Ask Experts Questions for FREE Help !
Ask
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,741, Reputation: 341
    Ultra Member
     
    #1

    Aug 17, 2007, 06:10 AM
    Giuliani "We are all members of the 9/11 generation."
    For anyone wishing to know how foreign policy (at least involving the war against jihadistan) would be conducted in a Rudy Presidency ;Foreign Affairs - Toward a Realistic Peace - Rudolph Giuliani is a must read.

    He adopts and defends much of the Bush Doctrine regarding the war against the Islamo-nazis while at the same time tempers our expectations regarding democracy promotion("We must be under no illusions that either Iraq or Afghanistan will quickly attain the levels of peace and security enjoyed in the developed world today." ). He gives the President kudos for "orchestrating the most fundamental shift in U.S. policy since Harry Truman" and says that like Ike "accepted Truman's framework", it is time for needed revisions. He renames the war once again to a more correct name in my opinion ;the "Terrorists' War on Us". He recognizes that to defeat jihadistan requires a long term commitment similar to the cold war .

    "The first step toward a realistic peace is to be realistic about our enemies. They follow a violent ideology: radical Islamic fascism, which uses the mask of religion to further totalitarian goals and aims to destroy the existing international system. These enemies wear no uniform. They have no traditional military assets. They rule no states but can hide and operate in virtually any of them and are supported by some."
    He intends to do the needed reforms at Foggy Bottom that I had thought Condi Rice was sent there to do. He would have the diplomatic corp do a much more aggressive job of advocacy ."Too many people denounce our country or our policies simply because they are confident that they will not hear any serious refutation from our representatives," he argues. "The American ideals of freedom and democracy deserve stronger advocacy. And the era of cost-free anti-Americanism must end."

    "A realistic peace is not a peace to be achieved by embracing the 'realist' school of foreign policy thought. That doctrine defines America's interests too narrowly and avoids attempts to reform the international system according to our values."
    Bingo

    He would strengthen NATO and expand it beyond the limits of US and European cooperation ,inviting non-European free nations into the defense pact. He would not place much faith in the ability of the UN to do much of anything. "The UN has proved irrelevant to the resolution of almost every major dispute of the last 50 years" he writes and would expect little more from them beyond humanitarian missions .

    In a major break from Bush policy he would not push for a Palestinian State . He says it is not in the interest of the United States to help create a Palestinian state that would "support terrorism." ....."Palestinian statehood will have to be earned through sustained good governance, a clear commitment to fighting terrorism, and a willingness to live in peace with Israel." This was of course President Bush's original position until he got talked into that great plan called the "road map " which later morphed into the “quartet” .

    I would like to see more about other foreign policy challenges but this is only one essay. I would be comfortable with Rudy leading us in the challenges posed by the "Terrorists' War on Us".
    ETWolverine's Avatar
    ETWolverine Posts: 934, Reputation: 275
    Senior Member
     
    #2

    Aug 17, 2007, 08:08 AM
    This is a terrific statement of his positions, and one that I am in near total agreement. I too would be comfortable with Rudy in terms of foreign policy.

    I'd like to see a similar statement of positions for his domestic policies. Where does he stand on the economy, taxes, welfare, budgetary issues, military spending, domestic anti-terrorism activities, border control, immigration, social issues, national healthcare, social security privatization, crime control, etc. I know where I THINK he stands on these issues, but a policy statement would be nice in pinning him down.

    Elliot
    Dark_crow's Avatar
    Dark_crow Posts: 1,405, Reputation: 196
    Ultra Member
     
    #3

    Aug 17, 2007, 08:33 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by tomder55
    For anyone wishing to know how foreign policy (at least involving the war against jihadistan) would be conducted in a Rudy Presidency ;Foreign Affairs - Toward a Realistic Peace - Rudolph Giuliani is a must read.

    He adopts and defends much of the Bush Doctrine regarding the war against the Islamo-nazis while at the same time tempers our expectations regarding democracy promotion("We must be under no illusions that either Iraq or Afghanistan will quickly attain the levels of peace and security enjoyed in the developed world today." ). He gives the President kudos for "orchestrating the most fundamental shift in U.S. policy since Harry Truman" and says that like Ike "accepted Truman's framework", it is time for needed revisions. He renames the war once again to a more correct name in my opinion ;the "Terrorists' War on Us". He recognizes that to defeat jihadistan requires a long term commitment simular to the cold war .



    He intends to do the needed reforms at Foggy Bottom that I had thought Condi Rice was sent there to do. He would have the diplomatic corp do a much more aggressive job of advocacy ."Too many people denounce our country or our policies simply because they are confident that they will not hear any serious refutation from our representatives," he argues. "The American ideals of freedom and democracy deserve stronger advocacy. And the era of cost-free anti-Americanism must end."



    bingo

    He would strengthen NATO and expand it beyond the limits of US and European cooperation ,inviting non-European free nations into the defense pact. He would not place much faith in the ability of the UN to do much of anything. "The UN has proved irrelevant to the resolution of almost every major dispute of the last 50 years" he writes and would expect little more from them beyond humanitarian missions .

    In a major break from Bush policy he would not push for a Palestinian State . He says it is not in the interest of the United States to help create a Palestinian state that would "support terrorism." ....."Palestinian statehood will have to be earned through sustained good governance, a clear commitment to fighting terrorism, and a willingness to live in peace with Israel." This was of course President Bush's original position until he got talked into that great plan called the "road map " which later morphed into the “quartet” .

    I would like to see more about other foreign policy challenges but this is only one essay. I would be comfortable with Rudy leading us in the challenges posed by the "Terrorists' War on Us".
    Tom
    There has been no change, nor does Rudolph Giuliani suggest a change in the overall thrust of foreign policy. What he is suggesting is a change in tactics, not a change in policy.
    The American foreign policy is guided not by a devotion to any kind of morality, but rather by the desires that follow:
    * Making the world safe for American corporations;
    * Enhancing the financial statements of defense contractors at home who have contributed generously to members of congress;

    What I am talking about is a Foreign Policy of intervention which began with taking the side of Chiang Kai-shek against the Communists, even though the latter had been a ally of the United States in the world war; and since then there have been 70 cases of American intervention in foreign countries. Is it any wonder we are called a Nation of Barbarians?
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,741, Reputation: 341
    Ultra Member
     
    #4

    Aug 17, 2007, 08:35 AM
    Elliot ,

    I am finding more and more to like about Rudy every day . One way to find out how he probably will stand on an issue is to look at who is advising him. On foreign policy his main man appears to be Yale professor Charles Hill.

    Hoover Institution - Fellows - Charles Hill

    Talking to Giuliani Advisor Charles Hill - HUMAN EVENTS

    But check out the all stars on his judiciary team!!


    Former Bush Solicitor General Ted Olson (who's wife Barbara was on the plane that plunged into the Pentagon on 9-11) .Olson was on the short list of potential nominees to SCOTUS

    Former Bush Attorney General Larry Thompson.He led counter-terrorism efforts and oversaw the prosecutions against officials at Enron. (He is also another black who Bush appointed to a high position in his government )

    Miguel A. Estrada .The judicial nominee who withdrew his name due to the ridiculous boycott by the Dems.
    Dark_crow's Avatar
    Dark_crow Posts: 1,405, Reputation: 196
    Ultra Member
     
    #5

    Aug 17, 2007, 08:36 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by ETWolverine
    welfare
    Elliot
    You mean aid to the poor? I'm all for that:D
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,741, Reputation: 341
    Ultra Member
     
    #6

    Aug 17, 2007, 08:47 AM
    DC

    If I looked at history through the glasses you wear then I would have to conclude that the founders were these wealthy business men who were tired of the royal screwing the Brits were giving them with taxes so they revolted . But it had little to do with the philosophies of the enlightenment.

    I would also say then the first intervention was not at the conclusion of WWII ,but instead during the 1st invasion of Canada ;or maybe it was Jefferson's attack of the Barbary Pirates who were threatening the interests of American businessmen .

    Luckily I am not that cynical .
    Dark_crow's Avatar
    Dark_crow Posts: 1,405, Reputation: 196
    Ultra Member
     
    #7

    Aug 17, 2007, 09:02 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by tomder55
    DC

    If I looked at history through the glasses you wear then I would have to conclude that the founders were these wealthy business men who were tired of the royal screwing the Brits were giving them with taxes so they revolted . But it had little to do with the philosophies of the enlightenment.

    I would also say then the first intervention was not at the conclusion of WWII ,but instead during the 1st invasion of Canada ;or maybe it was Jefferson's attack of the Barbary Pirates who were threatening the interests of American businessmen .

