The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
another WAR 2003 Virtual Instrument Plugins
Old 1st April 2003
  #511
Lives for gear
 
Ruphus's Avatar
 

Quote:
I believe America gives out more money in foreign aid than any other country in the world, foots more of the UN bill than anyone, plus perhaps the World Bank and the IMF too.
Just for the record, relatively to its gross national product America is among the very last ones of the western states with its foreign aid spendings.
The US have suspended their part of contributes to the UNO for decades and came back with a fraction only by making stipulations.
And about the world bank it seems worth to study what they are actually for.
Old 1st April 2003
  #512
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Ruphus
Just for the record, relatively to its gross national product America is among the very last ones of the western states with its foreign aid spendings.
I saw this retort coming a mile away as soon as Jon posted. Standard fare for America bashers is the line about per capita foreign aid. I know, I know, for you the American glass is always half empty, never half full.

Regardless, in the year 2002, the United States gave out more foreign aid than any other country on the planet. You can do that on a lower per capita basis than others when your economy is several times larger than theirs. Do the math. More money to people in need is more money, whatever your per capita complaints may be.

Do we get any credit for giving all this money away to poorer countries? No. You're too busy ferreting out any negative aspect in keeping with your anti-American agenda. If our economy was the size of Chad's, but we gave more per capita than we do now, do you think that would yield better or worse results for foreign aid recipients?

Nevermind that Germany, Canada, Japan and a host of other countries have had no need for much military spending of their own, since we have footed the bill to keep them safe for decades. Who gets called as soon as N Korea threatens Japan? Who spent untold billions keeping the USSR from making Western Europe look like Eastern Europe? The USA. But then, we get damned for spending money on our military.

Canada has been a great friend and ally with the US for many decades now, to mutual benefit. I have a number of Canadian friends, both in Canada and the US. But the honest truth is, due to the liberal Canadian administrations of late, the entire Canadian military would be hard pressed to take on the LAPD at this point. Germany, much less of a friend to the US, exists in a similar situation.

Such is the benefit of having your military protection provided by someone else. Then, you can spend your money on other things while belittling the US as a hobby. Maybe we should have billed you......nah, you couldn't afford it. Seriously. No problem. We could.


Regards,
Brian T
Old 1st April 2003
  #513
Lives for gear
 
Ruphus's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by littledog
Ruphus:

While your 14 point plan for utopia is obviously thoughtful and an honest attempt to create a fair society, I'm not sure i'd want to live in it. Even though I'm no where near your $5 million limit!

A society that is based on censorship of independent and creative thought (to serve the greater good, of course!) is very troubling. Who decides and enforces the morality? Does the majority have a complete tyranny over the minority?

Many of the great advances in both arts and sciences were made by people whom the majority considered outrageous or antisocial. Like Copernicus or Wilhelm Reich.

So while I understand your distaste at movies that glorify violience, perhaps the answer is education and free exchange of information and ideas, rather than censorship.

If the idea of censorship is so easily embraced on a bulletin board of "artists", I really fear for our cultural (and political) future.
Hey little dog,

I hear you there.
But, you see, homo saphiens is a social creature who only became what it is through interaction. This includes rules. We anyway live under rules, some even much more limiting than what I mentioned and some silly and unjust.

Since the **** period some habits are overdone. So whenever one might mention some kind of rule ore even only a definition it is received like dictatorship from a pseudo liberal point of view.
( not meant in any bad personal way )

Pseudo liberal, because in the same time crying circumstances are very naturally acccepted.

"A society that is based on censorship of independent and creative thought (to serve the greater good, of course!) is very troubling. Who decides and enforces the morality? Does the majority have a complete tyranny over the minority?"

Nobody said anything against independent and creative thoughts. I ask only for a border where thirds interests start getting restricted. That is all and I think very legitimate. Isn´t it?

Morality:
Morality is an artificial product anyways, founded and misused by church and rulers until today. Stupidity and dependent thinking grow on it.
What we need is ethics.
Autonomous conclusion grows on that.

Complete tyranny over the minority?
I believe that with the thinking habits we live, we completely underestimate the space left for everybody when majority would be respected.
And lastly look to what we have now, when a minority is respected instead. People that tell their shipbuilders that they ought to regularly invent something to make the next yacht more expensive, as it must get of higher value than the one of the neighbour / competitor with its 150 mio$ ship. ( They even start putting granite tables in there nowadays. Think of what idioty ...) - While in the same time with their greediness they cause so much trouble and destruction that you know of.

"So while I understand your distaste at movies that glorify violience, perhaps the answer is education and free exchange of information and ideas, rather than censorship."

Yes, rules are only there until their context is internalized. But without an aproximate basis first there would be absolutely no chance for free exchange of information.
Free information is what is feared most of all from or current dictators. And they would never ever let go by themselves. We live in a circle.
Because of unatural sociological state based on ecological enforcements people grow up unsatisfied and with compensating attitudes for the rest of their lifes. This again brings pathological greed pushing modern slavery which again results in insufficiant parency and so forth.

Only without the out-of-hand-profitting and with that sabotaging individuals and their influence free exchange can become possible.

Consider that it is not even only about fatal posession at bounding worlds resources and disposal in a few hands, but also unimaginable sabotaging in order to keep the common flow.

Already with todays technology we could have paradise on earth without question ( not to imagine what we had if possibilities were developed that were not because given circles would had needed rebuilding = solar energy, recycling, and some patents of a few that even I know of that would be groundbraking ).
And one could forget about all that moral rubbish according to which todays inefficiency would be indispensable for decent human beings. ( Like that guy who mentioned Bush rgoing to bed early and getting up early. Hehehe heh So what? Except morality of nonesense?)
People would be supplied efficiently, would need only little time of pecuniary work, weren´t distracted from themselves and their social environment and not fooled to be slaves and had the personal time they need to develop what from evolutionary capacity is there, but not in use as it is.

Don´t tell me you love to go for often underdemanding work that mostly gives you nothing and is organized suiting to a hundred years ago. Stay there for 40 hours a week and back at home often not even knowing how to pay your daily bills.
Don´t you say you think it natural that billions of people are crazy about love ( look in our culture products. Almost nothing but "love, love,love" ) while they hardly ever learn what that can be like. Majority meanwhile can´t even stay together with a partner for more than 3 months. Not to speak of big families, which would be necessary for empathy development, as you need association with distant mentalities like old people, handicaped and animals.
And I know that you are disturbed with the fact that even that little of your material world is stolen from underdeveloped societies.

I believe you would love to live in my society. You would be lucky in a now unknown way and not even while others suffer.



Utopia is not easy to reach, but great to arrive and it has no alternative. The funny thing is that what we call reality actually is the ( perverse ) paradoxum, while what we name utopia is just what suits to our logical abilities.

Unfortunately though, it will very likely not happen and in a few decades our only partners left over might be rats and cockroaches. Provided the earth would be still in one piece at all.

Time? I think to see that we have none under the circumstances we ignore.

Greets,

Ruphus
Old 1st April 2003
  #514
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally posted by BrianT


Canada has been a great friend and ally with the US for many decades now, to mutual benefit. I have a number of Canadian friends, both in Canada and the US. But the honest truth is, due to the liberal Canadian administrations of late, the entire Canadian military would be hard pressed to take on the LAPD at this point. Germany, much less of a friend to the US, exists in a similar situation.

Such is the benefit of having your military protection provided by someone else. Then, you can spend your money on other things while belittling the US as a hobby. Maybe we should have billed you......nah, you couldn't afford it. Seriously. No problem. We could.


Regards,
Brian T [/B]
Whoa Whoa whoa, just where were you guys when Canadians were dying in France in both world wars, for years before you guys got off your duffs and finally entred the war. Oh well we understand that was OK everyone knew Hitler had weapons. You guys have protected us from squat and in fact you have only used us as a potential battleground in your military strategy, so you wouldn't have to get your own shores dirty. This info comes straight from American sources interviewed in the last few days. Canada is a convenient buffer zone I believe is an accurate paraphrasing of his words.
We are not particularly interested in having a huge military and the truth beknown it's probably not necessary if you don't run around the world pissing folks off. There's a distinct reason why my american friends sew canadian flags on their backpacks when travelling abroad. Now if you want to step onto a hockey rink we'll be happy to whip your asses again, but that's about as violent as we like to get. How many dictators has Canada set up around the world to protect it's interests, how many times have we stepped into countries and over threw the regime 'cause we didn't like it's politics? Zero my friend, and despite your example were not about to try. And you know what. we're proud of that fact and in the last polls to come out 80% of Canadians were proud of their government for not becoming involved in your little adventure. It seems like your becoming more than a little defensive Brian and you're starting to sound a whole lot like the ugly American. I've been through the entire list of posts here and I don't see anyone attacking the American public. lots of questioning of the twits you elect or don't elect as may be the case, a little questioning of your arrogance as a country perhaps. But your posts are starting to justify that questioning.
Here in Canada you have used countervailing duties to destroy our softwood lumber industry throwing thousands of Canadians out of work, simply because you couldn't compete. You have used the courts to stop Canada from banning a known carcinagin (sp?) contained in Gasoline, under our so called free trade agreement. You wouldn't particapate in the world movement to ban land mines that are maiming hundreds of thousand of folks every year. You reneged on Nuclear proliferation treaties, so your fearless leadership could bilk your tax payers out of billions more in secret military spending. You are trying to open up reserves in Alaska for oil exploration, that will seriously impact wildlife movement over the entire Arctic. You have backed out of Kyoto. All these things were done not for principal or to promote general welfare in the world but to protect the profit margins of american business. And you want the rest of the world to admire you as leaders? If the LAPD were operating here in Canada most of them would be in jail by now and that's the way we like it. Take care Logan
Old 1st April 2003
  #515
Lives for gear
 
Ruphus's Avatar
 

Quote:
Who spent untold billions keeping the USSR from making Western Europe look like Eastern Europe?
Harharhar!!!

This is the best joke off all times!
The reason for the UDSSRs way of international politics and its over stressed arming was reasoned by whom?
Oh yeah, I think it was Santa Claus.


Us politics curled Gorbatchov into breaking up the UDSSR with promising him to become a big industrial leader and not only that Gorbi still is only on small budget.
The westernizing of the UDSSR has become the worst example of all in history.
The country has been completely robbed by mafia folks. Almost entire goods that belonged to the state have been stolen and manouevered into a few hands with shoulder tapin Americans ( as tapping ensures some gold dust ).
Majority has last time sufferd like now under the Zar.
And what please to you call that again!?

Hehehehe!!! heh

Don´t take it personally, but you can be funny, man.
Honestly!

Ruphus
Old 1st April 2003
  #516
jon
Capitol Studios Paris
 
jon's Avatar
 

Gorbi had to reform the USSR because the economic and financial condition had gotten to the point where the system was collapsing from within. Graft and corruption and the communist system had deteriorated the basic infrastructure of the USSR to a pitiful state. Far too much of the weak economy's resources were wasted or allocated to the arms race with the US for the system to survive...and so the system, weak and unproductive and grafted from within, collapsed.

I lived in Russia in 1994 and 1995, co-organizing the first large-scale commercial stadium and arena tours in that country after the fall of the Soviet system...acts like Joe Cocker, Patricia Kaas, Modern Talking, Chris Rea, Deep Purple, East17, Brian May, Elton John, Pavarotti, Chris Norman, Charles Aznavour, Sash!, David Bowie, Julio Iglesias, Run DMC, Bryan Ferry, Henry Rollins Band, Roxette, etc...and toured extensively throughout all of the CIS during 1996-1999.

During that time, I witnessed first-hand the chaos that occurs when people are given freedom but without the checks and balances of basic responsibility and respect for the law. Russia's lurch toward free market capitalism quickly became a jungle in which the only law that mattered was money and force. Everything and everyone could be bought -- or killed.

The Russian elites engaged in a power and property grab of a massive scale during the first 5-7 years of perestroika...similar to the one in America in the late 19th centry. The survivors of this process, once they had accumulated as much property as they could and found a place in the sun, turned their attention to building a legal system to protect and perennize their gains. This whole process is probably still going on, but it gets slowly more civilized with time.

I won't even go into the massive theft / transfer of wealth that occurred via the ruble devaluation of the 90s. That's another story.
Old 1st April 2003
  #517
Schnert
Guest
Quote:
Originally posted by BrianT
Regardless, in the year 2002, the United States gave out more foreign aid than any other country on the planet. You can do that on a lower per capita basis than others when your economy is several times larger than theirs. Do the math. More money to people in need is more money, whatever your per capita complaints may be.

