Oil for food

Man gotta love the amount of money Saddam was making from France Germany and Russia http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&e=6&u=/nm/20041115/ts_nm/iraq_oil_probe_dc

And you seriously expect us to debate this piece of garbage? It's put out by an administration that is currently running a bloody and unsustainable war with the country that is the subject of the report?

Fuck me dead, if that piece of crap isn't propaganda, then tear up the dictionary and rewrite it.

And you seriously expect us to debate this piece of garbage? It's put out by an administration that is currently running a bloody and unsustainable war with the country that is the subject of the report? Fuck me dead, if that piece of crap isn't propaganda, then tear up the dictionary and rewrite it.
Then WTF are all the left-wing-dribble-links you constantly post on here, hard journalism??!! At least the story is from Reuters, a somewhat respectable organization.
You simply won't allow the possibility that there is at least some justification for the Iraq war, albeit not what we originally expected, not one bit. So why do you still feel the need to debate the subject? We know pretty much everyone's opinion on the subject and the opinions aren't changing....

Then WTF are all the left-wing-dribble-links you constantly post on here, hard journalism??!! At least the story is from Reuters, a somewhat respectable organization.
You simply won't allow the possibility that there is at least some justification for the Iraq war, albeit not what we originally expected, not one bit. So why do you still feel the need to debate the subject? We know pretty much everyone's opinion on the subject and the opinions aren't changing....


Not disputing that Reuters is a reputable organisation.They report things exactly as they happen.So when the Senate tables a pile of propaganda, they report that the Senate has tabled a pile of propaganda.However,being good journalists, they don't put too much spin on it.They leave the reader to make up his own mind.If he has one.

There have been many different reasons put forward to justify the theft of Iraq, none of which make any credible sense.

WMD? not there,never were.
Remove Saddam? Done that, move out.
War on terrorism? What Iraqi terrorism? When was the last attack on U.S. soil, and what was the predominant nationality of the terrorists and the planners?
The current slaughter in Fallujah is further proof that Bush doesn't give a fuck abvout Iraqis. He's happy to murder anyone that opposes his puppet government.

Hey did you hear about this program Bush's friends are profiting from?

It's called Bullets for Blood.

Not expecting you to debate the facts naki. If I recall you're the one who said you would believe stuff from a government website, but you wont believe something the government says?

Not Saying Its Not True... But It Does Sound Kind Of Whimsical.

something else occurred to me. it may have some truth based on the fact that most UN members were in favour of reducing sanctions on Iraq to increase aid. doing things like substituting "substandard goods with top-grade ones" sounds like a good way to help the Iraqi people. If you would be happy to supply the oppressed Iraqi people with "substandard" goods, then i wonder who is really the one hurting the people. UNLESS you want to make the current administration look bad and look like they are not looking after their people so you can come in and depose them later, look like a hero, and get all the opil you want. Actually I am SURE it's true, I'm SURE that those countries were deliberately giving the Iraqi's extra money... or at least it's equivalent in improved aid. Perhaps they made a profit from getting the oil below market price, but this would be offset if they were giving out medicine and food below market price too. Sounds like a good way to get around the sanctions that most countries thought were harming the population of Iraq, a good way to get around what ended up as US sanctions.

Of course it can't be true!!!!!! France and Germany and Russia, are angels!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! the only country that can do evil is the USA. Anything said against another country is just propaganda.

some of you guys make me sick.

nup...i'm sure it's true now... changed my post

Not expecting you to debate the facts naki. If I recall you're the one who said you would believe stuff from a government website, but you wont believe something the government says?

Show me some facts and I'll debate them.Yet again you choose to quote out of context.Immigration schemes on a government website are far more credible that a 'report' released in wartime about the alleged activities of a previous enemy.

Saddam has long since been captured, so this 'report' is superfluous.The only purpose for releasing it in a blaze of publicity is to try and further muddy the truth about Bush's continued presence in Iraq.

Perhaps they made a profit from getting the oil below market price, but this would be offset if they were giving out medicine and food below market price too..
And you call republicans brainwashed... Are you seriously standing behind this theory?!
The bribery campaign has been well documented and the U.N. leadership is blocking every attempt to release more internal records.
This is the reason the UN, France, Russia, China, and Germany didn't want us in Iraq... It cut their profit margins!! They sold out the Iraqi people for personal gain! And you guys accuse Bush of going after blood-money, who's hands are bloody now?! Oh, smell that?? The stink of hypocrasy is emmenating from the U.N.!!!! I can't wait to see who's ass is on a platter next, and how the anti-Bush crowd justifies the UN's actions! Oops, it already begun in the quote above...
Fortunately, Iraqi's were very methodical about recording all financial transactions (including bribery) and we're finding out more about this scandal every week as we go through Saddam's own records.
Of course this won't persuade the "true believers" that Bush wasn't the evil, greedy, Texas oil man looking for Daddy's revenge, nothing will. So why do I even exercise my fingers over this...
:rolleyes:

note the words "perhaps" and "if" in you're quote.

i never saw that sort of uncertainty in george jnr's claims of weapons and bad men. turned out he was wrong but you don't hold him to it.

if you want people to believe your crap you have to come up with a reason. how much money dd the US make selling WMD to Iraq and how much did they save on field testing.....

Taranaki honestly you make me sick.



The next person who makes a direct attack on another member, or advocates genocide in the Middle East, or breaches the user guidelines for whatever reason,whatever their political persuasion, will be permanently removed from AF.




Comes back from a week off for breaching guidelines and starts right where he left off. :screwy:

So long,buddy, permanent ban this time.Personal attacks on other members are not permitted, and if I 'make you sick', you are better off staying away.

Murco, since you are so schooled up on UN reports, can you tell me why the US took control of Hans Blix's 12,000 page long WMD report then distributed copies of it to the rest of the UN that were only 4,000 pages long?

I know the answer already, but if you find out why - it'll give you another opportunity to slam some of those countries you name in this thread.

There's a catch though, the US will be one of them and the wrongdoings are much worse than the oil for food allegations.

Saddam has long since been captured, so this 'report' is superfluous..

Please elaborate.

Consider that the people pulling for the sanctions to be lifted prior to the war were opposed to their being lifted once Saddam was removed. A real humanitarian group that bunch was.

The UN is a corrupt waste of space. Annon's hands are as dirty as they come.













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

The UN is a corrupt waste of space. Annon's hands are as dirty as they come.


Funny you mention that.

But lets imagine you where living some where, where UN intervention was getting you water, food and protection. How might your opinion change then?

Of course from a US point of view, the UN is going to be obsolete to some, as it does not directly concern their best interests. But sometimes its nice to know poorer/less fortunate people are better off, due to some people giving a dam..


Sorry to go off on a tangent,


AS for the article stated at the start of this thread,

This seems like a retort to the WMD argument, or innocent victim death tolls. When it comes down to it Money or Peoples lives?

It just seems each side is getting desperate to justify their actions..

But lets imagine you where living some where, where UN intervention was getting you water, food and protection. How might your opinion change then?

Of course from a US point of view, the UN is going to be obsolete to some, as it does not directly concern their best interests. But sometimes its nice to know poorer/less fortunate people are better off, due to some people giving a dam..


Are you suggesting that humanitarian aide can only be done through the UN? That would be short sighted. There is nothing being done by the UN that isn't or can't be accomplished by individual countries or countries that want to work together.

The UN isn't obsolete - it was never worth a shit to begin with. The UN is a bunch of bureaucrats who's only goal is to further their own power. Its built on a flawed structure with vast percentages of people unrepresented.

I'll be happy the day the UN goes the way of the league of nations. That day is coming.













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

I'll second that.

Quote:Originally Posted by taranaki
" Saddam has long since been captured, so this 'report' is superfluous.."

Taranaki would you please explain how you reached this conclusion???

it's not that hard... the US said they were going there in the interest of world security and getting rid of an evil dictator. there were no WMD, Sadam has been ousted. In building a case reports like that one were necessary (though they turned out to be lies) so go and look up the definition of superfluous and see if you can work out why he said it.

it's not that hard... the US said they were going there in the interest of world security and getting rid of an evil dictator. there were no WMD, Sadam has been ousted. In building a case reports like that one were necessary (though they turned out to be lies) so go and look up the definition of superfluous and see if you can work out why he said it.

Are they "lies" or is it "superfluous" information? Big difference. Suggest you look it up!

If their is even an ounce of truth to the oil for food scandal I would hardly consider information regarding it as "superfulous".

I have two sons in the U.S. Army. One recently returned from Iraq and the other will soon be arriving. I want to UNDERSTAND what is going on and what people think, NOT argue about it or Monday morning quarterback( Us Marines Murder Unarmed).

I listen to all sides of an issue and ask more questions than make comments. I suggest you try doing the same. You answered a question that was not even directed toward you!

the previous reports "LIKE" this one WERE lies.

superfluous meaning extra and unnecessary.

while it was necessary to have the previous reports to attempt to built a case (or facade), it is not necessary after you have already invaded. This is especially the case when you don't care what anybody thinks of your actions anyway.

I'll happily explain 'superfluous' to you.

Saddam was a bad leader.That much we know.He has been deposed,and is in custody,pending trial [hopefully by his own country].He is no longer in a position to abuse his authority, and any information that relates to historical abuse should be collated and presented at his trial.

In terms of the rest of the world, this report is superfluous.The American authorities trumpeting this kind of stuff at a point that has no relevance to Saddam's trial raises the question,why are the powers that be releasing it at this time?

Simple really.They have no obvious justifiable continuing role in Iraq and want to bluff the public into thinking that they do.The report itself is superflous in terms of Saddam's future.The timing and method of its distribution is more about trying to add credibility to the atrocities being committed in Fallujah.

I would agree with you Naki if Saddamn was the only one doing this. But there are people out there walking the streets, sitting in there UN offices that don't belong there. They need to be found and removed.

With this report we can start to find out who broke the sanctions whether it be the French, Germans, Russians and the UN we will find out who was behind this. It has nothing to do with Saddamn anymore.

I'll happily explain 'superfluous' to you.

Saddam was a bad leader.That much we know.He has been deposed,and is in custody,pending trial [hopefully by his own country].He is no longer in a position to abuse his authority, and any information that relates to historical abuse should be collated and presented at his trial.

In terms of the rest of the world, this report is superfluous.The American authorities trumpeting this kind of stuff at a point that has no relevance to Saddam's trial raises the question,why are the powers that be releasing it at this time?

Simple really.They have no obvious justifiable continuing role in Iraq and want to bluff the public into thinking that they do.The report itself is superflous in terms of Saddam's future.The timing and method of its distribution is more about trying to add credibility to the atrocities being committed in Fallujah.

Thank you for responding.

A quick question about Fallujah. I understand that nearly all the citizens of Fallujah left the city before everything started happening. I heard an interview on npr(again) with several Fallujahans. They said that most had fled the city and most that were left were the insurgents. Also they wished that the US went in earlier before the large amounts of insurgents arrived. Is this true? Has anyone else heard this?

I've read a few things about that. It seems many of the citizens originally supported the insurgents but quickly found that they were put under their thumb and decided they really didn't want them there. Because the majority are Sunni, they aren't thrilled to have the US forces there but they know its a better alternative.













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

perhaps the ones they interviewed (and were allowed out of the city) were let out because they waved american flags?

sorry that was stupid.

flatrater does have a good point though that IF there are people within the UN or ANY country that is found to be guilty they should be dealt with.

HOWEVER... I would hope that so long as we are going down this path any Americans would also be investigated and if guilty would be dealt with in the same manner. I would also like to see the investigations go beyond sanctions, and extend to many of the acts and incidents that occurred under Sadam, with similar justice to be brought to those turned up in relation to these incidents.

HOWEVER... I would hope that so long as we are going down this path any Americans would also be investigated and if guilty would be dealt with in the same manner. I would also like to see the investigations go beyond sanctions, and extend to many of the acts and incidents that occurred under Sadam, with similar justice to be brought to those turned up in relation to these incidents.

I agree with you any and all should be dealt with the same way be it Americans or anyone else in the world. When I say any and all I am referring to those who side stepped the sanctions, those who lied during the oil for food program.

You wouldn't include those who were involved in any of the crimes Sadam is currently being charged with?

Are you suggesting that humanitarian aide can only be done through the UN? That would be short sighted. There is nothing being done by the UN that isn't or can't be accomplished by individual countries or countries that want to work together.

The UN isn't obsolete - it was never worth a shit to begin with. The UN is a bunch of bureaucrats who's only goal is to further their own power. Its built on a flawed structure with vast percentages of people unrepresented.

I'll be happy the day the UN goes the way of the league of nations. That day is coming.


Yes there are others doing humanitarian work, but it would be ignorant to not admit that a vast majority of help to countries is being provided via the UN. Take africa for an example, worldvision is not going to stop sufferring by themselves, theres still problems at the political level.

But to be fair, I have witnessed the UNs so called help, and sometimes their help isnt required(kinda like with the US), and is doing more bad then good.

In any event, a link bolstering your particular view on the UN would be good to read/acknowledge..

I would agree with you Naki if Saddamn was the only one doing this. But there are people out there walking the streets, sitting in there UN offices that don't belong there. They need to be found and removed.

With this report we can start to find out who broke the sanctions whether it be the French, Germans, Russians and the UN we will find out who was behind this. It has nothing to do with Saddamn anymore.

Removed by whom?