southsider2k5 Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 25, 2008 -> 10:07 AM) Ronald Reagan says hi. Except Reagan actually had some real good policies behind his talk, which led to the bankrupting of the Soviet Union. Somehow I don't see Obama having that ability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 25, 2008 -> 12:41 PM) Except Reagan actually had some real good policies behind his talk, which led to the bankrupting of the Soviet Union. Somehow I don't see Obama having that ability. It accelerated it, but didn't lead to it. That was already happening and Reagan knew it. He just capitalized. It probably would've happened on its own though, they couldn't wean themselves off the centrally planned economy they had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 QUOTE (lostfan @ Aug 25, 2008 -> 10:45 AM) It accelerated it, but didn't lead to it. That was already happening and Reagan knew it. He just capitalized. It probably would've happened on its own though, they couldn't wean themselves off the centrally planned economy they had. The moves they made by flooding the commodities markets finished off the USSR. They took away their only flow of hard currency. If commodities prices didn't bottom out during the 80's, the Soviet Union would be here today. If just being a bad form of government was enough, China would have gone away a long time ago. Same with trying to manage too much area under one empire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 25, 2008 -> 10:08 AM) The moves they made by flooding the commodities markets finished off the USSR. They took away their only flow of hard currency. If commodities prices didn't bottom out during the 80's, the Soviet Union would be here today. If just being a bad form of government was enough, China would have gone away a long time ago. Same with trying to manage too much area under one empire. And so now our plan to deal with the current threats we face is to drive commodity prices up through the roof so that they have so much money they all bury themselves in gold coins and drown in them, and that's the end of the threats from Iran, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, and Russia? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 25, 2008 -> 11:14 AM) And so now our plan to deal with the current threats we face is to drive commodity prices up through the roof so that they have so much money they all bury themselves in gold coins and drown in them, and that's the end of the threats from Iran, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, and Russia? China and India is who we are after right now. We are much more worried about them than any of the first three places on your list, and probably more worried than them versus Russia as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 25, 2008 -> 12:20 AM) I said nothing of the party website. I fail to see your point. let me re-create a day on soxtalk: ahb2008: I can't believe this RNC would do this this is childish and stupid article responder : oh well you do it all the time how are you complaining blah blah Clearly the difference is one is talking about a political party or media organization or political player with huge audiences and scopes, and one writes on a message board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 QUOTE (bmags @ Aug 25, 2008 -> 01:22 PM) let me re-create a day on soxtalk: ahb2008: I can't believe this RNC would do this this is childish and stupid responder : oh well you do it all the time how are you complaining blah blah Clearly the difference is one is talking about a political party or media organization or political player with huge audiences and scopes, and one writes on a message board. It doesn't say much for the person who is making the posts while critisizing the exact samething. I think that is the point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 QUOTE (bmags @ Aug 25, 2008 -> 01:22 PM) let me re-create a day on soxtalk: ahb2008: I can't believe this RNC would do this this is childish and stupid responder : oh well you do it all the time how are you complaining blah blah Clearly the difference is one is talking about a political party or media organization or political player with huge audiences and scopes, and one writes on a message board. So, it's ok for ahb to be childish and stupid, but not the RNC? Got it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted August 26, 2008 Share Posted August 26, 2008 QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Aug 25, 2008 -> 08:20 PM) So, it's ok for ahb to be childish and stupid, but not the RNC? Got it. actually, yeah. You'd like to see a huge organization and presidential candidate show a little bit more maturity than an over the top poster on a baseball message board. Well, I'd like to see. I know I have high standards though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts