07-06-2003 20:47									#61
	Re: Re: So, can we finally all admit Bush & Co. lied? Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by JimmyCracksCorn WOW BORIS, I THINK U R ON TO SUMTHING. CUZ LIKE, SHRUB IS AN IDIOT AND EVERY1 KNOWS SADAM DIDN'T DO NE THING WRONG. THE STATES SUX, IRAK ROXORZ!!!!!!!!!!!!

'bye, Zylka.

	07-06-2003 20:59									#62
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by HershOstropoler quote: Saddam knew we were coming for him. He had a year to get rid of em all. I don't doubt that Bush made up some of the WMD evidence though. BTW, antiwars, I'll tell you where the WMDs are when you tell me how we're getting oil. You seemed so sure of that a few months ago. Can we finally all admit that Boris & Co. lied? Look at a map of ME oil reserves. Look for Iraq on that map. Right in the middle of about 2/3rds of the world's oil reserves. It's a "vital region" for the US (and the entire West) - and not because of its vast reserves of Sand. A little strategic control is a nice thing - unless you mess it up.

I didn't ask you to prove that there is oil in Iraq. I asked you to prove that we're getting any of it. Show me a single American oil tanker that has docked at Umm Qasr and I will concede.


Edit: Damn nested quotes.

	07-06-2003 21:00									#63
	Re: Re: Re: So, can we finally all admit Bush & Co. lied? Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat 'bye, Zylka.

Who saw that one coming? Posts entirely consisting of sarcasm, capital letters, and badly spelled words...

	07-06-2003 21:09									#64
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

I see no reason to ban zylka. Indeed - power corrupts.

	07-06-2003 21:14									#65
	Support Apolyton

Zylka was already banned by Ming. He would have been back in three more days, but he just felt he had to "contribute" to this thread.

So his answer is to use his DL, JCC, but not bother in the slightest to disguise his style. JCC is gone, Zylka gets another week, until he creates a new DL, then it'll go on longer unless he gets the message.

	07-06-2003 21:15									#66
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Azazel, yes, banning is like torture. I was just out for a week and everyday I was suffering as I could not reply or make a new thread. Inhumane!

	07-06-2003 21:21									#67
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

JCC was his DL, and wasn't closed until now?
That's what you get when your authorities are not accountable. Corruption and lack of proper governance.

	07-06-2003 21:23									#68
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Jaguar Warrior I didn't ask you to prove that there is oil in Iraq. I asked you to prove that we're getting any of it. Show me a single American oil tanker that has docked at Umm Qasr and I will concede. Edit: Damn nested quotes.

It doesn't matter. Oil is a standardized, globally priced commodity. You don't buy "Iraqi" oil, or "American" oil. You buy it by grade, and pay for transportation. The only really significant point to where it comes from are what grades are available there, and how much does it cost to ship it? That's why a lot of US oil comes from Nigeria - it's cheaper to ship it due to the relatively shorter distance to US oil terminals on the east coast.

You don't have to buy it from any specific source to benefit from altering the global balance of supply and demand. 100% of that Iraqi oil could go to Russia and France, for all the US cares, because it displaces the oil Russia and France are getting from some other producer, so that oil ends up on the market, and the global price drops. See what I mean?

Go to NYMEX' website and look at oil futures. US Department of Energy and Platts (an industry publication) should have historical data you can dig up.

	07-06-2003 21:30									#69
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat It doesn't matter. Oil is a standardized, globally priced commodity. You don't buy "Iraqi" oil, or "American" oil. You buy it by grade, and pay for transportation. The only really significant point to where it comes from are what grades are available there, and how much does it cost to ship it? That's why a lot of US oil comes from Nigeria - it's cheaper to ship it due to the relatively shorter distance to US oil terminals on the east coast. You don't have to buy it from any specific source to benefit from altering the global balance of supply and demand. 100% of that Iraqi oil could go to Russia and France, for all the US cares, because it displaces the oil Russia and France are getting from some other producer, so that oil ends up on the market, and the global price drops. See what I mean? Go to NYMEX' website and look at oil futures. US Department of Energy and Platts (an industry publication) should have historical data you can dig up.

True. My post was badly phrased enough that you can jump on it.

How's this: prove that we have done anything post-war that has affected the international oil price to favor us.

	07-06-2003 21:38									#70
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Jaguar Warrior Show me a single American oil tanker that has docked at Umm Qasr and I will concede.

Not only oil in Iraq, a lot of oil around Iraq. As for tankers, as MtG said, irrelevant. I haven't subscribed to the simple oil-looting story - even I do not think the US political system has degenerated to that point yet. Also as I said earlier, oil is IMO just one reason among several.

"prove that we have done anything post-war that has affected the international oil price to favor us."

The expectations about Iraq's future affect the oil price, obviously. But that's also another issue. It's about secure and stable supplies within a reasonable price range, that's where most interests converge.

	07-06-2003 21:41									#71
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by HershOstropoler Not only oil in Iraq, a lot of oil around Iraq. As for tankers, as MtG said, irrelevant. I haven't subscribed to the simple oil-looting story - even I do not think the US political system has degenerated to that point yet. Also as I said earlier, oil is IMO just one reason among several. "prove that we have done anything post-war that has affected the international oil price to favor us." The expectations about Iraq's future affect the oil price, obviously. But that's also another issue. It's about secure and stable supplies within a reasonable price range, that's where most interests converge.

Much better answer than "there's oil there." Now do you really think that the benifits gained are gonna offset the colossal price of the war?

	07-06-2003 21:55									#72
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

well, unless we find the wmd, it'll look like being bush's friend is a terrible thing...
because if they really did lie... blair's going to die, powell's going to lose his credibility, rumsfeld and wolfowitz are going to look like gung-ho warmongers, and opinions will be worse than before.
and that's not something i want at all-- opinions are low enough already, and i don't want things to get worse.

we should, however, give them more time to find such weapons...although it'll be harder and harder to make that opinion tenable as suspected sites are cleared, as pressure to be overt builds...

i hope they find wmd.

	07-06-2003 21:57									#73
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

We can't do that until we fix the oil fields. Once sanctions are gone and Iraqi oil fields are capable of significant production, OPEC will have to call a meeting to adjust production quotas. For the first time ever, the world's largest oil consumer will be seated at OPEC, with the option to either push for higher quotas or to outright disregard any production quotas OPEC tries to set. There are a lot of non-OPEC producers, and some OPEC members who ignore quotas, so OPEC control of the market is tenuous at best, but the US controlling or influencing another major producer will nearly decisively shift the balance of power in the marketplace in favor of oil consumers.

Simply having that ability is already affecting oil prices, and Iraq isn't even producing yet.

The US won't do anything radical, because it's both a producer and consumer. Our domestic marginal cost of production is fairly high compared to most producing nations, and a lot of our oil is heavier (intermediate and lower quality) than Arabian gulf oil, so a sharp drop in oil prices takes a lot of US oil out of the domestic market, once the market price gets too low compared to marginal cost of production. We sure don't want to jack the price up too high, because then you get a nice recession to cure that extra demand. It's just another Goldilocks problem, but we're now in position to decide just how warm the porridge should be for everyone.

	07-06-2003 21:59									#74
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

JW:

If you
- manage to stabilise Iraq and make it a puppet swing producer (on which Saudi Arabia now has a sort of monopoly)
- stabilise the Saudi regime by withdrawing bases from there
- exert more influence in the region
- be able to intervene much more easily in case a major producer goes fundamentalist,

then it could be worth it in purely economic terms.

I don't share the premises and some of the effects, but at least that could be a plausible case.

Last edited by HershOstropoler on 07-06-2003 at 22:07

	07-06-2003 22:05									#75
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by HershOstropoler If you - manage to stabilise Iraq and make it a puppet swing producer (on which Saudi Arabia now has a sort of monopoly) - stabilise the Saudi regime by withdrawing bases from there - exert more influence in the region - be able to intervene much more easily in case a major producer goes fundamentalist, then it could be worth it in purely economic terms. I don't share the premises and some of the effects, but at least that could be a plausible case.

If you were Bush II, would you set back relations with France Germany and Russia, spend literally hundreds of billions of dollars, lose several dozen troops, and risk losing reelection just for a possible economic benefit that depends on 4 "ifs"? I wouldn't.

	07-06-2003 22:06									#76
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Jaguar Warrior Much better answer than "there's oil there." Now do you really think that the benifits gained are gonna offset the colossal price of the war?

That's one that nobody can prove. Assuming there's no meltdown in the ME, and everything goes as planned from a US perspective, it would be a very profitable long-term corporate pork program. (since the government/taxpayer sucks up the costs, but industry picks up the benefits*)

We already have the direct price of the war, but there's also the effects of the oil price spike on the global economy before the war started to consider. If anything goes wrong, from a long occupation, to another war, to some future disfunction in Iraq (coup, civil war after the US is out, etc.), then the payoff may never justify the costs.


* yes, increased industrial profits will yield increased tax collection, benefits to shareholders and maybe some benefits to consumers, but not fast enough to pay off the pork "investment" in a reasonable time frame. The profit here goes to the corporate beneficiaries.

	07-06-2003 22:10									#77
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Jaguar Warrior If you were Bush II, would you set back relations with France Germany and Russia, spend literally hundreds of billions of dollars, lose several dozen troops, and risk losing reelection just for a possible economic benefit that depends on 4 "ifs"? I wouldn't.

If you'd mind****ed yourself into thinking you had a handle on all the ifs, and already made a point of filtering everything you think and see and hear about Iraq to justify the action you want to take anyway, then maybe you would.

People often convince themselves there's sound rationale for what they're inclined to do anyway.

I don't think the invasion of Iraq was unjustified per se, and I'm not really sweated up about WMD's or Bush lying (I expected that anyway), but the real crux of the matter is how is this all going to play out over the next decade or so.

	07-06-2003 22:14									#78
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Why are we all taking the guy in the article's words at face value?

	07-06-2003 22:14									#79
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat If you'd mind****ed yourself into thinking you had a handle on all the ifs, and already made a point of filtering everything you think and see and hear about Iraq to justify the action you want to take anyway, then maybe you would.

Gotta love the Dubya. But you're saying that he wanted to do it anyway for a different reason, and the Economic factor was only a side effect. Which goes against the whole "its a war for oil" principle. I don't know whether you intended to mean that or not.

yikes I'm debating MtG

	07-06-2003 22:16									#80
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Azazel If the result of the war is good, I wouldn't be too concerned. I never cared for WoMD, anyway.

After that Neutron bomb thread you started, I find this hard to believe... or do you mean you never cared for that as a reason to remove the Saddam regime?

Anyway, of course they deceived us. Presenting arguments and not backing it up with solid facts "for security reasons" is a blatant cop out.

Contrast with the Cuban Missile crisis. Clear, blatant evidence posted in the UN.

When is the US going to realise it's run by big business for big business and the indivudial citizens mean as little to the administration as the individuals of the USSR did to the Communist Party of that country?

I'm not saying the US is the USSR, or that the situation is unchangable, or that living in the US does not have many benefits that outweigh the political farce that is misrepresented as "democracy".

But isn't it time we all started thinking about ways to improve things, rather than just falling into deep dispair?

	07-06-2003 22:19									#81
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Jaguar Warrior If you were Bush II, would you set back relations with France Germany and Russia, spend literally hundreds of billions of dollars, lose several dozen troops, and risk losing reelection just for a possible economic benefit that depends on 4 "ifs"? I wouldn't.

I wouldn't either, but this Iraq war was the pushed by a bunch of hardcore ideologues, and why would they give a flying **** about reality?

"But you're saying that he wanted to do it anyway for a different reason, and the Economic factor was only a side effect."

That's also the view I think is the most plausible. The principle is "It's a war for who the **** knows what".

	07-06-2003 22:19									#82
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Jaguar Warrior Saddam knew we were coming for him. He had a year to get rid of em all. I don't doubt that Bush made up some of the WMD evidence though.

That's all I was asking. The other rationales and utilitarian excuses are off topic, as I just wanted a simple admission that Bush lied. Thank you.

quote: BTW, antiwars, I'll tell you where the WMDs are when you tell me how we're getting oil. You seemed so sure of that a few months ago. Can we finally all admit that Boris & Co. lied?

Find me where I made the assertion above. You won't be able to, and I will then accept your apology for insinuating that I lied. Fair enough?

	07-06-2003 22:21									#83
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Shi Huangdi Why are we all taking the guy in the article's words at face value?

Why do you take Bush & Co.'s word at face value, when they've produced no evidence to back them up, and multiple intelligence sources in the U.S. and U.K. are saying, independently, that they lied?

This guy's words are corraborated across the pond (see Blair's dossier furor).

You seem eager to believe politicians and dismiss intelligence operatives. How odd.

	07-06-2003 22:25									#84
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Boddington's What's done is done. Finding weapons is only relevant if they may in future be used against us. Finding weapons to appease liberal whiners is not on the agenda. Let's look forward to Iraq II in Syria or Iran.

I don't think you understand the military capabilities or the popular mentalities of those countries if you think it is a good idea to occupy them.

I also invite you to look forward to the Muslim backlash before you are so proud to lick Bush's arse.

Get in, remove Saddam, setup a stable govt and get out - fair enough, a viable plan.

Crusades version 4 (or higher?) you can stick where you lick.

	07-06-2003 22:43									#85
	Remove this text

quote: After that Neutron bomb thread you started, I find this hard to believe... or do you mean you never cared for that as a reason to remove the Saddam regime?

2nd opinion. ( Unless he would start working on real WMDs, like nukes )

	07-06-2003 22:46									#86
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Jaguar Warrior Gotta love the Dubya. But you're saying that he wanted to do it anyway for a different reason, and the Economic factor was only a side effect. Which goes against the whole "its a war for oil" principle. I don't know whether you intended to mean that or not. yikes I'm debating MtG

Or, your primary reason is oil/economics, but that won't sell well for PR purposes, and you can't justify the purely economic risks to yourself without rationalization. So you find other excuses/reasons.

There's basically two reasons for all wars - power, or distraction from domestic issues. Almost nobody would give a **** about the ME in general if it wasn't for oil. It's the only resource they've got, but they've got the majority of the world's readily available supply, and it's essential. That's why the whole "no blood for oil" types just annoy me with their stupidity. Somebody's blood has always been shed for control of essential resources. The only thing stupider than the "it's all about oil" worldview is the people who deny that any of it is about oil.

The Dear Leader is every bit as bad as Hussein, he's far more dangeous, but he has a tougher military, he has WMDs, and he has no resources. So the cost/benefit ratio for thumping his ass to hell is a lot different.

	07-06-2003 22:46									#87
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Jaguar Warrior If you were Bush II, would you set back relations with France Germany and Russia

By antagonizing France and Germany, the two economic and political powerhouses of the EU, and isolating them whilst courting favor with the Eastern European nations, they may effectively negate their authority over the EU. A Tory I was talking to in London was thrilled with the war and the diplomatic stance against France and Germany, as it was giving the U.S. and U.K. a huge economic boon in Europe and reducing the former states' power.

Would that seem to make more sense?

	07-06-2003 22:55									#88
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Jaguar Warrior If you were Bush II, would you set back relations with France Germany and Russia, spend literally hundreds of billions of dollars, lose several dozen troops, and risk losing reelection just for a possible economic benefit that depends on 4 "ifs"? I wouldn't.

Let us look at the policiies the mental giants known as the Bush Administration have given us so far:

The rebuilding of Afganistan

Post-war Iraq

The insulting and ignoring of North Korea

The tax cuts

the PATRIOT ACT

Deployment of missile defence

Screwing the unemployed

etc.

Should it really surprise you that an Administration this ametuerish would do something this stupid?

Bush is Damien and the Manchurian Candidate all rolled up into one.

	07-06-2003 23:25									#89
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

I agree with Azazel, but not for the 'liberation' aspect (who really cares, eh?). It's a nice power play. In someways kinda like Reagan with those tiny wars in Latin America saying, hey, we're big, bad, and we'll **** you up. In essense, one reason was to tell the Islamic world that we aren't just gonna putz around in Afghanistan and that's it. Secondly, it gives you a nice base in the middle of the Mid East for deployment to deal with the terrorist problem in the future, without having to actually depend on Saudi Arabia (who knows what will happen in the future when the anti-American Crown Prince ascends fully).

If we can get some nice military bases and a fairly stable government in Iraq, it'll all be worth it. I'm not exactly a utilitarian, but I always believe that the ends can justify the means .

	07-06-2003 23:29									#90
	Tired of ads?

Imran, that doesn't answer the question. Forgive me for employing one of Lincoln's obnoxious tactics:

Did Bush lie to us?

Yes__ No__