It Was The New World Order

tabs · 09:31 AM

How in the world could these guys fk it up, they were given the keys to a Global Empire and all they could do is fk it up. BC bears as much responsibility as GW does, because he had the opportunity to nip this ***** in the bud, the only firm action BC ever took was to hold his co{k in his hand. Now the question is who is going to be the next fkup to take the wheel of the ship of state? Is the world going to get of the same type of deaf, dumb and blind leadership that the world has suffered with for the past 15 years. If the USA is governed with partisan politics rancor and special interests influencing every move, kiss it all goodbye.

The USA and the World can not sustain another 4 to 8 years of BS. It simply will not hold together, but will splinter and fragment. The whole of South Central Asia from India to Israel will go up in flames. You will see the Global economy come to a screeching halt.

In America forget about Health Insurance for 47 Million, that will just be a blip on the screen. Try an end to Social Security, Medicare, your 401Ks, IRAs, Stocks, Bonds, CDs, Pensions and Money Market accounts....and say hello to the bread lines. You will see an end of the technological revolution as there won't be anymore money to fund the R&D.

Its all going to fall apart...

BTW: U have Cheney and crew angling to provoke Iran into making a mistake so that the US has an excuse to go to war with them. I would not be surprised to see a military strike after the election if the Republicans lose.Thats where we are at.

sammyg2 · 10-20-2007, 08:33 AM

Waitin for em to refill the prescription?

J/k

Hugh R · 10-20-2007, 08:42 AM

Sammy, what part of tabs observations do you think are delusional?

Taz's Master · 10-20-2007, 09:59 AM

tabs, do I understnd you correctly?

Your position is that the POTUS has the "keys to the kingdom" and the responsibility to give the appearance of substance to the global economy. After 911 the global economy was in danger of folding without a significant show of force by the US.

If that was indeed the case why the international resistance by nations so dependant on the global economy against that show of force that they deemed so necessary?

tabs · 10-20-2007, 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taz's Master

tabs, do I understand you correctly?

Your position is that the POTUS has the "keys to the kingdom" and the responsibility to give the appearance of substance to the global economy. After 911 the global economy was in danger of folding without a significant show of force by the US.

If that was indeed the case why the international resistance by nations so dependent on the global economy against that show of force that they deemed so necessary?

Nearly every nation supported the US in its effort to overthrow the Taliban in Afghanistan. The problems came with the US desire to take out the Sadam regime in Iraq. It wasn't so much that it was to be done, just the method.

It is my contention that the POTUS responsibility is to ensure that the Global economy runs smoothly...promotes trade relations and ensures security by means of military force against anyone who trys to disrupt the order of things.

If one listens to GW and his concept of freedom and democracy he basically is saying that with freedom and democracy comes free market economies. Or vice versa.

Taz's Master · 10-20-2007, 10:22 AM

Do you believe deposing the Taliban and leaving Saddam in power would have been a sufficient statement?

tabs · 10-20-2007, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taz's Master

Do you believe deposing the Taliban and leaving Saddam in power would have been a sufficient statement?

If the US didn't get rid of the Taliban and disrupt Al Qaeda the USA and Global economy would have collapsed as a vote of no confidence. We HAD to take military action of some kind after 911.

With Iraq its a bit different. We did not have to take direct military action against Sadam. He was unfinished business from previous administrations. I believe he did have to go...somehow?

The BIG MISTAKE was including Iran as part of the "Axis of Evil" As a result the current leadership in Iran has become more militant toward the USA. Iran simply does not want to be bullied into submission by the USA.

The reason the Shah was deposed was to get rid of the corrosive influence the USA was having on Iran. Since then they have resisted that influence.

If Iran really wants to fk with the USA, they will stop taking $$$ as payment for oil and start taking Euros instead. Then it wouldn't be very long before the bombs would start falling on Tehran.

tabs · 10-20-2007, 10:47 AM

The swept under the rug fact about the war in Iwreck and policies toward Iran and the ME in general is the SUPREMACY of the US $$$$$$$ as the medium of exchange for oil.

Therein lies a more realistic REAL REASON for the war in Iraq.

911pcars · 10-20-2007, 11:02 AM

I believe it's all documented here (at least the last time I looked):

http://www.newamericancentury.org/

Review the section title, "Iraq/Middle East".

The list of signatories for this website at "Statement of Principles":

Elliott Abrams Gary Bauer William J. Bennett Jeb Bush
Dick Cheney Eliot A. Cohen Midge Decter Paula Dobriansky Steve Forbes
Aaron Friedberg Francis Fukuyama Frank Gaffney Fred C. Ikle
Donald Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad I. Lewis Libby Norman Podhoretz
Dan Quayle Peter W. Rodman Stephen P. Rosen Henry S. Rowen
Donald Rumsfeld Vin Weber George Weigel Paul Wolfowitz

FWIW,
Sherwood

Porsche-O-Phile · Porsche-O-Phile's Garage

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taz's Master

Do you believe deposing the Taliban and leaving Saddam in power would have been a sufficient statement?

Yes.

I-Wreck had nothing to do with 9/11 or with A.Q.

tabs · 10-20-2007, 09:34 PM

According to the "New American Sentry" in July 2001..note before 911....the neo-cons were upset that Sadam was able to thumb his nose at the USA and get away with it.

Porsche-O-Phile · Porsche-O-Phile's Garage

So our solution is to now put many other countries in a position where they can thumb their noses at the USA and get away with it. Brilliant!

hardflex · 04:20 AM

Tabs, somewhere I saw that Iran had already started trading oil in Euros in 2003 and other currencies too.

from wikipedia
Iran is planning to open a commodity exchange, variously referred to as the Iran Petroleum Exchange, International Oil Bourse or Iranian Oil Bourse. The acronym IOB has been used as it can be interpreted as either "International Oil Bourse" or "Iranian Oil Bourse", but it has no official status. It would be a Petrobourse for petroleum, petrochemicals and gas in various non-dollar currencies, primarily the euro. If successful, it would establish a euro-based pricing mechanism for oil trading, or oil marker as it is called by traders.

The geographical location is expected to be the Persian Gulf island of Kish (which is designated by Iran as a free trade zone.)[1].

The exchange has not yet opened, having missed at least three announced opening dates.

Although opening an oil bourse has so far been unsuccessful, Iran has had success in asking its petroleum customers to pay in non-dollar currencies. As of October 3, 2007, Iran currently receives non-dollar currencies for 85% of its oil exports with euros composing 65% and yen 20%. Iran is currently planning on moving the remaining 15% of dollar denominated oil exports to other currencies such as the United Arab Emirates dirham.[2]

I would think that the US insistence on the Dollar would be a violation of the GATT Agreement. I thought competition and Free Markets was a good thing?

red-beard · red-beard's Garage

Quote:

Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile

Yes.

I-Wreck had nothing to do with 9/11 or with A.Q.

The Oil for food program had about $20-100M/yr being diverted to Al Queda through Ahmed Idris Nasreddin, as documented by the Duelfer Investigation.

Porsche-O-Phile · Porsche-O-Phile's Garage

So stop the program. It still is no justification for invading a sovereign country, particularly one that puts the U.S. in a tactically compromised position in the most volatile region of the world for decades to come, alienating our allies and emboldening our enemies.

Shoot, the gubmint probably LOSES more than that each year due to accounting mistakes.

tabs · 10-21-2007, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hardflex

Tabs, somewhere I saw that Iran had already started trading oil in Euros in 2003 and other currencies too.

from wikipedia
Iran is planning to open a commodity exchange, variously referred to as the Iran Petroleum Exchange, International Oil Bourse or Iranian Oil Bourse. The acronym IOB has been used as it can be interpreted as either "International Oil Bourse" or "Iranian Oil Bourse", but it has no official status. It would be a Petrobourse for petroleum, petrochemicals and gas in various non-dollar currencies, primarily the euro. If successful, it would establish a euro-based pricing mechanism for oil trading, or oil marker as it is called by traders.

The geographical location is expected to be the Persian Gulf island of Kish (which is designated by Iran as a free trade zone.)[1].

The exchange has not yet opened, having missed at least three announced opening dates.

Although opening an oil bourse has so far been unsuccessful, Iran has had success in asking its petroleum customers to pay in non-dollar currencies. As of October 3, 2007, Iran currently receives non-dollar currencies for 85% of its oil exports with euros composing 65% and yen 20%. Iran is currently planning on moving the remaining 15% of dollar denominated oil exports to other currencies such as the United Arab Emirates dirham.[2]

I would think that the US insistence on the Dollar would be a violation of the GATT Agreement. I thought competition and Free Markets was a good thing?

Now U know why the USA has a hard on for Iran.

hardflex · 10-21-2007, 05:49 PM

If so, it's friggin ridiculous. Hell, we've had trade sanctions on them, through the 80's, I don't think we even recognized them Diplomatically for 20 years or so. What do we expect them to do?

But Bush was on TV calling this WWIII

I'll Say it again, I thought a free market was a good thing.

sammyg2 · 10-21-2007, 09:44 PM

The thread is mental masterbation.
Lots of discusion of things we know absolutely nothing about, or imaginary theories we dreamed up to help fill the void of knowledge.

Do we really thing that there are people behind the scenes pulling the strings and controlling "the world economy"?

Chocaholic · 10-22-2007, 03:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tabs

In America forget about Health Insurance for 47 Million, that will just be a blip on the screen. Try an end to Social Security, Medicare, your 401Ks, IRAs, Stocks, Bonds, CDs, Pensions and Money Market accounts....and say hello to the bread lines. You will see an end of the technological revolution as there won't be anymore money to fund the R&D.

Its all going to fall apart...

Mindless fear-mongering that is completely without basis. A case of not seeing the forest through the trees.

Sammy is right on. Another worthless thread.

Mule · 10-22-2007, 06:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tabs

BTW: U have Cheney and crew angling to provoke Iran into making a mistake so that the US has an excuse to go to war with them. I would not be surprised to see a military strike after the election if the Republicans lose.Thats where we are at.

I read this about 3 times & it still appears that you think the US govt. spends time trying to provoke the peace loving mullahs of Iran, as if that was ever necessary. Ray Charles can see that their hatred of the infidel eliminates any need for provocation & he's blind AND dead!

So fire up all 'em rich & tasteful brain cells & tell us what a wonderful world this would be with a nuclear Iran!