Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: LibertyBelt
"so what that oil is a major issue?"

Part of the problem with these phrases is that logically it is like dividing by zero. "Oil" and "for" are used in ways that deprives them of specific meaning - though a meaning can be derived from the phrase.

We are not going to war, nor did we in 1991, to acquire oil, which is what phrases like "No war for Oil" imply. We go to war for a variety of reasons, but as it regards oil, the reason is to maintain free trade - to deny a third party the ability to seize oil from an accepting seller. It's more like protecting your grocer than it is fighting "for oil".

265 posted on 01/29/2003 11:44:14 AM PST by lepton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies ]


To: lepton
If we wanted oil we would attack little tommy d. for his private land in Alaska.
267 posted on 01/29/2003 11:50:59 AM PST by gulfcoast6 (sena)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 265 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson