Iraq Victory Fails to Oil World Economy

[kskiska]

If President Bush's real reason for rolling his tanks into Iraq was to turn on the taps of the world's second-largest oil reserves to lower the cost of energy, he must be sadly disappointed. Following this weekend's attacks by saboteurs on Iraq's main oil pipeline to Turkey, oil prices in London are nearly back to where they were as military commanders prepared the first strikes in March.

The three months since full-blown hostilities ended have been a hard lesson for markets which had hoped to see oil exports from Iraq climb swiftly towards the 2m barrels a day the US promised to deliver by the end of the year. Southern refineries have been plagued by power cuts, the north-south "strategic pipeline" had already been sabotaged, and the weekend's attacks brought exports from the north of the country to a complete standstill.

After the fragility of America's energy supply was demonstrated last week by the worst blackouts for 30 years, and with US oil reserves running at historic lows, the attackers chose their timing well. Brent crude for October delivery was trading up 35 cents a barrel yesterday at $29.16, after hitting a high of $30.34 earlier this month.

more…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/oil/story/0,11319,1021441,00.html

[The_Casual_Observer]

1. Arbusto

Well, George has taken Arbusto international now.

Every day that this clown prince occupies the throne is one more day where things get worse. Even Rove can't help him anymore. Although it is already ugly for many good people out there, it is going to get worse. This makes 91-92 look like fun.

Even the freepers must be beginning to wonder what's going on.

[jarab]

2. Welcome to DU

------ jarab -----

[hadrons]

3. not bad news for Georgie's friends ...

the idea of grabbing Iraq's oil reserves was never to lower gas prices for the brainless freepers to fill their pick-ups, but to basically keep the Iraq's oil reserves in reserve ... Dumbya's Texas oil friends love high oil prices

[teryang]

4. What victory?

<Hawks in the Bush administration had hoped before the war that oil revenues of up to $15bn a year would offset the $4bn a month cost of keeping troops in Iraq. >

Whatever the revenues are there are two different sets of books. Those at Chevron and Halliburton don't pay a dime of the 4 billion a month. Whatever they get goes to their bottom line. The expenses go on the taxpayers' deficit tab.

Colonization never was profitable to Britain as a whole, only the aristocrats (Rhodesians) who skim the cream off the top. The government costs be damned, that is for the little people to pay. When the little people get tired of dying and paying the costs, then the colonial adventure ends and the Rhodesians retire to plot their next scam.