Viewpoint: Oil, war and terror

Oil, war

and terror

By Joe Baker

Senior Editor

“No matter what political reasons are given for war, the underlying reason is ALWAYS economic.” —A.J. Taylor, British historian.

Many recent events make little sense unless viewed against a backdrop of natural resources. For those who believe the War on Terror has nothing to do with oil, I suggest you consider the following facts. They have nothing to do with who is in power or what else may be happening.

Dale A. Pfeiffer is a Michigan geologist. He points out that our civilization today is entirely based on hydrocarbons—oil and natural gas. The energy we use to power our technology comes from these sources.

We heat and cool our homes with hydrocarbons; our transportation runs on them, and our electricity is largely generated by them. Even our food is fed with fertilizers based on hydrocarbons and sprayed with hydrocarbon-based insecticides. Each person in this country has the energy equivalent of a dozen slaves working on his or her behalf.

There is much talk about dependency on foreign oil and weaning ourselves from it. Why are we so dependent on oil and natural gas? Simply because there is no other source of energy that holds as much energy per unit.

The only thing close is uranium, and it is scarce and dangerous to work with. It could never provide enough energy to meet our requirements. The best grade of coal has only about 50 percent as much energy as oil and gas. Renewable energy sources can furnish only a small percentage of our needs.

Fusion energy seems just beyond our grasp

Energy cells are a storage system, not a source of energy. The energy in the cells must be produced from another source. Fuel cell technology is coming along but will not hit the mainstream market for anther years. So we are stuck with oil and gas.

Hydrocarbons are not considered a renewable resource. The conditions that produced them have been right only once in the history of the earth, and we are using them up at an alarming rate.

Production from any oil field follows a bell curve. It will increase as more wells are opened, then peak and ultimately, production will decline. That is the trend for every oil field ever discovered.

Dr. King Hubbert mapped the production curves for all the known oil fields in the world. He determined U.S. production would peak in the early 1970s and then decline. By the end of the 1970s, domestic production was declining irreversibly, meaning we cannot escape dependence on foreign oil.

Pfeiffer said global oil production peaked sometime last year and will start to decline within five more years. Maximum production is calculated at 90 million barrels a day. Unfortunately, he projects, by the year 2010, demand will be 100 million barrels a day. Now you see the crunch.

The oil-producing regions of the Middle East and the Caspian Sea basin are not expected to peak for several years yet. Whoever controls oil production in those two parts of the globe will control the world. Reportedly, Israel and the Palestinian Territories are also locations of untapped reserves.

Natural gas production likewise is expected to decline in the next decade. Coal resources in the U.S. are estimated to last about another 50 years. What about the Alaskan oil fields? Harvesting this oil would take a tremendous investment in energy and time and would yield only about 2 percent of our needs for 6 months, according to some experts.

Global oil production is peaking. We are in the twilight of the oil age. In five years, we will be unable to pump enough oil to meet the requirements of our civilization.

Pfeiffer says the oil elites want to use the remaining resources to establish a security state where they will be assured of a comfortable existence while the rest of us starve, suffer and slave for their benefit.

However, stretching his credibility, Pfeiffer fails to mention the Russian oil fields and how they have been used to augment supply when Iraq or OPEC threaten to or actually cuts supply.

Pfeiffer also asserts a background or network of control. How will control of the world’s supplies be gained? First, look at the backgrounds of the present power structure. The Bush and bin Laden families have close financial ties. Both have been involved in the Carlyle Group, a $12 billion equity company with holdings in oil and defense. Bush Sr. and George W. have been and are involved in the oil business in this country.

Beyond that, Dick Cheney was the CEO of Haliburton Oil, Colin Powell is a major stockholder in several defense contractors. Condoleeza Rice, the National Security Advisor, sat on the board of Chevron Oil and Exxon. Andrew Card, Chief of Staff, hails from General Motors. Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense, is former CEO of Searle Pharmaceuticals. Dick Armitage, Deputy Secretary of Defense, is a board member of Carlyle. Robert Jordan, ambassador to Saudi Arabia, was a member of Baker Botts, a legal firm specializing in oil and defense (the Baker in the firm is James Baker III).

The military-industrial complex provides the hardware for this axis of oil. Tony Principi, Secretary of Foreign Affairs, is from Lockheed Martin. Gordon England, Secretary of the Navy, is linked to General Dynamics. James Roche, Secretary of the Air Force, is from Northrup Grumman. Gen. Thomas White, Retd., Secretary of the Army, comes from Enron Energy. Donald Evans, Secretary of Commerce, owns Colorado Oil Co. Frank Carlucci, CEO of Carlyle, is a member of the Middle East Policy Council.

As with the energy company Enron, most of them had input to the administration’s energy policy through the task force whose notes are being so fiercely guarded by Mr. Cheney. The energy plan, basically, is a giveaway to the oil industry and a commitment to energy companies.

The attitude of this group toward global resources was indicated by George W. Bush when he was asked what he would do if Canada sought to restrict the flow of natural gas to this country. Bush replied he would do whatever was necessary to protect “our right” to Canada’s natural gas.

The attack on Afghanistan was on the pretext of fighting terror, but its base purpose was the same as the war in Bosnia, to secure an oil and gas pipeline. In Bosnia, it is to supply the European market, in Afghanistan, to pipe oil and gas to the Asian market and to supply the U.S.

The War on Terror gives the oil elite a perfect excuse to grab control of major oil and gas deposits in countries such as Iran, Iraq and Colombia and lets the administration legitimize a police state in the U.S., so the elite will be prepared to deal with an impoverished and starving population when the oil runs out.

You and I still have the power to change this scenario. Whether or not you believe the motivations are as outlined, the resources are running out. What are we going to do about it? By next election, there won’t be a lot of time left on the clock.

Starting on alternative energy systems—right now—is the only answer. Push fuel cell research. Invest more money is research and development of more efficient and cheaper solar, wind, bio-mass and hydroelectric power. Rockford industries can begin this process today, and we can be on the cutting edge of the driver’s seat of all kinds of power for tomorrow.

More on this problem can be found at www: from the and the alternative energy section of our website, www:

Enjoy The Rock River Times? Help spread the word!