BS: Bush's Latest Postwar Plan

Subject: RE: BS: Bush's Latest Postwar Plan
From: DougR
Date: 19 Nov 03 - 01:08 PM

Bobert;PDC: Wait and see whether or not the administration turns over leadership of Iraq to Iraqis. It is not yet June '04 (at least where I live). Why not do it now? Not a very bright question. It can't be done until Iraq is secure.

Will the U. S. maintain a base of military operation in Iraq? Probably, and it should. Will the Iraqis welcome it? I think so.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Bush's Latest Postwar Plan
From: Amos
Date: 19 Nov 03 - 01:22 PM

Thomas:

Sorry -- I meant return addresses of the envelopes...


A

Subject: RE: BS: Bush's Latest Postwar Plan
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Nov 03 - 01:40 PM

But Iraqis picked by the US and Co, rather than picked by the Iraqis.

And it can be assumed that any Iraqi government will be required to go along with any contracts and deals made by the occupying administration.

.....

"if our intelligence knew, why didn't US intelligence? "

It seems pretty clear that the people in the field and the experts, did, and that they reported in these terms - but the people making the decisions didn't want to listen to anything that might get in the way of a pre-planned invasion. That applies both to US intelligence and the UK equivalent. "There's none so blind as those who will not see."

Subject: RE: BS: Bush's Latest Postwar Plan
From: Bobert
Date: 19 Nov 03 - 02:00 PM

ttr:

About the masses being asleep at the wheel:

"The great masses of people... will ,ore easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one." (Adolf Hitler)

Doug:

There really isn't any "turning over" that is going to occur unless, of course, that Iraq developes pretty much what Bush and Wolfowitz want in the way of a government. You can forget free elections. We ain't got 'em here so its a real stretch to think that Iraq could pull them off. Democracy? Same answer... Yeah, think dictatorship under the guise of "republic" (ha...) with a better behaved Saddam.

BTW, how many folks remember that in Bush/Iraq War I, that Gorbachav negotiated with Saddam a retreat of all Iraqis from Kuwait, and Bush I said, "Firgit it!"????...

Yeah, we had Saddam in our pocket and could have very likely negoitiated to have US bases on Iraqi soil if we had really wnated to... But, no, instead Bush I & II have chosen to both use war as a means of solidifying political power and paying back their military/industrial complex financial backers which is a sneaky way of shifting even more wealth from Amrerica's working class to the moneyed and privedged class...

Oh, those wacky Bush's...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Bush's Latest Postwar Plan
From: DougR
Date: 20 Nov 03 - 12:48 AM

Bobert: if I din't know better, I might think you are a cynic.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Bush's Latest Postwar Plan
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 20 Nov 03 - 07:33 AM

RE: Elections in Iraq, any elections that are held will be a damn sight freer than during the Ba'athist days of SH.

Lots of people have negotiated things with Saddam - and just look at how many times Saddam actually held his end of the bargain.

Now why exactly would the US would require military bases on Iraqi soil???

"But, no, instead Bush I & II have chosen to both use war as a means of solidifying political power and paying back their military/industrial complex financial backers which is a sneaky way of shifting even more wealth from Amrerica's working class to the moneyed and privedged class..."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Subject: RE: BS: Bush's Latest Postwar Plan
From: Bobert
Date: 20 Nov 03 - 08:42 AM

("Hmmmmm", the Bobert thinks out loud, "Guess T. has alot of Lockheed/Martin and/or Hallinburton stock in the port folio?....")

Yo, Doug. The fact that yer guy is a crook is no reason to go insinuatin' that I'm cynical... So say yer sorry and I'll say I'm sorry fir yer guy being a crook...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Bush's Latest Postwar Plan
From: GUEST,Teribus
Date: 20 Nov 03 - 11:02 AM

Bobert,

Regarding your thoughts on me holding Lockheed/Martin and Halliburton stock - I can state with absolute certainty that I do not ...... but I guess that quite a fair number of Pension Funds do.

As to your remark to Doug, "The fact that yer guy is a crook....." That "Fact" Bobert only exists as a fact inside your head - In actual fact not a fact at all.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush's Latest Postwar Plan
From: Bobert
Date: 20 Nov 03 - 05:48 PM

So, T-Bird, yer back to yer old tricks with tricky sentences but I'll hand it to ya that ya' didn't use no double negatives... Okay, lets, for the purpose of discussion, assume that Bush is not a crook but its difficult because he does so many things that reward his financial backers, including unnecessary wars and rebuilding and caps on settlements for the phamacudicals companies, tax breaks that favor the rich, A Medicare package that was written in secret that will put billions of dollars back to insurance companies and away from health care, an unprecidented military budget, an Energy policy that was writtren in secret by his oil buddy, Dick Cheney and 42 other oil men and not even shown to the Dems until 3 dyas before they are going to vote on it.... etc., etc., etc., etc.......

The list just goes on and on and on... If Bill Clinton had done any of the above, then Ken Starr would have been all over him and Repubs' would have been calling for impeachment (not that I liked Clinton much, either.)

But Bush and his boys have figured out that they have the numbers in the legislature and the courts and figure, "Hey, who gonna stop us?"
They've gotten the3 elections so rigged and jerrymandered that they are right. No one can stop them except themselves...

Yeah, Bush talks the talk but walks like a man with no legs... He says all the right stuff but his actions are 180 degrees away from his boasts and promises... Sounds a whole lot like a crook to me...

And, BTW, how can the average American know whats really coming down? It's draned near impossible. The media manipuates information in printing the "Big Lie" on Page One and the retractions buried on page 23. And the average doesn't have time to get to page 23 because he;s too busy trying to hold on to his job at Boss Hog's Widget Co.

And the beat goes on....

This ain't at all what Tom Jefferson invisioned...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Bush's Latest Postwar Plan
From: GUEST,Frank Hamilton
Date: 20 Nov 03 - 06:17 PM

HI Teribus,

>Frank above mentions two oil corporations, one American
based >multinational Exxon/Mobil and Shell (Royal Dutch
Shell) which is >very much European. Now why the latter
would the latter would >want "American domination of
the market" I cannot begin to imagine.

All you have to do is follow the flow of oil...where it's
going.Note that these oil leases are not backed by Eurodollars.

>Another he did not mention was BP/Amoco (British, BP having
taken >over the US Oil Company Amoco, BP already owned Standard
Oil another >American oil company).

Well the Brits are being thrown a crumb. They are the "lieutenants"
to Bush interests.

>The French Oil Company Total-Petrofina-Elf are certainly involved
in >Iraq and have been for years, none of their licences have been >revoked since Saddam departed.

How valid are they? Who's going to let 'em pump?

>Oil, like any other commodity, gets sold to the highest bidder.

Except that it took a war to put a corner on the market.

>What Kevin says about money is perfectly correct. The "Oil >Corporations" do make money, they employ both directly and >indirectly a vast number of people the world over, their
owners are >a vast number of shareholders, including Insurance
and Financial >institutions who manage pension funds for
millions of people.

Many who reside in the US. They make money so that the flow of
oil goes to the West. The insurance and financial institutions
are predicated on keep the flow of oil to the US. All you have
to do is follow the money and oil trail. ANd I'm sure that many
an oil CEO has written himself a large pension fund at the expense
of his employees.

>The Oil & Gas industry is, and always has been, very much >an "American game" in terms of technology - but they do not control >it, and never have.

They will if Bush and Cheney have their way. The "American game" controls a good bit of it now. It's pretty clear that oil is what the Bushes are about.

Have you noticed that there is no encouragement today for alternative energy sources (and no propaganda please about how expensive this is)
because the oil interests in the US are interested in having their markets prevail. The cost is considerable to people in the US. 87 billion is only the start. If you naively think this money is intended for Iraqi reconstruction all you have to do is look at
Afghanistan.

There are international interests in the oil business but they controlled by a cartel who keep the prices up so that consumers will pay more at the pump. The US interests in this are considerable.
Do you honestly think that France and Germany are represented in parity with US and Britain regarding oil leases in Iraq?

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: BS: Bush's Latest Postwar Plan
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Nov 03 - 07:16 PM

I think the right word isn't "cynic" but "sceptic". A cynic takes delight in sneering at everyone and everything, and would be disappointed if it turned out that someone they'd been criticising was actually better than they had believed.

