Comments on: Iranian Hizbollah Makes Threats

By: sue

sue — Sat, 22 Jul 2006 03:09:32 +0000

Not a problem!!! he he A little hazard of my tongue!!

By: Cpl M

Cpl M — Sat, 22 Jul 2006 01:51:06 +0000

DOH! I should have picked up on that. Good one, sue. You got me.

By: sue

sue — Sat, 22 Jul 2006 01:37:06 +0000

Thanks Cpl M, I was referring to the fact that in #14 it was stated that the government never said it was about Iraqi Freedom!! Little sarcasm. Sorry!! Been with my guys for close to three years now, so I Do in fact know what it means!! again, my bad!!

By: Cpl M

Cpl M — Fri, 21 Jul 2006 21:31:05 +0000

Sue,

OIF1, OIF2, etc is how the we are breaking down OIF. With each major deployment we add a new number. OIF1 was the first portion in 2003. OIF2 was 2004. OIF3 was 2005. OIF5 is 2006. At least, the Marines are doing it this way.

By: sue

sue — Fri, 21 Jul 2006 07:59:16 +0000

I hate to state the obvious here but on a lot of the Soldiers addresses that I have had, there are three letters and then a number. OIF1, OIF2, OIF3, OIF4. Forgive me but I was under the impression that OIF stood for Operation Iraqi Freedom, Perhaps I'm mistaken. Anybody help me out here?

By: Cpl M

Cpl M — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 22:16:27 +0000

Rehashing your same argument that doesn't make sense isn't going to change my mind. I don't see how you believe this is about oil when you say this isn't about the price of oil. Saddam was getting very rich off of Oil for Food. Why in the world would he cut of supply and thus his cash flow? Your oil argument would only make sense if you say Saddam would have stopped oil sales.

And I don't have an army. I have a Marine Corps. Get it right, please. I didn't spend twice the amount of time in Recruit Training and conform to tougher standards to be lumped into the Army. Sorry CJ and Patriot, that is one of my little pet peeves.

Sadly, I'm going to have to stop replying to you, Blue. You contribute little or nothing to topic of conversation and have trouble saying anything other than negative things about Iraq and oil. Feel free to comment on my pieces, but don't hold your breath for a response.

By: The Blue Barn

The Blue Barn — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 22:08:08 +0000

This is aboout oil. You are just ignoring the facts. The facts are, you need oil to fuel your army. We have a massive miltary machine. If the oil runs out, our army stops. 90 percent of of the oil that is left on the earth is in the Middle East. Itâ€™s a fight to the death. To not to somehow have Iraq, with its second largest oil reserves, strategically involved with oil, would be insane.

This isn't about the price of oil.

Or we are not invading Cuba because they do not sit on the second largest oil reserves in the world.

By: Cpl M

Cpl M — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 22:03:28 +0000

I don't take anyone's word for anything unless I trust them. And I don't trust you.

This war isn't about oil as you and other Liberals so love to claim. If it was about oil, I wouldn't be filling my truck up for $60 a tank. Explain that, please.

And the reason we're not invading Cuba is because Congress hasn't authorized the use of military action against them.

By: The Blue Barn

The Blue Barn — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 21:35:46 +0000

They didn't really care about the Iraqi people. They did suspect hubrisly, that they would be greeted as liberators with candy and they would erect statues of Bush. There are human rights abuses all over the world, so then why aren't we invading other countires? Why not invade Cuba?

By: The Blue Barn

The Blue Barn — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 21:33:25 +0000

Well, your just going to have totake my word for it.
Look, the point is the Neo-Cons wanted a military presence in that region and they got it. There is no exit plan becuase we are not ment to leave. We have the largest military bases there, which we are currently building. We are going to have the largest foreign ambassy in the world there.