Iraq oil - the target for years

[acmavm]

By Ahmad Quni

Sunday 10 August 2003, 12:40 Makka Time, 9:40 GMT

<snip>
Iraq ranks only second to Saudi Arabia for its oil resources, and was the world’s second largest oil exporter before the Iraq-Iran war broke out in 1980.

The US has always been a key importer of Iraqi oil. Even under the UN sanctions, US companies imported some 750,000 barrels per day (bpd) from Iraq until the end of 2002.

Based on current estimates, Iraq’s oil reserves stand at about 115 billion barrels, equivalent to the total oil reserves of the US, Canada, Mexico, Western Europe, Australia, New Zealand, China and the whole of Asia.

<snip>

In 1927, major oil explorations were undertaken and huge oil deposits were discovered in the Mosul province, which fuelled the rivalry among competing colonialist oil companies even further.

However, a settlement was arranged and Iraqi oil was divided up into five portions, 23.75% for each of several companies from Britain, France, Holland and the United States.

The Iraqi people were left with virtually nothing of their oil wealth, and this unfair situation continued until 1958 when the Hashemite monarchy was toppled in a military coup.

The Iraqi petroleum company, shared by British Petroleum, Shell, Mobil and Standard Oil of New Jersey (Exxon) was established. Within a few years, this company had a total monopoly of Iraqi oil production.

Yet, the US oil companies and their government in Washington, were not satisfied since their target was to achieve complete control of the Middle East oil by displacing the British.

-MORE-

MODS: I know that there are more than three or four paragraphs here, but there was no other way to get across how in-depth this article is and how long this big rip off has been going on.

[Maple]

1. There is also

no link. And this sounds interesting.

[acmavm]

2. Nuts.

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/E07D937C-456F-48C9-90FF-A2C87F2DB724.htm

Geez, can't do anything right tonight.

[Maple]

3. Ta luv!

:D

[Cha]

4. So ..we were right to wear our

"No Blood For Oil" Pins of which we were scorned?

[cliss]

5. yes, a link would be great.

A few months before the war in Iraq, British protesters were really loud and obnoxious, waving their signs which said "No blood for Oil". A few days later, as if he had been watching the news, Powell asserted that "this is not a war about oil".

He was correct. It was not a war about oil, but about oil and control of the entire Middle East. Iraq, being the weakest link, was the most vulnerable. It was deemed the easiest to conquer, and also the most lucrative.

The Iraqis know they are sitting on a fantastic treasure, the highly coveted black gold. Unfortunately, that's the problem. They're sitting on top of it. And causing the occupiers lots of trouble.

After reading the PNAC plans, it becomes very clear that these people have finally gotten the opportunity to do what they have been planning on for years. This did not happen in conjunction with 9/11.

The Project for a New American Century was rebuffed time and time again in the past. It was only with the new pResident that they got their chance. The red carpet was rolled out. And we all get to see their amazing planning and careful consideration of peoples' lives in the process.

[donhakman]

6. 2 solutions remain

Iraq is not America's to sell

Iraq IS for the Neocon Corporate State to sell in the name of America.

A contingency as annoying as an election will not be allowed to stand in their way, it has already been fixed.

What many in the US do not know is that various Iraq oil piplines are blown up weekly. US forces are impotent against 99% of Arab resistence guerilla warfare tactics.

TWO solutions remain

1 Defeat for the US in Iraq. Saving face is not possible in this scenario.


2 Ultra Draconian measures exacted against every Muslim state. This would be justified by a claimed terrorist attack against a US nuclear facility.
Carving up radioactive middle eastern oil between Europe, Russia and China would be a hard if not impossible sell. US nukes that limit fallout may not be enough to placate the downwind China.

Knowing the weakness of US post war planning an Ultra Draconian plan to kill a billion people is too volitile to considered by anyone except a cocksure George Bush.



...........

If you can think of a rosier scenario, how likely do you think it is to succeed under this neocon administration along with its supporting shadow government (as described by Bush).

[donhakman]

7. Draconian poem

[cliss]

9. wow. Awesome posts, DonHakman.

My blood ran cold when I read them. I hope to God that won't happen, but knowing this administration like we do....


anything goes. Let's hope we survive them.

[bemildred]

8. Nukes are only an option if we prefer death to defeat.

It will not be overlooked a second time.