View Single Post
Old 05-03-2009, 03:03 PM   #56
Team Owner
SteelersinCA's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 2,537
Gender: Male
Member Number: 9302
Thanks: 4
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default Re: bho is what he is

Originally Posted by revefsreleets View Post

Bottom line, Jeremy, is you are offering a super simple explanation for an extremely complex relationship, which doesn't surprise me, but I think it's interesting that you won't be moved off your position.

I'm wondering, are you capable of learning about things you clearly have limited knowledge about, are you just banking on the (cough cough) "fact" that you already know everything?

And are you capable of typing a reply to me without some kind of cut or personal attack in it? It would seem not...
Again, the irony is astounding. It's about the only thing about your posts that actually is. Oh and the humor you provide!

What's the strategic, as you suggest, reason for the alliance if not oil? You can lace it with as much vitriol and personal insults as you wish and then say I can't respond without it, it would be par for the course with your posts.

Bottom line is we are in the Middle East because of it's important strategic value, i.e. 2/3rds of the world's oil. Any relationship forged over there, be it Israel, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait etc, is to improve our strategic position.

"As World War II ended, the United States became the great outside power in the Middle East, with three main concerns: Persian Gulf oil; support and protection of the new nation of Israel; and containment of the Soviet Union...Oil has always been the U.S.'s first priority in the Middle East. President Franklin Roosevelt discussed oil when he met with the Saudi king, Abdul Aziz ibn Saud, just before the close of World War II.

In case you poo-poo the NPR article (cause don't blame you, you voted for McCain) here's an article saying the same thing from the Cato Institute, I'm sure they meet your favor.

"After 70 years of broken Western promises regarding Arab independence, it should not be surprising that the West is viewed with suspicion and hostility by the populations (as opposed to some of the political regimes) of the Middle East.[3] The United States, as the heir to British imperialism in the region, has been a frequent object of suspicion. Since the end of World War II, the United States, like the European colonial powers before it, has been unable to resist becoming entangled in the region's political conflicts. Driven by a desire to keep the vast oil reserves in hands friendly to the United States, a wish to keep out potential rivals (such as the Soviet Union), opposition to neutrality in the cold war, and domestic political considerations, the United States has compiled a record of tragedy in the Middle East."

It is simple, we are in the Middle East because of oil. You apparently are the only one who disagrees with that. Any relationship that flows from that presence is guided by the principle of advancing our strategic interest in the oil.

I know it must be difficult to acknowledge I'm right or to, heaven forbid, agree with me, so I won't ask you to. Just keep hating, keep pretending it's me throwing out personal insults, keep pretending as if you don't care, or that I bore you. I assume Jeremy is some guy you had run ins with in the past on the forum and you are likening him to me. I love it when people use the "I've been on this board longer than you" argument. After all you've seen many come and go through the years, right? Must be a long 2 years since you've been on the board. Next will it be I have more posts than you? Ahh how the "mighty" have fallen. Should we call you pot or kettle?
SteelersinCA is offline   Reply With Quote