'None of the offered plans now before us to de-escalate the war disavow what we all know to be its original goals — control of Iraq’s oil and the building of large, permanent US military bases in Iraq.' commondreams.org

Is it true that no plans address those issues? Are any mainstream politicians in the US talking about them?

I won't speculate or comment, but certainly would not consider "commondreams.org" as a credible source.

quote:

Originally posted by newnickname:
'None of the offered plans now before us to de-escalate the war disavow what we all know to be its original goals — control of Iraq’s oil and the building of large, permanent US military bases in Iraq.' commondreams.org

Is it true that no plans address those issues? Are any mainstream politicians in the US talking about them?

I have never heard or read anything about how any 'withdrawal' would affect the permanent bases we are building, or even why we are building in Baghdad the largest US Embassy in the world!

Shouldn't your subject line read withdrawal pains?

At first glance that is how I read it, which given the long drawn out process of reaching a resolution to withdrawal our troops, pains is an understatement.

I'm actually kind of miffed at the Democrats on this matter - but then all politicians are pretty much limp, spineless, self serving (edited for profanity) so I'm not to miffed.

quote:

I won't speculate or comment, but certainly would not consider "commondreams.org" as a credible source.

I agree.

I don't think 'commondreams' credibility, or lack of it, is important to this thread. I just used the site, in this instance, because the quote put a thought neatly. You don't need to be a particularly credible source to ask a valid question.

Are you guys saying that there aren't huge, permanent-looking US bases being built in Iraq, and that there aren't unusual provisions in the proposed oil and gas law, giving UK and US oil companies a huge say in control of Iraqi resources?

One of the benchmarks the Democrats are touting, and Bush is saying seem a good idea, is the passing of the law on oil. This contains provisions on sharing revenue equitably among Sunnis, Shias and Kurds, which is probably a good thing. But it also contains the colonialist resource-grab provisions.

The Democrats don't seem to be discussing the bases or the attempt to secure the oil. Is there a consensus in the US that it can't just quit Iraq empty-handed? That 'enduring' bases and priviliged access to the oil are not negotiable? Or are those issues being discussed by mainstream politicians?

quote:

“You don't need to be a particularly credible source to ask a valid question.”

If you want a quote or point to be taken seriously it should be taken from a creditable source .

‘Commondreams’ is pretty much on the same level of credibility, or lack of it as this site in my opinion.

OK, OK. Please forget I mentioned 'commondreams' (the material on which is from a variety of alternative and mainstream sources - of varying credibility). It shouldn't matter to its validity where a question comes from, but obviously to some of you, it does. So forget it, or start another thread in which 'commondreams' can be discussed; 'commondreams' is not relevant to the topic. I'm sorry I picked that quote.

(Although I notice nobody has challenged the actual substance of the quote - are you saying there aren't issues involving the permanence of US bases and foreign control of Iraqi oil?)

Suppose the first post had been...

Are mainstream politicians discussing the issue of the US's enduring bases in Iraq, or the controversial production sharing agreements concerning oil, when they discuss withdrawal from Iraq?

...what would you have answered?

In other words, the Democrats don't seem to be discussing the bases or the attempts to secure oil. Is there a consensus in the US that it can't just walk away from Iraq empty-handed? That enduring bases and priviliged access to the oil are not negotiable?

Or, to put it another way, is it true that no withdrawal plans address those issues? Are any mainstream politicians in the US talking about them?

NNN. We forget nothing. We forgive nothing.

Possibly the oilworkers in Basra have been accessing that commondreams site:

'The unions oppose language that they deem offers too much of Iraq's 115 billion barrels of proven reserves to foreign companies.' www.upi.com

If only someone would tell them that questions raised on commondreams.org should be ignored.