Lets disect Oblahma speech, shall we!

[Ban Hammer 13,575]

dont try to cause confusion, just cause you look stupid now!

nothing can make you look worse as you wiggle about. so far all you've done is prove to be insulting without one single bit of proof to back up your statement.

first it's oil

now it's money

what's next?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

As I have said before, People need to realize that the major weapon of the current Jihad is money,not money that they have earned, but for the most part money that comes from an accident of geology. OIL

The way to stop them from attacking is to take the money away, and lets be honest we are a big chunk of the money.

The money spent in Iraq might instead be spent on an energy program to deprive the Saudis and Ahmadinejad,and others of the wherewithal that is critical to the Jihad.I believe that the $2 trillion spent in Iraq would have been better spent on solar and wind projects, and on nuclear reactors. Oil is their most dangerous weapon, and our dependency is giving them assurance that their guns will always be loaded.

Jihad is worldwide not just in afgan. and iraq. This does not require "the troops boots on their ground" here and there and everywhere. Not at all. It requires diminishing their oil revenues.[/b]

I think that's contentious - because even if the US gets itself off foreign oil, its not like there won't be a market for it, given that Russia and China are pretty significant customers in their own right. The only difference surely is that we wouldn't be funding it directly. That might be the ethical thing to do - but those countries will still be immensely profitable.

[nana_356 0]

dont try to cause confusion, just cause you look stupid now!

nothing can make you look worse as you wiggle about. so far all you've done is prove to be insulting without one single bit of proof to back up your statement.

first it's oil

now it's money

what's next?

And who have I unsulted? if you read my other posts, you wouldnt say that, as a matter of fact I have tried to keep things civil, but of coarce you didnt read! What proof would you like, just ask and I will provide??

[Ban Hammer 13,575]

dont try to cause confusion, just cause you look stupid now!

nothing can make you look worse as you wiggle about. so far all you've done is prove to be insulting without one single bit of proof to back up your statement.

first it's oil

now it's money

what's next?

And who have I unsulted? if you read my other posts, you wouldnt say that, as a matter of fact I have tried to keep things civil, but of coarce you didnt read! What proof would you like, just ask and I will provide??

why do i feel like i'm teaching english on the moon?

"you look stupid now" enough of a reminder?

and i'm still waiting for something that backs up your claim. so far it's all hot air. unless, of course, you want us to believe it's true because you said so.

[shadtov 0]

As I have said before, People need to realize that the major weapon of the current Jihad is money,not money that they have earned, but for the most part money that comes from an accident of geology. OIL

The way to stop them from attacking is to take the money away, and lets be honest we are a big chunk of the money.

The money spent in Iraq might instead be spent on an energy program to deprive the Saudis and Ahmadinejad,and others of the wherewithal that is critical to the Jihad.I believe that the $2 trillion spent in Iraq would have been better spent on solar and wind projects, and on nuclear reactors. Oil is their most dangerous weapon, and our dependency is giving them assurance that their guns will always be loaded.

Jihad is worldwide not just in afgan. and iraq. This does not require "the troops boots on their ground" here and there and everywhere. Not at all. It requires diminishing their oil revenues.[/b]

I think that's contentious - because even if the US gets itself off foreign oil, its not like there won't be a market for it, given that Russia and China are pretty significant customers in their own right. The only difference surely is that we wouldn't be funding it directly. That might be the ethical thing to do - but those countries will still be immensely profitable.

What do you suggest? Honestly. I talked with a former co-worker's husband about this this past weekend. He's working in nuclear energy. actually, more specifically as an engineer in something called "power pulses." Something about using the mechanisms we used for nuclear energy but with different sources. Okay, I'm showing my lack of knowledge in the department. At this point, I'm open to information from all sides of the argument (arguments?). I just know that something needs to happen... only, what?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Heres a good one!

"Everyone is so concerned now where all of the candidates are born. McCain was born on a military base in Panama. Hillary was born outside Chicago, and if you believe the media, Barack Obama was born in a manger." --Jay Leno

[nana_356 0]

I am asking you without any name calling,

Now what comment needs backing up?

That we rely on oil?

How much has been spent on the war?

That many other countries, besides iraq and afgan have jihadists?

The Us is a big chunk of their oil profit?

I have said many things inmy post, and I am asking you what specific comment do you need to be backed up?

[shadtov 0]

Heres a good one!

"Everyone is so concerned now where all of the candidates are born. McCain was born on a military base in Panama. Hillary was born outside Chicago, and if you believe the media, Barack Obama was born in a manger." --Jay Leno

ok, I agree, that's funny.

[SaadBell 0]

I believe that the $2 trillion spent in Iraq would have been better spent on solar and wind projects, and on nuclear reactors.

