Anyone else ever think we could do a better job?

Page 7 of 7 [ 110 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

Previous topic | Next topic

Macbeth
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 May 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,984
Location: UK Doncaster

20 Sep 2007, 8:20 am

Johnnie wrote:

Quote:

There are far too many other warlike nations in the area for him to have ever built up an arabic third reich of his own.

I doubt he was going to give up trying to expand his empire, he tried to take iran and than went after an easier target Kuwiat and we had to drive him out. The guy wasn't going to stop.[quote]

You obviously didnt read what I posted correctly. Yes, he wanted to expand his empire.. but at no point was he ever in a position to do so. He could have sat in his golden palace with maps of the world all coloured in IRAQ PROPERTY OF ME ... and it would have made no difference. As I said.. he spent nigh on a decade fighting Iran, and got nowhere... he invaded Kuwait, and promptly got beaten to hell by coalition forces for doing it. He had TEN YEARS to rebuild his war machine, teach them how to fight the americans et al, and what happened when they came back? He got flattened AGAIN.

There was, quite literally, a gulf between his dreams and his realities. BY that time scale it would have been about 100 years before he managed to become a threat to anyone other than the locality, and i very much doubt that Syria, Jordan, Iran, Egypt, Israel, Palestine etc would have sat there on their asses with their armies and let Saddam take them over. He wasnt clever enough to "annex the sudentenland" (Kuwait.) He just attacked it. He wasnt crafty enough to hide killing kurds, he just went ahead and gassed them in full vew of everyone. He was NEVER going to be as threat to the US of A.

_________________
"There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart,
that you can't take part" [Mario Savo, 1964]

Johnnie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 9 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 589
Location: green mountian state

21 Sep 2007, 6:28 pm

Quote:

He was NEVER going to be as threat to the US of A.

if you say so

Quote:

You obviously didnt read what I posted correctly.

if you say so

BeyondInfinity
Snowy Owl

Joined: 13 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 154

21 Sep 2007, 6:42 pm

any type of organized government has a bit of tyranny in it. freedom is surrendered when any system is given power over the individual.

_________________
"He who sees from the side has eight eyes"

Macbeth
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 May 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,984
Location: UK Doncaster

22 Sep 2007, 8:51 am

Johnnie wrote:

Quote:

He was NEVER going to be as threat to the US of A.

if you say so

Quote:

You obviously didnt read what I posted correctly.

if you say so

Unless you can demonstrate exactly how a tinpot dictator is a clear and present danger and a threat to the continental united states.. yes, I do say so.

And until you demonstrate applied understanding of what I wrote in your responses, yes, I say so. You aint reading em right.

_________________
"There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart,
that you can't take part" [Mario Savo, 1964]

Johnnie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 9 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 589
Location: green mountian state

22 Sep 2007, 11:59 am

Quote:

He was also not the only oil producing nation in the area, so he never had the monopoly.

all your double talk and other B/S doesn't change this simple fact
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 87_pf.html

now if you don't think disruption of oil to the USA isn't a threat while your life depends on oil, you needs to crawl out of your computer cave and go outside and discover how food is grown and ends up in the grocery store.

It don't matter if you grow your own and have ample supplies, who is going to protect you from the staving masses when they will kill you to get what you have, are you going to call the cops and let them know you have a pile of food, they will be the ones who come kill you to feed their families.

Macbeth
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 May 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,984
Location: UK Doncaster

22 Sep 2007, 1:52 pm

My life doesnt depend on oil supplies to the US. But then I'm not American.

Doesnt change the fact that he was never a military threat to the US.

If the war was about stabilizing oil supplies, they should have just said as much, and not started making BS up.

As for famine and war in the US over oil.. maybe you shouldnt have become so dependent on a material you have to ship in from abroad. Sounds like the money spent on that war would have been better spent on making the US less oil dependent. Given that youve already passed your peak oil production, and the rest of the world is well on the way to doing the same, making war over something thats not going to last anyway is futile.After all, how much oil does it require to ship thousands of soldiers across the world, and keep them and their vehicles supplied for a prolonged campaign? You could feed a small town for weeks with the money you burned every time you shot one of your own tanks in the ass. How many barrels of oil does it take to keep a squadron of A-10 tankbusters up in the air for a year exactly? How much is it to buy a single D.U round?

Kindly dont assume to think I am cretinous enough to have no idea how food gets on shelves either. The f*****g food pixies put it there every night after the shopkeepers go home. They also fix all the shoes and hide all the biros..... :roll:

_________________
"There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart,
that you can't take part" [Mario Savo, 1964]

Johnnie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 9 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 589
Location: green mountian state

22 Sep 2007, 6:19 pm

Quote:

My life doesnt depend on oil supplies to the US. But then I'm not American.

I take it you have never driven across the USA and saw the worlds bread basket.Add in canada and every other major food producing country on the globe fighting over restricted oil supplies and it will get ugly.

Quote:

NEW YORK — Wheat prices climbed further into record territory Wednesday (Sept. 12) after the Agriculture Department projected that U.S. stockpiles will dwindle to 33-year lows by the end of the crop year.

http://www.agweekly.com/articles/2007/0 ... kets10.txt

You may live on an island, but it's so connected to the world it's unreal. The colapse of the american economy would have ripple efforts around the world. look up any major US company and look at the list of major stock holders does Barclays ring a bell ?

Wheat,oil,corn are just commodities on the world market, shortages ripple around the globe in no time.

Quote:

maybe you shouldnt have become so dependent on a material you have to ship in from abroad.

That's really funny coming from somebody living on an island that probably couldn't support it's own population without supplies from around the world. How many rubber tree's do you have

Macbeth
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 May 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,984
Location: UK Doncaster

23 Sep 2007, 6:13 am

Johnnie wrote:

Quote:

My life doesnt depend on oil supplies to the US. But then I'm not American.

Quote:

maybe you shouldnt have become so dependent on a material you have to ship in from abroad.

That's really funny coming from somebody living on an island that probably couldn't support it's own population without supplies from around the world. How many rubber tree's do you have

That, my friend, is the point. I live on a small island. We have an excuse to search abroad for our requirements. You live on a whole continent, where you can, in theory, produce all of the things you need, without import. We have also managed to maintain reasonable standards of international diplomacy, and usually manage to get what we need these days without declaring war on everyone. With the obvious exception of Blair jamming his head so far up Bush's ass that he can lick the back of his teeth, we've managed to NOT end up almost universally reviled, even by our own allies.

And I did mention the whole peak-oil production problem worldwide. We could just as well have spent OUR money on becoming less oil reliant, rather than following you shower into a hugely unpopular war based on scuttlebutt, hearsay, and made up bollocks.

_________________
"There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart,
that you can't take part" [Mario Savo, 1964]

Johnnie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 9 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 589
Location: green mountian state

23 Sep 2007, 11:56 am

I guess if I lived over there I would be pissed off also, must really suck to live under the rule of central planners.

What it comes down to is the Queen of England has the Govenor of her territory called the colony of america do her dirty work and you complain about it.

Barclays Global Investors UK Holdings Ltd 253,686,695 shares of exxon/mobil, largest stock holder

Barclays Global Investors UK Holdings Ltd 110,445,447 shares of wal-mart stores largest stock holder

Barclays Global Investors UK Holdings Ltd 21,887,349 shares of general motors

STATE STREET CORPORATION Boston Mass. 73,998,670 shares of general motors, blue bloods of Boston

citibank
Barclays Global Investors UK Holdings Ltd 179,123,520 shares
STATE STREET CORPORATION 150,346,292 shares

so as you moan and groan to the american peasants, it's your own country influancing our elections by giving us the choice of which blue blood puppet of the Queen to vote for as you folks live off the dividend checks of America Inc.

some outfit called British Petroleum is over here drilling for oil in Alaska

http://www.moneyweek.com/file/19848/the ... a-oil.html

Quote:

Since then, North Sea oil has been a major source of wealth for the British and Norwegian economies. What's more, it's also been a crucial way for the UK to avoid depending on oil from the Middle East, or any other country.

so as you butt has lived off the oil money for probably you whole life, you complain about the country that has provided you the easy life as long as the dividend checks keep floating across the ocean and your government was able to keep oil consumption down at home so they had more to export.

==========================

Than we have idiots complaining about the money spent on the war while not thinking nothing of the money wasted on entertainment, all the money wasted on pro sports & music & hollywood productions could be better spend on social services and other noble causes instead of paying some freak pop star,movie star or jock millions so they can go buy drugs and waste the money on mansions and jet fuel to fly around running their stupid mouths.

Macbeth
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 May 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,984
Location: UK Doncaster

24 Sep 2007, 9:08 am

Johnnie wrote:

Quote:

Yes, we have north sea oil. Have done for a while. NOT having to depend on the middle east for it is a GOOD thing.

You really think that we still have a hand in governing the states? What kind of ass-backwards conspiracy theory is that? If you're going to argue the toss, at least keep it vaguely grounded in reality.

Funnily enough, I agree with you about the relative levels of spending on various non essential things. I dont think paying some football player millions of pounds for kicking an iflated pigs bladder about is a wise use of cash. However, i didnt mention that because its not particularly relevant to making war in Iraq. Tom Cruise's wage packet has no bearing on the subject.

_________________
"There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart,
that you can't take part" [Mario Savo, 1964]

Johnnie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 9 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 589
Location: green mountian state

24 Sep 2007, 2:26 pm

Quote:

You really think that we still have a hand in governing the states? What kind of ass-backwards conspiracy theory is that?

The largest shareholder in the nations largest companies sure can influance where the campaign money goes and what goes on the airwaves sinse they own part of the newsmedia also.

monty
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Sep 2007
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,741

24 Sep 2007, 2:55 pm

No doubt that the international financial elite include lots of Brits, along with old Dutch money as well. But I'm not sure that explains US foreign policy. The manifesto of the Project for a New American Century does a better job at explaining the Bush Administration's actions to date, and it was signed by people like Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. These people are blatant US nationalists, and they seek a situation where the US is the single, unchallenged superpower. They have a vision of re-organizing the governments of the Middle East. This vision is very UK-friendly, but I don't see that the British are calling the shots. They are a junior partner in the military ventures, and they get a minority position when it comes to the spoils.

Macbeth
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 May 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,984
Location: UK Doncaster

24 Sep 2007, 3:11 pm

monty wrote:

In other words, the US stomps around the globe acting like it owns the place, and we get dragged along because our glorious leaders are caught in its ass, whether it be Blair trying to suck Bush colon, or our dour and unelected scots ruler at the moment. Remains to be seen how gynaecological his involvement with america is.

I dont know as "junior partner" is the correct term. sort of implies that we dont actually do very much, or commit very much. Not so. We are simply smaller is all. Its enough commitment to have troops dying in a pointless venture. Its probably more of a commitment in some ways, because we dont tend to shoot our own allies quite as much.

_________________
"There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart,
that you can't take part" [Mario Savo, 1964]

monty
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Sep 2007
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,741

24 Sep 2007, 3:34 pm

I was using junior partner somewhat in the way that you suggest - as in a business where the minority holder is smaller, contributes fewer resources, and is compensated proportionately. Not minimizing your role in this fiasco at all, there is enough blame for all.

I suppose in a law firm, the term junior/senior partner has a different meaning, which may not be relevant. Of course we USians do tend to put ourselves a level higher up when it comes to who we respect, but we do not disrespect the Brits. Even if you are 'junior' partners.

Page 7 of 7 [ 110 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

Jump to:

Anyone else ever think we could do a better job? Post Reply New Topic

Anyone else ever think we could do a better job?