[ham] Re: [Rhodes22-list] Stan, CAUTION, politics ahead

Sat May 31 01:59:12 EDT 2003

very interesting and reasonable point of view, thank you.

MJM
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Roger Pihlaja" <cen09402 at centurytel.net>
To: "The Rhodes 22 mail list" <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 7:01 AM
Subject: [ham] Re: [Rhodes22-list] Stan, CAUTION, politics ahead

> Wally, Brad, et al,
> 
> Let me just add a chemical engineer's point of view to this discussion.  The
> world population is presently about 6.2 billion people & still growing
> exponentially.  It depends upon which expert you believe, but most estimates
> put the maximum world population that could be sustained on planet earth
> without modern technology at around 2 - 3 billion people.  So, we're already
> 2X - 3X beyond what can be supported without modern technology.  Think about
> how the infrastructure of civilization around you works and how the goods &
> services you depend upon are built & delivered.  How would you support the
> population of a major metropolitan area like New York or Los Angeles without
> it?  There is an intrinsic interconnectness or interdependency to modern
> civilization that makes it relatively fragile.  The engineers have done a
> marvelous job of making it all work pretty reliably & most people never even
> give it a moment's thought.  But, it's really a house of cards.  We in the
> US, Canada, Western Europe, Japan, South Korea, & a relatively few other
> places are sitting at the top of that house of cards.  It's a good life, but
> we should all be relatively nervous.  At the bottom of the house of cards,
> it all comes down to resources - water, energy, raw materials, etc.  Fossil
> fuels, like crude oil & natural gas, have a unique status in that they are
> both the world's primary energy resources & crucial raw materials for things
> like plastics, fertilizers & other ag-chemicals, pharmaceuticals, & other
> petrochemicals.  Like it or not, the unvarnished physical truth is that
> civilization as we know it would come to an end, 50 - 67% of the world's
> population would have to die, & the standard of living for the rest of us
> would be very much lower if access to crude oil were cut off.  At present,
> the Middle East has something like 60% of the proven reserves of crude oil
> in the entire world.  You can say what you want about the sincerity of our
> politicians, the morality of our foreign policy, the justifiability of any
> given war, etc.  Any politician or foreign policy that does not take into
> account these physical realities is naive to the point of childishness.
> This is the way the world really works.  All the multinational corporations,
> politicians, & governments are contrained by these physical realities.  It's
> already way too late to back off from it.  Look closely at it.  Take
> ownership of it in your own mind, patterns of thought, & behavior.  Make
> your judgements re foreign policy with it in mind.
> 
> Roger Pihlaja
> S/V Dynamic Equilibrium
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "brad haslett" <flybrad at yahoo.com>
> To: "The Rhodes 22 mail list" <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 9:09 PM
> Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Stan, CAUTION, politics ahead
> 
> 
> > Wally,
> >
> > First let me make a couple of minor points and then
> > I'll give you the answer you seek.
> >
> > "The President had consistently resisted the pressure
> > to stop the flow, lest total cutoff trigger a Japanese
> > invasion of the Netherlands East Indies, thus
> > extending the European war to Asia and makeing the
> > defeat of Hitler that more difficult.  Now, on August
> > 1 (1941), after long, serious discussions, Roosevelt
> > slammed an embargo on high-octane gasoline as well as
> > crude oil".... At Dawn We Slept, Gordon W. Prange
> >
> > "The Maikip oil feilds, producing annually two and a
> > half million tons of oil, had been captured on August
> > 8 (1942), ............On the thirty-first Hitler was
> > urging Field Marshal List......to scrape up all
> > available forces for the final push to Grozny so that
> > he "could get his hands on the oil fields".....The
> > Rise and Fall of The Third Reich, William L. Shirer
> >
> > Of course WW2 was more complicated than a quest for
> > oil but it was certainly a factor.
> >
> > Do we engage ourselves in Middle East politics because
> > of oil?  Well, it sure as hell isn't about the sand.
> > Did we have any business going into Somolia, Bosnia,
> > and all the other places we went during Clinton's
> > administration?  I have mixed emotions but I think its
> > a bit shallow and partisan to accept one invasion
> > because it was "the right thing to do" and a given
> > President decided to do it and then criticize another
> > President because he "did the right thing" but oil was
> > involved.  If someone wants to deplore or protest war,
> > fine.  Keep party politics out of it and be
> > consistant.  I don't remember the massing in the
> > streets of all the anti-war folks when "their" man was
> > in office.
> >
> > Brad
> > --- Wally Buck <tnrhodey at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > Brad,
> > >
> > > Hitler's run over Europe was not about oil. We
> > > didn't like Japan's advances
> > > into China so we slapped strict trade sanctions. I
> > > think it more about steal
> > > than oil but I could be worng. Japan bombed Pearl
> > > Harbor because we were
> > > hurting them through these embargos. They got
> > > pissed, attacked Pearl Harbor,
> > > we were then in a war. We then kicked ass and it was
> > > the right thing to do.
> > > We probably should have gotten involved even
> > > ealrier. We were to stupid to
> > > realize our National Security was at stake and still
> > > gettin gover WW I. I
> > > have no problem with going to war to defend National
> > > Security.
> > >
> > > Brad you will admit that oil was the primary cause
> > > of these wars. Many will
> > > not and I think they are iin denial. I agree most
> > > wars have been over
> > > economic issues, border disputes and religous
> > > reasons.
> > >
> > > Wally
> > >
> > > >From: brad haslett <flybrad at yahoo.com>
> > > >Reply-To: The Rhodes 22 mail list
> > > <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
> > > >To: The Rhodes 22 mail list
> > > <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
> > > >Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Stan, CAUTION,
> > > politics ahead
> > > >Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 16:54:12 -0700 (PDT)
> > > >
> > > >Wally,
> > > >
> > > >Lets go back a ways in history.  Japan invades
> > > China,
> > > >we do nothing (read "Rape of Nanching", Iris
> > > Chang).
> > > >Japan continues expansion throughout Pacific Rim,
> > > we
> > > >cut off their OIL.   Hitler invades Poland and
> > > France,
> > > >well, France sends him invitations. Japan bombs
> > > Pearl
> > > >Harbor and we go to war. Charles Lindbergh
> > > advocated
> > > >your position as regards going to war in Europe and
> > > >was isolated to the politcal fringes for the rest
> > > of
> > > >his life (read "Autobiography of Values, C.
> > > Lindbergh)
> > > >  I don't think its a stretch to say that
> > > ulitmately
> > > >WW2 was about oil, among other economic issues.
> > > >Throughout all history, when you peel away the
> > > stated
> > > >reasons for fighting, theres always an economic one
> > > >hidden somewhere.  Nothing would make me happier
> > > than
> > > >if we never had to fight another war, BUT, the
> > > world
> > > >operates on the wrong Golden Rule;  "He Who Has The
> > > >Gold Makes The Rules".  I think the US has been
> > > pretty
> > > >judicious with its power since WW2.  Like it or
> > > not,
> > > >we are the only remaining Superpower.  That won't
> > > last
> > > >forever but we can't turn back the clock and
> > > isolate
> > > >ourselves.  Had we listened to Lindy 60+ years ago
> > > >that's what we would have done but I'm not sure
> > > we'd
> > > >still be here as a soveriegn nation.
> > > >
> > > >Brad
> > > >
> > > >--- Wally Buck <tnrhodey at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > I think you are missing the obvious, that is if
> > > > > there was no oil in the
> > > > > region we would never have been there in the
> > > first
> > > > > place. I don't question
> > > > > your points but if there was no oil no Desert
> > > Storm,
> > > > > no fly zones would not
> > > > > exist, oil for food  would not exist, weapn
> > > > > inspections would not exist and
> > > > > so on. If Kuwait did not have oil we would not
> > > have
> > > > > come to the rescue.
> > > > >
> > > > > Don't get me wrong I am glad the guy is no
> > > longer in
> > > > > power I just think it
> > > > > is obvious that the reason we care is because of
> > > the
> > > > > oil.
> > > > >
> > > > > Wally
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >From: "Michael Meltzer"
> > > <mjm at michaelmeltzer.com>
> > > > > >Reply-To: The Rhodes 22 mail list
> > > > > <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
> > > > > >To: "The Rhodes 22 mail list"
> > > > > <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
> > > > > >Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Stan, CAUTION,
> > > > > politics ahead
> > > > > >Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 18:43:58 -0400
> > > > > >
> > > > > >I think you guys are missing the oblivious. It
> > > was
> > > > > exactly what it was.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >1)they simple did not like him, deep hated and
> > > > > mistrust... It really that
> > > > > >simple, they had his history, 2 wars, gas his
> > > own
> > > > > people,
> > > > > >rape/kill for control, starve his people for
> > > PR,
> > > > > etc.. it might not have
> > > > > >been on the US media radar but it was on
> > > leaders
> > > > > radar(and
> > > > > >every worker who job it was to watch the area),
> > > > > trying to kill dad did not
> > > > > >help. deeply felt repulsion at a moral level by
> > > the
> > > > > >leaders/works to him, No one to stand up for
> > > him.
> > > > > Thought in "everything he
> > > > > >says is a lie"
> > > > > >2)He and is sons where considered crazy, as in
> > > > > every report crossing desks
> > > > > >"We have no idea what he will do, but here is
> > > his
> > > > > >history"
> > > > > >3)He like to stick it to the US every chance he
> > > > > got, No Fly zone shootings,
> > > > > >The UN, oil for food, playing with WMD. keep
> > > him
> > > > > self on
> > > > > >the radars(unlike Libya).
> > > > > >4)Remember the people who are doing the
> > > government
> > > > > analyst are human, see
> > > > > >item 1-3, They really thought he would use a
> > > nuke,
> > > > > germs
> > > > > >or any thing else he could get his hands on.
> > > Any
> > > > > worst case idea US
> > > > > >analyst's came up with seemed to be answered
> > > "He
> > > > > could do it and
> > > > > >would do it when he can". You could see it in
> > > > > everyone actions. Most of the
> > > > > >action the leaders took looks like it was "For
> > > the
> > > > > good
> > > > > >of the nation and it is the right thing to do.
> > > > > motive".
> > > > > >5)Their is nothing magical about the
> > > intelligent
> > > > > here, the NY time and a
> > > > > >Tom Clancy will tell you how they are doing it.
> > > The
> > > > > problem
> > > > > >is allot of it like a "ink blot test", they had
> > > > > hard intelligent from
> > > > > >years ago and a lot of softer stuff
> > > now(invoices,
> > > > > wiretaps,
> > > > > >radio, overhead pictures), but those pesky
> > > human's
> > > > > from item 1-4 do color
> > > > > >it.
> > > > > >6)it was for oil but at the same time not, I do
> > > > > believe they ment the oil
> > > > > >for the people.
> > > > > >7)they where/are all kind of side benefits,
> > > Iran,
> > > > > Syria, Big Dog on the
> > > > > >block, The Economy(as in was is good for it).
> > > and
> > > > > Sodom will
> > > > > >kill people in a month then the war.
> > > > > >8)The contracts are a red herring, They by
> > > natural
> > > > > were a DOD contract
> > > > > >spec, saw the posting when it happened, it was
> > > all
> > > > > theory,
> > >
> > === message truncated ===
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
> > http://calendar.yahoo.com
> > __________________________________________________
> > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> >
> >
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> 