GostHacked Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2013/04/01/baird-iraq-foreign-visit.html As part of the mission, he is opening a diplomatic office that will be an offshoot of Canada's embassy in Amman, Jordan. The new office, however, will operate out of the British Embassy in Baghdad. It will be run by charge d'affairs Stephanie Duhaime, who had served in Iraq, Lebanon, Bangladesh and Syria and who played a role in developing NATO and Canadian counter-insurgency efforts in Afghanistan in 2009-2010. "Today's opening is a historic milestone in Canadian relations with Iraq and comes at a pivotal moment," Baird said in a release Monday from the Department of Foreign Affairs in Ottawa. "Ten years after the Iraqi intervention, Iraq is one of the fastest-growing economies in the world, despite deep and lingering sectarian tensions." So Iraq is one of the fastest growing economies on the planet. There was no to little growth under UN sanctions so as soon as those are lifted, yes the economy will 'boom' in a way. But not for the reasons people thing. I would guess that many have a different view of the new Iraq, where people think the war is over and Iraq is completely rebuilt. This is about resources in Iraq and nothing more. This new diplomatic mission ends a 30+ year Canadian absence from Iraq. Not sure if it's a good idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RNG Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2013/04/01/baird-iraq-foreign-visit.htmlSo Iraq is one of the fastest growing economies on the planet. There was no to little growth under UN sanctions so as soon as those are lifted, yes the economy will 'boom' in a way. But not for the reasons people thing. I would guess that many have a different view of the new Iraq, where people think the war is over and Iraq is completely rebuilt. This is about resources in Iraq and nothing more. This new diplomatic mission ends a 30+ year Canadian absence from Iraq. Not sure if it's a good idea. What resources does Iraq have? They have IEDs, which we don't need and oil, which we have a glut of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 Their oil is cheaper than ours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PIK Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 All we have ever heard was america is there to take thier oil, well has it happened , no it did not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RNG Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 Their oil is cheaper than ours. Totally wrong. Their oil sells at world price. Ours is at a large discount because the only export market we have is the US untill Northern Gateway is built (or if) so they are putting the screws to us. Here is a quote from http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2012/04/20/oil-refining-canada.html Canada exports almost three million barrels of oil per day, and the spread has at times been in excess of $30 per barrel of late, so that’s $90 million in lost revenue, every day, for the oil patch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortlived Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 (edited) http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2013/04/01/baird-iraq-foreign-visit.htmlSo Iraq is one of the fastest growing economies on the planet. There was no to little growth under UN sanctions so as soon as those are lifted, yes the economy will 'boom' in a way. But not for the reasons people thing. I would guess that many have a different view of the new Iraq, where people think the war is over and Iraq is completely rebuilt. This is about resources in Iraq and nothing more. This new diplomatic mission ends a 30+ year Canadian absence from Iraq. Not sure if it's a good idea. Now that they have turned Iraq into a debtor nation from a wealthy nation it is a growing economy, its not hard to grow from having all your infrastructure destroyed. They should offer up these sorts of port by buy a mission projects. Only handful of areas with high volume of Canadian travel should have paid missions the rest should operate on a highest bid basis. Canada under a Harper government really doesn't belong in the middle east, aside from Israel because it really doesn't like them. It only makes sense that now that 20 years of sanctions have been lifted, Iraq can start to reclaim its potentials from the 1970's and early 1980's. Iraq was the most advanced Arab state even having nuclear power capacities long before others. Of course now, it will all be foreign owned businesses..... so the common Iraqi's are forced to be slave labourors, as opposed to the owners of those industries. the whole idea out there is to keep them fighting so they can't get up. just a game of divide and conquer for the last 100 years or more. Edited April 1, 2013 by shortlived Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted April 2, 2013 Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 All we have ever heard was america is there to take thier oil, well has it happened , no it did not. Don't think so? This is reality. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jun/30/iraq.oil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted April 2, 2013 Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 I wonder if all those people working in the embassy get danger pay or if they can get a life insurance??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PIK Posted April 2, 2013 Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 Don't think so? This is reality. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jun/30/iraq.oil TO , that link did not work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted April 2, 2013 Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 TO , that link did not work. Yeah, I see what u mean, I try to find it another place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted April 2, 2013 Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 Here's the link you were trying to post - http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jun/30/iraq.oil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted April 2, 2013 Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 All we have ever heard was america is there to take thier oil, well has it happened , no it did not. Actually it sounds like China is the big winner taking all in Iraq but that's okay, "we're" with China too - our new best freinemies forever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted April 2, 2013 Report Share Posted April 2, 2013 I wonder if all those people working in the embassy get danger pay or if they can get a life insurance??? In some cases yes to both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charon Posted April 8, 2013 Report Share Posted April 8, 2013 So just as the Harper admin shuts down the Canadian Embassy in Iran, they open a new Canadian Embassy in Iran's new puppet state Iraq. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted April 9, 2013 Author Report Share Posted April 9, 2013 So just as the Harper admin shuts down the Canadian Embassy in Iran, they open a new Canadian Embassy in Iran's new puppet state Iraq. Although the new Iraqi government is attempting to have closer ties with Iran, they are still the West's puppet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charon Posted April 9, 2013 Report Share Posted April 9, 2013 Bit of both. Good to see our foreign policy is based on oil like the Americans'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortlived Posted April 9, 2013 Report Share Posted April 9, 2013 (edited) Bit of both. Good to see our foreign policy is based on oil like the Americans'. lol it is a one room office, the americans have a compound bigger than the presidential palace. How does proping up Iraq help Canada's oil based economy? The US was only oil under Bush The US is anti oil currently. Obama is all about transition to a non oil based economy and energy self sufficiency example http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/03/19/obama-reveals-plan-to-get-u-s-cars-off-oil-using-tax-payer-subsidized-firm-that-has-yet-to-produce-a-battery/ of course hey maybe keystone will be approved.. http://www.inquisitr.com/609041/keystone-xl-oil-pipeline-decision-from-obama-coming-soon/ has there been any foreign policy movement there from the Harper Government? Hello Mr. President could you have some more? None the less but I sense that while 66% of Americans support Keystone 50% of them are republicans. Of course Obama is somewhat non partisan so I wouldn't be suprised if Keystone is approved, but at the same time I would not be suprised if it wasn't. None the less I've heard absolutely no pressure from the Federal government to make it happen, unlike the Windsor Detroit Bridge. Obama of course has the leadway of being in his second term. John Kerry as secretary of state, might perhaps think about running a president again, maybe not.... none the less it is his decision more or less and he would be alienating a whole lot of democrats. Joe BIden, also would likely be plauged by keystone being approved. to a lessor extent. Its an issue. not a big issue but an issue. US foreign policy ain't based around oil anymore, it is based around trade.America needs trade growth in order to not collapse. Major things like Horizon BP, and China and Russia running out of oil, means the US can't afford to keep fueling an oil based economy. Of course both Biden and Kerry are pretty damn old now. Bear in mind I don't have my finger on US politics and what the outcome of the next US election would be............. I'm actually very mystified by After the Obama and what it presents to America and the world. http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml Edited April 9, 2013 by shortlived Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted April 9, 2013 Report Share Posted April 9, 2013 No doubt Baird is travelling quite a bit and now he's in Israel, trying to talk a merger for Potash Corp. of Saskatchewan and Isael Chemical Ltd. Is this part of his job, as minister of foregin affairs and if this deal goes through, Canada will have to defend Israel because Canadian interests??? http://www.globes.co.il/serveen/globes/docview.asp?did=1000835069 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortlived Posted April 10, 2013 Report Share Posted April 10, 2013 (edited) Nah, it didn't defend Libya or Syria. Canada has a prozionist gov right now, the deal has basically no effect on that. Edited April 10, 2013 by shortlived Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charon Posted April 10, 2013 Report Share Posted April 10, 2013 (edited) Ask SNC Lavalin how Canada can benefit from corrupt regimes with lots of oil. Or how about Talisman, and Ranger Oil? Edited April 10, 2013 by Charon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortlived Posted April 10, 2013 Report Share Posted April 10, 2013 (edited) Ask SNC Lavalin how Canada can benefit from corrupt regimes with lots of oil. Or how about Talisman, and Ranger Oil? they have far less corruption than the west. now open viciousness and human rights abuses that is a different issue. The West focuses on other countries people while the Arab world focuses on their own people. You don't need to be corrupt when you already got it. Its the law over there. Edited April 10, 2013 by shortlived Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charon Posted April 10, 2013 Report Share Posted April 10, 2013 (edited) Yes, there is alot of corruption in the west and Canada's domestic and foreign policy, now being based on oil and the MIC is disgraceful. Edited April 10, 2013 by Charon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortlived Posted April 10, 2013 Report Share Posted April 10, 2013 (edited) Yes, there is alot of corruption in the west and Canada's domestic and foreign policy now based on oil and the MIC is disgraceful. Oil and gas are major elements of the Canadian export market, in absence of other major exports, there really is no other main point or foreign policy in terms of foreign trade policy. True you are right of course. Personally, I don't think it is disgraceful.I think their domestic policy in regard to resource development is disgraceful, especially to the first nations. Edited April 10, 2013 by shortlived Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charon Posted April 10, 2013 Report Share Posted April 10, 2013 Trade policy is one thing. Foreign policy is another. One is a way of trading. The other is machiavellianism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.