Yes you have had some great leaders who understand that national interests and influence are not confined to national borders.Or perhaps you think deploying your military to East Timor wasn't exercising power in Australia's national interest (or the coming intervention in Fiji ).
Yes you have had some great leaders who understand that national interests and influence are not confined to national borders.Or perhaps you think deploying your military to East Timor wasn't exercising power in Australia's national interest (or the coming intervention in Fiji ).
I would be surprised if Australia interfered in Fiji. It would not be in our national interest. As to East Timor that was long overdue, we lacked national fortitude and a broad perspective in 1975, and we had our own internal problems on our mind, otherwise we would have stopped the Indonesian takeover of East Timor and West Papua. Helping East Timor actually cost us a great deal so it is fairly neutral in national interest and every now and then you do have to give the bully boy a bloody nose. We have had a number of people who have played a good innings on the world stage, sadly they are usually one match wonders
Don't know what this has to do with what we were discussing, haven't seen any terrorists here lately, unless you count Krudd for terrorising the miners, and the stock market.
Nobody says it... just like nobody said what the wingers REALLY think about government and BP, until Joe Barton said it... Of course, he backtracked real quick, because nobody is supposed to SAY those things - even though that's what they really believe...
So, I don't care if you SAID it, Steve. I care whether you BELIEVE it.
Steve ,aren't you glad that now ,besides putting words in our mouths ,that thoughts are put in our minds. And I thought I was privilaged to have a personal source monitor.
Nobody says it... just like nobody said what the wingers REALLY think about government and BP, until Joe Barton said it... Of course, he backtracked real quick, because nobody is supposed to SAY those things - even though that's what they really believe...
Kind of like Obama telling an Arizona senator he COULD secure the border but he won't until Republicans agree to amnesty?
So, I don't care if you SAID it, Steve. I care whether you BELIEVE it.
Steve ,aren't you glad that now ,besides putting words in our mouths ,that thoughts are put in our minds. And I thought I was privilaged to have a personal source monitor.
That's why I formed my response as a question, so I'd know what I thought before replying.
Kind of like Obama telling an Arizona senator he COULD secure the border but he won't until Republicans agree to amnesty?
Hello again, Steve:
Couple things. If the Democrats are want to cram stuff down your throats, why would they need the Republicans agreement on ANYTHING?
Plus, I was about to call Kyle a liar, but he was telling the truth in the video. It was YOU who wasn't. Words DO matter. In this case it makes a BIG difference between what Kyle actually said, and what YOU say he said.
Words matter - but not to you guys where end of life counseling is a DEATH PANEL. Bwa, ha ha ha.
That's why I formed my response as a question, so I'd know what I thought before replying.
Hello again, Steve:
Even though I'm not supposed to know, I actually DO know what The Republican Study Committee thinks. That's a group of more than 115 House conservatives. They wrote it down before they knew they shouldn't. They said the escrow fund amounts to "Chicago-style shakedown politics."
I guess you guys really think you're fooling everybody.
Couple things. If the Democrats are want to cram stuff down your throats, why would they need the Republicans agreement on ANYTHING?
Perhaps he doesn't have the votes from his own majority side?
Plus, I was about to call Kyle a liar, but he was telling the truth in the video. It was YOU who wasn't. Words DO matter. In this case it makes a BIG difference between what Kyle actually said, and what YOU say he said.
"On June 18, 2010, Arizona Republican Senator Jon Kyl told the audience at a North Tempe Tea Party town hall meeting that during a private, one-on-one meeting with President Obama in the Oval Office, the President told him, regarding securing the southern border with Mexico, “The problem is, . . . if we secure the border, then you all won’t have any reason to support ‘comprehensive immigration reform.’” [Audible gasps were heard throughout the audience.] Sen. Kyl continued, “In other words, they’re holding it hostage. They don’t want to secure the border unless and until it is combined with ‘comprehensive immigration reform.’”
In other words, Obama told him he COULD secure the border but he won't unless Republicans agree to amnesty... just as I said. Although I could have used he's "holding it hostage" for political reasons instead of enforcing the law he's sworn to uphold. Either way works for me.
Words matter - but not to you guys where end of life counseling is a DEATH PANEL. Bwa, ha ha ha.
The proposed mandatory end of life counseling is one objectionable aspect of Obamacare, but it isn't a death panel. Words matter.
They said the escrow fund amounts to "Chicago-style shakedown politics."
... and so it is . Forcing BP to agree to the terms of the escrow is beyond the powers of his office (ultra vires ). The fund should've been authorized by Congress ;the decisions on it's distribution by a judge .
Here are more things "they" said.
"They" said Bush invaded Iraq for the oil. "They" said Bush hates African-Americans when they thought Bush was slow to respond to Katrina . "They " told seniors that Bush was going to take away the elderly's Social Security"... and on and on...