    Luckily I am not that cynical .
    But America was not founded by wealthy businessmen and the Barbary Pirates were attacking American vessels to the point the economy had almost collapsed.

    Cynical, no.. just just betrayed by my own government who has flip-floped on the money they stole from me for over 40 years, and you should be too; wait until you attempt to get your social security retirement.

    P.S Social Security Retirement…you know, what the Right calls welfare.
    ETWolverine's Avatar
    ETWolverine Posts: 934, Reputation: 275
    Senior Member
     
    #8

    Aug 17, 2007, 09:19 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by Dark_crow
    You mean aid to the poor? I'm all for that:D
    No, I mean the act of the government taking your money to give to people who don't want to work because the government gives them free money that they have taken from you.

    Aid to the poor is called "charity" and it should be a personal choice, not a government program.

    Elliot
    Dark_crow's Avatar
    Dark_crow Posts: 1,405, Reputation: 196
    Ultra Member
     
    #9

    Aug 17, 2007, 09:55 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by ETWolverine
    No, I mean the act of the government taking your money to give to people who don't want to work because the government gives them free money that they have taken from you.

    Aid to the poor is called "charity" and it should be a personal choice, not a government program.

    Elliot
    Right, everyone who is poor is just a lazy mooch looking for a hand-out from those who do work.

    With your reasoning why should anyone have done anything for the Jews but open the gates to the concentration camps and wish them good luck?

    :(
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,741, Reputation: 341
    Ultra Member
     
    #10

    Aug 17, 2007, 10:04 AM
    excon agrees: Ron Paul for pres.
    Yeah there are things to like about a Ron Paul adm.. . especially his views on border security .

    Ron Paul 2008 › Issues › Border Security and Immigration Reform
    ETWolverine's Avatar
    ETWolverine Posts: 934, Reputation: 275
    Senior Member
     
    #11

    Aug 17, 2007, 12:38 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Dark_crow
    Right, everyone who is poor is just a lazy mooch looking for a hand-out from those who do work.
    Nope. Just the ones looking for welfare as their sole source of income. The INDUSTRIOUS people get off welfare as fast as they can and make something of themselves.


    With your reasoning why should anyone have done anything for the Jews but open the gates to the concentration camps and wish them good luck?

    :(
    What makes you think anybody did anything for the Jews but open the gates to the concentration camps and wish them good luck?

    My parents and grandparents came here to this country after the Holocaust. My grandparents were Survivors in Poland and my parents were born in German DP camps. They waited years before coming to this country legally, and when they got here, nobody gave them a damn thing. My mother's parents lost their tailoring jobs every week (they would be hired on Sunday, and then fired on Saturday for not showing up to work on the Sabbath, and then be hired by someone else on Sunday) for years. My father's fathe was a little luckier... their was a particular need for leather workers, so he didn't lose a job quite that often. They managed to scrape togther enough money to get by, and never received a single penny of welfare money orany other aid. Eventually they managed to put their kids through school, and their kids became professionals. But it wasn't because they received any money fom government programs. (And they sent their kids to private schools, Yeshivas, so they didn't even get government-financed education aid either.)

    So please, don't make the assumption that I don't know what poor people go through. But if I want to help poor people, I'll give charity. Don't steal my money in the name of helping the poor. As I said, charity is a personal choice, and I give lots of it. But I don't support people who aren't interested in getting off the public dole, and I should be able to make that choice.

    There's an old story: A Conservative and a Liberal were walking along the street. They passed a poor man with a cup. The Conservative asked him why he was collecting money, and the poor man answered that he had lost his last job, and was just looking for enough money to get a new suit of clothes so he could then find a new job. The Conservative took out a $10 bill and put it in the cup.

    The Liberal was so impressed with this act of generosity that he decided to do the same thing. The next time they passed a poor person with a cup, without asking the man any questions, the Liberal took $10 from the Conservative's pocket, gave $3 to the poor man, and kept $7 for himself as an administrative fee.

    Your welfare system at work.

    Elliot
    Dark_crow's Avatar
    Dark_crow Posts: 1,405, Reputation: 196
    Ultra Member
     
    #12

    Aug 17, 2007, 01:02 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by ETWolverine
    Nope. Just the ones looking for welfare as their sole source of income. The INDUSTRIOUS people get off of welfare as fast as they can and make something of themselves.




    What makes you think anybody did anything for the Jews but open the gates to the concentration camps and wish them good luck?

