# Attitude!



## gmaske (Jan 7, 2008)

I think this may have been floating around for awhile but I like it!

'Are we fighting a war on terror or are we not? Was it or was it not started by Islamic people who brought it to our shores On September 11, 2001 and have continually threatened to do so ever since? 

Were people from all over the world, not brutally murdered that day, in downtown Manhattan, across the Potomac from the nation's capitol and in a field in Pennsylvania? 

Did nearly three thousand men, women and children die a horrible, burning or crushing death that day, or did they not? 

Now I'm supposed to care that a few Taliban were claiming to be tortured by a justice system of the nation they come from, and our young men are fighting against in a brutal insurgency. 

I'll start caring when Osama bin Laden turns himself in and repents for incinerating all those innocent people on 9/11. 

I'll care about the Koran when the fanatics in the Middle East start caring about the Holy Bible, the mere belief of which is a crime punishable by beheading in Afghanistan. 

I'll care when these thugs tell the world they are sorry for hacking off Nick Berg's head while Berg screamed through his gurgling slashed throat. 

I'll care when the cowardly so-called 'insurgents' in Afghanistan come out and fight like men instead of disrespecting their own religion by hiding in mosques. 

I'll care when the mindless zealots who blow themselves up in search of nirvana care about the innocent children within range of their suicide bombs. 

I'll care when the Canadian media stops pretending that their freedom of speech on stories is more important than the lives of the soldiers on the ground or their families waiting at home to hear about them when something happens. 

In the meantime, when I hear a story about a ANA soldier roughing up an Insurgent terrorist to obtain information, know This: I don't care. 

When I see a wounded terrorist get shot in the head when he is told not to move because he might be booby-trapped, you can take it to the bank: I don't care. 

When I hear that a prisoner, who was issued a Koran and a prayer mat, and fed 'special' food that is paid for by my tax dollars, is complaining that his holy book is being 'mishandled,' you can absolutely believe in your heart of hearts: I don't care. 

And oh, by the way, I've noticed that sometimes it's spelled 'Koran' and other times 'Quran.' Well, Jimmy Crack Corn and, You guessed it... I don't care!! 

If you agree with this viewpoint, pass this on to all your E-mail friends Sooner or later, it'll get to the people responsible for this ridiculous behavior! 

If you don't agree, then by all means hit the delete button. Should you choose the latter, then please don't complain when more atrocities committed by radical Muslims happen here in our great country! And may I add: 

'Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference in the world. But, the soldiers know they have made a difference every day. 

I have another quote that I would like to add.......and I hope you forward all this. 

One last thought for the day: 

Only four defining forces have ever offered to die for you: 1. Jesus Christ 2. A Canadian soldier 3. A British soldier 4. A USA soldier 

One died for your soul, the other 3 for your freedom.
_________________
Ruffbird. 

A true American, just happen to live north of the forty ninth. "God BLESS AMERICA"


----------



## DLSeeAmerica (Feb 8, 2008)

I have some questions about this post:

If there had been foreign troops on American soil for the last 50 years, would you approve of that?

If China put troops on our soil tomorrow because they wanted our coal, would you be OK with that, or would you take to the streets against the invaders?

If a gang from the next town robbed your bank and shot the guards, would you go after the whole town, or just the gang?


----------



## niadhf (Jan 20, 2008)

gmaske said:


> Only four defining forces have ever offered to die for you: 1. Jesus Christ 2. A Canadian soldier 3. A British soldier 4. A USA soldier
> 
> One died for your soul, the other 3 for your freedom.


and years ago many of one of those three died to try to keep those freedoms from me.
i think they had been occupying the country for its natural materials and a bunch of "terrorists" threw their precious tea away. Then those terrorists had the nerve to shoot at them.

Now don't get all flaming. But its easy to copy and past a letter i have seen going around for years. Its harder to think through all the aspects of that letter.


----------



## gmaske (Jan 7, 2008)

Yep! It's all America's fault. We are the scourge of the world!

I'm sorry but I think you guys are NUTS!

We conquered most of Western Europe and Japan and what did we do with them? Why we gave it back to the people and all we asked of them was a place to bury our dead.
Yes we have medaled in their politics and propped up a few governments over the years for the sake of stability but oddly enough we get 99% of our oil from this hemisphere. Doesn't it bother you that these fanatics beleave that if you don't worship their God acording to their sect that you have no right to live. I think you had better take a new look at who's doing the killing when it comes to 911 and who we are actually fighting and what they believe about you and their idea of a perfect world. They will kill you as soon as look at you because you my friend are an infidel.
No we are not perfect but no other country in the history of this world has treated it's enemies the way this country has. No other country needs to put up walls to try and keep from being over run by people who are trying to get in and not out. We are the freest, and most benevolent country that has ever existed and yet somehow it's all our fault. I honestly can not understand how anyone who is a citizen of this country can think this way. No we are not perfect but show me from any period in history a better way.
I am mostly French, American Indian, and Irish, in blood line but..........
I AM AN EVIL AMERICAN AND PROUD OF IT :smt1099


