I think this is the beginnings of an economy based on perpetual growth and fossil fuel energy running headlong into geological energy constraints. Basically I see an undulatory downward path for the rest of my life. From here out, I think any rallies in our economic condition are going to be met with spiking commodity prices that knock us right back down.
Posted: Sun Apr 23, 2006 10:50 am Post subject: Why did Bush attack Iraq
What about the idea that Bush invaded Iraq for peak oil. I would love to have a rational discussion based on the merits or non merits of this theory: All wars have a resource component to them, and if the world is near peak oil Iraq has one of the last of the large remaining oil reserves in the world. So Bush went into Iraq to remove a tyrant who sat upon this giant oil supply. By removing Saddham and putting in a friendly government, oil supplies could be secured for the time being until the world transitions to an energy regime of alternatives. Could Bush have said this to the world before he invaded? No because this could stir the oil traders to bid the price of oil so high so fast that a global economic collapse could occur. So Bush gave reasons which he also probably believed like wmds etc. Necessary illusions to save the world from a collapse. What is the plausibility of this being the reasons for the invasion?. Was it a decision he had to make?
scittyman
Posted: Sun Apr 23, 2006 12:35 pm Post subject: Re: Why did Bush attack Iraq
June 2003
Paul Wolfowitz:
"Let's look at it simply. The most important difference between North Korea and Iraq is that economically, we just had no choice in Iraq. The country swims on a sea of oil."
Posted: Sun Apr 23, 2006 4:42 pm Post subject: Re: Why did Bush attack Iraq
"Let's look at it simply. The most important difference between North Korea and Iraq is that economically, we just had no choice in Iraq. The country swims on a sea of oil."
Posted: Sun Apr 23, 2006 11:20 pm Post subject: Re: Why did Bush attack Iraq
Well, I think it should be obvious to those who choose to inform themselves about geopolitics that Bush did not invade Iraq because of a WMD threat and oil was by far the biggest factor.
My own theory gleened from various sources is that Iran and Iraq have been in the crosshairs since the early 70's since the CIA was well aware of the ramifications of peak oil way back then. 9/11 was a false flag operation used to start a never ending war in the ME calculated to coincide with the global peak.
I am not sure of the "merits" but the general principle was not to merely have access but to control ME oil. One problem with the plan is controlling the Straits of Hormuz. IMO it was an unnecessary move by the US since the world seemed willing to keep selling oil to the biggest consumer on the planet for at least a little while longer, but the admin is a stacked deck right now, things just don't get any better.
From what I can tell, we are witnessing the start of the global resource war to end all wars. The US IMO is on the verge of martial law and a fast slide down to a bitter new reality for most, all it will take is one more unsettling event such as another 9/11. It will be a miracle to avoid WW3 over the course of the next 20 years, and the ME is ground zero.
When you consider the fact that most of the troops and therefore most Americans believe they invaded Iraq because of 9/11, we can see the admin is not really made up of a bunch of idiots, but rather a finely honed propaganda machine with an agenda focused on oil control using military might. Exactly what Dwight D. Eisenhower warned us could happen is happening. Conservation is not an option when the American military industrial complex is running the show.
Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 9:33 am Post subject: Re: Why did Bush attack Iraq
scittyman wrote:
What about the idea that Bush invaded Iraq for peak oil...
I'd say, start connecting the dots. Go back to the invasion. It is well documented that the intention was to throw the country into chaos. And for what possible reason? It keeps them out of the oil production game. It is three years later and they produce 25% less oil now.
Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 9:38 am Post subject: Re: Why did Bush attack Iraq
killJOY wrote:
"God told me to strike at al-Qaida and I struck them, and then He instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me, I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them."
Bush has denied saying that. Bush is, of course, a knee-jerk liar, but I think I believe him this time. For one thing, the sentence structure and word choice are above his usual grade level.
bartholland wrote:
"Let's look at it simply. The most important difference between North Korea and Iraq is that economically, we just had no choice in Iraq. The country swims on a sea of oil."
You're taking that out of context. Wolfowitz's point was that sanctions were effective against resource-poor N.K., but would not be against Iraq due to all the oil they had to sell; therefore invasion was the only choice (still a weak argument). With all the good reasons to think they invaded over oil, there's no reason trot out a bad one.
Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 5:46 pm Post subject: Re: Why did Bush attack Iraq
Wolfowitz's point was that sanctions were effective against resource-poor N.K., but would not be against Iraq due to all the oil they had to sell; therefore invasion was the only choice (still a weak argument).
I want to know why the invasion of Iraq was wrong from the standpoint of peak oil. If Iraq has oil and the world needs it to keep the global economy running why was it a bad move for Bush to invade. (Not including the poor planning and strategic errors the administration has made.Or the bad ethics of killing for oil). What else could have been done with Saddham then overthrow him?
Scittyman
Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 5:51 pm Post subject: Re: Why did Bush attack Iraq
Quote:
Bush has denied saying that. Bush is, of course, a knee-jerk liar, but I think I believe him this time. For one thing, the sentence structure and word choice are above his usual grade level.
It's one of those interesting stories.
The sentence structure, as you note, is not like Bush. He reputedly said this during a meeting and it went through multiple translations.
I can't see why the holder of the minutes of the meeting would lie about Bush's statement.
Quote:
Did Bush Say God Told Him To Go To War?
by Ira Chernus
June 30, 2003
Did God tell George W. Bush to strike at Al-Qaeda and Iraq? God only knows. Did Bush SAY that God told him to strike? We don't know yet, for sure.
Here is what we know for sure, so far. Journalist Arnon Regular wrote, in the June 26 edition of Ha'aretz (Israel's most reputable newspaper), that he has minutes of a meeting among top-level Palestinian leaders, including Prime Minister Mahmoud Abas. The minutes are apparently quite detailed, because Regular wrote a long article recounting very specific conversations. The last paragraph of the article reads:
"According to Abbas, Bush said: 'God told me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them.'"
Before you jump to any conclusions, remember that you are reading a translation of a translation of a translation. Mahmoud Abas does not speak English. Bush does not speak Arabic. If Bush said these words, or something like them, Abas heard them from a translator. Then Abas repeated them, as he remembered them a couple of weeks later, in Arabic. Some unknown person wrote down what he thought he heard Abas say. Then Regular, or someone at Ha'aretz, translated them back into English-or perhaps first into Hebrew and then into English.
Clearly, we don't yet know what Bush said, or why.
_________________ "By the time individuals discover that remaining resources will not be adequate for the next generation, the next generation has already been born. " David Price
Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 7:21 pm Post subject: Re: Why did Bush attack Iraq
Well duh!!! If you believe that he would've invaded Iraq even if it didn't have oil, your a first class fool. Just look at North Korea. If it had oil, I'm sure there'd be american troops there right now. The big question is this, even if GWB's intentions weren't to secure ALL the oil for America, what will the post-peak administration do? This is what scares me. Also, our military may use Iraq as a huge SPR, building it's own refineries and perhaps eliminating the locals near the oilfields. The main point is, regardless of what anyone says or does, Iraq is NOT vietnam, Iraq is not a Police Action (war), it is a resource occupation. We are protecting OUR oil so we can go on eating mcdonalds hamburgers and driving hummers for a few more precious years.
Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 8:35 pm Post subject: Re: Why did Bush attack Iraq
One must not forget that the U.S. military is now a major player in the area.It does have to ask permisson to move its toops about as they are now based in one of the producing countries.They also stabalize two of the major producers of oil S.A. and Kuwait.Remeber our way of life is not negotiable......These troop deployments have way of lasting decades,just look at europe and japan.
Joined: Mar 28, 2005 Posts: 399 Location: Northern California, USA
Posted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 2:18 am Post subject: Re: Why did Bush attack Iraq
Kickinthegob wrote:
From what I can tell, we are witnessing the start of the global resource war to end all wars. The US IMO is on the verge of martial law and a fast slide down to a bitter new reality for most, all it will take is one more unsettling event such as another 9/11. It will be a miracle to avoid WW3 over the course of the next 20 years, and the ME is ground zero.
When you consider the fact that most of the troops and therefore most Americans believe they invaded Iraq because of 9/11, we can see the admin is not really made up of a bunch of idiots, but rather a finely honed propaganda machine with an agenda focused on oil control using military might. Exactly what Dwight D. Eisenhower warned us could happen is happening. Conservation is not an option when the American military industrial complex is running the show.
All the nations of the world are in a lifeboat. The boat has a slow leak in it.
America (400 pounds, eating lots of fish): Hey China, stop eating so much fish, you're farts (carbon emissions) are stinking up the place and besides you're starting to sink the boat (high oil prices)!
China (Getting Fatter): You've been eating the fish(Modern Capitalism) for so long. I was a vegetarian (Communism) for so long and only ate seaweed. It's my chance to eat lots of fish and get fat like you. You must slim down.
India: America and I are going to cooperate in catching fish though I'll do most of the work.
Europe: Everybody should go on a diet and take more time off work.
Middle East: Since I bail the most water out of the lifeboat (not because I'm more virtuous, I just happen to be naturally endowed and I like it) everybody should become a muslim.
Africa (Cowering in the corner of the boat with his feet underwater): I'm too busy beating myself up to care about all this.
Environmentalists: Everybody should get out of the boat so it will float longer. You won't be able to catch hardly any fish but at least you'll be able to wait longer for rescue by space aliens and subsist on whatever seaweed that you can grab with the hand you're not using to tread water.
....A little while later as the boat starts sinking...
America: Ok everybody out of the lifeboat!
China: No you out of the lifeboat!
Everybody to Africa: You're getting out first!
Middle East: Since I controll who's end of the boat gets bailed everybody has to be a muslim now.
America to Middle East: Here let me put you in a headlock till you do my bidding.
China to Middle East: No! I was going to put them in a headlock.
Russia to China and Middl East: How about we sell you guys some brass knuckles to brawl it all out with the American.
Europe: Glad I'm in good shape. I can tread water better than any of these other guys with the boat half underwater and I've got my nuclear powered life vest.
Africa (Hanging on with a pinky to the outside of the boat): Well at least I never let go of the plank of wood (low-energy subsistance agriculture) that I was using to float around before. I'll take a few gulps of seawater when a big wave comes along though and I'll probably starve to death as holding onto a plank of wood in the middle of the ocean is not great for catching fish or seaweed.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
