mmjones
Member
First I would like to say that you have done your homework. I'm impressed, most people don't, and you seem to have formulated your opinions, however much I disagree with, on the facts you have seen.
Now...to get down to business. Sorry, I realize I made a mistake with the 80% figure. What I was trying to say was that 80% of the oil that the US buys is from abroad...that is at least the highest speculated percentage that I have seen, which I tend to use (I’ll admit it: for its shock value) the truth is no one really knows for sure. Though some figures, the US government for example, shows the percentage to be around 60%...about the lowest % I have ever seen...I tend to believe the median which puts the % in the low 70's where most environmental NGO's (non-governmental organizations: more impartial than the government, though they have their own vested interests) tend to cite.
The US does import more oil from Canada than any single nation, which is extremely easy because of it's location and NAFTA; but it is important to note that OPEC imports far more than Canada and all other non-OPEC nations combined. The US simply has vested interests in the Arabian Peninsula.
Concerning the oil reserves which can be found in the US…well we simply don’t have that much, and what we do have is being harvested, except for one area. Oil resources are being extracted from the South West, Mexican Gulf, and all over Alaska (regardless of the environmental damage: remember the Exxon Valdez). The one place the US isn’t drilling is in ANWR…which stands for Arctic National Wildlife REFUGE. A great figure I enjoy about drilling in ANWR is that once oil is being harvested, something which isn’t technically feasible for another 10 years, the amount of oil that could be extracted is equal to .7% of the worlds oil supply: which happens to be around the same amount of oil that the US could save by properly inflating their tires. (Knickerbocker, B. Fight over oil drilling in Alaska flares up. The Christian Science Monitor, pp. 1.) Drilling ANWR is a bad idea…environmentally and financially…and a REPUBLICAN controlled senate realized that, defeating the ANWR bill.
I’ll concede that Clinton pandered to the North Koreans, if that’s what you call it. He gave food aid to the N. K.’s when hundreds of thousands of poor peasants were starving to death because of their brutal regime. Food aid, at least to me, is not pandering. But the situation has been developing for the last 40 years…it is ignorant to say that Bush Senior or Reagan didn’t screw up during their chance to save the world. I’ll admit Clinton made some mistakes, but so did Bush (both of them) and Reagan.
I am certainly not in favor of a war with North Korea, but by supporting a war with Iraq you inadvertently are…is that what you want to do?
It wasn’t Clinton that screwed up in Rwanda…it was the world. The UN knew what was going on, and did nothing. Clinton knew what was going on…and did nothing. The Congress knew what was going on and did nothing. The public knew…or at least should have…and did little to nothing. What did I do…nothing, I was too young to realize what was going on…unfortunately.
I don’t know where you found that Oil-For-Food revenue bought weapons. Article 661 of the UN, the basis for oil-for-food is very strict, which has led to an almost constant audit process. The money gotten by the oil-for-food program are distributed like this:
That’s the official UN information. ( http://www.un.org/Depts/oip/background/index.html )
I don’t see any budget for weapons, do you?
Most of the information I have read concludes that the US supported both Iraq and Iran. Mostly through CIA money, training, and other support. Perhaps we aren’t as guilty in Iraq as we are in Afghanistan, but we are still guilty. And if you subscribe the fact that we only supported Iraq after the beginning of the Iran conflict, well then, we are just as guilty of escalating that region problem.
Remember that we were not friends with
If you’re interested, and I assume you are, because of our conversation…you should pick up Deadly Arsenals, it’s a little out of date, was written in 02, but it gives a great overview of the worlds weapons issues, and the history behind them. It’s by Joseph Cirincione.
I don’t know that I addressed all of your concerns…the real problem is getting through all of the propaganda, both sides have it, and it’s hard to tell who is right. You’ve presented me with some interesting ideas; hopefully I have done the same.
Matthew,
Now...to get down to business. Sorry, I realize I made a mistake with the 80% figure. What I was trying to say was that 80% of the oil that the US buys is from abroad...that is at least the highest speculated percentage that I have seen, which I tend to use (I’ll admit it: for its shock value) the truth is no one really knows for sure. Though some figures, the US government for example, shows the percentage to be around 60%...about the lowest % I have ever seen...I tend to believe the median which puts the % in the low 70's where most environmental NGO's (non-governmental organizations: more impartial than the government, though they have their own vested interests) tend to cite.
The US does import more oil from Canada than any single nation, which is extremely easy because of it's location and NAFTA; but it is important to note that OPEC imports far more than Canada and all other non-OPEC nations combined. The US simply has vested interests in the Arabian Peninsula.
Concerning the oil reserves which can be found in the US…well we simply don’t have that much, and what we do have is being harvested, except for one area. Oil resources are being extracted from the South West, Mexican Gulf, and all over Alaska (regardless of the environmental damage: remember the Exxon Valdez). The one place the US isn’t drilling is in ANWR…which stands for Arctic National Wildlife REFUGE. A great figure I enjoy about drilling in ANWR is that once oil is being harvested, something which isn’t technically feasible for another 10 years, the amount of oil that could be extracted is equal to .7% of the worlds oil supply: which happens to be around the same amount of oil that the US could save by properly inflating their tires. (Knickerbocker, B. Fight over oil drilling in Alaska flares up. The Christian Science Monitor, pp. 1.) Drilling ANWR is a bad idea…environmentally and financially…and a REPUBLICAN controlled senate realized that, defeating the ANWR bill.
I’ll concede that Clinton pandered to the North Koreans, if that’s what you call it. He gave food aid to the N. K.’s when hundreds of thousands of poor peasants were starving to death because of their brutal regime. Food aid, at least to me, is not pandering. But the situation has been developing for the last 40 years…it is ignorant to say that Bush Senior or Reagan didn’t screw up during their chance to save the world. I’ll admit Clinton made some mistakes, but so did Bush (both of them) and Reagan.
What I’m suggesting is that if you support the war in Iraq, which has been perpetrated on the idea that Iraq has WMD’s (weapons of mass destruction) then YOU my friend have to support a war with North Korea, China and Iran, to name a few. North Korea has WMD’s and has said they will use them if pushed by the US, not even Iraq has been that brash. They also have, unlike Iraq, the capability of hitting the lower 48 with a nuclear equipped ballistic missile. The same is true of China, who has as bad, or worse, of a human rights record as Iraq, remember Tienamen (sorry about the spelling) square.
I am certainly not in favor of a war with North Korea, but by supporting a war with Iraq you inadvertently are…is that what you want to do?
It wasn’t Clinton that screwed up in Rwanda…it was the world. The UN knew what was going on, and did nothing. Clinton knew what was going on…and did nothing. The Congress knew what was going on and did nothing. The public knew…or at least should have…and did little to nothing. What did I do…nothing, I was too young to realize what was going on…unfortunately.
I don’t know where you found that Oil-For-Food revenue bought weapons. Article 661 of the UN, the basis for oil-for-food is very strict, which has led to an almost constant audit process. The money gotten by the oil-for-food program are distributed like this:
That’s the official UN information. ( http://www.un.org/Depts/oip/background/index.html )
I don’t see any budget for weapons, do you?
Most of the information I have read concludes that the US supported both Iraq and Iran. Mostly through CIA money, training, and other support. Perhaps we aren’t as guilty in Iraq as we are in Afghanistan, but we are still guilty. And if you subscribe the fact that we only supported Iraq after the beginning of the Iran conflict, well then, we are just as guilty of escalating that region problem.
Remember that we were not friends with
You might find interesting that US supplied Iran with a nuclear reactor…the one, which is speculated for the recently speculated advances in their nuclear weapons program. Check out the University of Tehran…that’s where it is. Just like with Iraq, the US supported, at one time or another Iran. And like Iraq, we withdrew that support when we realized the nuts we were dealing with
If you’re interested, and I assume you are, because of our conversation…you should pick up Deadly Arsenals, it’s a little out of date, was written in 02, but it gives a great overview of the worlds weapons issues, and the history behind them. It’s by Joseph Cirincione.
I don’t know that I addressed all of your concerns…the real problem is getting through all of the propaganda, both sides have it, and it’s hard to tell who is right. You’ve presented me with some interesting ideas; hopefully I have done the same.
Matthew,
