Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

How can either candidate advocate energy independence

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Dover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-08 12:54 AM
Original message
How can either candidate advocate energy independence
Edited on Thu Oct-16-08 01:30 AM by Dover
even as we forge ahead with pipeline projects, wheeling and dealing on current and established lines throughout Europe and Eurasia (along the Caspian Sea and even across Afghanistan), apparently following a policy outlined in a bill by Congress in 1999, called The Silk Road Strategy Act (updated in 2006)? We may reduce Middle Eastern supplies (although even that seems doubtful), but seem to only be shifting our foreign dependencies to another region.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=115&topic_id=171417


Mr. BROWNBACK (for himself, Mr. SMITH of Oregon, Mr. BYRD, Mr. HAGEL, Mr. DODD, Mr. LUGAR, Mr. KYL, Mr. HATCH, Mr. GRAMS, Mr. CHAFEE, Mr. HELMS, Mr. THOMAS, and Mr. MCCAIN) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations
http://www.eurasianet.org/resource/regional/silkroad.html


Just try to get the candidates to mention the "p" word...
although... in the first debate McCain did mention those pipelines in Georgia, while Obama talked all around them. Obama seemed to flinch when McCain brought them up.

We also don't hear about this when they talk about building up our efforts again in Afghanistan.

The subject is completely off the table, and yet will make up a huge part of our foreign energy policy for years to come, requiring vast resources of money and military (even if they do build
a military pipeline protection force with members of those countries through which they will pass,
or by those who will profit).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-08 01:34 AM
Response to Original message
1. It's going to continue haunting us. We must stop carbon emissions.
As it stands, we have a very brief ten year period in which to cease what we're doing, or face extreme results. All while China puts ten million cars on the road every year.

Unless something like carbon sequestration can undo the mess we're making, we are in deep trouble.

Pipelines are a thing of the past. Or at least in terms of combustion. Oil is far more important than just for burning.

This issue is more powerful than politics. It's simply going to halt our activities. Or unless people don't give a crap about their children, we can continue melting their future. But I think that flinching we saw may have been the thought that we continue burning fossil fuels, not necessarily guilt.

I just know that Obama swears in, or we are in for dark dark times.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-08 01:54 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Oil is not the only resource from that region. Natural gas is also on tap.
In fact, it sounds like that is even more important than oil at this point.

Didn't Obama mention in tonight's debate that Luger is one of his advisors?
As indicated above Luger, Dodd, AND McCain all were part of the 1999 bill.
So I wonder what real differences Obama and McCain have on this issue?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-08 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #2
8. I don't remember if he said Luger.
We are going to have to take dramatic step very shortly. Gas, natural gas, they're still combustion.

It's going to be comical to watch the people who have their heads in the real world versus those who are spinning the truth. Although things happen slowly, we're already seeing that things are happening twice as fast as we anticipated. The scientific community is going to begin taking on a more and more important role in the demands that are made on people. As things begin melting and heating up, it's going to be scary, but yet funny. Because the republicans won't be able to deny or spin any longer.

I don't know if I've said anyting here. I'm flailing away on a crappy little laptop, and it's time to start this day. But things are getting interesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-08 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #8
14. Just for the record, here's what Obama said last night:
from a transcript of the debate:

Obama: Let me tell you who I associate with. On economic policy, I associate with Warren Buffett and former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker. If I'm interested in figuring out my foreign policy, I associate myself with my running mate, Joe Biden or with Dick Lugar, the Republican ranking member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, or General Jim Jones, the former supreme allied commander of NATO.

http://www.debates.org/pages/trans2008d.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-08 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #14
21. Here is what I think is going on.
Yes, I do remember him saying that. However I admit that I don't know Lugar's stance. And it's not too important, because I believe this problem is going to make itself more than obvious.

First, Obama is reaching out to swing voters. Whatever he says right now I take with a grain of salt. He voted against the Iraq invasiont, and that speaks volumes. And I mean in energy terms.

As an engineer who grew up in an engineering family in an engineering community, I remember seeing my first electric car show in 1964. We were ready for it. We commuted by bike. We drove 40 mpg cars in 1972. And then things just went south. Even today I watch with disgust as the 400 hp cars are being advertised. Where was the leadership. I think they were sandbagged. And perhaps just not willing to fight. Because a fight, it will be. Although the big three, if there even is such a thing any more, knows what's coming. There are two thousand dollar cars being made in India.

We need oil in order to sustain our present existence. Wind, solar, etc. can only provide so much. How do cargo planes work without petroleum? Solar isn't going to work. Not without massive research into battery technology. That's so far down the road, as far as I can tell, it's nonexistent. Obama used the keyword last night- sacrifice. I called my dad last night, and we both said it nearly simultaneously. It's a word we've waited decades to hear a president utter. There is another way to approach the energy problem. Use less. The word sacrifice translates primarily to slower. As long as chips can get to China without being in an overnight hurry, they can go by boat. But overnight is often critical. A part in a factory breaks, and that entire facility is down. The modern society is a nightmare, in energy terms. To make concrete we mine, crush, fire in monster kilns. Things are slowing down. But not in China and India. We might be able to get away with electrically fired cement kilns, but I doubt they can. And concrete, by the way, is one of the primary emitters of carbon.

There is only one way, honestly, to solve our present crisis. And it's called sacrifice. The world population must come down. Energy use must come down. I don't know how we're going to do it. As long as shoes are made by a big factory, we have to ship materials around the world, and ship shoes. But making one's own shoes might be even worse. The problem is, nobody has even begun to address the issues. It has been denial since the 70's. Then was when we should have hit the ground running. I know that the Chinese were already working on the electric car back then. I also know that we have electric cars. I've know people who helped build the prototypes back in the 80's. They are so sexy I don't know why GM didn't even try to bring them to market.

There is huge resistance to change. People like us are ready and yearning for it. But I think there is a hell of a lot of momentum in these businesses. They'll change when it affects their bottom line. Or when we have tough rules that take a bite out of them.

I am hoping that we have big enough majorities to put good laws into effect. I also am hoping we can bump lobbying into another stratosphere. There are so many people who are against any changes, no matter what, that they'd stop at nothing to keep things where they are. Fortunately, Bush screwed things up so much that we are in a position where we're going to have to change.

I don't know. I just see the problem. My sense is Obama has it all together. The best energy advisors. Ready to fund research on battery technology. That's the thing that's holding us back. The electric car has been here for years. It's batteries that we don't have. Solar has a long way to go, but it's fair.

Research, and a decrease in the comfort level of American living. Obama talks about five million new jobs in the energy area. That should tell us a lot. He also talks about it as the new economy. There's your answer. Don't let the term pipeline fool us. He knows. It's hard to believe we are about to have a president who knows, and perhaps the Congress to help him do it.

I'll believe it when I see it. But I feel hopeful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-08 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. A couple of things.
Obama was not in the Senate when the vote was cast for the Iraq war. So while he says he would
not have voted for it were he there, that is not the same as actually casting a vote. And even if
he wasn't for entering Iraq, that doesn't mean he's not FOR oil/gas development in Eurasia or elsewhere. Why is there no talk of bringing our troops home from Afghanistan?

While I appreciate and am empathetic with your sense of urgency and knowledge on the subject of sustainability, you haven't really addressed the ongoing plans for pipeline/oil & gas development in Eurasia as regards our ongoing policy there. And neither has Obama. It's not open to discussion.
I think our renewed interest in Afghanistan is an indication of renewal of interest in these projects
in that region. And the fact that there is little difference between Obama and McCain on the whole
Georgian issue also leads me to feel that they are listening to the same people on foreign energy policy (or very similar).
Lugar AND McCain were part of the original bill on Silk Road Strategy, so I think this goes beyond calculated rhetoric.

Sacrifice might be acceptable IF it is truly shared and isn't just another distorted and meaningless term like "patriotism". And IF those who have abused our system are held accountable and contribute to this country (as our country has, unwittingly, contributed to them). Of course our 'parties' and 'representatives' are all just as opague and interconnected as the complex financial entities we are currently trying to sort out.
How can one condemn the other if they all eat at the same table? Maybe a sacrificial lamb or two, but that's it.

