Orange Duce

[runrussellrun]

Just b/c most were Saudis doesn't mean they are ALL bad

[youthathletics]

This is not quite correct. As I'm sure you know, oil is traded on a worldwide market. If ME oil is significantly disrupted, the price for all oil will shoot up, harming the world economy,

Respectfully, you're assuming that the price of oil is directly related to supply and demand. It's not.

And you're also assuming that ME "stability" has anything to do with oil prices. RR and others are arguing that the entire region was in flames under Obama after the troops were pulled from Iraq. How were gas prices in those years?

Exactly.

It wouldn't harm the world economy the the point of a Depression if we stopped buying from the region. This is a flawed premise that led to all our ME shenanigans. We would simply move our energy demands elsewhere. BFD.

Gas prices are how much higher in the EU than in the US? And they get along just fine.

afan has given me a good head start. Oil NOW trades on a world-wide market and the US used to buy a lot of middle eastern (and Ven) oil. Until very recently it was against the law to export US oil. Oil trades on two very important indices: West Texas Intermediate (WTI) and Brent. WTI is the price of oil delivered to Cushing, OK. Brent is the price of crude delivered to Rotterdam. If we had turned out back on ME oil, the differential between Brent and WTI would have exploded. Would oil prices go up in the US - yep. Guess who wins out on that economic war-game? The USofA..... What do you think Trump's policies are preparing us for:

go ahead think a bit. Here are some clues:
- he is reducing/severing trading ties with China
- he is increasing US self-dependency in terms of transportation fuels
- he is trying to improve relations with Russia
- he is working to reinforce our border.

wonder why?

many folks will say it is because he is a racist pig. He is a pig, he is not a racist. You cold make the argument that he sees what is coming:

WHEN the middle east explodes - and at some point it has to - Brent is going to go well over $100/bbl. It might hit $200. What will that do?
- it will cripple global trade - because ships run on diesel/bunker fuel
- it will mean that those countries that are self-sufficient in terms of oil, will be far better off
- it will mean that Europe will have to look to Russia for its fuel
- it will mean that a lot of other countries will be facing incredible amounts of unrest and people will be pouring out of those countries creating a humanitarian crisis at our borders

When did the shale boom kick in ? You can't just unwind everything that happened since 1991. There was never a clear exit ramp. Are you ready to abandon our Arab allies, who rely on our support, to hold off Iran & their proxies ? You think the potential fallout in economic terms & potential terrorism won't impact us if the region devolves even further ?

George Mitchell began fracking in the 90's. It became widespread starting in the Barnett, spreading to the Haynesville, the Marcellus, then the Eagle Ford, the Bakken and the Permian. By 2006 it was clear what was coming. By 2014 the Boom was in high gear.

the exit ramp is very clear - leave. I suspect that if we really put our minds to it, we could pull everyone out of there in one night.

I'll answer one of your questions with a question - what Arab allies? The one's who flew panes into our buildings? Which allies is that exactly? So, YES I would.....

You had me up until your lasts sentence.

What about AFRICOM, which is essentially a line East to West protecting the central and southern continent of Africa from the trash infiltration coming out of the North. Do we also let Africa go to hell in a hand-basket and become an aggressive extension of the ME? We have thousands stationed there. I am genuinely asking for your perspective.

[HooDat]

My perspective is - who elected us the world's cops?

Who told us that it is our job to tell every other country and continent how to run their countries?

and more importantly - to do so through the use of force?

do we know that if we pulled back our military that the world would collapse? Are we making any friends in any of these countries? Are those "friendships" worth the lives of our children?

We put our soldiers in foreign countries and provide the bad guys with easy scapegoats for the troubles they sow.

We pulled out of Vietnam, and OMG the commies took over.... How is Vietnam doing now? Last I checked it is overrun with US and Northern European 20-somethings hitting the beaches and partying their butts off..... But we had to kill off and psychologically scar thousands of our kids (at the time).

But we should trust General Dynamics (er, I mean the gov) it is DIFFERENT in the ME!!!!! bs1

[old salt]

So leaving a stable Iraq & drawing ISIS out, so they could overrun Iraq & Syria, before we go back & kill thousands more (with hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, caught in the crossfire) was a good strategy ?

This is hopeless. Can't argue with logic like that.

This from the guy who thinks that removing the leader of his nation, and replacing him with US Marines was a brilliant long term idea, and Obama "wrecked" this super awesome plan.

How hard do you suppose the Mullahs in Iran were laughing as they watched Bush wipe out their rival? Now you're telling me that the Irans are lording over the region...and instead of blaming Bush for removing their rival, you want to put it all on Obama.



This is why you and I can't agree on anything. You want to put 100% of the problems in the ME on Obama. It's absurd. Further, you want to cite his "withdrawal" ....even though he didn't do that....as evidence that we need to go further in, injecting the US military into every single conflict in every single country in the region.

I'm sorry, but this reasoning is insane. We'd still be in Vietnam using this logic. I'm sick of the US casualties, and these discussions bring out the worst in me....sorry.

I keep telling you -- I brought up Obama because you said we should try a different policy.
Obama's policy was definitely different from his last 3 predecessors.

I'm not giving the Bushes a pass. I keep telling you -- we signed on for this when we went ashore in '91.
For us -- the MidEast is our Hotel California...
You can check out anytime you like,
...but you can never leave.

Give W credit. He finished up what his Dad started & had the fortitude to do the surge, which gave Iraq a chance.

[old salt]

RR and others are arguing that the entire region was in flames under Obama after the troops were pulled from Iraq. How were gas prices in those years?

You can thank the US Navy for keeping the Strait of Hormuz open & the oil flowing, just as they have since 1979.

You can thank our US military planners whose air strike targeting avoided oil production & transportation infrastructure,
...even including that which was captured & operated by ISIS, precluding the need to rebuild it after their defeat.

Who was going to close the ocean?

I don't own any oilfields in the ME, does anyone else in the USA? Sounds like we outta subsidize these poor oil companies, what with all the danger of having an entire ocean being "closed". Sounds like General Smedley was correct............thank you NAVY for protecting my interests.

Commodore Schmidlapp was going to close the ocean!

The Strait of Hormuz is not the ocean. It's the choke point in the Persian Gulf through which most oil shipments from the region pass. (1/3 of the world's seaborne oil)
Did either of you have to wait in gas lines in the '70's ?

https://www.nytimes.com/.../mideast-ten ... -says.html
Nov 14, 1990 - MIDEAST TENSIONS; U.S. Jobs at Stake in Gulf, Baker Says ... a primary reason the United States must confront Iraq is to save American jobs.

[a fan]

I keep telling you -- I brought up Obama because you said we should try a different policy.
Obama's policy was definitely different from his last 3 predecessors.

Strongly disagree.

Using your line of thinking, not mine.....who else, in hindsight, withdrew from Iraq early, leading to bigger problems in the ME? That's right, the first Bush. Obama didn't do anything that was new----sometimes we invade, sometimes we don't. Sometimes we send money, sometimes we don't. Theres no underlying logic or policy for the US in this region. It's an inkblot.....good luck squaring the circle.

For us -- the MidEast is our Hotel California...
You can check out anytime you like,
...but you can never leave.

Yeah, and it's why I argue with you so strenuously----I refuse to believe there isn't another way. Starting war to prevent war is insane. Killing hundreds of thousands and blowing trillions to knock a quarter off of the price of a gallon of gas is insane. I can't handle the barbaric line of thinking that led to our invasion in 91, and this same line of thinking keeps us there. Call me stubborn, I guess. It makes me sick to think that we're intentionally sending our people over there with a rifle and a Humvee.

Give W credit. He finished up what his Dad started & had the fortitude to do the surge, which gave Iraq a chance.

I give ALL Presidents credit for this forsaken region. Yep, even Trump. There are no right moves. Which is another reason why I have such a hard time hammering Obama for his actions.

Which leads to the other part where we disagree is that you think that Bush had things settled------what I see is the calm before more storms. There is no permanent calm there. Only problems that multiply constantly...

[old salt]

I keep telling you -- I brought up Obama because you said we should try a different policy.
Obama's policy was definitely different from his last 3 predecessors.

Strongly disagree.

Using your line of thinking, not mine.....who else, in hindsight, withdrew from Iraq early, leading to bigger problems in the ME? That's right, the first Bush. Obama didn't do anything that was new----sometimes we invade, sometimes we don't. Sometimes we send money, sometimes we don't. Theres no underlying logic or policy for the US in this region. It's an inkblot.....good luck squaring the circle.
Bush 41 didn't leave. Remember the no fly zones & Operation Provide Comfort.
OBL cited our continued presence in Saudi Arabia (the land of the Holy Sites) as a main reason for 9-11.

For us -- the MidEast is our Hotel California...
You can check out anytime you like,
...but you can never leave.

Yeah, and it's why I argue with you so strenuously----I refuse to believe there isn't another way. Starting war to prevent war is insane. Killing hundreds of thousands and blowing trillions to knock a quarter off of the price of a gallon of gas is insane. I can't handle the barbaric line of thinking that led to our invasion in 91, and this same line of thinking keeps us there. Call me stubborn, I guess. It makes me sick to think that we're intentionally sending our people over there with a rifle and a Humvee.
We're not sending that many anymore. Nearly all come home, unharmed. They are volunteers who believe in what they are doing.

Give W credit. He finished up what his Dad started & had the fortitude to do the surge, which gave Iraq a chance.

I give ALL Presidents credit for this forsaken region. Yep, even Trump. There are no right moves. Which is another reason why I have such a hard time hammering Obama for his actions.

Which leads to the other part where we disagree is that you think that Bush had things settled------what I see is the calm before more storms. There is no permanent calm there. Only problems that multiply constantly...
Iraq was stable in 2008. Remember the report by our foremost Iraqi war correspondent Dexter Filkins, which I link everytime we have this argument.

[a fan]

Of course is was relatively stable in 2008. Relatively. It's relatively stable now, is it not? It was relatively stable when Obama left office, for that matter. Meaning: stuff is still blowing up all over the country, and they still can't defend themselves.

What happens, for example, Iran is as crazy as the right is insisting they are, and they decide to invade Iraq?

My point is: surely you don't think that this is steady state? Things always get worse. It's the one thing we can count on.


And Bush most certainly did leave. He left Saddam in power. Saddam and his entire military and political infrastructure. We didn't have 30K marines running the show on the ground. Bush left...and sure, like Obama, had bases all over the region. We're splitting hairs here.

[old salt]

Of course is was relatively stable in 2008. Relatively. It's relatively stable now, is it not? It was relatively stable when Obama left office, for that matter. Meaning: stuff is still blowing up all over the country, and they still can't defend themselves.

What happens, for example, Iran is as crazy as the right is insisting they are, and they decide to invade Iraq?

My point is: surely you don't think that this is steady state? Things always get worse. It's the one thing we can count on.


And Bush most certainly did leave. He left Saddam in power. Saddam and his entire military and political infrastructure. We didn't have 30K marines running the show on the ground. Bush left...and sure, like Obama, had bases all over the region. We're splitting hairs here.

Who's splitting hairs ? We had a lot more forces in the region in the '90's, between the wars, than we have there now.
Look at the number of bombs we dropped in 1998 in Operation Desert Fox.

This is why we need stable, reliable Arab allies -- like Jordan, UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain, &, most importantly -- Saudi Arabia, which was moving that way, until MbS overplayed his hand. We also need Turkey, Egypt, Iraq & Qatar as allies.

[holmes435]

Give W credit. He finished up what his Dad started & had the fortitude to do the surge, which gave Iraq a chance.

HOLD UP. Full stop.

Credit? Finishing? No, absolutely not. HW made a pretty brilliant decision in stopping where he did after we crushed the world's 4th largest military in stunningly short fashion. No ongoing guerilla war, no occupation, just a swift and decisive blow showing the strength of the US and its allies and that we aren't to be trifled with.

W's folly in Iraq has been an unmitigated disaster, leading to Al Qaeda in Iraq, the rise of ISIS and more instability and death throughout the middle east. It took the focus off of Afghanistan which has lead to our longest war in the country's history. You have enough military background to know how bad of a decision starting a second war was when we were still fighting in Afghanistan.

Was Saddam bad? Obviously. But W made the situation much, much worse, and it's not going to get much better in the near future. He was absolutely terrible.

[old salt]

Give W credit. He finished up what his Dad started & had the fortitude to do the surge, which gave Iraq a chance.

HOLD UP. Full stop.

Credit? Finishing? No, absolutely not. HW made a pretty brilliant decision in stopping where he did after we crushed the world's 4th largest military in stunningly short fashion. No ongoing guerilla war, no occupation, just a swift and decisive blow showing the strength of the US and its allies and that we aren't to be trifled with.

W's folly in Iraq has been an unmitigated disaster, leading to Al Qaeda in Iraq, the rise of ISIS and more instability and death throughout the middle east. It took the focus off of Afghanistan which has lead to our longest war in the country's history. You have enough military background to know how bad of a decision starting a second war was when we were still fighting in Afghanistan.

Was Saddam bad? Obviously. But W made the situation much, much worse, and it's not going to get much better in the near future. He was absolutely terrible.

So if we had not invaded Iraq in 2003, where would we be with Iraq now ?
Still maintaining no fly zones over N & S Iraq from air bases in Saudi Arabia & Turkey ?
Still maintaining sanctions on Iraq, while they sell black market oil & exploit the corrupt UN oil for food program ?
Still watching the genocide of the Kurds & Marsh Arabs ?

or just leave & watch Saddam rearm ? Waiting for Uday & Qusay to inherit the family business ?

[ardilla secreta]

Rae Carruth released from prison on Monday and ready to join the presidents board on women’s relations.

[Trinity]

After we killed a 100k of their friends and family we hit this magic surge moment in Iraq where the ME was Obama’s to lose.
Because nobody holds a grudge in Iraq. Or switches sides.

Meanwhile, last night amid the flood of presidential lies at the Cruz rally Trump announced he’s a nationalist. Just hurled the dog whistle away and grabbed the megaphone. We’re back to President Bannon.

[Trinity]

Turkey still talking. The Saudi hit team was Skyping with a close Crown Prince advisor during the killing. He argued with Khashoggi, then told his team to “Bring me the head of the dog,”

[jhu72]

On the lighter side.

[foreverlax]

Give W credit. He finished up what his Dad started & had the fortitude to do the surge, which gave Iraq a chance.

HOLD UP. Full stop.

Credit? Finishing? No, absolutely not. HW made a pretty brilliant decision in stopping where he did after we crushed the world's 4th largest military in stunningly short fashion. No ongoing guerilla war, no occupation, just a swift and decisive blow showing the strength of the US and its allies and that we aren't to be trifled with.

W's folly in Iraq has been an unmitigated disaster, leading to Al Qaeda in Iraq, the rise of ISIS and more instability and death throughout the middle east. It took the focus off of Afghanistan which has lead to our longest war in the country's history. You have enough military background to know how bad of a decision starting a second war was when we were still fighting in Afghanistan.

Was Saddam bad? Obviously. But W made the situation much, much worse, and it's not going to get much better in the near future. He was absolutely terrible.

So if we had not invaded Iraq in 2003, where would we be with Iraq now ?
Still maintaining no fly zones over N & S Iraq from air bases in Saudi Arabia & Turkey ?
Still maintaining sanctions on Iraq, while they sell black market oil & exploit the corrupt UN oil for food program ?
Still watching the genocide of the Kurds & Marsh Arabs ?

or just leave & watch Saddam rearm ? Waiting for Uday & Qusay to inherit the family business ?

There is no winning in the ME.

We say we are there to protect our "national interests" - what are those?

Oil??

Military sales?

Protecting Israel?

Who did make us the world's cops? Why do we want the job?

"MONEY" for the .01% is the only really response....the rest is just b.s.

[MDlaxfan76]

Give W credit. He finished up what his Dad started & had the fortitude to do the surge, which gave Iraq a chance.

HOLD UP. Full stop.

Credit? Finishing? No, absolutely not. HW made a pretty brilliant decision in stopping where he did after we crushed the world's 4th largest military in stunningly short fashion. No ongoing guerilla war, no occupation, just a swift and decisive blow showing the strength of the US and its allies and that we aren't to be trifled with.

W's folly in Iraq has been an unmitigated disaster, leading to Al Qaeda in Iraq, the rise of ISIS and more instability and death throughout the middle east. It took the focus off of Afghanistan which has lead to our longest war in the country's history. You have enough military background to know how bad of a decision starting a second war was when we were still fighting in Afghanistan.

Was Saddam bad? Obviously. But W made the situation much, much worse, and it's not going to get much better in the near future. He was absolutely terrible.

I think another, perhaps more appropriate, way to say this would be that, in retrospect, the decision proved to be 'terrible'. As opposed to "he was absolutely terrible'.

Whether it was based on faulty intelligence assessments, or understandable, but faulty, paranoia, or other errors in judgment, which may or may not have been clear to the decision-making team and W at the time, or because the the 'hold and rebuild' planning was so miserably inadequate, etc, doesn't really matter other than for future planning and decisions. Disastrous mistakes were made.

I think that assessment can be simultaneously held with also assessing that the surge took political guts and proved to be effective on the ground. Yet, squandered subsequently, so at what cost and benefit?

My own belief is that W was trying to make sound decisions post 9-11, not based on personal reward, but rather for the good of the country. But that he was not personally equipped to make those decisions and over-trusting in the assessments of others, most notably Cheney, Rumsfield. And they in turn were over confident in America's capabilities, underestimating the challenges inherent in deep rooted tribal/religious conflict that most of us had no idea even existed, re Sunni and Shia, and various sects thereof, and they were over eager to alter the trajectory of the ME. In part based on the economic interests they saw for the US, through the prism of the oil and defense industries. Tragic mistakes.

BTW, Trump's main complaint about the Iraq war: "we should have taken the oil".

Make no mistake of the path we're on if there isn't some rebalancing of power through these mid-terms...and then Trump is re-elected.

[foreverlax]

After we killed a 100k of their friends and family we hit this magic surge moment in Iraq where the ME was Obama’s to lose.
Because nobody holds a grudge in Iraq. Or switches sides.

Meanwhile, last night amid the flood of presidential lies at the Cruz rally Trump announced he’s a nationalist. Just hurled the dog whistle away and grabbed the megaphone. We’re back to President Bannon.

"A globalist is a person that wants the globe to do well, frankly, not caring about our country so much. And you know what? We can't have that. You know, they have a word. It sort of became old-fashioned. It's called a nationalist. And I say, really, we're not supposed to use that word. You know what I am? I'm a nationalist, OK? I'm a nationalist.
"Nationalist. Nothing -- use that word. Use that word."

The definition, from Merriam-Webster; "a sense of national consciousness exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups."

Big difference between being a nationalist and a patriot.....

What he fails to realize, we need the globe as much as the globe needs us....

[Brooklyn]

Trump meme for today:

[dislaxxic]

My own belief is that W was trying to make sound decisions post 9-11, not based on personal reward, but rather for the good of the country. But that he was not personally equipped to make those decisions and over-trusting in the assessments of others, most notably Cheney, Rumsfield. And they in turn were over confident in America's capabilities, underestimating the challenges inherent in deep rooted tribal/religious conflict that most of us had no idea even existed, re Sunni and Shia, and various sects thereof, and they were over eager to alter the trajectory of the ME. In part based on the economic interests they saw for the US, through the prism of the oil and defense industries. Tragic mistakes.

MD, are you aware of the group called the "Project For A New American Century" ??

..