BruceVC

I have. It involves me moving to Canada. Hah, feel free to leave. Odd that you would flee to a country with higher tax and universal health care to get away from a democrat, but what-evs. It's not because she's a democrat. Hell, out of the people who have a reasonable shot at winning, I'd probably vote for Bernie. I decided a long time ago that if Hillary Clinton ever became president, I was leaving the country. As far as I'm concerned she's amoral, power-hungry, willing to do or say whatever to gather more power, and has no concern for the well-being of anyone other than herself. I don't trust her at all, and am fairly certain that given the chance, she'd gladly turn the US into a dictatorship with herself in power. Come on...are you being serious? Please trust me when I say you don't want to leave the USA just because of Hilary ....you will realize that the problems in other countries are much worse than your perception of Hilary Clinton

Yes I am very fortunate....its weird because most South Africans would jump at this but for me I feel I have a commitment here but I still want to understand what moving would mean Good point, they have branches in major cities of each state but you work from home, have virtual meetings and manage your appointments so I am basically talking about living in the capital city of each state and not living in the country side How is Arizona? It looks very hot from what I have seen, can you describe life there. If you don't mind any details you can share ?

I had a interesting job offer on Friday, the software that I sell and work with comes from the USA and the company made me a job offer to move to the USA. They said I could move to Texas, Oregan, NY, California, Virginia, Arizona, Massachusetts, Florida or Georgia as these are all considered hubs and I could stay in any of those places Its a really good deal and a great privilege and I need to consider it. But I am looking for feedback from anyone who stays in those states and what those states are like I have been to some of those states but only for a few days at a time, I am easy going and don't mind where I stay as anywhere in the USA would be good for me as I would move by myself and all my family are in NY but they aren't close to me. I am not use to the cold and would prefer a big city vibe but also a city where I can go into the country side for a break

She is Finnish? Dude wft......how did she become so conservative, I thought you guys were liberal She is daughter of economic refugees that left their country when it was in bad shape after war. Also she is american born, meaning that she is corrupted Phew....okay you dodged that bullet, as far as I'm concerned you have no responsibility for what she thinks or says

She is Finnish? Dude wft......how did she become so conservative, I thought you guys were liberal

Baro don't you feel more fulfilled and at ease..,..listening to me takes the stress over having to make your own decisions, now you can focus on other things

Shady will you vote for Clinton if Sanders loses? Nope, not voting for Clinton and will likely vote 3rd party if Bernie doesn't get the nomination. Also, most of the Sanders supporters that I know will either stay home or write his name in as protest Do you think all Republicans should support Trump if he somehow gets the nod? You agree that Clinton is coming off as condescending or that young people can't have a valid dissenting opinion? Not to worry though since Clinton is still the likely winner no matter how much I wish it were not so You have asked me some interesting questions....yes I assumed the majority of Republicans and Democrats would vote for the nominated candidate because for Republicans it seems the objective is to end the reign of Obama and anyone who follows his policies ...Clinton fits this profile and Sanders is similar around Federal government being able to intervene And I would think most Democrats would think if Trump or Cruz wins they both have plans to dismantle various social programs that have become the hallmark of Obama. So I would expect Democrats to not want a Republican candidate to win. But I admit I don't know much about how Americans support other candidates so please correct me about this I knew my comment about 19 year old may not be popular...but I stand by it, I just need to explain some context. I see this in my own country where people seem to think 18, 19 and 20 year olds have the economic solutions to our problems. People mistake activism with insight and experience. Of course young people must vote and its great they care but end of the day when did we get to a point where there is expectation that someone who has never worked or had to support themselves suddenly become an expert on policy? They are not suppose to know these things ...they students or just finished school An example is that video that was posted by Qistina where students at Harvard? were asked about ISIS...now obviously they all bright but there actual responses were factually incorrect ...its not there fault but they made some really bad comparisons I have no idea if Clinton is condescending towards young people and of course I would never say this to a room of young people but if I was concerned with what Americans want changed politically and economically I would focus on people like you who work, pay taxes and want real benefits to there lifestyles. Why would I focus on some 19 year old telling me to destroy Wall Street...I would listen to you if thats what you honestly felt but for me life and practical experience matters There will be exceptions of course and I am not suggesting only employed people should have a voice but likes of OWS I wont let define economic policy...do I sound condescending ?

I've seen a lot of those type of articles, I do wonder if it's reciprocal and Hillary supporters won't be there for Sanders if he wins. Good thing that's Bloomberg View otherwise I'd suspect that Mike was definitely going to run in order to save the US from Socialism and The Tea Party. Zora from your perspective as someone who wants the USA to fail and end Western global hegemony who would be the most disruptive candidate? Cruz perhaps ?( hypothetical question of course because 4 years is not enough to destroy the USA but you could do loads of damage in 4 years )

Shady will you vote for Clinton if Sanders loses? I laughed at the part of the article " It’s condescending,” said Caitlin Conley, a 19-year-old student at Franklin Pierce University in Rindge. “It’s like she doesn’t think young people can have an opinion and know what they are talking about.” Correct that's exactly what I think....and when I was 19 I wasn't assuming I knew more than people with 20-30 years experience

Barti please don't tell me you are planning on voting for Sanders as well....that would be the ultimate betrayal But on a serious note both Sanders and Clinton are better than any of the top 3 Republicans, you may assume I have no personal interest in Sanders winning but I do. He appeals to the younger people within the Democrats and people that want the social change he espouses...his views around free education, restructuring of Wall Street and ideas around healthcare I completely understand resonate with many Americans But for me a stable USA financial sector is critical to global health....lets just stay out of it for the sake of everyone. Hilary is the more reasonable candidate for me because she always seems to make points that I understand...nothing radical But end of the day they would both be good for the USA as they both are committed to growing and supporting the middle class But imagine a Trump victory ....I was watching various interviews with him around Megyn Kelly, she is smoking hot by the way, and I realized how insecure he is. No he really isn't the right person to be the President

I have. It involves me moving to Canada. Hah, feel free to leave. Odd that you would flee to a country with higher tax and universal health care to get away from a democrat, but what-evs. Hurlshot I know you aren't a big fan of Hilary but what is your view of her being elected? Living in California would this have any impact to you and your family that concern you with her policies ?

I have been asking myself this same question, why run for president? My view is because he is one of fairly large percentage of Americans, mostly white, who feel Obama has not only weakened the USA he is undermining certain core laws that the USA was built-on ...its like people feel this is a battle for American identity

I'd vote for a lobotomized chimp before I choose her. Its interesting that you have such little respect for your country...there is a good chance Hilary will be the next president. Yet you compare her to an animal? I'm not saying you have to like her...but dude come on, lets keep the criticism in perspective She's more like a cold blooded reptile. Or a virus. And as a liberal, I sincerely hope she's not elected. I would choose any republican over her, even Trump. Please consider a reality where she will become president...in fact I am confident she will be Sanders has done well but Hilary just is more experienced and reasonable with social changes And the Republicans have impacted there own success by allowing Trump to run rampant..yes I know I'm predicting early but I'll go into more detail after the election as I want to be right Also I understand its not like Trump could be reasonably stopped by anyone ...but I really think he has done the Republicans harm within the minorities

I'd vote for a lobotomized chimp before I choose her. Its interesting that you have such little respect for your country...there is a good chance Hilary will be the next president. Yet you compare her to an animal? I'm not saying you have to like her...but dude come on, lets keep the criticism in perspective

Gromnir I consider the view that the moon landing was a fake one of the " harmless conspiracy theories " But I'm not sure if you are aware, because you live in the USA, of the number of really irritating and contentious conspiracy theories that exist about the USA and the West that are part of a broader anti-Western narrative I generally hear about 2-3 every time there is a debate on a talk show about the USA...I regularly dispute them

Hi KP I know you open minded...will you support me in my view that its possible the moon could be made of cheese ?

It's definitely not oil, as kgambit says there simply isn't enough of it. The question of why would take literally pages of analysis. Though it might have something to do with the putative blocked gas pipeline from the gulf to Turkey via Syria even that is distinctly questionable as a major factor. From the west's perspective the three major factors were probably 1) Arab Spring made it doable and the narrative from it was... unfortunate, since the casualties were distinctly pro western dictators like Ben Ali (and Mubarak). Idea was to co opt it to get rid of leaders they disliked 2) The west's messiah complex, and the damage Iraq did to it 3) Their Gulf allies so very, very desperately wanted Assad gone and have lots of money (3) would be the biggest one by far, owing to the obsession KSA has with Iran and its shia crescent of influence, radicalising sunnis and (at best) marginalising those they don't see as proper muslims with Qatar and Bahrain not far behind there. Compared to the west they've expended vast amounts of money and political capital supporting the rebels, the west has largely just given lip service with no practical help. That's also why you have the west consistently describing Al Qaeda allied militia- literally the exact same relationship as the Taleban in Afghanistan has to Al Qaeda- as being 'moderate rebels'; those groups are the ones their allies primarily support. Now you can add a fourth reason too, butthurt that the Russian intervention is working, though again that is entirely lip service/ hand waving with no practical support and is more about PR than anything else. At this point they'll probably try for a 'sunnistan' solution of breaking up Iraq and Syria along- coincidentally, I'm sure- pretty much the exact boundaries of the current ISIS 'state'. Hence the talk of KSA contributing soldiers to an 'anti ISIS' ground force. They almost literally could not make a worse job of it than the west has made with their pet projects in Iraq and Libya unless they did so deliberately, Bruciekins. Zora you have raised some interesting points, I disagree with several of them and would like to debate with you but I don't want to spend time typing if you will just ignore me. So will you engage? Before you comment dont think you doing this for me, this is about giving people like Dark a balanced view of the situation

Thats okay Baro, I am more than happy to confirm anything you are unsure about ..just ask and don't be embarrassed

Stop huffing glue. It's bad for you. Okay I am one of those people who typically loathes to give any criticism on forums but don't you think its always good to keep an open mind? Not when you include the words "moon" and "cheese" in the same comment. Is it happy hour over in SA now? I live in a country that has one of the highest crimes rates in the world and we face a plethora of real economic, political and social challenges...if you are able its always happy hour over here

Syrian Oil production had already dropped to ~ 380,000 bbl/day by 2009 (from a peak of ~580,000 bbl/day in1996) and continued to decline to ~280,000 bbls/day (at the time the conflict started). Proven reserves are 2.5 billion barrels. Syria ranks 32nd in production and reserves. There are far larger and more reliable sources of oil than Syria. So you think that there was no business in the supporting of the civil war in that area? Like there was no additional business from France in moving to Libya? You're shifting the goal posts. First it was oil, now it's business in general? I simply replied to your comment about oil being a motivation. Syria's production is simply not that significant. ok, so what other than oil could drive them to Syria? It was the goal of French in Libya, so what would be other interests in Syria? What would removing Syrian pres. give? Dark despite what you think if the West can assist with preventing a protracted civil war and maybe encourage our type of government and democracy why wouldn't they help? But they won't go against the UNSC veto And at the time removing Assad would have weakened Iran who was still the enemy back in 2011

The West understandably considers Assad a vile, appalling, intransigent and brutal dictator It will take a massive amount of work to get the Syrian economy functional...I doubt the West will be prepared to commit these type of resources to help them..I know I wouldn't. It may just be easier to try to absorb the refugees

Stop huffing glue. It's bad for you. Okay I am one of those people who typically loathes to give any criticism on forums but don't you think its always good to keep an open mind?

There is absolutely nothing inconsistent in the pictures or the videos. Regolith (moon dust) is ultra reflective for starters. I know I saw a link detailing the explanations for the alleged inconsistencies - let me see if I can find it. The total radiation dose was ~32 mrem, or 0.016 rads (all from protons ≥100 MeV).; That is well below the levels required to cause illness let alone death. The misconception is that the Apollo craft flew directly thru the Van Allen belt. It actually skirted the edges of it, which significantly reduced the radiation threat. Here's a fairly detailed study of the issue: http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm or you can reference the actual dosimeter readings of the Apollo missions: https://lsda.jsc.nasa.gov/scripts/experiment/exper.aspx?exp_index=369 According to NASA there was no major solar flare during the Apollo missions. There were 1400 detectable events but none of them posed a risk to the astronauts. http://www.clavius.org/envsun.html Okay but guys Sarex may still have a point which will be very difficult to dispute.....if the moon was made of cheese then there was no landing? It was indeed fake...and how do we not know the moon is not made of cheese

Another question, what do you think is the Russian endgame ? Lets say both the Syrian rebels " aligned " to the West and ISIS are defeated and Assad stays in the power..who is going to rebuild the Syrian economy?

Dark you think this article is credible? Check below "Russians understand war. Americans understand managing conflicts to get unsatisfactory results,” one official familiar with the U.S. military campaign told The Daily Beast. The approach of both nations “tells the region who the players are. America is feckless and Russia and Iran are reliable allies.” Well when it comes to understanding warfare... what is better from the strategical point of view. gaining advantage at a cost of some civilian casualties or limited presence due to failures of previous campaigns and bad PR? You can;t deny that Russians are effective at supporting Assad with Aleppo most likely soon to be a crown jewel of their approach. Whereas US did what? They can;t even recognize who has islamic terrorist ties and who does not, so their hands are tied. Last thing they want to do is to copy mistakes of Afghanistan and Iraq. This also shows the msg that indeed Russians can be an effective support in the region while US so far had failed campaigns with exception of desert storm in 90s... Whatever they did after, always backfired and only complicated things. How are Iraq and Afghanistan better economically after the US interventions? What is the scope of the help there? They probably understand it, hence are slowly withdrawing and giving space to local players like Iran. Predictable dictatorship is much better than unpredictable mess that they caused. The only big question mark in the whole region is the Turkey and how far they are able to gamble away their position and test NATO ties. If they will invade Syria that will be an act of war against Syrian gov and its Russian ally... from there it is an easy route for a global disaster... Do you think the Russian intervention in Syria is an example of difficult military campaign....see my post above