The Iraq / war on terror thread

[POPmetal]

USA needs oil... that's why they want to "save" iraq people.

in about 10 years, the bad bad "chavez jr" will put in danger the world, and USA will rescue all of us (if venezuela still producing oil)

in about 20 years, usa will need drinkable water, they will find a potential enemy here in argentina, they will come to "save us" with few bombs, and take our antartic water reserve.

Oh bullshit!!!!!!? ?If this war was about getting cheap oil then why am I paying $2.85 for a gallon of gas?? The war for oil arguement is dead, get over it.

Nobody ever said it was about oil NOW. It is about securing a USA position in the middle east and securing cheap oil for later.

In case you haven't read lately, we consume 4 barrels for every 1 we drill up. We are on the downward slope of the bell curve and have been for years.

Our entire society as we know it depends on OIL. Everything, not just gassing our cars up. We have no technology set in place, or even close, if the oil supply begins to end. Chenney and other big oil fat cats have made claim (as far back as 99) that it is getting harder to find more oil and it is something we are going to have to deal with.

You see the price of oil now? That is because of speculation of low supply, and then actual low supply. What do you think is going to happen to when the supply does run low? Total economic colapse as gas prices sky rocket. You don't think out government is aware of this? Secure long term oil NOW for later. We consume 1/4 of the worlds oil, we need oil to live. Don't tell me we aren't there for anything else but that. If we wanted to free a country we would have gone to Sudan years ago.

If it was as simple as we need the oil, wouldn't it have been a lot cheaper to simply lift the embargo and start buying up from Saddam? It's not like he wasn't willing to sell.

[SLCPUNK]

Again I said future oil

[POPmetal]

Again I said future oil

Was there any reason to believe that Saddam would not be willing to sell it to us in the future? All we had to do was lift the sanctions.

[SLCPUNK]

Who said we wanted to buy it?

Who said we wanted just some of it?

Saddam selling to us?

Yea right.

[POPmetal]

Who said we wanted to buy it?

Are you saying there are US plans to grab oil from Iraq without buying it?

Who said we wanted just some of it?

Are there any indications that the US will bar Iraq from selling oil to non-US consumers?

Saddam selling to us?

Yea right.

If we had left him in power and lifted the embargo, do you honestly think he will balk at the billions of dollars he stands to make by selling oil? After all, with that kind of money he could build much more lavish palaces and much deeper mass graves.

[SLCPUNK]

Who said we wanted to buy it?

Are you saying there are US plans to grab oil from Iraq without buying it?

Who said we wanted just some of it?

Are there any indications that the US will bar Iraq from selling oil to non-US consumers?

Saddam selling to us?

Yea right.

If we had left him in power and lifted the embargo, do you honestly think he will balk at the billions of dollars he stands to make by selling oil? After all, with that kind of money he could build much more lavish palaces and much deeper mass graves.

I am saying that we are headed for an end of the hydrocarbon era, most certainly in our lifetime.

The liars in charge now are quite aware of this and placed themselves exactly where they need to be, in order to stretch this time period out a little longer when needed.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/feature/story/0,,1464050,00.html

Do I know exactly what they intend to do and how they are going to do it? No. Do I want to sit around and speculate with you on "shoulda coulda woulda" in regards to hypothetical oil sales with Saddam as the main character? No.

I do know that we depend heavily on oil and we are approaching an end to an easy (available) power source. We have put ourself over there under the guise of "feeing a country" that just so happens to sit on a huge oil reserve......

Go figure.

[POPmetal]

Who said we wanted to buy it?

Are you saying there are US plans to grab oil from Iraq without buying it?

Who said we wanted just some of it?

Are there any indications that the US will bar Iraq from selling oil to non-US consumers?

Saddam selling to us?

Yea right.

If we had left him in power and lifted the embargo, do you honestly think he will balk at the billions of dollars he stands to make by selling oil? After all, with that kind of money he could build much more lavish palaces and much deeper mass graves.

I am saying that we are headed for an end of the hydrocarbon era, most certainly in our lifetime.

The liars in charge now are quite aware of this and placed themselves exactly where they need to be, in order to stretch this time period out a little longer when needed.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/feature/story/0,,1464050,00.html

Do I know exactly what they intend to do and how they are going to do it? No. Do I want to sit around and speculate with you on "shoulda coulda woulda" in regards to hypothetical oil sales with Saddam as the main character? No.

I do know that we depend heavily on oil and we are approaching an end to an easy (available) power source. We have put ourself over there under the guise of "feeing a country" that just so happens to sit on a huge oil reserve......

Go figure.

This has no bearing unless the United States takes their oil without paying the market determined price. It would have been cheaper to lift the sanctions and buy the oil from Saddam than to launch a costly war, fight an insurgency, and rebuild a nation.

[Surfrider]

While I find myself in the middle of the argument between both sides, it is the use of the Oil Conspiracy Theory that I find most directly separates my beliefs over the war from others on this board.  As previously expressed, I think that waging war was obviously a poor decision in hindsight.  However, I simply believe that Bush acted on bad intelligence, and the administration was too trigger happy to get rid of Suddam.  In my opinion, the oil theories are not supported by any credible evidence, and they are simply attempts to create an alterior motive to what was simply a poor decision.  Of course, like Clinton, there are those that simply never liked Bush in the first place and have sought to find a hidden agenda behind all of his decisions. 

[Sterlingdog]

Do you really think it was "bad intelligence"?  I thought he knew perfectly well that there were no WMD's, he just wanted to justify going in there to the public. 

[mikegiuliana]

To answer the topic question it was never a good idea and we have accomplished nothing there.. well accept getting our guys killed.

[Surfrider]

Do you really think it was "bad intelligence"?? I thought he knew perfectly well that there were no WMD's, he just wanted to justify going in there to the public.?

Sure, I believe that he thought the weapons were there.  I do believe that he knew the evidence was not as strong as he was portraying to the public.  However, I have no doubt that he thought they had WMDs.  The government had actual evidence of their existance as close as 1992.  After that, Suddam consistently evaded inspectors and failed to produce evidence of the destruction of the WMDs.  In addition, Clinton along with many other countries (four or five others I beleive) believed Suddam had them also.  Of course, this isn't justifying the war since even if Suddam did have them invasion was a separate question altogether.  But do I think Bush believed Suddam had them?  Yes.  Was it one of the worst mistakes this nation has had to deal with?  Yes.

[POPmetal]

First, it was WMD's (not there).? Then, it was connections to Al Qeada (not there).? And FINALLY it was "bringing democracy to the Iraqi people".?

Bringing democracy to the Iraqi people was something the Bush administration espoused from before the war started. I'm surprised that you would distort the Bush administration's position like that right after accusing me of distorting SLC's positions? (meanwhile ignoring his crimes against logic and context, but I digress).

[SLCPUNK]

First, it was WMD's (not there).  Then, it was connections to Al Qeada (not there).  And FINALLY it was "bringing democracy to the Iraqi people". 

Bringing democracy to the Iraqi people was something the Bush administration espoused from before the war started. I'm surprised that you would distort the Bush administration's position like that right after accusing me of distorting SLC's positions  (meanwhile ignoring his crimes against logic and context, but I digress).

This is absolutely false.

His focus was soley on WMD, the supposed threat was, to us and his people.

[SLCPUNK]

I give a strawman alert when you turn something into a strawman argument.

 You proposed a hypothetical (strawman again) question, then asked why you thought that, and I answered with the question "because you are dumb?"

Guess I have to hold your hand and explain everything hmmm?

You answered "because you are dumb" because you know what I said was correct but at the same time you didn't want to admit it. If I was wrong, you would have simply disagreed with me.

And as for this alleged strawman, how did I misrepresent your point of view? Are you not being pedantic and acrimonious? You can't just pick and choose to argue the things you like and cry "strawman" whenever something you don't like pops up.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html

The below arguments could be added to the above link as a textbook example of a strawman.

"See, you just did it again with your fatalist view. And you're just being pedantic and bitter. It saddens me that people would be so pedantic and acrimonious that they would rather whine about the failure to find WMDs than to see the smile on the faces of free Iraqi people voting."

"You answered "because you are dumb" because you know what I said was correct but at the same time you didn't want to admit it. If I was wrong, you would have simply disagreed with me."


SLC's right,  Popmetal.  You're doing it a lot....

Coming from you, this means a lot. Since I value your opinions and well written posts. Thank you.

I'm glad somebody else can see through his horse shit.

[POPmetal]

First, it was WMD's (not there).? Then, it was connections to Al Qeada (not there).? And FINALLY it was "bringing democracy to the Iraqi people".?

Bringing democracy to the Iraqi people was something the Bush administration espoused from before the war started. I'm surprised that you would distort the Bush administration's position like that right after accusing me of distorting SLC's positions? (meanwhile ignoring his crimes against logic and context, but I digress).

This is absolutely false.

He didn't mention anything about democracy in the begining.

Only WMD.

This is from a GW Bush speech before the war on Iraq started:

The United States has no intention of determining the precise form of Iraq's new government. That choice belongs to the Iraqi people. Yet, we will ensure that one brutal dictator is not replaced by another. All Iraqis must have a voice in the new government, and all citizens must have their rights protected. (Applause.)

Rebuilding Iraq will require a sustained commitment from many nations, including our own: we will remain in Iraq as long as necessary, and not a day more. America has made and kept this kind of commitment before -- in the peace that followed a world war. After defeating enemies, we did not leave behind occupying armies, we left constitutions and parliaments. We established an atmosphere of safety, in which responsible, reform-minded local leaders could build lasting institutions of freedom. In societies that once bred fascism and militarism, liberty found a permanent home.

There was a time when many said that the cultures of Japan and Germany were incapable of sustaining democratic values. Well, they were wrong. Some say the same of Iraq today. They are mistaken. (Applause.) The nation of Iraq -- with its proud heritage, abundant resources and skilled and educated people -- is fully capable of moving toward democracy and living in freedom. (Applause.)

The world has a clear interest in the spread of democratic values, because stable and free nations do not breed the ideologies of murder. They encourage the peaceful pursuit of a better life. And there are hopeful signs of a desire for freedom in the Middle East. Arab intellectuals have called on Arab governments to address the "freedom gap" so their peoples can fully share in the progress of our times. Leaders in the region speak of a new Arab charter that champions internal reform, greater politics participation, economic openness, and free trade. And from Morocco to Bahrain and beyond, nations are taking genuine steps toward politics reform. A new regime in Iraq would serve as a dramatic and inspiring example of freedom for other nations in the region. (Applause.)

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/02/20030226-11.html

[SLCPUNK]

Jan. 29, 2002 state of the union address is when Bush outlined the terror threat from WMD, that was his primary focus through the entire speech.

Your speech is over a year later Feb. 26, 2003.

After Bush realised it was time to change his tune.

POPTARD = LIAR.


We already know that there were no WMD. All you are left to argue is if Bush said "free Iraq" before going to war? LOL, pathetic dude. Give it up already.

[POPmetal]

Jan. 29, 2002 state of the union address is when Bush outlined the terror threat from WMD, that was his primary focus through the entire speech.

Your speech is over a year later Feb. 26, 2003.

After Bush realised it was time to change his tune.

POPTARD = LIAR.


We already know that there were no WMD. All you are left to argue is if Bush said "free Iraq" before going to war? LOL, pathetic dude. Give it up already.

Unbelievable! pilferk you support this guy? I used to have respect for you.

[SLCPUNK]

[Dr. Blutarsky]

If the CIA, Britain, Russia and other US operatives told you that Iraq had WMD`s and that they had contact with Bin Laden, Al Quida and Zarqari would n`t you send in troops after Saddam kicked out UN inspectors especially right after 9-11 happened? ? Yes, in hindsight we had bad intelligence but do you sit on your ass and give Saddam the benefit of the doubt? If the security of your country is at stake, what would you do?

Sure if we knew then what we know now, we`d be better off not going into Iraq in the first place, but it diddn`t happen that way.

[POPmetal]

Put your hands together for SLC Franken everybody?