Why are people dying in Iraq?
September 15th 2007 03:13
literally felt sick at my stomach when I heard the entirety of this story. Of course I knew this was the motivation for a continued occupation of the country, and why the last thing Mr. Bush actually wanted was a smooth transition to a free and democratic Iraq. Sure, I expected that such grime would come out from under the blood-soaked sands of Iraq at some point, but the absolute level of lowness achieved seems even beyond what we have come to expect from Bush and company.
First, a little back story. We have all heard that there are benchmarks for the Iraqi government to meet. One of the big ones is with regard to the sharing of oil revenue. Oil is a big sticking point in Iraq, because the Shiites and Kurds have it in their areas, and the Sunnis don't for the most part. Without some agreement on how oil will be sold and where the profits would go, a unity government is not possible. So what if someone was to sabotage that possibility by negotiating a separate agreement with one of the factions? Might that person be called a traitor, or perhaps a war criminal?
Now suppose that person is deeply and intrinsically linked to the president. What does that say about what is really happening? To those who have said in the past Iraq isn't about oil we have pointed out the fact that you don't have to get oil directly from Iraq to make money. Oil closed above 80 dollars a barrel for the first time ever this week. As the saying goes, rising water lifts all boats. A Texas oil man can benefit from rising prices just as much as if the oil came over on a supertanker from Basra.
Here is the meat of what we have learned: One company has circumnavigated the reconciliation process by making a separate agreement for oil with the Kurds in the north. It wasn't Exxon, or Shell, or one of the big companies most people have heard of. It was a company called Hunt oil, from - you guessed it - Texas.
Hunt Oil CEO and president is Ray Hunt. Who is Ray Hunt? MSNBC reports he is a long-time friend and supporter of Mr. Bush. How close of a friend?
He is also on Halliburton's board, and a major Bush campaign contributor. Oh yea, he is also a trustee at Southern Methodist University, the place he suggested to Mr. Bush for the Bush Presidential Library. He then "donated" 35 million dollars for the construction of that library. Buy a library, get the oil from the conquered land. Conflict of interest?
And as Countdown went on to report, he is also a Bush appointee to the Presidential Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, which makes him privy to, by the Bush Administration's own description, gives him access to high level information about the security operation in Iraq. In all likelihood, more sensitive information than Mr. Bush provides to members of Congress. So he gets all the inside info, and then makes an oil deal by acting on that information.
I'm sure it was part of the plan from the beginning. It's a no-lose proposition from the Texas oil man's perspective. If the Iraqi government made agreements, they would seek contracts with all groups. If that is not to be the case and Iraq ends up fracturing, then separate deals can be made. And as guest Rachel Maddow pointed out, there is nothing that will benefit American oil companies more than an ineffective Iraqi government. One that will require American troops to be in the country for decades.
How is that different from what Hitler did, sending "businessmen" to invaded lands to control the resources and make slaves out of the local labor force. How does it differ from Oscar Schindler, before he found a conscience?
To those who still have any measure of respect or support for the Bush or anything associated with him, I ask you - What will it take? If this isn't enough for you to say "Enough!" What will be? If you take this obvious and clear slap in the face of everything America should stand for and do nothing, you are pissing on the memory of the founders and every man or woman who has sacrificed for us in the past. It is too late to be nice, it has gone way to far for real Americans not to call for action.
The American people need to demand that Congress - the Democrats, yes, and any Republican with an inkling of what is right, true, and honorable - they all need to stand up and say "I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore!" If the leadership fails to act, we must call upon all of our fellow citizens to do so. I think the most effective course would be economic. First, don't buy anything you don't need. Nothing. If that isn't effective enough, a full general strike. If that doesn't do it, then we will truly be in trouble.
First, a little back story. We have all heard that there are benchmarks for the Iraqi government to meet. One of the big ones is with regard to the sharing of oil revenue. Oil is a big sticking point in Iraq, because the Shiites and Kurds have it in their areas, and the Sunnis don't for the most part. Without some agreement on how oil will be sold and where the profits would go, a unity government is not possible. So what if someone was to sabotage that possibility by negotiating a separate agreement with one of the factions? Might that person be called a traitor, or perhaps a war criminal?
Now suppose that person is deeply and intrinsically linked to the president. What does that say about what is really happening? To those who have said in the past Iraq isn't about oil we have pointed out the fact that you don't have to get oil directly from Iraq to make money. Oil closed above 80 dollars a barrel for the first time ever this week. As the saying goes, rising water lifts all boats. A Texas oil man can benefit from rising prices just as much as if the oil came over on a supertanker from Basra.
Here is the meat of what we have learned: One company has circumnavigated the reconciliation process by making a separate agreement for oil with the Kurds in the north. It wasn't Exxon, or Shell, or one of the big companies most people have heard of. It was a company called Hunt oil, from - you guessed it - Texas.
He is also on Halliburton's board, and a major Bush campaign contributor. Oh yea, he is also a trustee at Southern Methodist University, the place he suggested to Mr. Bush for the Bush Presidential Library. He then "donated" 35 million dollars for the construction of that library. Buy a library, get the oil from the conquered land. Conflict of interest?
And as Countdown went on to report, he is also a Bush appointee to the Presidential Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, which makes him privy to, by the Bush Administration's own description, gives him access to high level information about the security operation in Iraq. In all likelihood, more sensitive information than Mr. Bush provides to members of Congress. So he gets all the inside info, and then makes an oil deal by acting on that information.
I'm sure it was part of the plan from the beginning. It's a no-lose proposition from the Texas oil man's perspective. If the Iraqi government made agreements, they would seek contracts with all groups. If that is not to be the case and Iraq ends up fracturing, then separate deals can be made. And as guest Rachel Maddow pointed out, there is nothing that will benefit American oil companies more than an ineffective Iraqi government. One that will require American troops to be in the country for decades.
How is that different from what Hitler did, sending "businessmen" to invaded lands to control the resources and make slaves out of the local labor force. How does it differ from Oscar Schindler, before he found a conscience?
To those who still have any measure of respect or support for the Bush or anything associated with him, I ask you - What will it take? If this isn't enough for you to say "Enough!" What will be? If you take this obvious and clear slap in the face of everything America should stand for and do nothing, you are pissing on the memory of the founders and every man or woman who has sacrificed for us in the past. It is too late to be nice, it has gone way to far for real Americans not to call for action.
The American people need to demand that Congress - the Democrats, yes, and any Republican with an inkling of what is right, true, and honorable - they all need to stand up and say "I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore!" If the leadership fails to act, we must call upon all of our fellow citizens to do so. I think the most effective course would be economic. First, don't buy anything you don't need. Nothing. If that isn't effective enough, a full general strike. If that doesn't do it, then we will truly be in trouble.
| 71 |
| Vote |
Comment by Ahmed
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks
On the other hand theres always the elections, a change in government could be just what the doctor ordered. If you look at it historically Saddam was no different to GWB in a lot of ways, what ended up with modern day Iraq was the lack of elections. People in the US still have some freedom in that they should be able to choose their government.
The hardest and most painful question isn't actually 'but can they?', even if they can it won't be of any use if ther eis no other government available.
It seems that way, there are two fringe candidates (that I know of) who want to fundamentally cahnge the way the US government works AND withdraw from Iraq, the rest are more level headed but they don't want to find a real solution to the war up there. Despite what the far right would have you believe the democrats don't want to withdraw, though they may be able to come up with a solution to the problem. Of course thats a biiiiig assumption, but you can dream, right?
The saddest part of it all I think is that GWB still has support, he is a pathetic leader, he's done a lot of bad for the world in generel in his serving terms yet people still support him. I mean, Saddam had ZERO support from the people for his entire 25 year tyranny, right from the getgo people knew the guy was crazy.
BUt americans, it seems like there are still a few of them who don't seem to be in tune with reality. Whats the point of freedom if you're going to give it all away and exchange it with civil rights abuse?
Comment by Ahmed
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks
It's strange in that it was so obvious that wasn't the case back then but it's even more obvious now, even he has since retracted his statement but you still have those morons like Bradish who think they know better.
Comment by Jeff Musall
Secular Humanity
Comment by al loomis
doesn't seem to be catching on. the writers of the constitution were not democrats, and had every intention of leaving the country in the hands of the american aristocracy. americans have swallowed that plan ever since.
Comment by Jeff Musall
Secular Humanity