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.

Oh, they did do a **** poor job. They listened to other clerics, who thought he was going to be more of a threat if captured. Guess they need to fix their mistake.

The polls conducted were done all over Iraq, and separated by regions/city. I think it was in Baghdad, Kurd areas, and the rest of Iraq. Kurds were most supportive of the coalition, but wanted a separate state from the Arabs. Most of the rest of Iraq agreed wit hthe people of Baghdad.

A survey on who the most trusted people in Iraq shows that the Relighous leaders are trusted most, because they are the ones that have always BEEN there for the people. The Coalition is, not surprisingly, on the bottom. Seriously, they just invaded the country, killed thousands, and changed things around. The fact that such a large portion of the poeple actually has ANY trust after only one year, is pretty good, considering the situation.

The cleric in Sadr city, with the miita of 2-3,000 men, was only trusted by 1% of the people polled, the members in the governing council, were ranked highest among individuals.

It supports what we “think” about this guy. Of course, how the people will react to the militias “removal” will be anybody’s guess.

I have a feeling that they will not be happy, hey, he’s a cleric, and we’re Americans, but that they will “understand”(meaning saying they’re upset, but not really doing anything about it, cause they know it HAD to be done).

We’ll see in the coming months.
Al Jezeera is reporting a mosque was hit, with people in it. Interesting to see if the people had AK 47’s and RPGs or not.
Rgardless, that wn’t go over well.

Originally posted by seahawk
That is a quite reasonable assesment of the situation Pluto.

But the problem is that it is really hard to get such fanatic people to change. And I believe that germans were much less fanatic then the islamic terrorists are.

Japan and Germany needed a total defeat which in the end showed the lies of their leaders and so helped to get rid of the ideas spread by them.

The only way to win over those muslem fundamentalists is to prove them wrong. Unfortunately nobody can prove that there will be no 70 virgins waiting in heaven. On the other hand those fanatics are quick to built social organisations that are helping the people. In the meantime US forces have to use force to capture those fanatics, which will always include the death of innocent cvilians. So in the end these action are exactly what the fanatics are saying.

” We will help you, the Americans will come to kill us and you.”
Which is exactly what is happening.

The best way to fight them is to beat them at the things that are helping the people with. If they give food, the US needs to give more. If they help with medical supplies the US must do more. If they give some people jobs, then the US must give jobs to a lot of people.

That is the only way – violence won´t work.

Violence won’t work in the end, but it will help put an end to the “rouge” cleric’s militias. Theya re dead-enders, whose time has passed. The Us had a plan to arrest him a while back, but fellow clerics, who did NOT like him, felt that he was insignificant, and his capture would fuel his followers into action. Since the June deadline is coming, and forces are trying to clean up the people trying to stop the transfer of power, the cleric had to act. If he didn’t, he would be done for once the power was transferred. At least, if he started a “revolt”, he could delay that transfer of power, and prolong his effective powertrip.

His followers are trying to start a revolt,and Al-queada is trying to start a civil war, both, opposed to each other fundamentally, have found that they are on common ground. For both of them, their long term goals(each other’s destruction) are moot, unnatainable, if their short term goals(stopping the transfer of power to IRAQIS) are not accomplished.

since the deadline approcheth, the forcasted losers of the deal(Shiite’s wanting an Iranian, theocratic, paradise&Sunis fearing their inevitable loss of absolute power) would be expected to try something of a last ditch effort to delay what would be a defeat for them–transfer of power to Iraqis, who DO NOT SUPPORT EITHER OF THEM. This transfer puts the insurgents into a bad situation. If they accept it, they will become irrelevant, if they FIGHT, they’re fighting against the will of the majority of Iraqis.
Fighting Iraqis, when the US is no longer in control, will gain them NO favor in Iraq, OR the muslim world.

Some think the soft natured way US troops have delt with insurgents recently has led to a loss of fear(respect) for US forces, which, accordingly, leads to bigger cajones onthe part of anti-US forces—they think they can get away with it.

Now, it looks like more heaft measures will be taken, the remove, once and for all , the people of Fellujia, and the Radical shiite militias, that simply will not accept the future of Iraq as a democratic state.

With them, it seems as if, sadly, violence is the only way to earn respect, and accomplish the goal.

When Iraqis take over, I feel(and hope) violence will be seen as unacceptable in ALL circumstances, by ALL muslims, since the people in power, will be, Iraqi. Then, it will be VERY difficult for even the most radical militant to justify attacks on muslims, who are in a postion to control their OWN destiny, and not at the hand of Western Overlords.

Originally posted by kev35

”

“IF I lived in a country where the leader had ultimate power, and ruled with an iron fist, and invaded other countries, and defied the UN for a decade, I wouldn’t be surprised when it happens. I’;d be happy he was faling, but upset that foreign troops were in my country, if just for my pride alone. Most people understand that “

If you live in America you already are. Iraq and Afghanistan are conquests of Bush Junior. Both countries were invaded by America. Did America not ignore the UN by invading Iraq? America only listens to the UN when it suits their purposes.

Regards,

kev35

do you really think that Bush has ultimate power? Sad. What kind of crap do they fed you in the media? Thought like that make me wonder exactly what kind of life you think Americans lead. Bush has power, but it’s not ultimate–far from it. He’s commander in cheif of the military, and with CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL, AFTER going to the UN, and GETTING them to give Saddam a deadline, he went back to get them to follow through. They didn’t, he did–with CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL. He never did anything without the majority support of congress. Congress is composed of Senators and representatives, elected by people of the US. Bush does not have ultimate power, and in fact, could have been stopped by congress if they wanted to. They didn’t.

Before making assumptions of American ignorance(I’m not referring to you, by the way), people should have an understanding of the way the country works.

Seriously, I don’t know how many people Ive spoken to, from other countries, that assume that the President has the authority over everything, and what he says goes. They think Bush is directly responsible, for every single aspect of American action overseas, and has ordered every single operation, attack, strike, directly. they think he’s in total control. He isn’t. He’s JUST the president, powerful yes, totally powerful, no. IF he was, he’d get removed, if not by congress, but by the people.

We have the power. Remember, we get to have guns….lots of guns. No dictatorships here…we won’t stand for it.

American soldiers joyus over the deaths of their enemies in vietnam, and americans praying for strenght are totally different. In Vietnam, we had many conscripts fighting. In Iraq, everyone volunteered for the job, and knew they what they were getting into. They are professionals, and “joy” over the deaths of enemies is much less prevalent. Does it happen? Of course, it’s war–these people were trying to kil them–war mentality is quite different than normal mentality.

Senator Kennedy said it’s Bush’s vietnam. Kennedy is a disgusting man, and should have been jailed for murdr, if not, manslughter. He’s goinig to say anything to discredit Bush, because Bush’s success–any of his successes–are a direct threat to Kennedy’s party obtaining any power.

You can argue about Iraq, it won’t do any good. We have an administration that has the reaolve to accomplish a goal. If Clinton had the same, bin LAden would have been killed a long time ago, and We would have kept troops in Somalia, and reinforced(as opposed to pulling out) UN forces in Rwanda.

So far, over 600 body bags have been brought home, and nobody’s changing their minds. With the knowledge that he war is being fought by mILITARY leaders,and not politicians, the public knows it will be won. Support in Vietnam would have been much greater if it were fought correctly. Instead, it lasted years, cost lives, and ended in disaster. Had Johnson acted as Bush has, letting the military do the thinking as well as the fighting, that would have been won.

Arguing over Iraq is pointless. We think we’re right, you think it’s wrong. Nobody will “know” what the truth was until time has passed. The Iraqi people have a very favorable outlook on their future, around 80% believe that they will be better off after power is handed over, than when they were under Saddam.
According to the recent polls, it seems more Iraqis support the coalition’s goals than Europeans!

Let them decide what’s best for themselves now.

Originally posted by Flood
So he doesn’t mean it? Does the writer get royalties from it? Does it have a sort of diddle-de-pom finish?
Or was asking ‘god’ to bless America?
The Nazis had ‘god with us’ on their belt buckles, you know…

Flood.

The Nazis(and terrorists) were deliberatly exterminating innocent people for the sole purpose of exterminating innocent people.

Americans are not intentionally exterminating innocent people, and try to AVOID it, even at their own peril.

Now, if the president said god Bless America, when we were going to start to carpet bomb an iraqi city, knowingly killing innocent people, then I’d say it’s wrong. Asking for God’s blessing in a time of war, when we’re trying to accomplish our goals, avoid civilian casualties, and imporve the lives of the civilians, in my opinion, is perfectly reasonable.

Different intent.

Like I said before, ASKING for the help of God is one thing. Proclaiming God’s satisfaction of the death and mutilation of people–civilian or military–is sick, and an insult to any person of God. Even the sunni clerics, who despise the americans, and don’t reject their deaths, opposed the mutilation.

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.