|
Post by traelin0 on Jan 29, 2011 14:17:19 GMT -5
Of course it does trae-there is a long and twisted history of U.S. and Middle East relations. And Middle Eastern citizens don't forget. Of course they don't. Any culture which has been occupied for oil for decades is going to remember, and it is a non-partisan issue because both parties are complicit. China has the right idea. They are implementing non-interventionism while building port facilities and infrastructure in countries in exchange for mineral and petro rights. That's what we should have been doing.
|
|
fairlycrazy23
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 23:55:19 GMT -5
Posts: 3,306
|
Post by fairlycrazy23 on Jan 29, 2011 14:18:18 GMT -5
We need to allow the expansion of the use of our own domestic resources, primarily petroleum (but other too like rare earth). Then we need to start to bring back our troops form around the world and quit meddling in the affairs of other countries.
|
|
|
Post by Thinking-long-term on Jan 29, 2011 14:21:15 GMT -5
We need to allow the expansion of the use of our own domestic resources, primarily petroleum (but other too like rare earth). Then we need to start to bring back our troops form around the world and quit meddling in the affairs of other countries. Fairly Crazy I think that's a very sane statement.
|
|
|
Post by Thinking-long-term on Jan 29, 2011 14:33:06 GMT -5
Of course it does trae-there is a long and twisted history of U.S. and Middle East relations. And Middle Eastern citizens don't forget. Of course they don't. Any culture which has been occupied for oil for decades is going to remember, and it is a non-partisan issue because both parties are complicit. China has the right idea. They are implementing non-interventionism while building port facilities and infrastructure in countries in exchange for mineral and petro rights. That's what we should have been doing. Who do you think built up those countries in the first place? And we all know what champions of Human Rights the Chinese are dont we.
|
|
|
Post by traelin0 on Jan 29, 2011 14:41:24 GMT -5
Who do you think built up those countries in the first place? And we all know what champions of Human Rights the Chinese are dont we. What do I care how China views human rights? I'm not Chinese and they aren't my problem. Their foreign policy is much closer to the Constitution and our Founding principles than ours is, by far and away. If by "building up" those countries you mean we occupied them and installed monarchs and despots willing to use the dollar in exchange for oil, as well as grant our corporations lease rights, I agree. The ME is entirely about oil for the Anglosphere. It always has been, ever since Standard Oil and Aramco. There is no point trying to put lipstick on this pig. It's time for us to admit our imperialism is an abject failure and stop it immediately before we bankrupt Rome and cause even more blowback.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jan 29, 2011 14:57:20 GMT -5
The days of meddling in other peoples politics are long gone. A lot of it was caused by the Cold War, one client state against the other. They, smaller countries could play one off the other. There is no more cold war... Major States have been doing this for ever..going back to before the Roman times. Today you still have it in a way , alliances , friendships, but to actively get involved , if done, much less today, and if involved , done less for natural resources, more for perceived security concerns, see Afghanistan,
|
|
fairlycrazy23
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 23:55:19 GMT -5
Posts: 3,306
|
Post by fairlycrazy23 on Jan 29, 2011 15:00:00 GMT -5
The days of meddling in other peoples politics are long gone. A lot of it was caused by the Cold War, one client state against the other. They, smaller countries could play one off the other. There is no more cold war... Major States have been doing this for ever..going back to before the Roman times. Today you still have it in a way , alliances , friendships, but to actively get involved , if done, much less today, and if involved , done less for natural resources, more for perceived security concerns, see Afghanistan, Do you mean long gone, in that we will always be meddling so no reason trying to stop now, or that we don't actually meddle anymore, because believe me we meddle..we meddle a lot.
|
|
|
Post by Thinking-long-term on Jan 29, 2011 15:00:47 GMT -5
Who do you think built up those countries in the first place? And we all know what champions of Human Rights the Chinese are dont we. What do I care how China views human rights? I'm not Chinese and they aren't my problem. Their foreign policy is much closer to the Constitution and our Founding principles than ours is, by far and away. If by "building up" those countries you mean we occupied them and installed monarchs and despots willing to use the dollar in exchange for oil, as well as grant our corporations lease rights, I agree. The ME is entirely about oil for the Anglosphere. It always has been, ever since Standard Oil and Aramco. There is no point trying to put lipstick on this pig. It's time for us to admit our imperialism is an abject failure and stop it immediately before we bankrupt Rome and cause even more blowback. Get over your hatred for the Anglosphere as you call it and substitute the phrase World Economy into your statement and you will be closer to the truth.
|
|
|
Post by Thinking-long-term on Jan 29, 2011 15:04:06 GMT -5
The days of meddling in other peoples politics are long gone. A lot of it was caused by the Cold War, one client state against the other. They, smaller countries could play one off the other. There is no more cold war... Major States have been doing this for ever..going back to before the Roman times. Today you still have it in a way , alliances , friendships, but to actively get involved , if done, much less today, and if involved , done less for natural resources, more for perceived security concerns, see Afghanistan, What do you think the Chinese are doing now? Corporate Sons of Beaches they are I tell you.
|
|
|
Post by traelin0 on Jan 29, 2011 15:04:59 GMT -5
Get over your hatred for the Anglosphere as you call it and substitute the phrase World Economy into your statement and you will be closer to the truth. I don't have "hatred" for the Anglosphere, all I did was connect the dots and judge based on our actions, not our words. The actions paint an entirely different story. There is no putting lipstick on the pig anymore; the facts speak for themselves. The sooner we all realize it the better the chances we have of arresting it before it gets any worse. You should reread that quote in your sig because what I say is a perfect example.
|
|
|
Post by traelin0 on Jan 29, 2011 15:08:35 GMT -5
What do you think the Chinese are doing now? Corporate Sons of Beaches they are I tell you. I follow the Chinese very closely and I am telling you they do not have the same foreign policy as we do. They are investing tens of billions in Africa, South America, and anywhere else that will let them in peaceful exchange for natural resources. That's what our Founders told us to do. They didn't just gain $2.65 TRILLION in reserves due to the "World Economy". They did it via smart commerce, albeit with some mercantilism that is gradually being weeded out.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jan 29, 2011 15:11:39 GMT -5
The days of meddling in other peoples politics are long gone. A lot of it was caused by the Cold War, one client state against the other. They, smaller countries could play one off the other. There is no more cold war... Major States have been doing this for ever..going back to before the Roman times. Today you still have it in a way , alliances , friendships, but to actively get involved , if done, much less today, and if involved , done less for natural resources, more for perceived security concerns, see Afghanistan, Do you mean long gone, in that we will always be meddling so no reason trying to stop now, or that we don't actually meddle anymore, because believe me we meddle..we meddle a lot. We as a great power will always be there in influencing..but actively over throwing regimes as we were involved in Peru, Iraq, Iran, Panama before there was a Panama, Philippines, Puerto Rico, Cuba, Mexico, Vietnam, and some I can't remember..no I don't believe we will see that again. One reason, unless it's a Granada type that could be done on the cheap and even there I wonder, we just can't afford it. With no Great power as a threat, and I don't see us going at it with China, though others might, there is no reason to get involved with Client states. Friendships yes, possible in training of and possible arm sales but even there, for what and why.
|
|
|
Post by Thinking-long-term on Jan 29, 2011 15:20:43 GMT -5
Get over your hatred for the Anglosphere as you call it and substitute the phrase World Economy into your statement and you will be closer to the truth. I don't have "hatred" for the Anglosphere, all I did was connect the dots and judge based on our actions, not our words. The actions paint an entirely different story. There is no putting lipstick on the pig anymore; the facts speak for themselves. The sooner we all realize it the better the chances we have of arresting it before it gets any worse. You should reread that quote in your sig because what I say is a perfect example. Hey if you are talking about our energy independence I wholeheartedly agree the sooner our Economy is not dependent on Oil from one of the most volatile regions in the World the better. More Nukes Less Kooks!
|
|
|
Post by Thinking-long-term on Jan 29, 2011 15:22:51 GMT -5
What do you think the Chinese are doing now? Corporate Sons of Beaches they are I tell you. I follow the Chinese very closely and I am telling you they do not have the same foreign policy as we do. They are investing tens of billions in Africa, South America, and anywhere else that will let them in peaceful exchange for natural resources. That's what our Founders told us to do. They didn't just gain $2.65 TRILLION in reserves due to the "World Economy". They did it via smart commerce, albeit with some mercantilism that is gradually being weeded out. It's called Business and they do it very well.
|
|
|
Post by Thinking-long-term on Jan 29, 2011 15:24:06 GMT -5
You will have to excuse me for a few I have to go stimulate the Economy and get some Groceries in.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jan 29, 2011 16:02:13 GMT -5
I follow the Chinese very closely and I am telling you they do not have the same foreign policy as we do. They are investing tens of billions in Africa, South America, and anywhere else that will let them in peaceful exchange for natural resources. That's what our Founders told us to do. They didn't just gain $2.65 TRILLION in reserves due to the "World Economy". They did it via smart commerce, albeit with some mercantilism that is gradually being weeded out. It's called Business and they do it very well. They , as well as South Korea, India and other rising countries are also investing billions in r and D for the 21st century in their own countries , to get a leg up. One of the planks that Obama suggested in the "State of the Union" that he wants to do, taken from Zakaria's suggestion by the way and it has been poo pooed by all posters here as unrealistic, just another stimulus package and dissed by any one commenting on it. His thoughts are that so many new industries have come from government programs, which they did, and it is something we should be doing too if we want the new industries to be based here , not there, yet no one is supporting that, all saying more BS from Obama. If these countries are and they are, I can get you all the links you want, are they just wasting their $ in so doing so? Remember , unlike us they think long term..not just the immediate,so what is wrong from us emulating them on something so important to our future to make sure we do have the jobs for the future generations or are those coming after us supposed to work primarily in service, food and custodial industries. If so, I doubt if they will know the middle class life style of their parents , and unemployment will then settle into the permanent high #'s they are today, no matter which political party is in office.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Jan 29, 2011 17:03:48 GMT -5
To the OP: Yep. It's Jimmy Carter all over again.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Jan 29, 2011 17:07:54 GMT -5
I don't have "hatred" for the Anglosphere, all I did was connect the dots and judge based on our actions, not our words. The actions paint an entirely different story. There is no putting lipstick on the pig anymore; the facts speak for themselves. The sooner we all realize it the better the chances we have of arresting it before it gets any worse. You should reread that quote in your sig because what I say is a perfect example. Hey if you are talking about our energy independence I wholeheartedly agree the sooner our Economy is not dependent on Oil from one of the most volatile regions in the World the better. More Nukes Less Kooks! Energy independence is a myth. It is not possible. Oil, in particular, is fungible. Yes, we can produce more and that would help lower the price as the global supply went up, but the basic principle is that no matter what we use, the whole world will still use the same amount of oil-- which is, the amount it needs. So, while we can talk about "energy independence" which typically means domestic oil production, it won't matter. If we don't buy it, someone else will. At a lower price, perhaps? Perhaps. Another myth is this "we're running out of oil" nonsense. We're not. There's no market force for "alternative" energy sources. It's all a government boondoggle. We ARE, however, probably running out of cheap oil. That is going to facilitate market changes on its own.
|
|
|
Post by Thinking-long-term on Jan 29, 2011 17:49:54 GMT -5
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Jan 29, 2011 17:55:58 GMT -5
Hey if you are talking about our energy independence I wholeheartedly agree the sooner our Economy is not dependent on Oil from one of the most volatile regions in the World the better. More Nukes Less Kooks! Energy independence is a myth. It is not possible. Oil, in particular, is fungible. Yes, we can produce more and that would help lower the price as the global supply went up, but the basic principle is that no matter what we use, the whole world will still use the same amount of oil-- which is, the amount it needs. So, while we can talk about "energy independence" which typically means domestic oil production, it won't matter. If we don't buy it, someone else will. At a lower price, perhaps? Perhaps. Another myth is this "we're running out of oil" nonsense. We're not. There's no market force for "alternative" energy sources. It's all a government boondoggle. We ARE, however, probably running out of cheap oil. That is going to facilitate market changes on its own. If the price rises then your correct ... there will be incentives for alternate energy, whether solar, Nuclear, wind , tides, ..the oil to be used for the chemicals, plastics, and other sources. Coal there is plenty of, however even when cleaned it's a pollutent..gas , but it sems we waste a lot of it in burn offs...I do believe in the idea that we contribute to global Warming...i know there are those who say there is no such thing..I hope they are correct..I am wrong in my beliefs.. I think I will be gone when the truth is verified even to the sceptics , and am afraid then it may be to late to do anything about it. i don't understand why the majority of the conservative crowd, not all, but I feel the majority , aha ... don't believe in it but thats another story.
|
|
|
Post by Thinking-long-term on Jan 29, 2011 17:57:04 GMT -5
Hey if you are talking about our energy independence I wholeheartedly agree the sooner our Economy is not dependent on Oil from one of the most volatile regions in the World the better. More Nukes Less Kooks! Energy independence is a myth. It is not possible. Oil, in particular, is fungible. Yes, we can produce more and that would help lower the price as the global supply went up, but the basic principle is that no matter what we use, the whole world will still use the same amount of oil-- which is, the amount it needs. So, while we can talk about "energy independence" which typically means domestic oil production, it won't matter. If we don't buy it, someone else will. At a lower price, perhaps? Perhaps. Another myth is this "we're running out of oil" nonsense. We're not. There's no market force for "alternative" energy sources. It's all a government boondoggle. We ARE, however, probably running out of cheap oil. That is going to facilitate market changes on its own. Maybe not in total but there are ways to reduce the dependence on foreign oil and reduce it's effect on our economy and thus reducing it's effect on our foreign policy.
|
|