Welcome! Here are the website rules, as well as some tips for using this forum.
Need to contact us? Visit https://heatinghelp.com/contact-us/.
Click here to Find a Contractor in your area.
We need $4.00/ gallon fuel
Comments
-
Ok
Sorry, but it is annoying. Some folks like to be cryptic or indulge in a lot of innuendo rather than clearly state what they mean.
Thanks for fleshing out your meaning. I think that I understand how your musical chairs comment ties into your Ayn Rand comment, but I'm not sure everyone does.
It is true that Ayn Rand was not an idiot, it was my irritation that led me to choose that word. She was an accomplished, if misguided, writer. I suppose her writings are mandatory for all young neo cons.
I do reject her philosophy of social Darwinism; her rejection of ethics not based on what she considered rational or logical self interest, or that some form of altruism is unrelated to a fundamental "right" to exist. A modern understanding of biology and evolution illuminates her thoughts as rather simple and incomplete.
The game of musical chairs is set up with a limited number of seats for the participants. As in the game of high tech investments, the set creates winners and losers. These are games. The same is not necessarily true of sustainable economies or ecosystems.
In short, Ayn Rand's philosophy is the same as that of the cancer cell, and just as successful.
Dale0 -
I really did not mean to link the two \"two words\"
I threw out the "Atlas Shrugged" reference to see if anyone would see how dangerously close they are in their thinking to the redistribution of wealth (goods, materials, resources etc,) to those with "needs". You can't live long without realizing that the really quick way to get a group to dispise you is to give them what you perceive as what they need.
There is in the pages of "Atlas Shrugged" a long treatise by one of the main characters that should be imho yearly required reading. In it are laid out some very American thoughts. I live in an urban area where there are the wealthy, the poor, the struggling and those who wouldn't struggle if given the opportunity to do so. I have cast my lot with the wealthy and the struggling. They give me the ability to pursue hope, life and sustainance for my family and business. Like Rand's, my Robin Hood robs from the poor, and gives to the rich.
One of the problems with this whole analysis of the $4.00 dollar oil is that an economy is not static. Nothing will be unchanged if one commodity goes out of the control of normal market forces. You artificially pump up the price of oil and it is all that people can do stay warm is to pay the price, they will dream about what they really want--big houses, big cars, vacations etc. They will dispise the fact that they need to work so hard so that someone can redistribute to someone the fruits of their labor. No rewards, no labor. No labor, nothing to redistribute. No goods, and programs to control our leaders control us.
"If you see Atlas toiling, struggling, with the world laughing at him, what advice would you offer him?" "I would tell him to shrug." (not a direct quote) Pray that the hard working people, tycoons, the wealthy and others in this country don't "shrug". I fear the world would suffer terribly were they to do so.0 -
Good discussion,
but I feel that this philosophy or Rand's is a shallow, short sighted, 19th century perspective. Your fear of "redistribution" is unfounded. That too, is a shallow, uniformed perspective which has already been properly constrained by history. Rand's perspective was colored strongly by her experience as a child in the USSR, a place and time in which altruism was unknown.
I have no problem with "normal market forces" but that whole, simple concept is a fantasy that is simply not found in the real world.
There is no need to "artificially" increase the price of energy, all we have to do is truly account for the real costs, which accrue to all of us, and to our children. What I have referred to as the "externalities". It has reached the point, as in the case of Enron, where these costs are incurred by behavior that we have all agreed is unfair to the point of being illegal, even in a capitalist socitety.
Rand's philosophy would justify robbing banks, (or illegally invading oil rich countries), simply because one could. Laissez-faire caplitalism at it's extreme. Ethics found in the natural world are not found here.
Energy is not orange juice, that is to say, it is not a commondity like any other; one you can do without, especially in the modern world. It is a commodity that is neccessary for success and survival. It is also in short supply and for the most part non-renewable.
Ecology teaches us that all economies are based on real ecosystems of which we are a dependent part, like it or not. (I feel like I'm lecturing a cancer cell.....no offense).
In real ecosystems, energy and material flows are of paramount importance. The human concept of economics or $$ flow is an abstract which ultimately must conform to reality. Like it or not this "wealth" will be redistributed, or the economic system of which we are a part cannot be sustained.
