Transfer of power!

[Rex_20XD6]

From about 9:00 to 12:00 here in washington state, U.S.A. the news cut in that the transfer of power has taken place. I dont know the details but if you find out anything please post it here.

[Rex_20XD6]

In case any of you don’t know where Washington is in the USA, it in the west cost next to the Pacific Ocean. :rolleyes:

[CubanFox]

I believe the Iraqis rang in their new "freedom" with a mortar attack on Australian troops.

On an unrelated note, it took me years to figure out that Washington DC wasn't in Washington state. Damned illogical Yanks ;)

[h&s]

I thought power is to "transfer" on the 30th?

[(*]

They did it early to fool the "terrorists"
Whether they did it now, 2 days from now, or 10 years from now....it doesn't really make any difference. It is quite simply meaningless (for the Iraqis of course)

But for the Americans, it is a brilliant political move. Occupation? What occupation? Iraq is a sovereign state! We aren't in control!

[h&s]

That was probably the excuse.
I bet they did it to stop the embarasment of the protest, because I think most people won't bother going now its happened :angry:

[Intifada]

this is a big fraud.

[chebol]

Why wouldn't people protest because of a little US word game? There is even more reason to protest now. Just in case you wanted PROOF that the handover was a sham- bang! the bastards give it to us. It ought to be MORE reason for people to come out.
I agree, however, that it was timed to confuse people's response to the handover, andto minimise the political impact of the demonstrations. More importantly, it is meant to minimise the political impact (in the 'West') of the reaction of the resistance in Iraq to the handover.

Final analysis- it won't make a lick of difference. The Iraqis want the Crusaders out, so they'll just have to kick 'em out.

[h&s]

Yeah, there may be more reason to protest now, but I certainly think fewer people will, as I've been confused by it and I don't know if I'll go anymore.

[Kobbot 401]

They did it so early to make all the well thought out plans of terroist to kill people on the 30th not work. Damn I wanted to read how the terroist bombed the building with the polititions inside it, mabey even have killed Chany (thats a bleasing for that man)

[Funky Monk]

Oh yes, how fantastic that would have been, the destruction of a stabilising factor in Iraq.

[James]

Iraq now has control of its oil again.

[DaCuBaN]

...and the first order of business is to agree to sell the oil too...? :angry:

In all seriousness though, this can only be a good thing. At least the US are no longer officially in charge. I guess only time will tell how this is going to pan out.

[James]

And it doesn't really matter who they sell it to, as long as they don't sell the rights.
Potential for several billion - this could get iraq back on its feet again.
Lets all hope so.

[Rex_20XD6]

I dont think that the Iraqy's arent to terably happy with the new government...

[DaCuBaN]

And it doesn't really matter who they sell it to

I see your point, but I disagree. The oil from Iraq very much constitutes 'spoils of war' in this sense, when the US should in all fairness be punished for their actions. Iraq is in a position, especially with Venezuela the way it is and Saudi Arabia at full production, that they could severely hurt the US - in the short term - by denying them the oil.

It's inevitable that the US will get it's hands on it, but in the meantime we can show the US that other than the all the killing (as if it wasn't enough) what the true spoils of a war are - economic hardship.

If you can&#39;t appeal to the heart or stomach, appeal to the wallet <_<

[Funky Monk]

To be honest "fair" doesn&#39;t come into it. The Americans have done what they wanted, no-one can stop them at the moment. What should be the prime concern is trying ot get Iraq on its feet and if that involves selling oil to the US then so be it.

[(*]

They will never be up on their feet as long as a puppet regime is in "control" and the U.S.A. maintains its occupation.

[ParanoidHumanoid]

Transfer of power? More like a clever chess move of propaganda. The Iraqi&#39;s have no government representing themselves thus far. The government that has been just officially installed was and is a psuedo-dictatorship brought to you by your friendly neighborhood corporate America.

This whole charade has nothing to do with Iraqi sovereignty but further control of Iraq for many years to come. The Prime Minister that was placed is an unelected dictator (but of course it&#39;s necessary with all of the killings, right? :rolleyes: ) And don&#39;t forget the vast amount of troops still in Iraq and many more we wish to put there. The fighting won&#39;t be given a chance to stop until the troops are out of Iraq and the people of Iraq vote for their OWN leader.

[monkeydust]

I love it how so many people genuinely believe that America wishes to instill democracy in Iraq due to its supposed benevolence.

All Historical evidence from the last 100 years indicates that the U.S. loves backing Right Wing dictatorships.

Anyone remeber Septemeber 11, 1973?

[DaCuBaN]

Transfer of power? More like a clever chess move

Indeed


What should be the prime concern is trying ot get Iraq on its feet and if that involves selling oil to the US then so be it.

I agree with the first half, but cannot on the second.

Practically every nation on the planet needs oil, there are plenty of other buyers waiting. I&#39;ll admit this isn&#39;t the best example, but were France not previously buying Iraqi oil when the US weren&#39;t?

Allowing the US to buy the oil is giving them &#39;spoils&#39; and I don&#39;t like it one bit. I&#39;m not so vehemontly opposed that I&#39;m going to hold the line for long, but I do think that everyone would be much better off if the new Iraqi government refused to trade oil with the invading forces.

It too would be a &#39;clever move&#39; on behalf of the fledgling dictatorship.

[Kobbot 401]

Probly not all of us Monkeydust, why dont you give us all the story.

[Kurai Tsuki]

Ah yes, the transfer of power in which the Iraqi interim government will have no veto power over American descisions.

[chebol]

But what it does do is opens the floodgates for real repression of the Iraqi people.
Because Iraq is no longer the responsibility of the Occupiers, they and the interim government have more leeway to commit atrocities to suppress the resistance. It removes direct responsibility from the hands of the US, and allows the Iraqi "government" (and it&#39;s "security advisors") to do almost whatever they want. After all, those Iraqis aren&#39;t "civilised". :angry:

[refuse_resist]

It was no surprise that they handed over power 2 days ahead of schedule. With the insurgency increasing, that&#39;s only got them all scared off their asses. It&#39;s only obvious this regime will be corrupt, since they were talking about putting Iraq into a state of martial law so they could try to crush the insurgency.

[Rex_20XD6]

Originally posted by Funky [email protected] 28 2004, 09:08 PM
To be honest "fair" doesn&#39;t come into it. The Americans have done what they wanted, no-one can stop them at the moment. What should be the prime concern is trying ot get Iraq on its feet and if that involves selling oil to the US then so be it.
Your totally right.

[Rex_20XD6]

It would have been really bloody if the transition of power hadn’t went ahead of schedule.

[Guerrilla22]

Power transfer? Iraqi Sovereignty? What a joke

[h&s]

The Iraqis have no real power. As a top official said last week;

We have the power to do what we want.....but Paul Bremmer has the cheque-book."

[roddes]

all the amrican&#39;s are doing is giving them self&#39;s the power back that wasnt even there&#39;s in the frist place

[Sabocat]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2004, 01:06 PM
Iraq now has control of its oil again.
:lol: Sure they do.

Except, that the U.S. appointed the people in charge of the oil industry. They mandated that the oil industry cannot be nationalized. They also decides, who get&#39;s the industry contracts.


Finally, Washington has taken a series of actions designed to render the interim government totally dependent on the US for its funding, and to leave Iraqi oil resources securely in American hands. In a June 18 order, Bremer established a “Program Review Board” empowered to “identify, integrate and prioritize funding requirements for relief and recovery activities in Iraq, and develop funding plans that propose allocations of resources available to meet these requirements.”

The board, which Washington controls, essentially seized control of Iraq’s finances and diverted them to enrich US-based corporations like Halliburton. It recently ordered &#036;2.5 billion that had accumulated in the UN-sanctioned Development Fund for Iraq—based on oil revenues—diverted to pay for reconstruction contracts, the costs of which had already been more than covered by US Congressional appropriations.

Source (http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/jun2004/iraq-j29.shtml)


Yeah...Some control.

[monkeydust]

Probly not all of us Monkeydust, why dont you give us all the story.

I&#39;ll cut a long story short for you:

In 1970, a democratically elected government, led by Salvador Allende was elected in Chile. Unfortunately, for the neo-cons in the U.S. this government was profoundly left wing.

Three years down the line, the CIA backed a Right-Wing coup in Chile, in order to overthrow Allende&#39;s government. The presidential palace in the supposedly sovereign nation of Chile was bombed as part of a military coup that was planned, financed, and carried out by or with substantial help from USA forces. That day and in the following weeks roughly 3,000 people were killed by Chilean military and police forces that had been trained, financed, and in part directed by USA government personnel. Well over 10,000, some say 50,000, were killed in the first few years of the long dictatorship that followed.

Here&#39;s some acts by the nice fellow that the U.S. backed in &#39;73 Pinochet (http://www.trentu.ca/~mneumann/pinochet.html).




What&#39;s done in Iraq is irreversible now. The damage caused, cannot be undone. It should be clear to any here, however, that it is time for all coalition troops to pull out: now. Thi, for me, seems the only route for long term "stability" in Iraq.

Anyone remeber 1920? :P

[Guerrilla22]

also see Iran 1953 and Guatemala 1954

[James]

south vietnam - 40s+
south korea - 45+

[Rex_20XD6]

That&#39;s sad...