Printable View
Tax gas and use the money to build the infrastructure needed to create an effecient public transport system that later on will be able to support itself. :idea2:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice
Or continue the love with the car with it's SUV, traffic jams, urban sprawl and complain for the oil prices, while everyone else finds it cheap.
Now, what's the odds of option 1 happening? :laugh4:
How much did Sarko pay for the nurses ?Quote:
for a handful of hostages isn't 300 million extremely generous?
But anyway the claim now is that the information on the laptop was about a payment in the early '90s (thats a strange change from "recently") , its a strange thing to have on a laptop in the jungle isn't it , finacial records from over a decade ago , not as strange as the WMD claims the Columbians are making though...yep apparently farc are building nukes:dizzy2:
Lets see , it was under Clinton that the Repubicans got shirty about linking the aid to the paramilitaries with the paramilitries stopping their murdering kidnapping and drug dealing ....So that would be after :yes:Quote:
Were these the terrorist we bankrolled before or after carving Panama out of Colombia to ease our naval transit issues?
Not really , the payments were justified under the guise that the paramilitaries/terrorists were fighting against the drug trade , it turned out the paramilitaries/terrorists were the drugs traders .:shrug:Quote:
More importantly, were we getting good value for our dollar
But anyway , back to the hostages sideline , Equador is pretty pissed at these events (to put it mildly), they had been in very lengthy negotiations to secure the release of hostages , these talks had been taking place in Eqaudor , and the person they were dealing with was killed in ....errrrrr...Equador .
Still , to view things from a different perspective , out of all the countries governments in South and Central America , how many are speaking in favour of Columbias action and how many have taken Equadors side in this violation of soveriegnty by Columbia event ?
You tell me?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
Haven't heard or read that one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
Laptops are supposed to be portable, you know. It's not supposed to be about nukes, but about dirty bombs. I'm a bit sceptical of all this myself, but Chavez supporting the FARC with money wouldn't surprise me :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
Everybody seems to think that the only way to peace is through negotiation, but these negotiations have been an off/on process for years now. Actually the FARC has never been this weak, and Colombia jumped on the opportunity to kill one of its most senior members.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesmen
And personally I doubt that Reyes set up camp about 1 mile inside Ecuador territory only because it would make negotiations with Ecuador easier :rolleyes:
Argentina is with Ecuador about this recent matter.
That's a great solution, why didn't I think of that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironside
Oh wait, I thought of it and dismissed it as a terrible idea due to the fact that an instant federal tax on gasoline isn't going to magically develop into an efficient bus network that can get me from my house to everywhere I need to go with the efficiency a car can.
That's just want I want to do, give the bureaucrats more money in hopes of them creating an efficient public transportation system that can serve the needs of people who don't live in cities. Yup.
Keep trying though, I'm sure you if add enough taxes the problem will eventually be solved.
Edit: My idea for a solution would be the encouragement of alternative energy solutions and vastly superior fuel efficient automobiles would be to give massive tax breaks to the company's researching and producing the new technology, but alas, I'll shut up now and try to get back on topic.
Bad, Chavez, Bad.
[B]They contained "information from one commander to another indicating that FARC was apparently negotiating for radioactive material, the primary basis for generating dirty weapons of mass destruction and terrorism" he added.”
I said they will say it… I knew it!!! :laugh4: Chavezovic, the Milocevic of South America… When he will start Ethnic Cleansing it will be time to bomb for Humanitarian Causes, of course…
“How much did Sarko pay for the nurses ?” Good question. I wish I know the answer…
And Sarko was ready to go to rescue and fetch Ingrid from the jungle… These Colombians should be (and will be, as the French recognised having Negotiations with the killed guy: Does that means France as well in the Supporting Terrorist Funding Countries?) punish for ruining his plans: First, good PR, second petrol from Chavez, all good before elections which could be a disaster for his party…
Can you find any country in the region that is not publicly taking Equadors side in this ?Quote:
Argentina is with Ecuador about this recent matter.
Colombia. :grin:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
We're trying that here, but the US government is whining and meddling...Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice
Wait a minute - are you equating Uribe's plan on changing the Colombian Constitution's 1 term limit for President (which is too short) with Chavez's plan for ABOLISHING Presidential term limits?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
If I criticize one I need to criticize the other? BUNK
I want to know what makes you the authority on modern South American politics. Did you major in South American studies? Have you lived in Colombia? What books have you read? Who do you know from Colombia?
Your opinions regarding Uribe seem to be baseless and I'd just like to know why I should trust your opinions regarding the situation over my own.
There is also not in Canada. No happy face for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice
If that's the efficiency you require before using it, then no wonder you got poor mass transit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice
Well, give me a nice market solution with any realistical hope of succeeding... While taxes by itself is about as effective as massive tax cuts, the state is about the only organisation that will ever go close to a long term project with long payback time with undirect profit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice
Subventions for bus companies willing to expand on that market? Or tax cuts below 0% tax if you prefer that. :laugh4:
That helps mass transit how? :inquisitive: And light-wight, relativly cars is going to be soo selling.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice
The alternative energy solutions are more interesting, but it'll probably take a few decades for it to develop fully.
As I have said previously on these boards, the biggest criticism that people could level at Chavez, if they open their eyes and ignore their dogmatic hatred, is his relationship with FARC. It seems fairly clear - and I have read a fair bit about it from varying sources - that Chavez is to some degree involved with FARC. I say some degree because depending where you read it goes from indifference, to tolerance to and further to active help of, FARC.
You won't find me defending Chavez for his relationship with FARC, it is an organisation which uses methods which I cannot agree with and is so far away from its founding principles it might as well be called what it really is, a drug cartel. However, when people point fingers at me or call me names - or demand to 'know where I am' - I would simply say that people here defend and agree with various organisations and governments who themselves have questionable - to say the least - relationships with certain organisations. This is politics and in terms of the situation in South America, it is drastically important politics, just like US support of dictators during the cold war was morally justified by it's supporters, by the necessity of the task at hand.
Let us get some things clear - Chavez's relationship with FARC does in no way reduce or dampen his great achievements domestically for the people of his nation, nor does it also do the same to his achievements internationally, to put South America back on the map and not an extended piece of the US. Whatever you say about the relationship with FARC, this does not change.
Furthermore, it is also apparent that people are ignoring the fact that Columbia, in effect, invaded a neighboring country. It is not acceptable, full stop. You cannot unilaterally invade another nation, for whatever reason and I think it is fair - if not being done for posturing reasons - for the neighboring states to send their troops to the borders. It is exactly what any nation on this planet would do when attacked. It doesn't matter nor should even come into anybody's thinking as to why it was done, it simply does not make any difference, a nation was invaded and is taking appropriate measures to defend itself in future. If we ignore international law, precedent and diplomacy like Columbia has done in the past week, then what we have is deepening anarchy in an international system which has only been getting out of the 'natural' state of anarchy, over the last 60 years.
And I would like to point out, lastly that it is quite coincidental, is it not, that Columbia have found in the very same computers information not only implicating Chavez and Venezuela but also Ecuador! Wow, who would have thought it! Information implicating the two nations pissed that the Columbian government unilaterally invaded a nation! Italy have condemned the attack too, maybe they were involved as well - give it time. It is too convenient and I try and shy away from convenient 'facts' that arise to demonise opponents on a subject.
Anyway, it is quite easy to support Chavez and the great things he has done for his nation and others in the region - as well as mine and London in particular, with the cheap oil deal - and salute a great man, while still stating that he and his nations policies are not perfect - much like many people here do with certain Presidents of a certain nation, of the past - a certain privatising, murdering scum bad starting with Rea.. springs to mind. I forget his name though.
If you want to criticize one then thats fine , but if you criticize one for being really really bad when the other is just as bad then what you write is ...errrrr...BUNK .Quote:
If I criticize one I need to criticize the other? BUNK
Consider it an application of that Negroponte doctrine that your government likes so much , speaking of which when your government doesn't invade countries , finance terrorists and deploy military forces to exert pressure then perhaps you can criticize other countries actions more freely and with more conviction .
Really ? thats funny .Quote:
Your opinions regarding Uribe seem to be baseless
Tell you what Tuff , you say you get your information from Wiki and the BBC , have you ever considered following links from those places to see the full selection of information that they are only giving you snippets of ?
All of the scandals involving Uribes ties and US government (and business)terrorist funding in Columbia can be gathered with a few quick clicks .
Now what is a really funny development in this story is Uribe wanting to send Chavez to the international court , doesn't the muppet know that his puppet masters don't like that court .:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
What is even funnier is that if the allegations before the Columbian courts about him come to fruition then he himself might be joining his old buddies on the growing list of dodgy Columbian characters wanted for extradition to the US .:yes:
So whats your point? Canadians have every reason to gripe about their high energy costs, even more so than Americans due to the putative taxes their government adds to the cost of fuel. Hell, everyone has the right to gripe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars
Not quite sure what you mean. Should I expect half ass transportation run by the state?Quote:
If that's the efficiency you require before using it, then no wonder you got poor mass transit.
