Page 5 of 8
Re: an old subject for question.....
Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2014 1:02 pm
by Pudfark
callmeslick wrote:Pudfark wrote:The "smart" move would have been to evacuate all American personnel out of the country...days ago. Instead, he chose to play golf and send in 275 more troops and as history has recorded....he'll sacrifice them. You may not agree with my "take" on that? Let's say, you don't. That would then become the "manufactured" excuse, to go "all in" to save them.... I believe that you and I could agree, that neither scenario is acceptable.
I actually agree.
Bottom line is this: you are finally going to see the sorting out of the whole Sunni/Shia mess in the region. The less involvement the US has, the better. In the eyes of Middle Easterners(possible excepting the Israelis and Egyptians, who we shower with money), the US has done nothing but fuck up in the region for 50 years. Let them do better.
Agreed.
Let China....take the "lead" as in (leed,led).
Re: an old subject for question.....
Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2014 1:12 pm
by callmeslick
I'm betting China has the good sense to learn from us, and the Russians, and save their money for the time being. There will come a time when the region requests economic assistance, but that time is not now, or soon.
Re: an old subject for question.....
Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2014 1:19 pm
by Pudfark
My remark was made in regard to China's need/thirst for oil and it's availability elsewhere.
It ain't available elsewhere in the quantities that they require. They'd damn near be forced to secure their supply of oil from the middle east. Take a gander at what they import from that region? China has hated the Russians for centuries and neither trusts the other. It's worse than the Russia/Ukraine thingy, now. just sayin'
Re: an old subject for question.....
Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2014 4:28 pm
by callmeslick
Pudfark wrote:My remark was made in regard to China's need/thirst for oil and it's availability elsewhere.
I suppose, but they might wish to balance the risks vs. rewards.........
Re: an old subject for question.....
Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2014 4:42 pm
by Pudfark
China has no choice....if Canada commits their oil to us/US.
You hold yerself out to be a smart guy?
Where else can China go to get the volume of oil that they must have?
I repeat, China has no choice.
Re: an old subject for question.....
Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2014 4:46 pm
by Pudfark
I know this ain't yer favorite guy. Beck
However, I think ya'd be damn surprised what he's sayin' about the US involvement in Iraq.
I just found this an hour ago....
http://www.glennbeck.com/2014/06/17/is- ... an-attack/
Re: an old subject for question.....
Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2014 4:54 pm
by callmeslick
interesting take, actually(blind pigs and acorns come to mind). Now, if that actually plays out that way, and all get home safely, how will the hate-Obama folks react to that?
Re: an old subject for question.....
Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2014 5:14 pm
by Pudfark
Probably folks would go along with it...maybe, even me.
However, this thought haunts....It coulda and maybe shoulda been done by air?
Why put more folks at risk?
Re: an old subject for question.....
Posted: Wed Jun 18, 2014 9:35 am
by callmeslick
Pudfark wrote:China has no choice....if Canada commits their oil to us/US.
You hold yerself out to be a smart guy?
Where else can China go to get the volume of oil that they must have?
Asia, Venezuela, Mexico, middle east, Scandanavia and GASP, the US. They'll end up buying from all of us.
I repeat, China has no choice.
they're the buyers, they have the cash, they have the #2 economy in the world, they have all kinds of choice. Only an idiot would think otherwise.
Re: an old subject for question.....
Posted: Wed Jun 18, 2014 12:05 pm
by Pudfark
They might try....they haven't so far....other contracts exist for future sales to others.
Pretty much that's your excuse to do nothing. Nothing begets Nothing. What I have proposed costs comparatively nothing and could resolve many problems now and in the future.
So, for the record..."You propose, do nothing" ?