Decision 2012
July 18th, 2013 at 11:46:28 AM
permalink
Quote: Beethoven9thThis conversation is a perfect example of why conservatives dislike trying to have an honest discussion with liberals. This silly game of semantics gets tiring. If you want to tax what you've just described, that's fine, and we can discuss it on its merits. But to try to pawn it off as some type of "consumption tax" is intellectually dishonest.
Regardless of what you want to believe, none of the taxes you described above is a consumption tax. (If you support those kinds of taxes, fine, but try basing your arguments on its merits instead)
Okay, you will have to define to me what an intellectually honest definition of a consumption tax is then. I'm not trying to play semantics. You said you were pro a consumption tax, so tell ME what defines a consumption tax. Excise taxes are consumption taxes (and exist today). Value Added Taxes and Sales Taxes are consumption taxes. So what is different about what I have described? No intellectually dishonesty. Saying 'I don't consume pollution' misses the point... a direct cost for pollution wouldn't be a consumption tax (I agree). I was just asking how you would regulate companies that are not taking into account their externalities of production. I even suggested more regulation is not the answer, but you seem to have choosen to ignore this, but focus on the 'semantics', something I was trying to avoid.
I've even tried to discuss it on it's merits. I don't even care if you want to say 'this is a bad way to do a consumption tax because of reason X'. Or even a bad tax because of reason X. What are the demerits for a hydrocarbon tax? What are the merits for a consumption tax? What sort of consumption tax do you think IS a good idea?
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
July 18th, 2013 at 12:08:53 PM
permalink
Quote: thecesspitOkay, you will have to define to me what an intellectually honest definition of a consumption tax is then. I'm not trying to play semantics. You said you were pro a consumption tax, so tell ME what defines a consumption tax.
So you need a definition of "consumption tax" now? I can't believe what this conversation has devolved into.
Anyway, try Dictionary.com.
Fighting BS one post at a time!
July 18th, 2013 at 12:38:59 PM
permalink
Quote: Beethoven9thSo you need a definition of "consumption tax" now? I can't believe what this conversation has devolved into.
Anyway, try Dictionary.com.
Way to avoid the question.
A tax, levied on hydrocarbons, at the point of sale, is a consumption tax, based on that definition you linked to.
So, therefore, I have no idea what your problem is with the line I was following with a tax on fuel.
"consumption tax
noun
a tax, as a sales tax, levied on consumer goods or services at the time of sale."
[edit]
I do see the hang up... I said 'carbon/pollution' tax. As I stated later, taxing pollution is not a consumption tax... correct, I went off a brief tangent.
A hydrocarbon tax would be a consumption tax.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
July 18th, 2013 at 12:44:02 PM
permalink
I answered your question and provided you with a link.Quote: thecesspitWay to avoid the question.
If a person goes to the store and purchases carbon, then absolutely.Quote: thecesspitA hydrocarbon tax would be a consumption tax.
...and people must drive on driveways and park in parkways because that's consistent with your definition of 'drive' and 'park', right?Quote: thecesspitA tax, levied on hydrocarbons, at the point of sale, is a consumption tax, based on that definition you linked to.
So, therefore, I have no idea what your problem is with the line I was following with a tax on fuel.
Fighting BS one post at a time!
July 18th, 2013 at 1:01:01 PM
permalink
Quote: Beethoven9thIf a person goes to the store and purchases carbon, then absolutely.
Thank god we agree on something.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
July 18th, 2013 at 3:40:52 PM
permalink
Quote: terapinedHere's a bold prediction, Elizabeth Warren 2024, after 8 years of Clinton.
Bold indeed, since she'll be three years older than McCain was in '08.
The issue with a consumption tax is that, as a percentage of income, the poor end up getting hosed. This is a problem because the rich are allowed to stay rich - rather than simply falling to whoever can command the most military respect - by the state. It's an almost invisible function, one taken for granted, but all money, even commodity-backed money, goes through the state, since that's who guarantees property rights, and its very invisibility shines a light on how central it is to the role of the state, beyond all the things we bang on about. Letting those who benefit most from that service pay essentially nothing by that virtue is absurd.
The trick to poker is learning not to beat yourself up for your mistakes too much, and certainly not too little, but just the right amount.
July 18th, 2013 at 4:38:43 PM
permalink
Essentially nothing? That's funny. EN is almost as ridiculous as ED.
Fighting BS one post at a time!
July 18th, 2013 at 5:39:37 PM
permalink
Wow, had no idea Elizabeth Warren was that old. Just checked, yup, born 1949. Hmm, maybe too bold a prediction.
She's really impressed me lately. She's also not a career politician and I like that also.
The UK odds site I check is down but did a google odds search and William Hill has odds on 2016. Cool, I always stay at the 4 Queens which uses William Hill sports book. Will be in Vegas in 4 months, wonder if I can lay a bet down on 2016? Or does sports book there only take sports bets. The William Hill internet site seems to cater to the British since lots of odds on Rugby and football is listed as "American Football"
Anyway, Elizabeth Warren odds 20/1 2016
Heres whats interesting at William Hill, Clinton favorite at 7/2 but Male odds are 1/6 and Female 7/2
She's really impressed me lately. She's also not a career politician and I like that also.
The UK odds site I check is down but did a google odds search and William Hill has odds on 2016. Cool, I always stay at the 4 Queens which uses William Hill sports book. Will be in Vegas in 4 months, wonder if I can lay a bet down on 2016? Or does sports book there only take sports bets. The William Hill internet site seems to cater to the British since lots of odds on Rugby and football is listed as "American Football"
Anyway, Elizabeth Warren odds 20/1 2016
Heres whats interesting at William Hill, Clinton favorite at 7/2 but Male odds are 1/6 and Female 7/2
Its just a forum. Nothing here to get obsessed about.
July 18th, 2013 at 5:57:38 PM
permalink
Quote: terapinedWill be in Vegas in 4 months, wonder if I can lay a bet down on 2016?
Um...it's illegal to bet on presidential elections in the US. *headshake*
You need to do it online.
Fighting BS one post at a time!
July 18th, 2013 at 6:04:28 PM
permalink
Quote: terapinedWow, had no idea Elizabeth Warren was that old. Just checked, yup, born 1949. Hmm, maybe too bold a prediction.
She's really impressed me lately. She's also not a career politician and I like that also.
She is completely divorced from reality, which makes her popular among liberals.
Can anyone imagine if Sarah Palin had claimed to be part Indian?
Or that student loans should be priced same as the Federal Funds Rate for overnight loans?
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
July 18th, 2013 at 6:08:59 PM
permalink
Quote: AZDuffmanCan anyone imagine if Sarah Palin had claimed to be part Indian?
Liberals would vote for Stalin over Palin.
Fighting BS one post at a time!
July 18th, 2013 at 6:13:29 PM
permalink
Quote: Beethoven9thUm...it's illegal to bet on presidential elections in the US. *headshake*
You need to do it online.
UH-OH. OMG. I put out an offer for action on 2016 election some posts ago. Boy am I in trouble. Just look at Beethoven9th sig "I don't like you. I really and truly do not like you." No doubt about it, I'm gonna get ratted out. Should I expect a knock on my door? I honestly like the give and take with Beethoven but gotta be honest, don't really like the sig. I guess its a good thing nobody took me up on the action. Am I in the clear? Better hide the stash just to be on the safe side.
I don't know about Stalin but I would vote for a chair over Palin.
Its just a forum. Nothing here to get obsessed about.
July 18th, 2013 at 6:22:55 PM
permalink
Quote: terapinedJust look at Beethoven9th sig "I don't like you. I really and truly do not like you."
I honestly like the give and take with Beethoven but gotta be honest, don't really like the sig.
Um...my signature is an Ahigh quote.
Fighting BS one post at a time!
July 27th, 2013 at 3:48:56 PM
permalink
Obamacare Call Center Employees Denied Healthcare Insurance
Isn't this just fitting? LOL
Isn't this just fitting? LOL
Fighting BS one post at a time!
July 30th, 2013 at 8:38:37 AM
permalink
I'm chiming in and since I wasn't here in 2012, here is my projected results for the 2016 Election
2016 election result/projection:
I did this last year and came within 2 million votes and had the correct number of electoral votes. I could copy the email to the McGlaughlin Group if you'd like, but it makes no nevermind what others think. The truth is what matters. Though I used THIER polling numbers, I believe this will be as accurate as I can get without know who is running. I did look up the number of potential voters, historic voting patterns.
I've thought about going 60/40 for the white vote as that's how is usually goes. More white men vote republican than white female. But more white women vote than white men. Please keep in mind that the number is total registered voters not how many people I expect to vote. 2016 should see fewer voters than 2012 which was over 120 million. If there is a polarizing figure, then it should be an average voting year. Otherwise I expect low turnout. Even if you go 60/40. the democrats win. The republican party is in shambles as it is. They'll be lucky to get 60% of the white vote in 2016. The bulk being Christian Conservatives. 2016 starts with a minimum split for all voters 51.1% to 47.2% . Advantage Democrats.
Splits by race:
White Vote: 50/50
Latino Vote: 75/25
Black Vote : 80/20
others: 65/35
146,311,000 registered voters in the United States
White: 63.7
Hispanic 16.4
Black: 12.6
Other: 7.3
Vote totals based on most recent census:
White: 93,200,107
Hispnic: 23,995,004
Black: 18,435,156
Others: 10,680,703
Democratic votes:
46600053.5
17996253.0
14748124.8
6942456.95
Republican votes:
46600053.5
5998751.00
3687032.20
3738246.05
Total votes by party:
Democratic 86286888.25
Republican 60024082.75
Total Votes 146310971
As for me personally, I voted independent going with some Judge who was in favor of legalizing marijuana. As of 2012, I will vote for Hilary if Chris Christie is not running. I just couldn't vote in a foreign exchange student who was not born in America. As for the Vulture Capitalist, I found out his camp was being funded by a ponzi scheme. I also have concerns over putting in a republican as long as there is a living Bush.
2016 election result/projection:
I did this last year and came within 2 million votes and had the correct number of electoral votes. I could copy the email to the McGlaughlin Group if you'd like, but it makes no nevermind what others think. The truth is what matters. Though I used THIER polling numbers, I believe this will be as accurate as I can get without know who is running. I did look up the number of potential voters, historic voting patterns.
I've thought about going 60/40 for the white vote as that's how is usually goes. More white men vote republican than white female. But more white women vote than white men. Please keep in mind that the number is total registered voters not how many people I expect to vote. 2016 should see fewer voters than 2012 which was over 120 million. If there is a polarizing figure, then it should be an average voting year. Otherwise I expect low turnout. Even if you go 60/40. the democrats win. The republican party is in shambles as it is. They'll be lucky to get 60% of the white vote in 2016. The bulk being Christian Conservatives. 2016 starts with a minimum split for all voters 51.1% to 47.2% . Advantage Democrats.
Splits by race:
White Vote: 50/50
Latino Vote: 75/25
Black Vote : 80/20
others: 65/35
146,311,000 registered voters in the United States
White: 63.7
Hispanic 16.4
Black: 12.6
Other: 7.3
Vote totals based on most recent census:
White: 93,200,107
Hispnic: 23,995,004
Black: 18,435,156
Others: 10,680,703
Democratic votes:
46600053.5
17996253.0
14748124.8
6942456.95
Republican votes:
46600053.5
5998751.00
3687032.20
3738246.05
Total votes by party:
Democratic 86286888.25
Republican 60024082.75
Total Votes 146310971
As for me personally, I voted independent going with some Judge who was in favor of legalizing marijuana. As of 2012, I will vote for Hilary if Chris Christie is not running. I just couldn't vote in a foreign exchange student who was not born in America. As for the Vulture Capitalist, I found out his camp was being funded by a ponzi scheme. I also have concerns over putting in a republican as long as there is a living Bush.
Buffering...
July 30th, 2013 at 9:59:49 AM
permalink
Quote: wrobersonI just couldn't vote in a foreign exchange student who was not born in America. As for the Vulture Capitalist, I found out his camp was being funded by a ponzi scheme. I also have concerns over putting in a republican as long as there is a living Bush.
I was trying to think of a clever response to these three sentences, but I think "headdesk" just about covers it.
The trick to poker is learning not to beat yourself up for your mistakes too much, and certainly not too little, but just the right amount.
July 30th, 2013 at 10:13:24 AM
permalink
The war(s), the economy and jobs were my top issues. If that helps. I'm not a complete idiot.
Those are things anyone elected would have to deal with first.
Those are things anyone elected would have to deal with first.
Buffering...
August 7th, 2013 at 9:36:59 AM
permalink
I don't understand Democrats at all. They idolize guys who have actual affairs (e.g., Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy), yet they run away from guys who simply do raunchy things online (e.g., Anthony Weiner). By Democrat standards, Weiner's getting a raw deal. Big time.
Fighting BS one post at a time!
August 7th, 2013 at 1:08:10 PM
permalink
On Obama's 59th visit to the Tonight Show
yesterday, he told Leno that he wants to deepen
the ports on the Gulf Coast, like in Charleston,
South Carolina, and Savannah, Georgia. Its
really too bad those places are not on the
Gulf Coast. If this had been Bush it would be
all we were hearing about today. Because its
Obama the media just shrugs and looks away.
yesterday, he told Leno that he wants to deepen
the ports on the Gulf Coast, like in Charleston,
South Carolina, and Savannah, Georgia. Its
really too bad those places are not on the
Gulf Coast. If this had been Bush it would be
all we were hearing about today. Because its
Obama the media just shrugs and looks away.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
August 7th, 2013 at 1:32:25 PM
permalink
Mussolini would get a favorable write-up in the newspapers if he ever came back to life and ran against Bush.
Fighting BS one post at a time!
August 7th, 2013 at 1:49:16 PM
permalink
Dan Quayle will always be known as VP 'potatoe'
Each day is better than the next
August 7th, 2013 at 1:58:22 PM
permalink
Quote: Beethoven9thMussolini would get a favorable write-up in the newspapers if he ever came back to life and ran against Bush.
Well, he did make the trains run on time (by cancelling half of them)
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
August 7th, 2013 at 2:09:44 PM
permalink
People are saying 'Oh I'm sure Obama knew those places
aren't on the Gulf.' I'm not sure of that at all. I really think
this guy is as close to an airhead president as we've ever
had. We never see his college transcripts because his grades
must have royally sucked. The short time he was a law
professor his students didn't like him, they thought he was
not very good. He can't talk without a prompter. He's delegated
every bit of responsibility in the WH to somebody else. They
now think Valarie Jarrett was the one who gave the order to
stand down in Libya because nobody knew where the frick
Obama was. She was running the office and she's a nobody.
He gives 'empty suit' a whole new meaning.
aren't on the Gulf.' I'm not sure of that at all. I really think
this guy is as close to an airhead president as we've ever
had. We never see his college transcripts because his grades
must have royally sucked. The short time he was a law
professor his students didn't like him, they thought he was
not very good. He can't talk without a prompter. He's delegated
every bit of responsibility in the WH to somebody else. They
now think Valarie Jarrett was the one who gave the order to
stand down in Libya because nobody knew where the frick
Obama was. She was running the office and she's a nobody.
He gives 'empty suit' a whole new meaning.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
August 7th, 2013 at 2:56:15 PM
permalink
He knew at least that the three cities on the Atlantic Coast, Savannah, Charleston, and Jacksonville are ports that that are attempting New Panamax ships but at least are considering it. Meanwhile, none of the gulf ports can handle these ships.
A gaffe for sure, but at least he knew which three states these cities belonged in. Give him a 1/2 point at least.
But subtract a point for claiming in the same interview that Putin was the head of the KGB.
Doesn't matter -- not like it's an election year.
A gaffe for sure, but at least he knew which three states these cities belonged in. Give him a 1/2 point at least.
But subtract a point for claiming in the same interview that Putin was the head of the KGB.
Doesn't matter -- not like it's an election year.
-----
You want the truth! You can't handle the truth!
August 7th, 2013 at 2:58:49 PM
permalink
Quote: boymimbo
But subtract a point for claiming in the same interview that Putin was the head of the KGB.
.
He also said the summer Olympics are in Russia
next year, in the same interview. They're in Brazil.
Why do they let this guy say anything off the cuff,
its a national embarrassment.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
August 7th, 2013 at 3:18:47 PM
permalink
To be clear, he said this:
All of these will be frozen or in storage in Russia next year.
Quote: POTUS on Leno
And if Russia wants to uphold the Olympic spirit, then every judgment should be made on the track, or in the swimming pool, or on the balance beam, and people’s sexual orientation shouldn’t have anything to do with it. (Applause.)
All of these will be frozen or in storage in Russia next year.
-----
You want the truth! You can't handle the truth!
October 31st, 2013 at 12:15:33 PM
permalink
Obama approval sinks to new low
...but then again, Obama supporters shouldn't get too down, and Republicans shouldn't get too excited. There are enough low information voters out there to keep Obama and the Dems afloat for the next 20 years.
...but then again, Obama supporters shouldn't get too down, and Republicans shouldn't get too excited. There are enough low information voters out there to keep Obama and the Dems afloat for the next 20 years.
Fighting BS one post at a time!
October 31st, 2013 at 12:19:12 PM
permalink
And then there is a tip of the hat to Senator Cruz :
" The public’s view of the Republican Party has reached another all-time low in the survey, with 22 percent seeing the GOP in a positive light and 53 percent viewing it negatively "
" The public’s view of the Republican Party has reached another all-time low in the survey, with 22 percent seeing the GOP in a positive light and 53 percent viewing it negatively "
Shed not for her
the bitter tear
Nor give the heart
to vain regret
Tis but the casket
that lies here,
The gem that filled it
Sparkles yet
October 31st, 2013 at 12:22:06 PM
permalink
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Exactly as I just stated. Low information voters in action!
Exactly as I just stated. Low information voters in action!
Fighting BS one post at a time!
October 31st, 2013 at 12:24:37 PM
permalink
Yes, we all know only Republican have the answers. But none of the solutions. Or as Tea party people say. " We can't drive the bus. But if you don't take us where we want to go, we will blow up the bus. "
I am not a math guy but if Rep and Dem are 50/50 and only 22% think the Republican party knows what it's doing.
Would that not meant the majority of Republicans think so also, even if not 1% of Democrats thought so. Just asking !
I am not a math guy but if Rep and Dem are 50/50 and only 22% think the Republican party knows what it's doing.
Would that not meant the majority of Republicans think so also, even if not 1% of Democrats thought so. Just asking !
Shed not for her
the bitter tear
Nor give the heart
to vain regret
Tis but the casket
that lies here,
The gem that filled it
Sparkles yet
October 31st, 2013 at 12:28:21 PM
permalink
Quote: BuzzardOr as Tea party people say. " We can't drive the bus. But if you don't take us where we want to go, we will blow up the bus. "
Really? Which Tea Party person said that? (Sounds like we have an imaginary information voter here, folks...lol)
Fighting BS one post at a time!
October 31st, 2013 at 12:29:30 PM
permalink
All of them !
Shed not for her
the bitter tear
Nor give the heart
to vain regret
Tis but the casket
that lies here,
The gem that filled it
Sparkles yet
October 31st, 2013 at 12:45:04 PM
permalink
There is more than a passing similarity between Joseph McCarthy and Ted Cruz, between McCarthyism and the Tea Party movement. The Republican Party survived McCarthyism because, ultimately, its excesses caused it to burn out.
Shed not for her
the bitter tear
Nor give the heart
to vain regret
Tis but the casket
that lies here,
The gem that filled it
Sparkles yet
October 31st, 2013 at 12:57:47 PM
permalink
Quote: BuzzardThere is more than a passing similarity between Joseph McCarthy and Ted Cruz, between McCarthyism and the Tea Party movement. The Republican Party survived McCarthyism because, ultimately, its excesses caused it to burn out.
Yes, they are similar in that they both see communists/socialists in our government and nobody seeming to care.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
October 31st, 2013 at 1:00:00 PM
permalink
Another fan of that great American Joseph McCarthy: You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency?
Shed not for her
the bitter tear
Nor give the heart
to vain regret
Tis but the casket
that lies here,
The gem that filled it
Sparkles yet
October 31st, 2013 at 1:01:19 PM
permalink
Quote: BuzzardAnother fan of that great American Joseph McCarthy: You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency?
He was a great American. Or do you like the idea of enemy sympathizers in high places?
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
October 31st, 2013 at 1:03:16 PM
permalink
If you think Joe McCarthy was a great American, you speak for the Tea Party. I need say no more.
Shed not for her
the bitter tear
Nor give the heart
to vain regret
Tis but the casket
that lies here,
The gem that filled it
Sparkles yet
October 31st, 2013 at 1:10:09 PM
permalink
Not as widely known as McCarthy's anti-Communist crusade were his various attempts to intimidate, and expel from government positions, persons whom he accused, or threatened to publicly accuse, of homosexuality.
Shed not for her
the bitter tear
Nor give the heart
to vain regret
Tis but the casket
that lies here,
The gem that filled it
Sparkles yet
October 31st, 2013 at 1:19:01 PM
permalink
McCarthy at the very least was the very worst of the political correct policeman. At the very least. And that's being nice.
There's no secret. Just know what you're talking about before you open your mouth.
October 31st, 2013 at 1:24:11 PM
permalink
Way too nice. A documentary is scheduled for release soon. About the " Lavender Scare ". McCarthyism at it's worst.
Shed not for her
the bitter tear
Nor give the heart
to vain regret
Tis but the casket
that lies here,
The gem that filled it
Sparkles yet
October 31st, 2013 at 1:29:47 PM
permalink
Quote: BuzzardIf you think Joe McCarthy was a great American, you speak for the Tea Party. I need say no more.
I proudly speak as a member of the Tea Party and similarly hate socialism and communism as the evil systems they are.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
October 31st, 2013 at 1:51:37 PM
permalink
I know what you're getting at, but it ultimately means nothing. For example, I don't think the leaders of the Republican party know what they're doing either, yet I sure ain't no O-bot!!Quote: Buzzard...only 22% think the Republican party knows what it's doing.
Would that not meant the majority of Republicans think so also, even if not 1% of Democrats thought so. Just asking !
Name ONE.Quote: BuzzardAll of them !
Fighting BS one post at a time!
October 31st, 2013 at 1:51:59 PM
permalink
As for McCarthy, he was far less harmful to the country than Obama.
Fighting BS one post at a time!
October 31st, 2013 at 1:52:59 PM
permalink
McCarthy started out with good intentions, to root
out the commies, and they were everywhere in
Hollywood and the gov't. But he got carried away
with his bad self and made a witch hunt out of it.
People forget that the Russians (commies) were our
allies in WWII and it wasn't till after the war that they
became our enemies. You need a playbill to keep track
of all the players.
out the commies, and they were everywhere in
Hollywood and the gov't. But he got carried away
with his bad self and made a witch hunt out of it.
People forget that the Russians (commies) were our
allies in WWII and it wasn't till after the war that they
became our enemies. You need a playbill to keep track
of all the players.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
October 31st, 2013 at 3:02:16 PM
permalink
Quote: BuzzardThere is more than a passing similarity between Joseph McCarthy and Ted Cruz, between McCarthyism and the Tea Party movement. The Republican Party survived McCarthyism because, ultimately, its excesses caused it to burn out.
Shed not for her
the bitter tear
Nor give the heart
to vain regret
Tis but the casket
that lies here,
The gem that filled it
Sparkles yet
October 31st, 2013 at 3:12:36 PM
permalink
Quote: EvenBobMcCarthy started out with good intentions, to root
out the commies, and they were everywhere in
Hollywood and the gov't. But he got carried away
with his bad self and made a witch hunt out of it.
People forget that the Russians (commies) were our
allies in WWII and it wasn't till after the war that they
became our enemies. You need a playbill to keep track
of all the players.
They were our allies but the sobs were never our friends. People in the USA in their desire to be more liked than feared always forget the difference.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
October 31st, 2013 at 5:17:42 PM
permalink
Quote: EvenBobPeople forget that the Russians (commies) were our
allies in WWII and it wasn't till after the war that they
became our enemies. You need a playbill to keep track
of all the players.
Allies only be circumstances. World War II (at least against the Germans) was a war fought on the Eastern front... everything else was a side show (a bloody, difficult, important sideshow). The US and UK needed the Russians to last and survive, lest Hitler get the gains and resources he needed. At this point, the political ideologies of the UK, the Russians and the US aren't important.
The uneasy alliance lasted until about 4 minutes after the end of the war in Europe... old Patton wanted to keep going and give the commies a bloody nose. Even before the end when it was clear that the Germans would eventually lose (post D-Day at the Yalta conference) there was massive tension between the sides about what a post war Europe would look like.
The Pacific War was pretty much all the US, with side shows (again important) by the Commonwealth and the Chinese partisans of different flavours.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
October 31st, 2013 at 5:24:14 PM
permalink
Quote: thecesspitAllies only be circumstances. World War II (at least against the Germans) was a war fought on the Eastern front... everything else was a side show (a bloody, difficult, important sideshow).
I saw on the military channel that all those 10's
of thousands of Studebaker 2.5 ton trucks we sent
Russia from 1942-45 won the war for them.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
October 31st, 2013 at 5:48:00 PM
permalink
Then he failed pretty miserably with J. Edgar Hoover.Quote: BuzzardNot as widely known as McCarthy's anti-Communist crusade were his various attempts to intimidate, and expel from government positions, persons whom he accused, or threatened to publicly accuse, of homosexuality.
October 31st, 2013 at 6:07:47 PM
permalink
Quote: EvenBobI saw on the military channel that all those 10's
of thousands of Studebaker 2.5 ton trucks we sent
Russia from 1942-45 won the war for them.
The claim is that the trucks sent on lend lease were the key factor. I'm not so sure, and many authors don't play it up as much, but they were important... the Russian army became a lot more mobile than the Germans, who despite all their massed tanks and Blitzkrieg we think of were bringing up their supplies and logistics by horse in many cases.
The trucks, as I recall were important in Operation Saturn(?) which cut of Paulus's army in Stalingrad.
Did they win the war for the Russians? Hard to say, any more than than claiming the delaying actions in Greece and Crete helped delayed the start of Barbarossa enough, or the attack in Tunisia kept important Luftwaffe and armoured elements away from the Stalingrad push (if I get my timing right without looking at Wikipedia). But the Arctic Convoys and the lend-lease of trucks were another part of it, for sure.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
