Thread: Iraq/Dinar News. before Febuary 2nd 2006

Originally Posted by Inscrutable

The Blog | Bob Cesca: Unsolved Mystery: The Iraqi Hydrocarbon Law | The Huffington Post

TomPaine.com - It's Still About The Oil

For more than four years, the Bush administration and its oil company cohorts have worked toward the passage of a new oil law for Iraq that would turn its nationalized oil system over to private foreign corporate control. On Thursday, January 18, this dream came one step closer to reality when an Iraqi negotiating committee of "national and regional leaders" approved a new hydrocarbon law. The committee chair, Deputy Prime Minister Barham Salih, told Reuters that the draft will go to the Iraqi cabinet next week and, if approved, to the parliament immediately thereafter.

The good news is that the Production Sharing Agreements (PSAs) so hotly desired by the Bush administration and the world's oil companies that appeared in earlier drafts of the law have apparently been removed. The PSAs gave private companies (including foreign ones) control of Iraq's oil production and 70 percent of the profits, specified that up to two thirds of Iraq's known oil reserves would be developed by private companies and locked the government into 30-year contracts.

Unfortunately, the bad news still outweighs the good.

First, the committee has debated the new law in near total secrecy: almost no one—both outside of and within the Iraqi government, including the parliament—has seen it.


But boots on the ground know of the Central Bank's intentions? LOL

Don't stress, there's plenty of time to buy. Support Rolclub, buy your dinars from Iraq dinars Dinar Trade Ask Ali for the exclusive Rolclub discount.

Actually the PSA's are still in the agreements but they aren't called PSA's anymore. One of the previous news items posted here explained how the name and the abreviation have been cleverly changed to escape the controversy.

Full Coverage: State of the Union Address Enlarge Photo APBush stresses need to succeed in Iraq
AP - 17 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - President Bush, confronting a skeptical Congress and American public, struck back Tuesday at opponents of sending more troops to the war. He asserted that "America must not fail in Iraq" and insisted his plan offered the best chance of success.

Originally Posted by Inscrutable

Come on, I've given you links and mathematical fact and now you spin it from 80 tons to $800 billion? I'm not going to do the math for you but after all the post where you have told me I'm wrong I reserve this post to tell you "No, you are"

Do the math.

Here's the 80's gold price history,Gold Price History - 1980 - London Gold Fix it's almost identical to today's price. So at $800 Billion they would need about 700 tons. I am laughing so damn hard I almost fell out of my chair.

I have always stated $800 Billion in gold reserves, but I thought it was 80 tons as opposed to 800 tons. The articles clearly state Iraq had hundreds of billions in gold reserves, and one specifically stated $800 billion at 1980's prices. So I am not spinning anything....$800 billion no doubt.

You can choose to believe they meant all of the Swiss reserves, but I disagree. They are stating the Swiss Secretariat managed Iraq gold reserves used specifically to back it's currency, which numbered into the hundreds of billions. You can say it's an interpretation issue, but it isn't. The Swiss' total reserves, under it's management, FAR surpassed that amount.

Laughing and falling out of your chair doesn't shed any truth to your position at all....It's simply laughter.

I have nothing more to add to this issue.

Bush to defend Iraq plan, propose lower U.S. gas use By Steve Holland and Caren Bohan
1 hour, 32 minutes ago



WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush will urge a rebellious Congress on Tuesday to give his new Iraq plan a chance in a State of the Union speech in which he also proposes cutting U.S. gasoline use to address climate change.

ADVERTISEMENT

Bush was to deliver his 9 p.m. EST (0200 GMT) annual address to a nation increasingly opposed to the Iraq war and to his drive to send in 21,500 more troops, and to a Congress entirely controlled by Democrats for the first time since he took office.

A Washington-Post/ABC News poll released on Monday gave him a job approval rating of 33 percent, essentially placing him at the weakest point of his presidency.

"Congress has changed, but our responsibilities have not," Bush will say. "Like many before us, we can work through our differences, and achieve big things for the American people."

Bush, in excerpts of his speech released by the White House, defended his new Iraq strategy to try to quell the uproar about it since he unrolled it two weeks ago.

"Many in this chamber understand that America must not fail in Iraq -- because you understand that the consequences in failure would be grievous and far reaching," Bush said.

White House counselor Dan Bartlett said Bush would call on Congress to give the strategy "a chance to work."

Virginia Democratic Sen. Jim Webb, who was to give his party's rebuttal, said befo*****d: "Basically, they don't have a plan."

HEALTH CARE, ENERGY ON AGENDA

Bush will use the lion's share of an expected 50-minute speech to talk about a domestic agenda for the year. With Iraq dominating the debate and Democrats in control of the House and Senate, his domestic proposals face an uncertain path.

He will float proposals on reducing U.S. gasoline usage 20 percent in 10 years, expanding health care for Americans, getting a new immigration policy approved and improving education.

The energy proposals by Bush, who has frequently been accused by critics of ignoring global warming, fall short of seeking mandatory caps on carbon emissions which are wanted by some Democrats in the Congress, as well as Europeans.

He would achieve his goal through improved vehicle fuel standards and a dramatic increase in production and use of alternative fuels like ethanol.

"It is in our vital interest to diversify America's energy supply -- and the way forward is through technology," Bush was to say.

Bush was not pushing for a specific increase in the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, which many experts see as critical to reduce oil usage but which the White House fears would prompt manufacturers to build smaller, less-safe cars.

Instead, he was asking Congress for authority to reform CAFE standards for cars with the goal of reducing projected annual gasoline use by up to 8.5 billion gallons, deputy White House chief of staff Joel Kaplan said.

Bush believes the projected growth in carbon emissions from cars, light trucks and suburban utility vehicles could be stopped in 10 years under his plan.

New York Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer (news, bio, voting record) criticized Bush's proposal, saying "the quickest, most efficient way to reduce gas imports and bring down prices is to increase fuel economy standards."

Bush's health care plan -- making health insurance taxable income and deductible up to $15,000 a year for families starting in 2009 -- could raise taxes for as many as 30 million Americans but lower costs for many millions more.

A U.S. official said it would cost $30 billion to $40 billion in initial years but eventually pay for itself.

The president will not address directly the efforts by Democrats and many Republicans to develop nonbinding congressional resolutions aimed at expressing opposition to his Iraq plan.

Bush will warn that failure in Iraq could embolden Iran in what Washington believes is its pursuit of nuclear weapons, national security adviser Stephen Hadley said.

A key Democrat predicted the Senate would strongly reject Bush's plan. "My guess is there will be an overwhelming rejection, on the record, of ... 'stay the course' with 20,000 more," Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joseph Biden (news, bio, voting record), a Delaware Democrat, said.

Bush will call for a special advisory council made up of bipartisan leaders in key committees to consult on Iraq and the broader war on terrorism.

Sen. John Warner (news, bio, voting record), a Virginia Republican, said he wanted to see the language on this but "I think we are loaded up to here with committees right now

Bush says failure in Iraq would be grievous 2 hours, 37 minutes ago



WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush will defend his decision to send 21,500 more U.S. troops to Iraq in his State of the Union speech on Tuesday, arguing that a failure there would be "grievous and far reaching."

ADVERTISEMENT

In speech excerpts released by the White House ahead of his remarks to a joint session of the U.S. Congress, Bush said he and his military commanders carefully weighed the options and that he chose the troop increase "because it provides the best chance of success."

"Many in this chamber understand that America must not fail in Iraq -- because you understand that the consequences in failure would be grievous and far reaching," Bush said.

Bush said he was proposing establishing a special advisory council on the war on terror made up of bipartisan congressional leadership.

"We will share ideas for how to position America to meet every challenge that confronts us. And we will show our enemies abroad that we are united in the goal of victory," he said.

He warned that America's dependence on foreign oil left it "more vulnerable to hostile regimes, and to terrorists" who could cause disruptions of oil shipments, raise oil prices and harm the U.S. economy.

"It is in our vital interest to diversify America's energy supply, and the way forward is through technology," Bush said.

He also congratulated the new Democratic majority in Congress and urged Democrats to work with him.

"We are not the first to come here with government divided and uncertainty in the air," Bush said. "Like many before us, we can work through our differences, and achieve big things for the American people."

Bush's Baghdad plan: What do the numbers mean?
By Anthony H. Cordesman
Commentary by
Monday, January 22, 2007


President George W. Bush has presented a new strategy for the war in Iraq that may be able to defeat the insurgency and reverse Iraq's drift toward large-scale civil war. His speeches to date, however, raise many questions as to both the risks it will create over the coming months and the real-world ability to actually implement his plans.

The new Bush approach is considerably more sophisticated and comprehensive than the one the president could fit into the 20-minute address announcing the plan - which had been cut back from a longer 40-minute version. It combines political, military, and economic action in ways that do offer a significant hope of success.

The following analysis examines the strengths and weaknesses of the proposals in the president's speech in detail, but also adds important further details and clarifications by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Peter Pace, and the US commander in Iraq, General George Casey.

A reading of these additional details is more reassuring than the bare bones of the president's speeches, but it is clear that the new strategy and plan do involve critical risks, political and military.

The most important such risk is that the success of his strategy depends on the cooperation of a weak and divided Iraqi government that may not agree to deprive Shiite militias of their growing power; on Iraqi forces that so far have shown little fighting capability and key elements of which are corrupt or allied with Shiite and Kurdish militias; and on the acceptance of a major US urban warfare campaign by a divided Iraqi people, many of whom are hostile to the US and the presence of American forces.

The overall changes in US deployment plans are complicated. They involve retaining and moving forces already in theater as well as adding new forces as well as some very high-capability Army and Marine Corps units. Their stated mission is to "help Iraqis clear and secure neighborhoods while protecting the local population. These actions will build the capacity available to commanders to 20 brigade or regimental combat teams to assist in achieving stability and security and accelerate Iraqi Security Force development."

The Bush plan will add two brigades and some 7,000 more combat troops to the force in Baghdad relatively quickly. This will raise the 24,000 US troops now in Baghdad to a total of 31,000. There are some three additional brigade equivalents in the pipeline, with around 10,500 more troops. These may deploy to Baghdad, to Anbar, or not at all depending on the pace of events. Even if all deploy, adding 17,500 more US troops in Baghdad might not be enough. There were close to 50,000 US troops in Baghdad during the peak of the fighting in 2004-2005, plus more than two brigades, covering an area about half the size of the one that the US now plans to clear. At most, Bush's plan would provide 41,500.

In addition, the new plan raises serious political issues of a different kind since both Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's advisers and those of Abdel Aziz Hakim's Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq have previously gone on record as opposing an increase in US troops. It will almost certainly mean a major confrontation with Moqtada al-Sadr's Mehdi Army, which can now draw upon up to 60,000 fighters nationwide.

More generally, much depends on the overall ability of the Iraqi government in achieving political conciliation and removing much of the popular support for insurgents and militias; and on the ability to co-opt or disband the less extreme Shiite militias and Sunni security forces.

The new Bush strategy focuses on Baghdad with a limited increase in US forces in Anbar, and calls for Iraqi forces to take formal control of the security mission in November. It is not clear that increasing US military strength from 132,000 to 153,000 will be enough to win even in Baghdad.

The combined total of US and Iraqi strength does not seem sufficient to guarantee similar victory in the rest of Iraq, particularly in Basra, where the British will soon start making major cuts in their forces, Kirkuk, Mosul, and Iraq's other major urban areas. Given the poor performance of Iraqi forces in Baghdad and their failure to effectively take control of the security mission in other provinces, it seems very doubtful that the Iraqis can make the required progress by next November.

As for the new "battle of Baghdad," everything hinges on whether the Iraqi government's new appointment as military commander, and his two deputy commanders, will actually fight, and can or will deploy three more Iraqi Army and National Police brigades across Baghdad's nine districts. The Bush plan calls for a total of 18 Iraqi Army and National Police brigades, but many of these units can't or won't really fight, and many are at only a fraction of their authorized manning. There are currently 42,000 men in these Iraqi forces in Baghdad. Adding two brigades will add at most 8,000 men, bringing the total to 31,000.
The Daily Star - Lebanon - The Middle East's Leading English Language Newspaper

The plan also relies heavily on the 30,000 men in the police forces in Baghdad. These Iraqi forces are to operate from local police stations - conducting patrols, setting up checkpoints, and going door-to-door to gain the trust of Baghdad residents. The reality is that the National Police still has ties to Shiite militias and death squads, and the regular police is ineffective, corrupt, and not properly trained or equipped for the mission. In reality, even if all the planned US forces, and Iraqi Army, National Police, and regular police forces do show up, the total mix of forces may still be inadequate to bring lasting security to a greater urban area with 5-6 million inhabitants.

Bush also was scarcely realistic in saying that US troops would support or "help" Iraqi forces, rather than lead them and bear the brunt of combat. Iraqi Army forces previously only deployed two of six promised battalions at the start of Operation Together Forward and took months to build up to around 7,000 troops. Putting a US battalion of 400-600 men as "embeds" in each of the nine Military Districts in Baghdad may help, but it is still US forces that will do almost all of the hard fighting. This is likely to sharply increase US casualties, at least initially.

As for national efforts, Bush's plan to increase the embedding of American advisers in Iraqi Army units - and partner a coalition brigade with every Iraqi Army division, and giving US commanders and civilians greater flexibility to spend funds for economic assistance may also help. There are, however, many questions as to the real-world ability to deploy enough qualified US advisers and translators, and increase the effectiveness of Iraqi forces. At the end of December, the Iraqi Army had trained and equipped 132,700 men, but many had deserted, many of the remainder were ineffective, and even effective units were often largely Shiite or Kurdish and had mixed loyalties.

It is far from clear that the US can rapidly succeed in raising Iraqi Army division strength from 10 to 13, brigades from 36 to 41, and battalions from 112 to 132. Out of the 92 Iraqi brigades now said to be "in the lead," as few as 10 may have high effectiveness, although some experts put the figure at 20-30. Bush did not discuss the problems in reforming the police or the Interior Ministry to increase transparency and accountability and transform the National Police. These are all "high-risk" measures.

The Iraqi Army is also only part of the story. The 24,400-man National Police will present a major force-development problem because of its ties to Shiite militias and extremists. No one knows how many of the 135,000 men trained and equipped for the police remain in service, but absentee and desertion rates often ranged from 25-50 percent, and the same is true of the 28,900 men trained for other Interior Ministry forces. Further problems exist in dealing with the 135,000 armed security personnel in the various facilities protection forces, many of which are loyal to Sunni, Shiite, or Kurdish factions rather than the central government.

The president's use of benchmarks and the implied threat that the US will leave if Iraqi does not support it and cannot take over security responsibility by November may backfire. It creates a strong incentive for the elements hostile to the US to keep up military pressure, and for Sadr and other Shiites hostile to the US to push the Maliki government to not cooperate. The government may also react by trying to use the US increase in forces in Baghdad and Anbar to focus on Sunni insurgents and defeat them, while leaving Shiite militias and forces intact, creating constant tension between the US and Iraqi governments.

That said, these very real risks in Bush's new strategy do not mean it cannot succeed over time. They simply mean the odds of success are probably less than even. The president did make it clear that he expects much more intense urban fighting, and understands that a more powerful and proactive US military effort to "win, hold, build" in Baghdad could significantly increase US casualties. What is not clear is what will happen if Iraqis turn against US forces, or the insurgents lie low and outwait the US and government forces in what is a long war of attrition.

