Picture of the Day - "Progress" in Iraq / Update

[Chandernagore]

The oil industry is in the process of being privatized. Bad tongues (but not me !) will pretend that they are being sold to US oil interests. What a sick outworldish thinking ! Bush would never do that ... in spite of the 5% US population consuming 25% of the world oil production. We must appreciate that current studies show that cheap oil production will peak somewhere between 2015 and 2040 and then the price will steadily increase as demand increase (check China) and world production starts diminishing. There are alternative sources of oil but all are far more costly to implement than the current oil field tapping system. Everybody knows our oil addicted economies are in for a rough ride in the short future.

Meanwhile I see that DRC asks again for increased EU commitment. DRC is right in the middle of the "non globalizing gap" so that fits the neocon theory of military intervention perfectly. But unfortunately there is no oil or any other sort of strategic interest there so the wonder theory is already collapsing. Even Dick Cheney is not interested. One must set priorities in order to be succesfull ! Still, we, simple minds, wonder what would happen if huge oil reserves were suddenly discovered in DRC ground.

After all maybe EU should gobble Turkey. That would close the range with the last big oil sources. You never know :rollroll:

[Indrid]

THE JEWS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
THE ILLUMINATI!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
HITLER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ELVIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Chandernagore]

THE AWEFULL GREEN THINGS FROM OUTERSPACE !!!!!!
INDRID !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Florin]

QUOTE

...... After all maybe EU should gobble Turkey. That would close the range with the last big oil sources. You never know   :rollroll:

I am reminding you that 10 years ago I worked as engineer for the petroleum industry in Turkey. Their production, as of 1994, offered about a third of the necessary. So Turkey was an importer, as of 1994.

The European Union should look somewhere else for petroleum.

Something else the EU should do...
As student in the first year I learnt at Chemistry (not a major discipline) that the French were experiencing with bacteria or other microorganisms, able to produce hydrogen from water, under the sunlight. I don't know what happened with those studies.
The genetic science made huge leaps meanwhile, so a fresh restart of the research could be possible.

[Chandernagore]

QUOTE

QUOTE ...... After all maybe EU should gobble Turkey. That would close the range with the last big oil sources. You never know   :rollroll: I am reminding you that 10 years ago I worked as engineer for the petroleum industry in Turkey. Their production, as of 1994, offered about a third of the necessary. So Turkey was an importer, as of 1994. The European Union should look somewhere else for petroleum.

Ah I was not looking at Turkey as a source of oil but as a base to grab it. For example, as soon as the prices get too high, we could decide that Saudi Arabia needs a democracy :loool:

QUOTE

Something else the EU should do...   As student in the first year I learnt at Chemistry (not a major discipline) that the French were experiencing with bacteria or other microorganisms, able to produce hydrogen from water, under the sunlight. I don't know what happened with those studies.   The genetic science made huge leaps meanwhile, so a fresh restart of the research could be possible.

I agree. Research is what we should invest in right now and seriously, not when we will be on the brink of economic disruption at some point in the future. However there are at least two obstacles :
1. Politicians are usually elected for 4 years, not 20 or 40
2. The powerfull oil lobbies have no interest in developping competition

I had myself long ago the opportunity to work on a project of alternate fuel based on polyalcohols. I declined, there was insufficient funding
I fear that as long as oil is cheap, things will stagnate.

[Chandernagore]

Deal with the UN !

Both sides put some water in their wine so as to meet halfway. Well, I did not expect people to behave reasonably at this stage

All this circus to end up where it started :roll:

[Florin]

The following link is right in our topic:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...id=540&ncid=716

No comments.

[mabadesc]

Great article. Thanks for posting the link, Florin!

[Chandernagore]

It's over : Bush lost. Wanted to play the lone cow boy but had to run back screaming to the UN. Good. We can now close this folder and go sleep in peace.

Thanks to all posters and see you next invasion :mrgreen:

[mabadesc]

[quote]It's over : Bush lost. Wanted to play the lone cow boy but had to run back screaming to the UN.[/quote]

I thought you'd praise him for seeking and obtaining UN intervention. Isn't this what you've been screaming about for the last year?

Now that he did it, you interpret it as "he lost", and you almost sound disappointed that you won't have to complain about this issue any longer.

P.S. I've been thinking of posting a message when the UN resolution was approved, but then I thought I'd wait to see how long it would take you to mention it, and what kind of spin you would put on it: positive (as in, Finally! Way to go, Bush!), or negative (as in, he lost, or he was forced to do it). I guess you chose the negative spin.

[Chandernagore]

[quote]I've been thinking of posting a message when the UN resolution was approved, but then I thought I'd wait to see how long it would take you to mention it, and what kind of spin you would put on it: positive (as in, Finally! Way to go, Bush!), or negative (as in, he lost, or he was forced to do it). I guess you chose the negative spin.[/quote]



Midway. Yes, he lost in the sense that his unilateral strategy concept has been shot down in flames and that's all there ever was in the Iraki experiment. But he get some points for (finally) recognizing that without some sort of legitimacy (not rooted in religious extremism) the path to democratisation is crossing a triple layer minefield.

Perhaps now something positive can be done with Irak, whatever the initial objective...

[mabadesc]

[quote]Midway. Yes, he lost in the sense that his unilateral strategy concept has been shot down in flames and that's all there ever was in the Iraki experiment. But he get some points for (finally) recognizing that without some sort of legitimacy (not rooted in religious extremism) the path to democratisation is crossing a triple layer minefield.[/quote]

I'm glad we're - finally - once again in partial agreement.

I say partial because I disagree with your statement that his unilateral strategy has been "shot down in flames".
If you remember, the US administration preferred and favored UN involvement even before the war broke out. But since they did not obtain it and since the UN wanted to continue to sit on their....hands for another God-knows-how-long period of time, the US proceeded ahead with their independent coalition: Great Britain, Italy, Spain, Australia, etc...

Now that the UN wants to join and share the responsibility of reconstruction and peace-keeping, that's great. Bush wanted them from the very beginning, but hey!, "late is better than never", right?

About your "path to democratization" being very dangerous, I couldn't agree more. It sure is, and this may have been the one point the US administration under-estimated with the Irak conflict. It's not that they were not aware it would be dangerous, it's just that they thought it would go smoother than it actually did.


[quote]Perhaps now something positive can be done with Irak, whatever the initial objective...[/quote]

You and I are in complete, total agreement here. :cheers:

[mabadesc]

Well, now it looks like those invisible WMD's may have existed after all, just before, during and after the Irak war.

This has just been admitted by the UN. Straight from the horse's mouth, so to speak.

Here are the first few paragraphs from an article in the World Tribune, which includes the UN's admission. If you want to read the whole article, you can find it at http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/b...breaking_1.html

QUOTE

UN inspectors: Saddam shipped out WMD before war and after     SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COM Friday, June 11, 2004 The United Nations has determined that Saddam Hussein shipped weapons of mass destruction components as well as medium-range ballistic missiles before, during and after the U.S.-led war against Iraq in 2003. The UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission briefed the Security Council on new findings that could help trace the whereabouts of Saddam's missile and WMD program. The briefing contained satellite photographs that demonstrated the speed with which Saddam dismantled his missile and WMD sites before and during the war. Council members were shown photographs of a ballistic missile site outside Baghdad in May 2003, and then saw a satellite image of the same location in February 2004, in which facilities had disappeared.

[Chandernagore]

QUOTE

The United Nations has determined that Saddam Hussein shipped weapons of mass destruction components as well as medium-range ballistic missiles before, during and after the U.S.-led war against Iraq in 2003.

Mmm I find it very hard to believe that *after* the war, from the bottom of his rathole, Saddam shipped out WMDs. On the other hand, that he destroyed ballistic missiles before the war is pretty well covered by the UN inspectors who watched the process back then. But trying to disarm was no longer a solution for him. Also, I'm not sure that it sets the good example for the others : disarm and we invade; get WMD quickly (N.Korea) and we leave you alone.

Anyway we could discuss indefinitely about who joined the other first, the US or the UN. I think the more important is that they are acting together again to salvage the situation and that's certainly good.

[Florin]

QUOTE

It's over : Bush lost. Wanted to play the lone cow boy but had to run back screaming to the UN. Good. We can now close this folder and go sleep in peace.....

Not so fast :!: Don't be so sure. We'll see after November.
Many American voters have no idea about the way the rest of the planet is thinking about the U.S., and others, even if they know, they don't care.
The old adage of Ludovic XIV: "Alone against all."

QUOTE

........ Also, I'm not sure that it sets the good example for the others : disarm and we invade; get WMD quickly (N.Korea) and we leave you alone.....

The invasion threats for North Korea could be good just for the ears of the average American folk.
America will never invade North Korea (simply because they will be by far a more redundant and stubborn foe than Iraq or Afghanistan.)
I would add that economical pressure could proof more useful, but knowing that in that famine few years ago about 1 of every 10 North Koreans died of hunger, and the regime still survived, I am skeptical about a date when that regime will fall.
However, this is unpredictable. In the early 80's ('81, '82...) a Frenchman made a study and wrote a book about how long the Communism will last. He said not earlier than in 40 years, not later than in 100 years.
For me, a teenager, 40 years sounded hopeful enough, but depressive (I would live to see it, but I'll be an old man), and 100 years sounded hopeless, of course. However, Communism fell in Europe and Russia after only other 7 years.