Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Tables may be turned on US over Kyoto
Business Day ^ | 29 September 2005 | Lisa Plit

Posted on 10/13/2005 12:49:49 PM PDT by proud_yank

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last
Should we have forseen this coming. At least now these weenies can't deny that Kyoto wasn't about trying to handicap the US economically
1 posted on 10/13/2005 12:50:05 PM PDT by proud_yank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: proud_yank

Perhaps we should implement tariffs against France, Germany, et.al. for not joining our efforts in Iraq. The cost of the war afterall, has an impact on our economy and gives them an economic edge on us. Take that back. Its a war for oil to fuel our economy, i'm an idiot!


2 posted on 10/13/2005 12:51:47 PM PDT by proud_yank (Socialism is economic oppression)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: proud_yank
Waaaaaah. We put these handcuffs on voluntarily, and you refused to chain the 85 lb. iron ball to your leg. That's not fair! ** snif **
3 posted on 10/13/2005 12:52:25 PM PDT by TChris ("The central issue is America's credibility and will to prevail" - Goh Chok Tong)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: proud_yank

...the very premise of the article is false...that the US is the leading 'carbon polluter'...I believe the mainland Chinese now hold that distinction...also a 'noon-ratifier' of Kyoto


4 posted on 10/13/2005 12:54:19 PM PDT by Armigerous ( Non permitte illegitimi te carborundum- "Don't let the bastards grind you down")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: proud_yank

"US, the world’s leading carbon polluter"

I would like to see proof of this. With Western Europe and China out there, I doubt this seriously.


5 posted on 10/13/2005 12:55:22 PM PDT by Conan the Librarian (The Best in Life is to crush my enemies, see them driven before me, and the Dewey Decimal System)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: proud_yank

Kyota exempts China and India. I would think if we were sued we would have the right to implead China and India and demand they comply too. Since they won't we wont have to either.


6 posted on 10/13/2005 12:55:36 PM PDT by Behind Liberal Lines
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Armigerous

...'non-ratifier'


7 posted on 10/13/2005 12:55:55 PM PDT by Armigerous ( Non permitte illegitimi te carborundum- "Don't let the bastards grind you down")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: proud_yank
The following is a list of all 'rat Senators who voted to support Kyoto when it came to a vote.

End of list.

8 posted on 10/13/2005 12:56:51 PM PDT by Semper Paratus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: proud_yank
At least now these weenies can't deny that Kyoto wasn't about trying to handicap the US economically

Sure they can. When have they ever balked at a lie? Frankly, I don't think they even realize they are lying when they do it, anymore. Whatever suits the "progressive" agenda is the truth. Whatever doesn't, isn't.

9 posted on 10/13/2005 1:05:09 PM PDT by chesley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: proud_yank
“for the optimal use of the world’s resources in accordance with the objective of sustainable development”.

And there it is, that magic buzzword, "sustainable development". When you see this in any document, it is fair to assume that the underlying purpose is to push socialism.

What they really mean is: It's not fair that some are so prosperous while others are not; Therefore economic growth must be artificially limited so as to "level" the playing field.
10 posted on 10/13/2005 1:05:24 PM PDT by rottndog (WOOF!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: proud_yank

This is merely wishful thinking by an African environmental activist posing as a "reporter", and is not grounded in any actual or likely occurrence.


11 posted on 10/13/2005 1:06:02 PM PDT by Zeppo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Conan the Librarian

Sanctions on us? By whom? As the worlds largest consumer, I wonder which of the countries doing business with us this moron thinks will cut their own financial throat in order to make a point and satisfy some loony tree hugger?

The author of this article is a first class fool, and totally brain dead in the area of trade and economics.


12 posted on 10/13/2005 1:06:07 PM PDT by Eagles Talon IV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: rottndog
And there it is, that magic buzzword, "sustainable development". When you see this in any document, it is fair to assume that the underlying purpose is to push socialism.

Yeah "sustainable development" is a tipoff, as is the word "optimal." You show me a world of six billion souls and I'll show you six billion different definitions of "optimal." These ecotards are arrogance personified. They are born knowing the "optimal" way of doing absolutely everything, although in real life all they have managed to actually do is blather off a bunch of buzzwords. I'll just continue to buy my electricity from the utility companies, my gasoline from the oil companies, and my cars from the automobile manufacturers, etc., thank you very much. It's not like any of this globalony is going to heat my bathwater or cool my beer.

13 posted on 10/13/2005 1:21:46 PM PDT by rogue yam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: proud_yank
ALTHOUGH the US, the world’s leading carbon polluter,...

That right there let me know I didn't need to read any further.

14 posted on 10/13/2005 1:26:37 PM PDT by Clock King ("How will it end?" - Emperor; "In Fire." - Kosh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: proud_yank

This is precisely why I objected to the WTO in the first place.


15 posted on 10/13/2005 1:27:02 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (US socialist liberalism would be dead without the help of politicians who claim to be conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: proud_yank

The destruction of the WTO and a general trade war with Europe won't help anyone.


16 posted on 10/13/2005 1:28:28 PM PDT by Owl558 (Pardon my spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: proud_yank

As long as nations want to trade with us, we have the upper hand. If the WTO tries to force us into Kyoto, we could give the WTO the heave-ho and form our own trade agreements with other nations. Those nations whose economies consists of making things to sell at Wal-Mart, or whose people depend upon our grain surplus will have an easy choice.


17 posted on 10/13/2005 1:35:59 PM PDT by bobjam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: proud_yank
I'm scared... what the hell are those foreign weenies going to do when we pull out of WTO and any other treaties impacted by this Kyoto crap? Some countries would quickly go under if we didnt purchase their products or if we slapped huge tarrifs on their products. Oh by the way, who is going to enforce these rulings against the US. There isnt an army out there big enough, nor stupid enough to take us on, especially for the UN and the WTO.

If the Chinese dont support as at the WTO, do they really think we are going to pay off the Fed reserve debt they own. Mexico would pump oil for us like it was going out of style because if we didnt trade with them they would go under as would much of South America.

18 posted on 10/13/2005 1:38:10 PM PDT by Dave S
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: proud_yank
Idiotic envirofacist wishful thinking.

the world’s leading carbon polluter...

Carbon is not a pollutant. Carbon does not contribute to elevated global temperatures...carbon dioxide does (but carbon dioxide is not a "pollutant" either).

The use of the term "carbon" instead of "carbon dioxide" betrays the author's real agenda...to her its not important what comes out of the furnace, rather what's important to her is what goes into the furnace.

IOW - lets reduce productvity no matter how many pollution controls you've enabled or no matter how many trees you've planted (if trees are included, the United States is a net consumer of carbon dioxide).

19 posted on 10/13/2005 1:38:10 PM PDT by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: proud_yank
The US could rethink its participation in multilateral agreements and institutions

Multilateral agreements and institutions with foreign countries regarding trade, etc..any agreement that places a foreign org. in any "power" over this country or its citizens is UNCONSTITUTIONAL anyway.

I suggest we DO rethink our involvement. If these countries want free trade...we should GIVE it to them on OUR terms..they will be free to accept them..or not.

I say they'll accept whatever crumbs we decide to throw their way..most in the WTO would still gathering nuts and berries and wearing animal skins if not for the USA....

20 posted on 10/13/2005 1:41:29 PM PDT by Iron Matron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson