You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Go to Page...
Thank you for crosschecking our sponsors!
About This Page: This is a discussion on Politics within the LetsGoKings.com forums, at Los Angeles Kings Hockey Fan Forum. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071126/...PdDVBHeee9IxIF
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071126/...ityVYKMVYUewgF
Two AP articles from today.
Basic deal by July=US keeps 50,000 troops in Iraq and gets preferential treatment on oil in return. No more UN involvement. US makes
Basic deal by July=US keeps 50,000 troops in Iraq and gets preferential treatment on oil in return. No more UN involvement. US makes Iranian allied Shiite governments coup proof while getting cover for this by the Orwellian tactic of claiming that the troops there will be checking the Iranian 'threat' in the area.
Deal is set up to make it impossible to pull out of Iraq before the election (or ever) and thus spread discord within the Democratic ranks as the base gets fed up with temporizing candidates who've been painted into a corner by the new situation. Republicans once again successfully manipulate electoral politics by creating policies designed to fracture their opposition.
__________________
"For if once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." Thomas DeQuincey, 1700's
Last edited by Leonidas; November 26th, 2007 at 04:11 PM.
I am sure you can't be surprised by this, we have kept troops all over the world after almost every war we have fought in. I would hope this would be seen as a positive sign given the present situation.
I am sure you can't be surprised by this, we have kept troops all over the world after almost every war we have fought in. I would hope this would be seen as a positive sign given the present situation.
Leo's never heard of Germany or Japan.
__________________ Hockey's original bad boy. The "Cowboy" Howie Young
This will do nothing to solve the strife in the long run. Analogies to Japan and Germany are flawed, because:
a) Neither country was on the brink of civil war at the end WWII.
b) The character and method of the Marshall Plan was profoundly different than the corporate boondoggle that is the Iraq Reconstruction.
c) The political conflicts between the US and the Middle East are different than those that motivated WWII.
I have a feeling though that the same people who will feel all pollyanna about this will be the same one who ranted for years about "spreading democracy" in the Middle East by "declaring war on terror" before reality embarassed them into silence.
It's unfortunate that the Democrats aren't running a single candidate with the spine to call BS on this.
It's unfortunate that the Republicans...well, what ISN'T unfortunate about the Republicans these days?
Also, "access to Iraqi oil" will not translate into cheap oil. Bush and Cheney--and the energy industry at large--don't want oil to be cheap. They want oil to be expensive. This is what we've been getting for years since the Iraq invasion and it's what we'll continue to get.
Also, "access to Iraqi oil" will not translate into cheap oil. Bush and Cheney--and the energy industry at large--don't want oil to be cheap. They want oil to be expensive. This is what we've been getting for years since the Iraq invasion and it's what we'll continue to get.
Totally agreed.
Truthfully, no politician is going to want cheap oil price anymore. They aren't too keen on conservation, either. Less consumption at lower prices means less tax revenue to plunder and piss away.
Of course, on this issue, I'm not surprised. I've see photos of the construction that the military is undertaking in Iraq. Nothing there smacks of "temporary".
This is all about flexing our big muscles in the face of Iran.
Irisher,I was kidding, and I totally agree with your comments. After spending that much money and lives in taking and holding Iraq there is no way this deal was not going to be on offer to the U.S.
The trouble with the U.S. is exactly the German/Japanese situation after ww2, they honestly believed that Iraq and other middle-eastern countries would embrace western style democracy ala Germany et al after ww2.
And yes there is no way this is about keeping oil prices down, I do think it is about oil but in its own special way. There is a hypothesis that the already weak dollar would collapse if countries started selling their oil in Euros, I might be cynical but it strikes me as one reason for the U.S. wanting regime change, when Saddam started selling his oil in Euros. Incidentaly nearly two years ago Iran stated it wanted to sell its oil in Euros.
Well, I said in 2002 this war was about oil and that in the long run we'd have a military base in Iraq when it was all over. Check and check.
BTW, the need to have the base was primarily because the base in Saudi Arabia was a bit out of the way. Plus, it put a lot of pressure on our "friends" there since it wasn't politically good for the Saud family. Bin Laden wanted us out and got his wish. How ironic....
jom
__________________ Old men's room wall saying: Flush hard, it's a long way to Washington
And to be honest Jom it is a upgrade on Saudi. They sandwich Syria with Israel, they have friendlier neighbours in Turkey, Kuwait and Jordan and have bases to the east and west of Iran.
This will do nothing to solve the strife in the long run. Analogies to Japan and Germany are flawed, because:
a) Neither country was on the brink of civil war at the end WWII.
because the allies had just kicked the **** out of them and the citizens just wanted to get on w/ their lives
Quote:
Originally Posted by irisher
b) The character and method of the Marshall Plan was profoundly different than the corporate boondoggle that is the Iraq Reconstruction.
If Japan or Germany had had terrorists bombing the soldiers that were liberating the general public, they would have been killed by the general public. Aren't some Iraqi citizens turning in insurgents?
Quote:
Originally Posted by irisher
c) The political conflicts between the US and the Middle East are different than those that motivated WWII.
This is more a religious conflict, not a political one.
d) Both Japan and Germany had some expectation of LIVING and existing as a country after WWII. It was also in our best interest to see that they existed (and succeeded) as countrys after we left. This was the mistake after WWI that Germany was left in such shambles that it helped lead to Hitler coming to power.
Terrorists have no country. They just want all Western civilization destroyed (starting w/ the US and Israel), and they have publically said all along that this is their goal.
because the allies had just kicked the **** out of them and the citizens just wanted to get on w/ their lives
Are you questioning the s***-kicking abilities of our current men and women in the armed forces? Do you always put your hatred of the troops out in the open like this?
Quote:
If Japan or Germany had had terrorists bombing the soldiers that were liberating the general public, they would have been killed by the general public. Aren't some Iraqi citizens turning in insurgents?
What's your point?
Quote:
This is more a religious conflict, not a political one.
I think you missed the point.
Quote:
d) Both Japan and Germany had some expectation of LIVING and existing as a country after WWII. It was also in our best interest to see that they existed (and succeeded) as countrys after we left. This was the mistake after WWI that Germany was left in such shambles that it helped lead to Hitler coming to power.
Great point Butch, Iraq is younger than Paul Newman. They have no national identity yet and hence attempts to keep the country sane and un-splintered are in vain.
Quote:
Terrorists have no country. They just want all Western civilization destroyed (starting w/ the US and Israel), and they have publically said all along that this is their goal.
And I want El Sid, Luongo, and Zetterberg to be traded to the Kings for a third round pick each. My point is this: the terrorist goals are even more unrealistic than those trades I just wished for. But does that stop people from invoking fear based on the terrorist pipe dreams of a Caliphate?
The light brown guy is going to attack Butch with a nuclear weapon. The other brown guy is going to steal his job, his child's education, and his healthcare. The black dude? He's going to shoot him just because that's what they do.
And the chances any of these happening is probably far less than some white dude pillaging his wealth and savings right from under him under the guise of "Capitalism, Baby!"
Are you questioning the s***-kicking abilities of our current men and women in the armed forces? Do you always put your hatred of the troops out in the open like this?
?? I think you misread what I wrote.
I wrote nothing of the sort that should make anyone think that I have "hatred of the troops..." ??
Official Negotiations to Keep US in Iraq Forever Begin 
KINGS17
