Iraq signs $3bn oil deal... with China

When was his regime going to end? What if support for sanctions continued to wither away, and oil was $150 a barrel? How would Saddam have looked then?

I don't know. I'd support a big move to nuclear energy. I'd like to see whoever gets elected get started on that, and lay down some plans that go beyond the 'two year election cycle' (as your article, which I liked a lot, points out).

 

There are a lot of what-ifs now, but the whole war feels mismanaged, rushed, and seems to be built on a lot of fearmongering. I would hope that the sanctions would hold and that more countries would support a diplomatic effort such as that until Saddam was a toothless bulldog... which I feel like he almost was after Desert Storm... In any case, he's dead now, good riddance, but we are very bogged down in the country, and I want no part of it. Even if the democratic system were stabilized completely, there's no saying that there could be a coup again in 2, 10, or 20 years...

As far as energy, I fear it, but I realize that nuclear energy is the only immediate major solution right now. I do wish some of that war money was spent on trying to figure out what to do with the toxic waste though...

We could fully open up the US oil reserves while we immediately build enough nuclear power plants to meet our needs and then start a percentage ban on foreign oil within a 10-15 year period until we are free from it.

We'd have to also be developing our wind, water, and sun energy technologies and start passing laws like the California clear air commission tried to do (i remember watching it in the Who killed the Electric Car movie) that requires a certain percentage of the cars on the roads to have zero emissions and then keep stepping up the percentage until the car manufacturers throw there R&D money behind the development of the electric car.

 

I agree with all of that.

The sanctions were not holding, that's wishful thinking. They were being evaded and a quite successful campaign by anti war types was painting the sanctions as genocidal. Osama bin Laden has used them as a rallying cry.

Well nothings forever, but it was pretty clear a year ago that if we had left the country would have become a complete bloodbath. Staying on, and committing to the surge, has dramatically improved prospects since then. As they say, you make the mess, you clean it up. I don't consider this an open ended committment, but as long as it looks like there is a good chance of a successful outcome, we shouldn't be abandoning the country to certain disaster.

I think the technical problems with nuclear waste disposal have been solved, its the political solutions that are lacking.

You cannot immediately build nuclear power plants, they take 10 years, or maybe you just meant immediately start? Also, I see no point or need or practical benefit from banning "foreign" (including Canadian?) oil.

Interesting, but actually not an argument against foreign oil unless the electicity that powers all these cars is not coming from oil too.

 

Are you sure about that?

 

^ I don't agree that we are running out of oil. That is the propaganda the oil companies are putting out to create artificial scarcity and jack up the prices. Meanwhile, record reserves are being reported as the oil companies rake in more money than ever before. There are literally MASSIVE oil fields around the world that dwarf the existing ones which remain untapped, and there is enough oil on the northern slope of Alaska to supply the US for the next couple hundred years at least. So the idea that these wars are simply about oil is bogus. It has a lot more to do than with just oil. It's about total control over the Middle East.

 

Not only North Slope, but Bakken Formation, Tupi in Brazil, as well as other much larger fields such as the pre-salt fields near Brazil (estimates have been as high as 80 billion barrels) and unexplored fields in Libya could possibly hold up to 100 billion barrels. The oil appears to be out there.

 

How is expanding nuclear generation going to do anything for the situation today?

Electrical generation in the US is mainly done with natural gas or coal and water. Nuclear isn't going to cut into our oil usage. Only addressing our vehicles will do that. So why McCain's big push for expanded nuclear power plants? Does he hold stock? The immediate solution is to make alternative fuels available at fueling stations and to come up with ways to adapt our vehicles to use other than petroleum products.


Unless you are proposing nuclear powered vehicles this isn't going to solve anything. Perhaps make a handful of people rich, but not going to lower our fuel or energy prices.

And it should be pointed out that the biggest supplier of petroleum to the US is Canada, so why all these wars in the Middle East. Does kind of explain why we are progressing with all the SPP crap behind closed doors and without congressional oversight.

 

The thing is if we also control the oil of the Middle East, we and our multinational buddies in Saudia Arabia can manipulate the price without end. And Israel controls the whole area as far as being the governing power with the might of the US behind it. Democracy it's not about democracy or human rights! It's all about greed and power. And if you choose to send your children to die for it, more's your loss.

