>> Let's see, he was completely wrong about the outcome of Kosovo and Serbia now has a democratically elected government that is building bridges to both the west and the former Soviet republics <<
what outcome in kosovo was pat buchanan wrong about?
>> One region's Buchanan prognostications debunked and strong evidence that intervention, rather than isolationism, can lead to peace, freedom for oppressed people, and economic opportunity. <<
what are you babbling about? what peace, freedom and economic opportunity? hundreds of thousands of serbians fled for their lives. thousands were killed by NATO carpet-bombing. 40,000+ peace keeping troops to ensure your "peace" and "freedom". as for economic opportunity, NATO exerts it's control in this regard as well by controlling customs duties and taxes. let's see how much freedom and peace will prevail if NATO ever withdraws it's troops!
>> Re the four Persian Gulf "consiprators", Buchanan's writing was not an argument against a cartel. It was an effort to create the image in voters' minds of a powerful foreign enemy comprised of some homogenous group of people who all see America as a nation of infidels, suitable only for looting. <<
you are seriously warped. any reasonable rational person would read the following statement to mean that he is saying the u.s. makes sacrifices for the benefit of countries such as kuwait and saudi arabia, and yet they don't mind aligning with the very countries we defend them from when it comes to controlling the price of oil. no one says you have to agree with his view, but only a sick bastard such as yourself would try to twist his statement of hypocrisy by saudi arabia and kuwait into a broad hatred of "a powerful foreign enemy comprised of some homogenous group of people who all see America as a nation of infidels,".
he said:
"Meanwhile, a decade after the Gulf War, American soldiers and airmen stand ready to die to defend Saudi Arabia and Kuwait from Iran and Iraq - as Saudi Arabia and Kuwait conspire with Iran and Iraq to keep oil prices over $30 a barrel -- to loot America and gouge U.S. consumers."
>> Does he (do you) really expect the producers of any major commodity product, especially one upon which their country depends for most or a large portion of its national income, to NOT try to balance supply and demand, and maximize sustainable, long-term cash flows? <<
all he is saying is kuwait and saudi arabia are members of opec--an organization which doesn't have america's best interests in mind, but sure doesn't complain when america defends them. this is such a simple concept i don't understand why you are having so much trtouble with it. all he is suggesting is that if kuwait and saudi arabia want to cozy up with iran and iraq on matters of oil, perhaps we shouldn't be so willing to defend them.
>> Give me a break. Besides, OPEC, as a cartel, has lost most of the power it held in 1973 <<
opec had lost a lot of power until recently, but it demonstrated it's power only a couple years ago with production cuts that sent oil rising to $38/bbl.
>> And pointing out the current $23 price of oil is hardly "nitpicking", much as you'd like to think <<
i wasn't referring to that. i was referring to your nitpicking irrelvant details like your claim that buchanan didn't know when WWII ended or some other crap you were babbling about.
>> It is evidence that his alleged conspiracy either never existed or has failed <<
no it isn't. the price of oil was just over $30/bbl a couple weeks ago. now it's $23. of course as usual you want to use prices that support your argument, and ignore the fact that high oil prices were a serious drag on the economy the last couple years. now that the world is slipping into a worldwide depression you cite $23/bbl oil as evidence the opec is weak. the only thing that is weak is your ability to make a valid point.
>> Since it hardly seems likely that Kuwait would join Iraq, or the Saudis or Iranians would join Iraq for that matter, in such a "loot America" conspiracy <<
they're all members of opec are they not?
>> We just happen to be the largest consumer in the global oil market, so it's fairly easy for him to paint us as the victims of this Persian Gulf conspiracy <<
you are trying to make it into something more than it really is. buchanan believes that opec is a body that conspires to keep oil at high levels that gouge american consumers. you don't have to agree with him if you like, but why must you insist that he is being a demagogue? obviously you think opec has little control over the price of oil so it's not any "conspiracy". he believes otherwise. what is your point of wasting time on this clear-cut difference of opinion?
>> even though fluctuations in the price of oil really don't have the kind of economic impact they once did. <<
i would argue otherwise, but you love to argue the minutia so much that i have to choose my battles so i will not bother with this one.
>> That they "conspire" to keep oil prices up, rather than admitting that balancing supply and demand to maximize earnings is (when anyone else does it) simply rational economic behavior <<
conspire - to combine or work together for any purpose or effect.
the definition of conspire is not exclusive to your description of opec. next point?
>> creates images of dark, backroom dealings between criminal masterminds plotting world domination <<
perhaps it does in your imaginative mind, but not necessarily by definition alone. once again you attempt twist his words, taking his statement of gouging of american consumers to a whole neew level of world domination. nowhere in his statement did he insinuate anything about world domination. you injected your own perceptions and colorations to the statement.
>> The word "loot" conjures images of angry mobs rampaging through our city streets, throwing rocks through store windows, stealing TVs and jewelry, and terrorizing innocent civilians. <<
wow that one word means all that? you think if i look up the word "loot" in the dictionary it will say something about throwing rocks through store windows, stealing tv's, jewelry, and terrorizing innocent civilians?
you are exposing your own ridiculousness. once again you waste a whole long post focusing on the language of pat buchanan attempting to impugn his character, because you don't have the ability to impugn his ideas.
>> Now, as for arguing globalization, try reading the articles from The Economist that I linked. They make the case for economic integration and point out the fallacies of the anti-globalist arguments better than I could. <<
well at least you admit you can't argue the merits yourself. we are making progress.
>> I hardly think the official Web site of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the Web site of Human Rights Watch qualify as "UN, NATO [or] new world order govt propaganda". You dismiss them simply because they don't support your weak argument, but I'm confident most would find them much more credible than your shadowy ".org" in Canada with nothing on Kosovo fresher than last winter. <<
Kosovo: UN Warns of Poll Violence
iwpr.net
Jimmy Carter: NATO bombing 'a fruitless effort'
www9.cnn.com
PLAINS, Georgia (CNN) -- Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter said Thursday that NATO's bombardments of Yugoslavia have failed to achieve the alliance's stated goals, and have unleashed "horrible destruction" on Serb civilians.
Amnesty accuses Nato of war crimes
guardian.co.uk
Nato today dismissed accusations by Amnesty International that it committed war crimes during its air war against Kosovo and Serbia.
Nato's commander during the Kosovo war has accused senior US military officers of repeatedly interfering in allied planning and of opposing moves that might have prevented the bombing campaign.
guardian.co.uk
Serb killings 'exaggerated' by west
guardian.co.uk
Claims of up to 100,000 ethnic Albanians massacred in Kosovo revised to under 3,000 as exhumations near end
Nato's shame
guardian.co.uk
Amnesty says we committed war crimes in Kosovo. British ministers come perilously close to shrugging it off
Dumbing down the war
guardian.co.uk
Today's apologies over missed targets in Kosovo are revealing of the extent of the air raids' failure there, writes Derek Brown
Last year's aerial onslaught on Serbia was a disaster. That much is certain, and the Ministry of Defence's own assessment, sensationally leaked today, merely confirms and underlines the extent of the tragedy.
Washington Post a "Useful Tool" for NATO?
fair.org
Paper's coverage distorts facts about Kosovo war crimes charges
World: Europe
Nato's bombing blunders
news.bbc.co.uk
Yugoslavia: U.S. Regrets Civilian Casualties
rferl.org |
