Obama Opens Offshore Oil-Drilling

It is my prediction that 25 years from now only the military and the very rich will possess and use gasoline.

I guess it is fitting then, that President Obama should announce the resolution to open offshore oil drilling at Andrews Naval Air Base in Washington. Since it will take about ten years to get the proposed platforms operational, this move will not significantly effect gas prices for US consumers. In my opinion it is more of a gift to the Pentagon from a President who wants to improve his popularity with military personnel.

Once again we see that there is little difference between Democrats and Republicans. Both parties have been ripping off the American People and the rest of the world for generations. The impending energy crisis is nothing new. Liberals saw this coming back in the seventies, and conservatives tried to ignore their warnings like ostriches with their heads stuck in the sand.

It is high time we stop pretending our problems will just go away if we ignore them. From the condition of things here on Earth, it is clear that things have been managed poorly. Let us stop wasting our precious irreplaceable resources,and killing ourselves in the process. We must start cleaning up our mess now. It may already be too late!

World War III

How does one make a distinction between "occupation" and "invasion"? It should be obvious right? Most would immediately say that an occupation is temporary and an invasion permanent.  But, let us look more closely at these words.

My Encarta Dictionary tells me that the first definition of "occupation" is "1. the job by which somebody earns a living." That makes sense when I think about what the United States is doing in the Middle-East. But wait, we're talking about a military action, right? The traditional military use of  the word "occupation" according to Encarta, is "4. MILITARY the invasion and control of a country or area by enemy forces."  Hhmmn, there is nothing there about leaving the invaded country...

The order by which Encarta lists the definitions for any given word are supposed to be representative of the commonality of their usage, so I was not surprised when I looked up "invasion" to find that the first definition was perfectly military in its application, "1. a hostile entry by an armed force into a country's territory, especially with the intention of conquering it."  Again, there is nothing here about leaving the invaded country. I like this word better for a description of what our country has done in the Middle-East; there is no deception with this word.

Of course our troops in the Middle-East are planning to leave...just as soon as they are done building a few more permanent military bases. Just like in Viet Nam, our presence there will eventually change the culture into a more "American friendly" place to be. The US military never had a plan for "leaving" Iraq, because that is not what an "invasion" is all about.

Let us use words that convey the true meaning of our actions in the Middle-East when we talk about our "enterprises" there. And let us not pretend that we are conducting "police actions" or "occupations"--this is not a "war on terror." We are in the middle of nothing less than World War III! How many nations are involved in this global power struggle? I think they all are...

Please leave your comments below.  Especially if you disagree with me!