Verily, the lawd Gawd has seen fit to bequeath to the American people, any and all oil deposits in the known world, the Moon, and possibly Mars. He beams benevolently at George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and small animals. If ever there was a time to give thanks, it was last Tuesday, at 2:30 PM!
And if you think any of that was stupid, just think about the last six years!!!
Posted by tempus at December 10, 2006 10:31 AMIt goes back to Executive Order 13303, signed May 22, 2003, which decrees that "any attachment, judgment, decree, lien, execution, garnishment, or other judicial process is prohibited, and shall be deemed null and void," with respect to the Development Fund for Iraq and "all Iraqi petroleum and petroleum products, and interests therein."
"I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, find that the threat of attachment or other judicial process against the Development Fund for Iraq, Iraqi petroleum and petroleum products, and interests therein, and proceeds, obligations, or any financial instruments of any nature whatsoever arising from or related to the sale or marketing thereof, and interests therein, obstructs the orderly reconstruction of Iraq, the restoration and maintenance of peace and security in the country, and the development of political, administrative, and economic institutions in Iraq. This situation constitutes an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States and I hereby declare a national emergency to deal with that threat."
In the short term, through the Development Fund and the Export-Import Bank programs, the Iraqi people's oil will finance U.S. corporate entries into Iraq. In the long term, Executive Order 13303 protects anything those corporations do to seize control of Iraq's oil, from the point of production to the gas pump -- and places oil companies above the rule of law.
Posted by Don Bacon at December 10, 2006 10:32 AMIt's great to see that "elections" are as impotent in controlling exploitation by elites in Iraq as they are in America.
Posted by euzoius at December 10, 2006 11:16 AMAfter reading Steve's "Cheney Wants To Side With The Shiites" piece below, it begins to dawn on me to ask why Iran would be in the least motivated to cooperate with the US in minimizing sectarian violence in Iraq if they know that Cheney/Bush team is going to back Iran's Shiite friends in Iraq. A Shiite dominated Iraq together with a like-minded Iran would create a huge Shiite block, which would then control a great deal of the Middle East's oil reserves outside of Saudi Arabia. This idea seems positively counter-intuitive for this administration, which seems to be obsessed with its desire to control those resources. Whew, talk about a Carl Eller mistake. Would somebody please explain what I'm not seeing?
Posted by Julie at December 10, 2006 11:23 AMI tend to think that, since the US hasn't controlled anything since it went into Iraq, and it doesn't really control anything now, it really doesn't matter who Bush/Cheney backs. Besides, what they say and what they do are usually (always?) two different things.
The US didn't want democracy or for the Shiites to be in power in the first place but others thought differently.
Cheney got his ears pinned back recently by King Faud for thinking about abandoning the Iraqi Sunnis, and the Sunni Saudi Arabians are the Bush family's hand-holding, bin-Laden friendly, weapons buying, oil pumping and al-Qaeda-funding best buddies in the whole world, so I don't think the Sunnis will be abandoned, and if they are then Katy bar the door.
Posted by Don Bacon at December 10, 2006 12:03 PMPersonally, when I see what looks like a covert agenda at work, I like to examine it, not just accept it at face value. Ok, I'm no brainiac, so be patient--I'm trying to think "out loud" here. (Painful, but what can I do?) The Sunnis and the Shiites are two different branches of the religion of Islam, the difference dating to disagreements about which caliph(s) should have succeeded Muhammad, kind of like the Popes and anti-Popes of the Catholics. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Baath party is the main political party of the Sunnis, right? And the Baath party is socialist, right? Is that what Cheney has against the Sunnis, that the Baathists favor the state owning the oil? If this is what's behind Cheney's siding with the Shiites, I think it's important to have it out in the open and being discussed, especially considering Cheney and Bush's oil business connections. Should the US base a strategic decision like this on the basis of personal business connections?
Th ntl prms tht w nvdd rq t prvnt ts l frm fllng nt th wrng hnds s frdlnt. t lrdy ws n th wrng hnds, ths f Sddm nd th N's l fr grft crmnls nd tht t th dtrmnt f th rq ppl. Grntd th pssblty tht Sddm's xpnsnst prdlctn cld dsrpt th flw f l frm nghbrng prvdrs ws cncrn nd rghtflly s. Dspt th lft's mndcs ccstns, th S s nt n th bsnss f stlng l.
[Editor: ignore=off]The US has been stealing oil in the ME since at least 1953 when they overthrew the democratic leader of Iran because he was going to nationalize the oil co.
what a blowhard
In the financial graft field, as in the killing fields, the US makes Saddam look like a piker. The GAO estimated the Oil-for-Food graft at $10 billion. The US has, to date, spent $350 billion in Iraq, with over $50 billion of it going to contractors like Halliburton who are guilty of fraud and non-performance.
An additional $23 billion of Iraqi money was grabbed by the US at the start of the war and placed in the Federal Reserve Bank in New York. From there, most of the money was flown in cash to Baghdad. Over the first 14 months of the occupation, 363 tons of new $100 bills were shipped in - $12bn, in cash. And that is where it all began to go wrong. "Iraq was awash in cash - in dollar bills. Piles and piles of money," says Frank Willis, a former senior official with the governing Coalition Provisional Authority. "We played football with some of the bricks of $100 bills before delivery. It was a wild-west crazy atmosphere, the likes of which none of us had ever experienced."
Posted by Don Bacon at December 10, 2006 01:34 PMJuan Cole on THE WINNERS.
Posted by Julie at December 10, 2006 01:59 PMWinners? Mission accomplished?
Yogi Berra: "It ain't over 'til it's over."
This idea seems positively counter-intuitive for this administration, which seems to be obsessed with its desire to control those resources. Whew, talk about a Carl Eller mistake. Would somebody please explain what I'm not seeing?
I think it works like this. The plan is to support the Kurds and Sunni. The Kurds have control of the vast northern area where only about 30% of the oil reserves have been tapped. The Sunni sit between the Kurds and Shi'ite south. The Shia in the south have their own oil, but not as much as in the Morth. The Sunni don't have a lot of oil, but they will provide a physical barrier, a buffer, between the Kurds and the Shia. At least that's the way it looks on the map.