What do you think of our current President?

[Kruska]

Hello FLYBOY,

No the oil was more on Bush senior, IMO or lets say rather to my knowledge, Bush junior is massively into arms companies and contracts.

Regards
Kruska

[Njaco]

Heres the motivation for these countries NOT joining the coalition. This is from 2003 at the time we went in....

Who Armed Iraq?
"The Iraqi air force does not fly Falcons or Eagles. The majority of the Iraqi air force is made in Russia. The Russian MiG and Sukhoi design bureaus supplied Iraq with hundreds of advanced strike-fighters and the Mach 3 Foxbat interceptor.......The remainder of the Iraqi air force comes from France and China.....However, the French Mirage F-1 is reportedly the best jet fighter in Iraqi hands. You can view an Iraqi F-1 in action on the State Department Web site, testing a chemical spraying system."

"The primary Iraqi missile is the Russian-made Scud. Other missiles include the FROG-7 from Russia, the Exocet from France and the Silkworm from China.....Even the missile parts are from Chinese, German and French sources."

"The Iraqi armor force is made up of Chinese and Russian models familiar to any "cold" warrior. The Iraqi T-72 and T-55 tanks are all of Russian manufacture. The Iraqis also have a large number of Type-59 Chinese tanks and Russian-made BMP armored troop carriers.....the Iraqi attack chopper force is Russian and French."

Still not convinced?

thats why should be better if iraq wasnt invaded. the iraqi army wasnt represents any risk for other nations in middle-east. it doesnt supported terrorism because the country was suffering a embargo, UN specialists was there, they ensure was no mass destruction weapons, no nuclear projects, no poison gas.

Don't know about that.

Osiraq - Iraq Special Weapons Facilities

""Iraq established its nuclear program in the late 1960s when it acquired its first nuclear facilites. Later, in the 1970s, Iraq was unsuccessful in negotiations with France to purchase a plutonium production reactor similar to the one used in France's nuclear weapons program. In addition to the reactor, Iraq also wanted to purchase the reporcessing plant needed to recover the plutonium produced in the reactor. Even through these requests were denied, France agreed to build a research reactor along with associated laboratories. Iraq built the Osiraq 40 megawatt light-water nuclear reactor at the Al Tuwaitha Nuclear Center near Baghdad with French assistance. Approximately 27.5 pounds of 93% U-235 was supplied to Iraq by France for use in the Osiraq research reactor....The reactor was a type of French reactor named after Osiris, the Egyptian God of the dead. The French renamed the one being built in Iraq, "Osiraq" to blend the name Osiris with that of the recipient state, Iraq. French orthography then made it "Osirak." "

But here is the best part. From just before the coalition invaded.....

Iraq is resupplying its air force with French parts, officials say | Deseret News (Salt Lake City) | Find Articles at BNET

"A senior administration official declined to discuss Iraq's purchase of French warplane and helicopter parts. "It is well known that the Iraqis use front companies to try to obtain a number of prohibited items," the official said.

The disclosure comes amid heightened anti-French sentiment in the United States over Paris' opposition to U.S. plans for using force to disarm Iraq.

A senior defense official said France undermined U.S. efforts to disarm Iraq last year by watering down language of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441 that last fall required Iraq to disarm all its chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs.

France, along with Russia, Germany and China, said yesterday that they would block a joint U.S.-British U.N. resolution on the use of force against Iraq."

Do those countries look familiar to you? Don't believe all the anti-Bush hype either. There are agendas on both sides. Like Flyboy said, we should have gone in but they should have planned for an occupation.

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by Kruska

Hello FLYBOY,

No the oil was more on Bush senior, IMO or lets say rather to my knowledge, Bush junior is massively into arms companies and contracts.

Regards
Kruska

Don't know about that....

He did run some oil companies (pretty badly) and he owns a baseball team.

[Kruska]

Originally Posted by Njaco

Heres the motivation for these countries NOT joining the coalition. This is from 2003 at the time we went in....

Hello Njaco,

If you would take the same assumption for Iran it would look very bad for England, Israel and the USA, besides now China and Russia.

After Iran fell to the infidels, Iraq suddenly became of interest for the USA. Before only the French were a supplier – Germany hasn’t sold a single weapon to Iraq. That joint venture systems such as an exocet missile can be delivered by the French has nothing to do with Germany.

BTW, who would you think supplied Hussein with biochemical substances in 1994/5 ?

Let me provoke another thought:

7 of the 10 world’s largest arms companies are US, the Number 3 is BAE Systems.
How come that the US and Britain are so eager to spread peace around the world?

Come on Njiaco the world is about $$. Between mid 2001 to end 2002 the US arms companys have contributed 90 million $ to Senate and Congress lobbyists.

The US should never have gotten themselves into a war with Iraq in the first place, it could have been solved diplomatically or with “prove” the UN would have given its blessing. There was no “imminent” danger or threat at all to urge the immediate disposal of Hussein.

Bush and his cabinet just desperatly needed to prove to the American people, that the "he" the US government is able to protect its citizens, to do something about 9/11 - so Iraq comes in besides Afghanistan.

The US deliberately feeded Iraq with altered and faked satellite photos to ensure an ongoing war between Iraq and Iran and as such to keep the balance of power. At the end Iraq was bankrupted and Hussein had nothing better to do then to go and get Kuwait’s oil and money to make up for it.

This balance of power (Reagan) was a dam good idea and Bush junior busted it, making things now worse than ever before and causing Iran to emerge stronger than ever to take the leading part of the anti Israel/USA coalition amongst Muslim countries.

But maybe this topic should not stay on this thread.

Regards
Kruska

[renrich]

What a bunch of BS. I never heard so much uninformed crap in my life. Show me one bit of evidence that Bush has benefited from any relationship with oil companies or arms manufacturers from the war in Iraq and give me a logical reason why he expected to gain anything from invading Iraq other than enhancing the security of the US or creating stability in the Middle East. Since you Bush haters conveniently leave out the UK and Blair, please explain their cooperation as well as that of some of the other coalition countries. I hope everyone in Brazil is not as misinformed as you!

[Njaco]

Come on Kruska, while having some good points in your post you can't believe all of that.

it could have been solved diplomatically

Sorry to say, but that is a pipe dream. Diplomacy? It doesn't work. The only reason for diplomacy is because somebody doesn't want to have any deaths. But they forget they are dealing with dictators or factions with a blood-lust. Diplomacy only puts off today what will definately happen tommorrow. And diplomacy does not work when dealing with a hard-core belief system. How do you talk with someone who believes you are an infidel not worthy of living?

And please don't hold the UN to that high standard. Its like poking a household cat with a stick - you may get scratched and a really bad look but thats all. The UN is useless.

If you read the article it said Germany sold parts, not weapons. And I'll concede even that may be incorrect or exaggerated. But the main weapons systems were from France, Russia and China. I agree, the world revolves around money and that was my point. Those countries didn't join because of money - the money lost on armaments.

And if Iraq suddenly became an intrest for the USA after 1980 how come there weren't any American weapons systems, even as far back as Desert Storm?

The whole thing is a mess. But to blame Bush for all the failures is narrow minded and misleading. What about the failures of Bush senior, or Reagan or Carter or - heaven forbid - Clinton? The media has a short memory and its a shame so many rely on that garbage to make an opinion.

[pbfoot]

Originally Posted by renrich

I hope everyone in Brazil is not as misinformed as you!

I think everyone of us is misinformed in one way or another after all your info nor mine came down from the mount written in stone

[Kruska]

Originally Posted by Njaco

And if Iraq suddenly became an intrest for the USA after 1980 how come there weren't any American weapons systems, even as far back as Desert Storm?

Hello Njaco,

No US weapons in Iraq?? Come on time for you to face the truth, even if it hurts

Please see: U.S. Diplomatic and Commercial Relationships with Iraq, 1980 - 2 August 1990 start with 1983,

and Arms sales to Iraq 1973–1990 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

History of Iran: Arming Iraq: A Chronology of U.S. Involvement , probably you will disapprove of this site but it is backed substancially IMO.

A whole range of “foreign” weapons were financed through USA – Israel – South Africa – Iraq additionally and "favoured" by the US.

Politics are dirty and sometimes unbelievable to a good citizen.

Germany supplied "Police Helicopters", some of them were upgraded for other functions in Iraq and by Iraq, with or without the German governments knowledge - who knows

When Hussein used gas against the Iranian revolutionary guards, the US didn’t mind at all, however they never controlled this guy, and by the time they found out, Hussein had made his own plans.

Off course you are correct about other US politicians making mistakes and blunders, such as German or any other politician, but since this thread is about Bush, I restricted my criticism to him.

And to say it loud and clear: IMO Bush is just a naïve guy who is a puppet dangling on Cheney’s and Rumsfeld's strings. Njaco I am only stating my opinion, that’s all.

I just hope that if the Republicans will win the next election, Cheney and Rumsfeld will not be included in the US government anymore but I doubt it. Cheney is a highly professional and dangerous person who has pulled the strings in US policy for the last 40 years, and he is not likely to give up his power and influence, neither will Rumsfeld.

As for the diplomatic alternative, yes I think it was a very valid assumption of mine. Due to Husseins failure against the US and coalition forces in the 1st Gulfwar, his image already suffered greatly in his own country and amongst his government even his Ministers. The whole country was suffering under the Embargo and IMO the existing and building up of opposition forces would have disposed of him within the next 2 years.

