Tuesday, May 02, 2006
War and Oil
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/3543/667/1600/jackassfp.jpg
SECDEF Don Rumsfeld was on Michael Medved’s show today. I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised, given that this administration uses the right-wing media extensively. From my unofficial count cabinet members appear on right-wing radio and FOX News several times as frequently as they bother with that evil main stream media. Nevertheless, it is disgraceful that any administration should send it members to propaganda outlets like Medved or Hannity or Limbaugh.
Nothing new was said by the SECDEF, as per usual administration convention. This makes the secretary’ s appearance yet another PR op instead of an opportunity to inform listeners. When Medved asked for some benchmarks of success Rumsfeld mentioned forming the Iraqi government and training security forces without offering any concrete information as to how many troops would be withdrawn once these benchmarks were met or how soon after these benchmarks were met troops might be withdrawn. This was simply more of the same.
When conservatives ask democrats and/or liberals about their “lack” of a plan for the country liberals might ask for the republican’s plan to get out of Iraq. Right now we have nothing. Right now we have the Secretary of Defense mentioning some things that might be good to see in Iraq without any specifics or idea of what those things might mean in terms of when and how many troops can be withdrawn.
John Kerry has, in recent months, been pointing out that the administration keeps harping on the fact that, as the Secretary said today, there are 250,000 Iraqi security forces trained. If Iraq now has more security forces than we have troops then why haven’t we withdrawn at least a significant portion of our troops? Three years ago Iraq had zero security forces; now they have a quarter of a million. Why are our troop levels in Iraq essentially the same?
Of course, by going on Medved’s show Rumsfeld guarantees that he won’t have to answer tough questions like that. It is left to the American people to wonder what the Hell is going on in Iraq and when can we leave, questions our elected officials simply refuse to answer.
As I pointed out a month or two ago, over eighty percent of Iraqis want us out by the end of the years. Lights out. That statistic trumps American considerations of when we would like to leave. If our administration truly respected democracy and wanted to spread it to the Middle East they would have to respond to the unambiguous will of the Iraqi people.
Democracy means being able to determine your own destiny and the destiny of your nation through a majority of the people reaching a consensus. The majority of Iraq has spoken. Even if they would prefer to fight it out amongst themselves neither side wants us there. While talking heads and US politicians fret about internecine strife in Iraq the people actually living there, the people on the ground, are overwhelmingly confident that they can work out their problems without further US involvement. I’m sure they would be happy to accept economic aid after our troops leave.
In other news, Bill Frist lies his ass off again. Once again, the Today Show is the dumping ground for his foul slander. After the whopper he told Matt Lauer about “she does respond” I’m a little surprised at how bravely he lies once again.
I can’t remember a congressman lying this blatantly. I don’t think that Tom DeLay can even rival Frist nowadays for sheer brazenness. She Does Respond was not bashful in saying that he wasn’t sure that WMDs were the main reason we went into Iraq, after, of course, we were already there and no WMDs had been found. I would like to remind reader that this is the republican senate majority leader speaking.
I’ve read the US Geological Survey’s analysis of ANWR. I am also aware of our daily consumption of oil and oil products. Frist cites the million barrels of oil a day figure, neglecting to mention that that amount of production would have only been reached after nine years of exploration and construction and a further twenty or so years of development. We might have a million more barrels of oil a day, but if it had been approved in 1996 production would just have started last year and a “million” barrels of oil a day would only be reached in about 2025, not today.
Frist also cites the 16 billion barrel figure without mentioning that the USGS estimates that figure is on the high end of probability, in the 5% range.
Even at peak production, which would last about 30 years, ANWR would reduce our importation of oil by a small percentage. Opponents of drilling cite a figure of 2%, a figure devised by the USGS based on US oil imports and factoring in US petroleum imports and possibly the growth of US consumption over the next twenty years or so. A paltry amount, to be sure.
This will have a very small effect on the price of oil in the United States, especially if Exxon and company are allowed to sell ANWR oil on the world market, and are not restricted to selling the oil in the United States, as oil prices are driven by the world market, of which ANWR and entire U.S. oil supply are a very small part, amounting to 3%.
Frist sells this drilling very well, mentioning that ANWR production would exceed the amount of oil we import from Saudi Arabia, which is true. Frist, however, doesn’t mention the twelve million barrels of petroleum we also import every day, nor does he mention that the United States, over the past ten or twenty years, has diversified its importation of oil to many countries besides Saudi Arabia.
This is the republican solution to oil prices that will increase not by 3% or 5% over the next generation but by several times. Oil prices have not increased by 3% or 5% over the last five years, they’ve doubled.
Maybe Frist is just in a bad mood after most of America, including most of his base, was offended by his offer of a $100 rebate to ease gas prices. It was a stupid plan, Bill, and even your own base hated it.
None of Frist’s bad ideas will make a difference in oil prices and gas prices that are exploding, and will continue to explode over the next couple generations as the world oil supply remains constant and demand skyrockets as India and China and third world countries industrialize.
I’ve never been that concerned with the welfare of the beautiful wilderness in Alaska, but I know a meaningless and misguided solution to a problem when I see it.
Those crazy democrats are out there proposing solutions like offering incentives and raising requirements to get cars and buses to reduce petroleum consumption by half by doubling their mpg. Ethanol might take the place of 90% of the petroleum used in gas for cars and buses. 67% of petroleum consumption in this country is for transportation costs (cars and buses). Think about it.
SECDEF Don Rumsfeld was on Michael Medved’s show today. I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised, given that this administration uses the right-wing media extensively. From my unofficial count cabinet members appear on right-wing radio and FOX News several times as frequently as they bother with that evil main stream media. Nevertheless, it is disgraceful that any administration should send it members to propaganda outlets like Medved or Hannity or Limbaugh.
Nothing new was said by the SECDEF, as per usual administration convention. This makes the secretary’ s appearance yet another PR op instead of an opportunity to inform listeners. When Medved asked for some benchmarks of success Rumsfeld mentioned forming the Iraqi government and training security forces without offering any concrete information as to how many troops would be withdrawn once these benchmarks were met or how soon after these benchmarks were met troops might be withdrawn. This was simply more of the same.
When conservatives ask democrats and/or liberals about their “lack” of a plan for the country liberals might ask for the republican’s plan to get out of Iraq. Right now we have nothing. Right now we have the Secretary of Defense mentioning some things that might be good to see in Iraq without any specifics or idea of what those things might mean in terms of when and how many troops can be withdrawn.
John Kerry has, in recent months, been pointing out that the administration keeps harping on the fact that, as the Secretary said today, there are 250,000 Iraqi security forces trained. If Iraq now has more security forces than we have troops then why haven’t we withdrawn at least a significant portion of our troops? Three years ago Iraq had zero security forces; now they have a quarter of a million. Why are our troop levels in Iraq essentially the same?
Of course, by going on Medved’s show Rumsfeld guarantees that he won’t have to answer tough questions like that. It is left to the American people to wonder what the Hell is going on in Iraq and when can we leave, questions our elected officials simply refuse to answer.
As I pointed out a month or two ago, over eighty percent of Iraqis want us out by the end of the years. Lights out. That statistic trumps American considerations of when we would like to leave. If our administration truly respected democracy and wanted to spread it to the Middle East they would have to respond to the unambiguous will of the Iraqi people.
Democracy means being able to determine your own destiny and the destiny of your nation through a majority of the people reaching a consensus. The majority of Iraq has spoken. Even if they would prefer to fight it out amongst themselves neither side wants us there. While talking heads and US politicians fret about internecine strife in Iraq the people actually living there, the people on the ground, are overwhelmingly confident that they can work out their problems without further US involvement. I’m sure they would be happy to accept economic aid after our troops leave.
In other news, Bill Frist lies his ass off again. Once again, the Today Show is the dumping ground for his foul slander. After the whopper he told Matt Lauer about “she does respond” I’m a little surprised at how bravely he lies once again.
I can’t remember a congressman lying this blatantly. I don’t think that Tom DeLay can even rival Frist nowadays for sheer brazenness. She Does Respond was not bashful in saying that he wasn’t sure that WMDs were the main reason we went into Iraq, after, of course, we were already there and no WMDs had been found. I would like to remind reader that this is the republican senate majority leader speaking.
I’ve read the US Geological Survey’s analysis of ANWR. I am also aware of our daily consumption of oil and oil products. Frist cites the million barrels of oil a day figure, neglecting to mention that that amount of production would have only been reached after nine years of exploration and construction and a further twenty or so years of development. We might have a million more barrels of oil a day, but if it had been approved in 1996 production would just have started last year and a “million” barrels of oil a day would only be reached in about 2025, not today.
Frist also cites the 16 billion barrel figure without mentioning that the USGS estimates that figure is on the high end of probability, in the 5% range.
Even at peak production, which would last about 30 years, ANWR would reduce our importation of oil by a small percentage. Opponents of drilling cite a figure of 2%, a figure devised by the USGS based on US oil imports and factoring in US petroleum imports and possibly the growth of US consumption over the next twenty years or so. A paltry amount, to be sure.
This will have a very small effect on the price of oil in the United States, especially if Exxon and company are allowed to sell ANWR oil on the world market, and are not restricted to selling the oil in the United States, as oil prices are driven by the world market, of which ANWR and entire U.S. oil supply are a very small part, amounting to 3%.
Frist sells this drilling very well, mentioning that ANWR production would exceed the amount of oil we import from Saudi Arabia, which is true. Frist, however, doesn’t mention the twelve million barrels of petroleum we also import every day, nor does he mention that the United States, over the past ten or twenty years, has diversified its importation of oil to many countries besides Saudi Arabia.
This is the republican solution to oil prices that will increase not by 3% or 5% over the next generation but by several times. Oil prices have not increased by 3% or 5% over the last five years, they’ve doubled.
Maybe Frist is just in a bad mood after most of America, including most of his base, was offended by his offer of a $100 rebate to ease gas prices. It was a stupid plan, Bill, and even your own base hated it.
None of Frist’s bad ideas will make a difference in oil prices and gas prices that are exploding, and will continue to explode over the next couple generations as the world oil supply remains constant and demand skyrockets as India and China and third world countries industrialize.
I’ve never been that concerned with the welfare of the beautiful wilderness in Alaska, but I know a meaningless and misguided solution to a problem when I see it.
Those crazy democrats are out there proposing solutions like offering incentives and raising requirements to get cars and buses to reduce petroleum consumption by half by doubling their mpg. Ethanol might take the place of 90% of the petroleum used in gas for cars and buses. 67% of petroleum consumption in this country is for transportation costs (cars and buses). Think about it.
# posted by BitterHarvest @ 4:31 PM 