I don't see it happening from the top down, or from inside the beltway. Even those with sincere intentions for REAL change aren't able to work in such a corrupt environment. And that leaves us with cosmetic remedies, propaganda and the masses being thrown a bone or two to keep them subdued. I think Obama will be a vast improvement comparitively speaking and is easier to digest. But I'm not sure that's a very flattering recommendation. For real change, it will be up to the people, if and when their illusions die and reality gets a foothold.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-08 09:21 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. You're making a lot of sense.
I want to thank you for keeping me straight. I knew Obama wasn't in Congress when the war was voted on. That's wrong. He did oppose it. And he did speak out publicly about that. I do wonder how he would have voted. I voted for Kucinich in the primary. That's where I want to go.

You've made some points that are bothering me as well. I don't like how Obama is speaking about military. And I'm probably being naive in thinking he's just talking to swing voters. I think you're right. The president is just one person. And not much more than that. Unless he's like Cheney. But that's a whole different subject.

It is a bottom up solution. But the bottom is waiting for the top to lead. Well, not me. And not people I know. But people like Palin. Complete idiots. They would follow, if someone would lead. Actually I doubt that. But some of the boneheads might listen. Part of the problem we're facing is the out-of-sight-out-of-mind scenario. Global warming. Where? I don't see it. Iraq war. It doesn't affect me. That's what the majority of people think. It takes some imagination. When there is no media, it takes a mind to imagine that a million Iraqi children don't have a hospital to go to. Among many things. Polar caps are melting. Those are just words to many people. It's going to take a very active top down leadership before the bottom even wakes up. And to overcome the comfort level that has lulled us into watching Cops and Fox, is going to be like detox. And the worst part is that by the time we do see life changing symptoms of global warming, it'll be way way way too late to do anything about it. Look at world population. We're in a situation now where no matter what we do with energy independence, we still cannot feed all of the people without artificially creating nitrogen in factories. One percent of the energy we use in America goes to making nitrogen for fertilizer. Many people don't realize that. And many people also don't realize that there is another problem nearing the same scale as global warming just revolving about that fertilizer. It's killing the world's aquatic systems. When it rains in Alaska now, it rains as much fertilizer as the typical wheat farmer's spring crop fertilization. And it is screwing up the ecosystem there.

Yeah, I don't know how we get out of this. I've always said, if we just stopped reproducing, it would all be over in 100 years. But that's not going to happen. And the damage is going to continue. War is just incomprehensible to me. As if we didn't have enough problems in our default existence. I once calculated that we had already used a billion gallons of fuel in the Iraq war, two years ago. Of course, a billion gallons isn't much in the global usage comparison. Geez. Hard to believe.

I'm not optimistic. And you haven't helped. Haha. Which is good. I needed a dose of reality. Obama sure sounds cognizant, and alive. But... Who knows. I never liked his Pakistan, and killing Osama talk. As far as I'm concerned, the first mistake we made after 9/11 was to not introspect and not forgive. But then 9/11 wasn't about what people think it was about. We needed war. We got war. The wealth was redistributed. And here we are.

I don't know. If we could break out of the two party system over night, maybe that would help? All we've got is Obama. We're going to have to find the most important link to break. And break it. Military spending? Lobbying? I happen to have glimpses of optimism where I see the whole system changing just out of economic neccessity. Battery research, education, health care, voting education. I just hope Im' not dreaming too much. I know one thing, Biden said that if Bush decided to bomb Iran, impeachment proceedings would begin immediately. I guess we'll see. What can WE do?

One more thing, I did see some discussion in China recently where they are realizing the seriousness of the situation. They are seeing the 10 million new cars on the roads per year, and it's sending up red flags. Air quality, etc. We're reaching limits. Sacrifice and limits are the two words I want to hear more. Limits is the thing that is going to happen to us in an ugly and painful way if we don't recognize them voluntarily.

Well, I'm blabbing. Not too many specific solutions from me. I see the problems as clear as day. I've been hurting for decades. I've been sacrificing. But one person won't cut it. I'm not sure one nation will cut it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-08 10:22 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. Well the good news is that individuals do make a difference
You are hardly alone in your efforts. Lots of folks BEING the change.

Our values and inner longings are shifting and the rest will follow that, rather than the other way around. A collapsing economy, et al, is, in my opinion, the symptom of that deeper change rather than the cause.
And with that change our illusions will also fall away and we'll see more honestly and recognize the abundance that is all around us in the simplest of things.

That's how I'm proceeding. I'm not waiting for a top-down change. If we have leadership we can
trust then that's icing on the cake. Creativity comes with chaos, and I'm quite certain that for
all the difficulties we will keep that spark alive and active.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-08 02:32 AM
Response to Original message
3. Silk Road to Ruin: Is Central Asia the New Middle East?
Edited on Thu Oct-16-08 02:42 AM by Dover
Just came across this book. I haven't read it yet, but it seems to insert serious, on-the-ground, commentary about this very subject in an otherwise humorous book that reads as a travelogue of sorts. Hmmmm.


Here's one reader's comments:


Silk Road to Ruin: Is Central Asia the New Middle East?
by Ted Rall

This book is a winner for both armchair travelers and those with a serious interest in international geopolitics. Intrepid journalist Ted Rall has become an expert on the obscure lands of Central Asia. This vast but little-covered area covers the five former Soviet republics known collectively as the "Stans," plus parts of Afghanistan and non-Chinese far-western China, all of which are strongly integrated in culture and history. Here Rall reports, with both journalistic insight and a brutally engaging writing style, about his extensive trips through the region. In an often rip-roaring read, we learn about the various horrors of traveling in Central Asia (the corruption and diarrhea there are both among the worst on Earth), while also gaining knowledge on the region's complex politics and infighting. Rall also provides enjoyable coverage of some of the region's offbeat personalities, locations, and culture - such as Turkmenistan's incompetent dictator Turkmenbashi, or a bizarre sport called buzkashi in which many meatheads die painfully for fun and glory.

Central Asia will soon be a world quagmire that will make the Middle East look like a hissy fit. Age-old ethnic tensions, corrupt dictators, irredentist meddling, and the hangover from Russian and Soviet brutalization will all soon combine with the worst of energy politics, as Central Asia's immense fossil fuel resources attract money and influence from power players. Ted Rall usefully clarifies what's really happening in Central Asia from the ground, and points out the geopolitical disaster that will occur if we merely view the region through the lenses of terrorism (i.e. everyone who disagrees with America is in league with Al Qaeda) or petropolitics (i.e. nations are given benefits or sanctions based merely on how much fossil fuel they can offer)....cont'd

http://www.amazon.com/dp/1561634549?tag=commondreams-20/ref=nosim
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-08 03:25 AM
Response to Original message
4. U.S., China vie for oil, allies on new Silk Road (Chicago Tribune)
Edited on Thu Oct-16-08 04:22 AM by Dover
ATASU, Kazakhstan - The wind-raked scrub of this barren plateau reveals little hint of the revolution gurgling 9 feet beneath.

China's first international oil pipeline, buried in the Kazakh steppe, is a milestone for the world's newest empire--one forged not in the name of destiny or God, but in pursuit of the planet's most valuable resources.

From the Himalayas to the Yellow Sea, China's cities are exploding in size. Their factories are filling shelves around the globe. The country's brand-new middle class is buying cars so fast that China is on pace to have more vehicles than America in two decades.

China had enough oil to sustain itself just 15 years ago. Now it is one of the world's thirstiest oil addicts, importing 40 percent of what it needs. Only the U.S. consumes more.

Each new factory churning out goods made in China and each new car on Chinese highways adds to a ravenous appetite for raw materials, not only oil but timber, copper and soybeans. Satisfying that appetite has sent Chinese oil explorers around the world--first into the arms of America's enemies but increasingly to friends as well.

The 19th Century saw the British Empire and czarist Russia jockey for control of Central Asia in a Great Game of global strategy. Today the game is gathering again, this time between China and the U.S. as China makes its biggest push for influence in this oil-soaked region since the days of the Silk Road.

No nation is more in play than Kazakhstan, where China's new oil pipeline snakes for 620 miles and may one day reach the shores of the Caspian Sea....>

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0612190174dec19,0,2353454.story

---------

Today.Az » Politics » President of Azerbaijani-American Council meets senator Sam Brownback

According to Day.Az, the event involved president of the Azerbaijani-American Council Javid Huseynov, representing the Azerbaijani Diaspora, who also held an individual exchange of views with senator Brownback.

It should be reminded that before John McCain's win at presidential primary in spring of this year, Sam Brownback was among the presidential candidates from the Republican Party. In 1999 alongside with John McCain, Sam Brownback was a co-author of the draft law Silk Road Strategy Act, envisioning US support in strengthening the political and economic independence and democratization of the South Caucasus and Middle Asian states.

In his speech at the event senator Brownback especially discussed the situation in Georgia and noted that Russia's actions in this country are inadmissible for the United States and demonstrate Russia's return to hostile anti-western position of the USSR of the cold war times. The senator announced that he had recently had telephone calls regarding the situation in the South Caucasus with presidents of Georgia and Azerbaijan and said the United States will take all steps for restoration of Georgia and the regional security. The senator noted that to protect the region from the further aggressive actions of Russia. the soonest admission of Georgia and Ukraine to NATO became urgent and that the United States work with European partners in this direction...>

http://www.today.az/news/politics/47162.html

---------

Interview with Dem Senator Mike Gravel (excerpt)---


Gravel: ....This is not going to happen where the country is bankrupt. Here is the key to it. They buy into it and this is the tragedy of it and this is why Americans, because our culture has been totally militarized, they buy into this American culture that we are the greatest in the world, we are the most powerful in the world and when he says statements like "we have got to deter Iran…we have got to curb Russian aggression," I mean, these are codeword for whipping up the American people to think that there are problems out there that we have to fear. We have been stealing fear in the American people since the Second World War so that we could have the people accept the fact to spend all this money that we spend not on education, not on health care, not on all these other things that needs be done but on the fact that we spend more money on defense than all the rest of the world put together. The budget of Iran is infinitesimal compared to what we spend on this defense budget.

Press TV: Do you think they do not realize that a president Barak Obama would inherit a 9-trillion-dollar budget deficit?

Gravel: No they do not. They are too busy cheering…not at all…and what they don't realize is that he can make all these statements but he can not change a simple law. He can not vote in the Congress. This is the Congress that does that and the Congress is going to be a Democratic Congress. Even if McCain were to win there is no question, nobody, nobody expects that the Congress would go Republican. So now we are talking about a congress, and so you look at war in Iraq. That was as much a Democratic war as a Republican war. When you look at the threats to Iran that is as much a Democratic threat as a Republican threat. And now look at Lieberman II resolution giving George Bush the authority. I do not know if you are aware of the details of American foreign policy with respect to what we call the SRS, the Silk Road Strategy where the United States of America wants to militarize and control the transportation of gas and oil from China to the European community. This is American imperialism at its worst and, of course, all of the cost that would be involved in that did not this and, of course, the whole nuclear situation. I do not know if you are really aware of the fact that the United Stats trying to organize, under Bush, for the last two years and now that is hopefully falling apart with the Russians by trying to organize the expansion of nuclear energy production. I would hope that Iran will just walk away from this whole idiocy, because fortunately they are too locked into this sort of prestige level but the answer to energy is not oil and gas, in the meantime, Iran has got unbelievable quantities of natural gas it is enough of oil and non-polluting within a space of three or four years.


Press TV: Well, John McCain is now saying tonight Americans witness the misleading speech fundamentally at odds with the meager record of Barak Obama. So, do you think well on personality issues rather than policy McCain would just hit him for the lack of experience.

Gravel: Barak Obama has the same position as McCain on Georgia with respect to Russia and they are both wrong…they are both wrong. What happened was the United States has no business selling arms to Georgia, has no business trying to get Georgia to join NATO. In fact NATO should be dissolved. There is no reason for that in the slightest and so Saakashvili, an elected official, who attacked another country that has an elected president that was guaranteed its autonomy by Russia. This is the sickest situation in the world and the American media and the American government has been complicit in this whole…in misinforming the American people on this and the best way to get information is to go abroad and listen to Al-Jazeera and listen to many your case, your broadcast and a lot more informed about what the America people are getting from the American information system which is so biased in this regard. But the arms race is being initiated by Bush bought into by the Democrats and by the Republicans. And that is the saddest of it all. And what we hear…what we see now is politics as usual in the United States…all the hoopla...and it is very sad because you can get away with this so long. We are raising expectations so high with the hope of change and when change is not realized, and it will not be, it just will not be. Then, of course, comes the alternative which is going to be a very cynical population in this country.

Press TV: Mike Gravel, I suppose we should turn now to who will win the election, do you think George W. Bush's camp have cards under their sleeves, such as Vladimir Putin said, to try and ensure a victory for John McCain?

Gravel: Well you never know. They have got this whole theory of October surprise. And, of course, I think that would copy Saakashvili in his stupidity he was hoping that he could trigger. I have fears that something dumb would happen with respect to trying to incite something with Iran. And that is stupid. You know, the provocations getting out there and, thank God, the leadership of Iran has been more mature. This hardly could be expected during the Cold War. A lot of times, under Richard Nixon and others we had more mature judgment exercised by Soviet leaders than we did by the American presidents and let us hope that we can hang onto that at least until January because I think that Obama will continue American imperialism but I do not think he will be as irresponsible as George Bush has been or, what I feel, that McCain would be. McCain really really would be, in my mind, dangerous as a president and he shoots from the hip.

Press TV: Of course, Obama mentioned the Martin Luther King Junior's speech as was expected. Well, there is another dream. St Paul, the city of F. Scott Fitzgerald. and of the American dream. What should we expect from St Paul. Will we see Dick Cheney? Will we see McCain speak about no timetable about the withdrawal of troops from Iraq for instance?

Gravel: No, I think that he will be little cleverer than that, but you raised something about Martin Luther King which, of course, they have not really focused on what, in my mind, the most important speech about Martin Luther King. Martin Luther King came out against the Vietnam War aggressively. And that is when a lot of backers of the black movements, of the civil rights movements really pulled away from him. They thought that he should not have done that. Well, to me, that was the greatest thing that Martin Luther King was doing. He was really talking about the civil rights. Not only of the black Americans but of the southeastern Asians who were being repressed, murdered and killed by the Vietnam War. But it is interesting that they do not talk about that with Martin Luther King. They only talk about the interests of the civil rights move in this country and not the civil rights move that he thought was important in Southeast Asia. Now, with respect to the Republican convention, I think we are going to see the same old hoopla that we saw in this convention…, you know, "everything they did was right." You are going to see more militarism. They are going to play more the military card…the commander-in-chief. And this plays into the militarized culture that has been placed on the American people. This is a tragedy. Here we have the super power of the world and I do not mean just the military superpower. We are the economic super power.

We are going to be losing that over time. But right now we are the dangerous country in the world. We truly are and I do not know of any way to change that other than to empower the people to be able to become lawmakers. You'll never see the representative government correct itself from the inside. It is going to come from the outside....>

http://www.presstv.ir/Detail.aspx?id=67913§ionid=3510302

Gravel (Wikipedia)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Gravel

-------


Anatomy of a Crisis

http://www.silkroadstudies.org/new/inside/publications/0602Uzbek.pdf

---------


Landrieu is the chair the Silk Road Congressional Caucus

The Silk Road refers to the ancient trade route through Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Armenia, Georgia, and Azerbaijan first explored by Marco Polo. The hope for the Silk Road Caucus is to help connect Central and South Asia and the Caucasus with the US, in an effort to encourage economic, cultural, and political exchange between our countries.

Why should Congress be interested in today's Silk Road?

-- Silk Road countries desire a deeper engagement with the US.

-- China and Russia have recently begun to project influence into the Silk Road region, in some cases at the expense of US interests.

-- Silk Road petroleum reserves have the potential of expanding world supply, resulting in better prices for U.S. consumers.

-- Some Silk Road nations possess weapons of mass destruction, and U.S. involvement is critical to curtailing WMD proliferation.

-- Extremist Islamic fundamentalism is attempting to disrupt and dominate politics in the region.


Countries of the Silk Road are seeking a well-conceived and proactive policy of engagement, which authorizes U.S. assistance to support their economic and political independence. After decades of Communist rule, these countries have faced a tough road toward economic development and prosperity, and the cultivation of a democratic society. It is important for Congress to provide and guide increased aid to support conflict resolution, humanitarian relief, economic and democratic reform, and respect for human rights in the region.

It is clear that the U.S. can no longer abide by its current policy toward the region--one that emphasizes a stand back and watch approach. Economic prosperity, the growth of democracy, and the establishment of the rule of law in the Silk Road states is essential for regional stability and US national security. The US must actively engage this region--both economically and politically.

http://www.ontheissues.org/International/Mary_Landrieu_Foreign_Policy.htm

-----

U.S., China vie for oil, allies on new Silk Road

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0612190174dec19,0,2353454.story





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The2ndWheel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-08 04:21 AM
Response to Original message
5. There is no such thing as energy independence
Which is why, as we improve our ability to extract and harness more and more energy from existence, our consumption never goes down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
taterguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-08 07:03 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Our consumption could go down if we just had the will to change our habits
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The2ndWheel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-08 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. Except that the two dominant institutions of today
corporations and governments, require growth. They need more people, they need more tax money, they need more jobs, they need more products, they need more resources, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
taterguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-08 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. The people don't need to consume as much energy as they do
But that's just my anecdotal opinion since I'm constantly seeing cars used for short trips in good weather.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-08 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #6
13. Jimmy Carter suggested Americans do that. Then Ronald Reagan became president and did the opposite.
The opportunity was there in the late 1970s. I have no doubt that if Carter had won a second term, we would have solar power on at least 25 percent of the homes in America right now. No, it didn't happen that way. The people elected Ronald Reagan instead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
taterguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-08 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. What's stopping the people from changing their habits now?
Is there any really good reason to use something as inefficient as a car if you're only traveling a couple miles?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-08 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. Old habits die hard, I would say. I'm not justifying it, though.
I would guess that is the reason why we haven't changed significantly.

As far as I go, I'm blessed in that there actually is a mass transit bus I could ride. Unfortunately, most municipalities that are large enough that a local mass transit network would be cost effective either can't or won't put up funds for such projects. The federal government would be in an ideal position to help with the costs, but it hasn't, and there hasn't been any real direction from the government in a while. I mean, when was the last time CAFE standards were raised? And if the government itself is unwilling to do anything like raise CAFE standards, what kind of example would that set for people in society as a whole? Not a good one, I'd say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
taterguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-08 04:45 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. I was asking about short trips that could easily be done on foot or bike
That has nothing to do with mass transit

And the federal government is the last place I look for examples about how to live my life.

I've never invaded a sovereign nation that didn't attack me. Ever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-08 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. I walk in trips less than 40 minutes walking distance, but other people drive.
Why do they drive? Old habits?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
taterguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-08 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. Once upon a time a large part of the population habitually smoked
Things can change when there's will to do so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-08 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. I think there's a growing will. The gas prices are forcing some to change habits.
Edited on Thu Oct-16-08 04:52 PM by Selatius
In that respect, it's a silver lining on an otherwise dark cloud. I brought up Jimmy Carter because it was an opportunity to change before gas prices got to the point where the economy started being crippled by it, but it didn't have to be this way. Not like this, not like this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-08 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. I'm not sure what you are trying to say.
Are you suggesting that foreign dependency for resources is inevitable? Or are you saying
sustainable resources are not viable? Is solar or wind energy cannot keep up with demand?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The2ndWheel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-08 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Define foreign in a global economy
We've got a global economy, we've got global corporations, but we still have regional governments. So is foreign dependency for resources inevitable? No, as long as we keep heading in the same direction of a global state, with the history and momentum of thousands of years of consolidation behind us.

"Or are you saying sustainable resources are not viable? Is solar or wind energy cannot keep up with demand?"

I'm saying that we're not independent of the planet, and anything we do that increases our ability to use more energy, whatever it may be, will increase the impact we have on the planet. Instead of mining below ground with coal and oil, we'll mine above ground with wind and solar. Doing that will create different kinds of problems. Can a global civilization with 7, 8, 9 billion people in the future, with most of the 6.7 billions people not even hooked into the global economic system today, be sustainable? Far fewer people hunting with sharp sticks impacted the environment. We can't escape physical reality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-16-08 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. Relative to oil and gas, I'll take the 'problems' presented by solar and wind any day.
What kinds of problems do you foresee relative to sustainable alternatives?
They are relatively passive and/or receptive to nature.

Water does present a different set of problems, however.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 04:49 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC