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: Bilow who wrote (137015)	6/19/2004 5:48:58 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 281500

<You keep going on and on about how there isn't any way we can get by on less oil consumption> A while ago I invented a theory on how to do it, which I called "Supply and Demand". Message 20179964 It's too complex for most people to grasp, but essentially it involves putting up the price when there isn't so much oil around. That makes people use less of it. Those who really need it will pay the high prices. Those who don't need it won't; they'll wear some insulation, buy a smaller vehicle or catch a bus or walk or run or ride a Segway or bicycle or motorbike or catch a train or do the job via cyberspace or something. They might even hitch-hike, offering cash to somebody who picks them up. Mqurice

To: Bilow who wrote (137015)	6/19/2004 8:00:03 AM
From: Sig	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

<<As far as abandoning the place, we're already setting up the deals to get us out of places like Falloujah. Those deals are with groups that the Administration swore they'd never deal with (i.e. Baathists and Islamic fundamentalists).>> Chasing Sadr out of Falugja was causing quite a ruckus, while blowing up the ammunitions he had stored there and with innocent people caught in the middle of fighting We had to back off and let things cool down enough so they could have the elections which is of more importance.. << The Administration hasn't even asked for an increase in the size of the US Army. The Senate and House voted to increase the numbers, but the figures are so minuscule as to put to the lie any claim that the US is somehow getting ready to take over Saudi Arabia's oil production, LOL. Here's the numbers (bear in MIND that Saudi Arabia is as populous as Iraq and considerably more radical in religious fervor)>>>> So how does this miniscule increase jibe with the contentions that the US evil empire is planning to occupy ME countries like Iraq or to conduct further wars in the region? Any US military action in SA would be completely different than that in Iraq in that we would not be out to destroy the infrastucture, communications, or armed forces but to assist them. Fighting the terrorists there does not require much military power - its more of an intelligence problem. IMO the first priority is to keep the oil flowing , not to change the the Saudi government. A lack of Saudi oil production would be an economic disaster for many countries including SA which is exactly what the terrorists want to achieve. So our hopes for a better life for the downtrodden Saudi citizens is placed on a back burner, because without a strong economy we would be unable to help anyone else who are in even more extreme difficulties. Sig