How many times do I have to explain this. Making this an oil war would be HARD. Everyday we went into this war the oil fields were bombed, wether by us or by Iraqis. The current cost to replace and repair these oil fields has sky rocketed into the billions of dollars, thus meaning that these oil fields wont earn you any money for YEARS no time in Bushs presidency or whoevers next will not be able to benefit from this oil. People just don't want to admit that this wasn't a war for money.
military suicides
Started by tanka, Feb 21 2004 09:59 AM
50 replies to this topic
#21
Opals25
-
- Members
-
- 134 posts
Aiee!
- Location:Secret place
- Projects:Being a dick.
Posted 20 February 2004 - 12:56 AM
#22
MuDsHoVeLeR
-
- Project Team
-
- 350 posts
title available
Posted 20 February 2004 - 01:16 AM
That is the most ignorant reason for the war I've ever heard. While it can be used as a justification (the oil, that is), it is most definately not a reason for the conflict. Iraq's profit from selling the oil is just as great as our (and the rest of the world's uses for it). There's absolutely no way Iraq would shut off all oil trade, for their economy would plummit and they'd be in worse shape than they have been in the past decade. Even if they prohibited the sale of oil to the US, we'd still get it from the rest of the Arab Nations, and other nations who DID purchase it from Iraq would resell it to us for little to nothing more than what they purchased it for.
#23
DrPietro
-
- Members
-
- 181 posts
Old timer from Origin
- Location:Inside memory address ACF67BH
Posted 20 February 2004 - 02:00 AM
True 
#24
Guest_Tupac_*
Guest_Tupac_*
-
- Guests
Posted 20 February 2004 - 09:20 AM
Idiot, Its a long term investment.How many times do I have to explain this. Making this an oil war would be HARD. Everyday we went into this war the oil fields were bombed, wether by us or by Iraqis. The current cost to replace and repair these oil fields has sky rocketed into the billions of dollars, thus meaning that these oil fields wont earn you any money for YEARS no time in Bushs presidency or whoevers next will not be able to benefit from this oil. People just don't want to admit that this wasn't a war for money.
Read this :
A little thinking material
O, and civilian casualties unavoidable by war? What an idiotic statement.
DONT THROW CLUSTERBOMBS !!! That would make a big difference.
And Saddam killed civilians who opposed him. I dont see much difference with Bush :
He attacks countries that oppose him.
#25
Mongoose
-
- Hosted
-
- 785 posts
TFH rOCks
- Location:Australia
- OMG I'M MEMBER NUMBER 189
Posted 20 February 2004 - 09:35 AM
what about when you walk into a house and just shoot them while they are begging
thats what happend.
thats what happend.
#26
DrPietro
-
- Members
-
- 181 posts
Old timer from Origin
- Location:Inside memory address ACF67BH
Posted 20 February 2004 - 09:40 AM
Bush is so god damn gay, is swear to god he is, tupac is right it's a long term investment into iraqs untaped wealth, USA is greedy! and thats that!
#27
tanka
-
- Project Team
-
- 431 posts
title available
- Location:Australia
Posted 20 February 2004 - 10:04 AM
Find me a war/conflict where no civilians died.O, and civilian casualties unavoidable by war? What an idiotic statement.
DONT THROW CLUSTERBOMBS !!! That would make a big difference. thinking material[/URL]
#28
DrPietro
-
- Members
-
- 181 posts
Old timer from Origin
- Location:Inside memory address ACF67BH
Posted 20 February 2004 - 10:06 AM
OMFG Tanka did you not here what he said?, did you even read the articial he linked? -_-
#29
Mongoose
-
- Hosted
-
- 785 posts
TFH rOCks
- Location:Australia
- OMG I'M MEMBER NUMBER 189
Posted 20 February 2004 - 10:27 AM
dose that mean medevil day battels to.Find me a war/conflict where no civilians died.
#30
tanka
-
- Project Team
-
- 431 posts
title available
- Location:Australia
Posted 20 February 2004 - 10:48 AM
The article had no relevance to civilian deaths. I wouldn't believe it anyway. Fox news is more reliable than that article, Which goes to show how reliable it must be.. :rolo:OMFG Tanka did you not here what he said?, did you even read the articial he linked? -_-
dose that mean medevil day battels to.
Medieval battles would have probably being worse!
#31
Mongoose
-
- Hosted
-
- 785 posts
TFH rOCks
- Location:Australia
- OMG I'M MEMBER NUMBER 189
Posted 20 February 2004 - 11:13 AM
not all. 
#32
Opals25
-
- Members
-
- 134 posts
Aiee!
- Location:Secret place
- Projects:Being a dick.
Posted 20 February 2004 - 04:10 PM
Americas civil war is probably the closest I can think of to casultie free. Civillians anyways.
There was only 1 if memory serves me right.
And lets see, you linked to a MESSAGE BOARD, everyone there could no apsolutley nothing, and if the way all the democrats are acting, there leaving Iraq as soon as possible and forgeting all of it, a real long term investemnt when its all just gonna disapear in a year. :rolo:
There was only 1 if memory serves me right.
And lets see, you linked to a MESSAGE BOARD, everyone there could no apsolutley nothing, and if the way all the democrats are acting, there leaving Iraq as soon as possible and forgeting all of it, a real long term investemnt when its all just gonna disapear in a year. :rolo:
#33
MuDsHoVeLeR
-
- Project Team
-
- 350 posts
title available
Posted 21 February 2004 - 04:12 AM
what about when you walk into a house and just shoot them while they are begging
thats what happend
It's a good thing you were there to verify that. No, really.
And that article, about 'Isn't that strange'... is ridiculous. As the son of an ExxonMobil employee, you learn some interesting facts that companies and the public tend to overlook. Now, I'll give you this... it's true that the oil in Alaska/Canada would last us about 75 years. It's also true that more than 90% (I believe, I can find you the graphs later) of the world's power comes from oil. Given that, less than .1% of the world's power comes from wind generators and solar power. Wood creates more power than both of those, I believe. Man I really need those charts to clarify for me. Anyway, those are some reasons that the war could be justified in the name of oil. The previous argument I posted, however, outlines why the war WASN'T fought for oil, however. Now, I can't tell you why it WAS fought, I don't think anyone can... but until you know what people of 'higher authority' know, I say you let them make the decisions.
#34
Mongoose
-
- Hosted
-
- 785 posts
TFH rOCks
- Location:Australia
- OMG I'M MEMBER NUMBER 189
Posted 21 February 2004 - 10:02 AM
thats just dumb starting a war so you can support other places.I really think this war was about getting support in the middle east. Out of all the countries in that area, Iraq would have been the most anti-US around. If they get rid of anti-US attitudes, terrorism will fall.
#35
tanka
-
- Project Team
-
- 431 posts
title available
- Location:Australia
Posted 21 February 2004 - 12:16 PM
What? 
#36
MuDsHoVeLeR
-
- Project Team
-
- 350 posts
title available
Posted 21 February 2004 - 05:56 PM
No Mongoose. His point was that they started they war to gain support from Arab nations... not to give support to Arab nations...
#37
Paranoid
-
- New Members
-
- 321 posts
title available
Posted 28 February 2004 - 03:47 AM
Do any of you even remember what this topic was originaly about?
#38
DrPietro
-
- Members
-
- 181 posts
Old timer from Origin
- Location:Inside memory address ACF67BH
Posted 01 March 2004 - 04:50 PM
Yes; it was about military personal killing themselfs and LT.DOWNSLAYER asking why. 
#40
Guest_Seamus_*
Guest_Seamus_*
-
- Guests
Posted 08 May 2004 - 01:45 AM
You freaking imbeciles. The British did worlds worse to Ireland than America is doing to Iraq. Heres something to prove it: All intentional casualties in Iraq were precieved as threats by the sometimes overly jumpy soldiers. You'd be nervous too if you were fighting an enemy that does not follow the rules! On the other hand, Britain conquered Ireland about 800 years ago. Then, the killing started. This went on for centuries, with Catholics being dragged out of their houses and murdered every week. It pinnacled when Britain withheld food during the Great Hunger, starving millions of Irish to death. A generation or two later, in 1916, a select few Irish citizens said they had enough and rebelled in Dublin city. Instead of negotiating, instead of using the police action needed to destroy the understrengthed rising, they brought in troops FROM THE FRONTS IN THE WAR to MASSACRE, UNDER THE DIRECT ORDER OF GENERAL JOHN GRENFALL MAXWELL, ANY IRISH MAN, WOMAN, OR CHILD SEEN. And all America did was send in troops to destroy the Iraqi military and Saddam Hussein. Go to http://users.bigpond.../kirwilli/1916/ to see more info, mine is not entirely accurate because I am very, very angry at the way you are portraying America, where I currently live. You are assholes. You think I am a coward, well then COME AND GET ME! And we'll see who is a match for who! Don't tell me to calm down either, I am defending America, and I am no even an American citizen. Only I am grateful for their sacrifice to make the world safer, huh? Britain, you never had the guts to do what the Americans have done: they stood up to the Soviets when you just sat there.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
