Posted on 12/07/2001 9:50:30 AM PST by Aurelius
The anti-American right is just as unappealing as the anti-American left. Both rely on the reader's weakness for the sentiments of suspicion and distrust. Both depend on the reader's inability to sort out and assess the complexities of the real world.
"ALLEGEDLY"????
I guess those were "alleged" C130s that the "alleged" media were photographing and filming landing and taking off from bases in the north.
It is a coincidence that the logical route for pipelines runs through Afghanistan and Pakistan.
"Logical route"?
Since Charlie is intellectually lazy enough to not bother to give us the specifics on WHAT country and WHAT kind of pipeline he is referring to, it is hard to tell what he's talking about. However, Turkmenistan is currently examining the possibilities of building a pipeline for it's large reserves of natural gas. One of the possibilities is through Afghanistan to Pakistan, however, there are many other options, and to call the Afghan route "logical", isn't nearly true.
Furthermore, I believe that Turkmenistan has just completed an agreement with Turkey to build their pipline in that direction.
Therefore, I suppose it is a further coincidence that the United States suddenly has an interest in not only getting rid of Osama bin Laden, but with replacing the government in Afghanistan.
Probably the most curious statement Reese makes. How could he say our desire to eliminate OBL and the Taliban aren't related? Bush has, since the beginning, made no difference between terrorists and governments that support and harbor terrorists.
And it is another coincidence that after nearly 10 years of dumping on Pakistan, we have suddenly re-embraced that country as one of our best friends.
If I'm not mistaken, Pakistan has always been an ally of the U.S. (at least as far as India goes). What exactly does he mean by "dumping on"? I mean, we dump on Canada all the time.
And it is a final coincidence, and one that prompted this column, that the Central Command has just stated publicly that when the war in Afghanistan ends, it doesn’t mean there won’t be a need for a U.S. military presence in the region.
Once again he lacks specificity. But I would say that the government has indicated the need for peacekeepers in country for a few years, although all indications are that it will be multi-national.
I don’t mean to sound cynical
Huh?
It is a coincidence that on Sept. 21, the British newspaper The Daily Telegraph reported that Israeli intelligence officials said they had not detected any link between Iraq and the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
Well, that's good enough for me!!
I can find numerous other articles that make it clear that Iraq was involved in 9/11. But that is beside the point. Since this is a war on terrorism, and Saddam is a major sponsor of terrorism, we are justified going after him even if he had nothing to do directly with the attacks. The same experts the news report uses (Mossad) says Iraq will have nukes in less than 5 years. That is a good enough reason for overthowing the current government for me.
Saddam, by coincidence, is one of those nationalists who thinks oil profits should be invested in the Arab world to benefit the Arab people rather than in London and New York.
"benefit the Arab people"???
Is he serious???
No, Saddam believes oil profits should be "invested" in builing new palaces to the tune of $1 billion. I'm sorry, but THIS is the most curious statement that Reese makes.
Exactly so. Does anyone really believe that clinton introduced a bunch of drug-running Albanian thugs into Kosovo, and stirred up and destabilized the whole Balkans, in order to make it easier to build a pipeline there? Or that bombing terrorists in Afghanistan is suddenly going to make the place safe for the oil companies? Total rot.
Nobody which is his point. A US-friendly strong central government is needed. KIM that the other two routes, i.e., through Iran and through Russia, are worse.
That would be interesting as we were attacked by Saudis.
Give me a break.
I have read quite a few good pieces written by him. This wasn't among them.
You try to be cute by half, and it never works, Ada.
The "Saudis" who attacked us were financed by another Saudi who was LIVING and OPERATING in Afghanistan, and being protected by the Afghan government.
And now, that former government is dead, and many of the operatives of the Saudi who attacked us (including their wives and children) are dead.
Who's next?
Well, yest and no. Yeah, there's oil under the ANWAR, but it's an open question of just how much oil there is. Actually, no one knows for sure until they start drilling, but geologists have done many studies and the results aren't necessarily encouraging. Here's a quote from the American Geololocial Institute about the oil in ANWAR:
"...geologists discovered that the recoverable oil is not uniformly dispersed in the 1002 [drillable ANWAR] area. The amount of technically attainable petroleum resources ranges between 4.3 and 11.8 BBO [billion barrels oil] (95% and 5% probablities). This estimate exceeds earlier calculations because of the improved resolution of the reprocessed seismic data. Furthermore, the USGS concludes that 2.4 BBO are economically recoverable at $18 per barrel, while 3.2 BBO are economically recoverable at $20 per barrel. No oil is economically retrievable at a market price less than $15 per barrel.
Currently, oil is going at about $20 per barrel. Last month (a fairly typical month), the U.S. imported over 11 billion barrels per day of crude oil and oil products. Who is the biggest supplier? Canada, followed by Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, and Mexico.
We consume about 6 billion barrel's worth of oil every year. So the oil under the ANWAR represents at best less than two years worth of our current oil consumption. Of course, it all can't be brought out at once, so production will be spread out over years, longer if oil prices are low.
Even if we were to start drilling in ANWAR tomorrow (and it'll be years before those fields start producing after drilling is approved by Congress), ANWAR and other domestic production isn't going to significantly reduce our reliance on imported oil. That doesn't mean we shouldn't be tapping the ANWAR oil, but don't expect it to be some sort of majic bullet.
Cheers.
Gentlemen, start your search engines.UNOCAL , that's who. Do your homework :-)
Silly me, I though that he believed in spending oil dollars to gas segments of his own population and to develop WMD capabilities while his people starve unless we feed them. I had no idea that I had him so wrong.
That would be interesting as we were attacked by Saudis.
Hey slick,
If Frenchmen flying the planes were ordered by Germans controling Turkey, we would have attacked the Germans responsible in Turkey, not France. I couldn't care less what the nationality of the attackers or their cohorts are. We go after the attackers and cohorts wherever they are.
Try and keep up, okay?
prambo
Accepting responsibility for the consequences of one's action is also American.
The premise of the article was the odds. Do the odds that such and such happing in a chronological order add up to what you think is acceptable? Are the lottery odds acceptable to you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.