no worries, apparantly its not about oil, boi, do i have tofu in my face

[Guest guest]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,880437,00.html

 

The US and British governments deny that oil is a factor in the

confrontation with Iraq. The Foreign Office minister, Mike O'Brien,

said yesterday: " The charge that our motive is greed - to control

Iraq's oil supply - is nonsense, pure and simple. It is not about

greed: it is about fear [about the proliferation of weapons of mass

destruction]. "

 

however...

" the state department stressed that protection of the oilfields

was " issue number one " .

 

its not for us though...

" The US secretary of state, Colin Powell, told the Boston Globe

yesterday: " If there is a conflict with Iraq, the leader ship of the

coalition [will] take control of Iraq. The oil of Iraq belongs to the

Iraqi people. Whatever form of custodianship there is ... it will be

held for and used for the people of Iraq. It will not be exploited

for the United States' own purpose. "

 

Asked whether US companies would operate the oilfields, Mr Powell

said: " I don't have an answer to that question. If we are the

occupying power, it will be held for the benefit of the Iraqi people

and it will be operated for the benefit of the Iraqi people. "

 

Or IS it...

" There is a debate within the US administration over whether some of

Iraq's oil revenues might be used to cover part of the costs of

occupation, which is expected to last 18 months.

 

The office of the vice-president, Dick Cheney, and some officials at

the Pentagon have reportedly advocated commandeering revenues from

the oilfields to pay for the daily costs of the occupation force

until a democratic government can be installed. "

 

Then there's this...

 

" The Wall Street Journal last week quoted oil industry officials

saying that the Bush administration is eager to rehabilitate the

Iraqi oil industry. "

 

" According to the officials, Mr Cheney's staff held a meeting in

October with Exxon Mobil Corporation, ChevronTexaco Corporation,

ConcocoPhilips, Halliburton, but both the US administration and the

companies deny it. "

 

 

 

So... just how would that work? How would profits from Iraq's oil

fields be used to pay for the occupation [ignoring the absurdity and

immorality of charging the country for attacking and occupying it]?

 

If private companies - Exxon, Chevron, Haliburton etc. are pumping

the oil, from fields " secured " by taxpayer supported U.S. Military

[and allies?], how EXACTLY would money from the sale go to pay back

Uncle Sam??? Would we TAX the oil companies? Would the companies have

to pay to be able to pump? If so, take a look at this:

http://www.federalbudget.com/corpwelfare.html

All taxes to corporations wind up being passed along to the consumer,

so we the taxpayers would be paying for the bombing, for the

occupation, AND for the increased price of oil to cover the cost of

the payments to the U.S. for the occupation. CEOs as usual get to

keep the profits.

 

Public-ization of risks... Private-ization of Profits.

 

Or... would we simply take our " cut " out of what we pay to the Iraqi

people for their oil? Their oil that we are " protecting "

and " holding in trust " for them. I wonder if their " cost " of

occupation would also include charging them for the depleted uranium

shells and other weapons that will poison their land for the next 4.5

Billion years? Or maybe we will be humanitarians and offer to clean

up the depleted uranium and buried mines.... and charge them for

the " service " ? Or both... charge them for the DU & for the cleanup.

 

The article also says:

" Iraq has the second biggest known oil reserves in the world

producing, in their current run-down state, about 1.5m barrels a day.

But experts contacted by the Guardian predict this could rise to 6m

barrels a day within five years with the right investment and

control. "

 

So... once we secure, occupy, and rehabilitate the oil fields, we can

thumb our noses at OPEC and pump as fast as the wells will stand...

causing much distress and unrest in other oil producing countries.

 

Perhaps leading to some sort of terrorist retaliation, but surely at

least worsening the situation for the populations of those countries.

[Venesuela for one]. No problemo... we'll just go on and war with

whomever we can't " convince " through " Tanya Harding Diplomacy " to see

our side and do things our way.

 

Sure am glad its not about oil. Nonsense, pure and simple.