D
David Bourne
Guest
Please correct me if I am wrong but wasn't this this gas fuel crisis predicted by a BBC2 documentary about four/five years ago that coupled with the failing Gulf Stream pushed us into an economic crisis?
E
EC
Guest
Thats how wars start!
T
tom riordan
Guest
I think you may be right David, the frightening thing is, the UK has now committed itself to the european pipeline and in the next few years 80% of our gas may be coming from russia, via scandinavia overland. It could mean that most of our gas and fuel may be subject to the political and financial whims of russia and opec producing countries.
E
EC
Guest
Oh yes, sounds like deep joy Tom and, maybe, many a cold winter ahead.
T
tom riordan
Guest
Scary thing is Eddie, I am reading these things in Construction News, so obviously our wonderfull government has already decided these things for us already. Methinks Mr Blair has left us with a cold legacy when he retires.
E
EC
Guest
Yeah, could be another thing to try and justify further incursions into the gulf Tom.
T
tom riordan
Guest
I think Iran is inevetable, just the timing is in doubt at the moment, sandstorms and all that, my bet is july/August. Any opinions. Am I barking up the wrong tree.
T
tom riordan
Guest
I think Iran is inevitable, just the timing is in doubt at the moment, sandstorms and all that, my bet is july/August. Any opinions. Am I barking up the wrong tree.
T
tom riordan
Guest
whoops two postings, I think JWB is trying to censor me.
E
EC
Guest
I think they would deffo fancy a spot of that Tom.
They have been making noises about Iran for some time, and if what we are led to believe by our media is true, the Iranian president likes to talk the talk also.
Opinion polls though will dictate whether TB follows suit, though I reckon at the moment he couldnt get away with it.
I do think they (the US) might need to create another excuse in the form of a 9/11 type incident, maybe a small nuke (Iran does apparently have some capability) or thermobaric explosion or something such like to give them the moral authority to attack, I agree with you, though its more a question of when than if!
They have been making noises about Iran for some time, and if what we are led to believe by our media is true, the Iranian president likes to talk the talk also.
Opinion polls though will dictate whether TB follows suit, though I reckon at the moment he couldnt get away with it.
I do think they (the US) might need to create another excuse in the form of a 9/11 type incident, maybe a small nuke (Iran does apparently have some capability) or thermobaric explosion or something such like to give them the moral authority to attack, I agree with you, though its more a question of when than if!
T
tom riordan
Guest
Funnily enough I was thinking the same thing about 9/11 type of incident, and I can tell you that I had the cheeks of my arse firmly clenched together when the clocks struck midnight last night. The current Iranian leadership are easily manipulated by the CIA, sorry American government and will be pushed right up to the edge and dragged back from the brink time and time again, ( a bit like a couple of our posters) I think crunch time will come when GWB has to face his country at election time, if he wins he is going to kick ass, if he thinks he is going to lose anyway, it will be his custers last stand, and Iran will be his Apache.
E
EC
Guest
He's won 2 already hasn't he Tom, but I know what you mean!
When the climate cools on the so called 'war on terror' as I think it is now with many americans believing that Bush and/or his cronies had something to do with 9/11, they will stoke the flames with something else.
I mentioned a while back an interview with former secretary Robert Mcnamara, who said words to the effect that there was a more than 50% chance of the USA being hit by a nuclear strike in the next decade!
Almost like he was softening people up for when it happens.
When the climate cools on the so called 'war on terror' as I think it is now with many americans believing that Bush and/or his cronies had something to do with 9/11, they will stoke the flames with something else.
I mentioned a while back an interview with former secretary Robert Mcnamara, who said words to the effect that there was a more than 50% chance of the USA being hit by a nuclear strike in the next decade!
Almost like he was softening people up for when it happens.
T
tom riordan
Guest
I think McNamara has a valid point to make, but with the post 9/11 hysteria dying down somewhat, I think the Americans will relax there defences too quickly and thus get hammered.
Do you believe in all the conspiracy theories that are bouncing araund the Net? and that a lot of mainland bombings in the USA are homegrown to set the people into a pro war mindset? Makes you wonder about our own problems in july and why the fcuk the brazilian boy was whacked amid such public scrutiny?
Do you believe in all the conspiracy theories that are bouncing araund the Net? and that a lot of mainland bombings in the USA are homegrown to set the people into a pro war mindset? Makes you wonder about our own problems in july and why the fcuk the brazilian boy was whacked amid such public scrutiny?
D
David Bourne
Guest
Yup, well back on track guys, the programme I was thinking of is here
IF . . . the lights go out ; which I think makes the case for energy, nuclear or other, under our own control.
IF . . . the lights go out ; which I think makes the case for energy, nuclear or other, under our own control.
Tom,
In February of 1951(?) the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States was ratified thereby limiting Presidents to a maximum of 2 times four year terms.
Prior to this I think I am right in saying that only 2 Presidents served more than 2 terms anyway;
George Washington 1789-1797
Franklin Delano Roosevelt 1933-1945
Thankfully, this means that GWB cannot stand for re-election.
In fact GWB is rapidly becoming a 'lame duck' President, the only problem with that being that 'lame ducks' do tend to do something a little wild every now and then if only to prove they are still in command!
In February of 1951(?) the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States was ratified thereby limiting Presidents to a maximum of 2 times four year terms.
Prior to this I think I am right in saying that only 2 Presidents served more than 2 terms anyway;
George Washington 1789-1797
Franklin Delano Roosevelt 1933-1945
Thankfully, this means that GWB cannot stand for re-election.
In fact GWB is rapidly becoming a 'lame duck' President, the only problem with that being that 'lame ducks' do tend to do something a little wild every now and then if only to prove they are still in command!
note: Washington stayed in power for a month or two more than his 8 years due to problems with organising the elections ;-)
T
tom riordan
Guest
Thanks Peter, an interesting note about the American presidency, I thought that the Presidents could be reelected ad nauseum. Even being re-elected twice only could leave a scary year every eight years with some of the Presidents, its looking more and more likely that Mr Bush could be looking for his swansong soon. I also note that the British press have started hinting that Mr Blair may withdraw all the British Troops from Iraq, as his final attempt for popularity before exiting stage right.
E
EC
Guest
Tom regarding the USA bombings being homegrown, their are connections between the american govt, CIA and al qaeda and there is evidence which suggests that countless warning were ignored, indeed some FBI agents were almost warned off their investigations pre 9/11.
Did the yanks make it happen? I am not sure. Did they let it happen? Almost certainly, imo.
Did the yanks make it happen? I am not sure. Did they let it happen? Almost certainly, imo.
Tom, interestingly the only way to circumvent the 2 term amendment is for a serving vice president to assume the presidency on the event of the incumbent President's death. He can then go on and serve his own 2 terms of 4 years. I don't think this has been done to date.
The only President (I think) to have served 2 non-consecutive terms was Grover Cleveland who became the 22nd and then the 24th President.
Like you, I absolutely fear just what GWB's swansong might be, although with any luck he might just cede Texas from the Union and make us all happy ;-)
Remember, if God had meant Texans to ski then he'd have made bullshit white :-0
The only President (I think) to have served 2 non-consecutive terms was Grover Cleveland who became the 22nd and then the 24th President.
Like you, I absolutely fear just what GWB's swansong might be, although with any luck he might just cede Texas from the Union and make us all happy ;-)
Remember, if God had meant Texans to ski then he'd have made bullshit white :-0
PS - I'm married to an American though gladly not one from Texas.