Edwin Black: ‘Banking On Iraq’

Source:Amazon- Edwin Black's book.

“New York Times and international bestselling author Edwin Black uncovers Iraq’s hidden economy and the companies that profit from its upheaval

Big business and global warfare have long been fiery and symbiotic forces in Iraq. Banking on Baghdad tells the dramatic and tragic history of a land long the center of world commerce-and documents the many ways Iraq’s recent history mirrors its tumultuous past. Tracing the involvement

of Western governments and militaries, as well as oil, banking, and other corporate interests in Iraq, Black shows that today, just as yesterday, the world needs Iraq’s resources-and is always willing to fight and invade in order to acquire and protect them.

While demonstrating that Iraq itself is partially to blame for its current state of turmoil, Black does not shy away from the uncomfortable truth that war and profit have also played an equal part in creating the Iraq we know today. Just as he did in IBM and the Holocaust, Black exposes the hidden associations between leading corporations, war, and oil-such as the astonishing connections between Nazi Germany, Iraq, and the Holocaust.

He exposes the war and race-based profiteering by some of the world’s most prestigious corporations, as well as the political and economic ties between the Bush administration and the companies that gain handsomely from its foreign policy. Just as he did in War Against the Weak, Black offers a compelling blend of history and contemporary investigative journalism that spans a century and eschews easy answers for complicated questions.

Edwin Black (Washington, DC) is the award-winning New York Times bestselling author of IBM and the Holocaust, The Transfer Agreement, and War Against the Weak. His journalism has appeared in the Washington Post, The Village Voice, The Sunday Times (of London), and The Los Angeles Times." 

From Amazon 

The Amazon review of Edwin Black’s book, is obviously a left-wing point of view and spin of the Iraq War. So take it for what you think it’s worth.

In 2004, you could argue that Iraq failed, because the world’s superpower the United States invaded them and knocked out their government and removed their dictator. And you could pretty much end it there and then debate more than ten years later if Saddam would still be in power today without the American invasion.

I’m not sure Iraq was ever originally set up to be a successful, independent country. It was set up by the United Kingdom as a British colony. And the way the British set it up was to create a state where you had two large ethnic groups: Levantine Arabs and Iraqi Kurds. And two major Islamic factions: sunnis and the Shias. With a bunch of other ethnic minorities like the Turkmen’s and Assyrians.

Iraq, similar to Iran, were set up to become reliable sources for oil and gas for Europe especially the United Kingdom. Unlike the State of Israel that was put together so the Jews could have their own country and not have to worry about being murdered by their own government in another country.

But even pre-2003 Iraq War, you could argue that Saddam Hussein destroyed Iraq. Here he had a fairly large country in land, but with only twenty-five-million people or so and yet most of them are educated, that is not only energy independent, but is one of the largest oil and has producers in the world. And yet he created a third-world country. Because he wasn’t interested in developing his country. But holding onto and expanding his dictatorship. And invading countries he thought he could control and steal their energy. Iran and Kuwait, come to mind real fast.

So Iraq failed, because it wasn’t set up to succeed by the British and Saddam, destroys his country by the way he mismanaged the economy started wars that shouldn’t have been fought. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.