mdsh00
Posts: 3968
Joined: Mon May 17, 2004 11:28 am

Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Wed Aug 06, 2008 1:18 am

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/05/iraq.oil/index.html

Quote:

Baghdad had a $29 billion budget surplus between 2005 to 2007. With the price of crude roughly doubling in the past year, Iraq's surplus for 2008 is expected to run between $38 billion and $50 billion, according to a report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office.

The United States has put about $48 billion toward reconstruction since the 2003 invasion of Iraq, auditors reported. About $23 billion of that was spent on the oil and electricity industries, water systems and security.

Didn't the Bush Administration say that Iraq's Oil revenues would be paying for most of the reconstruction and that it will be cheap on the American Taxpayer? Meanwhile the US is looking at a record deficit.
"Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a big fat white guy who is threatened by change."
 
Confuscius
Posts: 3568
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 12:29 am

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Wed Aug 06, 2008 1:30 am



Quoting Mdsh00 (Thread starter):
Baghdad had a $29 billion budget surplus

What, that's about two months worth?
Ain't I a stinker?
 
kappel
Posts: 1836
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 6:48 pm

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Wed Aug 06, 2008 7:50 am

I saw this on the NY Times website too. Totally unbelievable. So what has happened to all that money? This is not the first year they have a surplus. Why is unemployment still ramapant in Iraq. If you put everybody to work, I'm certain security will be much less of an issue.
L1011,733,734,73G,738,743,744,752,763,772,77W,DC855,DC863,DC930,DC950,MD11,MD88,306,319,320,321,343,346,ARJ85,CR7,E195
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 13438
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Wed Aug 06, 2008 8:49 am



Quoting Mdsh00 (Thread starter):
Iraq's surplus for 2008 is expected to run between $38 billion and $50 billion, according to a report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office.

Lets send 'em a bill for that exact amount, then.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Comments made here are my own and are not intended to represent the official position of Alaska Air Group
 
ME AVN FAN
Posts: 12970
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:05 am

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Wed Aug 06, 2008 4:10 pm



Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 3):
a bill for

-
There always is talk about the USA losing money in Iraq. BUT the question is WHO exactly is losing money! Nobody talks about the profits achieved by US-American companies active in Iraq (oil companies, seaport-handling-companies, computer-services-companies, etc). It might be interesting to know whether a combined total does show a profit.
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Wed Aug 06, 2008 4:14 pm



Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 3):
Lets send 'em a bill for that exact amount, then.

What will be the exact amount for the contra for Babylon?
 
seb146
Posts: 13900
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Wed Aug 06, 2008 4:34 pm



Quoting Mdsh00 (Thread starter):
About $23 billion of that was spent on the oil and electricity industries, water systems and security.

Does the average Iraqi have the stable electric and water systems they had before the invasion?

How are companies like KBR and others that got no-bid contracts doing in Iraq? How much American government money was walked away with from building a prison that has never been used? How much of Iraqs budget surplus actually came from the United States government?

And people wonder why the Untied States has such a huge deficit.
Life in the wall is a drag.
 
ME AVN FAN
Posts: 12970
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:05 am

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Wed Aug 06, 2008 4:40 pm



Quoting Baroque (Reply 5):
the exact amount

-
the USA of course should in such a case DEDUCT all profits achieved by US-American companies in Iraq, and prey that the outcome is not a "negative" amount !  Wink
 
yfbflyer
Posts: 255
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 5:50 am

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Wed Aug 06, 2008 7:54 pm



Quoting Mdsh00 (Thread starter):
Didn't the Bush Administration say that Iraq's Oil revenues would be paying for most of the reconstruction and that it will be cheap on the American Taxpayer?

They also said that it would only cost about 1 billion dollars. Is there anything else you government has said that isn't true?
"WMD"
"The US does not torture"
"We are not in a recession"
" 9/11 changed everything"

As for Iraq you boke it you bought it.
"pottery barn rule" ex Sec. of State Colin L. Powell.
 
ADXMatt
Posts: 513
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 4:07 pm

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Thu Aug 07, 2008 1:18 am

Shouldn't we be getting their oil really cheap? Heck we gave them freedom they can't give us some low cost oil?

Freedom isn't cheap.

Maybe they'll pay some of our bills since we are in such debt and they have a surplus?
 
User avatar
yowza
Posts: 4275
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:01 am

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Thu Aug 07, 2008 1:39 am

Oh I'm pretty sure Uncle Sam has some plans for the loot, errr suplus.

Quoting ADXMatt (Reply 9):
Shouldn't we be getting their oil really cheap? Heck we gave them freedom they can't give us some low cost oil?

Freedom isn't cheap.

Maybe they'll pay some of our bills since we are in such debt and they have a surplus?

I think I just blew a hemisphere... stunning statement.

YOWza
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Thu Aug 07, 2008 5:57 am



Quoting YOWza (Reply 10):
I think I just blew a hemisphere... stunning statement.

Great summary of a suitable reaction Y.

Apparently about USD10 bill is propping up a bank vault in NY.

I long for the GAO being let loose in Iraq, it would be worse (or better) than the Assyrians coming down like a wolf on the fold. Forget tanker contracts folk, get with where the real money has been going.
 
oldeuropean
Posts: 1686
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 5:19 pm

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Thu Aug 07, 2008 6:11 am



Quoting ADXMatt (Reply 9):
Maybe they'll pay some of our bills since we are in such debt and they have a surplus?

Why? Ain't the US has attacked Iraq without a reason?
Must be the problem of the US taxpayer, because they have believed in the lies of their government. Big grin

Axel
Wer nichts weiss muss alles glauben
 
ME AVN FAN
Posts: 12970
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:05 am

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Thu Aug 07, 2008 4:29 pm



Quoting ADXMatt (Reply 9):
re in such debt and they have a surplus?

-
Again, if you include the profits of US-American companies in Iraq it no longer is a debt, but rather certainly a profit.
 
MOBflyer
Posts: 150
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 9:42 am

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Sun Aug 10, 2008 1:37 am



Quoting Yfbflyer (Reply 8):
"We are not in a recession"
" 9/11 changed everything"

We are actually not in a recession. A recession is two quarters of economic contraction, and we actually GREW last quarter.

And 9/11 did most definitely change everything. That shouldn't need too much explanation.
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Sun Aug 10, 2008 4:34 am



Quoting MOBflyer (Reply 14):
And 9/11 did most definitely change everything. That shouldn't need too much explanation.

Humour me and tell me how it changed everything. How does the damage compare, for example, with that done to Beirut in 2006?

How does it compare with thirty years of IRA bombing in N Ireland and the UK? Want more comparisons?
 
Mir
Posts: 19093
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Sun Aug 10, 2008 4:47 am



Quoting ADXMatt (Reply 9):
Shouldn't we be getting their oil really cheap? Heck we gave them freedom they can't give us some low cost oil?

Freedom isn't cheap.

So you're saying that we should just go around deciding who to clean up and then try and stick them with the bill? What are we, an international squeegee guy?

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Sun Aug 10, 2008 5:12 am



Quoting Mir (Reply 16):
What are we, an international squeegee guy?

Hopefully not, but Wolfowitz certainly seemed to fit your elegant description Mir. Let us not forget who proposed this nonsense in the first place. Nobody in the administration seemed to notice that post 1991, Iraq was having trouble repaying its debts, nor to enquire why that might be. No, it was all Saddam's fault.
 
PPVRA
Posts: 7878
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Mon Aug 11, 2008 5:10 am

Quoting Oldeuropean (Reply 12):
Quoting ADXMatt (Reply 9):
Maybe they'll pay some of our bills since we are in such debt and they have a surplus?

Why? Ain't the US has attacked Iraq without a reason?
Must be the problem of the US taxpayer, because they have believed in the lies of their government. Big grin

Home Depot can't bomb my house, rebuild it with their own materials, than charge me. Iraq doesn't owe anyone anything

Quoting ME AVN FAN (Reply 13):

Again, if you include the profits of US-American companies in Iraq it no longer is a debt, but rather certainly a profit.

I doubt it, especially considering how expensive it is to keep troops there and maintain the operations. The money tends to come from U.S. taxpayers anyways, so it just kinda cycles. Of course it is being used to build useful things in Iraq, not the U.S., but that's something else. . .

[Edited 2008-08-10 22:23:33]
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
ME AVN FAN
Posts: 12970
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:05 am

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Mon Aug 11, 2008 7:45 am



Quoting PPVRA (Reply 18):
used to build useful things in Iraq,

-
how much of what is built by the US armed forces in Iraq will be really useful in the future is rather doubtful. Quite a lot actually is built by private US companies in Iraq and THESE things indeed WILL be useful.

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 18):
if you include the profits of US-American companies in Iraq it no longer is a debt, but rather certainly a profit.
--
I doubt it,

-
As there are no figures about the private profits done by US-companies in Iraq, as companies do the accounting not geographically but by business sectors/sections and profit-centers, nothing can be proven. You may of course be right, but I am convinced that there already now is a profit on the bottom-line. And if the USA go forward more wisely in the future than in the past 5 years, the "venture" will be a most definite profit for the USA in total.
 
MattRB
Posts: 1358
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 4:49 am

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Mon Aug 11, 2008 11:18 am



Quoting ADXMatt (Reply 9):
Shouldn't we be getting their oil really cheap? Heck we gave them freedom they can't give us some low cost oil?

Freedom isn't cheap.

Maybe they'll pay some of our bills since we are in such debt and they have a surplus?

Wow.. and here I thought this comment was coming from some naive 14-year old..

I have to agree with YFBflyer..

You broke it, you bought it. Iraq doesn't owe the US a penny.
Aviation is proof that given, the will, we have the capacity to achieve the impossible.
 
ME AVN FAN
Posts: 12970
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:05 am

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Mon Aug 11, 2008 12:28 pm



Quoting MattRB (Reply 20):
this comment was coming from some naive 14-year old..

-
I would not attack him in such a way. His comment is not childish but out of frustration about the whole matter and in disregard of the point that the USA right from the beginning wanted to conquer new markets and drive out Russia and France from the Iraqi market. The two countries will be back on the spot upon Iraq gathering more sovereignty, BUT US-companies made an entry into Iraq in a considerable way and if doing good work will stay big players there in future.
 
sv7887
Posts: 1259
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 7:31 pm

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Mon Aug 11, 2008 12:45 pm



Quoting MattRB (Reply 20):
You broke it, you bought it. Iraq doesn't owe the US a penny.

And the US doesn't "owe" Iraq anything...Go look at the British and the state they left their colonies in...

Quoting Baroque (Reply 15):
Humour me and tell me how it changed everything. How does the damage compare, for example, with that done to Beirut in 2006?

How does it compare with thirty years of IRA bombing in N Ireland and the UK? Want more comparisons?

30 yrs of IRA bombing didn't result in the death of several thousand citizens did it?

Look at the massive spending on Domestic security in the USA and the damage done to the Airline industry. Air travel in the USA has been completely transformed, (for the worse) because of 9/11.

Then look at Afghanistan, the London and Madrid Train bombings..It's this climate of fear that allowed GWB to get re-elected.

Imagine if 9/11 hadn't occurred. We wouldn't be in Afghanistan, and GWB never would have been able to make the case to attack Iraq. We wouldn't have the TSA, the Patriot Act, Iranians making noise because we were nice enough to knock off their arch enemy.

I do understand what you are saying, but 9/11 was more damaging then you think it was in the big picture sense.
 
MattRB
Posts: 1358
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 4:49 am

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Mon Aug 11, 2008 1:02 pm



Quoting ME AVN FAN (Reply 21):
I would not attack him in such a way.

I wasn't attacking him, just expressing my surprise that such a naive comment came from an adult.

Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 22):
And the US doesn't "owe" Iraq anything

Um.. the US bombed & invaded the country under false pretenses, wrecking the infrastructure and plunging Iraq into chaos. The US has the duty to fix everything at its own cost.

Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 22):
30 yrs of IRA bombing didn't result in the death of several thousand citizens did it?

Between 1700-1800 civilians, police and military: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provisi...nal_IRA_campaign_1969%E2%80%931997
Aviation is proof that given, the will, we have the capacity to achieve the impossible.
 
sv7887
Posts: 1259
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 7:31 pm

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Mon Aug 11, 2008 1:56 pm



Quoting MattRB (Reply 23):
Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 22):
And the US doesn't "owe" Iraq anything

Um.. the US bombed & invaded the country under false pretenses, wrecking the infrastructure and plunging Iraq into chaos. The US has the duty to fix everything at its own cost.

Just like the British invaded sovereign countries, looted them and just left? There is no such thing as Duty otherwise the EU would be active in Darfur and the international community wouldn't have let Rwanda rot.

You speak of the highest principles yet seem to ignore the fact the international community failed to remove Saddam Hussein from power in 1991. Then they proceeded to pass sanctions that only punished the Iraqi people. Sorry, Iraqi blood is on everyone's hands, not just the US.

False pretenses? Go read the Senate Foreign Intelligence Committee Report led by Democrats, who couldn't find a shred of evidence saying the evidence for Iraq was made up. If you read it you will see, "Generally substantiated by available intelligence." They would impeach him in two seconds if they had any real evidence.

Portraying Iraq as some sort of functioning state prior to the war is misleading and you know it. It was run by a ruthless dictator who actually used Chemical Weapons on his own people, killed scores of political opponents, jailed and murdered innocents, and kept his country starving while he and his sons lived the high life.

You call that a functioning state?
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Mon Aug 11, 2008 2:21 pm



Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 22):

Quoting Baroque (Reply 15):
Humour me and tell me how it changed everything. How does the damage compare, for example, with that done to Beirut in 2006?

How does it compare with thirty years of IRA bombing in N Ireland and the UK? Want more comparisons?

30 yrs of IRA bombing didn't result in the death of several thousand citizens did it?

