http://www.metafilter.com/tags/Iraqwar+oil Posts tagged with 'Iraqwar' and 'oil' at MetaFilter. Mon, 22 Aug 2005 08:26:31 -0800 Mon, 22 Aug 2005 08:26:31 -0800 en-us http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss 60 http://www.metafilter.com/44475/Power%2DCut%2DShuts%2DDown%2DIraq%2DOil%2DExports <a href="http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/050822/iraq_oil.html?.v=6">Power Cut Shuts Down Iraq Oil Exports</a> ASRA, Iraq (AP) -- Iraq's oil exports were shut down Monday by a power cut that darkened parts of central and southern Iraq, including the country's only functioning oil export terminals, Iraqi and foreign oil officials said. tag:metafilter.com,2005:site.44475 Mon, 22 Aug 2005 08:26:31 -0800 AP blackout brokenlink electricity export Iraq IraqWar oil oilfields petroleum power Yahoo celerystick http://www.metafilter.com/41194/Regarding%2DBlood%2DAnd%2DOil <small>Whereas, in the past, national power was thought to reside in the possession of a mighty arsenal and the maintenance of extended alliance systems, it is now associated with economic dynamism and the cultivation of technological innovation. To exercise leadership in the current epoch, states are expected to possess a vigorous domestic economy and to outperform other states in the development and export of high-tech goods. While a potent military establishment is still considered essential to national security, it must be balanced by a strong and vibrant economy. 'National security depends on successful engagement in the global economy,' the Institute for National Security Studies observed in a recent Pentagon study.</small><br><br>Regarding <a href="http://www.americanempireproject.com/bookpage.asp?ISBN=0805073132" title="Since September 11 and the commencement of the 'war on terror,' the world's attention has been focused on the relationship between U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East and the oceans of crude oil that lie beneath the region's soil. Klare traces oil's impact on international affairs since World War II, revealing its influence on the Truman, Eisenhower, Nixon, and Carter doctrines. He shows how America's own wells are drying up as our demand increases; by 2010, the U.S. will need to import 60% of its oil. And since most of this supply will have to come from chronically unstable, often violently anti-American zones -- the Persian Gulf, the Caspian Sea, Latin America, and Africa -- our dependency is bound to lead to recurrent military involvement.">Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America's Growing Petroleum Dependency</a> by Michael T. Klare, here is an <a href="http://www.americanempireproject.com/bookexcerpt.asp?ISBN=0805073132" title="Tampa, Florida, is not one of the places you usually think of as a hub for American relations with the oil kingdoms of the Persian Gulf. It does not, like Houston, play host to any of the giant US. oil companies; it does not, like Washington, D.C., house the State Department and foreign embassies; and it does not, like New York, lay claim to the United Nations and the international news media. But Tampa does have something that none of those other cities can claim: the headquarters of the U.S. Central Command (Centcom), the nerve center for all U.S. military operations in the Persian Gulf region, including those now under way in Afghanistan and Iraq. Centcom forces, operating as they do in the greater Middle East, occupy the front lines in the war against terrorism and play a critical role in efforts to prevent the spread of weapons of mass destruction. From its very inception, however, Centcom's principal task has been to protect the global flow of petroleum. ">excerpt</a> from the book and here is his most recent article--<a href="http://antiwar.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=Oil+and+the+Coming+War+With+Iran+-+by+Michael+T.+Klare+and+Tom+Engelhardt&expire=&urlID=13880692&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.antiwar.com%2Fengelhardt%2F%3Farticleid%3D5540&partnerID=16" title="Before proceeding further, let me state for the record that I do not claim oil is the sole driving force behind the Bush administration's apparent determination to destroy Iranian military capabilities. No doubt there are many national security professionals in Washington who are truly worried about Iran's nuclear program, just as there were many professionals who were genuinely worried about Iraqi weapons capabilities... Because Iran occupies a strategic location on the north side of the Persian Gulf, it is in a position to threaten oil fields in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, and the United Arab Emirates, which together possess more than half of the world's known oil reserves. Iran also sits athwart the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow waterway through which, daily, 40 percent of the world's oil exports pass. In addition, Iran is becoming a major supplier of oil and natural gas to China, India, and Japan, thereby giving Tehran additional clout in world affairs. It is these geopolitical dimensions of energy, as much as Iran's potential to export significant quantities of oil to the United States, that undoubtedly govern the administration's strategic calculations.">Oil and the Coming War With Iran</a>. Well, at least he has been consistent--consider <a href="http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=20011105&s=klare" title="There are many ways to view the conflict between the United States and Osama bin Laden's terror network: as a contest between Western liberalism and Eastern fanaticism, as suggested by many pundits in the United States; as a struggle between the defenders and the enemies of authentic Islam, as suggested by many in the Muslim world; and as a predictable backlash against American villainy abroad, as suggested by some on the left. But while useful in assessing some dimensions of the conflict, these cultural and political analyses obscure a fundamental reality: that this war, like most of the wars that preceded it, is firmly rooted in geopolitical competition.">The Geopolitics of War</a>, <a href="http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=20011224&s=klare" title="The Bush Administration enjoys strong support from Americans and the international community for the campaign against Osama bin Laden. As Richard Falk suggests in this issue ['In Defense of 'Just War' Thinking'], a war limited to the destruction of Al Qaeda can be considered a just and proportionate response to the September 11 terror attacks. But a larger effort, aimed at any number of states and individuals with no apparent connection to September 11, must not be viewed in that light. Such a campaign should be denounced as a dangerous example of 'mission creep,' intended to further the ambitions of certain strategists and politicians in Washington while exposing US soldiers and the American people to additional bouts of deadly violence. ">Wars Without End</a>, <a href="http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=20021007&s=klare" title="As the United States gears up for an invasion of Iraq, the great unanswered question continues to be: Why is the Bush Administration so determined to topple a government that has been effectively contained by American power for eleven years? The White House has offered several reasons to justify an attack on Iraq--Saddam Hussein is on the verge of obtaining nuclear weapons; an invasion is needed to prevent the transfer of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons to international terrorists, and so on. Another factor, however, may be of equal importance--oil. Two key concerns underlie the Administration's thinking: First, the United States is becoming dangerously dependent on imported petroleum to meet its daily energy requirements, and, second, Iraq possesses the world's largest reserves of untapped petroleum after Saudi Arabia.">Oiling the Wheels of War</a>, and <a href="http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=20050425&s=klare" title="As the Defense Department begins to look beyond the war in Iraq, a major priority will be to commence a systematic realignment of US forces and bases abroad. This massive undertaking will result in a substantial reduction of American forces in Germany and South Korea, and the establishment of new facilities in Eastern Europe, the Caspian Sea basin, Southeast Asia and Africa. Tens of thousands of troops (and their dependents) now stationed abroad will be redeployed to the United States, while fresh contingents will be sent to areas that have never before housed a permanent US military presence. These steps are largely justified in terms of military effectiveness--to eliminate obsolete cold war facilities and ease the transport of American troops to likely scenes of conflict. Underlying the planning, however, is a new approach to combat and a fresh calculus of the nation's geopolitical interests.">Imperial Reach</a> from his <a href="http://www.thenation.com/directory/bios/bio.mhtml?id=145" title="Michael T. Klare, professor of Peace and World Security Studies at Hampshire College and defense correspondent of The Nation, is the author of Resource Wars and, most recently, Blood and Oil: The Dangers and Consequences of America's Growing Petroleum Dependency.">articles</a> for <em>The Nation</em> alone. Here is an excerpt from his previous <a href="http://www.thinkingpeace.com/Lib/lib062.html" title="The protection of critical raw materials and transit routes has, of course, been a major theme in American security policy for a very long time. In the late 1800s, for example, the nation's leading naval strategist, Captain Alfred Thayer Mahan, won widespread support for his argument that growing U.S. participation in international trade required the establishment of a large and powerful navy. Similar views were advanced by President Theodore Roosevelt in the early 1900s, and later by key figures in the administration of Franklin D. Roosevelt. Concern over the safety of resource supplies also influenced American strategy during World War II and the immediate postwar period. Only with the outbreak of the Cold War did U.S. strategists diminish their emphasis on resource issues, turning their attention instead to political and military developments in Europe and Asia. ">Resource Wars</a> and here is <a href="http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/GC24Dj01.html" title="The worldwide decline in new discoveries has profound implications for the global supply of energy and, by extension, the world economy. Given a recent surge in energy demand from China and other rapidly developing countries, the US Department of Energy (DoE) predicts that, for all future energy needs to be satisfied, total world oil output will have to climb by 50% between now and 2025; from, that is, approximately 80 million to 120 million barrels per day. A staggering increase in global production, that extra 40 million barrels per day would be the equivalent of total world daily consumption in 1969. Absent major new discoveries, however, the global oil industry will likely prove incapable of providing all of this additional energy. Without massive new oil discoveries, prices will rise, supplies will dwindle, and the world economy will plunge into recession - or worse." title="So while the major stockholders of Exxon, Chevron and the other oil giants may be exulting at the moment, the rest of us should be deeply disturbed by their recent reports. Despite all the optimistic talk from Washington, we are facing a substantial and inescapable threat of global energy scarcity, which can only have dire consequences for our economy and the world's. Indeed, we are beginning to see hints of that today, with rising prices at the neighborhood gas pump and a perceptible decline in consumer spending. This coming scarcity cannot be wished away, nor can it be erased through drilling in the US's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, which contains far too little petroleum to make a significant difference even in US oil supplies. Only an ambitious program of energy conservation - entailing the imposition of much higher fuel-efficiency standards for US automobiles - and the massive funding of research and development in, and then the full-scale development of alternative, environmentally friendly fuels can offer hope of averting the disaster otherwise awaiting us.">Scraping the bottom of the barrel</a> and <a href="http://www.fpif.org/papers/03petropol/politics.html" title="In its pursuit of petroleum, the United States is intruding in the affairs of the oil-supplying nations. In the process, it exposes itself to increased risk of involvement in local and regional conflicts. This reality has already influenced U.S. relations with the major oil-producing nations and is sure to have an even greater impact in the future... Whether or not the administration consciously linked energy with its security policy, Bush undeniable prioritized the enhancement of U.S. power projection at the same time he endorsed increased dependence on oil from unstable areas. As a result, a two-pronged strategy governs U.S. policy toward much of the world. One arm of this strategy is to secure more oil from the rest of the world, and the other is to enhance the capability to intervene. While one of these objectives arises from energy preoccupations and the other from security concerns, the upshot is a single direction for U.S. dominance in the 21st Century. It is this combination of strategies, more than anything else, that will anchor the United States' international relations for years to come.">Bush-Cheney Energy Strategy: Procuring the Rest of the World's Oil</a>. Well, as to his position on current events, I don't think we need to draw a picture here. tag:metafilter.com,2005:site.41194 Wed, 13 Apr 2005 11:27:50 -0800 energy Iran Iraq iraqwar oil USA war y2karl http://www.metafilter.com/36738/The%2DSinking%2DPetroDollar%2Dabandon%2Dship <a href="http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=8613">Is Hugo Chavez Frias a marked man?</a> What about <a href="http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=23282">Gerhard Schroeder</a> or <a href="http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0802/applebaum052902.asp">Pooty-Poot</a>? We know that Saddam got Euros for oil. <a href="http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/iraqchron.html">October 31, 2000 The United Nations Sanctions Committee approves an Iraqi request to be paid in Euros, rather than United States dollars, for oil exported under the "oil for food" program, which is part of the sanctions regime stemming from Iraq's 1990 invasion of Kuwait. </a> <br><br> Iran has <a href="http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials_03/wallenwein040903.html">interest</a> in changing to either the new gold dinar or the nifty Euro. Implementation would be in 2005. If you belive <a href="http://www.rense.com/general59/theSunburniransawesome.htm">Rense.com</a> about The Sunburn (and keep in mind Iran hasn't had over a decade of sanctions to keep its military in check), the float of the PetroDollar may stop once the lighter than water part leaves the Dollar - and the invasion trick won't float (for long) this time. <br> Anyone scared yet? tag:metafilter.com,2004:site.36738 Thu, 04 Nov 2004 11:28:10 -0800 Dollars Euros Iraq iraqwar money oil rough ashlar http://www.metafilter.com/27868/Anybody%2Dsee%2Dthis%2Dcoming <a href="http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=332835&amp;sw=Haifa+Mosul">Anybody see this coming?</a> The United States has asked Israel to check the possibility of pumping oil from Iraq to the oil refineries in Haifa. The request came in a telegram last week from a senior Pentagon official to a top Foreign Ministry official in Jerusalem. tag:metafilter.com,2003:site.27868 Mon, 25 Aug 2003 12:04:29 -0800 Iraq iraqwar Israel oil USA war FormlessOne http://www.metafilter.com/23463/The%2DEuro%2DEffect%2DIraq%2DOil%2Dand%2Dthreat%2Dto%2Dthe%2Ddollar <a href="http://www.evworld.com/databases/storybuilder.cfm?storyid=490">Is the currency that oil is denominated in the real reason for the Iraq War?</a> "The Federal Reserve's greatest nightmare is that OPEC will switch its international transactions from a dollar standard to a euro standard. Iraq actually made this switch in Nov. 2000 (when the euro was worth around 80 cents), and has actually made off like a bandit considering the dollar's steady depreciation against the euro. (Note: the dollar declined 17% against the euro in 2002.)" tag:metafilter.com,2003:site.23463 Tue, 11 Feb 2003 01:12:51 -0800 bush dollar dubya economy euro exchangerate fed federalreserve georgebush gwb internationalrelations iraq iraqwar money oil opec thedailygrowl http://www.metafilter.com/23105/US%2Dbuys%2Dup%2DIraqi%2Doil%2Dto%2Dstave%2Doff%2Dcrisis <a href="http://www.observer.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,882512,00.html">US buys up Iraqi oil to stave off crisis</a> Buy now. Own later. Is this odd or what? tag:metafilter.com,2003:site.23105 Mon, 27 Jan 2003 07:43:06 -0800 Guardian Iraq IraqWar oil petroleum USimports war Postroad http://www.metafilter.com/21218/ <a href="http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/iraniraq.htm">Iran and Iraq: too much there for countries to ignore</a> If the peaceniks in the U.S. insist that going into Iraq is an attempt to get hold of the oil, then it might equally be said that those nations opposed to an American attack on Iraq also have self-interest in not wanting America to enter Iraq. tag:metafilter.com,2002:site.21218 Wed, 30 Oct 2002 09:11:28 -0800 brokenlink Iran Iraq iraqwar oil Postroad http://www.metafilter.com/20915/ <a href="http://www.sigmaxi.org/amsci/bookshelf/Leads02/hubbert.html">Hubbert's Peak: the impending oil shortage</a> Is this the REAL reason behind the push to invade Iraq? In 1956. M. King Hubbert, a respected petroleum geologist, predicted - to within a year! - the peak in US oil production: 1970. US oil production has declined every year since. Using the same statistical methods, others now predict a <a href="http://www.hubbertpeak.com/">world peak in oil production within a decade or even as early as 2006.</a> tag:metafilter.com,2002:site.20915 Fri, 18 Oct 2002 13:38:16 -0800 energy geophysics Hubbert HubbertsPeak Iraq iraqwar MKingHubbert oil statistics troutfishing http://www.metafilter.com/19731/ <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,786332,00.html">Mo Mowlam (former UK Government cabinet member) says the real goal of an Iraq war "is the seizure of Saudi oil".</a> The much-loved Northern Ireland peace process go-between writes that the threat of Saddam Hussein is already well-contained and that "Bush wants war to keep US control of the region". Hers is a view espoused fairly regularly of late. Would it really damage the American position to admit that this more about oil than about terrorism? tag:metafilter.com,2002:site.19731 Thu, 05 Sep 2002 07:46:21 -0800 iraq iraqwar momowlam oil war skylar http://www.metafilter.com/13643/ Finally, finally, finally!! Someone in the <a href="http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0201/08/ltm.05.html">mainstream media is finally asking some questions.</a> Lots of people (here and abroad) have known about this book for some time. I think it deserves some checking into. tag:metafilter.com,2002:site.13643 Tue, 08 Jan 2002 20:59:17 -0800 Afghanistan Iraq Iraqwar oil Taliban terrorism war WMDs WTC bas67