You know, you’re right— I don’t know anything about you except what you’ve posted, and honestly, it’s not positive. “Get over it,” indeed.
As for your assertion that I am not capable of thinking of anything but my own feelings, take a good, long look in the mirror, bub. Almost every single one of your assertations have been roundly refuted, yet you still persist. Well, to each his own.
I “get it” very well, thank you.
I never said I had a problem with the UN resolutions. In case you weren’t paying attention, this whole debate has been about the free exercize of our right to protest, not whether the UN’s actions were correct. That’s another thread. I stated the opinion that, whether the ideals of the cause are right or wrong, protest is a valid, healthy and necessary excersize of our rights. MY opinions of the validity of the potential war are not important: what is important is that if I feel something is wrong, I should feel free to make my voice heard, as should any American.
I support our troops fully, and hope for their safety. The troops are the ones who must fight a battle that politicians create. Thus, people should let the politicians know how they feel. No one is advocating protests of the troops themselves.
The troops suffer when people express the idea that there should be no war? Does not compute. Sorry. In fact, if war is not declared I would say many troops may live which otherwise may die. So, if you care so much for the troops, you too should be against the war.
It had no subsidies because it became a political hot potato. What politician would ignore mounting criticism for using nuclear power when he can easily subsidiize fossil fuels? The cost of nuclear reactors started to rise when the multiple redundacies were required to make the reactors to be 110 percent safe. Who instituted that? How many towns would allow reactors to be built if it wasnt? Raised consciousness courtesy of flower power. It is also ironic that in hindsight, nuclear power now turns out to be the cleanest mode of power generation.
I am not stating that protests are futile. When demonstrations raise debate, truth as well as lies are flung from either side. Its a matter of who is believeable in the end. There were anti-war protestors before the gulf war, they werent believable so they failed. The jury is still out on the current anti-war protestors.
All I am saying is someone has all the facts, he is basing his decisions on those facts and is not obligated to share those facts at this critical juncture. Protests are a necesary “evil” to make sure that he had better be right about those facts, and in the same token, those who say he is wrong, he is lying, he is stupid, had better have their facts right, to back themselves up with, because they may not have all of the facts and it is my opinion that they just dont see the whole picture.
I am not saying I do. all I am saying is I dont have the facts to question the man.
Its like calling for someone here to post a cite. Saying you cant give a cite right now, isnt the same as saying you dont have a cite at all.
We’re trying to make this into an intelligent debate. Would you like to join in?
Cite?
Last time I checked, this was the year 2003, not 1970. To my knowledge, no soldier has suffered any sort of attack from his/her fellow Americans. I haven’t heard a single anti-war protester say ANYTHING against our troops. On the contrary, what I have heard is expressions of concern for the troops, and for their families, and for the danger the troops may face. I have not heard of a single incident in which a soldier has been verbally abused or spat upon.
That’s the great thing about America. You have to “suffer” my advocation of free speech, and I have to suffer through your attacks on it.
Blown & Injected, I may have missed it, but I would like to see a response from you on the quotations from Theodore Roosevelt and Benjamin Franklin posted by Duckster.
Also, if given a choice, had you rather see the conflict with Hussein/Iraq resolved by diplomatic means or by war?
If we do attack Iraq, do you really plan to volunteer for duty?
BTW, the link that you couldn’t follow earlier was to the CBS polling site.
Good God, do you have no grip on reality here? Nuclear power had plenty of subsidies. Here are some facts about it:
It may be true that fossil fuels had more but that hardly is because of the protest movement against nuclear power. If you can find any such connection, show us.
As for nuclear reactor costs, you are making claims that one couldn’t even find on the nuclear industry website. Here is their take on regulation. Note that, while they are concerned that the regulations evolve so that they do not become outdated or burdensome, they do not attempt to make the claims you have made that these regulations have generally been too onerous or burdensome.
In fact, if you do cross-country comparisons with France and Japan, with France being a nation that gets the majority of its electrical power from nuclear, you find that the costs for nuclear plants in these different countries are about the same. What makes nuclear relatively more economical in France compared with fossil fuels is the higher cost to use the fossil fuels as compared to the U.S. not the lower cost of nuclear.
Also, I know of no evidence that the reactors are overengineered and in fact there have been enough close calls on various aspects to suggest that, if anything, the opposite may be true.
So, basically, as near as I can tell, your opinions on this matter have no basis in fact.
I did a google on “Nuclear power Protest” and got 206,000 hits.
all well and good, but to be fair, I did another google on “Hydroelectric protest” and got 11,800 hits.
Yeah, tell me the politicos and the NRC and the NEI are not going to bend over backwards to appease the rampant and mostly emotional fear of nuclear power.
I would if it were relevent to this specific issue, it is not - but it would take to much time and effort to explain it especially to the likes of Lissa
It is not about free speach, it is about the potential damage and division that our enemies can use to build on - AND I never said I was hoping for a war to break out.
Even a Libertarian has some limits and restriction - they use utilititarian means to decision making - what is best for most. It does not seem that indeciveness, division, and internal conflict is the best course for most.
Saddam’s gonna turn american granny’s into Weapons of Mass Destruction for his War Machine ?
You’re not just pulling our leg here, are you ? How exactly will that work ? I hope that their ancient lips aren’t going to have to get loose or anything. That could result in ship sinkage ! Please enlighten us as to the details of this new and credulous threat to America’s new world order. <insert smiley of your choice here>
Thanks, Blown & Injected, I needed a good chuckle.
Terribly sorry I’m so slow on the uptake, my good man. I know you have SUCH wisdom to impart, but are so very busy with your important life. Ah, if you only had the time (or were articulate enough) to show us the errors of our ways! What a world this could be! But please, don’t let me, the dullard, stop you from elucidating us, in your unique spelling and grammar, on the way the diplomacy and international policy REALLY work. See, we’ve all been laboring under illusions of freedom and clouding our minds by thinking about things too much. I’m sure you can set us straight.
Of course not, commerade! Our Western decadence will crush our empire, and we capitalist/freedom-loving bastards will finally get what we deserve. We, too, will learn to love Big Brother, and free ourselves from our thought-crime.
I’m not Lissa. (Sorry Lissa, but the tune was right. )
So let me get this correct. You are more afraid that we Americans just might expouse our rights of free speech that the enemy would use against us? Is that about it?
So in order to keep our rights we have to get rid of them? Been watching too many Vietnam War movies lately? (We had to destroy the village in order to save it. Fighting for peace is screwing for virginity. Yadda, yadda.)
If you are so afraid that Americans speaking out on issues is the greater damage, perhaps you need to have a talk with Bush and Rumsfeld. Both are yapping like crazy and informing Iraq what’s coming. After all, isn’t the element of surprise a key military tactic?
Your reasoning escapes me, unless, of course, there isn’t any to find.
Well, sure, the opinion of the public can be a factor…although I think if you look at how things evolved, it had much more to do with the nuclear industry fucking its own self over with Three Mile Island (and then the USSR with Chernobyl) and turning the general public fearful … perhaps for some pretty good reasons.
As for the NRC, they have lots of people pulling at them in different directions. At least as dangerous as appeasing the public’s fears (heaven forbid!) is them being “captured” by the industry they regulate…a particularly common problem when you have a revolving door between industry and government.
B&I: I can pretty much guarantee you that when most of the intelligent folks reading this thread are thinking “How can this poster be so dense?” they are not thinking of the likes of Lissa.
The key board is now a blur - so forgive me if I miss a couple of keys.
It is damn silly for some to put words in to my mouth and then try to fault me for others words.
I never said we need to or have to give up our rights.
I did not make any comments to war strategy.
I did not say debate or free speech is bad or wrong.
Let me try to make it simple, like Sheriff Taylor simple. It is one thing to bitch at your mother for heavy smoking, but ya don’t bitch at her while she is on her way to surgery for her cancer.
Not protesting does not equal anti 1st Amendment. :smack:
Hopefully the build up of troops is just a posture that says don’t screw with the inspectors and comply with the UN resolutions. It would be a good explanation for why the troop movements are so heavily talked about.
Hope I did not misspell a couple of words - that will be all the evidence Lissa needs to prove me wrong :rolleyes:
“Don’t expect Germany to approve a resolution legitimising war, don’t expect it,” he told a rally of his Social Democrats party.
France, Russia and China – all permanent members of the council – have made it clear they will not be rushed by any pressure from Washington for action against Saddam Hussein, and have backed a call by U.N. inspectors for more time to carry out their searches in Iraq.
[/quote