More or less, it did.

http://www.ocregister.com/ocr/sectio...ld/nation_world/article_614859.php
The IRA killed 638 members of British security forces, chiefly the army; 640 civilians, most of them Protestants; 273 police officers in Northern Ireland, six in the Irish Republic and five in England; 149 of its own members, either accidentally in explosions or deliberately as suspected traitors; 28 members of outlawed Protestant paramilitary groups; 23 prison officers; 12 members of rival anti-British paramilitary groups and one Irish soldier.
Add about 300 other IRA dead.

To which you need to add:
http://www.cfr.org/publication/9274/
Between 1968 and 1998, loyalist paramilitaries killed an estimated 864 civilians (most of them Catholic), compared with an estimated 728 civilians (most of them Protestant) killed by the IRA. Experts say loyalist groups have often acted out of religious hatred, while the IRA has more often targeted British security officers---killing more than 1,000 of them---in an effort to further its political goal of ejecting the British from Northern Ireland
Which suggests the numbers estimated for the IRA are understated.

And what is not in dispute is that some of the more lethal weapons, such as sniper rifles, were purchased in the US using funds sourced in the US. Go figure.

Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 22):
I do understand what you are saying, but 9/11 was more damaging then you think it was in the big picture sense.

Only in as much as it woke up the US. A bit overdue do you not think since it had been supporting at least one major terrorist organization for decades.

You might like to look at where the funds for Tamil Eelam come from, aside from Australia.

And all of this a mere bagatelle to the damage that has been done in Lebanon on at least a couple of occasions.

9/11 might have been the first time (aside for Oklahoma which we will keep forgetting of course) that destruction came to the US, but the US had been associated one way and another with many acts of destruction in many countries.

Why is it that things changed at 9/11 pray? Just because it was the first time the US realised what a nuisance a spot of destruction could be? Surely any destruction and death was just as destructive and as much to be regretted before and after 9/11. That attack did nothing in relation to how destructive other attacks had been or newer ones were to be.

I am pretty certain that those who had been attacked before 9/11 will be not a little bewildered to find that NOW attacks are naughty, naughty, naughty, but before, they were ho hum.

And of course, it still begs the question of exactly what Saddam or Iraq (whichever was the target) had to do with the 9/11 attack. Any advance on nothing, or rather less than nothing as there is no record of Saddam having assisted OBL - quite the contrary. (Ansar al Islam operated in an area under "Kurdish control" and under the wings of the US!!!).
 
sv7887
Posts: 1259
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 7:31 pm

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Mon Aug 11, 2008 2:37 pm



Quoting Baroque (Reply 25):
Why is it that things changed at 9/11 pray? Just because it was the first time the US realised what a nuisance a spot of destruction could be? Surely any destruction and death was just as destructive and as much to be regretted before and after 9/11. That attack did nothing in relation to how destructive other attacks had been or newer ones were to be.

You pretty much nailed it. It was the first time someone brought the fight to US soil. It's not that US interests weren't attacked before (Embassies in Africa, USS Cole), it's that it was a major attack on the US Homeland.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 25):
I am pretty certain that those who had been attacked before 9/11 will be not a little bewildered to find that NOW attacks are naughty, naughty, naughty, but before, they were ho hum.

Essentially that is exactly what happened. It was isolationism at it's best..As long as it didn't impact the US way of life, it wasn't a problem...It's funny how history repeats itself isn't it? (I'm thinking 1920's isolationism)

Quoting Baroque (Reply 25):
And of course, it still begs the question of exactly what Saddam or Iraq (whichever was the target) had to do with the 9/11 attack.

He didn't and we both know it. Bush was dumb enough to believe Chalabi and his band of minions. To say he lied is blatantly false however, he was just incredibly stupid.

Paul Bremer's dismissal of the Iraqi Army and De-baathification of the Iraqi bureaucracy was just the pinnacle of stupidity..Of course newly unemployed Iraqis were going to want to kill Americans for putting them and their families on the street.

However, the previous administration had also made Saddam their whipping boy. It was just US politics at the time. The only reason Bush was able to get his war was because the Press and the Congress were too craven to stand up to a popular President at the time.

They were craven then, and they are craven now...Whatever gets votes and ratings is what they believe in..

-Sam
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Mon Aug 11, 2008 3:37 pm



Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 26):
Quoting Baroque (Reply 25):
And of course, it still begs the question of exactly what Saddam or Iraq (whichever was the target) had to do with the 9/11 attack.

He didn't and we both know it. Bush was dumb enough to believe Chalabi and his band of minions. To say he lied is blatantly false however, he was just incredibly stupid.

You and I know that, as do a goodly few others, but you would not call it a 100% conversion - yet. We will keep trying, however. Big grin

Mmmm, I think it is kinder to assume he lied, cos he really would have to be very stupid and some evidence (you do conflict me at this point SV!!!) suggests he is not. I find I just cannot read the guy. Unlike his ability to read Putin you might say.  duck 

On Bremer, we definitely agree, although it is probably a bit more complex than just Bremer being stupid. But sacking the army and the de-Baathification was crazy. He also was associated in one way or another with the lack of accountability in relation to money. Between the wrecking of the fabric of the non-Saddam part of Iraq and the lack of accountability that pretty much explains how we are wherever we are now, with probably a couple of hundred billion largely unaccounted for.

No wonder they have enough money to fund an insurgency! All their Christmases come at once in a figurative sense!

As a sidebar, I saw a note in our local paper the other day that indicates three IRAQI exploration teams will start oil exploration again. It will be interesting to follow that in the professional journals.
 
sv7887
Posts: 1259
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 7:31 pm

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Mon Aug 11, 2008 4:00 pm



Quoting Baroque (Reply 27):
Mmmm, I think it is kinder to assume he lied, cos he really would have to be very stupid and some evidence (you do conflict me at this point SV!!!) suggests he is not. I find I just cannot read the guy. Unlike his ability to read Putin you might say.

I have the same trouble..Remember Bush for all purposes is a "Born again" Christian, so he might have thought he could use Democracy as a cure all for the Middle East's problems, as some sort of Enlightening the "natives" type of thing.

I see that alot with people here. They hear about my Indian religion and customs and think I need to be "enlightened" and indoctrinated into the Western ways of life. Liberals call me backward or "close minded" and Christian conservatives call me a Pagan and in need of Christ. (I am not kidding!!!)

Some Western things are good, but others not so good. Part of the Middle East's problem with the West is that they don't respect their cultural sovereignity. I think it's a legitimate argument. I don't think the Middle East needs any "enlightenment" and they rightly see it as a condescending attitude from the West. People need to respect each other's customs and not shove things down their throat.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 27):
On Bremer, we definitely agree, although it is probably a bit more complex than just Bremer being stupid.

Just more of this idealism of Democracy and cleansing Iraq..Life is not that black and white.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 27):
Between the wrecking of the fabric of the non-Saddam part of Iraq and the lack of accountability that pretty much explains how we are wherever we are now, with probably a couple of hundred billion largely unaccounted for.

It's even worse with the No-Bid contracts. What kind of madman just walks around handing over suitcases of money?

The sad thing is that this is how the American government works both on the State and National level. They are all a bunch of criminals.

For example, the "Big Dig" in Boston (A bunch of pointless construction projects) has cost over $14 Billion dollars. The tunnels leak and the ceiling tiles even fell on a person killing them. An audit found that they don't even know where a Billion dollars went!!!

Giving that the Italian Mafia controls all the construction firms in Boston I have a pretty good idea where it all went....

Quoting Baroque (Reply 27):
As a sidebar, I saw a note in our local paper the other day that indicates three IRAQI exploration teams will start oil exploration again. It will be interesting to follow that in the professional journals.

That is a good thing. Hopefully they won't squander their oil wealth killing each other. I know the past few years have been painful, but hopefully this will be a new beginning for Iraq, one filled with peace and prosperity.
 
ME AVN FAN
Posts: 12970
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:05 am

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Mon Aug 11, 2008 4:25 pm



Quoting MattRB (Reply 23):
I would not attack him in such a way.
--
I wasn't attacking him, just expressing my surprise that such a naive comment came from an adult.

-
well, he MAY take it negatively !  Wink
-- whatever, I did NOT take it as "naïve" but rather as a frustrated comment of a US-American seeing how his government is burning money. Had the "Bush-men" after the toppling of President Saddam Hussein al-Takriti handed over power to a president-ad-interim, started to retreat out of the cities and supported that new interim-president, they would now be highly popular in Iraq and would have saved billions.
- at the other hand, to make Iraq and the Iraqis liable for the miserable handling of the matter by one of the dullest presidents they ever had is not really a show of glory and wisdom
-

Quoting MattRB (Reply 23):
wrecking the infrastructure and plunging Iraq into chaos. The US has the duty to fix everything at its own cost.

-
a country which, whenever being the most powerful and one of the richest on earth, has problems to secure electrical power and decent public transport at home, hardly is the one to "fix" anything overseas. Iraq for instance needs a modernised railways system, and for that I might rather turn to Bulgaria than to the USA for help.
-
that the USA wrecked the infrastructure and messed up the invaded country is one side, that they by their support for the fundamentalists ruined much of the personal freedom the Iraqis DID have between 1918 and 2003 and ruined all the rights the Iraqi women DID have in this same period is one of the worst aspects. The Iraqi women between 1950 and 2003 enjoyed equality and personal freedom in an almost Western way, a standard which with the "help" of the USA has been ruined to a horrible extent.
-

Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 24):
There is no such thing as Duty otherwise the EU would be active in Darfur

-
the E.U. in fact IS active in the Darfur matters, supported by non-EU-countries like Switzerland, but it is not an easy thing, AND no European country has any desire to invade Sudan
-

Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 24):
Just like the British invaded sovereign countries, looted them and just left?

