Monday, August 18, 2008

Juxtaposing Two Political Issues

Sphere: Related Content

I just paid $3.49 for gas, a massive drop in just weeks from the $4.10 peak. I'm a bit bummed by this because it may cause the public to stop clamoring for domestic drilling even if it will help those who have been struggling through this increase.

I guess I kind of, sorta understand what liberals were feeling when they realized that we won in Iraq.

The difference is that with my political wish, soldiers sailors, airmen and Marines didn't have to die to bring it to fruition unlike the left's wish where every death was another reason to cheer.

I'll never forgive those fuckers for that.

Picture courtesy of the great Zombietime.

7 comments:

recursive.genepool said...

Won? Won what, exactly? The oil? More control of the region? What exactly was recently won? You're not the first person I've seen to say this, but I don't understand what it is, exactly that you're trying to say.

Has all ethnic conflict in Iraq ended? If so, that car-bomb that just went off yesterday in Iraq, what do you consider that?

It certainly hasn't been the war on terror, that's still going on. It certainly hasn't been any progress on alqaeda, can it? They are still a threat, aren't they, or are you saying they aren't?

What exactly, is the difference between today, half a decade after a "Mission Accomplished" banner proclaimed victory in Iraq, after which tens of thousands(or more) of Iraqis and thousands of americans have been maimed and injured and today, when tens of thousands(or more) of Iraqis(who haven't been killed outright in ethnic conflicts) are still under threat...

...unless the US pulls it's troops out, and leaves Iraq a bloodbath of ethnic conflict, and likely a total victory for Iran later on.

The price of oil in the US is higher than it was, the US has wasted much of its recent productivity and the US has pissed off most of its allies around the world.

Is it the price of gasoline that just went down? The same price that goes down every year around this time[1], and the same price that has been effected by the slowing US demand(due to the sluggish economy)[2], and that is more to do with OPEC collusion than anything to do with Iraq?

Because if it *is* for their oil, then your government just spilled blood from untold number of Iraqis, and further destabilized the middle east for your personal convenience, and the world will not forget this. And the US cannot live safely without the consent of the world, no matter what you think.

1 source

2 source

Scott said...

We won the battle against al-Qaeda in Iraq, haven't you heard? They planned to mass a large jihadi force and they in fact did. We crushed it and now they've reconstituted in Afghanistan where we can kill them as well.

The price of oil is higher because the war was all about oil, didn't you hear. Yeah, libs said it was all for the oil companies. You must have missed the e-mail, bro.

Anyway, oil is more expensive because supply is down with countries like China and India using more. Supply and demand and stuff, don't hurt yourself trying to comprehend.

Anyway, we won the war in Iraq and you're now trying a new tack since you can't use the old "we're losing" one.

Well, maybe you'll luck out and things will go bad in Afghanistan and you'll have some more military deaths to use for your political purposes.

recursive.genepool said...

"They planned to mass a large jihadi force and they in fact did."

That is completely not what happened. Al-qaeda doesn't *need* to attack the US in one big strike, and outside of 9/11, haven't ever done so. All they need to do, and all they are doing, is put one car-bomb in one place, and the US throws millions of dollars worth of military equipment into the area. They know full well how to fight the US and a single confrontation is not how it's done. Bin laden knows this and has made public statements to this effect.

As far as the war being about oil, there are a lot of people who believed that the iraq war had something to do with 911, others WMDs and saddam hussein's threatening of security of the region. At least you're honest, I guess. That might count for something.

And the whole post was about how oil was *cheaper*, and I made mention of supply/demand issues, and you accuse me of not knowing about how supply/demand works? What the hell? Reread my post, maybe?

Scott said...

Um, al-Qaeda attempted the Bojinka plot, succeeded in the first attack on the WTC and the African embassies and you say they haven't attacked us in one big shot outside of 9/11? You may want to read your history again.

Anyone who would deny that a part of the reason for the war in Iraq was for oil is deluded, oil is the blood of the US economy. It was also about the Bush Doctrine and it worked. We fought them there and not here and we beat them. Go back and read what the President said and you'll note that he was right. Bring it on! and all that was not just an idle boast to be mocked by lefties, it was a call to bin-Laden to send his jihadi's to Iraq and let's get it on. We did, they lost.

recursive.genepool said...

"We did, they lost."

That's the part I take issue with. Al-qaeda is still around, Bin laden might be as well. What has changed? Sure, Al-qaeda is pissing off some muslims who have to endure their bullshit, but outside of that? What has the US even done to al-qaeda, for the billions of dollars it's spent? It has killed a few of it's members...but those are easily replaced. And pissed off anti-US folk are having kids every day. Those kids will one day kill your fellow citizens.

Also; taking part in a terrorist attack and taking part on a front-on assault of the US war machine are completely different things.

What part of history would you like me to read? What speech of george bush's? I have read a few of them and I don't think he's got much right, but maybe you have one I don't?

recursive.genepool said...

After looking into it a little bit, both of the examples you cited were prior 9/11, and the first of them was more the work of a crazed madman(who received support from the network) than a massive attack of any kind. So neither could be something the US could "win" against by an the Iraq war.

recursive.genepool said...

Here's my question to you;

If you think you're entitled to the oil in other countries without the consent of the people in them, why shouldn't the rest of the world try to kill you to keep this from happening?

I mean, you admit that you were complicit in allowing your government to steal iraq's oil, who's next once iraq runs out?

Is it out of fear alone?