Iraqi Shias burn US flags

Perhaps we should let the Saudis and multinationals govern our affairs for us. They are anyway.

 

Are we going to add the Sudanese to the list of terrorist we are going after. Should we demonize them as well. What about the Saudis that blew up the Trade Center Towers?

 

Hey let's continue to add anyone that get's in the way to our axis of evil! The Sudan has lot's of poor folks that can't fight or stand up against us...let's make them the boogieman. But don't anyone consider that the majority of terrorists on 09/11 came from Saudi Arabia.

 

And it definitely is. Only after everyone is thoroughly familiar with the concept will the powers that govern the world and the conflicts now going on be held accountable.

 

This war will never conclude until the PSAs are signed.

 

Oh i see - thankyou. After appreciating what it stood for - this also helped http://www.carbonweb.org/showitem.asp?article=58&parent=4&link=Y&gp=3

Kurdish officials have already signed deals with foreign oil companies.

"The annexes must recognise that the Kurdish regional government has already allocated exploration and development blocks in the Kurdistan region under Production Sharing Agreements pursuant to the Iraq Constitution," he said.


So what sort of model would you prefer - other that PSAs.

No foreign investment ?.



Imho it is not the whole of the Sudanese ''we'' have issue with . Just certain groups over there. Imho it is about water not oil.

http://sudanembassy.org/default.asp?page=viewstory&id=485

http://sudanembassy.org/default.asp?page=viewstory&id=486

http://sudanembassy.org/default.asp?page=pressreleases

United States Recognizes Sudan's Government of National Unity and Interim Constitution as Important Step
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2005/49114.htm

 

It is the limits and controls set out by the PSAs and the protections put in place by the US that have Iraqi fighting Iraqi at the moment.

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/oil/2005/crudedesigns.htm#deal
http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/continued/2979/spoils_of_war/

 

Thank you - it is nice - for once - to hear somebodys further POV about a pretty vague notion of ''Blood for oil'' etc etc and all that goes with that POV. I have read a few peoples views - but for the most part they have nothing further to say - other than endless soundbites from ''liberal'' sources . I thank you for expanding on your POV.

I still think it [Iraqi violence] has a little more complexity than PSAs but it does add further insight into a very complex issue - so i thank you.

 

This is called projection - assuming these people hate America for the same reason you do. In fact, it seems you cannot even imagine the possibility that someone could do something wrong without it being America's fault in some way. That's why you pretend to be puzzled by what 'terrorism' means. That's why you read the standard western left wing fearmongering about PSAs and assume that it must explain the bombing of a Shia shrine, even though there is absolutely no evidence the two are connected at all.

It makes no sense, but you cannot accept a world more complicated than "everything is America's fault". Imagine this - the Sunnis aren't worried about the Americans getting the oil - they won't - they are worried about the Shia getting the oil. There is very little oil in Sunni areas. They liked the old system, where they were on top. That's why the Sunni are opposed to the occupation and the government, whereas the Shia are opposed to the occupation and not the government.

If your theory were valid, the Kurds would be fighting the occupation to prevent the evil Americans from bringing the apparently unspeakable horrors of foreign investment. But they aren't. They are getting along with the Americans better than anyone.

 

But you can accept the fact that there is a terrorist boogeyman behind every barrel Pepik? The Kurd's have already been promised protections why do you think they don't ask for more representation in the Iraqi government? I don't take a position on as far as the bombings of shrines. I don't pretend to have enough information. The Sunnis and Shias are worried about each other making deals with the western world that don't take the other faction into account. That's why the Iraqis have to establish their own rule without western intervention. Why can't we just back off and let them do that?

 

Iraq has had thousands of people killed by hundreds of suicide bombings from people you dismiss as 'boogeymen'.

Everybody is promised protections. The Kurds used to be under represented, now they are fairly represented, with some special treatment along the lines of e.g. the French in Canada.

You don't want to have enough information. Not taking a position is convenient enough - I mean seriously, you're pretending to be interested in what happens in Iraq but you have 'no position' on a wave or terrorist bombings targetting Shia holy sites, which are intended to spark a civil war?

No, you are projecting your paranoia about foreign investment again. If the Shia control the government and state run oil companies, they can still cheat the Sunnis.

Because the danger of civil war is so high.