> Since Japan and Germany had formed a military alliance, declaring war on one meant
> declaring on both. I don't believe either of our posts is wholly inaccurate, though I do thank
> you for providing the dates of when these events took place.

Not true. For example the Soviet Union was at war with Germany/Italy/Romania, but not at war with Japan until, IIRC, 1945.

By the way, as you mention the Holocaust, another figure is interesting here: Between December 41 and May 45, only 21.000 jews refugiees were accepted in the US. Gavras excellent movie of last year mentions similar reluctance to accept jew refugies (from neutral scandinavian countries) by the US during the war (in the movie, the "official" reasons given are logistical). Even Switzerland who has often been depicted as a bad example for it strict policy has acutually accepted more jews than the US during the war (of course, geographically, the two cases cannot be 100% compared).

Sorry, I replyied in the wrong place, should be one above.

"First off, I've been to Saudi myself. 1st TAC Fighter Wing stationed in Daharan. Spent all of Desert Shield there, plus a fair amount of Desert Storm. I can tell you first hand that citizens of Saudi live in anything but abject poverty. In fact, their citizens ALL get a welfare check from the state. Folks who are actual citizens are doing pretty nicely."

I didn't intend to say, they are really poor. Only in realtion to the elite, who can afford to spend 7 Million US$ on wedding guest presents.

But what's more important than this relative powerty ist the fact, that the living style of the royal familiy is seen by extrmistic Islamists agains Islam, as "western living style". And this they hate the worst. And if those extremists get a lot of followers - and 9/11 showed they do, especially from S.A. - the pro-western political system there is in big danger. And since S.A. is one of the biggest oil exporters in the world this will affect the US, whether they purchase oil from there or elsewhere.

[SNIP]

"Next up, we don't control ANY oil wells in that region. Britain does. There's a rather large British population in that region due to this. Officially, Saudi's wells are owned by Saudi, but they're all run by Aramco, a British company."

Tell me, how is the Arabian American Oil Company "Aramco" a British company ?
It was for 56 years an American company and was made in 1976/80 an 100% S.A. company. And you tell me, it's now controlled by Britain ?

Even if it is. It wouldn't make any difference. It's not about who owns it.
It's about price. And if S.A. gets instable or even anti-western, prices might increase greatly. Extremists don't need so much money as the S.A. princes do.
Look at Osama, child of a very rich family in the building business. He prefers living in Afghan caves.

"I still don't see how our enforcing an agreement that Iraq signed is tied to the US wanting to move in and take over oil fields."

Again, it's not about taking them, it's about securing them and keeping prices low. High oil prices are the killer for the US and most other economies.

"The United States has no wish to conquer any nation in that region. We got into the mess due to Kuwait being invaded and the very real threat Iraq presented to Saudi."

Well, Sadam told the US ambassador back then, that he would invade Kuwait, because Kuwait - at least he claimed such - took oil from wells near its border to Iraq. He thought it was Ok with the US, after all they were almost good friends back then. But the ambassador didn't understand and told the US gov, everything would be Ok - never mind the fact, that the Iraq army was already in position. He must have been competely surprised to see himself attacked by the USA.

"In every action the US has taken in that region the focus has consistently been to defend the stability of the nations friendly to us. If the United States truly wished to conquer territory in that region through military force, we would have done so years ago. Do you honestly believe that any of the oil rich nations there could stop us if that truly was our aim?"

I never said that was US's aim. See above. The aim is to secure the oil sources and its price.

"Only in the vehement search for evil purposes could one even begin to argue that the United States wishes to make territorial claims anywhere in that region. What we want, what the Saudis want, and what the Arab world in general wants is for US forces to leave that part of the world. That simply cannot happen so long as there is a Saddam controlling the still formidable military of Iraq."

If the US had done the job right the last time they were down there, Sadam wouldn't be thre anymore. But they didn't, because their aim was not to remove Sadam, but just secure Kuwaits oil wells. Same reason as above.
And they didn't do it right for another reason, of course. Because it would have meant the loss of a lot of US soldiers - and this is counter productive for any president, who wishes to be re-elected.

"As much fun as this thread has been, it's gone a bit long for this forum."

Fun is something different in my opinion, but I agree on the last part.

"First, I would love nothing more than to have us avoid a conflict with Iraq, or any other nation. I do not believe that is possible so long as Iraq refuses to live up to ANY of their agreements they entered into with the world. Either the security council's resolutions are relevant or they're not."

That they don't is just a claim, IMHO.

Today I read that the British report on Iraq's weapons is >50% a 100% copy of a document written by an US student, including all its spelling and grammar errors. The student claims, that this document, which he published 9/2002 is based on documents from 1991.

It doesn't contain any information relevant to after the last war and the Iraq resolutions of the UN in effect. Yet, the British gov claims the contrary.

This reminds me of the claim back then, that Iraq soldiers killed ill Kuwait babies in a hospital, ripping them from their life support systems.
This claim gave a push in internationl opinion towards a war against Iraq.
Some months or years after the war it was proven and/or admitted to have been a lie.

"Secondly, though I came to Saudi's defense to some extent here, I'm no fan of any monarchy. Far as I'm concerned, what I would love to see is a world that doesn't buy a drop of oil from anywhere in that region. The entire world needs to move on to some other form of energy, and quickly. I was encouraged to hear Bush propose serious investment in hydrogen and other alternative fuels in his State of the Union speech. Now to hold him and the US Congress to task on this point!"

After decades of wasting oil without limit...
The problem is, this is future technology. And Germany, I think is way ahead in this development. Increasing oil price would affect the US economy NOW, and it's already not quite up, why GWB wants to push 500 billion US$ into it in the coming years.

"Lastly, getting off the oil addiction would mean that the Arab world has to also move on to something else. The easy cash that oil provides them has actually held that region back, in that they're respective economies don't require any kind of innovation. I'm encouraged to see this Iranian distribution of Linux, and any other entry into where the rest of the world is at. I very strongly believe that the Arab world can contribute so much more than mucking with oil prices. I just can't imagine that happening so long as they're living on the oil addiction as well."

Well, at l(e)ast one paragraph, where I do agree 100%.

Regards,
Harald Henkel

Dear Sir.
Aramco is the acronym for the Arabian American oil company IT is NOT british, PLEASE!

im a saudi living in khobar/dhahran,my dad worked for aramco for 42 years my mom for 15 and my brother for about 6 now,
1-aramco stands for ARabian AMerican oil COmpany
2 the first 3 or 4 presidents were american
3 the aramco compound looks like a chunk of american suburbia.not the yorkshire dales
4- up till the 80s the the ratio of ownershhi[ was over 50 % to the american and the rest to the saudi gov
5- there IS abject poverty ,the eastern province where you were is a bad example since its where the oil is but even there child beggers can now be seen,it is certainly hasnt reached the mass starvation level but its amazing with all the recources that we havent turned it into a scandanavian like welfare nation
6-i beleive the cause is a-our own failure of addressing the corruption of the government, and b the US for propping that gov in exchange for an ally(saudi has never fought a war with israel unlike most arab countries there ) and the area and a steady flow of oil,

Your views are just insane and defy all logic. If Bush is simply an "oil manaic" there are much easier ways of getting it than colonizing militant countries halfway around the world. As mentioned above, we have lots of oil ourselves. It would be a hell of a lot easier to push aside environmental regulations than invade Iraq. If Bush must invade a country for oil, Veneluza is a much riper target than Iraq. Finally, if Bush must have Iraqi oil, he can lift the oil embargo tomorrow. Wouldn't that be a much easier way to get the oil? Perhaps?
>>>>>>>>>
Look. It takes 5 minutes on CNN to hear talk of how going to war with Iraq will lower oil prices. Sure we could attack Venezuala, but that would be political suicide. Iraq, on the other hand, now that's a convenient target. They've done something very wrong. While most of the world doesn't think that what they've done wrong justifies war (and indeed, much of the US population is against the war) one can still make a case. International politics is all about exploiting these delicate balances to your own gain. The Europeans do it as well, but they're not nearly as aggressive and ham-fisted about it as the Americans.

I can't deny it, because I have no proof either way. Prove it. By the way, how much oil is in Afganistan? Or did we Americans steal it all? You are so blinded by hatred that you are not making any sense.
>>>>>>>>>>>
http://www.newhumanist.com/oil.html
There is no doubting that Afghanistan is a strategic location for oil. Are Americans going to steal it? Of course not! Does it help to be on friendly terms with those running the country? You bet.

Such as? Hot talk does not represent proof. Let's see some of these supposed documents. And if they do exist, so what? I bet all of our respective governments have eqivalent documents. Get real people.
>>>>>
Why do you think the US has any interest in the middle east whatsoever? Why do you think we're "allies" with Saudi Arabia and Kuwait? Why do you think we ever got involved in the shit that happend in the 1980's in Iraq and Iran? The US imports about 5 billion barrels of oil per year. Contrary to previous posts, about 600,000 barrels a day come from Iraq (in comparison to 1.2 million from our #1 importer, Canada). The US economy is intricately tied to the price of oil. The US is the drain down which 26% of the world's total energy production flows. Oil is the one and only reason we have any involvement in the Middle East.

PS> I take offense to your implication that just because someone is against US foreign policy, that they have some sort of blind hatred for the US. Chill. I love the US. I love Thomas Jefferson, I love the Constitution (and unlike most Americans, I've actually studied it!), hell, I even love Starbucks. But humanity as a whole sucks ass, and there are particular things about the US, namely it's foreign policy, that suck ass.

Do some research...
The countries denying war for the us have billion dollar investments in Iraq. They rave about No war for oil. They cheer these senseless slogans because they hold agreements with this tyrant.

Don't forget the rights you have by just posting this message.
If you brougt any of this up in Iraq...
OFF WITH YOUR HEAD...
AND your families too...

FOR STARTERS... YOU POMPOUS AMERICAN ASS... I AM AN AMERICAN, BORN HERE, RAISED HERE AND SEEN THE WORLD FROM THE INSIDE OF THE AMERICAN CAGE AND LOOKED AT AMERICA FROM THE OUTSIDE-IN AS WELL. I GREW UP WITH A PERSECUTED PUNK ROCK CROWD, PERSECUTED FOR OUR SUPPOSED "ANTI-AMERICAN" VIEWS. ONLY, WE WERE MERELY POINTING OUT HOW CORRUPT THE GOVERNMENT HAS BECOME AND WE WERE LABELED AS COMMUNISTS, AND OUR MUSIC HAS BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE FCC AS AN ACT OF SEDITION IF PLAYED OVER PUBLIC AIRWAVES. WE HAVE BEEN SCREAMING FOR YEARS ABOUT THE 12 YEAR CIRCUS OF THE REAGAN-BUSH ADMINISTRATION, BUT NOBODY LISTENED. THEN 8 YEARS LATER YOU MORONS PUT ANOTHER PSYCHO-PATH INTO POWER, AND LOOK WHAT HAPPENED... WE ARE BACK AT WAR IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND WE WENT FROM AN ELIMINATED DEBT TO TRIPLE THE THREAT. WHO LOOKS LIKE A DUMBASS? THOSE WHO HOLD THE BURNT CHARRED REMAINS OF AN AMERICAN FLAG STILL WAVING IT IN YOUR OWN FUTILE ATTEMPT TO UPHOLD YOUR FOOLISH PRIDE. THE FACTS ARE AS SIMPLE AS LOOKING BACK TO THE DAYS WHEN ROME FELL. THE INITIAL POLITICS OF ROME WERE "OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE, AND FOR THE PEOPLE." THEN A FEW GREEDY POLITICIANS CAME IN TO POWER AND RUINED IT FOR THE REST, THUS ALLOWING AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE VISIGOTHS TO RUN RAMPANT THROUGH THEIR GREAT NATION. NOW ASK YOURSELF... WHAT IS OUR "DEMOCRATIC-REPUBLIC" MOTTO? "OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE, FOR THE PEOPLE." AND WHAT HAS EVERYONE SAID FOR THE LAST THIRTY TO FIFTY YEARS IN THIS COUNTRY IN REFERENCE TO OUR POLITICIANS? THAT THERE IS FAR TOO MUCH CORRUPTION FOR ANY GOOD TO BE DONE.... ARGUE THAT YOU IGNORANT, LAZY, UN-AMERICAN. IT IS THOSE WHO ARE FOOLISH AND SHEEPISH ENOUGH TO IGNORE THE FACT THAT THEY ARE BUILDING A MASSIVE PRISON AND ENSLAVING YOUR MINDS SO THAT THEY CAN MAKE A QUICK BUCK THAT FUEL THEIR FIRES AND ASSIST IN BURNING UP THE ONE MOST IMPORTANT RESOURCE THAT WE HAVE.... OUR HABITAT, MOTHER EARTH. AND I ASK ONE MORE QUESTION OF YOU, THE MAN WHO DARES POINT THE FINGER AT THE REST OF THE WORLD FOR BEING ANTI-AMERICAN. THE NEXT TIME YOU HOP INTO YOUR $40K SUV, START UP YOUR $2K NAV SYSTEM, AND IMMEDIATELY "REACH OUT AND TOUCH SOMEONE" ON YOUR $500 BLUETOOTH CELL-PHONE WHILE DRINKING YOUR COFFEE AND LISTENING TO MIND-NUMBING PROPAGANDA ON YOUR MEDIA BLITZ RADIO TALK SHOW (YOUR DAILY ROUTINE ON YOUR WAY TO A CORNER OFFICE)... ASK YOURSELF THIS QUESTION... "WHAT HAVE I EVER DONE FOR ANYONE BUT MYSELF? HAVE I EVER GONE OUT OF MY WAY TO HELP CHILDREN STARVING IN ANOTHER COUNTRY? OR HAVE I EVER GONE OUT OF MY WAY TO CUT BACK ON MY FUEL CONSUMPTION BY TRYING ANOTHER FORM OF COMMUTING TO WORK?" I'LL BET YOU START TO FEEL GUILTY WHEN YOU LOOK IN THE MIRROR EACH DAY. AS A MATTER OF FACT, I'LL BET YOU WILL WELL UP WITH TEARS. IF YOU DON'T.... THEN YOU ARE JUST AS WORTHLESS AS THE REST OF THE SO CALLED BLUE-BLOODED AMERICANS AND THE FASCIST REGIME THAT YOU SUPPORT BY VOTING A TERRORIST INTO POWER. NOW PUT THAT IN YOUR PIPE AND SMOKE IT!

AND IN RESPONSE TO THE "HOT TALK" AND GUILT PROVING DOCUMENTS THAT "EVERY GOVERNMENT" HAS IN THEIR POSSESSION.... IF THEY HAVE SAID (WHICH WE ALL KNOW THEY HAVE) AND ALL THE GOVERNMENTS ARE INVOLVED.... DOES THAT NOT TELL YOU SOMETHING? IT SHOULD BE SAYING TO YOU THAT THE CORRUPTION IS EVEN WORSE THAN FOREMENTIONED. THAT ALL THE GOVERNMENTS IN POWER ARE UPO TO NO GOOD..... MAYBE IT'S TIME TO FIND OUT IF WE STILL HAVE ANY POWER AS THE PEOPLE OF AMERICA, THE SUPPOSED GOVERNING BODY (WE WHO ARE SUPPOSED TO GOVERN OURSELVES), POSSIBLY BY CALLING OUT THE TERRORISTS THAT WE HAVE EMPOWERED IN OUR OWN GOVERNMENT AND FORCING THEM TO ANSWER THE BURNING QUESTIONS WHICH WE HAVE YET TO BE ANSWERED. BUT THAT WOULD PROBLY BE CONSIDERED AN ACT OF TREASON BY THOSE WHO GOVERN AND YOU DAMNED SHEEP WOULD PROBLY AGREE WITH THE SERPENTS FILTHY WORDS AS THEY STICK THE KNIFE IN DEEPER AND TWIST A LITTLE FURTHER. WAKE THE HELL UP YOU IDIOTS!

AND TO 7aMoOoDy AND ALL THE OTHER IRAQI'S, IRANIAN'S, AFGHANI'S, SAUDI ARABIANS, AND SO-ON AND SO FORTH.... I AM SORRY. SORRY FOR FAILING YOU AS AN AMERICAN. WE AS AMERICANS SHOULD HAVE BEEN THERE TO PROTECT YOU FROM THESE ASSHOLES AND WE WERE NOT.... WE AS A LARGE GROUP ARE SHEEP... BLIND TO THE TRUTH BECAUSE WE LET OURSELVES BE LED AROUND BY A LEASH.... THE UNITED STATES WAS FOUNDED ON SOMETHING VERY IMPORTANT AND WAS DESIGNED TO BE A VERY GOOD THING..... I AM SORRY TO HAVE TO BE THE ONE TO SAY THAT WE HAVE LOST SIGHT OF WHAT MAKES US AMERICANS.... AND WE HAVE LOST TOUCH WITH REALITY TO THE POINT WHERE IF IT ISN'T IN OUR OWN BACK YARD WE JUST DON'T GIVE A SHIT. SO ONCE AGAIN I APOLOGIZE FOR THE WORTHLESSNESS OF OUR ENTIRE COUNTRY... I ONLY HOPE THAT YOU AND ALL THE REST OF THE MIDDLE EAST WILL GREET PEOPLE LIKE ME WITH THE COURTESY OF A HUMAN BEING WHEN I AM FINALLY ABLE TO VISIT YOUR ONCE BEAUTIFUL COUNTRIES THAT YOU CALL HOME AS I HAVE THE HIGHEST RESPECT FOR ALL OF THE PEOPLE IN YOUR LANDS... YOU HAVE DEALT WITH EVER SO MUCH TURMOIL, MOSTLY CAUSED BY US... THE U.S.A.

"Fifty years? So you are fine with the idea of Hussain selling VX nerve gas to a terrorist cell which will lauch it on an American City because were we waiting for a political solution? This is okay with you? Appeasement is not the answer."

Nice the US is realizing this.

Saddam was politically and militarically active since mid 50s, is in the Iraqi government since late 60s and President since '79.
That he's an evil asshole was known long ago. Yet, he was good enough to be sold weapons in the fight against Iran, by US, especially by Mr. Bumsfeld who was shaking hands and talking with him like a friend or at least good business partner back then.

What do you call this ?

And what do you think, where he got the toxic gas and/or technology to produce it from, he used on Iran and Kurds ?
I know, there were German companies involved, but we were not alone.

Regards,
Harald Henkel