The 44th President Obama!!!!

[Beauty Mark]

Science has taken a hit in general or at least physics. Fermilab (one of the big national labs) in Chicago has gotten hit, and the last time I went to an American Physical Society meeting (2006) there were letter writing stations to tell the government to help fund physics. I imagine the situation is still the same, which sucks. I really wouldn't be surprised if NASA gets cuts too.

 

[FullWroth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hotmodelchiq You know it's really kind of sad.... All programs and government run agencys need SOOOO much reform and restructuring

Yeah, and looking at it from my artsy sociological viewpoint, unfortunately, the way we have it structured is good for logistics but makes it incredibly difficult to make anything happen.

I mean, when you're doling out budget money, it makes sense to divide everything up into neat little categories. Unfortunately, in real life, everything overlaps and you can't fix one thing without fixing everything that makes it what it is. Writing a law that says women (or blacks, to tip a hat to the race discussion earlier) are equal will only change their status on paper, because outside of paper you still have an entire populace who's been taught all their lives that X type of person is NOT equal, and you still have a culture that to this day continues distilling ALL people into their lowest common denominator stereotypes for mass entertainment, and you have a ravenous business industry that'll exploit anyone and everything to turn a profit no matter who it hurts.

It'll be similarly difficult to reform the school system, even without taking budget concerns into consideration. Sure, in a magical world where we had all the money possible, we could outfit every school with top-notch supplies, enough shiny new textbooks for every kid to have one of their own, fancy facilities for every interest they could have, field trips to educational places...

But it wouldn't work. We'd still have grossly unqualified teachers (obviously not all of them - I know I've had some absolutely amazing teachers in the past - but a lot of them, tragically). How do we fire all of these people who shouldn't be anywhere near a classroom and then find replacements for them overnight, and then deal with the sudden influx of unemployed educators into the workforce? Or how do we train them without incurring even MORE costs and STILL needing replacements for them while they're off being trained?

Then if we got past THAT, we'd still have a culture that values brawn over brains, and likability versus integrity. Looking good and going along with the crowd brings immediate rewards for the students - studying hard and keeping a good balance of work and play in your life, and maintaining your integrity in the face of peer pressure, that's hard, and the pay-off is so far away, and you don't see the WELL-BALANCED kids getting laid in movies, you see the pretty kids with the designer outfits and 2 hours of hair and make-up prep. Everyone wants to be the cool kid; nobody wants to be the smart kid. Teachers would still have to work their asses off just to convince kids that using their damn brains is actually worth their time, and that school isn't just a place to re-enact the latest episode of Hannah Montana or whatever young kids are watching nowadays, before they even GET to the part where they can teach properly.

We'd also still have a victim culture. Everyone just wants someone to blame. The minute someone's kid fails, whether it's because they have a learning disability, they're stupid (oh yeah, I went there) or they're just a spoiled little brat who doesn't feel like giving a shit, there's a higher chance that dear mommy and daddy will start pointing fingers like they're casting Magic Missile rather than actually admit that their kid has a problem and that they, as responsible adults in charge of their child's future success, need to find out what it is and address it objectively.

So uh... Obama will have to overcome all of that (and more! ugh) AND budgetary constraints when we're already in a recession (oh yeah, I went there too, none of this "Well I dunnooo, maaaybeeee, they haven't officially announced iiiit..." BS), not to mention special interest groups and opposing politicians who don't care about education nearly as much as they care about their own agendas, whatever they may be.

I do not envy him.

GO OBAMA GO! KICK BUTT!

 

[kimmy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by darkwater_soul We are close, but something to remember is that we are also in a huge deficit, we need to start cutting back on programs until we curb that a little, and his hard part will be deciding what needs to be put on the back burner.

nasa has contributed so much to our society, i think it'd be a great injustice to the people of the nation to limit their ability to do so. i mean, this computer right here i'm posting from, simply would not be without the technology nasa first created.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beauty Mark Science has taken a hit in general or at least physics. Fermilab (one of the big national labs) in Chicago has gotten hit, and the last time I went to an American Physical Society meeting (2006) there were letter writing stations to tell the government to help fund physics. I imagine the situation is still the same, which sucks. I really wouldn't be surprised if NASA gets cuts too.

that's a shame. i'm keeping my fingers crossed and hoping obama sees how important the sciences, and helping them advance, really is.

 

[reesesilverstar]

Yay!!! We brought it back. I'm so proud, u guys!

I'll be back to post on the issues later. Work must be done.

 

[carandru]

Found this article today about some of the moves the new prez is planning to make and he plans on making them rather swiftly I see.

Barack Obama plans quick transfer of Guantanamo Bay suspects to US - Times Online

Not sure how I feel about closing down Guantanamo bay.... I know human rights groups have really lobbied for closing the detentions center since the prisoners there aren't treated particularly well. I believe they weren't granted any type of protection until 2006 although they were supposed to be covered under the Geneva act (please correct if I'm wrong, b/c I really don't keep up w/ this stuff). I do know I don't like the idea of bringing potential terrorists to the US to try them although that may be the only way they can receive a fair trial. I can't really see how that would be the only way though

.

Does anyone know what type of naval operations still taking place at Guantanamo Bay and how will this affect them?

 

[kimmy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by carandru Found this article today about some of the moves the new prez is planning to make and he plans on making them rather swiftly I see. Barack Obama plans quick transfer of Guantanamo Bay suspects to US - Times Online Not sure how I feel about closing down Guantanamo bay.... I know human rights groups have really lobbied for closing the detentions center since the prisoners there aren't treated particularly well. I believe they weren't granted any type of protection until 2006 although they were supposed to be covered under the Geneva act (please correct if I'm wrong, b/c I really don't keep up w/ this stuff). I do know I don't like the idea of bringing potential terrorists to the US to try them although that may be the only way they can receive a fair trial. I can't really see how that would be the only way though . Does anyone know what type of naval operations still taking place at Guantanamo Bay and how will this affect them?

the cost to the american people to jail those "people" here rather than guantanamo is going to be astronomical. this article is full of contradictions, as it promises in one paragraph something that will require more tax money and then in the next paragraph, it promises tax cuts for the middle class, which is the majority of the country. i feel like maybe obama made too many promises before he really thought them out, and he isn't going to be able to keep many of them. of course, no politician ever does.

Quote:

Originally Posted by www.timesonline.co.uk He is looking at creating a new “terrorism court” on the US mainland to try up to 80 terror suspects, including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the self-confessed September 11 master-mind.

i still don't know why we need to try a self-confessed terrorist. he confessed to it! why bother trying him? gaaah i think the terrorism thing is still too touchy a subject for me, even after all these years.

 

[carandru]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kimmy the cost to the american people to jail those "people" here rather than guantanamo is going to be astronomical. this article is full of contradictions, as it promises in one paragraph something that will require more tax money and then in the next paragraph, it promises tax cuts for the middle class, which is the majority of the country. i feel like maybe obama made too many promises before he really thought them out, and he isn't going to be able to keep many of them. of course, no politician ever does. i still don't know why we need to try a self-confessed terrorist. he confessed to it! why bother trying him? gaaah i think the terrorism thing is still too touchy a subject for me, even after all these years.

I'm concerned over the cost to create a new court system to try these people. What happened to the system that was previously in place to try war criminals? I definitely do not have much knowledge on this subject, but I'm positive that there was something in place already.

Also, regarding the prisoners who are freed, where do they go? I remember reading that the Bush administration had a difficult time shutting down the detention camp b/c no country wanted to take these prisoners. Would they be freed in America or sent back to whatever country we bought/picked them up from?

 

[SparklingWaves]

Obama to seek new approach in Afghanistan

“The president-elect also intends to move ahead with a planned deployment of thousands of additional US troops to Afghanistan and refocus on the hunt for al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, the newspaper reported.”


Comment: Is this more of the back-door draft for our brave men and women serving in the Armed Forces ?

Source: Obama to seek new approach in Afghanistan - The Irish Times - Tue, Nov 11, 2008

 

[kimmy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SparklingWaves Obama to seek new approach in Afghanistan “The president-elect also intends to move ahead with a planned deployment of thousands of additional US troops to Afghanistan and refocus on the hunt for al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, the newspaper reported.” Comment: Is this more of the back-door draft for our brave men and women serving in the Armed Forces ? Source: Obama to seek new approach in Afghanistan - The Irish Times - Tue, Nov 11, 2008

wasn't obama in charge of the board that was supposed to oversee what was being done in afghanistan? didn't he just have like...seven years to ask for troops to be sent there?

 

[*Stargazer*]

Quote:

Originally Posted by carandru I'm concerned over the cost to create a new court system to try these people. What happened to the system that was previously in place to try war criminals? I definitely do not have much knowledge on this subject, but I'm positive that there was something in place already. Also, regarding the prisoners who are freed, where do they go? I remember reading that the Bush administration had a difficult time shutting down the detention camp b/c no country wanted to take these prisoners. Would they be freed in America or sent back to whatever country we bought/picked them up from?

The war crimes court is in The Hague, isn't it? But I feel like the people that get tried there are people like Milosevic, who commit crimes on a grand scale. I don't know that they deal with enemy combatants or whatever the hell we want to call them.

Many of them are afraid to be returned to their countries because they don't face great circumstances there and many will, as you said, be turned away from their home countries.
Quote:

Originally Posted by SparklingWaves Obama to seek new approach in Afghanistan “The president-elect also intends to move ahead with a planned deployment of thousands of additional US troops to Afghanistan and refocus on the hunt for al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, the newspaper reported.” Comment: Is this more of the back-door draft for our brave men and women serving in the Armed Forces ?

No, that is not at all what a "back-door draft" is. And that whole "back-door draft" business was a bunch of BS anyway. If your contract stipulates that you can be recalled as part of your obligations, then there is nothing "back-door" about it.

Ramping up troops in Afghanistan is a smart move. If we're lucky, it will work the way it did in Iraq.

 

[SparklingWaves]

I don't think it's "BS".


“The Army's stop loss policy can keep a soldier in service if his or her unit deploys within 90 days of the end of the soldier's commitment. However, soldiers are not currently compensated for that extra commitment. On average, soldiers affected by stop loss now serve an extra 6.6 months.

Stop loss often takes members of the National Guard away from their civilian jobs and educational pursuits, and away from their posts in border security. This lack of available National Guard leaves the nation more vulnerable during national emergencies, such as earthquakes and hurricanes.

Many of the soldiers who are deployed for multiple tours suffer from mental trauma following their service which has contributed to skyrocketing rates of divorce and combat stress. Suicide rates are up, with the Pentagon reporting that some 20 percent more troops committed suicide in 2007 than in 2006.

Divorce rates, which have been escalating since 2003, remain at about 3.3 percent, up from 2.9 percent before the start of the war.

Source:

Newspaper Editorial: Legislators - Compensate Troops


-58,300 soldiers have been affected by the stop-loss since 2002.

Source: USA Today


“The number of U.S. troops diagnosed by the military with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) jumped nearly 50 percent in 2007 from the previous year, as more served lengthy and repeated combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, Pentagon data released Tuesday show.

The increase brings the total number of U.S. troops diagnosed by the military with PTSD after serving in one of the two conflicts from 2003-07 to nearly 40,000.

Defense officials had not previously disclosed the number of PTSD cases from Iraq and Afghanistan.

The vast majority of those diagnosed served in the Army, which had a total of 28,365 cases, including more than 10,000 last year. The Marine Corps had the second-highest number, with 5,581 total, and 2,114 last year. The Air Force and Navy had fewer than 1,000 cases each last year, according to the data from the Office of the Surgeon General on a chart released by the Army.”

Source:
Nation & World | Pentagon: More troops suffering from PTSD | Seattle Times Newspaper


video - Google Video


Are you saying that we have thousands of new recruits just waiting for deployment? Are you saying that people are signing up for the Armed Services in record numbers?


More importantly, what is this pivotal point in these wars to indicate that we have won and the world is finally safe from "terrorism"?

 

[*Stargazer*]

When you sign a contract with the Armed Forces, you agree to serve time in the IRR (Individual Ready Reserve) at the end of your ACTIVE commitment. Your IRR commitment stipulates that you can be recalled at any time during your IRR period. There isn't anyone in the Armed Forces today that did not VOLUNTARILY sign up to be there and there isn't anyone there whose contract does not include IRR time. It's a fact of military life, period. It isn't a backdoor draft because it's a component of a VOLUNTARY contract. Anyone activated from the IRR is compensated at the same rate they were compensated as an Active Duty serviceperson, period.
This isn't new. My FIL served 22 years in the Marine Corps and got out in the late 80s. They called him in '91 to return to service as an air traffic controller during the PGW.

And yes, as a matter of fact, recruiting numbers are WAY up.

Quote:

Active Duty Recruiting Fiscal 2008. All services met or exceeded their recruiting goals for fiscal 2008. - The Army had 80,517 accessions, making 101 percent of its 80,000 goal. - The Navy had 38,485 accessions, making 100 percent of its 38,419 goal. -The Marine Corps had 37,991 accessions, making 100 percent of its 37,967 goal. - The Air Force had 27,848 accessions, making 100 percent of its 27,800 goal.

DefenseLink News Release: DoD Announces Recruiting And Retention Numbers For Fiscal 2008
And that is SOLELY new recruits. It has nothing to do with retention, which is also on the rise.

The Marine Corps is currently on pace to blow through their 2009 goal well in advance of the end of FY09.


Moving troops to Afghanistan has nothing at all to do with recruiting or stop loss. It's part of a coordinated effort to draw down in Iraq, while ramping up in Afghanistan. Planned deployments to Iraq were changed to Afghanistan. It's a mission driven action, nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Shimmer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SparklingWaves I don't think it's "BS". “The Army's stop loss policy can keep a soldier in service if his or her unit deploys within 90 days of the end of the soldier's commitment. However, soldiers are not currently compensated for that extra commitment. On average, soldiers affected by stop loss now serve an extra 6.6 months. Stop loss often takes members of the National Guard away from their civilian jobs and educational pursuits, and away from their posts in border security. This lack of available National Guard leaves the nation more vulnerable during national emergencies, such as earthquakes and hurricanes. Many of the soldiers who are deployed for multiple tours suffer from mental trauma following their service which has contributed to skyrocketing rates of divorce and combat stress. Suicide rates are up, with the Pentagon reporting that some 20 percent more troops committed suicide in 2007 than in 2006. Divorce rates, which have been escalating since 2003, remain at about 3.3 percent, up from 2.9 percent before the start of the war. Source: Newspaper Editorial: Legislators - Compensate Troops -58,300 soldiers have been affected by the stop-loss since 2002. Source: USA Today “The number of U.S. troops diagnosed by the military with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) jumped nearly 50 percent in 2007 from the previous year, as more served lengthy and repeated combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, Pentagon data released Tuesday show. The increase brings the total number of U.S. troops diagnosed by the military with PTSD after serving in one of the two conflicts from 2003-07 to nearly 40,000. Defense officials had not previously disclosed the number of PTSD cases from Iraq and Afghanistan. The vast majority of those diagnosed served in the Army, which had a total of 28,365 cases, including more than 10,000 last year. The Marine Corps had the second-highest number, with 5,581 total, and 2,114 last year. The Air Force and Navy had fewer than 1,000 cases each last year, according to the data from the Office of the Surgeon General on a chart released by the Army.” Source: Nation & World | Pentagon: More troops suffering from PTSD | Seattle Times Newspaper video - Google Video Are you saying that we have thousands of new recruits just waiting for deployment? Are you saying that people are signing up for the Armed Services in record numbers? More importantly, what is this pivotal point in these wars to indicate that we have won and the world is finally safe from "terrorism"?

There's not a servicemember in the military anywhere who isn't aware of what a stoploss is, or what it means.
There's also not a servicemember within the military that isn't aware of the inactive reserve portion of the contract. That portion is stressed over and over and over and over and over and over again at MEPS.

To call it a backdoor draft is misleading.

 

[ShugAvery2001]

Quote:

Originally Posted by carandru I'm concerned over the cost to create a new court system to try these people. What happened to the system that was previously in place to try war criminals? I definitely do not have much knowledge on this subject, but I'm positive that there was something in place already.

All of the prisoners at Guantanamo are not "war criminals". Alot of these people are "suspected" terrorist. So you can't put someone on trial at the hague for being a "suspected terrorist". Our current government has gotten us into SOO MANY QUESTIONABLE practices against our own constitution and signed treaties. It's going to take TIME AND MONEY to figure this all out! Our governments has also been snatching up random arabs they THINK are terrorist and sending them to secret camps around the globe INCLUDING guantano. This practice is called extrodinary rendition.

YouTube - Guantanamo Unclassified

YouTube - FRONTLINE/World | Extraordinary Rendition-Nov 6 | Preview #1

Quote:

Originally Posted by carandru Also, regarding the prisoners who are freed, where do they go? I remember reading that the Bush administration had a difficult time shutting down the detention camp b/c no country wanted to take these prisoners. Would they be freed in America or sent back to whatever country we bought/picked them up from?

Don't be confused.. not every prisoner is just going to walk free. Thats what they're trying to figure out how to handle trying these cases. There have already been guantanamo prisoners freed who were found innocent. From what I know, most of them just went back to their countries

 

[ShugAvery2001]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kimmy i think the terrorism thing is still too touchy a subject for me, even after all these years.

Our domestic terrorist get the benifit of a trial!! I mean we are still americans right who believe in the constitution?
I was in Oklahoma in college when that terrorist timothy McVeigh bombed the Murrah building. The murrah building had a day care inside it...

This is rough to watch.. but some of you need to know that terrorist attacks don't always have to result in bombing a country NOR can you control nutts with 'causes'

Our laws state that criminals be handled a certain way through the courts! Like it or not.

YouTube - It Happened In... Oklahoma - 13 Aug 07 - Part 1

 

[FullWroth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shimmer There's not a servicemember in the military anywhere who isn't aware of what a stoploss is, or what it means. There's also not a servicemember within the military that isn't aware of the inactive reserve portion of the contract.

And if they ARE unaware, they should've read their damn contract more closely. I cannot stress the importance of every person, military or civilian, in any profession, to always read AND understand anything they sign their name on. If you sign a credit card receipt without looking at the total and they overcharge you by $5, it's not so big, but something massive like a service contract that could get you killed? Yeeeaaahhh.

 

[SparklingWaves]

“Recent bleak assessments about the Taliban and a dramatic increase in the number of attacks in Afghanistan have left military commanders with nowhere to turn as they seek more troops. The Army and Marine Corps have been stretched thin by numerous deployments to both war zones, and the administration has been unable to persuade allies to send more troops.

"The Taliban and their supporters have, without question, grown more effective and more aggressive in recent weeks, as the casualty figures clearly demonstrate," Mullen said. ". . . We all need to be patient. As we have seen in Iraq, counterinsurgency warfare takes time and it takes a certain level of commitment."

In April, Mullen told the Senate Armed Services Committee that the United States was not doing all it should in Afghanistan and that more troops were needed. At a meeting in Fort Lewis, Wash., two weeks ago, Mullen said that he needed at least three more brigades in Afghanistan but that troop constraints were preventing such a move. "We are in a very delicate time," he said. “

Source: A Shortage Of Troops in Afghanistan - washingtonpost.com

Looking at reports from the front lines, more troops are needed and from our allies. How many troops will it ultimately take to win this war on terror?

I understand the reasoning for the position of the opposition about the term (Back-door draft) and the concept.

To reiterate, what is this pivotal point in these wars to indicate that we have won and the world is finally safe from "terrorism"?

 

[kimmy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShugAvery2001 Our domestic terrorist get the benifit of a trial!! I mean we are still americans right who believe in the constitution?

i find it hard to let someone who doesn't believe in the constituion benefit from its protective clauses. that's just my personal opinion though, and i know that viewpoint is shared by very few people in this country.

 

[Shimmer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SparklingWaves Looking at reports from the front lines, more troops are needed and from our allies. How many troops will it ultimately take to win this war on terror? I understand the reasoning for the position of the opposition about the term (Back-door draft) and the concept. To reiterate, what is this pivotal point in these wars to indicate that we have won and the world is finally safe from "terrorism"?

What does the term "back door draft" have to do with the war on terrorism?
Let me reiterate, there's no back door draft. There's NO servicemember who should be surprised by an extension of time.
None of them.
Not one single service member.

To answer your question, a pivotal point hasn't been defined.

 

[kimmy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SparklingWaves To reiterate, what is this pivotal point in these wars to indicate that we have won and the world is finally safe from "terrorism"?

there hasn't been one, imho, because we haven't really won yet. the world isn't safe from terrorism yet. we've still got a long, long road ahead of us which is why i think so many people are uneasy about obama's plan to withdraw troops by 2011, because the work isn't anywhere near done and obama wants to walk away.