| Author |
Message |
    
GOP Man
Citizen
Username: Headsup
Post Number: 415
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 9:07 am: | 
|
go ahead and scoff hoops, but ajc is right. he and I are of one mind on so many issues, and this one is no different. real Americans understand there is no peace without war. |
ajc
Citizen
Username: Ajc
Post Number: 5225
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 10:35 am: |
|
Invading Iraq was a courageous, smart, and responsible action to take in the face of world-wide condemnation of 9/11 and the repeated ignored sanctions from the United Nations. It was done within the accepted rules of engagement, with more than sufficient prior warning and opportunity to avoid the confrontation.
You guys need a make-over. As for the hate in your hearts for GWB, I invite you consider another four letter word, l-o-v-e.
1. I believe that love can win over hate.
2. Love can go beyond your troubles.
3. Love can bring hope where there is none.
4. Love can find what’s good and true in the world.
5. Love is beautiful and can hold nations together.
6. Love can lead to a promise of brighter days.
Have a great day guys... 
|
tjohn
Supporter
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 4377
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 10:38 am: |
|
Soon to be a major motion picture:
AJC, the Unlikely Hippie |
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3553
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 10:44 am: |
|
 |
Hoops
Citizen
Username: Hoops
Post Number: 1487
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 10:53 am: |
|
thanks ajc.
Oh btw here is are some examples of the love that America is spreading in Iraq -
There are plenty more. It makes everything seem a little different when we actually see the consequences of our actions. Was it really necessary for so much suffering to occur in Iraq? |
S.L.K. 2.0
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1714
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 11:16 am: |
|
Hoops-
Wait, do you not like the Iraq or war period?
-SLK |
Hoops
Citizen
Username: Hoops
Post Number: 1489
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 11:25 am: |
|
All war is wrong, however if a nation were to attack us we would be justified in defending ourselves. This war is not an example of a just war. Afghanistan is justified in my opinion because of their harboring of Bin Laden. We attacked the organization that attacked us and then quickly changed strategies to attack a nation that had zero to do with it.
The suffering caused is our fault. Whether Saddam was a tyrant or not, we were not justified in killing the tens of thousands that we have killed and we are not justified in wounding who knows how many thousands of others.
These pictures are only a few samples of the evil we have perpetrated in the name of 'democracy and freedom'.
We are not asked to sacrifice at here. We have to search for images like these because our news outlets wont show them to us. The reason they wont show them is to keep the war impersonal, to make sure that our sensibilities are left out of the 'war on terror'.
It turns out we may be no better then the terrorists. |
ae35unit
Citizen
Username: Ae35unit
Post Number: 106
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 12:23 pm: |
|
SLK- I'm assuming you backed our action (NATO, UN, US) in Kosovo. Right?
|
ajc
Citizen
Username: Ajc
Post Number: 5228
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 12:26 pm: |
|
...Hoops, I'm only impressed by your lack of knowledge and your classic Left Wing mentality. Your pictures are only more evidence as to why we needed to go to Iraq, and proof of why we need to stay the course until the mission is completed...
BTW, the vote in congress today, 252 to 153, clearly backs both the war in Iraq and the war on terror... Come on, 42 Democrats voted for it. The train is leaving the station pal, and if you have any sense at all you'll give up this stupid conversation and get on board. Retreat is not an option...
|
S.L.K. 2.0
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1718
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 1:11 pm: |
|
Hoops-
Two people can play the emotional tug game.
Here are 74 pages of reasons why we did go into Iraq:
http://www.9neesan.com/massgraves/
Shame...
-SLK |
ae35unit
Citizen
Username: Ae35unit
Post Number: 109
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 1:25 pm: |
|
you know what SLK, we did not go to Iraq because of any freakin' mass graves............just shut up already..jeez....that has not been one of the reasons so far. Check your talking points! |
tjohn
Supporter
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 4378
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 1:34 pm: |
|
Hoops,
Those pictures of the victims of war lack context.
Arguably, bloody civil war was going to be Saddam's successor with or without our involvement. It could very well be the case that our involvement is resulting in a less bloody transition of power in Iraq. While that is certainly not why we invaded Iraq, I would be happy to claim this as a positive aspect of our involvement. |
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3556
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 1:36 pm: |
|
Yup, ajc: Let's go to war until every Iraqi child is dead. Then they'll know who's boss. That'll finish the job, won't it?!
tjohn:
It could very well be the case that our involvement is resulting in a less bloody transition of power in Iraq.
I guess now, we'll never know the answer to that one, will we?
|
ae35unit
Citizen
Username: Ae35unit
Post Number: 110
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 1:49 pm: |
|
Tjohn-Arguably, the Easter Bunny wrecked my tomato plants. I'd rather think of it that way. Otherwise, it would have to be some senseless vermin.
|
tjohn
Supporter
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 4379
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 2:24 pm: |
|
Well, Iraq, I think, was destined to be a bloody mess. I wonder, however, if we are making it more or less bloody. |
S.L.K. 2.0
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1720
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 3:49 pm: |
|
tulip-
your ultimate message is peace, so why nitpick all the cons of war?
ae35unit-there were many reasons for invading Iraq. I am sorry you haven't paying attention. I am also glad to see you can live with yourself knowing that this stuff woulld continue exist hadn't we gotten involved.
Hey, not our problem right?
-SLK |
ae35unit
Citizen
Username: Ae35unit
Post Number: 112
Registered: 2-2006
| | Posted on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 4:02 pm: |
|
SLK-
Darfur
New Orleans
Out of control single party rule with rigged elections
Knee-jerk simpletons
Hey, not our problem right?
ae35unit |
Hoops
Citizen
Username: Hoops
Post Number: 1490
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 4:05 pm: |
|
SLK - are you for invading the Sudan? There are millions there that require our urgent help. The mass graves of Iraq are not blood on our hands (unless you consider that it was our weapons that were used for those killings).
tjohn - the coffins draped with American flags would not have been. The dead and injured Iraqis would not have been via American bombs and American bullets. The blood is on our hands now.
ajc - you dont make even one bit of sense. The pictures I posted were all due to our invasion. If we dont invade those Americans are still alive today. If we dont invade that little girl is happily playing today.
The consequences of our actions are real. The instant in 2002 that I first realized that Bush was going to invade Iraq I knew there would be many innocents hurt and killed. It is wrong. We went in for reasons that are not valid to us as Americans. They are valid only to the Haliburtons and the people who are making money off the misery of others.
Yes ajc I am left leaning. There has to be checks put in place that guarantee the individual his day in court and guarantee his human rights. The torture by Americans of foreigners is disgusting and taints every one of us in a bad light in the world. Your constant defense of these war mongers, these people who capitalize on the misery of the Iraqis in their quest for world dominance is disgusting.
Its one thing to couteract a crime against our great country like 9/11 by hunting down and killing those responsible and quite another to march into a sovereign nation that had nothing to do with that crime, confuse the American population about their connection to win popular support and take money out of our pockets in the quest for the dollar. Yes ajc these people are stealing money from each of us. They are not accountable to anything or anybody and the money is flowing like the oil in the Persian gulf.
These people are theives and their parents were theives. It is you who are hoodwinked and bamboozled. You can wrap yourself in the American flag and call yourself a great patriot but you have been fooled |
tjohn
Supporter
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 4381
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 4:28 pm: |
|
Hoops,
Suppose you had certain knowledge that the trade-off is 3,000 dead Americans and 150,000 dead Iraqis with our involvement versus 1,000,000 dead Iraqis with their own private civil war.
Now, regardless of what delusional Bush supporters may say, I know that nations do not go to war over this kind of thing. And they should not, because you never have certain knowledge.
But still, if you had such certain knowledge, then you would have to say our involvement, although based on half-truths and distortions, is not a bad thing. |
Hoops
Citizen
Username: Hoops
Post Number: 1493
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 4:35 pm: |
|
tjohn, its a moral dilemma. The balance says we should jump in to save the lives of 850,000 Iraqis, but the 'certain knowledge' is a variable. There may be certain better ways to stop a civil war and to bring about a peaceful settlement not requiring force.
I wonder what the response would have been in America circa 1861 if England (and say Denmark) came over and jumped into our business, jailed Lincoln and installed their own version of a goverment while occupying Washington, New York, and Richmond.
Which would be worse and would they actually stop a civil war or just postpone it?
|
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3557
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Friday, June 16, 2006 - 4:54 pm: |
|
SLK,
Thank you for realizing my ultimate message.
Nice of you. |
ajc
Citizen
Username: Ajc
Post Number: 5230
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, June 17, 2006 - 1:13 am: |
|
Hoops, thanks for sharing...
Listen, your rhetoric is so pathetic and baseless; I don’t know how you stand yourself. FWIW, Democrats are all passion and no policy...
You guys don’t seem to get it, the votes are in and America and Congress supports the war. We're staying the course!!!
|
Hoops
Citizen
Username: Hoops
Post Number: 1496
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, June 17, 2006 - 8:49 am: |
|
Listen, your rhetoric is pathetic, baseless and disgusting.
|
Montagnard
Citizen
Username: Montagnard
Post Number: 1961
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, June 17, 2006 - 8:53 am: |
|
Hitler tried to "stay the course" in Russia, but in the end the strategic situation favored the Russians, something that the more perceptive Germans realized from the outset.
Looking back from sixty years in the future, we tend to see the true German patriots as those who opposed Hitler.
|
ajc
Citizen
Username: Ajc
Post Number: 5231
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, June 17, 2006 - 11:25 am: |
|
"Why not look sixty years into the future... "
I’m sure you won’t have to wait sixty years to see where GWB will be considered the father of the new free Iraq. He'll be a national hero who will be remembered as the US President who brought freedom and democracy to Iraq and the Middle East, where before there was suppression of basic civil rights, murder, and mayhem...
I think Hitler is a bad example pal. You see, one of the most obvious differences between Hitler and Bush is, and there are many, is that Bush is not out to conquer other nations, he's out to free them...
I can understand how you guys feel. You’re afraid, and you believe your money is being wasted and should be coming back to you. You don’t want to see other Americans killed or wounded. You don’t want other people thinking bad things about us. Listen, being an American is not easy. The world expects a lot from us, and it’s not just all about our money.
Ask anyone, anywhere, if they want freedom. Freedom of religion, of speech, and of their political preference. Who doesn’t want freedom? Better question…. Who else besides America is willing to help people become free? Sadly we can’t help everyone everywhere, but we can try, and trying we are in Iraq... |
Unowen
Citizen
Username: Unowen
Post Number: 33
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, June 17, 2006 - 11:37 am: |
|
"...who brought freedom and democracy to Iraq and the Middle East..."
Bush has not brought freedom and democracy to the middle east, in reality he will be remembered as the guy who stirred the pot of anti-americanism in the middle east. |
ajc
Citizen
Username: Ajc
Post Number: 5232
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, June 17, 2006 - 12:35 pm: |
|
"Bush has not brought freedom and democracy to the middle east...
...maybe you're right? Actually, it was the US Congress that voted to bring freedom and Democracy to Iraq and the Middle East. And, the truth is they're doing a damn good job of it! |
Elgato
Citizen
Username: Elgato
Post Number: 71
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, June 17, 2006 - 5:53 pm: |
|
ajc, how come he's only out to free the countries with oil? And how come they're lucky enough to get these freedoms in Iraq when they're being curtailed in the good old USofA? |
ajc
Citizen
Username: Ajc
Post Number: 5233
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, June 17, 2006 - 7:03 pm: |
|
"...how come he's only out to free the countries with oil?"
I'm afraid it's the same answer, "it was the US Congress that voted to bring freedom and Democracy to Iraq and the Middle East." And, don't forget, it was also the Democrats who voted for it before they voted against it. |
Strawberry
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 7455
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, June 17, 2006 - 7:17 pm: |
|
Free nation's with oil??
Afghanistan ain't exactly bubbling in the stuff..You can now eliminate the oil angle.
Thank You. |
joel dranove
Citizen
Username: Jdranove
Post Number: 589
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, June 17, 2006 - 9:38 pm: |
|
Why did we go into Somalia during Clinton's reign?
jd |
tjohn
Supporter
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 4382
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, June 17, 2006 - 10:22 pm: |
|
That's easy. Countries engage in humanitarian operations when the expected cost is low. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5123
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, June 17, 2006 - 10:55 pm: |
|
joel, we didn't; our troops went in during Bush I. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5124
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, June 17, 2006 - 11:02 pm: |
|
Straw you seem to be making the argument that, because we didn't attack Afghanistan for oil therefore we didn't attack Iraq for oil.
Have you forgotten why we invaded Afghanistan, already? Or is your knee just jerking so hard you're hitting yourself in the face (are muscular spasms a symptom of drinking spiked Kool-Aid?) Because everybody knows why we invaded them; but there's no one reason that has stuck for why invaded Iraq. Even now, conservatives like SLK are creating new reasons why. In this latest bit of intellectual oregami, the mass graves we discovered after the invasion can be a motivating factor for the invasion.
Beam us up, he's discovered time travel! |
Elgato
Citizen
Username: Elgato
Post Number: 72
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, June 18, 2006 - 8:41 am: |
|
Strawberry, you don't have to look far to make the energy connection:
according to the Official Energy Statistics from the U.S. Government:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/afghan.html
Energy Overview
Between the 1960s and mid-1980s, the Soviets had identified more than 15 oil and gas fields in northern Afghanistan. Only three gas fields -- Khwaja Gogerdak, Djarquduk, and Yatimtaq – were developed in the area surrounding Sheberghan, which is located about 120 kilometers west of Mazar-i-Sharif. Afghan natural gas production reached 275 million cubic feet per day (Mmcf/d) in the mid-1970s. The Djarquduk field was brought online during that period and boosted Afghan natural gas output to a peak of 385 Mmcf/d by 1978. About 100 mmcf/d of this amount was used locally in gas distribution systems in Sheberghan and Mazar-i-Sharif as well as at a 100,000 mt/y urea plant located near Mazar-i-Sharif. One oil field, Angot, was developed in the late 1960s, but aside from production tests, oil production was intermittent, with daily outputs averaging 500 b/d or less.
Northern Afghanistan has proved, probable and possible natural gas reserves of about 5 trillion cubic feet (Tcf). This area, which is a southward extension of the highly prolific, natural gas-prone Amu Darya Basin, has the potential to hold a sizable undiscovered gas resource base, especially in sedimentary layers deeper than what were developed during the Soviet era. Afghanistan’s crude oil potential is more modest, with perhaps up to 100 million barrels of medium-gravity recoverable from Angot and other fields that are undeveloped. Afghanistan also may possess relatively small volumes of gas liquids and condensate.
Outside of the North Afghan Platform, very limited oil and gas exploration has occurred. Geological, aeromagnetic, and gravimetric studies were conducted in the 1970s over parts of the Katawaz Fault Block (eastern Afghanistan – along the Pak border) and in the Helmand and Farah provinces. The hydrocarbon potential in these areas is thought to be very limited as compared to that in the north.
The Soviets had estimated Afghanistan's proven and probable natural gas reserves at up to 5 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) in the 1970s. Afghan natural gas production reached 275 million cubic feet per day (Mmcf/d) in the mid-1970s. The Djarquduk field was brought online during that period boosted Afghan natural gas output to a peak of 385 Mmcf/d by 1978-79. After the Soviet pullout and subsequent Afghan civil war, most gas wells at Sheberghan area fields were shut in due to technical problems and the lack of an export market in the former Soviet Union.
At its peak in the late 1970s, Afghanistan supplied 70%-90% of its natural gas output to the Soviet Union's natural gas grid via a link through Uzbekistan. In 1992, Afghan President Najibullah indicated that a new natural gas sales agreement with Russia was in progress. However, several former Soviet republics raised price and distribution issues and negotiations stalled. In the early 1990s, Afghanistan also discussed possible natural gas supply arrangements with Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and several Western European countries, but these talks never progressed further. Afghan natural gas fields include Djarquduk, Khowaja Gogerdak, and Yatimtaq, all of which are located within 20 miles of the northern town of Sheberghan in Jowzjan province. In 1999, work resumed on the repair of a distribution pipeline to Mazar-i-Sharif. Spur pipelines to a small power plant and fertilizer plant also were repaired and completed. Mazar-i-Sharif is now receiving natural gas from the pipeline. The possibility of exporting a small quantity of natural gas through the existing pipeline into Uzbekistan also is reportedly being considered.
Soviet estimates from the late 1970s placed Afghanistan's proven and probable oil and condensate reserves at 95 million barrels. Most Soviet assistance efforts after the mid-1970s were aimed at increasing gas production. Sporadic gas exploration continued through the mid-1980s. The last Soviet technical advisors left Afghanistan in 1988. After a brief hiatus, oil production at the Angot field was restarted in the early 1990s by local militias. Output levels, however, are though to have been less than 300 b/d. Near Sar-i-Pol, the Soviets partially constructed a 10,000-b/d topping plant, which although undamaged by war, is thought by Western experts to be unsalvageable.
Petroleum products such as diesel, gasoline, and jet fuel are imported, mainly from Pakistan and Uzbekistan, with limited volumes from Turkmenistan and Iran serving regional markets. Turkmenistan also has a petroleum product storage and distribution facility at Tagtabazar ( Kushka – it’s on the Turkmen side) near the Afghan border, which supplies northwestern Afghanistan.
Besides oil and natural gas, Afghanistan also is estimated to have 73 million tons of coal reserves, most of which is located in the region between Herat and Badashkan in the northern part of the country. Although Afghanistan produced over 100,000 short tons of coal annually as late as the early 1990s, as of 2000, the country was producing only around 1,000 short tons.
End quote
And from Dick Cheney himself:
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/oil.html
In 1998, Dick Cheney, now US vice-president but then chief executive of a major oil services company, remarked: "I cannot think of a time when we have had a region emerge as suddenly to become as strategically significant as the Caspian." But the oil and gas there is worthless until it is moved. The only route which makes both political and economic sense is through Afghanistan. [Guardian]
And the BBC:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/1984459.stm
Afghanistan plans gas pipeline
Oil pipelines
The pipeline is Afghanistan's biggest foreign investment project
Afghanistan hopes to strike a deal later this month to build a $2bn pipeline through the country to take gas from energy-rich Turkmenistan to Pakistan and India.
Afghan interim ruler Hamid Karzai is to hold talks with his Pakistani and Turkmenistan counterparts later this month on Afghanistan's biggest foreign investment project, said Mohammad Alim Razim, minister for Mines and Industries told Reuters.
"The work on the project will start after an agreement is expected to be struck at the coming summit," Mr Razim said.
The construction of the 850-kilometre pipeline had been previously discussed between Afghanistan's former Taliban regime, US oil company Unocal and Bridas of Argentina.
The project was abandoned after the US launched missile attacks on Afghanistan in 1999.
US company preferred
Mr Razim said US energy company Unocal was the "lead company" among those that would build the pipeline, which would bring 30bn cubic meters of Turkmen gas to market annually.
Unocal - which led a consortium of companies from Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Turkmenistan, Japan and South Korea - has maintained the project is both economically and technically feasible once Afghan stability was secured.
"Unocal is not involved in any projects (including pipelines) in Afghanistan, nor do we have any plans to become involved, nor are we discussing any such projects," a spokesman told BBC News Online.
The US company formally withdrew from the consortium in 1998.
"The Afghan side assures all sides about the security of the pipeline and will take all responsibilities for it," Mr Razim said.
Reconstructing
Afghanistan plans to build a road linking Turkmenistan with Pakistan parallel to the pipeline, to supply nearby villages with gas, and also to pump Afghan gas for export, Mr Razim said.
The government would also earn transit fees from the export of gas and oil and hoped to take over ownership of the pipeline after 30 years, he said.
The Asian Development Bank (ADB) has been surveying routes for transferring local gas from northern Afghan areas to Kabul, and to iron ore mines at the Haji Gak pass further west.
"ADB will announce its conclusion soon," Mr Razim said.
The pipeline is expected to be built with funds from donor countries for the reconstruction of Afghanistan as well as ADB loans, he said.
|
ajc
Citizen
Username: Ajc
Post Number: 5235
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, June 18, 2006 - 9:34 am: |
|
So what is your interest in all of this? Afghanistan? Iraq? or how come Bush is only out to free the countries with oil?
|
Elgato
Citizen
Username: Elgato
Post Number: 73
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, June 18, 2006 - 10:41 am: |
|
Call me a cynic but I just don't believe we went into Iraq for the WMD's and here's some interesting background on Karai. An oil man, no less. It's long but worth a read.
http://sandiego.indymedia.org/en/2002/01/402.shtml
According to Afghan, Iranian, and Turkish government sources, Hamid Karzai, the interim Prime Minister of Afghanistan, was a top adviser to the El Segundo, California-based UNOCAL Corporation which was negotiating with the Taliban to construct a Central Asia Gas (CentGas) pipeline from Turkmenistan through western Afghanistan to Pakistan.
Karzai, the leader of the southern Afghan Pashtun Durrani tribe, was a member of the mujaheddin that fought the Soviets during the 1980s. He was a top contact for the CIA and maintained close relations with CIA Director William Casey, Vice President George Bush, and their Pakistani Inter Service Intelligence (ISI) Service interlocutors. Later, Karzai and a number of his brothers moved to the United States under the auspices of the CIA. Karzai continued to serve the agency's interests, as well as those of the Bush Family and their oil friends in negotiating the CentGas deal, according to Middle East and South Asian sources.
When one peers beyond all of the rhetoric of the White House and Pentagon concerning the Taliban, a clear pattern emerges showing that construction of the trans-Afghan pipeline was a top priority of the Bush administration from the outset. Although UNOCAL claims it abandoned the pipeline project in December 1998, the series of meetings held between U.S., Pakistani, and Taliban officials after 1998, indicates the project was never off the table.
Quite to the contrary, recent meetings between U.S. Ambassador to Pakistan Wendy Chamberlain and that country's oil minister Usman Aminuddin indicate the pipeline project is international Project Number One for the Bush administration. Chamberlain, who maintains close ties to the Saudi ambassador to Pakistan (a one-time chief money conduit for the Taliban), has been pushing Pakistan to begin work on its Arabian Sea oil terminus for the pipeline.
Meanwhile, President Bush says that U.S. troops will remain in Afghanistan for the long haul. Far from being engaged in Afghan peacekeeping -- the Europeans are doing much of that -- our troops will effectively be guarding pipeline construction personnel that will soon be flooding into the country. |
Montagnard
Citizen
Username: Montagnard
Post Number: 1963
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 18, 2006 - 3:04 pm: |
|
Let's not forget Richard Nixon as the father of Free Vietnam. |
anon
Supporter
Username: Anon
Post Number: 2792
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, June 18, 2006 - 3:19 pm: |
|
Montagnard:
Showing your anti-GOP bias. The father of free Vietnam was LBJ.
(Then again maybe it was JFK or Ike) |
S.L.K. 2.0
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 1728
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, June 18, 2006 - 8:55 pm: |
|
tom-
I don't agree with you so I must be one of them conservatives...
There were mutiple reasons behind going into Iraq. Are you saying that mass graves in Iraq was brand spanking news to you?
-SLK |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 3390
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Monday, June 19, 2006 - 11:31 am: |
|
AJC, I just got back to the board, and saw quite a few responses to your challenge to me, as to whether I will change my mind about Bush if he succeeds in Iraq. First of all, you've said several times it is not Bush, but Congress that brought us to war in Iraq. So I would credit them, as you seem to think I should.
My dislike of Bush is not specifically related to the invasion of Iraq. It is an example of my reasoning, but not the main cause. I think he is intellectually lazy. Not only does he does not appear to think critically, but he ridicules those that do. He takes positions based on faith as opposed to data. I don't necessarily mean faith in a religious sense, but a personal belief sense.
There are just so many things about his personal, political and professional actions that I disagree with, that success in Iraq (which I also, hope for) would not change my opinion of him at all.
I can admit (and have admitted) my biases. Can you? |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5127
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Monday, June 19, 2006 - 12:00 pm: |
|
SLK, I'm saying that the mass graves were not discovered until after we invaded. How could it have been otherwise? Something we learned after the invasion couldn't have been part of the decision-making before the invasion.
So you can't say we invaded because of the mass graves, because at the time we didn't know about them. |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page