Godlike Productions - Reply to Thread

Users Online Now: 1,446 (Who's On?)	Visitors Today: 204,697
Pageviews Today: 339,961	Threads Today: 159	Posts Today: 2,618
03:37 AM

Back to Thread

REPLY TO THREAD

Subject OIL & GAS WARS THE MIDDLE EAST AND THE PETRODOLLAR

User Name

Font color: Font:

In accordance with industry accepted best practices we ask that users limit their copy / paste of copyrighted material to the relevant portions of the article you wish to discuss and no more than 50% of the source material, provide a link back to the original article and provide your original comments / criticism in your post with the article.

[quote:DoomneT:MV8yMDEyMjEzXzMzODExMzI3XzdFRDUyRjIw]
[b]Pepe Escobar notes:[/b]

[i]Under newly elected president George W Bush… Unocal snuck back into the game and, as early as January 2001, was cozying up to the Taliban yet again, this time supported by a star-studded governmental cast of characters, including undersecretary of state Richard Armitage, himself a former Unocal lobbyist.

Negotiations eventually broke down because of those pesky transit fees the Taliban demanded. Beware the Empire’s fury. At a Group of Eight summit meeting in Genoa in July 2001, Western diplomats indicated that the Bush administration had decided to take the Taliban down before year’s end. (Pakistani diplomats in Islamabad would later confirm this to me.) The attacks of September 11, 2001 just slightly accelerated the schedule.[/i]

[i]Soon after the start of the Afghan war, Karzai became president (while Le Monde reported that Karzai was a Unocal consultant, it is possible that it was a mix-up with the Unocal consultant and neocon who got Karzai  elected, Zalmay Khalilzad).  In any event, a mere year later, a U.S.-friendly Afghani regime signed onto TAPI.

India just formally signed on to Tapi. This ended the long-proposed competitor: an Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) pipeline.[/i]

[b][color=red]Competing Pipe Dreams[/color][/b]
[i]
Virtually all of the current global geopolitical tension is based upon whose vision of the “New Silk Road” will control.

But before we can understand the competing visions, we have to actually see the maps:[/i]

http://blog.curry.com/images/2012/02/07/gasSupplyAndDemand.jpg

http://blog.curry.com/images/2012/02/07/southAndBluestream.jpg

[b]And here are the competing pipelines backed by the U.S. and by Iran, before India sided with the U.S.:[/b]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-CaXVzRxWw8Y/Tz_0g68MSKI/AAAAAAAAK40/x3bnv5xGZe8/s400/TAPI%2Band%2BIPI%2BPipelines.png
[/quote]

Original Message Five months before September 11 2001, the US advocated using force against Iraq … to secure control of its oil.

The Afghanistan war was planned before 9/11

See this:

[link to news.bbc.co.uk]

[link to www.msnbc.msn.com]

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 greenlighted the pipeline, the second if they didn’t.

Congressman Ed Markey said:

Well, we’re in Libya because of oil.
Senator Graham agreed.

And the U.S. and UK overthrew the democratically-elected leader of Iran because he announced that he would nationalize the oil industry in that country.

It’s a War for GAS

But it’s about gas as much as oil
As key war architect John Bolton said last year:

The critical oil and natural gas producing region that we fought so many wars to try and protect our economy from the adverse impact of losing that supply or having it available only at very high prices.

For example, the pipeline which the U.S. wanted to run through Afghanistan prior to 9/11 was to transport gas as much as oil.

Pictures (click to insert)

News