 

Sadaam was brutally executed in 2006, oil was at less than 70 per barrel, can't blame him for these prices today and can't justify his death based on oil prices either.

Prices started to rise with this preemptive war, and they don't seem to want to fall anytime soon except around elections.

 

I happen to disagree, in fact I believe just the opposite. What justification would Saddam have had before the Gulf War? How about after? The threat from Saddam increased from 1993-2003. His proliferation of chem and bio agents increased, as well as his relationship to known terrorists and organizations.

 

That is a fantastic question! Another good question is what happened to the Iraqi operational aresenal.

On January 1, 2002 Saddam oversaw the two largest military parades since the first Gulf War. Two parades. One, a display of battalions of Mujahedin. The second, a show of Iraq military power. Over a thousand tanks, several hundred armored fighting vehicles and artillery, ballistic and anti-aircraft missiles, paraded through the Grand Festivities Square of Baghdad for more than four hours. During the parade, formations of jet fighters and helicopter gunships hovered over central Baghdad.

After the invasion, only a fraction of these weapons had been accounted for, and only a fraction were destroyed.

April 5, 2003. GRU intel report indicated that a group of Republican Guard and Iraq Army units from Tikrit were moving West towards the Syrian border. An estimated 300 tanks, one hundred GRAD MBRL's (multi-barrel rocket launchers) (some equiped with chem warheads), radar and communications equipment, as well as remaining components of Iraq's WMD arsenal, were part of this convoy.

April 5, 2003. GRU intel report confirmed via Lebanese sources in eastern Syria that the convoy did cross the border in the early morning without any losses.

April 6, 2003. US intel report confirmed that Saddam Hussein arranged escape through an ex-Soviet "diplomat" via a Russian diplomatic convoy. Russian Ambassador Vladimir Titorenko was to lead the convoy to Damascus.

April 6, 2003. GRU intel report confirmed that Russian diplomatic convoy was attacked. Communications intercepts identify the attackers as US Special Forces. Forensic examination indicate the convoy was attacked using Russian-made weapons to conceal the identity of the attackers.

April 7, 2003. US intel report confirmed that Saddam did not escape in diplomatic convoy. Ex-Soviet "diplomat" confirms vehicle containing Saddam was in the convoy when in departed Baghdad. Vehicle containing Saddam Hussein is suspected to have broken away en route. Confidential Informant compromised.

Note: These reports have not been authenticated, but are interesting nonetheless. It should be noted that on April 8, Bush and Putin spoke on the phone, Bush promising to investigate the incident. Condoleezza Rice flew to Moscow to meet with Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov, apologizing for the incident. Russian sources claimed ignorance regarding Saddam's presence in the convoy as it left Baghdad, but did acknowledge that they did evacuate "highly sensitive Iraqi documents" as well as "devices taken from US military equipment captured by the Iraqis".

Kind of got off on a tangent here, but my point is that Iraq WMD were not the only thing that was not found after the invasion.

 

This is the media account of the events.

April 6, 2003, 10:10am EST
RUSSIAN DIPLOMATIC CONVOY ATTACKED IN IRAQ
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/russia_04-06-03.html



April 7, 2003, 10:20am EDT
OFFICIALS INVESTIGATE SHOOTING ATTACK ON RUSSIAN CONVOY
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/convoy.html


Sunday, April 6, 2003 Posted: 9:23 PM EDT (0123 GMT)
Russian convoy fired on in Iraq
Witness: Convoy caught in U.S.-Iraqi crossfire
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/04/06/sprj.irq.russian.convoy.attacked/

Granted intel reports have since been declassified, but at the time it sure seemed like neither side wanted to fully reveal what was going on.

 

That's the old Fox News propaganda- it all went to Syria. According to the Bush Doctrine (ask Sarah Palin what is means), Syria needs to be invaded since it can be perceived as a threat to the U.S. because of alleged WMD transferred in from Iraq. Every weapon that Syria supposedly had won't be accounted for, so its neighbors will need to be invaded, not to mention Iran and North Korea, and so on.

Back to the original posted article, a renegotiated oil deal from the 90s is hardly proof that the Iraq invasion wasn't about oil. That article discussed a contract for China to help build a refinery in Iraq. The article also stated the problem of non-competitive bidding on contracts.

.