Obama Intent on Keeping His Word - Again (125)
JamesBraginton: Yep,,u are right. It is called American Imperialism. Oh,,,and now we have Obongo. He is basically a puppet of corrupt politicians. I guess there are more spineless people here than normal people. I am ashamed of my country.
We won't mind if you move to a country that you can be proud of
------ This thread is Archived ------
Tom
I believe that was Kyrgyzstan, a former ally of the USSR and, well within the grasp of Russia and it's new way of thinking. Going back to those days is the way Russia is heading and, in fact, the non US Imperialism is viewed quite legitimately by them as Imperialism. In fact, they are holding back a two billion dollar loan to Kyrgyzstan based on the presence of the US there.
What I'm trying to say is that despite intention, the US does encroach and, actually surrounds some countries. It's a no win situation especially in this far reaching War on Terror where with over a hundred allies, and bases in every corner of the world, foes can easily feel intimidated and, conversely, allies assured.
So what to do? You can't just turn your back on allies nor can you grate the nerves of non allies on a continual basis or worse, set up SDI on these lands. I agree with many on the left that the US cannot sustain this nor should they however, to just pull out yesterday is a sure fire way to WWIII.
In response to: Consider for a moment...that most of the Islamic countries today where US Force are deployed....they are there by agreement. Consider that one of the Stan countries just decided to end a agreement. To allow the US Military presence...of 10,000...base access. Think that either the GWB or the Obama Administration is going to remain in one of these countries without an agreement? No both will leave.
I believe that was Kyrgyzstan, a former ally of the USSR and, well within the grasp of Russia and it's new way of thinking. Going back to those days is the way Russia is heading and, in fact, the non US Imperialism is viewed quite legitimately by them as Imperialism. In fact, they are holding back a two billion dollar loan to Kyrgyzstan based on the presence of the US there.
What I'm trying to say is that despite intention, the US does encroach and, actually surrounds some countries. It's a no win situation especially in this far reaching War on Terror where with over a hundred allies, and bases in every corner of the world, foes can easily feel intimidated and, conversely, allies assured.
So what to do? You can't just turn your back on allies nor can you grate the nerves of non allies on a continual basis or worse, set up SDI on these lands. I agree with many on the left that the US cannot sustain this nor should they however, to just pull out yesterday is a sure fire way to WWIII.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Drewski: Gypsy
All the reasons for the war were accomplished which included ....
- to get Iraq to comply with ceasefire terms
- to stop Iraq’s Inadvertence to UNSC resolutions
- to force Iraq to cease it’s violation of human rights
- to stop Iraq’s material breaches of UNSC resolutions
- to end Iraq’s WMD capability and aspirations
- to end repression of Iraq’s civilian population
- to force Iraq to return or cooperate in accounting for Kuwaiti and third country nationals
- to force Iraq to return Kuwaiti property wrongfully seized by Iraq,
- to end Iraqi Support for terrorism
- to show America has the will to help allies and destroy foes
- to depose a regional threat take in Saddam that would have to be dealt with sooner or later
- to force action from SA to take care of it's radicals
- to pressure other regimes in the area not to provide passive or active support to Jihadists
- to position US troops in the region in force to enable that pressure
- to aid their global and NATO mission by placing a Strategic Air Support base
- to support and help create an Arab democracy as an example to others
So, what part of it was a defeat?
All the reasons for the war were accomplished which included ....
- to get Iraq to comply with ceasefire terms
- to stop Iraq’s Inadvertence to UNSC resolutions
- to force Iraq to cease it’s violation of human rights
- to stop Iraq’s material breaches of UNSC resolutions
- to end Iraq’s WMD capability and aspirations
- to end repression of Iraq’s civilian population
- to force Iraq to return or cooperate in accounting for Kuwaiti and third country nationals
- to force Iraq to return Kuwaiti property wrongfully seized by Iraq,
- to end Iraqi Support for terrorism
- to show America has the will to help allies and destroy foes
- to depose a regional threat take in Saddam that would have to be dealt with sooner or later
- to force action from SA to take care of it's radicals
- to pressure other regimes in the area not to provide passive or active support to Jihadists
- to position US troops in the region in force to enable that pressure
- to aid their global and NATO mission by placing a Strategic Air Support base
- to support and help create an Arab democracy as an example to others
So, what part of it was a defeat?
