Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
freshwest
freshwest's Journal
freshwest's Journal
July 28, 2015
I guess Judith Miller is still on the payroll? LOL. No, but this is serious. It's RF101.
Put out a spurious story, force the Democratic candidate... and it's ALWAYS the Democrat being attacked, to refute but first make sure to leave it in place long enough to imprint that piece of dirt in the public mind.
Because we hold onto dirt faster and harder than anything good. Dirt will imply distrust and danger, so it goes straight to the subconscious. Never to leave once it's there. The brain does not forget anything, but it does prioritize danger for survival. Kept in a constant state of low level fear alters the conscious mind to allow propaganda in.
My thread on this:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/110215862
I posted this nearly two years ago. And I added this photo later:
One of the things the Clintons have been known for is their 'rapid response' team to these attacks. But the media is so much farther to the right, and the landscape of possible voters is too, that it doesn't take much to convince them.
A generation has grown up hearing Rush all their lives. Many regions of the country have lost all progressive, liberal or even neutral reporting. Journalism has been reduced to propaganda. And it is also in the hands of about half a dozen billionaires.
The airways and television and other venues, entertainment as well as 'news' is now echoing the same talking points until the human mind is overwhelmed. There are forms of what is called 'manufactured consent.' After a while those of an opposing view know better than to say a thing as they hear neighbors and their friends and family repeating it. Since it is everywhere, it's true.
One way is because a media story has been put out, there is an urgency to it. But it's not even current, oftentimes. I've caught 'breaking news' that is actually recycled from years ago. But when a manufacturer of some other vendor wants something to take part of the taxpayer's money or the Commons, a story pops up as if it's a crisis. It's not. At times the situation discussed has been taken care of, sometimes years ago. It may or may not generate public outrage and reaction.
But even everyone ignores it, the 'new crisis' is used as an excuse to pass a piece of legislation that profits someone by stealing the Commons or destroying some institution or agency no one had a problem with. Then it's passed even if the public does rouse itself to fight back.
Because it was 'on the news' so it must be true and important! The cycle repeats. I see all the news and entertainment as no more than selling a product. All kinds of things, from hate to war to gadgets.
'It's new! It's the best! Everyone wants it, everyone is buying it! Hurry! Don't miss out, you will get behind in the pack.'
It's buying to negate anxiety. The NYT is selling a product. Who benefits from it?
The GOP does.
July 28, 2015
Savoring every moment. More greatness yet to come. Wonders never cease.
And it's good to see someone point it out! I miss him already!
Savoring every moment. More greatness yet to come. Wonders never cease.
July 28, 2015
NO lies from YOU, but...
Operation Chaos 2016 is in full swing. The 2008 version of Operation Chaos, as named by Rush, was used on both of the Democratic frontrunners.
First for Obama with lies when HRC was up in the polls. Then swung to HRC with lies when Obama was up in the polls.
Fortunately, they were unable to stop the moral arc of the universe that is Barack Hussein Obama!
Breaks out in a song:
NO lies from YOU, but...
Operation Chaos 2016 is in full swing. The 2008 version of Operation Chaos, as named by Rush, was used on both of the Democratic frontrunners.
First for Obama with lies when HRC was up in the polls. Then swung to HRC with lies when Obama was up in the polls.
Fortunately, they were unable to stop the moral arc of the universe that is Barack Hussein Obama!
July 27, 2015
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
The disrespect shown to AA posters is simply wrong.
This black woman is an activist who is a Democrat and knowledgeable on everything that is going on in her state, obviously.
Why dismiss her?
It's a huge concern. AFAIK, the strongest votiung block in the Democratic Party are black females.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
The disrespect shown to AA posters is simply wrong.
This black woman is an activist who is a Democrat and knowledgeable on everything that is going on in her state, obviously.
Why dismiss her?
July 27, 2015
Petty said he stopped the GOP from using his songs, but thrilled at seeing Obama walk onstage as his song played.
BTW. Obama's 2012 DNC music by Tom Petty:
Petty said he stopped the GOP from using his songs, but thrilled at seeing Obama walk onstage as his song played.
July 27, 2015
The Nordic model (or Nordic capitalism[1] or Nordic social democracy)[2][3] refers to the economic and social models of the Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Norway, Iceland, Greenland, Faroe Islands and Sweden), which involves the combination of a free market economy with a welfare state.[4]
Although there are significant differences among the Nordic countries, they all share some common traits. These include support for a "universalist" welfare state (relative to other developed countries) which is aimed specifically at enhancing individual autonomy, promoting social mobility and ensuring the universal provision of basic human rights, as well as for stabilizing the economy, alongside a commitment to free trade. The Nordic model is distinguished from other types of welfare states by its emphasis on maximizing labor force participation, promoting gender equality, egalitarian and extensive benefit levels, the large magnitude of income redistribution, and liberal use of expansionary fiscal policy.[5]
The Nordic model is described as a system of competitive capitalism combined with a large public sector (roughly 30% of the work force).[6] In 2013, The Economist described its countries as "stout free-traders who resist the temptation to intervene even to protect iconic companies" while also looking for ways to temper capitalism’s harsher effects, and declared that the Nordic countries "are probably the best-governed in the world."[6][7] The Nordic combination of extensive public provision of welfare and a culture of individualism has been described by Lars Trägårdh, of Ersta Sköndal University College, as "statist individualism."[6] Some economists have referred to the Nordic economic model as a form of "cuddly" capitalism, with low levels of inequality, generous welfare states and reduced concentration of top incomes, and contrast it with the more "cut-throat" capitalism of the United States, which has high levels of inequality and a larger concentration of top incomes.[8][9]
The Nordic model, however, is not a single identical set of policies and rules in every country; each of the Nordic countries has its own economic and social models, sometimes with large differences from its neighbors.[10] While Sweden's neoliberal reforms[11][12] have reduced the role of the public sector over the last decades, and saw the fastest growth in inequality of any OECD economy,[13] Sweden's income inequality still remains lower than most other countries'.[14]
"The Nordic Model - Embracing globalization and sharing risks" characterizes the system as follows:[15]
* An elaborate social safety net in addition to public services such as free education and universal healthcare.[15]
* Strong property rights, contract enforcement, and overall ease of doing business.[16]
* Public pension plans.[15]
* Low barriers to free trade.[17] This is combined with collective risk sharing (social programs, labour market institutions) which has provided a form of protection against the risks associated with economic openness.[15]
* Little product market regulation. Nordic countries rank very high in product market freedom according to OECD rankings.[15]
* Low levels of corruption.[15] In Transparency International's 2014 Corruption Perceptions Index all five Nordic countries were ranked among the 12 least corrupt of 176 evaluated countries, and Denmark, Finland, Sweden and Norway all ranked within top 5.[18]
* High percentage of workers belonging to a labour union. In 2010, labour union density was 69.9% in Finland, 68.3% in Sweden, and 54.8% in Norway. In comparison, labour union density was 12.9% in Mexico and 11.3% in the United States.[19] The lower union density in Norway is mainly explained by the absence of a Ghent system since 1938. In contrast, Denmark, Finland and Sweden all have union-run unemployment funds.[20]
* A partnership between employers, trade unions and the government, whereby these social partners negotiate the terms to regulating the workplace among themselves, rather than the terms being imposed by law.[21] Sweden has decentralised wage co-ordination, while Finland is ranked the least flexible.[15] The changing economic conditions have given rise to fear among workers as well as resistance by trade unions in regards to reforms.[15] At the same time, reforms and favourable economic development seem to have reduced unemployment, which has traditionally been higher. Denmark's Social Democrats managed to push through reforms in 1994 and 1996 (see flexicurity).
* Sweden at 56.6% of GDP, Denmark at 51.7%, and Finland at 48.6% reflects very high public spending.[17] One key reason for public spending is the large number of public employees. These employees work in various fields including education, healthcare, and for the government itself. They often have lifelong job security and make up around a third of the workforce (more than 38% in Denmark). Public spending in social transfers such as unemployment benefits and early-retirement programmes is high. In 2001, the wage-based unemployment benefits were around 90% of wage in Denmark and 80% in Sweden, compared to 75% in the Netherlands and 60% in Germany. The unemployed were also able to receive benefits several years before reductions, compared to quick benefit reduction in other countries.
* Public expenditure for health and education is significantly higher in Denmark, Sweden, and Norway in comparison to the OECD average.[22]
* Overall tax burdens (as a percentage of GDP) are among the world's highest; Sweden (51.1%), Denmark (46% in 2011),[23] and Finland (43.3%), compared to non-Nordic countries like Germany (34.7%), Canada (33.5%), and Ireland (30.5%).
* The United Nations World Happiness Report 2013 shows that the happiest nations are concentrated in Northern Europe. The Nordics ranked highest on the metrics of real GDP per capita, healthy life expectancy, having someone to count on, perceived freedom to make life choices, generosity and freedom from corruption.[24]
* The Nordic countries received the highest ranking for protecting workers rights on the International Trade Union Confederation's 2014 Global Rights Index, with Denmark being the only nation to receive a perfect score.[25]
The Nordic welfare model refers to the welfare policies of the Nordic countries, which also tie into their labor market policies.
While there are differences among different Nordic countries, they all share a broad commitment to social cohesion, a universal nature of welfare provision in order to safeguard individualism by providing protection for vulnerable individuals and groups in society, and maximizing public participation in social decision-making. It is characterized by flexibility and openness to innovation in the provision of welfare. The Nordic welfare systems are mainly funded through taxation.[26]
Despite the common values, the Nordic countries take different approaches to the practical administration of the welfare state. Denmark features a high degree of private sector provision of public services and welfare, alongside an assimilation immigration policy. Iceland's welfare model is based on a "welfare-to-work" (see: workfare) model, while part of Finland's welfare state includes the voluntary sector playing a significant role in providing care for the elderly. Norway relies most extensively on public provision of welfare...[26]
Jerry Mander has likened the Nordic model to a kind of "hybrid" economics which features a blend of capitalist and socialist visions.[31] According to sociologist Lane Kenworthy, in the context of the Nordic model, "social democracy" refers to a set of policies intended to improve capitalism as opposed to a system to replace capitalism.[32] Kenworthy advocates for the U.S. to make a gradual transition to an economic system similar to those of the Nordic countries.[33] United States Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), a self-described democratic socialist, has been a strong proponent of the Nordic system.[34][35][36] Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz has noted that there is higher social mobility in the Scandinavian countries than in the United States, and argues that Scandinavia is now the land of opportunity that the United States once was.[37]
According to Naomi Klein, former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev sought to move the USSR in a similar direction to the Nordic system, combining free markets with a social safety net — but still retaining public ownership of key sectors — ingredients that he believed would transform the USSR into "a socialist beacon for all mankind."[38][39]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_model
Gorbachev's plan apparently did not get a chance as It appears Russia is in the hands of an oligarchy. That is the default whenever governments collapse, sadly. His plan sounded like a good transition model.
Of the five Nordic countries, Norway, Denmark and Iceland are NATO members. Sweden and Finland are not. Bernie mentioned NATO in his support for F-35 and drone production in Vermont which he says are important for fighting ISIS. These are good paying MIC jobs and a source of prosperity for those who get those jobs. Typical state politics used by both parties.
The moral question remains to be answered. We don't seem to be able to have a hard nosed discussion of such at DU without devolving into namecalling, but I think we need to seek more honesty on this subject.
He's a conventional politican, and it's apparent the socialists do have a bone to pick with him. But they have little success in the USA in getting what they want.
The World Socialist Web Site hates Bernie, with several articles calling him anti-union/ worker, anti-immigrant, deceptive and imperialist. They also don't like his strong support for military aid to Israel in light of the plight of Gazans which they have termed racist.
I don't agree with what they say, but then I'm a Democrat and they'd say the same about us.
You can't please everybody!
Sanders is not a purist. He is a follower of 'cuddly capitalism' as described here:
The Nordic model (or Nordic capitalism[1] or Nordic social democracy)[2][3] refers to the economic and social models of the Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Norway, Iceland, Greenland, Faroe Islands and Sweden), which involves the combination of a free market economy with a welfare state.[4]
Although there are significant differences among the Nordic countries, they all share some common traits. These include support for a "universalist" welfare state (relative to other developed countries) which is aimed specifically at enhancing individual autonomy, promoting social mobility and ensuring the universal provision of basic human rights, as well as for stabilizing the economy, alongside a commitment to free trade. The Nordic model is distinguished from other types of welfare states by its emphasis on maximizing labor force participation, promoting gender equality, egalitarian and extensive benefit levels, the large magnitude of income redistribution, and liberal use of expansionary fiscal policy.[5]
The Nordic model is described as a system of competitive capitalism combined with a large public sector (roughly 30% of the work force).[6] In 2013, The Economist described its countries as "stout free-traders who resist the temptation to intervene even to protect iconic companies" while also looking for ways to temper capitalism’s harsher effects, and declared that the Nordic countries "are probably the best-governed in the world."[6][7] The Nordic combination of extensive public provision of welfare and a culture of individualism has been described by Lars Trägårdh, of Ersta Sköndal University College, as "statist individualism."[6] Some economists have referred to the Nordic economic model as a form of "cuddly" capitalism, with low levels of inequality, generous welfare states and reduced concentration of top incomes, and contrast it with the more "cut-throat" capitalism of the United States, which has high levels of inequality and a larger concentration of top incomes.[8][9]
The Nordic model, however, is not a single identical set of policies and rules in every country; each of the Nordic countries has its own economic and social models, sometimes with large differences from its neighbors.[10] While Sweden's neoliberal reforms[11][12] have reduced the role of the public sector over the last decades, and saw the fastest growth in inequality of any OECD economy,[13] Sweden's income inequality still remains lower than most other countries'.[14]
"The Nordic Model - Embracing globalization and sharing risks" characterizes the system as follows:[15]
* An elaborate social safety net in addition to public services such as free education and universal healthcare.[15]
* Strong property rights, contract enforcement, and overall ease of doing business.[16]
* Public pension plans.[15]
* Low barriers to free trade.[17] This is combined with collective risk sharing (social programs, labour market institutions) which has provided a form of protection against the risks associated with economic openness.[15]
* Little product market regulation. Nordic countries rank very high in product market freedom according to OECD rankings.[15]
* Low levels of corruption.[15] In Transparency International's 2014 Corruption Perceptions Index all five Nordic countries were ranked among the 12 least corrupt of 176 evaluated countries, and Denmark, Finland, Sweden and Norway all ranked within top 5.[18]
* High percentage of workers belonging to a labour union. In 2010, labour union density was 69.9% in Finland, 68.3% in Sweden, and 54.8% in Norway. In comparison, labour union density was 12.9% in Mexico and 11.3% in the United States.[19] The lower union density in Norway is mainly explained by the absence of a Ghent system since 1938. In contrast, Denmark, Finland and Sweden all have union-run unemployment funds.[20]
* A partnership between employers, trade unions and the government, whereby these social partners negotiate the terms to regulating the workplace among themselves, rather than the terms being imposed by law.[21] Sweden has decentralised wage co-ordination, while Finland is ranked the least flexible.[15] The changing economic conditions have given rise to fear among workers as well as resistance by trade unions in regards to reforms.[15] At the same time, reforms and favourable economic development seem to have reduced unemployment, which has traditionally been higher. Denmark's Social Democrats managed to push through reforms in 1994 and 1996 (see flexicurity).
* Sweden at 56.6% of GDP, Denmark at 51.7%, and Finland at 48.6% reflects very high public spending.[17] One key reason for public spending is the large number of public employees. These employees work in various fields including education, healthcare, and for the government itself. They often have lifelong job security and make up around a third of the workforce (more than 38% in Denmark). Public spending in social transfers such as unemployment benefits and early-retirement programmes is high. In 2001, the wage-based unemployment benefits were around 90% of wage in Denmark and 80% in Sweden, compared to 75% in the Netherlands and 60% in Germany. The unemployed were also able to receive benefits several years before reductions, compared to quick benefit reduction in other countries.
* Public expenditure for health and education is significantly higher in Denmark, Sweden, and Norway in comparison to the OECD average.[22]
* Overall tax burdens (as a percentage of GDP) are among the world's highest; Sweden (51.1%), Denmark (46% in 2011),[23] and Finland (43.3%), compared to non-Nordic countries like Germany (34.7%), Canada (33.5%), and Ireland (30.5%).
* The United Nations World Happiness Report 2013 shows that the happiest nations are concentrated in Northern Europe. The Nordics ranked highest on the metrics of real GDP per capita, healthy life expectancy, having someone to count on, perceived freedom to make life choices, generosity and freedom from corruption.[24]
* The Nordic countries received the highest ranking for protecting workers rights on the International Trade Union Confederation's 2014 Global Rights Index, with Denmark being the only nation to receive a perfect score.[25]
The Nordic welfare model refers to the welfare policies of the Nordic countries, which also tie into their labor market policies.
While there are differences among different Nordic countries, they all share a broad commitment to social cohesion, a universal nature of welfare provision in order to safeguard individualism by providing protection for vulnerable individuals and groups in society, and maximizing public participation in social decision-making. It is characterized by flexibility and openness to innovation in the provision of welfare. The Nordic welfare systems are mainly funded through taxation.[26]
Despite the common values, the Nordic countries take different approaches to the practical administration of the welfare state. Denmark features a high degree of private sector provision of public services and welfare, alongside an assimilation immigration policy. Iceland's welfare model is based on a "welfare-to-work" (see: workfare) model, while part of Finland's welfare state includes the voluntary sector playing a significant role in providing care for the elderly. Norway relies most extensively on public provision of welfare...[26]
Jerry Mander has likened the Nordic model to a kind of "hybrid" economics which features a blend of capitalist and socialist visions.[31] According to sociologist Lane Kenworthy, in the context of the Nordic model, "social democracy" refers to a set of policies intended to improve capitalism as opposed to a system to replace capitalism.[32] Kenworthy advocates for the U.S. to make a gradual transition to an economic system similar to those of the Nordic countries.[33] United States Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), a self-described democratic socialist, has been a strong proponent of the Nordic system.[34][35][36] Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz has noted that there is higher social mobility in the Scandinavian countries than in the United States, and argues that Scandinavia is now the land of opportunity that the United States once was.[37]
According to Naomi Klein, former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev sought to move the USSR in a similar direction to the Nordic system, combining free markets with a social safety net — but still retaining public ownership of key sectors — ingredients that he believed would transform the USSR into "a socialist beacon for all mankind."[38][39]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_model
Gorbachev's plan apparently did not get a chance as It appears Russia is in the hands of an oligarchy. That is the default whenever governments collapse, sadly. His plan sounded like a good transition model.
Of the five Nordic countries, Norway, Denmark and Iceland are NATO members. Sweden and Finland are not. Bernie mentioned NATO in his support for F-35 and drone production in Vermont which he says are important for fighting ISIS. These are good paying MIC jobs and a source of prosperity for those who get those jobs. Typical state politics used by both parties.
The moral question remains to be answered. We don't seem to be able to have a hard nosed discussion of such at DU without devolving into namecalling, but I think we need to seek more honesty on this subject.
He's a conventional politican, and it's apparent the socialists do have a bone to pick with him. But they have little success in the USA in getting what they want.
The World Socialist Web Site hates Bernie, with several articles calling him anti-union/ worker, anti-immigrant, deceptive and imperialist. They also don't like his strong support for military aid to Israel in light of the plight of Gazans which they have termed racist.
I don't agree with what they say, but then I'm a Democrat and they'd say the same about us.
You can't please everybody!
July 27, 2015
The white guy putting his hands on the shoulders of the girl at the swimming pool in north Texas was said to be part of the racist response. Why is this guy getting in her personal space?
When we meet in my district with fellow Democrats, no one would dare to do such a thing. To anyone, even a disruptor, as we have LaRourchies come in from time to time to raise hell.
OMG, Bobbie Jo, I had not seen this:
http://m.dailykos.com/story/2015/07/22/1404615/-A-black-woman-s-negative-encounter-with-a-Sanders-supporter-after-NN15-BlackLivesMatter-protestThe white guy putting his hands on the shoulders of the girl at the swimming pool in north Texas was said to be part of the racist response. Why is this guy getting in her personal space?
When we meet in my district with fellow Democrats, no one would dare to do such a thing. To anyone, even a disruptor, as we have LaRourchies come in from time to time to raise hell.
July 26, 2015
Obama eating a meatball sub. Better than those GOP ralphing down those whatevers at fairs.
My standard meatloaf:
This is not measured. Cooks know what to do with portions.
Ground beef (and pork, too?)
Diced yellow onions
Sliced green zucchini
Diced tomatoes
Green chilis or ROTEL chilis
Bread enough to hold together
Egg or two
Lots of garlic powder
Fresh or dried parsley
Tomato sauce or pasta*
Lawry's Seasoned Pepper
Ketchup!
Mix it together and put in an oiled pan, be sure to use a cookie sheet covered with foil if it boils over. *Can cover the loaf with ketchup if you don't want to use tomato sauce or paste. Cook til done.
Or make hamburgers that can be frozen and fried or grilled later. They will be messy, so expect it. Cook until they are done.
P.S. I don't put salt in my food and even use unsalted butter.
Another one that can be made, but I usually make meatballs, thus the name:
Siclian Meatballs
2 pounds lean ground natural beef
1 pound french sourdough bread torn into pieces
8 ounces of dry grated parmesan cheese
20 cloves of fresh minced garlic
2 cups of water to disintegrate bread
1 cup fresh chopped parsley
4 cups of olive oil
Separate ground meat in a large bowl with your fingers or utensil.
In another bowl, shred the bread with your hands. Add water and squeeze to disintegrate. Mince garlic and chop parsley. When the bread disintegrates, mix into ground beef.
Add parsley and garlic and blend very well. Then add parmesan, which will absorb the water and blend very well.
Heat the oil and carefully spoon in meatballs. Use a screen while frying. It usually doesn't splatter because the water is absorbed, but it will bubble. Observe so they don't burn, cooking to a golden brown.
Lift out with skimming spoon to keep oil in the frying pan. Place on paper towels to absorb oil.
Do not simmer in sauce. Serve warm with meal, as a snack or freeze. I serve it with thin spaghetti, marinara sauce, sautéed onions and mushrooms, peas or spinach.
(That's it. Hope you won't find these too awful for your taste.)
Portabello mushrooms can be used to substitute for meat, but would not work with these.
Okay, here goes. I think these are safe:
Obama eating a meatball sub. Better than those GOP ralphing down those whatevers at fairs.
My standard meatloaf:
This is not measured. Cooks know what to do with portions.
Ground beef (and pork, too?)
Diced yellow onions
Sliced green zucchini
Diced tomatoes
Green chilis or ROTEL chilis
Bread enough to hold together
Egg or two
Lots of garlic powder
Fresh or dried parsley
Tomato sauce or pasta*
Lawry's Seasoned Pepper
Ketchup!
Mix it together and put in an oiled pan, be sure to use a cookie sheet covered with foil if it boils over. *Can cover the loaf with ketchup if you don't want to use tomato sauce or paste. Cook til done.
