I don’t think little george has much to do with the failure to catch bin laden. However, I do think that the US invasion has created a pretty effective recruiting tool for bin laden’s buddies (and will continue to do so for about another generation).
I don’t know what you expected him to do.
I expected him to [i][u]LEAD![/i][/u] I expected him to declare a state of emergency. I expected him to get on the phone and mobilize FEMA and the armed forces. I expected him to contact the mayor of NYC and the governor of NY state to offer assistance.
At that point, the President had been told only that the country was under attack. He didn’t know where we were being attacked and he didn’t know how. Yet he just sat there.
Admit it, Skipper, if a democratic President had sat on his duff like that while the counrty was under attack, you would have been outraged! You would have been right to be outraged at such incompetence. Instead, you make extremely lame excuses. It’s just sad, really.
When the attack occurred on Pearl Harbor is took several hours for the news to reach Washington. At that point, I’m sure he had more information that George Bush had on the towers.
In todays world of communication. If what you’re saying is true…then GW should have FIRED everyone in his administration for complete incompetence.
Getting the military ready and going isn’t something that happens in 5 minutes.
5 minutes…NO…2 days…YES. That’s the whole idea about readiness response. When I was with the 101st we were EXPECTED to be ready for deployment in 2 days OR LESS.
We think we found his burned up body, but we aren’t 100% sure of that even.
Where do you get this drivel. We know for a FACT it was Hitler.
I can’t think of the murderer’s name, but we had tens of thousands of people chasing a murderer around in the Smokey Mountains and it took years to catch that individual with him on our own soil and very limited resources.
Thank you for proving my earlier point. Bush is NOT putting anywhere NEAR enough resources into finding Bin Laden.
Admit it, Skipper, if a democratic President had sat on his duff like that while the counrty was under attack, you would have been outraged! You would have been right to be outraged at such incompetence. Instead, you make extremely lame excuses. It’s just sad, really.
If a democrat did this I would have been outraged. It doesn’t matter if the President is democrat, Republican, Liberal, Conservative, Jewish, Black, Woman…Judge them by their actions. The actions of 9/11 by Bush was complete incompetence or just plain stupidity.
Skipper and Norm judge things as…Everything Democrats do is BAD…Everything Republicans do is GOOD. Everything NON-CONSERVATIVES do is BAD…Everything by Conservatives - good. It’s called Pre-Judging…OR PREJUDICE. It’s also called stupidity.
Mike, You served in the 101st Airborne? My great uncle served in the 101st airborne during the D Day invasion, where he gave his life. Thank you for serving.
Mike, You served in the 101st Airborne? My great uncle served in the 101st airborne during the D Day invasion, where he gave his life. Thank you for serving.
I very sorry that he gave the ultimate sacrifice for his country. I was lucky, not to die or even get wounded in Nam. Unfortunately several of my friends and colleges weren’t.
That’s operating under the false expectation that for the military to react to an attack requires the President to take up arms and ride to the front on his horse. Sorry, it doesn’t work that way. A good commander in chief has taken care of that kind of thing long before it ever happens by placing the right people in the right place with the knowledge of what to do.
Sure, it took several minutes too long for the 4 planes that crashed for the military to begin implementing strategy for putting a stop to it, but within an hour or so the only planes in the air in the US were military planes. Local reserves and National Guards were put on alert and within a few hours there were a lot of essential guarded facilities. I know I had friends on a TVA lake that day and on their way around to another fishing location they got stopped as they passed the lake’s dam and were informed to stay well clear of the dam or they would be jailed or killed. By 1 pm, the local reserve commander called me to tell me they had been inspected by a general in preparation for weapons distribution from the armory and needed a light fixture and door lock fixed asap. By that afternoon, they had a command center set up and running.
We haven’t been attacked on US soil since. It appears to me that Bush’s plan has so far worked out.
Honestly, once an attack begins it’s way too late for the Commander in Chief to begin to take action. His major role is in preparation and assignment of command. Yes, he has to continue to lead, but for his part at that point he needs to accurately know what’s going on, who’s behind it and what parts of our defenses are working and what parts aren’t. I hardly think anyone knew anything other than we were under attack in the first few minutes.
