digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

See the original image at edition.cnn.com

United Arab Emirates To Cancel All Of Iraq's $7B Debt

edition.cnn.com — The president of the United Arab Emirates has agreed to cancel all of Iraq's debts to the country, an official government source said.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • lucy22, on 07/06/2008, -2/+95That is very magnanimous of him.
    • bosssmiley, on 07/07/2008, -15/+13Yep. $7 billion in cancelled debt buys a lot of good press for the UAE and a lot of good will from Iraq.

      Now I wonder which stock market bourse the Iraqi government will favour in future. Dubai's perhaps?

      Generous, but not disinterested.
      • hmunkey, on 07/07/2008, -35/+7We won't do ***** for other countries and we're a hell of a lot richer than the UAE.
      • thcobbs, on 07/07/2008, -5/+47@hmunkey

        /me rubs eyes

        You mean like this:
        "U.S. cancels Iraq's $4.1 billion deb"
        http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/12/17/iraq.mai ...

        Oh, and that was four years ago.


        Hmunkey... thank you for proving that on digg... the USA can never do the right thing.
      • CryRightardCry, on 07/07/2008, -7/+2@thcobbs
        Why are you never honest? Why is it you are only able to tell half a story?
        Why not point out that the odds of getting that money back were slim? Say WHY we forgave that debt.
        "The Iraqi National Assembly estimates that 95 percent of the debts accumulated by the Saddam regime are odious, and proposes a blanket settlement on that basis, largely as an expedient. If, however, creditors insist on repayment, Iraq's assembly would use the UN's existing arbitration procedures, under which both sides appoint a portion of the arbitrators on an arbitration panel, and the appointed arbitrators then select the balance of the panel. The onus would then be on the creditors to show that the monies lent to Saddam were, in fact, used for the benefit of Iraqis and not for Saddam's personal purposes."
        http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=2924

        So to be HONEST (try it sometime), we forgave debt that we had no chance at collecting. And who vouched for Saddam to get all that money? Us? Yep.

        Forgiving Iraqi debt was the same as CapitalOne giving up on collecting credit card debt from the homeless. It ain't gonna happen, why not look like a nice guy and pretend to forgive it?

      • thcobbs, on 07/07/2008, -0/+9How was I not honest? The debt was forgiven. Although I will admit that there are reasons I didn't know. That doesn't make me dishonest.

        And the UAE forgave the debt at the behest of the USA. Regardless, of the reasons, that's $12B in debt that has been canceled for Iraq. A major help in rebuilding the economy and country.
      • Ravatar, on 07/07/2008, -0/+8@hmunkey: You do realize per capita, the UAE has more purchasing power than US... right? They're also positioning themselves to become an economic superpower in the very near future.
      • Badandy127, on 07/07/2008, -1/+2UAE GDP: $159 billion
        U.S.A. GDP: $14 trillion
      • Trichomonas, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2@Badandy127

        Ravatar did say "per capita". Divide the GDP by the population of the country and then compare the values. You'll find that the UAE has a high GDP per capita than the USA.
      • Badandy127, on 07/08/2008, -0/+0@Trichomonas

        Yes, I saw that. I was more responding to the part where he said they are posed to become an economic superpower. They simply don't have the population to do that.
    • Spuy767, on 07/07/2008, -10/+17I know! That's got to be close to what they make off of oil in 12 minutes.
      • abdulkha, on 07/07/2008, -1/+0and why do they have debt in the first place?
      • unreg, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1It was called the Iran-Iraq war. The majority of the Middle East nations gave Saddam $$'s, if only to prevent the spread of Iran's religious influence.

      • RogueGenius, on 07/07/2008, -1/+1And then we eliminated all of Iran's enemies in one swoop. Nice.
      • tjrecord, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1Buried for ignorance. Learn a little more about UAE's economy before you make assumptions and come off as an idiot.
    • warsongs7, on 07/07/2008, -3/+21Dugg for magnanimous.
    • bovox, on 07/07/2008, -5/+11It's not so generous considering the US spends $2B a week in Iraq.
      • ImadtheApplefan, on 07/07/2008, -2/+14On a war the US started. They're not spending those 2B building roads or schools, they're spending money on the bombs that destroy 'em.
      • DarkShroud, on 07/07/2008, -1/+3Except that the US actually is building schools and roads.
    • greenroom628, on 07/07/2008, -3/+4well sure the uae can do that, since we've been paying for it all at the pump and everywhere else. where do you think they got all that money?
      • DesignNerd, on 07/07/2008, -1/+7actually, the UAE makes most of their money from the Free Trade Zone located in Dubai, not from oil.
      • carlosos, on 07/07/2008, -0/+3And the UAE pays the USA for their cars, software (and whatever they import from the USA). So what is your point? They made some money by selling a product...Amazing!

        It would me nice if the USA would have that kind of money but for the last few years they started spending more than they made...
    • MonkeyHugger, on 07/07/2008, -2/+3Shame america didn't do it with Britain's WW2 debts.

      We payed them off in October 2006. Quite a long time after the war.

      When even the UAE is acting like this it goes to show what a selfish nation the US is.
      • daxmedflax, on 07/07/2008, -2/+1Do you even realize how much money USA owes other nations? How about erasing those debts then..
    • piemcgee, on 07/07/2008, -0/+0I pissed.
  • deckarddigg, on 07/06/2008, -31/+6and what... the UAE makes nearly $1B in oil sales in a month?
    • benologist, on 07/07/2008, -3/+44So what? The rich don't have any obligation to help the poor, it's great when they do, especially when the help is "billions".
      • pintomp3, on 07/07/2008, -2/+3that's not really the point. the debt was accumulated by saddam. why should the iraqi people have to repay the debt of their oppressor? many new governments have been choked by the debt of their former dictators and oppressors. the IMF and world bank give loans to dictators such as pinochet in chile and the apartheid government in south africa. these debts are passed on to the new governments along with conditions to allow foreign ownership and other "free market" principles.
      • benologist, on 07/07/2008, -2/+2The loans were to the country not to Saddam. He no doubt pocketed most of the money and gave the change to his cronies which is sad as *****, but nobody automatically gets a clean slate just because their situation has changed.
      • overridemymind, on 07/07/2008, -2/+1Iraq apparantly does.

        Perhaps now the insurgency will die down a bit now.... then again, prolly not.
      • jgzman, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1Actually, sometimes people (and countries) do get a clean slate. I suspect that this was done with an eye to stabilize the area. This is one less thing the new Iraq government has to worry about; hopefully they can focus their attention and newly-freed resources on more important issues.

        Here's hoping.
    • hmunkey, on 07/07/2008, -0/+23So they just gave away 7 months of profits? That's pretty ***** amazing.
    • DutchGuilder, on 07/07/2008, -0/+7The UAE nets more like $10B per month from oil so $7B is more like 3 weeks of profits, not 7 months.
  • iiiears, on 07/06/2008, -25/+5When the article says Al Qaeda claimed responsibility. That was helpful.

    /What is that at todays prices about one barrel of oil? - Sorry but i couldn't couldn't resist.
  • damian7, on 07/06/2008, -27/+8/America's debt
  • LOLPROFIT, on 07/07/2008, -35/+9Iraq is so *****-up that even normal Arabs are afraid to go there.
  • Hellman109, on 07/07/2008, -29/+22Funny that the UAE absolves Iraq of their debts while the US 'liberators' are trying to steal their oil...
    • wisam, on 07/07/2008, -19/+6Exactly what I thought. I don't know how to feel about the UAE's gesture. It's outstanding generosity. At the same time one has to wonder. Where's the Iraqi oil? Why is Iraq in much deep debt while the infrastructure is much worse than before the war?

      It's like giving money to a poor child while you know that his father would take the money and buy drink for himself.
      • Treoinmypocket, on 07/07/2008, -1/+8"It's like giving money to a poor child while you know that his father would take the money and buy drink for himself."

        So then you are for cutting off all aid to Africa - correct?
      • saigumi, on 07/07/2008, -2/+10"Where's the Iraqi oil?"
        France.

        "Why is Iraq in much deep debt while the infrastructure is much worse than before the war?"
        Huh? What? Do you not remember the sanctions put in place after Desert Storm 1 that pretty much crippled Iraq? This isn't all due to the current state of affairs. A lot of the infrastructure was that way before DS2.

        Seriously, try to actually consume some information before you reguritate your ignorance.
    • BotchaMcCoola, on 07/07/2008, -14/+5I do not think it is stealing. The US taxpayers deserve
      a reasonable repayment rate from the Iraqi oil until the $3 Trillion
      is repaid. This idea was in the original plan to sell the war.
      While perhaps a little unfair, such huge sums in Sunni and Shia hands
      could fuel a whopping civil war later on. And the Iraqis must show
      their appreciation if there is any.
      • KnightWhoSaysNi, on 07/07/2008, -8/+8Yes, they must show their appreciation for us ***** up their country.
        That's got to be worth something.

        /sarcasm
      • SuminderJi, on 07/07/2008, -1/+3WTF?

        We went and bombed their country and killed civilians without catching the main guy who caused this war!

        I was as upset and shocked as any westerner / human when 911 happened. My little security bubble was shattered.

        However, "those" people have no bubble, children are dying every day. Mothers are crying every day.

        FOR NO ***** REASON OTHER THEN GREED!

        So next time you say something like that, picture someone killing your family and then asking for appreciation and money.
      • DarkShroud, on 07/07/2008, -1/+1@KnightWhoSaysNi, Yes I'm sure they want their children back in prisons or their women back in the rape rooms run by Sadam's son and army. We're so screwing up their country that we let them control their own oil. All while Al-Quida kills Iraqi men, women, & children with their suicide bombers.
    • noahhoward, on 07/07/2008, -4/+8If we're stealing Iraqs oil... where is it?
      • pintomp3, on 07/07/2008, -7/+3Exxon Mobil, Shell, Total and BP — the original partners in the Iraq Petroleum Company — along with Chevron and a number of smaller oil companies, are in talks with Iraq’s Oil Ministry for no-bid contracts to service Iraq’s largest fields, according to ministry officials, oil company officials and an American diplomat.

        http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/19/world/middleeast ...
      • noahhoward, on 07/07/2008, -2/+4And? How is that stealing Iraqs oil? Petrol companies are trying to get Petrol contracts, what else would they be trying to do? The largest international oil companies in the world offering to work an oil field, that's just absurd.
      • BotchaMcCoola, on 07/08/2008, -0/+0For what it may be worth, a Saudi colleague believes Halliburton is managing the oil revenues there. While US citizens may not get any of it directly, he thinks some is being used to reduce US occupation expenses. That may be the closest we the USA come to recovering from the Hawk Hijacking unless you have the right stocks I suppose.
    • DaDrake, on 07/07/2008, -0/+6How do you steal oil if its on a global market for everyone to bid on? Spend trillions of dollars on a war, only to spend the same market-value for oil as every other country??? Yea.... I am sure....
      • me0wzilla, on 07/07/2008, -2/+1you own it.. someone has to buy it off someone else.. the entity that is going to own it is the USA..
  • czeman, on 07/07/2008, -9/+105If only our (USA) debts would get cancelled.
    • noots, on 07/07/2008, -5/+52so you can get into debt again? not that your current debt has any effect on your budgets/spending.
      • aladrin, on 07/07/2008, -12/+5And that's different from Iraq how?
      • noots, on 07/07/2008, -4/+29well considering the US is piling up 10billion dollars of debt per week, i think it's a little different.
      • p3ngwin, on 07/07/2008, -8/+8yes, electing the same stupid president twice and continuing to live a ridiculously inefficient lifestyle certainly won't get rid of that at any time soon.

    • altgeeky1, on 07/07/2008, -5/+38That's different: Iraq's debts were accumulated by a megalomaniac tyrant.
      Oh. Never mind.
      • BadAsh71, on 07/07/2008, -19/+2I don't know if I would call him a "tyrant"... he kept Iraq in line... that is something the United States hasn't been able to do.
      • overridemymind, on 07/07/2008, -3/+5I wonder if that has anything to do with the proxy-war style campaign that Iran is operating in Iraq. I.E. supplying the extremists in Iraq with RPGs, explosives, AK-47's, and ammunition....

        I wonder if that has anything to do with Iran and/or other Middle-eastern entities seeing the power-vaccum and subsequent chaos generated by the overthrow of the Iraqi government as an opportunity to either

        A) Attack at the US forces currently occupying the region
        B) Sieze control of Iraq for themselves.

        ... Nah.

        Cheers,
        overridemymind
      • Midtowner, on 07/07/2008, -2/+6Override,

        You don't really seem to grasp the situation in Iraq re: Iran. Especially regarding B. Though Iraq is largely Shia, there is no way in hell they would submit to Iran. The Iraqi Shia are Arabs, not Persians. There is a huge cultural difference there, not to mention a recent war. There are bad feelings all around.

        Most of the fighters in Iraq right now are foreigners. The locals are largely not supportive of resistance. Al Qaueda, a Sunni organization not supported by Iran is on its last leg. The only real militia left is Al Sadr's army which will be overthrown in short order.

        It seems the good guys are winning.
      • winnestow, on 07/07/2008, -0/+4our debts were acquired by a free spending congress and a budget that was signed off by the executive branch. blame is on everyone
      • Ravatar, on 07/07/2008, -1/+1@overridemymind: Get real, we have been treating Iran like total ***** ever since the revolution that didn't quite work out the way WE WANTED. We try to convince them to dethrone Saddam then sit idly by as he devestates their country. Are you trying to claim Iran has less of a right to Iraqi soil than we do?
      • overridemymind, on 07/08/2008, -0/+0No, not at all, Ravatar. Iran, UAE, Afghanistan -- any of them have a right to invade whomever they please. That's one of the rights of a sovereign nation - the declaration of war.

        What I'm saying is that we have proven that outside forces are contributing to the insurgency in Iraq, which is part of the reason we're having so much trouble stabilizing the region.

        Points A) and B) I made were just guesses as per the motivation of Iran or any other nation (or organization, for that matter) for arming the Iraqi people and contributing to the instability of the region. What you mentioned about treating Iran the way we have is a possible (read: probable) cause for my point A)

        That being said, however, the people who in all honesty have a right to Iraqi soil are... well, the Iraqi people.
    • ChileanGoD, on 07/07/2008, -11/+8How about doing it for some 3rd world country who are more in need and are also exploited by the US?
      • flink405, on 07/07/2008, -4/+7What countries are being exploited by the U.S.?
      • mypetridish, on 07/07/2008, -4/+7Iraq, for one.
      • element1ne, on 07/07/2008, -2/+9Look at your shirt tag and you'll know.
    • masamunecyrus, on 07/07/2008, -2/+1Haha. It would take the rest of the free world's money to bail us out, and even then it would take several years.
    • wilhoitm, on 07/07/2008, -1/+10We are talking Trillions, even the Arabs may not have that much money.
    • Confuseus, on 07/07/2008, -6/+1this is different. America's debt is to our selves.. we don't owe anybody money
      • altgeeky1, on 07/07/2008, -0/+6Uh, no young grasshopper... that's patently false.
        The bar is set pretty low for knowing about who's really floating the loans for the Iraq war.

        The normal think to do when in ONE OR MORE wars is to conserve, ration, and raise taxes to cover the war's costs. These things WILL harm "consumer spending", but the alternative damage (increased principal and interest payments) is ALWAYS more harmful to the country.

        The two main parties floating war loans is a 'consumer' manufacturing nation, and a consortium of oil nations. It's in their short term interest to accumulate our debt. Long term, they don't need us.

      • triad203, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1We owe over 25% of our national debt to other countries, primarily to Japan, China, and UK.
  • egthareal, on 07/07/2008, -6/+162Hello American Express? Yes, did you just hear what dubai did for Iraq? Well... lets just say my middle name is Iraq.
    • ladon86, on 07/07/2008, -0/+7Congratulations, you are now a terror suspect. Your phone will be tapped, and your credit card bill forwarded to the NSA. Have a nice day sir!
    • Mikhail101, on 07/07/2008, -2/+2And by the way dubai is a place in the united Arab Emirates
  • ShootTheCore, on 07/07/2008, -18/+13Why has no-one yet in these comments congratulated UAE for doing a great thing? It isn't often that massively rich countries would be so altruistic so I really think we should all drop our suspicions and prejudices and congratulate UAE on this worthy move to try and stabilize the Middle East
    • Loonacy, on 07/07/2008, -1/+25Did you not notice the very first comment? Or do you just not know the meaning of the word "magnanimous"?
    • overt, on 07/07/2008, -2/+17They're spending 70 billion dollars on a freaking amusement park. What's another 7 billion?
      • zyklon, on 07/07/2008, -1/+8"What's another 7 billion?"

        Pocket change?
    • rajk0909, on 07/07/2008, -2/+1I agree. But some people are just too silly. Can't help it. All Hail UAE ! :-)
  • Steinr, on 07/07/2008, -7/+56I think it is awesome how the UAE is treating other nations in need. And this just shows that they are thinking for people and not just for money.

    It is like giving Iran aid in its difficult time of being occupied by a hostile nation.
    • Steinr, on 07/07/2008, -7/+5should be Iraq not Iran, sorry.
    • 55mph, on 07/07/2008, -1/+27Are you really this naive? Follow the money.

      The UAE is on the verge of becoming the middle east's base of operations for a dozen of our largest oil and ammunition's manufacturers.

      HAL will lead the way seconds after Cheney leaves office.
      • mohsenxp, on 07/07/2008, -1/+2555mph does have a point. No where in politics are things as straight forward as "We'll be nice and forgive this debt".
      • Steinr, on 07/07/2008, -7/+1I am sure that UAE has other motives too, but they will not be significantly influenced by the decision to let of Iraq. The world is ruled by money and I understand your point, never the less I think it shows more about them then just their wealth, when was the last time the US canceled another nations debt?
      • IndigoMoss, on 07/07/2008, -1/+7@ Steinr
        Pretty much right after WWII, when we lent a lot of money to Europe, some of the countries that went lent money to, we didn't ask for it back.
    • allengeer, on 07/07/2008, -0/+14The UAE needs a peaceful middle eastern region to maintain their success. Forgiving the debt of Iraq is a step in the peaceful, cooperative direction.
    • Ravatar, on 07/07/2008, -1/+2Well, there are grains of truth in your Iran statement. After all, we have been violating their sovereignty since we started illegally flying spy drones over their land.
    • ZenMojo, on 07/07/2008, -1/+1UAE, coming through in the clutch again. I guess they're trying to balance their karma with that whole 75% of the country being immigrant wage slaves living in shacks thing.
      • source1984, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1WRONG. the educated immigrants have cushy jobs, tax-free incomes, and good houses. the construction market is where the abuse is.
    • utahnkid, on 07/07/2008, -1/+1There are PLENTY of other nations in more need of that money then scum bag Iraq.
  • AboveandBeyond, on 07/07/2008, -48/+75Iran gave america $1 trillion worth of oil for katrina but america refused.
    • blanketfury, on 07/07/2008, -5/+92We prefer to take it by force.

      It's a lot more magnanimous that way.
      • flink405, on 07/07/2008, -19/+5You speak untruths.
        When and where has America taken oil by force?

        And if America took oil by force then why does America buy its oil from Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, and other oil producing countries?

        What oil companies does America own?

      • blanketfury, on 07/07/2008, -5/+10WOW. I seriously hope you're kidding.

        Looks like Ron Paul forgot to give you a reading assignment:

        http://www.amazon.com/Educating-Rudy-Paul-reading- ...
      • pintomp3, on 07/07/2008, -4/+6have you seen the recent no bid contracts the oil companies "won" in iraq?
      • flink405, on 07/07/2008, -2/+6The government of the United States owns no oil companies.
        Oil companies are international corporations owned by many investors from around the world.
        The United States government is not an investor in any oil company.

        Any oil contracts given in Iraq are to international oil companies and none to the government of the United States.

        To quote from a BBC article on June 30, 2008:
        "Iraq is seeking external help to boost output from six key oil fields and has attracted interest from leading US, Asian and European producers."
        http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7480674.stm

        And:
        "The current plan is to award a series of short-term services agreements to a select group of the world's biggest oil companies to upgrade its existing infrastructure, and the parallel launch of an auction for eight licences to redevelop some of its ageing oil and gas production facilities."
        http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7485685.stm
        ----------------------

        When you buy gas for your car can you tell which country the oil originated in???
    • flink405, on 07/07/2008, -10/+62Really? $1 Trillion worth of Oil for a Hurricane?
      Do you realize how much 1 Trillion dollars is?

      Can you please cite a legitimate news source for your statement?
      • pintomp3, on 07/07/2008, -2/+54it wasn't a dollar amount, it was 20 million barrels:
        http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4218986.stm
      • kyletehgreat, on 07/07/2008, -3/+2$1 Trillion dollars could by a lot of bling. $1 Trillion dollars could by most anything
      • Ex3poo, on 07/07/2008, -1/+3EVEN THE MOON!
      • Red1Delta, on 07/07/2008, -2/+1$1 Trillion dollars couldn't by the love that I have for myself.
      • geneticlone, on 07/07/2008, -2/+1@ kyletehgreat

        1 trillion dollars and its never coming back ^.^
      • triad203, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1@pintomp3: So 20m barrels at $141.5/barrel (as of today's close) -

        = 2.830.000.000

        That's 2.8 billion USD. Of course, other countries call this same number of zeros a trillion. =)
    • Displace, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2220 million barrels of crude are not worth $1 trillion
      http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4218986.stm
      http://www.bloomberg.com/energy/
      • birch25, on 07/07/2008, -0/+10ya, closer to $2.6-3.0 billion by recent prices
      • CCUboogernjit, on 07/07/2008, -4/+3yep i agree it is about 2.6 - 4.0 billion dugg down for AboveandBeyond being a complete dumbass and letting his emotions make up random BS.
      • triad203, on 07/08/2008, -0/+2@pintomp3: So 20m barrels at $141.5/barrel (as of today's close) -

        = 2.830.000.000

        That's 2.8 billion USD.

        Of course, other countries call this same number of zeros a trillion... =)
    • tjrecord, on 07/07/2008, -1/+4We were only allowed to take it if we lifted sanctions on Iran. We refused to lift the sanctions, we didn't refuse the oil. Dumbass.
    • diggrnumber1, on 07/07/2008, -1/+1only off by a factor of around 1000, using prices from back then.
    • utahnkid, on 07/08/2008, -1/+4Of course the US refused, they had no choice.

      Iran was demanding that all sanctions against the country be lifted, basically excusing every heinous act of terrorism their country had contributed to over the past few decades. All for what? A few days worth of oil? Haha yeah right, in their dreams.

      Try including all the details next time, genius.
  • j0hnk377y, on 07/07/2008, -13/+2Insert comment about forgiving personal debt at gas station fill up, followed by comment comment about forgiving the US debt....
  • Jackosx, on 07/07/2008, -3/+11I can't wait until they turn this place into a tourist destination!
    • SAc0balt, on 07/07/2008, -1/+0Me too! I have a lot of IQD that I've purchased in hopes that Iraq has an economic turnaround. Helloooooo moneys! :)
    • ecod3r, on 07/07/2008, -1/+0three steps to do accomplish this:

      First step is to wipe out the native people,

      Second step is to build the land

      third step is populate it with the brave new world people.
  • TheImaginator, on 07/07/2008, -1/+21I didn't see any other countries wiping out debt for countries having a hard time of things.
    That somebody has wiped out such a large debt is a good thing at any rate.
    • effer, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1This is an incredibly naive statement.

      There is no 'good will' going on here.

      Research IMF, World Bank and their connection to oil.
  • mohsenxp, on 07/07/2008, -4/+9Now onto Africa...oh wait.
  • onionlayer, on 07/07/2008, -9/+8They realize a lost cause when they see one.
  • antonio97b, on 07/07/2008, -1/+66Iraq must have called a good debt consolidation comapny.
  • blackjack75, on 07/07/2008, -6/+17Nice action from the UAE, but isn't Iraq supposed to be able to clear that debt rather fast? They're supposed to be producing a fifth of the world's oil. I assume at today's prices it won't be long before they can repay back. Unless for some reason Iraq's economy is hindered by some foreign force?
    • mohamedmansour, on 07/07/2008, -8/+2True, but USA controls the oil completly according to the news correspondant in Baghdad. They control the Oil, Airlines, gov. They keep saying they have given iraqi's full control, but t hat is a lie that has been proven by media.
    • Egoist, on 07/07/2008, -0/+9Oh goodness, since a Digger informed us of the news by "The news correspondent in Baghdad," (TNCB) it must be true! TNCB is such a reliable source because it's not just any journalist, but *the* news correspondent!

      If the US controlled Iraq's oil, why haven't all of the contracts already been given out to US oil companies? There is STILL not a single US company with drilling rights in Iraq.
      • CCUboogernjit, on 07/07/2008, -1/+0LMFAO!! mohamed you got burned!!
      • Ravatar, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2Why produce more oil when your existing companies are raking in record profits? They can let Iraq sit there indefinitely producing nothing if they really want. They can just keep blaming a ***** civil war on the lack of production.
    • executorzz, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1If you mean the foreign fighters using iraq as a proxy war against the US then yes you are right.
  • duffy89, on 07/07/2008, -2/+22They can afford it.
    • allengeer, on 07/07/2008, -1/+10and a "seven star" hotel,
      and one of the tallest (if not the) buildings in the world,
      and a building where each floor rotates independently,
      and a complete indoor ski slope in the middle of the desert,
      and . . .
      • bosssmiley, on 07/07/2008, -1/+7artificial islands
        and underwater hotels
        and a giant Arabian Nights theme park
        and a building even taller than the Burj Dubai.

        Yes, Dubai have ALL the construction budget (and most of the cranes China doesn't have).
  • astride, on 07/07/2008, -14/+2hello visa! cancel my $6.5k debit!
  • amightywind, on 07/07/2008, -25/+10Better and better news out of Iraq. President Bush's iron willed vision for a democratic Iraq is coming to fruition. The white flag democrats are looking sillier all the time.
    • Rotzooi, on 07/07/2008, -9/+12ROFL
    • wacomwacoff, on 07/07/2008, -9/+7Best sarcastic comment of the day.
    • altgeeky1, on 07/07/2008, -6/+2Simultaneous to the surge the US is "buying" militias' cease fire.

      Paying TRIBUTE in guns and money to al Sadyr is going to create more long-term problems for both Iraq and the US. And of course that's the neo-con plan... defer the inevitable and also make that inevitable pain worse.

      Yes, I'd say the neocon plans are all coming into place. I understand the motivation of those at the top - they all have dual citizenship with safe tax havens, and don't plan on hanging out in America forever. I can't figure out why their base wants to bankrupt the US though. The war on the middle class is going to undercut the military, among other things.
    • yojiffyskippy, on 07/07/2008, -0/+10True. Iraq does seem to finally be on the right track. But it's going to be a long journey. Too bad all the other countries in their neighborhood (like Iran and Syria) aren't as helpful as UAE.
  • AbsurdParadox, on 07/07/2008, -3/+26Considering the fact that the government that racked up that debt no longer exists, I would say this is simply a PR move... unless you believe that one group of people is responsible for another group of people's financial decisions.
    • flink405, on 07/07/2008, -7/+6So Republicans are not responsible for debts run up by Democrats and vice-versa?
      When each party is in power they are a new U.S. government.

      And the Germans and Japanese should not be responsible for the destruction and debt and injury they caused during WWII?
      • AbsurdParadox, on 07/07/2008, -0/+8Its hard to say, about the Republicans and Democrats in power, since they may be agreeing to pay such debt when they are elected.

        As for the Germans and Japanese - exactly. What you are guilty of, my friend, is collectivism. You're assuming that these groups of people are entities themselves, when they simply are not. "The Germans" or "The Japanese" are simply groups of individuals, and only individuals can be held accountable for ANY action.
      • bosssmiley, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2Part of the continuing De-Baathification policy.

        To saddle the new Iraq with Saddam's debtsiwould be to replicate the mistake the Allies made against Germany in WW1. To whit: punitive reparations are enough to cause socio-economic havoc, not enough to stop a new dictator.
      • RogueGenius, on 07/07/2008, -1/+3By the way, let's clarify something. Johnson was the last democrat to run up debts. All the current debt was run up by Bush. I would say 'Republicans,' but all the debt run up by previous republicans was completely eliminated by Clinton.
      • msimeth, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Those are not analogous to the present situation.

        In the case of the Republicans and democrats, it is still the same government.

        In the case of Germany. This is closer but I think that a difference would be that Germany invaded other countries so the repayment was somewhat putative as well as repayment.

        For Iraq it was a debt incurred by a deposed government of a people had not wronged the lenders of the money.
    • Stettenbauer, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Agree with the PR move .You can't get money from a stone,but they can invest in that country and make probably billions more than Iraq owed them.
  • fx666, on 07/07/2008, -3/+11This is a very good decision. Now Irag could rebuild itself at a much faster pace.
  • rajk0909, on 07/07/2008, -12/+1Something USA needs to learn from Satan UAE as they call them !
    • saigumi, on 07/07/2008, -1/+9I'm not sure you know what you are talking about. The US has forgiven a LOT of debt. Look at the whole repirations from the end of WW2 and how much the US wrote off and said "forget about it".
  • alphonseragusa, on 07/07/2008, -10/+4Aren't these the same people to fly to Milan on private jets for brunch?
  • jonnyeuchre, on 07/07/2008, -6/+47
    In other news, UAE pays $7B for drilling rights in Iraq.
  • nastronomical, on 07/07/2008, -14/+8Better and better news out of Iraq. President Bush's iron willed vision for a democratic Iraq is coming to fruition. The white flag democrats are looking sillier all the time.
  • NateTheApe21, on 07/07/2008, -3/+107B that is walking around money for them
  • czeman, on 07/07/2008, -14/+5Kerry would have been stupidier.
  • uptwolait, on 07/07/2008, -4/+10This is very, VERY good news. The UAE is the only hope of bringing stability into the region, since they have the money, the "correct" religion (for that region), and behave nicely in the capitalistic world business system. The US needs to stay cozy with them as we slowly get out of bed with Iraq and take the walk of shame back home.
    • allengeer, on 07/07/2008, -0/+4UAE's president Sheikh Nahyan is pretty progressive when it comes to the leadership of an Islamic nation. In addition to several acts of monetary benevolence both in the UAE and abroad, his wife Shaikha Fatima is extremely involved in the governance of the nation and the business in Dubai. What's even more interesting is that Sheikh Nahyan is perfectly comfortable and often does drive around the city and walk around without protection, often greeting people as just another citizen of the nation.

      Granted, the nation of UAE is under strict Islamic Law but that is the way the people of UAE want it to be. That's how they chose to set their lists of acceptable and unacceptable behavior, and although it may seem strict or overbearing in the western way of thinking, but that does not hinder the value or validity of the law to their culture.
  • alphonseragusa, on 07/07/2008, -11/+5QUEEF
  • flink405, on 07/07/2008, -18/+12Hey, what is with all the really good news coming out of Iraq?
    (That the mainstream media don´t report about and the Democrats don´t want us to know.)

    If it was up to Obama we would have withdrawn our forces a long time ago and civil war would be tearing Iraq apart killing tens of thousands of citizens in Iraq and al Queda building a huge prescence in the middle East and Iran pushing westward into Iraq territory.
    Great call, Obama! You were 100% wrong. Retreat and surrender is wrong. We need your wrong judgement leading our country???
    But when Obama finally travels to Iraq this summer he will get the chance to flip-flop on Iraq, too. And the press will cover for Obama.
    • allengeer, on 07/07/2008, -6/+7I don't think Obama said we should have withdrawn forces a long time ago. He said we should have never deployed forces in the first place. Get your understanding of his position correct. He wants a phased withdrawal of forces. That phased withdrawal will allow them to point check the security of the nation as the troop levels decrease.

      Secondly, they will arm Saudi Arabia with the necessary weapons to take over Iraq should it fall into chaos (pure conjecture).
    • Midtowner, on 07/07/2008, -2/+3You haven't been reading his recent statements saying that withdrawal should be limited by the facts as they are on the ground and that we shouldn't "squander" any gains we've made.

      -- yep, that's a 180 from his previous positions. More to come.
    • RogueGenius, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2Don't worry. Americans were killed today. The news from Iraq is still net bad. The next good news to come from Iraq will be the flowing headline: "Last American Troop Safely at Home."

      But, we won't be seeing any good news from Iraq soon.
    • zebco, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1You sound like an uneducated, overly proud douche bag American. You're waving the old, 'don't cut and run' flag, right? Because that's all you have? You say you're worried about innocent civilians dying in a civil war? How about all of the ***** innocent civilians that died as the result of the ***** war itself?
      So what you're really saying is that you're wrong, you're dumb as ***** and the war should have never taken place in the first place.
      Which means that Obama was right because he said that the decision to invade was a horrible one and it should have never happened.
      OK, just making sure we're both clear on that.
      • Midtowner, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1If by 'uneducated,' you mean I'm 2 semesters away from receiving my doctorate, yeah, I suppose I'm uneducated.

        No, all I have are facts -- that the American death toll has slowed to a trickle. That Al Qaueda in Iraq, once a powerful group was driven out of its last stronghold in Mosul the day before yesterday and now consists of nothing more than a few foreign fighters in the countryside.

        I never made any comment regarding the war being right in the first place. It was based upon flawed intelligence that everyone else in the world believed was true. So there weren't WMD's, do you suppose that at this point, after discovering that we have blundered hugely that we pull out and squander the gains we've made? Not even Obama thinks that now.

        Maybe you think that Obama was right. I guess then you'd concede that Obama is now not right? Do you even know what your'e talking about? Don't let the facts get in the way of your terrific preconceived and unsupportable notions.
    • segrev, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1Since it's impossible to discriminate between violence we are causing by being there...whether indirectly through our mere presence being an incentive for radical youth to join extremist groups' or directly through collateral damage... or the violence that is completely irrevelent to our presence, I say we focus on the AMERICAN lives we could save by the "cut and run" tactic. That makes it simple for them, and for us, forever blameless.
  • unknownsoldierX, on 07/07/2008, -5/+2Iraq called Peter Francis Geraci
  • liquidmetalband, on 07/07/2008, -7/+1I guess they don't want the people held down to debt when producing their precious oil. MAXIMUM PRODUCTION! WORK! WORK! WORK!
  • cph1, on 07/07/2008, -2/+407 billion?
    thats what America spends on 2 weeks in Iraq...
  • gregMF, on 07/07/2008, -8/+1I'm thinking of a number between 450 and 850...

    Do you know what it is? It is my credit score! It just happens to be 850.
  • Judasmac, on 07/07/2008, -6/+6What this article failed to mention is that Iran and UAE are disputing an island in the Persian Gulf. THe Maliki gov't put a big finger in Teheran's eye by siding with UAE in the dispute (shortly after Iran rebuffed an Iraqi plea to stop supporting Shia militias trying to destablize Iraq). THis is as much an Iraq-Iran story as anything.
  • raublekick, on 07/07/2008, -5/+0I'm really curious if this is a good thing. Considering the religious instability and the existence of various factions in Iraq, saying you want to "help Iraq building the holy shrines that were targeted by the terrorists" might not be the best move for anyone. What shrines are to be rebuilt? Even if it's a fair and even aim to rebuild shrines for each faction, there is the possibility that certain people won't like certain other people getting helped out at all.
    • BotchaMcCoola, on 07/07/2008, -1/+0Excellent point. UAE types are likable Arabs but often unrealistic and have the big heart- small brain syndrome.
  • Egoist, on 07/07/2008, -11/+4Cynical liberals are always easy to spot:

    UAE gifted Iraq $7B? Pft, that's like what they spend on private planes every month.
    Bill Gates is giving billions to the poor? Pfft, that's like what he spends on caffe lattes every month.

    They're the ones who refuse to see the good in anything.
    • cph1, on 07/07/2008, -1/+4Mark 12:41-44
      • msimeth, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1True but that isn't a reason to demean a rich person for giving a large sum, even if it is a smaller amount in relation to his/her wealth.

    • blanketfury, on 07/07/2008, -1/+3I guess you don't know the meaning of magnanimous either.

      Sigh.
      • Egoist, on 07/07/2008, -1/+1Was I replying to any comment that had the word "magnanimous" in it? That would be quite a burn if your reading comprehension level wasn't so low.
  • JFallon126, on 07/07/2008, -7/+5How bout the rest of the world follows this lead and forgives the massive debt that most of Africa is mired in?
    • NCg8r, on 07/07/2008, -0/+5A wise man once said "If I owe you $100 and cannot pay, I have a problem. If I owe you $1 million and cannot pay, YOU have a problem."
  • sheasie, on 07/07/2008, -7/+220 million barrels x USD110 per barrel = +USD2 Billion?! Iran offered Katrina victims only USD2 BILLIONS DOLLARS ?! what ***** cheapos! oh wait... actually that's kinda a lot of money, right? dayumn! well, good thing Bush didn''t take it from those filthy bastards... i guess... ?! because all they wanna do is nuke us anyway, right?! wtf?! oh this is retarded! just take their ***** oil gift of USD2 BILLION! wtf ?!....
    • SverigesKung, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2What does this comment even mean? I am confused. Are you mad at Iran? Do you talk like this?
      • sheasie, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1it was an unsuccessful attempt to communicate the madness/hypocrisy of the bush administration's policy towards iran (and katrina victims). bottom line: USD2B is a lot of money. why did the bush administration refuse the aid?
  • Simpl3x, on 07/07/2008, -3/+1With that much money, you can afford to be nice. Better than not doing anything at all though i suppose....
  • JibberGeorge, on 07/07/2008, -5/+12CORRECT NEWS TITLE ----

    The UAE Just Bought Iraq for $7B.

    • diggrnumber1, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1if i were an iraqi, i would be in favor of that sale. look at the other options:

      1. incompetent iraqi govt that works for us govt
      2. us govt that wants to kill all iraqis that oppose them
      3. muqtada al-sadr
      4. iran
      5. al-qaeda
  • Spartyon, on 07/07/2008, -2/+3they are making so much money with oil being ungodly expensive. If oil hits 200 a barrel maybe the US will catch a break and get out debt forgiven.
  • gaapgod, on 07/07/2008, -2/+2...UAE stock plummets on the news of the writeoff.
    • msimeth, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1And stock in economics plummets at your post.

      The UAE isn't a company, its a government. There is no UAE stock.
  • smaskat, on 07/07/2008, -7/+2Allah-u-akbar.
  • zerton, on 07/07/2008, -2/+1Iraq actually has tens of billions saved up from oil revenue. Nothing is being done with the money because for some reason every major infrastructure project gets bombed. Kind of counter-productive. But still nice of the UAE
  • blanketfury, on 07/07/2008, -9/+5I am officially retiring from Digg.

    Yay.
    • hellsing47, on 07/07/2008, -0/+4Quit lying.
    • JamesDiggem, on 07/07/2008, -1/+3There will be 50 12 year old Youtubers to replace you..
    • prleet, on 07/07/2008, -0/+2I tried but as you can see I am still here...so damn addictive..I think i am gonna file a class action lawsuit after you come back.
    • ShadowFox06, on 07/07/2008, -1/+0Good riddance.
  • seks03, on 07/07/2008, -2/+3This is bull. the only reason that debt is ever forgiven is because someone else will pay it via tax's of increased prices in goods, Either Saudi has obtained rights to something in Iraq, oil, ports, etc. or you will start seeing prices of oil go up more without Suadi complaining about it like they did before.... remember debt is never forgiven, it is just moved
    • msimeth, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1In this case moved to UAE government coffers in hopes of good PR and drilling Iraqi oil?
  • BillE3, on 07/07/2008, -2/+6How many of you know that BP is owned by the UAE? How many go to the local BP station for gas? I bet you thought it was British. UAE and Dubai have been trading oil futures in our market since Clinton opened the door to them. Taking the oil from $12 a barrel to $140 on our dollar. No small wonder they can bail out Iraq, you have no idea how much money they made off trading fake contracts for oil that did not even exist. The number of contracts traded increased by 8,000% after they entered our market. They certainly did not increase production by the same amount. Oil contracts used to be required to equate to a barrel of oil ready for delivery.
    • conspiracyofone, on 07/07/2008, -0/+0UAE owns BP? what is your source? I thought it was Kuwait who held a large share, not UAE. just curious.

      • msimeth, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Conspiracyofone is like
        "Liar...just curious."
      • BillE3, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1June 3, 2008 Senate hearing on oil commodity trading. Testimony of Michael Greenberg the Chair of the FCTC from 1997 to 1999. He was fired by Bill Clinton for speaking out against changing regulations to allow foriegn trades by BP and Dubai. He also told how the oil trade inspectors were all laid off at the same time. The responsibility of reporting a contract not backed by oil was left to BP and Dubai. Before that a contract had to be verified by an inspector before it could be released for trading. Bill Clinton had the senate secretly put the change in regulations attached to the 1999 farm bill just before he signed it into law. Google up the hearing, it lasted 2 hours. George Soros was there too, he claimed Soros investments does not trade in commodities and played dumb on the facts. Until then I had believed that BP was a British firm.
      • conspiracyofone, on 07/11/2008, -0/+0Who purchases these contracts? The ultimate goal being to drive up the price of oil?
    • UAEmirates, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1"P.I. Walters (later Sir Peter Walters) was BP's chairman from 1981 to 1989. This was the era of the Thatcher government's privatisation strategy. The British government sold its entire holding in BP in several tranches in 1984-7. The sale process was marked by an attempt by the Kuwait Investment Office, the investment arm of the Kuwait government, to acquire control of BP."

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BP
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 64 of 64 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.