Obama Opinions?

[showtime]

at my work they're already running a book on how long before he's asassinated




i'm more interested in the age old arguments like electric vs nitro

[Fabs]

Electric nitro sucks

[Andy Moore]

Very interesting points guys, I appreciate the commentary. Its rather difficult to get an opinion which isnt highly biased here in the US, as everyone gets theirs news from the same places and has one of two very narrow viewpoints.

[DaveG28]

Originally Posted by Andy Moore

Very interesting points guys, I appreciate the commentary. Its rather difficult to get an opinion which isnt highly biased here in the US, as everyone gets theirs news from the same places and has one of two very narrow viewpoints.

Yeah that's something I've noticed on US news, they tend to get one republican and one democrat in to have an argument, rather than one commentator with a more balanced view! It's highly entertaining, but makes it a pain to work out the truth of things politically!!

Gotta love Fox news though, they are something else, we've nothing like that over here, so amazingly biased!!

[Lee]

Originally Posted by Fabs

Electric nitro

Where can you race these, they sound ace

[Andy Moore]

Originally Posted by DaveG28

Yeah that's something I've noticed on US news, they tend to get one republican and one democrat in to have an argument, rather than one commentator with a more balanced view! It's highly entertaining, but makes it a pain to work out the truth of things politically!!

Gotta love Fox news though, they are something else, we've nothing like that over here, so amazingly biased!!

CNBC and CNN provide the biased viewpoint from the other end of the spectrum though. Fox just counteracts them.

[SlowOne]

There is more than a likeness to the election of John F Kennedy in 1960. He was the outsider, the charismatic young man who had the right things to say and was seen as hope for the future. Yet still there was a load of concerns about Socialism and Social Security and a National Health.

As it turned out, Kennedy was the man who faced down Nikita Kruschov and prevented him moving nuclear missiles to Cuba; Kennedy was the man who asked "not what this Nation can do for you, ask what you can do for this Nation"; Kennedy was the man who posed the challenge of "putting a man on the moon by the end of the decade..." He made peace, not war, he set challenges not taxes, and his premature passing was greeted with dismay the World over.

Obama has the same chance Kennedy had - a World in turmoil, a nation (USA) that has lost its way, a recession where big business has shot its bolt and can't lobby with any conviction, and a people who want to be lead. We can but hope that he sets a standard taht our tired politicians can't match, and we get some people who can lead, not tax.

The last 25-odd years have been an aberration in history, not a change. The next 25 years will be different, yet the same. We live in interesting times...

[gramey]

The sad part is that we as British people should care who the Americans elect as their President and what political leanings they have. Why should we concern ourselves with this? Basically because having slashed our armed forces to less than we'd need to defend ourselves we're totally dependent on the Americans to protect us. A consequence of this is that irrespective of whether it's a democrat or republican in the White House, when they say jump our government say's "How high?"
Sadly neither the US or our own government have learnt from history that the nature of the people your dealing with and the geographical nature of their lands is unlikely to result in peace and stability, just ask the Russians?
What appears to have been missed is that Saddam Hussein only got into power in the first place due to contra funding by the CIA. He was backed by the US when they went to war with Iran, come to that so were the Iranians as the US were unsure who was going to win so backed their horse both way's. Tens of thousands died in what after 5 years ended in stalemate and back at square one, then you wonder why Iran hates America.
When he failed to tow the White House line and went into Kuwait the US were forced to do something about him rather than lose face. Having done this, but without a mandate to actually get rid of him, they then had to come up with another reason to go back, hence the disinformation about WMD's.
One good ol' boy when asked about his placing an order for a Hummer H3 and it's fuel consumption and if it worried him genuinely replied "Hell no, why else did we invade Iraq".
If Obama restricts free trade it'll mean the yanks are back to having to accept home made sub standard over priced products that were shown up for what they were. When the likes of Honda & Toyota got round their restrictive practices previously by building assembly plants in the US and changing their brand name, Acura & Lexus, discerning Americans suddenly woke up to the fact that they didn't have to buy some shoddily made GM barge.
Will Obama be all things to all people, unlikely, will he do a better job than the ageing McCain, probably, does it really matter who's pulling Gordon Brown or David Cameron's strings, not really, we''ll still be their lap dog and do whatever they tell us to do.

[SlowOne]

Or...

Originally Posted by gramey

The sad part is that we as British people should care who the Americans elect as their President and what political leanings they have. Why should we concern ourselves with this? Basically because having slashed our armed forces to less than we'd need to defend ourselves we're totally dependent on the Americans to protect us.

We've always been dependent on the Americans for armed might, as has the rest of the World. We have not fought a war on our own since the Boer War. WW1 and WW2 depended on numbers made larger by the USA. We should concern ourselves because what the USA does drives what happens in the World. They are the largest single country with economic muscle. If we want to be independent, then a united Europe is our best chance, but no on wants to see that.

Originally Posted by gramey

A consequence of this is that irrespective of whether it's a democrat or republican in the White House, when they say jump our government say's "How high?"
Sadly neither the US or our own government have learnt from history that the nature of the people your dealing with and the geographical nature of their lands is unlikely to result in peace and stability, just ask the Russians?

It seems to me that the point everyone misses is that the terrorists always win. With one exception in the last 250 years, terrorists have always ended up in power. The USA gained power by acting as terrorists against us, and one can add Angola, Zimbabwe, South africa, Korea, Vietnam, Sudan, Eritrea, The Balkans, Mesopotania (where the UK were overthrown and split it into Irna, Iraq, etc.) and Northern Ireland. Until this is acknowledged and we start talking not fighting, little is going to change. We have no choice but to support the Americans if we want to fight, but the real question is "why fight?"

Originally Posted by gramey

What appears to have been missed is that Saddam Hussein only got into power in the first place due to contra funding by the CIA. He was backed by the US when they went to war with Iran, come to that so were the Iranians as the US were unsure who was going to win so backed their horse both way's. Tens of thousands died in what after 5 years ended in stalemate and back at square one, then you wonder why Iran hates America.
When he failed to tow the White House line and went into Kuwait the US were forced to do something about him rather than lose face. Having done this, but without a mandate to actually get rid of him, they then had to come up with another reason to go back, hence the disinformation about WMD's.
One good ol' boy when asked about his placing an order for a Hummer H3 and it's fuel consumption and if it worried him genuinely replied "Hell no, why else did we invade Iraq".

Spot on - we fight terrorists (or, in this case, we create them!!) and we lose - no surprise!

Originally Posted by gramey

If Obama restricts free trade it'll mean the yanks are back to having to accept home made sub standard over priced products that were shown up for what they were. When the likes of Honda & Toyota got round their restrictive practices previously by building assembly plants in the US and changing their brand name, Acura & Lexus, discerning Americans suddenly woke up to the fact that they didn't have to buy some shoddily made GM barge.

The reason that Toyota, honda, Nissan et al put plants in other countries is because their production systems demand it. The Toyota Production system (sometimes misnamed 'Lean') depends on being as close to the customer as possible. Their plants are there because that's how their production systems make money, not because of any political reason. BMW and Mercedes made pots on money sending cars from Europe long before they built plants in the USA - on the back of huge US subsidies, it should be added!

Originally Posted by gramey

Will Obama be all things to all people, unlikely, will he do a better job than the ageing McCain, probably, does it really matter who's pulling Gordon Brown or David Cameron's strings, not really, we''ll still be their lap dog and do whatever they tell us to do.

The aberration here is Bush Junior, not the USA. Bush Senior did no such thing in Gulf War1, indeed the UK were a willing partner. There has to be two sides to a situation, and one can argue that Blair was as guilty of thinking he could go against history as Bush was.

It's too easy to blame our stupidity in years gone by on being bullied by America. No one has to be bullied, especially not by a waning power. If there's blame to be apportioned here, we have to shoulder ours. Recession/depression changes the World, as it did in 1929. It's hard to see how the current politicians will be able to afford to act as they have in the past, and with (as you rightly point out) Russia and China on the ascendency, expect more listening and conciliation, not shouting and fighting. No doubt some of the compromises will be derided on here in years to come, but since we are no longer a World power (and neither are the USA) we have to get used to it.

[gramey]

Sadly the Americans, and therefore the UK as well, are not the champions of the free world that they like to portray themselves as. They plunder oil from Iraq under the guise of anti terrorism, yet if they were that concerned with freedom and democracy why have they not lifted one finger to rid Zimbabwe of Robert Mugabe?
Drifted a bit off topic here, I guess only time will tell if the American public have made the right choice, and that time may be dependent on keeping him alive. Far too many racists over there with the legal right to carry arms for the Secret Service guy's to sleep easily at nights.

[Alfonzo]

SlowOne - spot on.

[downtempo]

Glypo for prez!

Being an American this election proved to be difficult, don't get me wrong the voting process is something that I hold in high regard... the choices posed on me were the tough part.

Both of our candidates are warmongers, the difference is that McCain was willing to respect the borders of Pakistan, FATA and the NWAP in the search for al-Qaeda operatives. Obama has already stated that he would invade the sovereignty of these sensitive areas if he was given creditable military intelligence proving that bin Laden was within those borders.

The only thing that makes our current state of economy more comedic is our lame azz "War on Terror". We borrow billions from China to fund our war efforts while China supplies arms to General Kayani in Pakistan.

Meanwhile new policy is being set by our future Obama Administration to lay stipulations on our "aid" money to Pakistan. Basically Pakistan will continue to see American aid money in exchange for the ability to start having an American military presence in their country effectively buying our welcome. Kayani recognizes our disengenuine gesture with our money and has made numerous statements attesting to the fact.

We have deemed Pakastan's anti-radical Islamic extremism efforts as "not good enough" so it is time for us to put troops in yet another Middle Eastern country. Ironic how most would view Obama as the peaceful choice of the two.

Make no mistake, we will see the ultimate failing of America within our lifetime's... especially if Obama screws the pooch so badly that Palin gets a crack at the GOP ticket in 2012 as what is being currently projected.