Quote:
Originally Posted by Regorium
I think the message is pretty clear. Basically they believe that oil companies drive government decisions like the war in Iraq - whether or not that is justified is another story. I don't know what a Calgary specific example would be, but I'm sure people in the oil industry would know of instances where they "worked closely" with local communities and governments to get what they want with no concessions. Thus, by separating oil and state, they hope that government will drop the hammer on any suspicious/bad/unethical behavior without worrying about the massive royalties that they would lose, or energy security that they would gain.
Again, I am not supporting their stance, nor do I feel like their stance has any merit. It is one born out of ignorance to what actually happens. I am also amused that it IS so ambiguous, but I can clearly see what their intention was.
|
Canada was involved in the war in Iraq?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only Canadian soldiers involved in combat in Iraq were with American or British units on exchange. The invading Canadian horde that were driven there by 'big oil's interest in interfering in government policy numbered what? 2-3 dozen troops?
Sure, there were a few more Canadians sent there to try to help pick up the pieces after the initial war effort and provide people with a somewhat stable government and police force... But surely that's not what greenpeace has their knickers in a twist about - helping to get the government of a destroyed developing country back on it's feet and providing some semblance of security to its citizens.