Post your thoughts and comments about this blog post.

Post your thoughts and comments about this blog post.

if the surge CONTINUES to be succesful?

Yes. Even if you don't like it, it looks so.

Mr. Hussein may have won the battle but McCain will win the presidency. Liberals aren't numerous enough to carry the day...McCain gets the independent vote, the conservative vote, the moderate vote, and Hillary's minions...bye, bye Hussein.

Yes. Even if you don't like it, it looks so.

But Iraq is the watershed political event of our time; the lack of introspection and “I’m a hawk too!” business that seemed politically imperative in 2002 now simply looks like the strategic misjudgment it was.

if the surge CONTINUES to be succesful?

Mr. Hussein may have won the battle but McCain will win the presidency. Liberals aren't numerous enough to carry the day...McCain gets the independent vote, the conservative vote, the moderate vote, and Hillary's minions...bye, bye Hussein.

If this interpretation is accurate, it is very likely that from now on the vast majority of U.S. Senators and Representatives will vote based not on what they believe is right, but instead they will vote in a way that will make them look the best politically.

So, Obama gets a ride because he wasn't yet elected to the senate, and therefore didn't vote? WTF?!? I don't care what someone says they would have done "had they been there". Had Hillary not run and been elected, what would be the excuse then? Obama won the nomination because more people are prejudiced against women than black folk? Gimme a friggin' break on the I hate Hillary parade. It's over, you won. Let it go.

And even some of us gays are over the whole gay marriage thing ... give that a rest while you are at it :::longing for the days when I enjoyed your columns/blogs:::

Aren't you also ignoring the elephant Gil? If the Surge continues to be successful, then both Hillary and Obama may be irrelevant.

Of course, at this point the war is falling further down the list of what's important to voters. So I believe that it's once again, "The economy, Stupid."

one would think that with the most powerful military in the world, this would have taken about 2 weeks. But no, it's been years....

25 years from now you will understand why we couldn't leave. Until that time you can keep your moaning and groaning and declare how you did not support the war. When the smog clears your head and it all makes sense in the future you can admit how short-sighted you were and be thankful for the true leaders of the time.

And why would that be? Any solid reasons or just platitudes?

Maybe you can enlighten us as to the real reason, since we already burned thru about 20 reasons all which were lies.

And if you are right why weren't we told the real reason instead of being lied to?

Oh maybe you are one of these "the govt knows best " kinda podunks?

Mark my words, there will still be a USA Military base/presence in Iraq 20 years form now.
That is the problem with this country, WE NEVER LEAVE.

Later,
Muto

If you are correct, how do you explain the US forces withdrawal from the Philippines?

After WWII we constructed and occupied numerous bases and posts in that country, including Subic Bay and Clark AFB, both of which were huge multi-billion dollar bases.

But guess what, the Filipinos ask us to leave, and we left.

Only one reason will justify this war in 25 years "OIL"

Or the withdrawal of US forces from Cuba, Germany, Japan, South Korea, ooops sorry we never did withdraw from any of them did we. OOOPS

DING! DING! DING! We have a winner.

Who has the largest military in the world? What do we need for that military to function? Oil.

Live with it and deal with it.

We will leave Iraq after we have alternative energy sources that can fuel our military.

-- DISCLAIMER --

As previously stated I do not agree with our presence in Iraq (but still support the efforts of our troops there since that's where they are and I appreciate their service to our country).

-- END DISCLAIMER --

What do you think the war is? A friggin' video game? It's not Splinter Cell or Quake dude. Reality check. We went into a country believing that we would be seen as liberators, and we have been by many, but then we didn't close down the borders and in flood a bunch of "anti-occupation" forces. The government had the misguided notion that they could just go in, wipe out Saddam, set up a new government and leave with perhaps a token force left behind in a base outside of Baghdad.

Two weeks? are you nuts? Bear in mind too that this is now a different war than what we started out to fight. We started out to take out Saddam. That war is over. We are now in a second war (or sub-war if you will) which focuses on stabilizing the region and setting up the new government. The first war was successful. The second one? Not so much, until we added the necessary troops. We have now begun to see sucess. It's still an uphill climb, but hey, success is success regardless of the magnitude.

Only one reason will justify this war in 25 years "OIL"

If you are correct, how do you explain the US forces withdrawal from the Philippines?

After WWII we constructed and occupied numerous bases and posts in that country, including Subic Bay and Clark AFB, both of which were huge multi-billion dollar bases.

