It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Analysts Ponder U.S. Basing in Iraq!

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 11:10 AM
link   
No, you am that you am, there are different duties as a Swift Boat patrol, different areas of assignment. By the way, there are plenty of more hazardous jobs, as Kerry knew, and there was a reaon why he spent little time over there and even less time in a hot area.

Kerry is "castigated" because his "wounds", if you want to call them that, were not anything a child would even call a wound. A sliver that can be pulled out be hand, that leaves no mark and barely a drop of blood is not a wound, but is an excuse. Such an attitude is not one of a military leader. The fact he unassed the A.O. so quickly shouyld make you stop and wonder, even if this is the action of a political favorite. He thought more of his own hide than his own troops, and that is bad. Well, it would be, but in this case, it was probably better for his troops.

As for Bush, going into the Guard as a pilot was not the smartest moves if he was trying to avoid Vietnam. A very large percentage of the pilots came from the Guard, and both Alabama and Texas supplied a bunch of them. By the time Bush was out of training though, pilots were no longer in as high of a demand; the troops were being scaled back since the weaklings of the nation were not going to allow a win. It isn't his fault the war was ending without him.




posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 11:21 AM
link   
Well lets be serious about one thing, Kerry tried to avoid Nam, but wasnt able to so he signed up for a NON-combat position, after his signing (6 weeks I think) his MOS was changed to a combat one. So he went, and was wounded 3 times, he even filled out the paperwork.

NOT ONE PERSON ON THIS BOARD HAS GIVEN A LEGIT REASON WHY KERRY WILL NOT SIGN THE 180 FORM. I will keep mentioning it because deep down everyone knows he is hiding something. Just remember that when you vote FOR him.

You know, I bet John Walker got a dishonorable discharge also.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 01:37 PM
link   
Lets sum it up for you ed. With all the overwhelming evidence against bush and his administration why on earth would you still wnat to vote for the man saying he is the best choice?

Iraq was attacked for OIL.. ed... Not for WMD's not for liberation, not to stop sanctions, OIL ed OIL. You can keep saying no to yourself all you like but it's the truth ed. It's about money not about helping a poor down trodden people who we made poor and downtrodden.

The bases in Iraq will be PRIMARILY for protecting the oil lines. The reconstruction is hogwash. It's just a farce to secure our oil positions as the contracts are already setup lol.

We don't even need bases in Iraq as Halliburton hires their own mercs and makes rich oil barrons to protect the lines anyway - so it's just a farce to insure oil production and a jihadist war against the muslims.

I have no idea ed why you still fight against reality. Bush was used by his administration to secure a fighting ground against muslims, secure our oil commodities from muslim OPEC, and provide additional security for Israel.

Millions of Iraqi's have paid the price for their oil that we liberate in a strageic war to defeat jihad.

Ain't war hell.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 09:52 PM
link   
It still amazes me that people can critisize Kerry's war service while supporting someone who dodged the war. Even with the worst outlook on Kerry, it's still far above the call to duty Bush gave. Even if Kerry only had a paper cut, it's still more than Bush went through. Even if Kerry did try to avoid the war, Bush was successful at it.

Anyways, if the bases are made perminant (which judging by Bush's track record they will be), we should brace ourselves for a long future of terrorist attacks. They have made it abundantly clear their reasons for their attacks, and making perm bases would throw more gasoline on the fire. Not to mention the eroding support from the muslim community would tumble even further. But hey, we can just kill everyone to solve our problems right? Go Bush.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 10:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by vincere7

Iraq was attacked for OIL.. ed... Not for WMD's not for liberation, not to stop sanctions, OIL ed OIL. You can keep saying no to yourself all you like but it's the truth ed. It's about money not about helping a poor down trodden people who we made poor and downtrodden.



Lets see here 75 billion barrels in proven reserves...


assume $50 a barrel

Max 4 million barrels a day

200 Million a day.....

175 billion spent already

3 to 4 year payback?? If we take it all, but see we are not are we?

That makes no sense, peace and stability in the western economies maybe.

The Western Europeans and Asians use far more middle eaast oil than we do.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 10:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger

Originally posted by vincere7

Iraq was attacked for OIL.. ed... Not for WMD's not for liberation, not to stop sanctions, OIL ed OIL. You can keep saying no to yourself all you like but it's the truth ed. It's about money not about helping a poor down trodden people who we made poor and downtrodden.



Lets see here 75 billion barrels in proven reserves...


assume $50 a barrel

Max 4 million barrels a day

200 Million a day.....

175 billion spent already

3 to 4 year payback?? If we take it all, but see we are not are we?

That makes no sense, peace and stability in the western economies maybe.

The Western Europeans and Asians use far more middle eaast oil than we do.




Ok so if the war in Iraq was really about securing the country and making the world a safer place and all that bull# they crap on about, and not about oil... tell me one thing.

Why the # did they secure all the oil pipelines and all the oil infastructure... but still allow 342 tonnes of explosives go missing? hmmm sounds like their priorities isnt to stop rogue groups getting explosives... sounds more like the Army was ordered to protect the black gold primarily and forget about the explosives



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 11:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by specialasianX
Why the # did they secure all the oil pipelines and all the oil infastructure... but still allow 342 tonnes of explosives go missing? hmmm sounds like their priorities isnt to stop rogue groups getting explosives... sounds more like the Army was ordered to protect the black gold primarily and forget about the explosives


Actually fairly easy to answer, if the Iraqi people are ever to stand on their own they need their Oil revenues to do it. Look at it this way, the US was protecting the Iraq's future, keep in mind they are exporting more than 2 million barrels a day now, so they are financing some of their liberation.

We are footing the most, but they will ahve to have income after the elections......

Again we are spending $1 Billion a day at least, the iraqi's are only getting 100 million a day in revenue....Oil could not pay us back but in maybe 25 years or so....tyhey just dont have enough.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 11:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger

Originally posted by specialasianX
Why the # did they secure all the oil pipelines and all the oil infastructure... but still allow 342 tonnes of explosives go missing? hmmm sounds like their priorities isnt to stop rogue groups getting explosives... sounds more like the Army was ordered to protect the black gold primarily and forget about the explosives


Actually fairly easy to answer, if the Iraqi people are ever to stand on their own they need their Oil revenues to do it. Look at it this way, the US was protecting the Iraq's future, keep in mind they are exporting more than 2 million barrels a day now, so they are financing some of their liberation.

We are footing the most, but they will ahve to have income after the elections......

Again we are spending $1 Billion a day at least, the iraqi's are only getting 100 million a day in revenue....Oil could not pay us back but in maybe 25 years or so....tyhey just dont have enough.


That's great, Ed, but guess how much oil can get out of that country when insurgents blow up the pipelines and transfer stations on a daily basis.

Ooops.



posted on Nov, 1 2004 @ 11:32 PM
link   
And just how much are they exporting now?

I said over 2 million barrels a day...there goes that theory.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join