And that would've been that? <br><br>What would have been what exactly? Would 550,000 troops made a difference? Would we not be in the same exact mess we are in now except ten years earlier? What would be the difference? Those troops and the flag of democracy could be planted cleanly into the soil of Iraq where it would blossom and spread like a weed into the entire middle east?<br><br>If you think 550K troops would change night into day why are you not urging your President to send additional troops? Why isn't he? Do you know something he doesn't? You should let him know because it would really help out right now.<br><br>

Imminent threat? Immediate threat? <br><br><br><embed src="http://weinertlab.kicks-ass.org/~hunter/test/rumsfeld_facethenation.mov" autoplay="false" width="400" height="285"></embed><br><br>

The "is" rational of Clinton's I never thought was a really good one. But I always thought that his explanation that a blow job was not "sexual relations" was much dumber and had a much better ridicule factor. Lewis Black does a good number on it. But maybe the conservatives let that one pass because it might have dawned on everyone that we were hijacking the governmental process so we could hunt down evil recipients of blow jobs. A witch hunt led by Ken Starr that 40 million dollars later ended with nothing but a blow job and a stained dress. So we put the President under oath and asked him. This is where I think Clinton showed what a wimp he was. He should have said, "none of your fscking business you slimy little twerps". But he didn't. So now four years later we have to listen to this endless cacophony of radio personalities who never got a blow job unless they paid for it call Clinton scum.<br><br>I think they're just jealous. Or they still haven't ever had one and still don't know what they're missing. Maybe we should come up with a better bumper sticker. "Give a NeoCon a Blow Job and Change the World".<br>Couldn't hurt.<br><br>

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p> One problem with that is, we could get the oil cheaper when Iraq was ruled by Saddam and had sanctions.<p><hr></blockquote><p> Why do you think the war had anything to do with access to cheap oil? I'm not in the oil business but if I was I would certainly not want to have "cheap" oil. You don't make money transacting a business with cheap things, you make more money dealing in expensive things. Just ask Apple. <br><br>And it's not owning the oil. You don't get rich owning something. You get rich making a transaction. The more transactions the better. If you repair and lay the oil pipe, ship it through those pipes, each time you touch it money drops in your pocket. <br><br>Did anyone possibly think that oil businessmen want you to have cheap gasoline to pump in your car? Not a good strategy as Dell computer is finding out. If you cheap something down to no profit margin then one little mistake and the profit margins are gone completely. You sell something your absolute main goal is took keep profit margins as high as the buyer can stand. We got that at the gas pump now.<br><br><br><br>

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>I'm not in the oil business but if I was I would certainly not want to have "cheap" oil.<p><hr></blockquote><p>Then it's obvious you're not in any business. The oil industry is a middle man, they'd want the cheapest oil possible to make the most profits. Just as we in the corrugated industry want the cheapest paper prices possible, the less we pay for paper the more profit we make. The paper companies are simply a vendor... just as Saudi Arabia is a vendor to the oil companies. Prices obviously fluctuate in any business, but when you're manufacturing something, be it corrugated paper or gasoline, the less you pay for your raw materials, the better off you are. We squeeze our supply vendors, just as the oil companies squeeze theirs.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>If you repair and lay the oil pipe, ship it through those pipes, each time you touch it money drops in your pocket. <p><hr></blockquote><p>Really? How is an oil company that spends 50 billion dollars on a pipe making profit? They're 50 billion in the hole. That's 50 billion dollars in sales they have to make just to break even before they can even think of making a profit. The oil company that's simply buying that oil off the end of the pipe without paying for the infrastructure is the one that's making the profits. Yes, they're paying a bit more... but they've got a huge head start.<br><br>

I'm saying we had 550,000 troops on the ground in 1991 and could've very easily taken oil then. Who would've stopped us?<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>If you think 550K troops would change night into day why are you not urging your President to send additional troops?<p><hr></blockquote><p>And this is exactly where I'm critical of the administration right now. I DO think we should ramp up troop levels. I DO think we should send as many troops, NOW, to take out these terrorists. On this point I absolutely agree with you. We need more troops and we need them yesterday.<br><br>****************<br><br>

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>isn't it odd that michael moore is criticized to no end by people who are staunch supporters of the president?<p><hr></blockquote><p><br>No, but I think it's odd how MM portrays himself in this holier than thou kind of way when he's just a stupid white guy. If he was truly better than Bush, he wouldn't have to edit his films to rearrange events to make them say what he wants, would he?<br><br>*EVERYONE* lies, and anyone that says they don't are going to spend their eternity in hell because we've all lied at some point. I think it's fair to say each and every one of us lies to some extent every day. <br><br>

I do run a business. In the black for the last 15 years while most of my competitors with more resources have gone belly up. <br><br>But you aren't talking about the right businessmen. The middleman doesn't care what the price of the commodity is. Just so that she can buy low, touch it and sell higher. What deals are being cut right now in Iraq I do not know and you don't either but the price is fluctuating and the guy with the guns and the controls (Haliburton) makes money on all the fluctuations.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p> Really? How is an oil company that spends 50 billion dollars on a pipe making profit <p><hr></blockquote><p> Is this a trick question? Because your answer is wrong. You make money by selling the pipe! That's 50 billion in your pocket. Or even better, lease the pipe, make them pay for the install, then take a cut of the oil that flows through the pipe three times, not just once but over and over again. As I said before. Don't buy the oil. That's not where the money is. just touch it. With a leased pipe for starters.<br><br>I would think that corrugated card board is not subject to volatile price fluctuations. At least not ones governed by war. So the speculative market on card board would be a tad sleepy compared to oil or pork bellies. The fluctuation is the key that brings in the players. That is where you make all the cash. Price of oil getting too low. Have a war in the middle east. Best thing for business. Because you make all your money over uncertainty. <br><br>As a maker of cardboard, wouldn't you like it if there was a lot of uncertainty in the product you made? Maybe some of your competitors got a missile sent down their smoke stack? Maybe a forest goes up in flames right after you lock in a cheap price for pulp? You make a decent wage off of smooth waters. Less ulcers that way. But you make a killing when the market is all topsy turvy and you have some inside information. Good information like exactly when a war is going to start.<br><br>

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p> I DO think we should send as many troops, NOW, to take out these terrorists. On this point I absolutely agree with you. We need more troops and we need them yesterday.<br> <p><hr></blockquote><p> You are mistaken that I think that way. We are not fighting a few terrorists. We are fighting the people of Iraq. And we will have to bring in enough troops to exterminate a whole civilization and that never works. Haven't you seen the spontaneous cheering when one of our humvees go up in flames?Do you think terrorists are so organized they can whip up a nice little rally? No, it is the common Iraqi on the street telling us to get the hell out. We should listen. We should apologize for coming on the way out.<br><br>Yeah I know the response, "But we're not as bad as Saddam!! How dare you speak like that." Yeah, great moral yardstick the Republican Senator had when he said that. We settle for, "Not as bad as Saddam". Great. Something to be proud of.<br><br>

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Because you make all your money over uncertainty.<p><hr></blockquote><p>That, is absolutely correct.<br><br>If you look at gas prices over the past month (record highs), they supposedly skyrocketed on fears over supplies. The supplies are fine, in fact the Saudis are supposedly pumping at near capacity. Refineries are limited, but they've been limited for decades, so why is gas still so high and where is all this new profit (over the past six months) going?? Not to the sellers of crude oil, not to the gas station where you buy the gas. The middlemen love this fear and demand game, its like an instant cash bonus.<br><br>