Yesterday was the 11th anniversary of the 2003 Iraq War – yet to this day, few media reflections on the conflict accurately explore the extent to which opening up Persian Gulf energy resources to the world economy was a prime driver behind the Anglo-American invasion.
The overwhelming narrative has been one of incompetence and failure in an otherwise noble, if ill-conceived and badly managed endeavour to free Iraqis from tyranny. To be sure, the conduct of the war was indeed replete with incompetence at a colossal scale – but this doesn’t erase the very real mendacity of the cold, strategic logic that motivated the war’s US and British planners in the first place.
According to the infamous Project for a New American Century (PNAC) document endorsed by senior Bush administration officials as far back as 1997, “While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification” for the US “to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security,” “the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein.”
So Saddam’s WMD was not really the issue – and neither was Saddam himself.
The real issue is candidly described in a 2001 report on “energy security” – commissioned by then US Vice-President Dick Cheney – published by the Council on Foreign Relations and the James Baker Institute for Public Policy. It warned of an impending global energy crisis that would increase “US and global vulnerability to disruption”, and leave the US facing “unprecedented energy price volatility.”
The main source of disruption, the report observed, is “Middle East tension“, in particular, the threat posed by Iraq. Critically, the documented illustrated that US officials had lost all faith in Saddam due his erratic and unpredictable energy export policies. In 2000, Iraq had “effectively become a swing producer, turning its taps on and off when it has felt such action was in its strategic interest to do so.” There is a “possibility that Saddam Hussein may remove Iraqi oil from the market for an extended period of time” in order to damage prices:
“Iraq remains a destabilising influence to… the flow of oil to international markets from the Middle East. Saddam Hussein has also demonstrated a willingness to threaten to use the oil weapon and to use his own export programme to manipulate oil markets. This would display his personal power, enhance his image as a pan-Arab leader… and pressure others for a lifting of economic sanctions against his regime. The United States should conduct an immediate policy review toward Iraq including military, energy, economic and political/diplomatic assessments. The United States should then develop an integrated strategy with key allies in Europe and Asia, and with key countries in the Middle East, to restate goals with respect to Iraqi policy and to restore a cohesive coalition of key allies.”
The Iraq War was only partly, however, about big profits for Anglo-American oil conglomerates – that would be a bonus (one which in the end has failed to materialise to the degree hoped for – not for want of trying though).
The real goal – as Greg Muttitt documented in his book Fuel on the Fire citing declassified Foreign Office files from 2003 onwards – was stabilising global energy supplies as a whole by ensuring the free flow of Iraqi oil to world markets – benefits to US and UK companies constituted an important but secondary goal:
“The most important strategic interest lay in expanding global energy supplies, through foreign investment, in some of the world’s largest oil reserves – in particular Iraq. This meshed neatly with the secondary aim of securing contracts for their companies. Note that the strategy documents released here tend to refer to ‘British and global energy supplies.’ British energy security is to be obtained by there being ample global supplies – it is not about the specific flow.”
To this end, as Whitehall documents obtained by the Independent show, the US and British sought to privatise Iraqi oil production with a view to allow foreign companies to takeover. Minutes of a meeting held on 12 May 2003 said:
“The future shape of the Iraqi industry will affect oil markets, and the functioning of Opec, in both of which we have a vital interest.”
A “desirable” outcome for Iraqi’s crippled oil industry, officials concluded, is:
“… an oil sector open and attractive to foreign investment, with appropriate arrangements for the exploitation of new fields.”
The documents added that “foreign companies’ involvement seems to be the only possible solution” to make Iraq a reliable oil exporter. This, however, would be “politically sensitive”, and would “require careful handling to avoid the impression that we are trying to push the Iraqis down one particular path.”
Media analyses claiming lazily that there was no planning for the aftermath of the Iraq War should look closer at the public record. The reality is that extensive plans for postwar reconstruction were pursued, but they did not consider humanitarian and societal issues of any significance, focusing instead on maintaining the authoritarian structures of Saddam’s brutal regime after his removal, while upgrading Iraq’s oil infrastructure to benefit foreign investors.
A series of news reports, for instance, confirmed how the State Department had set up 17 separate working groups to work out this post-war plan. Iraq would be “governed by a senior US military officer… with a civilian administrator”, which would “initially impose martial law”, while Iraqis would be relegated to the sidelines as “advisers” to the US administration. The US envisaged “a broad and protracted American role in managing the reconstruction of the country… with a continued role for thousands of US troops there for years to come”, in “defence of the country’s oil fields”, which would eventually be “privatised” along with “other supporting industries.”
The centrality of concerns about energy to Iraq War planning was most candidly confirmed eight years ago by a former senior British Army official in Iraq, James Ellery, currently director of British security firm and US defence contractor, Aegis.
Brigadier-General James Ellery CBE, the Foreign Office’s Senior Adviser to the Coalition Provisional Authority in Baghdad since 2003, had confirmed the critical role of Iraqi oil reserves in alleviating a “world shortage” of conventional oil. The Iraq War has helped to head off what Ellery described as “the tide of Easternisation” – a shift in global political and economic power toward China and India, to whom goes “two thirds of the Middle East’s oil.” His remarks were made as part of a presentation at the School of Oriental & African Studies (SOAS), University of London, sponsored by the Iraqi Youth Foundation, on 22nd April 2008:
“The reason that oil reached $117 a barrel last week was less to do with security of supply… than World shortage.”
He went on to emphasise the strategic significance of Iraqi petroleum fields in relation to the danger of production peaks being breached in major oil reserves around the world:
“Russia’s production has peaked at 10 million barrels per day; Africa has proved slow to yield affordable extra supplies – from Sudan and Angola for example. Thus the only near-term potential increase will be from Iraq.”
Whether Iraq began “favouring East or West” could therefore be “de-stabilising” not only “within the region but to nations far beyond which have an interest.”
“Iraq holds the key to stability in the region”, Ellery continued, due to its “relatively large, consuming population,” its being home to “the second largest reserve of oil – under exploited”, and finally its geostrategic location “on the routes between Asia, Europe, Arabia and North Africa – hence the Silk Road.”
Despite escalating instability and internal terrorism, Iraq is now swiftly reclaiming its rank as one of the world’s fastest-growing exporters, cushioning the impact of supply outages elsewhere and thus welcomed by OPEC. Back in 2008, Ellery had confirmed Allied ambitions to “raise Iraqi’s oil production from 2.5 million bpd today to 3 million by next year and maybe ultimately 6 million barrels per day.”
Thus, the primary motive of the war – mobilising Iraqi oil production to sustain global oil flows and moderate global oil prices – has, so far, been fairly successful according to the International Energy Agency.
Eleven years on, there should be no doubt that the 2003 Iraq War was among the first major resource wars of the 21st century. It is unlikely to be the last.
Dr Nafeez Ahmed is executive director of the Institute for Policy Research & Development and author of A User’s Guide to the Crisis of Civilisation: And How to Save It among other books. Follow him on Twitter @nafeezahmed
Plantagenet on Thu, 20th Mar 2014 9:52 pm
Thank goodness Iraqi oil is now on the market. Peak Oil would be a very serious problem now if not for fracking in the US and the return of Iraqi oil to the world market.
Northwest Resident on Thu, 20th Mar 2014 10:09 pm
To those who believe that 9/11 “just happened”, your point of view is as good as any other.
But ask yourself, would the Iraq war have been possible without the full support of the American people?
Would the support of the American people have been there for the Iraq invasion IF there had never been a 9/11 and the subsequent threats of “mushrooms clouds”, “WMD” and “Yellowcake” that BUILT on the fear instilled by the events of 9/11?
To me, it is clear that 9/11 was a well-planned, organized event meant to mobilize Americans for the “war on terror” and the subsequent Iraq invasion.
Without that Iraq invasion, it is almost certain that the global economy would have crashed by now, there would be wars flaring all over the world in battles to the death over scarce resources, and we would most likely be living in post-apocalyptic and post-collapse times right now, with chaos and mayhem ruling every waking day.
So, was the Iraq war worth it? Think deeply on that question.
ghung on Thu, 20th Mar 2014 10:35 pm
Plantagenet, Iraqi oil was on the market before the US invaded. Factor in the costs of years of war and tens of thousands of lives, that’s some damned expensive oil they’re pumping now; some may say priceless.
noobtube on Thu, 20th Mar 2014 10:40 pm
Ahhh… the rationalizations Americans use for waging war against innocent people.
American exceptionalism… the United States has a bright future ahead!
Davey on Thu, 20th Mar 2014 10:53 pm
Sure noob like you are the judge and jury. Look in the mirror at your judgements. No I’m not buying it and we can Agee to disagree
ghung on Thu, 20th Mar 2014 11:35 pm
Chill out Davey. Noob doesn’t realize that he’s projecting, that his absolute declarations are on par with smurf and others who have no interest in furthering the discussion. At least they make it harder to ignore how screwed we all are.
GregT on Fri, 21st Mar 2014 12:06 am
On March 6 2004, the Central Bank of Iraq takeover was completed. The Iraqis are now indebted to the globalist central bankers like almost all other countries in the world. Iran is now one of the last remaining holdouts to the banking cartel, Iran is the next country on their list. The bankers could care less about the oil. The oil was the reward given to the corporate, and government lackeys that made the invasion and takeover a success.
Iraq was all about the money, like it always has been. Follow the money.
http://www.cbi.iq/index.php?pid=History
Davy, Hermann, MO on Fri, 21st Mar 2014 12:42 am
Yea, G, you would think at my age I could be more laid back. I feel sometimes as an American I am a wanted criminal.
DC on Fri, 21st Mar 2014 1:10 am
RoFL@Plant. Iraq was extracting oil just fine before the empire came along to invade…err liberate them from its Eruo-denominated oil sales. ‘Production’ promptly after that, tanked, and stayed there despite repeated statements by amerikan corporate propagandists that about how ‘inefficient’ the old Iraqi NOC was. And how uS ‘know how’ and general all around superiority would lead Iraqi oil ‘production’, under uS corporate management, would reach dizzying new heights, perhaps even rivaling Saudi Arabia itself.
Well, going on nearly 2 decades later, the Iraqi rump ‘states’ production figures are barely what they were before the uS came along with Operation Liberate Iraqi Oil from the Euro.
Northwest Resident on Fri, 21st Mar 2014 1:19 am
That’s right, DC. It was all a pack of lies. Now America gets what it wants from Iraqi oilfields when it wants it. Production hasn’t gone up only because they haven’t wanted it to go up — too much. Some think America is sitting on all that Iraqi oil, holding it secure for some time in the future, maybe post-collapse.
Makati1 on Fri, 21st Mar 2014 2:15 am
@NWR, 911 was the modern Pearl Harbor. Both were necessary to get the American people behind the wars-for-profit. Both were caused / allowed to happen, to gain that support. I wonder what it will take the next time? A ‘terrorist’ attack on the power system where the ‘terrorists’ just happen to be caught and turn out to be the ‘baddie’ of the day? We shall see.
@GregT, you are correct. It was the petro dollar that was in danger, not oil supplies. Ditto for Libya, and all the other current “terrorist” countries like Iran, Russia, and China. Problem is, now the list includes many other countries and growing all the time. The days of the petro dollar are about over. That will mean a huge drop in American’s lifestyles.
Plantagenet on Fri, 21st Mar 2014 2:20 am
People who claim Iraq was producing oil before the US invasion are missing the point. Iraq was under UN sanctions because Saddam Hussein was a fascist warmonger. Once the US topped the Iraqi Baath Socialist Party regime and handed Hussein over to the new Iraqi government, the UN sanctions were dropped. This paved the way for the growth in Iraqi oil production we’ve seen in the last few years.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Fri, 21st Mar 2014 2:33 am
Makati said – GregT, you are correct. It was the petro dollar that was in danger, not oil supplies. Ditto for Libya, and all the other current “terrorist” countries like Iran, Russia, and China. Problem is, now the list includes many other countries and growing all the time. The days of the petro dollar are about over. That will mean a huge drop in American’s lifestyles.
Explain yourself Makati on the huge drop in American lifestyles. Do you have evidence? Is it a sure bet that there will be a drop and by how much? What will this drop do to the rest of the world? Will the rest of the world profit? I believe there are very few countries decoupled from the US economically. I find it hard to believe a big drop in the US will not affect the rest of the world. The evidence is very unclear what will happen with a diminished petro dollar. There is also little evidence how diminished it will be until there is hard evidence on a replacement reserve currency. With Russia starting a new cold war that looks less likely all the time because it will require global cooperation and integration. Those conditions are unlikely now with Europe, Russia, and US in crisis over the Ukraine
GregT on Fri, 21st Mar 2014 4:12 am
“People who claim Iraq was producing oil before the US invasion are missing the point. Iraq was under UN sanctions because Saddam Hussein was a fascist warmonger. Once the US topped the Iraqi Baath Socialist Party regime and handed Hussein over to the new Iraqi government, the UN sanctions were dropped. This paved the way for the growth in Iraqi oil production we’ve seen in the last few years.”
Watch much TV Plant? Sounds like MSM propaganda, verbatim. You forgot about the babies being taken out of their incubators, the mushroom clouds, the yellowcake uranium, the chemical weapons stockpiles, and the Kurdish genocide.
Sorry Plant, all lies. Nothing could be further from the truth.
GregT on Fri, 21st Mar 2014 4:46 am
Davy,
Sorry, but what do you mean by “With Russia starting a new cold war”?
