digg

Join DiggAbout

Digg Townhall Tonight!
Tune into the live Digg townhall tonight at 5:00pm PST/8:00pm EST.

See the original image at washingtonpost.com —

Iraq and China Sign $3 Billion Oil Contract... Thanks Bush!

washingtonpost.com — Iraq and China signed a $3 billion deal this week to develop a large Iraqi oil field, the first major commercial oil contract here with a foreign company since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • Spandia, on 08/31/2008, -9/+69Yes, we went in and got the oil! Oh wait--it's all red.
    • chanop, on 08/31/2008, -0/+34OK, It's china's problem now. Let's GTFO
      • jj101, on 08/31/2008, -2/+13China are not ***** about are they? I know they've been buying up resources at an increasing rate over the past 5 years but I never saw this coming. I don't know whether to be impressed or worried.

        As for it being their problem now I think you'll find they just played the coalition for mugs.
      • renegadeafk, on 08/31/2008, -0/+14China touched it last!
      • unreg, on 08/31/2008, -1/+8JJ101

        Did you even bother to read the article? China is simply supplying technical services at a set price. They get no rights to the oil produced, no first dibs, nadda, nothing.
      • RogueGenius, on 09/01/2008, -1/+4unreg,

        So they are doing it for altruism?

        I got a bridge to sell you buddy.
      • bluezinc, on 09/01/2008, -3/+2China would wipe the streets clean. They'd make sure the only people living in Iraq were either in labor camps or Chinese party officials.

        You thought our Marines and Blackwater did some sick *****, wait until you see what the China's forces would do.
      • unreg, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1RougeGenius (hardly)

        They get $3 Billion dollars. Is it that difficult to figure out?
    • scoottie, on 08/31/2008, -1/+10wait wasnt it Dennis Kucinich that pushed for US oil companies to not get any oil contracts?

      http://www.digg.com/politics/Kucinich_seeks_to_bar ...
      • toetagger, on 09/01/2008, -0/+3This contract serves two purposes: 1) it 'shows' that the US doesn't control the govt. (a PR move) and 2) the field China will be developing is in the south along the Iranian border, surrounded by Shiites. If a western company goes in there it will be the subject of repeated attacks. China already works closely with Iran. Ok, kiddies, what else would you like me to explain. : )
    • Andysan, on 08/31/2008, -6/+10What the hell is Iraq supposed to do with their oil -- eat it? The libtards are bitching about Iraq not spending enough oil revenue on their reconstruction. Now the Iraqis are getting more revenue and the libtards are bitching about THAT. Geez -- how do some of these people even get dressed in the morning?
      • charlie55, on 08/31/2008, -0/+2you are correct. i suppose we should want the iraqis to not profit from their oil?
      • mrsteveman1, on 09/01/2008, -1/+9I think thats the point, they have ***** of oil, apparently ***** of money, and aren't spending much if anything on reconstructing their country - we are.
      • RogueGenius, on 09/01/2008, -1/+1"I don't know weather to be impressed or worried"

        Be impressed. They are fighting for their share of the world. We've pretty much given up. They deserve to get our spoils.
      • bluezinc, on 09/01/2008, -1/+2When you go to war for oil (however ***** up a reason that may be), and you "win"; you expect to get a little oil out of the deal. Not to give the oil to our industrial rival.

        Before this was already retarded, but we could bury out consciences and think, "well, at least gas will be cheaper". Only to find out that, "psyche! no oil for you! hahahaha! suckers!!"
    • Pedestrian101, on 09/01/2008, -2/+3And all liberals on Digg were pissed about contracts being given to AMERICAN oil companies.
    • spankaccount, on 09/01/2008, -3/+2As a sovereign country, Iraq can sign oil deals with whoever wants to buy it. Why are Diggbots so stupid? Just wait until America signs it's deal with Iraq - yup, Diggturds will Boo that too.
    • bluezinc, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1Me Chinese, me play joke...
  • pauls88, on 08/31/2008, -35/+3this will kill you america
    • enantiodromia, on 08/31/2008, -0/+17how do you figure? most of our oil comes from Canada and Venezuela.
      • Andysan, on 08/31/2008, -1/+8These people don't figure -- they just blather endless nonsense.
      • Blydchyld, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1You fail.

        http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_ ...

        Crude Oil Imports (Top 15 Countries)
        (Thousand Barrels per Day)
        Country Jun-08 May-08 YTD 2008 Jun-07 YTD 2007
        CANADA 1,883 1,840 1,888 1,905 1,881
        SAUDI ARABIA 1,479 1,579 1,523 1,501 1,407
        MEXICO 1,124 1,116 1,193 1,392 1,454
        VENEZUELA 1,085 1,030 1,012 1,135 1,109
        NIGERIA 946 851 1,036 893 1,022
        IRAQ 693 583 674 573 476
        ANGOLA 636 464 496 502 568
        BRAZIL 280 318 221 121 158
        ALGERIA 269 440 319 504 494
        RUSSIA 228 119 109 29 135
        KUWAIT 179 263 219 263 193
        ECUADOR 178 162 192 166 195
        COLOMBIA 177 245 182 143 108
        CHAD 107 57 101 80 69
        LIBYA 89 96 76 144 66
    • skinnydipinacid, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1that's nice Paul

      (just smile and nod enantiodromia... just smile and nod)
  • skoubydoo, on 08/31/2008, -13/+73You didn't think China, the EU, and Russia let the USA get away with Iraq, for nothing?
  • 03FightOn, on 08/31/2008, -22/+90lol...were'nt you tools just bangin on W for stealing Iraq's oil?????? Man, I have to catch my breathe cause I'm laughin so hard here!!!
    • doom777, on 08/31/2008, -7/+26guess it shows you this is not about oil
      • jj101, on 08/31/2008, -9/+3I think it tells you more about terrible startagey and short term planning. This doesn't mean the invasion was not about oil, it means that despite it, China have safeguarded the oil for themselves without lifting a finger. I would not be surprised if there were shedloads of Chinese people over there within the next six months. Just like they've been shipping people off to Africa too, after buying up other natural resources such as mines.
      • fugazied, on 08/31/2008, -4/+4What was it about then? Did the poor intelligence from the CIA/NSA really get the US into this mess? Did the neo-cons really think there were weapons in there based upon poor intel? Because it was a collossal ***** and somone has to take the blame.
      • Lunarsight, on 09/01/2008, -2/+1I always thought Iraq was a pissing contest between George W and his dad.

        George W wanted to show pops that he could finish something that his dad couldn't complete.

        His dad was wise enough to know the cost of trying to invade Baghdad. The wisdom didn't migrate to his son, apparently.



    • airwalkery2k, on 08/31/2008, -13/+6At least it made sense that they would go in to get oil. Hell, if we wasted all of our money on this war and lost all of our credibility, we might as well get something out of it. But it turns out, we don't. The only ones to profit is the war industry.
    • ocellnuri, on 08/31/2008, -6/+3You realize the internet is made up of more than one group of people with one viewpoint, right?
      • jj101, on 08/31/2008, -1/+2What are you talking about? Theres two types of people on the internet but the type changes depending on topic. Everyone else who comments falls into the opposite category as you. In this case the "you" he was referring to was obviously libtards, making the commenter a rep-ugly-can. Context is king.

        /sarc... actually (and unfortunately) thats probably true.
      • TheOther1, on 08/31/2008, -1/+3I thought the Internet was made up of a series of tubes.
    • grylls, on 08/31/2008, -6/+5It just shows that the chinese are smarter.
    • Psamtik, on 08/31/2008, -11/+1China stole it before Halliburton could, so now we have to figure out how to run our economies on irony.
      • dexter411, on 08/31/2008, -0/+8Apparently, the type of reading disability afflicting you makes it impossible to tell the words "stole" and "sell" apart.
      • jj101, on 08/31/2008, -2/+1"how to run our economy on irony". Lol. Concept of the day award.
      • ArcticWolf_0, on 08/31/2008, -0/+1Halliburton isn't an oil company...they don't have any oil...and they never will.
    • Herostratos, on 08/31/2008, -2/+3I would have dugg you but the excessive punctuation was a turn off.
    • rsh28630, on 09/01/2008, -4/+2Bush/Cheney are inept. This is simply further proof.
  • Depthfunction, on 08/31/2008, -10/+32I guess it's time for another "regime change".
    • NickSpinner, on 08/31/2008, -13/+4hit the nail on the head, and conflict with russia is in the plan too. really alex jones does have one of the best sites unveiling the truth at infowars.com and jonesreport.com
  • louiebaur, on 08/31/2008, -15/+5Yea Bush your rock Buddy!
    • VictoryTrash, on 08/31/2008, -2/+5If it's his rock, he can do what he wants with it.
  • headbutt, on 08/31/2008, -9/+24Crafty Chinese....
  • cyberdork, on 08/31/2008, -5/+88And that's how it should be, best offer gets the deal.
    • nightgts, on 08/31/2008, -5/+1$3 billion dollar deal is really not that much. there is something like 3 trillion dollars worth of oil there.
      • schnikies79, on 08/31/2008, -0/+10And they are getting $3 billion worth, not all of it.
      • unreg, on 08/31/2008, -2/+10The Chinese are providing technical services to the oil field operations, they get nothing in return besides the $3 Billion.

        You ***** need to actually read articles
      • RizzoFrank, on 09/01/2008, -0/+5But we don't have time to rtfa so we just comment our opinion regardless.
  • DestroyFascism, on 08/31/2008, -14/+47Mission Accomplished..
    • jaypooner, on 08/31/2008, -1/+1well at least this will lead to china getting addicted to oil
    • cowsgonemadd3, on 08/31/2008, -0/+2Wait...
      I thought we wanted to get off of iraq oil anyways...?
  • dha07030, on 08/31/2008, -5/+70Am I the only person who thinks this is not a bad thing. First of all there will be more companies than just China National Petroleum Corp. Second it shows Iraq is in control for the most part. Lastly 3 billion is not a large contract in the oil business. So yeah thanks Bush?
    • rogersj3, on 08/31/2008, -0/+15Exactly - this is just another sign of the progress that Iraq has made. Thanks Mr. President!

      /No sarcasm tags have been omitted from this post. Prolonged exposure to this post may cause severe bouts of liberal ranting, face-palming, or (in some rare cases) erections lasting more than eight hours. Ask your doctor if this post is right for you.
    • Iztikeit, on 08/31/2008, -5/+2Ends do not justify means
      • doom777, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1sometimes they do.
      • doom777, on 09/01/2008, -0/+2no, but rather the pros and cons of both ends and means must be counted, and weighed against each other.
    • AgmLauncher, on 08/31/2008, -2/+5And now China will have a vested interest in keeping the terrorists out of Iraq. Now China can deal with becoming a target for terrorists :)
  • Darren07, on 08/31/2008, -3/+169Why is this wrong?

    Why can't Iraq chose to sell its oil to anyone it wants?
    • atdigg, on 08/31/2008, -2/+17Also people should google for "fungible goods" -- it doesn't matter where oil is sold, the price of oil still goes down if you increase the supply.
      • cadmiumpaint, on 08/31/2008, -3/+2but the price goes up when the supply is limited and the demand increases.....such is the case with oil.
    • AboveandBeyond, on 08/31/2008, -20/+26because liberals are WHINERS
      • fugazied, on 08/31/2008, -5/+4Maybe they expect more from their politicians than invasion of other countries, high gas prices, mortgage crisis, bank bailouts and an increase in government debt of around 4 trillion dollars. If conservatives can put up with that, they can put up with anything. Maybe you like being in debt to china for trillions but I don't think it's so crash hot.
    • kingofinternet, on 08/31/2008, -4/+5think about it this way, we just spent $580 billion dollars raiding someone's house, getting maimed and blown up in the process, start fixing the joint up, and then we find out people are renting out a room in the house--to the guy at the office who's gunning for your promotion.
      • stillpissed, on 09/01/2008, -0/+2if i could digg that comment twice i would... perfect analogy.

        geez, it seems most people commenting on this article really missed the point.
      • milkycoffee, on 09/01/2008, -1/+1actually, I thought the point of the invasion was: DEMOCRACY. China, over the last decade has been very smart in dealing with African and Middle Eastern countries. They provide technical expertise as well as help develop infrastructure as part and bundle of the contracts they get at the expense of European and American companies.
    • rootnik, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1And it is not like the world, especially the Middle East, would sit quietly and let the US sign an Oil Contract with Iraq. It never could have happened.
      • myguitarisaweap, on 09/01/2008, -2/+1Who gives a flying ***** what the world thinks, that's the problem with this country.
    • tirofiban, on 09/01/2008, -0/+2Because if you listened to Dvorak's Audible pick, "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man" this is NOT how it is suppose to work.

      Here's how it is suppose to work, The US goes in either with an economic hit man, an assassin, or the military. Either way, the US companies get ALL of the contracts and the work is paid through US loans. Something is seriously wrong here. Someone is not going to be happy about this.
    • 9bpm9, on 09/01/2008, -1/+4Because the idiot liberals thought we were going for oil, when we clearly weren't, and since their are so insecure with themselves they can't admit that they were wrong, they blame the same person they blamed for saying he invaded Iraq just for the oil.

      I hate these people.
      • rootnik, on 09/01/2008, -0/+2I just want to thank you before you get buried for speaking the truth. I'm glad there are others out there who understand what they are really upset about.
      • brentologist, on 09/01/2008, -1/+0It's because not only do Bush fail in the war, he failed in his efforts to control Iraq and steal their oil.
    • wonttellya, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1Because three words "Bush", "China", and "Iraq" are in the title.
      According to liberal diggers, anything to do with Bush, China, Iraq, and McCain is wrong.
  • Pitofdoom, on 08/31/2008, -3/+16Either Iraq sells to the higher bidder, or they keep blowing everything up.
    Business can't operate without stability, that's good right ?
    • user500, on 09/01/2008, -0/+2let the locals kill some Chinese for a change.
  • bernk1, on 08/31/2008, -16/+48Wasn't this Bush's war to suck the oil out of Iraq to line the pockets of his oil business cronies? Wait, let me guess, the state-owned China National Petroleum Corporation is one of his cronies.
    • nicktx, on 08/31/2008, -16/+5That plan didn't pan out due to a severe case of incompetence among the neocons. But his old buddies lined their pockets either way. Unfortunately at our expense.
  • bernk1, on 08/31/2008, -13/+7Wasn't this Bush's war to suck the oil out of Iraq to line the pockets of his oil business cronies? Wait, let me guess, the state-owned China National Petroleum Corporation is one of his cronies.
  • alecsputnik, on 08/31/2008, -8/+6maybe with that money they can pay for the police to learn how to handle *****, and we can get the hell out of there.
  • sivartrenrag, on 08/31/2008, -8/+3Uh, Exxon and Shell and everyone else are going to get much bigger contracts than this, probably. But it still made me laugh pretty hard.
  • ChinezePanda, on 08/31/2008, -3/+91How does a deal made by a totally separate world power relate to actions by our president?

    I dont get it.
    • MercFox1, on 08/31/2008, -7/+39We go to Iraq "for the oil", and Digg is uproarious at Bush. China signs a deal with Iraq for oil, and Digg is uproarious at Bush.

      Draw your own conclusions, because mine will get me dugg down.
      • doom777, on 08/31/2008, -4/+20only liberals said that we went there for oil. Bush never said that.
    • TypeEE, on 08/31/2008, -0/+19I think some Americans did think that Americans entered Iraq could get all the oil contracts if not for free. This revealed that it is actually not the case.
    • Psamtik, on 08/31/2008, -10/+4Bush kicked a door down and China walked through it. Define irony.
  • Beveridge89, on 08/31/2008, -8/+3I like that this is being posted to complain that the war wasn't about oil. At least it's a new take on things.
  • DigSomeMore, on 08/31/2008, -9/+2Go Bush!
  • britblogger, on 08/31/2008, -15/+8well the Chinese own pretty much all of the United States' debt, so why not now the oil too?

    China is one of the wealthiest countries on the planet... America one of the poorest. weird huh.
    • stonewall123, on 08/31/2008, -3/+5That's alot of debt! Thanks Bush.
      http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.png
    • iPastafarian, on 08/31/2008, -1/+14America one of the poorest countries? Funny.
    • mirunit, on 08/31/2008, -0/+12I do not think I can begin to comment on how dumb you are.

      There is alot more at play to do with a nations wealth than their total debt count. The United States has massive amounts of infrastructure, natural resources (there is more than oil in this world as a resource), universities, human capital, international influence, military and raw GDP.

      In the future I can see China booming - which they will for sure, but in the end they will slow down. Most 1st world nations carry debt, USA, China (they do have some), Japan, Germany, Russia, UK, Spain, France, Canada. Also, I would like you to talk to the hundreds of millions in China Living off 100$ / month in near total poverty and tell them they are incredibly rich.
      • belfastbiker, on 08/31/2008, -0/+2If all these countries are in debt, which are in credit? Who are we in debt to?
      • omegared, on 08/31/2008, -0/+1Canada is paying off its debt for like the last 10 years.
      • mirunit, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1Private entities, banks and such are allowed to buy treasury notes along with the notes of other nations.

        https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world ...

        General Public Debt by GDP %. Canada for example has 68% of its GDP in public debt opposed to the United States's 60%.
    • edebolt, on 08/31/2008, -0/+4China's per capita GDP is about the same as Morocco. China still has 700,000,000 peasant farmers who survive on about $3 a day.
    • JoeB4ever, on 09/01/2008, -1/+2are you high or just plain stupid.

      The poorest people in America are still considered the richest people in the world

      take a ***** business/economics class
  • DroppedGT, on 08/31/2008, -3/+12Good. Now lets develop the next generation of energy while they fiddle around with the old source.



  • 9bpm9, on 08/31/2008, -8/+84Buried for sensationalist ***** title.
  • LongBong, on 08/31/2008, -12/+3Good. i don't want the USA to profit from that *****.
  • sfacets, on 08/31/2008, -6/+3LOL
  • jerrycan, on 08/31/2008, -11/+1TIME TO PULL OUT! LET THE CHINEE HANDLE NOW THAT THEY'RE VESTED.
  • vegx, on 08/31/2008, -6/+21Well, China did fund the war.
    • PainToad, on 08/31/2008, -3/+3huh?
      • macneib, on 08/31/2008, -0/+6China has purchased an incredible amount of US debt. Not enough to fund the war but enough to have a say in the affairs of the US treasury. Why do you think Hank Paulson is over there so often?

        It was a good move for Iraq/China/US. Bad situation for Iran since they'd prefer to be the main supplier to China thus ensuring that they are protected by China's security interests.
      • furyritchie, on 08/31/2008, -1/+1The Chinese own the debt the US of A used to kill the Iraqi's.
      • PainToad, on 09/01/2008, -1/+1Well there you go. Never knew that. I guess you (like the rest of the world) should get use to kissing their arses since they will be (are?) the next super-power.
      • skinnydipinacid, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1They've got a Billion + people Pain...
        They've been a superpower for quite some time!

        (nobody wants to ***** with China! Earth to Toad!!)
    • tulizx, on 08/31/2008, -0/+6And we still owe them the $, its a win win situation for China...
  • jshih, on 08/31/2008, -1/+1Hooray! We're finally in business!
  • stonewall123, on 08/31/2008, -1/+16Whatever happened to all that oil money that Bush promised would help pay for this war.

    "In selling the war to voters, Bush administration officials said overthrowing Saddam Hussein would cost as little at $50 billion, and that much of the reconstruction could be paid for with the Iraq's oil revenue."

    http://money.cnn.com/2007/11/08/news/international ...
    • patpl22391, on 08/31/2008, -1/+7If we took the oil, then it would be "war for oil" now that China won a contract, we have somehow failed....Digg is stupid.
    • sinator, on 08/31/2008, -4/+2I don't see any actual quotes from the Bush administration in your source, and I don't recall them ever blatantly stating that they would stand to make money off oil from Iraq.
      • stonewall123, on 08/31/2008, -1/+5His Secretary of defense pretty much said exactly that... " On March 27, 2003, Wolfowitz told a Congressional panel that oil revenue earned by Iraq alone would pay for Iraq's reconstruction after the Iraq war; he testified: "The oil revenues of that country could bring between $50 and $100 billion over the course of the next two or three years."

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Wolfowitz#Wolfow ...

      • JoeB4ever, on 09/01/2008, -1/+1so you're taking quotes from the DEPUTY of the secretary of defense as something Bush said

        you're a misleading piece of *****
    • fugazied, on 08/31/2008, -0/+3and the figure so far.... estimates range between 1 and 3 trillion dollars. Where did that money come from? National debt.

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic ...
    • URnotheonly1, on 09/01/2008, -2/+1US economy was paying the war off fine until the Democrats took over congress and drove the economy into the ground
      • stonewall123, on 09/01/2008, -1/+3Hmmm... are you joking b/c I didn't see the /sarcasm tag. Your assertion that the US economy was paying for the war just fine is totally wrong. We have been borrowing money adding to our national debt ever since Bush came into offfice. Just look at the national debt under his leadership ( http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.png ). And one more pesky fact that you have seem to have ignored is that the democrats could not have driven the economy into the ground since they only took control of congress last year.
    • tobiasly, on 09/01/2008, -2/+2Correct: we have been loaning Iraq money to pay for their infrastructure repairs, and once they start making money by selling their oil, they will be able to pay us back.
  • consciousNOT, on 08/31/2008, -7/+7Of course Obama wouldn't have allowed such a thing. Never. Ever. We all know he is more powerful than China. Or speeding bullet, even.
  • poidh, on 08/31/2008, -6/+17IT'S ALL ABOUT THE OIL.
    Or not.
    But don't let that let the Digg Kidz stop lying - IT'S ALL ABOUT THE OIL.
    • rexblade, on 08/31/2008, -1/+3No it was all about liberating the Iraqi, everybody knows that. Well that and a few companies have made a little money I think. Whats 3 billion to us in Iraq 2 weeks or so? Peanuts.
  • Markers, on 08/31/2008, -7/+4America! ***** Yeah!
  • massak, on 08/31/2008, -8/+29only liberal retards will see this as bad......
  • vinnyvenus, on 08/31/2008, -0/+10I thought people wanted Iraq to be independent of US. So this a good thing, right?
  • cadmiumpaint, on 08/31/2008, -10/+10Americans die, and our great grandchildren are put into massive debt so China can profit.

    "Mission Accomplished" indeed.
    • judicar, on 08/31/2008, -1/+7And if an American company had won the contract you would just be saying "See we did it for the oil!".
      • cadmiumpaint, on 08/31/2008, -6/+2oh you are right, the invasion of Iraq was/is all about the oil.

        our leadership is just too inept to make sure it was an American company that saw the benefit of our blood and money.
      • skinnydipinacid, on 09/01/2008, -1/+1So then...
        that would have made it okay?
        or just better?

        can't wait to hear that answer!
  • nicktx, on 08/31/2008, -1/+22$3 billion is like, 250 barrels of oil. I'm not bothered.
    • doom777, on 09/01/2008, -1/+5www.instantrimshot.com
    • mogobufflo, on 09/01/2008, -3/+2You buffoon, the $3 billion figure is the cost to develop the oil field, essentially meaning the exploration, drilling and construction costs associated with getting it up an running.
    • skinnydipinacid, on 09/01/2008, -1/+2It was a joke mogo... relax
  • enantiodromia, on 08/31/2008, -1/+4why is this a bad thing? afaik, we don't use even any Iraqi oil, it mostly comes from Canada and Venezuela.
    • jopache1, on 09/01/2008, -0/+31. Canada
      2. Saudi Arabia
      3. Mexico

      http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_ ...

      It kills me how when someone posted an article saying that big 4 "american" (BP and another were included in there) oil companies were given no bid contracts to Iraq everyone said it was proof that Bush was in it for the oil and he didn't give any other countries a chance to bid for it.. now we got other countries in on it and Diggers have found other things to whine about.
  • lornefs, on 08/31/2008, -2/+43 Billion is chump change, Shrub and his controllers have already spent over a half trillion American dollars on this endeavor.
  • connieLingus, on 08/31/2008, -5/+2good maybe iraq can start paying us back for kicking saddam the ***** out of there.
    • rexblade, on 08/31/2008, -1/+4Lol and getting rid of a few of those pesky relatives everyone had, and drawing radicals from all around for Jihad. Nothing adds to a community like a mass grave It gives a place nostalgia.
  • dalnet22, on 08/31/2008, -1/+3I'm confused. I swear I read something a few years ago where the US made a deal with Iraq to have access to the oil.
    • samimnot, on 09/01/2008, -0/+2from the article:

      Western oil companies came close this summer to reaching agreements with the ministry to return to Iraq. Those smaller technical service contracts involved giving advice on how to boost production. The China deal is a service contract, which is more lucrative and involves large-scale development of the field.
  • PacoLugi, on 08/31/2008, -2/+4Maybe we should drill for our own oil?

    • deepthot42, on 08/31/2008, -0/+2Nonsense.

      Well only do that after everyone else's oil supply is worn out. Then they will have to come to US!

      (unless of course... after everyone else's oil runs dry they invest in alternate fuel)
      • PacoLugi, on 08/31/2008, -0/+0We need a strong economy to fund alternative energy.
        However, we need low oil prices for a strong economy.

  • TheDarkTemplar, on 08/31/2008, -2/+6China and India are two of the many reasons why oil is so high. So what if China gets oil from Iraq, it might ease some of the squeeze in supplies that the rest of the world is facing. Besides, wouldn't we rather China get their oil from a country that is NOT SUDAN????
    • ZeeZee2k, on 08/31/2008, -1/+3China provides weapons to the sudanese government to kill people in darfur, Chinese get oil.
      China lends money to Americans to kill Iraqis, Chinese get oil.
  • cohiba1, on 08/31/2008, -3/+4wait...i thought it was a war for oil...that we went in a took everything for ourselves...
    huh...guess all those idiots were wrong again
    eh...im sure they're still right on their other issues
    • 4321234, on 08/31/2008, -0/+2The contracts with the Western oil companies were signed in June. Besides, why do you think Bush favors "American" oil companies? Aren't they all global, anyway?
    • rexblade, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1Lol yeah those idiots. You can sure call em! We got those WMD's nipped in the bud, phew! Close one!
    • milkycoffee, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1Actually it was war for the sake of war. To slowly but surely strip us of our individual freedom.
  • Maevirko69, on 08/31/2008, -0/+9oh yeah, war for oil...right...
  • norman619, on 08/31/2008, -0/+30This is priceless.

    "Iraq and China Sign $3 Billion Oil Contract... Thanks Bush!"

    So Iraq isn't allowed to do business with whomever they see fit? The US should have put a stop to it? You people have to make up your minds. Are we out to control of the oil in Iraq or not? Here's a bit of news for you guys. The US also does business with China as well as Russia. Shocking I know... Only idiots would choose not to sell oil to an energy starved China. It's good for their economy and a great business move.
    • Fremen93, on 09/02/2008, -0/+1I don't think you get the point. We have spent countless billions making Iraq stable enough to do business in, and China reaps the reward. Did China help out with the countless patrols our troops made in those streets? I doubt it....basically Bush got us into a useless war, then we had to spend billions cleaning up the mess we made..and now others are enjoying the results.
      But go ahead you idiots...vote McSame into office, so we can do it again with Iran
      • wojtyk, on 09/03/2008, -0/+0>> I don't think you get the point.
        No, YOU don't get it. Diggers spent _months_ posting ***** articles (mostly off Salon and HuffPo) about conspiracy ties between the government and Hallibrton and back-alley oil no-bid contracts and so forth...essentially they painted the entire war as a US attempt to gain control of Iraqi oil. And they grilled the Bush Administration _endlessly_ on it. Now the exact opposite happens and they _still_ are critical of Bush. This is called hypocrisy...attempting to have your cake and eat it to. That's why it's hilarious, and sad.

        >> basically Bush got us into a useless war
        Iraq is a free democracy that is slowly and successfully rebuilding its economy with genocide no longer rampant and you call that useless? Just because YOU see oil as the only reason Iraq is worth batting an eyelash at doesn't make it true.
    • terryfunk4life, on 09/19/2008, -0/+1Femen you just missed the whole point.
  • Iatethecrayon, on 08/31/2008, -4/+12first women's gymnastics...now THIS?!
  • lopla, on 08/31/2008, -8/+3HAHAHA, Bush blew the place up to get the oil and he couldn't even do that right.
    • furyritchie, on 08/31/2008, -2/+5You are stupid. Everything is too hard for you isn't it? Mummy still loves you.
      • doom777, on 09/01/2008, -0/+2it's mommy, not mummy.

        Mummies love noone.
      • norman619, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1doom777:

        Mummies love nooners?
  • Denster23, on 08/31/2008, -1/+14I'm confused by the title. Didn't you want to see non-American companies get oil deals too? Iraq should sell to whoever they want to.
  • 4321234, on 08/31/2008, -4/+5The debt Bush piled up to China will pay for the oil that China buys from Iraq, but don't worry. Now just open up offshore drilling and sell the oil to china to pay the interest of the Chinese loans that financed the war in Iraq that gained ......................wow, Bush really screwed the pooch, didn't he?
  • wiachy, on 08/31/2008, -1/+2even if we wanted an oil contract in iraq, we couldnt get one because the lovely environmentalists here wouldn't allow it lol. so thank YOU tree huggers.
  • deadbaby, on 08/31/2008, -0/+3Since we're spending $10B a month in Iraq providing security I sure hope the government of Iraq is going to throw some of that $3B our way.
    • milkycoffee, on 09/01/2008, -0/+1it was an invasion... not an invitation!!!
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 98 of 98 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.