Can anyone give one good reason why America should be involved in the middle east?

[Actor]

Maybe Tom has an answer. :bang:

[zico20]

We won't need to be once the Democrats pull their heads out of their asses and allow us to become independent of Middle East oil. Til then, oh well.

[FantasticDan]

http://www.respectmyplanet.org/publications/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/2014_crude_reserves.jpg

[MutuelClerk]

Either all in.

Or all out.

Not this middle of the road crap.

[Actor]

So it's all about oil?

[johnhannibalsmith]

...
Not this middle of the road crap.

I got to use the signature quote in the Ron Ellis/Pollos Hermanos thread and it just appeared again in my head when I read this so this time I'll link the YouTube since its good life advice that needs to be viewed now and then anyway.

mXkSCqvL0ko

[Actor]

Either all in.

Or all out.

Not this middle of the road crap.Nuke 'em or f*** 'em?

[HalvOnHorseracing]

We won't need to be once the Democrats pull their heads out of their asses and allow us to become independent of Middle East oil. Til then, oh well.
We have essentially achieved North American oil independence and estimates are by 2020 we will be about 11% from U.S. oil independence. Unless you were sleeping the last eight years, this is down from needing to get 65% of our oil from imports during the Bush administration. Apparently the Democrats pulled their heads out of their asses and if someone didn't notice...well, you figure out where their head was.

You've got to do a google or two before you zip off an off the cuff misstatement about where we are with oil independence.

The other thing you have to consider is that companies aren't drilling in a lot of the areas where they already hold leases because the price of oil is so low. Oil is a world commodity, meaning the source of oil is fungible. That has nothing to do with Democrats or Obama. You don't drill when the cost of bringing the oil up exceeds the world price.

And, believe it or not, we export a few million barrels of oil a day.

[Actor]

And, believe it or not, we export a few million barrels of oil a day.I've heard that Alaskan oil is sold to Asia and the money is used to buy oil from Europe and the middle east. That's supposed to be because its cheaper than shipping oil around the horn to refineries in the U.S. southern states or building new refineries on the west coast.

Correct me if that's wrong.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

I've heard that Alaskan oil is sold to Asia and the money is used to buy oil from Europe and the middle east. That's supposed to be because its cheaper than shipping oil around the horn to refineries in the U.S. southern states or building new refineries on the west coast.

Correct me if that's wrong.
The top five countries to which we export oil, in order

Canada
Mexico
Netherlands
China
Brazil

In some cases (Mexico) we import crude oil, process it at our refineries, and return it to Mexico in the form of gasoline. Mexico does not have excessive refining capacity, and most of it is along the Gulf side. Alaska oil probably goes to China. Like I said, as a world commodity (unlike natural gas) and the source of the oil is irrelevant. A lot of oil moves back and forth across the border from Canada. In fact, most of our oil imports are from Canada, not the middle east.

For exactly the reason you said, Hawaii imports most of its crude oil from Indonesia and the Pacific Rim.

Did that answer your quesition?

[davew]

We have been involved there since the early 50's. The CIA removed a democratically elected prime minister and put back in a Shah, because of nationalization of oil companies assets. The Shah was there until 1979 when overthrown by a revolution. Big war in Iran/Iraq in early 80's cut their output. All of the experts saying only 20 years of oil left in the world ... 3-mile nuclear power scare slows down that energy source.... and we get ...

http://transmissionsmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/sorrynogass.jpg

The USA did/does not like being dependent on another country/region when it involves such a big part of countries well-being (energy is up there with food).


It is true that with current technology, USA could be oil independent and net exporter ... but we got the tree huggers. Didn't want a pipeline in Alaska because it would affect the migration of caribou and other animals no one sees unless they live there. Pipelines are big issue with some. EPA is making refining much more expensive requiring all kinds of extra stuff. Tree huggers don't care if people 'wreck' the world somewhere else, just don't want it in their backyard.

[MutuelClerk]

Nuke 'em or f*** 'em?

I'm not nuking anyone. Seems the phrase " boots on the ground " scares everyone. So we tip toe away from boots on the ground and walk the middle of the road. This hasn't solved much and been very expensive.

[zico20]

We have essentially achieved North American oil independence and estimates are by 2020 we will be about 11% from U.S. oil independence. Unless you were sleeping the last eight years, this is down from needing to get 65% of our oil from imports during the Bush administration. Apparently the Democrats pulled their heads out of their asses and if someone didn't notice...well, you figure out where their head was.

You've got to do a google or two before you zip off an off the cuff misstatement about where we are with oil independence.

The other thing you have to consider is that companies aren't drilling in a lot of the areas where they already hold leases because the price of oil is so low. Oil is a world commodity, meaning the source of oil is fungible. That has nothing to do with Democrats or Obama. You don't drill when the cost of bringing the oil up exceeds the world price.

And, believe it or not, we export a few million barrels of oil a day.

The price of oil will eventually go up where it will be profitable again to drill. When that happens Obama's idiotic decision to restrict drilling in the Arctic and Atlantic Ocean will halt any chance to become totally independent. BTW, it was the democrats, just about all of them who cheered Obama's 1953 Outer Continental Shelf Land Act. This will be difficult to overturn by Trump.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/20/politics/arctic-drilling-ban-obama-trump/

[whisperlunch]

We are in the Middle East to protect Israel. That's why the Arab nations hate us. Oh and to make sure oil is somewhat stable

[Grits]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_production

The top producers. Saudi Arabia and Russia. They're #1 and #2. We're #3.

I'd be surprised if there's only 20 years of oil left worldwide. Not with as much as there is underground in Russia, and the Black Sea. It's virtually endless. Granted ExxonMobil/Tillerson struck this sweet partnership with Russia a few years ago, but as we know, there's sanctions holding it up.

https://www.amazon.com/Private-Empire-ExxonMobil-American-Power/dp/0143123548/ref

Been reading. This starts with the Exxon Valdez disaster and ends with the Deepwater Horizon (BP) blow out in the Gulf. There's a reason Siberia is a good place to drill for oil.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

It is true that with current technology, USA could be oil independent and net exporter ... but we got the tree huggers. Didn't want a pipeline in Alaska because it would affect the migration of caribou and other animals no one sees unless they live there. Pipelines are big issue with some. EPA is making refining much more expensive requiring all kinds of extra stuff. Tree huggers don't care if people 'wreck' the world somewhere else, just don't want it in their backyard.
There are things you can implicate the enviros in, but if you are talking about oil drilling, the current amount of drilling is almost entirely related to the world price of oil. It is simply not economically viable to drill new wells at current prices. If oil goes back over $100 a barrel, then drilling will boom.

Blaming the enviros for opposing the pipeline is like blaming the police for opposing crime. It is their "job" to advocate for the environment, just as it is the job of the oil companies to try to develop their resources. One of the things I find amazing about PA is how much time is spent analyzing things in the past that never happened. The enviros did their job, which was to make sure the pipeline was built with consideration for the delicate environment in the tundra, and the caribou didn't have their migration patterns disrupted, even though nobody sees them (although I have). I spend some time at Prudhoe Bay. Everybody is pretty happy with how it all turned out. I've also spent some time in Point Barrow. They build everything with a space between the ground and the structure because otherwise the permafrost would melt and the building would become unstable. Even in the frozen north oil comes out of the ground at 120 degrees or so. It made total sense to elevate the pipeline for a lot of reasons.

Petty ridiculous to think enviros wouldn't oppose drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and there is nothing wrong with that opposition. In the end, if you wind up with a project, the fact that there are two opposing sides makes it likely the project will be a success like the Alyeska Pipeline.

You can partially blame the enviros for the Keystone XL pipeline, but don't forget Nebraska opposed it as well. That one is probably moot with the Trump administration anyway.

If you knew what could come off a refinery in terms of emissions, you'd be thankful EPA is trying to limit the emissions. If you lived near a poorly controlled refinery, you'd have real health issues you'd have to deal with some day. Gotta say though, $2 a gallon gas sort of makes your argument about expensive gas not so timely. Just how much shit in the air you breathe and the water you drink is ok with you?

[Jess Hawsen Arown]

Reasons? Yes.

Good reasons? No.

[chrisl]

Opium trade. Many countries have been involved with protecting this. Big financial dividends to be made.

[Actor]

We are in the Middle East to protect Israel. That's why the Arab nations hate us. Oh and to make sure oil is somewhat stableWhy protect Israel? How does that benefit us?

[fast4522]

Why protect Israel? How does that benefit us?

By the time that you and I and everyone else on this BBS dies of old age the support for Israel by this country will be the same unwavering, and we will always protect Israel. You view these comments in a distressed way but you are not realistic. Not exactly the thread to comment about Vladimir Putin, and he is everything they say about him. Donald J. Trump wants to be open to deal with him from the Trump form line, if it is possible for a Mig fighter and maybe our F35 to get close enough to see each others face and maybe give each other a thumbs up instead of locking on for launch it might be plausible. Not that it is how it will go, but close calls and stupidity can co out with the Obama administration.

[boxcar]

Maybe Tom has an answer. :bang:

Oil brought the U.S. to the ME and Israel will keep us there. You heard it here first.

[Actor]

So what would happen if the U.S. simply pulled all military forces out of the middle east, let Israel fend for itself and paid whatever price the international market determines for oil?

[fast4522]

So what would happen if the U.S. simply pulled all military forces out of the middle east, let Israel fend for itself and paid whatever price the international market determines for oil?

Have you been smoking crack? Hillary lost big time and is hearing footsteps. Donald J. Trump will be the friend to Israel that it did not have with the last eight years, wake up your going to see a fifteen year rewind.

[Actor]

Have you been smoking crack? Hillary lost big time and is hearing footsteps. Donald J. Trump will be the friend to Israel that it did not have with the last eight years, wake up your going to see a fifteen year rewind.That does not answer the question. And I'm not advocating anything. I'd just like to know what sort of dire consequences would America experience if we pulled out of the middle east?

[HalvOnHorseracing]

That does not answer the question. And I'm not advocating anything. I'd just like to know what sort of dire consequences would America experience if we pulled out of the middle east?
Ah yes. You've experienced over here in far, far right world there are only two answers to all questions. It's Obama's (or Hillary's or both) fault. Trump will fix everything.

You can tell a ideological conservative, but you can't tell them much.

[Actor]

Ah yes. You've experienced over here in far, far right world there are only two answers to all questions. It's Obama's (or Hillary's or both) fault. Trump will fix everything.

You can tell a ideological conservative, but you can't tell them much.That still does not answer the question.

Let me simplify it a bit. Never mind the oil thing, what does America gain by supporting Israel?

[newtothegame]

That does not answer the question. And I'm not advocating anything. I'd just like to know what sort of dire consequences would America experience if we pulled out of the middle east?
Actor, I know we oppose each other from a political standpoint. But, leaving that aside, I think you need to refine your question.
There are those that will answer from a biblical perspective...
Those that answer from an economic perspective.....
Those that answer from a moral perspective.....
Point is, you will get varying answers, of all of which you may not be looking for.
I would suggest that the answer (at least from my perspective), is two fold.
Oil, oil, oil......As our dependence increases or decreases over time, our strategy changes along with it. Depending on our need for oil, the middle east could seriously hurt our economy with its control. Therefore, we are seriously invested in the ability for oil to flow out of that area.
Next, as much as I dislike the idea of being the worlds police, we almost have too in order to keep war from our own doorsteps. We cant just play nice and hope the middle east starts liking us all of a sudden. There is too much history for them to either forget or in some cases forgive. A prime example would be the northern alliance in Iraq. We partnered with them and then turned our backs on them. This allowed Saddam to almost annihilate them after we pulled back. Today, they don't trust us farther then they can watch us. May not be the best of examples but the point here is that most of the middle east doesn't trust us and if given the chance.....well it could be bad for us. Therefor, we almost have to keep a presence there OR, take a hardline stance and say we will bomb the F&^$ out of anyone who attacks us. It cant be a redline like Obama drew in Syria. If we take an isolationist approach and pull out, it has to be with a total understanding of what the repercussions are if they attempt to mess with our national interest.

