We know Saddam was bad, but he was secular - he couldn't allow Islam to rise too high or the Sunnis would be at the Shia - as we are seeing now. The whole WMD baloney was a cover to get us in and allow a plundering of Iraqi oil.
Read the Iraq hydrocarbon law - it takes Iraqi oil and will give it foreign companies - Conoco, Exxon, etc.
Kucinich is the only one who is calling it as it is:
You keep hearing that the Iraqis need to pass the oil law so oil revenue can be distributed - wonder why they haven't? They aren't that stupid to give away most of their biggest prize.
No? Iraq is about oil? What was your first clue?
Sarcasm aside you speak a sad, sad truth. Behind the hawks crying for the liberation of the Iraqis, the deeper reason was for oil, as we've known all along. The only true threat on the Axis of Evil was North Korea, which has no oil, and even though it has nukes, Bush really doesn't care. Iran doesn't have nukes, and Bush wants to invade Iran next. Why? Because Iran has oil.
______________________________________________________________________
"The harder the conflict the more glorious the triumph," Thomas Paine
Iraq was about oil... This is an example of liberal propaganda. Just like Chaney wanted to get into Iraq to benfit his company, Haliburton... You ultra-liberals need to provide facts every now and again, not just your prejudices.
It's what Michelle Moore Wants to do (but can't). Pure journalism, without any Overly Dramatic personal views thrown in, which only throw you off tract. It's more or less about the news media (basically Al-Jazeera) over there, and the political views of those were run it. The movie spends equal time SHOWING BOTH sides of the issue.
It was not what you would expect to see, and is rather interesting.
------MYSPACE URL myspace.com/sketical_believer OR E-MAIL zappafication@hotmail.com------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
Actually, the media isn't reporting it, either.
If you're pooh-poohing oil as the motive, then what do you think was the real reason?
Which propaganda do you subscribe to?
US Marine vet Vietnam 4/68 - 8/69 5th District, NJ
Here's some facts for you; check Mr. Cheney's TAX RETURNS! This administration, which DOES NOT represent the will of the majority opinion of this country, attacked Iraq under false pretenses for the express purpose of economic imperialism. P.S. I served 4 more years in the service than Bush and Cheney combined. Hey, I even showed up!
Oh, I knew it was about oil, but the Iraq hydrocarbon law proves it. Pure pillaging of another country. Disgusting.
NOW we're hearing about Pakistan - which I've said all along is more of a threat than Iraq (or Iran) - but no hoopla about Pakistan - why? no oil in Pakistan.
US Marine vet Vietnam 4/68 - 8/69 5th District, NJ
I tell you what. If we can stop using oil tomorrow, we can stop struggling to keep the supply lines open. Then I won't have to cringe at the hypocrisy of hearing people say "No blood for oil". Believe me, if there is no oil available tomorrow morning, there will plenty of blood to go around!
~ shades of the movie "Dune".
"The spice must flow!" is the cry repeated throughout this tale. Along with, "The one who controls the spice, controls the universe!" And in all the galaxy, there is only one spice source -- the desert wasteland planet named Dune.
I'm thinking the above cry(s) could apply not only to:
our country's appetite for oil;
as, well as, our citizens appetitie for drugs (both legal & illegal).
With vested interest in the White House for oil profits and all the industries that profit from it's extraction what did anyone expect? Too many bombs in inventory? Heck just icing on the oil profits cake. It is just the military/industrial/banking complex doing business as usual. Bad news on the warfront? No need to worry, Karl Rove will call all the media heads and give them the lie of the day to spread around and help redact any foreign press relaeses. That's how Chertoff gets those gut feelings about an impending terrorist attack, I guess. Is the public starting to smell a rat? Oh my gosh, another threat from Osamba bin Dead since 2024. Terror Level HIGH! Really, really RED!
http://www.infowars.com/articles/terror/bin_laden_another_dubious_tape_appears.htm
Osama looks good in the picture in the above article considering he is dead!
And talk about timing! Just when the neocons need it most!
I must have missed that one HC. Do you have any proof of this?
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/osama_dead.html
The above is the link, check it out for yourself.
Here is an excerpt:
Osama bin Laden is dead. The news first came from sources in Afghanistan and Pakistan almost six months ago: the fugitive died in December [2001] and was buried in the mountains of southeast Afghanistan. Pakistan's president, Pervez Musharraf, echoed the information. The remnants of Osama's gang, however, have mostly stayed silent, either to keep Osama's ghost alive or because they have no means of communication.
With an ego the size of Mount Everest, Osama bin Laden would not have, could not have, remained silent for so long if he were still alive. He always liked to take credit even for things he had nothing to do with. Would he remain silent for nine months and not trumpet his own survival? [New York Times. July 11, 2024]
The Central Intelligence Agency has closed a unit that for a decade had the mission of hunting Osama bin Laden and his top lieutenants, intelligence officials confirmed Monday. The unit, known as Alec Station, was disbanded late last year and its analysts reassigned within the C.I.A. Counterterrorist Center, the officials said. [New York Times 07/03/06]
No use hunting for a dead guy, right?
no body no dead
And products delivered with petrolium fuels.
What are you implying? It's okay that we committed aggressive war for oil? If we didn't have an "energy policy" (that's a joke) drafted by Cheney is secret with oil barons, but rather had an alternate energy program, we could be less dependent on foreign oil - but we've wasted 6 years.
US Marine vet Vietnam 4/68 - 8/69 5th District, NJ
Let's say it straight out. The reality is we need oil to continue our current standard of living. Everything is based upon it. Our entire transportation nexus, most of our industry, and our agriculture. Take a poll of the people you know. How, many want to give up some or all of their current standard of living. Not going to happen.
Further, if the American people wanted an energy policy 6 years ago, they would have one. Count the SUVs and big trucks on the road. We are in the current situation because we collectively voted for it by our choices. You want motivation for change? Well, we now have it. Quit kvetching and embrace the opportunity.
I see you are a Vietnam Vet. Are you suggesting that was a morally superior war because there was no mineral wealth at stake?
So, you're an "ends justifies the means" guy? Are you saying it's okay we went to war to secure an oil supply? It's not okay with me.
you say - "Further, if the American people wanted an energy policy 6 years ago, they would have one." - Not with a government that is deaf to all but a ruling elite. The vast majority of America wants us to wind down and get out of Iraq - what do we get? A troop surge. We have the best government money can buy.
No, Vietnam was another war based on lies and mis-managed, and it sickens me to see my country once again on the wrong side. I served my country - unlike chicken-hawk Cheney who has continued to lie and besmirch anyone who speaks against this grab for Iraqi oil - and they're after Iran's oil, too.
The truly tragic fact about this administration is that worse than all their corruption and greed is their arrogance and incompetence - Iraq would not be as bad as it is now if Rumsfeld, Bremer, Wolfowitz, ... had not been listened to and people like Powell and Shinseki - those with real experience - had been listened to, but facts and competence have not been valued, just political fanaticism. Nothing has been left unpoliticized - our justice system (federal attorneys), even the former surgeon general. And these chicken hawks dare to talk to me about patriotism? Disgusting.
US Marine vet Vietnam 4/68 - 8/69 5th District, NJ
I'm with you brother. I served only in peacetime, but you know what? At least I SHOWED UP, which is more than those gutless cowards Bush and Cheney can say.
another conspiracy, cheney and the oil barons...oooo, secret meetings, get all the oil. zzzzz
not a conspiracy the meetings are fact as is the fact that cheney and the white house refuse to release what went on in the meetings.
yeah yeah i know the comeback---national security. like the papers the white house refused to divulge on pat tillmans death and many other documents they refuse to turn over on the grounds of national security. horse manure in my opinion.
Energy policy meetings are always closed door meetings, with every administration. This is the norm, not an exception. When I first read Quicks charge, back in March or so, I looked into it. There is nothing there. No conspiracy, just normal operating procedure. That's all.
True. And yet, when the evil emperor was overthrown the spice still flowed. But it flowed at the discretion of Muad'dib.
You must remember (if you read them) that in later books Muad'dib himself became corrupt once he gained control of the spice. It was one of his later descendants that finally "freed" the universe when he became the worm and destroyed the spice.
