Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
If it was about oil, why did they stop when Iraq invaded Kuwait - to steal their oil.
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
If it was about oil, why did they stop when Iraq invaded Kuwait - to steal their oil.
IMO I think it is to control the 'buffer' situation between Israel and the hard line Islamic states. In particular Iran.
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Btw, since I do believe that we've established by now, that Israel, and what is a minority of the Israeli population in particular (a percentage of the settlers) are in breach of international law, how about the Palestinians?
I mentioned this before:
Quote:
...palestinian terrorism, or freedom fighting if we'll go by your definition, is equally contradictory to the UN's wishes, and seeing as how PLO was/is a big player in Palestine's government and was responsible for terror attacks in the past and most likely condones and possibly has a stake in the occasional attack today, and presumably has a considerable backing from the people, the powers that be in both countries have issues with following the UN's recommendations.
If I may say so, for the sake of fairness, Israel may not be the best country in the world, but in my thinking, neither is the Palestinian nation.
EDit: It may be that PLO no longer condones terrorism, but they used to, some of the current members included.
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigboab
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
If it was about oil, why did they stop when Iraq invaded Kuwait - to steal their oil.
IMO I think it is to control the 'buffer' situation between Israel and the hard line Islamic states. In particular Iran.
Oh no. Haven't you heard? Once everything is finished (and even now), our oil prices will plummet.
Hell since Kuwait was invaded by Iraq and we intervened, we've had a steady decline in gasoline prices.....silly.
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigboab
IMO I think it is to control the 'buffer' situation between Israel and the hard line Islamic states. In particular Iran.
Oh no. Haven't you heard? Once everything is finished (and even now), our oil prices will plummet.
Hell since Kuwait was invaded by Iraq and we intervened, we've had a steady decline in gasoline prices.....silly.
I was thinking about the longer term implications of the various nations in that area. Not the short term rise and fall of fuel prices for automobile owners.:(
As you say. Silly me.:lol:
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lynx
Quote:
Originally Posted by RioDeLeo
An admirable job of misrepresentation there Lynx, you are to be commended.
On the contrary, I was clarifying exactly what you yourself had said. If there is any misrepresentation you have uttered it yourself.
You may be surprised to find that I strongly disagree with the tripe that tralalala is putting forward. Unfortunately your method of argument is equally odious, it brings no merit to you or your point of view, and as such it damages the whole argument of those who see the events in the occupied territories as atrocities.
Do we really need this shit in here Lynx? You took my words, of which l was speaking generally, and twisted them to infer that l was talking about my modis operandi, and you did it deliberately. One would have expected more from the staff. Thankfully others can read my words without your interpretations. :angry:
@SnnY: You accused me of not answering points, then bring things up that you have flogged to death, and which l have answered many times. Your analogy about America\Australia et al has nothing to do with the present situation, there was no international law then, so there can be no illegal occupation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
I have absolutely no idea.
Yes, you have demonstrated that many times.
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigboab
IMO I think it is to control the 'buffer' situation between Israel and the hard line Islamic states. In particular Iran.
Oh no. Haven't you heard? Once everything is finished (and even now), our oil prices will plummet.
Hell since Kuwait was invaded by Iraq and we intervened, we've had a steady decline in gasoline prices.....silly.
Sarcasm doesn't really suit you.
Now if that's your argument, that the war couldn't have been about oil because you're paying more to fill your petrol tank. It's pretty shallow.
Do I need to point out why?
Now, I'm not saying that the war was purely for oil but it's undeniably a huge factor in the US' foreign policy. To deny this is particularly short sighted.
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RioDeLeo
Quote:
Originally Posted by lynx
On the contrary, I was clarifying exactly what you yourself had said. If there is any misrepresentation you have uttered it yourself.
You may be surprised to find that I strongly disagree with the tripe that tralalala is putting forward. Unfortunately your method of argument is equally odious, it brings no merit to you or your point of view, and as such it damages the whole argument of those who see the events in the occupied territories as atrocities.
Do we really need this shit in here Lynx? You took my words, of which l was speaking generally, and twisted them to infer that l was talking about my modis operandi, and you did it deliberately. One would have expected more from the staff. Thankfully others can read my words without your interpretations. :angry:
@SnnY: You accused me of not answering points, then bring things up that you have flogged to death, and which l have answered many times. Your analogy about America\Australia et al has nothing to do with the present situation, there was no international law then, so there can be no illegal occupation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
I have absolutely no idea.
Yes, you have demonstrated that many times.
Sure, you've answered it :rolleyes:
You haven't backed up your claims about that zionist crap one iota, for one thing.
And you've failed to answer the rest of it too, lynx and rat had to do that.
And, for the settlers that didn't steal anything from anyone, the analogy is definitely valid :dry: International law is only your law, if your state recognizes it, ffs.
EDit: and finally WRT the last quote, given who's got power in Palestine and what they've done in breach of all kinds of laws, why should Israel be expected to be any better wrt international laws?
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by manker
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Oh no. Haven't you heard? Once everything is finished (and even now), our oil prices will plummet.
Hell since Kuwait was invaded by Iraq and we intervened, we've had a steady decline in gasoline prices.....silly.
Sarcasm doesn't really suit you.
Now if that's your argument, that the war couldn't have been about oil because you're paying more to fill your petrol tank. It's pretty shallow.
Do I need to point out why?
Now, I'm not saying that the war was purely for oil but it's undeniably a huge factor in the US' foreign policy. To deny this is particularly short sighted.
Riiiight...and it has translated lower gas prices.
We have better relations with Kuwait ffs.
The water is only up to my ankles.
Re: I would like to argue something pretty important to me.
Oil companies profits are up, if thats what you mean.
Didnt think it was for the consumers benefit, did you?
