Why is it ?

[scottw]

Originally Posted by detbuch

The factual substance to your opinions are astounding.

there is so much irony there

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by zimmy

I think It is more likely that they pushed a war in Iraq to benefit their oil buddies.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by zimmy

So what? Most things didn't go as the administration planned. The fact that we didn't receive preferential treatment years later, doesn't mean that it wasn't what drove Cheney to push Dub to war. Maybe it was just a family grudge. 9/11 just gave him the politcal weight to do it.

Originally Posted by detbuch

Oh, so now we switch to another pseudo-fact, the family grudge thing. The factual substance to your opinions are astounding.

The only thing I said as fact was that US companies didn't get preferential treatment. Maybe one of the ways to keep these threads from going to the dogs is for everyone not to make up stuff and present it as what someone else said.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by zimmy

The only thing I said as fact was that US companies didn't get preferential treatment. Maybe one of the ways to keep these threads from going to the dogs is for everyone not to make up stuff .

great point......in terms of this thread.....you could begin with you

I think that when someone offers facts, which you so often demand and/or claim to be in command of, to you and you declare "so what" followed by a littany of wild speculation(which we know must surely be the result of learned analysis and meticulous research that "the masses" or most folks here aren't likely equipped to engage in or probably even understand) you are effectively illustrating one of the aspersions that you frequently cast at others from on high

waaaait......are you doing this on purpose?....you clever, clever guy

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by Nebe

Iraq oil map among U.S. energy task-force files - MarketWatch

And your point (still) is?

Originally Posted by Nebe

It doesnt take half a brain to read between the lines with what happened back then. The sheep fell for the WMD bait and and switch. What I didn't see coming was that China was awarded first dibs with Iraq's oil... Just one more reason why they own us.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Keep believing this Eben, sure it was a bait & switch.

Originally Posted by scottw

nice touch

If you are going to go low enough to (mildly) attack someone with the TinFoilHat, please have the decency to use JPG images to save people the trouble.

[Nebe]

My point is this.. The number one reason we invaded Iraq was about oil. All the other reasons were simply exaggerated truths and half lies to justify doing it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by JohnR

If you are going to go low enough to (mildly) attack someone with the TinFoilHat, please have the decency to use JPG images to save people the trouble.

I apologize profusely, i was going to switch it up but thought the suspense of a couple of mouse clicks might be more exciting

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by scottw

great point......in terms of this thread.....you could begin with you

I think that when someone offers facts, which you so often demand and/or claim to be in command of, to you and you declare "so what" followed by a littany of wild speculation(which we know must surely be the result of learned analysis and meticulous research that "the masses" or most folks here aren't likely equipped to engage in or probably even understand) you are effectively illustrating one of the aspersions that you frequently cast at others from on high

waaaait......are you doing this on purpose?....you clever, clever guy

I will refrain from saying what you are. Maybe I should post a picture instead.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by zimmy

The only thing I said as fact was that US companies didn't get preferential treatment. Maybe one of the ways to keep these threads from going to the dogs is for everyone not to make up stuff and present it as what someone else said.

It s strange that in your complaint about everyone (me?) making up stuff and presenting it as what someone else said, you quote yourself in exactly the way I quoted you. I did quote, exactly your words, it is "more likely" in my first response to Nebe's claim that you were "100% correct." And pointed out that it was a relative term derived from a possibillity or maybe. How you get that I was saying you presented the possibility as a fact is puzzling--I was clearly saying the opposite.

And about the family grudge thing that you switched to, I said it was a PSEUDO-fact, not that you presented it as a fact. Again, quite the opposite, implied by my following ironic observation on the "factual" substance of your "opinions."

The whole "fact" stuff in my posts was ironical retort to Nebe's really loving shutting down threads with "facts," neither of which he nor you, as you admit, actually presented in support of your claim that the Iraq invasion was "more likely" that they pushed a war in Iraq to benefit oil buddies. On the other hand, "maybe" you consider the Chinese, Russian, French, et. al., as Bush's oil buddies.

At any rate, as you say, the only thing you "said as fact" that U.S. oil companies didn't get preferential treatment, contradicts your opinion that "maybe" the invasion was to benefit "oil buddies," not withstanding, as Scottw points out, that you responded to my list of "facts" with a "So what?" and a "littany of wild speculation."

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Nebe

My point is this.. The number one reason we invaded Iraq was about oil. All the other reasons were simply exaggerated truths and half lies to justify doing it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I don't know how you arrive at the order of importance to support your "point" (opinion?) that the "number one reason" for the invasion was "about oil." Even if that were true, it's a far more vague and encompassing statement than that it was about profitting oil buddies. Even Spence thinks it was more about strategic influence than simple cronyism. Besides, oil is Iraq's economic connection to the world and its economic life's blood. Letting a dictator usurp that blood for his own purpose instead of benefitting both the world at large and specifically the well being of Iraq and its people makes oil a more complex commodity than profit for oil buddies.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by zimmy

I will refrain from saying what you are. Maybe I should post a picture instead.

just make sure it's a .jpg and not a .bmp

[Nebe]

Saddam was also going to sell iraq's oil based on the euro, a move that could have weakened to dollar.
My point is this... If any of you don't think that our national security decisions are not based heavily on oil, you really new to open your eyes.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Nebe]

Sorry for the typos.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Nebe

My point is this... If any of you don't think that our national security decisions are not based heavily on oil, you really new to open your eyes.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

great point

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Even Spence thinks it was more about strategic influence than simple cronyism.

If anything should shut the door on this thread I'd think it would be this

-spence