Guest Some Guy Report post Posted March 27, 2003 Well, Halliburton did win the first contract for oil distribution. So what? To my knoweldge haliburton sells supplies to build oil rigs and such they don't sell oil. Name an Iraqi company that is prepared to take over the oil production? How many Iraqis do you think will be employed by the soon to be increased and streamlined oil productio in Iraq? My guess would be thousands. ANd I'd bet that they'll make more than $1.50 a week. I've had enough of this "America is is an evil imperialistic power just out to get Iraq's oil and nothign else." I'm sick and fucking tired of it because it symply isn't true. We are not evil, we are not imperialistic, and we are not out to get their oil. We have no empire, like the French and Brits had, we have no desire to build one or guess what? We'd fucking have one, we could potentially colonize the whole world if we so chose but we haven't and won't because that is not and never has been what our country has been about. Mach7, when did all rich men become evil? Seems like you have absolutely nothing but hatefilled spewing of garbage to add to this discussion, whay don't you just stay out of it. The French, the Germans, and the UN have no business being involved in a post-Saddam Iraq. Teh Americans, the Brits, the Ausies, and the rest of our coalition do. If they didn't want to help then they shoudln't have any say. We've given teh French way too much for them doing way too little. They should just consider themselves lucky to even be on the UN Security Council. They lost in WWII, the rest of the council, except China won. France in not a world power and they have nothign to add in terms of military or any other help. Fuck them. They are irrelevant. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zorin Industries 0 Report post Posted March 27, 2003 There was a program on the BBC last nite about a potential world oil crisis, in it it quoted Donald Rumsfeld back in 1998 saying that the U.S should invade Iraq to secure there oil fields.It gave a good account of why the war could be for oil. I don't think it's the only reason for the war but it's definatly A reason Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Tyler McClelland Report post Posted March 27, 2003 Hey Some Guy, did you know that even when there was an embargo on trade with Iraq, Cheney's Halliburton set up foriegn subsidies in order to make huge profit by doing business with Iraq, Libya, and Iran? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Some Guy Report post Posted March 27, 2003 There was a program on the BBC last nite about a potential world oil crisis, in it it quoted Donald Rumsfeld back in 1998 saying that the U.S should invade Iraq to secure there oil fields.It gave a good account of why the war could be for oil. I don't think it's the only reason for the war but it's definatly A reason I didn't say that oil had nothing to do with it. If it does have anythign to do with then it is very, very low on the list. What will happen is that the world oil market will get flooded and teh prices will go down once Iraq is free and the sanctions are lifted. Hey Some Guy, did you know that even when there was an embargo on trade with Iraq, Cheney's Halliburton set up foriegn subsidies in order to make huge profit by doing business with Iraq, Libya, and Iran? Ok, and so what? What year was this? There have been embargos on those countries for years. Assuming this is true what does that have to do with this war right now? Cheney doesn't work for Haliburton now and he has no stock or power in that company. He had to give it all up to become VP, or it would be a conflict of interest. Just a question. If John Kerry were the President and a country was building illegal arms, threatening its neighbors, had invaded two of it's neighbors, was run by a tyrant and his two even sicker sons, and that country just so happened to have a ton on tomatos would call this a war for ketchup? (He married Theresa Heinz, of Heinz Ketchup in case you didn't know) Because that's about the best case you guys have drawn to this being a "war for oil". Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Tyler McClelland Report post Posted March 27, 2003 They still do illegal business with Iraq. It's being investigated, but Cheney has virtually no way (other than impeachment) to be charged while in office. He also gets $1 Million per year from Halliburton (even while in office) due to "deferred payment" or some bullshit. He very much DOES have interests in Halliburton, and I think it's quite obvious that when he's out of office, rebuilding the oil fields in Iraq will remain a hugely profitable venture for Halliburton (and Cheney, once he resumes being the CEO). Just a question. If John Kerry were the President and a country was building illegal arms, threatening its neighbors, had invaded two of it's neighbors, was run by a tyrant and his two even sicker sons, and that country just so happened to have a ton on tomatos would call this a war for ketchup? (He married Theresa Heinz, of Heinz Ketchup in case you didn't know) Because that's about the best case you guys have drawn to this being a "war for oil". Yeah, definitely, because we all know how profitable the market on foriegn ketchup is. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Some Guy Report post Posted March 27, 2003 They still do illegal business with Iraq. It's being investigated, but Cheney has virtually no way (other than impeachment) to be charged while in office. He also gets $1 Million per year from Halliburton (even while in office) due to "deferred payment" or some bullshit. He very much DOES have interests in Halliburton, and I think it's quite obvious that when he's out of office, rebuilding the oil fields in Iraq will remain a hugely profitable venture for Halliburton (and Cheney, once he resumes being the CEO). If they did do illegal businees with Iraq then they should be punished accordingly. Recieving deferred payment doesn't mean he still ahs an interest in Haliburton necesarilly. Lots of people get defered salaries after they leave a business. Who's to say that Cheney will go back to being President of Haliburton? He's relatively old and has a bad heart. He might just retire all together in '08 when he's done a VP. Yeah, definitely, because we all know how profitable the market on foriegn ketchup is. Well Kerry's wife's daddy made his billions some how didn't he? Ketchup is a very lucrative business. I'd wager that they use Heinz ketchup in hundreds of countries and it's the most popular brand in America. It was an analogy to show how silly this "no blood for oil" shit is. I have my opinion, you have yours. Let's see what happens in the next few years. If we have stolen all of Iraq's oil and the people there are no better or worse off then they have been under Saddam then I'll spologize and admit I was wrong. If we haven't stolen all their oil and the people of Iraq are better off than they were under Saddam will you admit you were wrong? Or will you just point ot American companies having investments in Iraq and declare that we have stolen their oil? Just a question for the "no war for oil" people. How stupid do you really think America, Britain, and the rest of the coalition are? Do you really think that we would start a war just to steal oil? Don't you think that if we were to steal the oil that the rest of the world and much of AMerica would be up in arms about it? Don't you think that it would be a very stupid way to try and get reelected? A little common sense dictates that stealing Iraq's oil is not the smartest thing to do for a politician. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Tyler McClelland Report post Posted March 28, 2003 Recieving deferred payment doesn't mean he still ahs an interest in Haliburton necesarilly. Lots of people get defered salaries after they leave a business. True, but he wouldn't recieve that money if Halliburton had gone under; giving them contracts ensures that isn't the case. Halliburton was having major accounting problems (ala Worldcom) in Cheney's last few years at Halliburton. They were speculating POSSIBLE money, not ACTUAL money (which was significantly lower than the actual income of Halliburton), and it inflated their stock price considerably. They actually suffered a loss in those years, and it was under investigation by the SEC when Cheney went into office, if I'm not mistaken. Who's to say that Cheney will go back to being President of Haliburton? He's relatively old and has a bad heart. He might just retire all together in '08 when he's done a VP. Maybe, but then again, he claimed he didn't know about the day-to-day operations of the company (which was bullshit, according to one of the members of Halliburton's board), and therefore, ya know... he's not doing much work... Perhaps he won't go back, but then again, maybe he will. It's pure speculation at this point. Well Kerry's wife's daddy made his billions some how didn't he? Ketchup is a very lucrative business. I'd wager that they use Heinz ketchup in hundreds of countries and it's the most popular brand in America. I don't see how we would profit from taking a crop from another country. We can grow it here as well as any other country can grow it. If we have stolen all of Iraq's oil and the people there are no better or worse off then they have been under Saddam then I'll spologize and admit I was wrong. If we haven't stolen all their oil and the people of Iraq are better off than they were under Saddam will you admit you were wrong? I don't claim that this war is about oil, and therefore, I don't think I need to admit I was "wrong" about the intangeable aspects of the war. Click it. That's one of them. Or will you just point ot American companies having investments in Iraq and declare that we have stolen their oil? Not really stealing their oil. Perhaps benefitting from the other country somewhat shadily, though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites