SOAKER Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 ^^^ Bump what you just said... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOAKER Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 I can see why they are staying there, ok it was a war he inherited so essentially he could just pull all troops out but then you are leaving Afghanistan in the shit, but they should look at the history of the country, a central government will never work it is a tribal country. He should be setting a staggered pull out of troops rather than adding more troops there. By announcing when they will pull out he is basically saying to the enemy to hold out til then and you can get back to business as usual. Key word being THEY...AMERICANS...not you pansy ass British toothless socialist wind bags, but Americans, people I know, knew or served with. Why don't you take your mouthy little ass over there and do something? But I guess you got it all figured out, we can't win there its TRIBAL, Decyfron said so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decyferon Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 Soaker - The British are in Afghanistan as well, so I don't quite know what your whining about there, I know people in the military out there as well, so do you great, again hardly a great talking point. Afghanistan has always been a tribal country, not because I say so, but because it is, the comment was about us (the british and americans) trying to force a style of government on the country that isn't going to work for them, and no WE can't win out there we shouldn't even be there. Why the hell would I want to go to Afghanistan, you couldn't pay me enough money to join the military, why would I want to put my life on the line for some politicians agenda? it just isn't worth it. And try and lay of the ignorant racism you spout, this isn't ch0 this if for grown up adults who like a decent discussion, all you do is post pictures and contribute very little, occasionally when you have typed up a response then you can sometimes come across as quite intelligent, but the vast majority i.e pics and comments like the one above about ron paul is just pointless and not needed in crossfire. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOAKER Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 The British are weak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decyferon Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 and what evidence do you have to support that assumption? The British military seem to do alright even though before Iraq/Afghanistan their military equipment was better suited to colder/non desert climates but they have made improvements, personally I wish they would pull all the troops out and let them go home to their families rather than fighting something that they won't win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LEVEL 75 PALADIN Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 Key word being THEY...AMERICANS...not you pansy ass British toothless socialist wind bags, but Americans, people I know, knew or served with. Why don't you take your mouthy little ass over there and do something? But I guess you got it all figured out, we can't win there its TRIBAL, Decyfron said so. I hope you get your shit pushed in by an IED. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_casek Posted December 7, 2009 Author Share Posted December 7, 2009 Seriously, both of you need to act like men and drop it. Heated debates are cool, but this is turning into an insult festival. News: The Copenhagen Summits are about to begin. Lord Monckton on the Summits via Russia Today BTW: A friendly warning. Mods are cutting down on this type of shit. If they see too much of the bullshit, they will ban you. No one wants that. Makes more work for them, less members for us (especially in our little collective in crossfire), and an all around bunch of crap comes of it. No one wants mods targeting crossfire for banning. They leave us to ourselves pretty much and it's nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LEVEL 75 PALADIN Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 Hey man I came into this thread with an honest and legit question and this dude came at me with his hoorah uneducated nonsense. Dude should stick to pictures he hotlinks from Palin/Beck12 forums. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_casek Posted December 7, 2009 Author Share Posted December 7, 2009 Hey man I came into this thread with an honest and legit question and this dude came at me with his hoorah uneducated nonsense. Dude should stick to pictures he hotlinks from Palin/Beck12 forums. I know that but now you're taking the bait and arguing like kids. He's a different kind of conservative than I am so I don't understand it and have no excuse for him. All I'm asking is for you guys to stop fighting like kids. I like that we have "free run" around here. The mods know we aren't causing any trouble in crossfire and we don't need regular patrols of them in here. Issues are better handled by us members than them. I'm not pointing fingers, just asking kindly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decyferon Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 Casek is completely on point here, obviously we can't all agree on the subjects that we discuss, and while we may be passionate about our views there is a way to portray them that doesn't belittle your arguement and cause. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOAKER Posted December 8, 2009 Share Posted December 8, 2009 Hey man I came into this thread with an honest and legit question and this dude came at me with his hoorah uneducated nonsense. Dude should stick to pictures he hotlinks from Palin/Beck12 forums. No you came into this thread posting pictures of south park characters eating shit, in an attempt to insult me... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_casek Posted December 8, 2009 Author Share Posted December 8, 2009 Chill. Let it go and let's get back to discussing this shit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fastZeetec302 Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 atleast hes killed the most pirates... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_casek Posted December 9, 2009 Author Share Posted December 9, 2009 Congressmen To Call For Break-Up Of Biggest Banks Five House Democrats will call this week for a return to a Depression-era law that separated Wall Street investment banking from Main Street commercial banking. If adopted, the measure would give banks one year to choose between being commercial banks or investment banks. The nation's biggest -- those now commonly referred to as "too big to fail" -- would be broken up. The Obama administration opposes the measure. The amendment's five co-sponsors -- Maurice Hinchey of New York, John Conyers of Michigan, Peter DeFazio of Oregon, Jay Inslee of Washington, and John Tierney of Massachusetts - want to restore the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, which prohibited commercial banks from underwriting stocks and bonds. The act was repealed in 1999 at the urging of, among others, Larry Summers, now President Barack Obama's chief economic adviser. The five congressman all voted against the repeal then -- and now they want it back. Former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker is one of a number of financial luminaries calling for at least a partial return to Glass-Steagall. The Wall Street Journal's editorial page also endorsed the concept in a recent editorial as a way to "reduce moral hazard" and "limit certain kinds of risk-taking by institutions that hold taxpayer-insured deposits." The law's repeal ushered in an era marked by big banks getting even bigger. The country's four largest -- Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup and Wells Fargo - now control more than half of the nation's mortgages, two-thirds of credit cards and two-fifths of all bank deposits. And because their deposits are taxpayer-insured, there's a growing concern that they will feel overly confident about making risky bets through their investment arms because they know that should they suffer huge losses, taxpayers will ultimately be there to bail them out. The five Democrats face big obstacles, including their own leadership and the Obama administration. Story continues below advertisement Three weeks ago on Capitol Hill, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said: "I would not support reinstating Glass-Steagall. And I don't actually believe that the end of Glass-Steagall played a significant role in the cause of this crisis." But in an interview Monday, Hinchey said that "some of the people around our president are not giving him the appropriate advice." He added: "And contrary to that, the wrong advice is coming forward -- and being implemented." DeFazio has called for Geithner to resign. In a Nov. 17 opinion piece in the Detroit Free Press, Conyers wrote: Without Glass-Steagall serving as a critical check on the power of banks, the floodgates of speculation were opened. The banks leveraged personal savings accounts to trade in exotic securities and assets. Banks, insurance companies, and investment firms merged at an astounding pace. No longer content to simply finance home mortgages, these new hybrids began creating and selling securities based off of the speculative value of shaky mortgages. The banks took on more risk because risk was profitable. No one paid much attention to what would happen when the speculation bubble burst. Conyers also argues that the administration is taking the wrong approach. Currently, the Obama administration is working with both houses of Congress on legislation aimed at preventing a...major calamity in the banking industry. I am concerned, however, that their preferred method seems to focus on empowering our financial regulators to manage and mitigate some level of "acceptable risk" within the present system, instead of correcting the structural flaws that make a collapse likely to recur. Conyers and Hinchey point to Volcker, among others, as being on the right side of this debate. In response to reports that the administration is marginalizing Volcker and disregarding his recommendations, Hinchey lashed out: "He's someone we should be listening to. It's very discouraging and annoying and angering to me that someone like him is not being listened to." But there's a reason for that, of course. As Hinchey said Monday, "I think there is excessive influence of some banks on the legislative process in this Congress." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/07/congressmen-to-call-for-b_n_383128.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord_casek Posted December 9, 2009 Author Share Posted December 9, 2009 Joblessness http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t12.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decyferon Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 Obama accepts Nobel prize, claims afghanistan war is 'just and necessary' http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/10/obama-nobel-peace-war-afghanistan "That is a source of our strength. That is why I prohibited torture. That is why I ordered the prison at Guantánamo Bay closed. And that is why I have reaffirmed America's commitment to abide by the Geneva Conventions," he said. But isn't it still open Obama?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 ^^ yup BUT... you know, he inherited this and you know well, the war, well, he never campaigned on any of that ending the war stuff, and and and... and.... obama reminds me of bush when he said ...'mission accomplished' about iraq. the economy is 'fixed.' mission accomplished! look at unemployment! im am teh godsz bow before me boy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decyferon Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 I know I have stated that I do like Obama as a person/leader but it doesn't mean I am oblivious to the fact he is still a politician who lies. If anything he has to work harder to prove the naysayers wrong but he just isn't doing it. I find it amazing when people put such blind faith in someone that is in a profession that is inheritantly based on lies and manipulation. I still think he was the best choice for America in the last election because I think if McCain/Palin had won the reputation of the US would be much worse, but he really isn't doing himself any favours in the way he has dealt with these big issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 i cant say that mccain would of been worse... i think it was basically a choice between lethal injection or the electric chair Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOAKER Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 We need to pull ALL of our troops out from over seas, Get rid of NAFTA, Raise tariffs, reduce corporate tax, create a flat tax, bring industry and manufacturing back to this country, get rid of the EPA, get rid of the unions, fire all the damn bureaucrats in Washington, get rid of all the New Deal and Great Society programs, and get this fucking country running again. fuck Obama and all them dickheads in Washington. Fucking overpaid, rich cunt sucking, power monger assholes...they are Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decyferon Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 I don't see anything wrong with unions, employees need someone to look out for their interests and need a way to mediate between employee and business, although unions are pretty much useless nowadays. However I don't know how the unions are in the US in comparison to here, they are quite handy here. Quite recently my wife had problems at work where the company was trying to screw her over, they were completely in the wrong and without the support of the union she would have lost her job. If she had had to employ a private lawyer to deal with the issue then it would have cost hundreds if not thousands to do that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 i gotta back soakers post. theoretically there can be, in my view, the view of an individualist, a legitimate union. the problem comes when you get a wagner act or taft hartley act or similar legislation, which force employers to work with unions. would it be right if we forced employees to work for certain companies? that is what labor legislation does, it forces employers to work with unions when they may or may not want to, on their employers own property. unions have the legal 'right' to form, force the employer to deal with this collective, quit or refuse to work, and stop competition from taking their positions. its no different than you getting a divorce. but you walk around outside of your house picketing and when a guy comes to go on a date with your ex wife, you beat the hell out of him. legitimately, unions could work, if they limited themselves to en masse quits. if you have a right to work, you have a right to quit, (barring contractual obligations) and if you have a right to quit, you ALL (employees) have a right to quit. but the moment you start beating up scabs, passing silly labor legislation by your political arm, you are no longer operating within the frame work of a free society. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOAKER Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 fuck Unions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decyferon Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 While I don't agree with the intimidation and tactics used on picket lines, I believe that workers have the right to work if they want and shouldn't be bullied into the mob mentality, I still think that a union is a good thing to have. Someone needs to protect the rights of the workforce otherwise the company can dictate unfair labour terms and bully the workforce. In the instance of my wife, she would have been fired on unfair grounds if she hadn't of complained to the union and they mediated between her and the company and backed her through the process, the company was entirely in the wrong and without their help she would have been screwed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mainframe Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 I know I have stated that I do like Obama as a person/leader but it doesn't mean I am oblivious to the fact he is still a politician who lies. If anything he has to work harder to prove the naysayers wrong but he just isn't doing it. I find it amazing when people put such blind faith in someone that is in a profession that is inheritantly based on lies and manipulation. Dude, in this thread you're only allowed to hate Obama or blindly love and support every decision he makes. Nothing in between. Stop having such a realistic opinion. And who are all these people who put blind faith in our politicians? I sure haven't met many of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mainframe Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 ^^ yup BUT... you know, he inherited this and you know well, the war, well, he never campaigned on any of that ending the war stuff, and and and... and.... obama reminds me of bush when he said ...'mission accomplished' about iraq. the economy is 'fixed.' mission accomplished! look at unemployment! im am teh godsz bow before me boy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted December 10, 2009 Share Posted December 10, 2009 While I don't agree with the intimidation and tactics used on picket lines, I believe that workers have the right to work if they want and shouldn't be bullied into the mob mentality, I still think that a union is a good thing to have. Someone needs to protect the rights of the workforce otherwise the company can dictate unfair labour terms and bully the workforce. In the instance of my wife, she would have been fired on unfair grounds if she hadn't of complained to the union and they mediated between her and the company and backed her through the process, the company was entirely in the wrong and without their help she would have been screwed. sure, unions benefit members in alot of areas... like making much more than a worker in the 'normal' work force. unions operate as a cartel. their sole economic purpose is to limit the labor force to increase the wages of the union workers. which is why clerks at the post office make 75K a year and drive bmw's running a cash register all day yet the store next door has clerks making 15-20K a year driving a hyundai doing almost the exact same job. its no different than if the govt passed a law saying you had to buy shoes made by a certain manufacturer at a certain price. it is essentially legalized govt protected price fixing and coercion. public sector unions are hilarious to me. the govt is supposed to be this benevolent master, yet all govt workers have these unions to 'fight for their interests.' from the perspective of liberty, a union is only legitimate if it limits its self to en masse quits. when they force the employers to work with them, (which they all do)this is no legitimate. to put it simply, if i hire a landscape company to take care of my yard, we agree on a price and all the details, shake on it and they do the job and i pay them. but its not legitimate if the landscapers come on my property, tell me i am not paying them enough, get a law passed making me still work with this company, and compel me to pay them 3 times as much, provide lunch for them and give them health insurance. in the free market, if the landscape company doesnt like the terms, they leave. if i dont like the terms, they leave. you cant have the non property owner force the property owner to do anything, such as unions do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOAKER Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 fuck Mainframe...and Unions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Mamerro Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 fuck Unicorns Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SOAKER Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 Unicorns are horny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.