Iran's Bomb
On the subject of Iran getting a nuke, another good question would be: what does this mean for the oil supply? If Iran were able to bully Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and lesser neighboring oil producers, this could have catastrophic consequences for US and Western access to cheap Middle Eastern oil. If the mullahs are as completely politically irrational as this article paints them to be, which I doubt (but only a little), they could hang the threat of nuclear reprisal over all Middle Eastern oil producers and thus unilaterally control the supply of oil reaching overseas destinations. A corrupt regime such as Iran would also be more likely to cut side deals with such historically unprincipled countries as North Korea, Russia, and China, giving them first-in-line access to what oil is produced and delivered. Net result: a weakened US at the consequence of strengthened Russian, North Korean, and Chinese governments and militaries.
Conclusion? It is imperative that we protect our access to cheap Middle Eastern oil. Do you want to maintain your current lifestyle? Well if you answered yes, then it's in the interests of the United States to protect our access to oil supplies. The "No War for Oil" chant is relevant to you if you want to: a) enjoy lowered taxes on key corporate innovators in the area of alternative energy and fuel sources (meaning: tax cuts for the big, bad companies and NOT more socialistic programs), or 2) are Amish or aspire to be. The communist, anarchist, and socialist protesters in New York this week seem to think either we are better off living like Neanderthals or that our current way of life is innate and does not need to be protected militarily. Take a moment and think about how your life would change if oil supplies were cut off or some other country took the primary position in line for available supplies. If the US is unable to protect the current system of economics and trade and another country, such as communist China took the role of global hegemon, would that make your life better or worse? The US military is protecting a way of life as much as it is the individual lives of its citizens. Everyone who complains about the lost liberties they have experienced since 9/11 should consider how annoyed they might be if our global economic system were to fail completely. And that is exactly what the "moonbats" on the streets of New York, in front of IMF, and burning The GAPs every time there is a meeting of economic leaders seem to want.
Finally, ask yourself who these protesters would prefer to sit in a certain oval shaped office at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. in Washington, DC, on January 25, 2005. Cast your vote according to the lifestyle you'd prefer to have.
Conclusion? It is imperative that we protect our access to cheap Middle Eastern oil. Do you want to maintain your current lifestyle? Well if you answered yes, then it's in the interests of the United States to protect our access to oil supplies. The "No War for Oil" chant is relevant to you if you want to: a) enjoy lowered taxes on key corporate innovators in the area of alternative energy and fuel sources (meaning: tax cuts for the big, bad companies and NOT more socialistic programs), or 2) are Amish or aspire to be. The communist, anarchist, and socialist protesters in New York this week seem to think either we are better off living like Neanderthals or that our current way of life is innate and does not need to be protected militarily. Take a moment and think about how your life would change if oil supplies were cut off or some other country took the primary position in line for available supplies. If the US is unable to protect the current system of economics and trade and another country, such as communist China took the role of global hegemon, would that make your life better or worse? The US military is protecting a way of life as much as it is the individual lives of its citizens. Everyone who complains about the lost liberties they have experienced since 9/11 should consider how annoyed they might be if our global economic system were to fail completely. And that is exactly what the "moonbats" on the streets of New York, in front of IMF, and burning The GAPs every time there is a meeting of economic leaders seem to want.
Finally, ask yourself who these protesters would prefer to sit in a certain oval shaped office at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. in Washington, DC, on January 25, 2005. Cast your vote according to the lifestyle you'd prefer to have.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home