monty16 Posted June 19, 2014 Report Posted June 19, 2014 You have interesting debating tactics. You choosing to ignore my posts over the past couple pages? Or just deliberately being abrasive? You are using the wrong bait. Shady is not stupid, he might be a bit blind and staunchly partisan, but he is not stupid. For the control of the currency oil is traded in. Not for the oil itself. There is a difference. A very key difference. You should have tried to polish that up a bit first and ignored the noises in your head to come up with something new and original over what your friend had given you for ideas. Nobody ever said that US apologists or Nazis are stupid. They fight hard to prop up the illusion even when it's far too late to change the obvious facts. Try this: The US went to war with Iraq for oil and it wasn't for WMD's or Saddam or anything else. The noise in your head should have told you that by now as you still are refusing to pick an excuse and prop it up with some evidence. You didn't start out on that side but I think I've succeeded in coaxing you over to that side now. Good for you! It starkly indicates your worth as a person! Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted June 19, 2014 Report Posted June 19, 2014 It was all about oil and nothing else but they can try to put a different spin on it by initiating a new approach saying it wasn't 'for' oil. The power of US propaganda. Pretending that it wasn't all about Iraq's oil at this late date when the US has been revealed as the pariah nation. Small brains can never escape their US propaganda indoctrination even when we now know the whole truth. And again tonight Rachel Maddow screams about how Cheney was responsible for the Iraq war. It's not only an attempt to absolve Bush2 from any responsibility but it also attempts to clear the US. Are you going to join their club or are you just pointing out that war for bucks is war for oil? No, I pointed out it was a war for bucks. Quote
monty16 Posted June 19, 2014 Report Posted June 19, 2014 (edited) No, I pointed out it was a war for bucks. Thanks! there was a time when any of our posters could be figured out by their track record of shooting off their mouths. There's never been any doubt about you and there's never been any doubt about Shady. But recently one of them must have said something stupid that called for him being corrected and he's completely compromised any principles he ever had in order to disagree with me. Now he's Shady's friend. There never was any misunderstanding about it but going with bucks which were obviously 'oil' bucks is a new approach. Albeit a feeble one! Edited June 19, 2014 by monty16 Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted June 19, 2014 Report Posted June 19, 2014 Thanks! there was a time when any of our posters could be figured out by their track record of shooting off their mouths. There's never been any doubt about you and there's never been any doubt about Shady. But recently one of them must have said something stupid that called for him being corrected and he's completely compromised any principles he ever had in order to disagree with me. Now he's Shady's friend. There never was any misunderstanding about it but going with bucks which were obviously 'oil' bucks is a new approach. Albeit a feeble one! You're welcome. And no doubt about you. Quote
GostHacked Posted June 19, 2014 Author Report Posted June 19, 2014 (edited) Here we go again. http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/19/politics/iraq-crisis/index.html?hpt=hp_t1 Washington (CNN) -- There's a growing chorus -- both in Washington and in the Arab world -- that Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has to go if there's any hope of unifying Iraq as Islamic militants advance south toward Baghdad. While some on Capitol Hill aren't shy about saying his days as the Iraqi leader should come to an end, at the White House it's more of a whisper. Senior U.S. officials tell CNN that the Obama administration is of the belief that al-Maliki is not the leader Iraq needs to unify the country and end sectarian tensions. The officials, along with Arab diplomats, say the White House is now focused on a political transition that would move Iraqis toward a more inclusive government -- one without al-Maliki that includes Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish factions. How are they going to make a government more inclusive when the division between Sunni, Shiite and the Kurds has been perpetuated by outside forces (internal as well) ...... Edited June 19, 2014 by Charles Anthony fixed malformed quote Quote
eyeball Posted June 19, 2014 Report Posted June 19, 2014 Senior U.S. officials tell CNN that the Obama administration is of the belief that al-Maliki is not the leader Iraq needs to unify the country and end sectarian tensions. What we need is a galvanizing event that can unify the planet and put an end to the nationalism which always seems to make senior officials everywhere get tense. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
monty16 Posted June 19, 2014 Report Posted June 19, 2014 Here we go again. http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/19/politics/iraq-crisis/index.html?hpt=hp_t1 How are they going to make a government more inclusive when the division between Sunni, Shiite and the Kurds has been perpetuated by outside forces (internal as well) ...... Heads will roll again until the stability that Saddam had achieved for his country is restored. Do you still understand that now that you have switched sides and are trying to parrot the US propaganda line that it was something other than oil that was the reason for war on Iraq? Or are you going to straddle the fence and provide more entertainment for us? Are you still working on that 'other' reason for war? Ask your friend for help! Quote
monty16 Posted June 19, 2014 Report Posted June 19, 2014 (edited) http://rt.com/usa/167100-us-wants-oust-maliki-iraq/ "If we got US drones to hit Baiji, and jets to bomb Isis elsewhere, we could slow them down," a senior Iraqi MP said to news outlet. "Without them we can do nothing. Without them we can't win." Whatttt? The entire Iraqi armed forces can't fight and defeat a few thousand ISIS fighters? What could be missing other than the will? Could it be that the will is missing because the people of Iraq want to see the US defeated and chased from Iraq with their tails between their legs? A stretch? What other reason could there be? Edited June 19, 2014 by monty16 Quote
monty16 Posted June 19, 2014 Report Posted June 19, 2014 RT News Israel politicians warn Iraq crisis may spark US concessions to Iran Israel fears that a jihadist offensive in Iraq may prompt concessions to Tehran from its longtime ally the US, AFP reported. If Washington needs Iran’s help to solve the Iraq crisis, the US “will need to be more flexible in negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program,” Israeli public radio cited Tourism Minister Uzi Landau as saying. “We’re in a situation where, to confront the threat from the global jihad, we rely on Iran and its allies.” A top Iranian official said Wednesday that Tehran could consider working with the US over the Iraq crisis if nuclear talks are successful. Iran has inserted the wedge without even trying. Does this increase the likelihood of a Zionist strike on Iran without US permission or help? Hopefully Obama will slap their peepees again and settle them down a bit. He must understand that peace is again threatened and will continue to be until Iran gets 'one'! Quote
monty16 Posted June 20, 2014 Report Posted June 20, 2014 275 and now another 300. http://rt.com/usa/167136-obama-iraq-military-advisors/ Is that too many or not enough? ISIS is coming. Chop, chop! Quote
monty16 Posted June 20, 2014 Report Posted June 20, 2014 Not to suggest that the Us would hide any of the truth about ISIS from you people but just in case. http://rt.com/news/166836-isis-isil-al-qaeda-iraq/ Trust RT news, the US has shown it no longer can be. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted June 20, 2014 Report Posted June 20, 2014 Not to suggest that the Us would hide any of the truth about ISIS from you people but just in case. http://rt.com/news/166836-isis-isil-al-qaeda-iraq/ Trust RT news, the US has shown it no longer can be. Have you ever been in Muslim country? Quote
Army Guy Posted June 20, 2014 Report Posted June 20, 2014 I don't think he has been out of moms basement....just a guess... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Gumby Posted June 20, 2014 Report Posted June 20, 2014 Can't wait for the Saudis to consider the petro-yen, petro-ruble, or petro-ingot. Then we'll see how fast they miraculously become dictators and terrorists, and how fast they are "liberated" from their homes and limbs. This argument will be repeated ad nauseum . Way to prop up dictators when convenient. When exactly did Saddam change from all round good-guy ally to all round bad-guy dictator? Oh right, when he considered trading oil in something other than greenbacks. Like it or not, Saddam was the only thing holding Iraq together, and Iraqi deaths of innocents have gone up by a factor of thousands since 2003. Every time there's a change in the civil war situation in Iraq, I get slammed at the gas pumps hard. Mission accomplished indeed. Oil companies win, Haliburton wins, and the cherry on top is that now all of the obscene profiteering in corrupt "rebuilding" will be covered up by destruction of said "rebuilding" . The more Iraq is in turmoil, the higher oil prices will be. I suspect that this has been the objective from the start, and so far there is 0 credible evidence to dispel the suspicion. I will never forget what infrastructure in Iraq was protected and secured first when Coalition boots hit the ground. That is the indicator of the mission objective. i will also not lose sight of the fact that the biggest proponents of the mission were oil and war contracting interests. Quote
GostHacked Posted June 20, 2014 Author Report Posted June 20, 2014 Not to suggest that the Us would hide any of the truth about ISIS from you people but just in case. http://rt.com/news/166836-isis-isil-al-qaeda-iraq/ Trust RT news, the US has shown it no longer can be. RT is Russian state run television. Don't kid yourself. However you will find the stuff on the USA on RT that you would not find on US MSM. And vice versa. Overall RT is no better than CNN or Fox. Quote
monty16 Posted June 20, 2014 Report Posted June 20, 2014 RT is Russian state run television. Don't kid yourself. However you will find the stuff on the USA on RT that you would not find on US MSM. And vice versa. Overall RT is no better than CNN or Fox. And why would I argue with somebody who is shown a link for a website and then calls it Russian t.v? Fox is not news, it's entertainment meant for the rabid right. RT can at least be called news. As can CBC. You shouldn't try to kid yourself because I'm not. While it's slanted toward Russia, it's still the best source of news we have on the topic we're trying to learn about and discuss. Don't be a kneejerk as soon as you see a reference to Russia. Haven't you learned anything from the US lies it has told for war. Oh wait, you have learned a bit. You just don't remember. Quote
GostHacked Posted June 20, 2014 Author Report Posted June 20, 2014 And why would I argue with somebody who is shown a link for a website and then calls it Russian t.v? I have the feeling it is just to be abrasive. Not very good for debate or general discussion. You've proven to be quite abrasive towards many here. But, enjoy your time here, while it lasts. I have a feeling it will be short lived. Fox is not news, it's entertainment meant for the rabid right. RT can at least be called news. As can CBC. You shouldn't try to kid yourself because I'm not. While it's slanted toward Russia, it's still the best source of news we have on the topic we're trying to learn about and discuss. Don't be a kneejerk as soon as you see a reference to Russia. Haven't you learned anything from the US lies it has told for war. Oh wait, you have learned a bit. You just don't remember. I've been watching RT for a couple years. They are no better. It's not a knee-jerk reaction. Quote
monty16 Posted June 20, 2014 Report Posted June 20, 2014 I have the feeling it is just to be abrasive. Not very good for debate or general discussion. You've proven to be quite abrasive towards many here. But, enjoy your time here, while it lasts. I have a feeling it will be short lived. I've been watching RT for a couple years. They are no better. It's not a knee-jerk reaction. You lose credibility when you try to compare Fox News with RT news. Same goes for MSNBC and their comedy routine. that's a problem because it shows you have still not broken away from being propagandized by the US. As for you watching RT for a couple of years? You thought they were television instead of understanding that I gave you links to an internet site. Why the shift to US apologist in the last few days? Did I hurt your feelings? Quote
-TSS- Posted June 20, 2014 Report Posted June 20, 2014 I would still call for the partition of Iraq but according to wiser minds that is out of the question so who am I to make such claims. Quote
GostHacked Posted June 20, 2014 Author Report Posted June 20, 2014 You lose credibility when you try to compare Fox News with RT news. Same goes for MSNBC and their comedy routine. that's a problem because it shows you have still not broken away from being propagandized by the US. You are still new here and have a decade of threads to catch up on that may show you how wrong you are. But I don't want to make this about you or me. My credibility is not at stake. I also mentioned that RT is no better than CNN or other MSM networks, but you chose to single out Foxnews. Good tactic, nice try. As for you watching RT for a couple of years? You thought they were television instead of understanding that I gave you links to an internet site. They are television. However they, like most MSM also have an online presence via websites and youtube. Why the shift to US apologist in the last few days? Did I hurt your feelings? When did I shift? And more specifically, how? Also, let's get back to the topic. Quote
monty16 Posted June 21, 2014 Report Posted June 21, 2014 I would still call for the partition of Iraq but according to wiser minds that is out of the question so who am I to make such claims. Your solution would cause even more problems and is uninformed. The correct solution to the problem is to resurrect Saddam. That being quite impossible then the next best thing is a leader who can bring Iraq back to the prosperity and cooperation amongst the various sects that it had under Saddam. I hope you can understand that but if you have been US propagandized then you no doubt won't. ISIS is most likely an unfortunate phase Iraq must now go through because of the US led wars. Quote
monty16 Posted June 21, 2014 Report Posted June 21, 2014 Have you ever been in Muslim country? Many, many times my boy but I'm not here to butter my bread for you. I'm here to give you the facts and hope that some of you have the cajones to understand them or rebut them. Now how about you getting back to the issues and show what you're made of? If I could be so presumptious, why did you ask? Really, why? Do you think there's something that I'm not getting right. I'm more than willing to dance with you on any topic you choose if it's relevant to this discussion. Quote
monty16 Posted June 21, 2014 Report Posted June 21, 2014 Should the US bomb all these stolen Humvees before they get to Syria and are used to fight against Assad? http://rt.com/usa/167436-isis-twitter-michelle-obama-hashtag/ We have to ask ourselves the question because Assad is the good guy now if ISIS is the bad guys. Or wait, is ISIS the good guys and Assad still the bad guy? Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted June 21, 2014 Report Posted June 21, 2014 Many, many times my boy but I'm not here to butter my bread for you. I'm here to give you the facts and hope that some of you have the cajones to understand them or rebut them. Now how about you getting back to the issues and show what you're made of? If I could be so presumptious, why did you ask? Really, why? Do you think there's something that I'm not getting right. I'm more than willing to dance with you on any topic you choose if it's relevant to this discussion. You seem to have a view of Islam that would indicate only a sort of google connection. Quote
Topaz Posted June 21, 2014 Report Posted June 21, 2014 IF and only IF the following article I came across, the people of the world and the USA are being scammed of what is really happening in the Middle-East and the reason for the high price of gasoline, at least in Canada. So read the following and state your thoughts. http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-redrawing-of-the-map-of-the-middle-east-begins-with-destruction-of-iraq/5387928 Quote
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.