This may come as a shock, but you're no Socrates.

ahhh your wit...

what would we do with out it?

what do you do with out it UG ???

By the way I am not Thomas Edison also, but I can still operate a light bulb

I thought this sub forum was Outside The Box some of you (you know who you are) are so inside the Fox network box , you could use a light bulb.. or a Socratic idea.. or perhaps any original idea.

.

@lannarebirth. FYI believe or not, the Nazis had originally planned to ship the European Jews to Madagascar

but those animals that escaped from the New York zoo got there first

@lannarebirth. FYI believe or not, the Nazis had originally planned to ship the European Jews to Madagascar

That was indeed one of their earlier ideas. But then they got more hardcore and built the death camps. So what's your point? BTW, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, the leader of the Palestinian people during WW2 was living in Berlin and actively promoted sending the Jews to the death camps. He understandably didn't want the Jews to go to Palestine, but actively promoting sending them to the death camps meant he was participating in genocide. When Palestinians today say that Palestinians had nothing to do with the Shoah, they are lying or just ignorant. They did have direct involvement in the name of their top leader at the time.

I thought this sub forum was Outside The Box some of you (you know who you are) are so inside the Fox network box , you could use a light bulb.. or a Socratic idea.. or perhaps any original idea.

Ground-breaking, "original" ideas like this.

we are going to war to protect profits

@lannarebirth. FYI believe or not, the Nazis had originally planned to ship the European Jews to Madagascar

That was indeed one of their earlier ideas. But then they got more hardcore and built the death camps. So what's your point? BTW, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, the leader of the Palestinian people during WW2 was living in Berlin and actively promoted sending the Jews to the death camps. He understandably didn't want the Jews to go to Palestine, but actively promoting sending them to the death camps meant he was participating in genocide. When Palestinians today say that Palestinians had nothing to do with the Shoah, they are lying or just ignorant. They did have direct involvement in the name of their top leader at the time.

My post was a bit of detail for lannarebirth, as he says not across all the detail. Personally I am across the history you have summarised, but it may be of interest to other forum members, understood?

I thought this sub forum was Outside The Box some of you (you know who you are) are so inside the Fox network box , you could use a light bulb.. or a Socratic idea.. or perhaps any original idea.

Ground-breaking, "original" ideas like this.

we are going to war to protect profits

No, original thought like

I knew Socrates, Socrates was a friend of mine. Sirineou you are no Socrates

now where I have heard . this before

Oil helped fuel the industrial revolution, and was good for it's time, but it's time is gone.

That must come as a surprise to most people. Oil is the cheapest widely available energy source (other than nuclear, which has its own hazards) and new technology keeps making it more and more accessible. Its time is far from "gone"

Oil helped fuel the industrial revolution, and was good for it's time, but it's time is gone.

That must come as a surprise to most people. Oil is the cheapest widely available energy source (other than nuclear, which has its own hazards) and new technology keeps making it more and more accessible. Its time is far from "gone"

Maybe Oil was cheap,

it is not cheap any more

if you factor in all the externalities then you get a more realistic picture of the true cost of oil.

Milton Copulus, the head of the National Defense Council Foundation, says. And as the former principal energy analyst for the Heritage Foundation, a 12-year member of the National Petroleum Council, a Reagan White House alum, and an advisor to half a dozen U.S. Energy Secretaries, various Secretaries of Defense, and two directors of the CIA, he knows his stuff.After taking into account the direct and indirect costs of oil, the economic costs of oil supply disruption, and military expenditures, he estimates the true cost of oil at a stunning $480 a barrel.

http://www.energyand...l-gas-crude/461

some other concepts needed to understand are , Population growth, oil usage per person, rate of increase of per person usage, Emerging economies and their per capita increase of oil consumption.

remember a fundamental rule, at 2% yearly increase we will have a 35 year doubling of consumption

The Good news is that the world Population Growth has slow down to 1.2% ,so at that rate it will take 58.3 years to reach 14 billion people

Imagine 14 billion people all wanting the same standard of living !! Some people warn of the coming Oil wars, the truth is we have being involved in oil wars at least since WWII. All the information is out there, easy to find,

Dump Fox news and dump CNN, the truth is not in what they tell you,

of course what they tell you will sound right, the truth is in what they don't tell you.

do you own research

watch this video, this is not some nut job video, it is a mainstream respected professor from the University of Colorado.and nobody deputes his analysis or numbers, it is very interesting and only about 1hr long,and comes in 8 parts,

and then tell me what you think, .

