Scheuer and RP

[TheRothbardian]

There isn't much similarity in their solutions to the terror problem is there? They agree on the cause but not the solution.

[ctb619]

Scheuer agrees that pulling out of the Middle East would weaken al-qaeda and other islamic terrorist groups, but he doesn't think that withdrawing is feasible until we can address our dependence on foreign oil.

[Slugg]

Scheuer agrees that pulling out of the Middle East would weaken al-qaeda and other islamic terrorist groups, but he doesn't think that withdrawing is feasible until we can address our dependence on foreign oil.

I believe we can't address our dependency on foreign oil until we leave. Money is like electricity, it will take the path of least resistance. As long as we're protecting oil over there, that's where it will come from. But, we leave, the oil tycoons will be FORCED to find other oil or another energy source. It'll cause gas prices to rise for awhile, but it'll be better for our kids.

[john_anderson_ii]

Scheuer agrees that pulling out of the Middle East would weaken al-qaeda and other islamic terrorist groups, but he doesn't think that withdrawing is feasible until we can address our dependence on foreign oil.

I think the U.S. is basically bent over a barrel in this situation. The lifeblood of the U.S. is oil. Without oil, the U.S. doesn't run. Osama wants a go at his primary enemies, the governments of several oil producing nations. We are not his primary enemy, we are shielding his primary enemies from Osama's brand of warfighting. That pisses him off. However, if we pull out and let Osama have his go, it will disrupt oil production, thus disrupting the U.S. economy.

If we stay, Osama will continue to attack us. If we leave, he will turn his attention to his reachable enemies and we will won't have oil.

I don't have a solution.

[noxagol]

Those countries can not afford to not sell us oil. We use 25% of the oil that gets used. Cut that demand out and and supply goes up, demand goes down, prices will drop like a rock and those countries will have no money.

Also, it will get us off our asses and find a good alternative, like electric cars.

[john_anderson_ii]

Those countries can not afford to not sell us oil. We use 25% of the oil that gets used.


Just to play the devil's advocate, as I've stated I don't have a solution.

What happens when the countries that are producing the supply come under Bin Laden's siege. If we aren't there shielding the governments of these oil producing nations, and Bin Laden tries to overthrow them. That will disrupt supply in a major way. In that event, oil prices will skyrocket.

[ctb619]

I believe we can't address our dependency on foreign oil until we leave. Money is like electricity, it will take the path of least resistance. As long as we're protecting oil over there, that's where it will come from. But, we leave, the oil tycoons will be FORCED to find other oil or another energy source. It'll cause gas prices to rise for awhile, but it'll be better for our kids.

I tend to agree. Pulling out may result in temporary disruptions and more price fluctuations, but in time the market will balance itself. If the price goes too high, there will be greater impetus to find alternatives. I think we can all agree that the instability we created in Iraq has resulted in a precipitous rise in the price of oil. Our mercantilist intervention often does more harm than good in securing our access to oil at reasonable prices.

[njandrewg]

I tend to agree. Pulling out may result in temporary disruptions and more price fluctuations, but in time the market will balance itself. If the price goes too high, there will be greater impetus to find alternatives. I think we can all agree that the instability we created in Iraq has resulted in a precipitous rise in the price of oil. Our mercantilist intervention often does more harm than good in securing our access to oil at reasonable prices.

I don't know about you, but if I got to keep an extra 1/3 of my paycheck...I wouldn't mind paying $5 for a gallon.

[john_anderson_ii]

I don't know about you, but if I got to keep an extra 1/3 of my paycheck...I wouldn't mind paying $5 for a gallon.

Personally, I think we should open up U.S. Oil Reserves, tell the Middle East to stand on their own at least until we get our own house in order, and then get to work. We can live off our reserves until we don't need them anymore.

This is America! I don't understand the lack of backbone surrounding foreign oil. When we put our mind to it, we overthrew a kindom. We put a man on the moon and 2 robots on mars. The American industrial might produced 8 battle ships and nearly 100,000 bombers, and 22 aircraft carriers in just 3 years of fighting WWII.

Why the hell is the country so scared about loosing foreign oil.

[drednot]

Just to play the devil's advocate, as I've stated I don't have a solution.

What happens when the countries that are producing the supply come under Bin Laden's siege. If we aren't there shielding the governments of these oil producing nations, and Bin Laden tries to overthrow them. That will disrupt supply in a major way. In that event, oil prices will skyrocket.

Iran still sells plenty of oil after Khomeini overthrew its government.

Also, Bin Laden has trouble recruiting when we are less involved in the Middle East, so our absence may actually lead to increased stability.

[d'anconia]

I think the U.S. is basically bent over a barrel in this situation. The lifeblood of the U.S. is oil. Without oil, the U.S. doesn't run. Osama wants a go at his primary enemies, the governments of several oil producing nations. We are not his primary enemy, we are shielding his primary enemies from Osama's brand of warfighting. That pisses him off. However, if we pull out and let Osama have his go, it will disrupt oil production, thus disrupting the U.S. economy.

If we stay, Osama will continue to attack us. If we leave, he will turn his attention to his reachable enemies and we will won't have oil.

I don't have a solution.

It's deeper than that. The oil-producing *corporations* have us in their pockets. We have places to drill in North America but the "EPA won't let us". We complain about high prices but Europe has prices almost 2x ours and, perhaps more importantly, the EPA won't let us build refineries in the U.S. Strangely enough nuclear reactors haven't been built at all since the 70's either.

Truth be told the big oil-producing corporations (many of which happen to be members of the CFR) have us exactly where they want us and realize that they can use the Environmental Protection Agency to push their agenda via lobbyists. After all, what is the price of a politician when compared to multi-billion $ annual profits?

I often hear the "we're in the Middle-East because of oil" argument but I need to see some empirical evidence and logical consistency before I buy it. Politicians can make a lot off of military contracts but I'm not convinced they could pull off sharing profits from public control of the oil industry in the Middle East. Correct me if I'm wrong though...

[Bison]

Our dollar is basicly backed by oil. We have our troops over there to make sure that the oil selling countries continue to bill for oil in dollars. That means that other countries who buy oil from middle eastern countries have to keep a supply of US dollars on hand to buy oil. It keeps our currency afloat.

If countries around the world did not need dollars to buy oil, then our currency would be worth very little. Countries like China would be dumping them out on the open market and it would definitley turn into a crisis.

Sadam tried to start billing for oil in Euros and we took him down. Iran has announced its own plan to bill for oil in Euros. What do you think will happen to them?

Thats why we need to overhaul our money system. Ron Paul advocates allowing gold and silver to be legalized as money along side the dollar, as legal tender for all debts public and private. That way we could transition out of the current mess that the whole federal reserve system has caused.

[beermotor]

I think the U.S. is basically bent over a barrel in this situation. The lifeblood of the U.S. is oil. Without oil, the U.S. doesn't run. Osama wants a go at his primary enemies, the governments of several oil producing nations. We are not his primary enemy, we are shielding his primary enemies from Osama's brand of warfighting. That pisses him off. However, if we pull out and let Osama have his go, it will disrupt oil production, thus disrupting the U.S. economy.

If we stay, Osama will continue to attack us. If we leave, he will turn his attention to his reachable enemies and we will won't have oil.

I don't have a solution.


End Oil addiction. Problem solved.

[LibertyEagle]

They are using oil as an excuse, just the same way they're using this "spreading democracy" BS. We don't need to overthrow and occupy nations to be able to buy their oil and they know that too.

[MsDoodahs]

They are using oil as an excuse, just the same way they're using this "spreading democracy" BS. We don't need to overthrow and occupy nations to be able to buy their oil and they know that too.

Yep.

I keep thinking how seriously pissed off the rest of the world is over our petro-dollar hegemony, and the way we've ridden roughshod over them since that convenient deal with OPEC (the one that said they'd sell their oil ONLY in US Dollars).

[klamath]

I know that the unstability of oil if we leave is highly over blown. They have to sell their oil. If they don't they will become beduin goat herders again. Places like kuwait have absolutly nothing but oil. They even have to import sand for concrete believe it or not because the sand that covers that entire country is unsutable.
Another thing is the cost benefit factor is no longer there. We are spending far more fighting to keep the prices down than the cost of oil we buy from there.

[emilysdad]

Our dollar is basicly backed by oil. We have our troops over there to make sure that the oil selling countries continue to bill for oil in dollars. That means that other countries who buy oil from middle eastern countries have to keep a supply of US dollars on hand to buy oil. It keeps our currency afloat.

If countries around the world did not need dollars to buy oil, then our currency would be worth very little. Countries like China would be dumping them out on the open market and it would definitley turn into a crisis.

Sadam tried to start billing for oil in Euros and we took him down. Iran has announced its own plan to bill for oil in Euros. What do you think will happen to them?

Thats why we need to overhaul our money system. Ron Paul advocates allowing gold and silver to be legalized as money along side the dollar, as legal tender for all debts public and private. That way we could transition out of the current mess that the whole federal reserve system has caused.

This is accurate. Iran also requested (demanded) oil payments in Yuen as well. It is not just about oil, but securing the dollar as the world currency

[Captain Shays]

I believe we can't address our dependency on foreign oil until we leave. Money is like electricity, it will take the path of least resistance. As long as we're protecting oil over there, that's where it will come from. But, we leave, the oil tycoons will be FORCED to find other oil or another energy source. It'll cause gas prices to rise for awhile, but it'll be better for our kids.

Spot on Slugg! I will ad no more to that.

[Captain Shays]

I know that the unstability of oil if we leave is highly over blown. They have to sell their oil. If they don't they will become beduin goat herders again. Places like kuwait have absolutly nothing but oil. They even have to import sand for concrete believe it or not because the sand that covers that entire country is unsutable.
Another thing is the cost benefit factor is no longer there. We are spending far more fighting to keep the prices down than the cost of oil we buy from there.


And until we see those costs factored into the final price at the pump, the American people will never know what they're really paying for their gas. Its a huge deception beperpetrated on us every day. The real costs are obsfucated behind the income tax which also provides the subsidies, tax breaks and grants ie corporate welfare.

Ron Paul can set us free faster than ALL the plans of the other candidates COMBINED. If we eliminate the military costs and the corporate welfare it will appear that prices have risen but the truth is we will be seeing the REAL costs associated with petroleum products. They will cost more at the time of purchase causing us to look elsewhere for alternatives and alternatives will be provided by all the inventors, innovators, backyard dreamers and businessmen. We will also naturally reduce our consumption for our own best interest. Consider this; we now import roughly 23% of the oil we use from the Middle East. Thats the difference between a car that gets 19mpg to one that gets 14mpg.
If you pulled up to a gas pump and saw $5.00 per gallon, how inclined would you be to buy an SUV the next time you need a new car?
This is what the Marxists want to accomplish with increases in taxes and what would happen naturally in a free market environment.
Eventually we would get sick of it and gravitate towards new, cheaper fuels and forms of transportation.

[sunny]

ok folks,
i just read all the posts.......

first of all we are not in the middle east for oil, we are there to maintain the dollar as the world reserve currency.....iraq threatened to only accept euros for oil because euros are backed 15% in gold......they don't WANT our dollars any longer.
second, iran has done the same thing and taken it a step further by creating a bourse (their equivalent of the new york stock exchange) based on euros as the medium of exchange.
we cannot have that either!

it's all about the damn dollar and it will be as long as people have confidence in it and that is fading fast! (2-3 billion daily from china, for one)

the us economic policy is all about monetization of debt which is unsustainable. we are off the gold standard and have been since 1971. there are no checks and balances for the existing currency and until there is widespread competition with another "legal "tender" things will continue as they are - going downhill fast. any attempts have been foiled by the fed (hunt brothers for example) and the liberty dollar is feeling the heat.
as long as the dollar remains the new world order can continue their insidious plan - when the dollar goes down completely it's a fair accompli.

as far as oil in this country there is enough oil in prudhoe bay alaska to provide this country for 150+ years........the oil companies have been capping the holes that have already been dug for oil AND natural gas - at great expense!
i was there working on the pipeline from 1974 - 1976 - mostly in prudhoe bay!

the problem is the refineries too......they're old and a mess!
what do you think katrina was about???
the point is to keep the oil dependence....not get away from it.

but the bottom line is the dollar.......as long as it is the world reserve currency things will remain the same..........BUT..........this is changing and the whole scenario is falling apart. things are too far gone and can no longer be patched up - plugging the holes in the dam do not work any longer.

the only solution is a complete purge of the current systems.

we are in systemic collapse!

[MsDoodahs]

This is what the Marxists want to accomplish with increases in taxes and what would happen naturally in a free market environment.
Eventually we would get sick of it and gravitate towards new, cheaper fuels and forms of transportation.

Exactly.

The free market would accomplish the very thing the "environmentalists" claim they want to accomplish.

The most vile "environmentalists" are conniving pieces of crap, because they are really not in it for saving the environment but for getting more money stolen via taxes from average joes - money that they can then use to pay for their favorite "projects." Selfish effing bastards. Too damn stingy to pay for those projects out of their own pocket - they prefer to raid yours and mine.

[saku39]

Lots of good points on this thread.

[iamso910]

Scheuer is not an economist, not a libertarian and not an expert on history. He is very well informed on Al Qaeda and other aspects of the Middle East.

I resepect his expertise on those issues, but on other issues, such as flag waving for the constitutional destroyer Lincoln, he is dense.