Proposed Iraqi Law give US & UK control of oil

Discussion in 'Your Bloody Soap Box' started by poweredbysweat, Jan 10, 2007.

  1. poweredbysweat

    poweredbysweat New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2006
    Messages:
    176
    Likes Received:
    0
    Read the article in "The Independent".

    http://news.independent.co.uk/world/...cle2132574.ece

    The Independent on Sunday has learnt that the Iraqi government is about to push through a law giving Western oil companies the right to exploit the country's massive oil reserves....

    ...Its provisions are a radical departure from the norm for developing countries: under a system known as "production-sharing agreements", or PSAs, oil majors such as BP and Shell in Britain, and Exxon and Chevron in the US, would be able to sign deals of up to 30 years to extract Iraq's oil.

    PSAs allow a country to retain legal ownership of its oil, but gives a share of profits to the international companies that invest in infrastructure and operation of the wells, pipelines and refineries. Their introduction would be a first for a major Middle Eastern oil producer. Saudi Arabia and Iran, the world's number one and two oil exporters, both tightly control their industries through state-owned companies with no appreciable foreign collaboration, as do most members of the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries, Opec....


    Anybody continues to believe that the Iraqi war was or is about terrorism is wearing blinders. We need to write our congressmen expressing our outrage.
     
    Tags:


  2. Eldron

    Eldron New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Messages:
    969
    Likes Received:
    1
    The war aside - I'm all for PSA's...

    For too long the rest of the world has been at the mercy of OPEC - everytime they fart the oil price jumps a few $. The more players entering the middle eastern oil market the better.

    The winter might not be as mild in the US next year and OPEC will have us paying $70 a barrel again!!!!
     
  3. sogood

    sogood New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2006
    Messages:
    2,148
    Likes Received:
    0
    US and UK may have commercial control of that oil. But they won't be very happy with the action of insurgents.
     
  4. Wurm

    Wurm New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,203
    Likes Received:
    0
    PSA's? Where the Big Oil co's get to screw the indiginous Iraqi population out of their birthright? Coming from someone who works for/with Big Oil, I'm not surprised at Eldron's stance.

    However:


    Rest of article
     
  5. poweredbysweat

    poweredbysweat New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2006
    Messages:
    176
    Likes Received:
    0
    PSAs bothers me a lot. Especially when the deals that these greedy people put forth, are only possible because they lobbied the Federal Government to invade a country, kill innocent people, and occupy the country. In addition, this continued occupation is nothing less than a subsidy for these corporations, courtesy of the taxpayers. And all this is occurring at a time when the US has record debt.

    I'd say a much better solution would be to reduce our dependence on oil. How would the world be a different place, had Al Gore rightfully won the office.
     
  6. Eldron

    Eldron New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Messages:
    969
    Likes Received:
    1
    I'd like to point out that the A in PSA stands for Agreement - as in Iraq will AGREE to sell it's oil. Plus there is the job creation, infrastructure, tertiary industry growth etc that will benefit the Iraqi people.

    I work for/with the Big Oil? That's a surprise to me! I just checked the tag on the front of my building and it turns out I work for venture capitalist company with no interest in oil at all. I really didn't see that one coming...

    I love the way you don't bother with facts when forming an opinion.


    @poweredbysweat - agreed! Reducing dependance on fossil fuels should be the world's number one priority right now. I think the PSA's will be a good thing IF they are done fairly. Iraq needs money right now - america will provide capital to get the oil out of the ground with Iraq getting some (how much I ask?) of the profits. It should pave the way for us troop removal. With the profits from the oil Iraq can create infrastrucure, create it's security force (army?), get schools/unis/hospitals etc going. What Iraq needs to be independant is money - I have concerns about the PSA's but it sounds like a solution to the Iraqi problem.
     
  7. poweredbysweat

    poweredbysweat New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2006
    Messages:
    176
    Likes Received:
    0
    Iraq could easily sell their oil on the International market, and for more than the US is willing to pay with our deflated dollar. My opinion is that, from the beginning, this war was about taking control of Iraqi oil. Terrorism was merely a front.
     
  8. Eldron

    Eldron New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Messages:
    969
    Likes Received:
    1
    Agreed again.

    This war was only ever about controlling Iraqi oil and breaking OPEC's monopoly. From a moral point of view it makes me sick - from a financial/economic point of view I'm really happy. I'd much rather buy my oil from a capitalist that values my dollar/euro/rand more than my background/religious stand point/skin colour. PSA's will allow me to buy cheap oil - I have no problem with that.
     
  9. Wurm

    Wurm New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,203
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think "bothering with facts" is something I'm known for around here, although ocasionally I make mistakes. I think I have you mixed up on this with Eoin.

    PSA's being an "agreement" as you say would only be an agreement by an Iraqi gov't that is clearly a BushCo puppet. It cannot be seriously argued that the majority of the Iraqi people are willing to give up 3/4 of the profit margin of their oil resources to foreign oil companies.

    To spin it otherwise as you are prone to do Eldron is disingenuous at best.
     
  10. Eldron

    Eldron New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Messages:
    969
    Likes Received:
    1
    Interesting that you use the word spin - where did you get the 3/4 figure from? I guess you "spun" it right? Or it could be you "bothering with facts" again...

    "Clearly a BuchCo puppet"? Would that be "bothering with fact" or more spinning?

    To use the age olde expression. Pot. Kettle. Black.

    PSA's are probably the only solution to a problem that was completely the US' making. If I were you I'd support them - although I guess you never would - what would you have to bitch & moan about if the US made right their error by creating a semi self dependant Iraq?
     
  11. Wurm

    Wurm New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,203
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, that would be you not bothering to comprehend the facts:

    "the provision’s backers say the 75 percent take on the profits will go on until drilling costs have been recouped. Err, that could take a couple of years right? After that, the Oil Boyz would skim about 20 percent of the profits. But that will double the industry skim for such deals."


    And now you're going to tell us that the Maliki gov't (or any "gov't" since Saddam) is an independent gov't/not a puppet regime, while 140,000+ foreign troops are fighting in and occupying its country??

    [​IMG]

    There's being disingenuous, and then there's being just plain stupid.


    Only solution? Hardly. How about this:

    1- Bu$hCo leaves Iraq.
    2- Iraq sorts out its own problems.
    3- Iraqi people/gov't nationalizes oil industry and keeps 100% of the profits instead of just 25%, even if there are eventually 2 or 3 separate "Iraqs".

    No, we can't have that can we? No more than UK & US would have Iran's oil nationalized in the 1950's - so they created a coup and installed the Shah.
     
  12. Eldron

    Eldron New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Messages:
    969
    Likes Received:
    1
    OK you're right.

    Edited: you know what - I don't care what you think.
     
  13. Wurm

    Wurm New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2004
    Messages:
    2,203
    Likes Received:
    0
    The only honorable thing left for you to do is commit hara-kiri. [​IMG]
     
  14. wolfix

    wolfix New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Messages:
    2,756
    Likes Received:
    0
    No one here does.
     
Loading...
Loading...