I think our concept of democracy is something a population has to desire so much that its citizens decide for themselves that they are prepared to fight and die for to become 'free'; instead we inadvertantly created the opposite - people who were prepared to die fighting both us as foreign invaders and 'infidel democracy' - it seems that many would rather be subjucated by their own religious leaders.
I don't believe that you can enforce democracy on a people - all they'll do is democratically vote in a regime that then kicks out the concept of democracy (as Algeria did and then France intervened as France didn't like the results).
I believe we should have toppled Saddam, but then 'got the Hell out of Dodge' (after immediately taking a census as we handed out food and water and helping set up local elections)........ then 'we' could not have been blamed for what has since happened.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Rusty
The elections proved otherwise as religious leaders did fairly miserably (less than 17% overall) and, it was rather difficult for the Iraqis to fight as Saddam had perfected Stalin's methods to near perfection so, a rebellion from within was unthinkable.
Rusty
Other than try, what would a better alternative be, business as usual with a more palatable despot installed?
Rusty
Set up local elections? You are going against the concept of democracy now. Pick a concept and go with it please. As for pulling out of dodge possibly this is a thought but, democracy has to have civilization to flourish in and, those that were fighting it were not dealing in civilization but rather chaos which flourishes in absence of hence, you are either for it and, willing to defend it while it grows or, against it.
In response to: I think our concept of democracy is something a population has to desire so much that its citizens decide for themselves that they are prepared to fight and die for to become 'free'; instead we inadvertantly created the opposite - people who were prepared to die fighting both us as foreign invaders and 'infidel democracy' - it seems that many would rather be subjucated by their own religious leaders.
The elections proved otherwise as religious leaders did fairly miserably (less than 17% overall) and, it was rather difficult for the Iraqis to fight as Saddam had perfected Stalin's methods to near perfection so, a rebellion from within was unthinkable.
Rusty
In response to: I don't believe that you can enforce democracy on a people - all they'll do is democratically vote in a regime that then kicks out the concept of democracy (as Algeria did and then France intervened as France didn't like the results).
Other than try, what would a better alternative be, business as usual with a more palatable despot installed?
Rusty
In response to: I believe we should have toppled Saddam, but then 'got the Hell out of Dodge' (after immediately taking a census as we handed out food and water and helping set up local elections)........ then 'we' could not have been blamed for what has since happened.
Set up local elections? You are going against the concept of democracy now. Pick a concept and go with it please. As for pulling out of dodge possibly this is a thought but, democracy has to have civilization to flourish in and, those that were fighting it were not dealing in civilization but rather chaos which flourishes in absence of hence, you are either for it and, willing to defend it while it grows or, against it.
------ This thread is Archived ------
jvaski: We won't mind if you move to a country that you can be proud of
Preferably not this one either thank you...
------ This thread is Archived ------
ttom500: I will keep it short to keep Fallingman happy.
Gozo.....please come to 2009. If those convoy attacks were still occuring we would still be having large numbers of casualties.
When we moved into the bases out side of the cities after teh surge....it was a means to disengage. Allow the Miliki gov't
the opportunity to control the country more. This all began months ago.
If the Iraqi people did not want the leadership of the Maliki gov't...they could have voted them out office. This is called democracy.
Welcome to 2009, Gozo.
Gozo.....please come to 2009. If those convoy attacks were still occuring we would still be having large numbers of casualties.
When we moved into the bases out side of the cities after teh surge....it was a means to disengage. Allow the Miliki gov't
the opportunity to control the country more. This all began months ago.
If the Iraqi people did not want the leadership of the Maliki gov't...they could have voted them out office. This is called democracy.
Welcome to 2009, Gozo.
More logical interpretations to an illegal occupation......how very imperialistic......
------ This thread is Archived ------
OBAMA isnt anything to be talkin about .. realize that.. He is going to screw this country up!
------ This thread is Archived ------
ttom500: And Gozo....the Gov't does not own the companies in the United States. If the share holders and the board of directors wish to
give a shining star the chance to increase the profitablity of a firm (no matter what its financial condition)....it is not the gov't place to halt them.
The gov't has no fiduary responsibilities over a company until a chapter 9 or 11 bankrutpcy has been done.
The bailout into the companies for the most part ocurred prior to any bankruptcy being declared or court decided. E.G, how they spend that money of a bailout....is legally their to do...they wish to invest it into the business plan of a shining star...
Presidnet Obama does not have the legal standing for this. Welcome to corporate law 101, Gozo.
give a shining star the chance to increase the profitablity of a firm (no matter what its financial condition)....it is not the gov't place to halt them.
The gov't has no fiduary responsibilities over a company until a chapter 9 or 11 bankrutpcy has been done.
The bailout into the companies for the most part ocurred prior to any bankruptcy being declared or court decided. E.G, how they spend that money of a bailout....is legally their to do...they wish to invest it into the business plan of a shining star...
Presidnet Obama does not have the legal standing for this. Welcome to corporate law 101, Gozo.
This post has made it glaringly obvious...in case of any previous doubts.....that our ideologies of what democracy is are as opposite to each other as black is to white.
While you seem to see evil in the slightest hint of left wing ideas in a government.....I tend to see a greater evil in the total capitalistic ideals adapted by your country in particular.
I prefer having a say in the manner my life, my country and well being is being planned and catered for by a freely elected social democratic government........
...then by being subjected to decisions I have no control over and that may not cater the individual's interests. In the hands of those corrupt minority whose sole aim is of making billions of profit...........
your system of corporate rule is as dangerous and ugly in it's reality as the worst form of communism. Just at opposite ends of the scale that denotes the political ideologies in act on this planet.
They are simply two facets of the same gem......domination.
------ This thread is Archived ------
To all those still desperately trying to convince all that the occupation of Iraq by the US was a gift sent from heaven to the population of Iraq..........
First we had the excuse of WMD, now it's dishing out democracy.....
An occupation will always remain what it intrinsically is.....an act of aggression.....applied by corrupt greed of corporate rule that justifies the disregard of the human factor for the sake of making money.
It will never be justified....not now.....not in the future.
OIL is the only reason for the invasion of Iraq.....and the paranoiac quest of the US to retain control of the larger chunk of the world's fuel supply.
Just as is was convenient in the past for the US to back and arm Saddam Hussien to go fight the Iranians........it was just as convenient to remove him once he nationalized all the oil industry and turned his back on the US.....
It is not democracy that instigated the US to occupy...but sheer imperialistic greed.
First we had the excuse of WMD, now it's dishing out democracy.....
An occupation will always remain what it intrinsically is.....an act of aggression.....applied by corrupt greed of corporate rule that justifies the disregard of the human factor for the sake of making money.
It will never be justified....not now.....not in the future.
OIL is the only reason for the invasion of Iraq.....and the paranoiac quest of the US to retain control of the larger chunk of the world's fuel supply.
Just as is was convenient in the past for the US to back and arm Saddam Hussien to go fight the Iranians........it was just as convenient to remove him once he nationalized all the oil industry and turned his back on the US.....
It is not democracy that instigated the US to occupy...but sheer imperialistic greed.
------ This thread is Archived ------
gozoman2
UN Resolution 1770 legalizes the occupation as does the 2008 Status of Forces Agreement between Iraq and the US.
It is an illegal occupation only if you believe the rule of the UN is illegal as well as the decisions of the US and Iraq government.
If that is considered imperialistic then your master is violence and chaos.
In response to: More logical interpretations to an illegal occupation......how very imperialistic......
UN Resolution 1770 legalizes the occupation as does the 2008 Status of Forces Agreement between Iraq and the US.
It is an illegal occupation only if you believe the rule of the UN is illegal as well as the decisions of the US and Iraq government.
If that is considered imperialistic then your master is violence and chaos.
------ This thread is Archived ------
gozoman2
Better not be buying any consumer goods otherwise you will be guilty of supporting the corporate elites. Matter of fact, don't try to invest any money as it will end up in that evil corporate world somehow and, you will be guilty of being as bad as the worst form of communist.
Stick with a tin can and string gozoman2, the rest of us use tools formed of profit seeking people.
In response to: your system of corporate rule is as dangerous and ugly in it's reality as the worst form of communism. Just at opposite ends of the scale that denotes the political ideologies in act on this planet.
Better not be buying any consumer goods otherwise you will be guilty of supporting the corporate elites. Matter of fact, don't try to invest any money as it will end up in that evil corporate world somehow and, you will be guilty of being as bad as the worst form of communist.
Stick with a tin can and string gozoman2, the rest of us use tools formed of profit seeking people.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Drewski: gozoman2
Better not be buying any consumer goods otherwise you will be guilty of supporting the corporate elites. Matter of fact, don't try to invest any money as it will end up in that evil corporate world somehow and, you will be guilty of being as bad as the worst form of communist.
Stick with a tin can and string gozoman2, the rest of us use tools formed of profit seeking people.
Better not be buying any consumer goods otherwise you will be guilty of supporting the corporate elites. Matter of fact, don't try to invest any money as it will end up in that evil corporate world somehow and, you will be guilty of being as bad as the worst form of communist.
Stick with a tin can and string gozoman2, the rest of us use tools formed of profit seeking people.
Thanks for your reply to my post - I have to go out now but will reply when I get back..............
on a lighter note we here in Gozo are very environmentally conscious and are setting up our own 'tin can and string' internet operation - powered by illegal immigrants and donkeys turning a rather large wheel to generate the electricity!
I happen to know gozoman2 and believe he is a decent guy doing his best in action as well as in words to make at least this island a better place to live in......... and, while capitalism has proved to create more wealth for more people than communism, the crazy world we live in where the only law we MUST obey is 'CONSUME CONSUME CONSUME' we must have an alternative........
and people like gozoman, who does his best to recycle stuff instead of destroying the planet by wasting all our limited resources on gas-guzzling mechanical gods and persuing 'The American Dream' of never-ending material success are at least making a physical effort instead of just talking about it like me!
I do NOT want to go back to living as a 'hunter/gatherer', and I am not particularly 'gripped' with enthusiasm by the thought of having to grow my own food, but I feel we are overcome by material greed when probably 99.99999% of the world just wants food and shelter and a decent environment and peace and hope for the future for both ourselves and our descendants - without the need of another world war to be the only outcome that will give us the chance to make yet another fresh start in the bloody history of the human race!
A long short note - now I'm late to go out, and I blame YOU!
------ This thread is Archived ------
Drewski: Skybow
I have not posted an opinion - yet. I'm more than happy to supply them and, the applicable quotes from those links however, I am not one to supply endless reams of information to somebody that actually does not want to read. If you wish a certain point clarified I will provide what you need.
Skybow
You posted about Dafur and how oil companies and tribes are doing a land grab then stated that Iraq was about oil a few times. I asked you to be more specific which does not mean that I wish you to provide a link, quote, reams of information, just explain how Iraq was all about oil when we all know that the US is the minority contractor in the oilfields and. it gets less oil now from Iraq than Saddam supplied to them before they invaded.
Skybow
In order to oust the Taliban and dismantle Al Qeada. OBL is a figurehead as Al Qeada is a fluid organization who’s leadership is fairly spread out however, depends on funding from private citizens and mosques in Saudi Arabia to exist with and operate internationally. His demise would do little to slow the group, it is more an emotional target than a strategic one.
Stopping the funding from Saudi Arabia by having the government there take action against Qutbists would provide a roundhouse to the organization however, the government, faced with the fact that Qutbism had a large potential to cause a civil war within the kingdom was very reluctant to take action.
In Tora Bora, faced with a few hundred US SF troops, escaped to Pakistan where he more than likely remains to this day. Pakistan is in a situation much the same as Saudi Arabia with Qutbists holding a lot of power among the people. If the US were to take actin then it only requires a simple rallying cry of ‘the Crusaders are attacking’ and one of the few strong allies in the War on Terror will be in the midst of a civil war. Hence, why you would need a hundred thousand troops in Afghanistan along the Pakistani border playing pool waiting for OBL to show his head rather than pressuring Saudi Arabia to cut off financing is beyond most policy makers.
Skybow
Which lies do you know for a fact and can you document them? The manhunt did not switch to Saddam as it never stopped for OBL with troop levels in Afghanistan growing from a few hundred to ten thousand at the time of the Iraq invasion.
Skybow
Less than one percent of his arms were from the US and the other 99% came from Russia, China, Europe and other Arab states so, given that every country on earth deals with the US in some way shape or form this can hardly be considered support. As for the second question, he was in violation of ceasefire conditions after he invaded Kuwait, an actual ally of the US and, Iraq’s proximity to Saudi Arabia in order to apply pressure to the Royal Regime made it the only desirable and, legally available land mass in which to place a large amount of US troops outside of Saudi Arabia to remove the Qutbist contention that Infidels were soiling holy land.
Skybow
So far you have said it is about oil but have not given much credit or evidence for this rather sweeping argument. If it were, Saddam would have bent over to acquiesce or, the US simple would have taken over Kuwait and pumped to their heart's content. After all, they had the manpower there.
I have not posted an opinion - yet. I'm more than happy to supply them and, the applicable quotes from those links however, I am not one to supply endless reams of information to somebody that actually does not want to read. If you wish a certain point clarified I will provide what you need.
Skybow
You posted about Dafur and how oil companies and tribes are doing a land grab then stated that Iraq was about oil a few times. I asked you to be more specific which does not mean that I wish you to provide a link, quote, reams of information, just explain how Iraq was all about oil when we all know that the US is the minority contractor in the oilfields and. it gets less oil now from Iraq than Saddam supplied to them before they invaded.
Skybow
In order to oust the Taliban and dismantle Al Qeada. OBL is a figurehead as Al Qeada is a fluid organization who’s leadership is fairly spread out however, depends on funding from private citizens and mosques in Saudi Arabia to exist with and operate internationally. His demise would do little to slow the group, it is more an emotional target than a strategic one.
Stopping the funding from Saudi Arabia by having the government there take action against Qutbists would provide a roundhouse to the organization however, the government, faced with the fact that Qutbism had a large potential to cause a civil war within the kingdom was very reluctant to take action.
In Tora Bora, faced with a few hundred US SF troops, escaped to Pakistan where he more than likely remains to this day. Pakistan is in a situation much the same as Saudi Arabia with Qutbists holding a lot of power among the people. If the US were to take actin then it only requires a simple rallying cry of ‘the Crusaders are attacking’ and one of the few strong allies in the War on Terror will be in the midst of a civil war. Hence, why you would need a hundred thousand troops in Afghanistan along the Pakistani border playing pool waiting for OBL to show his head rather than pressuring Saudi Arabia to cut off financing is beyond most policy makers.
Skybow
Which lies do you know for a fact and can you document them? The manhunt did not switch to Saddam as it never stopped for OBL with troop levels in Afghanistan growing from a few hundred to ten thousand at the time of the Iraq invasion.
Skybow
Less than one percent of his arms were from the US and the other 99% came from Russia, China, Europe and other Arab states so, given that every country on earth deals with the US in some way shape or form this can hardly be considered support. As for the second question, he was in violation of ceasefire conditions after he invaded Kuwait, an actual ally of the US and, Iraq’s proximity to Saudi Arabia in order to apply pressure to the Royal Regime made it the only desirable and, legally available land mass in which to place a large amount of US troops outside of Saudi Arabia to remove the Qutbist contention that Infidels were soiling holy land.
Skybow
So far you have said it is about oil but have not given much credit or evidence for this rather sweeping argument. If it were, Saddam would have bent over to acquiesce or, the US simple would have taken over Kuwait and pumped to their heart's content. After all, they had the manpower there.
Would you pleas refrain from breaking my posts up into pieces and pontificating on each piece. I am able to read whole paragraphs and would prefer to do so.
Thanks, Sky
------ This thread is Archived ------
Drewski:
"You’re not sure about occupying the entire world? Interesting that you yourself are not sure while everybody else including Bush were only fixated on Iraq."
"You’re not sure about occupying the entire world? Interesting that you yourself are not sure while everybody else including Bush were only fixated on Iraq."
What a splendid idea!
I believe in a one world government and one currency (the eurodollaryenzlotyroublethingy).
I'm all for conquering the world as long as 'we' are in power and not 'them' - then I'd have to fight for my 'rights'..... maybe!
------ This thread is Archived ------
Sure.
Skybow
I have not posted an opinion - yet. I'm more than happy to supply links and did read your page 5 stuff which had to do with tribal and corporate concerns about Iraq but nothing other than a flat statement about how Iraq was about oil without substance.
I explained how there were more troops looking for OBL at the outset of the Iraq invasion and why, and, why Iraq is important. I then asked for some lies which you know are lies and to quote them.
I explained that I don't need a whole bunch of links just your explanations of why you feel certain things other than 'it's all about oil' etc. In the face of information I have, oil for the US or, control of that oil is the last reason so what do you know that is different from what I know?
