good strategy japan

[drewshin]

great news, it looks like japan's support for the u.s. and sending troops is already paying off big time. i wonder which country's next on this gravy train? these other countries are dumb for not groveling to the u.s., look at all the big-time rewards they'll be missing!

Japan Strikes Commercial Oil Deal with Iraq

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

How dare you imply any member of the coaliton acted for any reason other than liberating the Iraqi people from a brutal dictator and protecting the world from Saddam's WMD.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
How dare you imply any member of the coaliton acted for any reason other than liberating the Iraqi people from a brutal dictator and protecting the world from Saddam's WMD.

Isn't selling oil to other countries going to be Iraq's best way to make money? You != think about it.

 

[drewshin]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
How dare you imply any member of the coaliton acted for any reason other than liberating the Iraqi people from a brutal dictator and protecting the world from Saddam's WMD.

Isn't selling oil to other countries going to be Iraq's best way to make money? You != think about it.

heh heh, i like how you see the situation. im saying that japan chose well, because they will now be the beneficiary of this and many future (heftier, as the article clearly states) contracts. where would they be if they had disagreed with the U.S.? they sure wouldn't have gotten this deal or be in on any future deals.

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: drewshin

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
How dare you imply any member of the coaliton acted for any reason other than liberating the Iraqi people from a brutal dictator and protecting the world from Saddam's WMD.

Isn't selling oil to other countries going to be Iraq's best way to make money? You != think about it.

heh heh, i like how you see the situation. im saying that japan chose well, because they will now be the beneficiary of this and many future (heftier, as the article clearly states) contracts. where would they be if they had disagreed with the U.S.? they sure wouldn't have gotten this deal or be in on any future deals.

I think you may be correct. If Saddam had not been removed from power he would still be giving those oil contracts to Russia and France.

Think about it.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
How dare you imply any member of the coaliton acted for any reason other than liberating the Iraqi people from a brutal dictator and protecting the world from Saddam's WMD.

Isn't selling oil to other countries going to be Iraq's best way to make money? You != think about it.

Like Turkey! Geez, we all know that Turkey eventually acted in favor of their conscience. Their choice had nothing to do with the amount of economic aid we'd give them in return.

 

[drewshin]

Originally posted by: etech

Originally posted by: drewshin

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
How dare you imply any member of the coaliton acted for any reason other than liberating the Iraqi people from a brutal dictator and protecting the world from Saddam's WMD.

Isn't selling oil to other countries going to be Iraq's best way to make money? You != think about it.

heh heh, i like how you see the situation. im saying that japan chose well, because they will now be the beneficiary of this and many future (heftier, as the article clearly states) contracts. where would they be if they had disagreed with the U.S.? they sure wouldn't have gotten this deal or be in on any future deals.

I think you may be correct. If Saddam had not been removed from power he would still be giving those oil contracts to Russia and France.

Think about it.

you're right. it's just the natural inkling of tyrants to play favorites to those who lick their boots and promising loyalty, even if crossing their fingers behind their back.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Syria had 3 pipelines going (although they were paying low ball rates) . . . I wonder when they will start flowing again to provide vital revenue to Iraq? France, Russia, and China have extensive oil and gas interests in Iraq which dwarf these Japanese contracts . . . I doubt the FrancoRussoSino phones are ringing from Iraq.

Your argument is pure poo.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Syria had 3 pipelines going (although they were paying low ball rates) . . . I wonder when they will start flowing again to provide vital revenue to Iraq? France, Russia, and China have extensive oil and gas interests in Iraq which dwarf these Japanese contracts . . . I doubt the FrancoRussoSino phones are ringing from Iraq.

Your argument is pure poo.

I am sure it will start flowing when syria is ready to pay fair market value....

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: drewshin

Originally posted by: etech

Originally posted by: drewshin

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
How dare you imply any member of the coaliton acted for any reason other than liberating the Iraqi people from a brutal dictator and protecting the world from Saddam's WMD.

Isn't selling oil to other countries going to be Iraq's best way to make money? You != think about it.

heh heh, i like how you see the situation. im saying that japan chose well, because they will now be the beneficiary of this and many future (heftier, as the article clearly states) contracts. where would they be if they had disagreed with the U.S.? they sure wouldn't have gotten this deal or be in on any future deals.

I think you may be correct. If Saddam had not been removed from power he would still be giving those oil contracts to Russia and France.

Think about it.

you're right. it's just the natural inkling of tyrants to play favorites to those who lick their boots and promising loyalty, even if crossing their fingers behind their back.

Who let those contracts out? Please be specific and name the names.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

I am sure it will start flowing when syria is ready to pay fair market value....

We are pumping crude through Turkey and Kuwait b/c they are paying market value for Iraqi crude AND they have the best (according to Iraqis) means for moving millions of barrels of Iraqi crude? Sure . . . I believe that . . . I hear despots the world over go to Niger with their yellow cake requisitions.

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc

I am sure it will start flowing when syria is ready to pay fair market value....

We are pumping crude through Turkey and Kuwait b/c they are paying market value for Iraqi crude AND they have the best (according to Iraqis) means for moving millions of barrels of Iraqi crude? Sure . . . I believe that . . . I hear despots the world over go to Niger with their yellow cake requisitions.

So are you saying we should reward a sanction breaker country like Syria and conduct business as usual with the oil pipelines?

 

[BarneyFife]

Originally posted by: AndrewR

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc

I am sure it will start flowing when syria is ready to pay fair market value....

We are pumping crude through Turkey and Kuwait b/c they are paying market value for Iraqi crude AND they have the best (according to Iraqis) means for moving millions of barrels of Iraqi crude? Sure . . . I believe that . . . I hear despots the world over go to Niger with their yellow cake requisitions.

So are you saying we should reward a sanction breaker country like Syria and conduct business as usual with the oil pipelines?

Why not? The government tends to reward Saudi Arabia who finances planes flying into buildings. At least the Syrians don't kill Americans.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Why not? The government tends to reward Saudi Arabia who finances planes flying into buildings. At least the Syrians don't kill Americans.

I would love to see proof that the Saudi gov't financed the 9/11 hijackers.

 

[BarneyFife]

Originally posted by: Orsorum

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Why not? The government tends to reward Saudi Arabia who finances planes flying into buildings. At least the Syrians don't kill Americans.

I would love to see proof that the Saudi gov't financed the 9/11 hijackers.

28 pages seem to be missing.... I wonder why??


link



As an example, the Saudis are said to be upset at New York Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer's comment last week that there was "an attempt here to conceal evidence that implicates the Saudi regime in a terrible tragedy."

Florida Democratic Sen. Bob Graham sent a letter to Bush on Monday, asking him to release censored parts of the congressional report. Declassifying more intelligence information, Graham wrote, could clear up the matter."That will permit the Saudi government to deal with any questions which may be raised in the currently censored pages, and allow the American people to make their own judgment about who are our true friends and allies in the war on terrorism," he wrote.

Current Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kansas, told CBS's Face The Nation he was "unhappy with the amount of material that was redacted." He also said that at least part of the congressional report was redacted to "protect the Saudis," adding that "there was obvious Saudi involvement" in the hijackings.

link

 

[cpumaster]

it's a public secret among media, intelligence community and govt officials in the U.S., nope, in the world, that the Saud family (the ruling Saudi family) financed a lot of charities that bankrolled many of the extrimists Islamic movements, and one of them is the Al-Qaeda at least up until 9/11.
Yet, the Saudi are very rich and very well connected with US oil interest which of course are very influential, even have members among our top decision makers. The fact is even if I could provide you with proves, are we willing to sacrifice our relation with Saudi and stop buying oil from them and pay maybe $1 to $2 more per gallons of gas? and remember the consequences don't just stop at our gas prices, our energy bill, grocery prices will also affected...
Americans are mad at people who is behind 9/11 that killed 3000 of our citizens, yet many of us are also hypocrits enough to look the other way when our pocket are affected....

 

[Alistar7]

Originally posted by: cpumaster
it's a public secret among media, intelligence community and govt officials in the U.S., nope, in the world, that the Saud family (the ruling Saudi family) financed a lot of charities that bankrolled many of the extrimists Islamic movements, and one of them is the Al-Qaeda at least up until 9/11.
Yet, the Saudi are very rich and very well connected with US oil interest which of course are very influential, even have members among our top decision makers. The fact is even if I could provide you with proves, are we willing to sacrifice our relation with Saudi and stop buying oil from them and pay maybe $1 to $2 more per gallons of gas? and remember the consequences don't just stop at our gas prices, our energy bill, grocery prices will also affected...
Americans are mad at people who is behind 9/11 that killed 3000 of our citizens, yet many of us are also hypocrits enough to look the other way when our pocket are affected....

gonna give you a little insight. You know what OPEC is I'm sure, do you realize they have a minimum price amount per barrel that they will not go below? Do you know why? That amount is determined SOLELY by the SA royal family, based on their needs to maintain power.

Is Iraq part of OPEC now? No. We don't use that much SA oil anymore, and it will be replaced by Iraqi oil. What do you think will happen to the royal family when they cant control the price and gurantee their required minimum price per barrel? They will have to sell more at a lower price, driving the price down even more across the board. Making sure Iraq is not part of OPEC not only deals a major blow to many terrorist groups, it also undermines all the oppressive regimes in the area and takes away their control over the price and market.

Drewshin your constant atacks on Bush are beyond old, could you at least stay in reality? You do realize France, Germany, and the Soviets have all already been given contracts? you do realize these contracts are not awarded by admin, it is done by career civil servants with no political ties. You do realize the intial unbid job Haliburton got was as advertised, short term with other companies having the right to bid once it was stable. You do realize they did not keep that contract right? ou do realize the EU has closely monitored every contract given and have found NO VIOLATIONS, nor have they recieved even one complaint from any EU business that feels they did not get a fair chance at a contract. I could do this in just about every thread you post in but what's the point. you Zebo, and the rest will just keeping spewing crap and calling it fact, election is coming up soon, vote your anti-Bush butts off so we can stop hearing the irrational non-factual whining......

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

So are you saying we should reward a sanction breaker country like Syria and conduct business as usual with the oil pipelines?

Do a search for Halliburton subsidiary activity with Iraq during the 1990s. Violations of sanctions only matter if you don't have most favored status with the Bush administration.


By the way . . . how did the Contras get weapons?

 

[drewshin]

Originally posted by: Alistar7

Originally posted by: cpumaster
Drewshin your constant atacks on Bush are beyond old, could you at least stay in reality? You do realize France, Germany, and the Soviets have all already been given contracts? you do realize these contracts are not awarded by admin, it is done by career civil servants with no political ties. You do realize the intial unbid job Haliburton got was as advertised, short term with other companies having the right to bid once it was stable. You do realize they did not keep that contract right? ou do realize the EU has closely monitored every contract given and have found NO VIOLATIONS, nor have they recieved even one complaint from any EU business that feels they did not get a fair chance at a contract. I could do this in just about every thread you post in but what's the point. you Zebo, and the rest will just keeping spewing crap and calling it fact, election is coming up soon, vote your anti-Bush butts off so we can stop hearing the irrational non-factual whining......

your constant lies are very old, alistar (at least you've stopped posting one sentence posts every few minutes).
you obviously missed the point of my post (which you usually do, or just randomly choose another topic to comment on. ADD?) Did i mention anything about the EU? NO. wake up, ali baba star. learn to read.

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: Orsorum

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
How dare you imply any member of the coaliton acted for any reason other than liberating the Iraqi people from a brutal dictator and protecting the world from Saddam's WMD.

Isn't selling oil to other countries going to be Iraq's best way to make money? You != think about it.

Like Turkey! Geez, we all know that Turkey eventually acted in favor of their conscience. Their choice had nothing to do with the amount of economic aid we'd give them in return.

Turkey voted with thier own self interests in mind. It had nothing to do with whether they thought the U.S. actions were justified or not. Turkey was afraid of the kurds getting thier own country.

 

[DKlein]

A term never to use when discussing any political motives or actions:

eventually acted in favor of their conscience

There's always another reason, and I'd say Rudder had it, of course not having to go through the whole ordeal of being a staging ground for a war and not having to deal with the unwelcoming response the war triggered in so many other countries probably also played a role in the decision (they are trying to get into the EU you know, one of the reasons they've stopped slaughtering Kurds and shoving them out of their country lately too - great ally we have there BTW, glad we gave them all those nice gadgets to help them with their "relocation projects").