Who would you vote for in November presedential elections?

talk random
101

sorry for the long time reply but, Our government says it will help our farmers, and give us an advantage over us farmers, but US farmers have government subsedies, giving them the ability to undercut australian farmers. Also Bush said it would benifit ammerican farmers.

i also have reservations with the deal, why would the largest ecconomy in the world want to make a FTA with Australia, a realy small ecconomy??? unless they know that they would gain more out of the deal. (or it could be a pay back for our support in the wars, but i’m not sure)

Some notable ecconomists and other respected finacial advisers have spoken out on the deal as it seems to favour the US a little with us not getting free trade in some of our bigest export areas such as Aussie beef and i think aussie made cars. they also wanted to take out out entertainment industry by swamping the aussie market with cheap US made tv shows, but the government was pressured to make ammendments to teh deal by all politicle parties.

I also believe that australia is a little too close to the USA in all areas such as forign policy, culture etc… and that we are loosing a little of our identity. Sure having the US as an ally is good and i support the move to help the USA in the two most recent wars even thought the iraq war was wrong. but i don’t want to see australia becoming the 52nd state of the USA, which seems to become more and more of a reality each year.

sorry for all the bad spelling but i’m kinda doing an Essay for studies of religion at the moment and i’m focusing more on that.

102

[ot]
Hi, there!

Well, actually I guess I won’t participate in this thread any more.
Enough hateful things have been spread here.
Most areguments from either side haven’t been understood and respected on the other side…

anyway about the banning thing:

It is not that I registered another name to make the impression to write as somebody else.
When my account was blocked, I thought that this was something like a server error so I wanted to have a look what was going on.
Since my regular account was blocked (as I found out later on that was not a coincidence) I registered another name to participate in the thread again.
Then this account was blocked too so I even registered a third one.
When I used this third name to see what was going on I read the message, that registering another name would result in a permanent banning.

Well, how should I have even known about this when I couldn’t log in with my regular name since it was blocked?

Just to let you know, I don’t EVER feel the need to pretend to be sombody else or make my point in somebody elses name!
This registering thing has nothing to do with the development of this thread.

I hope you know what I mean since (and I DON’T mean this in a sarcastic way) after the last few days, I am not too sure if my English is always precise enough to express myself comprehensibly.

Besides: telling me about the intention to block my account would have prevented you (telekinesis) and me from this mistunderstandig about this registering thing.[/ot]

See you all soon (in other treads)! :wink:

103

Oh in that case - I don’t blame you for not supporting the FTA :slight_smile: I thought you guys would have had a more favorable trade agreement that other countries such as China or Japan were able to get!

Basically, if you are making any goods that the US also tries to export in large quantities, your FTA will probably be more favorable to the US…unless your country is able to produce the same good with some peculiar quality that the US goods can’t match.

:kommie:

104

[ot]You can still post in the thread. You were not banned from the thread forever. Just the forum for 1 day, eventually which turned into 3 days. I can understand the misunderstanding of the new accounts. Don’t worry about it too much, things happen and you came out and explained the even in a mature manner and I can respect you for that. Just for future reference take me more seriously before you attempt to direct anything of that manner again towards me. I have been here for over four years now moderating this forum, I get along with just about everyone. But I take personal attacks seriously considering my dedication here over the long period of time. Just as you would respect a professor in college no matter if you like him or not, he can kick you out of the class or fail you. I’m the professor, you are the student. You can bring forth any debate, but leave out the directed sarcasm and attacks.

That’s all I have to say about the issue. I have moved on and your slate is clean with me. Considering all the lack of peace going on outside of the internet I’d rather forgive and forget than have enemies. Agreed?

About the banning, for future references I will also send an email stating the banning period and offense that brought forth the banning. I was always under the assumption that the forum notified users of the banning and time of ban when users attempted to login. My mistake.

Again, I’m over it. You can post in any thread you want.

:tie:[/ot]

105

[ot]
Well,

as for the professor - student thing:

Please do not take this as an affront, I do not agree with you.
I do not make a difference between one person and another person
whether he is ‘mighty’ as a moderator in a forum or a professor in a college.

(Sidecomment:
When I went to university there was no problem in having an intense discussion with a professor. There was no difference in the appreciation of opinions. The professors called the students ‘collegues’. But for sure there was a different tone in the discussions than in the discussion we led ;))

What is clear to me is that we both argued pretty emotional and that we went far off a grown up discussion (as well as some others did too).

