Finally: Getting Iraq's Oil

POSTED BY: SignyM
UPDATED: Sunday, August 16, 2026 22:48
VIEWED: 6718
PAGE 5 of 6

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT PAGE

CITIZEN

Thursday, April 19, 2007 9:10 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Rue called, she needs those rose colored lenses back.

You're wearing them. You stole them and won't give them back remember?

Quote:
As far as I can tell, StoryMark only ever posts to denigrate right leaning posters.

He does it a hell of a lot less than you, and only to Kaneman and Shinyed, who are, as we can see, flagged offensive. People you defend. Why do you defened offensive posters and attack others BDN?

Quote:
When a right leaning poster denigrates someone more left leaning, you are quick to defend. Now do you see the hypocrisy?

It's right here when you're accusing me of something you openly do and reveal in yourself

. I spend most of my posts not getting into fights, you spend most of your posts starting them. I'm sure that says something.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

DAYVE

Thursday, April 19, 2007 9:24 PM

Just saw this – it seems our fine politicians are now making up cute little songs before massacring indiscriminately

“Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran,”

McCain visits Murrells Inlet
By Scott Harper
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=18230309&BRD=2081&PAG=461&de
pt_id=385210&rfi=6

Quote:
….Another man — wondering if an attack on Iran is in the works — wanted to know when America is going to “send an air mail message to Tehran.”
McCain began his answer by changing the words to a popular Beach Boys song.
“Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran,” he sang to the tune of Barbara Ann. “Iran is dedicated to the destruction of Israel. That alone should concern us but now they are trying for nuclear capabilities. I totally support the President when he says we will not allow Iran to destroy Israel.”
He stopped short of answering the actual question and did not say if he supports an invasion of Iran.

RUE

Thursday, April 19, 2007 9:59 PM

Quote:
Gates Says There Are Limits to U.S. Patience in Iraq
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS 4:51 PM ET
Robert Gates carried an unmistakable message intended to stir the Iraqi government to act against sectarian strife.

And if Iraq doesn't 'freely' comply with US wishes what will the US do then?

GEEZER

Thursday, April 19, 2007 10:27 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
The problem with you all is that you're so easily distracted. Ya gotta keep your eye on the money... or in this case, the oil. I'm sure you don't recall, but I've been tracking this since 2004 www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=18&t=66094 www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=18&t=6652 just waiting for the other shoe to drop.

And this has what to do with the current Iraqi Oil Law? The CPA has been gone since June 28, 2004, and the current Iraqi Constitution, replacing the interum one structured by a CPA-named body, was approved in October 2005.

Still can't find anything in the Iraqi Oil Law which gives up any control of Iraq's oil to anybody but Iraq. They still need investment to get the oil out of the ground and to market, and that's what the Oil Law is about.

Maybe you should try reading it instead of repeating bloggers and two-year-old threads. If you can find something to discuss then, please do so.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

GEEZER

Thursday, April 19, 2007 10:32 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Quote:
Gates Says There Are Limits to U.S. Patience in Iraq
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS 4:51 PM ET
Robert Gates carried an unmistakable message intended to stir the Iraqi government to act against sectarian strife.
And if Iraq doesn't 'freely' comply with US wishes what will the US do then?

We leave. Won't that make you happy?

RUE

Thursday, April 19, 2007 11:15 PM

I was just thinking the fact that Gates said, at length, how 'frustrated' the US was with Iraq was rather pointless. The US could leave - but with most Iraqis that would be a promise rather than a threat. Or the US could do - what? Send more troops? Not likely. I just wonder why Gates even bothered.

"You just wait. Some day you'll be sorry. But then it'll be too late. Don't come crying to me then. I'll just say 'I told you so.' ..." blah blah BLAH blah blah blah

STORYMARK

Thursday, April 19, 2007 11:50 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Dayve:
Just saw this – it seems our fine politicians are now making up cute little songs before massacring indiscriminately

“Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran,”

McCain visits Murrells Inlet
By Scott Harper
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=18230309&BRD=2081&PAG=461&de
pt_id=385210&rfi=6

Quote:
….Another man — wondering if an attack on Iran is in the works — wanted to know when America is going to “send an air mail message to Tehran.”
McCain began his answer by changing the words to a popular Beach Boys song.
“Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran,” he sang to the tune of Barbara Ann. “Iran is dedicated to the destruction of Israel. That alone should concern us but now they are trying for nuclear capabilities. I totally support the President when he says we will not allow Iran to destroy Israel.”
He stopped short of answering the actual question and did not say if he supports an invasion of Iran.

