Iraq: The Policy Dilemma (1 Viewer)

[FoFa]

No that's the third excuse, first it was WMD when that failed to fool anybody it was "spreading democracy" now it's the war on terror

WMD, WMD! We have shown that was an English misinformation thing, where about the only thing you can blame the US on for that was listening to the English
"spreading democracy", been doing that for longer than I have been alive, so nothing new, just RICH harping again.
"war on terror", well, they started it, so pi$$ off.
Besides, it seems to be working some what. No attacks in the US for awhile.

 

[jsanders]

WMD, WMD! No attacks in the US for awhile.

Probably more accountable to the CIA and its programs then the war in Iraq.

 

[ColinEssex]

"war on terror", well, they started it, so pi$$ off.
Besides, it seems to be working some what. No attacks in the US for awhile.

Oh thats ok then - never mind Bali, Madrid, London, Turkey, Iraq etc etc

as long as the USA is safe thats all we worry about. god bless america

Don't forget who armed the Taliban up to the teeth to fight the Ruskies, etc etc etc

There was a programme on satellite a couple of weeks ago about just how clever the planning of the 11/9 thing was. When you think about it, getting the towers to collapse must have had architectural knowlege - it was very interesting

Col

 

[Rich]

There was an article in last years Wall Street Journal on the oil sands in Canada (said to contain 1.2 Trillion barrels. Later I saw a Discovery Channel special on oil consumption.
.

Extracting the oil from the sands just to satisfy the American disregard for the planet is too high a price to pay!

 

[Rich]

WMD, WMD! We have shown that was an English misinformation thing, where about the only thing you can blame the US on for that was listening to the English
.

It was a concocted excuse to try and get the invasion past the UN, the only people that fell for it were American

"spreading democracy", been doing that for longer than I have been alive, so nothing new, just RICH harping again.

Where and when ?

 

[FoFa]

Extracting the oil from the sands just to satisfy the American disregard for the planet is too high a price to pay!

So the U.K. does NOT use any oil?
Sort of like saying, he killed 10 people, I only killed one, so leave me alone and go after him.
Sorry, not buying it.

 

[FoFa]

It was a concocted excuse to try and get the invasion past the UN, the only people that fell for it were American

So if I am reading that correctly, then the whole Iraq thing is the U.K.'s fault and the U.S. gov. was just stupid to believe them?

 

[ColinEssex]

So if I am reading that correctly, then the whole Iraq thing is the U.K.'s fault and the U.S. gov. was just stupid to believe them?

No, Bush wanted to invade Iraq to finish off what his daddy didn't do, and of course to make his name in history as the biggest prat of a president the USA has had.

Had you seen Fahrenheit 9/11 then you would know that.

Col

 

[jsanders]

Extracting the oil from the sands just to satisfy the American disregard for the planet is too high a price to pay!

Up yours Rich, aren’t you tired of hearing your worn out rhetoric. I know almost everyone else is.

But are you just to simple to get that.

Maybe you're just jealous that we've had the big stick for a while; 400 years of British global domination wasn't enough for you huh.

 

[jsanders]

Iran; is the real danger. Back before the war when the administration was looking for excuses to invade (Iraq) they turned to the Iraqi expatriates for info on Iraq. It turns out that the Iranians had infiltrated the intelligence flow and “salted “the mine, so to speak.

They fed their Iraqi-Americans bad intell so we would get rid of the Iraqis for them; removing the only obstacle in their way to regional dominance.

Imagine the U.S. being an international pawn.

My, how the times have changed.

 

[Rich]

Up yours Rich, aren’t you tired of hearing your worn out rhetoric. I know almost everyone else is.

But are you just to simple to get that.

Maybe you're just jealous that we've had the big stick for a while; 400 years of British global domination wasn't enough for you huh.

Up yours too and if you read before opening your gob you'd know that the environmental cost of extracting the oil is more damaging than the final product. And since you keep on about the oil sands of Canada as securing the US future oil dependency it's obvious to anyone with any sense that you see Canada as a mere outpost of the US:
rolleyes:

 

[Rich]

So the U.K. does NOT use any oil?
Sort of like saying, he killed 10 people, I only killed one, so leave me alone and go after him.
Sorry, not buying it.

We have our own and we use from other sources that don't add so much to the global destruction as that used to extract the oil from the sands

 

[FoFa]

We have our own and we use from other sources that don't add so much to the global destruction as that used to extract the oil from the sands

Oh, you do do you?
But I thought your issue from many other post was the amount of carbon being put into the atmosphere, no matter where the oil came from?
Seems like you flip flop depending on if you are talking about the U.S.A. or not.

 

[Rich]

Oh, you do do you?
But I thought your issue from many other post was the amount of carbon being put into the atmosphere, no matter where the oil came from?
Seems like you flip flop depending on if you are talking about the U.S.A. or not.

No you're missing the point like Jenny, extracting the oil from the sands does more damage to the environment than the final product.
It's because of the process used to extract the oil

it takes a great deal of energy to recover bitumen and turn it into oil. An enormous amount of greenhouse gases are released in the process.

In fact, making oil from tar sands produces two or three times more greenhouse gases than producing conventional oil.

 

[dan-cat]

We have our own

But you're quite happy to export said oil to us gluttons for a price

Tsk, tsk - talk about feeding the fire

 

[Rich]

But you're quite happy to export said oil to us gluttons for a price

Actually I'm not but we're told the oil would need too much refining for us therefore it's more beneficial to sell it to your heavy old oil burners

 

[dan-cat]

... therefore it's more beneficial to sell it to your heavy old oil burners

more beneficial for whom - the environment