Speaking of words that matter, the White House and their media accomplices were aghast over a man who was just replaced as the point man for the Gulf disaster for spending some time yachting with his family.
“People will chew over this,” Emanuel said. “But don't take your eye off the major priorities and the key goals, that is dealing with the problem down in the well, and dealing with the problems of the region as it makes as important the people getting the resources they need to restore their lives and restoring that coastline to it environmental purity that it had at one point.”
No word from the White House on how we should react to a president who's "in charge" and "fully engaged" for attending baseball games and golfing - again - while complaining of Hayward's outing.
Aren't you a Christian? I think so from many of your other posts.
SO------
No one is going to win the war on poverty. Jesus said that there will always be poor people.
You believe Him, don't you?
Jesus words were not anything more that addressing a wrong attitude in a person who would subsequently betray him. Like so many who seek to help the poor they also seek to help themselves. The US is like Judas, his words drip with honey but self interest is what motivates him.
Yes I believe him but that doesn't stop us from trying since Jesus saying so doesn't make it mandatory for your nation to have large numbers of poor. We should not find reason to hide from our unwillingness to attack the big issues with vigour. Look at the resources you are willing to put into war and the Gulf cleanup, if you were to mobilise those resources to clean up poverty and you could start by addressing the issues in latin america which cause large numbers of people to migrate into you country and swell the numbers of poor there
Jesus words were not anything more that addressing a wrong attitude in a person who would subsequently betray him. Like so many who seek to help the poor they also seek to help themselves. The US is like Judas, his words drip with honey but self interest
is what motivates him.
Yes I believe him but that doesn't stop us from trying since Jesus saying so doesn't make it mandatory for your nation to have large numbers of poor. We should not find reason to hide from our unwillingness to attack the big issues with vigour. Look at the resources you are willing to put into war and the Gulf cleanup, if you were to mobilise those resources to clean up poverty and you could start by addressing the issues in latin america which cause large numbers of people to migrate into you country and swell the numbers of poor there
First step would be to forbid the bureaucrats from redefining "poverty" every year so they can get a raise. "Poverty" in the US is defined as earning less than the price of a car in a year. That's ridiculous.
First step would be to forbid the bureaucrats from redefining "poverty" every year so they can get a raise. "Poverty" in the US is defined as earning less than the price of a car in a year. That's ridiculous.
I think income of less than $1 a day would be a good place to start. Of course that would make most people in the US above the poverty line but someoneelse might get a look in while you could claim you have solved the problem, once you have conquered that one you could go to the next level say $5 a day. At this rate we will take a long time to get to the price of car but the lives of billions will be improved. Here's an idea give everyone below $10,000 income in the US a car, you can afford it, it will take a lot of clunkers off the road and improve those government owned industries. Just think of it 30 million new cars!
The cure for poverty is in your own hands, start helping someoneelse who really needs it and stop giving tied aid which really impoverises the poor more while enriching yourselves, a Judas solution
I think income of less than $1 a day would be a good place to start. Of course that would make most people in the US above the poverty line but someoneelse might get a look in while you could claim you have solved the problem, once you have conquered that one you could go to the next level say $5 a day. At this rate we will take a long time to get to the price of car but the lives of billions will be improved. here's an idea give everyone below $10,000 income in the US a car, you can afford it, it will take a lot of clunkers off the road and improve those government owned industries. Just think of it 30 million new cars!
The cure for poverty is in your own hands, start helping someoneelse who really needs it and stop giving tied aid which really impoverises the poor more while enriching yourselves, a Judas solution
To correct myself: defining poverty so the bureaucrats can get a raise.
To correct myself: defining poverty so the bureaucrats can get a raise.
I understood what you said, it is all part of that solution I told you about, self serving ideas which really help no one. We all watch politicians give themselves salary increases that are bigger than the poverty line itsself. There is where the problem lies, in the political gravy train. The solution, forget the lie about having to pay to get the best and demand that politicians are unpaid and get expenses only. You would see a quick exit of a lot of high minded citizens, next cut fat cat bureaucrat salaries in half, and ditto and you quickly see how see small government can run
I understood what you said, it is all part of that solution I told you about, self serving ideas which really help no one. We all watch politicians give themselves salary increases that are bigger than the poverty line itsself. There is where the problem lies, in the political gravy train. The solution, forget the lie about having to pay to get the best and demand that politicians are unpaid and get expenses only. You would see a quick exit of a lot of high minded citizens, next cut fat cat bureaucrat salaries in half, and ditto and you quickly see how see small government can run
I'll sign on to that plan; I've wanted all our politicians to be paid(including expenses) out of profit for years.
In January 2006, I answered a question on another Q&A board about the nature and causes of terrorism. Here is the original Q&A:
However, in the wake of the attempted UK car bombings, I am forced to review this answer. Clearly the doctors in charge of the plot were not economically...
Originally Posted by tomder55
