filtherton

I guess i'm all righteous indignated out. You're right that they weren't looking out for the interests of their countries, just a few wealthy individuals. I read it wrong. At this point all this news does is put chirac and putin a little closer to bush on my own personal "bought and paid for politicians" continuum.

I wonder if it may be possible to be against this war, and yet, not have lucrative and questionable oil contracts with the former iraqi leader? I didn't hear any mention of any canadians on that list. I was against that war and i'm just a poor student with a small income.


no blood for oil isn't accurate, and i doubt you could find a place on the tfp where i said such a thing. If i did, i'm sorry. I'm also sorry to inform you that you can't make me, or sparhawk or any one single person answer for the actions and opinions of the liberal archetype in your head. By that logic i could say imminent threat... imminent threat... where's your conservative righteous indignation?


You say this as if there was no other reason to be antiwar in this instance. I wasn't aware of bribes and neither were you. That article is dated Jan. 29th.
Of course there were ulterior motives in france and russia's decision not to support a war. There are always ulterior motives. Notice our stated purpose for war(wmd's and liberation) and our probable actual purpose for war(sending a message to rogue nations). You can't claim that "the left" was aware of them any more than "the right" was. What were the ulterior motives of germany and canada? Who was greasing their wheels?


Well, we can speculate all we want. Tony blair was pretty gung ho about invading, yet brits turned out by the thousands to voice their lack of support. As did many americans.