Comments on: Legitimizing Permanent Occupation of Iraq

By: hp

hp — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 05:44:06 +0000

“The phenomenon of Americans grovelling at the feet of their Zionist masters is certainly one of the most shocking historical phenomenon of the 21st century.”

Nothing to see here folks… move along now…… Nothing to see here

http://www.wakeupfromyourslumber.com/node/7425

By: hp

hp — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 05:25:22 +0000

Now Pelosi is not giving the orders to Israel. Israel is giving the orders.
And no minor one at that.
Removing Congress from the decision to attack another nation, possibly with nuclear weapons, is nothing if not a perfect example of who’s in charge.
This is the Speaker of the House for Christ’s sake.
Removing an obstacle for Israel to possibly start WWIII. Start a war where surely the bulk of fighting and dying will be done by Americans. Don’t forget, Bush also “vowed” to defend Israel no matter who starts a war.
This is the same very same Pelosi who stood before AIPAC a few weeks earlier holding the dog tags of an Israeli soldier and crying.
Ever see her cry over the 12,000 dead American soldiers, the 40,000 wounded American soldiers?
Me neither.

By: hp

hp — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 04:58:00 +0000

bozhidar, how many ‘writs’ did the Godfather and Co. sign?
How many contracts did Meyer Lansky draw up?

But what the hell, here’s proof.
Ron Paul snitching on Pelosi and her “orders from AIPAC and Israel.”

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/paul_pelosi_AIPAC/2008/06/18/105652.html

By: bozhidar balkas

bozhidar balkas — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 13:52:49 +0000

max, deadbeat,
i do not know that deadbeat is not right ab his conclusion that it is the aipac who has the decisive role in US foreign policy.
it plays some role, i conjecture. deabeat is merely conjecturing. we both see only the tip of the iceberg.
once deadbeat produces written material of decisions being made in WH and a prez was ordered by aipac or israel to do this or that and prez signed the writ, i’l listen up. thank u

By: bozhidar balkas

bozhidar balkas — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 13:38:52 +0000

max.
i said that the oil flowed freely before US invasion of iraq ‘03. seems to me, that even after invasion of iq, oil is available as needed. or, at least, oiless lands aren’t, as far as i know, crying out for oil.
it also seems that u think that think that oil is not important. no, i don’t think that.
in fact, i’m so unknowledgeable ab oil usages that i never think of its uses.
i know we need it.
u say “he who controls oil, controls the realm” yes, true. but u left out who is this “who” who controls oil and realm?
if the oil flows to each land in the amount needed, one cd conclude that nobody/everybody controls it.
if we wd conclude that US controls it then we conclude that the control was obtained only after 2 cent’s of conquests/ threats/expansion.
first one controls air-, seapassages, regions, etc., and only after that planet’s/resources/peoples.
so, to be more exact, i think, first u control the planet and then u control peoples/resources.
the crucial question to be answered is who controls and to what degree the planet/resources/peoples?
i say world plutos. i say that cuz it always had been so. or so i deduce. thank u

By: Max Shields

Max Shields — Sat, 12 Jul 2008 02:42:12 +0000

bozhidar balkas,

I don’t think oil need be the sole reason for everything any more than zionism is the reason (as Deadbeat insists repeatedly) for everything.

Oil has its place – try living without it for one day. No water, no electricy, no food, no ANY f#cking thing; GRINDING HALT. So, if you think oil is just a minor incidental that we can pay no mind to (as Deadbeat seems to endlessly insist), than go over in a corner and hold your breath for 30 minutes…that’s how much you and the rest of us NEED oil.

Chomsky – Deadbeat and his mindless zionism aside (give us a break), is not saying simply that oil is necessary for the US and that it hasn’t flowed freely since ‘03. What he does say in a number of articles is that oil is the coin of the realm. He who has CONTROL of the oil, controls the realm. Not only the US but the World at large – particularly the West, Asia (China being foremost) and India have sucked up to the tit of the oil rig. Who controls the oil rig controls the tit.

Clear? Hope so ’cause I bad at drawing pictures.

By: bozhidar balkas

bozhidar balkas — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 17:48:03 +0000

the planet is too poor w. too many people for plutocrats to go just after oil; they want all of the planet and w.o. socialism

By: hp

hp — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 15:53:52 +0000

Heeeeeere’s Noamy…

http://homo-sapien-underground.blogspot.com/2008/07/noam.html

By: bozhidar balkas

bozhidar balkas — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 13:08:44 +0000

mary,
oil has flowed freely until ‘03. thus the invasion cldn’t have been solely for oil if at all but for the acquisition of important real estate.
iraq is, in my mind, a third stepping-stone to all of asia and the planet.
palestine was the fisrt stepping stone, afgh’n the second, iraq the third stepping- stone for more real estate.
regarding the profits from iraqi oil, it is another matter. lotsof crooks will make lotsof money from iraqi oil .
thank uand if US invasion was for oil, how come it is now $4 a gln? shouldn’t it be $1?
every US war (160+ thus far) presaged more wars and not fewer. so iraqi invasion heralds syrian, lebanese, iranian, and ’stans invasions

By: mary

mary — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 10:47:18 +0000

Deadbeat – you seem to be pushing the view that Bushco waged their illegal war on Iraq for reasons other than oil. I would recommend the view of Noam Chomsky here on Its The Oil, Stupid.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20260.htm

By: Deadbeat

Deadbeat — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 07:23:04 +0000

The Peak Oil thesis serves as a powerful trap and a clever manipulation in that it lets the real forces of war and militarism (the military-industrial complex and the pro-Israel lobby) “off the hook; it is a fabulous redirection. All evils are blamed on a commodity upon which we are all utterly dependent.”[2]

By: Deadbeat

Deadbeat — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 07:20:51 +0000

Behind the Myth of War for Oil The widely-shared but erroneous view that recent U.S. wars of choice are driven by oil concerns is partly due to precedence: the fact that for a long time military force was key to colonial or imperialist control and exploitation of foreign markets and resources, including oil. It is also partly due to perception: the exaggerated notion that both President Bush and Vice President Cheney were “oil men” before coming to the White House. But, as noted earlier, George W. Bush was never more than an ineffective minor oil prospector and Dick Cheney was never really an oil man; he headed the notorious Halliburton company that sold (and still sells) services to oil companies and the Pentagon. But the major reason for the persistence of this pervasive myth seems to stem from certain deliberate efforts that are designed to perpetuate the legend in order to camouflage some real economic and geopolitical special interests that drive U.S. military adventures in the Middle East. There is evidence that both the military-industrial complex and hard-line Zionist proponents of “greater Israel” disingenuously use oil (as an issue of national interest) in order to disguise their own nefarious special interests and objectives: justification of continued expansion of military spending, extension of sales markets for military hardware, and recasting the geopolitical map of the Middle East in favor of Israel. Counterpunch

By: Deadbeat

Deadbeat — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 06:27:18 +0000

There is also evidence that for every dollar’s worth of oil imported from the Persian Gulf region the Pentagon takes five dollars out of the Federal budget to “secure” the flow of that oil! This is a clear indication that the claim that the U.S. military presence in the Middle East is due to oil consideration is a fraud .[26] CounterPunch

By: Michael Kenny

Michael Kenny — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 19:25:56 +0000

I wouldn’t get too worked up about permanent occupations of Iraq or radars in Poland or whatever. Long before any of this becomes operational, the US will have collapsed and won’t be able to afford the upkeep of any of this. In the meantime, money poured into these various bottmoless pits will create infrastructure useful to the countries concerned and, most of all, divert funds away from the killing of Palestinian children.

By: bozhidar balkas

bozhidar balkas — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 17:43:29 +0000

speaking of the ‘agreements’ btwn conqueror/occupier and conqueree/occupied peoples one presents a fictitious reality.
even worse than that is that ‘agreements’ btwn US and iraq must be approved by congress.
in other words, US is the law/exucutor/occupier/ratifier of whatever ensues.
thank u