Crude Dudes

Posted on Tuesday, September 21 at 11:10 by hoopoe
LINDA MCQUAIG (Toronto Star, Sept. 19/04)

From his corner office in the heart of New York's financial district, Fadel Gheit keeps close tabs on what goes on inside the boardrooms of the big oil companies. An oil analyst at the prestigious Wall Street firm Oppenheimer & Co., the fit, distinguished-looking Gheit has been watching the oil industry closely for more than 25 years.

Selling the modern world's most indispensable commodity has never been a bad business to be in — particularly for the small group of companies that straddle the top of this privileged world. But never more so than now. "Profit-wise, things could not have been better," says Gheit, "In the last three years, they died and went to heaven .... They are all sitting on the largest piles of cash in their history."

But to stay rich they have to keep finding new reserves, and that's getting tougher. Increasingly it means cutting through permafrost or drilling deep underwater, at tremendous cost. "The cheap oil has already been found and developed and produced and consumed," says Gheit. "The low-hanging fruit has already been picked."

Well, not all the low-hanging fruit has been picked.

Nestled into the heart of the area of heaviest oil concentration in the world is Iraq, overflowing with low-hanging fruit. No permafrost, no deep water. Just giant pools of oil, right beneath the warm ground. This is fruit sagging so low, as it were, that it practically touches the ground under the weight of its ripeness.

Not only does Iraq have vast quantities of easily accessible oil, but its oil is almost untouched. "Think of Iraq as virgin territory .... This is bigger than anything Exxon is involved in currently .... It is the superstar of the future," says Gheit, "That's why Iraq becomes the most sought-after real estate on the face of the earth."

Gheit just smiles at the notion that oil wasn't a factor in the U.S. invasion of Iraq. He compares Iraq to Russia, which also has large undeveloped oil reserves. But Russia has nuclear weapons. "We can't just go over and ... occupy (Russian) oil fields," says Gheit. "It's a different ballgame." Iraq, however, was defenceless, utterly lacking, ironically, in weapons of mass destruction. And its location, nestled in between Saudi Arabia and Iran, made it an ideal place for an ongoing military presence, from which the U.S. would be able to control the entire Gulf region. Gheit smiles again: "Think of Iraq as a military base with a very large oil reserve underneath .... You can't ask for better than that."

Read the whole article

Note: whole article

Contributed By



Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. Tue Sep 21, 2004 7:46 pm
    It must be very comforting to believe that this conflict can be simply explained as an oil grab. It's an easy explanation and obviously a writer such as McQuaig can draw out a whole book by linking factoids together no matter how tenuous they are. The trouble is that this argument doesn't make any economic sense, the dollar costs alone far outweigh any possible benefits economically. I doubt McQuaig is that simple herself, but she does have to pander to the anti-this/anti-that redneck's that will buy her book.

  2. Tue Sep 21, 2004 9:21 pm
    Oh, it`s not comforting at all. See, the US government is nothing but a bunch of puppets to these vampire corporations, and so, cost of waging war is of no concern, given that the ultimate goal is to make a few rich people at the top even richer, and securing a large supply of oil for a country that has the most millionaires on the planet. You`ll see the cost of this war come out in deteriorating health care, education, infrastructure, etc. in areas of the USA that are in decline or that are already slums. In fact, we`ve already begun to see it! The USA is already technically bankrupt, but since the goal of US dog eat dog policy is to make the rich even richer, then naturally rich people won`t suffer from any high cost of war. What`s left of the middle class, the working poor, and the ultra-poor always pay the real price for the racket that is war!

    ---
    Dave Ruston

  3. Tue Sep 21, 2004 9:30 pm
    Actually, this is NOT just a series of quips and anti-American digs. I have read her latest book and it is well-researched, as usual. There is no doubt that there were a variety of reasons unrelated to oil for this invasion ... but that was the big one. For another part of the picture, see my article here: http://yellowtimes.org/article.php?sid=1083

    Paul Harris

  4. Wed Sep 22, 2004 1:53 am
    I have read every book she has had published, there is not one loose thread on any page. She cuts right through the fog and gets to the point. She has a way of upsetting the ditto heads to no end.

    Her best to date - Greed, Lust and the New Capitalism -All You Can Eat. I have had my conservative friends read it and they all enjoyed it for its obvious message - capitalism has been one huge failure.

    Roy

  5. Wed Sep 22, 2004 2:16 am
    I've already ordered the book, I'll let you know how it ends.


    ---
    "One crisis at a time is life's motto" - Carl Sagan
    Jim Callaghan
    Minden, Ontario
    705-286-1860
    www.misterc.ca

  6. Wed Sep 22, 2004 2:13 pm
    re: 'Capitalism has been huge failure'
    Hundreds of millions of people would disagree with you and Ms McQuaig because they live longer, have more freedom and have far more personal wealth and security than any group of humans in history.

  7. by hoopoe
    Wed Sep 22, 2004 5:21 pm
    Maybe you don't understand that the US is the biggest consumer of oil in the world (about 30 to 40%). In addition, the present administration considers continuing this level of consumption a matter of national security, which means that if they have to invade a country to get it they will. To think that oil has nothing to do with invading Iraq is either ignorant or naivete.

    You can be sure that they have the same policy about water as well, which they also consume and waste huge quantities of. In other words, if Canada ever gets the guts to say no to the US on this matter expect the US to invade or at least to start chopping up huge ice blocks from the Canadian arctic and sailing them down south.

    As far as Linda McQuaig linking tenous factoids together, perhaps you could actually go through the above article and illustrate these point by point stating how you disagree with them and providing logical argument against them. From what I have read of Linda McQuaig she meticulously documents all of her facts. Contrast this to your vague statements here, which are typical of any "arguments" that Bush backers present.

    You seem to be confused as to the definition of a redneck. A redneck is someone who is too intellectually lazy to actually go and collect information on their own from sources other than their canadian alliance MP or the Sun Media rags and come to an informed opinion. To apply this to Linda McQuaig or her readers is ridiculous as she is one of the few political writers out there engaging in proper and extensive analysis of her subject matter.

  8. Mon Oct 04, 2004 2:41 pm
    Believe what you want..............It happened and my
    son is in Iraq due the stupid intervention into nothing by the Bush White house.
    Ann Burt



view comments in forum


You need to be a member and be logged into the site, to comment on stories.




Your Voice

To post to the site, just sign up for a free membership/user account and then hit submit. Posts in English or French are welcome. You can email any other suggestions or comments on site content to the site editor. (Please note that Vive le Canada does not necessarily endorse the opinions or comments posted on the site.)

canadian bloggers | canadian news