I bet tony blair could have saved him, if he just made a call to G.Bush and told him to release the women prisoners so that the poor guy could have come back!....
Shame Shame Shame
Printable View
I bet tony blair could have saved him, if he just made a call to G.Bush and told him to release the women prisoners so that the poor guy could have come back!....
Shame Shame Shame
Ever heard the phrase "We don't bargain with terrorists?"
so what do you suggest?
if he had agreed with the kidnappers and freed the women prisoners there would have been no guarantee that he would have been released, also you would give them or others the green light to do it again.
its a double edged sword.
You can't deal with terrorists. The moment you start, you just fuel their greed and will cause a wave of kidnappings and hostage demands like we've never seen. The Romans knew it and had an effective way of dealing with it. Kill one Roman, they kill one hundred of yours. We've just gotten soft.
rubbish, no one could have done anything to save him that wouldn't have put many many other lives in jeopardy.Quote:
Originally posted by aka_tech
I bet tony blair could have saved him, if he just made a call to G.Bush and told him to release the women prisoners so that the poor guy could have come back!....
The only people responsible for this atrocity are the people that killed him.
I dislike blair and bush as much as the next guy but you can't blame either of them for this single act of terrorism.
Well, I don't think Blair or Bush are exactly blameless. This is some new kind of war they are playing at here, where they use civilians to wash army clothes and serve army chow, and a host of other things that the Army would have done in a previous war. Consequently, these civilians are not being protected the way an Army group would have been, and these guys are in a war zone that is still hot. A far cry from past wars, when civilians only went in after the place was pacified to rubble.
you gotta be pretty desperate or stupid to take a job over there right now. It's a known risk.
they're not blameless for creating the situation in which this happened, but they can't be blamed for this individual incident, once it had started there was nothing they could have done to prevent what happened.Quote:
Originally posted by iaskwhy
Well, I don't think Blair or Bush are exactly blameless.
same thing could be said for police officers and firefighters. I think some are motivated by helping the iraqi people, and of course some are motiveated by 6 figure incomes.Quote:
Originally posted by jAQUAN
you gotta be pretty desperate or stupid to take a job over there right now. It's a known risk.
Well, I have to disagree. After all, the buck stops on either desk. Individual beheadings carry the same blame as fighting an experimental war in the first place. It's not like Rumsfeld is sitting in the Oval Office, except when told to show up. Bush is just as much to blame for letting Rummy fight an unconventional war as he is for getting us into it in the first place. You can bet, if there was any praise being handed out, he'd get it, so he also gets the blame. It's his war.Quote:
Originally posted by aversion
they're not blameless for creating the situation in which this happened, but they can't be blamed for this individual incident, once it had started there was nothing they could have done to prevent what happened.
I agree completely, but as I said, the scope of my post about what happened after the men were kidnapped. There was nothing any leader could have done to prevent the killings at that point other than to capitulate to their demands, which, with terrorists, is always out of the question.Quote:
Originally posted by iaskwhy
Well, I have to disagree. After all, the buck stops on either desk. Individual beheadings carry the same blame as fighting an experimental war in the first place. It's not like Rumsfeld is sitting in the Oval Office, except when told to show up. Bush is just as much to blame for letting Rummy fight an unconventional war as he is for getting us into it in the first place. You can bet, if there was any praise being handed out, he'd get it, so he also gets the blame. It's his war.
Absolutly right. But have you noticed a change in the way war is fought in the last 3 or 4 decades? If an american had been kidnapped in Seoul 40 years ago, the second day, there would have been a draft callup in the US and by day 10, paratroopers would have been dropping all around the capital. The president then, like now had that authority, but unlike then, the people are no longer behind the president. There use to be patriotic pride in the fact that americans were safe anywhere. Now, it's ho hum, another one, huh?
I'm not defending either frame of mind, it's just the way it was. :)
It always hurts a little when a captive is killed. But it immediatly leads to me wondering if it was in vain or not. I end up less shocked that a barbaric people would do something like that and more shocked at our own arrogance thinking we could reason with them.
You could eliminate every evil person in Iraq tomarrow and the left-overs would still not be able to help themselves. They would still need professionals from other countries to run their water, power, government, etc.
If you ask me, it not that big of a loss to just start raising the worst cities to the ground.
Exactly!Quote:
Originally posted by aversion
rubbish, no one could have done anything to save him that wouldn't have put many many other lives in jeopardy.
The only people responsible for this atrocity are the people that killed him.
I dislike blair and bush as much as the next guy but you can't blame either of them for this single act of terrorism.
So whats the prediction for Iraqi situation now? We all know B&B (Bush & Blair) are there for only 1 reason i.e. OIL. And now since they cant pump out OIL without people being killed, what will be the solution? And i hear Kerry is planning to stay there 2 if he gets elected....
I am as against the farcical war as anyone, but I honestly don't think oil is the reason we're there. It is true that iraq is a valuable country because of its oil reserves but america won't steal its oil, even if they go back to post gulf war levels of production the revenue will barely cover the projected iraqi goverment budgets, never mind have any money left over to pay the americans.Quote:
Originally posted by aka_tech
So whats the prediction for Iraqi situation now? We all know B&B (Bush & Blair) are there for only 1 reason i.e. OIL. And now since they cant pump out OIL without people being killed, what will be the solution? And i hear Kerry is planning to stay there 2 if he gets elected....
The rising price of oil because of instability in the region might benefit big oil companies around the world, but the instability is bad for business and I don't think it's naive to say that most oil businesses would prefer a stable region to an unstable market.
I honestly think the whole 'they're there to steal oil' argument does nothing but retard and discredit opposition to the war.
Secondly, if Kerry, or anyone, is elected they can't just pull out the troops, now that the forces are there they must stay, or the country and perhaps the region will collapse. Kerry plans to open dialogue with other nations to replace american troops in the region, to bring more help to the coalition, initially from NATO countries. Thus he plans to lessen the american presence in the region over time, not just pull everyone out.
Bush.
I blame Billy Connolly ;)
Study a little Iraqi history. It was one of the most progressive in the Middle East not too long ago, without the need of other "professionals" to run their economy. The "evilness" isn't an epidemic, but a result of a certain environment that has been created over a great many years.Quote:
Originally posted by jAQUAN
It always hurts a little when a captive is killed. But it immediatly leads to me wondering if it was in vain or not. I end up less shocked that a barbaric people would do something like that and more shocked at our own arrogance thinking we could reason with them.
You could eliminate every evil person in Iraq tomarrow and the left-overs would still not be able to help themselves. They would still need professionals from other countries to run their water, power, government, etc.
If you ask me, it not that big of a loss to just start raising the worst cities to the ground.
You want to talk about arrogance? How about the arrogance of thinking that we (or any group of people) is superior to any other group of people?
The people involved in the killing deserve all the punishment that can be delivered to them. The majority of Iraqis do not.
Me too! Let's lynch the bugger!!Quote:
Originally posted by SpockBert
I blame Billy Connolly ;)
me too.Quote:
Originally posted by SpockBert
I blame Billy Connolly ;)
"Why don't they just get on with it?"
dp
aversion- i always! respect your knowledge and thoughts, you are one of the few that inspires me, because you are very balanced.
but i have to disagree with your following statement.
"The rising price of oil because of instability in the region might benefit big oil companies around the world, but the instability is bad for business and I don't think it's naive to say that most oil businesses would prefer a stable region to an unstable market.
it is not about big oil businesses, the instability is complex math dedicated to parliamentary procedure, macro economics and personal finance for the eshlon in absolution, why is it that the elections in any nation only have an effect on the poor and middle class?
Thanks but I'm not sure where we disagee. In fact I'm not quite sure what you mean at all :|Quote:
Originally posted by Naked inc.
it is not about big oil businesses, the instability is complex math dedicated to parliamentary procedure, macro economics and personal finance for the eshlon in absolution, why is it that the elections in any nation only have an effect on the poor and middle class?
I'm saying that this doesn't have anything to do with oil, that some people may think oil companies like the high oil prices (caused by the instability in the region, not the instability caused by the oil prices) but in the long run they will prefer stability.
The instability is caused by the fact that there has been a war going on for the last 18 months and all these people are running around with guns and bombs blowing stuff up. Some of the stuff being blown up are oil pipelines.
btw, some elections do have a big effect on the rich, chaves' victory in venezuela effected the rich far more than the poor.
One advantage to being rich though, you can always hop on the big bird and fly off to London if things aren't going right.
controlling the oilpatch by being able to affect production quotas and telling opec to go piss up a stick - priceless to the bush family
Anyone who invests in oil knows it's and artificially inflated market... controlling it through artificial surplusses and shortfalls is how investors make a buck at it.
but there's more to the situation than oil to explain IRAQ.
Firstly, removing Saddam (So Damn Insane) from power was a GOOD thing ... regardless of why it was done ... it was a GOOD thing!!! no if's ands or buts... It was the right thing (probably for the wrong reasons) - only a true inbred idiot should argue against this statement.
One of the major reasons to do it ... AMERICA needed a WAR... when GOP Republicans can't fix the economy, when they want to steal taxpayer dollars hand over fist over dumptruck ... they have a war... it conveniently hides their modus operandi - how to steal billions from the public purse.
Rich get richer ... poor get drafted... (OK they aren't there yet... or are they ?? Reserves fighting overseas ... that's only happened in the past when there was a draft... they even sent those ridiculous weekend warriors known as the National Guard into active duty... )
One of the final reasons is a two fisted revenge clusterfu*k
1. finish the war daddy started but didn't kill the bad guy in ...
- think of the old AC/DC song "who's got the biggest balls of them all"
2. Get even for Rumsfelds sake... Old Rummy boy used to be a particularly good friend of Saddam... brought him many lovely presents which Saddam used against the Evil Iranians who kidnapped a bunch of American Diplomats. --- like the Iran Hostage Crisis ---
For the next several years Saddam happily killed tens of thousands of Iranians with AMERICAN made chemical weapons and OOPS several thousand of his own soldiars when winds changed directions.
Rummy was very upset ... his old drinking dog and bordello buddy had seemed to turn on him after this and wouldn't behave like Rummy wanted him to ... Rummy's little pet psychopath grew up and thought he he was the new ruler of the world... not gonna listen to uncle Rummy anymore...
probably a few psychotic reasons i've missed but ...
oh yeah... that's why the americans "knew" Saddam had Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD's) -- They sold and shipped the nasty things to Iraq in the first place...
They probably even found some of the ones that say
Made in USA
on them but somehow don't want us to know those are all they can find
Please correct me if I am wrong or misguided, but before the Coflict started Iraq exported no Oil (Legally). Zero Oil exports then and zero Oil exports now should have little if any effect on the price of oil.
Ummm ... Iraq was permitted to export oil in exchange for humanitatian aid...(Food & Medicine etc...) legally since Gulf War 1 ended (UN Security Council set the quota amount) . Additionally the illegal exports were aprox ten times the amount of the humanitarian exchange.
Again the US would love to drop the price of foreign/imported oil by flooding the market with Iraqi oil. Thus controling the world oil price at a US preferred level, and not the price goughing that OPEC makes money off of.
BTW ... shame on me but... my investments make me money off of high oil prices ... I took a 32% profit on my oil sector investments in the last seven months on unit rise alone. It's called profiting off of Oil & Gas Income Trusts. Hint to those of you looking for 30 odd percent in seven months... DO NOT BUY NOW!!!! your only putting money in my pocket (like I sell you the overinflated trust unit before it drops) you might make money on trust distribution 10-15% per anum but not off the unit rise ... yes I made over 40% combined value ... it's a buy low sell high thing.
Yes, they exported oil, legally, the Oil for Food program legally allowed SH to sell oil for humanitarian aid. But it turns out, the sanctions imposed were subverted by everyone from the UN on down. France, Russia, and many other countries were trading arms for oil all along. So it's doubtful the overall production was diminished very much.
Bingo!!!
You totally got the picture of how the real world works!!!
snowball (if you know what this phrase really means) the public with a total load of umm errr stuff ...
then do whatever backroom deals you want to do to make money up the yin yang for the old boys club.
pretend we're doing the right thing but actually perpetuating the same old **** again and again by everyone cheating in the background where no one see's them
i read this morning on the web that bigly has escape for a moment 30 minutes then they re-capture it and their investigation detect the presence of us special army with england special force mi6 so they kill it.
i think bush is responsible because the iraqian president ayad allaoui was ok to release the 2 women but bush stop the procedure. and blair con't do anything.
shame on you blair , bush is the killer.