Iraq wants U.S. withdrawal timetable

[gabosaurus]

The Iraqis needs all U.S. forces to leave. So it can negotiate with Iran.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25585978/

[Psychoblues]

The present administration will not agree to anything without an oil agreement. Didn't we all see that coming down the pike?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!

[5stringJeff]

If the Iraqis want a timetable, why aren't we giving them one?

[Psychoblues]

The oil considerations are being obstinate, jeff.

If the Iraqis want a timetable, why aren't we giving them one?

That's why. We will give them one on Jan. 20, 2009 or shortly thereafter. Sorry, jeff, but that's about the best we can do considering the present economic attachments to the oil industry of the present administration.

How much you want to bet that Iraq will again nationalize their oil industry within 2 years after we leave?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? When that happens the USA will be the only oil producing nation left on Earth that hasn't nationalized their oil industry, but that's excluding Alaska. From a practical standpoint Alaska has seen to it that their population benefits from every drop of oil that is exported from their precious state. Cool thought, ain't it?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

God Bless America

I Just Want To Celebrate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[5stringJeff]

Why would we nationalize any industry? How will government bureaucrats be able to run one super-duper oil company more efficiently than current oil companies do?

[manu1959]

The Iraqis needs all U.S. forces to leave. So it can negotiate with Iran.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25585978/

from the article.....

Fall in violence emboldens government
Iraq's government has felt increasingly confident in recent weeks about its authority and the country's improved stability, and Iraqi officials have sharpened their public stance in the negotiations considerably in just the last few days.

Violence in Iraq has fallen to its lowest level in four years. The change has been driven by the 2007 buildup of American forces, the Sunni tribal revolt against al-Qaida in Iraq and crackdowns against Shiite militias and Sunni extremists.

too funny our forces make them safe...and they get all cocky.....

this is exactly why i continue to say close all foreign military bases...cut off all foreign aid.....secure our borders and invest in america.....

if countries want our forces in their country they can pay us to have them there......

[retiredman]

Why would we nationalize any industry? How will government bureaucrats be able to run one super-duper oil company more efficiently than current oil companies do?

economies of scale... the same economic reality that drives most M&A activity.

[Psychoblues]

Are you familiar with Aramco, Jeff?

Why would we nationalize any industry? How will government bureaucrats be able to run one super-duper oil company more efficiently than current oil companies do?

Saudi Arabia was the first to nationalize their oil industry. They did so because Aramco and associates were lying, cheating, stealing and running havoc on the people residing in the country from which they were extracting resourses and they (Aramco et al) were making trillions of dollars in pure profits. Saudi Arabia wanted strict oversight and a national benefit to the people of it's country for the resourses it was providing to the oil business. They got that by nationalizing the entire industry within their borders and properties beyond. Aramco still runs it it but with less opportunities to lie, cheat and steal. It is a lot more complicated and comprehensive than that but that is the basic reason Saudi Arabia and every other oil producing country on Earth has nationalized their oil businesses.

Alaska drew up their oil business considerations based from the original Saudi documents and thus the Alaskan oil industry is effectively nationalized except it only applies to the State of Alaska and not as any significant boon to other citizens of the United States of America.

I hope this doesn't confuse you but that you become more interested in the subject and research it more for your own benefit and understanding. The oil industries have not been kind to Mother Earth or the people that live here. Dig it?!??!?!?!?!??!???!?!?!?

God Bless America!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I Just Want To Celebrate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[5stringJeff]

Are you familiar with Aramco, Jeff?



Saudi Arabia was the first to nationalize their oil industry. They did so because Aramco and associates were lying, cheating, stealing and running havoc on the people residing in the country from which they were extracting resourses and they (Aramco et al) were making trillions of dollars in pure profits. Saudi Arabia wanted strict oversight and a national benefit to the people of it's country for the resourses it was providing to the oil business. They got that by nationalizing the entire industry within their borders and properties beyond. Aramco still runs it it but with less opportunities to lie, cheat and steal. It is a lot more complicated and comprehensive than that but that is the basic reason Saudi Arabia and every other oil producing country on Earth has nationalized their oil businesses.

Alaska drew up their oil business considerations based from the original Saudi documents and thus the Alaskan oil industry is effectively nationalized except it only applies to the State of Alaska and not as any significant boon to other citizens of the United States of America.

I hope this doesn't confuse you but that you become more interested in the subject and research it more for your own benefit and understanding. The oil industries have not been kind to Mother Earth or the people that live here. Dig it?!??!?!?!?!??!???!?!?!?

God Bless America!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I Just Want To Celebrate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So, when oil companies make trillions of dollars in "pure profit," where do you suppose that goes? Well, it goes to the shareholders (or stockholders). From there, where does it go?

Some of it goes to buy houses, meaning that people in the construction industry have jobs.

Some of it goes to buy cars, meaning there are more auto industry jobs.

Some of it goes to buy other luxury items, providing jobs to jewelers, shipbuilders, and the like.

Some of it stays in the bank, which, in a world of fractional reserves and fiat money, means that banks have more money to loan out, lowering interest rates.

In other words, all of that "pure profit" goes back into the economy, providing capital and demand for jobs. In contrast, when the government gets all that money, that capital and job demand is forsaken, and the economy does not grow. So I would much rather have private companies make profit and allow the economy to grow than for a nationalized company to take money out of the economy.

[Psychoblues]

Ridiculous argument, Jeff.

So, when oil companies make trillions of dollars in "pure profit," where do you suppose that goes? Well, it goes to the shareholders (or stockholders). From there, where does it go?

Some of it goes to buy houses, meaning that people in the construction industry have jobs.

Some of it goes to buy cars, meaning there are more auto industry jobs.

Some of it goes to buy other luxury items, providing jobs to jewelers, shipbuilders, and the like.

Some of it stays in the bank, which, in a world of fractional reserves and fiat money, means that banks have more money to loan out, lowering interest rates.

In other words, all of that "pure profit" goes back into the economy, providing capital and demand for jobs. In contrast, when the government gets all that money, that capital and job demand is forsaken, and the economy does not grow. So I would much rather have private companies make profit and allow the economy to grow than for a nationalized company to take money out of the economy.

How much of it goes to improve the lives of the people that generate the goods that provide the "pure profit"? Your equations don't add up with this old libertarian.

God Bless America!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I Just Want To Celebrate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Psychoblues

[5stringJeff]

Ridiculous argument, Jeff.

How much of it goes to improve the lives of the people that generate the goods that provide the "pure profit"? Your equations don't add up with this old libertarian.

It keeps those people employed, so I would say that a lot of it goes to improve those people's lives.

[Psychoblues]

What people, jeff?

It keeps those people employed, so I would say that a lot of it goes to improve those people's lives.

Have you ever been to a third world oil producing nation, jeff? I doubt it. I have and I know the truth about it. Your speculation is just that if not lies altogether. Even Alaska is smart enough to embellish the livelihoods of it's own population with oil profits. Convince me that I am wrong.

God Bless America!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I Just Want To Celebrate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Psychoblues

[No1tovote4]

So, when oil companies make trillions of dollars in "pure profit," where do you suppose that goes? Well, it goes to the shareholders (or stockholders). From there, where does it go?

Some of it goes to buy houses, meaning that people in the construction industry have jobs.

Some of it goes to buy cars, meaning there are more auto industry jobs.

Some of it goes to buy other luxury items, providing jobs to jewelers, shipbuilders, and the like.

Some of it stays in the bank, which, in a world of fractional reserves and fiat money, means that banks have more money to loan out, lowering interest rates.

In other words, all of that "pure profit" goes back into the economy, providing capital and demand for jobs. In contrast, when the government gets all that money, that capital and job demand is forsaken, and the economy does not grow. So I would much rather have private companies make profit and allow the economy to grow than for a nationalized company to take money out of the economy.

Do not forget that "Corporate Taxes" is doublespeak. Corporations do not pay taxes, their customers do. What a "Corporate Tax" is in reality is a non-progressive sales tax directly upon those who the Ds supposedly are trying to "protect" from paying taxes on a large part.

It makes everything more expensive, it decreases growth and is counter productive.

There were two things that were done that we know helped the Great Depression deepen. 'Taxing the rich' was one of them...

It makes people feel good to hear that they are "paying their fair share", but it is directly opposite and it hurts the 'little guy'.

[5stringJeff]

Do not forget that "Corporate Taxes" is doublespeak. Corporations do not pay taxes, their customers do. What a "Corporate Tax" is in reality is a non-progressive sales tax directly upon those who the Ds supposedly are trying to "protect" from paying taxes on a large part.

It makes everything more expensive, it decreases growth and is counter productive.

There were two things that were done that we know helped the Great Depression deepen. 'Taxing the rich' was one of them...

It makes people feel good to hear that they are "paying their fair share", but it is directly opposite and it hurts the 'little guy'.

Indeed. And guess who has the highest corporate tax rates in the developed world? America!!!

[Psychoblues]

Wanna bet?

Indeed. And guess who has the highest corporate tax rates in the developed world? America!!!

That is a myth put out by reichwingers, jeff. However, put your money where your mouth is and name a bet you are willing to risk?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

God Bless America!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I Just Want To Celebrate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Psychoblues