Lighteningspeed

If that's what he attempted to do just to appease those Europeans, shame on him. Especially in view of the fact that he was a draft evader, going to England. Commander in Chief should not be someone who has never served in the military. One who has served in the military and have seen actions are less likely to commit troops for pure political reasons.

I've read that Europeans wanted us to be involved in Kosovo and take the brunt of the action because we have the so called "experience." The fact is Europeans thinks we, as people are expendable and they do not want to spill their precious European blood in Kosovo even though it was a purely European problem.

Zapata

Dubya "served" and he committed troops to Iraq for purely political reasons..........and, at a deployment level that surpasses all deployments under Clinton, combined.

aerospacepilot

After reading this thread, does anyone see why we should be moving away from oil as our primary source of energy??

Everyday, the US consumes over 20 million barrels of oil. With only 5 million barrels produced domestically, 15 million barrels of oil comes from foreign countries. 15 million barrels a day * $133.3/barrel (make the math easy) adds up to 2 Billion US dollars that we send overseas EVERYDAY. Every single day. 365 days a year. Do that for years and years, and I think you begin to see the magnitude of this crisis. And people wonder why the value of our dollar is getting lower and lower. Furthermore, if you take a look at the countries with the top 10 oil reserves in the world, you will find just about every nation that we hate.

Saudi Arabia
Canada
Iran
Iraq
Kuwait
United Arab Emirates
Venezuela
Russia
Libya
Nigeria

Iran, Iraq, Venezuela, Libya, Nigeria. We HATE these countries. So why are we sending them billions of dollars everyday. It is downright insane. We are funding both sides of the war on terrorism. Forgetting the massive economic and environment benefits of switching from oil, there is still a compelling national defense reason why we need to stop using oil.

I believe that both presidential candidates are serious about reducing our dependence on oil. That is good. What happens in the next few years is really going to determine whether we are able to ride out this recession and start on the path of economic prosperity, or whether we will go into a depression (as severe as anything since WW2, as predicted by Alan Greenspan). We need a 10 year Apollo like effort. Reduce government subsidies to oil companies, and increase government subsidies to alternative energy (NOT ETHANOL!). Make it economically favorable for everyone to own a hybrid/plug in hybrid/all electric car. Over 11 million barrels of oil per day goes to power cars, and yet we have reasonably priced technology to power cars using NO OIL! The technology is out there today to become completely independent of foreign oil, TODAY!

We need to do something about our use of oil, or we are going to have to accept the fact that soon we may no longer be the richest and most powerful nation in the country. And we are going to have to accept the fact that our economy may fall into a depression. The price of oil is only going to go up and up and up. Lets use the technology that has made our nation great for the past 100+ years and do something about oil. Lets cut our usage significantly so we can be completely independent of foreign oil.

Lighteningspeed

I do not consider current President as "served" when he has spent time with the other millionaire boys in the air national guard squadron and even at that dropped out of flying. Your point is exactly my point. Dick Chenney has never served in the military. Rumsfeld served but as a junior officer and has not seen "action." Former Deputy Defense Secretary has not "served' either and yet these guys were more than willing to send us to die for political and corporate greed. Former Deputy Defense Secretary after he got out was awarded with a top job at the World Bank.

When Rumsfeld was asked point blank by a Marine Gunnery Sargeant why the Marines are not getting the armor plating for their vehicles, his cold and short reply was "you go to war with what you've got," I along with other veterans wanted to send him to the front line on a combat patrol with the clothes he's got on, since Rumsfeld insists we go to war with what we've got.

CE750

scientists and futurists have been begging us to for decades! We're can't rely on oil to power everything anymore? Jets, are one thing, but cars, electric power, rail, and other things CAN and should run on alternative fuels.. derived from renewable sources. We know it, the world knows it, but the POWERS that be, in Oil, Government entrenched politicians taking money from big business lobbies, and other players (read the puppeteers) will not change it as it benefits them not to.

FDXer

This aviation forum is not the place to discuss politics. Everyone has an opinion and it's best to voice those in person and not on an anonymous public forum. Here's a review of the forum rules that everyone agreed to when they signed up...

"Topics Not for Discussion

There are currently NO forums that provide a venue for discussing politics or religion. While DreamLaunch Media Ltd. and Airline Pilot Central embrace the diversity the world has to offer, these subjects often are very emotional and there are many different views. In our experience the wide range of views and emotions rarely contribute to a harmonious online community or beneficial contributions to the piloting profession."

Spaceman Spliff

What you call the high "deployment level" occurred because Clinton drew down the military far beyond even your active imagination, and the full effects of that decision were not felt until W took office.

After Clinton farted around around and let Osama slip away, at least someone in the Oval Office has the stones to do something to keep us safe. I don't think Clinton's exploits with a fat intern and a cigar did much for us...do you?

Not political. Just factual.

CE750

FDXer, I agree... I hate brainless "republican vs democrat" debates that have no end, and discussions of social issues that have little or no bearing on our profession, but my view (which matters 0 as I'm neither the owner or moderator here) is that this subject is CENTRAL to our profession, our future and our need to be educated on it is critical.

In the end, for me at least, they're all "Republicrats".. Rats.. being the operative term!

I'll say no more on it. Sorry for my divergence.

The Duke

The current war in Iraq is a resource war. At this point, you'd have to be mentally defective in some way to think that WMD was the reason for our invasion. WMD seemed to provide the most easily jusifiable excuse, particularly when it came time to justify our case to the UN, for going to war. The whole, "well, our intelligence just wasn't good" excuse is probably the laimest excuse I've ever heard.

I haven't seen the movie, but I have studied the resource war perspective on the current war, it seems to make sense to me. Heck, the first Gulf War was a resource war, Iraq took over an oil field called Kuwait. I figure most people felt there was a remote chance that Saddam would once again strike out at an oil-rich country other than his own and would cause a major disturbance in the region, which would cause oil prices to rise based on fears that the disturbance would interupt supply. The attack on Iraq was basically a pre-emptive attack to prevent this. No WMD were ever found and shortly after the war began our commander-in-chief declared victory on the deck of an aircraft carrier. We're still fighting today. Why? We're stuck. If we withdraw from Iraq, it's likely a regime far worse than Saddam will come to power and further destabilize the region. If you think $140/bbl of oil sucks, wait 'til this happens! So, as strange as it may seem, we are essentially a stabilizing force in Iraq right now, this keeps oil prices in check. It also provides a buffer separating the Shia muslims in the east from the Sunni Muslims of the west (think Saudia Arabia, lots of oil!) The fact of the matter is a lot of Muslims hate each other, we don't need Iran and Saudia Arabia sharing a border, especially right now w/ oil prices where they're at.

Many other nations have developed weapons of mass destruction over the last 7 years and they have not been subject to pre-emptive attacks by either us or the "coalition of the willing". This is the writing on the wall that the current war in Iraq did not center around WMD; rather, its primary focus is the resource that keeps us going: OIL.

Rightseat Ballast

If the money this nation has spent on the Iraq war was instead spent on bringing alternative energies to the marketplace, and subsidizing the American people's shift to new vehicles, we would be in a much better place right now. However, no one in the current regime...i mean administration... wanted to convey to the people or our elected representatives the true cost of the war to come. Such things were known ahead of time, and with a little honesty I think the majority of our nation would have supported staying out of war, and switching energy sources. Heck, we could have even paid the oil companies tens of billions of dollars to keep them happy and still run up a smaller tab.

Beyond the financial implications of the Iraq war, we have also commited ourselves to an energy resource war. And much like the cold war, the energy war will continue for decades and end only when one nation is left NOT bankrupt and depressed. We are already way behind the financial power curve to engage in this war, and we just may end up with an economy like democratic Russia.