Anyway censoring in my eyes is not the best way to have the final say.

I do not find anybody’s opinion more important than anybody else’s.
I considered your arguments just as emotional as mine
the only difference is, that you are able to ban me and I am not.

In a non-forum-specific discussion I see everybody’s opinion even in value,
whether it is a moderator’s statement, a regular member’s statement or the statement of an alien or the president of whatsoever.

For the rest I fully respect your role as a moderator.
(As somebody as valuable as everybody else, who has to fulfill special moderator-functions).

What I learned from this is, that I’ll for sure try keep a level head when it comes to discussions on the forum.

So, I’m over it too,

let’s move on to business :wink:

PS:
Would you please delete the two other names I registered (florian & gschuettelter), as I didn’t find a way to do that myself.

Thank you :thumb:
[/ot]

106

[ot]Will do. I will get Kirupa to delete those other two names. The whole point of the teacher/student comparison was basically saying respect your elders. I wouldn’t talk back to an adult, especially sarcastically, out of respect of them being older than myself. I understand it’s not just black and white in the situation so I hear where you are coming from and the points are valid. Well, time to move on. I think I need to avoid political threads. I am the only conservative on this forum.

:P[/ot]

107

[ot]It’s good to show respect to everyone on the forums. Just treat everybody fairly and everything will be fine :thumb: [/ot]

108

[ot]Geesh, how could I have forgotten that word. Everyone of course should be respected and treated fairly. We are all lucky to have a level headed leader.

raises up kirupa flag and waves[/ot]

109

[ot]
we use off topic tags so much we might need on topic tags

i felt leftout for not us ing the off topic tags :frowning:
[/ot]

110

so off base its unreal pomme -

Bush administration has conceded over and over that there is no direct link to Iraq and 9/11

there are however many al qaeda ties that were proved to exist in the past and some until recent present…hussein gave safe passage, supplies, and etc to terrorists yadda yadda yadda you’ve heard this but you’ve chosen to forget it.

also those Iraqi’s fighting us? they are not “terrorists” no one called them that - they are “insurgents”

anyone that would start a fight in what they call in their own faith a holy site - anyone what would kill innocent other Iraqi’s and US soldiers, and every other country represented there are not to be applauded- they are to be apprehended or stopped by any means necessary -

if you don’t see that Pomme then I feel sorry for you - this isn’t a freakin’ “Iraqi civil war” or an “Iraqi Liberation War” this a network that consists of a little terror, a little Baath, and a little muslim extremist and they are not to be helped, uplifted, exonerated in any way shape or form…and i hope again that you were not implying that…

that statement was way off base coming from you Pomme - if you feel that way please do some more reading - its plain to see from almost every major newspaper and news channel (conservative or liberal for that matter) who those people blowing up their fellow country men and soldiers are…

and again it wasn’t a mistake Pomme - you need to take off your glasses and just read unbiased for a while - ever since you’ve started discussing this you’ve been charged with anti-US language, and have stated what is basically a “typical” agenda from those who don’t support Bush.

we liberated a people who couldn’t liberate themselves…

did you know there was over 100 different factions in Iraq that wanted freedom from Hussein but lacked the millitary might or power to do it??? Did you know that they also could never agree on how to do it, or what the cause was??? Now you tell me how those people who lived under his rule for that many years - would just all of a sudden be able to do it all themselves???

How about providing some solutions Pomme instead of criticizing our actions. I haven’t seen any charts, plans, or schematics coming out of France?

111

man this discussion is gettin sweaty.
so many ppl have diferent opinions on this matter.well guess what i have one too and iam gonna share it with you wheather you like it or not.
in my opinnion its not wheather which president it elected. its who is in the (i forgot the word) topmilitaryposition. forgive me if i am being racist. looking at the world economy in the west. it looks like the jews are a minority but they are the one with thte money. and why do u think US is supporting israel its cuz of the amount of money they are paying him to make thier desicions.

BTW McGiver i am sending you my address too its 65 bradstone sq
toronto, ontario
canada.
u dont have to worry about the spit drying up if i am not there. cuz itll jus freeze.
i have my own reasons for wanting bush to win

112

lol we produce things alot better and the only way we would be able to compete with the USA in nearly all areas is if our dollar was worth nothing vs the US but at the moment it seems fairly high. also because of the ammerican market, our number one designed / produced car (well alot of people see it that way, well in my circle of friends), the holden monaro (or in the USA the pontiact GTO) has to be changed to better suit the ammerican market :upset:

113

Bush administration has conceded over and over that there is no direct link to Iraq and 9/11

Yes, but some people on this board do not acknowledge that… :slight_smile:

there are however many al qaeda ties that were proved to exist in the past and some until recent present…hussein gave safe passage, supplies, and etc to terrorists yadda yadda yadda you’ve heard this but you’ve chosen to forget it.
Huhu. Ties. Yeah, such as the one in 1994 with a written report by a Baath member (high rank, don’t remember who) who points out that Bin Laden tried to reach Saddam and build some sort of political agenda together and where Saddam backs off more promptly than I would back off from a lion’s den. Ties. Right. Now, agreed, there has been RECENT ties between AlQaeda and Saddam (around Jan-Mar 2003), but when your country is on the brink of invasion, you take all possible help.

also those Iraqi’s fighting us? they are not “terrorists” no one called them that - they are “insurgents”

indeed, agreed again. But some people on this board haven’t acknowledged this yet.

anyone that would start a fight in what they call in their own faith a holy site - anyone what would kill innocent other Iraqi’s and US soldiers, and every other country represented there are not to be applauded- they are to be apprehended or stopped by any means necessary -

?? You are aware that “holy sites” have been refuges for muslim combattants for centuries right? But that’s beside the point. Basically, you’re saying that only Iraqi combattants and US Soldiers should kill each other and leave the others alone, right? In theory, it would be magnificent if they could meet on a battlefield and just shoot guns at each other. Unfortunately for them, Iraqis have NO CHANCE of winning if they do that. It’s called Guerrilla Warfare, we’re not at the movies here… The only way for Iraqi combattants to win this war is actually to do what they are doing == pressure on the international community to back off.

if you don’t see that Pomme then I feel sorry for you - this isn’t a freakin’ “Iraqi civil war” or an “Iraqi Liberation War”
YES IT IS. Both civil war and Liberation War. OF COURSE IT IS. When there’s an invading army (the US - and don’t tell me otherwise, the US INVADED Iraq) and some of the indigenous are rebelling against this INVASION, then it’s a Liberation War. When this same group of indigenous are rebelling against the government that has been put up by the invading army and starts fighting against the civil police forces, then it’s a Civil War too.

this a network that consists of a little terror, a little Baath, and a little muslim extremist and they are not to be helped, uplifted, exonerated in any way shape or form…and i hope again that you were not implying that…

Yes. Resistance Networks. And they are much more numerous than you would think… And why shouldn’t they be helped, uplifted and exonerated if the people helping uplifting and exonerating believe in the same things those people are fighting for?

that statement was way off base coming from you Pomme - if you feel that way please do some more reading - its plain to see from almost every major newspaper and news channel (conservative or liberal for that matter) who those people blowing up their fellow country men and soldiers are…
Well, that’s the thing you see. Newspapers are not here to give you your ideas, ideals and morals. You compile newspapers to have your own. It’s plain to see those people “blowing up their fellow country men and soldiers” (how unbiased of you… :wink: ) are guerrilla fighters and they are trying to win a war with a desperation you cannot grasp, obviously. Don’t read me wrong, I’m not FOR them or AGAINST the u.s., I’m being OBJECTIVE on this. (sidenote: given my job, I probably do more reading than you…but don’t count that as an argument, thx… and you should do some more INTERNATIONAL reading, don’t stick with ABC, NBC, CNN and FOX// LATimes, NYTimes and WashPost)

and again it wasn’t a mistake Pomme - you need to take off your glasses and just read unbiased for a while - ever since you’ve started discussing this you’ve been charged with anti-US language, and have stated what is basically a “typical” agenda from those who don’t support Bush.
indeed, because I don’t agree with what the US are doing right now in Iraq. On this particular issue, I’m anti-US (not anti-american, anti-US-govt). And again, cut out the crap with the “unbiased” thing, my being able to read with an international point of view gives me way more objectivity than you can grasp given the fact that you’re INSIDE the US. And I also read biased, because I can make out subjectivity and the rest. It’s about staying objective, not reading unbiased (everything one reads is biased to a point - rule number one in journalist schools)

we liberated a people who couldn’t liberate themselves…

Oooook. Why didn’t you give them weapons and stuff instead of invading? In the END, yes, you “liberated” (it’s not done yet…) the Iraqis, but that was not the REASON you went into Iraq. You supply a people with arms against an nationally elected leader, but you don’t supply a people with arms against a dictator? Come on now… You needed to get a foothold in the Middle East, because Saudi Arabia (given 9/11 and previous AlQ links) wasn’t good enough anymore

did you know there was over 100 different factions in Iraq that wanted freedom from Hussein but lacked the millitary might or power to do it??? Did you know that they also could never agree on how to do it, or what the cause was??? Now you tell me how those people who lived under his rule for that many years - would just all of a sudden be able to do it all themselves???
Where did I ever say something like that?

How about providing some solutions Pomme instead of criticizing our actions. I haven’t seen any charts, plans, or schematics coming out of France?
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, TOO EASY. That’s not how people argue, you know it. I’m not saying I have solutions (though, there shouldn’t have been solutions to be found, since there shouldn’t have been a war in the first place), I’m saying yours aren’t good enough.

YOU STOP BEING BIASED now, who are you kidding here. Because I think the US is doing the worst possible job ever in Iraq, because I think the US shouldn’t have gone, because I think the US should actually apologize to the international community for doing this without any kind of approval I’m the one being branded as “biased”. Yeah right. I just don’t agree with you. Take a little height when you analyse PR, please.

114

Excuse my ignorance… but is there a reason there are only two candidates?( I am not informed in US electoral politics). It seems that both candidates really dont represent the best interests of americans, although this is from my non-american point of view, its more a media battle than actual problem solving/ identifying legislation and solutions to a wide range of issues… Anyone know why there is limited choice?

115

There are a handful of 3rd party candidates, but they usually have no chance of winning. Since this is a winner-take-all system, only the two most popular parties, Democrats and Republicans have (historically at least) won. Though, in local, state, and occassinoally national house elections, you will find independents and 3rd-party candidates winning.

:kommie:

116

Ah ok, and the respective parties choose their representative/ candidate. Thanks thats interesting… ps a clever tongue and cheek article at http://www.theonion.com/news/index.php?issue=4036

May the best reptile win!

117

Ooops - I forgot to mention that the parties don’t elect the candidates. There are things called Primaries where registered voters pick one among a handful of candidates who will represent their party. The Democrats, since they are challenging a sitting President of another party, had about 8 or 9 candidates about 9 months ago. Through a series of mini-elections amongst primarily the Democrats, John Kerry came out on top several times with more votes than his Democratic challengers.

:gm:

118

Pomme your views are the polar opposite of mine - I cringe at some of what you said - supporting militant extremists in Iraq is inexcusable in my opinion - they are not fighting for their freedom and the very fact that you are closed to the possibility that what we are doing is not oppresive in nature shows that discussion with you is futile…not that I’m not up for it - but there are plenty of other users to discuss things with.

Please do not assume that your reading load is larger, that was very arrogant of you by the way lol - and I do read internationally.

This all does boil down to you’re not American, and you don’t understand.
Sorry if that sounds bad, but refraining from other possibilities such as you support terrorism I would rather say that.

And I hope that your view does not represent your country - but then again it could only lend from the fact that your country has no military power and perhaps doesn’t understand the mechanics of war. Which you cannot be blamed nor held accountable for.

119

Unfortunatley PRStudio, whatever happens in the states has a knock-on effect for the rest of us in the world, this is perhaps the reason so many people are very interested and passionate about this discussion. Personally I think it will be a disaster if Bush is re-elected, but that is my opinion. I am afraid I agree with Pomme on several points, but acceed that “americans would know better”…I am just scared that a lot of the american voting public arent as well informed on anything outside the scope of the us media, and I beleive the Bush administration is all about creating problems, nurturing fear, and then providing solutions ( at the expense of tax-payers money and liberties)

But I respect your opinion, it is good to hear some views from someone on the inside.
Kiupa. thanks for the info on electoral processes - U learnsomething new every day.

120

Yeah Pomme, how dare you challenge the intellect of a real American, who understands the mechanics of war… ::rolls eyes::