"Michael Johnson, PE" wrote in news:O6GdnVQrVJfN60 snipped-for-privacy@comcast.com:
Dubya's the one who doesn't get it.
I think it's more like we can learn the origins of where we came from by studying other planets and the universe. This, in turn, can help us develop better things in our time, i.e., cures for diseases etc.
They're already doing that. Look at the money (and lives) being spent in Iraq.
"Michael Johnson, PE" wrote in news:J5ydnY8x6e0VJU snipped-for-privacy@comcast.com:
You want waste? One word: Iraq. Both lives and money are being thrown away.
"Joe" wrote : >> Why our government cannot understand that is beyond me. : : Dubya's the one who doesn't get it.
Oh no, you did NOT just say that! This has been going on for AGES... no freaking way can you blame it on just one administration.
: I think it's more like we can learn the origins of where we came from : by studying other planets and the universe. This, in turn, can help : us develop better things in our time, i.e., cures for diseases etc. : : > Plus if the government didn't spend it on space programs they would : > probably spend on something even more useless. : : They're already doing that. Look at the money (and lives) being spent : in Iraq.
Ahhh... I get it now...
*disgusted look*"Michael Johnson, PE" wrote : : The waste bother me too. I also think that while the possibility is : remote we should have a plan for dealing with a rogue comet/asteroid. : It would take that much money. Besides if we are ever hit it would make : the suffer you just described look like mankind had a common cold, : relatively speaking. The real shame is that we, and other nations, have : to spend so much on defense and military related areas. If we would all : just play nice with each other think of the greater good we could : accomplish.
Boy, you got that right.
"Joe" wrote : : You want waste? One word: Iraq. Both lives and money are being : thrown away.
We heard you the first time.
IMO, it will take 20-30 years before we really know if the lives and money were wasted.
To repeat myself, we really won't know for decades if it was a waste or a brilliant move on Bush's part. History will be the judge.
"SVTKate" wrote in news:flCAe.1947$ snipped-for-privacy@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net:
IIRC, Dubya inherited a surplus. Look what he did with it. Yes, one administration.
Yeah, I get it now too. These Bush brothers need to leave. One's screwing us at the federal level and the other's screwing us at the state level. I've got a disgusted look too.
"Michael Johnson, PE" wrote in news:JeGdnZ4B0KF snipped-for-privacy@comcast.com:
Can you say 'Viet Nam'? Sure you can.
"SVTKate" wrote in news:LlCAe.1949 $ snipped-for-privacy@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net:
Good. It can't be said enough.
"Michael Johnson, PE" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@comcast.com:
Brilliant? Everybody's entitled to their own opinion.
I don't think you can equate the two after just 2-3 years in Iraq. Vietnam was 10-15 years in the making. Plus the casualties aren't anywhere near the level of Vietnam at its worst, or best, for that matter. Vietnam was a regional power struggle between the USSR and the US and this was the real reason the war lasted so long. We could have won it but we would probably have ended up fighting the Chinese, just like in Korea. Iraq is not even close to this type of war. The recent news report seem to suggest that troop levels will drop by 100,000 next year. I hope they are correct.
In Truman's day that thought he was an idiot too. ;)
: > "Joe" wrote : >: : >: You want waste? One word: Iraq. Both lives and money are being : >: thrown away. : >
: > We heard you the first time. : : Good. It can't be said enough.
You are quite a character
US involvement in Vietnam lasted nearly 30 years -- from using US military ships and planes to help the French move troops and supplies to Vietnam starting in late 1945, until the fall of Saigon in the spring of 1975.
To put Vietnam (and Iraq) in perspective, I highly recommend Barbara Tuchman's splendid history, "The March of Folly". If only the Dubya gang had read and understood it ...
I'm not familiar with the book you referenced but nobody knows the outcome of the Iraq war and no one knows if it will parallel Vietnam or any other war. Time will tell if it was worth fighting and even then I doubt everyone will agree. All we have now are opinions about it and nobody can prove their opinion is right.
As I told Joe, history will be the judge of President Bush. There are also many people who just hate him and there is absolutely nothing he can do in their eyes that is acceptable. Basically, they have no ability to be objective. Many of the complainers on the Iraq war are these people and they ignore the good things that have resulted from the conflict and just dwell on the negative. Many others are just out to make political hay from complaining about the war. For people that are motivated by these reasons it is a waste of time to discuss the topic with them. They are not really wanting good a debate. They just want to damage President Bush any and every way they can.
"Michael Johnson, PE" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@comcast.com:
The lack of a good reason for being there and the lack of an exit strategy is certainly common to both.
Exactly. And that's just what we're doing here. Posting opinions.
As it is for everyone.
Michael, I think the polarization you describe is largely due to (a) the way in which this administration carried out the whole post-9/11 thing (Saddam/Iraq/Bin Laden/WMD/etc.), (b) what they actually did, and (c) the perception (real or imagined) that the current administration is patronizing the American public.
I, along with many others, think that the American public was basically deceived and the present administration continues to this day to "spin" the whole thing for their own benefit. At this point, people are downright angry that the administration thinks they are that gullible. Some people believe that the administration has downright lied to them.
The question that people ask themselves is: "Are we better off now than we were before?" I certainly believe that the country is _not_ better off now. In no particular order, we're basically hated around the world, we've got the worst debt we've ever seen, we're in a war that was started for dubious reasons and has no end in sight, and we've got a president that's trying to dismantle Social Security.
I'd say there are at least a few damn good reasons why a lot of people are upset with this guy.
"SVTKate" wrote in news:MlNAe.2216 $ snipped-for-privacy@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net:
news:LlCAe.1949
LOL! And you're not?
"Michael Johnson, PE" wrote in news:j- snipped-for-privacy@comcast.com:
But at least Truman was never AWOL because he was out partying too much. ;)
Hmmm... Hummer/ Mustang Hummer/ Mustang $100,000/$2,000 (OK, conceed inflation) Ugly/ classic
Shuttle/ Spaceship One, Billions/ 10 Million
Now I have nothing against 1960's technology, but I don't plan to commute in it in 2005. NASA does.
David
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required