A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto makers » Ford Mustang
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Idea of the muscle car is dead (Or, why Ford can't sell cars now)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #141  
Old August 17th 08, 04:16 PM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
Joe[_113_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17
Default Idea of the muscle car is dead (Or, why Ford can't sell cars now)

Michael Johnson > wrote in :

> Joe wrote:
>> Michael Johnson > wrote in
>> :
>>
>> <major snippage>
>>
>>> It is going to take some MAJOR breakdown in our way of life before the
>>> population gets off its collective ass and makes real change happen.
>>> By then the Democrats and, to a lesser extent, the Republicans may
>>> have us screwed so bad there are no alternatives left. Either way we
>>> are getting EXACTLY what we deserve for being so apathetic for
>>> decades. I wouldn't blame the younger people if they just told all
>>> the Baby Boomers that when they retire they will be euthanized since
>>> they squandered all the money that was to go toward their retirement
>>> costs.

>>
>> Saw an interview with Andrew J. Bacevich last night on Bill Moyers'
>> Journal on PBS. Absolutely riveting, and that's not an exaggeration.
>>
>> Bacevich is highly accredited and tells the real story - he is right on
>> the money IMO.
>>
>> Here's a preview of what he's all about:
>> http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/08152008/profile.html

>
> It sounds interesting. I agree that our biggest threats come from
> within our own borders and I'll go even further and say they come from
> the very politicians we elect to solve our problems. It wouldn't take
> them more than a year to pass all the legislation needed to right the
> ship. It will take years to actually make it happen but to set the
> framework for it would be easy. I think there needs to be a fundamental
> change in our political structure and it needs to start with term
> limits. I think career politicians are killing this country.


Bacevich knows what he's talking about. Here's a brief bio on him:
http://www.bu.edu/ir/faculty/bacevich.html

Here's an interesting article he wrote last month for the Boston Globe:
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ed..._hath_wrought/

To date, nobody else has professed more sobering ideas than Bacevich
IMO. Unfortunately, it will take a radical mindset change in America
before we see real change such as he describes.
Ads
  #142  
Old August 17th 08, 04:19 PM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
Joe[_113_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17
Default Idea of the muscle car is dead (Or, why Ford can't sell cars now)

"Frank ess" > wrote in :

>
>
> Joe wrote:
>> Michael Johnson > wrote in
>> :
>>
>> <major snippage>
>>
>>> It is going to take some MAJOR breakdown in our way of life before
>>> the population gets off its collective ass and makes real change
>>> happen. By then the Democrats and, to a lesser extent, the
>>> Republicans may have us screwed so bad there are no alternatives
>>> left. Either way we are getting EXACTLY what we deserve for being
>>> so apathetic for decades. I wouldn't blame the younger people if
>>> they just told all the Baby Boomers that when they retire they
>>> will be euthanized since they squandered all the money that was to
>>> go toward their retirement costs.

>>
>> Saw an interview with Andrew J. Bacevich last night on Bill Moyers'
>> Journal on PBS. Absolutely riveting, and that's not an
>> exaggeration.
>>
>> Bacevich is highly accredited and tells the real story - he is
>> right on the money IMO.
>>
>> Here's a preview of what he's all about:
>> http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/08152008/profile.html

>
> The guy did seem to have the ducks in a row; his and every one else's.


Indeed. Here's his brief bio:
http://www.bu.edu/ir/faculty/bacevich.html

Check out his testimony before the House Armed Services Committee
last month:
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache...nk&cd=14&gl=us
  #143  
Old August 17th 08, 11:46 PM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
Michael Johnson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,039
Default Idea of the muscle car is dead (Or, why Ford can't sell carsnow)

Joe wrote:
> Michael Johnson > wrote in :
>
>> Joe wrote:
>>> Michael Johnson > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>> <major snippage>
>>>
>>>> It is going to take some MAJOR breakdown in our way of life before the
>>>> population gets off its collective ass and makes real change happen.
>>>> By then the Democrats and, to a lesser extent, the Republicans may
>>>> have us screwed so bad there are no alternatives left. Either way we
>>>> are getting EXACTLY what we deserve for being so apathetic for
>>>> decades. I wouldn't blame the younger people if they just told all
>>>> the Baby Boomers that when they retire they will be euthanized since
>>>> they squandered all the money that was to go toward their retirement
>>>> costs.
>>> Saw an interview with Andrew J. Bacevich last night on Bill Moyers'
>>> Journal on PBS. Absolutely riveting, and that's not an exaggeration.
>>>
>>> Bacevich is highly accredited and tells the real story - he is right on
>>> the money IMO.
>>>
>>> Here's a preview of what he's all about:
>>> http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/08152008/profile.html

>> It sounds interesting. I agree that our biggest threats come from
>> within our own borders and I'll go even further and say they come from
>> the very politicians we elect to solve our problems. It wouldn't take
>> them more than a year to pass all the legislation needed to right the
>> ship. It will take years to actually make it happen but to set the
>> framework for it would be easy. I think there needs to be a fundamental
>> change in our political structure and it needs to start with term
>> limits. I think career politicians are killing this country.

>
> Bacevich knows what he's talking about. Here's a brief bio on him:
> http://www.bu.edu/ir/faculty/bacevich.html
>
> Here's an interesting article he wrote last month for the Boston Globe:
> http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ed..._hath_wrought/


I don't agree with all his assessments in this article. I'm not a water
carrier for Bush these days but some of the things he bashes Bush on in
that article are yet to be determined. As time passes the real benefit
or folly of the Iraq war will be known. A talking head just can't say
whether it was, or wasn't, worth the expense at this point in time. I
don't know much about this guy but reading that article didn't do must
to impress me with his insight on foreign affairs. He seems a little
too biased. He made too many statements of fact when all the facts
aren't known at this juncture.

Iraq could very well turn out like Vietnam. When one looks at Vietnam
in and of itself it wasn't a war worth fighting. When put into context
with the overall goal of stopping the expansion of communism, opinions
as to its worth change. Had the USSR been allowed to expand their
influence unchecked we might have a very different world. The same can
be applied to the radical Islamics today. If they are allowed to run
unchecked we might be facing a dire situation 25, 50 or 100 years from
now. No one, and I repeat NO ONE, knows whether the decision to invade
and transform Iraq to a more Western political ideology was a worthwhile
endeavor. It is way too early to tell. When I read this guy stating
unequivocally that the Iraq war was a mistake it makes me think he has
too high an opinion of his mental prowess.

> To date, nobody else has professed more sobering ideas than Bacevich
> IMO. Unfortunately, it will take a radical mindset change in America
> before we see real change such as he describes.


The guy has some good ideas from a domestic standpoint but like most
talking heads, he is far from having all the answers to our problems.
Thanks for the heads-up on him though. It never hurts to get all sides
of the argument.
  #144  
Old August 18th 08, 12:52 AM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
Joe[_114_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7
Default Idea of the muscle car is dead (Or, why Ford can't sell cars now)

Michael Johnson > wrote in
:

> Joe wrote:
>> Michael Johnson > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> Joe wrote:
>>>> Michael Johnson > wrote in
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>> <major snippage>
>>>>
>>>>> It is going to take some MAJOR breakdown in our way of life before
>>>>> the population gets off its collective ass and makes real change
>>>>> happen. By then the Democrats and, to a lesser extent, the
>>>>> Republicans may have us screwed so bad there are no alternatives
>>>>> left. Either way we are getting EXACTLY what we deserve for being
>>>>> so apathetic for decades. I wouldn't blame the younger people if
>>>>> they just told all the Baby Boomers that when they retire they
>>>>> will be euthanized since they squandered all the money that was to
>>>>> go toward their retirement costs.
>>>> Saw an interview with Andrew J. Bacevich last night on Bill Moyers'
>>>> Journal on PBS. Absolutely riveting, and that's not an
>>>> exaggeration.
>>>>
>>>> Bacevich is highly accredited and tells the real story - he is
>>>> right on the money IMO.
>>>>
>>>> Here's a preview of what he's all about:
>>>> http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/08152008/profile.html
>>> It sounds interesting. I agree that our biggest threats come from
>>> within our own borders and I'll go even further and say they come
>>> from the very politicians we elect to solve our problems. It
>>> wouldn't take them more than a year to pass all the legislation
>>> needed to right the ship. It will take years to actually make it
>>> happen but to set the framework for it would be easy. I think there
>>> needs to be a fundamental change in our political structure and it
>>> needs to start with term limits. I think career politicians are
>>> killing this country.

>>
>> Bacevich knows what he's talking about. Here's a brief bio on him:
>> http://www.bu.edu/ir/faculty/bacevich.html
>>
>> Here's an interesting article he wrote last month for the Boston
>> Globe:
>>

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ed.../articles/2008
>> /07/01/what_bush_hath_wrought/

>
> I don't agree with all his assessments in this article. I'm not a
> water carrier for Bush these days but some of the things he bashes
> Bush on in that article are yet to be determined. As time passes the
> real benefit or folly of the Iraq war will be known. A talking head
> just can't say whether it was, or wasn't, worth the expense at this
> point in time. I don't know much about this guy but reading that
> article didn't do must to impress me with his insight on foreign
> affairs. He seems a little too biased. He made too many statements
> of fact when all the facts aren't known at this juncture.
>
> Iraq could very well turn out like Vietnam. When one looks at Vietnam
> in and of itself it wasn't a war worth fighting. When put into
> context with the overall goal of stopping the expansion of communism,
> opinions as to its worth change. Had the USSR been allowed to expand
> their influence unchecked we might have a very different world. The
> same can be applied to the radical Islamics today. If they are
> allowed to run unchecked we might be facing a dire situation 25, 50 or
> 100 years from now. No one, and I repeat NO ONE, knows whether the
> decision to invade and transform Iraq to a more Western political
> ideology was a worthwhile endeavor. It is way too early to tell.
> When I read this guy stating unequivocally that the Iraq war was a
> mistake it makes me think he has too high an opinion of his mental
> prowess.
>
>> To date, nobody else has professed more sobering ideas than Bacevich
>> IMO. Unfortunately, it will take a radical mindset change in America
>> before we see real change such as he describes.

>
> The guy has some good ideas from a domestic standpoint but like most
> talking heads, he is far from having all the answers to our problems.
> Thanks for the heads-up on him though. It never hurts to get all
> sides of the argument.


After watching the piece 60 minutes did tonight on Valerie Plame, I'm
more convinced than ever that the Bush administration should and will be
thought of as one of the more corrupt and irresponsible administrations
in history. If nothing else, it proves that politics in the 21st
century is most definitely out of control, and the current
administration is right at the forefront.

Bacevich certainly has an ax to grind; his son was killed in Iraq.
However, all his ideas are based on factual history. He's certainly one
of the most respected and knowledgable people that have spoken on these
issues, and what he says makes the most sense to me out of anybody I've
heard to date.
  #145  
Old August 18th 08, 01:28 AM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
Michael Johnson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,039
Default Idea of the muscle car is dead (Or, why Ford can't sell carsnow)

Joe wrote:
> Michael Johnson > wrote in
> :
>
>> Joe wrote:
>>> Michael Johnson > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> Joe wrote:
>>>>> Michael Johnson > wrote in
>>>>> :
>>>>>
>>>>> <major snippage>
>>>>>
>>>>>> It is going to take some MAJOR breakdown in our way of life before
>>>>>> the population gets off its collective ass and makes real change
>>>>>> happen. By then the Democrats and, to a lesser extent, the
>>>>>> Republicans may have us screwed so bad there are no alternatives
>>>>>> left. Either way we are getting EXACTLY what we deserve for being
>>>>>> so apathetic for decades. I wouldn't blame the younger people if
>>>>>> they just told all the Baby Boomers that when they retire they
>>>>>> will be euthanized since they squandered all the money that was to
>>>>>> go toward their retirement costs.
>>>>> Saw an interview with Andrew J. Bacevich last night on Bill Moyers'
>>>>> Journal on PBS. Absolutely riveting, and that's not an
>>>>> exaggeration.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bacevich is highly accredited and tells the real story - he is
>>>>> right on the money IMO.
>>>>>
>>>>> Here's a preview of what he's all about:
>>>>> http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/08152008/profile.html
>>>> It sounds interesting. I agree that our biggest threats come from
>>>> within our own borders and I'll go even further and say they come
>>>> from the very politicians we elect to solve our problems. It
>>>> wouldn't take them more than a year to pass all the legislation
>>>> needed to right the ship. It will take years to actually make it
>>>> happen but to set the framework for it would be easy. I think there
>>>> needs to be a fundamental change in our political structure and it
>>>> needs to start with term limits. I think career politicians are
>>>> killing this country.
>>> Bacevich knows what he's talking about. Here's a brief bio on him:
>>> http://www.bu.edu/ir/faculty/bacevich.html
>>>
>>> Here's an interesting article he wrote last month for the Boston
>>> Globe:
>>>

