posted 04-19-2003 04:06 PM            

I started a new thread here because every time I try to get Mech to focus on the subject, he ignores any points I make and goes on to bury the reader in leftist, anti-war propaganda, hoping to distract (and apparently anger)…..hardly a sign that his objective is truth.

This is obviously a disingenuous and dishonest tactic to destroy any consistency or progress in a discussion towards truth. I want to prevent that here...that's why I decided it would be good to devote a whole thread to this subject.

After all...if it can be proven that this war is NOT about oil, where do the anti-America protestors go from there? That was essentially the basis for their argument. That's why I intend to keep this thread on track and focused on this fundamental argument.

Firstly, I guess a good place to start would be to ask if somebody can explain to me how America intends to profit from Iraqi oil? How do these globalists intend to profit? What are the names of these companies and organizations?...and how do they directly profit from the sale of Iraqi oil?

If we can't show how this works...if we can’t provide evidence of who these companies are, then how can we say (with any truthfulness) that this is a war for oil, when the facts do not bear this out....when we cannot show how these mysterious companies profit from Iraqi oil...or even who they are?

Mech gave two examples of Bechtel and Halliburton...but when I pointed out that these companies are actually profiting from legitimate work in re-building Iraqi infrastructure, that only they can do, and do not profit from the sale of Iraqi oil, Mech merely ignores the point, changes the subject, or buries the reader in a hundred un-related cut and pastes. (This is a strong sign Mech is not interested in pursuing this subject further when the facts get in the way of his preconceived ideas)....

But, still I'd like to pursue this subject in greater depth despite Mech‘s attempts at sidetracking and distraction. Can anyone prove to me that the War for oil argument is valid? Is there any proof that America went to war for the sole purpose of seizing Iraqi oil? I don't see this happening, and furthermore, I don't see the mechanism by which America, or even so-called "globalist" companies can profit. How would Shell profit, for example?

posted 04-20-2003 01:03 PM               

Read about it here

posted 04-20-2003 04:46 PM            

It's about Russian and French desire to control the EU. Note that now that the regime has been taken down, the UN is hesitating to lift sanctions.

What does this mean? Well it means the very people who were complaining that sanctions hurt the Iraqi people (because Saddam was stealing all the money that was supposed to go for food in the food for oil program) are now wanting the sanctions in place, to prevent Iraq from selling oil on the world market to finance food, humanitarian aid and the re-building of Iraq. What a bunch of evil, immoral, corrupt hypocrites….

Let that sink in for a second. The UN is preventing Iraq from selling it's own oil so that the profits will help the Iraqi economy and go to the Iraqi people....

This war is indeed about oil in the eyes of Russia and France. They are the ones that want to profit from Iraqi oil at the Expense of the Iraqi people.

The euro vs. dollar argument is absolutely meaningless....

The main question of this thread has yet to be answered, however. How do these American companies supposedly profit from the sale of Iraqi oil? It seems to me the only people concerned about profiting from the sale of Iraqi oil is France, Russia and the UN.