Will the Instant Experts be Vindicated on Iraq?

perception wrote:

Frank Apisa

On second thought I believe we should both go play golf but not together.

There is way too much nastiness and I take the blame for some of it----I like to laugh at good jokes-----and I know I'm just as concerned about the world situation as you. I don't qualify to be a true neo-con because I'm not a born again marxist liberal intellectual---however I actually agree with the neo-cons concerning global strategy. When I sit down and think hard about what I would do if faced with the same problems and dilemmas that face this administration I usually come to the same conclusions and would make the same decisions that I see them making. I therefore laid down what I see as the truth about the decision to go to war in Iraq..

Your turn

Sorry we can't get in a round together, Perception. It might open both of our eyes. Playing a friendly round of golf tends to do that.

In any case, you and I see things differently -- and apparently we both tend toward "in your face."

A breather is in order.

Have a good day. Seems like we will regularly cross swords. Hope we can do it with a little less rancor next time.

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

Have a good day. Seems like we will regularly cross swords. Hope we can do it with a little less rancor next time.

I say--Amen to that----I took up golf too late in life but I started my son out at age ten and he's very good----he started his son out at age 6 and he can beat his dad regularly----he's now only 13 so he has fairly high expectations. All I can do is watch like any proud grandfather would ----- No--Neither I nor his dad are pushing him---just encouraging.

As long as there is mutual respect we will get along just fine----there is very little respect shown by many of the other participants unless you're in the same support group. Since most of us seem to be --- older--I find that a little hard to understand.

Have a good day yourself..

0 Replies

Jim wrote:

First off, an honest question. I haven't seen any breakdown on the costs to rebuild Iraq. Has anyone here? Specifically, is it 95% to repair war damage, and 5% to repair the damage of 30 years of Ba'ath Party misrule, or vice versa?

Hmm, I think it's 100% "US trying to make Iraq a better place after invading it". How much is pre-war will never really be quantified, after all, we have caused damage to this country for years now. You won;t find much agreement on who is to blame.

In any case, we invaded, and now it's on us to try to make it a better place. The WMD excuse didn't pan out so now we are only lefct with "we invaded you to help you". Let's not quibble about the help.

Quote:

I'd also like to talk about the idea the war was only about oil. There are only two ways I can think of this would make sense. The first way is if we were going to take the oil and not pay Iraq for it.

I don't think the war was about oil, but you left out the only reason that accusation would make sense. It would be about stabilizing supply and lowering prices, not outright theft of the oil.

Quote:

The second reason is that we're worried we won't be able to buy enough oil on the open market, and are looking for a guaranteed source of supply. That seems a little thin to me also.

Seems thin to me too, but again the supply is not really an issue yet, the supply is available. What is attractive to the US is to get more of the supply into teh market. The nations with oil regulate their sales, Russia and a few nations are more willing to sell than others but with another big reserve released into the market those who wish to drive up prices by regulating the supply will have more difficulty.

Quote:

It seems that many posters here on A2K disagree with me, and believe the war was about oil. I'd appreciate hearing your thoughts about it.

I don't think it was about oil. I DO think it was the worst thing the US has done in my lifetime.

0 Replies

Will the Instant Experts be Vindicated on Iraq?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know