PDA

View Full Version : LMAO! Rummy shuts down the pipeline from Iraq to Syria!


Car Key Boi
Apr 15th, 2003, 08:23 PM
http://www.msnbc.com/news/888057.asp?0cv=CB10

April 15 — U.S. forces have shut down a pipeline sending oil from Iraq to Syria, U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said on Tuesday. The move came after multiple warnings of possible sanctions against Syria by the Bush administration, which accuses Damascus of giving safe haven to remnants of Saddam Hussein’s Iraqi government and of developing weapons of mass destruction. Damascus rejected the accusations, calling the charges “threats and “falsifications.”

Ra!

- Car Key Boi http://carkeyboi.com/dump/MJmoonwalk.gif

rand
Apr 16th, 2003, 08:10 AM
http://www.msnbc.com/news/888057.asp?0cv=CB10

April 15 — U.S. forces have shut down a pipeline sending oil from Iraq to Syria, U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said on Tuesday. The move came after multiple warnings of possible sanctions against Syria by the Bush administration, which accuses Damascus of giving safe haven to remnants of Saddam Hussein’s Iraqi government and of developing weapons of mass destruction. Damascus rejected the accusations, calling the charges “threats and “falsifications.”

Ra!

- Car Key Boi http://carkeyboi.com/dump/MJmoonwalk.gif
what kind of "Ra!" was that ckb?

VSFan1 aka Joshua L.
Apr 16th, 2003, 02:12 PM
This was an illegal pipeline that was in total disregard to UN Sanction and the Oil for Food program set up by the UN.

ys
Apr 16th, 2003, 03:23 PM
This was an illegal pipeline that was in total disregard to UN Sanction

This was an illegal war that was in total disregard to UN laws..

The "illegal" word is no longer relevant in this world. There is no laws in a jungle. Everything is "legal" as long as you are strong enough to do that or smart enough not to get caught by those stronger than you..

Barrie_Dude
Apr 16th, 2003, 05:27 PM
Those dam Syrians are oily enough as it is! :rolleyes:

VSFan1 aka Joshua L.
Apr 16th, 2003, 07:42 PM
This was an illegal war that was in total disregard to UN laws..

The "illegal" word is no longer relevant in this world. There is no laws in a jungle. Everything is "legal" as long as you are strong enough to do that or smart enough not to get caught by those stronger than you..
Now you trump that? Just a few weeks ago you were supporting the war.....but I guess you got envious at the American support for it, seeing how you like to use and abuse what America is ;)

ys
Apr 16th, 2003, 07:50 PM
Now you trump that? Just a few weeks ago you were supporting the war.....but I guess you got envious at the American support for it, seeing how you like to use and abuse what America is ;)

No, I am just beating your twisted logics about what is "illegal" ..

disposablehero
Apr 16th, 2003, 09:47 PM
This was an illegal war that was in total disregard to UN laws..

The "illegal" word is no longer relevant in this world. There is no laws in a jungle. Everything is "legal" as long as you are strong enough to do that or smart enough not to get caught by those stronger than you..

The difference, as you all are so loathe to admit, is that the UN said "Iraq cannot sell oil except for through this program". They did not say "The United States cannot invade Iraq."

ys
Apr 16th, 2003, 09:53 PM
They did not say "The United States cannot invade Iraq."

Of course, they didn't say that. They are realistic, they have no means to enforce that, and that for like 5-10 years more US indeed can do whatever it wants. But then things will change..

Car Key Boi
Apr 16th, 2003, 10:25 PM
ugh, i hope everyone realizes that Bush/USA/blah have no intention of invading Syria, Iran or anyone else for that matter

shit, we can barely afford the Iraqi war, we certainly do not have the spare cash to fight another one

all of these "threats" that Powell/Rummy/blah are making are just that, threats, to let the Syrians and everyone else in that region know that we are not to be fucked with

making threats is the normal diplomacy

when yuo think about it, all international diplomacy is negotiation backed by threats, concealed or otherwise - the same applies at a business level with corporations and the like

when yuo have a union leader demanding more money for his members, the bargaining chip is the threat of a strike, for management it's the threat of firing the lot of them and replacing them with a non-union labor force - neither side wants a 'war' and through negotiation or 'diplomacy' a compromise is reached that is acceptable (perhaps not ideal) to both parties. When yuo have a 'war' it's because one side has been so unreasonable that further negotiation is not possible or is a complete waste of time - this is what happened in regard to SH - he was cut a deal back in 91 and he had no intention of sticking to it. The only time he showed any real intention of compliance, was when we dumped 250,000 troops on his border. When yuo move 250,000 troops around the world, because of the expense and logistics involved in transporting them and having them based in the middle of the desert, yuo're already committed to using them because if yuo withdraw them, yuo're gonna look a bit silly if the other dude starts up his shit again and yuo have to go through all that time and expense of deploying those troops again

now Syria is a different matter, their leaders will probably piss & moan at us publicly, but they'll deal with us, quietly behind closed doors so to speak, and there will be no invasion - trust me on this, so far my posts in regard to what was gonna happen in regard to Iraq/war/aftermath/blah has been pretty close to the mark

- Car Key Boi

ys
Apr 16th, 2003, 10:37 PM
No, of course, Syria and Iran are out of question. US won't defeat Iran as easily as Iraq, because it's twice as much of a population, because it's mountains instead of desert, and because the idea of "liberating" Iran would be simply impossible to sell.
Syria would be eathier, but in war with Syria it would be impossible not to get Israel involved, and with Israel involved, it would be a very different game..

VSFan1 aka Joshua L.
Apr 17th, 2003, 12:22 AM
Of course, they didn't say that. They are realistic, they have no means to enforce that, and that for like 5-10 years more US indeed can do whatever it wants. But then things will change..
Mhmm.....okay Moses.

What will happen in 5-10 years?

VSFan1 aka Joshua L.
Apr 17th, 2003, 12:25 AM
No, I am just beating your twisted logics about what is "illegal" ..
Well, if my logic is twisted, then so is all the other logic in the world. Illegal is by means of UN Sanction, which has already been stated. But instead of still defending your point (after DH plainly explained) you backpeddled on some prediction that the US/UN involvement won't matter in 5-10 years.

ys
Apr 17th, 2003, 12:26 AM
What will happen in 5-10 years?

For starters, US will no longer be economy #1 in the world..

VSFan1 aka Joshua L.
Apr 17th, 2003, 12:29 AM
For starters, US will no longer be economy #1 in the world..
Your.....style.....of.......ending......sentences. .....in......ellipses.......makes your views less credible, no matter how relevant they may be.

Just say what you gotta say.......in other words, take a stand.

Sam L
Apr 17th, 2003, 12:37 AM
For starters, US will no longer be economy #1 in the world..
How do you know that? And who will take its place?

VSFan1 aka Joshua L.
Apr 17th, 2003, 12:48 AM
The Federated States of Micronesia

Rollo
Apr 17th, 2003, 12:49 AM
What nation will be the #1 economy in the world YS? If your answer is China I wouldn't bet your dacha on it anytime soon:)

We have no need to invade Iran. In the near future the youth of Iran will likely throw out the ayatollahs who control it now. It's Saudi Arabia I worry about. When the masses overthrow the royal family there it could make the the French revolution look like a picnic. An "ally" could turn into an enemy overnight if that happens.

disposablehero
Apr 17th, 2003, 01:02 AM
The US economy not #1 in 5 years? LMAO! 25 years, MAYBE.

ys
Apr 17th, 2003, 01:05 AM
What nation will be the #1 economy in the world YS? If your answer is China I wouldn't bet your dacha on it anytime soon:)

China grows at 10% an year, while we are stagnating. China has a huge internal market as almost infinite potential for growth, we are spending billions on wars. At current pace they will be #1 in 10 years, that's US who is making them #1. They are preparing to send an austronaut into space very soon. And send an astronaut to the Moon within a decade. They can afford it, US no longer can. We are stuck with China, Rollo. We feed their growth, and our mere existance now depend on China. We could put economical sanctions on any country for human right violations, China can afford public executions of all that little internal opposition and will still stay with "most favored" status. Because any sanctions against China are equal to sanctions against US. And China will not be noisy for as long as US is feeding their growth, but soon US will no longer be able to keep it, and China might become less predictable. Now more than that.. After we gave away a lot of our production abilities to China, we are quickly giving away a lot of our intellectual ( software ) production ability to India. And, as you know, the military might is the direct derivative of economical might, and once China is #1 economy in the world, you can safely bet on them becoming #1 military power in the world soon after..

VSFan1 aka Joshua L.
Apr 17th, 2003, 01:08 AM
China grows at 10% an year, while we are stagnating. China has a huge internal market as almost infinite potential for growth, we are spending billions on wars. At current pace they will be #1 in 10 years, that's US who is making them #1. They are preparing to send an austronaut into space very soon. And send an astronaut to the Moon within a decade. They can afford it, US no longer can. We are stuck with China, Rollo. We feed their growth, and our mere existance now depend on China. We could put economical sanctions on any country for human right violations, China can afford public executions of all that little internal opposition and will still stay with "most favored" status. Because any sanctions against China are equal to sanctions against US. And China will not be noisy for as long as US is feeding their growth, but soon US will no longer be able to keep it, and China might become less predictable. Now more than that.. After we gave away a lot of our production abilities to China, we are quickly giving away a lot of our intellectual ( software ) production ability to India. And, as you know, the military might is the direct derivative of economical might, and once China is #1 economy in the world, you can safely bet on them becoming #1 military power in the world soon after..
While I don't necessarily disagree with what you say, it will be interesting to see what actually happens in 10 years. Who knows.....American foreign and "homeland" policy could drastically change that would essentially put England up as the #1 economy.

King Lindsay
Apr 17th, 2003, 01:13 AM
That's wrong. China is not growing as fast you say, and they are by no means capable of overhauling the American economy in ten years. MAYBE in 25 if EVERYTHING goes right, which is what DH said and he's correct.

Rollo
Apr 17th, 2003, 01:49 AM
I can't dispute you with facts YS-only an opinion. My opinion is that Chinese power will grow, but not to the extent you believe.Consider these factors:

1. China routinely misrepresents numbers of all sorts-including economic numbers. The whole sham with SARS is a case in point.

2. Economic bubbles burst.

I've lived in Japan and Korea during "boom" periods of more than 10%
economic growth. Those economies were built on exports in a lopsided manner. Those booms didn't last. Projecting solid 10% growth year after year just won't work. It probably isn't that high now (see point #1) and predicting growth is risky. Clinton was projecting surpluses tied to a booming stock market. We all know how that turned out.

3. China has several military concerns:

A. It wants to conquer or take Taiwan. This takes a deep water fleet
that China is only now getting.

B. It occupies Tibet and has to fight Muslim "terrorists" from the
province of Xinjiang, who want independence.

C. China's per cap spending on defense is huge.

4. IF China has an economic downturn there is no guarentee the communists would survive. If that happens civil war and or unrest is possible. Minorities would try to break away from Beijing in this scenario.

5. Poverty on a massive scale is common in the countryside. Millions of homeless people from the rural west are seaking fortunes in the more urban east. If China was becoming so prosperous thousands wouldn't be leaving for the US and Canada every year.

6. I tutor a Chinese businessman from Hong Kong. He thinks like you do YS, but in his opinion China is 50 years from equality with the US, not 10.

7. I'm happy China is getting ready to send a man to the moon, but we've been there 40 years now.

By virtue of it's population alone China will soon outclass the US in Asia, but only as regional power, not a world power. It's still two generations away from total parity.

ys
Apr 17th, 2003, 02:44 AM
1. China routinely misrepresents numbers of all sorts-including economic numbers. The whole sham with SARS is a case in point.

True, but why don't you believe your eyes rather than numbers? Don't you feel the might of Chinese economy in your day-to-day consumption?



2. Economic bubbles burst.

I've lived in Japan and Korea during "boom" periods of more than 10%
economic growth. Those economies were built on exports in a lopsided manner. Those booms didn't last. Projecting solid 10% growth year after year just won't work.

It has worked for almost 25 years to the point.. And there is major difference between Japan, Korea and China. China has a huge potential of growth based on internal market only.




3. China has several military concerns:

A. It wants to conquer or take Taiwan. This takes a deep water fleet
that China is only now getting.

B. It occupies Tibet and has to fight Muslim "terrorists" from the
province of Xinjiang, who want independence.

C. China's per cap spending on defense is huge.


Yes, Taiwan is a problem, but it is just a matter of time before it goes the way Hong Kong went, they simply have no choice. Tibet is a minor political problem, but nothing like military problem. Muslim population of Xinjiang is less than 0.1% of all Chinese population. China can sort it out
demographically, by simply populating that area by ethnic Chinese. It is
insignificant problem.


I'm happy China is getting ready to send a man to the moon, but we've been there 40 years now.


So? Can you do it now? Can US afford it now?

The point is that US is becoming a paper economical tiger, totally depending on some oversees factories. It outsources its major productive abilities to other countries, mostly to China, leaving only management to itself. One day those countries ( and given that China is communist, it is well in their tradition ) can say, why would we need American management for something that we produce..