How about tax cuts by say 10% or even more?Quote:
Well, give me a nice market solution with any realistical hope of succeeding... While taxes by itself is about as effective as massive tax cuts, the state is about the only organisation that will ever go close to a long term project with long payback time with undirect profit.
Subventions for bus companies willing to expand on that market? Or tax cuts below 0% tax if you prefer that.
I forgot though, the market is evil, the state must solve all! :yes:
I never said it would help mass transit. My point was it would get us off our addiction to oil and the corrupt governments of the Middle East, while costing a hell of a lot less.Quote:
That helps mass transit how? And light-wight, relativly cars is going to be soo selling.
I'm not sure what you mean by light weight relativity cars.
Hence, there needs to be greater incentive, which higher oil prices and tax breaks from the government will yield.Quote:
The alternative energy solutions are more interesting, but it'll probably take a few decades for it to develop fully.
Yu0 d0nt understand or is that sarcasm?Quote:
Originally Posted by CountArach
cH3@ how many miles/kilo's do you drive to work? last time I checked europeans dont depend on car as much a Americans do. What with closer locations and availibilty of various transport.Quote:
Originally Posted by Meneldil
Note on Ice's car that since he's in college that car is t3H important to him, with lack of money, he is most likely barely keeping up with g@s prices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
Do you agree that the ramifications of Uribe's referendum are very different from the possible ramifications of Chavez's failed attempt? That should be a simple answer, but I'm sure that you will complicate it.
Still; PHD in regional politics? Major? What makes your understanding so superior to those of us who see the forest for the trees? That you follow links? So do we.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAG
I'm glad that you condemn FARC.
The Colombian government made an incursion 1.9 miles into Ecuadorian rain forest and killed a terrorist who was orchestrating murders, drug transportations and kidnappings in their country. They promptly apologized to the Ecuadorian government for the necessity of the act, but claim that the situation wasn't being addressed. Since Ecuador and Venezuela seem to be in cahoots with FARC, telling them about the intelligence would have been a sure-fire way to get the FARC to re-locate.
There are plenty of international precedents. As much as I consistently disagree with Israel, they do this stuff constantly. The U.S. does this stuff. Turkey just did this. The examples of others doing this are many.
The fact is that the U.S. broke down the walls regarding the harboring of terrorists with impunity. Good. "International law" is a sham if it is used to harbor terrorists.
All of the Presidential candidates support Uribe in this action. I know, I know, "evil American Imperialist dogs want to eat our children", but it says a little bit when their answers are unanimous.
As much as I consistently disagree with Israel, they do this stuff constantly. The U.S. does this stuff. Turkey just did this. The examples of others doing this are many.
Most of the people who do this are "on your side" would you be so casual if it happened to your country or an ally ?
I really hope you're talking about Afghanistan, and not Iraq.Quote:
Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
It reminds me of the Israeli 'Operation Entebbe', where terrorists hijacked a civilian airplane and held them ransom. The Israelis promptly responded with a anti-terrorists raid into Uganda, rescuing many of the hostages. Even though they violated international law launching this attack, they did save lives. Whether is was right or wrong is your judgment, but the Israelis did it and saved lives. That's what matters to me, and I'll give them kudos for it.
I'm supporting Colombia in this attack since they destroyed a key FARC commander and struck a blow for law and order. While you can argue that it was an invasion and that it wasn't the right thing to do, I believe that it was a step in destroying the guerrilla force that is FARC. It will produce results that will lead to the downfall of this terrorist force.
If they want to be legitimate, why do they need hostages and threats to maintain their legitimacy?
Do we harbor terrorists? OH yea, that's right, we ARE terrorists.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly
No. If they harbor terrorists, not only would they most likely not be our allies, but I wouldn't feel bad if someone made a quick incursion. An exception to this is Pakistan. I wouldn't be pissed if Afghan (or U.S.) forces made an incursion, but I would question the pragmatism of such a move given the situation in the country and its tenuous hold to our alliance.
I was talking about Afghanistan in particular.Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars
Just curious. ~:)Quote:
Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
Israel does. The murderers of a completely innocent man in Lillehammer fled from justice to hide in Israel. Would you support an air strike against Israel?Quote:
Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
if you could see the forest for the trees you would understsnd , it is you that are calling well publicised things "baseless" and you whose only opinion on these issues seems to be Uribe isn't Chavez and Uribe likes American policies .Quote:
What makes your understanding so superior to those of us who see the forest for the trees? That you follow links? So do we.
Correct , America does commit terrorism and does support terrorists , it also harbours terrorists . So you fall flat on your face there Tuff .Quote:
Do we harbor terrorists? OH yea, that's right, we ARE terrorists.
For a recent example , can you name the person accused of killing European tourists by bombing hotels ? is it the same person accused of blowing up civilian airliners killing all the passengers ?
Where is that persn now ?
How many countries have had their attempts at bringing the terrorist to justice blocked by the country that supported , financed ,trained and now harbours him ?
Now then would all those countries be "justified" in bombing that country ?
“You cannot unilaterally invade another nation,”: Well, de facto you can. Then, you can declare a part of the territory you invaded independent… Was done from Panama and more recently for Kosovo…:beam:
“Uribe wanting to send Chavez to the international court”. Yep. Chavezovic, I told you.:2thumbsup:
“Do you agree that the ramifications of Uribe's referendum are very different from the possible ramifications of Chavez's failed attempt”
No. In France we have no limitation of the number of mandates. The principal is every body is equal in front of the law, and if somebody is good enough to be elected 3 times, well, it is good for the country…
Or you can go for the Putin’s solution…:beam:
A lot of democratic countries (if fact, the majority of) don’t know a system limiting the right of voters to decide who they want as President…
Yeah, I've never seen the need for a limit, when it can be bypassed very easily by putting a puppet in charge...Quote:
Originally Posted by Brenus
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boyar Son
Forgive me for butting in, but I have trouble detecting the sarcasm in said post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boyar Son
Somehow, I think building up a reliable, extensive bus network will take much less money and time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice
I agree. Otherwise any belligerent nation could just use the terrorist excuse to invade another country.Quote:
Originally Posted by JAG
My dad has to drive an hour each day to get to his work. My mom has to drive for 25 minutes or something like that(not including traffic jams). She mostly uses public transport though, but that means an hour on the road.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boyar Son
Pot, meet Kettle. :laugh4:
Car's will always have the benefit of being faster (unless the mass transit can bypass traffic jams or having high speed trains) and not needing to wait for the transport to arrive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice
You can develop a profitable system that aren't taking much longer, has quite dense transports and is cheap, but that's about it.
Well, the market cannot do it by itself (I still haven't seen you suggest anything different), and even your suggestion demands that the state will have to tax all other companies to make the tax cut an incentative. :bounce:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice
One of the flaws of the market is that if there's an expensive and long gap between the first investment and the income it's highly unlikely for the market to develop in that way, even if it's beneficial in the long term.
Or to put it differently, what's the odds for evolution to create a kentaur?
And don't you tax profits over there (aka you'll need to make a profit in the first palce to earn on a tax cut)? :inquisitive:
So by cutting off oil dependence you'll get an efficient national wide bus system that can quickly get me from point A to point B? Missed that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice
Solving oil dependance is an entierly different matter.
Missed a slow there :oops: . More energy efficient cars need either a new kind of engine or becoming lighter and cutting down on horse powers, if driven on oil.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice
And it will still take decades. BTW, waiting for the oil prices to be painfully high is also most likely lead to a painful transition period.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice
And it cannot be fully solved until there's some source of cheap and aboundant energy.
relativity cars??Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice
that will be fast!! :burnout:
j00r m0$+ likely the minority of the people who drive that much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Conradus
Quirinus- excuse me?
Uh huhQuote:
Originally Posted by Ironside
How exactly?Quote:
You can develop a profitable system that aren't taking much longer, has quite dense transports and is cheap, but that's about it.
The state already tax companies.Quote:
Well, the market cannot do it by itself (I still haven't seen you suggest anything different), and even your suggestion demands that the state will have to tax all other companies to make the tax cut an incentative. :bounce:
You think that developing a mass transit system capable of serving the needs of 300 million Americans efficiently and safely will be easier?Quote:
One of the flaws of the market is that if there's an expensive and long gap between the first investment and the income it's highly unlikely for the market to develop in that way, even if it's beneficial in the long term.
We tax income, yes. The point being, as the company makes major breakthroughs and starts to become successful they will be able to keep more of the income.Quote:
And don't you tax profits over there (aka you'll need to make a profit in the first palce to earn on a tax cut)? :inquisitive:
I never said that. The point I was making is this is one way of getting around the painful gas prices.Quote:
So by cutting off oil dependence you'll get an efficient national wide bus system that can quickly get me from point A to point B? Missed that.
Solving oil dependance is an entierly different matter.
Yes, that's what currently is happening/developing. I'm for accelerating the research.Quote:
Missed a slow there :oops: . More energy efficient cars need either a new kind of engine or becoming lighter and cutting down on horse powers, if driven on oil.
...and somehow you believe that taxing gasoline to 6 dollars a gallon and trying to develop a mass transit system that is actually capable of serving people's needs is going to be more timely and less painful?Quote:
And it will still take decades. BTW, waiting for the oil prices to be painfully high is also most likely lead to a painful transition period.
Yes, hence the research.Quote:
And it cannot be fully solved until there's some source of cheap and aboundant energy.
Do share you plan on how to accomplish this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quirinus
Firstly, heavily subsidise public transportation-- it's not going to be an attractive means of transport (as compared to cars) unless it's significantly cheaper. How about a dollar or fifty-cent day-pass? Instead of paying $50-100 per week for transport, only five dollars (or even $2.50) a week is needed for transport. For those who are tight on cash, that's a great incentive.
Of course, without the right infranstructure, even a free bus service would lack constant support. Map out a system of bus routes that is reasonably dense, and make them modular so as to be able to expand them at a later date. I understand that expecting a nationwide network is unreasonable due to the size of the US, but start with the urban areas-- New York, Washington DC, San Francisco, etc. etc. Don't skimp on anything-- good, punctual service is very important.
On the flip side of the coin, tax the purchase of cars heavily, and enforce measures that make purchasing a car a less attractive and viable investment. This way, people who might have previously drove anyway will at least give the public transportation system a try. Cars won't disappear from use, far from it. Those who can afford it will still buy it, and in the meantime the nation's coffers are filled, the same way they are filled by cigarette and liquor taxes.
I understand that it does take a whole lot of money, and it is difficult to change the mindset of an entire nation so soon, but it's possible. And I think it can be accomplished sooner than your plan of adopting alternative fuel and encourage research on them. My plan might take a decade or so, but what you're proposing (as I understand it) could possibly take a generation, maybe two, while in the meantime we have merciless traffic snarls and oil dependence on volatile, politically unstable regions. Your solution solves the latter, but not the former.
Boyar Son, you posted this:
CountArach made this observation about your post:Quote:
Originally Posted by Boyar Son
And you replied by saying:Quote:
Originally Posted by CountArach
So I pointed out your first post and indicated my skepticism that you were being sarcastic, unless your sense of irony is so refined that your sarcasm is undetectable by us common mortals.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boyar Son
Hope this clears things up. :yes:
About everyone I can think of spends atleast an hour on the road each day getting to and coming from his work.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boyar Son
Topics had ADHD
I personally can't understand what the heck public vs. private transportation has to do with Venezuelan threats against Colombia. Now can we pleeeaaassseee get back on topic. If this concerns you that much, make another thread, you can make as many as you like, but don't turn this into something it's not.
I think Colombia is in the wrong on this one. They violated Ecuador's sovereignty. Who's against me?
Let me try.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshal Murat
Venezuelans are commies, commies use public transportation.
Good capitalists have their own SUVs, take Texans for example.
Having your own car is an expression of your freedom(to destroy the environment, cause smog, cancer and death, basically be a darwinistic capitalist).
Venezuelans use tanks, tanks are owned by the commie government which is run by the commie public.
Therefore and because more than two people fit into tanks, tanks equal public transportation.
So basically the evil Venezuelan commie public transportation tank platoons near the border of Colombia, which uses mainly SUVs and is thus a capitalistic country of freedom and democracy and the American way, are a direct threat to world piece!
Therefore it is important to discuss the evils of the commie invention of public transportation to make sure that more people buy SUVs, stop supporting Venezuela and start buying Microsoft products to support capitalism, world piece, Texans, iraqi oil corporations(they use SUVs) and Bill Gates' american dream! :smash:
I have to go now or I'll miss my train later. ~D
Well said.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshal Murat
:inquisitive:Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshal Murat
Wait - didn't you say that you supported them?Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshal Murat
The old-school definitions of international "law" (to the extent that the term may be applied in a context without some higher controlling authority) suggest that military forces of one nation crossing the border of another nation constitutes an act of war by nation A at the expense of nation B and that such a violation is a legitimate casum bellum.
Is this the standard that should continue to apply? Why or why not?
I think that it is technically a cause for war. So is allowing a terrorist organization to cross the border with impunity in order to murder and kidnap civilians.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
The main idea of preventative action is to avert a war. When non-state actors use a state as an umbrella to such an extent that the state defense becomes terrorist defense, we have a problem. If the state cannot control the goings on of terrorism within its borders and it begins to effect the safety of neighbors, there may be legitimate reason to make a quick and decisive action.
The problem with Ecuador and Venezuela is that they support the FARC. They use their sovereignty as an excuse to aid in the training and protection of international kidnapping murderers. They should be ashamed of themselves and expect preventative action, as should any state that harbors terrorists and makes no real attempt to eradicate them.
The U.S. stands with Colombia because we believe in this basic tenet, from Obama to Bush - like it or not.
Well said. I think Chavez has become completely deranged over this incident. I'm curious to see how far he's willing to take his warmongering and what the fallout from it will be.Quote:
Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
Well done! :applause:Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
wouldn't the logical course of action be to secure the border to prevent FARC incursions, considering how provacative invading another country with your military is?Quote:
Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
that sounds rather simplistic.Quote:
The U.S. stands with Colombia because we believe in this basic tenet, from Obama to Bush - like it or not.
This seems more a case of hot-pursuit, not invasion. I don't think the Turks call their incursions into Iraq an invasion, and neither has the international community.Quote:
Originally Posted by Big_John
One has to wonder why the Colombian military didn't think that calling the Ecuadorian military to intercept the FARC on their side of the border would do any good. I would suspect that they'd experienced deaf ears before.
And parking your military along your border to prevent incursions by insurgants sounds simplistic to me. If it were that easy Afghanistan would be peaceful. Not to mention that here in the US we catch flak for increasing the presence ofBorder Patrol agents on our Mexican border...imagine what Chavez would do if armed troops took up permanent station. I'm sure he'd be cool with that:dizzy2:
Even Raúl Baduell, his old defense minister and former staunch supporter, doesn't believe Chavez' reaction is proportional. Something about distracting the populice from economic woes...
Are you familiar with a well known saying involving glass houses and stones ?:inquisitive:Quote:
The problem with Ecuador and Venezuela is that they support the FARC. They use their sovereignty as an excuse to aid in the training and protection of international kidnapping murderers.
You know the saying about it not being wise to throw them :yes:Quote:
They should be ashamed of themselves and expect preventative action, as should any state that harbors terrorists and makes no real attempt to eradicate them.
bollox , absolute hypocritical bollox .Quote:
The U.S. stands with Colombia because we believe in this basic tenet, from Obama to Bush
BTW Tuff , have you kept up with events ?
You know the ever changing stories the Columbians have come up with to justify their action ?
Concerning the evidence they have released from the laptop ?
Can you tell me , among the countries that were in negotiations , what country that you live in was in negotiations in Equador through the Equadorian government with the negotiator who was killed .
Is the answer
Ayour country
Byour country
orCyour country
But anyway , since you are such a cheerleader for Uribe , what are your views on the protests against terrorists in Columbia yesterday ?
Are you slightly curious as to why there were huge crowds with pictures of dead/missing people and signs calling Uribe a terrorist , kidnapper and murderer ?
Or does your blind support negate any curiosity about such things ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
People call Bush a terrorist and a murderer. I believe Uribe when he says that "whenever things start getting rough for the ELN and the FARC we hear their mouthpieces start talking about the governments 'human rights violations'". The international community (aside from socialists and contrarian zealots) sees him as a pretty reasonable man.
I see Uribe as an all around good Colombian President. I support the way that he is handling the crisis in his country. He is the first one that I have seen as heralding a new age in that countries history. Its easy for you and I to say that he is heavy handed - when your father wasn't murdered by drug dealing kidnappers and your government has a monopoly on force within its own terriitory.
http://www.colombiajournal.org/colombia222.htm
Somehow an Irishman who contradicts everything that anyone says will have a hard time convincing me that Uribe is bad for Colombia or that he is a totalitarian despot who kills innocents in their homes. Call me crazy (as I'm sure you will).
Post some homegrown links to people who believe Uribe is a murderer and a kidnapper - I'm always open to the truth and Uribe is no Mitt Romney, so I'd consider some solid evidence.
You're not likely to get any. :no:Quote:
Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
Tuff , the link you provided backs up everything I have said about Uribe :dizzy2:Quote:
Somehow an Irishman who contradicts everything that anyone says will have a hard time convincing me that Uribe is bad for Colombia or that he is a totalitarian despot who kills innocents in their homes.
