PDA

View Full Version : So are we gonna talk about Hamid Karzai going bat**** nuts or what?



JohnnyMack
4/6/2010, 08:16 PM
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-04-06-Karzai_N.htm

JohnnyMack
4/6/2010, 08:17 PM
If his administration implodes, that would be......troubling.

royalfan5
4/6/2010, 08:20 PM
If his administration implodes, that would be......troubling.

On the upside, I don't know how much his administration actually controls. Plus, he has to be on the smack if he thinks joining the Taliban would be a winning option for him. I'm pretty sure we would have him iced if he tried it.

Okla-homey
4/6/2010, 08:25 PM
Obama is an idiot. He doubled-down in Asscrackistan depite the fact it is run, at least Kabul that is, by guys so corrupt they make Chicago-land politicians look like Sesame Street.

We should have just continued bribing the right Jabba's like we did when we took it from the Taliban. Cheaper in the long-run, and less expensive in terms of US lives.

IMHO, as a guy who watched a couple thousand Americans with stacks of cash do what we're trying to do now, unsuccessfully, with over well 100K Americans and no bribery.

SoonerProphet
4/6/2010, 08:46 PM
Obama is an idiot. He doubled-down in Asscrackistan depite the fact it is run, at least Kabul that is, by guys so corrupt they make Chicago-land politicians look like Sesame Street.

We should have just continued bribing the right Jabba's like we did when we took it from the Taliban. Cheaper in the long-run, and less expensive in terms of US lives.

IMHO, as a guy who watched a couple thousand Americans with stacks of cash do what we're trying to do now, unsuccessfully, with over well 100K Americans and no bribery.

Don't think the "Jabbas" have the best organized force in the country. Let's face facts, that belongs to the Taliban. You've been there so I would defer to you, but I don't think in the long run they will have much success without US support...the Jabbas that is.

Scott D
4/6/2010, 09:05 PM
it bothers me that JM thinks there was a point in time where a poppy peddler like Karzai wasn't bat**** nuts.

delhalew
4/6/2010, 09:19 PM
I wondered when this would come up. Dude has balls anyway...but then his brother is big daddy heroin, so why not act like a loon.

sooneron
4/6/2010, 09:29 PM
I'm just glad my smack prices are coming down...

Curly Bill
4/6/2010, 10:30 PM
Obama is an idiot. He doubled-down in Asscrackistan depite the fact it is run, at least Kabul that is, by guys so corrupt they make Chicago-land politicians look like Sesame Street.

We should have just continued bribing the right Jabba's like we did when we took it from the Taliban. Cheaper in the long-run, and less expensive in terms of US lives.

IMHO, as a guy who watched a couple thousand Americans with stacks of cash do what we're trying to do now, unsuccessfully, with over well 100K Americans and no bribery.

Yeah right, like that's even possible. ;)

RACHEL MADDOW is my clone
4/6/2010, 10:42 PM
Smack should be legalized and Karzai was a great appointment.

sooner59
4/6/2010, 10:51 PM
So if their government did join the Taliban, we would no longer be against a group within a country, but a government that controls a country that may not want to be controlled by them.

That would mean the new Afghanistan = the old Iraq.

Get ready. Coming next summer....

Operation Enduring Freedom 2: Shock And Awe-LL OVER AGAIN!

Leroy Lizard
4/6/2010, 11:30 PM
Obama is an idiot. He doubled-down in Asscrackistan depite the fact it is run, at least Kabul that is, by guys so corrupt they make Chicago-land politicians look like Sesame Street.

That is a total insult to Afghanistan.

OklahomaTuba
4/7/2010, 10:21 AM
I think this about seals the deal as Hillary Clinton being the worst Secretary of State in modern history.

Which works out well considering she works for the modern equivalent of Hoover.

Harry Beanbag
4/7/2010, 12:28 PM
I think this about seals the deal as Hillary Clinton being the worst Secretary of State in modern history.

Which works out well considering she works for the modern equivalent of Hoover.

Worse than Madeline Albright?

SoonerProphet
4/7/2010, 12:32 PM
Or Powell or Rice? James Baker gets the nod for best in the last 4 admins or so.

OklahomaTuba
4/8/2010, 09:43 AM
Worse than Madeline Albright?
http://www.opednews.com/populum/uploaded/kim-20albright-2430-20090725-79.jpg

Yes, sadly I think she is.

It takes a special level of talent to possibly flip a country we have 100,000+ soldiers in and have been fighting for 8 years over to the other side.

Not sure we've ever seen our standing with so many allies and such go down the tubes in such a short amount of time as we are seeing now.

Tulsa_Fireman
4/8/2010, 09:54 AM
Not sure we've ever seen our standing with so many allies and such go down the tubes in such a short amount of time as we are seeing now.

Kinda like the downward spiral during the last administration?

I know for a fact that our current El Presidente made it a part of his platform to bring nations back together from relationships shattered by the Bush administration. Yet a good number of these nations still think we're sh*theads.

So maybe it DIDN'T have anything to do with George W. Bush. Or even Barack Obama. Maybe it had everything to do with these nations thinking the United States of America is a gaggle of sh*theads that they aren't too keen on being so dependent upon. Be it jealously, spite, whatever, I think it's pretty clear that others aren't so comfortable with an omnipresent single superpower. Especially as others in the world continue to grow economically and strategically.

SoonerProphet
4/8/2010, 09:58 AM
America has no allies, only interests.

Ike
4/8/2010, 10:22 AM
So maybe it DIDN'T have anything to do with George W. Bush. Or even Barack Obama. Maybe it had everything to do with these nations thinking the United States of America is a gaggle of sh*theads that they aren't too keen on being so dependent upon. Be it jealously, spite, whatever, I think it's pretty clear that others aren't so comfortable with an omnipresent single superpower. Especially as others in the world continue to grow economically and strategically.

Or, maybe it's more that they are starting to realize that from a foreign policy point of view, a democracy is the least stable kind of ally you can have. It takes a lot of hard work to build a working relationship with another country, and just one election to tear it all up.

I think the harsh degree of polarization we are seeing in our politics right now only amplifies the feeling other nations might be getting that we may be an unreliable partner in the future.

OklahomaTuba
4/8/2010, 10:51 AM
Kinda like the downward spiral during the last administration?

The "downward spiral" was always a myth. Mostly from the anti-American euroleft media and such. And even if it was real, what exactly has Obama done to make it any better?

The list of our allies he's thrown under the bus is long and growing every day it seems.

OklahomaTuba
4/8/2010, 10:53 AM
America has no allies, anymore, only interests.

FIFY.

There was a time Britain said we had a special relationship. That changed this year.

SoonerProphet
4/8/2010, 11:05 AM
The "downward spiral" was always a myth. Mostly from the anti-American euroleft media and such. And even if it was real, what exactly has Obama done to make it any better?

The list of our allies he's thrown under the bus is long and growing every day it seems.

Why don't you ask that dip**** Mikheil Saakashvili whom the Bush foreign policy nitwits goaded into poking the bear and got their asses kicked.

Bourbon St Sooner
4/8/2010, 11:31 AM
Man, the more I think about this the more surreal it seems. For this guy to utter that he may join the taliban he has to be either mentally unstable, seriously lacking in judgement or consuming a lot of his country's biggest export.

We really need to rethink what we're doing in that place.

OULenexaman
4/8/2010, 11:48 AM
a whole lot of head scratching on Pennsylvania Avenue today.....wonder how they will spin their way out of this one??

OklahomaTuba
4/8/2010, 01:35 PM
Why don't you ask that dip**** Mikheil Saakashvili whom the Bush foreign policy nitwits goaded into poking the bear and got their asses kicked.

I'm sure Comrade Putin much prefers the current regime's policy of dropping our missile shield, voluntarily disarming ourselves, announcing we won't retaliate if hit and throwing the Czechs, Pols & Jews under the bus, while letting their good customer Iran purchase all the stuff they need to make a bomb.

Also sure the bear loves the fact we won't be producing our own domestic oil reserves anytime soon, keeping the price of oil artificially high, which they profit from very nicely.

The Kremlin is laughing at us, and not just because of Hillary's misspelled reset button.

Tulsa_Fireman
4/8/2010, 03:05 PM
$85 a barrel is artificially high?

I think you're high.

SoonerProphet
4/8/2010, 03:13 PM
I'm sure Comrade Putin much prefers the current regime's policy of dropping our missile shield, voluntarily disarming ourselves, announcing we won't retaliate if hit and throwing the Czechs, Pols & Jews under the bus, while letting their good customer Iran purchase all the stuff they need to make a bomb.

Also sure the bear loves the fact we won't be producing our own domestic oil reserves anytime soon, keeping the price of oil artificially high, which they profit from very nicely.

The Kremlin is laughing at us, and not just because of Hillary's misspelled reset button.

Nice dodge...typical.

OklahomaTuba
4/8/2010, 03:16 PM
$85 a barrel is artificially high?

I think you're high.

No, $85 will be low once real demand picks up, or in other words, once Obama is done destroying the economy and bankrupting the country.

Of course we could prevent the coming oil and gas crunch with domestic supplies, but that would anger the pseudo-scientists, environmental wackos and gold digging banksters who helped him get elected.

And we know getting re-elected and fear mongering about the global warming scam is much more important than doing anything that would actually produce any private sector employment, which he has yet to do.

Tulsa_Fireman
4/8/2010, 03:33 PM
You do realize that it's a commodity market, right?

And that current domestic oil also enjoys higher prices at market?

And that 85$ a barrel is actually good for the state of Oklahoma and the large economy here in the state based solely on oil? And that higher prices per barrel incentivizes domestic production, not the other way around?

And that flooding the market with domestic crude would only serve to allow OPEC to reduce their production per barrel, being the best counter to maintaining a higher, yet reasonably acceptable price per barrel?

And that by doing all that, would prolong the Middle East's stranglehold on oil markets by extending the time frame at which their production capacity would be exhausted or minimized to the point as to eliminate middle eastern countries from players in markets or for alternative products to be developed?

How's that go again? Drill, baby, drill?

OklahomaTuba
4/8/2010, 03:43 PM
And that flooding the market with domestic crude would only serve to allow OPEC to reduce their production per barrel

Most people, like me, would consider this to be a good thing.

but hey, I've only been working in the energy industry for 10 years now, so i've learned that I'd much rather have $100+ oil than $30 oil.

Not sure the economy could handle it though. Thanks to Obama however, we get to find out!

Tulsa_Fireman
4/8/2010, 03:44 PM
So why are you bitching?

OklahomaTuba
4/8/2010, 04:00 PM
So why are you bitching?

Not bitching, just making the observation that Russia, along with the rest of our enemies in the world, much prefer higher oil to lower oil prices.

And higher oil prices are exactly what Obama's energy policy will/are giving us.

Personally, I'd rather see crude around $50-60 with domestic oil and the oceans of natural gas we are sitting on being exploited instead of imported.

Tulsa_Fireman
4/8/2010, 04:07 PM
You're mad.

$50 per barrel would crush domestic production. With the cost of American labor and the viability of actually making a profit, $50 oil could only be sustained relying on foreign product to prop up the market. Without that or a buttload of government spending to subsidize production, domestic product will decrease because of the inability of a large number of producers to actually turn a profit.

OklahomaTuba
4/8/2010, 04:19 PM
domestic product will decrease because of the inability of a large number of producers to actually turn a profit.

$50-$60 has been the average almost my entire career, and even the independents always made a profit on that. Even the offshore guys and the oilsand **** in AB.

Even the refineries made good margins at that contract price.

$85 is too high IMO. Gets any higher and it starts ****ing with the economy again.

Harry Beanbag
4/8/2010, 11:00 PM
Not bitching, just making the observation that Russia, along with the rest of our enemies in the world, much prefer higher oil to lower oil prices.


Not that I'm taking sides in this pissing contest or anything, but I've heard theories that low oil prices in the '80s were a large contributing factor to the fall of the Soviet Union. Sure, it also crippled the domestic oil industry and especially hurt Oklahoma and Texas in the process, but this is a big picture concept. By the same token, the reason oil prices have been high the last 10 years or so is to make China use more of their resources to continue growing.

You can choose to believe the price of oil is solely based on supply and demand, but that is a naive view. Economic warfare works, although it may be slow to see any tangible results, and is even more difficult to explain to the populace.

JohnnyMack
4/8/2010, 11:03 PM
Not that I'm taking sides in this pissing contest or anything, but I've heard theories that low oil prices in the '80s were a large contributing factor to the fall of the Soviet Union. Sure, it also crippled the domestic oil industry and especially hurt Oklahoma and Texas in the process, but this is a big picture concept. By the same token, the reason oil prices have been high the last 10 years or so is to make China use more of their resources to continue growing.

You can choose to believe the price of oil is solely based on supply and demand, but that is a naive view. Economic warfare works, although it may be slow to see any tangible results, and is even more difficult to explain to the populace.

http://fermentation.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/06/27/tinfoil.jpg

Harry Beanbag
4/8/2010, 11:04 PM
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get me.