WMD's: Do They Matter?

[eric]

Now this I must agree with ! That was a good post Bam. Fossil fuels must be replaced with cleaner more efficient forms of enery. Not to mention that they will be depleated one day. Though it would be impossible to just switch from one energy source to another, our entire infrastructure must be changed to accomodate these new sources of energy. So even if we had these forms perfected it would still be years before we were ready to use them. Therefore it is still necessary to secure a constant uninterrupted supply of fossil fuels, making our involvement in the middle east a necessary evil !

 

[SinisterMotives]

Originally posted by bamthin
I think we should be investing more in alternate energy sources and dumping more money into hydrogen power car research.

I happen to know that Wenchie is very interested in this idea herself, although I won't go into details without her permission.

 

[remie]

Originally posted by SinisterMotives
Maybe not. Let's just see how long it takes McDonald's and GulfDisney to set up shop there.

Too late.....sorry I dont have a link but heard a report some time ago that Mc Donalds was the busiest joint in town...especially for the US troops !!!!

 

[SinisterMotives]

Originally posted by remie
Too late.....sorry I dont have a link but heard a report some time ago that Mc Donalds was the busiest joint in town...especially for the US troops !!!!

I'd have preferred a more worthwhile introduction to capitalism for the Iraqis than bland, dry hamburgers, but if it works, it works!

 

[remie]

Originally posted by SinisterMotives
I'd have preferred a more worthwhile introduction to capitalism for the Iraqis than bland, dry hamburgers, but if it works, it works!

cant disagree with you there, but capitalism is capitalism and if the demand is there someone is wise enough to feed the need.

 

[Bern80]

Originally posted by bamthin

The people who support the Iraq war on humanitarian reasons alone are actually signing off on sending US troops to Iraq where they quite possibly will be killed. I am assuming that, since their convictions are strong enough to allow other people's children to go there and possibly die, that they would also send their own children there as well (less they be cowardly hypocrites).

In my opinion, if a person is not willing to have their brother/sister/child, or themselves for that matter, die in Iraq to build a democracy there, they should be against the war.

This is from a few pages back, but it speaks volumes about how much you value freedom, Bam. Everyone knows that death is both a possibility and a likelyhood when going to war. The only way to interpret what you said is that humanitarian reasons, which i believe to be the most honorable, are not worth the effort if it means loss of life to our troops.

You may disagree, but it does not change the fact that you are essentially saying freedom is worth very little indeed. If it is not worth human sacrafice, or at least the risk of it, what is it worth?
The only way to interpret this, Bam is that to you freedom is basically a worthless comodity and only the bare minimum should be sacraficed in order to achieve it.

Your statement does a wonderful job of underlying one of many liberal hypocrisy's. You talk and talk about the freedoms being violated all over this world, but that is all you do... talk. When it comes time to actually step up and realize that a dictator like Saddam can only be removed through force, your true colors start to show and you prove that liberals really don't care as much about freedom as you say you do, because it really isn't apparently isn't worth getting your hands bloody.

 

[jones]

And when you dont question authority, which is REQUIRED by our democracy. You're being unpatriotic bern.

and

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

 

[wonderwench]

Originally posted by bamthin
I think we should be investing more in alternate energy sources and dumping more money into hydrogen power car research. I would much rather have a gasoline free, pollution free automobile than see a space station on the moon. Think about how much pure research we could have done for alternate energy research with the $180 billion or so we spent getting rid of Saddam. Not even having to mention the saved lives.

Once the US removes it's dependence on crude oil, the Middle East becomes just another desert and the shieks will need to start raising camels again. With no money to finance terror, the WOT ends and the US wins. We developed a freakin' nuclear bomb and put a man on the moon, I think we can handle the gasoline free car.



-Bam

Then, Bam, you should be a huge supporter of President Bush. His administration announced the Hydrogen Roadmap - and has earmarked a great deal of research funding for hydrogen energy demonstration projects.

Another huge supporter of hydrogen power is Governor Schwarzenegger. He has converted one of his Hummers to run on hydrogen - and wants to see the state encourage more alternate and clean energy ventures.

 

[SinisterMotives]

Originally posted by wonderwench
Another huge supporter of hydrogen power is Governor Schwarzenegger. He has converted one of his Hummers to run on hydrogen - and wants to see the state encourage more alternate and clean energy ventures.

Well, that makes those behemoth gas-guzzlers palatable at least.

 

[bamthin]

Originally posted by wonderwench
Then, Bam, you should be a huge supporter of President Bush. His administration announced the Hydrogen Roadmap - and has earmarked a great deal of research funding for hydrogen energy demonstration projects.

Another huge supporter of hydrogen power is Governor Schwarzenegger. He has converted one of his Hummers to run on hydrogen - and wants to see the state encourage more alternate and clean energy ventures.

I am aware of the initiative and I think it's a good start. However, it's only $1.3 billion over five years which is woefully inadequate. Just think how quickly hydrogen energy could have been acheived if we dumped all the money we did in Iraq to it. In addition, is the hydrogen road map part of the broader Energy Bill that had all the pork for the energy suppliers and the environmental issues in it like drilling oil in National Parks?

The hydrogen project should stand alone and not be politicized. It's success will end the war on terror.

-Bam

 

[jones]

You guys should really watch this, thought it would be boring but was not at all.

Al Gore did a wonderful presentation on global warming and the enviroment.

He destroys the myths that global warming does not exist and the other side, its not preventable.

http://web1.media.globix.net/client/molemedia/moveon_011504.asx

 

[jimnyc]

Jones, not trying to stir up shit, but you should really watch more news than what moveon.org supplies. That's the equivalent of me watching and believing nothing more than Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter.

 

[jones]

You have a point, but it does not pertain to me. I get my news at alot of sources. national yes, just to get the jist of what people see, like Just a few seconds ago was on CNN reading about dems critizing appointment and plane crash in florida. Like here is a good one, it is biased of course, they do have alot of articles in there, but majority are from "credible news sources", it just filters out all the garbage americans are accustomed to. http://www.buzzflash.com/

I try to stay away from nationalist media , It has swayed my opinion. About the iraq war. During the invasion I thought it was justified to an extent. Then I started reading real news. Not from move on. They got good stuff, where else can you see gore speak about enviroment, not to mention uniting with a common cause to actually bring about change, no corporate influence involved.

 

[Bern80]

Originally posted by jones
And when you dont question authority, which is REQUIRED by our democracy. You're being unpatriotic bern.

and

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

Who says i haven't? No that my post had anything to do with questioning authority. Just because you feel the need to question authority doesn't mean your right. It may mean you just didn't get the answer you wanted to hear or you may not be asking the right question.

 

[Aquarian]

Originally posted by Bern80
What other way could it have happened? Do you honestly believe their might've been a way to remove Saddam w/o the use of force?

Sorry so long getting back to this. As I said, I don't have a well defined alternative plan. Targetted assassination crossed my mind but it opens doors that may be best left shut. Continued or different sanctions... may or may not have been effective. I just don't think that things had reached the boiling point that my mind says war requires. But it's all just playing monday morning quarterback at this point, all we can do now is go forward and try to make the best out of the situation. And welcome to the board, think I forgot to say that in my last post

 

[Bern80]

Originally posted by Aquarian
I just don't think that things had reached the boiling point that my mind says war requires. But it's all just playing monday morning quarterback at this point, all we can do now is go forward and try to make the best out of the situation. And welcome to the board, think I forgot to say that in my last post

If I may ask, what would the boiling point have been for you?


P.S. nice ending remark, whish the dem candidates would start thinking this way. It would help them a lot.

 

[Aquarian]

my boiling point would have been (I think) a direct attack on us another nation, or very substantial, sharable information indicating that an attack was in the readying stages. But then, I'm also the kind of guy who makes the other guy take the first swing. Imagine the old rayovac commercials with the guy saying "c'mon, knock it off, I dare ya". Jim will probably be along shortly to point out that the threat posed by saddam and his wmd weren't the reason, or at least not the only reason, we went to war so I'll go ahead and state that while they were not the only reason for war by far, they were the only reason that was likely to garner the support necessary to make it happen. This is why the administration had to focus on these aspects so heavily despite the current appearance that the evidence for these issues was slight and possibly wrong. As wolfowitz himself said:

"The truth is that for reasons that have a lot to do with the U.S. government bureaucracy, we settled on the one issue that everyone could agree on which was weapons of mass destruction as the core reason," Wolfowitz was quoted as saying in a Pentagon transcript of an interview with Vanity Fair.
from: http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-05-30-wolfowitz-iraq_x.htm

add in the PNAC doctrine, the administrations ties to the oil and war industies as well as a political history with saddam, family history with saddam ala the assassination attempt on Bush sr and it should certainly leave at least a few unanswered questions in one's mind.