Still trying to figure out who he’s talking ’bout
Politicians are a brave bunch. Fearlessly tackling issues that hit home hardest and never succumbing to the whims of big business… in bizarro world that is. Closer to reality, the politician is a different animal.
Politicians are stubborn, afraid of looking weak, and fearful that any admission of error will be cast as flip-flopping and inconsistency.
And in that light, Slate Magazine has listed the four unspeakable truths about the war in Iraq.
The first unspeakable truth is simply that the war was a mistake.
A second truth universally unacknowledged is that American soldiers being killed, grotesquely maimed, and then treated like whining freeloaders at Walter Reed Hospital are victims as much as “heroes.”
Reality No. 3, closely related to No. 2 and following directly from No. 1, is that the American lives lost in Iraq have been lives wasted.
A fourth and final near-certainty, which is in some ways the hardest for politicians to admit, is that America is losing or has already lost the Iraq war.
Now, before you get all partisan on the article, note that both sides of the camp are complicit.
Reasons for refusing to admit that the war itself was a mistake are surprisingly similar across party lines. It is seldom easy to admit you were wrong—so let me repeat what I first acknowledged in Slate in January 2004, that I am sorry to have given even qualified support to the war. But what is awkward for columnists is nearly impossible for self-justifying politicians, who resist acknowledging error at a glandular level.
#24 — Bye.
@ PMitchell: “I have really enjoyed your site for a couple of years … but I as a conservative who is not afraid to argue his point civilly is finding it very difficult to stomach shrill ultra liberal leaning your site is taking and the group it is attracting”
I started occassionally reading here about a year and a half ago, and what immediately struck me about this site was how reflexively ‘pro-Bush’ most of the commenters were (the site editors seem more libertarian than anything).
That clearly has changed. I think it’s pretty obvious that the reality of what got us into the war, as well as how well ‘staying the course’ was really doing for us, not to mention Katrina, a do-nothing Congress full of conservative Republicans engendering countless corruption probes, poor treatment of our heros at home, … I’m getting tired … lets just say ALL OF IT is finally having an effect.
People no longer are buying the discredited neo-conservative line, and that is what seems to be driving you crazy. I don’t know whether you’re one of those old time conservatives, who just hasn’t woken up to the fact that your movment has been hijacked by enemies more dangerous than the liberals ever were to you, or if you’re really one of the ‘body snatched’. But it doesn’t matter – the worm has turned my friend, and the vast majority just don’t see the world your way anymore. You’ve lost em.
And you can flee from all the sites reminding you of that fact that you wish. Its not going to change a damn thing. Better would be for you to accept A] the cock-up we’re in, B] that maybe a different point of view (even one from the >gasp
LIBERALS) might have a better handle on getting us out of it, and C] lend a goddamn hand instead of bitching.
But then what do I know? I was only one of those not-quite-liberal/not-quite-conservative people (you know, the OTHER third of US society) who saw something Rotten in Denmark back in ’03, and was told I was an America-hating defeatist by many a blinkered fool on the (always)Right.
Like you, apparently.
Funny. I was ‘walking away’ from this start of what appears to be a ‘Flame War’ yet, compelled to at least state a few things:
1. I was and still am a CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN.
I believe in what a Republican used to stand for: Limited Government. Smaller Government. More control to the States and out of the hands of Federal Power. A Strong Military. American goods over foreign goods. Keeping Power in the Hands Of The People.
However, the definition of Conservative Republican has been changed since I agreed to that party. It now consists of Fear Mongering Profit Corrupt Bigger Government. Less power to the states, and more in the office of the President. Less rights and willful violation of the laws of the Government. More regulation of the populace and less of the Corporations.
2. I fought in GW1. I fought in several other skirmishes in South America. I spent time in the DMZ in Korea, and also in Germany (before the wall was brought down). I went through 3 different Presidents in my term, and also apparently assisted the beginnings of the NeoCon movement (in the Reagan Years) without knowing it.
WAR is bad. Death is not a good thing. However, when you BELIEVE in America, and feel it is threatened physically by a foreign enemy, it can in some ways be ‘justified’. This war in Iraq was not a Justified War. It is an Occupation of the area to exert control and attain rights to the Land and Resources. Not for the American People. But apparently for the Corporations.
Being involved as I was with some of the not so nice aspects of my service, I saw a few things and did even more that I am not proud of, and have learned were carried out not for the good of the Country, but for the good of the Corporations.