Do we get any credit for giving all this money away to poorer countries? No. You're too busy ferreting out any negative aspect in keeping with your anti-American agenda. If our economy was the size of Chad's, but we gave more per capita than we do now, do you think that would yield better or worse results for foreign aid recipients?
Helping people in need is a good thing, but I don't really understand this "math". A family of 50 has $50, and another family of 2 has $2. The family of 50 gives this poor bugger $2, and the smaller family gives him $1. Is the larger family the one to applaud since it provided more help?
Old 1st April 2003
  #518
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Schnert
Helping people in need is a good thing, but I don't really understand this "math". A family of 50 has $50, and another family of 2 has $2. The family of 50 gives this poor bugger $2, and the smaller family gives him $1. Is the larger family the one to applaud since it provided more help?
I don't know. I suppose you would need to ask the recipient of the money if they would prefer $1 or $2. They might not really care where it came from.


Regards,
Brian T
Old 1st April 2003
  #519
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Ruphus
Harharhar!!!

Hehehehe!!! heh

Don´t take it personally, but you can be funny, man.
Honestly!

Ruphus
No problem. And don't take this personally, but you appear to be cynical person who finds great pleasure in looking for the negative in any situation.

May your life become more joyful in the future.


Regards,
Brian T
Old 1st April 2003
  #520
Lives for gear
 

Logan,

All I brought up about Canada was the deterioration of the military, *after* noting the mutual friendship between our countries and mentioning my many Canadian friends. Canada's underfunded and neglected military is an issue that many Canadians are worried about themselves. I can link you to Canadian originated news stories if you like.

And that makes me the ugly American?

Reread my post. Reread yours. Who sounds defensive? Who sounds like they're attacking the other's country, wholesale?

The ugly Canadian?


Regards,
Brian T
Old 1st April 2003
  #521
Schnert
Guest
Quote:
Originally posted by BrianT
I don't know. I suppose you would need to ask the recipient of the money if they would prefer $1 or $2. They might not really care where it came from.


Regards,
Brian T
Oh come on.....

They sure don't care where it came from, but most of them don't recieve anything at all. They might have though, if us rich countries were willing to share. Your leaders are not very willing, but then, they might have spent it all on arms
Old 1st April 2003
  #522
Gear Head
 

US hating?

Ahh, so much happens in the space of a few hours. Not so long ago Brian T was accusing the anti-war elements of US-hating/US-bashing--something like that. Before I could get a reply in the grounds had shifted again. But I'm gonna reply anyway.

First, being pissed off that the US has 3% of the world's population & uses 25% of the world's fossil fuels does not make one a US hater. In fact, quite often it goes hand in hand with being a US lover. Wanting a clean and beautiful US for future generations is not, so far as I can tell, an act of hatred.

Now, for those who wish to say that opposition to this war is all about having a vendetta against Bush or against the US, here are some reasons for being opposed to Bush's handling of this war that have nothing to do with stealing elections.

1. Decided to go to war before attempting any diplomatic solution.

2. When diplomacy came into play, it was more about brinksmanship than statesmanship, and was destined to fail since Bush was already dead set on going to war.

3. The Bush admin's PR campaign for the war to a large extent involved tying Saddam Hussein to al Qaeda. These links are tenuous at best, but that didn't stop 'em from selling the war as an extension of the whole 9/11 terrorist hunt.

4. The Bush admin claimed repeatedly that they had certain knowledge of Iraq's WMD stockpiles and yet seemed incapable of sharing any of this knowledge with UN weapons inspectors.

5. One of the key pieces in the admin's case against Iraq, a report that Iraq had attempted to buy weapons grade uranium in Africa, turned out to be falsified. (by whom it was falsified we don't know.)

6. Though the only legitimate authority for waging this war would come from the UN, the US dodged the UN when the time came to decide whether or not to go to war. Like it or not, the decision really belonged to the UN and not the US.

7. As to the wisdom of their military strategy: it would appear that the Bush admin made the gross miscalculation that an enemy of Saddam is a friend of the US. How very American of them.
Old 1st April 2003
  #523
Lives for gear
 

Re: US hating?

Quote:
Originally posted by hodad
[B
First, being pissed off that the US has 3% of the world's population & uses 25% of the world's fossil fuels does not make one a US hater. [/B]
I suppose you think that powering the world's largest economy (by an astounding margin, roughly equivalent to the next largest 4 nations *combined*) should use no more energy per capita than, say, Belize?

Would it shock you to learn that the US percentage usage of total world energy is about the same as it's total percentage of the world's GDP? Completely in line with the percentage of economic *output* it produces. Or are you more comfortable expressing it in only the most negative of terms?

How about a little credit for a mere 3% of the world's population kickin' out 20+ percent of the world's total efforts.

Sorry if we use an equivalent % of the world's energy to do it.


Regards,
Brian T
Old 1st April 2003
  #524
Lives for gear
 
malice's Avatar
 

Quote:
the entire Canadian military would be hard pressed to take on the LAPD at this point
uh, Brian ...doesn't it sound like a failure of your national security policy so far ???



malice
Old 1st April 2003
  #525
Lives for gear
 
littledog's Avatar
 

Hey Ruphus:

Good talking to you as always. If you ever get to Boston let's hook up! I haven't been to Germany since 1993, and I wasn't in Berlin, just Munich.

We could debate the finer points of your post forever, (anarchist utopia vs. socialist utopia, etc.), but when you said:

"Unfortunately though, it will very likely not happen and in a few decades our only partners left over might be rats and cockroaches. Provided the earth would be still in one piece at all."

... that really makes the rest of the argument pale in comparison. The world is threatening to soon reach the state where every tiny government run by who knows what lunatic dictator might have a nuclear weapon or two. And suicidal terrorists will be slipping across the borders with A-bombs in their backpacks.

Assigning historical blame for that situation will certainly be a lot easier than finding a real solution. I sorrow for the next generations...
Old 1st April 2003
  #526
Gear Head
 

Gdpp

Brian t sez:
Would it shock you to learn that the US percentage usage of total world energy is about the same as it's total percentage of the world's GDP?



Brian--
Is this why it's okay that the average fuel economy of our nation's vehicle fleet keeps going down? Sorry. Productivity and waste do not go hand in hand. Did you get this line from an oil company press release?
Old 1st April 2003
  #527
Lives for gear
 

Re: Gdpp

Quote:
Originally posted by hodad

Brian--
Is this why it's okay that the average fuel economy of our nation's vehicle fleet keeps going down? Sorry. Productivity and waste do not go hand in hand. Did you get this line from an oil company press release?

What car do you drive at this point? How many mpg? How many miles a day do you drive?

Just curious.

Regards,
Brian T
Old 1st April 2003
  #528
Lives for gear
 
Ruphus's Avatar
 

Littledog,

You bet I really would if I came along Boston.
I am taken with your awareness and I would really love to exchange thoughts with a spirit who obviously spends energy for the matters instead of for conserving any position.

As I am not travelling in the near future though ( am currently putting every penny into gear, seriously G.A.S. infected, while far, far away from 5 Million bucks heh ...) maybe we could correspond per e-mail from time to time. I would certainly like to.

In general BTW, I would love travelling in the US. Been there twice ( first time California, second time mainly NY ) and when at the second time driving around 5000 miles I fell in love with the rocky mountains when crossing them at right angles.
From then up I thought I would die for to one day cross them length side per motor bike. A dream ...

And through the Internet and the music meanwhile there are a couple of friends in different locations one could step in to say hello. But for the time being it will only be daydreaming.

Yours ,

Ruphus
Old 1st April 2003
  #529
Lives for gear
 
Ruphus's Avatar
 

BrianT,

All that know me would very certainly confirm that I am whatsoever, but definitly not cynical.

You might be right though about the fact that I am often feeling sorrow.
That´s the way it gets when you bear to seriously inform yourself and that´s what I do. Maybe less for masturbating, but because it can get you hooked and you can´t stop consuming even if you want to.
Years ago I decided to stop reading, because it brings me down, but I just couldn´t.
BTW, I also do celebrate good news ( like for instance that the ozon hole seems to shrink, which you might have missed ), but the relationship between good news and bad news is very unbalanced. This is not due to my personal prefernces. Just in the opposite way.

But you might think of me the way it suits you if it helps to keep the reception the way desired.

Ruphus

PS: I bet blind that Hodad is not driving one of those silly polluting tracks that are so fashionable now in the US. ( BTW, wonder which movie inspired that fashion Crocodile Dundee or which one?) Let´s see what he says.
Old 1st April 2003
  #530
Lives for gear
 
Midlandmorgan's Avatar
 

Quote:
Would it shock you to learn that the US percentage usage of total world energy is about the same as it's total percentage of the world's GDP?
Herein lies a big problem...comparative analysis standing without relavence....it would appear that many people here are now chanstising the US because of our alleged affluence. I really don't care what someone else's MGP is, of that my electric consumption is 3 times higher than yours...I can afford it; if you would like the same energy bill I have, then perhaps you should find a way to pay for it.

The really frightening aspect of many of the arguments here is their similarity to the pure socialist mantra of previous generations...in a perfect world, the things described about no one profiting off others and all that would be possible...but we don't live in a perfect world...there will ALWAYS be second-bests, ALWAYS be those losers in the race, ALWAYS be those who bypass the system, and ALWAYS be an element that says"you have something and I don't; so instead of me working to get what you have I am going to complain so what you have is taken away." This sounds harsh, but it does have some validity.

From the Utopian perspective, no one would ever get rich because of their hard work, innovation, and so forth...the bad side to that is that since the motivation for success has been all but removed, nothing would ever get done. When we record whatever projects, do we do so for the enlightenment of the art form, or do we do so expecting some sort of compensation? Couldn't we make a recording using a boombox? That way, no one's work would sound any better or any worse than anyone else's.

Stop critizing me and fellow countrymen because of the choices I have made, based on my wants, needs, desires, and my freedom to choose and ability to pay for from my perceived affluence. How hypocritical is that! How many homeless people could you shelter in a 30X50 tracking room? How many hungry children could you feed if you sold you esoteric mics and bought food for the needy?

Yet, alas, the world seems to forget just how much sacrifice each American makes to feed, shelter, and protect others less fortunate. Before the world bitches about the US not spending enough, open your own damn wallets and spread some of your 'wealth.'
Old 1st April 2003
  #531
Lives for gear
 
Ruphus's Avatar
 

Quote:
The really frightening aspect of many of the arguments here is their similarity to the pure socialist mantra of previous generations...in a perfect world, the things described about no one profiting off others and all that would be possible...but we don't live in a perfect world...there will ALWAYS be ...
What sounds like previous to you is grounded on actual state and doesn´t care for how it sounds.
And while it arises from current facts your talk is the one which is stereotype and unreflected.

Where do you know all those "always" from? From the past? Proposals are made for the future. You are obviously just adapting clishés without making own concentrated thoughts.

And believing that your wealth would be grounded on any kind or quantity of work is contempt against the majority in the underdeveloped world ( and in yours too ) who work in a hard way like you very likely have not even an idea of how it would feel while they get miserly rewarded.

Finally noone wants to take anything from you. Except that you would be far overpaid while simultaneously others are cheated. Which again might be though.

Ruphus

PS: To interpret critics on exploitation as just envy of those who would not possess shows the simplistic path you use to defend associative idleness.
Old 1st April 2003
  #532
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally posted by BrianT
Logan,

All I brought up about Canada was the deterioration of the military, *after* noting the mutual friendship between our countries and mentioning my many Canadian friends. Canada's underfunded and neglected military is an issue that many Canadians are worried about themselves. I can link you to Canadian originated news stories if you like.

And that makes me the ugly American?

Reread my post. Reread yours. Who sounds defensive? Who sounds like they're attacking the other's country, wholesale?

The ugly Canadian?


