are Americans funding terrorists?

**Last Roman** · February 07, 2006, 11:00 PM

I was watching the Colbert Report and the director of the CIA under Clinton believes that by buying oil from the Middle East, some of that money ends in the hands of anti-western groups. So what can we do to prevent this? We can use alternatives such as ethanol or start using our own oil reserves, such as in Alaska. Either way, we need to end our dependency on ME oil. What way do you think we should do this?

Personally I believe we should use alternatives. It ends dependency, helps the economy and is better for the environment. Seems like a win-win situation to me.

Also do you believe that American money is ending up in the hands of anti-American groups?

**danzig** · February 07, 2006, 11:08 PM

Originally Posted by Last Roman

I was watching the Colbert Report and the director of the CIA under Clinton believes that by buying oil from the Middle East, some of that money ends in the hands of anti-western groups. So what can we do to prevent this? We can use alternatives such as ethanol or start using our own oil reserves, such as in Alaska. Either way, we need to end our dependency on ME oil. What way do you think we should do this?

Of course alot of that money goes to the Saudis and in turn goes to terrorist so yeah I believe it since Saudi goverment is a corrupt, morally bankrupt one that we unfortunately support because we want their oil. Alaska wont solve the problem, ethanol, oil shale probably all figure into a possible solution. The problem is we need to get serious about it and invest in it like it was the space program in the 60s.

**Hub'ite** · February 07, 2006, 11:09 PM

Originally Posted by danzig

Of course alot of that money goes to the Saudis and in turn goes to terrorist so yeah I believe it since Saudi goverment is a corrupt, morally bankrupt one that we unfortunately support because we want their oil. Alaska wont solve the problem, ethanol, oil shale probably all figure into a possible solution. The problem is we need to get serious about it and invest in it like it was the space program in the 60s.

I completely agree. We need to end our dependency on ME oil.

**danzig** · February 07, 2006, 11:13 PM

The problem however is this:
"Americans depend upon imports to fill the gap," McGill said. "No combination of conservation measures, alternative energy sources and technological advances could realistically and economically provide a way to completely replace those imports in the short or medium term."

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsAr...archived=False

Exxon Exec's comment today, these guys need to be 'convinced' that there is profit in other areas regardless of what replaces oil (eventually something *has to*) someone has to supply it and our 'big' oil companies need to realize they need to be on the cutting edge of that for their own sake and surival instead of trying to fight it. The big three US auto makers are learning the lessons and for the better, yeah they are late to pick up and its been a hard one but not too late and long term its for the better for them and for the US, oil companies need to follow suit.

**Guderian** · February 07, 2006, 11:22 PM

I read in Time magazine that Ford is going to be focusing on "green" (gas-electric hybrids)cars, but that article was practically an advertistment for the Ford co, so I don't know how reliable that info is.

**danzig** · February 07, 2006, 11:27 PM

Originally Posted by Guderian

I read in Time magazine that Ford is going to be focusing on "green" (gas-electric hybrids)cars, but that article was practically an advertistment for the Ford co, so I don't know how reliable that info is.

Yeah read same article and few others, seems Bill Ford is betting the future of the company on it. The Time article definately made him out to be a Steve Jobs type figure, ie a visionary guess it remains to be seen but some of new Ford cars look pretty damn appealing.

**Da Skinna** · February 07, 2006, 11:29 PM

It is true, they are coming with a line of hybrid cars. As are a lot of American car companies.

It's too bad that the oil companies don't realize or care ('cuz they do know) that alternatives will make them last longer, eventually, and it's already started, oil will be very hard to find, and eventually become largely inaccessible. If they were to find an alternative, then they can make a lot of money WHILE doing a good thing. But they won't because money is money is money and they want it now.

As for the Saudi Arabian government, or even the country itself. It's a pretty pro-Islam place, I mean, that's all they're taught there, the 95% of Saudi's that aren't millionaire princes. They're taught the Quran, so it's easy for them to be duped into hating America by the fanaticals. If we wanted to curb terrorism, we should've attacked Saudi Arabia, take their oil, kill their princes, and put Starbucks and Pat Robertson Drive-Thru's on every corner. That'll do it.

**Dirty Harry** · February 08, 2006, 10:06 AM

ME oil isnt as strong as it used to be relative to world demand. In the 1970s when OPEC could shut off the valves and cripple the world it was at its peak. Now Canada and Russia will be dominating as the ME supplies dwindle so at least thats a positive. There's really no easy solution to the fact that buying oil from Saudi Arabia and Iran will help fund terrorism since their oil is high quality and easy to extract, so the market will always have a demand for it while they have supply. The best answer is to get better at fighting terrorism so we can kill all those sons of :wub: before they can do any damage (kind of like how Israel beat the second intifada, they just got really good at fighting them and kicked their asses).

**Lord Kal** · February 08, 2006, 10:47 AM

BUsh's state of th eunion referred to America ending oil addiction, but it also said they needed to support the healthcare system more a few days before they dropped :wub:s of funding for it to pay for fighter planes to bomb poor people. So it's probably your typical load of rubbish.

Americans won't give up their massive cars. It's as simple as that. They won't change from petrol until the last drop has been squeezed from the ground.

Also, America has always funded terrorism so I don't think they're going to care about that.

**minimann** · February 08, 2006, 10:59 AM

all countries are funding terrorim in a way government grants and benefits leaking into the wrong hands get spent on materials and training for such persons.

**danzig** · February 08, 2006, 11:08 AM

Originally Posted by Lord Kal

Americans won't give up their massive cars. It's as simple as that. They won't change from petrol until the last drop has been squeezed from the ground.

Yeah thats why the big three US automakers are bleeding money right now and adapting to providing smaller, more energy efficent cars while Japanese automakers who have focusing on it alot longer are putting up record profits. So no sorry its not 'that simple' as higher energy prices have forced Americans to rethink 'massive cars'.

Also, America has always funded terrorism so I don't think they're going to care about that.

As pointed out everyone does in someway and most of the time indirectly and not even realizing it.

**Dirty Harry** · February 08, 2006, 11:05 AM

I like big cars. Sure beat the crappy little mopeds europeans all drive.

**Farnan** · February 08, 2006, 05:09 PM

Also, the "massive cars" are sometimes neccessary, especially in the rural mountainous regions of the US. I have no idea why someone living in a city would want one though...

**QuackyNC** · February 08, 2006, 06:47 PM

I dont know if they all go to terroists or not, but the five members of the UN security council are also the top five suppliers of weapons in the world. Pretty ironic isnt it.

"Dont kill people with those weapons we sold you."

**stop-3** · February 08, 2006, 09:45 PM

What is terrorism? Sure, killing non-combatants deliberately is terrorism, whether it is one or three thousand. What about when you know that you will kill women and children when trying to kill one of the dreaded terrorists? What about the tens of thousands of innocents killed by the US in recent years? I think this is terrorism on a mass scale, especially when I believe that that behaving in this fashion actually breeds more of the dreaded terrorists.
I am not a muslim(being a devout athiest) or a lefty or a pacifist, yet I am forced to the conclusion that the US is by far the greatest terrorist force of recent years.

Hmm....come to think of it, did not aid (in many forms) pour over the Atlantic to the the glorious freedom-fighters of the Irish National Socialists for many years?

**the_mango55** · February 08, 2006, 09:54 PM

Originally Posted by stop-3

What is terrorism? Sure, killing non-combatants deliberately is terrorism, whether it is one or three thousand. What about when you know that you will kill women and children when trying to kill one of the dreaded terrorists? What about the tens of thousands of innocents killed by the US in recent years? I think this is terrorism on a mass scale, especially when I believe that that behaving in this fashion actually breeds more of the dreaded terrorists.
I am not a muslim(being a devout athiest) or a lefty or a pacifist, yet I am forced to the conclusion that the US is by far the greatest terrorist force of recent years.

Originally Posted by dictionary.com

ter·ror·ism
noun.

The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

When militaries kill civilians in actions designed to target military or terrorist forces, it is certainly bad. However it is not "terrorism" because it was not directed towards civilians, and it is not done with the intention of coercing public policy of a nation.

Also, only about 20-30% of US oil comes from the Middle East. Most comes from South America or from within our own borders, usually Texas or Alaska.

**QuackyNC** · February 08, 2006, 09:48 PM

I agree completely, but labeling someone a terroists is a matter of point of view and opinion. There is a thread about that though, you can discuss it there if you wish.