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: Hawkmoon who wrote (188653)	6/7/2006 10:54:17 AM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Some things you cant prevent. If they intend to fight it out, they will. I dont think that there will be a rush into the apocolypse. Iran will want nukes and iraq must be settled first. 10 years is enough time for us to become energy independent. The question is whether we are up to it. The much overused example, Marshall Plan, certainly comes to mind. Keep gas between $3 and $4. Explore offshore and in other safe areas. Do oil shale and alt fuels. Build nuke plants that are compeletely safe. And watch the jihadists kill each other on TV without our boys being anywhere remotely close to the battles.

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (188653)	6/7/2006 12:03:54 PM
From: jttmab	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Look at how the world markets are reacting over just the mere threats of an oil shut-off from Iran? Even though the US only obtains 10% of its oil from the Mid-East, the rest of the world is fully dependent upon this oil. Even if we didn't get a drop of oil from the mid-east, we would be just as dependent on mid-east oil as we are now. Where you get the crude isn't important. It's how much crude you need and the price of the crude. Now, if you're considering nationalizing the US oil industry or thinking about prohibiting, e.g., Exxon-Mobil, from selling it's crude on the global market the dynamic changes. jttmab