Cruz is done.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Nebe

Bush pushed us into perpetual war.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And here I thought that the pepole who declared war on us, and brought us to our knees on 09/11, had something to do with that.

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

And here I thought that the pepole who declared war on us, and brought us to our knees on 09/11, had something to do with that.

You want to go there ?

Please explain in detail how Iraq was connected to 9-11 and how they posed a risk to the safety of the United States. While you are thinking on this take time to consider the outcome if Iraq had no oil.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Nebe

You want to go there ?

Please explain in detail how Iraq was connected to 9-11 and how they posed a risk to the safety of the United States. While you are thinking on this take time to consider the outcome if Iraq had no oil.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Did I say Iraq? If you're waiting to catch me saying that Iraq was connected to 09/11, be patient, you are in for a long wait.

Yes, oil. So the fact that Saddam agreed to end the first war (which he started, not us), an dthen he failed to live up to the obligations, had nothing to do with it.

Can you answer a question. If it wass all about oil, why did we give Saddam so many chances to avoid war, by fulfilling his obligations? How many warnings did we, and the UN, give him? You can make a compelling case we should not have invaded. I don't think you can make a case it was all about oil. Who got that oil? I mean, we won the war, where did the spoils go?

[Nebe]

Waiting
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Nebe]

China got the first dibs at the oil. Now scratch your head on that one.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Nebe

China got the first dibs at the oil. Now scratch your head on that one.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That's not totally true. Nobody got dibs, the difference is that US oil companies need to make a profit where as the Chinese just want to secure the energy. Iraq isn't giving it away for free. I think Bush and Co made a gross over-estimation to the influence the US could really bring.

Funny, you overthrow the dictator to promote democracy...then you have to deal with the democracy.

[Nebe]

The fact is... China got the oil first.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Nebe

The fact is... China got the oil first.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think you're missing the point. Oil is a commodity. China was willing to secure contracts because they had a different business plan. Chinese domestic production is shrinking yet they have demand. The US has both domestic production and demand along with a natural gas excess.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

I think you're missing the point. Oil is a commodity. China was willing to secure contracts because they had a different business plan. Chinese domestic production is shrinking yet they have demand. The US has both domestic production and demand along with a natural gas excess.

stop talking to Eben like he's 4 years old

[Nebe]

Remember bush justified the war by saying "Iraq would pay for the war with their oil"?
What was that all about? I think something went on that we don't know about between bush and China and maybe how we couldn't pay off our debts to them. (Or something like that...). Tinfoil hat is on standby
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Nebe

Remember bush justified the war by saying "Iraq would pay for the war with their oil"?
What was that all about? I think something went on that we don't know about between bush and China and maybe how we couldn't pay off our debts to them. (Or something like that...). Tinfoil hat is on standby
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I don't think Bush ever said that, it was Paul Wolfowitz who served under Donald Rumsfeld.

It's interesting that people will have seizures over Benghazi yet totally ignore strategic failures that are order of magnitude larger in scale.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

I don't think Bush ever said that, it was Paul Wolfowitz who served under Donald Rumsfeld.

It's interesting that people will have seizures over Benghazi yet totally ignore strategic failures that are order of magnitude larger in scale.

If those strategic failures have been ignored, it is a wonder that we heard (and still hear, apparently) so much about them.

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by spence

I don't think Bush ever said that, it was Paul Wolfowitz who served under Donald Rumsfeld.

It's interesting that people will have seizures over Benghazi yet totally ignore strategic failures that are order of magnitude larger in scale.

He did say that.. i have a photographic memory.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Nebe

He did say that.. i have a photographic memory.

Should be easy to find a quote then. I'm not saying the administration didn't promote it, but I don't think Bush ever said it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Nebe]

I can vividly remember him standing behind the podium with that Alfred e Newman stare and big ears saying something along the lines of defending the wars cost and the fact that the Iraqi government would help pay for it wit their oil. I can't search for this with my iPhone but I'm certain. I remember wolfowitz saying this, Cheney said something as well and then Rumsfeld said that the war had nothing to do with oil. LOL.
THE FACT IS... The oil of Iraq was nationalized under saddam and not is is being ectraxted by foreign corporations.

I rest my case.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Nebe

THE FACT IS... The oil of Iraq was nationalized under saddam and not is is being ectraxted by foreign corporations.

I rest my case.


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

never mind....

[detbuch]

Ted Cruz grilled on economics and his tax plan

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=wDu2fWId8CA

He is head and shoulders above Trump in being able to handle interviews without dodging or filibustering. Maybe head and shoulders above all the other candidates of either party. It's a 40-50 minute interview, but well worth watching.

[Nebe]

What scares me the most is that cruz will make decisions based on his religion over what might be best decided in a non biased point of view.
I see bloody wars in our future with Cruz at the wheel
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Nebe

What scares me the most is that cruz will make decisions based on his religion over what might be best decided in a non biased point of view.
I see bloody wars in our future with Cruz at the wheel
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I didn't see any evidence of what you fear in the video. It was a very rational proposal based on economics, not religion.

BTW, some of the bloodiest wars have been caused by the pseudo-religion of socialism.

Also, the vast majority of his political arguments don't involve religion. And it is amazing how you can call others bigots who point out Islam's incompatibility with our values and secular system of government, yet you have this fear of Christians who have had such a major part of founding and sustaining our secular society. Reagan was as much a Christian as Cruz is, but he didn't make decisions based on his religion. And, rather than starting bloody wars, he helped bring down one of the bloodiest regimes in world history.

I don't see much evidence that American Christian leaders have started wars because of religion. Our wars have been for other reasons.