So much for Iraq for the Iraqis

sovtek

...but maybe they will get the envious position of working at McDonalds.

swiss

The measures were disclosed Sept. 21 before International Monetary Fund meetings in Dubai by, fittingly enough, the U.S. delegation. Foreigners will be allowed to own 100 percent interest in any Iraqi company outside the energy industry

This development has not gone unforeseen. During the war and directly after, the US continually talked about the need for finance of the 'reconstruction effort'. Unsurprisingly, they don't want to foot the cost themselves, so they do what any good bully does - make the victim cough up.

Now, in one sense I appreciate the need for foreign investment in Iraq to try to bring their economy out of dire recession. However, on the other hand, the wholesale dumping of Iraqi assets on the international scene is going to erode the soverignty of Iraq. Furthurmore, because this decision was taken by a US delegation, many Iraqis will understandably conclude that the US is not being serious about letting Iraq elect it's own officials to do the job of governing Iraq.

Jobs for Iraqi workers is a laudable ideal, but the price is national self determination. I'm not sure that's a price many Iraqis are willing to pay.

bonkey

Originally posted by swiss
Now, in one sense I appreciate the need for foreign investment in Iraq to try to bring their economy out of dire recession. However, on the other hand, the wholesale dumping of Iraqi assets on the international scene is going to erode the soverignty of Iraq.

Indeed. Working from rusty-memory, doesn't this mirror one of the typical behviours of the IMF which Stiglitz was illustrating does not achieve what it is supposed to achieve? Sure, its great for making the investors rich, but its not in the best interests of the Iraqi economy, nor ultimately of the nation itself.

I could be wrong...I don't have the book to hand...but I'm pretty sure that this was one of his major gripes.

jc

Johnmb

Is it just me or does this stink of history repeating itself. How long do they think it would take for the Iraqi people to get behind a would-be dictator who promised to re-nationalise all the industries that the US and the US backed government in Iraq sold off to foreigners? They are giving any would-be dictators the perfect rallying call. Maybe they are hoping that it would take several decades to get to that stage, and they will have removed all, or most, of Iraq's oil by then so it won't matter.

Victor

On the Auction Block by Edward Wasserman

Most of the Iraqi private sector was put up for sale yesterday.''

I presume the private investors get paid .... the article is a bit silent on the matter.

mr_angry

The article raises some good points, but I got the feeling that the author already had his mind made up before even beginning that article - it was anti-US from the very start.

I appreciate that he's trying to make a point, but I think a more balanced article would have been easier to swallow.

Tito

Dear Mr Angry,
With due respect the only reason Iraq is not the Iraqis at the moment is because they are unable to behave in a respectable manner.Despite this fact people continue to attack America my question is why?
When the anti-war movement protested way back before the start of war they said all America was interested in was oil now over six months on not a drop of oil taken from Iraq all we hear about now is the humanitarian crisis!Well excuse me but nobody has said anything about the humanitarian crisis that has been in Iraq for 30 years.
Why dont these protestor bums for get a job and stop taking advantage of the state.Also one final note the Anti War movement does not have support of the working class which is the class that pays for everything in this country.
It only has support from Noble spoilt brats and peasants who just came out of the off license.

Sleipnir

Originally posted by Tito
Dear Mr Angry,
With due respect the only reason Iraq is not the Iraqis at the moment is because they are unable to behave in a respectable manner.Despite this fact people continue to attack America my question is why?

Who is attacking America? Not any Iraqi's anyway. Not Saddam Hussein.
And DO NOT mention the attacks on the World Trade Centre, there is no evidence, WHATSOEVER, to link Iraq to those attacks.

Behaving in a respectable manner eh?
What about the people America has imprisoned in Guantanamo Bay?American has denied them their human rights and denied them any rights under the Geneva Convention.
Is shackling and blindfolding human beings as you cart them about tied to a rack "behaving in a respectable manner"?

America has not taken a drop of oil? Where are you living?
I would guess that you're in America watching Fox and CNN.
Haliburton, Donnie Rumsfeld's ex-company has been awarded many of the oil rights in Iraq so tell me how that is "Iraq for the Iraqi's"?

I think it likely that people are attacking America because they are tired of having that country's opinions and way of life imposed upon them by military force.

sovtek

Originally posted by Victor
I presume the private investors get paid .... the article is a bit silent on the matter.

That would be handy to know. At the same time it is really suspicious they are making such far reaching economic decisions in Iraq before there is a true government in Iraq.
In the real world respective governments get to intervene when a private company is sold to a foreign company.
[SARCASM]I will be so shocked if the first foreign companies just happen to be large contributors to the Bush election campaign or have ties to his administration. [/SARCASM]

Hobbes

Originally posted by sovtek
[SARCASM]I will be so shocked if the first foreign companies just happen to be large contributors to the Bush election campaign or have ties to his administration. [/SARCASM]

I thought that was a done deal already? Wasn't there uproar because Bush was handing out the contracts and ignoring British firms quotes for rebuilding?

sovtek

Originally posted by Hobbes
I thought that was a done deal already? Wasn't there uproar because Bush was handing out the contracts and ignoring British firms quotes for rebuilding?

OH yea I forgot...Last I heard Worldcom (yes the one that cooked it's books Enron/Anderson style, and even after a private Iraqi company got the system back online) was given a license for Iraq's wireless network.
That being said, getting reconstruction contracts and buying private Iraqi companies is two different animals...or am I wrong?

mr_angry

Originally posted by Tito
Dear Mr Angry,
With due respect the only reason Iraq is not the Iraqis at the moment is because they are unable to behave in a respectable manner.Despite this fact people continue to attack America my question is why?
When the anti-war movement protested way back before the start of war they said all America was interested in was oil now over six months on not a drop of oil taken from Iraq all we hear about now is the humanitarian crisis!Well excuse me but nobody has said anything about the humanitarian crisis that has been in Iraq for 30 years.
Why dont these protestor bums for get a job and stop taking advantage of the state.Also one final note the Anti War movement does not have support of the working class which is the class that pays for everything in this country.
It only has support from Noble spoilt brats and peasants who just came out of the off license.

Why is this directed at me???

I'm hurt.

*sniff*

jesus_thats_gre

Originally posted by sovtek
OH yea I forgot...Last I heard Worldcom (yes the one that cooked it's books Enron/Anderson style, and even after a private Iraqi company got the system back online) was given a license for Iraq's wireless network.
That being said, getting reconstruction contracts and buying private Iraqi companies is two different animals...or am I wrong?

The Iraqi's rejected the use of the American cellular standard, CDMA, and choose to go with the GSM standard that is in operation in many countries around the world, including all of Europe. Partial proof that it is not the Americans making all the decisions... The CDMA standard was developed by an American company called Qualcomm and an evolved version of this standard is being used for most 3G networks around the world.

Originally posted by tito

Dear Mr Angry,
With due respect the only reason Iraq is not the Iraqis at the moment is because they are unable to behave in a respectable manner.Despite this fact people continue to attack America my question is why?
When the anti-war movement protested way back before the start of war they said all America was interested in was oil now over six months on not a drop of oil taken from Iraq all we hear about now is the humanitarian crisis!Well excuse me but nobody has said anything about the humanitarian crisis that has been in Iraq for 30 years.
Why dont these protestor bums for get a job and stop taking advantage of the state.Also one final note the Anti War movement does not have support of the working class which is the class that pays for everything in this country.
It only has support from Noble spoilt brats and peasants who just came out of the off license.

What did angry do to invoke this response...

now read what he said again:

Originally posted by mr_angry4

The article raises some good points, but I got the feeling that the author already had his mind made up before even beginning that article - it was anti-US from the very start.

I appreciate that he's trying to make a point, but I think a more balanced article would have been easier to swallow.

bonkey

Originally posted by sovtek
OH yea I forgot...Last I heard Worldcom was given a license for Iraq's wireless network.

Can someone explain to me how a wireless network is part of a rebuilding effort????? Did Iraq already have one or something, that its being rebuilt?

Also, am I the only person vaguely sickened to see this level of money and interest in improving Iraq, when their Afghani neighbours are standing there with their bomb-torn begging-plate day after day asking for about triple the rebuilding assisttance they get now, so that they can improve their nation to "poor" status.

jc

It is rather an open unashamed purely business attitude by some American Business sponsored by the Bush administration.
Morally they have a duty to Afghanistan but their business code, ie desire for profit means nope, they won't do it.

Down to the smallest echelons of Business in the capitalist world , you are going to get this attitude and especially from a conservative Republican Whitehouse.

Even the millions committed by them recently to fight aids in Africa falls to that principal

mm

Sparks

When the anti-war movement protested way back before the start of war they said all America was interested in was oil now over six months on not a drop of oil taken from Iraq all we hear about now is the humanitarian crisis!

Is this nut sitting in a cave with his fingers in his ears and singing?
Tankers of oil have been sailing from Iraq for over a month now. Oil has been pumped out by pipeline pretty much uninterrupted since troops rolled past the oilfields. "not a drop taken"?? Sounds like someone's had a drop too many...

Tito

Originally posted by Kananga


I think it likely that people are attacking America because they are tired of having that country's opinions and way of life imposed upon them by military force.

Dear Kananga,
I think the weakness of your arguement is bourne out in the fact that you call me Sergant Pembury when I am in fact Tito/Lenin which were both communists.
Please enlighting me as to who is killiing America,British,Spainish,Polish soldiers over in Iraq at the moment.I never mentioned the Twin Towers that is a seperate issue but your ignorant mind cannot tell the difference between Iraq and Al Queda.Well boo hoo you seem to have ignored the fact that every convention is boken when that country deems it neccessary.For example Ireland has never met its target for third world aid.
America in my opinion has not forced it's opinions on anyone.I mean I have never heard of Americans storming a historic musem
I never heard of Americans running into disabled hospitals and rapeing women like so many Iraqi's.So to say America's opinion is been enforced on Iraq women and children is just not true.
I hate to disappoint you once more but shackling and blindfolding human beings is no where nearly as bad as watching Iraqi soldiers mutilating dead America's so I really think before you lecture about what happens at Guantanamo bay.
I live in Ireland I have visited many countries,I have also spoken to many goveronment officals in these countries even countries who have strained relations with America and even though they do not openly admit it everyone can now say we have seen the end of a tyrant.
You me documentation showings how many gallons of oil has left Iraq to America since the fall of Saddam.You will get your answer,then see who much France and Russia were receiving of Saddam and then think why they would not back America.
To me you seem to be one of these people who only care about what happens in Iraq because you are anti Bush if Bill Clinton was in charge you would not give a damn.
Thank you and good day

Tito

Originally posted by Sparks
Is this nut sitting in a cave with his fingers in his ears and singing?
Tankers of oil have been sailing from Iraq for over a month now. Oil has been pumped out by pipeline pretty much uninterrupted since troops rolled past the oilfields. "not a drop taken"?? Sounds like someone's had a drop too many...

With all due respect you must have been in a coma when saddam was in power for over two decades because you certainly did not protest then and when innocent people died in Kosovo you were not seen either so please do not take the moral high ground with me because you are just a fashion if good old cheating Bill as American president you would not look twice at what was happening in Iraq.
Fashion tart

Sparks

Fashion tart

Well, spank my bottom and call me alice. I've been well rebuffed by that comment there tito, and shall hereby revoke my right to ever have a political opinion ever again, and shall in fact never again vote, protest or do anything that might be seen as moral, all because when I was twelve, I didn't protest our beef deal with saddam.

Sleipnir

First of all, the line "ready when you are, Sargeant Pembury"
is my signature, it's on the end of all my posts. It's not directed at you (how could it possibly make any sense to!)
it's from a movie I'm sure you'll have heard of called
"The Silence of the Lambs"


Is it not a fact that
a.) Halliburton has been awarded oil contracts in Iraq?
b.) Halliburton is an American company?

"You me documentation showings how many gallons of oil has left Iraq to America since the fall of Saddam."

I honestly can't BELIEVE that you think America get's no oil whatsoever from the country which has the 2nd largest oil reserves in the world?
Where do you think America get's it's oil from, space???
You want numbers? Here are your numbers:

"Q. Who buys Iraqi oil?
A. The United States tends to be the biggest importer of Iraqi crude, buying 366,000 barrels a day during December 2002. Iraq was the seventh-biggest supplier of U.S. crude imports that month, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Iraq's other customers include France, Italy, Spain and the Netherlands. "

Last month, about two-thirds of Iraq's exports went to importers in North and South America. More than half of this amount ended up in the United States.

Source: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/special/iraq/1826218

So that's one of your points blown out of the water. You're doing fine.

"Please enlighting me as to who is killiing America,British,Spainish,Polish soldiers over in Iraq at the moment."

Please enlighten me as to whether or not coalition soldiers would be killed in Iraq if America and Britian had not invaded Iraq?

"Well boo hoo you seem to have ignored the fact that every convention is boken when that country deems it neccessary"

Like America ignoring the U.N. resolution objecting to them going in without the support of the U.N.?
There's one broken convention.


"America in my opinion has not forced it's opinions on anyone.I mean I have never heard of Americans storming a historic musem"

Museums? I thought we were talking about the geo-politics of the recent war, not bits of bone.
So what about the Iraqi Council, chosen & appointed by the U.S. administration to run Iraq?

"I hate to disappoint you once more but shackling and blindfolding human beings is no where nearly as bad as watching Iraqi soldiers mutilating dead America's so I really think before you lecture about what happens at Guantanamo bay."

Oh, so it's ok then? I thought America was "the leader of the free world"?


I'm not even going to go through your other points, they are the idle ratings of someone who get's their news from Fox, NBC and ABC.
You're opinion has been created for you by the media coverage you've seen, not by forming it yourself.
You're opinions have no merit and no basis whatsoever in fact.
They are so non-sensical that I really am starting to believe that this is just a troll.

Sparks

I hate to disappoint you once more but shackling and blindfolding human beings is no where nearly as bad as watching Iraqi soldiers mutilating dead America's so I really think before you lecture about what happens at Guantanamo bay.

Someone doesn't seem to be taking too much note of the current accusations of torture in Guantanamo, or the documented murder of people in US custody just outside Kabul. Nor of the comments by US military officers that prisoners get routinely shipped overseas to "less squeamish nations" - effectively outsourcing torture.

And do we have to remind everyone that this is being done in violation of the Geneva Convention and that it's so bad that the Red Cross has actually made complaints about it? The Red Cross, don't forget, very rarely make such comments to avoid the perception of political bias, which would comprimise their work, but when people are being murdered just outside Kabul and the ICRC are denied access to them, it's just pissing on the Geneva conventions from so high up that they can't afford to ignore it.

Which makes you pause - the ICRC think that it's less comprimising to their work to condemn US actions and be seen as siding with the "suspected terrorists"???

Sleipnir

That is because, According to America, the inmates in Guantanemo Bay do not have the rights accorded to them under the Geneva convention.
They refuse to treat them as POW's, preferring to treat them as terrorists, even though most of the inmates belonged to an army of an internationally recognized government.

jesus_thats_gre

Originally posted by bonkey
Can someone explain to me how a wireless network is part of a rebuilding effort????? Did Iraq already have one or something, that its being rebuilt?

Also, am I the only person vaguely sickened to see this level of money and interest in improving Iraq, when their Afghani neighbours are standing there with their bomb-torn begging-plate day after day asking for about triple the rebuilding assisttance they get now, so that they can improve their nation to "poor" status.

jc

Surely you have to agree that for any economy to grow or this case actually start, you need a telecommunications infrastructure. Obviously they are not going to start laying miles and miles of fibre because it will probably be sabotaged or stolen, so a cellular network makes alot of sense.

jesus_thats_gre

Originally posted by Tito
Dear Mr Angry,
With due respect the only reason Iraq is not the Iraqis at the moment is because they are unable to behave in a respectable manner.Despite this fact people continue to attack America my question is why?
When the anti-war movement protested way back before the start of war they said all America was interested in was oil now over six months on not a drop of oil taken from Iraq all we hear about now is the humanitarian crisis!Well excuse me but nobody has said anything about the humanitarian crisis that has been in Iraq for 30 years.
Why dont these protestor bums for get a job and stop taking advantage of the state.Also one final note the Anti War movement does not have support of the working class which is the class that pays for everything in this country.
It only has support from Noble spoilt brats and peasants who just came out of the off license.

Any chance of addressing this TITO??????

Hobbes

That is because, According to America, the inmates in Guantanemo Bay do not have the rights accorded to them under the Geneva convention.

Except that they do. Lets call it by it's real name, a concentration camp.

Oh I'm sure some people will grab thier handbags and say "ooh aah well I never!" but a prison where people are detained without rights and sentanced to death in the place without having to show any evidence is called a concentration camp.

they had a show on BBC last night (early morning) about the concentration camp. Quite frightning that people are letting this happen in the US. I can only assume the US media has thier heads up thier asses.

US people speaking were going on about "They are all evil men" (sic) in the camp, however they fail to mention the children (which are in fact innocent, thier parents are being detained there in some instances) or some of the other people who were released after being in what amounts to an animal cage for nearly a year (one of them, thier only fault was being a baker who sold bread to the Taliban).

Absolutly beyond comprehension, and Bush and his group are no better then Saddam.

Q. Who buys Iraqi oil?

Not sure about after the war, but before it the US was the biggest exporter of Iraqi oil. They even upped the amount they took just before starting the war. Oh the irony.

but nobody has said anything about the humanitarian crisis that has been in Iraq for 30 years.

Hmm, not sure about that time frame, but the US put Saddam in power to help fight Iran and there wasn't any uproar when they supplied the goods to help him gas the Kurds.

Sparks

That is because, According to America, the inmates in Guantanemo Bay do not have the rights accorded to them under the Geneva convention.

Lovely idea, but the convention specifically denies them the right to make that assertion.

Sparks

Oh I'm sure some people will grab thier handbags and say "ooh aah well I never!" but a prison where people are detained without rights and sentanced to death in the place without having to show any evidence is called a concentration camp.

Actually, just to nitpick, that's not what the definition of a concentration camp is. But you're completely correct, Guantanamo Bay (and it's siblings run by the US in Afghanistan and Iraq, away from those pesky cameras and human rights activists), are our generation's take on 1938's Dachau.

bonkey

Gents - a little less of the poster-attacking, and a little more of the post-attacking wouldn't go astray in general here.

bonkey

Originally posted by Kananga
That is because, According to America, the inmates in Guantanemo Bay do not have the rights accorded to them under the Geneva convention.

But the Geneva Convention itself denies the US the right to make that decision.

In the event of there being any question about whether or not someone is covered, as would clearly be the case with any detainees from at least Iraq and Afghanistan, then the decision rests with the relevant UN-appointed authorities, not with the nations involved.

Imagine if the US had not set Gitmo up during a time of war. Imagine if they announced a war on terror without a military war, and then proceeded to round up suspects across the US and "export" them off to foreign soil to avoid sticky issues like having to give them rights. Imagine other nations extraditing criminal suspects to this no-mans land. Do you think that would be considered acceptable? I don't, and yet these are the only detainees in Guantanamo where it is even arguable that the US can decide whether or not the GC applies. In the rest of the cases, once there is any doubt, it is supposed to be referred to the UN.

jc



jc

Victor

Originally posted by Tito
Please enlighting me as to who is killiing ... Spainish,Polish soldiers over in Iraq at the moment.

Please tell me how many Spanish soldiers are in Iraq and how many Polish soldiers have been killed in Iraq?

Originally posted by Tito
For example Ireland has never met its target for third world aid.

Yes it has, however it hasn't met the UN target, but then again neither has any other country outside Scandanavia.

sovtek

Originally posted by Victor
Please tell me how many Spanish soldiers are in Iraq and how many Polish soldiers have been killed in Iraq? Yes it has, however it hasn't met the UN target, but then again neither has any other country outside Scandanavia.

As well it's higher, as a percentage of GNP, than America.