[kevincarter]

One of the best ways to make people face the fact that we all depend and love an oil based society is to argue about war in Iraq.

Almost everybody is against that war. But ask them to choose: Invading some far Arab country or giving up your heating system this winter? Or paying ten times more for gas, food and goods… It’s easy to make the link “no gas = high prices”.

That choosing makes people realize how selfish we all are, some people even answered me that they would rather give up their heating system this winter. OK. What about next winter? And the other?

[VinceG]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kevincarter', 'I')nvading some far Arab country or giving up your heating system this winter?

[kevincarter]

Ok, maybe I should have said "give up your car". The thing is, if the war is not for oil then what is it for? To free the Iraqis? Yes, this year cars would be runing even if there was no war on Iraq, but for how long? Is there really no link between one thing and the other? Then why would they go there?

[JohnDenver]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kevincarter', 'O')k, maybe I should have said "give up your car".

[kevincarter]

Yeah but who gets the money from those 600.000 bpd? The US!!! That's the difference, before the war that money went to Saddam's (if you want to belive he did the oil for food program then it's ok) and after the war that money goes... where does it goes? I guess after they moved the troops halfway arround the world they won't let Iraq keep that cash. Invasion means I take all that you have and then I pay myself 600.000 bpd woth of oil. Money runs in a circle, otherways they would be stupid, and I think they are not.

[JohnDenver]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kevincarter', 'Y')eah but who gets the money from those 600.000 bpd? The US!!!

[gnm]

I think we can all agree that Iraq is centrally located in a region swimming in oil, and would therefore offer strategic advantage to whoever occupies it and maintains bases there yes?

-G

[kevincarter]

Yep, logic. Would you pay for something you can get for free? Logic counts, not just documents.

But the question is not that, the question is to choose between:

a) maintaining the current lifestyle
b) Invading someone else

If not now at some point in the future.

[gnm]

Well thats easy, lets use logic again...

1. We invade and occupy other coutries to take/purchase thier oil and all we do is push out the date when we will no longer be able to maintain the oil addicted lifestyle since it _will_ run out there too. And in the meantime we throw away countless lives and hundreds of billions of dollars, not too mention piss off huge numbers of people. And in the end the result is the same. We still can't sustain the lifestyle. And since we didn't invest all that time and effort in alternatives to the current paradigm the crash is that much worse.

2. We chose to change our lifestyle and follow a sustainable path, which results in a lot of discomfort and difficulty... for a time... and in the end are able to reach a level of equilibrium with our environment and are able to continue that path indefinitely.

hmmm, I choose - 2...

now who was that silly boy who said the american way of life is not negotiable? Well Ma Nature says "hey buddy you better start negotiating 'cause you're about to get a spanking"

-G

[RockHind]

Some see it as a choice between your car or war in Iraq,
Others have to make the choice of your car or your son.

[gnm]

too true Rockhind, too true....

Of course if we don't look to a fix for the future as well, then it will be all our sons and daughters who have to deal with the fallout...

-G

[kevincarter]

The thing is that society as a whole won't be able to switch. Once the choosing will be presented I'm afraid a majority would preffer to continue with their lifestyles no matter what, specially the Power Elite, people are not open to big changes. In any case there is no time for anything else than making a good plan for you and those arround and enjoying life NOW.