Things are really getting interesting now.
Of course it’s not about the oil
:rolleyes:
Hmm…
This isn’t necessarily a bad idea in the long run. It’s a ready source of income for the Iraqis.
It just seems like such a bad PR move, though. This kind of statement should really wait until the Israeli/Palestinian dispute is settled. What is the need to add any possible fuel to the fire now?
Right. I makes sense now.
Just because the Iraqis have historically dedicated to the destruction of Israel and there was some schmuck in charge there for years who wouldn’t deal with them, I guess Israel should never, ever have any sort of relations with Iraq. And especially not oil. :rolleyes:
That’s like saying I shouldn’t say hello to a guy who beat me up in second grade.
And you know what? You would have said this no matter where the oil went. I think you were drooling over the opportunity to make the “It’s all about the oil” comment.
So, is it turning out as well as you’d hoped?
So what is the problem here, Reeder? Should Iraqi oil specifically not be allowed to be sold to Israel? You have this annoying habit of posting the link to a story, and a smarmy quip or two, but no real debate.
What do you see as the problem to be debated here?
It is about the oil.
Water and power hasn’t been restored to all of Bagdad but the oil is flowing. Show me a link where it tells me how much Iraq has made from the oil that’s been pumped since we occupied Iraq.
Show me a link that says that ANY oil has been pumped to this point.
Agree with BnS. Israel is a market for Iraqi oil, which we want to sell to finance reconstruction. Tone deaf PR by Netanyahu, however. (So what’s new?)
Um. So? Oil is money. Regardless of the reason for taking Iraq, and as I’ve said before, I’m neutral on the issue, oil is necessary for Iraq’s revival and health.
Someone explain this for me please
It appears to be an Executive Order repudiating any deals that were in effect that were made by the old government.
Big flurkin’ deal. Are you going to make a point here or are you just going to throw up pointless cites and unsupported claims?
I read it as giving the oil companies, who will actually be doing the pumping, carte blanche with the profits. And no one can sue to direct the profits to a more worthy cause.
So why did you ask for an explanation, since you already knew the answer?
By the way, since you’re the one asserting things, I’m still waiting for that cite I asked for.
Show me in the order where it mentions any standing deals.
No mention of previous deals.
i just offer my opinion. I am not privy to the thoughts of Bush.
As you are I guess.
I’m sorry but how come you are so convinced that the Iraqi popuplation should pay for what the criminal invaders have destroyed.
Why are you talking as if the natural resources of that country BELONG to the USA and that the USA has any RIGT to DECIDE about selling it to WHOM?
This is once again the typical hypocritical disgusting American arrogance. You act as of the whole world belongs to you.
Well get some news people: time to become a bit modest since the world has enough of your attitudes and your bloody criminal government in the first place.
Aldebaran.
I’m not usually the first one to get all jingoistic around here, but what, exactly is your pathetic country going to do about it?
The Iraqi population isn’t paying. The oil money is. I hope it’s all being done in good faith for the benefit of the Iraqi people.
The USA has the right because we took on the obligation to rebuild the country after getting rid of Saddam and changing things so dramatically.
And everyone else acts like we owe them something until we ask something, in which case we’re being arrogant. Or they fly planes into skyscrapers. Either way, somehow it’s our fault.
And Reeder: Thanks for the cite. It would have been a lot easier if you had posted that in the first place.
Did you really think oil wasn’t being pumped?
Now the question is…whither goest the profits?