Was The Iraq War All About Oil?

[The Rabbi]

You mean general assumptions like saying Obama's like libertarians? You're a featherweight. Obama has used the military and been in people's shit diplomatically across the world. Your examples of his not using military where when he was getting his way already, why would he? Libertarians would not have been involved in those either militarily or telling people their business, we would have stayed out of them. You're full of crap.

You clearly dont understand the difference between flapping your gums on the internet and having to make decisions based on reality.
Obama had many opportunities to become involved in issues that a neocon certainly would have supported, and a libertarian certainly would have opposed. He did not become involved in those issues. Ergo he is closer to what a libertarian looks like than a neocon.

Whatever, I'm not going to debate definitions you insist on making up for words.

That was incoherent.
You've never defined a single term you've ever used. I'm not saying Obama is a libertarian. He clearly isnt. But his foreign policy is a lot closer to that of libertarians than to that of neoconservatives. That's a fact, jack.

 

[kaz]

You clearly dont understand the difference between flapping your gums on the internet and having to make decisions based on reality.
Obama had many opportunities to become involved in issues that a neocon certainly would have supported, and a libertarian certainly would have opposed. He did not become involved in those issues. Ergo he is closer to what a libertarian looks like than a neocon.

Whatever, I'm not going to debate definitions you insist on making up for words.

That was incoherent.
You've never defined a single term you've ever used. I'm not saying Obama is a libertarian. He clearly isnt. But his foreign policy is a lot closer to that of libertarians than to that of neoconservatives. That's a fact, jack.

Actually I defined neocon based on what neocon actually means and you decided to go with the definition you made up instead. And I told you that libertarian is not just about not using the military for non-defensive purposes, it's also not being in people's shit which Obama is all over the place whether or not he actually follows through on using the military to do it, which he has repeatedly.

I didn't define proximate cause, it's just an English word you don't know and aren't willing to look up.

We can clearly add "incoherent" to the list of words you don't know since it doesn't mean you don't agree with it. What I wrote was completely unambiguous. You probably don't know what that means either, it has more than six letters.

 

[The Rabbi]

Whatever, I'm not going to debate definitions you insist on making up for words.

That was incoherent.
You've never defined a single term you've ever used. I'm not saying Obama is a libertarian. He clearly isnt. But his foreign policy is a lot closer to that of libertarians than to that of neoconservatives. That's a fact, jack.

Actually I defined neocon based on what neocon actually means and you decided to go with the definition you made up instead. And I told you that libertarian is not just about not using the military for non-defensive purposes, it's also not being in people's shit which Obama is all over the place whether or not he actually follows through on using the military to do it, which he has repeatedly.

I didn't define proximate cause, it's just an English word you don't know and aren't willing to look up.

We can clearly add "incoherent" to the list of words you don't know since it doesn't mean you don't agree with it. What I wrote was completely unambiguous. You probably don't know what that means either, it has more than six letters.

Wow, ranting. Pretty soon you'll descend even firther.
No, your comment made little sense. Unless English is a foreign language to you. You never defined what neocon is. I never argued Obama was not in people's shit, whatever that's supposed to mean. But he has shied away from involvement where a neocon would press for it. Ergo he cannot be a neocon. So someone claiming he is either a) Doesn't know what a neocon, or b) doesnt know what Obama has been doing.

 

[kaz]

You never defined what neocon is

Post #207

 

[The Rabbi]

You never defined what neocon is

Post #207

That's only half the definition, and you didn't distinguish "neo" conservative from conservative. They are "new" conservatives, not conservatives.

The difference is they are tax and spend liberals who want to do that. Hence the "new" in new conservative.

That is why calling Laura Ingram a "neo" conservative was idiotic. She is a conservative, the traditional kind, there is nothing "new" in her conservatism.

Yeah you accuse me of making up definitions and here you are. It isnt even a definition. It's just an insult based on ignorance.
Move along, s0n. You're way out of your league here.

 

[kaz]

You never defined what neocon is

Post #207

That's only half the definition, and you didn't distinguish "neo" conservative from conservative. They are "new" conservatives, not conservatives.

The difference is they are tax and spend liberals who want to do that. Hence the "new" in new conservative.

That is why calling Laura Ingram a "neo" conservative was idiotic. She is a conservative, the traditional kind, there is nothing "new" in her conservatism.

Yeah you accuse me of making up definitions and here you are. It isnt even a definition. It's just an insult based on ignorance.
Move along, s0n. You're way out of your league here.

LOL, I usually only laugh at liberals like I am at you right now. I am moving on though, you're bush league. You should do reading about the history of neocons though, it's actually interesting. Using definitions you make up isn't.

 

[The Rabbi]

Post #207

That's only half the definition, and you didn't distinguish "neo" conservative from conservative. They are "new" conservatives, not conservatives.

The difference is they are tax and spend liberals who want to do that. Hence the "new" in new conservative.

That is why calling Laura Ingram a "neo" conservative was idiotic. She is a conservative, the traditional kind, there is nothing "new" in her conservatism.

Yeah you accuse me of making up definitions and here you are. It isnt even a definition. It's just an insult based on ignorance.
Move along, s0n. You're way out of your league here.

LOL, I usually only laugh at liberals like I am at you right now. I am moving on though, you're bush league. You should do reading about the history of neocons though, it's actually interesting. Using definitions you make up isn't.

Irony!
I always laugh at narco-libertarians, about the same way I laugh at you. I had thought you were one up on the usual dingbats calling themselves libertarians but I guess I'm wrong. It's true: Libertarian and liberal are pretty close to each other and not just in spelling.

 

[kaz]

Yeah you accuse me of making up definitions and here you are. It isnt even a definition. It's just an insult based on ignorance.
Move along, s0n. You're way out of your league here.

LOL, I usually only laugh at liberals like I am at you right now. I am moving on though, you're bush league. You should do reading about the history of neocons though, it's actually interesting. Using definitions you make up isn't.

Irony!
I always laugh at narco-libertarians, about the same way I laugh at you. I had thought you were one up on the usual dingbats calling themselves libertarians but I guess I'm wrong. It's true: Libertarian and liberal are pretty close to each other and not just in spelling.

Gotcha, I'm an anarchist ("narco libertarian") and also a Marxist "liberal." You really need to stop talking, you make yourself look dumber and dumber.

 

[The Rabbi]

LOL, I usually only laugh at liberals like I am at you right now. I am moving on though, you're bush league. You should do reading about the history of neocons though, it's actually interesting. Using definitions you make up isn't.

Irony!
I always laugh at narco-libertarians, about the same way I laugh at you. I had thought you were one up on the usual dingbats calling themselves libertarians but I guess I'm wrong. It's true: Libertarian and liberal are pretty close to each other and not just in spelling.

Gotcha, I'm an anarchist ("narco libertarian") and also a Marxist "liberal." You really need to stop talking, you make yourself look dumber and dumber.

Dont forget an Islamist. If you're going to distort and make shit up go all the way.

 

[Avorysuds]

Under Bush of course! Under Obama it's about saving minority children!

 

[nodoginnafight]

Here's a chance fro the left to show how truly stupid and dysfunctional they are. Many commentators have written that "of course the war was primarily about getting Iraqi oil." (Go Google it if you dnt believe me).
Do you agree with that?

Of course it was. We are not in other hell holes in the world, just the middle east. You can obscure it by talking about the proximate causes of the war, but the only reason we are there the way we are is oil.

You might want to read about how Iraq was created in Paris in 1919.

Nice to see stupidity is not contained to those on the LEft. Although I frequently consider libertarians to be leftists as well.
It would be like saying we went to war in Japan because of oil.

Japan attacked the United States because we were shutting them out of the world market for steel, scrap iron and aviation fuel .... so ....

Pearl Harbor History: Why Did Japan Attack? Eyewitness Accounts, Casualty List, Background

 

[deltex1]

From what I know our initial and long term involvement in the ME involves oil. Everyone knows that...and for good reason. Lately the radicals want us out of there so they can control the area and the wealth. Religion is a cover. If Obabble would get off his ass and make us energy independent we could nuke the fuggers and be done with them.

 

[Redfish]

From what I know our initial and long term involvement in the ME involves oil. Everyone knows that...and for good reason. Lately the radicals want us out of there so they can control the area and the wealth. Religion is a cover. If Obabble would get off his ass and make us energy independent we could nuke the fuggers and be done with them.

Obozo does not want us energy independent, he wants to bring the US to its knees as punishment for slavery and being successful. In his small mind he believes that our success was achieved by taking from the rest of the world.

worst president in history is too mild.

 

[Siete]

From what I know our initial and long term involvement in the ME involves oil. Everyone knows that...and for good reason. Lately the radicals want us out of there so they can control the area and the wealth. Religion is a cover. If Obabble would get off his ass and make us energy independent we could nuke the fuggers and be done with them.

so go buy an electric car and stop blaming Obama for the energy independent BS... YOU be energy independent.

see how easy it is to be INDEPENDENT ?

 

[deltex1]

From what I know our initial and long term involvement in the ME involves oil. Everyone knows that...and for good reason. Lately the radicals want us out of there so they can control the area and the wealth. Religion is a cover. If Obabble would get off his ass and make us energy independent we could nuke the fuggers and be done with them.

so go buy an electric car and stop blaming Obama for the energy independent BS... YOU be energy independent.

see how easy it is to be INDEPENDENT ?

I would if I could plug into your ass...but you have an "occupied" sign on it...permanently.........LMBBFFAO!!!!

 

[Siete]

From what I know our initial and long term involvement in the ME involves oil. Everyone knows that...and for good reason. Lately the radicals want us out of there so they can control the area and the wealth. Religion is a cover. If Obabble would get off his ass and make us energy independent we could nuke the fuggers and be done with them.

so go buy an electric car and stop blaming Obama for the energy independent BS... YOU be energy independent.

see how easy it is to be INDEPENDENT ?

I would if I could plug into your ass...but you have an "occupied" sign on it...permanently.........LMBBFFAO!!!!

so you're uninterested in being independent, you just want to yammer and carp about it.

Typical idiot RW'er ....

 

[Wry Catcher]

Here's a chance fro the left to show how truly stupid and dysfunctional they are. Many commentators have written that "of course the war was primarily about getting Iraqi oil." (Go Google it if you dnt believe me).
Do you agree with that?

Yep, if it were about WMD's, Rice, Powell, Cheney and Bush would have spoken about Mushrooms Clouds in reference to N. Korea and/or Iran during their dog and pony show.

 

[paulitician]

Yes, for the most part it was. Has it paid for the War yet? That's what Dick Cheney promised anyway. Heard they're selling most of it to China these days. Just another sad aspect of the monumental Iraq War blunder.

 

[kaz]

From what I know our initial and long term involvement in the ME involves oil. Everyone knows that...and for good reason. Lately the radicals want us out of there so they can control the area and the wealth. Religion is a cover. If Obabble would get off his ass and make us energy independent we could nuke the fuggers and be done with them.

so go buy an electric car and stop blaming Obama for the energy independent BS... YOU be energy independent.

see how easy it is to be INDEPENDENT ?

So where do you get the electricity for the car, Homey? Most of it comes from power plants that burn ... wait for it ... fossil fuels ... Liberalism, can't make that shit up...

 

[NotfooledbyW]

The Saddam was part of 9/11 strawman has refuted time and time again. Go read the Iraq Resolution. Those were the reasons, valid reasons, for the war.

What Iraq Resolution?

Rabbi has lost touch with reality on the reason Bush gave for invading years ago,

Here is a snapshot of how wrong Rabbi has been:

The Bush Administration gave a fuck about the U.N. They spent untold hours trying to convince those feckless weasels to go enforce their own sanctions. But they had their heads ALL THE WAY UP Saddam's ass in the oil for food scandal.

In a better world we'd send those useless commie assholes packing and turn Turtle Bay into condos and use the money for something worthwhile. Like a new aircraft carrier. But in the meantime engagement with the U.N is official policy.
I realize that's probably confusing to you.

Saddam Hussein not only cooperated fully with the UN prior to the invasion, he openly offered Bush to send thousands of CIA and anyone else into Iraq to help the UN find the alleged most lethal weapons ever devised that Bush said were being hidden still in March 2003.

When Bush turned down Saddam's offer mid December 2002 it is obvious Bush had not intent to abide by UNSC Res 1441 and invade Iraq for what ever oddball reason that danced around in his recovering alcoholic born again Christian head.

Sane and sober people know invading Iraq had not a damned thing to do with US national security.

Peacefully disarming Iraq was well underway. And Bush had to know that it was.