Security Council accepts No Fly Zone

[captain morgan]

You answer my question first Avro. How is it possible for those without insurance to get any healthcare at all? I guess that all of the State funded hospitals are filled with uninsured people NOT getting healthcare.

They're is a reason why poorer people in the U.S. have a lower life expectency than richer people, guy.

Lifestyle and nutrition have a lot to do with that. The medical system can't solve years of poor decisions.

 

[Avro]

You answer my question first Avro. How is it possible for those without insurance to get any healthcare at all? I guess that all of the State funded hospitals are filled with uninsured people NOT getting healthcare.

Yes indeed....how?

I have no idea, I guess it's a utopia.

I'll have to rethink my whole opinion on health care.

 

[Colpy]

In a mad, futile attempt to guide this thread back to the topic at hand:


DEATH TO TYRANTS!

I only wish we were bombing the crap out of Saudi Arabia as well.

 

[Icarus27k]

Lifestyle and nutrition have a lot to do with that. The medical system can't solve years of poor decisions.

I'm pretty sure not being able to get health care plays a really big role in reduced life expectency among the poor in the U.S. In fact, lifestyle and nutrition is kind of a part of medical care itself. I'm telling you, if you're a poor, uninsured sick person in some red state in the U.S., it's easy to see why you're going to die young. It's because you can't go to the doctor.

I guess that all of the State funded hospitals are filled with uninsured people NOT getting healthcare.

"All of the State funded hospitals". Yeah, all 168 of them in major cities and suburbs in 2002, that at that time, we're closing at an increasing rate because of the number of uncompensated care from treating uninsured people.

 

[Avro]

In a mad, futile attempt to guide this thread back to the topic at hand:


DEATH TO TYRANTS!

I only wish we were bombing the crap out of Saudi Arabia as well.

Yes, I already know you are an interventionalist.

Most neo-cons are.

I'd be happy to pack up and let them solve it on their own.

 

[captain morgan]

I'm pretty sure not being able to get health care plays a really big role in reduced life expectency among the poor in the U.S. In fact, lifestyle and nutrition is kind of a part of medical care itself. I'm telling you, if you're a poor, uninsured sick person in some red state in the U.S., it's easy to see why you're going to die young. It's because you can't go to the doctor.

"All of the State funded hospitals". Yeah, all 168 of them in major cities and suburbs in 2002, that at that time, we're closing at an increasing rate because of the number of uncompensated care from treating uninsured people.

Icarus... Colpy is right, this is the wrong thread for a healthcare discussion.

In a mad, futile attempt to guide this thread back to the topic at hand:


DEATH TO TYRANTS!

I only wish we were bombing the crap out of Saudi Arabia as well.

Suadi may have enormous problems if the democratization trend in the ME continues. I'll wager that your wishes will be realized from forces within Saudi and the ME itself.

 

[Avro]

Suadi may have enormous problems if the democratization trend in the ME continues. I'll wager that your wishes will be realized from forces within Saudi and the ME itself.

That is the way it should be.

The West has done more damage in babysitting than it has good.

 

[captain morgan]

That is the way it should be.

The West has done more damage in babysitting than it has good.

I couldn't agree more

 

[Avro]

I couldn't agree more

....and hell froze over.;-)

We have common ground and it pleases me.

 

[captain morgan]

Frightening... Ain't it?

 

[Avro]

Frightening... Ain't it?

Not really.

I like finding common ground with people.

 

[Icarus27k]

Icarus... Colpy is right, this is the wrong thread for a healthcare discussion.

Fine. Anyway, I've never said the U.S. engages in a war for oil, as someone accused me of saying earlier. Oil does play a significant role in some of the U.S.'s foreign relations (for example, with Saudi Arabia), but an actual war for natural resources I've never seen.

 

[Avro]

Fine. Anyway, I've never said the U.S. engages in a war for oil, as someone accused me of saying earlier. Oil does play a significant role in some of the U.S.'s foreign relations (for example, with Saudi Arabia), but an actual war for natural resources I've never seen.

Why give in?

