and the toll it took on future generations.
It's kind of hard to produce when you no longer have enough people of producing age.
|
|
|
|
Post by stayput on Jan 9, 2011 3:24:52 GMT -5
If the whole world is on fire, where are you "out of here" to. Where do you go to? You are at a distinct disadvantage when you go to unfamiliar land/people. It is far easier to defend that which you know and love, then to go some where you know nothing, or next to nothing.
Don't be that lady in Florida. I told this story long ago, but if you do recall, we were facing a major hurricane, and I was in the checkout line behind a lady who had filled her cart (over the top) with nothing but meat. She went on and on (for everyone around her to hear) about how her family would eat no matter how bad it was. Finally, I got tired of listening to her, and asked her; "Lady. If it is as bad as they say, we won't have any power. How do you intend to keep all of that meat fresh?
|
|
|
|
Post by traelin0 on Jan 9, 2011 11:46:42 GMT -5
If the whole world is on fire, where are you "out of here" to. Where do you go to? You are at a distinct disadvantage when you go to unfamiliar land/people. It is far easier to defend that which you know and love, then to go some where you know nothing, or next to nothing. Everyone should have a Plan B and if possible a Plan C. I'm not just going to adhere to a Plan A and throw myself at the mercy of warmongers. |
|