Declare an Emergency? Good Lord. What does that do other than get a politician press coverage during a storm? Do you honestly think that the Military, Police and Fire departments didn’t know we had an emergency on our hands?
On the phone to mobilize FEMA and the Armed Forces. I’d venture a guess that about the time the Pentagon got hit by an airplane the Military knew we were under attack and were likely already on alert status. Mobilize FEMA? Hmmmm?
Call the New York Mayor. Wasn’t his office in one of the smaller buildings that got smashed when the towers fell? What’s he going to tell him? Run Forest, Run?
One of the marks of a good leader is one who can remain calm under a situation like that and let the people he’s put in charge do what they are trained and charged with doing.
Skipper
I don’t think little george has much to do with the failure to catch bin laden
I don’t think they’ve put anywhere near enough resources to catch Bin Laden.
However, I do think that the US invasion has created a pretty effective recruiting tool for bin laden’s buddies (and will continue to do so for about another generation).
Since the invasion of Iraq…terrorist recruitment is up over 1000%. This according to GW’s own resources. If they’re reporting 1000%…I’ll bet it’s closer to 5000%.
GW is making more enemies then we can kill.
A unit positioned to go to war within 2 days is what it is, a sacrifice in hopes that it can hold on long enough for help to arrive. The 101st is famous for that. Bastone (however you spell it) during World War II was a classic example. The 101st was there in the battle, but winning and stopping the advance wasn’t possible without Patton’s Army that was 72 hours away.
You may get a few units going in a hurry, but moving an army large enough to handle a war is a complex thing requiring a lot of logistical effort not to mention once you get it there you have to continually supply and support it which of itself is as difficult a task as the fighting.
As far as Hitler goes, the debate on that is as open for discussion as it is to who killed JFK. I’m of the opinion that we did kill him as we said we did, but not everyone believes that, and honestly, who knows, he’s not been a problem since, and with Bin Laden running around hiding he’s not been a major problem since either. The goofball in Iran on the other hand is a different story.
No, we didn’t go far enough to eliminate the problem and apply enough force to do so. Shoot, half the people in this country listened to the media and sided with the liberals on it demanding we restrain ourselves and not go into Syria or Iran. Certainly if he’s hiding in Pakistan, a nuclear country, we probably aren’t going to go in there after him. If someone knows how to get him and force him to take a dirt nap, I’m interested in hearing it.
Oh, I almost forgot, thank you for your service to this country.
Skipper
Sorry, it doesn’t work that way. A good commander in chief has taken care of that kind of thing long before it ever happens by placing the right people in the right place with the knowledge of what to do.
It’s quite obvious that he didn’t have the right people in the right place at the right time. OR…he completely ignored them.
We haven’t been attacked on US soil since. It appears to me that Bush’s plan has so far worked out.
That has got to be the DUMBEST argument I’ve ever heard. Logic is NOT your strong point is it skipper.
Declare an Emergency? Good Lord. What does that do other than get a politician press coverage during a storm? Do you honestly think that the Military, Police and Fire departments didn’t know we had an emergency on our hands?
The ONE thing is does is bring in all off-duty personal to work. They can start gathering information, provide help.
Sorry Skip…but I’m still very convinced that if this happened on Clintons watch and he did the EXACT same thing you’d be all over his actions because he’s NOT A CONSERVATIVE.
A unit positioned to go to war within 2 days is what it is, a sacrifice in hopes that it can hold on long enough for help to arrive. The 101st is famous for that. Bastone (however you spell it) during World War II was a classic example. The 101st was there in the battle, but winning and stopping the advance wasn’t possible without Patton’s Army that was 72 hours away.
You may get a few units going in a hurry, but moving an army large enough to handle a war is a complex thing requiring a lot of logistical effort not to mention once you get it there you have to continually supply and support it which of itself is as difficult a task as the fighting.
