Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: stockman_scott who wrote (67892)	1/23/2003 12:33:30 AM
From: bela_ghoulashi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

...The implication that "it's all about oil" misses the point: the oil fields are immensely valuable for the Iraqi people themselves and what we're going to be trying to prevent is a repeat of 1991 when Kuwait's oil fields were torched. That would not be good for anyone, in Iraq or anywhere else. (In 1991, the smoke plume was actually a health hazard at times in some parts of southern Asia, for instance.) Powell announced that the use would hold and use the Iraqi oil fields "in trust" for the Iraqi people, and this is what I always expected. There have been rumors that the US would try to use oil sales to recoup some of the cost of the campaign, but I don't believe it. Nor will it be the case that we'll steal the oil, by selling it to ourselves at a depressed price. What I think will happen is that we'll operate the oil fields during the initial military occupation, and sell the oil on the world market at prevailing rate, and then administer that money to finance the reconstruction of Iraq. [Bland: This is the best thing that America could possibly do under the circumstances--make sure no party but the Iraqi people themselves benefit from the proceeds. And it is the best possible outcome for the Iraqis, save direct intervention from Allah. Naturally, though, there would be determined efforts to sabotage any and all of the good that might come from it, and in twenty years time, it may prove to have all been a wasted effort.] But, and this is the key point, we will make the decision about how much Iraqi oil to pump, because we need that ability for the next stage of the war. It is part of what is required before we can, finally, stop pretending that Saudi Arabia is a friend and actually begin to remove the true core of those who oppose us in this war. And when I say "we will make the decision" I don't mean the UN. The decision will be made by the US and UK and its true allies, also meaning not France and not Germany, who have now guaranteed that they won't be included in any important decision-making processes. And it will mainly be made on the basis of trying to make sure that the future stages of the war don't cause a wholesale collapse of the world's economy due to rapid fluctuations in the price of petroleum. Once it's clear that the US actually has control of Iraq's oil fields and is willing to pump oil to replace that which might be lost due to political turmoil in Iran or Saudi Arabia, oil prices on the spot markets will stabilize and one of the main secondary perils from this war (a world-wide depression) will be prevented. [Bland: Yes, this is in our strategic interest, but we would be far from being the only beneficiary.] One thing to watch for will be what the inspectors in Iraq do on the 28th and 29th. On the 27th Blix will make his report to the UNSC, and the result will be a US denunciation of Iraq, French and German defense of the inspections process, and no important action there. None of that will matter. We are not going to be stopped by UN action or lack thereof; the UN is no longer important. denbeste.nu