I have a friend that was over in Iraq. He's a reserve. He told me there's more soldiers on the oil wells then in the city. My question is do you think the bush administation would have gone after Iraq if their oil wells had dried up say 3 years ago? I have a funny feeling were not getting the whole story on this war.

 

 

Sorry, I don't have an answer for that quetion, but if it is for the oil it sure isn't showing up at the pump.

 

My guess is the soldiers are protecting the oil wells from terrorists. Plus the only way for Iraq to generate income and be more or less self suficient is to eventially sell their oil on the world market. What else are they gonna sell...sand?

 

What is going on, are the liberals going out and recruiting new people for us to set straight?

First I don’t think your buddy, unless he is high in the command has a clue what the hell is going on as far as body count and where every one is at.

Second, SO WHAT, if they are protecting the oil wells. As MROLDV8 stated they HAVE to be protected because in the Middle East that is ALL they have is oil for their income. If they didn’t have oil they would all starve to death because they don’t produce anything of any value to export for sale.

Do you drive a vehicle? Do you heat your house? Do you buy any product from any stores in America or anywhere else? Have you ever flown on an airplane? Have you ever ridden in a bus? If you answer yes to just one of those then you too are an oil man, welcome to the real world…

Get a clue young liberal, you still have a skull full of mush and if you hang around long enough we may be able to take that skull full of mush and transform it into a brain…

 

uhhh I think Iraq produced around 9 or 10% of the worlds oil supply before the war in 1991

and not much in the last 13 years.



So what real story do you think we are not being told ?

If your insinuating that were over there for oil your wrong.

I wish you were right and america would take over those oil fields and pay off the national debt we have incurred since Sept. 11 ...........

 

MROLDV8 nailed it. I remember during the Desert Storm the terrorists blew up a couple oil wells, and that burned for a long time.

 

Like this?



The terrorists will take any chance they get to damage the wells, just like last time.
It's absolutely right that we guard the wells. What should we guarding instead? The camels?

frankjr, grow up quickly and become frank senior

 

What? that Bush is trying to cover up that he's not going after the real threat of 9/11? Maybe it's Saudi Arabia, his friends? Or that green men looking for water were involved? Or that 01 is really Bush's screen name on here, and that he didn't know any better than to post a picture of "The Bandit"?

 

…Load ‘em up and trucken, we’re going to do what they say can’t be done…

Everybody, sing a along…

 

It's good to ask questions instead of blindly following your leaders like XLT. He wants to mold your mind alright. Into an unquestioning Follower like all the other Right Wingers..

It's actually a Good question to ask, considering our leaders told us the war was about WMD yet we find they have NONE. Makes you wonder what the war was really about.

So far I think Cheney's really the only one to Profit from it. At least they have a real, formal investigation launched on Haliburton now.

 

I asked a reasonable simple question about Iraq and you have people calling my brain mush, my friend who served 9 months over there is a idiot and I need to grow up? My question is a yes or no answer. Would we have gone into Iraq last year if their oil had ran out years ago? Instead it's don't answer the question like adults it's "Lets attack!" It must suck to have such hatred in your head. Boy there's some intelligent people on this board.

 

My guess is No...

 

Well, I agree 01/Bush/Burt's response was pretty harsh... and mine didn't clearly state my point... I say yes, I don't think it was about oil. I think it was about covering up the fact that Bush does not want to go after those truly responsible for 9/11...

 

Sorry if you were offended frankjr. I figured you were trying to start one of our many troll wars.
The simple answer is NO, of course not. I don't see too much Shock and Awe happening in Haiti, Zimbabwe, Eritrea or Palestine, do you?
Sadly for these people though, they have no oil which the West depends on for it's economy.
The majority of it comes from the Middle East and the West cannot allow the place to destabalize.
Now, here's the crux of the matter. However bad you/we think that the other Middle East states are (and they are plenty bad IMO) they more or less keep themselves to themselves.
Saddam proved that he had designs on Kuwait and he would have gone after the Saudi's in GW1 given the chance. The terms of the ceasefire after the first war was that he gave up all WMD's (which he had for sure back then) and co-operated with the UN weapons inspectors. That was supposed to be hand over everything AT ONCE, not play hide and seek.
If Saddam had been given the chance to re-arm (which intelligence suggested he was doing) then he could have started the whole thing over again from a position of strength. Remember him launching Scuds at Israel last time? Imagine him doing that again with Nukes or Chemicals and the Israelis retaliating. Hello $15 per gallon gas prices and a virtual return to pre-industrial society for all of us.
With the USA and its allies willing to enforce what the UN daren't do has led to the Libiyans, Iranians and the N. Koreans all wanting to talk. All producers of WMD's. All nations that support terrorism.

Funny that.