Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE War in Iraq Thread pt 2 (merged)

What's on your mind?
General interest discussions, not necessarily related to depletion.

Re: Should the rest of the world help pay for the Iraq war?

Unread postby Micki » Sat 21 Jul 2007, 01:19:05

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he US does alot good for the Global community that's not discussed or appreciated. It's easy to blame the US for all the worlds problems. Since we won WWII and the Cold War, were perceived, and rightly so, as the Worlds only Super Power. An Empire; But, it was never the US's intention to 'rule the world'. Globisation, Capitalism, American Culture, American Ideals, and Geopolitical circumstances have propelled it into an Empire.

Of course it was US intention to rule the world. Although you have not understood that US is not the people who live in USA but the bankers and freemansons who rule it. They funded all three sides in the war (communists, nazis and UK/US) and came out the winners nomatter what the outcome. It is through disorder and chaos that they rule as they can maniuplate the nations in what ever direction they desire. Haven't you seen what fraud the war on terrorism is? The "war" is a pretence for other desired outcomes.
Micki
 

Re: Should the rest of the world help pay for the Iraq war?

Unread postby OilIsMastery » Sat 21 Jul 2007, 03:52:43

Image
User avatar
OilIsMastery
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 507
Joined: Wed 11 Jul 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Manhattan - U.N. Occupied

Re: Should the rest of the world help pay for the Iraq war?

Unread postby TheDude » Sat 21 Jul 2007, 04:05:45

Indeed Bush isn't entirely like Hitler. He has elements of Caligula and Louis XVI as well.

The Hitler analogy mostly stems from the brazen grab for power - which he isn't done fulfilling, either - rather than the Final Solution most people associate Adolph with.

Cheney will be president tomorrow, BTW. No, I mean, officially Acting President, while Dubya has his colonoscopy.
Cogito, ergo non satis bibivi
And let me tell you something: I dig your work.
User avatar
TheDude
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 4896
Joined: Thu 06 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Location: 3 miles NW of Champoeg, Republic of Cascadia

Re: Should the rest of the world help pay for the Iraq war?

Unread postby Concerned » Sat 21 Jul 2007, 04:37:26

Not only no but Hell no. LOL

Before US invasion of Iraq no AQ, now AQ in Iraq and getting lots of recruits and experience.

The US and UK should be paying the rest of the world for all the terrorists they are freaking creating.

The US and UK should pay reparations to at least re-build 75-85% Iraq infrastructure they have destroyed, with their own money not Iraq oil money.

Get REAL and get the hell out of the country. Let them trade oil with with everyone except US and UK should they choose to do so.

The supreme arrogance to even contemplate asking for others to pay for your criminal actions is simply galling.

Be-gone fool.
"Once the game is over, the king and the pawn go back in the same box."
-Italian Proverb
User avatar
Concerned
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1571
Joined: Thu 23 Sep 2004, 03:00:00

Re: Should the rest of the world help pay for the Iraq war?

Unread postby Alcassin » Sat 21 Jul 2007, 08:25:51

NotMyBlood you are joking, aren't you?

1. Your country created, and sponsored AQ with Osama bin Laden, he was American agent. Fight with this insubordination alone, you created monster, so you have it.
2. Your country brought Opium back to Afghanistan to a pre-taliban level making its supplky 1st on the Earth. Congratiulations, hope, democracy and heroine.
3. Your country attacked Iraq in march 2003, like USSR invaded Poland on 17th September 1939 - without declaring war. Your country act like USSR on eastern grab of Poland.
4. It is not "few people" - for the WWII was responsible also "few people". War is hobby of elites, but your nation let to steal elections of 2000 and go for endless war. Don't use nuremberg excuse, that you only "followed the orders".
5. You are losing, because you are governed by a bunch of cleptocrats and plutocrats, sorry, your sovereign country, your decision.
6. If you want to let other countries pay, so let the rest of the world elect another president of the United States of America. Got the point? Politics are not charitable, grow up.