To be rational, as Ayn Rand would prefer, we need to invest in energy conservation on the part of the struggling poor people who make our economy run. These are the people who use the most energy, and create the most demand. Investing in them allows us to we can lower the demand and keep the price, (and the external costs), low for all of us, and for our children. (Other than sending them to die in oil wars, we don't rip off our children, do we?) The returns on those investments in "altruism", accrue to all of us.
Ayn Rand was an ok novelist but well behind our times.
Dale0 -
good book. make sure you remember it's a fictional utopian ideal she's writing about, and don't feel bad about skimming the 80 page "monologue" at the end.
To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"0 -
The rich can afford high utility bills
Several years ago I was discussing how difficult it was to get the wealthy customers to invest in high efficiency HVAC equipment. The middle income folks would listen, look at the paybacks, and make the decision to look at the long term investment in lieu of the "right now price."
The consultant told me that high utility bills didn't mean anything to people that had boatloads of money, but things that could be seen (cars, fancy rooms, diamonds, etc) would always be at the top of most of their priorities.
A couple of years ago I had a very wealthy doctor come in to our office to discuss new HVAC for his home. He drove up in a new Jag, which was 1 of 4 high-end cars that he had. His furnace, although still working, was loud, giving problems, and very inefficient---but it was also tucked away in a closet where it couldn't be seen.
After discussing the installation, he decided to wait until the furnace quit completely. There is no way that he would drive a car that was 2 years old, but it didn't bother him to have a 16-year old furnace. No one could see that furnace.
TA0 -
Ayn Rand
IT'S SIMPLITIC ,IT'S OUTDATED, REPEAT OVER AND OVER THESE MAGIC WORDS TILL YOU BELIVE IT. You are living in the time's she described when the power of political pull is more powerful then the productive. When the productive must beg for permisson to work. We are reaping the results of the belief that some people have the right to make slaves of others, to exsist as parasites on others work."when men trade with each other the choice is by money or guns and whips, those who see no differance, should learn it on thier own hides. As I think they will."There was an error rendering this rich post.
0 -
Oh Please...
... there are plenty of things that are wrong with the United States. Lack of opportunity is not one of them. Don't like who you are working for? Change jobs, move, or become independent. Many of the folks on this board are quite comfortable reaping their rewards by working for themselves...
Furthermore, I completely disagree with your rather flippant use of the word slave as describing the contractual relationship between most employers and their employees. Until employees are without rights, bought, or sold, the term simply does not apply.
It's entirely ironic to see how more socialist environments like the FRG offer bazillions of retraining opportunities, yet folks there by and large prefer to stick to jobs without futures like coal mining, etc. simply because the social benefits of unemployment are good enough. Over here, we have colleges that cost $$$, yet they are full of folks who are taking on huge debts, because it's worth it.
I don't know Ayn Rand, and don't have the time to read fiction. However, often folks would be well advised to treat fiction as that, fiction. It's like Asimov presuming that robots would be guided by just three laws, then writing stories on how to circumvent them. It might make interesting reading, but I doubt it will have to do anything with the kinds of AI we will be encountering in the future.0 -
Vanity is fascinating...
...note the huge surge in plastic surgery in this country. Image is everything, at least that's what the boob-tube is telling us. It becomes truly frightening when you hear Marketing-talk surrounding the targeting of toddlers.
Yesterday, I heard an ad on the local radio station regarding the boiler swaps that Keyspan is willing to underwrite/subsidize. Tellingly, they were making fun of the fact that most people would not show their heating system to friends and family. Yet, they were trying to appeal to folks' wallet and space-related needs...0 -
AI??
Oh, you mean the artificial intelligence to counter the abundance of natural stupidity.0 -
OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am amazed at where this thread went because one person posted "Atlas Shrugged".
I've read it several times BTW.
#1- This is America, and YES, whether you like it or not WE ARE DIFFERENT. We do not live according to necessity as do most other countries. We live according to our wants, not our needs.
#2- I don't care what Europeans pay for fuel. Not one bit do I care. We are NOT as dependent on "foreign fuel" as they are. Seen any oil fields in France, Germany, or England????? No? Where do they get their oil from?
BTW, France LOVES nuclear power. But here in the USA, we can't even think about a nuclear plant.
#3- I have to wonder why someone would prefer drag America down rather than lift the rest of the world up? Which "least common denomoinator" should we pick as a model?
