04-02-2010, 07:15 PM
Hi,
As for modernizing, if cutting off revenue leads to modernization, then sub Sahara Africa should be leading us into the twenty-second century. I believe that what modernization has taken place in the Middle East is because of oil revenues, not in spite of them. It costs money to build infrastructure, schools, hospitals, etc. And it takes social interaction to develop a more tolerant society. Without oil, both the money and the interactions would be missing. Some parts of the Middle East have done better, some have not done as well, and none probably have done all they could, but don't blame it on oil. Extremism, fundamentalism, breed best in poverty and isolation. And without oil income, most of the Middle East will revert to that condition.
And as to the funding of terrorism, yes, oil money makes it easier. It may be sufficient, but it is hardly necessary. Even an operation like 9/11 is relatively cheap -- say a million or so to fund the hijackers while they prepared (including the fees for flight schools). Compared to the billions involved in the oil trade, that's nothing. With about one and a half billion Muslims in the world, even if only one in a thousand supports terrorism, 9/11 still represents less than one US dollar per.
So, I repeat (to eppie), "I don't see <strike>the</strike> that connection between oil and Muslim extremism."
--Pete
Quote: . . . but to say that this means there is therefore no connection between the two is a fallacy.Yes, but this is getting far out of context. My statement was in reply to, "The day that we are not dependent on oil anymore will be the day that the middle east will start to try to modernize and get rid of muslim extremism." That is the connection I fail to see -- that somehow cutting off oil revenue will modernize the Middle East and end Muslim extremism.
As for modernizing, if cutting off revenue leads to modernization, then sub Sahara Africa should be leading us into the twenty-second century. I believe that what modernization has taken place in the Middle East is because of oil revenues, not in spite of them. It costs money to build infrastructure, schools, hospitals, etc. And it takes social interaction to develop a more tolerant society. Without oil, both the money and the interactions would be missing. Some parts of the Middle East have done better, some have not done as well, and none probably have done all they could, but don't blame it on oil. Extremism, fundamentalism, breed best in poverty and isolation. And without oil income, most of the Middle East will revert to that condition.
And as to the funding of terrorism, yes, oil money makes it easier. It may be sufficient, but it is hardly necessary. Even an operation like 9/11 is relatively cheap -- say a million or so to fund the hijackers while they prepared (including the fees for flight schools). Compared to the billions involved in the oil trade, that's nothing. With about one and a half billion Muslims in the world, even if only one in a thousand supports terrorism, 9/11 still represents less than one US dollar per.
So, I repeat (to eppie), "I don't see <strike>the</strike> that connection between oil and Muslim extremism."
--Pete
How big was the aquarium in Noah's ark?