Author Topic: Dmf  (Read 1421 times)

Offline NUKE

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8599
      • Arizona Greens
Dmf
« Reply #30 on: October 04, 2004, 08:47:41 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Steve
Ya, what is his plan?  

Nash doesn't know, even though he favors Kerry over Bush(he just can't tell you why he does).

does anyone know his plan?


Steve, don't you know?

"Help is on the way" and he is "reporting for duty" with "a better plan".

How many times does he have to say that before people will understand?

Offline NUKE

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8599
      • Arizona Greens
Dmf
« Reply #31 on: October 04, 2004, 08:50:26 PM »
Steve,

I was telling my brother about our lunch conversation today :)
Those two other guys who overheard us were pretty nice.

Yeah, I admit....I brought up Nash as an example of a Kerry supporter not knowing wtf Kerry stood for.

Anyway.

Offline Nash

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11705
      • http://sbm.boomzoom.org/
Dmf
« Reply #32 on: October 04, 2004, 08:53:39 PM »
How many times do I have to tell you?!!

Leadership abilities!

Offline TweetyBird

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1775
Dmf
« Reply #33 on: October 04, 2004, 09:49:16 PM »
>>6. My exit strategy is pretty simple. We're responsible. We have to stay until they have a somewhat stable government up and running with the necessary attendant supporting institutions. You'll need an Executive Branch, a Legislative Branch and a Judiciary. You'll need Army, Education, Public Health and other supporting players.
<<

Agree 100%. But I disagree with your time table. I think 100 years is closer to the mark, for one simple reason. we can't let them have a strong enough military to defend themselves until they like us. And thats gonna take awhile.

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Dmf
« Reply #34 on: October 04, 2004, 09:53:32 PM »
My thoughts are that we protect them until an election cycle or two goes by and they have their institutions up and running.

Then we throw a big farewell party and slip out the back after they're drunked up but before the booze runs out.

Then if the fall back into Muslim v Muslim conflict and Civil War we just "tsk, tsk" from a distance. We don't go back though.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline NUKE

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8599
      • Arizona Greens
Dmf
« Reply #35 on: October 04, 2004, 09:54:04 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by TweetyBird

Agree 100%. But I disagree with your time table. I think 100 years is closer to the mark, for one simple reason. we can't let them have a strong enough military to defend themselves until they like us. And thats gonna take awhile.


Kind of like how Germany and Japan took 100 years....

Offline TweetyBird

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1775
Dmf
« Reply #36 on: October 04, 2004, 09:56:32 PM »
Germany and Japan have token armies, incapable of defending those nations. We made them sign a paper to insure it.

Offline NUKE

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8599
      • Arizona Greens
Dmf
« Reply #37 on: October 04, 2004, 09:59:16 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by TweetyBird
Germany and Japan have token armies, incapable of defending those nations. We made them sign a paper to insure it.


when has a signed paper ensured anything? If a signed paper is all we need, then lets make Iraq sign one too, agreed? Problem solved.

Offline TweetyBird

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1775
Dmf
« Reply #38 on: October 04, 2004, 09:59:47 PM »
>>Then if the fall back into Muslim v Muslim conflict and Civil War we just "tsk, tsk" from a distance. We don't go back though.
<<

That would be a wonderful idea if oil wasn't a strategic resource.
It is, and a peoples wants it - most in the region who wants it aren't friendly with us.

Offline TweetyBird

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1775
Dmf
« Reply #39 on: October 04, 2004, 10:05:46 PM »
Nuke, Iraq is different. It has strategic natural resources - OIL. If it had none - we wouldn't be there, like so many places in Africa we aren't. Yes there are atrocities in those countries in Africa, but there is no huge oil supply. We NEED Iraq to be defended. Its a black chip ($100 chip). Japan and Germany resources were human (green $5 chips).

Its completely different

Offline NUKE

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8599
      • Arizona Greens
Dmf
« Reply #40 on: October 04, 2004, 10:09:52 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by TweetyBird
Nuke, Iraq is different. It has strategic natural resources - OIL. If it had none - we wouldn't be there, like so many places in Africa we aren't. Yes there are atrocities in those countries in Africa, but there is no huge oil supply. We NEED Iraq to be defended. Its a black chip ($100 chip). Japan and Germany resources were human (green $5 chips).

Its completely different


So now you bring up oil when before you stated that we can't leave until they "like" us and never before used oil in your argument ?

Okay, now tell us why we can't leave before 100 years because of oil.

This is good stuff.

Offline NUKE

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8599
      • Arizona Greens
Dmf
« Reply #41 on: October 04, 2004, 10:22:46 PM »
Good night Tweety.

Offline TweetyBird

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1775
Dmf
« Reply #42 on: October 04, 2004, 10:56:08 PM »
Its really pretty simple. Because there is so much oil under Iraq we can not let its control be up to chance, or fall into the the hands of Iran - most likely not by an outright attack, but by a war of religious factions supported by Iran.  Oil fuels the tanks and the planes, as well as most economies in this world. Iran can't have it - trust me. Just watch the Dow index when a pipeline explodes.

Iraq needs to have a strong enough military to defend a government that is alien in the region (i.e. democracy). It can't be a token army, especially with Iran having nuclear capabilities. Such an army, capable of dending Iraq, would be a threat to Isreal. So before they can have it, we have to make damn sure they're on our side. They have to like western society. Thats going to take awhile.

The realistic option is not to expect them to be able to defend themselves, in which case we'll  be permanent guards of Iraq.
That is the likely scenario, and it aint gonna be cheap.

Offline NUKE

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8599
      • Arizona Greens
Dmf
« Reply #43 on: October 04, 2004, 11:04:08 PM »
So now you suddenly enter "oil" into your argument?

I thought you said we couldn't leave until "they liked us"?

If oil was the main objective, why didn't we take it in the first war? Since when has the US ever relied on Iraqi oil?

So, why do you think we need to stay in Iraq for 100 years again? Why not just make them sign a paper like Germany and Japan?

goodnight.

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Dmf
« Reply #44 on: October 04, 2004, 11:13:41 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by TweetyBird
[B
That would be a wonderful idea if oil wasn't a strategic resource.
It is, and a peoples wants it - most in the region who wants it aren't friendly with us. [/B]


Ya ever try to eat oil?

 That oil WILL be sold. If it's sold, it can be bought.

Get Milo to explain the world oil market to you.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!