Every ministry of foreign affairs in the world should as cynical for you as Henry Kissinger was to them. War was based on lies, it is lost, and now it is the time to pay the bill, and the rest of a party laughs at you when you try to borrow again. My country serves in Afghanistan and in Iraq - and I won't beg others to pay for me, that's chilidish and makes me sick.
Peak oil is only an indication and a premise of limits to growth on a finite planet.
Denial is the most predictable of all human responses.
User avatar
Alcassin
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 614
Joined: Wed 20 Jun 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Poland

Re: Should the rest of the world help pay for the Iraq war?

Unread postby ClassicSpiderman » Sat 21 Jul 2007, 16:26:37

I just want to make myself perfectly clear: I don't support US foreign policy in regards to the Middle East. In fact, I think US foreign policy since the Vietnam war is misguided and immoral.

The title of this thread is a facetious remark--sort of directed at those who like to say that the Iraq war was war to defend the "American way of life". If that's the case, then other countries that import huge amounts of oil are also getting dividends from this war without paying for it like the Americans do.

The hypocritical social democrats of the Left (the peace party as in this case of the Iraq war) cheered on Bill Clinton's bombing of Yugoslavia, calling Slobodan Milosevic a murderer of hundreds of thousands of people, all lies of course. Funny that Milosevic defended himself rather well at the Hague and then conveniently 'died' before a verdict given against him.

The 'right' provides political support for the current war, because George Bush happens to be a Republican. The patriotic country bumpkins provide good cannon fodder for American imperialistic wars. George Orwell's "romantic man" comes to mind whenever a country needs to galvanize a country in a time of war. Roosevelt took advantage of US citizens xenophobia towards the japanese (after Pearl Harbor) to get the country sucked into WW2. When Stalin was getting his arse kicked by Germany, he abandoned all socialist pretense of 'internationalism' and framed the war as a 'Great patriotic war for the Russian fatherland'. Franco kicked the socialists' asses even though his armies were outnumbered by 3-1 because his side were devout Spanish nationalists--the opposition was a bunch of effete metrosexuals debating whether the concept of military rank was another bourgeois construct that should be abolished.

American nationalism is a powerful force that continues to drive this war (the hardcore 25% that support Bush). Why are they so devoutly behind this cause? The image of the turban-wearing swarthy Islamic shouting "Death to America!" is quite effective propaganda. Funny how the media masters brainwash everyone to feel guilty for being white and to respect and bow at the feet of multiculturalism, but they will allow these 'patriots' their 2 minutes of hate against Islamics (who happen to also be the enemies of Israel).

My advice to the American "patriots" is that their support of the war just continues to perpetuate a decadent, corrupt society. Ignore the useful idiots of the left who only hate the Iraq war because that paradigm conforms to their ideal of Third World solidarity or whatnot. These hypocrites would be hardcore supporters of this war if it was a (D) President. Bush is an internationalist-socialist who speaks "conservative" language.

"They" hate you for your freedoms? What freedoms? To watch Internet pr0n? To permit loose women to show off their ankles in public? To bring Brokeback Mountain to those uncouth, homophobic Arabs? They hate you because of America's meddling and one-sided foreign policy towards Israel.
User avatar
ClassicSpiderman
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 251
Joined: Thu 16 Mar 2006, 04:00:00
Location: Calgary

Re: Should the rest of the world help pay for the Iraq war?

Unread postby Bas » Sat 21 Jul 2007, 16:39:44

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('IrrationalExuberanceMonky', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Bas', 'A')merica should pay for it's own mistakes, sure enough, lost of europeans put a lot of money into that war, including my own country (which is in afghanistan in force) but IMO America should pay for it's own lies. O and btw, Europe is taking in more then 60 times the iraqi refugees america is taking in, let alon iran, syria, SA and Jordan who are taking in a 1000 times more Iraqi refugees than the US. You want truth? there you have it.

PS the title of this thread just makes me sick to my stomach.


OK, do you consider the UK part of Europe here or not? Because as Milliband just stated we're (the UK) in bed with America and that's that! We ain't going nowhere! In real terms Europe (including the UK) gave 'pocket change to Afghanistan.... 'A lot of money'? :o :razz:

BTW In the interests of disclosure, I'm an Atlanticist. 8)


That's BS

Europe put and puts alot of money into Afghanistan; there are more European soldiers there than there are from the US. Surely Europe, and especially HOLLAND contribute more there then America: Backup of these claims
Bas
 

Re: Should the rest of the world help pay for the Iraq war?

Unread postby Mircea » Sat 21 Jul 2007, 21:35:49

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Bas', 'T')hat's BS

Europe put and puts alot of money into Afghanistan; there are more European soldiers there than there are from the US. Surely Europe, and especially HOLLAND contribute more there then America


Sorry, but it doesn't mean much to me. The Brits and Germans viewed "Dutch solider" as oxymoronic, especially with a unionized army that only trained 35 hours a week, wouldn't train join exercises unless the US paid for it since Dutch troops got overtime pay, allowed troops to use drugs, wear earings in their ears while on duty and in uniform, and had women in combat units.

In fact, the Brits and Germans complained so bitterly that they couldn't trust the Dutch (and miserable fat Belgian bastards) to guard their backs that the US had to quell their fears by moving Patton's Brigade (from III Corp's 2nd Armored Division) to Garlstedt (in Niedersachsen about an hour south of Bremerhaven) and placing it under NORTHAG command (US troops under British command).

Having trained with Portuguese, Dutch and Belgian troops, I'd take the Portuguese any day.
User avatar
Mircea
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Fri 04 May 2007, 03:00:00

Re: Should the rest of the world help pay for the Iraq war?

Unread postby Bas » Sat 21 Jul 2007, 21:48:26

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Mircea', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Bas', 'T')hat's BS

Europe put and puts alot of money into Afghanistan; there are more European soldiers there than there are from the US. Surely Europe, and especially HOLLAND contribute more there then America


Sorry, but it doesn't mean much to me. The Brits and Germans viewed "Dutch solider" as oxymoronic, especially with a unionized army that only trained 35 hours a week, wouldn't train join exercises unless the US paid for it since Dutch troops got overtime pay, allowed troops to use drugs, wear earings in their ears while on duty and in uniform, and had women in combat units.

In fact, the Brits and Germans complained so bitterly that they couldn't trust the Dutch (and miserable fat Belgian bastards) to guard their backs that the US had to quell their fears by moving Patton's Brigade (from III Corp's 2nd Armored Division) to Garlstedt (in Niedersachsen about an hour south of Bremerhaven) and placing it under NORTHAG command (US troops under British command).

Having trained with Portuguese, Dutch and Belgian troops, I'd take the Portuguese any day.


ah ok, if you know so much then you probably know that dutch troops are in charge of THE key region in Afghanistan. Get lost with your speculation and hearsay. Besides that, it's not like the slithering cowardly portugese snakes(as the cliche goes about the portugese in Europe) ever want to contribute in an international undertaking when it's not for their direct personal gain.
Bas
 
Top

Re: Should the rest of the world help pay for the Iraq war?

Unread postby Pretorian » Sun 22 Jul 2007, 03:18:48

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Bas', ' ')O and btw, Europe is taking in more then 60 times the iraqi refugees america is taking in, let alon iran, syria, SA and Jordan who are taking in a 1000 times more Iraqi refugees than the US. You want truth? there you have it.



You take more of them becouse they show up there more frequently, same reason why Jordan take more than you do. Frankly I see no reason why would anyone take anyone, either from Iraq or anywhere else.
Pretorian
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4685
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Somewhere there
Top

Re: Should the rest of the world help pay for the Iraq war?

Unread postby Pretorian » Sun 22 Jul 2007, 03:44:23

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Fishman', ' ') One recent reporter there found out that Al quida had COOKED a child .


Did it came from OGSS news agency? Not saying that its not possible, but how do you know their Al quida IDs were genuine? May be they were Arab-Americans in desguise, on a secret mission from Pentagon?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Fishman', 'W')e put underwear on a prisoners head (and punish the offender), the enemy cuts off heads, and we are the bad guys.


Fish, are you a good guy? Please elaborate
Pretorian
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4685
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Somewhere there
Top

Re: Should the rest of the world help pay for the Iraq war?

Unread postby skeptik » Sun 22 Jul 2007, 06:53:28

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('NotMyBlood', ' ') But, when people(leftie europeans,some canadians, south americans, mexicans, muslims, etc, etc) compares bush to hitler, America to the Nazis its incredibly insulting.


America to the Nazis? wrong comparison. I would suggest that the Neo-con clicque in the Republican party currently running the show does bare that comparison.

As to the current nature of the US government, defintion is problematical. Part democracy part covert facism. There isnt a single word that covers 'The best Democracy money can buy'

http://neworleans.indymedia.org/news/2007/07/10585.php
do the comparison and make your own mind up.
User avatar
skeptik
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 418
Joined: Wed 24 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Costa Geriatrica, Spain
Top

Re: Should the rest of the world help pay for the Iraq war?

Unread postby eXpat » Sun 22 Jul 2007, 08:25:33

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ClassicSpiderman', 'I') just want to make myself perfectly clear: I don't support US foreign policy in regards to the Middle East. In fact, I think US foreign policy since the Vietnam war is misguided and immoral.

The title of this thread is a facetious remark--sort of directed at those who like to say that the Iraq war was war to defend the "American way of life". If that's the case, then other countries that import huge amounts of oil are also getting dividends from this war without paying for it like the Americans do.

The hypocritical social democrats of the Left (the peace party as in this case of the Iraq war) cheered on Bill Clinton's bombing of Yugoslavia, calling Slobodan Milosevic a murderer of hundreds of thousands of people, all lies of course. Funny that Milosevic defended himself rather well at the Hague and then conveniently 'died' before a verdict given against him.

The 'right' provides political support for the current war, because George Bush happens to be a Republican. The patriotic country bumpkins provide good cannon fodder for American imperialistic wars. George Orwell's "romantic man" comes to mind whenever a country needs to galvanize a country in a time of war. Roosevelt took advantage of US citizens xenophobia towards the japanese (after Pearl Harbor) to get the country sucked into WW2. When Stalin was getting his arse kicked by Germany, he abandoned all socialist pretense of 'internationalism' and framed the war as a 'Great patriotic war for the Russian fatherland'. Franco kicked the socialists' asses even though his armies were outnumbered by 3-1 because his side were devout Spanish nationalists--the opposition was a bunch of effete metrosexuals debating whether the concept of military rank was another bourgeois construct that should be abolished.

American nationalism is a powerful force that continues to drive this war (the hardcore 25% that support Bush). Why are they so devoutly behind this cause? The image of the turban-wearing swarthy Islamic shouting "Death to America!" is quite effective propaganda. Funny how the media masters brainwash everyone to feel guilty for being white and to respect and bow at the feet of multiculturalism, but they will allow these 'patriots' their 2 minutes of hate against Islamics (who happen to also be the enemies of Israel).

My advice to the American "patriots" is that their support of the war just continues to perpetuate a decadent, corrupt society. Ignore the useful idiots of the left who only hate the Iraq war because that paradigm conforms to their ideal of Third World solidarity or whatnot. These hypocrites would be hardcore supporters of this war if it was a (D) President. Bush is an internationalist-socialist who speaks "conservative" language.

"They" hate you for your freedoms? What freedoms? To watch Internet pr0n? To permit loose women to show off their ankles in public? To bring Brokeback Mountain to those uncouth, homophobic Arabs? They hate you because of America's meddling and one-sided foreign policy towards Israel.


I got your irony Spiderman, and for some newcomers I, like many others here, pointed out the petrodollar system, is not a difficult task , you just have to read some threads here, or google "Petrodollar" or "Bretton Woods" and read on, I think their answers prove (once more) that the hardcore Bush cheerleaders is impervious to reason.
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it."
George Bernard Shaw

You can ignore reality, but you can't ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.” Ayn Rand
User avatar
eXpat
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3801
Joined: Thu 08 Jun 2006, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Should the rest of the world help pay for the Iraq war?

Unread postby Ferretlover » Sun 22 Jul 2007, 15:33:36

I feel quite certain that having the rest of the world pay for this initial foray into world domination by the US would be most welcome for TPTB..

Just found this this am--comments, please?
PROJECT FOR THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY found at: http://www.newamericancentury.org/Rebui ... fenses.pdf

Wonder if there is an updated version lurking somewhere....
Ferretlover
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 5852
Joined: Wed 13 Jun 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Hundreds of miles further inland

Re: Should the rest of the world help pay for the Iraq war?

Unread postby Mircea » Sun 22 Jul 2007, 16:37:50

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Bas', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Mircea', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Bas', 'T')hat's BS

Europe put and puts alot of money into Afghanistan; there are more European soldiers there than there are from the US. Surely Europe, and especially HOLLAND contribute more there then America


Sorry, but it doesn't mean much to me. The Brits and Germans viewed "Dutch solider" as oxymoronic, especially with a unionized army that only trained 35 hours a week, wouldn't train join exercises unless the US paid for it since Dutch troops got overtime pay, allowed troops to use drugs, wear earings in their ears while on duty and in uniform, and had women in combat units.

In fact, the Brits and Germans complained so bitterly that they couldn't trust the Dutch (and miserable fat Belgian bastards) to guard their backs that the US had to quell their fears by moving Patton's Brigade (from III Corp's 2nd Armored Division) to Garlstedt (in Niedersachsen about an hour south of Bremerhaven) and placing it under NORTHAG command (US troops under British command).

Having trained with Portuguese, Dutch and Belgian troops, I'd take the Portuguese any day.


ah ok, if you know so much then you probably know that dutch troops are in charge of THE key region in Afghanistan. Get lost with your speculation and hearsay. Besides that, it's not like the slithering cowardly portugese snakes(as the cliche goes about the portugese in Europe) ever want to contribute in an international undertaking when it's not for their direct personal gain.


It isn't speculation and hearsay, it's fact. A US brigade was moved to German and placed in Kries Osterholz under British command in 1982 to defend the River Weser which links the port cities of Bremerhaven and Bremen, because neither the Dutch nor the Belgians could be trusted to do it.

The loss of either Bremerhaven or Bremen would have forced a NATO surrender within 30 days if France chose to remain neutral.
User avatar
Mircea
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Fri 04 May 2007, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Should the rest of the world help pay for the Iraq war?

Unread postby Mircea » Sun 22 Jul 2007, 16:51:18

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('skeptik', 'A')merica to the Nazis? wrong comparison. I would suggest that the Neo-con clicque in the Republican party currently running the show does bare that comparison.


You need to improve your understanding of neo-cons. Neo-cons first came to power during the Carter Administration and Carter was a Democrat.

Still, that's irrelevant since neo-cons are neither Democrats nor Republicans, they're Social Democrats. If you knew anything about neo-cons, you would know that, since neo-cons formed the core of the Young People's Socialist Leauge and their mentor (whose name I forget) was the protege of Leon Trotsky.

The YPSL later became the Social Democratic Party of America, commonly abbreviated SD. All neo-cons are current or former members of the SD, and yes, the vast overwhelming majority are ethnic Jews.

Neo-cons held/hold positions of power in all alphabet agencies and cabinet level offices since before GW was governor of Texas. They were there decades before Bush was president and they'll be there after he's gone (assuming he steps down voluntarily) in 2008 and 2012 and 2016 and 2020 and 2024, essentially forever (or the end of the empire and even after), unless someone hunts them down and kills them off.

So it doesn't matter. Elect whoever you want as president and they might bring in neo-liberal institutional globalists or maybe classical conservatives or liberals, or possibly even radicals or constructionists, but it won't change the fact that neo-cons will still dominate positions of power and authority in the alphabet agencies and cabinet offices.
User avatar
Mircea
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Fri 04 May 2007, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Should the rest of the world help pay for the Iraq war?

Unread postby IrrationalExuberanceMonky » Sun 22 Jul 2007, 16:59:37

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Bas', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('IrrationalExuberanceMonky', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Bas', 'A')merica should pay for it's own mistakes, sure enough, lost of europeans put a lot of money into that war, including my own country (which is in afghanistan in force) but IMO America should pay for it's own lies. O and btw, Europe is taking in more then 60 times the iraqi refugees america is taking in, let alon iran, syria, SA and Jordan who are taking in a 1000 times more Iraqi refugees than the US. You want truth? there you have it.

PS the title of this thread just makes me sick to my stomach.


OK, do you consider the UK part of Europe here or not? Because as Milliband just stated we're (the UK) in bed with America and that's that! We ain't going nowhere! In real terms Europe (including the UK) gave 'pocket change to Afghanistan.... 'A lot of money'? :o :razz:

BTW In the interests of disclosure, I'm an Atlanticist. 8)


That's BS

Europe put and puts alot of money into Afghanistan; there are more European soldiers there than there are from the US. Surely Europe, and especially HOLLAND contribute more there then America: Backup of these claims


That's great! I mostly don't mean that in a sarcastic way. If you have figures of raw EUR spent on those operations I'd like to see them. Because as far as I can see it's Germans, Dutch etc getting airlifted via USAF holiday airways to the safe north while UK/US soldiers eat bullets for breakfast in the nutty Taliban infested south...

So regardless of what troops were sent where I'd like to see eurozone spending in Afghanistan.

Thanks!
User avatar
IrrationalExuberanceMonky
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 107
Joined: Fri 20 Jul 2007, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Should the rest of the world help pay for the Iraq war?

Unread postby NotMyBlood » Sun 22 Jul 2007, 23:13:06

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ClassicSpiderman', '
')
"They" hate you for your freedoms? What freedoms? To watch Internet pr0n? To permit loose women to show off their ankles in public? To bring Brokeback Mountain to those uncouth, homophobic Arabs? They hate you because of America's meddling and one-sided foreign policy towards Israel.


The reasons behind why "they" hate us are quickly becoming irrelevant. As is most of the bickering between the EU/Canada and the US. I'm one who thinks there were many reasons for the Iraq War. It wasnt a simple power grab by the US. I'm sure everyone recognizes the importance of ME Oil to the US in particluar. However, 70% of Americans want out of Iraq. And I think thats exactly whats going to happen, sometime in 2008/9. My concern is what happens , if Oil prices skyrockets due to any reason. A broader War in the ME, Supply and Demand, AQ, etc etc....

I don't know about the EU or Canada, but it would devastate the American Economy. (you guys dont want that, do you?) America needs to slowly transition into a less consuming society. If , average Joe and Jane start losing their Jobs, can barely afford to get by each month, etc , etc in a short amount of time, then that comparsion to Nazi Germany may become valid.
User avatar
NotMyBlood
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 306
Joined: Fri 29 Jun 2007, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Should the rest of the world help pay for the Iraq war?

Unread postby cube » Mon 23 Jul 2007, 00:09:43

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('NotMyBlood', '.').I'm sure everyone recognizes the importance of ME Oil to the US in particluar. However, 70% of Americans want out of Iraq. And I think thats exactly whats going to happen, sometime in 2008/9...
Nothing would make me happier then to have the new government of Iraq sign an oil contract with the French. 8)
cube
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3909
Joined: Sat 12 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Should the rest of the world help pay for the Iraq war?

Unread postby NotMyBlood » Mon 23 Jul 2007, 01:13:06

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cube', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('NotMyBlood', '.').I'm sure everyone recognizes the importance of ME Oil to the US in particluar. However, 70% of Americans want out of Iraq. And I think thats exactly whats going to happen, sometime in 2008/9...
Nothing would make me happier then to have the new government of Iraq sign an oil contract with the French. 8)


From what I understand, the frenchies had all kinds of deals with Saddam. No wonder they opposed the War.......:):)

My point is, as long as the US continues to get cheap oil. Who cares? As long as the fat cat American Corporations dont take too much of a loss. You know, the appearance of a strong American Economy is important for foreign investment. If for Any reason, Oil becomes so expensive it starts hurting Joe and Jane American, all bets are off. The same 70% that want us to withdraw from Iraq will be calling for WWIII!!!
User avatar
NotMyBlood
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 306
Joined: Fri 29 Jun 2007, 03:00:00
Top

PreviousNext

Return to Open Topic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron