North Korean minister of defense executed

[AFTT47]

I don't know if it's that simple.

I did ten years in the US Air Force. I participated in the first gulf war in the 1990-1992 time frame. I'm maybe a little to the right regarding national defense although far-left socially. I'm definitely not one of those gung-ho guys who feels the need to broadcast his/her military service with bumper stickers or T-shirts. I can tell you though that everyone of us I've known or met are proud of our service. I've never known a single one of us who was resentful of what we were asked to do. Not to say that they're aren't any but I've never known one.

You mean people in the military are not resentful when they are sent into harm's way frivolously, or under false pretenses?

No. But nobody I served with from 1985 - 1995 that I ever met felt that they were put in harm's way frivolously, or under false pretenses. I didn't serve under Bush-Lite. I may have felt very differently had I done so. I voted for Reagan, the elder Bush and Bill Clinton so I never served under a President who I didn't trust.

[Cyberman]

Doesn't look like the guy in the OP was actually killed after all:

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2...431522581/

Yeah, I think I'd purge if someone fired a dirty great fuck-off gun at me.

[Thumpalumpacus]

China doesn't have much of a leash on North Korea.  China has zero interest in a nuclear armed North Korea, and couldn't stop North Korea going nuclear.

This is the naked truth. If China could have stopped NK from going nuclear, it would have. China could not do so.

They are even less positioned now than they were ten years ago. As are we.

---

Min, sometimes your cynicism reaches ridiculous heights. WTF does North Korea have to do with oil? 

Actually, if you think back to when the Bush administration was trying to justify the war in Iraq, they came up with the so-called "Axis of Evil," which was three countries with evil dictators that threaten the U.S.  Iraq, Iran, and North Korea.

But Min.'s point is that we'd have had a military intervention by now if Un was sitting on black gold.

When that AoE bullshit was being peddled, I was of the opinion that rather than a ground war in Iraq, we ought to strike at NK's nuclear facilities with bombers from Andersen AB in Guam, escorted by fighters based in Japan.

---

Yeah, I get it now. Can't say I agree with it but I get it.

Liberal conspiracy theories are every bit as silly as conservative conspiracy theories.

It's not a conspiracy theory.  It's an acknowledgement of the American mentality.  Why is it that we're so concerned with the ongoings of the Middle East yet nobody cares about the horrendous violence occurring in Africa?  It boils down to one word: resources.

That doesn't explain the interventions in Bosnia, or Somalia. It doesn't explain the fact that the Iraq invasion lowered the amount of oil available on the world markets.

[Minimalist]

And the price went through the roof.

The oil companies never lose, man.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Who is "we?"

Surely you don't think that "WE" gain anything from this?

Meanwhile, the fucking oil companies are cleaning up.

Support this claim with facts, please. Explain the current low cost of a barrel of oil. 

According to the chart in this paragraph of a Wiki article, only two of the thirty-one oil companies doing business in Iraq are American.

[Minimalist]

Don't you watch the news at all?

http://www.businessinsider.com/citi-saud...ff-2014-11

There's a standoff happening between the old oil powers and the booming US shale industry, as the OPEC oil cartel is thought to be pushing down prices to drive new production offline.

Just a pissing contest and a temporary one.  Enjoy it while it lasts.

[Thumpalumpacus]

And the price went through the roof.

The oil companies never lose, man.

From Wikipedia:

United States crude oil prices averaged $30 a barrel in 2003 due to political instability within various oil producing nations. It rose 19% from the average in 2002.[12] The 2003 invasion of Iraq marked a significant event for oil markets because Iraq contains a large amount of global oil reserves.[13] The conflict coincided with an increase in global demand for petroleum, but it also reduced Iraq's current oil production and has been blamed for increasing oil prices.[14] However, oil company CEO Matthew Simmons emphasizes the peaking and decline of oil-exporting in Mexico, Indonesia and the United Kingdom is the reason for the price gouging. According to Simmons,[15] isolated events, such as the Iraq war, affect short-term prices but do not determine a long-term trend. Simmons cites the use of enhanced oil recoverytechniques in large fields such as Mexico's Cantarell,[15] which maintained production for a few years until it eventually declined. Pumping oil out of Iraq may reduce petroleum prices in the short term, but will be unable to perpetually lower the price. From Simmons' point of view, the invasion of Iraq is associated with the start of long-term increase in oil prices, but it may mitigate the decline in oil production by retaining a partial amount of Iraq's oil reserves. As a direct consequence, the oil production capacity was diminished to 2 million barrels (320,000 m3) per day.[16]

The issue is a little more complex than you paint it, as the above shows.  

---

Don't you watch the news at all?

http://www.businessinsider.com/citi-saud...ff-2014-11

There's a standoff happening between the old oil powers and the booming US shale industry, as the OPEC oil cartel is thought to be pushing down prices to drive new production offline.

Just a pissing contest and a temporary one.  Enjoy it while it lasts.

Of course I watch the news.  I know that OPEC is opening up the pumps in order to drive frackers out of business. What you have not demonstrated is how the American oil companies benefited from the 2003 invasion. Quit muddying the waters, and support your point with verifiable facts.

[Minimalist]

Oh, that's easy.



I don't think the timing is a coincidence!

[Cyberman]

And the price went through the roof.

So did he.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Oh, that's easy.



I don't think the timing is a coincidence!

Are you even reading the posts I'm making? The issue of timing has already been addressed ("However, oil company CEO Matthew Simmons emphasizes the peaking and decline of oil-exporting in Mexico, Indonesia and the United Kingdom is the reason for the price gouging").

Also, post hoc ergo propter hoc is sloppy thinking.  You must actually demonstrate the connection.  Breezy assertions don't count.