Interesting article on our gov. screwing the people to fight their oil war.
10-19-2006, 08:37 AM
#1
the artist formerly known as mcdrama
Thread Starter
iTrader: (23)
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains, CA.
Posts: 6,428
Car Info: WRBP 2015 WRX Premium/CVT
Interesting article on our gov. screwing the people to fight their oil war.
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0...ory_page_prev2
Please read the entire 3 pages before commenting.
Please read the entire 3 pages before commenting.
10-19-2006, 09:10 AM
#2
Registered User
Join Date: May 2006
Location: I was up above it, now I'm down in it
Posts: 5,686
Car Info: New Government Motors SUV!
I'm suprissed they didn't just call it what it is, "heavy metal posioning".
I handled DU ammo for years, but I was always told to not let it come in contact with my skin. If it did, I immediatly went to go wash it off. Most of the people I served with were aware that DU is a heavy metal and it's dangerous. The Navy is slowly using up their DU ammo and replacing it with Tungstun which is just as dense (about 3 times denser than steel), but isn't classified as a heavy metal (not radioactive).
Also, I typed in depleted uranium into dictionary.com to see it's atomic wheight and compare it to tungsten. It gave me a list of links, the 2nd link being "Gulf War Syndrome". I personaly haven't heard that it was linked to heavy metal poisoning, but if I could find out accidently on dictionary.com, I don't think it's much of a secret.
I wouldn't put too much faith in that wired news website. Try and find more than one source before you worry yourself over a news artical. People are too quick to jump to conclusions.
... but yes, the war is over oil and they will never publicly admit it.
I handled DU ammo for years, but I was always told to not let it come in contact with my skin. If it did, I immediatly went to go wash it off. Most of the people I served with were aware that DU is a heavy metal and it's dangerous. The Navy is slowly using up their DU ammo and replacing it with Tungstun which is just as dense (about 3 times denser than steel), but isn't classified as a heavy metal (not radioactive).
Also, I typed in depleted uranium into dictionary.com to see it's atomic wheight and compare it to tungsten. It gave me a list of links, the 2nd link being "Gulf War Syndrome". I personaly haven't heard that it was linked to heavy metal poisoning, but if I could find out accidently on dictionary.com, I don't think it's much of a secret.
I wouldn't put too much faith in that wired news website. Try and find more than one source before you worry yourself over a news artical. People are too quick to jump to conclusions.
... but yes, the war is over oil and they will never publicly admit it.
Last edited by Superglue WRX; 10-19-2006 at 09:14 AM.
10-22-2006, 09:22 PM
#4
VIP Member
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Wherever Sucks the Most
Posts: 8,675
Car Info: 2003 WRX, 2008 Camry
If this war really is for oil, then I will never understand as we got it from Saddam for a decent price. Iraq has decent amount of oil but it's nowhere near the supplies of other countries. As i've said here before, why try and reinvent the wheel in a foreign country?
It just isn't good business to start a war for oil we already had access to. Just look at oil prices on the graph between Gulf War1 and Gulf War2. It speaks for itself. Especially considering the amount of money that goes towards fighting wars and the fact wars aren't a sure bet in the win department. The oil fields still lay crippled... Bush sure is reaping the profits, eh?
It just isn't good business to start a war for oil we already had access to. Just look at oil prices on the graph between Gulf War1 and Gulf War2. It speaks for itself. Especially considering the amount of money that goes towards fighting wars and the fact wars aren't a sure bet in the win department. The oil fields still lay crippled... Bush sure is reaping the profits, eh?
Last edited by Salty; 10-22-2006 at 09:31 PM.
10-22-2006, 10:32 PM
#5
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,556
Originally Posted by Salty
If this war really is for oil, then I will never understand as we got it from Saddam for a decent price. Iraq has decent amount of oil but it's nowhere near the supplies of other countries. As i've said here before, why try and reinvent the wheel in a foreign country?
It just isn't good business to start a war for oil we already had access to. Just look at oil prices on the graph between Gulf War1 and Gulf War2. It speaks for itself. Especially considering the amount of money that goes towards fighting wars and the fact wars aren't a sure bet in the win department. The oil fields still lay crippled... Bush sure is reaping the profits, eh?
It just isn't good business to start a war for oil we already had access to. Just look at oil prices on the graph between Gulf War1 and Gulf War2. It speaks for itself. Especially considering the amount of money that goes towards fighting wars and the fact wars aren't a sure bet in the win department. The oil fields still lay crippled... Bush sure is reaping the profits, eh?
According to that Iraq has one quarter of the worlds oil. Not to shabby if you ask me. Also I believe they have more oil the US.
10-23-2006, 11:45 AM
#6
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: UCIrvine
Posts: 3,312
Car Info: '05 Crystal Grey Metallic WRX Sport Wagon
Originally Posted by Salty
The oil fields still lay crippled... Bush sure is reaping the profits, eh?
What you say makes sense...but this admin doesn't always go for what makes sense (and you know it). More importantly, just because the war didn't end up GETTING us cheaper oil does not in any way mean that we didn't enter the war FOR cheaper oil. We already know this isn't how anyone planned the war to go...it is a failure no matter what criteria you use to judge it...so maybe the admin wanted to get cheaper oil but they f***ed up. Can't say either way, of course, but just because we didn't GET cheaper oil doesn't mean we weren't going after cheap oil.
10-23-2006, 02:09 PM
#7
VIP Member
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Wherever Sucks the Most
Posts: 8,675
Car Info: 2003 WRX, 2008 Camry
Originally Posted by MVWRX
What you say makes sense...but this admin doesn't always go for what makes sense (and you know it). More importantly, just because the war didn't end up GETTING us cheaper oil does not in any way mean that we didn't enter the war FOR cheaper oil. We already know this isn't how anyone planned the war to go...it is a failure no matter what criteria you use to judge it...so maybe the admin wanted to get cheaper oil but they f***ed up. Can't say either way, of course, but just because we didn't GET cheaper oil doesn't mean we weren't going after cheap oil.
But it just doesn't seem to add up considering who we're dealing with here... I wouldn't exactly say we're dealing non business savvy people here. If you told me Bush wrote a math or english text book i'd probably die laughing. But if you told me Cheney, Bush and the rest of his advisors made a ****ty business decision that cost millions then i'd be very skeptical.
I'll never be convinced that the war was for oil. I just doesn’t add up... but I would accept oil being a distant/mere byproduct/benefit that solely depends on the war’s outcome.
10-23-2006, 02:14 PM
#8
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: UCIrvine
Posts: 3,312
Car Info: '05 Crystal Grey Metallic WRX Sport Wagon
Originally Posted by Salty
But if you told me Cheney, Bush and the rest of his advisors made a ****ty business decision that cost millions then i'd be very skeptical.
Well...Cheney, yeah you're right...but Bush? You do remember his track record as a CEO right...
10-23-2006, 04:09 PM
#9
VIP Member
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Wherever Sucks the Most
Posts: 8,675
Car Info: 2003 WRX, 2008 Camry
Well look at it this way... Let's assume Bush made the final desicion to go despite Cheney and the rest of the admin/advisors not agreeing with him to being downright against the idea. If this were the case then were are all the whistle-blowing voices of opposition?
10-23-2006, 05:22 PM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: May 2006
Location: I was up above it, now I'm down in it
Posts: 5,686
Car Info: New Government Motors SUV!
Originally Posted by Salty
Well look at it this way... Let's assume Bush made the final desicion to go despite Cheney and the rest of the admin/advisors not agreeing with him to being downright against the idea. If this were the case then were are all the whistle-blowing voices of opposition?
And you're still looking at the short term of this. Control of 1/4 of the Earth's oil isn't going to be achieved in a few years with a poorly excecuted war. The fact that we did a poor job in following through with the objective of rebuilding Iraq was just due to poor planning... sort of like the events leading to 9/11 and the government's response to hurricane Katrina. The war just makes it a trifecta.
10-23-2006, 06:58 PM
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Northern Bay Area: Larkspur
Posts: 1,004
Car Info: 02 Silver WRX sedan. Eibach springs, Blitz NUR cat back, Rota 17" Attacks, Cobb AccessPort/DP
Just a couple of personal opinions...
Originally Posted by Superglue WRX
There's plenty of population that say this war is B.S. Oil may not be the only reason we are over there, but it is a reason.
And you're still looking at the short term of this. Control of 1/4 of the Earth's oil isn't going to be achieved in a few years with a poorly excecuted war. The fact that we did a poor job in following through with the objective of rebuilding Iraq was just due to poor planning... sort of like the events leading to 9/11 and the government's response to hurricane Katrina. The war just makes it a trifecta.
And you're still looking at the short term of this. Control of 1/4 of the Earth's oil isn't going to be achieved in a few years with a poorly excecuted war. The fact that we did a poor job in following through with the objective of rebuilding Iraq was just due to poor planning... sort of like the events leading to 9/11 and the government's response to hurricane Katrina. The war just makes it a trifecta.
The process of winning the hearts and minds of the people and establishing a self sustaining government is proving more difficult than at first anticipated. Of course the media isn't helping much. I'm sure they're pumping negativity over there as much as they are over here. Look at it this way, if every day on the news, every single fatal car accident was reported across the U.S. all day long, everyone would be against driving.
Think about how many times you hear, "IRAQ DEATH TOLL INCREASES BY TWO TODAY". Just imagine what it was like during WWII...."500 MORE AMERICAN SOLDIERS KILLED TODAY!!!".
It wasn't the Governments response to Katrina, it was the LOCAL governments **** poor preparation, planning, and follow through that allowed things to get so out of hand.
10-23-2006, 09:28 PM
#12
Registered User
Join Date: May 2006
Location: I was up above it, now I'm down in it
Posts: 5,686
Car Info: New Government Motors SUV!
Originally Posted by Chrisnonstop
The war was executed with exacting precision. I doubt any other country could have done it better. I'd say near perfection. We wiped out an entire countries military in less time than it takes me to wipe my ***.
The process of winning the hearts and minds of the people and establishing a self sustaining government is proving more difficult than at first anticipated. Of course the media isn't helping much. I'm sure they're pumping negativity over there as much as they are over here. Look at it this way, if every day on the news, every single fatal car accident was reported across the U.S. all day long, everyone would be against driving.
Think about how many times you hear, "IRAQ DEATH TOLL INCREASES BY TWO TODAY". Just imagine what it was like during WWII...."500 MORE AMERICAN SOLDIERS KILLED TODAY!!!".
It wasn't the Governments response to Katrina, it was the LOCAL governments **** poor preparation, planning, and follow through that allowed things to get so out of hand.
The process of winning the hearts and minds of the people and establishing a self sustaining government is proving more difficult than at first anticipated. Of course the media isn't helping much. I'm sure they're pumping negativity over there as much as they are over here. Look at it this way, if every day on the news, every single fatal car accident was reported across the U.S. all day long, everyone would be against driving.
Think about how many times you hear, "IRAQ DEATH TOLL INCREASES BY TWO TODAY". Just imagine what it was like during WWII...."500 MORE AMERICAN SOLDIERS KILLED TODAY!!!".
It wasn't the Governments response to Katrina, it was the LOCAL governments **** poor preparation, planning, and follow through that allowed things to get so out of hand.
The news reports what they want to report. If the exacts think the people will watch, then they report it. They know not to saturate or overstimulate the public, because we'll just loose interest in the matter. I'm not saying what they report is right or wrong, but it's whatever they feel like reporting.
And from everything I've read, and seen, heard, the local officials of New Orleans did everything they could to control the hurricane aftermath. It was the federal side that didn't take them seriously, until it was too late.
10-23-2006, 11:42 PM
#13
VIP Member
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Wherever Sucks the Most
Posts: 8,675
Car Info: 2003 WRX, 2008 Camry
Interesting read from the right: http://www.blackfive.net/main/2006/1....html#comments
I'm curious... what has obama voted on? Anyone? I'm certain he'd be better than the current administration but I wouldn't want a liberal in the White House either. No way.
I'm curious... what has obama voted on? Anyone? I'm certain he'd be better than the current administration but I wouldn't want a liberal in the White House either. No way.
10-24-2006, 01:23 AM
#15
VIP Member
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Wherever Sucks the Most
Posts: 8,675
Car Info: 2003 WRX, 2008 Camry
Not saying I wouldn't buy one a drink. I just wouldn't vote for one unless I was absolutely sure they didn't have a socialist agenda.
And btw, I meant to post that article in the Obama 2008 thread. Oh well...
And btw, I meant to post that article in the Obama 2008 thread. Oh well...
Last edited by Salty; 10-24-2006 at 01:31 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
spedmunki
Teh Politics Forum
0
09-18-2007 02:49 PM