Re: Cheney's Halliburton to Control Iraqi Oil?
Daniel Cassidy <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.kde.cafe |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Sunday 11 May 2003 3:03 am, James Richard Tyrer wrote: > > Then there is always the concept of adverse possession. If you live on > > land which is not yours, you immediately have rights superior to anyone > > but the "real owner", and if you continue in possession for some number > > of years (such as 12), subject to certain conditions, you end up getting > > full ownership of it if the real owner does not kick you out in the > > meantime (so squatter becomes owner, in a way). So in this way > > possession can even trump the (land deed) registration system. > > Uh! Big surprise, the US now possesses the entire country of Iraq. I > don't think that we have any intention of taking over private > property. But, the oil fields were nationalized. The US now has > possession of all Iraqi Government property. The US does have legal > possession of the oil fields irrespective of whether or not we hire > Halliburton to repair an operate them. Whether it is legal or not is not the argument. Whether it is moral, and consistent with what was promised to Iraqi people is. -- dan "Were i susceptible to having my mind changed, it would have changed my mind" - Matthew Parris Kde-cafe mailing list - [email protected] http://ofb.biz/lists/listinfo.cgi/kde-cafe DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on this mailinglist are the personal opinions of the author and do not represent OfB.biz: Open for Business, KDE or the author's employer.