show of hands of people in the oil business? personally, not a friend of a friend. I deal with it everday, drilling from the midcontinent of the US. I work for ExxonMobil. Iraqi oil is used everyday. Oil is the life blood of the world, good or bad.
Raises hand. Do you get National Petroleum News, Dnil? You might not if you're too far upstream.
Iraq, like the Gulf War, is about oil. Period. Now, Saddam is a bad guy who has done bad things and may do bad things in the future. Like many countries, Iraq has ignored a variety of UN sanctions. But without that big pool of oil, who cares? The United States and Europe don't when the oil isn't involved, or when the incident isn't on a border or poses an international power opportunity/threat.
Weapons of mass destruction? My biggest concerns would be N. Korea and PRC.
The reality is that Iraq represents both an opportunity and threat where oil is concerned. The opportunities for the major MULTINATIONAL oil companies like British Petroleum, ExxonMobil, Royal Dutch Shell/Texaco (mergers really have shrunk the number of players in this industry) are great, and a valid threat to the regional oil supply exists with Saddam in power.
Post 911 provided a unique opportunity where Afghan pipelines were concerned. Perhaps this effort against Iraq is just a realization that a door has been opened. I don't believe in the 911 Conspiracy BS, but opportunists know an opportunity when they see one. And just like the Democrats, the Republicans, and specifically the Bush candidacy, do have favored patrons to appease. In Bush/Cheney's case - the oil industry.
Rip fully noted the public message designed to make us feel good about the potential war. You can almost watch the same PR progression as in the Gulf War, where Bush Sr. fished around for an issue that the public would get behind other than "blood for oil."
Back then, the first angle attempted was Iraqi atrocities (even hired Hill and Knowlton for message development). Remember, Saddam was specifically called a "Hitler," but for some odd reason we never did the unconditional surrender thing. When the babies in the incubators story failed the truth test, the message moved on to weapons of mass destruction, which played well in the polls. And, of course, returning the great Kuwaiti democracy to its rightful place.
Today, it started with the terrorist angle, but that apparently was a dead end. It then went on to the weapons of mass destruction angle, which worked well the first time but generated no real traction at home or internationally this time around. Now, we're at the UN sanctions angle -- but only if the country involved is Iraq. Even Cheney has started to acknowledge the oil angle in his most recent speeches. Perhaps they are starting to realize that many Americans hold Laz's views.
Major benefits of Iraq war:
1. Oil development and production windfall
2. Securing regional oil supply from threat
3. Greater leverage against OPEC/greater competition/ not necessarily lower prices at the pump but perhaps less price volatility
Threats:
Bin Laden actually gets his region-wide holy war (goal of 911), friendly regimes are overthrown, worldwide financial disruption, WW2 level conflict. Probably an overblown concern.
There is a legal justification for this conflict, and we can find examples for a moral justification. But don't think for a second that we would be pushing for this war without that big lake of oil. Given oil's status as a critical national resource, for both the US and many other countries, we have to ask ourselves if the resource is worth the costs and risks. Perhaps it is, but I felt better about it when Iraqi tanks were rolling through Kuwait.
Charon
