Ron sent me another essay. There are some thins in this essay that I agree with and some things that I do not. I figger this may promote a lively debate in the comments.
Here's Ron.
Going through old files while visiting Mother last week, I read some notes and essays generated by my probe into various religions about 15 years ago. My bottom line conclusion at that time was that Christianity was more or less an update of Judaism and Islam was another modification of Christianity. The major differences were that Judaism was locked in the past, resisted change, and still awaited the Messiah’s arrival; Christianity was time-fixed much like Judaism, but willing to incorporate more modern ideas, and was awaiting the second coming of the Messiah; and Islam had no time anchor, was much simpler, and didn’t really know if it wanted a messiah or not.
The laws of Islam and Judaism are quite similar, especially where diet is concerned; in fact, it appears Muhammad very heavily plagiarized the Books of Moses. Essentially the three faiths are first cousins, like the people who gave rise to them, but Christianity first made the older faith more tolerant and loving and then later went through a period of excesses before undergoing a series of reforms which removed the fear and brutality common among zealots. The Crusades were no different from the Islamic jihads, and the Inquisition was to the Taliban as the sacrifice of Isaac was to the crucifixion of Jesus.
For many years I believed that the people of the Middle East were simply victims of their own history and culture. All they needed, it seemed, was an opportunity to develop their own forms of democracy and political freedom without warlords and tyrants and bullies. Summing up all the philosophers I had read over the years – Locke, Rousseau, Kant, Nietzsche – I believed that people were more or less the same no matter where you found them, basically good and kind and loving and all that. They preferred being sociable and gentle and neighborly to conquest and domination and violence. The people weren’t the cause of wars and murders; the fanatics were – the warlords, the tyrants, the bullies – and although new ones always seemed to pop up in every new generation, they were a tiny minority, only occasional warts on the gentle nature of the people themselves.
As we kicked Saddam out of Kuwait and then later deposed and executed him, as the Iraqi people in great numbers voted in free elections, as schools were rebuilt and reopened and girls were finally seen as people instead of property, as the infrastructure approached late 20th century efficiency, I decided that we had done a good thing and the world would profit greatly from our ethical stance and magnanimity. I was confident that our efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan would minimize, or at least delay, terrorist attacks on the homeland by lunatics bent on bending the entire world into Islam and reestablishment of the long-ago and longed-for caliphate.
Well, I was wrong. Not in a flash of insight or dazzling epiphany or sudden comprehension, but over years and months of subconscious analysis and data collection I’ve come to realize that the people of the "birthplace of civilization" are savage, barbarous, worthless bastards. We are wasting our time and money and energies trying to come up with a silk purse from a sow’s ear. The entire Middle East, from Afghanistan to Morocco, from Turkey to Somalia, is a sty, a sick primate breeding pen, a cradle of suspicion and fear and intrigue whose only currency results from the rest of the world’s addiction to liquid fossil fuels.
The concept of majority rule is perverted in that region to the point that minority rights simply do not exist. They fully understand the principle of voting, but once the vote is held, the losers no longer have any rights on the issues which brought about the elections in the first place. Their natural and immediate response to losing is predictably childish: throw a fit, kill people, blow up things, use terror and carnage to intimidate and coerce people and governments to conform to their grotesque doctrine, their diseased comprehension, their deformed philosophy.
They aren’t worth saving. Even the so-called "moderate" Muslims in Iraq are irredeemable. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis know where the IED factories are, where the foreign troublemakers are living, where the weapons are coming from and where they’re being cached. If they truly wanted the Iranian and Hizb’allah and Syrian and Egyptian troublemakers out of their country, they’d do something about it. But they don’t, so they’re complicit, guilty by association and by indifference to our efforts. Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Syria, Iran, Egypt, Libya . . . all have lived so long under the regimes of dictators, under the control of thugocracies, under the stifling umbrella of religious fanaticism that personal choice and freedom of just about anything are as remote to them as American football is to Europe and soccer is to us.
What happens to the people of that region, including everything from the Azores to Zimbabwe to Ankara to Zaire to Islamabad to Iraq and everything in between no longer interests me. Should our government decide to capture the oil wealth of the entire region and use it for our own purposes, fine. Should our national strategy include total elimination of all power points in Islamic nations, fine. Should our troops come home en masse next Saturday at 0700, fine. I really no longer care.
Iraq is not a déjà vu Vietnam; it’s a sewer infested with diseased subhumans operating on instructions from hopelessly contaminated DNA. The al Qaeda cancer has metastasized and is inoperable. The Hizb’allah carbuncle has spread its tentacles beyond its original Palestine in situ to open suppurating pustules in Europe and South America. The Saudi Madrassas have poisoned the fountains of knowledge in every Islamic city and nation on the planet such that weeding out the ignorance and hatred will take at least 5 generations.
It’s over. The American people cannot grasp the concept of selecting the battlefield. Our national memory is too short, our nature too forgiving, our focus too easily distracted to understand that the only way to keep war out of the country is to keep it in others. Conservatives will very likely lose more power in the next general election, and unless the GOP can find, groom, and get behind an electable candidate, the next PotUS will be a Democrat. Al Qaeda leadership knows that. Iran knows that. Syria knows that. Once again the US military will be downsized, underfunded, and forced to operate with aging aircraft, ships, and technology while our oil dollars purchase state-of-the-art devices in various groups whose goal is to kill us both as a nation and as individuals. All they have to do is wait.
Whether we continue trying to restructure Iraq to stabilize the region or not, whether our troops come home tonight at suppertime or 3 years from now, whether the surge improves security or fails miserably . . . it all makes no difference. Staying there now is merely postponing the inevitable because unless and until somebody bloodies our nose again, we’re not going to support George Bush’s "illegal" war. Bet on it. I hate to say it, and I know my take on it all won’t be popular with a lot of people, but there it is.
We are engaged in painting over rust, putting new shingles on cardboard roof decking, trying to instruct 2-year-olds in the fine art of negotiation and compromise. Showing people in that region how to establish a viable republican form of government is like trying to explain the exquisite pain of childbirth to a cowboy, or make a teenage girl understand what happens to a guy when he rides his bike over a curb and hits the crossbar with the wrong part of his anatomy. They won’t get it, primarily because they don’t WANT to get it. They actually NEED a strongman, a prince, a king, a dictator. Nothing else will work over there. Hell, it almost didn’t work here.
Our credibility is already shot in Europe and throughout Islam. Staying in Iraq will only further degrade our status world-wide. Our oldest and staunchest allies have abandoned us except for a token few troops here and there which together add up to only 10% or so of the total "coalition" effort. We’ve had troops in Germany and Japan since 1945; will we have to stay in Iraq and Afghanistan for 60 years as well? Let’s get out . . . of EVERYwhere. Bring home ALL the troops. Let Japan worry about NorKor. Let China worry about Islam. Let Europe worry about Europe. Let the socialists have all of Latin America.
Put our troops, what few we’ll have left after the next election, on our southern border. Let them assist after hurricanes and earthquakes and floods and fires. Make the streets safe in LA and Detroit and Atlanta and Miami, not Baghdad. And if anybody has any troubles with their neighbors, if somebody invades somebody else or steals their resources, if socialism and Sharia law don’t solve all the problems, take them to the UN to get them sorted out. Let’s stop playing Globocop and take care of our own back yard for a while. If nobody likes what we have to say, let’s quit talking.
Posted by denny at May 15, 2007 11:57 AMMinor quibble:
Where did you leave off and where did Ron start?
Posted by: DanS on May 15, 2007 01:17 PMDan Everything after "Here's Ron" is Ron's.
Posted by: Denny on May 15, 2007 01:25 PMIt wouldnt do any good to get out of Iraq and The Stan and every where else and come home..
The (D)s are not gonna be satisfied with just surrender in Iraq.. They are on a roll to give up everywhere and everythang.. From the Southern Border to Nawlins to Dearborn, Mich. to Minnesota to Islamburg, N.Y. ..
They dont want to fight to save Social Security, The Castle Doctrine, or even The First and Second Amendment..
They consider our complete Society broken and not worth savin and that the only solution is to destroy it all and start over with some sort of Socialism or dictatorship, even if it is under Sharia Law.. To them, even that would be more acceptable than what we have now.. Remember the slogan: "Anybody But "W" " ??
It is true that all we are doin is delayin the inevitable and that we do face the prospect of havin a (D) in the White House in '09 and that will surely speed up the process of swirlin down the toilet, but is it not also possible that at some point there will be an awakening and before the (D)s have a chance to render us unarmed, that a collection of Revolutionaries will be formed and action will be taken to stop the steady surrender of our Lives, Liberty, and Pursuit ??
Posted by: Wild Bill on May 15, 2007 01:48 PM
What an awesome read! I especially liked this one:
Showing people in that region how to establish a viable republican form of government is like trying to explain the exquisite pain of childbirth to a cowboy, or make a teenage girl understand what happens to a guy when he rides his bike over a curb and hits the crossbar with the wrong part of his anatomy.
Posted by: CharlieDelta on May 15, 2007 01:48 PMWOW - that is an awsome essay - Thirty years ago willing visiting that part of the world I reached a similar decision about the folks that live in Iran, Iraq, Suadi Aribia, Jordan and Turkey.
I really loved "Iraq is not a déjà vu Vietnam; it’s a sewer infested with diseased subhumans operating on instructions from hopelessly contaminated DNA. The al Qaeda cancer has metastasized and is inoperable. The Hizb’allah carbuncle has spread its tentacles beyond its original Palestine in situ to open suppurating pustules in Europe and South America. The Saudi Madrassas have poisoned the fountains of knowledge in every Islamic city and nation on the planet such that weeding out the ignorance and hatred will take at least 5 generations."
Posted by: Chuck on May 15, 2007 02:05 PMDenny.......
Some intriguing points here but.......
1.To put America first above all others means we as a nation would be up to enforcing that which was really in our national interest on a global scale with the determination to succeed as the only priority .......It isn`t working in Iraq now , it will not work under an America first scenario either.
2. Americans have very short attention spans .....unless we were under some form of an authoritarian central goverment which determined policy & had the means to compel citizens compliance, this will not work either, do not think that at least the conservatives in this country would stand by while this came to be.
3.America would have to be a "0" net importer of raw materials for basic need such as metals, oil,wood,electrical power, food stocks & so on. We no longer enjoy that capacity....To re-establish that would require a re-organization of our society, establish national priorities, annex all of Canada,most of Mexico & establish a current version of the Monroe doctrine. This aint gonna happen,too many wusseys & liberal do-gooders.
4.Patriotism would have to be a priority for all citizens. The curriculum of all our schools would have to be re-directed to instill this to all students with emphasis for American history & the advancement of American ideals.
5.Citizenship requirements would have to be strengthened, harder to get in, more participation mandatory, along with assimilation to a purely American society.
6....No more Quanzaa, Cinque De mayo, only American celebrations based on American traditions.
7.No more Muslim,Hindu,Bhuddist,Shinto or other religions, only Christian based theologies.
8.Welfare as we know it would have to disappear.....Education, training & workfare would become the norm , as an America first society , no free rides , everyone would have to contribute, voluntarily or involuntarily.
9. Our tax code would have to be revised...no loopholes , no exemptions, no free rides, all would have to share the burden to provide the money required to drive an America first society.
10. America first would require abandonment of treaties such as Nafta or others which promote or allow for transfer of manufacturing to outside the borders of America. Strict import regulations would apply for all goods which could be made here.
11. The United Nations would have to relocate offshore, by force if neccessary. Our participation in & funding for it would have to be eliminated. An alternative organization of true allies would be established to promote those ideas & policies favorable to us & those who are our demonstrated friends.
12.Our educational system would have to be re-designed to educate students who will graduate able to fuction from a technical standpoint as well as able to communicate in the language of our society English.Liberal Arts studies would be de-emphasized & replaced with Reading, Writing, Arithmatic & whatever additional studies deemed neccessary to maintain Amercan pre-eminance in the world.
13. Americas military would have to be second to none, a universal draft would mandatory, no special deferments other than certain ones religious in nature which would require alternative service. Everyone would be obligated , no exceptions, no excuses...failure to serve would be grounds for treason & enforced servitude. Cowards & liberals fleeing the country would be stripped of citizenship with no forgiveness.Anyone of service age taking part in demonstrations would be rounded up & sent to boot camp.
14. Propaganda is a very useful tool to promote a purely American agenda....the LSM would have to be dismantled with news presentations & documentaries tailored to fit the America first agenda by journalists who value truth, the constitution & America in what they present.
Actually I could go on for a very long time in very minute detail.....but the truth is American society will not change until our enemies bring Muslim terrorist activities to our Heartland in a fashion which will dwarf 9/11. This may be a stark assessment of horrific potential but I think it will happen & probably under a dimocratic administration...hope it don`t take place in my town or upwind.
Posted by: dudley1 on May 15, 2007 02:22 PMThe only improvment that I would include is this:
As we leave have the B-52's follow behind and take out the problem areas. That would delay their coming here.
I heard General Tommy Franks speak a couple weeks ago. People ask him what will happen in Iraq and Afganistan. He says "I dont know. but what I do know is that they have a chance where before they did not."
It sucks that they are squandering that chance.
I do beleive that the great silent force that can deliver this region is capitalism and the global economy. If Russia and China can right there ships, improve their societies transperancy and mitigate corruption , that could set things in motion. America has had noble reasons to invade Iraq. Russia and China are 100 + years behind us and just want the middle east to be their bitch.
The middle east needs patriots. They either do not exist or are in jails. We are not exacting the difference that I thought we would. It is sad.
Posted by: patrick on May 15, 2007 03:56 PMI also think that trying to force a democracy on these people is futile. Having lived amongst Muslims for many years I came to the conclusion that they cannot accept any form of government except a supreme ruler such as the Royal Family in Saudi Arabia and Jordan or a ruthless SOB like Sadaam Hussein. The people are like lemmings as they never take responsibility for themselves and will follow even a weak minded person if they think they will be rewarded someway. Their religion is all they have to cling to as there is nothing in their society but religion. They cannot think for themselves period. That's one reason that they are dominate over their females. It is accepted by their society therefore making themselves look strong among their peers. I've worked and lived in many different countries and many different societies. Most of them I understood but I have never understood how anyone can let religion be their entire being. For people on the left or right in America that think that they can assiimilate here and be proud Americans are dreaming. The biggest problem in the US are weak politicians on the left especially that let these people migrate here and demand us to accept their culture. They will bend over backwards to placate them thinking they will get their vote. I myself will see the progression of this so called multiculturalism but will probably never see the final ending. The only thing that will ever wake this country up and for us to demand an end to immigration period is that a nuke or someother WMD goes off in one of our cities and then just maybe the politicians will finally say enough is enough. But don't hold your breath.
Posted by: gene Hall on May 15, 2007 04:16 PMHi, what are the US's 'noble reasons' for invading Iraq - just curious
Posted by: Alison on May 15, 2007 05:09 PMInteresting timing as I was thinking a lot of what Ron had to say this morning to myself. Hard to give freedom to those who don't understand or want it. I agree with Ron's proposal for our military, but we all know the government won't use them in that capacity. Ron, we'll have to protect the border ourselves.
Posted by: Paul on May 15, 2007 05:11 PMAlison, the main reason for invading Iraq was to get rid of a dictator and to establish somewhat of a democracy and just maybe it would entice other countries in the region to re-think their policies and goals of destroying what little humanity that they possess and maybe follow Iraq into something more progressive than killing and destroying others. The problem as I see it is that as Muslims, they would rather fight amongst themselves than to have a viable government that works for everybody. Somewhat like the democrats in congress. They would rather for the US to be disgraced in the world with defeat than to try to right a wrong just to please their misguided thinkings.
Posted by: gene Hall on May 15, 2007 05:35 PMWe were enforcing UN sanctions imposed on Saddam in 1991. He continually failed to comply. Which resulted in a long drop with a quick stop for the ignorant bastard. Currently Iran is failing to comply with UN and AEA sanctions as well.
Posted by: vetfromhell on May 15, 2007 05:44 PMThat post was awesome. He wrote eloquently what I have said for years. Basically, primitive barbarians that have not evolved "up" the evolutionary tree can not, will not and do not understand democracy and all it entails. Ron needs to go one step farther in his analysis. Since, as Dudley I believe alluded to, there's no way in hell we can completely isolate ourself from the rest of the world, the only other option is to destroy (read kill and enslave) the Muslim countries. There's no other way to to fix this problem than to "cut off" the branch of the tree that is failing to keep up. I know it's heartless and cruel and oh so many terrible things to say and think such a thing, but we must face reality. Reality is Islam is not compatible with living in the modern world-Period. Nothing to argue, has been proven for decades, now let's stop pussyfooting around and fix the problem.
That's fucked up, Ray. Really fucked up, dude. I say we just leave them alone; reject all Visa requests from Muslim countries; seal our border. They'll kill themselves for us.
Posted by: Paul on May 15, 2007 06:53 PMRay........
There is no way we can really isolate ourselves from the rest of the world.......even if were remotely possible there are to many liberal socialists ,environmentalists & fellow travelers in our society for this to come to pass.
If Islam were kept in its current areas & nothing was to occur which would allow them access to WMDS or the ability to deliver them , about 300 years of evolution would render them to be acceptable for world interaction.
Since we are in a situation of waiting for a very large shoe to drop....we will just have to wait until it does drop,see how big it is & if the average citizen finally sees the light.
Posted by: dudley1 on May 15, 2007 06:59 PMIt's a mistake to equate the binding of Isaac (I say "binding" because Isaac was, pointedly, not sacrificed) with the crucifixion of Jesus.
Isaac was bound on the altar, but an angel stayed Abraham's hand. Abraham demonstrated his willingness to sacrifice his son, and that was enough for God: God did not want human sacrifice.
Jesus was crucified by the Romans, and, over time, as the nascent Christian theology developed, his death was considered to be a sacrifice to redeem Mankind from sin. This is almost a complete reversal from the Isaac story.
My point here is not to say that one or the other is right (as a Jew, I have my own opinion) - just that you can't really equate the two stories.
And stories they are, because at the end of the day, what we believe is not important. What we do is important. Muhammad may have been a great prophet, but as long as his followers blow themselves up amongst civilians in the name of jihad, they can all go fuck themselves. And I'd say the same about any Jew, Christian, Buddhist, or Voudoun shaman who did the same. (Funny, though. Not too many of them do that kind of stuff.)
Posted by: Elisson on May 15, 2007 07:22 PMElisson - Also there is no way you can convince me that the Jews killed Jesus. If they had they would have stoned him just like they stoned one of his disciples a few years later. The Gospels were all written after the last Jewish rebellion (and they were not written by Matthew, Luke, Mark, and John) and the Christian writers wanted to distance themselves from the Jews in the eyes of Rome. What better way than to blame Jesus' crucifiction on the Jews and not the Romans?
Posted by: Denny on May 15, 2007 10:09 PMGood post. The last paragraph was the best.
Posted by: Teresa on May 15, 2007 11:11 PMTeresa, when have you or any of your ilk ever done anything courageous, honorable, and good for the world?
Posted by: Paul on May 15, 2007 11:31 PMTeresa-
The only comment I have regarding the last paragraph refers to the first sentence:
"Put our troops, what few we’ll have left after the next election, on our southern border."
We wouldn't need troops on our Southern border (or Northern border) if American CITIZENS could step up to the plate, and do what our lame politicians on BOTH sides can't.
(Insert Second Amendment here...)
I would dedicate my weekends to patrolling the Southern border as long as the "rules of engagement" weren't as ridiculous as they are in Iraq.
Posted by: CharlieDelta on May 16, 2007 12:03 AMThe Democrats have been calling this war "George Bush's Vietnam" since the beginning. The only people I now see re-enacting the mistakes we made there are Nancy Pelosi, Harry Ried and their ilk. The Congress has no authority to tell the Generals on the ground nor the POTUS how to run a war. That is not their job. The President is the Commander In Chief not elected state representatives. I agree that we should not be there forever, but we made a promise to the Iraqi people and there government. Last time I checked a promise made is a promise kept, no matter what here in America. Would you walk away from your friend getting the shit beat out of him by three other guys? My answer is NO! You stand by your friends and never back down to your enemies together.
If we leave Iraq to the likes of Al-Qaida and the radical Shitte groups like the Iranian government, that are causing the violence in Iraq, we will witness the same attrocities that occured in South Vietnam when we ran away. The terrorists know that the American public is growing weary of this conflict with them and are exploiting that to there advantage. One of Sun Szu's rules in the Art of War is to demoralize your enemies at home and crush their will to fight. The American press is doing just that by telling us almost daily how many of our troops have died with courage and valour but not how many terrorists and murderous thugs have been sent to the grave.
The Americans that I was brought to know never retreat, never surrender and confront evil when made to. When you look someone in the eye and tell them "I have your back" you keep your word. Grow a spine America or it will be cut in half at your neck!
Posted by: kerrcarto on May 16, 2007 12:16 AM
I was born in Bahrain and attended high school in Indonesia. I have lived among Muslims and I can honestly say that Islam scares the crap out of me. I've lived through elections in Jakarta. Terrifying. There is no way true Democracy is catching on any time soon in Islamic countries. And the time it would take for education is not going to be granted by the liberals.
However, Ron might be able to sell them on his ideas for Islamic countries if he uses terms like 'late-term abortions' (4th trimester on up), 'Population Control' (Remember, people are a virus destroying the Earth) and 'Socialized Health Care' (ICBMs are the ultimate freebie 'one-stop-for-all-that-ails-you' kind of thing).
We could probably even get some irritating hippy indie-rocker to ride around on a bus and tell our school kids what a great idea the plan is if we play up the eco-friendly angle. Just think of all the organic fertilizer that would be created to nurture the planet plus the reduction of a couple billion CO2 and methane producing parasites! They might almost get enough carbon-offsets for Gore's house and Hollywood's private jets.
Posted by: Oil Field Trash on May 16, 2007 12:53 AMRon wrote : "Let’s get out . . . of EVERYwhere. Bring home ALL the troops"
Don't you think your interventionism is a key in your economic power? Why dou you think so much people on earth lend you money? What would you do for a living? with your trade deficit, and without people lending you money anymore (and even asking their money back), your economy would collpase, dont'you think?
You choosed an economic model, it's sucesfull, but it's hard to change.
Prosper, who and what are you referring to to "people lending you money". The key to America's economic power is hard work ethic, smart wit, and a desire to better ourselves. Unlike some other countries, your's included, the majority of Americans don't sit around on their lazy asses with the 30 something hour work week (well our welfare society does, but that's a topic for another day) trying to figure out how much vacation time we have, cheese we could eat, and how many white flags we can buy with the money we make. Our economic power is the realization of what a truly capitalistic country can achieve. Now the "intervention" you speak of is a RESULT of our economic power, not the cause of it. The world comes to us looking for policing, guidance, money and support. We've had enough of the worlds bullshit when they tell us the want/need us here to do this, but only until they tell us to leave. Fuck that. The US, if it's going to be constantly "asked" to bail other countries out of their self made problems, is going to start doing things on our terms, not some third world or socialist countries terms. Hence we have our presence in the middle east killing as many Islamists we can before our liberal fucktard lawmakers force us to pull out. Paul, I'm glad you felt my post was really Fucked up, because like you, I agree what needs to be done is fucked up. But it needs to be done nonetheless. Someone on this blog once wrote, in response to my feelings that it would be considered genocide to do that. I agree. But in a hundred years, people would look back and imagine what the hell would have happened hadn't we eliminated this parasite from the earth. Dudley, the world has become too small. IMHO, there's no way you can "isolate" these barbarians to themselves. The world has too much interest in what they have (no not sand, oil, there I said it libs)and fact of the matter is we need it. Since they can't/don't play well with others, it's time to remove them from the playground. They were part of a slave society once before, they have shown the world they function best when subjugated and denigrated, hence I say we (Caucasion's of European descent) give them want they want. We can be their overlords. Any objection or resistance is met with quick execution. It's not pleasant, hell, it's not even moral, it's a necessity.
One other thing to consider, it would be nice for us the US to have our forces own the Baghdad Airfeild given its geographical position between Russia, and the 'others'.
I liked Ron's essay, but I'm more about tactics than sillypopsicles.
The middle east will have to get it or Isreal and US will have to blow up Iran's nuke facilities or nuke the whole dang place>? Dah?
The whole world needs to work together to shut down Islamic terrorists, they threaten all of us.
Its a simple thought, but someone had to say it.
who and what are you referring to to "people lending you money".
U.S. liabilities to foreigners are estimated at $10.4 trillion in 2005.
That means amount owed to foreign lenders, what I called "people lending you money".
Who? Chinese for instance.
Prosper:
I believe you're conflating several things with that number.
U.S. liabilities to foreigners are estimated at $10.4 trillion in 2005.
This is well outside my sphere of expertise (just to disclaim that), but I think that's counting in "Trade deficits", and the like. Which are liabilities on a balance sheet, but not neccesarily "real" money.
Don't you think your interventionism is a key in your economic power?
No. Look at how much we're spending in Iraq. We could have sold out to Saddam, made money, and gotten oil at 1/2 the world market value. (Like, say, France).
Spread that out over the world writ large, where the troops and sailor are, and it's staggering what we take from the US budget and put overseas.
That "interventionism", as you call it, makes the other people prosperous - in theory. In practice, they establish welfare states, cut back on defense spending, and try and ignore that the light at the end of the tunnel is really a mirror.
Why dou you think so much people on earth lend you money?
Pretty much the same reason that almost every major invention/innovation for the last 100 years has come out of the US. Not all of them, mind you, but the vast majority of them, and the rate of innovation and invention has increased exponetially since WWII.
What would you do for a living? with your trade deficit, and without people lending you money anymore (and even asking their money back), your economy would collpase, dont'you think?
Nope. Our economy is very robust. The only thing that can seriously impact our economy is the government getting involved and trying to "fix" it.
Changes could occur - but the US is big enough that it could easily become a world unto itself.
Posted by: Unix-Jedi on May 16, 2007 08:56 AMCommentary comment.....
Denny.... You were right , a lively debate has been generated.
Ron.... Just as America first will not work for myriad reasons,neither will subjugation of the Arabs & confiscation of their oil....too many libs, socialists & do gooders. As for the oil, I am sure China & India would be upset.
Prosper.... you must be having lunch with the "Stupids" as you are mouthing their BS talking points. The economic result of our interventionism as you call it is the elimination of bribes & kickbacks to French politicians by Saddams regime.......Probably directly responsible for the defeat of Socialist candidates in the recent French election.
Countries who lend America money want their money back? Since you mentioned it , how about you championing lendlease repayments to the USA from your country......maybe we would not have to borrow money from other countries if the deadbeats of the world paid to us what is long overdue.
Teresa.... do you have your protest signs ready to demonstrate against America first or Arab subjugation? Oh hell, just fill in whatever your Liberal masters want on the signs.
LisaKay.... Too graphic of a picture for what probably would work
The prophet to lead us out of the despair of the Bush administration.....
I do not often subscribe to online petitions for political candidates but here is one which has been circulating for months, just add your name to the rapidly growing groundswell list of support for the people`s choice....
.......2008...HILLARY FOR PRESIDENT..............
1.Bill
2.Chelsea
3.
Ron:
A very thoughtful essay.
They won’t get it, primarily because they don’t WANT to get it. They actually NEED a strongman, a prince, a king, a dictator. Nothing else will work over there. Hell, it almost didn’t work here.
I'd just like to point out, as a partial rebuttal, that the exact same thing was said about women 100 years ago, and the Japanese 50 years ago.
Would you agree those statements were wrong?
To agree with you, in part, I was outraged that we 1) set up a Parlimentary system. Ok, partially, in all honesty, is because I can't figure out HTF a Parlimentary system works. In theory, in practice they seem to do a far worse job than the bicameral system.
Why didn't we insist on the Bill Of Rights? (Hell, why didn't we do that in Germany/France/Japan, all conquered and allowed to set up their own governments after WWII). Those rights are "self-evident", "endowed by our creator".
We didn't insist on any sort of control, de-Baathification, de-Wahhabbication, de-Persionization, and that is going to bite us in the ass.
All that being said - let's look at the raging success that the press refuses to tell us about.
The Kurds. From much the same background/education as the Iraqi's. Inside their protected state, they've had local and regional elections - changes in power between factions! They've been doing this since 1993, IIRC, and they've now got 14 years on the rest of the country.
(My understanding, several of their senior politicans have asked to join the US as the 51st state. I saw one say, "make sure we have Kirkuk, and we'll bring the oil!")
But that would cause Turkey and Iran to get upset. Ok, I can understand that, but I just don't give a flying fuck. The Kurds are a success story. We should support them, since they're doing what we said we wanted to see
We should support them, because it's the right thing to do, not because it's the politically expedient thing to do. Another flashbck to 1945, when a young man who'd help fight against the Japanese in French Indochina, for the promise of US support for an independant country after the war was sold out, to appease the .... French. So they wouldn't be embarrassed about losing their empire. That worked out real well for us, didn't it?
Posted by: Unix-Jedi on May 16, 2007 09:09 AMProsper - The reason people lend us money is because we have the best and most stable economy in the world and they know their money is safe invested in the United States economy. If other countries did demand their money back they would only be destroying their own economies. The United States is the economic engine that drives the world. When the United States gets a headache, the rest of the world gets the flu (or worse). This is why a scenario of a country like China dumping all their United States debt is ludicrous.
Posted by: Denny on May 16, 2007 09:50 AMProsper - Out total debt to foreigners is $10.5 trillion? How can that be when our total debt (including money the gummint owes itself in the IOU's it has put in the Social Security "Trust Fund") is $8.9 trillion? See debt clock on right sidebar. See also chart of foreign debt. The Brits are our bigest creditor.
Posted by: Denny on May 16, 2007 09:59 AMThis is a gross figure, because the liabilities from foreigners to the U.S. have not been subtracted. The net external debt, more precisely known as the Net International Investment Position (NIIP) was $2.7 trillion at the end of 2005. (wikipedia)
Prosper - That's a big difference betwen gross and net. Net is what counts. Also, once again, I have a problem using Wikipedia as a source. Steve uses official US gummint figures and he recalibrates his debt clock every month after the appropriate figures are released by the Treasury Department.
Posted by: Denny on May 16, 2007 12:01 PMProsper the accountant.....
Since you are so good with figures, maybe Wikipedia has figured the value of Frances past due Lendlease loans with interest, how about checking out something that has relevance, is past due,would be appreciated & just might make America receptive to saving your ass one more time when the Muslims try to take over in France.
Posted by: dudley1 on May 16, 2007 12:02 PMIt is amazing how many of you people can feel this way about Muslims, Arabs and virtually everyone in the Middle East, and yet STILL want us to stay in Iraq. Do you understand that all of our efforts in Iraq are about creating a stable, self-sustaining government? If that is impossible because they are ignorant, idiotic, crazed Muslim sub-humans, then creating a decent government there that doesn't hate the USA is impossible. If it is impossible, then why should we be fighting there at all?
If what you want is for the U.S. to take over the country and maintain it as some kind of U.S. controlled colony, then you want something completely different from the administration and Republicans in Congress. That isn't going to happen.
So, do you think the Iraqis are capable of a stable, democratic government which is not really a theocracy or not?
Posted by: Sally on May 16, 2007 02:10 PMSally:
It is amazing that you can dodge dozens of questions, and yet STILL want to be taken seriously. Do you understand that all of your efforts are about convincing people of your stance? If that is impossible because they are smarter, more educated, and have more historical knowledge, then creating a decent understanding is impossible. If it is impossible, why are you trying at all?
Posted by: Unix-Jedi on May 16, 2007 02:49 PMSocialist Sally......
Unlike you I will answer & the first time......Do I think that the Iraqis are capable of a stable democratic government which is not a theocracy? My answer is Yes! .......But the dimocrats are not going to give us the time to assist in establishing it. Second, it would be democratic but not a carbon copy of what we have due to cultural differances. Why do I feel this is possible? ....look to the Kurdish Iraqis, they are doing well since 1993 & have evolved a stable system. They deserve our continued support but I think the dimocrats will torpedo this as well. Unix-Jedi has more on this topic if you care.
Posted by: dudley1 on May 16, 2007 03:25 PMRon left out one thing...
When making a silk purse out of a sow's ear, the first thing you do is kill the sow.
While the America-alone scenario can be nice to dream about... unfortunately the only way it will work long-term is if America moves to another planet all by itself, and everyone who goes, binds themselves and all their descendants, in perpetuity, to that dream.
Posted by: Dave on May 16, 2007 08:37 PMSally - As long as you are ducking questions, here's another one for you to duck. What do you think of the Kompassionate Kos Kidz advocating gassing Lieberman? As I have stated many times, there is much more hatred coming from the Left than from the Right.
Posted by: Denny on May 16, 2007 10:57 PMDenny-
The Kompassionate Kos Kidz komments were really disturbing to read. Such compassionate hate in those words. I bet they would like to fight a more "sensitive" war too!
Those are the same trolls that komment here and call this a "message board"...
...America's future...
...scary!
Posted by: CharlieDelta on May 16, 2007 11:19 PM
You know, I am surprised Al Qaeda hasn't pulled some Tet-like suicide offensive as we experienced in Vietnam. Just a massive wave of attacks throughout Iraq. Yes, they would get their clock cleaned just like the VC did in Vietnam, but the American public would throw in the towel. I really wonder why they have not done that.
Posted by: Tailfeather on May 18, 2007 02:33 PMI'm new here and impressed with the level of knowledge demonstrated by most of the people posting comments. Regarding the original essay, I must say I basically agree with the overall view. I'm a little shocked at the intensity of emotion, but when I think of IED's and suicide bombers, the torture and the slaughter of innocents in Iraq, I understand.
I'm a geologist and I've studied the petroleum geology of the Middle East to some extent, enough to understand the basics. I even lived and worked in Iran for nearly two years in the late seventies, under the Shah. I enjoyed the experience greatly, it was different then and I was as they say, "young, and dumb, and full of cum".
I'm afraid everyone is right. We're going to be forced out of Iraq. It was a mistake going in. I supported it because I believed the Weapons of Mass Destruction existed, then when they weren't I felt betrayed. We should have destroyed Iraq's military and then left.
I fear we are between a rock and a hard place. We need Middle Eastern oil, to get it we must militarily maintain stability their. I see a long, dirty, nasty road ahead for us, Democrats in power or not.
I used to joke long ago, we should just take Saudi Arabia's oil fields, occupy that relatively small area, and pump it dry, say thank you very much, and leave. That idea looks pretty good in retrospect and it would have been easy to do years ago.
I wish I could feel more optimistic. I see no easy solutions. I've always believed in "speak softly, but carry a big stick". I learned long ago that speaking softly and reasoning with an Iranian Muslim at least, got you nowhere. Usually I'm optimistic, but not about the situation in Iraq.
Posted by: Peter on May 19, 2007 03:38 AMAre the Iraqi's, or other muslims capable of self governance?
Yes, but only if they will quit listening to fanatical mulahs. The youth there are, like Peter, young dumb and full of cum, and the only chance they have of getting any is the 72 mythical virgins. They are much like the Moron extremists in Utah and Nevada who dump their teen age sons in a distant city with nothing so that they will not be competing for the teenage virgins. The muslims send them off to be suicide bombers.