Land of Free

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Rus: No hurt feelings. And, no, I’m not arguing that the US has some moral imperative to influence world affairs. The problem is this: When the US has withdrawn from the world stage, like in the 1930s, it creates a vacuum and the potential for bad things to happen, such as the rise of fascism in Europe, and Japanese militarism in the Pacific.

The period of the late 1970s is another excellent example. The Soviets enjoyed tremendous sway in world affairs, and the US had pulled back as a result of Vietnam, Watergate, the Iran hostage crisis, etc. When Reagan came to power, he immediately set about reversing that course, and to great effect. In my mind, it is inarguable that this was a good thing, and it culminated in the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact forces. Were some of the methods used questionable? Absolutely.

A weak US provided the opportunity for Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda to strike us in 2001. This perceived weakness was derived from our unwillingness to strike back after the embassy bombings, the first World Trade Center bombing, Khobar Towers in Saudi, the Cole incident and our abrupt departure from Somalia.

What do you think would happen if we effected a similarly abrupt exit from Iraq?

[Sandi Egan]

Allan,

you make some sound points, but do you seriously compare a group of criminals to some of the most powerful countries of XX century?

U.S. ended up in the best overall situation after WWII, because it managed to stay extremely strong economy-wise. In 1980-s, USSR overspread itself to so many fronts, which lead to its collapse. And again, less aggressive US policy allowed for a much better results. Why repeat their mistakes?

Just look what happened in the world during last 10. China, Russia, India, Brazil are in much better economic shape, cut their debt, had enormous economic grows. None of them has troops abroad, but somehow their national interest are intact and nobody attacks them. We, on the other hand, only increased our debt, lost thousands of lives, killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people and alienated many allies. Do you feel more secure as a result?

Regarding oil. The cost of oil was less than $20/barrel before the war. Now it’s about $100. Import from middle east constitutes less than 50% of US supply. Even if some evil forces came to power over there and flatly refused to trade with us, what would happen? Could the price go up 5 times? No way! We could pay double to other oil producers, and buy as much as we needed. And those Arab countries would still have to sell their oil to someone, thus filling demand on the market. The high oil price today is a result of uncertainty. Markets are afraid of another war that could completely cut oil supply from the region, and THAT is the reason for todays prices.

[Sandi Egan]

Allan,

you make some sound points, but do you seriously compare a group of criminals to some of the most powerful countries of XX century?

U.S. ended up in the best overall situation after WWII, because it managed to stay extremely strong economy-wise. In 1980-s, USSR overspread itself to so many fronts, which lead to its collapse. And again, less aggressive US policy allowed for a much better results. Why repeat their mistakes?

Just look what happened in the world during last 10. China, Russia, India, Brazil are in much better economic shape, cut their debt, had enormous economic grows. None of them has troops abroad, but somehow their national interest are intact and nobody attacks them. We, on the other hand, only increased our debt, lost thousands of lives, killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people and alienated many allies. Do you feel more secure as a result?

Regarding oil. The cost of oil was less than $20/barrel before the war. Now it’s about $100. Import from middle east constitutes less than 50% of US supply. Even if some evil forces came to power over there and flatly refused to trade with us, what would happen? Could the price go up 5 times? No way! We could pay double to other oil producers, and buy as much as we needed. And those Arab countries would still have to sell their oil to someone, thus filling demand on the market. The high oil price today is a result of uncertainty. Markets are afraid of another war that could completely cut oil supply from the region, and THAT is the reason for todays prices.

[Sandi Egan]

Allan,

you make some sound points, but do you seriously compare a group of criminals to some of the most powerful countries of XX century?

U.S. ended up in the best overall situation after WWII, because it managed to stay extremely strong economy-wise. In 1980-s, USSR overspread itself to so many fronts, which lead to its collapse. And again, less aggressive US policy allowed for a much better results. Why repeat their mistakes?

Just look what happened in the world during last 10. China, Russia, India, Brazil are in much better economic shape, cut their debt, had enormous economic grows. None of them has troops abroad, but somehow their national interest are intact and nobody attacks them. We, on the other hand, only increased our debt, lost thousands of lives, killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people and alienated many allies. Do you feel more secure as a result?

Regarding oil. The cost of oil was less than $20/barrel before the war. Now it’s about $100. Import from middle east constitutes less than 50% of US supply. Even if some evil forces came to power over there and flatly refused to trade with us, what would happen? Could the price go up 5 times? No way! We could pay double to other oil producers, and buy as much as we needed. And those Arab countries would still have to sell their oil to someone, thus filling demand on the market. The high oil price today is a result of uncertainty. Markets are afraid of another war that could completely cut oil supply from the region, and THAT is the reason for todays prices.

[Sandi Egan]

Allan,

you make some sound points, but do you seriously compare a group of criminals to some of the most powerful countries of XX century?

U.S. ended up in the best overall situation after WWII, because it managed to stay extremely strong economy-wise. In 1980-s, USSR overspread itself to so many fronts, which lead to its collapse. And again, less aggressive US policy allowed for a much better results. Why repeat their mistakes?

Just look what happened in the world during last 10. China, Russia, India, Brazil are in much better economic shape, cut their debt, had enormous economic grows. None of them has troops abroad, but somehow their national interest are intact and nobody attacks them. We, on the other hand, only increased our debt, lost thousands of lives, killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people and alienated many allies. Do you feel more secure as a result?

Regarding oil. The cost of oil was less than $20/barrel before the war. Now it’s about $100. Import from middle east constitutes less than 50% of US supply. Even if some evil forces came to power over there and flatly refused to trade with us, what would happen? Could the price go up 5 times? No way! We could pay double to other oil producers, and buy as much as we needed. And those Arab countries would still have to sell their oil to someone, thus filling demand on the market. The high oil price today is a result of uncertainty. Markets are afraid of another war that could completely cut oil supply from the region, and THAT is the reason for todays prices.

[Sandi Egan]

Allan,

you make some sound points, but do you seriously compare a group of criminals to some of the most powerful countries of XX century?

U.S. ended up in the best overall situation after WWII, because it managed to stay extremely strong economy-wise. In 1980-s, USSR overspread itself to so many fronts, which lead to its collapse. And again, less aggressive US policy allowed for a much better results. Why repeat their mistakes?

Just look what happened in the world during last 10. China, Russia, India, Brazil are in much better economic shape, cut their debt, had enormous economic grows. None of them has troops abroad, but somehow their national interest are intact and nobody attacks them. We, on the other hand, only increased our debt, lost thousands of lives, killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people and alienated many allies. Do you feel more secure as a result?

Regarding oil. The cost of oil was less than $20/barrel before the war. Now it’s about $100. Import from middle east constitutes less than 50% of US supply. Even if some evil forces came to power over there and flatly refused to trade with us, what would happen? Could the price go up 5 times? No way! We could pay double to other oil producers, and buy as much as we needed. And those Arab countries would still have to sell their oil to someone, thus filling demand on the market. The high oil price today is a result of uncertainty. Markets are afraid of another war that could completely cut oil supply from the region, and THAT is the reason for todays prices.

[drunkle]

what is the relationship of the cost of oil to the cost of gas? i suspect that gas is being artificially suppressed…

[drunkle]

what is the relationship of the cost of oil to the cost of gas? i suspect that gas is being artificially suppressed…

[drunkle]

what is the relationship of the cost of oil to the cost of gas? i suspect that gas is being artificially suppressed…

[drunkle]

what is the relationship of the cost of oil to the cost of gas? i suspect that gas is being artificially suppressed…

[drunkle]

what is the relationship of the cost of oil to the cost of gas? i suspect that gas is being artificially suppressed…

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Sandi: I would argue that much of the increase in the price of oil has to do with China’s energy demands as it’s economy expands. Look at the prices of steel, iron ore, and other materials and consumables. All are up, and considerably. To argue that the price of oil is up solely because of the Iraq war is somewhat specious, to say the least.

As far as Russia goes: It’s economic success is nearly all due to it’s energy exports. It is lapsing back into authoritarianism, it is corrupt and nearly entirely dependent on oil and natural gas exports for hard currency. It has no economy to speak of, and foreign investors are running for the exits.

In the case of both China and India, they have both experienced exponential growth. However, both of them are now suffering from overstretch. Labor costs have mushroomed in both countries, and both are hamstrung due to lack of qualified management and legal personnel. Neither economy can continue expanding at the present rate, and neither possesses a strong enough government, legal system or financial infrastructure to support future, sustained growth.

I can’t comment on Brazil, but if history is any indicator, Brazil is probably part of the same boom and bust cycle that most South American countries such as Venezuela, Brazil and Argentina find themselves part of periodically.

The “allies” we have alienated, such as Germany, France and Italy, are part of the same group that have done nothing to combat terrorism, or bear their fair share of responsibility for ensuring stability and order through either NATO or the UN. If I am going to entrust my security to someone, I doubt seriously it would be either the UN or the european security collective (CSCE).

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Sandi: I would argue that much of the increase in the price of oil has to do with China’s energy demands as it’s economy expands. Look at the prices of steel, iron ore, and other materials and consumables. All are up, and considerably. To argue that the price of oil is up solely because of the Iraq war is somewhat specious, to say the least.

As far as Russia goes: It’s economic success is nearly all due to it’s energy exports. It is lapsing back into authoritarianism, it is corrupt and nearly entirely dependent on oil and natural gas exports for hard currency. It has no economy to speak of, and foreign investors are running for the exits.

In the case of both China and India, they have both experienced exponential growth. However, both of them are now suffering from overstretch. Labor costs have mushroomed in both countries, and both are hamstrung due to lack of qualified management and legal personnel. Neither economy can continue expanding at the present rate, and neither possesses a strong enough government, legal system or financial infrastructure to support future, sustained growth.

I can’t comment on Brazil, but if history is any indicator, Brazil is probably part of the same boom and bust cycle that most South American countries such as Venezuela, Brazil and Argentina find themselves part of periodically.

The “allies” we have alienated, such as Germany, France and Italy, are part of the same group that have done nothing to combat terrorism, or bear their fair share of responsibility for ensuring stability and order through either NATO or the UN. If I am going to entrust my security to someone, I doubt seriously it would be either the UN or the european security collective (CSCE).

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Sandi: I would argue that much of the increase in the price of oil has to do with China’s energy demands as it’s economy expands. Look at the prices of steel, iron ore, and other materials and consumables. All are up, and considerably. To argue that the price of oil is up solely because of the Iraq war is somewhat specious, to say the least.

As far as Russia goes: It’s economic success is nearly all due to it’s energy exports. It is lapsing back into authoritarianism, it is corrupt and nearly entirely dependent on oil and natural gas exports for hard currency. It has no economy to speak of, and foreign investors are running for the exits.

In the case of both China and India, they have both experienced exponential growth. However, both of them are now suffering from overstretch. Labor costs have mushroomed in both countries, and both are hamstrung due to lack of qualified management and legal personnel. Neither economy can continue expanding at the present rate, and neither possesses a strong enough government, legal system or financial infrastructure to support future, sustained growth.

I can’t comment on Brazil, but if history is any indicator, Brazil is probably part of the same boom and bust cycle that most South American countries such as Venezuela, Brazil and Argentina find themselves part of periodically.

The “allies” we have alienated, such as Germany, France and Italy, are part of the same group that have done nothing to combat terrorism, or bear their fair share of responsibility for ensuring stability and order through either NATO or the UN. If I am going to entrust my security to someone, I doubt seriously it would be either the UN or the european security collective (CSCE).

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Sandi: I would argue that much of the increase in the price of oil has to do with China’s energy demands as it’s economy expands. Look at the prices of steel, iron ore, and other materials and consumables. All are up, and considerably. To argue that the price of oil is up solely because of the Iraq war is somewhat specious, to say the least.

As far as Russia goes: It’s economic success is nearly all due to it’s energy exports. It is lapsing back into authoritarianism, it is corrupt and nearly entirely dependent on oil and natural gas exports for hard currency. It has no economy to speak of, and foreign investors are running for the exits.

In the case of both China and India, they have both experienced exponential growth. However, both of them are now suffering from overstretch. Labor costs have mushroomed in both countries, and both are hamstrung due to lack of qualified management and legal personnel. Neither economy can continue expanding at the present rate, and neither possesses a strong enough government, legal system or financial infrastructure to support future, sustained growth.

I can’t comment on Brazil, but if history is any indicator, Brazil is probably part of the same boom and bust cycle that most South American countries such as Venezuela, Brazil and Argentina find themselves part of periodically.

The “allies” we have alienated, such as Germany, France and Italy, are part of the same group that have done nothing to combat terrorism, or bear their fair share of responsibility for ensuring stability and order through either NATO or the UN. If I am going to entrust my security to someone, I doubt seriously it would be either the UN or the european security collective (CSCE).

[Author]

Posts