The "Blood for oil" may be right.

[Gem]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=564&e=4&u=/nm/20030411/ts_nm/iraq_oil_usa_dc_1 (http://)

The Defense Department is considering putting in place an advisory board of former U.S. oil industry executives to help run Iraq's oil industry, the head of which is likely to be Philip Carroll, a former chief executive of Shell Oil Co., sources said.

Of course, I don't see it as proof that the US is going to keep the oil for their companies for ever, but, I think we owe something to the media for showing this to us.
Like I said, it's suspicious.

Gem
P.S.: Anyone wants to guess who else is going to take care of the oil? (And didn' Blair say that the oil was going into a UN trust fund?):confused:

[Pyrrho]

Kind of a Catch-22. You need people who know the oil industry to oversee Iraq's oil business.

[subgenius]

WASHINGTON, April 10 — The Pentagon contract given without competition to a Halliburton subsidiary to fight oil well fires in Iraq is worth as much as $7 billion over two years, according to a letter from the Army Corps of Engineers that was released today.

The contract also allows Kellogg Brown & Root, the Halliburton subsidiary, to earn as much as 7 percent profit. That could amount to $490 million.

The corps released these new details in a letter to Representative Henry A. Waxman, Democrat of California and one of the two senior lawmakers who asked the General Accounting Office to investigate how the Bush administration is awarding contracts for the reconstruction of Iraq.

The reconstruction effort could cost up to $100 billion and become one of the most lucrative building programs in decades.

The contract to Kellogg Brown & Root was cited in the lawmakers' request to the G.A.O., the investigative arm of Congress. Mr. Waxman and Representative John D. Dingell, Democrat of Michigan, asked that special attention be paid to "allegations that Halliburton has received special treatment from the administration."

Vice President Dick Cheney was Halliburton's chief executive from 1995 until 2000. When he left the company to run for vice president, Mr. Cheney received over $30 million in compensation, Mr. Waxman said.

Since the attacks of Sept. 11, Kellogg Brown & Root has won significant additional business from the federal government and the Pentagon. It has built cells for detainees at Guantánamo Bay in Cuba and is the exclusive logistics supplier for the Navy and the Army, providing services like cooking, construction, power generation and fuel transportation.

Since the war with Iraq began, Mr. Cheney has been repeatedly questioned about his ties to his old employer and the oil industry.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/11/business/11REBU.html?ex=1050638400&en=8e3c238766503e7b&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE

At the very least it has the appearance of impropriety, which is bad. As was the refusal to give any information on his talks with these people in developing "energy policy."
I think they'd be screaming bloody murder if the shoe was on the other foot.
Yes, of course Halliburton, etc. all are in the business and are positioned to do the work, but that's why you don't put their former officers in the White House to begin with.
What is the merging of industry and political structure called again, I forget?

[ceo_esq]

A couple of observations:

1. Although Philip Carroll was once CEO of Shell's U.S. subsidiary, Shell is not an American oil company. The Shell group is essentially a 60-40 venture between a Dutch company and an English company.

2. As pyrrho2000 suggested, if you're assembling an advisory board (n.b. not an executive board) to counsel a third world country on developing its oil industry, there's nothing inherently suspicious about appointing a former Shell officer.

[WildCat]

Well, I for one believe we're after the oil. I'm also going to be on the first boat over to colonize the place. Then the destruction of Islam can begin, and the Zionists can begin the global takeover. :rolleyes:

[Tony]

Who will own the Iraqi oil fields? Are we going to set up a state run oil business? Or are we going to set up a private agency or corporation?

[EvilYeti]

Didn't this whole "blood for oil" thing start in the first Gulf war? Did we take Iraq's oil then? Why does everyone think we will do it now?

[Blue Monk]

Originally posted by Tony
Who will own the Iraqi oil fields? Are we going to set up a state run oil business? Or are we going to set up a private agency or corporation?

The ownership of the oil is up in the air at the moment as there is no recognized government of Iraq.

There will no doubt need to be some sort of working agreement in the meantime to get the oil revenues flowing into the country for rebuilding.

It would be nice if that by the time a new government is formed all is up and running.

[c0rbin]

No one makes money buying stuff from themselves.

Who is going to man the work-a-day projects in Iraq? American workers? Nope Iraqis. I have a feeling they will get paid for their labor and begin to see the benefits of life, liberty and a persuit of happiness.

[Blue Monk]

Right.

Besides, if we really wanted the oil we could have just urged a lifting of the sanctions. That would have been a hell of a lot easier, hehe.

[Roadtoad]

I'm taking a "We'll see" attitude for the moment. BUT, SG has a point. The possibility of any conflict of interest is a real danger here. It's nice that it's an advisory board, but is the possibility there that it could become an executive board? Does anyone have the info on this? Or is it simply too soon to tell?

[PogoPedant]

Originally posted by c0rbin
(..)I have a feeling they will get paid for their labor and begin to see the benefits of life, liberty and a persuit of happiness.
Right now they're enjoying the pursuit of property...

[corplinx]

Originally posted by subgenius

At the very least it has the appearance of impropriety, which is bad. As was the refusal to give any information on his talks with these people in developing "energy policy."
I think they'd be screaming bloody murder if the shoe was on the other foot.

The problem is, defense contractors like to hire people who worked in defense. Rumsfeld was on the board of quite a few military companies. Bush pulled these people back in from the private sector. In other words, if some scandal mucking worm wanted to, he could say just about any government contract awarded has a look of impropriety.

Haliburton is revenge. The anti-Bush crowd wants to blackball Haliburton because they sense they can do it. Let's face it, any new contracts Haliburton or its subsidiaries (as in the case of the oil fires) gets will be posted about in blogs and leftist rags until the NYTimes finally picks it up and cites "growing concern".


We can't let the kooks win. Not in this or in anything else.

[subgenius]

Definitely don't let the kooks win. Let big oil win, after all look how much they've done for you. They are your friend.

[Troll]

These are possible temporary measures to help Iraq get back into the world market and manage their own oil production.

I dare anyone to show personal gain as proof as opposed to what I just said. No rhetoric, no propoganda. show me who will gain more from Iraqui oil than the Iraqui people.

[subgenius]

The issue is not whether the Iraqi people will benefit. Hopefully they will, and hopefully they will benefit the most.

[Troll]

Originally posted by subgenius
The issue is not whether the Iraqi people will benefit. Hopefully they will, and hopefully they will benefit the most.

Good for you. You defined what the issue is not. So care to go for what the issue is then?

[subgenius]

The union of government and industry, thanks for asking.

[Troll]

Originally posted by subgenius
The union of government and industry, thanks for asking.

so government should never consider a possible industrial aide or advantage?

I'm sorry but isn't the smart move to try to find the best suited to do something?

[subgenius]

Originally posted by Troll


so government should never consider a possible industrial aide or advantage?

I'm sorry but isn't the smart move to try to find the best suited to do something?
Read what I wrote. Did I say that? Who you talking to? Who are you arguing with?

[Troll]

Originally posted by subgenius

Read what I wrote. Did I say that? Who you talking to? Who are you arguing with?

so then what exactly is :

[quote]

The union of government and industry, thanks for asking.[quote] that is the issue you claim this to be?

You said that was the issue and I asked about finding the best suited to solve something. If I the high ruler of me, find that HBO is the best suited to solve my entertainment needs, what is the issue pertaining to my government picking someone out of several in a particular industry that ca fill the need?