I read the intelligence report and I accept their analysis . At the time they still had better assessment of the situation than you do now 36 years later.
Traditional Conservative Values...are now found in current events.
- Thread starter Meat
- Start date
No, the gov't intervened to save high paying union jobs which helped Obama carry Michigan and Ohio in 2012. GM execs weren't given a choice.
Browntrk1
Member
The biggest issue with the American manufacturers is the lack of margin on their new vehicles. They make their money on volume because it costs a lot to manufacture in the States and they have a hard time competing with over-seas manufacturing costs. A stiffer tariff on imported vehicles is really the only beneficial way to get GM, Ford, and Dodge stable again. The next time there is a downturn and they can't sell what they produce, they'll all be in trouble again to some degree.
Newsweek is left of far left so take anything they publish with a grain of salt.
The possibility of higher tariffs are why foreign vehicle manufacturers build in the U.S. now. Ford took no gov't assistance last time as they actually ran their company well.
You're so desperate for a response that you're willing to go so far as try to contend that the intelligence report was fabricated. If so it wouldn't be the only fabricated intelligence as we clearly saw with the fabricated intelligence that Bush used to invade Iraq just to get back at Hussein for trying to kill his dad.
Browntrk1
Member
They didn't take "bailout" money but they did receive a loan of $5.9 billion in 2009 and asked Congress for a $9 billion "credit line" in case the economy worsened. I don't dispute their model was a lot more solid than their competitors but the automobile sector is just out producing long-term demand and competition has pushed margins on new vehicles so low that they rely too much on the economy to grow consistently which is not really the nature of our economy. I didn't realize the majority of imports were assembled here. I knew a few did but good for us, glad we are getting those jobs.
Do you really believe the Iraq war hinged on Bush wanting revenge? Really? Every major intelligence agency in the world believed Hussein had WMD's. Every major Democrat was on record that he did have them. He was in violation of, if I remember right, 17 U.N. resolutions. If there was a reason other than all that it was that Hussein was threatening to take Euros instead of Dollars for his oil. As for whether Reagan would or wouldn't have invaded it's a moot point. Iraq released them when Reagan became president, which strongly suggests that they respected him, feared him, much more than they did Carter.
59 Dano
I just want to make friends!
The deal is between Carrier and the state of Indiana. The idea that Trump offered a billion dollar contract is laughable.
59 Dano
I just want to make friends!
The number of cars that actually qualify as "imports" that would be subject to tariffs aren't enough to matter. Most of our Asian and European cars are actually built here.
Historians believe that they held the hostages as a snub to Carter not that they feared Reagan. They had the Russians on their side and they knew that Reagan's threats were designed to help him win the election.
59 Dano
I just want to make friends!
If that was his objective, he could have had Hussein killed without a single troop ever setting foot on Iraqi soil.
Which historians?
Why did Collin Powell quit as SOS? The intelligence he had to present to the UN was fabricated and he knew it. The mess you have in Iraq today is a direct consequence of the Bush doctrine and don't say it was Obama's fault . He had enough to deal with in the form of the deepest recession in 80 years and a treasury nearly drained by the cost of two wars that will be borne by the American people for decades to come. Foreign policy blunders are not party specific they have to be accounted for by the American people as a whole. Let's just hope that your beloved new president doesn't go cocking off at some foreign power who will militarily call his bluff and finds himself in the same situation Obama did. The cost of two wars and an economy in a recession so deep that it was tearing at the social threads that binds this society.
The hostages were on the plane but the Iranian government wouldn't let the plane leave Iranian soil until Reagan was sworn it. What military implications did that action have?
Which historians?
BrownArmy
Well-Known Member
Your assertion is incorrect, as a subsidiary of Carrier currently has a 800+ million dollar DOD contract. It's not unreasonable to speculate that a renewal of that contract was part of the negotiations. Truth be told, the general public will probably never be privy to enough of the details to assess whether the deal was worth it or not.
This version of events is generally accepted by historians.
Which historians? Allegations made by liberal journalists. Obama did send, what was it, 400 million dollars worth of Euros and Swiss Francs on an unmarked plane at night to release hostages held by Iran recently. Maybe that's the incident you're referring to.
Similar threads
