Originally posted by bbarrI used to think it was just for the oil.
The answer to that question is that it is in our economic interests to put into power an Iraqi regime that will be sympathetic to our need for oil.
Now I don't think it's just that.
One by one the enemies of Israel fall.
Why does the US do the Israeli's dirty work? Their army is already one of the biggest in the world, the have chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, the can look after themselves.
Originally posted by bbarrThe thing that confuses me is why, if it is about oil, why Iraqi oil? It makes more sense to attack Canada because it is closer and we get more oil from them. Plus it would be a nicer country to occupy. So logically it does not make sense to me that we invaded Iraq for oil. Kirk
No I wouldn't have said something similar if we invaded and occupied another country. 'You gotta start somewhere' doesn't constitute an argument, it's just an excuse not to think. There are reasons behind the choice of Iraq, I given you the actual motivation behind the invasion and occupation. Unless you can come up with a reason to think that oil had n ...[text shortened]... is that we desire the oil. This point is very easy to grasp, if you would just think about it.
Originally posted by Vargonce they're done with the little countries, america, britain and the rest of the coalition will walk up Israel and say" every time we've said this to a country so far, they've either disarmed, or weve destroyed them, so disarm or be destroyed". and hope it works.
One by one the enemies of Israel fall.
Why does the US do the Israeli's dirty work? Their army is already one of the biggest in the world, the have chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, the can look after themselves.
but if we are not going into syria next where are we going?? korea?
Originally posted by kirksey957The way things are going, it wouldn't surprise me if they did!!
The thing that confuses me is why, if it is about oil, why Iraqi oil? It makes more sense to attack Canada because it is closer and we get more oil from them. Plus it would be a nicer country to occupy. So logically it does not make sense to me that we invaded Iraq for oil. Kirk
But, the US are not unwilling to pay for the oil, they don't want to steal it, just have a cooperative seller.
Originally posted by kirksey957acualy america already has a mandate stating that canada must supply america with (dont know how many) units of oil per year. Also by "law" Canada must supply the american west with 100's of gallons of water a year.
The thing that confuses me is why, if it is about oil, why Iraqi oil? It makes more sense to attack Canada because it is closer and we get more oil from them. Plus it would be a nicer country to occupy. So logically it does not make sense to me that we invaded Iraq for oil. Kirk
Originally posted by nktwildI have a prediction. Kim Jong Il will completely disarm and join a monastic order before we ask Israel to disarm. Never going to happen. Kirk
once they're done with the little countries, america, britain and the rest of the coalition will walk up Israel and say" every time we've said this to a country so far, they've either disarmed, or weve destroyed them, so disarm or be destroyed". and hope it works.
but if we are not going into syria next where are we going?? korea?
- Joined
- 20 Feb 02
- Moves
- 58336
Originally posted by nktwildReally? They may have a contract but I do not know about law.! The US in not in a position where it can enforce its own internal laws upon sovereign states yet is it?
acualy america already has a mandate stating that canada must supply america with (dont know how many) units of oil per year. Also by "law" Canada must supply the american west with 100's of gallons of water a year.
Andrew
1 edit
Originally posted by latex bishopi think(i reaqd this stuff along time ago and forgotten alot of the detail) it was part of a peace deal between america and france, part of the contract states that stoping the water transfer is a declaration of war. as far as i know this was never changed
Really? They may have a contract but I do not know about law.! The US in not in a position where it can enforce its own internal laws upon sovereign states yet is it?
Andrew
Originally posted by nktwildIt is the least Canada can do to help keep our golf courses green since a Canadian has won the Masters. 😉 Kirk
acualy america already has a mandate stating that canada must supply america with (dont know how many) units of oil per year. Also by "law" Canada must supply the american west with 100's of gallons of water a year.
Originally posted by kirksey957Kir, let me tell you that Iraq has more oil (in storage or reserves) than us, canada mexico and many others countries together, thats the reason. Also atacking a country with problems and enemies like iraq is easier, because doesnt have democracy, this is something that facilitate the justification for the actack.
The thing that confuses me is why, if it is about oil, why Iraqi oil? It makes more sense to attack Canada because it is closer and we get more oil from them. Plus it would be a nicer country to occupy. So logically it does not make sense to me that we invaded Iraq for oil. Kirk
Originally posted by belgianfreakhttp://www.iraqbodycount.net
How many people died or were seriously wounded in the invasion? Can we take a number of 5000? (there is no official figure - the US has announced thet they "don't do body counts" ).
Maybe they're not 100% accurate, but at least they explain their methodology.