Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: fresc who wrote (24489)	1/3/2005 2:37:14 AM
From: Selectric II	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

If it was solely about oil, we'd "take" easy places like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Nigeria, and all the other OPEC states long before Iraq. The leftist screwballs here and elsewhere just don't make any sense, if you think about it.

To: fresc who wrote (24489)	1/3/2005 10:19:03 AM
From: Orcastraiter	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

Why doesn't Canada develop the sands? Could it be the cost per barrel to refine that gloop? It's going to take years for this thing to mature? Good or Bad? What ever happened to the "cake walk"? We don't need to take over any countries where US companies can go in and develop the oil. Laz says it's because of the oil. So does JLA. If you don't think that oil is the reason we are in Iraq, and that it's really about WMD and bad dictators then why didn't we take Iran and NKorea first. They have the nukes now. If you don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud you have to go where there is really a nuke. We didn't and we won't. It's all about the oil. Orca