So it was about the oil

[Jsme]

You want to know the funniest thing...........

While our gas prices was at $3 a gallon they were giving us excuse that rang on the war and then the hurricanes....

about 80% of our oil comes from Canada............

Go figure that into the head of our countrie's pockets

 

[jekajekalynn]

Ooops... This thread is about soemthing totaly different then I thought. I read the topic " So it was about the oil" and I thought "Yes, that is the basic premiss of Chanukah" . lol

 

[treesinger]

I think people were dismissing the reporter, or the OP, and whoever else is responsible for anything called "So Iraq Was About the Oil." But Wilkerson has apparently said "...the U.S. government now had no choice but to succeed in Iraq or face the necessity of conquering the Middle East within the next 10 years to ensure access to the region’s oil supplies," and we definitely need more than his bona fides to accept that one.

That is Wilkerson's opinion. I, for one, think our greatest oil threat is NOT finding ways to efficiently process that 500 years of shale in Colorado to completely make us independent of foreign energy supplies.

 

[treesinger]

O'Reilly lost credibility in this corner long before his deposition revealing his marital infidelity became public when he declared shortly after the Iraq war began that if WMD's were not discovered, he would never trust anything the Bush administration said again. O'Reilly has since reverted back to carrying water for the Bush adminstration, and WMDs still have never appeared.

O'Reilly always was a cad. Doesn't mean that he's wrong.
If you want to say that his opinions are ludicrous at times (let's ostracize San Francisco!) then I'm with you. Being a cad doesn't make him wrong on those points.

 

[treesinger]

Couple things here:

1 - No, congress did NOT have "all" of the same intel that the white house did. The intel they were given was much the same as the stories that Bush fabricated for the American people, and that some non-critical thinkers continue to spout to this day. It painted Iraq as an imminent threat, when it was nothing of the sort. It did not include the MANY dissenting opinions throughout the intelligence community (such as the FACT that many of Bush's statements were based on discredited intel and forged documents). We were NOT told before the war that Iraq may, some day, become a threat. We were told, in so many words, that the smoking gun proving the threat posed could be a mushroom cloud. We were told we KNEW he had WMD's, and we knew where they were, despite the FACT that we obviously did not.

So, make your choice: Bush is either incompetant, or he's a liar. But don't try to pass his incompetance off as "leadership".

2 - The nazi quote being discussed is apt, like it or not. I could care less where it came from. The FACT is that Bushco did exactly what that quote suggested, and some people are either too stubborn to admit it or too ignorant to understand that they've been duped.

As for corwardice, Mr. WICruizer...I'd respond, but last I checked, personal attacks are forbidden on this board.

I've read the pre-war intelligence report and still supported the war. I know you know why, but for the others out there...we knew Saddam HAD WMD's before, we had no proof that they were destroyed and he was defiant about helping us verify if he did destroy them. We certainly couldn't just take his word on it. The pre-war report said quite simply that we just didn't know what was going on but, in light of Saddam's trustworthiness and no proof that he destroyed the weapons he had, we had to assume that he still had them. And in a post-9/11 world, Bush's thought is "better safe then sorry, let's get him." I'm ok with that. Others are not. The beat goes on.

About the qoute comparison, yes it is apt. I would call it human nature. The Nazis used it to whip the people into a mad frenzy. Bush used it only to help justify his position. There was no hate there. Hitler wanted to create the master race. Bush went out of his way to say how kind and gentle 99% of Muslims were how we should NOT hate them and persecute them. Any reasonable person knows that Bush is not Hitler.

The quote is apt because it reflects human nature. The variable is intent and usage.

 

[momof2inPA]

I'm sorry that a quote in my profile has offended people. Bush has done some things I agree with and many things that I certaintly do not agree with, but he and his administration are in no way Nazis. I certainly am not comparing his actions with the actions of those who were Nazis. I'm sorry that you can't see why I find this quote interesting and relevant in the society that we live in today.

Don't feel bad, Meg. A quote's a quote. If someone see's a similarity to current situations, that's his or her own interpretation. Maybe Joe's defensiveness comes from the fact he/she sees likenesses between the quote and his chosen administration.

 

[dennis99ss]

Mugg Mann and Laugh O Gram. Right on. No Pun intended.

I find it interesting that the people who find the "quote" to be a comparision of Nazi vs. Bush are the same people who think Bush walks on water. However, these same people fail to see that the quote actually states a method by which people can use to put forth their agenda. The quote does not advocate an agenda, but simply is how an agenda can be achieved. As a result, it is not an advocation of Nazi ideals, it is a comparision of the use of psychology to obtain results.

 

[Mugg Mann]

You say that, yet you just made a direct comparison.

That's fine Mugg Mann. You can protest and Monday morning quarterback. In the meantime, I'm thankful real leaders are LEADING. Tough decisions are best handled by leaders like President Bush,.

Let's agree to disagree. You prefer leaders who merely handle tough decisions. On the other hand, I prefer leaders who not only handle tough decisions, but handle tough decisions correctly and don't try to bamboozle the public otherwise. That's why we view the current occupant of the presidency differently.

This "Monday Morning quarterback", along with many other "quarterbacks" noticed while the "Sunday" game was still going on (and not the morning after, as you want people to believe) that we were going after the wrong person, and we were not pursuing Osama with every means available to us. I had no problem going into Afganistan to get Osama, but I was against the Iraq war well before it actually started. It's clearly a greater mistake now than ever to those of us who are willing to consider all of the facts and not merely the ones that support your opinion.

I would appreciate it if you did not intentionally misrepresent my views again.

 

[JoeEpcotRocks]

Don't feel bad, Meg. A quote's a quote. If someone see's a similarity to current situations, that's his or her own interpretation. Maybe Joe's defensiveness comes from the fact he/she sees likenesses between the quote and his chosen administration.

I don't and you know I don't. Some here choose to make that vile comparison, and for you, momof2inpa, to say I see such likenesses puts you among those making such a vile comparison.

And no -- a quote one chooses is not simply a quote.