What did I learn from TIME today...?

[SirNitram]

Yes, the entire economy of Alberta is based on it

But seriously, you know perfectly well that you can't afford to lop off such a huge proportion of your oil source. It's not about reaping oil profits, but it's also not about humanitarianism, except as a secondary motive. It seems to me that, based on PNAC and other sources, the primary motive is "economic security", of which oil is an important component. Mind you, a lot of people shorten that to "security", because it sounds better that way.

You forgot to mention the 'International Community', of whom the members all seem to be people I never spoke to ever, so how can they know my opinions?

[Montcalm]

We get the same amount of oil from Canada that we get from Saudi Arabia.

And that's why we're going to take out Canada next.

...

Uh, did I just say that? Nevermind...

Be careful with what you say we do not have WMD but a drunk Canadian is really dangerous

[Ymir]

The US would never launch a nuclear strike against another nuclear-armed State unless fired upon first.

Not today. Tomorrow, who knows?

I don't know why you minimize the nuclear power of France, Britain, Russia, China, Israel, India, Pakistan, etc - These States all have notable influence because of it. France will remain a regional power with some diplomatic influence of note even if the security council is dissolute, because of a nuclear arsenal and a carrier battle group, for example. The USA may be the penultimate force but it does not have total dominance over all nations on Earth - And so areas of counter-influence exist, as they always have.

I haven't minimized their nuclear power, but they are not the topic right now. Neither have i claimed that USA have total dominance over all nations on Earth, only that is has a responsibility as the most powerful of them. A responsibility it has continuosly violated.

I don't understand what cease-fire violation you are talking about. Now has noone happened, and if it happened years ago, it is only hipocracy to start war over it now, after talking sweet words of preventing terrorism and support democracy and peace in the middle-east.

- Ymir, who don't think an occupation will do anything better...rather worse. Much worse.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Yes, the entire economy of Alberta is based on it

But seriously, you know perfectly well that you can't afford to lop off such a huge proportion of your oil source. It's not about reaping oil profits, but it's also not about humanitarianism, except as a secondary motive. It seems to me that, based on PNAC and other sources, the primary motive is "economic security", of which oil is an important component. Mind you, a lot of people shorten that to "security", because it sounds better that way.

I'd actually argue that the invasion of Iraq is a good sign in terms of going after the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which is the real threat. Iraq has the second largest oil reserves in the world after the KSA's - If those are brought to their maximum possible output, they would deaden the effect on the world economy of disrupting the Saudi exports. So once Iraq has been dealt with, and the latest technology is employed in bringing the Iraqi oil fields to maximum production, it will be possible - from an economic standpoint - to move against the KSA with minimal disruption to the world economy, and thus to go after the real centre of Islamofascism.


P.S. An interesting thing happened in that vein today, but I'm still trying to place it into the proper context, so my view on how possible this course of action is may be adjusted appropriately depending on how I settle on my evaluation of that. If you're curious - Richard Perle resigned. This may seem like a big blow to the neocon wing of the foreign policy in D.C. - However, did you hear about the controversy that had surrounded a meeting he had with some Saudi industrialists in Marseilles back in January? And are you aware of Daniel Pipes' work?

[Stormbringer]

Nuclear? The enviro-fascists killed it.

Sooner or later we will be forced to use nuclear power as we only have so much oil to burn. Once the prices get high enough the oposition will crumble. It's the only power source that will satisfy demand in the long term.

And if they ever get the fast-burn sodium reactor design into testing and production a whole lot of the environmental problems will be alleviated.

Coal? Monster pollution problem.

The older plants can be. But the newer and upgraded plants are relatively clean. As good or better than most oil fired plants.

[Ymir]

What about the whole gassing his own population thing? Not to mention the other crimes he's been accused of that are covered in far more detail elsewhere in this board.

What about the whole executing their own population thing? What about the crime's the US have been accused of that are covered in far more detail elsewhere, but probably not in this board?

Saddam are a sick and dangerous dictator. I have never stated otherwise. The problem is just that he is not the only villain in this drama. To do an appropriate comprehension - If Iraq are Darth Maul, who, then, are Darth Sidious?

Heh...it figures. "I love democracy".

- Ymir, who never does SW-references otherwise[/quote]

[SirNitram]

The US would never launch a nuclear strike against another nuclear-armed State unless fired upon first.

Not today. Tomorrow, who knows?

Appeal to Ignorance.

I don't know why you minimize the nuclear power of France, Britain, Russia, China, Israel, India, Pakistan, etc - These States all have notable influence because of it. France will remain a regional power with some diplomatic influence of note even if the security council is dissolute, because of a nuclear arsenal and a carrier battle group, for example. The USA may be the penultimate force but it does not have total dominance over all nations on Earth - And so areas of counter-influence exist, as they always have.

I haven't minimized their nuclear power, but they are not the topic right now. Neither have i claimed that USA have total dominance over all nations on Earth, only that is has a responsibility as the most powerful of them. A responsibility it has continuosly violated.

What, exactly, is the responsibility of the most powerful nation? I'd love to hear you define this for me. See, as I understand it, the most powerful nation is obliged.. Perhaps required.. to remove those it used as stepping stones, should they prove dangerous. You know, like the Taliban and Saddam.

I don't understand what cease-fire violation you are talking about. Now has noone happened, and if it happened years ago, it is only hipocracy to start war over it now, after talking sweet words of preventing terrorism and support democracy and peace in the middle-east.

Wow, there's a stupid statement. So, if we can't get him to obey the UN set resolutions in 12 years, we shouldn't do anything? Just say 'Oh well, let him kill his civilians and his neighbours, we don't care anymore, it's been too long'? Is there suddenly a statute of limitations on this shit? Of course, we're trying to do the last two.. Saddam is a dictator, so removing him helps foster democracy. And he's a dangerous son of a bitch when we don't hold a sword to his neck.

- Ymir, who don't think an occupation will do anything better...rather worse. Much worse.

Better than leaving things as-is.

Kemmish- Evolution through conflict.

[Dalton]

And Dalton, Fuck off. Perhaps you should refresh your memory on what exactly a troll is.

Don't make me laugh, kid. I've dealt with Usenet trolls that would make you curl into a fetal position and whimper. I maintain a database of some of them, in fact. I engaged in direct hand-to-hand combat with trolls that would crush you like an insect. I don't think you realize who you're talking to, pal.

The fact of the matter is that Eleas isn't trolling here. He's brought up good points and he's defending them skilfully. He's only a troll because you don't like his opinion and you're flaming him for it. If anyone's a troll, it's you, little "meNNis," for willfully and constantly insulting Eleas and Ymir and engaging in ad hominem attacks at every turn.

[SirNitram]

And Dalton, Fuck off. Perhaps you should refresh your memory on what exactly a troll is.

Don't make me laugh, kid. I've dealt with Usenet trolls that would make you curl into a fetal position and whimper. I maintain a database of some of them, in fact. I engaged in direct hand-to-hand combat with trolls that would crush you like an insect. I don't think you realize who you're talking to, pal.

I so call that quote for Final Flamewar: Return Of The King.

[fgalkin]

Yes, the entire economy of Alberta is based on it

But seriously, you know perfectly well that you can't afford to lop off such a huge proportion of your oil source. It's not about reaping oil profits, but it's also not about humanitarianism, except as a secondary motive. It seems to me that, based on PNAC and other sources, the primary motive is "economic security", of which oil is an important component. Mind you, a lot of people shorten that to "security", because it sounds better that way.

I'd actually argue that the invasion of Iraq is a good sign in terms of going after the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which is the real threat. Iraq has the second largest oil reserves in the world after the KSA's - If those are brought to their maximum possible output, they would deaden the effect on the world economy of disrupting the Saudi exports. So once Iraq has been dealt with, and the latest technology is employed in bringing the Iraqi oil fields to maximum production, it will be possible - from an economic standpoint - to move against the KSA with minimal disruption to the world economy, and thus to go after the real centre of Islamofascism.

Let's just hope that the attack doesn't happen before 2008. If any move is taken against Saudi Arabia, it will raise a shit-storm of Islamic fundamentalism, including possible suicide bombings from muslim American citizens (I don't know the priorities of Islamic fundies, but I'll guess they are the same that of the Christian fundies, that is, God first, Amrerica second). The last thing we want is Shrubby & Co. at the helm handling the situation.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

[MKSheppard]

Sooner or later we will be forced to use nuclear power as we only have so much oil to burn. Once the prices get high enough the oposition will crumble. It's the only power source that will satisfy demand in the long term.

You forget that we need oil for the petrochemical industry, aka plastics.

Yes, that nice computer monitor is made out of fossilized dinos

[SirNitram]

Sooner or later we will be forced to use nuclear power as we only have so much oil to burn. Once the prices get high enough the oposition will crumble. It's the only power source that will satisfy demand in the long term.

You forget that we need oil for the petrochemical industry, aka plastics.

Yes, that nice computer monitor is made out of fossilized dinos

All the more reason to remove the need to burn oil.

[MKSheppard]

All the more reason to remove the need to burn oil.

Thing is, I've heard that oil might actually be a renewable source,
due to oil seeps...or was that crackpot ranting?

[RogueIce]

Coal? Monster pollution problem.

The older plants can be. But the newer and upgraded plants are relatively clean. As good or better than most oil fired plants.

But then we'll be at the mercy of the all-powerful Coal Companies and the Company Town!!

Ok, that was lame...

What about the whole executing their own population thing? What about the crime's the US have been accused of that are covered in far more detail elsewhere, but probably not in this board?

Well, give me an example of how we're equal to Saddam gassing his own population, using women and children as shields for his troops, putting military equipment next to civilian areas so he can use them as a shield for his army...

Go ahead. Tell me how we're worse than he is, and what our crimes amount to compared to his.

Saddam are a sick and dangerous dictator. I have never stated otherwise. The problem is just that he is not the only villain in this drama. To do an appropriate comprehension - If Iraq are Darth Maul, who, then, are Darth Sidious?

But he's the only villian we can go after, at least for the moment. Him and the Taliban, Osama bin Laden, and other terrorists (whom we haven't forgetten, we just don't have the media covering all that).

Don't make me laugh, kid. I've dealt with Usenet trolls that would make you curl into a fetal position and whimper. I maintain a database of some of them, in fact. I engaged in direct hand-to-hand combat with trolls that would crush you like an insect. I don't think you realize who you're talking to, pal.

Nice work, Dalton. Nicely worded, and amusing to boot.

BTW, nice plug for your site there.

[SirNitram]

All the more reason to remove the need to burn oil.

Thing is, I've heard that oil might actually be a renewable source,
due to oil seeps...or was that crackpot ranting?

Never heard of it. I've tried to work out how you'd manufacture fossil fuels. In the words of SMAC: If we can but bypass the million-year production time, we can corner the market once again.

[Dalton]

I so call that quote for Final Flamewar: Return Of The King.

Be my guest

Nice work, Dalton. Nicely worded, and amusing to boot.

BTW, nice plug for your site there.

I try, kiddo

[Ymir]

What, exactly, is the responsibility of the most powerful nation?

To not opress and abuse the less powerful.

See, as I understand it, the most powerful nation is obliged.. Perhaps required.. to remove those it used as stepping stones, should they prove dangerous. You know, like the Taliban and Saddam.

To not use such stepping stones at all. It's like contaminating a whole citys population with ebola, and then offer medical help to those that seems to survive. Painful medical help.

So, if we can't get him to obey the UN set resolutions in 12 years, we shouldn't do anything?

You should do something. Like try a solution the rest of the Security Council can agree on. Try everything other than war before rushing in to bless the Iraqi people with 'democracy' and peanut-butter and take their oil in return.

Of course, we're trying to do the last two.. Saddam is a dictator, so removing him helps foster democracy.

And who decided that democracy is the ultimate political system that everyone on earth should be given by downright invasion?

- Ymir, believes in democracy, but not as it work in the world today

[Eleas]

To all - I wrote a post that took me fifteen minutes. Five minutes to go, the computer swallowed it, courtesy of a mouse wheel. I need to sleep and cannot remember what I wrote, so I will go now, with a few words to various debaters.

Uther - I must say I am impressed. Your last arguments were well thought-out and I'll be happy to take up the glove when I'm rested, if that's okay with you. I furthermore apologise for my words. While I feel there were merited insults, the anger was more the result of a screwy computer.

Marina - No, Ymir isn't me either, but he's a neighbor. And he's Ymir. We could concievably arrange a couple of phone calls to all three of us in order to settle this once and for all.

meNNis - I created this thread in order to discuss a subject. You initially refused to discuss said subject, preferring to fling banned in ASVS for being excessively wimpy... at a Moderator. Hey, here's a thought, maybe you should look up the definition of an Ad Hominem Attack? While you're at it, look up the words "cowardly fucker". If you don't have a dictionary nearby, you might want to try the definition in a mirror.

Durran Korr - I appreciate your restraint. Still, does every uncomfortable and / or unpopular opinion have to be a troll?

Dalton, Durandal - Once again, guys, I owe you. I know I've been, at least partially, attacking your home. That can't be fun. Seeing you come to the rescue is... humbling.

Morat - Ok, noted. Sorry about the sarcasm.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Not today. Tomorrow, who knows?

Strategic Paralysis. It won't happen tommorow because it's still in play. If something occurs to make it not be in play we probably won't have to worry about nukes going off because they won't be as much of a threat.

I haven't minimized their nuclear power, but they are not the topic right now. Neither have i claimed that USA have total dominance over all nations on Earth, only that is has a responsibility as the most powerful of them. A responsibility it has continuosly violated.

Why do we have some sort of responsibility because we're the strongest? That's a very odd idea - We just sort of ended up on the top, and for most of our history we didn't want to even be involved. You should be thankful we don't play by Belgian Congo rules.

Seriously, the idea that the nation on the top of the pile has a responsibility is very odd - If one nation has a responsibility, they all do, as nation-states are all equals in the eyes of the law. If one doesn't, none do. It's as simple as that. Their relative power only matters when their viability as nation-states is put to the test - IE, in time of War.

I don't understand what cease-fire violation you are talking about. Now has noone happened, and if it happened years ago, it is only hipocracy to start war over it now, after talking sweet words of preventing terrorism and support democracy and peace in the middle-east.

Hardly! It is a legal and viable point for the resumption of hostilities. The cease-fire violation has been continuous for twelve years. The cease-fire halted the Second Persian Gulf War, and mandated that Saddam disarm. He did not, and ever since then has been in violation and we could make war on him. For various reasons we have held back or been held back - Until now. But the right has always existed, and international law has never put a time limit on it.

Technically there is no Third Persian Gulf War - This is a legal resumption of the Second Persian Gulf War. And if we're disarming an irrational ruler of his WMDs, we are supporting peace. If the way to make a State compliant to its treaty obligations is to change its government to one that has rational rulers, a system with checks and balances that moderates out the extremists - a representative democracy like our own - is the best.

As for terrorism, Saddam has obvious ties to some groups even if his ties to Al-Qaeda are debateable. Al-Qaeda isn't the only terrorist group in the world.

[Darth Wong]

Sooner or later we will be forced to use nuclear power as we only have so much oil to burn. Once the prices get high enough the oposition will crumble. It's the only power source that will satisfy demand in the long term.

And if they ever get the fast-burn sodium reactor design into testing and production a whole lot of the environmental problems will be alleviated.

CANDU works fine

Coal? Monster pollution problem.

The older plants can be. But the newer and upgraded plants are relatively clean. As good or better than most oil fired plants.

That's not saying much. If you've ever seen figures on coal-fired plants, even with flue-gas conditioning and scrubbers, you're still looking at hundreds of thousands of tons of waste being pumped into the atmosphere every year for a handful of plants.

[Joe]

Durran Korr - I appreciate your restraint. Still, does every uncomfortable and / or unpopular opinion have to be a troll?

No, no, no, you seem to have misunderstood me. I didn't mean to imply that you were trolling, I was just saying that I personally agreed with him on the issue of the Iraq war, but I didn't approve of his debate tactics.

[SirNitram]

What, exactly, is the responsibility of the most powerful nation?

To not opress and abuse the less powerful.

Are we to allow others to abuse and oppress others? Or should we act? See, I'm not self-centered like some people here, I don't think we should ignore someone just because they're no threat to the US.

See, as I understand it, the most powerful nation is obliged.. Perhaps required.. to remove those it used as stepping stones, should they prove dangerous. You know, like the Taliban and Saddam.

To not use such stepping stones at all. It's like contaminating a whole citys population with ebola, and then offer medical help to those that seems to survive. Painful medical help.

Everyone uses stepping stones. No one wades through history, sorry to shatter your idealism. But it is the US's responsibility to remove them now.... Unless you think we should leave them there, like festering wounds until the limbs fall fucking off.

So, if we can't get him to obey the UN set resolutions in 12 years, we shouldn't do anything?

You should do something. Like try a solution the rest of the Security Council can agree on. Try everything other than war before rushing in to bless the Iraqi people with 'democracy' and peanut-butter and take their oil in return.

What do you think we've done for 12 years, moronboy?

Of course, we're trying to do the last two.. Saddam is a dictator, so removing him helps foster democracy.

And who decided that democracy is the ultimate political system that everyone on earth should be given by downright invasion?

- Ymir, believes in democracy, but not as it work in the world today

Whoever set the goals YOU CITED to be what the US should be doing. But let's ignore that, it makes you look bad... Asshole.

Kemmish-

That which don't age, don't change.
That which don't change, can't learn.
That which can't learn...

Paraphrased from Granny Weatherwax.

[Stormbringer]

Sooner or later we will be forced to use nuclear power as we only have so much oil to burn. Once the prices get high enough the oposition will crumble. It's the only power source that will satisfy demand in the long term.

You forget that we need oil for the petrochemical industry, aka plastics.

Yes, that nice computer monitor is made out of fossilized dinos

Exactly. All the more demand for oil. I was simply referring to the need for oil for fuel. The fact is we've got a finite supply of oil and we can't afford to burn it for ever.

At least plastics can be recycled.

[Stormbringer]

CANDU works fine

Sure does. But it's still got the spent fuel problem. The fast-burn sodium reactors are supposed to use 99% of their fuel.

That's not saying much. If you've ever seen figures on coal-fired plants, even with flue-gas conditioning and scrubbers, you're still looking at hundreds of thousands of tons of waste being pumped into the atmosphere every year for a handful of plants.

I've seen the figures for the best and the worst of them. They aren't that great but they're no worse than the oil plants.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Let's just hope that the attack doesn't happen before 2008. If any move is taken against Saudi Arabia, it will raise a shit-storm of Islamic fundamentalism, including possible suicide bombings from muslim American citizens (I don't know the priorities of Islamic fundies, but I'll guess they are the same that of the Christian fundies, that is, God first, Amrerica second). The last thing we want is Shrubby & Co. at the helm handling the situation.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

They're the only people who have the guts and the genius to pull it off. Properly planned and vigorously executed, and supported by the right nations - the help of whom can be gained in the appropriate ways - we can strike down the Wahhabi State. It probably won't happen before 2008 - But I expect our President after 2008 to be Condi Rice. Such a conflict might indeed see a violent response, but if aggressively waged, and if our target is properly recognized, such a true demonstration of American power - and our willingness to rearrange State boundaries - will end the issue decisively.

Other States beyond the KSA will have to be targeted, but few with direct military force.

Make no mistake, though - Iraq is in truth just one campaign in a very long and uncertain War against Islamofascism.