War War War War War War War War War War War War War War. For oil.

[Octafish]

That's messed up, wot?

Alan Greenspan claims Iraq war was really for oil

We could buy what oil we want cheaper than it costs to steal it by war. Must be old news.

Great Power Conflict over Iraqi Oil: The World War I Era

Heh. Wall Street lawyer and CIA-honcho-to-be Allen Dulles screwing over Turkey post-World War I, eh?

The Military-Petroleum Complex

Makes sense of a lot of things. Still, I don't know why this doesn't bother more people. Maybe because it wasn't on the tee vee.

Sen. Webb: Defense spending shouldn't be sacrosanct

I hate war. Does it bother you?

[asdjrocky]

1. Fuck war.

My principals don't change based on who is in office.

[invictus]

7. +1,000,000,000,000

[Octafish]

9. It really bugs me that so few seem to be bothered by the fact our nation is engaging in endless war.

Illegal. Immoral. Unnecessary. War.

We could get a lot more accomplished waging peace.

That, of course, requires leadership.

Thank you for understanding, asdjrocky. You are a person of integrity.

[asdjrocky]

16. Thank you Octafish, it's an outstanding post.

Remember, war has always been fought by the poor for the benefit of the rich, now more than ever.

Again, thanks for the post.

[Plucketeer]

60. The UNITED STATES OF AWARICA

In weaponry we trust! :patriot:

[asdjrocky]

103. Hey ol' buddy.

Hope you're still pluckin'! :hi:

[Plucketeer]

105. Plucky as ever!

;-)

[liberalhistorian]

37. Hey, if it doesn't involve American Idol or

who picked who on The Bachelor or which millionaire is screwing the other millionaire over in the Leno-Coco wars, who gives a shit? Come on, man, priorities, think about what's REALLY important! :sarcasm:

[Octafish]

38. And in an instant, the scales fell from my eyes and I could see tee vee.

No doubt about it, this is Zombie Nation. I read somewhere that the average American would demand $1 million to give up his or her television for life.

Survey says: "Most won't give up TV even if doing so would add five healthy years to lifespan." That's sick.

[Richard D]

79. A million?

Shit on a Popsicle. That's astounding. I'd do it for a cool 50K if i had a TV to give up. But that said, I wouldn't watch one the American average of over 4 hours daily for the rest of my life for a million dollars. Not even for 10 million.

[Jackpine Radical]

100. Not only sick but incomprehensible to me.

Today, on some sort of weird impulse, I went into a McDonalds, which I almost never do. There are little TV screens everywhere, and a couple of big ones. It looked like they were all set on Fox. People were sitting in there facing the screens, as slack-jawed as you can be and still wad french fries into your mouth. Their eyes were glazed.

I felt like I was having a flashback to a dream I once had, in which my wife and I were wandering among a totally entranced populace, all going about their various tasks like so many parts of a giant machine. We the only conscious ones in the dream; we were like ghosts; the robot-people didn't even notice us except to sometimes walk around us without seeming to notice our presence.

Somehow, the reality of that visit to McDonalds was weirder than the dream.

[smalll]

53. How exactly do you "wage peace" against the Taliban?

[AlbertCat]

64. How exactly do you "wage peace" against the Taliban?

Well 1st, you wait til you are actually attacked BY the Taliban....

[ThomThom]

82. You do it by putting them out of business,

by not giving them a reason to attract supporters. If we were building schools, small business, infer-structure and good will the Taliban would not be able to attract any supporters to their religious extremism. Educate and lift people up and there will be no need to take up arms and oppress people. But kill someones family member and you have an enemy for life and so it spreads. It is very simple peace works.

[dixiegrrrrl]

55. I seem to be hearing a lot of people ARE bothered by the war.

But.........

the way they voice that "bother" is not the way we did it 30 years ago.
Shit....42 years ago.

Sigh..now I really feel old.

[FiveGoodMen]

68. Trouble is, when millions from all over the world marched before the Iraq invasion

Dubya responded, "I don't listen to focus groups."

Our current government doesn't care what we think. It's not that they don't know...they don't care. Apparently, they don't have to.

[obxhead]

71. Today students across the country march in protest

although a little less money for pot is their reason, not 2 endless wars.

(yes, yes. I know students struggle and not all are potheads)

[Dragonfli]

99. It is different now than when we were younger, mostly the draft explains student apathy

It is easier to go to the wall, get arrested, beaten, tear gassed when the alternative is death by draft.
Many students I am sure care, but the passion to be shot if necessary by the national guard over your convictions comes easier when the alternative is being shot in a war.

Not making excuses, just saying the motivation is not the same for this new batch of kids.

[Echo In Light]

42. _

K&R

[leftstreet]

54. and another

[BrklynLiberal]

75. No argument here. When a soldier dies or is injured, it does not matter who is in the White House.

The family and that soldier suffers the same pain and heartbreak....

[asdjrocky]

104. I think more about the innocents that inevitably die in war.

But yes, a death is a death and it diminishes us all.

[walldude]

2. Would have been a huge success too if we had actually got the oil..

They couldn't even do that right.

[Robb]

3. There is that.

[Arctic Dave]

8. Ten to one we have to "liberate" Iraq again in about five to ten years.

Of course all oil contracts will be null and void like we did this time.

[Octafish]

14. International Fiends. Er. 'Friends.'

Pentagon Hands Iraq Oil Deal to Shell

The U.S. government secretly facilitated dealings between Shell and the Iraqi Oil Ministry for no-bid contracts.

So the BFEE's good friends overseas make the money. I. Can't. Make. This. Stuff. Up.

[bvar22]

33. The oil was never for us.

It was for the Global Corporations, and YES, they have it.
"They" used OUR blood and money to get it.

YOU will continue to pay whatever price "they" demand.

[grahamhgreen]

58. +1 - look at the Burj Dubai if you want to see who we are fighting these wars for!

[whosinpower]

83. It wasn't about taking it

It was about controlling the spigot and more importantly - it was about making sure the oil is priced in US dollars. Hussein had just set up an oil bourse, to be priced in something other than US greenbacks. If I remember correctly - it was euro's.

So....Iraq oil is still priced in us dollars, and where the oil goes and to whom is still controlled by US assets.....far as I know.

[Uncle Joe]

4. Bush just needs a lit cigarette in his mouth to look right at home.

Edit to add, now I see it in his hand.:)

Thanks for the thread, Octafish

[L0oniX]

13. ...and the customary resulting explosion from smoking at the gas pump.

:nuke:

[Octafish]

18. The guy's not qualified to pump gas.

Dunno know what he's good for. Can guess:

BFEE oil chums cashing in on Pentagon.

Most importantly: You are most welcome, Uncle Joe!

[HysteryDiagnosis]

5. I hate war, war is politics by other means. n/t

[BeFree]

12. Me too

War is a sign of the failure of diplomacy.

The US at one time took pride in war as a last resort, and pride in the idea that we don't torture. Bush shit all over both of those proud ideas.

[Octafish]

21. Crazy: The Pentagon and CIA chief Dulles recommended nuclear first-strike to JFK for Fall '63?

Obviously, their descendants now run the show.

Details.

[Gabi Hayes]

28. 100% correct:

http://www.globalsecuritynewswire.org/gsn/nw_20100301_8911.php

The Obama administration has ruled out pledging in a forthcoming U.S. nuclear strategy review that the United States will never initiate a nuclear first strike against another power, the New York Times reported yesterday (see GSN, Feb. 17).

U.S. President Barack Obama was set to hear alternatives from Defense Secretary Robert Gates today for addressing remaining concerns over the Nuclear Posture Review, officials told the Times. The issues to be discussed included the possibility of redefining the purpose of the U.S. strategic arsenal by specifying situations in which the country might use its nuclear weapons.

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and other ranking Democrats have called on the president to state in the review that the "sole purpose" of the nation's nuclear weapons is to prevent a nuclear strike. Defense Department officials and a large contingent of White House staffers, though, have sought language specifying deterrence of nuclear strikes more generally as the leading reason for the arsenal (Sanger/Shanker, New York Times, Feb. 28).

Obama has reportedly hoped to rule out the initial use of nuclear weapons as well as the employment of nuclear weapons against nations that possess only conventional arsenals, according to the Atlantic magazine.


hmmmmm....how did thinking like that mentioned in the last paragraph work out for JFK? did they show him the video Bill Hicks mentioned in his 'act?'

[flyarm]

40. I would not trust anything Gates tells Obama about anything ,remember he was involved in Iran/Contra

He should have been indicted but the treshold of resonable doubt most likely kept him out of jail.

Gates was up to his eyeballs in the Iran -Contra crimes..wake the fuck up!
http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/walsh/chap_16.htm

snip:

Gates and Casey's November 1986 Testimony


The events leading up to the preparation of false testimony by Director Casey in November 1986 -- preparations that Gates nominally oversaw -- are set forth in a separate chapter of this Report. There was insufficient evidence that Gates committed a crime as he participated in the preparation of Casey's testimony, or that he was aware of critical facts indicating that some of the statements by Casey and others were false.

Conclusion


Independent Counsel found insufficient evidence to warrant charging Robert Gates with a crime for his role in the Iran/contra affair. Like those of many other Iran/contra figures, the statements of Gates often seemed scripted and less than candid. Nevertheless, given the complex nature of the activities and Gates's apparent lack of direct participation, a jury could find the evidence left a reasonable doubt that Gates either obstructed official inquiries or that his two demonstrably incorrect statements were deliberate lies.



GREAT THREAD OCTAFISH! THANK YOU!!

[stray cat]

6. Boycott anything made with oil or anything that oil provided energy for

and any job that requires anything that ever used oil. If everyone in the US refused to use any type of energy or product made with oil there would be no supply and demand to worry about.

[BoWanZi]

15. Would that even be possible?

I mean stuff as simple as plastic uses petroleum. I can understand richer people being able to afford cars/vehicles that don't rely on oil to run but the majority of people in the US can't readily afford to replace their old petroleum based car with an electric of some sort just as a form of protest for starters.

Never using anything made with oil or using oil as an energy sounds like a very idealistic goal that can't possibly be attained by the average lower/middle income brackets barring living off the land.

Heck, if I could do that, I would, but there is no way I could afford a new electric car.

[Uncle Joe]

19. No the 20th century development of oil based products has addicted human society

in a multitude of ways.

The effort needs to be focused on switching away from those uses in all manner possible.

If you can't afford an electric car, do what you can do, until society catches up.

[Subdivisions]

49. And yet that is EXACTLY what will happen....

Never using anything made with oil or using oil as an energy sounds like a very idealistic goal that can't possibly be attained by the average lower/middle income brackets barring living off the land.

Crude oil extraction has not increased since February of 2005. That's over FIVE years. This fact is at the very root of all the world's economic malaise. It IS THE ROOT CAUSE.



Now, you may look at that graph and point out that there was more oil extracted in July of 2008, noted on the graph as "Peak 3". To understand this, however, you have to go back and observe the data leading up to that peak. I won't glaze your eyes over with the numerical data such as production and import figures. All you need is your memory. Do you remember awhile back when gasoline prices rose to the $3.50 - $5.00 range, depending on where you live? Those prices were due to the demand for gasoline EXCEEDING the ability of oil companies/countries to provide enough crude oil to the market to meet booming demand. So, in response to these fundamentals of supply/demand, prices went skyward. (And, for those of you who will squawk about speculators and speculation, well pardon me for saying this but "Duh!". Speculation is the cornerstone of commodities pricing. Specualtion is where supply and demand meets money!)

But here's the kicker: The rise in the price of oil beginning in 2007 and leading up to Peak 3 in July of 2008 ACTUALLY ENABLED the increase in crude oil extraction that resulted in that all-time production peak. Why is this important? Because it demonstrates the inability of oil producers to increase production without corresponding high fuel prices. It also demonstrates that, in order to increase production above the current level of 72 million barrels per day, prices will have to increase SIGNIFICANTLY to enable oil produces enough revenue to invest in exploration and production. Also contributing to Peak 3 was a little trick in early 2008 by the energy tracking agencies EIA and IEA to begin including ALL LIQUIDS (including ethanol) in the crude oil report to mask the increasing decline in crude. Nice, that.

I could write a book about this but I'll just say this in closing this post: Economic growth DEPENDS ON OIL. As the above graph continues to show a decline, ECONOMIC GROWTH CANNOT HAPPEN! That means that, as production of crude oil (and all the really good, cheap oil has alread been burned, leaving only the heaviest and sourest oil which costs more to produce and refine) declines, our civilization WILL CONTRACT OR COLLAPSE. So, like it or not, the idea of a http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/series/aftermath/4462/Overview">world without oil (NatGeo Channel, March 8, 9pm Eastern) will be attained, and that time is not so far off. Current average estimates of the end of oil for the United States is 2040, at which point we will be down to our own production of around 5 million barrels per day. And I don't have to tell you who will have access to THAT oil.

[robertpaulsen]

66. Thanks for that encapsulation of reality.

And thanks for the NatGeo heads-up! I'll definitely check that out. Bottom line is that if we don't prepare for the 22nd century, which in a best case scenario will be a civilization without oil, we will enter the 22nd century without oil and without civilization. We only face a Mad Max world if we keep letting the mad men run things.

[Subdivisions]

93. Thanks, rp. Always nice to have you back me up on this subject.

It means a lot considering your superior knowledge of this issue.

Unfortunately, I see no way out of the ongoing financial crisis and the concurrent situation with oil production without a Mad Max scenario. We're seeing the faintest first whispers of such a scenario with every desparate act related to the recession/depression in which we currently find ourselves. And it will probably only get worse as the supply of oil continues to decline, taking the ecomony with it.

The only way out of all of this and to salvage some sort of orderly contraction is to remove the mad men/women from the equation. Unfortunately, they are the people with the power and the wealth and they will continue business as usual for as long as it is possible.

You mentioned the 22nd Century...While I have you here, let me ask: Are you aware of the Brown-Fouchet study? I know you know about Brown's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_Land_Model">Export Land Model (http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2767">MORE). Fouchet and Brown got together on the effect of ELM combined with the projected production decrease over time (Fouchet/TheOilDrum.com, et. al.), or "Ultimate Recoverable Reserves", and came to the conclusion that we have until 2040 before no more oil will be available. It's best illustrated in this image I captured from http://www.postpeakliving.com/preparing-post-peak-life">a video presentation by PostPeakLiving.com:



And http://scitizen.com/future-energies/jeffrey-brown-and-the-net-oil-exports-crisis_a-14-2559.html">here is an article on it.

Can you spare a moment to give your thoughts on this?

Good to see you, Robert. =)

[robertpaulsen]

106. Right on, Subdivisions! EVERYONE needs to watch this video!

I mentioned the 22nd century because even if you go by the most conservative estimates for oil production, (and by conservative I mean EIA & CERA) you still have to concede that it will no longer be economically feasible for any country to produce oil in the 22nd century. That means if we wait until then to abandon the Infinite Growth Paradigm, it will be an act of civilization suicide. But I absolutely believe we will no longer be able to produce oil long before 2100. Our society is long overdue for action on this; we should have listened to President Carter.

Thanks so much for linking that video, Subdivisions! I had not read the Brown-Fouchet study; one area I would like to see them do more study as it concerns the US is Mexico. I'm sure you've read what DU's own http://www.paulchefurka.ca/Mexico%20and%20the%20Problematique.html">Paul Chefurka has researched. We're already starting to see residual effects of this with the increased narcotics trafficking and corresponding cartel violence within Mexico and near our border. As they get closer to zero net oil exports, this crisis will only get worse.

There's only one thing not being addressed in the article that is extremely important and sometimes gets glossed over: pharmaceutical & food production. As far as pharmaceuticals are concerned, this is the real elephant in the room concerning the health care debate: production of pharmaceuticals is dependent on cheap oil too. We can build a sustainable living society without planes or automobiles. We cannot sustain society without our health and without food, we can't live period! But it looks like postpeakliving.com is trying to address all those issues. I had not seen that site before you brought it to my attention, so thanks again!

[Subdivisions]

109. 'We're already starting to see residual effects of this with

the increased narcotics trafficking and corresponding cartel violence within Mexico and near our border. As they get closer to zero net oil exports, this crisis will only get worse."

That, Robert, is a very good point about the situation in Mexico! Yes, I am very familiar with Paul Chefurka. It's been a while since I visited that particular article. I've been so focused on the world oil stage that, even though I'm familiar where the production decline hotspots are, I haven't really studied the affect inside each country where depeletion is an issue. Now that you mention it, it makes logical sense that the rise in narcotics trafficking and cartel violence in Mexico could be a manifestation of the internal destabilization resulting from the crash in Canterell oil production, and the corresponding hit to Mexico's social programs, 40% of which was fueled by Pemex. Here's an excerpt of that article:

http://www.paulchefurka.ca/Mexico%20and%20the%20Problematique.html

The Scenario

• Mexico's biggest oil field is Cantarell. Its 2 million barrel per day output was responsible for 60% of Mexico's production, and all its oil exports to the United States.

• Those oil exports account for 40% of Mexico's public funding.

• Cantarell's output is known to be crashing (see graphic above). Production has declined by 25% in the last year and is predicted to be down about 60% from its peak by the end of 2007. The field will probably lose over 75% of its production capacity by the end of 2008.

• When this happens Mexico's economy will probably implode.

• The United States currently exports about 20% of its corn crop.

• Next year, 20% of the United States' corn crop is going to be used for ethanol.

• Mexico imports a substantial amount of corn from the United States.

• As Cantarell's output declines, oil exports to the US will drop in lockstep.

• As oil imports drop in the US, the pressure will mount to produce more ethanol as a substitute.

• As more corn is bought by the American ethanol industry, US corn exports, especially to Mexico, will slide.

• At the same time the probability is high that Global Warming will result in higher temperatures in Mexico, a country already at temperature risk.

• Rising temperatures will bring more drought conditions and a drop in Mexico's own corn production.

• Now you have a country with a decimated economy and declining food. This is a recipe for massive migration.

• The migration moves North as it has in the past, but this time in enormous numbers.

• As the economic refugees cross the border what do they find?

• In January, 2006, KBR (a subsidiary of Halliburton) was given a $385M contract to build a string of very large detention camps in the United States...

Peak oil, global warming, food, biofuels and authoritarianism — all rolled up into one neat but ugly little package. Coming to a border near you within 3 years.

It would be interesting to further research this aspect of the overall peak production picture. Even better would be for Paul to update that article (c. 2007) to include developments seen in Mexico during the interim. Paul, are you watching?

I'm glad you liked the postpeakliving.com video presentation. I actually came across it by accident and was blown away by their presentation and content. Great http://postpeakliving.com/peak-oil-primer">Peak Oil Primer and their http://postpeakliving.com/guide-to-post-peak-living">Guide To Post Peak Living is excellent.

While I agree with your comments regarding food and pharmaceutical production, there is an additional factor that will challenge even more our ability to produce food and the Earth's ability to provide medicinal remedies. That factor is Climate Change. And because the world's population, perhaps especially that of developing nations like China and India, will be unwilling to heed the warning of declinging oil production, bringing Climate Change under control is unlikely. Taken together, the dawn of the 22nd Century is likely to be very warm, very dry, and very quietly.

[robertpaulsen]

107. One more point after watching Part 3 of the postpeakliving.com videos.

This guy is wonderfully clearheaded about where we could be headed. It really is a toss-up between Mad Max and Creative Descent. The big question: how soon before we collectively realize that voting for politicians who promise to continue the Infinite Growth Paradigm will only lead our own destruction? The answer will decide which fate we face.

http://www.postpeakliving.com/preparing-post-peak-life-part-3

[Subdivisions]

110. Unfortunately we, collectively, will NOT realize that before it is too late. That is our fate. n/t

[truedelphi]

78. Your post is a sad and telling one.

We get a weird lovely PBS station out here in rural California and just last night a program was on about how to convert your car to run on alcohol. The speaker even explained how he makes his own alcohol. (I am putting in a call to the TV station so that I can get the name of the program, and perhaps obtain a DVD of it)

He makes his alcohol by visiting the back end of donut shops and taking away the two day ol donuts. One pickup truck full of donuts gets cooked and then converted into alcohol. As the donuts cook, the flour converts to alcohol and so does the sugar. However the top layer is lard, which he skims off and uses to burn the next batch of donuts that he cooks.

I forget how much alcohol he gets from this, but he never pays for gas and he sells his alcohol to other users of the same type of car set up. For something like 80 cents a gallon. So someone else doing this could make a living at it.

Everything that is currently made out of oil - our gas, our plastics etc, used to come from the plant kingdom. In Brazil currently, not a single ounce of gas from petroleum is used for farming. The tractors trucks and cars all run on ethanol, which is all plant based. the Brazilians go about Ethanol very differently than we do. they don't use the edible part of the sugar plant but the refuse part of it. (We make our ethanol from the food part of the corn plant,when we could use just the husks!)

[kimmerspixelated]

86. Wow! That's great TrueDelphi!

That DVD would be a great seller as well!

[Uncle Joe]

17. The world needs to get off it's empire treadmill and the nations with the most power

have the greatest ability and responsibility to influence that change.

We need to convert to sustainable technologies ASAP weaning our selves away from fossil fuels and to the extent possible, that should be a world wide effort.

The pursuit of oil and coal is killing us in more ways than one.

[Octafish]

20. Fiberweed

In the film "Up in Smoke," Cheech and Chong drove a van made out of a substance Sgt. Stadanko called "Fiberweed" across the border.

I thought it was science fiction, but I was wrong.

As for the pharmeceuticals and fertilizers, let's think a minute.

[arcadian]

65. I agree. But that would be impossible.

Would require living in the woods naked and digging for grubs. Everything has oil in it, even the things you wouldn't think have oil and everying that is manufactured requires oil at virtually all points in the process.

[Autumn]

10. Yeah. War fucking bothers

me a lot. I hated Bushes wars and I hate Obamas wars. I think if they want wars EVERY president and politician needs to put on uniforms and go to the front lines and direct the war themselves. And not come back till the war is over.

[Octafish]

30. Excellent idea.

Brave leaders have thought of that. Patton wanted to face Rommel, each in their own tank, one-on-one, winner take all. Cowards, though, like to have someone else do the dying while they get the glory.

Democrats once had the reputation for being the War Party. Great interview with the author of "The Partisan Divide" here.

[L0oniX]

11. But by all means keep cheer leading those who join the military.

[mopinko]

22. medals are just cogs in the war machine.

no war heroes, no wars

[tekisui]

23. And 'thanking' them.

[L0oniX]

25. For what? Contributing to the destruction of this country? Fighting for the corporations?

If they were actually fighting to defend this country I would support them all but it wasn't another country that attacked us, it was a group of criminals. It was and is a police matter and not a military one.

[anonymous171]

76. Military is not the problem. The financial parasites are. nt

[tekisui]

24. I hate war. Actually hate isn't a strong enough word.

I despise war. The very thought of innocent people dying for political reasons turns my stomach. It disgusts and revolts me.

[Octafish]

96. Prescott Bush Sr. wanted to keep USSR out of Iraqi oil fields back in 1959...

He wrote about it in Reader's Digest:

To Preserve Peace Let’s Show Russians How Strong We Are

By Prescott Bush
U.S. Senator from Connecticut;
member of the Senate Armed Services Committee
The Reader’s Digest
July 1959 pp. 25-30

MAN’S GREATEST danger, it is said, is ignorance. In a very real sense, the Soviet Union’s ignorance of our military strength may be the source of her gravest peril—and ours. Kaiser Wilhelm started World War I because he miscalculated Allied power. Hitler, mistakenly thinking he could blitz the world, launched World War II. Kruschev today lacks firsthand knowledge of our country; he may be given what others think he would like to hear—rather than an objective report on our actual military strength. Although it seems impossible that any sane person could start a war, we would be wise to take no chances.

Why not invite the Soviet high command to the United States for a conducted tour of our military might? We are bringing Russians to see our farms and factories, our scientific laboratories and research centers; we exchange dancers and musicians. Why not have their military leaders over for the most beneficial look of all? Our expressed policy, the aim and purpose of our entire defense system, is to deter the Kremlin from starting a war. What better way to deter than to show?

What we could show is nothing more nor less than the greatest military might ever assembled in the history of the world. If the Soviet high command could see what we have, they should be of our mind—that for them to start war today would be an act of insanity.

SNIP...

It’s fortunate for them that we want only peace with justice. Our entire record attests to that. We have no history of aggression, profess no desire for world domination, as do the Communists. Only by their continued menace have we been forced to take these measures for defense.

I ASK, “Why don’t we show the Russians many of these defense measures?” What I would not show them is any self-satisfaction on our part about the future, any slowing-up of plans to produce the new weapons which must inevitably take the place of the old ones. I believe we are in a continuing struggle to keep on top in this business of declaring war. I think that the Russians are never to be underrated. I also believe that the Communists are master bluffers that they seek to put us off by arrogant threats to Berlin and to the peace of the far Pacific, and, while our people are preoccupied with these threats, they may try to take over Iraq as the Chinese Reds have conquered Tibet.

CONTINUED...

SOURCE: READER’S DIGEST JUNE 1959

By Prescott Bush
U.S. Senator from Connecticut;
member of the Senate Armed Services Committee
The Reader’s Digest
July 1959 pp. 25-30

Sorry, I don't have access to the article online. I transcribed it from a Xerox.

Something else: Prescott forgot to mention how he helped bankroll Hitler.

[bridgit]

26. Reminds me George Carlin, 'America is the only fucking country with bombs & rockets...

"...right there in the fucking national anthem" It does seem unlikely, however, that a country so predicted upon; so interwoven with occupation and armed conflict that it concludes on the high notes of home plates, 50 yard lines, and the priors to the jump balls of the NBA - could have been otherwise unless war, absent any concerns for national defense, is an expression of un-sated primordial release instead and that all the rest simply constitutes the nebulous fog *of* war. The unspoken 'why we fight' of an assertion that the only reason we do so is for oil

But all of those lines in the sand were not drawn by America per se, some yes some no but not as a rule. The extent to which that is the case is the inverse-extent to which no one has been asking the right questions over & over & over again

America is too often a wild west snake oil salesman. We don't like to work that hard so long as someone else is willing to do the heavy lifting - and g.w. bush is the irrefutable proof of that so we wait while we beg the question someone else has already answered, "How *do* you draw a line in the sands of a region that has no borders?" and we wait a bit more...

For the monarch to send in their emissary


But war? War sucks! I think that if one finds ones self in one, it is best to conclude the matter most expeditiously and get the fuck out!

[L0oniX]

29. Here's another one ...or two ...or three ...etc

That worst outcrop of herd life, the military system, which I abhor . . . This plague-spot of civilization ought to be abolished with all possible speed. Heroism on command, senseless violence, and all the loathsome nonsense that goes by the name of patriotism–how passionately I hate them! – Albert Einstein

Patriotism which has the quality of intoxication is a danger not only to its native land but to the world, and “My country never wrong” is an even more dangerous maxim than “My country, right or wrong.” – Bertrand Russell

Every miserable fool who has nothing at all of which he can be proud, adopts, as a last resource, pride in the nation to which he belongs; he is ready and glad to defend all its faults and follies tooth and nail, thus reimbursing himself for his own inferiority. – Arthur Schopenhauer

Naturally the common people don’t want war . . . Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders . . . All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism. – Hermann Goering.

A patriot is somebody who protects his country from his government. Or better yet: who has the guts to protect his country from its government. – Piotyr Dirk

[bridgit]

32. Patriotism on each, every & all sides is imo too much like taffy cause that last one

"A patriot is somebody who protects his country from his government. Or better yet: who has the guts to protect his country from its government." – Piotyr Dirk - is the new battle cry of the baggers. Though neither am I able to sign onto; as do many here at DU, "My country, *always* wrong" - I think if that were the case we wouldn't be living here we'd be living somewhere else

Cool quotes, thanks :kick:

[amborin]

27. recommend

[malaise]

31. I love your threads Octafish

Rec

[HCE SuiGeneris]

34. Operation Iraqi Liquidation n/t

[unkachuck]

35. K&R....n/t

[yurbud]

36. oil should be the first word out of Democrats mouths whenever they discuss the Middle East

or Central Asia or any other place that has oil and we claim is a threat to us or in need of humanitarian ''help.''

[northofdenali]

39. O. K.

Where's our President in this?

Not. Attending.

[unhappycamper]

41. Put me solidly in the hate war group.

k&r

[Blue Owl]

43. Nothing more barbaric than an "optional" war.

And nothing more cowardly than one based on lies and fabriactions.

[Mari333]

44. and it continues to this day

no one is held accountable, and obama and his minions are just another head on the same snake.

[Subdivisions]

45. Seizing Iraq was *co's solution to

reducing our dependence on "foreign" oil.

[Hubert Flottz]

46. Goober is pumping Ethyl!

Where's Andy?

[Octafish]

95. Now that you mention it, Goober always kinda looked at Aunt Bea funny, too.

[Hubert Flottz]

102. Too stoned to govern...

No wonder the country is in the sad shape it's in now.

[opihimoimoi]

47. Peace prosperity stability fun mo luaus less famine less waste less misery mo wisdom

less discord

more promise

save the Trio..Reason sanity and Truth

Less Ruth

LOL

[mod mom]

48. War is profit- KBR get's a 2.8 Billion $ contract despite egregious actions:

:mad:

Despite all their egregious misdeeds, KBR still rewarded w huge contracts, even though “Many within DoD have lost or are losing all remaining confidence in KBR’s ability ". This sounds a lot like like the Bush Administration with Cheney calling the shots!

Army awards lucrative Iraq contract to KBR
By Kimberly Hefling and Richard Lardner - The Associated Press
Posted : Tuesday Mar 2, 2010 13:22:45 EST

WASHINGTON — Defense giant KBR Inc. was awarded a contract potentially worth $2.8 billion for support work in Iraq as U.S. forces continue to leave the country, military authorities said Tuesday.

KBR was notified of the award Friday, a day after the company told shareholders it lost about $25 million in award fees because of flawed electrical work in Iraq.

The company was charged with maintaining the barracks where Staff Sgt. Ryan Maseth, a 24-year-old Green Beret, was electrocuted in 2008 while showering. The company has denied wrongdoing, and investigators said in August there was “insufficient evidence to prove or disprove” that anyone was criminally culpable in Maseth’s death.

The uproar over his death triggered a review of 17 other electrocution deaths in Iraq and widespread inspections and repairs of electrical work in Iraq, much of it performed by KBR.


http://www.armytimes.com/news/2010/03/ap_kbr_contract_030210/

KBR gets $35M contract despite electrocutions
By Kimberly Hefling - The Associated Press
Posted : Saturday Feb 7, 2009 17:03:23 EST
WASHINGTON — Defense contractor KBR Inc., which is under criminal investigation in the electrocution deaths of at least two U.S. soldiers in Iraq, has been awarded a $35 million contract by the Pentagon to build an electrical distribution center and other projects there.

The announcement of the new KBR contract comes just months after the Pentagon, in strongly worded correspondence obtained by the Associated Press, rejected the company’s explanation of serious mistakes in Iraq and its proposed improvements. A senior Pentagon official, David J. Graff, cited the company’s “continuing quality deficiencies” and said KBR executives were “not sufficiently in touch with the urgency or realities of what was actually occurring on the ground.”

“Many within DoD have lost or are losing all remaining confidence in KBR’s ability to successfully and repeatedly perform the required electrical support services mission in Iraq,” wrote Graff, commander of the Defense Contract Management Agency, in a Sept. 30 letter.

Graff rejected the company’s claims that it wasn’t required to follow U.S. electrical codes for its work on U.S. military facilities in Iraq. KBR has said it would cost an extra $560 million to refurbish buildings in Iraq used by the U.S. military, including Saddam Hussein’s palaces, which among other problems are based on a 220-volt standard rather than the American 120-volt standard.

-snip

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/02/ap_kbr_contract_020709/

Memo: Halliburton failed to purify GIs’ water
Internal report says contamination could've caused 'mass sickness or death'


updated 7:28 a.m. ET, Thurs., March. 16, 2006
WASHINGTON - Halliburton Co. failed to protect the water supply it is paid to purify for U.S. soldiers throughout Iraq, in one instance missing contamination that could have caused “mass sickness or death,” an internal company report concluded.

The report, obtained by The Associated Press, said the company failed to assemble and use its own water purification equipment, allowing contaminated water directly from the Euphrates River to be used for washing and laundry at Camp Ar Ramadi in Ramadi, Iraq.

The problems discovered last year at that site — poor training, miscommunication and lax record keeping — occurred at Halliburton’s other operations throughout Iraq, the report said.

“Countrywide, all camps suffer to some extent from all or some of the deficiencies noted,” Wil Granger, Theatre Water Quality Manager in the war zone for Halliburton’s KBR subsidiary, wrote in his May 2005 report.

-snip
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11854311/

Pentagon Dismisses KBR Contaminated Water: Troops Should ‘Just Drink Bottled Water’
On Sunday, the AP reported that contractor KBR has been providing “unmonitored and potentially unsafe” water to U.S. troops in Iraq. According to a Pentagon Inspector General’s report, dozens of soldiers fell sick, suffering “skin abscesses, cellulitis, skin infections, diarrhea and other illnesses” after using the “discolored, smelly water for personal hygiene and laundry.”

In a press briefing on Monday, Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell dismissed KBR’s gross negligence. He responded by joking about how everyone knows the water in Iraq is unsafe, and advised everyone to avoid drinking it:

You know, we’ve all been to Iraq several times. Everywhere you go they make it perfectly clear that you don’t want to drink the water, so I’m a little surprised myself that this is an issue. As I understand it, the bottled water, which is what you’re supposed to be drinking in Iraq, had no issues whatsoever in the testing that was done. Evidently, there was some issue with some of the other water that was, I guess, primarily meant for washing. <...>

But I think our encouragement is always — for journalists and warfighters alike is read the signs and just drink the bottled water.

-snip
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/03/12/kbr-water/

KBR Dodges $500 Million In Social Security And Medicare Taxes In Cheney-Backed Scheme
No private contractor has financially profited from the Iraq war more than Kellogg Brown & Root (KBR), which until last year was a subsidiary of Halliburton. The firm currently has more than 21,000 employees in Iraq, and between 2004 and 2006, received more than $16 billion in government contracts — far more than any other corporation.

Yet KBR hasn’t been passing on these enormous profits to American taxpayers or even its own employees, thanks to a plan that Vice President Cheney helped establish. Today, the Boston Globe reports that KBR has avoided paying more than $500 million “in federal Medicare and Social Security taxes by hiring workers through shell companies” based in the Cayman Islands. A look at the costs to KBR employees:

While KBR’s use of the shell companies saves workers their half of the taxes, it deprives them of future retirement benefits.

In addition, the practice enables KBR to avoid paying unemployment taxes in Texas, where the company is registered, amounting to between $20 and $559 per American employee per year, depending on the company’s rate of turnover.

As a result, workers hired through the Cayman Island companies cannot receive unemployment assistance should they lose their jobs.

KBR’s practices are extreme, even compared to its competitors. Other top Iraq war contractors — including Bechtel and Parsons — pay Social Security and Medicare taxes for their employees.


-snip
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/03/06/kbr-taxes-cheney/

Pentagon Won't Probe KBR Rape Charges
DoD IG Says the Justice Dept. Is Still Investigating the Alleged Gang-Rape
By JUSTIN ROOD
Jan. 8, 2008

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4099514&page=1


KBR Rape Case Settled for $3 Million after Arbitration Award
By Minara El-Rahman on November 23, 2009 2:16 PM | No TrackBacks
AP reports that a woman who claims that she was raped back in 2005 while she was working for the company KBR Inc. (which was a subsidiary of Halliburton Co. at the time) settled her case for nearly $3 million dollars this week after winning an arbitration award over the alleged rape.

http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2009/11/settlement-for-3-million-dollars-over-kbr-rape-case.html


The Army official who managed the Pentagon's largest contract in Iraq says he was ousted when he refused to approve more than $1 billion in questionable payments to KBR, the Houston-based company that has provided food, housing and other services to U.S. troops.

Speaking out for the first time, Charles M. Smith said that he was forced out in 2004 after telling KBR officials the Army would impose escalating penalties if they failed to improve operations. "They had a gigantic amount of costs they couldn't justify," he said. But he was suddenly replaced, he said, and his successors approved most of the payments. Army officials denied Smith had been removed because of the dispute but confirmed reversing his decision.

http://www.startribune.com/world/19997404.html?location_refer=World

[sabrina 1]

50. "Disturbing story of Fallujah's birth defects"

The criminal war in Iraq, and now in Afghanistan, neither of which were necessary wars, have produced horrrors beyond imagination, not only in those who were direct victims of these crimes, but in future generations of those two countries and the troops who were sent there to fight for oil.

Disturbing story of Fallujah's birth defects

One photograph I saw showed a newborn baby with three heads.

While we were at the clinic, people kept arriving with children who were suffering major problems - a little girl with only one arm, several children who were paralysed, and another girl with a spinal condition so bad I asked my cameraman not to film her.

At the clinic we were told that the worst problems were to be found in the neighbourhood of al-Julan, near the river.

It seems though that opposition to these criminal wars and any demands for accountability regarding the perpetrators of these crimes against humanity, depends on which party is responsible. There is little opposition now, other than from people who have now been marginalized by the 'left', like Cindy Sheehan, since Democrats took over Congress and the WH.

War is evil. It is heart-breaking to read that the current puppet government in Iraq, betraying its own people for power and profit, refuses also to hold anyone accountable for these atrocities because they 'do not want to embarrass the Americans'.

Shame on us!

[grahamhgreen]

57. Ugh...!

[ThomThom]

85. Yes depleted uranium weapons are a war crime that will go on

for a very long time.

[Soylent Brice]

51. Yes, war bothers me.

[MissDeeds]

52. I hate war

And feel it is too often the first choice instead of the last resort. I am NOT in favor of a draft, but if it was in place, there would be a much greater outcry against the wars. I unfortunately know people who dismiss war deaths with the lame "well, they chose to enlist, they didn't have to" meme. Needless to say, I almost have to be restrained upon hearing this. If their sorry butts were on the line, they may be more vocal about ending the wars and finding a political, diplomatic solution.

[grahamhgreen]

56. Yes. "End the madness of Obama's war!" (adapted from German war resisters slogan.)

[fascisthunter]

59. "What Good is it for?"

[bdamomma]

73. absolutely nothing!

[hootinholler]

61. I thought it was to get Iraq's oil off the market

Then to steal it via unmetered pipelines.

I heard today on NPR that if Iraq's oil comes online the price of oil will drop and that would be bad.

-Hoot

[patrice]

62. WE ARE WAR SLAVES! - and that's not even the slightest exaggeration.

With Military taking up to 50% of all revenues for a couple of decades.

And that doesn't even include nukes under the control of the DOE.

Nor Black Ops.

[pundaint]

77. Well and frighteningly put. Maybe Mar 15 should be tax for war freedom day.

[Goldstein1984]

63. Fantastic Post

Thanks for the links. I found some great stuff, and then some more great stuff, and...

[tomm2thumbs]

67. Palin isn't even sure - after encouraging her own son to fight - *video*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVDCXpSD6Fk

*this was prior to her VP nomination - telling the truth before she realized it would hurt her standing in the election

[KamaAina]

69. It is not for oil so stop saying that!

Afghanistan in particular is about gas, too (the Unocal pipeline). :eyes:

[Octafish]

94. Double-Oh Karzai -- Our Man in UNOCAL put the Taliban in Texas

Thank you, KamaAina! I stand corrected.

From ENRON Entanglements to UNOCAL -- Bringing the Taliban to Texas and Controlling Afghanistan

[Jkid]

70. I knew it!

[The_Commonist]

72. "America's War" is sure to end badly...

Like in "V for Vendetta" or "The Animatrix".

War on Terror?
Stupidest idea ever.
And there are still SO many people out there who don't get that it was ONLY for the oil and for the power projection.

Suckers...

[naaman fletcher]

74. K+R brother. nt

[Chemical Bill]

80. Hell, * said it was about oil...

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2005/08/31/bush_gives_new_reason_for_iraq_war/

[juno jones]

81. Thank you Octafish.

Back in GW1, A 'crazy liberal' friend of mine would protest solo daily at the IL capitol house. His sign read "No Blood For Oil".

Seems as appropriate now as it did then.

On edit: We might not have been so fucked if altternatives has truly been explored in the last thirty years. Change is hard. Entropy is easy.

[Enthusiast]

84. IF we had a democracy

we would be out of Iraq and Afghanistan tomorrow. Stop thinking we have a democracy because we don't.

[SlingBlade]

87. K & R .... We Progressives Didn't leave the Party

The Party left us.

[Norrin Radd]

88. kr

[G_j]

89. time to consider that war is not an acceptable problem solving tool..

not unless you are intent on creating worse problems..

[onethatcares]

90. aside from a short period in the 90s, we've been at war since

nixon was elected. Hell, since Eisenhower was elected. There was Viet Nam, the congo, the dominican republic, nicaruagua, El Salvador, Iran, Iraq x 2, Somalia, Beruit, and probly a bunch I don't remember.

What a waste of lives.

Peace. Yes, war does bother me.

[gimama]

91. LOVE PEACE..Let's get us some o' THAT!

Answer Coalition has listed 50 cities with transportation to DC for the March 20 rallies:

www.answercoalition.org
(scroll down)
www.march20.org

Mr. President, will YOU listen???

[gimama]

92. O,yeah.. knr!

Thanks for YOUR excellent OP!

[Cetacea]

97. K&R

[maryf]

98. K& too late

Error: you can only recommend threads which were started in the past 24 hours

[Sheepshank]

101. that outift, that pose.

It all looks so natural on him lol

[Overseas]

108. It has been sad to learn how very many of our wars have been for oil.

Or other natural resources our "free market" corporations crave.

Edited to add-- Our "free market" has been very very expensive.