John Kerry: Unfit For Command

[Ned]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


Uh, what success? Besides, what was the result of Nixon's "Vietnamization?" Our lackeys folded and our enemies won. Are you sure that's the sort of formula we should try to emulate?

Lackeys?

So that is what you and Kerry think of the new Iraqi government?

My God. How do we win in Iraq with such attitudes?

[Kidlicious]

You honestly think they aren't our lackeys Ned?

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Ned


Lackeys?

So that is what you and Kerry think of the new Iraqi government?

I haven't asked John yet what he thinks about them. Can you hang on a bit while I call him up?

My God. How do we win in Iraq with such attitudes?

It's Iraqi attitudes we have to worry about, and it's not really likely that we're going to "win" in any event, because the idea of installing a stable, pro-western democracy was pretty delusional in the first place.

[Pekka]

Ned, well actually, Kerry's plan to win Iraq is more realistic in my opinion. Double the size of special forces (who makes the good kills), and gather a stronger coalition and support, which I think he might be able to do. Now, the question is, is he really going to do this AND how well can he execute his plans. The reality is, the number of troops are wayyyy to low, this is a fact, and not a single word in the world can make it go away, not even if there has been operations in the past where simular ratio of groups were able to succeed, it don' tmatter they need MORE troops in there.......... so, what Bush is campagning with his security issues, I don't see that coming up any time soon. Keeping the troops the same will not bring victory. Multiplying the amount of troops gives the proper tools for it, and then we have to see if they can succeed, which they hopefully will

Support the troops by giving them a chance to do their job

And yes, their government in Iraq is total lackey as of now, as it should be.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Kidicious
You honestly think they aren't our lackeys Ned?

It is the attitude that counts.

Now that Kerry has openly attacked the Saudi royal family, how much influence can Kerry expect with them in fighting war on terror or negotiating higher production.

Ditto Iraq. How can we transition to an independent Iraq if the US president openly calls them lackeys?

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Ned
Now that Kerry has openly attacked the Saudi royal family, how much influence can Kerry expect with them in fighting war on terror or negotiating higher production.

Oil production from the Saudis isn't a real issue, and do we really want to transfer even more wealth to them?

The current prices are largely speculatively driven about future stability, they're not driven by shortage of current supplies.

Ditto Iraq. How can we transition to an independent Iraq if the US president openly calls them lackeys?

I don't think Kerry said that. I know I did, but we haven't talked yet about which plum-list job I'll be getting in January, so I'm not currently a spokesman for the Kerry administration.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ned
It is the attitude that counts.

I don't know how to respond to this, but it's nice to talk to you again Ned.

Originally posted by Ned
Now that Kerry has openly attacked the Saudi royal family, how much influence can Kerry expect with them in fighting war on terror or negotiating higher production.

Do you think Bush is going to negotiate for lower oil prices?

Originally posted by Ned
Ditto Iraq. How can we transition to an independent Iraq if the US president openly calls them lackeys?

If we call them independent how will we transition to an independent govt. You can't turn an apple into an apple. It's already an apple.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Kidicious

Do you think Bush is going to negotiate for lower oil prices?

Why not, if the implication is that his ties to big oil prevent him from doing so thats misplaced as oil companies a) make most of their profits in the commerical sector via quickie shop sales. b) to the extent they make profit on gasoline sales they make most of it during flux times when the price is moving either up or down allowing them the opportunity to pre-empt costs and/or lag behind when costs have dropped

Further the gas/oil companies are to a great extent slitting their throats for further downstream commodity refined products like solvents etc that are indeed susceptible to drops in demand

Finally, I would think it obvious it is in his best interests to drive oil prices lower for purposes of not feeding inflationary pressures.

[MichaeltheGreat]

How can Bush (or anyone) "negotiate" for lower prices when the US government isn't the buyer, the Saudis aren't nearly the only seller, and the prices are set multilaterally on several marketplaces?

[Kidlicious]

It's hard to say how much oil prices affect Bush's consituents, and it high oil prices would help them more or less, but Bush owes a lot of rich people, the Saudis being some of those people. He is in no position to negotiate with them.

[MichaeltheGreat]

(a) The Saudis don't set the prices, global marketplaces do.

(b) Neither Bush nor any other President has or could have a role in determining prices, they can only enact policies (such as the war in Iraq) to which the global market responds.

(c) High oil prices only help the Saudis and other producers in the short term. In the long term, they make it more likely for US and other marginal producers to increase production, while encouraging both conservation and R&D for alternative sources.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
How can Bush (or anyone) "negotiate" for lower prices when the US government isn't the buyer, the Saudis aren't nearly the only seller, and the prices are set multilaterally on several marketplaces?

Obviuously he doesn't, historically the requests have been to increase production in order to affect overall world supply of crude.

[MichaeltheGreat]

And we're in a situation where there's strong global overproduction, but high prices regardless.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

I'm not close enough to the supply situation at present to know one way or the other. Media continues to report it as a tight supply. (As correct as the media normally is, that is )

Likewise I am led to beleive we have chronic shortage of refinery capability. This much I believe as it was the projections my wife was following in her previous role at Exxon.

[MichaeltheGreat]

They don't understand markets beyond the depth of elementary school civics.

I haven't seen a more current published report, this is for the week ending August 6:

http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/weekly_petroleum_status_report/current/pdf/highlite.pdf

The refinery capacity shortage is real and persistent, but it's been with us a long time. Nobody really wants to invest a billion or two in creating overcapacity.