Over on a Bush poll thread we have this incredibly stupid and moronic comment... and then of course, crawling into the matubatory intellectual sack with Looney, we have....yes, you guessed it....the raving collectivist Mel "I know what's better for your money than you do" Brennan... Typically, of course, these guys have an astonishing level of ignorance about the oil industry in Iraq and what is happening there. So, if you want to know what's REALLY happening in the Iraqi oil industry -- you know, like, um, the FACTS -- take a moment and read this: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/iraq.html Since companies from South Africa, Russia, Turkey, Germany, India, Indonesia, and the Czech Republic are involved in the Iraqi Oil industry, Bush and Cheyney are doing a piss poor job of stealing. Oh, by the way, the Iraqi oil industry was a shambles even before the war, going all the way back to the Iran conflict.
Kenneth Pollack has a column in the NYT's op-ed page today about five things that need to be done to "win back" Iraq. Contained within his criticism of an overly bureaucratic, top down reconstruction effort is this nugget: It sounds like he's implying the Iraqi oil ministry could use some cleaning out. Of course then, he doesn't link to any reporting about the the theft of oil revenues, so we have no way of evaluating what he says, who is actually receiving the revenues, and if it's actually taking place. But it seems the oil money trail should be one of the key things reporters should be looking at, not to get Bush for stealing oil, but to give a better understanding of what's hurting the US efforts in Iraq. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/01/opinion/01pollack.html?pagewanted=2
I'm not so sure, but I honestly can't get onto you anymore about this kind of crap judging by the piles of other useless or otherwise redundant threads started here.
No it doesn't. You're quoting two other posters from another thread and discussing a topic that could easily be addressed in that very same thread.
'Control' of oil does not mean Bush or Cheney own the company that owns Iraqi oil, and that all profits are flowing into their back pockets. Only the really stupid or naive (which equally applies to many hippy protestors and ostrich conservatives) would ever think that, or come to conclusions based on this view. "Control" means ensuring a reliable supply of oil. By such measures, one could see that the oil/gas deals that US companies have with Canada/Mexico lead to a sort of control - as in, established contracts with friendly partners. Our safe supply of fuels from these countries is controlled. Iraq a few years ago? Unfriendly source of oil. In fact, not much oil being pumped because of UN restrictions. Changing that situation and installing a "friendly" government is a way to "control" that source of fuel - even if no politician gets a few barrels of oil in their basement.
IF there is some stolen oil floating around out there, boy do I wish I could get my hands on some. Cuz $2.60 at the pump is putting a real dent in my checking account.
Yes it does. The quotes from two other posters in the other thread is a convenient segue into THIS topic...oil...which is SEPARATE from the OTHER topic...that Bush is getting good poll numbers. Then again, making distinctions was never your strong suit.
That's not what control actually means. That's influence. And if influence was meant by the poster way back then, then it shouldn't been used.
Of course, what they said, and clearly what they believe, is that Bush and Cheyney are "stealing." But hey, what's this word or that word or some other word, when all you care about is distorting, demagoging, and otherwise slandering? Meanwhile, "control" is not the same as "ensuring a reliable supply." I can have zero control yet know that the supply is reliable. You know, with other companies involved, and me paying them a market price. In other words, NOT stealing. But for you, and so many of the other brain-locked moonbats, useful distinctions aren't a strong suit.
So, are you Loney and Mel having a nice time sharing the bedsheets? Tootsies nice and cozy warm?? Let us know if they keep their hands to themselves.
Threads in the politics forum never evolve in mid thread... Of course thinking never was your strong suit.
Let's take this thread at its face value. The original comment, I believe, is that BushCo and CheneyCo attacked Iraq because of real reasons and fake ones. Real reasons: - Settle a Bush Family Score with Saddam - Get some oil flowing - Get some war contracting going, preferably to friends of CheneyCo and BushCo (See: Halliburton and Carlyle) Fake reasons: - WMD - Saddam Hussein is a secret homosexual lover of Osama bin Laden - Depose a tyrant Karl Keller's respons is that the Real Reasons for the war couldn't be true, because there have been CONTRACTS with international companies to help setup the oil pumping/refining/security businesses, and only SOME of these companies are American! This is the worst straw man ever. Even I am certain that BushCo and Rummy and his ilk did not think there would be this long, drawn out conflict. Remember the flowers? However, things aren't working out as planned. The war planners belief that this would be a quick painless war was about as well thought out as the oil companies belief that Iraq would be paying for its own reconstruction on the backs of those clever contractors getting the pipelines up and running. Just because it hasn't worked out that way doesn't mean it wasn't part of the original plan.
So the poll that says 40 some odd % support impeachment is to believed But this poll is to be discounted Tell me, how does that logic work ?
george, what poll are we talking about on this thread? Methinks you have too many windows open at once.
You would be correct sir See what you get for trying to multitask and keep the money pouring in for the guys in the corner offices
As I said, Loney accused Bush & Cheyney of "stealing" and Mel "God, what an idiot socialist I am" Brennan chimed in in agreement. It's no straw man. I have proven they are not stealing, not if their motivations are deceitful (for the negativsts) or laudable (hey, 25 million free Iraqi's are just downright meaningless and insignificant compared to not-found stockpiles of WMD..right, moonbat brain?) Again, once again, the so-called nuanced lefty unwashed that infect this board like a syphilitic brain fever have a very very VERY hard time getting their meager little consciousnesses around these very very simple distinctions. Typical. Very typical.
Ok, coming from a strickly neutral postion here, if Bush and Cheney are stealing the oil, who exactly is getting the oil? What companies? Obviously they aren't passing the savings down to us the consumers in the states are they? So where is the oil going? I have also read that the pipelines themselves are having to be repaired on a daily basis, and not just due to insurgents either, but from disrepair.
You must not have read this http://www.weeklyworldnews.com/features/politics/59610 "JUST ONE MONTH after their gay marriage rocked the world, ecstatic newlyweds Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein have adopted a shaved-ape baby to make their family complete. And while the news is sure to set terrorists' hearts aflutter, the animal-rights group that delivered the chimp to a go-between who promised that the 9-month-old was going to a "good home" say they were lied to -- and they want the little critter back." This was before Saddam went to solitary confinement, of course.
Karl, you are so sharp! You're absolutely right. You have unequivocally proven that Bush is not "stealing" oil. You've obliterated another lefty illusion. All this time we all thought Bush and Cheney were sneaking around in ski masks, secretly filling giant tubs behind the White House with pilfered light crude. Now, thanks to your dauntless investigation, you've proved that's not actually the case. Bush never even owned a pair of Bruno Magli shoes, and therefore could not be the real culpirit. Don't you feel proud of yourself for making us liberals look like fools, once again? Have yourself a cookie. You deserve it.