Quote by PSORaine:
Wow, you changed your position quickly. From not wanting to get into a controversial topic to semi-personal attacks in just a few posts. Lots of people who are not voting age are perfectly able to debate politics. It doesn't take a voter's registration card to read a newspaper.
The truth is, most people who complain about the state of the country, or who think one person or another can turn it around probably don't hear it from their parents as much as they hear it from some campaign material. All candidates want to oversimplify the problems the country has so they can provide a solution that voters can't wait for them to implement.
All the same, your post is misleading. Why, from the way you write, it makes it sound like we are in Iraq over the OIL! But that can't be! I'm sure that this war is and always has been about defending ourselves from terrorism! This war is about preventing bad men from coming to America! We're fighting them over there so they don't come over here! No, wait, it's about the WMDs! Or is it to topple Sadam's regime of terror? Yes, that's it- freedom to Iraq- whether they want us there or not!
The Iraq war, which by now most people agree is a war we were entered into without knowing all the facts- a war under false pretenses if you prefer. We are- for all intents and purposes- trying to bring peace to a land that has been at war since the crusades. And until that happens (read: NEVER) George W Bush would never withdraw troops. Whether it's stupidity, pride, determination, or just him having seriously bad advisors, I don't know, nor do I care to debate my own personal opinion on it. But what is very obvious is that this war is and will continue to be a massive waste of American money. The US has allocated over $360 billion dollars for the war. That's ALLOCATED, not actual spending. Do you feel that if everyone in America turned off their power strips so they didn't waste that "passive energy" it would in any way offset that amount of money? Or did we just not need that money?
And how can you say that the whole world is in an economic slump? OK, I can see Japan because of how closely tied to America they are- but China? India? Even South Korea is up. EU unemployment rates are some of the lowest in years. Although I am an American, I currently live in Germany for a few months, and things I have to pay in Euros are kicking my a$$!
But the worst thing that GWB has done to our country has got to be the drop in credibility that we now have. If you've ever traveled to another country and seen the eyeroll when they realize you're American you know what I mean. I had an English friend who was shocked when he heard I was American, because of my vocabulary and spelling. He said everyone he knew thought of Americans as trash, with Texas accents and shot guns.
Regarding transportation (I assume you mean you have 2 cars that get more than 30 MPG... do you mean MPH or do you really think cars are made that can't drive over 30 MPH?) the fact remains that the US is a very mobile country, and it is not possible for EVERYONE to walk to work or school or only drive once a week. Are these huge SUVs and trucks and other "phallic compensators" ridiculous? YES! Does America need to work on energy conservation? Of course! We also need the government to put AT LEAST as much money into developing alternate fuel sources for our future as they do into securing oil for our "right now." And this war isn't about oil, remember. Because if we acknowledge that this war is over oil then that means we're slaughtering Iraqis, both insurgents and civilians, for the good of our own country, not for the reasons we were given prior to war- nor for the reasons given to our allies, some of which chose to fight and die right alongside us thinking our motives were a bit more noble than just wanting OIL.
The absolute absolute WORST part of this war is that talking about it has become a debate of party politics, or finances. It's inevitable that someone starts talking environment. Usually you'll find someone who starts bringing up 9/11 (even politicians and government leaders like to throw in something like that that SHOULD be irrelevant). But the cost to our country is much higher than the 3 trillion the Washington post estimated it to cost a few weeks ago. What is so sad is that we overlook, in these debates, the nearly 4000 men and women who will never return to their families. The over 29,000 that were wounded and will never be the same, and the over 150,000 families who are living in fear that their loved ones will be added to either of those other numbers.
It's always people who either have no loved ones in the Army or have already lost their soldiers that say "If we pull out now, our soldiers will have died in vain!" Do we say that casualties in Vietnam died in vain? If we are trying to get something out of the garbage disposal with our hands and it starts going and cuts off a finger, do we keep reaching in there, risking the other 9, so that one finger didn't go down in vain? OK, not the prettiest analogy, but I'm tired!
Why is Reagan made into some kind of God here? I leave you with a quote from www.globalexchange.org (keep in mind it's from 10/07 so when it says "Current" deficit it's a little behind, but I believe it's talking end of fiscal year):
" It is odd that the Republicans have made a big issue of the deficit and the national debt, seeing as it was Republican presidents (Reagan and Bush) who created the record deficits that produced most of the national debt. When Ronald Reagan took office on January 20, 1981 the national debt was under $1 trillion. By the end of the Bush administration, on January 20, 1993, the national debt had quadrupled to $4 trillion. The interest we taxpayers fork over to bondholders on this additional $3 trillion in debt (figuring at an average of 7 percent) comes to $210 billion: far more than the current budget deficit of $172 billion. If Reagan and Bush hadn't splurged on the military while giving huge tax breaks to their corporate backers, there would be no budget deficit."
Sorry to drop you all the way at the end of this novel there, GB, but I wanted to say I believe you are correct in your assumption. HP had his calculations backwards
3.00 USD = 1.91137 EUR. Regardless, whether it is priced in dollars or Euro, the value of the oil should remain the same. Currency doesn't deternine value. That's why if I go to the Rewe down the street and buy a 1/2 gallon of milk and only pay 1 euro, I'm paying the same as if I went to the commissary here and bought it in USD. What cpt Adams is insinuating regarding the value shift would pretty much be like saying "Too bad barrels of oil aren't priced in Yen! 100 yen is only about a dollar!" (I'm using an estimate of $100 a barrel, which I think is fairly accurate right now, and don't hold me to the currency conversion ^_^).