Beer Goggles: RamRod and Coffee Discuss the Canceled Taliban Peace Talks: TidePodcast Episode 119

1 Hour, 8 Minutes


39 thoughts on “Beer Goggles: RamRod and Coffee Discuss the Canceled Taliban Peace Talks: TidePodcast Episode 119

  1. Marleen

    Instead of an hour and eight-minute conversation described as “Beer Goggles: RamRod and Coffee Discuss the Canceled Taliban Peace Talks: TidePodcast Episode 119” above, there is an approximately ten and a half-minute video on banana republics/wars/history; thought you might want to know.

      1. Marleen

        I see the answer to whether or not you intended to leave it out is that, no, you didn’t intend to leave it out… since It is now there.

  2. Marleen

    Websites, or the programming(s) for interface with them, sometimes malfunction unevenly — not for everyone. Within the last week, someone else’s site was returning an error or unavailability message when I clicked on the individual topic or the comment button for it… but it didn’t look that way to the blog owner. Sometimes, some blog visitors can utilize ping back while others can’t. (I don’t post pingbacks but I’ve seen this reported.) Those are examples.

    Anyway, I’m glad I was finally able to access the conversation with you and RamRod.

    I really don’t want us/the U.S. to be going in to fight for Saudi Arabia. It doesn’t make sense, and we don’t need to keep doing things like this to the people who volunteer.

    1. bottomlesscoffee007

      I’m right there with you Marleen. To be honest though, these things are so nuanced, that the answer is never clear.

      1. Marleen

        It’s too weird, to me, that the majority of 9/11 hijackers were Saudi Arabian extremists (like the current “crowned” prince himself is an extremist) And lots of people have been way anti-Muslim since then… but not anti going to war for those Muslims in particular? All this stuff just doesn’t add up. It seems like insane little disparate bits here and there.

        Who said the following?
        I think Islam hates us.

        Who said this?
        The Saudis pay cash.

        1. bottomlesscoffee007

          I don’t know who said either. I don’t know if it’s true about the 9/11 hijackers or not as well. Just like UFOs, the government is now telling us what is true and what is not true. The question is, who do you trust?

  3. Anonymous

    It is Quds, the Iranian special forces who are suspected of being responsible for the interdiction in the straight of hormuz the gulf of oman.

  4. Anonymous

    Also, according to general dunford, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, the deployment will be in the hundreds not the thousands. It will also likely be air defense and other specialty skills, so it will not likely manpower intensive. That being said, the Saudis are ISIS ‘s biggest backers, with wealthy princes and shieks funneling millions to them and other Islamic terrorist groups. Any way you slice it, we would be actively helping a country that is actively funding anti western terrorists, in an effort to maintain low oil prices and help our economy. I think the question here is, is a healthy American economy worth the blood sweat and tears of our troops?

    1. bottomlesscoffee007

      I don’t believe so. Just my opinion. What’s the sense in America being energy independent and being an energy exporter if we are still willing to shed blood over oil in other parts of the world?

  5. Anonymous

    Finally, contrary to popular belief, we did not train Bin Laden. We trained the mujahdeen, which fought the russians. Bin Laden also led a group of “Afghan arabs” in the fight against the russians, and it’s rumored that the CIA built him a training camp in khost, but at the time, we were loose allies as we shared a common enemy. Bin Laden used his own money plus Arab donations to recruit, train and equip an all Arab group in this fight, which he would later morph into Al Qaeda.

  6. Anonymous

    I said all of this stuff out loud while listening to the podcast, but you guys probably didn’t hear me. You and ran crushed it on this one, really enjoyed listening. -Steve

  7. Anonymous

    Also, I don’t understand how we are energy independant, I hear everyone e say we are, but I’ve never heard it explained. Also, I thought we had always exported oik, as it was more profitable for American companies to export sell oil and let other foreign companies refine it than it was to refine and sell here due to oil taxes and regulations.
    As well, we will always be beholden to OPEC, as they set the price per barrel.

          1. Marleen

            I was thinking the same thing with regard to “us” importing or exporting energy. Not only is it not me, it’s not the U.S. per se — but private companies.

              1. Marleen

                I should probably say private as well as publicly-traded (for instances, Koch Industries is private while I think Shell is publicly traded — still, not the U.S. per se).

  8. Marleen

    In 2011, the country became a net exporter of refined petroleum products.

    Source: Energy Information Administration (March 12, 2015). “How much of the oil produced in the United States is consumed in the United States?”.

  9. Marleen
    The fraction of crude oil consumed in the US that was imported went from 35% immediately before the 1973 oil crisis, peaked at 60% in 2005, and then returned to 35% by 2013 thanks to increased domestic production from the shale oil boom.

    1. bottomlesscoffee007

      Hahahah, I don’t know. You just strike me as that. Good heart, loyal, fierce and not one to be taken advantage of.

Please Like This Post, Follow and Comment to Aid in the Discussion

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.