Page 14 of 19 FirstFirst ... 4910111213141516171819 LastLast
Results 261 to 280 of 377
  1. #261  
    Quote Originally Posted by xForsaken View Post
    Oil, well oil is oil, as I have said in past posts, if someone comes up with a viable cheap alternative to oil, the middle east will still blame us.
    Hopefully they don't use that as an excuse tonot research altenative options. I wonder where we'd be if instead of 3T on war, they spent that money on R&D for alternative oil/ petroleum byproducts, (and really... We're not THAT far away from that reality, compared to say 50 years ago)
  2. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #262  
    Someone help me out here. Where did it come out that *the reason* the terrorists were after us was because they want to protect middle east oil?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  3. #263  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Someone help me out here. Where did it come out that *the reason* the terrorists were after us was because they want to protect middle east oil?
    no the front line terrorists are after us because they see us as a threat to their way of life. We occupy the middle east for the oil.
  4. #264  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    That area has gone back and forth for millenia. You can't just draw a line in the sand and say it was so and so's fault. Both sides are the problem. Depending on your ideological leanings, you pick a side. But that doesn't help anything, and the cycle goes on forever.

    Maybe everyone should step back and somehow start fresh? Wishful thinking, I know.
    someone has to cut there losses. That's the only way any conflict ever ends... I'd say the occupants backing off would be most beneficial for everyone. All I know is we've tried being the aggressor. It hasn't worked...
  5. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #265  
    Quote Originally Posted by Mhunterjr View Post
    no the front line terrorists are after us because they see us as a threat to their way of life. We occupy the middle east for the oil.
    Ahh, so please show us the glut of oil we've seen from these occupying efforts.... the huge drop in gas prices? Booms in oil company stocks?

    Show me ANY real or anedotal evidence that we're there for oil, please.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  6. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #266  
    Quote Originally Posted by Mhunterjr View Post
    someone has to cut there losses. That's the only way any conflict ever ends... I'd say the occupants backing off would be most beneficial for everyone. All I know is we've tried being the aggressor. It hasn't worked...
    We've tried being the aggressor? Explain please. I missed that invasion of Israel/Palestine.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  7. #267  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    We've tried being the aggressor? Explain please. I missed that invasion of Israel/Palestine.
    see: the existence of israel, the invasion of iraq.

    remember they see it as an attack on islam, not an attack on a specific state. Besides supply Israel with so much military tech labels us as their enemy as well...
  8. #268  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Ahh, so please show us the glut of oil we've seen from these occupying efforts.... the huge drop in gas prices? Booms in oil company stocks?

    Show me ANY real or anedotal evidence that we're there for oil, please.
    show me anedotal evidence that we're there for anything else... Our presence was felt there before the first terrorist attacks against the west. The only reason we haven't seen a drop in oil prices is because our attempts to implant allies there have all blown up in our faces... Literally.

    oh I forgot, we're there to help an oppressed people by the kindness of our hearts /sarcasm
    Last edited by Mhunterjr; 11/30/2010 at 12:27 PM.
  9. #269  
    Well, the reason we were there that is most relevant to Bin Laden has nothing to do with Oil, it was the Cold War. We armed the Taliban to fight the Russians because it was cheap, and the Russians had to spend a ton of money fighting the war. It was part of our effort to bankrupt the USSR. So I think the whole idea of interventionism is what seems to tick off a lot of extremists. Like I said before though, intervention is part of our strategic view of the world now. The United States wants to prevent an empire from forming, so if any nation grows to big and too influential to the point of nearing the point of expansion into an empire, the US will arm groups that are resisting. The US doesn't want them to win or care if they do, but wants the nation to get caught up in conflict and waste resources.

    As I said before, you cannot blame Israel for this policy. Supporting Israel is important for the US because it makes sure that the most powerful military force in the region is one that can never blossom into an empire.
  10. #270  
    Quote Originally Posted by Mhunterjr View Post
    no the front line terrorists are after us because they see us as a threat to their way of life. We occupy the middle east for the oil.
    occupy the middle east??!!?? umm huh,, last i checked the numbers of troops left in Iraq is dropping quickly,, to have troops stationed in different countries, ie bases,, is not an occupying force. There is a distinct difference between stationed troops and an occupying force.. some one here said something about .. after the first iraq war we occupied Saudia Arabia..??!!??? again HUH.. Being invited to stay by a govt is not an occupying force.. This is not semantics, they are distinctly different. You can say the west/allies occupied Germany after WWII.. that changed over the years.. Afghanistan has an occupying force, at the behest of the elected govt. ummm also no oil in Afghanistan to speak of.. lots of poppies,, some natural resources, actually quite a bit of raw resources.. but no oil.
    So outside of a few thousand troops in iraq, and the troops in the Afghan region what other force is "occupying" the middle east?
    Life is short, Play hard, and enjoy every moment as if it was your last.
  11. #271  
    Quote Originally Posted by Mhunterjr View Post
    i'm not ignoring the jews displaced as a result of a holocaust. I'm simply critical of the idea the forging a jewish state in a location that belonged to someone else is a good idea. If the jews were some how able to do it themselves, the so be it. Hey, that's how the US was formed. But when you look the fact that the entire western world bullied the islamic states out of their land, it's no surprise that they would want it back. The argument that jews have a right to it because they were there first has no bearing. As you stated, that place has changed has plenty of times. But it was due to the people choosing their own destiny. Being conquered is one thing. But for the UN to just come in and create a state... That's wrong...

    I agree with you on the notion of a valuable alternative to oil. But all of the money we waste fighting a war we cant win, could be spent on education and research into viable alernatives.
    Actually the state that was wanted didnt get done by the UN, When the coalition of Arab armies, iraq, syria, egypt, Saudia Arabia, etc etc plus a little mercenary army as well went into slaughter and that is the word that was used, they met a slightly nastier force than they thought. end result, Jewish state. Yes there was a partition, but also the british with UN help tried to block jews arriving in Palestine. They also disarmed the Jewish militias, and massacres of jewish settlers as well as the jews of the region ensued. no the jewish militias were not blameless and commited atrocites as well. there has been for over 2000 years been a jewish presense in Palistine. Things changed when the Jews returned to their precieved home, according to their Torah, the land God promised them. So as micael says, its gone back and forth for a long long time....
    Life is short, Play hard, and enjoy every moment as if it was your last.
  12. #272  
    There seem to be 2 camps:
    1. bomb Arab countries (theoretically scaring would-be terrorists into submission)
    pros: makes you feel like a badass; pentagon gets to use its toys
    cons: angers arabs (there are many), embroils us in more conflicts, probably helps terrorist organizations recruit more easily.

    2. remove incentives to terrorism (theoretically we can figure out what we did to anger them and we can work it all out and sing kumbaya):
    pros: leaves us all feeling warm and gooey inside; satisfies liberal guilt; does not involve sending troops or risking lives.
    cons: very difficult to figure out exactly what motivates the terrorists; at least a certain percentage of the terrorist will always hate us because of our mere existence as liberal democracies (the sharia camp); this would likely require us to abandon at least some of our commitments to allies in the region; it is likely to make us look weak to those terrorists that are not convinced to abandon our ways.

