Slashdot Mirror

apparently iraq already has acquired some..!

It's the Oil, stupid:

Read about Oil in the Caspian Sea
courtesy of Radio Free Europe:

Energy Politics in the Caspian and Russia: 2001

Thank you and have a marijauan-induced nice day.

I did, however, turn up this article on the booming economy of Northern Iraq (from Radio Free Europe), attributed there to thriving black market exports to Turkey, Iran, and southern Iraq. Interestingly, Rubin points out that during his visit to the area in Iraq he claims is doing so well, he "I watched smugglers load sacks of rice and grain (and whiskey) for export", which is consistent with the more left-wing report from the area.

What's more, in the north, the UN takes responsibility for distributing the cash from the oil sales provided by the inefficient oil-for-food program ("the north ... can use the money to finance U.N.-approved projects"), while Hussein is allowed to use the money as he pleases.

But with (hardly unreasonable) statements from the UN such as "Iraq... is liable under international law for any direct loss, damage, including environmental damage and the depletion of natural resources, or injury to foreign Governments, nationals and corporations, as a result of Iraq's unlawful invasion and occupation of Kuwait" and the immediately following "all Iraqi statements made since 2 August 1990 repudiating its foreign debt are null and void", they have other things to deal with. In fact, Iraq's economy was not doing well before the war, and has sagged ever since due to the sanctions (see Kamil Mahdi, Rehabilitation Prospects for the Iraqi Economy, which conflicts to a certain extent with the reports of illicit trade supporting the northern economy, but only by deemphasizing its impact on the areas nearest the markets for it).

You are, of course, correct in pointing out that US and UN actions are two very separate things--but I would argue that this does not extend to the actions of the Security Council. I am also embarrassed for speaking before I knew what I was saying. However, I am not convinced.

> Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy were lifted out of the debris of war by the Americans

Presumably he's talking about the Marshall Plan. According to the Marshall Foundation figures, the greatest beneficiary by far were the UK, contrary to what this guy claims. This does not take into consideration the Lend Lease program, which funnelled many more material resources into the UK, much of which never made its way back to the US. Many economists and historians will tell you that is was more Germany's economic recovery than anything else that drove European recovery during the decades after the war. Of course, admitting that loudly and publicly would create somewhat of a moral dilemma, since Germany's image as the eternal bad guy would be tarnished.

> None of these countries is today paying even the interest on its Remaining debts to the United States.

Again, not entirely true. At least Germany had fully repaid its debts during the '50s. For an interesting assessment of the Marshall Plan, read this article. Also, lest you think the Marshall Plan was a purely altruistic gesture, check this tidbit over at the Library Of Congress.

> Does any other country in the world have a plane to equal the Boeing Jumbo Jet, the Lockheed
> Tri-Star, or the Douglas DC10? [...]
> Why do all the International lines Except Russia fly American Planes?

?? Ok, this is obvious trolling, but what the heck. I guess he hasn't heard of Airbus, which has recently had higher sales than Boeing. He might also want to check with some British and French aircraft manufacturers and see how they felt about being essentially strong-armed out of the market by the US during the decades following the war.

And regarding Boeing's constant whining about the EU's cash subsidies to Airbus, they might want to pause and consider where they'd be without the mega-juicy military contracts of WWII. For well over a decade after the war, Boeing civilian aircraft were mere permutations of their warplane parts bins.

> You talk about German technocracy, and you get automobiles. You talk about American technocracy,
> and you find men on the moon

Uh, he might want to visit the Marshall Space Center in Huntsville, AL, and read some of the last names on the exhibits. Trivial details, I know.

> When the railways of France, Germany and India were breaking down Through age, it was the
> Americans who rebuilt them.

Must have been some wet dream he had, no other explanation.

> I can name you 5000 times when the Americans raced to the help of Other people in trouble. Can
> you name me even one time when someone else raced to the Americans in trouble?

Well, that might have something to do with the metaphorical smirk on the US' face if offered "help": "Thanks, but you better keep it. You might need it more than us."

These are mere corrections of this guy's "facts" and in no way meant to denigrate the USA's contributions to the world. There is no denying that the world would be a lesser place without their democratic strength and stability over the last century.

The Democrats started the "low cost housing" idea--besides ruining the lives of many poor people and increasing crime rates--each apartment is worth about $20. Well, school funding is based on property taxes and local millages....
>>>>>>>>>
If there were no "low cost housing," then there would be more homeless and you'd have set of problems.

If you want fair schools, take funding entirely to the state level so every school gets equal dollars per student or have free private school charters for everyone. (Republican ideas.)
>>>>>>>>>
Taking funding to the state level wouldn't change anything. Many states (VA for example) are even less competent than the national government. Every school getting equal tax dollars would work better, but
A) Rich suburbanites would never agree to it
B) Its a socialist idea.
As for free private school charters, you might as well say "give all schools enough money." There is no practical difference between the government paying for private schools (what charters would amount to) and the government paying public schools, and most private schools are not in locations that would be easily accessible to the poor.

As for the US bombing everyone... We only do what the UN says. And it's not just the US that's the army of the UN. Most Democratic countries bomb along with us--you just don't hear anyone complaing about it. It's in style to hate the US.
>>>>>>
Bullshit. The UN *is* the US. Who is there to stand against us? France! Ha! In the UN, whatever the US says, goes. While people might complain, and the US might make a few concessions to keep someone in the security council from voting something down, the US gets its way in the big issues. Take economic sanctions against Iraq for example. France, China, and Russia favor easing or lifting economic sanctions on Iraq. France, China, and Russia are three of the five permanent members of the UN security council, and all have veto powers.

I think DeBeers has more Money and product than Microsoft.

Debeers= Diamond Cartel. Effectively, the Only company that serves as an origional source for Diamonds. All Jewelry companies buy diamonds from dealers who buy them from DeBeers. No viable choices exist, except for the Pink diamond mines in Australia.

There are sources in the US, but DeBeers bought out Congress in the mid 1800's, who passed economic, safety, and environmental laws that effectively made diamond mining unprofitable in the Americas, or made deals like these
_______________________________