[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Changez_like: *
Right, and quicker the oil flows OUT of Iraq.
[/QUOTE]
By George, I think you've got it !!!! And as the oil flows out, guess what comes in??? Money. Green, green money!!! Money to build things. Money to buy food. Money for medicine. Money for schools.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by myvoice: *
By George, I think you've got it !!!! And as the oil flows out, guess what comes in??? Money. Green, green money!!! Money to build things. Money to buy food. Money for medicine. Money for schools.
[/QUOTE]
And as soon as this "green green money" comes in, it will go right out again, to pay for the price of war.
What an absurd situation this entire thing is.
We take a country that had advanced socio-economic indictators and completely wreck it, reduce it to a level where children have to beg, where doctors make less than taxi drivers, and twelve years later after Iraqi mothers and fathers have buried half a million of their children, we come in and say - Hey we’re you’re liberators, we’ve come to save your country, aren’t you ecstatic to see us rebuilding your country and giving out reconstruction contracts to American companies? 
Am i the only one who feels like this is straight out of some bad twilight zone movie.
MyVoice,
Yes oil companies do that; can you tell me whether American oil companies will be based in a post-Hussein Iraq and if so how much of the profits they will take in for themselves? Please also let me know whether Iraq will STILL have to pay reparations for the ‘Gulf War’ out of its oil revenues and if so how much to each country.
The thing that will most honor the dead in Iraq is establishing a free and economically strong society for the living.
Talk about honoring the dead in this way really makes me sick. First you have to lift the sanctions. As for establishing a “free” society - Iraq’s opposition groups don’t seem to be too happy about the latest US plans for a “free” Iraq.
By " We " your refering to Saddam, correct?
Neither you nor I really know the answer to those questions do we Nadia? The only difference between us is that you choose to assume a negative case scenario and I choose to assume a positive case scenario. Time will tell who is right.
You should go to the doctor. Here’s my get well soon gift. 
Consider it done. The day after the war is over, unless that is a Sunday and the Security Council can’t meet that day.
Yeah well, the NA wasn’t so keen on US demands for representative government in Afghanistan either. These folks want power. They probably aren’t so keen on sharing it.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by underthedome: *
By " We " your refering to Saddam, correct?
[/QUOTE]
No, i am referring to the entity that kept an embargo deliberately imposed upon the country for twelve years, the UN Security Council.
I don’t think such a sickness can be cured by any doctor, other than Doctor Sir Knight George Bush by not going to war.
**Neither you nor I really know the answer to those questions do we Nadia? **
Neither does the US, apparently. Does the US have a properly mapped-out plan for a post-Hussein Iraq?
You should go to the doctor. Here’s my get well soon gift.
awww thank you. Your concern for my health is so touching. i think i will get better much quicker if i stop reading comments on this Forum that advocate embarking upon a mass slaughter against innocents, and no regard for “collateral damage”.
Consider it done. The day after the war is over, unless that is a Sunday and the Security Council can’t meet that day.
Check that again - there was a thread in which OG and i were arguing because, from what it appeared, the US would NOT lift sanctions immediately subsequent to the war.
**These folks want power. They probably aren’t so keen on sharing it. **
That was quick 
i thought the Iraqi opposition groups were the darlings of the US admin - the love affair over so quickly? Pity.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by underthedome: *
By " We " your refering to Saddam, correct?
[/QUOTE]
then "you" would be America??
Exactly :k: :k:
I thought you were referring to Saddam, after all he is the one that led his country to two wars (another 1 pending), murder his own people with chemical weapons, is a brutal dictator, and has allowed his people to suffer while he spends billions on himself. You can understand my confusion, no? Yet millions march for this man to stay in power, this does indeed seem like a very bad twilight zone movie.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by underthedome: *
I thought you were referring to Saddam, after all he is the one that led his country to two wars (another 1 pending), murder his own people with chemical weapons, is a brutal dictator, and has allowed his people to suffer while he spends billions on himself. You can understand my confusion, no? Yet millions march for this man to stay in power, this does indeed seem like a very bad twilight zone movie.
[/QUOTE]
Re-read her post. "We" = US and allies.
UTD
man, saddam is a dictator, an evil person and should be slapped to death, but that is NOT the reason we are going after him, there are plenty of other dictators in teh world as well who would be right up there with him in terms of nastiness.
So lets not make this some altruistic social service rescue mission to liberate ppol from him, becaus ethe ppl have been sufferingunder him for more than a decade after desert storm.
Kick his butt, sure, but his dictatorial rule did not happen yesterday, it has been around for sometime, and at one time he was an ally as well.
same for those other set of idiots, taleban. when we attacked them we made it look like they were so bad and so horrid..which they were, but they had been all that pretty much all the time they were in power.
the fact that war got rid of them and may get rid of saddam now and may be a blessing to the people is a by product, not our primary goal. Otherwise there are other dictators that we should start taking out soon. lets start closer to home..lets take out castro.
True Fraudia, I've stated all along that the primary goal is to free Iraq of any WMD that Saddam may have, unfortunately we all know Saddams track record for telling the truth is less than par (over par? anyways...). In doing this a side effect will be the freeing of Iraq. One need not support the war against Saddam because it's in the security interest of the United States but one should support it because it frees the Iraq people.
Nadia,
"Check that again - there was a thread in which OG and i were arguing because, from what it appeared, the US would NOT lift sanctions immediately subsequent to the war."
My remberance of that thread was another Damned if you do and Damned if you don't situation. A Washington think-tank was commissioned to think out all the needed steps to rush assitance to Iraq after a conflict. They went over each sanction and each regualtion, and each UN provision and were advocating to get all of the paperwork in order ahead of time so that relief could progress without delay.
One of the recommendations was to "review" sanctions for those which could easily be removed, while leaving others in place. For example, I do not think that Iraq should immediately be allowed to import Millions of pounds of plutonium, or nuclear triggers. Nadia presumed that sanctions important to the health and wellbeing of the average Iraqi would be those under review.
Now to the thread:
My personal opinion is that those companies that have been the lapdogs of Saddam (TotalFina and Lukoil) have been much more deplorable than those that would help a free and democratic Iraq. Do I want every advantage for US companies? Sure. Do I hope the Russians and the French get screwed? YES! On the other hand it will take Billions in capital investments to re-work the Iraqi Oil infrastructure. Some estimates say that it will take 5 to 7 years to really increase production of oil. US companies will be putting up the money to make that happen. It is called investment, and it will benefit both the Iraqi's and the US companies. Will the US companies ever recoup the 100Billion that will be spent getting rid of Saddam? Doubtful.
And Fraudia. If your University grades are all B's, and one F, how do you improve your gradepoint the quickest? Get the F up to a C, and maybe in time a B. Go after the worst of the worst first, even though there are plenty of other tyrants. They will all be looking over thier shoulders. The tyrants of the world are sure not going to fear the UN! And the French will roll out the red carpet for you and buy you lunch.....
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Nadia_H: *
i think i will get better much quicker if i stop reading comments on this Forum that advocate embarking upon a mass slaughter against innocents, and no regard for "collateral damage".
[/QUOTE]
The only advocacy for "mass slaughter of innocents" that I'm aware of comes from al Quaeda and other groups of its ilk. You don't drop leaflets, engage in an attempt at a diplomatic solution for years, develop "smart" munitions and call for deadlines if your intention is mass slaughter. The words, actions and intent matter. The people involved in this conflict who have shown no regard for "collateral damage" are Saddam and OBL in fact "collateral damage" is all they are interested in.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Ohioguy: *
Go after the worst of the worst first, even though there are plenty of other tyrants. They will all be looking over thier shoulders. The tyrants of the world are sure not going to fear the UN! And the French will roll out the red carpet for you and buy you lunch.....
[/QUOTE]
Not quite accurate because the tyrants have been around for a long time, and as much as we may try to show this as some mission to free teh Iraqi people, that is only a by product, essentially a tyrant can do all he wants unles she is deemed a threat by us.
The other dictators know this. They have no fear because as long as they do what they do at home but not be seen as a threat by a major world power, no one is going to stop them.
as I said..otherwise we would have taken care of Iran, cuba, north korea, assorted places in africa etc etc. The dictators are not shaking in their boots, because they know its not about freeing people as the main cause, that is only a by product...so no they will not be looking over their shoulders.
as far as UN goes, if we cant respect the UN, how do we expect any tyrant to respect it..
do i think he needs to be removed from power, hell yes.. but lets call it as it is, lets not use the suffering of Iraqi ppl or Saddam's domestic policies as the reason, because that is clearly not it. the reason simply is WMD and our connection to some logic thats asys that he will use them against us.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by myvoice: *
Thap: I'm reasonably sure that SOME oil can be extracted profitably at $15 per barrel. It is my understanding that the cheapest oil to extract is Middle Eastern oil. But there are significant differences in exploration, development and extraction costs based upon geography. Offshore oil is the most expensive. I do not believe you would find many people or companies at all conduct new offshore exploration, development and extraction of off-shore reserves if the price per barrel stabalized at $15 per barrel. You'd have to supply some sources for me to accept that.
Even OPEC has determined that a $22 to $28 per barrel price is the range required to sustain required investment.
[/QUOTE]
Well the only reference I can supply is my project budgeting.