Rpg.
I see that the latest “terror scare” the “bombs” for Chicago, originated in Yemen.
Now, do you advocate invading Yemen or bombing Afghanistan twice as hard, because this is the “base” of terrorism?
In answer to your comments about Peak oil being a nonsense , I offer the following:
Surging price of oil forces US military to seek alternative energy sources 28 October 2010
Fiscal reality is dawning as US jets and warships trial alternative fuels in bid to end military’s costly dependence on oil
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/cif-green/2010/oct/28/oil-us-military-biofuels

To show that all is not sweetness and light in the US I also offer the information below:

Why Is Indiana Putting Armed Security Guards Into 36 Unemployment Offices Across The State?
October 29th, 2010
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/why-is-indiana-putting-armed-security-guards-into-36-unemployment-offices-across-the-state

Rpg we cannot overlay ANY "Western Ideals" on these people AT ALL unless they wanted to change anyway- and that WAS the only way to "win" the war.
Sending soldiers indefinitely into an always-hostile region to keep the threat under check in only ONE COUNTRY inside an entire world region where the terrorist's ideology is popular is not worth, "winning" what exactly? Higher opium trade? Jihadi numbers spreading outwards into Pakistan? You do also realize that there are perfectly good terrorist training camps in PAKISTAN, don't you?

We show the terrorists we have better weapons, they change tactics and slip into a more politically sensitive country we cannot touch and try to convert it instead- as they are doing right now.

Also, you do realize that all of these terrorists make it explicitly clear that they target countries with troops in "Muslim Holy lands?", and don't seem to attack or even mention Western countries that do not.
So what exactly are we doing there?

Unless of course you think every terrorist on the world works for Al Queda, and the people they recruit sincerely feel they are happy to die to get some strangers from a far-away land to change their religion (yet strangely people like Hilali aren't even brave enough).

But you tell me, which of the two seem most likely to recruit people, and how this would be affected once foreign presence stops?

davidf tell me where I said I wanted to invade and slaughter the inhabitants? Read your own posts about the Palestinian boys. Stop with the emotive "slaughter" language, you are trying to verbal me with emotive language, again .. I'll not bother with you again.

sarnian, yep, Yeman, Pakistan, anywhere they harbor terrorists should go on the list of places to do extreme damage unless they do something to curb the terrorists activities.

If countries enable and give solace to terrorists to base and train there, to act out random acts of violence, then we should hand out to those countries random acts of retribution. Seriously respond out of all proportion, show them who the hard men are, and they will understand, it's a middle eastern thing.

It certainly worked on Libya didn't it? they got the heck out of the supporting terrorist business.

Peak "mineral" oil is what you're talking about, isn't it - why do you deny the existence of other forms of fuel, grassoline, ethanol from sugar and bamboo .. jeez, what a closed and one track mind, what's up? Disappointed the doomsaying is being negated?

Where did I say the US people were nice?

you guys love to verball don't you?

kh all your rants assume one day we have to leave off all this aggression responding to terrorists, as President Bush said, this is not going to end, this is the state of the world now. Eventually we'll wear the terrorists down, if we don't, they will kill us - it's simple.

They are NOT going to let us live in peace, this is what they do, this is their occupation and their goal is an Islamic state worldwide, even the Indon Bashir repeats this.

Remember 9/11? That how this invasion started. Your rants are all over the shop and completely incoherent, don't bother me anymore.

Folks, we either roll up the drawbridge and go for the insulated solitary look, or if we're going to be out int he world, we have to join in the protection of it.

Rpg.
*Peak "mineral" oil is what you're talking about, isn't it - why do you deny the existence of other forms of fuel, grassoline, ethanol from sugar and bamboo . Disappointed the doomsaying is being negated?*

Unfortunately you are now into the “ They will find an answer” stage of your denial.
No I do not deny the existence of other forms of fuel but the trap is that it is not a feasible possibility.
Reason? Well if or should I say when Mineral oil gets too expensive to recover it will not be available to provide:
The diesel to operate farm machinery needed to farm the crop to make the ethanol.
The fertilizer (made from oil & gas) needed to farm the crop to make the ethanol.
The diesel to cart the crop to a manufacturer.
The diesel to cart to fuel to wherever it is going to be used.
But you are going to say, we will use the ethanol to do all this.
Here a little thing called “Energy returned on energy invested” (EROEI) comes into play. Google it.
This means that you would not have enough to run a war or even a civilian country dependent on this alone as below:

Petroleum's EROEI = 10 means that for each ten energy-units
of oil-derived fuels you produce you get to keep 9 energy
units for uses other than fuel production, since you have to
put aside 1 energy-unit to produce the next ten units.

Ethanol's EROEI = 2 means that for every 2 energy units of
ethanol you produce, you get to keep only 1 energy-unit for
uses other than fuel production since you have to put 1
energy-unit aside to produce the next 2 energy-units.

The other problem of course is that to produce a worthwhile amount of fuel, you would have to use so much arable land that you tend to starve as you are doing it. Can’t have food and fuel.

sarnian you're clearly in denial about other forms of fuel .. during WWII there were fuel shortages and people miraculously found ways around it with various forms of home made fuel. Have some faith in all the various substances available to us, if we run short of land for energy crops, we can always go indoors, or up in layers, and after all there is abundant room in Australia for all manner of crops that do not have to be overly water hungry. If they are, we plant them where there is water, the northwest ..

I'm sure you'll have a hysteric exaggerated "DOOM!" laden answer for everything and why I am wrong about it all, but I'll bet we survive.

You measure what we can do in the future by what we have now with no real driver. When "peak Oil" happens as you wish it to, we'll move on, we'll have a driver .. we will adapt, like we will adapt to a warmer earth. have some faith in the resilience of the planet and mankind .. stop panicking, it's untidy. (petrol today is only $1.40 ish a litre .. what's your problem?)

"Unfortunately you are now into the “ They will find an answer” stage of your denial."

I could say the same for you with AGW .. couldn't I?

If you feel that peak oil is inevitable and there's nothing we can do .. what do you think is going to happen, that we all just curl up and die? Of course not, even if there is some relative hardship, life will go on.

What do you think is going to happen if the earth warms, even 5 degrees on average? It won't happen overnight, and we'll adapt, we have no choice.

Cheer up, it could be worse, we could be hit by an asteroid .. or even be ruled by the Green party (now that, would be miserable!).

rpg, My reference to the lessons of history was not to any specific engagement at any time, but to the general impression one is left with about wars from the pages of history - that they are immoral and many - civilians and fighters die for little result.

I undestand the point you make about no end - that is what worries me. You write '..it is an asymmetric force against guerillas ... we cannot afford to lose this one."

Any idea of an attack on Pakistan worries me too, they have nuclear weapons and I would think, not be to restrained in their use - particularly if India joined the fray. There is much hatred between those two countries.

If, as many say, Afghanistan is part of a war against the west, its thinking, religion and so on, where the devil is this to end?

Also, I must say that david f was not advocating tolerance of terrorism. He was making the legitimate point that the freedoms of the west are very attractive to ordinary non-western people who, it is fair to say, would not want to give them up to fight for an ideology of hatred. In that regard they are little different to us.