I can believe I used to like that guy. Back in 2000, I probably would have voted for him, if he'd won the GOP nomination.

But now? No way. No way in hell.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

SIGNYM

Thursday, April 19, 2007 11:53 PM

Whodied- I'm sure there's a LOT going on behind the scenes and it has nothing to do with what we're being told.

Cheney prolly wants to deal with a centralized government, because it's far easier to negotiate with a puppet than with two independent provinces who have China, Europe, and even Russia as potential customers. Once a deal is inked it has to be honored - even if the government is a dicatatorship, and even if it's overthrown immediately after signing. (That's one of the many ways that governments are disadvantaged with respect to multinationals and banks.)

I just can't imagine how the oil is going to be extracted and shipped even if a contract is signed. The probable signatory (the central government) can't guarantee security of the oil fields or pipelines, both of which are very vulnerable to sabotage. Perhaps Cheney envisions using oil revenues to bring in a massive contingent of private security forces (Blackwater, etc.) Anoterh option is to make sure that the right (militia) people get a piece of the pie.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

PIRATENEWS

Friday, April 20, 2007 12:02 AM

The non-stop 16-year-so-far Iraq Wars, which genocided 2.5-million Iraqis and killed over 100,000 US troops, so far. The war is scheduled to last 100 years, according to a draft-dodging drunk dick named Dick. Murtha and others in Congress, from both parties, say the only way to give the Bush Gang their "surge" is to draft everybody. Active duty, reserves, "national" state guard, and 75-year-old retired soldiers with terminal cancer are already drafted into the Iraq Wars, through "stop loss" slave contracts. So you sodomite Bush lovers will get to do the dufflebag drag. Hoo ra!

Kuwait is a kingdom, not a democratic republic. Kuwait also has legalized slavery, including African slaves. So black-skinned US soldiers were killing and dying so that Arab kings could own black slaves.

The purpose of this illegal war is to keep oil profits high, which means keeping gas prices high, by cutting off the oil supply. Economics 101: supply and demand. All Iraq wanted to do was sell USA cheap oil. But the Bush Gang spent trillions of taxdollars (ie private Federal Reserve Debt loans from Communist China) to raise the price of oil. Communist china even gets to drill for oil of the coast of USA, but US oil companies are banned.

If US soldiers wanted to defend USA, they would leave Iraq and Afghanistan and Iran, and sit on the US border, shooting every wetback in the head, and raiding every house in USA with illegal aliens, and enforcing martial law to arrest every mayor and city councillor in Sancutary Cities, and arrest every governor and state legislator and state cop who sells driver licenses to illegal aliens. One major purose of the British Empire's Gulf Wars is to get US combat soldiers out of USA, in order to overthrow USA.

So USA needs to nuke London NOW, nuke Canada NOW, nuke Mexico City NOW, kick Communist China (British Hong Kong) out of USA NOW. And cut the head off the German queen of England (Bush Jr's 19th cousin, 3rd removed).

Gotta go. Red Dawn is on TeeVee right now.

"You can't stop the signal!"
-Mr Universe, Pirate TV

FIREFLY SERENITY PILOT MUSIC VIDEO V2
Tangerine Dream - Thief Soundtrack: Confrontation
https://video.indymedia.org/en/2007/02/716.shtml
http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=8cd2bd0379340120e7a6ed00f2a53ee5
.1044556
www.myspace.com/piratenewsctv

DRIVE: FREE TV EPISODES ONLINE
www.myspace.com/driveonfox

Does that seem right to you?
www.scifi.com/onair/

RUE

Friday, April 20, 2007 1:13 AM

Hey, SignyM

Afghanistan's pipeline, stalled out b/c of Taliban in S Afghanistan.

From WIKI, which is confirmed by everything else I've read:
"The new deal on the pipeline was signed on 27 December 2002 by the leaders of Turkmenistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan and in 2005 Asian Development Bank submitted the final version of feasibility study designed by British company Penspen. Signing the agreement was made possible by the invasion of Afghanistan by United States military forces a year prior, which overthrew the Taliban government controlling most of Afghanistan. Building the pipeline was cited by some critics of the Bush administration as a motivation for the invasion. Some people have even said that if you take a map of U.S. military bases in Afghanistan and a map of the proposed pipeline they are very close together, suggesting that bases are positioned to protect natural gas interests. However, since then the project has essentially stalled; construction of the Turkmen part was supposed to start in 2006, but the overall feasibility is questionable since the southern part of the Afghan section runs through territory which continues to be under de facto Taliban control."

Maybe US permanent bases in Iraq ??

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT PAGE