The irony: US money caused the death and destruction

[Lizard3]

Under the war powers act, can the President suspend patents on things like 100 mile per gallon carbs? The Germans had synthetic oil in the 40's. My god with the technology of today we SHOULD HAVE ALREADY HAD AN ALTERNATIVE!

[miko2d]

How about not driving those 15 MPG SUVs where compact cars would do?

 miko

[Maverick]

Rip,

Submitting to one form of tyranny to avoid another is not a solution. If we do the terrorists have won completely. This country was founded on principles of freedom and individual liberty. It is the brightest and biggest bastion of freedom in the world. If you tear it down because of some animal’s actions they won not only the day but also the war.

A further point is that it will NOT stop them from doing it again. No system of security is perfect. There is no way you can prevent a determined terrorist from conducting some kind of attack. You have to try as best you can but don't lose touch with why this country exists. It exists because people dared all to be free. Don't give it all up because others on the world want to dictate to us how we should live and what we will do. That is surrender to tyranny and they will be the dictators of it.

Now as far as the concept of money as the root of the problem here. Yep in a way that is absolutely true. Money and more specifically, oil, is a major part of this. That is not to say there is a problem about it. I have read posts about the “war for oil” we already went through.

If you think this was a means to keep the price of oil down you are far too simplistic. The economy of the globe is far too entangled for actions regarding a critical resource NOT to have a major impact of all “industrial” nations. If you allow one party, or mad man to control it, you have not only surrendered your needed resource to them but also your entire economy and country. No nation is self-sufficient anymore. No society can exist as a sole entity without relations with other nations. All events in industrialized nations are related to oil. Nothing gets moved, delivered, manufactured or even discarded without the use of oil. Food is not grown in sufficient quantities other than for farmer consumption without oil. To allow someone to control that resource is to place your nation hostage to the whims of that entity and submit to a virtual slavery situation. Your economy will for all practical purposes cease to exist.

This type of situation is no less a threat than that of Hitler controlling Europe and Russia with North Africa thrown in. Hitler could not have had much more control of the continent (hell hemisphere) than a sole person could in control of the majority of the world’s oil. Anyone with even a minor comprehension of economics will understand this.

Now is money the problem here?? As far as the Middle East and particularly the oil producing countries, you bet. Is it the fault of America? Nope. There are far more riches in the oil producing nations than ever before in the history of the world. The distribution of those riches to their populations is the responsibility of those same nations.

Here is a clear question for you. Is it the responsibility of the US or other nations to tell another nation how to spend their money as long as it is not used to threaten an ally or us?

Now bin ladin has a hatred for the US because there are “westerners” in the form of US citizens in that country. He does not like the idea of that as he is quoted as saying that they “defile” his country. This is due to his particular religious (bigoted) beliefs. It doesn’t matter that the recognized government of that nation has invited the U.S. there.  He wants all non-Muslims out of Saudi Arabia. He was willing to accept non-Muslim help in fighting for Afghanistan’s freedom. Now he wants to pay that help back with terrorism and a “holy war”. This is hardly a civilized action or a rational one. No one on those planes used in the terrorist acts were a threat to him, his country or his religion.  I seriously doubt anyone in the WTC was a threat. The Pentagon, due to possible military actions, “might” have been a threat but only at the direction of the political head of this country. This is not an appropriate reason for this type of barbarity.

What remains is the response to this action. What are the nations that have been mobilized and unified by this act going top do? If the instigator IS bin ladin how far do we go? I suggest that the length has already been determined. NATO has declared this to be an attack on NATO if it came from outside the U.S.. President Bush and members of Congress have already described this as an “act of war”. A declaration of “no difference between those who committed acts of terrorism and those who harbor them” has been made. I suggest to you that the scope of the response is soley dependant on the response of the nation / nations harboring the suspects in Tuesdays action. Do they continue to harbor terrorists or do they surrender them? To what extent are they going to harbor them? That will determine the extent of damage and number of casualties in any conflict.

<lecture mode off>

I didn’t really mean to get this involved.

Mav

[Ripsnort]

I  must have used the wrong words, by police state, I am meaning tighter security at airports, stricter passport control, borders where 100% of vehicles are searched, air marshals if necessary, tighter security around large groups of people (sporting events etc.)  Some of you read a Nazi regrime into the post, you were mistaken.  I'm talking about allowing more time in our daily lives for tighter security.

Niklas is making corporate America to look bad, I just want to say, without corporate America, there would be NO USA.

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by StSanta:
Rip: I understand your sentiment.

But, we're moving towards globalisation and interdependency, not self sufficiency

It seems to me the key is voting with your money - i.e buying from a prtner you trust. Norway is the worlds second largest oil producer - and the US has, as you say, oil on its soil as well. but oil is only part of the equation.

The price will be higher costs.

The way to defeat international terrorism is the opposite of isolationism, but that's a whole other matter.

I wholeheartedly agree, I just want the world to become less dependant on middle east oil.  Lead by example, the USA has been leading by example for 100 years along with other high profile countries...its time we rid ourselves of oil dependancy where the money for that oil is used against us, as it is currently today.

[10Bears]

Hey yo, Rip,

Read this,

Throughout the day following the dastardly and unprovoked attacks using
hijacked planes, I have heard a number of media people refer  to the
possibility that we may have to "tighten down some of our freedoms." I've
heard people say that the age of innocence that is America is over, and
that we may now all have to join in some sort of sacrifice of our liberties
and freedoms in order to protect ourselves in the future.

I am here to tell you right now that, if anybody thinks that - I don't care
if they're in the news media, Congress or in the general population - they
are missing the whole point of what being an American means. You're missing
the whole point of the Constitution and the whole point of the reason for
the founding of this country.

  If you think that the proper response is to ratchet down freedom because
of this, if you think that it's worth trading a little freedom in order for
security, you must work hard to banish that thought. The exact opposite is
what needs to be our motivating attitude. This nation must reaffirm its
freedoms. It must rebuild itself and expand upon its freedoms. We cannot
allow an event like this to cause to us shrink smaller within ourselves and
become fearful.

Tom Brokaw wrote a great work called The Greatest Generation, and there's
no question that the World War II generation was a great generation. Well,
it's time for a new generation or two to step forward, to step up to the
plate and let itself be known and let itself be heard. We have allowed
ourselves to be lulled into a sense of security over the years, precisely
because of the notion that things like what happened yesterday don't happen
in this country. Now that these things have happened, we must meet the
challenge.

Wow, who do you think wrote that?
Rush Limbaugh

[Ripsnort]

I'm talking about spending more time waiting to board a plane for security reasons, I'm talking about having to wait 1 hour at a border crossing instead of a "How many days you staying?" and a wave of the hand...I'm talking about sacrificing convience for security.  Don't read any more into that than you already mistakenly have.