Iraq ain't about Oil

[Joshua Goldberg]

I am really not into keeping this thread going by adding to it BUT comparing Vietnam to
Iraq?....oh please.

Iraq = 300 Cruise Missiles per day X 4 days. Then a limited Air Assault..just to see who is
still left standing, then the Bombers come in and pound what is left standing to powder and
(then) the ground forces finally show up (USMC 1st of course) for a little Search & Destroy,
round up unfreindlies, clear away debris for the Jets and Hercs to land and up goes the U.S.
Flag....end game.

My only regret will be the American troops who will be killed/injured as a result of mechanical and
human errors. You mass 100K+ troops together in these many bases, all stuck weeks "on hold" waiting
for the call and some troops are going to get harmed when the call finally comes. Every branch of
the service will be falling over one another vying for airtime "live on CNN".
-------------------------------------------------------------

"Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
> >
> > No way this is going to be another Vienam nor is it going to cost many American lives. It is
> > something we can do on the cheap and the payoff will be tremendous - a whole new middle east
> > that will be much more to our liking. Read your history. War solves many otherwise unsolvable
> > problems.
>
> I agree completely. How dare the people in the Middle East lay claim to AMERICA'S OIL, just
> because it lies beneath their pitiful countries? Kill them all, and let Jehovah/God/Allah sort
> them out.
>
> What good are our nuclear weapons if we don't get to use them on other people, anyhow?
>
> Tom Sherman - Recumbent Curmudgeon

 

[Tom Sherman]

Joshua Goldberg wrote:
>
> I am really not into keeping this thread going by adding to it BUT comparing Vietnam to
> Iraq?....oh please.
>
> Iraq = 300 Cruise Missiles per day X 4 days. Then a limited Air Assault..just to see who is
> still left standing, then the Bombers come in and pound what is left standing to powder and
> (then) the ground forces finally show up (USMC 1st of course) for a little Search & Destroy,
> round up unfreindlies, clear away debris for the Jets and Hercs to land and up goes the U.S.
> Flag....end game.
>
> My only regret will be the American troops who will be killed/injured as a result of mechanical
> and human errors. You mass 100K+ troops together in these many bases, all stuck weeks "on hold"
> waiting for the call and some troops are going to get harmed when the call finally comes. Every
> branch of the service will be falling over one another vying for airtime "live on CNN".

This is a bad plan. Think of all the expensive infrastructure that is necessary for oil production
that will be destroyed. In addition, it will cost money to take care of the survivors. Using poison
gas on the whole lot would optimize future oil company profits and keep gasoline prices low for
those who bought extra large SUV's because the increased rate of depreciation tax write-offs that
smaller vehicles are not eligible for.

Tom Sherman - Recumbent Curmudgeon

 

[Joshua Goldberg]

Think Neutron Bomb...infrastructure remains, organics don't.
------------------------------------------------------------
"Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> Joshua Goldberg wrote:
> >
> > I am really not into keeping this thread going by adding to it BUT
comparing
> > Vietnam to Iraq?....oh please.
> >
> > Iraq = 300 Cruise Missiles per day X 4 days. Then a limited Air Assault..just to see who is
> > still left standing, then the Bombers come
in
> > and pound what is left standing to powder and (then) the ground forces finally show up (USMC 1st
> > of course) for a little Search & Destroy,
round up
> > unfreindlies, clear away debris for the Jets and Hercs to land and up
goes
> > the U.S. Flag....end game.
> >
> > My only regret will be the American troops who will be killed/injured as
a
> > result of mechanical and human errors. You mass 100K+ troops together in these many bases, all
> > stuck weeks "on hold" waiting for the call and
some
> > troops are going to get harmed when the call finally comes. Every branch
of
> > the service will be falling over one another vying for airtime "live on CNN".
>
> This is a bad plan. Think of all the expensive infrastructure that is necessary for oil production
> that will be destroyed. In addition, it will cost money to take care of the survivors. Using
> poison gas on the whole lot would optimize future oil company profits and keep gasoline prices low
> for those who bought extra large SUV's because the increased rate of depreciation tax write-offs
> that smaller vehicles are not eligible for.
>
> Tom Sherman - Recumbent Curmudgeon

 

[Jim Verheul]

How will you feel abou the Iraqi civilians who are killed?

JV

"Joshua Goldberg" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:%[email protected]...
> I am really not into keeping this thread going by adding to it BUT
comparing
> Vietnam to Iraq?....oh please.
>
> Iraq = 300 Cruise Missiles per day X 4 days. Then a limited Air Assault..just to see who is still
> left standing, then the Bombers come in and pound what is left standing to powder and (then) the
> ground forces finally show up (USMC 1st of course) for a little Search & Destroy, round
up
> unfreindlies, clear away debris for the Jets and Hercs to land and up goes the U.S.
> Flag....end game.
>
> My only regret will be the American troops who will be killed/injured as a result of
> mechanical and human errors. You mass 100K+ troops together in these many bases, all stuck
> weeks "on hold" waiting for the call and some troops are going to get harmed when the call
> finally comes. Every branch
of
> the service will be falling over one another vying for airtime "live on CNN".
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> "Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> >
> > Edward Dolan wrote:
> > >
> > > No way this is going to be another Vienam nor is it going to cost many American lives. It is
> > > something we can do on the cheap and the payoff will be tremendous - a whole new middle east
> > > that will be much more to our liking. Read your history. War solves many otherwise unsolvable
> > > problems.
> >
> > I agree completely. How dare the people in the Middle East lay claim to AMERICA'S OIL, just
> > because it lies beneath their pitiful countries? Kill them all, and let Jehovah/God/Allah sort
> > them out.
> >
> > What good are our nuclear weapons if we don't get to use them on other people, anyhow?
> >
> > Tom Sherman - Recumbent Curmudgeon

 

[Tom Sherman]

Jim Verheul wrote:
>
> How will you feel abou the Iraqi civilians who are killed?
>
> JV

I thought the primary objective of war was to kill people, especially if they look a little
different, dress differently, speak a different language, practice a different religion, follow a
different denomination of the same religion, have valuable natural resources, or refuse to accept
the FREE MARKET/WTO/World Bank/IMF as the source of all that is good in the world. All these are
valid moral reasons for killing people both domestically and in foreign countries - the more killed
and the more suffering they undergo, the more just the war is.

Violence is the best way to solve problems, as it does not require any compromises in one's
position, and the only difficulty former opponents provide is disposal of their corpses.

Tom Sherman - Recumbent Curmudgeon

Somewhere somebody must have a little sense, and that's the strong person. The strong person is the
person who can cut off the chain of hate, the chain of evil. And that is the tragedy of hate, that
it doesn't cut it off. It only intensifies the existence of hate and evil in the universe. Somebody
must have religion enough and morality enough to cut it off and inject within the very structure of
the universe that strong and powerful element of love. - Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.

 

[Dave Larrington]

Yeah, plus you'll be able to sell the two-headed depleted-uranium-riddled survivors shedloads of
Windolene for polishing the ruins...

Anyone thinking that Bush's and Nobhead's little jaunt will be cheap and painless should try to lay
hands on a copy of the G2 section of "The Guardian" from February 14th. Don McCullin's introduction
can be found here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,894704,00.html. The photographs are not
available online which, if one is at all squeamish, is a Good Thing. One can only view so many
burned and dismembered Iraqi corpses, blinded American soldiers and Kurdish children starving to
death because "our" erstwhile allies, the Turks, denied them entry into Turkey before one begins to
yearn for something a little easier on the eye. See also:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,895124,00.html,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,895121,00.html and
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,895132,00.html

The first link above shews how to overcome Tom Sherman's little conundrum:

> the only difficulty former opponents provide is disposal of their corpses.

'Among the calamities of war may be jointly numbered the diminution of the love of truth, by the
falsehoods which interest dictates and credulity encourages.' (from The Idler, 1758)

Dave Larrington - http://legslarry.crosswinds.net/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================

 

[Jackal]

Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:

>
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>>
>> No way this is going to be another Vienam nor is it going to cost many American lives. It is
>> something we can do on the cheap and the payoff will be tremendous - a whole new middle east that
>> will be much more to our liking. Read your history. War solves many otherwise unsolvable
>> problems.

You are one DREAMING mof'er.

 

[Jackal]

> Get real. The name of the game is power politics. Read Machiavelli. Sadamm Hussein ought to be an
> object lesson to us all.
>
> Ed Dolan - Minnesota aka Lower Slobovia
>

Bet you voted for DuhW?

 

[Jackal]

"Joshua Goldberg" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:%[email protected]:

> I am really not into keeping this thread going by adding to it BUT comparing Vietnam to
> Iraq?....oh please.
>
> Iraq = 300 Cruise Missiles per day X 4 days. Then a limited Air Assault..just to see who is
> still left standing, then the Bombers come in and pound what is left standing to powder and
> (then) the ground forces finally show up (USMC 1st of course) for a little Search & Destroy,
> round up unfreindlies, clear away debris for the Jets and Hercs to land and up goes the U.S.
> Flag....end game.

And the 100,000 innocent civilians????????????????

 

[Brian Rost]

Joshua Goldberg wrote:
>
> My only regret will be the American troops who will be killed/injured as a result of mechanical
> and human errors.

Ny only regret is that those who have this "bomb them into the next century" mentality aren't all
volunteering for the front lines. As a veteran, maybe I hold the president to a higher standard than
most when it comes to wasting young lives for vague reasons.

P.S. we bombed the **** out of Afghanistan yet we still seem to be meeting "pockets of resistance"
over there.

--

Brian Rost
Stargen, Inc.

**********************************************************************

 

[Mikael Seierup]

"Brian Rost" skrev ...

> Ny only regret is that those who have this "bomb them into the next century" mentality aren't all
> volunteering for the front lines.

Wouldnt be cheaper in bombs to bomb them back to the last century?

M.

 

[Dave Larrington]

Tch, Jackal, they're not innocent. They're *foreign*. Big difference...

Dave Larrington - http://legslarry.crosswinds.net/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================

 

[Joshua Goldberg]

100K Innocents???? American-British and Australian Innocents will be affected too, if a U.S. or
Allied soldier is killed, his/her spouse, parents, children etc. suffer as well. Even worse if the
death is without purpose or honour, as such a death results in damage to an entire Nation. If the
end goal of a war with Iraq is to just take out Saddam....use a company of SEALS. If the end goal is
to demoralize the entire country of Iraq...open Free Trade with her neighbours and let the people of
Iraq see Iranians driving around in Lincolns and Porsches while they (under Saddam's rule) use
pushcarts and go to bed hungry. If you want to take out Saddam and install a new Pro-American
regime....send in the 100K Plus Coalition troops parked on Iraq's borders and scorch the earth.

A good course would be to get Russia and Britain to join the U.S.A. and get into bed with Iran and
let Iran take out Iraq. This way Saddam is taken out by his neighbours...who btw were at war with
Iraq for 8 years and the war never officially ended and NOT by the Yankee Imperialists who every
kid in the Mideast will be taught to hate from birth. A war with Iraq using U.S. and Coalition
troops will destabilize the Mideast just as easily as pumping LSD into the water supply of the
entire Mideast.

**My personal choice in all this, would be for Washington to pump a few Hundred Billion into
"Brainwashing" the American people into believing that SUVs and ALL gas-guzzling autos are really
bad things to have. Impose HP restrictions on all cars sold in the USA, stop taxing bikes and any
product that will shift America away from a dependency on Mideast Oil. Finally get all Americans
OUT of the Mideast (Israel included). Let the Arabs return to declaring land and resources wars
on each other...then when only a few countries are left standing and impoverished after blowing
their budgets on dragged out wars...THEN Washington can ride to the rescue and be appreciated
(for a change).

"War is not always the best solution-sometimes it is the ONLY solution".

PS...I really don't want this thread to drag on and I think I will back off and let others play in
this sandbox.

"Jackal" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> "Joshua Goldberg" <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:%[email protected]:
>
> > I am really not into keeping this thread going by adding to it BUT comparing Vietnam to
> > Iraq?....oh please.
> >
> > Iraq = 300 Cruise Missiles per day X 4 days. Then a limited Air Assault..just to see who is
> > still left standing, then the Bombers come in and pound what is left standing to powder and
> > (then) the ground forces finally show up (USMC 1st of course) for a little Search & Destroy,
> > round up unfreindlies, clear away debris for the Jets and Hercs to land and up goes the U.S.
> > Flag....end game.
>
>
> And the 100,000 innocent civilians????????????????

 

[Skip]

"Mikael Seierup" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Brian Rost" skrev ...
>
> > Ny only regret is that those who have this "bomb them into the next century" mentality aren't
> > all volunteering for the front lines.
>
> Wouldnt be cheaper in bombs to bomb them back to the last century?
>
> M.

Al Qaeda seems to have a strong preference for the stone age. So backwards bombing would probably
work best for them.

S.

 

[Bandjhughes]

"Jim Verheul" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> How will you feel abou the Iraqi civilians who are killed?
>
> JV
>

I think all the Iraqi civilians killed by Sadam is terrible--as it has been for decades.

 

[Bandjhughes]

Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

>
> I thought the primary objective of war was to kill people, especially if they look a little
> different, dress differently, speak a different language, practice a different religion, follow a
> different denomination of the same religion, have valuable natural resources, or refuse to accept
> the FREE MARKET/WTO/World Bank/IMF as the source of all that is good in the world. All these are
> valid moral reasons for killing people both domestically and in foreign countries - the more
> killed and the more suffering they undergo, the more just the war is.
>
> Violence is the best way to solve problems, as it does not require any compromises in one's
> position, and the only difficulty former opponents provide is disposal of their corpses.
>
> Tom Sherman - Recumbent Curmudgeon

No, war is a political act meant to coerce or influence. It is normally used after other actions
(political pressure, economic sanctions, etc) aren't working. Killing people is not the objective at
all--influencing the leadership is the objective.

 

[Bandjhughes]

> And the 100,000 innocent civilians????????????????

There will be many more that 100,000 innocent civilians saved after sadam is gone.

BTW, bombing accuracy has grown exponentially. In WWII it would take literally thousands of bombs to
drop a bridge with a high degree of confidence. During the Korean War it would take hundreds to have
the same degree of confidence. During Vietnam it would take dozens. In DESERT STORM it was down to a
couple of bombs. And we have improved the overall DMPI (desired mean points of impact) accuracy
quite a bit since DESERT STORM. Likewise, the number of innocent casualties has dropped
substantially. Of course, many apparently think we still have 60-year-old technology and ignore
modern improvements to come up with their baseless, pulled-out-of-their-rears, casualty figure
predictions.

 

[Jackal]

[email protected] (bandjhughes) wrote in
news:[email protected]:

>> And the 100,000 innocent civilians????????????????
>
> There will be many more that 100,000 innocent civilians saved after sadam is gone.
>
> BTW, bombing accuracy has grown exponentially. In WWII it would take literally thousands of bombs
> to drop a bridge with a high degree of confidence. During the Korean War it would take hundreds to
> have the same degree of confidence. During Vietnam it would take dozens. In DESERT STORM it was
> down to a couple of bombs. And we have improved the overall DMPI (desired mean points of impact)
> accuracy quite a bit since DESERT STORM. Likewise, the number of innocent casualties has dropped
> substantially. Of course, many apparently think we still have 60-year-old technology and ignore
> modern improvements to come up with their baseless, pulled-out-of-their-rears, casualty figure
> predictions.
>

OThers are stupid enough to have ignored the innocents killed in EVERY action. Was it a school or a
hospital we bombed by mistake? Oops, sorry dead folks, guess that bomb wasn't so smart. Some are
naive enought to think that those wonderful shots of the bomb going into a window of the target
building was the NORM and not the exception. Get a clue.

 

[Jackal]

[email protected] (bandjhughes) wrote in
news:[email protected]:

>> And the 100,000 innocent civilians????????????????
>
> There will be many more that 100,000 innocent civilians saved after sadam is gone.
>
Talk about your"baseless, pulled-out-of-their-rears, casualty figure
> predictions."

Guess your guess is just smarter huh?

 

[Brian Hughes]

> OThers are stupid enough to have ignored the innocents killed in EVERY action. Was it a school or
> a hospital we bombed by mistake? Oops, sorry dead folks, guess that bomb wasn't so smart. Some are
> naive enought to think that those wonderful shots of the bomb going into a window of the target
> building was the NORM and not the exception. Get a clue.

Actually I'm quite familiar with the accuracy of our latest weapon systems. But it's funny when the
totally clueless tell others to get a clue. But you can't help it, you don't know any better.