Attention all soldiers

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Redneck

Oh, not this "War for Oil" pulp again....

Maybe one of these "war for oil" proponents could explain why, if we went into Iraq to take their oil, we're not taking their oil? Or why we bothered, for that matter, since we had significantly more troops in oil-rich Kuwait than their entire standing army already? Or why we didn't just do like France did and look the other way while Sodom tortured his people in exchange for a couple sweet oil contracts? (Hey, there's some "Blood for oil", there....)

---

Very well then. I will explain it. This war wasn't about "Oil" in the sense that we would have cheaper gas. This war is about controlling an entire region. (That region being the Middle East.) The reason we took Iraq over Kuawait is because of it's strategic value. It is literally in the center of the Middle East. The U.S. could invade virtually ANY Middle Easter country from Iraq.

Now, the reason this has strategical importance to the United States is because Oil is going to be very important economically in the near future to other countries (I.e China) if they want to grow economically. With a billion plus people, they are going to need oil in order to have a functioning economy like ours. If we secure one of the most oil rich regions in the world, then we are effectively limiting China's ability to grow economically.

The whole talk of an 'exit strategy' is a joke. The United States has NO intentions of leaving Iraq. Ever. We are going to establish PERMANENT bases in the middle east. (Bases smiliar to the bases we have in Europe.) In fact, the Bush administration wants to move most of it's forces in Europe and re station them in the Middle East.

If you want to know the truth behind the Bush Administrations foreign policy, and the war on Iraq, check out "The project for the new american century." This isn't liberal propaganda BS. It is a conservative, Washingtone based, think tank. They wrote a plan called "Rebuilding America's Defenses" Which basically outlines what they think the United States should do in order to ensure that they remain "The sole world superpower" for the next one hundred years.

Also, before I finish, I would like to help prove my point by reminding that "Rebuilding America's Defenses" was written by a lot of famous people. Some names you should recognize are Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz. Everything that this essay describes is EXACTLY what George Bush is doing. I will also provide you with a link to The Project for the New American Century's official website. It can be found here

With this being said, how can you support this war? This war IS about power. Period. That is an unarguable fact. So then, the question I ask you is this: Is it ok to kill for power? If you think that it is ok, than supporting this war makes sense. If however, you think otherwise, then supporting this war makes you a hypocrit.

Personally, no matter what my feelings about the war (which I oppose), I have nothing but respect for those who fight.

Quote:

---

Or why we didn't just do like France did and look the other way while Sodom tortured his people in exchange for a couple sweet oil contracts? (Hey, there's some "Blood for oil", there....)

---

I'm only gonna say this once, so read carefully...WE DID! :mad: :mad: :mad: Get your facts straight.

Well, the whole 'War for Oil' comment was said in slight ignorance, as I didn't mean that the only reason this war is being fought is for oil, as nikotine has said. For that I apologize. But oil is being taken from Iraq. Ever heard of the Oil-for-Food program? It's a program that is ENTIRELY funded by the countries natural resource. In exchange for their oil, they get money to help provide for their citizens, that *gasp* are mostly in a horrible state due to the war that is going on there.

And even when I referred to it as a 'war for oil', I never denied that the troops over their deserve respect. (well, most of them, but some sure as hell don't) I will not thank them for going over there and doing some of the things they have done, ordered to or not. Yes, there are some things I know I can thank soldiers for, but not everything. This ia a war I do not believe in so I will not say I appreciate some of the things soldiers are doing over there. I will, without hesitation, hope for their safety over there, and a safe return home.

Quote:

---

You shouldn't violate OPSEC

---

You don't have to worry about that. I once pissed off theabominatrix really bad because I wouldn't break OPSEC.

Quote:

---

You can say a general unit, your MOS, stuff like that. I just got out of Iraq, about a month ago--Combat Engineer, near BIAP, under 1st Cav.

---

I'm in the same place. 3rd ID, 21E. Mostly operate a bulldozer.

Oh, this thread is getting out of hand already. If you want another war for oil thread, well, we've got millions, it's like a happy collection we got here at the forum, you can kick a rock in EoFF Forum Land and under it you'll find a debate on that. Anyway, I shouldn't mod or anything, I'm just an unrecognized member :D

Anyway, about the whole soldier thing, no, I don't want to thank anyone, frankly. Why? Not because I think that job is not a hard one, and can be very degrading at times given the authoritarian order it follows, and I do not believe anyone should make such a sacrifice on behalf of the ruling class. The day an army serves the interests of something I believe in, then maybe I would not think in such a way, yet hardly could an army serve what I believe in, of course I wouldn't know, because I don't even know what I believe in yet, specially since I am reading a book right now that is almost teaching me how any possible paradise I can dream would be, once accomplished, another hell.

Oh, don't take me wrong, I don't have anything against soldiers themselves. I just think their choice is not the best one, this does not mean they are bad people. Well, some are bad people, some are not, as in everything in thsi world.

nik0tine--
So the real reason we invaded Iraq is to use it as a springboard to take over the entire middle east--and eventually, I assume, the world? Riiiiiiiight--read ya loud an' clear; it's allll a conspiracy....

DarkLadyNyara--
I assume you have something resembling evidence to back that claim up?

Camanche--
They're in a horrible state because of the war? Nothing to do with the guy who tortured and slaughtered his own people for a couple decades? You sure about that?

And Shadow Nexus, all I can say is that if you don't think being a soldier is difficult, you don't know much about being a soldier.

"So the real reason we invaded Iraq is to use it as a springboard to take over the entire middle east--and eventually, I assume, the world? Riiiiiiiight--read ya loud an' clear; it's allll a conspiracy"

If you read the link that Nik provided, you may see that it's more possible than just a conspiracy.

Take care all.

Remember ...

" In any war, there are heroes on both sides."

Thank you, Devin. (I can call you that, right?)

Quote:

---

nik0tine--
So the real reason we invaded Iraq is to use it as a springboard to take over the entire middle east--and eventually, I assume, the world? Riiiiiiiight--read ya loud an' clear; it's allll a conspiracy....

---

You obviously did not click on the link I provided, and you also obviously did not understand my post. We are not trying to "take over the world" We are trying ensure that we are the sole super power. We want to create a "New American Century" Where America dominates world affairs. If it doesn't make sense to you I will be more then happy to explain anything you don't understand.

"Thank you, Devin. (I can call you that, right?)"

Surely my friend.


I have a feeling that that will be a tough argument either way, as people will believe what they want to believe, honestly no matter what.

Take care all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Redneck

Camanche--
They're in a horrible state because of the war? Nothing to do with the guy who tortured and slaughtered his own people for a couple decades? You sure about that?

---

I said mostly. As in, of course they were in a horribly state before, but the war only helped to worsened it.

Quote:

---

I have a feeling that that will be a tough argument either way, as people will believe what they want to believe, honestly no matter what.

---

Which is most unfortunate. However, try as we might, people will always be more comfortable believing what they have always believed. I certainly know I was, but the facts are overwhelming, and in the end, I had no choice but to alter my opinion. (Does any of this make sense? For some reason I feel like it doesn't.. :confused: )

That makes perfect sense. A big underlying problem this country, and actually here at this board, is that we're letting our opinions become facts and basing it off of that.

Take care all.

While I personally think that Sadam had to be taken out sooner or later.. Sadam out the only one I think should be taken out. and also we were still busy in Afganistan... Spreading out your forces to several different places isn't wise... Remember the roman empire? The mongols? the huns? Germany in WWII? Napoleon? Etc... Many of these people tried to fight too many fronts or went too far when waiting for a bit would be better.

Also the reasons that bush and them are using to get sadam out are wrong. We should do it to help our fellow humans... not for oil or power.

And thridly... if we had waited till we had been done in Afganistan(would probably take a few years at least) I would likely be more supportive of the war.

Now Yes I wish them safety but I don't aggree with the war as is... some hypothetical situations could make me more willing to support it, but those didn't happen.