Have we been attacked by Iraqi’s EVER? No.
We were attacked by a militant group of extremists that WE TRAINED AND SUPPLIED. I know this PERSONALLY.
3. This “Support our Troops’ is just a SLOGAN being used. IT MEANS NOTHING to the people running this occupation and war.
The VA was and has been cut for years during this ‘War’. Yet, no one bothered to look. No one bothered to investigate. I told everyone who asked why I never used the VA. I told them to go to the facility and see for themselves. No One ever seemed to make it there.
Until recently.
I ask this question in the utmost honesty and sincerity:
Are you really that stupid that you believe Iraq is anything BUT an occupation, having anything to do with the Attacks that occurred on US Soil? If so, How is it you can read these statements>? Because if you ignore the FACTS as they have been explained, even by the so-called ‘Liberal Media’ How can you not question why you believe what you do? How can you not want to find out the Truth for yourself…instead of just spouting some rhetoric about “what a waste of time and effort…”
Oh, yeah….’and Make Sure we include a ‘Support the Troops ” magnat that was MADE IN CHINA.
30,
Just maybe… (perhaps a touch of the 10 pints too…)
There is a fifth one:
After hundreds of billions spent and thousands of patriotic Americans killed, AMERICA IS WORSE OFF THAN BEFORE.
It’s so incredibly sad and pathetic that I hate to even say it… but we all know it’s true. This has been a GIGANTIC waste of money and TRAGIC waste of lives — ONLY TO MAKE THE THREAT OF TERRORISM WORSE.
The thing about politicians changing their minds about the war – at this point, admitting you made a mistake will get you no credit, since it will look like you are just swinging in the breeze of public opinion. In other words, it becomes, “I am sorry I voted for the war. I had no idea it would become this unpopular.”
I would much prefer to see McCain changing his “fight on until the end” position than Hilary “apologize” for voting for the war. The former would possibly affect what we do in the future, whereas the latter is just a meaningless gesture about something that happened in the past.
Doug,
You listed two choices, surely there must be others?
Doug wrote: whereas the latter is just a meaningless gesture about something that happened in the past.
For the millions of we Americans who are SICK AND PISSED at a president who would rather send our country into hell rather than admit he’s ever been wrong, such a gesture from H Clinton would show us that she’s not that kind of president.
I am a Reagan conservative and I have to say that you are very correct about the republican congress they got fired and I am glad they (and by they I mean all democrat and republican ) have been bought and payed for by lobbyists and big business. This current and the last congress are comparable in corruption to those of the 1800’s and early 1900’s and it is an embarrassment to our country .
The President isnt as bad as you all want to make it out You just hate the man no matter what he does and it took 6 years of the press beating on him about every thing and even misreporting Iraq (this so called horrible surge is working) but have you heard anything about the decrease of over 80% in violence in Baghdad NOOOO you only hear about the one car bomb that went off.
The democrats want another Vietnam for some unknown reason they like to loose it makes them feel good
#37, doug,
While I respect your opinions, you are always thoughtful and rational, I disagree on this point.
The driver who admits they made a wrong turn is better then the driver who refuses to accept they have gotten the whole bus lost.
Even better, if we relied upon your directions because you swore you knew how to get there is a heck of a whole sight worse then the driver that takes advice from those that took the trip last year.
I can have no respect from McCain because he refuses to see what this war is about. I admit that Clinton probably is more opportunistic then realist on this same point, but even that is better then “stay the course”.
