Cadillac Owners Forum banner

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,471 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I was reading an article the other day and it was talking about how there is a fast growing tide of anti-war sentiment in the country. All I can say is..
it's about friggin' time!!!
This country has to wake up and smell the BS of the Bush administration. It's time to start questioning the direction of our government. Time to start standing up and saying "our children are dying for a lousy cause".
And before anyone decides to flame me for not supporting our troops, think REAL hard about what I said. I support our troops 110% and wish with all my heart that they could perform their respective duties in support of a more honorable goal. They are truely stuck in the middle. The old stuck between a rock and hard place syndrome. They signed on as a member of the US armed forces, and pledged to support the commander in chief. It's not their fault the commander in chief is a goof. They are valiantly trying to perform their duty and should only be praised for doing so. We, as a country, should not put them in such a bad situation. We, as a country, should call our president and his administration on the carpet for the stupidity they have shown over the past few years, especially since 9/11. The problem is too many people are as blind as the lemmings that follow their leader off the cliff. This country has lost it's way. Too many sheep, not enough leaders. What happened to us?
 

·
Banned
Cadillac
Joined
·
16,105 Posts
There are millions of other Americans that feel as you do. I believe they are questioning if they had to be put "in harms way."

When that woman was protesting near where Bush was last week and Bush drove by, I thought it would likely not be too much trouble for him to stop and talk with her, even if briefly. If I recall, she had lost her son in Iraq. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't THINK Bush talked with her?? I'm fuzzy on it now as I was sick all last week.

I know it would be impossible for Mr. Bush to talk with EVERYONE who lost a son/daughter in the war, but my point is that it did gain international media coverage and I thought it might be appropriate if he stopped on his drive out.....

Forgive me but it's really only when coffins start coming home in huge numbers that people start to take notice. I fully support the forces of our nations but I do not see an end in sight for this situation, and I don't like saying that one damn bit!
 

·
Registered
'98 Buick Regal LS - '91 Caddy Seville - '87 Caddy Seville!
Joined
·
4,425 Posts
Illumina's A-1 solution for the war in Iraq:

Pull out every single American soldier and let Iraq fend for themselves! Who cares if that sandpit becomes a safe haven for terrorists, irregardless of who's fault it is for the war? Bush got the United States into this mess, so let's just leave and forget that we were ever there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,471 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
The answer is simple freinds. It's all about oil. We are currently using a 1/4 of the world's production of oil, and with countries like China coming up and using more oil, there simply will not be enough to go around. We are doing what anyone with a brain would do, securing our supply. I just think there's other ways to do it. I mean hell, look at China. They're not worrying about going to war, they're just simply going to buy Unocal (sp). The Chinese government owns some 70% of a company that's trying to buy the oil giant (and it's reserves).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,302 Posts
Do you mean like this, Canadian company bought by CHina

PetroKazakhstan soars after takeover bid
Last Updated Mon, 22 Aug 2005 15:35:10 EDT
CBC News

Shares in PetroKazakhstan Ltd. soared this morning after the Canadian-based oil company became the target of a multi-billion dollar takeover.

China National Petroleum Corp. (CNPC) made a $4.18 billion US bid for the company causing shares to rise 18 per cent.

PetroKazakhstan has its headquarters in Calgary but operates only in the central Asian country of Kazakhstan. The company, formerly known as Hurricane Hydrocarbons, is one of the largest foreign energy companies operating in Kazakhstan.

On the Toronto stock market, PetroKazakhstan shares were up $9.95, or 18.1 per cent, to $64.85 Cdn in midday trading.

PetroKazakhstan is considered a key acquisition intended to boost China's energy supplies.

CNPC is China's biggest oil producer. It is the parent company of PetroChina Co. Ltd., whose shares are traded on stock exchanges in Hong Kong and New York.

A takeover of PetroKazakhstan would mean closer economic ties between China and Kazakhstan. Kazakhstan, which borders China, Russia and the Caspian Sea, is expected to become one of the world's leading oil producers over the next two decades.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,471 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Exactly!
As time goes by, you'll see more and more mergers in the petroleum industry. Eventually, my guess is, the whole world's production of crude will be controlled by just a couple entities.
Remember that old movie The Road Warrior? Everyone thought it was far-fetched back in the 70's..... :suspect:
 

·
Banned
Cadillac
Joined
·
16,105 Posts
illumina said:
Illumina's A-1 solution for the war in Iraq:

Pull out every single American soldier and let Iraq fend for themselves! Who cares if that sandpit becomes a safe haven for terrorists, irregardless of who's fault it is for the war? Bush got the United States into this mess, so let's just leave and forget that we were ever there.
The problem with this is, people, and other countries will ask questions like Why did we go there in the first place then??

What about the other countries committed there now, do they just pull out too?

To the parents who lost U.S. soldiers in Iraq, was their sacrifice all for nothing if we just pull out?? What did this accomplish then?

The UN told the U.S. there was no cause for war with Iraq, but the "invasion" occurred regardless, so if the U.S. just pulls out without cleaning up the mess, what will the world think of the U.S.?? Will the U.S. still have a good reputation?

Those are just a couple of the questions that will be tough to answer, etc. And they would be asked.

You likely would have to carpet bomb the ENTIRE country of Iraq if you really want the problem solved, but that will be too costly to the American taxpayer and it would only garnish more support against the U.S. worldwide, but especially in the Middle East. And if you nuke Iraq, the oil is no longer good.

I don't see a victory in this anymore, or at least it is very difficult to.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,471 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
It's all about egos. You going to tell me nobody ever made a wrong move when it came to a war or an invasion? The REAL crime here is not quickly admitting when we're wrong, and rectifying the situation. No, we just "stay the course" and hope things get better. Hope our pocketbook is deeper than the terrorists? That our pool of troops is larger than that of the terrorists? History is full of events that unfolded poorly for fools with big egos. We're just adding to them here, I think. And as for allowing the families of the fallen to believe that their sacrifice was for nothing, hate to say it but isn't that what happens in any battle? Don't the losers generally have to deal with that reality? So what, we just don't give up and that means we don't lose? It's idiotic IMO.
IMO, every life that has been lost has been for nothing, that's what makes it such a crime in my book. The problem is, the families of the fallen shouldn't blame the messenger for the truth, they should blame the guy that put their loved ones in harms way. The guy that we trusted with their lives in the first place. Ask yourself this one question, if the Bush adinistration truely believes in this war, why don't they commit their sons and daughters to it? Wouldn't the HONORABLE thing to do be to support it with what's dear to them? Yeah, it's okay that all the "common" people in the country are losing their loved ones, while the politicians hide their loved ones from danger. Just like they pass laws that make everyday life so much harder on the common man while all the while passing laws that insulate them and their families from the hardships their laws create.
 

·
Banned
Cadillac
Joined
·
16,105 Posts
Katshot said:
It's all about egos. You going to tell me nobody ever made a wrong move when it came to a war or an invasion?
I'm not sure if you are asking me this question or not but I would answer, yes, there are always mistakes made in war, even mis-judging the events that lead up to a war, and like you I think it has to be "seen right through to the end." If it's abandoned then it was all for nothing. I think the world would become furious if the U.S. just simply pulled out, but sometimes I think it might have to. Then again, if they did pull out it is not going to stop the potential for future terrorism in the U.S. They are and will remain just as furious at the U.S. for being there in the first place.
 

·
Watching the Watchers
Joined
·
5,959 Posts
rhetorical question...mistakes happen all the time, just nobody admits it. The problem is, it's not just war its every aspect of american life, nobody can admit to being wrong. You see it on the internet all the time :)
 

·
Banned
Cadillac
Joined
·
16,105 Posts
Sinister Angel said:
Don't mind me... just stopping through..

http://capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4364
So, he's saying lop off the head and the war is over?? But you have to find Osama first. Therein lies the problem, finding the head. You cannot really fight a war on terror because the targets are hidden, hence the term..."terrorist." Terrorists blend in with the general population whether in NA or in Afghanistan/Iraq.

"Taking the war to the enemy" is a wonderful and effective way to fight a "seen" enemy, (like WW2) but that author forgets that the war was already brought to American soil and likely will happen again. So that theory is "out the window" isn't it? There are supposedly many sleeper cells already in NA that will act when they see fit. Some will say that bringing the war to them only made them MORE resilliant and angry.

Just some quick observations from scanning that article. I'm just looking for logic in it and I don't necessarily agree or disagree with everything there.
 

·
Registered
'98 Buick Regal LS - '91 Caddy Seville - '87 Caddy Seville!
Joined
·
4,425 Posts
Ralph said:
The problem with this is, people, and other countries will ask questions like Why did we go there in the first place then??

What about the other countries committed there now, do they just pull out too?

To the parents who lost U.S. soldiers in Iraq, was their sacrifice all for nothing if we just pull out?? What did this accomplish then?

The UN told the U.S. there was no cause for war with Iraq, but the "invasion" occurred regardless, so if the U.S. just pulls out without cleaning up the mess, what will the world think of the U.S.?? Will the U.S. still have a good reputation?

Those are just a couple of the questions that will be tough to answer, etc. And they would be asked.

You likely would have to carpet bomb the ENTIRE country of Iraq if you really want the problem solved, but that will be too costly to the American taxpayer and it would only garnish more support against the U.S. worldwide, but especially in the Middle East. And if you nuke Iraq, the oil is no longer good.

I don't see a victory in this anymore, or at least it is very difficult to.

Not that my statement was pure sarcasim.

The nasty truth is, whether people like it or not, is that the Iraqi question as I'll call it from here on out, must be completed.

It's the manner of how and when this situation will be complete. As of now, the new Iraqi constitution has been drafted, and is up for final review amongst the top political entities of their new nation. This can be considered a stepping stone to American military withdrawl. The big question is however is this: once the constitution is totaly finalized, when will American troops be able to pull out?

To go even deeper, when will the new Iraqi government be able to stand and fight the insurgency alone and ensure that the new government will not be usurped by the insurgency once American involvement had dissapated?

In usurping the new government, I don't mean outright "Russian flu's" like Gorbechev had before the Soviet fall, and I don't mean bloody take-overs. what I mean is this: will the insurgents become a politcal force in the new Iraq once we have left? And what kind of force will they become once we leave? Who and what are their influences going to cover once we leave?

These are the questions that needs to be asked, and then answered before we all jump on one bandwagon or another.

So let's ask this:

What is an exit strategy?

Waht is the exit strategy for Iraq?

What terms does the strategy demand?

What condidtions will make this strategy viable for total American withdrawl?
 

·
Banned
Cadillac
Joined
·
16,105 Posts
illumina said:
So let's ask this:

What is an exit strategy?

Waht is the exit strategy for Iraq?

What terms does the strategy demand?

What condidtions will make this strategy viable for total American withdrawl?
Exit or not, there will have to be U.S. soldiers in Iraq for decades if they want to ensure laws and policies are followed that they set up. Look at Germany, etc.

Sure, the new constitution is a "stepping stone" but look how secure that country is right now. It's going to take YEARS if not decades before it is or ever will be "stable" again. Look at Isreal and Palestine, that's been going on for how long now?

The only way the U.S. can or should exit is when there is peace and stability in the region, and it doesn't look too promising at this point I'm afraid.

There will always be insurgants in Iraq as long as Western forces are there.. When and if there is a "pull out" there will likely be attacks on home soil again.
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top