War for Oil? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

rulemylife -> War for Oil? (6/30/2009 9:26:34 AM)

Sooo..............

We had two former oil company executives as President and Vice-President.

We invaded an oil-rich country for reasons that proved to be false.

We were promised the invasion would be be paid for out of the oil reserves of the Iraqis grateful for our liberating them, but instead the American taxpayers paid.

But it really wasn't about the oil.


Up for bid at Iraq oil auction: Uncertainty - Oil & energy

Return could make foreign companies billions, if contracts are honored

BAGHDAD - More than three decades after they were booted from the country by Saddam Hussein, international oil companies are poised for a return to Iraq where next week they will bid for a slice of the country's vast crude reserves.



willbeurdaddy -> RE: War for Oil? (6/30/2009 9:33:25 AM)

I see, so resuming international commerce and the economy of a country we liberated isn't appropriate? We should guard the oil fields and keep them from operating? Maybe we should divert them into a sink hole somewhere so nobody can get to them.

You make no sense.



FirmhandKY -> RE: War for Oil? (6/30/2009 9:39:50 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

I see, so resuming international commerce and the economy of a country we liberated isn't appropriate? We should guard the oil fields and keep them from operating? Maybe we should divert them into a sink hole somewhere so nobody can get to them.

You make no sense.


He doesn't have to. Religious beliefs rarely make logical sense.

Firm



Starbuck09 -> RE: War for Oil? (6/30/2009 10:52:14 AM)

 Rule my life do you think waging war for oil is wrong or are you just annoyed that the reasons given proved to be false?



Politesub53 -> RE: War for Oil? (6/30/2009 4:21:55 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Starbuck09

Rule my life do you think waging war for oil is wrong or are you just annoyed that the reasons given proved to be false?


Of course waging war for oil, or anything else is wrong. There is nothing wrong in protecting your own resources, stealing someone elses is another matter.



Starbuck09 -> RE: War for Oil? (6/30/2009 4:37:51 PM)

 Why do you think it's wrong though polite sub? There are plenty of people who think that the Iraq war was waged for oil but I can't help but notice that our oil consumption has risen rather than fallen in disgust.



Politesub53 -> RE: War for Oil? (6/30/2009 4:50:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Starbuck09

Why do you think it's wrong though polite sub? There are plenty of people who think that the Iraq war was waged for oil but I can't help but notice that our oil consumption has risen rather than fallen in disgust.


Youre kidding me right ? Why have laws at all ? Why not just go out and steal whatever we like ?

As for the point about Oil consumption, yeah youre right, to hell with those poor sods who got killed, as long as I can drive to the shops.




Starbuck09 -> RE: War for Oil? (6/30/2009 4:53:44 PM)

Well that's how the world works the stronger countries consolidate their power by exploiting those that are weaker.  That is exactly my point about oil consumption as well polite sub I wonder how many anti war activists would feel so moraly secure if next time they filled their car with petrol they instead imagined it was the blood of dead Iraqis?



philosophy -> RE: War for Oil? (6/30/2009 4:58:28 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Starbuck09

Well that's how the world works the stronger countries consolidate their power by exploiting those that are weaker. 


...it's also an open invitation to terrorism. If you can't face a bullying nations military face to face, you'll strike back any way you can.
The world you're appearing to defend is short sighted and unwise. The battlegrounds are shifting.......



Starbuck09 -> RE: War for Oil? (6/30/2009 5:00:46 PM)

 I disagree philosophy terrorism is nothing new it's simply different methods. The world and it's power mechanisms is  the same now as it has been for a good two thousand years.



Politesub53 -> RE: War for Oil? (6/30/2009 5:04:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Starbuck09

Well that's how the world works the stronger countries consolidate their power by exploiting those that are weaker.  That is exactly my point about oil consumption as well polite sub I wonder how many anti war activists would feel so moraly secure if next time they filled their car with petrol they instead imagined it was the blood of dead Iraqis?


Incredible, so being a stronger country justifies everything. Like Hitler for instance ?

As for the blood of Iraqis instead of oil remark, thats just comptemtible. Unless you think all the oil we use comes from Iraq.

So, your telling me if gang of blokes break into your home, and steal everything thats okay ? My bet is you will be straight on the phone dialling three nines.



Starbuck09 -> RE: War for Oil? (6/30/2009 5:09:10 PM)

 I didn't say being stronger justified anything polite sub I said that is how the world works. I disagree that the blood for oil remark is contemtible, why do you think we invaded that particular countery. Our present oil does not come from Iraq but that is irrelevant we do not have to be using iraqi oil to be benefiting from it. We have enormous contracts to exploit Iraqi oil wealth we benefit from it directly but people [including those who think it's wrong] can't bear to inconvenience our lives so no matter how loudly people pay lip service to the concept no war for oil they don't stop using it.
Of course I would ring the police if someone broke into my home just as the iraqi's fight our forces I don't deny them that right in any way.



Politesub53 -> RE: War for Oil? (6/30/2009 5:15:56 PM)

Starbuck my point is this. Why make international laws and disregard them when it suits ? Do you think thats okay because thats "How the world has always worked" ?

Frankly i would strive for something better.




Starbuck09 -> RE: War for Oil? (6/30/2009 5:21:29 PM)

 I think international law is a poor joke polite sub with weak states being the punchline. As soon as a country decides it cannot get what it wants by legal means it ignores law and proceeds as it sees fit as long as it is powerful enough that no one dares stop it. I think weaker states would be better of disregarding international law as well and rely on alliances alone to protect them. I don't particuarly like how the world works polite sub and if I thought there was a better way of doing things i would endorse it but I don't think there is a realistic mechanism for controlling powerful nations except for the threat economic, or military of other powerful entities. The only way I could see a hope for world peace would be to unite the world under a single government but the chances of that are so slim as to be fantasy.



Politesub53 -> RE: War for Oil? (6/30/2009 5:25:24 PM)

So stronger nations need not lead by example ?  I find that a very sad reflection on the state of world affairs.



Starbuck09 -> RE: War for Oil? (6/30/2009 5:33:46 PM)

 How can they lead by example unless there is agreement by all powerful countries? Otherwise you simply have some powerful countries running amok while others stand back and watch until they decide they are losing too much power and go to war with catastrophic consequences.



slaveboyforyou -> RE: War for Oil? (6/30/2009 5:35:57 PM)

We and your country, politesub have made it perfectly clear that the world's energy supplies would not be allowed to be held hostage.  We've made it clear that we would use force to protect and allow the free trade of the world's energy supplies.  It might not seem right.  But if you or I didn't have the police, the toughest guy in the neighborhood is going to take our stuff anytime it suits him.  As it stands right now, we don't have a world police force.  As for leading through example, are you kidding?  The collective forces of the West could turn the world into a global gulag if we felt like it.  But yet we restrain ourselves.  You don't think that's leading by example?



ThatDaveGuy69 -> RE: War for Oil? (6/30/2009 5:39:13 PM)

The real reason for the invasion of Iraq has nothing to do with oil.  It's all about the money.  When the US governament needs money it doesn't just print up more.  It borrowes it -at interest- from the Federal Reserve, an entity completely separate from the government.  The Fed is owned and operated by a handful on insanely wealthy individuals, none of whom were elected and none of whom have any responsibility to the US popultion at large.

All the other excuses for war are just excuses.  WW I, WW II, Korea, Viet Nam - they were all pushed on us by banking interests.  This is not to say that those who fought and died were fools.  Merely that there blood was bought and paid for many times over to the banking interests that hold the notes.

If Iraq were truly a ware for oil it really would have been paid for with Iraqi oil reserves.  But that won't ever happen.  Debt is what gives power over a nation.  Debt is what keeps every one of us in perpertual slavery.  Have a nice day.

~Dave



philosophy -> RE: War for Oil? (6/30/2009 5:43:44 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Starbuck09

I disagree philosophy terrorism is nothing new it's simply different methods. The world and it's power mechanisms is  the same now as it has been for a good two thousand years.


...you're wrong. And the reason you're wrong is nicely symbolised by the medium through which we're communicating. Doris Lessing once said that we were the first generation with access to all the books ever written. That was before the internet. We now don't just have access to all the books......we have access to a great percentage of all that's been written. More people have access to more information than ever before in the history of mankind.
Nowadays, one hacker could theoretically take down a bank from their bedroom. One person could put together a fuel air bomb. One person could learn how to make saron gas. It used to be that the knowledge to do that sort of thing was solely in the hands of governments or quasi-governmental institutions. Nowadays we can all do it, if sufficiently motivated.
One such motivation is a big powerful nation bullying the nation to which we belong.
The battlefield has changed. The old rules no longer wholly apply. Nations used to be able to bully with impunity if their military was capable enough......that is changing too.
The end result of the sort of approach you are advocating is a sort of permanent war on terrorism.....where the act of waging it ensures its longevity. Utterly unwise.



Starbuck09 -> RE: War for Oil? (6/30/2009 5:50:08 PM)

Again I disagree philosophy I believe you are conflating change in scale with change. There has always been a perpetual war on terrorism in one form or another. Every decade of every century has had groups, minorities, cults, religions e.t.c. that have propogated terror and in turn have been persecuted. The fact that the scope for death is greater does not mean that the fundamental dynamics of the world have changed. I would also point out that alot of fear of weapons of mass destruction linked with terrorism comes straight from the government to the media. Take the dirty bomb for instance, it is a nonsense weapon with no scientific basis, but the government is quite happy to let the media print horror stories as it keeps people frightened and malleable.



Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
4.711914E-02