DC on Fri, 21st Mar 2014 7:11 am
Warmonger? You could probably make that one stick. Fascist though? Haha, sure. Besides hyperbole, (and not really being true in any real way), what does that contribute? Your gov’t had him murdered, in a most undignified manner I might add. Not because he was a ‘bad guy’. The Us has absolutely NO problem with bad guys, fascist bad guys, commie bad guys, and everything in between. Except for bad guys that sell their oil in Euros instead of Us Toilet paper. For that, all good or bad credits with the uS are null and void. But you know this already dont you Plant….
Davy, Hermann, MO on Fri, 21st Mar 2014 10:06 am
Sorry Greg, I was baiting there to see who would pounce on me! But you are nice about it. I would have to say I really meant the US and Russia may descend into a cold war environment. Nothing like the superpower age but nonetheless a time of brinkmanship, competition, and spoiling. It is a pity because now is when we need global cooperation, adjustment, and mitigation to adapt to limits of growth and AGW. I am American and I think is wrong for us to be involved in Ukraine period. That is Russia’s and Europe’s back yard. The US is stuck in its desire to shape the world in its image and it is plain wrong in this case. We have never had an alliance with Ukraine like Japan or South Korea. Russia is the one that is needed to subsidize the Ukraine. Their economies, culture, governance, and judicial are far more related from the legacies of the USSR.
Now DC, I buy some of what you say. The US has no problem pushing its self-interest with whoever fit their needs. Enlightened democratic ideas take a back seat as we see so many times. Iraq is more complicated than your description. Sadam was instability in a region of great importance to the global economy. The US was stuck in a cold war with Sadam. Once Bush saw the opportunity with the US pumped up from 2001 they seized it. I hate what the neocons have done to the US turning us into a police state. DC, the whole US is not the embodiment of evil, even the government has some good people and ideas. To be honest DC, I am starting to lose hope with the death spiral of corruption, manipulation and the revolving door of political/industrial patronage. Sadam was evil in most every way yet, probably what Iraq needed to stay in one piece. If oil was not involved he would have been left to manhandle that country to his desires. Sadam got cocky at the wrong time, place, and with the wrong player.
red on Fri, 21st Mar 2014 10:38 am
can be off topic but relevant, 20 years ago, 15 fields had the capacity to produce more than 1,000,000 b/d. Today(the details are as on year 2005)
only four field can produce that much: Ghawar (Saudi Arabia), 1948,Kirkuk (Iraq), 1938, Burgan Greater (Kuwait), 1927, Cantarell (Mexico), 1976.
Arthur on Fri, 21st Mar 2014 11:43 am
Iraq and all the warmongering since (Lybia, Syria, Ukraine) had it’s origin in PNAC, the Program of the New Je… umm, Program of the New “American” Century. The USSR was dissolved, the question for the mainly Zionist signatories of the PNAC document was: how to put the rest of the planet into the pocket of the… giggle… “Americans”.
On page 51 of that program we find: “Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor” ”
Pearl Harbor, as wel all remember, was the grandiose succesfull attempt of the Zionist dominated Roosevelt government in provoking the Japanese toddler, with an economy 1/10 of that of the US, in dealing the first blow against the US, in a desperate attempt to circumvent the US imposed 100% oil embargo against Japan and get the oil somewhere else (Dutch East-Indies) and remove the US threat from the left flank while advancing south. Roosevelt imposed that oil-embargo shortly after Japan had joined the Axis, after a military adviser named McCollum had pointed out to Roosevelt that he could get his desired war with Germany via the ‘Japanese backdoor’, now that Japan and Germany were allies. Japan was never taken seriously other then as a nuclear testing ground to find out how many civilians you can kill with a nuke. Against all warnings of his military advisers, Roosevelt deliberately had put his fleet in a very vulnerable position. In chess this is called a ‘pawn sac’. Via Pearl Harbor, Roosevelt circumvented Congress, that at the time still represented the interests of the American people, that in great majority was pro-Hitler, for good reasons because he never was a threat to America and merely wanted his stupid Danzig back, to find himself embroiled in a world war against Poland, Britain (+ Canada, Australia + rest empire), France, Holland, Belgium, Norway, USSR and USA, outnumbering the poor Germans 1:6. Via that brilliant Pearl Harbor move, America was able to join WW2 and upgrade itself from being a geopolitical provincial backwater, but already the biggest industrial power on earth, to the premier address on the planet, all at the cost of Europe, via an alliance with arguably the largest bunch of mass murderers on the planet, the Soviets. End good, all good (for the US). And yes, we all could have been speaking German, but now we all speak English, so big deal. And since Adolf was not entirely convinced by the blessings of multiculturalism, Holland would have remained Holland, albeit with German rather than English as a second language, rather than in 2014 have to face the specter of major ethnic troubles, if not a civil war in the long term. Thanks for the liberation America, but please don’t do it again.
One of the signatories of PNAC was a Dov Zakheim. Dov who? Dov, the Zionist mastermind of 9/11. At the time of completion of the PNAC document, Dov was CEO of SPC, a firm specialized in remote control of airliners. Dov realized that a New Pearl Harbor was necessary to fillfull the millenia old dream of the (self) Chosen to bring the planet under their control (forget the Protocols, read the Talmud). Dov was inspired by the technology of his own firm, made a few phone calls with Silverstein, the NY Port Authority, owner at the time of the WTC complex and with the PM of Israel (the commanders of the Mossad). Dov also made sure that one of the targets was to be the Pentagon at exactly the same spot where 30 or so comptrollers were trying to figure out what had happened to the 2 trillion $, that went missing at the time the very same Dov Zakheim was responsible for these 2 trillions (probably funneled to Israel). The Mossad then selected a few Muslim patsies from Hamburg (half an hour walk from where I lived at the time, milking the dot com craze for a Manhattan based company), abducted and killed them, took their passports, to be used by Israeli stand-ins to join some flying lessons in Florida and to deliberate plant (Atta’s) passport in a street in Manhattan, next to WTC in flames. Shortly after the impact at 9/11, a Zionist called Jerome Hauer appeared on television to put the blame on bin Laden, without a shred of proof. The American public went ape shit, just like with Pearl Harbor 1.0, and the US shadow government had achieved what it wanted: push back constitutional liberties at home (Patriot Act, already written with the ink not yet dry) and create the pretext to invade any country at will on the basis of the ‘war on terrorism’. If not Iraq but Mozambique had been an important oil country on the verge of accepting euro’s rather than dollar, the story would have been “19 Mozambikies with box cutters”. The patsy was found in a useful idiot named KSM, although professional CIA torturers had a hard time extorting the confession from him by applying waterboarding some 180 times. Sometimes one has to worry if CIA torturers have become pussies. In Nuremberg the method of choice was to spread the legs of the Germans and stamp with your boots on their testicles, just as long as was needed to finally made the bastards confess that they had killed 6 million Jews in gas chambers, leaving the notoriously noble Anglos and Soviets no other choice than to confiscate this morally depraved continent called Europe.
For those naïve flag waving patriotards, claiming that the US government would never do such a thing, please study the wiki page “Operation Northwoods”. The 9/11-avant la lettre operation had been given the nod by the entire top brass of the US establishment, but the last US president with a brain and conscience and a spine (sorry Jimmy), Hitler-admirer JFK (Hitler-admirer because he was briefed by his father about what really had happened during WW2) called it off. He got killed a little later because he had pissed off too many people (Northwoods, intending to abolish Zionist cash cow the FED, preventing Israel from acquiring nukes and several other highly anti-semitic issues).
Piers Morgan says: because Saddam Hussein was a fascist warmonger
That’s a good one! Of course he was, but I am sure you remember the pictures of the occasion where Rummy shook hands with the fascist. Hussein was very useful as a US proxy to wage war against Iran, that had dared to kick US asses out of Iran after they had decided to exploit the fossil wealth all for themselves and the Iranian people. Can’t have that of course. But then, after the US funded Iraqi assault against Iran failed, Hussein got an attitude, started to support the Palestinians and other dubious causes, dubious in the eyes of Zionist run USA, the land of the Chosen. It was the same Rummy btw, who needed an awful lot of time to get rid of his 9/11 morning dropping, when he sat on the loo, on the safe side of the Pentagon, waiting for the bombs to go off (there never was a plane hitting the Pentagon) and the rest of the 9/11-operation to complete. Later he made himself useful by helping picking up debries from the Pentagon lawn, rather than taking responsibility for organizing counter measures, which is what he was paid to do for.
I feel sometimes as an American I am a wanted criminal.
Please Davy, don’t make yourself so important. Nobody has issues with you. What do we need to do to prove that? Free massage, free beer? When we are discussing Iraq, we are discussing the actions of the (Zionist dominated) US rulers, not about you or grassroots America. What America needs now is a Putin to organize a “Final Solution Ultralight”. Just like Putin put all these Zionist oligarchs, working in the interest of the Washington NWO, either in jail or kicked them out of the country to Israel/UK, but left the Anne Frank’s of this world alone, America now needs a JFK or Ron Paul type to: 1) abolish the Fed 2) eliminate the ADL, SPLC, AIPAC, CFR and all the other shady Zionist run clubs that de facto rule America, apart from the synagogue and the Zionist Rose Growers Organisation 3) nationalise the media 4) reopen the 9/11-investigation with subpoena powers, this time not run by the US-government, but the Red Cross, Sweden or the International Pathfinder Organization, anything.
Your gov’t had him murdered, in a most undignified manner I might add
Yes, these are the mores of the NWO, introduced by Anglos and Soviets in Nuremberg. In 1815, when Napoleon had put Europe in flames for the second time, by marching all the way to Moscow, even he was not executed, but got an island all for himself, even with a private little army.
Makati1 on Fri, 21st Mar 2014 12:08 pm
Davy, when the petro dollar is no longer used in international trade, it will revert to it’s real value. Some economists say it will drop at least 40%. Others say it will be like toilet paper as the US will have to sell real things to earn money to pay for imports like oil, food, and the hundreds of other things the US no longer has or produces. Today we print to buy. When we have to produce or die, we will die.
A few more stupid actions by the US like trade sanctions on Russia, will just hasten that day of reckoning. When the world finally wakes up and realizes how it is being screwed by the Federal Reserve, the game will be over. China, Russia, and now dozens of other countries are bypassing the USD as much as possible. I think the end is in sight.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Fri, 21st Mar 2014 12:17 pm
Arthur said – Please Davy, don’t make yourself so important. Nobody has issues with you. What do we need to do to prove that? Free massage, free beer? When we are discussing Iraq, we are discussing the actions of the (Zionist dominated) US rulers, not about you or grassroots America.
Yea, OK, Arthur. I will not buy into your prescription but I will not deny the jist of it. We do have a destructive leadership at all levels in the US that have been corrupted by too much power,,,, for sure. Definitely a house of cards going on in the US. I respect criticism that is aimed at this American people hijacking problem. I will react to direct insults to, what you call the, “Grass Root Americans”. There are still many Americans that have not been ruined or dumbed down. This is changing with every generation and over time. It is my hope that we do have a correction that forces the old survival skills back on the population that are being destroyed by the so called “Mutated New American Way of Life” that has been hijacked by the 1%ers, big corporations, and the so called intellectual elite. This is being exported through a global system that is now a mirror of this American behavior. The rest of the world is taking to it and tweaking it even more. It is now a whole new animal evolving into a global power phenomenon above the American influence. America is diminishing as the rest of the world reestablishes itself. We as a world society are multi polar and global now. In this situation I feel more criticism should be directed globally and in a multipolar frame of focus. China, Russia, and the other developing powers are to blame now also for their own contribution to the rape and pillage of the world.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Fri, 21st Mar 2014 12:25 pm
Makati said – Davy, when the petro dollar is no longer used in international trade, it will revert to it’s real value. Some economists say it will drop at least 40%.
Makati do you follow the pseudo-science gods called economists that got us into this situation? What will happen to global trade when the dollar losses 40%. I will tell you “global collapse”. You are not going to see the rest of the global system just pick up like nothing happened!.. My point Makati is this has never happened and there are no historical references. We cannot use previous reserve currencies as a reference. China is in a debt death spiral and the last thing they need is to dump the dollar and complicate their effort to contain their debt crisis. Russia is a basket case and subject to commodity prices IOW a banana republic with the worst of the demographic problems in the world. I do believe the petro dollar will diminish but this will be along with the death of globalism.
Northwest Resident on Fri, 21st Mar 2014 2:41 pm
Makati — You mention Iraq as being one of “the wars-for-profit”. But from my point of view, the invasion of Iraq was not to make a buck, but to lock down and securely hold a vast amount of “easy to get” high quality oil (estimated to be as large as Saudi Arabia’s original reserves). America and its allies are still in control of Iraqi oil, producing it in relatively small amounts, but holding the majority of that oil in reserve. Why? My guess is that TPTB are looking beyond economic collapse, which they know will happen along with all the associated consequences, and are holding the Iraqi oil in reserve to kick start and power a new version of human civilization post-collapse.
GregT on Fri, 21st Mar 2014 4:28 pm
“We do have a destructive leadership at all levels in the US that have been corrupted by too much power”
The real power brokers of the US are above those who you believe to be the ‘leadership’. Arthur, once again, has done his homework. The real resource being fought for here is not oil, it is the control of human labor. If any of you guys care to understand what is really going on in the world, stop buying into the MSM ZOG propaganda. Arthur has given you enough above to keep you busy for quite some time. The truth is there for anyone who wants to search for it. No one is going to spoon feed it to you.
Northwest Resident on Fri, 21st Mar 2014 5:21 pm
“The real resource being fought for here is not oil, it is the control of human labor.”
I’ve tried to get my brain around that point of view, but it just doesn’t work.
When you have oil, who needs human labor? Just build machines. Mechanize. Automate. That’s what innovation is all about, cutting human labor out of the picture.
If human labor is the ultimate goal, then why not invade India or China or some other population-dense country — you know, round up and secure all that human labor. Instead they set off a series of events that lead to the invasion of Iraq where there isn’t much human labor at all, but lots and lots of oil.
Arthur strikes me as very intelligent and well-versed, but I question the conclusions that all of his studies and admittedly large exposure to information drives him to arrive at.
Tell me why human labor is the real resource being fought for. Please do spoon feed it to me — if possible…:-)
Arthur on Fri, 21st Mar 2014 6:26 pm
The goal of Washington over the past century, like that of the USSR, is/was to establish a global power structure, or world government. It does not really matter that much what is the exact ideological foundation of that power structure. If Bolshevism works, fine. If Capitalism + Liberal democracy works better, also good.
The final goal is to abolish nations (anti-racism=anti-nationalism ideology to accomplish that) and let the world economy operate under one central bank. Anyone can go and live anywhere he wants. That’s in the (short term) interest of the third world, but not of the first world, that would disappear, in a world without borders.
The emerging reality described as “peak-oil” is not exactly favorable to achieve the NWO. Neither is the presence of large Russian and Chinese blocks, not saddled with a Protestant background, like Anglosphere. But, if someday somebody would invent an endless energy source (like fusion), the NWO would probably be inevitable.
Iraq was invaded, as always to hit several flies with one stroke:
1) capture oil resources: geo-strategic advantage over China and ‘partner’ Europe
2) remove Saddam who increasingly started to pimp himself as THE Arabian leader with an attitude against Israel
3) Saddam wanted to sell his oil in Euro’s, a frontal attack against US global interests
4) Impose liberal democracy in Iraq, that could serve as a template to be imposed in Iran and North-Korea later. And China.
But what the rulers of KSA already feared, liberal democracy is a concept that has only validity within the context of western industrial society, not in the rest of the world that essential is tribal, almost everywhere. And besides, in the view of Muslims, democracy is for pussies. Iraq morphed from essentially Arabian national-socialism to tribalism over night and is now somewhat held together by the largest tribe, the Shi’ites. Iran and Assad-Syria love the new situation, KSA hates it.
GregT on Fri, 21st Mar 2014 8:11 pm
NWR,
If you were in control of the issuance of currencies, and were able to ‘loan money’ into existence, then why would you be any longer concerned with material wealth? The game being played here is far above such a simple concept. The goal all along has not been to control just finance, but to be in control of the people. To govern the masses that you believe are not capable of governing themselves. Not just some of the people, but all of the people. As Arthur points out above, a New World Order. A one world government, controlled by one world bank. NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM.
If you had control over 2 trillion barrels of oil, and no human beings, the oil would do you absolutely no good. It is human labor that is necessary to utilize that oil, and turn it into something that is tangible. It is not possible to control the minds of the people, but it IS possible to control their labor. Just as it has always been done throughout history.
What is the biggest threat to national sovereignty? What has the capability to crash economies world wide? DEBT. Who does the US owe 17 trillion dollars to? Where did that money come from?
How can the future LABOR of human beings be owed to someone, if those human beings are not even born yet?
Northwest Resident on Fri, 21st Mar 2014 8:38 pm
GregT — So, not so much to control human labor, but to just plain control people including what labor they do — got it.
I believe that “the masses” are most definitely not capable of governing themselves. That’s a given.
A one world government could be the best thing that ever happened to the world, or the worst. Many different governments all competing against each other for limited resources, jockeying for power and strategic position — we’ve seen how that’s worked out these last ten thousand or so years.
A one-world government would be the most efficient government possible, provided it was done right. Those who have their own unique laws — female circumcision, stoning adulterers to death, letting rapists go free because the female was “asking for it” with her style of dress, child brides, etc.. — would probably prefer to not have to live under one world-wide set of laws. But cultures that allow that sort of crap are exactly the ones that need to have one-world law applied, in the interest of protecting innocents and human dignity.
In short, there is no reason to believe that one-world government would be inherently evil or bad, and plenty of reasons to believe that it might be the best thing that ever happened to humanity.
But plenty are sure to disagree. I’m not even that sure myself. Just playing devil’s advocate.
I think that “controlling human labor” as the primary goal of the elites is a stretch of rationale, despite your excellent answer. One world government — that could end up being the main goal, no argument on that point.
GregT on Fri, 21st Mar 2014 8:58 pm
NWR,
I know that I have posted some of these quotes before.
“Let me issue and control a nation’s money and I care not who writes the laws.” Mayer Amschel Rothschild (1744-1812), founder of the House of Rothschild.
“The few who understand the system will either be so interested in its profits or be so dependent upon its favours that there will be no opposition from that class, while on the other hand, the great body of people, mentally incapable of comprehending the tremendous advantage that capital derives from the system, will bear its burdens without complaint, and perhaps without even suspecting that the system is inimical to their interests.” The Rothschild brothers of London writing to associates in New York, 1863.
“I am afraid the ordinary citizen will not like to be told that the banks can and do create money. And they who control the credit of the nation direct the policy of Governments and hold in the hollow of their hand the destiny of the people.” Reginald McKenna, as Chairman of the Midland Bank, addressing stockholders in 1924.
If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks…will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. Thomas Jefferson in the debate over the Re-charter of the Bank Bill (1809)
So ask yourself this; Does this sound like the kind of people that you would like to have as your dictators?
Northwest Resident on Fri, 21st Mar 2014 9:21 pm
GregT — good quotes, and good points.
Up until recently, they never really just created money out of thin air, did they? I mean, they had some loan, or some guarantee of repayment, or some natural resource upon which to base the creation of that currency. That was up until the major fraud precipitating 2008 and ever since then in the form of QE and multiple other efforts to keep the economy limping along. Yeah, now they just print it up out of thin air, no collateral or guarantee of repayment required.
I get what you’re saying though, and no, I would not want them as my dictator(s), though they pretty much have been all along whether I wanted it or not.
I hope (and believe) that at some point in the future, banks will go the way of dinosaurs and communities will have their own local economies. There won’t be enough energy for global trade, not on any kind of grand scale that requires financing and global banks, not that I can see anyway. The age of oil-fueled wealth and power is collapsing right before our very eyes, and it is going to bring a lot of the Rothschilds and others like them down at the same time. I still hope, and I think we all still hope, for a world where there is a semblance of law and order, of security guarantees, where an elected or otherwise beneficially inclined government is in place to keep the bad guys and evil-doers under control. Whether that ends up being one world government or many local governments, it doesn’t matter to me, just the end result.
GregT on Fri, 21st Mar 2014 9:35 pm
NWR,
Chris Martenson put together a series of short videos back in 2009, called the Crash Course. I would highly recommend watching it.
http://www.peakprosperity.com/crashcourse
Chapter 12: Debt. Gives a very good summary on debt.
h ttp://www.peakprosperity.com/video/229/playlist/153/chapter-12-debt
From the video:
Now, we learned in Section 4 that money can be viewed as a claim on human labor, and we just learned that debt is really just a claim on future money, so we can put these statements together and arrive at Key Concept #6: Debt is a claim on future human labor.
Arthur on Fri, 21st Mar 2014 9:44 pm
A one-world government would be the most efficient government possible, provided it was done right.
NRW, be careful what you wish for. There is one country resembling the projected NWO the most: the USA. “Fine”, you will say, “we’re on top”.
But what will happen if the BRICS succeed in depriving the US of the reserve currency free lunch, making an end to the convenient “we print, you work” scheme and you will be no longer “on top”. Are you not afraid that you will wake up in a third world country and that a massive amount of bills will come in, to be paid by the Euro-Americans? I think that will happen and that the Euro-Americans will try to escape from the US via secession and start a country/homeland for themselves. We have seen from the example of the Ukraine during the past month that Russians prefer to live with Russians and Ukrainians with Ukrainians, although the majority Ukrainians would prefer to keep the Russians minority plus land within the Ukrainian tax-farm (as long as it is a minority that can be controlled). Now what’s going to happen if the Euro-Americans will be no longer in the majority, as will be the case, not too far in the future? They will take a hike, provided they manage to escape from Washington, that probably won’t let them without a fight.
Makati1 on Sat, 22nd Mar 2014 1:12 am
Arthur, Americans can not consider a world where say, Asia is in control. It is like looking into the sun without protection. But, it could happen.
Everyone seems to think that China cannot dump it’s dollar holdings. It can and will eventually. It is cheaper than war and a faster win.
Besides the fact that, when the price of gold is unleashed, they will easily make up a few trillion they may lose in the crash. Gold is the money of millenia and always will be.
Northwest Resident on Sat, 22nd Mar 2014 1:54 am
Arthur — Yeah, you’re right, it could end up being a mess. My qualifier was “if it is done right”. Not that I think it will happen. But one world government, if done right, would be the most efficient and probably guarantee a lower level of violence than the many competing governments in our history including today have managed to do. Just a philosophical perspective. Maybe someday in a far distant future.
Arthur on Sat, 22nd Mar 2014 8:33 am
Playing the devils advocate here, the pure existence of nukes is the best argument for the NWO, because the latter would eliminate the danger of MAD. I think that in the long run some sort of international order is inevitable. But I prefer to see it run by Europeans (EU, US, Russia) and Chinese, not Zionists and keep some form of compartimentalized/segregated world upright.