Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: McCain Asserts Iraq Withdrawal Could Mean Civil War


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: McCain Asserts Iraq Withdrawal Could Mean Civil War Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: McCain Asserts Iraq Withdrawal Could Mean Civil War - 3/26/2008 11:31:06 PM   
cyberdude611


Posts: 2596
Joined: 5/7/2006
Status: offline 		You are correct that other sources of oil that at one time was too expensive and today makes more economic sense. The oil sands up in Canada has a capacity of an estimated 1.6 trillion barrels. That's enough oil to fuel the continent for a few hundred years. The problem though is the cost was at one point too expensive and it just rips up the environment.

What we can also do is look at coal. We have a TON of coal in this country. We have coal everywhere. And there is a process where we can turn coal into oil. The technology was developed by the Nazis, believe it or not. But the reason we dont do this is because it is expensive and the industry would need to be developed. 10 years ago it wasn't woth it. Now...it might be something to look into.

Of course the environmentalists would shit a chicken with any of these ideas. But maybe it would be worth it if it saves the lives of thousands of soldiers.

Fixing our relationship with Venezuela also wouldn't hurt. That country is loaded with oil and we already have the technology to refine it.

< Message edited by cyberdude611 -- 3/26/2008 11:33:50 PM >

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: McCain Asserts Iraq Withdrawal Could Mean Civil War - 3/27/2008 2:30:58 AM   
meatcleaver


Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline 		Chirac said before the invasion that an invasion would cause a civil war. Blair told the British ambassador, 'He (Chirac) just doesn't get it.' It seems he did.

The US is going to have to be in Iraq for decades to prevent a civil war, this is not news.

_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to celticlord2112)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: McCain Asserts Iraq Withdrawal Could Mean Civil War - 3/27/2008 2:36:16 AM   
meatcleaver


Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: celticlord2112

quote:

We actually invaded the wrong country. We should have invaded Iran. We now realize that mistake. That is why we are now waiting for an excuse to bomb Iran.

Invading Iraq was a mistake

Not invading Iran was not a mistake.



The US was kicked out of Iran in '79, now this might have been a humiliation but it's one the US really should get over but going on the Cuba example, its doubtful they will.

The US aren't the first imperial power to be humiliated and they aren't going to be the last but they seem to insist on holding on to their grudges for a record amount of time.

_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to celticlord2112)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: McCain Asserts Iraq Withdrawal Could Mean Civil War - 3/27/2008 6:18:15 AM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline 		You might want to take another look at that. Iraq had been putting thorns under everyones' saddles for a very long time, it was by far the most destabilizing force in the region. There was the Iran / Iraq war, in which poison gas was used not only on Iran but on his own people. Genocide against the Kurds and the Shia, mass murder and unspeakable torture on a scale that is mind-numbing to consider. The invasion, rape and pillaging of Kuwait. The targeting of coalition aircraft which were trying to enforce the 'no fly zone". Saddam's support of Palestinian terrorists, and many other grievous misdeeds highly  suspected by several major world powers. Saddam even wanted the world to believe he had WMDs because he feared the Iranians, and he thought they wouldn't attack Iraq if he kept the appearance up that he had them.

You say that Iraq was contained, but how well and for how long? Were we to patrol the skies over Iraq forever, getting shot at all the while? The oil-for-French-weapons program was only enriching corrupt United Nations officials and the French, Germans and others who were profiteering off the misery of the Iraqi people... as well as Saddam & Sons.

Usually I appreciate your posts but you couldn't be more wrong on this one.

quote:

ORIGINAL: celticlord2112

quote:

We are there to secure our national interests.

It is the ultimate perversion of foreign policy that US troops continued presence in Iraq is in this country's best interests, while the initial invasion was not.

Saddam Hussein was unquestionably contained and posed little immediate threat even to his neighbors in 2003.  He did not have weapons of mass destruction.  Iraq was not a destabilizing influence in the Middle East.

We need to stay in Iraq.  We should not have entered Iraq.



(emphasis added)

< Message edited by Sanity -- 3/27/2008 6:40:13 AM >

_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to celticlord2112)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: McCain Asserts Iraq Withdrawal Could Mean Civil War - 3/27/2008 6:57:40 AM   
kittinSol


Posts: 16926
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

Iran is the largest sponsor of terrorism in the world. They have some nice attractive oil fields next to Caspian Sea. They dont have control of their air nor their sea. They have US troops on both their borders. So yes....they are scared. And they should be scared. That's why they are trying to make friends with Russia and China. That's why they are trying to buy every defense system they can get their hands on. And that's why they are trying to get nuclear weapons.



Yep. Iran is desperately attempting to protect its sovereignty because the USA is ready to go in and steal their natural resources at the earliest opportunity. That you advocate this proudly and stridently is a sign of a particularly flawed moral character. Didn't they teach you that theft was bad, and illegal?

_____________________________



(in reply to cyberdude611)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: McCain Asserts Iraq Withdrawal Could Mean Civil War - 3/27/2008 7:22:43 AM   
seeksfemslave


Posts: 4011
Joined: 6/16/2006
Status: offline 		McCain says leaving Iraq might mean Civil War.
Seeks says that the Brits leaving Bhasra has resulted in the start of a civil conflict
Shia v Shia.
In today's news.

(in reply to kittinSol)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: McCain Asserts Iraq Withdrawal Could Mean Civil War - 3/27/2008 7:30:57 AM   
celticlord2112


Posts: 5732
Status: offline
quote:

You might want to take another look at that. Iraq had been putting thorns under everyones' saddles for a very long time, it was by far the most destabilizing force in the region. There was the Iran / Iraq war, in which poison gas was used not only on Iran but on his own people. Genocide against the Kurds and the Shia, mass murder and unspeakable torture on a scale that is mind-numbing to consider. The invasion, rape and pillaging of Kuwait. The targeting of coalition aircraft which were trying to enforce the 'no fly zone". Saddam's support of Palestinian terrorists, and many other grievous misdeeds highly suspected by several major world powers. Saddam even wanted the world to believe he had WMDs because he feared the Iranians, and he thought they wouldn't attack Iraq if he kept the appearance up that he had them.

You say that Iraq was contained, but how well and for how long? Were we to patrol the skies over Iraq forever, getting shot at all the while? The oil-for-French-weapons program was only enriching corrupt United Nations officials and the French, Germans and others who were profiteering off the misery of the Iraqi people... as well as Saddam & Sons.


In 2003, Iraq was not a problem in search of a solution.  Saddam was contained.  The military dimensions of the containment (e.g., the no-fly zones) were dirt cheap compared to the cost of the military presence the current situtation requires--cheap both in dollars and in lives lost.

Saddam did provide support to terrorist groups, yet perversely his support had a "keeping up with the Joneses" flavor:  The most notable group enjoying Iraq support at the time, Hamas, enjoys broad support througout the Arab world.  Of the other groups enjoying Saddam's aid, most were of questionable or declining influence in the Middle East.  Saddam did not aid Al-Quaeda directly, preferring the secular movements to the Islamic fundamentalist movements (there is evidence to indicate Saddam supported many groups also supported by Al-Quaeda, but this merely makes Al-Queada a coincidental Saddam "friend" rather than a committed one); Islamic fundamentalism, which is a destabilizing influence in the Middle East, was not backed by Saddam.

It is arguable that containment could not have been maintained indefinitely.  By the same token, neither can US combat forces be maintained in Iraq in their current configuration indefinitely.  Had containment broken down, it is exceedingly likely that Saddam would have become a grave and immediate threat in the Middle East, but it is also exceedingly likely that world opinion would have perceived him as such--the perception which was glaringly absent when Bush invaded in 2003. 

It is possible, perhaps even probable, that regime change was inevitable in Iraq.  However, it is undeniable that, in 2003, that question was far from settled, and by acting before it was settled, Bush alienated the international community rather than leading it.  The very best characterization that can be placed on the 2003 invasion is that it was premature. 


_____________________________



(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: McCain Asserts Iraq Withdrawal Could Mean Civil War - 3/27/2008 7:36:55 AM   
celticlord2112


Posts: 5732
Status: offline
quote:

Yep. Iran is desperately attempting to protect its sovereignty because the USA is ready to go in and steal their natural resources at the earliest opportunity. That you advocate this proudly and stridently is a sign of a particularly flawed moral character. Didn't they teach you that theft was bad, and illegal?

You are seriously proposing that it is acceptable for a nation to fund suicide bomb attacks--attacks on non-combatants, innocent women and children--because of a presumed predatory desire on the part of the United States?

Even if one accepts your indictment of the US--which I do not--terrorism is not "protecting sovereignty."  Terrorism is state-supported mass murder.


_____________________________



(in reply to kittinSol)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: McCain Asserts Iraq Withdrawal Could Mean Civil War - 3/27/2008 7:51:23 AM   
kittinSol


Posts: 16926
Status: offline 		It goes without saying that I find your interpretation of facts one-sided.

A few names, thrown into the pot: the CIA and al-Quaida, America and the IRA, support of the Mudjahidins against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan... Military coups throughout South America in the seventies... dodgy interventions in Central America... nobody's cleaner than snow here.

The power of might does not make one right.

_____________________________



(in reply to celticlord2112)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: McCain Asserts Iraq Withdrawal Could Mean Civil War - 3/27/2008 8:00:40 AM   
celticlord2112


Posts: 5732
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

It goes without saying that I find your interpretation of facts one-sided.

A few names, thrown into the pot: the CIA and al-Quaida, America and the IRA, support of the Mudjahidins against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan... Military coups throughout South America in the seventies... dodgy interventions in Central America... nobody's cleaner than snow here.

The power of might does not make one right.


How does any of what you have posted here serve as a moral justification for any government sponsoring a terrorist organization?

How does any of what you have posted here make "sovereignty" a valid justification for a government giving aid and comfort to a terrorist organization?

Please explain.  I really do wish to know how you answer these questions.


_____________________________



(in reply to kittinSol)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: McCain Asserts Iraq Withdrawal Could Mean Civil War - 3/27/2008 8:05:48 AM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline 		Any govt. we leave in place will resemble this one and WILL be CORRUPT.

Item: Iraq is pumping and selling 2.5 million bbls/day (should be 6.5 million/day) that brings in over $200 MILLION per DAY !! Where is ALL that money going ?

It isn't going into the country but Iraqi govt. principal's Swiss bank accounts. Until there is some integrity to these people who have in fact been in civil war for 2-3 years, there is little hope for Iraq regardless of our presence..

(in reply to celticlord2112)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: McCain Asserts Iraq Withdrawal Could Mean Civil War - 3/27/2008 8:11:17 AM   
DesertRat


Posts: 2774
Joined: 11/29/2004
From: NM/USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: celticlord2112
You are seriously proposing that it is acceptable for a nation to fund suicide bomb attacks--attacks on non-combatants, innocent women and children...

Why not? It's apparently acceptable for a nation to fund attacks that cause tens of thousands of non-combatant (innocent women and children) deaths...which we excuse as "collateral damage".

quote:

Even if one accepts your indictment of the US--which I do not--terrorism is not "protecting sovereignty."  Terrorism is state-supported mass murder.

Terrorism, in some cases, may be thinly veiled state-supported murder. Our methods, if one can call them that, in Iraq constitute blatant, in-your-face mass murder. Funded by me...us...the taxpayers...for the benefit of Parsons, Halliburton, and Blackwater, to name just a few. What's the real purpose of this shit? Who the fuck knows?

Welcome to the New American Century.

_____________________________

When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro--Hunter S. Thompson
It's crackers to slip a rozzer the dropsy in snide!--Chief Dead St. Knockout, 1933, Liverpool
Damn the crops. I'll only find peace at the end of a rope.--Winston Van Loo, 1911

(in reply to celticlord2112)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: McCain Asserts Iraq Withdrawal Could Mean Civil War - 3/27/2008 8:18:35 AM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline 		I think the point she's trying to make is the US isn't morally pure in regards to terrorism.

I'll be more blunt. Your nick indicates a high likelihood of Irish ancestry. I am part Irish as well and was a not infrequent visitor to real Irish bars in NYC, Boston and Chicago over the years. A lot of these places had a big jar at the end of the bar next to the tip jar for money for the "struggle." I don't know whether you did or did not donate money to the IRA but know that many of our cousins in the US did and our government turned a blind eye to that funding of international terrorists. Should the Brits have sent cruise missiles or other precision ordinance into those bars?

If the US really wanted to put a real hurt on international terrorist organizations Iran would be well down the target list. Syria is the target that needs the most urgent attention. The Bekka valley in syria is absolutely crawling with terrorist and their training camps. After dealing with Syria then you have to deal with the Saudi terror supporters before even considering Iran.

(in reply to celticlord2112)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: McCain Asserts Iraq Withdrawal Could Mean Civil War - 3/27/2008 8:22:50 AM   
kittinSol


Posts: 16926
Status: offline 		My initial comment was in response to cyberdude's immoral suggestion that as Iran was vulnerable, we ought to go in and take their petrol. He hardly even used terrorism as an excuse to go in there. I'm surprised you didn't jump on his bandwagon to question him :-) .

You say it's okay to go in and take their petrol because they "sponsor terrorism": I say it's never okay to invade a country on such spurrilous claims. This holier-than-thou stance on terrorism also makes me think that by your logic, the USA should have been invaded by the rest of the world a long, long time ago, considering their involvement with al-Quaida, the IRA, and some of the dodgiest regimes on the planet.

Have you forgotten that Baby Bush and his family slept with Bin Laden :-) ?

This predatorish view of the world is all fine and dandy until hypocrites try and make the rat race look like a moral battle. You sound dangerously like that's what you're trying to do: please reassure me that you haven't lost your way on the path to moral rectitude?

You think it's a good idea to lead into yet another fruitless war; I don't. I'd rather see my taxes went to fund education, healthcare and other unsexy things.

Fall prey to the government propaganda if it rocks your boat. Me, I'd rather bask in the knowledge that I know little of what is really going on  .


< Message edited by kittinSol -- 3/27/2008 8:34:40 AM >

_____________________________



(in reply to celticlord2112)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: McCain Asserts Iraq Withdrawal Could Mean Civil War - 3/27/2008 8:24:59 AM   
kittinSol


Posts: 16926
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Should the Brits have sent cruise missiles or other precision ordinance into those bars?



Now that I think of it, we should have... only joking  .

_____________________________



(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: McCain Asserts Iraq Withdrawal Could Mean Civil War - 3/27/2008 8:33:35 AM   
celticlord2112


Posts: 5732
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
I'll be more blunt. Your nick indicates a high likelihood of Irish ancestry. I am part Irish as well and was a not infrequent visitor to real Irish bars in NYC, Boston and Chicago over the years. A lot of these places had a big jar at the end of the bar next to the tip jar for money for the "struggle." I don't know whether you did or did not donate money to the IRA but know that many of our cousins in the US did and our government turned a blind eye to that funding of international terrorists. Should the Brits have sent cruise missiles or other precision ordinance into those bars?

The United States government never cut the IRA a check.  The United States government never gave the IRA a training facility.  The United States government never provided the IRA with intelligence on potential targets.

So no, the Brits should not have sent cruise missiles. 


_____________________________



(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: McCain Asserts Iraq Withdrawal Could Mean Civil War - 3/27/2008 8:47:54 AM   
celticlord2112


Posts: 5732
Status: offline 		Your argument appears to be summarized thus:

Because the U.S. has unclean hands regarding terrorism, it is morally acceptable for Iran, Iraq, or any state, to fund, support, and train terrorists to send suicide bombers into civilian targets in Israel, Lebanon, Spain, Indonesia, or any other country besides the United States.

That argument is very close to Mao Zedong's observation that political power flows from the barrel of a gun, and contradicts your earlier "might is not right" stance.




_____________________________



(in reply to kittinSol)
Profile   Post #: 37
RE: McCain Asserts Iraq Withdrawal Could Mean Civil War - 3/27/2008 8:53:20 AM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Should the Brits have sent cruise missiles or other precision ordinance into those bars?



Now that I think of it, we should have... only joking  .

Not to hijack this high quality discussion but why not? Everything I've ever read says the US Irish giving was where most of the IRA's money came from. With Irish-American pols protecting the practice a reasonable stance would have been to cut the legs out from under the IRA by dealing with the funding stream. Maybe not cruise missiles but arguably a few assasinations of those in the US funneling the money to Shin Fein and the IRA would have saved lives in the long run.

(in reply to kittinSol)
Profile   Post #: 38
RE: McCain Asserts Iraq Withdrawal Could Mean Civil War - 3/27/2008 8:56:57 AM   
kittinSol


Posts: 16926
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: celticlord2112

Your argument appears to be summarized thus:

Because the U.S. has unclean hands regarding terrorism, it is morally acceptable for Iran, Iraq, or any state, to fund, support, and train terrorists to send suicide bombers into civilian targets in Israel, Lebanon, Spain, Indonesia, or any other country besides the United States.



Yes and no. The USA have unclean hands. It's not morally acceptable for any country to sponsor terrorism, but as they do, I don't see why it should be okay for America to give the rest of the world lessons in morality.

quote:



That argument is very close to Mao Zedong's observation that political power flows from the barrel of a gun, and contradicts your earlier "might is not right" stance.



The above is so presposterous, I'll assume you said it as a joke :-) .



_____________________________



(in reply to celticlord2112)
Profile   Post #: 39
RE: McCain Asserts Iraq Withdrawal Could Mean Civil War - 3/27/2008 9:00:35 AM   
kittinSol


Posts: 16926
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Should the Brits have sent cruise missiles or other precision ordinance into those bars?



Now that I think of it, we should have... only joking  .


Not to hijack this high quality discussion but why not?



Britain was giving the United States a lesson in grandeur and nobility  .



_____________________________



(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: McCain Asserts Iraq Withdrawal Could Mean Civil War Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.125