|
9398. Marc-Albert - 12/13/2009 11:12:44 PM It had been widely expected, ever since the intervention, that US firms would have a major share, perhaps the lion's share, in the Iraqi oil business.
I said, even before the intervention, that this argument was stupid. Iraq was never about oil. 9399. Marc-Albert - 12/13/2009 11:23:14 PM 
Amurcans taking over Iraqi oil?
...Iraqi officials have signed a deal with Britain's BP and China's CNPC to develop its Rumaila oilfield, a milestone in Iraq's efforts to renew its oil sector...
...Britain's Shell and Malaysian firm Petronas have been awarded a joint contract to exploit Iraq's giant Majnoon oil field, potentially worth $12bn...
...Italy's Eni SpA, with California's Occidental Petroleum and the Korea Gas Corp., was awarded Iraq's Zubair oil field with estimated reserves of 4.4 billion barrels...
...Japan's Nippon Corp., leading a consortium of Japanese companies including Inpex Corp. and JGC Corp., is at an advanced stage in talks to win the Nassiriyah oil field...
9400. Marc-Albert - 12/13/2009 11:34:44 PM
Amurcans taking over Iraqi oil?
Administrator Bremer Order No 39, section 6 :
Areas of Foreign Investment
1) Foreign investment may take place with respect to all economic sectors in Iraq, except that foreign direct and indirect ownership of the natural resources sector involving primary extraction and initial processing remains prohibited. 9401. wabbit - 12/13/2009 11:46:18 PM Way back in the early days, we were told that the war in Iraq would cost the US taxpayer little, that Iraqi oil money would be financing the occupation. On March 27, 2003, [Paul] Wolfowitz told a Congressional panel that oil revenue earned by Iraq alone would pay for Iraq's reconstruction after the Iraq war; he testified: "The oil revenues of that country could bring between $50 and $100 billion over the course of the next two or three years. Now, there are a lot of claims on that money, but ... We are dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction and relatively soon." LOL! Those neocons sure could spin a good story. But if Obama has to raise taxes on the wealthy to start paying for this neocon crap, well, shame on him!9402. alistairConnor - 12/17/2009 10:03:39 PM So it's looking like it's all turned to shit at Copenhagen.
Any other outcome would have been something of a miracle. Poorly prepared by most participants, they came irreconcilable expectations and limited will to compromise. Numerous are the nations that are waiting for the US to make bold moves. The Americans want to make bold moves, but can only do so if other nations commit to verifiable reductions.
The Chinese know all this. And they appear completely intransigeant on this point: voluntary reductions only for the developing world (ie them), refusal of any international monitoring system to verify their emissions.
If they don't move on this by tomorrow, the show is over, not with a bang but with a whimper.
There are plenty of other major obstacles, but quite a lot of convergence, and no other absolute show-stopper like this one. I don't see how the Chinese can avoid coming out of this with the public perception that they killed Copenhagen. Sadly, that seems to be a price that they are willing to pay. 9403. alistairConnor - 12/18/2009 4:00:35 PM So, Obama's speech was a huuuuge disappointment to the inflated hopes of half of humanity... ouch.
On the other hand, straight afterwards he went into a huddle with the Chinese for an hour, and the early news is that there is substantial progress in the air...
9404. vonKreedon - 4/1/2010 6:39:12 PM Taking up the discussion in the American Politics thread about Israel, Netanyahu, and settlements. Marj, Arky, and AC seem to be arguing that the Netanyahu government seriously overstepped by authorizing the settlement building in East Jerusalem, that Obama gave him a harsh talking to in their meeting, and all this is likely to result in the fall of the Likud led government in favor of a Kadima government that will enforce a settlement freeze and so make peace possible. If I have this wrong please let me know the specifics of my error.
I offered polls that show that the Israeli people don't like the current government, but also don't actually want a settlement freeze. Further, while Kadima is leading Likud in voter preference, this not new. Kadima currently has more seats in the Knesset than Likud. However, the Likud coalition is based on the far right/religious parties for its formation and for its maintanance. I don't see the means for toppling the government without the assistance of these parties and the quickest way for Likud to lose these parties is by enforcing a settlement freeze.
I'm told to get my head out of my poll citing ass, but I'm not being offered any actual data to support a rosier picture of the Israeli position. I'm not claiming to be particularly well informed, so please do enlighten me on the data that I'm missing. But I'm afraid I can't take it on the faith that one can just tell that Obama has successfully chastened Netanyahu, I need actual changes in behavior/polling to be convinced that anything is actually changing. 9405. alistairConnor - 4/2/2010 4:23:56 PM Kree : Arithmetically, the Israeli government needs to control 61 seats in parliament, out of 120.
Likud has 27, Labor 13, the religious right 26. Total : 66. If any party defects, Netanyahu loses his majority.
So, Labor can bring him down. And agree to go back into government only with Kadima and without the religious right.
Nothing obscure about that.
Another scenario is that Netanyahu caves on the settlements, the religious right repudiate him and Kadima comes to the rescue.
Either way is OK by me.
The poll shows the Israeli public about evenly divided on settlements. Or to put it another way, deeply divided on settlements. I'd have to look at historical trends, but probably, support for new settlements is as weak as it's ever been. In such circumstances, a government is wrong whatever it decides.
If Netanyahu sticks to his guns and continues with the settlements, my guess is that he won't last long. I'd rather he went down in a hail of bullets, but I think he's wily enough to change course before that. 9406. vonKreedon - 4/2/2010 5:39:45 PM Labor can bring the government down, but looking at your math, Kadima, or anyone else, cannot form a government without the religious right and my understanding is that the religious right will not accept an actual settlement freeze making such a policy politically unachievable. Am I missing something? 9407. alistairConnor - 4/2/2010 11:26:48 PM Yes, you're missing basic arithmetic.
Kadima : 29
Likud : 28
Labor : 13
How many does that make? 9408. vonKreedon - 4/2/2010 11:53:07 PM But that assumes that each of those parties, Likud in particular, has any interest in entering a government that will actually stop the expansion of settlements. It appears that even Kadima, whose most prominent founder was Ariel Sharon, is not in favor of actually freezing the expansion of settlements, as this Jerusalem Post article indicates.
So yes, Kadima/Likud/Labor could form a government and leave the religious right out in the cold, but is that likely to have any actual impact on the expansion of settlements, both by "natural growth" in the West Bank and insertion of new blocks in East Jerusalem?
OTOH, you are right that I completely overlooked the possiblity that Kadima, Likud, and Labor could kiss and make up a new government. 9409. pseudoerasmus - 5/14/2010 10:24:09 PM Alistair, what happens to your wager with Pincher if the Euro just disappears into the night ? 9410. alistairConnor - 5/15/2010 9:07:08 AM Indeed!
I think I cough up, out of principle. On the other hand, even if the thing crumbles as a common currency, I expect it will subsist as a notional thing, much like the ECU before the euro proper.
But my bets are looking pretty silly now. I overestimated the stability of the world economy.
On the other hand, I correctly picked 2008 as "peak everything" year. 9411. alistairconnor - 5/15/2010 11:01:51 AM Pseud : what do you think of this :
Financial Meltdown : the Card Game
Looks like fun, but far too complicated for me, of course. Though satirical in intent, it seems to be quite playable, and probably educational too.
Setup
1. Take one set of ordinary playing cards (preferably the Denialists' Deck or the Iraqi Bad Guy deck the Americans put out in 2003, but any deck will do). Aces count as ones (unless the players bribe each other to count them as something else).
2. Hand each player twenty (20) Greenback tokens and give each player a pile of Debt tokens. Finally, place a pile of Greenbacks, a pile of Debt tokens and a pile of Credit Rating tokens in an easy-to-reach place (the players represent banks, so let's call this the Central Bank). Functionally, Greenbacks can be used as Central Bank Debt tokens (the two kinds will never end up in the same pile unless you're engaging in some seriously shady accounting), but if you have enough different kinds of tokens, it is recommended that you keep them distinct for psychological reasons.
3. Shuffle the cards and deal each player a hand of three cards
4. The player most recently convicted of accounting malfeasance goes first. If tied, the player with the highest personal equity goes first.
5. The turn passes counter-clockwise. 9412. bhelpuri - 6/21/2010 7:40:05 AM Well, well, there may be life in the old thread yet.
Greetings and salutations, Pseuder. It is nice to see you still connected to this space. I was hoping that was the case.
Shall we play a game? 9413. bhelpuri - 1/30/2011 9:03:00 AM Well, it is a bit of the old feeling all over again, standing riveted and agog as another hugely pivotal moment in history pops out of a clear blue sky, and another monumental edifice that was built to last crumbles to dust right in front of our eyes.
Egypt, wow. The Mubarak regime was obviously much more rotten and crumbling on the inside than the West expected, but it was less than a week ago that Biden was endorsing his leadership! Now, I doubt he even gets to give another speech!
One of many ways that this incident reminds me of the 9/11 moment, is the immediate apprehension of global reverberations from this regime falling the way it has; devastatingly quickly and completely, and broadcast live across the region and the world.
I do not subscribe to any domino theories and other neocon wet dreams, but at the same time I very much doubt that we are seeing the end of this wave of "people power", even "satyagraha" in the region. The timing is right for these tactics to be highly effective. If the Palestinians got their act together right now, they could have their state by summertime. 9414. bhelpuri - 1/30/2011 9:31:02 AM Thinking about America's place in the world ten years after 9/11, and more specifically the Middle East, it's hard not to come to the conclusion that its ability to lead and influence political events in the region have dramatically waned, even if its military positioning is improved via the occupation of Iraq and huge new bases in the Gulf.
With the sudden collapse of two American-supported dictatorial regimes, and a visibly building pressure on two others (Saudi and Jordan), it's pretty evident that there indeed is a "demographic tsunami" which is now manifesting itself in regional politics, and obviously features an implacable opposition to the US presence. We can probably now start to use words like "defeat" to describe what has happened to the US in the Middle East over the past decade.
It's interesting how clearly I recall how I felt when I posted this amazingly prophetic article, probably in this very thread. The writing was already on the wall then. 9415. bhelpuri - 1/31/2011 9:00:26 AM 9416. bhelpuri - 1/31/2011 6:33:29 PM The hypocritical and sanctimonious division of countries by the U.S. and the West between the "axis of evil" on the one hand, and the "moderates" on the other, has collapsed. If there is an axis of evil, then it includes all the non-democratic regimes, including the "moderates" and the "stable" and the "pro-Western." Today Egypt, tomorrow Palestine. Yesterday Tunis, tomorrow Gaza.
Not only is the Fatah regime in Ramallah and the Hamas regime in Gaza destined to fall, but perhaps also, one day, the Israeli occupation, which certainly meets all the criteria of criminal tyranny and an evil regime. It too relies only on guns. It too is hated by all levels of the ruled people, even if they stands helpless, unorganized and unequipped, facing a big army. The first conclusion: Better to end it well, with agreements based on justice and not on power, a moment before the masses have their say and succeed in banishing the darkness.
A second, no less important conclusion: Alliances with unpopular regimes can be torn up overnight. As long as the masses in Egypt and in the entire Arab world continue seeing the images of tyranny and violence from the occupied territories, Israel will not be able to be accepted, even it is acceptable to a few regimes.
From Haaretz.
9417. bhelpuri - 2/1/2011 8:02:04 PM I don't know why people are so gaga over Al Jazeera. It isn't a patch on good old Haaretz for plain-speaking realism.
See today's editorial:
Israeli foreign policy views the reigning regional order, one of tyrants who remain in power for years, as the lesser evil. Israeli leaders have always preferred to do business with Mubarak and his ilk, on the assumption that they would "preserve stability" and forcibly repress the radical forces seeking change in the region.
This view led Israel to disregard the citizens of neighboring countries, viewing them as devoid of political influence in the best case and as hostile Israel-haters in the worst case. Israel viewed itself as a Western outpost and displayed no interest in the language, culture and public opinion of its immediate surroundings. Integration into the Middle East seemed like a trivial, if not a downright harmful, fantasy. As a result, Israel never prepared for the changes that were occurring behind the sclerotic facade of these countries' rulers.
The revolution in Tunisia and the mass anti-government protests in Egypt demand a shift in the way Israel's leaders see the regional order and Israel's place in it. Instead of seeking refuge in the known and the familiar - the tired claims that "there's no one to talk to and no one to rely on" - Israel's foreign policy must adapt itself to a reality in which the citizens of Arab states, and not just tyrants and their cronies, influence the trajectory of their countries' development.
The time has come to start preparing for a new regional order. Instead of clinging to the old, collapsing order, Netanyahu must seek peace agreements with both the Palestinians and with Syria in order to make Israel a more welcome and desirable neighbor.
It don't get any plainer than that.
|
 |
Go To Mote #
|
|
