Breakfast With The Donald!
Viewing comments for Chapter 7 "Editorial: America's Green Military"Political essays about the 45th President
7 total reviews
Comment from hvysmker
Hmmmm, Brett. You ask: "Is a Green-sustaining military the best one for the United States or should we continue to be dependent on oil-producing countries that keep us over the barrel?" A loaded and biased question if I've ever seen one. Also an over-simplification of a much more complex subject. When it comes to your wording, I agree, disagree, and have no opinion.
We, Russia, and China have a lot of oil in reserve for two reasons. First, in case of war. Secondly, because it's cheaper to buy from other countries like Saudi Arabia than to use our own.
Back in, I think it was 1954, we made a deal with the Saudis to let us buy as much of their oil as we need for our own price. In return, we'd help defend them. That meant they didn't need a large army of their own. We also keep a lid on their human rights violations. We bitch about Iran, for instance, and ignore the same practices in Saudi Arabia. They're one of, if not the most, despotic country on Earth.
Now, that deal is coming back on us in the form of the war in Syria and their dislike for Iran. For myself, I have no bone at all to pick with Iran. As for Syria, the original reason we're there was to overthrow their government because the Saudi family insists.
Now, though, our previous actions are coming back to bite us on the butt. We've interfered too often, making too many enemies of the common people in the Middle East. Our current enemy, we call IS is only a continuation of what we labeled the Arab Spring of commoners fighting back against despotic governments and US an European influences. Freedom fighters, if you will. And, of course, our lookout is oil. For us, everything in that part of the world has to involve oil. To them, oil is only a distraction. They wish to be left alone to determine their own fates.
I totally agree that we should try to relegate oil back to being only a lubricant. There are enough alternates, including nuclear energy, to topple King Oil back to being a mechanic's best friend.
On a broader scale, have you noticed how each administration brings up new threats, somehow letting the old ones fade away? The gas crisis for instance, once a huge issue, is now almost non-existent. Why? Maybe because of that old deal with the Saudis. Could it be, for political reasons, we created it ourselves?
The threat of global cooling has morphed into global warming. Although Communist countries ( A misnomer in itself since the only one really communist was Romania ) still exist, somehow they're no longer a threat.
We, meaning the Military Industrial Complex President Truman warned us about, need an enemy. Russia now turning democratic, so we needed another enemy. Darn it, who could we choose. No good candidates except North Korea and the public wouldn't accept them as a serious enemy. Hey! How about Iran? It annoys us by kicking out OUR pet dictator and thumbs its nose at us. So, now, Iran is our enemy. Even though they've never started a war in maybe 300 years. Their last one was one we helped instigate with Iraq. S'okay. They'd do in a pinch. Actually, to be real about it, if they wanted an atomic bomb or three, all they'd have to do is buy one from a former Russian satellite or North Korea. Dr Khan of Pakistan fame must be sitting around somewhere. He'd know the best sellers or help them himself.
Damn. Here I go rambling again. See ya later.
Charlie
reply by the author on 09-Jul-2017
  |
Hmmmm, Brett. You ask: "Is a Green-sustaining military the best one for the United States or should we continue to be dependent on oil-producing countries that keep us over the barrel?" A loaded and biased question if I've ever seen one. Also an over-simplification of a much more complex subject. When it comes to your wording, I agree, disagree, and have no opinion.
We, Russia, and China have a lot of oil in reserve for two reasons. First, in case of war. Secondly, because it's cheaper to buy from other countries like Saudi Arabia than to use our own.
Back in, I think it was 1954, we made a deal with the Saudis to let us buy as much of their oil as we need for our own price. In return, we'd help defend them. That meant they didn't need a large army of their own. We also keep a lid on their human rights violations. We bitch about Iran, for instance, and ignore the same practices in Saudi Arabia. They're one of, if not the most, despotic country on Earth.
Now, that deal is coming back on us in the form of the war in Syria and their dislike for Iran. For myself, I have no bone at all to pick with Iran. As for Syria, the original reason we're there was to overthrow their government because the Saudi family insists.
Now, though, our previous actions are coming back to bite us on the butt. We've interfered too often, making too many enemies of the common people in the Middle East. Our current enemy, we call IS is only a continuation of what we labeled the Arab Spring of commoners fighting back against despotic governments and US an European influences. Freedom fighters, if you will. And, of course, our lookout is oil. For us, everything in that part of the world has to involve oil. To them, oil is only a distraction. They wish to be left alone to determine their own fates.
I totally agree that we should try to relegate oil back to being only a lubricant. There are enough alternates, including nuclear energy, to topple King Oil back to being a mechanic's best friend.
On a broader scale, have you noticed how each administration brings up new threats, somehow letting the old ones fade away? The gas crisis for instance, once a huge issue, is now almost non-existent. Why? Maybe because of that old deal with the Saudis. Could it be, for political reasons, we created it ourselves?
The threat of global cooling has morphed into global warming. Although Communist countries ( A misnomer in itself since the only one really communist was Romania ) still exist, somehow they're no longer a threat.
We, meaning the Military Industrial Complex President Truman warned us about, need an enemy. Russia now turning democratic, so we needed another enemy. Darn it, who could we choose. No good candidates except North Korea and the public wouldn't accept them as a serious enemy. Hey! How about Iran? It annoys us by kicking out OUR pet dictator and thumbs its nose at us. So, now, Iran is our enemy. Even though they've never started a war in maybe 300 years. Their last one was one we helped instigate with Iraq. S'okay. They'd do in a pinch. Actually, to be real about it, if they wanted an atomic bomb or three, all they'd have to do is buy one from a former Russian satellite or North Korea. Dr Khan of Pakistan fame must be sitting around somewhere. He'd know the best sellers or help them himself.
Damn. Here I go rambling again. See ya later.
Charlie
Comment Written 27-Jun-2017
reply by the author on 09-Jul-2017
-
Thanks.
Comment from Teri7
This is another very interesting read you have written but I still stand with the fact that we as American's need to pray earnestly. No one mentions the return of Christ which is sooner than anyone thinks. We do not know the hour or the day. The angels do not even know. Maybe we all need to get closer to God and then see how things start to work for us. What can anyone lose by trusting God? I mean He is the creator of all! Blessings, Teri
reply by the author on 20-Jan-2017
 |
This is another very interesting read you have written but I still stand with the fact that we as American's need to pray earnestly. No one mentions the return of Christ which is sooner than anyone thinks. We do not know the hour or the day. The angels do not even know. Maybe we all need to get closer to God and then see how things start to work for us. What can anyone lose by trusting God? I mean He is the creator of all! Blessings, Teri
Comment Written 19-Jan-2017
reply by the author on 20-Jan-2017
-
Thanks.
Comment from judiverse
I've heard of several cabinet appointees differing from Trump on some policy matters. I think new energy possibilities should be explored, and implement them if the actually work. In the meantime, I don't think we should discontinue use of fossil fuels. I doubt that Trump himself has any clear convictions regarding Green Energy. On most subjects he'll say something and change his mind later. His cabinet secretaries will have to pay close attention to what he's up to and rein him in if he becomes too preposterous. It will indeed be an interesting four years. Excellent presentation. judi
reply by the author on 02-Feb-2017
|
I've heard of several cabinet appointees differing from Trump on some policy matters. I think new energy possibilities should be explored, and implement them if the actually work. In the meantime, I don't think we should discontinue use of fossil fuels. I doubt that Trump himself has any clear convictions regarding Green Energy. On most subjects he'll say something and change his mind later. His cabinet secretaries will have to pay close attention to what he's up to and rein him in if he becomes too preposterous. It will indeed be an interesting four years. Excellent presentation. judi
Comment Written 19-Jan-2017
reply by the author on 02-Feb-2017
-
Glad you enjoyed this posting.
-
You're very welcome. Happy trails. judi
Comment from Barb Hensongispsaca
Again I look for your pieces of information that I can grab onto and mull over. I have to say, for the past year I have been afraid and now I am even more afraid.
reply by the author on 20-Jan-2017
|
Again I look for your pieces of information that I can grab onto and mull over. I have to say, for the past year I have been afraid and now I am even more afraid.
Comment Written 19-Jan-2017
reply by the author on 20-Jan-2017
-
Glad you enjoyed this Editorial.
Your comments and support appreciated.
Comment from bookishfabler
I'm still here. I'm an advocate for Green living. It is costly right now, but many countries are living it, Amsterdam comes to mind. They even have a building with only bicycle parking. Anyway, it is our future, and we should not have other countries have a hold on us as a nation.
hugs Heidi
reply by the author on 02-Feb-2017
|
I'm still here. I'm an advocate for Green living. It is costly right now, but many countries are living it, Amsterdam comes to mind. They even have a building with only bicycle parking. Anyway, it is our future, and we should not have other countries have a hold on us as a nation.
hugs Heidi
Comment Written 19-Jan-2017
reply by the author on 02-Feb-2017
-
Glad you enjoyed this posting. Your comments and support appreciated.
Comment from barkingdog
We'll have to wait and see how this goes.
Pruitt, attorney general nominee, is opposed to any form of renewal energy and currently has six law suits pending against the EPA.
Perry, energy secretary nominee, prefers oil to biofuel and has formerly had a feud with the EPA.
Perry and Pruitt are both opposed to Green Energy.
:) e
reply by the author on 02-Feb-2017
|
We'll have to wait and see how this goes.
Pruitt, attorney general nominee, is opposed to any form of renewal energy and currently has six law suits pending against the EPA.
Perry, energy secretary nominee, prefers oil to biofuel and has formerly had a feud with the EPA.
Perry and Pruitt are both opposed to Green Energy.
:) e
Comment Written 19-Jan-2017
reply by the author on 02-Feb-2017
-
Glad you enjoyed this posting. Your comments and support appreciated.
Comment from DR DIP
Each post you have done recently on this subject always opens our eyes to new controversy in the presidency. new conflicts. Foreign policy and internal policy that he invokes after tomorrow is either going to frightening to the rest of the world or a boon for America's allies TIME WILL TELL!
Thanks for posting as always
dip
reply by the author on 20-Jan-2017
|
Each post you have done recently on this subject always opens our eyes to new controversy in the presidency. new conflicts. Foreign policy and internal policy that he invokes after tomorrow is either going to frightening to the rest of the world or a boon for America's allies TIME WILL TELL!
Thanks for posting as always
dip
Comment Written 19-Jan-2017
reply by the author on 20-Jan-2017
-
Glad you enjoyed this Editorial.
Your comments and support appreciated.
