This War is Different? and things to think about

[ViperPilot 0]

Quote

The liberal also screamed NO WAR FOR OIL before iraq... Because that is what their shallow minds thought this was about. This much I know...
If we went to Iraq for OIL, then we are getting screwed right now!!! I pay 2.50 for regular :-)

Yeah, no shit. If we were there to suck Iraq dry of its oil, our gas prices would be a hell of a lot lower. That's just common sense. Not to mention we've never gotten more than around 15-20% of our oil from the Middle East. People assume that because it's an oil rich region that we get 95% of our oil from there. It actually mostly comes from South America, with another big part coming from Africa and old Soviet Bloc states.

[kallend 2,106]

Quote

Quote

Fine add the 1st war to the list. The point is that Iraq right now was started no differently than pretty much all of our wars/conflicts in the past.

Not WWII, a country attacked us there - here a radical group attacked us.

Yes, Japan attacked us, not Germany. It's irrelevant at that juncture that Germany and Japan had somewhat of an alliance. We still attacked Germany when they had yet to attack us, just as we attacked Iraq when they had not directly attacked us. It's the same situation.

Quote

LIBERATE: To set free, as from oppression, confinement, or foreign control.

Ok, as soon as we leave they will be liberated, just as I wrote.

Nope, Iraq is not under foreign control. We are there, but we are not running the government. The government is entirely made up of Iraqis. We set Iraq free from opporession and confinement by a dictatorship. We do not control Iraq anymore, Iraqi people do. So yes, it is liberated.

.

Yes, just like Poland, Czechoslovakia, East Germany Bulgaria, Estonia, Lithuania, Hungary etc. were liberated by the Soviets. Their governments were made up entirely of their own people, and it was just a technicality that the Red Army was occupying their lands. They weren't under foreign control, oh no! Completely in control of their own destinies, they were.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[ViperPilot 0]

Obviously this one was meant for me, so...

Quote

What about the iraqi civilian deaths, they all died in iraq. I guess they don't mean anything to you, 10000s of them have died

They do mean something to me. They mean more to me then they do to you, that's for sure. Why? Because I've seen it, you haven't. Iraqi civilians were being murdered before we got there, and the insurgents are continuing to murder them today. We're trying to help. When you look at those high figures, look at how they died. Car bombings, suicide bombings, just plain executed in the street, etc. All done by the insurgents. So before you get pissed at us for the number of Iraqi civilians dead, start looking in the right direction at those insurgent assholes who are doing the killing.

[ViperPilot 0]

You can't serioulsy think that's a valid comparison? The Soviets ruled with an iron fist over the Bloc countries. How are we doing the same in Iraq? Right now were just trying to train the Iraqis to fight so they can keep control over their own country. We're there because they can't do that yet. They're taking forever and it's really pissing me off. Too many of these guys don't even care, they're just there to get paid. As for the actual political side of it all, the Iraqis are doing everything. We had no hand in writing the constitution, no hand in how they want to do things. Sure we give advice, but that does not equate to having an iron grip on the process.

[kallend 2,106]

Quote

You can't serioulsy think that's a valid comparison? The Soviets ruled with an iron fist over the Bloc countries. How are we doing the same in Iraq? Right now were just trying to train the Iraqis to fight so they can keep control over their own country. We're there because they can't do that yet. They're taking forever and it's really pissing me off. Too many of these guys don't even care, they're just there to get paid. As for the actual political side of it all, the Iraqis are doing everything. We had no hand in writing the constitution, no hand in how they want to do things. Sure we give advice, but that does not equate to having an iron grip on the process.

By definition, you are not a free nation if you have a foreign occupying army on your soil. I don't care who's army it is, an army of occupation is not consistent with freedom and self determination.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[ViperPilot 0]

Well the reason I disagree is because we are not an army of occupation anymore. Like I said, the only reason we're still there is because the Iraqi Army/Police can't defend their country on their own. You have to realize that these guys suck really bad. Some are trying really hard, and that's great. But a huge number just care about getting paid, and it's damn hard to train people that don't care. We are there defending the country because its countrymen don't have the ability to do that yet. What do you suggest, we just leave and let the insurgents take control of the country while killing 100s of thousands in the process? Iraq sucks, but it's just not right to leave all these people defenseless. Do you agree?

[storm1977 0]

although, the Iraqi government has asked the US to stick around to help train troops. Once that happens they said we will be asked to leave.
Seems to me the Government likes having the help around right now.

-----------------------------------------------------
Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty

[kallend 2,106]

Quote

although, the Iraqi government has asked the US to stick around to help train troops. Once that happens they said we will be asked to leave.
Seems to me the Government likes having the help around right now.

I seem to recall the Honecker government in East Germany and the Jaruzelski government in Poland were enthusiastic supporters of the Soviet occupation, because the Soviets had put them in power. Just like the US put the current Iraqi government in power.

An occupied country is not a free country. Ever.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

By definition, you are not a free nation if you have a foreign occupying army on your soil. I don't care who's army it is, an army of occupation is not consistent with freedom and self determination.

I am curious if you view Germany as a free country today? And if so, at what point it became a free country after the second world war? Obviously it was occupied somewhere in there...

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

By definition, you are not a free nation if you have a foreign occupying army on your soil. I don't care who's army it is, an army of occupation is not consistent with freedom and self determination.

Wow...so we've been occupying basically half the world since '45, then....

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[ViperPilot 0]

Quote

Just like the US put the current Iraqi government in power.

Well the Iraqi president and the Iraqi Parliament Speaker for the time being were elected by their peers. But I suppose you'll argue that we held guns to each electors head as they voted. Not to mention the election coming up in December. So no, we're not controlling Iraq's destiny, they are. We're just helping them keep safe for the time being, as they have ASKED us to.

[Alias 0]

Quote

Quote

The liberal also screamed NO WAR FOR OIL before iraq... Because that is what their shallow minds thought this was about. This much I know...
If we went to Iraq for OIL, then we are getting screwed right now!!! I pay 2.50 for regular :-)

Yeah, no shit. If we were there to suck Iraq dry of its oil, our gas prices would be a hell of a lot lower. That's just common sense. Not to mention we've never gotten more than around 15-20% of our oil from the Middle East. People assume that because it's an oil rich region that we get 95% of our oil from there. It actually mostly comes from South America, with another big part coming from Africa and old Soviet Bloc states.

The US is there for oil. Now stop it!

It seems your confusion lies in the difference between current suppliers and prices to the US and the US being in Iraq related to total reserves in the Mid East. Iraq has the second largest. World consumption is up largely due to China. Thus changing the game.

When you hear the US is there to "Stabilize the region" It means secure oil for the US for the future.

Sorry, but it largely about oil. Which is logical I guess. I just dont like the way it's being done.


Dont forget Canada is and has been one of our top three suppliers for over a decade. And with the potential in oil sands, could be a larger supplier in the future...maybe

Carpe Diem

[ViperPilot 0]

Quote

When you hear the US is there to "Stabilize the region" It means secure oil for the US for the future.

Hey, if we're securing oil fields for the future while achieving our other objectives, then hell yeah! It's just annoying when people think we're there solely to rob the Iraqi people of their oil. That's the stupid part. But it still stands that we get little of our oil from there (of course this may change in the future, but for now, Iraq is not our big supplier of oil).

Now, stop bothering me!!

[Alias 0]

Nope - just second largest reserves in the world.

That's key

Carpe Diem

[ViperPilot 0]

Well hopefully it is nice and secure. Because I sure as hell don't want to run out of oil.

[bodypilot90 0]

Quote

Well hopefully it is nice and secure. Because I sure as hell don't want to run out of oil

I don't think rubber band powered jump planes would go very high

[Dougiefresh 0]

Quote

No, I haven't researched any of this but..........

you lost me right there.

Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so. --Douglas Adams

[ViperPilot 0]

Hahaha, no, no they wouldn't. I'd like to get up to alititude in under 75 years, preferably.

[rushmc 23]

I only meant to put some things into a different context. I do not believe Mr. Bush lied or invaded for money. I get tired of the hate and venom spewed by many toward our country and President. I believe that the Senators and media who put out lies and theories (with no facts are costing our military (your friends and work mates) many lives by helping the enemy to believe they have a chance to win.

To you, I want to say thank you! Because of people like you forums like this can exist. I too will say a prayer for you, your friends and the enemy that you kill because we are all people of this earth.

Be safe and thank you.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[ViperPilot 0]

Quote

I believe that the Senators and media who put out lies and theories (with no facts are costing our military (your friends and work mates) many lives by helping the enemy to believe they have a chance to win.

So true. When the enemy belives we are losing at home (and they do), their resolve grows stronger every day. So to you out there who hate Bush and hate what my friends and I do, thanks. I really appreciate the strengthened resolve in the enemy.

I'm not saying you have to like Bush and his policies, but at least cut us some slack and let us do our jobs. We'd be much better off without the rampant whining coming from home.

[AlexCrowley 0]

This thread illustrates quite clearly the power of propaganda and disinformation broadcast by the US media.

I'm not even going to begin to detail the reasons I feel that way, but you could start with PNAC and work your way forwards.

Check the british Times, the NYT, the Daily Telegraph (but bear in mind that the Telegraph is used by MI6 far more often than any other paper). Cross reference with the UK Independent, Times of India and throw in a dash of Japanese and Pakistan english speaking news (because I dont recall the papers I read at the time.)

Should give a clearer picture.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[kallend 2,106]

Quote

Quote

Just like the US put the current Iraqi government in power.

Well the Iraqi president and the Iraqi Parliament Speaker for the time being were elected by their peers. But I suppose you'll argue that we held guns to each electors head as they voted. Not to mention the election coming up in December. So no, we're not controlling Iraq's destiny, they are. We're just helping them keep safe for the time being, as they have ASKED us to.

Poland, Czechoslaviakia, Hungary etc, all elected their leaders too while under Soviet occupation. And those elcted leaders always supported the Soviet occupation (Because those that didn't, like Dubcek) didn't last very long).

Sorry, but we ARE an occupying power, and as a result it cannot be said that Iraq is free and has self determination, no matter how benign our intentions may be.

I happen to believe our intentions were pure US self-interest (aka OIL). Freeing the poor Iraqi people from a dictator, WMDs, etc, were all a smokescreen that Bush used to rally support for his war. There are plenty of nations with worse dictators than SH that we haven't invaded. They have no oil, however.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[ViperPilot 0]

Guess what, Iraq IS NOT in the Soviet Bloc. The Soviets are not there, stop making comparisons that are not valid. There is a vast difference between us and the Soviet military of that time. This comparison is at best an extremely far-fetched dream.

Quote

Freeing the poor Iraqi people from a dictator, WMDs, etc, were all a smokescreen that Bush used to rally support for his war

So you think we haven't freed the Iraqi people? What news station do you watch? They are free. And as for the WMDs, it's blatantly obvious that they were there at a time, maybe not when we went in, but they were there prior. But, that's an entirely different topic. And since you believe this, I'm assuming you consider the US to be in control of 75% of the world, since we have military bases in that much (or so). Just because we have a presence there does not mean we control the government.

[Gravitymaster 0]

It's also misleading for anyone to say we are an "Occupying Force. When Iraq held elections we said we would leave anytime the Govt. asked us to. To date I have heard no such request. That means we are there at the behest of the Iraqi Govt.

[ViperPilot 0]

Exactly. If they want us there, then we are only visting by request, not by force. Thus, no occupation, just presence.