myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Culture wars
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17747
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Sat Sep 12, 2015 1:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yet another oil man wants to sell us yet another used war, reasoning that it will work out well this time.

Quote:
Since WWII the world has looked to the US for strong leadership. If we lead, many will follow as has been shown in the past. Also, those who dislike us will tread very carefully before acting against our interests. That strong leadership has evaporated during this Administration and the consequences are on the front pages every day. Of course a President should be cautious before committing the military.......but equally, I don't want a president to take actions which contradict the recommendations of his expert advisers, merely to fulfill campaign promises. As for knee jerk reactions, I assume you are referring to GW. Too many forget the overwhelming sentiment in the country, and that of Congress, which strongly supported those actions following 9/11. Most of our knees were jerking.


Of course the idea that non-state terrorists will "tread very carefully before acting against our interests" in nonsense. "The second attack on the World Trade Center was one of a substantial number of attacks by Al Queda, and occurred during the bellicose Bush administration. Of course, that administration was much more concerned with ensuring oil security than dealing with difficult problems like the asymetric nature of terrorism.

Whatever the value, and political need, associated with going after Al Queda in Afghanistan, and following up with an ill-conceived effort in Iraq, the sheer incompetence of that effort has reduced, not increased our security. The lack of follow-through in Afghanistan, after a proxy war between the US and the Soviet Union that started in 1979, has assured another generation of corruption and violence in that beleagured country. Despite the killing of Bin Ladin, the investment of thousands of US lives and billions of dollars, the country is corrupt and violence and without any real prospect of resisting the return of the Taliban. The educational and peace-keeping systems are far too weak to counterbalance the fanaticism of Muslim extremists and the violence of the drug lords. It is folly to blame that on either Bush or Obama, instead it is time to exert some control over our knee jerk reactions and learn the lessons of history.

No War for Oil was the slogan of many opponents of the Iraq war. Here's a bit of opinion piece on how much we are spending in the military effort for oil security.

Quote:
How much are we paying for a gallon of gas?

We pay about $3.00 for a gallon of gasoline at the service station. But the real price of gas is much higher and camouflaged by myriad direct and indirect costs associated with maintaining our oil economy. How much are you actually paying for gas? Take a closer look at the hidden bills footed by your taxes:

The cost of securing our access to Middle East oil..is estimated at $50 billion per year.. The federal government subsidizes the oil industry with numerous tax breaks and government protection programs worth billions of dollars annually. These benefits are designed to ensure that domestic oil companies can compete with international producers and that gasoline remains cheap for American consumers.

Our dependency on oil from countries that are either politically unstable or at odds with the U.S. subjects the American economy to occasional supply disruptions, price hikes, and loss of wealth, which, according to a study commissioned by the U.S. Department of Energy, have cost us more than $7 trillion present value dollars over the last 30 years. That is more than the cumulative cost of all of the wars fought by the U.S. since the Revolutionary War. The transfer of wealth to oil-producing countries - $1.16 trillion over the past thirty years - significantly increased our trade deficit. The Department of Energy estimates that each $1 billion of trade deficit costs America 27,000 jobs. Oil imports account for almost one-third of the total U.S. deficit and, hence, are a major contributor to unemployment.

The cost of securing our access to Middle East oil - deploying U.S. forces in the Persian Gulf, patrolling its water and supplying military assistance to Middle East countries - is estimated at $50 billion per year, which adds additional dimes to each gallon of gasoline we purchase

Political instability in the region breeds wars and embroils the U.S. in costly military actions. The 1990-91 Gulf War broke out as a result of an oil dispute between Iraq and Kuwait. The cost to the international community reached almost $80 billion. The cost of the 2003 Iraq war and the following occupation of the country is estimated at $200 billion.

According to the National Defense Council Foundation, the economic penalties of America's oil dependence total $297.2 to $304.9 billion annually. If reflected at the gasoline pump, these “hidden costs” would raise the price of a gallon of gasoline to over $5.28. A fill-up would be over $105. To ensure access to the oil that fuels our economy, the U.S. is forced to maintain continuous presence in the Middle East. This presence has been a rallying cry for anti-Americanism and Islamic fundamentalism.

Fatwas (religious rulings) issued by Al-Qaeda in 1996 ("Declaration of War against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places" and in 1998 ("Declaration of the World Islamic Front for Jihad against the Jews and the Crusaders") emphasized the presence of U.S. soldiers in Saudi Arabia, the home of Islam's two holiest places. It was claimed that this was the greatest transgression against Muslims and that U.S. support of local regimes was unacceptable. Hence, the September 11 attacks were motivated by Al-Qaeda's desire to drive the "infidel armies" out of the oil-rich Persian Gulf.

The total dollar value of the attacks is rather difficult to quantify but it is certainly very high, surely in the range of hundreds of billions of dollars.

World competition for dwindling oil reserves will force the U.S. to increase its footprint in the region while oil generated wealth would continue to provide extremists the capital to market and implement their ideas worldwide. The unavoidable result is even more terrorism and instability. So when it comes down to the question of whether we can actually afford to shift away from petroleum-based energy system one should remember that the combined impact of wars, terrorism and environmental degradation is likely to send the price of oil right through the ceiling over the next two decades. Alternatively, the cost of emerging technologies is likely to decrease over time, as mass production and commercialization takes place.

Furthermore, if history is our guide, we can see that every industrial and technological revolution in history inspired an economic boom. Building an infrastructure for next-generation energies would generate millions of jobs around the world, and revolutionize the automobile industry as well as other industries.

Researching, developing, and introducing new transportation technologies that are cleaner, safer, and less economically destructive should, therefore, be our top national security and economic priority.


Hiding those costs helps big oil retain profits; higher prices that captured the real cost of oil security would send a price signal to conserve energy. But the same folks who take advantage of these subsidies rail at efforts to develop alternatives.

Let's look at how the oil business has actually affected societies throughout the world. Iran, Iraq, and Saudia Arabia generate much of their revenue from oil--yet are among the least democratic countries in the world. The rising tide of oil revenues goes to sustain the oligarchy, rather than generate jobs. But perhaps the saddest case is Nigeria. From the September Smithsonian:

Quote:
Half a century ago, Nigeria seemed poised for greatness. Oil had been discovered in the Niger Delta in 1956—four years before independence—promising to shower the country in riches and ease tensions between the country’s predominantly Muslim north and its Christian south, a legacy of arbitrary colonial border-making. Instead, a series of rapacious regimes, both military and civilian, looted the oil riches—stealing some $400 billion in the half century since independence, according to some sources—deepened the country’s destitution and fanned sectarian hatreds.

Education in Nigeria has suffered, too. The secular education model introduced by Christian missionaries never took hold in the north, where an estimated 9.5 million children attend almajiri, or Islamic schools. Overall, of the nation’s 30 million school-age children, about 10 million receive no instruction. Eighty percent of secondary school students fail the final exam that permits advancement to college and the literacy rate is just 61 percent. There is a federal and state college system, but it is chronically underfunded; the quality of teachers is generally poor; and only about one-third of students are female.


Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/escape-from-boko-haram-180956333/#CJ02wSMTOcD5Ao8X.99

The sad story of Africa and corporate investment in raw materials is that more often than not, the wealth of development has gone to the very few, and created cultures of corruption. I ask you again, why in the world should we buy another used war from another oil man?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 20935

PostPosted: Sat Sep 12, 2015 2:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mrgybe wrote:
Iran is about to get hundreds of millions of dollars to sponsor even more terrorism and fulfill the promise of the Ayatollah just yesterday that Israel will not exist in 25 years, ...

That 's billions, with a "B".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 20935

PostPosted: Sat Sep 12, 2015 2:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

nw30 wrote:
Geeesh, the left today, so sensitive.

That is being cured as we type. UC is on the brink of imposing a rule that no one on campus is allowed to offend anyone, with dire consequences to any who dare break the rule.

So much for the First Amendment.

That is the dumbest, most offensive, fugging outrageous, dangerous piece of "legislation" I've ever heard from an institution who pretends its purpose is to educate people. Even worse is that there are people stupid enough not to see how dumb, offensive, fugging outrageous, and dangerous such oppression is.

WSU, down the road apiece, has three professors who lower students' grades, even flunk some, if they use such HATE terms as "male", "female", "homophobic", etc. The NEXT DAY the university happened to email me a donation request with a Comments box.

Bad timing.

I mean BAD timing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 10588

PostPosted: Sat Sep 12, 2015 3:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It a bit ironic that isobars is rambling on about rules limiting free speech when he employs a software program that blocks the receipt of free speech from many folks here. If he could only stand back, listen to himself and seriously examine what he's been doing. Maybe then he could see himself for the hypocrite he really is.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jp5



Joined: 19 May 1998
Posts: 3394
Location: OnUr6

PostPosted: Sat Sep 12, 2015 9:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

swchandler wrote:
It a bit ironic that isobars is rambling on about rules limiting free speech when he employs a software program that blocks the receipt of free speech from many folks here. If he could only stand back, listen to himself and seriously examine what he's been doing. Maybe then he could see himself for the hypocrite he really is.


Don't hold your breath SW. Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 10588

PostPosted: Sat Sep 12, 2015 10:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You're right JP, my attempts to bring isobars to the light are probably fruitless. However, thanks for quoting my post, since it potentially slips through isobars' blockade and gives him a chance at reflection and some kind of salvation.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jp5



Joined: 19 May 1998
Posts: 3394
Location: OnUr6

PostPosted: Mon Sep 14, 2015 9:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

swchandler wrote:
You're right JP, my attempts to bring isobars to the light are probably fruitless. However, thanks for quoting my post, since it potentially slips through isobars' blockade and gives him a chance at reflection and some kind of salvation.


Aye but yee forget matey, I be #18 on the list. Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17747
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Mon Sep 14, 2015 10:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ah, but did you make Nixon's enemy list as well? The parallels are striking.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jp5



Joined: 19 May 1998
Posts: 3394
Location: OnUr6

PostPosted: Mon Sep 14, 2015 12:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mac wrote:
Ah, but did you make Nixon's enemy list as well? The parallels are striking.


S. Harrison Dogole?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 10588

PostPosted: Mon Sep 14, 2015 12:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

"Aye but yee forget matey, I be #18 on the list."


Your right, I sometimes forget just how vast his killfile list is. Based on his boasts about it in the past, I'm recollecting that there must be about 32 to 40 folks on it. That's a whole lot of folks to deliberately censor out out of your world, but that's only here at iWindsurf. I don't doubt that there are many more in some of the other forums that he haunts. Conflict and difficulty getting along with others follows him like a dark cloud, yet I'm sure that he believes that he's the victim in what happens, because he's such a mellow upbeat guy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Page 7 of 10

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group