[Parkview_Pirate]

Oil is a big part. Defense (weapons sales) is a big part. Israel is a smaller, but critical part since they are a friend. Sort of.

The Middle East is most likely to get even more unstable, which has an impact all across the planet, since our civilization is essentially an oil-based economy.

When the Saudi's lose political control, it's going to make for some interesting times, and that does not look to be too far away....

[fast4522]

That does not answer the question. And I'm not advocating anything. I'd just like to know what sort of dire consequences would America experience if we pulled out of the middle east?

As much as I wanted to drill down on this last night, I wanted other than my perspective posted. Newtothegame stepped up and added a view that suggest more complex than what your looking for, today observing MLK perhaps I will save a different perspective that is somewhat mean. But instead say that Israel is more than our friend in the region.

[boxcar]

So what would happen if the U.S. simply pulled all military forces out of the middle east, let Israel fend for itself and paid whatever price the international market determines for oil?

Only the U.S. pulls out its forces? And all the Islamic countries who hate Israel -- they pull out their forces too?

[Tom]

Yup.
Pull them out and put them in Israel.
I thing the muslim nations in the ME have long ago shown their true colors.
There is no reason to trust any of them today.

[boxcar]

France says 'serious consequences' if US embassy moves to Jerusalem

Sometimes blind leftists actually find a kernel of truth.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/france-says-serious-consequences-us-embassy-moves-jerusalem-114924882.html

[PaceAdvantage]

Ah yes. You've experienced over here in far, far right world there are only two answers to all questions. It's Obama's (or Hillary's or both) fault. Trump will fix everything.

You can tell a ideological conservative, but you can't tell them much.And the far, far left world here in off-topic (not as large a population, but just as vocal at times) would blame Bush for everything and tell us how Obama was going to fix everything.

There's no difference to the two sides, yet the left always sees itself as somehow better... :lol:

[HalvOnHorseracing]

And the far, far left world here in off-topic (not as large a population, but just as vocal at times) would blame Bush for everything and tell us how Obama was going to fix everything.

There's no difference to the two sides, yet the left always sees itself as somehow better... :lol:
In the words of Mark Knopfler, Two men say they're Jesus one of them must be wrong.

[PaceAdvantage]

Judging by the election results (local, state and federal) of the past 8 years, I believe the people have answered that question...for the time being.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Judging by the election results (local, state and federal) of the past 8 years, I believe the people have answered that question...for the time being.
I'm reminded of the current run of Geico commercials. A guy is on trial for robbing a safe. They have his fingerprints on the safe, a selfie of him robbing the safe, texts from him saying he just robbed a safe and so on. When the DA asks him what he has to say, he says, 15 minutes could save you 15% or more on car insurance, and the judge says, good point, case dismissed.

If you get my drift!

[PaceAdvantage]

You win, I guess.

[boxcar]

In the words of Mark Knopfler, Two men say they're Jesus one of them must be wrong.

