Apology accepted, we will just have to agree to disagree.

The Oil For Food Report is here http://www.iic-offp.org/documents/II...027Oct2005.pdf

Alright now that we have established that we differ on the motive of France not to enter the war, can we now focus on America's motivesto enter the war?
I can't prove any of it, but I have a really hard time accepting the the US merely did this to help the misfortunes of the oppressed in Iraq. We already know that the biological excuse was bogus, so what about the other motives?

I'm sorry Ted this topic has been done so many times before that I don't think anyone is eager to enter it again. I for one have written a lot about it.

Hahahahaha that's okay Italian Guy, I'm new here and ready to rumble! I'll have a look-see into the old forums. The ability to switch on thought intregue me a lot.

Originally Posted by Ted

Hahahahaha that's okay Italian Guy, I'm new here and ready to rumble! I'll have a look-see into the old forums. The ability to switch on thought intregue me a lot.

NP man.

Originally Posted by Ted

I forgot to mention that I find it quaint that one of the longest threads is how fed up the US is with the UN. But you quote them when it is convinient for your post. This eclectic use of information is..... well it is just somewhat ironic.

agreed
but then they refuse to believe that they have done very little good and continue to ***** n moan, dispite the fact that the USA has continually undermined the UN and then goes and complains when they dont do what they want

they've got the blinkers on

Originally Posted by Locke

agreed
but then they refuse to believe that they have done very little good and continue to b**ch n moan, dispite the fact that the USA has continually undermined the UN and then goes and complains when they dont do what they want

they've got the blinkers on

Facts are facts, the UN had to report this data.

Just because one doesn't like the practices and beaurocracy of the UN, doesn't mean they can't use information given from report done on the matter.

The statement itself which the UN was forced to give out, was due to an investigation (read the article more carefully).

Nothing ironic here, except whos really got the blinkers on.

Umm, this isn't really anything new, I read an article at the beginning of the war in Iraq, I believe the number of contracts that countries had with Iraq via the Oil for Food Program were as followed. France: 9,000+, Russia: 7,000+, China 2,000+, United Kingdom: 8 (4 under review) United States: 2. Something along those lines. Personally, I was not suprised when I heard this, I remember in middle school talking in Geography about an incident where US Navy Seals boarded a Russian tanker illegally carring Oil from Iraq. Of course I did not understand what that meant at the time, I do however remember thinking "What does that mean? The oil is red, green, black and white? I don't get it." Ah the advantages of being a youth and ignorant of world politics, something nobody truly understands but everyone claims to be an expert.

If nothing else this kills the argument that America Britain are fighting this war for oil because then I can turn around and say that France, Russia and China oppose this war for oil. Back to square one.

I don't even dwell on the oil issue, it is stupid, why waste all that oil to try and get access to the third largest oil supply when we have a monopoly on the first and second largest supplies of oil? (Saudi Arabia and Canada)

To me the reason for war is simple. One of the key themes for establishing the UN was "Never again." referring to the Holocaust, one of the UN's primary goal is to never allow another genocide. The problem is that one can not even say that the UN is losing that fight because they are simply ignoring it. In Asia, Africa and Central America the UN has not even taken a side glance at these instances. How many more times will we say never again? The answer seems simple, a lot! (Please note, the US is just as guilty as all other members of the United Nations, especially the Security Council which, using Rwanda as an examply, held behind the curtains meetings in which they agreed to never mention the word Genocide when discussing the "Incident in Rwanda."

The only reason the UN opposed the War, is becuse their aid money was funding the Iraqi Army. They are now IMO at the same level as the Leauge of Nations. They are as incompetent and as corrupt.