Off Topic Iraq Evidence

Question:

euroman2…@aol.com (Euro man2003) wrote in news:20021209013700.06052.00000171@mb-fq.aol.com: > It is a well known fact that had the western world not found the oil > for the Saudis

euh shouldn’t that be "…found the Saudi oil source for the West " Toan

Response:

tonyjef…@aol.com (tonyjeffs) wrote in message <news:ede7dcf1.0212080619.39f71bdd@posting.google.com>… > I understand more where you’re coming from with this. > So I’ll revisit.

<… > > > 2. France and Russia at odds with USA over recent UN requirements. > > > France and Russia happen to be the countries with contracts to drill > > > in Iraq. > > > USA happens to be the country that was spurned by Iraq & doesn’t have > > > such contracts, & would like to. > "Pelican" <pelican_s…@yahoo.com> wrote in message <news:9SoI9.1546$Y86.217@news2.central.cox.net>… > > {boggle}

For anyone who still genuinely doesn’t believe it’s about oil, see this site for a quote from Russia http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?objectID=35B8848E-C28B-401B-8C26A2… "Russian government sources say that Baghdad’s cancellation of a huge oil contract has removed one of Moscow’s main reasons for opposing military action against Iraq. " etc Tony

Response:

>>It’s a well-known fact that if we want Iraqi oil contracts we could simply

ask for them. We could even dictate far more favorable terms for ourselves.<< It is a well known fact that had the western world not found the oil for the Saudis and the rest that they’d still be the way they are except poorer. The west gave them the ability for prosperity. In return, they nationalised the oil and act as badly towards their people as the worst executives of corporate America. Euro Man2003

Response:

euroman2…@aol.com (Euro man2003) wrote in news:20021209013304.06052.00000170@mb-fq.aol.com: >> I’m not sure why you hate America so much for trying to save the western > world again.

Hi Euroman, I wasn’t suggesting you had misquoted me. I was referring to the above comment which implies that I must have that opinion.. Anyone reading your line above would mistakenly believe that I hate America, and that’d be your fault. …But I admit I was being picky. I don’t hate America. Where would I be without Rock & Roll, Tamla Motown? Where’d the Beatles be without it? Marvel & DC comics Some great movies. I haven’t even decided 100% that their foreign policy is wrong, although I’m leaning in that direction. All that I am confident about is that the USA is desperate to get a long- term grip on Middle Eastern oil, and it has nothing to do with human rights, and that in totality is what the likely US war is all about. Whether that’s wrong or not is something I’m saving for later. ………… Can we agree a peace treaty here if its ok with you?. I’ll be less picky, I was thinking about stuff you said today. You represent the views of a lot of people, so I would like to understand exactly why you think what you do about my comments. So – and this isn’t to try and catch me out or start an argument – quote it if I stray. Can I ask you some short answer questions, and then ask you again about some of them, maybe quote you some government stuff at you or oil business stuff and try and change your mind? Not a competition – I want to understand your point of view. Could you answer along the lines of "Agree" "disagree" "dont-know" "dont-care" "not-relevant" -anything short- to the following statements? Very grateful. I’ll owe you a beer. 1.The USA has 30 billion barrels of proven oil reserves yet to be extracted from under the ground or under the sea 2.In addition, the US geological survey team predicts that there is a reasonable possibility of another 12billion barrels yet to be proven. 3.There is not likely to be more USA oil than this. 4. The USA uses 7 billion barrels of oil per year. 5. The USA imports about 2/3 of its oil. 6. Much of the world we know fairly accurately how much oil there is, but there are still some places we don’t. Antartica, southern Iraq, parts of Eastern Europe. 7. The whole world has 1200 Billion barrels of oil proved, and the same again speculative 8. The whole world uses about 30 billion Barrels per year. 9. We are so advanced today that although there will be small discoveries, we know enough about the geology of the world to be reasonably accurate in our predictions of the total quantity of oil. 10. Oil is pretty useful stuff. If we couldnt get it out the ground, we’d have to make it maybe from vegetable crops. 11. It’d cost much more to distil it than to suck it out the ground. Maybe twenty times as much (These stats don’t relate to heavy oil or shale oil)

Response:

>From: "smartarse" smart.a…@ntlworld.com >America! America does nothing unless it

helps America. I’d be a little careful with that broad a statement. Can you say "Somalia?" That may have been America at it’s "best." "Bosnia?" We had little to gain there either. But Iraq? I could argue both sides of that issue–till my brain ground to a halt. The real answer may lie in "mixed motive." Anyone who presumes to "know" the actual "answer," is simply arguing from a particular "position." Bear one thing in mind "smartarse," Americans are hardly cohesive on this or any other particular issue )) We never, in fact, speak with a single voice. Dissent are us-’n-stuff–and I hope it stays that way. RHaj

Response:

Tone, I’d be "grateful" if you don’t YELL AT ME to not do something again. I reread the below and I don’t see where I misquoted you. I drew some conclusion and some charges, but I didn’t misquote you. I am pasting the message below for you to explain to me where I am not correct. I am making an assumption that you disagree that Saddam Hussein is a madman who would destroy the Western world in a heartbeat. My reason: because to argue against getting him out of there now while we can is in the interest of the Western World, regardless of whether we can find the hidden evidence in an area the size of Texas. Euro man2003 > 5. USA is currently using desparate tactics to undermine the credibility of

the UN, and of Iraq’s efforts to co-perate<< > The UN is a disgrace. Its participants are primarily dictatorships and its

sole existence now is to extract wealth from the US. They even have the nerve to talk of a UN World Tax. > I’m not sure why you hate America so much for trying to save the western

world again. > If you continue to hamper their efforts in the war on terrorism by foolishly

believeing that a mass murderer is welcomed in civil society, they maybe you think the Syrian dictator belongs on the UN human rights commission too. > Euro Man2003

Hi Euroman. I’d be grateful if you don’t associate quotes from me with unrelated propaganda from you, as it gives a false view of what I said, and a false view of what I think. DONT DO IT AGAIN Where are you really from Euroman? [again, a place where your ancestoral English relatives sotod by in silence as your countrymen slaughtered my relatives in a genocide]. Tony

Response:

Euroman asked for evidence that the USA’s interest in Iraq is about oil. 1. Motive. The US is seriously low on oil reserves. (Check BP.com for details of proved reserves. Check US Geological Survey for speculative reserves. Check any published data. Check any other oil site for corroboration. 2. France and Russia at odds with USA over recent UN requirements. France and Russia happen to be the countries with contracts to drill in Iraq. USA happens to be the country that was spurned by Iraq & doesn’t have such contracts, & would like to. 3. Suspicious behaviour. Why have the USA & UKsuddenly taken an interest in Iraq’s 1988 human rights violations? Amnesty International highlighted this when it was going on – when it mattered!!- but these two nations weren’t interested. Why are they interested 14 years later? 4. Despite repeated claims and allegations, the USA has not been able to provide any evidence that Iraq still has weapons of the disputed category. 5. USA is currently using desparate tactics to undermine the credibility of the UN, and of Iraq’s efforts to co-perate 6. The real burden of proof lies with the accusors, not with the defendants. For his case to be moral and valid Burning Bush has to support his claims firstly with evidence, and subsequently with proof. He hasn’t made any progress in this key regard. **Where is the evidence for the prosecution? There doesn’t appear to be any!!** Tony

Response:

5. USA is currently using desparate tactics to undermine the credibility of the UN, and of Iraq’s efforts to co-perate<< The UN is a disgrace. Its participants are primarily dictatorships and its sole existence now is to extract wealth from the US. They even have the nerve to talk of a UN World Tax. I’m not sure why you hate America so much for trying to save the western world again. If you continue to hamper their efforts in the war on terrorism by foolishly believeing that a mass murderer is welcomed in civil society, they maybe you think the Syrian dictator belongs on the UN human rights commission too. Euro Man2003

Response:

euroman2…@aol.com (Euro man2003) wrote in news:20021207002445.08987.00000153@mb-cp.aol.com: – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> 5. USA is currently using desparate tactics to undermine the > credibility of the UN, and of Iraq’s efforts to co-perate<< > The UN is a disgrace. Its participants are primarily dictatorships and > its sole existence now is to extract wealth from the US. They even > have the nerve to talk of a UN World Tax. > I’m not sure why you hate America so much for trying to save the > western world again. > If you continue to hamper their efforts in the war on terrorism by > foolishly believeing that a mass murderer is welcomed in civil > society, they maybe you think the Syrian dictator belongs on the UN > human rights commission too. > Euro Man2003

Response:

"Tonyjeffs" <iraq[remove]@tonyjeffs.com> wrote in message

news:Xns92DD5797A602Biraqremovetonyjeffsc@62.253.162.105… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> euroman2…@aol.com (Euro man2003) wrote in > news:20021207002445.08987.00000153@mb-cp.aol.com: > > 5. USA is currently using desparate tactics to undermine the > > credibility of the UN, and of Iraq’s efforts to co-perate<< > > The UN is a disgrace. Its participants are primarily dictatorships and > > its sole existence now is to extract wealth from the US. They even > > have the nerve to talk of a UN World Tax. > > I’m not sure why you hate America so much for trying to save the > > western world again. > > If you continue to hamper their efforts in the war on terrorism by > > foolishly believeing that a mass murderer is welcomed in civil > > society, they maybe you think the Syrian dictator belongs on the UN > > human rights commission too. > > Euro Man2003 > Hi Euroman. > I’d be grateful if you don’t associate quotes from me with unrelated > propaganda from you, as it gives a false view of what I said, and a false > view of what I think. > DONT DO IT AGAIN > Where are you really from Euroman? > Tony

Coming from the President who said "there ought to be limits to freedom!" America is not trying to save the western world as euroman said. I am positive it is about oil.

Response:

> 1. Motive. The US is seriously low on oil reserves. (Check BP.com for > details of proved reserves. Check US Geological Survey for > speculative reserves. > Check any published data. > Check any other oil site for corroboration.

Who in the hell cares about oil reserves? It’s far cheaper to simply replenish them from available stock than risk a destabilizing war. For cryin’ out loud, fucking Osama Bin Laden himself could be the president of Iraq and 95% of the people on this planet would think we’re still just after oil. > 2. France and Russia at odds with USA over recent UN requirements. > France and Russia happen to be the countries with contracts to drill > in Iraq. > USA happens to be the country that was spurned by Iraq & doesn’t have > such contracts, & would like to.

{boggle} It’s a well-known fact that if we want Iraqi oil contracts we could simply ask for them. We could even dictate far more favorable terms for ourselves. > 3. Suspicious behaviour. Why have the USA & UKsuddenly taken an > interest in Iraq’s 1988 human rights violations? Amnesty > International highlighted this when it was going on – when it > mattered!!- but these two nations weren’t interested. Why are they > interested 14 years later?

It’s a small piece of the puzzle. A better question is why Amnesty International has chosen to ignore the substance of the UK’s report on Saddam’s torture, genocide and human rights violations and instead lambaste it as politically motivated. Sure it’s partly politically motivated – does that change the fact that it’s true? Or is AI simply pissed that they’re not in the lead this time? > 5. USA is currently using desparate tactics to undermine the > credibility of the UN, and of Iraq’s efforts to co-perate

Uh … yeah, Iraq’s efforts to cooperate. That’s why the final declaration report says they have no WMD. That’s real cooperation there, sparky. > 6. The real burden of proof lies with the accusors, not with the > defendants. > For his case to be moral and valid Burning Bush has to support his > claims firstly with evidence, and subsequently with proof. He hasn’t > made any progress in this key regard.

Are you kidding me? The entire fucking planet knows that Hussein has repeatedly lied, knows that defectors have provided specific and detailed testimoney as to what he’s been up to, and you’re telling me this crap? Newsflash, genius: people don’t oppose removing Hussein, they don’t doubt Hussein is guilty of what’s been accused, they simply oppose using force to oust him, and they do so out of fear of the ramifications – not out of specific objection to military action in and of itself. > **Where is the evidence for the prosecution? There doesn’t appear to be

any!!** It’s not a court of law.

Response:

"Pelican" <pelican_s…@yahoo.com> wrote in message <news:9SoI9.1546$Y86.217@news2.central.cox.net>… > > **Where is the evidence for the prosecution? There doesn’t appear to be > any!!** > It’s not a court of law.

I guess you don’t need any evidence then. Tony

Response:

"Pelican" <pelican_s…@yahoo.com> wrote in news:9SoI9.1546$Y86.217@news2.central.cox.net: > Who in the hell cares about oil reserves? It’s far cheaper to simply > replenish them from available stock than risk a destabilizing war.

Just to clarify. Reserves are what you have buried under the ground. When they run out, you don’t have any available stock. Tone

Response:

I understand more where you’re coming from with this. So I’ll revisit. "Pelican" <pelican_s…@yahoo.com> wrote in message <news:9SoI9.1546$Y86.217@news2.central.cox.net>… > > 1. Motive. The US is seriously low on oil reserves. (Check BP.com for > > details of proved reserves. Check US Geological Survey for > > speculative reserves. > > Check any published data. > > Check any other oil site for corroboration. > Who in the hell cares about oil reserves? It’s far cheaper to simply > replenish them from available stock than risk a destabilizing war.

The US government cares GREATLY about oil reserves, and all the western governments, because they only have a few years of home-grown oil left. After that we’re entirely dependant on imports. The Gulf states care about oil reserves because unlike industries like farming, the oil industry has a very finite life. Once it’s gone, they have nothing to leave their children. > > 2. France and Russia at odds with USA over recent UN requirements. > > France and Russia happen to be the countries with contracts to drill > > in Iraq. > > USA happens to be the country that was spurned by Iraq & doesn’t have > > such contracts, & would like to. > {boggle} It’s a well-known fact that if we want Iraqi oil contracts we > could simply ask for them. We could even dictate far more favorable terms > for ourselves.

I think you misunderstood me – my fault for lack of detail. I’m not referring to contracts to BUY oil. I’m talking about contracts to DRILL for oil in Iraq. The US is persona non gratis in this regard. > > 3. Suspicious behaviour. Why have the USA & UKsuddenly taken an > > interest in Iraq’s 1988 human rights violations? Amnesty > > International highlighted this when it was going on – when it > > mattered!!- but these two nations weren’t interested. Why are they > > interested 14 years later? > It’s a small piece of the puzzle. A better question is why Amnesty > International has chosen to ignore the substance of the UK’s report on > Saddam’s torture, genocide and human rights violations and instead lambaste > it as politically motivated. Sure it’s partly politically motivated – does > that change the fact that it’s true? Or is AI simply pissed that they’re > not in the lead this time?

Amnesty International (AI) isn’t ignoring it. They’re making a huge deal of it. They’re particularly annoyed that when it suits the US UK governments, they use AI as a political pawn to justify a war. Amnesty International has a lot of higher profile campaigns going. Poverty in Russia, Chechnya, abuses in Africa, for example, but the US & UK aren’t interested in those campaigns. the only one they ‘care’ about right now is Iraq. > > 5. USA is currently using desparate tactics to undermine the > > credibility of the UN, and of Iraq’s efforts to co-perate > Uh … yeah, Iraq’s efforts to cooperate. That’s why the final declaration > report says they have no WMD. That’s real cooperation there, sparky.

Do you have any evidence to the contrary? The weapons inspectors have asked repeatedly for information from the US so they can investigate, but the US haven’t delivered as yet. Makes one wonder if anyone has any evidence. > > 6. The real burden of proof lies with the accusors, not with the > > defendants. > > For his case to be moral and valid Burning Bush has to support his > > claims firstly with evidence, and subsequently with proof. He hasn’t > > made any progress in this key regard. > Are you kidding me? The entire fucking planet knows that Hussein has > repeatedly lied, knows that defectors have provided specific and detailed > testimoney as to what he’s been up to, and you’re telling me this crap?

If you track down UK or US defectors, they’ll speak badly of their homeland too. That’s why they defect. > Newsflash, genius: people don’t oppose removing Hussein,

Which people? Bush & Blair? Who? >they don’t doubt > Hussein is guilty of what’s been accused,

Which aacusation? Human rights abuses? Hiding nuclear weapons in people’s houses? Making the report to short/long? Be more specific. they simply oppose using force to > oust him,

Who do you mean? Yourself? and they do so out of fear of the ramifications – not out of > specific objection to military action in and of itself.

No you’re wrong. There is a whole spectrum of public opinion. I’m sure there are some people that agree with you, but most have their own views. > > **Where is the evidence for the prosecution? There doesn’t appear to be > any!!** > It’s not a court of law.

I guess you don’t need evidence then!! Tony

Response:

Filed under: Human Rights

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

TrackBack URL | RSS feed for comments on this post.

Activism Change

Learn, read, react :: Activism