U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-06-2010, 09:51 AM
 
4,510 posts, read 4,114,433 times
Reputation: 1501

Advertisements

The money Bush/Cheney spent on Iraq to kill a dictator we previously supported, who hated the Islamic fundamentalist Shia and killed them everytime they tried to flagellate themselves, or tried to display their extreme fundamentalist views (think Al Quada), has capsized our economy - but to use the phase they threw out every time to justify the war, 'the world is a better place without Saddam, right?' - WRONG.

If the real intent of the war was to lock up the prized oil fields (on Cheney's oil 'meat chart') for ourselves and shut out the French, German and Chinese who had pending long term contracts with Saddam, that failed as well.

The Iraq vote will install a government that will basicly be an Iranian satellite.

Money and lives well spent - right?

France24 - Chinese-led group formally signs Iraq oil deal (http://www.france24.com/en/20100128-chinese-led-group-formally-signs-iraq-oil-deal - broken link)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-06-2010, 10:04 AM
 
26,658 posts, read 17,312,632 times
Reputation: 10465
Quote:
Originally Posted by KRAMERCAT View Post
The money Bush/Cheney spent on Iraq to kill a dictator we previously supported, who hated the Islamic fundamentalist Shia and killed them everytime they tried to flagellate themselves, or tried to display their extreme fundamentalist views (think Al Quada), has capsized our economy - but to use the phase they threw out every time to justify the war, 'the world is a better place without Saddam, right?' - WRONG.

If the real intent of the war was to lock up the prized oil fields (on Cheney's oil 'meat chart') for ourselves and shut out the French, German and Chinese who had pending long term contracts with Saddam, that failed as well.

The Iraq vote will install a government that will basicly be an Iranian satellite.

Money and lives well spent - right?

France24 - Chinese-led group formally signs Iraq oil deal (http://www.france24.com/en/20100128-chinese-led-group-formally-signs-iraq-oil-deal - broken link)

Anyone with any sense knows that the illegal war was all about the oil. The shamelss war profiteering that ensued was the bonus for other Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld cronies. It is stunning that there are still people that insist that the previous administration gave a rat's butt for the people of Iraq and whether or not they had a "democracy". Sure! What is even more stunning is the fact that when you grab power and money, you are above the law.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2010, 10:10 AM
 
Location: NE Ohio
30,193 posts, read 16,626,600 times
Reputation: 8850
Quote:
Originally Posted by KRAMERCAT View Post
The money Bush/Cheney spent on Iraq to kill a dictator we previously supported, who hated the Islamic fundamentalist Shia and killed them everytime they tried to flagellate themselves, or tried to display their extreme fundamentalist views (think Al Quada), has capsized our economy - but to use the phase they threw out every time to justify the war, 'the world is a better place without Saddam, right?' - WRONG.


What has capsized our economy is Barack Hussein Obama and the Democrats in Congress. But former Democrat administrations gave them a good running start, starting with Jimmy Carter and the CRA, which was then expanded under Clinton. That is what is responsible for the Banking/Mortgage scandal, along with the mismanagement of Fannie Mae (under Democrat "leadership").

Defending ourselves against our enemies is a legitimate function of the military, and the Federal Government, and that is a purpose that is spelled out in the Constitution ("...to provide for the common defense...").

Spending money on all the other programs the Federal Government spends money on, is not something that the Constitution has given the Federal Government the authority to do.

Ever read the Constitution? Perhaps you should.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KRAMERCAT View Post

If the real intent of the war was to lock up the prized oil fields (on Cheney's oil 'meat chart') for ourselves


What makes you think this? According to what source, was that our "real intent"? No one ever said that, though a lot of people have made that accusation. Where's the proof? Do you know something the rest of us do not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by KRAMERCAT View Post
and shut out the French, German and Chinese who had pending long term contracts with Saddam, that failed as well.

The Iraq vote will install a government that will basicly be an Iranian satellite.


Hardly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KRAMERCAT View Post

Money and lives well spent - right?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2010, 10:22 AM
 
Location: Lake Oswego, Manhattan, Aspen
3,236 posts, read 4,208,349 times
Reputation: 11627
We will never know the true agenda, or whom it serves.

But there is one thing of which we can be sure. At no point in any of the secret meetings was "What is good for The American People?" a question that was asked. The well-being of Americans is NEVER a consideration.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2010, 10:41 AM
 
Location: NE Ohio
30,193 posts, read 16,626,600 times
Reputation: 8850
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickofnyc View Post
Anyone with any sense knows that the illegal war was all about the oil. The shamelss war profiteering that ensued was the bonus for other Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld cronies. It is stunning that there are still people that insist that the previous administration gave a rat's butt for the people of Iraq and whether or not they had a "democracy". Sure! What is even more stunning is the fact that when you grab power and money, you are above the law.
As usual, you don't know what you're talking about. You haven't a clue.

If the war was "all about oil", why aren't we getting any of it?

It was never about oil. Hello? 9/11? Have you forgotten that date? Terrorism?

You leftist just want to make it about oil (even though no case can be made for such an assertion that doesn't seem to bother you). If you could make the case, someone might listen. But we all know it's only because of your hatred for Bush that you try to make the claim.

Please tell us, what was the "shameless war profiteering"? What profiteering? Oh, are you talking about Halliburton again? The EVIL Halliburton, right? Again, you have no clue. But let me help out: Halliburton does what few other companies do, and since they built most of the equipment used in those oil fields, they know it better than anyone. Is that what you call "profiteering"? What a ridiculous claim!

I don't think we are getting one drop of oil from Iraq. If we are, we are buying it at the same price the rest of the world pays.

Why don't you people give it a rest. I think we're all a little tired of hearing about Bush and how he screwed everything up (during most of his term, our economy was very good, with low unemployment, low inflation, and low interest rates.

Look at us now, after slightly over a year with Obama. Total disaster, and getting worse every day. He's doing nothing to improve the situation, and everything to make it much worse. And he is doing it on purpose. And the Democrats are going right along (because they are all cut from the same cloth). Notihng but corruption in this administration, and this Congress.

Our very freedom is on the chopping block, and none of these leftist radicals give a damn about the Constitution. In fact, it is their purpose to destroy it.

Wake up!! Smell the coffee!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2010, 10:46 AM
 
Location: Central Illinois -
21,559 posts, read 14,358,004 times
Reputation: 14692
Whats that old Chinese saying?

"Even the best intentions can blow up in your face"?

No wait, wasnt it "Weapons of Mass Destruction do not equal a favorable outcome"?


I can't remember now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2010, 11:23 AM
 
528 posts, read 408,395 times
Reputation: 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy View Post


As usual, you don't know what you're talking about. You haven't a clue.

If the war was "all about oil", why aren't we getting any of it?

It was never about oil. Hello? 9/11? Have you forgotten that date? Terrorism?

You leftist just want to make it about oil (even though no case can be made for such an assertion that doesn't seem to bother you). If you could make the case, someone might listen. But we all know it's only because of your hatred for Bush that you try to make the claim.

Please tell us, what was the "shameless war profiteering"? What profiteering? Oh, are you talking about Halliburton again? The EVIL Halliburton, right? Again, you have no clue. But let me help out: Halliburton does what few other companies do, and since they built most of the equipment used in those oil fields, they know it better than anyone. Is that what you call "profiteering"? What a ridiculous claim!

I don't think we are getting one drop of oil from Iraq. If we are, we are buying it at the same price the rest of the world pays.

Why don't you people give it a rest. I think we're all a little tired of hearing about Bush and how he screwed everything up (during most of his term, our economy was very good, with low unemployment, low inflation, and low interest rates.

Look at us now, after slightly over a year with Obama. Total disaster, and getting worse every day. He's doing nothing to improve the situation, and everything to make it much worse. And he is doing it on purpose. And the Democrats are going right along (because they are all cut from the same cloth). Notihng but corruption in this administration, and this Congress.

Our very freedom is on the chopping block, and none of these leftist radicals give a damn about the Constitution. In fact, it is their purpose to destroy it.

Wake up!! Smell the coffee!
To invoke 9/11 as some sort of argument for going into Iraq is silly, Iraq under Saddam Hussein was an enemy of Al Queda- he hated them as the Islamic fundamentalist rule they are trying to bring to the world were a threat to his regime-if Bush hadn't been distracted by his advisors (Cheney, Wolfowitz- who each had their own reasons for wanting to invade Iraq prior to 9/11) and had instead put all of the U.S. efforts into Afghanistan, where the real threat from AL Queda was at the time, maybe we would have caught Osama while we had the chance-
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2010, 11:33 AM
 
Location: 15 months till retirement and I can leave the hell hole of New Yakistan
25,326 posts, read 14,041,763 times
Reputation: 6505
Quote:
Originally Posted by specialrequest View Post
To invoke 9/11 as some sort of argument for going into Iraq is silly, Iraq under Saddam Hussein was an enemy of Al Queda- he hated them as the Islamic fundamentalist rule they are trying to bring to the world were a threat to his regime-if Bush hadn't been distracted by his advisors (Cheney, Wolfowitz- who each had their own reasons for wanting to invade Iraq prior to 9/11) and had instead put all of the U.S. efforts into Afghanistan, where the real threat from AL Queda was at the time, maybe we would have caught Osama while we had the chance-
uhmmm,

Iraq and alqueda were connected.......iraq had nothing to do with 9/11,,,and nobody said it did, but lraq and alqueda were together on somethings


US State Department
November 4, 1998

Bin Laden, Atef Indicted in U.S. Federal Court for African Bombings

New York -- Usama bin Laden and Muhammad Atef were indicted November 4 in Manhattan federal court for the August 7 bombings of the US embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and for conspiring to kill Americans outside the United States.

Bin Laden's "al Qaeda" organization functioned both on its own and through other terrorist organizations, including the Al Jihad group based in Egypt, the Islamic Group also known as el Gamaa Islamia led at one time by Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, and a number of other jihad groups in countries such as Sudan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Somalia.

Bin Laden, the US Attorney charged, engaged in business transactions on behalf of Al Qaeda, including purchasing warehouses for storage of explosives, transporting weapons, and establishing a series of companies in Sudan to provide income to al Qaeda and as a cover for the procurement of explosives, weapons, and chemicals, and for the travel of operatives.

According to the indictment, bin Laden and al Qaeda forged alliances with the National Islamic Front in Sudan and with representatives of the Government of Iran and its associated terrorist group Hezballah with the goal of working together against their common enemies in the West, particularly the United States.

"In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the Government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq," the indictment said.
Beginning in 1992, bin Laden allegedly issued through his "fatwah" committees a series of escalating "fatwahs" against the United States, certain military personnel, and, eventually in February 1998, a "fatwah" stating that Muslims should kill Americans -- including civilians -- anywhere in the world they can be found.



------------------------

The Guardian
February 6, 1999

Saddam link to Bin Laden

By Julian Borger

Saddam Hussein's regime has opened talks with Osama bin Laden, bringing closer the threat of a terrorist attack using chemical, biological or nuclear weapons, according to US intelligence sources and Iraqi opposition officials.

The key meeting took place in the Afghan mountains near Kandahar in late December. The Iraqi delegation was led by Farouk Hijazi, Baghdad's ambassador in Turkey and one of Saddam's most powerful secret policemen, who is thought to have offered Bin Laden asylum in Iraq.

News of the negotiations emerged in a week when the US attorney general, Janet Reno, warned the Senate that a terrorist attack involving weapons of mass destruction was a growing concern. "There's a threat, and it's real," Ms Reno said, adding that such weapons "are being considered for use."

-----------------------------

notice the dates.....well before bush was even in the whitehouse
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2010, 11:36 AM
 
26,658 posts, read 17,312,632 times
Reputation: 10465
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy View Post


As usual, you don't know what you're talking about. You haven't a clue.

If the war was "all about oil", why aren't we getting any of it?

It was never about oil. Hello? 9/11? Have you forgotten that date? Terrorism?

You leftist just want to make it about oil (even though no case can be made for such an assertion that doesn't seem to bother you). If you could make the case, someone might listen. But we all know it's only because of your hatred for Bush that you try to make the claim.

Please tell us, what was the "shameless war profiteering"? What profiteering? Oh, are you talking about Halliburton again? The EVIL Halliburton, right? Again, you have no clue. But let me help out: Halliburton does what few other companies do, and since they built most of the equipment used in those oil fields, they know it better than anyone. Is that what you call "profiteering"? What a ridiculous claim!

I don't think we are getting one drop of oil from Iraq. If we are, we are buying it at the same price the rest of the world pays.

Why don't you people give it a rest. I think we're all a little tired of hearing about Bush and how he screwed everything up (during most of his term, our economy was very good, with low unemployment, low inflation, and low interest rates.

Look at us now, after slightly over a year with Obama. Total disaster, and getting worse every day. He's doing nothing to improve the situation, and everything to make it much worse. And he is doing it on purpose. And the Democrats are going right along (because they are all cut from the same cloth). Notihng but corruption in this administration, and this Congress.

Our very freedom is on the chopping block, and none of these leftist radicals give a damn about the Constitution. In fact, it is their purpose to destroy it.

Wake up!! Smell the coffee!
As usual I will attempt answering utterly stupid questions. Right off the bat your obtuse beliefs are blatanly obvious...what the hell did Iraq have to so with 9/11???

Why aren't you getting the oil? OMG! The guys making the profits do not care who gets the oil as long as they make the profits. Ask Cheney about his backroom deals...I was not in attendance.

Cheney's Oil Law For Iraq Is Neocolonial Theft

As stated, the purpose of these wars was not to grab the oil, as a thing in itself. However, as anyone familiar with the appetites of the Bush-Cheney crowd knows, they are not averse to making a few billion bucks in the course of overthrowing regimes and occupying countries. And, controlling the flow of oil, is also a means of containing resource-dependant countries like China.

The recently drafted Iraqi Oil Law is a case in point. If one were to write an unbiased executive summary of the law, it would have to contain the following points: The purpose of the legislation is to open Iraq's vast, undeveloped oil fields to exploitation by international oil companies (read: the friends of Cheney and Bush) in a modern version of early twentienth-century colonial ventures for oil. In order to exercise control over the oil, U.S. military forces will be forced to extend their tour of duty, and set up the biggest embassy in the world, thus dashing hopes for Iraqi sovereignty.

If current Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is unwilling or unable to force through the legislation, he can be replaced by Cheney favorite Iyad Allawi, a man closely associated with the process leading to the law. As a postscript to such a summary, one must note the shameful fact that there has been, to date, only one U.S. Congressman, Dennis Kucinich, who has unmasked the outrageous aims of the law, and started a fight around it.

Cheney's Oil Law For Iraq Is Neocolonial Theft
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2010, 11:41 AM
 
Location: Sierra Vista, AZ
16,133 posts, read 20,822,095 times
Reputation: 8293
If they had the choice they would bring Sadaam back in a minute
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top