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 : Rat's Nest - Chronicles of Collapse -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ron who wrote (12345)	6/27/2011 10:31:08 AM
From: Wharf Rat	1 Recommendation Respond to of 24233

Why US engages in petrodollar warfare Sunday, 26th June, 2011 BOOK REVIEW: PETRODOLLAR WARFARE AUTHOR: William R. Clark AVAILABLE: Amazon.co.uk By Paul Busharizi TWO events this week could not have been better timed as I read the book “Petrodollar Warfare.” One, Barrack Obama’s announcement that he would be withdrawing the bulk of the US soldiers from Afghanistan by this time next year and secondly, the ongoing Greek debt crisis that is causing sleepless nights for Eurozone’s finance ministers and putting the single currency under a lot of stress. This book has as its central thesis that US is waging war and has done so across the world since the early 1970s, to protect oil sources. Oil is the fuel that drives American economy who with less than 5% of the world population consumes one in every four barrels of oil produced. It kind of makes sense that it cannot afford the world’s oil reserves – mostly in the Middle East, to fall into hostile hands. But the even more potentially dangerous relationship is the connection between oil and the viability of the US dollar. To step back into history; after the Second World War, world currencies were backed by gold, meaning every unit of currency was backed by a country’s gold reserves. However, as a fallout of the Vietnam war, the US went into so much debt that it could not honour because it did not have enough gold-backed dollars – in short, the US actually went bankrupt. To avert the catastrophe, then President Richard Nixon, pulled America off the gold standard, which allowed the printing of dollars to pay off his country’s obligations. However, there were problems with this arrangement not least of all that the dollar was effectively worthless than before it reneged on the gold-standard. But more importantly because it was the world’s reserve currency, everybody was saving their surpluses in dollars. To maintain the dollar’s pre-eminence, the Nixon administration impressed upon Saudi Arabia and therefore OPEC (Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries) to sell their oil only in dollars. This did two things; it meant that oil sales supported the dollar and also allowed the US access to exchange risk free oil. To buy oil, all America has to do is print more dollars. Free oil. With an oil-backed subsequent US administrations have thrown fiscal prudence to the wind and lived beyond their means, spending more than they collect in revenues and importing more than they export. The net result today is that from being the biggest creditor nation, the US is now the biggest debtor nation and their budget is hundreds of billions in the red. In classical economics, the strength of a currency is determined by the strength of a given economy. Does the country export goods and services more than it imports? Does the country produce more revenue than it consumes. Is its budget in the black or at least balanced? Given these parameters, were the dollar not backed by oil, it would today not be worth the paper it is printed on. America propagates war to protect its oil supplies, but even more importantly, to safeguard the strength of the dollar. The book wades through history in an attempt to prove this hypothesis and does quite a good job of it. It shows that Saddam Hussein’s most recent problems and his demise were fuelled by his desire to see Iraq’s oil paid for in euros not in dollars. Forget about weapons of mass destruction. Recent sabre rattling by the US about Iran under the guise of protesting their nuclear development programme, were actually because Tehran proposed a euro-denominated oil exchange and were willing to host it. The author also examines the neo-conservatism doctrine as practised by the Bush administration, which professed that there is no moral right except the right of the superior to rule over the inferior classes! While examining the concept of peak oil, Clarke raises the spectre of the real danger of a world without oil and dismisses some alternative energy proposals doing the rounds. It is a fascinating book whose only failing may be that its flow is broken by continuous references in the text to sources. The logic is compelling and gives a much needed alternative view to the world view propagated by western media and should be essential reading for all leaders of nations – actual or aspiring. newvision.co.ug

To: Ron who wrote (12345)	6/27/2011 10:39:59 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24233

The Energy Bulletin has a link to the three recent excellent articles by Ian Urbina, with the NYT, covering various aspects of the shale gas plays: energybulletin.net. He was on CNBC this morning, and I thought that he did a very good job. He said he was primarily trying to highlight a discussion, within the industry, that had been heretofore largely hidden (with the exception of course of ASPO-USA, the Energy Bulletin & The Oil Drum). He specifically highlighted the fact that many publicly held companies were drilling wells that did not make a lot of sense on a per well basis, but they added crucially important* proven and proven undeveloped reserves, especially in terms of barrels of oil equivalent--which is the same point that the "Rock" and Art Berman, et al have been making. westexas on June 27, 2011 - 9:19am