Letters for Ohio

[GaMeFrEAK1018]

I'm a country-dweller now (not that there really is much 'countryside' in the UK - not like 'countryside' in the US, anyway), and I've been to Wyoming a good few times and love it there. It's just so calm and...lovely...

 

Plus you have the bonus of being so close to Yellowstone NP, which is my number 1 favourite place in the US. Ever.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

ah, when do you plan on comin over?

[HaVoC]

No idea, but the sooner the better as far as I'm concerned. This whole country's going mad...

[Foxtrot]

Any time you want to stop by in Ohio, I'm sure we can get an airsoft game going for ya, and if you dont bring your own, I got a gun I can loan.

 

You won't be used to the FPS on it though

[Rikkster]

######, and I can prove it. Iraq does have a decent size supply of crude oil - I'll give them that yes. If the United States really wanted a long term supply of crude oil, with a quick way to extract it, and easily transported over to the US with a slimmer chance of terroism, they have two other countries to look for where they can juse invest the (*Insert how many billions of dollars already spent on iraq here*).

 

The oil part of the war was more concerning OPEC abandoning the petrodollar and switching to the Euro as the main currency for oil transactions. That would have had a catastrophic effect on the American economy, hence "clear and present danger". Not that they can admit that in public, because it would make their other claims of "free and fair trade" look hypocritical in the extreme.

 

In 1999 the USA used 18.5 million barrels of oil a day, so you can expect that number to be higher now. At today's prices the USA pays roughly $1 billion dollars every day for oil (with oil at $50 a barrel), so the $100ish billion for the war covers maybe three months usage.

 

Iraq's profitable in the long term - favoured nation status, oil pipelines to Israel, trade credits and so on. It's business. Just unfortunate that so many people had to die along the way.

 

 

I don't beleive Bush is stupid enough to invade Iraq, and risk lives just over oil, when we could of done that right there. I'm sure he had other reasons to invade Iraq, like WMD's, or just out of security.  Argue with me yes, but this is my opinion.

 

The American economy is the single strongest card in the USA's hand. A direct threat to it IS regarded as a clear and present danger, and IS a reason to go to war.

 

No situation like this is ever simple enough to point fingers and say "yes it's definitely this" - there were several reasons. What they had nothing to do with is WMD, security or terrorism - they knew they were lies (backed up by forged documents) even as they spoke them, and Saddam posed no international threat whatsoever, as confirmed by Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice in 2001.

 

 

Not sure if any one caught this in the news, it was only up briefly on most sites.  2 Sarin gas IED went off on US troops about a month or two back. Not 100% sure on this, but isn't Sarin gas considered a WMD? I'm nearly 100% sure it its. 4 US Soldiers were treated for it, and later sent home, no one died from it. So I'm guessing for the liberal media, before the recongize that there was WMD's in Iraq that some one has to die from them before they will report it.

 

The story you mention is here. Saddam did have a lot of chemical weapons left over from the Iran-Iraq war and yes, he was supposed to have destroyed them. The difference is this; the reason we went to Iraq was he was supposedly a clear and present danger by means of supplying WMD to terrorists who would then attack the US.

 

There is a fundamental difference between having the sort of chemical and bio-labs and manufacturing facilities needed to produce these armaments, and the terrorist links which would supply them (which we now know were another lie) and finding a few artillery shells left over from an old war. These remnants would not be a reason to initiate a war in which many thousands have died, at least to my mind.

[HaVoC]

Any time you want to stop by in Ohio, I'm sure we can get an airsoft game going for ya, and if you dont bring your own, I got a gun I can loan.

 

You won't be used to the FPS on it though 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Where abouts in Ohio are you. I may actually take you up on that at some point, if you were serious

[Foxtrot]

The oil part of the war was more concerning OPEC abandoning the petrodollar and switching to the Euro as the main currency for oil transactions.  That would have had a catastrophic effect on the American economy, hence "clear and present danger".  Not that they can admit that in public, because it would make their other claims of "free and fair trade" look hypocritical in the extreme.

 

In 1999 the USA used 18.5 million barrels of oil a day, so you can expect that number to be higher now.  At today's prices the USA pays roughly $1 billion dollars every day for oil (with oil at $50 a barrel), so the $100ish billion for the war covers maybe three months usage.

Switching from the American Dollar to the Euro would cause a shake up, but nothing thats completely non-recoverable. As I've said before in my posts, that we Could of invested money in non-opec countries, like Russia, and into the U.S. This would solve any problem, and get rid of any threat of some one hanging oil prices over our head. (I.e. 1970's oil crisis.)

 

You have a point - but there's other ways around it then saying it's a clear and present danger, especially when that way is basiclly waving the birdy at the countries who threaten us, and invest in our selves to supply our own oil supply. As you mentioned before, our free and fair trade our own doing - something we need to get rid of. As of now, 60% of all US drilled crude oil goes to other countries (interesting eh? See the NAFTA agreement). Out of the 40% we keep, 60% of the refined fuels from that 40% of left crude go to other countries as well. (See NAFTA again.)

 

The first step is solving this - with out causing war, agruements, and possibly tradewars yes, would be bowing out of NAFTA, and taking care of our selves first before others.

 

I live in Youngstown Ohio, at one time the third largest producer of steel in the United States. Since the 1960's, we've had over a million jobs leave the valley in one way or another, mostly in steel production (and finishing.). The whole free trade thing is a crock of ****ing sh!t. It was designed to help countries, and all it's doing now is turning around and abusing the country which orignally set it up - America. In steel production, Oil production, Mfg. Jobs, everything that was ment to help other countries out, they turned around and abused us with it. I'm going to stop there, because thats an entirely different arguement too. My post was mainly to point out the flaws in today's media, and I've done that, and you've just backed me up with it as well. If you want to discuss the current economic situation in the world today, then feel free to start another thread on it, and I'll make sure to post there with my feelings.

 

 

Iraq's profitable in the long term - favoured nation status, oil pipelines to Israel, trade credits and so on.  It's business.  Just unfortunate that so many people had to die along the way.

The American economy is the single strongest card in the USA's hand.  A direct threat to it IS regarded as a clear and present danger, and IS a reason to go to war.

 

Iraq in 50 years, if it actually becomes a stable, favoured nation, with oil production will be nothing more then a bare waste land, because all the oil will be gone. Actually, probably less then 50 years at current production settings. Will a few people get rich and live well? Yes, good for them. But after that, there will be nothing because Iraq really has no other natural resources. Too many people are looking out for today, not the future. As I said before, there would be MANY other ways to go about protecting america's economy with out going to war, and letting the amount of soldiers, and civilians we have dead now, die.

 

America has been in the dumps before with the economy, we'll survive, adapt, and come back again. Thats how it's always been, remember the old saying, American inginuity? That will happen, like it or not. But right now most American's are lazy, and want other people to do things for them instead of having to get up and think about what to do and how to do it, and then go out and do it them selves.

 

 

 

No situation like this is ever simple enough to point fingers and say "yes it's definitely this" - there were several reasons.  What they had nothing to do with is WMD, security or terrorism - they knew they were lies (backed up by forged documents) even as they spoke them, and Saddam posed no international threat whatsoever, as confirmed by Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice in 2001.

The story you mention is here.  Saddam did have a lot of chemical weapons left over from the Iran-Iraq war and yes, he was supposed to have destroyed them.  The difference is this; the reason we went to Iraq was he was supposedly a clear and present danger by means of supplying WMD to terrorists who would then attack the US. 

 

There is a fundamental difference between having the sort of chemical and bio-labs and manufacturing facilities needed to produce these armaments, and the terrorist links which would supply them (which we now know were another lie) and finding a few artillery shells left over from an old war.  These remnants would not be a reason to initiate a war in which many thousands have died, at least to my mind.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Remnants or not - they were there, and the media should of picked up on it. In stead though, they basiclly said, flatly 'No WMD's", which leads the adverage dumbass American to beleive that there was no trace of WMD's there. Also, if I were Saddam, and weapons inspectors wanted to search, why not let them? What would make you risk loosing power to not let a simple team of searchers to search? Now enough to fight over? No, not at all. I don't beleive I ever said I was For the war, nor did I ever say I was Against the war either. Should we be there is a whole debate in it's self - one topic I never ment to bring up, nor do I want to debate about it. My point all the posts I've made so far ('cept the purely off topic ones, see below.) is the liberal media, and their coverage of the war, political race, etc. I firmly do NOT agree with today's media coverage.

 

 

Where abouts in Ohio are you. I may actually take you up on that at some point, if you were serious

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yes, I am serious. As I said above I live in North Eastern Ohio, about an hour south of Cleveland ohio. www.airsoftcleveland.com www.airsoftohio.com

 

And to both - Please excuse my slow posting, I have alot of classes on friday. (Being in University and all - sucks some times, but it will pay off in the long run.)

 

Cheers

Fox