Regards,
Brian T
The point of my post was to put into perspective the ridiculous statement that you have defended or protected us, with a few points about how the american adminastration has adversely affected the welfare of Canadians. Some how it seems to me that when there are emphrical observations of things that the American Government does around the world that are only in the interests of American Business, some loyal americans retort with "you don't like us because were richer than you". Actually we don't give a rats ass, you couldn't pay me to live in an american city. I don't hate Americans I don't hate Iraqis. I do reserve the right to protest warmongering idiocy when I see it however. This is all moot tho' because the real excrement will hit the fan when the american public has to deal with the ruin of the American economy that will be the outcome of the massive defecit that Dubya is building to make the world safe for American business. Hopefully the average American will lose their taste for their government spending their tax dollars to make billions for the american business elite, which is the real reason for this invasion in the first place. Possibly they might be better off spending it on the 40 million americans that have no health care insurance. And those Canadians who are complaining about the state of the Canadian military, you are absolutely right they exist mainly they are ultra right wingers and ex military or Canadian business types, who complain that americans are suggesting to them that we ought to increase our military spending. They are free to emigrate any time.
Just heard on the news that americans are boycotting French's Mustard due to the French stand on the invasion of Iraq. Problem is French's is an american co. Certainly hope a little more thought is going into what the american government is up to. Take care Logan
Old 1st April 2003
  #533
Lives for gear
 
5down1up's Avatar
 

short break here ,

LETS SMOKE A JOINT TOGETHER AND DRINK SOME BEERS ...

it looks like the world isnt ready yet for changes ,
thats sad , cause it would have made me real proud living in that decade when people realize what " important " means .
the war is on , people are dying ... no matter what ...
theres no excuses and reasons for that .

if people still believe that violence is a solution --> dead end street . i am not a fortune teller but i would have loved to see how the military presence of the u.s and their allies with the WHOLE WORLD in their back would have changed the whole messed up situation in the middle east . now almost 60 years later after the allies have created the middle east scenario , they still walk the same old road ...
W A R

heh
Old 1st April 2003
  #534
Gear Addict
 

5&1
Took your advice although it still early here, and I'm already in a better mood. I want to offer an olive branch to Morgan and Brian, if it is percieved that i have been criticising them personally. I don't know Morgan's work but I have checked out Brain's and he is an obviously talented guy, who is very generous with his time and his enthusiasm for developing DAWs as a first class recording medium. I do reserve my right to be very critical of his government's policies, but I want to make it very clear that my criticisms are exactly that and do not refect any criticism of the vast majority of americans, whom I still regard as friends and neighbours. Take care Logan
Old 1st April 2003
  #535
Gear Head
 

Re: Re: Gdpp

Quote:
Originally posted by BrianT
What car do you drive at this point? How many mpg? How many miles a day do you drive?

Just curious.
Brian--
I drive a Chevy Prizm. It gets about 31-32 mpg mixed city/highway driving. Of late I've been averaging maybe 15 miles of driving a day. If I had the money to buy one, I'd be driving a hybrid.
Old 1st April 2003
  #536
Lives for gear
 

Normally I wouldn't post on this thread (none of you want to know what I think of it, I promise). But this old news artical was so curious, I had to share it with you guys. If it has been posted already, I'm sorry, but I'm not going to read through 37 pages to figure out if it has:



Administration Split On Europe Invasion


Washington, April 3, 1944 (Reuters)



Fissures are starting to appear in the formerly united front within the

Roosevelt administration on the upcoming decision of whether, where and

how to invade Europe. Some influential voices within both the Democrat

and Republican parties are starting to question the wisdom of toppling

Adolph Hitler's regime, and potentially de stabilizing much of the

region.



"It's one thing to liberate France and northwestern Europe, and teach

the Germans a lesson, but invading a sovereign country and overthrowing

its democratically-elected ruler would require a great deal more

justification," said one well-connected former State Department official.

"The President just hasn't made the case to the American people." Indeed,

some are querulous at the notion of invading France itself. They argue,

correctly, that the German-French



Armistice of 1940 is a valid international treaty, and the Vichy

government is widely recognized as the legitimate government of France,

even by the US. (The British government doesn't recognize it, but much

of that is a result of antipathy to the Germans from the Blitz.) Under

this reading, German forces are thus legally stationed in France, per

the request of its government, and by all observable indications, the

Vichy government is supported by the "French street."



More Frenchmen serve voluntarily in the Vichy militias than join the

"underground" organizations supported by foreign intelligence services

like MI5 and OSS. It was pointed out to this reporter by a prominent

former US ambassador to France that, "President Pétain was legally

appointed by the last freely elected government of the Third Republic,

and therefore is the legitimate democratically-chosen head of state. He

has been governing by emergency decree under the appropriate provisions

of the Third Republic Constitution. Surely there are grave issues of

international law in any aggressive act against France."



In addition, some have proposed that, once the Russians take back

Poland, it might make sense for them to stop at the German border.

They argue that much, if not most, of Hitler's war-making capacity

has been destroyed by the Allied bombing, and after we've taken

back the Benelux countries, he'll only be a threat to his own

people, and the ethnic minorities within Germany itself.



Others, however, contend that as long as he remains in power, he will be

a continual threat to the region, and perhaps even the world, as there

are rumors that he's frantically developing weapons of mass destruction

greater than any the world has previously seen, and is building rockets

with which to deliver them. "For God's sake, the man is gassing Jews

by the millions!" said one exasperated presidential advisor. "Do you

think that he's going to be content to simply murder his own people

if we let him stay in power?" Concern is great that, in a total

German defeat, or regime change, the results could have unpredictable

and far-reaching consequences. Germany consists of a large number

of ethnic groups antipathetic to each other, including Germans, Jews,

Bohemians, Slavs and Gypsies. In the power vacuum created by the

absence of a strong and stable central government, there is concern that

it could split up into a number of fractious, balkanized countries, with

the potential for renewed war and strife on European soil. There has

been little public discussion of what kind of government would replace

the present **** Reich, and many believe that, in the absence of a plan,

it would be foolish to simply go in and topple the dictator.



The Administration has reportedly been talking to German dissidents, but

they're hardly united in anything other than a desire to see the end of

the Hitler regime. Many who know them well feel that there's little

prospect for them forming a post-war consensus German government.

Others say, however, that the German people are well educated, and

that if the shackles of the brutal regime that currently oppresses

them could be thrown off, there are excellent prospects for one that

would be friendly to the US and western values in general. Such a

government, in a region in which it is so dominant, could provide a

healthy example for the populace in some of the other troubled

regimes in the area. But despite such optimism among some advisors,

many, particularly in Congress, are also frustrated by an apparent

lack of an exit strategy. There is a great deal of concern, both

within and outside the Administration, that should the German

government be replaced, US troops might have to be stationed in

Europe for five to ten years. Some have even suggested, improbably,

that they could end up being there for decades. One Senator who

has been deeply involved in the discussions within the Administration

said, off the record, that "we can't risk the chaos that could

result from Hitler's removal. He's the only thing holding Germany

together. Once we get into Alsace, and the Russians cross the

Vistula, what we need to do is to establish a truce with him, and

set up an arms inspection regime, so that he will never again be

able to threaten his neighbors. We'll let the new planned United

Nations organization handle it.
Old 1st April 2003
  #537
Lives for gear
 
malice's Avatar
 

Wow, that is udge ...

I might wait a while before comenting that



malice
Old 1st April 2003
  #538
Lives for gear
 

Re: Re: Re: Gdpp

Quote:
Originally posted by hodad
Brian--
I drive a Chevy Prizm. It gets about 31-32 mpg mixed city/highway driving. Of late I've been averaging maybe 15 miles of driving a day. If I had the money to buy one, I'd be driving a hybrid.

I smiled as I read that. I respect you for not just talking about something you believe in, but actually doing something about it. That's a good thing.


Regards,
Brian T
Old 1st April 2003
  #539
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Killahurts


Administration Split On Europe Invasion


Washington, April 3, 1944 (Reuters)

F
I'll bet dollars to doughnuts this is fake. I may be wrong, but the language sounds a bit too informal and, umm, contemporary for 1944 journalism.
Old 1st April 2003
  #540
Gear Maniac
 
recorderman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally posted by Messiah

America lives at the expense of others, and these "others" happen to contain a very large number of muslims,
what bull****....they do not know haow to run there own lives period. The only thing that keeps them together is their common hatred for Isreal.


On the lighter side Read this O' mis-guided PeaceNicks:

"I was wrong" by Ken Joseph Jr.
.....the account of a human shield in Iraq.

http://www.iconoclast.ca/MainPage.as...=/newPage1.asp
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
mastermix / Mastering forum
5
Nick A. / So much gear, so little time
9
Nu-tra / So much gear, so little time
40

Forum Jump
Forum Jump