View Full Version : "It's All About Oil" (Iraq)
The Fight Over Iraq's Oil (http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/mpapps/pagetools/print/news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2847905.stm)
Sleek-Jet
03-14-2003, 10:37 PM
I read recently an article that stated that any conflict in the middle East is about oil. You can not remove it from the equation since that is the predominant industry in the region. Any thinking person can quickly grasp this concept and move on.
Companies from several countries - Russia, France, Italy and China, among others - already hold contracts, but because of UN sanctions they are not operational.
Companies without contracts, including the British and American ones, will have to assess how much time and trouble they are willing to bear.
These are the two most telling sentences in the whole piece. Makes a person think about whose oil interests are most at stake here.
[ March 14, 2003, 10:38 PM: Message edited by: Sleek-Jet ]
It's all about free market oil. :p
TOBTEK
03-14-2003, 10:52 PM
I've been saying this all along, If the U.N inspectors have been there for weeks if not months looking for "wepons of mass destruction" and coming up with very little. WE keep saying they have them and can prove it, why cant we just tell the U.N inspectors where the wepons are at. I have a customer/friend that is high mucky muck in the military and states we have 70 cemical sites pin pointed and will be destroyed with one push of a bottom. SO, again if we know of these sites why doesnt the U.N???????
It comes down to dollars and cents....we are after the oil!
fatalbert
03-14-2003, 11:30 PM
If you look at the natural gas supplies in Afganistan, and the pipeline that has to be built to transfer the natural gas, then combine that with the oil reserves in Iraq, the story starts to tell itself. Hate to admit it, but being the parnoid, question everything goberment says type person, the picture doesn't always look good. I support George W., but it is not all about terrorism.
srs
Mandelon
03-15-2003, 12:13 AM
How much is military action going to cost the US? How much is it going to cost to help rebuild all the Iraqi infrastructure? It would be cheaper to buy the oil, if that's all it was about.
Stupid Fast
03-15-2003, 03:49 AM
TOBTEK:
I've been saying this all along, If the U.N inspectors have been there for weeks if not months looking for "wepons of mass destruction" and coming up with very little. WE keep saying they have them and can prove it, why cant we just tell the U.N inspectors where the wepons are at. I have a customer/friend that is high mucky muck in the military and states we have 70 cemical sites pin pointed and will be destroyed with one push of a bottom. SO, again if we know of these sites why doesnt the U.N???????
I usually don't get into political stuff but, Do you really think the UN inspectors are that good? North Korea has developed nuclear weapons right under UN "inspectors" noses. If the UN is so Compitent, how did that happen? In my mind, this is kinda about oil. Oil is money. Money is needed to research and develop and hide weapons. Because Saddam has oil. he has Lots of money. This makes him VERY dangerous. To dangerous in my mind.
My daughter is two years old. She will only remember 9/11 from stories. I do not want to allow her to have another event that will haunt her for the rest of her life.
So I guess this is about money and oil.
ERIC
NashvilleBound
03-15-2003, 05:32 AM
We are within days of a war that will cost US millions if not billioms to fight. Not to mention the loss of our servicemen and womans lives...whats that worth? The oil, now thats a joke. We could easily claim it as ours but that still would not help the consumer. The goverment would take it and keep all the profits. Our goverment in all their wisdom has a plan. I think its the wrong plan. But thats very typical...
twistedpair
03-15-2003, 08:02 AM
NashvilleBound:
Our goverment in all their wisdom has a plan. I think its the wrong plan. But thats very typical... Never trust a politician who says he's working for 'you'.
malcolm
03-15-2003, 08:12 AM
If it was all about oil we would find a reason to go to war with Saudi Arabia!
Some people on this board need to listen to the country song, "Have you forgotten?"
spectratoad
03-15-2003, 08:15 AM
The UN is worthless. I do agree that we need to quit saying that we have proof. We should just lay those cards on the table, tell the UN, France & Germany to F off and do what we need to do. I do believe that we get most of our oil from South America so why aren't we attacking Venezuala?? :confused: If we allow him (saddam) to continue there will be future problems. DOn't forget people, nearly 3,000 people died in a matter of hours when someone attacked. These groups, al-queda, extremist muslims, only understand power and if you run away they will continue to attack. If you turn around and kick their ass then they think twice about whether they want to confront you again. We will be attacked again, I just hope we are better prepared next time. Just my .02
Mandelon
03-15-2003, 08:44 AM
When we get in there and get to the records.....then it will be obvious why France and Germany have been against it.
France and Germany have been selling them nuclear weapons parts and chemical generation equipment, among many other products...
I bet the paper shredders are working over time!!
France and Germany are awaiting all the black market oil they've been promised for the backroom deals.
Seadog
03-15-2003, 08:48 AM
Any one who thinks the US is going to benefit by going to war with Iraq is living in a fool's paradise. GWB is an oil man. H eknows that we would never get enough oil from Iraq to pay for the cost of the war. If anything, it would be better for the US to let the Iraqis to continue as they were. The Iraq oil fields are falling apart. Within a few years, the capacity of the oil fields will fall to the point that they will have little to sell. They are already at 1/3 of their capacity due to equipment failure. Less Iraqi oil means enough profit margin to keep US fields vaible. We go to war, it will cost us billions to win and establish a new government. This new government would be under no obligation to US businesses. So we are going to spend billions of our money with no advantage to US companies. We are so devious and greedy.
On the other hand, Saddam has contracts with France, Germany and Russia that will provide billon of dollars to the governments. The Russian contract, I believe, is worth around 45 billion $s. A war that removes Saddam will void these contracts and put them on the open market again. But they are peace loving benefactors to the world.
The real reality is that the Middle East has been a hot bed of religious fanaticism for decades. To provide the means for peace there, is going to require playing hardball. We have to eliminate the biggest promoter of this fanatacism. SH pay millions of dollars to the families of Palestinian bombers. This is very public knowledge. If we eliminate SH and establish a moderate government, then that means when another nation starts thinking about becoming rogue, they will remember what happened to SH and tone it down. Look at what is happening now, The French have made it plain that they will veto anything the US and Britain proposed. Iraq has started to say screw everyone, we are not going to play . If France and them had supported a hard line, we may have had a chance to kick SH out without a battle. Now we will have a tougher fight.
Our government may not always be in the right. There have been mistakes made through out history. The biggest mistakes have come by appeasing dictators until they become powerful enough to create a major turmoil. Everyone talks about how hated we are in the world. History is rife with examples about how unpopular the right decision can be. We don't elect a president to take a poll for every decision. We just had a president who only real decision he made was when to zip down his pants. We pick a president ot lead the most powerful nation in the world. It is a huge responsibility and to accuse him of making a truly important decision for anything but the highest motives is wrong.
old rigger
03-15-2003, 08:51 AM
'it about the oil'...that's the most ****ed up thing I keep hearing. Yes, oil's part of it but if that was the only reason, why didn't we take it in '91?
That's a bullshit argument. Why is it people like to, or choose to, believe Saddam?
This guys the most dangerous man on the planet right now. When Hitler was comming into power, he had many friends around the world that couldn't see or wouldn't believe that he was a danger to the world. Same thing went on then as what's going on now. Protests to war, big arguments about how he's not a threat, on and on. His friend's? How about the Pope at that time. Joseph Kennedy (JFKs dad-no surprise there)and many, many high profile political people of the times...in our country! All wanted to stay out of the war, and all proven dead ****ing wrong.
It's history repeating itself only now, for the last 20 years, little Johnny in our schools doesn't know that, because he reads politacly corect history books that gloss's over what really happend.
What do you think would have happened if the US didn't get involved in the war and kick ass then? For one Germany would be the super power,not us and more than likly we'd all be speaking German right now.
It's the same story now, only Saddam has the weapons Hitler only dreamed about.
Wake up.
Tinkerer
03-15-2003, 12:29 PM
TOBTEK--- If we sent the UN inspectors to the BAD weapons sites not just some outdated rockets or warheads -- What do you think would happen to the inspectors-- SUDDAM would have them killed-- There would be another unfortunate accident.
Sleek-Jet:
These are the two most telling sentences in the whole piece. I think they are telling, however there are more telling statements and information in the article then just those two.
The article was about how going to war is not all about oil...and how difficult it will be for the US or Britian to get their hands on the oil. It lays out facts, and the fact is that the new incoming government would be the one incharge of the oil. Not the US or the UK.
This statement is very telling as well:
After the 1991 Gulf War, Kuwait said it would open its oil industry to foreign investment; 11 years later that has yet to happen - because of nationalistic opposition in Kuwait's parliament.
Or this one:
One of the reasons that the "It's all about oil" discussion gets off on the wrong track is that it makes the assumption, often without realising it, that Iraq would turn over its current 2.8 million barrels per day of production capacity to international companies. But that's a misleading assumption. Why would a new Iraqi government want to split revenues?
I'm certain oil is a varible, but I do not believe it is "ALL ABOUT OIL" :)
Sleek-Jet
03-15-2003, 02:40 PM
MJ19, I am in full agreement with you. I guess I didn't get my point across in the way it was meant.
Oil is a common denominator in that part of the world. As the essay pointed out, and you also, there is no guarantee of an increase in Iraqi oil production based on the outcome of a war. And even a smaller chance of that oil going to America or Great Brittan.
The statement quoted was to point out that the "doves" in the UN (France, Germany, and Russia) are protecting their interests over the rest of the world's... politics as usual.
And a question to all the peacnicks in this country: If a war with Iraq is averted, and at some time in the future the Iraqi's aquire nuclear capability, either through research or the black market, who is going to be the SOB's that didn't do anything about it?
My awnser is not France, Germany, or Russia in the worlds eyes, but the good 'ole U.S. of A.
Sleek-Jet:
MJ19, I am in full agreement with you. I guess I didn't get my point across in the way it was meant.
Oil is a common denominator in that part of the world. As the essay pointed out, and you also, there is no guarantee of an increase in Iraqi oil production based on the outcome of a war. And even a smaller chance of that oil going to America or Great Brittan. Ahhhh Thanks for the clarification :D Sometimes it's not always easy to read 'meaning' from typed words...thanks again :)
XLGPP
03-15-2003, 03:43 PM
'it about the oil'...that's the most ****ed up thing I keep hearing. Yes, oil's part of it but if that was the only reason, why didn't we take it in '91?
That's a bullshit argument. Why is it people like to, or choose to, believe Saddam?
This guys the most dangerous man on the planet right now. When Hitler was comming into power, he had many friends around the world that couldn't see or wouldn't believe that he was a danger to the world. Same thing went on then as what's going on now. Protests to war, big arguments about how he's not a threat, on and on. His friend's? How about the Pope at that time. Joseph Kennedy (JFKs dad-no surprise there)and many, many high profile political people of the times...in our country! All wanted to stay out of the war, and all proven dead ****ing wrong.
It's history repeating itself only now, for the last 20 years, little Johnny in our schools doesn't know that, because he reads politacly corect history books that gloss's over what really happend.
What do you think would have happened if the US didn't get involved in the war and kick ass then? For one Germany would be the super power,not us and more than likly we'd all be speaking German right now.
It's the same story now, only Saddam has the weapons Hitler only dreamed about.
Wake up. couldnt be said any better!!!
NashvilleBound
03-15-2003, 03:46 PM
MJ19:
I'm certain oil is a varible, but I do not believe it is "ALL ABOUT OIL" ) [/QB]Ya, Who started this thread anyways???? Sheesh :)
Seadog
03-15-2003, 04:18 PM
On the news the showed some yahoo saying that it was terrorism by the US to go to war to enrich Bush's oil cronies. Our education system at work. The Al Gore contingent still believes anything they are told and are too endoctrinated to look at the facts. I don't mind people have views against the war, but at least have intelligent arguments.
Thunderbutt
03-15-2003, 06:49 PM
It is about oil! Not to many of you guys remember WW2. Japan tryed to kill us because of OIL. They needed it and we had it and wouldn't give it to them. Why do you think we went in to help Kuwait, it was for OIL, we didn't give a shit about the people of Kuwait, do you notice that we didn't make them a democrated country, so why use this for a reason to invade Iraq.
The question is. Are we running out of OIL, or do we want to control most of the OIL so we can run the other countries out of OIL. The old saying. If I have all of the marbles go get FU--ed.
As for as Korea we know they won't attack Japan or South Korea because they don,t have OIL. They won,t attack China or Russia because they would get ther ass kicked, and China doesn't have OIL eather, so they are trying to bribe us out of it by building the nuc plants.
We are all like puppets that are controled by the big shots. We give up our lives for there OIL, and who ever is left they will sell it back to us for $3.00 a GAL. I only have a few years left to do what I love and that is boating and I don't give a shit if its $5.00 a gal I'm going.
For all of you guys that are 18 to 35 good luck. Please don't go to Canada
Kim Hanson
03-15-2003, 07:14 PM
Thunderbutt:
It is about oil! Not to many of you guys remember WW2. Japan tryed to kill us because of OIL. They needed it and we had it and wouldn't give it to them. Why do you think we went in to help Kuwait, it was for OIL, we didn't give a shit about the people of Kuwait, do you notice that we didn't make them a democrated country, so why use this for a reason to invade Iraq.
The question is. Are we running out of OIL, or do we want to control most of the OIL so we can run the other countries out of OIL. The old saying. If I have all of the marbles go get FU--ed.
As for as Korea we know they won't attack Japan or South Korea because they don,t have OIL. They won,t attack China or Russia because they would get ther ass kicked, and China doesn't have OIL eather, so they are trying to bribe us out of it by building the nuc plants.
We are all like puppets that are controled by the big shots. We give up our lives for there OIL, and who ever is left they will sell it back to us for $3.00 a GAL. I only have a few years left to do what I love and that is boating and I don't give a shit if its $5.00 a gal I'm going.
For all of you guys that are 18 to 35 good luck. Please don't go to Canada Now why would you bring me into this shit talking about Canada, we provide alot of oil to the people who want it and you guys are them , same as natural gas,that would be us.Now explain to me " Please don't go to Canada"..( . )( . ).... :mad:
Kim Hanson
03-15-2003, 07:22 PM
How long do I have to wait for the answer? :o
Kim Hanson
03-15-2003, 07:46 PM
Thunderbutt, where do you guys have oil anymore in the "USA"? If you did find some it would be such a small amount you wouldn't even explore for it, because the cost would be to much! I live in Canada's Heavy Oil Capital~~Lloydminster,Alberta!
What Old Rigger said!!! IN Spades. Couldn't have said it better myself. OK lets for the sake of arguement agree it is ALL about oil.....Think about it....This country runs on oil and lots of it. Think of all the industrys that are directly and indirectly related to the production of oil products. For fuel, lubricants, plastics, autos, and all that is related to autos, commerical transportation, farming, electricity, home heating, air travel, tourisim, hospitals/health care, I can go on... in other words just about all our economy is directly or indirectly related to the production of oil. Now, the Democrats oppose drilling in just about anywhere in the US including ANWR and all offshore. Just where do they propose we get the oil to run this country on? They are quick to critisize but offer no solution. Face it, we need Middle East oil to run and we will buy it, not steal it.
[ March 15, 2003, 07:56 PM: Message edited by: 058 ]
NashvilleBound:
Ya, Who started this thread anyways???? Sheesh :) Alright Mr. Nashville...am I going to have to come down to your house and whoop some booty. devil :D Yup I started this thread to remind people out there that oil isn't the ONLY reason out there. :cool:
I have to listen all day long at college how Bush is only going to war for the oil...How the US wants to take over Iraq and control the oil...it's crazy & drives me nuts...the professors at school back those thoughts...it's crazy...all these young impressionable minds getting filled with bullsh*t from their professors...Grrrr... :mad:
Mr. Kim...For the Record, I didn't say anything about Canada :D In regards to your comment about the oil here in the US, if we did go on explorations to find more oil, the environmentalists would put a stop to it quickly because a purple toad with yellow spots and a green tongue would be endangered. :p :D
Seadog
03-15-2003, 09:04 PM
Guess what people. Oklahoma is at the top of the oil industry. The experts are here and in Texas. The US has enough oil reserves to last a long time, but it is in areas that are more expensive than some of the alternatives. We do not need Iraq oil and it is not worth a hill of beans to the US. This is what pisses me off to no end. The idiots who cannot get it into their heads that we do not give a shit about the oil except that Suckam does not use it as a weapon to destroy the ecology and cause havoc around the world. His last little burn session caused a lot of problems around much of the world. I see too many jackasses with their 'government conspiracies' or 'big business conspiracies'. Too many of the liberals punks that would rather put nails in a tree than allow a house to be built. And they all attack our government which is the only one that will not track them down and shoot like the rabid dogs they are. How many liberals in Iran or Iraq? How many living anti-governement protester? We have the best society in the world, bar none. Perfect no, but if find one you like better, get the heck out of here. And thunderbutt, learn a little about the history you keep spouting. It wasn't just oil the Japenese wanted. It was all raw materials, particularly steel. And their main goal was imperial expansion. Both Japan and Germany would not have killed millions if the British and French had not continually rolled over and kissed Hitler/Tojo butt.
Froggystyle
03-15-2003, 09:06 PM
I got this today from an active duty freind still in the teams...
U.S. Navy Capt. Ouimette is the XO of NAS, Pensacola. Here is a copy of
the speech he gave earlier this month. A wonderful and accurate account
of why we are in trouble today.
+++++++++++++++
America WAKE UP!
That's what we think we heard on the 11th of September 2001 and
maybe it was, but I think it should have been "Get Out of Bed!" In fact, I
think the alarm clock has been buzzing since 1979 and we have continued to hit
the snooze button and roll over for a few more minutes of peaceful sleep since
then.
It was a cool fall day in November 1979 in a country going through a
religious and political upheaval when a group of Iranian students attacked
and seized the American Embassy in Tehran. This seizure was an outright
attack on American soil; it was an attack that held the world's most
powerful country hostage and paralyzed a Presidency. The attack on this
sovereign US embassy set the stage for the events to follow for the next
23 years.
America was still reeling from the aftermath of the Viet Nam
experience and had a serious threat from the Soviet Union when then,
President Carter, had to do something. He chose to conduct a clandestine
raid in the desert. The ill-fated mission ended in ruin, but stood as a
symbol of America's inability to deal with terrorism. America's military
had been decimated and downsized / right sized since the end of the Viet
Nam war. A poorly trained, poorly equipped and poorly organized military was
called on to execute a complex mission that was doomed from the start.
Shortly after the Tehran experience, Americans began to be kidnaped
and killed throughout the Middle East. America could do little to protect
her citizens living and working abroad. The attacks against US soil
continued. In April of 1983 a large vehicle packed with high explosives
was driven into the US Embassy compound in Beirut. When it explodes, it kills
63 people. The alarm went off again and America hit the Snooze Button
once more. Then just six short months later a large truck heavily laden down
with over 2500 pounds of TNT smashed through the main gate of the US
Marine Corps headquarters in Beirut. 241 US servicemen are killed. America
mourns her dead and hit the Snooze Button once more. Two months later in
December 1983, another truck loaded with explosives is driven into the US Embassy
inKuwait, and America continues her slumber. The following year, in
September 1984, another van was driven into the gates of the US Embassy in Beirut
and America slept.
Soon the terrorism spreads to Europe. In April 1985 a bomb explodes
in a restaurant frequented by US soldiers in Madrid. Then in August a
Volkswagen loaded with explosives is driven into the main gate of the US
Air Force Base at Rhein-Main, 22 are killed and the Snooze Alarm is buzzing
louder and louder as US soil is continually attacked. Fifty-nine days
later a cruise ship, the Achille Lauro is hijacked and we watched as an American
in a wheelchair is singled out of the passenger list and executed. The
terrorists then shift their tactics to bombing civilian airliners when
they bomb TWA Flight 840 in April of 1986 that killed 4 and the most tragic
bombing, Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988, killing 259.
America wants to treat these terrorist acts as crimes; in fact we are
still trying to bring these people to trial. These are acts of warÂ…the Wake Up
alarm is louder and louder.
The terrorists decide to bring the fight to America. In January
1993, two CIA agents are shot and killed as they enter CIA headquarters in
Langley, Virginia. The following month, February 1993, a group of
terrorists are arrested after a rented van packed with explosives is
driven into the underground parking garage of the World Trade Center in New York
City. Six people are killed and over 1000 are injured. Still this is a
crime and not an act of war? The Snooze alarm is depressed again.
Then in November 1995 a car bomb explodes at a US military complex
in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia killing seven service men and women. A few months
later in June of 1996, another truck bomb explodes only 35 yards from the US
military compound in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. It destroys the Khobar
Towers, a US Air Force barracks, killing 19 and injuring over 500.
The terrorists are getting braver and smarter as they see that
America does not respond decisively. They move to coordinate their attacks in a
simultaneous attack on two US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. These
attacks were planned with precision, they kill 224. America responds with
cruise missile attacks and goes back to sleep.
The USS Cole was docked in the port of Aden, Yemen for refueling on
12 October 2000, when a small craft pulled along side the ship and exploded
killing 17 US Navy Sailors. Attacking a US War Ship is an act of war, but
we sent the FBI to investigate the crime and went back to sleep.
And of course you know the events of 11 September 2001. Most
Americans think this was the first attack against US soil or in America.
How wrong they are. America has been under a constant attack since 1979
and we chose to hit the snooze alarm and roll over and go back to sleep.
In the news lately we have seen lots of finger pointing from every
high official in government over what they knew and what they didn't know.
But if you've read the papers and paid a little attention I think you can
see exactly what they knew. You don't have to be in the FBI or CIA or on
the National Security Council to see the pattern that has been developing
since 1979. The President is right on when he says we are engaged in a
war. I think we have been in a war for the past 23 years and it will continue
until we as a people decide enough is enough.
America has to "Get out of Bed" and act decisively now. America has
changed forever. We have to be ready to pay the price and make the
sacrifice to ensure our way of life continues. We cannot afford to hit
the Snooze Button again and roll over and go back to sleep. We have to make
the terrorists know that in the words of Admiral Yamamoto after the attack on
Pearl Harbor "that all they have done is to awaken a sleeping giant."
Thank you very much.
Dan Ouimette
Pensacola Civitan
19 Feb 2003
Kim Hanson
03-15-2003, 09:10 PM
My comment was for "Thunderbutt" MRS. MJ19
Thunderbutt
03-15-2003, 09:12 PM
Kim Hanson:
How long do I have to wait for the answer? :o Were you alive in the 60's and 70's?
Kim Hanson:
My comment was for "Thunderbutt" MRS. MJ19 Yeah I know, but I wanted to send you a SMILEY :D and let you know it wasn't me, I'd never say anything against my long lost lutefisk cousin. :p wink :D
Froggystyle:
America has to "Get out of Bed" and act decisively now. This is why my alarm clock doesn't have a snooze option. I feel when the alarm rings, it's time to wake up, get out of bed and take action on the day! :)
Kim Hanson
03-15-2003, 09:36 PM
Yes,and I'am 42 years old now!Did that make any change to what you are talking about with respects to Canada? I still want to know what you mean by that, "Don't go to Canada" shit!
Kim Hanson
03-15-2003, 09:44 PM
Smiley,you know how to make me laugh.. :D
Seadog, just how did the British roll over for Hitler? The French, yes...they roll over for anybody. Their best friend is a white flag. But the British held out for the course of the war suffering thru months of bombings including countless V-2 rockets. Those people lived in the subways thruout the war because there was nothing left of London but the only Germans ever to set foot on British soil were POWs and spys, much to the dismay of Hitler. Go back and re-read the correct history not some bullshit taught to you by some liberal left wing doper-baby trying to re-write history to suit his cause. burningm
Thunderbutt
03-15-2003, 10:11 PM
Kim Hanson:
Yes,and I'am 42 years old now!Did that make any change to what you are talking about with respects to Canada? I still want to know what you mean by that, "Don't go to Canada" shit! During the 60's and 70's a lot of our people went to your part of the world to avoid the war in Veitnam. Ask your Dad he will explain it to you.
Thunderbutt:
During the 60's and 70's a lot of our people went to your part of the world to avoid the war in Veitnam.I believe you're referring to the draft...we don't have a draft going on right now.
I'm curious what this has to do with oil? :confused:
[ March 15, 2003, 10:28 PM: Message edited by: MJ19 ]
Suffered enough
Nejjat Mohammed,
labourer, 31
Most people here think that it'd be great if the United States and Britain attacked Saddam Hussein - we've suffered enough because of him. America has been promising for 12 years that it'll get rid of him but until now they haven't done anything.
Our other worry is that Turkish troops may come over the border. If America lets them come in, they will.
****************************
We want peace
Leila Mohammed,
housewife, 22
I think war will be very bad for us. It's not that I love Saddam but I don't like war and I don't want conflict here. However, I think it'll happen soon.
We want to live in peace but we also want Saddam to be removed because he's been the reason for all of our suffering. I hope and pray that Saddam Hussein will soon be gone and we'll be free.
************************
My family was killed
Keykavos Derakhpoor.
unemployed, 55
Getting rid of Saddam will be a positive thing if it leads to a better government that respects human rights and Islamic laws. Of course I'm afraid about the prospect of war. Six members of my family died in the chemical attack in 1988 and it could happen again.
I don't think Saddam will get away this time. He won't win.
************************
Sometimes you have to fight
Ibrahim Abdul Rashid,
market trader, 31
Everyone loves peace and hates war but everyone wants democracy; sometimes you have to fight for it. We'll be very happy if there's no war. I think foreign forces could help our situation without war and suffering - that would be perfect.
Saddam Hussein is a criminal and he'll use anything to hold on to power - even chemical weapons.
*********************
Saddam tortured us
Sangar Madiya,
student, 23
We'll all be very glad if Saddam is removed very soon - he has tortured the Kurds. Here in Halabja, 5,000 people were killed by his chemical weapons and many more are sick and ill because of what he did. I think the diplomatic route still has a chance but I hope that whether it's through diplomacy or war the Kurds may enjoy political and human rights.
*************************
We're depending on the West
Fuad Ahmed,
hospital worker, 36
Of course I'm frightened of war - especially here in Halabja. Everything bad that's happened to the Kurds has happened here.
I don't think Saddam Hussein will change so getting rid of him is the best way of saving us from more suffering.
*****************************
I thought it was interesting to read some of the more local people speak in regards to war with Iraq. Of course these are opinions, but they are opinions of the people that will be directly affected and possibly killed. It seems to me, they (like us) can't agree on going to war or not, but they all (like us) agree Saddam must be taken out of power one way or another.
I hope that if we do go to war, it is VERY quick and Saddam has no chance!!!
[ March 16, 2003, 10:23 AM: Message edited by: MJ19 ]
Irishluck
03-16-2003, 10:19 AM
Very interesting to see opinions from the other side. It's almost to sad to think that most of the Iragi people are decent,and hard working people like us. It's time to go to war and get this S.O.B.If we happen to get some oil out of it,who gives a rats ass. It will just benefit us all.
Jungle Boy
03-16-2003, 10:23 AM
It's about oil and getting rid of an asshole. If George Sr had the rocks last time, this would not be happening now. George Jr wants to safe daddy's face. North Korea is a bigger threat if weapons is the worry. They have the ability to sell those nukes to terrorists. As far as Thunderbutt goes, how does Canada come into this? VietNam was a political war with NO way to win. TB, do you really think that the USA went into Nam to save the poor south from the communists? Ya right. If I was a 18 year old kid in the early 60's and seen my friends comming back in body bags, I'd be skinning out too. I know that won't go over very well here, but just because the Government tells you to jump off a cliff for your country do you really think you should? People were very uninformed in those days and tended to believe anything that was told to them by the people in power. Not anymore.
By the way, I still think Sadman needs to die. devil But the 1 billion dollar questions is - Who's going to replace him and how is the USA going to change the generations of hate that is bred into these people. It can't be done,,,,,,,EVER.
Irishluck
03-16-2003, 10:38 AM
Well during the first Gulf War the military objective was to liberate Kuwait. That's what we did, if we wanted all of Irag's oil don't you think we would of taken it. Vietnam is just a sad tale in American history, this war that's about to start has a more defined meaning. My question to all protesters is what more evidence do you need? Their anti Bush not anti war.
Jungleboy, We need to clear one thing up, Geo. sr. was forbidden to proceed any further that the Iraq/Kuwait border in 1991. That was one of the conditions that was made when he put together the colition to drive the Iraqis out of Kuwait. This was one of the reasons we got to use Saudi land for military bases. He did an incredible job of gathering world support and to form such a large colition in such a short time but with this support went many conditions. Had we gone into Iraq and marched on Bagdad we would have violated the agreement. There were alot of people in high places that wanted to move on to Bagdad. I think he showed incredible restraint by sticking to the colition agreement. Unlike the the man who followed him he kept his word.
old rigger
03-16-2003, 11:06 AM
The man who followed did ****ING NOTHING after our country was attacked again and again except sniff cigars.
He's more worried about how history's going to view him as a past president (small caps on purpose)than he ever worried about doing his job.
****in prick treated the most powerful office in the world like a carnival ride. Made my dad's skin crawl everytime he saw Clinton salute the Marine stanting gaurd at his helicopter.
Irishluck, 058, you both have hit the nail squarely on the head with your last posts. Thank you.
Thunderbutt
03-16-2003, 11:08 AM
Jungle Boy:
It's about oil and getting rid of an asshole. If George Sr had the rocks last time, this would not be happening now. George Jr wants to safe daddy's face. North Korea is a bigger threat if weapons is the worry. They have the ability to sell those nukes to terrorists. As far as Thunderbutt goes, how does Canada come into this? VietNam was a political war with NO way to win. TB, do you really think that the USA went into Nam to save the poor south from the communists? Ya right. If I was a 18 year old kid in the early 60's and seen my friends comming back in body bags, I'd be skinning out too. I know that won't go over very well here, but just because the Government tells you to jump off a cliff for your country do you really think you should? People were very uninformed in those days and tended to believe anything that was told to them by the people in power. Not anymore.
By the way, I still think Sadman needs to die. devil But the 1 billion dollar questions is - Who's going to replace him and how is the USA going to change the generations of hate that is bred into these people. It can't be done,,,,,,,EVER. I saw thoses same guys you talk about in body bags come back during the Korea war and the inlistments into the military were up, and the young people wern't leaving the country. Aren't all wars political? In thoes days we didn't like the Communists.
I know most of the people want to go to war with this jerk. (THEY JUST DON'T WANT TO BE IN IT)
Kurtis500
03-16-2003, 11:11 AM
For those that think there is no oil here in the US are misinformed. There is more than enough and in the same places. Many wells have been capped (west Texas) for reasons other than being dried up. What all of the reasons are I dont know for sure, however there is oil and it is obtainable in some current well locations or with a variety of drilling techniques. This is true around the US, and of course there are advances in drilling itself with newer lighter shafts allowing a deeper reach...and so-on. My opinion is that oil is cheaper to import just like a coffee maker is. Cheaper labor, no unions, cheaper cost against the dollar, and of course, no environmentalists to stop the work. Those things alone make it unaffordable in the US right now to compete with cheaper oil markets. Just like building a car, same principle different product. These are some of the factors that I know that put some in my family out of work years ago with companies like Baroid, Westex, Aamoco and a few others.
Part of my family still resides in west Texas and seem pretty reliable when they inform me of these things. However, I'm not going to push it on people as facts, so do what you like with it.
As for Britain, I didnt read the first comment about them rolling over, but when they, along with France, were faced with Germany's re-arming they didnt intervene. 058, I think you should read the history books for a phrase 'peace in our time' and you will see how Britain signed an agreement with Hitler after the Rhineland, Austria, Csech, Romania, and the Sudetens were already conquered or re-armed. Britains Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain then signed an agreement with Hitler. All this less than one year before Hitler invaded Poland. Hitler was not stopped by the countries that defeated them in WW1. A country which was disarmed and impotent was allowed to lie, cover-up, and re-arm only to hand the world its greatest war ever with the greatest loss of life. Germany was a joke militarily in 1930, 15 years later nobody was laughing.
JustMVG
03-16-2003, 11:30 AM
With regards to Bush Sr. having the "rock" to go on and get rid of Saddam, the Saudi's requested that the war be ended, and reluctently Mr. Bush did just that, Gen. Shwartzkopf was ready and had the troops to do the job, Colin Powell was ready, but the Saudi's our friends made the damn decision, albeit the wrong one but hey they have their reasons $$$.
Now does anyone remember the plans for an oil pipeline to built by the U. S. and Russia thru Afghanistan south towards Iraq and the Gulf???
While this may not be "Just about Oil" and yes getting rid of the present regime in Iraq is and SHOULD be a priority, with the new "leader/leaders of Iraq we can negotiate new oil contracts with them on our terms and maybe recoup some of the financial losses incurred from this war, it's the new political arena that will be developed that we need to worry about.
the arabs don't really want a democracy, they like things the way they are, i don't think the hatred for america and americans in general is ever going to go away in that region, too much has happened and the kids there are being brought up to believe that we americans have caused everything and every problem they have.
Sorry i went on so long, but i just wanted to put my .02 in Thanks for the time Mike VG
I am familier with the works of Mr. Chamberland. He thought he could keep Britian out of war with a piece of paper, just like alot of naive people today thinking Saddam will disarm and become a model citizen just because we want him to. I took exception to the remark about Britian rolling over for Hitler because he grouped Britian and the French in the same catagory. I don't remember reading about the German army sipping British tea in London like they were guzzling French wine in Paris. I stand by what I said.
Jungle Boy
03-16-2003, 11:43 AM
I stand corrected about the reason for George Sr not going to finish the job. I didn't have my facts correct. idea
Seadog
03-16-2003, 11:52 AM
058, I definitely was not taught history by liberals. I am a amatuer history buff, with WWII my main field. I was raised in the Military by a father who served two tours of Nam before I served mine. Nam was a mistake that we went into with the best of intentions. Unfortunately, we let the politicos dictate tactics.
What happened with Hitler has many similarities to today. In 1935, Italy attacked Abyssina (Ethiopia) and the Leaque of Nations imposed sanctions, which were promptly ignore by member states. 1936, nationalists began a civil war in Spain, which the Germans began participating in. They also began drafting troops and moved into the Rhineland in open defiance of the Versailles treaty. In 1937, Chamberlain initiated a policy of 'appeasement', which propted Hitler to send troops into Austria. When England and France did nothing, he then turned his attention to Chechoslavakia. In 1939, England and France made pacts with Poland, Greece and Romainia. By the time they actually got into the battle, Germany was going through Belgium. The only reason the we kept England as a staging point for the attack on Europe, is that within days of destroying the British air power, Hitler switched to terror bombing, allowing the military to regroup. That one mistake was the biggest savior of the Allied effort.. It was not until Chamberlain was removed and Bulldog Churchill took over, that England began to get into the war. Churchill spent most of the 1930's warning about Germany, but his warnings were realized almost too late.
Chamberland was a fool. Tried to keep the peace and keep Hitler from invading by signing stupid treatys, Dealt and played with Eastern Europe's future by agreeing to hand over to Hitler land he had no control over to begin with. Just goes to prove you cannot make deals with the devil, something the fools of today should learn.
Regarding Britian/Germany...Correct me if I'm wrong, but all my history books state: When the fighting started on British soil, they did not stand around and let it happen. They faught, Sir Winston Churchill did a great job of rallying the people together for the cause.
Jungle Boy:
I stand corrected about the reason for George Sr not going to finish the job. I didn't have my facts correct. idea Jungle Boy,
I think that was very honorable of you to admit an error. :) Very cool!!!
[ March 16, 2003, 02:39 PM: Message edited by: MJ19 ]
mike37
03-16-2003, 02:41 PM
MJ19:
Regarding Britian/Germany...Correct me if I'm wrong, but all my history books state: When the fighting started on British soil, they did not stand around and let it happen. They faught, Sir Winston Churchill did a great job of rallying the people together for the cause. it not what they did after the fighting started
it what they did befor that has to do with what is going on now
mike37
03-16-2003, 02:49 PM
The Constitution of the United States, Art. III, defines treason against the United States to consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid or comfort. This offence is punished with death. By the same article of the Constitution, no person shall be convicted of treason, unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.
(giving them aid or comfort.) <this part dident some hollywood F!!!cks do this by going over there as human shealds and there is more than two witnesses
mike37:
The Constitution of the United States, Art. III, defines treason against the United States to consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid or comfort. This offence is punished with death. By the same article of the Constitution, no person shall be convicted of treason, unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.
(giving them aid or comfort.) <this part dident some hollywood F!!!cks do this by going over there as human shealds and there is more than two witnesses Did our news catch any pictures of them? I did not hear of any 'famous' folks going, but if they did, yes they should be convicted of treason!
Mandelon
03-16-2003, 02:52 PM
Sean Penn....aid and comfort. = POS. burningm
Mandelon:
Sean Penn....aid and comfort. = POS. burningm Was it caught on film?
old rigger
03-16-2003, 03:07 PM
They're (the Hollywood left) just following a rich and misguided tradition of thinking that just because they can read lines, hit marks, look cool in makeup and can call a press conference that will be covered, someone gives a shit about thier POV. I've had about enough of Mike Farrel and Martin Sheen.
Hanoi Jane has got to be the most well know of the Holywood traitors. Here at the local VFW in Long Beach, there's a nice little sticker of her face plastered in the urinal. The members take great pride in pissing on her at every opportunity.
mike37
03-16-2003, 03:12 PM
MJ19:
Mandelon:
Sean Penn....aid and comfort. = POS. burningm Was it caught on film? the testimony of two witnesses
not caught on film
mike37:
MJ19:
Mandelon:
Sean Penn....aid and comfort. = POS. burningm Was it caught on film? the testimony of two witnesses
not caught on film I didn't see it, but if you know of two that did...convict :D
sam pioske
03-16-2003, 03:43 PM
Wow good reading! Protect our country at all costs, Our interests. for our children*** EVEN THE PROTESTERS children. when its over let God sort out the bad guys God bless our country.
Seadog
03-16-2003, 04:26 PM
When you try to cooperate with a tyrant bent on domination, you only encourage them. We shall always have those high minded people who decry war as the ultimate evil. This unfortunately is not the case. In WWII, these high minded people almost allowed Hitler and Tojo to dominate the world.
Today the French and Russians do not have high minded morals as a reason. The French have been major Iraqi trade partners for over 30 years. They built two nuclear reactors and provided Iraq with 25 billion dollars in weapontry. The French state owned oil company TotalFinaElf has contracts worth many more billions. Saddam's outster will cost the French government the money stilled owed for weapons and the contracts. I for one, will boycott Total and Fina for their association with the French government. The Russians have loaned billions to to Iraq which will have to be written off, further hurting their economy. BTW, for those who still think we want the oil, the total amount of oil in Iran is 20 billion barrels. The US has over 31 billion in known reserves. While Iraq has a lot for the land area and they have no environmentalists to create headaches, we have the oil we need when it becomes viable to harvest it.
[ March 17, 2003, 05:50 AM: Message edited by: Seadog ]
MJ19:
Jungle Boy:
I stand corrected about the reason for George Sr not going to finish the job. I didn't have my facts correct. idea Jungle Boy,
I think that was very honorable of you to admit an error. :) Very cool!!! I agree...JB is a stand up guy...we need more JBs around here. :D
Nokomis
03-16-2003, 05:00 PM
Old rigger, you took the words out of my mouth about these Hollywood libs who think they should have a say in the foreign policy of this country. I also hope it haunts them for the rest of their (hopefully short) careers. I for one will not spend a dime on those a-holes movies or music.
As for this war "being about oil", its about castrating an power hungery tyrant hell bent on gaining world clout by struting around with the best weapons his oil money can buy.
As long as he's in power, its not a matter of if he'll get nukes, its when.
Irishluck
03-16-2003, 06:13 PM
As far as these Hollywood Liberals, I hope their the ones that get hit with bioterrorism. Then there's the Dixie chicks, who the hell do they think they are? I am glad that people are returning their tickets. When this war is finally over (a month or two) the whole world will shut their mouth because more will be revealed about what is really going on over in Iraq.
Froggystyle
03-16-2003, 06:30 PM
Check out my post on "History Channel tonight"
I think it is topical.
Thunderbutt
03-17-2003, 12:04 PM
Jungle Boy:
It's about oil and getting rid of an asshole. If George Sr had the rocks last time, this would not be happening now. George Jr wants to safe daddy's face. North Korea is a bigger threat if weapons is the worry. They have the ability to sell those nukes to terrorists. As far as Thunderbutt goes, how does Canada come into this? VietNam was a political war with NO way to win. TB, do you really think that the USA went into Nam to save the poor south from the communists? Ya right. If I was a 18 year old kid in the early 60's and seen my friends comming back in body bags, I'd be skinning out too. I know that won't go over very well here, but just because the Government tells you to jump off a cliff for your country do you really think you should? People were very uninformed in those days and tended to believe anything that was told to them by the people in power. Not anymore.
By the way, I still think Sadman needs to die. devil But the 1 billion dollar questions is - Who's going to replace him and how is the USA going to change the generations of hate that is bred into these people. It can't be done,,,,,,,EVER. Jungle Boy, All I have to say Is (ARE YOU FOR US OR AGAINST US) The last report I got was that you guys didn't want anything to do with us or the war. Also you guys thing our President is a Moron. Who said that?. C.C to Kim Hanson
JustMVG
03-17-2003, 12:37 PM
And now our "Canadian Friends" have announced that they will not be supporting us with any of their troops. Like they said on South Park Blame Canada. J/K :D :D
Mike Vg
Blown 472
03-17-2003, 12:40 PM
Thunderbutt:
Jungle Boy:
It's about oil and getting rid of an asshole. If George Sr had the rocks last time, this would not be happening now. George Jr wants to safe daddy's face. North Korea is a bigger threat if weapons is the worry. They have the ability to sell those nukes to terrorists. As far as Thunderbutt goes, how does Canada come into this? VietNam was a political war with NO way to win. TB, do you really think that the USA went into Nam to save the poor south from the communists? Ya right. If I was a 18 year old kid in the early 60's and seen my friends comming back in body bags, I'd be skinning out too. I know that won't go over very well here, but just because the Government tells you to jump off a cliff for your country do you really think you should? People were very uninformed in those days and tended to believe anything that was told to them by the people in power. Not anymore.
By the way, I still think Sadman needs to die. devil But the 1 billion dollar questions is - Who's going to replace him and how is the USA going to change the generations of hate that is bred into these people. It can't be done,,,,,,,EVER. Jungle Boy, All I have to say Is (ARE YOU FOR US OR AGAINST US) The last report I got was that you guys didn't want anything to do with us or the war. Also you guys thing our President is a Moron. Who said that?. C.C to Kim Hanson Where did he say for or agianst? and one person sez something and the whole country is to take the blame? :confused:
Jungle Boy
03-17-2003, 01:49 PM
Thunderass, I'm all for getting rid of Saddman. But I also think that there is going to be long lasting effects of doing so. It will cost many many millions of dollars and the in the end, the arab world and all the muslums around the globe will still hate the western world. They have more bottled up hate in there hearts than the whole population of the USA could ever imagine having. This war with them will not be over any time soon. All the muslims, arab, islams and all the other freaks will come out of the wood work and make live shitty for westerns all over the world for a long long time. But ot answer your question - YES, I'm with you, something must be done.
Now to the spineless government of my country. I live in the west, as does Kim. We don't vote them pricks in. We have NO say in the fereral goverment out west. It's the way that it works here. We in Alberta just pay the bills with oil revenue and then watch them squander it away. I am embarrassed every time the prime minister and one of his ****ing buffoons open their ignorant mouths and say goofy stuff about the USA. They are the biggest trading partner we have, protector and security blanket. I would love to be able to have a military that could actually help the USA in this fight, but we don't, due to this governments spending habits. They'd rather give money to their pensions, 3rd world countries, lazy Indians, interest free loans to their buddies ect, ect. I'm not proud of this, but it's out of my control. Western seperation is gaining strength and I'd be all for it. I'm very sick and tired of sending my tax dollars so them pricks can give to the french cocksuckers and the others with their hands out all the time. I have alaways believed that if you what to have money, you get your lazy ass out of bed in the morning and go to work. If you have to move out of your beloved shithole of a mining town or fishing village then do it. I hope I have set the record straight, Thunderass. argue :cool: :D
Seadog
03-17-2003, 02:38 PM
You have to pity a country that has a version of France that is sometimes more anal than the real thing. Every trucker I know of, hates taking a load to Quebec.
Jungle Boy
03-17-2003, 02:46 PM
Seadog:
You have to pity a country that has a version of France that is sometimes more anal than the real thing. Every trucker I know of, hates taking a load to Quebec. SOMETIMES???,, ALL the time is more like it.
Thunderbutt, back off...He is no more responsible for his government's policys as we are for our's, no matter how lame they both can be. Jungle Boy is a good guy, he was somewhat misguided about a few facts regarding the '91 Gulf war and when it was explained he admitted his lack of knowledge and stood corrected...more than some would do on these boards. I can say with out any doubts he is with us.
Thunderbutt:
All I have to say Is (ARE YOU FOR US OR AGAINST US) The last report I got was that you guys didn't want anything to do with us or the war. Also you guys thing our President is a Moron. Who said that?I think you must have interpreted something incorrectly. :confused: Or maybe you are not relaying your beliefs with enough factual (non-emotional) information to make your point clear? :confused:
Jungle Boy
03-17-2003, 05:18 PM
058 & MJ19, Thanks for your backing. :cool: I try to take the highline and not take runs at the people here, but I guess sometimes I loose control of my emotions. You should see me freak out in real life!!!! Me and my brother have some very lively "discussions" at times, after a bottle rum. All in good fun though. Good luck to your fellow Americans in Gulf.
Thunderbutt
03-17-2003, 05:24 PM
Jungle Boy:
Thunderass, I'm all for getting rid of Saddman. But I also think that there is going to be long lasting effects of doing so. It will cost many many millions of dollars and the in the end, the arab world and all the muslums around the globe will still hate the western world. They have more bottled up hate in there hearts than the whole population of the USA could ever imagine having. This war with them will not be over any time soon. All the muslims, arab, islams and all the other freaks will come out of the wood work and make live shitty for westerns all over the world for a long long time. But ot answer your question - YES, I'm with you, something must be done.
Now to the spineless government of my country. I live in the west, as does Kim. We don't vote them pricks in. We have NO say in the fereral goverment out west. It's the way that it works here. We in Alberta just pay the bills with oil revenue and then watch them squander it away. I am embarrassed every time the prime minister and one of his ****ing buffoons open their ignorant mouths and say goofy stuff about the USA. They are the biggest trading partner we have, protector and security blanket. I would love to be able to have a military that could actually help the USA in this fight, but we don't, due to this governments spending habits. They'd rather give money to their pensions, 3rd world countries, lazy Indians, interest free loans to their buddies ect, ect. I'm not proud of this, but it's out of my control. Western seperation is gaining strength and I'd be all for it. I'm very sick and tired of sending my tax dollars so them pricks can give to the french cocksuckers and the others with their hands out all the time. I have alaways believed that if you what to have money, you get your lazy ass out of bed in the morning and go to work. If you have to move out of your beloved shithole of a mining town or fishing village then do it. I hope I have set the record straight, Thunderass. argue :cool: :D Why are all of you guys full of name calling.
You know you can come down here and join one of our services just like we did in WW2 before the U S got involved. We were flying for the Canadian air force way before the U S entered the war. to protect you're French cousins.
Jungle Boy
03-17-2003, 05:45 PM
Thunderbutt,
I'm 43 years old and have many sore bones & joints in this over used body of mine. I'm afraid I'd be a liability to your forces. You're better off with out me. Again, good luck to your fellow Americans. Take care and I'll try to better behaved towards you in the future. Happy boating, after all that's why we are all here. :cool:
Tom Brown
03-17-2003, 05:52 PM
Thunderbutt:
Why are all of you guys full of name calling."all of you guys" ?
Are you an anticanite?
[ March 17, 2003, 05:52 PM: Message edited by: Tom Brown ]
twistedpair
03-17-2003, 06:03 PM
Do NOT judge Canada on the acts of Quebec. That would be like judging America on the acts of Berkeley. I was born in Winnipeg and have two brothers that live in British Columbia, and like jungleboy said, seperatism is gaining speed.
Stand Down, Thunderbutt. Sorry we all did not serve in the U.S. military, as that seems to be your only measure of patriotism or concern. Not all Americans are for this war, just as not all Canadians are against it.
Thunderbutt: You know you can come down here and join one of our services just like we did in WW2 Originally posted by Thunderbutt: [b]1 Jim Slevin Fenton MO USMC 1952-1956 I thought you said you served from 1952-1956??? :confused: Are you saying you served in the Canadian Military as well as the American Military??? :confused:
[ March 17, 2003, 06:23 PM: Message edited by: MJ19 ]
Seadog
03-17-2003, 10:06 PM
As bad as those who enjoy the benefits of our society and use their rights to attack our society, it is just as bad to slam those who chose to contribute without being part of the military. I have always felt that it would be good to have a national service requirement for citizen rights. One year service before any college allowed, before you can vote or before you can own land. I also realise that there must be alternatives to military service. Health care, police, forestry projects, etc. are all ways to contribute. Admittedly, a radical concept, but I grew up with the notion that family and country are who we are.
Thunderbutt
03-18-2003, 03:11 PM
MJ19:
Thunderbutt: You know you can come down here and join one of our services just like we did in WW2 Originally posted by Thunderbutt: [b]1 Jim Slevin Fenton MO USMC 1952-1956 I thought you said you served from 1952-1956??? :confused: Are you saying you served in the Canadian Military as well as the American Military??? :confused: No, I was not in both, (I didn't say me, I said our) what I was telling him was that our people saw that they, Canada and England, needed help to fend off Germany in 1939 I hope this topic is over. I know that we are all pulling for our people.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.