Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Trouble in Egypt
Author Message
ClairtonPanther Offline
people need to wake up
*

Posts: 25,056
Joined: Mar 2005
Reputation: 777
I Root For: Pitt/Navy
Location: Portland, Oregon

Donators
Post: #61
RE: Trouble in Egypt
(02-03-2011 04:07 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Anyone heard from the UN? Failed institution.

PHUK THE UN. Wouldn't hurt my feelings at all if we left that POS institution.
02-03-2011 04:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Motown Bronco Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,758
Joined: Jul 2002
Reputation: 211
I Root For: WMU
Location: Metro Detroit
Post: #62
RE: Trouble in Egypt
I found this series of photographs to be interesting.

http://pajamasmedia.com/phyllischesler/2...hic-story/

They are photos of Cairo University graduates from 1959 to 2004. In '59 and '78, the female graduates dressed fairly modern and "let their hair down", so to speak. By '04, nearly all of them are shrouded in veils. It's like social norms have gone backwards.
02-03-2011 05:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SuperFlyBCat Offline
Banned

Posts: 49,583
Joined: Mar 2005
I Root For: America and UC
Location: Cincinnati
Post: #63
RE: Trouble in Egypt
(02-03-2011 05:04 PM)Motown Bronco Wrote:  I found this series of photographs to be interesting.

http://pajamasmedia.com/phyllischesler/2...hic-story/

They are photos of Cairo University graduates from 1959 to 2004. In '59 and '78, the female graduates dressed fairly modern and "let their hair down", so to speak. By '04, nearly all of them are shrouded in veils. It's like social norms have gone backwards.

In many Muslim countries, Egypt, Iran, Afghanistan (although very poor) etc.
heck the girls had lipstick, bubble gum, listed to the Bee Gees and pop music etc. Not so much anymore, but internet access in these countries is having an impact.
(This post was last modified: 02-03-2011 06:06 PM by SuperFlyBCat.)
02-03-2011 06:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 80,656
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3192
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #64
RE: Trouble in Egypt
(02-03-2011 01:39 PM)Motown Bronco Wrote:  In a perfect world, Washington would simply be blunt:
"We'll desire to work with and establish a civil relationship with whoever winds up leading Egypt. It's not our responsibility to 'choose' their leaders, but the people. But to whoever attains power, it's actually quite simple... If you so much as blow a fart in our direction, we'll give you a thorough beat-down. But if you're friendly with us, we'll be friendly with you. End of discussion."

Yes.

Except that, for that message to mean anything, you have to be willing to deliver that severe beat-down when the time comes. Occupying territory and trying to "win the hearts and minds of the people" is not delivering a severe beat-down.

I remember, early on in the days of Desert Storm, when Colin Powell said, "first we cut off the head, then we kill the snake" (may not be an exact quote). Sitting and listening, I thought, "Wow, he really gets it." Twenty years later, I'm still waiting for someone to cut off the head first. Some head, somewhere.

When rogue leaders start to understand that messing with the US means putting a target on your back, we'll get some respect. But we don't have the guts to play the game that way, and they know it.
02-04-2011 08:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Motown Bronco Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,758
Joined: Jul 2002
Reputation: 211
I Root For: WMU
Location: Metro Detroit
Post: #65
RE: Trouble in Egypt
Reminds me of the Russia-Georgia conflict a few years ago. Russia blasted in, relentlessly laid a smackdown for a couple weeks, then completely left.

I don't who was the real instigator. Probably Russia. I remember it being a lot of "you started it, no you started it" mumbo-jumbo. But it was pretty impressive.
02-04-2011 11:26 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Ninerfan1 Offline
Habitual Line Stepper
*

Posts: 9,871
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 146
I Root For: Charlotte
Location:
Post: #66
RE: Trouble in Egypt
Appears the Saudi's warned Obama against humiliating Mubarak in the fashion he did prior to him doing it.

I ceased being amazed at the ineptitude of this man and his administration.

At least there can no longer be an argument against what most of us said from the beginning. The guy is not qualified to lead this country. Never was.
02-10-2011 10:12 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SumOfAllFears Offline
Grim Reaper of Misguided Liberal Souls
*

Posts: 18,213
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation: 58
I Root For: America
Location:
Post: #67
RE: Trouble in Egypt
(02-10-2011 10:12 AM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  Appears the Saudi's warned Obama against humiliating Mubarak in the fashion he did prior to him doing it.

I ceased being amazed at the ineptitude of this man and his administration.

At least there can no longer be an argument against what most of us said from the beginning. The guy is not qualified to lead this country. Never was.

Hammered that nail on the head. Just have to make sure he is a 1termer.
02-10-2011 10:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Machiavelli Offline
Back to Reality. Oh there goes Gravity

Posts: 25,357
Joined: Apr 2006
I Root For: BGSU
Location:
Post: #68
RE: Trouble in Egypt
This has to make the Saudi Royal family nervous. They could be the next domino to topple.
02-10-2011 10:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NIU007 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 34,241
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 315
I Root For: NIU, MAC
Location: Naperville, IL
Post: #69
RE: Trouble in Egypt
(02-10-2011 10:18 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  
(02-10-2011 10:12 AM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  Appears the Saudi's warned Obama against humiliating Mubarak in the fashion he did prior to him doing it.

I ceased being amazed at the ineptitude of this man and his administration.

At least there can no longer be an argument against what most of us said from the beginning. The guy is not qualified to lead this country. Never was.

Hammered that nail on the head. Just have to make sure he is a 1termer.

The Saudis don't want the same thing happening to them.
02-10-2011 11:15 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Machiavelli Offline
Back to Reality. Oh there goes Gravity

Posts: 25,357
Joined: Apr 2006
I Root For: BGSU
Location:
Post: #70
RE: Trouble in Egypt
Ohhhh how I love our addiction to a 19th century energy supply. It clouds our judgement, our nation's moral fiber, and keeps one of our nation's political parties war chest stocked.

Keep Kowtowing to Saudi demands...................
02-10-2011 01:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 80,656
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3192
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #71
RE: Trouble in Egypt
(02-10-2011 01:11 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Ohhhh how I love our addiction to a 19th century energy supply. It clouds our judgement, our nation's moral fiber, and keeps one of our nation's political parties war chest stocked.
Keep Kowtowing to Saudi demands...................

The problem is not addiction. That implies that there are alternatives.

Our problem is that there aren't any viable 20th or 21st century alternatives. We need to be developing those at the same time as we make the most of what we have. We are doing neither.
02-10-2011 01:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
niuhuskie84 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,930
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 12
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #72
RE: Trouble in Egypt
Looking more like a military coup.
02-10-2011 01:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Machiavelli Offline
Back to Reality. Oh there goes Gravity

Posts: 25,357
Joined: Apr 2006
I Root For: BGSU
Location:
Post: #73
RE: Trouble in Egypt
There is nothing the House of Saud has in common with American ideals. Yet we prop it up for oil. If oil was allowed to float to it's "real costs" we would have alternatives today. I know the majority of people, including you Owl, don't believe that. I understand. I don't. Oil is sold in this country today under great subsidization. 95 % of American's don't understand it's true costs.
(This post was last modified: 02-10-2011 01:39 PM by Machiavelli.)
02-10-2011 01:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 80,656
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3192
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #74
RE: Trouble in Egypt
(02-10-2011 01:27 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  There is nothing the the House of Saud has in common with American ideals. Yet we prop it up for oil. If oil was allowed to float to it's "real costs" we would have alternatives today. I know the majority of people including you Owl don't believe it. I understand. I don't. Oil is sold in this country today under great subsidization. 95 % of American's don't understand it's true costs.

You grossly misstate both my position and the problem.

I totally agree that the price of oil (or oil products) has to rise before we get sensible energy policy. Since the 1970s I've strongly advocated significant increases in the gasoline tax, offset by tax savings elsewhere to mitigate the negative impact on the economy.

Where I disagree, and where you're simply wrong, is that rising gasoline prices will deter consumption, but by themselves they won't do much to advance the cause of alternatives. That's because while there are economic differences between the price of oil and alternatives, the greater differences are physical. Simply raising the price won't convince people to shift FROM oil until there is something else to shift TO. And that's what's missing.

There simply are not any good alternatives--yet. Electric cars--yes, if we had batteries that would let you drive further on a charge (we don't) and if we had an electricity generation, transmission, and distribution grid that could deliver the power to recharge all those cars (we don't). And generating that extra electricity from solar or wind is a great idea except that the sun usually won't be shining and the wind may or may not be blowing when people want to recharge those cars.

We'll probably find a better solution to the battery problem in the next 10 years or so. Those kinds of solutions tend to be found once you start using a product in some quantity. But until we find the will to address the NIMBY issues associated with electricity generation and transmission, the latter problem will remain. California--a hotbed for greens--hasn't allowed a new electric power plant since the 70s/80s (San Onofre was, I believe, the last). What happens when they try to put even 5 million electric cars on the road? And that number doesn't make a noticeable dent in the problem.

The one thing that would help most in the short run is sugar cane ethanol from Latin America. We could reduce our oil consumption by 15-20% (maybe as much as 30% if we end the stupid Cuban trade sanctions) by substituting ethanol for gasoline--and new cars can be built to take advantage for about $100 more, and existing cars converted for about $200. Sugar cane is efficient enough as a source to eliminate many of the problems with corn, sugar prices are depressed so that a rise wouldn't hurt, and giving Latin America another cash crop should help both our drug problem and our immigration problem. Past that we can cut imports by about 5-10% with drill here, drill now. After that we're looking at 0.4%-0.5% from elecric cars by 2015 (if Obama's goal of 1 million electric cars is reached by then) or 2020 (which industry sources say is more likely). After that, for now, exactly nothing.

One other thing people fail to understand. We don't get that much oil from the Mideast. Most of it goes to places like Europe, China, Japan, and India. It's too far and costs too much to transport it here. We get most of our oil closer to home--Canada, Mexico, Venezuela, Nigeria, Brasil. So why are we over there protecting the oil supply instead of Europe, China, Japan, and India? Empire, my lad, empire. We do it for empire, not for oil.

So you have some of the pieces right, but you are putting the puzzle together wrong.
(This post was last modified: 02-10-2011 02:04 PM by Owl 69/70/75.)
02-10-2011 01:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Machiavelli Offline
Back to Reality. Oh there goes Gravity

Posts: 25,357
Joined: Apr 2006
I Root For: BGSU
Location:
Post: #75
RE: Trouble in Egypt
To quote something along the lines of Rummy

There are known knowns........... There are known unknowns................

I'm right about the known unknowns and history is my teacher. When we first sailed across the pond it was in boats designed for the Med. We now have airplanes that do it at supersonic speeds. If oil was purchased at it's true costs we would have "supersonic" solutions.
02-10-2011 02:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Machiavelli Offline
Back to Reality. Oh there goes Gravity

Posts: 25,357
Joined: Apr 2006
I Root For: BGSU
Location:
Post: #76
RE: Trouble in Egypt
Owl,

I enjoy your readings. Can't comprehend this statement though. This is flat out wrong.

Where I disagree, and where you're simply wrong, is that rising gasoline prices will deter consumption, but by themselves they won't do much to advance the cause of alternatives.
02-10-2011 02:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Rebel
Unregistered

 
CrappiesNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #77
RE: Trouble in Egypt
(02-10-2011 02:58 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Owl,

I enjoy your readings. Can't comprehend this statement though. This is flat out wrong.

Where I disagree, and where you're simply wrong, is that rising gasoline prices will deter consumption, but by themselves they won't do much to advance the cause of alternatives.

I can't, for the life of me, figure out why you can't see the negative impact higher gas prices will have on, well, EVERYTHING. How do you think food gets to the markets? And you're calling for raising gas taxes? Are you insane? One of the main reasons our economy started tanking 5 years ago was due to our gas prices rising sharply in a short period of time.
02-10-2011 03:12 PM
Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 80,656
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3192
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #78
RE: Trouble in Egypt
(02-10-2011 02:58 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Owl,
I enjoy your readings. Can't comprehend this statement though. This is flat out wrong.
Where I disagree, and where you're simply wrong, is that rising gasoline prices will deter consumption, but by themselves they won't do much to advance the cause of alternatives.

No, it's not wrong, and that's the comprehension problem here. Obama goes to a place that makes windmills, or insulation, or solar panels, and talks about how those products help end our dependence on oil. That's the statement that's wrong.

70% of the oil we use moves people and things up and down highways. Windmills don't move people and things up and down highways. Solar panels don't move people and things up and down highways. Insulating your house doesn't move people and things up and down highways.

Until we change the way we move people and things up and down highways, we aren't going to change our dependence on oil. And raising the price, even to European levels, doesn't create another way to move people and things up and down highways.

We've spent 35 years and billions of dollars finding ways to save "energy," but we haven't figured out how to move people and things up and down highways.

I don't use an electric car, not because of price, but because I drive more miles in a day than a charge will take me. I do drive a VW diesel, because it gets 43 miles to the gallon. You can raise the price of oil, and I will find a way to use less, but I won't switch to alternatives because there isn't one for me to switch to.
02-10-2011 03:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NIU007 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 34,241
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 315
I Root For: NIU, MAC
Location: Naperville, IL
Post: #79
RE: Trouble in Egypt
Higher gas prices will deter consumption somewhat. People make fewer trips, carpool, and buy cars that get better gas mileage, and demand for hybrids (or other cars with good gas mileage) goes up, which further spurs innovation there. Doesn't solve the problem but helps somewhat. Also, solar energy for the home would be more competitive. It would help to have more people set up to work from home, which would not only save gas but lighten the load on already congested roadways, lower pollution, possibly reduce need for office space, etc. Not everyone can do that but some could.
02-10-2011 05:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
I45owl Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 18,374
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 184
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: Dallas, TX

New Orleans Bowl
Post: #80
RE: Trouble in Egypt
(02-10-2011 05:55 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  Higher gas prices will deter consumption somewhat. People make fewer trips, carpool, and buy cars that get better gas mileage, and demand for hybrids (or other cars with good gas mileage) goes up, which further spurs innovation there. Doesn't solve the problem but helps somewhat. Also, solar energy for the home would be more competitive. It would help to have more people set up to work from home, which would not only save gas but lighten the load on already congested roadways, lower pollution, possibly reduce need for office space, etc. Not everyone can do that but some could.

Those are assertions that are similar to the assertion that regulations encourage innovation (as in Obama's claim that regulations which encouraged efficiency in refrigerators spurred the development of defrosters and less expensive fridges). Those assertions don't make sense on their face and don't stand up well under scrutiny.

In the case of Solar Energy - "more competitive" still doesn't doesn't necessarily mean that it would gain any traction. It's competition is still coal, nuclear, hydro, and other sources moreso than oil.
02-10-2011 06:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.