Yes, this could well be the primary motive for some nations with regard to Iraq. I mean American and British blood at the hands of terrorists for French and Russian oil profits. Here’s an important piece about the conflicts of interest that plague Russia and France, among the chief advocates for leaving Saddam in power:
Since 1996, Russia has ranked first among nations doing business with Iraq under the oil-for-food program with sales exceeding $4 billion, and Russia still hopes to collect the $12 billion in cold-war-era debt owed by Iraq. In 1997, a consortium led by Russian giant Lukoil signed a contract worth an estimated $4 billion to develop the massive West Qurna oil field in southern Iraq. A contract Lukoil cannot start work on until the U.N. sanctions are lifted… Last year under the oil-for-food program, France sold $1.5 billion worth of goods to Iraq, the most of any nation. Major French companies like communications giant Alcatel and automakers Peugeot and Renault have landed lucrative deals in Iraq. France’s Total Fina Elf has exclusive rights to develop the Majnoon and Bin Umar oil fields which are believed to be the largest in the world and estimated to hold 35 billion barrels of oil; more than three times Total Fina Elf’s current reserves.
It seems to me that if we liberate Iraq, one of our critical post-war goals should be blocking any country that votes against us in the U.N. from having any economic access to a post-war Iraq. We need to tell them that now. Russian and French contracts with Saddam should be deemed null and void, and all future contracts reserved for true allies, i.e. Britain, Australia, Italy, Spain, and a few others. Since France, Germany and Russia have done nothing to remove Saddam, why should they benefit from his removal? Fair’s fair, no?
JOE MILLIONAIRE’S A HOTTY: Yes, I must confess, the underwear pics won me over. My colleague, Michelle Cottle, on the other hand, has a cow about a reality show whose basic premise is that women often seek men with real financial resources. I take her point about misogynist stereotypes. Sure, many women marry for pure love, lust or good company. But a woman who may have to have kids isn’t crazy to want a husband who can earn a good living. This isn’t gold-digging; it’s self-protection. And prudence. Men are far less sensible. I realized this when it dawned on me that I found Mr Millionaire far more attractive when I realized he was a construction worker. Maybe Fox should do a gay version where the contestants for the guy’s, er, heart are first told he’s a construction worker and later given the awful news that he’s a millionaire merchant banker. They’d be crushed.
The Dish 