In other words, we should focus our energies on finding a new fuel/energy source. Things is, that take research, and research takes time.
Was oil a factor in this war? Yes it was, but not the only one. Some forget that the people who live in the Middle East are not free like we are, they live in a totally controlled society. By exploiting the oil until we find something else to use as fuel, we can improve their economic status and quality of life. I will admit that it is a shame that people need to die in order to make this happen, but that's how the world works. As time goes by, humanity on the whole will learn to work together, but like doing research for new fuels it is a slow process.
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
P.S.
I didn't make it through the later books.
Iraq is for oil?
Well, besides many emotions we need to look at the issue from the right perspective. Did we stop using the oil? Do we allow drilling in Alaska? Venezuela has a communist revolution pretty much. So let me guess, is anyone wants to pay for oil double of what we paying now? It’s hypocritical to argue about oil and at the same time we are using it every day.
While I don’t support much hype of being in Iraq cause of oil I do realize that Iraq has a strategic location on the Middle East. Look at the map. Having base there and loyal government, helps us a lot on the long run. Islam is not going away and it’s picking up pace and getting more aggressive. Those countries around Iraq are not fighting us for land (most war were territorial’s), they are fighting us for ideology.
These days everything becomes smaller, more portable and more destructive. If we close our eyes and ignore the problem in that region soon it will come back to haunt us. In no way I am saying that war is going the right way and we are winning. I am originally from Russia and we had same issue with Afghanistan before. After 20 years of no results and failure, Russia finally pulled out of the Afghanistan.
This is not a war that constantly on our TV screens; it’s a partisan war similar to what Russia had during World War II. And thank to gorillas tactics and partisans the Russia won the World War II. This tactics has been proven to work. The solution to this is not a simple and I don’t have an answer to it, tough understanding of the issue helps.
We can continue to finger point whose fault that is but it does not solve the problem. We eventually will find out who was wrong and who was right but it does not cancel the issue on our hands at the present moment. If we look around at the political arena these days, we see mostly that people are blaming others for how did we get into this situation, but there are no real solutions to solve the issue its self.
PicassoInActions you seem to be level headed. You look at the world around you and make educated decicions based on what you see. You also make an very good point.
Just because oil is a factor, does not mean we should look the other way. The Middle East has always been a hot bed of anger and fighting, as far back as anyone can remember.
Islam Extremist are responsible for 9/11 and they must pay for that. The problem is that they are every there, not just in one country, Iraq is just a important strategic location in this war. The problem is that it's kind of like Vietnam, we really do not know who the emeny really is or where they really are. It's a tough sitution to be in for all of us.
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
Where is your proof that Islamic extremists were responsible for 9-1-1?
osama told the world they did it. they admitted it, they planned the whole thing. where have you been? do you own a TV?
There was nothing Iraq did to contribute to 9/11. That's fact. The BS about wmds was cooked up and proven false. All our going into Iraq has done is create way more arabs that hate us.
By the way - the Soviets didn't win WWII with guerrilla warfare, they won by mass of numbers in conventional battles. You are right to point out that the Soviets lost in Afghanistan; we lost in Vietnam, and stand to lose in Iraq BECAUSE you can't win a guerrilla war if the bulk of the people in the country support the guerrillas. If we don't win the Iraqis over, we cannot win. We cannot win militarily.
US Marine vet Vietnam 4/68 - 8/69 5th District, NJ
Don't tell me that you believe the government distroyed two of it biggest towers in it's most important business center, killing thousand of it's own people, just to start a war for oil.
If they wanted to create a bogus reason to go war, they wouldn't have to go through all that trouble just to lie to us.
Plus, didn't Bin Laden/Al-Qaeda take full credit.
------http://www.myspace.com/sketical_believer------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
I don't believe our government was behind 9/11 - I never said that. What I'm saying is Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, so why are we in Iraq? OIL.
US Marine vet Vietnam 4/68 - 8/69 5th District, NJ
i'm thinking bush (along with his gang, congress', & the media's consent) broke iraq, now i guess we gotta try to fix it.....ugh.
we've been there 5 years not much has changed (shades of vietnam)
how about we just tell the "international community" which would include the surrounding muslim countries that:
1) in 6 months, we will arm each & every iraqi..
2) in 6 months, we will leave iraq....(damn the oil prices)...and get outta their iraqis' way.
3) the international community will have 6 months to prepare: to help solve things or hunker down.
Let me get this strait. So in other words what your saying is, leave and let them go crazy on the world. Once they do, we defend ourseleve and anyone who will work with us, other wise, goodbye been nice knowing you.......
Am I reading into that correctly. Or am I missing something?
------http://www.myspace.com/sketical_believer------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
the international community needs to bear into this problems for any viable solution...
otherwise yes, hunker down.....and let the civil war begin......its be going on for 5 years already.
the turks have already amassed about 140K troops on their border.
al-quaeda (they would be the only foreigners in country, now) wouldn't have a chance against the sunis, shia & kurds.....i'm thinking
I've said the same thing many times
------http://www.myspace.com/sketical_believer------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
yes, either the international community sets up & takes action
or
yes, iraq becomes a muslim problem that they've long been passive about........
then let's see if we can do something positive after the dust settles........
they've got 6 months.....
I understand that everyone is frustrated with the war in Iraq. And I hear left and right people screaming about get out of the Iraq. Well idea is not bad at all but what about consequences?
We need to put emotions aside and try to understand where we are standing now. We need to put aside issue of being right or wrong to go into the war for the moment and realize what have been happening. For the past several years we breed and create more terrorist in those Islamic states that we can afford now. Did we go to war for the right reason? It does not matter at this point. What are matters is how to deal with that now. The people in Iraq, Afghanistan has no economy.
People have no skills except handling the gun. Are we going to teach them anything else besides using a gun? Isn’t what happened in Afghanistan after Russia left? We trained those gorillas against Russians and left them alone right after. Most of their life they are fighting. They don’t know anything better than fight. So what are our options? Leave Iraq now and give the power to their own government that can’t handle a day without help? Realistically looking we don’t have many options left. The moment we leave, it will become a camp ground for Islamizes. Do you think they will leave us alone because we decide to withdraw? And please don’t attack me by saying; hey we went there for the wrong reason. Ok. We did. And that was 4 years ago. Now we need to figure out what to do now, not what we did 4 years ago (That will be solved eventually).
But now we have to make sure we won’t get any back fires. We need to find the approach for better education in those areas. We need to find way to make sure if we leave they won’t try to screw us over.
Regardless of many pacifistic opinions, fear was always a tool to control masses. If they are afraid of us they won’t harm. If we show them we are weak, they will explore that in a second.
Once again to recoup, I have no idea how to deal with this situation now but looking at the history of similar events and analyzing religious movements I don’t see how we can withdraw at this point.
IF democrats will get to the power they are not going to withdraw either. They are not stupid enough not to see what will happen right after. Yes, it this sounds cool and very supportive from the general population and may help win the election but at the same time they will have to face bigger problems in a short while. And they know it will be harder to handle than now.
Of course the Democrats are not going to pull out if they get in office; they know that will be a huge mistake. They will simply put their own spin on the fact we are staying.
I do share the fear of what will happen if we just pull out, it could be a disaster. We have to deal with the extremist and even try to find a way to unite the different Islamic Factions. It's not an easy job to deal with.
Not only do we have to deal with the Islamic extremist, but we can not forget about the Israeli extremist. We have to find a way to unite them with the Islamic population.
Even further than that, allot of this fighting between all these different groups has to deal with claming the land as their Holly Land. But in reality it is the Holy Land for three of the worlds major religions, Christianity, Islam, and Judaism (Buddhism even has some ties there). Once we all realize this I believe thing will be allot more peaceful there. The problem is convincing the extremist (on all sides) to see that.
------http://www.myspace.com/sketical_believer------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
It was mentioned that if we show weakness, the terrorists (and, I assume, all who distrust the U.S. and western civilizations) will exploit that weakness. However, strength does not have to be "boots on the ground." What if we show strenth by uniting with other humanitarian nations whose goal is to help the innocent in the areas of the world where the weak are being attacked? Strength found in caring people who band together to provide food, education, job training, and health care could translate into new friends and support among the people who distrust our motives now. Yes, we would have to provide protection for the innocent; but that protection could come in the form of defensive measures taken by protective forces from all like-thinking nations. Care, food, medicine, education, guidance without interference, protective defence (rather than offence) might be the humanitarian muscle that needs to be flexed - and flexed as one in humanitarian "gyms" throughtout the tolerant world.
But sometime you have to flex your Offensive Muscle. True it should be avoided at all cost. We should also flex our humanitarian muscle a little more than we probally do.
------http://www.myspace.com/sketical_believer------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
And how does it solves the issue? WHishfull illusions are slightly different than current situation.
I am not saying you are wrong and that would be the prefered way but how does it help us today? Leave Iraq and invite all those religious fanatics here?
"Care, food, medicine, education, guidance without interference, protective defence (rather than offence) might be the humanitarian muscle that needs to be flexed - and flexed as one in humanitarian "gyms" throughtout the tolerant world."
Cool, i like it. Are you saying we need to build another Chines wall around those who does not accept this way? Or you think those who are against us will say thank you for leaving and leave us alone?
The humanitarian muscle shouldn't be left out.
But we need offence as well.
------http://www.myspace.com/sketical_believer OR zappafication@hotmail.com------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
Well said.
like I said, Cheers to JackPhillipsII
------http://www.myspace.com/sketical_believer OR zappafication@hotmail.com------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
The world, too has politics, and for the past 6 years we've dumped on just about every other country except Britain for not wanted to join us in out Iraqi escapade. Fortunately, I think foreign nations are better at diplomacy than Condescending Rice and a new US government could make significant progress in bringing us back to the community of nations.
We need to lead by example, not by arrogance and force of arms.
US Marine vet Vietnam 4/68 - 8/69 5th District, NJ
We do need to mend our foreign relations. As difficult as that can be I feel most countries would not fret at giving us a chance to "redeem" ourselves, for a better lack of terms
------MYSPACE URL myspace.com/sketical_believer OR E-MAIL zappafication@hotmail.com------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
Sounds great. Where are we going to find these wonderful nations? Each nation in the world has its own agenda and if they did not, wouldn't they be in Darfur to solve that problem. As countries go, we are actually above average in our caring and how we operate in the world. We must realize that there is no altruist approach that the world's nations will jump toward. Thus we can only choose the best path for us with the least brutality toward others - brutality is relative.
Bottom line, the security of this nation must come first.
Ken Moyes
So what did Iraq have to do with our security, other than for the oil it's sitting on?
"As countries go, we are actually above average in our caring and how we operate in the world. We must realize that there is no altruist approach that the world's nations will jump toward. Thus we can only choose the best path for us with the least brutality toward others - brutality is relative."
I used to agree with the first quoted sentence, I no longer do.
I am not talking altruism, I just feel most countries agree it is better to get along than to be confrontational. We snubbed many nations - like France and Germany - because they didn't jump on the fool's express to invade Iraq.
And lastly, war is brutal - always.
US Marine vet Vietnam 4/68 - 8/69 5th District, NJ
ummmm....you mean, like in, Darfur?
and....Rwanda? for example?
Iraq really wasn't about Iraqi oil. Has anyone read the Project For a New American Century (PNAC)? It was the neo-con's view of the world and our role in it. I first read it in 2024 when I first heard the term neo-con. Quite frankly it scared the life out of me. Their idea is that no democracy will attack another therefore all governments must be changed to democracy to ensure our safety. The ideas they put forth were to change governments by political, economic and military means. The first country targeted was Iraq because it was perceived as the weakest and an easy conversion (boy were they wrong). The final chapter in their conversion to democracy was a winnable nuclear exchange with Communist China. I don't know if the original version of that website is still available but I remember what I read, mainly because I was so dead set against every premise they offered. World domination is not what the U.S. should be about.
However, I do believe what we did in Afghanistan was exactly what needed to be done. That is where the people that attacked us were hiding, not in Iraq. The biggest shame there is we never finished the job. If we wanted to build a democracy in that part of the world Afghanistan should have been the country to do it in.