Gelsons Dad
Well-Known Member
What rubbish. The idea that Oil was the reason for the war is just a nonsense. Just because there are discussions and agreements about what would happen afterwards in no way implies that oil was the reason.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
British jihadists killed in RAF drone strike
- Thread starter Pam
- Start date
What rubbish. The idea that Oil was the reason for the war is just a nonsense. Just because there are discussions and agreements about what would happen afterwards in no way implies that oil was the reason.
grunge
Well-Known Member
What rubbish. The idea that Oil was the reason for the war is just a nonsense. Just because there are discussions and agreements about what would happen afterwards in no way implies that oil was the reason.
It was oil, Bush jnr finishing daddies job, whilst securing oil for the future seeing as Americas running out.
The reasons they gave for starting the war were blatant fabrications at worst, really really poor Intel at best.
And even if it was shite Intel, there was no way Iraq could touch us with WMDs! And there were no terrorist groups working from there.
There was zero reason for us to go into that war and look what a shit storm its left behind.
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 88,443
Three million?its such a nonsense comment that it shows either no clue about life or its trolling. I gave you the benefit of the doubt with trolling!
No clue that people that actually turn up at protests are the tiny tip of the ice berg of people who feel the same way. A protest of 3million, the largest ever in the UK would mean the majority of the country agreed.
No clue that the Iraq war was about steeling oil hidden behind a thin veil of "WMD", a veil so thin that only the most moronic would have believed it. Even if they had them they had no way to attack us with them!
Here's a link for the latter oil steeling stuff
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...n-oil-firms-and-invasion-of-iraq-2269610.html
Great revisionism.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/2765041.stm
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 88,443
Those Labour cunts lied to the public you're right.It was oil, Bush jnr finishing daddies job, whilst securing oil for the future seeing as Americas running out.
The reasons they gave for starting the war were blatant fabrications at worst, really really poor Intel at best.
And even if it was shite Intel, there was no way Iraq could touch us with WMDs! And there were no terrorist groups working from there.
There was zero reason for us to go into that war and look what a shit storm its left behind.
And they killed Dr David Kelly.
tolmie's hairdoo
Well-Known Member
It was oil, Bush jnr finishing daddies job, whilst securing oil for the future seeing as Americas running out.
The reasons they gave for starting the war were blatant fabrications at worst, really really poor Intel at best.
And even if it was shite Intel, there was no way Iraq could touch us with WMDs! And there were no terrorist groups working from there.
There was zero reason for us to go into that war and look what a shit storm its left behind.
America running out of oil?
They produce more than enough of their own and that's before the shale gas goldrush and any Alaskan pipeline.
The oil was left with Iraq, even though a huge swathe of Congress have long argued they should be entitled to use their reserves towards reimbursing the cost of the war.
grunge
Well-Known Member
Wiki States 3m reported to have turned up, maybe it was 3m in total but 750k at anyone time? Or maybe wiki is wrong:)
Gelsons Dad
Well-Known Member
America running out of oil?
They produce more than enough of their own and that's before the shale gas goldrush and any Alaskan pipeline.
The oil was left with Iraq, even though a huge swathe of Congress have long argued they should be entitled to use their reserves towards reimbursing the cost of the war.
yeah but... but....
This is what happens when people rely on wiki for their information. 3 million lines of crap in one thread.
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 88,443
Give me five mins on wiki and I'll have that up to 56m.Wiki States 3m reported to have turned up, maybe it was 3m in total but 750k at anyone time? Or maybe wiki is wrong:)
I'll stick with the police report on BBC though.
grunge
Well-Known Member
America running out of oil?
They produce more than enough of their own and that's before the shale gas goldrush and any Alaskan pipeline.
The oil was left with Iraq, even though a huge swathe of Congress have long argued they should be entitled to use their reserves towards reimbursing the cost of the war.
Oil production in the USA was in decline from 89 to 2010, more than enough maybe but still in decline.
west didsblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Oct 2011
- Messages
- 31,079
Whilst you're correct that the atrocities carried out around the world in the name of IS are not directly controlled by the leadership, they only represent a tiny fraction of the atrocities carried out in their name. The vast majority of murders, rapes and other atrocities are carried out in Syria and Iraq under the direction of the IS leadership.The same flawed thinking led to Al-Qaeda being an organisation of just a few hundred pre-9/11 to one of thousands in the proceding decade. ISIS, like Al-Qaeda is not a top down organisation that has control of cells around the world. Small cells/groups in other parts of the world subscribe to their mantra and ideology and carry out attacks which they proscribe to ISIS. They are not led or controlled by a central command. In fact most of the atrocities carried out around the world in the name of ISIS have been carried out by deranged individuals or small groups, planned on their own and not commanded by some Baddie Boss in Syria. Read the article I posted several pages back.