Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
False. Once word came that the rebels have Gaddafi on the run and out of power, oil prices plunged.
Obama never invaded Libya even though fox and other far right wing propaganda networks would like you to think that. Of course it's about oil, but we see now how it would be approached. If we had a republican president right now, you can all but guarantee we would be at full blown war with Libya, costing even more lives and more insane spending. Obama is making a wise choice by supporting the rebels to do the fighting, and help them out in the end for their sacrifice. That gives great relations with the country and new Libyan administration, saves US troop's lives and stops even more outrageous spending we absolutely can not afford.
#1 for Obama.
i find it that lately various things have been playing with our oil and gas prices they do not go down consistently as the prices go up.. Forget about all that demand nonsense there always have been an demand for oil etc and the prices were a dollar or so before 9/11
Libya has approximately 2% of the world's total oil supply. The NATO intervention was about helping people overthrow a malevolent dictator, on the principle of self determination.
This wasn't about oil, it is about freedom for an oppressed people.
You left out the most important word in that headline "Alleged." And what the hell is "theblaze.com?"
The retarded radical right sees a bunch of brown Muslim people overthrowing a brutal regime and automatically assumes Al Qaeda camps will be springing up tomorrow
Why does democracy in the middle east have to be the secular democracy that WE want? Islam is a big part of society in that part of the world and, democracy or not, Islam will have a role in forming their society.
You guys are going to have to understand some things.
1. Obama is pro Muslim Brotherhood, Islam, etc. He is not pro America.
2. These "uprisings" in the middle east that are supposed to be for democracy - are really countries being stolen by Islamic and Muslim Brotherhood interests for controlling the oil rich areas - Egypt, Libya, Syria, etc.
3. The gulf moratorium was for the purpose of shutting down rigs for American use and have them be relocated to the middle east and Africa under new contracts so that region can profit.
I suggest putting this filter on your thinking cap for the next week or two and see if Obama starts making sense.
Libya has approximately 2% of the world's total oil supply. The NATO intervention was about helping people overthrow a malevolent dictator, on the principle of self determination.
This wasn't about oil, it is about freedom for an oppressed people.
FYI - 2% of all of the money made from oil sales is still a lot of loot.
The blue above that you said sounds familiar - oh yeah, Iraq. At least there was a link in Iraq, or at least a perceived link, between our attackers and Saddam. I don't think Libya did anything to us. And there is much more oppression in other parts of Africa - don't you think?
I'm sure to be consistent, you supported Bush's program in Iraq just like you are OK with Libya, right?
1. Obama is pro Muslim Brotherhood, Islam, etc. He is not pro America.
If you understood anything about America, you would know that there is no mutual exclusivity between it and "Islam". They are not antithetical.
Quote:
2. These "uprisings" in the middle east that are supposed to be for democracy - are really countries being stolen by Islamic and Muslim Brotherhood interests for controlling the oil rich areas - Egypt, Libya, Syria, etc.
I'm glad you understand what the ME uprisings are about more than the poor saps who only happen to live there and to be actual participants.
Quote:
3. The gulf moratorium was for the purpose of shutting down rigs for American use and have them be relocated to the middle east and Africa under new contracts so that region can profit.
Evidence?
You are aware, are you not, that we don't get most of our oil from the ME, let alone the Gulf?
Quote:
I suggest putting this filter on your thinking cap for the next week or two and see if Obama starts making sense.
I prefer not to have my thoughts filtered through the likes of David Horowitz, Joseph Farah and Pamela Geller.
The blue above that you said sounds familiar - oh yeah, Iraq. At least there was a link in Iraq, or at least a perceived link, between our attackers and Saddam. I don't think Libya did anything to us.
Pan Am 103?
That's more than Iraq ever did (to us).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
