jefferson_dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-19-08 11:28 PM
Original message |
Iraqi PM: US Should Leave As Soon As Possible; GB PM Brown: Time to scale down in Iraq (AP) |
|
Tell me again. How is McSame not royally "screwn" <sic>?
|
babylonsister
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-19-08 11:35 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Obama is getting a lot of support. That's excellent! nt |
iconicgnom
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-20-08 01:32 AM
Response to Original message |
2. Did Iraq pass the made in US oil deal which gives away all their resources? |
|
Or is it still being debated?
|
Jack Rabbit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-20-08 09:34 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
4. It will be debated for a hundred years |
|
In the US, we call that a filibuster. Except the only other party they're debating is Bush and the neocons.
|
iconicgnom
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-20-08 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
5. Either they passed it and Exxon etc. are free to go in and plunder, |
|
or they didn't. If they passed it, the US will (historically, the US has done this) be free to protect Exxon, protect "american interests" in Iraq, if a later non-puppet Iraqi gov't tries to change the terms. Since the oil giveaway being pushed by the US was as total as total can be, while throwing a penny to the Iraqis scrabbling in the sand, any later reformation of those laws would be categorized as a "nationalization" of the resource, in effect, as a theft, (as is done in every other case where a country tries to take back what is theirs, and which international "superpower" thieves have stolen).
To plunder the oil resources was the only purpose of the Iraq war, and it's a yes/no answer on whether they succeeded in passing the made in USA and written by Exxon oil/resource distribution laws the US wanted.
|
DUlover2909
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jul-20-08 06:08 AM
Response to Original message |
3. I am tired of hearing "artificial time frame" being used by the press and pundits. |
|
artificial defined as:
1. made by human skill; produced by humans (opposed to natural): artificial flowers. 2. imitation; simulated; sham: artificial vanilla flavoring. 3. lacking naturalness or spontaneity; forced; contrived; feigned: an artificial smile. 4. full of affectation; affected; stilted: artificial manners; artificial speech. 5. made without regard to the particular needs of a situation, person, etc.; imposed arbitrarily; unnatural: artificial rules for dormitory residents.
Which definition do they mean? #5? I guess so. Since no specific goals have been set forth thus far by the administration, what other choice do we have for withdrawal? No conflict means troops stay since they are succeeding. All out civil war means troops stay to quell the violence. An arbitrary, artificial date of withdrawal without regard to the particulars on the ground seems to be the ONLY logical course of action.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 25th 2024, 04:32 AM
Response to Original message |