To All Americans - Post-9/11 Era

To All Americans

Post-9/11 Era Forum

Pages:  1Original Forum    Popular Forums    Search

Posted by: sandradon

Could you please visit this site http://ist-socrates.berkeley.edu/~pdscott/iraq.html
and give me your comments on the information contained there. I'm fed up to the back teeth hearing
that Americans are uninformed and ignorant of world
economics.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Dreamzwalker

You may want to check your link.
Does not display

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Caps#1

no it doesn't

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Sean Kelly

berkeley was spelled wrong

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Dreamzwalker

Whoops - that's what I get for not paying attention.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Edward Teach

What a bunch of bull!!!! I hope that the author didn't get a grade for that.

Oh that's right Berkeley is a liberal college isn't it. Remember all the protesters from the Vietnam era.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Sean Kelly

I used to work in Berkeley near the university. If a week went by without SOME form of protest then something was gravely awry.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Sable

very interesting to read.

Goots,

quote:
What a bunch of bull!!!!


i see that you still dont want to hear or read anything bad about your country, but i need more than "Oh that's right Berkeley is a liberal college isn't it", if you think it s nothing but garbage, give us facts.

this links give us new evidences that this is a war for oil that you have been denying since the begining.

i find it hard to defense, but i admit you are doing a good job. yet, I have read nothing so far that could change my mind, and a lot that fortify the idea.
Reply To this Message

Posted by: Edward Teach

I would hardly call it evidence. There are a lot of truths in the document but they take those truths and spin them into theorys that just arn't true. It's just retoric to support their view.

You know we don't have a crisis here with oil. Gas prices have gone up a bit because of panic and because of the world price per barrel of oil. But that's more panic because of war.

One other thing, who should you believe. People who receive daily intelligence briefings from the worlds best intelligence agencies like CIA and MI6, or people who recieve all their intelligence from the media?

I'm not going to repost the stuff that I've already posted. However you can visit my site. And that document is too long to rip apart.

http://iraq.usaiway.net

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Dreamzwalker

It is a paper placed together through person beliefs and person stand point. Exaggerations are mostly truths but placed on a higher level to appeal more to emotion and those against war.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: mcbevin

quote:
You know we don't have a crisis here with oil. Gas prices have gone up a bit because of panic and because of the world price per barrel of oil. But that's more panic because of war.


a bit of information from my website ( http://www.bevin.de/usa ) -

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Stor...,880443,00.html
http://www.eei.org/issues/news/releases/010517.htm
May 2001 - The US energy department frighten politicians with a study known as the Cheney report (after the former head of Halliburton oil services group, now US vice-president, who wrote it). He predicts that imported oil would need to rise from 10.4 million barrels a day at present to 16.7 million barrels a day by 2020.

http://www.sundayherald.com/28224
http://www.rice.edu/projects/baker/...gy/energytf.htm
April 2001 - A report entitled 'Strategic Energy Policy Challenges For The 21st Century' is submitted to Vice President Dick Cheney, advocating a policy of using military force against an enemy such as Iraq to secure US access to, and control of, Middle Eastern oil fields.

''Iraq remains a destabilising influence to ... the flow of oil to international markets from the Middle East. Saddam Hussein has also demonstrated a willingness to threaten to use the oil weapon and to use his own export programme to manipulate oil markets.'. The document also points out that 'the United States remains a prisoner of its energy dilemma', and that one of the 'consequences' of this is a 'need for military intervention'. It says the 'central dilemma' for the US administration is that 'the American people continue to demand plentiful and cheap energy without sacrifice or inconvenience'.



i beg to differ
Reply To this Message

Posted by: Caps#1

I think that gas stations use the threat of war as an excuse to higher prices, Sable, I think no matter what you read or how much proof we give you will ever change your mind.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Dreamzwalker

I think that's part true but the gas were I live was 1.85 a gallon in May of 2001 -
Now it's 1.49 a gallon here.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Caps#1

Well, here where I live it is one of the highest prices ever at 1.65-1.75 a gallon for regular gas. We should consider ourselves lucky, I hear in some parts of CA gas is 2.50+ for one gallon of regular.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Dreamzwalker

That's what I've heard.
Hope it doesn't reach that here. I'm going to ask my friend from NY what here's is.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Sable

dont be to worry, as soon as the war wil begin, the price will go down.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Dreamzwalker

Possibly - but i'm not worried about to much. Get paid pretty nice to sit on my hippie arse all day.


Unless it reaches 2.10+ a gallon. Then I would be

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Sean Kelly

it's $2.30/gallon here for the 91 grade that my car needs glad my commute is less than 15 miles, it used to be a lot worse.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Dreamzwalker

Yikes....Glad it hasn't reached that here. My round trip to work and back is about 35- 40 miles. Depends if I take the hwy to the turnpike/toll road, or just the highway.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Caps#1

i don't work and don't drive so I don't care...lol, and who cares what the buses have to pay for gas to take me to school!!!

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Sable

who cares...may be the million of iraqi that has already died, and the thousands to come.
enjoy the 1 dollar difference you will get.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Marc Flemming

Congratulations, Sable. That was the 1000th post in the Iraq forum.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Sean Kelly

YEAH! YAY! You've won the FREE , "NUKE IRAQ!" bumper sticker! Just mail us your address!

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Caps#1

WE ARE NOT GOING TO KILL CIVILAINS, YOU ANTI-WAR PEOPLE USE THAT ARGUMENT EVERY TIME, BUT IT FAILS, WE WILL NOT HURT CIVILAINS AND YOU KNOW IT, THE TRUTH IS YOU HAVE NO REASONS TO SUPPORT YOUR POSITION. AND AS FOR THAT BUMPER STICKER, I WANT IT, I WOULD PUT IT ON MY FUTURE CAR, lol, AND AS FOR YOU SABLE, WATCH THE NEWS SOME MORE AND GET CAUGHT UP ON WHY WE NEED TO GO TO WAR.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Dreamzwalker

quote:
Originally posted by Sable
who cares...may be the million of iraqi that has already died, and the thousands to come.
enjoy the 1 dollar difference you will get.




The million Iraqi that have died, died by Saddam's hand.
And don't you mean the thousands that are going to surrender?
People need to understand, we are not going in to KILL civilians. Anti-war people keep saying "what about the children?" That's the only excuse they can come up with, and removing Saddam will give those children a future.
Reply To this Message

Posted by: Caps#1

very good point Dreamzwalker

Reply To this Message

Posted by: mcbevin

quote:
WE ARE NOT GOING TO KILL CIVILAINS, YOU ANTI-WAR PEOPLE USE THAT ARGUMENT EVERY TIME, BUT IT FAILS, WE WILL NOT HURT CIVILAINS AND YOU KNOW IT, THE TRUTH IS YOU HAVE NO REASONS TO SUPPORT YOUR POSITION. AND AS FOR THAT BUMPER STICKER, I WANT IT, I WOULD PUT IT ON MY FUTURE CAR, lol, AND AS FOR YOU SABLE, WATCH THE NEWS SOME MORE AND GET CAUGHT UP ON WHY WE NEED TO GO TO WAR.


What planet are you living on exactly, Mr Caps?

Have you read about the US's plan for attack on Baghdad? The insane amount of bombs they're going to drop there - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...6-2003Mar5.html . The UN estimates of 500,000 civilian injuries/deaths as direct/indirect results of this war+bombing? - http://www.mcc.org/areaserv/middlee.../sanctions.html

Have you been following the increased US bombing in recent months in Iraq, with many civilian casualties already this year? - http://www.ccmep.org/usbombingwatch/2003.htm

Or perhaps you've forgotten the millions of civilians killed by US bombing in cambodia, laos and 'nam? - http://www.bevin.de/usa/

Now Caps - some people are trying to have an intelligent debate here over a war and personally I just find your drivel distracting. Would it be too impolite to request that you refrain from posting until such time that you actually have something useful to contribute to the discussion?
Reply To this Message

Posted by: skippy

quote:
Originally posted by Dreamzwalker




The million Iraqi that have died, died by Saddam's hand.
And don't you mean the thousands that are going to surrender?
People need to understand, we are not going in to KILL civilians. Anti-war people keep saying "what about the children?" That's the only excuse they can come up with, and removing Saddam will give those children a future.
OK, when did Saddam kill a million people? Dude, you've got an aweful lot of facts, but no reliable sources we can look at.

The last statistic I've heard is that 5,000 Kurds died when he gassed them. Bush said 20,000 in his speech, but they said 5,000 on the news the other night. I believe the news. So, how did he kill the other 995,000?
Reply To this Message

Posted by: Edward Teach

quote:
Originally posted by mcbevin


What planet are you living on exactly, Mr Caps?

Have you read about the US's plan for attack on Baghdad? The insane amount of bombs they're going to drop there - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...6-2003Mar5.html . The UN estimates of 500,000 civilian injuries/deaths as direct/indirect results of this war+bombing? - http://www.mcc.org/areaserv/middlee.../sanctions.html
What does the military say will be the civilian casulties? The UN is using figures from previous wars. This is not going to be like previous wars. There have been BIG changes since even the last gulf war.

quote:

Have you been following the increased US bombing in recent months in Iraq, with many civilian casualties already this year? - http://www.ccmep.org/usbombingwatch/2003.htm

"Warplanes taking part in U.S.-British patrols over southern Iraq on Monday attacked air defense targets in a "no-fly" zone"

"Earlier, coalition jets hit a mobile missile guidance system about 370 kilometers (230 miles) west of Baghdad at about 8:20 a.m. (4:10 a.m. GMT), according to a statement from the Florida-based Central Command. The military said the strike was ordered "in response to Iraqi threats."

"Precision-guided weapons were used to target a mobile missile guidance radar system, the statement said. A similar surface-to-air missile system and an anti-aircraft artillery site were attacked on Friday and Wednesday. "

etc your site goes on and on. Unless Saddam is putting civilians at these sites there shouldn't be that many civilian casulties.

quote:

Or perhaps you've forgotten the millions of civilians killed by US bombing in cambodia, laos and 'nam? - http://www.bevin.de/usa/


Come on now that was a different era with different technology.

No doubt there will be civilian deaths, but there would be far less if Saddam didn't put civilian offices, schools and the like over top of his commmand centers.

HE is the one using HUMAN SHIELDS which is a direct violation of the Geneva Convenctions.
Reply To this Message

Posted by: mcbevin

I was simply trying to make the point that there will in fact be civilian casualties.

I don't want to argue over who is to blame for them.

Regarding big changes since the last Gulf War, I am very dubious. Are you talking about the Mother of all Bombs they've just developed perhaps? Or the Bush administrations eagerness to make use of chemical + nuclear weapons?

Sorry, I should qualify that. They are trying to get congress to let them use and further develop 'non-lethal' chemical weapons, and 'mini'-nukes. I wouldn't want to imply that the US was using WMD in the war against WMD or anything!

Anyway, as I said, I was just trying to make a basic point about the realities of war to our expert Caps, rather than to start a debate on exactly how many civilians will die in the war and who is to blame.

Reply To this Message

Pages:  1 Free Forums    Chat Forum

Post-9/11 Era Forum: To All Americans

Forum Forum Forum