War with Iran close, and US forces likely already on the ground- USAF Colonel (ret.) (1 Viewer)

[littlewing69]

Re: War with Iran close, and US forces likely already on the ground- USAF Colonel (re

When of the American working population there is easily 15,000,000 people who are earning less than $14,000 USD annually looking at basic expenses not including clothing and other things. It seriously lowers the true standard of living to a degree which is below internationally accepted poverty. This country having the HIGHEST GDP and being the richest nation in the world. Thanks, capitalist country.

Capitalism may not make everyone rich, but communism sure makes everyone poor.

 

[ElendilPeredhil]

HA! That's a laugh. The president of the United States is more or less a dim-wit who can't string a proper sentence together. He may seem to have good character at times to you, but he certainly doesn't posess any intelligence. This proves that the only reason why there hasn't been a black president is because there hasn't been enough funding and such for a black president. George W. Bush had oil money which he used to launch his campaign, an honest Black politician has about 2% of the ammount of money bush had coming in. Who do you think would win the election?

Leaving aside a personal dislike of Bush, he can't have become president without at least a high school educaton. I didn't say you had to be intelligent, I said you had to be educated and and Bush is. He's an idiot, but he's still educated. 'an honest black politician'...no such thing as an honest politician.

 

[littlewing69]

Re: War with Iran close, and US forces likely already on the ground- USAF Colonel (re

Leaving aside a personal dislike of Bush, he can't have become president without at least a high school educaton. I didn't say you had to be intelligent, I said you had to be educated and and Bush is. He's an idiot, but he's still educated. 'an honest black politician'...no such thing as an honest politician.

How hard is it really, to get a tertiary education in America when you have the money and connections that Bush had?

 

[Aryanbeauty]

Re: War with Iran close, and US forces likely already on the ground- USAF Colonel (re

170666.67 yet only the number 1 person has income higher than this

The working poor cant have US$ 500,000 income, average are not calculated on simple method like you used, there are more accurate statistical methods to reflect the reality such as weighted mean and truncated mean and also other various statistical methods. If they include Bill Gates annual income , american average income will goes up to millions for each person which is not true.

GDP and average annual income calculated by labour dept is reliable and the best key indicator of economic condition of a given country.


15,000,000 people who are earning less than $14,000 USD annually looking at basic expenses not including clothing and other things. It seriously lowers the true standard of living to a degree which is below internationally accepted poverty
There is no such defined internationally accepted poverty, the only key indicator is people living below $1 per day, china have 120 million people living with or less than $1 a day.

Has there ever been a black president? how many black senators are there? has there every been an red-indian president...
Ask that question when Australia elect aboriginal Prime Minister or a Lebanese!

The president of the United States is more or less a dim-wit who can't string a proper sentence together. He may seem to have good character at times to you, but he certainly doesn't posess any intelligence.
Have you ever listened Bush's speeches? Can you point out a time when he cannot string out proper sentence? His speeches on state of the union and his election victory speeches were brilliant. He may not be as articulate as Tony Blair, he sure have intelligence and strong will power. He is a graduate of the world's most prestigious universities Yale and Harvard which you will never see in your entire life.

This proves that the only reason why there hasn't been a black president is because there hasn't been enough funding and such for a black president. George W. Bush had oil money which he used to launch his campaign, an honest Black politician has about 2% of the ammount of money bush had coming in. Who do you think would win the election?
Does america needs black president while close to 80% of its population are whites? Does that makes american looks bad? Australia also have 6% asian population and when will it elect an asian as Australian Prime Minister not to talk of an aboriginal? How many Asians are there in Australian Parliament? It is easy to point finger at others while the same situation clearly exist right here at home!

For your information George Bush's top donors for his election campaigns are all financial companies NOT oil company. Morgan Stanley $600,480 Merrill Lynch $580,004PricewaterhouseCooper $512,500 UBS Americas $468,075 Goldman Sachs $388,600 MBNA Corp $356,350 Credit Suisse First Boston $330,040Lehman Brothers $327,725Citigroup Inc $320,620
link Where does that so called OIL money comes from

The election was not fought between Bush and a black candidate, it was between Bush and Kerry, both of them are whites!

 

[HotShot]

Re: War with Iran close, and US forces likely already on the ground- USAF Colonel (re

But even the poor in the US have a higher standard of living than those in the indian middle class.

i doubt it, i think the middle class would have a better standard of living than the poor in the US.