----------



## Anarius (Mar 8, 2008)

Damn straight GMASKE!
[Rant]
As a soldier who has actually had a combat tour, I can tell you that these people are VIOLENT, SICK, and NUTS, furthermore, I can tell you that the MEDIA is FULL OF SHIT. So Saddam didn't have nukes? SO WHAT. He had nerve gas equipped artillery shells! And other shit besides! Who cares if Bush omitted facts about the specifics? Or if our intelligence was bad! Saddam=bad, America=Good. Besides, you elected him! The commander in chief does not need to consult with you lot. He can do as he damn well pleases. If you don't like it, find somewhere else to live! See, here in America, we don't KILL YOU if you try to leave. We DEFINITELY don't execute your relatives for the same, and we don't RAPE WOMEN as a punishment for the transgressions of their relatives!

Oh, and since someone has to mention Hitler, let it be me. Should we have left Nazi Germany alone? We didn't know about the holocaust at the time, but in hindsight it was a evil atrocity that anything should have been given to prevent. Nobody should argue with that. We KNOW Saddam did things just as bad...but we should wait and see? Bullshit.

Go ahead and "STOP LOSS" my ass. I Don't care. I JOINED THE MILITARY TO SERVE MY COUNTRY AND ITS PEOPLE. My big question is why stop with Iraq? Send me on a WHIRLWIND TOUR of the Middle-East! Iran next! Then Syria, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, some R&R in Israel, then onto the UAE, Oman, Jordan, Yemen, Azerbaijan, and why not North Korea just to spice it up?

I don't care if I serve for the next 40 years! It would be GREAT if we could ALL just GET ALONG but that is not going to happen so I will make DAMN SURE that my people are the LAST ONES STANDING and you can go JUMP A FRIGGIN' CLIFF if you think differently. Better yet, take your bible, pull that meter long walking stick out of your ass, and go have a enlightened debate with a moderate Muslim (they don't exist) and see just how far your head will roll.

GET REAL PEOPLE.

[Rant Over]


----------



## gmaske (Jan 7, 2008)

Oh no! It looks like I stepped in it again :buttkick:
I don't mean to start these things :smt083
Oh both said Poo Bear 

I guess I'm just a RED NECK UGLY AMERICAN at heart!
I can't help meself :smt033


----------



## niadhf (Jan 20, 2008)

gmaske said:


> Yep! It's all America's fault. We are the scourge of the world!


I have said before and I will say again. Do not put words in my mouth. I said THINK. Nowhere did I say "it's all Americas fault. Not here, not on this same post with a slightly different quote last month.



> Yes we have medaled in their politics and propped up a few governments over the years for the sake of stability but oddly enough we get 99% of our oil from this hemisphere.


A bit of an understatement. And yes, this is what empires and powerful nations have been doing for years. This is what Japan tried with china in the early 20th century (1937? i think?). And we know what happened there, as the national community stomped them down then for trying what others had done and been left alone for. This after the U.S. supported Japanese agression toward Russia in 1904-1905.


> Doesn't it bother you that these fanatics beleave that if you don't worship their God acording to their sect that you have no right to live.


Yes, yes it does. It doesn't however mean that I blindly follow someone else's writing. As I sad, I read this same thing over 6 years ago, soon after 9/11. life is change and progression. Present me with new stuff. Then I look at it again. Someone else's regurgitated hate I have no use for.



> I think you had better take a new look at who's doing the killing when it comes to 911 and who we are actually fighting and what they believe about you and their idea of a perfect world. They will kill you as soon as look at you because you my friend are an infidel.


Nope. I know who is trying to kill us. My eyes are quite open, thank you.



> No we are not perfect but no other country in the history of this world has treated it's enemies the way this country has. No other country needs to put up walls to try and keep from being over run by people who are trying to get in and not out. We are the freest, and most benevolent country that has ever existed and yet somehow it's all our fault. I honestly can not understand how anyone who is a citizen of this country can think this way. No we are not perfect but show me from any period in history a better way.
> I am mostly French, American Indian, and Irish, in blood line but..........
> I AM AN EVIL AMERICAN AND PROUD OF IT :smt1099


Nope, we aren't perfect. That right there is my point. We have made and will make mistakes. We are after all part of the human race. That is how we evolve and change and grow. We are however a Great Nation. Why? because we CAN think, disagree, speak out, and express. Again, I do not believe I EVER (and I'm talking since this "argument" started 7 years, 5 months, and 28 days ago) said, "it is all (America's) fault." 
Can I give an example from history with a better way? Well if I could show that I woud probably be headed for a big white house in D.C about now. I think we both agree here. Hell I said the same thing both here and in my first post to this thread. 
However I AM free to think and not blindly follow a train of thought put forth by some annomyous person who sent it out to circulate the world wide web. And frankly, I excercise my right, AS AN AMERICAN CITIZEN, to think how I wish. Just as I excercise my other rights as an American citizen. Just as I have been removed from a trail jury selection for refusing to give up my RIGHT as an American to "Jury Nullification". Because I have made myself *learn* my rights.
Bloodline, ah heck, German, French, Irish, Dutch, Native American... just your ordinary average American Citizen. And Frankly Gmaske, proud of it.

