Who to vote for? (for US President)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well since we're not really talking politics, I'd h ave to say that Bush would likely be the candidate that would launch a war against the cats, increase military spending and generally believe in taking the emperor out of power. Kerry would likely cut spending on the military and tell the remaining commanders to deal with the Kilrathi with their aging scimitars...
 
All I'm reading is a bunch of how Bush would best defend us. Well, if paranoia is your cup of tea, then so be it. But I'd rather have a President who's actually seen some action rather than someone who's records are amazingly enough missing.
 
This talk about Bush and Kerry fighting the Kilrathi, is it just more or does anyone else think that by the time the cats do come around they both will be dead, burried and have been decomposed by then? I mean it is six hundred years in the future! Wasn't the idea who would be better the preparation for the war with the cats six centuries from now.
 
Hm... good point, anxiety.

Still, I see a certain young pilot in the confederation that holds some resemblance to our current president...

*looks your way, Maniac*

If I had to compare Kerry to a WC-era pilot, he certainly reminds me a lot of Bossman... and I'd certainly take "the boss" over second-lieutenant Marshall, anyday :-)
 
Dundradal said:
Fusion is a nice idea but still 50 years away from practical use (sorry BTTF 2, but no Mr. Fusion for the Deleron)
Click to expand...

This isnt actually true, JET and the russian test beds have both produced break even energy results, and JET in fact in its final test run (it closed down the team now moving to ITER - of course tahts not built yet and the americans keep handily offering to give money to build it then laughing and taking it away again - if the fucking thing gets built, we will have fusion reactors in 10 years) - anyway in its final test run, JET managed to achieve an energy output in 20 seconds of online time equivalent to a coal fired powerplant in a month. - admittedly the input required is stupidly high, but if it can produce that much power and all we have to finalise is keeping the input power source stable then the fusion problem is nearly solved - what we have here though is a case of fucktards blocking its development for their own gain *cough* bush
 
As Madman said fusion is closer than you think, the problem is if it is developed to safely work, then the economy would shift away from oil really quick. A lot of big buisnesses that profit from the oil industry aren't going to want to see that happen.

I'm not going to be one of those "blame the evil corporations" type of people. They're doing buisness the way buisness has always been done. It's just a truism that the economy will slow progress if a change isn't seen as profitable.

My personal opinion is to see alternate energy sources up and running long before we actually need them. There are a lot better things we could be using this day and age rather than fossil fuels that won't cause the problems of fossil fuels and are not limited like fossil fuels.
 
Shipgate said:
Is it true Bush wants to revive the whole Reagan Star Wars thing and put weapons in space?
Click to expand...

I would doubt that because I don't see that being particularily cost effective for a war against terrorists where better intelligence would be much more useful than new weapon systems, but I'm sure the DOD has never stopped wanting to have weapons in space (at least not if cost wasn't a factor). Most importantly, I don't think they'd call it "Star Wars" this time, more likely "Star Wars Chapters IV-VI" since no politician would want to associate themselves needlessly with the prequeals. :cool:
 
I don't think, that NASA could help us with our ecological and economical problems we have. Don't get me wrong, I'm a kind of utopist, idealist and phantast, but also a realist. I'm no US-citizen and it seems that the majority here is for Bush Jr, but I'm not.

I have no great opinion about him (don't worry, the same applies to this narcistic Michael Moore guy).

After my humble estimation, humankind has doomed theirselve. In 50 years it will be shure, that the global economic collaps, in latest 100 years civilization is gone and in 1.000 years humans are history. Hey, I'm not such a neurotic pessimist! ;)

Why should USA invest in such an abstract thing like NASA?
You don't believe really that we live in hundred years like in Star Trek or Wing Commander? That was sixties ideals of future perspectives, nothing more...

Otherwise, I can't give you real advice who you shall vote. I live not in the USA and don't know much about the goals of the democratics. But I know who I don't would vote.
 
Malar said:
After my humble estimation, humankind has doomed theirselve. In 50 years it will be shure, that the global economic collaps, in latest 100 years civilization is gone and in 1.000 years humans are history. Hey, I'm not such a neurotic pessimist! ;)

Why should USA invest in such an abstract thing like NASA?
You don't believe really that we live in hundred years like in Star Trek or Wing Commander? That was sixties ideals of future perspectives, nothing more...
Click to expand...

In 50 years well start building colonies in the solar system. In 637 years well meet a race thats bigger than us. THEN will be extinct.
 
Give David Quinson four more years!

He never agreed to the truce and told congress to get bent while we got ready to defend the home system...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top