kahden suunnan sentteri
Jäsen
Julkisen puolen suvakilla? No, jätetään tämä omaan arvoonsa.
Kirjoitin edullisen, mutta ennen kaikkea vakaan öljyvirran, enkä väitä että USA takaa itselleen halvan öljyn, vaan yrittää taata. Omasta näkövinkkelistään katsottuna rationaalisista syistä.
Tässä jenkit Irakin sotaan vieneiden republikaanien kommentteja:
"People say we’re not fighting for oil. Of course we are. They talk about America’s national interest. What the hell do you think they’re talking about? We’re not there for figs." - Chuck Hagel, US Secretary of Defense
"Of course it’s about oil, it’s very much about oil, and we can’t really deny that." - Kenraali John Abizaid, entinen CENTCOMin päällikkö
"I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil" - Alan Greenspan
‘If Zarqawi and bin Laden gain control of Iraq, they would create a new training ground for future terrorist attacks. They’d seize oil fields to fund their ambitions.” - George W Bush
"My friends, I will have an energy policy that we will be talking about, which will eliminate our dependence on oil from the Middle East that will — that will then prevent us — that will prevent us from having ever to send our young men and women into conflict again in the Middle East" - Senaattori John McCain
"Better to start that drilling [for oil within the U.S.] today than wait and continue relying on foreign sources of energy. We are a nation at war and in many [ways] the reasons for war are fights over energy sources, which is nonsensical when you consider that domestically we have the supplies ready to go. - Sarah Palin
"In 2002, Chalabi [the Iraqi politician and oil minister who the Bush Administration favored to lead Iraq after the war] joined the annual summer retreat of the American Enterprise Institute near Vail, Colorado. He and Cheney spent long hours together, contemplating the possibilities of a Western-oriented Iraq: an additional source of oil, an alternative to U.S. dependency on an unstable-looking Saudi Arabia". - David Frum, GWB:n puheenkirjoittajana 2001-2002.
"The critical oil and natural gas producing region that we fought so many wars to try and protectour economy from the adverse impact of losing that supply or having it available only at very high prices." - John Bolton, Undersecretary of State, ja yksi terrorisminvastaisen sodan arkkitehdeistä
"Of course it’s about oil, it’s very much about oil, and we can’t really deny that." - Kenraali John Abizaid, entinen CENTCOMin päällikkö
"I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil" - Alan Greenspan
‘If Zarqawi and bin Laden gain control of Iraq, they would create a new training ground for future terrorist attacks. They’d seize oil fields to fund their ambitions.” - George W Bush
"My friends, I will have an energy policy that we will be talking about, which will eliminate our dependence on oil from the Middle East that will — that will then prevent us — that will prevent us from having ever to send our young men and women into conflict again in the Middle East" - Senaattori John McCain
"Better to start that drilling [for oil within the U.S.] today than wait and continue relying on foreign sources of energy. We are a nation at war and in many [ways] the reasons for war are fights over energy sources, which is nonsensical when you consider that domestically we have the supplies ready to go. - Sarah Palin
"In 2002, Chalabi [the Iraqi politician and oil minister who the Bush Administration favored to lead Iraq after the war] joined the annual summer retreat of the American Enterprise Institute near Vail, Colorado. He and Cheney spent long hours together, contemplating the possibilities of a Western-oriented Iraq: an additional source of oil, an alternative to U.S. dependency on an unstable-looking Saudi Arabia". - David Frum, GWB:n puheenkirjoittajana 2001-2002.
"The critical oil and natural gas producing region that we fought so many wars to try and protectour economy from the adverse impact of losing that supply or having it available only at very high prices." - John Bolton, Undersecretary of State, ja yksi terrorisminvastaisen sodan arkkitehdeistä
Guardian selittää mitä edellä puhuneet herrat ja rouvat lausunnoillaan tarkoittavat:
The real goal - as Greg Muttitt documented in his book Fuel on the Fire citing declassified Foreign Office files from 2003 onwards - was stabilising global energy supplies as a whole by ensuring the free flow of Iraqi oil to world markets - benefits to US and UK companies constituted an important but secondary goal:
"The most important strategic interest lay in expanding global energy supplies, through foreign investment, in some of the world's largest oil reserves – in particular Iraq. This meshed neatly with the secondary aim of securing contracts for their companies. Note that the strategy documents released here tend to refer to 'British and global energy supplies.' British energy security is to be obtained by there being ample global supplies – it is not about the specific flow."
To this end, as Whitehall documents obtained by the Independent show, the US and British sought to privatise Iraqi oil production with a view to allow foreign companies to takeover. Minutes of a meeting held on 12 May 2003 said:
"The future shape of the Iraqi industry will affect oil markets, and the functioning of Opec, in both of which we have a vital interest."
A "desirable" outcome for Iraqi's crippled oil industry, officials concluded, is:
"... an oil sector open and attractive to foreign investment, with appropriate arrangements for the exploitation of new fields."
The documents added that "foreign companies' involvement seems to be the only possible solution" to make Iraq a reliable oil exporter. This, however, would be "politically sensitive", and would "require careful handling to avoid the impression that we are trying to push the Iraqis down one particular path."
"The most important strategic interest lay in expanding global energy supplies, through foreign investment, in some of the world's largest oil reserves – in particular Iraq. This meshed neatly with the secondary aim of securing contracts for their companies. Note that the strategy documents released here tend to refer to 'British and global energy supplies.' British energy security is to be obtained by there being ample global supplies – it is not about the specific flow."
To this end, as Whitehall documents obtained by the Independent show, the US and British sought to privatise Iraqi oil production with a view to allow foreign companies to takeover. Minutes of a meeting held on 12 May 2003 said:
"The future shape of the Iraqi industry will affect oil markets, and the functioning of Opec, in both of which we have a vital interest."
A "desirable" outcome for Iraqi's crippled oil industry, officials concluded, is:
"... an oil sector open and attractive to foreign investment, with appropriate arrangements for the exploitation of new fields."
The documents added that "foreign companies' involvement seems to be the only possible solution" to make Iraq a reliable oil exporter. This, however, would be "politically sensitive", and would "require careful handling to avoid the impression that we are trying to push the Iraqis down one particular path."
Koska täydellisesti epäonnistunut sota lopulta vähensi Irakin öljyä maailmanmarkkinoilta, jopa miljoonia barreleita (per päivä), pitää väitteesi siitä, että Irakin sota olisi nostanut öljyn hintaa, varmasti osin paikkaansa. Miltä osin, en tiedä. Kenties haluat hieman valottaa mihin väitteesi sodan viisinkertaistavasta vaikutuksesta perustuu? Muistetaan ettei korrelaatio implikoi kausaliteettia. Yrjöpussin energianeuvonantaja, öljypomo Matthew Simmonsin mukaan yksittäiset tekijät kuten Irakin sota voivat vaikuttaa öljyn hintaan lyhyellä tähtäimellä, mutteivät määritä pitkän aikavälin trendiä. Nykyhetken vinkkelistä sodan alku ajoittui pitkän ja voimallisen hinnannousun alkuun, mutta sotaa edeltävien kolmen ja ensimmäisten kolmen kuukauden aikana öljyn maailmanmarkkinahinta vain laski.
Pointti ei nyt kuitenkaan ole siinä nostiko lopulta vai ei ja kuinka paljon, vaan siinä, että tärkein syy sotaan ryhtymiseen oli taata öljyn saatavuus Irakista ja koko lähi-idästä kokonaisuutena, yksityistää täysin Saddamin hallussa ollut öljyntuotanto sellaisille yhtiöille jotka eivät käytä öljyä valtapeliensä välineenä vaan vain myyvät sitä kiltisti jenkeille tienatakseen ja suistaa vallasta yksi vahva diktaattori. Koko sotilaallinen läsnäolo lähi-idässä perustuu valtaosin samalle tavoitteelle. Toissijaisesti toki myös jälkijättöisesti kansalliselle turvallisuudelle, kaikki arabit kun eivät tätä "läsnäoloa" (= neljä miljoonaa tapettua muslimia) niin kovin arvosta.
Tämän vuoksi meillä on täällä pohjolassakin pakolaiskriisi ja jonkin sortin ISIS-uhka.
Viimeksi muokattu: