how? coz looks like Job cant be finished by the most technologically advanced nation in the world
How can America get out of Iraq?
- Thread starter GAMETHEORY
- Start date
The answer is a bigger war.
You mean by annexing southern Iraq to Kuweit and creating a Kurdistan state in the north?
It can't.
Capturing a State is relatively easy in comparison to holding on to it and trying to police people who don't want you over there!
The only way you can win is to either kill all the people that are against you or to change their opinions towards you!
The way things are over at Iraq, their opinions are getting worse towards this country and the US is doing nothing to make them better!
The only way you can win is to either kill all the people that are against you or to change their opinions towards you!
The way things are over at Iraq, their opinions are getting worse towards this country and the US is doing nothing to make them better!
Last edited:
Same way they got in!!!LIE!!!!!!
If America wanted out of Iraq, they'd just leave, much as they left Somalia. They don't want to leave Iraq; they just want the bad press to stop. Let's hope the public doesn't get distracted and the media move on before some peaceful solution is found.
RoadRage said:
co-sign
I hate to agree with Donald Trump, but fuck it declare victory and get the fuck out, and let God sort it all out, shoulda left Saddam there, all we did was make the inevitable come earlier, so fuck it, transform, and roll out
Sometimes back in my mind i hate to admit that there is no reason to think that America wants to get out of Iraq. I mean why do you think they are there in the first place? As long as the formula that the US has taken over from Israel of 10 dead Arabs equals one dead member of the "civilized world" holds true, the US will stay. They'll start to get worried when it goes to 5:1.
War????? What war??? We are watching NBA playoffs, have fun at spring break etc.........
that's not a war and America is going nowhere.........
Cheney had Iraq in sights two years ago
By Simon English in New York
Last Updated: 12:26am BST 22/07/2003
Documents released under America's Freedom of Information Act reveal that an energy task force led by vice-president Dick Cheney was examining Iraq's oil assets two years before the latest war began.
The papers were obtained after a long battle with the White House by Judicial Watch, a conservative legal charity that opposes government secrecy and which is suing for the dealings of the task force to be made public.
The emergence of the documents could fuel claims that America's war in Iraq had as much to do with oil as national security. It also indicates that the Bush administration is beginning to lose the battle to keep its internal workings secret.
The 16 pages, dated March 2001, show maps of Iraq oil fields, pipelines, refineries and terminals. A document titled Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts is also included, listing which countries were keen to do business with Saddam's regime.
Judicial Watch requested the papers two years ago as part of its investigation into links between the Bush administration and senior energy executives including Enron's former chairman Ken Lay.
Mr Cheney has fought the release of the documents at every stage. A court ordered two weeks ago that at least some of the task force's working papers should be made public.
Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton said: "People will draw their own conclusions about the documents, but that is what an open society is about. Given the delay in their release, the Bush administration clearly did not want them to come out."
A spokesman for Mr Cheney did not return calls yesterday. The US Commerce Department said in a statement: "It is the responsibility of the Commerce Department to serve as a commercial liaison for US companies doing business around the world, including those that develop and utilise energy resources. The Energy Task Force evaluated regions of the world that are vital to global energy supply."
Judicial Watch isn't claiming that the documents are proof of any particular intent but say they should be open to public scrutiny.
Mr Fitton said: "Opponents of the war will point to the documents as evidence that the Bush administration was after Iraqi oil. Supporters will say the energy task force would have been remiss if it did not take Iraq's oil into account."
Nevertheless, the documents represent a surprising development. Until now it had been assumed that the US government was stonewalling over the energy task force papers because they would show the extent to which major party benefactors, including Enron, effectively wrote national energy policy.
Judicial Watch and other watchdogs are now curious what else may be revealed. A court ordered the government to comply with the Freedom of Information Act and give up these documents more than a year ago. Judicial Watch said it could not explain why the papers were suddenly released. A government spokesman declined to elaborate.
Maps of oil fields and pipelines in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates and a list of energy development projects in those two countries are also included.
Mr Cheney argues that his consultations with the energy industry should be private so that all parties can speak freely. A US court recently described this invoking of executive privilege "extraordinary" and "drastic".
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/07/22/wcheny22.xml
that's not a war and America is going nowhere.........