Small list of successes , big list of failures , damning list of conclusions:idea2: Well done you make things so easy:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
So you didn't watch yesterdays protests then , neither have you looked at the allegations before the courts ...thats rather silly isn't it :oops:Quote:
Post some homegrown links to people who believe Uribe is a murderer and a kidnapper
errrrr...excuse me Tuff , but what does Uribe himself say about that event and how it effects his policies?Quote:
Its easy for you and I to say that he is heavy handed - when your father wasn't murdered by drug dealing kidnappers
Is it Ait has no effectr on his policies
B it has no effect on his policies
or Cit has no effect on his policies .
The thing is Xiahou , I don't need to , Tuff in his wisdom provides all the evidence neededQuote:
You're not likely to get any.
You do know its quite difficult to succed in things when you have terrorist/insurgents/guerillas running around the whole place, then you have drug lords who have a great of power for a drug lord, many supporting both sides of the conflict, then the country it self is very poor overall with many people poverty stricken (As are most 3rd world countries)Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
yes but that isn't the issue , Tuff thinks that Uribe is an all around good guy , anyone with involvement with terrorists/paramilitaries is not an all around good guy even if he does believe in the free market , went to Harvard and is an ally of the US .Quote:
You do know its quite difficult to succed in things when you have terrorist/insurgents/guerillas running around the whole place, then you have drug lords who have a great of power for a drug lord, many supporting both sides of the conflict, then the country it self is very poor overall with many people poverty stricken (As are most 3rd world countries)
Politicians are generally scummy overall , a politician with a dodgy past and continuing dodgy links is very scummy indeed .
Now Uribe doesn't get it all his own way of course , the attempted legalisation of the land theft his political allies tried was blocked .
“So is allowing a terrorist organization to cross the border with impunity in order to murder and kidnap civilians.” From when? During the War of Independence, Algerians guerrilla had shelters in Tunisia. The French Air Forces attacked one of their logistic bases and was obliged to apologise by the pressure, in others, of USA.
According to this logic, USSR would have ground to attack USA in Alaska due the US support to the future Talibans…:laugh4:
Never see the Spanish Army launching raids in France against the ETA…:inquisitive:
“The problem with Ecuador and Venezuela is that they support the FARC” Colombia says… And Iraq had WMD.
“he's willing to take his warmongering and what the fallout from it will be.” I didn’t know that Venezuelan Forces did cross the Borders of Colombia…
“This seems more a case of hot-pursuit, not invasion”: That is for police action. Not military. Then explain where and when the pursuit took place… It was a plain and organised military action… Illegal even if explainable… Colombia chooses to ignore the political price to pay, thinking rightly, that Big Brother USA will protect in case of bad mood from the others sides.
“I don't think the Turks call their incursions into Iraq an invasion, and neither has the international community.” Right in case of the Turks, wrong in case of International Community…
Breaking news, EU invades Sudan: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=100098
I'm sure everyone here is just as outraged as I am.
About time I say. :2thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Vladimir
I agree - congratulations EU.Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
Most observers can see that Uribe attacks paramilitaries AS WELL AS the FARC and drug cartels. I am not saying that Uribe has transformed his nation into heaven on earth, but I am saying that he has been a positive influence - not simplu as a counterbalance to the left in the region.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
Why do you hate freedom?
You are just so wrong on so much that it's comical. EU shouldn't go into Darfur - Chavez is a good guy - Bush is a murderer - yeadayadayada
Where in Ireland are you from? I hope my ancestors stayed away from the water.
On my last visit to Ireland there was a special on TV that literally stated that the U.S. government could CAUSE HURRICANES and actually caused Katrina. It stuck with me that this was the public education they were getting. How could anyone not hate the U.S. believing that tripe?
(EDIT: I forgot, I'm supposed to use smiley's:yes: )
C'mon, don't attack him directly. Try to use a bit o' humor.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Jaysus, Mary'n Joseph, ye mean ta say tat ain't true?Quote:
Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
*chews his straw thoughtfully for a very long time*
Next, ye'll be tellin' me that leprechauns don't hide their pots o'gold. :no:
heh.Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost
No, we the english are constantly attacking the rainbow fortress in eastern afghanistan in a effort to free the leprechauncns from severe beatings by the taleban where they'll be "persuaded" to give us the formula for gold makingQuote:
Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost
Well what a pillock , so then Tuff (forget about your fanciful uneducated uribe worship for a while ) please remind me where I have said any of that ?Quote:
You are just so wrong on so much that it's comical. EU shouldn't go into Darfur - Chavez is a good guy - Bush is a murderer - yeadayadayada
You do realise its quite a good indication that your line of reasoning on a subject has fallen apart when you have to invent stuff.....
