Go Home Human Shields, You U.S. Wankers... Iraqi Citizens topple main Saddam Statue

[Basstrap]

and how do you think Africa should be "stabalized"?

 

[Salome]

the war against Iraq IMO opinion was justified because of Iraq not following up on UN resolutions and because the UN failed to come to another (perhaps better) solution than war (and I blame Europe even more than the US for this happening)

it doesn't even matter much to do what the exact reasons are why Bush has decided to do something about Saddam and not go after every dictator in the world (though I think evidence shows that no other leader has been a thread to other countries more than Saddam)
because you won't rid the world of all evil it isn't bad when you at least do something about some of it

I do believe the people of Iraq rejoice being rid of Saddam
and I do believe that they are thrilled that they didn't have to wait another year/5 years/10 years for it to happen

 

[YellowKite]

The suggestion that Bush has personal gain from invading Iraq is unsupportable.

One word: OIL

More specifically, Halliburton and Texas oilmen. Bush will have to go somewhere after he leaves DC [hopefully in Jan 2005] and it will be straight into the arms of his papa and his old oil cronies in Texas.

 

[nbcrusader]

One word: OIL

More specifically, Halliburton and Texas oilmen. Bush will have to go somewhere after he leaves DC [hopefully in Jan 2005] and it will be straight into the arms of his papa and his old oil cronies in Texas.

Try again.

It would be far easier to open Alaska to drilling than to invade another country, which supplies little oil to the US.

The oil argument is speculative at best, coming from a pool of thin generalizations.

 

[sharky]

War is bad and all but look at the other evidence. Saddam Hussein supports terrorism, genocide, ethnic cleansing. In northern Iraq, military officials found al Qaeda literature and a passenger plane fuselage used to train terrorists. The government repeatedly ignored UN requests to disarm. Hans Blix said the weapons inspectors were being impeded by Iraq and Iraq would never comply with UN requests.

I suggest you read this Salon article to understand what is going on there. The New Yorker also has some good articles about what is going on in Baghdad right now.

http://salon.com/news/feature/2003/04/09/mahad/index.html

 

[FizzingWhizzbees]

Try again.

It would be far easier to open Alaska to drilling than to invade another country, which supplies little oil to the US.

Currently Iraq supplies little oil to the United States, however Iraq has the second largest oil reserves in the world (I believe Saudi Arabia has the largest) and having control of those reserves would clearly be extremely beneficial to the United States given that its energy requirements continue to increase.

The argument that oil was a motivation for the US in this war isn't just that the US wants access to the oil (ie to trade with Iraq) it's that it wants control of the oil reserves so it can decide who gains access to them.

 

[nbcrusader]

Sounds like a colorful scheme - a little out of synch with a country that promotes free trade. The argument was for Bush's personal gain. So, I say, try again.

 

[hiphop]

these folks have been planted there by the Bush Administration!

You are insulting the Bush administration.

Fact is, we don?t know the truth about that - after all we weren?t there.

 

[FizzingWhizzbees]

Sounds like a colorful scheme - a little out of synch with a country that promotes free trade. The argument was for Bush's personal gain. So, I say, try again.

Steel tariffs also sound a little out of synch for a country that promotes free trade, and yet remember the arguments last year regarding the US and steel tariffs?

And I never claimed the war was fought for Bush's personal gain, I was just responding to your comment about oil drilling in Alaska.

 

[Screaming Flower]

the war against Iraq IMO opinion was justified because of Iraq not following up on UN resolutions and because the UN failed to come to another (perhaps better) solution than war (and I blame Europe even more than the US for this happening)

it doesn't even matter much to do what the exact reasons are why Bush has decided to do something about Saddam and not go after every dictator in the world (though I think evidence shows that no other leader has been a thread to other countries more than Saddam)
because you won't rid the world of all evil it isn't bad when you at least do something about some of it

I do believe the people of Iraq rejoice being rid of Saddam
and I do believe that they are thrilled that they didn't have to wait another year/5 years/10 years for it to happen

well said salome.


seeing the iraqis celebrate today has been one of the most amazing things i've ever seen. it's pure joy.

 

[YellowKite]

Try again.

It would be far easier to open Alaska to drilling than to invade another country, which supplies little oil to the US.

The oil argument is speculative at best, coming from a pool of thin generalizations.

No way are Alaskans going to allow some Texan to come in and leave with their resources and profits. I lived in AK and they have a saying "Why do Texans resent Alaska? Because they have more land, more oil, more gold and less people to put up with."

And because it is closer to home ? Americans are going to be more vocal about the pillaging of one of our most beautiful, remaining natural landscapes than the total destruction of a foreign land.

And how little oil do you think we are talking about?

From Reuters:
The United States consumption of Iraqi crude increased by 24 percent in January, even as the Bush administration gears up for a war it says is not about Baghdad's oil.

The U.S. share of official Iraqi crude exports in the U.N.-monitored oil-for-food program has risen to 67 percent, from 58 percent of Iraq's crude shipped in December.

Stronger U.S. buying has helped push Iraq's official oil exports in January up to 1.7 million bpd, up from the 2002 annual average of about 1.25 million bpd.

Currently the North Slope of AK account for approx. 1 million barrels of crude oil a day and it is on a downward slope of production. [World Resource Institute]

Iraq's daily production averaged 2.5 million barrels in February. The United States tends to be the biggest importer of Iraqi crude, buying 366,000 barrels a day during December 2002. Iraq was the seventh-biggest supplier of U.S. crude imports that month. [U.S. Energy Information Administration.]

And that was under the oil exchange programs run by the UN - now that Bush and buddies are establishing Halliburton [and other US oil interests are sure to follow] along with the fact that Iraq has one of the most abundant oil reerves in the world? It's all good in their eyes. I bet they can taste the money as we speak.

Bush and Co. are looking to line their pockets and line the pockets of the people whose money got them into the White House in the first place.

 

[sharky]

Sorry but your oil argument doesn't hold water. So we get some oil from Iraq. We also get oil from Nigeria, which is in Africa. Wasn't someone in this thread bitching and moaning earlier about why we don't go in to Africa? And we had to increase our oil supply from Iraq because there was a shortage from Venezuela due to a strike there.

And if I recall correctly, Halliburton has been cut from the running for the Iraqi rebuilding process.

 

[FizzingWhizzbees]

Sorry but your oil argument doesn't hold water. So we get some oil from Iraq. We also get oil from Nigeria, which is in Africa. Wasn't someone in this thread bitching and moaning earlier about why we don't go in to Africa? And we had to increase our oil supply from Iraq because there was a shortage from Venezuela due to a strike there.

And if I recall correctly, Halliburton has been cut from the running for the Iraqi rebuilding process.

The point isn't that the US gets "some oil from Iraq" it's that Iraq has the second largest oil reserves in the world. It's not about how much the US trades with Iraq but how much oil Iraq actually posesses. Nigeria does have quite significant oil reserves, but nowhere near the amount that Iraq has.

 

[FizzingWhizzbees]

Sorry, I forgot to also reply to your comment about Halliburton. While I realise that control of oil obviously brings benefits to certain oil companies (such as Halliburton) I think the larger point is that the whole of the US economy is entirely dependent on oil. It's not only about benefitting one specific company.

 

[Man Inside The Child]

according to my brother-in-law, who is the chief correspondent for bloomberg news in the middle - east, there are only a few hundred people chanting in the streets (not as many as CNN tries to portray). but it is no surprise to him that CNN has exaggerated yet another report. he also has the feeling that most of the paraders are paid off by the americans. He says that most people are too scared to do anything and nobody wants the americans around. Most people he talks to say that they don't want saddam but they don't want the americans to come and take their oil.

 

[FizzingWhizzbees]

Out of interest, I wondered if anyone else saw the banner referred to in the subject of this thread? It was shown on Sky News and it was interesting because the words "Human Shields" were printed onto a banner in black type and the words "go home us ******" had clearly been added afterwards as they were painted on in red paint. Just wondered if anyone else had seen it?

 

[hiphop]

Talking about the wankers? Just tell me how many Iraqis are able to spell that word

Interesting insider source, Man Inside The Child. Keep me updated.

 

[FizzingWhizzbees]

Talking about the wankers? Just tell me how many Iraqis are able to spell that word

Probably more than the number of Brits and Americans who could spell in Arabic! (Sorry guys, but you have to admit that in general Britain and America suck at languages in comparison to the rest of the world...)

 

[diamond]

great thread Headache.
This is must be a tough day for the Bush Haters -no matter how much they deny it

DB9

 

[BVS]

With the block of information from the outside world with the iraqi information minister, how are they familiar with the terms "human shield" and "wanker"? This seems odd.

 

[hiphop]

I doubt though that Iraqis use vulgar words in the same way like us, Supastar. After all, many believe in the Koran.

 

[hiphop]

according to my brother-in-law, who is the chief correspondent for bloomberg news in the middle - east, there are only a few hundred people chanting in the streets (not as many as CNN tries to portray). but it is no surprise to him that CNN has exaggerated yet another report. he also has the feeling that most of the paraders are paid off by the americans. He says that most people are too scared to do anything and nobody wants the americans around. Most people he talks to say that they don't want saddam but they don't want the americans to come and take their oil.

Great post. What do you think, diamond?

 

[YellowKite]

Sorry but your oil argument doesn't hold water. So we get some oil from Iraq. We also get oil from Nigeria, which is in Africa. Wasn't someone in this thread bitching and moaning earlier about why we don't go in to Africa? And we had to increase our oil supply from Iraq because there was a shortage from Venezuela due to a strike there.

And if I recall correctly, Halliburton has been cut from the running for the Iraqi rebuilding process.

I used facts and figures and you are just using empty comments. If you can show me how the US isn't reliant on foreign oil, then do so. I am not in here bitching and moaning because Bush is NOT invading Africa because I am complaining about the invasion of Iraq. Why would anyone who was against the war in Iraq complain because the Bush administration wasn't also invading Africa? That doesn't make any sense.

Wherever we get our oil [Iraq, AK or Venezuela] it doesn't change the FACT that oil will be the end reward for Bush & Co.

 

[nbcrusader]

Wherever we get our oil [Iraq, AK or Venezuela] it doesn't change the FACT that oil will be the end reward for Bush & Co.

It is not FACT, it is SPECULATION. There are plenty of easier ways to be financially rewarded as President. I would believe the whole idea that Bush invaded Iraq for his personal gain when he shaves his head, moves into a secrete lair and has a miniature clone made.

 

[ALEXRUS]

As soon as an African country gets a real pain in the ass, the leader of the free world will not care about invading, breaching international law, and about how many civil "casualities" it may take. After all the example has been set. Now he can afford anything. After not being charged for breaching international law one time, why should the administration be charged another time?

You seem to care much about international law. It's dying now. I mean, of course, CERTAIN things like for instance SOME bilateral treaties or international maritime rules will remain but on the whole... U will agree that to a great extent international law is fiction. It's based exclusively on voluntariness. It just registers on paper the current state of affairs. My deep conviction is that unless there is balance of forces, international law loses much of its ... hmmm....utility. What we have now? A great and ONLY superpower with no counterweight. A superpower that gets irritated (to put it mildly) when countries like let's say Guinea do not support the superpower in the UNSC. There are two options as I see it:
1. History shows that all empires crumbled, they were not able to carry their own weight. There is a possibility that the only existing empire will destroy itself. Thus, the balance will be restored.
2. Until it happens, we will witness the law dictated by the only superpower. Will it be Lynch law?

 

[Rono]

Have a nice future Iraq people, you deserve it after the victims you had after de bombings and after 30 years of dictatorship.

( And in this 30 years almost every country in the world did trade with Iraq , even Disneyland )


Read you,...

 

[FizzingWhizzbees]

great thread Headache.
This is must be a tough day for the Bush Haters -no matter how much they deny it

DB9

By "Bush Haters" I'm assuming you mean people who are anti-war? (btw, what about those who voted for Bush but don't support his war drive?) Anyway, speaking as someone who's anti-war, I don't think this has been a "tough day" - I don't think that the events of today were ever unexpected, the US has the biggest military in the world and there was only ever going to be one conclusion to this conflict, that is a victory for the US/UK forces.

I hope now that today will mean an end to all the fighting and that no more innocent lives will be lost in this war. I feel happy for those people who celebrated the removal of Saddam Hussein and I only hope that their hopes for a democratic and free Iraq can be fulfilled.

Honestly, diamond, I'm just happy that it seems Baghdad won't undergo yet another night of bombing and its citizens won't be forced to endure another night of fear and possible injury. For that reason alone, it's definitely not a "tough day."

 

[Dreadsox]

that its energy requirements continue to increase.

The argument that oil was a motivation for the US in this war isn't just that the US wants access to the oil (ie to trade with Iraq) it's that it wants control of the oil reserves so it can decide who gains access to them.

I could make a stronger argument that Russia and France were opposed to the war because of the oil, than can be made for the US starting a war for oil. Shall we do this debate again?

France and Russia ABUSED opposed us at the Security Council for their access to the oil. Do I need to list the numbers of times they blocked efforts to improve sanctions. DO I need to list who started violating the flights into Baghdad that the Security COuncil had passed resolutions on?

There is FAR FAR more evidence that these two nations have made their choices for the good of their own needs.

Peace

 

[sharky]

so why not attack France or Russia? They get their oil from Iraq too which is why they didn't want to go to war with them. And those weren't facts. Those were YOUR facts.

As for how many people are REALLY in Iraq partying, I'm sure alot of them are too afraid to come out after the last time we screwed them over.

 

[Lilly]

But what gives the US the right? Is it fair to all the countries in Africa and around the world who are oppressed by tyrants?

Many more countries.....like Burma? Rwanda?


I guess I can't answer factually because I haven't studied them as much. Burma deals with itself. Its citizens die all the time because of its own government. (They had a civil and regular war at the same time, generally not a recipe for success.)

One thing I can add, is a synopsis of the answer to the question I asked Mary Robinson (former UN high commissioner of human rights).

Me: Today it is obvious terrorism is still a real threat to Americans (this is when we had orange level threat), how do you feel humanitarian efforts could quell terroristic uprisings in places like Indonesia?

Ms. Robinson said that she feels as though by giving humanitarian effort only to those who support us just creates a greater hate. She said we should help the people on either side, and that will help them not want to kill us all so much. She cited the division of religion, that if the US still wants to be seen as non-secular, we should act like we are.

The only "problem" with that is the whole supporting the opposition idea.....it's utopian in my opinion.