2011-03-29, 01:48 | Link #12741 | |
Aria Company
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2011-03-29, 01:56 | Link #12742 | |
Um-Shmum
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at GNR, bringing you the truth, no matter how bad it hurts
Age: 39
|
Quote:
I'm fairly sure that if you go to an avarage person's house and rummege around in their basment, you've got a 50% chance of finding an AK-47, and a 30% chance of finding an RPG-7 launcher.
__________________
|
|
2011-03-29, 02:16 | Link #12743 |
Gamilas Falls
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 46
|
This is Libya. Remember them? Enemy of the United States for the later half of the Cold War. Thus they were armed with Soviet made stuff since the 1970s and 1980s? Them, right?
__________________
|
2011-03-29, 02:39 | Link #12744 | ||
NYAAAAHAAANNNNN~
Join Date: Nov 2007
Age: 35
|
Quote:
Naturally speaking, I am not surprised if Gaddafi had made deals with Norinco for ammunition. Or even the rebels for that matter; I do know that there are some interest groups in the world who didn't care who buys their stock, a good deal is a good deal. Quote:
You sound like you have done it before during your tour of duty.
__________________
|
||
2011-03-29, 06:37 | Link #12745 |
books-eater youkai
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Betweem wisdom and insanity
|
Syrians rally for Assad, president due to speak
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...72N2MC20110329
__________________
|
2011-03-29, 11:06 | Link #12747 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: classified
|
Here's a story about Fail:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/...-capitol-hill/ And another about EPIC FAIL: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...s-by-2050.html
__________________
|
2011-03-29, 11:23 | Link #12748 |
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 66
|
I see the Syrian thug and his family have "thrown out the government". Its almost funny to watch every autocrat in history go through the same moves of solving everything but the intrinsic problem that irritates everyone. ... Him, his family, his security forces, looting the wealth of the country.
__________________
|
2011-03-29, 11:27 | Link #12749 | |
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 66
|
Quote:
1) Yes, another "buy American" bribe is not how to solve problems. This is just "Bush give-away to corporations" through the front door Obama-style. I didn't like the last one, I didn't like Bush's TARP -- I don't like giving tax cuts, tax waivers, or any favoritism to our immortal undying super-citizens. The GOP may be "corporatii thugs" but the DNC is "corporatii lite". 2) How is eliminating cars in cities in the EU a fail? Most EU cities are well on their way to pedestrian-friendly streets, towns, cities and enough public transit to cover it. This might happen organically over the same time period even without any mandate. I work my way around Portland and San Francisco without a car... and frankly, the last two times I've been to LA I have not rented a car -- used public transit and a bit of taxi. That's *Los Angeles*.
__________________
|
|
2011-03-29, 12:02 | Link #12750 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: classified
|
Quote:
If the use of automobiles fizzles out in European cities organically/naturally over time through freedom of choice on the part of the people, that's one thing. But to have government force you to take public transit (and allow government to have total jurisdiction over you) or walk, is a huge retrogressive move back to 19th Century transportation models. This type of nanny-state crap is anathima to me. I hold individual freedom in the highest regard, and banning private transportation, which is one of greatest forms of individual freedom, is diametrically opposed to my classical liberal sensibilities.
__________________
|
|
2011-03-29, 12:08 | Link #12751 | |
Not Enough Sleep
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: R'lyeh
Age: 48
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2011-03-29, 12:14 | Link #12752 |
Asuki-tan Kairin ↓
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Fürth (GER)
Age: 43
|
@GundamFan0083,
Did you actually read the article. Its about diesel/petrol/gas engine cars. London has very strict rules regarding cars in the city center even today. So, I guess it is not too unlikely, that by 2050 (thats another 39 years) only battery powered (or similar - e.g. hydrogen fuel cell) cars and transportition systems are allowed in cities. The other question is, if cars as we know them today will still exist then... and if there are some stretches of Autobahn left that have no speed limits.
__________________
|
2011-03-29, 13:36 | Link #12753 | |
I disagree with you all.
Join Date: Dec 2005
|
Quote:
|
|
2011-03-29, 14:23 | Link #12755 | |
The Voice of Reason
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Netherlands
Age: 47
|
Quote:
Even if their reasoning for it (decreasing CO2 emissions to slow down, or even reverse Global Warming) is a farce, there are are other byproducts of combustion that completely warrant the ban of these 'dirty' cars. One particular street in my city used to be so bogged down by cars, you could see the soot on the window sills. if you washed your windows, you could do it again the next day because they would get so dirty from all the stuff in the emission fumes. Now imagine getting all that stuff in your lungs. You can't tell me that's not going to haunt you later in life if you're unfortunate enough to live there, or at least pass by there regularly. The only way this can fail is if they don't make sure everyone has proper access to public transportation, which would eliminate the need of a car. But by 2050, I'd like to think that they have at least found a solution for that.
__________________
|
|
2011-03-29, 14:43 | Link #12756 | |
Pretentious moe scholar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Age: 37
|
Quote:
You're talking about freaking public streets. They aren't goddamn private property, its the government's job to make sure they're used in orderly and efficient manner. And last time I checked European governments were pretty good about accommodating private transportation methods that didn't involve massive space footprints.
__________________
|
|
2011-03-29, 15:52 | Link #12757 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Suburban DC
|
In America there is going to have be a balance due to the prolifieration of cars. What's more newer cities like Dallas and LA are already built to car scale so it'll be hard to retrofit them.
Still while I hold freedom in the highest regard as well, the whole car=freedom is a real stretch to me. A car is just a tool to get around, with good and bad parts. Any other romantic notions of it sounds way too 1950s PR movie to me. |
2011-03-29, 17:52 | Link #12758 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
|
Quote:
|
|
2011-03-29, 19:53 | Link #12759 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: classified
|
Quote:
Quote:
When government forces the poplulation to do something that inhibits a right-- and freedom to travel is a right--then they no longer represent their polulation. Unless of course the population has called for this, which the article doesn't indicate. As Vexx pointed out, it must come of its own volition, and with the consent of the governed, not at the whim of some elite group of bureaucrats. Quote:
I'll explain. The freedom comes from having total control of the conveyance and being able to travel wherever you want, whenever you want, and as far as you want. Public transit doesn't allow for that. In addition, you have far more right against unlawful search and seizure in your personal automobile, then you do on a public vehicle. The idea that a person doesn't have a right to a car is dangerous in my opinion. Using the rationale you put forward, I could easily point out that you have no right to health care. You could use herbal remedies, or just not get sick in the first place by eating only good foods, and excercising every day. However, I don't see it that way. We pay taxes for a reason. The highways and byways are something we as citizens are all entitled to use. You, like me, and everyone else, has THE RIGHT to travel on the public roads that our taxpayer money pays for in whatever form of tranport that is safe for such travel. The idea that it is some kind of priviledge is ludicrous (not saying you said that BTW). No government has the right to ban an idividual's private transport in a de facto manner. The people must agree to this by voting for it. Otherwise, they're nothing more than serfs and/or slaves to a dictatorial state. While I do believe that AGW is not anywhere near as severe as we have been lead to believe, the pollution problem is very real. However, the solution put forward by the EU to go to electric cars doesn't solve the problem of pollution. It simply moves the problem to the power plants and will increase the need for more nuclear reactors. If these people in the EU were actually serious about an environmental agenda to be met by 2050, then they'd be pouring the money not into public transit, but into the development of Hydrogen fuel--which actually IS CLEAN! Quote:
Who the hell are these bureaucrats to tell their populations what kinds of cars they can drive? Or whether they can have a car or not? If the people of each city vote to ban the cars, then that is proper and just. If a group of elitist politicians do it by government fiat, then it is tyrannical and that is my point. Freedom means the government is the servant of its citizens, tyranny means the citizens are the servants of the government.
__________________
|
||||
2011-03-29, 20:22 | Link #12760 |
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 66
|
Being licensed to drive a car in any of the 50 states is a *privilege* not a "right". It says that on page 1 of most driving license study books. Might want to reread that.
If you have alternatives in transport choice, THATS freedom. Frankly, most days a car is like a boat anchor -> $400/month payment, $100/month insurance, $200+/month gas, $100/month avg. maintenance, storage costs, parking fees, toll fees, property taxes.... Cars are great for travel between cities, vacations, long distance, etc. Its unlikely those will ever be replaced in the US. But if you could just grab a rental car when you needed one at $20/day or so for those special trips, the need to own one becomes a hobby rather than a desperate necessity when other alternatives exist. It should be noted that it is fossil-fuel burning cars that are the main concern.... not necessarily the concept of individual mobile transport.
__________________
|
Tags |
current affairs, discussion, international |
|
|