 http://uk.news.yahoo.com/030520/80/e0em4.html
Problem with Bush and his admin is that they think the whole World is as thick as they are.
|
 |
 Shock!!!!
No! you're joking!
|
|
No surprise at all.
Bit like a heroin addict saying he is going to invade his dealers house and kill 'the man' himself on the premise that he is nasty to his wife and beats his children. (allthough he has been buying heroin off him for 20 years knowing these facts full well).
Now the addict has complete control of the house, and more importantly the stash of smack. Our U.S addict is going to hand the worlds second largest pile of heroine over to the smack dependant community?........I don't think so.
No he is going to keep his grubby little hands on it and feed the habit/hunger, allthough bear in mind it may not actually be enough!
How do you like the analogy?
Trouble its oil, and our economy is more than addicted, it's compleatly dependant. Stop the fix and the body of advanced western capitalism does cold turkey for a week, and dies. No if's or buts it just dies.
|
|
 SECOND largest? Industry rumour has it that Iraq's "stash" is bigger than Saudi's by a factor of two or even three. Oh, and both the Ruskies and the Frogs had assets in place to help rebuild the oil infrastructure in the country just before the invasion, er, I mean liberation. No wonder they didn't want the Yee-hahs disobeying the UN.
|
|
 funnily enough when i pointed out that "petrol addiction is the worst addiction of all" lots of people on here got cross...!!!
|
|
 The talk of taking years to set up a government, means that the government has to be a US puppet
|
|
A few points here -
Iraq doesnt have double the reserves of Saudi. Currently *known* reserves are about half Saudi - but bear in mind this is more than the whole of Europe & N America combined... that puts it into perspective.
There's not much chance that the real figure could be double or triple that however.
Definitly this whole thing has been about the control of the oil reserves under the guise of weapons of mass disguise, or freeing the people or whatever.
The French & Russians didnt object to it for any noble moral reasons, it was 'cause they had huge multi-million (billion?) dollar contracts in place with Saddam, & knew they would lose them essentially if the Alliance (remember it wasnt just US&UK) went in & did their stuff.
Trouble is now the US have to try to get a government in place that isnt going to be a religious state & will be friendly to US policy - and presumably be willing to host US forces now they have pulled out of Saudi. If they don't get it, they'll probably just continue occupying until they do, citing that anything else "isnt democratic".
|
|
Trust me Mr.B when I say Iraq's oil reserves are much bigger than that.
|
|
Check it out....
http://www.bp.com/centres/energy2002/pagedownloads/T_oil_res.pdf
|
|
where'd the "f" go off the end of that??!
|
|
As a nice follow up -
Rumsfeld Urges Ending Ban on Nuclear Weapons Research
http://story.news.yahoo.com/fc?cid=34&tmpl=fc&in=World&cat=Nuclear_Weapons
Terrorism is alive and well in the Whitehouse
|
|
Indeed it is:
http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=2781755&src=UK_DskTopTkr/GetContent
|
|
 Hang on, answer me this,
if the Ruskies and the Froggies got to the point where they realised Bush was going to take out Saddam, why not throw in their lot with the US and share in the spoils?
Once they realised their interests were not going to be looked after by the UN, they could have joined the coalition, helped to kick Saddams butt, and so had troops on the ground in situ to protect their interests......
|
|
from Reuters;
'..The Senate voted 51-43 to uphold a request from President George W. Bush to repeal the ban on research and development of tactical nuclear weapons with one-third or less the force of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima in World War Two that killed more than 100,000 people. ...'
that's ok then, only 33,333 people will be killed,
unless of course they use 3 of them...
|
|
 They'd probably bomb themselves, anyway.
|
|
 Back to the Neutron Bomb then
|
|
 but to be totally honest though saddam was a bad man that had it coming, the iraqis didn't seem too upset that he's gone i'm sure they'll have a better quality of life now him and his buddies have been run out of town, so whatever bush and blairs reasons for this war as far as the people of iraq are concerned i'm sure they'll be better off.
and from a selfish point of view if the allies get the oil cheap we'll be better off.
so everyones happy?
|
|
 They didn't look too happy this morning on the news, what with the sewage plant for Bagdad not working since the looting 6 weeks ago and now pouring untreated sewage into the drinking water. Still once the country decends into civil war everything will turn out just peachy for them.
|
|
i think with cheap oil you (and your kids) will actually be worse off. Also I doubt the iraqis are that over the moon at the moment - what is the value of their currency? Do they even have a cash economy? When will they be pegged to the dollar? (look how well that worked in argentina). on a similar note did anyone see this
|
|
I think the clue is in their name:
'...The 75th Exploitation Task Force...'
|
|
