PDA

View Full Version : Eh.....It's Only a Billion Bucks...



Norske3
10-11-2005, 06:39 AM
....disappears in to some peoples pockets.

web page (http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2005-10-10-iraq_x.htm?csp=24)

Wild Wassa
10-11-2005, 06:42 AM
Well what about the other missing 5 billion in US dollars? ... or that's only expendible research dollars and only to be expected really, in a place like Iraq, when the world needs Democratizing.

Democratizing Iraq is such a hoot don't you reckon? ... and cheap at twice the rate in lost lives. Plenty of people in TV land still support Iraq?

The traitors who supported the war in Iraq ... how do you live with yourselves?

Warren.

[ 10-11-2005, 07:53 AM: Message edited by: Wild Wassa ]

Granville
10-11-2005, 06:54 AM
http://aljira.org/images/exhibits/109554317574Lg.jpg

LeeG
10-11-2005, 06:57 AM
that oil for food scam started it,,,it was Clintons fault

LeeG
10-11-2005, 06:58 AM
or maybe nation building on the cheap is like building a boat about 10' longer than your budget.

formerlyknownasprince
10-11-2005, 07:05 AM
Plenty of people in TV land still support Iraq? Why not?

The traitors who supported the war in Iraq ... how do they live with themselves?
Probably because they have a brain that they exercise from time to time.

Like it or not, the USA is the world's only effective policeman at this time. Australia is closely aligned with the Americans. Care to give some thought to how the world might evolve without the stick getting wielded for those who get out of hand?

Traitor is a strong word - wielded clumsily by some.

What's Latham's party's view these days mate?

Ian

Wild Wassa
10-11-2005, 07:12 AM
Someone else ask the questions.

Warren.

LeeG
10-11-2005, 07:21 AM
"the only effective policeman"

not a very convincing argument for deception and incompetance.

WX
10-11-2005, 07:30 AM
Igatenby, the war in Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism...Saddam was a tinpot dictator that fell out of favour with the US admin. He also hated Osama...so what does Bush, Tony and Little Johnny do? Well They want to control his oil so they invade Iraq depose Saddam, destabilize the country, kill A LOT of civilians and let Al Qaeda in!
The US as Judge Dredd....Great! Go Bush!
I'd front them to the war crimes tribunal no worries.
Sorry about the spelling but it's late and my eye's are bleary.
As for Howard and his work place reforms...I wouldn't piss on him if he was on fire.

Wild Wassa
10-11-2005, 07:32 AM
It is deceitful of any government to deliberately create conflict ... and then claim to be the ones who are righteous enough to solve it. Deemed by God.

Well, I know what this war in Iraq is really about, it is shame that one of my countrymen is so inept that he can't see through the deception ... well as long as he feels patriotic, justified and likes to suck up, who else is right?

Warren.

[ 10-11-2005, 08:58 AM: Message edited by: Wild Wassa ]

martin schulz
10-11-2005, 07:48 AM
Originally posted by WX:

I'd front them to the war crimes tribunal no worries.Won't work, because the USA boycott the international Court of Justice. Lex Americana!

Victor
10-11-2005, 11:39 AM
It's not just hubris, it's also incompetence. Whatever "democratiziation" was supposed to mean, what's really happening over there is something else. This is the Beltway Circle Jerk, the same one that brought you Vietnam. Reality is what you and your esteemed colleague agree it is, and if the Vietnamese and the Iraqis don't play by the rules, well, too bad for them, even if they don't know what the rules are. In other words, these policies are fostered by people who talk only to each other. And just like in Vietnam, plenty of people will tiptoe away with bundles of cash in their pockets.

As a matter of fact, both Afghanistan and Iraq are starting to look like Vietnam during the French pullout.

[ 10-11-2005, 12:41 PM: Message edited by: Victor ]

formerlyknownasprince
10-11-2005, 05:29 PM
"the only effective policeman"

not a very convincing argument for deception and incompetance. And what's the UN's annual budget - now there's a convincing argument!?

A billion bucks is chickenfeed - but it seems that the system is working - these guys are getting pinged.

I'd call the war in Iraq an exercise in control. Yep Saddam became a rogue. Get a few rogues going - providing bits to JI, OBL and others and things snowball. Rapidly.

If you want to talk incompetance - take a look at the number of deaths due to errors in the medical system... 8,000 pa in Australia - but thats a different story.

Better yet guys - get out there and do something about it - the incompetence that is.

formerlyknownasprince
10-11-2005, 05:41 PM
so what does Bush, Tony and Little Johnny do? Well They want to control his oil Hey fellas - theres lots of easier targets out there with more oil - Saudi Arabia, Canada, Iran ... Hell's bells, Nigeria and Libya and Venezuela would have been three easy ways to get more oil (in total). Kuwait is a pushover, as we know - and has about the same amount as Iraq.

Stop dreaming..... World not doing what you want it to?

The real worry in this whole deal is the voices in little George's head that we now hear made him do it. God told him to do it! C'mon guys - take on God.

LeeG
10-11-2005, 05:51 PM
Originally posted by igatenby:
[QUOTE]

I'd call the war in Iraq an exercise in control. Yep Saddam became a rogue. Get a few rogues going - providing bits to JI, OBL and others and things snowball. Rapidly.
What is the price of rice in China?

ahh you must be speaking of the BMD, Bits of Mass Destruction.

WX
10-11-2005, 08:59 PM
Igatenby, Saddam never had anything to do with OBL or JI.Saddam was never a threat to the West.
Let's see, how many countries has Saddam destabilized?
Hmmm...none.
Now let's how many countries has Bush destabilized?
Wow..at least two.
Though I will admit that Afghanistan has been so badly stuffed about with over the last couple of hundred years that it's hard to know what a stable Afghanistan would look like.
Hands all here who think Iraq will become a shining light of democracy under the guiding hand of the US?

skuthorp
10-11-2005, 09:48 PM
I have no time for little johnny, you could make out a case for treason there too. Harm to the state, etc. The US may not recognise the world court but George and his ilk may find their travel restricted when out of office,
As for our major alternative party, well their a lot of 'me to'ers' these days. not a viable alternative.
It's a sad thing for Aus when the government is made up of unaccountable liars and sycophants and the opposition is unelectable.

formerlyknownasprince
10-11-2005, 09:50 PM
Let's see, how many countries has Saddam destabilized?
Hmmm...none.

........

Hands all here who think Iraq will become a shining light of democracy under the guiding hand of the US? AHH - how about Kuwait and Iran for two?

and ... not looking that likely is it - but the Brits are more to blame for that IIRC - something about where the lines got drawn on a map.

ljb5
10-11-2005, 10:16 PM
Originally posted by igatenby:
theres lots of easier targets out there with more oil - Saudi Arabia, Canada, Iran ... Hell's bells, Nigeria and Libya and Venezuela would have been three easy ways to get more oil (in total). Kuwait is a pushover, as we know - and has about the same amount as Iraq.God, you're so naive!

The idea was never to get Iraq's oil for us -- it was to get Iraq's oil for his friends.

Saudi Arabia already sells us oil. Why would Bush go and take it for free if we're willingly paying his friends for it?

How much do you know about what's going on in Venezuela?

You're absolutely right -- Kuwait is a 'pushover.' They have a puppet government acting in someone's interest -- not yours -- care to guess who?

The price of oil is up 200% since Bush took office -- you think that's an accident?

Anyway, none of this matters to the subject of this thread -- Bush's Iraq is fraught with corruption. No matter if the invasion was justified, the theft of $1Billion isn't.

[ 10-12-2005, 08:18 AM: Message edited by: ljb5 ]

WX
10-12-2005, 02:25 AM
kuwait was a police state before Saddam invaded with the ok from the US I might add (he sounded out the US before he went in)...There is a good chance he was setup over that. Kuwait is once again a police state.
Iraq went to war with help from the US in the form of intel, WMD (ie chemical) and 1,000 pound bombs with instructions on where to drop them.
I might add I not just Yank bashing here the Poms, Frogs and few others were more than happy to supply all sorts of military hardware to Saddam in exchange for a slice of the oil pie.
There is nothing black and white here..international diplomacy is a very sordid occupation. Fighting for democracy, that's just for public consumption. Do you really think Bush and his ilk care about democracy and human rights? Have a close look at the political structures of his allies in the fight against terrorism, if you counted up the democracies on one hand you wouldn't get to the little finger!
Howard doesn't care, he'll shake hands with anybody that will give him what he wants...Beasley's no better.
Choice...there is no choice anymore.

formerlyknownasprince
10-12-2005, 05:40 AM
God, your (sic) so naive!
Nah mate - just pullin' a wanker's chain - he tends to froth at the mouth sometimes, so I let him know there's other points of view out there - then he typically gets nasty and plays the man rather than the ball - then he edits .....

I've got no illusions about the oil companies - I took one of the biggest on over a relatively small environmental disaster last year and that little action may yet get a lot bigger. I didn't get any action until I personally contacted their Chairman. One (very) senior oil company manager said to me about six months back - its virtually impossible to not make money in this (oil) business.

I have even fewer illusions about politicians - of either side - but there won't be any detail. WX is spot on - there isn't a great deal of choice.

Cheers

ljb5
10-12-2005, 07:22 AM
Originally posted by igatenby:
Nah mate - just pullin' a wanker's chain - he tends to froth at the mouth sometimes, so I let him know there's other points of view out thereLet me get this straight -- you realize Bush and his war are corrupt -- but you choose to stick up for him for sport -- just to pull someone's chain?

Pathetic. Be a man. If you know something is wrong, stand up and oppose it.

Above all, don't "pull a wanker's chain" and then accuse him of "playing the man, not the ball." You're guilty of what you accuse him of doing.

Now, let's try this again.... A billion dollars has disappeared into the corruption and incompetence of Bush's Iraq. Do you approve?

(Remember: play the ball, not the man. Don't attack me; answer the question).

[ 10-12-2005, 08:32 AM: Message edited by: ljb5 ]

formerlyknownasprince
10-15-2005, 11:11 PM
Sorry for the delayed response - no internet for four days... the kids seemed lost without it! :D

Now to respond to your edited post ...



(Remember: play the ball, not the man. Don't attack me; answer the question).
Yep, shall do!

BTW, show me where I attack the man - not the issue - it helps with credibility.

As a matter of interest, can you do it without using words like "pathetic, naive, etc"?


Pathetic. Be a man. If you know something is wrong, stand up and oppose it.
I do - and I always do it in a way that I'd be comfortable doing it in public, face to face - and without needing a pseudonym.

Plenty on here would do themselves a favour if they applied the same standard.


Let me get this straight -- you realize Bush and his war are corrupt -- but you choose to stick up for him for sport -- just to pull someone's chain?
Show me where I said anything like "Bush and his war are corrupt" (your words). I think Bush is inept in some ways, but then all politicians tend to have defects - some worse than others. Their success or otherwise derives from how they prioritise and balance conflicting needs.


Above all, don't "pull a wanker's chain" and then accuse him of "playing the man, not the ball." You're guilty of what you accuse him of doing. You are reading things into the English language mate. Stating my opinion isn't playing the man. Things like
Pathetic. Be a man. gets closer to playing the man.


Now, let's try this again.... A billion dollars has disappeared into the corruption and incompetence of Bush's Iraq. Do you approve?
Of course I don't approve of corruption - even the outrageous suggestion made elsewhere on this forum for Chad to bribe a motor vehicle tester, which he dismissed.

In the scheme of things, as I said, a billion bucks is chickenfeed - and as I said (maybe you missed it) "but it seems that the system is working - these guys are getting pinged".

Ian

ljb5
10-15-2005, 11:33 PM
Ian, that was the worst composed post I've ever seen.

You said you were "just pullin' a wanker's chain."

That's the very definition of "playing the man, not the ball."

Address the subject -- don't simply attack people for fun.

If you approve of the corruption, come out and say it. If you disapprove, plainly say that.

I don't understand this middle-ground where you claim you don't approve, but say you don't care and you harrass anyone who does care.

The subject of this thread is the missing billion dollars in Bush's Iraq. Just comment on that and move along. There's no need to pull anyone's chain.

[ 10-16-2005, 01:12 AM: Message edited by: ljb5 ]

formerlyknownasprince
10-16-2005, 12:47 AM
Ian, that was the worst composed post I've ever seen.
That'd be because I was responding to your attack point by point.

WX
10-16-2005, 03:42 AM
Did you see the bit on the news Frdiay night about Bush and his Q&A session with US soldiers in Iraq. The whole thing was choreographed right down to the breathing...just more lies and deceit.
Ignateby, I don't question you as a person but I seriously question your belief that this war is just and that the invasion and occupation of Iraq was justified.

formerlyknownasprince
10-16-2005, 05:42 AM
Didn't see it - but why would that surprise anyone? He trips over his tongue every time he opens his mouth, so the more they can correograph the better he appears. Guess what - most, if not all, politicians do it.

Do I think the war is just? I'd rather see no war.

Do I think it is being well managed? No.

