Bush. The Catalyst for war in the middle east

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 04:23 AM
link   
All is going according to plan. Bush and his underworld puppet masters have managed to set the world spinning, IMO.
I would not be surprised if WE and not Hammas took those soldiers. Another 9/11 easily accomplished to start what otherwise couldnt have been started.
This is just sick. And to think we sit back and take it is more than i can bear.

Unless you have an underground bunker yourself, and plan to be saved, you should look at this and know that plans to do away with the world's population are underway. And YOU are included. So, think before you defend the REAL axis of evil here.
WHEN
will the madness stop? I cant help noticing how quiet Bush & Co. are for the last couple of weeks. These are busy boys, IMO.

As for me, I want them out of office. Yes, the world will continue fighting, the middle east will continue to be a mess, hunger will continue, etc., but the planning and plotting to bring on the end...by these two swine must STOP NOW.

I WANT THEM OUT.


THEY ARE THE REAL AXIS OF EVIL.




posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 04:25 AM
link   
I don't understand how you can blame this one on the Bush administration.. isn't it obvious that there are religious fanatics in the middle east that are trying to destroy every religion that isn't Muslim? Did Bush put them there too?

*Does this even belong in the ME conflict section?

[edit on 15-7-2006 by Techsnow]



posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 04:27 AM
link   
Here is a link to another thread.

politics.abovetopsecret.com...'

Israel did it themselves, we believe. Wake up and smell the lies.



posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 04:33 AM
link   
Yes, I already read that thread and those links and you know what I don't care if Israel did go into gaza and arrest a couple Hamas soldiers, they probably had a reason. I don't care if thats what sparked the capture of the Israel soldiers.

See the reason I don't care here.



posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 04:38 AM
link   
You should care about the lies.

Lies start wars.

Lies all around. Set em up boys, drinks for all the liars.



posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 04:41 AM
link   
"you dont care" "probably" and "if"

If that isnt the reason, then what is the reason that would make you care techsnow.



posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 04:42 AM
link   
Well I might care if I were Muslim maybe but thank god I'm not because then I would probably have blown my self up by now.



posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 05:37 AM
link   
Well one thing is for certain. I bet all his Oil money constituents are loving this sky-high oil money coming in! Its a Gusher yeehah!!!!!!


Makes you wonder why he is being quiet about Israel/Lebanon/Palestine. The day he says to calm down is the day the prices will start dropping back again. Until then the uncertanity will keep driving oil futures up. keep'em guessin for dear ole dad.
(Im such a wiseguy!)


Pie



posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 05:42 AM
link   
Pieman thats a good point but wouldn't that happen even if Bush(oil man) wernt in office?



posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Techsnow
Pieman thats a good point but wouldn't that happen even if Bush(oil man) wernt in office?


Tech
Thats really hard to say. I guess if the same exact situations occurred with the same responses yeah most definitly. If it was someone else reacting differently and there is no middle east tension then more then likely no. We'd be seeing 1.00 a gal. prices probably. Commodities trading (OJ, Oil, Pork Belly, Coffee, Sugar,Uranium,Gold, Platinum etc) is really touchy stuff. Too much rain, too little rain, political temperaments in certain countries, neighboring countries. Hurricanes..etc etc affects the price of the Commodities being traded.. If he makes any comments that Israel should back off the price will probably go down. If he says to invade Iran...that price is gonna go up.


Pie








[edit on 15-7-2006 by ThePieMaN]



posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 12:22 PM
link   
Dg I agree with you very much, since the 9/11 the reshaping and destabilization of the Middle East by the present administration has been in the making.

We all know that the taking over of Iraq was on the table even before Bush and 9/11 happen.

Since 9/11 US has been arming and keeping Israel well trained and ready for war.

While is nothing wrong with that . . . is all part of a master plan of taking away theocracy rules in the middle east. Something that I also have not problem with.

The present administration wanted to kill two birds with one shot, taking hold of vast oil reserve in the area with Iraq and braking apart their main goal Iran.

Israel can not benefit any more from all these . . . they will be able to get the war they want and at the same time eliminate the thread that these theocratic governments with terrorist groups that has been a torn on Israel for decades.

But things no always go the way is expected . . . Iraq was the road to get to Iran . . . but things did not work out in the desirable way.

Too many opposition fueled by the unhappy post invasion Iraq and Iran helping with that unhappiness.

US had to stop their advance to Iran, but . . . guess what Israel can not wait anymore, they were promised a war and a better middle east after taking over Terrorism and evil Iran so they are now taking matters into their own hands.

The goal is to bring Iran into the Lebanon, Syria Israel conflict and so far the Bush administration is encouraging any attacks done by Israel.

Funny when you hear on TV that any attacks coming from Israel are just acts of self defense because they are Sovereign country .

Also Iraq was a sovereign country and so is Iran, Syria and Lebanon . . . but they have not right to defend or even fight against anybody else.

While I do not condemn Israel from taking actions against their lands I question very much the motives of such actions that have brought the situation to this point.

I can not wait to see the role of the US and the present administration on all this affair.



posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
Funny when you hear on TV that any attacks coming from Israel are just acts of self defense because they are Sovereign country .

Also Iraq was a sovereign country and so is Iran, Syria and Lebanon . . . but they have not right to defend or even fight against anybody else.

While I do not condemn Israel from taking actions against their lands I question very much the motives of such actions that have brought the situation to this point.

I can not wait to see the role of the US and the present administration on all this affair.



Iraq, Iran, Syria and Lebanon have all been found to have violated UN Security Council Resolutions. Iraq before it was invaded, Lebanon for not disarming militias in its southern lands (Hezbollah), Syria for the same thing and Iran over parts of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

If it wasn't for the pacifist states and a 'laissez-faire' attitude in the UN (too many to name, but includes France and China), there would already have been action taken to deal with these violations. But, seems some places haven't learned the lessons of the League of Nations and we soon will fall back into the same type of mess it led us into at its destruction. Sad really.


Sticking to the topic of Bush behind this mess, the author of this thread is way off. WAY OFF. Sir, you're mind is messed up. Seek help.

There is conflict in this region today. As there was 1000 years ago. And as there probably will be 1000 years from now. Hasn't ever mattered who was in power, and it won't matter whoever is in power in the future. There will be fighting and conflict and death and destruction.

The problem lies in the fact that radical Islamists have, in a sense, 'stolen' the religion and are using it as a front for their anti-western ambition. And moderate Muslims have yet to really denounce, en masse, their programme and label them for what they really are, terrorist cowards hiding behind religion that teaches peace and harmony.

As it stands today, when Christians (or Buddhists, or Jews) denounce terror attacks for what they are, the radical elements point to it as us labelling all Muslims terrorists, making it into a religious war. They have been, for some time, uniting this front (specifically Islamist regimes, and Muslims in general) and preparing for some major event, a war perhaps, or even a united empire in the region.

When the moderate Muslims start coming forward and pointing the finger at fellow Muslims who commit atrocities, then and only then, will the region stabilize into a period of peace.

To me, I can't see why peace won't work in the region. The major religions in the area (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) all to my knowledge preach tolerance to others beliefs. A big stumbling block is land, and there's no easy solution for that, but maybe declaring demilitarized zones is the way to go, or make the areas internationally protected.


Sorry for the length of the post, I just had to get that off my chest.



posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 02:08 PM
link   
Out of chaos comes the spoils of war.



posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 04:30 PM
link   
DeadEagle

You seem to forget that our present administration is rule by corporate greed.

Whatever corporate wants corporate gets.

Wars and oil are profitable very lucrative business.

The only evil lies under the sands in the middle east . . . because corporate wants it, and they careless what is at stake to get it.

Even if it means the decimation of an entire races because they have been tagged evil and different because they do not follow the same god that the western does.

Stop believing the lies and research on the history, invasions and occupations of the lands that are called the middle eastern lands.



posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 05:05 PM
link   
So was it corporate American greed that started the Crusades? Bush maybe? Hey, Cheney's pretty old, maybe it was him?


Come on.

If you seriously believe the US administration is after oil, I got news for you. You're wrong. I know its hard for you to understand, because concepts like this are a 'big picture' thing, and you just don't see it. The invasion of Afghanistan was in direct retaliation for Sept. 11/01, and the Iraq invasion was two-fold. One, to have better tactical position on both Syria and Iran, two of the three largest sources of terrorists worldwide, and a neccesary future target. Second, to tie up lose ends from the first Gulf War and put a stop to Saddam Hussein from supplying terrorist in the Phillipines and elsewhere.

Besides, if the USA was after oil (as you claim), does it not make better sense logistically speaking, to invade Venezuela or annex Mexico for oil? I mean, then, it would really cut down on the cost to ship it to the USA, right? Chavez is an a-hole, so a case could have been made to take him out.



posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 05:10 PM
link   
Perhaps you should find out who is drilling oil in Iraq.

And perhaps you should go and try to find where the Iraqi oil is right now. . .


Venezuela is nothing compare with the black lake that is under Iraq and Iran.

Is all about middle eastern control of oil for future energy goes with China, India and Asian countries becoming big consumers.



posted on Jul, 15 2006 @ 05:32 PM
link   
I've got an idea to where that oil is going, but I've found nothing concrete, only speculation and claims. So I'll reserve judgement for awhile.


I do not think, for a minute, that oil was the main motivation to invade Iraq. A nice prize along the way, but not the main reason.


To understand where I'm coming from, you need to know that I really do believe (since I got into politics in HS) that the Middle East has been poised for a huge war for years. The pot has been on simmer for decades. The previous clashes, I'd call them minor. The U.S., being the superpower it is (and big brother to many a nation) would be involved in any conflict in that region.

Now if they thought along the lines that I did, that war was imminent at some point in the near future, would it not be to the US's advantage to have bases in very strategic locations to mobilize at a moments notice, instead of having to do it from carriers and have an extra army (has they not toppled Iraq) to deal with?

Now, with forces in both Iraq and Afghanistan, Iran and Syria are both flanked from 3 sides. Not an ideal position for either regime to defend itself.


BTW, I think the oil is arriving in Israel, but not 100%sure.



posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 07:06 AM
link   
To believe the war in Iraq is about oil is to believe we went to the moon to find green cheese.

Oil economics 101:

Basically, the price of a barrel of oil is set by market forces such as supply and demand, and is then adjusted by what could be summed up as "current events."

Those "current events", alone, make your supposition invalid because wars, unrest etc., REDUCE the amount of oil available, and raises the price. (I say supposition because you 'nor anyone can provide any proof of your claims, where-as economics prove you to be in error. We bought oil at market rices from Iraq, for example, for decades, we do now, and we will continue to do so.... at fair market prices.

All the oil in the world goes into one big "pool" of oil, and is then bid on/purchased by all countries. Even the oil produced here in America goes into that pool. Winning a war (or whatever) by us, or anyone, doesn't give us exclusive rights to their oil; plain and simple.

The economics of most every advanced country are based on oil one way or another... not just America.



posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 07:16 AM
link   

by DeadEagle: ".... Also Iraq was a sovereign country and so is Iran, Syria and Lebanon . . . but they have not right to defend or even fight against anybody else."


REPLY: To be a sovereign country depends on the freedom of it's citizens to decide on how they are governed and by whom. Iraq hardly fits that category.... Isreal does. Everything else you posted above is correct except for:
"I've got an idea to where that oil is going...." Please see my post, above.

And also this:

"..... all to my knowledge preach tolerance to others beliefs."


You are incorrect there. Islam is most definately NOT the "Religion Of Peace" as has been spouted; they want the end of everyone who doesn't believe in Islam/Mohammed. Look at most places in the world today where there is unrest, or blood flowing in the streets, and you'll find Islam/Muslims. That's their NWO. The United Nations (not) has their own idea of the NWO. The UN is the embodiment of the "Elite" that people should be worrying about, and they're closely tied to the EU.


[edit on 16-7-2006 by zappafan1]



posted on Jul, 16 2006 @ 08:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by zappafan1

by DeadEagle: ".... Also Iraq was a sovereign country and so is Iran, Syria and Lebanon . . . but they have not right to defend or even fight against anybody else."




What you have as my quote is actually marg6043's quote. I was responding in part to this.



Originally posted by zappafan1
REPLY: To be a sovereign country depends on the freedom of it's citizens to decide on how they are governed and by whom. Iraq hardly fits that category.... Isreal does. Everything else you posted above is correct except for:
"I've got an idea to where that oil is going...." Please see my post, above.


The 'pool' of oil you described in a virtual 'pool'. It doesn't all go to some majical place where tiny little elves are working feverishly to blend all the world's oil just for the sake of blending it. Or so we can't say our oil came from one place and not another. No.

So far as I know, the price of a barrel of oil is decided by several markets and hubs around the globe (supply v demand), but most oil is sold directly from one country to another.





new topics
top topics
 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join