War Crimes?

[EagleSmack]

Toro is making a lot of sense. It is you that looks... well... sort of foolish and uninformed.

 

[Toro]

Honestly Toro you make no sense at all. If the 1991 war caused the reccession( which I don't buy) then why the rush to war in 2001? If high oil prices caused the reccesion why did double the cost of oil not do the same currently? If war causes high oil prices why did the price of oil drop during the invasion of Iraq? How do they make margerine taste like butter?

I'll tell you what it is on your part.....an excuse and it's funny watching you stumble and fumble all over yourself making them up.:lol:

However, like I said before, unlike the current conflict, the one in 1991 was not intentional. They were both an "oops" though.:lol:

Stop trying to convince me the 1991 gulf war was done on purpose because you're doing a great job so far.

I don't make sense to you because you don't understand it.

The reason why the price of oil dropped as the invasion was taking place in both wars because once the war started, the oil market discounted a victory for our side.

And, as I stated above, but which you seem to not have read or understood, the global economy is different now than it was in the early 1990s.

Whether or not you believe a recession occurred is irrelevant, as the people who know and lived through that time do understand what occurred. Nor do I care if I convince you. Perhaps you should go to your library and read the microfiche of Report on Business on the Financial Post on what was occurring during the Gulf War at the time.

 

[Avro]

I don't make sense to you because you don't understand it.

The reason why the price of oil dropped as the invasion was taking place in both wars because once the war started, the oil market discounted a victory for our side.

And, as I stated above, but which you seem to not have read or understood, the global economy is different now than it was in the early 1990s.

Whether or not you believe a recession occurred is irrelevant, as the people who know and lived through that time do understand what occurred. Nor do I care if I convince you. Perhaps you should go to your library and read the microfiche of Report on Business on the Financial Post on what was occurring during the Gulf War at the time.

Victory was predicted in the current war as well and look what happened. Plus the wars where different in how they were sold one baing hard the other being a pieace of cake.....figure out which one was which yourself as I reacll both vividly.

The causes for the reccession were as follows....

There was a price shock and stabalization policy that depressed real out put to limit inflation from the stock.

Monetary switched to a lower target for nominal growth.

Government purchases of goods a services declined.

Tax rates increased.

There was a negative shock to aggregate technology.

Regulatory changes reduced the intermediation provided by banks.

Changes in the world economy (ie Japan, colapse of the USSR) had a negative effect on U.S. output.

There was a spontaneous decline in consumption.

Your assumption that the U.S. avoided a war in the 1990's and rushed to one in 2001 bcause of different economic outlooks is ludicrous and your sad devotion to everything consevative exposes this fact.

It's okay to say it was a mistake, many brave cons have poked their head out of the box to say so.

However, I reiterate yet again the first gulf war was not intentional by the U.S. but a whoops-a-daisy by idiotic diplomate who oddly enough was born in Canada.

Maybe it was out fault.:lol:

 

[Logic 7]

Your totally wrong, Logic.

War was not good for the US economy. Soaring oil prices pushed the economy into recession in 1991 and ultimately cost Bush I his job.

That doesn't make any sense.

Ok, knowing there is millions of americans are working for those coorporations, no war would put them at risk to loose their job one day, since there is no bomb to sell to the us military anymore.

Or let's put it this way, war isnt good for the US economy, but it is still good for bush campaign contributors, that is something that you can't refute.

When was the last time the bush family ever cares about ordinary americans?

 

[EagleSmack]

Ok, knowing there is millions of americans are working for those coorporations, no war would put them at risk to loose their job one day, since there is no bomb to sell to the us military anymore.

Or let's put it this way, war isnt good for the US economy, but it is still good for bush campaign contributors, that is something that you can't refute.

When was the last time the bush family ever cares about ordinary americans?

Today... how is that?

 

[Avro]

Today... how is that?

If your going to ask a question try to make sense.

Being vague is intelectual cowardice.:roll:

 

[EagleSmack]

If your going to ask a question try to make sense.

Being vague is intelectual cowardice.:roll:

He asked when the last time the Bush's cared about ordinary Americans.

My answer was "Today... how is that?"

Boy are you reaching.

 

[Avro]

How does he do that? by ignoring the people of New Orleans yet again? I was there a few months ago, you should be ashamed of yoursleves.

 

[Avro]

Genious at work?

http://www.comedycentral.com/shows/the_daily_show/index.jhtml

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Yep, this guy knows the difference between sunni and Shia.

 

[EagleSmack]

Gaaaaa... New Orleans. Do you even have a clue of what New Orleans was? Do you think those neighborhoods were sets from "Leave it to Beaver". Those people were coddled and shipped all over the country to spread their crime. The crime rate of Houston sky rocketed with the influx of these people. They flooded the Cape where I live and scrounged the money that was given them on booze and strippers. A news crew followed the lot of them and had them on film boozing in public getting three squares a day. They moved into hotels and motels and destroyed them and wouldn't leave. The City of New Orleans was (is) a cesspool to begin with and the only safe place was Bourbon St.

Would you want them in your neighborhood?

 

[Avro]

Gaaaaa... New Orleans. Do you even have a clue of what New Orleans was? Do you think those neighborhoods were sets from "Leave it to Beaver". Those people were coddled and shipped all over the country to spread their crime. The crime rate of Houston sky rocketed with the influx of these people. They flooded the Cape where I live and scrounged the money that was given them on booze and strippers. A news crew followed the lot of them and had them on film boozing in public getting three squares a day. They moved into hotels and motels and destroyed them and wouldn't leave. The City of New Orleans was (is) a cesspool to begin with and the only safe place was Bourbon St.

