Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
iraq may have 79 billion dollar surplus iraq may have 79 billion dollar surplus

08-06-2008 , 06:06 PM
http://news.aol.com/article/iraq-may...surplus/121167

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." Representative Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

it was obvious that we needed to approve funds to invade iraq, but i think now 1 trillion dollars later and iraq producing well over 2 million barrels of oil a day its time for some of the financial burden to be lifted from our shoulders.

if they paid for 25 percent of our operational costs over there they could still operate with a surplus, and eventually they would have huge profits again once they hit their approx 4 million barrel a day peak production rate.
08-06-2008 , 07:54 PM
I'm confused. Why would another country have to pay down American goverment bills?
08-06-2008 , 08:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Azur
I'm confused. Why would another country have to pay down American goverment bills?
uh they have billions a year in surplus because of us?
08-06-2008 , 08:42 PM
But then the money wouldn't be going to the right people!
08-06-2008 , 08:44 PM
While I understand why Americans are frustrated by this, but I don't think its especially fair for them to pay our military expenses when we, well, invaded their ass.
08-06-2008 , 08:47 PM
1) Produce oil
2) Pay back U.S. Expenses
3) Profit?
08-06-2008 , 08:49 PM
I don't think we should get them to pay our bills. But if the Iraqi government were to actually spend this money on some of the many problems they have, things would most likely get much better.
08-06-2008 , 09:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by daaaaahawkz
uh they have billions a year in surplus because of us?
You made a typo there. I think you meant to say that they have billions a year surplus despite the US.


Quote:
Originally Posted by shoxbb6
I don't think we should get them to pay our bills. But if the Iraqi government were to actually spend this money on some of the many problems they have, things would most likely get much better.
They are. But suddenly dropping a very big amounts of money into the economy isn`t a very good idea. Also, a lot of the problems can`t be solved by throwing money at them.
08-06-2008 , 09:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikestoys
While I understand why Americans are frustrated by this, but I don't think its especially fair for them to pay our military expenses when we, well, invaded their ass.
Yeah, and they lost, now we get all their monies.

Genghis Khan would be ashamed if he heard you.
08-06-2008 , 10:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by STA654
Yeah, and they lost, now we get all their monies.

Genghis Khan would be ashamed if he heard you.
Genghis Khan wins.
At everything.


Zerjal et al [2003] [6] identified a Y-chromosomal lineage present in about 8% of the men in a large region of Asia (about 0.5% of the men in the world). The paper suggests that the pattern of variation within the lineage is consistent with a hypothesis that it originated in Mongolia about 1,000 years ago. Such a spread would be too rapid to have occurred by genetic drift, and must therefore be the result of selection. The authors propose that the lineage is carried by likely male-line descendants of Genghis Khan and his close male relatives, and that it has spread through social selection.
08-06-2008 , 10:30 PM
Genghis is definitely one of the most if not the most ballinest guy evar.

However, he is asian, so you know what that means.
08-07-2008 , 10:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikestoys
While I understand why Americans are frustrated by this, but I don't think its especially fair for them to pay our military expenses when we, well, invaded their ass.
Invaded? More like liberated their ass.
08-07-2008 , 07:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoBitch
Invaded? More like liberated their ass.
Exactly, we just gave them Democracy. Time to pay up bitches!
08-08-2008 , 07:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikestoys
While I understand why Americans are frustrated by this, but I don't think its especially fair for them to pay our military expenses when we, well, invaded their ass.
epic incorrectness.
08-08-2008 , 09:47 AM
I bet there is a lot our military does that doesn't exactly involve military conflict like build bridges and schools so instead of them paying us we should just have them pay for it themselves.
08-08-2008 , 01:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by daaaaahawkz
uh they have billions a year in surplus because of us?
We get no points for eventually removing the tyrant we helped install. In fact, even looking at the Iraq invasion in the most beneficial light possible, our overall score is still negative.
08-08-2008 , 01:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jah7_fsu1
Exactly, we just gave them Democracy. Time to pay up bitches!
freedom isn't free, ldo.
08-08-2008 , 02:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexM
We get no points for eventually removing the tyrant we helped install. In fact, even looking at the Iraq invasion in the most beneficial light possible, our overall score is still negative.
US didn't help install Saddam
08-08-2008 , 03:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexM
We get no points for eventually removing the tyrant we helped install. In fact, even looking at the Iraq invasion in the most beneficial light possible, our overall score is still negative.
Oh we installed Saddam? Cool, everything is america's fault!
08-08-2008 , 07:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikestoys
Oh we installed Saddam? Cool, everything is america's fault!
You must know that hussein was considered an ally of the united states for a period in the 1980s by the reagan white house, right?

and was given support, right?

a big thing that pisses me off is that according to Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfield, Saddam became a scumbag/tyrant as soon as he became inconvenient to U.S. interests.

that being said, Saddam did rise to power without help from the united states (as far as I know).

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/edi...raq_appeasers/
08-08-2008 , 07:28 PM
Main point is, we're not seeing one cent of the money so quit whining.
08-08-2008 , 09:20 PM
does anyone believe that george bush really does not have a war chest and that he made only $250k or whatever last year? nah, i am sure he has made billons off the war.
08-08-2008 , 11:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by xxThe_Lebowskixx
does anyone believe that george bush really does not have a war chest and that he made only $250k or whatever last year? nah, i am sure he has made billons off the war.
He probably has something like a second FullTilt account with rakeback. Of course it's in the name of his wife, so they can't really do anything about it, but still...
08-09-2008 , 11:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by STA654
You must know that hussein was considered an ally of the united states for a period in the 1980s by the reagan white house, right?

and was given support, right?

a big thing that pisses me off is that according to Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfield, Saddam became a scumbag/tyrant as soon as he became inconvenient to U.S. interests.

that being said, Saddam did rise to power without help from the united states (as far as I know).

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/edi...raq_appeasers/
Next time, just make a post saying, "ikes right." It may be hard for you to do, but please to be trying.
08-09-2008 , 11:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ikestoys
Next time, just make a post saying, "ikes right." It may be hard for you to do, but please to be trying.
lol, wat

my post was very different from a simple affirmation of your point.

next time, try not to act like such a condescending d-bag. It may be hard for you to do, but please to be trying.

and no **** you would just like people to respond to every one of your posts with "ikes right".
The problem is people rarely feel that way.

      
m