[Face Ache]

I think this warrants it's own thread.

Do you believe Iraq is a threat to the US?

Try as I might, I can't see how.

[CollinG3G4]

No.

[chris v]

The Iraqi regime is a threat to its own population, and a threat to its neighbors, like Turkey, Israel, Syria Kuwait, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Iran.

They are not directly a threat to the U.S. at this time. Left unfettered, they could become one, but they have hardly been unfettered since the '91 war.

If all of Iraq's neighbors were clamoring for help defending themselves against an agressive Iraq, we'd be plenty justified in helping them, in the same way we helped Kuwait in '91, but they're not. None of those countries have expressed any real enthusiasm for a U.S. led invasion.

CV

Edit: I forgot Jordan-- also not big fans of Saddam's, but also not exactly clamoring for war.

[Usama's Carcase]

Nam, infidels.

[Usama's Carcase]

Originally posted by chris v:
The Iraqi regime is a threat to its own population, and a threat to its neighbors, like Turkey, Israel, Syria Kuwait, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Iran.

They are not directly a threat to the U.S. at this time. Left unfettered, they could become one, but they have hardly been unfettered since the '91 war.

If all of Iraq's neighbors were clamoring for help defending themselves against an agressive Iraq, we'd be plenty justified in helping them, in the same way we helped Kuwait in '91, but they're not. None of those countries have expressed any real enthusiasm for a U.S. led invasion.

CV

Edit: I forgot Jordan-- also not big fans of Saddam's, but also not exactly clamoring for war.

well said. However, I'd argue that being a threat in that particular region, i.e., the middle east, and being a threat to the specific countries you mentioned, does make Saddam a direct threat to The Great Satan and the West at large.

[macvillage.net]

I think it's a threat to the US only in an economic state... as far as diplomaticly attempting to block oil to the US (which it isn't to good at)...

It's really an Israeli threat, but since we swore to protect... we must.

[Mac Zealot]

Iraq and the middle east do not play such a huge role in oil, we wouldn't be in trouble at all if anything.

It's not even really oil that's the issue, see, this problem has a direct effect on us because saddam is a gun-wielding maniac, while (well at first), the korean war wasn't a threat to us, but as I had figured, they're just trying to get our attention.

[Millennium]

An immediate threat? No. But it is known to be trying to acquire weapons which would make it an immediate threat, and this amounts to the same thing.

The point is to deal with this threat before it turns into another North Korea.

[rampant]

Originally posted by Usama's Carcase:
Nam, infidels.

ENGLISH, MOTHER****ER! DO YOU SPEAK IT?

[Zarqawi's Stump]

Originally posted by rampant:
ENGLISH, MOTHER****ER! DO YOU SPEAK IT?

Contestant: 'I'll take 'Terrorist Languages for $1000, Alex.'

Alex: 'It is the Divine Tongue of Muhammed, and Allah's words are written in this language.

Contestant: What is 'Arabic', Alex?

Alex: Correct!

ding-ding-ding. I've won an all-expense paid trip to Yemen, where I can buy North Korean missiles for bargain-basement prices!

[tintub]

Of course not

[I Bent My Wookiee]

Does it matter what most pople think? If Bush wants to do something they will find one way or another to do it.

[Zarqawi's Stump]

Originally posted by I Bent My Wookiee:
Does it matter what most pople think? If Bush wants to do something they will find one way or another to do it.

a valid point, but it's interesting to get a feel for where the folks on the board stand.

[driven]

Was Afganistan a threat?

Iraq is far better equipped and far better funded, and arguably far more pissed.

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally posted by chris v:
The Iraqi regime is a threat to its own population, and a threat to its neighbors, like Turkey, Israel, Syria Kuwait, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Iran.

They are not directly a threat to the U.S. at this time. Left unfettered, they could become one, but they have hardly been unfettered since the '91 war.

If all of Iraq's neighbors were clamoring for help defending themselves against an agressive Iraq, we'd be plenty justified in helping them, in the same way we helped Kuwait in '91, but they're not. None of those countries have expressed any real enthusiasm for a U.S. led invasion.

CV

Edit: I forgot Jordan-- also not big fans of Saddam's, but also not exactly clamoring for war.

Ahhh... i like this poll. democracy in action right here. Well put Chris. Also, lets not understimate the population of that region. I mean many of them do have military power, it may not be much, but it's there, if they dont see need to get all hyper about Iraq, i dont see why a nation literally on the other side of the globe needs to (it's to do with the economy and politics, not freedom).

Also, i dont think the Iraqi people will stand for Saddam much longer. revolutions happed and will happen. If the change of regime comes from within the better. The purpose of the U.N. in the case of states as these, is not to bring about regime/leadership change, thats the job of the population, but to ensure that the state isnt a threat to the international community, and if the U.N.(which include's iraq's neighbours), dont see them as a viable threat, then i see no reason why the U.S. should.

Nothing is etched in stone, Iraq COULD be building up it's arsenal, and if the U.N. dosent see it, it's their/our fault if something happens. But right now, it seems as though the U.S. is a threat to world peace.(not just the middle east)

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally posted by driven:
Was Afganistan a threat?

Iraq is far better equipped and far better funded, and arguably far more pissed.

So lets give them some more reason to be pissed with us.....as the great yoda said.... fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering.

[driven]

Originally posted by Hawkeye_a:
So lets give them some more reason to be pissed with us.....as the great yoda said.... fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering.

Appeasment won't work.

If we are nice will they decide not to hate us? Doubt it.
(I have a feeling that we can agree to disagree on that point.)

It's like the guy that keeps taking your lunch money and hates you because you come from a rich family. You can be nice to him, but he'll never stop bullying you unless you decide to kick his ass ...

[daimoni]

.

[tintub]

Originally posted by Hawkeye_a:
Ahhh... i like this poll. democracy in action right here. Well put Chris. Also, lets not understimate the population of that region. I mean many of them do have military power, it may not be much, but it's there, if they dont see need to get all hyper about Iraq, i dont see why a nation literally on the other side of the globe needs to (it's to do with the economy and politics, not freedom).

Also, i dont think the Iraqi people will stand for Saddam much longer. revolutions happed and will happen. If the change of regime comes from within the better. The purpose of the U.N. in the case of states as these, is not to bring about regime/leadership change, thats the job of the population, but to ensure that the state isnt a threat to the international community, and if the U.N.(which include's iraq's neighbours), dont see them as a viable threat, then i see no reason why the U.S. should.

Nothing is etched in stone, Iraq COULD be building up it's arsenal, and if the U.N. dosent see it, it's their/our fault if something happens. But right now, it seems as though the U.S. is a threat to world peace.(not just the middle east)

absolutely.

[Zimphire]

I think we should go into a GM forum and post "Which is better, GM or FORD.

I think we'd get fair results.



You guys crack me up with these polls, as if they mean anything in real life.

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally posted by driven:
Appeasment won't work.

If we are nice will they decide not to hate us? Doubt it.
(I have a feeling that we can agree to disagree on that point.)

It's like the guy that keeps taking your lunch money and hates you because you come from a rich family. You can be nice to him, but he'll never stop bullying you unless you decide to kick his ass ...

So when exactly did Iraq steal America's lunch money ?Seems to me like we are trying to steal their lunch money...oil.

[Face Ache]

Originally posted by driven:
If we are nice will they decide not to hate us? Doubt it.

Define "they".

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
I think we should go into a GM forum and post "Which is better, GM or FORD.

I think we'd get fair results.



You guys crack me up with these polls, as if they mean anything in real life.

it's kinda like choosing between republicans and democrats eh ?

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Hawkeye_a:
So when exactly did Iraq steal America's lunch money ?Seems to me like we are trying to steal their lunch money...oil.

Eh? THe Us pays for it's oil just like everyone else. We could get ALL the free oil we want if we choose to, but no, we pay for it just like evreyone else. Where are you getting this from?

[appledude83]

Good lord no.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
I think we should go into a GM forum and post "Which is better, GM or FORD.

I think we'd get fair results.



You guys crack me up with these polls, as if they mean anything in real life.

Oh the baseless accusations. Bizarro

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Eh? THe Us pays for it's oil just like everyone else. We could get ALL the free oil we want if we choose to, but no, we pay for it just like evreyone else. Where are you getting this from?

Yes we do now. But when we control the oil feilds, mark my words, oil prices in the US will fall drastically...which will lead to more ppl here buying SUVs, which could get the economy going again.

[Zarqawi's Stump]

Originally posted by Hawkeye_a:
Yes we do now. But when we control the oil feilds, mark my words, oil prices in the US will fall drastically

Nostralamus speaks! Harken all Ye lesser mortals!

[derien]

Originally posted by Hawkeye_a:
democracy in action right here.

According to Aristotle, democracy is the deviant form of rule by many. The virtuous version is polity.

This pointless trivia has been brought to you by the holder of a degree in political science who got by mainly by noting the pretty diagrams in all those texts.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Hawkeye_a:
Yes we do now. But when we control the oil feilds, mark my words, oil prices in the US will fall drastically...which will lead to more ppl here buying SUVs, which could get the economy going again.

Originally posted by voodoo:
Oh the baseless accusations. Bizarro

[derien]

Originally posted by Hawkeye_a:
Yes we do now. But when we control the oil feilds, mark my words, oil prices in the US will fall drastically...which will lead to more ppl here buying SUVs, which could get the economy going again.

I'm afraid I have to insist that this is not about economics. No economic good will come of this, at least for the average consumer. Though it will probably remove a lot of the uncertainty holding back the stock market.... I've said this before, but let me repeat: it's going to be a long time before Iraq's fields can produce at "capacity." The infrastructure has been decaying for over a decade and that won't be turned around before the economy naturally rebounds (I hope).

Furthermore it's unlikely that Iraq will withdraw from OPEC, which sets quotas for its members, so global oil production will not increase significantly enough to affect prices dramatically. I don't believe the U.S. is foolish enough to directly seize control of the oil fields--that would be an open invitation for terrorism. I've heard talk of trusts for reconstruction and the like--probably something like a less-restrictive "oil for food" program.

I don't think this war is about humanitarianism or imminent threats, but I've also really got to hope the administration isn't silly enough to think that Iraq's oil will solve all the country's problem.

[voodoo]

Originally posted by Zimphire:

Good thing I wasn't talking about hawkeye_a

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by voodoo:
Good thing I wasn't talking about hawkeye_a

Your kidding me?

[voodoo]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Your kidding me?

no wait...

[Nicko]

Originally posted by voodoo:
[/B]

nice one.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by voodoo:
Unoriginal post from voodoo snipped

Your just the MS of posts aren't you?

[voodoo]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Your just the MS of posts aren't you?

I'll give you a hint: no I'm not.

[Logic]

Originally posted by voodoo:
I'll give you a hint: no I'm not.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by rampant:
ENGLISH, MOTHER****ER! DO YOU SPEAK IT?

I believe that our deceased friend here was trying to refer to Vietnam, which, in US slang, is often abbreviated as Nam or, more properly, 'Nam. My guess is, this is an attempt at comparing the situation in Iraq to the Vietnam war.

[Zarqawi's Stump]

Originally posted by Millennium:
I believe that our deceased friend here was trying to refer to Vietnam, which, in US slang, is often abbreviated as Nam or, more properly, 'Nam. My guess is, this is an attempt at comparing the situation in Iraq to the Vietnam war.

You would be incorrect in that conclusion. Nam is Arabic for 'yes'. In keeping with my Arab-Terrorist facade, I thought it fitting to use an Arabic word. So yes, I believe Saddam is a threat to the Great Satan.

I apologise for the confusion.

[suhail]

Iraq was never a threat to the U.S. The U.S. just wants the oil, for free! Here is some history:

Secertary Baker encoraged Saddam through U.S. embassador Glaspie to invade Kuwait. That was eight days before Kuwaits invasion in 1990.

The U.S. was after Iraqs oil since the late fifties when Abdel Kassem overthrew the Iraqi monarchy (A British monarchy ruling since the 20's). Kassem's new government founded an organization to resist Western oil monopolies. The CIA, with the help of some U.S. generals, devised a plan called "Canonbone" to invade Iraq and seize its oil. In the early 60s Kassem and thousands of supporters were massacred by a CIA coup.
In the early seventies, the Iraqi oil was controlled by the U.S. and U.K. through the Baathist party which came to power a few years earlier.
The U.S. then urged the Kurds to rebel against the Iraqi government, and were supplied U.S. weapons through Iran (Ayatollah). The U.S. never wanted the Kurds to win, they just wanted an on-going war while the U.S. drained the oil.

And it went on from there, one failure after the other... The U.S. the U.K and Israel were all involved in bringing you the movie "Troubles in the Gulf", vilifying and allying whomever they saw fit. Unfortunately for them, and all the innocent, it had been an on-going disaster.

And now they are planting hundreds of thousands of troops in the Gulf to "get it right".


So pull-up a chair, get your self a bag of salted popcorn, and watch WWIII start right before your eyes.

[Zarqawi's Stump]

Originally posted by suhail:
Iraq was never a threat to the U.S. The U.S. just wants the oil, for free! Here is some history:

Secertary Baker encoraged Saddam through U.S. embassador Glaspie to invade Kuwait. That was eight days before Kuwaits invasion in 1990.

The U.S. was after Iraqs oil since the late fifties when Abdel Kassem overthrew the Iraqi monarchy (A British monarchy ruling since the 20's). Kassem's new government founded an organization to resist Western oil monopolies. The CIA, with the help of some U.S. generals, devised a plan called "Canonbone" to invade Iraq and seize its oil. In the early 60s Kassem and thousands of supporters were massacred by a CIA coup.
In the early seventies, the Iraqi oil was controlled by the U.S. and U.K. through the Baathist party which came to power a few years earlier.
The U.S. then urged the Kurds to rebel against the Iraqi government, and were supplied U.S. weapons through Iran (Ayatollah). The U.S. never wanted the Kurds to win, they just wanted an on-going war while the U.S. drained the oil.

And it went on from there, one failure after the other... The U.S. the U.K and Israel were all involved in bringing you the movie "Troubles in the Gulf", vilifying and allying whomever they saw fit. Unfortunately for them, and all the innocent, it had been an on-going disaster.

uh, yeah. Keep living in that dream world, because the shock of reality would kill you. Post some reliable sources, not backwater websites or IP addresses (like a previous poster has done).

Basically what it comes down to is lies and disinformation on your part.

[Cipher13]

No.

The US wants oil.

Iraq will become a threat if the US attacks, unprovoked...

[7Macfreak]

Originally posted by Cipher13:
No.

The US wants oil.

Iraq will become a threat if the US attacks, unprovoked...

that was putting it simply. and i'd say not just iraq, but quite a few other 'islamic' nations COULD BECOME a threat. the 'latest' country to feel threated by the US is, surprisingly, pakistan(read about that here so there's probably a lot more KILLING IN THE NAME OF ___ to come.

[Spliffdaddy]

The US wants oil sooo bad that they are willing to spend enough money on war to buy ALL of Iraq's oil for the next decade.

Are you folks really that stupid or do you just hate Dubya?

That's what I thought.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Cipher13:
No.

The US wants oil.

Iraq will become a threat if the US attacks, unprovoked...

If the US wanted oil, The US could have and can take it if it wants. The US pays for oil just like everyone else. BTW Didn't Bush just sign something to help car companies further along the progress of gasoline-less running cars by 2010? Hmm

[Cipher13]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
The US wants oil sooo bad that they are willing to spend enough money on war to buy ALL of Iraq's oil for the next decade.

Are you folks really that stupid or do you just hate Dubya?

That's what I thought.

Wanna put that in gramatically correct English for those of us who don't live in Tenessee?

I'm assuming you're trying to say "with the amount of money the US will spend on war, they could just buy the oil"?

Wow. If that's so...

1. why give money to Iraq when you can just take?
2. ever heard of inflation? As oil becomes rarer, it will get extortionately expensive...
3. ever heard of the phrase "kill two birds with one stone"? No? *sigh*

Originally posted by Zimphire:
If the US wanted oil, The US could have and can take it if it wants. The US pays for oil just like everyone else. BTW Didn't Bush just sign something to help car companies further along the progress of gasoline-less running cars by 2010? Hmm

It can take it, can it? Yes, it can - by warring with the owner country. Duh. THat's exactly what we're saying.

Sure, he may have - but does that mean the entire world will instantly take up gasoline-less cars? Replace ALL gas cars with them? Heh. This would make the US the oil baron country, rather than Iraq... very strategic. Owning the Iraq oil reserves would give the US a lot of leverage in the future. Not to mention many third world countries (and armies) would be completely at their mercy...

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Cipher13:
It can take it, can it? Yes, it can - by warring with the owner country. Duh. THat's exactly what we're saying.

But that isn't what is going on. See we did it in the early 90s, then again in the late 90s. Didn't take their oil. We still payed for it.We aren't going to do it now either.

Sure, he may have - but does that mean the entire world will instantly take up gasoline-less cars?

Well it's a good thing I never claimed they would now isn't it? Why did you even make this point? Who are you arguing with? No one ever said otherwise.

Replace ALL gas cars with them? Heh. This would make the US the oil baron country, rather than Iraq... very strategic. Owning the Iraq oil reserves would give the US a lot of leverage in the future. Not to mention many third world countries (and armies) would be completely at their mercy...

I never said get rid of ALL gas cars did I? Come on Cipher, if you are going to argue with me, at least argue with something I actually said ok?

[Cipher13]

You missed my point entirely.

You made the comment about non-petrol cars; the point I made was that MOST cars in the world would STILL use petroleum, which made your point about bush pushing for non-petroleum cars moot.

With me?

See, thing is, you COULD have in the early 90's - but the crisis wasn't nearly as bad as it is now.

I don't know about the wholesale prices of oil, but in Australia, petrol prices have nearly doubled since the early 90's.

[suhail]

This is general knowledge about the History of Iraq.
I will post a couple of threads about the history of the Gulf, and the involvement of the U.S, U.K, and Israel, which dates all the way back to the 50's. Their mission, oil.


Zarqawi's Stump (previously known as Atef's Carcass) Join the army, maybe someone will put you out of your bitter misery.