Ahhh, but the George ‘dubbya’ and his associates would have had to start pumping their own oil much sooner wouldn’t they.
If Kerry wins ( he seems to be a good man ) his presidency will be blighted by having to try and pull the ‘west’ out of this mess.

As for Blair well………..the song they played at the victory party when they defeated the Tory’s was M Peoples “Things can only get better”.
This time round the country as a whole should be singing The Who’s “We don’t get fooled again”

Kerry? Kerry has said for YEARs that saddam was a threat, was evil, and needed to be removed from power. Until a year ago, Kerry supported the war for not only the wmd’s, but for the need to rid the world of saddam. th eonly reason he’s “Against” it now, is beacause half the country supports the war, and almost all of them are voting for GWB. If Kerry wants any hope of getting elected, it lies in the people who are against the war. So, he changes his stance.

Saying we’re “losing” in Iraq is utterly stupid. I have a friend in the 82nd, who returned months ago. His friends still there(many of whom care little for Bush or Kerry, and don’t care for the reasons for going to war) are disgusted by teh media reports of us “losing” over there. they are killing so many of the terrorists, and the Iraqis are doing a lot of it. almost all of the people they kill are NOT Iraqis.

Look at the recent bombings–people in line to become Iraqi police officers. These people KNOW they’re being targeted, yet they wait in line. It is ignored by the foreign media that most Iraqis want ALL the foreignn occupiers out ASAP. Currently, the US is HELPING Iraq remove the foreigners that are targetting and killing inocent Iraqis.

Most Iraqis want us to leave, but they want the foreign terrorists to go first.

i don’t care if you think the reasons for going to war were good or not. However, saying that we’re “losing” to the terrorists is simply incorrect.

It’s all about Genetics and physical conditioning. Across Africa, there are multitudes of different body types. typically, northern Africans, from Somalia and Ethiopia, are very tall and very lean. The environment is an open savanna, tall grass, hot etc. Thus, over tens of thousands of years(if not more), the most desireable traits have been expressed as such, favoring taller, darker skinned people, who can cover great distances.

Central Africans, living in dense forests are much shorter, just like south american peoples living in similar habitats.

Europeans evoleved in colder climates, where body heat loss was a major selective force, tend to have larger trunks and shorter limb lengths than north africans. The cold has also been a selective force in minor differences, like matted, insulative hair for europeans, and “poofier” hair, that helps iin cooling off, for african people.

In general, People of European decent have shorter limbs for their body weight, while people of African decent have have smaller trunks for their body weight. Essentially, they are more dense than europeans. People of African Decent tend to have denser bones, and less internal body fat–a big contributer to bouyancy.

There’s nothing racist about it–it’s simply the way people evolved in different climates/areas of the world.

White people, having a generally larger trunk and less density on average, will, on average, have an advantage in swimming.

Just like black people, who have denser bones and less internal volume for their weight, expend more energy(on average) to simply stay afloat than white people.

When I go swimming, I have to let almost ALL the air out of my lungs to sink to the bottom. One of the black guys on my swim team could BARELY float with a lungful of air. If he exhales a tiny bit, he sunk right to the bottom.
It was pretty neat, actually.

The reason most running events are dominated by black athletes is simply because people of African ancestry have the ideal body type for track and field events.

First of all, I was referring to forests in the US, where human activity has halted the natural processes(forest fires), and lead to the massive, catestrophic, canopy fires that destroy thousands of acres.
The US needs to thin the forests, replicating the natural fires that would have regulated things.
Groups like the sierria club try to stop any logging, and lead to big fires that destroy, not thin the forests.

When I speak of exotic pets, I speak of all of them, form small reptiles, to tigers.

I know many people that own tigers, lions, crocs, 20foot + snakes, rare or endangered animals, etc. All perfectly legal and permitted(when necessary, for endangered animals)
For the record, idiots like the guy in NY, with the lion in his apt., are the oddity.
There are more tigers in private ownership in the United States than in the rest of the entire planet, wild or in zoos.
Most of the privately owned animals have better accomidations than a zoo could afford.
I do not own anything like that, though my family did own a serval a few years back. Pretty much every exotic mammal is bred in captivity. Nobody would want a wild caught cat or monkey or bird. In fact, most large mammals have been bred for 50+ years in the US, and could be on their way towards domestication. I keep chameleons and geckos. Many of which are imported, though, for breeding purposes. I pretty much don’t like Wild Caught animals, they are stressed,a nd don’t do as well as farm raised or captive bred.
Thankfully, many countries where they come from in Africa realized the potential market for them, and banned exportation on all but a few species(ones that benifit from habitat destruction) and farm raised species. for the ones still collected, they have fairly strict quotas on numbers.
That keeps the difficult to manage wild animals out of the price range of the average operson, and into the hands of experienced keepers, who will most likely not kill it!

Just 15 years ago, these animals were flooding the markets in the millions, selling for next to nothing, and nearly 100% of them were dead in a year.
Were animals rights groups involved in fixing the problem? Sure. So were the keepers of these animals–organizations of chameleon breeders brought the information to the attention of some groups, and they used their power to bring the trade into managable, human, and profitable levels.

Now, the animal rights groups want to stop US from keeping our animals. they don’t care about the lack of cruelty, they just want to keep them out of captivity, because of their ideological viewpints. They are not animal WELFARE groups. If they were, they’d stop the cruelty, and support the educated keeping and captive maintence of these species. Instead, they are animal RIGHTS groups. They assign the same rights they feel they have to animals who cannot comprehend these rights.

Many species will probably be extinct in the wild soon, for one reason or another. Maintaining captive breeding programs of them is essential. Some private owners basically maintain private zoos, some do so for profit, some for pleasure.

Keeping these animals is what I do, it’s my #1 source of fun(outside of family). It ****es me off when people try to take that away from me.

I would really support a group the tried to do some really good, honest anti-cruelty-to animals work done. Improve slaughter methods, keep tabs on pet stores that treat animals like product, and not living things, prevent illegal poaching and importations. I’m on their side!

If they only could find a mid ground, they would have the side of every exotic animal keeper on the planet.
It’s my belief that you should be allowed to keep whatever you want, or do whatever you wish, as long as it isn’t a threat to others.
Now, a guy in a NYC apartment wants a tiger/lion/alligator. Seriously, in a NY apt., that IS a threat to others, especially if he’s not going to know what the hell he’s doing!!!
Compare that to a guy nearby that I know, who has a 50+ acre property. He had lions, camels, tigers, bears, and more. Kept better than the state zoo!
He’s got permits, responsibility, and knowledge.

that’s the difference.

As far as naomi campbell, my cousin is a model, and knows her. She’s a heroin addict….go figure.

See, typical European elitisim… “WE europeans KNOW politicians are self-serving, you americans trust them!” hehe.

Actually, most people know not to trust them. The nice thing about bush, that makes his supporters defend him, is that he actually HAS done most of the important things he said he would, his tax cut was the number one reason conservatives voted for him, and he delivered.

After 9/11, he promised to do everything he could to follow through. Wether you agree or not, he did follow through with what he said he would.

Now, obviously, if you disagree with him, you disagree withwhat he promised, and what he did. However, I voted for him, because I wanted what he said he was going to do–namely cut taxes. Well, he cut taxes, AND he actually followed through with military force after we were attacked–siomething the last guy didn’tdo, because it might look bad.

So, the supporters of Bush do so because he ACTUALLY followed through! It is rare to have a politician actually do what they promised. In the #1 and #2 areas, he did. for that, I’ll defend him.

For his flaws–allowing government to grow, being iffy on the “assault weapons ban” , etc., I will criticize him.

For conservatives, after 8 years of Clinton’s taxes, scandals, and non-reaction to multiple terrorist attacks, tax cuts and a pro-active defense is something worth defending.

funny, I saw the village, and I loved it. I guess people went in expecting a monster movie, apparantly not learning from signs, that that wasn’t likely. I agree, if you went in expecting a monster movie, it would have ****ed you off so much, you couldn’t enjoy the rest.

It was great. While the overall story was predictable, the little events that occur,as well as the way he made you question your own thougths (about what was going on), made for their own surprises.

At least it’s not JUST in the US. Sean hannity and Jay Leno do skits where they go on the street and ask random people random questions about relavant issues, history in particular.

It is absolutly amazing how little the average person knows about history or current events.

IT seems that the worst areas are in big cities, where people CAN live their whole life unaware of the outside world. These people know ONLY what they see on TV, and they don’t even watch the news.

They know th epresident, but not the vice president. They don’t know ANYTHING about history, NOTHING.

It gets me sick to my stomach to see a 30 year old professional voice their opinion on why Bush is evil, and then not know who the vice president is, or who we fought in WWII.

At least have some knowledge before you have an opinion!

Not even the Cuban emigres make the latter claim any more, pluto77189, so what’s your source for such a statement? You’re making this “classmate” of yours up, aren’t you?

Is it the fact that Castro is a “Communist” that makes him An Evil Man, unlike US-backed dictators who really did murder those who spoke out against them – such as Pinochet?

You see, that’s the point. I could care less what sort of government Cuba has, as long as you don’t get executed for speaking out against it. Actually, this guy wasn’t one of my friends, just a classmate. My teachers told us about it–his mother came in and pulled him out of class when they found out.

So, is there an Aurora? Mach 10+ perhaps? 🙂

Don’t know abut Aurora, but I’m sure there’s plenty of fun stuff out there(there being somewhere in New Mexico, Nevada, etc) that we don’t know about.

Back in the 60’s/70’s(I think) they were messing with nuclear ramjet engines, project Pluto. Now THAT’s some interesting research. They wanted something that could travel at mach 3+, and basically fly around the world non-stop. Perfectly feasible, except for weight.

The had Uranium reactor engine nozzels, hundreds of them, hexagonal shaped rods, packed together in the rear. they would heat up to extremly high temperatures–as does the material in a nuclear reactor). The vehicle is launched at a high speed(faster than mach1).

The air passing through is heated up so intensly(by the reactor) that it exits the rear holes at a higher speed than it entered, giving thrust. The engine could run for as long as the material remained “hot”–basically longer than it would take to circle the globe.

IT was ended because it was unnecessary, with ICBM’s doing the job faster and more cheaply, but the research MAY not have been totally abandonded.

PArt of the drawback was the massive size for the thing–the conceptualized final design was though to require a vehicle about the size and weight of a locomotive.

they tested the nuclear reactor ramjet engines several times, feeding it with a massive jet engine. The thing actuallty worked.

All in all, pretty damn cool, if not something that amounted to anything practical.