Regards
Kruska

[JugBR]

Originally Posted by renrich

What a bunch of BS. I never heard so much uninformed crap in my life. Show me one bit of evidence that Bush has benefited from any relationship with oil companies or arms manufacturers from the war in Iraq and give me a logical reason why he expected to gain anything from invading Iraq other than enhancing the security of the US or creating stability in the Middle East.

the guy had an oil company called "arbusto"(bush in spanish) in TX. this company was specialist in search for oil where there wasnt oil. why ? i dont know... what i know is he always have beign inside the oiler businesss and all companies he work for, crashed, then people accuse him to use internal knowloge at the time those companies would sell its stoks in the market, to benefit himself. people also said, by the fact he was son of the president, no charge was made against him.

we also have the bush father, former cia director when happened the watergate scandal right ? we have its relationship with al saud family and with bin laden family, we have thousand of issues about mr cheeney...

you see, everything associated with the word bush is nebulous.

what hides "behind the bush" ? i dont know, but should have a lot of dirty there if we look for the clues...

Originally Posted by renrich

Since you Bush haters conveniently leave out the UK and Blair, please explain their cooperation as well as that of some of the other coalition countries. I hope everyone in Brazil is not as misinformed as you!

man thank you for the "bush hater", did you realize that the governments of all those countries who involved with this operation in iraq are suffering a strong internal opposition, low popularity indexes, or even was quit ?

like spain, after the blast in station, aznar goes out and zapatero, an anti-war activist was ellected. or britain where people said t. blair was the doggy of bush. i ask you, reinrich, why so manny people in the world hates bush ?

did you see the dolar behind the euro ? the price of a barrel of oil ? the inflation issues ? the economic crisis striking usa ?

did you see the results of the pool of this topic ?

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by Kruska

Hello Njaco,

No US weapons in Iraq?? Come on time for you to face the truth, even if it hurts

Please see: U.S. Diplomatic and Commercial Relationships with Iraq, 1980 - 2 August 1990 start with 1983,

and Arms sales to Iraq 1973–1990 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

History of Iran: Arming Iraq: A Chronology of U.S. Involvement , probably you will disapprove of this site but it is backed substancially IMO.

The US actually sold the Iraqis Hughes 500 Helicopters and probably funded arms deals during that period - Iraq was seen as a way to counter Iran and its Islamic Revolution, in 1986 it would of been seen as the right thing to do.

Originally Posted by Kruska

And to say it loud and clear: IMO Bush is just a naïve guy who is a puppet dangling on Cheney’s and Rumsfeld's strings. Njaco I am only stating my opinion, that’s all.

That sums it up perfectly!!!!!!

Originally Posted by Kruska

I just hope that if the Republicans will win the next election, Cheney and Rumsfeld will not be included in the US government anymore but I doubt it. Cheney is a highly professional and dangerous person who has pulled the strings in US policy for the last 40 years, and he is not likely to give up his power and influence, neither will Rumsfeld.

If the Republicans loose it will be because of the likes of Cheney and Rumsfeld - for the most part i doubt you'll see them around any more.

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by JugBR

we also have the bush father, former cia director when happened the watergate scandal right

Wrong....

"Director of Central Intelligence

In 1976, Ford brought Bush back to Washington to become Director of Central Intelligence. He served in this role for 355 days, from January 30, 1976 to January 20, 1977. The CIA had been rocked by a series of revelations, including those based on investigations by Senator Frank Church's Committee regarding alleged illegal and unauthorized activities by the CIA, and Bush was credited with helping to restore the agency's morale. In his capacity as DCI, Bush gave national security briefings to Jimmy Carter both as a Presidential candidate and as President-elect, and discussed the possibility of remaining in that position in a Carter administration but it was not to be."

[JugBR]

flyboyj i was wrong, my apologies, i recognize my mistakes man, bush dont.

[FLYBOYJ]

No problem...

[renrich]

Kruska, with respect, your remarks about Rumsfeld and Cheney show how little you know about American politics. McCain has never been a supporter of Rumsfeld. He constantly criticised him when he was SecDef. Cheney has about as much chance of being part of a McCain administration as I do. You need to quit believing all you read in the newspaper and see on TV. Remember Dr Goebbels and propaganda! FB, I disagree with you. If Hussein wins it will be because of the economy and because many people think it is "right" to have a black man as president. Goodness only knows why. In fact, between now and the election you will see Hussein soften his rhetoric on Iraq because he knows the mission is succeeding over there and to precipitately pull out could be a disaster for him and the dimocrat party. Actually jugb, you are wrong about the foreign countries and Bush. France elected a somewhat conservative as president and he and Bush are very much in accord, Britain's prime minister is a conservative and he and Bush are fine together just as Blair was and Germany is now cooperating with the US and George Bush quite nicely. In fact, foreign policy initiatives for thr US with our allies that matter are doing very well. Don't fret about the economic "crisis" in the US. It is only in the imagination of the media and perhaps yours.

[Haztoys]

Originally Posted by renrich

Kruska, with respect, your remarks about Rumsfeld and Cheney show how little you know about American politics. It is only in the imagination of the media and perhaps yours.

I really wish you would get a new hobby ..I really wish you were on here to write about WW2 and planes ..Some time I wonder..???

You know as much about American politics as I know about German politics ...And thats not much..Its funny I never really here any Americans say they "really" know about other countrys politics ...But boy people for other countrys sure know about American politics..They think...