From CNN/Money:
“The first contracts for rebuilding post-war Iraq have been awarded, and Vice President Dick Cheney’s old employer, Halliburton Co., is one of the early winners.
“The Kellogg Brown & Root (KBR) unit of Halliburton (HAL: up $0.61 to $20.73, Research, Estimates), of which Cheney was CEO from 1995 to 2000, was awarded a contract late Monday by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to put out oil fires and make emergency repairs to Iraq’s oil infrastructure…
“Though none of the potential administrators of such a contract — including the Defense Department, the State Department’s U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the United Nations — have claimed responsibility for handing out the job, Monday’s award could mean the Defense Department will be in charge.”
Once again: This war is not about oil.
The peace, however… well, yeah, that’s about oil.
The upcoming peace will be historic; the first-ever corporate occupation force will be unleashed on Iraq. Expect to see joyous Iraqi executives dancing in the streets as benevolent US oil magnates ride on in, handing out candy bars and bubble gum.
All that wealth, of course, belongs to the people of Iraq. The Administration’s been clear on that. And it’s vitally important to get that wealth flowing into the Iraqi economy. It’ll just be flowing in the form of dollars rather than, oh, say, francs. Or rubles.
At least it’s nice to know that our government is willing to pay the costs of rebuilding Iraq. The fact that the costs (in the case of oil infrastructure, that’s “$5 billion initially, with $3 billion more in annual operating expenses”) will be paid from our rickety national budget directly into, for example, the coffers of Dick Cheney’s old company… well, that’s war for ya. It’s hell. Certain existing contracts will get wiped off the map, we knew that goin’ in. We can’t hang around and wait for some fledgling Iraqi government to decide which oil companies from which nations they want to deal with - there’s no time. It’ll have to be administered by American and British companies for now, a rough-and-ready Coalition of the Shilling.
Afterwards, the “Iraqi People” can decide who gets all the big oil contracts - the folks who put ‘em in power or the sniveling weasels who were propping up the previous government. That’s not our our choice, that’s the choice of the Iraqi People. The same way the American People chose Halliburton to bear our standard into the upcoming peace.
But that’s not important right now - there’s a war on. Paying too much attention to little side details like this while American men and women are out there in the trenches - that wouldn’t be patriotic. So check out MSNBC’s latest SlaughterCam and try to focus on what’s really important here. Don’t worry - those petty, pesky post-war details are being handled by qualified personnel who have the spare time to think about such things. Like the Defense Department.





16 comments
craig
March 25, 2003 at 2:04 pm
1I know its petty to quibble - there’s a war going on, we’ve got to stand by the party line and all - but the franc is the currency of Switzerland. France uses the Euro.
The first
March 25, 2003 at 2:04 pm
2Ha!
First.
What a travesty.
What if Clinton or Gore had done this? My god, you wouldn’t be able to get within 30 feet of an AM Radio for all the raucus bitching from the conversatives.
But when THEY do it…. well, like Adam says, that’s war.
ghani
March 25, 2003 at 2:13 pm
3I was wondering … didn’t Rumsfeld say it’s against the Geneva Convention to show pictures of prisoners of war to the public? Of course the embedded media is n’t showing the American prisoners of war (held by Iraq. It’s truly disturbing, they looked absolutely horrified, weren’t receiving any or very little medical care and seemed to be in shock) but they don’t seem to have a problem showing pictures of the Iraqi soldiers that were caught by the allies.
kidkostar
March 25, 2003 at 2:20 pm
4I heard Ken Lay was going to be installed as the American Vicelord of IraqCo. because of his vast experience running energy companies and since he just needs a job. With Lay’s expertise Bush administration officials are already projecting turning a very respectable profit on Iraq in no more than six months.
adam
March 25, 2003 at 2:33 pm
5Ghani - the Iraqis have been complaining about precisely that point. Me, I don’t think it violates the Geneva Convention to show prisoners from either side. I interpret the disputed clause to cover things like putting pisoners on display in the town square.
Craig - You’re right, ‘course. But “franc” seemed like a more evocative currency in this case. [Durn those Swiss too, by the way…]
Kelly
March 25, 2003 at 2:50 pm
6Classic. There’s nothing like someone who can tell it like it is and still make me laugh.
Rana
March 25, 2003 at 4:19 pm
7On the showing of POWs — I _think_ the perceived difference is that the American POWs were named and asked questions on film, while the Iraqi POWs have been largely nameless (though I haven’t been watching news on tv, so I could be wrong). If one interprets the Geneva Convention a certain way, it’s not necessarily that showing prisoners per se is wrong, but doing so in a way that humiliates them personally is.
This said, I don’t know if I agree with either side. It does seem cruel to expose shell-shocked prisoners to the eye of the world, but then the print media here has not been shy about showing Iraqi prisoners being strip-searched before surgey, albeit anonymously from the back, and I’m not sure that’s all that much better.
Of course, POWs are something that should be expected in war, and to cover up their existence also seems wrong.
Washington Irving
March 25, 2003 at 4:33 pm
8Since we’re talking about POWs and the Geneva Convention. My thoughts have been: I can understand if Mr Rumsfeld demands that the POWs be treated per the Geneva Convention. But I’m also wondering what about all those fellows we have imprisoned in Guantanamo? Iraq could claim just as well as we have that these US POWs are “unlawful combatants” if for no other reason than that this war is definitely against international law.
Alan M.
March 25, 2003 at 5:15 pm
9Did you notice, with that CNN article, the related story on the side, about NYC’s comptroller filing for Halliburton to be investigated for possible ties to terrorist-friendly Iran?
So we’re taking steps to remove a potentially-connected-to-terrorist leadership so that we can go about installing a potentially-connected-to-terrorist corporation? Right…
prmantis
March 25, 2003 at 5:37 pm
10here’s the geneva convention as it applies to POW’s
http://193.194.138.190/html/menu3/b/91.htm
This may be as close as it gets to any of this….
Prisoners of war are entitled in all circumstances to respect for their persons and their honour. Women shall be treated with all the regard due to their sex and shall in all cases benefit by treatment as favourable as that granted to men. Prisoners of war shall retain the full civil capacity which they enjoyed at the time of their capture. The Detaining Power may not restrict the exercise, either within or without its own territory, of the rights such capacity confers except in so far as the captivity requires.
– splitting to avoid an overly long post!
prmantis
March 25, 2003 at 5:38 pm
11– resuming cause I wasn’t quite finished!
i heard some of the family members of POWs saying they were a little relieved that their loved ones were still alive and, while shocked and somewhat injured, not in too bad of shape….
I also think that interviewing family members of POWs on TV should be against the Geneva Convention or the Convention Currents or the Current Styles… or something — talk about exploitation!
oy
Cathy
March 25, 2003 at 5:39 pm
12How dare you question our God-given right as Americans to take down horrible, nasty regimes-(who happen to have the natural resources we need)It is our Christian duty to bring enlightment to these barbaric savages, whether they want their country modeled on the state of Texas or not.If they would only stop fighting us, we could stop destroying their country.They dont’t seem to understand we have their best interests at heart, we know what’s best….no really, we do.
Dee
March 25, 2003 at 9:59 pm
13Iraq® — A Leisure Service of Bechtel Corp.
Anonymous
March 26, 2003 at 2:49 am
14Tony may need to hire a lobbyist (or a veep): http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2881075.stm
mbare.org
March 26, 2003 at 3:51 am
15I guess us bloggers need to be careful how we talk about the POWs. http://www.yellowtimes.com was temporarly shut down (by their host - inappropriate content etc.) because they showed the pictures. CNN reporter Keven Sites was asked to stop posting to his blog from N.Iraq (http://www.kevinsites.net). Who next? This recent rash of ridiculous shut downs for the greater good is just about as stupid as that Florida thing. Anyway, thanks for the great blog, Felbers, a link from a link from a link from a link and I was here. Keep up the good work!
m
http://www.mbare.org (come visit! make some comments.)
abdelouahab
March 31, 2003 at 5:01 am
16I don’t believe in americain policy toward the islamic and arab world specially what we follow daily in the international media