How do the Spanish feel?

Originally posted by Flood
So gas is available everywhere then?
In Britain there are very few outlets for refueling gas-powered vehicles – to the point that local authority have had to build their own special refueling points to fill up their cars and vans (which have been bought at great expense to show the taxpayer that they care for the environment). Its the same with electrics – the only fuels in common supply all over the country are petrol and diesel.
Maybe America is looking toward the future with better forward vision than I believed…

Flood.

Oh, not gas, as in propane, gasoline, petrol–I forget I’m talking to people who speak ENGLISH, not American English!

It runs on gasoline, but has an electric motor, dynamic braking, and a bank of large metal hydride batteries. The batteries, coupled with the electric motor(that functions as a generator) are used to recoup as much energy from the gasoline as possible. this is usually lost in other vehicles during braking, coasting, ideling. The gas engine shuts off when it’s not in motion, and it uses electirc power to start moving. once in motion, the gas engine turns on. When you stop, the electricmotor is used to slow the car, lessening the use of the brakes, and converting the forward motion of the car into electric energy, charging the batteries. whenever the engine is generating extra power, that is not needed for forward motion, it’s used to charge the batteries. Awesome idea, and incredibly practical. These things are the MOST in demand car in the US, and the local Toyota dealers have 10-12 month waiting list for the 04 Prius, which gets from 50-60 miles per gallon, and is more powerful, and bigger.

Plus, there’s a $2,000 tax deduction for getting a clean fuel vehicle, part of the Bush tax cut plan.

Some vehicles operate on natural gas, or ethynol. the ethynol vehicles have very good mileage, just abut as good as a gas car, but I have not idea about the natural gas vehicles…I know they’re clean. There are VERY few of these. Gasoline/electric vehicles are a much better idea, for now, since Gasoline is available, affordable, and energy effecient, if used in a hybrid vehicle.

We’ll be driving them until fuel cells become practical.

So gas is available everywhere then?
In Britain there are very few outlets for refueling gas-powered vehicles – to the point that local authority have had to build their own special refueling points to fill up their cars and vans (which have been bought at great expense to show the taxpayer that they care for the environment). Its the same with electrics – the only fuels in common supply all over the country are petrol and diesel.
Maybe America is looking toward the future with better forward vision than I believed…

Flood.

Originally posted by Flood
:confused: Is that natural, coal-gas, or butane/methane gas?:confused:
Surely hybrid vehicles these days are electro/petrolium powered.

Flood.

gas/electric powered. I own a Toyota Prius, it’s awesome. We average 47 miles per gallon, and certain times of the year, we get over 50. Plus, it’s not a weak, underpowered thing like most electrics. Awesome technology.

In Fact, hybrid SUV’s are coming out, that will perform BETTER than current models(more power, less enging/brake/transmission stress) , but will get nearly DOUBLE the mileage.

Yes, Americans like to drive SUV’s, because many of us need a large cargo capacity, or need to tow trailers. Most americans would prefer to drive more economical vehicles, especialy with gas so high, but the expense of an SUV or truck is worth it, especially if it’s used for work.

With Hhybrid SUV’s, people can eat their cake and have it too.

With electric cars, you had to compromise. For many peopel, the compromises were simply too great.

The promise of high mileage, high performance hybrid vehicles may, in time, drastically reduce our dependance on Foreign oil.
That alone makes it worth the extra 2 or 3 grand.

Yes and no.

Surely we would have become an united socialist Germany if the allies would have decided to leave the western part of Germany open to a Soviet invasion. That is a fact nobody with a sane mind can not honor.

If Germany would have been left alone by all external influence, I think we would have seen a small civil war between communist supporters and democrats. In the end the democrats would have won. I think Germany would have turned out like Austria did. A neutral democracy. But that is pure speculation.

I do agree that the development in Iraq will have a direct impact on Iran. If things in Iraq turn out good for the people there (and the US stops threatening Iran) then it is likely that we will see aa democratic revolution in Iran. If Iraq suffers from a civil war or even worse the islamic hardliners raise to pwer, then the situation in Iran good become quite different.

Anyway imo the War in Iraq had a negative influence on the developments in Iran.

What we feel?

A good question, all the conservatives says a very simple thing NO SURRENDER, to any terrorism

Socialists call murderers to the conservatives, and even some of them says that we must talk with AQ “boys”

The new goverment is going to put Moratinos for the Foreign Affairs…this guy is one of the most beloved Arafat friends (Sorry for the deals with Israel)…., and they put in Economy another “Nobel Prize” one of the guys touched by the Eurostat scandal

You can see the Guardia Civil deployed in refineries for example, and the Army in another installations

Our troops in Iraq, defending their base, and our multinational Brigade in Iraq lost one soldier from El Salvador Army.

Our last (but no least) Civil War was more complicated than some fascists Vs communists in the streets, and some foreign medias says that we are heading again to another civil war…:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

Originally posted by seahawk
So don´t tell me that the US won the war and invented democracy in Germany.

Never said INVENTED democracy.

Face it, if the US and Britain left Germany alone, they would have been either: under communist control (misery), or under a dictator (misery).

Democracy in West germany was a DIRECT result of the allies maintaining a foothold in germany, while defending against Russian threats.

It may have had it’s initial spark generated in the 20’s, but there was no way in hell it was going to come about if WE(US and England) hadn’t done what we did, which is: invade Germany, help stamp out the Nazis, help a democracy take hold, and help rebuild.

Iran IS ready for a democracy, it just needs a push. War would push too hard. Freedom and economic prosperity in Iraq, however, a nation that was suffering under the weight of the world, that, will be the push Iran needs for a democratic revolution.

Originally posted by skythe

Democracy will not arrive in the Middle East overnight, but that does not make it a cause unworthy to fight for. You think Muslims are unready for Democracy? How will they ever be when you’re not even willing to help them get there? The problems will not disappear simply because you choose to ignore them.
You keep bringing up World War II analogies in your arguments. “Not our problem” was a very popular argument back then as well. When the Germans entered the Ruhr, when you took over Austria or Czechoslovakia, with the Japanese in Manchuria, the Italians in Ethiopia and Fascists in Spain. Wasn’t Europe in for a surprise, huh? Appeasement doesn’t work, Europeans should be the last to think so.

I tell you something what Japan did in China or Manchuria would have been no problem for europe if it would not have been for the british empire. What the fascists did in Spain turned out to be no problem for their neighbours. Germany should have been stopped earlier. The earliest and most promising point would have been in the 1920ies when there were large demonstrations in the Ruhrgebiet against the compensation payments and the french troops in the area. The democratic german government of that time was repeadly asking for a reductin of the compensation payments, as the economic was hard hit during after the world economic crisis.
But the allies refused to do and french troops used force to bring down the demonstrations. This and the economic collapse was what made people hate the allies and support Hitler. Because after that the easy solution he promised (defeat the allies and Germany will prosper again) seemed so simple and good to the average german.
In the 1920 there was a young democracy growing in Germany, but it did not get support it would have needed to stabilize.

In the arab states there is no genuine movement for a democracy. And you can´t force democracy to the people.

Imo the state most likely to become a democracy in the region is Iran. Because large parts of the population are fed up with the current system and have a desire for democracy. But instead of helping that movement we declare Iran to be part of the axis of evil. Which in fact meant that mayn Iranians rallied behind the current system because their country was/is under attack from the outside.

And when I say we should get out of the region, then I mean we should have no troops there. Helping Turkey to stay a democracy can not be done with troops. Democracy must offer a better future to the average people then a muslim dictatoship and it must be clear to the people there. So helping their economy and helping them to prosper is a better way. Make them a partner. We must also cooperate to find elements that want to fight democracy. But the decision must always come from the people, all the west can do is to make the “democratic solution” the most promising for the average people.

Originally posted by pluto77189
Anybody care to remember exactly HOW democracy came to the germans? Through what methods?

Let’s see… Dictator in power, Americans and British invade….yeah….Dictator and evil fascist party removed from power….England and America rebuild Germany….hmmmm….bring in supplies, in defiance of large, hostile forces….
Germany rebuilds….grows, becomes one of Europe’s most pwerful economic and military powers. No Major european war in 60 years…

And that is wrong my friend.

Even before WW1 there were already elections in Germany, yet the ultimate decision remained with the imperator.

After WW1 the imperator was thrown out and Germany became a democracy. Thsi democracy did not bad in the first years, but the world economic crisis and the payments a compensations for WW1 were wrecking the german economy. High unemployment rates, social unrest, etc.
So in 1933 many people believed that their live under a strong ruler (imperator) had been better and they wanted such a person back. Hitler promised this change. And in the first years of his dictatorship the life for the average german did in fact improve.
Why the German went to war for him and´took so much hardship during the war without braking with this regime is beyond my understanding though.
After WW2 most new leaders came from the democratic period within the two World Wars. So the new democracy was largely based on that experience and on that democratic culture. The new democracy also learned from mistakes made during that time. Furthermore the econimic help surely did help to stabilize the democracy, as it helped to stop any hate against the new system from forming. What also helped was the russian thread, as most germans feared the russians after WW2. And in that way the western allies were the smaller of 2 evils.
Today germany has a democratic tradition. The majority of the people have accepted that society as the best for them.

So don´t tell me that the US won the war and invented democracy in Germany.

Nothing is inevitable, Turkey is not lost, but how do you expect to win it over to your side when you’re not even willing to put up a fight? Oh, they’ll sell you their oil, but when the prices are triple their current rate, you’ll discover that the money you need for border surveilance is not so easily come by. Not that it matters, since with a negative birth rate and aging population, Europe needs the immigrants. Without your help to solve their problems at home, they’ll just be importing it into your heartland, border control or not.

But all this is entirery beside the point. All you’ve dealt with are the examples, not the core of the issue. You assume your spheres of interest and that of the fanatics are mutually exclusive. This is hardly the case. Your interests go far beyond your borders, and neither do theirs stop on your frontiers.

Democracy will not arrive in the Middle East overnight, but that does not make it a cause unworthy to fight for. You think Muslims are unready for Democracy? How will they ever be when you’re not even willing to help them get there? The problems will not disappear simply because you choose to ignore them.
You keep bringing up World War II analogies in your arguments. “Not our problem” was a very popular argument back then as well. When the Germans entered the Ruhr, when you took over Austria or Czechoslovakia, with the Japanese in Manchuria, the Italians in Ethiopia and Fascists in Spain. Wasn’t Europe in for a surprise, huh? Appeasement doesn’t work, Europeans should be the last to think so.

Originally posted by pluto77189
Hybrid cars actually work BETTER than pure gas powered cars…

:confused: Is that natural, coal-gas, or butane/methane gas?:confused:
Surely hybrid vehicles these days are electro/petrolium powered.

Flood.

Originally posted by seahawk
People need to be ready for democracy and those people are not ready yet. As the germans were not ready for democracy yet after WW1.

Anybody care to remember exactly HOW democracy came to the germans? Through what methods?

Let’s see… Dictator in power, Americans and British invade….yeah….Dictator and evil fascist party removed from power….England and America rebuild Germany….hmmmm….bring in supplies, in defiance of large, hostile forces….
Germany rebuilds….grows, becomes one of Europe’s most pwerful economic and military powers. No Major european war in 60 years…

If the majority of the people in Turkey want to support such a system, then there is nothing wurope can do. The outcome won´t change.

And I doub they won´t sell us their oil. Cause if they want to have support in the public in their countries, then they need money to purchase goods and wood. The only way to get this money is to sell the oil. Remember that Iran is still selling oil to the west and has been selling oil even during the darkest days of the islamic revolution.

Immigration is nothing I fear. Just use the moeny spent on the war on terror and the colonial adventures and we could ahve a very good border surveillance.
Then some changes to the laws in europe and we could kick tjem out as quickly as they come in.

imo the current situation in the middle east and other moslem countries is that you can either have an islamic regime or a dictatorship (in one form or the other). Democratic tries will always end in the islamic regime.
People need to be ready for democracy and those people are not ready yet. As the germans were not ready for democracy yet after WW1.

Originally posted by skythe
Do you define their areas of interest? What happens when their areas of interest overlap yours, in Turkey for instance? What happens if they decide Europe is in their sphere of interest? Heck, why go that far, my car runs on fuel, what do your car run on?

I was planning to stay out of this–you know, an American talking about OIL, man do we just LOVE oil!

Protecting Saudi Arabia frm Saddam was an important enough issue to justify the first gulf war. If Saddam took over the oilfields of SA, the American economy would crash. It would not destroy us, but it would hurt us REALLY bad. So much, that it was financially sound to remove the threat by means of force.

Hopefully, our dependance on oil will lower. Hybrid vehicles are a great first step, getting 50% better mileage. If, hypothetically, 50% of the new vehicles purchased over the next decade are hybrid vehicles, we could get by with NOT importng oil from the MidEast AT ALL.

the problem with fuel cells is cost, as they’re too young a concept. they might be the future, though.

Electric cars are a waste, since quite a bit of elcetrisity comes from burining oil and coal…
If we went more nuclear, electric cars would be a great way to go.
although performance is an issue–most americans commute, and traveling anywhere in this place requires lots of distance.

When I see my in-laws, it’s 250 miles away, up in the mountiains. A pure electric car won’t cut it.

Hybrid cars actually work BETTER than pure gas powered cars, not only more range, and mileage, but more power, and much longer life, since systems wear less, they should last nearly TWICE as long as conventional vehicles…

Hybrid cars for everyone! Free us from the financial hold of our enemies!

Originally posted by seahawk
The simple solution is to stay out of their areas of interest.

Do you define their areas of interest? What happens when their areas of interest overlap yours, in Turkey for instance? What happens if they decide Europe is in their sphere of interest? Heck, why go that far, my car runs on fuel, what do your car run on?

Attacks on tourists in arabic nations don´t bother me. There is a simple solution, don´t go there. If we europeans are not welcome, then we can spent our money inside the european community. Let those countries see how they will do without the money.

Ah, but we already know the answer to that, they will immigrate to Europe. You cannot escape dealing with the realities of this planet, they are neither going to go away nor leave you alone simply because you’re trying to ignore them.

Originally posted by seahawk
Well I have some further ideas, that would surely get europe out of the targeting sights of islamic terrorists.

The simple solution is to stay out of their areas of interest.

I do not care what is happening in Afghanistan nor did I care about Iraq. We should also get out of the whole middle east trouble spot. Just end support to all sides and let them fight it out. The fortress idea will work better, then playing world police men. There are too many people out there that hate the west at the moment. No chnace in hell we will ever get them all, so the best thing is to keep them out of europe.

Attacks on tourists in arabic nations don´t bother me. There is a simple solution, don´t go there. If we europeans are not welcome, then we can spent our money inside the european community. Let those countries see how they will do without the money.

I’d love to see this tried. Unfourtunatly, it won’t work.

These are people that can praise God’s greatness while mutilating a body.
They cried tears of JOY when thousands of innocent people died on 9-11.
They kill themselves, with the thought that God is HAPY when innocent people die.
They kill themselves for the promise of paradise.
Their idea of paradise is 70 virgins–how material, and pathetic, that the ability to deflower 70 women is the BEST they can come up with!
They are willing to go through great lengths, and suffer horrible deaths, just on the possibility that they’ll kill someone.

People warped to such a degree that such evil is justifiable have no hope. It is absolutly CERTAIN that they will not stop if left alone. IF a nation WAS to leave the region, and ignore it, they’d still be a target.

Over the years their goals have shifted. IT used to be the palestinians, then,after the gulf war, it was US forces in Saudi Arabia. Now, it’s our culture in general, evil in that it influences their children. Western culture is a threat to religious fanatics, and its existence threatens their leaders.
when we pull our military out of SA, and the palestinians have a state, will the terrorists then stop?

Anyone thinking that they’ll stop is a fool.

Isreal is a PRIME example. The palestinians were given a generous offer recently, and rejected it. the leaders(arafat) would have been without purpose if such a “goal” was accomplished. They are terrorists, and their true goal is the elimination of Isreal, made clear by the rejection of the offer(during the clinton years).

Anyone that thinks the terrorists will stop when a palestinian state is established is also a fool. the vat Majority of palestinians may be happy, and content, when a state is formed. The few hard-core terrorists will not, Hamas will not, Al-oksa mb will not. When this happens, the palestinians had better take care fo the problem themselves, or Isreal will.

I think this is the biggest problem for peace there. Isreal UNDERSTANDS that terrorisim will not end until either Isreal is destroyed, or the terrorists are. If the plo won’t take care of the problem, the isrealis will have to. Isreal wants peace, Palestine wants peace, but the terrorists want the destruction of Isreal. One of these groups has to go. Any guess as to which it is?

We can’t keep fooling ourselves into thinking the terrorists will listen. They just won’t. Period.

Well I have some further ideas, that would surely get europe out of the targeting sights of islamic terrorists.

The simple solution is to stay out of their areas of interest.

I do not care what is happening in Afghanistan nor did I care about Iraq. We should also get out of the whole middle east trouble spot. Just end support to all sides and let them fight it out. The fortress idea will work better, then playing world police men. There are too many people out there that hate the west at the moment. No chnace in hell we will ever get them all, so the best thing is to keep them out of europe.

Attacks on tourists in arabic nations don´t bother me. There is a simple solution, don´t go there. If we europeans are not welcome, then we can spent our money inside the european community. Let those countries see how they will do without the money.

Originally posted by seahawk
Honestly I think. pulling troops from Afghanistan and Iraq is a wise move anyway. Those are not places europeans do belong.

I would rather concentrate on finding the terrorists already living in europe, instead of playing savior of the arab world.

Over the past few years we’ve had Al Quida attacks in New York, Bali, Mombasa, Istanbul, Casablanca, German tourists have been attacked in Jerba, and a French tanker off Aden, to name a few. Yet you think you can avoid this by retreating into yourselves? Terrorism is not someone else’s problem, and in this day and age, local measures can hardly provide security when a plane taking off in North Africa can arrive over Europe within the hour or when anyone can drive any bomb across your borders. The effectiveness of a military mission in one place or another can be debated but aborting them all will be sheer folly. There are no fortress walls to hold these people back.
You’ve got to appreciate the irony, this is after all a thread dealing with Spain. Is it not the Spanish civil was that taught us “ask not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee”?

Originally posted by pluto77189
As far as spelling–my typing errors are the biggest annoyance, my work keyboard is messed up, and my spacebar/shift keys are defective, and lots of my words ge tsplit–like that.

OFten, the shift key sticks like this.

Upon re-reading my posts, yeah, it is kind of annoying. I’ll try to watch out for that, but I tend to type a lot…

OK, I’ll forgive you for that.

“Well, that’s the big question. If we knew who they were, we’d simply kill them all. What we do know about them, is that they’re NOT a “nation” , but reside in many nations. “

Well exactly, Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 or Al-Qaeda, but we chose to attack them anyway. And paying families of dead Hizbollah terrorists hardly amounts to justification for invasion.

Anyhow, I think I’d have to agree with Keltic’s comments on this. Probably, the Spanish are confused about what to do next.

Originally posted by google
First of all, how do you know whether they will certainly attack Spain?

Secondly, how do you know who ‘them’ is? Or does one just make up a country, attempt to associate it with Al-Qaeda, and attack them a la Iraq? Perhaps Spain should attack Morocco.

Thirdly, one or two spelling/typing mistakes don’t bother me, but when your post is fraught with them, it detracts from your credibility (and is just plain annoying to read)- so please correct them! 🙂

How do I know whether they will attack Spain? They did, on 3/11, then last week they found another bomb, on a high speed rail. So, they DID attack spain again, unless you want to give them the benifit of the doubt that they put that bomb there for safe keeping?

who are “they”?

Well, that’s the big question. If we knew who they were, we’d simply kill them all. What we do know about them, is that they’re NOT a “nation” , but reside in many nations.

If we do nothing, “they” will attack us. The fluid nature of terrorists(no real base, move around), coupled with their fanatical beliefs, makes them impossible to reason with or contain.

As far as spelling–my typing errors are the biggest annoyance, my work keyboard is messed up, and my spacebar/shift keys are defective, and lots of my words ge tsplit–like that.

OFten, the shift key sticks like this.

Upon re-reading my posts, yeah, it is kind of annoying. I’ll try to watch out for that, but I tend to type a lot…

First of all, how do you know whether they will certainly attack Spain?

Secondly, how do you know who ‘them’ is? Or does one just make up a country, attempt to associate it with Al-Qaeda, and attack them a la Iraq? Perhaps Spain should attack Morocco.

Thirdly, one or two spelling/typing mistakes don’t bother me, but when your post is fraught with them, it detracts from your credibility (and is just plain annoying to read)- so please correct them! 🙂