[quote]You know what fred? You make sense. I do not give a fuck about the lives of people in the middle east. The oil belongs to he strongest people. We will take it because we can.
fuck them. Let’s put everybody in jail.[/quote]
Another ignorant emotional leftie reduced to hysterical hyperbole.
Question: How much of Iraq’s oil does the US control?
Answer: NONE
Question: If this were all about oil, why not just keep Kuwait’s after “liberalizing” the country?
Answer: Because that was never the US intent.
Question: Why do lefties keep bringing up this old “it’s all about oil” canard?
Answer: Because they are ignorant shitbags who march to feel good about themselves since they have low-paying jobs that do not provide sufficient stimulation. Republicans are too busy working to have the requisite time to engage in such “activities.”
I love this quote on so many levels.
First, we have the hypocrisy of allowing the Iranians to be concerned about Saddam’s initiation of a war that left more than a million dead. We also have the use of chemical weapons against Iranian civilians cited as sufficient cause for “concern.” So why not for the US?
Second, we have the perhaps unwillingly acknowledged fact that if the US did remove Saddam, it also took away the need for Iran to develop a nuclear weapon to protect itself. Ergo, no matter how you slice it, the US invasion was key to this salient fact.
Whoops! I am sure that this response was not thought out so I will give you the chance to retract it. Must be a bit early for you this morning, eh spookster?
I love this quote on so many levels.
First, we have the hypocrisy of allowing the Iranians to be concerned about Saddam’s initiation of a war that left more than a million dead. We also have the use of chemical weapons against Iranian civilians cited as sufficient cause for “concern.” So why not for the US?
Second, we have the perhaps unwillingly acknowledged fact that if the US did remove Saddam, it also took away the need for Iran to develop a nuclear weapon to protect itself. Ergo, no matter how you slice it, the US invasion was key to this salient fact.
Whoops! I am sure that this response was not thought out so I will give you the chance to retract it. Must be a bit early for you this morning, eh spookster?[/quote]
First, I never said Saddam wasn’t a regional threat.
Second, the U.S. invasion was indeed a huge favor to Iran. Why do you think Ahmad Chalabi was being so “helpful”. Ironically though Iran was still on the verge of being “punished” for having a nuclear weapons program anyway until the adults stepped in and (hopefully) stopped the madness.
Thirdly, I lifted that information about Iran’s motivation for developing a nuclear weapons deterrent from a U.S. (or British, can’t remember for sure) intelligence assessment.
Stop backpedalling. You are looking foolish. Just retract the statement and I will let you off the hook or are you trying to “mean something else” now? It is early and you did not really mean to say what you just said. Here’s your chance. Agree.
I have irrefutable evidence of Fred Smith in possession of a chemical weapon, and, if outing were an option, I would post it here for all to see.
Don’t you people have some Britney to listen to?
oh my gosh…thanks for the laugh there FS
Iraq,crippled by years of stringent economic sanctions would have invaded Saudi Arabia,that very same Saudi Arabia that’s mega rich and can afford pretty much any arsenal it wishes??
we’re not even talking about all their other allies* who,according to your “vision” would just sit back with popcorn and watch…
Saddam was wiser than all Bush’s combined ,only a cretin would attempt an invasion that everyone knows is doomed from the off.
[quote=“fred smith”]
I said we would be there for 60 years, we will. [/quote]
damn right you will.
now i very much doubt that righting the wrongs will be the motive behind such an extended and costly occupation.
more like pumping black gold till the last drop.
recent reports tells us that petrol output in Iraq now is vastly superior to production levels during Saddam’s term.
so while most of Baghdad is very much still a pile of rubbles,we rest assured that oil field are now equipped with state of the art gear and are now working at full capacity.
fuck schools,fuck hospitals…my American friends,it is now very safe to buy SUVs again 
Da Blind Frog:
You are rambling. Pollack thinks that the scenario was a realistic one. He was and is considered one of the foremost experts on the subject. He advised mostly Democrat administrations but agreed with a Republican one that removing Saddam was needed.
Since when have the Saudis or Kuwaitis or Emiratis or Omanis or Bahrainis or Qataris ever done their own fighting?
never,because they are clever…
they know they own something that the whole world needs,why would they spend even a penny arming themselves whilst they know damn well that the minute they get under threat the mighty US of A would be sending whatever’s available to crush that threat??
except for kuwait,i can’t,for the life of me, remember when any of those you mentioned had to fend for themselves.
actually kuwait perfectly illustrated why it’s a bad bad bad idea to go against any of those states.
as i stated already,only a retarded moron would contemplate going after any of those petroleum giants.
oh,and it’s dablindfrog,you numbnut!