Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How do you feel about the USA turning Iraq into a satellite nation?
It isn't. If it were, we'd actually be deriving some net benefit, instead of it being a continual drain on our national resources and a trillion $ blunder we will be paying for the next generation or so.
If we had any kind of real control over there we would also at LEAST have expected to seize their oil... or hell, their oil contracts, which instead appear to by and large have gone to European companies.
It isn't. If it were, we'd actually be deriving some net benefit, instead of it being a continual drain on our national resources and a trillion $ blunder we will be paying for the next generation or so.
If we had any kind of real control over there we would also at LEAST have expected to seize their oil... or hell, their oil contracts, which instead appear to by and large have gone to European companies.
Some "satellite nation," indeed!
USA controls their politics
USA corporations aren't benefiting from Iraq reconstruction?
Oil: "Prior to the 2003 invasion and occupation of Iraq, US and other western oil companies were all but completely shut out of Iraq's oil market," oil industry analyst Antonia Juhasz told Al Jazeera. "But thanks to the invasion and occupation, the companies are now back inside Iraq and producing oil there for the first time since being forced out of the country in 1973."
"Even as Chinese oil companies lock up the majority of oil from Iraq, four American development companies, including Halliburton, are sucking up half the development dollars that will be spent over the next 10 years."
The mistake you are making is comparing European socialism to American capitalism. The entire goal of American war mongering is to benefit Corporations. The goal isn't to improve American or Iraqi lives, it's to make them depended on American business. This has been American agenda since the end of WW2.
USA corporations aren't benefiting from Iraq reconstruction?
Oil: "Prior to the 2003 invasion and occupation of Iraq, US and other western oil companies were all but completely shut out of Iraq's oil market," oil industry analyst Antonia Juhasz told Al Jazeera. "But thanks to the invasion and occupation, the companies are now back inside Iraq and producing oil there for the first time since being forced out of the country in 1973."
"Even as Chinese oil companies lock up the majority of oil from Iraq, four American development companies, including Halliburton, are sucking up half the development dollars that will be spent over the next 10 years."
None of this establishes Iraq as a "Satellite Nation" of the US, except that it now actually trades with us. Like China. Or Estonia.
And, the key is NET benefit. Frankly the amount of benefit to American corporations pales in comparison to the price of the war. (And damned right if we're going to be the one PAYING for the re-development, the LEAST that could happen is that an American company get the bulk of the contracts. It being Halliburton is kind of obvious though).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red_Devil
The mistake you are making is comparing European socialism to American capitalism. The entire goal of American war mongering is to benefit Corporations. The goal isn't to improve American or Iraqi lives, it's to make them depended on American business. This has been American agenda since the end of WW2.
European socialism cannot exist without capitalism. And it cannot exist without the type of adventurism pursued (for example, Gulf War 1, fought basically for Euro interests and Saudi interests).
But I agree in principal. Securing - by force if necessary - of strategic resources and markets for the use by the West and its allies (including of course, the United States) is no secret.
It's what lets you and me sit on a computer and banter instead of actually having to struggle for anything in life.
But that's not annexation of territory. And it's not what Russia did vis-à-vis Crimea.
Location: In a Galaxy far, far away called Germany
4,300 posts, read 4,409,483 times
Reputation: 2394
Quote:
Originally Posted by musiqum
Russia did nothing wrong to Crimea. And Crimea voluntary reunited with Russia.
LOL! Yeah, right! Those "self defense" forces (that are just Russian troops with their patches removed) were always in the Crimea (complete with tanks, helicopters, and Armored personnel carriers). If they were interested in finding out what the Crimeans wanted, then why were the only two choices to vote for: 1) Become independent or 2) become part of Russia? Why was there not a # 3) to stay in the Ukraine, as an option? You russians just ought to 'fes up and just admit that you wanted Crimea as a last option because you couldn't control the Ukraine in it's entirety. The Ukrainians have no one to blame but themselves though. They couldn't/wouldn't stop being a corrupt nation and even elected a man (Yanukovich) who - despite only making a small amount of money as President - built a 75 million dollar mansion. I guess it pays to be a russian puppet.
LOL! Yeah, right! Those "self defense" forces (that are just Russian troops with their patches removed) were always in the Crimea (complete with tanks, helicopters, and Armored personnel carriers). If they were interested in finding out what the Crimeans wanted, then why were the only two choices to vote for: 1) Become independent or 2) become part of Russia? Why was there not a # 3) to stay in the Ukraine, as an option? You russians just ought to 'fes up and just admit that you wanted Crimea as a last option because you couldn't control the Ukraine in it's entirety. The Ukrainians have no one to blame but themselves though. They couldn't/wouldn't stop being a corrupt nation and even elected a man (Yanukovich) who - despite only making a small amount of money as President - built a 75 million dollar mansion. I guess it pays to be a russian puppet.
It doesn't matter what russians wanted or what they were interested in... And this is because the primary initiative of reunification with the Russia belonged to crimean people themselves. It was their own choice by their good will regardless of any russian intention. And that crimean referendum has been held by crimean authorities, not by Russia.
That's why I can repeat again - Russia did nothing wrong to Crimea.
BTW, Yanukovich never been a russian puppet. He was always playing his own game. His presidential chair swung in different directions depending on current situation. And I think this is the main reason of why he lost so shameful and infamously.
But the US wants their puppet government in Ukraine now. http://www.presstv.com/detail/2014/03/02/352880/us-wants-puppet-government-in-ukraine/
Last edited by musiqum; 04-04-2014 at 09:29 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
