Iran will be no pushover, however, and any chicken-hawk who believes they can devise a a successful PR strategy so this flies after the Iraq debacle is out of their mind.
Iran announced recently they have the world's 2nd largest oil reserves. US wants in and will use Iraq as base of operations. They don't want Japan to develop their new big oil field. They will use the WMD argument (again) to the justify action.
Joined: Aug 14, 2004 Posts: 2066 Location: San Diego, Ca.
Posted: Mon Aug 16, 2004 8:20 pm Post subject:
What will Kerry do if he gets in? I am a Republican but GW Bush scares the cr** out of me. I will be voting 3rd party. Will Kerry pick up where GWB left off?
After the WMD fiasco (untruthfulness on the part of the USA), who is going to belive this administration? _________________ "Peak oil isn't more than an interesting industry factoid and doesn't have anything to do with the hysterics speculated on ad nauseum around here!" ReserveGrowthRulz
Frankly, I find it hard to believe that either of these bozos would dare any further unnecessary military adventures. We definitely would not be facing these oil prices right now if we didn't have to move our armed forces to hell and back and if we hadn't destabilized an oil producer.
Further adventures means further wasted oil and further interruptions in supply. An Iraq adventure would likely mean $100/bl oil. I don't think anybody wants to be the guy that gets blamed.
Iraq is less at risk, IMO, than Venezuela. Chavez just won his referendum, and Bush has a million billion reasons to hate this guy.
Chavez was the last leader of state to visit Saddam Hussein before the US invasion. Chavez is good buddies with Fidel Castro. Cuba and other Latin states are getting sweetheart deals on Venezuelan oil. Chavez's government has rejected the US model for free trade, and is successfully forming trade agreements with neighboring SA states that amount to unprecedented bargaining power when trading energy with the USA.
And Venezuela is sooo much closer than Iraq, but here;s what experts say:
''The administration really doesn't have any good options for bringing pressure to bear on Chavez at this point if he does win'', according to William LeoGrande, a Latin America expert at American University here. ''The last thing it wants to do is alienate another big oil producer. If Chavez wins, they're just going to have to grit their teeth and live with him''.
''If the oil is flowing and U.S. investors are happy, this administration isn't going to do much'', Michael Shifter, a Venezuela expert at the Inter-American Dialogue (IAD), a prominent think tank here, told IPS. ''What the U.S. wants above all else is stability''.
But then, it may be that GWB will burn his bridges just to get the situation so screwed up that the people start screaming for nuke plants. So maybe you should vote Kerry. _________________ http://www.openspeech.org - please visit and post!
Joined: May 26, 2004 Posts: 1190 Location: Zoorope
Posted: Tue Aug 17, 2004 3:36 am Post subject:
No risks for Iran. That country is quite another story than Iraq. The have good leaders (like them or not), they elected them in democratic elections, the country is not splitted into three or four ethnical groups, they are not even ARABS! (Call a persian "arab" and you're dead!).
They are good in military, the country is unite and strong and they don't intend to give any oil to anybody claiming it.
A war on Iran would be a pain the *** so big that Iraq would appear a breeze. I think nobody will try.
And Venezuela also: they're making important agreements with all Latin American (expecially Brazil and Argentina), it's impossible a military expedition without setting into fire the whole region. Oil is theirs, and they know it. No way. _________________ **no english mothertongue**
--------
Objects in the rear view mirror
are closer than they appear.
With 1.3 billion people, a phenomenal rate of economic growth, and an insatiable consumer demand for cars, China will soon come into direct conflict with the United States over oil, the world's most valuable and increasingly scarce industrial commodity.
The pressure on supply will inevitably jack up prices to levels that would make today's motorists and electricity customers blanch.
The conflict is unavoidable. It could create geopolitical tensions and cause dramatic shifts in U.S. foreign policy that may overshadow today's preoccupation with global terrorism. And there are no easy solutions to avert it, only regrets over this nation's missed opportunities in decades past to develop viable alternative energy sources to lessen U.S. dependence on imported oil.
Quietly and with minimal coverage in the U.S. press, the Navy announced that from mid-July through August it would hold exercises dubbed Operation Summer Pulse '04 in waters off the China coast near Taiwan.
This will be the first time in U.S. naval history that seven of our twelve carrier strike groups deploy in one place at the same time. It will look like the peacetime equivalent of the Normandy landings and may well end in a disaster.
Needless to say, the Chinese are not amused. They say that their naval and air forces, plus their land-based rockets, are capable of taking on one or two carrier strike groups but that combat with seven would overwhelm them. So even before a carrier reaches the Taiwan Strait, Beijing has announced it will embark on a crash project that will enable it to meet and defeat seven U.S. carrier strike groups within a decade. There's every chance the Chinese will succeed if they are not overtaken by war first.
Remember, they don't have to capture their oil wells, they only have to keep them from consuming to free up more oil. A nice bonus is that in case of an escalation the US can easily default on the billions of its foreign debt that is in Chinese hands.
Joined: Apr 21, 2004 Posts: 508 Location: Republic of Texas
Posted: Tue Aug 17, 2004 8:05 am Post subject:
The president still has to have the support of Congress for a full fledged war. I don't see the president, whoever it is, getting support for another war anytime soon.
Picking a fight with China out of oil desparation does make sick sense. Yeah, Bush would need Congress's rubber stamp. Just send Colin Powell around with the appropriate proof of China's threat. _________________ http://www.openspeech.org - please visit and post!
Joined: May 17, 2004 Posts: 1969 Location: Democratic People's Republic of Washington
Posted: Tue Aug 17, 2004 4:24 pm Post subject:
buster wrote:
Picking a fight with China out of oil desperation does make sick sense. Yeah, Bush would need Congress's rubber stamp. Just send Colin Powell around with the appropriate proof of China's threat.
That would be easy. I can think up a plausible "threat" that they would use to initiate a war with China. Here is a summation of the likely presentation that Colin Powell, and George Herbert Walker Bush would present to the United States Congress.
The Chinese government has an active nuclear program, and also has nuclear missiles capable of reaching the west coast of the United States. This presents a clear and present danger to the very lives of the American public, and this threat must be eliminated. Also, the Chinese have initiated a space program, and are expected to send a man into orbit by 2008. Once China achieves this, then they will have the capability to deploy a nuclear warhead to anywhere on the planet. This would pose a clear and present danger to every man, woman, and child both in the United States, and worldwide. We must crush this threat before it is actualized.
The nation of China is also expanding their economy at an astounding rate, and in doing so, they are competing with us in the procurement of the precious resource of petroleum. China is now the second largest consumer of oil, only second to the United States. The adoption of the automobile in China is similar to the automobile rush that took place in the United States during the early 20th century. By competing with the US economy, and consuming a large percentage of oil necessary to the continuation of the "American Way" of life, they are endangering not only the economy of the United States, but also endangering humanity with their over-zealous economic boom. To ensure our stance as the most powerful economy on the face of the earth, we must act now to oppress the industrialization of China.
The Chinese military is also undergoing a massive build up in preparation for conflicts that have not yet materialized. Taiwan may seek independence in the next 5 years according to Radio Pacific International, and China is intending to respond to Taiwan with "any means necessary" , including military force, to ensure the continuation of the "One China" policy set in place by the communistic Chinese government.
En Sum, china poses a threat to the well being of the United States physically as well as economically; China also poses a significant threat to their neighbors. China has become a rouge nation that must be brought into line, and we must impose an economic change from communism, to free market capitalism, we must also replace the authoritarian government with a "democratically elected" puppet government that will pose no threat to their neighbors, or to the United States.
That sounds like a valid argument that Bush & Co would use to initiate a war with China, and it would only use facts also. It would be likely that the American public would approve of military action, and so would congress. I dread the day that the above takes place, as it will surly initiate WWIII. _________________ Here Lies the United States Of America.
Joined: Aug 12, 2004 Posts: 1180 Location: England
Posted: Tue Aug 17, 2004 4:52 pm Post subject:
Come on guys , give me a break war with China you have got to be kidding me. The only way to win would be to use a substantial amout of nukes given the size of the country, and you certainly could not invade they have a standing army of millions !! *100
I think even the US public would realise war with China would be in effect world war III as countries take sides, and selling this to the public post Iraq would be impossible.
Besides what would be the point , in nuking the whole of China you would probably create such damage to the environment we'd all be fecked including the US *1000
Maybe I didn't say SICK loud enough when I said "sick sense."
If we were to invade and conquer China, we'd still want them to develop their industry, right?
Not only would they keep buying cars, our troops would probably have to build the roads! _________________ http://www.openspeech.org - please visit and post!
The president still has to have the support of Congress for a full fledged war. I don't see the president, whoever it is, getting support for another war anytime soon.
Who said anything about the US attacking China? If China attacked the US, Bush would need no congressional stamp to retaliate. That's just a matter of irritating them enough.
Quote:
If we were to invade and conquer China, we'd still want them to develop their industry, right?
Not only would they keep buying cars, our troops would probably have to build the roads!
If they would conquer it, indeed. But what if we they just bomb them back to the dark ages? It would free up a lot of commodities for the world market; it would slash a large portion of the US foreign debt; it would provide a lasting solution for the US trade deficit.
Maybe Bush was serious about eliminating debt.
Hmm. Guess I played civilization one time too many.
Joined: Jun 02, 2004 Posts: 1078 Location: Bristol, UK
Posted: Wed Aug 18, 2004 12:32 pm Post subject:
smiley wrote:
If they would conquer it, indeed. But what if we they just bomb them back to the dark ages? It would free up a lot of commodities for the world market; it would slash a large portion of the US foreign debt; it would provide a lasting solution for the US trade deficit.
Maybe Bush was serious about eliminating debt.
Hmm. Guess I played civilization one time too many.
One flaw with eliminating US trade deficit by destroying China... America wouldn't have any STUFF any more. China manufactures a lot of stuff for America. Sure they could take their $80 billion and buy stuff from somewhere else but to manufacture locally would be MUCH more expensive than China and to buy elsewhere cheap would be right back at square one.
America's trade deficit isn't the problem it's the symptom of having a huge demand for cheap electronics, clothes and general tat. Try addressing this demand before nuking anyone!
Also, the Chinese have initiated a space program, and are expected to send a man into orbit by 2008. Once China achieves this, then they will have the capability to deploy a nuclear warhead to anywhere on the planet.
Perhaps you didn't notice but the Chinese have already sent a man into orbit, not long after the US space shuttle crashed in February 2003.
naval blockade of china would be a possibility, even covertly, (couple of VLCC or other commodity transports get sunk) and china has very real problems
but the chinese could flood the market with US treasuries, and the US would likely implode
All times are GMT - 6 Hours Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4Next
Page 1 of 4
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