    My parents and grandparents came here to this country after the Holocaust. My grandparents were Survivors in Poland and my parents were born in German DP camps. They waited years before coming to this country legally, and when they got here, nobody gave them a damn thing. My mother's parents lost their tailoring jobs every week (they would be hired on Sunday, and then fired on Saturday for not showing up to work on the Sabbath, and then be hired by someone else on Sunday) for years. My father's fathe was a little luckier... their was a particular need for leather workers, so he didn't lose a job quite that often. They managed to scrape togther enough money to get by, and never received a single penny of welfare money orany other aid. Eventually they managed to put their kids through school, and their kids became professionals. But it wasn't because they received any money fom government programs. (And they sent their kids to private schools, Yeshivas, so they didn't even get government-financed education aid either.)

    So please, don't make the assumption that I don't know what poor people go through. But if I want to help poor people, I'll give charity. Don't steal my money in the name of helping the poor. As I said, charity is a personal choice, and I give lots of it. But I don't support people who aren't interested in getting off of the public dole, and I should be able to make that choice.

    There's an old story: A Conservative and a Liberal were walking along the street. They passed a poor man with a cup. The Conservative asked him why he was collecting money, and the poor man answered that he had lost his last job, and was just looking for enough money to get a new suit of clothes so he could then find a new job. The Conservative took out a $10 bill and put it in the cup.

    The Liberal was so impressed with this act of generosity that he decided to do the same thing. The next time they passed a poor person with a cup, without asking the man any questions, the Liberal took $10 from the Conservative's pocket, gave $3 to the poor man, and kept $7 for himself as an administrative fee.

    Your welfare system at work.

    Elliot
    Ohhh Mr. Wolverine, I know you're not as tough as you talk, I bet there is a great-big-ol heart down there.
    Dark_crow's Avatar
    Dark_crow Posts: 1,405, Reputation: 196
    Ultra Member
     
    #13

    Aug 19, 2007, 04:08 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by ETWolverine
    No, I mean the act of the government taking your money to give to people who don't want to work because the government gives them free money that they have taken from you.

    Aid to the poor is called "charity" and it should be a personal choice, not a government program.

    Elliot
    Oh Mr. Wolverine, I spoke with Auntie about this and she believes you misunderstand. Welfare is what the oligarchs who run America on inherited property, wealth and social status, give to small business i.e. high taxes, myriad regulations, and restrictive laws in the name of "fairness;" at the expense of entrepreneurial activity, technological creativity, and full employment of human resources,

    Therein sits the true socialist bureaucracy and its cost far exceeds the social programs for the poor.

    She say’s we could learn a lot from China, who is now the fastest growing economy in the world; and why- the Government is simply standing away while 1.2 billion practice nineteenth Century American democratic capitalism: ordinary citizens actually getting rich by paying no attention whatever to the IMF, World Bank, or the U.S. Treasury.
    ETWolverine's Avatar
    ETWolverine Posts: 934, Reputation: 275
    Senior Member
     
    #14

    Aug 20, 2007, 07:06 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by Dark_crow
    Ohhh Mr. Wolverine, I know you’re not as tough as you talk, I bet there is a great-big-ol heart down there.
    I assume that you have heard the old saying: "Those who are not liberal when they are young have no heart. Those who are not conservative when they get older have no brain."

    I grew up.

    Or, to put it more susinctly, I do have a heart. I just save it for those who show me they have some too. If you don't have the heart to try to work your way out of poverty, I don't have the time or money to waste on you. But if you do try to pull yourself up by the bootstraps and make something of your life, I'll back you up with training, funding, job-searching, and even grants to start up a business. It's called WORKFARE, and unlike the concept of welfare, it works. (Coincidentally, this was the concept of welfare that was originally proposed by FDR in his "New Deal"... not this free money, free food, free services for anyone and everyone who doesn't want to work crap that we see in the contemporary welfare system.)

    Oh Mr. Wolverine, I spoke with Auntie about this and she believes you misunderstand. Welfare is what the oligarchs who run America on inherited property, wealth and social status, give to small business i.e. high taxes, myriad regulations, and restrictive laws in the name of "fairness;" at the expense of entrepreneurial activity, technological creativity, and full employment of human resources,

    Therein sits the true socialist bureaucracy and its cost far exceeds the social programs for the poor.
    That is a huge part of why I am against the welfare system. It assumes that because someone owns a business must be "rich" and then takes their money to give it to the poor, who don't bother working because the government automatically assumes that anyone who isn't working can't. It is pure social engineering, redistribution of wealth, and is a complete failure at stopping poverty because it rewards poverty.

    She say’s we could learn a lot from China, who is now the fastest growing economy in the world; and why- the Government is simply standing away while 1.2 billion practice nineteenth Century American democratic capitalism: ordinary citizens actually getting rich by paying no attention whatever to the IMF, World Bank, or the U.S. Treasury.
    Yes, it's true. China is indeed a growing economy because they are allowing a greater amount of capitalism to creep into their communist-totalitarian system. But the government still rewards failure by propping up failing businesses with government-guaranteed loans that will never be repaid, nationalizes anything that becomes too successful, and taxes businesses in order to redistribute the wealth. (And I won't even mention the religious oppression... I assume you know about the Falun Gong/Falun Dafa and how they are oppressed by the Chinese government.) As I mentioned in another post, China is on the brink of financial disaster. We can indeed lean a lot from China... but most of it is about what NOT to do.

    Japan is a much better example of a thriving economy based on purely capitalist ideals with little government intervention. Israel. Hong Kong. Taiwan.
    Dark_crow's Avatar
    Dark_crow Posts: 1,405, Reputation: 196
    Ultra Member
     
    #15

    Aug 20, 2007, 11:16 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by ETWolverine
    I assume that you have heard the old saying: "Those who are not liberal when they are young have no heart. Those who are not conservative when they get older have no brain."

    I grew up.

    Or, to put it more susinctly, I do have a heart. I just save it for those who show me they have some too. If you don't have the heart to try to work your way out of poverty, I don't have the time or money to waste on you. But if you do try to pull yourself up by the bootstraps and make something of your life, I'll back you up with training, funding, job-searching, and even grants to start up a business. It's called WORKFARE, and unlike the concept of welfare, it works. (Coincidentally, this was the concept of welfare that was originally proposed by FDR in his "New Deal"... not this free money, free food, free services for anyone and everyone who doesn't want to work crap that we see in the contemporary welfare system.)



    That is a huge part of why I am against the welfare system. It assumes that because someone owns a business must be "rich" and then takes their money to give it to the poor, who don't bother working because the government automatically assumes that anyone who isn't working can't. It is pure social engineering, redistribution of wealth, and is a complete failure at stopping poverty because it rewards poverty.



    Yes, it's true. China is indeed a growing economy because they are allowing a greater amount of capitalism to creep into their communist-totalitarian system. But the government still rewards failure by propping up failing businesses with government-guaranteed loans that will never be repaid, nationalizes anything that becomes too successful, and taxes businesses in order to redistribute the wealth. (And I won't even mention the religious oppression... I assume you know about the Falun Gong/Falun Dafa and how they are oppressed by the Chinese government.) As I mentioned in another post, China is on the brink of financial disaster. We can indeed lean a lot from China... but most of it is about what NOT to do.

    Japan is a much better example of a thriving economy based on purely capitalist ideals with little government intervention. Israel. Hong Kong. Taiwan.
    I won’t even attempt to answer your obvious “Zionist” type Rant about Welfare. Taxation is designed to serve the top at the expense of the bottom; not to serve the bottom.

    As to China- you provide the only argument left to the American Establishment i.e. China is growing because it is being run by the elite. [Confusing America or Japan with China] …OR…You Parrot the corporate oligarchs who huff and puff about a handful of "political prisoners" in China and claim their "human rights" have been violated, but you don’t ask why. Well, I’ll tell you why anyway… because they were not permitted by legal authorities to break laws or overthrow the existing government
    ETWolverine's Avatar
    ETWolverine Posts: 934, Reputation: 275
    Senior Member
     
    #16

    Aug 20, 2007, 12:57 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Dark_crow
    I won’t even attempt to answer your obvious “Zionist” type Rant about Welfare. Taxation is designed to serve the top at the expense of the bottom; not to serve the bottom.
    No... in our society it was designed to help the people at the bottom. It just doesn't do what it was designed for. It was poorly designed and engineered. Which is exactly why the Founding Fathers attempted to limit taxation to covering the costs of the military, police, road maintenance and a postal system. Taxation NEVER does what it is designed to do.

    As to China- you provide the only argument left to the American Establishment i.e. China is growing because it is being run by the elite. [Confusing America or Japan with China] …OR…You Parrot the corporate oligarchs who huff and puff about a handful of "political prisoners" in China and claim their "human rights" have been violated, but you don’t ask why. Well, I’ll tell you why anyway… because they were not permitted by legal authorities to break laws or overthrow the existing government
    DC, if you read my actual response, you will find is that I said China's economy is growing DESPITE government running the system, elitism, and tyrranical rule... BECAUSE they have made some important capitalist innovations to their system that have allowed the system to expand and become competitive.

    Now... I can't really understand why you say that I am on a "Zionist" rant, other than the fact that I mentioned Israel as a good, growing capitalist economy. I also mentioned Hong Kong, Taiwan and Japan as crowing capitalist economies. Not sure why this qualifies as a "Zionist rant. (And no, I'm not mistaking Japan for China. I know my Asian History better than that.)

    Finally, exactly at which point did the Falun Dafa try to overthrow the government? I suggest that you try reading up on the subject before assuming that the Falun Dafa were some sort of political party trying to overthrow the Chinese government. The Falun Gong'Falun Dafa movement is a philosophy of peace, eschewing violence under any conditions, including threat to their own lives. They are practitioners of a chi-gong (chi-energy manipulation) method and meditation system that is purely peaceful. They are no political, have no interest in anything political, and just want to practice their meditation system. They have been systematically beaten, jailed, tortured, killed, "disappeared" and hunted just for existing. And the number of Falun Dafa that have been imprisoned and tortured is more than just a handful. Their numbers are in the several-hundred-thousands. Please do some research on this subject.

    I don't really understand where you are coming from with this post.

    Elliot
    heywood jablomey's Avatar
    heywood jablomey Posts: 4, Reputation: -1
    New Member
     
    #17

    Aug 20, 2007, 01:24 PM
    You are all tools.
    ETWolverine's Avatar
    ETWolverine Posts: 934, Reputation: 275
    Senior Member
     
    #18

    Aug 20, 2007, 01:30 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by heywood jablomey
    You are all tools.
    Uh... yeah... thanks for your opinion. :confused:
    gallivant_fellow's Avatar
    gallivant_fellow Posts: 157, Reputation: 31
    Junior Member
     
    #19

    Sep 3, 2007, 04:42 PM
    I like Giuliani, search him on YouTube. Reporters try to trick him and fumble him up like they are used to doing to Bush, but he calmly and boldly shuts them down. Also, he has stated that he will END illegal immigration and take down the US crime level. The only thing I don't like is how he is using 9/11 to boost himself up all the time.
    excon's Avatar
    excon Posts: 21,482, Reputation: 2992
    Uber Member
     
    #20

    Sep 3, 2007, 05:13 PM
    Hello tom:

    Anybody who says "We are all members of the 9/11 generation", is a person who's about to take away some of your rights.

    excon

Not your question? Ask your question View similar questions

 

Question Tools Search this Question
Search this Question:

Advanced Search

Add your answer here.


Check out some similar questions!

Locating a Die-cast metal 1980's generation "Side Swipe" Transformer [ 4 Answers ]

Does anyone know if the Transformer "Side swipe" was ever produced in Die cast Metal around 1 to 24 scale size? And if so, where to obtain one from? It can be a re-issue of the 1980's transformer but must have the following features: - Die-cast metal exterior panels - A red Lamborghini -...

Who manufactures Yangson Generation 3 "Altezza Style" clear tail lights? [ 2 Answers ]

Does anyone know who manufactures Yangson Generation 3 "Altezza Style" clear Tail lights? I am trying to find out who manufactures these tail lights and where these tail lights are manufactured. There seems to be a lot of distributers in the market place but no mention of a manufacturer! ...

Honda accord 2000 6 cyl " the light "check" is on" [ 1 Answers ]

My honda accord 2000 6 cyl. With 101000k miles is was with the light "check" on. I took To a non-honda mechanic and he erased it. The computer said that the code is PO700, and the mechanic said that it needs to have the "transmission rebuilt", and the price ranges from $ 1500.00 - 1600.00. My...

Can not "copy", "paste" and "cut" ! [ 2 Answers ]

Last week, my laptop was infected by virus, I sent for repair. After that, I couldn't find "copy" and "cut", and"paste" is in grey colour ! What have to do to have them back ? Can someone help ? Thanks in advance !


View more questions Search