Oil wells on fire in South Iraq
 

Saddam Hussein = One hell of a guy.

Since when did it become good military strategy to say, "I'm getting invaded. I better go set fire to my own shit!"

lol... what a dipshit.

Hell i just read me "Might" have killed him already.

I doubt he did, but it would be nice to take him out early.

Did you honestly expect anything different given his track record?

Oh no. I just don't understand the logic of it.

Edit: Though I don't really expect logic out of that guy.

Re: Oil wells on fire in South Iraq
 

If you know you're going to lose or the odds are seriously against you then, yes, I think this is a good military strategy. These fires could slow down the militaries advance. Also, why leave anything for the enemy? If I had something valuable on me and someone was going to kill me and I had the option of 1) leaving it for the bastard who killed me or 2) destroying it before I die. I'd take #2 every time.

A very common tactic throughout history of warfare, unfortunately. The Battle of Atlanta in the Civil War was a good example of this.

Re: Re: Oil wells on fire in South Iraq
 

True. And this isn't really a surprise, considering he did the same in Gulf War I.

Which of course leads to the question: if we know that once invaded he's going to set fire to as many oil fields as he can, how exactly is this war about oil again?

Re: Re: Re: Oil wells on fire in South Iraq
 

Tsk, tsk, tsk. There you go again. You must be hanging out with Fritz. No fair using logic.

A "scorched earth" policy is indeed a valid, if somewhat desperate, military strategy. As another example, the Russians have used it in their long history, most recently in World War II against the Germans.

Re: Re: Re: Oil wells on fire in South Iraq
 

There will still be plenty... PLENTY of oil left. Though I don't think this war is all about oil.

There are, however, some very large oil companies that stand to make a lot of money on rebuilding efforts (they planned on the fires) namely Haliburton (yes, the same Haliburton that VP Dick Chaney was an exec for) and Schlumberger. A large, Houston-based oil company. We're talking billions of dollars here. Billions.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Oil wells on fire in South Iraq
 

This isn't logic. Well, if you think oil field on fire = no oil then it is is logic. It's wrong, but could be logical if the facts held up. Which they don't. Many oil fields were set on fire in Kuwait, but they still have plenty oil.

Just because you set an oil field on fire that does not mean that there will be no more oil. See my post above. Again, this war isn't about oil. Is it playing a factor? Sure it is. Just not that big of one.

beeellions!

Re: Re: Re: Re: Oil wells on fire in South Iraq
 

I agree that it's ridiculous to claim this is a war about oil. But you can bet your ass that some oil companies with connections to the Bush administration will be ready to remind him how much money they donated to the cause when contractors are needed to rebuild the Iraqi oil business.

Are you telling me I should buy Schlumberger stock now or what?

Of course, when people talk about Halliburton, they fail to take into consideration that there are only three or four companies trained to deal with oil well fires, and most likely all of them will receive government contracts to deal with the fires.

Indeed.

Just convenient how of the three or four companies trained to deal with oil well fires, the one that was picked has direct ties with VP Dick Chaney. Funny how things just work out, eh?

There were backroom dealings going on. It's pretty niave to think that Haliburton was just the one lucky company chosen by Bush to get this money. Very niave. But it's a part of politics. This sort of you watch my back, I'll watch yours goes on all the time. Democrats do it. Republicans do it. It's just a part of politics and being well-connected. Does it look fishy? Yes. Does it seem inaapropriate? Yes. But it's how the world of politics works and has worked for ages.

Make it so, number one.

Did you know that we recently put up a 900 million dollar contract for reconstruction for bid? However the bidding is closed to only four invited companies. These companies have given roughly 2.8 million to political campaigns over the past four years, most to Republicans.

While any of these companies may be capable of filling the contract, this kind of cronyism is exactly what makes the US look bad. Why the hell limit this to political pals? Its this kind of thing that makes me wonder about our motives. I want to believe this is about noble ideals, but when we start handing out paychecks to big donors I have to wonder.

For French, it was all about oil. When nearly half of your oil imports come from Iraq, you better believe that was what the issue was. For us, we do want someone more sane to be sitting on top of those fields (and it won't be us because OPEC will not allow that).

Well, the original theory behind scorched earth was to destroy and usuable resources in front of an advancing enemy. Eventually, with no shelter, food or clean water the enemy would have to retreat or face serious logistics issues. In a modern war, especially in a war on this scale where the troops are amply supplied and will not require the resources of the land to survive, it doesn't make any sense militarily. Politically, it is probably doing Sadaam more harm than good, but whatever floats your boat, I suppose.

Sounds like we're crossing the border with ground troops now, according to NBC. One of their "In-Beds" says the troops are on the move and there is tons of artillary fire in the night sky.

What the heck are you doing making intelligent comments in this thread! ;)

Ah, yes. The French are all greedy, self-serving bastards. They want their oil no matter what the cost. But not the USofA. Oh no siree Bob! Only noble aims here. Gettin' rid of mad men and all. Oil? Heck no, sir! We don't care about no oil!

Puh-lease.

Did you even read the comment before replying? :rolleyes:

Smoke Operations Baby!!!!!

Are you saying that the contracts have already been handed out? I was under the impression that they had not, and would not until after the war. I could be mistaken, of course.