Heav'n, whose high walls fear no assault or Siege,

Or ambush from the deep. What if we find

Some easier eneterprize? There is a place

........ another World, the happy seat

of som new race calle'd Man, about this time

To be created like to us, ........

............., but favour'd more

Of him who rules above;

US citizens are valuable to US, so since no conventional military options can obtain satisfactory results, they resort to terrorizm. Each US citizen costs about $100,000+ to raise, whereas I doubt if it is even $20,000 for an Iraqi child (may be much less). So in pure number term, it is very expensive for US to suffer casualties, whereas the Islamic world got a cheap & numerous crop. Quantity has a quality of its own as Lenin states.

Firstly I don't think that oil money goes directly towards IEDs.  Secondly, your point about increasing supply to pinch the Arabs is slightly simplistic.  5% may well cause the price to drop but right now it is increased demand which is driving up oil prices more than a limited supply.  Even if it was limited supply, the Arabs could just limit the supply even more to keep the price where it is.  I don't hold it past them because they do it all the time.  It's just that they can't keep it up when one of them decides to drop the price to increase profits (because of quantity).  No, the market is driving up prices less so than the Arabs limiting the supply. 

If you say so...

How about Maslow Pyramid? U get a dollar, u buy a burger. U get another dollar, u add a side of fries. Still another dollar, u might as well splurge & get drink to go w/the meal. It is oil money that is trickling down to IEDs. If it is not, then where are they getting it? They dont produce nothing, do they? Do they produce intelectual property? Or do they produce tourism? Or do they produce corn? What do they produce besides Oil?

U are right that 5% assumption is very simplistic and general, but principals of it are sound. Tru it is unpredictable how much demand will grow, or how far the prices will drop. By temporarily flooding the market for oil these things will be acheived:

More economic activity takes place (more tax reciepts, more money to spend on military, happier ppl will complain less, more troops on the ground, faster quiet in Iraq)

Less economic activity in Middle East (they have to look harder for buyers, will get less dollars per unit of their efforts, places like Dubai go bankrupt, that puts strain on finances, no rich financiers of terrorism, faster quiet in Iraq)

No country can voluntarily decide to produce less oil. They have bills to pay just like anyone else. Good times incourage excessive spending (exuberant thinking) and when ur money maker (oil) starts bringing in less dollars, u dont produce less of it, u produce even more. Limiting of supply by OPEC will last only 1-1.5, then bills come due & u just pretty much have to pump more oil. If US starts supplying bigger share of world oil demand, somebody will have to supply smaller share of it, or prices will tumble. If OPEC chooses to be that guy, let them be our guest.

Difference here is that Stalin & Peter can afford good bodyguards. But Average Ivan cant. So terorizing an average Ivan living under Stalin will have less of an impact than terorizing him living under Yeltsin. U kill a son of a mother in a democracy & she becomes a political activist. U kill a son of a mother in a dictatorship & she cries & she sobs, but tommorow she'll get up & go about being a nurse just as she was before.