Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebe
I really love shutting down threads with facts. ..  |
Which facts? The fact that you linked to an article. The article doesn't present any "facts" that prove that Iraq was invaded to benefit Bush's oil buddies. It doesn't even imply it, but says that anti-war activists would try to make hay with the documents. Plus it's an old article that has been made pretty much moot with newer ones and with actual facts that imply the opposite of what you claim.
As you note, and didn't see coming, mostly other than American oil companies have been benefited. in the 2009 auction for contracts on oil extraction in Iraq, no U.S. based oil companies won a contract.
A Time Magazine article, 12/19/2009, stated "Those who claim that the U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003 to get control of the country's giant oil reserves will be left scratching their heads by the results of last weekend's auction of Iraqi oil contracts: not a single U.S. company secured a deal in the auction . . ." It quotes Alex Munton, middle east oil analyst for the energy consultancy Wood Mackenzie: "[This] certainly answers the theory that the war was for the benefit of big U.S. oil interests. That has not been demonstrated by what happened this week."
A 1/18/2010 article in INVESTOPEDIA ends with "the perception that American oil companies would receive preferential treatment in a post war Iraq have been proven false so far, with only two U.S. based companies receiving contracts to develop iraqi oil fields, this is a sharp slap in the face to conspiracy theorists everwhere."
Andrei Kuzayev, president of Lukoil, one of the Russian oil companies that were awarded contracts in the 2009 auction said "The strategic interest of the U.S. is in new oil supplies arriving on the world market, to lower prices . . . it is not important that we did not take part in the coalition [to invade Iraq] . . .For America, the important thing is open access to reserves. And that is happening in Iraq." Mostly without access to oil by American companies.
Philip Frayne, U.S. Embassy Spokesman in Baghdad, said, after the 2009 auction round "The results of the bid round should lay to rest the old canard that the U.S. intervened in Iraq to secure oil for American companies." So far, I have not heard that Obama has had him removed.
The 2010 Wikileaks revealed a great deal of troublesome "facts" about U.S. government involvements, including the Iraq war, and the "secret" discussions by higherups regarding the reasons to go to war, but the leaks revealed NO plans to do so to profit Bush's "oil buddies."
Threaded Mode