Logically speaking, there's no reason why both can't be wrong. :rolleyes:

[Actor]

Best answer so far.
Actor, I know we oppose each other from a political standpoint. But, leaving that aside, I think you need to refine your question.
There are those that will answer from a biblical perspective...
Those that answer from an economic perspective.....
Those that answer from a moral perspective.....
Point is, you will get varying answers, of all of which you may not be looking for.
I would suggest that the answer (at least from my perspective), is two fold.
Oil, oil, oil......As our dependence increases or decreases over time, our strategy changes along with it. Depending on our need for oil, the middle east could seriously hurt our economy with its control. Therefore, we are seriously invested in the ability for oil to flow out of that area.Is a U.S. military presence there necessary to assure the flow of oil out of the area? Don't they want to sell their oil? Are we afraid that Russia or some other enemy will outbid us on the world market? If we were not there would the market price of oil rise so much that it's cheaper to fund a military presence?
Next, as much as I dislike the idea of being the worlds police, we almost have too in order to keep war from our own doorsteps. We cant just play nice and hope the middle east starts liking us all of a sudden.Is it necessary for them to like us? Does it all boil down to just two scenarios: they either like us or we occupy them?
There is too much history for them to either forget or in some cases forgive. A prime example would be the northern alliance in Iraq. We partnered with them and then turned our backs on them. This allowed Saddam to almost annihilate them after we pulled back. Today, they don't trust us farther then they can watch us. May not be the best of examples but the point here is that most of the middle east doesn't trust us and if given the chance.....well it could be bad for us. Therefor, we almost have to keep a presence there OR, take a hard line stance and say we will bomb the F&^$ out of anyone who attacks us. It cant be a red line like Obama drew in Syria. If we take an isolationist approach and pull out, it has to be with a total understanding of what the repercussions are if they attempt to mess with our national interest.So we screwed up, 175,000 lives have been lost, 7000 of them American lives, over 100,000 civilian lives, and now we have no choice but to continue to screw up? All this so we can pay less than $5/gal for gasoline?

[davew]

We are in the middle east because more than 17 US intelligence think it is a good idea to be there.

[newtothegame]

Best answer so far.
Is a U.S. military presence there necessary to assure the flow of oil out of the area? Don't they want to sell their oil? Are we afraid that Russia or some other enemy will outbid us on the world market? If we were not there would the market price of oil rise so much that it's cheaper to fund a military presence?
Is it necessary for them to like us? Does it all boil down to just two scenarios: they either like us or we occupy them?
So we screwed up, 175,000 lives have been lost, 7000 of them American lives, over 100,000 civilian lives, and now we have no choice but to continue to screw up? All this so we can pay less than $5/gal for gasoline?

We are not the only oil consumers on the planet. With an improper flow of oil, I would imagine (due to supply and demand laws), they could easily control the oil prices and hurt our economy.

No, its not necessary for them to like us. However, they have stated goals of DESTROYING us. This is a little more serious then just not liking us.

I don't like the continuation either. However, is there another alternative? I don't think there is a lets play nice scenario that will work. We either pull all the way out or we continue to have a strong presence.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

[QUOTE=newtothegame]We are not the only oil consumers on the planet. With an improper flow of oil, I would imagine (due to supply and demand laws), they could easily control the oil prices and hurt our economy.
/QUOTE]
OPEC is having a hard time controlling the supply of oil as it is, to a great degree because the extensive social welfare programs like you see in Saudi Arabia require oil around $90 a barrel. in the alternative they need to sell a lot of oil to make up for it. It is also the case that China is now the big consumer of energy and raw materials in the world. Besides, as we've been talking about, we are at North American energy independence, and may have U.S. energy independence by 2020. The smartest thing they can do is keep production high, because as soon as demand drives up prices, all the oil we aren't drilling for now because it is too costly gets put into play. I wouldn't worry so much about the Middle East screwing up

[boxcar]

Something that is being overlooked in this discussion are all the important strategic seawater routes in the Middle East area (Mediterranean, Persian Gulf, etc.). We probably have more of our navy in that area of the world than in any other.

[johnhannibalsmith]

I don't think you can undervalue the desire to be there in the middle of it because as long as we're in the middle of it, we get to at least play a role in how everything gets screwed up. I think a lot of people under the umbrella of defense would argue that it probably will always be a mess and we won't fix it but its going to affect us one way or another and better to not be having to ask around among those that have inserted themselves strategically into the middle of it to figure out which way the stinky wind will blow this decade.