02-20-2003, 10:55 PM
(This post was last modified: 02-20-2003, 11:17 PM by Occhidiangela.)
I heard yet again on the radio this morning a fellow protesting the impending war, and he once again uttered the idea that this was about the US going to Iraq and getting our hands on Iraqi oil.
For the last 12 years, Iraqi oil production making it to the world market has slowed to a trickle, where there was once a nice, healthy stream. UN sanctions, enforced by US and Brit ships, in the main, with an assist from loyal allies like the Spanish (Why their pulling over of the ship with missile parts near Yemen was handled the way it did still confuses me.) is what keeps this flow reduced. For what it is worth, Turkey loses over a billion a year in oil and fees not pumped through the pipeline from Northern Iraq into Turkey and its ports of debarkation.
The world market, as it now stands, has plenty of oil. Here in America there are no gas lines, as there were in 1973. Any oil producer anywhere has, in the short term, reaped the "hostility premium" of (depending on who you read) of some 5-15 dollars per barrel as the future of Iraq et al remains a bit uncertain. The price of gas here in Corpus Christi just hit 1.59 per gallon, up from last spring where it was about 1.07, and last month in the 1.29 region.
In other words, if Iraq never pumped another barrel of crude from the earth, there is no world wide oil shortage. The price per gallon may go up a bit, which is how markets work, and as always, the folks on the edges of liquidity are the one's who get hit the hardest.
When Iraq re enters the international oil market, sanctions lifted at last, the price of gas will go down for everyone, a bit, as Iraq will be trying to make money to repair its economy and standard of living. But the need for 'their' oil is chimerical.
I don't understand what basis these folks have in using that soundbyte as their point in the debate, since it is so blatantly and transparently dead, from a simple economic stand point. The international oil market will adjust, and it has the capacity to adjust. If Americans bitch about the price of oil, I will remind my countrymen about . . . 1973, and the gas lines.
Full disclosure: I drive a Saturn for many reasons, and fuel economy is one of them. :) I'd rather have more beer money each month than to pay more to Shell or Exxon just to get to and from work. The filling station gets my money either way, but at least this way I get to drink some of the product, rather than my car being the only one who gets a drink. :o
Iraqi oil is not what US is after. Were that the case, we would not have embargoed Iraq for 12 years, we would have stayed around and taken over Saddam's oil fields in 1991. It wasn't the issue then, and it aint the issue now.
And regarding the Persian Gulf, I still want to know when the Green Party folks in Europe will post their formal suit against Saddam Hussein for the environmental damage he did when he ordered the opening of the pipelines that pumped untold rivers of oil into the Persian Gulf, and had the Kuwaiti fields set on fire as his troops left Kuwait.
The myth that America would go to war to save a few cents a gallon at the pump is complete falsehood, and the clearest point is that the blockade we now enforce keeps the price of gas up since Iraqi oil is witheld from the global market.
Why don't these folks argue 'points against' that have a bit more value to them? Are they afraid to think? There are opposing arguments with greater merit, even if I personally disagree with some of them.
*edited since I forgot that "Preview is your friend."*
For the last 12 years, Iraqi oil production making it to the world market has slowed to a trickle, where there was once a nice, healthy stream. UN sanctions, enforced by US and Brit ships, in the main, with an assist from loyal allies like the Spanish (Why their pulling over of the ship with missile parts near Yemen was handled the way it did still confuses me.) is what keeps this flow reduced. For what it is worth, Turkey loses over a billion a year in oil and fees not pumped through the pipeline from Northern Iraq into Turkey and its ports of debarkation.
The world market, as it now stands, has plenty of oil. Here in America there are no gas lines, as there were in 1973. Any oil producer anywhere has, in the short term, reaped the "hostility premium" of (depending on who you read) of some 5-15 dollars per barrel as the future of Iraq et al remains a bit uncertain. The price of gas here in Corpus Christi just hit 1.59 per gallon, up from last spring where it was about 1.07, and last month in the 1.29 region.
In other words, if Iraq never pumped another barrel of crude from the earth, there is no world wide oil shortage. The price per gallon may go up a bit, which is how markets work, and as always, the folks on the edges of liquidity are the one's who get hit the hardest.
When Iraq re enters the international oil market, sanctions lifted at last, the price of gas will go down for everyone, a bit, as Iraq will be trying to make money to repair its economy and standard of living. But the need for 'their' oil is chimerical.
I don't understand what basis these folks have in using that soundbyte as their point in the debate, since it is so blatantly and transparently dead, from a simple economic stand point. The international oil market will adjust, and it has the capacity to adjust. If Americans bitch about the price of oil, I will remind my countrymen about . . . 1973, and the gas lines.
Full disclosure: I drive a Saturn for many reasons, and fuel economy is one of them. :) I'd rather have more beer money each month than to pay more to Shell or Exxon just to get to and from work. The filling station gets my money either way, but at least this way I get to drink some of the product, rather than my car being the only one who gets a drink. :o
Iraqi oil is not what US is after. Were that the case, we would not have embargoed Iraq for 12 years, we would have stayed around and taken over Saddam's oil fields in 1991. It wasn't the issue then, and it aint the issue now.
And regarding the Persian Gulf, I still want to know when the Green Party folks in Europe will post their formal suit against Saddam Hussein for the environmental damage he did when he ordered the opening of the pipelines that pumped untold rivers of oil into the Persian Gulf, and had the Kuwaiti fields set on fire as his troops left Kuwait.
The myth that America would go to war to save a few cents a gallon at the pump is complete falsehood, and the clearest point is that the blockade we now enforce keeps the price of gas up since Iraqi oil is witheld from the global market.
Why don't these folks argue 'points against' that have a bit more value to them? Are they afraid to think? There are opposing arguments with greater merit, even if I personally disagree with some of them.
*edited since I forgot that "Preview is your friend."*
Cry 'Havoc' and let slip the Men 'O War!
In War, the outcome is never final. --Carl von Clausewitz--
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
John 11:35 - consider why.
In Memory of Pete
In War, the outcome is never final. --Carl von Clausewitz--
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
John 11:35 - consider why.
In Memory of Pete