If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CBS Los Angeles 2)   If Baghdad falls, today's gas prices will "look like a bargain in a couple weeks". Happy vacation season, everyone   (losangeles.cbslocal.com) divider line 261
    More: Scary, Baghdad, head of government, KNX  
•       •       •

8657 clicks; posted to Main » on 14 Jun 2014 at 5:01 PM (18 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



261 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-06-14 07:53:07 PM  
I suppose it's a good thing we have hybrids and EV's then. fark Iraq, let it burn.
 
2014-06-14 07:55:53 PM  
If you add the cost of our recent wars-for-oil to the cost of gas, we've been paying $10 per gallon for the last decade anyways.
 
2014-06-14 07:57:53 PM  

Bob Dolemite: Nemosomen: "Discounts?" Are you referring to discounts like those that Russia used to give Ukraine? Futures buyers do not have access to those "discounts," which are really just disguised foreign aid. Any other "discount" between two private entities would just be equivalent to a future that was traded off-exchange.

Please correct me if I'm misinterpreting what you mean by discount, as I legitimately would like to know.

I sell you something for $5 that I think is actually going to come in at $4.  turns out, it only actually cost me $3.  I'm not giving you that $1 back.  i say fark you, i got $2 off you.

no one is ever going to short it.  i will sandbag so i make sure i get mine, and anything extra is gravy.


Wait... what?  That sounds like a supplier agreeing to sell something for $5 in the future, when they think that it will be worth $4 at that time.  It turns out that it was only worth $3 (A massive price swing), and they refuse to give back that profit that they never said they would to begin with?  That's just an off-exchange future.  A more realistic scenario would be that the seller sells at whatever it's worth now, for delivery in one month, then buys a future at that price, then he can profit from the price change in the interim.

All of that is price into futures, in fact, that is exactly how futures work.
 
2014-06-14 08:00:06 PM  

Cyclometh: zerkalo: And another civil war begins. It's gonna be armagheddon, millions slaughtered

Don't know about millions- maybe over the entire timeframe. But it was obvious what was going to happen at the outset.

The US keeps thinking they can do this thing where they go in with the military, kick some ass for a while, spend a bunch of money and then put in whatever government they want.

It simply doesn't work. Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan... the last time we managed to actually install a new government in a defeated enemy nation was pretty much Japan.

And nobody's willing to consider the price required to do it again. I've said it before and I'll stand by it- unless you're willing to see at least 15% of an entire generation dead, you're not going to win. If you want to completely destroy a government and replace it, you have to be willing to destroy their society and that means killing a lot of people. Whether it's bullets, bombs or nukes, you have to be willing to murder entire cities, not just individuals or small areas.

Until we remember that to defeat an enemy means to kill enough of them that the entire culture is broken, we'll keep coming back here. You can't engage in nation-building unless you're willing to engage in nation-destroying.

The reason we're so bad at it is that we can't stomach the cost unless it's imposed on us, as it was in World War II. When it's our own choice, we're not willing to do what's necessary to actually accomplish the goal. And that's why it's always been a bad idea, and will continue to be one because we spend blood and treasure for nothing.


Well said.
 
2014-06-14 08:05:51 PM  

DrPainMD: If you add the cost of our recent wars-for-oil to the cost of gas, we've been paying $10 per gallon for the last decade anyways.


Sorta.
We may not pay it at the pump (due to low gas tax), but that cost IS there. Our military (both from excursions and general security) is a large part of the reason why oil is traded in USD.
 
2014-06-14 08:17:32 PM  

Nemosomen: All of that is price into futures, in fact, that is exactly how futures work.


right, which is a horrible way to do business.  it clearly doesn't solve issues with volatility, as any time some fear mongering OPEC notice or whatever farks with the price of the futures... IMMEDIATELY.  In fact, main street sees the increase immediately in the form of $0.30/gallon.  this is clearly not what the price actually is for the gas that is in the pumps.  it's simply scandalous.

since this happens so frequently, it's really absurd to suggest that they price that risk into the futures cost especially considering how minute the swings are.  5% swing on the price of crude shouldn't equate to a 10+% swing on the street... same day.  half the time the price spikes for a few days then goes down causing little to no effect.  especially if you spread that increase over your net 30 example.  it's a racket.
 
2014-06-14 08:21:46 PM  

brantgoose: On the plus side, the USA, Canada, the UK, and Mexico can ease any drops in Saudi production. OPEC  is weaker than it used to be for this reason. Iran might be willing to produce and export more, possibly Venezuela and Nigeria might cheat a bit, Russia will do as it pleases for fun and profit.

Not shown: China. It can run its production on coal and increasingly solar, wind, gas, and nuclear power so it can throw in its massive weight to prevent its best customers from slipping into recession at tremendous risk and cost to itself. Chin is expected to become the largest global economy in the world this year or next at the latest.

Don't panic. Keep calm and look into alternative transportation.


http://knoema.com/nwnfkne/world-gdp-ranking-2014-data-and-charts

Would you prefer the World Bank numbers, which are from 2012:

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD?order=wbapi_data_ va lue_2012+wbapi_data_value+wbapi_data_value-last&sort=desc

Which is more likely, China's Economy growing 75% in the next year or you being amazingly uninformed?  At China's peak growth rate, they're 20 years from being close to the US economically.

\Seriously, you're an idiot.
 
2014-06-14 08:24:54 PM  

Cyclometh: gnosis301: Cyclometh: Japan's kind of a special case because nukes changed the game; look what happened to Japanese culture in the wake of those.

Go on.

To be fair, I'm oversimplifying things- this is Fark, after all. But it's quite clear that Japanese culture changed radically after its defeat and the occupation. There are arguments to be made that pre-war Japan wasn't all that different from post-war in many ways, and that the militaristic expansion and conquest phase it entered into that culminated in WWII was historically, maybe not an aberration, but not exactly typical.

But it's pretty clear that Japan's defeat required something pretty devastating, and that has had effects on its culture ever since.

Unless we're willing to conquer and occupy- and that means a lot of death or as someone else pointed out several generations of occupation (and probably more violence to suppress insurgency), none of which the US seems willing to do of late, believing (wrongly) that we can get to these places of changing a society without paying such a toll.


The one point I will raise to your otherwise excellent argument is that Japan was relatively isolated - China and Korea weren't allies. Germany had it's own issues, and was a totally separate culture (yes, I am not mentioning Italy). Here, despite the factions,(see below for further discussion), of Sunni, Shia and Kurd, they are above all Muslim - and that would mean, if the country of Iran were nuked, ever Muslim would be outraged - from Iraq to Saudi Arabia. Well, at leastpublicly, to appease their populace.

The Iranian issue post Saddam Hussein is more akin to the landscape post Tito/Yugoslavia. A factional, religious nightmare held together by iron gripped dictatorship. Remove that, and it explodes back into factional discord, each of which will fight for control. The US and allies (sadly, Australia was one) stepped into that quagmire, then into a worse one with tribal factions in Afghanistan.

/ one should not fight a land war in Central Asia
// or choose the wine glass with Ipocane
 
2014-06-14 08:28:46 PM  

zerkalo: Isis already holds Tikrit. Whether or not they can keep it is up in the air. Gas be going up either way




Tikrit is where Donald Rumsfeld said Saddam kept his WMDs.

If ISIS finds them, the stuff might really hit the fan.
 
2014-06-14 08:31:45 PM  

jaytkay: Cyclometh: the stated goal was to do so. The stated goal was liberating the Iraqis from dictatorship.


The states goal was destroying Saddam's WMD. His chemical and biological weapons that he could attack the US with in only 30 mins.
 
2014-06-14 08:39:02 PM  

caeroe: I'm late to the party but anyway...

Saddam should have been left in power. Ever heard of the expression "the devil you know"? At least with him we knew he could control the religious whackjobs.
It's a shame we can't sit back and let the two muslim factions kill each other, because of farking oil prices.


Then why aren't we supporting Assad?
 
2014-06-14 08:39:36 PM  
Screw it. Leave these idiots to their own devises. Best-case? Iran gets involved in a civil war and learns the costs of intervention. Maybe it'll destabilize the Ayatollahs' hold on power.
 
2014-06-14 08:43:28 PM  
I'm not sure how I'll restrain my rage if Obama involves us in Iraq again.
 
2014-06-14 08:47:14 PM  
I better start practicing my "Nelson Muntz Laugh" for when the Metro Bus I'm riding on passes by those gas stations filled with scowling soccer Moms filling up their H2s.
 
2014-06-14 08:51:47 PM  

Nemosomen: "If Baghdad falls" is a mighty big "if."  ISIS holds Tikrit?  Does that city support the current regime, or were they more supportive of Saddam Hussein al Tikriti's regime?


Bingo.

Sunny cities fell easily to ISIS.

shiate cities aren't gonna capitulate so easily.
 
2014-06-14 08:52:23 PM  
Sunni dang nabbit.
 
2014-06-14 08:54:39 PM  
Auto correct whips me again!

Shiate = shiate
 
2014-06-14 08:55:15 PM  
I give up.

LOL
 
2014-06-14 08:57:54 PM  
On one of the financial shows today it was stated that the Saudis could increase production by not too much and it would completely cover any Iraq oil not making it on to the market.
 
2014-06-14 08:59:33 PM  

Bob Dolemite: Nemosomen: All of that is price into futures, in fact, that is exactly how futures work.

right, which is a horrible way to do business.  it clearly doesn't solve issues with volatility, as any time some fear mongering OPEC notice or whatever farks with the price of the futures... IMMEDIATELY.  In fact, main street sees the increase immediately in the form of $0.30/gallon.  this is clearly not what the price actually is for the gas that is in the pumps.  it's simply scandalous.

since this happens so frequently, it's really absurd to suggest that they price that risk into the futures cost especially considering how minute the swings are.  5% swing on the price of crude shouldn't equate to a 10+% swing on the street... same day.  half the time the price spikes for a few days then goes down causing little to no effect.  especially if you spread that increase over your net 30 example.  it's a racket.


You're just making up numbers.  And if that's a horrible way to do business, why isn't everyone losing money?
 
2014-06-14 09:01:27 PM  

destrip: Iraq was under the power of a greedy dictator for years, gas prices were cheap and stable ($1.29-1.39 from the 80s - early 2000s)
We took over Iraq, gas prices went up to unprecedented highs (remember, most gas pumps were, by design, incapable of registering more than $1.99 a gallon?)
Iraq achieved "independence," gas prices stayed up.
Iraq has issues again, gas prices go up.
Something doesn't quite add up here.

As far as the yahoos taking over cities there, there are relatively few roads between cities. As the "militants" are a bunch of towelheads riding around in Toyota pickups, why can't we, or the Iraqi army for that matter, just bomb or blockade the main highways leading into Baghdad? If the militants can't get there they can't take anything over. Blast 'em into the stone age like we did to Saddam's army when they were fleeing Kuwait during Desert Storm.

Better yet, go high tech and use an EMP weapon to disable the pickups!


I don't think gas prices really skyrocketed until Katrina.
 
2014-06-14 09:03:04 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2014-06-14 09:06:50 PM  

timelady: Cyclometh: gnosis301: Cyclometh: Japan's kind of a special case because nukes changed the game; look what happened to Japanese culture in the wake of those.

Go on.

To be fair, I'm oversimplifying things- this is Fark, after all. But it's quite clear that Japanese culture changed radically after its defeat and the occupation. There are arguments to be made that pre-war Japan wasn't all that different from post-war in many ways, and that the militaristic expansion and conquest phase it entered into that culminated in WWII was historically, maybe not an aberration, but not exactly typical.

But it's pretty clear that Japan's defeat required something pretty devastating, and that has had effects on its culture ever since.

Unless we're willing to conquer and occupy- and that means a lot of death or as someone else pointed out several generations of occupation (and probably more violence to suppress insurgency), none of which the US seems willing to do of late, believing (wrongly) that we can get to these places of changing a society without paying such a toll.

The one point I will raise to your otherwise excellent argument is that Japan was relatively isolated - China and Korea weren't allies. Germany had it's own issues, and was a totally separate culture (yes, I am not mentioning Italy). Here, despite the factions,(see below for further discussion), of Sunni, Shia and Kurd, they are above all Muslim - and that would mean, if the country of Iran were nuked, ever Muslim would be outraged - from Iraq to Saudi Arabia. Well, at leastpublicly, to appease their populace.

The Iranian issue post Saddam Hussein is more akin to the landscape post Tito/Yugoslavia. A factional, religious nightmare held together by iron gripped dictatorship. Remove that, and it explodes back into factional discord, each of which will fight for control. The US and allies (sadly, Australia was one) stepped into that quagmire, then into a worse one with tribal factions in Afghanistan.

/ one shoul ...


I assume you meant Iraq, not Iran. Anyway, there was this concept invented by Claude Levi-Strauss called structural-functionalism. It's essentially that you don't find people engaging in many cultural practices that don't mostly work for most of them most of the time. So when you see a fairly persistent totalitarian regime, you might consider that maybe it's that way because the other options are worse, and take a bit of care when acting to topple it. Of course, the opportunistic politicians, media hacks, and various flavors of ideologues and demagogues beating the drums for wars are either unaware of the structural-functionalist perspective, or choose to ignore it.
 
2014-06-14 09:08:04 PM  
Some day you farking people will stop falling for the scare tactics of the hedge fund investors. You'll either do that, or you'll just watch the economic system collapse like the goat sacrificing Romans who didn't see the germanic tribes coming.
 
2014-06-14 09:08:43 PM  
I am convinced ISIS is being funded by Radio Shack.  Now stick with me here.... During the Super Bowl RS was airing those ads trying to see Radio Shack differently from the RS of the 80's and that didn't work... So what if Radio Shack is planning on going back to its 80's business model and instead of offering parts to build computers, it offered electric vehicle starter kits, starting at $109.99 and then you could add options as you saw fit.. they could change their name to Tesla Shack and watch the $$$ just come rolling in...  It's pure genius I tell you
 
2014-06-14 09:08:48 PM  

Prophet of Loss: The US is a net exporter of oil.


Why the fark is gas so expensive?
 
2014-06-14 09:12:59 PM  
Those people are seriously retarded and I don't mean disabled, they are farking jelly bean retarded and Sadaam was the same but he was the meanest retard. They absolutely deserved him and we farked up not knowing that.
 
2014-06-14 09:15:15 PM  
Gas prices work as follows:

People have gas to sell. They want to make as much money as possible. They will use world events as a reason to raise prices, but never to lower them. They don't care what you think.
 
2014-06-14 09:16:25 PM  

Cyclometh: zerkalo: And another civil war begins. It's gonna be armagheddon, millions slaughtered

Don't know about millions- maybe over the entire timeframe. But it was obvious what was going to happen at the outset.

The US keeps thinking they can do this thing where they go in with the military, kick some ass for a while, spend a bunch of money and then put in whatever government they want.

It simply doesn't work. Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan... the last time we managed to actually install a new government in a defeated enemy nation was pretty much Japan.

And nobody's willing to consider the price required to do it again. I've said it before and I'll stand by it- unless you're willing to see at least 15% of an entire generation dead, you're not going to win. If you want to completely destroy a government and replace it, you have to be willing to destroy their society and that means killing a lot of people. Whether it's bullets, bombs or nukes, you have to be willing to murder entire cities, not just individuals or small areas.

Until we remember that to defeat an enemy means to kill enough of them that the entire culture is broken, we'll keep coming back here. You can't engage in nation-building unless you're willing to engage in nation-destroying.

The reason we're so bad at it is that we can't stomach the cost unless it's imposed on us, as it was in World War II. When it's our own choice, we're not willing to do what's necessary to actually accomplish the goal. And that's why it's always been a bad idea, and will continue to be one because we spend blood and treasure for nothing.


A very rational and sane description of why every war we've  gotten into since 2 has been a debacle. Killing people to stop those people from killing people doesn't work if you are not one of those peoples.
 
2014-06-14 09:16:29 PM  
You shiatheads know that when they name something in public it's to get you scared of it, right? ISIS is a name, you should be afraid, you should pay attention to the viet cong, I mean ISIS.
 
2014-06-14 09:16:35 PM  

danno_to_infinity: Laobaojun: Which is absolute profiteering bull crap, as only 3% of US oil is imported from Iraq.
Farking treasonous, self-serving actions by the US oil industry.

are we co-authoring a newsletter?

/great mind yadda yadda or it is fools seldom differ?

some well owner was trying to tell me today that the days of cheap gas are over forever.  Hell, I'm not looking for 29 cents a gallon, if they can't make a profit at 2 dollars a gallon, then fark them.  pump price is triple what it was in '92 (1.25), even with inflation, it shouldn't be more than 2.11 today.


Not to call you out but can you explain why? I took econ and I'm trying to figure out how this statement
is true.
 
2014-06-14 09:19:28 PM  

alice_600: Not to call you out but can you explain why? I took econ and I'm trying to figure out how this statement
is true.


Global fungible markets aren't clear to these people.
 
2014-06-14 09:22:12 PM  

forgotmydamnusername: timelady: Cyclometh: gnosis301: Cyclometh: Japan's kind of a special case because nukes changed the game; look what happened to Japanese culture in the wake of those.

Go on.

To be fair, I'm oversimplifying things- this is Fark, after all. But it's quite clear that Japanese culture changed radically after its defeat and the occupation. There are arguments to be made that pre-war Japan wasn't all that different from post-war in many ways, and that the militaristic expansion and conquest phase it entered into that culminated in WWII was historically, maybe not an aberration, but not exactly typical.

But it's pretty clear that Japan's defeat required something pretty devastating, and that has had effects on its culture ever since.

Unless we're willing to conquer and occupy- and that means a lot of death or as someone else pointed out several generations of occupation (and probably more violence to suppress insurgency), none of which the US seems willing to do of late, believing (wrongly) that we can get to these places of changing a society without paying such a toll.

The one point I will raise to your otherwise excellent argument is that Japan was relatively isolated - China and Korea weren't allies. Germany had it's own issues, and was a totally separate culture (yes, I am not mentioning Italy). Here, despite the factions,(see below for further discussion), of Sunni, Shia and Kurd, they are above all Muslim - and that would mean, if the country of Iran were nuked, ever Muslim would be outraged - from Iraq to Saudi Arabia. Well, at leastpublicly, to appease their populace.

The Iranian issue post Saddam Hussein is more akin to the landscape post Tito/Yugoslavia. A factional, religious nightmare held together by iron gripped dictatorship. Remove that, and it explodes back into factional discord, each of which will fight for control. The US and allies (sadly, Australia was one) stepped into that quagmire, then into a worse one with tribal factions in Afghanistan.

/ ...


You are completely correct.
s/Iran/Iraq
s/Iraq/Iran

I also typed poorly. My apologies. Trying to pump out a damned Academic paper is doing my head in, and I am getting lazy in snatched asides of posting;)
 
2014-06-14 09:25:31 PM  
So if the shiate forces in Baghdad  stomp the ISIS offensive into the dirt, prices will drop right on down, right?
 
2014-06-14 09:35:00 PM  
And now Obama is moving aircraft carriers into the region. Is he acting because of oil? If he doesn't act, the Iranians will... Is he being played for a fool by the Iranians to do their dirty work or does he just want to protect oil interests...? Either way he doesn't look very good.
 
2014-06-14 09:44:29 PM  
I knew those pieces of shiat would do this.  I'd take my broken ass back there now if only to shoot every Iraqi farker I see.
 
2014-06-14 09:46:09 PM  

AeAe: Prophet of Loss: The US is a net exporter of oil.

Why the fark is gas so expensive?


Because we're all rubes ... and sadly proud of it.
 
2014-06-14 09:46:55 PM  
I can't even believe all the breath I've wasted telling people "No, nuking Iraq is not the answer, many of them are good people"  Evidently they are ALL cowards that require extermination.
 
2014-06-14 09:46:59 PM  
Thanks Obama.
 
2014-06-14 09:47:34 PM  
So much for the naivete of youth.
 
2014-06-14 09:47:41 PM  

fusillade762: But I've been assured by many Fark Independents our involvement in Iraq had nothing to do with oil. So this can't possibly be true.


Anybody anywhere anytime who says a war doesn't have economic underpinnings is either lying or an idiot.

Or, in the case of neocons, both.
 
2014-06-14 09:47:43 PM  

svanmeter: And now Obama is moving aircraft carriers into the region. Is he acting because of oil? If he doesn't act, the Iranians will... Is he being played for a fool by the Iranians to do their dirty work or does he just want to protect oil interests...? Either way he doesn't look very good.


I'm no political scientist, but I'm afraid he's throwing good money after bad because he can't bear the idea that we fought over 10 years of war for absosmurfly nothing.

/we did
 
2014-06-14 09:50:07 PM  

svanmeter: And now Obama is moving aircraft carriers into the region. Is he acting because of oil? If he doesn't act, the Iranians will... Is he being played for a fool by the Iranians to do their dirty work or does he just want to protect oil interests...? Either way he doesn't look very good.


Gotta love wingnuts.  They ignore our advice, call us traitors for saying invading was a bad idea, spend billions of dollars and thousands of lives propping up a corpse, and now they blame Obama when the corpse, predictably, falls over.

Party of personal responsibility indeed.
 
2014-06-14 09:54:05 PM  

Phil McKraken: I'm not sure how I'll restrain my rage if Obama involves us in Iraq again.


I hear we're deploying carriers to the Gulf of Tonkin relevant area :)
 
2014-06-14 09:54:22 PM  
Ford C-Max plugin-hybrid user here.  I get about 35km on my charge, enough for me.  Cut my gas costs into 1/6th of what they were before.  Plus I get to play the fun game of brake-as-gently-as-i-can for battery recharge regenerative braking!

Still as dangerous as gasoline cars though, I know.  I've got a pack full of lithium ion batteries in the trunk, occasionally a fan comes on to cool them.  I know what happens to l-ion batteries when you puncture them.
 
2014-06-14 09:59:47 PM  

PunGent: svanmeter: And now Obama is moving aircraft carriers into the region. Is he acting because of oil? If he doesn't act, the Iranians will... Is he being played for a fool by the Iranians to do their dirty work or does he just want to protect oil interests...? Either way he doesn't look very good.

Gotta love wingnuts.  They ignore our advice, call us traitors for saying invading was a bad idea, spend billions of dollars and thousands of lives propping up a corpse, and now they blame Obama when the corpse, predictably, falls over.

Party of personal responsibility indeed.


So, what does your juicer run on?
 
2014-06-14 10:04:05 PM  

FiggyPudding: "A fighter using a loudspeaker urged the people to join the militant group "to liberate Baghdad and Jerusalem," according to CBS News. "

/shiatstorm in process


I'm not a huge fan of Israel, but they're 4 - 0 in conventional wars last I checked.  I'd LOVE to see these yahoos tangle with the IDF.

/Merkava vs. technical, anyone?
 
2014-06-14 10:05:18 PM  

thisisarepeat: PunGent: svanmeter: And now Obama is moving aircraft carriers into the region. Is he acting because of oil? If he doesn't act, the Iranians will... Is he being played for a fool by the Iranians to do their dirty work or does he just want to protect oil interests...? Either way he doesn't look very good.

Gotta love wingnuts.  They ignore our advice, call us traitors for saying invading was a bad idea, spend billions of dollars and thousands of lives propping up a corpse, and now they blame Obama when the corpse, predictably, falls over.

Party of personal responsibility indeed.

So, what does your juicer run on?


I'm old-fashioned.  The juicer in my kitchen runs on muscle power.  The juicer in most people's kitchens in the US run on coal, at the end of the day.
 
2014-06-14 10:06:16 PM  

AeAe: Prophet of Loss: The US is a net exporter of oil.

Why the fark is gas so expensive?


The dollar isn't worth much when your printing money like drunk sailors.
 
2014-06-14 10:10:19 PM  

Cyclometh: zerkalo: And another civil war begins. It's gonna be armagheddon, millions slaughtered

Don't know about millions- maybe over the entire timeframe. But it was obvious what was going to happen at the outset.

The US keeps thinking they can do this thing where they go in with the military, kick some ass for a while, spend a bunch of money and then put in whatever government they want.

It simply doesn't work. Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan... the last time we managed to actually install a new government in a defeated enemy nation was pretty much Japan.

And nobody's willing to consider the price required to do it again. I've said it before and I'll stand by it- unless you're willing to see at least 15% of an entire generation dead, you're not going to win. If you want to completely destroy a government and replace it, you have to be willing to destroy their society and that means killing a lot of people. Whether it's bullets, bombs or nukes, you have to be willing to murder entire cities, not just individuals or small areas.

Until we remember that to defeat an enemy means to kill enough of them that the entire culture is broken, we'll keep coming back here. You can't engage in nation-building unless you're willing to engage in nation-destroying.

The reason we're so bad at it is that we can't stomach the cost unless it's imposed on us, as it was in World War II. When it's our own choice, we're not willing to do what's necessary to actually accomplish the goal. And that's why it's always been a bad idea, and will continue to be one because we spend blood and treasure for nothing.


Mostly agree, except for Korea.  South Korea was a success, in my book...I'd MUCH rather live there, than in North Korea.  The only pity was China blocked our advance north...the southern locals being mostly on our side helped, of course.
 
Displayed 50 of 261 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report