Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: roo_ster on September 17, 2010, 10:10:19 AM
-
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/LI14Ak01.html
"If they want to kill each other, why not help them?"
TJ demonstrated that one man; with nothing but a tenuous grip on English grammar, a congregation that could fit on a carnie thrill-ride, and a $2 paperback Koran; can trigger thousands of people around the world (MSM-types and gov't weenies all over) who then trigger tens & hundreds of thousands to go completely apeshit.
TJ destabilized quite a bit and caused a huge ruckus in the Muslim world, a world unaccustomed to criticism of its foundational beliefs. What if some organization with real resources did its level best to disrupt and throw into chaos the Muslim world with all-out asymmetrical attacks at its foundations?
-
IMHO, its a brilliant idea, but because of our reliance on the ME for oil, any private individual pursuing such an agenda would probably be arrested. The Goobermint would probably never try such a stunt.
-
The best way for the West to subvert Islam, emasculating its world wide terror abilities, is for the West to become independent of the Islamic world for its energy needs. No money, no terror. They go back to sitting around, sipping tea.
We've had nearly 40 years to become energy independent. We have the means and the resources in the West. That we haven't proves the vast disconect the Western ruling class has with reality. That we haven't proves the vast disconect the average citizen has with what it is that guarantees his freedom. That is the single major imperative to changing out our "leaders" from the sycophantic fools we now have.
Every political and economical problem the West confronts is tied up in energy. The word itself is the root, the foundation of everything having to do with life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Always has, always will.
To be free and at liberty, energy must be expended. It's time the real discussion begin. So far it hasn't. If I was running for national office, energy independence would be my single issue. It is the only thing I would talk about and show how it affects everything in the modern world. Without energy, nothing happens.
-
What if some organization with real resources did its level best to disrupt and throw into chaos the Muslim world with all-out asymmetrical attacks at its foundations?
To what end? Does the word Crusade ring a bell?
-
To what end? Does the word Crusade ring a bell?
Yep.
If you're going to engage in warfare, you need to kill your enemy (screaming beards).
I'd think that Iraq and A-stan would have taught us all that lesson by now.
-
I've tho't for a long time that the best way to fight these people is to work on making the US a net *exporter* of energy. Just for fun, see if we can drive down the price of oil to $1 per barrel. It would change the entire global political balance.
And what if TJ *had* burned a koran, and it so upset the screaming-beard types that they killed themselves? He'd probably be considered a hero instead of a rascist kook.
-
To what end? Does the word Crusade ring a bell?
To what end? To reduce the ability of dark-age Muslim "civilization" to disrupt the rest of the world.
You might recall that all the Muslim territory the Crusaders battled on was Christian territory until the Muslims battled on it a couple centuries prior and wrested it from the Eastern Roman Empire.
-
Disrupting them by burning their book so they will not disrupt us; sounds like a battle over who's God is better to me. I'll pass, it doesn't bother me who they worship.
-
Disrupting them by burning their book so they will not disrupt us; sounds like a battle over who's God is better to me. I'll pass, it doesn't bother me who they worship.
I'd guess you didn't read the article.
-
Disrupting them by burning their book so they will not disrupt us; sounds like a battle over who's God is better to me. I'll pass, it doesn't bother me who they worship.
Right now they want to fight "the serpent." That's the West.
Get them fighting about esoteric BS about Islam. Get them fighting about the validity of various "holy sites." Get them fighting about events in Muhammad's life. Poke the beehive and suggest that Muhammad didn't even exist. Make it look like it's coming out of the Muslim community rather than the West.
They'll durka-blow themselves up for decades, over their own perceived conflicts on who they worship.
Better than durka-blowing some of us up.
-
I fail to see how fomenting chaos in the middle east is beneficial to us.
-
makes some folks feel good
-
I fail to see how fomenting chaos in the middle east is beneficial to us.
I think the reasoning is to get the preoccupied with themselves for awhile. But while we're hooked on oil, it'd be like a junky going cold turkey...
-
I think the reasoning is to get the preoccupied with themselves for awhile.
If we insult and offend them enough to start 'em rioting, I think it's safe to say they won't forget about us.
-
If we insult and offend them enough to start 'em rioting, I think it's safe to say they won't forget about us.
But if we trick them into thinking they've insulted and offended themselves, the durka-splodey-tude will be most entertaining. =D
-
were "spengler" more credible to me the article would mean more.
-
I fail to see how fomenting chaos in the middle east is beneficial to us.
How would we tell the difference? :lol:
-
I read the article but it still seems like the primary focus is finding various reasons to use this tactic against Islam. They conclude with this:
Weapons are there to be used, and theological weapons may turn out to be some of the nastiest means of war-fighting at hand.
