Page 18 of 27 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 262

Thread: US Closing Embassies in Mideast for a Day amid Possible Qaeda Threat.....

  1. #171
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: US Closing Embassies in Mideast for a Day amid Possible Qaeda Threat.....

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    It hasn't solved it nor exacerbated it. But it has helped.
    Has it? So we're better off than in the 60's? Less debt? Less government? More freedom? Less international threats?

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    Larger. Do you think the war on terror is the major reason for that?
    Well you don't spend trillions of dollars when you're broke and end up breaking even.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    lol you're one of those guys. Okay, nevermind lol
    So insult is the only way you can deal with question and debate?

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    lol, no they don't, but you won't accept that, I can now tell.
    It's because I'm a scientist, I recognize data and measurement and analysis. What is better? What threats alleviated? Is America in a better place than before we started this interventionist attitude?

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    You keep saying decades but then you just went back one? I don't get it. When did this start? Maybe then you'll understand why I said it worked for quite some time. Since you're one of those guys, though, probably not.
    You say it worked, but there's no evidence for that. Decade after decade after decade, we're still in the same places, fighting the same wars, dying in the same sand, broke and broken. But it's worked for quite some time, yes? Then you have evidence. I await your presentation of it.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  2. #172
    Sage
    OldWorldOrder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    10-12-15 @ 12:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,820

    Re: US Closing Embassies in Mideast for a Day amid Possible Qaeda Threat.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Has it? So we're better off than in the 60's?
    We maintained a very strong economy- although always decreasing relative to other nations for reasons that have nothing to do with domestic politics- and general stability through the 90s.

    Less debt?
    For most of it, yes. But again, that goes back to the developed world-aside from the US- being destroyed by the second World War. Was it any surprise that by even the late 40s the US was losing ground to Europe and the like? Of course not. By the 1960s it was even worse. And then with Deng in China? The 1980s were worse than, too. Nothing to do with domestic policy.

    Less government?
    lol? Are you implying the more government is always bad? Sometimes it's bad and sometimes it's good.

    More freedom?
    Same.

    Less international threats?
    Less.

    Well you don't spend trillions of dollars when you're broke and end up breaking even.
    The US isn't going to break even either way without adding significant revenue. The wars make no difference there.

    So insult is the only way you can deal with question and debate?
    No, but there's no convincing some people, and I know recognize you as one. Look at your sig, dude.

    It's because I'm a scientist, I recognize data and measurement and analysis.
    You should apply that scientific method.

    What is better?
    Who said the word 'better'? Use science to tell me, please.

    What threats alleviated?
    Since when?

    Is America in a better place than before we started this interventionist attitude?
    Yes.

    You say it worked, but there's no evidence for that. Decade after decade after decade, we're still in the same places, fighting the same wars, dying in the same sand, broke and broken. But it's worked for quite some time, yes? Then you have evidence. I await your presentation of it.
    Uhhh..the standard of living for the average American as compared to the rest of the world from, say 1870 and now.
    The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected.
    -GK Chesterton

  3. #173
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: US Closing Embassies in Mideast for a Day amid Possible Qaeda Threat.....

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    We maintained a very strong economy- although always decreasing relative to other nations for reasons that have nothing to do with domestic politics- and general stability through the 90s.
    Indeed, we bought on credit for pretty well as long as that could go. We gave to the banks to subsidize, we converted to corporate capitalism to add a bit of lifetime. But it wasn't sustainable, was it? Where are we now? Where's our production and manufacturing? Where is our ingenuity? Our progress?

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    For most of it, yes. But again, that goes back to the developed world-aside from the US- being destroyed by the second World War. Was it any surprise that by even the late 40s the US was losing ground to Europe and the like? Of course not. By the 1960s it was even worse. And then with Deng in China? The 1980s were worse than, too. Nothing to do with domestic policy.
    So without spending all this money blowing up places in the middle east for as long as we have, we'd be in less debt? That's your argument?

