dianavan - 06 Dec 05 - 03:24 AM


Are you telling us Dianavan that Chalabi and the US Government are pushing to have US and UK troops remain in Iraq under contract? Because when I made the statement that, "no evidence has been offered with regard to US intentions of remaining in Iraq" I was refuting Boberts comments about US military presence in Iraq, if you are going to quote me Dianavan quote in context:

"Saddam has been removed. Time to leave, right???" As soon as the elected Iraqi Government tells us to leave.

So US presence is for no other reasons.." 'cept oil and stategic military reasons..." Of course Bobert, that is why no major US or British Oil Company has been awarded any of the Field Development Contracts, and no evidence has been offered with regard to US intentions of remaining in Iraq for any longer than the Iraqi Government wants the MNF there, the presence of that force also being subject to a UN Mandate - it runs out end of 2006 and is to be reviewed in June 2006."

Has that cleared it up for you??? Or does it have to be further explained??

As to the articles you regard as evidence of intent. How many contracts have been awarded Dianavan? How many major US and UK oil Companies are now controlling Iraq's economy because of deals that Chalabi and the US government have pushed through?

NONE Correct Dianavan?

And old Chalabi had better get a move on, after the 15th of this month he is no longer in office - Is he Dianavan? He could of course be re-elected, probably will but will he be deputy or oil minister that as yet remains to be seen.

You Dianavan are an hysterical alarmist, whose powers of analyses and prediction are thankfully miles off target.