Proof!

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/24/washington/24contracts.html

Lopter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Proof!
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/24/washington/24con
> tracts.html


That is some serious logical hurdling. Thanks for the laugh though.

What a load.

Right now we hear all these folks complaining that Iraq might have $79B in surplus from the sale of oil. Now, when the Iraqi government opts to award contracts to oil companies, Schumer says we should block it. Talk about arrogant. The awards are not just for the US, they are French and British as well.

What Iraq decides to do with their oil contracts is up to them, not us. We do not own or control their mineral rights.

Russia and China are not our friends. The fact that they are not getting these contracts is a GOOD THING. The fact that Schumer and Company are trying to block the contracts is very telling, and for those folks that keep harping on people questioning people's patriotism, I am sorry, but actions speak VOLUMES louder than words.

Speaking of actions........ if China isn't our friend, then why are we asking them for financing?

Not speaking of any action whatsoever...... please put the Cheetos down and take a walk or something.

Actually it is cookies atm. They are good - I would offer you one, but it seems you have other issues....

No, China is not a friend to the US. You have something to refute that statement? And why are we asking them for financing? Because a bunch of folks like you constantly buy their products and goods (the ones not made in Taiwan), and they need to keep the US monetary system stable so that they can keep fueling their economy.

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What a load.
>
> Right now we hear all these folks complaining that
> Iraq might have $79B in surplus from the sale of
> oil. Now, when the Iraqi government opts to award
> contracts to oil companies, Schumer says we should
> block it. Talk about arrogant. The awards are not
> just for the US, they are French and British as
> well.

Go tell the families of these 4155 http://icasualties.org/oif/BY_DOD.aspx soldiers killed by the IED's that the war was really about oil.

09/05/08 Thibeault, Jordan P. P. DoD Confirmation Non-hostile Balad (FOB Hammer)
09/04/08 Thomas, Bryan R. DoD Confirmation Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack Baghdad (eastern part)
09/04/08 Mayne, Kenneth W. DoD Confirmation Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack Baghdad (eastern part)
09/02/08 May, Patrick W. DoD Confirmation Non-hostile Baghdad
08/28/08 Nieve, Jorge L. Feliz DoD Confirmation Non-hostile - vehicle accident Mosul
08/28/08 Gonzalez, Michael L. DoD Confirmation Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack Baghdad
08/27/08 Cooper, David K. DoD Confirmation Hostile - hostile fire - small arms fire Qadasiyah
08/26/08 Alfonso, Carlo E. DoD Confirmation Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack Baghdad (Sadr City)
08/25/08 Fitzmorris, Steven J. DoD Confirmation Hostile - hostile fire - small arms fire Adhamiyah
08/19/08 Stanciel, George DoD Confirmation Hostile - hostile fire - mortar attack Amarah
08/17/08 Stottlemyer, Travis M. DoD Confirmation Non-hostile Manama
08/14/08 King, Janelle F. DoD Confirmation Non-hostile Baghdad
08/14/08 McGuire, Daniel A. C. DoD Confirmation Hostile - hostile fire - small arms fire Falluja
08/13/08 Hale, James M. DoD Confirmation Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack Baghdad (northwestern part)
08/10/08 Ferschke Jr., Michael H. DoD Confirmation Hostile - hostile fire - small arms fire Tikrit (southwest of)
08/10/08 Gibson, Kenneth B. DoD Confirmation Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack Tarmiya
08/09/08 Ulloa, Jose E. DoD Confirmation Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack Baghdad (Sadr City)
08/07/08 Maybin, Danny E. DoD Confirmation Non-hostile Camp Arifjan
08/07/08 Trejo, Stewart S. DoD Confirmation Non-hostile Karma
08/07/08 McKiski, Adam T. DoD Confirmation Non-hostile Karma
08/04/08 Hutton, Timothy J. DoD Confirmation Non-hostile Baghdad
08/04/08 Menke, Jonathan D. DoD Confirmation Hostile - hostile fire - IED Baghdad
08/04/08 Henry, Gary M DoD Confirmation Hostile - hostile fire - IED Baghdad
08/03/08 Schmidt, Ronald Andrew DoD Confirmation Non-hostile - vehicle accident Baghdad
08/02/08 Miller, Brian K. DoD Confirmation Non-hostile - vehicle accident Abd Allah
08/02/08 Cole, Jennifer L. DoD Confirmation Non-hostile - gunshot wound Baiji
08/02/08 Dickson, Kevin R. DoD Confirmation Non-hostile Balad
07/31/08 Mitchell, Andre Darnell DoD Confirmation Non-hostile - vehicle rollover Mosul
07/30/08 McHale, James A. DoD Confirmation Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack National Naval Medical Center, Bethesda,
07/17/08 Larsen, Jackie L. DoD Confirmation Non-hostile Balad (Balad Air Base)
07/15/08 Textor, David W. DoD Confirmation Hostile - hostile fire Mosul
07/15/08 Vrooman, Jeremy D. DoD Confirmation Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack Knan (died in Baghdad)

and the list goes on

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Actually it is cookies atm. They are good - I
> would offer you one, but it seems you have other
> issues....
>
> No, China is not a friend to the US. You have
> something to refute that statement? And why are we
> asking them for financing? Because a bunch of
> folks like you constantly buy their products and
> goods (the ones not made in Taiwan), and they need
> to keep the US monetary system stable so that they
> can keep fueling their economy.

Are you that stupid. Of course you are. Take a look at who, besides the Saudis, own our t-bills. Google. Own it. Use it.

What does this have to do with anything? Oh right, suddenly the topic is, the war was for oil.. I forgot. Funny that the article you quoted said nothing about that, other than the fact that Schumer didn't want them to award no bid contracts to these companies.

Yes, their deaths were tragic, but you are making a leap here that due to 9/11, and the fact that Saddam and Iraq supposedly had nothing to do with supporting terrorism (as per other posters here), that instead, the folks in the Bush Whitehouse suddenly said - "Voila!!! An opportunity!!! Lets use this to help us justify attacking Iraq to get control of their oil!!"

Sure. And the Russians, Chinese and French (who all had billions of dollars in oil contracts with Iraq - IF they had sanctions lifted) al had no interest in helping Iraq cover up their WMD? Please. Yes, yes, the US is a bad country, we are all bad, the Bush administration is all bad. Happy now?

I never said the Iraq War was for oil. You must have me confused for someone else. But, I'm glad to see you're all worked up and your blood pressure is in the "high"-to-"pretty-high-due-to-lard-and-excessive-internet-posting". Please keep pounding the plastic so you'll be one less GOP vote.

Yes, all the money we are spending on oil has given the Middle East a huge boost. But still, lets look at China - from one of their own mouthpieces...

http://www.chinaorbit.com/china-economy/the-danger-of-chinas-trade-surplus.html

Quote

Effects of China's Trade Surplus

One of the top priorities of the Chinese government this year will be the reduction of the trade surplus. The Chinese government will focus this year on importation instead of exportation. Taxes on imports have already been lowered to encourage Chinese companies.

It is important for the stability of both the global and Chinese market that China controls its surplus. China’s money supply has grown significantly in the last year primarily due to the trade surplus; these big flows of money make it harder for banks to control investment and inflation. The surplus adds to China’s foreign exchange reserve, which has contributed to rapid investment growth by adding to the money available for banks to lend out.

The big trade surplus China has with the U.S could lead to a global recession. A collapse in the ability of the United States to finance the shortfall could drive interest rates higher and block growth in the world's largest economy, economists have said.

The surging trade surplus has increased friction with trading partners. In this case the pressure of other governments on China’s revaluation of its currency is more a political than an economic matter. For the U.S and other countries that have a big trade deficit with China, the solution is clear: If China would revaluate its currency their trade deficit will reduce. Another benefit is that their domestic inflation will decrease as well.

China revaluated its currency slightly last summer. Some argue that it might be good for China to revaluate its currency because the revaluation of the Yuan can help the Chinese economy because the export will slow down, and China will have more control over its balance of payments. The reasons against the revaluation are that the Yuan will slow down China’s economy and the investment would also decrease in China. An Appreciation of the RMB would involve a major change in China's international monetary policy and have important consequences for growth and stability in China and the stability of Asia.

In general, the view in Asia is not to revaluate the Yuan while trading partners of China want an appreciation.

It is in their interests to continue to lend money to the US, and keep the dollar stable. Pretty much what I said, no? That still does not make them our friend - and the more indebted to them we become doesn't help our position at all.

Registered Cuckoo Bird Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I never said the Iraq War was for oil. You must
> have me confused for someone else. But, I'm glad
> to see you're all worked up and your blood
> pressure is in the
> "high"-to-"pretty-high-due-to-lard-and-excessive-i
> nternet-posting". Please keep pounding the
> plastic so you'll be one less GOP vote.

Hmm - and here is the bye line:

Let's Not forget why the US is in Iraq- Bush wanted OIL!

If you are saying that you are not trying to tie the deaths of the soldiers to that claim then why post it here? And as for me, no blood pressure problems at all - this is actually relaxing and fun.

Enough of your trolls. If you have something meaningful to post great, otherwise you are getting boring.

Boring so much that your fat sausage fingers are having a hard time keeping up. Is that sweat underneath your teet?

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What does this have to do with anything? Oh right,
> suddenly the topic is, the war was for oil.. I
> forgot. Funny that the article you quoted said
> nothing about that, other than the fact that
> Schumer didn't want them to award no bid contracts
> to these companies.
>
> Yes, their deaths were tragic, but you are making
> a leap here that due to 9/11, and the fact that
> Saddam and Iraq supposedly had nothing to do with
> supporting terrorism (as per other posters here),
> that instead, the folks in the Bush Whitehouse
> suddenly said - "Voila!!! An opportunity!!! Lets
> use this to help us justify attacking Iraq to get
> control of their oil!!"
>
> Sure. And the Russians, Chinese and French (who
> all had billions of dollars in oil contracts with
> Iraq - IF they had sanctions lifted) al had no
> interest in helping Iraq cover up their WMD?
> Please. Yes, yes, the US is a bad country, we are
> all bad, the Bush administration is all bad. Happy
> now?


Wow! You really do have an imagination...so now you have China and Russia covering up Iraq's WMD! Pure bullshit....you make up facts just like your president...one lie after another lie..after another lie!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/09/2008 09:41PM by Vince(1).

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What a load.
>
> Right now we hear all these folks complaining that
> Iraq might have $79B in surplus from the sale of
> oil. Now, when the Iraqi government opts to award
> contracts to oil companies, Schumer says we should
> block it. Talk about arrogant. The awards are not
> just for the US, they are French and British as
> well.
>
> What Iraq decides to do with their oil contracts
> is up to them, not us. We do not own or control
> their mineral rights.
>
> Russia and China are not our friends. The fact
> that they are not getting these contracts is a
> GOOD THING. The fact that Schumer and Company are
> trying to block the contracts is very telling, and
> for those folks that keep harping on people
> questioning people's patriotism, I am sorry, but
> actions speak VOLUMES louder than words.


You dumb republikan! CHina has gotten a contract..a big one!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/28/AR2008082802200.html

Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations;....

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c107:5:./temp/~c107Hv1CJ3::

Makes you wonder what the real motivation was.

Radiophile Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
continuing to
> possess and develop a significant chemical and
> biological weapons capability, actively seeking a
> nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and
> harboring terrorist organizations;....

And Bush was wrong on ALL accounts!