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 : Politics of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (4399)	1/21/2009 8:48:33 PM
From: RetiredNow	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 86356

Yes absolutely. The I think consultants could easily isolate costs of securing oil supplies that are distinct from other commodities. Wars in the Middle East are a great example. They serve no other commodity, since the Middle East produce nothing else of value besides oil. Keeping our shipping lanes open around the world is another matter entirely, since it would be difficult to separate from other commodities. Although, I'd leave that assessment to the experts. As far as all of our bases all around the world, I've long advocated a complete reassessment. There is no need for us to have bases in South Korea, Japan, Germany, and everywhere else. Those countries are stable Democracies with powerful militaries, that do not need our presence on their land. I'm glad we've been pulling out of their countries. We should pull out of far more and move to a reliance on a highly mobile and specialize armed forces, as Rumsfeld envisioned. That is what is needed in today's world of asymmetrical warfare.