Newsgroup: it.politica
Titolo: Mica UK e USA sono in Iraq per il petrolio, noooo

Mica UK e USA sono in Iraq per il petrolio, noooo
Future of Iraq: The spoils of war 
How the West will make a killing on Iraqi oil riches 
By Danny Fortson, Andrew Murray-Watson and Tim Webb 
Published: 07 January 2007 
Iraq's massive oil reserves, the third-largest in the world, are about to
be thrown open for large-scale exploitation by Western oil companies under
a controversial law which is expected to come before the Iraqi parliament
within days. 
The US government has been involved in drawing up the law, a draft of
which has been seen by The Independent on Sunday. It would give big oil
companies such as BP, Shell and Exxon 30-year contracts to extract Iraqi
crude and allow the first large-scale operation of foreign oil interests
in the country since the industry was nationalised in 1972.
The huge potential prizes for Western firms will give ammunition to
critics who say the Iraq war was fought for oil. They point to statements
such as one from Vice-President Dick Cheney, who said in 1999, while he
was still chief executive of the oil services company Halliburton, that
the world would need an additional 50 million barrels of oil a day by
2010. "So where is the oil going to come from?... The Middle East, with
two-thirds of the world's oil and the lowest cost, is still where the
prize ultimately lies," he said.
Oil industry executives and analysts say the law, which would permit
Western companies to pocket up to three-quarters of profits in the early
years, is the only way to get Iraq's oil industry back on its feet after
years of sanctions, war and loss of expertise. But it will operate through
"production-sharing agreements" (or PSAs) which are highly unusual in the
Middle East, where the oil industry in Saudi Arabia and Iran, the world's
two largest producers, is state controlled.
Opponents say Iraq, where oil accounts for 95 per cent of the economy, is
being forced to surrender an unacceptable degree of sovereignty.
Proposing the parliamentary motion for war in 2003, Tony Blair denied the
"false claim" that "we want to seize" Iraq's oil revenues. He said the
money should be put into a trust fund, run by the UN, for the Iraqis, but
the idea came to nothing. The same year Colin Powell, then Secretary of
State, said: "It cost a great deal of money to prosecute this war. But the
oil of the Iraqi people belongs to the Iraqi people; it is their wealth,
it will be used for their benefit. So we did not do it for oil."
Supporters say the provision allowing oil companies to take up to 75 per
cent of the profits will last until they have recouped initial drilling
costs. After that, they would collect about 20 per cent of all profits,
according to industry sources in Iraq. But that is twice the industry
average for such deals.
Greg Muttitt, a researcher for Platform, a human rights and environmental
group which monitors the oil industry, said Iraq was being asked to pay an
enormous price over the next 30 years for its present instability. "They
would lose out massively," he said, "because they don't have the capacity
at the moment to strike a good deal."
Iraq's Deputy Prime Minister, Barham Salih, who chairs the country's oil
committee, is expected to unveil the legislation as early as today. "It is
a redrawing of the whole Iraqi oil industry [to] a modern standard," said
Khaled Salih, spokesman for the Kurdish Regional Government, a party to
the negotiations. The Iraqi government hopes to have the law on the books
by March.
Several major oil companies are said to have sent teams into the country
in recent months to lobby for deals ahead of the law, though the big names
are considered unlikely to invest until the violence in Iraq abates.
James Paul, executive director at the Global Policy Forum, the
international government watchdog, said: "It is not an exaggeration to say
that the overwhelming majority of the population would be opposed to this.
To do it anyway, with minimal discussion within the [Iraqi] parliament is
really just pouring more oil on the fire."
Vince Cable, the Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman and a former chief
economist at Shell, said it was crucial that any deal would guarantee
funds for rebuilding Iraq. "It is absolutely vital that the revenue from
the oil industry goes into Iraqi development and is seen to do so," he
said. "Although it does make sense to collaborate with foreign investors,
it is very important the terms are seen to be fair." 
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article2132569.ece
-- 
Qultura politica di Tonibaruch su It.Politica.Internazionale :
"Oltre al cumswapping e al cumdodging, fai anche il creampie, 
porno-razzi-catto-somarello?" 
http://groups.google.it/group/it.politica.internazionale/msg/1db9ef6abb0f7604?dmode=source&hl=it
Tonibaruch: "Chomsky... uno svitato filonazista"
http://groups.google.it/group/it.politica.internazionale/msg/4fcafdb551331642?dmode=source&hl=3Dit
 
questo articolo e` stato inviato via web dal servizio gratuito 
http://www.newsland.it/news
 segnala gli abusi ad 
ab...@newsland.it

Vi faccio un discorso serio...se riuscite a comprendere, facendo un attimo
tabula rasa dei vostri indottrinamenti, razzismi, puntigli mentali,
schieramento di comodo e soldi che vi vengono versati per dire e scrivere
cazzatucce varie ,ecc...
L' Opec è l' Arabia Saudita. Perchè tutti gli altri stati Arabi produttori
di petrolio- escluso il Venezuela, che però deve sottostarci, volente o
nolente, hanno con chiara decisione affidato all' Arabia Saudita i loro
affari e contrattazione .
L' Arabia Saudita, per ragioni che non sto a specificare..se poi volete ve
le dico, ha fatto contratti con Multinazionali Statunitensi - e a lei e a
loro- gli USA-collegate direttamente e non- per lo sfruttamento delle
risorse petrolifere fino al 2010.
Quando Saddam- anni passati si alleò con il Vaticano- IOR e transazioni
verso i conti sopratutto elvetici- con Francia e Germania...la Banca
Centrale Tedesca si è rinforzata moltissimo con i "lavori" in Brasile e la
foresta amazzonica, diventando troppo potente...la Germania è stata di fatto
responsabile di due guerre mondiali e non può, il Mondo, fingere che non sia
vero- di fatto nazionalizzò molte società petrolifere Usa in Iraq per
concedere la gestione a Francia, Germania e pure Italia...con Tareq Azziz-
cristiano- messo apposta per ragioni politico-diplomatiche verso gli affari
vaticano- italiani - europei ...come fece il Nasser con Suez, per capirsi, e
dicendo quali navi dovevano passare o no dal canale...ed invase pure il
Kuwait per renderlo di fatto una sua saddamica succursale petrolifera
sganciata dall' Arabia Saudita e dagli Usa e "regalarlo" tramite lui che ci
beccava tanti, ma tanti soldoni all' Europee Italia, Francia, e GERMANIA!
Avvenne la prima Guerra del Golfo con il beneplacito dell' Onu - e invece
Monsignor Ilarion Kapucci e Formigoni Ciellino filo-Saddam buono...eh..- in
cui purtroppo il Bush Senior, per privilegiare la sua campagna elettorale in
Usa, commise un errore immane...e qui sarebbe richiesta una lunga analisi in
proposito, perchè dovette dare anche disposizioni particolari...ecc...ecc..
Saddam vivo e ringalluzzito dai suoi fedeli Francia, Vaticano , Germania
sommamente...decise pure che il petrolio suo doveva essere pagato non in
dollari, ma in Euro...con la "cattolica" intercessione della Banca
Vaticanea..
Brevemente quindi la conclusione:
Potevano gli Usa permettere questo?
NO, semplicemente perchè se oggi gli Usa perdessero la loro forza economica
perderebbero anche supremazia tecnologica e potenza.
E noi cadremmo tutti sotto il Governo di certi probi come il Presidente
Iraniano, la teocrazia Islamica che non solo vuole la fine di ogni
democrazia occidentale, ma che di certo sgozzerebbe ebrei in europa, ma pure
cristiani, cattolici e musulmani sunniti, forse pure ismaeliti e karigiti,
berberi algerini,ecc....
Allora io mi chiedo come è possibile non capire che gli Usa- con tutti gli
immensi difetti di uno Stato Democratico -  siano preferibili e di gran
lunga ,anche dagli europei "civili",ad una supremazia di Stati dittatoriali,
incivili e assolutamente illiberali e fanatici.
Ed ovvio che come in passato venivano fatte guerre per terre- Crociate,
Lotte fra Feudatari, ec- oggi in epoca moderna le guerre si fanno per la
supremazia tecnologica ed economica...da cui dipende tutto.
Vorrei aggiungere molte altre cose...
Luciana Cencioni