Or make hamburgers that can be frozen and fried or grilled later. They will be messy, so expect it. Cook until they are done.
P.S. I don't put salt in my food and even use unsalted butter.
Another one that can be made, but I usually make meatballs, thus the name:
Siclian Meatballs
2 pounds lean ground natural beef
1 pound french sourdough bread torn into pieces
8 ounces of dry grated parmesan cheese
20 cloves of fresh minced garlic
2 cups of water to disintegrate bread
1 cup fresh chopped parsley
4 cups of olive oil
Separate ground meat in a large bowl with your fingers or utensil.
In another bowl, shred the bread with your hands. Add water and squeeze to disintegrate. Mince garlic and chop parsley. When the bread disintegrates, mix into ground beef.
Add parsley and garlic and blend very well. Then add parmesan, which will absorb the water and blend very well.
Heat the oil and carefully spoon in meatballs. Use a screen while frying. It usually doesn't splatter because the water is absorbed, but it will bubble. Observe so they don't burn, cooking to a golden brown.
Lift out with skimming spoon to keep oil in the frying pan. Place on paper towels to absorb oil.
Do not simmer in sauce. Serve warm with meal, as a snack or freeze. I serve it with thin spaghetti, marinara sauce, sautéed onions and mushrooms, peas or spinach.
(That's it. Hope you won't find these too awful for your taste.)
Portabello mushrooms can be used to substitute for meat, but would not work with these.
July 26, 2015
Perhaps that's why the truce is over. It seems to have come out a bombing in Turkey by ISIS (?) that the Kurds blamed Turkey for, as they've been lax with allowing ISIS to cross their land before.
One of the things that spurred the USA to get involved with Syria was Turkey's complaintss that the civil war there, which by all measures is the fault of the Assad dynasty, was firing shells into Turkey and killing people.
Supposedly by accident. Those shells have going all over the place. But Turkey and nations next to Syria have been flooded with refugees from Iraq and Syria. The outpouring of refugees escaping ISIS has impacted so many countries, such as Greece, the African nations, etc.
It is a human and ecological holocaust that we will not see the end of in generations, IMO. Part of the reason Obama did not want to get drawn back into Iraq and to avoid the Syrian disaster was that there are so many who have been displaced by the war in Iraq, and more warfare will only displace more. I posted this a while back on a thread about the number of casualities in Iraq:
‘Apocalyptic’ Isis beyond anything we've seen, say US defence chiefs.
By Spencer Ackerman - 22 August 2014
...(General) Dempsey, an Iraq veteran, has long been sceptical of US military involvement in the Syrian conflict, citing among other reasons the threat to US pilots from dictator Bashar al-Assad’s air defences. He has frustrated those who advocated American involvement in the two neighbouring wars, such as hawkish Republican senator John McCain, who in June called on Obama to fire Dempsey, saying he “has done nothing but invent ways for us not to be engaged.”
Echoing the White House’s stated position, Dempsey said the US needed “a coalition in the region that takes on the task of defeating Isis over time,” something the administration this week has put effort into broadening and strengthening. But the group’s ultimate defeat, the general said, would only come “when it is rejected by the over 20 million disenfranchised Sunnis that happen to reside between Damascus and Baghdad.”
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/21/isis-us-military-iraq-strikes-threat-apocalyptic/print
This is no longer just about Iraq. Since Damascus is in Syria, all the way to the Mediterranean and the doorstep to Europe. Many centuries of warfare between the empires, of which the caliphate is planned to be one. And Baghdad is set near the sea on the other end of that stretch of land on the eastern side.
Those 20 million don't all support the Daesh, but that is a huge number and it's not like these people are unable to figure out how to fight to survive. Obama warned Maliki that excluding them them from his government (in revenge for Saddam's oppression of the Shia, I guess) would cause Iraq to break into pieces. So he couldn't fully support Maliki because he didn't govern with inclusion, which would be the only way to have peace.
The result of those fleeing Iraq and impacting other nations created a diasphoria for the new century. The Iraq War was a TEOTWAWKI event and shattered lives and allegiances. The Middle East will be transformed into different nations, because the original fuel for the Daesh is the need of those refugees for a homeland.
Imagine for a moment, an army of 20 million armed and angry and possibly homeless in the USA on the move. Just picture the bloody carnage in the neighboring states in a desperate fight for living space.
The Kurds were accused of being extrene in the past. They managed through the overthrow of Saddam to possess an autonomous region in northern Iraq. The legacy of Bush will hang over us for a generation or more and change the entire world as we know it, too. JMHO.
Okay, I just re-read the link to see if I missed something big. I did:
On Wednesday, the PKK claimed responsibility for the killing of two Turkish police officers near the Kurdish majority city of Sanliurfa, near the Syrian border.Perhaps that's why the truce is over. It seems to have come out a bombing in Turkey by ISIS (?) that the Kurds blamed Turkey for, as they've been lax with allowing ISIS to cross their land before.
One of the things that spurred the USA to get involved with Syria was Turkey's complaintss that the civil war there, which by all measures is the fault of the Assad dynasty, was firing shells into Turkey and killing people.
Supposedly by accident. Those shells have going all over the place. But Turkey and nations next to Syria have been flooded with refugees from Iraq and Syria. The outpouring of refugees escaping ISIS has impacted so many countries, such as Greece, the African nations, etc.
It is a human and ecological holocaust that we will not see the end of in generations, IMO. Part of the reason Obama did not want to get drawn back into Iraq and to avoid the Syrian disaster was that there are so many who have been displaced by the war in Iraq, and more warfare will only displace more. I posted this a while back on a thread about the number of casualities in Iraq:
‘Apocalyptic’ Isis beyond anything we've seen, say US defence chiefs.
By Spencer Ackerman - 22 August 2014
...(General) Dempsey, an Iraq veteran, has long been sceptical of US military involvement in the Syrian conflict, citing among other reasons the threat to US pilots from dictator Bashar al-Assad’s air defences. He has frustrated those who advocated American involvement in the two neighbouring wars, such as hawkish Republican senator John McCain, who in June called on Obama to fire Dempsey, saying he “has done nothing but invent ways for us not to be engaged.”
Echoing the White House’s stated position, Dempsey said the US needed “a coalition in the region that takes on the task of defeating Isis over time,” something the administration this week has put effort into broadening and strengthening. But the group’s ultimate defeat, the general said, would only come “when it is rejected by the over 20 million disenfranchised Sunnis that happen to reside between Damascus and Baghdad.”
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/21/isis-us-military-iraq-strikes-threat-apocalyptic/print
This is no longer just about Iraq. Since Damascus is in Syria, all the way to the Mediterranean and the doorstep to Europe. Many centuries of warfare between the empires, of which the caliphate is planned to be one. And Baghdad is set near the sea on the other end of that stretch of land on the eastern side.
Those 20 million don't all support the Daesh, but that is a huge number and it's not like these people are unable to figure out how to fight to survive. Obama warned Maliki that excluding them them from his government (in revenge for Saddam's oppression of the Shia, I guess) would cause Iraq to break into pieces. So he couldn't fully support Maliki because he didn't govern with inclusion, which would be the only way to have peace.
The result of those fleeing Iraq and impacting other nations created a diasphoria for the new century. The Iraq War was a TEOTWAWKI event and shattered lives and allegiances. The Middle East will be transformed into different nations, because the original fuel for the Daesh is the need of those refugees for a homeland.
Imagine for a moment, an army of 20 million armed and angry and possibly homeless in the USA on the move. Just picture the bloody carnage in the neighboring states in a desperate fight for living space.
The Kurds were accused of being extrene in the past. They managed through the overthrow of Saddam to possess an autonomous region in northern Iraq. The legacy of Bush will hang over us for a generation or more and change the entire world as we know it, too. JMHO.
Profile Information
Member since: Fri Dec 10, 2010, 11:36 PMNumber of posts: 53,661
