The Real Reason We're Still In Iraq

medicineman

medicineman

New Member
A second Bush-set and Democrat-adopted benchmark that the government of al-Maliki must meet concerns Iraq's oil industry and Iraqi multibillion-dollar oil revenues. Both rivals agree that the new Iraqi oil law should be adopted this year to favour investing foreign oil companies with 70 percent of oil revenue to recoup their initial outlay, then companies can reap 20 percent of the profit without any tax or other restrictions on their transfers abroad. Both parties seek to distribute the oil revenues on ethnic and sectarian basis in accordance with the new draft hydrocarbon law. The Democrats had proposed that by July 1 of this year Bush must certify that progress is being made on these issues or US "withdrawal" will begin within 180 days. The wide spread Iraqi opposition to this law is a major contributor to the civil war.
There it is in a nutshell. Oil revenues. Who said this was not blood for oil, Ho, Ho, Ho. This was a long article, I just condensed it.
 
Roseman

Roseman

Elite Rolling Society
what about that embassey bush built there that's bigger than the Vatican,
and cost 950 mil. Is he going to leave that?
 
cali-high

cali-high

Well-Known Member
thats forsure

but you got to stand by your soldiers some of them didnt want to go. and theyre scared got to stand by them and stand up for them when some1 is talking down on them.

thats how i feel and if any1 was to talk bad about our troops then theyre will be some problems

rep your country!


peace
cali
 
medicineman

medicineman

New Member
cali-high said:
thats forsure

but you got to stand by your soldiers some of them didnt want to go. and theyre scared got to stand by them and stand up for them when some1 is talking down on them.

thats how i feel and if any1 was to talk bad about our troops then theyre will be some problems

rep your country!


peace
cali
Click to expand...
Why is it that when someone talks against the war, some Idiot thinks they're talking bad about the troops? The troops are stuck in this war and I'll wager 95% of them want it to end right fucking now! Don't make assumptions about people that hate this unholy war. I stand with the troops and want to end it for them so they can come home and get on with their lives, that is why I express my hatred of the war, not hatred of the troops. Figure it out!
 
ViRedd

ViRedd

New Member
I believe it was the irrational democrats who bitched like crazy early on about lack of armor ... and now the solution is to defund the troops while "supporting" the troops?

Vi
 
medicineman

medicineman

New Member
ViRedd said:
I believe it was the irrational democrats who bitched like crazy early on about lack of armor ... and now the solution is to defund the troops while "supporting" the troops?

Vi
Click to expand...
There you Go! Defund the troops. It's defund Bush and his war. you know he's gonna make it about the troops, thats what he's done since day one, it's all about the troops except when it's his debacle, and this whole war is his debacle. It's funny how the whole world can see how fucked up this government is but a few nearsighted individuals on this and other sites still toe the line on Bushs' agenda. I guess dead heads are just that, dead in the head
 
ViRedd

ViRedd

New Member
"There you Go! Defund the troops. It's defund Bush and his war."

It doesn't really matter how you want to propagandize it, Med ... a lack of funds to fight the war means the troops will be in need. How does shutting off the funds for materials, armor, weapons, food, etc., support the troops? Your comments, please.

Vi
 
medicineman

medicineman

New Member
ViRedd said:
"There you Go! Defund the troops. It's defund Bush and his war."

It doesn't really matter how you want to propagandize it, Med ... a lack of funds to fight the war means the troops will be in need. How does shutting off the funds for materials, armor, weapons, food, etc., support the troops? Your comments, please.

Vi
Click to expand...
Are you really that dense? If the funding is cut off, can't you see he would be forced to pull them out of harms way. If he didn't he would be fully responsible for their demise, If he is that cold blooded that he would allow troops to be slaughtered over political maneuvering, he would be treasonous and would have to be removed. It is the congresses responsibility to follow the peoples mandate and defund the war. This is the only way the Idiot will give up his stupid stubborn agenda. I say to you, every troop that dies from the the day the congress defunds the war is on the head of George Bush and all like you who voted for him!
 
ViRedd

ViRedd

New Member
medicineman said:
Are you really that dense? If the funding is cut off, can't you see he would be forced to pull them out of harms way. If he didn't he would be fully responsible for their demise, If he is that cold blooded that he would allow troops to be slaughtered over political maneuvering, he would be treasonous and would have to be removed. It is the congresses responsibility to follow the peoples mandate and defund the war. This is the only way the Idiot will give up his stupid stubborn agenda. I say to you, every troop that dies from the the day the congress defunds the war is on the head of George Bush and all like you who voted for him!
Click to expand...
I guess I have to keep repeating myself here; I did not vote for Bush!

I think I'm starting to understand your reasoning, Med. Let's see if I have this straight: If the Democrat party votes to defund the troops during a time of war and troops die as the result, Bush is the traitor?

Perhaps Blinky Palosi can make another trip to Syria to consult her friends for advise?


Vi

 
medicineman

medicineman

New Member
ViRedd said:
I guess I have to keep repeating myself here; I did not vote for Bush!

I think I'm starting to understand your reasoning, Med. Let's see if I have this straight: If the Democrat party votes to defund the troops during a time of war and troops die as the result, Bush is the traitor?

Perhaps Blinky Palosi can make another trip to Syria to consult her friends for advise?


Vi


Click to expand...
Twist and spin, twist and spin round and round it goes.
 
ViRedd

ViRedd

New Member
Again, Med ... you fail to answer the question. Here it is again:

"I think I'm starting to understand your reasoning, Med. Let's see if I have this straight: If the Democrat party votes to defund the troops during a time of war and troops die as the result, Bush is the traitor?"

Want to try again?

Vi
 
medicineman

medicineman

New Member
ViRedd said:
Again, Med ... you fail to answer the question. Here it is again:

"I think I'm starting to understand your reasoning, Med. Let's see if I have this straight: If the Democrat party votes to defund the troops during a time of war and troops die as the result, Bush is the traitor?"

Want to try again?

Vi
Click to expand...
NO!....................
 
Tommy6162

Tommy6162

Well-Known Member
ViRedd said:
Again, Med ... you fail to answer the question. Here it is again:

"I think I'm starting to understand your reasoning, Med. Let's see if I have this straight: If the Democrat party votes to defund the troops during a time of war and troops die as the result, Bush is the traitor?"

Want to try again?

Vi
Click to expand...
i think med means that if the funding is cut. and bush fails to bring the troops home stright away.. eg "boyz the funding has been cut but i just need another month out of ya". and then some die dew to having no bullets to shot back with or something like that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top