What's really funny is Cali and Florida are just fine with sucking down the oil pulled out of the gulf, as long as it is in the backyard of Texas and Louisiana. Kind of like the people that scream for more jails, but demand you put it "somewhere else". However, it does appear that the tune is changing in Florida. Amazing what an issue this has become, and will be in this election.
I see. Check? No. You guys have me more convinced already. And I guess SabanFan was right about my, how do you say it... naivete. Most of my arguments are not the result of a lot of research; rather, I base my opinion on the arguments I have heard. As a result, I don't mind admitting I am wrong. I should strive for more knowledge, and I do, but it is a struggle to fit a lot of research into my schedule. Really, I learn a lot from Tiger Forums.
If full-scale invasion was truly necessary, I don't oppose that, and I don't necessarily oppose rebuilding or helping to rebuild afterward if it doesn't put us in a serious economic bind. I believe we had the support of the world going into Afghanistan, so I think rebuilding Afghanistan would have been a collaboration. It turns out that we did invade Afghanistan and made quick work of it, but we dropped the ball at least once when it came to capturing bin Laden and we allowed Pakistan to stonewall us. We then decided, midstream, to change the focus of our military. This is one of the main things that irks me about our decision to go to war in Iraq. When it costs as much as it has I really wonder if help to the extent that we've provided it is necessary. Afghanistan would have been a totally different situation. We went into Iraq against the world's wishes. I may be beginning to come around. Interesting article that gives one side of the argument. Shouldn't this really be bigger news if it is a legitimate answer to many of our problems? Why aren't Republicans making a bigger fuss and making a better case to the American people? Don't disagree. One of my biggest concerns is that we won't keep the oil we produce. This may be US oil we are talking about, but if we allow the oil companies to drill it won't be US oil anymore, it will be oil company oil. Also, the argument opposing drilling says that what we will be able to produce will be a drop in the bucket in the overall scheme of things, which will have minor effects on the price of oil. True. A lot of people are having money taken out of their pockets under Bush's administration... the standard of living for working class families has fallen during the leadership the Republican party has had the opportunity to give us.
Nonsense. Invading and occupying countries to eliminate a few thousand international criminals is trying to kill a flea with a bulldozer. Impressive, perhaps, but expensive, clumsy, noisy, causes a lot of damage, and is no real threat to the flea! Especially if the wrong country is chosen. The fact that terrorists hide and fight like guerillas is exactly the reason that we have large numbers of covert CIA operatives, Special Operations Forces, and counter-insurgency and counter-terrorist specialist units. Use the right tool for the right job. Save the heavy forces for the heavy threat. Above all don't waste a cool $Trillion trying to turn Iraq into Kansas while Osama bin Ladin and his cohorts run free in Pakistan.
I agree. It is easier to hide from a large conventional military force, then a covert, undercover one.
Agreed, I'm not happy at all about the timeline either. I'd prefer us not going into Iraq but the president always has classified information that the public doesn't have access too. I don't know the answer to your questions however what really could be the other side of the argument? Think about it for a minute: Are you going to tell me we can't drill anywhere in this country because of some spotted oil or something? Honestly we have every reason to drill but at least one political party has every reason not too, anywhere! Whats wrong with this picture? This doesn't matter, really, think about it. We live in a global economy, any oil that is brought on the open market will affect the price, supply and demand. You mean the do nothing argument and just let the arabs dictate the price of oil and gas. Do you really believe that 800 billion gallons of oil shale in Colorado is a drop in the bucket? That is only in one small region of the USA? Are you next going to tell me that this country doesn't have any other resources. These people say such stuff because they really don't want us to do this. Look, I want us to develop alternate, clean energy but the way I see it we have 2 choices if you want to keep your lifestyle. 1) Drill for oil, it will affect the price IMHO and develop alternative energy 2) Don't Drill, pay more, Our lifestyle will eventually have to change. I disagree here. The main problem we are having is less money because of gas prices. It is killing us like it is to a lot of people, I can only speak for myself here. Some people seem to want to blame Bush and the Republicans for this problem but the truth is we haven't had a good energy policy in this country for decades.
I would agree with you guys in some situations however Bill Clinton tried this in Afghanistan and failed. The Taliban was the government in Afghanistan, no way you could do what you and Red claim in that situation, same about Iraq. You sure is heck couldn't do that in Pakistan either without a full scale invasion. Keep in mind going after a few terrorists, the way Red described it is totally different than the situation in these countries.
Maybe the cost of extracting oil from shale is prohibitive. I don't know. I think it is important to consider both sides and just assuming lame arguments from the Democrats is counterproductive and not in everyone's best interest, IMO. Being that at least half the country lean Democrat, their opinions and arguments shouldn't be ignored. We are a democracy that has to work together. One side shouldn't feel they can or should simply ignore the other. So we should drill in environmentally sensitive locations so the US can put a drop of oil in the worldwide bucket and lower the price of gas a few cents? If the oil we produce is only a drop in the bucket and won't specifically help the US, why bother? Granted, I am worried that the US will continue to produce less goods and commodities, making us less increasingly less stable and independent, but I'm not sure drilling small amounts of oil is the way to go. Maybe drilling opponents have misrepresented their case and the US oil reserves will make a significant impact on worldwide oil production and costs. I don't know for sure either way, but I can't just assume Democrats fundamentally oppose drilling and offer up red herring arguments. At what rate could we produce this oil and is producing oil from shale more expensive? Do we simply drill for this oil or does it require strip-mining or something? Why are we the only country feeling the pinch, then? I think the pain the rest of the world is feeling now is mostly related to the decline of the US dollar, not energy costs.
What are you talking about? Clinton sent air strikes that succeeded in destroying Al Qaida bases but didn't kil bin Ladin because Pakistan tipped Al Qaida off when we notified them at the last minute that missiles would be overflying their country. That's exactly what was done. We did not send in divisions of heavy forces to invade and occupy Afghanistan. We sent in CIA to help the local Afghan warlords defeat the Taliban and then we put them into control of their country. We have never and do not occupy Afghanistan, yet we defeated the Taliban using CIA, Special Forces, airpower and light mountain troops training and supporting Afghan army units. The Afghanistan war was fought smartly, but has suffered by the distraction and the money and troop depletion of the Iraq war. No, that would be costly in lives and dollars and would gain us nothing of value. If Pakistan is an ally they will allow us to target the terrorists among them and help us to get it done. If they are an enemy, they will continue to support the terrorists and allow them to use Pakistan as a base. Then we go after the terrorists anyway and if Pakistan interferes, we blockade them, declare no-fly zones, and if necessary, bomb them until they see the light. Going in on the ground with an invasion force and occupying the country is poor strategy and just adds to the problems without solving the original issue. Did the Iraq debacle teach us nothing? No, it isn't. Explain how it is different.
