So why can't we contain Iraq?

[Arrow]

It wouldn't decrease the risk at all. If we start using alternative fuels, the economy of the Mid-East is going to collapse -- Every single Arab country combined has a GDP the size of Finland's when you remove oil revenues. Guess who everyone over there will blame for that?

And what do you think they'll do about it without money?

Are you that naive? There are large Muslim populations in Europe and decent-sized ones in the Americas, and of course there are Muslim countries like Pakistan and Indonesia and Malaysia that wouldn't be affected by ending the market for oil.

These people would provide all the funding necessary for the terror acts to be carried out, if not carry them out themselves. You know why? They're all Muslims, and the Muslim Umma is a single unified body; they don't have a conceptualization of the Nation-State like we do. So when we abandon the majority of the population of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to STARVE TO DEATH without money to import food, the nation which, coincidentally, contains the Hejaz, the holiest region with the two holiest cities in Islam, all of those people will be very upset.

I wish everyone who proposed theories on how to deal with this would at least study the issue before trying to do so. As you can see, not only would developing an alternative source of fuel be disastrous, but when the oil runs out naturally in that region, we're probably going to see a wave of terrorism to make the current one look like nothing at all.

That's why it's vital that we totally remake the Middle East before then into a region capable of at least supporting its self; the alternative is a religious war unlike anything seen since the 17th century.

According to an in-depth report made by Frontline, the majority of terrorist funding and funding for many (if not most) of the fundamentalist muslim schools comes from Saudi Arab. The entire Saudi economy is based on oil. Furthermore, I doubt that many muslims outside of the middle east would take up the terrorist cause (if they wanted too, many of them would have already, and the U.S. and Europe would basically have a lot of small civil wars to deal with).

[The Duchess of Zeon]

According to an in-depth report made by Frontline, the majority of terrorist funding and funding for many (if not most) of the fundamentalist muslim schools comes from Saudi Arab. The entire Saudi economy is based on oil. Furthermore, I doubt that many muslims outside of the middle east would take up the terrorist cause (if they wanted too, many of them would have already, and the U.S. and Europe would basically have a lot of small civil wars to deal with).

The Saudis give about three billion a year in funding to terrorist-related activities, yes. That's hardly all the money that goes to terrorism; a lot comes from Indonesia, and potentially more from Pakistan. Neither will be solved with alternative fuel sources.

A fair amount even comes from western countries, and there have been incidences of western Muslims joining terror groups. I'm saying that would increase if you caused millions of Saudis - the people who live in the State which contains the Hejaz, the holiest part of the Islamic realm - to starve to death.

[Captain Kruger]

Consider what happened with Hilter. The allies appeased him to prevent war, and were afraid because of German's renewed military might (the French should have prevented that when they had the chance). Hilter used his power to gain land and more power. This is the same thing that Saddam has tried to do over and over again. The North Koreans want something (but I don't know exactly what), but they aren't out to take control of Southeast Asia. With the Soviets, they could be reasoned with, and with each side possessing thousands of nukes, the Soviets and the US knew that a mistake would destroy the world. Saddam has far more in common with Hilter than the North Koreans or the Soviets.

That's exactly the point I've been making. Stupid damn Frenchies are making the same mistake all over again, reaffirming their official status as the Spineless Pussies of Europe.

The real disappointment to me is Germany. I actually thought they had a pair. I guess I was wrong.

[0.1]

So, it seems that nobody can provide a good definition and plan for containment of Iraq.

Hmmm, just as I thought, it's been used as a catch phrase and there is no substance behind it.

[Darth Wong]

I have some trouble, however, with Marina's assertion that switching to alternative fuels would trigger a holy war. Slogans like "Infidels On the Holy Land!" and "Free Palestine!" are a lot catchier than "Decreased Demand for our Primary Export Product!"

[Andrew J.]

It wouldn't decrease the risk at all. If we start using alternative fuels, the economy of the Mid-East is going to collapse -- Every single Arab country combined has a GDP the size of Finland's when you remove oil revenues. Guess who everyone over there will blame for that?

And what do you think they'll do about it without money?

Are you that naive? There are large Muslim populations in Europe and decent-sized ones in the Americas, and of course there are Muslim countries like Pakistan and Indonesia and Malaysia that wouldn't be affected by ending the market for oil.

These people would provide all the funding necessary for the terror acts to be carried out, if not carry them out themselves. You know why? They're all Muslims, and the Muslim Umma is a single unified body; they don't have a conceptualization of the Nation-State like we do.

Ah, the Caliph has returned? I had not heard. When did this occur?

EDIT: Just in case this seems a little obtuse, I'm suggesting that the Muslims world is a as unified, approximately, as Yugoslavia.