Democrats; Kick Alt Fuel into Legislature Net

Democrats; Kick the ball into the net! (Yet don’t do anything depraved)

Tuesday 30 of January, 2007
Democrats in congress the purpose of the game is to kick the ball into the net past the goalie (President Bush). It won’t take a Beckham sort of English(spin) to accomplish it. You are right in front of the goal outnumbering the goalie’s pol;itical ability to veto..don’t just kick it back to midfield and stall.I will even point out what the important political ball is that you have in front of the net…it is alternate fuel and transport legislation.

Reliance upon oil for U.S. transportation is the basis of all evil in American economics, and to fail to address that issue of American reliance on an early 20th century fuel that is causing incredible deficits and jeopardizing U.S. independence besides being the main cause of the administration’s unwillingness to support real democracy in Iraq (more about that later) avoids meaningful legislation.

The Iraqi oil fields may be the largest remaining in the world worth more than a trillion dollars. The only right solution to the Iraq problem is to publicly urge that the oil fields be privatized and distributed to all Iraqi citizens in equal shares of a public corporation. The oil is the real recruiting incentive for puppet governments there, and for terrorism and so forth. The actions of the United States that subvert the social structure of Muslim or Arab traditional patriarchal and fratricidal society seeking to replace it with a feminism is another issue entirely.The congress should develop wind, solar and fuel cell power incentives domestically to get Americans to provide their own fuel instead of outsourcing their future to foreign corporations and sometimes inimical economies abroad. The congress should immediately create a M.I.T.I. like federal economic policy board to study and attack current accounts generating deficits by creating new U.S. green and high tech business research, development and manufacturing.

Even the Alaska State legislature could get on board and provide a small part of its oil revenues for Wind farms in S.E. Alaska communities such as Wrangell to generate independent local electricity for municipal use and also to create hydrogen fuel.

A Better Strategy to Defeat Administration Bungling in Rebuilding Iraq

The effort to support nation rebuilding in Iraq is grimly serious and costing thousands of American and Iraqi lives. The bungling administration took a well designed military victory with the implicit prospect for success in rebuilding a nation with democratic aegis and bungled the moment. The administration willingness to spend public funds on war that trickles down profits (flummery) to special interest contractors in oil and defense related industries does not extend to non-defense civilian infrastructure investments that could have supported better prospects for successful national development in Iraq. The administration’s scrooge like character of spending on non-military alternative fuels, wind, solar, fuel cell, paving solar voltaic research and independent local economic research, development and manufacturing budgets is dismal. The administration seems only wiling to invest in fifty years profit plans for oil companies that pay no royalties to the public treasury, instead plundering national resources like covert economic guerrilla operatives subverting in plain sight of a somnolent media purchased by global corporations. Was it possible in 2003 to know that the administration would be so unprepared to follow up and instead would create such conditions as to allow a werewolf resistance movement to form an insurgency that would cause far more casualties than the 2003 war?

I will use a smidgen of sarcasm in this brief comment on the alternatives to continued incompetence that forces damaging casualties in Iraq and economic harm to both the Iraqi and U.S. economies. Achieving a peaceful and satisfactory resolution of political events in this phase of history of Iraqi history requires U.S. leadership willing to request that Iraqi’s own their own oil fields privately, equally and democratically.

One might ask if society reelects indignant leadership (2004) unwilling to support an actual and not just an apparent democracy in Iraq that may be publicly perceived as a puppet government, it deserves a continued descent in it’s own nation away from a democratic government and downward unto royal family dynasticism in support of global investment and the comparative decay of the national manufacturing sector and border security. All the very rich want of course is for Americans to hush up about millions of cheap laborer’s flooding in to subvert unionization or any sort of undesirable economic or political tendencies on the management/labor scale. Aristotle wrote in the politics that democracies collapse into tyrannies perhaps in a similar way that free radicals or unbound particles in atomic orbits are unusual and unstable and certain bound states the norm without unusual force acting upon the nucleus. Democracies are phenomenal and tyrants while tyrants and other undemocratic elements prefer to bind social order into changeless and exploitable submission disregarding most social concerns about ‘improvement’ of environmental and political prospects. The sole necessity for political tyranny is to control of public expression and opinion and to liquidate dissent and rival political wills to shape social destiny in other than the tyrant’s preferred direction.

I haven’t earlier had a chance to respond to the President’s bone-headed notion that his present Iraq policy is a good one. It is a lame-duck effort to secure oil field contracts for favorite hydrocarbon services and supply corporations. Liberating Iraq in 2003 was a moral policy; willfully bungling the rebuilding of Iraqi security is not.Some would debate the definition of what a war is and if the war after the 2003 war ended is a war at all. I won’t quibble though the broadcast media is owed an argument, and will provide a better, cheaper way to win the war in Iraq below.

The winning war strategy in Iraq is beyond the intellectual grasp of the Bush administration, while the inherent conflict of interest in oil related businesses the President has mires his limited creativity political problem solving in a crude slop-pit of a quag.

Right off I wish the President’s battle of the fiscal bulge to get oil contracts and to become guardian angels for the Iraqis of Terrorized City success. If he had trained three brigades in BlackOp counter-intelligence special forces operations instead and maybe got Vladimir Putin to send some Spetznatz and former K.G.B. trainers instead to create a sort of mini-second directorate able to work with Iraqi co-horts maybe they would have had a better chance of success than mal-adapted Army and Marines sent to be targets of opportunity as bomb locating device counterparts to I.E.D.’s and suicide bombers.Oh well good luck General Petraeus, even Caesar in the battle for Alexandria had a better idea of the nature of war than the non-combat experienced administration leadership perhaps…if only Bob Dole had been elected in 1994 instead…

President Bush has challenged anyone to provide a better plan than his, implying in probable error that his plan has merit and this is a response providing some detail and analytical commentary regarding aspects of my better plan. I have previously published elements of this alternative plan that seem to have goon unnoticed I must say. It is better than the Von Bush plan.

First a few observations about the political complex of compresence of Iraq that reveal the fundamental unsoundness of administration policy.Iran and Syria aren’t short term regional phenomenalities and are unlikely to provide any political support to administration Iraqi policy in the near term. Implementation of policies in support of administration goals in Iraq would perhaps be beyond the ability of an Iranian or Syrian government to accomplish in the short term even if such possibly inimical objectives were made policies of those governments the President has declared as the drive wheels on the axis of evil.Administration energy policy is implicitly inimical to and counterproductive on its efforts to attain a secure Iraq. Pursuit of Iraq oil field contracts worth perhaps one trillion dollars to support globalist corporate oil profits and fleets of SUVs in the U.S.A. denigrate alternative energy development in the U.S.A. with the collateral promotion of nuclear power globally as the primary non-hydrocarbon energy source instead of green fuels. Iran of course is developing a nuclear energy infrastructure that may destabilize Middle Eastern prospect for peace in the long run, and it is supported by Russian and French corporate suppliers in developing its nuclear capability.Iran has perhaps misevaluated the role nuclear power can play in war and peace, especially at the crossroads of potential nuclear crossfire from Europe, Russia and the U.S.A. in event of any escalated nuclear war crisis, and in the degree of danger destruction of operating nuclear plants present to civilian population nearby and downwind as well as the costs required to contain simple nuclear power plant meltdowns, yet Iran is not alone in that regard. Most nuclear plants on Earth today probably haven’t a failsafe capacity to automatically safely mothball themselves if some plague were to incapacitate plant operators globally. The world might well instead experience universal nuclear plant meltdowns.

Administration policy seems to make an implicit assumption that in six months or a year or two essential social and political facts may change to such an extent that terrorism might be controlled and minimized in Iraq while history seems to indicate the opposite.

The intafada in West Bank territories went on for years with a very better match and knowledgeable Israeli military and intelligence infrastructure barely able to contain the crisis allowing in just several Hamas bombs and bombers now and then into the heart of the nation. The Shi’a, Sunni and numerous other interests from within and without Iraq have ample explosives ordinance and personnel to continue devastating attacks on defenseless civilians in Iraq for decades like as not. If one considers the difficulty the British military and intelligence as well as the Ulster police forces had in containing I.R.A. terrorism in Northern Ireland and extrapolates to the more variegated political and geographical tactical facts of Iraq the prospects for immediate political stabilization of Iraq including the elimination of explosions amidst civilians becomes less than optimal.

The Iraqi oil fields are believed to be the largest remaining on Earth, possibly greater than the Saudi fields that may have already reached peak production capacity. The prize of political control of the vast oil wealth of Iraq is the best lure to subordinate political followers to an effort to war political conquest.

In the United States unfortunately both major political parties place governors on their truth capacity that prevent recognition of the facts of oil and its relationship to declining North Sea and American oil fields.

Terrorism to dominate Iraqi politics isn’t likely to stop in the next year or two, neither is the U.S. free to withdraw military forces quickly for several tactical reasons that include;

1)Future distrust of U.S. political trustworthiness

2)Forming world opinions that the United States may start rational economic policies.

3)Exclusion from Iraqi oil field contracts through a puppet government in Iraq (the world perhaps believes that what it is).

4)High stakes mid-east craps shooting with international political developments of a dangerous yet possibly interesting complexity

5)A slump in Texas and red state war industries and good paying employment in war industries that are the best left since the end of most blue collar U.S. jobs and the crash of Ford Motor. Excluding oil, manufacturing is just 9% of the U.S. economy now while financial services has risen to about 30% If America runs from Iraq the world may believe Americans are living on loans spendthrift wimps with easy scamming incomes letting the Chinese to the production and the illegal aliens Mexicans do the construction.

6)The U.S. economy may crash if oil prices reach 300 dollars a barrel in some Mideast war scenario.

7)The wealthy may need to force a depression to break alternative fuel development and transportation, snuff support for environmental politically, and gut support for environmental technology start up businesses.

Because the Iraqi people have no certain political victors and the dynamics of group cohesiveness perhaps the best chance of not becoming a target for liquidation, radical political party structures in Iraq may remain the most likely way of organization with the least chance of reconciliation politically. There is one way to get the 1.5 million Iraqi refugees to return and to gain popular support for an Iraqi Government; support an actual democracy in Iraq and issue each citizen in Iraq a one-time stock issuance of Iraqi Oil fields. Every Iraqi citizen would receive an equal number of shares of all of Iraq’s oil, while the government would keep 10% for public financing.While the oil fields of Iraq are not owned by the people, for the people as privately owned shares the oil field control incentive will be the underlying destabilizing financial agent in the region. Alternatively with private ownership by the citizens of Iraq of their oil fields the credibility the United States could receive in the world and in Iraq would rise while the United States would still have a fair opportunity to let its corporations such as Exxon and Halliburton purchase oil or provide oil field services. Obviously the United States in relying upon oil for domestic transportation energy supply is doing tremendous financial harm to itself and reducing its role in global leadership steadily falling below the horizon of progress and becoming a military servo-unit of globalist corporatism.

In the United States fuel cells, wind and solazçµõwerçõÃÃÃÃeçÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃsyÃÃÃÃÃed by federal and state laws to give homeowners and automobile producers cause to make their own power and develop non-fossil fuel driven electric vehicles.One may stop to consider the actual present posture of both political parties in the debate about the President’s deployment of more military forces to Iraq; does either party have it’s sail up and moving the ship of state forward or are they scattered across the water and the officers acting as if they were under the influence of argo or mold hallucinogenics from moldy bread doing the St. Vitas dance?Is the present level of American military investment in Iraq sustainable over several years if the Iraqi terrorists do not behave and just keep it up? I would think the answer is no. Yet the Bush administration (43) is the most financially spendthrift in world history and it seems the President’s allotted role in life to spend other peoples money like a drunken sailor. The political reaction to that fact judging by his reelection in 2004 is ho hum. Deficit spending is a private and public way of life in a decadent nation losing its creativity and becoming a skimmer of other people’s money.

The perennial war in Iraq isn’t perhaps on a sustainable basis. A cynic might wonder if perennial wars shouldn’t be financially sustainable instead. The President answered that question in his state of the Union address by saying that he has a plan to balance the federal budget three years after he leaves office. Good plan Mr. President, kowibunga dudes.

If the financing of a protracted civil conflict in Iraq is not realistic, then the alternative might seem to be withdrawing from Iraq in some scaled down pace to allow the maximum degree of international contempt for American foreign policy to develop while simultaneously allowing a jockeying for position of political power after the U.S. retires it’s military personnel from the conflict to build up. Terrorism could increase in that time with the prospects for increased oil supplies available to the United States decreasing. Abrupt withdrawal of U.S. forces is the third obvious alternative with the probable consequences of sundry wars locally and regionally suitable best for global media telecasting if it’s not an Olympic year.

President Bush’s bulging surge of military forces this year of some 21,000 calls for a bit more analysis. It may work just as he hopes; in six months the terrorists will flee, turning in their explosives in handy e.o.d. amnesty bins on the way to Syrian and Iranian borders were well planned military ‘nets’ will capture them and bring them back to Baghdad for a good hanging.

On the subject of the hangings of Saddam Hussain and his deputies I must comment that competent hang persons test drop a bagged weight equal to that of persons being hanged first and adjust the length of the rope to control the drop distance in order that the hangees neck may be broken with sufficient drop yet the head not torn off from to much combine drop distance and weight; quite an unprofessional hanging Baghdad. Practice makes perfect however, and if politicians in D.C. had a guillotine in their own red square or in their pagan statues district I’m sure they might watch the budget, borders and manufacturing a better.

Seriously though, the U.S. Government may be a whore of Babylon sold out to the corporatist set creating a batter collapse of democracy into tyranny with velvet cages until a cheaper hair shirt cage is available so the prospects for getting anyone in congress or the White House simply to publicly announce support for privatization of Iraqi oilfields is as unlikely as building a dirt and concrete Hadrian’s Wall of border security along California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas.The U.S. Congress with a democratic majority has so far shown its flip side of the coin lackeys character since taking control. With the ball unchallenged in front of the goal they don’t even have an idea that the purpose of the sport is to kick the legislative ball into the net. With President Bush being the opfor goalie the job shouldn’t be very difficult. Not requiring a Pele` style upside down flying back kick or a Beckham hyper-English deceit-o-boot or anything.

Two years of Democratic control and the losers will just play ball control even if they have a power play opportunity keeping the legislation somewhere around midfield hoping to let the game clock expire.

Probably they really want some x-rated depravity legislation, or to give federal funding to abort some embryos and making non-binding resolutions about the war will help take up the time and help the President balance the budget by 2011. In the meantime Democrats the ball to kick past the President into the net is alternative energy policy. Yes it’s that simply. A policy that can’t be reversed by the next Republican congress or President.

The policy should build up home power production to charge electric cars, make hydrogen pumps at local municipal, state and federal government vehicle fueling stations attractive and available to the public with contracts for operating and supplying the hydrogen going to private contractors, research funds for making all American highways with a lot of annual sunshine photon collecting electrical energy conducting surfaces into local grids and so forth. I have written about alternate energy policy elsewhere as have innumerable others. Now its time to act on it democrats and pass the bill. The President would need to be virtually a traitor to veto an honest energy reform bill from some points of view. Fossil fueled federal deficits are rupturing the United States, and so is a daft Democratic party (stay away from the depravity legislation partiers).

On the final plan B alternative wash our hands of the problem strategy for solving the problem of Iraqi military expense and casualties (the tripartite federal segregation plan) I will make these few comments.Since the conflict in Iraq presently may not be simply of a sectarian civil war nature (this gets somewhat more complicated and thus tedious for politicians, yet stay with it for a while more), but is of a financial nature for the control of oil, and for other causes including social alterity (change) of a radical nature from the west that is perceived as being forced in, and of other causes that I may or may not mention here, the tripartite separation into Kurdish, Shia and Sunni states may not end the troubles of terrorism in the region, nor end the possibility that each or all of the federated or not new states may harbor terrorists fomenting attacks on U.S. oil fields, U.S. federal debts, the treasure of the United States, Congress, The White House, Chicago, Detroit, Minneapolis or Bubba’s bar. Three states instead of one may reduce immediate sectarian battles locally yet provide little assurance that mainly politicians friendly to American interests will not let terrorists reside in their countries. Terrorists may also conduct over-the-border raids of terror and job hunting in the goal to subvert the security and independence of the neighboring country causing its people restiveness as they seek to overthrow their on incompetent rulers. Three nations instead of one would still be targets for all of the machinations of oil intrigues, sectarian, reformist and conservative politics that have laid dormant bubbling under-the-surface in extreme repression for decades or centuries in some instances.

Three nations is a prima facie good idea. Consider that Toynbee noted that religious oppression or religion replacement from the top from foreign rulers are resisted more than any other thing that stimulates resistance in a conquered nation. The patristic social order of Iraq is also subject to radical restructuring even following Saddam Hussain’s bath party displacement of Iraqi male roles in the family brought a feminine loyalty to the fascist state sociologically. As normal Arab male dominated society attempts a return after the fall of the Bath Party the west seeks to emasculate the traditional Arab family once again and dissolve it with birth control pills, Nair and blind allegiance to global corporatism without a male authority figure. In a sense the terrorists of Muslim fundamentalism are fighting for their manhood against western forces of feminist dependence on global corporatism that impose a tyrannical collapse upon democracy and individualism. These guys in the Middle East may keep detonating themselves for some time, or detonating others, in the complex tangled bank of sociological factors stimulating a troubled sleep in the hypothetical dream world of American current account and federal deficits.
Extremism in American politics and Middle Eastern politics are undesirable and harmful to the environment. Even so the Democratic Party must learn to kick the ball into the net when they have a chance instead of just mugging for the cameras.