Steve, when it's come to oil, gas, silver, copper, gold, tin, diamonds or timber and rubber there were and are very few dictators or monarchies America's primary capitalists didn't or don't like. Heck, Haliburton thought it okay to do business with Iran in the face of sanctions. Care to ask Mr. Cheney why?
Today, many of those capitalists have their names embedded on hospital walls, library benches or street signs filtered everywhere, mainstream USA. And the peasants who died or lost their homes from all of this, go unknown, unremembered. Discarded people, really. And it's also true that a large body of the Muslim world has been and continues impacted by all of this. And note that I think the Soviets weren't pretty on dictator issues either!
The above 'tis all a true fact!
So what can be done about it?
Bottom line is that wrongdoing everywhere--here, there or even in the places we don't even know about--should be stopped.
It'll likely become most interesting, as the UN investigation continues to take hold, to see how the UN vs. the US, among others, match up regarding oil scandals past and present.
Russia, I might note, seems to have a lot of its own oil resources and likely is in better shape than America when it comes to access. Also, as I understand it, the French use nuclear energy for 80 percent of their energy. Are they really thus likely to be deeply embroiled in a deep Iraqi oil scandal? Have you considered any of this against the background of the investigation? Were these two nations really in the deep pockets of Iraq? Does it make sense from a practical point of view?
I'm not at all certain. Thus, I'll reserve my judgment until the UN investigation into the Iraqi Oil for Food Program concludes. I'm not simply going to take some quick, off-the-cuff GOPwinger, pre-election win points all delivered at the infant stages of the investigatory proceeding as something to trust in the matter.
Heck, I'm still wondering why Bush and Cheney, since they were so sincerely hell-bent on establishing democracy into Iraq (in the absence of WMD and Al Qaeda connections, etc., democracy a fallback position--do you think?)--why they didn't immediately have American invasion forces occupy and protect Iraqi public citizen recordkeeping buildings, records so important, so vital to a democratic election. I mean it's easier to have a vote if you know who the citizens are, don't you think?
Instead, those buildings got ranscaked, looted and practically destroyed, along with most Iraqi government buildings. Bush and Cheney did, however, manage to have American forces protect the Iraqi Oil Ministry Building. Given the topic we're on, was this, in itself, a scandal of sorts?
Anyway, speaking of trust, I didn't trust at all what Bush and Cheney, et. al., said at the beginning of the Iraq War either. Here, read some of my writing on the subject:
Subject 53564
Subject 53789
Doesn't it bother you at least a little bit that mere PartyTime could be right on such an important issue as to whether to go to war or not, and Bush and Cheney could not be? Heck, the only intelligence sources I had came from the Internet. Do you think the Internet is a better source of intelligence than what Bush and Cheney had available to them? |
