Bimmercat, this story has been around for a while now. I think you posted it some time ago. But where is the real evidence? If it is true I agree with you but until authentic documents from reliable sources are produced I prefer to be cynical.
Mart
oil for food?
Re: oil for food?
Well, whenever I hear people argue that the Yanks only went in there for oil I point out that if thats what they really wanted all they had to do was tell Saddam -
" Look, you're corrupt and want to stay in charge. We can get rid of you anytime we want, but if you keep selling us oil at a reasonable price and guarentee its supply, we'll look after you. "
If this is supposed to all be about oil then its a funny way to go about things. They've lost nearly 1000 troops, cost several hundred billion dollars, probably cost the President his job and made the bloody price of oil go up anyway ! They've made a mess I have to admit, but I still thnk they went there for the right reasons.
You probably all hate me now but I'm used to copping shit over this. Go on, fling some.
" Look, you're corrupt and want to stay in charge. We can get rid of you anytime we want, but if you keep selling us oil at a reasonable price and guarentee its supply, we'll look after you. "
If this is supposed to all be about oil then its a funny way to go about things. They've lost nearly 1000 troops, cost several hundred billion dollars, probably cost the President his job and made the bloody price of oil go up anyway ! They've made a mess I have to admit, but I still thnk they went there for the right reasons.
You probably all hate me now but I'm used to copping shit over this. Go on, fling some.
Phwooorr...look at her....CRASH
Re: oil for food?
According to the media the problem is that all the chinese have upgraded from 50cc to 100cc mopeds .
If the war wasn't about oil , then heads should roll at MI6 and the CIA as the WMD intelligence was bollocks
If the war wasn't about oil , then heads should roll at MI6 and the CIA as the WMD intelligence was bollocks
Ride Yamaha , support Rossi !
Re: oil for food?
To give a literal answer
Smallest swept volume m/c 125cc (James ,Excelsior, CG125 and a loaner Yam SR125 that I can remember)
ditto car 850cc mini .
All of them an absolute hoot . James Hunt loved his A35 van because you could drive it on the limit , without speeding !
Smallest swept volume m/c 125cc (James ,Excelsior, CG125 and a loaner Yam SR125 that I can remember)
ditto car 850cc mini .
All of them an absolute hoot . James Hunt loved his A35 van because you could drive it on the limit , without speeding !
Ride Yamaha , support Rossi !
Re: oil for food?
I'm not sure that it would be possible to write a more biased article.
Based on smears and innuendo the UN is accused of being "kleptocratic" - language such as "As with so many other UN swindles, the oil-for-food gravy train" really shouldn't be seen anywhere near a news report.
Nice to see that you can see right through Mr Moore - but are swayed by this piece of drivel.
Who knows - there may well have been corruption - where there's large sums of money you will almost always attract corrupt people.
But as the main "evidence" of this oil for food scandal appears to have been provided by Mr Chalabi - you'll remember him, the upstanding Iraqi who provided the Pentagon with evidence of Saddam's WMDs and assured them that an American invasion would be a success - there seems to be a long way to go.
This is all over the news - its hardly being hidden by the "anti-war media outlets". But it appears to be an extremely complex issue, and so will be a bit beyond what passes for journalism at "The New American".
Try something like
http://www.forbes.com/energy/2004/05/20 ... 0iraq.html
to see how murky and byzantine this whole situation is becoming. Or is forbes part of the liberal media junta desperately trying to hide the real facts from The New Americans?
"It certainly explains the actions of France."
oh dear me another paranoid conspiracy theory - you don't think that its rather more likely that France was against the war because it was clear that the invasion had nothing to do with the battle against terrorism and would lead to instability in Iraq that could spread through the middle-east.
Instead you have to believe that any country that disagrees with the righteous policies of the US must be duplicitous and grasping and deviously managed to brainwash the mass of world opinion against the noble cause that America was pursuing.
There really is no need to dig for hidden explanations for the actions of france - and many other countries. Their governments simply disagreed with your government.
Based on smears and innuendo the UN is accused of being "kleptocratic" - language such as "As with so many other UN swindles, the oil-for-food gravy train" really shouldn't be seen anywhere near a news report.
Nice to see that you can see right through Mr Moore - but are swayed by this piece of drivel.
Who knows - there may well have been corruption - where there's large sums of money you will almost always attract corrupt people.
But as the main "evidence" of this oil for food scandal appears to have been provided by Mr Chalabi - you'll remember him, the upstanding Iraqi who provided the Pentagon with evidence of Saddam's WMDs and assured them that an American invasion would be a success - there seems to be a long way to go.
This is all over the news - its hardly being hidden by the "anti-war media outlets". But it appears to be an extremely complex issue, and so will be a bit beyond what passes for journalism at "The New American".
Try something like
http://www.forbes.com/energy/2004/05/20 ... 0iraq.html
to see how murky and byzantine this whole situation is becoming. Or is forbes part of the liberal media junta desperately trying to hide the real facts from The New Americans?
"It certainly explains the actions of France."
oh dear me another paranoid conspiracy theory - you don't think that its rather more likely that France was against the war because it was clear that the invasion had nothing to do with the battle against terrorism and would lead to instability in Iraq that could spread through the middle-east.
Instead you have to believe that any country that disagrees with the righteous policies of the US must be duplicitous and grasping and deviously managed to brainwash the mass of world opinion against the noble cause that America was pursuing.
There really is no need to dig for hidden explanations for the actions of france - and many other countries. Their governments simply disagreed with your government.