Smooth Running Democracies

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

Thats why people are blowing our troops up in Iraq?

Come on man, that is a really stupid narrow minded statement. You really believe we are in Iraq because of business interests and an attempt to exploit the Iraqi economy?

[tw]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Come on man, that is a really stupid narrow minded statement. You really believe we are in Iraq because of business interests and an attempt to exploit the Iraqi economy?

Explain why the largest embassy in the world is the US Embassy in Baghdad. Explain why the reasons for invading Iraq so strongly correspond to the Project for New American Century where America must protect "OUR" oil and where America must do anything necessary (including Pearl Harboring of Russia, India, or Germany) to keep the US as #1. But somehow the invasion had no basis in exploiting the Iraq economy and resources even when Iraq was a threat to no one?

Explain why we are in Iraq when Iraq was never a threat and when the smoking gun (always necessary to justify a war) does not exist? Explain the many corporations reaping massive profits with no-bid contracts (ie Haliburton) that are also closely aligned to top George Jr administration staff?

Since we created a war in Iraq for none of the Military Science 101 reasons that justify war, then why are we there? TheMercenary does not answer that question; only makes accusations. Every action to get American into war with Iraq was not justified by a 'smoking gun'. But then those who promoted the lie also defined a need to protect "OUR" oil - a political agenda.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by tw

Explain why the largest embassy in the world is the US Embassy in Baghdad. Explain why the reasons for invading Iraq so strongly correspond to the Project for New American Century where America must protect "OUR" oil and where America must do anything necessary (including Pearl Harboring of Russia, India, or Germany) to keep the US as #1. But somehow the invasion had no basis in exploiting the Iraq economy and resources even when Iraq was a threat to no one?

Explain why we are in Iraq when Iraq was never a threat and when the smoking gun (always necessary to justify a war) does not exist? Explain the many corporations reaping massive profits with no-bid contracts (ie Haliburton) that are also closely aligned to top George Jr administration staff?

Since we created a war in Iraq for none of the Military Science 101 reasons that justify war, then why are we there?

Supportive actions of the events are not machinations planned by it. Stop with the conspiracy theory BS.

PS. You never took Military Science 101, I did.

[tw]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

PS. You never took Military Science 101, I did.

You could have fooled me. I don't even see evidence of a college degree. But I do see you posting your own pictures and labeling them as me. I guess I was supposed to be honored?

TheMercenary. All joking aside, you demonstrate little grasp of military science. Otherwise you would have seen "Mission Accomplished" in 2002 as the complete fiasco and justified only by lies. Curious that I, using principles from Military Science and repeatedly quoting them, accurately described "Mission Accomplished" in 2002 as unjustified. Where were you when that fiasco was made so obvious by basic military doctrine?

Your grasp of military science seem to correspond to a claim by Pres Cheney. Cheney claims to be a great military leader in the image of Patton, Bill Sherman, and Epaminondas. He also advocated a war that violates basic military principles. Did you see reality back in 2002 or did you also have that minimal grasp of basic military doctrine?

Well if Military Science justified an American invasion, then tell us, what is this military doctrine that justified that war in 2002 or today? Do you also, like Cheney, view yourself with that same grasp? If so, then explain the military doctrine that justified an invasion of Iraq. You haven't. Here is your opportunity to prove you learned Military Science 101. Show us how "Mission Accomplished" is justified by those principles of MS.

Meanwhile, posting big word does not mask one glaring fact. TheMercenary never explains why that political agenda advocated by Project for a New American Century, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfovitz, Feith, etc is somehow separate from their effort to create war. As Isikoff and Corn note,

Taking out Saddam was more than taking out Saddam. It was part of the larger strategic vision: expanding the United States' influence and showing its muscle in the Middle East.

"Mission Accomplished" was justified by lies. But the real agenda was (according to these and other founding members of PNAC) about securing "OUR" oil - and other similar objectives. Why the largest embassy in the world in Baghdad? The American intend in Iraq is that clear. We (George Jr) intended to fix Iraq to our liking.

So do you, TheMercenary, have the same "long view" that Cheney also claimed to have? The same "long view" defined by Project for a New American Century? Or do you continue to post only by criticizing? Based upon everything posted by TheMercenary, you have no military science (officer) training other than what is taught to Privates.

Show me. Show us how "Mission Accomplished" is justified by basic military doctrine. TheMercenary never once has.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by tw

You could have fooled me. I don't even see evidence of a college degree.

Let's compare your years of active service to mine and then see if I have any legitimate insight into the issue. In fact I have a number of college degrees thank you very much.

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Come on man, that is a really stupid narrow minded statement. You really believe we are in Iraq because of business interests and an attempt to exploit the Iraqi economy?

I think it would be stupid to rule it out. Also, they are attacking us more for the imperialistic part.

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2004/09/0080197

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

I think it would be stupid to rule it out. Also, they are attacking us more for the imperialistic part.

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2004/09/0080197

I am in no way saying that business has not attempted to take advantage of goberment handouts during the gross dumping of money, any business in position to take such advantage would be stupid not to do so, it is called capitalism. But to imply, as tw has so many times, that we invaded because of business interests is patently ridiculous.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

But to imply, as tw has so many times, that we invaded because of business interests is patently ridiculous.

Ummm, no. It is not ridiculous. Cheney's pre-9-11 Iraq oil map is enough to keep it out of ridiculous teritory.

Not proven, perhaps not even likely, but not ridiculous.

[xoxoxoBruce]

We can't rule out the possibility, or even the probability, that some of the key perpetrators didn't have other agendas. That said, I doubt if the war was the result of a business oriented conspiracy.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

Ummm, no. It is not ridiculous. Cheney's pre-9-11 Iraq oil map is enough to keep it out of ridiculous teritory.

Not proven, perhaps not even likely, but not ridiculous.

I have never seen proof of such a map. I think it is ridiculous because most of the critical comments are drilled down to some large conspiracy theory about oil and Cheney hate and Haliburton and KBR and Bush hate. Every deployment that I ever went on, with a 24 notice, had KBR people on the ground in support. The contracts went way back into the 1990's. There was not a single company who did the specialty work that they did to support deployed troops. Not one. They cornered the markets on it and did so long before Bush. But because of Cheney's associations with the parent corp it gave fuel to the conspiracy theorists little minds. Funny how no one really gives a crap about the hundreds of Congressmen and women who have left office and moved right into a business job where they lobby or work for a business they supported and got earmarks for when they were in office. All the political hacks do it.