This is what a Neocon thinks would happen with non-interventionism

I remember the good old days when the neo-cons did everything in their power to convince us that this is NOT a war for oil...this is about freedom, and happiness, and giving bunnies to every middle easterner! But now the surface arguments about democracy in the middle east and freeing people from dictatorship are gone.....And now it's really just one big debate about whether or not the military action HELPS us get oil, or HURTS our efforts to get oil....I guess it's nice to see some honesty for once.....

My friend read a choice sampling of the comments from this forum and wrote his sharpest retort to date. I look forward to an equally intelligent response. Please limit remarks to courteous, educated, and complete facts in a humble and Ron Paul tenor. thank you. Here's his coup de grace:

So, all the islamists want is to be left alone? I think not! I find it particularly interesting that your fellows ascribe all sorts of rational arguments to the radical islamists. They make much of the fact that they wouldn't destroy the Saudi Oil fields, stating 'categorically' that something is untrue, when in fact it is very true and provable by a small amount of research. Notwithstanding all of the breastbeating about islam being a "religion of peace" and my demonizing an entire religious sect, not one of these folks seem to believe that the radicals are, proveably:

a-Wholly oblivious, if not contemptuous, of the ramifications of destroying or crippling the Saudi oil fields, or anyone else's for that matter. They don't look at P&L statements and decide who has the most to lose. They don't care about the economic impact to themselves.

b- Disrupting the oil flow to other nations, not the United States, will cause the most problems. In the U.S. it will cause only inconvenience, intially. Fact: The Saudi brand of Islam (Wahabbiism) is the most virulent form and they spread, it along with their money, all over the globe. Even in the United States, they fund mosques across the nation, from which they preach the destruction of the U.S.A. and Israel. The radical jihadists don't care about the Saudis or Wahabiism. It's likethe Sunnis and the Shiites. They'd as soon kill each other as anyone else. Allah Ahkbar my ass.

b- Have proved beyond a reasonable doubt that they don't care about human life...any human life, even their own (see homicide bombers) as long as they believe that by killing they advance their agenda or purge the infidels from the planet.

By ascribing rationality to the radical islamist jihad, your friends are doing themselves and everyone else a disservice. To apply the normal laws of civility, justice and statesmanship to the jihadists is like dressing up a pig in a tuxedo...its still a pig. How many beheadings, honor killings, suicide/homicide bombers, rocket attacks on Isreali farms and schools, sectarian murders, urging the death of a cartoonist and the flogging of a second grade school teacher for naming a teddy bear mohommed for God's sake, will it take to convince them that the radical islamists don't give a rats ass about peace, oil money, the Saudi government (or any government), peace or self determination. Everything that they have said and done so far recommends that they be exterminated. Because that is what they plan to do to anyone who does not capitulate to their demands.

There are many, many muslims out there who do not agree with the radicals. There were many Germans out there who did not agree with Hitler, either. Where is their voice?

I'm ignorant for saying that most of the newborn babies in the emerging and third world are uneducated? That they will hew to the teachings of the radical imams? Well, I guess this poor ol' cowboy needs to get some larnin' from yer eddycated pals, now don't he? If you are going to make a counter argument, make it based upon facts, not the way you THINK things are or ought to be. If you want to denigrate my opinion with snide and condescending remarks, ala the elitist liberals, I'll pass and leave you to your own world. What color is your sky, by the way? I have HISTORY on my side of the arguments, what besides wishful thinking do you have on yours?

You can't have it both ways. Either the jihadists are clever and resourceful, as in using $4.00 worth of box cutters to destroy billions of dollars worth of property and 3,000 lives, or they are dirt poor ingnoramuses who pose no threat. Which way do you want it? I can argue either side. Also, to deny, or worse to not see, the connection between the islamic birthrates in Europe and middle east is inviting disaster.

By the way, I misstated the oil supply comment, what I meant was one half of the worlds proven oil reserves(approximately). Saudi Arabia is second only to Mexico in the size of their proven oil reserves. It is not the U.S. that will be most hurt by a cut in arabian oil, as your friend insists. Look into the agricultural and engineering uses of oil (light sweet crude) before making such statements. Many oil fields, including the Mexican one are peaked or slightly past their peak, by the way.

I think it is beyond reason to argue that the current jihadist attacks against the west, worldwide, are in some way not connected to the muslim religion and that even though the jihadists are small in number within the muslim world, they weild inordinate power. Sayng that they think rationally about how many of their number would perish in a nuclear counter stike is beyond belief. The radicals WANT to die for Pete's sake. Why would they care if they are wiped out if they've made a huge strike at the infidels inthe name of Allah?

Just because something has not happened, doesn't mean that it will not or cannot happen. We can use logic to extrapolate the things we know, but we cannot know the unknowable. My premise, and my opinion, is that the radical jihadist, islamofascists or whatever name you want to give them, can and will foment large scale conflict across the globe if they are left to their own devices. If you think that by retreating to our borders we will escape involvement you are living in a fools paradise.

In the time that Europe has pursued high taxation for the delivery of cradle-to-grave benefits, we have seen the population trend as explained by Mark Steyn. There has been some radical Islamic activity against Europe, starting long before 9/11, and having been dealt with as a matter for the local police and national intelligence services there. The average European had accepted the everyday fact of a NATO alliance as protection from a Soviet invation in the 80s. They now rely on that alliance for threats both internal and external, e.g., Yugoslavia and Afghanistan. For all of this, American funding and military support has undergirded this 'umbrella' of protection for Europe.

However, Europe is different now. The governments of most countries have had to scale back their welfare schemes in order to comply with the demands of participation in the European Union. The euro is the common currency for some 450 - 500 million people and a workforce that will soon dwarf the U.S. in terms of output. These countries have also had a great ability to produce their own advanced military technology. Witness France's nuclear arsenal, its air force and navy. Britain, though not in the Union yet, has demonstrated its military capabilities in Iraq and Afghanistan. Sweden, a neutral country, continues to develop fighter jets and has a standing army that is very large in proportion to its population. If they are able to do all of this and still provide for massive welfare programs, then why not remove American support and allow the European Union to adopt its form its own military alliance?

A rearrangement of NATO as a European millitary alliance would force the participating countries to spend more of their own budgets on weapons development and to create a single military entity with a unified response to a challenge. This would also have the effect of capping their welfare programs and bringing work ethics back to their national populations. The change in culture that this could bring about might also influence their peoples to go back to traditional lifestyles, e.g., families with children. When these people go back to working for their stakes, instead of having everything handed to them, then they will get busy defending them from competitors -- that is, a flood of immigrants who are not of the same culture. This would be what you expect from human nature. It's not where the group in question lives that makes them different, it's HOW they live.

In any event, your friend 'I'm not a neo-con, I just play one on AOL' has to explain what our military engagements do to get the Europeans to fend for themselves and return to favoring traditional social structures and a culture of productivity. If Europe is forced to step up to the plate, then its people will have a heightened interest in how to respond to Islamic radicals or whatever the problem. If their own perceptions were to move closer to your friends, then wouldn't he find an ally in them?

then maybe they can explain to me why the acts they perpetrate in the world are called "intervention"

According to Wikipedia:

Intervention may refer to:

Intervention (counseling), an orchestrated attempt to compel a subject to "get help" for an addiction or other problem
Intervention (TV series), a documentary series
"Intervention" (Buffy episode)
"Intervention" (song), a song by Arcade Fire from Neon Bible
"Intervention", a song by Madonna from American Life
Intervention (law), a legal procedure for a nonparty to enter an ongoing lawsuit
Art intervention, an interaction with a previously existing artwork, audience, or venue/space
Cognitive interventions, a set of techniques and therapies practiced in counseling
Health intervention
Humanitarian intervention
Well intervention, a term for the maintenance and repair of oil and gas wells

I don't see "armed invasion" on the above list.

Am I missing something?

Does intervention = murder? Then we better shut down all those drug counselers!

If your friend is serious about this and he values your friendship then there are various sources of relieable information from which to draw from to counter his arguments.

This idea that America needs to go to war because we need oil from the middle east is nonsense. There's plenty of documentation from Petroleum Institutes and Gas Associations that shows that America has plenty of oil, coal and natural gas within our own shores! . http://thenewamerican.com/node/382
We can also move ahead with nuclear power and avoid having to be dependent upon foreigners for our energy needs. There is also the Hydrate Methane deep down in the bottom of the oceans that promises an abundant energy supply.There is energy we haven't even thought about exploiting because we're too busy carrying out the delusional fantasies of the Neo Cons in their "give war a chance" nonsense.

You should also use the Free Market approach with your Neo-Con friend. Hopefully he hasn't forgotten about that! The free market is the only way to get sufficient supplies of energy at a cheaper price. Take away the regulations and America becomes energy independent without resorting to a costly war.

However if he's insistent that we must be interventionists then use his own arguments against him. You can paint a scary scenario just as well as he can. Your scenario is as follows: Tell him that imagine that instead of the USA being the alpha dog on the planet that the "Caliphate," or the Muslim world is the alpha dog on Earth.
"The news dailys and the the Neo-Islamo Facists within those countries chant daily on the Mohammad O' Show, and on the Sham O'Hussein Show and the Rushda Fatso Show that we must bomb those remaining Christian nations to smithereens. We must hunt down and kill the last remaining terrorist Christian cells otherwise the world won't be safe until we fullfill our duty as good Muslims. We are after all the "one country with the ability, resources and manpower to have stopped the situation in the first place.." everywhere in Islamo Radio and TV the pundits pound the war drums that the Caliphate must obey its destiny and "Police the Planet!"

Maybe he'll see that just becuse you have the power and the ability to "police the planet" that it's a good idea to do it. No tell him that because we are the strongest that we must set an example on how the strongest nation on the plalnet must comport itself. Lead by example and not out of the barrel of a gun the way that Mao Tse Tung advocated. Tell him you stand for a strong defense but not a bullying foreign policy that creates hatred. Your idea of a strong defense is to go after those few terrorists with "Letters of Marque" and a determined foreign policy to follow through in getting the Osama Bin Ladens of the world and bring them to justice.We won't need to use a whole army and attack the wrong country when all that was required was to obey the law of the land- The US Constitution. Tell him about Paul's book too!

Good grief! He thinks all Arabs are jihadists? Actually, it's a tiny minority. His worries are appropriate for about 650 A.D. The only thing that could ever make the radicals a majority is if we keep bombing them.

He thinks Europe, Russia, and China can't defend themselves! It sounds like the domino theory (that got us into Viet Nam) all over again. That theory was, at least, plausible when the moving force behind the dominoes was a Soviet Empire with vast population and resources, but the world did not end when we pulled out of Viet Nam. The Radical Islamics, however, are a band of a few thousand thugs.

Th NeoCons accuse US of conspiracy theories???

it doesnt matter what he thinks or what we think. the usa is out of money.

the weird thing about the future is that no one knows it. ron pauls ideas could be the wrong thing for this country at this time. i dont think so, so i am voting for ron paul.

ask him how he plans on paying for a world wide policing force.

this whole thread is spitting in the wind and not doing much to get ron paul elected.

ron paul 2008

I could get into detail about the little known interventions in U.S. history that should teach us a lesson, such as Greneda, Chile, Iran, Nicaragua (especially the arming of the insurgent contras - similar to our current arming of the Iraqui police), but I'll spare us the long winded history lesson, and simply say that we cannot fight an ideal, nonetheless our miscontrued version of an entire religion. The whole "Islamofacist" deal sterotypes an entire faith and futher polarizes people. The whole basis for rejecting a non-interventionist policy litteraly rests in an assumption that because we're America, our actions don't have consequences. Blowback, people. Blowback. Some might even call it karma. Whatever it is, it is real. We need to get our egos in check immediately.

~ Corie Whalen ~ (508 - 308 - 9008)
[Assistant Organizer, Boston Meetup]