RINF.COM : THE BREAKING NEWS ALTERNATIVE rinf.com ：突發新聞的替代 Thursday, July 10th, 2008週四， 2008年7月10日 |  |
Breaking News 突發新聞 | | Forum 論壇 | | UK News 英國新聞 | | USA News 美國新聞 | | World News 世界新聞 | | Political News 政治新聞 | | Sci-Tech News 科技新聞 | | War & Terrorism News 戰爭和恐怖主義新聞 | | Sports News 體育新聞 | | Multimedia 多媒體 | | Set Homepage 設為首頁 | |
BREAKING NEWS 突發新聞 |
It’s the Oil, stupid!它的石油，愚蠢！ Thursday, July 10th, 2008 週四， 2008年7月10日 Discuss this report in the RINF forums > 討論這個報告，在rinf論壇> By Noam Chomsky | The deal just taking shape between Iraq’s Oil Ministry and four Western oil companies raises critical questions about the nature of the US invasion and occupation of Iraq — questions that should certainly be addressed by presidential candidates and seriously discussed in the United States, and of course in occupied Iraq, where it appears that the population has little if any role in determining the future of their country.由諾姆喬姆斯基|處理剛才正在形成之間的伊拉克的石油部和4名西方油公司提出的關鍵問題的性質，美國入侵和佔領伊拉克-的問題，當然應該處理的總統候選人，並認真討論了在美國的國，當然在被佔領的伊拉克，似乎是人口少，如果任何角色，在決定自己國家的未來。 Negotiations are under way for Exxon Mobil, Shell, Total and BP — the original partners decades ago in the Iraq Petroleum Company, now joined by Chevron and other smaller oil companies — to renew the oil concession they lost to nationalisation during the years when the oil producers took over their own resources.談判正在進行之中，為埃克森美孚，殼牌，總和BP -原來的合作夥伴在數十年前，在伊拉克石油的公司，現在加入由雪佛龍和其他規模較小的油公司-延長石油讓步，他們輸給了國有化期間年時，石油生產者接管自己的資源。 The no-bid contracts, apparently written by the oil corporations with the help of US officials, prevailed over offers from more than 40 other companies, including companies in China, India and Russia.無出價合約，顯然是書面，由石油企業的幫助下，美國官員，壓倒提供了來自40多個其他公司，包括公司在中國，印度和俄羅斯。 “There was suspicion among many in the Arab world and among parts of the American public that the United States had gone to war in Iraq precisely to secure the oil wealth these contracts seek to extract,” Andrew E. Kramer wrote in The New York Times. “有人懷疑，其中許多在阿拉伯世界和其中的部分美國民眾認為，美國已經向在伊拉克戰爭，正是為了確保石油財富的這些合同，尋求提取， ”鄭家富e.克萊默寫在新的紐約時報。 Kramer’s reference to “suspicion” is an understatement.克萊默的參考，以“懷疑”是輕描淡寫。 Furthermore, it is highly likely that the military occupation has taken the initiative in restoring the hated Iraq Petroleum Company, which, as Seamus Milne writes in the London Guardian, was imposed under British rule to “dine off Iraq’s wealth in a famously exploitative deal.”此外，它極有可能的軍事佔領已採取主動行動，在恢復痛恨伊拉克石油的公司，其中，謝米爾恩寫在倫敦的監護人，是強加在英國統治下，以“吃飯小康伊拉克的財富，在一個著名的剝削處理“ 。 Later reports speak of delays in the bidding.稍後的報告發言的延誤，在招投標。 Much is happening in secrecy, and it would be no surprise if new scandals emerge.許多正在發生的事情保密，那將是毫不奇怪，如果新醜聞出現。 The demand could hardly be more intense.需求難以更加激烈。 Iraq contains perhaps the second largest oil reserves in the world, which are, furthermore, very cheap to extract: no permafrost or tar sands or deep sea drilling.伊拉克包含也許是第二大石油儲量在世界上，這是，此外，非常便宜的提取：沒有永久凍土或瀝青砂或深海鑽探。 For US planners, it is imperative that Iraq remain under US control, to the extent possible, as an obedient client state that will also house major US military bases, right at the heart of the world’s major energy reserves.美國規劃師，已是刻不容緩，伊拉克仍然是美國的控制下，在可能的範圍內，作為一個聽話的客戶，國家也將內務美國的主要軍事基地，有權在世界的心臟的主要能源儲備。 That these were the primary goals of the invasion was always clear enough through the haze of successive pretexts: weapons of mass destruction, Saddam’s links with Al-Qaeda, democracy promotion and the war against terrorism, which, as predicted, sharply increased as a result of the invasion.這些人的首要目標入侵總是不夠清楚，通過的陰霾，連續的藉口：大規模殺傷性武器，薩達姆的聯繫與基地組織，民主促進和打擊恐怖主義的戰爭，正如所料，大幅增加為因入侵。 Last November, the guiding concerns were made explicit when President Bush and Iraq’s Prime Minister Nouri Al Maliki signed a “Declaration of Principles,” ignoring the US Congress and Iraqi parliament, and the populations of the two countries.去年11月，指導的關切作出了明確時，美國總統布什和伊拉克總理nouri基地馬利基簽署了“原則宣言” ，忽略了美國國會和伊拉克議會和種群的兩個國家。 The Declaration left open the possibility of an indefinite long-term US military presence in Iraq that would presumably include the huge air bases now being built around the country, and the “embassy” in Baghdad, a city within a city, unlike any embassy in the world.宣言離開開放的可能性無限期長期美國在伊拉克的軍事存在將假定，包括龐大的空軍基地，正在興建的全國各地，和“大使館”在巴格達，一個城市一個城市，不同任何駐華使館世界上。 These are not being constructed to be abandoned.這些都不是正在建造的必須放棄。 The Declaration also had a remarkably brazen statement about exploiting the resources of Iraq.宣言也產生了顯著赤裸裸的聲明，開發資源，伊拉克的武裝。 It said that the economy of Iraq, which means its oil resources, must be open to foreign investment, “especially American investments.” That comes close to a pronouncement that we invaded you so that we can control your country and have privileged access to your resources.它說，經濟的伊拉克，這意味著其石油資源，必須開放給外國投資， “尤其是美國的投資。 ”來關閉一個宣告，我們侵略你，讓我們可以控制您的國家和有特權的訪問您的資源。 The seriousness of this commitment was underscored in January, when President Bush issued a “signing statement” declaring that he would reject any congressional legislation that restricted funding “to establish any military installation or base for the purpose of providing for the permanent stationing of United States Armed Forces in Iraq” or “to exercise United States control of the oil resources of Iraq.”的嚴重性，這一承諾是強調了今年1月，當布什總統發出了“簽署聲明”中宣布，他將否決任何國會立法限制資金“建立任何軍事設施或基地的目的，提供為永久派駐美國軍隊在伊拉克“或”行使美國控制石油資源的伊拉克“ 。 Extensive resort to “signing statements” to expand executive power is yet another Bush innovation, condemned by the American Bar Association as “contrary to the rule of law and our constitutional separation of powers.” To no avail.廣泛運用“簽署聲明” ，擴大行政權力的又一布什創新，譴責美國律師協會“ ，相反，以法治和我們的憲法權力分立” 。不得要領。 Not surprisingly, the Declaration aroused immediate objections in Iraq, among others from Iraqi unions, which survive even under the harsh anti-labour laws that Saddam instituted and the occupation preserves.毫不奇怪，聲明立即引起了反對在伊拉克，除其他外從伊拉克工會，生存，甚至下苛刻的反勞工法，薩達姆提起和佔領保留。 In Washington propaganda, the spoiler to US domination in Iraq is Iran.在華盛頓的宣傳，擾流板，以美國在伊拉克的統治是伊朗。 US problems in Iraq are blamed on Iran.美國在伊拉克問題，是對伊朗的指責。 US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice sees a simple solution: “foreign forces” and “foreign arms” should be withdrawn from Iraq — Iran’s, not ours.美國國務卿賴斯認為，一個簡單的解決方案： “外國勢力”和“外國武器”應撤出伊拉克-伊朗的，不是我們。 The confrontation over Iran’s nuclear programme heightens the tensions.對抗伊朗的核計劃，加劇了緊張局勢。 The Bush administration’s “regime change” policy toward Iran comes with ominous threats of force (there Bush is joined by both US presidential candidates).布什政府的“政權更替”對伊朗的政策來與不祥的武力威脅（有布什是加入由美國總統候選人） 。 The policy also is reported to include terrorism within Iran — again legitimate, for the world rulers.該政策還報導，包括恐怖主義的伊朗-再次合法的，為世界的統治者。 A majority of the American people favours diplomacy and oppose the use of force.大多數的美國民眾贊成外交，並反對使用武力。 But public opinion is largely irrelevant to policy formation, not just in this case.但輿論在很大程度上是無關政策的形成，不僅在這起案件。 An irony is that Iraq is turning into a US-Iranian condominium.一個諷刺的是，伊拉克正轉變成一個美國和伊朗共管。 The Maliki government is the sector of Iraqi society most supported by Iran.該馬利基政府是部門的伊拉克社會的最支持伊朗。 The so-called Iraqi army — just another militia — is largely based on the Badr brigade, which was trained in Iran, and fought on the Iranian side during the Iran-Iraq war.那些所謂的伊拉克軍隊-只是另一個民兵-主要是基於對巴德爾旅，這是在伊朗受過訓練，並爭取對伊朗方面在伊朗-伊拉克戰爭。 Nir Rosen, one of the most astute and knowledgeable correspondents in the region, observes that the main target of the US-Maliki military operations, Moktada Al Sadr, is disliked by Iran as well: He’s independent and has popular support, therefore dangerous.近紅外光譜羅森，其中一個最精明和有知識的記者在該地區的，指出的主要對象是美馬利基的軍事行動，薩德爾moktada基地，是不喜歡的伊朗，以及：他的獨立和有民意支持，因此危險。 Iran “clearly supported Prime Minister Maliki and the Iraqi government against what they described as ‘illegal armed groups’ (of Moktada’s Mahdi army) in the recent conflict in Basra,” Rosen writes, “which is not surprising given that their main proxy in Iraq, the Supreme Iraqi Islamic Council dominates the Iraqi state and is Maliki’s main backer.”伊朗“明確支持總理馬利基和伊拉克政府對他們稱之為'非法武裝團伙' （ moktada的邁赫迪軍）在最近的衝突，在巴士拉， ”羅森寫道， “這並不令人驚訝，因為他們的主要代理在伊拉克，伊拉克伊斯蘭最高理事會主導的伊拉克國家是馬利基的主要支持者“ 。 “There is no proxy war in Iraq,” Rosen concludes, “because the US and Iran share the same proxy.” “有沒有代理在伊拉克戰爭， ”羅森的結論是， “因為美國和伊朗有著相同的代理” 。 Teheran is presumably pleased to see the United States institute and sustain a government in Iraq that’s receptive to their influence.德黑蘭是假定高興地看到，美國研究所和維持一個政府在伊拉克的的接受他們的影響力。 For the Iraqi people, however, that government continues to be a disaster, very likely with worse to come.為伊拉克人民，不過，政府仍然是一個災難，很可能與差來。 In Foreign Affairs, Steven Simon points out that current US counterinsurgency strategy is “stoking the three forces that have traditionally threatened the stability of Middle Eastern states: tribalism, warlordism and sectarianism.” The outcome might be “a strong, centralised state ruled by a military junta that would resemble” Saddam’s regime.在外交事務中，史蒂芬西蒙指出，美國目前的反的策略，是“引發三股勢力有傳統威脅的穩定中東國家：部落主義，軍閥主義和宗派主義”的結果可能是“一個強大，集中法治國家一軍政府將類似於“薩達姆政權的。 If Washington achieves its goals, then its actions are justified.如果華盛頓能達到其目標，那麼它的行動是合理的。 Reactions are quite different when Vladimir Putin succeeds in pacifying Chechnya, to an extent well beyond what Gen. David Petraeus has achieved in Iraq.反應有很大的不同，當普京總統成功地平息車臣，在某程度上遠遠超出將軍大衛彼得雷烏斯取得了在伊拉克。 But that is THEM, and this is US.不過，這是他們，這是美國。 Criteria are therefore entirely different.準則，因此，完全不同。 In the US, the Democrats are silenced now because of the supposed success of the US military surge in Iraq.在美國，民主黨沉默，因為現在的假定的成功，美軍在伊拉克的激增。 Their silence reflects the fact that there are no principled criticisms of the war.他們的沉默反映了一個事實，不存在任何原則性的批評，這場戰爭。 In this way of regarding the world, if you’re achieving your goals, the war and occupation are justified.在這樣的關於世界，如果您實現您的目標，戰爭和佔領是合理的。 The sweetheart oil deals come with the territory.甜心石油交易來與該國領土。 In fact, the whole invasion is a war crime — indeed the supreme international crime, differing from other war crimes in that it encompasses all the evil that follows, in the terms of the Nuremberg judgment.事實上，整個入侵是一項戰爭罪-事實上，最高人民法院國際犯罪，從不同的其他戰爭罪行，因為它包含了所有的邪惡如下，在該條款對紐倫堡判決書。 This is among the topics that can’t be discussed, in the presidential campaign or elsewhere.這是主題之一，可以先不討論，在總統競選活動或其他地方。 Why are we in Iraq?為什麼我們在伊拉克的？ What do we owe Iraqis for destroying their country?是什麼，我們有責任為伊拉克人摧毀他們的國家呢？ The majority of the American people favour US withdrawal from Iraq.大部分的美國民眾贊成美國從伊拉克撤軍。 Do their voices matter?做他們的聲音此事？ Noam Chomsky’s writings on linguistics and politics have just been collected in “The Essential Noam Chomsky,” edited by Anthony Arnove, from the New Press.諾姆喬姆斯基的著作對語言學和政治剛才已收集在“基本諾姆喬姆斯基， ”主編安東尼arnove ，由新的新聞。 Chomsky is emeritus professor of linguistics and philosophy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, Mass.喬姆斯基是名譽教授語言學和哲學在麻省理工學院技術在馬薩諸塞州的劍橋 See More: 看到更多的： Oil 石油Discuss this report in the RINF forums > 討論這個報告，在rinf論壇> Have Your Say: It’s the Oil, stupid! 你說：它的石油，愚蠢！ Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.很抱歉，評論形式是封閉在這個時候。 This entry was posted on Thursday, July 10th, 2008 at 9:26 am and is filed under 此項目被張貼在週四， 2008年7月10日在上午09時26分，並提交下 War & Terrorism News 戰爭和恐怖主義新聞 . 。 You can follow any responses to this entry through the 您可以按照任何的反應，此項目通過 RSS 2.0 2.0 feed. 餵養。 Responses are currently closed, but you can 反應目前關閉，但您可以 trackback Trackback跟踪 from your own site. 從你自己的網站。 | Translations 翻譯               Free Newsletter 免費通訊 Related News 相關新聞
Email This Page To A Friend 電子郵件此頁給朋友 Latest Headlines 最新的新聞標題
More更多 Breaking News突發新聞 Archive 存檔
|
About 大約 | | DVD Store DVD的商店 | | Opinion 民意 | | Reviews 評語 | | Special Guests 特別來賓 | | Webmasters 網站管理員 |
The views expressed in the RINF news wire and newsletter are the sole responsibility of the author (s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the webmaster. 所表達的意見，在rinf新聞電線和通訊是唯一的責任作者（ S ）和並不一定反映的意見，網站管理員。 RINF.COM: Breaking News & Alternative Media is Copyleft - Copy & Distribute Freely. rinf.com ：突破新聞與其他的媒體是copyleft的-複製及分發自由。 News Forum 新聞論壇 |
