|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 10:31 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| mises wrote: |
| Even if that is true, it does not mean therefore America had to invade. The Saudis were far more connected to AQ than was Iraq. |
You are correct but it just something more that shows Saddam never gave up his war. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 10:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And? I don't get it. 3 years before the invasion he offered to open up Iraqi oil fields to Western (American) firms at a good price. He tried to give up his war. Bush was too busy talking to the Iraqi government in waiting to care.
| Quote: |
An oil economist adviser to the World Bank and the UN Industrial Development Organisation, Dr Salameh says that among the world's biggest oil producers, Iraq alone has enough reserves to increase flow substantially. Production in eight others - the United States, Canada, Iran, Indonesia, Russia, Britain, Norway and Mexico - has peaked, he says, while China and Saudia Arabia, the remaining two, are nearing the point of decline. Before the war, Saddam Hussein's regime pumped 3.5 million barrels of oil a day, but this has fallen to just 2 million barrels.
Salameh told a British parliamentary committee last month that Iraq had offered the US a deal, three years before the war, that would have opened 10 new giant oil fields on "generous" terms, in return for lifting sanctions. "This would certainly have prevented the steep rise of the oil price," he said. "But the US had a different idea. It planned to occupy Iraq and annex its oil." |
http://www.smh.com.au
He tried to give up his war. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 11:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
And? I don't get it. 3 years before the invasion he offered to open up Iraqi oil fields to Western (American) firms at a good price. He tried to give up his war. Bush was too busy talking to the Iraqi government in waiting to care.
| Quote: |
An oil economist adviser to the World Bank and the UN Industrial Development Organisation, Dr Salameh says that among the world's biggest oil producers, Iraq alone has enough reserves to increase flow substantially. Production in eight others - the United States, Canada, Iran, Indonesia, Russia, Britain, Norway and Mexico - has peaked, he says, while China and Saudia Arabia, the remaining two, are nearing the point of decline. Before the war, Saddam Hussein's regime pumped 3.5 million barrels of oil a day, but this has fallen to just 2 million barrels.
Salameh told a British parliamentary committee last month that Iraq had offered the US a deal, three years before the war, that would have opened 10 new giant oil fields on "generous" terms, in return for lifting sanctions. "This would certainly have prevented the steep rise of the oil price," he said. "But the US had a different idea. It planned to occupy Iraq and annex its oil." |
http://www.smh.com.au
He tried to give up his war. |
Why would anyone believe Saddam?
More to the point why ought anyone believe Salameh on why the US invaded Iraq. He is not in a position to know anything about US intentions.
And the US didn't try to annex Iraqs' oil .
The US had a different reason for invading Iraq. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nautilus
Joined: 26 Nov 2005
Location: Je jump, Tu jump, oui jump!
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 6:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
I suspect that historians of the future will instead see Bush's decision to insist upon a "surge" of reinforcements being sent into Iraq, combined with a complete change of anti-insurgency tactics as configured by General Petraeus, as the moment when the conflict was turned around there, in the West's favour. |
Absolutely.
Bush senior saved Kuwait and Bush junior sorted out Iraq. I think now public opinion has to call it a good job well done. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yawarakaijin
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 5:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think a lot of people discount or entirely overlook the way the 1st Gulf War ended when it comes to understanding some of the violence we see in Iraq up to this day.
Bush I bascially incited an uprising amoung the Shiites and then, entirely under the noses of the coalition, left them to be slaughtered by Hussein. It is unknown how many Shiites were massacred by Saddams' forces in the years following the end of the first Gulf war. I wonder how many Shiites lost family members and then consequently went about enjoying the demise of Saddam Hussein while simultaneously loving every oppurtunity to target American soldiers in Iraq.
Revenge is pretty big in Arab culture. I wouldn't be too shocked to learn it is high on the list of quite a few Shiites in Iraq. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 5:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nautilus wrote: |
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
I suspect that historians of the future will instead see Bush's decision to insist upon a "surge" of reinforcements being sent into Iraq, combined with a complete change of anti-insurgency tactics as configured by General Petraeus, as the moment when the conflict was turned around there, in the West's favour. |
Absolutely.
