It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by ShadowHasNoSource
So let's say that the dead dinosaurs are running out. Why isn't anyone pushing anything remotely related to alternate fuel sources? How is War the answer? If the U.S. controls the last of the fossil fuels everything will be ok? It just doesn't make sense.
that soon we will have to choose which side we are on or face death at the hands of the now enemy.
Perhaps it's a case of survival of the fittest for the US. I'm not saying that's justification for the war, just speculating that the US gov might see it as a dog-eat-dog world.
What I'd like to know is what would be the cost & implications of establishing an alternative source of energy? Obviously one problem would be the masses of automobiles that would become redundant, that and an upheaval in international trade. Any thoughts?
In Europe, alternate fuel measures are already being put into place. Windfarms and hydroelectricity do acount for a sizeable proportion of energy production. Research has also been given massive funding.
But it's a Catch22 situation. The West cannot go over to other means of fuel without speeding up the process of deterioration in the present Middle East - it has to be sorted out first.
If the West immediately started using different fuel sources, the money that the Middle East nations rely on to survive would be cut off and we would only be speeding up the negative effects that would occur without economic change.
By buying Middle East oil, the West has actually helped the average joe on the streets to survive - a lot of the oil money has been siphoned off by individual leaders but hwat remains actually puts the bread on the man in the street's table. Stop buying oil and you stop his only means of feeding himself.
The war is not about controlling oil. It's about replacing and influencing regimes where the people in power are the only ones benefitting and putting in place market economies that do not rely on one single unsustainable source. The few people who control the Middle East state's purses get rich themselves but only throw a few handouts to their population from the oil revenues. But it's a short term solution - the guys in charge of the regimes are only living for the now.
It should also be noted that poverty is the greatest breeder of extremism. If you have a region with no income, you are going to have a region where extremism will run unchecked.
You will find that since Iraq has been invaded, there have been literally thousands of small businesses that have sprung up over there. People are actually investing in their own economy for the first time and although oil is still the major factor contributing to income, people are realising that they can provide alternative means of supporting themselves.
www.cpa-iraq.org...
Originally posted by Muaddib
The world has not changed? Tell me the last time that 3,000 people or more died in one terrorist act, tell me the last time that an extremist islamic group attacked and killed people in Spain and tried to commit other suicide attacks on Spain and other countries.
The extremists have said it, they want to kill all those people that are not Muslim and they want Islam to rule the world, those words come from islamic extremists, not from our govenrment, and not from any of us. We did not point a gun to their heads for them to say these things. Jakomo, shadowhasnosource, and whoever else thinks like them, are blinded to the situation we are in and the events that are happening in the world.
If we leave Iraq and stop root out islamic extremists, they will see this as a war they have won, this in turn will give them more strength and more moderate Muslims will probably join their cause making possible for other attacks like 9/11.
Originally posted by ShadowHasNoSource
The sorting out (politically) can be done very quickly and easily. The problem is it hasn't.
Let them fight out the details verbally in parliament. Teach the Arab world industry. Let the asians do that though. Teach em how to create an economy. The chinese can do it.
The reality of the situation, that I see, tells me that there's nothing wrong in the Arab world if we would just leave them alone.
You mean like India? Or Ethiopia? I don't think it's just poverty although I do admit that is an ingredient.
Originally posted by Leveller
The quotes I've taken from you in the first paragraph, all have one thing in common. They will all take decades to come about and none of it will hapen without outside interference.
Politically, things cannot be sorted out quickly. There are no politics in Arab states. They are one party states. Sure some of them have parliaments and supposed opposition parties but that's all just for show.
You could set up a UN parliament but they can't even agree with people in their own countries. It's highly unlikely that they will agree with each other. You only have to look at the Arab League to see what a state they get themselves into.
Yes, teach them industry. But how long do you think that takes? You're talking decades to be able to get an economy off the ground. If it doesn't happen soon, the oil will run out and there will be no money to create those industries.
If we just left the Arab world alone, as I said - a few royal families and tyrants would get rich and then in 30 or 40 years the whole region would be plunged into massive turmoil. The whole point is that they can't be left alone!!! The guys in charge couldn't run a bath, let alone make any plans for their countries' futures.
And finally, yes Ethiopia and India. Ethiopia was ripped apart by extremism through poverty. Why do you think the famine in the 80s was so bad? It wasn't down to ther weather conditions - the civil war was the contributing factor.
As for India? Well, it's not as poor as it used to be. It's economy is one of the fastest growing in the world, but it has had it's fair share of extremism and it's still happening on a daily basis.
[Edited on 13-5-2004 by Leveller]
Originally posted by ShadowHasNoSource
First thing that should've happened when Saddam fell was local elections. That would have put everyone in the mood to cooperate.
What did the 10yr sanctions do to Saddam sitting in his palaces? Nothing. But they did kill a half a million Iraqi children.
Originally posted by ShadowHasNoSource
Fine. Go have your unholy war. This is still the same old tired war torn planet it has been since history recorded. New faces and new names but that's about it.
I'm not in a situation. I can get along in this silly society no matter what happens. Islamics taking over the world, come on.
Are we back to 9/11? The worst atrocity I've seen in my young life. I still feel the pain for those lost. Still wondering though, how 9 of the hijackers managed to escape certain doom and make it back to their homes with all flights being down in the U.S. I guess those were the 9 that went out for some lap dances. Allah couldn't let them get off that easy.
[Edited on 5-13-2004 by ShadowHasNoSource]