Page 1 of 5 1234 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 105
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,028

    war on terror? or quest for oil...?

    what do you guys think of bush's proposed attack on iraq? ya think he wants it because he truly believes they are a treat or cuz he wants their oil and iraq doesn't have an army that could say no (as opposed to attacking someone like russia who also has oil, but also has an army)...??

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    259
    I highly doubt it has anything to do with oil, maybe it plays some kind of role but a very small one if so, it's about getting order back in the country like we did in afghanistan
    VibeHost, A DensityHost Company
    Under NEW Ownership
    Quality, Affordable Reseller Hosting
    www.vibehost.com

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,028
    who ever claimed the taliban wasn't running their country to their will...??? the taliban was running it just fine 'till the US bombed the hella outa them... i mean... the fact that the US claimed an entire government was support terrorism was the only reason we have such a soiled opinion of that government... there are even reports of members of the taliban contacting US authorities letting them know that bin laden was planning an attack (and even provided dates/etc)...

    and its quite a coincidence that some 2 billion dollar pipeline deal that the taliban refused to allow went through... not even a year after the taliban fell... heh... this 2 billion dollar oil pipeline directly benefited a consortium of US oil companies... ... ... so... was the attack on afghanistan even terror related?

    how can an entire government be responsible for the actions of one citizen (heck, bin laden wasn't even a citizen)? are all the students at colombine high school responsible for the shootings commited by those 2 renegades?

    even to this day, there has been no solid evidence linking the taliban government to terrorism... its just been what people say... nothing proven... but i could be very wrong... someone care to hunt up a trusted newpaper's article proving me wrong?

    if some guy comes up to me in the middle of the street and shoots me in the leg, am i allowed to shoot them back? is it legal for me to shoot them back? is it ethical? is it one of the qualities of a good member of humanity? forgive and forget isn't the most practical response, but there can be compromises... ... ...

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,028
    the US keeps on ranting about how iraq has nuclear weapons or could have them... yet... UN arms inspectors have visited the country numerous times... and never have they found nuclear weapons... or even the means to make nuclear weapons... ... ...

    ~12.5% of the US's oil needs come from iraq... the US takes control of that country, its a HUGE step to being able to tell other arab countries to f*ck off in the event of a disagreement...

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    8,535
    the US keeps on ranting about how iraq has nuclear weapons or could have them... yet... UN arms inspectors have visited the country numerous times... and never have they found nuclear weapons... or even the means to make nuclear weapons... ... ...
    How long ago was it that the UN Arms inspectors were in Iraq? 4 Years? Last time the US Bombed Iraq they were 1 year away from being able to create a nuclear bomb, and the US has NEVER once said Iraq has nuclear weapons. They have however said Saddam is constantly seeking Nuclear and Biological weapons, and it's a possibility that he already has them.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,028
    you forget to mention that the 1 year figure is from before bombing iraq... and that the bombing destroyed all of iraq's infrasture and generally speaking: bomb making capabilties... ... ...

    bush has repeatedly used the excuse that iraq is a threat to global security in trying to encourage the senate to join his war... the UN even refuses to join... but then again... if the UN were to join, it wouldn't see the as much of the oil benefits as the US would... so the UN is less biased on this matter...

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,028
    o... when i say destroying infrasture... to use an analogy... i ain't talking just blowing up a datacenter... i am talking destroying an entire city's connectivity to the outside world... so it'd take a hella lotta work to relay all that fiber...

    o... n iraq had allowed the UN weapons inspectors to re-enter their territory... the only disagreement is that sadam won't let them enter his presidential properties... its like wanting to go through the white house and the pentagon... would bush allow that? never in a million years...

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    8,535
    who ever claimed the taliban wasn't running their country to their will...??? the taliban was running it just fine 'till the US bombed the hella outa them... i mean... the fact that the US claimed an entire government was support terrorism was the only reason we have such a soiled opinion of that government... there are even reports of members of the taliban contacting US authorities letting them know that bin laden was planning an attack (and even provided dates/etc)...

    how can an entire government be responsible for the actions of one citizen (heck, bin laden wasn't even a citizen)? are all the students at colombine high school responsible for the shootings commited by those 2 renegades?
    The Taliban gave Bin Laden sanctuary in 1996, so they obviously weren't against terrorism, however they may not have been for it either. But if they were against Terrorism they would have handed Bin Laden over, when the US repeatedly after 9/11 and before the bombing started.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Melbourne Downunder
    Posts
    2,292
    Oil of course
    our society runs on oil

    now we have the pipeline coming through afghanistan in US hands, the obvious desired outcome is to remove Hussein and leave US troops to maintain order in the country, then the oil is controlled by USA

    and if you look at the map US will be controlling the same area that was once controlled by England

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    8,535
    Almost the whole middle east was once controlled by England. I think England used to be called the land where the sun never set, or something along those lines because they had so much territory.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,028
    wanna take a shot at how many people the US has given political asylum to? i bet you some of those folks have colorful pasts... just because they take in a stray, doesn't automatically mean they agree with them... its called compasion...

    and... take a man with 250 million dollars (atleast, other estimates put it over 400 million USD)... and put a few hundred soldiers willing to die for him, all around... do you think the taliban would have been able to capture him? heck, even the US will their billions on a military budget can't capture him... ... ...

    Originally posted by inogenius


    The Taliban gave Bin Laden sanctuary in 1996, so they obviously weren't against terrorism, however they may not have been for it either. But if they were against Terrorism they would have handed Bin Laden over, when the US repeatedly after 9/11 and before the bombing started.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,028
    yeah... "the sun never sets on the british empire"

    Originally posted by inogenius
    Almost the whole middle east was once controlled by England. I think England used to be called the land where the sun never set, or something along those lines because they had so much territory.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    8,535
    wanna take a shot at how many people the US has given political asylum to?
    Oh, I know the US given it out to a lot of people with some not so nice pasts. Good 'ole Clinton gave it out to a lot of people.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,028
    o... and the afghan people love bin laden not because of his hatred of americans... but rather because of his assistance (financial and humanitarian) during afghanistan's battle against the soviets...

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Melbourne Downunder
    Posts
    2,292
    the English drew lines on the middle east map with a ruler and a pencil and arbitrarily marked off territories with friendly or puppet rulers

    their mistake was not being able to predict the future, the future of our society running on oil

    we all know better now, especially those families whose fortunes are founded on oil

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,028
    so how can you say the taliban were terrorists because they allowed bin laden to enter the country (and give sanctuary to)...?

    its not like bin laden was making policy decisions for the country/etc... (not officially atleast)...

    Originally posted by inogenius


    Oh, I know the US given it out to a lot of people with some not so nice pasts. Good 'ole Clinton gave it out to a lot of people.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    8,535
    I didn't say they were terrorist, I said they obviously weren't against it.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,028
    well... u know all those ppl that clinton/etc gave out asylum to... well... those colorful pasts... must have included some terrorism in it somewhere... but since it wasn't against the US, i am guessing that it wasn't as publicized or even possibly just downplayed... but i am guessing the US isn't against any of that stuff neither...

    so... US not against terrorism... unless its against them... lol... that about sums it up, don't u think?


    vibehosts... i'd love 2 hear from u again... since u so promptly stated u don't think its about oil... why don't u think its about oil? i have stated reasons on why i do think it is... any rebuttal... ?

    i love debates... gets these boards all lively...

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Melbourne Downunder
    Posts
    2,292
    there are a great number of people who regard US as a home of terrorists

    just depends on your perspective

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Kelowna B.C.
    Posts
    1,686
    Netdude Saddam never allowed UN weapons inspectors full access to everything they wanted to see. Whenever the inspectors came across a "restricted" site they were turned back by armed guards. That was the talk for several years when Clinton was around - he was asking for unrestriced weapons inspections. Saddam has several "presidencial palaces" all of which are off limits to the inspectors. Why could that be?? A couple years back when the inspectors were allowed in the country they were able to check a weapons supply depot for possible WMD's and biological weapons. Moment before the inspectors arrived several large trucks were seen by satellite taking weaponry away from the site. I don't blame the Bush administration for not trusting Saddam - the dictator has screwed the US many times over.

    I think the US does have a legitimate claim about Iraq and their weapons capabilities. They have used chemical weapons before and I'm sure they won't be afraid to use them again. He has even used 14, 13 even 12 year old soldiers to fight, We all remember the Iran-Iraq war.
    The US is concerned about several things in that region:
    1. ISRAEL!!! If Saddam ever brought together a coalition to attack Israel nuclear war would be imminent. The last time Saddam fired scuds at the israelis the Israeli government was ready to nuke Iraq. They explicitly told the US government if they were ever attacked by Iraq again they would go nuclear on them. If Saddam does aquire nuclear capability there very well could be a nuclear holocaust - 100's of times more worse than the bombs dropped on Japanese soil. These are not the puny 1 megatonne bombs - these are the equivalent of 50 - 100 "Little Boy" and "Fat Man" bombs that will be dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. And if Saddam is successful at ousting the Israelis (however he does it) he will be the distinguished islamic leader throughout the middle east just as Abdul Nasser was in Egypt and we all know what that might entail.

    2. Terrorism - Given the opportunity I believe saddam will take advantage of these terrorist activities. Unfortunately there is no proof provided by the US government, makes everyone skeptical and understandably so.

    3. I don't think Bush knows how to deal with the economic problems in the US at the moment. He has continually made the Iraq issue front and center in US politics - a move that may be called a distraction. It worked in his favor - the democrats didn't focus on the economic problems of the US, instead they hopelessly debated about the Iraq issue. If they had done a better job Bush might not have received the authority to go to war against Iraq. Instead the Democrats seriously lost the resolution and in my opinion they will lose further seats in congress at the upcoming election because of their incompetence.
    Bush succeeded in this department.

    4. Oil is not a big issue - the US have plenty to use, they don't have to get it from Iraq. Sure %10 of the US's oil comes from Iraq but they can go get it somewhere else like the former SSR's they have billions of gallons that are still undiscovered. Major US oil corporations are curently in Russia surveying and drilling. Billions have been invested so far. Oil will not be a problem.

    5. Turkey - A very democratic and islamic state that resembles Pakistan however is a very viable country. They have been waiting 25 years to be accepted in to the European Union and everytime they have applied for membership the EU has rejected them. They have met most of the demands of the EU, some of which not even current member countries abide by. If the EU doesn't allow them in (and doesn't look like they will) Turkey will go to the Middle East for support - they have an exploding economy that needs to go places, and right now Europe is closed. If the US establish a middle eastern democracy or a change in government this possible move South by Turkey may not hurt so bad.

    In my opinion - Bush is in the wrong for going to war before the weapons inspectors can do their job, that is if Saddam gives full undisclosed access to all buildings in Iraq. If he doesn't comply with the UN resolutions then a "Joint Taskforce" would be appropriate. Not a "Unilateral attack" - this would only further the hatred of islamic peoples. Its much better if you have a group to take someone out, more people to spread the blame.
    Last edited by HostingDotExpress; 10-15-2002 at 11:52 PM.
    Hosting.Express | Affordable Web and Email Hosting
    Shared | Reseller | 24/7 Support | NSA Free
    SPECIAL OFFER - domain name, email and cPanel web hosting = $3.73 per month | Contact Us: 1-800-861-1888

  21. #21
    netdude I thought you left

    Take your politic rhetoric somewhere else geeze, AND QUIT TELLING PEOPLE YOU'RE LEAVING
    dotGig
    <:<: [Fruit eating linux administrator]

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,028
    lol

    i never told anybody i m leaving... heh... btw... i'll reply back in just a bit... kinda in the middle of some other stuff... was out earlier...

  23. #23
    Yes ya did, now go troll another board
    dotGig
    <:<: [Fruit eating linux administrator]

  24. #24
    War is never about human rights, period. No country and no politician would waste billions of dollars in any war without receiving `something`in return, which could be in form of creating an international trade city (HongKong), rebuilding a country (Afghanistan & Germany) or because of oil (Iraq).

    By the way, according to recent studies, the US has oil reserves left for about 6 more years.
    Marc Wyss - marc@mchost.com
    MCHost Inc - Experts in Private Label Reseller Plans
    http://www.mchost.com

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Melbourne Downunder
    Posts
    2,292
    well said kiwi

    and we're just the poor mugs at the bottom who cop it all

Page 1 of 5 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •