War on terror?

[mjkoziel 0]

Hi, I just heard a university speaker on the radio saying that the Bush administration is using the need for a "war on terror" as an excuse for a sort of global domination.
The "war" is giving them the opportunity to have a military influence in most countries... especially the ones that are major oil producers - hence giving the US control of Oil.

The speaker went on to parallel this with the threat of "communism" in the 50's as an excuse to make war in Korea and Vietnam.

The general theme was that the Administration was blinding the people, with what he called propaganda, to eat this reason as an excuse to make war and perpetuate the USA's need for control of the Middle east oil.

Just wondering if anyone has the American peoples perspective on this.

Thanks,
Matt

[PhillyKev 0]

One American's perspective. Ditto.

[Muenkel 0]

I don't know how it is in Canada, but it has been my experience in the U.S. that most University Professors are generally anti-Republican and their views tend to be extreme left wing.

Was it public radio you were listening to?

Actually what our administrations have a tendency to do is to bomb a pharmaceutical company right before there is a vote on their impeachment.

_________________________________________
Chris

[Sonic 0]

Quote

administration is using the need for a "war on terror" as an excuse for a sort of global domination.

A lot of people in the UK have been saying the same thing for ages.

-----------------------------------
It's like something out of that twilighty show about that zone

[billvon 2,991]

>The general theme was that the Administration was blinding the
> people, with what he called propaganda, to eat this reason as an
> excuse to make war and perpetuate the USA's need for control of
>the Middle east oil.

I think that is one reason we are in this propaganda war, but not the only reason. If it were the only reason, the money spent on war could be spent getting us off oil (and providing tens of thousands of jobs.) I think our administration honestly thinks it's "all for the good of the country" (spoken in that monty python voice) and that it will actually help with terrorism.

[wmw999 2,447]

Funny how bad it is to be educated. Wouldn't life be simpler if we all quit after we had exactly enough educational tools to perform our assigned role in life. Just think of the reduction in waste of time caused by too much thinking.

Anyway, I'm sure it's crossed GWB's advisors' minds that if they could only effect all of the changes they thought were important world-wide, then the world would acknowledge that they REALLY knew the answer all along. And probably bow down in gratitude to their awesomeness.

Just like our parents REALLY knew the answer all along.
I think some would like the US to be the dominant world power. They think we're right, and have good on our side. But the right to self-determination overrides that.

Wendy W.
(that's MY decision mine mine mine mine mine mine mine!)

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[jraf 0]

I hate to brake the news, but over a year ago someone has attacked the United States and killed a whole bunch of people. As far as I am concerned that warrants a little vengence.

I lately paid $1.74 for gas. Admitted I drive on premium, but that is expensive. Oil supply is unstable hence the high price (Europeans - don't say a word. The reason your gas is so expensive is because your governments decided to tax the shit out of you).

So easy to be critical of the Big Bad Yanks. As far as I remember though the British government (poking at sonic) managed a small war in Ireland since 1916.

jraf

Me Jungleman! Me have large Babalui.
Muff #3275

[jdhill 0]

Another American's opinion.... that's a load of crap!

The US already has a certain amount of military influance in many countries, as we train, equip, and advise a large number of them. We don't need to wage war to gain more. Has it allowed us into countries overtly that we would have otherwise needed to do things covertly, sure. But it isn't to control their oil.

The war on terror is something that should have been embarqued on a long time ago, either covertly or overtly. We should not allow terrorist to rest, ever, not any of them.

The threat of communism in the 50s was as real as the threat of terrorism is today. The war (police action) in Korea was under the flag of the UN, the US just had the majority role (not including the Korean people).

The war in Vietnam, well, you can debate the root cause of that for a long time, but it was not started by the US.

Yes the US has an interest in stablizing the price of oil, including middle eastern oil, but I don't think anyone is blind to the reason we are hunting terrorists.

Just another American's opinion.

Josh

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke

[PhillyKev 0]

I agree....but how did it get turned into a war against Iraq and grouping N. Korea into the "axis of evil"? There are definite political agendas being pushed with the cry of "Remember 9/11" that had nothing to do with it.

[Muenkel 0]

Quote

Funny how bad it is to be educated. Wouldn't life be simpler if we all quit after we had exactly enough educational tools to perform our assigned role in life. Just think of the reduction in waste of time caused by too much thinking.

Education is a great thing. I just don't think having a degree necessarily makes you smart. Sometimes too much education leads to an elitist attitude. Sometimes people are so book smart, they lack common sense. Just my humble opinion.

_________________________________________
Chris

[jdhill 0]

Iraq and N. Korea have been on the bad guy list a long time, not just since 9/11.

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke

[Sonic 0]

Really, I never noticed !! I know it's a bad thing that happened, and I wish it never did. But there is definatly something bigger going on than "let's get these mo-fo's"

-----------------------------------
It's like something out of that twilighty show about that zone

[wmw999 2,447]

Quote

Education is a great thing. I just don't think having a degree necessarily makes you smart. Sometimes too much education leads to an elitist attitude. Sometimes people are so book smart, they lack common sense. Just my humble opinion.

Oh, it doesn't. But education often gives you access to a whole lot more inputs with which to perform thinking, by exposing you to them, and by giving you some reasons why others have thought they were valid. It's up to the user to determine the utility of those inputs.

Yes, of course institutions can choose what inputs to give you access to. Look at the strongly religious colleges.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[PLFXpert 0]

Quote

the money spent on war could be spent getting us off oil

I won't get involved in the other conversation here, but speaking of oil...I learned in my BioTechnology class that we have the technology to be running cars (at high speeds, as well, I might add) off of our everyday garbage and wheat. The US has PLENTY of that stuff. Brazil currently has this sort of technology implemented. The US doesn't use it b/c the car people don't want to make cars that take that kind of fuel until there's fuel stations for it, and the fuel station people don't want to open stations if there are currently no cars that run on it. Catch 22.

[Muenkel 0]

Quote

Yes, of course institutions can choose what inputs to give you access to. Look at the strongly religious colleges.

I agree with this statement. However there is some irony in my experience. I attended 2 different universities; 1 Catholic, the other secular. The Catholic one seemed to have many more professors who had a political agenda (liberal) than the secular one. I guess it just really annoyed me that I had to listen to a professor's opinion incessantly rather than the subject material. I was paying (well, the truth be told, my dad was paying) for me to have an education, not some person's personal opinions. I will admit though, I did have some fantastic professors who I really admired and taught me alot.

_________________________________________
Chris

[Guest]

Once again, it's just eggheaded liberal simplicity (and leftist propaganda itself).

The proof is this - if we were as we are portrayed, we would simply march in and take it. After all, who would stop us?

And there WAS a communist threat. Just ask the Koreans.

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[mjkoziel 0]

Dude! Did you just say Bad Guy's. Maybe they are EVIL too.
Maybe anyones opinion that is different than ours is EVIL.

M

[billvon 2,991]

>I hate to brake the news, but over a year ago someone has attacked
> the United States and killed a whole bunch of people. As far as I am
> concerned that warrants a little vengence.

Yep, but we should confine our vengeance to the people responsible. If someone breaks into your house, it might make sense to go after him, but it doesn't make sense to go after all Hispanics, even if he was Hispanic.

> lately paid $1.74 for gas. Admitted I drive on premium, but that is
> expensive.

Wow! Travel a bit. Outside the middle east, we have the cheapest gas on the _planet_. It's cheaper than bottled water, for crying out loud.

[billvon 2,991]

>Iraq and N. Korea have been on the bad guy list a long time, not
> just since 9/11.

Then why are we selling them reactors, bomb parts, giving them aid and giving them military advice? Heck, we gave Hussein military intelligence aid while he was gassing his own citizens.

If we're going to put them on the bad guy list, treat them as such. Don't sell them reactors then cry that they have them, and can use them in their nuclear program. Don't give radical terrorists millions in weapons. It will (in fact, has) come back to bite us.

[Scoby 0]

Quote

> lately paid $1.74 for gas. Admitted I drive on premium, but that is
> expensive.

Wow! Travel a bit. Outside the middle east, we have the cheapest gas on the _planet_. It's cheaper than bottled water, for crying out loud.

I actually root for gas prices to go up. I think the only way we are going to wean ourselves from this addiction is a little bit of pain in the pocketbook. I know ot would cost me more money, but I've already voted with my wallet to buy a small car and ride a motorcycle.

[jdhill 0]

We gave Iraq intel before being on the bad guy list... may not have been the best move, but we did. Iraq got their reactor from the... wana guess?... the French.

We told NK we would sell them a reactor (that is not capable of creating weapons grade materials) if the abandon their weapons program... they never gave up their program, we never delivered the reactor...

I think all these things are called "diplomatic measures" which were concidered to be better than getting into a shooting war with them at the time.

Maybe you are right, we should have taken a differnt path then...but we didn't.

Josh

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke

[billvon 2,991]

>Iraq got their reactor from the... wana guess?... the French.

No, I'm talking about the two reactors the US sold to the North Koreans under the 1994 US-North Korea Agreed Framework.

>We told NK we would sell them a reactor (that is not capable of
> creating weapons grade materials . . .)

Any LWR can create plutonium. LWR fuel can be used in breeders to make weapons-grade plutonium pretty quickly, and the same fuel can be processed to make weapons-grade uranium. You need a nuclear weapons program to do this sort of processing, of course - which they have.

>Maybe you are right, we should have taken a differnt path then...but
> we didn't.

Right, we all make mistakes. I just hope we learn from them.

[jraf 0]

Do you feel that the UK is being left out. I see Her Majesty's government going hand in hand with Washington. What are you complaining about, you will benefit too, and perhaps more than we.

jraf

Me Jungleman! Me have large Babalui.
Muff #3275

[jraf 0]

Bill, with all due respect notice that in my post I do mention why we have cheap gas. Not so long ago (maybe 3 years) I was paying more or less $1 per gallon. The fact that we are cheaper than Itally or the UK is no consollation for me.

If it were an increase in MY taxes to spend more on MY schooling system (vide: 1992 Ross Perot presidential campaign) I could accept it. This is supporting the oil producers - mainly OPEC affiliated arab countries.

By now MY gas prices are higher. Do I honestly care about the Middle East? Not really! As far as I am concerned they can kill each other and I would be happy.

Last but not least I don't see the Federal Government going after Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain and many other countries of the region. Your theft analogy is perhaps a bit far fetched.

Prost!

jraf

Me Jungleman! Me have large Babalui.
Muff #3275

[billvon 2,991]

>Bill, with all due respect notice that in my post I do mention why we
> have cheap gas. Not so long ago (maybe 3 years) I was paying
> more or less $1 per gallon. The fact that we are cheaper than Itally
> or the UK is no consollation for me.

Sorry if I misunderstood. I think the primary reason gas prices will go up is that we are just going to plain run out of oil no matter how many new wells we drill. When demand goes up and supply falls, prices rise.

>By now MY gas prices are higher. Do I honestly care about the Middle
> East? Not really! As far as I am concerned they can kill each other
> and I would be happy.

Well, here's a question, then - if you had to pay $2.50 per gallon, and the end result of doing that would be that we could disregard the middle east completely (i.e. no more support of terrorists, no more oil shortages from OPEC, no more support of Saudi Arabia or Kuwait, no more terrorist attacks on us) would you do it?

>Last but not least I don't see the Federal Government going after
> Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain and many other countries of
> the region. Your theft analogy is perhaps a bit far fetched.

Right, we are going after Iraq instead, who didn't support Al Quaeda. We are also threatening Libya, Syria, and Iran (at least we've lumped them under 'the axis of evil') - I hope we're not invading them all.