Most of the Democrats in congress and even those running for president seem to agree with the Bush administration on a fairly crucial issue: by omission, they imply that the Iraq War is not about oil. The Democrats in Congress even went as far as including as including a benchmark in their Iraq funding bill requiring Iraq to pass a Hydrocarbon Law that gives up to 80% of their oil income to American oil companies, claiming that the law was about dividing the money between ethnic groups even though that is only 3 lines of a 33 page document.

Al Gore is seen as the natural candidate for president by many Democrats, so when his book THE ASSAULT ON REASON came out, I wanted to see if he was honest about the oil motive for the Iraq War or gave the same evasions or vague statements of others like "We wouldn't be there if their main product were coconuts," the equivalent of a cop investigating the murder of a loved one never getting past saying "He was in a dangerous neighborhood."

To my surprise, he was honest.

What he says is not new, but he is the highest ranking American establishment figure to acknowledge these facts.

For example on page 118, he talks about the Cheney Energy Task Force looking at the map of oil exploration blocks in Iraq, and quotes a Canadian journalist as saying it looked like "a butcher's drawing of a steer with the prime cuts delineated by dotted lines." On the next page, he mentions the Bush administration blending its policy toward rogue nations with the energy policy of capturing new oil reserves.

On page 119, he says the Hydrocarbon Law was written in Washington, DC for the benefit of oil companies and given to the Bush approved government to pass.
The rest of the story and excerpts from the book

Hydrocarbon Law .PDF

Could you find the section in here that says the US gets 80% of the oil. Only because I think your completely wrong. The Law refers to PSA's to which the rate of return in 12.5% margin, the remender is Iraqi income. About standard for PSA. Slightly higher rate then the 10% PSA's held prior to the war by China, Russia and France.

I assume you are aware that China currrently recieved the first Post war PSA from Iraq. Hardly even an Allied country.

I see contract in the works also for Vietnamese and India... Norwegians recently got one also.

Al Gore is a Dipshit.

quote:

Article 1: Ownership of Petroleum Resources
Oil and gas are owned by all the people of Iraq in all the Regions and Governorates.

For the sake our troops, it matters what Iraqis think of this and they see themselves being screwed.

http://www.handsoffiraqioil.org

The Bush administration initially wanted to privatize outright, but the oil companies were actually a bit subtler, and preferred PSAs which could still give them the lion's share of profits.

Good, then their representatives in their representative republic shouldn’t vote for the Bill. I wouldn't.

Honestly, I don’t think it makes any difference.

On one hand, it would drastically increase the time that the Iraq Economy becomes viable. A viable Iraqi Economy is good for Iraqis, YES it will cost to get that quick of an improvement. Nothing is free in this world, not even Al Gore's advice.

On the other hand, As both Venezuela and Russia have recently shown. RE-nationalizing the oil industry is fairly easy to do.

The major companies are waiting for that Hydrocarbon Law because they dictated the terms. They passed up some of the early contracts because they weren't on favorable enough terms, as this BBC story notes:

quote:

The first three Iraqi oil projects up for grabs are for developing the Khurmala Dome field in the north of the country, the Suba-Luhais field in the south, and the smaller Hamrin field, again in the north.

Shell said it was initially interested in taking on Khurmala Dome, but turned it down because it was not happy with the terms of the offer.

"We obtained a copy of the tender but the scope and contract format are not compatible with our aspirations for long-term risk-reward contracts," said a Shell spokesman.

A spokesman for BP said it has not made a bid for any of the first three contracts.


BBC: Iraq oil deals 'by end of August' (2004)

Russia and Venezuela have been cited by Iraqi oil workers and other Iraqi experts as reasons to avoid PSAs in the first place.

Russia in particular got royally screwed.

The reason why we should care is this law is being forced through while American troops are there, so we as a country will be blamed for it far more than if it was just some snake oil salesman from the world bank or an oil company pushing it.

If you recall, one of the reasons Bush and even many Democrats claimed we were in Iraq was to fight terrorism. Pissing people off by screwing them out of the one thing they have of value makes it clear the war has nothing to do with that.

quote:

long-term risk-reward contracts

So shell wasn't making enough to cover the fact they will become a giant Bulleye for Terrorist. Sounds reasonable to me. Maybe that is what the 2.5% extra is for.

PSA's are not guaranteed no-bid contracts, you have to negotiate them.

quote:

Russia in particular got royally screwed.

No they didn't, you think it is easy starting a oil exploration project in the middle of nowhere. Look up Sakhalin Island and that is the project Russia bought out Exxon's controlling interest. That is all we are talking about, is controlling interest in particular projects.

PSA have a rule to play in emerging markets or in Iraq's destroyed infrastructure. They bring in expertise, investments and speed once removed from the governmental controls. Iraq does not have money, expertise or speed. I personally would like to see them retain national control over their oil. Mostly on a national pride issue. I however see nothing wrong with issuing PSA’s in the short term, these contracts are indefinite.

quote:

Al Gore is a Dipshit.

Speaking of dipshits that picture of the little girl reminds me of one.

quote:

Speaking of dipshits that picture of the little girl reminds me of one

DAMN...... Nice first impression... Nothing like Beating up a 8 year old girl. Look forward to many more...

quote:

Originally posted by brntfvr:

quote:

Al Gore is a Dipshit.

Speaking of dipshits that picture of the little girl reminds me of one.

Normally, I welcome all newcomers to Thom's Forum, but this time I will not stoop so low as to a person that has to pick on little girls.

When the Democrats realize that "Oil" props up the Federal Reserve, and that-for example, the teachers union gets it's loot from Uncle Sam, they will authorize W to use military force against Iraq, on whatever pretext available.

Oh wait, that already happened.

quote:

Originally posted by Chaos-Theory:
When the Democrats realize that "Oil" props up the Federal Reserve, and that-for example, the teachers union gets it's loot from Uncle Sam, they will authorize W to use military force against Iraq, on whatever pretext available.

Oh wait, that already happened.

CT, I would love to hear you explain how the Federal Reserve is propped up by oil from Iraq? That should be one good story.

quote:

Originally posted by brntfvr:

Speaking of dipshits that picture of the little girl reminds me of one.

How....progressive.


BTW,

algore is a dipshit.

quote:

Originally posted by Ronald Rutherford:

CT, I would love to hear you explain how the Federal Reserve is propped up by oil from Iraq? That should be one good story.

I never said backed by "Iraq" .

So what is the Fed backed by?

quote:

Originally posted by Chaos-Theory:

quote:

Originally posted by Ronald Rutherford:
CT, I would love to hear you explain how the Federal Reserve is propped up by oil from Iraq? That should be one good story.

I never said backed by "Iraq" .
So what is the Fed backed by?

You are right you did not mention Iraq backed up, but then you said that is why we invaded Iraq-so the tie in is there.
If you say what the Fed is backed by:
Federal Reserve Act
or you mean
Services charged for from the Banks including check cashing, etc.
FDIC charges.
or
Seigniorage
or
Interest received on debt instruments
...

quote: "Most of the Democrats in congress and even those running for president seem to agree with the Bush administration on a fairly crucial issue: by omission, they imply that the Iraq War is not about oil. The Democrats in Congress even went as far as including as including a benchmark in their Iraq funding bill requiring Iraq to pass a Hydrocarbon Law that gives up to 80% of their oil income to American oil companies, claiming that the law was about dividing the money between ethnic groups even though that is only 3 lines of a 33 page document."

The very good news is that the U.S. and its corporations will not get their hands on the oil. A spokesman for al-Sadr's bloc said, "A country which is occupying Iraq will not have its corporations negotiating for Iraqi oil." And the Sunni clerics have issued a fatwa against the hydrocarbon law. And I've heard there is Kurd opposition, too.

What a laugh- U.S. goes on imperialist war and then fails to procure the spoils!

Yes, it is always better to have their oil in the ground. Lest they have to actually decide how to divide up the Devil's Kool-aid. It is better to throw sabots into the machinery of progress.

ridiculous qoute: "Yes, it is always better to have their oil in the ground. Lest they have to actually decide how to divide up the Devil's Kool-aid. It is better to throw sabots into the machinery of progress."

That's right, moron, no one in the ME knows how to pump crude. As a matter of fact, no one in the ME has profit-sharing with private corporations. Maybe a little modernization advice from the neighbors is all that's needed. And possibly your securing a new brain.

I like you Brent so I won't go on the ad hom attacks for now.

Then why have they not pumped it? Do you think it is in the interest of Iran, SA or even Kuwait to have Iraq's oil at full production?

Maybe you can think of oligopolistic competition.

Mark my words, it will be China that will eventually be the big winner in Iraq-if Iran does not cast their sabots into the machinery.

quote: "I like you Brent so I won't go on the ad hom attacks for now."

As I consider imperialism and unproked military attack resulting in massive, unnecessary death & suffering to be serious issues, I say anyone who makes excuses for it is an asshole.

Screw you in your secure fascist bastion, under the shadows of Ronald Reagan's ranch!

quote:

Originally posted by BrentBozo:
quote: "I like you Brent so I won't go on the ad hom attacks for now."

As I consider imperialism and umproked military attack resulting in massive, unnecessary death & suffering to be serious issues, I say anyone who makes excuses for it is an asshole.

I something bothering you today?
I don't feel that I am excusing anything you think I am. I just think that discussions about percentages just creates class warfares that benefit no-one. Now if Kurdistan gets 17% of the oil-reserves is that too much or too little? But how much do they get if there is civil war?

Oh, you just are thinking global chessboard vis-a-vis China or Iran: cheap speculation to justify an unprovoked war & occupation.

Take a hike, Ronald.

quote:

As I consider imperialism and unproked military attack resulting in massive, unnecessary death & suffering to be serious issues, I say anyone who makes excuses for it is an asshole.

Are you saying your an asshole? or does this only cover the US policy. if our attack was unjustified then you must be justifing Saddams imperialism, unproked military attacks, massive unnecessary death & suffering and his attempt at genocide.

Asshole

quote:

Take a hike, Ronald

I took a wonderful hike in Glacier Park Montana, I hope to post some pics soon

quote:

Originally posted by Loganthor:

quote:

Take a hike, Ronald

I took a wonderful hike in Glacier Park Montana, I hope to post some pics soon

Excellent, maybe Brent will tell us where he likes to hike also.

I here that Cuba has some nice trails.