Islamic Iraq, great.

[CNagy]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3755850.stm

Lowest approval rating of an American president, lower than Nixon, and he'll "grudgingly accept an Islamic Iraq." Do I really need to say more about this?

[TheLostProphet]

Goddamnit, this sucks. Cause y'know, it's just not freedom with a Christian government. Stupid people and their silly thousand year old beliefs. Bah humbug!

[akitaka]

Does he even understand as to what he's talking about?

[Myrsilus]

I'm not the type of guy to whine and whine about Bush and all that... I love being the middle man and arguing both sides.

But damn, what is he implying? :D

[CNagy]

Wow, I love the immediate assumption that I am some Religious Right nut. I'd be as pissed off if there were a Christian government, since a) democracy has nothing to do with religion and b) trying to install a Christian government would ensure we'd have to keep forces there for at least another century.

How about the fact that not only did we get into a war we had no business getting into, we didn't do what we set out to do? Or how about the fact that everything that seemingly could go wrong has gone wrong? I love having our international credibility flushed down the drain because of some religious dolts believing some delusional oil baron's lies. His 36% approval rating is too little, too late.

[Bobbybirdtree]

All those soldiers in vain.....

[Kuhool]

everyone hates Christians!

[akitaka]

...and the next few years where they want to keep 100k soldiers in there? Cripes.

I'm telling you, his cabinet has him on puppet strings. That felt like the most unspecific statement on governing that I've read, besides his so-called "bushisms". Democracy? Islamic? Letting them do what they think is right? All in one bundled paragraph?

(nosebleed)

[Myrsilus]

I'll admit, there is a lot of Christian bashing around here. Even if it isn't too obvious sometimes.

I'm too impartial to care about that, though. I take the best of all worlds.

Personally, I see no problem with an Islamic Iraq. Bush is going to get some bad responses for his statements.

[Marblehead]

So long as it's an Islamic government that 100% supports U.S. interests I'd say,


"A-OK, U.S.A!!!"


You didn't think we were actually trying to free these people did you?

[akitaka]

It's like having a really good friend that hovers over everything you do, and takes what he wants, stating that it's an exchange for "helping" you. Annoying as f**k.

[CNagy]

Just realized I grabbed an old article. Here are some recent ones:

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/18150
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/13/AR2005081300853.html

[MeneerDijk]

heh, now that's a pickle. The Iraqi people democratically electing an islamic leader that turns back democracy. I hope Nush still hass the receipt to the bombs he dropped

[KujiInRetsu]

It's times like this I wonder why democracy is so "great". When stupid people are the majority of the voting populous, things are bound to go wrong. This is a very elitist statement, but it is a very true elitist statement. The population of Iraq has not had decent school systems for a good twenty years or more while under Saddam's rule, and America? Who the hell knows what happened here?

[CNagy]

Democracy is great because when your country gets smart enough to realize that their democracy sucks, they are empowered to make a new democracy that fixes old problems and introduces a whole new set of problems. A theocracy, on the other hand, requires a system reset and extraction of the religious base, which will once again fall to America to accomplish.

[Inu Ga Urusai]

If we all worshipped Satan, none of this would be happening.

[Kustom]

Democracy is great because when your country gets smart enough to realize that their democracy sucks, they are empowered to make a new democracy that fixes old problems and introduces a whole new set of problems. A theocracy, on the other hand, requires a system reset and extraction of the religious base, which will once again fall to America to accomplish.

Good point. Prepare to return to Irak a few years after troops leave it, when it's become a theocracy like Iran and you have to remove it. Only this time make sure to say it's for oil, it'be simpler for everyone and at least you'd be home faster. ;)

[Sedated]

I still wonder how people insist it's for oil, when our oil prices are higher than they've ever been since I've been alive. We don't have any extra oil out of it. We didn't get cheaper prices on it. American companies have not been thriving from it. I just plain don't see the connection, other than that Bush and Co have large stakes in the oil business. Not to say that the war was for good reasons, nobody on this board really knows, and if they say they do, they're dillusional. The only people who know the real reason are in Washington on vacation right now. The real reason for the war may or may not have been good, but I really don't see a decent enough connection to say it's for the oil. If anything, it's a good reason NOT to, because it's the first obvious conclusion people will try to make. If I owned a huge corporation that sold snow, and I started a political movement to take over the Arctic... then the first thing people would say is that I'm doing it to get all of the snow to sell. (Yes I know it's a silly idea to use for a company, but I was going for something that would be as obvious as the oil thing).

[TheLostProphet]

I think it's because the US doesn't have a track record for fighting wars just out of the goodness of their hearts. And I swear I read a statement where Bush said the oil fields would be under US control until the country has been stabilised or something, but don't quote me on that.

I guess oil prices have risen because of the increase in terrorism and the way OPEC wont be too pleased with a Middle Eastern country being invaded and having more planned.

[Sedated]

I think it's because the US doesn't have a track record for fighting wars just out of the goodness of their hearts. And I swear I read a statement where Bush said the oil fields would be under US control until the country has been stabilised or something, but don't quote me on that.

I guess oil prices have risen because of the increase in terrorism and the way OPEC wont be too pleased with a Middle Eastern country being invaded and having more planned.

What you said is true, but I'm sure they knew the oil prices would rise from a war and things would get tighter rather than a huge benefit. I don't recall any direct statements about the oil fields, but I do remember one was made. I just don't remember the exact terminology. I think they also knew that Saddam would try to destroy the oil fields too, which wouldn't be something they wanted either.

[KujiInRetsu]

snippet
Fact of the matter is though, they're democratically electing a theocracy to power. Yes, democracy does allow for error correction by the people, but as long as the people stay uneducated about critical issues and leave the ruling to the elected officials, who are apt to abuse their given powers, they may never be able to correct for the damage a theocracy can cause.

[Kustom]

If anything, it's a good reason NOT to, because it's the first obvious conclusion people will try to make. If I owned a huge corporation that sold snow, and I started a political movement to take over the Arctic... then the first thing people would say is that I'm doing it to get all of the snow to sell.

Er... But that's not why you would do it, right? Taking other the Arctic to bring democracy to the penguins you never gave a damn about before, I suppose...

But seriously, I don't think the war was for oil only. The war was about stability in the middle east, which included taking control of oil reserves, because you know being so dependent on the Saudis can kill you (As opposed to being too dependent on oil, which is somehow never a problem in America). The Neocons wanted to demonstrate how America could take over rogue states overnight and turn them into democracies friendly to America (I believe that's what they really cared about). It would then scare the shit out of other rogue states who would then lie low and crack down on terrorism.

And that's where they messed up real bad. The Middle East is no more stable, terrorism got boosted, and the entire American military has been stuck in a country four time smaller than Iran for 3 years. If I was a mollah, I'd be opening a bottle of champagne right now! Oops, right they can't do that.

What I was half-jokingly saying is that, going in for oil only would have been a less sexy perhaps, but much more reasonable objective.

[CNagy]

I still wonder how people insist it's for oil, when our oil prices are higher than they've ever been since I've been alive. We don't have any extra oil out of it. We didn't get cheaper prices on it. American companies have not been thriving from it. I just plain don't see the connection, other than that Bush and Co have large stakes in the oil business. Not to say that the war was for good reasons, nobody on this board really knows, and if they say they do, they're dillusional. The only people who know the real reason are in Washington on vacation right now. The real reason for the war may or may not have been good, but I really don't see a decent enough connection to say it's for the oil. If anything, it's a good reason NOT to, because it's the first obvious conclusion people will try to make. If I owned a huge corporation that sold snow, and I started a political movement to take over the Arctic... then the first thing people would say is that I'm doing it to get all of the snow to sell. (Yes I know it's a silly idea to use for a company, but I was going for something that would be as obvious as the oil thing).

The oil fields were divided up by the Coalition of the Willing before we ever set foot in Iraq. Basically, a number of factors are driving the price of oil up despite the fact that we have a greater access to it. First, prices always raise in the summer-- this is something that the companies themselves do. Gasoline consumption rises because everyone is going on various trips and vacations; electricity prices go up because people are using more central air-- these are steps taken to squeeze extra dollars out of the people. Despite the fact that gasoline prices are significantly higher than they were this time last year, our consumption has only increased, showing that we'll grumble but we'll still fill up at the pump.

Secondly, any time anyone sneezes in the Middle East the price of oil goes up. With such a huge reserve there, trouble of any kind tends to cause an oil scare. Furthermore (and this isn't a seperate point because I don't know how current it is anymore,) OPEC occasionally restricts production to drive prices up.

Thirdly, gasoline (or petrol to our neighbors across the pond) prices have been artifically low in the United States for many, many years. We've worked to keep the cost of gasoline down to encourage a fuel guzzling society, only that won't work forever, and you will see prices rise and stabilize right along side the gas prices in Europe and Canada.

Fourthly, you factor in greed. We went over there for oil. Why? Because oil makes some people alot of money. If the american people suddenly balked at the price of gasoline, we would see it slowly deflate. Despite an excessive amount of oil, a company has no reason to lower its price if all we are going to do is complain about it. Why should they if we'll still buy the same amount (if not more) of gasoline despite the fact that oil has gone from $50 to $65 dollars a barrel (numbers are estimations.) That's $15 dollars extra profit in hand.

Americans will complain about the prices, and a few will do something about it. Moped sales have doubled in the last year, as the dorky yet fuel efficient (50 miles to the gallon sounds nice) vehicles override a sense of style with a highly effective $10 fillup at the pumps. When gasoline prices continue to rise, perhaps we shall see a massive reduction in the number of SUV sales, as 8 mile to the gallon vehicles become a luxury for the super rich. But for the most part, people are content to grumble and do nothing else.