It's one mans OPINION while he ranted on for an hour...it's not a governmental confession.
2007-07-08 17:10:26
·
answer #1
·
answered by Erinyes 6
·
1⤊
3⤋
As it stands right now, over 80% of Iraqi oil is under contract to Compagnie Petrol De Francais. That's a French company.
A lot of the oil workers in Iraq, before the UN Peace Enforcement Mission of 1991, were Egyptians and Palestinians. Because there was an Egyptian contingent in the UN Peace Enforcement force, Hussein deported all of the Egyptians. Many of the Palestinians left also.
We have never depended on Iraqi oil for more than 4% of our imported oil needs. In fact, from 1990 onward we have not imported one drop of Iraqi oil.
Now I know you got "het up" reading one page from the Congressional Record. But, you ought to investigate how much imported oil we use, why it's been over 30 years since we have built a refinery while filling our roads to overflowing with vehicles, and why Congress got rid of the oil depletion allowance, making it a bad business decision for oil companies to find it in the States and its off-shore waters, rather than import it.
You also have to realize that the part of the Congressional Record which you cited is part of Special Orders, where any member can drone on for up to 60 minutes on any topic after the business of the House has been concluded for the day. So, Dennis Kucinich was preaching to an almost empty chamber.
2007-07-09 00:16:27
·
answer #2
·
answered by desertviking_00 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
What? The US is involved in oil in the middle east? What? The US Oil Mafia is involved with 'our' government? What? 'Our' government has used 'our' military as mercenaries for the US Oil Mafia? Perish forbid! Holy #$%^.....and here all along we thought this $%^&ing war was about WMD...or was it bringing democracy to Iraq?Wait!I distinctly recall something about terrorists....or maybe it was that some middle eastern thug had 'killed his own people'? ...as if that's never happened before. Ah, well...it's probably all some phoney BS cooked up by the 'liberal' press. I mean would George Bush even be smart enough to try to fool us? Maybe Cheney...I dunno'.....anyway, Paris Hilton is far more important than several hundred thousand dead people in a country far frar away.....I mean aren't we 'making progress'?
2007-07-09 00:48:18
·
answer #3
·
answered by Noah H 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Well, hate to tell you this, but Oil and Glass are the only two things Iraq has to support it's economy. Glass can be made anywhere there is sand, and it's not that easy to transport. Oil, on the other hand, can be moved anywhere around the world-at a lower cost than glass. So, if we don't make Iraq but it's oil on the global (global meaning the whole world, not just the US) then how else is the country going to support herself?
2007-07-09 00:14:55
·
answer #4
·
answered by crknapp79 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
I wasn't gullible. I knew this administration used the Iraqi War for personal reasons. They used people's fears to go into Iraq. They used 9/11 so Halliburton can make money off of the soldier's blood.
If it weren't for the Nixon administration, this would have been the most incompetent and disgraceful administration in history.
2007-07-09 00:16:06
·
answer #5
·
answered by linus_van_pelt_4968 5
·
3⤊
0⤋
The reason why Bush hasn't been impeached is because it would put Cheney in his place, an even worse situation than we have already. Bush would then claim the executive privilege to issue his own pardon and the whole fiasco would be a waste of taxpayers money.
2007-07-09 00:17:17
·
answer #6
·
answered by wztellinitthewayitis 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
don't include me in that "we". i wasn't gullible enough to vote for that born again poser much less believe the cooked up justifications given to invade Iraq. i had read about PNAC and knew what Cheney's criminal cabal of neoCONs were up to from the moment the word "Iraq" emitted from GW's smirking lips. i protested the war on Iraq from the get go and was called a "traitor" and a "terrorist enabler". i guess it just takes some folks longer to wake up and get a clue. and then there's the 28 Percenters who were then and are now and forever obtuse rubes.
2007-07-09 00:24:04
·
answer #7
·
answered by nebtet 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
Bush and his Buddies ordered the Invasion or Iraq in order to steal the OIL.
Good work!
2007-07-09 17:16:40
·
answer #8
·
answered by Ringo G. 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well, that lets me out...
I told the neo-con collective BEFORE the Iraq war that invading Iraq would be a big mistake. I told them verbatim exactly what is happening now in that country.
One of their biggest blind spots was the, back then, success in Afghanistan. I explained to my neo-counterparts that the Taliban were NOT Afghans. The Afghans had a vested interest in kicking out the Taliban invaders. Iraq was an entirely different matter AND they were not involved in 9/11 so why do it in the first place?
All I heard in return was a bunch of one line slogans smothered in machismo. Now, due to these wish-I-were-macho types, hundreds of thousands of civilians are dead and/or wounded. 3600 and counting soldiers have had their very lives snatched out of them. 26,000 and counting have been wounded with 13,000 wounded not able to return to duty.
Tough talking morons have never impressed me. The Iraq war is a prime example of why...
2007-07-09 00:07:48
·
answer #9
·
answered by Chi Guy 5
·
4⤊
2⤋
Give the opposing view a thought or two:
Imagine if you are wrong in your assessment and we are really being gullible enough to ignore the Islamic terrorists' threats and accept the democrats' policy of defeat.
Could be we are being as gullible to buy into this policy of defeat as the terrorists thought we would be.
How would that make you feel?
2007-07-09 00:24:58
·
answer #10
·
answered by LeAnne 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
Dennis Kucinich is loony toons! He needs to be put away in an institution.
2007-07-09 00:20:09
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