I hope this format works better for you.
Skybow
In response to: No you're not wondering why there seems to be a conflict, you are trying to manufacture one.
For someone who isn't posting any links for your information (or opinions) you sure are asking for them aren't you?
Now you want me to elaborate about how the mission in Iraq is about the Oil? Have you read at all my post's on pg 5?
Here you go, for a landlocked relatively geographically unimportant country, how is it that our government was in hot pursuit of OBL in Afganistan after 911 when suddenly Iraq became more important.
Lies were presented as truth by the Bush administration and the manhunt switched to Saddam. Someone who played ball with the Us gov. for years, could it be he didn't want to play ball anymore?
For someone who isn't posting any links for your information (or opinions) you sure are asking for them aren't you?
Now you want me to elaborate about how the mission in Iraq is about the Oil? Have you read at all my post's on pg 5?
Here you go, for a landlocked relatively geographically unimportant country, how is it that our government was in hot pursuit of OBL in Afganistan after 911 when suddenly Iraq became more important.
Lies were presented as truth by the Bush administration and the manhunt switched to Saddam. Someone who played ball with the Us gov. for years, could it be he didn't want to play ball anymore?
I have not posted an opinion - yet. I'm more than happy to supply links and did read your page 5 stuff which had to do with tribal and corporate concerns about Iraq but nothing other than a flat statement about how Iraq was about oil without substance.
I explained how there were more troops looking for OBL at the outset of the Iraq invasion and why, and, why Iraq is important. I then asked for some lies which you know are lies and to quote them.
I explained that I don't need a whole bunch of links just your explanations of why you feel certain things other than 'it's all about oil' etc. In the face of information I have, oil for the US or, control of that oil is the last reason so what do you know that is different from what I know?
I hope this format works better for you.
------ This thread is Archived ------
It certainly does work for me, thank you. The other format was in effect cherry picking my post.
I have already posted to you I don't think we will convince each other of anything so it is fairly pointless to go on and on with simply opinions that are not based in facts.
That requires posting links IMO to where the information is coming from that formed our opinions. Hopefully most of those links will not be from either L or R extreme perspectives but more middle of the road sources.
I have already posted to you I don't think we will convince each other of anything so it is fairly pointless to go on and on with simply opinions that are not based in facts.
That requires posting links IMO to where the information is coming from that formed our opinions. Hopefully most of those links will not be from either L or R extreme perspectives but more middle of the road sources.
------ This thread is Archived ------
rusty_knight: What a splendid idea!
I believe in a one world government and one currency (the eurodollaryenzlotyroublethingy).
I'm all for conquering the world as long as 'we' are in power and not 'them' - then I'd have to fight for my 'rights'..... maybe!
I believe in a one world government and one currency (the eurodollaryenzlotyroublethingy).
I'm all for conquering the world as long as 'we' are in power and not 'them' - then I'd have to fight for my 'rights'..... maybe!
Not me. The quote from above was me replying to Ray who said ..
What Ray said .....
In response to: It's just not possible for a country that's entirely broke and utterly dysfunctional to occupy the entire world.
I'm not even sure it's really such a good idea.
I'm not even sure it's really such a good idea.
And I agreed with him as you know saying that good thing Bush etc were only concentrated on Iraq and Afghanistan.
Rusty
In response to: I happen to know gozoman2 and believe he is a decent guy doing his best in action as well as in words to make at least this island a better place to live in......... and, while capitalism has proved to create more wealth for more people than communism, the crazy world we live in where the only law we MUST obey is 'CONSUME CONSUME CONSUME' we must have an alternative........
I believe that as well and, that he is a fine outstanding human however, one cannot complain about consumerism while they are a consumer. It's like Al Gore and his mega kilowatt power usage while preaching energy frugalism, or peace while advocating the destruction of a country. Well meaning is one thing but to take a side then one must live that side for the most part rather than preach while living off the avails of that opposing side.
Rusty
In response to: A long short note - now I'm late to go out, and I blame YOU!
I know of what you speak. This is endless so please, have a beer on me, wish I was hoisting with you right about now.
Skybow, glad it works. I was only trying to keep points in order as I dislike a factual post becomming a wild essay riddled with emotions and all.
Skybow
In response to: It certainly does work for me, thank you. The other format was in effect cherry picking my post.
I have already posted to you I don't think we will convince each other of anything so it is fairly pointless to go on and on with simply opinions that are not based in facts.
That requires posting links IMO to where the information is coming from that formed our opinions. Hopefully most of those links will not be from either L or R extreme perspectives but more middle of the road sources.
I have already posted to you I don't think we will convince each other of anything so it is fairly pointless to go on and on with simply opinions that are not based in facts.
That requires posting links IMO to where the information is coming from that formed our opinions. Hopefully most of those links will not be from either L or R extreme perspectives but more middle of the road sources.
I'm very interested to see why you believe the war in Iraq was all about oil. So, if you could post a brief summary of what facts that you know of that support that I would appreciate it. Then if required I could ask you to support some of those rationale with links and quotes. If I have difficulty with those then I would be more than happy to give you links to sites that support my reasons why yours are possibly wrong if you wish.
Unless of course, this is too much hassle.
------ This thread is Archived ------
I will look into that tomorrow morning, it is almost 2 am here and I have to try to get some sleep right now OK?
------ This thread is Archived ------
blu555fire: OBAMA isnt anything to be talkin about .. realize that.. He is going to screw this country up!
We'de be happy to put you with Bush, Cheney and McCain on an island and the four of you can run things again .......
------ This thread is Archived ------
This Thread is Archived
This Thread is archived, so you will no longer be able to post to it. Threads get archived automatically when they are older than 3 months.
« Go back to All Threads
« Go back to All Threads
More Threads
Common Issues with the BMW X1
Sleepy Don!
1830's Music
The Best of the GOP
other can see but not you
Salami, Salami, Baloney
your personality
How far is too far?
everything is changing
rarotonga
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
I have not posted an opinion - yet. I'm more than happy to supply them and, the applicable quotes from those links however, I am not one to supply endless reams of information to somebody that actually does not want to read. If you wish a certain point clarified I will provide what you need.
Skybow
You posted about Dafur and how oil companies and tribes are doing a land grab then stated that Iraq was about oil a few times. I asked you to be more specific which does not mean that I wish you to provide a link, quote, reams of information, just explain how Iraq was all about oil when we all know that the US is the minority contractor in the oilfields and. it gets less oil now from Iraq than Saddam supplied to them before they invaded.
Skybow
In order to oust the Taliban and dismantle Al Qeada. OBL is a figurehead as Al Qeada is a fluid organization who’s leadership is fairly spread out however, depends on funding from private citizens and mosques in Saudi Arabia to exist with and operate internationally. His demise would do little to slow the group, it is more an emotional target than a strategic one.
Stopping the funding from Saudi Arabia by having the government there take action against Qutbists would provide a roundhouse to the organization however, the government, faced with the fact that Qutbism had a large potential to cause a civil war within the kingdom was very reluctant to take action.
In Tora Bora, faced with a few hundred US SF troops, escaped to Pakistan where he more than likely remains to this day. Pakistan is in a situation much the same as Saudi Arabia with Qutbists holding a lot of power among the people. If the US were to take actin then it only requires a simple rallying cry of ‘the Crusaders are attacking’ and one of the few strong allies in the War on Terror will be in the midst of a civil war. Hence, why you would need a hundred thousand troops in Afghanistan along the Pakistani border playing pool waiting for OBL to show his head rather than pressuring Saudi Arabia to cut off financing is beyond most policy makers.
Skybow
Which lies do you know for a fact and can you document them? The manhunt did not switch to Saddam as it never stopped for OBL with troop levels in Afghanistan growing from a few hundred to ten thousand at the time of the Iraq invasion.
Skybow
Less than one percent of his arms were from the US and the other 99% came from Russia, China, Europe and other Arab states so, given that every country on earth deals with the US in some way shape or form this can hardly be considered support. As for the second question, he was in violation of ceasefire conditions after he invaded Kuwait, an actual ally of the US and, Iraq’s proximity to Saudi Arabia in order to apply pressure to the Royal Regime made it the only desirable and, legally available land mass in which to place a large amount of US troops outside of Saudi Arabia to remove the Qutbist contention that Infidels were soiling holy land.
Skybow
So far you have said it is about oil but have not given much credit or evidence for this rather sweeping argument. If it were, Saddam would have bent over to acquiesce or, the US simple would have taken over Kuwait and pumped to their heart's content. After all, they had the manpower there.