http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/11/27-4

"Dubai is finally financially bankrupt - but it has been morally bankrupt all along. The idea that Dubai is an oasis of freedom on the Arabian peninsular is one of the great lies of our time.

Yes, it has Starbucks and Dunkin' Donuts and the Gucci styles, but beneath these accoutrements, there is a dictatorship built by slaves."

So now, are the those that do REAL work to bail out those scoundrels that profit from slavery and their ability to rig markets?

We have a travel embargo on Cuba, but not on Dubai?

Being in the architectural visualization field, I've noticed that the Dubai market has completely dried up for my peers. Many commercial and high-end residential projects have been cancelled or put on hold indefinately. I didn't realize what impact Dubai's economy would have on the rest of the world until now.

Build it on sand. Build it on quicksand. The hourglass for growth based economy on a round planet with finite coastline is about to run out.

Muha, muha, muha hahaha (diabolical laughter).

Burnback resulting from attempts to launder Iraq's war spoils in resources. Iran is next....

i am actually hoping for a big bounce in the dollar...say about ten percent and a nice pullback in gold. Après moi, le deluge.

the king is wearing see through threads but his courtiers dont dare tell his subjects that the rest of the world sees their king standing before them bare a$$'d neked.

Debt, excess, rackets, debauchery, the exploitation of labor and a fake culture: Yes friends, behold Dubai, the inspiring model for the Muslim future.

Some TWN context:

Three months ago, TWN had a guest post here, with the optimistic title:
"Dubai, Not Obama, is the Mideast's Best Peace Hope":

"As Americans, Israelis and Palestinians continue their endless peace-jockeying, a more hopeful solution
has emerged. It is a fresh Arab initiative that depends neither on America nor Israel.

It is Dubai.

(...)

From nowhere, Dubai has mushroomed into a trading city-state on the lines of Hong Kong and Singapore,
with sidelines in real estate and tourism.

Dubai accomplished all this without (much) oil, and without the help - or even recognition - of the
United States. While Washington has been caught up prolonging the Israel-Palestinian conflict and
starting a war in Iraq, Dubai was erecting one of the world's most spectacular cities.

So, how can Dubai fix the Middle East? It certainly can't do much to help Palestinians suffering under
Israeli misrule. But that is the point. Dubai has succeeded in spite of the plight of the Palestinians,
and in spite of what Arab leaders describe as US meddling that stymies their development. One of the
favorite themes of Dubai leader Sheikh Mohammed is that his counterparts should stop bloviating about
the Israelis and start serving the interests of their own citizens.

Dubai's wild growth backs up Sheikh Mohammed's message. His business-before-politics way is becoming a
development model for the rest of the Arab world."

more here:

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2009/09/guest_post_by_j_12/

And Dan Kervick, I think you nailed it in your response then, so I hope you don`t mind
me pasting one of your almost three months old comments here:

Posted by Dan Kervick, Sep 01 2009, 11:08PM - Link

I trust I have said enough disparaging words in the past about the autocratic sheikhdoms
and kingdoms of the Arab Peninsula not to be accused of hypocrisy for the following:

Dubai's "model" is not really exportable, and is thus not really a model. As Krane
indicates, Dubai is not really a country in the modern sense but an old-fashioned "city-
state". As other such boom cities have learned in the past, if you live in a
neighborhood of more austere and repressive states, practice a policy of neutrality and
laissez faire economic liberality, and throw your doors open to every kind of of
smuggling, money-laundering, offshoring, expatriot looting and flesh-peddling, you can
do do a booming business for a time among the world's playboys, embezzlers, swindlers
and robber barons, who have more money pouring out of their bank accounts than they know
what to do with.

Dubai is just a glittering monarchical anachronism, a gaudy stone on the hand of the
courtesan of the month, a fancy car in the garage of a cosmetically enhanced lottery
winner. And it is very unlikely that Dubai will last in any way other than as a long-
term tourist attraction where people will come in the future to see the comically
opulent and excessive relics of the vanished Oil Coast.

A model? Yeah right, maybe the whole world can become Foxwoods Casino, Monaco or Dubai,
places whose existence is only possible because they are parasitic wealth-absorbing
growths on the body of the real world.

Justifying the actions of a fabricated country put under the rule of a corrupt nomatic tribe, sounds self serving for the short term, but its destructive otherwise. Specially when you consider they are on the verge of total collapse.

Paul Norheim took this one and hit it out of the park! As guest commentary, Jim Kane's "Dubai, Not Obama, is the Mideast's Best Peace Hope" ranks right up there with hosting James "Dow 36,000" Glassman's "wisdom" about the financial crisis (Feb 26, 2009).

Apparently there is a whole book publishing segment dedicated exclusively to throwing BS up against the wall and hoping it will stick long enough to max out the royalties.

Just a side note to POA:

Above I quoted one of Dan`s many brilliant comments at TWN in the recent years. Do you
seriously think that these comments are written by mobilizing only the left (analytical)
part of Dan Kervick`s brain?

I`m all for using both intuition, instincts, analytical skills, experience, and
judgement, but in my view, Dan is not a good example of someone using only the analytical
side of his brain.

Well, considering the excited glee that Krane noted the presence of brothels in Dubai, I imagine he can get laid there now at a substantial discount. But he better be careful. When the economy tanks, a whore house's doctors are the first to go.

And uh, gee, I dunno, Paul. Maybe Dan's synapses do occassionally arc over the center line. I wonder if this rare phenomena is accompanied with some sort of facial tic?

The latest Daily Kos weekly tracking poll has 46% of Democrats sitting out the 2010 elections vs. 14% of Republicans.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/11/27/808503/-Weekly-Tracking-Poll:-New-Feature-Paints-Ugly-2010-Picture

When the Democrats get creamed in 2010, they'll have no one to blame but Ralph Nader!

Krugman doesn't think this is such a big deal.

European stock markets recovered a good amount of their losses
yesterday, while the US stock market had only about half the dip
that Europe did, and then started recovering value steadily
through the day.

Dubai's plan is grow as rapidly as possible and to position itself
as the new center of money and power in the Gulf and the
Mideast, before the oil runs out. They're in a race against time,
and the recession is a serious setback for them. If they can't
achieve what they want in the next few years, they risk becoming
a backwater, with consequent declines in property values,
population, and wealth. They will need continued growth and
financial success in order to service their existing loans, much
less restructured and future debt.

Dubai's debt, whether 40 billion or a hundred billion dollars is
substantial. But it's also not out of line with other recent
collapses that treasuries are successfully coping with already.

Dubai always looked like a very high risk proposition. I would
expect that loans issued to support its development reflected
that fact. Banks and investment houses should have been
carrying reserves for this eventuality, and been prepared to
respond to dips in value or problems servicing the loans.

Like John Paulson needs a couple of extra billion to skew reality in the financial markets even more.

I don't see gold spiking. It's role as commodity of last resort is related to there being no fiat currency left standing. I doubt we will see that. Rather, it is another speculative vehicle among many and, looking back a couple of decades, has not really outperformed many other speculative vehicles. Not that we might not see another 10-20% before it pulls back.

Regard Dubai as a somewhat closely held corporation disguised as a government. Pandering to the excess and greed we have seen emerge in markets worldwide. Hubris and arrogance of the rich and famous, wrapped in the bizarre confluence of mideast sheikdom and western pseudo royalty. It's perpetrators and it's enablers deserve severe punishment, not bailouts.

Maybe Dubai can slant drill Iran's energy like Kuwait did to Iraq.

Then we can have a resulting war.

Maybe Brewster Jennings will intercept a crate of WMD precursors bound for Iran's sanctioned ports the same way it did the border shipment from Kuwait to Iraq....

Mr.Murder,

Kuwait didn't steal any oil from Iraq, this is
propoganda from the iraqies and their leftist
allies that justify an invasion and rape of
kuwait.

As someone who was a child during the invasion and
witnessed it, there is nothing that gets to me
more than hypocritical liberals/progressive
mocking the suffering that happened there and
justifying it. Things like this reveal that kind
of sick and disgusting souls you have. Hundreds of
thousands of people were turned stateless, those
that stayed under the mercy of thugs that
kidnapped, tortured, raped, and murdered as they
please.

Kuwait is a sovereign country and Iraq wanted its
oil because it bankrupted itself from wars it
started. I guess since it's not the US nothing
really offends your bleeding hearts; no, the other
way around, support and make excuses for iraq,
those innocent poor souls fighting imperialism.

