SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: frankw1900 who wrote (91052)12/17/2004 6:43:12 AM
From: Hoa Hao  Respond to of 793801
 
Yours makes as much sense as anyone else's.



To: frankw1900 who wrote (91052)12/17/2004 11:59:14 AM
From: carranza2  Respond to of 793801
 
I think this scenario stuff is a gas.

So do I, but I like your scenarios much, much better than I do mine.



To: frankw1900 who wrote (91052)12/19/2004 12:01:27 PM
From: carranza2  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793801
 
One of the reasons I am so pessimistic is the Arabization of Europe, as ranted upon by Oriana Fallaci:

weeklystandard.com

Bat Ye'or has a more scholarly approach to the same thing. Here are links to her recent book and to the text of its preface:

amazon.com

dhimmitude.org

A short quote from the preface:

Observing this disturbing phenomenon, one gets the impression of a sinking continent, a colossal Titanic wreck, where the passengers run from one desperate situation to another. Indeed the situation does seem hopelessly compromised, as the European political authorities responsible for a state of affairs that they have knowingly created refuse obstinately to confrontit. Instead, they tend to escape into a virtual world of rhetoric thatreplaces reality.

Over the past three decades, the EEC and the EU’s political and cultural organizations have invented a fantasy Islamic civilization and history. The voluminous historical record of violations of basic human rights for all non-Muslims and women under the shari’a (Islamic Law)—throughout the past, and in contemporary Muslim societies—is ignored, or dismissed. Immunized from criticism by this fabricated historical construct, Europeans could engage in mutually fruitful business transactions and diplomatic ventures —particularly at the United Nations and other world bodies—with dictatorial regimes. It is in this context of international relations— pompously called ‘‘international legality’’—that ‘‘old Europe’’ driven by France, the main architect of this policy, opposed America and supported Palestinian terrorist organizations.

In this book, Euro-Arab Judeophobia will be examined only as an indicator of the common Euro-Arab culture that is permeating, even overwhelming, all levels of West European society. It is no easy task to avoid an analysis of the current European Judeophobic trend. Under the euphemism of ‘‘peace process,’’ the EU has made Israel the cornerstone of its relations with the Arab states, with the USA, and of its own security—as a quid pro quo against Islamist terror. Hence, from whatever angle we observe these three positions, we find that Israel is at the core of Europe’s strategies. In
fact, as it will become clearer in the following pages, under Arab pressure, the EU has willingly made Israel hostage to its own Arab policy and its security.

Fostering and promoting such hate through policies, speeches, and the media impact both the elite responsible for its expression, and the larger society.3 For Jew-hatred, as abetted by EU policy decisions, does not concern only the Jews, but also non-Jewish Europeans—either as active or passive
supporters of this dynamic, or in opposition to it.

Judeophobia does affect the way Europeans—whether Christian, ‘‘post-Christian,’’ or atheist—understand their past and conceive their future. Their understanding of history, and conception of the future, is also influenced by European anti-Americanism. The nexus between European Jewhatred
and anti-Americanism becomes apparent when Americans resist Islamization and perceive their identity and culture as an emanation of biblical history and values—a heritage scorned by contemporary Eurabia.

The recurrence of antisemitism across Western Europe is mentioned here as a reliable indicator of more fundamental
changes that impact, ultimately, all of Western civilization. It relates to a profound structural transformation of the western part of the European continent that affects its
demography, culture, and religious orientation. These tectonic shifts have deep sociopolitical divisions, which came to the fore during the acrimonious public debates and demonstrations that surrounded the American-led Coalition War against Iraq in Spring 2003.
European anti-Americanism is not a new phenomenon. During the Cold War, it was perceived as an almost exclusively, albeit widespread, Sovietinspired phenomenon. However, a contemptuous anti-Americanism among some Europeans—particularly certain French and Germans trends— reflected a sense of cultural superiority and compensated for the Nazi, Fascist, and Communist defeats. The collapse of the Communist system exposed other currents of anti-American hatred, manifested by Third-Worldists, neo-Communists, and Islamists reoriented into a powerful jihadist coalition against Western democracies and their values. This recast ideological war is deeply rooted in a Euro-Arab political alliance and growing cultural symbiosis, which propagates—and expresses, often unabashedly— virulent antisemitism and anti-Zionism.

The Euro-Arab Dialogue implemented in the 1970s a new sociopolitical and cultural conception, which has now affected profound changes within Western Europe. In the following pages, I use the terms ‘‘Europeans’’ and ‘‘Eurabians.’’ Eurabia designates a new entity—with political, economic, religious powerful governmental lobbies. While Europeans live within Eurabia’s constraints, few are really conscious of them on a daily basis, beyond a somewhat confused awareness. Eurabians are the agents and enforcers of this all- ncompassing new Eurabian policy and culture. The tension between Europeans and Eurabians arises from fundamental and uncompromising differences over political, societal, and cultural values, as well as core religious identities. This tension is also apparent in disputes regarding the strength and durability of the European-American transatlantic alliance
and the cohesion of what we still call Western civilization.

The divisive European-Eurabian arguments over the war in Iraq, or the larger global war on jihad terrorism, reflect a deeper religious and cultural confrontation between Western and Arab/Islamic civilizations where, consciously or not, Eurabians have become the agents of Islamic political ambitions in Europe.



To: frankw1900 who wrote (91052)12/19/2004 12:27:47 PM
From: carranza2  Respond to of 793801
 
US defense costs are about 3% of GDP. The security for connectedness arrangement leads to even greater US,, Chinese and Indian prosperity. The pressure in Iraq by the al Qaida/Baathists does not increase. The Iraqi Shiites and Iranian Khomeniists are already more enemies than friends and Iraqis obstinately go their own route despite the Iranian blandishments and sabotage. The US remains as guarantor of Iraq independence. The Iraqi extremists are either killed or drawn into a new arrangement by tribal leaders.

It's not the monetary costs to which I only refer. We are a reluctant warriors, even if the cause is a good one. While the costs in men and treasure in Iraq are not huge given the stakes, they will be perceived as enormous if another 1,500 men are killed. In historical and actual terms, the costs are almost inconsequential. I hate to sound so cold, but this is what this kind of discussion requires.

There will be a movement much like the antiwar movement of the '60s which will be effective. Rumsfeld's recent miscues don't help.

Canadian oil sands producers who have as much oil in the ground as all of Arabia and can profitably produce "forever" at $30 bbl, really crank up and replace Saudi as the swing producer.

Perhaps. I had not given this factor any consideration. It is hugely important for the future since any person who considers the issue knows that energy alternatives to oil are practically non-existent in the foreseeable future, i.e., the next 30 years, at a minimum.