here's how the game gets played. scare everybody into thinking that destruction of those oil fields would result in $100/barrel prices. then, using that as justification for 'protecting the wells', one could actually make an argument that it should be 'priority number one'. one could also argue that even at $50/barrel, we're getting our money's worth.

but then, you'd have to also consider that protecting those wells, and using the proceeds of those wells (btw, who's doing the buying?) to rebuild iraq, is the only option that should be available. what i have a problem understanding though, is if the money used from the oil in iraq 'could' be used to rebuild iraq, why isn't it being used rebuild iraq now? are they not pumping @ 100% capacity? are the companies that had contracts before all this destruction, still get their contracts honored? by whom?

these are the questions that are evading the american reporters. in fact, i'll bet you all the reporters are playing ignorant and scared that they may lose their 'privileges', because i certainly haven't heard any answers. ideas have been out there for a while. december was when they were supposed to have this 'captured treasure summit', but nary a word from the media about it. why? why is this as much a secret as the energy policy meeting? or bush 41's presidential records? why???