Iraq

should we just get the fuck out of there and let the genociding take its course or what?

>>1
No, we should cooperate with Iran in stabilising Iraq.

>>1

I don't like how the pro-War crowd who argued going to war with Iraq so they could "shoot sum Ayrabs" and "showem whos boss" are now the ones saying "we need to git out and let them sand niggers kill eachother," "fuck the ayrabs let them destroy one another."

Well pro-Iraq crowd, you're the one who caused the problem, now correct it.

>>3
Its past correction. The thing is, Iraq is an reluctant nation to begin with, created by the brittish according to their divide and conquer colony policy. It could never last in democratic form, their is to much strife between ethnic groups. But nobody wants a autonomous kurdistan (except the kurds) or any other division of the country so the US is forced to stay. But it will be an eternal struggle, a money pit and massgrave, and it will put afganistan and chechnya to shame.
Funniest thing is that this was all forseeable and mentioned by  more rational people, but the US wanted its war and it got it. Should´ve invaded some smaller country instead, should´ve learnt from Daddy Bush (panama) and Reagan (grenada). Thats how you fight a war!

>>4
That makes no fucking sense at all, that conspiracy theory is even more retarded than the ones the nazis made up to persecute the jews. You're just blaming the British because they are white.

Spoiler: It was the Ottomans.

>>4

Daddy Bush and the CIA were all over Central America -- They did it the right way, fight wars using proxies and not American soldiers, that way if something goes wrong, all can be blamed on the individuals who reside in the state you're using to overthrow the Government with... Although this was not the case with Kennedy's Bay of Pigs, today with very obscure avenues I'm sure you could get away with a lot more than you could in the past, heck, when Kennedy launched the Bay of Pigs, there wasn't even a Telecommunications Satellite in orbit, it took till 1964/65 for that to come around.

It just irks me endlessly that the same who were thirsty for blood got a war that was not "winnable" and thus they just want to leave and not finish the job. "Hey America, you wanted to shoot some Arabs, now is the perfect opportunity!" but they'll respond "Nuthin u can't do over thar now, they just animals cuz dats wut dey are." Whereas they could at least do something like fund Syria to overtake Iraq as they funded Iraq to fight Iran, that way they get some profits from their losses.

>>5
yeye, whatever, same thing -> nation not stable. I dont care what color the imperialist has, ottamans are as big cocksuckers as the brits and the apemericans. Enjoy your graves

I really don't know what the US should do. Invading was clearly a mistake, leaving might turn the place into genocideland, staying, on the other hand, isn't doing anything particularly good, either. Constant suicide bombings for a few years now and no end visible.

True, the recent problems in the middle-east have their roots in the colonists dividing lands in their offices by rulers and pencils. After that they were only worsened by creating states out of thin air in between other countries and nations and waging the cold war in there.

I own oil stock and when we went into afganistan oil went up from 20 bucks to 30 bucks a barrel. That was not good enough for my bottom line. When we went charging into Iraq oil has gone to 60  to 70 bucks a barrel. I can't wait when we go into Iran this month and then I will be able to profit off the 125 bucks a barrel. I love these wars. More war please:)

>>9
"when we went into afganistan oil went up from 20 bucks to 30 bucks a barrel"
"we went charging into Iraq oil has gone to 60  to 70 bucks a barrel"
Prove it.

http://www.wtrg.com/oil_graphs/oilprice1947.gif

>>11
High oil prices are bad for business. Only communists profit from the war. Communists like Chavez who can now sell their oil for a higher price. This is what happens when the state monopolises a nation's resources, we must privatise social security, health and education now before the same happens to us. The US are still underdogs, like cowboys.

>>12
Chavez actually tried to seal a deal with the US to lock the market oil price (at a lower level). Diablo Bush was not interested. The market price is not set by chavez but (duDUM!) the market. And oil companies are fucking booming. And Bush & Co who have a lot of oil interests see no end to their personal gain from these wars. But thats coincidence, or wait what? What was the reason not to invade Pakistan when they developed nukes and trained taliban terrorists?

>>13
If he set the price of oil lower than the market cost, companies would simply buy all his oil and sell it for a higher price. Also when oil prices sank in 2004 his country nearly went into revolt against him, Venezuela's prosperity depends on high oil prices.

I fail to see why you intentionally overlooked these obvious facts, do you think I'm uninformed like the average Venezuelan? I'm more suspicious of your intentions than US oil companies.

>>14
I assume (as should you) that the deal entailed some form of direct transfer at rebated prices or a multilateral reform or regulation of some sort. It was shot down before it went into action anyways. Revolt? I thought that when minority interests tries to oust a democratically elected official thats called a coup, but english is not my first language so what do i know. But maybe you mean the recall referendum? Well, he won that too.  Venezuelas prosperity does in fact not depend on high oil prices, rather the high prices has overflowed the venezuelan cashbox to such an extent that rampant inflation is feared. Thats why hes spending his cash on starting a south american credit bank, a south american news network, a multitude of charity projects targeting invalids, blind and whatnot.

But let me tell you who to suspect. The same people who told you that the iraqis hated Saddam so much that they would welcome the G.I.:s with open arms are the same people telling you that Chavez has just bribed his population and its just a question of time before he is ousted. The same people thought the cuban peasentry would rise in arms on the american side during bay of pigs. Wishful thinking bordering the criminal insane.

>>15
Find the details of this offer then. If Venezuela sold their oil for less than the market price there would be revolt as the Chavez regime is all about extracting profits from their nation's resources in order to stay in power.

>>16
http://www.guardian.co.uk/venezuela/story/0,,1745707,00.html
he wants to lock it at 50$ a barrel, 15$ below the market price.
And no, there will be no revolt since the majority of the people wants him in power, he has not hidden his agenda (socialism, nationalisation of resources and industries etc) at all. There may be a coup though, God and Bush willing. Btw, read moar, the sources where you gather your knowledge seem contaminated by complete lack reality.

>>17
>>16
A quick google search also returned this

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4871938.stm

>>17
If he is good natured and popular with the people, why does he need violence and "rule by decree" to have his way?

Also he has the power to reduce oil prices but has not done so, actions speak louder than words. He wants oil prices to be higher than they were during 2002 and 2004 so he has enough cash to stay in power.

>>19
Why are high oil prices a bad thing? People buy less gas, oil stays for longer and nature doesn't get owned so much.

The Iraq war is illegal, we promised we wouldn't go in there during the Golf War but we ended up in there any ways about 13 years later. Our presents in there are effecting oil prices and almost all of our tax money is going toward war spending. I have a friend in Iraq and they don't really talk about politics while they're there but he doesn't like all the money being spent on this war. Half a trillion is going to the Iraq War.
>>20
I'm afraid our car companies are to retarded for that shit because of all the rich people and rednecks willing to buy huge gas guzzling cars.

>>20
Actually I didn't read what you said all the way through, I though you were going to say some thing smarter. But no people are not driving less because of the high oil prices.

>>20
If it's too high or too low it's a bad thing. If it's too high it is because it is being monopolised. If it is too low it gets used up too quickly and the economy becomes dependant on it.

>>21
We spend that much on Iraq and the arabs bitch whine that we don't care about them? They should be thanking us.

>>23
The money is going toward weapons and weapon research such as marines in a tube.

>>21 The Iraq war is illegal,

What the fuck does that even MEAN?  What laws were violated?  Congress authorized it, the UN gave it its blessing, so what do you mean when you use that word?

>>we promised we wouldn't go in there during the Golf War

*snrk*  Who told you that?  At the end of the 1991 war, we promised Saddam that if he got up to any monkeyshines, we WOULD invade and take him out.  That was written into the armistice agreement.  That's the whole reason we kept troops in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia afterwards.  Then Clinton ignored him for 8 years, and he started thinking we didn't mean what we said.

Not the same anon, but what the heck, the thread is interesting.

>>25 the UN gave it its blessing

Uh, not true at all.  Colin Powell spoke to the UN general assembly in early in 2003, showing  the "proof" that Saddamn's regime had WMDs. Then the US together with the Brits and Spain proposed to use force against Irak, but because the rest of the NATO and the Russians strongley opposed it, the US retired the proposal because it was almost sure that it would be vetoed.

tl;dr The UN couldn't possibly give its blessing for the invasion because the US didn't oficially ask for it.

>>19 Also he has the power to reduce oil prices but has not done so

I don't have much love for Chavez, but he can't really do that as long as Venezuela is a memeber of the OPEC. Hell, if it was for him he would sell the oil by Euros instead of US Dollars just to piss Bush off, but the OPEC said NO WAY to that.

And the guy IS popular. You could say that he bought that popularity, but the fact is undeniable. I read that the initial membership process of Chavez's unified party was just closed, and it sems that over five million people signed up, which is roughly the 20% of that nation's population.

>>24
And protecting Iraqi civilians from sectarian genocide squads.

>>26
The majority of Venezuelans believe OPEC is an ancient civilisation, euro is a slang term for gringo and that Chavezism will create a utopia where they don't have to carry buckets of their faeces half a mile to the nearest stream in order to dispose of it cleanly. Chavez's popularity is no indicator of his ability to ensure prosperity, liberty and justice for his country, neither is it an indicator of adherance to what he preaches.

Also logical fallacy, since Chavez knows he cannot quit OPEC this does not rule out the possibility of this being a propoganda coupe. He has OPEC by the balls and could do his best to reduce the cost, frankly OPEC should call his bluff until his imperial socialist coffers run dry.

Amazing what Amerikans don't hear about. Funnier still is the "la la la la la la la la la la la la" way they don't want to hear the facts either lulz!

>>27
Uh, I don't even know how to respond to the first part of your post, it's as bad as  those saying that all Americans are dumb and fat and whatnot. His ability as a ruler, that's something I can't make an educated opinion about, and I am pretty sure neither you can.

And exactly how does he have the OPEC by the balls?

>>29
He literally owns a significant portion of the world's oil supply. OPEC wants to extract it and sell it. Their only bargaining chip is that they run most of the infrastructure. Also I know a lot morre about Chavez and OPEC than you do, so if you want to submit that's fine. I won't though.

Gee. Kurdish rebels attacking Turkey now. Wonder why Saddam put such a huge fucking leesh on them then...? hmmm...

CUT THE FUCKING CRAP BEFORE YOU FUCKING KILL US ALL!

>>30
You just dismissed in your other post the enire population of a country as ignorants. Sorry, but that's bullshit. Just saying on the internet that you "know" stuff doesn't make it real.

>>30
Okey mr Know-it-all, you have clearly not read the previous links. Venezuela has crude oil which is more expensive to develop than regualar oil. An oil price above 40$ a barrel is needed, else there is no profitability. The current price is around 70$ a barrel and albeit it fluctuates it will never go below 40$ again. This means that Venezuela has around 200 years worth of oil reserves, more than saudi arabia, and as the oil price increases this will increase even further. So, his cash nor his oil will not run out. But it is not his doing that oil prices sky rocket. If you want lower oil prices, make the US leave Iraq and stabilize the situation there through some league of arab nations and make peace between Israel and the rest of the region through forcing Israel to accept demands. Thats 30$ right there, and although unlikely its more fucking possible than to hope that Chavez sells oil for a loss.

>>1

YES

>>34

No we shouldn't. That would be submitting to the will of terrorists and proving to the world that democracy is weak.

>>33
This is 4chan. You click links at your own peril, faggot.

>>33
So why doesn't the evil dictatorship of america that you hate so much sell out Israel for cheaper oil?

sex 2 times a day for u

>>37

Zionists neoconservatives in the Pentagon?  I present old copypasta...

Inside the government, the chief defense intellectuals include Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy secretary of defense. He is the defense mastermind of the Bush administration; Donald Rumsfeld is an elderly figurehead who holds the position of defense secretary only because Wolfowitz himself is too controversial. Others include Douglas Feith, No. 3 at the Pentagon; Lewis "Scooter" Libby, a Wolfowitz protégé who is Cheney's chief of staff; John R. Bolton, a right-winger assigned to the State Department to keep Colin Powell in check; and Elliott Abrams, recently appointed to head Middle East policy at the National Security Council. On the outside are James Woolsey, the former CIA director, who has tried repeatedly to link both 9/11 and the anthrax letters in the U.S. to Saddam Hussein, and Richard Perle, who has just resigned his unpaid chairmanship of a defense department advisory body after a lobbying scandal. Most of these "experts" never served in the military. But their headquarters is now the civilian defense secretary's office, where these Republican political appointees are despised and distrusted by the largely Republican career soldiers.

Most neoconservative defense intellectuals have their roots on the left, not the right. They are products of the influential Jewish-American sector of the Trotskyist movement of the 1930s and 1940s, which morphed into anti-communist liberalism between the 1950s and 1970s and finally into a kind of militaristic and imperial right with no precedents in American culture or political history. Their admiration for the Israeli Likud party's tactics, including preventive warfare such as Israel's 1981 raid on Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor, is mixed with odd bursts of ideological enthusiasm for "democracy."

>>39
needs moar masons and gray aliens

>>40

Actually, that CP seems founded in sound reason.

>>41
wut.

errr... okaaaaaay... CP is now "copypasta" it appears...

>>43

CP is CopyPasta, as is Capitan Picard.

Caturday Pictures

Captain Planet