Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Israel to U.S. : Now Deal with Syria and Iran -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sea_urchin who wrote (16123)	8/19/2007 2:40:45 PM
From: sea_urchin	Respond to of 22250

> I have never claimed that the acquisition/control of oil was the ONLY reason the US invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, but it was a damn important one thinkprogress.org >>Sesktak Warns Iraqi Oil Law Contains ‘Undue Ability Of U.S. Oil Companies To Control Iraqi Profits’ Alternet’s Joshua Holland reported recently, “If passed, the Bush administration’s long-sought ‘hydrocarbons framework’ law would give Big Oil access to Iraq’s vast energy reserves on the most advantageous terms and with virtually no regulation.” The framework law proposes to hand over effective control of as much as 80 percent of the country’s oil wealth. A recent poll showed that all Iraqi ethnic and sectarian groups across the political spectrum oppose the principles enshrined in the oil law, and 419 Iraqi oil experts, economists and intellectuals recently signed their names to a statement expressing grave concern over the bill. The head of the Iraqi Federation of Union Councils said recently, “If the Iraqi Parliament approves this law, we will resort to mutiny.”<<

To: sea_urchin who wrote (16123)	8/20/2007 5:02:00 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 22250

Re: Wishful thinking or not, and for what it's worth, it's the worst rift I'm aware of and the one that's discussed the most. Ok, let's do a bit of geopolitical fiction... Suppose for a moment that the US war machine had invaded South Africa instead of Iraq: 150,000 US troops criss-crossing, rampaging, messing around in your country --for your sake, for white South Africans' sake. Now, after three years of occupation, US invaders are not satisfied with their South African "experiment"... things just don't turn out the way they expected --not enough hatred, not enough distrust, has been sown among South Africa's vying constituencies (whites, blacks, Indians, Zulus, Bantus, you name it) as a result of the US occupation. So, our CIA and Pentagon schemers have deemed it necessary to help the process a little bit.... A sudden, growing wave of terrorism starts ripping South Africa: car-bombs blow up in white neighborhoods --only to be blamed on black terrorists. Car-bombs blow up in Zulu areas --only to be pinned on Bantu terrorists. Likewise, car-bombs blow up in Bantu areas, only to be blamed on Zulu terrorists. Occasionally, a few US troops are killed by a roadside bomb --to be blamed on "Al Qaeda infiltrators" (coming from Zimbabwe, to be sure). Etc, etc. At that point, Searle, "the worst rift I'm aware of and the one that's discussed the most" would be South Africa's (US-manufactured) racial war --not Iraq's. Gus

To: sea_urchin who wrote (16123)	8/20/2007 5:59:44 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 22250

Re: I have never claimed that the acquisition/control of oil was the ONLY reason the US invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, but it was a damn important one and for you to continue to deny it demonstrates your obsession with Judeofascism (as you call it) as the only motive the US could possibly have had. As I put it, "oil" is merely a rationalization to justify US crusades into the Middle East... If oil were paramount, the US's #1 ally in the Mideast should be Iran, not oil-less Israel... Reminder: Message 20425946 Message 22275547