Love Is Oil You Need!

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Iraq's oil "belongs to the Iraqi people" and the United States would hold Iraqi reserves in trust if it occupied Iraq after a war, Secretary of State Colin Powell said.

In an interview with regional newspaper reporters, the transcripts of which were released Wednesday by the State Department, Powell said Iraqi oil "will be held for and used for the people of Iraq."

europe.cnn.com...

So as we suspected.Americn oil companies will be employed to get the oil out and they will have their generous share.Then the USA will hold onto what remains in "Trust" so they can finance a puppet Regime.

Now we all know the truth about this coming war!

1) Powell said the United States is "studying different models" of how Iraq's oil fields would be operated under a U.S.-led occupation

How many models can there be? the oilfields belong to the iraqi people who have been long done over by regimes and tough UN sanctions because of their leader. There should only be one model, give it to the iraqis.

2)France and Russia, say they want to give inspectors more time to work.

They have missed out on the sharing of the cake and are upset by this.

3)"Unless we see that kind of change in attitude on the part of Iraq, then how much longer should inspections go on? One month, two months, three months?" he asked. "What will be the difference if they are simply trying to get time in order to frustrate the purpose of the inspections.

CHANGE OF ATTITUDE, hehehe, right Mr Powell you are having a laugh mate. Its obvious that nothing but annilahation of Iraq will do, the diplomatic efforts of Mr Rumsfeld to get immunity for high ranking iraqis is nothing more than a smoke screen.

Going through the threads recently several things have come up which make it obvious US/UK have decidied war will happen. (britains build up of troops, Americas build up, the rheotoric coming from Blair, Bush and their croneys and the silly mouthings of the UN both security council and weapons inspectors)

AA lol

[Edited on 23-1-2003 by cassini]

Can someone explain why you would not like your government to secure a reliable flow of a vital natural resource that is critical to the national economy?

because it does n`t belong to you

and would demonstrate that the war was never actually about the Iraqi people.

Originally posted by cassini
because it does n`t belong to you

At what point in history has that ever slowed the politcal motives for war?

Again, securing a reliable flow. Why wouldn't you expect your government to accomplish this?

Originally posted by Lupe_101
and would demonstrate that the war was never actually about the Iraqi people.

Perhaps not. But freeing the people from "evil dictatorial" leadership has been the catalyst excuse used to begin the machines of war.

May be it has n`t but you were asking a question dealing with the present and I answered in the present.

"Again, securing a reliable flow. Why wouldn't you expect your government to accomplish this?"

I would expect a government to do this. The point is here is that greed is the prime motivator and the Iraqi people will once again loose out. I have no probplem with America trying to secure oil for itself but I would expect it to do it through the purchase of oil from other countries. Events in Venezelua have obviuolsy persuaded the American government that they must CONTROL a vast are of oil reserves. On current estimates Iraq has some 200 BILLION barrels of natural oil reserves putting it not far behind Saudi Arabia. The manner and the way they are trying to secure it is on the surface horrific, effectively starting a war to gain the worlds second largest oil reserves.

but guess thats alright if you are a capitalist.... where anything may be done in order to get your profit.

I think I can probably even forgive the capitalist nature of the escapade, its a political philosophy like any other.

what I cant support is the two faced way in which they have manipulated their own people into supporting a war based on certain issues when in reality it is being fought to sustain a covert adgenda.

However I remain to be convinced of any of Bush's motives theological economic or political.

at present any way you look at it, its just a stupid war.

"I think I can probably even forgive the capitalist nature of the escapade"

Can`t understand why you have put that one lupe, This will undoubtedly cause death in no small amount if it goes ahead (even if the death is small its no excuse) so why does that justify the capitalist nature of the "escapade"????
care to expand on that one???

I'm no great fan of capitalism, especially when melded with the U.S. fanatical devotion to exploitative corporate practices.

However, if the U.S. were to say "hi, were capitalists, as such it makes sense to take this country over no matter what the loss of life to them because frankly we don't care" then at least we could all turn round and say, well, they're capitalists, what did we expect.

Then maybe the whole world would address the issue and political adgendas such as Bush's current administration would be regarded as equally tyranical and destructive as Saddams (all beit on a much larger and more global scale)

Honesty concerning what capitalism actually does in these circumstances could cause a global reapraisal of its implications.

However whilst it hides its ugly head behind pseudo humanitarian excuses there will allways be a fair percentage of the populace willing to believe that Nike trainers grow on trees that exploitation is a minimal and necessary evil to preserve ones way of life, that, for example, purchasing clean air shares from poorer countrys is perfectly justifiable because one really couldn't survive with more expensive petrol and only one car.

Covering up the implications of ones actions in the name of capitalism or, and pehaps this is worse, not admiting to its implications in the first place is, in the long term, far more dangerous to the world than living under an economic philosophy that should, if honesty were to be employed, die out of its own accord.

[Edited on 23-1-2003 by Lupe_101]

So....since the US is going to bare the cost of this war to remove an EVIL person from power, it's only logical to pay the bill with this EVIL person's oil...then help out his oppressed people with the oil $$$ instead of allowing Europeans the chance to sneak in and rob the Iraqi people again with oil deals with the EVIL people running the country.

can you please point me in the direction of the letters requesting your help to free them from their evil oppressor please?

Sounds a bit like going down Soho, beating up the local crack dealer and then going round the flats demanding protection money.

Lupe nice one, I`m no great fan of capitalism myself.

"Then maybe the whole world would address the issue and political adgendas such as Bush's current administration would be regarded as equally tyranical and destructive as Saddams" I would like to have the hope that they would but when you see this
"So....since the US is going to bare the cost of this war to remove an EVIL person from power, it's only logical to pay the bill with this EVIL person's oil...then help out his oppressed people with the oil $$$ instead of allowing Europeans the chance to sneak in and rob the Iraqi people again with oil deals with the EVIL people running the country."

You have to wonder if such would happen.

" only logical to pay the bill with this EVIL person's oil" my problem with this is that whilst you may due a certain amount of reparation over the cost of the war, it will be the case that the american oil companies will come in and have an extended run with the oilfields and take more than their fair share.

"instead of allowing Europeans the chance to sneak in and rob the Iraqi people again with oil deals with the EVIL people running the country. " by dragging up the past your argument becomes silly. We are not talking about what has happened but what will happen. The Europeans most particulary the British probably have the most to answer for. This is old ground and it is the suspect motives of ALL concerned we are questioning.

"then help out his oppressed people with the oil $$$ instead of allowing Europeans the chance to sneak in and rob the Iraqi people again" you think we should let you go in there and repeat the same mistakes????

"since the US is going to bare the cost of this war to remove an EVIL person " there are plenty of other EVIL dictators in the wrold that need sorting out for various reasons yet Iraq is top of the aganda, why is that? Other of these powers have weapons of destruction and tyrannical regimes which exploit and abuse their own populace. 200 Billion barrels oil got anything to do with it?

Anyone that thinks the people of Iraq enjoy having Saddam as their leader is on crack.

I'd put my money on his own military killing him within a month with our help, but then again his whole country is in love with him according to the clueless. I guess since his face is painted on buildings all over the country...I guess you're correct.

cassini - Uh...we rebuilt Europe and Japan after WWII as well as being the world's leader in giving aid around world. Yet you're calling us LIARS when we say we'll rebuild Iraq with the oil profits????

[Edited on 23-1-2003 by MT69]

"Anyone that thinks the people of Iraq enjoy having Saddam as their leader is on crack.

I'd put my money on his own military killing him within a month with our help, but then again his whole country is in love with him according to the clueless. I guess since his face is painted on buildings all over the country...I guess you're correct."

THIS IS NOT WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO DISCUSS STAY ON THE TOPIC OR BUTT OUT

Uh, Lupe said nobody in Iraq wants Saddam gone after I said we'll use the OIL $$$ to pay off the war and rebuild Iraq....get a clue by following each post in this thread.

"Anyone that thinks the people of Iraq enjoy having Saddam as their leader is on crack."

That may well be the case. I just don't see many people actually asking them.
Your government has got you convinced that they scout the world looking for poor oppressed people and then liberate them, allowing them to welcome in a new dawn of freedom and financial stability.

Its strange because whenever I see pictures of Kabal, I see a large ruined city full of miserable people many of whom don't have legs half heartedly waving an american flag and looking scared.

what price freedom.
or to wax quotational "who polices the police"

Kabal???

Oh, Kabul...no wonder you don't see happy Afghans, you're looking in the wrong city with your "news" crews. So much for your INTEL, you're dismissed...