AMERICAN AMBASSADOR GANG RAPED THEN MURDERED BY MUSLIMS

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Dawgs

Bosnia?

Do some research Dawg.

Maybe Whirly will tell ya......

I don't have time for all the ignorance around here.

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by WTF

Could you be more specific?

Could you break down the cost in lives and money on each front?

My guess Iraq and Afgan are head and shoulders abouve the other four.

I would also suggest that it is oil business we are after, not Muslim protection. We go to war for the benifit of a small segment of our society. Defense Contractors and Oli Interests.

Your own post contradicts itself.

Afghanistan doesn't have a drop of oil. And we have wasted far too many lives trying to nation build those backward, hillbilly jihadists. We should have flattened the place, put one of the Northern Alliance commanders in charge, and LEFT within 2 years. Then we could have paid money to the thug we left in charge to keep the Taliban out of power, keep AQ out of the country, and keep girls in school and out of burqas. Not a perfect solution, btu better than the lousy alternatives.

A few years back, progressives bashed Bush for getting involved in Iraq and neglecting the "good war" in Afghanistan. Iraq was "war for oil", but Afghanistan was not contaminated by having oil.

You don't hear that much from progressives now, do you? Especially since the death count in Afghanistan is now higher than Iraq and that is largely the fault of Obama increasing rather than decreasing forces in Afghanistan.

Also, Bosnia. We conducted extending bombing campaigns in Yugoslavia to stop the Serbs from annihilating the Bosnia. And Bosnia also does not have a drop of oil.

So, no. Our foreign policy does not boil down to simple securing oil for a small group of people. Energy security certainly does play a part in the calculation. But it is one among many.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by ExNYer

Your own post contradicts itself.

Afghanistan doesn't have a drop of oil. And we have wasted far too many lives trying to nation build those backward, hillbilly jihadists. We should have flattened the place, put one of the Northern Alliance commanders in charge, and LEFT within 2 years. Then we could have paid money to the thug we left in charge to keep the Taliban out of power, keep AQ out of the country, and keep girls in school and out of burqas. Not a perfect solution, btu better than the lousy alternatives.

.

You do not know your history very well do you? Follow the money...

http://www.prorev.com/2009/08/why-is...important.html

A glance at a map and a little knowledge of the region suggest that the real reasons for Western military involvement may be largely hidden.

Afghanistan is adjacent to Middle Eastern countries that are rich in oil and natural gas. And though Afghanistan may have little petroleum itself, it borders both Iran and Turkmenistan, countries with the second and third largest natural gas reserves in the world. (Russia is first.)

Turkmenistan is the country nobody talks about. Its huge reserves of natural gas can only get to market through pipelines. Until 1991, it was part of the Soviet Union and its gas flowed only north through Soviet pipelines. Now the Russians plan a new pipeline north. The Chinese are building a new pipeline east. The U.S. is pushing for "multiple oil and gas export routes." High-level Russian, Chinese and American delegations visit Turkmenistan frequently to discuss energy. The U.S. even has a special envoy for Eurasian energy diplomacy.

Rivalry for pipeline routes and energy resources reflects competition for power and control in the region. Pipelines are important today in the same way that railway building was important in the 19th century. They connect trading partners and influence the regional balance of power. Afghanistan is a strategic piece of real estate in the geopolitical struggle for power and dominance in the region.

Originally Posted by ExNYer

Your own post contradicts itself.

Originally Posted by ExNYer

Also, Bosnia. We conducted extending bombing campaigns in Yugoslavia to stop the Serbs from annihilating the Bosnia. And Bosnia also does not have a drop of oil.

So, no. Our foreign policy does not boil down to simple securing oil for a small group of people. Energy security certainly does play a part in the calculation. But it is one among many.

Wow...great history lesson. You do realize that Clinton did not want to go there nor did the GOP. We did not lose one single life there. We spent very little in terms of money.

I said this

Originally Posted by WTF

All wars worth fighting are for resources. No resources and you won't have much of a war. That is why Bosnia was such a small affair.

.

You have twisted wtf I said. I said Bosnia was not much of a war and it wasn't. No resources.

I said wars worth fighting for are about resources. And when I say worth, I mean our government spends considerable resources in terms of lives and money.

Learn to read wtf I say, this is not a lying ass joe blow. I actually understand a subject before wading in.

[Guest032516]

WTF, I actually know my history quite well.

And that link you posted to that "Progressive" website is just more conspiracy minded BS, this time from the left side of the aisle.

We need gas, so we invade the neighboring countries? Even though we can buy it from either Russia or Turkmenistan? Or for that matter Canada? And we want to spend billions to put a back-up pipeline through the most chaotic country on earth - even before 9-11?

The article itself said "since the 1990s" Washington has "promoted" a pipeline to the south.

Well, it's been 15 or 20 years. Were is it? Have they even stuck a shovel in the ground?

Here is an alternative real world theory. No one - and I mean no one - was ever serious about putting a dime of money into a pipeline or any other big commercial enterprise in Afghanistan. And it may be that in our lifetimes no one ever will.

How could you ever rely on a gas line that could be blown up at an minute by medieval Neanderthal? Why would you ever invest money on such a venture?

Half the country is religious fanatics and the other half are thieves.

Chin waggers in DC think tanks and in Foggy Bottom spew proposals and proclamations all the time. And most never amount to shit. Because after they stop and think, they realize it was a bad idea to begin with. But they don't issue a proclamation saying "never mind".

Like I said your link is just left side of the aisle conspiracy mongering. It is no better than the paranoid links posted by SEE3772.

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by WTF

Wow...great history lesson. You do realize that Clinton did not want to go there nor did the GOP. We did not lose one single life there. We spent very little in terms of money.

Yeah, no one wanted to go to war and yet somehow the Air Force magically appeared in the skies.

The point is that: 1) we actually went to war and 2) it wasn't for oil. And low casualties after the fact doesn't change that.

My point was that '"war for oil" is a left-wing trope - except when their guy is in office. We may consider energy in our calculations, but it is one of many factors.

[hotindallas]

Originally Posted by timpage

...assuming it's true...

But it was on the internet!!! That means it HAS to be true !!!!!

[timpage]

Originally Posted by ExNYer

Yeah, no one wanted to go to war and yet somehow the Air Force magically appeared in the skies.

The point is that: 1) we actually went to war and 2) it wasn't for oil. And low casualties after the fact doesn't change that.

My point was that '"war for oil" is a left-wing trope - except when their guy is in office. We may consider energy in our calculations, but it is one of many factors.

Our interest in the middle-east is due to the energy resources in that region. Period. Pardon the pun, but everything flows from that. There may be other variables in the calculation, but in the absence of the oil, those variables would be rendered meaningless.

[Little Stevie]

Originally Posted by SkylarCruzWantsYou

'Tis All.

Originally Posted by ExNYer

Sounds like Bullshit to me.

Originally Posted by CJ7

bullshit

Originally Posted by SkylarCruzWantsYou

My picture explained what I think of your original post.

Hoping that the individuals who may have been responsible for this act are punished, is one thing.

Saying that because of the actions of a few, a whole group of people need to be "eradicated like smallpox" is vastly different.

If you don't want any Hitler pics in your thread stop mirroring him with your comments.

Originally Posted by SkylarCruzWantsYou

So you are going to kill every Muslim in the world now? Is that your great plan Joe ?

How do you know the government is behind the attacks? Especially when Mohamed Morsi is trying to get a loan from IMF?

So when I see Christians walking around picketing soldiers funerals chanting about how America is doomed :





I should immediately start concocting plans to kill this family because they are one of Americas enemies, heck I should kill all Christians because if this groups is soo hateful it must mean all Christians are hateful. I should just squash them like bugs right? What a beautiful example you are setting.

EXACTLY! This is what makes the extreme wing of Teapublican Party just as dangerous as many other factions. We are but a hair away from the lawless lynching or shooting of Muslims in this country. One only needs to see the "Ayrian" ex-military moron who shot up the Sikh Temple and the Sikh who was shot mistakenly after 9/11 to see that the potential is just below the surface. The hair trigger that initiates these things has been ground paper thin by the AM Radio hate-mongers, FAUX "News" and blogs like the ones used to source this story.

[CJ7]

Originally Posted by ExNYer

Yeah, no one wanted to go to war and yet somehow the Air Force magically appeared in the skies.

The point is that: 1) we actually went to war and 2) it wasn't for oil. And low casualties after the fact doesn't change that.

My point was that '"war for oil" is a left-wing trope - except when their guy is in office. We may consider energy in our calculations, but it is one of many factors.

the reasoning for going to a streetfight in Iraq boiled down to choice #3

Iraq has wmd's ... damnit,
ok
Iraq had ties with 911 ... aaarrrrrrrrrrgggghhh, damnit damnit damnit
ok
Iraq has an evil dictator that wont let his people vote ..

boooooya, we have an excuse !!!

[JD Barleycorn]

http://www.pixelpress.org/bosnia/con...us-troops.html Soldiers did die in Bosnia. Source: The New York Times

I'm surprised the Marc Rich's name didn't come up. Clinton pardoned the multi-million dollar tax evader while Rich was trying to put together a deal to build a pipeline.

I wonder what the democrats would say if we did just take the oil. Would they feel good that they got one right while paying $1.25 for a gallon of gas.

[JD Barleycorn]

Well shit! Stevie has cut and pasted. The conservation is over. Everything that could be said has been said with a cut and paste.

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Well shit! Stevie has cut and pasted. The conservation is over. Everything that could be said has been said with a cut and paste.

Don't be unkind. It's all he can do. Maybe, we should give him a participation trophy.

[Dawgs]

Originally Posted by WTF

You do not know your history very well do you? Follow the money...





Wow...great history lesson. You do realize that Clinton did not want to go there nor did the GOP. We did not lose one single life there.

7 in Bosnia
1 in Yugoslavia

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by hotindallas

But it was on the internet!!! That means it HAS to be true !!!!!

That's what I thought until I invested my life savings in a chinchilla ranch.

[i'va biggen]

I had a noga ranch ....