Congratulations:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
In the topic:
Did you guys see the debate in Santo Domingo?
I got bored when Chavez started to talk, I fell asleep for a second! And Chavez was talking to Cristina, like Chavez was alone with her. And ignored the others...
Frag doesn't want the Netherlands to go in with the EU mandate. You don't wan't Ireland to go with the EU mandate. If everyone said this about their own EU nation the EU WOULDN'T BE IN DARFUR. Who's mandate would they go under?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
You arn't saying that Ireland should go alone because "they would barely be able to do a fishing expedition without international logistical support" (paraphrased poorly)
I hope that you don't mean the UN - China would block any expedition there.
I'm sure that you meant something else by that statement as I'm sure that you will let us know.
You have called Uribe a power hungry, kidnapping murderer. Yoo have also equated him with Presidnt Bush as BAD. You have made mention that our country supports terrorism from within its own borders (Israel, the U.S. Military, Colombia) and I'm sure that makes bush a murderer in your eyes (I'm looking for the exact quote).
I'm also looking for that old mega thread about Chavez.
Another one bites the dust?
http://www.eltiempo.com/justicia/200...R-3990694.html
Sorry for the Espanol.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vladimir
Bring the Spanish elsewhere, this is not the USA. :shifty:
goodQuote:
Originally Posted by Vladimir
:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
I agree with Frag . The Irish should never have gone in under the EU mandate .
Wrong country Tuff , did you get confused :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: wrong civil war :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
your mind reading abilities are very poor , I would give up if I was you:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:Quote:
I'm sure that you meant something else by that statement as I'm sure that you will let us know.
:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:Quote:
You have called Uribe a power hungry, kidnapping murderer. Yoo have also equated him with Presidnt Bush as BAD. You have made mention that our country supports terrorism from within its own borders (Israel, the U.S. Military, Colombia) and I'm sure that makes bush a murderer in your eyes (I'm looking for the exact quote).
Is that the one where I call him a prick or the one where I call him an idiot ?Quote:
I'm also looking for that old mega thread about Chavez.
Have you ever considered quitting while you are way behind or are you determined to persist in falling flat on your face at every stride ?
:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:
Argh you are right on that count. My mistake.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman
You love Chavez though. Everybody knows it.
I actually remember that he said Chavez is an idiot or something along those lines...Quote:
Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
:laugh4: Everyone will agree: He's very consistent. :yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
I have written that lots of times , I have also written that the main opposition in Venezuela are idiots too , and very very stupid with it .Quote:
I actually remember that he said Chavez is an idiot or something along those lines...
It is very easy to make a case against Chavez that will stand up to scrutiny , one that can clearly rip apart his actions and policies rather than focusing on the nonsense rhetoric , yet so far throughout the numerous "OMG its Chavez" topics only one poster has managed that simple task , and that was Redleg .
poor Tuff. :cry:Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars
When the anti-terrorist units or Governments which order operations will understand that to kill the leaders is not THE solution? The Germans killed several leaders of the French Resistance and never even slow down the movement… In Iraq, did the insurgency stop after the elimination of the biggest murderer?
An other one take the rank. Number 3 becomes number 1, problem fixed.
If you want to stop a movement, stop the reason why it started. In case of Colombia, give back the land taken by the latifundia and stop to protect the rich and powerful…
To finance a resistance with drugs isn’t new: The French and the USA did it in Vietnam (Mongs, Hre, and others Mountainous Tribes). And what was about the Irangates and the Colonel Oliver North? By the way, what did happen to him?:inquisitive:
That's true, people sometimes forget and sometimes don't even know what the real cause for insurgent movements is in Latin American. There are hundreds of groups in Argentina and Brazil only which are protesting to recover stolen land, stolen rights or stolen dignity... So far very few of them are getting any...Quote:
Originally Posted by Brenus
Damn it. Thanks for all of your support. I means alot to me. I'll just wait for the next massive regional conflict.:tumbleweed:Quote:
Originally Posted by Big_John
It's days like these where you don't know if you'll ever be a whole person again...
:drama2:
a little bit of massive killing isn't much to ask for one man's happiness. cooler heads are a-holes. :thumbsdown:Quote:
Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff
Here's a short review of the fallout.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read: