lake avenue
Active Member
- Mar 30, 2015
- 274
- 24
- 31
I don't pretend anything, I'm a libertarian party supporter, and being anti-war does not make me a lefty.You pretend not to be. The anti-iraq bit was and still is a lefty scam. Blame bush and crew for a failure to predict and for the mishandling of the aftermath but the lead-up was legit.not a lefty nor am I a democrat. sorry bud.You're just a post-2003 lefty dupe. Democrats taking advantage of a situation they initially supported having gone south and all in the name of political opportunity.A security threat? Of course it was a security threat- that's why we didn't get UN support for it amirite?You're a dupe. Of course oil supply is a significant dynamic in any conflict in that region. But only propagandists push that angle when fooling dupes. Iraq was considered a security threat and was dealt with accordingly and with bipartisan support. That flawed aftermath was propagated into a lefty political opportunity and you bought it.Bush started a war over oil. That's right wing propaganda. It worked on you.
See how much sense that argument makes? None. You can't just say "your opinion is shit" without providing any real argument. Conspiracy theories with no real backing.
I'm sure that it's just a coincidence, however, that oil profits soared at the beginning of the war
"Of course it's about oil; we can't really deny that," said Gen. John Abizaid, former head of U.S. Central Command and Military Operations in Iraq, in 2007. Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan agreed, writing in his memoir, "I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil." Then-Sen. and now Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said the same in 2007: "People say we're not fighting for oil. Of course we are."