McCain vs. Obama Watch

KwungSun
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#361
Report 10 years ago
#361
(Original post by MuseValheru)
The situation with China and its ever strengthening economy. In this case I agree with both Obama and McCain. Obama proposes enforcing all standing trade agreements with China and instigating new agreements, McCain purposes strengthening the military which would in my opinion enable enforcement of trade agreements.
Yea a new arms race is just what the world needs...
0
quote
reply
Bateman
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#362
Report 10 years ago
#362
(Original post by MuseValheru)
Well firstly I am English and therefore have no vote in this, his internal policies are less likely to affect me than his foreign policy.

Obama's policy of negotiation seems to lack substance, its all well and good on paper, but as highlighted by Iraq and Saddam Hussien people dont always play ball.

McCain on the other hand has stated that the situation in Iran is unacceptable and could threaten the safety of surrounding countries and the Western World. He has stated that he would instigate military action if required. His position is very much military action as a secondary course of action if negotiation fails. Obama hasnt come forward to say this and hides behind negotiations, which throughout history have failed.

McCain believes that the war in Iraq was poorly managed, he believes that troops are required to slowly hand power back to the Iraqi people. Obama on the other hand wishes to form a staged withdrawal with immediate affect as shown by his support of the Iraq De-escalation Act that aimed to have all troops out of Iraq by March this year. This will in my opinion would just make the problem worse as there are too many conflicting parties in the arena.

Iraq and Afghanistan are long term commitments to protect both the Western World and the citizens of the middle east.

The situation with China and its ever strengthening economy. In this case I agree with both Obama and McCain. Obama proposes enforcing all standing trade agreements with China and instigating new agreements, McCain purposes strengthening the military which would in my opinion enable enforcement of trade agreements.

$1000 oil barrels please.
china is stronger than america, strengthening americas army is silly, china would still dfeat it and it would probably destroy the earth.

"our economy is failing, let's spend money on our army!1!"
Energy prices are increasing what do we do? "drill baby drill"

bush's third term basically..

obama on the other hand want's to change americas economy infa structure.
0
quote
reply
davidjones90
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#363
Report 10 years ago
#363
Both chat **** to be honest. Trying to gain energy independence etc etc

America uses 20million ish barrels of oil each day. The highest in the world. China despite have a population 4 times of that of America uses some 7million /day...the UK uses 1.2m/day

Here is a breakdown
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_...nt_consumption

They need to concentrate of energy efficiency to lower the amount they use.
0
quote
reply
KwungSun
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#364
Report 10 years ago
#364
(Original post by davidjones90)
Both chat **** to be honest. Trying to gain energy independence etc etc

America uses 20million ish barrels of oil each day. The highest in the world. China despite have a population 4 times of that of America uses some 7million /day...the UK uses 1.2m/day

Here is a breakdown
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_...nt_consumption

They need to concentrate of energy efficiency to lower the amount they use.
What they really need to do is concentrate on toning down their lifestyles but that's not going to happen.
0
quote
reply
MuseValheru
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#365
Report 10 years ago
#365
(Original post by Bateman)
$1000 oil barrels please.
china is stronger than america, strengthening americas army is silly, china would still dfeat it and it would probably destroy the earth.

"our economy is failing, let's spend money on our army!1!"
Energy prices are increasing what do we do? "drill baby drill"

bush's third term basically..

obama on the other hand want's to change americas economy infa structure
.
By taxing at the top of the chain, this will effect everybody but the people at the bottom of the pyramid will come off worse.
0
quote
reply
KwungSun
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#366
Report 10 years ago
#366
(Original post by MuseValheru)
By taxing at the top of the chain, this will effect everybody but the people at the bottom of the pyramid will come off worse.
Trickle down economics is a myth. Look at the Reagan years. You do not make poor people better off my giving corporations more money.
0
quote
reply
Bateman
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#367
Report 10 years ago
#367
(Original post by MuseValheru)
By taxing at the top of the chain, this will effect everybody but the people at the bottom of the pyramid will come off worse.

I'm not going to debate with you because you're a cretin.

you don't know what you're talking about.

obama is taxing the "top of the chain" by an extra 1% which would be enough to shred a few % of tax from the bottom of the chain.


If america caries on at this rate, in 10-20 years time, the middle class will disapear.
0
quote
reply
favh
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#368
Report 10 years ago
#368
(Original post by Captain Crash)
The definition of a capitialist country is a very loose one i.e one based on property rights and primarily on free market principles. (Note that the lack of a firm consensual definition of capitalism/true scotsman is the root of this fallacy.)
So to be clear, you think there is some confusion as to whether a state-controlled subsidised mortgage provider set up by the state is consistent with 'property rights and free market principles'?

Because if you are, then I would dearly like to see you try to defend that wild claim.

If we were talking about the merits and demerits of abortion, or democracy/liberty-building interventionism, and I tried to claim one side for 'true capitalism' (or libertarianism, which you have strayed into somewhat), then maybe you would have a point.
0
quote
reply
crazygirl4521
Badges: 14
#369
Report 10 years ago
#369
(Original post by Rascalov)
I doubt he'll be living long enough to survive it and judging by what I've read about her should she be president America's going to be ****ed. Amongst many other things she belongs to a particularly bat***** insane church assembly who speak in tongues
I don't think politics and religion should be mixed because it leads to confusion, but respect peoples religious beliefs though if people speak in tongues they speak in tongues. I know you don't mean any offence to anyone but being born a pentecostal Christian it sounds kind of rude. :cool:

This is why palin should be president

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=2zP8uFPWxaA

She can deal with russia!!

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=KDmNk2...eature=related

(Im joking btw)
quote
reply
L i b
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#370
Report 10 years ago
#370
(Original post by Darkened Angel)
I cant believe you just compared abortion to infanticide! They are not equal! This is exactly why religion shouldn't mix with politics.
I don't see why... yes, I am to some extent religious, but that does not impact on my view on abortion at all. Several notable Christian theologians have been pro-abortion, even within the Roman Catholic Church. There is absolutely no Biblical authority to condemn abortion, and it is an entirely divisible thing from religion.

On the infanticide issue: arguments were presented which would support infanticide, without making any credible argument against. That is clearly what I object to.

A fetus is not a life, it's a bunch of cells.
It clearly is alive, that much is biological fact; as for a bunch of cells, what do you think you are?

No one should be forced to have a child they did not want or even planned.
Why? We force people to look after their children once they are born.

A rape is traumatic enough without a child being involved. You may as well rule out contraception as it ends potential lives :rolleyes:
Nope, 'potential life' is a nonsense; I am a potential criminal, that does not mean I get sent to jail for it.

Seriously, if this is the level of argument you're going to present, then there's not really much point even discussing the issue.
0
quote
reply
L i b
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#371
Report 10 years ago
#371
(Original post by zanejamal)
An early stage fetus is not self aware, it is a bunch of cells rapidly dividing
It is not self-aware, but neither is a sleeping person, a person in a coma, someone with a severe mental illness or such - yet we do not permit their semi-arbitrary killing.

It is ridiculous to suggest that a rape victim should have to bare the responsibility of a child when it would significantly reduce the quality of their life.
No it's not.

Anyway, I am not trying to persuade anyone here, just to point out that it is a perfectly viable, and indeed logically consistent, viewpoint. I think I've done that now: several opportunities have been given to allow for credible justification for this 'OMG it is ridiculous!1' angle, and those offered have been outstandingly disappointing.

What "right" does the state have to impose on the rape victim of going through 9 months of pregnancy and having a baby.
The state has a right to enforce criminal law, and protect those who cannot protect themselves.
0
quote
reply
JocastaJackal
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#372
Report 10 years ago
#372
It's obviously a biased article, but nonetheless it just makes me genuinely sad to read it instead of angry.
0
quote
reply
D-Day
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#373
Report 10 years ago
#373
I was on the fence about the two of them (Obama and McCain). Hell, I hadn't planned on voting. After doing some research on this peach of a woman, Obama has my vote.
0
quote
reply
indefenseoftruth
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#374
Report 10 years ago
#374
(Original post by Bismarck)
Alternet is about as reliable and unbiased as Pravda. Not sure what it says about people who take it as Gospel, just because it says whatever they want to believe.
Says the crazy conservative.
Let me guess, do you shoot migrant Mexicans from your cotton farm?
0
quote
reply
LaSagna
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#375
Report 10 years ago
#375
I was surprised that they didn't include her belief that global warming isn't caused by humans.
0
quote
reply
King4eva
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#376
Report 10 years ago
#376
she is crazy
0
quote
reply
Stozo
Badges: 0
#377
Report 10 years ago
#377
I think it was best summed up on Mock the Week last night, she makes Bush look like an informed progressive.
0
quote
reply
favh
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#378
Report 10 years ago
#378
(Original post by Stozo)
I think it was best summed up on Mock the Week last night, she makes Bush look like an informed progressive.
Why do you assume that 'informed' and 'progressive' people would be socialists?
0
quote
reply
ssk2
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#379
Report 10 years ago
#379
I think it was best summed up on Mock the Week last night, she makes Bush look like an informed progressive.
When you're using Mock the Week as your basis for a reasoned debate, you know you're scraping the bottom of the barrel.

well she got her 1st passport LAST YEAR. so i think its doubtful.
You do realise there's a Bristol in the USA?
0
quote
reply
Darkened Angel
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#380
Report 10 years ago
#380
(Original post by L i b)
On the infanticide issue: arguments were presented which would support infanticide, without making any credible argument against. That is clearly what I object to.

It clearly is alive, that much is biological fact; as for a bunch of cells, what do you think you are?

There are no credible arguments for it. The early fetus is not concious, it is not even aware of its existence, it is merely a bunch of cells, just like the skin cells, etc.

Why? We force people to look after their children once they are born.

No we don't, children can be given away for adoption. You cant force people to look after a child. And adoption is hardly the best option for the reasons someone else has already stated. There is also no certainty that a child will get adopted, if abortion was made illegal then the pressures on child care will rise significantly but the demand for adopting kids will stay the same. It is a very bad option. Fair enough if people are against abortion but if other people want to abort their child then they have every right to.

Seriously, if this is the level of argument you're going to present, then there's not really much point even discussing the issue.

The same can be said about you.
My replies are highlighted in bold.
0
quote
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Were you ever put in isolation at school?

Yes (225)
27.81%
No (584)
72.19%

Watched Threads

View All