Printable View
http://www.hungangels.com/board/view...hlight=#294630Quote:
Originally Posted by jaycanuck
http://www.hungangels.com/board/view...hlight=#292547
http://www.hungangels.com/board/view...hlight=#290350
Shit, the fucker's avatar even has shades too. :wink:
hmm...wonder who he is.
And?Quote:
Originally Posted by jaycanuck
That is one man's opinion. If it were just about oil, our invasion would have been different. The first thing that would have been done would have been to secure the oil fields. That isn't what happened. Greenspan may know economics, but he obviously doesn't know anything more about military strategy than any other Average Joe off the street. I don't know why people assume that because someone has a degree in X that he knows a lot about Y.
We did secure the oil fields in the first week of the invasion. But we couldn’t keep them secure. We thought we were going to be accepted as liberators. We thought that by taking out the middle man (i.e. the Iraqi government) our oil companies could deal directly with the towns and villages that provide the hard labor for working those fields. Halliburton could smell the profits. But Cheney and Halliburton thought wrongly. We weren't mistaken for liberators. After all, we weren’t. And so it took more effort than expected to keep those oil fields safe.
Bill Moyers and Alan Greenspan are two men. Indeed Greenspan explains that he is just putting to ink what everyone knows. That the Iraq War was about oil is more than one man’s opinion. Perhaps you meant to say that it’s just one opinion that almost everyone shares. Instead of securing those fields we created insecurity. We went four trillion dollars into debt because of the Iraq debacle. We actually lost more than that in Iraq because Bush started his presidency with a ten year surplus.
But more than money we lost over four thousand American lives. The number of severely incapacitated soldiers who made it home alive is tenfold that number. They will require medical treatment for the rest of their lives. But hey, VA health is socialism. Those lazy soldiers with brain injuries and no limbs should get up out their beds and work for a living, right? Four years of service and they think they deserve a lifetime of medical care!?
The nature of human kind, the norm and the expectation, is for a community to come to the aid of any member who is experiencing a personal crisis. From time immemorial we aided people whose homes were on fire. We’ve aided people whose homes have been flooded. We aid people who are being robbed or wronged. And we have aided people who are sick. It’s our duty. There is no right that says we can sit back and watch; not in the constitution and not in any religion’s scripture or in any thinker’s moral philosophy.
First off, it is rather disingenuous of you to virtually accuse me of being against socialized medicine. I have not stated a position one way or the other. I have merely shown - with evidence that none of you have ever disputed - that the current American system is not as bad as many would have you believe.Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
Secondly, if the Iraq War was merely about oil, then we would have done nothing BUT seize the oilfields and we would have held them against anything. We did a lot more. I'd trust Tommy Franks on this matter over Alan Greenspan.
Thirdly, we do give aid to the sick and indigent. Didn't you read my post about my friend who had no job and no car who got treatment for cancer (and was able to get SSDI - saving his apartment)?
Well, get off the fence. What is your position on "socialized medicine"? And to say that the American system is not as bad as you and many right-wingers out there would like us to believe is akin to showing that among the midgets of health care, the US might be the tallest one.Quote:
Originally Posted by duplicatt
Uh, we went there under every pretext imaginable all with the sole purpose of controlling those oil fields and making sure that supplies from that region were not interrupted. Do you really believe the public support would have been there had the administration's true reasons been revealed? And you're right: We did do a lot more. Let's see, according to the DoD's own figures, 95,000 Iraqis died via this country's unwarranted, unjust, and unprovoked attack. Other organizations have it at eight to ten times that figure. Now, divide any figure by 3000.Quote:
Originally Posted by duplicatt
Hmmmm, let's see. What was that latest figure that just came out that told of the tens of thousands of Americans that die each year due to the lack of insurance? You're not going anecdotal on us here are you?Quote:
Originally Posted by duplicatt
You're all heart.
The war was fought because the Bush Whitehouse new about the imminent peak and terminal decline of world oil production.Quote:
Originally Posted by duplicatt
Yeah, right....lolQuote:
Originally Posted by archineer
It's rather disingenuous of you to literally accuse me of virtually accusing you of taking a position which you virtually support but literally feign not to support. Clever :wink: I'm with Realgirls4me: time for you to get off the figurative fence. We[] have one of the worst infant mortality rates and one of the worst life expectancies among the western developed nations. No other developed nation in the western tradition has so many citizens dying because they're uncovered or going bankrupt because of the illness of a family member. But hey, things aren't as bad as we think they are. After all, who wants longevity when you have to watch your children die, your family go without proper medical care and your house fall into the hands of insurance barons?Quote:
...it is rather disingenuous of you to virtually accuse me of being against socialized medicine.
We peaked in 2005, just wait and see....Quote:
Originally Posted by fred41