just a thought
I, like most of you, like to see myself as being reasonably well informed, as staying abreast with the news, trends and happenings in the world and so on and what-have-you. Every now and then I get my comeuppence for that small piece of vanity, in the form of an article or editorial, usually on the internet, that looks at an issue (or a small part of one), from a different perspective, and it just blows me away.
About a week ago, while listening to an internet broadcast on a public radio station, I heard a promo, a short commercial, for a lecture series on what it termed one of the chief causes of the war and strife in Iraq --- the privatization of the Iraqi oil industry. As I listened to the program I was waiting for, I opened a new browser window and googled the term, (without quotation marks). What I read was quite interesting, some of it biased, (in both directions), but interesting. A lot of things made a bit more sense after reading a few of these articles.
The gist of the analysis is that the underlying strategy behind the invasion of Iraq is not to combat Islamic extremism or global terrorism, it is to put significant economic assets into the control of those who now control assetts in other parts of the world, (you know, here).
If this assertion, (on the part of western policy analysts as well as Iraqi nationalists) is only 10% correct, it still represents a huge incursion, for whatever motive, into the affairs of a sovereign people, (note I am not referring to a "rogue government" or "terrorist regime"), and a very significant impediment to their own right to self determination.
Now, speaking as someone who really can't stomach much in the way of current energy prices, I still have to factor this in to my opinion of the current US regime, the Democratic heir apparent, and the overall situation in the world, and, in the popular media.
Those 3000+ victims of 9/11? Apparently, none of them had the keys to the vaults of any Swiss banks, or the deeds to any undeveloped oil fields, so their deaths, while regrettable in that it represents the loss of taxable income for the government, and the loss of the WTC meant a significant economic hit for somebody, all that is just window dressing. I wonder if Osama bin Laden and his relatives are alive today because they did somebody such a big favor?
Focus a little harder.
About a week ago, while listening to an internet broadcast on a public radio station, I heard a promo, a short commercial, for a lecture series on what it termed one of the chief causes of the war and strife in Iraq --- the privatization of the Iraqi oil industry. As I listened to the program I was waiting for, I opened a new browser window and googled the term, (without quotation marks). What I read was quite interesting, some of it biased, (in both directions), but interesting. A lot of things made a bit more sense after reading a few of these articles.
The gist of the analysis is that the underlying strategy behind the invasion of Iraq is not to combat Islamic extremism or global terrorism, it is to put significant economic assets into the control of those who now control assetts in other parts of the world, (you know, here).
If this assertion, (on the part of western policy analysts as well as Iraqi nationalists) is only 10% correct, it still represents a huge incursion, for whatever motive, into the affairs of a sovereign people, (note I am not referring to a "rogue government" or "terrorist regime"), and a very significant impediment to their own right to self determination.
Now, speaking as someone who really can't stomach much in the way of current energy prices, I still have to factor this in to my opinion of the current US regime, the Democratic heir apparent, and the overall situation in the world, and, in the popular media.
Those 3000+ victims of 9/11? Apparently, none of them had the keys to the vaults of any Swiss banks, or the deeds to any undeveloped oil fields, so their deaths, while regrettable in that it represents the loss of taxable income for the government, and the loss of the WTC meant a significant economic hit for somebody, all that is just window dressing. I wonder if Osama bin Laden and his relatives are alive today because they did somebody such a big favor?
Focus a little harder.
posted by eccentric recluse at 2:06 PM
9 Comments:
Puts a whole new slant on one of corporate America's favorite buzz phrases, "level playing field." I think they mean "levelled."
I am not sure what scares me the most, the fact that there appears to be a group of people in the world bent on controlling the rest of us, one way or another, (that is nothing new, but the scale of this is astonishing); or the fact that this appears to operate in plain sight while the majority of us choose to see something else entirely.
I think it is too hard to believe the outrageous stuff that is happening; that is their camouflage. Just do something totally unreasonable, and when someone points it out, you say, that accusation is unreasonable.
"Rosie" style, incoherent and not worthy of comment, almost...
Amazing, the theories that can be pieced together.. with a "control us all" added to the mix.
If there WERE an entity, or consortium aimed at pulling off something like what's implied here... and able to make it happen and stick on the world's stage, and be worth the risks of failure, they'd do it toot sweet... not drag it on and let the blogging geniuses shine the light of truth on them..
As for Middle East self-determination ? War, war, war.. if not for reasons in front of them now, they'll find new ones. They have for god knows how long. Civil war is their choice, even when self-determination is all but handed to them with promises to help make it happen.
hold on just a second there. this is not a conspiracy tome, although I concede that if one wades into this it certainly starts to look like one real quick.
this post brings up one aspect of policy in the mideast, and it is a legitimate issue, I leave it to the reader to determine how much importance it carries, and to decide how much importance it carries in the collective minds of the peoples of the region.
self determination? yeah, I know, its pretty bleak, but civil war is a form of self determination. Those facts, while sad, are not a good strategic or econonomic reason to exploit the situation.
Thanks for stopping by...
...Amazing, the theories that can be pieced together.. with a "control us all" added to the mix...
yes, one can jump to some pretty irrational conclusions, but I will go back and say again that I do not know how much of this is true, but there does seem to be quite a bit of documentation from the State & Defense Departments around, not too mention the positions of some political interests abroad for this not to be some kind of a factor here. I state here an now that I find it interesting that this particular aspect of strategy has not seen so much as a bah humbug by the administration talking heads among all the talk of WMD's, the global war on terror and a flowering of democracy in the region. It is my belief that there is always more than meets the eye when it comes to money and power.
If there WERE an entity, or consortium aimed at pulling off something like what's implied here... and able to make it happen and stick on the world's stage, and be worth the risks of failure, they'd do it toot sweet... not drag it on and let the blogging geniuses shine the light of truth on them.
ever hear of BP-Amoco? They got their licks in nearly a hundred years ago and are still reaping a handy profit from the House of Saud. No, there is most likely not a monolithic them, but a number of smaller ones, political, economic and religious. If you disagree, fine, but don't think for a minute that big money/business does not influence government policy up to and including waging war to subjugate an enemy. They get the luxury of deciding who an enemy is...
Wellll ,, that's a completely different way to look at it. Of course big business influences government decisions (right up to, and including foreign policy). There's a good and bad to it. But (big but), who are these big businesses, and who are the people whom they influence, and who are the people who benefit ? That list includes just about all of us... from managers to stock-holders to customers to voters.
Nobody is naive enough to think that this country; it's freedom and standard of living could happen without global exploitation. That's just how it works. That's how it will always work.
Remove the PC gloves and you gotta see that the Middle East is it's own, worst enemy. Cultures are the product of people in the long run. Sure, people can be victims of a culture for a decade, generation or even century...but what's been going on in the M.E. hsan't even slowed down through the information age. In fact, it's worsened. That this war-driven people sits on the planet's energy jugular dictates that they be exploited. I'm actually amazed that the civilized world hasn't colonized that part of the world, utterly and permanently. Self-determination indeed.
Before you slap me with a racist label.. think about how much evil the world has lived through, 'cause of the state of the M.E.
I don't think you are a racist, and while I agree with many of the facts you have noted it is from a slightly different perspective. I point to a lack of transparency here, (and that puts it rather kindly, deceit is a more apt term), a situation that constructs a scenario for public consumption that actually hides true motivations.
Corporate interests? yep, we all have them, but I have mentioned before, on these pages, that corporations are not individuals, and have far too much leeway and privelege in conducting their operations. I am familiar with only a couple of good sized concerns, but these companies actually own a controlling interest in themselves. If every independent shareholder voted one way, the Boards could legitimately vote the Boards shares and go in a completely different direction if it so chose. The corporation should have no rights or prerogatives, but face it, we all know that they do and that they dwarf those of the individual or even large groups of individuals.
I am hesitant to put a label on this type of operation, to much danger of being seen as a cliche...
just my $0.02.
Ever wonder why nobody; not congress, a Nader-type or a Moore-type... nobody.. I mean nobody has been able to hold big-oil's feet to the fire over profits and gas prices... ever ? I know I do/did.
It's because everyone who's bothered to get their hands dirty and feet wet; looking into it; runs away saying, "nevermind, please pretend I was never here".
The chore of getting oil from around the world and into your gas tank is logistical nightmare, and very risky. The fact that it's done at all (let alone for less than $10/gallon) is the wondrous product of captitalsm and the pursuit of profit. Without futures speculators to insure the flow... and incredibly resourceful and capable oil companies put it all together, well what's the alternative? A government run conglomeration to handle it all from overseas shipping, to refining to distribution and finally to run and maintain retail outlets ? We'd be lucky to get it done for less than $10/gallon... and be lucky if the supply were the least bit reliable.
And on top of all this, there are all the restrictions put up on new refineries and new drilling by everyone from tree-huggers to liberal politicians. And now this nonsense about windfall profit taxes.. unbelievable.
We're still very very lucky to be getting gas-on-demand, every major street corner for $3/gallon.
You won't see a polititina or activist show us how evil big-oil is.. 'cause they aint. And if they do get special treatment as a corporation, we all benefit.
Anyway.. my point is... special treatment for corps benefits us all.. from the corp employee, to the stock-holder, to the customer... and if it's a little too special.. so what ? NOBODY can do what they do, for how much they charge. Letting a corp reap windfall profits is way better than letting a government tax us at the levels they do. Now there's a problem to look into.
Post a Comment
<< Home