Enron and a few other US oil companies were investing in the Pipeline from Kazakstan to Pakistan, the Taliban didnt want it and the negotiations were getting tough or even impossible untill Sept 11. happened. Then everything was canceled. The negotiations were handled by the US, France, The UK and 2 other countries if I remember correctly
czar there have been many deals proposed by many companies and countries over the past 20 years. Until december, none of them became deals. This pipeline has more interest that just US companies.
The current deal that was signed in december, does not go to any US companies.
I'm only saying than Enron did invest alot of money in the previous pipeline negotiations and resource.
The US economy grew at 3% last year, that is far from crisis. There are still some kinks to work out from 9/11 and the dotcom fallout, but overall things are looking up.
Actually, you are wrong, the talibans cut the pipeline completely, but now the oil flows again, how strange that the terrorists were operating right along the pipeline..... do they drink oil?
Originally posted by: SnapIT
Actually, you are wrong, the talibans cut the pipeline completely, but now the oil flows again, how strange that the terrorists were operating right along the pipeline..... do they drink oil?
Please show proof that this pipeline exists and was cut. But I am not expecting you to have any....
They probably quit fighting just to shut the Swedish ambasdor up.
Really, I would never have guessed you were that old.
I read it, that's what I got out of it. I see no reason to read that again.
The US had no vital interests in Kosovo either but since the Europeans couldn't handle it we had to intervene. The US has tried isolationism before. It didn't work. I see no reason to wait until WWIII breaks out to get involved in some situations. I only wish the Europeans would pull their fair share of the load.
The US is letting Japan, S. Korea, China and Russia take the lead in dealing with N. Korea. Now please make up your mind. Either you want the US involved in world affairs or you don't.
I am going to let this drop here... as you do not get the point not the first, not the second, not the third...
Í don't think it's because your stupid, so don't take this the wrong way...
But you definenty are, either that or a blind leader of the propaganda, my grandfather told me they were like you... never again..
No, I don't get your point because you don't have one.
Your only purpose is to bash the US and you don't even do that very well.
BTW sonny, I was out of high school before you were born. The only reason I didn't think you were as old as you say you are is the juvinile style of reasoning that you have displayed.
I'll humor you and take a look at your little post again. I also pet stray kittens when I see them, don't feel special.
You imply that the US has only once done a good thing. That's pretty idiotic on your part, let's move on.
You say that the US entered WWII not because we had to, not because we wanted to but because Germany was growing too big and we wanted to nuke Japan. You surprise me. You surpassed the idiocy of the first statement.
You say the whole world except for the ignorant Americans agree that the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasake were acts of incredible cruelty. So, we dropped those bombs just to be cruel. The fact that we were at war had nothing to do with it. The fact that a land invasion of the main islands of Japan would have killed more people had nothing to do with it. That is the reasoning of some eurotrash types that wish to revise history to suit their own ends. I read it the way you meant it the first time and on the second reading it still sounds as stupid.
Your only purpose is to bash the US and you don't even do that very well.
BTW sonny, I was out of high school before you were born. The only reason I didn't think you were as old as you say you are is the juvinile style of reasoning that you have displayed.
I'll humor you and take a look at your little post again. I also pet stray kittens when I see them, don't feel special.
You imply that the US has only once done a good thing. That's pretty idiotic on your part, let's move on.
You say that the US entered WWII not because we had to, not because we wanted to but because Germany was growing too big and we wanted to nuke Japan. You surprise me. You surpassed the idiocy of the first statement.
You say the whole world except for the ignorant Americans agree that the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasake were acts of incredible cruelty. So, we dropped those bombs just to be cruel. The fact that we were at war had nothing to do with it. The fact that a land invasion of the main islands of Japan would have killed more people had nothing to do with it. That is the reasoning of some eurotrash types that wish to revise history to suit their own ends. I read it the way you meant it the first time and on the second reading it still sounds as stupid.
Oh, but i am just eurotrash, so wtf can i say to make you believe anything?
Simpleminded americans, yeah, you got it, simpleminded, all of you of course, as all of us are eurotrash...
Not that i am implying that any american fellows would EVER even think of such a thing (if you are above third grade, you know)...
YES, the ENTIRE WORLD thinks that bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki (learn how to spell) were acts of incredible cruelty.... the ENTIRE WORLD, except maybe England, as those idiots still bow to you.....
Did you get it this time, i emphazied the letters the first time, but that did not do the trick, try again...
Heard that before. What would "America" do without your there to defend it?
It may be true that more lives would have been lost had the war not ended when it did, but did the US really need to drop two nukes on Japan to make its point? I doubt they had to drop even one. A pre-arranged demonstation would have done it.
You didn't become eurotrash until you started whining like one.
That's a pretty idiotic statement to make that the ENTIRE world thinks the US was wrong for ending the war with Japan as quickly as possible and with fewer causalities then the alternative. But hey, it's your statement. PROVE IT.
That's a pretty idiotic statement to make that the ENTIRE world thinks the US was wrong for ending the war with Japan as quickly as possible and with fewer causalities then the alternative. But hey, it's your statement. PROVE IT.
Originally posted by: hagbard
Heard that before. What would "America" do without your there to defend it?
It may be true that more lives would have been lost had the war not ended when it did, but did the US really need to drop two nukes on Japan to make its point? I doubt they had to drop even one. A pre-arranged demonstation would have done it.
EVERY civilized nation knows it was a two tag test run...
Actually, YOU think it is an idiotic statement, 5 billion of people think not...
You are stupid, did you know the alternative, it was firbombing, and it would have taken half the cost, and about 10% of the ones who have been hurt...
Of course, you did not know that... you just follow what you are told, just like any nice little puppy...
I bet that is what annoys you puppies, that we are bigger, stronger, faster, and that we actually find the truth while you are still yappin...
Originally posted by: SnapIT
Originally posted by: hagbard
Heard that before. What would "America" do without your there to defend it?
It may be true that more lives would have been lost had the war not ended when it did, but did the US really need to drop two nukes on Japan to make its point? I doubt they had to drop even one. A pre-arranged demonstation would have done it.
EVERY civilized nation knows it was a two tag test run...
Don't follow you here? BTW, don't let etech bug you, he hates anything not American. He has even called me Eurotrash, and I'm Canadian. Let's take up a collection and buy him an Atlas.
You just keep posting statements that are more idiotic than the last one you posted.
You do not "firebomb" coastline, a coastline does not burn. Cities are firebombed. The alternative to the nukes was an invasion.
I am starting to disbelive that you were ever in any armed force. You show no knowledge of the military or weapons. You certainly do not know the history of WWII.
I guess you dont know how many lives were lost in Dresden do you? Firebombing killed as many if not more than the nukes did.
This is like shooting fish in a barrel. You really should bone up on your history.
Nagasaki/hiroshima ~230,000 dead within a year.
linkage
Dresden ~135,000 killed in firebombing feb 13, 1945
Tokyo ~124,000 killed in firebombing march 9, 1945
linkage
looks like a close race, with firebombing in the lead.
Hagbard
If you want to condemn a bombing during WWII then condemn the bombing of Dresden. I'll concede that it was an unnecessary waste of life. It did little to nothing to end the war. Of course it was done under the command of the British so you can't really bash the US with it. I understand of course why you rant on Hiroshima and not Dresden.
If you want to condemn a bombing during WWII then condemn the bombing of Dresden. I'll concede that it was an unnecessary waste of life. It did little to nothing to end the war. Of course it was done under the command of the British so you can't really bash the US with it. I understand of course why you rant on Hiroshima and not Dresden.
You said Dresden then firebombing....hence you meant Dresden. And the numbers I've been able to come up for that city is under 50,000.
I didn't "rant", I added to his comment. Don't know how the Brits would have conducted a demostration rather than bombing in their case.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter