Updated Title: World Revolution 2011

firstdown · 02-28-2011, 01:00 PM

From your link

The deferred salary is based on a 1998 agreement in which Cheney elected to defer compensation earned in 1999 for his employment as CEO of Halliburton. This deferred salary is paid in annual installments, with interest, over the five years after Cheney's retirement from Halliburton.

That agreement is in writing and was done before DC was even in office or even running as VP. Trying to make something from nothing.

Lotus · 02-28-2011, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tiggwin

Ok Lotus now go back and re read what I wrote... the statement Ruhskins made was that we invaded to steal their oil... I simply corrected Ruhskins by saying that we didnt invade to steal oil... if we had why dont we have it?? We went in "under the threat" of WMD's... I didnt say that we found any first off... and secondly if you think the UN neutered Saddam in any way you are grossly mistaken... As a matter of fact Russia, France as well as Germany all 3 still had oil contracts with Saddam that directly violated the UN Sanction of Oil for Food. Also during the whole Monica Lewinski scandal in 1998 Saddam kick the weapons inspectors out of Iraq so for more than 5 yrs we had not monitored their weapons programs so when the NIE came across Bush's desk in February of 2003 stating that Iraq HAD purchased or ATTEMPTED to purchase Urainium yellowcake from Niger we couldnt verify whether he did or didnt. Now to Bush's credit he spent 13 months trying to get Saddam to allow weapons inspector back in so we could verify what programs he did or didnt have... he balked at us and refused. Bush finally made a stand and told Saddam that if we didnt have weapons inspectors on the ground in Iraq by March of 2003 that we would attack.. Saddam continued to "Stand defiantly in the face of the US!!" Im sure you remember all of those headlines in the USA Today etc... all the papers ran it as a cover page headline... I was in the first Persian Gulf War and I knew when we left that we would have to go back... it was just a matter of how long would it take. In the future read what I have written before you just automatically assume Im on one side or the other.

Please update your information:

1) I agree that your were responding to Ruh's claim about oil. I did read your post. But you went on to talk about WMD's, which was mistaken. I responded to that.

2) There were UN weapons inspectors in Iraq until the bombs started dropping in March 2003. Bush, however, was too impatient to let them do their work.
Weapons Inspectors Leave Iraq - CBS News

Also, your view fails to take into account that if we wanted to stop the spread of WMD's, Iran and N.Korea were obviously better targets.

3) The claim about the purchase of uranium from Niger proved to be hoaxed. CIA director George Tenet told the White House that the documents were false yet the White House continued to make the claim. Joe Wilson revealed the hoax. Then, in retaliation, a senior Bush administration official "outed" his wife Valerie Plame as a CIA agent, thus effectively ending her career in the field.
Niger uranium forgeries - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

All of this is why I said that you were the victim of "obsolete propaganda."

Chico23231 · 02-28-2011, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Good point, how 'bout we stick to the topic, and quit bashing current and former presidents.

yeah that was actually the context of the "give it a rest" comment, probably should have said stick to the topic. It was right after the thread title change and FD couldnt wait to blame Obama for Oil prices. Still relevant as a result of whats going on, but not directly. Had to reference the short term memeory issue, but bottomline...presidents really cant do anything about it oil price. But when it comes to policy and alternatives to foreign oil, yeah something can be done.

Lotus · 02-28-2011, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by firstdown

From your link

The deferred salary is based on a 1998 agreement in which Cheney elected to defer compensation earned in 1999 for his employment as CEO of Halliburton. This deferred salary is paid in annual installments, with interest, over the five years after Cheney's retirement from Halliburton.

That agreement is in writing and was done before DC was even in office or even running as VP. Trying to make something from nothing.

It does not matter for this issue when the deferments started. The fact is that while in office Cheney had a stake in Halliburton's profitablity (without that profitability he could not have been paid his deferments).

So, by your own argument, Cheney had a stake in Halliburton's financial success in Iraq during the war.

firstdown · 02-28-2011, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lotus

It does not matter for this issue when the deferments started. The fact is that while in office Cheney had a stake in Halliburton's profitablity (without that profitability he could not have been paid his deferments).

So, by your own argument, Cheney had a stake in Halliburton's financial success in Iraq during the war.

You ned to read a little better.

From The Link:

On the other hand, there is a possibility that if the company went bankrupt it would be unable to pay. That raises the theoretical possibility of a conflict of interest -- if the public interest somehow demanded that Cheney take action that would hurt Halliburton it could conceivably end up costing him money personally. So to insulate himself from that possible conflict, Cheney purchased an insurance policy (which cost him $14,903) that promises to pay him all the deferred compensation that Halliburton owes him even if the company goes bust and refuses to pay.

saden1 · 02-28-2011, 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by firstdown

You ned to read a little better.

From The Link:

On the other hand, there is a possibility that if the company went bankrupt it would be unable to pay. That raises the theoretical possibility of a conflict of interest -- if the public interest somehow demanded that Cheney take action that would hurt Halliburton it could conceivably end up costing him money personally. So to insulate himself from that possible conflict, Cheney purchased an insurance policy (which cost him $14,903) that promises to pay him all the deferred compensation that Halliburton owes him even if the company goes bust and refuses to pay.

He's a real piece of work...Evil genius!

firstdown · 02-28-2011, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saden1

He's a real piece of work...Evil genius!

Its done more often then you would think because people who run for office have interest in busnesses which can be a conflict no matter how big or small they may be.

Lotus · 02-28-2011, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by firstdown

You ned to read a little better.

From The Link:

On the other hand, there is a possibility that if the company went bankrupt it would be unable to pay. That raises the theoretical possibility of a conflict of interest -- if the public interest somehow demanded that Cheney take action that would hurt Halliburton it could conceivably end up costing him money personally. So to insulate himself from that possible conflict, Cheney purchased an insurance policy (which cost him $14,903) that promises to pay him all the deferred compensation that Halliburton owes him even if the company goes bust and refuses to pay.

But as an unpaid consultant during his time in office, he'd still rather get the money from Halliburton rather than an insurance policy, right? And he wanted to return to financial involvement with Halliburton after he was in office, right?

Please stop defending the indefensible. Between Halliburton, the Carlyle Group, and Bechtel, Cheney had a strong financial stake in the Iraq war. It is just that simple.

Ruhskins · 02-28-2011, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by firstdown

That was just a fabrication of the left and never the reason for the war.

Neither was WMDs.

Once again, reason nothing gets done in this country, people are too busy sticking to their party line and don't know much about compromise. Each side blindly bitches about the other side. For every complaint that the left makes, you can find a similar complain from the right and vice versa. And for every f*ck up the right makes, you can find something similar from the left.

firstdown · 02-28-2011, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lotus

But as an unpaid consultant during his time in office, he'd still rather get the money from Halliburton rather than an insurance policy, right? And he wanted to return to financial involvement with Halliburton after he was in office, right?

Please stop defending the indefensible. Between Halliburton, the Carlyle Group, and Bechtel, Cheney had a strong financial stake in the Iraq war. It is just that simple.

I don't even give a rats ass I'm just pointing out what you seem to keep reading over. Why would DC even care who gives him the money? You keep saying he had this financial stake in the war but you have no evidence even when the evidence say he did not.

12thMan · 02-28-2011, 04:17 PM

Why do we say, rat's ass?

Where did that come from, First?

How come it's not a roach's ass...or an elephant's ass. Or a monkey's nose? I don't appreciate the way we disparage rats around here.

firstdown · 02-28-2011, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 12thMan

Why do we say, rat's ass?

Where did that come from, First?

How come it's not a roach's ass...or an elephant's ass. Or a monkey's nose? I don't appreciate the way we disparage rats around here.

Let me google that for you

Lotus · 02-28-2011, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by firstdown

I don't even give a rats ass I'm just pointing out what you seem to keep reading over. Why would DC even care who gives him the money? You keep saying he had this financial stake in the war but you have no evidence even when the evidence say he did not.

Actually I've produced a lot of evidence above. But you ignore it because you don't give a "rat's ass."

firstdown · 02-28-2011, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lotus

Actually I've produced a lot of evidence above. But you ignore it because you don't give a "rat's ass."

Funny,

Ruhskins · 02-28-2011, 05:38 PM

So, back to the Middle East, anything new going on?

02-28-2011, 01:00 PM	#121
firstdown Living Legend Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: chesapeake, va Age: 49 Posts: 15,277	Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011 From your link The deferred salary is based on a 1998 agreement in which Cheney elected to defer compensation earned in 1999 for his employment as CEO of Halliburton. This deferred salary is paid in annual installments, with interest, over the five years after Cheney's retirement from Halliburton. That agreement is in writing and was done before DC was even in office or even running as VP. Trying to make something from nothing.

02-28-2011, 04:17 PM	#131
12thMan MVP Join Date: May 2005 Location: washington, D.C. Posts: 11,366	Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011 Why do we say, rat's ass? Where did that come from, First? How come it's not a roach's ass...or an elephant's ass. Or a monkey's nose? I don't appreciate the way we disparage rats around here.

02-28-2011, 05:38 PM	#135
Ruhskins Gamebreaker Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Columbia, MD Age: 34 Posts: 14,613	Re: Updated Title: World Revolution 2011 So, back to the Middle East, anything new going on? __________________ R.I.P. #21 New words created on The Warpath: Rewalsr - Somretimes - Fualt - Jersesy - Itiot - Composetory Afeard - Storgn - Empliment - Gaissn - Saftys - Minnisota Faviort - Hatter - Phsyched - Foof - Heloing - Brutual Stroried Check out this cool local internet radio show Weds 7-9pm: The DC Sports Chat I sense an annoyance in the Force

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Updated Title: World Revolution 2011

Debating with the enemy