U.S.-Occupied Iraq Ready To Cooperate With Israel

[Herschel]

A minister appointed by the U.S.-handpicked Iraqi Interim Governing Council (IGC) said Sunday, January 25, his "country" was ready to sell electricity to Israel.

Interim Electricity Minister Aiham al-Samarrai was quoted by the Qatari news agency as telling reporters "it was necessary to change the old mindset that banned dealing with them (Israel). It is a democratic world."

cut

http://www.islam-online.net/English/News/2004-01/25/article10.shtml


Although this source is suspect, we can hope the story is accurate. The newly liberated Iraqis would do well to recognize the value of a relationship with little Israel.

[wtmusic]

1. You mean little nuclear-powered Israel?

Is it up to the newly-liberated Iraqis, or their puppet government? How about that Iraqi pipeline bringing oil to Israel for 25% less than Israel is paying now?

Sounds like those newly-liberated Iraqis need some lessons in marketing... :eyes:

[Jack Rabbit]

2. The Iraqis are not liberated

They are under a hostile occupation.

I agree that there would be a benefit to establishing a relationship with Israel and that it is long past time for more Arab states to cease their counterproductive opposition to Israel's existence.

However, let's not kid ourselves about who is "governing" Iraq. It isn't Iraqis. A council of quislings hand-picked by a colonial administrator isn't a legitimate government.

[Herschel]

3. You two

We will agree Iraq would benefit from establishing a relationship with Israel. Indeed, using Israel as a blueprint would be wise.

Surely you must see the Iraqis will be well served in the long run by the elimination of Sadaam.

[wtmusic]

4. You mean after the civil war?

I'll withhold judgement for now. You might wish to do the same.

[Herschel]

5. You need only look back

and see the terror Sadaam wrought on his people. He is gone. Be glad.

[wtmusic]

6. I'm not glad

He's gone. Big f*cking deal.

We've invaded a sovereign country without provocation and hypocritically cited Saddam on UNSC resolution violations, while tearing up the UN Charter itself.

Oh, did I mention we killed 35,000 people in the process? That those people were defending their own country from a foreign invasion? That we installed Saddam and gave him the weapons to kill those people?

Apparently, Herschel, you believe in vigilante justice, in lowering ourselves to Saddam's level to accomplish our ill-defined goals. I don't. I believe in respect for international law, in setting an example for the rest of the world.

[Webster Green]

7. And the terror that Bush has wrought is a good thing?

I don't think so.

[Jack Rabbit]

9. The possibilities are too endless to frame the debate that way

You are simply employing a black-or-white fallacy. In principle, I agree that the elimination of Saddam is a good thing. However, it was accomplished in about the worst way possible; I actually believe leaving him where he was would have been better than carrying out this plan. That says more about what I think about the folly of the invasion than about Saddam. It is fallacious to believe that Saddam's elimination by itself benefits the Iraqi people.

The Bushies have merely replaced a gang of murderers with a gang of thieves. That's only an improvement insofar as a thief is morally superior to a murderer, but neither is fit to govern a nation.

Bush did not invade Iraq for any of the stated reasons. There were no weapons (and he either knew or should have known that); there was no tie to al Qaida (and he either knew or should have known that); there was certainly no connection with the September 11 attacks (Bush has all but admitted this). He invaded Iraq to put the nation in US hands and sell the country's resources out from under the people to whom those assets rightfully belong. It is colonialism, pure and simple.

To cite my own words:

If Bush steps aside and lets those with the interests of the Iraqi people take charge, this sorry affair might be salvaged in the end. Then and only then will the fall of Saddam become a truly meaningful event.

As for a relationship with Israel, we do agree. However, that is a decision to be made by an Iraqi government that is responsible to the Iraqi people, not to one responsible to colonialists in Washington.

[sushi]

14. Great post!

Now it looks like Iraq could fall apart after a civil war. I wish the Iraqis wouldn't let themselves be divided and conquered. After almost a year of searching no WMDs have been found. When I think of the arrogance demanding that the Iraqis don't fight back, it fills me with rage. Imagine, demanding from people of a sovereign country not to defend their country!

[beanball]

10. The elimination of Sharon

would do wonders for a more peaceful middle east.

[Darranar]

8. The Iraqis have not been liberated...

In a highly destructive and murderous war, tens of thousands of them have been slaughtered and many more shall die from the brutal occupation. There is little hope for Iraqi democracy, since the US administration seems intent on privatizing everything in sight and turning it over to US firms "rebuilding" Iraq. The result will likely be a neocolonial and chaotic state controlled in part by US firms (and what is not controlled by them left in complete chaos), not a stable democracy independent from heavy US influence.

[Herschel]

21. Please!

Will Iraq be better off without Sadaam? I think you know the answer.

[Darranar]

22. I don't know...

who is Iraq?

US corporations may well end up better off. Bush certainly won't be, though. As for the Iraqi people, it depends on who gets elected president.

[Jack Rabbit]

23. What is the city but the people?

Coriolanus, 3.1.198

[Jack Rabbit]

24. Further discussion in LBN

Thread on the report on Iraq from Human Rights Watch.

[Darranar]

11. So US puppets are willing to deal with a US ally...

How strange!

[Jackie97]

12. But Iraq has freedom right?

Bullcrap!

The US is picking the governing counsil (not the Iraqi citizens, which is what a democracy is really about). Therefore, the US is forcing Iraq to sell their electricity to Israel.

This was ALL ABOUT TAKING IRAQ'S RESOURCES. The US and Israel were NEVER in any danger.

US out of Iraq NOW!

[JasonDeter]

13. Isn't it ironic! LOL! also

I find it ironic the Iraqis complain bitterly the 'terrorists' blowing up innocent Iraqis! Seems to me they're beginning to understand how the Israeli population feels.

[dudeness]

15. is this a sick joke ??

Interim Electricity Minister Aiham al-Samarrai was quoted by the Qatari news agency as telling reporters "it was necessary to change the old mindset that banned dealing with them (Israel). It is a democratic world."

a sovereign country invaded by an imperialist power..its citizens slaughtered..and a colonial council imposed on the general population..is THAT democracy?

allow free elections under UN auspices..and let the people of iraq decide its foreign policy..not another puppet regime..

[drewb]

16. Be glad!

Be sad! :puke:
Be mad! :puke:
Be bad! :puke:
Be rad! :puke:

:loveya:

[Forkboy]

17. Let this be a lesson to other countries

Kiss US and Israel's ass or you get stomped like a narc at a biker rally.It's the thing "beacons of democracy" do best!

[kalian]

19. Yup...the so-called "American-zionists" plot....

strange how that "conspiracy" turns out to be reality a few decades
later, no? :eyes:

[drdon326]

18. I'm sure Yassir....

must be ready to slit his wrists.

He keeps betting on the wrong horse.....like a sure
anti-bet. lol

[kalian]

20. Liberated, eh?

Hmmm...interesting theory. I'll call the Iraqis "liberated" once the
imperialist troops and their Israeli "consultants" are out of Iraq
and the Iraqi people themselves CHOOSE whom to deal with.

And people that support these abominations directly support shrub and
his policies. There's no counter-argument against that. YOU support
shrub.