Forums » Off-Topic
finally! ive been sending nasa 1 letter every 5 days for 6 years asking them to do this.
Just a response to the First Gulf War being just I'm not sure it really was, I think Iraq had a right to invade Kuwait. Basically what happened is a huge oil supply underground laid directly underneth the border regions of Kuwait and Iraq.
Each country put their own mining equipment and for a while it was fine. Kuwait realized Iraq was threatening their profits and so of course they call the West and strike a deal with them and get better drilling equipment to allow faster gathering of oil. After a few months of this extensive drilling and harvesting of oil the large oil field began to drain but since Kuwait's side was emptying faster more Iraqi oil headed their way. (Think of it like a tub, if you fill it up with water and open the drain the water goes towards the drain).
A country like Iraq in the middle east does not have much tourism, much arable land (with exception to river valleys which were already taken)), much coastline to compete with shipping rights in the Persian Gulf or to drill offshore; basically Oil is their major export and pretty much the only thing that sustained the country. They tried to negotiate with Kuwait; didn't work. After coming out of a war recently with Iran and being given US weaponry their military was much more formidable than Kuwaits so they decided to secure their side of the oil they invaded Kuwait.
I agree invasion isn't the best plan of action but think about if we discovered a massive oil deposit in the Gulf of Mexico but foreign countries were draining the region for their personal gain instead of splitting it equally. Everyone is fighting over "Black Gold" these days *shakes head*
Each country put their own mining equipment and for a while it was fine. Kuwait realized Iraq was threatening their profits and so of course they call the West and strike a deal with them and get better drilling equipment to allow faster gathering of oil. After a few months of this extensive drilling and harvesting of oil the large oil field began to drain but since Kuwait's side was emptying faster more Iraqi oil headed their way. (Think of it like a tub, if you fill it up with water and open the drain the water goes towards the drain).
A country like Iraq in the middle east does not have much tourism, much arable land (with exception to river valleys which were already taken)), much coastline to compete with shipping rights in the Persian Gulf or to drill offshore; basically Oil is their major export and pretty much the only thing that sustained the country. They tried to negotiate with Kuwait; didn't work. After coming out of a war recently with Iran and being given US weaponry their military was much more formidable than Kuwaits so they decided to secure their side of the oil they invaded Kuwait.
I agree invasion isn't the best plan of action but think about if we discovered a massive oil deposit in the Gulf of Mexico but foreign countries were draining the region for their personal gain instead of splitting it equally. Everyone is fighting over "Black Gold" these days *shakes head*
Wait, to clarify: it's ok to use force to secure oil? Sweet: we'd be justified in invading Iraq, then, even if it was to protect our supply of oil and to have to not spend more to purchase it.
Back step, genius, you just started down a slippery slope without a bright-line distinction to save your ass.
FYI: your hypothetical is already more or less happening, see, e.g., Chavez and Venezuela. They have massive oil reserves and sell to us at whatever price they feel they can extract. Meanwhile, they extract and consume oil far faster per capita than U.S. citizens ever could: to a Venezuelan, cheap gas that they can burn up and replace by draining the oil reserves faster than ever is a God-given right. Again, by your logic, it would be ok (if not ideal) for the U.S. to go to war to secure a "more fair and even" distribution of that oil.
Back step, genius, you just started down a slippery slope without a bright-line distinction to save your ass.
FYI: your hypothetical is already more or less happening, see, e.g., Chavez and Venezuela. They have massive oil reserves and sell to us at whatever price they feel they can extract. Meanwhile, they extract and consume oil far faster per capita than U.S. citizens ever could: to a Venezuelan, cheap gas that they can burn up and replace by draining the oil reserves faster than ever is a God-given right. Again, by your logic, it would be ok (if not ideal) for the U.S. to go to war to secure a "more fair and even" distribution of that oil.
No i never said it was right to go to war over oil what I meant was that Kuwait and Iraq had a conflict that wasn't shown over public television. Another thing, I said Iraq and Kuwait are border countries and that this is a dispute between countries on borders, I never said it gives the right to the US to sail halfway around the world to attack a much weaker country to steal there natural resources, thats imperialism. What happened in Iraq/Kuwait was unneccessary but Kuwait refused to negotiate knowing that UN would save them if something did happen; and they were right.
No, it wouldn't be right for US to go to war with Venezuela over resources to share evenly because US does not have claim to these resources. Once again US doesn't touch Venezuela (*hands lecter a map*) It belongs to Venezuela and thats their resources and when they are all gone thanks to them they will suffer the consequences of their actions.
Border Disputes between nations are different than Imperialism is what I am getting at.
The first Persian Gulf war we entered through public opinion because Kuwait was taken over by Iraq but underground it probably was about Oil.
No, it wouldn't be right for US to go to war with Venezuela over resources to share evenly because US does not have claim to these resources. Once again US doesn't touch Venezuela (*hands lecter a map*) It belongs to Venezuela and thats their resources and when they are all gone thanks to them they will suffer the consequences of their actions.
Border Disputes between nations are different than Imperialism is what I am getting at.
The first Persian Gulf war we entered through public opinion because Kuwait was taken over by Iraq but underground it probably was about Oil.
I heard Canada has some oil sand...
*hears the stomping feet of war*
*hears the stomping feet of war*
Interestingly enough, Yuutuu1's argument can be taken many different ways. It just depends on where you decide to place the non-existant periods.
edit: Actually I heard a funny conspiracy theory the other day from a relatively reputable source. In the 20's, Trudeau used the War Measure's Act to place the military in Quebec in response to the FLQ "Terrorist Threat", and generally ready the troops around the nation. Considering that the FLQ was anything but a real terrorist threat, said theory states that Trudeau actually had intelligence of an impending US invasion, with insertion points along the Quebec and Ontario borders.
Funny people those conspiracy theorists. Even when they're right, they're funny. Funny funny funny funny.
edit: Actually I heard a funny conspiracy theory the other day from a relatively reputable source. In the 20's, Trudeau used the War Measure's Act to place the military in Quebec in response to the FLQ "Terrorist Threat", and generally ready the troops around the nation. Considering that the FLQ was anything but a real terrorist threat, said theory states that Trudeau actually had intelligence of an impending US invasion, with insertion points along the Quebec and Ontario borders.
Funny people those conspiracy theorists. Even when they're right, they're funny. Funny funny funny funny.
Well there were political parties that were interested in continuing manifest destiny and spreading through "our god given land" in Canada and making that part of the United States. Up until WW1 Canada was still seen as a possible aquisition. For a while we tried to buy Cuba from Spain and tried to purchase and or take with force Baja California.
I think its funny about illegal immigration and how people want to build a fence to keep Mexicans from hoping the border. Only 150 years ago Mexico owned California, Nevada, Utah, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and parts of Colorado. Some people from Mexico can say they are just going to their ancestors homes :).
I think its funny about illegal immigration and how people want to build a fence to keep Mexicans from hoping the border. Only 150 years ago Mexico owned California, Nevada, Utah, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and parts of Colorado. Some people from Mexico can say they are just going to their ancestors homes :).