What about destabilization of our economy. If the Arabs could cut off our supply of oil, wouldn't that do far worse damage than any suicide bomber could ever hope to achieve?
How could all these security measures, electronic surveilance, baggage screening, bomb detection, ect. prevent the financial ruin of this country?
Is this really a war on terrorism or a battle for control of the oil?
2006-09-12 09:51:29 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
MAN is the most dangerous weapon.
It's the mind that is most destructive. It doesn't matter how they carry the act out.
2006-09-12 09:53:31 · answer #1 · answered by Jormir 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Since much of the United States is owned by folks in the United Arab Emerrits, I doubt that destabilizing the dollar would be a good long-term goal for anyone with that kind of power. Of course, if they knew when the strike was going to be, they could dump US dollars, go to gold and then wait. Movie about that called "Rollover" you might be interested in seeing.
Bombs are one thing, the power of capital is quite another.
2006-09-12 10:08:17 · answer #2 · answered by NeoArt 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Like Jormir said we are the most dangerous weapon. The bomb does not create, launch , or detonate itself. Someone has to be controlling it, and first of all man is the one who started the argument that led into the war that led to the bomb.
2006-09-12 09:58:09 · answer #3 · answered by Bluefire 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Opec already did see Energy Crisis of 1973
2006-09-12 09:53:36 · answer #4 · answered by Bryan S 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Actually "worrying" about being bombed is usually a more dangerous weapon than the bomb itself.
2006-09-12 10:04:19 · answer #5 · answered by carpediem 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
WEll, I am no expert, but I think they (Arabs) want the money we (Americans) pay them FOR oil as much as we WANT/NEED the oil...
2006-09-12 10:03:17 · answer #6 · answered by sacolunga 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