You got to stop that, that sounds like good old common sense, and we Americans don't like that kinda of thing.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Heres a good one!

"Everyone is so concerned now where all of the candidates are born. McCain was born on a military base in Panama. Hillary was born outside Chicago, and if you believe the media, Barack Obama was born in a manger." --Jay Leno

ok, I agree, that's funny.

I appreciate your willingness to laugh.

[nana_356 0]

charles and nessa, I apologize if I have offended you. there is alot of disrespect and name calling going on here and I got caught up in it. Very sorry!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

As I have said before, People need to realize that the major weapon of the current Jihad is money,not money that they have earned, but for the most part money that comes from an accident of geology. OIL

The way to stop them from attacking is to take the money away, and lets be honest we are a big chunk of the money.

The money spent in Iraq might instead be spent on an energy program to deprive the Saudis and Ahmadinejad,and others of the wherewithal that is critical to the Jihad.I believe that the $2 trillion spent in Iraq would have been better spent on solar and wind projects, and on nuclear reactors. Oil is their most dangerous weapon, and our dependency is giving them assurance that their guns will always be loaded.

Jihad is worldwide not just in afgan. and iraq. This does not require "the troops boots on their ground" here and there and everywhere. Not at all. It requires diminishing their oil revenues.[/b]

I think that's contentious - because even if the US gets itself off foreign oil, its not like there won't be a market for it, given that Russia and China are pretty significant customers in their own right. The only difference surely is that we wouldn't be funding it directly. That might be the ethical thing to do - but those countries will still be immensely profitable.

What do you suggest? Honestly. I talked with a former co-worker's husband about this this past weekend. He's working in nuclear energy. actually, more specifically as an engineer in something called "power pulses." Something about using the mechanisms we used for nuclear energy but with different sources. Okay, I'm showing my lack of knowledge in the department. At this point, I'm open to information from all sides of the argument (arguments?). I just know that something needs to happen... only, what?

Well obviously we need a self-sufficient energy policy that doesn't rely on foreign imports. I was objecting to the idea that doing so would significantly damage the oil profits of ME countries. It will have an impact - but the US isn't the only customer for its oil - it would just mean there's more to sell to Russia and growing economies like India and China.

[HAL 9000 96]

He understands international affairs alot better than McCain. He understands that the jihadists majour weapon is oil.

you mean exxon is leading the jihad?

btw, i've yet to see any jihadist blow themself up while attached to a barrel of oil.

I think that's probably b/c some of those jihadists' friends and families are Oil Barons selling the product to us.

so guilty due to the actions of their relatives and friends?

Only if the jihadists are associated or if they endorse certain candidades- according to certain lines of crazy talk.

But I was going more to the "they don't have oil to blow up since its on sale" bit. I like the logic though.

i'm still not buying the oil is their major weapon. should we be fearful of 55 gallon drums on the tip of an icbm?

Well we've had our intel community insulted before with "faulty intel" so I wouldn't toy with WMDs as a good argument of fear. Specially in that region of the world. I also, however, agree with you on the weaponized oil part... just offering up a humorous take on perhaps why they don't have it to strap on.

eta: post lunch food coma

Edited June 4, 2008 by maviwaro

[HAL 9000 96]

As I have said before, People need to realize that the major weapon of the current Jihad is money,not money that they have earned, but for the most part money that comes from an accident of geology. OIL

The way to stop them from attacking is to take the money away, and lets be honest we are a big chunk of the money.

The money spent in Iraq might instead be spent on an energy program to deprive the Saudis and Ahmadinejad,and others of the wherewithal that is critical to the Jihad.I believe that the $2 trillion spent in Iraq would have been better spent on solar and wind projects, and on nuclear reactors. Oil is their most dangerous weapon, and our dependency is giving them assurance that their guns will always be loaded.

Jihad is worldwide not just in afgan. and iraq. This does not require "the troops boots on their ground" here and there and everywhere. Not at all. It requires diminishing their oil revenues.[/b]

I think that's contentious - because even if the US gets itself off foreign oil, its not like there won't be a market for it, given that Russia and China are pretty significant customers in their own right. The only difference surely is that we wouldn't be funding it directly. That might be the ethical thing to do - but those countries will still be immensely profitable.

What do you suggest? Honestly. I talked with a former co-worker's husband about this this past weekend. He's working in nuclear energy. actually, more specifically as an engineer in something called "power pulses." Something about using the mechanisms we used for nuclear energy but with different sources. Okay, I'm showing my lack of knowledge in the department. At this point, I'm open to information from all sides of the argument (arguments?). I just know that something needs to happen... only, what?

Please tell us more about those power pulses. That would be something new to me.