Are Democrats going slow on ending the war to let oil companies lock in oil deals?

[yurbud]

Poll question: Are Democrats going slow on ending the war to let oil companies lock in oil deals?

Bush is still strong-arming the Iraqis on behalf of the oil companies to pass a hydrocarbon law that the oil companies have dictated, and will set terms that other big oil countries like Iran or Saudi would never accept unless a gun was to their head.

Are the Democrats doing this kabuki of non-binding resolutions so the oil companies can finish their business with the weight of our military behind them?

Once it's clear we're pulling out, any Iraqi leader would know his life depended on getting a deal that is more favorable to his people since their gun would still be at his head but Bush's wouldn't be.

[TheWraith]

1. No.

Do you seriously think that any kind of oil deal is going to be worth the paper it's printed on the minute we leave Iraq? Hell, they barely pump any oil at all right now what with all the pipeline attacks--without the US forces there, that would drop to zero, and probably stay there for many years.

[yurbud]

3. so you think the Iraqis are so retarded they couldn't figure out how to get the oil out of ground

without bwana to help?

Maybe they could take the bone out of their nose and use it to dig in the sand.

I agree with the first part about the value of those contracts when we are gone, which may be why the Dems are letting them go through the motions--or they figure not protesting it is a win-win. If it works out, big oil won't be mad at them. If it doesn't work out, there's nothing they can be blamed for.

[lapfog_1]

2. What makes you think the Democrats CAN stop the war?

They do NOT have even a simple majority of senate votes (not with Johnson out sick and Joementum voting more repuke than many repukes). Stop thinking that because the Dems won 49 Senate seats (with one solid IND and one IND vote on procedural matters ONLY) that this makes them somehow able to move anything through the Senate.

You want congress to stop the President? Then you have to get 60 solid Senate Dems and possibly a few more House seats.

Oh sure, they can propose to defund the military, but they don't have the votes or balls to do it.

[yurbud]

4. I was hoping to be proven wrong on this

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

5. Nothing so sinister. Just playing it safe with "politics as usual".

As usual, they are following the polls and trying to have it both ways. "I'm against the war..but, defunding it is too politically risky."

Now that it's politically correct to be against the war they are throwing marshmallows at it. After the "surge" fails and the disgust and frustration of the people at politicians still playing politics they will edge toward "stronger measures".

Politicians don't lead they follow the polls and the money.