    But the offshoring or production actually has a lot to do with domestic and foreign policy. Our domestic policies have increasingly concentrated wealth into the smallest number of hands. The corporate capitalist model we now follow breeds more into that. Middle class and lower have been stagnate or losing ground. Only the top fractions of a percent have really grown. To keep everyone in line, to allow people enough consuming power to keep them pacified, we need cheaper and cheaper sources of labor. Slave labor essentially, which is why we have traditionally offshored production to countries with very few labor and environmental laws. It all plays into the same cycle.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    lol? Are you implying the more government is always bad? Sometimes it's bad and sometimes it's good.
    No, rather that government is dangerous. A necessary danger, but one that MUST be controlled. When you do not control it, you get what we have now; and we're not on a positive slope.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    Same.
    Same? I can't buy the same guns that could have been purchased pre-Reagan. I can't say what I could have said in the 50's (not that i was alive then, there was just less policing). We have "free speech" zones now, we prearrest people before political conventions, the NSA and all other branches of government keep close eye on us, you can't go through an airport without being treated as a criminal, cops can search our property for pretty well any reason, they can confiscate it for less. It's the same? I don't think that's an honest answer.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    Less.
    Less? I didn't need TSA in the 80's. We didn't have a color coded warning system. We didn't need the HLS, as aggressive an NSA, etc. If we're at less threat, why do we need so much more government force and infrastructure?

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    The US isn't going to break even either way without adding significant revenue. The wars make no difference there.
    Our debt is around, what 16 trillion? The WoT has cost somewhere around 1.5 trillion. That's 1% It's actually rather significant. Much more so than the programs where we spend millions of dollars that people complain about.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    No, but there's no convincing some people, and I know recognize you as one. Look at your sig, dude.
    Indeed, tis nothing more than a statement of fact.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    You should apply that scientific method.
    I always do

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    Who said the word 'better'? Use science to tell me, please.
    You said that our policies have helped, which means we are better off. I didn't say solved, I said better. You claimed it, I'd like to see some metrics on it.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    Since when?
    As far back as you please. Probably safer than during WW II? Pearl Harbor killed what, 2K...so a bit less than 9/11. And one can say 9/11 was worse since it was civilian target in an era where there wasn't major war between the major countries of the world. But perhaps. Let's say the 60's. Are we safer now than in the 60's? How many terrorist attacks did we have in the 60's? How many now? Did it peak? Are we on the down slope now? What data do you have in general to show trends. You claimed we're better off, our policies have helped. So you can show evidence of this helping, yes?

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    Yes.
    Evidence?

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    Uhhh..the standard of living for the average American as compared to the rest of the world from, say 1870 and now.
    Uhhh, the standard of living, living wage, consumer power, and wealth accumulation in the US as compared to the US in the past. Helped means it got better, not worse. Let's see your data.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  4. #174
    Sage
    OldWorldOrder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    10-12-15 @ 12:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,820

    Re: US Closing Embassies in Mideast for a Day amid Possible Qaeda Threat.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Indeed, we bought on credit for pretty well as long as that could go. We gave to the banks to subsidize, we converted to corporate capitalism to add a bit of lifetime. But it wasn't sustainable, was it? Where are we now? Where's our production and manufacturing? Where is our ingenuity? Our progress?
    No one option is sustainable. Who said it was? But American interventionism certainly helped prop up the head start the US first received by sharing a landmass with unorganized and comparably technologically inferior city-states, a later received by being the one developed nation to avoid abject destruction. It helped. That's the point: you said it's hurt, I said it helped for the majority of the time applied.

    So without spending all this money blowing up places in the middle east for as long as we have, we'd be in less debt? That's your argument?
    We'd have less security, too. It's a balance.

    But the offshoring or production actually has a lot to do with domestic and foreign policy. Our domestic policies have increasingly concentrated wealth into the smallest number of hands. The corporate capitalist model we now follow breeds more into that. Middle class and lower have been stagnate or losing ground. Only the top fractions of a percent have really grown. To keep everyone in line, to allow people enough consuming power to keep them pacified, we need cheaper and cheaper sources of labor. Slave labor essentially, which is why we have traditionally offshored production to countries with very few labor and environmental laws. It all plays into the same cycle.
    No, the offshoring really doesn't. Nations with large and varied interests will have large and varied foreign military/political/socio-economic interests. You're confusing the cause with the effect.

    No, rather that government is dangerous. A necessary danger, but one that MUST be controlled. When you do not control it, you get what we have now; and we're not on a positive slope.
    Everything's dangerous. Water is dangerous if you drink too much. It's also dangerous if you don't have enough. Very dangerous in your lungs. Less so in your stomach. To say water is completely good for you or completely bad for you, then, would be wrong. It depends on the degree, it depends on how it's applied. Government is the same way.

    Same? I can't buy the same guns that could have been purchased pre-Reagan. I can't say what I could have said in the 50's (not that i was alive then, there was just less policing). We have "free speech" zones now, we prearrest people before political conventions, the NSA and all other branches of government keep close eye on us, you can't go through an airport without being treated as a criminal, cops can search our property for pretty well any reason, they can confiscate it for less. It's the same? I don't think that's an honest answer.
    You can also marry a guy. You can marry someone who isn't of your race. You can now fly, much cheaper than in the 1950s (per capita). Your wife can have maternal leave. Freedom is more than gun rights and the NSA (did you have cell phones in the 1950s anyway? So let's call that a wash- you didn't have any freedom from wiretaps then, either, that's why the Church Committee convened in the 1970s).

    Less? I didn't need TSA in the 80's. We didn't have a color coded warning system. We didn't need the HLS, as aggressive an NSA, etc. If we're at less threat, why do we need so much more government force and infrastructure?
    You don't have the Soviet Union on the brink of nuclear war. Are you saying the TSA is capable of killing more people at once than nuclear war? Has the TSA ever killed anybody? You're being very meolodramatic here.

    Our debt is around, what 16 trillion? The WoT has cost somewhere around 1.5 trillion. That's 1% It's actually rather significant. Much more so than the programs where we spend millions of dollars that people complain about.
    Has it cost that? Does that include troops salaries and perks? You should look into that.

    Indeed, tis nothing more than a statement of fact.
    No, it's not. That's kinda the problem. It's your opinion, and if you can't figure out that just because you think it, it's true, then you have some significant problems.

    I always do
    I hope to see it someday!

    You said that our policies have helped, which means we are better off. I didn't say solved, I said better. You claimed it, I'd like to see some metrics on it.
    I didn't say better. I said they maintained US standards for quite some time. Are Americans 'better off' than if those policies weren't applied from the 1890s onward? Of course.

    As far back as you please. Probably safer than during WW II? Pearl Harbor killed what, 2K...so a bit less than 9/11. And one can say 9/11 was worse since it was civilian target in an era where there wasn't major war between the major countries of the world. But perhaps. Let's say the 60's. Are we safer now than in the 60's? How many terrorist attacks did we have in the 60's? How many now? Did it peak? Are we on the down slope now? What data do you have in general to show trends. You claimed we're better off, our policies have helped. So you can show evidence of this helping, yes?
    We're much safer than the 1960s, of course. We're not under the threat of nuclear war. Terrorism is about the democratization of violence, via technology, and that has very little to do with American policy. What American policy could've completely avoided twitter?

    Evidence?
    Standard of living, 1870s to now. I already told you that, why did you ask again?

    Uhhh, the standard of living, living wage, consumer power, and wealth accumulation in the US as compared to the US in the past. Helped means it got better, not worse. Let's see your data.
    lol?


    If the only thing you want to use is wealth accumulation...it still wouldn't be smart thing to use when the comparison is against the gilded age lol
    The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected.
    -GK Chesterton

  5. #175
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: US Closing Embassies in Mideast for a Day amid Possible Qaeda Threat.....

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    No one option is sustainable. Who said it was? But American interventionism certainly helped prop up the head start the US first received by sharing a landmass with unorganized and comparably technologically inferior city-states, a later received by being the one developed nation to avoid abject destruction. It helped. That's the point: you said it's hurt, I said it helped for the majority of the time applied.
    Has it? You still offer no numbers nor analysis. You yourself said that this was a complex issue well before, yes? Did you take the time to disentangle the non-linear effects to say that interventionism=better? Or are you taking coincidence of economy and claiming that interventionism had positive effect on it? I just want your evidence for the claim, nothing more.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    We'd have less security, too. It's a balance.
    You have proof for this, or is it just assumption? My opinion is that without the interventionism our actions wouldn't play into the hands of terrorists. Hell, had we not trained OBL and the terrorists to fight the Russians, we'd likely see decreased threat now. Each time we intercede unjustly into foreign lands, we play into the propaganda of terrorists. We make the world a little less stable, a little more at risk. You can only bomb people for so long before they become REALLY pissed off about it, and if they can find no satisfaction through diplomatic means, they are all the more likely to try non-diplomatic means.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    No, the offshoring really doesn't. Nations with large and varied interests will have large and varied foreign military/political/socio-economic interests. You're confusing the cause with the effect.
    Not really. It's simplified because there has been growth in sectors not in industry, but those revolve around technology and would require that we educate more of our population to maintain. However, the wealth gap is not confused and the buying power is not confused. One of the reasons people bitch that we can't buy our own products is because wealth distribution did not keep up with labor and environmental laws. So to subsidize that, we use slave labor where we can get it. Currently it's China. Which in and of itself does lend to some stability because China is less likely to involve itself militarily against the United States with its economy so deeply entwined with our own. Which would bolster my point that trade, not war, make for stability.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    Everything's dangerous. Water is dangerous if you drink too much. It's also dangerous if you don't have enough. Very dangerous in your lungs. Less so in your stomach. To say water is completely good for you or completely bad for you, then, would be wrong. It depends on the degree, it depends on how it's applied. Government is the same way.
    Government is the same way. I did say it was necessary, and its necessity is in securing the rights and liberties of the People. Anarchy does not work. Measured fact as well. So we must have some, but too much currently has affected our freedom and liberty as well as put us in more danger of international retaliation.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    You can also marry a guy. You can marry someone who isn't of your race. You can now fly, much cheaper than in the 1950s (per capita). Your wife can have maternal leave. Freedom is more than gun rights and the NSA (did you have cell phones in the 1950s anyway? So let's call that a wash- you didn't have any freedom from wiretaps then, either, that's why the Church Committee convened in the 1970s).
    I can marry a guy in some states. It's not a wash though, all you have is superficial things which obviously would have been allowed had we invested in our freedom instead of killing those around us.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    You don't have the Soviet Union on the brink of nuclear war. Are you saying the TSA is capable of killing more people at once than nuclear war? Has the TSA ever killed anybody? You're being very meolodramatic here.
    We have something worse. A former Soviet block selling arms to others, not being able to account for some, and we trained the terrorists to help fight them and that pretty well backfired.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    Has it cost that? Does that include troops salaries and perks? You should look into that.
    Overall cost of the WoT. 1% of our debt

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    No, it's not. That's kinda the problem. It's your opinion, and if you can't figure out that just because you think it, it's true, then you have some significant problems.
    Indeed it is. America has some of the most aggressive police in the world. We also jail more people per capita than any other nation on the planet. We've restricted areas of free speech, we monitor the "malcontents", there is no privacy anymore, and the 9th and 10th amendments are all but ignored.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    I hope to see it someday!
    If you're ever honest about the data, you'd see it already.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    I didn't say better. I said they maintained US standards for quite some time. Are Americans 'better off' than if those policies weren't applied from the 1890s onward? Of course.
    You said it helped, so that means it made things a bit better, I'm just trying to see if you could actually quantify your statements. Pssst....you haven't.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    We're much safer than the 1960s, of course. We're not under the threat of nuclear war. Terrorism is about the democratization of violence, via technology, and that has very little to do with American policy. What American policy could've completely avoided twitter?
    Are we? We no longer have the Soviet Union it's true. But we're worried about North Korea having weapons, Iran going nuclear, Russia not being able to account for all its nukes, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    Standard of living, 1870s to now. I already told you that, why did you ask again?
    Because you've produced nothing to actually back it up other than saying the same thing again. Of course the standards of living neigh across the globe have increased but proportionally so? And still? 70+ years we've been in the ME, how have we fared?

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    lol?


    If the only thing you want to use is wealth accumulation...it still wouldn't be smart thing to use when the comparison is against the gilded age lol
    Oh, America make some money, it's just that the money isn't distributed along natural demographics. Which is the dishonesty in that plot of yours, you're purposefully skipping over all the statistics.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  6. #176
    Sage
    OldWorldOrder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    10-12-15 @ 12:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,820

    Re: US Closing Embassies in Mideast for a Day amid Possible Qaeda Threat.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Has it? You still offer no numbers nor analysis. You yourself said that this was a complex issue well before, yes? Did you take the time to disentangle the non-linear effects to say that interventionism=better? Or are you taking coincidence of economy and claiming that interventionism had positive effect on it? I just want your evidence for the claim, nothing more.
    Well, the evidence would be found in the positive effect that oil from the Middle East after World War II had on the American economy and thus people. The evidence would be found in the power of United Fruit. The evidence is everywhere. I'm kinda shocked that you 'want proof' (although I've already given you one graph), but you're not doing anything to support your claims. But then again...your sig...

    You have proof for this, or is it just assumption? My opinion is that without the interventionism our actions wouldn't play into the hands of terrorists. Hell, had we not trained OBL and the terrorists to fight the Russians, we'd likely see decreased threat now. Each time we intercede unjustly into foreign lands, we play into the propaganda of terrorists. We make the world a little less stable, a little more at risk. You can only bomb people for so long before they become REALLY pissed off about it, and if they can find no satisfaction through diplomatic means, they are all the more likely to try non-diplomatic means.
    The US didn't train OBL. I honestly stopped reading there.

    Not really. It's simplified because there has been growth in sectors not in industry, but those revolve around technology and would require that we educate more of our population to maintain. However, the wealth gap is not confused and the buying power is not confused. One of the reasons people bitch that we can't buy our own products is because wealth distribution did not keep up with labor and environmental laws. So to subsidize that, we use slave labor where we can get it. Currently it's China. Which in and of itself does lend to some stability because China is less likely to involve itself militarily against the United States with its economy so deeply entwined with our own. Which would bolster my point that trade, not war, make for stability.
    Using cheap labor isn't knew. That has nothing to do with US policies, really.

    Government is the same way. I did say it was necessary, and its necessity is in securing the rights and liberties of the People. Anarchy does not work. Measured fact as well. So we must have some, but too much currently has affected our freedom and liberty as well as put us in more danger of international retaliation.
    So you just subjectively say it's too much. I say it's not. Okay. Stop pushing your opinion as fact, thanks.

    I can marry a guy in some states. It's not a wash though, all you have is superficial things which obviously would have been allowed had we invested in our freedom instead of killing those around us.
    You also only have superficial things, then. You're not the arbiter of what is or isn't superficial.

    We have something worse. A former Soviet block selling arms to others, not being able to account for some, and we trained the terrorists to help fight them and that pretty well backfired.
    That's not worse.

    Overall cost of the WoT. 1% of our debt
    You didn't answer my question.

    Indeed it is. America has some of the most aggressive police in the world. We also jail more people per capita than any other nation on the planet. We've restricted areas of free speech, we monitor the "malcontents", there is no privacy anymore, and the 9th and 10th amendments are all but ignored.
    loooooooooooool?! Where else have you been?!

    If you're ever honest about the data, you'd see it already.
    You've not shown me one link whatsoever. And you've argued purely from emotion thus far.

    You said it helped, so that means it made things a bit better, I'm just trying to see if you could actually quantify your statements. Pssst....you haven't.
    Psssst...you don't know how to read a graph.

    Are we? We no longer have the Soviet Union it's true. But we're worried about North Korea having weapons, Iran going nuclear, Russia not being able to account for all its nukes, etc.
    And? We were worried about North Korea before that. Pakistan before that. India before that. South Africa before that. Israel before that. These things have nothing to do with American policy.

    Because you've produced nothing to actually back it up other than saying the same thing again. Of course the standards of living neigh across the globe have increased but proportionally so? And still? 70+ years we've been in the ME, how have we fared?
    We've fared well? Are you student of history or what? I don't mean youtube videos, I mean real scholarly works. Mearsheimer. Walt. Waltz. Kyle. Coll. History didn't start in 1999.


    Oh, America make some money, it's just that the money isn't distributed along natural demographics. Which is the dishonesty in that plot of yours, you're purposefully skipping over all the statistics.
    We already talked about the gilded age. Wealth disparity was much worse than now. And the graph covers that so.....

    Stop being so emotional. Start learning even basic historical things, like who trained OBL. Otherwise I can't continue.
    The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected.
    -GK Chesterton

  7. #177
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: US Closing Embassies in Mideast for a Day amid Possible Qaeda Threat.....

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    Well, the evidence would be found in the positive effect that oil from the Middle East after World War II had on the American economy and thus people. The evidence would be found in the power of United Fruit. The evidence is everywhere. I'm kinda shocked that you 'want proof' (although I've already given you one graph), but you're not doing anything to support your claims. But then again...your sig...
    My sig has nothing to do with it, stop trying to deflect. So you claim that dependence of foreign oil ultimately is better than had we developed energy independence?

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    The US didn't train OBL. I honestly stopped reading there.
    That's because you don't care to know. We trained the "freedom fighters" in the Middle East to combat Russia, OBL was part of that group and he ultimately went on to start Al Queda.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    Using cheap labor isn't knew. That has nothing to do with US policies, really.
    It isn't, but it becomes necessary when wealth distribution is driven to such opposing extremes as is in America currently

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    So you just subjectively say it's too much. I say it's not. Okay. Stop pushing your opinion as fact, thanks.
    Deflection. It's objectively too much as it has now significantly affected our freedoms.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    You also only have superficial things, then. You're not the arbiter of what is or isn't superficial.
    Freedom of speech, privacy, property, etc. are not "superficial" they are essential to a free state.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    That's not worse.
    Not knowing where the arms are isn't worse than a country who wished to oppose America but was all too unwilling to engage in major military battle with us?

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    You didn't answer my question.
    I did, 1.5 trillion is the cost of the WoT

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    loooooooooooool?! Where else have you been?!
    Insult and deflection.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    You've not shown me one link whatsoever. And you've argued purely from emotion thus far.
    Deflection, I have argued nothing from emotion. Just detailing the gross expansion of government power against our free exercise of rights.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    Psssst...you don't know how to read a graph.
    Got a PhD in experimental physics, I can read a graph.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    And? We were worried about North Korea before that. Pakistan before that. India before that. South Africa before that. Israel before that. These things have nothing to do with American policy.
    Not quite to this extent. Pakistan we still worry about, didn't really improve that. South Africa isn't really any better. We still involve ourselves with Israel. Interventionism has fueled a lot of the conflicts.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    We've fared well? Are you student of history or what? I don't mean youtube videos, I mean real scholarly works. Mearsheimer. Walt. Waltz. Kyle. Coll. History didn't start in 1999.
    Good thing 70 years ago wasn't 1999.


    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    We already talked about the gilded age. Wealth disparity was much worse than now. And the graph covers that so.....
    No, your graph is aggregate gains, wealth disparity is shown in the breakdown of economic classes. Your graph purposefully hides thay

    A Rise in Wealth for the Wealthy; Declines for the Lower 93% | Pew Social & Demographic Trends

    During the first two years of the nation’s economic recovery, the mean net worth of households in the upper 7% of the wealth distribution rose by an estimated 28%, while the mean net worth of households in the lower 93% dropped by 4%, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of newly released Census Bureau data.
    That's a 32% swing is disparity.

    Income inequality in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    The distribution of income in the United States has been the subject of study by scholars and institutions. Data from a number of sources[1] indicate that income inequality has grown significantly since the early 1970s,[2][3][4][5][6] after several decades of stability.[7][8] While inequality has risen among most developed countries, and especially English-speaking ones, it is highest in the United States.[9][10][11]

    Studies indicate the source of the widening gap (sometimes called the Great Divergence) has not been gender inequality, which has declined in the US over the last several decades,[12] nor inequality between black and white Americans, which has stagnated during that time,[13] nor has the gap between the poor and middle class been the major cause—though it has grown.[14] Most of the growth has been between the middle class and top earners, with the disparity becoming more extreme the further one goes up in the income distribution.[15] Upward redistribution of income is responsible for about 43% of the projected Social Security shortfall over the next 75 years.[16] The Brookings Institution said in 2013 that income inequality was increasing and becoming permanent, reducing social mobility in the US.[17]

    A 2011 study by the CBO[18] found that the top earning 1 percent of households gained about 275% after federal taxes and income transfers over a period between 1979 and 2007, compared to a gain of just under 40% for the 60 percent in the middle of America's income distribution.[18] Other sources find that the trend has continued since then.[19] In spite of this data, only 42% of Americans think inequality has increased in the past ten years.[20] Income inequality is not uniform among the states; as measured by the Gini coefficient: after tax income inequality in 2009 was greatest in Texas and lowest in Maine.[21]
    Productivity_and_Real_Median_Family_Income_Growth_1947-2009.jpg

    Median family income flattened out in the 70's while production continued to rise, the remainder went to the elite.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    Stop being so emotional. Start learning even basic historical things, like who trained OBL. Otherwise I can't continue.
    Maybe it's time for you to do some research and figure it out.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  8. #178
    Sage
    OldWorldOrder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    10-12-15 @ 12:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,820

    Re: US Closing Embassies in Mideast for a Day amid Possible Qaeda Threat.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    My sig has nothing to do with it, stop trying to deflect. So you claim that dependence of foreign oil ultimately is better than had we developed energy independence?
    No. The US wasn't going to achieve energy independence then, though.


    That's because you don't care to know. We trained the "freedom fighters" in the Middle East to combat Russia, OBL was part of that group and he ultimately went on to start Al Queda.
    Please stop. You know nothing about this, obviously.

    It isn't, but it becomes necessary when wealth distribution is driven to such opposing extremes as is in America currently
    It's a shame we're talking about the US over the past century plus and not just currently then, isn't it?

    Deflection. It's objectively too much as it has now significantly affected our freedoms.
    No, that's still subjective. Do I need to link you to a dictionary?

    Freedom of speech, privacy, property, etc. are not "superficial" they are essential to a free state.
    Nor are freedoms to pursue happiness...especially when it's within those freedoms. You don't get to decide, I'm sorry.

    Not knowing where the arms are isn't worse than a country who wished to oppose America but was all too unwilling to engage in major military battle with us?
    No, it's not.

    I did, 1.5 trillion is the cost of the WoT
    What does that include? Does it include troop and support salaries?

    Insult and deflection.
    Just laughing at you. No, the US doesn't have some of the most aggressive police in the world. How sheltered.

    Deflection, I have argued nothing from emotion. Just detailing the gross expansion of government power against our free exercise of rights.
    Stop arguing from emotion, please.

    Got a PhD in experimental physics, I can read a graph.
    Then you refuse not to? Interesting. Again: emotion.

    Not quite to this extent. Pakistan we still worry about, didn't really improve that. South Africa isn't really any better. We still involve ourselves with Israel. Interventionism has fueled a lot of the conflicts.
    South Africa isn't any better? Why are you talking about things you know nothing about? This is on par with the 'US trained OBL' escapade.

    Good thing 70 years ago wasn't 1999.
    Not for you.

    No, your graph is aggregate gains, wealth disparity is shown in the breakdown of economic classes. Your graph purposefully hides thay

    A Rise in Wealth for the Wealthy; Declines for the Lower 93% | Pew Social & Demographic Trends
    Hint: you're the only one talking about wealth disparity. Since you brought it up, I corrected you and told the Gilded Age included an even worse disparity. Lemme guess: you know as much about it as you do South Africa and OBL?

    Good thing I've been talking about 100+ years and you linked to something in the past few.

    Productivity_and_Real_Median_Family_Income_Growth_1947-2009.jpg

    Median family income flattened out in the 70's while production continued to rise, the remainder went to the elite.
    Good thing I was talking about 100+ years and you just talked about something from the 1970s.

    Maybe it's time for you to do some research and figure it out.
    Said the guy who thought the US trained Bin Laden and said the South African situation is still there. lol
    The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected.
    -GK Chesterton

  9. #179
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: US Closing Embassies in Mideast for a Day amid Possible Qaeda Threat.....

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    No. The US wasn't going to achieve energy independence then, though.
    Stop presenting your opinions as fact.


    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    Please stop. You know nothing about this, obviously.
    This is known. We trained groups in the ME to fight our proxy war with Russia and from there came the terrorist organizations. Do some reading.



    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    It's a shame we're talking about the US over the past century plus and not just currently then, isn't it?
    It doesn't matter, for even if taking out to earlier time periods, this deviation is still there. You're just trying to redefine goal posts and pretend that makes a difference.



    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    No, that's still subjective. Do I need to link you to a dictionary?
    You can link me to some of your proof if you could ever provide it.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    Nor are freedoms to pursue happiness...especially when it's within those freedoms. You don't get to decide, I'm sorry.
    Quite true, for if I got to decide, we wouldn't have such large government force being used against our rights and liberties as they are now.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    No, it's not.
    Interesting opinion. But knowing that a major country had nukes and were unwilling to use them was a lot better than not knowing who has those nukes now.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    What does that include? Does it include troop and support salaries?
    It's the overall cost of the interventionist wars in the ME.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    Just laughing at you. No, the US doesn't have some of the most aggressive police in the world. How sheltered.
    We jail more people per population than any other country on the planet. How sheltered.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    Stop arguing from emotion, please.
    Deflection, that wasn't emotion

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    Then you refuse not to? Interesting. Again: emotion.
    No, I read it fine. And deflection, that wasn't emotion.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    South Africa isn't any better? Why are you talking about things you know nothing about? This is on par with the 'US trained OBL' escapade.
    It's one of the most crime ridden countries on the planet. The Western world just doesn't really care much about Africa anymore. It's not that it's gotten better. Africa in general is rather messed up and we don't really pay much mind.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    Not for you.
    Not for anyone skilled in subtraction.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    Hint: you're the only one talking about wealth disparity. Since you brought it up, I corrected you and told the Gilded Age included an even worse disparity. Lemme guess: you know as much about it as you do South Africa and OBL?
    Wealth disparity is part of the problem. You didn't show any disparity in the Gilded Age.

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    Good thing I've been talking about 100+ years and you linked to something in the past few.
    It doesn't change the fact that disparity has grown between the economic classes

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    Good thing I was talking about 100+ years and you just talked about something from the 1970s.
    It doesn't change the fact that disparity has grown between the economic classes

    Quote Originally Posted by OldWorldOrder View Post
    Said the guy who thought the US trained Bin Laden and said the South African situation is still there. lol
    Insult is not argument. We trained folk for our proxy wars, and South Africa is still a hell hole. But you're free to go there and check it out.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by Ikari; 08-07-13 at 11:02 PM.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  10. #180
    Sage
    OldWorldOrder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    10-12-15 @ 12:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,820

    Re: US Closing Embassies in Mideast for a Day amid Possible Qaeda Threat.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Stop presenting your opinions as fact.




    This is known. We trained groups in the ME to fight our proxy war with Russia and from there came the terrorist organizations. Do some reading.
    This is as far as I got. I can't take you seriously. Read a book, dude. This is just pathetic. You're supposed to be a scientist? Holy ****.
    The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected.
    -GK Chesterton

Page 18 of 27 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •