Republicans try but can't change history

[surada]

It was crippled by its addiction to a 7th century death cult. Bush was ignorant like most 'elites' and really thought he could encourage leopards to change their stripes and rebuild a bunch of cultists into a civilized nation. He now knows better, and so do we. You loons just can't admit to that, too committed to 'Stupid'.

I resigned the Republican party before the invasion. Everyone knew it was stupid.

 

[surada]

Attacking Kuwait made that plan toast.

Kuwait wouldn't forgive Iraq's OPEC quota. Iraq was way behind in oil production.

 

[DudleySmith]

I resigned the Republican party before the invasion. Everyone knew it was stupid.

lol rubbish.

 

[DudleySmith]

Kuwait wouldn't forgive Iraq's OPEC quota. Iraq was way behind in oil production.

Nothing to do with it; we had mutual defense agreements with Kuwait, and with Saudi Arabia, and with Israel for that matter; your nutjob hero attacked them all.

 

[surada]

Nothing to do with it; we had mutual defense agreements with Kuwait, and with Saudi Arabia, and with Israel for that matter; your nutjob hero attacked them all.

Saudi Arabia tried to stop the US invasion, but Bush wouldn't listen. Bandar was recalled to Arabia. Israel wanted the US to invade per Clean Break Strategy.

 

[surada]

lol rubbish.

Yep. After 35 years. I'd written dozens of letters opposing the invasion.

 

[Roudy]

Attacking Kuwait made that plan toast.

Kuwait was drilling sideways aka “slant drilling” at its border with Iraq to illegally access Iraqi oil, with the blessing of the US of course. That’s the reason for Iraq attacking Kuwait.





Charles Jannuzi
Associate Professor (1994-present)

It was quite likely true. Iraq had some very legitimate claims against Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. That didn’t justify invasion. But what did Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States think Iraq was going to do? Drown in debt? Dismantle its army?
Iraq and Kuwait were ‘sharing’ a known oil field (which on the surface mostly fell in Iraqi territory), and Iraq thought that Kuwait was using directional drilling to take more than its share. Iraq and Kuwait had never negotiated a deal for how to share the field, since Iraq rightly felt that Kuwait wasn’t entitled to any—that the border had been drawn to give them some of the oil.
Kuwait actually didn’t dispute the claim. It instead countered that Iraq had exaggerated the amount (Iraq accused Kuwait of stealing 300,000 - 350,000 barrels a day).
Even if Kuwait wasn’t using slant drilling to take oil out of clearly marked Iraqi territory, it was using it to take more out of a shared field, far exceeding any amount it was entitled to for having a bit of the field fall in Kuwait.
It was also over-producing oil and driving down the price, in large part due to the huge amounts of oil it was sucking out of the Ramaila field. Iraq had a pretty good idea of just how much oil Kuwait could produce, so that is why it figured out that Kuwait was sneaking more oil out of the shared field using directional/horizontal drilling that was not visible from the activities just across the border that could be observed.
The cause of the dispute: Kuwait using the fact that a small part of the huge Rumalia oil field falls inside Kuwait in order to siphon huge amounts of oil out of it.

 

[surada]

Kuwait was drilling sideways aka “slant drilling” at its border with Iraq to illegally access Iraqi oil, with the blessing of the US of course. That’s the reason for Iraq attacking Kuwait.





Charles Jannuzi
Associate Professor (1994-present)

It was quite likely true. Iraq had some very legitimate claims against Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. That didn’t justify invasion. But what did Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States think Iraq was going to do? Drown in debt? Dismantle its army?
Iraq and Kuwait were ‘sharing’ a known oil field (which on the surface mostly fell in Iraqi territory), and Iraq thought that Kuwait was using directional drilling to take more than its share. Iraq and Kuwait had never negotiated a deal for how to share the field, since Iraq rightly felt that Kuwait wasn’t entitled to any—that the border had been drawn to give them some of the oil.
Kuwait actually didn’t dispute the claim. It instead countered that Iraq had exaggerated the amount (Iraq accused Kuwait of stealing 300,000 - 350,000 barrels a day).
Even if Kuwait wasn’t using slant drilling to take oil out of clearly marked Iraqi territory, it was using it to take more out of a shared field, far exceeding any amount it was entitled to for having a bit of the field fall in Kuwait.
It was also over-producing oil and driving down the price, in large part due to the huge amounts of oil it was sucking out of the Ramaila field. Iraq had a pretty good idea of just how much oil Kuwait could produce, so that is why it figured out that Kuwait was sneaking more oil out of the shared field using directional/horizontal drilling that was not visible from the activities just across the border that could be observed.
The cause of the dispute: Kuwait using the fact that a small part of the huge Rumalia oil field falls inside Kuwait in order to siphon huge amounts of oil out of it.

View attachment 647263

Saudi Arabia forgave Saddam's OPEC quota debt. Kuwait wouldn't. Rumalia is a shared field.

 

[DudleySmith]

Kuwait was drilling sideways aka “slant drilling” at its border with Iraq to illegally access Iraqi oil, with the blessing of the US of course. That’s the reason for Iraq attacking Kuwait.



Charles Jannuzi
Associate Professor (1994-present)

It was quite likely true. Iraq had some very legitimate claims against Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. That didn’t justify invasion. But what did Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States think Iraq was going to do? Drown in debt? Dismantle its army?
Iraq and Kuwait were ‘sharing’ a known oil field (which on the surface mostly fell in Iraqi territory), and Iraq thought that Kuwait was using directional drilling to take more than its share. Iraq and Kuwait had never negotiated a deal for how to share the field, since Iraq rightly felt that Kuwait wasn’t entitled to any—that the border had been drawn to give them some of the oil.
Kuwait actually didn’t dispute the claim. It instead countered that Iraq had exaggerated the amount (Iraq accused Kuwait of stealing 300,000 - 350,000 barrels a day).
Even if Kuwait wasn’t using slant drilling to take oil out of clearly marked Iraqi territory, it was using it to take more out of a shared field, far exceeding any amount it was entitled to for having a bit of the field fall in Kuwait.
It was also over-producing oil and driving down the price, in large part due to the huge amounts of oil it was sucking out of the Ramaila field. Iraq had a pretty good idea of just how much oil Kuwait could produce, so that is why it figured out that Kuwait was sneaking more oil out of the shared field using directional/horizontal drilling that was not visible from the activities just across the border that could be observed.
The cause of the dispute: Kuwait using the fact that a small part of the huge Rumalia oil field falls inside Kuwait in order to siphon huge amounts of oil out of it.

View attachment 647263

Doesn't neuter mutual defense agreements, and Saddam had other options; the fact is he just saw an excuse to invade. Oil belongs to whoever can pump the most out of them. All oil fields are 'shared' by the fact that they are big pools, and pumping anywhere in one lowers the amounts anybody else in the field can pump, and lowers gas pressure and in many case raises the water tables through out the whole field. His pretext wasn't the oil, it was some 'ancient Iraqi claims to the swamp and land'.

 

[Roudy]

Doesn't neuter mutual defense agreements, and Saddam had other options; the fact is he just saw an excuse to invade. Oil belongs to whoever can pump the most out of them. All oil fields are 'shared' by the fact that they are big pools, and pumping anywhere in one lowers the amounts anybody else in the field can pump, and lowers gas pressure and in many case raises the water tables through out the whole field. His pretext wasn't the oil, it was some 'ancient Iraqi claims to the swamp and land'.

True, but since Sadam was in full control of the money coming from any oil revenues, the Kuwaitis were essentially putting their hands into Sadam’s pockets. And the US also initially deceived Sadam by letting him think we would be “neutral” In that fight.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

It was crippled by its addiction to a 7th century death cult. Bush was ignorant like most 'elites' and really thought he could encourage leopards to change their stripes and rebuild a bunch of cultists into a civilized nation. He now knows better, and so do we. You loons just can't admit to that, too committed to 'Stupid'.

Contempt for All Mountain Monkeys Is Rationalism

The same upper-class respect for foreign savages explains the Afghan pullout disaster. Bi-den was just following the Neocons' same illusion that the native soldiers would finish off the Taliban themselves if we left enough weapons for them.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Doesn't neuter mutual defense agreements, and Saddam had other options; the fact is he just saw an excuse to invade. Oil belongs to whoever can pump the most out of them. All oil fields are 'shared' by the fact that they are big pools, and pumping anywhere in one lowers the amounts anybody else in the field can pump, and lowers gas pressure and in many case raises the water tables through out the whole field. His pretext wasn't the oil, it was some 'ancient Iraqi claims to the swamp and land'.

Saddam Needed Kuwait So He Could Defeat Iran

Iraq is Mesopotamia. Kuwait has belonged to it for 5,000 years. It is nothing but a cut-and-paste country clipped off a map by the Allies after World War I. When Iraq gets a stable leadership again, it will certainly try to get Kuwait back. That is a permanent goal of all Iraqis.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

2. IF Pence believed that the ballots were fraudulent, is that not what SHOULD have happened?

The Big Lie self~coup failed because Pence knew the ballots were not fraudulent, and that the states certified them with Biden as the winner.
Pence was a Christian who could not lie for Don Trump.

I am not wrong. The Trump Thomas Eastman Meadows self coup plot to keep Trump/Pence in power after losing an election has absolutely nothing to do with the objection rules that you are citing. They pressured Pence to do something absolutely outside of his constitutional authority. The plotters wanted Mike Pence to reject “certified electors“ because in those seven states in question, each one submitted republican slates of “fake electors”

 

[Polishprince]

The Big Lie self~coup failed because Pence knew the ballots were not fraudulent, and that the states certified them with Biden as the winner.
Pence was a Christian who could not lie for Don Trump.

How could Pence know for sure whether or not the ballots and the counting were fraudulent or not?

The matter hadn't been investigated at all, certainly not by the time of the vote certification.

And even today, there are a lot of doubts, particularly considering the fact that Sleepy Joe was credited with 81 million votes.

Smelled like bullshit then, and still does today.

Vice President Pence should have insisted on a full investigation

 

[whutTHEYsay]

How could Pence know for sure whether or not the ballots and the counting were fraudulent or not?

Because all 50 states certified their elections on or before December 15, 2020 after all the Trump campaigns challenges in court failed. When slates of electors are certified by that date there is no more recourse for the loser to change the outcome in any legal way. At that point Trump can only change the outcome by committing fraud, but he needed Mike Pence to cooperate in the self~coup and commit that fraud for him.

Denied a second term, Trump was always free to bring evidence forward that there was outcome determinative fraud in any of those seven states.

He never tried.

He could not have become president if he won a case proving fraud deprived him winning the White House for a second term, but the political impact would’ve been much more positive for democracy and himself rather than assemble amob and try to pressure Mike pants to violate his oath of office and commit fraud for him.

 

[sealybobo]

The Big Lie self~coup failed because Pence knew the ballots were not fraudulent, and that the states certified them with Biden as the winner.
Pence was a Christian who could not lie for Don Trump.

He will go down in history as a patriot. Like Paul Revere.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

He will go down in history as a patriot. Like Paul Revere.

… with the black mark on his legacy that he did not quit the Republican Party immediately following the Republican Party assault on western liberal democracy on January 21, 2021.

 

[sealybobo]

… with the black mark on his legacy that he did not quit the Republican Party immediately following the Republican Party assault on western liberal democracy on January 21, 2021.

Why should he leave the party? They should leave. But it's up to voters.

 

[Unkotare]

...

Because history is what it is. ...

democrats cough American Civil War cough

 

[mikegriffith1]

Fact check: Some Republicans have tried to rewrite the history of January 6. Here's how | CNN Politics

When the House Select Committee investigating the events of January 6 convenes for the first time, it will be against a backdrop of Republican objections and falsehoods.

www.cnn.com

Because history is what it is. Despite the efforts of Trump and his Cult members in Congress to rewrite it to reflect positively on Trump, theirs is a lost cause.

Trump and his disciples, since January 6 have tried over and over to convince the American people that the insurrection was caused by Antifa, was a peaceful event with lots of love in the air or was just a guided tour of the Capital building.

We know better! It was an aggressive attempt by white nationalists, inspired by Trump, to take over the government of the United States. Anyone who sees it in a different light is not a loyal, patriotic American, but rather is a Trump disciple who places him above the Constitution of the United States and the welfare of the majority of the American people.

Today's congressional hearing will expose the Trump people who tried to storm the Capital for what they really are: enemies of the American people.

You are delusional. Read and educate yourself:

Jack Smith Report Proves Media Were Lying About J6 'Insurrection'

Former special counsel Jack Smith released his findings in his Jan. 6 case, proving the incident at the Capitol was never an "insurrection."

thefederalist.com

Great-Grandma Convicted For 10 Minutes In Capitol On Jan. 6

After being strung up on charges by Biden's DOJ, 71-year-old Rebecca Lavrenz may be thrown in jail for walking around the Capitol on J6.

thefederalist.com

Garland Uses Cops Who Died By Stroke, Suicides To Rewrite J6

Not a single police officer was killed on Jan. 6, but Merrick Garland's statement about the protest may have people thinking otherwise.

thefederalist.com