> http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ed.../articles/2008
>>> /07/01/what_bush_hath_wrought/

>> I don't agree with all his assessments in this article. I'm not a
>> water carrier for Bush these days but some of the things he bashes
>> Bush on in that article are yet to be determined. As time passes the
>> real benefit or folly of the Iraq war will be known. A talking head
>> just can't say whether it was, or wasn't, worth the expense at this
>> point in time. I don't know much about this guy but reading that
>> article didn't do must to impress me with his insight on foreign
>> affairs. He seems a little too biased. He made too many statements
>> of fact when all the facts aren't known at this juncture.
>>
>> Iraq could very well turn out like Vietnam. When one looks at Vietnam
>> in and of itself it wasn't a war worth fighting. When put into
>> context with the overall goal of stopping the expansion of communism,
>> opinions as to its worth change. Had the USSR been allowed to expand
>> their influence unchecked we might have a very different world. The
>> same can be applied to the radical Islamics today. If they are
>> allowed to run unchecked we might be facing a dire situation 25, 50 or
>> 100 years from now. No one, and I repeat NO ONE, knows whether the
>> decision to invade and transform Iraq to a more Western political
>> ideology was a worthwhile endeavor. It is way too early to tell.
>> When I read this guy stating unequivocally that the Iraq war was a
>> mistake it makes me think he has too high an opinion of his mental
>> prowess.
>>
>>> To date, nobody else has professed more sobering ideas than Bacevich
>>> IMO. Unfortunately, it will take a radical mindset change in America
>>> before we see real change such as he describes.

>> The guy has some good ideas from a domestic standpoint but like most
>> talking heads, he is far from having all the answers to our problems.
>> Thanks for the heads-up on him though. It never hurts to get all
>> sides of the argument.

>
> After watching the piece 60 minutes did tonight on Valerie Plame, I'm
> more convinced than ever that the Bush administration should and will be
> thought of as one of the more corrupt and irresponsible administrations
> in history. If nothing else, it proves that politics in the 21st
> century is most definitely out of control, and the current
> administration is right at the forefront.


IMO, the Plame case was them looking for their 15 minutes of fame. They
tried to do everything possible to stay in the spotlight. There was
probably a money angle in it for them. The Plame investigation was the
Democrats version of the Kenneth Star investigation except it never got
as much traction. The only thing that came from it was Scooter Libby's
perjury conviction that had nothing to do with the original
investigation. Plus, I don't look to CBS, ABC, NBC etc. to provide
unbiased news or reporting.

I have no doubt that Bush sold the war to the public, Congress and the
world, in general. Then again all wars have to be sold in this country.
IMO, what we have today is a bunch of Monday morning quarterbacks
whining about being duped and/or using this issue to score political
hits. The reality is the overwhelming majority of people whining now
bought into it and went right along with Bush. Then when things got
dicey they bailed and started revising history to make themselves look
like prophets. Now that Iraq is stabilizing they are running back the
other way. We won't know if the Iraq war was worthwhile for another two
decades, if not longer.

> Bacevich certainly has an ax to grind; his son was killed in Iraq.


This explains his tone. It also requires a footnote be placed on his
statements. Things like this cloud people's judgment and can skew their
thought process.

> However, all his ideas are based on factual history. He's certainly one
> of the most respected and knowledgable people that have spoken on these
> issues, and what he says makes the most sense to me out of anybody I've
> heard to date.


From what little I have read I respect his domestic ideas more than his
geopolitical ones.
  #146  
Old August 18th 08, 02:44 AM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
Joe[_113_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17
Default Idea of the muscle car is dead (Or, why Ford can't sell cars now)

Michael Johnson > wrote in
:

> Joe wrote:
>> Michael Johnson > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> Joe wrote:
>>>> Michael Johnson > wrote in
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>> Joe wrote:
>>>>>> Michael Johnson > wrote in
>>>>>> :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <major snippage>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It is going to take some MAJOR breakdown in our way of life
>>>>>>> before the population gets off its collective ass and makes real
>>>>>>> change happen. By then the Democrats and, to a lesser extent,
>>>>>>> the Republicans may have us screwed so bad there are no
>>>>>>> alternatives left. Either way we are getting EXACTLY what we
>>>>>>> deserve for being so apathetic for decades. I wouldn't blame
>>>>>>> the younger people if they just told all the Baby Boomers that
>>>>>>> when they retire they will be euthanized since they squandered
>>>>>>> all the money that was to go toward their retirement costs.
>>>>>> Saw an interview with Andrew J. Bacevich last night on Bill
>>>>>> Moyers' Journal on PBS. Absolutely riveting, and that's not an
>>>>>> exaggeration.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bacevich is highly accredited and tells the real story - he is
>>>>>> right on the money IMO.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here's a preview of what he's all about:
>>>>>> http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/08152008/profile.html
>>>>> It sounds interesting. I agree that our biggest threats come from
>>>>> within our own borders and I'll go even further and say they come
>>>>> from the very politicians we elect to solve our problems. It
>>>>> wouldn't take them more than a year to pass all the legislation
>>>>> needed to right the ship. It will take years to actually make it
>>>>> happen but to set the framework for it would be easy. I think
>>>>> there needs to be a fundamental change in our political structure
>>>>> and it needs to start with term limits. I think career
>>>>> politicians are killing this country.
>>>> Bacevich knows what he's talking about. Here's a brief bio on him:
>>>> http://www.bu.edu/ir/faculty/bacevich.html
>>>>
>>>> Here's an interesting article he wrote last month for the Boston
>>>> Globe:
>>>>

>>

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ed.../articles/2008
>>>> /07/01/what_bush_hath_wrought/
>>> I don't agree with all his assessments in this article. I'm not a
>>> water carrier for Bush these days but some of the things he bashes
>>> Bush on in that article are yet to be determined. As time passes
>>> the real benefit or folly of the Iraq war will be known. A talking
>>> head just can't say whether it was, or wasn't, worth the expense at
>>> this point in time. I don't know much about this guy but reading
>>> that article didn't do must to impress me with his insight on
>>> foreign affairs. He seems a little too biased. He made too many
>>> statements of fact when all the facts aren't known at this juncture.
>>>
>>> Iraq could very well turn out like Vietnam. When one looks at
>>> Vietnam in and of itself it wasn't a war worth fighting. When put
>>> into context with the overall goal of stopping the expansion of
>>> communism, opinions as to its worth change. Had the USSR been
>>> allowed to expand their influence unchecked we might have a very
>>> different world. The same can be applied to the radical Islamics
>>> today. If they are allowed to run unchecked we might be facing a
>>> dire situation 25, 50 or 100 years from now. No one, and I repeat
>>> NO ONE, knows whether the decision to invade and transform Iraq to a
>>> more Western political ideology was a worthwhile endeavor. It is
>>> way too early to tell. When I read this guy stating unequivocally
>>> that the Iraq war was a mistake it makes me think he has too high an
>>> opinion of his mental prowess.
>>>
>>>> To date, nobody else has professed more sobering ideas than
>>>> Bacevich IMO. Unfortunately, it will take a radical mindset change
>>>> in America before we see real change such as he describes.
>>> The guy has some good ideas from a domestic standpoint but like most
>>> talking heads, he is far from having all the answers to our
>>> problems. Thanks for the heads-up on him though. It never hurts to
>>> get all sides of the argument.

>>
>> After watching the piece 60 minutes did tonight on Valerie Plame, I'm
>> more convinced than ever that the Bush administration should and will
>> be thought of as one of the more corrupt and irresponsible
>> administrations in history. If nothing else, it proves that politics
>> in the 21st century is most definitely out of control, and the
>> current administration is right at the forefront.

>
> IMO, the Plame case was them looking for their 15 minutes of fame.
> They tried to do everything possible to stay in the spotlight. There
> was probably a money angle in it for them. The Plame investigation
> was the Democrats version of the Kenneth Star investigation except it
> never got as much traction. The only thing that came from it was
> Scooter Libby's perjury conviction that had nothing to do with the
> original investigation. Plus, I don't look to CBS, ABC, NBC etc. to
> provide unbiased news or reporting.


Bush and his cronies (and yes, he _is_ ultimately responsible for the
actions of his people) outed Valerie Plame (which, by the way, is an act
of treason and a capitol offense during wartime, and we are at war
according to Bush) because Bush wanted revenge against her husband, Joe
Wilson, for exposing the sham about Niger and yellowcake uranium. To
top it off, Bush outright lied when he said that he'd fire anyone
involved with leaking the name.

IMO, allegations (whether true or not) that news sources are all biased
and untrustworthy is an excuse not to look at the facts.

> I have no doubt that Bush sold the war to the public, Congress and the
> world, in general. Then again all wars have to be sold in this
> country.


Maybe in this day and age, and that's one of the major problems. Why do
wars have to be "sold" in the first place?

> IMO, what we have today is a bunch of Monday morning quarterbacks
> whining about being duped and/or using this issue to score political
> hits. The reality is the overwhelming majority of people whining now
> bought into it and went right along with Bush. Then when things got
> dicey they bailed and started revising history to make themselves look
> like prophets. Now that Iraq is stabilizing they are running back the
> other way. We won't know if the Iraq war was worthwhile for another
> two decades, if not longer.


I completely disagree. IMO, many of the horrible truths about this
adminstration's chicanery are now being brought into the public's view,
and as a result, more and more people are questioning what the hell has
been going on.

>> Bacevich certainly has an ax to grind; his son was killed in Iraq.

>
> This explains his tone. It also requires a footnote be placed on his
> statements. Things like this cloud people's judgment and can skew
> their thought process.


Bacevich has been up front all along about his son's death, and his
views and ideas are all valid regardless. He's still one of the few
people who make total sense.

>> However, all his ideas are based on factual history. He's certainly
>> one of the most respected and knowledgable people that have spoken on
>> these issues, and what he says makes the most sense to me out of
>> anybody I've heard to date.

>
> From what little I have read I respect his domestic ideas more than
> his
> geopolitical ones.


You might want to read more, as he's making the most sense of anyone
these days.
  #147  
Old August 18th 08, 03:37 AM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
Michael Johnson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,039
Default Idea of the muscle car is dead (Or, why Ford can't sell carsnow)

Joe wrote:
> Michael Johnson > wrote in
> :
>
>> Joe wrote:
>>> Michael Johnson > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> Joe wrote:
>>>>> Michael Johnson > wrote in
>>>>> :
>>>>>
>>>>>> Joe wrote:
>>>>>>> Michael Johnson > wrote in
>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <major snippage>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It is going to take some MAJOR breakdown in our way of life
>>>>>>>> before the population gets off its collective ass and makes real
>>>>>>>> change happen. By then the Democrats and, to a lesser extent,
>>>>>>>> the Republicans may have us screwed so bad there are no
>>>>>>>> alternatives left. Either way we are getting EXACTLY what we
>>>>>>>> deserve for being so apathetic for decades. I wouldn't blame
>>>>>>>> the younger people if they just told all the Baby Boomers that
>>>>>>>> when they retire they will be euthanized since they squandered
>>>>>>>> all the money that was to go toward their retirement costs.
>>>>>>> Saw an interview with Andrew J. Bacevich last night on Bill
>>>>>>> Moyers' Journal on PBS. Absolutely riveting, and that's not an
>>>>>>> exaggeration.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bacevich is highly accredited and tells the real story - he is
>>>>>>> right on the money IMO.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here's a preview of what he's all about:
>>>>>>> http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/08152008/profile.html
>>>>>> It sounds interesting. I agree that our biggest threats come from
>>>>>> within our own borders and I'll go even further and say they come
>>>>>> from the very politicians we elect to solve our problems. It
>>>>>> wouldn't take them more than a year to pass all the legislation
>>>>>> needed to right the ship. It will take years to actually make it
>>>>>> happen but to set the framework for it would be easy. I think
>>>>>> there needs to be a fundamental change in our political structure
>>>>>> and it needs to start with term limits. I think career
>>>>>> politicians are killing this country.
>>>>> Bacevich knows what he's talking about. Here's a brief bio on him:
>>>>> http://www.bu.edu/ir/faculty/bacevich.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Here's an interesting article he wrote last month for the Boston
>>>>> Globe:
>>>>>

> http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ed.../articles/2008
>>>>> /07/01/what_bush_hath_wrought/
>>>> I don't agree with all his assessments in this article. I'm not a
>>>> water carrier for Bush these days but some of the things he bashes
>>>> Bush on in that article are yet to be determined. As time passes
>>>> the real benefit or folly of the Iraq war will be known. A talking
>>>> head just can't say whether it was, or wasn't, worth the expense at
>>>> this point in time. I don't know much about this guy but reading
>>>> that article didn't do must to impress me with his insight on
>>>> foreign affairs. He seems a little too biased. He made too many
>>>> statements of fact when all the facts aren't known at this juncture.
>>>>
>>>> Iraq could very well turn out like Vietnam. When one looks at
>>>> Vietnam in and of itself it wasn't a war worth fighting. When put
>>>> into context with the overall goal of stopping the expansion of
>>>> communism, opinions as to its worth change. Had the USSR been
>>>> allowed to expand their influence unchecked we might have a very
>>>> different world. The same can be applied to the radical Islamics
>>>> today. If they are allowed to run unchecked we might be facing a
>>>> dire situation 25, 50 or 100 years from now. No one, and I repeat
>>>> NO ONE, knows whether the decision to invade and transform Iraq to a
>>>> more Western political ideology was a worthwhile endeavor. It is
>>>> way too early to tell. When I read this guy stating unequivocally
>>>> that the Iraq war was a mistake it makes me think he has too high an
>>>> opinion of his mental prowess.
>>>>
>>>>> To date, nobody else has professed more sobering ideas than
>>>>> Bacevich IMO. Unfortunately, it will take a radical mindset change
>>>>> in America before we see real change such as he describes.
>>>> The guy has some good ideas from a domestic standpoint but like most
>>>> talking heads, he is far from having all the answers to our
>>>> problems. Thanks for the heads-up on him though. It never hurts to
>>>> get all sides of the argument.
>>> After watching the piece 60 minutes did tonight on Valerie Plame, I'm
>>> more convinced than ever that the Bush administration should and will
>>> be thought of as one of the more corrupt and irresponsible
>>> administrations in history. If nothing else, it proves that politics
>>> in the 21st century is most definitely out of control, and the
>>> current administration is right at the forefront.

>> IMO, the Plame case was them looking for their 15 minutes of fame.
>> They tried to do everything possible to stay in the spotlight. There
>> was probably a money angle in it for them. The Plame investigation
>> was the Democrats version of the Kenneth Star investigation except it
>> never got as much traction. The only thing that came from it was
>> Scooter Libby's perjury conviction that had nothing to do with the
>> original investigation. Plus, I don't look to CBS, ABC, NBC etc. to
>> provide unbiased news or reporting.

>
> Bush and his cronies (and yes, he _is_ ultimately responsible for the
> actions of his people) outed Valerie Plame (which, by the way, is an act
> of treason and a capitol offense during wartime, and we are at war
> according to Bush) because Bush wanted revenge against her husband, Joe
> Wilson, for exposing the sham about Niger and yellowcake uranium. To
> top it off, Bush outright lied when he said that he'd fire anyone
> involved with leaking the name.


Her operations in the CIA weren't all that secret. She and her husband
made it no secret she was working for the CIA. They made it sound like
they were on some super secret mission when they were supposedly outed.
This was just one of dozens of ways the Democrats tried to pin
something on Bush and his staff. They wasted so much time on this stuff
instead of solving some real problems like the rising cost of oil. The
Democrats have been fiddling trying to nail Bush while Rome burned.

> IMO, allegations (whether true or not) that news sources are all biased
> and untrustworthy is an excuse not to look at the facts.


That is the problem though. You can't rely on the media to present the
facts. All I know (and all 99.999999% of us know) is that millions of
dollars were spent on a witch hunt that yielded Libby getting his hand
smacked for perjury which had nothing to do with the original reason for
the investigation. Then after the investigation was over Plame tried to
suck off the government tit some more by launching a civil lawsuit but
her case was thrown out of court because it had no merit.

>> I have no doubt that Bush sold the war to the public, Congress and the
>> world, in general. Then again all wars have to be sold in this
>> country.

>
> Maybe in this day and age, and that's one of the major problems. Why do
> wars have to be "sold" in the first place?


It has always been this way. The Revolutionary War had to be sold as
did the Civil War, WWI, WWII, the Vietnam War and the Afghanistan and
Iraq wars. The next one will have to be sold too. During WWII the
government regularly manipulated the news and other information fed to
the general population to keep interest in the war high and bad news in
the shadows. It is just the way mankind works because wars need the
support of a majority of people to be fought and won.

>> IMO, what we have today is a bunch of Monday morning quarterbacks
>> whining about being duped and/or using this issue to score political
>> hits. The reality is the overwhelming majority of people whining now
>> bought into it and went right along with Bush. Then when things got
>> dicey they bailed and started revising history to make themselves look
>> like prophets. Now that Iraq is stabilizing they are running back the
>> other way. We won't know if the Iraq war was worthwhile for another
>> two decades, if not longer.

>
> I completely disagree. IMO, many of the horrible truths about this
> adminstration's chicanery are now being brought into the public's view,
> and as a result, more and more people are questioning what the hell has
> been going on.


IMO, we can all get whatever we want from the news reports. I don't
claim to know one way or the other who did what to whom. Whether the
war was worth the cost in dollars and lives won't be known for decades, IMO.

>>> Bacevich certainly has an ax to grind; his son was killed in Iraq.

>> This explains his tone. It also requires a footnote be placed on his
>> statements. Things like this cloud people's judgment and can skew
>> their thought process.

>
> Bacevich has been up front all along about his son's death, and his
> views and ideas are all valid regardless. He's still one of the few
> people who make total sense.


He seems a little too sure of himself for me to give him my unwaivering
seal of approval.

>>> However, all his ideas are based on factual history. He's certainly
>>> one of the most respected and knowledgable people that have spoken on
>>> these issues, and what he says makes the most sense to me out of
>>> anybody I've heard to date.

>> From what little I have read I respect his domestic ideas more than
>> his
>> geopolitical ones.

>
> You might want to read more, as he's making the most sense of anyone
> these days.


He might be. I'll try and read his stuff more now that I know he is out
there.
  #148  
Old August 19th 08, 12:57 AM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
Joe[_114_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7
Default Idea of the muscle car is dead (Or, why Ford can't sell cars now)

Michael Johnson > wrote in
:

> Joe wrote:
>> Michael Johnson > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> Joe wrote:
>>>> Michael Johnson > wrote in
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>> Joe wrote:
>>>>>> Michael Johnson > wrote in
>>>>>> :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Joe wrote:
>>>>>>>> Michael Johnson > wrote in
>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <major snippage>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It is going to take some MAJOR breakdown in our way of life
>>>>>>>>> before the population gets off its collective ass and makes
>>>>>>>>> real change happen. By then the Democrats and, to a lesser
>>>>>>>>> extent, the Republicans may have us screwed so bad there are
>>>>>>>>> no alternatives left. Either way we are getting EXACTLY what
>>>>>>>>> we deserve for being so apathetic for decades. I wouldn't
>>>>>>>>> blame the younger people if they just told all the Baby
>>>>>>>>> Boomers that when they retire they will be euthanized since
>>>>>>>>> they squandered all the money that was to go toward their
>>>>>>>>> retirement costs.
>>>>>>>> Saw an interview with Andrew J. Bacevich last night on Bill
>>>>>>>> Moyers' Journal on PBS. Absolutely riveting, and that's not an
>>>>>>>> exaggeration.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bacevich is highly accredited and tells the real story - he is
>>>>>>>> right on the money IMO.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Here's a preview of what he's all about:
>>>>>>>> http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/08152008/profile.html
>>>>>>> It sounds interesting. I agree that our biggest threats come
>>>>>>> from within our own borders and I'll go even further and say
>>>>>>> they come from the very politicians we elect to solve our
>>>>>>> problems. It wouldn't take them more than a year to pass all
>>>>>>> the legislation needed to right the ship. It will take years to
>>>>>>> actually make it happen but to set the framework for it would be
>>>>>>> easy. I think there needs to be a fundamental change in our
>>>>>>> political structure and it needs to start with term limits. I
>>>>>>> think career politicians are killing this country.
>>>>>> Bacevich knows what he's talking about. Here's a brief bio on
>>>>>> him: http://www.bu.edu/ir/faculty/bacevich.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here's an interesting article he wrote last month for the Boston
>>>>>> Globe:
>>>>>>

>>

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ed.../articles/2008
>>>>>> /07/01/what_bush_hath_wrought/
>>>>> I don't agree with all his assessments in this article. I'm not a
>>>>> water carrier for Bush these days but some of the things he bashes
>>>>> Bush on in that article are yet to be determined. As time passes
>>>>> the real benefit or folly of the Iraq war will be known. A
>>>>> talking head just can't say whether it was, or wasn't, worth the
>>>>> expense at this point in time. I don't know much about this guy
>>>>> but reading that article didn't do must to impress me with his
>>>>> insight on foreign affairs. He seems a little too biased. He
>>>>> made too many statements of fact when all the facts aren't known
>>>>> at this juncture.
>>>>>
>>>>> Iraq could very well turn out like Vietnam. When one looks at
>>>>> Vietnam in and of itself it wasn't a war worth fighting. When put
>>>>> into context with the overall goal of stopping the expansion of
>>>>> communism, opinions as to its worth change. Had the USSR been
>>>>> allowed to expand their influence unchecked we might have a very
>>>>> different world. The same can be applied to the radical Islamics
>>>>> today. If they are allowed to run unchecked we might be facing a
>>>>> dire situation 25, 50 or 100 years from now. No one, and I repeat
>>>>> NO ONE, knows whether the decision to invade and transform Iraq to
>>>>> a more Western political ideology was a worthwhile endeavor. It
>>>>> is way too early to tell. When I read this guy stating
>>>>> unequivocally that the Iraq war was a mistake it makes me think he
>>>>> has too high an opinion of his mental prowess.
>>>>>
>>>>>> To date, nobody else has professed more sobering ideas than
>>>>>> Bacevich IMO. Unfortunately, it will take a radical mindset
>>>>>> change in America before we see real change such as he describes.
>>>>> The guy has some good ideas from a domestic standpoint but like
>>>>> most talking heads, he is far from having all the answers to our
>>>>> problems. Thanks for the heads-up on him though. It never hurts
>>>>> to get all sides of the argument.
>>>> After watching the piece 60 minutes did tonight on Valerie Plame,
>>>> I'm more convinced than ever that the Bush administration should
>>>> and will be thought of as one of the more corrupt and irresponsible
>>>> administrations in history. If nothing else, it proves that
>>>> politics in the 21st century is most definitely out of control, and
>>>> the current administration is right at the forefront.
>>> IMO, the Plame case was them looking for their 15 minutes of fame.
>>> They tried to do everything possible to stay in the spotlight.
>>> There was probably a money angle in it for them. The Plame
>>> investigation was the Democrats version of the Kenneth Star
>>> investigation except it never got as much traction. The only thing
>>> that came from it was Scooter Libby's perjury conviction that had
>>> nothing to do with the original investigation. Plus, I don't look
>>> to CBS, ABC, NBC etc. to provide unbiased news or reporting.

>>
>> Bush and his cronies (and yes, he _is_ ultimately responsible for the
>> actions of his people) outed Valerie Plame (which, by the way, is an
>> act of treason and a capitol offense during wartime, and we are at
>> war according to Bush) because Bush wanted revenge against her
>> husband, Joe Wilson, for exposing the sham about Niger and yellowcake
>> uranium. To top it off, Bush outright lied when he said that he'd
>> fire anyone involved with leaking the name.

>
> Her operations in the CIA weren't all that secret. She and her
> husband made it no secret she was working for the CIA. They made it
> sound like they were on some super secret mission when they were
> supposedly outed.
> This was just one of dozens of ways the Democrats tried to pin
> something on Bush and his staff. They wasted so much time on this
> stuff instead of solving some real problems like the rising cost of
> oil. The Democrats have been fiddling trying to nail Bush while Rome
> burned.


By no means are the Democrats innocent. But I'm still convinced that
the current administration is guilty of a lot more than they've been
held accountable for.

>> IMO, allegations (whether true or not) that news sources are all
>> biased and untrustworthy is an excuse not to look at the facts.

>
> That is the problem though. You can't rely on the media to present
> the facts. All I know (and all 99.999999% of us know) is that
> millions of dollars were spent on a witch hunt that yielded Libby
> getting his hand smacked for perjury which had nothing to do with the
> original reason for the investigation. Then after the investigation
> was over Plame tried to suck off the government tit some more by
> launching a civil lawsuit but her case was thrown out of court because
> it had no merit.


The facts are out there - it just takes a bit more legwork to find them.
My only point was that some people's claims that they can't find facts
to support certain allegations is nonsense. Facts are there, they just
need to have all the crap scraped off them.

>>> I have no doubt that Bush sold the war to the public, Congress and
>>> the world, in general. Then again all wars have to be sold in this
>>> country.

>>
>> Maybe in this day and age, and that's one of the major problems. Why
>> do wars have to be "sold" in the first place?

>
> It has always been this way. The Revolutionary War had to be sold as
> did the Civil War, WWI, WWII, the Vietnam War and the Afghanistan and
> Iraq wars. The next one will have to be sold too.


Perhaps we have different ideas about "selling" war. When a cause is
obviously justfied, there's no selling involved IMO. The example that
immediately comes to mind was Peal Harbor. Sure people can cite 9/11 as
well, but the big difference is that the "enemy" in 9/11 was never
correctly identified until recently. Even then, we continue to plunder
along in the wrong arena.

> During WWII the
> government regularly manipulated the news and other information fed to
> the general population to keep interest in the war high and bad news
> in the shadows. It is just the way mankind works because wars need
> the support of a majority of people to be fought and won.


There is a huge difference between Americans supporting a just cause and
Americans being sold a war like it's a used car.

>>> IMO, what we have today is a bunch of Monday morning quarterbacks
>>> whining about being duped and/or using this issue to score political
>>> hits. The reality is the overwhelming majority of people whining
>>> now bought into it and went right along with Bush. Then when things
>>> got dicey they bailed and started revising history to make
>>> themselves look like prophets. Now that Iraq is stabilizing they
>>> are running back the other way. We won't know if the Iraq war was
>>> worthwhile for another two decades, if not longer.

>>
>> I completely disagree. IMO, many of the horrible truths about this
>> adminstration's chicanery are now being brought into the public's
>> view, and as a result, more and more people are questioning what the
>> hell has been going on.

>
> IMO, we can all get whatever we want from the news reports. I don't
> claim to know one way or the other who did what to whom. Whether the
> war was worth the cost in dollars and lives won't be known for
> decades, IMO.


Sorry, Michael, but I believe that's utter nonsense. Simply put, we are
involved in something we should not be because of certain people's
agendas.

>>>> Bacevich certainly has an ax to grind; his son was killed in Iraq.
>>> This explains his tone. It also requires a footnote be placed on
>>> his statements. Things like this cloud people's judgment and can
>>> skew their thought process.

>>
>> Bacevich has been up front all along about his son's death, and his
>> views and ideas are all valid regardless. He's still one of the few
>> people who make total sense.

>
> He seems a little too sure of himself for me to give him my
> unwaivering seal of approval.


I'm not asking you to give him any kind of approval. I'm simply
pointing out that what he says and what he's said make more sense to me
than just about anyone else I've heard on the course of American
history. If you disagree, that's fine. Please tell me who makes more
sense to you and I'll gladly read him/her.

>>>> However, all his ideas are based on factual history. He's
>>>> certainly one of the most respected and knowledgable people that
>>>> have spoken on these issues, and what he says makes the most sense
>>>> to me out of anybody I've heard to date.
>>> From what little I have read I respect his domestic ideas more than
>>> his
>>> geopolitical ones.

>>
>> You might want to read more, as he's making the most sense of anyone
>> these days.

>
> He might be. I'll try and read his stuff more now that I know he is
> out there.


It's nothing to do with Bacevich, but this is a very interesting link
nonetheless:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKFKGrmsBDk&fmt=18
  #149  
Old August 19th 08, 02:12 AM posted to rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang
Michael Johnson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,039
Default Idea of the muscle car is dead (Or, why Ford can't sell carsnow)

Joe wrote:
> Michael Johnson > wrote in
> :
>
>> Joe wrote:
>>> Michael Johnson > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> Joe wrote:<snip>
>>> Bush and his cronies (and yes, he _is_ ultimately responsible for the
>>> actions of his people) outed Valerie Plame (which, by the way, is an
>>> act of treason and a capitol offense during wartime, and we are at
>>> war according to Bush) because Bush wanted revenge against her
>>> husband, Joe Wilson, for exposing the sham about Niger and yellowcake
>>> uranium. To top it off, Bush outright lied when he said that he'd
>>> fire anyone involved with leaking the name.

>> Her operations in the CIA weren't all that secret. She and her
>> husband made it no secret she was working for the CIA. They made it
>> sound like they were on some super secret mission when they were
>> supposedly outed.
>> This was just one of dozens of ways the Democrats tried to pin
>> something on Bush and his staff. They wasted so much time on this
>> stuff instead of solving some real problems like the rising cost of
>> oil. The Democrats have been fiddling trying to nail Bush while Rome
>> burned.

>
> By no means are the Democrats innocent. But I'm still convinced that
> the current administration is guilty of a lot more than they've been
> held accountable for.


I guess the very same complaints the Democrats had about the Republicans
when Clinton was in office are now applicable to them. They have wasted
two years trying to pin anything on Bush and it was all in vain. The
hypocrisy on both sides is so thick you can cut it with a knife. I only
give the Republicans a slight edge because when it comes to things like
taxes, drilling etc. they talk a good game but then even they never seem
to be able to close the deal.

>>> IMO, allegations (whether true or not) that news sources are all
>>> biased and untrustworthy is an excuse not to look at the facts.

>> That is the problem though. You can't rely on the media to present
>> the facts. All I know (and all 99.999999% of us know) is that
>> millions of dollars were spent on a witch hunt that yielded Libby
>> getting his hand smacked for perjury which had nothing to do with the
>> original reason for the investigation. Then after the investigation
>> was over Plame tried to suck off the government tit some more by
>> launching a civil lawsuit but her case was thrown out of court because
>> it had no merit.

>
> The facts are out there - it just takes a bit more legwork to find them.
> My only point was that some people's claims that they can't find facts
> to support certain allegations is nonsense. Facts are there, they just
> need to have all the crap scraped off them.


The facts are somewhere but neither side can be trusted to present them.
They each have something to gain from their story being accepted as
truth. This story is going the way of Roswell. The truth will never be
known.

>>>> I have no doubt that Bush sold the war to the public, Congress and
>>>> the world, in general. Then again all wars have to be sold in this
>>>> country.
>>> Maybe in this day and age, and that's one of the major problems. Why
>>> do wars have to be "sold" in the first place?

>> It has always been this way. The Revolutionary War had to be sold as
>> did the Civil War, WWI, WWII, the Vietnam War and the Afghanistan and
>> Iraq wars. The next one will have to be sold too.

>
> Perhaps we have different ideas about "selling" war. When a cause is
> obviously justfied, there's no selling involved IMO. The example that
> immediately comes to mind was Peal Harbor. Sure people can cite 9/11 as
> well, but the big difference is that the "enemy" in 9/11 was never
> correctly identified until recently. Even then, we continue to plunder
> along in the wrong arena.


IMO, the Iraq War is the same kind of war as the Vietnam War. They are
tactical wars that fit into a bigger strategic picture. Before the
worth of these kind of wars are known a good bit of time has to pass to
see the results. If Iraq does stabilize and becomes a positive force in
that part of the world then history will be a kinder judge of Bush. The
Middle East needs to be brought into the 21st century and a strong, and
basically democratic, Iraq would be a good start to accomplishing it.
If Iraq does prove pivotal in reshaping the Middle East would you change
you mind about whether the war was justified? I think there are some
people that won't regardless of the outcome.

>> During WWII the
>> government regularly manipulated the news and other information fed to
>> the general population to keep interest in the war high and bad news
>> in the shadows. It is just the way mankind works because wars need
>> the support of a majority of people to be fought and won.

>
> There is a huge difference between Americans supporting a just cause and
> Americans being sold a war like it's a used car.


I think saying Americans were sold a bogus war is ignoring the many
Americans that felt the war was worth fighting. Right now I think it
was worth fighting and I don't feel I was sold anything. Besides, Bush
did get re-elected so at least a majority of the voting public wanted to
give him four more years. There are still a lot of people that support
the successful prosecution of the war to the end. If the public is as
much against the war as the liberals claim, then Obama would be miles
ahead of McCain in the polls instead of being tied. By all normal
conventions, Obama should be wiping the floor with McCain.

>>>> IMO, what we have today is a bunch of Monday morning quarterbacks
>>>> whining about being duped and/or using this issue to score political
>>>> hits. The reality is the overwhelming majority of people whining
>>>> now bought into it and went right along with Bush. Then when things
>>>> got dicey they bailed and started revising history to make
>>>> themselves look like prophets. Now that Iraq is stabilizing they
>>>> are running back the other way. We won't know if the Iraq war was
>>>> worthwhile for another two decades, if not longer.
>>> I completely disagree. IMO, many of the horrible truths about this
>>> adminstration's chicanery are now being brought into the public's
>>> view, and as a result, more and more people are questioning what the
>>> hell has been going on.

>> IMO, we can all get whatever we want from the news reports. I don't
>> claim to know one way or the other who did what to whom. Whether the
>> war was worth the cost in dollars and lives won't be known for
>> decades, IMO.

>
> Sorry, Michael, but I believe that's utter nonsense. Simply put, we are
> involved in something we should not be because of certain people's
> agendas.


Every war is someone's agenda. The Revolutionary War was more the
agenda of the aristocracy than the common man. It was conceived,
planned and managed by the wealthy like Jefferson, Washington, Franklin
etc. Bush didn't start this war on his own. Congress and the UN was
right there with him. There is a lot of people trying to revise history
on the Iraq War before its history is even finalized.

>>>>> Bacevich certainly has an ax to grind; his son was killed in Iraq.
>>>> This explains his tone. It also requires a footnote be placed on
>>>> his statements. Things like this cloud people's judgment and can
>>>> skew their thought process.
>>> Bacevich has been up front all along about his son's death, and his
>>> views and ideas are all valid regardless. He's still one of the few
>>> people who make total sense.

>> He seems a little too sure of himself for me to give him my
>> unwaivering seal of approval.

>
> I'm not asking you to give him any kind of approval. I'm simply
> pointing out that what he says and what he's said make more sense to me
> than just about anyone else I've heard on the course of American
> history. If you disagree, that's fine. Please tell me who makes more
> sense to you and I'll gladly read him/her.


No one makes total sense on everything. This guy is no different. I
don't see how anyone can determine the worth of fighting in Iraq at this
point in time. It is too early to tell. Was the Vietnam War worth
fighting? That can be intelligently debated both ways. The only way we
can know for sure is to know what the course of history would have been
from not fighting it and that will never be known. Had we not
confronted the Soviets in Vietnam we might be fighting a conventional
war in Japan or South Korea right now.

>>>>> However, all his ideas are based on factual history. He's
>>>>> certainly one of the most respected and knowledgable people that
>>>>> have spoken on these issues, and what he says makes the most sense
>>>>> to me out of anybody I've heard to date.
>>>> From what little I have read I respect his domestic ideas more than
>>>> his
>>>> geopolitical ones.
>>> You might want to read more, as he's making the most sense of anyone
>>> these days.

>> He might be. I'll try and read his stuff more now that I know he is
>> out there.

>
> It's nothing to do with Bacevich, but this is a very interesting link
> nonetheless:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKFKGrmsBDk&fmt=18


He's definitely a person that sees the glass as half empty.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New - Mercury Muscle Cars Muscle Car Color History Book, Cover - Front.jpg 255893 bytes HEMI-Powered@[email protected] Auto Photos 0 April 23rd 08 01:02 PM
New - Mercury Muscle Cars Muscle Car Color History Book, Cover - Back.jpg 242202 bytes HEMI-Powered@[email protected] Auto Photos 0 April 23rd 08 01:01 PM
A whole new way to buy & sell muscle cars on the net. [email protected] Antique cars 0 January 23rd 05 09:35 AM
A whole new way to buy & sell muscle cars on the net. [email protected] Antique cars 0 January 23rd 05 09:31 AM
New place to buy and sell muscle cars on the net. [email protected] Antique cars 0 January 23rd 05 09:30 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.