Ralph Peters NY Post Surge Article (1 Viewer)

Thanks for the CS Monitor link. Interesting story. Doesn't say much to support your argument above, but it's a very interesting story.

To me, the oil agreement is in the process of being in negotiations. That is a far cry from Americans confiscating the oil fields of Iraq.

Are American companies angling for a taste, you betcha. Does it make sense for the Iraqis to give American companies a taste, yep. This is a very similar situation to a venture capital deal, you bring in the VC guys, give the VC guys a taste, and they provide the management expertise, exposure to capital, exposure to new markets. The pie is much bigger in the end. It doesn't always work out, but many times it does. The target company and the VC guys are both trying to do what's in their self-interest.

Also, if you don't believe that AQ has "lost big" in Iraq, then you simply haven't been following what's been going on in Iraq for the past 18 months. They have, without question, lost big in Iraq. If I recall, even Zawahiri came out with a message some months ago, essentially conceeding the point. It appears that Zawahiri has a pretty clear understanding of the scope of the defeat of AQ in Iraq.
 
Last edited:
To me, the oil agreement is in the process of being in negotiations. That is a far cry from Americans confiscating the oil fields of Iraq.

Negotiations? Yeah, here we still have 130,000 troops in country. Let's make a deal! Yeah, right. We're basically already forcing them to divvy up their oil revenues while we militarily occupy their country. Negotiations. hahahahah. But even if the United States makes a decent deal with the Iraqis, the muslim world will probably think otherwise, I mean, really we don't have a good track record in this regard. Just ask Iran. :shrug:

Oho, and what has the United States done thusfar in handling Iraq's oil revenues?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6621523/

lmao. A boondogle, per usual with the whole post-invasion policy. Really, if you were an Iraqi citizen, or living in the middle east, what would you think of the United States' intentions?

Are American companies angling for a taste, you betcha. Does it make sense for the Iraqis to give American companies a taste, yep. This is a very similar situation to a venture capital deal, you bring in the VC guys, give the VC guys a taste, and they provide the management expertise, exposure to capital, exposure to new markets. The pie is much bigger in the end. It doesn't always work out, but many times it does. The target company and the VC guys are both trying to do what's in their self-interest.

Glad you admit it. Now let's look rationally at the policy. Opening up Iraq will mean A. more of a foreign reliance on oil B. Further enriching and empowering large oil conglomerates--Average U.S. Joe won't see any benefits from this policy.

So, if Iraq was not about ousting Hussein, terrorism, establishing democracy, it was about using the U.S. military to occupy Iraq to get American oil companies a cut of the financial pie.

Now, how in the world will this policy benefit you and I, ordinary, middle class Americans? How will it move the United States away from the reliance on foreign sources for oil and fossil fuels in general The policy doesn't make any sense from a military and economic perspective. Again, we're spending 1.3 trillion dollars to continue to be dependent on foreign oil, continue to be dependent on fossil fuels, and fill the coffers of oil companies.

Who stands to benefit Dapperdan? Really? I can think of many other more rational projects to spend 1.3 trillion dollars--namely levees to protect New Orleans. Again, priorities, man.

Of course the policy will benefit the fat-cat CEOs from Halliburton/ExxonMobil and the politicians who orchestrated this policy.

And there's one big difference between a VC deal and this operation--The United States taxpayer and United States military is footing the bill--to the tune of over a trillion dollars and counting and over 3,000 American lives. Let the oil companies do their own dirty work. But their influence and fingerprints are all over this administration. No surprise, there.

Again, for what? More dependency on foreign oil? Madness.

Also, if you don't believe that AQ has "lost big" in Iraq, then you simply haven't been following what's been going on in Iraq for the past 18 months. They have, without question, lost big in Iraq. If I recall, even Zawahiri came out with a message some months ago, essentially conceeding the point. It appears that Zawahiri has a pretty clear understanding of the scope of the defeat of AQ in Iraq.

I've followed events, just like you.

No man, because any way you want to spin it, and you've spun it so many times here.
One. More. Time.
Al-Queda was not in Iraq before the invasion. The United States created this problem by invading. We created a new base of operations in Iraq. Iraq has not been a "victory" for the United States vs. Al-Queda. The only reason AQ became a problem in Iraq was that the U.S. occupation pushed Iraqi insurgents into AQ ranks. We continue to occupy the country longer, and it'll just take time before the guerrilla war and insurgency gets going again.

So yes, your technically correct. AQ has only "lost big" because they were allowed to set up shop and recruit in Iraq. So at best, it's a push but I wouldn't argue that it's even a push. We've already allowed AQ to establish networks in Iraq and who knows how many more AQ recruits have joined other terror networks because of AQ propaganda about occupying Iraq. Again, you may think we have idealistic and good intentions in Iraq. I think the rest of the middle east thinks otherwise, and for this reason I think it's a fool's errand to occupy Iraq because it's a perfect recruiting tool for jihadists.

We have a chance to turn over control to the Iraqis, but we're not leaving anytime soon because of the oil. Again, democracy, terrorism....all not important.
 
Last edited:

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom