America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 19 years ago by Sonny_LSU. 60 replies replies.
2 Pages<12
So , have we won yet?!?!
CWFoster Offline
#51 Posted:
Joined: 12-12-2003
Posts: 5,414
Sorry guys, the troops are not protecting freedom and America--they are being used as pawns in a mad political game lead by Rove and Cheney.

Tons of high explosives are now lost and presumably in the hands of terrorists. Previously they were under lock and key. AlQuieda is having a recruiting field day because of our efforts. We are also losing control of both Iraq AND Afghanistan, in case you haven't noticed. What do you think will happen with all the heroin now being pumped out of the latter? Do you not think that this will come back to hurt America in a big way? What do you think the drug money is being used for?--to support democracy in Afghanistan?

It is really sad what is happening and yes, the democrats played a big role by picking such a weak candidate--but please don't celebrate a victory when there is none to be had! America needs help, we are now 8th in per capita income, 11th in literacy--headed in the right direction?--I say we have a long way to go!

Wagner
OK, JUST ONE MORE TIME, KIDS!

1) The leader of the most bloodthirsty group in Iraq is a ranking member of Al Queda. He was there recovering from the loss of a hand in Afghanistan.
2) People don't come and go in a totalitarian regime without SOMEONES OK, Saddam had to KNOW he was there.
3) He was wanted in his home country of Jordan, so it wasn't safe for him there.

WAIT A MINUTE, if he didn't go home because he didn't feel SAFE, why did he go to Iraq? (before the war started) GEE, do you think he might've felt...PROTECTED??? Why do you suppose that?
Maybe the training that Al Queda members got in the airliner fusalage south of Baghdad, on a military base that defectors said was used to train "foreigners" who were kept separate from Iraqi troops?
But WAIT! The 911 Commission said there was NO connection between Al Queda, and Saddams government! And we KNOW the 911 Commission is part and parcel as thorough and unbiased as say..... the Warren Commission? It never ceases to amaze me that people who would never accept that Lee Harvey Oswald acted totally alone, will buy the findings of a similar investigation without a single skeptical thought.

If we accept the thought that maybe there WAS a link between the two entities (Al Queda, and The Iraqi Baath Party), and that EVERYONE (including John F'in Kerry) thought Saddam was working on aquiring nukes, and biological weapons, then it stands to REASON that he might supply them to his "cohorts" in Al Queda, and thus DID pose a threat to the US.

Everybody is up in arms about the missing explosives, and I confess, I haven't kept up on this like I should (we just got back from taking on ammo in NJ, we were underway on election night) The last I heard the explosives were secured, and sealed (the guys who secured them still had Iraqi units to prosecute) and they returned in TWO DAYS and the stockpile had already been ransacked. OK, this is a call made by the operational commander on the ground. Persue a fleeing enemy, or allow them to regroup. I'M not going to judge him! And I'm not going to fault his (and my) Commander-in-Chief for not micro-managing the war. Hindsight is 20/20, maybe they should have called in a Tomahawk Strike on the dump after they left it, maybe they should have set demo charges before they left, but the Iraqis were known for storing chemical weapons (poorly marked) right alongside conventional munitions. Gets dangerous to set off stuff indiscriminately! BTW, in case you haven't figured it out yet, I'm one of those "Pawns". I was in the Persian Gulf, and Red Sea launching Tomahawks during the war, and I was on a big amphib taking Marines over there this summer. I'll be back there again next spring and summer. Don't use me and my shipmates as a sympathy point to make Bush look bad! Somebody finally let us shoot back!

I'll work on getting the educational spending figures as time permits, they may be out of date, but they were good under Clintons administration.
usahog Offline
#52 Posted:
Joined: 12-06-1999
Posts: 22,691
well said CW... course it is waisting breath to try and explain over and over again... it falls on deaf ears...

these folks who B!tch have to have a reason and GWB seems to be that reason....

so the beat goes on, and on!!!

Hog
CWFoster Offline
#53 Posted:
Joined: 12-12-2003
Posts: 5,414
Societal Support for Education
The indicators in this section explore U.S. investment in the human and financial resources of education and compare this investment with that of other industrialized countries. Overall, the United States appears supportive of education. To illustrate, in public and private education, the United States has a student/teacher ratio similar to the ratios of all the countries reported (Indicator 39). Additionally, the public financial investment in education in the United States is among the highest of the G-7 countries, and of many of the other countries reported as well (Indicators 41 and 42).

When considering spending on education, it is important to note that not all countries' education systems provide the same services. Countries have different priorities for education spending and may allocate more or less money to such educational services as special education, in-school libraries, and psychological counseling, among others.

Public financial investment in education

To illustrate, the U.S. devoted a greater share of public expenditure to education than all of the G-7 countries except Canada (Indicator 41). Further, relative to GDP per capita, the United States is among the highest spenders of the G-7 countries (Indicator 42). Finally, the United States outspent all of the G-7 countries except Canada on a measure of per student expenditure on primary and secondary education in constant U.S. dollars. However, relative to GDP per capita, U.S. per student expenditures are in the middle range for G-7 countries (Indicator 43). As with most G-7 countries, in 1992 the United States devoted approximately three-fourths of its current public expenditure to preprimary through high school education and the remaining share to higher education (Indicator 44).

In the United States, most public funding for primary through secondary education originated at the regional (state) or local levels in 1992, while in France and Italy, most originated at the central level (Indicator 45). Public expenditure does not provide the entire picture of educational spending. Private expenditure is an important component of education financing in some countries, including the United States, that is not considered in indicators of public investment. Private expenditure can make up 20 percent or more of total educational spending in such countries as Germany, Japan, Spain, and the United States. It becomes even more important at the higher education level, where it makes up more than 40 percent of the total educational expenditure in the United States and over 55 percent in Japan. (See the sidebar entitled Private spending plays a role in education financing.)

Cross-country comparisons of financial statistics have often been criticized for the comparability problems in the data. However, the indicators in this section benefit from recent improvements in comparability, particularly in the public sector.

Teacher salaries

Teacher salaries are the largest component of educational cost in any country. While the indicators described previously highlight the extent of U.S. investment in education, its spending on teachers lags behind many industrialized nations. To illustrate, high school teachers in the United States have lower salaries relative to GDP per capita than their counterparts in all the G-7 countries except Japan (Indicator 40). The comparatively low pay of U.S. teachers is not consistent with the high K-12 spending in the United States.

One reason for the lower teacher salaries in the United States compared with the other countries reported may be that U.S. teachers (especially high school teachers) are required to obtain less training than their counterparts in the other G-7 countries. Whereas the United States offers a year to year teacher training program, the other G-7 countries often require 5 or more years of training. (See the matrix entitled Elementary and secondary school teacher training and certification requirements.)

Staff employed in education

The United States also differs in the composition of its staff employed in education (Indicator 38). While the United States has a similar amount of teaching staff as a percentage of the total labor force as do all of the G-7 countries for which data are available except Italy, this percentage was lower in the former West Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States than in all of the remaining countries, except for the Netherlands and Turkey. Additionally, the United States was the only country where nonteaching staff made up a greater percentage of the labor force than teaching staff.

However, in the United States, support for education goes beyond providing for instruction. The education system in the United States offers services (e.g., meals, transportation) that are not necessarily provided by schools in other countries. In Australia, for instance, the education system does not employ nurses or doctors for most of its elementary and secondary schools. Instead, students rely on other sources for health care. (See the sidebar entitled Staffing a country's education system.)

CWFoster Offline
#54 Posted:
Joined: 12-12-2003
Posts: 5,414
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs/eiip/eiipsse.asp

it seems my figuers weren't out of date!
Sonny_LSU Offline
#55 Posted:
Joined: 11-21-2002
Posts: 1,835
Russ, 1 question:

Should the whole world be based on Democracy, Capitolism, and, let's face it, the American Way?
EI Offline
#56 Posted:
Joined: 06-29-2002
Posts: 5,069
Author: Sonny_LSU Date: 11/08/2004 08:41 AM Reply
Russ, 1 question:

Should the whole world be based on Democracy, Capitolism, and, let's face it, the American Way?


I say yes


Sonny
1 question:

Can you think of, or beleive in a better way?
Socialism? Communism? Facism? Dictatiorships?
Monarcy? One world government?
JonR Offline
#57 Posted:
Joined: 02-19-2002
Posts: 9,740
Yo Sonny_LSU:

"Should the whole world be based on Democracy, Capitolism, and, let's face it, the American Way?"

My reply:

A big hell YES !!!!!!!!

JonR
Sonny_LSU Offline
#58 Posted:
Joined: 11-21-2002
Posts: 1,835
So, it is your view that the world should do things OUR way?

Hmmmmmm.....why does the Roman Empire come to mind?

There is an article in Men's Health you guys should read. It is from the view of a British citizen living here and his perspective of the US as it relates to the rest of the planet. Before you jump to conclusions, he admires our country and is not being anti-American or unrealistically critical.
usahog Offline
#59 Posted:
Joined: 12-06-1999
Posts: 22,691
"Russ, 1 question:
Should the whole world be based on Democracy, Capitolism, and, let's face it, the American Way?"

Nope, I personally don't care what the rest of the world does, unless it effects these United States, and Iraq and the UN was/were and are effecting these United States...

These Terrorist was/were and are effecting these United States...

Hog
eleltea Offline
#60 Posted:
Joined: 03-03-2002
Posts: 4,562
The election didn't even slow it down.
Sonny_LSU Offline
#61 Posted:
Joined: 11-21-2002
Posts: 1,835
Russ, that was, actually, a great response. Kudos!
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages<12