Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

It's so funny, I could cry...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • It's so funny, I could cry...

    ...how self-destructive the hawks mouths are. Rumsfeld's deputy, Wolfowitz, certainly has taken a cue from his boss, and learned the fine art of shooting off his mouth in the worst possible way. In this story, from The Guardian http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/...970334,00.html
    those of us who said so all along, are given the chance to once again say..."We told you so!"

    Quote

    Oil was the main reason for military action against Iraq, a leading White House hawk has claimed, confirming the worst fears of those opposed to the US-led war.
    The US deputy defence secretary, Paul Wolfowitz - who has already undermined Tony Blair's position over weapons of mass destruction (WMD) by describing them as a "bureaucratic" excuse for war - has now gone further by claiming the real motive was that Iraq is "swimming" in oil.

    The latest comments were made by Mr Wolfowitz in an address to delegates at an Asian security summit in Singapore at the weekend, and reported today by German newspapers Der Tagesspiegel and Die Welt.

    Asked why a nuclear power such as North Korea was being treated differently from Iraq, where hardly any weapons of mass destruction had been found, the deputy defence minister said: "Let's look at it simply. The most important difference between North Korea and Iraq is that economically, we just had no choice in Iraq. The country swims on a sea of oil."

    ...

    end quote
    I have no problem at all with being proved wrong. Especially when being proved wrong leaves the world a better place, than being proved right...

  • #2
    Oh...and by the way...if these trailers are being claimed to be mobile biological weapons production labs, then why the **** were the guys investigating them back in April, when these pictures were taken, not wearing their Haz-Mat bunny suits?
    Attached Files
    Last edited by JAMiAM; 04 Jun 03, 23:11.
    I have no problem at all with being proved wrong. Especially when being proved wrong leaves the world a better place, than being proved right...

    Comment


    • #3
      So French Russian and German are just a bunch of hypocrits people hummmmmm

      Jamiam you could cry. I just LOL about all the vertuous quote posted here about the right to intervine in IRAQ tor emove Saddam. Saddam is threat to what hummmm PEACE you say, Human rights you say hummmm, BLA BLA BLA .

      And poor powell showing nice proof of MDW in IRAQ, best will be to show a derrick

      OIL Is the only anwer ouarfff ouarffffff ouarfff ( this is my LOL transcription)

      truth always appears after sometime

      What a "oily" day
      Oil bless you all

      Wanderpeace LOL
      The Best weapon ever:a good Joke. The Best shield ever: Humour
      JLBETIN© Aka Der Wanderer TOAW Section Leader is a █ WHQ/SZO/XG/Gamesquad® product since 01/2003
      The Birth of European Army Tournament round Three is opened

      Comment


      • #4
        While I tend to agree that oil was a major motivating factor, that quote in the Guardian article is being taken out of context and with a heavy skew.

        A reporter asked Wolfowitz the old "Why Iraq and not North Korea" question and he responded by saying economic sanctions and/or incentives would work with Korea, but not with Iraq, because of the oil. Iraq was swimming in it, enormous wealth, etc.

        EDIT: Ok that wasn't very clear. Basically, Wolfowitzs point was that in his view North Korea can be manipulated with economics whereas Iraq can not.

        Wolfowitz did not suggest that they attacked Iraq for oil. That is just the spin put on the article by the Guardian reporter.
        Last edited by MikeJ; 04 Jun 03, 16:13.
        "Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding."

        – Associate Justice Louis D. Brandeis, Olmstead vs. United States.

        Comment


        • #5
          Speaking of oil, what is the status of all that oil? Is it leaving the country? Where is it going? That should be important in deciding how much the US has been corrupted by oil shouldn't it? It should be the first thing pointed out.
          Get the US out of NATO, now!

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by JAMiAM
            Oh...and by the way...if these trailers are being claimed to be mobile biological weapons production labs, then why the **** were the guys investigating them back in April, when these pictures were taken, not wearing their Haz-Mat bunny suits?
            Depends. If they had already concluded it was no major threat, then wearing Haz-Mat isn't necessary. Troops usually look for any reason not to wear these uniforms. Besides, most labs are designed to provide safe working conditions. People wear bio suits to prevent humans from contaminating products. It's virtually impossible to cleanse the human body of the billions of bacteria, parasites, etc that exists. A single cough can push thousands of bugs to distances greater than 40ft.

            In any case, I don't see the trailer find as concrete proof Iraq had a WMD program. It could be a research facility for legal things like producing antibotics. The Iraqis simply used the truck because they were concerned a laboratory would be bombed.
            "As soon as men decide that all means are permitted to fight an evil, then their good becomes indistinguishable from the evil that they set out to destroy."-Christopher Dawson - The Judgement of Nations, 1942

            Comment


            • #7
              I once "hehe" -ed on the Iraqi issue before the War, and I was holding my card of "for oil and weapon money" .... And there was one reply from a pro-bush guy which shut me up with one single shot: no, the aim is global donimation, much beyond oil and weapon.

              He is right. Right about the wrong strategy of dear Bush.
              Attn to ALL my opponents:

              If you sent me your turn and after 24 hours, you still did not get anything from me, please be sure to post in the forum to ask for what is going on.

              Remember, I ALWAYS reply within 24 hours, even if I do NOT have time to play my turn, in which case I will at least send you email to tell you that I will have to play it later, but I DO receive your turn.

              Comment


              • #8
                about the mobile supposed WMD factories:

                As a matter of fact NO traces of WMDs were found during their investigation and the only reason why Bush thinks that they were used to manufacture WMDs is because a) they were painted in military camouflage color (LOL, yes, green is indeed the best possible choice for a desert country, I'm just curious why the US army painted their tanks and equipment yellow ?? ) and b) because they are supposedly to expensive for civil use. Yeah, right, as if a man who builds countless superexpensive palaces and basically owns enourmous amounts of oil would care about the price

                AND: If these labs would have been used to produce WMD (biological or chemical) they had to be airtight to prevent any of the substances from leaving the production place just in case of an accident. Well, have a look at that truck, does it look airtight ???
                Last edited by Kraut; 05 Jun 03, 12:34.
                "The conventional army loses if it does not win. The guerrilla wins if he does not lose."

                Henry Alfred Kissinger

                Comment


                • #9
                  hehe... let me help you out, buddy

                  Originally posted by Kraut
                  about the mobile supposed WMD factories:

                  As a matter of fact NO traces of WMDs were found during their investigation

                  huh ... excuse me... yet... that is, we do not find large amount of evidence of WMD yet. They are to be found soon, though the exact time of discovery, due to the obvious nature of such an event, would be hard to predict. However, please allow me to correct you, sir, we do have numerous evidences from our intelligence that they DO have WMD, which up till now, due to security reasons, unfortunately, we found inappropriate to disclose.


                  Originally posted by Kraut

                  and the only reason why Bush thinks that they were used to manufacture WMDs is because a) they were painted in military camouflage color (LOL, yes, green is indeed the best possible choice for a desert country, I'm just curious why the US army painted their tanks and equipment yellow ?? )

                  I believe the paint color of the coalition forces has nothing to do with the Iraqi WMD, isn't it? (Friendly, confident, smile and pause to wait for claps... claps... )


                  Originally posted by Kraut

                  and b) because they are supposedly to expensive for civil use. Yeah, right, as if a man who builds countless superexpensive palaces and basically owns enourmous amounts of oil would care about the price

                  Please notice that Saddamn Hussein did abuse Iraqi people's money for his own luxury, which was witness by all the gentlemen here, esp. after the coalition victory over the dictator. (pause, smile, ... claps..) However, none of those expenses to his personal favor was "civil" use. He did intend NO civil use, as a matter of fact, may I remind the gentlemen here, that terrorism, in particular, bioterrorism or some more dangerous forms, were to this evil man's personal pleasure and luxury as well? (brief pause, quiet, everyone look scared..) However, this danger is now dismissed by our brave servicemen and women... (claps...)


                  Originally posted by Kraut

                  AND: If these labs would have been used to produce WMD (biological or chemical) they had to be airtight to prevent any of the substances from leaving the production place just in case of an accident. Well, have a look at that truck, does it look airtight ???
                  (laugh ..) Yes, you are right in common sense. However, that precautions are widely used in the west as for any biological or pharmaseutical labs, in order to protect the personels or civilians around. Do you think a dictator who was willingly deliberately using such weapons on his own people would care the least bit about such things? Surely not. (claps.. claps.... claps... smile.. winning smile... )


                  hehe...
                  (you see how pointless it is to argue this kind of things? )
                  Attn to ALL my opponents:

                  If you sent me your turn and after 24 hours, you still did not get anything from me, please be sure to post in the forum to ask for what is going on.

                  Remember, I ALWAYS reply within 24 hours, even if I do NOT have time to play my turn, in which case I will at least send you email to tell you that I will have to play it later, but I DO receive your turn.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    huh ... excuse me... yet... that is, we do not find large amount of evidence of WMD yet. They are to be found soon, though the exact time of discovery, due to the obvious nature of such an event, would be hard to predict. However, please allow me to correct you, sir, we do have numerous evidences from our intelligence that they DO have WMD, which up till now, due to security reasons, unfortunately, we found inappropriate to disclose.
                    Considering the surety with which we were informed of the presence of these WMDs, the time required to find such weapons is long over due. Remember all this fuss over WMDs was when SH was running things and nobody (from the UN especially) had the freedom to actually determine where these things were. It was popularly explained that SH was moving them around and the inspectors were too slow to find them. Now SH is gone, the dictatorship toppled and we can go whever we want. We apparently had sufficient intelligence to make a two week job out of the invasion which was touted to be 'brilliantly executed' but not enough to keep track of the WMDs which were the whole pretext of the invasion in the first place.
                    Get the US out of NATO, now!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      From the Guardian homepage about the previous article quoted:

                      A report which was posted on our website on June 4 under the heading "Wolfowitz: Iraq war was about oil" misconstrued remarks made by the US deputy defence secretary, Paul Wolfowitz, making it appear that he had said that oil was the main reason for going to war in Iraq. He did not say that. He said, according to the department of defence website, "The . . . difference between North Korea and Iraq is that we had virtually no economic options with Iraq because the country floats on a sea of oil. In the case of North Korea, the country is teetering on the edge of economic collapse and that I believe is a major point of leverage whereas the military picture with North Korea is very different from that with Iraq." The sense was clearly that the US had no economic options by means of which to achieve its objectives, not that the economic value of the oil motivated the war. The report appeared only on the website and has now been removed.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Please notice that Saddamn Hussein did abuse Iraqi people's money for his own luxury, which was witness by all the gentlemen here, esp. after the coalition victory over the dictator. (pause, smile, ... claps..) However, none of those expenses to his personal favor was "civil" use. He did intend NO civil use, ...
                        Let's try to keep a little perspective here. The US did not invade Iraq in order to restore socialism to Iraq. SH was no more abusive of the "people's money" then anyone of the sheiks of Kuwait or Saudi Arabia or even the very fat and opulent clerics of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
                        Get the US out of NATO, now!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Not terribly surprising that both the government and the Guardian use dishonesty to promote an agenda.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by SparceMatrix


                            Let's try to keep a little perspective here. The US did not invade Iraq in order to restore socialism to Iraq. SH was no more abusive of the "people's money" then anyone of the sheiks of Kuwait or Saudi Arabia or even the very fat and opulent clerics of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
                            To be fair to the Administration, a speech about Iraq was not made without commenting on the human rights abuses of Sadaam's regime. I personally didn't find it a particularly persuasive argument for intervention, but it is one they used along with WMDs.

                            Comment

                            Latest Topics

                            Collapse

                            Working...
                            X