I can’t help but feel disturbed by some of the comments here. I certainly can’t blame those who believe this war was a mistake. However, all the conspiracy theories about how the war is for oil are just nonsense. There is a negligible amount of oil being exported out of Iraq due to the insecurity there – a pittance compared to what the largest oil companies pump every day from other places. If the government were driven by “big oil” and wanted to do its bidding, it would have been far easier and more profitable to simply make a underhanded deal with Saddam to allow him to pump more oil for a share of the profits. (You know, like many other “more moral” nations were already doing during the oil for food debacle)
The fact is the most important reason we went to war to attempt (stress on attempt) to set up a democratic nation in the heart of the middle east, in order to combat the terror nursery governments that allow madrassas to train little children to hate the West and to die “for Allah.” WMDs played a part, but was mostly oversold to the nation and the world as the primary reason. The fact is, something needed (and still needs) to be done to fight the long term war on terror – that is stopping the indoctrination of children to become terrorists. Iraq may very well have been the wrong place for that, as it was more secular and not a hotbed for future terrorists. It’s central location, (bordered by Iran and Syria – who were hoped would be affected by a democratic neighbor) the view that the population would welcome the toppling of their government, the open excuse of Iraq’s constant violation of the Gulf War Peace Treaty and multiple UN resolutions, and finally the fears of Saddam’s WMDs is why Iraq was chosen. It’s easy to say in hindsight that it was not worth it. (I tend to agree, as Iran seems to be much more of a threat than Iraq ever was. I also agree that the administration has made far too many costly mistakes there.) However, at the time it seemed like the right thing to do. (Which is why Congress overwhelmingly supported it on both sides of the isle – see Hillary Clinton and John Edwards)
Those who enjoy repeating the other big conspiracy theory that Bush lied and was behind it all (which I find hilarious, since these same people who say Bush is an evil mastermind capable of fooling the whole country into war also say he’s dumber than a monkey) also seem to forget that every major intelligence agency in the world had the same misconception of WMDs as ours did. Anyone who has conveniently forgotten about this need do no more than a LexusNexus search on news stories from 2002 to the time of the invasion. Even France, opposed to the war, a few days into the invasion said publicly that it would join the war if Saddam used his WMDs. Does this sound like something Bush could have done alone? It’s simply not in the realm of reality, only in the minds of those that think emotionally (see: Hate) rather than rationally. (Not to say that all those who disagree are irrational, just those that forward conspiracy theories and resort to personal insults because they lack the intellect to discuss things civilly)
In closing, despite what any of us think about how the war began, we should all be hoping for a victory in Iraq, because a victory for us means stability for Iraqis as well. Leaving Iraq to secretarian violence at this point would be flat out irresponsible, and hatred of a president should never take priority over the good of the nation. Let’s overcome the past mistakes and deal with the present – we have much work to do.
JAG0718 – I like your points, but your last one is the most profound
“Let’s overcome the past mistakes and deal with the present – we have much work to do.”
I could not agree more – however what irritates me and others like me is that this president refuses to learn from those past mistakes. Take the surge for an example. The additional troops are a pittance given the scope of the problem they are to solve. If we’re going to surge lets really do it – not 21,00 – not 29,000, but 50,000 or 100,000 more. If its that important, then lets stops all leaves and reliefs, mobilize the entire reserve and guard forces and admit to the country its going to take a 100% effort. Secondly lets admit a 3 month surge is a joke. This is at least a year long problem. And once all this has been admitted, then lets go in and start doing the job.
If I can see this, why can’t Bush?
Sounds The Alarm –
I can’t disagree with you. I believe you’re correct in your assessment of more troops being needed to do this right. This surge is really not enough, another 100,000 (150,000 if you take Gen. Shinseki’s advice) would likely be needed to really flood the areas that are currently out of control. However, there are 2 things that make it impossible. First, I don’t think the Army can handle that many more troops in Iraq for 1 year at this point, seeing as they are already so strained. Also, the current atmosphere in the US would never allow for that many more to be sent. These reasons don’t make your point any less correct, just not doable. This might be doable if the rest of the world realized that Iraq’s security is in their interest and helped out, but our allies won’t even send more desperately needed troops to Afghanistan, much less to Iraq. (Where many are rooting for a US loss regardless of the danger it presents to them) This super-surge honestly should (and could) have been done 3 years ago when the immediate post-invasion situation was clearly not going well. I hope we’re both wrong and the current surge can get the situation to at least the point where a smaller force can keep it secure. Only time will tell.
JAG0718 – all being said – I really hope it DOES work. I’m a firm believer in Colin Powell’s “Pottery Barn” Rule. I truly believe most citizens on this BLOG do to, although we don’t say it. Perhaps we should.
Jag, excellent posts. I agree with you 100%.
Greg, I don’t believe America is “worse off than it was before”and that the threat of terrorism is worse than before as you do. When was he last attack on America? Do you think that there were to be no followup terrorist attacks after 911? How many attempts of terrorism have been thwarted because of America’s hard line?
Yes the loss of life is deplorable, and yes Bush is a far from being of presidential quality, and yes America has smashed a nest of angry bees and was unprepared for the onslaught OR the extent of terrorist plague… BUT… America has go to get a grip ans suck up it’s embarrassment and whatever other emotions it’s flailing from and FINISH THE F”KING JOB… this time with a better plan. The rest of the world barely has the balls to do pull off the baseboards and face the roaches, so America showing weakness at this point is only going to embolden terrorists and make your allies cower even more.
As a Canadian, I’m appreciative of the USA and it’s brave souls who are facing the shit for the rest of us.
Jag, excellent posts. I agree with you 100%.
Greg, I don’t believe America is “worse off than it was before”and that the threat of terrorism is worse than before as you do. When was he last attack on America? Do you think that there were to be no followup terrorist attacks after 911? How many attempts of terrorism have been thwarted because of America’s hard line?
Yes the loss of life is deplorable, and yes Bush is a far from being of presidential quality, and yes America has smashed a nest of angry bees and was unprepared for the onslaught OR the extent of terrorist plague… BUT… America has go to get a grip ans suck up it’s embarrassment and whatever other emotions it’s flailing from and FINISH THE F”KING JOB… this time with a better plan. The rest of the world barely has the balls to do pull off the baseboards and face the roaches, so America showing weakness at this point is only going to embolden terrorists and make your allies cower even more.
As a Canadian, I’m appreciative of the USA and it’s brave souls who are facing the shit for the rest of us. You don’t have to be perfect to be appreciated.
Puting aside past mistakes, and looking at how do we get out. All the experts agree that there is no military solution available at this point. what we need is a diplomatic solution, that was the conclusion of the Baker commission and many of Bush’s own generals. Bush is ignoring this advice completely at the countries peril.
Sounds the Alarm, I would whole heartily endorse the notion of the commentators have a more intelligent and thoughtful debate than just writing a few anti-President Bush statements. Lead the charge.
JAG0718- Are you actually a JAG Officer? If so, what did you think of the article’s mentioning of the U.S. solider. In terms of “lowering the testing standards,” increased pay for retention…etc. Personally, the angle the author takes is based more on biased information, but I’m curious to see what you think.
JAG0718 – How much in profit are the Oil companies making from Iraq NOT producing Oil?
Not being a part of OPEC, Saddam was trying to compete with them.
How much would you be willing to risk to provide DEMOCRACY to another country that was ‘not as bad’ as most others in the region? Why are we trying to provide another country Democracy? We DON’T Have one here. We are a CAPITALIST REPUBLIC. Why aren’t we trying to establish that in Iraq? Why has the only major agreement been focused on HOW the OIL PROFITS are distributed and who controls the rights to the Oil? Its not the people. Its the Corporations.
Why is it that in the last few years, We as AMERICANS have paid more and more for NO RESULTS? Who profits from an EXTENDED Conflict? Iraqis? Americans? Or CORPORATIONS?
How is it 8 BILLION dollars has been misplaced/LOST and NO ONE IS BEING HELD ACCOUNTABLE? Who PROFITS?
Iraqis? Americans? Or Corporations?
How is it that since the 70’s we have had an ‘Oil Crisis’? How is it that NO ALTERNATIVES have even been explored beyond a sound bite?
How is it that the true enactors of the attacks on US Soil were 15 SAUDI’s , and yet we are attacking and Occupying IRAQ?
Who is it in Iraq we are SUPPORTING by being there? The SHIA? The SUNNI? The Kurds? The main conflict of Baghdad is that the SUNNI are fighting the SHIA. The Shia are ‘bad’ because they are also in IRAN.
Who Profits? Americans who are having to get 2-3 jobs just to make ends meet, while Tax Breaks are given to the extremely wealthy IN TIME OF WAR?
Why has a Draft Not been reinstated if the War is as important as it should be (based on the talk of ‘Support the Troops’ idealogy) and the American Public is going bankrupt due to health care costs, Banks increasing interest on loans (in as much as 30% for late fees becoming PERMANENT).
Its only a Theory if you can’t prove it.
The links are there. The information is there.
Yet nothing is done to prevent other than ‘If you aren’t with us you are against us”. All major news media is owned by Massive Conglomerates. AT&T has bought enough companies to be actually MORE POWERFUL than it was when it was originally broken up.
“Those who forget the past re condemned to relive it” is more accurate and descriptive than I could ever be.
Yet you say to ‘forget what happened…lets just move forward”.
Without UNDERSTANDING what HAS HAPPENED, how can anything be changed or any progress forward be made?
Call me crazy. Call me a Nut.
I just have seen too many things in my lifetime that point to a Conspiracy. That point to a ruling class and a subjugated lower class.
But don’t let me interfere with your Shopping….
I’m seeing a pattern:
“This blog has a liberal bias!”
“Digg has a liberal bias!”
“All the posters here have a liberal bias!”
“The media has a liberal bias!”
Well we all know that reality has a well known liberal bias, right?
Or could it be that when you’re an extremist everything, no matter how moderate, seems to be biased?
Mister Justin, I have a story recommendation (http://tinyurl.com/236g9k): Georgia increases force contingency to 2,000, from 850, in Iraq. Long live the “Coalition of the Willing,” & “New Europe.”
mxpwr03 – I’m actually not a JAG officer, it’s just a handle.
Dennis – Although I’m not sure any response to your post will actually make a difference, I’ll take a shot. First, oil companies, like all companies, are trying to make a profit first and foremost – this is not questioned. However, the type of power you attribute to them, and other corporations, is simply not substantiated by the facts. (At least from what I have seen) Putting forth that the invasion of Iraq is purely oil-based ignores all of contemporary history (namely how 9/11 changed our view of world threats – note to all: this is not to say Iraq was part of 9/11, but our invasion of Iraq was a result of our changed perceptions of the world) in favor of a conspiracy theory that is supported by shaky circumstantial evidence at its absolute best. (that evidence being the assertion that they benefit from the invasion, which I suppose can be claimed, but beneficiaries of actions are not necessarily the cause) Ockham’s Razor is particularly appropriate here, and I’m afraid conspiracy is not the most likely explanation.
Also, as far as Saddam not being part of OPEC – he was under global embargo and couldn’t sell his oil anyway. (outside of the oil for food) Like I said in my original post, the oil companies would have made out much better if they had an under the table deal that would allow Saddam to sell oil for a share of profits – so the Iraq invasion being for the oil companies doesn’t add up.
As far as democracy vs. republic, this is getting a little too picky for this venue, as I assume that everyone here understands that the term “democracy” in reference to the US means the democratic republic (which is also capitalist) government, as opposed to direct democracy, which I do not believe has actually been implemented anywhere since ancient Athens – though I could be wrong) As far as government missteps and corporate profits, the government has always been bad handling private contracts – this is certainly nothing new. It’s mostly due to incompetence and lack of due diligence, rather than a conspiracy.
As far as alternatives to oil, simply, there is nothing better out there at the moment. (very unfortunate) For all the huge SUVs and millions of cars we drive, there is no other fuel that has enough stored energy and exists in enough supply for the world’s thirst. Ethanol’s nice, but it is less efficient per unit of volume and there is not nearly enough production capacity to fill all our tanks. Hydrogen’s a pipe dream until we figure out a cheap way to generate it since our atmosphere has barely any. (Too bad we don’t live on Jupiter) So until someone comes up with something better, and can build the production capacity to fill our needs, oil is all we have. (Again, unfortunately – no one wants us off oil more than I do. I consider it a national security issue)
As far as the draft, right now it would hurt more than help to have a bunch of untrained conscripts running around Iraq, getting kidnapped and tortured on TV. This isn’t WWII, we are not looking for bodies to throw at an enemy to get a beachhead. We need more highly trained soldiers for a counter-insurgency, not conscripts.
I’m always open to differing ideas, but I think we all end up learning more when they’re based on fact instead of conspiracy theory.
Indeed. If you bypass any of the evidence, the concept of anything becomes impossible to believe.
History has its place, to teach the lessons that could not be learned otherwise. Do some research.
Saddam, in 1991, WAS trying to sell his oil cheaper than OPEC wanted him to. He invaded Kuwait based on information the Saudi’s gave him (I notice you did not include them in your rebuttal) and the approval of that same group of Saudi’s. TIME Magazine did a wonderful write up of the entire debacle, that I remember reading (and have a copy of) while waiting to get a haircut prior to Deployment.
At the time, Oil was selling for $17.00 a barrel. Opec wanted to halt production to drive up the price. Saddam kept selling at the listed value. He also threatened to continue to do so.
Barring any military action, he would have succeeded.
Funny, the Wayback machine does not include any of this, as coverage was spotty and unavailable. I do recommend going to your local library and looking it up. July – Sept. 1991.
This is where it began. The sanctions that were then imposed (which Kaufi (sp?) and his family decided to profit off of…again…its out there, just last year it was reported this occurred).
I am all for looking at facts. I am all for keeping an open mind about the circumstances. However, to say that this conflict in Iraq was not started due to OIL is disregarding the facts of the matter.
I say this knowing you will not take the time required to research and examine the situation.
Alternative fuels aren’t available for the simple reason that the Oil Companies don’t see 39 Billion in profits from them.
The attack on Sept 11, 2001 was and will remain a mystery. Why Saudi Terrorists, lead by a CIA trained group, empowered by USA sold weapons, were able to pull this off. Amazing. Yet, there have been no records of material examination of the structures. No changes to how the current buildings are developed, nor changes to where the backup supply generators have been placed.
I agree. Hydrogen is a pipe dream. However, why is so much being spent to research it, when other countries have realized Ethanol is available and a decent substitute? Or even Corn Grown / Soybean / ‘insert your favorite oil here’ has been proven to be usable? Why have no auto manufacturers other than Toyota (and in limited cases other mfr’s) even begun to develop/market alternatives? Because they, for some reason, are being told not to. 30 years after the initial ‘Oil Crisis’ where people were waiting in lines on odd & even days, and we have YET to come up with an alternative? WHY IS THIS? Simple, there is NO PROFIT to be made in R&D.
I realize you won’t believe me….I am asking that you expand a little of your thought process and research these matters yourself.
Why are there still so many questions regarding the fact that we have 4 Major Bases in Iraq? Yet, no news coverage in America.
Read the BBC, or the Nederlands papers/online news and see what is being reported. If we are to be out by 2008, why have we spent so much money to build PERMANENT structures?
Also, you don’t reply to the question of where the money went? Why are we, as US taxpayers in the middle and lower class being forced to pay MORE, while tax breaks are being given to those who make more (the upper 1% of the country). How is this ‘Supporting’ anything other than to line the pockets of the extremely wealthy and drive down the middle and lower classes.
It is fine to not believe. but to be purposefully Ignorant is what irritates.
I am not asking for anything other than peoplke to look at the facts that are available. To question everything this Administration has done. Because soon they will be questioning everything that you as a citizen do. Heck, thats already happening. With Phones being tapped, emails and correspondence being opened, grabbing of US citizens off the street to place them in a hole in foreign countries…
But there is no conspiracy.
Safety is Control. “We are from the Government, and we are here to help….”
#38, 39, 41. But it WOULD be meaningless, right now. If, after no WMD were found, but before public opinion turned against the war, she admitted that her vote was a mistake, that would have meant something. One could reasonably assume she was actually sorry for a war begun under false pretenses.
Now, it would be, “I am sorry I voted for a war that is now so unpopular.” She would merely be proving that she was the political chameleon that we all suspect she is.
and #38, there are certainly alternatives. Barak Obama was right on the war from the begining.
#54, What the eff are you commenting on? I’ve seen a lot of crap posted here, but that post is the worst I have ever seen. Most of it is total bull crap. All of it is near incomprehensible.
Try sleeping it off and then repost your thoughts.
Sleeping it off? Why don’t you learn how to read?
Dennis, I wasn’t going to comment but that last post #54 was totally insane. One of the many distorted statements you made…
“Alternative fuels aren’t available for the simple reason that the Oil Companies don’t see 39 Billion in profits from them.
The oil companies sell oil byproducts. They are not equipped to make hydrogen, wind generators, batteries, solar power, or ethanol from sugar cane. Any group with knowledge and money can research and develop alternative fuels and the ONLY reason we are not all driving gasoline free vehicles right now has more to do with the majority public still demanding that a car travel 400 miles without refueling, be fast as hell, carry 100 cu-ft of air and built like a tank to pull the cabin cruiser they don’t own.
The oil companies have a right to sell their product, but until there is an alternative CLEAN fuel with the possibility of being as abundantly available as oil without breaking the bank, that can realistically be harnessed to propel people around in the manner they are used to, we will be driving gasoline cars.
Another point. In order to squeeze out a competitor, a monopolizing industry can lower its price to make competing alternatives expensive by comparison or unprofitable to compete. Tell us HOW rising gas prices are squeezing out competitors Dennis.
#57, I read quite well thank you.
Your post is too long. It meanders all over the place. You have several thoughts that have nothing to do with this topic. You tell us to go read other media to tell us something most of us already know.
I admit too often my posts get too long. But I do try to stay focused on the topic.