Quote:
Originally Posted by billethkid
the bad guys can only succeed when the good guys do nothing.....and we are becoming an easy mark for the bad guys....at some point a stand has to be taken.
An "event" of some kind will no doubt occur in the middle east some day. When it happens we should put every effort in the protection of the USA, it's people and it's assets.
Yes there will be a disruption of oil supply.....such a big surprise!!!
Knowing that will be the result, just what is it we as a country are doing to make sure the impact of a permanent oil supply disruption does not affect us?
NOTHING last time I checked!!
I say pull out our troops and let that part of the world sort itself out while we get our affairs here at home attended to.
We are no more than a knat pushing on an elephant to go in a different direction in the middle east.
If we pulled out and embarked on energy self sufficiency that would send a much stronger signal to the bad guys in the middle east. With a more positive result than us pushing on the elephant.
btk
|
But what you suggest is a little bit more than 'doing nothing', I think.
The other thing to consider is that if the U.S. assumes an attitude of more self-interest as you suggest we do, that maybe Europe and other countries in the Middle East, and maybe even China, will suddenly see their way clear to step into the situation and take a more active role.
If Israel bombs Iran and then Iran begins retaliation against those that they see as responsible, mainly us, by constricting or stopping the shipment of oil through the Straight of Hormuz, the whole world will quickly find itself without enough oil. That would include heating oil for Europe and oil headed to refineries that provide gas for everyone, from China to Europe to North America. And the Saudis wouldn't be selling oil any more as almost all their production gets shipped thru the straight. They too would definitely have a dog in the fight.
There should be a whole lot of people very interested, very quickly in re-opening that 21-mile wide piece of ocean. About 20% of the world's oil, about 35% of oil shipped by sea, goes thru that body of water.
Now, I wonder whether such a sequence of events might change the debate between our presidential candidates? It might be interesting to hear where Mitt Romney might stand on such a situation. His foreign affairs advisors, particularly John Bolton who is rumored to be Romney's choice for Secretary of State, are all particularly hawkish and openly willing to commit the U.S. to more military involvement. And I wonder whether our government might take another look at that pipeline from Canada to the Texas refineries?
I guess we're still back at my initial question--now what?