|
Libya Situation (pg. 56)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| DJ RANN |
Bull. I railed you so hard you completely disappeared from the thread entirely (not to mention other picking up on how you were getting it) and then PKC argued until I posted sources, then it became obvious we were splitting hairs on the same subject. He asked for proof, I gave it to him, and the more I gave to him and elaborated, the more he said "well I didn't think of that aspect". I've never changed my point about this war or that one, so don't even try it.
As for your point, learn to read your own sources you utter pleb
| quote: | Originally posted by The17sss
Pentagon spokesman Col. Dave Lapan said the jets were assigned to NATO and are operating under NATO command. |
yet.....
| quote: | Originally posted by The17sss
Libya rebels urge U.S. to bring back bombers
|
Man, you gotta do better than that or this is going to end like it did last time for you :haha: |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| I’d just like to point out that even though I didn’t think of “oil consultancy” I still think the argument that bush went into Iraq for personal financial gain is quite, quite ridiculous and also bereft of supporting evidence as far as actual motivation goes. |
|
|
| igottaknow |
| bush is the biggest jack wagon president we've ever had. he doesn't need a well thought out reason for doing something stupid. he said in an interview years later that even if he knew they didn't have nuclear weapons program he still have invaded. |
|
|
| Hot&Cold |
That is a god damned lie and you know it!
George W has done more for this country than any of you so-called experts here! The Bushes are a godsend to this country, and you are all idiots for failing to comprehend that. |
|
|
| DJ RANN |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
I’d just like to point out that even though I didn’t think of “oil consultancy” I still think the argument that bush went into Iraq for personal financial gain is quite, quite ridiculous and also bereft of supporting evidence as far as actual motivation goes. |
WTF? You . Don't back track now. I've shown the huge and far reaching financial benefits for going to war against Iraq, from the consulting, to the security, to the infrastructure, to the logistics, and that's not even talking about defense money.
Again, amongst your three main reasons for going to war is "reducing US dependence on Hostile Oil", yet I'm the one saying it was for financial gain, and I'm the fool? Give me a ing break.
I said Bush (along with a small group of very powerful republicans) had clear and direct financial gains from going in to Iraq. That is true as per the links to his families and others (cheyney included) and as posted, Exxon now got the first of the foreign contracts, something that simply would not have happened prior to the invasion.
So deal with it and wake up. |
|
|
| Hot&Cold |
| The US went to war with Iraq because they are paid by the jews to do so. Derrrrrp. Morons. THe lot of you. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ RANN
WTF? You . Don't back track now. |
Im not backtracking. My opinion hasn’t changed. I admitted I didn’t consider oil consultancy, and that’s it. I spoke up to ensure that nobody is under the impression that I agree with your conspiracies.
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ RANN
I've shown the huge and far reaching financial benefits for going to war against Iraq, from the consulting, to the security, to the infrastructure, to the logistics, and that's not even talking about defense money. |
And all that does is prove that privatised warfare and reconstruction is expensive. It doesn’t prove anything about the motivations for war.
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ RANN
Again, amongst your three main reasons for going to war is "reducing US dependence on Hostile Oil", yet I'm the one saying it was for financial gain, and I'm the fool? Give me a ing break. |
Which is a strategic concern, not a “my family gets all the oil $$, yippee!!” george bush concern.
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ RANN
I said Bush (along with a small group of very powerful republicans) had clear and direct financial gains from going in to Iraq. That is true as per the links to his families and others (cheyney included) and as posted, Exxon now got the first of the foreign contracts, something that simply would not have happened prior to the invasion. |
Exxon didn’t get the first foreign contract. It got the first contract awarded to the US. |
|
|
| Comrade Stalin |
| quote: | Originally posted by Hot&Cold
That is a god damned lie and you know it!
George W has done more for this country than any of you so-called experts here! The Bushes are a godsend to this country, and you are all idiots for failing to comprehend that. |
A chimp would find it hard taking you seriously. |
|
|
| Hot&Cold |
| quote: | Originally posted by Comrade Stalin
A chimp would find it hard taking you seriously. |
I would imagine so.
Even though that both species of chimpanzees are the sister group to the modern human lineage, I highly doubt they have the ability to measure the level of seriousness a human exhibits through speech.
A rhesus macaque however... |
|
|
| DJ RANN |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
Im not backtracking. My opinion hasn’t changed. I admitted I didn’t consider oil consultancy, and that’s it. I spoke up to ensure that nobody is under the impression that I agree with your conspiracies.
|
Nor any of the other things that I've listed as being obvious financial incentives for going to war.
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
And all that does is prove that privatised warfare and reconstruction is expensive. It doesn’t prove anything about the motivations for war.
|
Read what you just wrote. "Privatised warfare"; using US tax dollars to par for a war; Using the premise of war to massively expand defense spending that hugely benefited private companies, not to mention oil companies that are now able to operate in Iraq.
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
Which is a strategic concern, not a “my family gets all the oil $$, yippee!!” george bush concern.
|
I never said that, so don't dumb it down to for your own twisted and divisive version of my argument. However, I've already provided multiple links and published sources showing that Bush and Cheyney (personally) benefited financially on a a huge scale from going to war, both in terms of their oil and defense wealth interests.
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
Exxon didn’t get the first foreign contract. It got the first contract awarded to the US. |
Valid point, I should have been more clear.
@Hot&cold - seriously lame troll attempt. Try harder or off. |
|
|
| srussell0018 |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
|
| quote: | | Originally posted by DJ RANN |
Kiss. |
|
|
| The17sss |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ RANN
Bull. I railed you so hard you completely disappeared from the thread entirely (not to mention other picking up on how you were getting it) and then PKC argued until I posted sources, then it became obvious we were splitting hairs on the same subject. He asked for proof, I gave it to him, and the more I gave to him and elaborated, the more he said "well I didn't think of that aspect". I've never changed my point about this war or that one, so don't even try it.
As for your point, learn to read your own sources you utter pleb
yet.....
Man, you gotta do better than that or this is going to end like it did last time for you :haha: |
My god you are the dumbest piece of I've ever seen. First of all, I didn't vanish due to your "fabulously fabulous" winning arguments... I merely sat back and watched PKC take over, since you two started getting into it.
YOUR WORDS : | quote: | | You can suppose whatever you want about the future but the USA as of right now has zero assetts active in Libya. |
Doesn't matter if "the jets were assigned to NATO and are operating under their command"... THEY ARE U.S. JETS, THEREFORE U.S. ASSETS, FLOWN BY U.S. PILOTS. They are just "under someone else's command."
And it doesn't matter that "Libya rebels urged the U.S. to bring back bombers". The reason doesn't matter- THE BOMBERS ARE U.S. BOMBERS, THEREFORE U.S. ASSETS that you so smugly instructed me were no longer part of the mission.
Did you not read this passage either? | quote: | | While officials may claim American is taking a back seat in the campaign, U.S. jets have attacked Libyan targets three times in the last 10 days. Add in aerial refueling, reconnaissance and electronic jamming missions and the U.S. is flying 35 percent of all the NATO missions. |
ZERO ASSETS huh? "In and out of there" huh? Who's the ing pleb!? Man I've never seen anyone so ing wrong act so confidently that they are right. Wow... what a useless you are. |
|
|
|
|