@ cookies_and_milk:
"Kuwait didn't steal any oil from Iraq, this is
propoganda."

News reports indicated that Kuwait had begun slant-drilling across the border to siphon from Iraqi oil fields.

Perhaps those mainstream media reports had flaws; however, the accounts were straightforward and I know of no reason not to take them at face value.

Can anyone supply additional data?

Couple thoughts:
If a nation wishes to secure its borders against attack from a larger, hostile, neighboring country, it is generally a good idea not to violate the national sovereignty of that less stable, militaristic neighbor by crossing the border via slant-drilling to remove Iraqi oil that lies within Iraqi territory.

Just sayin'.

I have no doubt Iraq had its eye on a larger prize. Certainly the same is true of Kuwait, GHW Bush and the U.S. -- as a marginally forthright interview with April Glaspie would bear out, were she willing and capable of relating her invitation to Saddam Hussein to make breakfast out of Kuwait. So you have others to credit and blame for the invasion Kuwait, among them Kuwait's nominally 'moderate' allies in the U.S., i.e., Bush I, James Baker, Scowcroft & Co.

If the slant-drilling reportage was journalistically dubious, there is no question some visible effort would have been made to correct the record --- and that did not happen.

"As someone who was a child during the invasion and witnessed it, there is nothing that gets to me more than hypocritical liberals/progressive
mocking the suffering that happened there and
justifying it"

So, you "witnessed it" as a "child", therefore you know so much more than those of us that "witnessed it" as adults, right? How do you people dream this shit up? Sometimes it seems as though you work purposely to make yourselves appear foolish.

And the OPEC production regulations that Kuwait was violating, in order to harm Iraq by driving down the price of oil? Is that a myth too, Cookies??

Fact is, we gave Saddam a wink and a nod to go into Kuwait. It was the precurser to all that has occured since. So whatever blood has been spilt since, whether it be Iraqi, Kuwaiti, or American, we are indeniably stained with it.

Cookies can be excused for being deluded as a child. One wonders why he hasn't grown up in the intervening years.

The short view of what the " senior executives of Hill and Knowlton in Washington, the biggest global PR firm at the time, which had a contract worth more than $10 million with the Kuwaitis to make the case for war." is here:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0906/p01s02-wosc.html

The fuller story, By Dr; Douglas Kellner of UCLA is here is here:

http://preview.tinyurl.com/o4pqb

the CS article contains the priceless Rummy paraphrasing of Churchhill:

"Sometimes the truth is so precious it must be accompanied by a bodyguard of lies."

Cookies and Incubators hasn't given a response since?

Thomas Tutwiler's family owned the slant drilling patent. Marge Tutwiler was Undersec. of State to James Baker at the time of Desert Storm. Perhaps you'vbe heard of Marvin Bush, a board member of the subservices slant drilling group.

The Tutwilers were next door neighbors of a family who also did much work in the field of oil services. Perhaps you've heard of the Halliburtons.

Marge Tutwiler was also the first Director of Communications for the Coalition Provisional Authority when it was in command of Iraq. One of her blood relatives was on Cheney's staff of the Office of Senate President(the title whereby he tried to avoid Executive transparency).

Suppose anyone care to ask Sen.Santorum's staffer Ms.Ledeen where the information that made its way into notes of the Senate Intelligence Committee hearings at the time regarding Iraq, where those notes came from?

When I was in school at the time of Desert Storm a Kuwaiti student said she knew the girl who claimed to have her baby smashed by the Iraqi soldiers in a hospital, snatched from an incubator. The girl was "never pregnant" and that claiming to have been so was entirely against the cultural norms of good standing.

The phantom baby snatchers story rose to the level of being used in speeches and PR releases by our government at the time. GHWB even made a reference to it.

rich,

Iraq owed money to kuwait, it had a much larger
military, and nationalists calling to annex
kuwait, how stupid do you think the government
could be to steal iraqi oil? Sorry, I don't
believe this.

PissedOffAmerican,

Why the hell was Kuwait trying to harm Iraq? it
criminally supported him during his war with Iran
and loaned him money. this is nothing but leftists
justifying the savage crimes of a tyrant because
he's anti-US. What disgusting people you are.

And I guess you as an adult THOUSANDS of miles
away, w/o any knowledge about the region and its
culture, knows more about this than me? My father
never knew every day if it would be the last he'd
see us, and you scumbags don't even have the
dignity to just at least shut up and not justify
what happened, support it, or deny the crimes that
happened.

erichwwk,

I've had more than enough reading leftists
articles about the 'PR WAR' and that BS. The US
did what it did for its interest and so did the
kuwaiti royal family in trying to save their
country. I haven't read that article because I
can't handle reading another one repeating that
congress testimony and saying kuwaities didn't
suffer during the war or deserved it for being
'rich fat sheiks' who can buy PR firms or because
their country belonged to progressive hero saddam
hussein. It's horrifying what happened and the
only thing that equals it is the justification and
mocking from anti-US ideologies.

I'm glad the royal family spend money on a good PR
firm, otherwise I'd be living in a virtual
concentration camp and who knows if I'd be alive
or any of my family members would be.

One would think you people would have enough
shame to avoid revealing your true nature. Perhaps
if the US made a deal with saddam and gave him
Kuwait, then every leftist in the world would
champion my cause living under the mercy of
saddam's goons as I'd be a victim of US
imperialism then.

A friend of my father was killed and all of his 3
sons, a relative was tortured for months before
being executed. Say you're anti-war, say you don't
care, come out and say anything but say nothing
bad happened or it was justified or deserved or
mock it. What unbelievable morals you people have.
it's not that people like you don't exist in
abundance, and ones with much more vile thoughts,
but I guess it's because this is so personal to me
it's hard to move on. I still have to remind
myself that it's over, nothing like it will happen
again, I'm free and safe. No matter what rotten
people like you say, that's not going to change.

Mr.Murder,

it's irrelevant whether the babies story was true
- the iraqies invaded a sovereign country and
committed countless barbaric crimes. That's a
FACT.

I still don't believe that slant drilling story,
kuwait would be too scared of Iraq and like I said
it supported it and loanged it money. Hell if the
government did slant drill then it might as well
be debt payment.

And even that is also irrelevant - saddam wanted
to annex kuwait, I don't think the kuwaities gave
me an excuse but if they did it's just that, an
excuse. Nothing he did was justified, nothing.

I'm half-expecting somebody to talk about how kurds
were disloyal iraqies and saddam was protecting the
unity of iraq when he gassed them. Or whatever propaganda he used to slaughter them.

"When I was in school at the time of Desert Storm a Kuwaiti student said she
knew the girl who claimed to have her baby smashed by the Iraqi soldiers in a
hospital, snatched from an incubator." (Mr Murder)

"I'm glad the royal family spend money on a good PR
firm, otherwise I'd be living in a virtual
concentration camp" (cookies_and_milk)

-----------------------------------------------------------
The royal family didn`t only spend money. The girl giving the false claims was
actually a member of the Kuwaiti royal family, and the daughter of the Kuwaiti
ambassador to the US.

^would fit in a Mr.Murder post beginning with
'cookies and gas.'

Post before this was a comment on the one I made
before it.

Paul Norheim,

Yes I know that, and if I ever get to meet that
woman I'll thank her with all my heart for what she
did.

"Why the hell was Kuwait trying to harm Iraq? it
criminally supported him during his war with Iran and loaned him money. this is nothing but leftists justifying the savage crimes of a tyrant because he's anti-US. What disgusting people you are"

Are you denying the motives behind Kuwait's violation of the OPEC production regulations? If so, then you are denying history. But carry on, you aren't exactly famnous here for credible commentary.

So, because I cite actual history, I'm a "disgusting" person, and anti-american to boot. Brilliant, you got any other pearls of wisdom??

"I'm half-expecting somebody to talk about how kurds were disloyal iraqies and saddam was protecting the unity of iraq when he gassed them"

Well hell, we could use another poster barfin' up straw positions to argue against. Might as well be you. Wouldn't want Nadine to get lonely, would we?

PissedOffAmerican,

You're a disgusting person for much more than this
thread, but no, denying history isn't one of them.
Given how reality/history is perceived differently
by zealots like you, I don't even need to bother
researching this matter. But like I said, even if it
were true, it's irrelevant. Logic and a basic
understanding of the region is more than enough to
discount that though, even though it's irrelevant.

I have no idea why I torture myself by checking
comments sections anywhere on the internet, but this
one ends here. I've said what I wanted to say in my
first post, and the replies pissed me off to post
more, but there's no use in this. I said what I
wanted to say, the zealots are welcome to repeat
what they said. It's nearly 5:30 AM here and I need
to sleep instead of argue with people on the
internet. People suck, they are rotten to their
core, lesson learned for the 46250928340th time. Bye
now.

Mr.Murder,

"When I was in school at the time of Desert Storm
a Kuwaiti student said she knew the girl who
claimed to have her baby smashed by the Iraqi
soldiers in a hospital, snatched from an
incubator. The girl was "never pregnant" and that
claiming to have been so was entirely against the
cultural norms of good standing."

I thought she claimed to be a nurse working there
and not pregnant herself?

Either way, that dumb kuwaiti student you knew
should have been proud of the woman that played a
role in liberating her country and hundreds of
thousands of people, ending their suffering and
giving them a life, a future. That is not against
the cultural norms of good standing in my book.

OK, NOW I'll actually be gone. That post just
popped back in my head and had to reply.

Egads.

cookies_and_milk?

Hmmm?!?

Sounds like hasbarist colleague of Nadine pretending to be Kuwaiti.

I second POA.............Egads.

Dammit, I have no will power.

Yeah, easy e, because every kuwaiti would support
their country erased from the map, turned
stateless, and sleep every night not knowing if
somebody's going to break into his house and take
him away. Then wake up and live a miserable life
under a savage occupation that makes the worse of
the israeli one look like a joke.

Yep, ask any kuwaiti, they'll tell you it's a
conspiracy of imperialist america and the sheiks,
all kuwaities wanted to be part of iraq and live
that miserable life. Or, they'll tell you they
deserved what happened to them and the war, like
chosmky said, was an unjust war. They would gladly
live that miserable life because they deserve
nothing better, as progressives/leftists don't
think they deserve any better. Fat sheiks that
hire PR firms, oh they'd tell you saddam wasn't
enough for kuwaities but america had to come in
and impose its imperialist will.

How ignorant can someone get? I mean isn't there
some limit? Amazing.

If any mods can check my IP, it'd be in Kuwait.
And if any if the ignorant zealots here speak
Arabic, I'd gladly respond. Of course then I'd be
accused of being a non-kuwaiti arab living in
kuwait or an american arabic-speaking spy. Heh.

I don't know who Nadine is (I think I've seen some
posts of her but I don't read this blog a lot) or
what hasbarist means.

Mr.Murder,

"Cookies and Incubators hasn't given a response
since?"

This is not a chat, I don't have to reply
immediately. You sound so proud of yourself there,
like a defender of justice that shot down
imperialist anti-saddam propoganda and the
progressive cause. I wanted to just post that
first reply and leave, even if I didn't continue
replying nothing would change in the facts your
deluded world view conveniently ignores. It's OK,
most people live in their own reality bubbles,
ideologues and zealots like the ones here
especially. Much like religion and it's deluded
followers. There's barely any difference really.

Mr.Murder,

"Cookies and Incubators hasn't given a response
since?"

This is not a chat, I don't have to reply
immediately. You sound so proud of yourself there,
like a defender of justice that shot down
imperialist anti-saddam propoganda and the
progressive cause. I wanted to just post that
first reply and leave, even if I didn't continue
replying nothing would change in the facts your
deluded world view conveniently ignores. It's OK,
most people live in their own reality bubbles,
ideologues and zealots like the ones here
especially. Much like religion and it's deluded
followers. There's barely any difference really.

Cookies.......

Would you care to show us where ANYONE here endorsed, condoned, supported, or justified Saddam's invasion of Kuwait????

Then, show us where anyone endorsed, condoned, supported, or justified the Iraqi army's treatment of the Kuwaitis?

Fact is, there have been three premises mentioned by posters other than yourself...

1) That there is evidence, and many who believe, that Kuwait was slant drilling into Iraq.

2) That it is KNOWN that Kuwait was violatibng OPEC production regulations, and it is widely believed that the reasion was to harm Iraq economically.

3) That there were propagandized events presented to the media, in order to further demonize Iraqi troops and curry favor for military intervention, that did not in fact actually occur.

Now, reread your own comments, and explain to us why you've made such an antagonistic ass of yourself merely because some of us choose not to ignore history.

I can't count the number of articles I read
justifying saddam's invasion, and they were all
leftists articles. And by saying kuwait was
harming iraq, you're saying saddam had a reason to
invade. And by repeating 'propoganda that
demonized iraqies' you're also implying no crimes
happened, which again is also a theme in all the
leftist articles I read about the gulf war.

Kuwait violating OPEC regulations wouldn't be any
different than what many members do, doing it to
harm iraq however is absurd and only the most
ignorant of the region would believe that. Kuwait
not only had no reason to harm iraq, it was scared
of it and was also an ally that criminally
supported it during its war with iran.

As for slant drilling, from what I know kuwait is
naturally lower than iraq and saudi arabia and so
the oil in those borders fills in kuwaiti wells
and that pissed off the iraqies. I don't know the
details of this so I could be wrong, but again 1)
i don't buy any 'evidence' as everybody with an
agenda has their own version of reality they push
and 2) it's irrelevant as iraq wanted to invade
kuwait for a long time and did it for its oil and
not defending iraq's and even if kuwait did it, it
would not be a reason justifying the invasion.

The poor demonized iraqi soldiers did a lot of
crimes that you would consider propaganda, picking
that one congress testimony again does nothing but
argue that iraqies didn't do anything wrong, it
was all propaganda. Maybe if the palestenians
hired a PR firm and exaggerated a thing or two or
invented one we can all laugh at those arabs and
their PR propoganda and say the israelies are
victims of demonizing and racist propaganda. I
hate using this analogy because the iraq invasion
was a thousand times worse than anything the
israelis could do, it was shorter mind you, but
I'd rather live in the west bank or gaza than any
country occupied by iraqies.

When you say iraq had reasons to invade kuwait,
that the gulf war was a propoganda war - nothing
happened, it was all good there except bush didn't
want you believing that, it's not a just war as
chosmk said (he could still say it's not a just
war but recognized the suffering of the people
occupied, but of course the progressive humanist
didn't in his article. actually I take that back,
you couldn't say that and still say it's not a jus
war, it was as just as WWII or any other just war)
you can't go and say oh, but I only mentioned this
or that w/o implying anything you accuse me of.

I really am done with this thread now. I'm not
going to bother editing this post, I just rambled
and not sorry if it's hard to read, this is not
worth it.

Cookie....

Some smart and caring people render wisdom for the benefit of informing all. If you think being there with strong ties in the middle east automatically makes one more qualified that people with better insight to a hawkish outdated policy of an imperialist power, then please help us by removing qualifiers like "leftists" from your argument and share facts (not emotional or belligerent responses) to counter what you consider as politically biased views.

On that note, when you say: "I'm half-expecting somebody to talk about how Kurds were disloyal Iraqis and saddam was protecting the unity of iraq when he gassed them. Or whatever propaganda he used to slaughter them."

Know that Sadam claimed his northern Kurds betrayed him for not putting up resistance against Iranian army's advance that went far into Iraqi territory. Also Khomeini wasn't delusional when he refused the Iran Iraq war seize fire, he just miscalculated on what would happen to his troops when they were staging for their assault on Baghdad. Along with Kurdish civilians from different villages, were enemy soldiers who dies under the same chemical agents that was supplied to Sadam Hussein. This is a fact that some of us with great ties to that region have lived with, as others in the west had "classified CIA material" to deal with.

Coming back to Dubai, the characteristics of the subcultures you've touched upon is what can make Dubai the focal point of our foreign policy problems. This is something that regardless of our party affiliation, some of us believe our seasoned politicians (who always man handle the president and the American pulic) are just too old, too spent, too biased and too blind to navigate through in our new speedy information age. That's why they've had to resort to military force.

"I can't count the number of articles I read
justifying saddam's invasion, and they were all
leftists articles. And by saying kuwait was
harming iraq, you're saying saddam had a reason to invade. And by repeating 'propoganda that
demonized iraqies' you're also implying no crimes happened, which again is also a theme in all the leftist articles I read about the gulf war"

Why is it that so many of you feel a need to import a truckload of straw everytime you stick your foot in your mouth????

I am "implying" NOTHING that you state I am implying.