F**K Me! How many of you Yanks knew this?

IMO, a significant portion of the motivation for the invasion of Iraq was to prevent the USD from losing its dominance. And, it was a good idea with respect to the USD to prevent that. Sadly, Rumsfeld messed up, we spent more than we needed on that war because of that, then the homefront was mismanaged. And, now, we have even more mismanagement. I am not surprised and the sad thing is that subsequent mismanagement and inaction elsewhere has ensured that one of those (speculated) motivations for the invasion was in vain, IMHO.

That's the most idiotic explanation I've heard, and I've heard some beauts.
Saddam was in no position to do anything about the dollar. His oil was embargoed and in any case his infrastructure was damaged. He barely had the capacity to sell enough oil to keep his own country afloat.
That's a real boner of an idea.
Irrespective of your ad hominems, Hussein certainlyhad full intentions of moving from the USD. Yes, he was embargoed, but we all know how well that worked. And, as one of the major oil reserve nations in the area, his influence in the Middle Eastern oil market was nothing to sneeze at even post-First Iraq war.

Again, I remind you that I am making no claim that this USD issue was a primary reason for invasion. I am saying it was a significant consideration, though.
There were no ad hominem attacks. I'd suggest reviewing what the term means.
How do you know what his influence was? He had lost a major war with the US, and fought to a standstill with the Iranians. The Egyptians and Syrians are traditional enemies of Iraq and in any case the Saudis call the shots on oil.
Do you have ANY evidence that ANYONE in the administration thought of this as a consideration?
 
That makes a difference somehow?

Oh, right. Let's make sure we have buses for these emergencies, but let's not bother to staff them for emergencies. Very competent.

I thought NO had a preparatory drill within 18 months of Katrina. That should certainly have brought up questions about bus drivers and the like.
But it's OT.
There were years of questions about bus drivers, and all emergency procedures. No one in state government leadership listened or cared until the disaster was something to demagogue. Then it was excuse making, blame shifting and finger pointing instead of answers.

It's why Blanco isn't the governor anymore.

Yet somehow, unlike Georgia or Somoa, it was all Bush's fault. Liar and hypocrite.
 
I thought NO had a preparatory drill within 18 months of Katrina. That should certainly have brought up questions about bus drivers and the like.
But it's OT.
There were years of questions about bus drivers, and all emergency procedures. No one in state government leadership listened or cared until the disaster was something to demagogue. Then it was excuse making, blame shifting and finger pointing instead of answers.

It's why Blanco isn't the governor anymore.

Yet somehow, unlike Georgia or Somoa, it was all Bush's fault. Liar and hypocrite.
Let's not forget Mississippi, who was hit harder than LA but it didn't make the news as much because their state government was on top of it.
 
That's the most idiotic explanation I've heard, and I've heard some beauts.
Saddam was in no position to do anything about the dollar. His oil was embargoed and in any case his infrastructure was damaged. He barely had the capacity to sell enough oil to keep his own country afloat.
That's a real boner of an idea.
Irrespective of your ad hominems, Hussein certainlyhad full intentions of moving from the USD. Yes, he was embargoed, but we all know how well that worked. And, as one of the major oil reserve nations in the area, his influence in the Middle Eastern oil market was nothing to sneeze at even post-First Iraq war.

Again, I remind you that I am making no claim that this USD issue was a primary reason for invasion. I am saying it was a significant consideration, though.
There were no ad hominem attacks. I'd suggest reviewing what the term means.
How do you know what his influence was? He had lost a major war with the US, and fought to a standstill with the Iranians. The Egyptians and Syrians are traditional enemies of Iraq and in any case the Saudis call the shots on oil.
Do you have ANY evidence that ANYONE in the administration thought of this as a consideration?
Ron Paul knew about it. So, as I have no delusions of BDS, I am pretty confident that they were not so incompetent not to take it into consideration.
 
Last edited:
Yet somehow, unlike Georgia or Somoa, it was all Bush's fault. Liar and hypocrite.

Nobody was blaming Bush FOR Katrina, just his actions (or lack thereof) afterwards...
Rather than the governor and mayor, whose actions actually caused the disaster post-storm.
But the same thing didn't happen in MS. Why is it Bush never gets kudos for the great job he did in MS?
 
I agree re the governor and mayor, but can you see somebody like Johnson, or Nixon or even Reagun sitting on their butts. They would have got proactive no matter what and there would not have been a thing the gov could have done about it. Sure, bitch and holler about states' rights or whatever, but I don't think they would have said a damn thing...
 
Yet somehow, unlike Georgia or Somoa, it was all Bush's fault. Liar and hypocrite.

Nobody was blaming Bush FOR Katrina, just his actions (or lack thereof) afterwards...
Rather than the governor and mayor, whose actions actually caused the disaster post-storm.
But the same thing didn't happen in MS. Why is it Bush never gets kudos for the great job he did in MS?

Probably because the state govt in MS had a handle on it. If a State gov is incapable of action, then the fed should step in straight away...
 
Yet somehow, unlike Georgia or Somoa, it was all Bush's fault. Liar and hypocrite.

Nobody was blaming Bush FOR Katrina, just his actions (or lack thereof) afterwards...
The APPEARANCE of lack of action. The fact was, the governor was responsible for calling for federal help, and delayed and dithered.

As soon as the call was made, federal help came.

1. the states rights types keep SAYING it wasn't the Feds responsibility.
2. They DIDN'T SHOW UP FOR DAYS.
3. Bush's aides had to make him a DVD so he'd actually look at what was going on in NOLA.
4. Brownie was ill-equipped for the job.


And why were you determined to troll this thread into this subject just b/c of an offhand reference on my part?
 
Nobody was blaming Bush FOR Katrina, just his actions (or lack thereof) afterwards...
The APPEARANCE of lack of action. The fact was, the governor was responsible for calling for federal help, and delayed and dithered.

As soon as the call was made, federal help came.

1. the states rights types keep SAYING it wasn't the Feds responsibility.
2. They DIDN'T SHOW UP FOR DAYS.
3. Bush's aides had to make him a DVD so he'd actually look at what was going on in NOLA.
4. Brownie was ill-equipped for the job.


And why were you determined to troll this thread into this subject just b/c of an offhand reference on my part?
While not directed at me, question remains, why didn't Obama do better with the smaller issues of GA and Somoa?
 
Back on topic.

1) Is it better to let the dollar slide so you can pay off your debt more quickly and be more competitive with exports and pay higher oil prices; or
2) Keep the dollar strong?

I think there is an argument for the former because it will lead to the latter eventually anyway.
 
Back on topic.

1) Is it better to let the dollar slide so you can pay off your debt more quickly and be more competitive with exports and pay higher oil prices; or
2) Keep the dollar strong?

I think there is an argument for the former because it will lead to the latter eventually anyway.

Let the dollar go, let US go to second class statehood. You and others will agree, the world will be better off. Perhaps the US will be too.
 
Nobody was blaming Bush FOR Katrina, just his actions (or lack thereof) afterwards...
Rather than the governor and mayor, whose actions actually caused the disaster post-storm.
But the same thing didn't happen in MS. Why is it Bush never gets kudos for the great job he did in MS?

Probably because the state govt in MS had a handle on it. If a State gov is incapable of action, then the fed should step in straight away...
Unbfortunately (for your argument) that isn't how the federal system works.
And imagine the hue and cry if Bush had just sent people to NO without the request of the governor. It would be "Pres Bush tears up the Constitution!" all over again.
The left will not let Bush win. Fortunately his reputation will improve over time, just as Truman's did.
 
1. the states rights types keep SAYING it wasn't the Feds responsibility.
2. They DIDN'T SHOW UP FOR DAYS.
3. Bush's aides had to make him a DVD so he'd actually look at what was going on in NOLA.
4. Brownie was ill-equipped for the job.
I don't know where you're getting this garbage. You claimied ignorance of a topic earlier, you should do that on this one as well.

Read up: it's nothing like what you have apparently been told. ESPECIALLY your #2 and #3.

Criticism of government response to Hurricane Katrina - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
And why were you determined to troll this thread into this subject just b/c of an offhand reference on my part?
What fucking difference does it make? You don't have to reply to my posts.

Adding some substance to what you term a "troll thread" isn't a bad deal. I reserve the option to correct partisan bullshit wherever I see it.
 
Back on topic.

1) Is it better to let the dollar slide so you can pay off your debt more quickly and be more competitive with exports and pay higher oil prices; or
2) Keep the dollar strong?

I think there is an argument for the former because it will lead to the latter eventually anyway.

Let the dollar go, let US go to second class statehood. You and others will agree, the world will be better off. Perhaps the US will be too.

you should have thought about the second-class statehood thing when bush was cutting taxes for the rich while running a two-front war of choice.
 
Back on topic.

1) Is it better to let the dollar slide so you can pay off your debt more quickly and be more competitive with exports and pay higher oil prices; or
2) Keep the dollar strong?

I think there is an argument for the former because it will lead to the latter eventually anyway.

Hmm, let's see. Maybe we need massive inflation in this country. That was sooo productive during hte 1970s.
We need to:
Cut federal spending and rein in the deficit
Raise interest rates and reduce the money supply in the near future
Lower the corporate tax rate to be more competitive with other countries
Eliminate Sarbanes-Oxley
Negotiate free trade treaties with more countries, starting with Columbia.
 

Forum List

Back
Top