Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk

Flying Dutchman · Jan 31, 2012

Chocoholic wrote:No one can know exactly what was going on unless they were actually there.

event horizon · Jan 31, 2012

Chocoholic wrote:event horizon , Of course the whole Iraq thing was about the oil! How about you actually speak to people who worked there during the conflict. It was never EVER about WMD. And I'm sick to death of all the stories that go around, unless you actually know and talk to people who were there, who knew what was going on, don't believe all the garbage the media spewed out. No one can know exactly what was going on unless they were actually there

Do the Chinese who own the copper mines in Afghanistan and oil fields in Iraq know this?

shafique · Feb 01, 2012

Chocoholic wrote: Of course the whole Iraq thing was about the oil! How about you actually speak to people who worked there during the conflict. It was never EVER about WMD.

Spot on Chocs.

Cheers,

Shafique

event horizon · Feb 01, 2012

Yeah, I'll wait for the first supertanker full of oil to make it's way to the US before I believe in conspiracy theories that are based on popular belief or innuendo.

shafique · Feb 01, 2012

It's amazing to find someone who still believes the spin that Iraq had WMD. Bravo eh, you continue to surprise me with your beliefs.

Cheers,

Shafique

event horizon · Feb 01, 2012

Pray tell, what does your post have anything to do with what I wrote above?

Err, because I don't believe in your conspiracy theory works out to what you wrote?

More of your "brilliant" "logic", I see.

shafique · Feb 01, 2012

I relates to your beliefs expressed in this thread about Iraq, WMDs and how the sabre rattling against Iran isn't like the sabre rattling against Iraq.

If you are going to get me to explain every obvious post to you multiple times, it will get tedious. :roll:

Cheers,
Shafique

event horizon · Feb 01, 2012

So your incoherent post and incoherent reply had nothing to do with what I wrote.

I see when conspiracy theories are addressed head on you change topic and accuse your opponent of XYZ.

But seriously, how much oil has the United States stolen from Iraq?

Give me the figures.

shafique · Feb 01, 2012

eh - it is no skin off my nose if you want to believe the spin about Iraq's WMD etc. As I said above, I just found it amazing that someone still believes this today.

Your beliefs are your own - I'm not sure why you want me to validate/repudiate them for you.

Cheers,

Shafique

event horizon · Feb 01, 2012

Troll, where did I even mention anything about WMD's in my last several posts?

You're irredeemably braindead.

shafique · Feb 01, 2012

No need to resort to insults. Your beliefs, as kooky as they seem to others, are your beliefs.

You challenged me on the WMD point - and I'm the one who brought it up. Saying to Dillon that his arguments against Iran are reminiscent of the arguments against Iraq before the invasion. You jumped in. Live with it.

Cheers,
Shafique

event horizon · Feb 01, 2012

Your beliefs, as kooky as they seem to others, are your beliefs.

What are my beliefs, where did I mention them in this thread and what relevance do they have in the context of my last several posts?

You challenged me on the WMD point - and I'm the one who brought it up.

That you lied when I challenged your attempt at historical revisionism? Yes, you incorrectly claimed opposition to the Iraq War was over the existence of WMD's.

That's a lie. The opposition to the war was that the existence, which protesters and opponents took for granted, of WMD's did not constitute war in the first place.

Saying to Dillon that his arguments against Iran are reminiscent of the arguments against Iraq before the invasion. You jumped in. Live with it.

I don't think even your deranged mind understands what you're trying to say here. Just more nonsense and confused ramblings.

shafique · Feb 02, 2012

shafique wrote:And yes, I'm afraid that I do indeed believe that the fuss is more about Oil and Gas than a regional nuclear threat.

shafique wrote:I had similar discussions with guys who insisted that Saddam had WMD - my view at the time was that that was an excuse. I smell the same fishiness this time round with Iran.

What confused you about my comments to Dillon?

Cheers,

Shafique

Chocoholic · Feb 03, 2012

Sadly EH, you're the one who bought into the lies and conspiracy theories. The rest of us with half a brain understand the truth!

Flying Dutchman · Feb 03, 2012

Anyways, when Jews hear somebody who wants to finish them off (whether the words Jews, Zionists or Israeli's are used), they tend to believe that nowadays.

shafique · Feb 03, 2012

Well, as Mel confirmed the oft quoted (and still believed) quote that Iran wants to 'wipe Israel off the face of the earth' was a mistranslation of 'wipe the regime off the pages of history' - and was a quote from an Ayatollah about the Zionists, not all Jews or the State of Israel.

Beliefs based on misinformation/propaganda can be quite dangerous.

Cheers,

Shafique

Flying Dutchman · Feb 03, 2012

shafique wrote:Well, as Mel confirmed the oft quoted (and still believed) quote that Iran wants to 'wipe Israel off the face of the earth' was a mistranslation of 'wipe the regime off the pages of history'

As was also confirmed by the experts of MEMRI. I am not sure what is worse to wipe a country off the pages of history or wipe it from the map. Anyways, who was talking about that quote? The Iranian regime is spewing antisemitic hatred and more utter non-sense on a very regular basis.

shafique · Feb 03, 2012

The phrase is sometimes compared to a desire to wipe Nazism off the pages of history - and the fact that such a statement is not calling for the destruction of Germany or hatred against all Germans.

As I've told Mel, I've personally looked into all the later statements from Ahmadinejad which have been portrayed as 'he's calling for the destruction of Israel again' and found that he hasn't actually called for the destruction of Israel or the killing of Jews. I may have missed some, but all the one's I've looked at haven't actually said this.

The point is that this initial lie about wiping Israel off the map is still being repeated and many aren't aware that it isn't factual.

In any case, I've stated my case that I think it is about the oil and gas - and the Iranian threat to others is the equivalent of Saddam's supposed WMDs.

Cheers,

Shafique

event horizon · Feb 03, 2012

Chocoholic wrote:Sadly EH, you're the one who bought into the lies and conspiracy theories. The rest of us with half a brain understand the truth!

What are those conspiracy theories and lies?

Oh, and do you have any proof for your conspiracy theory that Iraq was invaded for oil?

Perhaps you conspiracy theorists can perform a simple thought exercise - how are the powers that be able to invade other nations over oil but can't drill for oil in Alaska (ANWAR), lift the current ban on off-shore drilling or force the Keystone pipeline through?

Flying Dutchman · Feb 04, 2012

shafique wrote:The phrase is sometimes compared to a desire to wipe Nazism off the pages of history

Only a mad person would compare Zionism with Nazism. This is also a quote from the Iranian leader (I haven't seen any counter arguments):

The uniform shout of the Iranian nation is forever, 'Death to Israel'

He has nothing against Jews right, only the ones living in Israel, how comforting :-/.

shafique wrote:In any case, I've stated my case that I think it is about the oil and gas - and the Iranian threat to others is the equivalent of Saddam's supposed WMDs.

Your record of political analysis and prediction is already extremely poor in DF. So now the sanctions against Iran are really about oil and not the nuclear program? Interesting.

Mahmoud is an idiot Shaf, a holocaust denier, a believer in the wildest conspiracy theories. A few months ago I think I opened a thread where he claims the West is manipulating the clouds over Iran. Doesn't sound like a sane person to me. The Iranian deserves so much better!

Bora Bora · Feb 04, 2012

event horizon ,

how are the powers that be able to invade other nations over oil but can't drill for oil in Alaska (ANWAR), lift the current ban on off-shore drilling or force the Keystone pipeline through?

It's about business. The majority of oil companies that are in oil-rich countries are American companies - keep the foreign oil flowing and keep American oil companies in business.

Flying Dutchman · Feb 04, 2012

Chocoholic wrote:The rest of us with half a brain understand the truth!

You claim to know 'THE TRUTH', still you cannot back it up with any arguments, and those who do question 'THE TRUTH' have less than half a brain? That doesn't sit well with me.

--- Sat Feb 04, 2012 1:56 pm ---

Bora Bora wrote:It's about business. The majority of oil companies that are in oil-rich countries are American companies - keep the foreign oil flowing and keep American oil companies in business.

BB, you think the US made a net profit by invading Iraq?

shafique · Feb 04, 2012

Flying Dutchman wrote:BB, you think the US made a net profit by invading Iraq?

Shouldn't the question rather be - have those who supported the war (and especially the business interests in the US) made a net profit?

The US taxpayer has certainly spent billions (perhaps over a trillion? - not checked recently) on the war - it hasn't gone to make Iraqis richer.

How about Halliburton - there was a lot of noise about it before the invasion, but muted talk afterwards. By how many millions/billions (I'm guessing) are they better off now, for example?

(Oh, and without actually looking at the figures - I would imagine that the US does hope to turn a profit from the invasion. They are digging in for the long run in Baghdad with, IIRC, what amounts to a whole village for the US embassy. Whilst some contracts are going to the Chinese - in areas which are quite dangerous - I'd like to see overall how much of the Iraqi wealth is going to the US and US interests vs other countries. Now, that would settle the argument with hard facts.)

Cheers,

Shafique

event horizon · Feb 04, 2012

It's about business. The majority of oil companies that are in oil-rich countries are American companies - keep the foreign oil flowing and keep American oil companies in business.

What does your response have to do with American oil companies not being able to drill in ANWR or off-shore?

(Oh, and without actually looking at the figures - I would imagine that the US does hope to turn a profit from the invasion.

Turn a profit, how exactly?

Oil companies often don't make a profit as it is. Even if Iraq had say 2 trillion dollars worth of oil in her fields, and the Americans somehow managed to gain access to all of that oil (a ridiculous claim that's completely untrue), the oil companies would only see a sliver of that 2 trillion dollars in actual profits.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15462923

They are digging in for the long run in Baghdad with, IIRC, what amounts to a whole village for the US embassy.

Embassies usually aren't sources of profit. Since when have they been? The government funds embassies, not the other way around. I'm not even sure what this comment has to do with claiming Iraq was invaded over oil. I assume it was something to pad your post with irrelevancy from our resident spambot.

Whilst some contracts are going to the Chinese - in areas which are quite dangerous - I'd like to see overall how much of the Iraqi wealth is going to the US and US interests vs other countries. Now, that would settle the argument with hard facts.)

Yes, it would be good if you actually looked at the facts. Even going so far as claiming the Chinese companies got oil fields in dangerous areas....such as southern Iraq.

Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk

Iran - New Sanctions

Go To

Dubai Discussions

Dubai Expat Forums

Dubai Business

Dubai Tech Discussions

Dubai Classifieds