No Blood For Oil!

[patsfan]

What in the hell is that bullshit all about? You would think with all this protesting going on the least they could do is get the facts straight. Instead of making a good intelligent argument, all these idiots can come up with is no blood for oil, or Iraq had nothing to do with 911.

Well, firstly, this was has nothing to do with our interest in oil. If these people took three seconds out of there mindless lives they would know that we get most of our oil from places other than the middle east, like Mexico for example.

Secondly, the administration has never ever put Iraq with 911, they have instead made the argument that there is a clear and present danger from the regime that threatens our nation. Let's see, they have weapons of mass destruction, they have used them on citizens before, and they fund terrorism in Israel. I don't think it is a stretch to conclude that they would and possibly have sold some pretty nast weapons to terrorists.

Oh, and have you all noticed something else? If we are the tyrants here, why is it that you never ever see an Iraqi defector in any of these peace rallies? Because they know that kind of tyrant Sadam is and want him out of power! How come you never see ralies protesting Sadam?......because he will kill anyone that does.

The idiots here protesting don't even know why they are protesting. Most of them are elitest Ivy leage bratts who have never had to work in their lives. They see people joining the military, fighting for our country, and willing to die for that cause as something poor people do. They do not see the integrity and bravery that our service men and women display, instead they look down their rich noses at them and thumb their noses at our heroes. You would never catch one of these bratts volunteering for their country, instead they will sit by and ridecule our service men and women.

Instead of taking a risk for a true belief, they will tie up traffic, have a vomit party, and "inconvenience" everyone else to make their point. And for what? For change? I find it hard to believe that anybody has such little common sense to believe that their actions will change our policy in Iraq........yet there they are, and they actually do believe this will happen.

They don't think or care about what consequences their actions may have. They don't care that by blocking traffic in instersections that there may be an ambulance that can't get by to save someone's life. They don't even think about the fact that their actions are tying up our police officers who are on high alert. Instead of having our police officers protecting our cities when there is a clear and present danger, they are out there babysitting these idiots. If god forbid something happens on our soil when it could have been avoided, then these "peace" protestors have blood on their hands.........only this time it will be the blood of american citizens.

[freak]

Easier way to refute the "No Oil for Blood" crap.

Iraq is part of, drumroll please.................

OPEC

or the "Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries."

Other member countries include:

Algeria
Indonesia
Iran
Kuwait
Lybia
Nigeria
Qatar
Saudi Arabia
United Arab Emirates
Venezuela

According to the OPEC website, their "mission" is this:

to bring stability and harmony to the oil market by adjusting their oil output to help ensure a balance between supply and demand. Twice a year, or more frequently if required, the Oil and Energy Ministers of the OPEC Members meet to decide on the Organization's output level, and consider whether any action to adjust output is necessary in the light of recent and anticipated oil market developments.

So, it clearly shows that the United States would have NO say over Iraqi oil. It would fall under OPEC, and prices and production is set by that organization.

[pookie]

Originally posted by patsfan
They don't think or care about what consequences their actions may have. They don't care that by blocking traffic in instersections that there may be an ambulance that can't get by to save someone's life. They don't even think about the fact that their actions are tying up our police officers who are on high alert. Instead of having our police officers protecting our cities when there is a clear and present danger, they are out there babysitting these idiots. If god forbid something happens on our soil when it could have been avoided, then these "peace" protestors have blood on their hands.........only this time it will be the blood of american citizens.

I agree with this point about the protests distracting police from their important duties. But it's more important for these kids to get their mugs on TV in their eyes. Be careful patsfan, your post here borders on patriotic and you shall be ridiculed heartily for this.

[BuckWild]

It's amazing how all of the people who claim this is for oil and imperialism can not explain why we gave the damn oil back after Desert Storm. We owned the friggin oil fields then, if we are so selfish, and only do this to secure more oil for our pig society, why in the hell did we give it back the first time?

Maybe it's because we are actually a society of morals and values that doesn't want some half cocked dictator to actually possess the means to cause us a great deal of harm, and we would prefer to sacrifice now and return the country of Iraq back to it's people before it gets any worse.

I am constantly bewildered by the complete lack of any effective argument that anyone has against this war.

Show me a believable point and maybe then I will listen, till then you who are afraid to make the ultimate sacrifice for freedom, but so easily enjoy its rewards, can buzz off.

The US is not perfect, but I challenge ANYONE to show me a better society on this friggin planet, that can match us for our freedom and our charity. I submit that none exist, NONE.

BuckWild!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(venting frustration)

[Patman12]

There have only been a few times in which I have been in total agreement with W's actions. The first time was when we went into Afghanastan and the second came when we invaded Iraq. There have been many times when I have disagreed with President Bush, but not on this.

Patsfan, you are right, that whole no blood for oil slogan is crap. It is a slick catch phrase introduced into the vernacular by those that think that Hussein could be dealt with by continually extending deadlines. Well guess what, that didn't work. Force, always a last resort option, was and still is justified in this case. It's amazing the number of ex-Iraqi citizens here in America that are so grateful that the invasion to rid Iraq of Saddam is happening. It is also very gratifying and encouraging to see Iraqis applauding and encouraging our troops as they progress towards Baghdad.

Originally posted by freak
Easier way to refute the "No Oil for Blood" crap.

So, it clearly shows that the United States would have NO say over Iraqi oil. It would fall under OPEC, and prices and production is set by that organization.



Clear to you maybe.

OPEC doesn't have a say in anything other than OUTPUT. They don't decide to whom the member nations choose to sell oil, and all OPEC nations are sovereign nations. Ultimately they are free to exceed or not exceed OPEC recommendations. The US has frequently pressured the Saudis to produce more oil.

They set a level of production for the member countries. However, Iraq is under UN sanctions and does not contribute to the OPEC quota. All of Iraq's exports are managed by the UN. Who controls the UN? Who will control Iraqi oil with a US-friendly regime in place?

Additionally, Iraq has the second largest PROVEN oil reserves and is the most under-developed (90% unexplored), making it the possibly if not likely the source of the largest un-tapped oil resources in the world.


"Iraq contains 112 billion barrels of proven oil reserves, the second largest in the world (behind Saudi Arabia). Iraq's true resource potential may be far greater than this, however, as the country is largely (90% or so) unexplored due to years of war and sanctions. Deep oil-bearing formations located mainly in the vast Western Desert region, for instance, could yield large additional oil resources (possibly another 100 billion barrels), but have not been explored. Iraq's oil production costs are amongst the lowest in the world, making it a highly attractive oil prospect. However, only 15 of 73 discovered fields have been developed, while few deep wells have been drilled compared to Iraq's neighbors. Overall, only about 2,000 wells reportedly have been drilled in Iraq (of which about 1,500-1,700 are actually producing oil), compared to around 1 million wells in Texas for instance. In addition, Iraq generally has not had access to the latest, state-of-the-art oil industry technology (i.e., 3D seismic), sufficient spare parts, and investment in general throughout most of the 1990s, but has instead reportedly been utilizing questionable engineering techniques (i.e., overpumping, water injection/"flooding") and old technology to maintain production.

source: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/iraq.html

[pookie]

Originally posted by Patman12
There have only been a few times in which I have been in total agreement with W's actions. The first time was when we went into Afghanastan and the second came when we invaded Iraq. There have been many times when I have disagreed with President Bush, but not on this.

Patman, you are right, that whole no blood for oil slogan is crap. It is a slick catch phrase introduced into the vernacular by those that think that Hussein could be dealt with by continually extending deadlines. Well guess what, that didn't work. Force, always a last resort option, was and still is justified in this case. It's amazing the number of ex-Iraqi citizens here in America that are so grateful that the invasion to rid Iraq of Saddam is happening. It is also very gratifying and encouraging to see Iraqis applauding and encouraging our troops as they progress towards Baghdad.

What is discouraging to me is the lack of support and the global tounge lashing that the US is taking by some of our so-called allies like France, Russia, Germany, and China. As global support grows (or should I say common sense grows) for this effort in Iraq, will these countries jump on the bandwagon as well or will they continue with their disapproval of the U.S.?

[pookie]

Originally posted by NoRespect
The US has frequently pressured the Saudis to produce more oil.


How many times has Saudi Arabia succumb to pressure from the United States? Me thinks never.

Originally posted by pookie
How many times has Saudi Arabia succumb to pressure from the United States? Me thinks never.

One Example (West Africa) Took me about two minutes to find. How many do you want me to dig up?



US puts pressure on West Africa to increase oil production

"29-07-02 The West has activated a plan to reduce its dependence on politically risky Gulf oil by encouraging a huge increase in production in West Africa and by tempting Nigeria to leave OPEC. Nigeria, the key nation in the region, faces a clash between its ambition to double oil output and the potential collision with its membership of the producer cartel.
The West African state is already producing well above its agreed quota of 1.7 mm bpd and new discoveries off the Niger Delta could yield more than 1 mm bpd in just a few years. Western oil companies are, meanwhile, getting alarmed at the prospect of billion-dollars investments being mothballed because of Nigeria’s need to comply with OPEC limits.

The potential to increase Nigeria’s oil exports is attracting attention in Washington. US refineries absorb about half of Nigeria’s 1.9 mm bpd and the Bush Administration is anxious to secure alternative sources to Gulf Arab states which are seen as increasingly unfriendly to US interests.
Walter Kansteiner, US Under Secretary of State for African Affairs, met President Obasanjo of Nigeria to discuss oil and security issues. The meeting drew an immediate denial from Jerry Gana, the Information Minister, who said Nigeria had no intention of leaving OPEC. “The United States is trying to put pressure on us. They are luring us to pull out of OPEC. But we know how our interests would be best served and so we are not going to leave OPEC,” he said.

Publicly, the US Government denies that it is applying pressure but Nigeria’s dilemma is obvious. “Nigeria has put a lot of money into developing the offshore, and production quotas need to be adjusted,” an executive of a leading Western multinational said.
Mr Kansteiner has made the US objective very clear: “African oil is of national strategic interest to us, and it will increase and become more important as we go forward.” It is difficult to see how OPEC can accommodate Nigeria’s ambition to double production.

The Brent price drifted lower to $ 25, suggesting that OPEC’s basket of crudes is now priced near the bottom of its $ 22-$ 28 target range. Nigeria’s disaffection with OPEC is helping to soften the price and the West African state is not the only dissenting voice. Algeria, another OPEC member, can produce about 1 mm bpd but is limited to less than 700,000 bpd.
Rampant overproduction is also making a mockery of the quota system and the pressure is on Saudi Arabia to agree to a redivision of the spoils. But the world’s biggest oil producer, with output of 7 mm bpd and capacity to produce 10 mm, is in no mood for charity, after watching helplessly as Russia’s newly privatised oil industry grabbed export markets as Saudi Arabia cut back production.

For the US, the producers of Africa’s Gulf of Guinea offer a more attractive source of energy than Russia. Nigeria is close to US refineries on the East Coast and the Gulf of Mexico. "

[patsfan]

And why is it that all these arab protestors are saying it's not fair for the innocent people of Iraq. Call me crazy but I thought that freeing people from a tyrant who murders, rapes, and pillages them is a good thing. I say it's not fair for the civilians to have to deal with acid baths and torture.

I don't argue the need for natural resources and the political expedience of reducing dependence on Arab oil. However, Iraq ceases to be "Arab" oil with a US-friendly regime in place. Suddenly it can negotiate at will for oil and increases "reserves" by 20-50 Billion barrels of oil. I am not naive about the need for oil -- don't be naive about the motives for war. The Bush Administration sees this as killing two birds with one stone and rightly so. Get rid of Saddam, secure oil interests at the same time. Don't tell me you can't see that. I don't even disagree with it!

[pookie]

Originally posted by NoRespect
One Example (West Africa) Took me about two minutes to find. How many do you want me to dig up?



US puts pressure on West Africa to increase oil production

"29-07-02 The West has activated a plan to reduce its dependence on politically risky Gulf oil by encouraging a huge increase in production in West Africa and by tempting Nigeria to leave OPEC. Nigeria, the key nation in the region, faces a clash between its ambition to double oil output and the potential collision with its membership of the producer cartel.
The West African state is already producing well above its agreed quota of 1.7 mm bpd and new discoveries off the Niger Delta could yield more than 1 mm bpd in just a few years. Western oil companies are, meanwhile, getting alarmed at the prospect of billion-dollars investments being mothballed because of Nigeria’s need to comply with OPEC limits.

The potential to increase Nigeria’s oil exports is attracting attention in Washington. US refineries absorb about half of Nigeria’s 1.9 mm bpd and the Bush Administration is anxious to secure alternative sources to Gulf Arab states which are seen as increasingly unfriendly to US interests.
Walter Kansteiner, US Under Secretary of State for African Affairs, met President Obasanjo of Nigeria to discuss oil and security issues. The meeting drew an immediate denial from Jerry Gana, the Information Minister, who said Nigeria had no intention of leaving OPEC. “The United States is trying to put pressure on us. They are luring us to pull out of OPEC. But we know how our interests would be best served and so we are not going to leave OPEC,” he said.

Publicly, the US Government denies that it is applying pressure but Nigeria’s dilemma is obvious. “Nigeria has put a lot of money into developing the offshore, and production quotas need to be adjusted,” an executive of a leading Western multinational said.
Mr Kansteiner has made the US objective very clear: “African oil is of national strategic interest to us, and it will increase and become more important as we go forward.” It is difficult to see how OPEC can accommodate Nigeria’s ambition to double production.

The Brent price drifted lower to $ 25, suggesting that OPEC’s basket of crudes is now priced near the bottom of its $ 22-$ 28 target range. Nigeria’s disaffection with OPEC is helping to soften the price and the West African state is not the only dissenting voice. Algeria, another OPEC member, can produce about 1 mm bpd but is limited to less than 700,000 bpd.
Rampant overproduction is also making a mockery of the quota system and the pressure is on Saudi Arabia to agree to a redivision of the spoils. But the world’s biggest oil producer, with output of 7 mm bpd and capacity to produce 10 mm, is in no mood for charity, after watching helplessly as Russia’s newly privatised oil industry grabbed export markets as Saudi Arabia cut back production.

For the US, the producers of Africa’s Gulf of Guinea offer a more attractive source of energy than Russia. Nigeria is close to US refineries on the East Coast and the Gulf of Mexico. "

My bad I guess. I thought we were talking about the Saudis (Saudi Arabia), not Nigeria.

Originally posted by NR
Get rid of Saddam, secure oil interests at the same time. Don't tell me you can't see that. I don't even disagree with it!

You may need to check into your local BMW dealer for a checkup on your import there NR. I think you may need an alignment. You're starting to pull to the right.

Originally posted by pookie
My bad I guess. I thought we were talking about the Saudis (Saudi Arabia), not Nigeria.

I figured a lateral example would suffice...it is the same concept. If you accept that they have pressured Nigeria to leave OPEC do you really need to read an article about US pressure on Saudi Arabia? I was illustrating the fact that it happens. The oil market is NOTHING if not political.

If you need to see the specific example -- I'll find it.



You may need to check into your local BMW dealer for a checkup on your import there NR. I think you may need an alignment. You're starting to pull to the right. :D

No SUV here. I used to drive a German car -- they sell you a new car every time you need a brake job.

You can't protest the concept of oil unless you are Amish or something. It is ubiquitous in this country. So why is it that conservatives get defensive about the concept that it isn't exclusively a war about the morality of Saddam's regime?

The mistake is that the Bush Administration is spinning that angle. Why not just tell the truth? We are adults, we can think for ourselves. I would be more excepting of it if they would just come out and stop saying it is ABOUT Saddam. If it is true then I think they are stupid. If it isn't I know they are dishonest.....

[Phobia]

I'm going to rent a gigantic portable meat grinder and roll around to all the protest sites. I think the protesters should have an opportunity to relate to the Iraqi citizens by jumping in for a few revolutions. We'll turn it off before they're entirely consumed - promise. Just let them "ride" long enough to get a general idea of what happens to Iraqi citizens who express their own opinions..... I'm so humane, I'll even have an ambulance standing by.

[pookie]

Specific examples of Saudi Arabia bowing to the US on oil demands would be cool. There's a big difference between Saudi Arabia and Nigeria, no??

This war is ALL about Hussein. You guys are barking up the wrong tree. I am no expert but look at what's going on here. Hussein is a torturing, murdering dictator. He's not just a "bad fellow" NR, he kills and tortures people. He enjoys banging large spikes into people's ears and into their brain. He's been quoted as saying that he'd never be like Hitler because Hitler was "soft". How can any country in this free world sit there in their freedom and defend this Iraqi regime? How can you and Alice condemn this action by the U.S. (not just GW who's IQ is not up to snuff w/ what is to be expected)? I know that my arguments lack a lot of the super intellectual stuff that many on this board are blessed with, but common sense is very important. I have common sense and some of the extremely informed "book smart" political posts that I've seen in the last 8 hrs lack common sense...period....I will not argue this. I tend to get a hair across my ass when somebody insinuates that we deserve whatever we get and the whole 9/11 discussion was ridiculous.

Our government sucks. Our government is the best government on the face of this earth. Sooner or later everybody in the U.S. should accept the fact that they live in the best country in the world. If any folks out there can make it a better happier country, then I will vote for you. Until then.............

[pookie]

Originally posted by Phobia
I'm going to rent a gigantic portable meat grinder and roll around to all the protest sites. I think the protesters should have an opportunity to relate to the Iraqi citizens by jumping in for a few revolutions. We'll turn it off before they're entirely consumed - promise. Just let them "ride" long enough to get a general idea of what happens to Iraqi citizens who express their own opinions..... I'm so humane, I'll even have an ambulance standing by.

Out of the blue comes a prophet..... Where did you come from Phobia? Swooping in like a B2 and dropping a nice little Daisy Cutter.....;)

[Phobia]

Originally posted by pookie
Out of the blue comes a prophet..... Where did you come from Phobia? Swooping in like a B2 and dropping a nice little Daisy Cutter.....;)

This particular war is near and dear to my heart. I was in Kuwait City the day after they were liberated from Saddam and his cohorts in '91. They were only under his thumb for a year. I can't imagine the jubilation of a people whom have be oppressed for decades. I wish I were in Baghdad to witness it first hand. One of the happiest days of my life.

[pookie]

Originally posted by Phobia
This particular war is near and dear to my heart. I was in Kuwait City the day after they were liberated from Saddam and his cohorts in '91. They were only under his thumb for a year. I can't imagine the jubilation of a people whom have be oppressed for decades. I wish I were in Baghdad to witness it first hand. One of the happiest days of my life.

Congratulations! That would make you an Infadel!

Some of the jubilance of the Iraqi citizens is being reported. But, unfortunately it seems that we are being portrayed externally and internally as "George Bush and his gang of evil villains". (This is a quote from a Hussein right hand man, not an anti US, US citizen.)

[Phobia]

Originally posted by pookie
Swooping in like a B2 and dropping a nice little Daisy Cutter.....;)

BTW, I dropped a raiderfan while sitting down about 30 minutes ago...

[BuckWild]

Originally posted by NoRespect
One Example (West Africa) Took me about two minutes to find. How many do you want me to dig up?



US puts pressure on West Africa to increase oil production

"29-07-02 The West has activated a plan to reduce its dependence on politically risky Gulf oil by encouraging a huge increase in production in West Africa and by tempting Nigeria to leave OPEC. Nigeria, the key nation in the region, faces a clash between its ambition to double oil output and the potential collision with its membership of the producer cartel.
The West African state is already producing well above its agreed quota of 1.7 mm bpd and new discoveries off the Niger Delta could yield more than 1 mm bpd in just a few years. Western oil companies are, meanwhile, getting alarmed at the prospect of billion-dollars investments being mothballed because of Nigeria’s need to comply with OPEC limits.

The potential to increase Nigeria’s oil exports is attracting attention in Washington. US refineries absorb about half of Nigeria’s 1.9 mm bpd and the Bush Administration is anxious to secure alternative sources to Gulf Arab states which are seen as increasingly unfriendly to US interests.
Walter Kansteiner, US Under Secretary of State for African Affairs, met President Obasanjo of Nigeria to discuss oil and security issues. The meeting drew an immediate denial from Jerry Gana, the Information Minister, who said Nigeria had no intention of leaving OPEC. “The United States is trying to put pressure on us. They are luring us to pull out of OPEC. But we know how our interests would be best served and so we are not going to leave OPEC,” he said.

Publicly, the US Government denies that it is applying pressure but Nigeria’s dilemma is obvious. “Nigeria has put a lot of money into developing the offshore, and production quotas need to be adjusted,” an executive of a leading Western multinational said.
Mr Kansteiner has made the US objective very clear: “African oil is of national strategic interest to us, and it will increase and become more important as we go forward.” It is difficult to see how OPEC can accommodate Nigeria’s ambition to double production.

The Brent price drifted lower to $ 25, suggesting that OPEC’s basket of crudes is now priced near the bottom of its $ 22-$ 28 target range. Nigeria’s disaffection with OPEC is helping to soften the price and the West African state is not the only dissenting voice. Algeria, another OPEC member, can produce about 1 mm bpd but is limited to less than 700,000 bpd.
Rampant overproduction is also making a mockery of the quota system and the pressure is on Saudi Arabia to agree to a redivision of the spoils. But the world’s biggest oil producer, with output of 7 mm bpd and capacity to produce 10 mm, is in no mood for charity, after watching helplessly as Russia’s newly privatised oil industry grabbed export markets as Saudi Arabia cut back production.

For the US, the producers of Africa’s Gulf of Guinea offer a more attractive source of energy than Russia. Nigeria is close to US refineries on the East Coast and the Gulf of Mexico. "

NR, you posted all this but as I read it I failed to find where the US had pressured Saudi Arabi at all, and I definitely didn't see where Saudi capitulated to any pressure.

Maybe you posted the wrong article, this one didn't help your argument.

BuckWild!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[patsfan]

The Saudis do not bow to our pressure because they believe they hold all the cards. They have done very little to support us in our efforts to thwart terrorism, yet some of the terrorists of 911 came from their country. Their lack of respect to our wishes is even prompting the United States to leave the bases in Saudi. We are now looking at moving our forces from Saudi Arabia to Qatar. Qatar is a very small but rich nation who wants our protection now that they are becoming wealthier from their oil.

Originally posted by BuckWild
NR, you posted all this but as I read it I failed to find where the US had pressured Saudi Arabi at all, and I definitely didn't see where Saudi capitulated to any pressure.

Buck,

As I had explained to Pookie in a previous post:

The was intended to demonstrate how the US can in fact pressure OPEC nations to increase production of oil in order to reduce oil prices. Nothing more. If you read to much into the "Pressure on Saudi Arabia" You MISS THE POINT of the entire discussion. Nitpicking is pointless. (That said I will also demonstrate pressure on Saudi Arabia -- and resulting capitulation in my next post -- although it is secondary to the argument. )

The article is relevant because it not only demonstrates that negotiation process with an OPEC member nation (NIGERIA) but ADDITIONALLY shows that they are trying to convince Nigeria to leave OPEC. OPEC puts SUGGESTED curbs on production. They put pressure on member nations to comply. Trade partners like the US also put their own pressure. The member nation ultimately is free to decide, to a point. Which brings up the next point: The fact that the US would attempt to convince Nigeria to LEAVE OPEC in order to enable them to DOUBLE their production is ENTIRELY relevant to my argument. However, you had to first understand that argument to see that. No offense intended.

I will highlight a few points:


"29-07-02 The West has activated a plan to reduce its dependence on politically risky Gulf oil by encouraging a huge increase in production in West Africa and by tempting Nigeria to leave OPEC. Nigeria, the key nation in the region, faces a clash between its ambition to double oil output and the potential collision with its membership of the producer cartel." (READ OPEC)

"The West African state is already producing well above its agreed quota of 1.7 mm bpd and new discoveries off the Niger Delta could yield more than 1 mm bpd in just a few years. Western oil companies are, meanwhile, getting alarmed at the prospect of billion-dollars investments being mothballed because of Nigeria’s need to comply with OPEC limits."

-- US companies are the paid to discover, develop and recover oil from nations like Nigeria AND SAUDI ARABIA. The have a huge investment that goes unused when a nation cuts back production. That is PRIVATE pressure that the US puts on OPEC.


"The potential to increase Nigeria’s oil exports is attracting attention in Washington. US refineries absorb about half of Nigeria’s 1.9 mm bpd and the Bush Administration is anxious to secure alternative sources to Gulf Arab states which are seen as increasingly unfriendly to US interests. "

-- That last remark may SEEM contradictory to my argument, but it is not. The fact that the US is actively maneuvering to secure other sources of oil proves that supply IS A CONCERN. My argument is that Iraq is yet ANOTHER source, and a source that gives the US unprecedented leverage regarding production and exports after the liberation of Iraq. OPEC doesn't decide how much oil Iraq produces the UN does. The UN has had the sole power to approve ALL Iraqi exports since 1991.


Walter Kansteiner, US Under Secretary of State for African Affairs, met President Obasanjo of Nigeria to discuss oil and security issues. The meeting drew an immediate denial from Jerry Gana, the Information Minister, who said Nigeria had no intention of leaving OPEC. “The United States is trying to put pressure on us. They are luring us to pull out of OPEC. But we know how our interests would be best served and so we are not going to leave OPEC,” he said.

"Publicly, the US Government denies that it is applying pressure but Nigeria’s dilemma is obvious. “Nigeria has put a lot of money into developing the offshore, and production quotas need to be adjusted,” an executive of a leading Western multinational said. Mr Kansteiner has made the US objective very clear: “African oil is of national strategic interest to us, and it will increase and become more important as we go forward.” It is difficult to see how OPEC can accommodate Nigeria’s ambition to double production."

"Rampant overproduction is also making a mockery of the quota system and the pressure is on Saudi Arabia to agree to a redivision of the spoils. But the world’s biggest oil producer, with output of 7 mm bpd and capacity to produce 10 mm, is in no mood for charity, after watching helplessly as Russia’s newly privatised oil industry grabbed export markets as Saudi Arabia cut back production."


-- Posturing on both sides but that very fact proves that negotiations are taking place or neither would have reason to posture. Overproduction within OPEC is destabilizing the Oil Cartel. Saudi Arabia is overproducing as well, in order not to lose markets to the Russians. "Pressure on Saudi Arabia to redivide the spoils" -- deciding who gets this over-produced oil.

The US would like to have somewhere other than Saudi Arabia to get its oil from, but UNTIL another source is secured, they pressure ALL of their trade partners to keep the supply consistent with their demand and to keep prices down. And yes we get oil from Mexico and Canada but that is irrelevant as long as ANY of it comes from the Middle East. A drop off in a fraction of a percentage point in the supply of oil has an immediate impact on the US economy.

Not that it matters or anyone cares (just making good on a promise.)





U.S. PRESSURES KUWAIT TO INCREASE OIL PRODUCTION

LONDON – The United States has pressed Kuwait to violate an OPEC ceiling and increase crude oil production to ensure supplies in case Washington decides to topple the regime of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.

Industry sources said the pressure on Kuwait and other GCC states comes amid rising oil prices fueled by concern that supplies would be halted by any U.S.-led attack on Baghdad. Oil prices have already surged above $30 a barrel, the highest point in 18 months.

Saudi Arabia has already pledged to increase oil supplies to counter any shortage that would result in an Iraqi oil cutoff. But the sources said the Bush administration wants Kuwait and other OPEC members to pledge the same.

OPEC oil ministers are scheduled to meet in Vienna on Sept. 19. The group has already been reported as significantly violating its own production ceiling.


(Source: The Middle East Newsline http://menewsline.com/stories/2002/september/09_02_4.html)


The US pressured all OPEC nations to increase supply in order to stabilize markets, lower prices, and ensure supply in the event of war. Saddam has a history of cutting oil to the US at strategic junctures, the last time was during the last Gulf War. The amount of oil that the US gets from Iraq is slight but important especially in light of the demand created by war. The United State's strategic concern for oil is directly linked to its foreign policy. To say that the war isn't related to issues of oil resources is simply not supported by fact. The ability to wage war is itself dependent on oil supply -- particularly when you are trying to garner world support from nations who's markets will be directly affected by changes in the supply of oil.

[BuckWild]

Originally posted by NoRespect
Not that it matters or anyone cares (just making good on a promise.)




The US pressured all OPEC nations to increase supply in order to stabilize markets, lower prices, and ensure supply in the event of war. Saddam has a history of cutting oil to the US at strategic junctures, the last time was during the last Gulf War. The amount of oil that the US gets from Iraq is slight but important especially in light of the demand created by war. The United State's strategic concern for oil is directly linked to its foreign policy. To say that the war isn't related to issues of oil resources is simply not supported by fact. The ability to wage war is itself dependent on oil supply -- particularly when you are trying to garner world support from nations who's markets will be directly affected by changes in the supply of oil.

Sorry about the first reponse NR, I failed to read the entire thread before I opened my typing finger.

That said, I believe you are right that oil does play a large part of our foreign policy, and even has a not insignificant impact on this war. But, for some to assume that that is the only reason we are in this and that the only people benefitting from the war are those that drive huge SUVs and the ilk, is a little hard to swallow.

The problem I see with most proetesters is that they bite onto one argument like a pitbull and refuse to even entertain the thought that there could be other motives. This causes many of them to view the US while wearing blinders. Like those that protest because of the potenetial for civilians to be killed. These fools completely ignore the fact that no one has killed more civilians in Iraq then Hussein himself. Just for this reason they should be celebrating that we are going in, regardless of the fact that we may have multiple motives.

BuckWild!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally posted by BuckWild
Sorry about the first reponse NR, I failed to read the entire thread before I opened my typing finger.

That said, I believe you are right that oil does play a large part of our foreign policy, and even has a not insignificant impact on this war. But, for some to assume that that is the only reason we are in this and that the only people benefitting from the war are those that drive huge SUVs and the ilk, is a little hard to swallow.

The problem I see with most proetesters is that they bite onto one argument like a pitbull and refuse to even entertain the thought that there could be other motives. This causes many of them to view the US while wearing blinders. Like those that protest because of the potenetial for civilians to be killed. These fools completely ignore the fact that no one has killed more civilians in Iraq then Hussein himself. Just for this reason they should be celebrating that we are going in, regardless of the fact that we may have multiple motives.

BuckWild!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Buck,

Those "blind-pitbulls" don't have a party affiliation. I see them all the time. I'm not saying the war is only about oil. I am saying it has to be a factor. The Middle East if not for oil it would be a very different place, a very poor place. There would still be fighting there without oil, there has been fighting there for all recorded history. However, we would be less inclined to care about it in my opinion if not for a vested interest in the oil.

I hear what you are saying about war for humanitarian reasons. Throughout history very few wars have been fought exclusively for those reasons. I hope this turns out to be one of them, but you know my opinion on the matter. I support the troops who are over there fully. Few situations in my opinion are uncomplicated enough to make war a useful solution. Hatred has a way of still being there when the smoke clears.

[pookie]

Originally posted by FallingAlice
1. You're setting up a false dilemma. I have never defended Saddam Hussein. I do think that as we continue pat ourselves on the back about our moral superiority, then we ought to at least admit that we helped create the monster. We supported him and we helped set him up. And we turned a blind eye for many, many years when he was gassing his own people because it was in our interest to do so.

I'm sorry but I get a hair across my ass when I hear Americans making remarks about how "Cool" it is to see the aftermath of bombing floating up into the atmosphere over Baghdad.

I'm curious, what is this war to you? A video game?


2. Read Schwarzkopf's interview again. You posted it. Did you read it? If you read it, then I'd hope you can begin to understand my position -- the same position taken by many, many people around the world. This is not about hating the U.S. This is about believing that what we are doing now is imprudent and will cause us untold, unintended and unforseen difficulties on a massive scale.

Points noted Alice and I respect your stance. As eloquently written as all of your posts are, I must remind you that they are, after all, your opinion and approximately 75% of Americas do not agree with this opinion.

[Hawg73]

Speaking of oil......this struck me funny and decided to share.

[Hawg73]

And since I revived this thread (god help me) I read something today that was the best profile of Saddam Hussein I have yet run across. Extremely well written and insightful (IMO), it runs a little long but I found it totally engrossing.

If you would like to know more about the man and his motivations this might be for you.

If you decide to read it - I recommend clicking on the "printable version" button and then stretching the window out sideways to make it more comfortable to read. Enjoy.

www.theatlantic.com/issues/2002/05/bowden.htm

[Nomar]

I am new here and definitely don't want to cause any problems, but it bothered me when I read some of the anti-war posts in this thread. Although I would rather us not have to go to war, as I am sure everyone agrees with me, this is something we must do. And to bring up another point, our military force is based on voluntary membership. There is no draft at this time, so those who join, do so because they have the deep desire to protect our country and know that they could be called on at any time for battle. I support our troops and our President. In case anyone doesn't realize or understand why we are over there right now, I ask that you take a look at this website. It is best viewed with a connection better than dial-up and you will need to use speakers with it as well. I was actually just told this website has already been posted, but I wanted to post it again. THIS is why we are over there.

http://www.politicsandprotest.com

Just my opinion, which I am entitled to, just as those of you who are against the war are entitled to as well.

Thanks for reading.

-Nomar

[pookie]

See....The Red Sox shortstop is a Republican too!

[Nomar]

Kudos to Mark Loretta and the rest of the Padres for their support of our troops!

[Nomar]

I don't think you have the power to read the minds of every soldier over there.

Never said I had that power. Although sometimes I wish I had mind reading powers!! :D

Wait a minute now, how would you know I didn't have that power?? Do YOU have the power to read minds?? Oh you silly you!! :)

I've seen this website before. I didn't find it a compelling argument for war when I first saw it. A second look didn't change my mind.

Sorry to hear that. :( That's pretty compelling for me. I think at the very least, we owe it to those people who lost their lives as well as the families who lost loved ones.

Like I said, these are strictly my opinions and all I ask is that you respect my opinions as I respect yours.

-NoMaR

[Hawg73]

Would somebody please just call me an idiot for waking this thread up again? Sometimes I just don't use good judgement.

Originally posted by Hawg73
Would somebody please just call me an idiot for waking this thread up again? Sometimes I just don't use good judgement.

Couldn't leave well enough alone could you? :doh: Then again, you didn't exactly twist anyone's arm...

[pookie]

Originally posted by Hawg73
Would somebody please just call me an idiot for waking this thread up again? Sometimes I just don't use good judgement.

Ya, thanks Hawg! Now my co-workers are getting the left hook too! Christ almighty! :eek:

Originally posted by pookie
Ya, thanks Hawg! Now my co-workers are getting

the left hook too! Christ almighty! :eek:





"The Left Hook!" :D We haven't even begun, tell him Alice.

[Hawg73]

Don't even go there. No taunting. I'm about to snap and I made a solemn vow.

[pookie]

Originally posted by NoRespect
"The Left Hook!" :D We haven't even begun, tell him Alice.

Oy! Don't the two of you have a street to lay in or some civic disobedience to partake in? A "die in" I think they call it..... :p :p :p

I only say that cuz I can!o:-)

[freak]

Originally posted by FallingAlice
A deep desire to protect our country is one reason why people join the military. True. But people join the armed services for lots of reasons, including the desire to get an education, poverty, lack of other options, a sense of order and discipline in their lives that they could not find elsewhere. Many reasons. And they don't necessarily all agree with our decision to undertake this particular war. I don't think you have the power to read the minds of every soldier over there.


But regardless of motives for joining, all officers and enlisted accept the responsibility that comes with military service, which may include giving their life in service to the country. There is an implicit acceptance of such consequences.

[dropKickMurphy]

Originally posted by patsfan
No Blood For Oil!

I agree, blood for oil is a very bad idea. Trust me, I tried it and it doesn't work. My car was low on oil, but I was too cheap to buy any. So I figured "what the hell" and jabbed a screwdriver into my wrist. I let a quart or so of blood flow into the engine, then drove off. I was feeling pretty smart about it until after a couple of miles the blood coagulated and my engine siezed. Let me tell you, it would have been a hell of a lot cheaper to spring for that can of Quaker State in the first place. I learned my lesson.

[freak]

Originally posted by pookie
A "die in" I think they call it..... :p :p :p

A bunch of fools here at UNH did that. Idiots.

One apologist for the protest, in response to someone who found it offensive, asked what was offensive about showing what was happening.

In this case, people laid down in front of the library with fake blood on, and name tags saying stuff like "Iraqi soldier," "Iraqi women/child," or "US soldier."

But in this case, they were NOT simply 'showing' what was happening.

Nor does that explanation make any sense. If their purpose was to show that people die in war, I say to them, "No sh*t."

No, clearly their purpose was to show what THEY think is happening in Iraq. That WE are root cause of the conflict, and that the resultant death and destruction is our fault. And that our soldiers perpetrate this as agents of the government.

In this case, it was extremely disrespectful towards our troops, regardless of what one may think of the war.

[freak]

Originally posted by dropKickMurphy
I agree, blood for oil is a very bad idea. Trust me, I tried it and it doesn't work. My car was low on oil, but I was too cheap to buy any. So I figured "what the hell" and jabbed a screwdriver into my wrist. I let a quart or so of blood flow into the engine, then drove off. I was feeling pretty smart about it until after a couple of miles the blood coagulated and my engine siezed. Let me tell you, it would have been a hell of a lot cheaper to spring for that can of Quaker State in the first place. I learned my lesson.

:D

Jerry: You put blood in the car?!

Kramer: Jerry, it was overheating. You should take better care of that thing.

[pookie]

Originally posted by freak
A bunch of fools here at UNH did that. Idiots.

One apologist for the protest, in response to someone who found it offensive, asked what was offensive about showing what was happening.

In this case, people laid down in front of the library with fake blood on, and name tags saying stuff like "Iraqi soldier," "Iraqi women/child," or "US soldier."

But in this case, they were NOT simply 'showing' what was happening.

Nor does that explanation make any sense. If their purpose was to show that people die in war, I say to them, "No sh*t."

No, clearly their purpose was to show what THEY think is happening in Iraq. That WE are root cause of the conflict, and that the resultant death and destruction is our fault. And that our soldiers perpetrate this as agents of the government.

In this case, it was extremely disrespectful towards our troops, regardless of what one may think of the war.

Yes. Now we have a leftist professor at Columbia U hoping for 1,000,000 Mogadishu to attach our troops...this spoken in front of thousands. We have our wonderful Hollywood contingent making fools of themselves with their security keeping them safe and warm. We have the Dixie Chix that insult the U.S. President, apologize, then reneg on that apology. We've got an Australian anti-war leftist fellow who would like Syrians and Iranians to join the fight and die. Rockers Pearl Jam lose an incensed audience as Eddie Vedder impales a picture of Pres. Bush on a microphone and smashes it on stage.... the list goes on and on.

I am worried about America. I'm not worried because of the war and the evil dictator(s) that we will defeat. This has all happened before and America has proved it's strength and it's worth over and over again.

I'm worried about this country because of the some of the examples listed above and the fact that many have now taken freedom of speech to new ludicrous levels. I worry for my kids whom I try to teach to respect others, their elders, respect themselves and do what you know is right. It's not Hussein's or Osama bin Laden's that threaten our country. It's Americans that take their rights that have been given to them for granted.

Originally posted by freak
:D

Jerry: You put blood in the car?!

Kramer: Jerry, it was overheating. You should take better care of that thing.






Three pints of Kramer:



<EMBED SRC="http://www.dreams2.com/seinfeld/Jerry%20&%20Kramer%20-%20Ahhh!.mp3" AUTOSTART=FALSE LOOP=FALSE WIDTH=145 HEIGHT=45 ALIGN="CENTER">
</EMBED>




How about the one when Kramer goes to the vet:



<EMBED SRC="http://www.dreams2.com/seinfeld/Kramer%20-%20Disgusting.mp3" AUTOSTART=FALSE LOOP=FALSE WIDTH=145 HEIGHT=45 ALIGN="CENTER">
</EMBED>

[Patman12]

Originally posted by pookie
Yes. Now we have a leftist professor at Columbia U hoping for 1,000,000 Mogadishu to attach our troops...this spoken in front of thousands. We have our wonderful Hollywood contingent making fools of themselves with their security keeping them safe and warm. We have the Dixie Chix that insult the U.S. President, apologize, then reneg on that apology. We've got an Australian anti-war leftist fellow who would like Syrians and Iranians to join the fight and die. Rockers Pearl Jam lose an incensed audience as Eddie Vedder impales a picture of Pres. Bush on a microphone and smashes it on stage.... the list goes on and on. Let's not forget Sen. Kerry, eh? He's a peach.

I am worried about America. I'm not worried because of the war and the dangerous, evil dictator(s) that we will defeat. This has all happened before and America has proved it's strength and it's worth over and over again.

I'm worried about this country because of the examples listed above and the fact that many have now taken freedom of speech to new ludicrous levels. I worry for my kids whom I try to teach to respect others, their elders, respect themselves and do what you know is right. It's not Husseins or Osama bin Ladens that threaten our country. It's Americans that take their rights that have been given to them for granted.
Agreed. I believe in the first amendment but there comes a time when voicing opinion does more harm than good. The protesters had plenty of opportunity to speak out before the war began. Now it is time to exercise a modicum of responsibility and shut the hell up. If you don't like President Bush or his policies then wait until the 2004 elections and vote him out. But to go on and on about stopping the war is insane. It is not going to halt the military action or alter the war plans. In fact, the people that protest give ammunition to the Iraqi soldiers to use on any captured POW, and that is reckless.

[pookie]

Originally posted by Patman12
Agreed. I believe in the first amendment but there comes a time when voicing opinion does more harm than good. The protesters had plenty of opportunity to speak out before the war began. Now it is time to exercise a modicum of responsibility and shut the hell up. If you don't like President Bush or his policies then wait until the 2004 elections and vote him out. But to go on and on about stopping the war is insane. It is not going to halt the military action or alter the war plans. In fact, the people that protest give ammunition to the Iraqi soldiers to use on any captured POW, and that is reckless.

The word treason comes to mind.

[freak]

"I feel assured that no American will hesitate to rally round the standard of his insulted country in defense of that freedom and independence achieved by the wisdom of sages and consecrated by the blood of heroes." --Thomas Jefferson: Reply to Georgetown Republicans, 1809

Perhaps Mr. Jefferson thought too highly of those of us who followed him.

Originally posted by Patman12
I believe in the first amendment but there comes a time when voicing opinion does more harm than good. The protesters had plenty of opportunity to speak out before the war began.


Now it is time to exercise a modicum of responsibility and shut the hell up.

If you don't like President Bush or his policies then wait until the 2004 elections and vote him out.

But to go on and on about stopping the war is insane. It is not going to halt the military action or alter the war plans. In fact, the people that protest give ammunition to the Iraqi soldiers to use on any captured POW, and that is reckless.



So to attempt to follow your logic:

Opinions that cannot directly effect changes in foreign policy today are invalid and should not be voiced.


Applying the same logic to your statement above:

Your opinion on this matter cannot directly change the fact that I disagree with you, or prevent me from voicing my opinion. Therefore you shouldn't have said anything. To do so is insane, reckless.


Reckless: the War. Opinion: mine. Don't like it: fine. Just don't think that the First Amendment is somehow limited to peacetime. As for voting him "out" next time, you can count on it. Just like we did in the last election.

[freak]

"If we are forced into war, we must give up political differences of opinion and unite as one man to defend our country. But whether at the close of such a war, we should be as free as we are now, God knows. In fine, if war takes place, republicanism has everything to fear." --Thomas Jefferson to Thaddeus Kosciusko. 1799

or

"That in a free government there should be differences of opinion as to public measures and the conduct of those who direct them, is to be expected. It is much, however, to be lamented that these differences should be indulged at a crisis which calls for the undivided counsels and energies of our country, and in a form calculated to encourage our enemies in the refusal of justice, and to force their country into war as the only resource for obtaining it." --Thomas Jefferson: Reply to New London Republicans, 1809

or

"The times do certainly render it incumbent on all good citizens attached to the rights and honor of their country to bury in oblivion all internal differences and rally around the standard of their country in opposition to the outrages of foreign nations. All attempts to enfeeble and destroy the exertions of the General Government in vindication of our national rights, or to loosen the bands of Union by alienating the affections of the people, or opposing the authority of the laws at so eventful a period, merit the discountenance of all." --Thomas Jefferson to Daniel D. Tompkins, 1809

or

"[It is a] sacred principle, that in opposing foreign wrong there must be but one mind." --Thomas Jefferson: Reply to New York Tammany Society, 1808

Originally posted by freak
"If we are forced into war,

we must give up political differences of opinion and unite as one man to defend our country.

Jefferson was entitled to his opinion then as I am now. You can cite all of his recorded letters, writings and speeches: It won't change that fact. (Nor will it change the fact that in Iraq, we are the aggressor.) The volume of that opinion really goes to make my case not yours.

I am not going to get into a constitutional debate with you freak, your views on the matter -- as well as a significant number of Jefferson citations -- have been spelled out repeatedly for anyone to consult should they be so inclined. Your understanding of the concept of free speech is surprisingly constrained given your propensity for citing Constitutional law and Jefferson.

[freak]

No, you clearly don't understand.

My concept of free speech is far more lenient than that of you liberals. I don't think you can place restrictions on what "free speech" means, for if you do, how can the speech really be free.

HOWEVER, I feel that the Founders were extraordinarily capable and intelligent men, and due respect to their opinion must be given. They've earned it.

Jefferson is NOT saying that one can not voice dissent during such times, but that one should not.

I do find it amusing that you only cited ONE section of ONE quote I provided. The latter part of that quote is far more important. Jefferson recognized the dangers that accompany what he promotes. But he promoted it anyway.

In other words, stick together, and sort things out afterwards. If wrongs have been committed, let them be punished.

Further, one can say that were were indeed 'forced' into war, by the continued non-compliance of Saddam.

Constitutional debate? I never brought that document up here. You're reaching with that comment, NR.

[freak]

And you say we're the aggressors, correct? Suppose you're right. Jefferson also said this:

"It is our duty still to endeavor to avoid war; but if it shall actually take place, no matter by whom brought on, we must defend ourselves. If our house be on fire, without inquiring whether it was fired from within or without, we must try to extinguish it." --Thomas Jefferson to James Lewis, Jr., 1798

[pookie]

It was only a matter of time, right?

---------------------------------------------
Apr. 7, 2003

Soldiers with the Army's 101st Airborne Division discover what they believe to be an Iraqi storage site for chemical warheads, U.S. commander says. Describing the discovery as a potential "smoking gun," the official says soldiers found in a warehouse outside Baghdad about 20 medium-range rockets with warheads containing sarin and mustard gases.

-----------------------------------------------

More from Reuters on the same facility

Military sources said experts were looking at three 50-gallon barrels and 11 25-gallon barrels found at the site. As well as sarin, they may also have found phosgene, a choking agent that causes fluid buildup in the lungs, he said.

[Nomar]

Looks like we may have killed Saddam and both of his sons with an attack on a bunker today!!!!!!!!!!!! All I can say is SWEET!!!! I will be keeping an eye on the news!! Oh, and Pookie, thanks for your post below. I knew they had chemical weapons. It was just a matter of time before they were located. I am sure we will unearth more.

Originally posted by Nomar
Looks like we may have killed Saddam and both of his sons with an attack on a bunker today!!!!!!!!!!!! All I can say is SWEET!!!! I will be keeping an eye on the news!! Oh, and Pookie, thanks for your post below. I knew they had chemical weapons. It was just a matter of time before they were located. I am sure we will unearth more.


Where did you see this? That would be great news. In a related matter, it looks like they killed "Chemical Ali" -- the guy reportedly who ordered the use of chemical weapons against the Kurds in '88.

http://www.dailytelegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/04/08/wali08.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/04/08/ixnewstop.html

Originally posted by Nomar
Looks like we may have killed Saddam and both of his sons with an attack on a bunker today!!!!!!!!!!!! All I can say is SWEET!!!! I will be keeping an eye on the news!! Oh, and Pookie, thanks for your post below. I knew they had chemical weapons. It was just a matter of time before they were located. I am sure we will unearth more.


The story from CNN.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/04/07/sprj.irq.war.main/index.html

[Patman12]

Fox News has extensive coverage of this on television. Let's hope the second time was the charm!:thumb:

[Nomar]

I too saw that they think they got Chemical Ali. That's also great news! The empire is falling. By the way, your last post was number 911!! Seems fitting since we may have killed Saddam and his sons.

Originally posted by Nomar
By the way, your last post was number 911!! Seems fitting since we may have killed Saddam and his sons.

That is eerie isn't it?

[pookie]

Originally posted by Nomar
Looks like we may have killed Saddam and both of his sons with an attack on a bunker today!!!!!!!!!!!! All I can say is SWEET!!!! I will be keeping an eye on the news!! Oh, and Pookie, thanks for your post below. I knew they had chemical weapons. It was just a matter of time before they were located. I am sure we will unearth more.

I still won't believe it until experts confirm that it is Hussein that is dead. Who knows maybe they killed one of his doubles. Those doubles sure do look a helluva lot like him! I was hoping that they could get Uday alive, so that he could be ridiculed and humiliated in front of the world, particularly the Iraqi athletes that he tortured for not performing up to par!

[pookie]

On a somewhat related note.... Does anybody else get a BIG kick out of the Iraqi information minister, Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf? I hope he's not killed so he can do stand up comedy back here in the states. Smoke swirls around the city, machine gun fire in the background, Marines having a smoke break Hussein's palace and this guy stands on a rooftop saying, "Nope, no infedels here. We're slaughtering all the infedels. We are too powerful for those.....woah....duck.....missile! Like I was saying, we are winning this war with God's help!" Can he possibly think that anybody, even his own countrymen believe him? I find his speeches/updates entertaining.

[freak]

I heard yesterday, that if you had widened the camera shot of his press conference, you would have seen our tanks in the background. And that it was the presence of the foreign reporters that saved his skin. I think it would be hilarious to see a shot of him denying Americans were in Baghdad, only to see them in the background.

[pookie]

Originally posted by freak
I think it would be hilarious to see a shot of him denying Americans were in Baghdad, only to see them in the background.

That would be priceless! Picture him doing one of his typical denial propoganda talks when 2 US Marines calmly walk up, pick him up by the arms and legs and calmly walk off camera.... Al Jazeera and Iraqi TV (Abu Dabi?) go to a test pattern.....:thumb:

[Hawg73]

Forget Raymond or Larry David or whoever else you might think is funny.

This guy is the most hilarious character I have seen in a long time. It isn't often when I have smiled watching war coverage, but when even Al-Jazeerah is poking fun at the guy you know he is from another planet.

The other day I saw him quoted as first saying that the 200-odd bodies found in the south were Iraqis from the war with Iran (80's) and then saying that because of the American agression the Iraqi authorities were unable to return them to their families.

I keep expecting him to say that the Rams actually won the 2001 superbowl.

[pookie]

Originally posted by Hawg73
Forget Raymond or Larry David or whoever else you might think is funny.

This guy is the most hilarious character I have seen in a long time. It isn't often when I have smiled watching war coverage, but when even Al-Jazeerah is poking fun at the guy you know he is from another planet.

The other day I saw him quoted as first saying that the 200-odd bodies found in the south were Iraqis from the war with Iran (80's) and then saying that because of the American agression the Iraqi authorities were unable to return them to their families.

I keep expecting him to say that the Rams actually won the 2001 superbowl.

Uncle Hawg..... Did you get your "replying from work" problem fixed or something?????!! Or are you just playing hookie today due to the 742nd snow storm of the season up there? Don't feel bad, my brother has to put in insurance claims this week on both of his vehicles and possibly replace his roof due to the golf ball sized hail over the weekend..... I'll take the snow storm any day sir!

[Nomar]

must be a new tactic they are trying for combat.....


http://www.nbc5i.com/news/2087544/detail.html

[pookie]

Originally posted by Hawg73
Forget Raymond or Larry David or whoever else you might think is funny.

This guy is the most hilarious character I have seen in a long time. It isn't often when I have smiled watching war coverage, but when even Al-Jazeerah is poking fun at the guy you know he is from another planet.

The other day I saw him quoted as first saying that the 200-odd bodies found in the south were Iraqis from the war with Iran (80's) and then saying that because of the American agression the Iraqi authorities were unable to return them to their families.

I keep expecting him to say that the Rams actually won the 2001 superbowl.

Here's the latest quote from Inspector Clouseau... aka Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf. This he said this morning at 0330 CDT. "We are going to attack them and destroy them." Iraqi Minister of Information

Wow! This guy is good!

[Nomar]

sounds like somebody clued him in that there is actually a war going on over there....

[Hawg73]

Originally posted by pookie
Uncle Hawg..... Did you get your "replying from work" problem fixed or something?????!! Or are you just playing hookie today due to the 742nd snow storm of the season up there? Don't feel bad, my brother has to put in insurance claims this week on both of his vehicles and possibly replace his roof due to the golf ball sized hail over the weekend..... I'll take the snow storm any day sir!

No it is still a problem. I'm home sick today, but not too sick to log onto the planet.

The bleeping snow is bleeping unbeleepingievable. I am so tired of this crap I could scream. Got another 4 inches last night down my way and more possible tomorrow. I'll be sure and check the weather down your way when its 150 in the shade.

Just once I'd like to actually see golf-ball sized hail. That and a tornado and I'm all set.

Oh well, time to turn on the war and hope for an appearance by Shecky Mohammed bin Dangerfield. I need my hard news fix.

[brew-ski]

As I look out a window in the office at the clear blue skies and 70+ degree weather I think....DAMN I'm glad I'm not back east!!!..

Seriously though this has got to go down as one the worst winters ever back there, doesnt it? Worse than the winter of '78? My mom just came out to visit and now is off to San Antonio to visit my sister...she is all freaking out about trying to get back to Logan and to Falmouth later this week

[Hawg73]

Originally posted by brew-ski
As I look out a window in the office at the clear blue skies and 70+ degree weather I think....DAMN I'm glad I'm not back east!!!..

Seriously though this has got to go down as one the worst winters ever back there, doesnt it? Worse than the winter of '78? My mom just came out to visit and now is off to San Antonio to visit my sister...she is all freaking out about trying to get back to Logan and to Falmouth later this week

Never a storm to outdo the big blizzard of 78 or even that close, but for sheer relentlessness this one might take the cake. History shows us that eventually it may warm up, but....so much for global warming and my lawn will be looking fine in another two weeks.

Not everyone is lucky enough to live in one of the most temperate climates on the planet, brew. You bastard.:D

[brew-ski]

well if it makes you feel any better Hawg... all it does is bring out the blondes in skimpy bikinis..a real traffic hazard and terrible on the neck:thumb:

[Nomar]

This is real cool. Show your support!!

http://www.zoom-n.com/rf/waveit/go3.php

[freak]

Durham hasn't been hit as hard, due to the proximity to the coast. It sux. Just inland at my parents house, they got alot more snow this winter. Not that we didn't get much here, but not enough for my tastes. I want one of those April 20 inchers!!!!!

[Prometheus441]

Ok Kiddies,it seems that your buddy and mine,the king of optomism and da Queen of De'nile,Al Sahaf appears to have left the building!!!!!.Seems he did'nt show to reassure the Iraqi people that they safe from the infidels !.God,I am gonna miss that
guy .

On another note,for those of you that saw the coverage of the
Iraqi people tearing down the statue of Sadam,was that incredible or what ?.For anyone opposed to the war,I say that was an example of why we went to war.For those in support of
the war,I say,thats an example of why we went.Amazing how
the hate for America was on the face of all those Iraqi's tearing down that statue ,huh ?.I just hope that Blixen (Han's) ,the lost riendeer got to see that coverage.Think he and Chirac were sharing a glass of champange and saying "Boy,did we call that one wrong !",lol.

[Hawg73]

No comment necessary.

[Hawg73]

Originally posted by brew-ski
As I look out a window in the office at the clear blue skies and 70+ degree weather I think....DAMN I'm glad I'm not back east!!!..

Seriously though this has got to go down as one the worst winters ever back there, doesnt it? Worse than the winter of '78? My mom just came out to visit and now is off to San Antonio to visit my sister...she is all freaking out about trying to get back to Logan and to Falmouth later this week

Brew,

I recieved a little photo in the mail today entitled "Summer in Massachusetts" that reminded me of your comment. I can just hear you laughing fiendishly over the whole mess.

[pookie]

Originally posted by Hawg73
No comment necessary.

In response to Hawg's blondes against the war... Here we have some very confused protestors.

[Hawg73]

The war is going so well that some people are celebrating prematurely. Nothing like a nice barbeque. This one is entitled "Redneck Grill".

Originally posted by Hawg73
Nothing like a nice barbeque. This one is entitled "Redneck Grill".


And to think I rated this four stars....

Can I have that back.


I like the snowmen playing poker. :thumb:

[brew-ski]

what gets me about the red neck grill is in the corner of the pic (where i diverted my eyes after seeing that hideous image)..I see the "lil-red neck" aka lil mullet watching the whole thing..never can teach them too early in the Ozarks I guess..

[pookie]

Originally posted by brew-ski
what gets me about the red neck grill is in the corner of the pic (where i diverted my eyes after seeing that hideous image)..I see the "lil-red neck" aka lil mullet watching the whole thing..never can teach them too early in the Ozarks I guess..

Sad thing is, I think I met this guy in Memphis. ;)

Originally posted by pookie
In response to Hawg's blondes against the war... Here we have some very confused protestors.


It seems to me they would have been better with the old "Lick Bush" slogan given their proclivities.

Ambivalence is being a conservative lesbian during the next election. Confusion is being a blonde, conservative lesbian during the next election.

[pookie]

Originally posted by NoRespect
It seems to me they would have been better with the old "Lick Bush" slogan given their proclivities.

Ambivalence is being a conservative lesbian during the next election. Confusion is being a blonde, conservative lesbian during the next election.

ROFL ROFL

Good one chief!

I'm thinking that these poor ladies are part of a bigger group headed up by none other than spawn of Satan Martha Burk.

Lesbians Against Bush In America

Acronym anyone? LABIA

[freak]

http://byloff.50megs.com/pictures/IFM.gif

[Prometheus441]

That is classic,thanks for the chuckle

[pookie]

LONDON, England -- French President Jacques Chirac says his country is "rejoicing" in the apparent collapse of the Iraqi dictatorship.

Chirac strongly opposed a U.S-led military attack on Iraq, preferring to work through the U.N. Security Council in supporting longer weapons inspections.

But he said in a statement released by the Elysee Palace Thursday: "France, like every democracy, is rejoicing over the collapse of Saddam Hussein's dictatorship, and hopes for a quick and effective end to the battle."

His foreign minister, Dominique de Villepin, added: "With the collapse of Saddam Hussein's regime, a dark page has been turned."

[brew-ski]

here is a website dedicted to our favorite Iraqi Inspector Clouseau
http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/

one of my fsvorite quotes (inspired by melba marcos):

About Bush and Rumsfeld: "Those only deserve to be hit with shoes."

[pookie]

Originally posted by brew-ski
here is a website dedicted to our favorite Iraqi Inspector Clouseau
http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/

one of my fsvorite quotes (inspired by melba marcos):

About Bush and Rumsfeld: "Those only deserve to be hit with shoes."

I hear that it's a major insult in Iraq to be hit with shoes. That's why the citizens were hitting that statue of Hussein with their shoes before and after it was ripped down...kinda funny.