OIL, page 2
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times


reply posted on 19-1-2003 @ 01:11 PM by moonclamp
Originally posted by AegisFang
didn't get into ww2 until it was almost over? when did it start? 1939? and when did it end? 1944/45? when did the us get in? 1941? looks like we were in for more than the last bit of it right? and if we didn't help how come the europeans were'nt anywhere close to winning till we got in? you europeans just amaze me with your selective memories. just remeber if it weren't for the US you'd all be speaking german right now. and if you're jewish you'd be dead.

OK so I exaggerated a little, it was Dec 1941 but it was only when American interest was threatened by the bombing of Pearl Harbor that they entered the war.

Hitler was killed in April 1945 when Russian troops entered the capital, Europe was already won with conventional weaponsby the time that Hiroshima was bombed in August killing 180,000 people in one go, 3 days later they bombed Nagasaki killing 80,000.

The greatest help the US offered us in the earlier days was loans of military equipment and financial support, I may be wrong here (I'm sure you will correct me) but the first American and British co-invasion was in Sicily in 1943 before that most allied troops in Europe were made of Europeans and US involvement was in the South Pacific.

No country is ever innocent. The US is built on the graves of the Native Americans. Concentration camps were an English invention during the Boer War, Romans threw Christians to the lions, Germans slaughtered the Jews, Iraq has slaughtered the Kurds.

All I am trying to say is that there are 2 sides to every story and that it is only when you examine all the biased information you can start to make some sense of it.

Even Hitler invaded Poland because he claimed that Poland was moving in on Prussia and slaughtering the inhabitants, he offered to remove his troops but was told he must also return German Currency to the "Gold Standard" which he refused to do because his breaking away from that was what fixed the German economy.

Two sides to every story.


reply posted on 19-1-2003 @ 01:14 PM by deepwaters
I must beg to differ with you here! I my humble opinion:

The U.S is NOT so imperious as to wantonly attack "poor innocent" Iraq because of her oil reserves. Please donít be so eager to think that this is about the U.S. bullying some ìtargetî nation out of greed for their oil.

Saddam Hussein is a threat to world security, if you disagree, why not move there and live under his murderous regime? Perhaps if you witnessed your wife tortured and murdered in a shopping area during broad day light or spoke to Kurds who were hit with Saddamís nerve gas bombs, you might change your mind.

The U.S. has been assisting in the building of Russiaís massive oil reserves infrastructure with ties for re-payment for future shipments. Russia has developed a taste for Western Capitalism and loves buying, clubbing and living the ìgood lifeî. They want more U.S. dollars and the U.S. wants their oil. Itís a simple matter of supply and demand, and equals a win / win situation.

Even though they are two-faced, the Saudiís still have the worldís largest oil reserves and are now realising that Saddam is rocking everyoneís boat with his hateful compulsion to acquire WMD. The recent Saudi willingness to remove him testifies to that fact.

Should the free world allow him to gain the ability to destroy Israel and the rest of the world? Should we allow him to have the means to decimate entire regions of people whom he hates?

Saddam is an unstable individual; heís a megalomaniac who ìblessesî some lucky Baghdad neighbourhood on his every birthday with the latest statue of whom else but, HIM. Have you seen the Baghdad museums, they are full of paintings and statues of whom else ñ Saddam.

Iím sorry, but that man is obsessed with his own dreams of grandeur and goals of destruction of the Western World. The sooner we all wake up and see that maniac for who and what he is, the better!

In the final analysis: time will tell as it always does. Iím willing to bet everything that I posses in this world that Saddam is actively involved in the development of WMD, is hiding his stockpile and would go out with a big bang if given the chance.

Any takers?

Deep



reply posted on 19-1-2003 @ 02:20 PM by deepwaters
If 9/11 and its aftermath isn't a good enough reason for America to protect herself from terrorists and those nations that support them, what is?

I can not believe that any U.S, President would run the gauntlet of public and world opinion out of sheer desperation for Iraqi oil. Do you really believe that Mr. Bush would possibly sacrifice hundreds or thousands of innocent American servicemen to satiate Americaís greedy need for Iraqi oil? If that were the case, then Mr. Bush would be as bad as Saddam Hussein, a deranged hate-filled megalomaniac whose sole interest is personal ambition. I am not saying that the American President is a saint, but I seriously doubt that heís on a par with Saddam Hussein.

This all goes back to Americaís security and future freedoms. A strong nation is a free nation, and the freedom that every American citizen enjoys should never be diminished or taken for granted. Many countries criticize America and grumble about her power and wealth. America is the dominate world power and as such, prone to such criticisms. Having visited a few countries including South Africa, I can tell you that Iíd gladly live in America than anywhere else on Earth. Considering such things as government controlled medias, female genital mutilations, murder of innocent children, mass starvation, persecution and abuse of women, forced imprisonment or murder of dissidents, chemical gassing, robbing national financial reserves and so many further atrocities ñ Iíll take America any day of the week.

May I suggest that ìifî America is such a bad country, then the place to begin that change is within America. What would you do to bring about positive change? What are your strategies for constructive change and movement? Itís so easy to sit back and criticize the Nationís leadership, but what platform for change do you propose? I contend that national leadership is not an easy affair; itís fraught with critics and reluctant people who donít agree. I donít envy any U.S. Presidentís job, despite all the glory that goes with it. To be faced with national or international crises and have to make decisions that could potentially affect thousands or even millions of lives must be a tremendous burden. Perhaps if we sought to understand, appreciate and support our national leaders, we might gain a better understanding and appreciation of what their agendas are.

BTW: not having a go at you, just logically debating this issue.

Now as always, wishing you all the best,
Deep


reply posted on 19-1-2003 @ 11:43 PM by Saphronia
all war is messy and people die needlessly. so, for me a it's not a matter of choosing Saddam over my own country. it's choosing life. by not murdering we save ourselves from suffering from that same fate. to deny that there are other options besides waging urban warfare is insanity. (i won't even mention bombing cause if our government does that...i won't be able to call myself american without vomiting violently. seriously, blowing up kids in their homes, unthinkable.)

while the people of Iraq may welcome regime change, I don't think they want the US to have power over their destiny. i don't think they are looking forward to years of occupation and i DO think they will fight it. and in the end many people will die. it's tragic. but, Saddam isn't gonna let it be any other way if we let it come to war.

the inspectors are the solution. no matter how long it takes they should remain in Iraq just like they did in N.Korea--until recently but that's a whole nutha topic--let the inspectors stay and monitor.

and i'm no liberal by defination, i disagree with many many things liberals love (like spending).

...and one more thing we live in a country where it is your right to take to the streets if you have beef with policy and actions of your government...i don't like reading paragraph after paragraph of an american b*tching about people exercising their rights. you say we're free, then act like it, stop b*tching about our freedom to disagree.

and...all government is corrupt and all leaders rise to power under circumstances that are shady...bush is legit as any other leader who has taken the oath of the office for the president of the United States.

ummm...TC, the WWII thing had me bugged, you don't just drop nukes on innocent childern and say, "sorry you had to be burned alive, but our cause was just." that can never happen again.

[Edited on 20-1-2003 by Saphronia]
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>    ^^TOP^^



ALL ATS`ers are terrorists
  Posted 4 days ago with 10 member flags
CNN Endorsing Terrorism
  Posted 7 days ago with 7 member flags
Obama\'s terror Drones.
  Posted 5 days ago with 6 member flags