Iraq

[Anathema]

Lol

eventually we won't have a choice.

[Anathema]

Btw

http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/07/iraq.poll/index.html

The majority of the US people will support the attack- but more then half of them believes Bush hasn't done everything possible to solve the problem through diplomatic means.

[Dude_Doc]

It's over pretty much. There will be an attack, no doubt of it. When Bush says "I want...", he'll get it.

[Devastator_Mech]

Cars can't actually run on nuclear power (you'd need an individula reactor) but you can invent new ways of storing it, like hydrogen cells.

And yes, the uranium supply is limited. We need to find an alternative source. One could be fusion power, but another one that is already theoreticly possible is to launch a satelite that collects solar power and converts it into microwaves (the wave used by a....microwave :) ) and send it to Earth, where it's re-converted into electrical power. But this was never put into practice.

This theory is close to impossible, its just like time travel. Changing electric into microwave is like saying changing light into solids.

But it is possible using the satelite to reflect sunlights to the ground, therefore you could even recharge "things" at night.

[emprworm]

you guys are all brainwashed by your pompus media. We have NEVER, i repeat NEVER needed Iraq's oil. If you are going to be that guillible, then that is sad for you. I pity all of you that think the US wants ANYTHING from Iraq. We never needed it before and we most certainly dont need it now. Iraq doesn't have anything we want, except dangerous weapons. You are all a bunch of uneducated brainwashed teenagers.

I hate to be harsh, but its absolutely true. We need nothing from Iraq. Period. We have plenty of oil here and from Canada. We have more than enough. Saudi Oil is the only external source of oil we have reliance on. And saudi was invaded by Iraq so they don't like Iraq very much either.

The US does not need anything from Iraq. End of sentence. PERIOD. Grow up guys, and start thinking for yourselves and quit letting a bunch of idiots in the media think for you.

[Dude_Doc]

Indeed. The U.S. is not attacking because of oil. They are attacking because there is a mad Hussein with deadly weapons in his hands, and if he is not defeated, and his regime of terror, there could be more to the whole. I was just pointing out that the U.S. will attack, nothing else.

[zamboe]

zamboe, im gonna try not to make a 1000 page post like I usually do :)

I'll be short and sweet.

The united states, and Bush do not need Iraq's oil. They couldnt care less. Iraq's oil has as much meaning as the dog doo-doo stuck on the bottom of my shoe. NO ONE NEEDS iraq's oil. No one cares. Iraq has nothing...absolutely nothing we want. PERIOD.

All that oil crap about the US needing Iraq's oil is meaningless hogwash propogated by foreign media that does not have a clue about us. Now, Saudi Arabian oil we do rely on. BUt that is IT. No other middle eastern country has anything the US wants.

And i cant wait for the day when nuclear energy is the power of the world and no more oil is needed. i hate oil.

Emprworm, respectfully you are totally incorrect.

In business there are no flags or national interest, there is no such things as the US doesn't care, in business the only thing that cares is the bottom line, the profit ?. I really dont feel like answering your post because you didnt mention any reason just mentioned a few patriotic statments that would be good for a nationalistic party campaing, but that make no sense in the oil business and the US-Europe oil strategy for the next 100 years.

You should go and take a look at the sites of the energy department, the aspe, the asme, the opep, you'd have to read and understand how this business goes, before you make such a statment, because at least in this area *common sense* opinions dont really matter.

[quoudam72]

Regardless of what you say Empwrm the oil is a part (put whatever percentage here you want) of attacking Iraq. Yes, Iraq has posed a threat to US interest with it's weapons program but saying that the US does not need Iraq oil is not all true. Maybe the US is not hurting for the oil in the Iraq sands but it sure as hell would not hurt to have Saddam out of the way period (and have his oil). Think of it in terms of Saddam no longer in power then you have no threat from Iraq (dealing with terrorists/other threats) and you also have more oil in addition to the Saudi oil reserves. You can kill two birds with one stone. I may not agree with all that I see but I do understand the majority of the sitution. Oil is important make no mistakes about it, which I know you haven't. ;D

[emprworm]

zamboe, quandom: you guys are totally wrong. you are just spewing the same garbage being spoon fed by your media. we never needed Iraqi oil in the past. WE were the ones that forced the world to impose sanctions on them. They were so desperate to have the sanctions lifted they pleaded because they needed all of US. They desperately wanted to sell their oil to the rest of the world, but no one bought any because of their punishment for sanctions. IRAQ needs the REST OF THE WORLD to buy from them. NOT the other way around. The US is abundantly wealthy. No one needs, or has ever needed anything in Iraq. On the contrary, Iraq needs everyone else. Hate the US all you want, that is fine. But I'm not going to sit back while you propogate the lies of foreign media that doesn't have a clue what the US wants or needs. Iraq has nothing we want or need. Period. And oil has nothing to do with attacking Iraq. Just more media jargon. The US will never control Iraq oil. Who fed you that line of crap? O wait, more foreign media lies. Even if we kill Hussein, we SITLL wont control their oil, and the cost for defeating him in monetary terms outweighs anything you think we will gain from it (which is nothing except disarming Iraq and freeing its people). Do we control oil or gain anything in Afghanistan? NO. Wake up, it is NOT about oil. The US will never control oil in Iraq. Do we control oil in Saudi? haha. Cmon guys. Get a grip.

US bombing Iraq for oil? lol. :D :D what a crock of garbage

[Anathema]

We're forgetting the original point of Bush' campaign: to stop the terror threat. Bush has no proof Sadam has ties with terrorists.

Surveilance photos:

http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/08/bush.iraq/index.html

(scroll down to the special report thingie, then click on surveilance photos)

[emprworm]

ties with terrorist? Saadam IS a terrorist. I think people convieniently forget this man gasses his own people.

[Anathema]

The situation in Iraq wasn't the major reason behind this attack- the threat to the US (and its allies) is.

[quoudam72]

Do we control oil or gain anything in Afghanistan? NO. Wake up, it is NOT about oil. The US will never control oil in Iraq. Do we control oil in Saudi? haha. Cmon guys. Get a grip.

I never mentioned anything about the US controlling the oil in any of these regions (you misunderstood me). As far as anyone gaining anything out of Afganistan (that could be another story) this is old infromation from about 1997 and 1998.

A company called Unocal has an option is to build a pipeline south from Central Asia to the Indian Ocean. One obvious route south would cross Iran, but this is foreclosed for American companies because of U.S. sanctions legislation. The only other possible route is across Afghanistan, which has of course its own unique challenges. The country has been involved in bitter warfare for almost two decades, and is still divided by civil war. From the outset, we have made it clear that construction of the pipeline we have proposed across Afghanistan could not begin until a recognized government is in place that has the confidence of governments, lenders, and Unocal. Nothing to gain in Afghanstan.

Unocal foresees a pipeline which would become part of a regional system that will gather oil from existing pipeline infrastructure in Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Russia. The 1,040-mile long oil pipeline would extend south through Afghanistan to an export terminal that would be constructed on the Pakistan coast. This 42-inch diameter pipeline will have a shipping capacity of one million barrels of oil per day. The estimated cost of the project, which is similar in scope to the trans-Alaska pipeline, is about $2.5 billion.

There is also a another project that is sponsored by the Azerbaijan International Operating Company, a consortium of 11 foreign oil companies, including four American companies, Unocal, Amoco, Exxon and Pennzoil.

In October of 1997, the Central Asia Gas Pipeline Consortium, called CentGas, in which Unocal holds an interest, was formed to develop a gas pipeline which will link Turkmenistan's vast Dauletabad gas field with markets in Pakistan and possibly India. The proposed 790-mile pipeline will open up new markets for this gas, traveling from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan to Multan in Pakistan. The proposed extension would move gas on to New Delhi, where it would connect with an existing pipeline. As with the proposed Central Asia oil pipeline, CentGas can not begin construction until an internationally recognized Afghanistan Government is in place.

Empwrm you don't understand the world we live or your blind to it for the same reasons you accuse me (it may not all be oil but it is also about oil). As far as us being brainwash it is just not true I speak for myself let the others come to their own defence for I am no ones hero. The politics involved in these situtions have been brewing for a long time. It is not hate for the US that I have it is severe criticsm.

[zamboe]

zamboe, quandom: you guys are totally wrong. you are just spewing the same garbage being spoon fed by your media. we never needed Iraqi oil in the past. WE were the ones that forced the world to impose sanctions on them. They were so desperate to have the sanctions lifted they pleaded because they needed all of US.

Again, emprworm. You provide no data no empiric information just some general statment that would be appropiate for elections. Therefore your pure opinion has no proved background and therefore as u didn't even answered my last post, because u couldn't I think, just repeated the same thing. Get the big picture.

[zamboe]

Hate the US all you want, that is fine. But I'm not going to sit back while you propogate the lies of foreign media that doesn't have a clue what the US wants or needs.

Where and at what point did I say or mentioned that I hate the US ?.

I dont heat the US, I have admiration for your country and I have very good friends in the US. Never say that to me. But for you, it seems that if anyone has a different opinion than yours then automatically that person hates the US, well u are really extremist then.

First, you don't represent nobody but yourself you don't represent the whole US opinion when u say " doesn't have a clue what the US wants or needs", i guess it's you who doesn't a clue about it. Besides you don't even know how much oil needs your country, how much oil demand grow is expect, what substitutes and it's cost relation is. There is nothing wrong if you don't know it, but if you are going to make an statment based only in your common sense and nationalistc views then your opinion well be very weak, as it is.

Last, I know when a debate is not longer benefitial, and at this point you've just repeated the same thing 3 times, it means that u have nothing else good to add and also you've taken this to a personal level by saying a lie about me, well I like to debate when it's a debate where people can respectfully understand (not always share) other's opinion, but you just took the debate to a simple child's conversation.

[zamboe]

Do we control oil or gain anything in Afghanistan? NO. Wake up, it is NOT about oil. The US will never control oil in Iraq. Do we control oil in Saudi? haha. Cmon guys. Get a grip.

I never mentioned anything about the US controlling the oil in any of these regions (you misunderstood me). As far as anyone gaining anything out of Afganistan (that could be another story) this is old infromation from about 1997 and 1998.

A company called Unocal has an option is to build a pipeline south from Central Asia to the Indian Ocean. One obvious route south would cross Iran, but this is foreclosed for American companies because of U.S. sanctions legislation. The only other possible route is across Afghanistan, which has of course its own unique challenges. The country has been involved in bitter warfare for almost two decades, and is still divided by civil war. From the outset, we have made it clear that construction of the pipeline we have proposed across Afghanistan could not begin until a recognized government is in place that has the confidence of governments, lenders, and Unocal. Nothing to gain in Afghanstan.

Unocal foresees a pipeline which would become part of a regional system that will gather oil from existing pipeline infrastructure in Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Russia. The 1,040-mile long oil pipeline would extend south through Afghanistan to an export terminal that would be constructed on the Pakistan coast. This 42-inch diameter pipeline will have a shipping capacity of one million barrels of oil per day. The estimated cost of the project, which is similar in scope to the trans-Alaska pipeline, is about $2.5 billion.

There is also a another project that is sponsored by the Azerbaijan International Operating Company, a consortium of 11 foreign oil companies, including four American companies, Unocal, Amoco, Exxon and Pennzoil.

In October of 1997, the Central Asia Gas Pipeline Consortium, called CentGas, in which Unocal holds an interest, was formed to develop a gas pipeline which will link Turkmenistan's vast Dauletabad gas field with markets in Pakistan and possibly India. The proposed 790-mile pipeline will open up new markets for this gas, traveling from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan to Multan in Pakistan. The proposed extension would move gas on to New Delhi, where it would connect with an existing pipeline. As with the proposed Central Asia oil pipeline, CentGas can not begin construction until an internationally recognized Afghanistan Government is in place.

Empwrm you don't understand the world we live or your blind to it for the same reasons you accuse me (it may not all be oil but it is also about oil). As far as us being brainwash it is just not true I speak for myself let the others come to their own defence for I am no ones hero. The politics involved in these situtions have been brewing for a long time. It is not hate for the US that I have it is severe criticsm.

Agree with you quondam in most of the things you say, that's data, those are facts.

Besides, taking in groups the oil interest from investors and suppliers in Iraq, the French companies (such as TotalFinaElf mainly) has big interest there and also the russian who happens to be the main oil equipment supplier for Iraq and Iran. Those countries both have the veto power for any UN resolution, and of course they will consider their interest and the US interest in the oil of Iraq.

[nemafakei]

"Saudi Arabian oil we do rely on"

Other than questions over why one oil is better... is it also that the US is eliminating someone close to 'reliable' middle-eastern oil who opposes the US?

As to Afghanistan, Bush wanted to 'punch' someone to exact some sort of revenge after September the 11th. Not resources, but some odd lashing out - cum - PR exercise for Bush.

[ordos45]

Actually we do use oil from Iraq. It's part of the UN's Oil for Food Program.

However a few things do upset me about Iraq mentioned in the news recently:

30,000 barrels of a biological weapon missing in Iraq.

Possible nuclear weaponry within Iraq.

The US having not caught the Iraqi government smuggling oil.

And the list of minor things go on and on and on.

Anyhow, the way I see it, the war is being fought anyhow, and it has been since I was five years old. Iraq is still firing on AMERICAN and BRITISH aircraft in the No-Fly Zone. In the past year alone over 750 shots have been fired at US and British aircraft in the No-Fly Zone. Besides, anyone with half a mind knows we're already attacking Iraq with at the very least, Special Ops.

[emprworm]

you guys are being rediculous. Last I checked, the entire world drives cars and uses oil. The US has no, I repeat NO need for Iraq oil any more than anyone else.

Again, emprworm. You provide no data no empiric information just some general statment that would be appropiate for elections.

Again, Zambo, you provide no data, no empiric information just some general anti-american propoganda that would be appropriate for your anti-american sentiment.

Therefore your pure opinion has no proved background and therefore as u didn't even answered my last post, because u couldn't I think, just repeated the same thing. Get the big picture.

Therefore your pure opinion has no proved background and therefore as you haven't supported any of your irrational claims that the US desire to remove the Iraqi regime is motivated by OIL (rediculous, and preposterous), because you can't, u just continue to repeat the same thing. Think for yourself, and stop letting foreign media think for you.

Wow, Azerbaijan making a pipeline. Big deal. The US will not be any kind of major benefactor for this. Anyone who is stupid enough to think the US will go to war and kill many of its own people so Azer can make a pipeline that benefits Europe is beyond absurd. EUROPE needs Iraqi oil more than the US does.

It's part of the UN's Oil for Food Program.

This was because of Iraq's PLEAS that we buy oil from them. Iraq was DESPERATE for other people to buy its oil due to sanctions. The US only bought oil from Iraq because the UN said they should and because Iraq was practically begging for it. You think the US

was begging Hussein, "O, please Saadam, sell us some oil. O please, O please." How rediculous. It was IRAQ that was begging the world to lift sanctions. The US only bought oil from Iraq so they could cave into UN demands. But of course, whenever the US does something the UN WANTS, you still have guys like Zamboe criticizng them. And when the US disobeyes the UN, Zamboe and friends still criticize them. Its a no-win situation for the US.

Get the big picture .

The US doesn't care about Iraqi Oil.

Period.

[emprworm]

As to Afghanistan, Bush wanted to 'punch' someone to exact some sort of revenge after September the 11th. Not resources, but some odd lashing out - cum - PR exercise for Bush.

All i have to say to that is why dont you ask 23 million freed afghanistans who are still rejoicing to this day whether or not they are glad for the strikes. Ask the women who are now learning to read and their daughters who are going to school what they think of it.

Ask the tens of thousands of lives who were saved and find out if they feel they've been ruthlessly "punched."

Afghanistan needed to be toppled LONG ago. Sep 11 was finally a good excuse to do it. Any government doing what Afghanistan did to its people needs to come down.

[Anathema]

But the Afghanistanian people were never the point of the attack on Afghanistan. If it were, then why wait till a bunch of fanatics fly 2 plains in 2 of your skyscrapers?

[emprworm]

*BEGIN MAJOR RANT*

You think the world would have supported the US just toppling Afghanistan before Sep 11? Lol. You guys defend even Sadaam today. Sep 11 was FINALLY a justification to do something that needed to be done long ago. You people in here are so ruthless. You defend a few thousand taliban lives over 23 million innocent people who are butchered routinely. You'd rather the few thousand Taliban who blow women's brains out for no reason in the street continue on doing what they do so long as they dont mess with you. Good grief. Is there any morality left in this world? You people make me sick. Coutries that do what Afghanistan did, NEEDED DESPERATELY to be toppled. If it werent for UN immoral 'isolationsit' crap, Afghanistan would have been toppled long ago, saving perhaps millions of lives.

Its really sad when it takes a 9/11 before the apathetic incompassionate people in the world will finally approve of doing something that already needed to be done that wasn't done long ago because of the world whiners.

And are you ready for the sick part? The sick part is that there were STILL people who wanted Afghanistan to be left alone so it could continue to butcher people and enslave women.

As far as I'm concerned, any homosapien bipedal anthropod sitting back in his little chair watching TV in his nice safe little house who says "Leave Afghanistan Alone. Let the Taliban continue to enslave people" is barely even a human being. Such a person to me is almost an animal. If losers on this planet will allow forced slavery and torture to exist, and care not to eradicate it, and actually SPEAK AGAINST those who want to remove it, then as far as I'm concerned these people do not belong in the human race, and this world will only improve once they are gone.

If slavery and genocide is going to end, it will take MORAL people to cry out against it and use NECESSARY FORCE to protect the lives of the innocent, because the wicked do not care about your little requests for peace.

UN Peace Freak sitting inside his house getting fat on cookies watching CNN:

"O, wicked ruler, will you please stop torturing and enslaving your people?

Wicked Ruler: "No."

Peace Freak: "Ok. I'll ask again in 6 months. Take care!"

Makes me sick. it really does.

**END RANT*

Ok, so how is everyone doing today? Lovely day out!! :)

[Anathema]

Humans are of secondary importance when it comes to the US. Vietnam is a perfect example. Do you think the US fought that war for the sake of the Vietnamese people? No, they were trying to restrict communist advancement.

[emprworm]

vietnam was stupid. Don't use a stupid war and compare it to a necessary moral action (like toppling the taliban)

I really dont care what GEORGE W BUSH's PERSONAL motivation was for toppling Afghanistan, it needed to be done and it was unquestionably moral.

And, btw, you do not know bush's personal motivation either. The point is not his personal motivation, the point is that something morally necessary was done.

[Anathema]

I really dont care what GEORGE W BUSH's PERSONAL motivation was for toppling Afghanistan, it needed to be done and it was unquestionably moral.

Agreed. But Iraq is a different thing- driving Sadam out will not eliminate the threat of Sadam. If he has mass destruction weapons he will use them when he's cornered.