Do I have the answers? No - but I reckon the Brits could teach them a thing or two from what they learnt in Northern Ireland.

I made my point earlier about the US being the only effective policing authority at a world level at this point in time. Do I like that? No - but that's the way it is.

What's coming up? China will emerge as a significant power within the next 15 years. I've had dealings with some of their senior bureaucrats and politicians. New ball game.

Do I want Australia linked to the US? Absolutely.

Ian

ljb5
10-16-2005, 12:05 PM
Originally posted by igatenby:
I made my point earlier about the US being the only effective policing authority at a world level at this point in time.I've been meaning to ask you about that...

What do you mean by "effective"?

Do you mean "able to accomplish the mission," or "able to declare 'Mission Accomplished'"?

You do realize they're not the same thing, don't you?

[ 10-16-2005, 01:47 PM: Message edited by: ljb5 ]

formerlyknownasprince
10-16-2005, 05:47 PM
No matter if the invasion was justified I take it from this that you supported the start of the war?

Effective is a relative term - and the US has been relatively effective on many occasions over the last 30 years - as has Australia locally, with East Timor and the Solomons. Care to provide examples of any other nations or international bodies performing effectively in international policing - or do you prefer international anarchy?

Mission Accomplished wasn't too well correographed was it? :D He certainly has an ability to get that foot right into his mouth.

WX
10-16-2005, 06:01 PM
Igatenby (got it right that time...I can be a bit dislexic sometimes).
We as a country seem to feel the need to have a big brother making many of the decisions for us.
When the Japs came south Churchill was willing to sacriffice Australia to protect the mother country.
So we became disenchanted with the UK and threw our lot in with the US and got screwed by MacArthur instead. We got sucked into the Vietnam War with our All The Way With LBJ goverment.
Now Little Johny has got involved in another pointless war, admittedly on a much smaller scale.
Howard echos US policy so closely I am surprised Bush doesn't call him Little Me.
By all means lets Allie ourselves with nations of similar belief, but for F**k sake let's at least have an opinion and say no if we disagree.

formerlyknownasprince
10-16-2005, 06:48 PM
By all means lets Allie ourselves with nations of similar belief, but for F**k sake let's at least have an opinion and say no if we disagree. But we do.

Many useful things have come out of our close involvement with the US:

We now get top level intel. and equipment out of the US - the good stuff, with all the proper goodies. We also get to supply equipment to the US - eg Austal building a $US220m Littoral Combat Ship for the US Navy.

Little Johnie can and does talk freely and frankly with Georgie Boy. As to saying no where we disagree - where do we disagree at present? We took the lead on East Timor - but couldn't have done it without US support.

There's a long way to go on things like distorted trade in agricultural products - but at least we've got the US talking about free trade. You don't get that by kicking them in the teeth.

Ian

PeterSibley
10-16-2005, 10:27 PM
We now get top level intel. and equipment out of the US - the good stuff, with all the proper goodies. errrr....like WMD ?was it good intel,or lies for us,or did the US lie to us or ,or was it just Johnny lying, or ,or ... GOOD INTEL ?

WX
10-17-2005, 02:10 AM
East Timor! We only sent in the troops and then too late to stop the worst excesses of the Indo backed Militia because the Australian people demanded Howard do something. The Liberal government were quite happy to sit on their hands and do nothing for fear of upsetting the Indos.
When the Australian army finally went in they were denied access to intel.
Don't you remember Downer playing down the effect the Militia were having in East Timor?
So, what did Howard do after East Timor independence, he did his best to make sure they stayed poor by refusing to give them a decent slice of the Timor Sea gas and oil reserves.
We've had nothing but a littany of lies from Howard on just about everything.

formerlyknownasprince
10-17-2005, 04:07 AM
Oh dear. Short memories. Was it 1975 that the journos were murdered in East Timor? Remember Gough? C'mon fellas - forget the politics - look at the issues.

Gough's a little unwell at present, so I'd hesitate to ask him what he was thinking in those days, but he rang me a couple of years back and we spent a pleasant 15 minutes talking about what was in Harold's briefcase when he disappeared off Cheviot Beach.

WX
10-17-2005, 06:06 AM
Actaully I don't have a problem with agreeing with you on that. I was quite disgusted back then as well. WE are talking about the lies and mis information of the present government.
Howard lied about Iraq and WMD's, He lied about the boat people, He lied about East Timor, he lied about the children overboard incident...shall I go on?
Yes I know Beasley's no better.