I believe wars are serious affairs and should be fought fiercely. I just don't see the benifit of declaring war on Islam or the moral reason for trying to use an underhanded method of destoying it.
-
I believe wars are serious affairs and should be fought fiercely. I just don't see the benifit of declaring war on Islam or the moral reason for trying to use an underhanded method of destoying it.
Islam is a highly fragmented group of sub-religions. Lots of branches.
The Al Qaida branch may only have a few hundred thousand adherents. And maybe only 3% of them care enough to get off their azzes and make war on the Great Serpent. And the Al Qaida branch may be a totally different sect than the Lebanese Al Aqsa Brigade. They may have theological differences that can be exploited, turning them against each other.
This is wise war, and Sun Tzu would be proud of the general that exploited such tactics.
-
the author is a very interesting guy him being a larouche fanboi says a lot.
-
And what if TJ *had* burned a koran, and it so upset the screaming-beard types that they killed themselves?
Unfortunately they rarely kill themselves without taking a few innocent soldiers/Afghan/Iraqi civilians with them.
-
Unfortunately they rarely kill themselves without taking a few innocent soldiers/Afghan/Iraqi civilians with them.
This.
Also, there is a simple answer to this quabble:
The answer is nuclear energy.
-
If we insult and offend them enough to start 'em rioting, I think it's safe to say they won't forget about us.
True, but there will be less of them when they get around to remembering us.
-
This.
Also, there is a simple answer to this quabble:
The answer is nuclear energy.
This. As well as any other viable forms of energy production. It's not that we, the United States, are so dependent on ME oil, it is the West in general. We import a comparitively small amount from the ME for our own use as compared to other nominal western allies.
That is not to say, were our ME imports disrupted, we would not experience higher prices for refined products and shortages.
-
Don't worry about the oil thing. President Obama is on the job. An offshore drilling moratorium and making it much more difficult to get permits to drill will really help reduce our dependence on foreign oil. ...wait...what? ???
Regarding the Nuke Power comment, how much would the oil market really be affected by nuclear power? I don't see us burning oil to produce electrical power. Now if you want to start talking about natural gas, that is another issue.
On the Muslim issue, I think for me, Terry Jones just underscored that many of these people we are fighting for and against over there are just plain nuts. It really brings to mind questions about whether these people are worth wasting our treasure and soldier's lives on.
-
Regarding the Nuke Power comment, how much would the oil market really be affected by nuclear power? I don't see us burning oil to produce electrical power. Now if you want to start talking about natural gas, that is another issue.
Consider this:
Suppose [this wouldn't happen overnight] the US replaced all its natural gas, coal, and oil-fired power plants with nuclear plants. Prices of coal and natural gas woild fall (meaning other countries and consumers would purchase more of it), leading people to switch away from oil.
Because nearly half of US' power generation is coal (44.9%) and 23.4% of it is natural gas, that would be a big thing. Further, compact and cheap nuclear power will increase the viability of electric vehicles.
-
The single largest use for crude in the US is, by far, gasoline. They have a long way to go yet, but electric cars are the single greatest route to energy independence we have. I DO NOT think they should replace gasoline cars, however, nor do I like politicians "social engineering" through taxes and regs. But seriously, cars like the Volt (plug-in series hybrids) are probably one of the best ways to unshackle us from the Middle East.
Pure electrics are fine for "in-town only" types (and gearheads!), gas or diesel would still be fine for rural folks (and gearheads!), but most people would be fine with hybrids (and gearheads! see the pattern? :D).
Performance, cost, and other things still need to advance a bit first, though. Like getting away from the rarer elements. (I'm looking at you, Li!)
-
Plus, there's no reason we couldn't also go to thorium reactors too. Way more common than Uranium in the ground, it's everywhere...
And IMO, human civilization is going to need petrochemicals for fertilizers, pesticides, plastics, lubricants, medicines and an almost uncountable number of other things in the long run more than we're going to need to be burning them in cars.
-
WRT the OP's thesis, I think some folks are missing the forest for the jihadi propaganda.
We are in the ME/Muslim world today. We were there yesterday, we'll be there tomorrow. (Historically speaking.)
We've (the USA) been there since the birth of the nation (Barbary Pirates).
[Western Civ has been in the ME since before Christ, given that Christianity (and therefore Judaism) are fundamental building blocks of Western Civ. Western Civ has been menaced by Islam since it broke out of the Arabian peninsula in the 8th Century.]
The formula goes like this:
1. Nutjob Muslims take the Koran, Haditha, and contemporaneous histories of Mohammed seriously.
2. NJs start to threaten and/or destroy American interests in the name of their god.
3. America takes it in the shorts for a while and finally gets fed up.
4. America sends armed forces to kill the jihadi scum and occupy for more or less time.
5. American armed forces leave and eventually new idiots begin to take the Koran, Haditha, and contemporaneous histories of Mohammed seriously...