You’re comparing the Army of WWII to the Army of today…FAR FAR DIFFERENT. In WWII they didn’t even have helicopters. 101st in WWII was Airborn…while now it’s Air Assault. And you can mobilize the whole division in less then 48 hours. I’ve seen it done.
As far as Hitler goes, the debate on that is as open for discussion as it is to who killed JFK. I’m of the opinion that we did kill him as we said we did, but not everyone believes that, and honestly, who knows, he’s not been a problem since, and with Bin Laden running around hiding he’s not been a major problem since either. The goofball in Iran on the other hand is a different story.
And there are people who believe in BigFoot and aliens…not to mention the nuts who still think the world is flat. What someone believes does NOT make it a fact.
Shoot, half the people in this country listened to the media and sided with the liberals on it demanding we restrain ourselves and not go into Syria or Iran.
Good morality skipper. Go in and shoot innocent people…Excellent. I guess from your statements that you NEVER served in the military did you??? I’m NOT a liberal…And especially NOT a RAD-Con. I’m considered a MODERATE (which the VAST majority of people in the country are). You think the ONLY way to solve this problem is to go in and just KILLING everyone. Is that just stupidity or just being a racist. As far as Pakistan goes…We’ve already been in there. Read the news…we just did a attack which Pakistan is still complaining about.
It is true that ethanol has less potential energy than gasoline, however, it is not true that you can’t eliminate the penalty. In fact, because of the higher compression ratios in an ethanol engine, you actually will get better gas mileage with the lower potential energy fuel. What’s that mean? There is less potential energy to start with, but more kinetic energy to end with. So, not only is ethanol primarily using free energy given to us by the sun, it takes less of it to do the same thing (so better gas mileage means cheaper to fill up at the pump, filling up less often, etc).
I own a 2006 Chevy Impala. When I have regular gas in it i average 26mpg city/highway. When I run E85 I only average 17.5mpg. The difference in price up here N/W Indiana is about 20-30cents. Witch in lost fuel economy is so not worth it, unless it is half the price of regular gasoline. All E85 vehicles have of course a special fuel pump and on board computer witch determines the fuel being used. An E85 vehicle “when using E85 fuel” has to pump more because it does not com bust as easily do to the lower octane. Check it out for your self though maybe you’ll get lucky with the Dodge, but as far as Impala’s go, it’s a no go.
Corn is not the answer!!! but its a start. There are much better alternatives to corn but there are no special interest groups with tons of money to influence the government into scamming the American public. E85 has numerous downfalls and few benefits, the upside being that 85% of it comes from corn and only 15% comes from oil thus reducing dependency on foreign oil but not oil from the middle east as many think, most of our oil comes from domestic sources and also places like Venezuela and actually Canada. Middle east oil is mainly going to China, a country which is about to overtake our oil consumption. It has also given hard working farmers a much needed and deserved windfall, but I wonder where they will be once government subsidies are no longer needed and removed and then ethanol falls flat on its face leaving the farmers out in the dark. The downfalls to Ethanol are quite numerous, E85 does contain less energy than regular unleaded gasoline, you will get less mileage, but typically you will still save some money overall. It takes more energy to make a gallon of Ethanol than the energy that you get out of it. You should see the power lines running to the Ethanol plant I live near. Power that comes from a Coal fired power plant, so ya Ethanol may emit fewer emissions but when the power to make ethanol comes from burning coal, another fossil fuel, where’s the sense in that? if It also takes ten gallons of water to distill out one gallon of Ethanol. Then add to that the environmental impact of growing corn. Corn does not grow very well on its own, First the ground has to be plowed loosening the top soil for planting, which promotes erosion, then the corn has to be planted, and then various fertilizers and pesticides are applied all of which are very harmful to the environment, and are destroying our water bodies and contaminating ground water supplies. A lot of corn also has to be irrigated, which is greatly reducing our countries supply of fresh water. Then the corn has to be harvested, and hauled, the ground is plowed up again, more chemicals are added to help decompose the waste products and then the fields are left exposed to erode away. So take into account the intensive labor, chemicals, irrigation, and even the fuel used in all that heavy equipment all to grow what could be considered one of the worst “alternative” fuels, its the definition of insanity. Now take into consideration a few alternatives like sugar cane, native prairie grasses, and switch grass. They are converted to alternative fuels with little effort and contain much more energy than regular unleaded gasoline. Due to its diversity native prairie grasses are naturally disease resistant, and drought resistant. Unlike corn, they never require irrigation, fertilizers or pesticides and they don’t require cultivation. They only require a single planting, and can sustain multiple harvests a year. They are also perennial so they do not need to be replanted, they simply regrow again the next year. The soil is not left exposed greatly reducing erosion, and the prairie grasses and switch grasses will actually restore nutrients to the soil. Which means that they could be grown in areas that could not sustain corn agriculture and in about ten years the grasses will have enriched the soil enough to cultivate other crops. So why are we not utilizing these other methods? Because there are no big interests and deep pockets promoting the prairie grass. Unfortunately money drives this country, not common sense. Our countries leaders will pour billions of dollars more into Ethanol before it will finally flop, and hopefully then we can finally move onto something better. It is very clear that Ethanol is not the way to go, but we do have to give it credit for being a start and a step in the right direction. Kudos to the National Corn Growers Association and other special interest groups for promoting that first step and successfully starting the alternative fuel movement. You’ve made yourselves tons of money, now please step aside so we can move on to better things.
Brazil’s Ethanol comes from Sugar Cane NOT corn. Sugar cane Ethanol contains much more energy than corn Ethanol and regular unleaded gasoline. Brazil has done a superb job in becoming a self sufficient energy producer.
With the numbers you just provided, using E85 vs. gasoline is a wash. Gasoline is slightly more economical to use. Assuming you have a 20 gal. tank and get 26 mpg on gasoline, that means that you can travel 520 miles on a tank of gas and it will cost $80 at $4.00 per gallon (ahhh, the good old days). So what will E85 cost?
To fill the 20 gallon tank at $0.50 less would mean that your fill will cost $70 and save $10 on that fill, BUT the known mileage may be about 15% less, meaning that your 26mpg is now 22.1 mpg. At that rate you can only travel 442 miles on a tank of E85.
So how do we compare? Let’s even up the scoreboard and compare what it costs to travel the 520 miles. We know that gas costs $80 to travel the 520 miles. If we add 78 miles worth of fuel to the E85 run, we can travel a total of 520 miles also. That 78 miles extra means that we need to add $12.35 of additional fuel (3.53 gal of E85) to the tank. So the total costs of E85 to travel the same distance is $70+$12.35 = $82.35.
So a tank of gas costs $80
A tank + partial tank of E85 costs $82.35 to travel the same distance. [Plus you need to go to fuel stop twice]
These numbers are so close that if the mileage varies just a little, or your travel experience varies just a little, or any other number of minors factors kick in, the E85 could be less expensive.
At this time fill your tank with what is convenient. Personally, I would choose E85 just to stick it to those loveless, clueless, blood sucking oil vendors.
One other thing…as the price of Gas rises or falls, and if E85 is still $.50 lss…the numbers change a bit. If gas was $3.00/gal and E85 was $2.50…E85 is more economical. If gas is $5.00 and E85 is $4.50 gas pulls further away from E85 as more economical…
Yep, American agribusiness is extremely destructive and inefficient, and we are going to pay royally for it. Up to 10 feet of good topsoil has washed and blown away from our fields… soon they’ll be down to poor subsoil and need incredible amounts of fertilizer.
And why corn-based ethanol? It’s nothing but pandering to Iowa corn farmers. Something called the Iowa Caucus, happening too early in the presidential primary season and having far too large an effect – the hair on the tip of the tail wagging the dog. Every political gasbag who wants to be the president has to swear to Iowa farmers that we’ll devote ever more corn to fueling our SUVs.
I also use E-85 in my caravan and I lose about 15% in milage. All of Valvoline and Castrol oil are rated for use in E-85 motors. Be sure to change your oil more offten because the E-85 will clean out your lines and engine and the alcohol will thin you oil more. Good luck.