Saw that on TV.

So sad to see that the oil we were promised would repay us for the war ripped off - ripping us off in the process.

Have Bush or Cheney or Wolfowitz told the Iraqis we get ALL their oil until the TRILLION dollars is paid back?

I know they said it would cost at the most $50 Billion, but hey, what's fair is fair. So what if it costs 20X what they said? They're the ones who got us into this with their promises of little time and no expense to us, right?

I recall in May 2003 Bush said that every drop of oil belonged to the Iraqi people in responce to the no blood for oil chants. I don't remember him promising the oil money to us. Can you cite a quote?

We need to pay the insurgents more money to buy some more peace. Maybe the dollar is too weak, perhaps we should start paying them in Euros.

Bigger riots in Indiana Farmers' markets when they run out of corn.

John McBush.
And I would no more lie to the American people than I would to my viet cong captors.

Eric-Google Bremer and the CPA Rules-one of them was the de-nationalizing of Iraq's oil industry, to be auctioned off to a small group of Bush's buddies.

"That's my oil and I want it now!

Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Defense Secretary at the time of the war and now head of the World Bank, told Congress: "We're dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon."

"Why has the Iraqi government not spent more of its oil revenue on reconstruction, economic development and providing essential services for the Iraqi people?" the senators asked in their letter.

They estimated that Iraq will earn at least $100 billion in oil revenues in 2007 and 2008.

At a hearing this week, the top U.S. military commander of the Iraq region told Levin that most of Iraq's oil revenue is sitting in banks.

"The facts are that their ability to institutionalize and effectively distribute those funds is lacking," said Adm. William Fallon, commander of U.S. Central Command, which oversees Iraq. "This is not going to happen overnight. We've got to continue to engage with them."

Levin, a war critic, quickly pounced.

"I can't accept the answer that they're not capable of administering their own revenues," he said.

"They have a budget which is approximately this amount. And it's totally unacceptable to me that we are spending tens of billions of dollars on rebuilding Iraq while they are putting tens of billions of dollars in banks around the world, from oil revenues. It doesn't compute, as far as I'm concerned."

let me restate this so it is perfectly clear

America is spending BILLIONS reconstructing Iraq

iraq is putting BILLIONS in the bank.

is that fiscal conservatism?

Fuck it just veto health insurance for kids.

recall in May 2003 Bush said that every drop of oil belonged to the Iraqi people in responce to the no blood for oil chants. I don't remember him promising the oil money to us. Can you cite a quote?

Posted by shirtsbyeric at 2008-03-26 06:37 AM

Bush is pushing hard to get the Oil Law passed.

Antonia Juhasz of the group Oil Change International told IPS the issues of oil and permanent military bases are related.

"We've got the Bush administration pushing aggressively for an (Iraqi) law that would give oil companies 20- to 25-year contracts for oil in Iraq and if they were to be at work for an extended length of time, they would need security," she said.

Regarding the Iraqi OIL law:

Financially, it legalizes very unfair types of contracts that will put Iraq in very long-term contracts that can go up to thirty-five years and cause the loss of hundreds of billions of dollars from Iraqis for no cause.

And the second point is concerning Iraq's sovereignty. Iraq will not be capable of controlling the levels--the limits of production, which means that Iraq cannot be a part of OPEC anymore. And Iraq will have this very complicated institution called the Federal Oil and Gas Council, that will have representatives from the foreign oil companies on the board of it, so representatives from, let's say, ExxonMobil and Shell and British Petroleum will be on the federal board of Iraq approving their own contracts.

And the third point is the point about keeping Iraq's unity. The law is seen by many Iraqi analysts as a separation for Iraq fund. The law will authorize all of the regional and small provinces' authorities. It will give them the final say to deal with the oil, instead of giving this final say to central federal government, so it will open the doors for splitting Iraq into three regions or even maybe three states in the very near future.

Sad to say but the US has tried to marginalize the real power in Iraq...Moqtada Sadr. AS long as the US ignores him there will never be a political outcome in Iraq.

The only reason Bush, Cheney, McCain etc. can claim the surge is working is because Sadr call for and maintained a cease-fire.

Should we consider this just the backwash as the Iraqi's rinse their mouths out from the "surge"?

Fuck it just veto health insurance for kids.

Posted by truthhurts

Republicanism is so great !

Ever notice when fighting and casualties are down, Cons say it's proof the surge is working, and when fighting and casualties are up, they say it's proof the surge is working.

The lack of logic is amazing.

That's because the surge is working!

Fuck it just veto health insurance for kids.

Posted by truthhurts

Republicanism is so great !


Posted by YoMeLIB at 2008-03


and yes.....THIS is a fuckin lie as always from libs when it suits them.


and I am not surprised that the left here is deflecting everything away from one important fact with talk of oil money AND that deserves a conversation, no doubt, but READ THE REPORT REAL SLOWLY AND CAREFULLY........I didnt see one word about american forces, did you?
so its iraqis who are doing the fighting for their country. so let me ask a question and MAYBE I can get a rational answer from one of you somewhere.
jomama...that leaves you out right there....
isnt this what many of you have said needed to happen? iraqis fighting thier own battles.

and as I have said when sadr was holed up in the mosque and we should have blown his head off...
this joker has got to go.......

isnt this what many of you have said needed to happen?


more precisely we said we should get the fuck out of the country.

but yes, you are correct the ISF fighting this battle is an improvement, of sorts, but that is because we dont have troops down in the south (the brits are bunkered down) and I will be surprised if the ISF can win a pitched battle like this without our support.

and BTW we ARE confronting the mahdi army in Sadr city.

this ALSO indicates some significant political issues, sadr's allegiences, the intra shiite conflict, the status of sadr's ceasefire, Iranian influence, etc.

IF the ISF can gain control in Basra then it could indicate a positive development, if they fail than things will get a whole lot worse.

During a briefing in Baghdad on Wednesday, a British military official said that of the nearly 30,000 Iraqi security forces involved in the assault, almost 16,000 were Basra police forces, which have long been suspected of being infiltrated by the same militias the assault was intended to root out.

But Cheney just said a few months back that Basra was a success, becuase the Brits were able to withdraw troops! Did Cheney lie...AGAIN?????

***"Fuck it just veto health insurance for kids.

Posted by truthhurts

Republicanism is so great !"

Yomelib***

Half truths and exagerations. But hey, why take care of my own children when I can get the government to do it for me! Liberalism is so great!
See, works both ways, and neither side is totally wrong or right.

IF the ISF can gain control in Basra then it could indicate a positive development, if they fail than things will get a whole lot worse.
Posted by truthhurts at 2008-03-27 08:03 AM

TH...they want to crush al-Sadar before the elections, al-Sadar and Iran will not go peacefully. I think they are in for some dire times. US troops coming home... not going to happen.

Sad to say but the US has tried to marginalize the real power in Iraq...Moqtada Sadr. AS long as the US ignores him there will never be a political outcome in Iraq. From my 2008-03-26 03:18 PM post.

The US gov't seems to back the wrong person or ignore the power in the country we disassemble.

Moa se Tung wanted our help we said no lost China, Castro same thing, South America, South East Asia, Middle East,
US foreign policy is very short sighted.

IF the ISF can gain control in Basra then it could indicate a positive development, if they fail than things will get a whole lot worse.
Posted by truthhurts at 2008-03-27 08:03 AM

TH...they want to crush al-Sadar before the elections, al-Sadar and Iran will not go peacefully. I think they are in for some dire times. US troops coming home... not going to happen.

Sad to say but the US has tried to marginalize the real power in Iraq...Moqtada Sadr. AS long as the US ignores him there will never be a political outcome in Iraq. From my 2008-03-26 03:18 PM post.

The US gov't seems to back the wrong person or ignore the power in the country we disassemble.

Moa se Tung wanted our help we said no lost China, Castro same thing, South America, South East Asia, Middle East,
US foreign policy is very short sighted.

Al-Maliki told the leaders "we have made up our minds" to enter the fight "and we will continue until the end. No retreat."

It very well be Al-Maliki's end.

Al-Sadar gave the US and Iraq a six plus months window to get their act together, instead they do not act. So al-Sadar will act. This was not started by the Iraqi gov't, al-Sadar gave his militia the go ahead.

BAGHDAD (AP) -- Tens of thousands of Shiites took to Baghdad's streets to protest the government crackdown on militias in Basra as heavy fighting between Iraqi security forces and gunmen erupted for a third day in the southern oil port and the capital.