Ian....after 1300 posts it's a tad late...

Joe...there IS only ONE 'truth', just many interpretations...

bakerstreet dunno, but whom ever does it, the oil fires do need putting out so someones going to end up doing it, though I think that CBC International did state that someone is already capping the few that were set ablaze. So if they have the contract it must be them is what I figure. But they are some of the best in the world, top notch so why wouldn't they be doing it?

Of course that is without taking the question of opn biding into consideration, which was not really conneted to the context of the response on my part.

IPlural: true. I wish they would have at least taken bids for the rebuilding from the rest of the coalition. I'm all for the war, and I don't think it is being waged because of economics, but it makes for bad press, especially when easily confused people are trying to find an excuse to call us 'invaders'.

If money *is* shifted under the table at least we can say it is coming from US tax dollars and not the Iraqi people. Oil and arms deals that rely on Saddam staying in power also rely on the poverty of the Iraqi people. Two birds with one stone, oui?

There is no such thing as "objective press".

By the way, were you bullied by some French kid when you were young or something? You make it sound like France is out to "Control The World For Their Evil Purposes!".

no, crea, i don't think they want to control the world. Why would they? Too much accountability and not a lot of profit.

a couple of facts for ya:

French exports to Iraq increased from 300 million to 1 billion dollars from 2000-03.

'Total Fina Elf' had inked deals with Iraq to share in the oil production of two fields, the output being enough to fulfill French oil needs for *30* years.

From 1981-2001 France, China and Russia supplied 81% of Iraq's military imports, the US was 11th on the list during that period.

Here's a report that originally appeared on the Al-Jazeera website:

http://memri.de/uebersetzungen_analysen/themen/oekonomie/eco_irak_27_03_03.html

another good list of statistics is here: http://www.heritage.org/Research/MiddleEast/wm217.cfm

If you find those links suspect, I can find numerous others that share that view. These are the nations who are anti-war and yet somehow up to their necks in Iraq. Peace-loving nations that financially support a regime that has murdered hundreds of thousands of its own people.

France spends a great deal of time and effort fencing economically with the US and anyone else that threatens their supposed 'culture'. I can go and make you a list of times France has had 'reservations' when people around the world have begged for military assistance if you need me to. I doubt you do. Add to that the numerous times they have refused to classify terrorist organizations as 'terrorist' and allowed them to run store-front operations.

No, I am not a big fan of France, crea. I don't have any more respect in this case for Germany than I do for France. Russia and China should be no-brainers to anyone with any concept of 'human rights'. An odd crew to be so pro-peace, wouldn't ya think?

Let me reiterate what I see:
1. those links state that France does a lot of business with Iraq (including weaponry) and has large interests in it. As do other nations.
2. coincidentally a lot of these same nations are against the war

So there is a high correlation between the countries that have economical interests in Iraq and those that are against the war.

Ergo, these articles conclude that, 1 + 2 = 3:
3. France (and others) are against the war to protect their economic interests

Right?

Crea: number 3 could also be stated as "France (and others) are protecting Saddam Hussein to protect their economic interests" Fact is, once the regime is gone, so are their agreements.

Granted, they may make new ones, but an evil bird in hand...

( lol, and the award for 'Most egregious misuse of an old saying' goes to... )

I never bought into the bin Laden thing. I'm not a fan of the Saudis, though, so with some alterations I could make it work

Good luck ducking the boss. I'm pooped and bleary-eyed from working on my little girl's birthday present and wasting time here, lol. g'nite.

backerstreet,
talking about deals with irak, you should read that article from the washington post (dated Nov, 2001) :

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/sanction/iraq1/oilforfood/2001/0627chen.htm

You'll always find informations and its counter-part over the net. Now, to discern true from false, that's the hardest part. I'm not saying that france did not any business with irak, it must be true (after all, total-fina-elf is not a company much appreciated by the french population), but you can find several informations in a lot of places saying that usa made also big deals (chemicals weapons and more) with irak.

Iplural: huh? who cares what they owe us, we are the ones making war. We aren't trying to protect those debts by leaving him in place. The point isn't what Iraq owes these other countries, it is the fact that they are desperately trying to keep Saddam Hussein in power so they can do business with him.

Thibaud: I'm sorry, but it sounds like you are saying "Sure, he's evil, but since you sold something to him 30 years ago you can't touch him now." People keep saying stuff like that, mentioning that the US helped Hussein during the cold war. My opinion is "So?". What sort of world would this be if you couldn't re-assess relations with other nations. Anti-war Europe seems to have no trouble doing so.

When this is over Saddam Hussein's regime will be gone. Ask yourself what kind of people could be upset about that.

backerstreet,
did you read the article ? it wasn't 30 years ago but only some years ago : 1997 to 2000 does not really correspond to the cold war period.

Anyway, you didn't understand what i said : i've never said that since country x (whether it would be france, usa etc..) had/has a deal with hussein, then it would let him quiet. We all agree that hussein is a terrible dictator who must be removed. All i'm just saying here, is that you think that france/germany/china/russia (and a lot of other countries) didn't want that war only because of interests with irak.
What i just meant in my previous post is that a lot more countries (usa included) had/have deals with irak.

It's too basic assuming that "if you don't want war, then it means that you support saddam hussein".
Really ? I didn't want that war. Is that because I have a special interest to hussein ? come on. Anti-war Governement opinions/populations opinion are greatly different. It reminds me what Powell or Rumsfeld (I can't remember who did) said : "you're with us or against us". Arg, that's stupid ! It's not because we disagree on something that we're automatically against the usa. It's not the case at all.
Though we also have some stupid guys here who would try to destroy a McDonald, I can assure you that the majority of the french population has always been in favor of the usa and they never tried to boycott nor rename US words ('freedom fries/toast' makes me laugh).

Anyway, i just hope now that this war will end soon (with a US success of course) then, let see how it'll go for irak, democracy, middle-east region. I'm not sure that democracy in irak will work, but well, time will tell (let's hope I'm wrong).

there's always games we can play on a machine when we feel the urge to blow things up! (and it's muchhhh safer) hehe

okay sorry you guys can continue your army talk now...

Thibaud: The 30 year reference was to the occasional 'The US sold WMD to Iraq" comments that appear. To be frank, I don't like Dick Cheney. I didn't like him as a choice for a running mate and I don't like him as a vice president. I don't think G.B. would have been allowed to run without him, though. To be honest I could make a fairly long list of people I would rather have than G.B. in the office of President.

I can't vouch for Halliburton's business practices either. Usually when they get caught in something it ends up being a 'subsidiary' they recently liquidated. I dunno. I have two main concerns for this war. Is removing Hussein something that will better Iraq and the world as a whole, and is anyone taking advantage of the Iraqi people in the process?

Considering the contracts for rebuilding Iraq are gonna be paid by US tax dollars, or UN, or whatever they decide, I can't say the Iraqi people would be harmed, no matter the subcontractor shenanigans. There will be a great deal of work done to rebuild their nation. I don't have any doubt in my mind that the world will be a better place without Hussein.

I agree that many more countries have deals with Iraq, but the most-vocal of the anti-war crowd have the biggest deals, and that is way too much of a coincidence to me. I believe that they aren't pro-peace, they just don't want to lose their lucrative business deals.

As I said before, all Saddam Hussein needs is to be left in power. Preventing this war would have given him that. That was my point. I don't have any hard feelings against you. I respect your opinion. This is just talk.

was directed to craeonic´s post.