How does the world see Americans (and McCain/Obama)

KungFooMasta · Post by **KungFooMasta** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 8:51 pm

What do you mean by "nice try", did you even read the article?

syd · Post by **syd** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 9:13 pm

I did, it's an interesting reading though.
And nice manipulation from my friend warmi.

let's summarize:
syedhs says "Isreal has a nuclear arsenal, guess what, it comes from the US".
warmi replies "You mean France" with a nice link.
The article basically says "France and Israel worked together on nuclear projects in the 50's". At these early stages France didn't even have the knowledge as well.

VictorMoran · Post by **VictorMoran** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 9:53 pm

Well some time real world experience do not guarantee the best deal.
To paraphrase Borack Obama, not one had better resume than dick Cheney and we all know how that worked out.
For those who say John McCain have more foreign policies experince than Borack Obama, maybe they should see Mccain history in perspective, these videos may help out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVfU8g8dlNg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6GBdyws5YU&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HcdLO3jKkPo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VRAshmSdps
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAzBxFaio1I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnyEMLXvgV8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iL-x2t8S ... re=related

and my favorite, McCain debunking himself
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ioy90nF2anI

warmi · Post by **warmi** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 10:39 pm

syd wrote:I did, it's an interesting reading though.
And nice manipulation from my friend warmi.

let's summarize:
syedhs says "Isreal has a nuclear arsenal, guess what, it comes from the US".
warmi replies "You mean France" with a nice link.
The article basically says "France and Israel worked together on nuclear projects in the 50's". At these early stages France didn't even have the knowledge as well.

There is no manipulation here.
It was the French who helped Isreal get their first nuke going ... that's just a well known fact.

There is a lot of money and military help given to Izrael by the US administration but that has nothing to with their nukes.

syd · Post by **syd** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 10:46 pm

Thanks for the link.
I knew about his views, but didn't know how dumb he is! lol
is being ignorant a common thing with republicans?
this makes thing clear

warmi · Post by **warmi** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 10:51 pm

syd wrote:Thanks for the link.
I knew about his views, but didn't know how dumb he is! lol
is being ignorant a common thing with republicans?
this makes thing clear

The fact that some random dude on the net thinks that McCain is dumb doesn't make his so.

In any case why would you care ?
Don't you have your own politicians to worry about ?

syd · Post by **syd** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 11:01 pm

warmi wrote:It was the French who helped Isreal get their first nuke going ...

done some research, you are indeed right warmi.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negev_Nucl ... rch_Center

syd · Post by **syd** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 11:04 pm

warmi wrote:In any case why would you care ?

I'll be living back in the US soon.
don't know if you noticed but everybody is concerned.

VictorMoran · Post by **VictorMoran** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 12:20 am

I have to disagree with this phrase
"some random dude on the net thinks that McCain is dumb doesn't make his so" these videos are real facts.

The videos are not from ramdom dude, they are taken from real interviews, press conference and town meetings during the campaign trail and presidencial debates, they are very relevant.

For example, ex senator Phil Gramm, one of top economic adviser of the McCain campaign.
When asked about the difficulties middle class America is facing as result of the disastrous economic policies of market deregulations during the first 6 years of the republican congress and this republic administration, his responded with this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJVD9FaMQN4
â€œthe losers has being countries like India and Chinaâ€

Evak · Post by **Evak** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 2:01 am

I suppose Obama and McCain just sit in a dark room like mushrooms and come up with economic policy all by themselves?

It doesn't really matter what the president thinks so much as who his advisers are and how much he can get passed through the government. Sure he has the power to veto some things he is passionate about, but he can only go so far.

From what I can tell, Obama mostly tells people what they want to hear, and usually falls back into some generic statements when pressed by the media. I think McCain is unfairly represented by the media so it's now wonder Obama is the darling of international news.

Just look over the news of the past few months since he won the republican primaries. Almost no coverage. Hillary and Obama got all the news because the gossip was great for ratings. Once that passed Obama got all the news because of various controversy and large corporate news groups like the BBC being heavily biased in favour of liberal issues.

Without looking, I'd say Obama gets at least 80% of media coverage, where McCain seems little more than an afterthought.

It's no wonder the rest of the world loves McCain, he has the charisma and people skills to look good on TV. But I'm not convinced he has the guts to take on the establishment and carry government with him.

I don't think he can stand up against a Nancy Pelosi who is probably the most powerful and feared person in the Democratic party and might very well string him up like a puppet.

warmi · Post by **warmi** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 2:20 am

[quote="VictorMoran"]I have to disagree with this phrase
"some random dude on the net thinks that McCain is dumb doesn't make his so" these videos are real facts.

The videos are not from ramdom dude, they are taken from real interviews, press conference and town meetings during the campaign trail and presidencial debates, they are very relevant.

For example, ex senator Phil Gramm, one of top economic adviser of the McCain campaign.
When asked about the difficulties middle class America is facing as result of the disastrous economic policies of market deregulations during the first 6 years of the republican congress and this republic administration, his responded with this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJVD9FaMQN4
â€œthe losers has being countries like India and Chinaâ€

VictorMoran · Post by **VictorMoran** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 3:36 am

warmi wrote: The guy has a Ph.D. in economics and is a vice-president of a Swiss bank.

Now , let us see .. not being an expert on the subject, who am I going to believe , some random dude on the net or Gramm ?

I see, I think it is safe to say you are not part of the Mccain team, because this is what he has to say after he saw the video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqj7bZWMgKY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tq0YxVuPXXU&NR=1

As for his position as vp of a bank, it might had to do with his lobbing influence in the bush administration with regard to the deregulation of the subprime lender market.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9246.html

Conservatives keep saying these videos are taken out of context.
I ask you, how can a video be taken out of context when they show the entire content?
I mean, conservatives do not think the same way about the Jeremias wright videos.

warmi · Post by **warmi** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 3:48 am

VictorMoran wrote:
warmi wrote: The guy has a Ph.D. in economics and is a vice-president of a Swiss bank.

Now , let us see .. not being an expert on the subject, who am I going to believe , some random dude on the net or Gramm ?
I see, I think it is safe to say you are not part of the Mccain team, because this is what he has to say after he saw the video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqj7bZWMgKY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tq0YxVuPXXU&NR=1

As for his position as vp of a bank, it might had to do with his lobbing influence in the bush administration with regard to the deregulation of the subprime lender market.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9246.html

Conservatives keep saying these videos are taken out of context.
I ask you, how can a video be taken out of context when they show the entire content?
I mean, conservatives do not think the same way about the Jeremias wright videos.

McCain is a politician ... you need to do what you need to do to get elected.
People generally prefer politicians like Clinton â€¦ able to "feel their pain" even if it is complete bullshit and there is no pain to begin with - nobody likes to be told to suck it up and stop whining.

As far as these videos â€¦ think about it this way .. if someone were to follow you with a camera and recorded everything you said in public, given some creative editing, it woudnâ€™t take a genius to come up with a set of videos that would make you look like a moron.
It is just human nature â€¦ we all make mistakes and say things that don't always make sense.

The general co-chairman of John McCainâ€™s presidential campaign, former Sen. Phil Gramm (R-Texas), led the charge in 1999 to repeal a Depression-era banking regulation law that Democrat Barack Obama claimed on Thursday contributed significantly to todayâ€™s economic turmoil.

Hehehe .... ... Obama is trying to make McCain look bad.
Shocking

Kerion · Post by **Kerion** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 4:50 am

I find it sort of funny when people say "Obama has no experience, and he just says what people want to hear".

There was another president, ohh, about 40 years ago. Same basic idea. Not enough experience, said what people wanted to hear, too young, etc.

His name was John F. Kennedy, and while he died young, he put in place policies and programs that catapulted this country in to the drivers seat in terms of technology and economics. Without any experience, he successfully guides us through the Cuban Missile Crisis, the closest we've ever come to all out nuclear holocaust.

Sometimes fresh ideas and fresh faces are a good thing, and I think this is one of those times. Is it a risk? Of course it's a risk, so was electing Kennedy. After eight years of Bush though, I am ready for a radical change. For the last eight years we've been basically lied to, spit on and treated like criminals in our own country. Our economy is going to hell, the worlds opinion of us is in shambles (yes, this matters, whether you like it or not), our dependence on foreign oil is at best the same, at worst the problem has grown. We are no more secure than we were after 9/11, although we have all kinds of wonderfully invasive new policies (domestic spying anyone?). I've had eight years of "conservative republican" bs and I'm up to my eyes in it. It's time for a change.

warmi · Post by **warmi** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 5:26 am

he put in place policies and programs that catapulted this country in to the drivers seat in terms of technology and economics

Yeah he surely did.
On the other hand ideologically and policy-wise he was much closer to Reagan than Obama.

I don't have a problem with his inexperience - my main problem is with his extremely leftist and liberal record.

Evak · Post by **Evak** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 5:43 am

I'd compare Obama with Tony Blair and new labour rather than Kennedy. I doubt most people are aware of the damage done back home over the past few years.

warmi · Post by **warmi** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 5:56 am

I doubt most people are aware of the damage done back home over the past few years.

It is not my home , but according to what these folks tend to post you are absolutely correct.

http://samizdata.net/blog/

mr. iknoweverything · Post by **mr. iknoweverything** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 6:01 am

the situation in the UK really scares the shit out of me . i mean, every time i hear about england its something that sounds like straight out of 1984.

however, i wouldnt compare obama to blair. that new labour thing seems like a thing of the 90s to me. kind of like the social democrats here in germany. i dont know whats coming next, but it's kind of clear it will be something refreshingly different (hopefully).
and the US seem to once again be on the bleeding edge and leading the way for everybody else with obama. at least thats my impression.

Post by **xavier** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 6:14 am

mr. iknoweverything wrote: and the US seem to once again be on the bleeding edge and leading the way for everybody else with obama.

Dunno about all that -- however, if Barack Obama is the face of the United States to the rest of the world, it will go a long way towards mending strained relations with everyone, I think. And that's what we need right now -- someone who actually can talk to other nations without patronizing them.

warmi · Post by **warmi** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 6:22 am

mr. iknoweverything wrote:the situation in the UK really scares the shit out of me . i mean, every time i hear about england its something that sounds like straight out of 1984.

Nah .. it is hard to outdo Swedes when it comes to this sort of stuff ...

It was supposed to be a party with balloons and a birthday cake but the eight-year-old Swedish boy had not reckoned on his countryâ€™s obsession with equality and inclusiveness. Two of his classmates were left off the invitation list â€“ and that, deemed his school â€“ was forbidden and a violation of their rights in the strictest â€œnanny stateâ€

syedhs · Post by **syedhs** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 6:48 am

Just to make things clear:

1) I dont know where Israel source its nuclear stuff from, but other weaponaries like helicopter are definitely sourced from USA.

2) Inexperience is actually nothing - a good politician should be able to muscle the professionals , the best minds, the think-thanks to gather around him, discuss and come out with the best policies which suit the interest at that time. And I think Obama can do that.

The 'change' he is talking quite largely can be understood from his recent speech talking of Winnie The Pooh in international policies. A sample article: Barack Obama aide: Why Winnie the Pooh should shape US foreign policy.

The explanation is this: the most problematic area in USA international policies concern of the ones applied on Middle East specifically, so Obama in a way has suggested that the current ongoing policies which have been running for decades must be changed. IMO, if he managed to get this part solved, then he would have solved maybe 80% of the problem and terrorism can be curbed too.

Wonder why no-one seems interested in finding the reasons of terrorism? All we get to hear and see is the need to defend USA soils from terrorism, but why terrorism in the first place? Not to say terrorists are right (definitely they aren't), but why - could it be that some people are destined to terrorism without any reason? Of course not.

syedhs · Post by **syedhs** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 6:52 am

IMO, the only ones that can judge whether Obama is (or is not) today's JFK is someone who is old and mature enough to witness both elections. At least he was a teenager in 1960s and still live today

warmi · Post by **warmi** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 4:59 pm

syedhs wrote:Just to make things clear:

The explanation is this: the most problematic area in USA international policies concern of the ones applied on Middle East specifically, so Obama in a way has suggested that the current ongoing policies which have been running for decades must be changed. IMO, if he managed to get this part solved, then he would have solved maybe 80% of the problem and terrorism can be curbed too.

The explanation is this: the most problematic area in USA international policies concern of the ones applied on Middle East specifically, so Obama in a way has suggested that the current ongoing policies which have been running for decades must be changed. I

If you talking about Bush and his people then what happened in the last 5 years was a significant change from what used to be the default U.S. policy in the region.
One could spend whole day discussing it but it will suffice to say that the people responsible for the â€œoldâ€

FrameFever · Post by **FrameFever** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 5:07 pm

tomorrow Obama will speak in Berlin...I'm curious what he will say

Kerion · Post by **Kerion** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 5:28 pm

Evak wrote:I'd compare Obama with Tony Blair and new labour rather than Kennedy. I doubt most people are aware of the damage done back home over the past few years.

People said the same thing about Kennedy at the time. Go back and look at his campaign speeches and the pundits at the time.

Like I said, is it a risk? Sure, but it can't be anymore of a risk then electing ANOTHER war hawk who supports torture and domestic spying, now can it? America needs someone in charge who wants MORE liberty for us, not less. We need someone who is a smooth talker right now, as much as no one wants to admit it. The world doesn't like us right now, and that's a bad thing.

Our next president's two main goals need to be: Smoothing over our image on the world stage and breaking our dependence on foreign fossil fuels. Anything beyond that is gravy on the taters.