US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Why would anyone continue to claim the iraqi war was a failure?

This is a discussion on Why would anyone continue to claim the iraqi war was a failure? within the Politics forums, part of the US Discussion category; Quote: Originally Posted by JRK You know what does not make sense to me? you improve the supply the price goes down the price goes ...


Go Back   US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum > US Discussion > Politics

Politics Discuss government policies and candidates...

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61 (permalink)  
Old 03-07-2011, 10:42 AM
Uncensored2008's Avatar
Libertarian Radical
Member #27995
Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Behind the Orange Curtain
Posts: 29,206
Thanks: 9,961
Thanked 8,256 Times in 6,343 Posts
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 10678
Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati
Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati
Quote: Originally Posted by JRK View Post
You know what does not make sense to me?
you improve the supply the price goes down
the price goes down, profit goes down

What kind of idiot would believe that?
An idiot without a semblance of understanding of market economics.

I have my students study what is called "The Taco Bell Case."

To summarize, In 1988, Pepsi Cola was about to close the Taco Bell franchise as unprofitable. At the time, Pepsi was charging $0.89 for a regular taco and the same for a regular, bean burrito.

In a last ditch effort, the marketing department decided to run a Sunday special with taco's and bean burritos at $0.29. The argument was that even if Taco Bell took a loss per piece on the tacos, incremental sales of drinks and other items would make up for the difference and turn the chain around.

What happened was nothing short of astounding. Not only did the plan work, but Taco Bell was actually making a profit on the $.29 items. See, there biggest issue was overhead absorption, not food cost. By moving more product, they cut scrap (bad food) to almost nothing and cut overhead from 419% to 60%. Taco Bell then restructured their entire menu at sharply reduced prices and the chain was profitable within a year. Three years later, Pepsi was able to sell the chain (Along with KFC and Pizza Hut) to Yum foods at a huge profit.

The key to being profitable was lowering prices, VOLUME rather than margin was the key.

Price goes down, profit goes up - basic economics.
__________________
"If your Health Care cost have risen 30% or more, thank Obamacare."
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
USMessageBoard.com is the premier Political Forum Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see these ads. Please Register - It's Free!
  #62 (permalink)  
Old 03-07-2011, 10:44 AM
Registered User
Member #20542
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 9,680
Thanks: 2,390
Thanked 2,606 Times in 1,874 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 571
Dr.Drock is faster than a speeding bullet Dr.Drock is faster than a speeding bullet Dr.Drock is faster than a speeding bullet Dr.Drock is faster than a speeding bullet Dr.Drock is faster than a speeding bullet Dr.Drock is faster than a speeding bullet Dr.Drock is faster than a speeding bullet Dr.Drock is faster than a speeding bullet Dr.Drock is faster than a speeding bullet Dr.Drock is faster than a speeding bullet Dr.Drock is faster than a speeding bullet Dr.Drock is faster than a speeding bullet Dr.Drock is faster than a speeding bullet Dr.Drock is faster than a speeding bullet Dr.Drock is faster than a speeding bullet
Quote: Originally Posted by JRK View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by Dr.Drock View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by JRK View Post

Really?
this is your OPINION
And mine without the name calling follows


Presidential Authority in the War on Terrorism: Iraq and Beyond
Published on October 2, 2002 by Jack Spencer BACKGROUNDER #1600
Print PDF
Download PDF
SHARE
Facebook
Twitter
Email
More
The President of the United States has no greater responsibility than protecting the American people from threats, both foreign and domestic. He is vested by the Constitution with the authority and responsibility to accomplish this essential task. In taking his oath of office, the President swears to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States," the Preamble of which makes providing for the "common defense" a top priority. Congress must now make its voice heard on a key issue of national security and bring to a vote support for President George W. Bush's strategy for pursuing the war on terrorism in the way that he, as commander in chief, deems necessary.
As the nature of the threats to the United States changes, so must the nation's approach to its defense. To fulfill his constitutional responsibility, the President must have the flexibility to address these threats as they emerge; and, given the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction by nations hostile to America, in an increasing number of cases, this may require applying military power before the United States or its interests are struck. In situations where the evidence demonstrates overwhelmingly that behavioral trends, capability, and motives all point to imminent threat, it may be necessary for the President to attack preemptively.
While there has been little argument over the use of armed force in Afghanistan to retaliate against an act of aggression, preemptive action is also clearly justifiable because the following principles apply:
PRINCIPLE #1: The right to self-defense is codified in customary international law and in the charter of the United Nations. The most basic expression of a nation's sovereignty is action taken in self-defense. Traditional international law recognizes that right,1 and the United Nations Charter is wholly consistent with it. Article 51 of the U.N. Charter states: "Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations."
PRINCIPLE #2: The right of "anticipatory self-defense" allows for preemptive strikes. 2 The right to self-defense incorporates the principle of anticipatory self-defense, which is particularly salient in the war on terrorism. The reality of international life in the 21st century is that nations or organizations that wish to challenge America or Western powers increasingly are seeking weapons of mass destruction to achieve their political objectives. The only effective response may be to destroy those capabilities before they are used. The tenet of traditional, customary international law that allows for this preventive or preemptive action is "anticipatory self-defense."
An oft-cited incident that validates the practice of anticipatory self-defense as part of international law occurred in 1837. That year, British forces crossed into American territory to destroy a Canadian ship, anticipating that the ship would be used to support an anti-British insurrection. The British government claimed its actions were necessary for self-defense, and the United States accepted that explanation.3
While there is debate as to whether or not this principle of international law survived the adoption of the U.N. Charter, the fact is that neither the charter nor the actions of member states since the charter came into force outlaw the principle.4 Israel has invoked the right of anticipatory self-defense numerous times throughout its history, including incidents in 1956 when it preemptively struck Egypt and in 1967 when it struck Syria, Jordan, and Egypt as those nations were preparing an attack.
The United States has also asserted its right to anticipatory self-defense. A classic example occurred in 1962 when President John Kennedy ordered a blockade of Cuba--a clear act of aggression--during the Cuban missile crisis. Although no shots had been fired, President Kennedy's preemptive action was imperative for the protection of American security. During the 1980s, President Ronald Reagan invoked this right at least twice: first, in 1983, when he ordered an invasion of Grenada to protect U.S. nationals from potential harm, and again in 1986, when he ordered the bombing of terrorist sites in Libya.
When any nation that is overtly hostile to America or its allies is developing weapons of mass destruction, has ties to international terrorist, and intelligence data give reason to believe that there is an intent to attack, the threshold of the United States' right to invoke a response based on anticipatory self-defense has clearly been passed.
PRINCIPLE #3: The United States government alone has the authority to determine what constitutes a threat to its citizens and what should be done about it. Under the U.S. Constitution, the authority to determine when it is appropriate for the United States to invoke and exercise its right to use military force in its own defense is vested in the President, as commander in chief of the armed forces, and Congress, which has authority to raise and support armies and to declare war. No treaty, including the U.N. Charter, can redistribute this authority or give an international organization veto power over U.S. actions that would otherwise be lawful and fully in accord with the Constitution.5
PRINCIPLE # 4: The President as commander in chief has the authority to use America's armed forces to "provide for the common defense." The Constitution gives Congress the authority to declare war but makes the President commander in chief. Since the birth of the nation, this division of power has given rise to tension between the executive and legislative branches of government regarding who can authorize the use of force.6
Debate regarding this matter gave rise to the War Powers Resolution,7 which states that the President can use force to protect the nation without congressional authorization for 60 to 90 days. Many, including every President since this resolution came into force in 1973, have regarded the document as unconstitutional. Most, however, agree that the President has the authority to defend America from attack, even in the absence of congressional authorization.8 It should be noted that if Congress is truly opposed to any military action authorized by the President, it has the power to defund that mission, making it impossible to carry out.
"Section Eight gives to the Congress certain broad enumerated powers. Among these are the power to lay and collect taxes and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; to borrow money on the credit of the United States, to regulate interstate, foreign, and Indian commerce; to create courts inferior to the Supreme Court; to establish uniform naturalization and bankruptcy laws; to declare war; to "raise and support armies," "provide and maintain a navy," and provide for their regulation; coin money and regulate the value; administer the postal service; "promote the progress of science and useful arts" by granting exclusive rights to authors and inventors; and various other powers. The section also gives to Congress the power to "make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States."

Article One of the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I underlined the important parts of what you cut and pasted and included section 8 of the US Constitution.

The stuff you sent over could be twisted and lawyered into a short term attack of Iraq being acceptable, not a war.
My friend at anytime congress could have DE funded it
Unlike the way BHO has these slush funds for the UAW, GM, Chrysler and GMAC. The war needed funding from congress
At least you're taking a better tactic now, pointing fingers rather than trying to twist an obviously unconstitutional war into being constitutional.

Funding and not funding isn't the same as declaring war.

Personally I don't know why they didn't declare war, the idiots in Congress would've approved of it, but the fact is that they didn't.
Reply With Quote
  #63 (permalink)  
Old 03-07-2011, 10:49 AM
shintao's Avatar
Take Down ~ Tap Out
Member #24733
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 7,150
Thanks: 95
Thanked 649 Times in 563 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 62
shintao could be the Buddha shintao could be the Buddha shintao could be the Buddha shintao could be the Buddha shintao could be the Buddha shintao could be the Buddha shintao could be the Buddha
Quote: Originally Posted by diamonddave View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by rightwinger View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by jrk View Post

1) many of bin-ladens top chiefs where killed in iraq
2) how does any-one know that? Saddam was told what to do after 1991 and he ignored it . How does anyone know what was shipped out of iraq from 9-01-3-03? And to add there was numerous wmds found (over 500) munitions found in iraq meet wmd criteria, official says
3) i agree
4) no we did not, a handful of drunks did and they went to prison for it
5) no saddam did, that violence had 18 months to be prevented
iraq was one of the largest strategic blunders in us history. Poor intelligence, poor execution, no valid rationale for invading. While we pulled needed forces out of afghanistan, we needlessly killed 4000 americans in an unnecessary conflict
unsubstantiated and subjective... Typical for you and your ilk...
fail!!
Reply With Quote
  #64 (permalink)  
Old 03-07-2011, 10:50 AM
JRK JRK is offline
Registered User
Member #28394
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 7,488
Thanks: 850
Thanked 636 Times in 472 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 330
JRK may be on a path to greatness JRK may be on a path to greatness JRK may be on a path to greatness JRK may be on a path to greatness JRK may be on a path to greatness JRK may be on a path to greatness JRK may be on a path to greatness JRK may be on a path to greatness JRK may be on a path to greatness JRK may be on a path to greatness JRK may be on a path to greatness JRK may be on a path to greatness
Quote: Originally Posted by Uncensored2008 View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by JRK View Post
You know what does not make sense to me?
you improve the supply the price goes down
the price goes down, profit goes down

What kind of idiot would believe that?
An idiot without a semblance of understanding of market economics.

I have my students study what is called "The Taco Bell Case."

To summarize, In 1988, Pepsi Cola was about to close the Taco Bell franchise as unprofitable. At the time, Pepsi was charging $0.89 for a regular taco and the same for a regular, bean burrito.

In a last ditch effort, the marketing department decided to run a Sunday special with taco's and bean burritos at $0.29. The argument was that even if Taco Bell took a loss per piece on the tacos, incremental sales of drinks and other items would make up for the difference and turn the chain around.

What happened was nothing short of astounding. Not only did the plan work, but Taco Bell was actually making a profit on the $.29 items. See, there biggest issue was overhead absorption, not food cost. By moving more product, they cut scrap (bad food) to almost nothing and cut overhead from 419% to 60%. Taco Bell then restructured their entire menu at sharply reduced prices and the chain was profitable within a year. Three years later, Pepsi was able to sell the chain (Along with KFC and Pizza Hut) to Yum foods at a huge profit.

The key to being profitable was lowering prices, VOLUME rather than margin was the key.

Price goes down, profit goes up - basic economics.
So the reason gas is 3.50 a gallon is because taco bell did this?
Seriously
I have heard it all now
Try and explain that to me as it relates to oil prices as well as supply

Iraqi oil was being sold on the black market, and yes that was part of the problem that needed resolve
Do you know what this war was really about?
Look at a map of Iraq and see where it sits in the middle east

Saddam had been told and told and told and told to do the right thing
9-11 comes along and he acted foolishly
he paid for it
his people paid for it as well as 1000s of brave American troops
Reply With Quote
  #65 (permalink)  
Old 03-07-2011, 10:55 AM
BlindBoo's Avatar
Registered User
Member #25197
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 10,811
Thanks: 1,053
Thanked 2,291 Times in 1,760 Posts
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 1295
BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court
BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court
Quote: Originally Posted by JRK View Post
1) REMOVE SADDAM
DONE
2) STABILIZE COUNTRY
DONE
3) HAVE A REPUBLIC BORN OF THESE EVENTS
DONE

Am missing something here?
1. By disregarding the UNSCR 1441(which the US signed onto) the US led invasion of Iraq in 2003 was illegal.

2. Not stable. Civilians dead in Iraq bus bombing 7-3-2011

3. After all is said and done, when we leave it will still be a miserable shit hole.

The invasion and occupation of Iraq was sold as a security threat because of the WMD. Not to remove Saddam from office. Not to nation build. Not to spread a Republic form of governemnt.
__________________
A man said to the universe:
"Sir I exist!"
"However," replied the universe,
"The fact has not created in me
A sense of obligation."

-- Stephen Crane
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to BlindBoo For This Useful Post:
NoNukes (08-22-2011)
  #66 (permalink)  
Old 03-07-2011, 11:03 AM
DiamondDave's Avatar
Army Vet
Member #11393
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: MD, on the Potomac River
Posts: 17,979
Thanks: 6,931
Thanked 5,028 Times in 3,244 Posts
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 2885
DiamondDave has a reputation beyond repute DiamondDave has a reputation beyond repute DiamondDave has a reputation beyond repute DiamondDave has a reputation beyond repute
DiamondDave has a reputation beyond repute DiamondDave has a reputation beyond repute DiamondDave has a reputation beyond repute DiamondDave has a reputation beyond repute DiamondDave has a reputation beyond repute DiamondDave has a reputation beyond repute DiamondDave has a reputation beyond repute DiamondDave has a reputation beyond repute DiamondDave has a reputation beyond repute DiamondDave has a reputation beyond repute DiamondDave has a reputation beyond repute DiamondDave has a reputation beyond repute
Quote: Originally Posted by shintao View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by diamonddave View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by rightwinger View Post

iraq was one of the largest strategic blunders in us history. Poor intelligence, poor execution, no valid rationale for invading. While we pulled needed forces out of afghanistan, we needlessly killed 4000 americans in an unnecessary conflict
unsubstantiated and subjective... Typical for you and your ilk...
fail!!
Yes... he, and you, fail all the time with such tactics
__________________
Fuck the subjective notion of 'fair'
Embrace true equality in treatment in all aspects, not just ones that benefit you or your cause

Quote: Originally Posted by Truthmatters View Post
A pure Democracy is NOT Democracy.
Reply With Quote
  #67 (permalink)  
Old 03-07-2011, 11:05 AM
grunt11b's Avatar
Registered User
Member #27890
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: In Reality
Posts: 4,647
Thanks: 2,008
Thanked 1,162 Times in 814 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 324
grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness
Quote: Originally Posted by georgephillip View Post
The one in four Iraqis who have died, been maimed or displaced from their homes or incarcerated since March 2003.

How do you justify killing thousands of innocent human beings for money?
Kinda hard not to when they are harboring terrorists in there homes and around there villages.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #68 (permalink)  
Old 03-07-2011, 11:22 AM
BlindBoo's Avatar
Registered User
Member #25197
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 10,811
Thanks: 1,053
Thanked 2,291 Times in 1,760 Posts
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 1295
BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court
BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court
Quote: Originally Posted by Uncensored2008 View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by Douger View Post
Satans Empire took a rather advanced middle eastern country and destroyed it for one reason and only one.
Operation
Iraqi
Liberation.
So we must have gotten lots of oil from Iraq, brite boi.

How much, exactly have we imported (Stolen, if you prefer) from post Sadam Iraq?
We've averaged between 300 and 400 thousand barrels a day before and after the invasion and occupation.

Crude Oil and Total Petroleum Imports Top 15 Countries
__________________
A man said to the universe:
"Sir I exist!"
"However," replied the universe,
"The fact has not created in me
A sense of obligation."

-- Stephen Crane
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to BlindBoo For This Useful Post:
JRK (03-07-2011)
  #69 (permalink)  
Old 03-07-2011, 11:34 AM
BlindBoo's Avatar
Registered User
Member #25197
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 10,811
Thanks: 1,053
Thanked 2,291 Times in 1,760 Posts
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 1295
BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court
BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court BlindBoo could be on the Supreme Court
Quote: Originally Posted by DiamondDave View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by Dr.Drock View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by Uncensored2008 View Post

What would the charge against Bush or Cheney be? Specifically, using US criminal justice code? The exact law?

See, Sallow is a stupid fuck - he spews shit to smear the opposition and bolster his shameful party.

But others, who are not as shallow as Sallow, should endeavor to actually THINK the problem through.

The mind of Sallow is only capable of "Democrat good - HATE REPUBLICAN."
This is the last time I'll repeat myself, in order to go to war it HAS to be approved by Congress according to the US Constitution.

Being one of the rare americans who takes the Constitution seriously I know I sound like a loon, but you either approve of the Iraq War and the other unconstitutional wars or you take the Constitution seriously and want it abided by.

There's no in between.
Not all military actions are wars... we have not had a true war since WWII.... And we are allowed to have military actions, without declarations of war... congress DID approve this military action known as the Iraq conflict, and we were justified in continuing hostilities after the terms of cease fire were violated (as they were NUMEROUS times over the years)
Not so sure about that:

BYPASSING THE SECURITY COUNCIL: Ambiguous Authorizations to Use Force, Cease-Fires and the Iraqi Inspection Regime
__________________
A man said to the universe:
"Sir I exist!"
"However," replied the universe,
"The fact has not created in me
A sense of obligation."

-- Stephen Crane
Reply With Quote
  #70 (permalink)  
Old 03-07-2011, 12:25 PM
JRK JRK is offline
Registered User
Member #28394
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 7,488
Thanks: 850
Thanked 636 Times in 472 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 330
JRK may be on a path to greatness JRK may be on a path to greatness JRK may be on a path to greatness JRK may be on a path to greatness JRK may be on a path to greatness JRK may be on a path to greatness JRK may be on a path to greatness JRK may be on a path to greatness JRK may be on a path to greatness JRK may be on a path to greatness JRK may be on a path to greatness JRK may be on a path to greatness
Quote: Originally Posted by BlindBoo View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by Uncensored2008 View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by Douger View Post
Satans Empire took a rather advanced middle eastern country and destroyed it for one reason and only one.
Operation
Iraqi
Liberation.
So we must have gotten lots of oil from Iraq, brite boi.

How much, exactly have we imported (Stolen, if you prefer) from post Sadam Iraq?
We've averaged between 300 and 400 thousand barrels a day before and after the invasion and occupation.

Crude Oil and Total Petroleum Imports Top 15 Countries
I am un sure this was a bad thing nor am I sure it was never part of the reason
Reply With Quote
  #71 (permalink)  
Old 03-07-2011, 12:27 PM
Uncensored2008's Avatar
Libertarian Radical
Member #27995
Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Behind the Orange Curtain
Posts: 29,206
Thanks: 9,961
Thanked 8,256 Times in 6,343 Posts
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 10678
Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati
Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati
Quote: Originally Posted by BlindBoo View Post
1. By disregarding the UNSCR 1441(which the US signed onto) the US led invasion of Iraq in 2003 was illegal.
Nope.

UNSCR 1441 isn't a law and has no legal binding on the sovereign nation of the United States of America.

While it distresses you, the USA is NOT a colony of the UN.
__________________
"If your Health Care cost have risen 30% or more, thank Obamacare."
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Uncensored2008 For This Useful Post:
grunt11b (03-07-2011)
  #72 (permalink)  
Old 03-07-2011, 12:30 PM
Uncensored2008's Avatar
Libertarian Radical
Member #27995
Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Behind the Orange Curtain
Posts: 29,206
Thanks: 9,961
Thanked 8,256 Times in 6,343 Posts
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 10678
Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati
Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati Uncensored2008 gives orders to the Illuminati
Quote: Originally Posted by BlindBoo View Post
We've averaged between 300 and 400 thousand barrels a day before and after the invasion and occupation.

Crude Oil and Total Petroleum Imports Top 15 Countries
So what you're saying is that we didn't gain so much as a drop?

Levels are the same?

Hmm, the oil charge is way off then, spurious and without foundation.

So is KOS stupid, or just lying when they program the drones to bleat the "It's about oil" claim?
__________________
"If your Health Care cost have risen 30% or more, thank Obamacare."
Reply With Quote
  #73 (permalink)  
Old 03-07-2011, 12:31 PM
grunt11b's Avatar
Registered User
Member #27890
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: In Reality
Posts: 4,647
Thanks: 2,008
Thanked 1,162 Times in 814 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 324
grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness
Quote:
Satans Empire took a rather advanced middle eastern country and destroyed it for one reason and only one.
Operation
Iraqi
Liberation.
If this war was for oil only, then why has the price of oil only gone up since 2003?

You fail again, well, at least your ignorance does.
This war was never about oil. To Bush it was about thumping some tango ass, to the Dems, it was to spend as much money to devalue our currency and collapse the economy. I don;t expect you to understand, you're only a minion.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #74 (permalink)  
Old 03-07-2011, 12:35 PM
grunt11b's Avatar
Registered User
Member #27890
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: In Reality
Posts: 4,647
Thanks: 2,008
Thanked 1,162 Times in 814 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 324
grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness grunt11b may be on a path to greatness
Quote:
1. By disregarding the UNSCR 1441(which the US signed onto) the US led invasion of Iraq in 2003 was illegal.
Then the Democrats share in that illegal behavior. Bush did not take this nation to war on his own, he could not have done it without the support from the congress and senate, and here is what they thought.


2. Not stable. Civilians dead in Iraq bus bombing 7-3-2011

Who detonated the bomb that blew the bus up? Us or the terrorists? And if you say our presence brought this about, you are officially a retard because these people have been doing this to each other for about a thousand years.
More stable now then it was in 2003. Have you been there? I didn't think so. The US deaths you hear of now are in Afghanistan, not Iraq, pay attention to the news and not to the Bots running the white house and you will see this for yourself.
__________________

Last edited by grunt11b; 03-07-2011 at 12:39 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #75 (permalink)  
Old 03-07-2011, 12:38 PM
shintao's Avatar
Take Down ~ Tap Out
Member #24733
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 7,150
Thanks: 95
Thanked 649 Times in 563 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Rep Power: 62
shintao could be the Buddha shintao could be the Buddha shintao could be the Buddha shintao could be the Buddha shintao could be the Buddha shintao could be the Buddha shintao could be the Buddha
Quote: Originally Posted by Uncensored2008 View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by JRK View Post
You know what does not make sense to me?
you improve the supply the price goes down
the price goes down, profit goes down

What kind of idiot would believe that?
An idiot without a semblance of understanding of market economics.

I have my students study what is called "The Taco Bell Case."

To summarize, In 1988, Pepsi Cola was about to close the Taco Bell franchise as unprofitable. At the time, Pepsi was charging $0.89 for a regular taco and the same for a regular, bean burrito.

In a last ditch effort, the marketing department decided to run a Sunday special with taco's and bean burritos at $0.29. The argument was that even if Taco Bell took a loss per piece on the tacos, incremental sales of drinks and other items would make up for the difference and turn the chain around.

What happened was nothing short of astounding. Not only did the plan work, but Taco Bell was actually making a profit on the $.29 items. See, there biggest issue was overhead absorption, not food cost. By moving more product, they cut scrap (bad food) to almost nothing and cut overhead from 419% to 60%. Taco Bell then restructured their entire menu at sharply reduced prices and the chain was profitable within a year. Three years later, Pepsi was able to sell the chain (Along with KFC and Pizza Hut) to Yum foods at a huge profit.

The key to being profitable was lowering prices, VOLUME rather than margin was the key.

Price goes down, profit goes up - basic economics.
Dear Cheveron, take advice from Taco Bell.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Lower Navigation
Go Back   US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum > US Discussion > Politics
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:05 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.