[scroungydog]

we don't have to like war or support our prez's deceisions but lets respect the men and women who choose to defend our country. i'm sure some of them in iraq are not too happy with president bush right now but they are doing a very difficult job and not getting the respect they deserve. just my opinion.

 

[LordOpie]

feel better after getting that off your chest?

 

[slein]

yep, support the troops for guarding the oil wells yet not the museums. yay to BOOSH for that.

just my opinion.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by slein
yep, support the troops for guarding the oil wells yet not the museums. yay to BOOSH for that.

just my opinion.

What kind of people loot their own museums anyway?

Well, actually i think it would be cool to have a T Rex skull on my wall, so maybe i can empathise, but still....

Who really cares about some museum?

Way to dance around any real debate slein

 

[rbx]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
What kind of people loot their own museums anyway?

Well, actually i think it would be cool to have a T Rex skull on my wall, so maybe i can empathise, but still....

Who really cares about some museum?

Way to dance around any real debate slein

the museum had some REALLY valuable artifacts that date to one of first civilizations, imagine something like the declaration of independance got stolen!

although lives are way more important than artifacts i understand why they could be pissed!

 

[slein]

i remember a thread where someone said that the US was in their hay-day, and soon their time would come to an end. a further quip to that was how there are countless ways in which ROMAN influence on society is apparent today.

so, who really cares about museums? i guess it wouldn't be the ignorant.

as for supporting the troops, yep, i do agree that they need our support. my comment was aimed at the vacuous support they have from their leaders. at this time its not their job to make peace for the iraqis, but it is a job only a soldier can do.

so, as i dance around the issue of putting out oil fires yet not protecting the public interest, i have to say that you, BS, have nary a point and lack a clue.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by slein
i remember a thread where someone said that the US was in their hay-day, and soon their time would come to an end. a further quip to that was how there are countless ways in which ROMAN influence on society is apparent today.

so, who really cares about museums? i guess it wouldn't be the ignorant.

as for supporting the troops, yep, i do agree that they need our support. my comment was aimed at the vacuous support they have from their leaders. at this time its not their job to make peace for the iraqis, but it is a job only a soldier can do.

so, as i dance around the issue of putting out oil fires yet not protecting the public interest, i have to say that you, BS, have nary a point and lack a clue.

Perhaps i need to break it down further so you get the point.

How does guarding museums, rather than oil fields (bear in mind that we have a limited number of troops) allow for a more stable Iraq...when their main source of future income will be oil......not artifacts?

You pal, have no point

 

[Silver]

The point is, I think, that the current administration thinks nothing of putting people in harms way to make sure oilfields are ok (didn't they push up the plans a bit when a couple of wells went up?), but doesn't care a whit for culture or history.

Not that it surprises me in this case.

 

[valve bouncer]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
Perhaps i need to break it down further so you get the point.

How does guarding museums, rather than oil fields (bear in mind that we have a limited number of troops) allow for a more stable Iraq...when their main source of future income will be oil......not artifacts?

You pal, have no point

Remember though BS that Iraq can be regarded almost as the well-spring of civilisation. Supposedly the Garden of Eden was at the confluence of the Tigris and Euphrates river and it was from around that area that the first great civilisations emerged . So these museums are the guardians of not only Iraqi history but the history of the Western world. In a way those museums reflect our own history and I think that is worth preserving. As I recall one of the reasons for getting rid of the Taliban (albeit a minor reason) was that they were destroying the non-Islamic heritage of the area. Remember those enormous Buddhist statues they blew up. Liberating Iraq means not only helping the people but preserving their heritage of which they are justifiably proud.

 

[slein]

so.... we are concerned about IRAQ's future in the world, and the terms by which we feel these are acceptable are by creating an economy. it shall be based on oil, as you mentioned, for there is little else they can offer. we won't add that their mustard agent is purer than the stuff the western world can produce without purification. obviously the artifacts (i won't include the five cent "priceless" word) in the museums won't feed the people who make the money from the oil. after all, you can't take a dollar from them because too much oil may have been burnt by the oil fires. its not as if boots and coots is going bankrupt (or are they?). and, with a limited number of troops, what are we to do?

the invasion wasn't necessarily legal in the world view. i still haven't heard about any smoking guns, and that may be because forces loyal to SADDAM are still drving around these mobile labs - i'll eat my words if they find anything. or it may be that the IRAQI capability to produce them got in the way of their execution agenda. if it ain't about oil, it definitely ain't about the land and its people.

whatever the reason, i have a difficult time believing that the level of looting going on had anything to do with troops on the ground or an effective war plan. the looting was going on and it wasn't stopped. things that belonged to the majority got stolen by organised crime and regular people. the US is simply appeasing the UN by controlling the only thing in the country that is worth anything: oil.

there are many gigameters of oil lines and so many oil fields that there aren't enough troops in the world to keep it safe from CHINA. yet, how many museums and palaces and government buildings are there? the world don't need no artifacts, they need oil man!

oil for who? well, maybe you can answer that. i'll give you three guesses.

future income butcher smincome! your argument makes almost as much sense as mine, love.

 

[ohio]

Bingo, Slein. Their future income is tied to oil, because that's all (we think) we need from them.

Somehow Germany and Japan managed to be rebuilt and compete in the world economic markets without oil, but that must be because... um.... because, well crap... maybe it's because human beings actually have the ability to learn and create. Maybe if we rebuilt a country that wasn't wholly dependent on a commodity, it could rebuild itself into the hub of culture, learning, technology and commerce it was in the pre-crusade era.

Why do we assume that Arab-Muslim countries lack the ability to create industry?

I'm not saying we should DENY them of oil income, but handicapping them reducing them to oil dependence won't solve ANY long-term problems in the region. The oil can pay for the rebuild, but the rebuild should provide them with the resources to stand alone.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by ohio
Bingo, Slein. Their future income is tied to oil, because that's all (we think) we need from them.

Somehow Germany and Japan managed to be rebuilt and compete in the world economic markets without oil, but that must be because... um.... because, well crap... maybe it's because human beings actually have the ability to learn and create. Maybe if we rebuilt a country that wasn't wholly dependent on a commodity, it could rebuild itself into the hub of culture, learning, technology and commerce it was in the pre-crusade era.

Why do we assume that Arab-Muslim countries lack the ability to create industry?

I'm not saying we should DENY them of oil income, but handicapping them reducing them to oil dependence won't solve ANY long-term problems in the region. The oil can pay for the rebuild, but the rebuild should provide them with the resources to stand alone.

Are you trying to convince me or yourself here?

I think it should be plain to see that the one way a country can industrialize itself, is by capitalizing upon its natural resources. And as far as i know, oil is Iraqs main resource for the time being, that is until cars begin to run off of sand or camel scat.

Yes, its bad that some museums got looted, but it should be obvious as to why it wasnt an imediate priority. Are there any ecological disasters stemming from a looted museum? Will the country be forever trapped in poverty because of a looted museum?

No!

This is an easy one guys.

 

[ohio]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
Will the country be forever trapped in poverty because of a looted museum?

You probably also have a hard time understandng why a Picasso is worth millions...

Someone mentioned above that the word "priceless" is a silly one, but it's pretty much all we have to describe something so valuable as a lesson from history. Especially in this case, what could be more important to this nation than reminders and examples of their ability to achieve technological and cultural greatness? It's not touchy feely hippy crap... you talked before about how important the morale of the Marines is; why are Iraqis any different.

Oil as income is not sustainable beyond 50 years from now, and not a country in the region is equipped to handle what comes after. Why do the same thing to Iraq, simply because it's the easiest thing to do right now?

As a side note: How exactly does one loot oil? How much oil could really be lost to people that are towing stolen trucks by hand and carrying couches on their backs?

 

[DRB]

Originally posted by ohio
You probably also have a hard time understandng why a Picasso is worth millions...

Someone mentioned above that the word "priceless" is a silly one, but it's pretty much all we have to describe something so valuable as a lesson from history. Especially in this case, what could be more important to this nation than reminders and examples of their ability to achieve technological and cultural greatness? It's not touchy feely hippy crap... you talked before about how important the morale of the Marines is; why are Iraqis any different.

Oil as income is not sustainable beyond 50 years from now, and not a country in the region is equipped to handle what comes after. Why do the same thing to Iraq, simply because it's the easiest thing to do right now?

As a side note: How exactly does one loot oil? How much oil could really be lost to people that are towing stolen trucks by hand and carrying couches on their backs?

The protection of the oil industry was not to keep it from being looted but from being damaged. You know that.

The arguement about oil as income is a moot one. The simple fact of the matter is that without oil Iraq has NOTHING. Oil will be the source of the funds to rebuild the country and to give it a chance to develop some plan for after oil. So the focus right now has to be on oil. What happens next will be up to them. However, this leads to the question you asked.

You asked why do we assume that Arab-Muslim countries lack the ability to create industry? Because they haven't. No major industry other than that related to oil has ever been developed in the region. The countries have seemingly never made one step towards any long term planning beyond oil. Even within the oil industry look at the amount of internal development these countries have undertaken. Little if none (Iran being an exception to this). The vast majority of the folks working within the oil industry in Middle Eastern nations is foreign. The technology is almost always from the west. For countries that depend on oil has a source of income it is truly amazing the almost complete lack of research and development they do in regards to the creation of new technology in production, transportation or refining.

However, most (if not all) will allow rampant unemployment coupled with government welfare (paid for by oil) to be the answer. The f'd up thing about it is that they will pay more to folks on unemployment welfare than they will to folks who work in the manual labor jobs within their own oil industry.

Even countries in the region that don't have their own supplies fo oil rely on it for income. Syria's economy is a case in point. It depended heavily upon oil as a source of income. Oil that was sold to it below market value and in turn sold at market value. Now with that source of cheap oil gone, what are they going to do? When was the last time you turned anything over and saw made in Syria? They have simply taken the easy way out.

These countries have to be responsible themselves in developing alternate sources of income. Not the UN, not the US, not anyone else but themselves.

As for their own treasures and history looted from museums.... its a damn shame.

 

[ohio]

Originally posted by DRB

These countries have to be responsible themselves in developing alternate sources of income. Not the UN, not the US, not anyone else but themselves.

It's not our responsibility, but really neither was liberating Iraq. What we have right now is the opportunity to demonstrate the potential of harnessing the value of oil for other development purposes. Unlike the war itself, this would cost us nothing (all paid for by Iraqi oil)... in fact, because they CAN pay for it, we would actually profit from the venture.

Perhaps with an example in place, other nations would follow. Of course, the above would necessitate a length of presence/occupation that is probably far longer than either side is comfortable with. Not being any form of expert, I would venture that it's worth the diplomatic effort...

And while they haven't created industry in modern times, the relics from those museums are the proof that they CAN. Or at least could, before the days of Islam...

 

[rbx]

Originally posted by DRB
Now with that source of cheap oil gone, what are they going to do? When was the last time you turned anything over and saw made in Syria?

what will syria do?

they will leech even more lebanons economy(more so then the last 10years)

 

[LordOpie]

I don't believe any one type of person is any smarter than another type. I don't think the Japanese are smarter than Iraqis as a whole. Or rather their potential.

Japan succeed because of the US's help after WWII.

Give the Iraqi people the tools to develop their niche in the world and they'll succeed too. In fact, Iraq has an advantage over Japan because of their natural resource of oil.

And I think it is our (US) responsibility to help them.

 

[DRB]

Originally posted by rbx
what will syria do?

they will leech even more lebanons economy(more so then the last 10years)

No doubt it will lead to a further tightening of the Syrian "peacekeeping" mission in Lebanon.

 

[Silver]

Originally posted by LordOpie
I don't believe any one type of person is any smarter than another type. I don't think the Japanese are smarter than Iraqis as a whole. Or rather their potential.

Japan succeed because of the US's help after WWII.

Give the Iraqi people the tools to develop their niche in the world and they'll succeed too. In fact, Iraq has an advantage over Japan because of their natural resource of oil.

And I think it is our (US) responsibility to help them.

That's fairly revisionist. Are you claiming that without the US's help, the Japanese would be subsistence rice farmers right now?

And the Germans would be a bunch of nomad barbarians? C'mon....

 

[LordOpie]

Originally posted by Silver
That's fairly revisionist. Are you claiming that without the US's help, the Japanese would be subsistence rice farmers right now?

And the Germans would be a bunch of nomad barbarians? C'mon....

I'm suggesting that the USA had a positive and direct role in developing their current economy.

Rice farmers? maybe not. But superior technological developers, maybe not as well.

 

[DRB]

Originally posted by Silver
That's fairly revisionist. Are you claiming that without the US's help, the Japanese would be subsistence rice farmers right now?

And the Germans would be a bunch of nomad barbarians? C'mon....

Do you think they would have been as successful as quickly without the US help? Definately not.

The amounts of money dumped into both countries by the US after the war was immense. In both cases, the countries industries were virtually non existant. The industries that developed in both countries post war would have been difficult if not impossible to develop without large scale economic investment. Neither country was capable of any large scale investments in themselves in their post war economies. There was no source of income other than that provided by the US and its allies.

Look no farther than post WW I for the signs of success that the Germans were capable of with no outside help. If it hadn't been for the rise of the war industry brought about by the Nazis it is unlikely that Germany would have ever resembled anything different than most Cold War era Eastern bloc countries. Also take into consideration that German industry didn't suffer strategic bombing during WWI.

Furthermore, in the case of Germany, it is unlikely that without US occupation forces and subsequent military presence that the Soviets could have kept their hands off of Germany.

 

[slein]

oil lines: reparable

stolen art: irreplaceable until returned.

i still don't believe IRAQ is completely about oil. as for JAPAN and GERMANY, the countries that helped rebuild them got something out of it. the western world's dirty fingers are, however, all over that region for one reason or another.

maybe we should move the GIANT factory to TIKRIT or somewhere like that to help IRAQ become self-sustaining. but, what if the people don't want to do that? in any case, the US is there now and will continue to be there for the foreseeable future. the troops there still have a daunting task to prove that the entire venture was for reasons stated before the invasion. time can only tell....

 

[Silver]

Originally posted by DRB
Do you think they would have been as successful as quickly without the US help? Definately not.

The amounts of money dumped into both countries by the US after the war was immense. In both cases, the countries industries were virtually non existant. The industries that developed in both countries post war would have been difficult if not impossible to develop without large scale economic investment. Neither country was capable of any large scale investments in themselves in their post war economies. There was no source of income other than that provided by the US and its allies.

Look no farther than post WW I for the signs of success that the Germans were capable of with no outside help. If it hadn't been for the rise of the war industry brought about by the Nazis it is unlikely that Germany would have ever resembled anything different than most Cold War era Eastern bloc countries. Also take into consideration that German industry didn't suffer strategic bombing during WWI.

Furthermore, in the case of Germany, it is unlikely that without US occupation forces and subsequent military presence that the Soviets could have kept their hands off of Germany.

Pretty good points there. Especially with Germany, it's hard to underestimate how important West Germany was in the cold war. I do think the Germans and the Japanese would have been fine by themselves (as far as re-establishing their economies and industrial bases go) but it would have taken a lot longer without US help.

If we replicate this success with Iraq, I will be a happy camper, and I'll admit I was wrong about the motives of the administration.

I think an extended occupation with a repeat of the Balkans is a much more realistic outcome though, and that worries me.