Prediction

[Shira]

Today is 2/9/2005.
In 2/9/2010 the US armed forces will still be in Iraq. The explanation is very simple.
You have to be aware of the real reason of the Iraqi war. Needless to say that the war has nothing to do with WMD or Terror or ‘Democracy to Iraq’ or any other BS like these. Remember that the one and the only reason for the war is that Cheney and his gang love oil. They must be close to the oil and to totally control it. No one (including B.Boxer and T.kennedy) is mentioning this reason.
The bottom line: The US is not going to leave Iraq in the foreseeable future.

[KEmperor]

Does going away for a month and then reposting the same thing over and over count as spamming?

[TexasPatriot2024]

thats crap and you know it, have you seen oil prices drop here?

[KEmperor]

thats crap and you know it, have you seen oil prices drop here?

Don't even try to begin to confuse Shira with facts.  Her arguments all boil down to:

1:  Bush and Cheney are evil
2:  Europe is paradise
3:  The Iraq war was for Oil

Any deviation from that norm and you are part of the vast right wing conspiracy.

[minionofmidas]

While I don`t believe oil was "the one and only reason for this war", a prediction that the US military will still be in Iraq in 2010 is hardly a daring or unusual one.
 
And I think even you guys know there`s no reason to believe, no reason whatsoever, that increased control of oil supplies by a fistful of companies would lead to a drop in consumer prices.

[Blue Rectangle]

They must be close to the oil and to totally control it. No one (including B.Boxer and T.kennedy) is mentioning this reason.

Boxer and Kennedy won't say they believe your theory?  What does that tell you?

If controlling oil is so important, why did this administration pull most all our troops out of Saudi Arabia?  If oil production is so critical, why not drill for the huge reserves we have here?  I'm pretty sure drilling ANWAR would be easier than the occupation of Iraq.

Also, have you considered the Oil for Food scandal?  It's pretty obvious now that France and Russia were benefiting tremendously from the continued presence of Saddam in Iraq.  Are you open to the idea that opposition to Bush's Iraq policy by France and Russia just might have been driven by the motives you assign to Bush and Cheney?

[Erc]

Of course, ANWAR got defeated in the Senate 55-45 or something like that, while invading Iraq got 80-20 support... [/devil's advocate]

In all seriousness, though, we'll still have troops in Iraq in 2010.  But probably no more than 20,000 or so, just to keep an eye on Syria and Iran.

[Blue Rectangle]

Of course, ANWAR got defeated in the Senate 55-45 or something like that, while invading Iraq got 80-20 support... [/devil's advocate]

In all seriousness, though, we'll still have troops in Iraq in 2010.  But probably no more than 20,000 or so, just to keep an eye on Syria and Iran.

And even if ANWAR drilling had been approved there would have been endless legal battles.  Hmmm, so maybe fighting al Qaeda in Iraq is easier than fighting lawyers here at home.

Your prediction on troops in Iraq is probably accurate.  We have had troops in Kosovo for 10 years now, so why would our withdrawl from Iraq be faster?

[AuH2O]

The best way to get Iraqi oil was to keep Hussein in power and buy from him. Anyone with half a brain knows as much.

[Wakie]

A couple of thoughts on this ....

1) We probably will still be in Iraq in 2010.  We're in Korea, Japan, and Germany.  We don't leave in a hurry.

2) When the flow of oil is lower the price is higher while the cost of acquiring it for refiners is constant.  Therefore, in those cases oil companies make MORE money.  Freeing up the oil flow in Iraq is against their best interests.

3) ANWR isn't the solution to our energy crisis.  A "Manhattan Project" into alternative energy is.

[Jake]

We're still in Kuwait 15 years after the fact, still in Korea 52 years after the fact, still in Japan 60 years after the fact, still in Germany 60 years after the fact, still in Italy 60 years after the fact, still in the UK 60 years after the fact.  The real question is when will troop numbers return to around 2001 levels.  The answer, by the '06 elections, there will be fewer than 50K and by the '08 elections fewer than 20K.

[J.R. Brown]

The truth is fossil fuels are killing our planet. Personally, I think the U.S. needs to focus on finding some alternatives.

[opebo]

thats crap and you know it, have you seen oil prices drop here?

Don't even try to begin to confuse Shira with facts.  Her arguments all boil down to:

1:  Bush and Cheney are evil
2:  Europe is paradise
3:  The Iraq war was for Oil

Any deviation from that norm and you are part of the vast right wing conspiracy.

Actually Europe is, if not paradise, clearly a much better place in which to live than the US.

As for the purpose of the Iraq war - oil was just a side benefit.  The real benefit is in domestic politics.  Winning elections on cheap, nonsensical jingoism and warmongering is priceless.  Militarizing society and transferring massive amounts of wealth to defense and other contractors - who are all Bush backers - is very handy.  Notice he's trying to eliminate the income of the few remaining backers of Democrats - such as trial lawyers - while providing his constitutency with massive subsidy?

Of course control of some oil is not without some value, but certainly no one in the Bush administration wants low oil prices.

[The Duke]

Never mind that we can have iraqi oil by simply lifting sanctions.  Never mind that if you're trying to address threats to our oil supply, Chavez is a greater threat than Hussein.

The fact that even the most extreme Democrat Senators won't say its for oil, and the fact that even anti-Bush defectors from the administration won't say its for oil, shows that its not for oil.

[Blue Rectangle]

Isn't it lovely how Shira kicks off a mighty debate and then leaves? God love her! She knows how to press all the right buttons!

From experience.  These buttons have been pressed before.

I have a prediction too:
Shira will soon start a thread asking, "What was the *real* reason for war in Iraq?"

[Shira]

Your prediction on troops in Iraq is probably accurate.  We have had troops in Kosovo for 10 years now, so why would our withdrawl from Iraq be faster?

Big difference between Kosovo and Iraq. Unlike Iraq, Kosovo and Bosnia were real problems and not a fake like the Iraqi one. We were lucky then that we had a real president B.Clinton and not this virtual one G.W.Bush.

[The Duke]

We claim Iraq had WMD programs.  We found hundreds of tons of uranium, Scud Missiles, CBW researchers, and caches of weapons.

We claims Saddam backed terrorists.  We find a money trail from Baghdad to Islamic Jihad, Ansar al-Islam, Al Qaeda, Hamas, etc.

We claim Saddam butchers his own people.  We find mass graves.

That last one is especially significant, since all that was alleged in the Balkans was a humanitarian crisis.  If Shira thinks a humanitarian crisis justifies war in the balkans, then surely she must be applying the same standard to Iraq?

[Shira]

We claim Iraq had WMD programs.  We found hundreds of tons of uranium, Scud Missiles, CBW researchers, and caches of weapons.

We claims Saddam backed terrorists.  We find a money trail from Baghdad to Islamic Jihad, Ansar al-Islam, Al Qaeda, Hamas, etc.

We claim Saddam butchers his own people.  We find mass graves.

That last one is especially significant, since all that was alleged in the Balkans was a humanitarian crisis.  If Shira thinks a humanitarian crisis justifies war in the balkans, then surely she must be applying the same standard to Iraq?

The problem with you that you are totally misinformed.

[The Duke]

We claim Iraq had WMD programs.  We found hundreds of tons of uranium, Scud Missiles, CBW researchers, and caches of weapons.

We claims Saddam backed terrorists.  We find a money trail from Baghdad to Islamic Jihad, Ansar al-Islam, Al Qaeda, Hamas, etc.

We claim Saddam butchers his own people.  We find mass graves.

That last one is especially significant, since all that was alleged in the Balkans was a humanitarian crisis.  If Shira thinks a humanitarian crisis justifies war in the balkans, then surely she must be applying the same standard to Iraq?

The problem with you that you are totally misinformed.

Name one thing I said that was wrong.

[The Duke]

And Shira is logged off.  Yet another quasi troll refuses to back up their allegations.

[minionofmidas]

We claim Iraq had WMD programs.  We found hundreds of tons of uranium, Scud Missiles, CBW researchers, and caches of weapons.

We claims Saddam backed terrorists.  We find a money trail from Baghdad to Islamic Jihad, Ansar al-Islam, Al Qaeda, Hamas, etc.

We claim Saddam butchers his own people.  We find mass graves.

That last one is especially significant, since all that was alleged in the Balkans was a humanitarian crisis.  If Shira thinks a humanitarian crisis justifies war in the balkans, then surely she must be applying the same standard to Iraq?

The problem with you that you are totally misinformed.

Name one thing I said that was wrong.

I've highlighted the parts that you'll need to convince me of.
Also, I don't know what a CBW researcher is, and none of the others have ever been denied...and you'd expect a cache of weapons in a country for chrissakes. I mean, they had an army, right?

[Middle-aged Europe]

Also, I don't know what a CBW researcher is

"Chemical and biological weapons" would be my guess. He probably means this former scientist who buried some his stuff in the garden of his house.

[??????????]

And Shira is logged off.  Yet another quasi troll refuses to back up their allegations.

Yes we have quite a few quasi trolls around here :

Wakie
MacFarlan
JFern
PnkRocket

[Blue Rectangle]

Your prediction on troops in Iraq is probably accurate.  We have had troops in Kosovo for 10 years now, so why would our withdrawl from Iraq be faster?

Big difference between Kosovo and Iraq. Unlike Iraq, Kosovo and Bosnia were real problems and not a fake like the Iraqi one. We were lucky then that we had a real president B.Clinton and not this virtual one G.W.Bush.

Shira, Clinton sat in the Oval Office, got on TV, and claimed that we must act in Kosovo because Serbia threatened our NATO allies.  Never mind the fact that the only NATO country bordering Serbia is Greece, which is a long-standing ally of the Serbs.  The "threat" that Serbia represented to the U.S. and our allies was precisely zero.

The reason we are still in Kosovo is because Clinton/Albright/Clark completely botched the situation.  We should not have taken sides in a civil war, but rather had only provided humanitarian aid and supported UN observers.  Instead Clinton pushed a view of "Serbia evil/Kosovo good" that the Iran-funded muslim terrorists in Kosovo used to claim that the U.S. had fought the war for Kosovo independence.  If we withdrew from Kosovo, it would become a terrorist quasi-state in the heart of eastern Europe and that would threaten us and our NATO allies.

Correction: we have had troops in Bosnia for 10 years, only 6 years in Kosovo.

[minionofmidas]

Shira, Clinton sat in the Oval Office, got on TV, and claimed that we must act in Kosovo because Serbia threatened our NATO allies.  Never mind the fact that the only NATO country bordering Serbia is Greece, which is a long-standing ally of the Serbs.  The "threat" that Serbia represented to the U.S. and our allies was precisely zero.

Actually, the only NATO country Serbia borders is Hungary, which had joined the NATO weeks before. Otherwise, you're right.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

or rather, was pushed into such a view

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Saudi-Arabia funded. And US-funded. And wherever-there-is-an-Albanian-community funded. But Iranian funded? Never heard that. Why the hell should they be?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, they had always fought the war for Kosovo independence...and NATO got in on their side, after pretty much bogus "mediating" talks at Rambouillet. So you can see their point...even though NATO always disavowed such a goal.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Basically the situation is, the NATO and the EU have landed themselves colonies in Bosnia and the Kosovo. Macedonia too. And now there seems to be no way out...sounds a bit like what I expect in Iraq, except that'll always require much more manpower, and claim casualties. Also sounds a bit like the early stages of US involvement in Viet Nam.