Iraq Wants the US Out - Our New Saigon Moment

[Sallow]

Well here's what you are missing.

Iran hasn't initiated war in over a century.

It has however..had it's democratically elected government knocked over by outside meddling from the United States.

And if you want to continue to make this about me personally..we are done here.

Cheers.

Untrue. Iran has initiated wars with Israel through its Hamas proxy and with the US through its Hizballah proxy.

Is proxy too complicated a word for you? I can draw pictures with crayons, if that will help

So how many wars by proxy, have the USA initiated in Cuba, Central America, S. America, the ME, Eastern Europe.......

Do as I say, not as I do?

Or the Catholic Church for that matter?

 

[Sallow]

For those with functioning brains, I already provided facts of Iranian-backed wars with Israel and acts of wars against the US.

You'll just have to opt out.

"Proxy" wars are real life declarations of war now? They count as invasions?

Is that what you are saying?

Really?

Still no comment on the Iranian strikes on Kurdistan clown face?

Clown face?

Is that like Poker face?

With a Clown face instead?

You a lady Gaga fan?

 

[High_Gravity]

"Proxy" wars are real life declarations of war now? They count as invasions?

Is that what you are saying?

Really?

Still no comment on the Iranian strikes on Kurdistan clown face?

Clown face?

Is that like Poker face?

With a Clown face instead?

You a lady Gaga fan?

Still nothing to say about the Iranian strike on Kurdistan?

 

[Sallow]

Can you read? post where I threatened you. Your also a liar as well being misinformed.

Sallow knows less than zero about Iranians, if he tried to call an actual Iranian an Arab they would knock out his fucking teeth, he lost all credibility when he said that and he didn't have that much to begin with.

About there.

By the way..I have made that "mistake" in real life. That's not where I lost my teeth.

Yes but when did you lose your brains?

Just about when I started responding back to your assinine posts.

But..that can be remedied.

Unless you have some intelligent content to post..we are done.

Cheers.

 

[High_Gravity]

About there.

By the way..I have made that "mistake" in real life. That's not where I lost my teeth.

Yes but when did you lose your brains?

Just about when I started responding back to your assinine posts.

But..that can be remedied.

Unless you have some intelligent content to post..we are done.

Cheers.

You said Iran never attacked another country, yet have nothing to say about the Iranian strikes on Iraqi Kurdistan, you are an idiot, you may now shut your cock holster and retreat from this thread.

 

[Foxfyre]

Iran overrun Iraq????

That takes the cake!

Yeah. Those of us who actually read history books rather than get our education from Huff post or Daily Kos actually pick up on stuff like that. Try it. You might be really surprised. And also understand why Iranians are not Arabs.

Okay.

History question.

When was the last time Iran attacked another country?

In modern times Iran generally has not been as directly aggressive as some of its neighbors but has funded terrorist organizations and others hellbent on aggression. It is difficult to pinpoint 'blame' for the Iran/Iraq war that is generally dated from September 1980 to 1988 but there is sufficient blame to go around. Probably technically Iraq struck the first blow but soon found itself outclassed by a USSR backed Iran. Would Iran have attacked Iraq if Iraq had not fired first? Hard to say. Most historians think that was the plan though. The conflict between Iran and Iraq spans centuries more recently with clashes between Iran's Shi-ite and Iraq's Sunni controlled governments. Many if not most of the insurgents determined to scuttle plans for a free and independent Iraq have entered Iraq through Iran.

Iran has long been funding anit-Israeli groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah by shipping arms and missiles through Syria to such groups.

More recently in 2007 Iranian Revolutionary Guards invaded and seized most important control of the Masandam Peninsula in Oman. That solidified Iran's complete control of the straight. (Oman previously controlled the southern end.)

 

[Sallow]

Yeah. Those of us who actually read history books rather than get our education from Huff post or Daily Kos actually pick up on stuff like that. Try it. You might be really surprised. And also understand why Iranians are not Arabs.

Okay.

History question.

When was the last time Iran attacked another country?

In modern times Iran generally has not been as directly aggressive as some of its neighbors but has funded terrorist organizations and others hellbent on aggression. It is difficult to pinpoint 'blame' for the Iran/Iraq war that is generally dated from September 1980 to 1988 but there is sufficient blame to go around. Probably technically Iraq struck the first blow but soon found itself outclassed by a USSR backed Iran. Would Iran have attacked Iraq if Iraq had not fired first? Hard to say. Most historians think that was the plan though. The conflict between Iran and Iraq spans centuries more recently with clashes between Iran's Shi-ite and Iraq's Sunni controlled governments. Many if not most of the insurgents determined to scuttle plans for a free and independent Iraq have entered Iraq through Iran.

Iran has long been funding anit-Israeli groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah by shipping arms and missiles through Syria to such groups.

More recently in 2007 Iranian Revolutionary Guards invaded and seized most important control of the Masandam Peninsula in Oman. That solidified Iran's complete control of the straight. (Oman previously controlled the southern end.)

Okay..an adult answer.

But the bottom line is Iran has not been an aggressor in a war for quite some time..and does have a list of legimate beefs.

And they did try to become more of a moderate state with the election of Khatami. Attempts to normalize relations were rebuffed by the Clinton adminstration and continued on through the Bush administration.

Which brings us to now. Iran watched two huge countries get rolled by the United States. They are nervous and should be.

 

[Foxfyre]

Okay.

History question.

When was the last time Iran attacked another country?

In modern times Iran generally has not been as directly aggressive as some of its neighbors but has funded terrorist organizations and others hellbent on aggression. It is difficult to pinpoint 'blame' for the Iran/Iraq war that is generally dated from September 1980 to 1988 but there is sufficient blame to go around. Probably technically Iraq struck the first blow but soon found itself outclassed by a USSR backed Iran. Would Iran have attacked Iraq if Iraq had not fired first? Hard to say. Most historians think that was the plan though. The conflict between Iran and Iraq spans centuries more recently with clashes between Iran's Shi-ite and Iraq's Sunni controlled governments. Many if not most of the insurgents determined to scuttle plans for a free and independent Iraq have entered Iraq through Iran.

Iran has long been funding anit-Israeli groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah by shipping arms and missiles through Syria to such groups.

More recently in 2007 Iranian Revolutionary Guards invaded and seized most important control of the Masandam Peninsula in Oman. That solidified Iran's complete control of the straight. (Oman previously controlled the southern end.)

Okay..an adult answer.

But the bottom line is Iran has not been an aggressor in a war for quite some time..and does have a list of legimate beefs.

And they did try to become more of a moderate state with the election of Khatami. Attempts to normalize relations were rebuffed by the Clinton adminstration and continued on through the Bush administration.

Which brings us to now. Iran watched two huge countries get rolled by the United States. They are nervous and should be.

And that sir is undulturated poppycock.

 

[Sallow]

In modern times Iran generally has not been as directly aggressive as some of its neighbors but has funded terrorist organizations and others hellbent on aggression. It is difficult to pinpoint 'blame' for the Iran/Iraq war that is generally dated from September 1980 to 1988 but there is sufficient blame to go around. Probably technically Iraq struck the first blow but soon found itself outclassed by a USSR backed Iran. Would Iran have attacked Iraq if Iraq had not fired first? Hard to say. Most historians think that was the plan though. The conflict between Iran and Iraq spans centuries more recently with clashes between Iran's Shi-ite and Iraq's Sunni controlled governments. Many if not most of the insurgents determined to scuttle plans for a free and independent Iraq have entered Iraq through Iran.

Iran has long been funding anit-Israeli groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah by shipping arms and missiles through Syria to such groups.

More recently in 2007 Iranian Revolutionary Guards invaded and seized most important control of the Masandam Peninsula in Oman. That solidified Iran's complete control of the straight. (Oman previously controlled the southern end.)

Okay..an adult answer.

But the bottom line is Iran has not been an aggressor in a war for quite some time..and does have a list of legimate beefs.

And they did try to become more of a moderate state with the election of Khatami. Attempts to normalize relations were rebuffed by the Clinton adminstration and continued on through the Bush administration.

Which brings us to now. Iran watched two huge countries get rolled by the United States. They are nervous and should be.

And that sir is undulturated poppycock.

Well feel free to expand on why..

If the situations were reversed and a Iranian secret service team backed a military overthrow of Eisenhower and put a decendent of King Charles on an "American Throne" then had an Iranian company start grabbing our oil..think we'd be a little miffed..

No?

 

[Marc39]

Okay.

History question.

When was the last time Iran attacked another country?

In modern times Iran generally has not been as directly aggressive as some of its neighbors but has funded terrorist organizations and others hellbent on aggression. It is difficult to pinpoint 'blame' for the Iran/Iraq war that is generally dated from September 1980 to 1988 but there is sufficient blame to go around. Probably technically Iraq struck the first blow but soon found itself outclassed by a USSR backed Iran. Would Iran have attacked Iraq if Iraq had not fired first? Hard to say. Most historians think that was the plan though. The conflict between Iran and Iraq spans centuries more recently with clashes between Iran's Shi-ite and Iraq's Sunni controlled governments. Many if not most of the insurgents determined to scuttle plans for a free and independent Iraq have entered Iraq through Iran.

Iran has long been funding anit-Israeli groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah by shipping arms and missiles through Syria to such groups.

More recently in 2007 Iranian Revolutionary Guards invaded and seized most important control of the Masandam Peninsula in Oman. That solidified Iran's complete control of the straight. (Oman previously controlled the southern end.)

Okay..an adult answer.

But the bottom line is Iran has not been an aggressor in a war for quite some time..and does have a list of legimate beefs.

And they did try to become more of a moderate state with the election of Khatami. Attempts to normalize relations were rebuffed by the Clinton adminstration and continued on through the Bush administration.

Which brings us to now. Iran watched two huge countries get rolled by the United States. They are nervous and should be.

Iran has been involved in wars against Israel through its Hamas proxy and involved in acts of war against the US through its Hizballah proxy.

There are online dictionaries for you to look up the word "proxy," dumb dumb

 

[Sallow]

In modern times Iran generally has not been as directly aggressive as some of its neighbors but has funded terrorist organizations and others hellbent on aggression. It is difficult to pinpoint 'blame' for the Iran/Iraq war that is generally dated from September 1980 to 1988 but there is sufficient blame to go around. Probably technically Iraq struck the first blow but soon found itself outclassed by a USSR backed Iran. Would Iran have attacked Iraq if Iraq had not fired first? Hard to say. Most historians think that was the plan though. The conflict between Iran and Iraq spans centuries more recently with clashes between Iran's Shi-ite and Iraq's Sunni controlled governments. Many if not most of the insurgents determined to scuttle plans for a free and independent Iraq have entered Iraq through Iran.

Iran has long been funding anit-Israeli groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah by shipping arms and missiles through Syria to such groups.

More recently in 2007 Iranian Revolutionary Guards invaded and seized most important control of the Masandam Peninsula in Oman. That solidified Iran's complete control of the straight. (Oman previously controlled the southern end.)

Okay..an adult answer.

But the bottom line is Iran has not been an aggressor in a war for quite some time..and does have a list of legimate beefs.

And they did try to become more of a moderate state with the election of Khatami. Attempts to normalize relations were rebuffed by the Clinton adminstration and continued on through the Bush administration.

Which brings us to now. Iran watched two huge countries get rolled by the United States. They are nervous and should be.

Iran has been involved in wars against Israel through its Hamas proxy and involved in acts of war against the US through its Hizballah proxy.

There are online dictionaries for you to look up the word "proxy," dumb dumb

Be all you can be..

Become a Marine - Contact a U.S. Marine Corps Recruiter Today

 

[Foxfyre]

Okay..an adult answer.

But the bottom line is Iran has not been an aggressor in a war for quite some time..and does have a list of legimate beefs.

And they did try to become more of a moderate state with the election of Khatami. Attempts to normalize relations were rebuffed by the Clinton adminstration and continued on through the Bush administration.

Which brings us to now. Iran watched two huge countries get rolled by the United States. They are nervous and should be.

And that sir is undulturated poppycock.

Well feel free to expand on why..

If the situations were reversed and a Iranian secret service team backed a military overthrow of Eisenhower and put a decendent of King Charles on an "American Throne" then had an Iranian company start grabbing our oil..think we'd be a little miffed..

No?

I'm not dealing with hypotheticals here. If you want to play the 'what if' game, start a thread for that. I am dealing with the actual history and the facts that we can verify from reliable sources. You know, that history and those facts you have been ignoring or blowing off as you continue to demonstrate your ignorance on this particular subject. Ignorance is not a sin nor a flaw. Ignorance can be corrected by actually reading up from reliable history rather than cherry picked Wiki entries or leftwing propaganda sites.

Demanding that ignorance is truth is a flaw and sometimes a sin, however.

I also hate and quickly become bored with circular arguments. If you wish to address or competently rebut criticisms of your posts here, go for it. Otherwise, everything you have posted related to the actual topic has been adequately addressed. I suggest that you review.

 

[Sallow]

And that sir is undulturated poppycock.

Well feel free to expand on why..

If the situations were reversed and a Iranian secret service team backed a military overthrow of Eisenhower and put a decendent of King Charles on an "American Throne" then had an Iranian company start grabbing our oil..think we'd be a little miffed..

No?

I'm not dealing with hypotheticals here. If you want to play the 'what if' game, start a thread for that. I am dealing with the actual history and the facts that we can verify from reliable sources. You know, that history and those facts you have been ignoring or blowing off as you continue to demonstrate your ignorance on this particular subject. Ignorance is not a sin nor a flaw. Ignorance can be corrected by actually reading up from reliable history rather than cherry picked Wiki entries or leftwing propaganda sites.

Demanding that ignorance is truth is a flaw and sometimes a sin, however.

I also hate and quickly become bored with circular arguments. If you wish to address or competently rebut criticisms of your posts here, go for it. Otherwise, everything you have posted related to the actual topic has been adequately addressed. I suggest that you review.

You want the actual history?

Kermit "Kim" Roosevelt, Jr. (February 16, 1916 – June 8, 2000), was a Special Activities Division political action officer who coordinated the Central Intelligence Agency's (CIA) Operation Ajax, which orchestrated the coup d’état against Iran's democratically-elected prime minister, Mohammed Mosaddeq, and returned Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the Shah of Iran, to Iran's Peacock Throne in August 1953. He was also the grandson of US president Theodore Roosevelt.

Kermit Roosevelt, Jr. - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

My "hypothetical" is exactly what happened to Iran.

 

[Marc39]

Okay..an adult answer.

But the bottom line is Iran has not been an aggressor in a war for quite some time..and does have a list of legimate beefs.

And they did try to become more of a moderate state with the election of Khatami. Attempts to normalize relations were rebuffed by the Clinton adminstration and continued on through the Bush administration.

Which brings us to now. Iran watched two huge countries get rolled by the United States. They are nervous and should be.

Iran has been involved in wars against Israel through its Hamas proxy and involved in acts of war against the US through its Hizballah proxy.

There are online dictionaries for you to look up the word "proxy," dumb dumb

Be all you can be..

Become a Marine - Contact a U.S. Marine Corps Recruiter Today

Your FAIL duly noted.

 

[Valerie]

BAGHDAD—Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki ruled out the presence of any U.S. troops in Iraq after the end of 2011, saying his new government and the country's security forces were capable of confronting any remaining threats to Iraq's security, sovereignty and unity.

Mr. Maliki spoke with The Wall Street Journal in a two-hour interview, his first since Iraq ended nine months of stalemate and seated a new government after an inconclusive election, allowing Mr. Maliki to begin a second term as premier.

A majority of Iraqis—and some Iraqi and U.S. officials—have assumed the U.S. troop presence would eventually be extended, especially after the long government limbo. But Mr. Maliki was eager to draw a line in his most definitive remarks on the subject. "The last American soldier will leave Iraq" as agreed, he said, speaking at his office in a leafy section of Baghdad's protected Green Zone. "This agreement is not subject to extension, not subject to alteration. It is sealed."

More at link
Iraqi Prime Minister Says U.S. Forces Must Leave On Time - WSJ.com

Say hello to Iran.

Trillions of taxpayer dollars thrown away, the loss of American influence and stature all over the world, countless of innocent people dead .. including tens of thousands of dead and wounded American soldiers .. all to hand Iraq to Iran like a wonderful Christmas present.

The president announced that agreed upon plan in an address to the nation on August 30th...


http://www.usmessageboard.com/general-discussion/131090-the-presidents-speech.html

"

The Americans who have served in Iraq completed every mission they were given. They defeated a regime that had terrorized its people. Together with Iraqis and coalition partners who made huge sacrifices of their own, our troops fought block by block to help Iraq seize the chance for a better future. They shifted tactics to protect the Iraqi people, trained Iraqi Security Forces, and took out terrorist leaders. Because of our troops and civilians -- and because of the resilience of the Iraqi people -- Iraq has the opportunity to embrace a new destiny, even though many challenges remain.

...

So tonight, I am announcing that the American combat mission in Iraq has ended. Operation Iraqi Freedom is over, and the Iraqi people now have lead responsibility for the security of their country.

...

We’ve removed nearly 100,000 U.S. troops from Iraq. We’ve closed or transferred to the Iraqis hundreds of bases. And we have moved millions of pieces of equipment out of Iraq.

This completes a transition to Iraqi responsibility for their own security.

Going forward, a transitional force of U.S. troops will remain in Iraq with a different mission: advising and assisting Iraq’s Security Forces, supporting Iraqi troops in targeted counterterrorism missions, and protecting our civilians. Consistent with our agreement with the Iraqi government, all U.S. troops will leave by the end of next year. As our military draws down, our dedicated civilians -- diplomats, aid workers, and advisors -- are moving into the lead to support Iraq as it strengthens its government, resolves political disputes, resettles those displaced by war, and builds ties with the region and the world. That’s a message that Vice President Biden is delivering to the Iraqi people through his visit there today.

...


Only Iraqis can build a democracy within their borders. What America can do, and will do, is provide support for the Iraqi people as both a friend and a partner.

Ending this war is not only in Iraq’s interest -- it’s in our own. The United States has paid a huge price to put the future of Iraq in the hands of its people. We have sent our young men and women to make enormous sacrifices in Iraq, and spent vast resources abroad at a time of tight budgets at home. We’ve persevered because of a belief we share with the Iraqi people -- a belief that out of the ashes of war, a new beginning could be born in this cradle of civilization. Through this remarkable chapter in the history of the United States and Iraq, we have met our responsibility. Now, it’s time to turn the page.

As we do, I’m mindful that the Iraq war has been a contentious issue at home. Here, too, it’s time to turn the page. This afternoon, I spoke to former President George W. Bush. It’s well known that he and I disagreed about the war from its outset. Yet no one can doubt President Bush’s support for our troops, or his love of country and commitment to our security. As I’ve said, there were patriots who supported this war, and patriots who opposed it. And all of us are united in appreciation for our servicemen and women, and our hopes for Iraqis’ future.

The greatness of our democracy is grounded in our ability to move beyond our differences, and to learn from our experience as we confront the many challenges ahead.

"

Remarks by the President in Address to the Nation on the End of Combat Operations in Iraq | The White House

 

[Foxfyre]

^^Looks like someone's starting to get they sore loser on^^

Just as I thought, you can't prove that: AGAIN, unless you can prove THAT WE SENT THOSE WEAPONS OVER THERE FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF GASSING IRANIAN CIVILIANS, YOU HAVE NO ARGUMENT.

Our hands are quite obviously clean, dry of that, WE GAVE THAT SUPPORT TO DEFEAT THE WORSE, MORE BRUTAL, IRANIAN GOVERNMENT. THAT WAS THE OBVIOUS PURPOSE OF THAT SUPPORT.

Again, you just wanna twist, distort, and revise shit so it fits your wacko lefty agenda...............sad.

I see no further reason to continue this "debate" I've clearly made my point, with a case, set, MATCH.

HG and I are enjoying a good laugh privately tho from your "knowledge"

Actually, a careful study of history shows that the USA didn't back either regime. But a stronger, better (USSR) supplied Iran did threaten to overrun and absorb a weaker Iraq which we did not see as a healthy situation with a huge percentage of the world's oil supplies at stake. So we supplied Saddam with enough weaponry to stave off iran. It was a conflict between the USSR and USA as much as between Iran and iraq. But Reagan figured if we kept Iran and Iraq busy beating each other up without either gaining a significant advantage, they would leave everybody else alone.

Saddam actually got his weapons and support from several sources Germany, France, England etc. not all of this was given to the Iraqis by the US like the moron Sallow is trying to imply.

I missed this earlier, but you are absolutely correct. The UN Security Council and many member nations had a strong interest in neither Iraq nor Iran 'winning' that war.

I remember in the aftermath of Desert Storm, President H.W. Bush's military advisors wincing when he returned from Iraq and said he was proud to see not a single piece of American weaponry among that destroyed or captured. He might not have seen it, but they all new that there was a LOT of U.S. weaponry there. One of those presidential gaffes for the history books.

 

[mdn2000]

Which world? There has been a great deal of regional instability because of the American invasion.

Are you willing to take in Iraqi refugees? Millions of them have poured into Jordan and Syria.

We have been taking in Iraqi refugees for years.

I thought the instability was because we are fighting with our hands tied behind our backs, I am all for destroying all the tyrants of the world, takes time though, especially the educating the society part.

Regional instability, the Iranian-Iraq war, was the regional stability or are you referring to the invasion of Kuwait as the time of regional stability, maybe you mean gassing of the Kurds as being when the region was stable. What about during the Yemen war or perhaps after Israel declared itself a nation and Iraq went to war against Israel. So your saying there was a bit of stability somewhere in here that Americans upset. I should go on with the Arab wars, much more than I mentioned, and we upset the peace?

Naive doesn't begin to explain this..

Because naive it is not, thanks.

 

[mdn2000]

Sunni do you know what Saddams regime did to the Shites, Kurds, Kuwaitis and Iranians? it was not all peaches and cream under Saddam.

Saddam was No saint by any means.

But he lived in a tough neighborhood and these people were out to kill him and topple his government.

He just responded using weapons and money supplied by the U.S.

btw We didn't say jack when he gassed the Iranians.

Saddam invaded Iran. Iran was not out to kill him.

By the time it became widely known he was using gas against Iranian troops he was being supplied by many compainies in the West thanks to Ronnie Raygun. In fact Americans can say "And I helped"

How he US armed Saddam Hussein with chemical weapons | Green Left Weekly

On December 19-20, 1983, Reagan dispatched his Middle East envoy — none other than Donald Rumsfeld — to Baghdad with a hand-written offer of a resumption of diplomatic relations, which had been severed during the 1967 Arab-Israel war. On March 24, 1984, Rumsfeld was again in Baghdad.

On that same day, the UPI wire service reported from the UN: "Mustard gas laced with a nerve agent has been used on Iranian soldiers ... a team of UN experts has concluded ... Meanwhile, in the Iraqi capital of Baghdad, US presidential envoy Donald Rumsfeld held talks with foreign minister Tariq Aziz."

......

According to Washington Post journalist Bob Woodward, in a December 15, 1986 article, the CIA began to secretly supply Iraq with intelligence in 1984 that was used to "calibrate" mustard gas attacks on Iranian troops. Beginning in early 1985, the CIA provided Iraq with "data from sensitive US satellite reconnaissance photography ... to assist Iraqi bombing raids".

But that doesn't mean Libertarians supported either Saddam or Raygun! We didn't.

Your link contained not one meniton of the USA supplying or building chemical weapons for Iraq, at best the article states Rumsfeld held meetings with Iraqi's the same day they gassed Iranians.

Are you stating Rumsfeld passed gas?

 

[Sallow]

We have been taking in Iraqi refugees for years.

I thought the instability was because we are fighting with our hands tied behind our backs, I am all for destroying all the tyrants of the world, takes time though, especially the educating the society part.

Regional instability, the Iranian-Iraq war, was the regional stability or are you referring to the invasion of Kuwait as the time of regional stability, maybe you mean gassing of the Kurds as being when the region was stable. What about during the Yemen war or perhaps after Israel declared itself a nation and Iraq went to war against Israel. So your saying there was a bit of stability somewhere in here that Americans upset. I should go on with the Arab wars, much more than I mentioned, and we upset the peace?

Naive doesn't begin to explain this..

Because naive it is not, thanks.

Okay..lets go piece by piece.

America's admitted less then 10K refugees..that's compared over 2 million displaced by the war.

And exactly what business does the United States have in the Middle East? America isn't enough for us?

The Gassing of Kurds and the Iran/Iraq war took place at the behest of the United States. The government provided them with plans on how to construct the chemical weapons and hardware. And you do know that the Kurds are considered terrorists by most nations in that region..and us.

 

[Revere]

What business does China have with Africa?

Oh, I know.

Oil exploration contracts with any African nation with oil.