[CLUE-Talk] Why Iraq? Why now?

[Kevin Cullis]

Matt,

Interesting read.  While I agree that oil is an issue in the problems
we're having, I find it hard to believe that it's the ONLY thing.  I'll
reserve judgement until I see some more info, but thanks for the links. 
You've added to my body of knowledge.

On a more interesting note:  how do you think this will play into the
Christian perspective of the "Left Behind" book series of a one world
government controlling everything?

I see a convergence of a numaber of factors that are leading us in this
direction: IPv6 (has 2 to the 128 power number of IP addresses, but not
literally but is expected to be deployed within 10 years), RFID (the
white block ID on your windshield for automatic E-470 tallying of your
drive through as well as small grain of rice sized receivers to track
what is sold and what is not, also to be deployed in about 10 years) and
the general acceptance of debit cards, computer peer-to-peer sharing as
well as the sheer power of computing in general
(http://www.top500.org/), lower, restricted, or controlled oil reserves,
legal stuff like Homeland Security Department and FEMA, worldwide
communications, European Union's Euro, globalization of the monetary
system and trade interconnecting the globe, and a host of other things.

Interesting stuff in the next few years, more than the last 100 for
sure.

Kevin

On Sat, 2003-02-01 at 00:43, Matt Gushee wrote:
> This recurring debate on Iraq is wearing me out. But I thought I'd
> present a selection of interesting links, with just a little commentary.
> 
> The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) is a think tank that is
> reported to have had a strong influence on the Bush administration's
> foreign policy. Several current members of the administration are or
> have been associated with the project, notably Paul Wolfowitz. Here is
> an excerpt from PNAC's 1998 letter to then-president Clinton:
> 
>   The only acceptable strategy is one that eliminates the possibility
>   that Iraq will be able to use or threaten to use weapons of mass
>   destruction.  In the near term, this means a willingness to undertake
>   military action as diplomacy is clearly failing. In the long term, it
>   means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power. That now
>   needs to become the aim of American foreign policy.
>   
>   (http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm)
> 
> The signatories of this letter included Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld,
> Richard Perle, Elliott Abrams, and Richard Armitage.
>   
> The 2002 policy paper _Rebuilding America's Defenses_ takes a new and
> more revealing tack on the Iraq problem:
> 
>   Indeed, the United States has for decades sought to play a more
>   permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved
>   conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for
>   substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue
>   of the regime of Saddam Hussein.
> 
>   (http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf)
> 
> Read that carefully.
> 
> Why exactly are we so interested in Gulf regional security, anyway? 
> 
> What else could the reason be but oil?
> 
> And what is the specific concern around oil? 
> 
> According to sources I have read, world oil production will most likely
> peak in the near future, possibly in the next 5-20 years. And when that
> happens--not in the much more distant future when the oil comes close to
> actually running out--things will start to get very ugly. Certainly
> there will be intense competition and rapid price increases for energy;
> resource wars seem to be a strong possibility. From what I have seen,
> this projection is not mere environmentalist doomsaying, but the
> thoroughly-researched opinion of respected petroleum industry analysts
> (note, however, that this is difficult to fully confirm, since I haven't
> found any open-access petroleum industry sites). But anyway, here are
> some of the better links I've found:
> 
>   http://www.wri.org/wri/climate/jm_oil_000.html
>   http://www.iea.org/g8/world/oilsup.htm
>   http://www.hubbertpeak.com/
>   http://www.ems.org/oil_depletion/story.html
> 
> Also, a Google search for "peak oil production" turns up quite a few
> hits.
> 
> If these projections are indeed well-known and believed in the oil
> industry, then we can reasonably guess that they are very much on Dick
> Cheney's mind. So here's a hypothesis:
> 
>   Cheney and his war faction believe they are doing us all a favor by
>   going out and grabbing a share of the remaining oil before the shit
>   hits the fan.
> 
>   If you ask me, part of a sensible response to the coming scarcity
>   would be an aggressive program of conservation and alternative energy
>   development. But that, of course, has the potential to cut into the
>   profits of Big Oil.
-- 
Kevin Cullis <kevincu at orci.com>