Just because someone has a low opinion of politicians and a particular political culture, or of wealthy and powerful people and the methods they use to get richer and more powerful - that in no way implies they are cynical. It is far more likely to imply that they are idealistic, which is the reverse of cynical.

What really is cynical is to assume that there is no point in making those kind of criticisms, because, when all is said and done, there's no way it could really be better.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush's Latest Postwar Plan
From: DougR
Date: 20 Nov 03 - 11:02 PM

Geeze, Kevin, what a skeptical, (cynical) point of view! :>)

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Bush's Latest Postwar Plan
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Nov 03 - 03:11 AM

Hi there Frank,

In response to your post of - 20 Nov 03 - 06:17 PM

You advise me to follow the flow of oil - Oil flows to where it is most used, to developed industrialised countries in the East and West. Any great scheme or master plan involved in that? - No, it flows that way because that is where those selling the oil get the best price for it.

BP, counted as being one of the "Seven Sisters" for at least 100 years. A major oil company, whose expertise and wealth was based on their ability to find oil (Shell's on the other hand was based on transportation of oil). The BP take over of Amoco a few years ago had nothing whatsoever to do with the US administration throwing anyone any crumbs - the take-over, like their take-over of Standard Oil, was based on purely business principles and strategy.

As far as I know no exploration licences have been revoked in Iraq which makes them as valid today as they were when they were granted.

In what way did the war you refer to "put a corner on the (oil) market"?

So the "Oil Corporations", their employees (including the boss); their shareholders (all of them), profit. Anything wrong with that? As stated above oil flows to where it is most used - again no dark secret plan, no major change in how the industry operates in response to demand. Oh, by the way, remunerations for CEO's of the type you refer to are decided and voted on by the shareholders of the company - they don't write them themselves, and they are definitely not awarded at the expense of their employees (i.e. they are no worse of after such an award than they were before it).

Please explain how if "Bush and Cheney" get their way they are going to gain control the world's Oil & Gas Industry??

Don't know about Oil Company involvement in alternative energy in your neck of the woods, but over here in Europe, the EU, individual governments and the oil companies are very involved in alternative energy - mark you a great deal of the impetus behind that is the requirements to meet emmission control targets. The unfortunate thing about most alternative energy sources is that they cannot produce 440v- 3 phase power required for industry.

What is the parallel in Afghanistan - money voted and allocated for reconstruction in Afghanistan is doing precisely that. Why should the case be any different in Iraq? The belief, or expectation, of instantaneous and complete improvement to circumstances in both those countries is what is naive. It is going to take time, money, combined with the will and resolve to see it through (reconstruction of Germany 5 years - as I've said before it's early days yet).

You say that although : "There are international interests in the oil business but they (are) controlled by a cartel who keep the prices up so that consumers will pay more at the pump."

What cartel are you referring to - OPEC? If so OPEC's main take on things is to ensure that the resources of the member states are managed and exploited to the maximum advantage of those member states.

As to prices at the pump - considering what people in the US regard as reasonable use of the resource we are talking about - you should be paying five times the amount for your fuel.

Regarding representative parity between France and Germany, and the US and Britain regarding oil leases in Iraq. I think you will find that if anything the French come of best - Saddam was one of their best customers for nuclear technology, missile systems and combat aircraft for years. Ba'athist Iraq paid for those goodies with oil, oil exploration and production licences, etc, which still hold good today.

Subject: RE: BS: Bush's Latest Postwar Plan
From: Bobert
Date: 21 Nov 03 - 08:53 AM

Well, yeah, all you gotta do is *follow* the flow of oil... And where is going? Into Boss Hog's SUV's for which he recieves a healthy tax credit to own? Hmmmm? This is energy policy? Really? Rewarding consumption is not an energy policy. It's narcisim, selfish and down right friggin' stupid...

There is no logic in any energy policy that is built around *consumption*. But that's what yer gonn get every time you let 42 oilmen write the policy behind closed doors... Talk about the fox guarding the henhouse. Whew.........

Beam me up...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Bush's Latest Postwar Plan
From: DougR
Date: 21 Nov 03 - 01:41 PM

Will somebody PLEASE beam Bobert up?
:>)
DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Bush's Latest Postwar Plan
From: Peace
Date: 21 Nov 03 - 02:10 PM

Gee, DougR, then the sky would be falling the other way. At least it's a change.