Author Topic: Interesting point of view (Read 1368 times)

Sixpence · « **Reply #45 on:** October 01, 2003, 07:58:44 AM »

We were spending 50 billion a year securing the middle east long before the attack. Did it prevent 9/11? Spending $$ and being over there caused it. Now we are going to start spending 87 billion a year. At what point to we start to realize that spending all this $$ isn't working. It's time to get the U.N. back in there and let the rest of the world(who are so vocal about being involved) start footing the bill.

Y'all make it sound like this is the first 87 billion we are spending. Add that to all the $$ we have spent the last 20 years and give me a total. The answer might raise an eyebrow.

Alot of working people are going to lose a son over there. I bet not one politician will.

Sabre · « **Reply #46 on:** October 01, 2003, 01:06:17 PM »

AKcurly, when you make a claim like that, it's your job to support it, not mine. Otherwise, I'll assume you're generalizing and pulling ideas out of the air. And yes, Congress does control the purse strings, and thus could take some credit for supporting Reagan's leadership in confronting the USSR head-on, rather than through appeasement...if the democrats hadn't been dragged screaming and kicking behind like they were (my recollection, though perhaps clouded by the passage of time). I often have to stand over my 5-year old to make him clean his room. When that's the case, my praise is significantly less than when he goes in and does it on his own;).

AKIron · « **Reply #47 on:** October 01, 2003, 01:23:37 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Thrawn
*sigh*

It might help your case if the US actually took Alaska instead of purhcasing it from Russia.

Riiiight.

And they'll be reading in the history books in a hundred years or so how we bought the middle east too.

AKcurly · « **Reply #48 on:** October 01, 2003, 03:14:41 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sabre
AKcurly, when you make a claim like that, it's your job to support it, not mine. Otherwise, I'll assume you're generalizing and pulling ideas out of the air. And yes, Congress does control the purse strings, and thus could take some credit for supporting Reagan's leadership in confronting the USSR head-on, rather than through appeasement...if the democrats hadn't been dragged screaming and kicking behind like they were (my recollection, though perhaps clouded by the passage of time).

It's not my job. I simply reported a fact. I have no interest in convincing anyone of its accuracy. If you wish to consider my remarks inaccurate, that's ok with me.

You didn't mention your age but you mention having a 5 year old. Were you beyond adolescence when Reagan was president? I'm not trying to be insulting, but frequently, young kiddos don't read newspapers. Perhaps you were a teenager?

The budget deficit issue was widely reported by all newspapers and magazines of that time period.

The military service issue was really gross and again, widely reported. I'll give you the gist of the story.

First, the preliminaries. I spent 3 years in the USN teaching mathematics and physics to officers of foreign navies. This was in the late 60s, early 70s. No one shot a bullet at me. I was in Memphis, Tenn the entire period.

I had a lot of friends that went to Vietnam that didn't return. Willingly or unwillingly, they went to a place where folks were shooting bullets at them. They didn't desert, they didn't frag their officiers and many died. Maybe it was a stupid war, dunno, but they still went and died.

When Reagan was President he was widely quoted as saying that he was part of the US Army outfit that made first contact with Auswitz.

That was a lie. He never left Hollywood. He made movies for the US Army. I thought it was obscene that he would report that he went in harms way --- a place where other men shot bullets at you.

Finally, look at your sentence starting with "And yes, Congress ..."

You can either give credit to congress or Reagan for the military deficits of that period. It is illogical to fault congress (for the deficit) and praise Reagan for the results. That would be called "having your cake and eating it too."

If you really want to track down the budget reference, you can either examine historical budgets (they're out there) or search old newspapers files. Both will have the figures.

curly

JBA · « **Reply #49 on:** October 01, 2003, 03:24:25 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKcurly
Don't talk to me about democrats spending.

The budget deficit during the Reagan administration exceeded the total of all previous presidents.

Let me make sure you understand what I'm saying. Take the budget deficit of George Washington and add that to the budget deficit of John Adams and so on. Right up through Woodrow Wilson (WW1) and FDR (WW2) and Harry Truman (KW) and Johnson/Nixon (Vietnam) up to and including Jimmy Carter, the president preceding Ron Regan. The sum of all those budget dificits was smaller than the deficit generated by Reagan.

curly

The only true measurement of deficits is as a percentage of GDP and right now it is were it always is after a recession at 4.5%. The national average is 4.2% GDP after all recessions we have ever had. Further more Reagan was trying to out spend the USSR and force their bankruptcy, which he succeeded in doing along with depressed oil values, thanks to the Saudi’s.

AKIron · « **Reply #50 on:** October 01, 2003, 03:35:02 PM »

Curly, while not NEARLY as old as you, I am old enough to remember the "Reagan Years" quite well. I always knew that Reagan's contribution to the war effort was in making training films. I never heard the quote you ascribed to him 'till now.

I'm sure you realize that "he was widely quoted" isn't the same as you saying he said it. Lot of people didn't like him, you have any other evidence he actually lied about his service?

JBA · « **Reply #51 on:** October 01, 2003, 03:41:00 PM »

There was a black Senator or rep of something can't recall now but will look for it, who recived an award from the Jews communited, He has said he was at Auswitz for the liberation. Never proved by any records or witnesses. Maybe your thinking of him.

