General Chat / WWIII

You mean they were all totally high when they were protesting for feminist rights? :' />

And to believe you were the one that said...

You and I and most of the people here at NE are far more knowledgeable than 99.99% of the world's population. Literally.

lmao man...

Come on now Corky, you knew what I meant.

Corky thats why I love you.

You mean they were all totally high when they were protesting for feminist rights? :' />

He said it, but I know that all of you were thinking it.

I know I sure was.

George Bush is stupid but I don't think hes actually stupid enough to think that he can spread democracy and freedom halfway around the world to countries that have nothing going for them but their oil. The whole "Iraqi Freedom" and giving them democracy is just a cover up for why we are really over there, so whenever this war is over for us and our troops come home, the government can say "We tried to give freedom but we failed". (or lets say they even were successful) And after that speech on CNN it heads right over to a story about prices at the pump. After every single story about the war, the next clip they show is about gas prices.

Give me a fucking break.

Ok, let's assume we went there for the oil. Just for the sake of arguement.

If we want the oil, the way to get it is to NOT start a military campaign on this scale. Having guerrilas blow up your production facilities does not help you control the oil.

The US has no control over the oil wells there. They are controled by the new Iraqi government, which is elected from Iraq (though, admittedly, that is friendly to the US as well.)

If we were indeed going there for the oil, negotiation would've worked out a whole hell of a lot better. That, or pinpoint Spec Ops strikes.

-ACE

I will read and comment on Nate and Ed's longer posts later, but I do have one thing I want to say quicly.

The United States do NOT need crude oil. The current price increases regarding oil based products, namely gasoline, will not be solved with more oil. Refineries in the United States are operating at around 98% which is the safest a refinery can usually run for a continued period of time. It is simple math. More raw material does not equal more finished product if the means of production are not there.

Edited by lazyboy97O, 22 July 2006 - 03:45 PM.

Two things, there is this evil taboo associated with going their for oil. The word duh comes to mind. The US is not going to enter a war unless there is some strategic value to it.

And for the sake of devil's advocate...If the oil crisis is a result of refineries, then why are we not building new refineries? I mean if that will alleviate the problem then why not just build more.


The answer, the world's oil is running out. Oil prices are actually based on what the barrels of crude sell for on the open market. When their is crisis and fears of shortage then oil inherently goes up.

And for the sake of devil's advocate...If the oil crisis is a result of refineries, then why are we not building new refineries? I mean if that will alleviate the problem then why not just build more.

EPA regulations.

Seriously. It cost too much to set up industrial sites on that scale.

-ACE

The world's oil is running out my ass. This has been said already but I'll reiterate it. The middle East estimates of the amounts of crude oil they have continually increase even though they are using a lot of it. And we have tons of crude oil here that just has not yet been mined due to costs. So saying the world's oil is ruuning out is bullshit. Sure it's running out to some degree just because we are using oil everyday, but by no means are we nearing the limit. Maybe 30 years from now. Not now though. Also, Oil prices are based on what the oil companies can get away with, which depends on many more variables then just supply and demand. One other variable is the ssceptibility of people like you whi whine about the world's oil supply running out when it really isn't (Which plays into the whole fear factor). They also depend upon fear as you said among other things. Also, the fact we're in a wartime mens they can get away with jacking up the prices much more than they would get away with under usual circumstances.

Edited by eman, 22 July 2006 - 07:11 PM.

Oil prices are based on:

Wholesale market price (your $76/barrel thing right now) + EPA regulations + refinery production + oil company profit + transportation costs + individual gas station profits

But c'mon, guys, to say we went to Iraq just for oil is to sound sort of conspiracy theorist. That may have been an ulterior motivation, but it was far from the only reason, or even half the reason.



And in case anyone didn't get it (I think everyone did), my joke about feminists getting high was comic relief needed every once in a while in a serious topic.

Yea good points. But what is the reason why we went to war w/ Iraq? To fix their government? I highly doubt that. Maybe it was partially the reason but there has to be more that. Because their will NEVER be world peace, and to go to war halfway across the world seems ridiculous. Especially when there are bigger conflicts within our own country.

Yea good points. But what is the reason why we went to war w/ Iraq? To fix their government? I highly doubt that. Maybe it was partially the reason but there has to be more that. Because their will NEVER be world peace, and to go to war halfway across the world seems ridiculous. Especially when there are bigger conflicts within our own country.

Are you saying you'd prefer a civil war?

-ACE

Are you saying you'd prefer a civil war?

-ACE

Naw, you misunderstood me. We don't need to be in Iraq. We dont't need to be in war what so ever. There are issues we have to deal with in the US and not whether Iraq has a democracy or not.

Edited by RMM, 22 July 2006 - 09:14 PM.

We didnt go to Iraq to give them democracy. Thats more a byproduct of having wiped out their government.

And why shouldn't they be entitled to the same priveledges that you enjoy as a member of free democratic society? Its selfish as hell to not try and give them the same freedoms you do. Oh thats right, you only care about how youre affected, not the countless others in this world who suffer under oppressive regimes.

Do you honestly think that I don't want them to have a democracy. Of course I do. Everybody in the world wants everybody in the world to be happy and free. Who wouldn't?

But losing our troops isn't worth it. I just think that sometimes we need to stay outta other country's business.

"War is not the answer"

Edited by RMM, 22 July 2006 - 09:42 PM.

Naw, you misunderstood me. We don't need to be in Iraq. We dont't need to be in war what so ever. There are issues we have to deal with in the US and not whether Iraq has a democracy or not.

Of course not.

There's always the perfectly viable alternative of hiding under our beds as terrorists destroy our country.

WMDs or not, Iraq's old regime has proven time and time again that it is sympathetic to terrorist organizations, and our government saw fit to remove them.

I think they've be rather good about telling us that as well.

-ACE

There's always the perfectly viable alternative of hiding under our beds as terrorists destroy our country.

Well I guess it depends on what you believe. I don't believe the 9/11 attacks were done by Al Queda. So im my mind, and im not the only one, their terrorists organizations were never really a threat to our country.

Well I'm not saying they were not a threat at all, because terrorists are definately a threat. I just don't think they were something our government couldn't handle. But goin to war was not the answer. I can say I agree with most Americans that this war is unessecary and never should've happened in the first place.

Edited by RMM, 22 July 2006 - 10:48 PM.

Well I guess it depends on what you believe. I don't believe the 9/11 attacks were done by Al Queda. So im my mind, and im not the only one, their terrorists organizations were never really a threat to our country.

Well I'm not saying they were not a threat at all, because terrorists are definately a threat. I just don't think they were something our government couldn't handle. But goin to war was not the answer. I can say I agree with most Americans that this war is unessecary and never should've happened in the first place.

You can't be serious.

I take it you bought into that 'Loose Change' crap?

-ACE

We didnt go to Iraq to give them democracy. Thats more a byproduct of having wiped out their government.

And why shouldn't they be entitled to the same priveledges that you enjoy as a member of free democratic society? Its selfish as hell to not try and give them the same freedoms you do. Oh thats right, you only care about how youre affected, not the countless others in this world who suffer under oppressive regimes.

No, you know whats selfish as hell? Thinking we, big World-saving United States, have the place to invade a country halfway around the world and spark a potential world war. We had no business going to Iraq, terrorists or not. And if the motive was to eliminate terrorism, why not go to one of the countries that is actually home to a larger terrorists presence. I don't think the war is for oil, like Corky said that's a bit too outlandish a claim. But I also think that the war is unmerited, and to be honest there is no reason we are still in Iraq.

Also, minnimee or someone else who is in favor of the war, could you please explain what you think is the valid reason we are in the war in Iraq. I'm really interested to know what exactly it is that makes you support it. And please be more specific than just, "We need to get rid of the terrorists." (I'm honestly just curious, not attacking you guys or anything)