So our action in the Middle East is about oil, but now how you think....

[FormerDem06]

So Afghanistan has a lot of oil. The US invades, and the oil flow stops, prices go up. Now Iraq has a LOT of oil, the US invades; oil flow stops and prices go up. The US now invades Iran, oil flow stops, prices go up.

This is not about controlling the resources for US interests I don't believe, but about creating a false scarcity so we can be charged 3.00-5.00 a gallon for gas, and thus increase profits for the oil companies.

The only time I can EVER remember Iraq under Sadaam truly being in trouble in the World community was the time that he pumped more oil than the artifical OPEC monopoly wanted him to and boy did they get mad.

The more I read, the more I am starting to believe that oil is plentiful, we are not going to run out and that all of these stories are beneficial to only one group of people....oil companies and the countries who sale said oil.

It looks more and more like Diamonds every day (diamonds are at best semi-precious, but a false scarcity have made them EXTREMELY valuable).

[Rosa Luxemburg]

1. and petro Euros

the US also doesn't want the oil nations to deal in Euros. Complicated.

[rosesaylavee]

3. More at this link about petro dollars and

why we are fighting the "axis of evil". It is a bit long but worth the time imo. http://www.brasscheck.com/videos/oil/oil1.html

North Korea and Iraq and Venezuala just 'happened' to suggest that they would trade oil with Euros rather than the American dollar in 2000. Hmmmm. More than a coincidence? I think not.

[Bluestar]

2. Ding ding ding! We have a winner

I have thought also (for the past couple of months) that it was about controlling the flow of cheap oil rather than getting the oil. I read that Iraqi crude is the best on earth--the sweetest crude that requires little refining. If Saddam was getting ready to increase his market share, that would drive prices down.

It also sounds like a good motivation for putting Saddam in a box in 1991 doesn't it? Now that the greedy oil pigs have their price increase, they can seize the Iraqi oil fields and control how much gets to market. And the US military pays for their protection. We Americans are such suckers.

[Bushwick Bill]

4. You're wrong.

You are subscribing to the Greg Palast theory for the war, but this is a rare instance where he got it wrong. I know oil prices are down at this moment, but that is for any number of reasons, most of which do not have to do with the supply demand fundamentals. The planet has been struggling to get past 85 million barrels per day production for about a year now. New projects will not likely make up for massive decline rates in the world's fields. Here is some background.
http://jameshowardkunstler.typepad.com/clusterfuck_nation/2007/01/the_cheap_oil_m.html
http://www.peakoil.com/fortopic26281-0.html

[Igel]

5. Afghanistan has a lot of oil?

A quick search showed it managed 500 barrels a day for a while, but that's about it ... and that wasn't recent.

It has oil--est. at a 100 million barrels, not a great deal--but only the one field's supposedly ever been developed. It's better with natural gas, but that's also not well developed, was mostly for local consumption, and output peaked in the '70s.

Let me know if I'm wrong on that. I'd love to hear that Afghanistan has lots of oil.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

6. Look where the pipeline goes

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forum/forumnew41.php
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/1984459.stm
http://www.worldpress.org/specials/pp/pipeline_timeline.htm

[leesa]

7. No. We invaded Afghanistan in order to install a government so that we

could get right-of-way legally established for Chevron to build their gas pipeline to tap Caspian resources. The Taliban wouldn't play along, so they needed something more compliant installed.