Hollings is leaving office because he betrayed his electorate to get national status as a liberal candidate for president. Now he bitterly regrets it.
So his anger showed when he made a statement that was perfectly true. He said that, compared to Israel, nothing else in American foreign politics makes any difference, least of all American interests.
Everybody in professional politics knows that. That is precisely why no one is allowed to say it.
Liberals have been trying desperately to say that the War in Iraq is just a a War for Oil. But every now and then liberals slip up and tell the truth. It gets them into DEEP trouble, and every conservative who wants to be respectable screams bloody murder when he does.
No, the Iraq War is not for oil. That would be in America’s interest. The last group of Americans who fought a war in America’s interst wore gray uniforms, and that war wasn’t necessary.
We can get all the oil we need from outside the Middle East. Britain, the only European country that joined in this War for Oil, is also the only European country that has its own independent oil supply.
But there is no other excuse for America’s presence in the Middle East except oil. So we must say “oil, oil, oil” because otherwise we will be saying what every Arab leader tells us: the Middle East hates us because we are there for Israel.
#1 by Bedford on 11/13/2004 - 7:00 pm
No, if we say it’s for oil, Bob, the Left will say blood for oil! Kerry is the Left and he never said it was for oil. The National Geographic had a feature on world petroleum recently – the mideast is 2/3 of the world supply. However, a petroleum expert by the name of Simmons says that the world’s largest oil field in Saudi Arabia is being extensively water injected. That is a sign that the field is finally depleting. Boone Pickens says oil is going near term to $60 per barrel. Finally, the China card which is behind this current pressure on oil – the Chinese are desparately seeking oil anywhere because without it, their economic boom will bust. Here is some demorat party humor – someone said Dicki Harpootlian chartered a jet for Boston when he heard the election eve exit polling – those wacky demorats wanted it soooo much!
#2 by Hank Parnell on 11/15/2004 - 11:05 am
We have plenty of oil right here in the US, if the environmentalists would allow us to extract it. There is plenty of oil in Mexico and Central America, and if we must wage war on somebody for “oil,” why not them? They’re invading us anyway. North Carolina is damn near one of the “Disunited States of Mexico” now anyway.
And there is still the open question as to whether or not the source of oil is biotic or abiotic. If it is abiotic, then there are undoubtedly deeper reserves within the earth that we know nothing about now. We know that hydrocarbons exist in space and on other planets (e.g. Jupiter) that ostensibly have no life to produce them.
Oil and its extraction are political smokescreens. Nearly all of “science” amounts to politics nowadays, of one breed or another.
#3 by Bedford on 11/16/2004 - 10:21 am
There is an estimated 3 billion barrels of oil in the Arctic Wildlife Preserve and some more in the Gulf, but it is not “plenty”. It only requires simple arithmetic to add up the demand that India and China could require in the future. There are lots of claims about using hydrogen and finding more oil, but the picture is really not too bright for users – it is pretty good for anyone who has oil to sell. The Saudi oil fields would be the easiest to seize.
#4 by Don on 11/16/2004 - 11:50 am
Poor Fritzie didn’t get his thirty pieces of silver. C’mon Fritz, tell the Whole Story loud and often.
Revenge is Sweet, saith the Lord.
#5 by Hank Parnell on 11/16/2004 - 2:41 pm
There could be “plenty” — if we were smart. Somehow “seizing the Saudi oilfields” sounds more like a problem than a solution to me.
The Germans purportedly developed synthetic fuels by the end of WW2. We could surely do the same, if we didn’t “outsource” everything to foreigners, and give away jobs to immigrants illegal and legal. This used to be a country where ingenuity solved problems. But, admittedly, this used to be a white country, too. White-dominated country, anyway. Why do I get the feeling that made ALL the difference?
#6 by Bob Whitaker on 11/16/2004 - 4:19 pm
Hank, why do you get that feeling?
Well, let me list all the BROWN skinned countries with a decent living standard and their own solutions to shortages:
The above list is not copyrighted.
#7 by John E. Reb on 11/17/2004 - 3:18 am
I noticed two thigs of note in the replies on this topic, well actually three, but I’ll comment mainly on the first two because I see very little discussion anywhere on these points; 1 the question as to the nature of oil being biotic or abiotic, and 2 the mention of the German’s synthetic fuels during WWII.
On the first subject, I read a short time ago (maybe a couple of months now) an article on Jeff Rense’s site that was quoting someone from inside the petroleum industry stating that oil was a natural byproduct of the internal mechanisms of the earth, and was NOT biotic. I have not seen this anywhere before or since, but it gets even better as it was also stated in that article that the old “dry” wells are once again full, or filling back up. If what was stated in this article has any substance there is plenty of oil, and we are being led to believe that we are running out in order to justify the outragous prices. Has anyone besides myself seen that article, and if so do you have any more information on the subject?
The second subject regarding the synthetic fuels the German’s developed during WWII. I’m a student of history (no I didn’t major in history in college, but I study it, and yes Bob, I did go to college, but I NEVER adopted the liberal BS they push, and gave the “instructors” hell because I’ve always been a very outspoken real conservative ;-)), and I have read in numerous books about the German’s use of synthetic oil. I don’t recall any mention of a gas substitute, but the definatly had synthetic oil. Because I have been aware of the fact that the German’s had developed, and extensivly used synthetic oil during WWII I always found it curious why there was such a big deal made out of the fact that suddenly during the 1970’s we developed synthetic oil. I suspect now that the reason so much was made of it was to lead everyone to believe that there was/is an energy crisis, and to justify high oil prices.
The third subject of note here is one that I consider so obvious that anyone should be able to see it. That is what this unconstitutional war we are fighting is about. The way I see it is that both positions that have been mentioned are correct. We are definitely fighting for Israel’s intrest, and anyone who is even the least bit honest with theirselves should know that. But, you also have to take into account that both boy george and cheny (sp?) are in the oil business, and you can bet that they are making a killing off of this unconstitutional romp through the middle east, so there is motive in both directions there.
#8 by Richard L. Hardison on 11/17/2004 - 9:36 pm
There has been debate as to biotic/abiotic origin of pertroleum for some time. There are some wells whose production fell to a very low level then suddenly jumped again to a much larger level, although not the original level.
As to the biotic/abiotic debate I must plead ignorance, and I think most of the Oil world must as well. My observation, however, is the biotic side seems to have the evidence on their side in terms of overall production levels and the peak production forecasts which have been pretty much on the money.
It is true the Germans pioneered synthetic oil. Most of the plants were in the Rhine valley near Mannheim – not too far from the coal mines of the Ruhr and next to the massive water (Rhine River) source needed to produce the stuff. One of the major reasons we have not engaged in such things is the need for massive water resources near the coal or Kerogen shales that would be converted. Similar projects were started by Exxon and others in NW Colorado in the late 70s, but they couldn’t solve the evirnomental and water probelms. If you want to see some of the problems, altough expressed with a screetch, see “The Angry West” by Richard Lamm.