Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Finally. Shiites, Kurds and Sunnis agree.

  1. Nov 22, 2005 #1
    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/I/IRAQ_CONFERENCE?SITE=CAFRA&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

    Let me see now. The three major factions in Iraq, congressional democrats, the majority of American people and most of the rest of the world agree. Now we just need to convince Dick Cheney and the troops can come home.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Nov 22, 2005 #2
    Now that Iraqies want us out... shoudl be we get out?

    What do you all think now?

    Bush said we will stay as long as the Iraqis want us to, and the Iraqi government is elected by the people.

    edit: woops, added an e in iraqis in the title.
     
  4. Nov 22, 2005 #3
    We're done in Iraq, quit shipping oil out.
     
  5. Nov 22, 2005 #4

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I do think it is probably time to start considering how we are going to withdraw. The government is largely set up, and the factions appear to be ready to make an honest effort.

    The one major problem is that the Iraqi police and military are not very strong yet. However, in previous threads, I described a "tipping point" (not sure if that's actually the term I used) where the government would become inherrently stable. Prior to reaching that point, pulling out would decrease the stability and afterwards it would increase the stability. I think that the coalescing of the government is probably that point. And I think a pull-out over the course of the next year is probably a good idea. I'm not sure if it should be a complete pull-out or if we should leave 20,000 troops or so in Baghdad to protect the seat of government in the "green zone", but the such things can be based on how the withdrawal goes.

    It might be interesting to dig up a few of those threads from 6 months or a year ago and see what criteria people had at the time and whether they have been met...

    I don't know what (if anything) Bush is thinking about this issue, but the risk for him now is that any move towards a pullout can (will) be painted as a political defeat. Whether it be anouncing a pullout today or announcing a timetable or set of criteria, his opponents will say that they were responsible for making it happen. That is what was really at stake with the Murtha bill: everyone knows we need to pull out eventually, and everyone wants to be the guy/party responsible for making it happen.
     
    Last edited: Nov 22, 2005
  6. Nov 22, 2005 #5

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I'm not sure exactly what you are implying there, but are you implying that we are stealing Iraq's oil? We're not. Heck, we're not even requesting they give us a break on it to help defray the cost of the war. And if we stop buying their oil and/or helping them sell it, the lifeblood of their economy goes away.

    So, what do you mean by "shipping oil out" and why should whoever is doing it stop?
     
  7. Nov 22, 2005 #6

    Astronuc

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Iraq needs foreign exchange, otherwise the dinar is pretty worthless. Other oil countries are exporting oil - and other oil countries are selling oil to US. As Russ indicated, the US is paying fair market value.

    Iraqis need to stop fighting and stop the insurgency, and start rebuilding their society, their economy, and their infrastructure, and that will take time. For now they have to export as much as they can in order to purchase what they cannot produce. Hopefully they will become more self-sufficient ASAP.
     
  8. Nov 22, 2005 #7

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    For that, I am not very optomistic. Most oil producing countries rely exclusively on oil for their economic strength. And in 50 years or so, when the wells start drying up and the money with them, the mid-east may drop into an Africa-like political/economic disaster.
     
  9. Nov 22, 2005 #8

    Astronuc

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Well they (we?) better start planning for that 'inevitability'. It's not like they (and we) don't know that is going to happen. :rolleyes:

    But then I tried working with a local planning agency, and when I mentioned thinking 10 - 20 - 30 - . . . years down the road, someone said "more than 10 years, forget it. We are lucky if we look 3-5 years in the future."

    I was stunned! What kind of planning is that? There is actually long-term plans, but those are so hypothetical, and often the government does not publicize them. For one, highway plans may involve expansion and aquisition of property - usually against the wishes of the owner.

    A lot has to do with how the federal government does the $multi-billion transportation bills.
     
  10. Nov 22, 2005 #9

    Art

    User Avatar

    Yes the Iraqis do need all the money they can get from oil exports but apparently that's not what's going to happen
    http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/business/?id=15066
    http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/story.jsp?story=670335

    http://www.swissinfo.org/sen/swissinfo.html?siteSect=143&sid=6258079&cKey=1132664748000
     
    Last edited: Nov 22, 2005
  11. Nov 22, 2005 #10

    SOS2008

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Another good reason for why Iraqis want an end to the occupation. However, because they lack resources (capital, technology, etc.) to develop oil fields on their own, I believe this has been a common practice in the M.E.--to partner with foreign companies in such ventures. The questions are was this a reason for invasion, and why such unfair terms? And the U.S. is chastising other countries in the UN for exploitative behavior (not that it isn't deserved, just that the U.S. is as bad).
     
  12. Nov 22, 2005 #11

    Hurkyl

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Maybe you didn't mean how this sounds, but I still feel the need to point out that even if there was a timetable, that does not mean the troops will come home now, or even soon.
     
  13. Nov 22, 2005 #12
    I was being facetious. Of course the troops will not come home immediately. The Iraqi factions are only calling for a timetable.

    Sorry, I guess it does sound like Representative Hunter's proposal that was voted down in the house.

    Saying that we will stay until the mission is accomplished, and not defining what that mission is, IMO is fueling the insurgency. With pressure from every direction Bushco will have no choice but to put forth a plan to get us out of Iraq. Hopefully it will be better than the one that got us in there to begin with.
     
  14. Nov 22, 2005 #13
    I can't find this "Crude Designs" report by Muttitt but I have found this report of his on PSAs....
    http://www.carbonweb.org/documents/PSAs_privatisation.pdf
    Aside from a summary overview of PSAs in general and in certain historical instances it is mostly filled with slanted conjectures and political spin about what will supposedly happen in Iraq. I have no idea why any one would take this guys work seriously if it is all like this.
    According to that last article you cited even the Iraqi government is saying that his reports are off base considering that they have yet to even begin negotiations. In the report I have read Muttitt only barely mentions the fact that Iraq WANTS a PSA and casts a sinister view of that matter making it seem as though the head of the Iraqi Ministry of Oil must be a shill for the oil consortium or that the Oil Consortium must be coercing or duping the ministry.
    Muttitt has only made speculations on what the Iraq will be "losing" in revenue due to a PSA. Not only that but apparently he conviently neglects to mention how much revenue Iraq would be getting according to his speculations and how that would compare to any other sort of development plans, or at least if he has none of these news sources has mentioned it (again I am unable to find this new report they are quoting). He just focuses on the big bad oil companies who are going to supposedly exploit Iraq's resources and making gigantic profits with out even putting his speculative figures into perspective with a comparison to Iraq's total (speculative) revenue. Or at least that's what I would surmise based on the way his report has been reflected in the media.
    Maybe Muttitt needs to get a BLOG.
     
  15. Nov 22, 2005 #14

    kat

    User Avatar

  16. Nov 22, 2005 #15

    Hurkyl

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Just curious: why not simply ask for a clear definition of what the mission is, instead of a timetable? (I guess I'm singling you out as a representative of all the people demanding a "timetable", if you don't mind)

    I am mildly opposed to the idea of a timetable because, in my eyes, it would do nothing more than hand people a liscence to complain, and could even seriously harm the efforts if this caused pressure to do a rush job, or even abandon an achievable goal just to meet a deadline.

    And I have this feeling that your comment here is what many people really want to know anyways: to outline exactly what we want to do, as opposed to a date when we'll be gone.
     
  17. Nov 22, 2005 #16
    Go Iraqis go, go go go! Join hands, Shiites, Sunnis and Kurdish people! Defend your land, defend your oil, defend your women and defend your children, defend what is rightfully yours from foreign greed and agression!! Join hands and kick their butt, just as our ancestors in KMT and CCCP did to kick the teeth in of the Jap(anese)s!!!!!!!!
     
    Last edited: Nov 22, 2005
  18. Nov 22, 2005 #17
    Polly.. all political disagreements aside you should really be more careful with the language you use here.
     
  19. Nov 22, 2005 #18
    Didn't realise you are so attentive to other people's feelings.
     
    Last edited: Nov 22, 2005
  20. Nov 22, 2005 #19
    Probably the one I edited out of the quote in my post.
    Though I'm not so worried about my own sensitivities as I am about others and the possibility that you may receive warnings for using such language.
     
  21. Nov 22, 2005 #20
    I have made an amendment in my first post, is it okay now?
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Finally. Shiites, Kurds and Sunnis agree.
Loading...