Milton Copulus died in 2008..In 2006 he said that the true cost of oil was $10 - which sounds a lot more sensible.

http://www.evworld.c...fm?newsid=11520

I'm sure he would be pleased that so many new sources for natural gas are being found in the USA as well as ways to extract it cheaply. Oil is going to be an affordable energy source for far into the future and it's time is far from "gone".

Milton Copulus died in 2008..In 2006 he said that the true cost of oil was $10 - which sounds a lot more sensible.

http://www.evworld.c...fm?newsid=11520

I'm sure he would be pleased that so many new sources for natural gas are being found in the USA as well as ways to extract it cheaply. Oil is going to be an affordable energy source for far into the future and it's time is far from "gone".

The fact that he died is of no importance to this conversation, and I used his name because he was a conservative

, $ 10 for what unit of measurement? you probably mean per US gallon.

There are many numbers being thrown around,depending on the methodology , , most everyone agrees at a $15 per gallon number,

but whether you accept the $10 or the $15 number , the number is still too high. and certainly not cheap.

And what price does one place on Human life ? or dreams deferred?

As far as Natural gas is concerned. We will see. I will only mention one word , Fracking

Do you know how Fracktup Fracking is? If Natural gas was so plentiful, why do we need to engage in Fracking.?

$ 10 for what unit of measurement? you probably mean per US gallon.

Yes $10 per gallon. It is in the link. As for fracking, it will get more more and more effective and less dangerous as scientists experiment with it over time. We have enough oll to last a long time.

$ 10 for what unit of measurement? you probably mean per US gallon.

Yes $10 per gallon. It is in the link. As for fracking, it will get more more and more effective and less dangerous as scientists experiment with it over time. We have enough oll to last a long time.

and what happens while the Scientists experiment?

I don't mean to be mean to you,or get personal, I will just say this to make a point,

But how about the scientists experiment on you , and when they get it right come back to me?

Or better yet How about we change to other more sustaining, less disruptive energy systems?

or will we all compromise our lives , so that we can extract every last drop of profit from Fossil fuels and then find something else?

The problem is that we do not have other more sustaining, less disruptive energy systems that are affordable. That is why we have to use what we have the best way we can until we learn more. It is much like medicine today. In a few decades we will look back at what we have now as primitive, but we have little choice at the moment.

The problem is that we do not have other more sustaining, less disruptive energy systems that are affordable. That is why we have to use what we have the best way we can until we learn more. It is much like medicine today. In a few decades we will look back at what we have now as primitive, but we have little choice at the moment.

Why we don't have better energy Choices?

The cost of the Iraq an d Afghanistan war is estimated at $1,358,222,904,593

why cant we invest a fraction of that on renewable energy R&D?

watch a portion of Eisenhower's Fair well address to the nation, ( a republican and a military man), why do you think he chose these words

Obama just "invested" a lot of money in renewable energy and it was complete waste. I am all for renewable energy, but only when in becomes economically worthwhile and that will likely be when the private sector figures something out.

Obama just "invested" a lot of money in renewable energy and it was complete waste. I am all for renewable energy, but only when in becomes economically worthwhile and that will likely be when the private sector figures something out.

You know better than that. Out of 100 startups, how many become big deals? One?

BTW, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, the leader of the Palestinian people during WW2 was living in Berlin and actively promoted sending the Jews to the death camps. He understandably didn't want the Jews to go to Palestine,

The fact that he was one of the half-dozen or so landlords who owned most of the land within the Palestine Mandate did influence his actions. The Jews, through people like the Rothschilds, bought the marshes and other land that was thought too difficult to farm from these landowners, then proceeded to make it into very productive land through more modern farming techniques. This made them more prosperous than their traditionist neighbours, thus planting the seeds of jealousy.

If the newcomers had stayed farming at subsistence level, or gone into the small towns and studied the Torah, like the Jews already established in the area, there may have been no conflict, but no, these immigrant Zionists fleeing the pogroms in Eastern Europe took enough time to check on the best ways to survive in their new environment.

So they were vilified by the ignorant masses.

Many people do not realize that the Jews bought much desolate land legally, but when the Arab landlords saw how they improved it, they wanted it back and fomented riots and unrest against the Jews in order to to force them off of it. That is how the troubles began that ended up with the Jews declaring independence and the UN backing their play.The initial plan would have given a much better deal to the Arabs, but they refused it, declared war and the rest is history.

I don't blame the Palestinian Arabs being angry when Jewish migration to Palestine spiked. That's normal. The dream of Zionism, Jewish nationalism in Israel, was a threat to them, that can't be denied. Their leader going to Berlin to work with the Nazis to send the Jews to the death camps to stop them from going to Palestine. That's genocide. Also keep in mind the Palestinians were pushing for the Nazis to bring the genocide to Palestine but the Nazis got too busy losing the war to see that as a priority. Of course if the Nazis had won, they would have.

In 1948 around 90% of the Arabs living in the area called Palestine were recent immigrants from surrounding countries and most of them had been attracted there by economic activity caused by the Jews - most of who were also immigrants. Turning barren desert into irrigated farmland just doesn't pay sometimes.

Isn't it about time that the whole world went to hell in a handcart? Then we could all get back to drinking beer, farting in bad and having a laugh...

My father used to say that the world is going to hell in a handbasket back in the 60s. I used to laugh at him, but maybe he had a point.

The world's been going to hell in a handbasket since 4000BC. The doom and gloom provides employment for millions. I prefer beer.

Good news. The PM of Syria defected to Jordan today. Another blow against Assad!

The US did not start helping Israel until they had already won 3 wars against the Arabs on their own. I'm sure that they appreciate US help, but that is not how they ended up being so successful..

Does Ulysses Grand know you are using his name to post such nonsense?

PS: in regards to your August Strindberg quote, you know that people keep dogs for reasons other than biting people , right?

Greece has ... Greece.

The Jews had no homeland before Israel.

OK, here is where my Zionism comes in. I want the Jews to stay. They're there. They have historical claims there and they had a very good reason to fight for survival as a people after the holocaust. They should fight to keep it like any other people who could would do. Does that make Jews especially good or bad morally compared to other peoples, winners and losers? No. It makes them normal, morally ambiguous. If the American Indians could have won a homeland for at least part of the USA (don't count reservations), they would have, and they would have defended it. It's tragic what happened to them of course and it is a dark mark on the USA in a similar way with the aborogines in Australia. If the Palestinians want to keep fighting to liberate Israel from the Jews they can go ahead, but Jews have a claim there now and it is strong. 75 percent of Jews in Israel were born there. I suggest that with international support the Palestinians could in the long run do much better by finally accepting Israel, making peace, and get on with the business of getting rich, which they could easily do in partnership with a peaceful partnership with Israel. Imagine that region with peace, the industry and tourism potential. Would it be perfectly fair? Impossible, but it would be better for more of their people than the messed up status quo. (Not hard to do.) Of course if the Palestinians really believe they can win and crush Israel, I understand if they keep fighting. But if that's their path, then I don't have a problem with massive retaliation by Israel. So choose.

Of course if the Palestinians really believe they can win and crush Israel...

a question JT: what do you think is the percentage of hardliners (e.g. Hamas) who want to crush Israel and the percentage of Palestinians who would like to have peace for themselves and their children?

Of course if the Palestinians really believe they can win and crush Israel...

a question JT: what do you think is the percentage of hardliners (e.g. Hamas) who want to crush Israel and the percentage of Palestinians who would like to have peace for themselves and their children?

My understanding based on reading polling over the years is that over 80 percent demand unconditional right of return for Palestinians into Israel. That is something Israel can never accept because if she did, she would no longer exist. So I interpret anyone with that opinion as a hard liner not interested in peace with Israel.

The flip side of that is the Israeli side has gotten more hard line as well, and every sign it will become even more so. The more progressive Israeli factions on Palestinian policy have become very weak. There is a social movement for domestic issues but that's not the same thing. I recently read that the super religious faction now at only 10 percent is set to grow to 30 percent. So Israel grows more right wing, the Palestinians don't budge on acceptance of Israel, so it's not looking good.

I have always blamed BOTH sides for all the failure but there is so much bad blood now I can't actually imagine a good outcome anymore. The people who accuse the Israeli government of really not being interested anymore in a two state solution I think are correct. But I also don't think the Palestinian people or leadership (both factions) are interested in a two state solution either.

Could they all merge in one state and live in a majority Arab pluralistic democracy in peace? Personally, that seems impossible but some progressive forces on both sides (who hate ALL the governments in the region and there is a lot to hate) seem to be at least talking about that academically.

My understanding based on reading polling over the years is that over 80 percent demand unconditional right of return for Palestinians into Israel. That is something Israel can never accept because if she did, she would no longer exist. So I interpret anyone with that opinion as a hard liner not interested in peace with Israel.

looking at these polls shouldn't you take into consideration that there is already the third brainwashed generation growing up in misery who doesn't know anything else than (perceived or real) oppression, hardship, shitty living conditions and you name it negatives?

i don't have any Palestinian friends but i have a bunch of very close Jewish friends. some (few) of them are hardliners, e.g. one living in Uruguay, but doing voluntary a full term military service in the IDF and insist on wearing a yarmulke when we are at the beach in Jomtien once a year or spend a couple of hours in a go-go bar.

but even the hardliners among my friends (exceptions prove the rule) do not condone settlements and walls making islands in the West Bank, pardon me... in Judea and Samaria (according to Steely Dan).

My understanding based on reading polling over the years is that over 80 percent demand unconditional right of return for Palestinians into Israel. That is something Israel can never accept because if she did, she would no longer exist. So I interpret anyone with that opinion as a hard liner not interested in peace with Israel.

looking at these polls shouldn't you take into consideration that there is already the third brainwashed generation growing up in misery who doesn't know anything else than (perceived or real) oppression, hardship, shitty living conditions and you name it negatives?

i don't have any Palestinian friends but i have a bunch of very close Jewish friends. some (few) of them are hardliners, e.g. one living in Uruguay, but doing voluntary a full term military service in the IDF and insist on wearing a yarmulke when we are at the beach in Jomtien once a year or spend a couple of hours in a go-go bar.

but even the hardliners among my friends (exceptions prove the rule) do not condone settlements and walls making islands in the West Bank, pardon me... in Judea and Samaria (according to Steely Dan).

Apology accepted. Indeed if the generic Arabs living in the region choose to synthesize a discreet identity named after a Roman name for the region then why not refer to the so called west bank by it's original names, which even predate the Romans. Judea does sound so much more Jewish does it not, and settlements there would not need the same degree of chutzpah to be built.

Should land for peace ever be possible then even the hawks would accept it, with the proviso of land swaps to reflect how vulnerable Israel is at it's narrowest point, however the Palestinians have balked at this chance on numerous occasions whilst Abbas could make Forbes rich list, as could Arafat before him. But even for the average Palestinian things are not as bad as painted from the outside, shame their media and so called religious leaders feed them hate from cradle to grave.

http://www.jpost.com....aspx?id=280722

Former PA security chief Dahlan says Gaza "not under siege", residents "not lacking anything."