Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (132851)	5/13/2004 4:13:10 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

Perhaps you didn't notice, we were attacked in New York and Washington a couple of years ago. Perhaps you also didn't notice, but David Kay ascertained that the Iraqis were working on increasing the range of their ballistic missiles. True, they would not yet have reached the United States, unless we presumed they were on a naval platform, but they would have reached American troops in Saudi Arabia, the Persian Gulf, and perhaps parts of NATO.........

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (132851)	5/14/2004 2:39:14 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

This is an example of a post that gave offense: One of the stupidest assertions of the anti- war folk is that they would defend the United States if it shores were invaded. That is to set the bar too high. In this era, if they are invading your shores, they have probably already taken out several cities. We are threatened by the terrorist with the dirty bomb, or with ballistic missiles, waiting until troops establish a beach head is much too late. Good point. Now tell me again who it is that wants to invade our shores. Sometimes I forget and it leaves me at a disadvantage when I attend the Chicken Little meetings and forget to scream like a woman and cry, "the sky is falling, the sky is falling." As far as them "taking out several cities," which country should we kill next? As I understand it there aren't too many countries with the military capability to "take out [any] of our cities?" Also, how many terrorists will disappear when we do that? I'll have to rely on your expertise in these matters since, as you can see, I haven't a clue as to what you're talking about. But then I'm clearly not in the Grand Phu Ba league when it comes to biting like a scared dog. If Joe McCarthy had been more of a neocon he could have gone after those commies where they lived; overseas. We'd have probably lost a few million or maybe a few 10 million of us, and the radical Muslims would have been able to sit by and watch, but the world would have damn sure known that we weren't going to wait around while the rest of them acted in undemocratic ways and threatened our future security. Face it, Joe was a wimp. So were Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush the 1st and especially that pervert Clinton. We've waited years for the moral certainty and intellectual acumen of a leader like Bush the 2nd and now it's our turn. And the best part of it is that we've got an all-volunteer army together with tax breaks; it won't cost the rest of us anything.

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (132851)	5/17/2004 6:43:12 PM
From: Sig	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

<<Good point. Now tell me again who it is that wants to invade our shores. Sometimes I forget and it leaves me at a disadvantage when I attend the Chicken Little meetings and forget to scream like a woman and cry, "the sky is falling, the sky is falling.">>> Nobody has to invade us to destroy our society as we know it. I am pessimistic today and it looks like the good times are over for while. We are using 20 mm bbls oil per day when Iraq is producing 2 mm bbls per day. Even if they get to 4mm bbbls, we use 5 times that amount. Not all is lost yet, but there are huge investments and changes if we want to continue driving SUV's . Here is a new well in the Gulf, producing 1/2000 of what we use per day. There are many, many more low production wells and fields that have been shut down that could be improved and reactivated. biz.yahoo.com The production of these wells is worth about $520,000 per day at present prices. Yet that is only 1/2000 of what we are using. Amazing . This is gross, our consumption has grown beyond all reasonable measures. Having 4 time the GNP of the No 2 country, Japan, we should have worked at becoming more efficient. Lots of talk there, but not enough action. IMO we are in tough. But fuel was so cheap, that the CAFE efficiency requirements for vehicle fuel efficienty were cancelled or diluted by excluding trucks from the computations. It will take all America can do now to hold the major gains in life style. And the chances of going downhill are growing despite all we may accomplish in Iraq. Reactivate old wells despite the fact it may disturb some nearby residents, open up the offshore areas that have been shut down, drill new wells in Alaska, The insulation in many new buildings is now inadequate, being based on comparion with much lower oil prices. Move to florescent lighting which is much more efficient. Develop more efficient cars and rapidly. We are drowning in laws and regulations that prohibit this, or prohibit that, or demand that. It stifles new ideas and solutions. And it will take time to revise those rules. Meanwhile we are heavily engaged in the ME trying to stabilize the oil production regions and postphone the day of reckoning. Buying time. Sig