Would you want them in your neighborhood?

So it's true then? Black people don't count. From what I saw it seems to be true.

 

[Curiosity]

New Orleans was a disaster ready to happen at the whim of nature

I wondered if you Avro would latch onto the racial argument rather than the real one - that the levees in Louisiana had been in disrepair for years and years - getting little or no attention from the State (which bears the prime responsibility) and no it has nothing to do with the people of New Orleans who are a mix of many ethnicities.

When a person cries 'race' within an argument - they are using basic chat rather than debate.

As with the bridge in which just collapsed these facilities are state-nurtured and monitored, whereas in New Orleans the local government was sitting on their hands waiting for the federal government to come in and repair the levees which were deterioriating for years long before the floods.

When you have a corrupt state and local government who do not keep up with the times, the media are quite willing to jump on the bandwagon as they did in this case and try to suck in the feds.

I guess people do not understand the responsibilities of state and national funding.

Avro for one so bright, why do you prefer to write inflammatory commentary rather than investigating and disussing the truth. You seem to fall in with the rhetorical patter of the suckers who think the government should be their mommy.

 

[Avro]

New Orleans was a disaster ready to happen at the whim of nature

As with the bridge in which just collapsed these facilities are state-nurtured and monitored, whereas in New Orleans the local government was sitting on their hands waiting for the federal government to come in and repair the levees which were deterioriating for years long before the floods.

When you have a corrupt state and local government who do not keep up with the times, the media are quite willing to jump on the bandwagon as they did in this case and try to suck in the feds.

I guess people do not understand the responsibilities of state and national funding.

Avro for one so bright, why do you prefer to write inflammatory commentary rather than investigating and disussing the truth. You seem to fall in with the rhetorical patter of the suckers who think the government should be their mommy.

Really?

This how other governments handle reality.....

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Their Levees - Our Levees
[/FONT]
​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
Here's how the British hold back the waters from flooding London:

And the Dutch solution to protecting an entire nation that mostly rests below sea level:

The Italians are defending their city on the sea, Venice:

And...
Here's how the richest, most powerful and technologically advanced
nation on earth protected against the long-forecasted flooding of New Orleans:

None of witch was done at the local level.​

[/FONT]

 

[Curiosity]

Avro - what is your point? That other nations are far ahead of the U.S. in levee management? I would not disagree with that for a moment - the state and fed governments seems more interested in maintaining surface highways and seem to forget about crossings, bridges, and water abatement... but that would be up to the state to continually monitor, requesting funding and have assessments done on a regular basis for maintenance and repair.

What does this have to do with you on a personal basis Avro? Do you have loved ones in danger living in the U.S.?

Or are you just on a mission to focus all you can on your dislike of the U.S. as a nation.

Isn't it good you are not living here. It should be a happy moment for you.

 

[Avro]

The levees were the responsiblity of the army corps of engineers who said the levees were in state of disrepair to the deaf ears of the federal government.

Other less rich nations could protect themselves why not the rich United States?

 

[Curiosity]

Well Avro I ask again: What has this to do with you personally - to get you in such a twist?

 

[Avro]

Well Avro I ask again: What has this to do with you personally - to get you in such a twist?

It was in relation to the claim of GWB caring about Americans, I've seen his caring the big easy and cried......literally.

My brother inlaw has family in the area with marraige and it hurts him to see the surfferring. seriously go there, in most parts it's like visiting a third world country.

 

[Toro]

The causes for the reccession were as follows....

There was a price shock and stabalization policy that depressed real out put to limit inflation from the stock.

Monetary switched to a lower target for nominal growth.

Government purchases of goods a services declined.

Tax rates increased.

There was a negative shock to aggregate technology.

Regulatory changes reduced the intermediation provided by banks.

Changes in the world economy (ie Japan, colapse of the USSR) had a negative effect on U.S. output.

There was a spontaneous decline in consumption.

Your assumption that the U.S. avoided a war in the 1990's and rushed to one in 2001 bcause of different economic outlooks is ludicrous and your sad devotion to everything consevative exposes this fact.

It's okay to say it was a mistake, many brave cons have poked their head out of the box to say so.

That's odd, considering I supported Democrats the past four elections.

Causes of the 1990 recession.

Published by the the Federal Reserve

Pessimistic consumers, the debt accumulations of the 1980s, the jump in oil prices after Iraq invaded Kuwait, a credit crunch induced by overzealous banking regulators, and attempts by the Federal Reserve to lower the rate of inflation all have been cited as causes of the recession.

And

When the model was used to identify the basic disturbances that might have caused the 1990 recession, three points emerged from the analysis. First, while the timing of the downturn in July 1990 was clearly related to the loss of consumer confidence and business confidence at the time of the Gulf crisis, the economy had already significantly weakened, peaking relative to trend over a year earlier.

Wanna keep arguing?

 

[Toro]

The levees were the responsiblity of the army corps of engineers who said the levees were in state of disrepair to the deaf ears of the federal government.

Other less rich nations could protect themselves why not the rich United States?

I completely agree with this.

However, its not all Bush's fault.

Louisiana may be the most corrupt state in the union. For example, a million dollars in funds that were meant for the levies were used by local officials to entertain at the Super Bowl.

 

[Avro]

I completely agree with this.

However, its not all Bush's fault.

Louisiana may be the most corrupt state in the union. For example, a million dollars in funds that were meant for the levies were used by local officials to entertain at the Super Bowl.

All?

I can agree with that.

The fault is at the feet of many.