[jeffvail]

Adapting the Exploitation Model: Does the US have NO plan, or a NEW plan?
What are the Bush administration’s plans in Iraq? On the surface, everything is going badly. The Jan 30th elections are destined to fail, and there are huge structural obstacles to overcome before Iraq can become a stable, peaceful nation. On top of that, the Iraq situation is so closely intermingled with two neighboring crises, in Iran and Saudi Arabia, that it will be exceptionally more difficult to deal with any single problem in isolation. Does the Bush administration have a plan to deal with this web of problems? Are they just blazing ahead with a plan that they know won’t work for lack of any viable alternatives? Or… are they pioneering an entirely new strategy in international relations: Intentional Instability? In order to answer that, I must first lay a foundation:

The Exploitation Model of colonial control, and the legacy of British cartography: England is a small country, with a relatively small population. They were never able to field the kind of imperial expeditionary forces of other empires. Instead, from the very beginnings in India, they pioneered a new means of controlling colonies: exploit internal divisions. I call this the "Exploitation Model."

[spear]

Yeah bribe them and buy them out into selling out their countries and countymen.In other words they looked for traitors to cooperate with.thats nothing new in the history books .

[frankthetank]

Yup...keep the people occupied while corporations drain your oil, empty your forests, and take your gold...makes perfect sense...its sad, but it looks like its been working pretty good..l

[savethehumans]

I think the "insurgents" who've been blasting the oil pipeline infrastructure might disagree with you, frank!

When do you think the Bushies will figure out that instablity in these places means instablity for THEM, too? Next year? Next decade? Never? Right now, I'm opting for the third choice!

[jeffvail]

I'm not sure that instability in the Middle East means instability for the Bush Admin... Actually, I tend to think the opposite:

Who profits from terrorism and war?
Did world instability help Bush or Kerry in the election (even after you consider how much Bush has mucked up the respons)
Stocks up or down: SAIC, Lockheed, Northrop-Grumman, etc. (who did they contribute more money to?)

And finally, who pockets the terror/instability premium in the price of a barrel of oil? Given that we have fairly inelastic demand, and fairly inelastic supply (at least on the up side), the instability premium goes straight into the pocket of Bush's biggest donors.

Now, I'm not going straight off the deep end with conspiracy theories here -- that is, I'm not suggesting that all of this terror/middle east instability is a result of a conscious plan by the Bush Admin. What I am suggesting is the possibility that they recognize that, for the time being, instability is the lesser of two evils when compared to what stability in the region might bring... namely the rise of Iran as a regional hegemon, the shift from a NYC oil bourse/saudi/petro-dollar nexus to a Iran/other oil bourse/islamist/petro-euro nexus. THAT would be bad for the Bush program.

[jeffvail]

I'm not sure that instability in the Middle East means instability for the Bush Admin... Actually, I tend to think the opposite:

Who profits from terrorism and war?
Did world instability help Bush or Kerry in the election (even after you consider how much Bush has mucked up the respons)
Stocks up or down: SAIC, Lockheed, Northrop-Grumman, etc. (who did they contribute more money to?)

And finally, who pockets the terror/instability premium in the price of a barrel of oil? Given that we have fairly inelastic demand, and fairly inelastic supply (at least on the up side), the instability premium goes straight into the pocket of Bush's biggest donors.

Now, I'm not going straight off the deep end with conspiracy theories here -- that is, I'm not suggesting that all of this terror/middle east instability is a result of a conscious plan by the Bush Admin. What I am suggesting is the possibility that they recognize that, for the time being, instability is the lesser of two evils when compared to what stability in the region might bring... namely the rise of Iran as a regional hegemon, the shift from a NYC oil bourse/saudi/petro-dollar nexus to a Iran/other oil bourse/islamist/petro-euro nexus. THAT would be bad for the Bush program.

[frankthetank]

JEff...i'm not that old, but i've realized one thing so far. It all comes down to the bling bling (MONEY)...All you got to do is follow the trail...

[lutherquick]

Great, what exactly does the US expect democracy to yield all over the world?

This is the problem. Dr Rice thinks by spreading democracy all over the world that energy prices will fall, labor will be cheaper and US prosperity will be greater. The US thinks good will, honey, extra printed US dollars and smiles will impress everyone to love America, lay down Iraqi insurgency arms, Palestinians would vote for an American approved leader, and all will love Bush's god.

Nothing is coordinated in US foreign policy, nothing.
This is why 100% of US foreign policy is a dismal failure.
Not only during Bush's internship but also during most of the Clinton years.

While other nations are busy staying within their own boarders and protecting what's theirs, the US is busy "reaching out", spreading war all over the world using buzz words such as democracy and human rights and market economics.

It just isn't that simple. Even if we Americans did create all this suffering for good intensions, why are we sticking our noses there?

The reason is energy.

And the reason nothing makes any sense when you analyze the language of democracy, reforms, market economics, human rights, is because we Americans are snowing the world with a bunch of BS.

American needs energy, period, and people must die, period. Democracy has nothing to do with it. Bush, Cheney, Rice and Rummy might say words of free election in Palestine, but they are thinking about OIL. They will shake your hand and say how great the progresses is in Iraq, but they are thinking OIL (long term).

US interventionism is failing because there is no methodology, no planning, no structure, no logic, and no justification. By all democratic, humane, justifications, and ethics, those countries that have the least energy and consume the most will go black. Those countries that have the remaining energy and little consumption will maintain a bright future.

The confusion, unpredictability and volatility we see in the world today is Peak Oil going into full throttle while America becomes comfortable on her deathbed and releasing gasps and last breaths.

Shame on America for cloaking her true intensions. We could say America has lost her foundation. But remember, it was we American that were scalping American Indian children for the sake of human rights and democracy. Maybe nothing has changed.

The lack democracy all over the world isn't the problem, infact there is more democracy than America admits. But the true problem is that those democracies aren't buying into the American BS story. Democracy will win, not America. Having Palistinians or Venezuelans vote for a "nut case" (as labled by US "nut cases"), is democracy.

Look out America, the market is stronger than the US, and democracy is stronger than the US. Boy does this screw up Bush's orders whispered in his ear by God.

[backstop]

Lutherquick -

don't be too hard on your country's culture - just like the Jews and many others coming out of Europe after WWII,
the early emigrants to America carried memories of a lot of utterly brutal repression within them.

And as for the "Viking Economics" by which the US conduct is run -
i.e. : "Trade when you must - Pillage when you can - Rape when it's safe to do so -"
well that goes all the way back to the Vikings' control of the N. European slave-trade that they ran from Dublin. Definitely not a US invention.

With regard to present US strategy, while I'd agree it looks like failure all round, that does depend on ones view of the actual goals it seeks.

For example, there have been 5 years of foreign policy decisions which have with steady consistency helped to escalate oil prices -
without a word of apology, or a word of complaint in the media globally,
who seem to swallow the notion that the oil price rises are, consistently, an accidental outcome of trying to lower oil prices.

If, alongside pumping investment into the Chinese economic boom,
those oil prices are now escalated to the point of causing a hard recession inside China,
and, as a consequence the collapse of the last major Communist govt,
then within its terms the strategy would not have been a failure.

Hasn't worked out like that yet mind . . .

regards,

Backstop

[Suheya]

I think that your premises are all correct.
I think your conclusion is not.

The US strategy has been coordinated to ensure access to oil long term when the crunch really hits.

We have a police station in Iraq, a fronteir outpost in Afghanistan, and connection points around the world.

One more 9-11 type event and we'll have a conscripted army as well.

The foreign policy of the US has had the double effect of maintaining dollar hedgemony and our future access to Middle East oil.

[lutherquick]

Dear Suheya,

OK, the reason we did not have anymore 9/11 is because why? Because we now take nursing Iraqi weman as hostages? You know, for democracy.

Honestly, society today in America is like a board meeting at Enron or a CIA get together in the oval office over the WMD evidence.

Talk is cheap.

The results are a joke.

Dear backstop,

So what you are saying is that we want democracy in the world, but not realy. What you are say is that our corruption is good corruption. Looks to me like the Greek, Roman, Nazi, and Soveit empires did the same. And the US ain't special, we will not survive peak oil. No corruption in our America society will make it succeed.

By the way, this theroy I keep seing that high energy is going to kill the cometitors like China? Dream on... The energy producers and the energy consumers who produce goods and services for export (China / India) will work directly, without this dollar hegemaney middle man. Decouple the US dollar from the global economy, and countries tooled to produce will work with countries with energy, that's simple, and there are so many signes pointing to that. Everyone is queitly leaving the dollar.


The oil is "over there", it's not here. Most wars can be won if the fighting is on our home turf, we ain't going to win this one.

I'm hard on America because I believe in the ideals and the words in our printed material (ngo), I believe the brochure (consitution), I do not accept our actions which are not inline with our protocol as defined by what we SAY or write.

Double standards and hypocricy are not noble.

No friggen way we can "take from the world" forever, one day, it's back to work, back to localization, back to consuming what we produce.

How desperate is America when we now take hostage Iraqi nursing woman just because her husband is part of the insurgency? Whether we can judge that or not, it's proving how desperate DC is.

Soon we will behead the insurgency on TV, or scalp thier children, you know, for democracy.

The Palistinians were told to vote for whoever you want, they did, now we are angry? someone please explain...

I think shock and awe has yet to come, and we Americans will be shocked, while those with democracy will be in awe.

I have no hesitation in thinking what the future will be like, but getting there is going to bloody and ugly as America escalates her level of imagination and brutality for the sake of forcing the world to subsidize her.

The party is over for America.

[Suheya]

Lutherquick - apologies - I didn't understand your last post, so I know not how to answer.

The reason we haven't had a major terrorist attack since 9-11? I think it's only because they have not decided to attack us. I don't think it has anything to do with us.

[backstop]

Lutherquick -

I'm sorry my post wasn't clearer -

Far from saying that American corruption is good corruption, let alone a corruption that will bring any lasting or worthwhile or honourable success,
I'm saying that it's just the same old corruption as ever, and not even particularly imaginative.

With regard to oil prices being hiked, I suspect that the Neo-cons are after the communist govt primarily, with the hope of getting a purchasable regime replacing it. As I said, it hasn't worked out like that yet.

Yes the empire is coming down, but I think you're right to honour the aspiration to fair play and liberty - for all that aspiration has been the glue that has kept the American people supporting it for so long.

regards,

Backstop

[lutherquick]

Dear backstop,

Sorry, I'm a little emotional. And I was confused at times as I would salute to whatever the PNAC would say. I believe in the America ideals, and fair and level playing field. It's that I get so burned up when those in DC go to church after they ordered nursing Iraqi mothers to be held hostage to make the insurgency say "uncle". It's why I look at the latest Palistinian elections and only see real democracy, even if it's "dark".

Peak oil is nasty enough. Yet I see a bigger monster, bigger than peak oil as America innovated tales (wmd in Iraq, or Saddam did 9/11) to gain access to energy that belongs to others, when we should be innovating from within.

I wrote that democracy is stronger than America, and that the market is stronger than America. But let me elaberate, I think US foriegn policy is not what Americans would want if they understood the truth. While many Americans had slaves, most did not restist in losing these slaves as laws changed. I think Americans are good, but it's the dip sh!ts on top that are delaying our ability in dealing with PO, it's these DC idiots that talk about human rights while ordering such crazy and secret actions from Iraq, NSA, to Gitmo an other events.

How can Bush go to church, talk about God when he orders Iraqi mothers that are nursing to be held hostage to force some insurgency to buckle?

At this point, it's every man, woman, child and dog for himself. The world is going to be ruled by savages. Now speaking of savages, what don't we know about our government? What ugly, nasty, subhuman, evil, disgraceful, shameful, anti God things has the US government done that will probably be kept topsecret for 50 years, what haven't they told us?

[HonestPessimist]

lutherquick, American foreign policy is driven by the interests of the Council on Foreign Relations, none that has to do with the greater American aspirations and interests for the union and more to do for the whole planet. If you delve deep into the origins and purposes of the Council on Foreign Relations, you would be surprised who made it so to advance powerful interests that have nothing to do with the United States of America.

[lutherquick]

Dear HonestPessimist,

I do understand what "Council on Foreign Relations" is about.

But are we realy in Iraq because of democracy?
Be honest, why are we realy there?

The CFR has a great purpose if democracy is realy what it's pushing. But America selectivly pushes democracy only in countries with or around oil and gas. Why is that? And if after some effort we fail, then we place some dictator pupet. As if a dictator that will exploit is own people is better than a democracy. But the truth is, America doesn't care about democracy or dictators, as long as hegemony works there for us. We Americans need to be subsidized, this is what all us implimentations are about. Be it the State Department, PNAC, or CFR, we will talk about democracy, but then selectivly apply our effort so as to create more AID flowing bach to the US economy.

All these think tanks, NGO's, commities, they are all saying democracy, but thinking about exponential growth for the US economy.

It's realy "nice" how insistutions like CFR print material about democracy. But none of them do democracy. For whatever reason they were founded, over time, everyone one of them morphs into a machine that will agrigate resources for America.

It's all one big BS story to me.

[lutherquick]

I think most people will admit that the methodology of the market to bring the American economy to it's level has been a success. American's consider their economy as the most advanced. Although, most advanced in terms of burning down resources, and most advanced in blowing nearly everything, it's the market that gains credit to this phenomenon.

By letting Darwinism, the random, poke in the dark effort of finding the sweet spot that makes the US economy the most energy consuming, resources consuming economy in the world has been declared a success. Even as we deal with the daunting task of peak oil, it was the market that accidentally found the way to deplete natural resource so fast. Solute to the US market based on dollar hegemony where we measure efficacy by man hours and currencies, not energy, not raw material input.

However, random, poke in the dark methodologies should have been keep within economic spheres, not US foreign policy, and not US security.

The US is now trying to deplete the world's reserve on tolerance, on double standards, on hypocrisy. People in America 100 years ago mostly thought oil would last forever, they were as sure as Bush is today that Saddam did 9/11, wmd are in Iraq, jobs leaving is a good thing, and that selling port security to Muslim is good.

There are similarities to Market economics and Market foreign policy and Market security.
You see, a "market" eludes that nobody is planning, nobody is thinking.
To that end, sure, Bush is applying market mechanisms towards foreign policy and our national security.

There was no planning in Iraq, there is no planning with our energy crises.

It's like tossing darts or like pissing in the bathroom when it's dark, start pissing and then adjust your aim until you hit the bowl.

The market, energy, foreign policy, and our security are all tied together because none are implemented with thinking or brains.
Human existence is hanging on the threads of chance and probability.

Our government leaders pretend to know, while their followers pretend to understand. It's one big lottery.

[Z]

There is no finish line.

Running faster and faster, by optimizing the economy with more and more pro-business policies, only leaves you exhausted at the end.

[linlithgowoil]

i just read your post but have no idea what it is about.

[TommyJefferson]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('lutherquick', 'T')he market, energy, foreign policy, and our security are all tied together because none are implemented with thinking or brains.