I may shock you and many here.
If the US is going to pursue a path toward Imperial Empire, then why do we care what they think?
We have already spent over 250 billion on Iraq - 2,000 dead nearly - 10,000 wounded, many for life.
What would happen if we openly announced that we will be extracting an amount of oil, as part of a massive infrastructure upgrade, to compensate us for our expenses, future costs to take real care of our wounded for life - and money to pay the families for those that died there?
Since it's projected that we will be there at least 7 more years, and we will likely spend a minimum of $ 500 billion on this, and taking care of casualties, what would be wrong with announcing that we will be extracting 500 billion in oil over the next 10-20 years?
This would bring down the cost of oil here - which would immediately lower the price of gasoline at the pump - probably back under 2.00.
We could start massive investments here: new oil tankers, new oil workers, new massive SPR storage facilities, many times the size of the current SPR - probably dozens of times larger.
The US could then control the price of world oil - selling into the market on large spikes to control the price. This would give us 20 years to develop alternative energy (some of the money - billion - could go for tax incentives for that also)
Iraqis would cry. The world would cry. But who could stop us?
Is it moral?
Well - is it more moral to invade a country and kill 20,000 civilians - than to extract payment in kind for our true costs?
Maybe that's the plan anyway.
Maybe our leaders see a hyperpower in America at it's military peak vs. the world - but also a nearly bankrupt America facing a currency crisis in the next few years.
What to do? Control the price of world oil. The dollar will surge, the bubble can expand! The Empire lives on.
t
>>
But Iraqi oil workers are furious about the conference. "The second phase of the war will be started by this conference carving up the industry," said an outraged Hasan Juma'a, head of the Iraqi General Union of Oil Employees. "It is about giving shares of Iraq to the countries who invaded it - they get a piece of the action as a reward. The British government will back this action in order to pay its debt in Iraq."
Hasan, who represents 23,000 skilled oil workers, fears that deals struck at the conference will see profits from Iraq's massive oil reserves - the second richest in the world - lining the pockets of multinational corporations at the expense of the Iraqi people.
Previous form suggests his concerns are well founded. Under the initial wage table drawn up by Paul Bremer's provisional Baghdad government in September 2003, oil workers were to receive a minimum monthly pay packet of £25. After a threatened union strike, it was raised to £38. And, Hasan insists, "Iraqi oil workers are good enough to rebuild without any need of help. "
Greg Muttitt, a researcher with Platform, an independent environmental think thank, agrees. "The decisions on how to carve up Iraq are being made behind closed doors in Washington, London and Baghdad.
"This conference is a key part of the plan to help multinational companies get stuck in once those arrangements are in place. It's a corporate feeding frenzy - they're not writing the recipes, they're tucking in their napkins."
Yahia Said, an Iraqi research fellow in global governance at the London School of Economics, commented:
"Iraq's oil is very cheap to extract. In the lack of transparency and with Iraq under occupation, people suspect oil companies are up to foul play. But those companies wouldn't yet dare sign a contract under the present government because it lacks legitimacy. But the oil companies are eyeing each other - this conference is like a dating game." |
