Thoughts for Today

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
You may be right or you may be wrong, but the common justification to the public for having nuclear weapons is that they act as deterrents – that is what is actually promoted, or, in Toryspeak, it's an issue of National Safety. Of course the US invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with nuclear weapons – if anything it was all to do with the US desire to replace Sunni with Shiite – but the point is that the US deliberately lied about the presence of them in Iraq, no doubt trying to play on public fears. Yet no-one questioned why, if both Iraq and US had these so-called deterrents, there was actually a need to invade. Surely, if they were indeed deterrents, one would cancel out the other rendering invasion/war as pointless? As that didn't happen, it tends to suggest that the ‘deterrent factor’ is flawed.
I think Iraq was two things - oil - and revenge for unfinished Kuwait business for daddy. Bush and Blair told bare faced lies.
There was never a need to invade - nobody outside the Middle East was fearful of the WMDs. It was just a smokescreen.
Unfortunately deterrents - defence - nuclear - wars are not just Tory politics - Labour are as bad - and all the churches too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hornet-Fez
I think Iraq was two things - oil - and revenge for unfinished Kuwait business for daddy. Bush and Blair told bare faced lies.
There was never a need to invade - nobody outside the Middle East was fearful of the WMDs. It was just a smokescreen.
Unfortunately deterrents - defence - nuclear - wars are not just Tory politics - Labour are as bad - and all the churches too.
I have to agree wholeheartedly with every word. The daddy angle always seems to be missed but I'm sure it was one of the prime factors.
 
I think Iraq was two things - oil - and revenge for unfinished Kuwait business for daddy.
Unfortunately deterrents - defence - nuclear - wars are not just Tory politics - Labour are as bad - and all the churches too.

I doubt the first of those - I'd wager that whatever they could have got from oil has been trumped by the cost of the invasion. Their business acumen simply wouldn't allow for a loss. And that doesn't include the human cost to their own, something that doesn't appear to faze them.

Yes, I know that it's not just Tory politics, but they just happen to be in charge at the moment - fraudulently or otherwise. Labour and LibDem are just as bad - the SNP however... :)
 
I doubt the first of those - I'd wager that whatever they could have got from oil has been trumped by the cost of the invasion. Their business acumen simply wouldn't allow for a loss. And that doesn't include the human cost to their own, something that doesn't appear to faze them.

Yes, I know that it's not just Tory politics, but they just happen to be in charge at the moment - fraudulently or otherwise. Labour and LibDem are just as bad - the SNP however... :)
The cost of the invasion was 61 billion dollars. Saudi Arabia et al paid 36 billion of that.
Iraq govt made 3.7 billion dollars from oil exports in July 2016 alone. Given that it cost US less than 25 billion dollars, I think they've probably recouped that.
 
The cost of the invasion was 61 billion dollars. Saudi Arabia et al paid 36 billion of that.
Iraq govt made 3.7 billion dollars from oil exports in July 2016 alone. Given that it cost US less than 25 billion dollars, I think they've probably recouped that.

Try $2 trillion + andy...

Of course the spectacular rise in oil prices during the period of the war may have benefitted them greatly, but not enough to recoup that.
 
Try $2 trillion + andy...

Of course the spectacular rise in oil prices during the period of the war may have benefitted them greatly, but not enough to recoup that.
Quite right, BB. Just a quick (why does iPad autocorrect change 'quick' to 'uncle'?) look, maybe the figures I got were for the assault alone. I've seen now the 2+trillion figures now. Wow. That is mind-boggling. All because someone's dad was perceived to be embarrassed.
 
I think Iraq was two things - oil - and revenge for unfinished Kuwait business for daddy. Bush and Blair told bare faced lies.
There was never a need to invade - nobody outside the Middle East was fearful of the WMDs. It was just a smokescreen.
Unfortunately deterrents - defence - nuclear - wars are not just Tory politics - Labour are as bad - and all the churches too.
Spot on. Especially daddy's unfinished business which is a favourite point of mine when debating the topic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: andytoprankin
on FB:
Rod Phillip-Ellsworth Stapleton to The Awakening - group meeting and discussion
4 mins·Calgary, AB, Canada·

Sending one and all the blessings of Love, Light and gratitude towards all initiations of Light Body activations during this evenings opening of The Lion’s Gate Cosmic Portal. Open all hearts and accelerate that profound transfiguring of the universal Divine Flame awakening. As we all are the dimensional doorway for energies, dimensions and consciousness streams far beyond this 3D frequency.

Eye Am Over-Soul






<yikes>




<laugh>
 
on FB:
Rod Phillip-Ellsworth Stapleton to The Awakening - group meeting and discussion
4 mins·Calgary, AB, Canada·

Sending one and all the blessings of Love, Light and gratitude towards all initiations of Light Body activations during this evenings opening of The Lion’s Gate Cosmic Portal. Open all hearts and accelerate that profound transfiguring of the universal Divine Flame awakening. As we all are the dimensional doorway for energies, dimensions and consciousness streams far beyond this 3D frequency.

Eye Am Over-Soul






<yikes>




<laugh>
WoooOOOOOooo
<laugh>