Guard Dog

Probably not. Someone told me once, if you put a Sunni and a Shia in a room together and told each the other was the last of his kind in the world they would fight to the death. Personally, I think 9-11 shows the wisdom of the Monroe/Roosevelt Doctrine. I would rather see the US concern itself ONLY with the Western Hemisphere. If it were up to me I would immediately close all bases east of Puerto Rico and west of Guam, redeploy those units within that zone and IMMEDIATELY terminate all foreign aid to any country not in North or South America. MFN trade status for China would be revoked and granted to someone close to home. As for the rest of world, they can get by on their own. Wars, tsunamis, whatever, they hate us, they have never helped us, why should our money help them. As for Europe, I doubt they need or want our help these days.

Yeah, but they are talking about USING them. Edit: Forget that last comment, it was hypothetical and pointless.

Taks is right about that. Plus very little of Iran's terrain can be reached with power lines. One reactor could probably run the entire country's existing infrastructure. They are enriching far too much material (based on the number of facilities they have) for it to be anything other than weapons. Personally, I would have handled US foreign policy very differently since 9-11 had I been in the White House and the Iraq war to date has been an utter abortion. That said, were are in it and cannot back out without creating more and far worse problems down the road. When we were packing up to leave in '91 everyone was saying we would have to come back because the job was not finished. That turned out to be true. I don't want to see US Troops fighting there again ten years from now. So as wrong headed as it has been done, better to finish it now.

Heh, technically a right or left winger comes from what side of the assembly chamber you sit on. Since I could not seem to win an election, I couldn't be either!

Remember the chess analogy I gave you Sand? Sometimes you need to take a square not because you need it now but because you will need it later? The war in Iraq is just a part of the war on terror. If Iraq and Afghanistan were both stable with a strong US presence, and Pakistan and Uzbekistan are allies with the US, Iran is totally surrounded and is less likely to launch one of those nuclear weapons they are building. BTW, are you ready to change your name to Snow yet? Looks like you are getting enough.

Hey Wals, I take it back. Maybe there WILL be another European war. You guys just seem to have it in for each other. I just have a problem with their backwards views on homosexuality and abortions. IMO it doesn't belong in EU, not that the US is backwards, but lets face it you do have a very right wing Christian movement. Jeez Lucius. I was just making a joke here. And, last time I checked, wasn't the EU an economic alliance? You live in Denmark right? What the heck do you care about the political climate or opinions about abortions and homosexuality in another country? The opinions of the average Pole on a purely social issue have no bearing on trade, military cooperation, or other aspects of the EU. Also, I would point out that being of a particular faith or political persuasion does not require to conform to any perceived stereotype. I am a Christian and I could not care less about who is or is not homosexual, and can see no reason they should not be allowed to do what they please so long as it does not affect me. I think most "right-wing" Americans would agree with me. Hmmmm.... I get the strangest feeling I've said these things to you before.....

the .22 is a fine round for target practice but that the heck will you be hunting with it???? Beetles? Hamsters? I've got a story about a relative of mine who shot a black bear with a .22. It's a short story.

Hey Wals, I take it back. Maybe there WILL be another European war. You guys just seem to have it in for each other.

That statement is a steaming pile of BS. A weapon is an inanimate object, incapable of aggression. If putting a weapon in a persons hand makes them aggressive then that is a character deficency in that individual and has nothing to do with the weapon. By using your logic I might claim that beer has given me a beer gut. But the truth is, that beer would have sat right there on the shelf if I did not buy it. And nothing would have happened if I did not drink it. The fault is not with the beer it's with me. If someone abuses a weapon it is not the fault of the weapon, the people who made it, or other uninvolved people who own a weapon. It is the fault of the indvidual only. We had a gun control thread already. A lot of acrimony, argument, link posting, baiting and it all boiled down to Europeans having a different opinion than North Americans on the subject. And not a little condecension over the cultural differences on both sides.

This reminds me of the story of the dyslexic agnostic the night he got insomnia. He sat up all night wondering if there was a dog.

Sure! We could take use US cost of living, working for Mexican wages, paying Canadian taxes. Good thing the health care would be free cause who the heck could afford it?

We tried that once... It really did not go over well. But seriously, I doubt, EU or no, we will not see another global conflict on the scale of WWII. All economies are so interdependent who could afford it? As for breaking up the US, I doubt that will ever happen but you are correct about it being unwieldy to govern. The Founders recognized that and that is the reason for the (oft-ignored) 10th Amendment in the constitution. FDR shot that to pieces.