The West has two interests in the Middle East and that is why we have proped up dictators no matter what they do to their own people.

Oil and Israel.

Take away both and we would treat them the same way we do Africa.

 

[Icarus27k]

Update on the news, according to CNN.com. The U.S. and British militaries have joined the French in action in Libya. The U.S. is apparently launching missiles. I assume, from warships.

Why give in?

The West has two interests in the Middle East and that is why we have proped up dictators no matter what they do to their own people.

Oil and Israel.

Take away both and we would treat them the same way we do Africa.

That seems to be more historical cases of oil motivating the U.S. In more recent times, ideology plays a larger role. I might say that all that capitialist ideology that was previously directed against communist countries has been redirected into this idea of freedom and democracy spreading across the ME.

 

[Avro]

That seems to be more historical cases of oil motivating the U.S. In more recent times, ideology plays a larger role. I might say that all that capitialist ideology that was previously directed against communist countries has been redirected into this idea of freedom and democracy spreading across the ME.

My bad, forgot about ideology.

Three reasons they are still there....oil being the main one.

 

[Icarus27k]

My bad, forgot about ideology.

Three reasons they are still there....oil being the main one.

"They are still there"? I assume you mean dictators supported by the West. But as for this current conflict, the Libyan thing, the main reason for it is not oil.

 

[Avro]

"They are still there"? I assume you mean dictators supported by the West. But as for this current conflict, the Libyan thing, the main reason for it is not oil.

Yes and yes.

 

[damngrumpy]

I understand there are a lot of people who want the Middle East Problem to go away.
It won't do that because of where it is located and there has been conflict there for
centuries. Roles have also been reversed, in the Middle Ages the Muslims were the
moderates and the Christians of Europe were in the fundamentalist mood and went
and staged crusades to covert or kill the Muslim enemy.
The fact is the problem is not going away and it will get even worse if left unattended.
So many people wanted Hitler to go away and he didn't. The west has been spoiled
over the last several decades, worshiping consumer goods, entertainment tonight
and digital games. Reality is waiting just around the corner. If we ignore this mess
we will be fighting for our lives just like we ignored Hitler and his friends at another time
in history. I don't like the idea of getting into a wider mess in places like Libya but the
fact is the line in the sand has to be drawn somewhere. Afghanistan should have been
tackled with more firepower and manpower much sooner and occupation should have
been the first concern for the west. Instead we installed a corrupt government that is
ineffective and has no loyal backing from its citizens.. Right cause, stupid procedure.
Iraq was a waste of time. Saddam was at least secular and had the backing of a large
portion of the population. He was not a Muslim crazy, a dictator yes, a nice man no,
but he was not crazy.
In Libya we have a nut case, being opposed by different factions which will fight each other
later for control of the country. We have the potential for an all out civil war that could in
fact spill over into other areas and create a wider conflict with even worse implications for
the world. The biggest mistake for the west was giving the regime there a chance to be
part of the modern world, they should have dealt with this twenty years ago.
I don't like the prospect of a war there, but I am more concerned about having to fight the
entire region at some future date because we did not deal with the matters before us at
this present time.

 

[BaalsTears]

Colonel Gadhafi vs. Generalissimo Obama.

Obama has called for Gadhafi's ouster. If that doesn't happen this will be interpreted as a major defeat for Obama, and through him for America. That will add fuel to the fire.

Either Gadhafi defeats the rebels outright, or he draws this conflict out and forces Obama to maintain his Libyan operations indefinitely in the knowledge that domestic politics in America will weaken Generalissimo Obama's ability to maintain operations. For Gadhafi this struggle is existential. But not so for Obama.

Obama and the Liberal Internationalists who have mounted this fool's errand need to be taught a lesson in Libya, just as the Neo-Cons were taught a lesson by Iraq. Obama is going to get the Bush treatment. God damn Obama to hell.

Edit: What vital Canadian national interest is at stake that would justify sending aircraft and personnel to the Maghreb? None that I can think of.

 

[Avro]

The French have come the rescue of the neo-con interventionalists, guess French Fries are back on the menu.