Oh, and my moral compass is just fine. I happen think think people should enjoy life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I just don't believe that killing is a good way of bringing that about. You think war is necessary. I don't. I think war makes people hate life, people lose liberty in support of war and in general, war ruins happiness. That's OK we disagree. To decide what course of action we take, in the US, we vote. Obama knows this (as Senator Obama is on record saying it is illegal for the POTUS to unilateral invade another nation). He must therefor be impeached. At least if he remains in Libya past Sunday. That is the rule of law. Obama is not above the Law. He's a Citizen like anyone else.
If you can't understand how the US/NATO is doing this out of pure greed, maybe you can understand through reasoning, that invading/occupying other countries doesn't make you/the world safer. Going into Afghanistan and Iraq has won the US another hundred years of hate. The sons and daughters of the people you murdered there will want their revenge. Stop going where you were not invited, to do favors that nobody asked for. If you want peace and safety for your country, leave everyone else the fuck alone.
2 times in one day Spidey . That should be some kind of lesson for yeah . That was 2 independent studies of your posts bro . You might be surprised at how much you sound like Glen Beck some times . The Glen Beck of the progressives the Super Spidey Goat the Great .
My last position in the workforce (I went back to school last year) was working in BD Management for one of the largest Engineering / Industrial Construction companies in Alberta. Our clients were Oil & Gas companies owned both domestically and by foreign corporations. So, as you can imagine the topic of the US's involvement on the world stage concerning oil was discussed ad nauseam. I'd like to share with you a few points that I have gleaned from the talks with people I have associated with here in the Canadian Oil & Gas sector. Please bear with me on some of my statistics as they may be a bit dated. I will try to post some clarification when I have more time. So (in my opinion), it has been a common misconception that the US was operating under possible conspirative direction within Iraq for the purpose of claiming its oil reserves for its own. In the wake of the "liberation of the people" there has however, been a dramatic increase (and it will continue to gain momentum) in the involvement of some large North American oil services corporations. One of them is in fact, Halliburton; which of course, is adding fuel to the fire for those who believe the war was solely motivated by oil. Unfortunately, when it comes to oil services companies there are few in the world that are able to provide the technologies or resources to allow operations of the necessary scale in the region (arguably the most important of them is drilling). Halliburton (and others) were operating in Iraq prior to any military involvement so, already had (at least some) infrastructure and experience. This brings me to my main point. Iraq has already sold most of its oil reserves (12 large reserves, I believe) to companies around the world with the largest of them going to a Russian company, Lukoil. A Chinese company also purchased one of the auctioned fields as I recall. Only one was sold to a US company and it is not of significance, both because of its size and the imports already in existence from other sources. These companies are going to be tendering necessary services with invites going to certain US corporations as they plan to develop the fields they've purchased. The only possible benefit the US will see is a reduction in the market price of crude as more product is available globally by these companies. To date, the US has spent approximately 1 trillion dollars on the war in Iraq alone (900 billion approved spending; approximately 100 billion of losses in assets etc.). Add to this the cost of renovating existing Iraqi facilities and then the hassles from existing trade partners make the venture seem impractical at best. The top 5 exporters of oil to the US are (in order): Canada, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and Nigeria. One trillion dollars spent in R & D for the refinement of the existing shale oil reserves right on US soil would be far, far better spent than trying to rob another nation of theirs or in purchasing Canadian reserves. There are some red flags considering the media hype surrounding it (M. Meyers for example), but the general consensus (from what I've heard) the actual execution of "war for oil" isn't feasible.
So when they let the national museum of Iraq be pillaged and meanwhile watched the oil wells like hawks, was it because 7000 years of Iraqi history is worth less than whatever little bit of oil they're getting from there?
Maybe because the wells are the revenue stream for that country . The Museum might of had more value in a future world , but hey right now all things are financially dependent. You could blow your nose on a big tree leaf like me instead of using tissue paper . it would save the cost of tissues . The future income of the nation by its natural resources. That might be why
As long as the World continues to use the USD as the reserve currency and oil continues to be sold in USD, the US doesn't need to actually own the oil outright. I just needs for oil to ONLY be sold in our currency. We can continue to print USD. In my mind, its an ingenious way to "steal" profit from another countries resource without actually physically taking the oil out of the ground. Notice how quick Iraq was invaded following an announcement that their oil would be sold in another currency. I'm no conspiracy theorist, but, it's not hard to imagine the benefits the US has enjoyed having a printing press of reserve currency backed by oil.
Anyway, Obama (like tweedle dee and tweedle dicky before him) is probably in violation of the US Constitution and MUST therefor be impeached. POTUS are NOT above the Law. We do not live under tyranny. At least not yet. Let Obama do one good thing in office, and serve as an example to future POTUS who think to overstep their Constitutional bounds. When Obama swore the oath, he bound himself legally and morally to uphold the US Constitution. It's that simple.
Well there might be something to what you just said . The ponzi scheme of the federal reserve would be more like it . Presidents are puppet heads for the federal reserve and the I.M.F. Easy Money makes the world go round . Easy money losses value as the world goes around . I predict government loan defaults in the future . What will happen when it does ? any guesses ?
As I understand the process, having a commodity traded in US currency only marginally (at best) is beneficial to the US as their is no exchange to look after. The exchange of currencies from other nations is done through the bank and notes are not printed for this.
I'm not sure of the finer details to the USD being the reserve currency. But it seems to be backed by oil which is backed by our military. There are a number of books written on the topic of the USD being a 'PetroDollar'. Why else was Iraq invaded? Why was Libya invaded? Why do we tolerate the Saudi Monarchy. NK drops a nuke and barely a word muttered. Saddam does nothing and Bush/Cheney go out on a limb pretending he had WMD, was going to nuke us and orchestrated 9/11. The ONLY thing of value in Iraq is oil. As you said, we don't have all the plum contracts - so what DO we get out of it? As they say, follow the money. It seems to me we get to print money backed by oil. $15 trillion at last count. That aside, as I said, it's not the prerogative of the POTUS to declare War. That power rests with the Congress and for good reason. While I don't think War solves anything and while I may hate the NK leaders for starving 3 million NK to death, it still rests with Congress, not the POTUS, to declare and fund war. I'm not "picking" on Obama either. He broke his oath. He should be impeached. I don't place US politicians on pedestals. I see them as Civil Servants. The good ones I admire, the bad one should be chased out of town and/or strung up. The US government IMO has broken the social contract. It's now up to the People to take a stand. Don't worry, impeaching and jailing public officials for corruption is actually a good thing. It's not something to be afraid of.
What "oath" did he break? Oh and here is Obama's position on Libya. Legal Analysis and Administration Support for Bipartisan Resolution Given the important U.S. interests served by U.S. military operations in Libya and the limited nature, scope and duration of the anticipated actions, the President had constitutional authority, as Commander in Chief and Chief Executive and pursuant to his foreign affairs powers, to direct such limited military operations abroad. The President is of the view that the current U.S. military operations in Libya are consistent with the War Powers Resolution and do not under that law require further congressional authorization, because U.S. military operations are distinct from the kind of “hostilities” contemplated by the Resolution’s 60 day termination provision. U.S. forces are playing a constrained and supporting role in a multinational coalition, whose operations are both legitimated by and limited to the terms of a United Nations Security Council Resolution that authorizes the use of force solely to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under attack or threat of attack and to enforce a no-fly zone and an arms embargo. U.S. operations do not involve sustained fighting or active exchanges of fire with hostile forces, nor do they involve the presence of U.S. ground troops, U.S. casualties or a serious threat there of,or any significant chance of escalation into a conflict characterized by those factors. http://www.scribd.com/doc/58047625/United-States-Activities-in-Libya-6-15-11 Arthur
It looks like it's up to the Courts now. The Oath he may have broken is the Oath he took to uphold the US Constitution. Just because there are no physical "humans" in Libya does not mean we are not waging war there. If we were to create fully automated aircraft and tanks and send them into Canada bombing the shit out of people there, I think any SANE person would count that as war. Even if people are sitting in their living rooms doing the killing by remote control. THAT seems to be the argument Obama is making. Lets see if the Courts buy it.
But he isn't even in breach of the War Powers Resolution yet. More to the point, he has notified Congress why he doesn't think the War Powers Resolution applies, so it really is a legal issue, but clearly this disagreement, considering the limited scope of US involvement in Libya is not something that rises to the level of "high crimes and misdemeanors", so no, he is not likely that he is going to get impeached for this as you are not going to find 2/3 of the Senate agreeing with you. Arthur
What kind of logic is that? It's as if you're saying: Killing somone with a bullet does not count as Murder. You have to physically kill a person with your bare hands :bugeye: Invading a Sovereign nation and murdering it's Civilians is an act of War. That aside, you did see how quickly Obama autopened the Patriot Act into Law again? How many Bankers he's hired? How much money is being spent on the US military and how much will not be spent on education, healthcare, research, or any other social programs like fixing our roads and 100 year old water mains? Obama is a stooge. He's not in any way different from GW Bush Jr. You'd have to be blind to think he has the Nations' (or even your) best interests at heart. Even the Japan have joke T-shirts on sale in Osaka making fun of Obama and "Change you can Believe In". Everyone seem to see it except Liberal Americans. I don't get it.
I just read today that the US military spends 20 billion dollars a year on air conditioning for tents and provisional constructions in Iraq and Afghanistan. 20 billion dollars on making military personnel feel fresh. The entire NASA budget is 19 billion.
