Posted on 05/15/2007 9:44:06 AM PDT by Sleeping Beauty
Reading too many NY Times quagmire stories?
*shrug* Sometimes I do...
You didn’t know about Alaska Oil Royalties? It’s how they get people to live in that frozen wasteland.
As to your other statement, nowhere in that article does it say the Kurds oppose revenue sharing. They oppose a national oil company. Here’s what they say about revenue sharing:
“”We want to create an automatic payment mechanism where it doesn’t rely on the goodwill of the finance minister or the oil minister for the regions to get their fair share,” he said”
So they are FOR revenue sharing, they want it to be based on free market, not some oil minister, and be an automatic payment to all regions that makes sure they all get their “fair share”. Under Saddam, the Kurds got almost NONE of the oil revenue, and they fear corrupt politicians will take the money and give it to their supporters instead of the Kurds.
The only outcome I see is that no matter what, the US taxpayers (and their descendants for generations to come) are going to get stuck paying off the holders of all those T-Bills to the tune of almost a Trillion dollars.
Maybe the genius brain trust in DC should cut a deal with which ever faction will agree to pay us back and sell us oil below market.....................
You're right. I assume they are currently piping it through Iraq.
When we pipe oil through Canada, I assume we pay Canada.
All I know for sure is that without this oil revenue sharing bill signed by the Iraqi government -- now -- they will remain locked in a worsening civil war and Americans will not willingly continue to sacrifice our soldiers and our treasure while they slug it out and bleed us dry.
The real bottom line is that we need this oil. It's a national security issue. We need the oil more than we need to kill Al Qaeda in Bagdad and its environs.
So, what do you suggest we do if the Kurds pull out of the Iraq Parliament? (Followed by the Sunnis.) Back to square one?
I didn't even know they existed. I assume you are the expert on that.
This is a critical thinking thread.
I'm not so sure which is the greater priority...
LOL! BWHAHAHA!! Thanks..whew...I needed the laugh. That's got to be the most pie in the sky, unrealistic, load I've heard in at least a week. I would point out the glaring differences between the two regions but I realize 'conservatives' don't like real compare and contrast between current and past police actions...
I honestly didn't. But now I am looking it up. Maybe I can afford a second home and have my share of the oil revenues pay for it. It's better than an IRA.
As to your other statement, nowhere in that article does it say the Kurds oppose revenue sharing. They oppose a national oil company.
You are right. I jumped to fast conclusions because I see a vast gulf that cannot be crossed -- at least not in time to prevent the fall of the Iraqi government. I really don't want to start over again. You know? And I really want to walk away with the oil -- to help make up for all the sacrifices we made for these people.
I'm not so sure which is the greater priority...
Well, I'm a capitalist. Can't help it. Get the money first, then kick their butts.
It would make the war easier to sell at home, as well.
As usual, a content-less post.
Well, it would be critical thinking if the original story was as alarmist as you make it out to be.
But to keep a promise, I will make a post, one post, which will explain why you're wrong. Again.
Create a number of viable separate oil businesses. Issue every adult Iraqi citizen ownership shares in all of these separate operations. Allow these shares to be bought & sold on an Iraqi stock exchange. Those who want to stay in the oil business keep their shares and buy more. Those who prefer cash now sell their shares. Once oil is in the marketplace, the need to fight over control of the government will be reduced.
We make it clear to the Kurds if they torpedo a reasonable oil deal, that we need to end the Sunni insurgency, they will forfeit our protection and we will not defend them against Sunni, Turkish or Iranian incursions.
Afghanistan should have been fragmented along ethnic lines into mutually warring pissant regions, and the same fate should have befallen Iraq.
I guess the globe makers didn't have a lobby to push for this.
To the untrained eye, it may look alarmist -- but it is an alarming development from the perspective of national security and the US economy.
Last week, Vice-President Cheney traveled to Iraq for the SOLE purpose of forcing the Iraqi Patliament to sign the oil revenue sharing bill that the Parliament announced days earlier was drafted.
Trust me when I tell you that Cheney was not there for a photo op or to sabre rattle with Iran. Those of us in the global economy business are balancing on a knife edge waiting for this to come down. The stakes are high.
If the bill doesn't get signed before June -- the Iraqi parliament will probably disintegrate, oil prices could slam America like nothing we've ever seen before, the US might be forced to pull troops out of Iraq, and our national security could be compromised.
Admittedly -- none of this gets into the news (except high-level financial news) -- but a few creative souls around here like to "think" about things rather than "react" to them. It's the classical conservative approach.
It would be nice to have you in the game.
I have been following developments in Iraq like a hawk since day one. I do not share your pessimism. The fact that Kurds today, or Sunni’s yesterday, or Shia last month threaten to leave the gov’t does not concern me. It is how things work in a parliamentary system. It is how they jostle for power.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.