Black Gold
May 25, 2005 10:35 AM   Subscribe

In the beginning of the war we started in Afghanistan, many people believed that we actually went to war so a consortium of large oil companies could build a pipeline that would get oil out of the land-locked Caspian Sea. That pipeline has just been turned on.
posted by Mr_Zero (26 comments total)

This post was deleted for the following reason: the newer post is better.

Mission accomplished. I'll now proceed with bying my second H2.
posted by NewBornHippy at 10:39 AM on May 25, 2005

And some local will promptly sabotage the damn thing by Friday.
posted by alumshubby at 10:42 AM on May 25, 2005

We went to war because Osama Bin Laden was in Afghanistan.
posted by 6550 at 10:42 AM on May 25, 2005

Uh. Dude. The Baku-Ceyhan pipeline doesn't go through Afghanistan. THAT pipeline was slated to go the other way to provide oil to India. It was canceled.
posted by tkchrist at 10:43 AM on May 25, 2005

posted by drakepool at 10:50 AM on May 25, 2005

So many things wrong with this post!

Perhaps you should look at a map of the pipeline, no Afghanistan. Or just read your own article: the pipeline goes "from Azerbaijan along a circuitous route through Georgia to the Mediterranean port of Ceyhan in Turkey," also note this missing Afghanistan. Also, this is a BP pipeline, not an American one. And, while Iraq is certainly open to debate, the Taliban were sheltering Bin Ladin after 9/11.

Yeah, backing up conspiracy theories with false facts!
posted by blahblahblah at 10:58 AM on May 25, 2005

This pipeline, does it make Bush's penis erect?
posted by fenriq at 11:08 AM on May 25, 2005

6550: The Taliban offered to *give* us binLaden; Great Leader turned them down.
posted by modernerd at 11:10 AM on May 25, 2005

drakepool: He who controls the spice controls the universe?
posted by papercake at 11:10 AM on May 25, 2005

And I much prefer the other conspiracy theory - that America went to war so that Bush could look like a "war president" and see his ratings rise, which did indeed happen.

If Osama was to ever actually be caught, of course, a lot of people would think the "war" was over, and Bush wouldn't like that. His ratings might fall....

The "all about oil" theory never made much sense when you examine the figures. The cost of the invasion (Iraq or Afghanistan) was massively more than the profits from any possible oil deal.

Nice try, though - keep digging!
posted by cleardawn at 11:11 AM on May 25, 2005


Piter did not tell you?
posted by drakepool at 11:19 AM on May 25, 2005

In the beginning of the war we started in Afghanistan

We have always been at war with Iraq. Afghanistan is our democratic ally. We have never been at war with Afghanistan. Iraq is our enemy.
posted by spacewrench at 11:20 AM on May 25, 2005

Iraq is our enemy.
No... Terror is our enemy. Terror. Haven't you been paying attention?
posted by Hugh2d2 at 11:25 AM on May 25, 2005

The "all about oil" theory never made much sense when you examine the figures. The cost of the invasion (Iraq or Afghanistan) was massively more than the profits from any possible oil deal

I agree with you in general (that oil is not the only cause of war, just the main cause), but your point is not accurate because you're comparing government spending (our tax dollars) with private profits. If I have to spend 100 billion government dollars to make even 100 million dollars, it's worth it because I've put up none of my own money, and there isn't even any debt.

But, if we did look at it from the government perspective, you're still wrong. The cost of invasion, if in the end it yields more oil on the international market, is miniscule in comparision to the overall increase in tax revenue due to an economy running on cheaper fuel. It means more trade, more business, and more revenues for public and private companies, and for the Government and its Armies. Furthermore, being able to control the oil producing regions and have some measure of control over prices grants the ability to influence the Chinese economy and ensure economic dominance, which is also exponetially more valuable then the invasion costs.
posted by chaz at 11:27 AM on May 25, 2005

The Ballad of George Bush
by Mystyk

Come and listen to a story about a man named George
A wealthy, false prophet who was always craving more
Then one day he was treatin A-rabs rude,
And straight from Iraq he sighted bubblin crude.

Oil, that is. Black gold, Texas tea.

Well the first thing you know ol W starts a war
Smart men said "George, you're goin way too far"
Said "We really ought to strive for some peace"
But he replied, "You're not a patriot like me"

Fascist, that is. Gitmo camps, terror alerts.

Well now its time to say good by to America et al
It had a great run and also had a great fall
You're all invited to read more if you're a fan
Just google the phrase "American Taliban"

Expatriate, that is. Canada, British Isles.

"Y'all come back now, y'hear?"

My apologies to Paul Henning, but I just couldn't resist.
posted by mystyk at 12:19 PM on May 25, 2005

Uh. tchrist. The pipeline south through Afghanistan can still be built, once the CIA uses all that Afghan poppy money to get the Afghan militias to wipe each other out. As for the current pipeline, the War On Terror/Osama/Afghanistan helped the US to "increase its influence" in "the turbulent Caucasus", bribing/intimidating the local regimes let us "protect" them (and ourselves) from "Al Qaeda". US bases with lots of US weapons and the troops to use them, US loans and grants to prop up our new satrapies, US businesses investing in their economies... And now we get not only more weak countries to lord it over, but also another source of oil that does not depend on Iraq and other Arabs, so y'all might soon be paying less to propel your Humvees across the street to the mall!

We should all be grateful for 9/11. If Al Qaeda didn't exist we'd've had to invent it.
posted by davy at 12:36 PM on May 25, 2005

mystyk, that's excellent!

The "all about oil" theory never made much sense when you examine the figures.

I think you're presuming that Bush makes sense.

davy, you be grateful for the murder of 3000+ plus Americans. I, however, will continue to be outraged by it. And more outraged by Bush's reaction then and since to it.
posted by fenriq at 12:49 PM on May 25, 2005

modernerd, I admit I oversimplified the Afghanistan situation in my response to a poor post.
posted by 6550 at 12:52 PM on May 25, 2005

Oh for fuck's sake. As already noted the pipeline does not go through Afghanistan. Also, the US didn't start the war in Afghanistan either. The place has been a continuous war zone almost since the 1900's what with 11 government overthrows, and certainly since the Soviets invaded in the 1979 after their puppets, the People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan. One could even argue that the war started in the 1890's with attempts by the British and then the Russians to control the 'roof of the world'. This created the mujahideen which was created and molded in Pakistan, funded by the USA and supplied extensively by China. After the mujahideen drove the Soviets out it fell to fighting within itself, producing the off-shoot of the Taliban and the Northern Alliance. What the USA did was to heavily back the Northern Alliance faction in the form of supplies, elite troops and then eventually full ground military resources. As for the claim the Taliban offered to hand over Bin Laden? Complete bullshit. The Taliban were never serious about this considering Bin Ladin funded fully 11% of their operations at the time and they could not afford to lose that, nor the credit they had in the eyes of the hardcore muslim world which gave them other funding. It certainly wasn't for oil either, as the amount of crude Afghanistan produces is so close to nothing it might as well be.
posted by Vaska at 12:57 PM on May 25, 2005

Coming next, the truth about the "Vietnam offshore oil" hoax...

Why is it that everytime we get into a foreign policy screwup, some nitwits explain everything in terms of some oil conspiracy theory? Mind you, oil is an important component of our foreign policy, but it's not a blanket explanation for everything. Life is complex.
posted by warbaby at 1:23 PM on May 25, 2005

A few interesting facts...detailed here

..did you know the pipeline was mainly financed with taxpayers money ? 70% of the financing was supported by lending of public money (at which interest rate ? I suppose low..but taxpayer don't know, they'll not complain about risks either)

..did you know that if you pay tax on the oil passing by that pipeline you're being double-taxed ?

..did you know that on top of double taxation you'll also have to pay the companies their profit margin ?

Did you know you don't really know much ? Assume position, thank you.
posted by elpapacito at 1:33 PM on May 25, 2005

warbaby writes "Why is it that everytime we get into a foreign policy screwup, some nitwits explain everything in terms of some oil conspiracy theory?"

'cause this Administration is top-heavy with oilmen (and at least one oilwoman).
posted by clevershark at 1:44 PM on May 25, 2005

Is this thread still here?

People need to learn that making false claims does not, in fact, strengthen your arguments -- it weakens them. There's plenty to criticize about this administration without resorting to shadow boxing. Ugh.
posted by pardonyou? at 1:48 PM on May 25, 2005

Davy... the POST said "that" pipeline. inferring incorrectly that this, the OIL Baku-Ceyhan pipeline, was the Unocal NATURAL GAS pipeline. The Unocal pipeline, first considered in the early 1990's, to go to India - the natural gas flowing in it was not destined for US consumers but rather to India and China. Unless there has been a radical shift in consumer behavior and SUV technology and suddenly we run all our SUVs on natural gas refined and shipped from India.

A better question would be: Would US oil interests PROFIT from either arrangement. And yes. They would. But they ain't doing it with the US consumer in mind. Not directly.

It is the Indian and Chinese markets that have the REAL growth.

BTW. The US bases you speak of in Afghanistan are several hundred miles from this pipeline across some of the most seriously hostile terrain on earth. We do have some bases in central asia that serve the purpose you alluded to. We have since Clinton. None of this is new.

Please. People. Get your facts straight first. Let's all operate on facts.

But to the point that the war on "terror" is all about oil. So what. Sure. A great deal of it. We don't want a hostile (to US interests) "terror" state to have all that oil.

The war on terror. It is about global hegemony and geopolitical strategy AND security. And Oil - like it or not - is big part of that. Thank god for that. At least there might be SOMETHING practical and tangible out of all this bullshit. Maybe. Come on though. Every nation secures it's interests.

I disagree with Bush's means. Vociferously. But it's fairly childish to cling to the simplifications of "it's all about oil, man". And leave it there, spining off every diabolical fantasy you can to that end. That shit won't help. The world is a complicated dangerous place and we are competing like animals do for resources. The animals with the most resources flourish and set the rules.

IOW. You'd all rather have Fascists (who disdain the rights of women and murder homosexuals as a matter of law) - Islamic or otherwise - control the most valuable substance on earth? Or China? I don't. I mean I don't trust Bush - but I trust him a shit load more than I do the Saudi's, Musharif, Bin Laden, the Iranian Mullahs or the premier of China. You want their rules?

So understand this - these machinations over resources have been going on FOREVER. The French do it. The Dutch do it. We do it. And until there is a source of cheap unlimited energy that doesn't reside under some poor disenfranchised tribesmen's thirteenth century sandals we are stuck playing geopolitical chess. And sometimes dirty pool.

And not only do I not own a humvee I don't own an SUV and live about as low impact and sustainable as an American can.
posted by tkchrist at 2:00 PM on May 25, 2005

Drakepool said it all.
posted by Citizen Premier at 3:23 PM on May 25, 2005

« Older Amnesty report 2005   |   Forum flame fest turns deadly. Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments