'The War Is Not Over'

There are 20 comments on the Sep 12, 2006, Los Angeles Times story titled 'The War Is Not Over'. In it, Los Angeles Times reports that:

WASHINGTON - President Bush led the nation on Monday in marking the fifth anniversary of the Sept.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Los Angeles Times.

chazmo

San Antonio, TX

#232124 Jul 20, 2010
Qwerty is a monkey wrote:
<quoted text>
Bloody good idea, but then France didnt invade Iraq and sent you intelligence telling your there was no reason to do so.
Banning Burquas is very favourable to me lol
Hey, McSqwerty...is this you?

http://photos.igougo.com/images/p249795-Dubli...

Thank God France wasn't involved in the oil for food scandal...

Else...

Someone could say they became complicit in any outcome...
chazmo

San Antonio, TX

#232125 Jul 20, 2010
WhiteCollarCrime wrote:
<quoted text>
There might be some Democrats who run Wall Street but ZERO liberals.
There is a difference.
Liberals support capitalism...

Therefore...

You are INcorrect...

Or am I thinking REAL Liberals...

As in classic liberals...
chazmo

San Antonio, TX

#232126 Jul 20, 2010
arbitrageur wrote:
<quoted text>
But you are for BIG, BIG, government. Do YOU need protection?
Oh no...

That makes VDubya NON liberal...

Shock-a-mundo
chazmo

San Antonio, TX

#232127 Jul 20, 2010
Qwerty is a monkey wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes i know Saddam had zero suicide bombings and zero Al Qaeda. But as for now after the war if bribes work for making insurgents stab each other in the back and hand their commrades over to the West then i say if it works, it works!
There is no question or doubt that the war was illegal. The UN Charter which all members of the UN swear to uphold was broken. Containment of Saddam was far more effective. And as some analysts say, countries like Iraq often need a hard b*stard of a Dictator to keep the place under control. I have no delusions about what Saddam was and was not. I know he gassed the Kurds, people who are hated both along the Iraq and Turkish border. Back then however Saddam was a pal of ours. That is one reason i will not accept the gassing of Kurds as one justification to call him a monster now but not back then when we tried to help him win a war against Iran.
Iraqs security is largely maintained by private security firms now. Thats why Western civilians and soldiers have accidentally been killed countless times. Iraq is not a victory, its a fortress and the reason it was more successful shall we say than Afghanistan is because it had some stability before the war. The people are used to being kept under an iron fist.
But Al Qaeda will be in Iraq for the rest of our life time probably. Any opportunity to bomb a crowded market or Western forces will be taken. It happens every few weeks and a large scale one happens every few months.
Iran wanted Iraq to become an Islamic Republic, while Iraq being a secular country refused. So as for Saddam keeping up the pretense that he did have WMD, i can understand this. Especially since Iraq came off second best in the Iran/Iraq War.
The Middle East is one of the last places you want to be destabalised. Bush accomplished this magnificently. And thanks to us many of those countries do have guns, bombs, planes and tanks we would rather they didnt.
Zero suicide murders under Saddam...

Wonder why?...

Could be that tree chipper/shredder that folks got dropped in feet first...
WhiteCollarCrime

Islip Terrace, NY

#232128 Jul 20, 2010
Qwerty is a monkey wrote:
<quoted text>
Well your making good points, but from the evidence i have seen the Soviets were asked to intervene to help install a Socialist government. Again you might be right, but nothing i have ever seen, heard or read points to an aggressive invasion. If it was, why did the Soviets send government advisors to Afghanistan before sending in the military???
The curious thing about Osama Bin Laden is that he was happy enough to have Western infidenls in Afghanistan during the war. Osama Bin Laden is not the authority on Islam it has to be said and their is now law or rule say peoples of other religions should be banned from Islamic countries.
And another curious thing is that after the invasion of Afghanistan by the West, constuction on the gas pipelines restarted almot straight away.
Yes Usama bin Laden distorts Islam and unfortunately millions agree with him.

Why would Afghanistan want an Atheist communist/socialist government from Russia?

Many US military advisers were also sent to Vietnam and Korea before those wars.

On one of your own videos a Russian agent said that they never seen any Americans in Afghanistan so the support was only weaponry not personnel.

Pipelines for gas and oil are being built as well as Mega Military Installations peppered throughout Iraq and Afghanistan.

But naturally it is only speculation on my part.
chazmo

San Antonio, TX

#232129 Jul 20, 2010
Qwerty is a monkey wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes i know Saddam had zero suicide bombings and zero Al Qaeda. But as for now after the war if bribes work for making insurgents stab each other in the back and hand their commrades over to the West then i say if it works, it works!
I'll bet you failed to count these suicide murderers...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governmental_pos...

''Others[who?] felt that Saddam's ties to terror groups were
well-established, and his weapons programs very real.
Although the U.S. has yet to find the location of the WMDs,
they did find records of bank transactions from some of Saddam's
accounts that paid various suicide bombers' families $25,000 in
exchange for their sons' martyrdom.''
WhiteCollarCrime

Islip Terrace, NY

#232130 Jul 20, 2010
chazmo wrote:
<quoted text>
Liberals support capitalism...
Therefore...
You are INcorrect...
Or am I thinking REAL Liberals...
As in classic liberals...
Authentic Liberals and Authentic Conservatives support fair capitalism, fair government, et cetera.

Corporate Democrats and Corporate Republicans are doggy dog winner takes all and always the bottom line matters.

This system keeps chazmo working three jobs and getting killed in taxes.

I just used your name as a generic.

chazmo

San Antonio, TX

#232132 Jul 20, 2010
Qwerty is a monkey wrote:
<quoted text>
That is a surprise! The good General didnt always seem like a very bright man or one who would vote for Obama non the less! Presuming thats true. You never know with these websites posting "facts" though.
Iraq was a scapegoat. But now it has become the problem it never was.
More like a different kind of problem...

Iran is soon to be a different kind of problem too...
Qwerty is a monkey

UK

#232133 Jul 20, 2010
WhiteCollarCrime wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for the data.
When a country goes to war there is usually many underlining reasons for it and not made known to the public.
Why hasn't the USSR or USA invaded Cuba?
Is it probable that there is no oil there?
Why did the Soviets recently invade Georgia?
Is it probable that there is oil there?
----------
Iraq, 1917
http://tinyurl.com/raud8
They came as liberators but were met by fierce resistance outside Baghdad. Humiliating treatment of prisoners and heavy-handed action in Najaf and Fallujah further alienated the local population. A planned handover of power proved unworkable. Britain's 1917 occupation of Iraq holds uncanny parallels with today - and if we want to know what will happen there next, we need only turn to our history books...
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/arti...
Ok, good point again and i will say it is difficult to think of a war in the last 30 years that has not been fought over oil or some other resources. Take the Falklands for example.

That is a good question regarding Cuba, invading it would have been easy enough but is there not the possibility that we are just talking about different times and different circumstances. Cuba is Communist nation and it must have been very, very pleasing to the USSR that a small poor island nation a hundred miles off the coast of the US became Communist. If the US had invaded Cuba after the Revolution then can it not be reasonable to argue that the Soviets may have invaded a small Democratic nation along its lines that was closely tied to the US due to fear of the Soviet Union? Or was Cuba just not that important??? Could it be as simple as that?

At this time, both the US and the Soviets were fighting to keep ahead of each other in the arms race. "I have more nukes than you do".

Also what Soviet invasion of Georgia are you talking about? I thought Georgia was one of the founding States of the Soviet Union in 1917???

But yes, Britains past interests in Iraq were based upon the oil. All Western interest in Iraq over the last century has been based on oil. So im with you there. No question no doubt. But the 2003 invasion was more, it was also a scapegoat and in my view a supposed warning and punishment on the Islamic world on what Bush saw as an easy target.

Might interest you also-

The former head of MI5 (internal security) from 2002 to 2007 said on BBC News at the Iraq inquiry today that the invasion gave Al Qaeda a foothold in Iraq that it previously did not have, and that Saddam was a small and containable threat if a threat at all to anyone.
Qwerty is a monkey

UK

#232134 Jul 20, 2010
chazmo wrote:
<quoted text>
Zero suicide murders under Saddam...
Wonder why?...
Could be that tree chipper/shredder that folks got dropped in feet first...
Yeah suicide bombings by insurgents and fanatics is preferable to a Dictator who tortures a few thousand of his own people over the course of his long, long dictatorship.

See those folk dropped into the wood chipper? How do ya know alot of them were not religious nuts trying to radicalise large sections of Iraqi society???
Qwerty is a monkey

UK

#232135 Jul 20, 2010
WhiteCollarCrime wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes Usama bin Laden distorts Islam and unfortunately millions agree with him.
Why would Afghanistan want an Atheist communist/socialist government from Russia?
Many US military advisers were also sent to Vietnam and Korea before those wars.
On one of your own videos a Russian agent said that they never seen any Americans in Afghanistan so the support was only weaponry not personnel.
Pipelines for gas and oil are being built as well as Mega Military Installations peppered throughout Iraq and Afghanistan.
But naturally it is only speculation on my part.
Well i dont think Afghanistan was heading toward Communism or considered it. But there is a difference between Communism and Socialism and Socialism can be compatible with a secular State. Even if it is largely Islamic in religion. Many Muslim nations have been secular over the years. And Socialism unlike Communism does not mean Atheism either.
Qwerty is a monkey

UK

#232136 Jul 20, 2010
chazmo wrote:
<quoted text>
I'll bet you failed to count these suicide murderers...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governmental_pos...
''Others[who?] felt that Saddam's ties to terror groups were
well-established, and his weapons programs very real.
Although the U.S. has yet to find the location of the WMDs,
they did find records of bank transactions from some of Saddam's
accounts that paid various suicide bombers' families $25,000 in
exchange for their sons' martyrdom.''
You think anyone with a hint of common sense will take Dubya's "position" or "intelligence" on Iraq was correct???
Qwerty is a monkey

UK

#232137 Jul 20, 2010
chazmo wrote:
<quoted text>
More like a different kind of problem...
Iran is soon to be a different kind of problem too...
We will see!

“French Cocoa Party”

Since: Jan 08

Keynesian Fields

#232138 Jul 20, 2010
Tea Partiers Hate Blacks wrote:
<quoted text>
Back to "how to" books. Is there a "how to" book on "how to break the law in one's given occupation or profession just enough to gain a competitive advantage over one's competitors but not enough to get arrested and sent to prison?" It seems that this is the one book that needs to be written, because in my experience the true secret to success in America (besides choosing the right parents) is to gain competitive advantage by "cutting corners" or by "cheating a little" or by "breaking the law and not getting caught."
How about a "how to" book on "how to start the worldwide communist revolution in your spare time?"
How about "how to become the father (or mother) of a new nation, just like George Washington?"
Perhaps best would be "how to identify an economic niche early and exploit it." This is perhaps the best and only "honest" way to become rich in a capitalist society without either choosing rich parents or by cheating.
Those economic niches are rare things. Not enough to go around. Do you say "tough luck" to those not fortunate enough to find one in their lifetime?
I want to eliminate the "tough luck" in life, for others as well as for myself. Do you find that you revel in the "tough luck" meted out to others?
Certainly not. I just sell "How to" books. The perfect niche, especially these days.
chazmo

San Antonio, TX

#232139 Jul 20, 2010
arbitrageur wrote:
<quoted text>
Could very well be that the main problem for the Americans is in the Sudan.
That's why Biden wanted to invade that country.
How about Somalia? Now, that's a problem, too.
Yemen, too...

Seriously, tho...

Iraq killed two birds, etc...

No Saddam...

Iran has two sides covered...
chazmo

San Antonio, TX

#232140 Jul 20, 2010
WhiteCollarCrime wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree with most of this post and your points are well taken.
Most in Iraq know the government is just as corrupt as Saddam was and the same is true of Afghanistan with Karzai "STEALING" the election with the help of the USA.
President Bush lost the hearts and minds of the whole Middle East by invading Iraq which was the wrong country.
The USA is Number One in selling weaponry all around the world.
The Arms Trade is Big Business
http://tinyurl.com/cfjq5e
http://www.globalissues.org/article/74/the-ar...
Lost the ENTIRE Muddle East?...

Really think so?...

http://www.sanfranciscosentinel.com/...

I don't...

But note the San Francisco Spin Doctors at work...
chazmo

San Antonio, TX

#232141 Jul 20, 2010
arbitrageur wrote:
Mystery for White House: Where Did the Jobs Go?
New York Times special caucus blog
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/19...
Amazing how they still haven't figured out that life is not a textbook...

Just wait 'til 'unemployment' starts at 18...

And lasts for life...

After all...

If someone doesn't feel like they should have to work...

Shouldn't a Nation as Free and Wealthy as America...

Support these people?...

There should be lots of free cash floating around once all the White People give up all their possessions and property...

As payment for slavery and such...

“French Cocoa Party”

Since: Jan 08

Keynesian Fields

#232142 Jul 20, 2010
WhiteCollarCrime wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for the data.
When a country goes to war there is usually many underlining reasons for it and not made known to the public.
Why hasn't the USSR or USA invaded Cuba?
Is it probable that there is no oil there?
Why did the Soviets recently invade Georgia?
Is it probable that there is oil there?
----------
Good question, VDubya. Cuba has massive oil reserves.

Here, main-stream, foreign, and independent all agree.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14095881/

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/oct/18/c...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7675234.stm

http://www.counterpunch.org/lindorff10212008....

Russia didn't invade Georgia for its' oil reserves, VDubya.

Can't find any reference to it having any. It imports its natural gas from Russia and Azerbaijan, preferring to lessen its dependency on Russian oil.

Geo-politics may be at play, however.

do a search on "Georgia" in this document, for its importance.

http://www.usembassy.it/pdf/other/RS21190.pdf

BP seems to have an interest, topically, for Europe, anyway:

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2008/08...

And the Christian Science Monitor view, as radical as they are:

http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/2008/0816...

The 1,100-mile Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) pipeline provides only about 1 percent of the global demand for oil. But, as Prof. Michael Klare of Amherst College notes: "There's not a lot of spare [crude oil] capacity" in the world.

In the long-running struggle for control of Caspian oil and gas and influence in the ex-Soviet states of that region, the clash has been a blow to US clout.

"The Russians come out of this as winning this round," says Professor Klare. "They are the power brokers in this part of the world…. But there will be more skirmishes to come."

Klare, author of "Rising Powers, Shrinking Planet: The New Geopolitics of Energy," sees the conflict as "not a battle for democracy," as portrayed by Washington. "It was a battle for energy," he says.

In his State of the Union Address in 1980, President Jimmy Carter proclaimed what has become known as the "Carter doctrine." It stated that the US would use military force if necessary to defend its national interest in the Persian Gulf region. Carter saw the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan at that time as "a grave threat to the free movement of Middle East oil."

President Clinton, as Klare sees it, expanded the Carter doctrine "more or less" to include Caspian oil. The BTC pipeline, taking crude from Azerbaijan through Georgia to the Turkish port of Ceyhan, where it is loaded on tankers for the international market, was "Clinton's brainchild," says Klare.

President Bush has heated up what Klare regards as a struggle over vital resources, rather than a throwback to the cold-war era or classic balance-of-power politics. In that struggle, the US helped Mikheil Saakashvili win the presidency in Georgia after its 2003 "Rose Revolution" and helped build up and train Georgia's armed forces.

When the American-educated Saakashvili attempted to show his mettle and restore the breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia to Georgia's control, the Russians took the opportunity to show who is boss.

>>>> Your rhetoric sounds good, sometimes, VDubya, but usually 85% wrong.

“French Cocoa Party”

Since: Jan 08

Keynesian Fields

#232143 Jul 20, 2010
I don't blame the Russians, VDubya, it is their backyard.

Bush was not too bright to think that supporting Kosovo's independence from Serbia would have any effect elsewhere.

After all, should one support breakaway regions from the larger country??

“French Cocoa Party”

Since: Jan 08

Keynesian Fields

#232144 Jul 20, 2010
Beside, one could easily separate fact from fiction, VDubya. The US consumes 10 times a day what the Caspian Sea area produces.

The Caspian Sea is a 700-mile-long body of water in central Asia bordered by
Azerbaijan, Iran, Kazakhstan, Russia, and Turkmenistan. Among the five nations, only
Iran is a member of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries. Azerbaijan,
Kazakhstan, and Turkmenistan became independent when the Soviet Union dissolved in
1991. The Caspian Sea region historically has produced oil and natural gas, but the region
is considered to have large resources of oil and gas capable of much greater production.

Current Production and Proven Reserves

The Caspian Sea region presently is a significant, but not major, supplier of crude
oil to world markets, based upon estimates by BP and the Energy Information
Administration (EIA), U.S. Department of Energy.

The Caspian region produced 1.9
million barrels per day (bbls/day) including natural gas liquids in 2005, or 2% of total
world output (Table 1).1 Thirteen non-Caspian region countries each produced more than
1.9 million bbls/day in 2005. Caspian Sea region oil output has been higher, but suffered
during the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the years following. Kazakhstan, whose
production has risen rapidly since the late 1990s, accounted for 67% and Azerbaijan for
22% of regional crude oil output in 2005.

Based upon figures published by BP, Caspian Sea region oil production comes from
proven (economically recoverable) reserves of 48 billion bbls (Table 2). This equals
about 4% of total world proven reserves, and much more than BP’s figure for U.S.
reserves (29 billion bbls). EIA estimates of much larger “possible” reserves suggest a
potential for much greater production. However, as indicated by analysis later in this
report, there are obstacles to output increases both now and in the future.

The Caspian Sea region’s relative contribution to world natural gas supplies is larger
than that for oil. Its gas production of 3.0 trillion cubic feet per year (tcf/yr) in 2005 was
3% of world output. As with oil, gas production has been higher, but suffered during the
Soviet Union’s collapse and the following years. Turkmenistan is the largest producer;
with production of 2.0 tcf/yr, it accounts for almost two-thirds of the region’s gas output.

http://www.usembassy.it/pdf/other/RS21190.pdf

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Terrorism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News 2016 GOP Hopefuls Hold Fire After Drone Disclos... 2 hr Le Jimbo 25
News Muslims made unwelcome as times toughen (Oct '10) 6 hr Republican 96
News 6 from Minnesota charged with trying to join Is... 9 hr JCJ 17
News Why should Australians fear from Muslims? (Dec '07) 19 hr Serpent 46,827
News Yemen's defiant Shiite rebels press their offen... Apr 23 Jeff Brightone 1
News Canada's PM Reaffirms Commitment to Israel Apr 23 Wally 1
News IS and the IRA - a comparison Apr 22 James 1
More from around the web