AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > General > General Chat

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2008-11-08, 23:23   Link #1
solomon
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Suburban DC
44th President and 111th Congress (US Gov't 2009-2011)

With the end of the election most everyone knows what the outcome was. Scince there was some conflicts in the US Election 2008 thread about content, I decided to create a new thread to focus on the future as opposed to past events.

So this thread is to speculate on the direction gov't goes in from now on and reaction to what goes on.



As of right now we have what 3 senate seats in question? After that the Dems have made great gains, one of the big things is how the balance between the congress and white house will be. Especially with a larger (but more VARIED) democratic congress and a shell shocked and (according to analysts) more conservative republican party.

It'll be interesting to see what happens from here on.

Last edited by solomon; 2008-11-09 at 00:14.
solomon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-08, 23:28   Link #2
yezhanquan
Observer/Bookman wannabe
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 29
First on the agenda: The economy. Hell, it could very well become the only thing on the agenda.

The wars: Well, this ties in with the economy. To stop the money burning, a quick pullout might work. But, geo-politically, things would be sticky.
__________________
Those from the lower levels cannot hope to surpass those from the upper.

RIP, Oba-chan (1935-2008)
yezhanquan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-08, 23:28   Link #3
mg1942
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
umm isn't 110th congress still Bush 2.0?

Obma starts in 111th (2009-2011)
44th President and 111th Congress (US Gov't 2009-2011)

Last edited by mg1942; 2008-11-09 at 00:39.
mg1942 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-09, 00:15   Link #4
solomon
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Suburban DC
Good point, sorry if I can't change it, I don't know how.
solomon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-09, 00:18   Link #5
solomon
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Suburban DC
Quote:
Originally Posted by yezhanquan View Post
First on the agenda: The economy. Hell, it could very well become the only thing on the agenda.

The wars: Well, this ties in with the economy. To stop the money burning, a quick pullout might work. But, geo-politically, things would be sticky.
I supported Obama on his energy, urban and infrastructure platform but yea, most of such plans will have to severely curttailed, microsized or even ignored in the short term. There is just no money. Iraq will wind down, I'm not THAT worried about it, I don't want to make Iraqi's sound lazy at all, but we just can't afford to be over there at the level we are at now for too much longer. As for Afganistan, yea it's important that we refocus energy there but I'm not sure if the american part of the "surge" tactic will be of that much use. Is it possible to get Europe to cooperate more?
solomon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-09, 02:02   Link #6
Demongod86
Gundam Boobs and Boom FTW
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
The fact is once we pull out in 16 months as Al maliki wants, we did our job. We won our fight. If he loses the war after that, well, that's his loss. We're handing his country to him the way he wants it.
Demongod86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-09, 03:54   Link #7
yezhanquan
Observer/Bookman wannabe
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 29
On troop pullouts, the shutting of overseas bases might be brought up. Places like South Korea and Okinawa.
__________________
Those from the lower levels cannot hope to surpass those from the upper.

RIP, Oba-chan (1935-2008)
yezhanquan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-09, 04:10   Link #8
aohige
( ಠ_ಠ)
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Somewhere, between the sacred silence and sleep
Quote:
Originally Posted by yezhanquan View Post
On troop pullouts, the shutting of overseas bases might be brought up. Places like South Korea and Okinawa.
That would be a terrible idea.

As much friction as the base presence may have on locals, the truth is, both South Korea and Japan needs US presence to keep security in that part of asia, and US needs both of those countries for economical reasons. Between Japan and Korea, more than half of the electronics in US are supplied and countless jobs.

You will hear the vocal minority of Okinawan protests, but the silent majority of Japanese understands the importance of US presence. We're not that stupid.
__________________
aohige is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-09, 04:27   Link #9
mg1942
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Now, how about Missile defense in Europe? Obama said NO ground based ABMs in Europe unless "it works".

Too bad he's gonna have to scrap it for now. Euro-based ground ABM is useless against current and future threats, especially the latest generation of TOPOL Ms

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4XzipgqfbY
mg1942 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-09, 04:49   Link #10
yezhanquan
Observer/Bookman wannabe
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by aohige View Post
That would be a terrible idea.

As much friction as the base presence may have on locals, the truth is, both South Korea and Japan needs US presence to keep security in that part of asia, and US needs both of those countries for economical reasons. Between Japan and Korea, more than half of the electronics in US are supplied and countless jobs.

You will hear the vocal minority of Okinawan protests, but the silent majority of Japanese understands the importance of US presence. We're not that stupid.
Actually, I beg to differ. Would the Chinese do anything to upset the status quo? My answer is: No. As for North Korea, well.... anything goes with that kid. Are South Korea and Japan so incapable of defending themselves? As I remember it, some troops will be pulling out of South Korea, and battlefield command would be handed to the Koreans themselves.

As for missile defense, economically, it doesn't make any sense. As I see it, Russia is reacting to an perceived threat by NATO to tighten its sphere of influence.
__________________
Those from the lower levels cannot hope to surpass those from the upper.

RIP, Oba-chan (1935-2008)
yezhanquan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-09, 04:54   Link #11
Irenicus
Le fou, c'est moi
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Age: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by yezhanquan View Post
Actually, I beg to differ. Would the Chinese do anything to upset the status quo? My answer is: no.
It's not China, it's North Korea. It's not that the US troops are militarily crucial, but their expertise and intelligence resources are nonetheless useful. Moreover, if North Korea's gone wild, the US will find no better casus belli than American soldiers being attacked unprovoked.

Besides, the local citizenry might be a little miffed at US military presence, but to the governments on both sides of the Pacific it's just another useful diplomatic relationship that put the countries' shared interests together. The cost of maintaining such bases, I suspect, is probably minimal at best. Why tinker with what's already working fine enough? I'm sure President-elect Obama has a lot of better things to do anyway.

Edit: Didn't catch your NK edit in time. But yeah, reduction in troop commitments isn't anything new or particularly game-changing. It might not even have anything to do with East Asian geopolitical concerns as it is with requiring all that extra manpower in Afghanistan.
Irenicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-09, 04:56   Link #12
yezhanquan
Observer/Bookman wannabe
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irenicus View Post
It's not China, it's North Korea.

Besides, the local citizenry might be a little miffed at US military presence, but to the governments on both sides of the Pacific it's just another useful diplomatic relationship that put the countries' shared interests together. The cost of maintaining such bases, I suspect, is probably minimal at best.
Thanks for the reminder, though I caught myself in time... I guess.

Still, I'm pretty sure that troops in SK will be cut back, as I mentioned (Kang might give a better update on this.). Troops in Okinawa will also be cut back (I think), but overall, the US will continue to have a presence in East Asia. I don't expect, or desire, a total pullout. But, the troops are being stretched by the wars...

Of course, funding for bases is peanuts compared to the wars. That is where the money is being burnt.

In other news, the lobbies. Oh boy, the lobbies. How Obama will fare against them is anyone's guess. Now, I personally think that lobbies are not inherently bad. They look after the interests of their clients. That's fine. My beef is their under-the-table stuff, the type which will disintegrate under sunlight.
__________________
Those from the lower levels cannot hope to surpass those from the upper.

RIP, Oba-chan (1935-2008)
yezhanquan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-09, 05:06   Link #13
Irenicus
Le fou, c'est moi
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Age: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by yezhanquan View Post
In other news, the lobbies. Oh boy, the lobbies. How Obama will fare against them is anyone's guess.
May be that's where Rahmbo comes in? They say he was chosen precisely because somebody needs to be Obama's bad cop.



I have to admit, though, that the idea of saving Detroit doesn't really go well with me. Not unless the government adds a whole lot of strings attached to justify the bailout: no golden parachutes, one-time only, green cars, etc. Oh, and the unions there, Democratic stalwarts that they are, are also pretty sleazy.
Irenicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-09, 05:09   Link #14
yezhanquan
Observer/Bookman wannabe
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 29
As I mentioned, it's the underground deals that are the problem. Also, the entrenched industries meant that if nothing is done, new and more viable solutions will not be possible as the oldies just deemed them expensive and dismiss them out of instinct.

Detroit is a nuke waiting. No bailout, the city WILL meltdown. The companies are losing money and pretty soon, their pants as well.
__________________
Those from the lower levels cannot hope to surpass those from the upper.

RIP, Oba-chan (1935-2008)
yezhanquan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-09, 05:48   Link #15
solomon
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Suburban DC
There will be some gov't action due to the huge importance of the big 3 on US economy, but yea it should be condition based.

Also if if the big 3 go under, say good bye to Detroit. It really hasn't diversified enough to get moving on it's own yet.
solomon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-09, 07:41   Link #16
konstargirl
Reisen FTW!
*Graphic Designer
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Chicago,IL, USA!!!!
Age: 21
Send a message via Yahoo to konstargirl
A thread dedicated to Obama. This should be pretty exciting.
konstargirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-09, 11:48   Link #17
shelter
Every word must conjure
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: City of No Yesterdays
Send a message via MSN to shelter
Not that the economy & American troops are not important, but Obama needs to get the Middle East Roadmap back on the agenda again. The fact that Israel & Palestine have been stalled for so long makes it look bad on the U.S, who proposed the thing in the first place (if I'm not wrong).

He might try also to be less belligerent with the Iranians. Not everything should be an absolute when it comes to bilateral ties.

Show that he can make some progress with these 2, and he'll make a lot of people where I'm at happy.
shelter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-09, 12:15   Link #18
Luminisk
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: CA
Age: 27
__________________

Luminisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-09, 14:10   Link #19
nanafan
horo fan
 
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: missouri, usa
Age: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by shelter View Post
Not that the economy & American troops are not important, but Obama needs to get the Middle East Roadmap back on the agenda again. The fact that Israel & Palestine have been stalled for so long makes it look bad on the U.S, who proposed the thing in the first place (if I'm not wrong).

He might try also to be less belligerent with the Iranians. Not everything should be an absolute when it comes to bilateral ties.

Show that he can make some progress with these 2, and he'll make a lot of people where I'm at happy.
That is true, I don't know if Bush has really done much with those two. The economy is definitely going to be a beast, that's gonna be the biggest issue on his plate.
__________________

All my little plans and schemes, lost like some forgotten dreams, seems like all i really was doing was waiting for you..-Real Love
nanafan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2008-11-09, 18:37   Link #20
Sides
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Edinburgh
Age: 32
The 44th president, hmm. I hope he isn't superstitious.
Sides is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
united_states

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 15:36.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.