Now, I have a dark view of human nature and expect that the Western Civ will have to periodically slap down the savages, drain the swamp, push back the verge, whatever. Western Civ will do so until it commits civilizational suicide or the eschaton, whichever comes first.
But, what if there were other means to kill back the jihadi weeds with less risk to civilized peoples? Would not that be better than shipping our men & women over to some dunghill country to kill goat-humping fools with visions of martyrdom dancing in their heads?
Something like the Iran/Iraq war (which kept both from getting too frisky with the West), distributed enough draw in the jihadis and turn them into fertilizer. Like a regional bug zapper. Or, maybe just at the country level, pitting domestic extremist vs domestic extremist, sort of a Mohammedian Spy vs Spy.
The Muslim world is split enough, crazy enough, and paranoid enough that such an indirect approach is likely to keep them occupied...and make the direct kill-and-accupy approach less likely.
-
It has been opined that the Iranian drive for WMD is to actually deal with Israel, and Saudi Arabia, thereby establishing themselves as the "Leader of the Muslim World", and coincidently controlling lion's share of the oil coming from the ME. Any conflict that results in that outcome would be bad for Western interests.
-
OK, roo_ster, but Anne Coulter still had a better strategy.
-
IMHO, its a brilliant idea, but because of our reliance on the ME for oil, any private individual pursuing such an agenda would probably be arrested. The Goobermint would probably never try such a stunt.
Don't worry about the oil thing. President Obama is on the job. An offshore drilling moratorium and making it much more difficult to get permits to drill will really help reduce our dependence on foreign oil. ...wait...what? ???
It bugs me to read comments such as these - it's a simple numbers game, and one that not many look into without simply parroting "facts" they've heard. Frankly, it smacks of uninformed folks talking of "machine guns" where we can plainly see a semi-auto.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fperotcharts.com%2Fimages%2Fenergy%2Fenergy07-640.png&hash=cd18cebbd6eaaab8e6d3e79a0ab1b887cc74b675) (http://perotcharts.com/2008/07/united-states-oil-imports-by-country-march-2008/)
18.9% as of 2008, and 16.4% as of 2009! That's how much we get from the ME. Seems to me we'd be better off buying from folks who AREN'T actively supporting those trying to kill us...
Heck, we get more oil from Mexico than we do from the ME, and nearly twice that from Canada. Again, I just don't see the reasoning behind arguments such as these.
Now, to be ignored. ;)
Back to your regularly scheduled program. :P
-
But you're only counting the percentage imported from SA and Iraq, while over 20% of imports are labeled as "Other." Don't you need to know who the others are, before you can draw that conclusion?
-
I sure do need to know those numbers! That's why I went to the source website (http://www.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_impcus_a2_nus_ep00_im0_mbbl_m.htm) and looked for myself, as well as gleaning the 2009 numbers. ;)
-
Oh, OK.
-
If other states, more heavily dependent on oil from the ME are deprived of that resource, they will bid up the price of oil for all of us.
-
Total production figures of crude oil from the ME are lower than you'd think.
7,095.60 million barrels/year. all of the Middle East (Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Qatar, Saudia Arabia, UAE) ~26.90% of world production.
1,938.15 million barrels/year, US, ~7.35% of world production.
26,374.90 million barrels/year, total world production, with a large portion being used domestically in producing countries.
Also, it's amusing to note that the ME imports nearly all of their gasoline, with Saudi Arabia alone importing 406.61 million barrels of crude each day; that's a whopping 13.5% of what they export!
Once again, all my data comes directly from the EIA. :)
-
Disrupting them by burning their book so they will not disrupt us; sounds like a battle over who's God is better to me. I'll pass, it doesn't bother me who they worship.
In actuality, it can be argued that all monotheistic religions worship the same god, all that changes is the name by which they call him/her/it. After all, monotheism says there is only one god. If there is only one god, then any religion that recognizes only one god must be worshiping the same god. I don't really care that Muslims call God "Allah" instead of "Y_hw_h," and it doesn't bother me that they choose to regard Mohamed as the ultimate prophet of God's word rather than Jesus, or even that they use the Q'uran as their holy book instead of the Holy Bible. However, it DOES bother me that they think I should be killed because I do NOT choose to believe that Mohamed was the ultimate prophet of God's word. It also bothers me that they can burn Bibles with impunity, but they don't think non-Muslims should burn Q'urans.
Mostly it's that wantin' to kill me because I'm a Christian that bothers me. In fact, that bothers me quite a bit.
-
If there is only one god, then any religion that recognizes only one god must be worshiping the same god.
From a Christian perspective, if a person denies that Jesus of Nazareth is God Incarnate, we can know with certainty that they are not worshiping the Christian God. The Apostle John referred to such people as "antichrist."
-
In actuality, it can be argued that all monotheistic religions worship the same god, all that changes is the name by which they call him/her/it.
Not hardly....that's like saying Hawkmoon and fistful are just the same type of APS member...just the names are different....
Mostly it's that wantin' to kill me because I'm a Christian that bothers me. In fact, that bothers me quite a bit.
Me too....that's a trait that kinda transcends the different-religion thing....I'd feel the same way about a person whether they're Muslim or athiest or even Christian...
-
and it doesn't bother me that they choose to regard Mohamed as the ultimate prophet of God's word rather than Jesus,
Christians do not believe that Jesus was the ultimate prophet of God's word. Christians believe Jesus is God. Muslims do not. Therefore, they are not worshiping the same god.
-
PTK, its hardly ignorance. Statistics only bear out part of the story.
We're depending on the ME for at least 16% of our oil. But its more complicated than that, too. Many other western countries get oil from the ME.
So, if we lose a portion or all of that oil in a conflict, most likely so will our allies (and presumably some of them get more than 16% of their oil from the ME).
Those allies would then turn to our other sources to get oil. This would lead to a spike in demand.
So, a loss of 16% of our oil will not result in a 16% spike in prices.
In the short term, it would create rationing and panic.
In the long term, who knows how much prices would rise.
-
...presumably some of them get more than 16% of their oil from the ME...
On what, precisely, is this presumption based?
-
On what, precisely, is this presumption based?
Distance. We get 30% of our imported oil (according to your chart) from sources in our own hemisphere. The assumption would be that oil imported to Europe would likely come from closer to home, which for them is the ME. Even if, for argument's sake, they import roughly the same percentage as us from the ME...demand is demand. Decreasing 16% of the supply across the board would suck.
-
From a Christian perspective, if a person denies that Jesus of Nazareth is God Incarnate, we can know with certainty that they are not worshiping the Christian God. The Apostle John referred to such people as "antichrist."
Now you're getting into the issue of the nature of the Trinity, and not all Christian denominations agree on that. From any number of your posts I have the impression that you are more or less a fairly fundamental Christian, but within the broad category of "Christian" there are perspectives other than yours. And this is probably not the appropriate forum (ior at least not the appropriate thread) to conduct that discussion.
-
Distance. We get 30% of our imported oil (according to your chart) from sources in our own hemisphere. The assumption would be that oil imported to Europe would likely come from closer to home, which for them is the ME. Even if, for argument's sake, they import roughly the same percentage as us from the ME...demand is demand. Decreasing 16% of the supply across the board would suck.
No offense whatsoever intended, but... come on. Numbers and sources, or I'll be bowing out of this half-hearted debate and away from your "facts".
-
No offense whatsoever intended, but... come on. Numbers and sources, or I'll be bowing out of this half-hearted debate and away from your "facts".
According to this site, the EU gets 30% of its oil from OPEC countries
http://ec.europa.eu/energy/observatory/oil/import_export_en.htm
OPEC Member Countries:
Algeria Angola Ecuador Iran Iraq Kuwait Libya Nigeria Qatar Saudi Arabia United Arab Emirates Venezuela
How is 16% not reliance? That is over one tenth of our oil sources from the ME. You can't tell me that wouldn't negatively impact our economy.
-
JamisJockey,
I wasn't saying it isn't reliance, I simply wanted numbers and sources. I hate when I post lots of numbers, sources, and conclusions drawn from same, and then in reply I get "well, I think...", or "presumably...", or "obviously...". It's just... lame. :D
Thanks for a source! I'll need time to peruse it. :)
-
Now you're getting into the issue of the nature of the Trinity, and not all Christian denominations agree on that. From any number of your posts I have the impression that you are more or less a fairly fundamental Christian, but within the broad category of "Christian" there are perspectives other than yours. And this is probably not the appropriate forum (ior at least not the appropriate thread) to conduct that discussion.
Since when do we talk about anything in the appropriate thread? :lol: Again, from a Christian perspective, Jesus is God. Disagreement with that places a person outside "the broad category of 'Christian.'" Beyond that, I can only agree to disagree with you.
-
Since when do we talk about anything in the appropriate thread? :lol: Again, from a Christian perspective, Jesus is God. Disagreement with that places a person outside "the broad category of 'Christian.'" Beyond that, I can only agree to disagree with you.
As a dirty atheist scum heathen, I've got to regretably take Fistfuls side on this one :facepalm:.
Christian means you recognize Jesus as God, through the Trinity. If not, then a religion might follow Christ, but not actually be Christian.