Iraqi oil money disappearing.

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by diamond geezer, Apr 26, 2004.

  1. diamond geezer macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2004
    #1
    Christian Aid Org

     
  2. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #2
    There must be a lot of heavily-lined pockets around. :eek:
     
  3. toontra macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2003
    Location:
    London UK
    #3
    The Iraq invasion and occupation is going as planned then - I mean as predicted (well, by many).

    Just when you think your depths of cynicism have been reached....

    The main re-assurances about the invasion, in the UK at least, were that:

    1) Oil revenues would be transparently used directly for reconstruction (it is their oil, after all!)

    2) The quid-pro-quo used to persuade waverers was a full and meaningful commitment by the US to a Arab/Israel solution via the 4-party "road map".

    Two down, none to go!
     
  4. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
  5. toontra macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2003
    Location:
    London UK
    #5
    Thinking about it rationally, why should we be in the slightest bit surprised by the oil money is disappearing. After all this is la straight commercial enterprise for all of the contractors - they don't give a damn about Iraqi welfare - why should they - they're there to earn as much money as possible for themselves.

    But there are two factors which set this apart from a "normal" commercial enterprise with its checks and balances, therefore making this all the more unfair for the Iraqis.

    1 The largest contracts didn't go through a normal tendering process. The contracts were awarded by the US & their appointees (ie IGC) to themselves.

    3 The security problems mean that every contractor working in Iraq must pay roughly $1000 per week in insurance. That wouldn't make commercial sense in any normal situation. Who pays for this? The Iraqis, out of their oil revenues.

    In other words, the main beneficiaries are coalition contractors, "security" guards (seen by ordinary Iraqis as mercenaries) and insurance companies, and presumably any Iraqis in positions of influence to receive back-handers. Ordinary Iraqis, who have had no representation in any of this, are at the bottom of the line when it comes to receiving dividends from the oil sales.

    This was all predicted before the war.
     
  6. SlyHunter macrumors newbie

    SlyHunter

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Location:
    Florida
    #6
    Um What kind of link is that
    ie it doesn't work and its the link from the first post. The quote is the entire address of your link.
     
  7. wwworry macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2002
    #7
    Spoils of War

    here's a link for ya

    Spoils of War
    talk about mismanagment! First the looting that came because they had no plan. Now this.
    THe military has done a great job over there but the political head that runs it has continually messed up, making decisions and lies based on OUR elections and public relations in THIS country (the US).
     
  8. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #8
    The military have certainly succeeded in killing a lot of people. Is that doing a great job? By that criterion, they have a long way to go: they did a much better "job" in Vietnam. Three million, was it?
     
  9. SlyHunter macrumors newbie

    SlyHunter

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Location:
    Florida
    #9
    Second off
    yeah right has anyone forgotten that the oil for food fiasco is still being investigated.
    http://www.commentarymagazine.com/SpecialArticle.asp?article=A11705017_1
    The full store is over 20,000 characters long and is very interesting.
    and then the real corruption set in
    And is this the same United Nations that, now, we are planning to entrust with bringing democracy to Iraq?
    Ok I may be seeing something thats not really here but that 4 Billion sounds familiar somehow? Could it be the same 4 billion talked about in the first post or a different 4 billion?
    http://www.commentarymagazine.com/SpecialArticle.asp?article=A11705017_1

    I had to cut larger parts out because this forum limits posts to 10,000 characters I had posted 15,000 and that was less than half of the article. Lots of important pertinent information is contained in those missing parts.
     
  10. Taft macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #10

    So you respond to an accusation of corruption by making an accusation of corruption? I notice you think that the Oil-For-Food program was corrupt, but do you agree that the current relief/rebuilding effort is also corrupt?

    Also, that article you posted is hideously biased toward US interests. It is interesting to note that the column doesn't mention the fact that the US, like France and Russia, participated in the program until 1999 and only left it when they thought they were getting the short end of the stick. So it isn't impossible to believe that the US was also complicit in this corruption, but only when it served US interests.

    The world is a very corrupt place. Sometimes I can't believe the naivete of those who think our government is immune to that corruption. Or maybe its only corrupt when you are describing actions of the opposition party?

    This duplicity annoys me.

    Taft
     
  11. toontra macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2003
    Location:
    London UK
    #11
    Quite so. The problem with the missing money in this case was that the US repeatedly assured it's allies, including the UK, that there would be transparency in accounting for the oil revenues when it was busy justifying the military action.

    In these circumstances, with the whole (largely skeptical) world watching on, for things to have gone so badly wrong so quickly leads one to think that their re-assurances were for political effect and were actually of little or no worth.
     
  12. numediaman macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago (by way of SF)
    #12
    It's a "Mac" link -- it goes direct to a porn site. On a PC it justs goes nowhere. See, as we've told you, you need to switch to Mac!
     
  13. SlyHunter macrumors newbie

    SlyHunter

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Location:
    Florida
    #13
    wow I tried this link http://www.christianaid.org/
    and same web site right? I still see no story about the missing money contained in quote from first post.
    And um really would be wierd if it turned out to be a porn site but it didn't.

    I did however find this at that site
    http://www.christianaid.org/insider/insider-5-08.asp#1
     

Share This Page