So true…
I wish they hadn’t used Powell but it’s still kinda funny.
Welcome back my friends,
To the thread that never ends,
Were so glad you could attend,
Come inside, come inside.
Restless: " And the Mage, the only thing I ever lost in these threads was my time and patience."
Uh, yeah, right. “And I click my heels and say there’s no place like home, there’s no place like home. Then I look around. Damn, still in the asylum.”
I was expecting you to say it was an April fools joke. Would have been a great excuse.
As far as Drew69, he has got to be against the war. One single fake post, and so obviously trying to make anyone positive about the action look like a bigoted idiot. This is the unintelligent opinion of what the extreme protesters think anyone who disagrees with them is like. Whoever posted that decided the only way to win his/her argument was with deception. If you have to lie to support your position, then what position could you possibly have?
"I was expecting you to say it was an April fools joke. Would have been a great excuse. "
Ah, yes it would have been a great excuse. I didn’t even cross my mind.
You know there’s quite a few impersonators (spelling?) around here, I even got a message by “Daranos” filled with insults by someone else that couldn’t for obvious reasons be him. Weird, when this is now a registed user forums.
Anyway, almost everyone is happy now, Bush friends have secured the administration of Iraq’s oil camps, the Iraquis got rid of a dictator, and you all think this was done for the right reasons and thus can sleep with a clear consciousness at night.
I have been busy with work and school. Roy Batty, Babydoll, Restless and the rest of you are doing a great job. Keep it up.
Restless: I never PMd you so it must have been someone else under my name. Even if I had, I would never have insulted you. I am glad you don’t believe it was me.
Babydoll: Those pictures of Bush were hilarious! Keep them coming. And ignore all the haters.
Dustin: My apologies for not responding directly to your comments, but I was distracted by other things and your thoughts deserve some deliberation. Unfortunately, I do not have time to search for citations supporting some of my comments, but I will describe where they may be found and trust in your good faith that, if significant to your arguments, you will research them for yourself.
“So we regret the failures of American foreign policy and resent being placed in the position that we must hope, even pray for the expeditious elimination of the Bathists and the destruction of Saddam’s apparatus.”
What’s this we stuff?
You are entirely right. In the passion of the moment it is too easy to overreach and exaggerate. However, I am sure that you do not disagree with the inclusive “we” in regard to the regrets for failures in American foreign policy (i.e., if you agree there were mistakes, if not, please let me know how you can defend actions like the overthrow of elected of elected democracies, the imposition and support of ruthless dictators (Diem, Pahlavi, etc.), and the US support for the re-entry of French imperialists into Indochina…the list goes on, but I will leave you with these examples), and I am sure that you do not disagree with the hope for the quick dispatch of Hussein. What you obviously and understandably disagree with is the inference of your inclusion in the resentment for being forced into a position of hoping for the quick prosecution of the war. My apologies. However, I remain persuaded that the decision to prosecute the war without the support of the UN or the greater consensus of the international community was a grave mistake and left those of us who fear the consequences of reckless unilaterlism feeling resentful. This is not so much of a political consideration as it is a diplomatic and philosophical position. I consider George Bush senior’s leadership in creating the first Gulf coalition one of the great achievements of statesmanship in the twentieth century. I consider George junior’s diplomatic failure to achieve anything close to his father’s success, a catastrophe.
I was going to stay out of this thread but you went a tad too far. He will be eliminated, and everything that our government said in regard to Saddam’s regime will be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt (possession of WMDs, crimes against humanity, etc.).
I do not disagree with any of these propositions nor do I believe I stated otherwise. There has never been any doubt about our (i.e., speaking as a citizen of the US) ability to militarily defeat his regime, nor, do I believe there is, possibly in the entire world except for the most deranged radicals, anyone who doubts the obscenity of his crimes. Even if the weapons of mass destruction are not found on Iraqi soil, I am also certain they exist. I think your “tad too far” does not reach my opinions on these matters as much as it offended your sense of being included in my “we.”
“Regardless of the outcome of the war, the most cogent analysts [particularly Joseph Wilson, the last ambassador to communicate with Saddam – and a Republican appointee] are suppressed by the Christian fundamentalist control of the US government.”
I love this shit! What leftist conspiracy web site do you read.
I apologize for the strident nature of this statement and the insufficient supporting arguments. I realize that many consider Bill Moyers’ a leftist, however, Joseph Wilson is not by any means a leftist nor even, for that matter, a liberal. He is a highly respected career diplomat and scholar who was willing to be interviewed by Moyers (as have, by the way, a growing number of conservatives who are seeking venues to express their concerns about the radicalization of the all three branches of government) where he described in what I regard as the most cogent and well reasoned assessment of the Iraqi dilemma. I usually respond to anyone who suggests a conspiratorial mindset in the same way that you responded to my comment: I quickly dismiss them as being plain whacko. Wilson’s comments made me drop my jaw. I had heard rumors that the so-called “Princes of Darkness” - Wolfowitz, Perle, Rummsfeld, etc., had plans for re-engineering the Middle East and dismissed it as conspiracy theory. But Wilson described Richard Perle’s consultations with the Likkud party when both the Republican’s and the Likkud were out power, to develop a “clean break” policy for the military restructuring of the entire region. That this proposal so closely matched the current Bush policy was more than disconcerting. You can read a transcript of the interview at http://www.pbs.org/now/transcript/transcript_wilson.html
In regard to the comment about Christian fundamentalism and my later reference to the identification with the Taliban, I can give you a few references. First, it is well established, both by the electoral poles and by administration policies, that there is an affiliation between the Bush political agenda and fundamentalist Christianity. That this is a deliberate connection is well documented in the recent best seller, by Dubose, Reid, and Cannon, titled <Boy Genius: Karl Rove, the Brains Behind the Remarkable Political Triumph of George W. Bush.> I doubt if anyone would disagree that Bush actively promotes a religious agenda. However, the radical right wing of the Bush administration (most notably symbolized by John Ashcroft) is something I believe should be regarded as a real threat and perhaps sinister to our republican form of democracy. The nature of fundamentalist religion of any type is intolerance, whether it be Christian, Islamic, Judaistic, Hindu, or whatever. Intolerance in fundamentalist religion usually translates into beliefs that one religion will ultimately reign supreme and the entire world will submit to the will of God once the infidels are brought into line. The long tradition of religious fascism in the West was finally transmuted into the pluralism and tolerance that we enjoy today by the treaties of Augsburg and Westphalia after decades of slaughter in the name of ideology. This is an argument that requires more than an Internet thread exchange to fully appreciate, but the insinuation of a religious agenda into American politics is far more sinister than it appears. In my view, the only period of American history that resembles our current experience is the two decades leading up to the Civil War when the intractable irrationality of the Abolitionists and States Rightists led to the greatest blood-letting in our history (slavery was eliminated in almost all other Western nations without war before our Civil War, even in Czarist Russia). Fascism has no allegiance to the right or the left; it is the progeny of irrational adherence to ideology.
Finally, a comment about your “leftist” attribution. I suppose, given the opinionated nature of some of my comments, that I cannot complain about attacks ad hominem. However, to say that my views are leftist is not accurate. I am liberal in some areas, conservative in others. I am a passionate patriot and supporter of the US Constitution and the freedoms promised by its amendments, especially the Bill of Rights…freedoms that hang on a thin thread in times of trouble, especially when laws are passed to limit them.
“A cold and sober review of the possibilities leave little room for hope. The irony is that the hatred and resentment of the Islamic world is not against Americans. We are still the hope of the world. It is against the religious intolerance of the intolerant and provincialist fascism of the Bush administration.”
Horsehockey! You have no clue! Your opinions are about as far from reality and the truth as a person can get. Please take your leftist bullshit to another forum that will be more open to your “opinions”, if you want to call them that.
The comments about the hatred and resentment of the Islamic world are from a Lehrer News Hour story on an opinion pole conducted with nationals of several Islamic states prior to the war. Ironically, Islamic nations with dictatorships sponsored by the US (Egypt and Saudi Arabia) were most likely to have citizens to report resentment of the US yet still would immigrate to the US if given the chance. Iranians (a nation with a “dictatorship” not sponsored by the US) were especially resentful of the Bush administration, but also most appreciative of US democracy and respectful of Americans. To them, American democracy indeed is the hope of the world, why else would Al Quaida want to attack its symbols? According to Joe Friedman (a columnist with the New York Times who has written extensively about the sensitivity that both Europeans and Mideasterners have toward ideological nature of the Bush administration), the hatred and resentment is directed toward the administration and not the citizenry. My statement is taken directly from him. If you have a chance, tune into BBC coverage of Middle Eastern affairs and listen to their descriptions of attitudes toward the Bush administration. I used the word “provincialist” because the lack of awareness of Islamic attitudes was evidence that administration is completely blind to the effects of ideological rhetoric like “evil” and, incredibly, slips of the tongue like “crusade.” Islamic peoples interpret the close association of US support of Israel with Christian ideology for which there is, in fact, a considerable literature available to document the strange alliances that came into existence during the Reagan era (and have continued to grow) between fundamentalist Christians (who see the establishment of the State of Israel as a sign of the return of Christ) and fundamentalist Jews (who see the establishment of the Jewish State as a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham). It is not at all difficult to conclude that the flames of war and violence in the Mid East are driven by Christian, Jewish, and Islamic ideologies. What is difficult to understand is that this fact is strangely overlooked in the US.
“Think about it. The British parliament can speak against the fundamentalist right wing in the US, but criticism from within is completely suppressed by the self-righteous, right wing attacks against any that oppose them.”
Shut up! Really, nothing personal, but your full of shit. This is your opinion and nothing else. You have no way proving one thing you’ve just said. That fat-shit Michael Moore might agree, but you DO NOT speak for the majority of Americans. Come back to reality, quickly!
This statement came about as a result of the striking experience of watching this issue discussed by the Parliament on CSPAN. I was amazed that such open discussion could occur in Britain, but has never surfaced in public discourse in the US. It would take too long to discuss my reasoning, and I certainly do not have objective data (although I would like to do such a study), but, I believe I can make a cogent case that the intolerant attacks on liberalism, or any perspective that is inconsistent with fundamentalist ideology (e.g., Harry Potter, evolution, etc.) suppresses discourse in the US. As the fundamentalist movement has gained supremacy, both the moderate press (i.e., not Fox News) and the public are too intimidated to directly confront this issue. I also believe that this is a most foreboding condition. It is when people fear speaking out that fascism takes hold. Please understand that I am not attacking Christianity or any other religion. Until the twentieth century, fascism almost always appeared as religious intolerance. Both Communism and Nazism were fashioned to be, and indeed were religions! It is not so much the cultural system that raises concern, but the desire and willingness to dominate based on convictions of rightness that are found in true believers.
“What we need is perestroika, an open discourse that unveils the right wing fundamentalists for what they are.”
No we don’t. They are conservatives with our, well, maybe not your, best interests at heart. They are doing what they believe is the right thing to do, whether you like it or not. And quess what? The majority of Americans agree.
To paraphrase another famous commentator, “What’s this ‘our’ stuff?” Right wing fundamentalists have your best interests at heart? Actually, I do not disagree that most Christian people who are conservative, do indeed have the best of intentions. However, I do not consider most Christians to be radical right wing. Every movement has a radical minority and it is precisely these groups that are to be most feared. The book I mentioned above includes documentation about a Machiavellian and calculated strategy developed by Karl Rove to enlist the support of Christians for George Bush’s election. Most commentators that I have read on the subject believe that Rove is not a Christian! Conservative Christianity is the most potent and dominant political force in the country. Anyone who wins their support will be in power. The left wing movements of the sixties and seventies were an anomaly, the US is the most religious (and, hence conservative) of all of the developed nations. If conservative Christians closely examined the domestic policies of the Bush administration, they might be surprised to find that their support has been counter to their own self interest. The majority of Russians never supported the Bolsheviks and Lenin. We take our democracy for granted. Most Americans are not aware of facts like the attempted military coup planned against the Roosevelt administration prior to WWII because a group of oligarchs felt that Mussolini had the best answer. They failed in their attempted coup because they tried to enlist a conservative Marine general who took his oath to defend the Constitution seriously. Ironically, Roosevelt did not prosecute them because so many were personal (upper class) friends and he was able to avoid the embarrassment because of the attack on Pearl Harbor.
“Purely and simply they are fascists of the same degree as the Taliban…”
No, they are not. Only in your liberal fantasy world.
OK, this is an over-the-top exaggeration, at least for the moment. My association of the current administration with the Taliban came about by way of the surprising result (before the Afghan war) of the number of alliances that developed between the US and the Taliban in the UN. There were several votes, most involving policies about birth control and women’s right to abortion, where the US and the Taliban were the only dissenters among all of the nations! I grant that is a weak argument, but I have not been able to resist the comparison. I must qualify this, however, with my distrust of the motives of the Bush administration and the extent to which they may be willing to use violence outside of the norms of the international community. There was at least a thin legal basis for the invasion of Iraq, a fact that will make it more difficult to justify action, no matter how correctly conceived, in the future. I am by no means trivializing the unparalleled problems created by transnational terrorism and the need for effective action. Difficult challenges are best met with an accurate and realistic self appraisal. You might think of my use of hyperbole as a device for challenging how Americans should see themselves. Sometimes appearances are more powerful than actions and anyone who lacks awareness of the appearance they project is blind to any consequences that will befall them.
“…and Americans have become so disempowered that they are nearing a time when the domination of right wing control of invasive technologies and propaganda will be impossible to displace. It is a time for great despair. The times are fertile for the rebirth of the Mussolinis and Lenins that plunged the world into a holocaust.”
I believe that we can have faith in the structure of our government to a certain extent, but I also believe we must remain true to Thomas Jefferson’s insistence on vigilance. There is no time in history when the potential abuses of technology have been so grave, and this concern should not be limited to WMDs. There is considerable evidence of shifts in the distribution of power and wealth in our society. Americans have enjoyed a long period of prosperity and civil peace. What is most fearful is that this peace has slackened our vigilance, not for enemies from without, but the enemies of hubris and a collective inability to be self critical and deliberate about the long-term consequences of our actions. Do you know the story of the Athenian arrogance and hegemony over the Delian League and how it led to their downfall? Have you read about John Maynard Keynes’ claim as he left the League of Nations that the humiliation the Allies poured upon Germany in reparations and partitioning would lead to a new era of German nationalism? It took seventeen years for Hitler to become Chancellor. Why do you think Truman fired McArthur? great national hero who became so self absorbed that he thought that eight atomic bombs would kill enough Chinese to make them back off. Truman saw it differently. He saw that the use of those weapons would make us the same as the Nazis and Japanese that we defeated. Do you see a possibility that our humiliation in Viet Nam could have led to the resurgence of militaristic conservatism in the US? Have you read the history of the beginning of WWI? Not the story of the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand, but the unilateral military moves made by Austria into Serbia; a scenario dreadfully similar to Bush’s unilateralism in response to a terrorist act. In answering your criticisms, there hasn’t been room or time for discourse about the crisis that is before us. It has never been about our ability to defeat Saddam Hussein or his malignant regime. It is about the world that we, the US, are creating. At least read the text from Joe Wilson’s interview and answer for yourself if you can feel confident that our path is well chosen. More important, if by chance you doubt that it is, what are your options? Do you believe that the consequences of these actions will never touch you? Do you think that the actions taken were the only ones possible?
I love your comparisons. They are so far removed from reality, it’s almost funny. If you were to bring some sense to your posts I’m sure I will respond. If not this will be the first and only time I post on this thread.
Who’s reality? My grandfather, my grandmother, all of my great aunts, uncles except for one, all of my uncles (3 of them), my brother in law and now one of my cousins, have served their country in time of war. My father served as a Green Beret during the Viet Nam era. All of us were caught up in a struggle against fascism, Nazi, Nipponese, or Communist, no matter how else you care to characterize it, it was ideological fascism. For all of the things we did right, for all of the mistakes we made – no matter how tragic, the most horrible outcome would be for us to become what we fought against.
Restless: You said, " and you all think this was done for the right reasons and thus can sleep with a clear consciousness at night."
Yep, I sleep great, when I can get my ass in bed. Again if you believe that these companies are going to be making a lot of money, invest in them. This “inside” information is going to make you a ton, if you are right. Personally I will keep my money out of the oil industry, with the flood of oil coming out I think their stocks are going to drop. But if you are correct, then you might as well as get rich off of it. Put your money where your mouth is. (Yes I said this before, but nobody has taken me up on my offer.)
I notice these threads are starting to slowly disappear, and other stuff is taking its place. That might be good, but I only hope everyone does not forget that the job is still not done. Some countries we have helped rebuild, and prosper, but others we have forgotten. This problem with Iraq should have been dealt with the first time around. All we needed to do was to give a little support to the opposition forces. Instead we flew around keeping an eye on them, but little else other then play UN inspector games.
I do hear people complain about Bush, but I have yet to hear a good argument. I don’t expect everyone to like him, and I even have trouble with some of his issues. But I know it is the issues, and not the person. The argument that Bush worked for an oil company, there are oil companies in Texas, bush is from Texas, and Iraq has oil therefore he is attacking Iraq for oil. Sorry but this is an illogical argument. This is what people call a jump to a conclusion. Nobody has yet to produce a direct link.
It is the same with Halliburton. Because Cheney worked for Halliburton, and Halliburton contracts with the government, Cheney must be funneling business to them. Another jump to conclusion. Unless there is any true connection shown, I cannot believe these “rumors.”
I will say it is good to keep an eye on the government. No politician should be unquestionable. There are people who check these things out, and if they find true impropriety then it will be big news. The opposite party wont let something that big go unnoticed. But until then it is just innuendo and speculation.
As far as Bush’s religion, what the hell does it matter? I cannot see any bad coming from religious values. He has said positive things about Islam, and other religions, so I don’t see any connection to fanaticism. Though I have seen some minor fanaticism in televangelists. And more so from Louis Farrakhan, and extreme amounts from the Islamic countries. All of this has nothing to do with religion. It has to do with people using the power of religion to control people to give themselves power. Faith can create an extreme blindness, especially if you are raised with those beliefs, and the training in Islamic countries is very intense. And too many radicals have taken over in the many Islamic countries Mosques.
Political parties can also cause a strong blindness. Each party sees the other as a corrupt entity, and themselves as the savior. I prefer not to belong to any political party because I like to think for myself. I find myself disagreeing with one or the other party at times, and agreeing with one or the other party at times. The parties would work better if they were debating the issues. Instead they try to fight with each other, and play political games.
I actually spend time deciding what my beliefs are. I don’t like to have beliefs given to me. Each one must be logical, or at least useful. I ask myself why I believe what I believe. I have changed my beliefs, or my beliefs have become stronger because of this. Too many people don’t even understand the basic concepts of liberal and conservative ideas. Some people have told me that they are neither liberal nor conservative, at which point I ask them “So you think the government is perfect the way it is?”
Looking back on the 20 th century the political landscape was run by the Democratic party. It looks like that is changing for this century. There has been a major shift right, and with the recent changes in campaign contributions that were supposed to root out corruption in donating to political parties, the Democrats actually have lost a lot of cash. This is very interesting because I remember that it was supposed to hurt the Republican Party the most.
Back to Bush, I have found little intelligence in all of the arguments against him. I have even avoided entering into discussions with too many people who’s best argument is that “Bush is a big doody head.” The following is the way I have seen the arguments against the Bush administration:
Saddam gassed thousands of Kurd families
Damn that Bush.
Saddam tortured thousands of people
Damn that Bush.
Saddam hires “professional” rapists
Damn that Bush
Saddam invaded Kuwait
Damn that Bush
America stopped the attack on Kuwait
Damn that Bush
Saddam burned hundreds of oil wells
Damn that Bush
America was attacked on 911
Damn that Bush
Bush said terrorism cannot exist any more
Damn that Bush
Bush broke up Al Queada
Damn that Bush
Bush got rid of Saddam Hussein
Damn that Bush
Bush kept his word
Damn that Bush
Iraqi’s are cheering in the street that they are finally free
…Damn that Bush
“Yep, I sleep great, when I can get my ass in bed. Again if you believe that these companies are going to be making a lot of money, invest in them. This “inside” information is going to make you a ton, if you are right. Personally I will keep my money out of the oil industry, with the flood of oil coming out I think their stocks are going to drop. But if you are correct, then you might as well as get rich off of it. Put your money where your mouth is. (Yes I said this before, but nobody has taken me up on my offer.)”
LOL at the inside information, I mean, only the millions of Europeans that watch Euronews and other non US based televisions chanels are aware so it’s defenitely a secret.
So the war is almost done. As a recap, it’s nice to see everything I thought confirmed by your behaviour, and also by what the US failed to do. It would be truly hilarious, if it wasn’t so tragic, that the only buildings secured against pillage by the US troops were the Oil ministry, the oil camps and Saddam’s palace that was used as military headquarters. For a nation that claims to be acting on the interest of Iraquis, I’m sure it has never crossed your minds that you actually should have secured all the hospitals and the museum that held inumerous treasures as ancient as civilization. Again, the USA is breaking international laws (Hague and Geneva Conventions) by failling to provide basic needs that are responsibility of the occupying power.
The damage and the killing are done and we’re all in expectation as to whether or not the USA will be able to manage anything else BUT the OIL camps and if the Iraquis will tolerate being drained of their most valuable natural resources by the occupying power. I for one, am curious.
LOL
Restless:
Do you live in a fantasy world? You have been wrong on all points and have yet to admit it. Apparently we are supposed to be psychic and know that the Iraqis were going to loot the hospitals and museums. But since the Iraqi people did it and not the Americans, you obviously blame America.
Also you still do not understand my statement. If these oil companies are doing what you say, and are going to make a ton then buy the stock. It will go up, and you will get rich. “Put your money where your mouth is.”
And again it was fully legal, regardless of what you think. A reporter just found another link between Al Queada and Iraq.
Although I know you wont read it, or if you do it will be called a plant by the US, or some other attempt to avoid reality.
Also I sleep good knowing that the Iraqi people are free, and can choose their own destiny, for better or worse. For some reason you cannot accept this, and can only go back to the oil excuse.
If you truly believe it is the oil then answer these questions
- Why didn’t we take the oil in the first Gulf war?
- How does flooding the market, causing oil prices to fall help the oil industry?
- When have we ever taken over a country, and taken their oil in the past 100 years? (The oil industry really did not exist before that.)
One more question. Why can you not accept that America can actually do a good thing?
(I thought this thread was about to vanish.)
"Restless:
Do you live in a fantasy world? You have been wrong on all points and have yet to admit it. Apparently we are supposed to be psychic and know that the Iraqis were going to loot the hospitals and museums. But since the Iraqi people did it and not the Americans, you obviously blame America. "
Wrong on all points? Ok, so not even mentioning that this implies that Vietnam war didn’t happen, that no chemical terrorism was performed by your nation then, that you didn’t drop between 90 and 280 millions of cluster bombs during a period of nine years in Laos, that you didn’t support Saddam, or Mobutu Seseseko, the worst dictator to ever rule Zaire, or that you didn’t give protection to Emmanuel Constant, how slaughtered thousands of innocents in Taiti, you didn’t perform terrorist actions against Cuba with the virus that devasted the pig population in that small country for decades, etc,etc. Right? You are implying that you didn’t kill innocents in Iraq, that you didn’t protect the only building that could serve the USA economical interests, that you aren’t breaking the International laws by not providing the basic needs of the occupied population, right? It is all worng, because it doesn’t play on your little TV screen where some of you watch the war for entertainment, right?
The history books are filled with terrible lies and the USA never, ever did anything wrong,. right?
Euronews are blatant liers, and you didn’t go straight for the oil camps once you got there., and the majority of the rest of the world’s population lives in a fantasy world because it doesn’t eat the crap the american media feeds you, right??
Is that it? Or am I missing your point? This is why the USA is in this situation, because you refuse to aknowledge and therefore can’t learn from your past mistakes. You are the ONLY nation to have a burned flag ever single day across the world but still there’s nothing wrong, because, no matter what, the USA == good guys. Right?
"Also you still do not understand my statement. If these oil companies are doing what you say, and are going to make a ton then buy the stock. It will go up, and you will get rich. “Put your money where your mouth is.” "
I am putting my money where my mouth is. I am acting in a active manner accordingly to my beliefs. And I would never give money to a american company.
"And again it was fully legal, regardless of what you think. A reporter just found another link between Al Queada and Iraq.
Although I know you wont read it, or if you do it will be called a plant by the US, or some other attempt to avoid reality. "
Sorry to disapoint you, but I did read it. Occupying a country without presenting ANY evidence of a direct threath to world peace or to the USA borders is illegal, regardless of what YOU think. It’s not my fault you can’t read properly. I never denied that there wasn’t a link, there is a link between ALL the muslim world and Al-qaeda, which is not the same as saying that the whole muslim world supports or has actively contributed to terrorist actions against the USA.
"Also I sleep good knowing that the Iraqi people are free, and can choose their own destiny, for better or worse. For some reason you cannot accept this, and can only go back to the oil excuse. "
Free? they’re a occupied country and you say they’re free?
"If you truly believe it is the oil then answer these questions
- Why didn’t we take the oil in the first Gulf war? "
Because you didn’t have the lame excuse you have now, there wasn’t the fear of the terrorist threath to allow you to gather enough support, outside and inside the USA.
"2. How does flooding the market, causing oil prices to fall help the oil industry?
3. When have we ever taken over a country, and taken their oil in the past 100 years? (The oil industry really did not exist before that.) "
Because now, the Texas oil companies have put their hands on oil at a fraction of the extraction cost you can achieve in america.
"One more question. Why can you not accept that America can actually do a good thing?
(I thought this thread was about to vanish.) "
Oh, you have done good things, the internet being one of them, but the vast majority of your military actions have been plain wrong by my standards.
Restless:
Again you go off subject, bringing in everything you possibly can to bolster your argument, assuming it is related, and once again you have twisted my words. Vietnam, underwear gnomes, Godzilla. I thought we were discussing Iraq. History books? Euronews? I never mentioned these things and yet you put word in my mouth. No source of information is ever going to have the whole truth. That is impossible. Sure there is crap reporting in America. There is crap reporting all over the world.
Also have you ever read an American history textbook? I have read of American Indians in the 1800’s being wiped out. I never said America was perfect, but getting better all the time. It is not the 1800’s not even the 1970’s. (Weren’t you trying to say this to US=GG? Hypocrisy?) We do learn from our mistakes. And we get better.
Again I don’t care about the people hating Americans, and burning our flag. I also don’t care about the Nazi’s or the KKK. If you cannot see these actions as what they are, then I should question your education.
I am not sure how a person could act inactively, but the fact that you won’t put money into an American company means you don’t believe that these companies will make a profit. Your money will not go to the company, but to a person selling their stock in the company. Regardless of weather you agree with them or not, if you believe you won’t be able to change their actions, and they will make money, why not take some for yourself? Then it won’t go to these “Evil” investors.
Again it was fully legal. If you are thinking the UN actually has any authority whatsoever then the fact that they specifically did not tell the US to stop the action (As required by the UN rules) then it is still legal. If you read the 11 separate links posted by Anderson previously then there are very strong links. You just stated, " I never denied that there wasn’t a link…" and this statement alone is you stating that we were in our rights to defend ourselves. And no there is not a link between all Muslims and Al-Qaeda, just many of the radical ones. I won’t make a racial blanket statement about all Muslims.
As far as freedom, they are freer then they have been in decades. Occupied or not. We are already pulling some troops out, and are helping to get their new government up and running.
And great answers. How exactly does this work? “You harbor terrorists so we get your oil.” That is not an excuse, and we could have said the exact same thing 13 years ago. We were there, and with less reporters. If there is nothing to stop us now, there was nothing to stop us then.
How exactly is it cheaper to extract Iraqi oil then to extract oil elsewhere? So the labor might be a little cheaper, that is only one of many expenses. Not only that, the world is keeping an eye on what America does there. Including a lot of Americans. If there are oil companies there, are they there taking it, or just trying to help the Iraqis get back up and running? I don’t just assume that the reason a company is somewhere is just because of evil intentions. What actual information do you have that the oil is being taken? I won’t doubt that they might buy it, along with every oil company in the world. I also think they will pay a fair market price for it. The only reason we would want the oil would be for financial gain. If so then why are we giving Saddam’s money back to Iraq? Why would we not just keep it?
The oil companies could have made a lot more then what they now will with Iraqi oil open to the market. Their own wells across the globe now produce a cheaper product. And each of these wells cost a ton. OPEC has agreed to cut production by 7% in hopes that oil prices will go up. And that is not a guarantee it will just because OPEC countries have a history of not following through with reductions, plus their effect on the market is weaker then it once was. In fact I just checked and oil prices just dropped on the Asian markets.
And if it is not up to your standards to stop a genocidal megalomaniac from killing, torturing, and raping over a million people, then I don’t want to have your standards.
"Restless:
Again you go off subject, bringing in everything you possibly can to bolster your argument, assuming it is related, and once again you have twisted my words. Vietnam, underwear gnomes, Godzilla. I thought we were discussing Iraq. History books? Euronews? I never mentioned these things and yet you put word in my mouth. No source of information is ever going to have the whole truth. That is impossible. Sure there is crap reporting in America. There is crap reporting all over the world.
Also have you ever read an American history textbook? I have read of American Indians in the 1800’s being wiped out. I never said America was perfect, but getting better all the time. It is not the 1800’s not even the 1970’s. (Weren’t you trying to say this to US=GG? Hypocrisy?) We do learn from our mistakes. And we get better. "
Well, again you fail to see my purpose in bringing american past history into discussion, perhaps you’re mistaking me for some kind of Europeans=Good guys or something. It just serves to illustrate how you have put yourselfs where you are and why the rest of the world see’s you as we do.
The only thing that gets better is that instead of slaughtering several thousands for your interests you know only apparently slaughter a few. But good for you, you aknowledge, most americans I see think that all you’ve done was for the good of mankind, ask avoid roids.
"I am not sure how a person could act inactively, but the fact that you won’t put money into an American company means you don’t believe that these companies will make a profit. Your money will not go to the company, but to a person selling their stock in the company. Regardless of weather you agree with them or not, if you believe you won’t be able to change their actions, and they will make money, why not take some for yourself? Then it won’t go to these “Evil” investors.
"
Missed the point again. I’m talking about the kind of protest Gandhi used in India against the British.
“Again it was fully legal. If you are thinking the UN actually has any authority whatsoever then the fact that they specifically did not tell the US to stop the action (As required by the UN rules) then it is still legal. If you read the 11 separate links posted by Anderson previously then there are very strong links. You just stated, " I never denied that there wasn’t a link…” and this statement alone is you stating that we were in our rights to defend ourselves. And no there is not a link between all Muslims and Al-Qaeda, just many of the radical ones. I won’t make a racial blanket statement about all Muslims. "
Not according to the Geneve convention and the ONU resolutions, although I do admit the later are too vague and could be interpreted in more than one way.
About the Iraq extraction costs, if memory doesn’t fail me it’s about 20% of the cost. Of course, anything I say is a lie as american corporations CAN NOT ever do anything that is less correct, right?
Read this, and then tell me how does it smell to you:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/04/25/60minutes/main551091.shtml
The Mage: While prices “per barrel” may fall, US companies will benefit from increased volume and having control over the supply.
Your “put your money where your mouth is” comment makes no sense. Lets try it a different way:
Me: I am against the nuclear power companies.
The Mage: Well, why don’t you invest in the nuclear power companies if you think they are bad? You will make money, then. Put your money where your mouth is.
Here is a news story from the Guardian in the UK:
“Al-Qaida links still dubious”
From the Mirror in the UK:
“Skoking Gun” stinks of spooks
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/page.cfm?objectid=12898683&method=full&siteid=50143&headline=ROUTLEDGE%3A%20SMOKING%20GUN%20THAT%20STINKS%20OF%20SPOOKS
What a coincidence that documents were found, in a bombed out building.
The odd part is that Osama Bin Laden’s name was covered in “white-out”. WHY?
If the Iraqis wanted to conceal that fact, they could have just destroyed that entire document. It seems like a definite “plant” to me. I suppose it was just “good luck” that western reporters happened to come across these documents, and not miltary officials or soldiers? Hmm.
Here’s something from 60 Minutes on the “sweetheart deals” the government is handing out to it’s pals:
"(CBS)?After dropping more than 28,000 bombs on Iraq, the United States has now begun the business of rebuilding the country.
And it promises to be quite a business. With at least $60 billion to be spent over the next three years, the Iraqi people won’t be the only ones benefiting. The companies that land the biggest contracts to do the work will cash in big-time.
Given all the taxpayer money involved, you might think the process for awarding those contracts would be open and competitive. Well, so far, it has been none of the above. And the early winners in the sweepstakes to rebuild Iraq have one thing in common: lots of very close friends in very high places, correspondent Steve Kroft reports":
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/04/25/60minutes/main551091.shtml
From USA Today:
“Pause the Post-War Glee to Ask: Were Supporters Misled?”
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2003-04-27-campbell_x.htm
From the Independant (UK):
"Revealed: How the road to war was paved with lies:
Intelligence agencies accuse Bush and Blair of distorting and fabricating evidence in rush to war"
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/story.jsp?story=400805
I am working on getting some links from FOX NEWS for you, The Mage.
I know you don’t believe it unless Bill O’Reilly says it. 
Restless:
“Well, again you fail to see my purpose in bringing american past history into discussion, perhaps you’re mistaking me for some kind of Europeans=Good guys or something. It just serves to illustrate how you have put yourselfs where you are and why the rest of the world see’s you as we do.”
I know exactly why you keep bringing up history. It allows you to connect anything to your argument, regardless of its nature. And again I know why a lot (not all) of the world sees us the way they do. Hate, envy, arrogance? And while America has done some crappy things in the past, it has done more good things. I am not going to be an apologist for the past, but again it is the past. Germany killed 6 million Jews, and millions of others. But that was the Germany of the past. I don’t hold this past against them.
Many radical Muslims still hold the Crusades against the Christians, and that was many centuries ago, and they hold the Jews accountable for the actions of some Jews in the time of Mohammed. Yet there are Muslims and Jews who get along great. They do not hold the past against each other. This occurs even in some mid-eastern countries. America has done a lot of good, and I believe that practically every action taken by America in the 1900’s and the 2000’s were taken with the belief that the action was better for the world.
Many Americans are attacked in foreign countries because there is a myth that Americans kidnap people, and kill them and steal their organs to sell. This has no basis in reality, yet here is another reason that America is hated. Too often people see a movie and foolishly believe that it must be the way life is in America. (With X2 coming out, they are going to think we are mutants with super powers.) Also it has been argued that the American media sucks. Well it does quite a bit. And when other people catch these news reports they get the impression that America is full of nothing but crime, divorce, millions of people living on the street, and half the population selling their children for crack. The term “No news is good news” can be understood in two ways.
As far as corruption in corporations, a few businesses just got hit with a $1.5 billion penalty. And the bad publicity will actually hurt these businesses worse then the penalty. If a corporation is caught doing things they shouldn’t, they generally get in trouble. But because some corporations have done the wrong thing should not cause all corporations to be put under the same blanket statement. I doubt Kofi Anon will get in trouble for allowing DVD players and various other luxuries to be allowed under the “food for oil” program. (Ever eat a DVD player?)
As far as the article about Halliburton, it raises the possibility of impropriety, and yes it should be investigated. But it still does not point out a definite impropriety. Is there a kickback, or is it just because there is a lot of trust in a corporation he is very familiar with? If there was a possibility of impropriety then why didn’t they let Saddam burn those wells? Halliburton would have made a lot more, but instead they are loosing out on possibly Billions because the American Special Forces stopped those wells from going up in flames. Now find an article that does not mention possibilities, and mentions actual connections.
About the accusation of being an hypocrite, USA=Good guys was using my country past as a dubious mean of trying to make you all understand my reasonings and personal beliefs basing his judgement on facts that occurred before I was born. I failed to see the logic. Iuse these facts to try to illustrate the reasons why the USA is in the position it is today, which most of you don’t even seem to be aware of.
In a nutshell, you can’t keep showing a total lack of respect for other nations opinions, beliefs, culture and ways of life, not to mention for human life, and expect everyone to respect you back. It doesn’t work like that: When and IF your country starts showing some consideration for the rest of the world things might slowly change but your arrogant attitude and nationalistic pride will prevent this from happen.
Hey Lumpy, how you been?
You links are absolutely wonderful. I opened each one up in a web page, and then I went to your favorite site ? whatreallyhappened.com. Astonishingly every single article you posted was highlighted pointing out the fact that I previously connected to them, and I was very surprised that they were listed on the web page in the exact order you posted them in your response.
And you are trying to say I cannot think for myself?
Your little comparison with the nuke power plants was majorly flawed. My statement was in the reference to the US supposedly allowing oil companies to steal oil and get rich. I don’t think anyone mentioned the stealing of nuke power rods. Just being against something was not my point, which you cannot understand because it wasn’t stated on your favorite website. If they are actually doing this with the oil, then their stock will jump dramatically. Just being against the nuke industry will not make any nuke stocks jump, and you listed no correlation to them making any extra money. A better understanding of economics would help.
I won’t accept any links from your bogus site. You still have not properly answered my question about this site. You only dodged the question by twisting my words. Again I said it was “Anti-American”, the opposite of “Pro-American”. I didn’t say “Un-American” like you tried to make it sound like. I believe in freedom of speech, and find it very American to believe in this freedom. But in this websites case that means he has the right to distort the truth, and make sure all links are biased against America.
Ok I’ll respond to these links.
Link 1. An article about the United States itself actually downplaying the documents. Now why would we do that if we are trying to make a false connection? Nobody in that article said they didn’t meet. And nothing was mentioned about disputing these documents.
Link 2. An opinion, not a news story.
Link 3. Also mentioned by Restless. A story questioning government actions with Halliburton, but not making any specific link.
Link 4. Opinion, not news.
Link 5. Interesting how the headline biases the story. (You do read more then the headlines don?t you?) The article was obviously about political positioning. One side says one thing, and another says something else. Personally I would believe the American intelligence agency before I would believe any other because of how far spread and powerful they are. (I believe that this is another big reason America is hated.)
As far as Bill O’Reily, actually I have watched him a few times. I have agreed with him a lot, and many times disagreed with him. I haven?t really seen his show in a while. I have found Fox news to be leaning right just as the rest of the tv news media, and most of the newspapers lean left. I have found that they tend to allow liberal speech openly, and debate. Some of their shows are “Fair and Balanced” like they say, and some are obviously leaning right, Bill O’reily and the Fox and Friends being obvious examples. That being said, most of the shows on Fox news are not reporting, but news shows. There is a difference. Hannity and Comes has a conservative and liberal host who take turns discussing the issues with their guests. I would call this a balanced discussion.
The biggest problem I have about the complaints about Fox News is that nobody realizes that every news channel tended to be liberally biased, and that was ok, but to be conservatively biased is bad. An example of what most conservatives went though over the past many years would be having all news channels suddenly become conservatively biased. I doubt you would like that. I prefer to get my news from a variety of sources, and not just one source. Also understanding the bias of each channel, and program helps to better know the real news story. Just like knowing the facts on protein helps when there is a news story about how “bad it is for the kidneys.” And don’t forget they hired Geraldo Rivera. He admits readily he is a liberal.
I have never found a single person, program, magazine, or author I have agreed with 100% of the time. (Or even 75% of the time.) If I ever did I would start questioning myself and wondering if I was allowing another person to think for me. And if I stated all of my beliefs, I doubt I could find a single person who would agree with me on all of my opinions. Because I actually think for myself I find my opinions fall under many different political philosophies.
Restless:
We have been showing a lot of respect for other countries. Where exactly have we not been respecting other countries, except getting rid of a completely psychotic megalomaniac? Again a complaint about the “Evil Americans.” Every problem in the world is due to the Americans. I don’t care if these other countries respect us or not. Again it is not due to what we do, but who we are.
Some idiots are trying to ask, “What did we do to cause this attack?” This is as stupid of a question as, “What did the Jews do to cause the Nazi’s to hate them?” Again it is giving support and acceptance to hate. We had a total of 50 countries at least give some support to the action against Iraq. And yet I still hear only about America.
Again you try to imply that the whole world is against America. That everyone hates America. This is not true. The fact that 49 other countries backed us is a testament to that.
Now exactly what position are you referring to? Being the most powerful country in the world? Having an economy that supports the world? Americans donate $135 billion to charitable organizations. (I didn’t get an exact year for this.) Much of this goes overseas. The only way I see us not respecting other countries is that we don’t do as we are told. We keep trying to work with other countries toward peace. We keep trying to make this a better world. We stopped a ruthless dictator who was killing and torturing, and yet you point the finger at America for not respecting human life? You showed no respect for human life by not wanting this evil man ousted.
And what is wrong with national pride? Does it upset you that we don’t hate ourselves? It does not mean we are better then anyone, but it does not mean we are worse then anyone either. Our single biggest problem is that America is so successful that too many people do not respect what they have.
I said it before. I do believe we should bend over backward to help the world, but I don’t think we have to bend over foreward.