Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / [LOCKED] The Dollar Vs. The Euro

Author
Message
Mason
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Mar 2004
Location: Arizona
Posted: 10th Jun 2005 15:29
Well I was siting in the Dentist the other day, bored out of my mind, and I found an article about the American Dollar Dropping in value. I also noticed that the Euro is worth a good amount more then the dollar. Here is an article about it:

The Dollar Vs. The Euro

http://gbr.pepperdine.edu/041/devaluation.html


This is the most similiar article I could find on it. I'm not the smartest person when it comes to currency n such, but why exactly would the Dollar be decreasing in value. Same goes for why would the Euro be rising at such a steady pace.

Quote: "He commented that a weaker dollar is good for American exports "

John Snow, the Us Treasury Secretary said that a weaker dollar is better? How in the heck is a dollar that is worth less money better for exports? Plus, it might be better for exports but what about the American people that have would like to vist other countries for tourism and vacation. Wouldn't the weak American dollar make it very expensive for someone to just go on vacation.

Lost in Thought
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Feb 2004
Location: U.S.A. : Douglas, Georgia
Posted: 10th Jun 2005 17:03
The value of money has several determining factors. One major factor is how much money is printed vs how much gold the governemnt has to back it up (this is why counterfeit money is so bad). Another is investors in the currency which affects the gold vs money ratio. The reason a weaker dollar is better for exports is things are cheaper to buy when buying with stronger currency. It's like buying something in Mexico with a US Dollar. You can buy alot becasue their currency is weaker than ours. The down side is this hurts imports as well as entertainment and vacation spending, as it costs more to go to otehr places with stronger currency.

Mason
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Mar 2004
Location: Arizona
Posted: 10th Jun 2005 17:22
Quote: ""He commented that a weaker dollar is good for American exports ""

So is this more of an excuse for our weaker dollar? Im sure it has its ups and downs, but I think the downs seem a little more extreme.

In the article, there was a lot of talking about an economic crash n such affecting the whole world. How can that be caused just by having a weaker currency. Is it because a lot of people are investing in America's currency since it is so popular for trading. Also, I saw somewhere that a lot of people could/are changing their investments from the American Dollar to the Euro. Couldn't that cause our dollar to be worth less?

I wonder why the dollar is dropping so and the euro is rising.
Btw: thanks for clearing up some of those things, makes more sense now.

Lost in Thought
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Feb 2004
Location: U.S.A. : Douglas, Georgia
Posted: 10th Jun 2005 17:33
Quote: "Also, I saw somewhere that a lot of people could/are changing their investments from the American Dollar to the Euro. Couldn't that cause our dollar to be worth less?"


Yes it will thats what I was talking about. When people invest in the US Dollar the government can up the gold reserve to back the dollar so it is worth more. If these investments drop enough then so will the gold reserve.

That is the 2 ways currency can drop in value.

1) If you make too much currency the gold to currency ratio will fall and it will be worth less.

2) Your gold reserves for backing the currency drop due to weak economy/ losing investors and the ratio will also drop making the currency less valuable.

There is nothing good about the value of your currency dropping too much in the overall picture. There will always be fluctuation though.

BearCDPOLD
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Oct 2003
Location: AZ,USA
Posted: 10th Jun 2005 17:45
As Lost in Thought said, it's a ratio of currency distributed to gold reserves. I think the decrease can be attributed to the fact that we're in a large deficit, the government has printed more bills and thus made the value diminish.

Crazy Donut Productions
Current Project: A Redneck game
MicroMan
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Aug 2003
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posted: 10th Jun 2005 18:03
There's also the expectation of the buyers of the dollar to consider. Investors want return for their spent money, and when they perceive an ecomony to be weak then they will switch to an ecomony that is perceived to be stronger, and where their investment will increase. So, if an investor buys dollars for a dollar he or she doesn't want a situation where the dollar slips in value.

Expectations then have a lot to say for the value of a currency, and that expectation doesn't need to be based on a true fact. However, with a growing fiscal deficit and a rising trade deficit vis a vis other countries an invester will probably see that as bad and will switch to another currency to prevent losses.

In the EU there are laws against piling up fiscal deficits (even if a few of the bigger countries tries to flaunt that law). So, in the EU the books are pretty much in order - even though the economic performance is sluggish.

-----
They SAID that given enough time a million monkeys with typewriters could recreate the collected works of William Shakespeare... Internet sure proved them wrong.
-----
empty
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: 3 boats down from the candy
Posted: 10th Jun 2005 18:37
Quote: "even though the economic performance is sluggish."

Absolutely. Plus the fact that the Euro still performs relatively well even after the constition debacle tells a lot about what investors think about the current US economy.


Play Nice! Play Basic! Version 1.073
David T
Retired Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2002
Location: England
Posted: 10th Jun 2005 20:11
Weaker dollar is good because

1) It's almost £2 to a dollar. Waaay

2) Things are very cheap to import. Which I like.

Facts are meaningless.
You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true.
Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 10th Jun 2005 21:02
Quote: "Weaker dollar is good because

1) It's almost £2 to a dollar. Waaay

2) Things are very cheap to import. Which I like."


On the flip side... we can't export goods without reducing price to almost cost, and well; yeah.

Another fine example of 'Good for Consumer' - 'Bad for Business'
There really needs to be some proper trade agreements put in place to stop slides like this. Well that and someone take away Bush's rubber stamp signature thing for budgeting.

Rob K
Retired Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Sep 2002
Location: Surrey, United Kingdom
Posted: 10th Jun 2005 21:18 Edited at: 10th Jun 2005 21:19
Quote: "How in the heck is a dollar that is worth less money better for exports?"


Basic economics. I can now afford more American goods that I could several years ago, because the pound is now worth more relative to the dollar. Therefore it is good for your exports.

Quote: "Wouldn't the weak American dollar make it very expensive for someone to just go on vacation.
"


Of course, but for the economy as a whole, it is better if people spend their money in America rather than in other countries. As the currency gets weaker, expenditure is switched to domestic goods and services.


BlueGUI Windows Plugin
Killswitch
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Oct 2002
Location: School damnit!! Let me go!! PLEASE!!!
Posted: 11th Jun 2005 02:05
It might have something to do with the Republicans turning a $1 trillion surplus into a $1 trillion deficit.

What is the stronest currancy in the world? As far as I know it Seterling, but I only ever see Pound vs. Dollar, Dollar vs. Euro, and Euro vs. Pound.

~It's a common mistake to make, the rules of the English langauge do not apply to insanity~
Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 11th Jun 2005 02:07
The Canadian dollar went up 7 10ths of one cent yesterday, and they were praising it to no end on the radio yesterday. My aunt & uncle in California sends me money all the time (because they're so nice) and I used to be able to get $1.5CDN for each $1US. But I just received a cheque and got only $1.2--- what's with that!? Come on dollar--- go down!

In all seriousness I wish we'd convert over to the Euro already :-P


--[R.O.B.O.I. and FireTris Coming Soon]--
Mason
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Mar 2004
Location: Arizona
Posted: 11th Jun 2005 02:23 Edited at: 11th Jun 2005 02:24
Quote: "And what are the implications for U.S. citizens? Have you seen the Grand Canyon?"

That was the end of the article, lol I don't get it.

Anyway, I remember the article in the dentist office saying that "Yen" or some Asian currency was worth a lot more then the dollar, but I'm not sure.

Quote: "Come on dollar--- go down!"

lol...

Quote: "It might have something to do with the Republicans turning a $1 trillion surplus into a $1 trillion deficit.
"

How in the is this the Republicans fault?

Anyway, so what exactly would cause a world-wide economical crash? The article at the dentist was saying that many big countries could fall in to somewhat of an economical crash if the dollar was to lose its value. I'm guessing that really wouldn't happen (hopefully) but I guess it could.

Oh, and from a non Democratic/Republican view, what exactly do you think President Bush has to do with the dollars value dropping. (please don't flame or anything, just tell me what you think) It doesn't seem like he is doing that great of a job on the economy side, and I think he is doing a little to much on the war side.

Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 11th Jun 2005 03:29
Quote: "what exactly do you think President Bush has to do with the dollars value dropping."


I know I'm not American but I've been under the impression that any budget spending *must* be approved by the president, before it is allowed to be taken from the treasury.

Also to this fact prior to the Bush Administration and the 'Iraq War', the United States was around 650billion Surplus.

Now they are running a 300billion defeceit. Although I agree with the administration that 'any military action of such scale is costly', the fact is that it was actually a very small, very short overall conflict; that should never have taken so many lives or resources. One of Bush's key speech plans was that his adminstration had a 4year plan to reclaiming that defeceit; however currently thier plan seems to revolve around weakening (or strengthening depending on your perspective) the Dollar.

The UK was also doing that, althought it's now evened out and looks to start dropping again soon. Though there is a major difference, our country .. well i can't remember it's ever had a surplus in my lifetime. Bush has taken a strong economy and effectively pushed it too far because he doesn't know when to stop spending money.

In his last term he didn't veto a single request for funds. (thought they call it something else, can't remember what but something) I mean he wasn't really thinking ahead.

To be honest I'm not that bothered, as they will have to equalise it at some point else it'll start to hit businesses.

Rob K
Retired Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Sep 2002
Location: Surrey, United Kingdom
Posted: 11th Jun 2005 03:32
Quote: "How in the is this the Republicans fault?"


It is the government's fault because they set the levels of expenditure and taxation.

I am not that familiar with the US economy's history. Since America *is* the world's most powerful economy, it cannot really blame "global trends" for its own performance, since it contributes significantly to them in the first place.

Quote: "Oh, and from a non Democratic/Republican view, what exactly do you think President Bush has to do with the dollars value dropping"


The US budget and trade deficit is a major factor behind the low value of the dollar. The government's policy direction is at least partially responsible for this. I don't think that Bush has a great deal of personal involvement, it is just that he happens to be the figurehead of the government.


BlueGUI Windows Plugin
Mason
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Mar 2004
Location: Arizona
Posted: 11th Jun 2005 04:16
Quote: "Also to this fact prior to the Bush Administration and the 'Iraq War', the United States was around 650billion Surplus.

Now they are running a 300billion defeceit."

Well I guess that would make sense seeing how we are in some kind of "War", but isn't that a bit much. Obviously something else is going on to kill our profits...

Quote: " I don't think that Bush has a great deal of personal involvement, it is just that he happens to be the figurehead of the government."

seeing how he is the figure head of the gov't, I guess everyone would look at him as the problem. Although I think the war we are in is necessary, I think that Bush is taking it too far. Possibly him urging the war on has anything to do with it?

Quote: "In his last term he didn't veto a single request for funds."

Possibly they were good requests?

Quote: "It is the government's fault because they set the levels of expenditure and taxation."

I just don't appreciate how it is said "The Republicans fault" instead of the governments fault.

Im gunna go look for that 4 year plan that Raven was talking about and see what its all about.

Rob K
Retired Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Sep 2002
Location: Surrey, United Kingdom
Posted: 11th Jun 2005 04:29
Quote: "I just don't appreciate how it is said "The Republicans fault" instead of the governments fault.
"


But the Republicans *are* the government, having been approved by the public at the last election.


BlueGUI Windows Plugin
Mason
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Mar 2004
Location: Arizona
Posted: 11th Jun 2005 04:35
Quote: "But the Republicans *are* the government, having been approved by the public at the last election.
"

Not necessarily, there still are democrats in the government. Isn't that more of a stereotype? I'm sure there is a better majority of Republicans, but you still can't exactly pin it on them saying its all the Republicans fault and has nothing to do with the Democrats.

Rob K
Retired Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Sep 2002
Location: Surrey, United Kingdom
Posted: 11th Jun 2005 06:54
Quote: "Not necessarily, there still are democrats in the government. Isn't that more of a stereotype? I'm sure there is a better majority of Republicans, but you still can't exactly pin it on them saying its all the Republicans fault and has nothing to do with the Democrats.
"


My understanding is that the Republicans have enough representation in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, as well as a Republican President, that they can get their legislation through with very little difficulty.

It is the same as in this country pre-2005, the Labour party had a significant majority so they were able to get their policies implemented quite easily (apart from troubles caused by rebels in their ranks)


BlueGUI Windows Plugin
Lost in Thought
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Feb 2004
Location: U.S.A. : Douglas, Georgia
Posted: 11th Jun 2005 08:28
Quote: "My understanding is that the Republicans have enough representation in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, as well as a Republican President, that they can get their legislation through with very little difficulty."


That is quite true. Republican reps are like puppets, however the leader votes they all vote. That is the democrats downfall as well they are not puppety enough . They seem to actually think for themselves, so even if they are the majority they lose because of the ones who don't vote the same add to every one of the republicans who vote against them.

At least the puppet master fell asleep long enough for them to knock down a couple of Bush's ideas

Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 11th Jun 2005 10:52
I thought the seat votes were only passed on legislation / bills?
Finances would fall under the direct jusridiction of the current government.

In either case, it doesn't stop the fact that Democrates were in power over almost a decades with a Surplus.
Republicans are in office for a little over half a term and your country was on the brink of a recession.

I would say that is pretty overwhelming acknowlagement that the Bush administration just can't seem to handle thier spending.
Atleast that's the message that I get from the situations.

Generally speaking, the guys voted in effectively have the decision making power; as a result anything that goes wrong or right is thier fault. That's the entire point in voting them in, is it not?
So that thier particular stance, views, etc. are what guide and shape the country over the 4years of thier term.

Mason
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Mar 2004
Location: Arizona
Posted: 11th Jun 2005 11:29 Edited at: 11th Jun 2005 11:39
Quote: "In either case, it doesn't stop the fact that Democrates were in power over almost a decades with a Surplus.
Republicans are in office for a little over half a term and your country was on the brink of a recession."

Yeah, but they weren't faced with a war... I'm sure if Democrats were hit with a war (which they couldn't avoid) that the money would definitely drop.

Quote: "That is quite true. Republican reps are like puppets, however the leader votes they all vote. "

Thats not true for all of the Republicans same goes for the Democrats IMO. Obviously the party that they are in is where their vote is going to go. The only way that a true Democrat would vote for the other canidate is if theirs is extremely lacking or if the Republican canidate is extremely superior to the others. Of course, almost 100% of the time, its not true. So of course they are going to vote for their party. Same goes with Republicans. Oh btw: Im talking about voting on presidents. As far as voting on laws n such, I can c what you mean. (edit: I think I don't understand what your saying though lol)

Quote: "My understanding is that the Republicans have enough representation in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, as well as a Republican President, that they can get their legislation through with very little difficulty."

Yeah, that makes more sense... Your from Uk right, what parties do they have over their? Are they the same/similiar as the US or completely different. I haven't a clue how Uk works.

Edit:
I think I misunderstood you lost in thought. I was talking about how americans vote for presidents lol. I think you were talking about something else?

Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 11th Jun 2005 12:59
Quote: "Yeah, but they weren't faced with a war... I'm sure if Democrats were hit with a war (which they couldn't avoid) that the money would definitely drop."


It was a volentary war. No one forced America to take the steps it did, in-fact it was ONLY the Bush Administration that was set on going to "war" no matter what.

And I'm sorry but that wasn't a war. I don't care what anyone says it wasn't a war in any shape fashion or form.

Quote: "Yeah, that makes more sense... Your from Uk right, what parties do they have over their? Are they the same/similiar as the US or completely different. I haven't a clue how Uk works."


Actually I fear this is the problem with the Democracy in America.
Many voters (like yourself) have no clue how your own political system works.

Mason
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Mar 2004
Location: Arizona
Posted: 11th Jun 2005 14:07 Edited at: 11th Jun 2005 14:19
Quote: "Many voters (like yourself) have no clue how your own political system works. "

Actually, I'm not a voter because i'm underage, making you incorrect . Plus, I didn't make this thread to get flamed, I made it to learn. Why would I be asking these questions if I did have a clue? Another thing, are you speaking on behalf of all the Democrats in America? If so your sadly mistaken. I'd like to see how that would stand against other Democrats in this forum.

Quote: "It was a volentary war. No one forced America to take the steps it did, in-fact it was ONLY the Bush Administration that was set on going to "war" no matter what."

Raven if we didn't go to war, we would have gotten bombed again. Could you imagine 9/11 all over again?! This was definitely not voluntary. We were attacked, and we defended our country in order to keep it safe. Now if thats voluntary , then you best look it up. Oh yea, don't forget that its spelled Voluntary, not
Quote: "volentary"


Edit:
Anyway, whats the big difference between the way the gov't works in Uk compared to Us. Are there different parties and such? (lol, I still have no clue)

I have a question Raven, what do you do for a living, seems like you know a loooooot about computers n such. (not trying to be rude just wondering )

Dazzag
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: Cyprus
Posted: 11th Jun 2005 20:47
Quote: "Anyway, whats the big difference between the way the gov't works in Uk compared to Us. Are there different parties and such?"
Not much. We have three main parties (and lots of small useless ones like the Monster Raving Loony Party). Realistically there is only two as one of them never gets anywhere near. And double realistically the main party is unbeatable at the minute. But yeah, it's not much different really. Corruptiontastic and all that. I like that word. Might add it to the Urban dictionary...

Cheers

I am 99% probably lying in bed right now... so don't blame me for crappy typing
lagmaster
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Playing:
Posted: 11th Jun 2005 21:04
heh im taking advantage of this low american dollar value.

the irc server is only costing me £2.60~ a month. if you do some real searching you can find some good webhosting bargains. i mean even if you wanted to splash out 40-70 dollars a month you can get a dedicated server, covert that to uk sterling, it's cheap.

should of took advantage when it was 1.95+ last year now it's 1.81?

lagmaster - [url=irc://irc.devhat.net]irc.devhat.net[/url] <-- irc network for #darkbasic
- most of my websites down :/
Chris K
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Oct 2003
Location: Lake Hylia
Posted: 11th Jun 2005 23:53
America has to borrow 2 billion a day from China.

When I went on holiday last year (or year before) the Dollar/Euro exchange rate was 0.99999124 or something. Basically exactly the same.

My Showcase - It's DBpro-tastic
David T
Retired Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2002
Location: England
Posted: 12th Jun 2005 01:42
Your from Uk right, what parties do they have over their? Are they the same/similiar as the US or completely different.

Woah - most people are up to date with American parties etc here but probably because we all were finding ways for Kerry to win last time. Damn.

Anyway, we have

Labour
Conservatives
Liberal Democrats

and various other tiny ones, including might I add The British Communist Party.

Lib Dems never get anyway, though are seen as quite a trendy choice. If you can't decide between the big two go for them and help cut labour's majority.

Conservatives imo are okay, some hate them though. It depends alot - the - how can I put this - lower echlons of society tend to not like them and go for Labour.

As for Labour, I'm not entirely sure how they won the election. They are falling apart and scandal after scandal is coming out yet for some reason people still vote for them. I reckon they'll lose the next election. Their majority was cut by something like 40% last election, with that rate I hope there will be a change of government in 2009.

"A book. If u know something why cant u make a kool game or prog.
come on now. A book. I hate books. book is stupid. I know that I need codes but I dont know the codes"
Mason
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Mar 2004
Location: Arizona
Posted: 12th Jun 2005 03:07
Quote: "They are falling apart and scandal after scandal is coming out "

Scandals huh, what did they do?

Quote: "America has to borrow 2 billion a day from China."

Yowch, thats a good amount of cash for every day.

Quote: "heh im taking advantage of this low american dollar value."

I wish I could but sadly I live in America lol.

Quote: "Woah - most people are up to date with American parties etc here but probably because we all were finding ways for Kerry to win last time. Damn."

Honestly, I don't know a damn thing about the Uk except that its not in North america . Well, I'm sure your all up to date with our parties because that election was such a big deal. If I could vote, my vote would go to bush all the same. I don't like Kerry's bs, but thats just me. As far as that election went, you didn't have much of a choice. Imo bush isn't that great of a president, and I don't think that Kerry would have been a good one either.

Why is the war we are in view as such a horrible thing. plenty of the things that happened in the war were good. I mean we did get Suddam Hussein help Iraq become a Democracy. We also prevented a 9/11 hittin us and/or Uk again. I'm not sure why all you guys think its unecessary.

Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 12th Jun 2005 03:10
Quote: "Actually, I'm not a voter because i'm underage, making you incorrect . Plus, I didn't make this thread to get flamed, I made it to learn. Why would I be asking these questions if I did have a clue? Another thing, are you speaking on behalf of all the Democrats in America? If so your sadly mistaken. I'd like to see how that would stand against other Democrats in this forum."


If you were just asking questions then you would've recieved an answer, but you are making assumptions. Given what you were assuming it led me to believe you were actually a voter.

Though that isn't always true, given Mouse has one of the biggest opinionated stances on politics and he still has a good 2-4years before he can vote. It is something that irritates me about him. Rather that trying to learn and listen he seems to feel the knowlage he has and having google as one of his favourites instantly makes him some sort of instant guru on any subject. He particularly likes to excersise this within the politics theatre.

If you wish to learn, then ask questions; and there are many people here who would be willing to explain what they understand. There is also the United States Government page, which outlines much about the technical side of how things work.

Quote: "Raven if we didn't go to war, we would have gotten bombed again. Could you imagine 9/11 all over again?!"


I'm standing by my statement that it was a Conflict not a War. Though honestly, I don't see what staging a military action to overthrow a dictatorship has anything to do with a terrorist cell attacking America.

Yes, September 11th 2001 was a horrific display of terrorism power. Yet how is it any different to the Unibomber? Who killed several hundred people each time he set a Van to explode? He was American, so it isn't just the people outside of the country that are suffering.

The question is, do you actually understand WHY America was attacked in the first place?

That is possibly the most paramount question to ask... and yet no one asked it. The way the government played it, were that outsiders were attacking your freedom and revenge must be exacted. This action was the exact reason that these terrorists attack you in the first place.

And they didnt' attack the Trade Towers by accident either. It wasn't as if they were trying to send a message JUST to America, that wasn't what it was about. They attacked building that could instablise the American economy, as well as the local interests (i.e. United Kingdom as well).

Did you know that 4 Seperate Terrorist attacks from the same group were attempted in the United Kingdom?

I bet that's a little fact that you were never told about. You know why they failed yet here, yet attacks succeeded in the United States?

It comes down to the simple point, that the United Kingdom or more'over, N.Ireland and England have been for almost 60-70years iirc under constant paramilitary threat particularly from Terrorist attacks. Is it the peoples fault? No; Is it the government's fault? Yes.

People always will suffer at the hands of terrorists because of things governments do, sometimes even decades in the past. Often is the case that some point neither the government or the faction remember exactly why it's happening, just that it's always been that way and it always will be.

And while England call these Terrorist attacks, the opposite site looks at them as acts for liberation.

Did you know that during the early 80s, Afgahnistan was one of those countries fiercely found over by the Russian and American governments? It was being fought over simple because the other side wanted it. There was no regard to the citizens living there, to these super-powers it was just a prize to flaunt. Though there also might be interesting to point out that Afgahnistan is one of the biggest Opium Poppy growing countries. I have no idea if that has anything to do with it or not, but it's nn interesting side point.

Russian aren't attacked for the simple reason, they originally won the country; amd armed them against the americans. Later the americans fought back the country and tried to change it; once russia lost interest, so did the americans. So after rifing the entire country through a war that didn't consern them, and changing them to ahear to american values... one day they just left leaving the country in a state of disarray.

It's hard not to feel pissed off, especially when a country who can't understand your language tells you that your god is false; and thier god is true. This is all one big Jihad to Al'qeda, it's a holy war for retribution.

To the americans its' a terrorist attack for no reason. No doubt as far as the people are conserned they have no idea why it's happening. So they're scare, their angry and to look good the governments wants to show that they are determined to bring those responsible to justice.

Question is... who are they punishing. Iraq had nothing to do with the Al'qeda so why go to "war"? They'd already once again forced over Afgahnistan, forcing the country to rebuilt once again, and now again leaving them to do it on thier own while focus of the people is elsewhere.

While Iraq is now 'free', it doesn't make the United State any safer. The governments way of keeping the people safe is by restricting the freedoms of it's people.

None of my freedoms have been restricted here in England, yet I feel safe from terrorist attacks. Maybe not safe from being mugged or something during the night in the centre of town; but our police has always been kinda weak (within my lifetime anyways)

Quote: "I have a question Raven, what do you do for a living, seems like you know a loooooot about computers n such. (not trying to be rude just wondering )"


Right now, I'm a Programmer. This said, usually I'm an Artist.
CG Engineer, Texture Artist, Environment Modeller, etc.. I've done just most aspect of art over the last 8years.

Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 12th Jun 2005 04:34
This has turned into yet another war topic. There's one of these already.

Click.

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-11-27 17:50:22
Your offset time is: 2024-11-27 17:50:22