Furthr
Well, there you have it. He deliberately lied or his immediate admin was grossly incompetent. Either way, let's hope there's a media frenzy. If there is any consistency in congress' sense of propriety (there isn't) then he'll be impeached (he won't).
Didn't even make front page news on Monday--nor did the follow-on (probes being called for-big deal) Where's the outrage?
Kerrey/Graham in 2004!!
Last edited by Merryprankster; 07-09-2003 at 03:01 AM.
"In the world of martial arts, respect is often a given. In the real world, it must be earned."
"A stupid man's report of what a clever man says is never accurate because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand. "--Bertrand Russell
"Liberals - Cosmopolitan critics, men who are the friends of every country save their own. "--Benjamin Disraeli
"A conservative government is an organised hypocrisy."--Benjamin Disraeli
Chairman of the ORA-board
That's old news for us "non-americans"...
But please show a link to a newspaper or something, so that we can have it prooved black on white.
Furthr
Fair enough.
http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/20...2003071306.asp
http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2003/s897935.htm
http://www.boston.com/dailynews/189/...r_in_St:.shtml
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2...of-union_x.htm
We've ALL known the Uranium claim was SUSPECT for quite some time. The question was "did we KNOW if it was false, or was it just 'unconfirmed'?" There continued to be burgeoning evidence that it was indeed bad data, but still nothing super-concrete (beyond a reasonable doubt, say). I realize that distinction may not mean much to some people, but it's terribly important to me, since I'm an analyst. I'm cautious about saying something like "Rush Limbaugh is a big, fat, idiot." I'm more inclined to write "Recent reports indicate Rush Limbaugh is a big, fat, idiot," because confirming that may be difficult. (Well, not in Rush's case).
That distinction means a LOT. I work with shades of gray w/respect to accuracy and credibility consistently, so actually KNOWING something is a big deal to me. (yes, I KNOW Rush is a big, fat, idiot.
Clearly, we've now officially gone beyond unconfirmed, suspect reporting into "Oh, yeah, I used reporting that was clearly incorrect. By the way, the former Charge d' Affairs in Iraq said it was WAY off and really just so improbable not even the Heart of Gold and Zaphod Beeblebrox could instigate it. My bad." Now the question is, liar or incompetent? Or both? For once, a dilemma that isn't false!
Last edited by Merryprankster; 07-09-2003 at 03:29 AM.
"In the world of martial arts, respect is often a given. In the real world, it must be earned."
"A stupid man's report of what a clever man says is never accurate because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand. "--Bertrand Russell
"Liberals - Cosmopolitan critics, men who are the friends of every country save their own. "--Benjamin Disraeli
"A conservative government is an organised hypocrisy."--Benjamin Disraeli
Chairman of the ORA-board
Thanks.
So, what is worse lying about: The reason for going to war with thousands of casualties & the destroying of a whole nation; or about getting B-jobs in the oval office...?
Hmmmm
...
Dayum, dats a tough nut to crack..
Furthr
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3056626.stm
bbc link.
To me, the thing that nailed it was when the former charge d' affairs for Iraq came out and said it was bogus (saw the interview). For that guy to go on record... that's big. Sure, we had reports that that was most likely what happened (had been proven false after investigation) but this guy came out and SAID it. Wow.
"In the world of martial arts, respect is often a given. In the real world, it must be earned."
"A stupid man's report of what a clever man says is never accurate because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand. "--Bertrand Russell
"Liberals - Cosmopolitan critics, men who are the friends of every country save their own. "--Benjamin Disraeli
"A conservative government is an organised hypocrisy."--Benjamin Disraeli
Chairman of the ORA-board
What would make Iraq that important, that a President of the most powerful country in the world would stand up and downright lie to to the rest of the world..?
now let's see.. oil is too obvious, that has become a cliché.
ummm...
Can't think of anything else
Oh yeah, for strategic reasons, pinching Iran & Syria from 2 directions (the others being Afghanistan and Israel).
That's it..
Furthr
Oil really doesn't make sense. I know it's the popular reason but it doesn't make sense. We have greater interests in Oil in Nigeria and could have done something there, thanks to current unrest, under the guise of humanitarian aid, without getting the rest of the world ****ed at us, yet we went this route. I can think of several valid geoplotical reasons in a Realpolitik kind of way, as you suggested. But generally--I think Bush genuinely perceived (opinion vice fact) a threat--after all, Saddam tried to kill his father.
Chen Zhen--careful, we don't know if Bush lied yet. All we know is that he used bad information that HE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN was bad. Again--either he lied or his immediate staff was inept here. One is an aspersion on his personal character (and thus his fitness for the job), the other is merely an aspersion on his and his admins fitness for the job. Jimmy Carter is an example--great man, lousy administrator.
Last edited by Merryprankster; 07-09-2003 at 10:15 AM.
"In the world of martial arts, respect is often a given. In the real world, it must be earned."
"A stupid man's report of what a clever man says is never accurate because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand. "--Bertrand Russell
"Liberals - Cosmopolitan critics, men who are the friends of every country save their own. "--Benjamin Disraeli
"A conservative government is an organised hypocrisy."--Benjamin Disraeli
Chairman of the ORA-board
Ok, sorry. I'll take it back. For now.
But think about it: What country would be easier to get oil from? Nigeria or Iraq? It would be odd if the US suddenly gained interest in doing funny-stuff with Nigeria, but the US has an old history with Iraq & Saddam, so it would make more sense by going there for oil. +, if the US government uses Nigeria or the Caspian sea as examples of "oh, we don't attack Iraq for the purpose of oil, because these-and-these countries have more oil, then why don't we attack them?", then it's a diversion. Because it would be more convenient to attack Saddam after 9/11 than some African country, or some unknown dictator in a former Soviet Union-republic. Right?
It's just my obsevation and opinion.
Furthr
I didn't say attack. Nigeria was/is having some SERIOUS ethnic unrest which got so bad they had to stop oil production in February (it has sense returned to production but the threat remains--sometimes violent--sporadic reports of attack on oil infrastructure, etc). ChevronTexaco, ExxonMobil, and several European oil conglomerates, including TotalElFina and a couple others, based in Denmark, France, the Netherlands and Spain have an incredible amount of people and money invested in Nigeria along with ChevronTexaco and ExxonMobil.
Nigeria is a MAJOR contributor to the U.S. oil market and clearly to the European one as well. It is the 8th largest producer in the world. Light, sweet, crude dominates most of their production (it's easier to crack and refine=very high profit margin). It would have been much, much simpler to embark on a "U.N. Peacekeeping mission," largely U.S. funded and backed with what probably would have been enthusiastic European response rather than ****ing off most of the world with a war in Iraq.
If this were really about oil or profits therefrom, Bush could have simultaneously protected oil company interests and profits while looking like a nice guy instead of a warmonger.
Last edited by Merryprankster; 07-09-2003 at 04:58 AM.
"In the world of martial arts, respect is often a given. In the real world, it must be earned."
"A stupid man's report of what a clever man says is never accurate because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand. "--Bertrand Russell
"Liberals - Cosmopolitan critics, men who are the friends of every country save their own. "--Benjamin Disraeli
"A conservative government is an organised hypocrisy."--Benjamin Disraeli
Cheese is where it's at!
MP.
Didn't GWB II choose and appoint his own advisers?
Furthr
Of course--that's my point exactly and why I made a distinction between character issues and competency issues, as below:
Reading for comprehension....the other is merely an aspersion on his and his admins fitness for the job.
Last edited by Merryprankster; 07-09-2003 at 10:15 AM.
"In the world of martial arts, respect is often a given. In the real world, it must be earned."
"A stupid man's report of what a clever man says is never accurate because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand. "--Bertrand Russell
"Liberals - Cosmopolitan critics, men who are the friends of every country save their own. "--Benjamin Disraeli
"A conservative government is an organised hypocrisy."--Benjamin Disraeli
Eight Extremes Boxer
Oil mail be one factor, yes, but it's probably not all.
I think you'd have to look closely at the current regime in USA to understand what's going on.
See the following website for what I think may be a clue:
http://www.newamericancentury.org/st...principles.htm
Note the signatories!
A very interesting site and another one with more speculation can be found at http://www.informationclearinghouse....rticle1665.htm
Later folks.
"Once you get deeper into the study of Kung Fu you will realise that lineage and insulting others become more important than actual skill and fighting ability." -- Tai'ji Monkey
"Eh, IMO if you're bittching about what other people are doing instead of having intelligent (or stupid) conversation about kung fu or what your favorite beer is, you're spending too much time exploring your feminine side." -- Meat Shake
Chairman of the ORA-board
maybe it would, but if it was done right after 9/11, the American people would have questioned why the US government would suddenly focus on Nigeria, when not even Osama would have been captured yet. So it would still make more sense to attack Iraq, since A= the US has a past history with the country and Saddam, and B=it's an Arab country, because the hostility and suspicion towards Arabs/middle-easterners(not Israelis included) is very large in the US after 9/11, so it's easier to make an Arab (oil-rich) country the point of focus, leading to war.It would have been much, much simpler to embark on a "U.N. Peacekeeping mission," largely U.S. funded and backed with what probably would have been enthusiastic European response rather than ****ing off most of the world with a war in Iraq.
Know what I mean?
And the rest of the world would make very great protests towards the US no matter what they will do now, (speaking of foreign-policy) since the trust in the US speaking the truth is VERY VERY low in the rest of the world.
That's the way it goes, ho's.
Senior Member
For what my oppinion is worth. The oil thing is more about controlling OPEC policy than a country with a lot of Oil in it. Iraq is always trying to get OPEC to produce less and push the price down. This is what sparked the first Gulf war, Kuwait wanted to produce more oil and Iraq didn't want them to. Kuwait did it anyway, some people say they were 'encouraged' to do so by the US, despite their OPEC agreements.
This is why i think it's more about Oil policy than the Oil in the country itself.
Point of Fact: Nigeria is in OPEC but has not been so much of a problem in terms of opposing US oil policy.
Registered User
An interesting discussion happened on this area...
Turns out that there are two schools of thought about the amount of oil available in the world.
The current administration's official line is 50% usage of what the majority of scientific evidence claims...and they claim:
That roughly 50% of the oil that man will ever be able to remove from the ground for use has been recovered in the last 100 years. - There is only 50% of the total oil supply left in the entire world.
Given that the excalation of oil use has been in the last 50 or 60 years...coinciding with the use of fossil fuels for heating, transportation, and even electrical power, and that the demand has been escalating...
The estimates are that somewhere around 2050 or sooner, the world's oil supply will be depleted.
Now, the Bush admin maintains that these numbers are too low...but even then, the depletion would happen later than 2050..but not later than 2100...
The forecast is that things will start to get REALLY tight around 2020....and that there will be TWO countries in the world that will take on great signifcance around then or give or take 5 years...
Iraq and Saudi Arabia....
So, if that is true....one thing is that military might and economics - being heavily tied to transportation and power...fuels... will experience a signifcant set of issues regarding control and influence in those areas.
Alternative fuels...well they get lip service but large scale workable solutions are just not there and not even really on the horizon....so...is it not easier just to make sure NOW that you have strong influence in one if not two of the projected areas of importance in 15 or 20 years....
It is about CONTROL of oil and power...A military without oil...only things like nuclear powered ships would still work...what happens to a great air power - without fossil fuels...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
