I believe they "keep sending it over here" because drug addicts keep paying whatever price they charge in order to take their product.
But actually I think 90% of the opiate production of Afghanistan actually stays in Europe. I could be wrong but I think I'm right...I'll do a little research in the a.m. I'm off to bed. Later kids!
Double Standard?
by Bendrr 28 Replies latest social current
-
EvilForce
-
upside/down
To the average Saudi youth... this looks hypocritical don't you think? The unemployment rate for Saudi youth stands at around 32 percent. In 2004, one in every two Saudis was less than 15 years old, and an estimated 60 percent of the population is under the age of 21. The problem is only going to get worse not better.
What's wrong with this picture?
The Saudi gov't... a "Royal" family... a "Islamic" state...nonsense!
I just read how the Saudi's are in debt up to their Royal Islamic eyeballs...How is that possible?
The "West" is in NO way responsible for this...it's THIER issue. If the "West" did intervene..they'd be labeled "meddlers" and "imperialists".
Don't you get it? YOU CAN'T WIN with these people... the Middle East likes living in the Dark Ages... and their Fundy "Islamic" so-called leaders, will forever exploit this.
It would be like a Dub winning the Presidency of the US (and letting the GB have "influence")...can you imagine? Well that's EXACTLY what's been going on there for over a thousand years...
The American Empire is simply securing it's influence over what it considers a strategic resource...and beat China to the punch...
"The Golden Rule...He who has the
oilgold MAKES the rules..."- Jafar / Aladdinu/d (of the whatever happened to methanol class)
-
Simon
The fundamental problem is that the west interferes too much and either imposes a leader they do not want or props up a leader they want to boot out. All because they want guaranteed and cheap oil as so want a puppet / friendly regime. They then allow these regimes to stay in power despite the wishes of the general people which invariably means harsh treatment and oppression and turning a blind eye to human rights abuses.
Americans looking for the cause of the problem should look closer to home - it is your countries wasteful and greedy thirst for oil that is the root cause of most of the modern problems. Think about that next time you bleat on about your right to cheap oil and get an even bigger SUV to haul your fat ass round.
Even the first Iraq war was fundamentally caused by oil.
-
Bendrr
I know you have stated before that we find the various suicide bomber's family and then exterminate their next of kin.
I'm pretty sure I didn't say that, EF. You may have read it in my infamous nuclear weapons thread, but I doubt it was me who said it. And honestly, stop buying the hype. I have never advocated or even condoned the idea of killing a billion Muslims. I simply advanced the idea, which I do support, of one or two nukes used in response to a major terror attack, such as with hindsight being 20/20 probably should have been done to Mecca already. "Scare the Jihad out of 'em", I think is how I termed it, "show them there's a power greater than Allah".
Mike.
-
EvilForce
I'm sorry Bendrr I thought that was you....
However...using a nuke really isn't an option. We must never use nuclear weapons ever again. There were many neo-cons pushing to use our nukes as a first strike against the Soviets. Thank god we never did. But they were always saying it was inevitable so let's use it now before it's too late. While "only" using one or two nukes may not create a global ecological disaster it would be horrific none the less.
The "genie would truly be out of the bottle" then. No country that was using restraint in developing and deploying nukes would hold back. China knowing that the US would use nukes would increase their nuclear capacity by a factor of 20 times. Right now they have about 270 total nukes in land, sea, and air configurations. To repel a true US attack they would need on order of probably 5,000 radiological weapons. The US in 2002 had almost 10,000 weapons. India, Pakistan, Iran, North Korea and others would be making warheads as fast as they could.
Also, nuking Saudi is a bit like a drug addict killing his drug dealer to teach him a lesson. The US is reliant on Saudi for the oil. Do you have any idea what kind of fallout taking 10.5 to 11 million barrels of oil off the market PER DAY?!? Turning the desert of Saudi into a "sheet of glass" doesn't quite accomplish much.
NUCLEAR WEAPONS MUST NEVER, EVER, EVER BE USED AGAIN UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE. -
EvilForce
Simon...the UK isn't a whole lot better when it comes to wasting energy and having "fat asses" either. Lest ye without sin cast thy first stone.
According to the bbc 22% of Britons are obese. See www.bbc.co.uk/science/hottopics/obesity/
The US averages 22.8%....by state (fattest to slimest):
Percent of
Obese Adults
Alabama
28.4
Mississippi
28.1
West Virginia
27.7
Indiana
26.0
Kentucky
25.6
Arkansas
25.2
Georgia
25.2
Michigan
25.2
Tennessee
25.0
Ohio
24.9
Louisiana
24.8
Texas
24.6
South Carolina
24.5
Oklahoma
24.4
North Carolina
24.0
Delaware
24.0
Iowa
23.9
Nebraska
23.9
Pennsylvania
23.8
North Dakota
23.7
Missouri
23.6
Alaska
23.5
California
23.2
Illinois
23.2
Minnesota
23.0
South Dakota
22.9
Kansas
22.6
Maryland
21.9
Idaho
21.8
Virginia
21.7
Washington
21.7
Oregon
21.5
Nevada
21.2
New York
20.9
Wisconsin
20.9
Utah
20.8
District of Columbia
20.3
New Hampshire
20.2
New Mexico
20.2
Arizona
20.1
New Jersey
20.1
Wyoming
20.1
Florida
19.9
Maine
19.9
Vermont
19.6
Connecticut
19.0
Montana
18.8
Rhode Island
18.4
Massachusetts
16.8
Hawaii
16.4
Colorado
16.0
Total average
22.8 -
Bendrr
We may be getting sidetracked with the nukes bit, EF. But like it or not, it is very likely to come to the point one day when one has to be used again. The real question is whether it is used pre-emptively or in retaliation. The Cold War we won because we won the arms race, basically waiting until the enemy couldn't afford the bigger and better guns anymore. The lesson there is deterrence and what I'm advocating is a show of force that deters Islamic terrorism. Discourage the followers of the radical clerics from strapping on bomb belts or hijacking planes overwhelmingly. Yes, it might end up taking a nuke to do that or at least the threat of one. Personally, I'd rather it be the threat.
What I was trying to get at, is how do we counteract the radical Imams and Mullahs without military intervention? We've thrown foreign aid dollars at foreign poverty for years now. Simon has a point, that we have to stop aiding dictators. It's kind of "damned if you do, damned if you don't". Bush Senior should have ordered Saddam taken down in the first Gulf War. And France and Russia shouldn't have been selling him banned weapons and sending Spetznaz troops to help him haul "cargo" to Syria. Clinton should have accepted the multiple offers of Osama Bin Laden in handcuffs. Carter should have struck back hard at Iran when the hostages were taken, instead of the disaster that happened.
We also can't simple be isolationist with regards to the Middle East. Even if Middle Eastern oil weren't an issue for us, and if we were to tap our own reserves maybe it wouldn't be, Israel cannot be left alone without our support otherwise there will eventually be no Israel. And as I have said, they don't just hate us for our interventions. They hate us because we're infidels. The radicals want a one-world Caliphate and as long as you and I and Simon exist, we're in the way.
Mike.
-
Soledad
Americans looking for the cause of the problem should look closer to home - it is your countries wasteful and greedy thirst for oil that is the root cause of most of the modern problems. Think about that next time you bleat on about your right to cheap oil and get an even bigger SUV to haul your fat ass round.
oh......right......cars in the UK run on thin air I guess
-
Simon
I have never advocated or even condoned the idea of killing a billion Muslims. I simply advanced the idea, which I do support, of one or two nukes used in response to a major terror attack, such as with hindsight being 20/20 probably should have been done to Mecca already. "Scare the Jihad out of 'em", I think is how I termed it, "show them there's a power greater than Allah".
I think you have got a bit carried away with the propaganda you see on Fox news. Even the satelite guided smart bombs are not smart and have killed thousands of innocent civilians.
How would dropping nuclear weapons be anything other than a lot worse? You are advocating mass murder for no reason than your own paranoia and fear.
Simon...the UK isn't a whole lot better when it comes to wasting energy and having "fat asses" either. Lest ye without sin cast thy first stone.
According to the bbc 22% of Britons are obese. See www.bbc.co.uk/science/hottopics/obesity/Ah, you are using averages. The many Americans who are in poverty and malnurished probably bring that down a bit.
oh......right......cars in the UK run on thin air I guess
No, not at all. But 'economy' is a selling point and conservation is not a dirty word. People driving big SUVs round town are generally looked down on as being pratts.