Pentagon to triple the number of drones

[mesaserf]

Some food for thought.

C40 You say the invasion of Iraq was justified by our elected leaders because they "believed" Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.

Then why have we not invaded North Korea?

They have shown that they now possess weapons grade materials and have detonated an atomic bomb.

They have stock piles of nerve gas and other agents that are the definition of WMD's. Defectors from the North Korean military have given testimony that they tested these chemical weapons on political prisoners.

While we spend blood and treasure in Iraq and Afghanistan millions of people in North Korea suffer under the iron fist of one of the worst governments in the world. So again... Why have we not invaded?

Could it be that North Korea does not have oil?

I'll tell you this much, if the current pressure being put on the Iranian government fails to bring about regime change I guarantee we will use the military option. Royal Dutch Shell and BP have lusted after those oil reserves ever since the Shaw was ousted in the late 70's. But first we will have to get Iraq and Afghanistan out of the news. The sham coalition government in Iraq will be declared a victory and the Afghan people will again be abandoned to their fate after the new gas pipe line is completed from the Caspian.

It may even take another terrorist event (God I hope not!) to jump start this thing. And when that happens will you just carry on business as usual in your basement office in the Pentagon?

Well... I guess no one will have to worry about accountability for war crimes since they set legal president with the Bush memos on torture. All you have to do now is say that you acted under orders.

Nuremberg was for nothing after all...

And the corporate media talking heads kept on... and on....and on......

 

[Mamma]

If that was food for thought, I am still hungry. Your rant on conspiracies, evil corporations were amusing as is your ignorance on the N Korea situation.

 

[JungleJett]

Every time someone brings up the "oil" argument, I just have to laugh.....and feel sorry for their ignorance.

set legal president

....go back and correct your post.

 

[ableone]

He is actually quite correct.

A foreign policy that dictates we invade every nation that threatens to develop WMDs is both ill advised and completely unworkable.

Even had Iraq possessed WMDs the invasion was a poor strategic decision for the United Stantes.

 

[mesaserf]

If that was food for thought, I am still hungry. Your rant on conspiracies, evil corporations were amusing as is your ignorance on the N Korea situation.

Ignorance? OK then give me some help. Why have we not invaded North Korea?

Are we afraid of them? Would we be up against the Chinese?

Oil has nothing to do with it? Why not?

Please do not just ignore the questions. Give me your opinion and I may just stand corrected.

 

[mesaserf]

Every time someone brings up the "oil" argument, I just have to laugh.....and feel sorry for their ignorance.


....go back and correct your post.

Ugh. OK "Precedent" Happy now?

Please correct my ignorance. Unless you think your attack on the messenger and not the message is good enough for you. Please step up to the plate!

 

[JungleJett]

Ugh. OK "Precedent" Happy now?

Please correct my ignorance. Unless you think your attack on the messenger and not the message is good enough for you. Please step up to the plate!

Go back and correct it.

Show me irrefutable proof where oil was the reason for the Iraq invasion. Cite reputable sources, links, documents, personal knowledge, ect.

Balls in your court. If you cannot provide proof for your allegations, I would recommend remaining quiet.

 

[C40_Pilot]

And where is all that oil?

So if oil was the reason, where is it all? Why aren't prices cheaper? Are we hoarding Iraqi oil, putting it in ships and storing it someplace?

Where did all of that precious oil go?

 

[Mamma]

Ignorance? OK then give me some help. Why have we not invaded North Korea?

Are we afraid of them? Would we be up against the Chinese?

Oil has nothing to do with it? Why not?

Please do not just ignore the questions. Give me your opinion and I may just stand corrected.

Mesa,
I would rather not do all your homework but I will give some help.

1) Study the Korean War and pay particular attention to Chinese involvement. Try and focus on why they became involved and what they were willing to sacrifice.

2) Study the history of Korea...emphasize on the geographical significance of it over the ages. I'll throw in "buffer state" to get you in the right direction.

3) Get a subscription to Strafor and study the N. Korean military and their likely strategies should we attack them. How much artillery, tanks and men do they have right next to Seoul. How many millions would die in the Korean hoard raining south? Then look at the social and economic state of N Korea. Is that something we really want to deal with should be conquer them?

4) Oil does have something to do with the Iraq invasion but regional stability and reducing terrorism have a large part. Here, I would like you to google which Arab countries helped us in our Iraq invasion. Aside of Iran and Lebanon, please tell me which Arab countries did not base our troops, weapons or allow overflight rights. Then ask yourself, if we were there to steal all the oil, would these countries be in favor of it? Perhaps Saddam was a destabilizing force there? Perhaps a democracy in an oil rich state with better than average education rates would help stabilize the area thus reduce terrorism.

5) Ask yourself this. Do you think Iran will get a nuclear weapon in the next couple years? If your answer is in the affirmative, what do you think Saddam would have done to counter that threat?

6) Last, read up on the term "state interest."

That is all!

 

[Mamma]

He is actually quite correct.

A foreign policy that dictates we invade every nation that threatens to develop WMDs is both ill advised and completely unworkable.

Even had Iraq possessed WMDs the invasion was a poor strategic decision for the United Stantes.

Wrong. That is not our foreign policy. If you want to be educated, read up on my response to mesa and then to give you some homework:

Look up UN Resolutions against Iraq; Iraq's Gulf War I surrender agreement; ramifications to the world's oil supply should Iran and Iraq both no nuclear. Try to think not to think so short term in regards to whether the Iraq invasion was a good or bad idea. The fruits of the Iraq invasion will not be seen for a generation or two.

Now, was the Iraq war ill thought out? Did the Bush Admin completely bumble the aftermath? Did we screw it up by the numbers? You bet we did. But you did not ask that so I won't delve into it.

 

[Mamma]

So if oil was the reason, where is it all? Why aren't prices cheaper? Are we hoarding Iraqi oil, putting it in ships and storing it someplace?

Where did all of that precious oil go?

Ding Ding Ding!!!

 

[mesaserf]

Go back and correct it.

I can't unless someone knows a trick to doing it.

Show me irrefutable proof where oil was the reason for the Iraq invasion. Cite reputable sources, links, documents, personal knowledge, ect.

Well, I do remember someone in the Bush White House (I think it was Rumsfield) telling the press that the war would be paid off with Iraq oil. Other than numerous articles that you would just blow off as being leftest rants I would need a top secret clearance or a freedom of information act to do so. But then again you asked this so you can justify disregarding my comments and avoiding my questions. Fair enough.

Balls in your court. If you cannot provide proof for your allegations, I would recommend remaining quiet.

That's nice, I guess I'm the fool for trying to debate on flight info.

 

[mesaserf]

Mesa,
I would rather not do all your homework but I will give some help.

1) Study the Korean War and pay particular attention to Chinese involvement. Try and focus on why they became involved and what they were willing to sacrifice.

2) Study the history of Korea...emphasize on the geographical significance of it over the ages. I'll throw in "buffer state" to get you in the right direction.

3) Get a subscription to Strafor and study the N. Korean military and their likely strategies should we attack them. How much artillery, tanks and men do they have right next to Seoul. How many millions would die in the Korean hoard raining south? Then look at the social and economic state of N Korea. Is that something we really want to deal with should be conquer them?

4) Oil does have something to do with the Iraq invasion but regional stability and reducing terrorism have a large part. Here, I would like you to google which Arab countries helped us in our Iraq invasion. Aside of Iran and Lebanon, please tell me which Arab countries did not base our troops, weapons or allow overflight rights. Then ask yourself, if we were there to steal all the oil, would these countries be in favor of it? Perhaps Saddam was a destabilizing force there? Perhaps a democracy in an oil rich state with better than average education rates would help stabilize the area thus reduce terrorism.

5) Ask yourself this. Do you think Iran will get a nuclear weapon in the next couple years? If your answer is in the affirmative, what do you think Saddam would have done to counter that threat?

6) Last, read up on the term "state interest."

That is all!

Good points. Yes, If we did invade NK we would put a lot of civilians in harms way in Seoul. Not to mention the humanitarian problem that would develop in the aftermath. Also the Chinese response and/or involvement is a big factor. I think NK will just collapse on its own. Then the US and China will have to pick up the pieces.

Kuwait and Saudi Arabia were the major suppliers of bases for the invasion. Both have been in our pockets for years. We allowed Saddam to stay in power for years because he was a counter balance force against Iran. We played both sides against each other during the Iran-Iraq war to ensure neither side gained the upper hand. It only got out of control when Saddam invaded Kuwait. We could not allow him to become too strong. Hence the first gulf war.

We left Saddam in power because Bush Sr. knew Iraq was a tribal/religious mess that could spin out of control. Only later under Bush Jr. did Dick and Rummy decided that we could invade Iraq on the cheap and get control of those oil reserves. The rest is history.

Could Saddam have done something to counter the threat of a nuclear Iran? No. But let me ask you this. Did Iran begin its nuclear arms building, and then accelerated it because of the Iraq invasion? Or was it inevitable because of its increasing wealth and power?

If we cannot force a regime change in Iran with political pressure I think we will eventually have boots on the ground.

Who knows. Again, good points.

 

[mesaserf]

Ding Ding Ding!!!

Um.. Unless I missed something would not the oil still in the ground be considered oil reserves? You do know the stuff keeps pretty good while under ground, right?

Just asking.

P.S. It's been fun fellas but I have to sign off. I have a busy few days coming up and I have to get packed.

Peace out.

 

[Mamma]

Good points. Yes, If we did invade NK we would put a lot of civilians in harms way in Seoul. Not to mention the humanitarian problem that would develop in the aftermath. Also the Chinese response and/or involvement is a big factor. I think NK will just collapse on its own. Then the US and China will have to pick up the pieces.

Kuwait and Saudi Arabia were the major suppliers of bases for the invasion. Both have been in our pockets for years. We allowed Saddam to stay in power for years because he was a counter balance force against Iran. We played both sides against each other during the Iran-Iraq war to ensure neither side gained the upper hand. It only got out of control when Saddam invaded Kuwait. We could not allow him to become too strong. Hence the first gulf war.

We left Saddam in power because Bush Sr. knew Iraq was a tribal/religious mess that could spin out of control. Only later under Bush Jr. did Dick and Rummy decided that we could invade Iraq on the cheap and get control of those oil reserves. The rest is history.

Could Saddam have done something to counter the threat of a nuclear Iran? No. But let me ask you this. Did Iran begin its nuclear arms building, and then accelerated it because of the Iraq invasion? Or was it inevitable because of its increasing wealth and power?

Who knows. Again, good points.

Nice post. Much better grasp. But, aside of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, you forgot to mention Bahrain, Qatar, UAE, Oman, Syria, Turkey, most of Europe and Eastern Europe. All had a hand in getting rid of Saddam.

Good point on Iran and their nuclear ambitions. I don't know the answer. I think they have always wanted a nuke so they could be a major player in the region vs western powers. A nuclear Iran and non Nuclear Iraq would have been an out of balance situation there so there is no way Saddam would have not tried to acquire one.

I still don't see where we are controlling any oil reserves. We are not paying for the war with oil nor are we stealing it. I think we should charge them in the form of oil and we should take some for a certain amount of time. But who am I to make that call.

Thanks for the back and forth.