Cheney had Iraq in sights two years ago
By Simon English in New York
Last Updated: 12:26am BST 22/07/2003
Documents released under America's Freedom of Information Act reveal that an energy task force led by vice-president Dick Cheney was examining Iraq's oil assets two years before the latest war began.
The papers were obtained after a long battle with the White House by Judicial Watch, a conservative legal charity that opposes government secrecy and which is suing for the dealings of the task force to be made public.
The emergence of the documents could fuel claims that America's war in Iraq had as much to do with oil as national security. It also indicates that the Bush administration is beginning to lose the battle to keep its internal workings secret.
The 16 pages, dated March 2001, show maps of Iraq oil fields, pipelines, refineries and terminals. A document titled Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts is also included, listing which countries were keen to do business with Saddam's regime.
Judicial Watch requested the papers two years ago as part of its investigation into links between the Bush administration and senior energy executives including Enron's former chairman Ken Lay.
Mr Cheney has fought the release of the documents at every stage. A court ordered two weeks ago that at least some of the task force's working papers should be made public.
Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton said: "People will draw their own conclusions about the documents, but that is what an open society is about. Given the delay in their release, the Bush administration clearly did not want them to come out."
A spokesman for Mr Cheney did not return calls yesterday. The US Commerce Department said in a statement: "It is the responsibility of the Commerce Department to serve as a commercial liaison for US companies doing business around the world, including those that develop and utilise energy resources. The Energy Task Force evaluated regions of the world that are vital to global energy supply."
Judicial Watch isn't claiming that the documents are proof of any particular intent but say they should be open to public scrutiny.
Mr Fitton said: "Opponents of the war will point to the documents as evidence that the Bush administration was after Iraqi oil. Supporters will say the energy task force would have been remiss if it did not take Iraq's oil into account."
Nevertheless, the documents represent a surprising development. Until now it had been assumed that the US government was stonewalling over the energy task force papers because they would show the extent to which major party benefactors, including Enron, effectively wrote national energy policy.
Judicial Watch and other watchdogs are now curious what else may be revealed. A court ordered the government to comply with the Freedom of Information Act and give up these documents more than a year ago. Judicial Watch said it could not explain why the papers were suddenly released. A government spokesman declined to elaborate.
Maps of oil fields and pipelines in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates and a list of energy development projects in those two countries are also included.
Mr Cheney argues that his consultations with the energy industry should be private so that all parties can speak freely. A US court recently described this invoking of executive privilege "extraordinary" and "drastic".
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/07/22/wcheny22.xml
As silly as this comment is it almost makes sense. They lied their way in, why not have Bush lie the US out of there. The whole war has been nothing but a lie to begin with.hanginbals said:
Simply have Bush stand in front of another "Mission Accomplished" sign maybe in Bagdad this time (instead of an aircraft carrier) and start troop withdrawls. This should be easy for Bush his entire career has been about nothing but lies and failures.
The truth is there's no easy way out of there.
Mo-Better said:As silly as this comment is it almost makes sense. They lied their way in, why not have Bush lie the US out of there. The whole war has been nothing but a lie to begin with.
Simply have Bush stand in front of another "Mission Accomplished" sign maybe in Bagdad this time (instead of an aircraft carrier) and start troop withdrawls. This should be easy for Bush his entire career has been about nothing but lies and failures.
The truth is there's no easy way out of there.
See if you acknowledged that they lied to get in without questioning why, then you have fallen for the trap.
It would have mean't that you gave the lie some credibility.
However if you search for the real reason then America is not leaving there no time soon.
Energy must be secured.
Get it????
By any means necessary!!!!
For George W Bush certainly it has become his own private Tar Baby which he can neither hide nor abandon. The bellicose arrogance of his carefully farmed school of warmongers at home, coupled with the normal human intransigence of "foreigners" with their own independent minds, hearts, and hopes for the future, collide in a maelstrom which has been called "the whirpool of time."
If he escalates, the American electorate will eventually realise they've been "had" into creating another Vietnam, as the "enemy" can never simply roll over and play dead -- the only behaviour acceptable to US warmongers. If he withdraws, the warmongers he has courted and inflamed with a mindless passion for military savagery will crucify him on a cross of napalm. He's literally caught between his own fundamentalists at home and the fundamentalists (both Islamic and Judaic) abroad.
I am still wondering what if J.HANS MORGENTHAU was alive today, what would he say?
If he escalates, the American electorate will eventually realise they've been "had" into creating another Vietnam, as the "enemy" can never simply roll over and play dead -- the only behaviour acceptable to US warmongers. If he withdraws, the warmongers he has courted and inflamed with a mindless passion for military savagery will crucify him on a cross of napalm. He's literally caught between his own fundamentalists at home and the fundamentalists (both Islamic and Judaic) abroad.
I am still wondering what if J.HANS MORGENTHAU was alive today, what would he say?
Maps and Charts of Iraqi Oil Fields
http://www.judicialwatch.org/iraqi-oil-maps.shtml
Do you abandon a robbery in progress????? You are still going to go to jail...................
[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]These are documents turned over by the Commerce Department, under a March 5, 2002 court order as a result of Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit concerning the activities of the Cheney Energy Task Force. The documents contain a map of Iraqi oilfields, pipelines, refineries and terminals, as well as 2 charts detailing Iraqi oil and gas projects, and “Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts.” The documents are dated March 2001. Click here to view the press release.[/font]
- [font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Iraq Oil Map[/font]
- [font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts - Part 1[/font]
- [font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts - Part 2[/font]
- [font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]United Arab Emirates Oil Map[/font]
- [font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]United Arab Emirates: Major Oil and Natural Gas Development Projects[/font]
- [font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Saudi Arabia Oil Map[/font]
- [font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Saudi Arabia: Major Oil and Natural Gas Development Projects[/font]
http://www.judicialwatch.org/iraqi-oil-maps.shtml
Do you abandon a robbery in progress????? You are still going to go to jail...................
Halliburton operates in Iran despite sanctions How do U.S. contractors legally do business there?
By Lisa Myers & the NBC investigative unit
Updated: 9:24 p.m. PT March 7, 2005
function UpdateTimeStamp(pdt) { var n = document.getElementById("udtD"); if(pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) { var dt = new DateTime(); pdt = dt.T2D(pdt); if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S(pdt,(('false'.toLowerCase()=='false')?false:true));} } } UpdateTimeStamp('632458562673230000');
It's just another Halliburton oil and gas operation. The company name is emblazoned everywhere: On trucks, equipment, large storage silos and workers' uniforms.
But this isn't Texas. It's Iran. U.S. companies aren't supposed to do business here.
Yet, in January, Halliburton won a contract to drill at a huge Iranian gas field called Pars, which an Iranian government spokesman said "served the interests" of Iran.
"I am baffled that any American company would want to have employees operating in Iran," says Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine. "I would think they'd be ashamed."
Halliburton says the operation — videotaped by NBC News — is entirely legal. It's run by a subsidiary called "Halliburton Products and Services Limited," based outside the U.S. In fact, the law allows foreign subsidiaries of U.S. corporations to do business in Iran under strict conditions.
Other U.S. oil services companies, like Weatherford and Baker Hughes, also are in Iran. And foreign subsidiaries of NBC's parent company, General Electric, have sold equipment to Iran, though the company says it will make no more sales. (MSNBC is a Microsoft-NBC joint venture.)
Still, Halliburton stands out because its operations in Iran are now under a federal criminal investigation. Government sources say the focus is on whether the company set out to illegally evade the sanctions imposed ten years ago.
"I am formally announcing my intention to cut off all trade and investment with Iran," announced President Bill Clinton in 1995.
Sources close to the Halliburton investigation tell NBC News that after that announcement, Halliburton decided that business with Iran, then conducted through at least five companies, would all be done through a subsidiary incorporated in the Cayman Islands.
"It's gotten around the sanctions and the very spirit and reasons for the sanctions," says Victor Comras, a former State Department expert on sanctions.
For Halliburton to have done this legally, the foreign subsidiary operating in Iran must be independent of the main operation in Texas. Yet, when an NBC producer approached managers in Iran, he was sent to company officials in Dubai. But they said only Halliburton headquarters in Houston could talk about operations in Iran. Still, Halliburton maintains its Iran subsidiary does make independent business decisions.
Why should Americans even care if U.S. companies circumvent the sanctions?
"The purpose of these sanctions is to dissuade Iran from supporting terrorism and from seeking to acquire weapons of mass destruction," says Comras.
There's a move in Congress to close the loophole.
"We don't want American companies propping up a government that's dedicated to our destruction," says Sen. Collins.
Halliburton says it is unfairly targeted because of politics, but recently announced it is pulling out of Iran because the business environment "is not conducive to our overall strategies and objectives."
However, that exit will be slow. Halliburton announced it was leaving Iran only three weeks after Iran announced the lucrative new gas deal, which industry sources say will take three years to complete.
All the show boating is for the US population.
Behind the scenes, it goes down............
By Lisa Myers & the NBC investigative unit
Updated: 9:24 p.m. PT March 7, 2005
function UpdateTimeStamp(pdt) { var n = document.getElementById("udtD"); if(pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) { var dt = new DateTime(); pdt = dt.T2D(pdt); if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S(pdt,(('false'.toLowerCase()=='false')?false:true));} } } UpdateTimeStamp('632458562673230000');
It's just another Halliburton oil and gas operation. The company name is emblazoned everywhere: On trucks, equipment, large storage silos and workers' uniforms.
But this isn't Texas. It's Iran. U.S. companies aren't supposed to do business here.
Yet, in January, Halliburton won a contract to drill at a huge Iranian gas field called Pars, which an Iranian government spokesman said "served the interests" of Iran.
"I am baffled that any American company would want to have employees operating in Iran," says Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine. "I would think they'd be ashamed."
Halliburton says the operation — videotaped by NBC News — is entirely legal. It's run by a subsidiary called "Halliburton Products and Services Limited," based outside the U.S. In fact, the law allows foreign subsidiaries of U.S. corporations to do business in Iran under strict conditions.
Other U.S. oil services companies, like Weatherford and Baker Hughes, also are in Iran. And foreign subsidiaries of NBC's parent company, General Electric, have sold equipment to Iran, though the company says it will make no more sales. (MSNBC is a Microsoft-NBC joint venture.)
Still, Halliburton stands out because its operations in Iran are now under a federal criminal investigation. Government sources say the focus is on whether the company set out to illegally evade the sanctions imposed ten years ago.
"I am formally announcing my intention to cut off all trade and investment with Iran," announced President Bill Clinton in 1995.
Sources close to the Halliburton investigation tell NBC News that after that announcement, Halliburton decided that business with Iran, then conducted through at least five companies, would all be done through a subsidiary incorporated in the Cayman Islands.
"It's gotten around the sanctions and the very spirit and reasons for the sanctions," says Victor Comras, a former State Department expert on sanctions.
For Halliburton to have done this legally, the foreign subsidiary operating in Iran must be independent of the main operation in Texas. Yet, when an NBC producer approached managers in Iran, he was sent to company officials in Dubai. But they said only Halliburton headquarters in Houston could talk about operations in Iran. Still, Halliburton maintains its Iran subsidiary does make independent business decisions.
Why should Americans even care if U.S. companies circumvent the sanctions?
"The purpose of these sanctions is to dissuade Iran from supporting terrorism and from seeking to acquire weapons of mass destruction," says Comras.
There's a move in Congress to close the loophole.
"We don't want American companies propping up a government that's dedicated to our destruction," says Sen. Collins.
Halliburton says it is unfairly targeted because of politics, but recently announced it is pulling out of Iran because the business environment "is not conducive to our overall strategies and objectives."
However, that exit will be slow. Halliburton announced it was leaving Iran only three weeks after Iran announced the lucrative new gas deal, which industry sources say will take three years to complete.
All the show boating is for the US population.
Behind the scenes, it goes down............
The best answer for all these problems is for the US to abandon its plans to maximise exploitation of Iraqi oil and sort out its fuel dependency problems on an internal basis.
Nothing short of this kind of sea change in policy is either going to calm relationships with the Middle East or slow down inevitable world climate change.
The Middle East countries have a right to benefit from a significant increase in oil prices and this would slow the trend of global warming into the bargain.
Nothing short of this kind of sea change in policy is either going to calm relationships with the Middle East or slow down inevitable world climate change.
The Middle East countries have a right to benefit from a significant increase in oil prices and this would slow the trend of global warming into the bargain.
Similar threads
