I have a question. If we REALLY gave these countries "back," then why do we still have military bases in most, if not all, of them? From one perspective, yes, we gave them back, but from another, how much do we really continue to control/influence THEIR foreign policy down the road? Something to think about huh? If there were Philipine or British bases scattered all around the United States, some of you guys would be the first to say that we are an "occupied" country. You'd probably start grinding your teeth at the sight of Korean war planes launching daily from some air base 5 miles down the road from your farm, OR to make things more palatable for yourself, you could buy into the necessary propaganda endlessly reminding you how our "friends" are here to ensure the safety of the world?
Now, BamBams, or should I say
Road Warrior 
, do you derive this opinion from the fact that there are American military governors still in place in these countries? There are not.
You must know that we lease these bases from the host countries, and, for the most part, they're glad to have them - and the revenue they generate. They may not love us, but they simply
adore our money.
By the way, if we "control" their policies, how come they are so outspoken against us. We've got bases on German soil, but we sure haven't controlled or influenced that country a heck of a lot. For all the troops and money we have poured into NATO, you'd think we would have gotten more cooperation from two of our so-called "allies" if we had so much influence on their foreign policies. This "influence" sure didn't stop France from selling banned weapons to Saddam, did it?
Now, before you jump all over me, let me state that I DO believe it was a good idea to invade both Afganistan and Iraq. I support Bush 100% in those two wars, but I still believe that oil is a huge factor in this equation. And saying this, doesn't in any way, diminish the huge sacrifices we have made as a country to ensure our freedom, power, and way of life here. If I could have gone to either of these wars, I'd have been one of the first to volunteer, BUT when Iran gets invaded next for having WMD will you then believe me? When Saudi Arabia gets handcuffed by us for harboring terrorists, will you then believe me? When we finally assume total control, behind the scenes of course, of ALL middle east oil will you THEN believe me? I am not yet convinced that we have really given anyone "everything" back.
Really? And where is this huge flow of oil into the US that you allege we fought for? Isn't it interesting that we turned the Kuwaiti oilfields back to the Kuwaitis after the Gulf War. And, we're financing the recovery effort in Iraq without any demands on her oil. I mean, we
do control the entire country. Why is there no call for American oilfield workers to go over there to harvest the spoils of war.
As for warring on other countries that threaten us, your problem with that is?
Had certain recent administrations "taken care of business," we would not find ourselves with our backs against the wall today. Terrorists lost their fear of us because we sent out the message to the world that we were vulnerable. We could have had Osama bin Laden's head on a platter years before he plotted and financed 9/11, but Slick Willie was too busy dipping his wick and trying to cover up his actions to take advantage of the offers made by the Sudanese. Bush Sr. allowed Saddam to stay in power and brag to his people that he had won the Gulf War. We've hamstrung Israel in her efforts to defend herself against her hostile neighbors. They start wars, and, when the Israelis kick butt, we tell them they've got to agree to "cease-fires" instead of allowing them to solve the problems once and for all. And, we have the gall to demand that they return captured territory to their enemies.
Do you think that terrorist leaders are unaware of our softness? Do you think that they had any reason to fear our "big stick" and our willingness to wield it? Of course not. Now we've got to make up for lost time. You know, there was a time when folks were afraid to give this country any grief. To attack us in any way meant repercussions that they didn't want to have to face. Even though we were ostensibly following a hands off policy with regard to the 2nd World War, for example, Yamamoto warned his government that to attack us was akin to waking a sleeping giant. He was right. Now, all to many people, both abroad and at home, want to administer anaesthesia to our national will - to put us back to sleep. But, the alarm clock has gone off, and, thanks to our current leadership, we're wide awake.
The imminent oil shortage is going to totally wreak havoc on this earth, for nearly everything around you is produced or acquired from petroleum....even the computer you are using right now wouldn't be here if it were not for plastics. There is now way that we can switch everything over to other resources BEFORE we run out of oil, so start preparing yourselves and your families now.....this is REAL, and if one wants to be okay 20 years from now, that person should wake up and start thinking of how he is going to survive. When we think about "oil" we instantly think about transportation, but there are gazillions of products and services that are 100% reliant upon petroleum. When a barrel of oil becomes so high priced that you can only fill up your tank once a month - if you're lucky, you will see that cost reflected in EVERYTHING else as well.
As to any oil shortage, I am not convinced that it is as critical as you seem to think. It is the liberals, the same ones who want to destroy our national will and put us back to sleep so that their friends, and our enemies, can walk all over us again, who are doing their best to block our harvesting resources that are under our very feet at ANWR. If we have enemies without, we certainly have enemies within among the "hate America first" crowd and their capitol on the Left Coast. They'd like to keep us dependent on foreign sources, perhaps to bring our economy to a standstill. They are opposed to every plan proposed by the President to provide for our energy needs. Is it any surprise that a work of fiction by that horses patoot, Michael Moore, won an Academy Award as a "documentary?"
I agree that a great deal of our manufactured goods derive from petroleum, and that is why we have to do everything we can to find and exploit new sources of oil as well as discover new ways to generate energy without the use of fossil fuels. And, we have to utilize alternate means of energy production that we already have the technology to make use of, like nuclear power plants. But, even the suggestion of building such plants brings the lefties out of the woodwork like termites. What do you suppose is at the root of California's energy crunch?
Perhaps we ought to start sucking the oil out of the Middle East to pay for our expenses that have resulted from the war that has been forced upon us by the oil rich supporters of world terrorism. Then we can see to it that some of the money made from that oil gets back to the people of those countries. Right now vast oil revenues of these countries goes into providing more and more extravagant lifestyles for leaders who oppress their peoples and poison their minds against us, claiming that it is the "Great Satan" that is responsible for their woes. The hatred on the "Arab Street" for America is based on the Big Lies they are told by their "leaders." These same "leaders" make sure to keep them poor and illiterate to feed their fanatical hatred and deny them the means of finding out the truth.
There's no question in my mind that the peoples of the Middle Eastern Islamic countries would be far better off if we threw out all their current governments and did some "nation building" along the principles that have made this country the greatest and freest in the world. Given a taste of republican government, the people of the region wouldn't ever want to go back to the way things are now.
P.S.
Although we may disagree on some things,
mi amigo, I still think you're a fine fellow - thoughtfully arguing your point without reference to such irrelevancies as implying cocaine use by our President in his youth, an allegation made by his liberal enemies that was never substantiated in any way.