But by GOD, Allah, Jehosephat or the twelve shiny snake like apendages of the snorkle god of east juju, I WILL use my brain to think, and not blindly follow the call of the lead beast up that gently curved and sloping ramp.

Guess its just to much to ask there huh?:smt076

(on a side note, that "yardstick" I carry that I "needed to remove", is really my grandmother's by God shillelah and will rake the skin off that violent finactic. I never said we should roll over and drop trou either. Just THINK.)


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

You do not defeat your enemy by becoming your enemy.

I have also served a combat tour. I certainly do care if my president “omitted specifics.” A lie of omission is still a lie.

I do not know any soldiers who want to go on a “whirlwind tour” of the Middle East. It is not possible, sustainable, or desirable.

I know many moderate Muslims.


----------



## gmaske (Jan 7, 2008)

I don't have a problem with THINKING, but I do tend to agree with the original post. I personally don't care if the suckers worship the ass of a cow. That is their business. It becomes my business when if I don't worship their cows ass and I become a target in their desire for a world wide holy war. I do not believe that on the whole we have caused the people of the middle east any great inconvience. If our influence were totally removed, there would be a continuing string of coups and counter coups and the region would be in much worse shape than it is now.

Frankly I wish we could just walk away from the region and let them do what ever they want to do to each other as sad as that may be. They made us a target and I for one am not willing to ignor things like the Trade Center, Embassy bombings, and plane hijackings and bombings as just the price we pay for being a world power. They do not respect us as a people and will destroy us if given half a chance were as we respect their right to exist and live in their own country according to their own customs and beliefs. I don't have a problem with those people in the middle east that will treat others with a common and mutual respect. I don't want to tell them what to do or believe, and I expect that of them. I'm sure there are a lot of great and good people over there and I wish them the best and I hope our country is doing everything it can to get them on their feet. I see the root of the problem in the fanatic belief that if you aren't for their brand of God then you are trash and worthy of a bullet. I find it very irksome that somehow we brought this on ourselves. They don't think like we do and vice versa. We have never to this point invaded, ocupied, and annexed their countries for their damned oil as many countries have tried or would like to do.
The hard core beliefs of the fanatical Muslems are quit revolting to me as a Christian were I am taught to treat each human being equally as a sacred vessel that carries an eternal spirit whether they be male, female, black, yellow, red or white. I have a core belief to respect the life choices of others and to place value on their lives even if I don't agree with their choices. Laying aside all the church crap, it would be wonderful if all would come to know the salvation that I have, but, I'm not going to devalue or kill you if you don't. Nor will I stand idly by and allow others to kill in the name of their religion. Those that live by the gun shall die by the gun. You can mince back and forth about the paticulars of who did what to whom but, the bottom line here is,
"Good and Evil".

We, after all, have been labeled "The Great Satan" not so much for what we have done to them but because of our core beliefs and freedoms that they view as "sin." Sin is an archery term for missing the mark. The word has, over time, taken on an "EVIL" meaning which, in the light of christianity, is wrong....but I digress....I won't shoot you for sinning but if you try to kill me or mine for something you view as missing the mark or standard of some religion, you are sure as hell gonna get some lead thrown at you and little or no respect in the bargin! There are fundimental diffrence in ours and their core beliefs. I am willing to make allowance for theirs if it brings no harm to me and my nation. They crossed that line a long time back and we let it ride far to long for the sake of "Peace". Those who would compromise freedom for the sake of peace deserve neither.

This is my view and if anything it is stronger now than ever before. I am not a believer that might makes right. I have no control over what corporations and little control over what my government does. I believe that on the whole we as people are a good and just nation. There are moments were we have had blood on our hands for sure but I don't believe that anything in our recent history warrents the violent and vicious attacks upon us. I do believe with all my heart that if we will finish what we have begun the people of Iraq and Afghanistan will be much better off by far than if we never went there in the first place


----------



## submoa (Dec 16, 2007)

Mike Barham said:


> You do not defeat your enemy by becoming your enemy.


I totally wholeheartedly agree with this statement. You are defined by your actions, not your "stated" intentions. If we we want to think of ourselves as the good guys, we need to show this with our actions.

Our military does more than "kill the enemy." We provide emergency relief for natural disasters around the world. While it angers me that some politicians want the US to be the welfare office to the world, I am not opposed, but proud, of our efforts to allieviate legitimate suffering.



Mike Barham said:


> I know many moderate Muslims.


+1 again Mike.

The true enemy is fundamentalism of any kind and intolerance. At the risk of getting flamed, I see no difference between an Al-Qaeda suicide bomber, Irish car bomber, or abortion clinic bomber. Its all indescriminate murder self-servingly encouraged by extreme, intolerant ideologies. Similarly, Nazi Holocaust, ethnic cleansing of Muslims and the Darfur genocide are all different faces of the same evil.


----------



## Anarius (Mar 8, 2008)

Mike, we seem to be butting heads a lot, but thats okay.

When I am talking about 'whirlwind tour' please realize that that is NOT what I want, I was trying to point out that we are in this for a long haul and anyone who believes that the United States is evil and that they have a right to attack it is fair game. I don't want to see more of us killed, I don't want to see more violence than is necessary. What I'm trying to illustrate is that we should not be using any half measures.My _opinion_ is that we should go all-or-nothing.

There is no such thing as a 'moderate' Muslim. Sure, I've met a lot of Muslims who haven't tried to kill me, but if they follow the teachings of the Koran then they believe that all must convert to Islam or die. How is that moderate?


----------



## submoa (Dec 16, 2007)

Anarius said:


> I've met a lot of Muslims who haven't tried to kill me, but if they follow the teachings of the Koran then they believe that all must convert to Islam or die. How is that moderate?


There are also Preachers who say on Sunday, you must accept the salvation of Jesus or burn in hell.

The Qur'an says not to take innocent life. On the other hand Wahhabism, preaches that Muslims should not only "always oppose" infidels "in every way," but "hate them for their religion ... for Allah's sake," that democracy "is responsible for all the horrible wars of the 20th century," and that Shia and other non-Wahhabi Muslims were infidels. (http://www.freedomhouse.org/uploads/special_report/45.pdf) Wahhabism formed the creed upon which the kingdom of Saudi Arabia was founded and is the dominant form of Islam found in Saudi Arabia, and Qatar, as well as some pockets of Somalia, Algeria and Mauritania. And according to Bush, the Saudis are our friends....

Don't blindly confuse Wahhabism with Islam.

I'm not a Muslim, but I've also read the Torah, the Bagavagita, the Dhammapada, the book of Mormon and the Bible to seek answers to a whole lot of bad shit that I've seen.


----------



## niadhf (Jan 20, 2008)

submoa said:


> The true enemy is fundamentalism of any kind and intolerance. At the risk of getting flamed, I see no difference between an Al-Qaeda suicide bomber, Irish car bomber, or abortion clinic bomber. Its all indescriminate murder self-servingly encouraged by extreme, intolerant ideologies. Similarly, Nazi Holocaust, ethnic cleansing of Muslims and the Darfur genocide are all different faces of the same evil.


Well said. At times I climb on my soap box box and wax phylisophical in a diareaha of the mouth, then some one comes along and says all I said, in a few sentences.

Gmaske. 
I must say, I agree much more with your last response then to the orignal post. More importantly your last post speaks to me of you, a person, not some annonymous perveyor of sound bites.
I see a difference between what you said, in your words and originally, and the "letter" you opened this thread with. One shows your beliefs, thoughts, feelings and passions, and whether i agree with them ALL, Wholeheartedly or not, I can at least see that they are truly yours. 
The other I see as simply a person (whomever wrote it) whining about how things aren't they way they would like. Do you see the difference I mean here? Or am I just blabbering?

Thank you for presenting your thoughts.


----------



## gmaske (Jan 7, 2008)

submoa said:


> The true enemy is fundamentalism of any kind and intolerance. At the risk of getting flamed, I see no difference between an Al-Qaeda suicide bomber, Irish car bomber, or abortion clinic bomber. Its all indescriminate murder self-servingly encouraged by extreme, intolerant ideologies. Similarly, Nazi Holocaust, ethnic cleansing of Muslims and the Darfur genocide are all different faces of the same evil.


I'd be hard pressed to put it any better than that :smt023


----------



## gmaske (Jan 7, 2008)

niadhf said:


> Gmaske.
> I must say, I agree much more with your last response then to the orignal post. More importantly your last post speaks to me of you, a person, not some annonymous perveyor of sound bites.
> I see a difference between what you said, in your words and originally, and the "letter" you opened this thread with. One shows your beliefs, thoughts, feelings and passions, and whether i agree with them ALL, Wholeheartedly or not, I can at least see that they are truly yours.
> The other I see as simply a person (whomever wrote it) whining about how things aren't they way they would like. Do you see the difference I mean here? Or am I just blabbering?
> ...


I think the saddest part of the whole of that reigon is that it is totally motivated by hate. The place would be a garden of eden if all that energy were used constructively and they could stop killing each other and the Jews. 
The original post is just really a laundry list of all the frustration that "we" collectively feel. It is no more than a snap shot or a sound bite that convays a distilled thought or feeling.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

Anarius, I am very sorry you don't know any moderate Muslims, but I know many and can assure you that they do exist. I don't know how much non-combat contact you had with the people of Iraq, but I have had quite a lot with the people of Afghanistan, and most of them don't want to kill Americans or anyone else. Most are just regular folk trying to get by in a very tough situation.

I know this forum has to have its anti-Muslim flamefests every now and again, though, even if most of the people doing the ranting don't actually know any Muslims.


----------



## gmaske (Jan 7, 2008)

Mike Barham said:


> Anarius, I am very sorry you don't know any moderate Muslims, but I know many and can assure you that they do exist. I don't know how much non-combat contact you had with the people of Iraq, but I have had quite a lot with the people of Afghanistan, and most of them don't want to kill Americans or anyone else. Most are just regular folk trying to get by in a very tough situation.
> 
> I know this forum has to have its anti-Muslim flamefests every now and again, though, even if most of the people doing the ranting don't actually know any Muslims.


 Mike,
I hope to God that we are able to bring peace and stability to those contries were the people don't have to live under someones boot. I don't care if they are Muslims. It is neither here nor there as long as we can coexist and prosper. I never ment this thread as a bash of all Muslims, just the ones that seem to be socially challenged in the extreme.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

All too often I see these kinds of threads devolve into "nuke all the Muslims" shouting matches, or advocacy of silly and unrealistic military plans like invading every Islamic nation on the planet.

It's a tough situation all around. Now that my tour is winding down, I am of the general opinion that overwhelming military force is not the answer here. Rather, this battle needs to be fought more on the political and philosophical fronts, where we have expended very little energy compared to our flexing of military muscle. We can see how far the military option has brought us, with Iraq still screwed up and Afghanistan backsliding, though fortunately America hasn't suffered another major attack.

I think a better way to fight this stupidly-named "war on terror" is with small units of special operations personnel, avoiding costly fights that gain us nothing (like the one in Iraq), and doing our best at home to wean ourselves from the oil that keeps us wedded to this otherwise useless part of the world.

I don't think imposing democracy on Muslims is ever going to work well, so I think our whole strategy here is badly flawed. I actually think that on this issue, the Democrats are talking more sensibly than Senator McCain, who has a lot of his considerable ego invested pursuing a strong military course.


----------



## gmaske (Jan 7, 2008)

I too had concluded long before we ever got involved over there that there must be something in the air or water that causes self distructive insanity! I wonder if God himself could bring peace to the reigon short of nukeing the place. I think the best hoped for solution will be some sort of fair minded but strong dictator of some sort. The place is a true ******** and if we can ever truely extract ourselves it will be a miracal


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

Islam _is_ a corrosive force in the Middle East, no doubt about that. It is the primary obstacle standing between Arabs/Persians and democracy, liberty and prosperity. We eventually need to convince them of that, but that will take a very long time, and we aren't going to convince them by threatening to nuke their holy sites or invading their countries.

Among the many Muslims I've met here, there seems to be an direct correlation between how angry they are and how devoutly they practice Islam. But most Muslims here don't seem terribly devout. The local guys we hire barely observe Ramadan, and I have literally never seen them pray, never mind five times a day. I guess that just as there are lapsed Catholics and lapsed Jews, there are lapsed Muslims. We need to encourage more lapses. :mrgreen:


----------



## DLSeeAmerica (Feb 8, 2008)

The bible says "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

So my questions, as I stated above, are:

If there had been foreign troops on American soil for the last 50 years, would you approve of that?

If China put troops on our soil tomorrow because they wanted our coal, would you be OK with that, or would you take to the streets against the invaders?

If a gang from the next town robbed your bank and shot the guards, would you go after the whole town, or just the gang?


----------



## gmaske (Jan 7, 2008)

DLSeeAmerica said:


> The bible says "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."
> 
> So my questions, as I stated above, are:
> 
> ...


Well here's the deal sparky:
Other than Iraq and Afghanistan our troups are no were they are not invited to my Knowledge and the people seem happy for the most part now that we are there.
It's not directly about the oil and for the most part the people seem pleased. On the other hand if we were attacked for our coal you're darn streight we'd fight but we aren't comparing apples to apples here. Totally diffrent circumstances are in play here.
No we'd go after the bad guys.

I see in your questions a very liberal mind set. I get the feeling that you think that if we will just leave everybody to their own business that the world will be a happy and peaceful place. We tried that before WWI and WWII....It didn't work so well. You must have slept through history class or had some really bad teachers. Even a laymans study of human nature will show you that there are those that if not checked by law and force will not respect their neighbor. It doesn't take a degree to extrapolate this out to nations and their conduct.

I have addressed your questions with my views for the sake of being polite and not ignoring your post.No FLAME intended here but You aren't gonna change my view and I doubt I'll change yours.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

Does anyone seriously think that absent the need to keep the oil flowing, we'd still be in the Middle East, save perhaps a token presence to assist Israel in the event of another invasion by Arab states?

Does anyone really believe we kicked Iraq out of Kuwait out of the goodness of George HW Bush's heart?

Does anyone really believe that we garrisoned troops in Saudi Arabia for a decade because we really liked the House of Saud?

Does anyone really believe we didn't move into Iraq at least partially because we wanted to garrison troops somewhere _other_ than Saudi Arabia, but still close enough to protect the flow of oil? One of al-Qaeda's rationales for attacking the US was the stationing of infidel troops in the Muslim holy land.

There are other reasons we are in the Middle East, of course, but let's not pretend that the flow of oil isn't a major consideration. Nations act in their own self-interest, and America's self-interest right now is in assuring a steady flow of oil. This is perfectly rational, since our current economy would crumble without it.

Our thirst for oil has enriched the Muslim states, and granted them power over us. Now they are rich enough that some of them funnel weapons and cash to their surrogates who fight us. They wouldn't have that money or those weapons if we hadn't been paying them for oil for eighty years.

_"The spice must flow."_ - Frank Herbert, _Dune_


----------



## gmaske (Jan 7, 2008)

A much more black and white way of looking at it and all very true. I guess the point I was driving at but missed is we didn't take it from them but we do protect it FOR them and the Royal Saudi Family would $hit if we started packing up to leave. But that is another chapter isn't it! Yeh we prop them up just like we propped up the Shaw of Iran and where did that lead?

CAN'T WE USE SOMETHING ELSE BESIDES OIL!:toimonster:


----------



## submoa (Dec 16, 2007)

Mike Barham said:


> Our thirst for oil has enriched the Muslim states, and granted them power over us.


If only as much money went into alternative fuel source research (or cancer or diabetes or AIDS.... etc.) as curing the impotence of old men.



Mike Barham said:


> _"The spice must flow."_ - Frank Herbert, _Dune_


I loved that book!


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

submoa said:


> If only as much money went into alternative fuel source research (or cancer or diabetes or AIDS.... etc.) as curing the impotence of old men.


Well, if gas prices stay high for long enough, the economic incentive will exist for companies to find alternate fuel sources. There was obviously economic incentive to invent Viagra. :mrgreen:

I think it is better that private companies do the searching. Relying on government bureaucrats to pick winners and losers in the marketplace is stupid.

For many years, our government essentially subsidized the price of gas. Now we're doing it with the blood of our young men and women, instead of with money collected from middle-aged people. We need to stop that, and redirect our efforts. This probably won't happen until there are strong economic disincentives to buying lumbering V10 trucks, gas guzzling Hummers, and 500hp sports cars.

I sold my SUV and bought a little Honda Fit, partially because of gas prices and partially because I want to contribute as little as I can to the thirst for oil that keeps our military in the Middle East.



> I loved that book!


One of my absolute favorites. Frank Herbert was more prescient than his hero Paul Atreides.


----------



## submoa (Dec 16, 2007)

Mike Barham said:


> I think it is better that private companies do the searching. Relying on government bureaucrats to pick winners and losers in the marketplace is stupid.


Normally I'd agree with you, but when an industry exists to serve the public good but cannot become more efficient through volume, then government must step in. IE. Police force, Fire rescue and infrastructure repair.

Alternative fuel sources such as cold fusion are in the realm of pure science where public research funding is better spent than subsidizing pharmaceutical research to give erections to the elderly.

After all, you can't trust the oil industry to cut its own throat.



Mike Barham said:


> This probably won't happen until there are strong economic disincentives to buying lumbering V10 trucks, gas guzzling Hummers, and 500hp sports cars.


+1!! However the current strategy Corporate Average Fuel Economy legislation is unwise. I'd rather see a limit on the displacement of engines sold in the US... perhaps 2.0L with exceptions for mass transit and commercial vehicles. Smaller engines means lighter cars and less wear and tear on highway infrastructure.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

I'm not aware of actual industries that exist to serve the public good. All I know of are out for profit, which is the best incentive of all. 

Using your examples, I am not at all sure private companies wouldn't do better jobs at fire rescue and road work. The police must be public, however, to ensure objectivity (rather than efficiency) in the justice system.


----------



## submoa (Dec 16, 2007)

Mike Barham said:


> I'm not aware of actual industries that exist to serve the public good. All I know of are out for profit, which is the best incentive of all.
> 
> Using your examples, I am not at all sure private companies wouldn't do better jobs at fire rescue and road work. The police must be public, however, to ensure objectivity (rather than efficiency) in the justice system.


The point I'm making, is that if you leave it to market incentives to act in the public good, no one would pay for infrastructure repairs or adequately fund police and fire especially outside their own specific neighborhood.

Getting back to target. We both agree buying oil gives our money to people who hate us. The energy industry, mainly oil companies, can't reasonably be expected to fund pure research that would make themselves obsolete.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

Agreed on the latter point, unless they think they can make more money selling something else versus oil.

But who picks the "something else?" A Barack Obama appointee in Washington?


----------



## submoa (Dec 16, 2007)

Mike Barham said:


> But who picks the "something else?" A Barack Obama appointee in Washington?


Point made. With the oil and corn lobbies (aka bribe dispensary), really can't trust government. Can't trust Big Oil.

If we don't win the lottery by some geek in a labcoat finding a solution on his own, any real alternative will probably come from outside the US. God forbid we trade dependence on mid-east oil for dependence on Chinese cold fusion.:smt022


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

It's really unfortunate that we Americans have let the granolas kill our nuclear power industry, which might have been our salvation.


----------



## Jackle1886 (Dec 21, 2007)

OH yes but Nuclear power is sooo DANGEROUS. Ya right, I live in MI, and we have a power plant pretty close to where i live. Right on the shores of the big lake. And ya know what, in a few years it will shut down. Because it's so old and we haven't built any new power plants in DECADES....and we can't drill in Alaska...and oh I could go on. But what do we do about it?


----------



## gmaske (Jan 7, 2008)

All I can say is something is gonna give pretty soon. Us folks that work for a living can't absorb the continuous price up swing fueled by the rise in gas prices. If it gets bad enough them tree huggers might get walked on if they stand in the way. We'll be drilling oil but by that time it will be to little to late.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

Jackle1886 said:


> But what do we do about it?


I think, from a national security (rather than environmental) standpoint, conservatives need to think hard about energy conservation and moving away from dependence on Middle Eastern oil. I realize that this goes against conservative thinking on market solutions, but I am not advocating government intervention, but rather a "movement" among conservatives to get us away from oil and on to other energy sources.

It does not help that, because of the culture war in American, conservatives enjoy driving big vehicles and rubbing it in the faces of liberals, and looking down their noses at little "treehugger" cars.


----------



## James NM (Jan 4, 2007)

DLSeeAmerica said:


> I have some questions about this post:
> 
> If there had been foreign troops on American soil for the last 50 years, would you approve of that?
> 
> ...


What a load of CRAP!

The entire post is so absurd that most here, including me, chose to ignore it, as if responding to it would somehow legitimatize it. But I kept coming back, and re-reading it, thinking I had somehow missed something. And finally, it occurred to what was missing. What's missing is someone calling Bullsh*t!

I don't even know what you're talking about, do you?

A 50 year occupation? We (The United States of America) kicked the hell out of the Axis powers a little over 50 years ago, and then rebuilt their countries and economies to the extent that theirs exceed ours in a lot of respects today. Without the US, Europe & Asia would be speaking 2 languages - German & Japanese. If the US desired world domination, it was ours for the taking (and still is). Our economy, our military, our industrial complex, our new weapons of mass destruction - the whole freaking world was ours for the taking. We were the Worlds only Superpower, and what did we do with this unmatched superiority? We cleaned the debris of fallen empires and rebuilt their countries brick by brick.

China and coal? The closest we have came to stealing someone's oil is buying Alaska from Russia. If we wanted to take someone's oil, we could. Speaking of which, you sound like a Hugo Chavez sympathizer. If we wanted someone's oil, we could send a couple of "well prepared" Cub Scouts Troops south and squash your little dictator friend like the bug that he is. But since we haven't done that, just who's country are you saying we invaded and stole their oil??



> If a gang from the next town robbed your bank and shot the guards, would you go after the whole town, or just the gang?[/


 HUH?? Are you saying that we should only have gone after the hijackers? How about the regime in Afghanistan that trained, supported, gave shelter, and financed the hijackers?

We went after the WHOLE gang! And we're still after them. And I hope we continue after them, until none are left. Does anyone remember the wild joyous parades that overwhelmed the middle east when 3000 innocent men, women, and children from around the world were murdered on our soil on 9/11? I do. Did anyone see the joy in the faces of some Muslims when innocent Israeli children were recently slaughtered? I did.

Now here's what I think. Most of the middle east hates us. Because of unending and unchallenged propaganda filth, most of the middle east hates us. Even the countries in the middle east we call our "Allies" hate us (except for Israel). I believe that the only reason the terrorists have not continued to murder innocent civilians here in the US is because we took the fight to them. They hate us. If they could murder civilians here, they would. Why else would the terrorists not continue to strike us here, because they now love us?

DLSeeAmerica, you make a lot of vague, shadowy statements that are open to wild interpretation that really have no meaning or basis in fact. I think someone needs to call it for what it is. BULLSH*T! I have a lot more respect for the original poster and the quote he posted. At least his post had something your's lacks - substance.


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

Well, I don't entirely agree with the leftist talking points in *DLSeeAmerica's* post either, but I don't think he's _totally_ off base with some of his statements.



DLSeeAmerica said:


> If there had been foreign troops on American soil for the last 50 years, would you approve of that?


I don't think he's talking about Iraq or Afghanistan here. But the American military _has_ been mucking about in the Middle East for a very long time. We rolled into Lebanon in the 1980s (and got our butts kicked). While Somalia is in Africa, it's a Muslim country, and we intervened there (and got our butts kicked). The "peacekeeping" mission in the Sinai has been ongoing for decades. We garrisoned troops in Saudi Arabia - the land of Islam's two holiest cities - since at least 1990. Same for Kuwait. And in 2003 we rolled into Iraq on bad information (and were fought to a standstill until recently).

And I think he does have a point. Let's say the UN had garrisoned troops in major American cities to "help protect the US from terrorism" after 9/11. We'd have self-styled "patriots" all over the internet ready to load their ARs and fight the blue helmets. Hell, we have that already without a UN military presence in America.



> If China put troops on our soil tomorrow because they wanted our coal, would you be OK with that, or would you take to the streets against the invaders?


Okay, the analogy might be a little clumsy, But if anyone believes that preserving the flow of oil from the Middle East is a not a major reason we are there (and have been there for decades), well, they just have their head in the sand.

I'm not saying preserving the oil flow is a bad thing, because our economy depends on it. We have had ample warning that $110-a-barrel oil prices have been coming, and we did _nothing_ to wean ourselves off this addition to Arab/Persian oil. Now in addition to money, though, we have to spend American blood to preserve that flow of oil. I have participated in well over twenty Fallen Comrade ceremonies here, and have performed honor guard duties for two soldiers (my unit has had two KIA). I resent the hell out of the fact that, despite decades of advance notice, America just sat on its collective hands and enriched the Arab oil baronies, while doing nothing to develop alternate fuel sources.

If someone wants to believe that none of this is about oil, well, I will let them go back to listening to the conservative talk radio mouthpieces and pretending to think for themselves.

From *James NM*:



> Are you saying that we should only have gone after the hijackers? How about the regime in Afghanistan that trained, supported, gave shelter, and financed the hijackers?


Even most liberals have no problem with the invasion of Afghanistan and fighting the Taliban. I was pleased to be assigned to this fight rather than the pointless one in Iraq. However, I can attest that we are going about this fight in typically stupid fashion, particularly when we go around the country burning to the ground the _only_ crop that Afghans can sell at a profit. This just alienates Afghans and drives them right to the Taliban and al-Qaeda.



> We went after the WHOLE gang! And we're still after them.


Well, the gang wasn't in Iraq, but we continue to spend money and blood there. Meanwhile, we can't respond adequately to other threats from "the gang" because our military is worn down from five years of fighting a war that gains us absolutely nothing...but has had the very undesirable effects of creating an entirely new set of enemies and alienating the very allies we need to win the stupidly-named "war on terror."



> And I hope we continue after them, until none are left.


I do, too. Yet if our battle tactics kill one bad guy, but create ten more, are we winning or losing?



> Now here's what I think. Most of the middle east hates us.


*Most* of the Afghans I've met (which is a lot) like us just fine, actually. The Kuwaitis like us fine, and appreciate us kicking the Iraqis out of their country . Have you actually traveled the Middle East, or are you just going by what Rush Limbaugh and Michael Savage say?

Clearly there are some Arabs/Persians who hate us. Just as cleary, there are many who do not, or who are neutral.



> I believe that the only reason the terrorists have not continued to murder innocent civilians here in the US is because we took the fight to them.


But they _did_ continue to murder people in Madrid, London, Bali, etc. It may be simply that attacking America is logistically much more difficult than hitting other pieces of Western Civilization, and like everyone else, the terrorists want more "bang for their buck," bad pun not intended.

Yes, we are fighting bad guys in Iraq. But these *are not* the same bad guys who attacked us on 9/11. We created a large number of our enemies with our many blunders in Iraq, starting with an invasion that was based on intelligence blunders, a blundering disregard of the advice of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs in the post-war planning, and continuing with blundering Rumsfeld DoD policies that had too few troops on the ground in the months and years following the invasion.

The hostilities in Iraq have done nothing to make Americans safer. If anything, the invasion of that country has angered more Muslims, made al-Qaeda recruiting easier, severely degraded our military readiness, and alienated Western nations that might have otherwise helped us win our war. Look at how America now has to go to NATO, hat in hand, begging for more troops and equipment in Afghanistan. Iraq has had only counterproductive results all around, when it comes to fighting the bad guys who attacked us on 9/11.


----------