    other alternatives?
    Supporting Centrists and encourage them to police their own people.
    This is not a solution, but it can be done while still trying to balance between the above 2 approaches (sorry too lazy to go into more detail in this post, maybe later).
  13. #273  
    Quote Originally Posted by xForsaken View Post
    occupy the middle east??!!?? umm huh,, last i checked the numbers of troops left in Iraq is dropping quickly,, to have troops stationed in different countries, ie bases,, is not an occupying force. There is a distinct difference between stationed troops and an occupying force.. some one here said something about .. after the first iraq war we occupie*****d Saudia Arabia..??!!??? again HUH.. Being invited to stay by a govt is not an occupying force.. This is not semantics, they are distinctly different. You can say the west/allies occupied Germany after WWII.. that changed over the years.. Afghanistan has an occupying force, at the behest of the elected govt. ummm also no oil in Afghanistan to speak of.. lots of poppies,, some natural resources, actually quite a bit of raw resources.. but no oil.
    So outside of a few thousand troops in iraq, and the troops in the Afghan region what other force is "occupying" the middle east?
    the distict difference between stationed troops and occupying force? That's loaded language. If we're in there country and they don't want us, we are occupying. Invited by who? The gov't that we put there! Give me a break...
  14. #274  
    Quote Originally Posted by xForsaken View Post
    Actually the state that was wanted didnt get done by the UN, When the coalition of Arab armies, iraq, syria, egypt, Saudia Arabia, etc etc plus a little mercenary army as well went into slaughter and that is the word that was used, they met a slightly nastier force than they thought. end result, Jewish state. Yes there was a partition, but also the british with UN help tried to block jews arriving in Palestine. They also disarmed the Jewish militias, and massacres of jewish settlers as well as the jews of the region ensued. no the jewish militias were not blameless and commited atrocites as well. there has been for over 2000 years been a jewish presense in Palistine. Things changed when the Jews returned to their precieved home, according to their Torah, the land God promised them. So as micael says, its gone back and forth for a long long time....
    neither the US or the UN had any place picking sides and ending the back and forth. The people should decide there oen destiny
  15. #275  
    Quote Originally Posted by Mhunterjr View Post
    neither the US or the UN had any place picking sides and ending the back and forth. The people should decide there oen destiny
    Well when the people don't agree, we have war. In fact, there were 2 wars. If you "leave it up to the people", then its a question of who is strong enough to keep the land.
  16. #276  
    Quote Originally Posted by Courousant View Post
    Well when the people don't agree, we have war. In fact, there were 2 wars. If you "leave it up to the people", then its a question of who is strong enough to keep the land.
    yup. Civil war. Why should the UN choose the victor? i'm sure the west would have fewer enemies had they let it play out.
    Last edited by Mhunterjr; 11/30/2010 at 02:59 PM.
  17. #277  
    Mhunterjr; this isn't hypothetical, that war was fought, twice. Israel won both. I am confused by your comment.
  18. #278  
    Quote Originally Posted by Mhunterjr View Post
    neither the US or the UN had any place picking sides and ending the back and forth. The people should decide there oen destiny
    actually the un voted to stay the heck out of it for the most part.. the british as i said disarmed most of the jewish militias.. there was no help from any outside nation(s) in the war that ensued. As you said, let the people decide for themselves. I think they did. in a very big way.
    Fact, the arab armies were better armed and better lead, british officers, yes, there was a brigade of troops that were trained by the allies to fight the germans, they were the core of the troops that Isreal used. None the less, jewish fighters beat troops considered to be the best in the area. I might also mention that the Jews were heavly out numbered. Some estimates say as much as 20 to 1. The difference, was determination, much like back in 1776, when another group of untrained, malnourished, out gunned, out numbered individuals fought off a world power, and won.
    Another fact, the original jewish fighters and politicians were very very left leaning, aligned with Moscow far more than with the west in political ideals. The fact Moscow backed several of the Arab countries with weapons and such didnt sit well with the Isrealis. The British basicly embargooed all arm shipments to the Jewish fighters. No one lifted a hand to help them.
    Since than, they have been helped. They have developed their own tanks, firearms, etc etc. yes they have purchased some things from the west.
    Ultimately, there was a revolution in the middle east of sorts, call it an invasion if you wish, but the jews of Isreal created a state, where one has not been in a long long time.
    We in the west have our allies, where would the US be without those allies? Is it any different for Isreal to have allies, and if so Why?
    I would humbly suggest, that if the west was to pull completely away from Isreal, only one thing would happen, we would find out for sure as to whether Isreal has the bomb or not. I would humbly suggest, that several cities and millions of people would cease to be. That is IF they have the bomb.
    My bet, they do, and with the rhetoric coming out of several fine upstanding nations, of the middle east about what should happen to Isreal and its people, and based on a statement from Isreal saying something along the lines of,, the Holocaust will never happen again to the jewish people.. hmmmm you tell me what will happen..
    Life is short, Play hard, and enjoy every moment as if it was your last.
  19. #279  
    Quote Originally Posted by Courousant View Post
    Mhunterjr; this isn't hypothetical, that war was fought, twice. Israel won both. I am confused by your comment.
    ok,but their state wasn't formed by themselves. I'd say they won when their opponent has given up, admitted defeat, signed a treaty...
  20. #280  
    admitted defeat? these are dictators who hold power by projecting strength, they are not going to admit defeat, especially when the war takes place on someone else's land. you admit defeat if you are at risk of being annhilated and have no other choice. Thats why the only countries to sign a treaty are some of the ones right next to Israel that were actually at risk of being counter-attacked.

    Keep in mind, most wars these days are fought without formal declarations of war, and are ended without formal treaties.

Posting Permissions