#4- Any and I mean ANY discussion of "redistribution" of wealth is a step closer to socialism. Deny that fact all you want, but you are wrong. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need". Who said that?
#5- This is America, and if a person has enough money to build a 45 million dollar home with marble stairs and a "junky old hot air system", what business is it of yours?
Are you ready to become the "Home Police"?????? I can already see the justification. "We're helping save the planet". "Pro-choice for reproduction, but the big brother sez you gotta' have a VITODENS AND QUIK-TRACK!!!!!!"
#6- See #5
So this is the business we have chosen. Some will agree that what we do is important, but most won't. They want cool lookin' windows and cabinets.
So the suggestion has been put forward to raise fuel prices so that they will put more intetrest in the "comfort system" they choose? I wish I was a "child of the sixties" so I could walk through life with those glasses on.
I choose to run and challenge the rest to keep up rather than to crawl and congratulate the rest for staying one step ahead.
You boys have an agenda and it ain't freedom. You want mandated success. That will never work, but dream on.
Ayn Rand nailed all of you "Ellsworth's" YEARS ago. Call her names, spout your pseudo-psycho-babble, but you know who you are.
And in the free market, you lose.
$4.00/gallon??????? Would that make all of you elitist, euro-lovers "feel" better?
How about this? If you make twice as much as the "Poverty stricken" American, you pay TWICE as much for EVERYTHING as they do? Gas for them is $1.90, you pay $3.80? Isn't that fair????? Or should Dan Rather who makes over 1 million a year make-up the difference?
Put your money where your mouths are.
So in closing, I have to use the word "FACIST". But I never expected anything less from you guys. "This is my vision of Utopia, anything that contradicts it is evil".
Nice!
Nice justification for $4.00/gal for fuel. "Just so I could close the job I couldn't sell"?/????????
Try staying in touch with the country you came from chief.
You can't win all of them, no matter how good you think you are, some people will not pick you. Do you think bashing them on an internet site is a good idea?
BTW, all of you lefties completely forgot to mention HALIBURTON!!!!!!! I shouldn't have to remind you of that!!!!!
In any case, sleep well.
0 -
First I agree with silver springs and thank him for communicating it so well. Constantine I was not referring to employers and employees when I wrote slaves. I am not going to go on here because it will be useless. I made the first post out of fustration and should by now have known better. I hope that any one who wants to control the lives of others get what they deserve. They will but unfortunatly not before they destroy every body else.There was an error rendering this rich post.
0 -
Slavery
did you know that at the battle of gettysburgh, 63,000 americans died? 63,000! One day, one battle.
Now we have people that want us to retreat because we hit the "magic" 1000 mark in Iraq.
I would imagine that the slaves and their decendants should be happy that "those" folks didn't control things then.
They kinda remind me of a Python sketch, ""RUN AWAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!RUN AWAY!!!!!!!!!!"
Silver0 -
Well Pat,
Your anger, fear and paranoia came through loud and clear, but it was pretty difficult to make much sense out of the rest of it.
I didn't know that anyone on this thread had made any comments about "controlling the lives of others" or making them "slaves".
Your rhetoric comes across more like Joe McCarthy or John Birch than Ayn Rand.
Dale0 -
Mr. Stevie
Well, I would have expected that you would be the type to support our troops.
I'm surprised to hear that you have no problem sacrificing as many as 63,000 of them so that companies like Halliburton can continue to mine fat, no bid contracts and to allow a handful of American oil companies to corner exclusive access to one of the largest oil reserves left on the planet.
I'm amazed that you find it appropriate to subsidize low American energy prices with the lives of our young people. I can only expect that you are talking about other people's kids, not yours. They're just the children of poor Americans, after all. I suppose it must be worth it if it keeps rich Americans from having to invest in energy conservation in their second and third trophy homes.
Dale0 -
I have a small amount of anger. No fear or paranoia, if you dont think some folks want to run peoples lives on here.. then you aren't reading the posts, or are so used to it you do not see it for what it is. But lets just drop this it can just go on and on and acomplish nothing. Does anybody have some install pics or something?There was an error rendering this rich post.
0 -
Fascinating Rant
- So, we are suppose to live according to our wants, not our needs. Every little indulgence is OK, stewardship of country, planet, or whatever resource you can think of is optional?
May I suggest reviewing the history books on what happens when countries degenerate due to such excesses, such as the WWI-monarchy in Europe, Louis XV, or any other great empire. Note how they usually are not destroyed from foreign forces at the height of their power, usually the rot killed them first from within.
There are several realities that we will have to face in our lifetimes. One of them is that other countries like China are rapidly industrializing. Their economies will also demand huge amounts of natural resources (the US currently consumes ½ of the world's energy output). If Chinas economy continues to grow at the present rate, it is simply a matter of time before they will have a reason to project force the way we do.
And then what will we do? Still consume according to our wants, as opposed to our needs? - Oil in Germany, France, and England: Germany has little, to no oil reserves, true. Why is that? Because the post WWII-Germans made a concious decision to give up their rights to the seabeds below the North Sea, which turned out to have huge oil and gas reserves. Ever heard of Brent Crude? The Norwegian and English governments have been subsidizing their coffers with all the money they make off oil and gas royalties ever since.
France made a conscious decision to go Nuclear. Something on the order of 82% of their energy needs are now met by this fuel. EDF has been taking over all their EU competitors because none of them (who use primarily other fuels due to local paranoia about nuclear fuel) can compete with the subsidized cost of nuclear energy.
Are fission-based nukes then the answer? Well, according to some NASA scientists that gave a presentation at my University, no, because the planets' energy usage is growing exponentially.
Thus, unless Fusion reactors become a reality, Energy is going to become a big issue in our lives... We either anticipate that and account for market breakdowns (i.e. folks electing not to install efficient insulation/heating plants/etc.) or we continue to subsidize the wasteful doing the wasting. - You seem to think that raising the bar for the US would drag it down rather than up. Nothing further could be from the truth. Look, every Republican politician has railed on about our dependency on foreign fuel, yet has done little to nothing to reduce it. They hold up drilling in the NWR as some sort of panacea even though the alleged resources there would only supply the current US demand for one month.
The CAFE standards have been allowed to just affect cars, not SUVs. GWB even tried to repeal the non-partisan energy standards that I helped develop under the Clinton administration. These were energy standards where we could show a 3-4-year payback on the marginal investment for better energy efficiency with the assumption that energy prices were going down, not up, due to de-regulation.
See, the market does not automatically allocate resources efficiently and that is why Congress passed a law during the last fuel crisis to mandate efficiency reviews for common household durables (AC/HP/Boilers/Washing machines/Fridges/etc.) and to raise standards where a reasonable payback can be expected. It's a win for everyone, the consumer included.
Congress recognized that US market is particularly sensitive to initial-cost expenditures, damn the operational costs later. And until energy prices rise appreciably, we will have to continue to legislate minimum efficiency standards instead of letting market forces do it for us. - And you are absolutely right, many builders and homeowners do not want a home inspection police force. Except most municipalities already have them. At least in this neck of the woods... we even have a checkbox on the building permit for insulation application... and good inspectors have saved many a HO life by red-tagging dangerous installs.
So, should we legislate minimum energy efficiency standards for construction considering the very low fuel prices in this country? Well, considering the minimal marginal cost of insulating a home vs. not insulating one, I think the answer is obvious. Our house renovation will include Icynene in the walls, between floors, and in the attic. All that for about 2% of the overall construction cost. It could probably be done for even less with cellulose.
In closing, it's pretty hilarious how you are hiding behind a fake e-mail address and come out of the woodwork to participate on this thread. I have to wonder if your avatar is simply meant to disguise a regular participant on this board that usually participates under a different name. Only Dan would know by taking a look at the IP addresses.0 - So, we are suppose to live according to our wants, not our needs. Every little indulgence is OK, stewardship of country, planet, or whatever resource you can think of is optional?
-
Dale, I think we have a troll on our hands...
... the e-mail address is 99.999% sure to be fake. That is unless Stevie Nicks has suddenly decided to grace this board with viewpoints that are 100% out of line with what I have heard her say in interviews. I suspect that "Stevie"/Silver Springs/Whatever is a regular board participant out to stoke a flame-war. A pity, really.0 -
Good one Constantin!!!!!
You nailed it! Stevie Nicks!!! ROTFLMAO!!!!
Mark H
To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"0 -
Oh Yeah
I figured as much. That's why I referred to it as Mr. Stevie. Still, the reactionary rhetoric seemed to strike a chord with other participants in the thread. The air is full of it these days. I think it needs to be exposed for what it is.
Dale0 -
war for oil - we already pay $4/gallon
I'm glad to see that Silver Springs see that we are over there for oil. The problem I have is with the economics. Iraq pumps $2m/day or about $80m/day *365 = $29B/yr. Assuming that you have to give part of that to the Iraqi govt, why spend $200B (or more) on a war for that oil? The pay back is going to be 20 or 30 years, if we are lucky and the US doesn't go bankrupt.
We are already paying $4/gal. It comes out of your paycheck instead of the gas bill.0 -
It's not about oil
In my book, it's about 3,000+ dead Americans at the bottom of the World Trade Center towers. How did we forget about that so quickly? Maybe some of us actually believe the drivel on the evening news that tells us what we are supposed to do a believe and think. We didn't fire the first shot in this war. That would have been somewhere back around the time they tried the towers first time.
I can't believe there are people with their heads far enough in the sand (or somewhere else) that they would think we can just leave the terrorists alone and they will go away. Doesn't work that way with people who behead other folks to "make a statement". These people (questionable use of the word) will not rest until all Jews are dead and America is out of the picture worldwide.
JMHO, you are free to disagree but you will have a difficult time convincing me that they will not strike again at the first opportunity. We need to remove as many means and as many opportunities as possible.0 -
that would make sense.
IF we were really in pursuit of the one who attacked us.
or
IF we were serious about cracking down on the country that most terrorist funds come from (saudi arabia)
or
IF Iraq had anything to do with any of the terrorists that have attacked us, or had ever actually attacked us
or
IF killing "terrorists" and invading nominally muslim countries didn't write the terrorist's recruiting posters for them.
We have given the terrorists an enemy to demonize. As long as we're screwing around with our guns and our bombs and our soldiers in the middle east (not necessarily all three) we are at risk for future attacks, but we choose to be in a war by choosing to keep our interests in the middle east.
You want to be safe from terrorist attacks? Get us off oil and out of the middle east. Then they would have no reason whatsoever to attack us.
Until then, you can hope that guns and bombs and soldiers will make us safer. But it won't. All it does is increase the resolve of those who already hate us and create more enemies who want to strike us. Just like the WTC increased our resolve against our enemies.
To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"0 -
iraq did not cause 9/11
Nice try. Osama bin Laden attacked the world trade center not Iraq, but he doesn't have any oil so we are just sending a small group after him. Saddam is a bad guy (thank you Rumsfeld for training him) but he was totally hemmed in and basically toothless. He had nothing to do with 9/11.
0 -
black and white?
12 people are in a bar and the bartender serves the last 12 beers for the day. The biggest (selfish) guy grabs 3 beers and downs them. One of the other guys gets pissed off and punches him. The big guy attacks the rich corrupt guy standing next to the guy who punched him because they might be friends.
Is the big guy justified in attacking the rich corrupt guy or the one who attacked him? Is the selfish guy really "good"?
I think we need to share a little more. Freedom to waste a precious resource is not what our forefathers had in mind.0 -
.
Retired and loving it.0 -
Blackbirds
This is of an actual experiment described in a recent Scientific American article by Susan Blackmore on "memes".
The initial experiment uses two blackbirds, a friarbird and an owl.
Blackbird #1 is exposed to BB#2 who is turn is exposed to an owl which is a natural predator of Blackbirds. BB#2 resonds to the owl with agitation an fear, tail twitching, wing flapping, squawking etc.
BB#1 sees this, but the experiment is arranged so that BB#1 sees a Friarbird in place of the Owl. Friarbirds are normally harmless to Blackbirds. But now BB#2 has mistakenly taught BB#1 that Friarbirds are a threat so when BB#1 is exposed to a Friarbird it responds with agitation and fear.
The experiment continued BB#1 teaching as many as 6 consecutive Blackbirds in a row that Friarbirds are dangerous.
Take from this what you will. I think that Iraq was no more dangerous to the US than Friarbirds are to Blackbirds.
If anyone is interested I can further document it. The aritcle on "memes" is fascinating. A meme is what was passed from BB to BB.
Dale0 -
> This is of an actual experiment described in a
> recent Scientific American article by Susan
> Blackmore on "memes".
>
> The initial experiment
> uses two blackbirds, a friarbird and an
> owl.
>
> Blackbird #1 is exposed to BB#2 who is
> turn is exposed to an owl which is a natural
> predator of Blackbirds. BB#2 resonds to the owl
> with agitation an fear, tail twitching, wing
> flapping, squawking etc.
>
> BB#1 sees this, but
> the experiment is arranged so that BB#1 sees a
> Friarbird in place of the Owl. Friarbirds are
> normally harmless to Blackbirds. But now BB#2 has
> mistakenly taught BB#1 that Friarbirds are a
> threat so when BB#1 is exposed to a Friarbird it
> responds with agitation and fear.
>
> The
> experiment continued BB#1 teaching as many as 6
> consecutive Blackbirds in a row that Friarbirds
> are dangerous.
>
> Take from this what you will.
> I think that Iraq was no more dangerous to the US
> than Friarbirds are to Blackbirds.
>
> If anyone
> is interested I can further document it. The
> aritcle on "memes" is fascinating. A meme is
> what was passed from BB to BB.
>
> Dale
0 -
HHHhhhmmmmmmmmmm
Keep trying guys. They hate us because we try to "export" freedom. They hate us because they see the USA as a threat to their little fiefdoms and their sense of control. They hate us because we have a different lifestyle and don't believe the way they think all people have to believe. If you're feeling sorry for them you're very welcome to go and live with them if you wish.
Oops! we're on the edge of the political cliff here.
But it is fun!
Sorry, I'm not what you would consider PC. (G)0 -
I'm not feeling sorry for anyone. I'm looking at the facts. The people fighting us do not have control, nor fiefdoms... those are our "friends", the northern alliance in afghanistan, if you care to remember them.. you know.. the ones gang raping women in the streets of the country we "freed".
You really think they would give two pecks what the heck we were doing over here if we weren't killing them and supporting their enemies in their backyard?
That is quite interesting. "They hate freedom". I love that. Never thought a bs sound bite like that would have the shelf life that one does though.
Afghanistan and Iraq were in no danger of being "freed" by us before we were attacked, even if they did hate "freedom". Find another rationale.
To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"0 -
Mr. Ebels
I think it's ok as long as we are considerate of the readers and respondents.A little PC is what allows us to disagree. This subject is on topic as well I think, since it is definitely energy related.
That said, I feel like anyone who really thinks that we invaded and occupied Iraq because we are exporting freedom is incredibly, or intentionally naive.
I'm not sure of who you are referring to as "they" who hate us....all Muslims, all Saudis, all Iraqis, all Arabs, all Afghanis, etc. ? Just who are we talking about? We know Osama and al Queda attacked the WTC, but we gave up chasing him and just used 9/11 as an excuse to invade an unrelated, soverign country. We decided to attack Iraq rather than al Queda because attacking Iraq is so much more potentially profitable, for a few.
At this point much of the world is afraid of us. Most people in the world are far more afraid of Bush and Company than they ever were of Saddam. We do have weapons of mass destruction and mass weapons of "conventional" destruction and we have shown that we have no problems indiscriminately using them. Bush is clearly out of control.
It's all about oil, and oil merchants and weapons and weapons merchants. And it's not oil for US, it will be sold at the highest price to the highest bidder. It's oil profits for a handful of US companies. They are using our patriotism, our $$, the lives of countless Iraqis and the lives of our kids to subsidize their shameless profiteering. They are making fools out of anyone who thinks we are "exporting freedom" or that the people we are invading and occupying "hate us".
Dale
Dale0 -
Before this thread is deleted
SO if Osama is captured or killed, terrorism will end?
Are you suggesting that once he is taken out of the general population, the beheadings will cease?
OBL and his organization would cease terror operations if the USA got out of the middle east?
When did "we" quit pursuing OBL? General Tommy Franks disagrees with that position. Do YOU know more than he does?
We did NOT go to Iraq to "export freedom", we went there to enforce numerous UN resolutions that Saddam ignored and thumbed his nose at. Resolutions that were it not for the resolve of the USA had ZERO power. We went there to remove a lunatic that used WMD's on the citizens of that country and would have had NO problem selling some of those very same weapons to terrorist organizations like Al queda. If you don't believe that he would have, you are the naieve one. He paid money to the families of Palestinian homicide bombers in Israel.
The USA is commonly referred to as "The Great Satan" in the middle east. That did NOT start under the Bush administration. We are not referred to as "The great evil oppressor", or, "The great evil capitalistic society", or , "The great evil occupier of the holy land".
We are "The Great Satan", simply because we do not follow the ideology of OBL and his ilk. Take a look at what the Taliban did to women in Afghanistan if they were ACCUSED of adultery. That is ideology sir and they mean to export that ideology around the world.
Explain the murder of all of those Russian children. Russia had no part in the Iraq war, so why kill all of those children? And why kill babies that have NOTHING to do with a governments policies?
Not all Iraqi's hated America, just the ones that controlled theh bombs did.
Mark H
To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"0 -
Figure it out
Mark,
Tommy Franks is just the General who told them what they wanted to hear. He made a huge mess, murdered a lot of innocent people, and countenanced torture. Basically, he failed then retired. I have no respect for the man.
Chechnia and Russia and their civil war, and the terrorism that is used in it, is a separate subject, just like Iraq and al Queda.
Maybe you haven't been paying attention, but Iraq had no "bombs" that we need to be concerned with.
BTW. do you also go by Stevie Nicks?
Dale
0 -
1. Osama is the only one who has successfully attacked us, and he's done it to us and US targets around the world many times. It would be the single most effective immediate thing we could do to remove him from the equation. We have thousands of soldiers and hundreds of billions of dollars in Iraq. What proportion of that should be focused on a real, proven, demonstrable, direct threat to american security?
2. We did not go to Iraq to enforce UN mandates. That is the UN's job. They said not to go in. If we go in anyway, that is defying the UN, not supporting it. Had no power? Funny, saddam doesn't have a nuke program, nor WMDs... seems like the sanctions did their job. OR us going in got those WMDs into someone else's hands real fast, and we have no idea where they are now. Is that better?
3. Why are we the great satan to them? Not because they care whether we are Islam or not. Maybe someday they would care about that, but you would do well to remember fundamentalism is the refuge of the desperate. People who have something to lose do not strap bombs to themselves for the promise of eternal heaven. and a big part of the region's state as it is is because of our constant meddling in their affairs for the last 50 years. Side with Iraq against Iran. Side with the taliban against Russia. Then go SUPPORT the most brutal fundamentalist regime in the area (saudi arabia) for no explicable reason... except ONE, and one reason only. I'll give you a hint, it's not UN resolutions, WMDs, nor is it to export freedom to those poor saudis nor to keep an airbase there.
It's all down to oil. To be fair, oil is extremely important and we're rapidly heading down a dead end there; look at china and india's QUICKLY growing usage and the much slower growth of production capabilities and anyone can see a critical point will be reached soon where demand will outstrip supply. Very soon. Our choices are to get off oil, fight to keep it, or face the dire consequences for our nation when our supply is threatened, and all the drilling in alaska we can muster won't change that.
It's apparent what we've chosen first.
oh and Russia, those were Chechnyan rebels who Russia is strong-arming left and right. Muslims yes, and muslims (among others in Chechnya) that are directly being oppressed by russians. Funny how these things have backlashes and consequences, eh? Kind of like when we play musical chairs with middle eastern warlords for decades maybe?
To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"0 -
read \"The New Great Game\" - oil or terror?
If you want to read an action packed look at the politics in the Middle East, Read "The New Great Game" by Lutz Kleveman. I couldn't put it down for two days. He travelled to 10 different countries and got an inside look at the power plays that will effect our future.
http://www.newgreatgame.com/0 -
What is it about?
Don't get me wrong, Steve, there is no question that we ought to keep the memory of the WTC, Pentagon, and Shanksville victims alive. Reconstructing the tower complexes will be a lot simpler than rebuilding the voids left in peoples lives.
However, it is a bit simplistic to assume that Iraq had anything to do with 9/11. The bi-partisan 9/11 report team found no connection between Iraq and Al-Quaida. Given their access to documents in all government agencies, they're in a better position to understand the issue than any of us.
Now, how does invading a nation that had nothing to do with terrorism help us fight that scourge? Consider that Iraq was arguably the most secular regime in the Middle East before Saddam was toppled. Frankly, I would have preferred the billions spent fighting terrorism, not impotent dictators. If you want a dangerous dictator, look no further than North Korea...
Just think of how the CIA could use the hundreds of billions spent thus far on the Iraq war to rebuild its operational practice and take the fight to the terrorists instead of waiting for them to trigger a tripwire over here? Nevermind nation-building excercises in places like Afghanistan that need better cash-crops than poppy's if we want to preserve the peace there.
Like others have pointed out, you will always find boneheads willing to blow themselves up. When this goal can be achieved for profit (to the next of kin), even more fools will crawl out of the woodwork to volunteer. The only way to minimize the threat ultimately is to give folks more reasons to want to live... as despotic leaders and fundamentalist religions (by and large) only appeal to those who have little or nothing to loose.
Thus, we have no choice but to work with other nations to hunt down terrorists and bring them to justice. Subsequently, anything but a multilateral approach is doomed to fail and may in fact backfire severely. Witness the numerous civilian casualties counted as "collateral damage" that will evoke the same hatred by their next of kin vs. the US and its allies, as the terrorism victim feels towards the terrorists.0 -
There are plenty of free countries, Mr. Ebels...
... so Freedom alone cannot be the reason that the US is despised by its enemies. There are other factors that also seem to influence our standing, such as:- Continued support for the government of Israel, regardless of how many UN resolutions it is breaking on any given day (remember the latest rationale for invading Iraq?) How about the plea from several Israelies I know that asked me to appeal to the US government to stop the emigration of radical US Jews to Israel? Allegedly, they are at the forefront of illegal settler movements.
- Continued government support for despotic autocracies and dictatorships around the world whenever it suits the White House (Democratic or Republican). Remember the Shah? His security police wasn't any nicer than the one the Mullahs created later on... US military officials like Ollie North completed the circle when they sold highly-classified munitions and spare parts to the Mullahs... Now who is the worse enemy? Those who claim they want to kill us or those within our own government who took an oath to protect us,then turn around and supply our sworn enemies with weapons?
- We're the lone superpower (right now) but our human intelligence-gathering is pathetic and ineffective. That always paints a big target mark for anyone trying to make a name for themselves.
- And many more, tired...
0 -
Change the world?
How about if you good Americans with your strong opinions buy a book for a poor person in New York City. It's a small thing, but it would speak volumes right about now
New York Cares Book ClubRetired and loving it.0 -
Dale
I do not enjoy getting into these discussions here. Most of the time they end up getting personal and Dan has to delete them.
No I do not also go by Stevie Nicks, I have no problem letting people know my political view points and have no need to hide behind fake names.
When will you be asking for murder charges to be filed against Gen. Tommy Franks and the rest of America's fighting forces in Iraq?
As for paying attention, perhaps you missed the story about Syria using WMD's in Sudan? Wonder where those came from. For 6 mos. the President tried going through the UN giving ample time for those WMD's that THE WHOLE WORLD said Saddam had to be moved across the Syrian border. Sattelties watched the trucks moving.
But you and I disagree on this issue and that is where it must end. Agree to disagree. Fair?
Mark H
To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"0 -
OK Lads
We've established that there are a multitude of viewpoints on the topic of war and terrorism and oil and economics and and and and... all the rest of the stuff we have on this post. Let's move on the the $4.00/revisited post above and get back to what we do best. This all started because I was frustrated with a lack of focus on energy conservation in the first place. Didn't mean for the post to go where it did.
I may be un-PC and a little blunt at times but I try to be polite and I respect each and every person here as well as their ideas. I want you all to know that I do not hold any animosity toward a single soul who voiced an opinion contrary to mine. Appreciation of anothers' viewpoint is a sign of at least a little intelligence from my experience.
I wish you all a good day and happy customers!!!!0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 86.6K THE MAIN WALL
- 3.1K A-C, Heat Pumps & Refrigeration
- 54 Biomass
- 423 Carbon Monoxide Awareness
- 98 Chimneys & Flues
- 2K Domestic Hot Water
- 5.5K Gas Heating
- 101 Geothermal
- 157 Indoor-Air Quality
- 3.5K Oil Heating
- 65 Pipe Deterioration
- 931 Plumbing
- 6.2K Radiant Heating
- 384 Solar
- 15.2K Strictly Steam
- 3.3K Thermostats and Controls
- 54 Water Quality
- 42 Industry Classes
- 48 Job Opportunities
- 17 Recall Announcements