RE: http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,159368,00.html


I think you should run for President!
My whole family would vote for you!
I render my salute!

1) If North ran for President I'm sure he could get the Duncan Hunter vote.
2) Cheap shot, Ollie, on tapping the oil reserve in 2000. Anyone can enter "Clinton Gore oil reserve" in their favorite search engine and get pro and con articles/observations on the matter.
3) Except for #2, kudos to O. North for bringing up the matter of energy policy and the urgency of dramatically reducing our dependence on oil. Is Ollie going "green?"

I am not an Oliver North fan to say the least, but to give credit where credit is due... this OPED is spot on, and deserving of KUDOS.

Perhaps Ollie can employ his considerable conservative connnections to contact the powerful petroleum company CEO's and encourage them to take the lead in financing alternative energy technology research and development... I think not.

It seems to me that Mr. North has conveniently omitted the following from his list of "threats" which contibute to the rising cost of crude oil:
1. The US's hostile stance against Arab, Persian and Muslim oil producing countries.
2. The US's support of Israeli hegemonic goals
in the ME which directly challenges the sovereignty of those oil producing countries.

US policy in the ME is one of monumental strategic failure on two levels. First, the US continues to bite the hand that feeds it oil. US demand for oil increases proportionately to its hostile stance taken against those very countries with whom the US should be friendly toward in order to insure a continuing flow of oil. US attitude seems to be "We're here to make war against you and to conquer you, but we insist that your oil spigot remains open to our demands". Secondly, a major reason the US is waging war in the ME is to make certain that the world continues to denominate the sale of oil in US dollars. I think there's little doubt that the US dollar will collapse, probably sooner than later, causing OPEC and other oil producing countries to flee to other currencies. Then it's good-bye Superpower status for the US.

Although Mr. North's list of "threats" may be accurate, he has failed to place the onus where it truly belongs - at the foot of America's failed foreign policies and because of its aggressive military actions in the Middle East in favor of Israel.

The oil ministers don't control the price of oil, so why do you think the U.S. has any major impact? Now, if you're a Bush-hater, anti-war, anti-military individual, I can understand your blame America first stance on oil prices.

The lack of a coherent energy policy is a story of failure to address long-term outcomes in both foreign and national policy (especially in the Middle East), and outright incompetence. There is a fair amount of blame to go around, but the past 7 years have demonstrated a better than doubling of fuel prices and massive profits for the oil industry (to be expected when the government is being run by former oil men), one foreign policy disaster after another, united much of the world against us, and doubled the national debt incurred by every administration from Washington through Reagan by borrowing money from the communists.

The rush to corn as an energy resource is a gross error, in that it drives up the prices of food and deteriorates the soil it is planted in (there are several more beneficial crops that can be used for this purpose) for minimal gain. It is, however, politically popular despite being lousy national policy as the costs outweigh the benefits.

The lack of willingness to heavily promote energy independence (now addressed somewhat by the recently signed legislation) has led to US car manufacturers losing serious ground to foreign companies, and the current policy to print huge volumes of cash so we can pretend to pay debts only dilutes the money supply (which has led to huge reduction in the value of the dollar, all of our wages, buying power, etc) and weakens our country.

The good news is that the military is now on its way to becoming one of the largest users of renewable energy as its fuel costs and logistical burdens have increased massively over the past 7 years. This will benefit all of us as it will greatly encourage more research and development into green technologies, and again demonstrates that the armed forces will technologically lead the way despite it's CiC consistent refusal to do so (until very recently).

quote:

Originally posted by Misanthrope2:
It seems to me that Mr. North has conveniently omitted the following from his list of "threats" which contibute to the rising cost of crude oil:
1. The US's hostile stance against Arab, Persian and Muslim oil producing countries.
2. The US's support of Israeli hegemonic goals
in the ME which directly challenges the sovereignty of those oil producing countries.

US policy in the ME is one of monumental strategic failure on two levels. First, the US continues to bite the hand that feeds it oil. US demand for oil increases proportionately to its hostile stance taken against those very countries with whom the US should be friendly toward in order to insure a continuing flow of oil. US attitude seems to be "We're here to make war against you and to conquer you, but we insist that your oil spigot remains open to our demands". Secondly, a major reason the US is waging war in the ME is to make certain that the world continues to denominate the sale of oil in US dollars. I think there's little doubt that the US dollar will collapse, probably sooner than later, causing OPEC and other oil producing countries to flee to other currencies. Then it's good-bye Superpower status for the US.

Although Mr. North's list of "threats" may be accurate, he has failed to place the onus where it truly belongs - at the foot of America's failed foreign policies and because of its aggressive military actions in the Middle East in favor of Israel.

Misanthrope2- I am trying to connect for a more "private" discussion, however cannot do so through a profile page for you. Please contact me through my profile page. Thank you for your thoughtful insights. Incidentally I was interviewed by Col. North before heading out to combat - it was an interesting experience!

quote:

Originally posted by haljil:

quote:

Originally posted by Misanthrope2:
It seems to me that Mr. North has conveniently omitted the following from his list of "threats" which contibute to the rising cost of crude oil:
1. The US's hostile stance against Arab, Persian and Muslim oil producing countries.
2. The US's support of Israeli hegemonic goals
in the ME which directly challenges the sovereignty of those oil producing countries.

US policy in the ME is one of monumental strategic failure on two levels. First, the US continues to bite the hand that feeds it oil. US demand for oil increases proportionately to its hostile stance taken against those very countries with whom the US should be friendly toward in order to insure a continuing flow of oil. US attitude seems to be "We're here to make war against you and to conquer you, but we insist that your oil spigot remains open to our demands". Secondly, a major reason the US is waging war in the ME is to make certain that the world continues to denominate the sale of oil in US dollars. I think there's little doubt that the US dollar will collapse, probably sooner than later, causing OPEC and other oil producing countries to flee to other currencies. Then it's good-bye Superpower status for the US.

Although Mr. North's list of "threats" may be accurate, he has failed to place the onus where it truly belongs - at the foot of America's failed foreign policies and because of its aggressive military actions in the Middle East in favor of Israel.

Misanthrope2- I am trying to connect for a more "private" discussion, however cannot do so through a profile page for you. Please contact me through my profile page. Thank you for your thoughtful insights. Incidentally I was interviewed by Col. North before heading out to combat - it was an interesting experience!

I sent a msg to you through your profile page. If you did not receive it let me know and I will make public my profile so that we can communicate. Thanks!

I believe the term to describe what any candidate "promises" is pandering.

Whether Democrat, Republican, etc. they have to say things aimed at their base, and hopefully not alienate those who might be persuaded to vote for them.

I find it rather short-sighted, alarming, and potentially paralyzing, that this country hasn't built any nuclear power or other classic energy plants in a long time.

And to top it off (no pun intended,) we haven't tapped into the oil reserves in Alaska or drilled off the West Coast due to political infighting and machinations.

What does the author think will happen if a candidate does talk about it? I'm sure they each have a "to-do" list that's prioritized to suit their & their party's ambitions first. After all, it's obvious that getting and wielding power, (within the guidelines of their handlers and/or masters) is the prize.

Note: shouldn't we have been getting oil from Iraq by now anyway to help pay for this "war" and ease the energy shortage?

This dire situation poses more questions than it answers, and I don't see anyone who has any doable/workable/acceptable to most (majority?)/relatively quick solutions (although the carmakers are pursuing, and creating, some new ways to fuel transportation.)

Hopefully that can change, but it would take a new way of confronting and solving problems (like bi-partisanship in Congress!)

Misanthrope2,

The dollar will collapse for additional reasons:

1) Our overcommitment to Social Security and Medicare. The recent Medicare prescription drug bill only made it worse.

2) Our colossal nation debt. We're now at $9 trillion and it will only get much worse. This monster is so big, no one can stop it. We just don't have the national will. I feel sorry for my children and I hope they won't hate me for what we've done to them.

I estimate we have another thirty years at best.