Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

War on Iraq

Oil for Sale: Iraq Study Group Recommends Privatization

By Antonia Juhasz, AlterNet. Posted December 7, 2006.


The Iraq Study Group may not have a solution for how to end the war, but it does have a way for its corporate friends to make money.
Advertisement

In its heavily anticipated report released on Wednesday, the Iraq Study Group made at least four truly radical proposals.

The report calls for the United States to assist in privatizing Iraq's national oil industry, opening Iraq to private foreign oil and energy companies, providing direct technical assistance for the "drafting" of a new national oil law for Iraq, and assuring that all of Iraq's oil revenues accrue to the central government.

President Bush hired an employee from the U.S. consultancy firm Bearing Point Inc. over a year ago to advise the Iraq Oil Ministry on the drafting and passage of a new national oil law. As previously drafted, the law opens Iraq's nationalized oil sector to private foreign corporate investment, but stops short of full privatization. The ISG report, however, goes further, stating that "the United States should assist Iraqi leaders to reorganize the national oil industry as a commercial enterprise." In addition, the current Constitution of Iraq is ambiguous as to whether control over Iraq's oil should be shared among its regional provinces or held under the central government. The report specifically recommends the latter: "Oil revenues should accrue to the central government and be shared on the basis of population." If these proposals are followed, Iraq's national oil industry will be privatized and opened to foreign firms, and in control of all of Iraq's oil wealth.

The proposals should come as little surprise given that two authors of the report, James A. Baker III and Lawrence Eagleburger, have each spent much of their political and corporate careers in pursuit of greater access to Iraq's oil and wealth.

"Pragmatist" is the word most often used to describe Iraq Study Group co-chair James A. Baker III. It is equally appropriate for Lawrence Eagleburger. The term applies particularly well to each man's efforts to expand U.S. economic engagement with Saddam Hussein throughout the 1980s and early 1990s. Not only did their efforts enrich Hussein and U.S. corporations, particularly oil companies, it also served the interests of their own private firms.

On April 21,1990, a U.S. delegation was sent to Iraq to placate Saddam Hussein as his anti-American rhetoric and threats of a Kuwaiti invasion intensified. James A. Baker III, then President George H.W. Bush's secretary of state, personally sent a cable to the U.S embassy in Baghdad instructing the U.S. ambassador to meet with Hussein and to make clear that, "as concerned as we are about Iraq's chemical, nuclear, and missile programs, we are not in any sense preparing the way for preemptive military unilateral effort to eliminate these programs."*

Instead, Baker's interest was focused on trade, which he described as the "central factor in the U.S-Iraq relationship." From 1982, when Reagan removed Iraq from the list of countries supporting terrorism, until August 1990, when Iraq invaded Kuwait, Baker and Eagleburger worked with others in the Reagan and Bush administrations to aggressively and successfully expand this trade.

The efficacy of such a move may best be described in a memo written in 1988 by the Bush transition team arguing that the United States would have "to decide whether to treat Iraq as a distasteful dictatorship to be shunned where possible, or to recognize Iraq's present and potential power in the region and accord it relatively high priority. We strongly urge the latter view." Two reasons offered were Iraq's "vast oil reserves," which promised "a lucrative market for U.S. goods," and the fact that U.S. oil imports from Iraq were skyrocketing. Bush and Baker took the transition team's advice and ran with it.

In fact, from 1983 to 1989, annual trade between the United States and Iraq grew nearly sevenfold and was expected to double in 1990, before Iraq invaded Kuwait. In 1989, Iraq became the United States' second-largest trading partner in the Middle East: Iraq purchased $5.2 billion in U.S. exports, while the U.S. bought $5.5 billion in Iraqi petroleum. From 1987 to July 1990, U.S. imports of Iraqi oil increased from 80,000 to 1.1 million barrels per day.

Eagleburger and Baker had much to do with that skyrocketing trade. In December 1983, then undersecretary of state Eagleburger wrote the U.S. Export-Import Bank to personally urge it to begin extending loans to Iraq to "signal our belief in the future viability of the Iraqi economy and secure a U.S. foothold in a potentially large export market." He noted that Iraq "has plans well advanced for an additional 50 percent increase in its oil exports by the end of 1984." Ultimately, billions of loans would be made or backed by the U.S. government to the Iraqi dictator, money used by Hussein to purchase U.S. goods.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: iraq, baker, eagleburger

Antonia Juhasz is a visiting scholar at the Institute for Policy Studies, author of "The Bush Agenda: Invading the World, One Economy at a Time," and a contributing author, with John Perkins and others, of "A Game as Old as Empire: The Secret World of Economic Hit Men and the Web of Global Corruption." www.TheBushAgenda.net.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from War on Iraq! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
The Marshall's Back In Town: Listen UP, Y'hear?
Posted by: edith on Dec 7, 2006 12:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Iraq's oil reserves" are what we want. The Moron Media, the pundits who treat politics as a game, and the Dimwit Duke of Crawford all have their reasons for downplaying this key finding of the HW Sr transition team influenced by Eagleberger & Baker back in '88.

That's what it was about then. That's what it was about now. The fun scandal will be when it's revealed that before W invaded Iraq, the Baker guys and Carlyle wanted to pay off Sadaam, end the sanctions, and go into business w/the Maximum Leader. When an oil deal couldn't be struck, Iraq became a member of the Axis of Evil.

Whether the completion of the 9/11 Project always contemplated Iraq invasion or perhaps an oil deal w/Sadaam remains to be seen. But 500,000 plus are dead and maimed because the sweetest oil east of the Pecos wasn't available the way Marshal Baker wanted it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Typical NeoCon response Posted by: goatini
» RE: Typical NeoCon response Posted by: Conservasaurus
» Nice pissing contest Posted by: Michael Robin
criminals
Posted by: rsaxto on Dec 7, 2006 1:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Baker and the rest of the Bushies are simply war criminals who are quite willing to kill and injure over 1 million people in Iraq so they can steal Iraq's oil. Baker also slickly stole the 2000 election for the Bushies so they could put this evil scheme in motion. Impeach the Bushies and bring all US troops home and let the Iraqis run their own country as international law clearly indicates that they should.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Production-sharing oil deal worth billions
Posted by: Moonray on Dec 7, 2006 2:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What the author doesn't get into is that the special "production-sharing agreements" being negotiated with the Iraq government would allow U.S. corporations to pump oil for only a few dollars per gallon. The profits would be huge -- mind-boggling.

But now it seems unlikely that those deals will be finalized, and the oil rigs are more likely to be Chinese and Russian.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Oops! Make that a few dollars per barrel!
Posted by: Moonray on Dec 7, 2006 2:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
:)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

hahahahahahahahaahahahaaaa!!!!!!
Posted by: Prophit on Dec 7, 2006 3:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
OH, MY, I AM STILL LAUGHING. PRIVATIZE???? NOW WHO THOUGHT OF THAT AND WHY DIDN'T I???? LOL oh, they really think we are stupid. It was always the weakness of the Bush family. Their 98 IQ for pappy and 91 IQ for Jr got together and said, "we are smart and the dirty masses are dumb so we can lie to them and they will buy it"..... hahahaha, oh, dear. I held out some hope that maybe somebody rational on that committee might actually come up with something workable. That is the only place where they are right, I WAS DUMB TO THINK THAT. LOL They literally are recommending we actually LEGITIMATELY STEAL IRAQI PEOPLES SOVEREIGN NATIONAL RESOURCES INSTEAD OF ILLEGALLY STEALING IT. WOW, WHAT A GREAT IDEA. lol (sarcasm intended) I AM STILL LAUGHING.

Not hardly, what a joke. Its back to ignoring all of them and pushing this congress to get us out of Iraq and let these people own their own natural resources and run it themselves.

I HATE THAT WE HAVE SO MANY CROOKS IN PUBLIC SERVICE. Its really getting to me now worse than even before. No one has a scintilla of integrity in leadership of this country, NO ONE. Not even the dems (well, maybe a few on both sides of the aisle like Ron Paul and Feingold, if he doesn't sell out.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Too Stupid.
Posted by: shangrilalad on Dec 7, 2006 3:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If Democrats worked half as hard for the common good as Republicans work for corporate corruption, the country wouldn’t be going bankrupt. You’ll never hear a story like this reported by the mass media of course, but if Democrats reported the facts on hundreds of stories like this on cspan, they could begin to educate the American people. The fact that they don’t isn’t simply a matter of sloth, it’s a matter of money. Stealing from the many for the sake of the rich is what our corrupt system of government is all about.

Too bad a majority of Americans are too stupid to figure that out.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

ECLECTICIST SEEKER, S. JIM RODRIGUEZ
Posted by: SJR505 on Dec 7, 2006 5:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
THE MORE THINGS CHANGE, THE MORE THEY REMAIN THE SAME...NOTE THAT THE SAME 'ELITIST" THAT KISSED UP TO SADDAM HUSSEIN AND NOW PART OF THE IRAQ STUDY COMMISSION, AKA: GIVEAWAY BROKERS- JIM BAKER AND EAGLBURRGER , BOTH RECOMMENDED CENTRAILIZING THE IRAQ OIL INDUSTRY WITH TH U.S. BEING IN THE MIDDLE OF FORMULATING THE LAWS, ETC...
JUST THINK WE COULD NOT WIN THE WAR, SO WE ARE DIPLOMATICALLY OFFERING AN OUT WITH OF COURSE OUR OIL COMPANIES HAVING THEIR HENCHMEN -BAKER AND EAGLEBURGER , LEADING THE WAY...

I HAVE SAID IT AGAIN, AGAIN , AND YET AGAIN THAT THE U.S TROOPS WILL NOT LEAVE IRAQ UNTIL THE PSA'S- PRODUCTION SERVICE AGREEMENTS, ARE IN THE HANDS OF THE U.S OIL CARTELS, NOT UNTIL THEN...
ONE THING THAT BUSH "EL SILVERFOOT' 43 FORGOT : THE POWER OF AMERICAN PUBLIC OPINION..." AND, THIS MY AMIGOS WAS HIS ACHILLES HEEL, AS WELL AS HIS GREED, FEAR, AND VANITY...
FURTHER, I HAD ASKED AS TO WHO WOULD BAIL HIM OUT OF THIS "CACA" EVENT...THE ANSWER - " PUBLIC OPINION"
REMEMBER :
1 Corinthinas : 1:27
But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise , and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the things that are mighty.

S+JIM=RODRIGUEZ+++ECLECTICIST SPIRIT SEEKER+++

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Hahahahaa! Posted by: Prophit
IRAQ Study group......
Posted by: walterik on Dec 7, 2006 7:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am delighted with the comments of the writers of the articles above. If anyone would believe that things are changing after the election - don't hold your breath. It will be the same story only the color will change. There are only a very few Democrats who are willing to do the proper things. The rest are what they are best at - Politics. And one should not forget the little side product - money.
One can only say: The citizens of the US are represented by the best politicians money can buy. A change was necessary, but will it be really a change?
Whatever is being said about the Republicans, they stick together. The Democrats give the impression that they are weak, undecided, disunited and afraid to call as spade a spade.Considering this situation, I would not be surprised to see the Republicans again control both houses in 2008.
W.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The Biggest Difference Posted by: Lincoln fan
Aren't you glad you voted Democrat?
Posted by: albrechtkrausse on Dec 7, 2006 8:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Silly people. Both parties are of the same clothe. Now we have all these 'progressives' looking to the likes of JAMES BAKER III for salvation in Iraq?!? Wow. The plan worked! Use the Neo-Cons to fake evidence, start a war, and bungle it. They kick them out and have the old-guard realists step in as saviours and continue the secret (not so secret) policy in the middle east that has been going on since before Carter. I can't believe the beloved Democrats consider the likes of Kissinger, Baker, Bush senior, Gates, et al the saviours but I guess it, hopefully, shows people the truth.

Watch out for more intervention in former Soviet republics. Brzezinski is always waiting in the wings to get involved again!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Baker Commission: Force, subterfuge; what's the diifference?
Posted by: monkeywrench on Dec 7, 2006 8:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One other little detail that is missing from the Baker Commission report is any talk of revoking sweetheart reconstruction contracts with the likes of Fluor, Bechtel, Parsons and Halliburton, and reopening them to bid by Iraqi and other arabic contractors. This would help to put Iraqis back to work, and thus would do more to calm the situation in Iraq than almost any other goodwill gesture – but nowhere has it been even hinted at.

It seems that while the Baker Commission papers over the gaping holes in the walls, the House of Iraq will fall down anyway – no matter, though, as long as we can still pump the black gold out of the basement while foreign contractors, using illegal labor from Pakistan and elsewhere, can still pretend, at ridiculously inflated prices, to repair the rot.

Nothing – nothing – is going to change in Iraq until the Iraqi people once again have a stake in their own country –– but the Baker Commission will help the administration see to it that that day will come only after there is nothing left there worth owning.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Good companian article on oil corp. negotiations, terror & war
Posted by: yurbud on Dec 7, 2006 8:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
See Oil, War and Other Incongruities at Counterpunch.

Best excerpt:

Common to both the Afghan and Iraqi lines of dots are energy resources, both oil and gas. It is true our country depends on oil and gas, but it is not the American people who need to corner Mid East oil and gas by force. Dozens of oil companies around the world"the "foreign suitors," for example"can supply us with Iraqi oil or Caspian Basin gas, and would be pleased to do so. There is no reason not to rely on them: we are buying more and more Toyotas and Volvos, and fewer Chevrolets and Fords, with no apparent damage to our national security. Why not do the same with gasoline, diesel, and LNG, and avoid armed conflict?

Why not? Because the bottom lines of Exxon-Mobil, Unocal and other domestic oil companies, in the eyes of the Bush Administration, are sacrosanct. It is not the American consumers, then, but only the American oil companies who benefit from George Bush's premeditated wars.

Oil, War and Other Incongruities

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Imagine
Posted by: rwa on Dec 7, 2006 8:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"In fact, from 1983 to 1989, annual trade between the United States and Iraq grew nearly sevenfold and was expected to double in 1990, before Iraq invaded Kuwait. In 1989, Iraq became the United States' second-largest trading partner in the Middle East: Iraq purchased $5.2 billion in U.S. exports, while the U.S. bought $5.5 billion in Iraqi petroleum. From 1987 to July 1990, U.S. imports of Iraqi oil increased from 80,000 to 1.1 million barrels per day."

Imagine if the U.S. had simply continued to improve it's trade relations with Iraq. As the Soviet Union collapsed Iraq would have become a major arms client. It's highly educated scientists would have collaborated with U.S. based multi-nationals. Why couldn't this have occured? Because a prosperous, developed, and secular Arab state would have posed a threat to Israeli dominance. The instigation of the Gulf war involved dual citizen and or Israel first zionist extremists such as Libby, Abrahms, Perle, etc... The same un-prosecuted criminals that brought us Iran contra (also to weaken Israel's enemies).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Imagine Posted by: laoma
Privitization?
Posted by: willymack on Dec 7, 2006 9:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Of course, American and British oil companies want Iraq's oil extraction, transport, and profit taking to be dominated by, uh..., the US and UK. Look at who is demolishing and brutalizing Iraq. Surprise, surprise! Iraq is but the beginning of a series of Resourse Wars for control and exploitation of earth's dwindling raw materials, a course which can only lead to the rapid decline and demise of civilization. "Life" as we Americans have come to know it is, and has been, unsustainable because of its wasteful and polluting nature. Unless we, as a people, can find some way to curb the blind greed and criminal indifference to human want and suffering, kept invisible by our propoganda machine, we'll find ourselves in the same boat as those people in the Third World we look down our noses at with such contempt.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Peace for Oil
Posted by: rwa on Dec 7, 2006 9:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"If US imperialism had not occupied Iraq, oil prices would not have increased to [US]$70 per barrel. Thus if the US ends the occupation of Iraq, the oil market can easily receive 4 [million] to 5 million barrels a day of Iraqi oil, hence the price of oil will decline. The simple fact is that the oil market is driven by supply and demand, and if supply is being restricted or intentionally cut by the various institutions of imperialism such as the threat of war with Iran, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, terrorism, and military occupation of defenseless nations, then oil supply is expected to decline and oil prices will rise, [and] so will profitability of oil corporations. This manipulated decline in oil supply will be enforced by the shortage of domestic refineries in the United States of America. Hence a high oil price is determined by the oil market. This clearly suggests that the oil market is driven by imperialist manipulators, particularly oil corporations and the Bush administration. In short, the foregoing analysis helps us to conclude that US imperialism, not the Arabs, the Persians, or the Russians, has created its own energy insecurity by using its global military action of cultural hegemony in order for the American oil corporations and the military complex to make huge profits. "
Adil Mouhammed

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bush Family Oil Wars, Neocons and Theocons
Posted by: bob t on Dec 7, 2006 10:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And so the Bush family oil wars just go on and on and on thakns to the suporters of the repub party which include, the american corporatocracy, the Neocons and the Theocons aka Theocrats. The Theocons being the white southern confederate states Baptists and the Pope both previous and present who support the repubs no matter the death and destruction they wreak upon us ALL. Can 'we the people' stop these criminals and their endless corruption, I don't see how.

Pray for Peace

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Iraq may have the MOST oil reserves of any country
Posted by: metamind on Dec 7, 2006 10:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's uncertain how much oil Iraq has but some estimates go as high as 300 billion barrels. The lowest estimate is about 120 billion. Let's take a middle-range number of 200 billion barrels and a modest price of $50/barrell. That's 10 TRILLION dollars of capital in the ground, much of it "easy oil" because it is easy to extract from the ground. That's roughly the equivalent of the ENTIRE capitalization of the New York Stock Exchange. Imagine that!

Even if this war costs one trillion dollars it's still a good deal if the U.S. can reap 2 or 3 trillion in benefits. That's how some people think about these things. Now, consider the fact that Saudi Arabia is supposed to have the most oil of any nation, around 230 billion barrels, plus the fact that they have been pushing the oil out by pumping water into the ground for years. Many experts think that Saudi Arabia may be OVERESTIMATING its reserves. Imagine what would happen if the Saudi people found out they were running dry! Revolution! Osama bin Laden. Islamic theocracy. You get the drift. So they keep pretending that their reserves are huge to keep the people at bay.

Iraq is UNDERestimating their reserves and Saudi Arabia is OVERestimating theirs. This means that Iraq is NUMBER ONE in oil reserves.

By the way, there is no shortage of oil. It's a matter of how EXPENSIVE it is to retrieve. There is 1.2 TRILLION barrels of oil available on the ocean floor, but it's expensive!

Now consider Canda, Venezuela, Russia and a dozen other countries which COULD produce a lot more oil if they were given the investment capital and time to get the job done.

Then consider that Brazil meets the majority of its fuel needs with ethanol manufactured from sugar cane. How many countries could reproduce Brazil's example given the capital and the time?

The issues are the cost of energy production and the time it takes to produce it. That's why the war in Iraq was imperative at this juncture in history. We are about to find out how the "oil cartel" has been fleecing us for years.

Ignorance makes money. We are becoming enlightened on the subject of energy and as we do so the "oil spell" will dissipate. The oil companies have spent huge amounts of money to convince the people that ethanol is not viable, that electric cars don't work, and a dozen other deceptions.

If the Democrats are smart they will focus on developing energy alternatives. The timing is excellent. The people are ready. We are patiently waiting for the leadership.

Steve Moyer
http://stevemoyer.us

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Not a compelling reply, rwa Posted by: Michael Robin
War for Oil is Just a Fantasy
Posted by: rwa on Dec 7, 2006 11:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Many Americans have the absurd notion that the only limit to U.S. power is the will to use it. This absurd idea provides the Israel Lobby with a vocal American minority that is easy to exploit in behalf of "standing tough" in the Middle East. The main reason that neither Republicans nor Democrats can come to their senses about Iraq and America's disastrous Middle East policy is that the Israel Lobby will not let them.

Right-wing Israeli governments suffer the same delusion as neoconservatives about limitless U.S. power. They believe that the power of their lobby can ensure that American power will be used to destroy all of Israel's enemies.

The U.S. is likely to remain mired in Iraq until Israelis cast out this delusion. No amount of U.S. power can make it possible for Israel to both steal Palestine from Palestinians and have peace. No number of U.S. invasions of Islamic countries can win "the war on terror." As long as right-wing extremism prevails in Israel and as long as the U.S. interferes in the internal affairs of Muslin countries, the formula for calamity remains in place."
Paul Craig Roberts

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» His Master's whip Posted by: edith
» RE: His Master's whip Posted by: riley
How do we know when they've stopped lying?
Posted by: MonkeyBoy on Dec 7, 2006 11:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The theme this week seems to be "OK, we've been lying about Iraq for a long time, but now you can trust us, because we're telling you the truth. Honest..." I'm not sure that these guys will ever tell us the "truth" behind the Iraq War and 9/11. They let it get so bad that it's obvious to everyone on the planet, then they have to admit the lies...or do they?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Similarities and bring 'er home.
Posted by: symcokid on Dec 7, 2006 12:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Eighty per cent of Iraqi's want the USofA out of their country, who's going to listen? Eighty seven per cent of Americans want Bush impeached, he's still in like Errol Flynn. Iraq's oil is ours, what are we waiting for, we've got other little ME countries to conquer yet so we can steal their oil too under some false pretenses. I don't suppose it would be feasible to lay a oil pipeline along side the Trans-Atlantic cable over here to save on handling and shipping costs? Gravity flow part of the way and then pump the rest of the distance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

People Party vs. Money Party, We will need more
Posted by: 1Eco. on Dec 7, 2006 12:39 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
People's Party Members in leadership positions who will be able to address the facts. See People Party vs. Money Party: Sirota

That will take time and effort, yet my guess is no one thought a real change domestic US would happen overnight. The people are behind on this news because they don't see it, read it, or hear it. That does not mean they will not care about the facts and details as they slowly start to learn the truth. It is important to remember the new cost estimates are now, $2 Trillion Dollars.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Blood For Oil
Posted by: NoPCZone on Dec 7, 2006 2:41 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is anybody surprised that they want to privatize the oil? Under the current regime and any likely to follow, the oil 'rights' will be sold of in sweetheart deals and a handful will profit and the Iraqi people will get screwed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Carter's Man Brzezinski
Posted by: albrechtkrausse on Dec 7, 2006 3:10 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
says a lot in his writings. Look for him to also get involved more. Look for more 'involvement' in the former Soviet republics. Here's what Carter's main man has to say:
"The world's energy consumption is bound to vastly increase over the next two or three decades. Estimates by the U.S. Department of Energy anticipate that world demand will rise by more than 50 percent between 1993 and 2015, with the most significant increase in consumption occurring in the Far East. The momentum of Asia's economic development is already generating massive pressures for the exploration and exploitation of new sources of energy and the Central Asian region and the Caspian Sea basin are known to contain reserves of natural gas and oil that dwarf those of Kuwait, the Gulf of Mexico, or the North Sea."

"The most immediate task is to make certain that no state or combination of states gains the capacity to expel the United States from Eurasia or even to diminish significantly its decisive arbitration role."
—from his book "The Grand Chessboard"

Brzezinski is a past member of the Board of Directors of Amnesty International, Council on Foreign Relations, Atlantic Council, and the National Endowment for Democracy. He was formerly a director of the Trilateral Commission now serving only on the executive committee, and formerly a boardmember of Freedom House. He is currently a trustee and counselor for the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a board member for the American Committee for Peace in Chechnya info on the advisory board of America Abroad Media and on the advisory board of Partnership for a Secure America

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

OIL FOR SALE: BETRAYING AMERICAS TROOPS AND FREEDOM
Posted by: sofla100 on Dec 7, 2006 4:01 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
By privatizing oil exploration and rights in Iraq our politician Chickenhawks, virtually none who served in war themselves, have betrayed our troops in Iraq and freedom. To use our troops for this purpose, to secure the oil fields in the service of private interests, is to sacrifice the lives of thousands of Americans for the profit of very few. It is to betray the USA and the American people. Once again, those who support the war and allegedly support the troops by not being critical of America, ARE NOT REALLY SUPPORTING THE TROOPS NOR AMERICA. They are part of the betrayal of the troops and the betrayal of America.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Corporate media - at it again
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Dec 7, 2006 6:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's no surprise that the corporate media, from the NYT to the WP to CNN to NPR to FOX, hasn't mentioned the planned privatization of Iraq's oil. The silence is deafening, but they must be counting on the American people to miss the underlying story.

I'd just like to express my gratitude to Antonia Juhaaz for covering this topic, and also direct readers to today's interview on Democracy Now: http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/12/07/1452236

This topic is at the heart of why US troops are still in Iraq; my suggestion is for people to contact their local corporate media outlets by phone and email and demand why they are refusing to cover this aspect of the Iraq Study Group report. Three cheers to Alternet for publishing this story!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How does privatization actually benefit Iraq?
Posted by: cinattra on Dec 7, 2006 7:52 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How does privatization actually benefit Iraq?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

re blood for oil
Posted by: amazed again on Dec 8, 2006 12:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Of course we all knew what was coming, but hope eternal springs.
The Oil wells of Iraq must be a huge draw card.
I read somewhere that one of the evils in pandoras box was hope. and the only thing left after all evils escaped was hope, but hope is also one of the evils. So after the past week we need to discard hope, drop it into the bottom of the ocean of fears and tears, because as long as we hold onto hope we will never escape from evil doers.
The Dems will not drag the world out of the mire, it doesn't suit them any more than it suits GWB and Co.
America has always looked after self and the more money one has, the more they will be looked after by power brokers, It seems to me that to be bowed and scraped to is the pinacle of wealthy folks dreams. Be it film stars or politicians or just a common or garden millionaire. and the older the money the more they are fawned upon.
I tell my family and friends to follow the money when they are looking for the reasons for the Iraq war or the deaths of so many millions, and GWB and Co are certaintly following the money. Do they not realise that money doesn't make happiness. I think they believe they will come back to spend it when they die. So its more than money its power over other people, I believe they think that Power is somehow going to make them invinsible.

I read of the loss of 1 1/2 million Iraqi's and the millions of widows and families without bread winners. Of course while Bush and Co allow the destruction of the humanity of Iraq there will be less people to share the wealth with, so perhaps this is their purpose in allowing such an evil war to continue, Shades of Hitler and Co. But by allowing others to their dirty work they can't be blamed can they?

I don't think GW is such a bumbling idiot. I think he puts on a good act and allows people to think he's incompetent but I don't see his incompetence, I see someone who is wily as a fox. we all laugh at him but up to date who has done the laughing?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Sawitcoming
Posted by: Sawitcoming on Dec 8, 2006 6:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
NOTHING NEW HERE: James Baker III has always been a crook, in it for the money. As Sec of State for HG Bush he helped establish the US as the biggest drug trafficking country in the world through the CIA. Armed Hussein to the hilt and feathered his own nest with oil money. When the two became partners in the Carlyle Group they became partners with Bin Laden as well as the Saudis. Baker has met with Bin laden since 9/11, reportedly in Sierre Leone. Baker is fronting Oil Co. Kerr-McGee for offshore exploration with the Moroccon Government. He and his law firm are in every oil deal legitimate and non around the globe.

This study group was begun nine months ago as just what it is-nothing. A study by a corrupt oil mogul for a corrupt oil mogul administration, put intopower by the Supreme Court, panicked by Peak Oil. They are SUPPOSED to do anything for oil. The Democratic win a few weeks ago just happened to coincide with their "findings" which were nothing but stay the course with fluff.

Despite all the hoopla, you would be hard put to find a more corrupt person to head this panel than Baker, other than the current administration. All of them crooks, all of them reliant upon Afghanistan drug money to shore up the Wall Street Recovery and all of them willing to do anything to get the last drop of oil on this earth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]