Bush senior saved Kuwait and Bush junior sorted out Iraq. I think now public opinion has to call it a good job well done. |
I wonder. Apparently, insiders are hinting that the things done and said in the White House circa 2002, 2003, and 2004 were simply inexcusable. I think in 30 years, just when Bush's reputation is ready to be on the mend, the release of those documents will remind us why his approval ratings were so low. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pligganease
Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Location: The deep south...
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 6:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| nautilus wrote: |
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
I suspect that historians of the future will instead see Bush's decision to insist upon a "surge" of reinforcements being sent into Iraq, combined with a complete change of anti-insurgency tactics as configured by General Petraeus, as the moment when the conflict was turned around there, in the West's favour. |
Absolutely.
Bush senior saved Kuwait and Bush junior sorted out Iraq. I think now public opinion has to call it a good job well done. |
I wonder. Apparently, insiders are hinting that the things done and said in the White House circa 2002, 2003, and 2004 were simply inexcusable. I think in 30 years, just when Bush's reputation is ready to be on the mend, the release of those documents will remind us why his approval ratings were so low. |
I agree. In the end, I feel Iraq will be successful. However, I think most people are peeved at the fact that they were misled and the initial conflict was fumbled so badly.
Honestly, I don't think anything could save the Bush presidency from a legacy of incompetence. Katrina, Guantanamo, Iraq, "Mission Accomplished," cronyism, and Fahrenheit 911 (Crap, BS "mock"umentary, I know) will see to that.
Let's not forget the economic debacle that currently ensnares the U.S. and the world. The war is financed by China, and we give "Economic Stimulus" checks funded by China for people to spend at Wal-Mart and give it back to China. We're shipping our manufacturing sector out of the country, while corporate executives are reaping record salaries for laying off American workers. Free trade agreements are being negotiated left and right. Not with countries that are wealthy enough to sustain fair trade practices, but with poor countries that can provide cheap labor.
Bush has truly shown us how bad a bad presidency can be. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tiger Beer
Joined: 07 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 7:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't see how Iraq could be better in 30 years. I see it as MUCH WORSE. And we all know who is going to be blamed on that one..
The kind of problems there aren't going to just 'go away'.
From now until the next several hundred years, there will always be the 'American Occupation' period with thousands of Iraqis dying by Americans, Al Quaeda, Terrorits, Jihadists, more American bombings, and on and on... none of which existed there prior to the American invasion.
America made Iraq BATTLEGROUND #1 well above and ahead of where Al Quaeda actually was at.
It will also go into Iraqi History of the time they lost their soveregnity. A time where the Americans built bases and embassies all over their country, brought in large oil companies to reap the oil from the land, and went into individuals houses on patrol searching for anyone who didnt seem to like what was happening to their country. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 7:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tiger Beer wrote: |
I don't see how Iraq could be better in 30 years. I see it as MUCH WORSE. And we all know who is going to be blamed on that one..
The kind of problems there aren't going to just 'go away'. |
Of course it will be better in 30 years. Everyone suffers from war fatigue. Even insurgents. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tiger Beer wrote: |
I don't see how Iraq could be better in 30 years. I see it as MUCH WORSE. And we all know who is going to be blamed on that one..
The kind of problems there aren't going to just 'go away'.
From now until the next several hundred years, there will always be the 'American Occupation' period with thousands of Iraqis dying by Americans, Al Quaeda, Terrorits, Jihadists, more American bombings, and on and on... none of which existed there prior to the American invasion.
America made Iraq BATTLEGROUND #1 well above and ahead of where Al Quaeda actually was at.
It will also go into Iraqi History of the time they lost their soveregnity. A time where the Americans built bases and embassies all over their country, brought in large oil companies to reap the oil from the land, and went into individuals houses on patrol searching for anyone who didnt seem to like what was happening to their country. |
No cause once the US has the right weapons states and elites will have to think twice about supporting terrorists.
Tigerbeer this is what it was like before the US invaded Iraq.
| Quote: |
Al-Qaeda camps 'trained 70,000'
Thousands are said to have joined al-Qaeda camps in Afghanistan
Some 70,000 people received weapons training and religious instruction in al-Qaeda camps, German police say.
The claim came at the retrial of Mounir al-Motassadek, a Moroccan man accused of involvement in the 9/11 attacks, which were partly planned in Germany.
A German police officer told the court recruits at the camps were taught they had a duty to kill US citizens. |
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4146969.stm
Is that ok with you? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jkelly80
Joined: 13 Jun 2007
Location: you boys like mexico?
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 7:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
No cause once the US has the right weapons states and elites will have to think twice about supporting terrorists.
Tigerbeer this is what it was like before the US invaded Iraq??
| Quote: |
Al-Qaeda camps 'trained 70,000'
Thousands are said to have joined al-Qaeda camps in Afghanistan!!!
Some 70,000 people received weapons training and religious instruction in al-Qaeda camps, German police say.
The claim came at the retrial of Mounir al-Motassadek, a Moroccan man accused of involvement in the 9/11 attacks, which were partly planned in Germany.
A German police officer told the court recruits at the camps were taught they had a duty to kill US citizens. |
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4146969.stm
Is that ok with you? |
That's the strategy. Conflate conflate conflate, use innuendo and manipulation, because the facts just aren't there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tiger Beer
Joined: 07 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
Tigerbeer this is what it was like before the US invaded Iraq.
| Quote: |
Al-Qaeda camps 'trained 70,000'
Thousands are said to have joined al-Qaeda camps in Afghanistan
Some 70,000 people received weapons training and religious instruction in al-Qaeda camps, German police say.
The claim came at the retrial of Mounir al-Motassadek, a Moroccan man accused of involvement in the 9/11 attacks, which were partly planned in Germany.
A German police officer told the court recruits at the camps were taught they had a duty to kill US citizens. |
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4146969.stm
Is that ok with you? |
100% CORRECT. Al-Qaeda IN Afghanistan, (echo) (echo) (echo) IN AFGHANISTAN AFGHANISTAN AFGHANISTAN.
KEY WORDS in there. Look at the KEY WORDS.
There were not al-quaida camps in Iraq, in fact, Bin Ladin HATED Saddam. Saddam was even fighting Iran (the other one that McCain wants to bomb).
If you connect the dots properly, you'll see 'quagmire' written all over this scenerio. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nautilus
Joined: 26 Nov 2005
Location: Je jump, Tu jump, oui jump!
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Iraq was a wise move as it centred the fight against islamic extremists into a single theatre of military warfare.
before that it was a case of terrorism spreading globally.
Al quaedas goal was a caliphate or islamic superstate. Now it has a new gaping hole in its gut called the Amerrican protectorate of Iraq.
Which is a bigger insult to muslims? israel, or Iraq?
Answer: Who cares, they brought it on themselves. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spliff
Joined: 19 Jan 2004
Location: Khon Kaen, Thailand
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nautilus wrote: |
Iraq was a wise move as it centred the fight against islamic extremists into a single theatre of military warfare.
before that it was a case of terrorism spreading globally.
Al quaedas goal was a caliphate or islamic superstate. Now it has a new gaping hole in its gut called the Amerrican protectorate of Iraq.
Which is a bigger insult to muslims? israel, or Iraq?
Answer: Who cares, they brought it on themselves. |
Dude, right on! 
Hope to make it bigger including Iran.....  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tiger Beer
Joined: 07 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 8:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nautilus wrote: |
Iraq was a wise move as it centred the fight against islamic extremists into a single theatre of military warfare.
before that it was a case of terrorism spreading globally.
Al quaedas goal was a caliphate or islamic superstate. Now it has a new gaping hole in its gut called the Amerrican protectorate of Iraq.
Which is a bigger insult to muslims? israel, or Iraq?
Answer: Who cares, they brought it on themselves. |
Iraq wasn't a center for jihads, islamic extremists, etc. Again, that was AFGHANISTAN. Wrong country!
Iraq was the country with a secular non-islamic guy who was going pretty strong after Iran and was a thorn in the side of all its neighboring islamic states, and everyone who was pro-islam generally disdained and hated. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
