Joined: 20-Jan-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 818
QuoteReplyTopic: And McCain's VP pick is... Posted: 12-Sep-2008 at 21:42
Originally posted by Seko
Too much blogging will make your head spin. My suggestion! Use AE as your source of inspiration and up-to-date news!
Heh... I do admit that i enjoy the more popular weblogs immensely, from reading their views, exploring their link to an article and making up my own mind and finally... to the readers interaction that is usally allowed in the comments section. Though their not my only source for news, they do give it a much higher degree of interaction that most news organisations dare not touch! AE does bring inspiration & up-to-date news, but you left out one important thing... for some darn reason, it is one of the more addictive forums on the web for historians & amateur's too keep coming to!
Also, as if I had to remind you, don't worry about everyones elses hearsay, especially the so-called professionals.
That's true. It doesn't hurt too remind me from time to time. I do tend to get carried away at times! But, then don't we all?
You may include me with the guilty ones in over dramatizing and spinning a few points across. However, unlike you I have a need to show the dark side of this woman. "Why is that?", one may ask. Oh, perhaps because she is about to possibly hold one of the most influencial positions in the world and that my little two cents is a form of education, specualtion and ventilation! That I would not feel comfortable keeping my mouth shut when I think someone of her caliber is contemplated for the vice presidency would be an understatement. In this case - ignorance is not bliss.
I do understand, as I noted earlier. I trust you will likewise understand if I generally do keep my mouth shut in these threads, and not read too much into it.
-Akolouthos
Of course I understand and will try to respect your expectations. Still, it's kinda fun getting all knotted up writing this stuff. Take care Ako. May we meet again in some other random thread...
Too much blogging will make your head spin. My suggestion! Use AE as your source of inspiration and up-to-date news!
Heh... I do admit that i enjoy the more popular weblogs immensely, from reading their views, exploring their link to an article and making up my own mind and finally... to the readers interaction that is usally allowed in the comments section. Though their not my only source for news, they do give it a much higher degree of interaction that most news organisations dare not touch! AE does bring inspiration & up-to-date news, but you left out one important thing... for some darn reason, it is one of the more addictive forums on the web for historians & amateur's too keep coming to!
Also, as if I had to remind you, don't worry about everyones elses hearsay, especially the so-called professionals.
That's true. It doesn't hurt too remind me from time to time. I do tend to get carried away at times! But, then don't we all?
Blogs are a kick. AE can't be kicked.
..and yes we all get carried away. Maybe that's part of the spontaneous fun of this forum. The stuff that comes out of our minds when unfiltered...pure unadultrated fun. To top it off we even get to learn something new. Soccer scores, the latest in King Kang music, politics, intense Balkan competition, and our postings on the latest and greatest this and that!
You may include me with the guilty ones in over dramatizing and spinning a few points across. However, unlike you I have a need to show the dark side of this woman. "Why is that?", one may ask. Oh, perhaps because she is about to possibly hold one of the most influencial positions in the world and that my little two cents is a form of education, specualtion and ventilation! That I would not feel comfortable keeping my mouth shut when I think someone of her caliber is contemplated for the vice presidency would be an understatement. In this case - ignorance is not bliss.
I do understand, as I noted earlier. I trust you will likewise understand if I generally do keep my mouth shut in these threads, and not read too much into it.
-Akolouthos
Of course I understand and will try to respect your expectations. Still, it's kinda fun getting all knotted up writing this stuff. Take care Ako. May we meet again in some other random thread...
May it be so.
By the way: I just reread my first post, and it sounded rather meaner than I had intended it to. I was going for quasi-righteous indignation, but it came off more as self-righteous anger. Glad you took no offense, as none was intended.
Quasi-righteous indig huh? Sounds Austin poweresque. I'm thinking more about breaking my fast in a few hours instead vernacular impressions of a sceptic right now. My stomach would like a salad, few slices of bread, corn, beans, sausage, and various chocolates.
That is just plain out denial my friend. We have ample proof on the market that he knowingly had Powell speak about nonexistent weapons facilities, we know that the CIA gave again knowingly fraudulent information, and fake reports on the Saddam - AlQueada alliance, which is laughable since he was a target of theirs alongside Iran (they after all have a quarrel with secularists - Saddam - and shia - Iran -.)
I don't believe Mr. Obama is the peacenik many believe him too be? Not that i am intentionally trying too change the subject, but unless he has quite the idea, he was talking at one time of doing what Mr. Bush hasn't dared to do, that is sending troops into Pakistan's northern territories! Now whether that is a good or bad idea is a debatable point worthy of it's own discussion? But if people think we are having troubles in the middle east now, then i can only imagine that taking the precarious position of invading an unsure, but old ally and one with nukes even... that it would unleash a new type of hell upon the world, that would no longer be containable within the middle eastern region?
Now, if he did such a thing, would i think that made him a stupid warmonger? Certainly not, he would be doing what he thought was strategically best for the country and it's allies! Though i do highly think that it would easily surpass the reasonably debatable points raised by the opposition regarding their idea's of the "invasion of Iraq as being the ultimate in the heigth of political stupidity"! Would you not agree to a certain extent?
Anyways, that is just one man's opinion. Besides that, if Obama wins the election and carries through on the previous mentioned unmentionable, then he and Bush would have atleast one thing in common, i know... they both acted on the best information available too them, with a very limited set of options on what to do about multitude of issues facing the US and it's allies. In such a scenario, people within the government would turn on him quicker than they turned on Bush, just too cover their own career's & political a$$e$! It's lonely at the top and it does make it questionable too me if Mr. Obama is even ready for the vile hatred that "will be" heaped upon him for every littel mistake? Now after i have said all that, does that sound like denial or does it sound like i am trying too keep my expectations based within the confines of reality?
It is clear he started an illegal war, not only here in the states, but also world wide by not adhering to the UN whom we use when it serves our purposes, but when not we cast aside.
I have grown too highly distrust the UN anymore as the arbiter of neutrality, justice & fairness! Now if they were too stop acting like a country club for the out-of-touch and corruptibly rich politico's out for themselves first & their own countries second, and start acting like the responsible stewards people used too expect of them, then maybe, just maybe.... i would feel a little better about that organisation, and perhaps... even start trusting in them again! Otherwise, that organisation has very little credibility with me!
I guess that is the conservative way out - look at O'Rilley and the other dimwit pundits - they attacked Britney Spear's sister for her teen pregnacy - called the parents pinheads, but lo and behold the last few weeks the same ones tell us that Palin's daughter made a choice (interestingly they never made the point in the previous news story that her sister also made the same). We can't have people run this country on such silly duality.
It makes no difference to me, if the tv pundits are not on the level, then i care very little for the opinions of those pundits who live in glass houses and yet... are the quickest too cast the first stone, whether their on the right, center or the left. It's still a shamefully immature position for a bunch of grown up adults too take!
Actually Panther, not that I disagree about the Illinois senator's remarks and do think that Obama is still suspect, however you may not have noticed that Bush did really send troops into Pakistan.
Strain in ties as US launches ground raids inside Pakistan
by P. Parameswaran Fri Sep 12, 10:07 AM ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) - US ties with "war on terror" ally Pakistan are strained after US commandos unilaterally launched ground assaults on militants on Pakistani soil, drawing fire from the military chief in Islamabad...
i rarely care to tell people what foreign leader i support, and whom they should elect as to lead their country!
If the American President did not go around bombing countries, nobody would have cared who you elect.
Not so! People from other countries have been interested in influencing or concerned about US Presidential elections atleast going back before the days just prior to WW 2. Of course it is not just a phenomenon unique for the US, it is just in man's nature too try and control what isn't currently in his control!
[/QUOTE]I can assure you our interest is very much heighten after the heavy footprint the USA makes on the world. A introspective protectionist USA would interest us less, sheer size of that market would mean it makes a difference, but not in that 'will he or wouldn't he start a war' way. Can you see what questions we are asking about and what words we are looking at? its not about USA medicare policy it about their foreign affairs and their attitude to other powers.
Bush aint no spend thrift, we can look at the accounts over iraq and the type of money simply pilfered by both Iraqi's, oppositional groups and politically aligned US contracters. Nothing was done to control such large amounts and prevent wastage. I am not even talking about the destroy first, rebuild later wastage the USA did to begin with. He simply has been throwing massive licks of money around with little accountablity and effect.
Actually Panther, not that I disagree about the Illinois senator's remarks and do think that Obama is still suspect, however you may not have noticed that Bush did really send troops into Pakistan.
Strain in ties as US launches ground raids inside Pakistan
by P. Parameswaran Fri Sep 12, 10:07 AM ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) - US ties with "war on terror" ally Pakistan are strained after US commandos unilaterally launched ground assaults on militants on Pakistani soil, drawing fire from the military chief in Islamabad...
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum