Abu Dhabi: the best market for Rolls-Royce

GO UAE! lol.

I'm shocked,shocked there are RR's in one of the richest places in the world.

Good luck to the middle east once oil runs out.
Gas got cheaper cuz of the West stalling economically but it does not mean that oil is not running out.

Besides, the middle east has done nothing special for the world besides causing problems.

( P.S. - The Typical Ignorant Response = But U.A.E. has more income from tourism than oil : Right, and you believe the GDP results put forth by these nations ? )

Ignorance is bliss!

Causing problems? Please enlighten me... I would love to hear this... :)

Abu Dhabi, the capital of the UAE depends on oil.. Dubai on the other hand, doesn't.

Thank you TheSailor. He said causing trouble... what kind of trouble? Wars? You can thank the US all day for that. Iraq didn't want war.. The 1st excuse was " We want to get rid of weapons of mass destruction "... Did they find any? Nope. 2nd excuse was we want to get rid of the regime. That's funny, because the US themselves put Saddam in charge of Iraq.. but once he step his toe out of line ( stopped doing what they wanted ) they play heroes and go in there to get him killed. Well done! Iraqi people thank you so much for killing well over 500k Iraqi people since the war started :) They also thank you for the tribal war going on! :) I can go on and on and on... So next time instead of saying something stupid without thinking, think!

M35R, Your vague reference to the US putting Saddam into power needs some frame work for a better understanding as to WHY we helped him into power. Please allow me to educate the "Blissful Idiots"...

Not that long ago Iraq was a monarchy, that's right, they had a british puppet ruler because BP owned a bunch of Iraq dirt. On 14 July 1958, a ruthless man named Abd al-Karim Qasim and his followers used troop movements planned by the government as an opportunity to seize military control of Baghdad and overthrow the monarchy. After seizing power, Qasim assumed the post of Prime Minister and Defense Minister, and soon withdrew Iraq from the pro-Western Baghdad Pact and established friendly relations with the Soviet Union. Oh those pesky Russians... To make himself more popular with the citizens of Iraq he passed a law to seize 98% of Iraqi land from the British-owned Iraq Petroleum Company, he then handed most of it over to farmers. It was also during his rule as Prime Minister that confrontation with the Kurdish minority started. The new Government declared Kurdistan “one of the two nations of Iraq.” During his rule, and in doing so the Kurdish groups wanted an opportunity to declare independence.

After a period of relative calm, the issue of Kurdish autonomy (self-rule or independence) went unfulfilled, sparking discontent and eventual rebellion among the Kurds in 1961. Or in other words, Qasim was no longer liked by many in Iraq, and they wanted him GONE!

Qasim was overthrown by the Ba'athist coup of February 8, 1963, motivated by fear of communist influence and state control over the petroleum sector. That's right, his own countryman thought he was going to sell out to the Russians, so with the help of the US and British intelligence agencies, he was overthrown. So you see, it wasn't just a case of Americans sticking their nose where it doesn't belong, his own countrymen wanted him gone. The mistake we (the US) made was not killing Saddam sooner, like right before he gassed nearly all the Kurds to death. And Sailor, your being a Brit... You got a lot of nerve calling the kettle black my friend, we did most of your country's dirty work here. If you don't think taking 98% of BP's land would come without consequence from the British intelligence agencies, you're in denial! Here is a good read if you want the full history, the one you wont see in the history books. http://rationalrevolution0.tripod.com/articles/real_saddam.htm

Sailor, the reason Saddam deposed Al-Bakr is because he thought Al-Bakr was a CIA front. There seems to be little doubt the CIA was instrumental in bringing the Ba'ath party to power back in '63, but to say the CIA put Saddam into power is too straight a line for this "Blissful Idiot". There seems to be more proof that during and after Saddam's deposing of Al-Bakr, that the CIA either had little or no control over Saddam. The reason Saddam executed govt officials and video taped it for all to see was two fold, 1). He thought they were under the control of the CIA, and 2). To show the CIA and anyone that would potentially work with the CIA to regain control, that his weapon of choice is brutality, and if you want to take a shot at him, you are more likely to die trying. And it worked. All the CIA had to do was sit back and wait for him to come calling, because they knew the man would become drunk with power and not know how to weild it, which is exactly what he did. We didn't put him there, we did however (unknowingly) put him in a position to put himself there, and when he did, we did nothing. THAT is not the same as putting him there. And if you served a six month tour in Irag in service to your country, this man in another country thanks you for your service. If you were there NOT in service for your country, well then, most likely "you're a naughty boy".

Sailor, If you read my post carefully it was in response to the ignorant moron M35R's ridiculous statement. I singled you out because I thought you were British, my mistake, I take full responsibility and it won't happen again. There are a lot of "blissful idiots" around the world that accuse my country of having an imperialistic mentality. That America and her citizens, politicians, and public servants travel the globe imposing their will upon the masses in an effort to seize global dominance. Forgive me for being so defensive, but I'm tired of these idiots painting my country with such a broad brush. The CIA, NSA, SIS, and Denmark's PET do what they do on behalf of freedom, democracy, and protecting our collective interests around the world. If the nations of NATO expect America to commit their best, brightest, and fearless in defense of their respective countries during times of war, then you can be damn sure we will continually monitor and or influence governments, regimes, and monarchy's in times of relative calm. America learned valuable lessons from WWII, first and foremost appeasement didn't work and never does. Secondly, if we are going to send our young to die on your behalf, we will do our best to level the battle field for allied forces before the first shots are fired. In all of WWII Denmark had about 2,100 military deaths, in just the European Theater alone American combat casualties totaled over 586,600, of that number almost 117,000 paid the ultimate sacrafice. As time goes on memories get shorter and shorter, and as the greatest generation in recent history dies off we can either remember and respect that history and all that it taught us, or simply ignore it and be doomed to repeat it. AND M35R, THIS IS DIRECTED AT YOU... As far as Iraqi civilian deaths go, yes indeed it is truly sad. One of the reasons Americans treasure their freedom is because they know how costly it is, freedom is not cheap. In our own civil war the casualties totaled almost 700,000. As the Sailor pointed out, these religious zealots (radical islaamic extremeists) hide behind their religion. These are the individuals resposible for killing over 500,000 civilians in Iraq.

Kthorn, that was a good history lesson, but you ignored something. The US didn't invade Iraq with the intentions of "helping people to find freedom and democracy". It was because of the claimed "weapons of mass destruction" that were supposedly threatening Israel's existence. Then they moved to excuse number 2. If you think about it, how many people did Saddam kill during his time? Well there's one thing for sure, not as many as the number of people killed now after the invasion!

And whats sad is that there are proofs of how the invading armies are the ones who are causing the civil war going on between different faiths. Just as an example ( and I'm sorry I cant provide the source ATM ), 2 British soldiers were caught by the Iraqi police after they were dressed up as Iraqi bearded civilians and were shooting in a shia neighborhood. Can you explain this?!

The real reason we invaded Iraq (I was not for it by the way) was because we had assets on station from the afgan war, and if the administration could justy the re-allocation of those assets then it was a great opportunity to remove a man that most nations in NATO wanted out. The problem is that the administration figured (wrongly) that we could use the "end justifies the means" scenario by claiming WMD'S or regime change after a brief war. The problem is the war was anything but brief, and as it dragged on it became less popular. In addition to that, the US and it's allies grossly underestimated the Iraqi desire for liberty. It seems in the name of religion, all they really wanted to do was to settle a few "old scores" and kill one another. I took exception to your assertion that the CIA put Saddam in power, and then went "in to play heros" (as you call it) when he stepped out of line. I took exception because of the last line in your post. Your version of history is exactly what the sailor referred to as dumbing it down for the general public. Your version is simply not factual history, a little too loose in the details for this "blissful idiots" liking.

So if this was the real reason, ( to satisfy NATO ) why didn't they say so from the beginning? I'll tell you why.. Because the American people would be against it. They had to put a "shiny glittery" cover on it all to get support from the people. The only battle the US army won in Iraq was against the Iraqi Army... All thanks to using biochemical weapons that are ILLEGAL. That's how they took over the airport. That's how they won. Till this day American and foreign soldiers are being killed everyday. Till this day there is no peace or stability in Iraq. (What a shame, since in Saddam's time, everything was under perfect control). And even now when the US army and it's allies leave, they will claim victory, but that's also a big lie used to cover up the huge failure in Iraq. As we speak, there are states in Iraq that are ruled according to the Islamic law... your media probably forgot to mention that :).
My explanation was brief, but it's not way off the point..

M53R, Not to satisfy NATO moron, to satisfy the UN, which is nothing but a friggin joke. An all talk, no action, corrupt worthless entity that should be abolished. Rather than continue to go off topic any further on an automotive website, I'll leave you with this. Do you think Kim Jong il has everything under perfect control right now? Here let me answer that for you, of friggin course he does, he's a brutal dictator just like Saddam was. Your quote about it being "a shame" shows your ignorance, and your explanation was weak at best. Unless you subscribe to a military website you don't get the good news that comes out of Iraq because the MSM doesn't report it. Our biggest mistake was thinking that the Iraqi people would treasure life more than they glorify death, and we were wrong. Please forgive me for surrendering at this point but I'm obviously engaged in a battle of wits with an un-armed man. If you live in the EU and speak english, remember to thank an American next time you see one. And if you care to pay your respects, there are twelve (12) WWII U.S. Cemeteries in Europe, you can find the list here. http://www.30thinfantry.org/researching.shtml

I don't need to subscribe to anything. I have relatives living in Iraq, and 2 uncles killed in an explosion. I'm not from the EU, nor do I live there, but whatever you say.. American started on the basis of freedom etc etc, but has moved way too far away from that.. And I'm glad we could agree on something, the UN is BS.

I thought Hong Kong, since there are sooo many phantoms there.