Here’s the Department of Energy’s estimates of international oil and natural gas reserves. Roughly 65% of world oil reserves are in the Middle East, with Saudi Arabia and Iraq being #1 and #2.
I’d heard three theories about how this war was ‘about oil’:
The one Sofa King* and joemama* mention above, that with a hand on the Iraqi oil spigot, the US could control the price of oil to the benefit of its economy.
That Saudi Arabia could easily fall to an Islamic revolution, which would cut the supply of oil to us Western infidels, driving up the price. We would need Iraq in friendly hands before this event occured, to ensure that Iraq would boost its production to compensate for Saudi cuts. (This is a variation on #1, but a specific enough worry that it deserves its own bullet point.)
The Crony Capitalism Theory, also discussed above: that contracts involving Iraqi oil production would be steered to Bush and Cheney’s buddies in the oil bidness.
*[sub]A great juxtaposition of usernames, btw. Could put them together in a sentence, like: “Sofa Kingjoemama - how big a thrill do you get out of it?” [/sub]
Yes there is.
The thick smoke interferes with laser guidance.
Around Baghdad whole trenches are filled with oil for this exact purpose.
The argument was the same during the last Gulf-War.
It wasn’t done just out of spite.
It may not be about oil today, but after the shooting begins tomorrow we are going to
-spend $100 billion on Bush’s war
-militarily occupy Iraq for years looking under every rock for WMD
-quite possibly operate the world’s largest soup kitchen for millions of Iraqi refugees
From what I can gather reading this thread, it seems like the current Administration wants to take control of the world’s oil supply, and by extension the world’s economy.
Kinda reminds me how Bush/Cheney conspired with Enron to put a stranglehold on the electrical supply in California, raking in billions of dollars and busting out the company in the process.
The thumbnail summary behind the “it’s all about oil” argument:
Projections by energy companies is that US consumption of oil will increase in the next 30 years, to the point where 60%+ of our oil will have to be imported to meet those needs.
Fulfilling those needs would require buying oil from countries that may be hostile to the United States.
To avoid #3, the US should secure foreign oil sources.
Because Saudi Arabia (#1 foreign oil supply) is currently under US control, Iraq (#2 foreign oil supply) is the best candidate for a takeover.
All of these steps were written up by Dick Cheney back in 2001 (before 9/11, even). Do a search on “The Cheney Report” in Google for numerous references.
Furthermore, this policy is merely a continuation of “The Carter Doctrine” (keep America chummy with Saudi Arabia for cheap oil) and similar suggestions from neo-conservative think-tanks (such as the Project For the New American Century)
Slayer, the JDAM system will indeed perform better in adverse weather (and ‘artificial bad weather’ as an oil smoke screen) but it is mainly a weapon against fixed targets.
The abillity to knock out vehicles or ad hoc targets still needs laser guidance. I also doubt whether GPS is accurate enough to take out a bridge.
So, in all, a smoke screen will still hamper the targeting abillities of the attacker.
Okay, so I can see (and it’s not like it wasn’t obvious) what the U.S. has to gain from gaining control of Iraq’s oil fields, but the thing I’m having trouble understanding is how that would happen. I guess part of my confusion stems from how we’re defining “control” of oil production in Iraq, American control of which being the underpinnings for the theories presented by joemamma and Sofa King.
I can see how, as tomndebb said, that even fair prices would be a great savings to the U.S. (big enough to pay for this war?) but I gather that this isn’t the same thing as “control.”
So how are we defining control* and how do we think we’re going to get away with it (what with the U.N. pissed off at us and everything)?
*Similarly, how much of rjung’s comment about Saudi Arabia’s oil being under U.S. control is facetious and how much is serious?
**
While there are always lots of reasons for any action like this, this is certainly one of the key ones that relates to oil.
Nor is there anything particularly sinister about this. The U.S. doesn’t want “free” oil, it wants a steady supply of oil. Saudi Arabia is a potential powder keg. The House of Saud could go under quite quickly and the new regime would be very strongly anti-western. No one wants to see ObL’s idealogical soulmates in a position to bring the world economy to a grinding halt.
The U.S. and the West in general have a vital national interest in ensuring a steady supply of oil. If you think people are upset now, think what would happen if gasoline in the U.S. cost $6+ per gallon? Gas prices are, of course, only the tip of the iceberg because an oil shock would cause price rises across the board for virtually every category of goods and services and wreaking economic havoc. This could easily happen if Saudi Arabia did have a “regime change” and decided to shut off the taps. Putting the Iraqi oil supply in “safe” hands and bringing more Iraqi capacity on-line will greatly mitigate this risk.
As for why the U.S. doesn’t want the oil fields wrecked, there are two reasons. First, America wants the Iraqi capacity available in case there is a disruption in supply. Second, and more importantly, a booming Iraqi oil sector is the key to building a prosperous and relatively calm post-war Iraq. If it takes a year for Iraq to start pumping oil again, that’s a year that the U.S. will have to put up the money to re-build Iraq’s economy and infrastructure.
Burning oil fields can also be seen as a form of chemical warfare. I’m not sure what the current consensus is on “Gulf War Syndrome” is (if there is one), but breathing in fumes from openly burning crude oil certainly is/was a reasonable suspect. If breathing in smoke from a leaf (tobacco) can cause cancer, imagine what smoke from petroleum can do.
What is the ceiling on oil prices? That is, how high can gas prices go before the substitutes become cheaper? $6 seems high to me.
Well, you see, Bush’s vice president is Cheney. And Cheney used to work for Halliburton. And Halliburton was involved in the oil business. And oil is used for planes, trains and automobiles. Kevin Bacon was in “Planes, Trains and Automobiles”. Steve Rankin was in “Trapped” with Kevin Bacon. David Duchovny was in “The X-Files” with Steve Rankin. And he also in “Kalifornia”. So clearly Bush is responsible for the shennanigins in California.
