Crown
Board: Porsche - 911 - 997
Language: English
Region: Worldwide
Close
CloseForum - Thread
Jul 8, 2005 5:34:19 AM
- SoCal Alan
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: Orange County , United States
- Posts: 7268, Gallery
- Registered on: Mar 6, 2004
- Reply to: MMD
Jul 8, 2005 5:40:54 AM
- SoCal Alan
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: Orange County , United States
- Posts: 7268, Gallery
- Registered on: Mar 6, 2004
- Reply to: 69bossnine
Re: yarub1 - you have very good points....
Quote:
69bossnine said:Quote:
SoCal Alan said:
69bossnine, you are very wise for your age. Your comments are always worth reading. Thanks for the post.
Thanks Alan, because your post instantly prompted me to imagine and visualize Eric Cartman saying in his fantasy wise-elder-ninja voice "69bossnine, you are wise for your age...", and now it's stuck in my head, and will have me giggling to myself the rest of the day!! These types of diversions are my key to happiness and internal peace. Thanks!!
That's ok. For a couple of days, I kept muttering to my wife, "if you've got an issue, here's a tissue".
I love that quote.
Jul 8, 2005 6:29:34 AM
- SoCal Alan
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: Orange County , United States
- Posts: 7268, Gallery
- Registered on: Mar 6, 2004
- Reply to: JimFlat6
Jul 8, 2005 9:20:10 AM
- Dilinger
- Rennteam Pro
-
- Loc: Athens,Greece , Greece
- Posts: 2034, Gallery
- Registered on: Dec 23, 2004
- Reply to: SoCal Alan
Re: yarub1 - you have very good points....
My condolences to all people suffering a tragedy in London.
People, dont let all screwed up politicians geti between you relationships.
We are from different countries, that have different politics. But we are united because we share a common passion for automobiles.
SO, it would be better, if we left out of our relationships these twisted politicians that can only destroy our friendship.
Lets stay united in this forum.
i love all people of all nations. As long as they dont mess with my life. And ussually politics is messing with other peoples lives. Not individual people.
People, dont let all screwed up politicians geti between you relationships.
We are from different countries, that have different politics. But we are united because we share a common passion for automobiles.
SO, it would be better, if we left out of our relationships these twisted politicians that can only destroy our friendship.
Lets stay united in this forum.
i love all people of all nations. As long as they dont mess with my life. And ussually politics is messing with other peoples lives. Not individual people.
Jul 8, 2005 10:31:48 AM
- yarub1
- Pilot
-
- Loc: Riyadh , Saudi Arabia
- Posts: 417, Gallery
- Registered on: May 31, 2004
- Reply to: 69bossnine
Re: yarub1 - you have very good points....
Hello all,
I will just answer few of the post due to lack of time.
Ummm, the United Nations decided Iraq was an outlaw regime, or did I miss something?? The U.N. clearly agreed that Iraq was an outlaw regime, they just didn't want to deal with the fallout of really doing something about it, and as usual, there were too many hands in Saddam's cookie jar for the U.N. to be effective.
Are we talking about the same UN that was against the war but the US Administartion decided to go ahead anyway with the war. Your argument in this case places the current US Administration in the same outlaw regim that Saddam was classified in.
The "world" decided against the war?? LOL!!!! Against the "will of the world"?? LOL!!!! Your "world" is a fantasy world, one that obviously does not include:
Afghanistan
Albania
Australia
Azerbaijan
Bulgaria
Colombia
Costa Rica
Czech Republic
Denmark
Dominican Republic
El Salvador
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Georgia
Honduras
Hungary
Iceland
Italy
Japan
Kuwait
Latvia
Lithuania
Macedonia
Marshall Islands
Micronesia
Mongolia
Netherlands
Nicaragua
Palau
Panama
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Rwanda
Singapore
Slovakia
Solomon Islands
South Korea
Spain
Turkey
Uganda
United Kingdom
United States
Uzbekistan
If my count is correct there are 46 nations in that list. The UN has 191 members. Lets do the math 191 - 46 = 145.
145 nation were against the war. That why the UN , which is the body representing the world decided against it.
"And you know damn well that many other democratic countries were against the war for strictly financial reasons, not humanitarian or ethical."
The same can be said about many of the countries that are in your list. The first one is Afganistan, the leader of that country would be long gone if it was not for the US protection.
"If Saddam was telling the truth, then why didn't he abide by the U.N. orders and offer full disclosure? Why? And don't delude yourself, it wasn't just the U.S. intelligence that warned of WMD's. Why the hell do you think the U.N. was levying sanctions? Because intelligence from everywhere around the globe indicated it. A lie, by definition, is an INTENTIONAL mis-statement of fact."
It does not change the fact that no WMD where found. Which Saddam was claiming he did not have (By the way I am not defending Saddam. You wont believe how much I hate this guy). If it is an "Inteligence mistake" like you claim, know I am more worried about the future of the world.
I will just answer few of the post due to lack of time.
Quote:
69bossnine said:
Quote:
Is it? The oil IS the main source of energy. If you control it you control the world and its growth. Because of that, the USA Administration is actively seeking the control of oil sources.
Nice theory, followed by a conclusion drawn from that theory. None of which adds up to actual fact. You'll need more than a theory to form an argument.
If you dont agree with me I am fine with that. But tell me what is the main source of energy, if your answer is oil then the above is a fact.
Quote:So, by your logic, because Bush is from Texas, he profits from high oil prices? Again, nice conclusion based on nonsensical and convenient assumptions. Yes, you're right, our president is fleecing the entire U.S. population for personal profit. Yeah, that's the ticket! Your conspiracy theory would make a great made-for-TV movie, which our fanatical fact-allergic Hollywood is probably already working on...
Remember that Busch is from Texas.
Remember that a lot of conspiracy theory turned out to be true. Anyways, I hope that holywood will give me royalties if they are making a movie out of this.
quote]First of all, the US Administration has NO RIGHTS to impose its views on what is write and what is wrong on other nations.
Quote:
Who gave the US the right to decide what is and what is not an outlaw regim?
Ummm, the United Nations decided Iraq was an outlaw regime, or did I miss something?? The U.N. clearly agreed that Iraq was an outlaw regime, they just didn't want to deal with the fallout of really doing something about it, and as usual, there were too many hands in Saddam's cookie jar for the U.N. to be effective.
Are we talking about the same UN that was against the war but the US Administartion decided to go ahead anyway with the war. Your argument in this case places the current US Administration in the same outlaw regim that Saddam was classified in.
Quote:
The world decided against the war and the US went ahead against the will of the worl because it can.
The "world" decided against the war?? LOL!!!! Against the "will of the world"?? LOL!!!! Your "world" is a fantasy world, one that obviously does not include:
Afghanistan
Albania
Australia
Azerbaijan
Bulgaria
Colombia
Costa Rica
Czech Republic
Denmark
Dominican Republic
El Salvador
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Georgia
Honduras
Hungary
Iceland
Italy
Japan
Kuwait
Latvia
Lithuania
Macedonia
Marshall Islands
Micronesia
Mongolia
Netherlands
Nicaragua
Palau
Panama
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Rwanda
Singapore
Slovakia
Solomon Islands
South Korea
Spain
Turkey
Uganda
United Kingdom
United States
Uzbekistan
If my count is correct there are 46 nations in that list. The UN has 191 members. Lets do the math 191 - 46 = 145.
145 nation were against the war. That why the UN , which is the body representing the world decided against it.
"And you know damn well that many other democratic countries were against the war for strictly financial reasons, not humanitarian or ethical."
The same can be said about many of the countries that are in your list. The first one is Afganistan, the leader of that country would be long gone if it was not for the US protection.
"If Saddam was telling the truth, then why didn't he abide by the U.N. orders and offer full disclosure? Why? And don't delude yourself, it wasn't just the U.S. intelligence that warned of WMD's. Why the hell do you think the U.N. was levying sanctions? Because intelligence from everywhere around the globe indicated it. A lie, by definition, is an INTENTIONAL mis-statement of fact."
It does not change the fact that no WMD where found. Which Saddam was claiming he did not have (By the way I am not defending Saddam. You wont believe how much I hate this guy). If it is an "Inteligence mistake" like you claim, know I am more worried about the future of the world.
Jul 8, 2005 10:45:16 AM
- yarub1
- Pilot
-
- Loc: Riyadh , Saudi Arabia
- Posts: 417, Gallery
- Registered on: May 31, 2004
- Reply to: John SF 2005 997 S
Re: About the WMD...
Quote:
John SF 2005 997 S said:
The problem was that Saddam WANTED his neighbors to think he had WMD so they would live in fear of Iraq - so he did everything he could to make it look like he was snubbing the UN inspectors and hiding them from them even though he didn't have them any more....
Sorry but I dont agree with that John. Evrybody knew that Saddam had his teeth knocke out in 1991. Basicaly Iraq was a country on its knee and every US administratio knew that starting from Klinton all the way to the current president. The tragic event of 9/11 gave a good excuse to the current administration to go finish him. Again so they can control the second largest oil reserve in the world.
It would be interested to know if the US would go after Saddam if Iraq main export were strawberies.
Re: yarub1 - you have very good points....
Quote:
JimFlat6 said:
We didnt have the wrong reasons. The WMD was just the end of a long list of them and under a long list of circumstances and previous, but recent Iraqi history. Hussein really brought it upon himself. He had a huge opportunity to reinvent himself politcally after Gulf 1
and totally, completely blew it. Bad taste in velvet paintings,Doritos and porn does not make a genius!
Jim The US government always stated that Saddam can remain in power if he gives up his WMD, thats the official claim. But in reality no matter what he did the US would get rid of him sooner or later not because he was a tirant (The US is alied to a lot of people like him) but because he went against the interest of the US.
Re: yarub1 - you have very good points....
Quote:
br d said:Quote:
yarub1 said:
I think they stoped looking for WMD in Iraq. So basicaly Saddam was telling the truth when he said that he did not have any. Guess who's the liyer now.
I was in London today, I was at Aldgate Station early this morning, before the bombing occured. I was lucky, many others weren't.
I really shouldn't get involved in this but some things are just a little too much.
If Saddam "didn't have WMD" what do you think he used on the Marsh Arabs, harsh language? We know he had them, he used them, mercilessly. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The invasion of Iraq was messy, and the arguments for doing it were not entirely waterproof, of that there can be no doubt, but I think another 25 years of the terror and oppression that Saddam enjoyed inflicting would have been far, far worse. And his two f*ckpig sons would have been happy to continue it.
I'm no big fan of any politician or leader, but I have to say that I find the defending of Saddam's integrity pretty offensive.
br d
First of all, I am glad that your safe and I hope that your love ones are safe as well.
The word integrity does not exist in the dectionary of politicians (Any politian).
You are missing the point, I am not defending the integrety of Saddam (See above statment) what i am against are the reasons and all the lies that surround the Iraq invesion. Because of the greed for oil a lot of inocent people are dying when they should be alive, so when somone tells me that they are doing it to spread democracy and all the good things that comes with I find that very offensive.
By the way, he used poisenous gases aginst the Curde not the Arab Marshes.
Re: yarub1 - you have very good points....
Quote:
JimFlat6 said:Quote:
cartouche said:Quote:
br d said:Quote:
yarub1 said:
I think they stoped looking for WMD in Iraq. So basicaly Saddam was telling the truth when he said that he did not have any. Guess who's the liyer now.
I was in London today, I was at Aldgate Station early this morning, before the bombing occured. I was lucky, many others weren't.
I really shouldn't get involved in this but some things are just a little too much.
If Saddam "didn't have WMD" what do you think he used on the Marsh Arabs, harsh language? We know he had them, he used them, mercilessly. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The invasion of Iraq was messy, and the arguments for doing it were are not entirely waterproof, of that there can be no doubt, but I think another 25 years of the terror and oppression that Saddam enjoyed inflicting would have been far, far worse. And his two f*ckpig sons would have been happy to continue it.
I'm no big fan of any politician or leader, but I have to say that I find the defending Saddam's integrity pretty offensive.
br d
Sorry : there is a confusion between bellicose Irak before Gulfwar one ans UNO inspections, and bloodless Irak after Gulfwar one and UNO inspections.
Iraq was not "bloodless" after Gulf 1. They executed Kuwaiti POWs,Iranian POWs,Kurds,their own people,continued to try to shoot down allied aircraft, tried to kill the leadership of Kuwait and the ex pres of the US war, paid for suicide bombers in Israel and used oil revenues for weapons and not food or medicine.
Hussein is a [censored] arrogant fool who played at being a junior grade Stalin too long and self destructed.
Does that meet "bloodless" by Belgian standards? I think not.
Well nothing changed after the invasion. People are still being killed, tortured (Abu Ghraib comes to my mind), helicopters and planes being shot down, POW being shoot will lying on the floor wounded. The only difference that I see know is that the US Army is involved in it. The tirant is gone but thing got worst in Iraq.
Like the French would say "Le roi et mort, vive le roi"
Re: all about oil?.
Quote:
JimFlat6 said:
If the USA was in Iraq for just its oil, do u really think the US would bother with Iraq? Get real!!! That would be the last of our choices. There are so many oil producing countries easier to take, like Brunei, Nigeria,Angola,Libya and all of the North Sea Oil Fields. They have any sizeable navies to stop the USA??? Nooooooooooo.
Iraq has the second largest oil reserve in the world and Saddam was not playing the "superpower and folowers" game.
Re: yarub1 - you have very good points....
ISUK,
I agree with you. I am impressed with you writing.
Dear US Rennteamster,
I am starting to feel some tension from my US Rennteamster (If I am wrong please correct me), therefore I would like to state the following:
I am not anti-US ( I leaved in the States for 7 years and had a good time) and I am specialy not a pro-Saddam. I am just against SOME of the US polocies (Iraq happens to be one of them) thats why I was carfule in my writing to always differenciate between the US as a country and people and the current Administartion. I did not intend to offend anyone or be disrespectfull in any of my postings, if anybody is interested in the point of view of a Middle Eastern man on the tragic events in Iraq I will be more than happy to carry out this interesting discussion later in the week (I will be very busy in the next few days), if you feel that this discussion is going too far I will stop my participation.
Have a good week-end all
.
I agree with you. I am impressed with you writing.
Dear US Rennteamster,
I am starting to feel some tension from my US Rennteamster (If I am wrong please correct me), therefore I would like to state the following:
I am not anti-US ( I leaved in the States for 7 years and had a good time) and I am specialy not a pro-Saddam. I am just against SOME of the US polocies (Iraq happens to be one of them) thats why I was carfule in my writing to always differenciate between the US as a country and people and the current Administartion. I did not intend to offend anyone or be disrespectfull in any of my postings, if anybody is interested in the point of view of a Middle Eastern man on the tragic events in Iraq I will be more than happy to carry out this interesting discussion later in the week (I will be very busy in the next few days), if you feel that this discussion is going too far I will stop my participation.
Have a good week-end all
.
Jul 8, 2005 12:18:09 PM
- Holminator
- Veteran
-
- Loc: USA , United States
- Posts: 1041, Gallery
- Registered on: Sep 28, 2004
- Reply to: yarub1
Re: all about oil?.
yarub1,
If we really wanted Iraqi oil, we could have had it after the 1st Gulf War! Or do you believe your beloved Saddam could have stopped the Coalition Forces!
And speaking of Coalitions, it is very arrogant of you to minimize the current Coalitions contribution to freeing Iraq from a ruthless tyrant and trying to help them get back on their feet. How about the Iraqi people themselves- they defied threats of death and torture to go to the polls in January. Heck, a greater percentage voted there than usually votes is other countries.I guess you dismiss their brave actions too!
Regarding no WMD's, using your logic, if the victims body is never found in a murder case- then the crime never happened right!
For you to equate what happened at an Iraqi prison ,by a few idiots ( for the most part frat boy crap), to what Saddam did to his people for decades leaves no doubt in my mind where your allegiances are! Your mind is obviously closed to any logical reasoning. Gee, I wonder where I've heard the same nonsense you spew... NY Times, LA Times, CBS News, Michael Moore...
If we really wanted Iraqi oil, we could have had it after the 1st Gulf War! Or do you believe your beloved Saddam could have stopped the Coalition Forces!
And speaking of Coalitions, it is very arrogant of you to minimize the current Coalitions contribution to freeing Iraq from a ruthless tyrant and trying to help them get back on their feet. How about the Iraqi people themselves- they defied threats of death and torture to go to the polls in January. Heck, a greater percentage voted there than usually votes is other countries.I guess you dismiss their brave actions too!
Regarding no WMD's, using your logic, if the victims body is never found in a murder case- then the crime never happened right!
For you to equate what happened at an Iraqi prison ,by a few idiots ( for the most part frat boy crap), to what Saddam did to his people for decades leaves no doubt in my mind where your allegiances are! Your mind is obviously closed to any logical reasoning. Gee, I wonder where I've heard the same nonsense you spew... NY Times, LA Times, CBS News, Michael Moore...
Re: all about oil? Yes!.
SVNSVN said:
"If we really wanted Iraqi oil, we could have had it after the 1st Gulf War! Or do you believe your beloved Saddam could have stopped the Coalition Forces!"
You can't eat your soup, main course and dessert at the same time, because you will chocke. I Think that Busch (Father) was very wise when he stoped. You see the problem is not occupying Iraq, the problem is the mess that will come after it and President Busch Snr understood that.
SVNSVN said:
"And speaking of Coalitions, it is very arrogant of you to minimize the current Coalitions contribution to freeing Iraq from a ruthless tyrant and trying to help them get back on their feet. How about the Iraqi people themselves- they defied threats of death and torture to go to the polls in January. Heck, a greater percentage voted there than usually votes is other countries.I guess you dismiss their brave actions too!"
Am I? I think the arrogance comes from the people who planned the whole military compain without thinking about the aftremath consequences. The tragic event of yesterday in London are a daily occurance in Iraq due to the arrogant planing of the US military.
Yes, I agree with you regarding the defiance of the Iraqi peole to go to the pole. That was the only positive thing in this mess and hopefuly wont be the last.
SVNSVN said:
"Regarding no WMD's, using your logic, if the victims body is never found in a murder case- then the crime never happened right!"
We are not talking about a murder case here! We are talking about a NUCLEAR PROGRAMME with its supporting infrastructure. If I was a US citizen and my elected leaders tells me that they went to war to get rid of Saddam's WMD but unfortunatly they could not find it, I would start to ask some extremely serious questions. Think about all the casulties on all sides and its just the beginning. That's why I am so upset about the hole Iraq fiasco.
SVNSVN said:
"For you to equate what happened at an Iraqi prison ,by a few idiots ( for the most part frat boy crap), to what Saddam did to his people for decades leaves no doubt in my mind where your allegiances are! Your mind is obviously closed to any logical reasoning. Gee, I wonder where I've heard the same nonsense you spew... NY Times, LA Times, CBS News, Michael Moore..."
My allegiance is for my people, the Arabic people and NOT corrupted to the bone Arabic governments, I have members of my tribe (Arabic society is mainly a tribal society) in Iraq and my heart bleeds every time I listen to the news and see whats happening their.
Iraq is a war zone and what you see on TV is just the tip of the icebirgh. I am sure that far more serious crimes are being commited from both sides far from the cameras.
You have to understand that the people of the Middle East have been lied to and cheated so much (by local government and outside powers alike) that we evolved, we have now in our DNA a lying detection system, when someone is lying a big red light start flashing in our heads and I am telling you that the Iraq war is about OIL and Nothing else.
The only magazines that I read sometimes from the US are Car related magazine and nothing else, except that sometimes I do watch "Faux News" sorry I mean "Fox News" when I want to have a good lough, and who's Michael Moore???
Regarding my "Logical Reasoning" you have every rights to question it, like I have the right to questione your's. Remember, the world will be a veeeery booooring place if we all think alike.
Off topic. How is your convertable? Five months to go before I get mine. The waiting is killing me (The killing me part is just i figure of speach so dont go celebrate SVNSVN
).
Sorry but I need to sign off now. Have a good week end all
"If we really wanted Iraqi oil, we could have had it after the 1st Gulf War! Or do you believe your beloved Saddam could have stopped the Coalition Forces!"
You can't eat your soup, main course and dessert at the same time, because you will chocke. I Think that Busch (Father) was very wise when he stoped. You see the problem is not occupying Iraq, the problem is the mess that will come after it and President Busch Snr understood that.
SVNSVN said:
"And speaking of Coalitions, it is very arrogant of you to minimize the current Coalitions contribution to freeing Iraq from a ruthless tyrant and trying to help them get back on their feet. How about the Iraqi people themselves- they defied threats of death and torture to go to the polls in January. Heck, a greater percentage voted there than usually votes is other countries.I guess you dismiss their brave actions too!"
Am I? I think the arrogance comes from the people who planned the whole military compain without thinking about the aftremath consequences. The tragic event of yesterday in London are a daily occurance in Iraq due to the arrogant planing of the US military.
Yes, I agree with you regarding the defiance of the Iraqi peole to go to the pole. That was the only positive thing in this mess and hopefuly wont be the last.
SVNSVN said:
"Regarding no WMD's, using your logic, if the victims body is never found in a murder case- then the crime never happened right!"
We are not talking about a murder case here! We are talking about a NUCLEAR PROGRAMME with its supporting infrastructure. If I was a US citizen and my elected leaders tells me that they went to war to get rid of Saddam's WMD but unfortunatly they could not find it, I would start to ask some extremely serious questions. Think about all the casulties on all sides and its just the beginning. That's why I am so upset about the hole Iraq fiasco.
SVNSVN said:
"For you to equate what happened at an Iraqi prison ,by a few idiots ( for the most part frat boy crap), to what Saddam did to his people for decades leaves no doubt in my mind where your allegiances are! Your mind is obviously closed to any logical reasoning. Gee, I wonder where I've heard the same nonsense you spew... NY Times, LA Times, CBS News, Michael Moore..."
My allegiance is for my people, the Arabic people and NOT corrupted to the bone Arabic governments, I have members of my tribe (Arabic society is mainly a tribal society) in Iraq and my heart bleeds every time I listen to the news and see whats happening their.
Iraq is a war zone and what you see on TV is just the tip of the icebirgh. I am sure that far more serious crimes are being commited from both sides far from the cameras.
You have to understand that the people of the Middle East have been lied to and cheated so much (by local government and outside powers alike) that we evolved, we have now in our DNA a lying detection system, when someone is lying a big red light start flashing in our heads and I am telling you that the Iraq war is about OIL and Nothing else.
The only magazines that I read sometimes from the US are Car related magazine and nothing else, except that sometimes I do watch "Faux News" sorry I mean "Fox News" when I want to have a good lough, and who's Michael Moore???
Regarding my "Logical Reasoning" you have every rights to question it, like I have the right to questione your's. Remember, the world will be a veeeery booooring place if we all think alike.
Off topic. How is your convertable? Five months to go before I get mine. The waiting is killing me (The killing me part is just i figure of speach so dont go celebrate SVNSVN
).
Sorry but I need to sign off now. Have a good week end all
Re: all about oil? Yes!.
As terrible as yesterday's events in London were, we must not make the mistake of filling the television screens, radio waves, internet forums etc by stoking it up. Publicity is exactly what these terrorists want. The more we shrug these events off, as difficult as it might be and get on with our normal daily lives the less we encourage such acts. Yesterday in the UK all the channels showed constant coverage of the carnage, destruction and disruption. If these terrorists were holed up somewhere, with there televisons on, they must have loved it.
Jul 8, 2005 3:57:04 PM
- SoCal Alan
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: Orange County , United States
- Posts: 7268, Gallery
- Registered on: Mar 6, 2004
- Reply to: yarub1
Re: About the WMD...
Quote:
yarub1 said:
It would be interested to know if the US would go after Saddam if Iraq main export were strawberies.
If Saddam can make billions off strawberries and use that money to fund the infrastructure to build WMD's, umm, yeah, the world must remove Saddam, especially after 9/11, especially after signing the unconditional cease fire agreement with the US, post-Gulf War I.
Jul 8, 2005 4:00:02 PM
- SoCal Alan
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: Orange County , United States
- Posts: 7268, Gallery
- Registered on: Mar 6, 2004
- Reply to: yarub1
Re: all about oil? Yes!.
Quote:
yarub1 said:
My allegiance is for my people, the Arabic people and NOT corrupted to the bone Arabic governments, I have members of my tribe (Arabic society is mainly a tribal society) in Iraq and my heart bleeds every time I listen to the news and see whats happening their.
Why isn't your allegiance to all people, not just "your people"?
Jul 8, 2005 4:02:04 PM
- SoCal Alan
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: Orange County , United States
- Posts: 7268, Gallery
- Registered on: Mar 6, 2004
- Reply to: yarub1
Jul 8, 2005 4:07:56 PM
- SoCal Alan
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: Orange County , United States
- Posts: 7268, Gallery
- Registered on: Mar 6, 2004
- Reply to: yarub1
Re: yarub1 - you have very good points....
Quote:
yarub1 said:
You are missing the point, I am not defending the integrety of Saddam (See above statment) what i am against are the reasons and all the lies that surround the Iraq invesion. Because of the greed for oil a lot of inocent people are dying when they should be alive, so when somone tells me that they are doing it to spread democracy and all the good things that comes with I find that very offensive.
Is it a fact that there were lies or is this just your opinion? If fact, please prove that the administration was lying. If opinion, please state it as so. Thanks.
Re: all about oil? Yes!.
Dreamcar,
I agree with your comments reference the media coverage but in today's world there is no way the media will ignore such major incidents. What I found distasteful is the dumbing down in the quality of reporting and the need for vacuous presenters to make stupid remarks just to fill airtime. Asking questions like "why is Tony Blair telling everyone that Muslims are just as angered by the barbarity of these acts as the rest of us" was just incredulous. I'm afraid our media is descending to the level of the large US networks (no offence to our US friends on the board intended here) where the subject matter is reduced to a discussion level that a 10 year old can understand. There are complex issues here which people are not being educated on. Lets have informed debate and not on the hoof reaction which can be very biased immediately after terrible attacks such as these.
As for simply ignoring the whole situation I have to disagree with you on this point as I believe that only serves to make things worse. To stop a bully you have to confront them and make people aware of their actions. Once you have the weight of public support behind you the bully has lost his ability to be effective. If, on the other hand, you try to ignore them, their rage and subsequent persecution simply increases. Northern Ireland should have taught all of us in the UK this fact if nothing else. It was the exposure of the media coverage of the Omagh bombing that finally lost the Republicans the tacit support of the silent majority and began the road towards peace.
I agree with your comments reference the media coverage but in today's world there is no way the media will ignore such major incidents. What I found distasteful is the dumbing down in the quality of reporting and the need for vacuous presenters to make stupid remarks just to fill airtime. Asking questions like "why is Tony Blair telling everyone that Muslims are just as angered by the barbarity of these acts as the rest of us" was just incredulous. I'm afraid our media is descending to the level of the large US networks (no offence to our US friends on the board intended here) where the subject matter is reduced to a discussion level that a 10 year old can understand. There are complex issues here which people are not being educated on. Lets have informed debate and not on the hoof reaction which can be very biased immediately after terrible attacks such as these.
As for simply ignoring the whole situation I have to disagree with you on this point as I believe that only serves to make things worse. To stop a bully you have to confront them and make people aware of their actions. Once you have the weight of public support behind you the bully has lost his ability to be effective. If, on the other hand, you try to ignore them, their rage and subsequent persecution simply increases. Northern Ireland should have taught all of us in the UK this fact if nothing else. It was the exposure of the media coverage of the Omagh bombing that finally lost the Republicans the tacit support of the silent majority and began the road towards peace.
Jul 8, 2005 4:14:47 PM
- SoCal Alan
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: Orange County , United States
- Posts: 7268, Gallery
- Registered on: Mar 6, 2004
- Reply to: yarub1
Re: About the WMD...
Quote:
yarub1 said:
Again so they can control the second largest oil reserve in the world.
The US is not interested in this. The people of the US would not stand for stealing another country's oil. What did the US steal in Germany and Japan after WWII? If you re-evaluate your statement, you may see the motive for going into Iraq quite differently.
Re: all about oil? Yes!.
Yarub, you know that many middle east nations thrive on conspiracy theories about who is in power, who wants power and who is leaving power. You could put up a 24hr "all conspiracy" sat TV network and barely cover one tenth of the conspiracy stories that come out of the region.
The idea that Iraq was invaded as a conspiracy just to steal its oil makes a nice story to nod heads over in a
tea shop, but simply isnt true.
Look at the locations and SIZES of the worlds oil reserves. It's obvious that if the US wanted to invade a country for its oil, the US Army would simply drive up to Canada. They have more oil, a friendlier climate and better freeways.
World Top 10 - Oil Reserves Countries
Country Billions of Barrels
Saudi Arabia 261.8
Canada 180.0
Iraq 112.5
U.A.E. 97.8
Kuwait 96.5
Iran 89.7
Venezuela 77.8
Russia 60.0
Libya 29,5
Nigeria 24.
The idea that Iraq was invaded as a conspiracy just to steal its oil makes a nice story to nod heads over in a
tea shop, but simply isnt true.
Look at the locations and SIZES of the worlds oil reserves. It's obvious that if the US wanted to invade a country for its oil, the US Army would simply drive up to Canada. They have more oil, a friendlier climate and better freeways.
World Top 10 - Oil Reserves Countries
Country Billions of Barrels
Saudi Arabia 261.8
Canada 180.0
Iraq 112.5
U.A.E. 97.8
Kuwait 96.5
Iran 89.7
Venezuela 77.8
Russia 60.0
Libya 29,5
Nigeria 24.
Re: yarub1 - you have very good points....
Quote:
yarub1 said:Quote:
br d said:Quote:
yarub1 said:
I think they stoped looking for WMD in Iraq. So basicaly Saddam was telling the truth when he said that he did not have any. Guess who's the liyer now.
I was in London today, I was at Aldgate Station early this morning, before the bombing occured. I was lucky, many others weren't.
I really shouldn't get involved in this but some things are just a little too much.
If Saddam "didn't have WMD" what do you think he used on the Marsh Arabs, harsh language? We know he had them, he used them, mercilessly. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The invasion of Iraq was messy, and the arguments for doing it were not entirely waterproof, of that there can be no doubt, but I think another 25 years of the terror and oppression that Saddam enjoyed inflicting would have been far, far worse. And his two f*ckpig sons would have been happy to continue it.
I'm no big fan of any politician or leader, but I have to say that I find the defending of Saddam's integrity pretty offensive.
br d
First of all, I am glad that your safe and I hope that your love ones are safe as well.
The word integrity does not exist in the dectionary of politicians (Any politian).
You are missing the point, I am not defending the integrety of Saddam (See above statment) what i am against are the reasons and all the lies that surround the Iraq invesion. Because of the greed for oil a lot of inocent people are dying when they should be alive, so when somone tells me that they are doing it to spread democracy and all the good things that comes with I find that very offensive.
By the way, he used poisenous gases aginst the Curde not the Arab Marshes.
"Because of the greed for oil" ? Yeah, that's why oil hit an ALL TIME price high Wednesday.
This phrase "because of the greed for oil" is such bs. Not one person that uses this line can give 1 shred of evidence how or why this has helped the US with oil.
Re: all about oil? Yes!.
Jim,
The issue of oil is almost certainly one reason for the situation currently unfolding in Iraq. It is just implausible to say the least that the US adminstration thought it would invade Iraq to "steal" it's oil reserves for US consumption.
The truth probably lies in the fact that high world oil prices are not good for the economies of the industrialised nations. As countries like China and India continue to grow their economies, their demand for oil products multiplies. Whilst the US might not be dependant upon Middle East crude for it's own use, rising global oil prices will affect US energy prices as US oil companies are tempted to export crude to secure bigger profits. The classic supply and demand situation kicks in causing US prices to rise. To prevent this from happening the US government would have to take direct control of US oil assets and I can't see any administration being prepared to take such an anti-capitalist step unless in time of global war. If Iraq falls into the hands of a regressive fundamentalist religious government which wants to stay in power by reverting back to a civilisation based upon those from hundreds of years ago then it might just shut of the refinery taps and cause a critical world oil shortage and subsequent rampant inflation. To stop this the western world needs a modern, democratic government in charge in Baghdad which is willing to do business with the west. Saddam's continued repression of his people was likely to cause a power vacuum upon his demise which would open the way for fundamentalists to take control. I think that Bush and Blair recognised this fact and decided to act whilst Saddam was still in power in an effort to encourage the people to embrace democracy rather than have blind religious faith in an extremist goevernment.
The issue of oil is almost certainly one reason for the situation currently unfolding in Iraq. It is just implausible to say the least that the US adminstration thought it would invade Iraq to "steal" it's oil reserves for US consumption.
The truth probably lies in the fact that high world oil prices are not good for the economies of the industrialised nations. As countries like China and India continue to grow their economies, their demand for oil products multiplies. Whilst the US might not be dependant upon Middle East crude for it's own use, rising global oil prices will affect US energy prices as US oil companies are tempted to export crude to secure bigger profits. The classic supply and demand situation kicks in causing US prices to rise. To prevent this from happening the US government would have to take direct control of US oil assets and I can't see any administration being prepared to take such an anti-capitalist step unless in time of global war. If Iraq falls into the hands of a regressive fundamentalist religious government which wants to stay in power by reverting back to a civilisation based upon those from hundreds of years ago then it might just shut of the refinery taps and cause a critical world oil shortage and subsequent rampant inflation. To stop this the western world needs a modern, democratic government in charge in Baghdad which is willing to do business with the west. Saddam's continued repression of his people was likely to cause a power vacuum upon his demise which would open the way for fundamentalists to take control. I think that Bush and Blair recognised this fact and decided to act whilst Saddam was still in power in an effort to encourage the people to embrace democracy rather than have blind religious faith in an extremist goevernment.
Re: all about oil? Yes!.
Quote:
ISUK said:
Dreamcar,
As for simply ignoring the whole situation I have to disagree with you on this point as I believe that only serves to make things worse.
With respect I didn't say ignore it. It is impossible to ignore such terrible acts. My point is that these acts are carried out purely for publicising their deranged cause. That is why it was timed to coincide with the G8 summit.
I totally agree with your views about the moronic comments of some of the reporters though.
Forum
About Rennteam | Help | Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Support | Contact | Imprint | Archive
Powered by
Community
and
