This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Congressman: "We're In Libya Because Of Oil"
Congressman Ed Markey said today:
Well,
we're in Libya because of oil. And I think both Japan and the nuclear
technology and Libya and this dependence that we have upon imported oil
have both once again highlighted the need for the United States to
have a renewable energy agenda going forward.
Could that possibly explain why we're not letting the Arab League states take care of Libya?
Remember that Alan Greenspan, John McCain, George W. Bush, a high-level National Security Council officer and others say that the Iraq war was really about oil.
And
according to French intelligence officers, the U.S. wanted to run an
oil pipeline through Afghanistan to transport Central Asian oil more
easily and cheaply. And so the U.S. told the Taliban shortly before
9/11 that they would either get "a carpet of gold or a carpet of
bombs", the former if they gree
»
- advertisements -
"If" his opinion is off.. thats one thing.. but the man works his ass off to see that people get real hard facts.. he works his ass off educating people..
Now I know your Irish, so you drank your dinner.. and I like my Irish Friends so I am willing to cut you some slack here.. but understand.. beating up the people who give 110% and try to share every bit of information available to them is not an honorable thing to do.
George.. Keep up the Great / Fantastic / Excellent Work.. you never mind my drunk buddy here..
Sincerely, JW
Not drunk ... read my posts below which are more cognizant of what is actually going on here than what lazy George posted above from the anal pedophile, Markey ...
We're not going along with the UN in Libya for oil ... there are two reasons:
1. Chess game with Republicans to advance debt ceiling ...
2. Obama is positioning himself to be Teleprompter Jesus of the World by letting the UN lead ...
Oil has nothing to do with it ... maybe for France, but even then 1.8% of the world's oil production (Libya's contribution) is a nothingburger ... would be like me telling you to stop eating 36 calories a day (1.8% of the daily recommended allowance of 2000 calories) ... you wouldn't even notice it ... same goes for Libya in world oil production ...
Your analysis is shallow and flawed and unsurprisingly, does not correspond with reality.
Distribution of oil, for sake of optimization of energy use, is localized. Contrary to your example, there is not a world univariant pool of oil supply but several pools of supply as countries strive to get their oil from the closest location possible in order to optimize the energy return rate.
Libya going offline is not spread evenly on all the oil consuming countries. It is not 1.8 pc going off. It suppresses a large share of certain countries consumption. Which is totally different.
Italy is one country that is in this situation: libya going off line could lead their economy to go to a halt.
It follows that european countries that are large creditors of Italy will suffer from Italian economy stalling (France is one of the major creditors)
As Italy economy is slowing down to a halt, France debt's will grow even more suspicious.
It follows that the Eurozone will even be more sensitive than it is now (the problem of credit being only one as losing Italy as a trading partner will also be of weight)
As the Eurozone is tanking, the US will be affected.
See the GD, the interactions between the US and Europe were fundamental.
Nope, the oil distribution is localized. It is not like losing 1.8 pc of your daily recommended allowance. It does not spread evenly.
It is more like a gang, with a gang member losing the capacity of extracting wealth from its turf, with that gang member owing money to the rest of the gang.
Oil is a big feature in the war against Libya.
@AnAnonymous
That was a disgusting display of reason and facts.
It is not 1.8 pc going off. It suppresses a large share of certain countries consumption. Which is totally different.
Again, read the post below ... Libya is 1.8% of the worlds oil production. You need a class in critical thinking or something ... just because you focus on the fact that they provide most of their oil to the EU doesn't change the fact that their contribution is 1.8% ...
Italy is one country that is in this situation: libya going off line could lead their economy to go to a halt.
And if you're not a globalist, like me ... not a globalist, you should say ... "why do I fucking care what happens in Italy?" Their problem. They should have elected smarter leaders and planned better. How is it my fucking problem that most Italians are lazy, socialist morons more focused on their cars and dicks than on their energy problems?
See the GD, the interactions between the US and Europe were fundamental.
Evidently you eat the Keynesian buffet for economic studies ... which is like eating at McDonalds and calling it health food. The interactions between the US and Europe had NOTHING TO DO WITH THE GREAT DEPRESSION ... the original Great Depression, just like the current Great Depression II, was a series of credit/debt imbalances and a flawed methodology to fight cost push inflation/deflation pressures by central banks/governments. Fuck some of you people are so fucking brainwashed and ignorant of history it is sad really ...
Nope, the oil distribution is localized. It is not like losing 1.8 pc of your daily recommended allowance. It does not spread evenly.
Again with the globalist bullshit ... again, how is this my problem if I live in Korea and Italy is dependent on shitty Libyian crude? It isn't ... sure it will push up the cost of oil ... but based on your thesis, it is far more likely that Gaddafi burns his fields before he surrenders which means the idea that we're going in for the oil is built on further abject stupidity ... unless the U.S. actually puts troops on the ground in Libya, Gaddafi will destroy his oil fields before he surrenders. What then, genius globalist .... what then?
It is more like a gang, with a gang member losing the capacity of extracting wealth from its turf, with that gang member owing money to the rest of the gang.
Except the NWO "gang" hasn't been approved by the U.S. yet ... which is one of the reasons why Obama hasn't gone FULL RETARD here ... granted, I'm not saying he won't. He still wants to be Teleprompter Jesus of the World ... and falling in line to the UN and doing their bidding on the way to an NWO would certainly benefit his candidacy ...
Actaully, it is even worse than that, Libyan exports represent 3.8% of the net exports on the market..... And since 2005, net exports are down about 8%....
From the EIA, Europe is ~75% of Libyan pie, China 11% and a whole bunch of small contries make up the other 14%
Moreover, Libyan oil is very high quality, easy to refine. Oil is not nearly as fungible as people believe it to be... Most European refineries would choke on the Syncrude that comes from the Tar Sands....
It is all about the oil, always has been, always will be (at least for the next 50 years)
First point, the US is the ganglord of the world order.
For a non globalist, you have a very global all encompassing approach to the issue.
I had a totally different experience. A few years, while living in condos for bachelors, I had this revelation: save for sexual services, all of my neighbours could have disappeared without impacting my life (same for them relatively to me)
What mattered (and still matters) most is that the negroes, the arabs, the Chinese kept behaving the way they were expected to. Disturbances there would impact my life.
I never heard that assessing the interactions of countries was a Keynes'approach.
So you are telling that if Italy potiental to activity is going to zero, it will have no impact on people outside of Italy, including people who are trading with Italy?
How?
And to the other question, lets see if Gadafi burns the oil fields...
Good cyber blowjob for George. Shame the need to revert to stereotypical, ignorant nonsense to support the local hate america fear mongerer but misery loves company.
BTW pack animal don't let me down.
when the metals crater with the end of QE, fully expect you to lead the herd in the "but I got out at the top" posts.
I'm not sure what we are doing in Libya, but I think I know why we are in Afghanistan. Look at Afghanistan on the map.
http://maps.google.com/maps?rlz=1C1GGGE_enUS405US405&q=afghanistan+map&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=Afghanistan&gl=us&ei=lwiITciXOIrUtQPIwvGdDA&sa=X&oi=geocode_result&ct=image&resnum=1&ved=0CCYQ8gEwAA
Afghanistan has a long border with Iran, and an even longer border with Pakistan. Iran has 10% of the world's remaining oil reserves, is the avowed enemy of Israel, supports Hezbollah, and has nuclear aspirations. Pakistan is the only nuclear-armed Islamic state, and is a home base for jihadists who attack in Afghanistan and India. Afghanistan and Pakistan lie directly in the path of any oil or gas pipeline from the producing nations, like Iran and western Kazakhstan, to the consuming nations, like India and China. Google the TAP natural gas pipeline. TAP is trans-Afghanistan pipeline. Google Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline (IPI). Afghanistan is rich in strategically important minerals.
Just a few hundred miles from southern Afghanistan is the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz. The US has built or is building THREE 700-million dollar "embassies" in the region: in Baghdad, Kabul, and Islamabad. The US has no intention of leaving.
If we wanted to reduce the threat of terrorism, we would get out of there and leave those people alone. Our continued presence is like poking a stick into a hornet's nest. Terrorism is not sufficient justification for the vast expense of that war. We need to distinguish between strategic objectives and cover stories.
You are just figuring that out? How old are you?
I guess I'm just not as smart as you, bro. My mind is filled with doubt. I look for multiple sources of information. Sometimes it takes years. And even then I am never quite sure. So it sounds like you at least agree with my points, even though they are trivial?
What is going to blow your mind is the next obvious step that will happen.
If the whole place is going batshit insane and the people are revolting across the board, it's only a matter of time before a modern version of teh Caliphate rises from that.
Kids say the darndest things
Somebody give Ed Markey a lolly pop. A winner every time...
That's not all. Ron Paul already admitted on the record that we are never paying back the debt. If that is not an incentive for countries like China to stop buying treasuries, I don't know what is.
China is irrelevant. They aren't the biggest customer anymore. We buy our own treasuries. It's one of the most absurd practices in the history of money. Furthermore, we do it obviously -- right under everyone's noses. We pretend there is a market for our own treasuries and use the clever sleight-of-hand of public-private collusion / primary dealers to make the whole thing smell legitimate.
The entire world knows its a joke, but the moment that the joke is recognized publicly -- the entire edifice of debt, securities, derivatives, etc, falls to pieces. The system is a lie, but without that lie there is chaos. So we believe in the lie.
The system exists because the most powerful forces in the world say it exists.
The USG will have to pay it back or face some rather severe consequences...like being unable to fund itself. That's why, IMHO, there will be no QE3 and deflation is likely to set in again.
the USG will pay back all debts in worthless fiat. print, baby, print. the Bernake never sleeps
It has been shown by numerous studies and experience, that debt payments, in a deflationary scenario, are increasingly difficult to pay. That's why, IMHO. there will be endless printing. It's their MO, their DNA (Debt Never Abates)
The FED can't control the yield curve after about 5 years. The bond market doesn't lie. Yields do not portend hyper-inflation or even severe inflation. I think the market sees the current wildly irresponsible fiscal policy actions as a last ditch attempt to keep the administration in power. Heck, Bush did the same thing with the housing bubble ... and it worked! Why wouldn't Obama follow the same game plan? Its all about the election. For now, the bond market doesn't see it as a threat. But it will if it goes on too long and the yields will let you know. The USG cannot afford much higher yields so I think that, ultimately, the bond market is in charge not the FED and the USG.
Raw Dog says it all:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCBZcqjBRQ8
I fucking love that Raw Dogs track. Da refix was betta tho', innit.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57nCwqjE35Q
agreed. great post. thank you.
Does this mean that the Swedes will be asking for Obama's Nobel medal back?
Meet the new boss...same as the old boss. I for one didn't get fooled again!
Of course, the only mitigating factor in American participation in the Libyan insurrection is the falling revenues to BP due to falling oil pumping.
Of course, the question that most Americans (Ameritards??) are unaware of is, "Who owns BP? Or, who at least is the majority owner of BP?"
Now, the doofus will flop their arms like a dead fish and proclaim, "The shareholders, dummy!"
But that's no answer.
Who is the majority owner of BP? Exxon-Mobil? JPMorgan Chase? Citigroup? BankofAmerica? Morgan Stanley? Goldman Sachs?
These are the crucial questions not being asked today --- at least during the Great Depression the populace knew better.
Today, the zombie American is forever clueless.
And Hillary Clinton journeys to Bahrain, and on the next day the protesters are fired upon and killed, and the Saudi army arrives.
Figures....
JPM is ultimate majority holder.
Please. The fake Nobel peace prize is norvegian. The need protection from US for when CCCP advances on norvegian oil interests in the Arctic.
CCCP has moved to israel
Sho has, my bruther.
Kuhn, Loeb Bolsheviks FTW
BP sponsored those medals
The brothes Nobel worked for/with the brothers Rotheschild.
Thank you, sir. That explains Kissinger (the original genocidal jooooo), Krugman, Friedman, Obamao etc
What a crock.
Global warming/carbon tax
dinosaurs to oil
Al Gore scum.
well, mister nader had a few things to say about that, and the phrase war criminal was in there somewhere, referring to the current commander.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axCLQQzMtsw
It's so transparently an attempt to protect companys' massive investments ---
http://bit.ly/gdBbvK
Ah the ever astute George Galloway is on the case, how nice. Yes I certainly see his point about the Arab League; bunch of corrupt autocrats who may be deposed by their disgruntled populations any day now... it's only natural they'd back international action against a corrupt autocrat whose disgruntled population tried (and came within days of failing) to depose him.
Just another Dem Congressman spouting the propaganda line "war for oil" to the masses dumb enough to believe it.
George Galloway is awesome
Thanks
George Galloway is awesome
Thanks
Watch out who you thank...
:)
Surprised? Don't be. Afghanistan had two companies competing for the pipeline, Unocal and and Argentinian firm?
Step one was getting into Afghanistan, Step two was accomplished by initiating meltdown of Argentinian economy at the same time. Competition gonzos. Unocal it's all yours.
Somewhat similar to Afghanistan, listen to this guy draw the dots between NATO, PEasants, Workers, and Ruling Class.
He analyzes the war in Yugoslavia, but it sounds IDENTICAL to whats happening in Libya.