moments of silence

[plazul]

Two more Marines killed in Iraq today. Two more moments of silence on the News Hour.

How many more moments of silence will it take before we start screaming?

(C)

[jayboy]

It ain't over till its over. Wars are for the benefit of the affluent and the carnage of middleclass children too innocent to hold a gun and take anothers life. But until we, you and I, organize to a substantial voting block that can not be ignored, will favors from PAC contributors’ end and with it the wars and hunger. It is up to us. Monday night football or patriotism?

[Warsai]

We must use the tools at our disposal as an American people to show the government that we don't agree this war, that this war isn't right, and that our troops must come home.

In the meantime, the government tries to stop pictures of all the dead coffins and bodies from getting back to America, they try to propagandize the media into making the people believe that what they're doing is right, and they label those who speak out against all this as people helping the terrorists.

[jwolf7722]

i dont agree with the war over there but i think it is necessary. they have OIL!!!!!!!!!

[Warsai]

Originally Posted by jwolf7722

i dont agree with the war over there but i think it is necessary. they have OIL!!!!!!!!!

You're kidding right? Yes, they have oil, but look what we've done over there. Who are we to go over to another country kill millions of innocent lives and leave the country in ruins?

Yes, we took Saddam from power that was a good thing. But LOOK WHAT WE'VE DONE!! JUST LOOK!!

Are you kidding, I hope you're kidding.

[Bill Sikes]

It's not a war at all, at best it could be described as a punitive action. Who
declared war? No-one! Having to play by the rules, when one can just wade
in and give someone a bashing... no way!

[anastrophe]

i'm not in favor of war, but we are totally justified in taking military action to protect 'our' supply of oil. yes, it's not very nice, but it's a question of lives. yes, it is costing lives in iraq, and ostensibly we aren't even there for the oil (yeah, right).

think about it. the US imports more than 60% of its oil. think about the consequences if the rest of the world banded together and decided to completely shut off our oil supply. it's not a question of people having to curtail their SUV pleasure trips. if the US oil imports were shut off there would be massive deaths in the united states. It would take barely a month for absolute anarchy to set in. People would starve to death. this *isn't* hyperbole. how do you think your local grocery store keeps its shelves stocked? where do you get your food?

'no blood for oil'? i agree. if we don't ensure the availability of our oil imports, blood will run in the streets of this country. our dependence on foreign oil 'sucks', but it's a matter of life and death. we are trading lives in iraq for lives here.

i only wish we could have waged a 'smarter' war, with less reliance on ground troops. the grunts always take it in the shorts. twas ever thus.

[Serenity]

well said "Anastrophe".

I truly don't think people realize the seriousness of the war in Iraq.....(neither did i until recently).
It's crucial that people are exposed to the RELEVANT view point, and not this muddly-cuddlin viewpoint of wich all of us would like to be blanketed by.

Ever since the test of time have we battled for access of necessities. Throughout the course of civilization and most definitely after the last WW, the general concensus believes in peace.

That's fine and dandy....it's a measure that loves practice....yet the very people that preach it, don't practice it.

The world's dependency on fossil fuels is an understatement when i use the word "Addiction".
As stated above, without it many will DIE. no "peaceful" matter.
And all the while we like to bs ourselves that we live a peaceful god-worthy way of life.....we're more then likely driving down the road, on our way to the grocery store, or at home cooking for the family-----all of which depends on fossil consumption.

Clearly the point I'm trying to make, is that no matter how much we talk about the peace we want, we fuel the war day after day.

Who's got what you need? and who dies first?

[plazul]

Originally Posted by anastrophe

i'm not in favor of war, but we are totally justified in taking military action to protect 'our' supply of oil. yes, it's not very nice, but it's a question of lives. yes, it is costing lives in iraq, and ostensibly we aren't even there for the oil (yeah, right).

think about it. the US imports more than 60% of its oil. think about the consequences if the rest of the world banded together and decided to completely shut off our oil supply. it's not a question of people having to curtail their SUV pleasure trips. if the US oil imports were shut off there would be massive deaths in the united states. It would take barely a month for absolute anarchy to set in. People would starve to death. this *isn't* hyperbole. how do you think your local grocery store keeps its shelves stocked? where do you get your food?

'no blood for oil'? i agree. if we don't ensure the availability of our oil imports, blood will run in the streets of this country. our dependence on foreign oil 'sucks', but it's a matter of life and death. we are trading lives in iraq for lives here.

i only wish we could have waged a 'smarter' war, with less reliance on ground troops. the grunts always take it in the shorts. twas ever thus.

There's a lot more oil in Alberta Canada than there is in Saudi Arabia. It just costs more to get out of the ground. We only get a small percentage of our oil from Iraq so I seriously doubt that invading Iraq was necessary for our economic survival. Plus, sanctions were already affecting production.

As far as the 60% import thing goes, remember that the economic impact of an oil embargo would work both ways. Who do you suppose would suffer more, America or the OPEC nations? And I doubt that countries like Russia, Venezuala, and Mexico would cut us off.

So, with all due respect, I do think you're engaging in a little hyperbole. But that's okay, I do it myself.

[Bill Sikes]

> i'm not in favor of war, but we are totally justified in taking military action to
> protect 'our' supply of oil.

Ye Gods, it's no wonder that the U.S.A. has a very slight "image problem" over
a large part of the world. The oil there belongs to Iraq, not the U.S.A.

> think about it. the US imports more than 60% of its oil. think about the
> consequences if the rest of the world banded together and decided to
> completely shut off our oil supply. it's not a question of people having to
> curtail their SUV pleasure trips. if the US oil imports were shut off there
> would be massive deaths in the united states. It would take barely a
> month for absolute anarchy to set in. People would starve to death.
> this *isn't* hyperbole. how do you think your local grocery store keeps
> its shelves stocked? where do you get your food?

If the whole of the world refused to sell oil to the U.S.A., it would still
have 40% of what it needs now - and if the price increased it could be
self sufficient. Sorry, but the above is not "hyperbole", it's just rubbish.

> 'no blood for oil'? i agree. if we don't ensure the availability of our oil
> imports, blood will run in the streets of this country. our dependence
> on foreign oil 'sucks', but it's a matter of life and death. we are trading
> lives in iraq for lives here.

It's most unlikely that *everyone* would refuse to sell oil to the U.S.A.
The current activity in Iraq has, IMO, everything to do with politics, and
money, and very little to do with much else.