$5 gallon gas wont't stop worlds most thirsty SUV

Our Leader will not hangar and throw away the key to his Boeing 747, the
worlds most fuel thirsty personal SUV. Think about that next time you
think its your duty to break our "addiction to oil." Mr. Bush is
ever-ready to remind us of our "duty," usually before he flies off in Air
Force One to deliver a self-serving political speech. His SUV will burn
more fossil fuel in one day's time than you could in your full-size Hummer
in 200 years.

The plan was to conquer Iraq, getting rid of bad guy Saddam, and pump their
oil into our pipelines. It didn't work, of course, despite the enthusiasm
to that plan by all the Iraqis, because our military machine is the biggest
single CONSUMER, not provider, of oil. Shut down the War and you will see
gas prices retrench due to the oil consumption savings alone.

If the United States government would invest a year's worth of
money-down-the-drain for this lash-out-at-anyone-illegal (all undeclared
wars are illegal to a Strict Constructionist) war, we could build the
coal-to-oil conversion plants we need to become energy self-sufficient.

Please repost this message to all 104,000 newsgroups.

 

I don't understand your and many others' obsession with getting the US's (or
'the West's') hands on Iraqi oil as a justification for the invasion.

There was no hindrance to Iraqi oil flowing westwards.

DAS

For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling

 

It actually made things worse.

Realistically I dont think most americans gave a rats ass about the
atrocities being commited against the Iraqi people by Saddams government.

Saddam would still be in power today if in 1990 he hadn't invaded Kuwait,
and instead started selling his oil, and even before that if he hadn't
started a war with Iran. But crazy Dictators tend to ruin things for
themselves.

 

i don't understand how dipstick troll rectal orifaces like you can find a
connection between this drivle you post, and ford vehicles that are talked
about in a newsgroup called alt autos ford.

 

Iraq had a war against Iran - Iraq was supported by the USA for
several reasons - one of which was revenge because of the destruction
of the US embassy in Iran and the taking of the US hostages.

As Iraq fought Iran, Iraq's oil infrastructure collapsed and they
couldn't pump oil. Iraq struck a deal with Saudi Arabia and Kuwait:
They would pump Iraq's OPEC oil quota with their own oil, and give
that money to Iraq as a sort of loan.

Later, Kuwait wanted that money paid back, and started doing serious
things in the financial world against Iraq. Iraq told the USA that
they were going to invade Kuwait, and the USA didn't tell them not to.

The USA let Iraq invade Kuwait, because that would allow the USA to
"rescue" Kuwait and Kuwait would "owe" the USA for that. As a result,
the USA got bases and troops in Kuwait.

But wait. The USA wasn't done yet. Operation "Desert Shield" was a
ruse played against Saudi Arabia to get them to "invite" US troops in
to protect them. The US showed the Saudia's fake satellite photos
showing that Iraq was massing troops and tanks along the Iraq-SA
boarder. There was no such build-up, but the US needed to instill
fear and desperation to get the Saudi's to allow the US to station
troops in their country. The troops never left, and that was one of
the reasons why muslim/islamic anti-US sentiment built up and led to
the 9-11 attacks (the infidels were allowed into the holy land).

Operation Desert Storm had turned a friendly Iraq (ie Saddam) into an
enemy. What the US gained was a military foot-hold into Kuwait and
Saudi Arabia. Then they turned the screws on Saddam, but it was
taking too long and there was no obvious reason to commence hostile
action against Iraq, and eventually the USA invented a reason to
invade Iraq in order to install a US-friendly gov't (along with more
military bases). That situation has "blown up" in the face of US
planners, and it's not clear how it's going to play out.

The surrounding Arab countries have a lot at stake to see that it
doesn't work, for if it doesn't then the US would learn a lesson -
that they don't really have enough resources or the ability to
re-engineer a country (an arab country).

Iran is now handing the USA a reason to invade them too (uranium
enrichment) but it's too early to play that card right now. It can
wait until the Dem's have had their turn in the whitehouse (to put the
US back into financial order) after which the next republican
administration will invade Iran because the lax democrats have allowed
them to become a "gathering threat" against the US.

Meanwhile, US citizens are experiencing (effectively) a tax on
oil/gasoline that is equivalent to what CDN's and Europeans pay.
Instead the tax is going into the pockets of the oil industry, and
they can pay their exec's $400 million in retirement packages now.
Americans will have to just spend less at Walmart - and China will cry
about that.

 

It was? if so, I think it would have been better to just undercut the
French and pay Saddam a 'broker fee' like the UN did.

What Cretins like Noman Nabisco dont seem to understand is that oil flows
into a free market.
We dont have to 'corral' oil... we just have to TOTALLY IGNORE anything
that goes on in the oil producing countries, and we'll have the cheapest
oil possible. Never mind they are using oil profits to train terrorists,
just stick our heads in the sand and our asses in the air. And then, when
countries like Iran use oil and passages to blackmail us... just give em
what they want... none of OUR business what they do in their region.

Oh, WAIT... part of what pisses Bin Laden off, is that we DID business with
the Saud's, and ignored everything they did in their country.

As to all those dead Kurds and Shia... Screw 'em! Right, Nomen?

Is that why?. Where's the figures on that? Where's the statements to that
effect?
And, if we cut and run, are you and Pat Buchanan supposing that Iran
wouldnt immediately test us by closing the straits of Hormuz?

No data.. just a 'drive-by' meme!

Okay...I declare it.

And you arent a 'strict constructionist' because you would have the
government in the oil business... Something better left to industry.
Guess you didnt think of that.. but then there's a lot of things you dont
think of.

I think there's a law or something against making public fun of idiots and
the cerebellum-disadvantaged.

 

Yes, he would.

That's right

Right again.. but then Saddam had been blustering a while.

LET?!!! Now that is taking things a bit far into the Whoo--eee-ooo realm

There wasnt? then what the hell did we do all that killing against?

Oh, those sad little Muslims!

Tell ya what... you had the things right there for a while and now you're
into "WE are the enemy" trilateral commission stuff.

You Pat Buchanan and Nomen... what a trio.

How about this... we deport any arab, persian, back to where they came
from? Sound reasonable? Then we dont have any troops in Islamic lands.

And we nuke the shit out of em if..

 

MoPar Man wrote:

Ha, ha, ha... What a vivid imagination. It is amazing what two lonely
brain cells can come up with when they have nothing else to do.

Matt

 

Patriotism is blind, isin't it Matt?

 

Dont reply to a drive-by, with just more snark... take on somebody that
can debate you!

Like I said.. you started out with actual facts, though spun a little;
including April Glaspie, then took off into conspiracy-land!

If you aint the guts to take me and a couple others on here, then go hang
with your chums on DU:

quote:
the levers of democracy are too weak to take these traitors down. The
Criminal Bush Regime must be physically removed. The protesters in D.C.
need to push up against the White House gates in a mass mob to actually
threaten this P.O.S.

Enough said for now... I've just about had it, and this country really
needs to ORGANIZE and PROTEST!!! It's now high time to get SERIOUS.
-unquote
--
Yeh, I'm a Krusty old Geezer, putting up with no more ostrich-ized anti-
war pap.
If you want to say what happens to a million or so Arabs has nothing to
do with you, just say it and dont make up excuses as to how WE started
it... i'll bury your ass with facts and quotes from your own freakin Dum-
o-crats!

 

It can be, to be sure, but not nearly so much as paranoia.


Matt

 

You and Pat Clancy need to collaborate on a novel.

 

Interesting bit of fantasy / fiction.

 

No, Backyard! The conspiracy theorists think that secretly the
Bushies -want- us to cut and run so that Iran -will- do something like
test a nuke or close the straits - so that we will have an excuse to
invade Iran.

Of course, the more pragmatic of us out there figure that the Bushies
don't want to pull out because it would throw too many variables
into the upcoming congressional elections. Right now all the Republican
races are built on the Hawk arguments of staying the course, arguments
that only rcently stopped reverberating with the voters. Those campaigns
are all ready committed to the stay-the-course arguments, and it's too
late to change direction or they are gonna get accused of being
flip-floppers. I think most of the upper Repubublican party masters
are now deeply regretting using that argument against the Kerry campaign -
it ignored one of the fundamental of politics - that all politicians are
flip-floppers. It was a lot like what the Republicans did to Clinton
when they accused him of being a liar and forced a special investigation
to investigate his lies - they cannot argue against this tactic when it's
turned against them with the Delay issue and Valerie Plame issue
and the White House leak issue.

The whole thing is kind of like watching the iceberg coming right at
you from the bow of the Titantic. The boat is just too massive to turn
on a dime, all you can do is sit back and cringe when the inveitable
wreck happens. I personally am rather amazed, being a Democrat.
The last time the Republicans got ahold of power back in 1980 with
Raygun, they managed to hold on to it pretty well for 12 years.
Now it's pretty well a given that they are going to lose it after only
6. I was sure they were going to be more clever about it than that.

Ted

 

The dimocrats want to pull out of Iraq now because things are coming
together in Iraq and they will loose the biggest issue in November.


mike hunt

 

Feel better now Ted?

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

 

The only thing that's coming together in Iraq, is Al Quaeda.

 

And we all know how happy that makes you and your liberal buddies.
Pretty sad when whatever side you're on becomes so entrenched in their
politics that you have to wish for bad things to happen and rejoice when
they do.

So what's your precious U.N. doing about Iran? Oh that's right - they
can't do anything because the major players (nations and individuals)
are so caught up financially in helping them succeed. More bad things
for you to cheer about.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

 

Oh and while I'm on the subject - as usual, while the U.N is sitting
around with its collective thumb up its butt, once again, by default,
the U.S. will be forced to make the really tough decisions and take
action and do all the heavy lifting and make 99% of the sacrifices, and
the liberals will once again be able to criticize and urge hatred of the
U.S. around the world for taking military action and not using
"diplomatic means" to solve the problem.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

 

<<His SUV will burn
more fossil fuel in one day's time than you could in your full-size
Hummer
in 200 years. >>

Bush does not own AF1, we do, he's just renting it. And so did the
president before him and the one after him. I guess he's supposed to
spend a week driving himself from Washington to Los Angeles in a
rubber-floored Corolla to make you feel good?