But guess what, the Filipinos ask us to leave, and we left.

Wrong again. Listen, we have enough oil under our land for 100 years, we don't need foreign oil. If we (you) would get off your butt and allow us to drill the first thing that whould happen is the speculators would have a tissy fit and the price at the pump would go down.

Wrong again. Listen, we have enough oil under our land for 100 years, we don't need foreign oil. If we (you) would get off your butt and allow us to drill the first thing that whould happen is the speculators would have a tissy fit and the price at the pump would go down.

wwII is way more than 20 years ago

Wrong again. Listen, we have enough oil under our land for 100 years, we don't need foreign oil. If we (you) would get off your butt and allow us to drill the first thing that whould happen is the speculators would have a tissy fit and the price at the pump would go down.

Gee that true, but we withdrew from the Philippines in 1992, which is only 16 years ago.

yeah, how many years after wwii was that?

yeah, how many years after wwii was that?

in addition. why would the oil companies want to drill for more oil? so they can sell it cheaper and make less money? I'm no wharton school of business grad, but that doesn't sound like something they would be eager to do in my opinion.

If 4000 wells in the GoM generate only 1.6 mbbd, and we imported 12.5 mppd (6 from OPEC), we would need to add 10,000-15,000 wells to be self-sufficient. Not likely to happen anytime soon, regardless of how many acres are available.

2 weeks, yeah. if they really wanted to win the"war" as you call it, they could drop a bomb and end it quick. this is a game. a political game. liberation my !profanity! just like vietnam was huh? you people buy into all the garbage they throw at you. still believe nam was a just cause? you people are nuts. sorry pal, i'm too old to be playing video games so i can't relate to what you mentioned on that topic.

If you are correct, how do you explain the US forces withdrawal from the Philippines?

After WWII we constructed and occupied numerous bases and posts in that country, including Subic Bay and Clark AFB, both of which were huge multi-billion dollar bases.

But guess what, the Filipinos ask us to leave, and we left.

Drop a bomb? You mean a nuke? What? In today's political climate, one shepherd gets offed by a stray bullet and it's all over the news. Can you imagine the reaction to a nuke? Sure, it would certainly do a number on Iraq, but we would quickly become a lot less popular than we already are.



Who said anything about 'nam being justified? I didn't. I wasn't even alive until shortly after U.S involvement in that war ended. And...I thought it was Kennedy (a Democrat) who sent us over there, and Nixon (a Republican), who got us out?



-- Disclaimer --



I'm not a Republican, nor do I have any love for that party, just pointing out the facts.



-- End Disclaimer --



you obviously didn't really read what I wrote. It appears that you just had a knee jerk reaction to the first sentence...after the original disclaimer...did you even read that? Sheesh.

How many years? Less than two years from the time they asked us to leave. Before then they were perfectly happy having us there, and I never heard a peep from anyone about our foreign bases being a problem. Perhaps I am wrong though. We're you protesting our presence in the Philippines in 1990?

Nobody cared. It's only in the context of Iraq that these foreign bases are a problem. Once the fighting dies down, the problem will cease to exist, just like our military presence in Saudia Arabia and Kuwait is not a problem.






For the same reason that all the auto makers started to build mini vans. There's a market.

If I were small domestic oil company, or an investment banker with the ability to cobble together a drilling company, I'd darm sure try to find some oil and get it on the market.

We're not talking about just one oil company, if that were the case then you might have a point.





And that data is based on a $30, $40, $50 barrel of oil? I'd say that at $130 a barrel, things would speed up quite dramatically.

Drop a bomb? You mean a nuke? What? In today's political climate, one shepherd gets offed by a stray bullet and it's all over the news. Can you imagine the reaction to a nuke? Sure, it would certainly do a number on Iraq, but we would quickly become a lot less popular than we already are.



Who said anything about 'nam being justified? I didn't. I wasn't even alive until shortly after U.S involvement in that war ended. And...I thought it was Kennedy (a Democrat) who sent us over there, and Nixon (a Republican), who got us out?



-- Disclaimer --



I'm not a Republican, nor do I have any love for that party, just pointing out the facts.



-- End Disclaimer --



you obviously didn't really read what I wrote. It appears that you just had a knee jerk reaction to the first sentence...after the original disclaimer...did you even read that? Sheesh.

oh yeah, just to inform you. The vietnam war started in 1956 under Ike, not kennedy. And I wouldn't go so far as to give Nixon the credit for getting us out. The country pretty much demanded it, sort of like now.That's almost as bad as giving Reagan credit for tearing down the Berlin wall.

It was factually Kennedy who sent the first combat troops into vietnam. Prior to that our troops only acted in an observational capacity...

yeah, how many years after wwii was that?

in addition. why would the oil companies want to drill for more oil? so they can sell it cheaper and make less money? I'm no wharton school of business grad, but that doesn't sound like something they would be eager to do in my opinion.

Do you know what the profit margin is for BIG OIL on each gallon of gas?
Less than 10 cents per gallon.
They do all the drilling, transportation to the refinery, they refine it, transport it to the station, all that for less than 10 cents per gallon.

The government on the other hand, sits on its butt risking nothing, investing nothing and yet they take on average 57 cents per gallon.

John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, first called for the so-called gas tax holiday, which would lift the 18.4-cent federal tax on each gallon of gas and 24.4-cent levy on each gallon of diesel.

Their highest profit margin is in the production sharing agreements to the country where they're drilling.

I thought it was 18 cents per gallon.

PA taxes are 31.1 and add in fed 18.4. Here's a chart.
http://www.gaspricewatch.com/usgastaxes.asp

PA taxes are 31.1 and add in fed 18.4. Here's a chart.



http://www.gaspricewatch.com/usgastaxes.asp

I see it's the evil socialists in Pa , building roads.

This chart is more current.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/245.html
So who is more evil? Pa building roads or oil companies making gas for you to drive on those roads?

You want to go after an evil group, try jewelry shops and look at their profit margin/mark-up.

Not trying to give "BIG OIL" a pass here, just saying.

Houston-based ExxonMobil (XOM), the No. 1 publicly traded oil company in the world, rode record crude oil prices to $10.9 billion in first-quarter earnings Thursday, despite lower production of oil. ExxonMobil's 17% increase in quarterly earnings from a year ago continues a string of eye-popping earnings announcements from big oil companies in the USA and the United Kingdom this week, including BP (BP), up 60%; Shell (RDSA), 25%; and Conoco (COP), 17%. Chevron (CVX) announces its earnings Friday.

"A rising tide lifted all ships," says Fadel Gheit, an oil industry analyst at Oppenheimer. "The gains from higher oil prices more than offset the lower production volume."

You want to go after an evil group, try jewelry shops and look at their profit margin/mark-up. Or maybe a bar/restaraunt and look at their margin on soda or worse yet a mixed drink.

There is a big difference between mark-up and profit margin.

-- DISCLAIMER --

As previously stated I do not agree with our presence in Iraq (but still support the efforts of our troops there since that's where they are and I appreciate their service to our country).

-- END DISCLAIMER --

What do you think the war is? A friggin' video game? It's not Splinter Cell or Quake dude. Reality check. We went into a country believing that we would be seen as liberators, and we have been by many, but then we didn't close down the borders and in flood a bunch of "anti-occupation" forces. The government had the misguided notion that they could just go in, wipe out Saddam, set up a new government and leave with perhaps a token force left behind in a base outside of Baghdad.



"Hmmm...really? I thought we went in for the so-called "Weapons of Mass Destruction" and Osama Bin Laden...then it changed to Saddam and giving them a government much like ours" Unfortunately, our government, as the rest of the world sees it, is a joke! Cost of living expenses on the rise, wages remaing low, jobless rates climbing and climbing, factories closing down and moving overseas or to Mexico. The economy is in a crisis and all that seems to be going on is the same thing that always goes on..finger pointing! I ask you this, who would want a government like ours?? If you ask me, I think ours is more corrupt then Saddam's."




Two weeks? are you nuts? Bear in mind too that this is now a different war than what we started out to fight. We started out to take out Saddam. That war is over. We are now in a second war (or sub-war if you will) which focuses on stabilizing the region and setting up the new government. The first war was successful. The second one? Not so much, until we added the necessary troops. We have now begun to see sucess. It's still an uphill climb, but hey, success is success regardless of the magnitude.

"Reality check...How successful do you really think were going to be at stabilizing a nation that forever has a history of being a volatile nation that everyday worries about the threat of sucide bombers, insurgents and militias. I find it fascinating that we went in to put an end to a dictatorship only to inject our ideas and forms of government(which clearly is in a sense of dismay) to this region. Hmmm, doesn't that sound to you like a dictatorship of our own???"