do USA taked oil of irak?

[<RJMC>]

is just that I hav hear that are many conspiracy theoryes about that bush attached irak to get theyr oil

but the true I didnt hear anything that support that so maybe thats was all fake


I ask this cuz here in my country the m********er of our president us making like some propaganda saying that USA want "to take our resources" when the truth USA looks like they dont want this piece of shit we call president to goverment the country,but still I will not anoy you whit the crapy comunisn that is happening here

 

[Eg.]

we would have taken iran or saudi arabia, they have more. its just lies

 

[bliink]

I know english isnt your main language, but you should read over your words a little more carefully before you submit a thread.

 

[Calanen]

The oil thing is just a furphy of the left. Saying that the USA only intervenes overseas when oil is involved is just rubbish.It is not bourne out by history or the facts.

And certainly, the USA was in a much better position to take the oil fields in 1992, but it did not leaving Saddam in power.

The USA just wanted Saddam out of the way.

 

[Scoobnfl]

is just that I hav hear that are many conspiracy theoryes about that bush attached irak to get theyr oil

but the true I didnt hear anything that support that so maybe thats was all fake


I ask this cuz here in my country the m********er of our president us making like some propaganda saying that USA want "to take our resources" when the truth USA looks like they dont want this piece of shit we call president to goverment the country,but still I will not anoy you whit the crapy comunisn that is happening here

Having lived in Venezuela briefly in the early 90's I sympathize with you and your nations plight. Venezuela is beautiful and filled with wonderful and kind people. Hopefully there will be a remedy to Chavez and his reign of insanity.

 

[mabufo]

More than half our oil supplies come fromn inside our country. That is why I like bush - because he is drilling in Alaska... We cannot rely on the middle east for something that we need so much, because they will control us with it; though becoming somewhat self sufficient is the right way to go... it is not always the easiest.

The rumors of the war being for oil were all lies. Really and truly.

Though I cannot say I know what you are going through.. You need to roll with the punches as we say here, meaning don't give up... keep the faith matey.. keep the faith.

 

[CptStern]

it was never about taking the oil but controlling it

More than half our oil supplies come fromn inside our country

no:

"55-60% of US consumption is imported at a cost of $50 billion+ per year, amounting to the largest single element of our trade deficit"

 

[brink's]

They could have purchased the oil for 1/3 of what it cost to actually go to war with Iraq.

 

[CptStern]

control of the second largest oil producing country is far more lucrative

 

[VirusType2]

Im sorry I don't know much about politics and If the US was doing it for oil -which I highly doubt - they wouldn't let it be known.

Anyway I can't see anything supporting this becuase our economy has been ****ed up ever since the world trade center attacks and since we went to war

We are not richer- in fact we are poorer, and all americans are paying almost 100% more for oil and gasoline ever since - and people in the know say its never going to go back to the way it was. So In my opinion - IRAQ owes us for saving their asses from Sadam and helping to fix thier country.

 

[brink's]

I'm not defending the war at all, I just think the US had other motives besides oil. - nagative ones

 

[VirusType2]

it was never about taking the oil but controlling it



no:

"55-60% of US consumption is imported at a cost of $50 billion+ per year, amounting to the largest single element of our trade deficit"

Agreed. controll.

I think sadam was selling oil for arms(military weapons) and things like that - I don't think we(USA) liked that idea very much

 

[mabufo]

it was never about taking the oil but controlling it

I'd like to see you go and back that one up.

As for where are oil comes from.. I have read differently.

 

[CptStern]

see, i think this is what confuses people ...the american public stand to gain nothing from war in iraq, they will see none of the benefits (no lower gas prices, if anything it's an excuse to raise prices) It's companies like this that are war profiteers:

Boeing

Lockheed Martin

Northrop Grumman

General Dynamics

Raytheon

United Technologies

Halliburton

General Electric

Science Applications International Corporation

CSC/ DynCorp



..it's all part of the military-industrial complex


this is a good start if you'd like to find out more

 

[Tr0n]

see, i think this is what confuses people ...the american public stand to gain nothing from war in iraq, they will see none of the benefits (no lower gas prices, if anything it's an excuse to raise prices) It's companies like this that are war profiteers:

Boeing

Lockheed Martin

Northrop Grumman

General Dynamics

Raytheon

United Technologies

Halliburton

General Electric

Science Applications International Corporation

CSC/ DynCorp



..it's all part of the military-industrial complex


this is a good start if you'd like to find out more

Also to add on to that...another reason is for more political control in the middle east.Now what comes from it I don't know...

 

[CptStern]

I'd like to see you go and back that one up.

simple, while baghdad was being looted guess which building was gaurded night and day?

As for where are oil comes from.. I have read differently.

well then you should be able to provide a source

 

[mabufo]

I read the headline of the article stern.. I almost pissed my pants I laughed so hard.

EDIT: the last link you posted...

 

[mabufo]

I think that picture is bogus.

 

[VirusType2]

this is a good start if you'd like to find out more

This smells like corruption in the US government

 

[CptStern]

I think that picture is bogus.

no it's not



http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?ObjectID=3401035

http://www.ccmep.org/2003_articles/Iraq/042103_us_bars_access_to_oil_ministry.htm

 

[mabufo]

well then you should be able to provide a source

I could pull conservative sources out of my ass just like you do the liberal ones stern... but where will that get us?


As for the vice president... Him having left the company 5 years ago.. and 3 years before that piece was written really establishes that there is no argument to be had. He left to become Bush's running mate. There was no war when he joined up with Bush. So how does Haliburton's doings have anything to do with anything? They don't.

Contractors will find work where work is needed. That simple.

 

[mabufo]

no it's not



http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?ObjectID=3401035

http://www.ccmep.org/2003_articles/Iraq/042103_us_bars_access_to_oil_ministry.htm

Well, like you posted earlier sterno my buddy... Oil comes from the middle east... nowonder they don't want people wrecking the administrative building - because the world runs on oil every single country needs it... and the middle east has it... so I think it's a damn good think we protected the office building where that stuff is all at.. it's people like you, the feel good liberals, who twist it into something totally insane.

 

[<RJMC>]

and USA get some benefits whit this war?

from what I know the reason was that they thought that are nuclear weapons there but there was not weapons

but something good comes from this war?

 

[VirusType2]

I could pull conservative sources out of my ass just like you do the liberal ones stern... but where will that get us?


As for the vice president... Him having left the company 5 years ago.. and 3 years before that piece was written really establishes that there is no argument to be had. He left to become Bush's running mate. There was no war when he joined up with Bush. So how does Haliburton's doings have anything to do with anything? They don't.

Contractors will find work where work is needed. That simple.

Well what I got out of that article was shame. It looks as if Cheney was boosting his own wallet and the wallets of ex-co-workers by going to war.

Was that the reason we went to war? Hell no. but it looks bad.

 

[CptStern]

I could pull conservative sources out of my ass just like you do the liberal ones stern... but where will that get us?


As for the vice president... Him having left the company 5 years ago.. and 3 years before that piece was written really establishes that there is no argument to be had. He left to become Bush's running mate. There was no war when he joined up with Bush. So how does Haliburton's doings have anything to do with anything? They don't.

Contractors will find work where work is needed. That simple.

really?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/30/iraq/main580998.shtml

http://www.veteransforpeace.org/Report_links_Iraq_103003.htm

http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2003/030926-iraq2.htm



"to the victor goes the spoils"

 

[mabufo]

Cheney doesn't work for the company stern.. you have no argument.. honestly.

 

[VirusType2]

and USA get some benefits whit this war?

from what I know the reason was that they thought that are nuclear weapons there but there was not weapons

but something good comes from this war?

Well the good things - Sadam is out of power. People in IRaq can vote now. Terrorists have alot less place to hide in iraq. Sadam can't screw with -i think it was food for oil program.

there is no chance for Sadam and iraq to develop nuclear weapons

 

[CptStern]

show me where I said he did

 

[VirusType2]

Cheney doesn't work for the company stern.. you have no argument.. honestly.

In the first article Stern posted it said that Cheney was still getting money from the company. however from the last link he posted

"As a company uniquely qualified to take on this difficult assignment, we will continue to bring all of our global resources to bear at this critical time in the Middle East. We have served the military for over 50 years and have no intention of backing down at this point," he said.

so they would have been involved anyway. but that is my point. i think I've lost everyone.

 

[mabufo]

Thats the thing. That's why the connection becomes null, and that's why your agument isn't an argument.

EDIT: I am addressing stern's post.. the one above this one^

 

[gh0st]

I hope we taked oil of Irak, we might as well.

Lowers our dependance upon disgusting organizations like OPEC, loosens their leash on us.

 

[mabufo]

The whole world is too dependant on oil in general. People behind companies like OPEC make it worse for everyone.

 

[PickledGecko]

Im sorry I don't know much about politics and If the US was doing it for oil -which I highly doubt - they wouldn't let it be known.

Anyway I can't see anything supporting this becuase our economy has been ****ed up ever since the world trade center attacks and since we went to war

We are not richer- in fact we are poorer, and all americans are paying almost 100% more for oil and gasoline ever since - and people in the know say its never going to go back to the way it was. So In my opinion - IRAQ owes us for saving their asses from Sadam and helping to fix thier country.

Owes? I don't recal anyone asking to be saved. Bush did it for his reasons, at no point were the Iraqis asked for their opinion. If I hit a burger out of your hand and then demanded money for "saving you" from fat, salt and cholesterol, would you pay?

 

[gh0st]

Owes? I don't recal anyone asking to be saved. Bush did it for his reasons, at no point were the Iraqis asked for their opinion. If I hit a burger out of your hand and then demanded money for "saving you" from fat, salt and cholesterol, would you pay?

Ha oh my. Its not like the Iraqi people had the choice to come ask America for liberation. You have your tongue cut off for speaking out against Saddams regime, I'm sure thats a risk the average Iraqi wants to take.

 

[PickledGecko]

But their freedom is theirs to die for, not my families. Brittish and US people have paid that price already, many years ago. It's not our responsiblity to die for Iraqi freedom, its the Iraqi's.

 

[mabufo]

The world can't change on it's own. Everyone needs to pitch in.

 

[gh0st]

But their freedom is theirs to die for, not my families. Brittish and US people have paid that price already, many years ago. It's not our responsiblity to die for Iraqi freedom, its the Iraqi's.

Not everyone has the ability to rise up against opressive regimes. America had the benefit of the will and the means, the Iraqi people had neither. Dont dare think the Iraq situation before our intervention was like pre revolutionary America.

 

[PickledGecko]

Well the good things

Sadam is out of power.

True

People in IRaq can vote now.

True

Terrorists have alot less place to hide in iraq.

Erm... But they wernt there in the first place. Are you thinking about Afghanistan?

Sadam can't screw with -i think it was food for oil program.

As I understood it, it was us (the West) screwing them (Iraq) out of a fair price for their oil and leaving them with very little food and medicines, to you know, stop kids from dieing of easily curable diseases.

there is no chance for Sadam and iraq to develop nuclear weapons

And how far had they gotten? NOWHERE! Because there was no such program.

 

[PickledGecko]

Not everyone has the ability to rise up against opressive regimes. America had the benefit of the will and the means, the Iraqi people had neither. Dont dare think the Iraq situation before our intervention was like pre revolutionary America.

But why Iraq. Why not any of the other Dictatorships. They all come with Human Right abuses. Why this particular Human Rights abuser? Why not remove him after the Gulf War? It can't just because he was a Dictator, there must be other motives.

 

[gh0st]

But why Iraq. Why not any of the other Dictatorships. They all come with Human Right abuses. Why this particular Human Rights abuser? Why not remove him after the Gulf War? It can't just because he was a Dictator, there must be other motives.

Because at the time the war was started there were eminent threats. The war is still completely justified on the basis of humanitarianism. As for not removing him during the gulf war, dont ask me. I would have removed him right then and there. One thing was that Papa Bush didnt feel that (correct me if I'm wrong) the juristiction the UN gave him went so far as to actually remove Saddam from power. No, its not cause he's a dictator. Its because human rights abuses proliferated under him and he ran a corrupt and disgusting regime which was a threat to his neighbors.

BTW google oil for food, I'm not sure you completely understand it. It wasnt 'the west' it was western EUROPE as well as the UN administration.