ChatterBank21 mins ago
Iraq Oil
Ok, this isn't a Daily Mail Link so please forgive my temerity.
Is this right for us now - economic return etc - or was this the plan all along and just your usual destroy it then charge to make it better?
http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idU SLU95171220090430
Just looking at opinions really, no slanging matches if you will....
Is this right for us now - economic return etc - or was this the plan all along and just your usual destroy it then charge to make it better?
http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idU SLU95171220090430
Just looking at opinions really, no slanging matches if you will....
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Ankou. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.I don't think the original invasion was prompted by oil. I think it was much more basic and personal than that.
There was definately a plan/scheme/plot call it what you will at one point after the invasion. That involved Iraqi oil being used to fund reconstruction at inflated prices to US and some UK companies without competetive tender.
Basically the Americans going on a shopping expedition with Iraq's wallet in their own store.
That seemed to fail mostly due to the security situation.
This latest business does not look like the same thing as the Iraqis appear to have a free hand and can ask for competetive tender from any country without restriction.
The UK is just bidding for the business, the Iraqi government can say "No"
Of course if there are any restrictions or external pressures on how Iraq can spend it's own oil money that'd be different.
There was definately a plan/scheme/plot call it what you will at one point after the invasion. That involved Iraqi oil being used to fund reconstruction at inflated prices to US and some UK companies without competetive tender.
Basically the Americans going on a shopping expedition with Iraq's wallet in their own store.
That seemed to fail mostly due to the security situation.
This latest business does not look like the same thing as the Iraqis appear to have a free hand and can ask for competetive tender from any country without restriction.
The UK is just bidding for the business, the Iraqi government can say "No"
Of course if there are any restrictions or external pressures on how Iraq can spend it's own oil money that'd be different.
I think we (UK as opposed to the US) were there because Bush blackmailed Blair into joining in the game.
I rather think there was a "with us or against us" conversation involving UK US military and intelligence co-operation.
Blair tried to drag his feet at the UN as you may recall but then Cloin Powell gave his little power point ( which he now regrets he says) and swung it.
I don't for a moment expect to ever see confirmation of this. I expect that it's well tied up in the 100 years rule
But that's what I think happened
I rather think there was a "with us or against us" conversation involving UK US military and intelligence co-operation.
Blair tried to drag his feet at the UN as you may recall but then Cloin Powell gave his little power point ( which he now regrets he says) and swung it.
I don't for a moment expect to ever see confirmation of this. I expect that it's well tied up in the 100 years rule
But that's what I think happened
Thanks for taking the time to answer. Whilst I think the war was based on dubious information and intent, I am not entirely anti. And I�m not anti-US either. Why do you people have to be so aggressive and pigeon hole everyone as for you or against you?
I don�t really believe our presence there was necessary nor justified, but since we were there and it cost us a lot of money and lives to be there, I don�t see any reason why we shouldn�t get something out of it economically.
If we (the British) didn�t then you could be damn sure the Americans, French and Germans would be swooping in to nibble on the carrion.
I don�t really believe our presence there was necessary nor justified, but since we were there and it cost us a lot of money and lives to be there, I don�t see any reason why we shouldn�t get something out of it economically.
If we (the British) didn�t then you could be damn sure the Americans, French and Germans would be swooping in to nibble on the carrion.
apologies, forgot to mention the eradicated by the taliban and producing 900% since being invaded poppy crops. funny how that one works (war on drugs and all) but who's paying attention cash is always good, pays for all that good old sectarian violence when your stirring the pot in someone elses kitchen.just keep reading the paper, we're trying to nip this kind of stuff in the bud, right. but there's still a lot of work to be done. http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context =va&aid=13325