Well, it's hit the news now. The Whitehouse is planning a military government for Iraq. (http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/10/11/iraq.occupation/index.html) Thedre is not actually any war on between the two. The USA is saying "Let's go in, crush them, take over, and install our own government."

I've covered all the hypocrisy involved in the USA's recent and current actions in other threads. Here, I wish to point out one further thing.

What will happen if the USA goes ahead with this? There will be tens of thousands of US troops running Iraq, headed by a General or such. Everyone in the area will be pissed off with that. Iraq will turn into another Israel/Palestine, in that there will be bombing, suicide attackers, snipers, and so on, all over the place, attacking those occupying US forces. The USA will ues this as an excuse to further strengthen their presence in the Middle East. War is a good excuse for getting what you want.

This isnt about the war on terrorism, and they don't care about the people in Iraq. If they really cared about the people, they would be fighting in Africa to, but no there are no money to be made there. But in Iraq there is.

it's all about the oil

Well that's what I think

If you are going to scold America for imperialistic histories, scold Britain first. They are the Empire where the sun never sets.

We learned it from europe.

All empires have sucked. All governments today suck. The whole political world is bollocks, every word from every politican's mouth is crap.

Now is your turn to begin ranting about corperations and then a little on religion.


Anyway, what do you propose we do.

FYI: Conditions now in most "civilized" countries are the best they have ever been.

Yeah, living conditions are nifty for many of us. That's the good part of capitalism and an organised nation.

Can I just point out quickly, if it wasn't for the British Empire, there'd be no USA or Canada. Just food for thought there.

I think the US will install a puppet leader who is voted in by the locals, but the US run the show backstage.

Ok. Then you now must blame Britain for us. Personally, if I lived in the revolutionary war I would have been a Tory.

I just want to point out that this is the republicans who are doing this, people like Bush. Not all US citizens agree with what hes doing, I sure as hell don't. So when you say USA just remember its not the USA thats doing this its a certain party within the government.

What will happen if the USA goes ahead with this? There will be tens of thousands of US troops running Iraq, headed by a General or such.

Wouldn't you have a bunch of americans in control that want you to live, instead of a bunch of Iraqis with chem and nuclear weapons that want to kill you just because you're an american?

Everyone in the area will be pissed off with that. Iraq will turn into another Israel/Palestine, in that there will be bombing, suicide attackers, snipers, and so on, all over the place, attacking those occupying US forces.

Why would they be pissed off because we replaced there rivals, who want to kill them anyway for resources, so they can conquer the middle east? And really, does Palestine have anymore terrorists to spare to attack Americans that are in turn saving them from a nuclear/chem superpower? And if they attack the Americans, wouldnt the Americans in turn give Israel more aid? To kill more palestinian terrorists? Fucking Duh.


The USA will ues this as an excuse to further strengthen their presence in the Middle East. War is a good excuse for getting what you want.

So we want Oil, right? Well let me straighten this for all you idiots:



THERES NO OIL IN IRAQ! THERES ALSO ECONOMIC SANCTIONS ON IRAQ! THEY CANT SELL OR BUY OIL!

It is the same way in every country.

Whats the same way?

Originally posted by Unregistered
THERES NO OIL IN IRAQ! THERES ALSO ECONOMIC SANCTIONS ON IRAQ! THEY CANT SELL OR BUY OIL!

there is no oil in Iraq but because there are economic sanctions they can't sell stuff you say then don't have? :confused:

Originally posted by Bachus
there is no oil in Iraq but because there are economic sanctions they can't sell stuff you say then don't have? :confused:


Even they had oil (bought it, or otherwise) all they could use it for would be themselves. They couldnt sell it or otherwise. Its not about oil.

Originally posted by Unregistered
Even they had oil (bought it, or otherwise) all they could use it for would be themselves. They couldnt sell it or otherwise. Its not about oil.
Iraq has oil alot of it too, they can't sell it indeed due to the economic sanctions but when USA invades the country USA will have their hands on the oil.

Originally posted by Unregistered

So we want Oil, right? Well let me straighten this for all you idiots:

THERES NO OIL IN IRAQ! THERES ALSO ECONOMIC SANCTIONS ON IRAQ! THEY CANT SELL OR BUY OIL!
Because you're such a genius, I thought you might like to see some things:

From the USA's DOE
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/iea/table81.html
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/iea/table31.html
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/iea/table32.html
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/iea/pet.html
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/iea/wec.html
http://www.ott.doe.gov/facts/archives/fotw220.shtml
http://www.ott.doe.gov/facts/archives/fotw220supp.shtml

And:
http://www.platts.com/features/Iraq/index.shtml

There's heaps more. Education is gooood.

Ah but the question is, Adam, why would they pump more than they need?They can't sell it. When we get there, we'd have to start pumping, and that would be alot of effort and political humiliation.

I believe Iraq is currently seeling through Russia at a cut price. Not sure though.

How so?

Oh, maybe Iran even:
http://www.fas.org/news/iraq/1995/13274728-13282358.htm

Then there's the old oil-for-food thing:
http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9801/07/iraq.oil/

Looks like the Russian thing ended actually:
http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/company/cnm04836.htm

Ah, interesting article here:
http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/company/cnm24049.htm



Oil companies have stake in Iraq
By Mark McDonald

15-09-02 For oil companies and governments in the United States and around the world, there's more at stake in Iraq than weapons of mass destruction. There's oil.
Iraq has the world's second largest oil reserves, after Saudi Arabia's. Toppling Saddam Hussein could restore Iraq as an influential player in the world oil market. Development of Iraq's vast oil reserves -- largely suspended during two decades of war and UN sanctions -- could push down global oil prices and produce a windfall for those oil companies that win the exploration and development contracts.
One camp of political analysts even suggests that, at a time of strained US-Saudi relations, an oil-rich Iraq could lessen US dependence on Saudi Arabia. Those hopes are probably overblown, oil market experts say. Such theories are "based more on fantasy than on knowledge," said James Placke, a senior associate with Cambridge Energy Research Associates, a consulting company, and a former senior State Department Middle Eastofficial.

Any new production from Iraq or other countries such as Russia would provide a limited cushion against a cut-off of oil elsewhere. But Iraq's oil production isn't likely to be large enough to erode Saudi oil power anytime in the foreseeable future. During the first 10 months of 2001, Saudi Arabia supplied the United States with 1.6 mm bpd of crude oil, or 18 %, of US crude oil imports. In 2001, the United States imported 778,000 bpd of Iraqi oil through third parties.
A major issue for Iraq is its crumbling infrastructure. It's one thing to have oil in the ground. It takes years of costly investment to build the facilities to get it out and to market. Iraq, which produced 3.5 mm bpd at its peak in 1990 just before the Gulf War, now can pump only 2.8 mm to 3 mm barrels because of war damage to facilities and maintenance neglect.

Iraqi oil ministry officials have talked about boosting production to 6 mm bpd in seven years. Even that might be optimistic. Just getting Iraq back to the 3.5 mm bpd level could take three to five years, Cambridge Energy estimates. Saudi Arabia produces about 7.4 mm bpd of oil and has the capacity to pump at least 10 mm barrels, according to the US Energy Department. By 2010, eight years from now, Saudi capacity is expected to reach 15 mm bpd, according to US Energy Department projections.
"Saudi Arabia is just such a dominant player that you're not going to remove the Saudis," said Raad Alkadiri, an analyst with the Petroleum Finance, a consulting group in Washington. The nation has the capacity to pump so much oil that "you're not going to be able to ignore it. Iraq can't replace it." The end result of new Iraqi production could be increased Western dependence on the Mideast.
"With any of these things, you have to be careful what you wish for," said Lowell Feld, an international energy markets analyst with the Energy Information Administration, a division of the Energy Department.

In the short term, a regime change in Iraq could have a modest impact on oil prices. Iraq currently is producing at least 1 mm barrels less than its capacity, largely because of a dispute with the United Nations over an oil-for-food program that limits how Iraq can use its oil revenues.
If the sanctions were lifted, Iraq might add a mm bpd to the market in quick fashion, which could shave $ 1 to $ 2 off the price of a barrel of oil, depending on whether other oil exporters cut production to offset the new Iraqi supply. Oil is trading at around $ 30 a barrel, which is 42 gallons. Iraqi oil development still would be lucrative for oil companies.
Russian and French companies have been cutting deals with Iraq to develop its oil resources, though they are unlikely to proceed unless the UN restrictions on Iraqi oil sales are lifted. US companies have to wait on the sidelines because the government bars them from doing business with Iraq. "A lot of oil companies are very optimistic about what you're going to see," Alkadiri said.

Iraq has proved reserves of 113 bn barrels, lessthan half of Saudi Arabia's 265 bn barrels. But Iraq may have much more oil, say experts, noting that the latest oil searching techniques have not been applied because there has been virtually no exploration in more than 20 years.
"No one really knows the full extent of Iraqi reserves," Placke said. "Iraq went into the isolation booth at the start of the Iran-Iraq war in 1979."
The rights to develop Iraqi oil could be a contentious point in seeking Russian support for any military action against Saddam. The Russians would like to see their deals preserved, but the United States would not want to shut its firms out.
"We will certainly have an interest in ensuring an open and level playing field for our oil companies," a senior US envoy in Moscow said. "It's not like we're going to be giving all that to Russia."

Source: Tribune Business News

Originally posted by Unregistered

THERES NO OIL IN IRAQ!

YOURE NUTS
GET DEAD

-I-

Unregistered, there's plenty of oil in Iraq. Heaps of it.

The US can't get any right now because of trade sanctions.

...BUT! If we invade, Bushy will be able to get as much oil as he wants from the 51st state :rolleyes:

Oh, and he can make $$$ off of Iraq's natural resources by selling it at lowered prices to other nations, especially African nations who need oil but can't afford to buy a lot unless its cheap cheap cheap!

So I'll bet that Iraq's oil wells will run dry about 5 times sooner if they're under US jurisdiction than if they belong to Iraq, whether there are export bans on Iraq or not.