-
That the USA in 2003plus copied the exploits of the British Empire of the 1700s and 1800s and that GWB copied the methods of the Prime Ministers of Queen Victoria (Benjamin Disraeli, Palmerston, etc) is not really a show of wisdom and progress.
-

Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 24):
"Generally substantiated by available intelligence." They would impeach him in two seconds if they had any real evidence.

-
I am not interested in who might impeach whom. Clear is that the "facts" presented by the US-government and its secret service agencies were wrong, false, made up, faked.
-

Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 24):
Portraying Iraq as some sort of functioning state prior to the war is misleading and you know it. It was run by a ruthless dictator who actually used Chemical Weapons on his own people, killed scores of political opponents, jailed and murdered innocents, and kept his country starving while he and his sons lived the high life.

-
That Saddam Hussein al-Takriti was a tyrant is clear, and that Iraq, due to the sanctions after 1990 (sanctions caused to a wide extent by the stubborness of this tyrant) had many shortcomings is obvious. Iraq under his rule however WAS functioning and HAD an intact infrastructure.

Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 24):
You call that a functioning state?

-
and here you distort matters. Hitler's German Empire and Stalin's Soviet Union WERE functioning states as well.
-
 
sv7887
Posts: 1259
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 7:31 pm

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Mon Aug 11, 2008 4:34 pm



Quoting ME AVN FAN (Reply 29):
Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 24):
There is no such thing as Duty otherwise the EU would be active in Darfur

-
the E.U. in fact IS active in the Darfur matters, supported by non-EU-countries like Switzerland, but it is not an easy thing, AND no European country has any desire to invade Sudan

Right and they've stopped what violence exactly? How did they stop the violence in Rwanda?

Quoting ME AVN FAN (Reply 29):
That the USA in 2003plus copied the exploits of the British Empire of the 1700s and 1800s and that GWB copied the methods of the Prime Ministers of Queen Victoria (Benjamin Disraeli, Palmerston, etc) is not really a show of wisdom and progress.

Rebuilding a country and spending billions of US money is comparable how? How has the US profited from Iraq at all? So much for colonization...

Quoting ME AVN FAN (Reply 29):
That Saddam Hussein al-Takriti was a tyrant is clear, and that Iraq, due to the sanctions after 1990 (sanctions caused to a wide extent by the stubborness of this tyrant) had many shortcomings is obvious. Iraq under his rule however WAS functioning and HAD an intact infrastructure.

Functioning? You call Saddam's rule freedom? Cutting off the hands of political prisoners, killing children, and throwing people off of buildings is freedom? Sure as long as you don't badmouth the regime everything is okay I guess.

Those people were starving due to the Sanctions. Ask the Kurds how well Saddam took care of them. Then ask the women who were raped by Uday Hussein and on a good day were given cash for their suffering. The unlucky ones were found with slit throats in the Tigris river..

It all depends on what you call Freedom.

You seem to want to paint Iraq as some sort of vibrant country that the Americans came and destroyed. Iraq was in shambles after the first Gulf War and was in the rebuilding phases right now.

Blaming Americans for everything won't hide the reality that Iraq was hardly Club Med for its people.
 
ME AVN FAN
Posts: 12970
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:05 am

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Mon Aug 11, 2008 5:22 pm



Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 30):
There is no such thing as Duty otherwise the EU would be active in Darfur
-
the E.U. in fact IS active in the Darfur matters, supported by non-EU-countries like Switzerland, but it is not an easy thing, AND no European country has any desire to invade Sudan
--------------------------------
Right and they've stopped what violence exactly? How did they stop the violence in Rwanda?

--
HOW should they have stopped it ? They and the Arab League have put pressure onto General Bashir to at least stop the government support for the West-Sudanese militia. But General Bashir is not exactly open to outside suggestions.
-
In case of Rwanda, Europe was split, with France supporting the regime in Bujumbura and Britain trying to topple the same regime via its links to Uganda and Kenya.
-

Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 30):
Rebuilding a country and spending billions of US money is comparable how? How has the US profited from Iraq at all?

-
The USA ensured that the major civilian contracts went to US-companies. The USA ensured that companies from Russia and France were NOT allowed to compete in public contracts. The handling of airports and seaports to a wide extent went to US-companies, mostly such connected to Halliburton (coincidence of course). The USA were NOT in that field of business in Iraq before. Overall, US private industry profits from Iraq in a big way.
-

Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 30):
So much for colonization...

-
Yes, exactly. In British colonies, British companies usually won whatever public contracts there were, and in French colonies, French companies usually won whatever public contracts there were, etc.
-

Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 30):
Functioning? You call Saddam's rule freedom? Cutting off the hands of political prisoners, killing children, and throwing people off of buildings is freedom? Sure as long as you don't badmouth the regime everything is okay I guess.

-
> No, I do NOT call Saddam's rule "freedom"
> But public services under Saddam's rule WERE functioning
> In dictatorships, political freedom is zero, but
> In so-called "democracies", political freedom is existing but personal freedom is zero
-- personal freedom means equality of women, consumption of beer + wine,
the freedom to abstain from attending religious services, the freedom to dress as you like,
the freedom to be of whatever religion or denomination in whatever part of the city, etc
-

Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 30):
you call Freedom

-
You apparently call women forced to wear veils freedom, you apparently call women no longer being allowed to do shopping, to conduct business, to have shops of their own, to attend university, to go to restaurants unattended freedom. And THIS applies to all the women and not just to politically active ones or to unlucky victims of a totalitarian dictator.
-

Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 30):
vibrant country that the Americans came and destroyed

-
a country ruled by a bloodthirsty tyrant and has crazy sons hardly can be described as "vibrant" but the infrastructure was still there. What the USA did was to mess up a mess, destroy what was around and fail to repair it.
-

Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 30):
Iraq was hardly Club Med for its people.

-
Nobody said so on here
-
and it is NOT blaming "Americans", it is blaming the government. And that is a difference. To say that the president was elected by a majority of the people does not make mistakes he does mistakes of the people.
-
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Tue Aug 12, 2008 6:11 am



Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 28):
That is a good thing. Hopefully they won't squander their oil wealth killing each other. I know the past few years have been painful, but hopefully this will be a new beginning for Iraq, one filled with peace and prosperity.

The normal cycle will mean that it will be 10+ years to know what effects new exploration will have. There has been little or no recent surface mapping. I cannot see it being possible to run seismic until security is better (say 3 years if optimistic) and then a year to interpret and identify drilling targets. Another year to mobilize rigs and drill a 4 km well. Assume it is successful, another six months to drill the first step out wells, so about 2 more years for a producing field to be ready. Connecting pipelines. So nearly 10 years if the first prospect is successful. More likely 10+

The no bid contracts. I cannot work out if they were the iceberg or the visible tip, I suspect the latter. What was under the water was the total lack of financial control and the waste of most of the money AS WELL AS the corruption of the whole Iraqi system.

Quoting ME AVN FAN (Reply 31):
What the USA did was to mess up a mess, destroy what was around and fail to repair it.

As you say, it was a functioning government, even if many of its functions were not good functions. That was destroyed and the replacement government has been responsible for at least some of the subsequent atrocities.

I mean seriously, it does not take 6 years to train an army or a police force, what is taking the 6 years and is not nearly complete is having a responsible government able to control them.

The "we organized a vote and the people voted" mob should hang their heads is shame at being so naive as to what resulted from the elections.
 
ADXMatt
Posts: 513
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 4:07 pm

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Mon Aug 18, 2008 2:09 am



Quoting ADXMatt (Reply 9):
Shouldn't we be getting their oil really cheap? Heck we gave them freedom they can't give us some low cost oil?

Freedom isn't cheap.

Maybe they'll pay some of our bills since we are in such debt and they have a surplus?

I didn't mean to STIR THE POT so to speak and I'm not naive. I was making a joke. I thought it would be obvious.

If Iraq wasn't an oil country would we have gone in? How much is their oil really costing us now?
 
Flighty
Posts: 7677
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Mon Aug 18, 2008 4:28 am

It's their money. How dare we suggest we should take it. It's not our oil in the Iraqi ground. At least, not until we offer them statehood, citizenship, or shoot every last one of them (which would not be unusual in American history).
 
ME AVN FAN
Posts: 12970
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:05 am

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Mon Aug 18, 2008 11:44 am



Quoting Baroque (Reply 32):
it does not take 6 years to train an army

-
the USA in fact trained TWO armies. Roughly half of the recruits of the "New Iraqi Army" were Kurds, who took the education and training and then vanished, most presumably taking their equipment with them, back to Kurdistan.
 
User avatar
moo
Posts: 4072
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 2:27 am

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Mon Aug 18, 2008 11:51 am



Quoting ME AVN FAN (Reply 35):
the USA in fact trained TWO armies. Roughly half of the recruits of the "New Iraqi Army" were Kurds, who took the education and training and then vanished, most presumably taking their equipment with them, back to Kurdistan.

And quite probably could be using that training against Turkey...
 
ME AVN FAN
Posts: 12970
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:05 am

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Mon Aug 18, 2008 1:20 pm



Quoting Moo (Reply 36):
quite probably could be using that training against Turkey...

-
possible, but it is not the same organisations on the Turkish side, which means intra-Kurdish rivals, and it is to build up a Kurdish army for the moment they get into full and official independence, as they will
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Mon Aug 18, 2008 2:39 pm



Quoting ME AVN FAN (Reply 35):
Quoting Baroque (Reply 32):
it does not take 6 years to train an army
the USA in fact trained TWO armies. Roughly half of the recruits of the "New Iraqi Army" were Kurds, who took the education and training and then vanished, most presumably taking their equipment with them, back to Kurdistan.

Six years to train even two armies is not really efficient especially as the army was probably sympathetic until Bremer and his gang dismissed it.

Back in 1914, it took Kitchener just under a year to have his army ready, and that was even more from scratch and even more under wartime conditions.

Irony button on. Just shows, you cannot teach those ***** Iraqis anything!!!  sarcastic   sarcastic  Irony button off.

Actually, although I don't know you are wrong on that MAF, my "antennae are not happy". Not sure how to prove you wrong, but were the Kurds not recruiting happily up north and I thought the early drafts were heavily biased to the Shia???
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Mon Aug 18, 2008 2:58 pm



Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 26):
Essentially that is exactly what happened. It was isolationism at it's best..As long as it didn't impact the US way of life, it wasn't a problem...It's funny how history repeats itself isn't it? (I'm thinking 1920's isolationism)

No 1920's here! The fact of the matter is that there wasn't isolationism... but American military presence and interventions in the Middle East that stoked and fueled the fires that led to 9/11.

And the only reason we have military bases in the Middle East (and not Darfur) is purely because of oil... if we went home and stopped "desecrating" Islam AQ et al would leave us alone!

Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 26):
He didn't and we both know it. Bush was dumb enough to believe Chalabi and his band of minions. To say he lied is blatantly false however, he was just incredibly stupid.

Bush may be stupid, but Dick and his ultra-right wing gang planned this invasion (all poorly) starting with his tenure at the AEI after he left Bush senior's administration as SecDef.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
seb146
Posts: 13900
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Mon Aug 18, 2008 4:10 pm

Not only is Iraq running a surplus (thanks to the Bush Administration) but they are in negotiations with China for oil drilling rights. http://www.iraqoilreport.com/
Life in the wall is a drag.
 
ME AVN FAN
Posts: 12970
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:05 am

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Mon Aug 18, 2008 6:06 pm



Quoting Baroque (Reply 38):
Six years to train even two armies is not really efficient especially as the army was probably sympathetic until Bremer and his gang dismissed it.

-
The whole handling of post-2003-Iraq lacked ANY efficiency. And Bremer was a thoroughly negative contribution to the mess. The "old" army was anti-Saddam by majority, just in need of some "cleaning". To dissolve it simply was wrong. Just as to prohibit the strongest secularist force, the Socialist Ba'ath Party, which as well majority-wise was rather anti-Saddam, with the noteable exception of Saddam-loyalists and secret service men in his "system".
-
It did take so long because nobody who had served with the "old" army was allowed to join the "new" one.
-
Here some info about Lord Kitchener, who I would never compare with the "amateurs" of the Bushists :
--
Muhammad ibn Abdalla [the Mahdi] and began fight to unify the tribes in western and central Sudan in 1881; Mahdi’s followers [Ansars] today are associated with the Umma Party; Mahdi led nationalist revolt against Ottoman-Egyptian which led to the fall of Khartoum in 1885; after Mahdi’s death his state overwhelmed by an Ango-Egyptian force led by Lord Kitchener in 1898; Sudan proclaimed condominium, under British-Egyptian administration, in 1899;
--
Lord Kitchener anyway DID use units of the British army and the Egyptian army already existing, and did NOT refuse the participation of officers who might have been involved in the Arabi Basha uprising of 1882, but allowed the participation of all who he deemed able to revert the devastating end of Gordon Basha in 1885 .
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Tue Aug 19, 2008 5:40 am



Quoting ME AVN FAN (Reply 41):
Lord Kitchener anyway DID use units of the British army and the Egyptian army already existing, and did NOT refuse the participation of officers who might have been involved in the Arabi Basha uprising of 1882, but allowed the participation of all who he deemed able to revert the devastating end of Gordon Basha in 1885 .

The new army I was referring to was the one that Kitchener found he needed by Sept 1914 when the old professional force had been partly destroyed by Moltke's advance and it became clear that a large army was needed to fight the trench war. That new army was pressed into service in summer 1915 - even though equipment, especially artillery was still lacking, and most unfortunately for many of the men involved!! Some of the new regiments were decimated within days of getting to the front line, but that new army was what kept the UK in WW I.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitchener's_Army
 
ME AVN FAN
Posts: 12970
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:05 am

RE: Iraq May Have A $80B Budget Surplus

Tue Aug 19, 2008 4:15 pm



Quoting Baroque (Reply 42):
he needed by Sept 1914

-
ok, but Kitchener clearly had format !

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 17 guests