ScubaDoo said:Originally Posted by Tarball
Last I checked history, Iraq invaded Kuwait...and that lead to a war you suppoted?
Goodness, I realize your hatred for Bush is deep but now you are really contradicting your positions with almost every post.
Im not contradicting myself, Its wrong to Invade another country for its resources. Saddam was wrong for the Invasion.
So why do you think its OK for us to Invade Iraq for its resources.
If Iraq didn't have its massive oil reserves, we would not be in Iraq.
Your vanity holds you in contempt of the truth.
Tarball said:Originally Posted by ScubaDoo
Im not contradicting myself, Its wrong to Invade another country for its resources. Saddam was wrong for the Invasion.
So why do you think its OK for us to Invade Iraq for its resources.
If Iraq didn't have its massive oil reserves, we would not be in Iraq.
Your vanity holds you in contempt of the truth.
That's not the only contradiction you've posted...
Moving on;
We don't believe we went into Iraq for it's resources. The fact that we've been there for years now and haven't confiscated a single drop of oil tends to lend credence to that...
You're wrong about us going into Iraq. Afghanistan is proof we don't need natural resources to go after terrorists or terror sponsoring regimes.
Tarball said:Originally Posted by ScubaDoo
Im not contradicting myself, Its wrong to Invade another country for its resources. Saddam was wrong for the Invasion.
So why do you think its OK for us to Invade Iraq for its resources.
If Iraq didn't have its massive oil reserves, we would not be in Iraq.
Your vanity holds you in contempt of the truth.
Funny earlier you said it was wrong to preemptively invade anyone. We Iraq didn't invade us why should we have been engaged in the first installment of the gulf war.
stdreb27 said:Originally Posted by Tarball
Funny earlier you said it was wrong to preemptively invade anyone. We Iraq didn't invade us why should we have been engaged in the first installment of the gulf war.
He also said we were attacked for spending too much on our military and that we should spend "defensively" as I recall.
1journeyman said:Originally Posted by Tarball
That's not the only contradiction you've posted...
Moving on;
We don't believe we went into Iraq for it's resources. The fact that we've been there for years now and haven't confiscated a single drop of oil tends to lend credence to that...
You're wrong about us going into Iraq. Afghanistan is proof we don't need natural resources to go after terrorists or terror sponsoring regimes.
We can't steal the oil, all oil must be sold under & thru law. The oil belongs to the Iraq people. So therefor we can't "just take it". But, what we can do is dictate what price we buy it at & how its disrupted. That is why we are there! To secure the reserves for our best interests. The Iraq leaders must agree to our terms of Price to be bought & distribution. & they are not doing it.
That's why the oil isn't moving out of Iraq. The people of Iraq are refusing our demands of the oil.
ScubaDoo said:Originally Posted by Tarball
You posted that spending money for the militray will lead to war and attack.
Under your theory..there is no need to spend a penny becuase we will be left alone.
Now you are saying, we need money to defend our baorders.....but yet, if we do not spend we will not be attacked..so why spend?
I'm simply trying to follow the logic or lack thereof.
Now, it appears it is your position that we somehow can only spend on defensive weapons and this is okay. Can you please define these weapons?
If I say to you, I'm going to buy a hand gun to protect my home. But i use it rob my neighbor in his home.
What would you say I bought the hand gun for?
Tarball said:
Originally Posted by 1journeyman
We can't steal the oil, all oil must be sold under & thru law. The oil belongs to the Iraq people. So therefor we can't "just take it". But, what we can do is dictate what price we buy it at & how its disrupted. That is why we are there! To secure the reserves for our best interests. The Iraq leaders must agree to our terms of Price to be bought & distribution. & they are not doing it.
That's why the oil isn't moving out of Iraq. The people of Iraq are refusing our demands of the oil.
Tarball, where do you get your info? Seriously?
First off, Iraq is a founding member of OPEC. So much for us regulating at what price they sell oil at.![]()
Second: "Iraq’s inability to secure crude pipelines in the north has meant that exports are generally routed through the southern port of Basrah. According to IRMO/ITAO, crude oil exports have fallen from a post-war high of around 2.0 million bbl/d in 2004, to an average of 1.5 million bbl/d in 2006. However, there is some marginal improvement recently mainly due to the intermittent ability to export crude through a northern pipeline, and improved loading capabilities in Basrah. In June 2007, Iraq issued its first tender in almost six months to sell Kirkuk oil. Iraq’s oil exports are under the domain of the Iraqi parastatal State Oil Marketing Organization (SOMO). The majority of oil exports go to refineries in Asia, including China and India. ..."
So they have refused to sell their oil huh? Better hurry and tell them that. Cause looks to me like they are selling a heck of a lot, primarily to India and China.
Tarball said:Originally Posted by ScubaDoo
If I say to you, I'm going to buy a hand gun to protect my home. But i use it rob my neighbor in his home.
What would you say I bought the hand gun for?
At then time of militray spending...you cannot determine a tank that is used for defense or offense..can you?
Besides, it was you position that if we do not sepnd money on the military...we will not be attacked.
many military weapons cannot be differentiated between offense/defense.
At the time of purchase of the handgun, no one knows the reason for the purchase besides the purchaser.
I thought it was your position if we spent money on the military, then we will be attacked. It matters not in your exmaple the purpose for the purchase...becuase if it does not take place...we will not be attacked according to your earlier post.