War for Oil

By Mike Siesel

Now we read what we have always suspected, and the Bush Administration always denied, that we invaded Iraq for its oil

An article in The Independent in Britain titled "Future of Iraq: The spoils of war" outlines legislation coming before the Iraqi parliament that will favor western oil companies like Exxon-Mobil and British Petroleum, allowing them to keep 75% of the profits from Iraqi oil production until their startup costs are recovered, and 20% of the profits thereafter. By comparison, "that is twice the industry average for such deals."

This only confirms previous previous reports regarding the privatization forced on the Iraqis, and one cause of the opposition to US forces. But even if the Production Sharing Agreement passes there will be no development until the violence in Iraq subsides. As a measure of its effect, Iraq today produces only half as much oil as it did before the invasion.

So now we also know why President Bush is intent upon supporting the Maliki government, and will probably send more troops to Iraq, and maintain a force in that country despite a recent poll showing that 89% of the Iraqis want us to leave. It has nothing to do with protecting a fragile democracy and everything to do with securing a favorable deal for the American and British oil companies paid for in American blood and treasure.

But what if the surge and accelerate policy fails? How many lives will be lost?

I mean, given the charade that's been played, starting with the elusive WMDs, does your sense of honor feel tarnished enough to reject a deal like this, or is okay send our troops on a fool's errand when the real goal is to assist a corporate take over of another country's resources?

Since the Spanish-American War we have given our government permission to insert troops to protect American interests. Naturally there's some sort of treaty with a dictator about to be overthrown, and the press always comes up with a good story to sell. And of course those who oppose these revolts are labeled commies, or socialists, or - now - liberals.

But this is the first time in history when we simply invaded a country for the sole purpose of exploiting their resources.

It reminds me of the British Empire, and we saw how that turned out. And yet we have followed them down the dark path.

150 years ago they adopted a policy of free trade and sterling flowed to America like dollars today flow to China.

They have an Official Secrets Act that prevents their citizens from learning what the government is up to, and it seems that we're at least on the slippery slope of that sort of legislation.

Of course our founders gave us the 2nd Amendment so that we would have the means to overthrow a government that becomes tyrannical, and restore our Constitution.

But what good is hunting rifles and hand guns against the awesome power that our military possesses. And now we can see that even if our troops would refuse to fire upon us, there's at least 20,000 "security" forces in Iraq who would. Blackwater Security Consulting claims to maintain a database of 100,000 qualified men ( meaning several years experience in some sort of Special Forces training ) available for "security" work, and already they have deployed a force in New Orleans after Katrina.

When you really consider the consequences of a government that heeds the moneyed interests of multinational corporations rather than the lives of human beings you have to ask yourself why YOU are really so much different from the people of Iraq.

Because you're an American?

Maybe...

and then again maybe NOT.

War for Oil

By Mike Siesel

Scroogle