There's also more domestic oil available these days as opposed to in the past.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Wild Hoss View PostCircling back to the ME...how many of us here would be willing to extricate ourselves completely from the region, even if it meant surrendering influence to Russia, Iran or another power?
Yes please! The best gift you could give an enemy is handing them the middle east.
- Top
Comment
-
Originally posted by drok View PostI don't think it's actually explaining anything though. It's highlighting what the question should be...why are woman not entering those college majors? The different "life choices" is a lazy reason and just makes you ask, why are they "making" different life choices.
Men's share of the total pie is, in fact, higher than women's. Some of those reasons are mentioned above. Another factor is professions with an element of danger which pay a premium and are held mostly by men. Tradesmen like electricians and plumbers are almost all men, etc. I don't think there is any damage to society if a women chooses to be a kindergarten teacher instead of an engineer.
- Top
Comment
-
Boy what a disruption that would be to entrenched interests if a full exit was made. Screw defense contractors and the Israel lobby. Screw Sisi and the House of Saud. Buy oil from absolutely no one in the region and you'd have 2m bpd to import from elsewhere -- in this current environment producer countries would be lining up to sell, so pick a few and use that leverage in so many other areas. Done right -- i.e. banning oil imports from countries with human rights abuses -- you could take a serious shot at providing a model for ending the oil curse in such countries.
If you count Af and Pak, and you end all foreign aid to the region, that's $10 billion a year. How impressive it would be to use foreign aid for actual humanitarian/development efforts, like health and education. The headlines that would generate worldwide -- beacon-on-the-hill status reactiviated! Who knows but, given that absence makes the heart grow fonder, it might over time actually increase our influence in the region.
Of course this is all never gonna happen. It would be fun to try, though. Especially before Dick Cheney dies.
- Top
Comment
-
Originally posted by hack View PostBoy what a disruption that would be to entrenched interests if a full exit was made. Screw defense contractors and the Israel lobby. Screw Sisi and the House of Saud. Buy oil from absolutely no one in the region and you'd have 2m bpd to import from elsewhere -- in this current environment producer countries would be lining up to sell, so pick a few and use that leverage in so many other areas. Done right -- i.e. banning oil imports from countries with human rights abuses -- you could take a serious shot at providing a model for ending the oil curse in such countries.
If you count Af and Pak, and you end all foreign aid to the region, that's $10 billion a year. How impressive it would be to use foreign aid for actual humanitarian/development efforts, like health and education. The headlines that would generate worldwide -- beacon-on-the-hill status reactiviated! Who knows but, given that absence makes the heart grow fonder, it might over time actually increase our influence in the region.
Of course this is all never gonna happen. It would be fun to try, though. Especially before Dick Cheney dies.
- Top
Comment
-
Originally posted by hack View Post
If you count Af and Pak, and you end all foreign aid to the region, that's $10 billion a year.
No idea....but if we knew, I suspect we wouldn't pay it.
- Top
Comment
-
The GAO reports that the US military (not counting Iraq and Afg) maintains slightly over 800 military facilities beyond the US borders. You don't think we could project military power with a mere 500? That's where real savings can be reached. But none in the legislature want to be labeled "soft on terrorism" or "anti-military" or "isolationist" by the Dickhead Cheney's of the world. Term limits are sadly unconstitutional on a federal level which promotes the attitude of re-election being the single most important goal of Reps and Sens. In the last 30 years I don't believe I've heard a politician utter the words "In the country's best interest, not mine....".“Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.” - Groucho Marx
- Top
Comment
-
Agree on term limits being a problem. I'd be in favor of congress having 6 or 8 yet election periods but also limiting the number of terms they could serve.
Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkGrammar... The difference between feeling your nuts and feeling you're nuts.
- Top
Comment
Comment