I remember Reagan and have read a bit about him, never heard that quote made by him.

midnight Target · « **Reply #52 on:** October 01, 2003, 04:10:01 PM »

Quote

When Reagan was President he was widely quoted as saying that he was part of the US Army outfit that made first contact with Auswitz.

I'm hardly a Reagan fan, but I gotta call BS on this one. Never happened as far as I can remember, nor as far as an extensive search of the internet can find.

AKcurly · « **Reply #53 on:** October 01, 2003, 05:09:12 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by midnight Target
I'm hardly a Reagan fan, but I gotta call BS on this one. Never happened as far as I can remember, nor as far as an extensive search of the internet can find.

Yeah midnight? Well, this one (unlike the budget issue) is very easy to find.

I well remember being outraged when Reagan said that.

Here's the text of his remarks and a URL. Of course, URLs prove nothing, but I read it, saw a hilarious report on the news (complete with Reagan's lips moving) and so a URL convinces me that I'm not suffering from dementia.

By the way, read the entire page. George W Bush is leading the pack.

Text of the remark:

The Liberator.
In November 1983, Reagan told visiting Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir that he had served as a photographer in a U.S. Army unit assigned to film Nazi death camps. He repeated the story to Simon Wiesenthal the following February. Reagan never visited or filmed a concentration camp; he spent World War II in Hollywood, making training films with the First Motion Picture Unit of the Army Air Corps.

URL:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2003/0309.mendacity-experts.html

I have many flaws. Prevarication isn't one of them.

curly

AKIron · « **Reply #54 on:** October 01, 2003, 05:16:00 PM »

I'm gonna hafta do some research on this one Curly.

"In November 1983, Reagan told visiting Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir that he had served as a photographer in a U.S. Army unit assigned to film Nazi death camps. He repeated the story to Simon Wiesenthal the following February. Reagan never visited or filmed a concentration camp; he spent World War II in Hollywood, making training films with the First Motion Picture Unit of the Army Air Corps."

This statement doesn't actually say Reagan lied. It implies it. It is possible Reagan said which unit he was assigned to without saying he filmed any Nazi death camps. There's so much spin in politics I'm gonna trust ya but verify.

Sixpence · « **Reply #55 on:** October 01, 2003, 05:19:08 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKcurly

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2003/0309.mendacity-experts.html

I have many flaws. Prevarication isn't one of them.

curly

That is too funny, I like the killer trees

AKIron · « **Reply #56 on:** October 01, 2003, 06:02:48 PM »

I can't find anything else to either support or disprove your link Curly. May have to concede that Reagan lied and if he did it is deplorable. However, to rank any president as a bigger liar than Bill (as did your reference) is ludicrous and definitely calls into question it's honesty.

AKcurly · « **Reply #57 on:** October 01, 2003, 06:27:35 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKIron
I can't find anything else to either support or disprove your link Curly. May have to concede that Reagan lied and if he did it is deplorable. However, to rank any president as a bigger liar than Bill (as did your reference) is ludicrous and definitely calls into question it's honesty.

You're letting your political opinions get in the way of open and honest judgment.

Was Bill a liar? Oh yeah, he was really skillful! And so is/was W. Bush, Reagan, HW Bush, Nixon, Roosevelt and probably every politician to hold public office (heh, didn't include Truman.)

I didn't fault Reagan for being a consummate liar. He was though. I faulted Reagan for the type of lie he told.

curly

AKIron · « **Reply #58 on:** October 01, 2003, 09:11:08 PM »

They didn't even mention one of Bill's biggest lies "...but I didn't inhale". You didn't believe that one didja? If ya did I got some prime swampla... er real estate in Forida for sale.

Of course Bill's biggest offenses weren't actually lies but his deeds, to name a couple, accepting campaign funds from the Chinese in exchange for technology and pardoning murderers as he slithered out of office.

I really couldn't care less how many blowjobs he got in the oval office though I did take great offense at electing someone who so thoroughly abused his office as governor.

AKcurly · « **Reply #59 on:** October 01, 2003, 09:56:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKIron
They didn't even mention one of Bill's biggest lies "...but I didn't inhale". You didn't believe that one didja? If ya did I got some prime swampla... er real estate in Forida for sale.

Of course Bill's biggest offenses weren't actually lies but his deeds, to name a couple, accepting campaign funds from the Chinese in exchange for technology and pardoning murderers as he slithered out of office.

I really couldn't care less how many blowjobs he got in the oval office though I did take great offense at electing someone who so thoroughly abused his office as governor.

Heh, hard to separate political opinion from facts. You keep ignoring the facts and throwing up political smoke.

I don't think you'll find a person on the planet who believes WC respected the truth (certainly not me!)

But I'm telling you, Ron Reagan's lies were far more reprehensible than anything that Clinton/Johnson/Kennedy ever did.

Evidently both Clinton & Kennedy had a fondness for young females. Johnson had a fondness for winning elections, even if it meant voting a few folks from the graveyard.

But none of them misrepresented their service (or lack of it) to their country. What Reagan did was a far greater disgrace to the office than anything "slick willie" did. And that bud isn't a political fact, it's just a plain old simple fact to all men and women who have served in the US military.

curly