| From | Message | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
 An interesting idea...*************************************************************************** “We have two immediate opponents, the irreconcilable wing of Islam and the rogue dictatorships that empower the radical Islamists. The irreconcilable wing of Islam considers America the great Satan. The Islamists cannot reconcile with a secular system of laws. They cannot tolerate a West that maintains a presence in the Arabian Gulf or that would defend Israel's right to survive as a country. They cannot tolerate freedom of speech, freedom of religion, or freedom for women. In short, their demands are irreconcilable with the modern world. “Politically correct secularists cannot understand that we are participants in a global civil war between the modernizing and irreconcilable wings of Islam. While the irreconcilable wing must be fought militarily, this is also a cultural, political, and economic war (as was the Cold War). This war is not primarily about terrorism, it is about an Islamist insurgency against the modern world. “A reasonable estimate would be that this war will last until 2070 (the Soviet Union lasted from 1917 to 1991, or seventy-four years). An optimist could make a case for winning by 2025 or 2030. Alternatively this conflict could be a fact of life for several centuries (as the Catholic-Protestant wars were during the Reformation and Counter Reformation). “Because secular post-modern analysts refuse to take religion seriously, we describe "suicide bombers" while our opponents describe "martyrs." We see them as psychologically deranged where they see themselves as dedicated to God. We focus on body counts while our opponents see their dead as symbols for recruitment. We focus on weeks and months while our opponents patiently focus on decades and generations. We think of trouble spots while they think of global jihad. We are in a total mismatch of planning and understanding. “We are hunting down al Qaeda (a loose grouping of 3,000 to 5,000 people) while our opponents are vastly larger. As one counter-terrorism analyst suggested to me "about the time we wipe out al Qaeda there will be five to ten new organizations of equal or greater size." We can reasonably guess that about 3 to 4 percent of the 1.3 billion Muslims on the planet are potential terrorist recruits-a pool of 39 to 52 million young men. There might be more than 10,000 potential recruits for every current member of al Qaeda. “Virtually every expert believes the number of militants available to the Irreconcilables is growing much faster than we are killing them. We have no effective communication counter-strategy to the television stations like Al-Jazeera and Al-Arabiya that serve as multimillion (maybe multibillion) dollar force multipliers for the insurgency. Consider the tiny cost bin Laden pays for an audio tape that these stations broadcast to more than a third of the Arab world at no cost to al Qaeda.” There is one obvious response to the turmoil: North American Energy Independence now. In the last several years, technology and engineering advances have enabled access to vast domestic oil and gas resources we never thought reachable before. I sat down with Scott Noble – who runs the largest privately held mineral royalties company in the United States – and Exploration & Production magazine to discuss the impact of these enormous changes, and the opportunity to move beyond dependence on Middle Eastern oil. You can watch our conversation here. www.epmag.com And if you want to know all the facts on this new reality, you can watch our full session on energy at Newt University, which contains some truly amazing information on American energy potential I can guarantee you’ve never heard. |
||
|
|
||
|
Aussie By pandering to the monarchies and dictators, we open ourselves up to hate and violence by their opponents. By developing our own, internal energy reserves, we would not need to pander to and assist these corrupt monarchies and dictatorship. We would also increase our own internal security, provide thousands of jobs, and reduce the cost of energy at home. |
||
|
Softie Would they continue to 'advance' in technology and modern living? Would they quickly revert back to 15th century day to day living as the tech they've bought with oil money deteriorates or would some other countries step in and 'take over'? Would a world war ensue? |
||
|
Softy If you were to ask the average "terrorist" "freedom fighter" or whatever you want to call them if they care they would probably say something to the tune of we don't care, we want you out of our country forever If you present this idea to the average oil company they would probably tell you it sounds like a great idea....to your face. If you had a real plan or a real chance of changing things you would probably end up dead of "natural causes" |
||
|
|
||
|
Stinky ... |
||
|
stinky, chaz Think about where oil is used. It is used in EVERYTHING. Almost every industry is dependent on having a supply of oil. Almost every product made is dependent on oil being used somewhere in the production. It is even used in the production of food. Name an industry that does not need oil. You can't. Even if the oil companies here bought OUR domestic oil, rather than foreign oil, and gave us the same mark-up, we would be better off. Are you saying that we wouldn't? I have stated that developing and using our own domestic energy sources would be better for us because: It would lower the cost of the oil we buy, even if the same markup is applied by oil companies. It would provide secure sources of energy. It would provide thousands of jobs. It would allow industries to continue in operation, or new industries to develop. It would allow us to leave the Middle East to themselves where they could: decide for themselves who will rule and not hate us for it... (theoretically) revert back to their 7th century ideologies as they see fit... become subjugated by China or Russia, and then hate them. Are you guys saying you don't see the benefit of developing our own energy resources??? |
||
|
softy The article you presented wasn't just about developing energy resources it was about our ties to the middle east. My point was that they would love for us to leave. It doesn't benefit most of the people in the middle east anyway. So a guy that lives in a clay house with a dirt floor could care less that we want to leave. He wants us to leave yesterday! My other point was go ahead and try to make an alternate energy source other than oil. You will never live to see it happen. Other than that. Sure go ahead, I'm all for it. |
||
|
dmaestro 22-Sep-12, 13:39 |
|
||
|
|
||
|
dm Do you disagree with anything I wrote? If so, what and why? COMPLETE energy independence may not be feasible, but do you have anything to say that is wrong with becoming as independent as possible? So, what if world demand is growing? That would be even more reason to do so. How and why does Karma have anything to do with us becoming as energy independent as possible? |
||
|
Since we don't have a lock on the energy that is diistributed under the surface of the Earth, we should use diplomacy to access it. When it becomes economical to dig up or pump our own energy resources, then we should dig and pump it up, not before. |
||
|
Illi ... |
||
|
|
||
|
Softy ... |
||
|
|
||
|
dmaestro 23-Sep-12, 14:14 |
|
Log in 