Look, don't come into the house of dinar, shout and scream $800 billion and how I'm wrong then run away. Prove to me $800 billion, there's got to be a link available to you somewhere (to assume this) because I searched and there's not one to me.
I've given you the 80's gold numbers in addition to many other facts, now it's your turn.

And I didn't say that the SNB uses all it's resources to back the dinar, I am stating that the article says the Swiss secretariat is worth hundreds of billions "in whole".

Next post please provide some proof.

Originally Posted by wellwishes

I have always stated $800 Billion in gold reserves, but I thought it was 80 tons as opposed to 800 tons. The articles clearly state Iraq had hundreds of billions in gold reserves, and one specifically stated $800 billion at 1980's prices. So I am not spinning anything....$800 billion no doubt.

You can choose to believe they meant all of the Swiss reserves, but I disagree. They are stating the Swiss Secretariat managed Iraq gold reserves used specifically to back it's currency, which numbered into the hundreds of billions. You can say it's an interpretation issue, but it isn't. The Swiss' total reserves, under it's management, FAR surpassed that amount.

Laughing and falling out of your chair doesn't shed any truth to your position at all....It's simply laughter.

I have nothing more to add to this issue.

The UN envoy on Iraq affairs Ashraf Qazi said on Tuesday that the Iraqi government's sovereignty and authority to run the country's affairs should be recognized.

Noozz.com | IRAQ

Saddam's Gold!

The marines got it.

schools open in Mushahidah
Tuesday, 23 January 2007
By Sgt. Cheryl Cox
1st BCT, 1st Cav. Div. Public Affairs



Staff Sgt. Riley Smallwood, a Soldier with Co. B, 2nd Bn., 8th Cav. Regt. and a native of Griffen, Ga., plays with young children Jan. 15 outside the newest girls and boys school in Mushadhidah, Iraq. Smallwood was one of several Soldiers who visited the schools to attend the ribbon cutting ceremony and to deliver school supplies to the students.MUSHAHIDAH — It has been said that fostering education is one of many steps toward improving safety and stability for Iraq’s future — its children.

The Soldiers of Company B, 2nd Battalion, 8th Cavalry Regiment helped the city of Mushahidah, Iraq, get one step closer to this goal by opening three new schools within the city Jan 15.

The Soldiers assisted with opening a girl’s elementary school, a girl’s secondary school and a boy’s elementary school.

“This project is an example of the close partnership we have with the Mushahidah city council to create a secure, safe and stable environment in Mushahidah,” said Capt. Adrian Spevak, the Co. B, 2nd Battalion, 8th Cavalry Regiment commander and a native of Allentown, Pa., during the ribbon cutting ceremony for the girls’ schools. “It is an honor and privilege to be here for the ceremony, and I look forward to continuing our close relationship with future projects.”

Just as Spevak said he was excited to see the children have a new place to go to school, the Mushahidah city council members said they were also very excited.

“This is a great example for the projects in this area,” said Shiek Naif Moutlak, the chief of the city council. “We thank the coalition for all they have done and hope for other projects in the area to help the people.”

And helping people is what makes all the hard work worth while.

“We have been working for six months to get the school to a good standard for the kids,” said Capt. John McGowan, the Company C, 414th Civil Affairs Battalion commander and a native of Birmingham, Ala. “By working with the Iraqi government, we have made a better place for the students to go to school.”

While the council members and the Soldiers celebrated the ribbon cutting, McGowan had chance to talk to a few people at the school.

“By being here talking to the students, I know that they are very happy to have a better place to go school,” he continued. “And the teachers are happy to have a good place to go to work and teach from.”

The newly opened schools are a great improvement from the old schools the children were attending, according to McGowan.

“The children now have classrooms with new desks and unbroken windows,” said McGowan. “They also have new school supplies that they may not have had without the help of the coalition partnership.”

Before leaving the girl’s secondary school, Spevak stepped into one of the classrooms to talk to the students.

“I am honored to be here to help make this school a better place,” he told the girls. “It is definitely a privilege to look into the eyes of tomorrow’s leaders in Iraq.”