Hmmm...Will American voters be bought for 40¢ a gallon?

[sjmom2329]

<p>

@logosprincipal

I don’t hear the doomsday scenarios from the soldiers who have actually been there serving their country, but rather from those who seem to wish them to be true.

Well said, and worth repeating.</p>

[Allmusic]

<p>What’s ever curious to me is that <em>I</em> have read umpteen stories of soldiers who have actually been there, serving their countries, and they are the biggest doomsday scenarios of all. I don’t wish the reverse to be true, but I know what I read, and what I see. </p>

<p>Straight from the horse’s mouth, the “I don’t know why we are there”…yup, from our American servicepeople.</p>

[xiggi]

<p>“Here is how it works…”</p>

<p>No, CGM. That is not how it works. Just check the past posts where this issue has been debated. </p>

<p>And, for what it is worth, gasoline is too cheap, way too cheap for our own good. But I am not expecting many hypocritical Gore-adoring liberals to understand that. What matters is how much it costs to drive the SUV to the local Starbucks, pick up a Double Macchiatto, anc chit-chat with other patrons about how survival in our economy has become so expensive and so rough since Slick Willy departed. All the while furiously reloading that wonderful Daily Kos on the new Mac portable. </p>

<p>Yep, that is how it works!</p>

[Allmusic]

<p>Xig, the big honkin’ gas guzzlin’ truck and SUV drivers, those with that pretty yellow decal on the back, also traditionally have sported little “W” stickers too.</p>

[FountainSiren]

<p>

<em>I</em> have read umpteen stories of soldiers who have actually been there, serving their countries, and they are the biggest doomsday scenarios of all.

Says more about your reading habits, than soldier’s stories, IMO. </p>

<p>Of course most major news outlets have opposed the Bush Admin, if not the war. I would think it bizarre if we started seeing stories of patriotic soldiers coming home and outspokenly supporting the war in the major media. These soldiers certainly exist…so, how many stories of them have you read? If little to none: how to account for that? </p>

<p>The most high profile soldiers (Generals and Colonels on the ground) seem to speak of Iraq in different tones and colors, but their voices come through the media more or less unfiltered, if edited, because of their positions.</p>

<p>Honestly, I don’t know how the war is going. The confusion in the press prevents any real view, for me. The dogma colors everything—from the Administration to its critics…but far worse is the selective reporting of the media. It isn’t trustworthy. I think most would agree with this. On the left and the right.</p>

[mini]

<p>I know that the Iraqi government says an average of more than 100 folks are being killed every day (not counting those killed by Iraqi or American forces, or dying in the outlying insurgency.) So figure maybe 200 or so a day. At that rate…well, you can do the numbers.</p>

[kluge]

<p>Logosprincipal (and sjmom1329): I don’t know which soldiers you hear from, but the chief intelligence officer for the Marine Corps - and his commanding officer - are less enthusiastic:

The chief of intelligence for the Marine Corps in Iraq recently filed an unusual secret report concluding that the prospects for securing that country’s western Anbar province are dim and that there is almost nothing the U.S. military can do to improve the political and social situation there, said several military officers and intelligence officials familiar with its contents.</p>

<p>“I have seen that report and I do concur with that [intelligence] assessment,” said Marine Maj. Gen. Richard Zilmer, speaking to reporters Tuesday by telephone from his headquarters near Fallujah, Iraq. He said he found “frank and candid” the analysis by Col. Pete Devlin, the Marine intelligence chief in Iraq, who concluded that prospects for securing al-Anbar province are dim.

I have the good of our country at heart. I have no political ambitions, and the tactic of accusing those who disagree with you of lack of patriotism is cheap and sleazy.</p>

[mini]

<p>“I have the good of our country at heart. I have no political ambitions, and to accuse me to the contrary is cheap and sleazy.”</p>

<p>Well, if you were being “cheap and sleazy”, you’d be in good company. ;)</p>

[logosprincipal]

<p>kluge,
I’m not saying that everything is rosy in Iraq, nor is anyone else that I’m aware of, but I do believe that it is a winnable war if we as a country have the heart to win. And, fyi, the soldiers that I talk to are my friends and neighbors who have served there.</p>

[mini]

<p>Whether it is “winnable” (i.e. “winning hearts and minds”) at this point likely has virtually nothing to do with “us”.</p>

<p>As to whether the U.S. sets up permanent military bases and controls the pipelines for the interests of the cheap and sleazy, that remains to be seen.</p>

[Allmusic]

<p>My “heart to win” went out the window 2600 American lives and $400B ago.</p>

<p>It isn’t a winnable war, no matter how many which ways it is spun…“mission accomplished”, “last throes”, “victory declared”, etc.</p>

<p>We will have those permanent bases though Mini. I wonder if the loss of blood and treasure was worth it.</p>

[barrons]

<p>Most US petro imports DO NOT come from the middle east. Canada, Mexico and our friend Hugo are our top three sources. Next is Saudi Arabia.</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/company_level_imports/current/import.html[/url]”>http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/company_level_imports/current/import.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

[mini]

<p>WHERE most of it comes from is not the issue - all that matters is where the last 1-2% come from. </p>

<p>Meanwhile Mr. Cheap hasn’t gotten so much so that his Secretary of the Army won’t even submit a budget. We’ll just have to see what Mr. Sleazy has to say about THAT. I’m sure we won’t hear any comments from Her Royal Mendaciousness.</p>

[driver]

<p>

Honestly, I don’t know how the war is going. The confusion in the press prevents any real view, for me. The dogma colors everything—from the Administration to its critics…but far worse is the selective reporting of the media. It isn’t trustworthy. I think most would agree with this. On the left and the right.

Following up on what FS said, here’s a tally of the number of reporters currently embedded with troops: 9, and 4 of those are reporters for US armed forces publications.
<a href=“http://pajamasmedia.com/2006/09/how_many_embedded_reporters_co.php[/url]”>http://pajamasmedia.com/2006/09/how_many_embedded_reporters_co.php&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>The soldiers that I know–friends and family–are professional soldiers, and feel that they are making a positive difference. My cousin, home just a week or so ago, will return to Afghanistan early next year for his fourth combat tour since 9/11. We can trade anecdotes until the sun goes down, but I think the fact that reenlistments are steady, and that so many reenlistees are opting to return to the war theater (as Cindy Sheehan’s son did, for example) says it all.</p>

<p>As for the portions of the National Intelligence Estimate selectively leaked by the CIA to the NYT, I can’t believe we’re going through this again. You guys need to learn what the NIE is so you’re not constantly repeating the same mistakes. It is raw intelligence/guesstimates/opinion from over a dozens sources presented to the president on a daily basis. Remember the great April Fool’s Day NIE flap that had you all excited this spring? <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=170623&highlight=nie[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=170623&highlight=nie&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>It’s also worth remembering that it was the October 2002 NIE that told us in no uncertain terms that Iraq had extensive chemical and biological capability, and would have a nuke within a decade. A worthwhile discussion of the latest NIE flap and its antecedents here: <a href=“http://counterterrorismblog.org/2006/09/911_commission_members_should.php[/url]”>http://counterterrorismblog.org/2006/09/911_commission_members_should.php&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

[sjmom2329]

<p>Kluge, this is what logosprincipal said, and with which I agreed,

I don’t hear the doomsday scenarios from the soldiers who have actually been there serving their country, but rather from those who seem to wish them to be true.

This is your response,

…the tactic of accusing those who disagree with you of lack of patriotism is cheap and sleazy.

I don’t see where either of us accused those who disagree of being unpatriotic. It just sounds like you jumped to the Democratic party’s talking points.</p>

<p>Allmusic, we don’t agree on political issues (though we do on others!) but I enjoy hearing from you. My only comment is that if your primary source is the Boston Globe, you’re reading a very slanted point of view.</p>

[mini]

<p>“It’s also worth remembering that it was the October 2002 NIE that told us in no uncertain terms that Iraq had extensive chemical and biological capability, and would have a nuke within a decade.”</p>

<p>Yup. Four years later and Cheap and Sleazy STILL can’t do any better.</p>

[barrons]

<p>That last 1-2% only matters in the very short run. In the long run demand would easily adjust and drop enough to compensate. Look how quickly gas guzzlers started piling up on dealer lots and drove Ford to the brink. Also new supplies would appear. Like that ANWR stuff we are sitting on.</p>

[mini]

<p>Agreed. The price drop is ONLY about that last 1-2%. </p>

<p>(You don’t see anyone capping wells…or buying new SUVs.)</p>

[fundingfather]

<p>

Funny, all the people I know who’ve <em>left</em> the military—my nephew (the orthopedic surgeon who did up to 100 amputations a day during his service in Iraq), the marine private who was a student of mine years ago, a family practice doctor who enlisted to “do his duty” after 9/11, a few others–they’re all voting and donating Democratic now.

</p>

<p>Hmmmm … something doesn’t quite add up:</p>

<p>

All amputation statistics are provided to the CRS by the Department of Defense’s Deployment Health Support Directorate (DHSD). As of March 31, 2005, the DOD reported a total of 428 amputations during OIF.

<a href=“http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RS22126.pdf[/url]”>http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RS22126.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

[Allmusic]

<p>Rumor has it, FF, that the catastrophic injuries (requiring amputations and such) have been grossly underreported. Not to offend FS, but “I have read that” sentiment and statistic in numerous places. I could google for you, since you don’t like my hearsay.</p>

<p>SJ, I <em>do</em> read the Boston Globe, and the NYT, and LAT, the WaPo, every day! (nope, no Washington Times or NY Post or Boston Herald here!) :)</p>