Eddo, you have WAY too much disposable income. Those pieces are not cheap. And everyone else, cut the man some slack here. He can buy any kind of legal firearm he wants for any reason or no reason. It's in the Constitution. Remember? We discussed all that just a little while ago?

Wow. Thats ufcked up.

Another Darwin moment.

I agree, excellent book. But I am a Hemingway fan anyway. To Have and Have Not was my favorite.

Civil War II huh? Tell me Weiser, are you willing to kill me and my family simply because we have different political beliefs than you and yours? Maybe you should think about that before going on about how "awesome" it will be. I'd pass that comment off as a joke but you have made it before.

Sirius Radio channel 31, Radio Margaritaville. Dial it in and lock it!

Link This stuff will KILL you! Out of curiosity, whats the longest time you guys have spent playing at one time and what game was it? When Madden football came out for the Sega Genesis back in '94 I called in sick for work on Monday and played nearly continuously from Saturday morning until Monday night. These days I ususally lose interest after 2-3 hours. But I have a pretty short attention span.

That was private land though Gorgon, not public. If it were public there would never have been the need to go to court. The state could have just ordered a halt. Or not since the states position was that the damned bird wan't there to begin with. In America, once upon a time, the use of private land was the business of the owner and no one else. My how things have changed.

No, that statement is based on what I know of him personally. Or rather what the people I know, know of him personally. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying the entire environmental movement is without merit (that is a whole different subject) and you should know I am no Republican looking to take shots at a Dem just for being a Dem. But so far the "Green Cause" is paying off big for him. After the 2000 election he was dead meat politically. He came out of that court battle looking like a sore loser, and the truth is he was the first presidential candidate in 120 years to lose his home state. He was a man dangling from a cliff by a tuft of grass. Now he is the toast of the Hollywood liberals and everything he says is treated as canon law by the media no matter how preposterous it might be or how little fact his statements may be based on. His name recognition is greater than ever, the 2000 election is in the distant past and if he steps into the race he becomes the immediate front runner with the ultra wealthy of Hollywood just dying to contribute to him.

I know Mr. Gore... somewhat. I had the chance to meet him twice when I was involved in politics. This man is no crusader. He does not care about saving the planet, or the environment. To him, environmentalism is simply the vehicle he has chosen to advance himself. As with many politicians he is a study of narcissism gone wild. In 1991 he was the junior senator from Tennessee, bucking for a 1992 Presidential run. He involved himself in a protest/court battle involving the Georgia Pacific Co. timber operations near Covington TN. A number of environmental groups filed for a court injunction to stop timbering PRIVATELY OWNED land they had leased timber rights to. The cause was based on a report of some endangered bird that made it's habitat in that area. While the court battle went on Mr. Gore got his picture on the front page of the Memphis Commercial Appeal standing arm in arm with the protesters blocking the access road to the land. Eventually Ga. Pacific stopped fighting and pulled out of the area. The enviro groups claimed victory and most of the people in Covington TN lost their jobs. At least if Mr. Gore was a true believer then those who lost their jobs would have been the tragic side effect of "doing the right thing". But all he cared about was the publicity it generated for him which makes him a despicable cold blooded S.O.B in my book. The sad thing was the Tennessee Fish and Game commission maintained that species of bird no longer inhabited the east side of the Mississippi River. But as a few of you pointed out here, facts mean little compared to the perceived importance of the message. This incident played out after he became VP but I'm convinced it had a lot to do with why he lost in Tennessee in 2000. No one likes to be used. Lady Crimson is right, open any newspaper and you can find dozens of examples of hypocrisy. But seldom does a total fraud like Gore get embarrassed like this. And Sand it does matter. Even if he is not in politics at this moment he has become the de facto leader of the "New Left". And trust me, we have not heard the last of him in national politics. And any opportunity to discredit him should be capitalized on. Have you guys actually read his book? If you think Bush is scary, take a good hard look at this guy. Here is a man who has discreetly hinted (in his book at leas) he does not believe in private ownership of land, and has argued for nationalizing property and businesses. No thank you. And yes Wals, politicians MUST be held to the same standards as regular citizens because they ARE regular citizens just doing a government job. The moment there is a separate law for us and them Orwell's worst imaginations will become our reality.

The final WOT book might be a long time in coming. Mr. Jordan has been fighting a usually terminal blood disease this past year. The good news is, he is doing better. Much better in fact. I know he says he is comitted to finishing his series. But I think concerns like that are secondary to him right now.

No, the problem is in his world I should be cooking over an open fire and walking everywhere I go. Meanwhile he sucks up more power than a suburban city block, rides in a small fleet of SUVs, and flies private planes any time he needs to go from here to there. To me this is an example of "All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others".