TurtleDude said:neither answer is correct. It was about kicking saddam out of kuwait. If it were about Oil, we would have taken Kuwait's oil or Iraq's oil. We made no effort to change Kuwait's government either.
TimmyBoy said:So you honestly believe the "liberation" of Kuwait had nothing to do with oil? Or the fact that Saddam might have attacked Saudia Arabia and seized those oil fields? It seems the royal family in Kuwait was restored because it suited America's oil interests the best.
TurtleDude said:anything to do with the ME can be argued to be about Oil but it wasn't the primary reason.
I wish when we engage in these alleged wars for Oil we do a better job. sadly we don't-hence gas is 2.50 a gallon :mrgreen:
TimmyBoy said:Just because the price of gas is high doesn't mean that the war couldn't be about oil. And it seems their is alot of countries that could use serious American help, more so than the Middle East, but as you pointed out, we are involved primarily in the ME were oil is dominant. Hmm, call me crazy, but I see a pattern here.
TurtleDude said:its not crazy to realize that if the ME is destabilized so is the oil supply which in turn means the western economies. I don't have a problem with a war to protect the source of energy. True, I wish we were more energy sufficient-I would like to see more nuclear energy plants etc but right now oil is the main game.
TimmyBoy said:ahh an admission from my lawyer friend eh? You ADMIT, come on, you being a lawyer, admissions is what will screw you in a court of law heh heh. The lawyer ADMITS, you will be on the front page of the newspaper, "TurtleDude ADMITS to oil being a reason for US involvement in the Middle East." Gee, the headlines won't read "Turtledude maintains his honest integrity and tells of oil being a factor in US Middle East policy" NO, the headline will read "Turtledude ADMITS" as if it was a bad thing to have integrity and honesty. Honesty, not the best policy in American society.
Turtledude, I know you don't have a problem with the war in the Middle East being about securing the oil to keep our economy going, but I would say that you should go their and fight too since you have no problems with it. Me personally, I think we could have easily found alternative energy resources to fuell our economy, which would have kept us out of wars in the Middle East. But then the oil industry which contributes alot of money to American politicans wouldn't stay rich by reverting to alternative energy resources.
TurtleDude said:are you bored and trying to start a flame war Timmy. I wish I didn't have a blown knee two bad discs and a shoulder that just got scoped a few weeks ago. Damn I wish I were 22 again rather than more than twice that but if i could still join up (another chance) I wouldn't be over there. I would be a JAG officer and at 22 I was going to be in the USAMU/USAST Benning
TimmyBoy said:I wasn't trying to start a flame war, I was trying to be humerous. I figuired you being a lawyer and me being an ex-cop you would pick up on my humor.
TurtleDude said:somedays I am more of a cop than a lawyer :mrgreen:
TimmyBoy said:You don't want to be a cop man. Stay being a lawyer. That way, you make all the money, never in danger and never have to constantly watch your back all the time and get paid crappy for it. Watching your back is not just limited to being careful when dealing with criminals or when you are on a traffic stop with a stranger, it's also watching your back from the system. Being a cop is highly politicized job and people are always conspiring to move up at the expense of somebody else in that field, sometimes an innocent cop can be framed to look guilty before a jury because his honesty and integrity is a threat to crooked cops, so the crooked cops try to make the honest cops look crooked. Or, you an get yourself in a situation where you have to sort of break the law in order to live while dealing with a criminal and it gets caught on video and LO, you are on trial and the system will give the people the conviction they want. Or if you are crooked cop, you might end up on trial for being crooked because honest cops dime you out. Or, you can always follow the letter of the law and end up dead for doing so. It's one of those jobs where you are always in a no win situation.
TurtleDude said:I know of what you speak. In Private practice I represented cops-or should I saw I represented the insurance company that covered cops.
STORMWATCHtv said:Of course its a loaded question. Sure it was about oil. However good americans risked their lives to give Kuwait back to a semi free people. Semi free just means that its better to live in a rich Kuwait under happy rich princes, who are kind unless crossed. Than it is to live under Saddams crazy sons and generals, who may kill you even when your following the rules.
GySgt said:I'm not going to vote eitther way, because it was about both. This is why America can't do anything in this world without the haters looking to bash it's motives. The haters will say it was about oil, as they stand at the pumps filling their cars. The naive will say it was about helping Kuwaitis.
The truth is that it was about both and rightfully so.
Doesn't anyone think about how all of Europe lunged at the chance to "liberate" Kuwaitis from Saddam's tyranny, but completely turned their backs when it came time to "liberate" Iraqis from Saddam's tyranny? If the intent is to say that their was but one reason for the Gulf War, one should look towards countries like France who was obviously in it for the oil alone.
TurtleDude said:excellent point-stabilizing an area that is so important to the US economy is not evil-its necessary
TimmyBoy said:The same was said about slavery. Slavery was not evil because it was an integral part of the US economy. In a Letter to an English Abolistionist a pro-slavery American argued that slavery was a good thing because blacks were taken care of better than the "free" low wage English industrial worker and the US economy prospered. But the fact of the matter was, slavery was not a good thing at all, no more better than a super-power protectinig royal families in the Middle East, some that are very brutal towards their own people.
GySgt said:I'm not going to vote eitther way, because it was about both. This is why America can't do anything in this world without the haters looking to bash it's motives. The haters will say it was about oil, as they stand at the pumps filling their cars. The naive will say it was about helping Kuwaitis.
The truth is that it was about both and rightfully so.
Doesn't anyone think about how all of Europe lunged at the chance to "liberate" Kuwaitis from Saddam's tyranny, but completely turned their backs when it came time to "liberate" Iraqis from Saddam's tyranny? If the intent is to say that their was but one reason for the Gulf War, one should look towards countries like France who was obviously in it for the oil alone.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?