O.T. - On Target...

Get serious. Scientists have found "industrial" pollution from the time of the Roman Empire (and earlier) in ice cores at the North Pole. It is virtually impossible for any nation not to pollute.

Since the US leads the way in pollution controls, we are doing something (although more is better as they used to Econ 101). We have moved away from soft coal (I remember watching them hand washing the walls of public buildings in London to remove the coal residue in 1987). We require scrubbers in smokestacks (although we should force this more strongly). There is evidence that our air and water qualities have improved since the 1970s (although again, there is room for improvement, especially locally in some major metro areas).

But wait, we are doing more, there are more trees in the US than 150 years ago (at least in Virginia and Pennsylvania). Wetlands are more likely to be protected. We continue to expand park holdings (although we need to stop the freebies to the lumber industry for example, who use roads built by the govt. to cut trees on public lands, then ship the wood to Japan for processing and use, not even keeping the profitable part of the work in the US).

We can and should do better with recycling as a nation. And, American enviromentalist groups should learn from the Euros in at least one regard, business is not an enemy, merely people motivated by different issues. So, if you can show them how to improve the environment while making a profit, they almost always will (ex. the French printing ind., heavy metals ind., certain polluting byproducts created in one used by the other, and the enviros who brought them all together to reduce pollution and business costs).

However, despite all that, especially the last bit, being lectured about the environment by Europeans is like being preached to about the virtues of vegetarianism, by a lion with tape worms.

From: snipped-for-privacy@aol.com (KLawr63125)

Thank you, Ken, for saving me from having to respond to that nitwit on these points.

My home page:

" In walks the village idiot and his face is all aglow; he's been up all night listening to Mohammad's radio" W. Zevon

I've heard of several admittedly smaller Canadian firms that have gone belly-up since NAFTA. Going belly-up since NAFTA is something I know well here in western New York. We've watched all of our major employers leave, downsize or go out of business thanks to Washington. The person that came up with that law (and I know Clinton ~signed~ it but that prick didn't write it) should be taken out and hung like a side of beef. But hey, according to Rush, no jobs were lost that could have been filled by American workers that ~wanted~ to work, right?

I'm going back to modeling.....

-- John The history of things that didn't happen has never been written. . - - - Henry Kissinger

Sure. They learned all about the concept and how to stretch it from the "wetbacks" who came down from the north and east prior to 1836.

Perot was right, except it is a slow hissing sound as the companies leave like theives in the night rather than a giant sucking sound.

Interesting--how do you quantify something like that? The best I can do is an impression that the various West Europeans have at least been reliable from time to time, and Germany more often than France; in neither case is their scope of reliability vis-a-vis the US as bad as Iraq has been vis-a-vis everybody. Not that I'm out to give awards for "discernably more reliable than the worst possible example."

You missed my point--I'm talking about the attitude of the Sunnis in Saudi Arabia, and just how welcoming a Wahhabist population would be to an influx of armed Shi'ites.

We do have to leave them to themselves--it's inherent in letting them have a chance at democracy. In other words, consistent with the concept of self-government, we cannot dictate the terms of self-government to them. Doesn't mean we have to remove all of our troops--example, South Korea, with a functioning democracy and a long history of American military presence, because the South Koreans wanted us to remain. However, expecting Iraq to be a client for maintenance of the government of our choice in Saudi Arabia is naive, dangerous and doomed to failure.

Nobody. And maybe that's the point--maybe the choice was either to dispose of Saddam or to have a stable Iraq. A chilling thought, and if democracy doesn't take, terminal instability is what we'll have.

Mark Schynert

Ah, is it Marxist this week? How quaint.

Mark Schynert

I don't think so--I never had any trouble with his dad's efforts in Iraq, nor with Reagan's Cold War 'build 'em under the table' defense spending policies. This Bush doesn't get enough right on the foreign policy front for me to give him more than faint praise.

If Kerry becomes president, he's going to be trapped by the exigencies of the situation exactly like Nixon was trapped by LBJ's mess-making. He'll try to get Western allies and the UN to take off some of the heat, but he can't pull us entirely out of Iraq now, anymore than Bush can. My hope is that he can start to get troops out of there sooner, and put us on a road to getting them all out of there sooner. There is a middle ground between precipitous exit and establishing permanent bases. It's going to require imagination and nuance on the part of policy makers. AFAIC, this administration has had an adequate audition to demonstrate it's not up to the task.

Mark Schynert

new thread:

...and waiting, and waiting, and waiting...etc.

Tom

That's one reason I always found it more than odd that some African-Americans chose to abandon Christianity, the religion of their masters, in favor of Islam, the religion of their enslavers.

Tom

So, my impression that NAFTA was a plan to help the bottom line of large businesses at the terminal expense of employees and smaller businesses seems to be right?

Seems odd that the politicians would be more interested in helping big business than in helping the voters who put the in place.

Very odd, indeed.

Sarcasm mode off.

Tom

Bill I looked over your home page, but saw no mention of the attack on the Liberty.

Did I miss something?

Tom

Ever been to the Los Angeles basin?

Ever visit there in the 1950s-1960s?

Tom

Like I said, please show me where the fairness in Koyoto is ??

Because it sure is not fair to the USA.......................

"AM" wrote

Waiting for what, you rock head? I didn't claim that the was the result of my research or experience. Tom asked if anyone had any ideas as to why Israel attacked the Liberty. I posted what some author had professed, which I explained in more detail to Tom hours before you posted. The fact that you even brought this up is laughable.

Do you realize that you have used "oblivious" for "obvious" in at least three recent postings? Were you even aware that they are two different words?

KL

"AM" wrote

Drunk AND stupid. What a wonderful combination.

"Lesion to self". . . This is a joke, right?

KL

"AM" wrote

However, this goes far beyond that. Your butchery of every aspect of English is so extensive that you are undercutting whatever argument you are trying to make. That makes YOU the loser, and a perfectly legitimate (and I dare say quite enjoyable) object of ridicule.

BTW, I don't abide by internet conventions about being nicey-nice. Sorry.

KL

"AM" wrote

I wasn't the one who made that mistake in their post you pathetic moron, that was Sam Vanga.

You are like the boxer in the Monty Python sketch: "He doesn't know when he's been beaten. He doesn't know when he's won, either. In fact his brain has no sensory apparatus whatsoever. . ."

C'mon guys - this is a joke, right? Who is this really - Schynert? Kim?

KL

"Maiesm72" wrote

My guess is that his sig line was just in an unfortunate proximity to his answer.

KL