IgG4: Was Iraq actually exporting any oil?
Shostie: phillydrifter: 2k8Is it really that much more difficult to type "2008?"It's one extra keystroke.
Shostie: Is it really that much more difficult to type "2008?"
iheartscotch: Most of the current gas price is based on futures and speculation. But, I'd definitely refrain from fueling up within 48 hours of Baghdad's fall; if it happens.
Fark like a Barsoomian: All I'm saying is, next time we go to war for oil. Let's get some oil.
MaudlinMutantMollusk: IgG4: Was Iraq actually exporting any oil?Yeah... I was wondering just how big a contributor they are myself/found this: Iraq was the sixth largest net exporter of petroleum liquids in the world in 2012, with the majority of its oil exports going to the United States and to refineries in Asia.
Shostie: It's one extra keystroke.
zerkalo: And another civil war begins. It's gonna be armagheddon, millions slaughtered
Laobaojun: Which is absolute profiteering bull crap, as only 3% of US oil is imported from Iraq.Farking treasonous, self-serving actions by the US oil industry.
jehovahs witness protection: Obama planned this so he can okay the Keystone pipeline and look like he's a hero.
Cyclometh: zerkalo: And another civil war begins. It's gonna be armagheddon, millions slaughteredDon't know about millions- maybe over the entire timeframe. But it was obvious what was going to happen at the outset.The US keeps thinking they can do this thing where they go in with the military, kick some ass for a while, spend a bunch of money and then put in whatever government they want.It simply doesn't work. Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan... the last time we managed to actually install a new government in a defeated enemy nation was pretty much Japan.And nobody's willing to consider the price required to do it again. I've said it before and I'll stand by it- unless you're willing to see at least 15% of an entire generation dead, you're not going to win. If you want to completely destroy a government and replace it, you have to be willing to destroy their society and that means killing a lot of people. Whether it's bullets, bombs or nukes, you have to be willing to murder entire cities, not just individuals or small areas.Until we remember that to defeat an enemy means to kill enough of them that the entire culture is broken, we'll keep coming back here. You can't engage in nation-building unless you're willing to engage in nation-destroying.The reason we're so bad at it is that we can't stomach the cost unless it's imposed on us, as it was in World War II. When it's our own choice, we're not willing to do what's necessary to actually accomplish the goal. And that's why it's always been a bad idea, and will continue to be one because we spend blood and treasure for nothing.
Cyclometh: Heh. Glad I drive a Volt. Haven't bought gas in over six months and only twice in the last year.
some_beer_drinker: sounds hawt. let's get some boots on the ground.
Cyclometh: And nobody's willing to consider the price required to do it again. I've said it before and I'll stand by it- unless you're willing to see at least 15% of an entire generation dead, you're not going to win. If you want to completely destroy a government and replace it, you have to be willing to destroy their society and that means killing a lot of people
hasty ambush: Well then Obama gets his wish, why are y'all biatchin?
If you like these links, you'll love
Total accessTotal knowledgeTotal Fark
Sign up for the Fark NotNewsletter!
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Oct 17 2017 06:26:18
Runtime: 0.423 sec (422 ms)