What's That About War For Oil??

[JimH52]

Hint: don't tell lies and you don't get called a liar. The comment that the war is not about oil is in the context of responding to pundits accusing the Administration of invading Iraq to to specifically steal Iraq's oil. Which, is untrue.

That ae even give a shit about the Middle East at all and who is control of what is based solely on our interest in and dependence on Arab oil.

See how easy it is when you put things in correct context? I don't even see the point to posting this misleading crap. It was TOO easy to shoot down.

I was talking about your other ID.

 

[Gunny]

I was talking about your other ID.

I don't have another ID. If I did, why would I use basically the same one? I'd have one like "LibLarry" and come on here and slobber and foam at the mouth and make baseless accusations and insult conservatives. Don't have to think nor research arguments that way.

I'll also point out that in the 4 years I've been on this board I've maybe called someone a liar twice. I use the word correctly as opposed to way it gets slung around here because a person believes something different, and I use it sparingly because the word actually has meaning.

 

[jillian]

Hint: don't tell lies and you don't get called a liar. The comment that the war is not about oil is in the context of responding to pundits accusing the Administration of invading Iraq to to specifically steal Iraq's oil. Which, is untrue.

That ae even give a shit about the Middle East at all and who is control of what is based solely on our interest in and dependence on Arab oil.

See how easy it is when you put things in correct context? I don't even see the point to posting this misleading crap. It was TOO easy to shoot down.

Actually, the pile of dog droppings calls me a liar for every opinion I have and every source I post. And it was the right that ran around whining that this was a war b/c of WMD's and to "liberate" the Iraqis (and a multitude of other pretend reasons) and when the "left" said it was about oil, you called us liars then.

Hence McCain realizing his gaffe

 

[William Joyce]

A real gaffe would be to admit that the war was fought for Israel's sake, not America's.

 

[Paulie]

Its not a gaffe, moron....its reality.....

Are you naive enough to think that if our enemies cut our oil supply it wouldn't cause a MAJOR conflict.... its akin to cutting off food imports if we absolutly required 50% food imports to survive...
Its one of the reasons the Japs attacked us in '44.....
they have NO OIL of their own and we threatened what imports they were getting....
To the US...OIL is our blood....without it we will cease to exist as we know it...
to us...the oil is about as important as food.....
thats why we have have our own supply
not rely of other counties....we must us our own resources....and screw the Dims and their eco-wackos...

How does this give us any moral right to invade a sovereign country?

Should Cuba invade us for placing a trade embargo on them, consequently hurting their economy? I mean, the logic is the same.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

How does this give us any moral right to invade a sovereign country?

Should Cuba invade us for placing a trade embargo on them, consequently hurting their economy? I mean, the logic is the same.

If they could, they would have cause, YES.

that is how it works with Nations.

 

[Larkinn]

If they could, they would have cause, YES.

that is how it works with Nations.

No, actually thats not how it works. Thats how it worked 60 years ago. We've come a ways since then.

Thats why the US pays Antigua untold millions, perhaps billions, in reparations instead of just invading them.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

No, actually thats not how it works. Thats how it worked 60 years ago. We've come a ways since then.

Thats why the US pays Antigua untold millions, perhaps billions, in reparations instead of just invading them.

No, we do that because that is deemed the best option for us. Personally I would go back to the "millions for defense, not one cent for bribes" but that is just me.

 

[Larkinn]

No, we do that because that is deemed the best option for us. Personally I would go back to the "millions for defense, not one cent for bribes" but that is just me.

The best option for us, because the international community demands it. It is not a bribe at all, it is reparations for the illegal actions the US has taken on online betting.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The best option for us, because the international community demands it. It is not a bribe at all, it is reparations for the illegal actions the US has taken on online betting.

Really? Illegal? Not quite. The US may agree to pay but it is not because it is "illegal".

Last I checked there is no World Government and no actual authority to force a sovereign nation to do anything the UN or some "world Court" demands.

 

[Gunny]

Actually, the pile of dog droppings calls me a liar for every opinion I have and every source I post. And it was the right that ran around whining that this was a war b/c of WMD's and to "liberate" the Iraqis (and a multitude of other pretend reasons) and when the "left" said it was about oil, you called us liars then.

Hence McCain realizing his gaffe

Nothing for McCain to realize. His words were miscontrued and he clarified what everybody with any objectivity already knows. We wouldn't give a rat's ass about the Middle East if they hung each other by the 'nads with piano wire by the thousands if we didn't have an interest in who controls what makes this country go.

Look at Sudan.

I don't agree with ANYONE calling someone a liar unless they are actually lying, period. A matter of opinion can be incorrect, or different, but not necessarily a lie. The accusation is misused on this board, and it's misused WAY too often.

 

[Gunny]

The best option for us, because the international community demands it. It is not a bribe at all, it is reparations for the illegal actions the US has taken on online betting.

Oh yeah because we're SO well-known for caving to the international community's demands.

 

[Larkinn]

Really? Illegal? Not quite. The US may agree to pay but it is not because it is "illegal".

Yes, actually thats because it is illegal.

Last I checked there is no World Government and no actual authority to force a sovereign nation to do anything the UN or some "world Court" demands.

Check again. Its called the WTO and there are adjudicative bodies set up by the int'l community that have binding force.

By the way, the UNSC has the authority to force a sovreign nation to do whatever it damn well pleases.

 

[Larkinn]

Oh yeah because we're SO well-known for caving to the international community's demands.

Umm, no we aren't. That doesn't mean it never happens. We caved to, of all nations, Antigua. By the way...they forced us to cave.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Yes, actually thats because it is illegal.



Check again. Its called the WTO and there are adjudicative bodies set up by the int'l community that have binding force.

By the way, the UNSC has the authority to force a sovreign nation to do whatever it damn well pleases.

That you believe that is truly pathetic.

 

[Larkinn]

That you believe that is truly pathetic.

Umm its not really opinion, its fact set out in the UN Charter and the WTO agreement respectively.

Again...why do you think the US is giving Antigua untold millions because of a WTO violation?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Umm its not really opinion, its fact set out in the UN Charter and the WTO agreement respectively.

Again...why do you think the US is giving Antigua untold millions because of a WTO violation?

Name one UN resolution enforced on any Nation that chose to ignore it. I won't hold my breath waiting for your answer.

We pay because it is determined to be the correct path at this moment. Just as we INVADED Iraq when we felt that was the correct path to take in THAT situation.

 

[Larkinn]

Name one UN resolution enforced on any Nation that chose to ignore it. I won't hold my breath waiting for your answer.

UNSC resolution 660 and co.

We pay because it is determined to be the correct path at this moment. Just as we INVADED Iraq when we felt that was the correct path to take in THAT situation.

No, we pay because Antigua demanded it and threatened us (and the int'l community backed them up on that).

 

[RetiredGySgt]

UNSC resolution 660 and co.



No, we pay because Antigua demanded it and threatened us (and the int'l community backed them up on that).

You are hilarious.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

With out the US military there would have been no freeing of Kuwait. The UN just got to tag along because it made it easier.