15 Sep 15
Trump: We shoulda kept Iraq's oil!
I love this Guy. This is what I have posted before as the mistake G. W. Bush made by not paying for the war with the Oil from Iraq. I said this before that Bush's main mistake was listening to the complaints of the liberal Democrats who said he was only going into Irag for the oil. Bush tried to pretend he was above such things and put us deep in debt in the process. If we are going to do something we have to do it all out and that means getting the spoils of war to pay for it just like ISIS is doing. Trump is right, we have stupid leaders.
15 Sep 15
Originally posted by RJHindshe is certainly the most interesting politician to date.
Trump: We shoulda kept Iraq's oil!
[youtube]ikF9V91Lp0A[/youtube]
I love this Guy. This is what I have posted before as the mistake G. W. Bush made by not paying for the war with the Oil from Iraq. I said this before that Bush's main mistake was listening to the complaints of the liberal Democrats who said he was only going into Irag for the oil. B ...[text shortened]... he spoils of war to pay for it just like ISIS is doing. Trump is right, we have stupid leaders.
Originally posted by RJHindsA "Christian" in favor of theft now. Those "spoils of war" belong to the Iraqi people. If you and Trump are proposing we wage war merely to steal other people's stuff, then you are no better than common criminals.
Trump: We shoulda kept Iraq's oil!
[youtube]ikF9V91Lp0A[/youtube]
I love this Guy. This is what I have posted before as the mistake G. W. Bush made by not paying for the war with the Oil from Iraq. I said this before that Bush's main mistake was listening to the complaints of the liberal Democrats who said he was only going into Irag for the oil. B ...[text shortened]... he spoils of war to pay for it just like ISIS is doing. Trump is right, we have stupid leaders.
Originally posted by no1marauderUnder Saddam, or under ISIS, "the Iraqi people" never shared in the wealth generated by the oil. That's a strawman.
A "Christian" in favor of theft now. Those "spoils of war" belong to the Iraqi people. If you and Trump are proposing we wage war merely to steal other people's stuff, then you are no better than common criminals.
15 Sep 15
Originally posted by normbenignFunny how Obama is unwilling to admit that the core of ISIS is really remnants of Saddam's government.
Under Saddam, or under ISIS, "the Iraqi people" never shared in the wealth generated by the oil. That's a strawman.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/04/21/what-saddam-gave-isis.html
16 Sep 15
Originally posted by no1marauderWe would be just extracting the pay due to cover the expenses of freeing the people from a ruthless dictator. Seems fair to me. 😏
A "Christian" in favor of theft now. Those "spoils of war" belong to the Iraqi people. If you and Trump are proposing we wage war merely to steal other people's stuff, then you are no better than common criminals.
16 Sep 15
Originally posted by normbenignHardly. A goodly portion of the oil wealth under Saddam was used for.social welfare, infrastructure and other things that benefited the Iraqi people.
Under Saddam, or under ISIS, "the Iraqi people" never shared in the wealth generated by the oil. That's a strawman.
In any event, those resources belong to them not thieves from other countries.
Originally posted by no1marauderWe could have easily taken our fair share as their debt to us for gaining their freedom for them and still have plenty for themselves. It could have been done if it were not for people like you in the Democrat Party that made out like it would be an evil thing to do. Those people could have had a wonderful life if not for you and your elk. 😏
Hardly. A goodly portion of the oil wealth under Saddam was used for.social welfare, infrastructure and other things that benefited the Iraqi people.
In any event, those resources belong to them not thieves from other countries.
16 Sep 15
Originally posted by RJHindsIsn't that the same as the British claiming their fair share of taxes in order to govern and protect the American colonies?
We could have easily taken our fair share as their debt to us for gaining their freedom for them and still have plenty for themselves. It could have been done if it were not for people like you in the Democrat Party that made out like it would be an evil thing to do. Those people could have had a wonderful life if not for you and your elk. 😏
16 Sep 15
Originally posted by robbie carrobieNot really because the British were taking taxes for doing nothing. The colonists were complaining about taxation without representation. That is why they said "No Taxation Without Representation." 😏
Isn't that the same as the British claiming their fair share of taxes in order to govern and protect the American colonies?
16 Sep 15
Originally posted by no1marauderLike financing Abu Grab where lots of Iraqis were tortured.
Hardly. A goodly portion of the oil wealth under Saddam was used for.social welfare, infrastructure and other things that benefited the Iraqi people.
In any event, those resources belong to them not thieves from other countries.
16 Sep 15
Originally posted by normbenignThat's a strange place to bring up while suggesting the moral superiority of US invaders and thus their entitlement to steal the resources of the Iraqi people.
Like financing Abu Grab where lots of Iraqis were tortured.
Your claim was that the Iraqi people didn't share in any of the benefits of the oil wealth prior to the US invasion. Surely you know that is mistaken. And even if it wasn't, it would hardly justify foreigners coming in and forcibly stealing their oil.
16 Sep 15
Originally posted by no1marauderDon't make the mistake of equating me with RJHinds or his arguments. Saddam Hussein was no angelic and benevolent leader. The crowds cheering as his statue toppled testified to that. That doesn't equate to "superiority of US invaders and thus their entitlement to steal the resources of the Iraqi people."
That's a strange place to bring up while suggesting the moral superiority of US invaders and thus their entitlement to steal the resources of the Iraqi people.
Your claim was that the Iraqi people didn't share in any of the benefits of the oil wealth prior to the US invasion. Surely you know that is mistaken. And even if it wasn't, it would hardly justify foreigners coming in and forcibly stealing their oil.
With the withdrawal of US peacekeeping forces the Sunnis (ISIS) gained power to attack both Iraqi cities and parts of Syrian, killing Shia, Coptic Christians, and anyone else who opposed them. Was it our place to invade or keep the peace in the first place? I think not.
Originally posted by normbenignThat is a non sequitur. I never claimed Saddam was anything but a tyrannical dictator. I merely pointed out that much of the oil wealth did flow into programs beneficial to the Iraqi people; most dictators know enough to provide some benefits to the People.
Don't make the mistake of equating me with RJHinds or his arguments. Saddam Hussein was no angelic and benevolent leader. The crowds cheering as his statue toppled testified to that. That doesn't equate to "superiority of US invaders and thus their entitlement to steal the resources of the Iraqi people."
With the withdrawal of US peacekeeping forces th ...[text shortened]... who opposed them. Was it our place to invade or keep the peace in the first place? I think not.
US forces were occupiers and invaders, not "peacekeeping forces". The levels of violence in Iraq during the US occupation far exceeded anything that had happened in that country's existence (at least in recent decades). Whether anything like ISIS would have developed or been as strong as it became absent the US invasion and occupation is unclear at best.
Of course, I agree with the last sentence.
EDIT: So far as I know, every single Republican candidate has expressed the belief in continuing and expanding the US military's role in the Middle East, most insisting on the introduction of ground troops into both Iraq and Syria. A vote for any Republican candidate is a vote for more war.