The only reason is oil

It's all about the Petro-dollar. Euro vs. USD.

The fact that it appears oil, or chatter of hybrid and such, doesnt mean anything.

WE have put ourselves in the grips of oil, or shall I say, allowed ourselves to be put in the grips.

Now it is a crutch, that can be used to hold the population, and the economy, hostage.

[Edited on 17-2-2004 by smirkley]

there are alternatives one of the earliest was intiated by Tesla but the big money got a hold of that and squirrled it away.... it was going to give us all free energy and would not have taken much to implem"free energy" you can bet that scared the crap the carnegies and rockefellers and such of the day

Originally posted by watcheroftheskies
there are alternatives one of the earliest was intiated by Tesla but the big money got a hold of that and squirrled it away.... it was going to give us all free energy and would not have taken much to implem"free energy" you can bet that scared the crap the carnegies and rockefellers and such of the day

Yeah, but the radiant energy idea was only the building block to what would be appropriate today.

If it was truely a cost efficiant way to do things, it would have been done.

Gee how many times do I have to repeat this?

The war was about a number of issues and oil was one of them, maybe the most important (though I doubt that), reason, but to say it was the only reason defies logic really.

Originally posted by THENEO
Gee how many times do I have to repeat this?

The war was about a number of issues and oil was one of them, maybe the most important (though I doubt that), reason, but to say it was the only reason defies logic really.

listen to this man! its like what i said, only he has more credibility!

There is no doubt about the fact it was over other issues
I will still hold the line though..... if there was no oil in Iraq ..... then there would have been no war

The other issues brought up were just a diversion though .... propaganda to sway the masses into a patriotic flag waving fervor
"every gun that is made,every warship launched,in a final sense is a theft from those who hunger and are not fed,those who are cold and are not clothed."
Dwight Eisenhower
april 16th 1953

I dont think it was all about oil I think part of it was to gain another foothold in the middle east. Like now we freed them to have any type of government WE choose

www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net...

but, are we honest enough with ourselves to know it may have been about oil?

Originally posted by watcheroftheskies
There is no doubt about the fact it was over other issues
I will still hold the line though..... if there was no oil in Iraq ..... then there would have been no war

you mean with Saddam still? I doubt that. You must also consider where this country is located.

I think you have it backwards, oil made Saddam and much of the BS in the world today, possible!

That statement makes more sense.

"i can stomach us going to war a lot easier if the truth be told and not all this flag waving garbage propaganda that the administration wants to shove down the americans throats... please tell the truth......"

you wouldnt even accept the truth... just look at ur "this war is for oil" post...

Originally posted by watcheroftheskies
Well people i know that this is mostly opinion and that is all opinions are (just view points). If there was no oil in iraq there would have been know action taken... it is not about freedom mr. Bush. it is not about saving theese people from husseins tyranny.... it certainly is not about weapons of mass destruction...only weapon of mass destruction in reality is long range icbm's
if there was no oil there .. no war would have happened
i can stomach us going to war a lot easier if the truth be told and not all this flag waving garbage propaganda that the administration wants to shove down the americans throats... please tell the truth......

Absolutky true Bush just went there fir oil he's a fag

ok whats goin on...
im not usually one to moan at quality of posts... but wtf!

true oil made saddam ....still no oil .....no war
question ....if there was no oil in iraq... we would we have taken military action....?

[Edited on 19-2-2004 by watcheroftheskies]

i think everyone should look closely at smirkleys reply

"true oil made saddam ....still no oil .....no war
question ....if there was no oil in iraq... we would we have taken military action....?"

huh? i dont understand

There is no evidence that oil has a part, but there is ample evidence that terror and evidence to the contrary that the Bush oil people are getting rich because of the war. Of course, oil in that region makes that region important, and of course, the oil revenuefor countries in that region allows people like Hussein to be a threat and countries Saudi Arabia to finance terrorists, but as far as the West taking over the oil or any nonsense like that, come on, let's stay somewhat close with lucidity.

Mr crowne im not sure who your were replying to...but if it was to me i never said we were taking over the oil
i just said if there was not a drop of it in the country we would not have gone in....despite the so called war on terror or saddams atrocities

There is no evidence that oil has a part, but there is ample evidence that terror and evidence to the contrary that the Bush oil people are getting rich because of the war.

what 'terror' evidence are you talking about exactly?

and as far as your second statement, not only do i think you need to dig a little deeper, but i could also point out halliburton and friends, their ties to bush&co and their no bid contracts as the tip of the proverbial shady iceburg that is our current administration.

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
There is no evidence that oil has a part, but there is ample evidence that terror and evidence to the contrary that the Bush oil people are getting rich because of the war. Of course, oil in that region makes that region important, and of course, the oil revenuefor countries in that region allows people like Hussein to be a threat and countries Saudi Arabia to finance terrorists, but as far as the West taking over the oil or any nonsense like that, come on, let's stay somewhat close with lucidity.

Its an actual fact that the U.S. switched Iraq's petroeuros to petrodollars. Why would the U.S. do this when pricing oil in euros would have meant more money for the Iraqi people and help them recover from the invasion faster? Its not like Iraq was pricing its money in Iraqi dinars, it was euros. It just doesn't make any sense unless the U.S. was financially motivated to do this.

Link discussing the perplexing switch