|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » General Discussion |
Very_Boring_Name (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 10:24 AM Original message |
If it's all about the oil why would you intentionally overthrow the guy freely supplying it? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
razorman (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 10:33 AM Response to Original message |
1. I have wondered the same thing. For many of our military actions, we have |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
robinlynne (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 12:37 PM Response to Reply #1 |
25. oh yes we did. Iraqi oil is now ours. (not due to the the first war, but this one.) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rfranklin (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 10:34 AM Response to Original message |
2. Perhaps the oil companies want to eliminate the payments to Khadaffi and his family... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Junkdrawer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 10:37 AM Response to Reply #2 |
3. Yep. BP was "years away from any production".... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TBF (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 10:38 AM Response to Original message |
4. He had been supplying it - until very recently when he began to talk |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Turborama (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 11:17 AM Response to Reply #4 |
8. The awarding of contracts to India, China and Brazil outside the normal bidding process was AFTER... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TBF (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 11:51 AM Response to Reply #8 |
17. Not so fast - |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Turborama (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 12:08 PM Response to Reply #17 |
20. So? That might explain why they abstained... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TBF (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 12:15 PM Response to Reply #20 |
21. What is your date of intervention please? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Turborama (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 12:42 PM Response to Reply #21 |
27. You know when it was. I'm going to correct myself. It was a terrible attempt at obfuscating |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TBF (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 01:19 PM Response to Reply #27 |
29. The date of intervention is not a "tangent" when your theory rests |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Turborama (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Mar-22-11 04:49 AM Response to Reply #29 |
33. The abstentions occurred on March 17 2011 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TBF (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Mar-22-11 07:08 AM Response to Reply #33 |
38. Gaddafi is unpredictable and unstable - I'm not a fan. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
meow mix (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 10:39 AM Response to Original message |
5. K&R |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Motown_Johnny (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 10:46 AM Response to Original message |
6. and why not go after countries with even more oil than Libya? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Erose999 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 11:22 AM Response to Reply #6 |
10. We did. #2 on the list is Iraq, and the Neocons are gnashing their teeth to go after Iran. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Ikonoklast (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 11:42 AM Response to Reply #10 |
14. China and India will get any and all oil out of Iran, now and in the future |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Statistical (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 11:46 AM Response to Reply #10 |
15. How much oil did we get from Iraq? n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Erose999 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 02:11 PM Response to Reply #15 |
30. Ask Halliburton. They made lots of money upgrading the oil fields. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cui bono (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 10:46 AM Response to Original message |
7. The White House did say this was not about ousting Gaddafi. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TBF (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 11:54 AM Response to Reply #7 |
18. I don't think it is about ousting him necessarily, it's about keeping that |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
UTUSN (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 11:21 AM Response to Original message |
9. K&R #1 (for as long as the +1 lasts!1) n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
conspirator (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 11:26 AM Response to Original message |
11. Price haggling. Better deal. Have you ever seen the confessions of an economic hitman |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JustABozoOnThisBus (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 11:40 AM Response to Original message |
12. We did it with Saddam |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ButterflyBlood (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 11:41 AM Response to Original message |
13. EXACTLY. If it was about oil the US and allies would be BACKING Gadaffi |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
leftstreet (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 11:47 AM Response to Original message |
16. What difference does it make? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
quinnox (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 11:55 AM Response to Original message |
19. I think its better when you make really silly polls n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PurityOfEssence (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 12:20 PM Response to Original message |
22. He HAS been changing the contracts, and we could also get a better deal |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sabrina 1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 12:28 PM Response to Original message |
23. He wasn't 'freely supplying it' for one reason. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Junkdrawer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 12:39 PM Response to Reply #23 |
26. +1000 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cali_Democrat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Mar-22-11 04:54 AM Response to Reply #23 |
34. +1001 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
snot (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 12:36 PM Response to Original message |
24. Who was in line to succeed him, if he were left in power? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
n2doc (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 12:58 PM Response to Original message |
28. Saddam sold us oil, too n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Erose999 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 02:24 PM Response to Reply #28 |
31. Actually we had him under embargo. And he had let the fields deteriorate to the point that |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Mimosa (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Mar-22-11 05:15 AM Response to Reply #31 |
36. ^ Great observation, ERose999 ^ |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
StarburstClock (583 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Mar-21-11 02:42 PM Response to Original message |
32. To control the oil yourself and the speculation that surrounds it |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Mimosa (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Mar-22-11 05:10 AM Response to Original message |
35. Because -like Saddam- he was taking too big a cut. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Runework (141 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Mar-22-11 05:20 AM Response to Original message |
37. Answer to the OP right here |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Sat May 04th 2024, 08:20 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » General Discussion |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC