-
ICMag with help from Landrace Warden and The Vault is running a NEW contest in November! You can check it here. Prizes are seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!
There are companies that make money out of selling weapons to usa military. There are companies that made money out of selling weapons to Iraq. These companies will now get new orders as the weapons and amunition are being used up. The bills for these costs get added to the losing countries world debt. And the world bank pays up the bills to the winner. The costs of reconstucting the countries after the war are also paid for in the same way. So by USA etc. contractors reconstructing the country, it is those contracting companies making the profits. These companies are being paid for clearing up what the military did in order to win the war, which they needed to do to ensure the bills would be paid. It's only expensive to lose a war, not to win one. Iraq will now have a large bill to pay. This will not be paid to the USA but to the world bank. They will be able to pay, because of the value of the oil under the country. So to help them repay their bill for being invaded, the military have generously concentrated their efforts on ensuring a steady oil supply has not been interupted to much. Ok so a lot of oil seems to have gone missing somewhere, but you get a bit of pilfering during a war. So the Iraqis get to pay their bills, and the USA et al, all get profits for thier companies, their military get new weapons paid for, and some exercise, and the owners of these companies may even contribute to the campaign funds of the political parties responsible. Everyones a winner, no?
G
Guest
GrowNub024 said:
North Korea has wmd.. they like to flaunt that fact. N korea who bush labels as one of the "axis of evil" countries is not free either. What's the difference between them...
The bush admin used faulty inteligence to try and connect iraq with bin laden and terrorism when that was not the case. How we are loosing so many lives in iraq while bin laden runs free beats the hell out of me.
Last edited:
7
70s_PotHead
The only reason Bush went after Iraq is because Saddam Hussein tried to kill his daddy after the 1st gulf war, Iraq is a personal vendetta that got out of control IMO.
70s
70s
It's amazing that they managed to keep the story under wraps for a whole year, what is the American press up to?
It's clear that the story is embarrassing to the Bush administration and the US Army. First, the convoy took a wrong turn and drove down a dead end.
Second, they got attacked, and lost the whole 12 truck convoy to a few armed locals. You can't really call it an ambush, the assailants couldn't have prepared the attack, they simply improvised as the convoy unexpectedly came their way.
Third, part of the military escort abandoned the convoy, and that they do not want people to know since it is a hard blow to troop moral and their whole propaganda machine. One of the US Army's holiest codes of conduct is that when you fight a war, you never, ever leave a soldier behind. Well, in real life, it doesn't always happen that way.
It's clear that the story is embarrassing to the Bush administration and the US Army. First, the convoy took a wrong turn and drove down a dead end.
Second, they got attacked, and lost the whole 12 truck convoy to a few armed locals. You can't really call it an ambush, the assailants couldn't have prepared the attack, they simply improvised as the convoy unexpectedly came their way.
Third, part of the military escort abandoned the convoy, and that they do not want people to know since it is a hard blow to troop moral and their whole propaganda machine. One of the US Army's holiest codes of conduct is that when you fight a war, you never, ever leave a soldier behind. Well, in real life, it doesn't always happen that way.
J
James-Bong
Yo man, i did alot of convoy escorts while i was over there..... and actually operated out of Camp anoconda..... Just another example of what the troops and contractors go through over there, Not some censored bullshit on CNN.
You guys Really want the uncensored truth take a look at this video....
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3519855663545752103&q=iraq
You guys Really want the uncensored truth take a look at this video....
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3519855663545752103&q=iraq
G
Guest
I bet ol Chuck wouldn't be skeered.
Seed
Seed
GrowNub024
Member
I saw on Fox 4 that this guys is now sueing the govt lol
G
Guest
If you must drive a truck. Try and hit as many of those camel jockies as possible 100pts a camel jockey. can add up real quick.. HIT HIM~!!!! lmao yea i cracked myself up.. peace..
Gsack
Gsack
70s_PotHead said:
Gulf war? I heard it was after Saddam beat Bush Sr at the golf par...
With a solid 9-under 11.
Don't worry daddy, I'll mess him up on the next round... and his darn country.
Last edited:
naga_sadu
Active member
Saddam Hussien led a Socailist regime, loosely modeled after the system of Warsaw Pact countries- which was opposed to Islamic fundamentalism such as Al-Qaeda. Ba'athism = Socialism. So, Ba'ath party = Socialist party. I do agree, tho, it was not a democratic socialist republic, 'twas an autocratic one. But still- the Al Qaeda made inroads into Iraq AFTER the US invasion. During Hussien's rule, people who were seen as "potentially fundamentalist" were killed even at the slightest sign of suspicion. Namely Muktada-Al-Sadr's father. Many aspects of Hussien's rule would be considered as blasphemous sins in the AL-Q's ideology.
In the 80s, if my memory serves me straight, eventhough Hussien was gassing the Kurds, the American government portrayed him as a force of forward thinking and modernisation. I remember how the US gov. used to showcase Saddam as the first "Arab" leader to have equal rights for males/ females and how Saddam was the only Muslim leader to allow women to walk around in public wearing Jeans and tees whereas the others would force 'em to wear that loose fitting ninja dress. Also, the Western media at the time commended Saddam on more than 1 occasion for taking such a tough stance against Islamic fundamentalism (like the ones you saw in Iran after Khomeini took control). Heard any voice of America broadcasts at the time?? I doubt it.....
Donald Rummy had no qualms shaking Hussien's hand. This was when he was gassing the Kurds. But oh yes!!! He was fighting a war for the US government against Iran, so he must be a gem of an Angel, right??? The purpose of the Iran-Iraq war was to make IRaq fight America's war, to enable the US, thru Hussien, to gain control over Iran's eastern territories, which have lotsa petro resources. Why? Because the pro US Shah was overthrown and Khomeini was in no mood to give his petro resources to the US. (But of course, even during Khomeini's time, "behind the curtain" dealings between the non oil US corporations such as construction and their Iranian counterparts continued and still continues to this date).
But the Iranians weren't as dumb as the US gov woulda hoped. While Hussien borrowed heavily from the US and from his GCC neighbours, and pumped the best against Iran, the Iranians retaliated by simply sending waves upon waves of irregular militias.
The war came to a grinding halt. Hussien couldn't make the inroads as America hoped. And he sure incurred alot of debt and the US gov at the time refused to waive them- I'm guessing because he failed to reach his objectives- which was to make inroads into Iran's oil rich eastern provinces. Well, the US then proposed a plan which would make Saddam lease out his petro resources to American MNCs on a job work unit (similar to what you have in Saudi and Kuwait). Hussien refused and insisted on a 50:50 partnership.
Well, then he invaded Kuwait, on assumption that since Hussien fought America's war for 8 years against Iran, the US won't mind his move. Well, he was wrong and within an instant, the US who once championed him as a forward thinking modernised leader suddenly becomes a village burning, wife beating scum of the earth.
Now, tying up Iraq and Al-Q....TILL THE US CAME THERE WAS NO LINK....
When the Iraqis first invaded Kuwait, Bin Laden first offered to regroup his men in Saudi and fight off Saddam's army. The Saudi royals turning down of Bin Laden's aid offer and calling the Americans for help is what made Osama declare Jihad w/ the West and in particular, Saudi Arabia. Don't lump the Al-Q and Saddam together. While neither were exemples of humanism and kindness, they aren't related in the slightest of bit and were each others' sworn enemies.
As a matter of fact, one of the main goals of many Special Republican Guard elements such as the Nebuchadnassar division as well as the Makkabarat (secret police) was to identify and immediately destroy any sources of Islamic radical elements they run into.
Coming back to the AL-Q, the ones who bombed the WTC...
The Al-Qaeda was armed, trained, and heavily funded by the US Gov, in particular the CIA, to go combat the Soviet forces who invaded Afghanistan in '79. Why? Because if the Soviets consolidated their grip over Afghanistan, they'd have access to a warm water port, something Uncle Sam didn't want.
Taking a bunch of illetrates, arming them with state of the art stingers, telling them to go all out by promising them little New Yorks after the fiasco was over and simply turning ur backs on them once the mission is complete (in this case, the Soviet withdrawal) isin't the brightest of ideas I've run across, no offense. And hoping that they'd just walk away and start singing nursery rhymes is beyond the realm of wishful thinking- it's outright stupidity.
Bin Laden has had a long history of romance with the US gov and their elitist masters. Every single road construction project awarded to American construction companies in coutnries like Quatar, Saudi, Yemen etc., were all given to them thru...the Bin Laden family, who are construction tycoons themselfs.
I'll agree, Hussien wasn't an angel and neither was Osama. But at one point, they were the American government's heroes. People the US Gov employed and engaged to fight their dirty wars. And the US GOv is the world's biggest collection of dumbasses if they sincerely believed that after the work they were hired / engaged these dictators & terrorist leaders for was "done" or "failed", they'd just go back into potato farming.
Oh well, now, the bad guys are those turban donning "camel jockeys." Not too long back, these very same turban donning "camel jockeys" were the "good guys"- fighting for freedom of culture and religion against those evil, EVIL...E V I L red bastards. Damn!!! The US gov seems to be really good in coming up with a new major threat the instant the existing one has faded. WHo'll be the next threat, I wonder? Truckers w/ red baseball hats? Alaskan crab fishermen? Who knows...
I would be damned if I thought that the US GOV (NOT the people) want world stability w/o volatility. But alas, if that were to happen, the corporate sector, especially the ones tied to the arms industry, would have to see a "mere" $2 billion instead of $500 billion +. But alas...for the US oil corpos, the situation didn't quell as easily as they woulda hoped. AND BTW: DID YOU READ THE JAMES BAKER REPORT?!?!?!?!?! Now, Bush's closest aide of the Iraq war is calling for a silent US withdrawal, suggesting that IRAN AND SYRIA fix the mess created in Iraq.
And, there were no WMDs found in IRaq because Saddam depleted them all on Iran. And I'm no Hussien supporter- but I'd much rather live in Hussien's IRaq than in Al Saud's Saudi Arabia ANY FUCKING DAY. The answer to the Iraq war is sadly oil (the medium thru which it's traded) and more venues for profit for US arms mfrs. And capturing more oil won't affect the prices because now, we have a more or less monopolistic situation in the petro industry. And monopolies don't like lowering prices, that's for fucking sure.
With the red bastards gone into the pages of history, the major shotcallers of the US economy needed new foes because volatility is what makes the arms industry tick. Well, they just got them some new foes. And apparently, drug users have also joined in the fray
I don't expect the US gov to do "nothing"- I'd sincerely request them to stop funding and supporting dictators and crazy freaks by supplying them w/ money, infra and arms, as a start.
Here are some more tyrinical governments and crazy lunatics installed and/or supported by the US gov:
1. Pol Pot (logistics support thru the CIA- to oppose a Vietnam backed Hun Sen from taking control. The Vietnamese were closer allies to the USSR and during Pol Pot's time, the Sino-Soviet rift was in full swing. The US & China at the time supported Pol Pot + when Hun Sen led a force to dispose of this tyrant, the US CIA supported Pol Pot's troops thru massive logistics and battlefield info).
2. Diem- the leader of South Vietnam.
3. Batista of Cuba.
4. The Czar of Russia (in the 20s)
5. The KLA
6.
Pinochet 7. The Al Qaeda (till the USSR fell)
8. Saddam Hussien
9. Thaksin Shinawatra
10. The king of Saudi Arabia (the ONLY country on earth which endorses public executions and mutilation of body parts as acceptable and legal. The Al Saud family was installed to power by the US).
11. Hosni Mubarak (not installed but heavily supported)
12. Lakshar-e-taliba (till the USSR fell)
13. Harkat-ul-Ansar (till the USSR fell)
14. Hizb-ul-Mujahideen (till the USSR fell)
15. Ferdinand Marcos
I can go on and on if u wish....but u get the point.
But the ABSOLUTE BEST the US gov. can do right now is to stop supporting freaks and dictators when doing so benefits them for the short run......
Spending billions to create a bunch of fucked up prodigies and spending billions more to fight them sometime later is an utter waste of peoples' money.
Great idea
:But be prepared to answer the following questions...from ur son in the future.
Daddy, why is lil' Timmy glowing in the dark? And what's this strange thing growing outta my bunghole....?
That's prolly why it's not a good idea to nuke Iraq......as if the current mess created by profiteering goat fuckers hasn't fucked the world up in more ways than 1.
Last edited:
C
Chamba
Don't forget Iraq'a plan to start pricing the oil they produce in euros
and in 50 year's time, we'll read the secret documents that support that statement as being one of the most important (and not often mentioned) "reason" why the US invaded Iraq
if the world's oil producers and then all the other traders started using Euros instead of US$ for trade then the US would collapse financially..in a rather dramatic fashion
obviously even US citizens wouldn't justify an invasion (& Rosy, let's call it what it is - an invasion..not an "occupation".) based on maybe economics, so the lies were cooked up and the patriotism drum was sounded...
the fact is Rumsfield, Cheney, Bush and all the other reptiles in the current US admin lied, people died and so are war criminals
and in 50 year's time, we'll read the secret documents that support that statement as being one of the most important (and not often mentioned) "reason" why the US invaded Iraq
if the world's oil producers and then all the other traders started using Euros instead of US$ for trade then the US would collapse financially..in a rather dramatic fashion
obviously even US citizens wouldn't justify an invasion (& Rosy, let's call it what it is - an invasion..not an "occupation".) based on maybe economics, so the lies were cooked up and the patriotism drum was sounded...
the fact is Rumsfield, Cheney, Bush and all the other reptiles in the current US admin lied, people died and so are war criminals
Last edited:
