Why the Public incorrectly evaluates candidates

[Armoured]

It's up to him to say what he means not you to use it for your ego games- or to insinuate I don't understand him. I have noticed that you like to denigrate.
Cheap debating tricks are good for atheists but why not follow the example of a Catholic saint like Hildegarde of Bingen? Or is your Catholicism only on the surface?

I didn't "denigrate" anyone. By the way, I see you'e new here (welcome, BTW) and questioning the bonafides of another member's stated faith is a no no. Mods will smack.

 

[7trees]

I didn't "denigrate" anyone. By the way, I see you'e new here (welcome, BTW) and questioning the bonafides of another member's stated faith is a no no. Mods will smack.

On the contrary I admire the Catholic saint very much.

 

[RDKirk]

No, we don't wonder. We know. Oil. They had it when we needed it, and they stood against OPEC to keep it to a tolerable level for us when everyone else was paying the equivalent of $10 per liter. Businessmen like to keep their largest customers happy and coming back for more. Especially when they knew we could have bombed the smithereens out of them, waltzed in, and taken their oil and their country from them within a week. In other words, they knew which side their bread was buttered on. They didn't like Sadaam's butter. Ours was a bit more palatable.

Do some Googling for "petrodollar" and "Nixon."

In 1972, President Richard Nixon took the American dollar off the gold standard and floated its value against the world currency market. There are some esoteric global financial reasons why he did that (and conspiracy theorists have justification for spinning like tops), but he was well aware that when it did it, the value of the dollar would fall like a stone against other world currencies on the currency market.

So Nixon hedged his bet by arranging a deal with Saudi Arabia that they would accept only US dollars for their oil. In return, the US would provide them with military protection. That meant anyone who wanted Saudi Oil would have to first buy US dollars.

Since then, the other Saudi Peninsula states have gotten in on the same deal--the rest of the world must buy US dollars to purchase Saudi Peninsula oil.

That is why the US rushed in when Iraq invaded Kuwait (and it looked like Saudi Arabia was next). That is why the US considers Saudi Arabia an "ally" despite the fact that Saudi Arabia is the nucleus and primary supporter of the extremist Wahhabi (Salafi) doctrine that is responsible for all exported Islamic terrorism in the world. That is why American presidents of both parties make a pilgrimage to Riyadh to kiss the Saudi king.

 

[RDKirk]

You are barking up the correct tree IMO.


As an aside.....I had three encounters with CIA operatives in three different deployments to Iraq. All three were puzzling. All three were counterproductive. Two of three I was able to stop the madness the inept operators were heck bent on making happen. Yes they can be very stupid. Or did they truly know what they were doing? Either way what they were trying to do in two cases was just plain stupid and would have got Americans and innocent Iraqis killed.

That happens a lot. Defense is frequently at cross purposes with the CIA. You should have seen the fight over control of armed drones.

The problem is that the CIA works for politicians while soldiers work for military commanders.

Even in intelligence, I pitied the CIA folk because politicians do not want the truth; military commanders, OTOH, know they need the truth. So the CIA gets twisted into arcane purposes while defense is a lot more straightforward.

 

[RDKirk]

It's up to him to say what he means not you to use it for your ego games- or to insinuate I don't understand him. I have noticed that you like to denigrate.
Cheap debating tricks are good for atheists but why not follow the example of a Catholic saint like Hildegarde of Bingen? Or is your Catholicism only on the surface?

No, I don't mean Obama caused ISIS.

However, American financial policies--continued by both parties-- since 1972 have supported Saudi Arabia and other Sunni states support extremist Islamic positions.

 

[7trees]

No, I don't mean Obama caused ISIS.

However, American financial policies--continued by both parties-- since 1972 have supported Saudi Arabia and other Sunni states support extremist Islamic positions.

We know of course you don't mean Obama caused ISIS; rather that is a misinterpretation insinuated against me.

I would ask however just on the general topic of the Middle East: Did Saddam invade Kuwait because they were stealing his oil by an almost horizontal underground pipeline? Or was that misinformation? I expect you'd know- Thanks.

 

[RDKirk]

We know of course you don't mean Obama caused ISIS; rather that is a misinterpretation insinuated against me.

I would ask however just on the general topic of the Middle East: Did Saddam invade Kuwait because they were stealing his oil by an almost horizontal underground pipeline? Or was that misinformation? I expect you'd know- Thanks.

Iraq's issues with Kuwait and Saudi Arabia were far broader and deeper than that. The oil thefts were happening to some extent, but those were just pretext.

 

[7trees]

Iraq's issues with Kuwait and Saudi Arabia were far broader and deeper than that. The oil thefts were happening to some extent, but those were just pretext.

Thanks for that.
Is the Middle East becoming less stable? And is there a threat of war or is that just Putin steaming off against the USA? If I'm not getting too far off topic.

 

[Armoured]

On the contrary I admire the Catholic saint very much.

Hildegarde isn't a member here. But anyhoo...

 

[tickingclocker]

Do some Googling for "petrodollar" and "Nixon."

In 1972, President Richard Nixon took the American dollar off the gold standard and floated its value against the world currency market. There are some esoteric global financial reasons why he did that (and conspiracy theorists have justification for spinning like tops), but he was well aware that when it did it, the value of the dollar would fall like a stone against other world currencies on the currency market.

So Nixon hedged his bet by arranging a deal with Saudi Arabia that they would accept only US dollars for their oil. In return, the US would provide them with military protection. That meant anyone who wanted Saudi Oil would have to first buy US dollars.

Since then, the other Saudi Peninsula states have gotten in on the same deal--the rest of the world must buy US dollars to purchase Saudi Peninsula oil.

That is why the US rushed in when Iraq invaded Kuwait (and it looked like Saudi Arabia was next). That is why the US considers Saudi Arabia an "ally" despite the fact that Saudi Arabia is the nucleus and primary supporter of the extremist Wahhabi (Salafi) doctrine that is responsible for all exported Islamic terrorism in the world. That is why American presidents of both parties make a pilgrimage to Riyadh to kiss the Saudi king.

That's more of why SA is our ally (as allies go), despite all the caterwauling about how they treat women, etc.. So Donald Trump's ads screaming that the Clinton Foundation accepted money from SA, an "enemy" of the US, is a complete, known fake. That is, if he bothered to actually learn--and respect the realistic facts of this world's system. Which I doubt. Which makes him an imbecile for POTUS in my eyes. Trump himself gave money to the Clinton Foundation at one time. Did HE expect quid pro quo as well? Should we all assume he did it out of the goodness of his heart? The Donald?? When he brags he told Hillary Clinton---show up at my wedding--because he donated $100,000 to their foundation? I don't know about you, but I'm all for facing reality.

What a complete and utter joke this entire vote has descended into. Played on all of us.

 

[RDKirk]

Thanks for that.
Is the Middle East becoming less stable? And is there a threat of war or is that just Putin steaming off against the USA? If I'm not getting too far off topic.

Syria has been an ally of Russia/Soviet Union for decades. Putin himself may have spent time in Syria during the reign of Assad's father. The US has and does prop up lots of "bad" leaders--so do the Russians. Assad is one of theirs--he's their "Shah of Iran." Expecting the Russians to oppose Assad is simply the kind of stupid pigheadedness that politicians often get themselves into.

The problem the US has in the middle east is still that Saudi Arabia is the cultural enemy of the US and yet a financial "ally." The only players in the middle east seriously fighting ISIS are Assad and Iran (and the Kurds, but for themselves). Neither Saudi Arabia nor Turkey are seriously fighting ISIS.

 

[wing2000]

Thanks for that.
Is the Middle East becoming less stable? And is there a threat of war or is that just Putin steaming off against the USA? If I'm not getting too far off topic.

I'm still try to figure out what thread topic is.

 

[7trees]

Syria has been an ally of Russia/Soviet Union for decades. Putin himself may have spent time in Syria during the reign of Assad's father. The US has and does prop up lots of "bad" leaders--so do the Russians. Assad is one of theirs--he's their "Shah of Iran." Expecting the Russians to oppose Assad is simply the kind of stupid pigheadedness that politicians often get themselves into.

The problem the US has in the middle east is still that Saudi Arabia is the cultural enemy of the US and yet a financial "ally." The only players in the middle east seriously fighting ISIS are Assad and Iran (and the Kurds, but for themselves). Neither Saudi Arabia nor Turkey are seriously fighting ISIS.

Thank you again for the intelligent information. Does this mean therefore that Muslim Iran is more merciful to the suffering Christians in Syria than the USA? As it seems to me the west has been far too lax in helping the persecuted.

 

[trunks2k]

On the contrary I admire the Catholic saint very much.

He was talking about your comment "Or is your Catholicism only on the surface?" not your opinion on Catholic saints.

 

[RDKirk]

Thank you again for the intelligent information. Does this mean therefore that Muslim Iran is more merciful to the suffering Christians in Syria than the USA? As it seems to me the west has been far too lax in helping the persecuted.

I don't know what Iran (or rather, Iran-backed Iraqi Shiites) are dealing with Christians in the areas they reclaim from ISIS. But I'd rather be a Christian in Iran than in Saudi Arabia.

 

[7trees]

He was talking about your comment "Or is your Catholicism only on the surface?" not your opinion on Catholic saints.

I know.

 

[7trees]

I don't know what Iran (or rather, Iran-backed Iraqi Shiites) are dealing with Christians in the areas they reclaim from ISIS. But I'd rather be a Christian in Iran than in Saudi Arabia.

Thanks. I agree.

 

[tickingclocker]

Thank you again for the intelligent information. Does this mean therefore that Muslim Iran is more merciful to the suffering Christians in Syria than the USA? As it seems to me the west has been far too lax in helping the persecuted.

Do you honestly expect an economics driven human world system to protect.... the people of faith?? Even ours gives a casual nod to doing so, dropping us like last week's mashed potatoes whenever they don't need us any longer. And do we learn from it? No.

 

[7trees]

Do you honestly expect an economics driven human world system to protect.... the people of faith?? Even ours gives a casual nod to doing so, dropping us like last week's mashed potatoes whenever they don't need us any longer. And do we learn from it? No.

I don't expect it but I had hoped, in sorrow, more Christians would demand it.

 

[tickingclocker]

I don't expect it but I had hoped, in sorrow, more Christians would demand it.

We have demanded it. To no avail. We are patted upon the head, reassured, and sent out to play, but quietly. Then promptly forgotten. Out of sight, out of mind. Then we blindly elect the leavings of the bottom of the barrel to represent us (aka Jesus Christ, as if He needs it), because no others are willing to step in it and get their shoes as dirty as they must become in this world's system. Understandable, because nowhere in the bible does God suggest that Christians involve themselves in this world's system except to share His Gospel with as many "of the world" as possible. We don't need a "Christian" government to accomplish that. We don't need any government at all to accomplish the will of the Lord. Christians are not divine. The United States is not divine. The Constitution is not divine. GOD alone is divine. Those facts are tough to separate from wishful thinking, let alone squarely face for some people.

If possible, so far as it depends upon you, live peaceably with all. (Rom 12:18)