Has there ever been a black president? how many black senators are there? has there every been an red-indian president...
Ask that question when Australia elect aboriginal Prime Minister or a Lebanese!

Australia is a relatively young country and the poms when they came here they absolutely destroyed the indigenous population. As such its only in recent the aborginies are making some sort of recovery. Lebanese? there are hardly any in australia and they have better chance of being prime minister here than a latin american would have in America.

U didnt answer the question. elendil claimed that blacks lack of education - which i think is ridiculous as she contradicted herself saying there are many black doctors and lawyers etc.

Its money if you are rich and wealthy then you very strong chance of becoming the president of America - nothing got to do with educations or intelligence - if u have money the rest follows. so why hasnt there been any black presidentS? the blacks have contributed a lot to american society? (why without them u wouldnt have the olympics or america wouldnt stand a chance).

 

[Serius]

I disagree with this statement and i'll explain why.
In the U.S the cost of rent in any decent area (which isn't project-housing or low property value caused by danger and theft) is about $600 USD a month. Now, with this extremely high price included with utility bills and food how much would be needed yearly to maintain these necessities?

Housing $600 x 12 = $7,200
Electricity $170 x 4 = $680
Phone $30 x 12 = $360
Gas/Hot Water(elec) = $150 x 4 = $600

That alone not including Food or size of the family comes to $8,840 (that's barely right I made many mistakes but still the other problems arise.)

Then when somebody has an accident and needs medical coverage what do they do? Medicate doesn't cover or illnesses or doctors expenses and is only admissible in the very low serviced public hospitals which are overflowed by demand.

When of the American working population there is easily 15,000,000 people who are earning less than $14,000 USD annually looking at basic expenses not including clothing and other things. It seriously lowers the true standard of living to a degree which is below internationally accepted poverty. This country having the HIGHEST GDP and being the richest nation in the world. Thanks, capitalist country.


HA! That's a laugh. The president of the United States is more or less a dim-wit who can't string a proper sentence together. He may seem to have good character at times to you, but he certainly doesn't posess any intelligence. This proves that the only reason why there hasn't been a black president is because there hasn't been enough funding and such for a black president. George W. Bush had oil money which he used to launch his campaign, an honest Black politician has about 2% of the ammount of money bush had coming in. Who do you think would win the election?

You are correct, alot of Americans live below the poverty line. Minimum wage is a joke[ and alot of people in America are living on this line of about 5$ an hour unlike Australia where most people are earning a decent wage] where the only way you can live off it is if you are single, housed in a trailerpark and living off twinkies.America doesnt have the safety net we do either, welfare? what a joke. Their medical system is up the shitter aswell. If you cant afford treatment you will probably die.

The only way normal people can afford treament is to have medical insurance... the problem is that people with pre-existing conditions cant get insured. Born with asthma? you are fine until 18[covered under your parents] but after that good luck getting insurance.


The purpose of the president isnt for inteligence [although it would be good to have that aswell] its to have a moral representative of the people, a guy who you trust to look after your interests and take the moral ground you would most likely take yourself. Alot of white americans dont trust blacks, so i dont see a black president for quite awhile.

I would love to see an indigenous australian prime minister one day, because when that day comes, i will be able to say that our countrys problems are on the right track to being fixed. Fact is, its not going to happen for awhile because white australia sees aboriginals as alcoholic violent rurals who sniff petrol, live in housing department and survive off welfare[which contrary to popular beleif doesnt all go towards alcohol]
An indigenous australian prime minister would sort out our countrys problems quick smart.

edit: lol i misspelled intelligence

 

[Aryanbeauty]

You are correct, alot of Americans live below the poverty line. Minimum wage is a joke[ and alot of people in America are living on this line of about 5$ an hour unlike Australia where most people are earning a decent wage] where the only way you can live off it is if you are single, housed in a trailerpark and living off twinkies.America doesnt have the safety net we do either, welfare? what a joke. Their medical system is up the shitter aswell. If you cant afford treatment you will probably die.

"Poverty" here isn't like poverty in the past or in most other places in the world. For example, starvation was a constant danger for most of humanity since time immemorial, but it is almost unheard of today in America even with all its three hundred million occupants. Most people "below the poverty line" here have access to running water, modern plumbing, electricity, refrigeration of food, a bed, furniture, air-conditioning, products for personal hygiene, cleaning products, cooking and eating utensils, plenty of warm clothing, and more than sufficient food to stay healthy. In addition to these goods that satisfy the more basic needs, virtually anyone can save enough to have access to modern goods like television sets, telephones, DVD players, washing machines, personal computers, books, radios, CD players, and microwave ovens.

Quote from http://www.mises.org/story/2219

What Americans call poverty or poor is luxury in Asia and Africa.

America doesnt have the safety net we do either, welfare? what a joke. Their medical system is up the shitter aswell. If you cant afford treatment you will probably die.

Ever heard social security apart from various welfare grants from state govt? Although I despised people who rely on foodstamp it is not better nor worse than in australia. What can we say when you have doctor death and a health system which requires you to wait 6 months for surgery!

Its money if you are rich and wealthy then you very strong chance of becoming the president of America - nothing got to do with educations or intelligence - if u have money the rest follows. so why hasnt there been any black presidentS? the blacks have contributed a lot to american society?

Abraham Lincoln was hardly a rich man when he was elected US president, Bill Clinton was not rich either, George Bush himself is no Billionaire, in fact I cannot find an American President who is famous for being rich. Do you have any proof or example of American President who were rich? You are absolutely right that wealthy people have more chance NOT only in USA but also everywhere where elections are held. When australia elect aboriginal or lebanese person as its Prime Minister, Britain elect an Indian PM or france elect north african as its President and when Germany elect a turk as its Chancellor then USA will elect a black president.

the blacks have contributed a lot to american society?
They also contributed for almost half of all violent crimes despite them being just 12% of the population. Yes if you speak of contribution to society thats it.
Does America owes its presidency to Blacks just because they won a lot of medals in the olympics? That should be the last reason why they should elect blacks. Oh yeah Jews contribute a lot to american economy, they controlled many financial institutions and Jewish Scientists such as Albert Einstein and Robert Oppenheimer who invented Nuclear Bomb which made america won the 2nd world war does that make them favourable to be the President?

Lastly, some facts of Australian Poverty you don't want to see or hear:

In 2000, 13 per cent of Australians (2.6 MIllion) (1 in 8) were living in poverty up from 11.3 per cent in 1990. The percentage of children in poverty has risen from 14.3 per cent in 1990 to 14.9 per cent in 2000.

5.5 million people are in households with incomes less than $23,000 pa (in USA poverty line is about AU$ 25,000) Yes that is a quarter of the australian population.

Wealth is very unequally shared in Australia. The top 10 per cent of wealth holders own 45 per cent of household wealth, while the bottom 50 per cent own only 7 per cent.

NSW was the state with the highest poverty rate at 13.9 per cent

You can see more of it Here

 

[Serius]

yeah i am pretty sure iam below the poverty line, if i moved out of home in order to make rent i would be surviving on 2minute noodles and canned soup.

 

[HotShot]

Re: War with Iran close, and US forces likely already on the ground- USAF Colonel (re

"
They also contributed for almost half of all violent crimes despite them being just 12% of the population. Yes if you speak of contribution to society thats it.
Well duh that was the whole - "they way american treat blacks" - people arent to be born to be violent or turn violence for fun. They are normally driven into it. Its perfect example of the standard of living in america - high crime rates. The reason a lot of black people are involved in crimes and are fat is because of their wealth. They are relatively poor compared to white people in america - inequality by race. Fast food, junk food tend to be cheaper and thus these black people tend to eat more of these types of food and thus become fat.

Does America owes its presidency to Blacks just because they won a lot of medals in the olympics? It was one example. They make signficant proportion of americas population and are representative of america. I dont any reason why there shouldnt be a black president. To my knowledge there isnt even a black senator?
So you claim that white people are not invovled in crimes - talk some in sense.
even the president committed a crime:

There are a number of accounts of substance abuse and otherwise disorderly conduct by Bush from this time. Bush has admitted to drinking "too much" in those years and described this period of his life as his "nomadic" period of "irresponsible youth".[5] On September 4, 1976, at the age of 30, Bush was arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol near his family's summer home in Kennebunkport, Maine. He pleaded guilty, was fined $150, and had his driver's license suspended until 1978[6] in Maine.[7] Bush was able to keep his drunk driving arrest a secret throughout his years as governor of Texas. [8][9]

-wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush
just because black are prone to be involved crimes (partly because of racial discrimination) that has no reason why there shouldnt a black president.

Oh yeah Jews contribute a lot to american economy, they controlled many financial institutions and Jewish Scientists such as Albert Einstein and Robert Oppenheimer who invented Nuclear Bomb which made america won the 2nd world war does that make them favourable to be the President?

How many jews are in the senate?

Lastly, some facts of Australian Poverty you don't want to see or hear:

I think we are well aware of 'poverty' in Australia. The fact is try not move away from the topic we are talking America here buddy. America apparently the 'best' country in the world - and thus it should lead in everything including poverty, the environment etc - but it doesnt and thats a fact.

http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/rn/2004-05/05rn49.htm
-here is a more reliable source on Australian pverty.

Once again you cant compared an average income from America to that of Australia. it doesnt work even if you have converted the currency you have to take into account the relative price of goods in each country.

Rich = billionaire are bloody rich rich in my opinion is is anything above 150k per year. George Bush dad was president so obviosly he was rich - no doubt about it.

 

[Aryanbeauty]

Re: War with Iran close, and US forces likely already on the ground- USAF Colonel (re

It is not white people's fault that black people are fat! There are plenty of health foods, fresh fruit more than you can eat and are extremely CHEAP in USA. Any obese person should blame himself or his parents. NOT White people or the President.

They make signficant proportion of americas population and are representative of america. I dont any reason why there shouldnt be a black president. To my knowledge there isnt even a black senator?
So you claim that white people are not invovled in crimes - talk some in sense.
You talk about their contribution in society and I added their contributions in society. I did not said it is the reason they should not be elected.
If you comprise almost 80% of the population then the majority of crimes would be committed by that particular race. There is no need to emphasize the crimes committed by white, they are majority even if they commit 80% of crimes it is understandable. Blacks committing nearly half of all violent crimes is unprecedented given they are only 12% of the population. That is common sense. The majority of crimes in australia are committed by whites but you will also see unprecedented high rate of crimes commited by Lebanese and Middle eastern people in Australia given they are only 0.8% of australian. Are they driven by white majority to commit crimes as you mentioned too?

No one said they should not be President, the chances are slim given blacks numbers only 12% of the population. Just as a lebanese have no chance in australia. Yes there is black senator barack Obama from Illinois. You should know that there are only 2 senators each in all states and unless blacks make up significant portion of population in a given state they have very little chance. But you may stop blaming whites for not electing black senator. It is their freedom of choice.
I am not sure about number of jews in senate, but they do number around 20 + it is because Americans are not anti-semitic like you.

I think we are well aware of 'poverty' in Australia. The fact is try not move away from the topic we are talking America here buddy. America apparently the 'best' country in the world - and thus it should lead in everything including poverty, the environment etc - but it doesnt and thats a fact.

Apparently you are not aware, when you have equally high poverty rate you will not be pointing fingers at other country and it makes sense to compare with other country where they have similar per capita income and living standard are fairly similar. Even if america does not lead in everything it does not stop being the number 1 country in the world where almost everyone wants to live. It has always been the number 1 destinations for immigrants throughout centuries and an Australian pollute the environment as much as an American does.

Once again you cant compared an average income from America to that of Australia. it doesnt work even if you have converted the currency you have to take into account the relative price of goods in each country.

Why can't I compare australia and USA? Prices in Australia, USA and Western Europe are fairly similar, all of them having comparable income and it is Valid to compare these countries.

Rich = billionaire are bloody rich rich in my opinion is is anything above 150k per year. George Bush dad was president so obviosly he was rich - no doubt about it.

You said it is easy for rich people to become president yet you failed to produce a Rich president of USA. If George Bush is rich then there are more than 7million millionaires in USA and its easy for those 7 million to be the President? If rich people are elected for President Bill Clinton would have lost to Ross Perot because he is white and is a billionaire or even George W Bush's father who was an incumbent.

 

[Comrade nathan]

Re: War with Iran close, and US forces likely already on the ground- USAF Colonel (re

Capitalism may not make everyone rich, but communism sure makes everyone poor.

That's just ridicilous. People look at Socialist countries and compare the standards of living with 1st world countries, so it seems that Socialism does make people poor. Today in the case the various socialist or market-socialist countries we can even even say that people in this countries do live in poverty. However people who claim socialism spreads poverty care very little for history.

The most prominant examples that prove this idea wrong is found in Russia and China. Socialism destroyed fuedalislm and feudal living standards. Living standards were greatly improved during socialism in Russia (1917-1956) and China (1949-1973). The USSR was considered 2nd world, not 3rd world. The rapid pace that Socialist countries improved living standards can not be compared to any other country. You could compare it to such places as the south of Korea, or Japan pre WW2. But this does no acknolwedge the privaleged position this countries take in American imperialism.

What people fail to take into accounts is two things. These socialist nations were 3rd world or 2nd world nations, which grealty improved condition. People want to compare capitalist countries like the USA with socialist Cuba. A real comparison is comparing Cuba with another Latin american country with little resources. This shows that socialism doesn't spread poverty. In countries like the USSR and China it was actually moving to destroying. In poorer small countries like Cuba, socialism benifits the poor, by making sure the poor get access to benifits of society. The other thing people do not acknowledge is the benifits of being a post colonialist nation, which now play a dominating role in todays neo-colonial world.

 

[ElendilPeredhil]

Re: War with Iran close, and US forces likely already on the ground- USAF Colonel (re

i doubt it, i think the middle class would have a better standard of living than the poor in the US.

U didnt answer the question. elendil claimed that blacks lack of education - which i think is ridiculous as she contradicted herself saying there are many black doctors and lawyers etc.
quote]

I said, there aren't enough black people with an education to have realistic odds of becoming president...speaking purely in probability terms without introducing other factors such as lingering residual racism and self defeatism...
but that the educated ones do work in all those kinds of fields...basically I was trying to cirumvent the argument against my 'not enough educated ones' by pointing out I am well aware that they work in other fields...

 

[HotShot]

Re: War with Iran close, and US forces likely already on the ground- USAF Colonel (re

That's just ridicilous. People look at Socialist countries and compare the standards of living with 1st world countries, so it seems that Socialism does make people poor. Today in the case the various socialist or market-socialist countries we can even even say that people in this countries do live in poverty. However people who claim socialism spreads poverty care very little for history.

The most prominant examples that prove this idea wrong is found in Russia and China. Socialism destroyed fuedalislm and feudal living standards. Living standards were greatly improved during socialism in Russia (1917-1956) and China (1949-1973). The USSR was considered 2nd world, not 3rd world. The rapid pace that Socialist countries improved living standards can not be compared to any other country. You could compare it to such places as the south of Korea, or Japan pre WW2. But this does no acknolwedge the privaleged position this countries take in American imperialism.

What people fail to take into accounts is two things. These socialist nations were 3rd world or 2nd world nations, which grealty improved condition. People want to compare capitalist countries like the USA with socialist Cuba. A real comparison is comparing Cuba with another Latin american country with little resources. This shows that socialism doesn't spread poverty. In countries like the USSR and China it was actually moving to destroying. In poorer small countries like Cuba, socialism benifits the poor, by making sure the poor get access to benifits of society. The other thing people do not acknowledge is the benifits of being a post colonialist nation, which now play a dominating role in todays neo-colonial world.

yeah spot on , america is a big country with vast resources - it has a lot of inhabitable land, it has gold, oil a lot of primary resources. Good source of water and generally a good range of climate. It is not isolated relatively close to other countries has trade. on theother hand australia has a lot of land that is not habitable, relatively low population, Isolated, droughts. the weather is relatively hot and dry. A comparison of poverty between America and Australia needs to takes these into accout - i think australia has done extremely well economically.

yes perhaps the number of blacks are relatively low - but surely there has to be a few in the senate?

 

[Aryanbeauty]

Re: War with Iran close, and US forces likely already on the ground- USAF Colonel (re

That's just ridicilous. People look at Socialist countries and compare the standards of living with 1st world countries, so it seems that Socialism does make people poor. Today in the case the various socialist or market-socialist countries we can even even say that people in this countries do live in poverty. However people who claim socialism spreads poverty care very little for history.

The most prominant examples that prove this idea wrong is found in Russia and China. Socialism destroyed fuedalislm and feudal living standards. Living standards were greatly improved during socialism in Russia (1917-1956) and China (1949-1973). The USSR was considered 2nd world, not 3rd world. The rapid pace that Socialist countries improved living standards can not be compared to any other country. You could compare it to such places as the south of Korea, or Japan pre WW2. But this does no acknolwedge the privaleged position this countries take in American imperialism.

What people fail to take into accounts is two things. These socialist nations were 3rd world or 2nd world nations, which grealty improved condition. People want to compare capitalist countries like the USA with socialist Cuba. A real comparison is comparing Cuba with another Latin american country with little resources. This shows that socialism doesn't spread poverty. In countries like the USSR and China it was actually moving to destroying. In poorer small countries like Cuba, socialism benifits the poor, by making sure the poor get access to benifits of society. The other thing people do not acknowledge is the benifits of being a post colonialist nation, which now play a dominating role in todays neo-colonial world.

Capitalism destroyed and replaced feudalism almost two hundred years before socialism was introduced in russia and China.

Compare:

Under Industrial revolutions working conditions were poor but there was no such mass starvation , forced work or mass relocation of workers which all happened in Russia and China. Developments were done by force at the cost of the lives of more than 20 or more million russians killed under soviet socialism programme and more than 40 million killed under Chinese famine as a result of their implementation of socialist policy. I am not surprised that very very few people miss the old USSR or China under Mao. Mao's successor realized that they almost destroyed the whole country and started limited capitalism under Deng Xiaoping only under which china actually witness some economic growth. The Growth gained under socialism at the cost of lives lost is worth nothing, had they introduced capitalism they can move ahead twice as fast and without killing 60 million people in the process.

In Russia, there was economic growth but stagnated since 1960's under Leonid Brezhnev until 1990's when Soviet Union finally broke up because of the failure of the economy and its inability to keep up with US Arms and space race which practically made USSR economy broke.

The living standard improved, compared to 50 years or 100 years before, but it is not even comparable to the west. The only imporvement in industry was heavy industry such as Steel, Tanks, Machinery and such with very few consumer goods. Everyone was dissatisfied with the lack of choice. Most Russians subsist with stale bread and cabbage soup throughout socialism, No there was no such savoury food such as chocolate or cake for ordinary people.Some people were happy because they had something to eat at least instead of starving under the Czar's rule.

Cuba is a failure story of Socialism, They were poor in 1900, they were still poor in 1950, they were poorer in 2000 and among the poorest country in 2006! why did cubans leave their country in thousands every year risking their life in the high seas with raft trying to reach USA, Puerto Rico and Mexico if socialism was so good for the poor? Similar questions are asked for USSR and any other country which use socialism why did people fled those country in millions if they were so good for the people?

There is no success story of socialism in the world, it all ends to misery, despair, mass murdering, starvation, opression,uprising, chaos, substandard-living condition, low quality consumer goods; lack of freedom of speech, movements, religion.


i think australia has done extremely well economically.

Thanks to capitalism in China with increasing demands for australian resources which fueled economig growth here.

 

[banco55]

Re: War with Iran close, and US forces likely already on the ground- USAF Colonel (re

That's just ridicilous. People look at Socialist countries and compare the standards of living with 1st world countries, so it seems that Socialism does make people poor. Today in the case the various socialist or market-socialist countries we can even even say that people in this countries do live in poverty. However people who claim socialism spreads poverty care very little for history.

The most prominant examples that prove this idea wrong is found in Russia and China. Socialism destroyed fuedalislm and feudal living standards. Living standards were greatly improved during socialism in Russia (1917-1956) and China (1949-1973). The USSR was considered 2nd world, not 3rd world. The rapid pace that Socialist countries improved living standards can not be compared to any other country. You could compare it to such places as the south of Korea, or Japan pre WW2. But this does no acknolwedge the privaleged position this countries take in American imperialism.

What people fail to take into accounts is two things. These socialist nations were 3rd world or 2nd world nations, which grealty improved condition. People want to compare capitalist countries like the USA with socialist Cuba. A real comparison is comparing Cuba with another Latin american country with little resources. This shows that socialism doesn't spread poverty. In countries like the USSR and China it was actually moving to destroying. In poorer small countries like Cuba, socialism benifits the poor, by making sure the poor get access to benifits of society. The other thing people do not acknowledge is the benifits of being a post colonialist nation, which now play a dominating role in todays neo-colonial world.

Did Hong Kong and Singapore have a "privileged position in American imperialism"? It's true that there was economic growth in communist countries but comparable capitalist countries outpaced the communist growth substansially (west germany, east germany etc.) and that's leaving aside all the restrictions on freedom that come with communism.

 

[HotShot]

Re: War with Iran close, and US forces likely already on the ground- USAF Colonel (re

I think you will find in the above posts the following points regarding the war on terrorism the occupation of iraq and afghanistan.

1. Firstly i think it is very clear that america illegally attack iraq - they used false evidence and betrayed the public.

2. Also the invasion of afghanistan till now has not achieved the goal of destroying/ killing or capturing its leader Osama Bin Laden.

3. There have been massive cover ups since the invasion of both countries like the AWB, american relations with Pakistan etc.

4. The invasion of both afganistan and iraq has led to an increase of worldwide terrorist attacks. Both directly and indirectly. There has been an increase of attempts of terrorism activities.

5. It is also clear the way the US handling the situation has been appalling. Hundreds of american and allied soldiers have died. Yet nothin really has been achieved.

6. The US continues to deny that a civil war exists in Iraq - when it is clearly evident.

7. A intelligence report is leaked containing - basically how the america is losing the war on 'terror'. Again Bush denies this fact.

8. The US continues to make false claims.. and continues to go in the wrong direction.

9. Finally, since the invasion till now nothing has been achieved. The world is not safer, the terrorists have increased in number - there is more hatred towards the West than there ever was. The situation in the middle east has worsened since the invasion. The fact is the US are hopeless.
Any such talk about possible invasion of Iran is ridiculous nor even a bombing. Their president and openly said that they are not pursuing nuclear weaponry, any such invasion would be a violaton UN resolution as was the case with Iraq. No country has legal right to attack another under any circumstance. Unless it is already being attacked. But america was never attacked by a country but by a terrorist group.

 

[Generator]

Re: War with Iran close, and US forces likely already on the ground- USAF Colonel (re

HotShot - if you're not going to bother with a proper link, it would be best if you just didn't even bother with the post at all.

Please repost the articles (or edit the above post so that it contains the relevant links) and this time be sure to post the article-specific links.

 

[ElendilPeredhil]

Re: War with Iran close, and US forces likely already on the ground- USAF Colonel (re

It is not white people's fault that black people are fat! There are plenty of health foods, fresh fruit more than you can eat and are extremely CHEAP in USA. Any obese person should blame himself or his parents. NOT White people or the President.

They make signficant proportion of americas population and are representative of america. I dont any reason why there shouldnt be a black president. To my knowledge there isnt even a black senator?
So you claim that white people are not invovled in crimes - talk some in sense.
You talk about their contribution in society and I added their contributions in society. I did not said it is the reason they should not be elected.
If you comprise almost 80% of the population then the majority of crimes would be committed by that particular race. There is no need to emphasize the crimes committed by white, they are majority even if they commit 80% of crimes it is understandable. Blacks committing nearly half of all violent crimes is unprecedented given they are only 12% of the population. That is common sense. The majority of crimes in australia are committed by whites but you will also see unprecedented high rate of crimes commited by Lebanese and Middle eastern people in Australia given they are only 0.8% of australian. Are they driven by white majority to commit crimes as you mentioned too?

No one said they should not be President, the chances are slim given blacks numbers only 12% of the population. Just as a lebanese have no chance in australia. Yes there is black senator barack Obama from Illinois. You should know that there are only 2 senators each in all states and unless blacks make up significant portion of population in a given state they have very little chance. But you may stop blaming whites for not electing black senator. It is their freedom of choice.
I am not sure about number of jews in senate, but they do number around 20 + it is because Americans are not anti-semitic like you.

I think we are well aware of 'poverty' in Australia. The fact is try not move away from the topic we are talking America here buddy. America apparently the 'best' country in the world - and thus it should lead in everything including poverty, the environment etc - but it doesnt and thats a fact.

Apparently you are not aware, when you have equally high poverty rate you will not be pointing fingers at other country and it makes sense to compare with other country where they have similar per capita income and living standard are fairly similar. Even if america does not lead in everything it does not stop being the number 1 country in the world where almost everyone wants to live. It has always been the number 1 destinations for immigrants throughout centuries and an Australian pollute the environment as much as an American does.

Once again you cant compared an average income from America to that of Australia. it doesnt work even if you have converted the currency you have to take into account the relative price of goods in each country.

Why can't I compare australia and USA? Prices in Australia, USA and Western Europe are fairly similar, all of them having comparable income and it is Valid to compare these countries.

Rich = billionaire are bloody rich rich in my opinion is is anything above 150k per year. George Bush dad was president so obviosly he was rich - no doubt about it.

You said it is easy for rich people to become president yet you failed to produce a Rich president of USA. If George Bush is rich then there are more than 7million millionaires in USA and its easy for those 7 million to be the President? If rich people are elected for President Bill Clinton would have lost to Ross Perot because he is white and is a billionaire or even George W Bush's father who was an incumbent.

I agree with almost everything you said, except for the rich part. Your average poor man off the street, working two jobs to feed his family cannot become president. They can’t afford the advertising, or even the time off work necessary to campaign for the presidency. It is easier to become president if you are rich (just upper class, not necessarily a billionaire) because you can afford to spend your time going around to every opening of a supermarket, kissing babies and sucking up to voters. A poor man, or even a middle class person, can’t afford the time to do those things. And using Abraham Lincoln as an example is silly because that was so long ago it is irrelevant.

 

[banco55]

Re: War with Iran close, and US forces likely already on the ground- USAF Colonel (re

I agree with almost everything you said, except for the rich part. Your average poor man off the street, working two jobs to feed his family cannot become president. They can’t afford the advertising, or even the time off work necessary to campaign for the presidency. It is easier to become president if you are rich (just upper class, not necessarily a billionaire) because you can afford to spend your time going around to every opening of a supermarket, kissing babies and sucking up to voters. A poor man, or even a middle class person, can’t afford the time to do those things. And using Abraham Lincoln as an example is silly because that was so long ago it is irrelevant.

In america if you have brains and drive you are not going to wind up working two jobs to feed your family in the medium-term. Remember you have to be 35 + to run for president. If by the time they are 35 they haven't been able to get a good job than they are probably not up to the presidency. The people who work two jobs for the most part are the ones who didn't go to college and I can't see them electing anyone without a college degree. Bill Clinton was from a white trash background don't forget.

 

[Comrade nathan]

Re: War with Iran close, and US forces likely already on the ground- USAF Colonel (re

Capitalism destroyed and replaced feudalism almost two hundred years before socialism was introduced in russia and China.

Compare:

Under Industrial revolutions working conditions were poor but there was no such mass starvation , forced work or mass relocation of workers which all happened in Russia and China. Developments were done by force at the cost of the lives of more than 20 or more million russians killed under soviet socialism programme and more than 40 million killed under Chinese famine as a result of their implementation of socialist policy. I am not surprised that very very few people miss the old USSR or China under Mao. Mao's successor realized that they almost destroyed the whole country and started limited capitalism under Deng Xiaoping only under which china actually witness some economic growth. The Growth gained under socialism at the cost of lives lost is worth nothing, had they introduced capitalism they can move ahead twice as fast and without killing 60 million people in the process.

In Russia, there was economic growth but stagnated since 1960's under Leonid Brezhnev until 1990's when Soviet Union finally broke up because of the failure of the economy and its inability to keep up with US Arms and space race which practically made USSR economy broke.

The living standard improved, compared to 50 years or 100 years before, but it is not even comparable to the west. The only imporvement in industry was heavy industry such as Steel, Tanks, Machinery and such with very few consumer goods. Everyone was dissatisfied with the lack of choice. Most Russians subsist with stale bread and cabbage soup throughout socialism, No there was no such savoury food such as chocolate or cake for ordinary people.Some people were happy because they had something to eat at least instead of starving under the Czar's rule.

Cuba is a failure story of Socialism, They were poor in 1900, they were still poor in 1950, they were poorer in 2000 and among the poorest country in 2006! why did cubans leave their country in thousands every year risking their life in the high seas with raft trying to reach USA, Puerto Rico and Mexico if socialism was so good for the poor? Similar questions are asked for USSR and any other country which use socialism why did people fled those country in millions if they were so good for the people?

There is no success story of socialism in the world, it all ends to misery, despair, mass murdering, starvation, opression,uprising, chaos, substandard-living condition, low quality consumer goods; lack of freedom of speech, movements, religion.

You didn't even reply to my comments. My post was about the problem of comparing Socialist countries to Capitalist nations, which you continued to do in your reply. I mention that there is poverty in Cuba, and you do the same. Then state they are the poorest in the world with no statistics. What can I do if you regurgitate a common anti-communist which I already argued against.