China, Russia plan joint war games

[GLauren]

ummmmm...yeah.

Nostradamus? You there?

:nonono:

BEIJING,China (AP) -- China and Russia will hold their first joint military exercise next year, the Chinese government has announced, and President Hu Jintao is calling for further expansion of the rapidly growing alliance between the former Cold War rivals.

The announcement came during a visit this week to Beijing by Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov, who was expected to discuss expanding Russia's multibillion-dollar annual arms sales to China.

The exercises were to take place on Chinese territory, the official China News Service (CNS) said Monday.

But that report and other government statements did not say when they would take place or what forces would be involved.

"We want ... to promote the development of the two countries' strategic collaborative relationship in order to safeguard and promote regional and world peace," CNS quoted Hu as telling Ivanov.

China's Xinhua News Agency quoted Ivanov and his Chinese counterpart, Cao Gangchuan, as saying the military exercises would be an "important event, the significance and impact of which will be far-reaching."

Beijing and Moscow have built up military and political ties since the Soviet collapse in 1991, driven in part by a joint desire to counterbalance U.S. global dominance.

They are partners in the six-nation Shanghai Cooperation Organization, formed to combat what they consider the common threat of Islamic extremism and separatism.

The other members are the former Soviet republics of Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan.

In October, Beijing and Moscow settled the last of their decades-old border disputes that led to violent clashes in the 1960s and 1970s.

The agreement was signed during a trip to Beijing by Russian President Vladimir Putin, who said relations had reached "unparalleled heights."

That visit also produced a pact to jointly develop Russian energy resources -- an urgent issue for Beijing, which is trying to avert fuel shortages in its booming economy.

The frontier, where at one point 700,000 Soviet troops faced 1 million Chinese soldiers, is now a bustling cross-border market.

China has become the Russian arms industry's No. 1 customer, and is expected to buy weapons worth $2 billion, this year to modernize its arsenal and back up frequent threats to invade Taiwan, the self-ruled island that Beijing claims as its territory.

The United States and the European Union have banned weapons sales to China since its bloody 1989 crackdown on pro-democracy protesters.

But Moscow has supplied Beijing with high-performance Su-27 fighters and other top-of-the-line arms.

Hu is to visit Moscow in May during festivities commemorating the end of World War II.

[shadowchaser]

ah shit maybe i should hold off on buying a new car

[Snardy]

ah shit maybe i should hold off on buying a new car

In a related note, cheap Chinese cars are expected to flood the US market by 2010. Who's going to selling them? The top company to do business with China - Wal-Mart.

Once Detroit goes under, Americans will quickly wise up.

[shadowchaser]

In a related note, cheap Chinese cars are expected to flood the US market by 2010. Who's selling them? The top company to do business with China - Wal-Mart.

Once Detroit goes under, Americans will quickly wise up.

we must find the heart of Wal-Mart and destroy it

[ManWhore]

Who's going to selling them? The top company to do business with China - Wal-Mart.


something tells me that those cars will not be LEVs either. :nonono:

so...how long until WW3? :confused:

[bobafettish]

we must find the heart of Wal-Mart and destroy it

http://www.rhythmism.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=15011

[ichi_gami]

In a related note, cheap Chinese cars are expected to flood the US market by 2010. Who's going to selling them? The top company to do business with China - Wal-Mart.

Once Detroit goes under, Americans will quickly wise up.
who's going to be doing the purchasing?

oh yeah, those who are employed by domestinc industry, aka "evil corporations"

my heart pumps piss for those who slit their own throats.

(that said, news of the domestic auto industry's demise was premature in the 1960s, and is likely premature now as well. there are and have been plenty of cheap shitboxes offered for sale in the u.s. and the market has, time and again, shown little interest.)

[Supster]

post of the day imo! :lol:

http://www.rhythmism.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=15011

[shadowchaser]

so...how long until WW3? :confused:

i know the roaches in your apartment will survive :lol:

sorry :nice: :kiss:

[drone]

(that said, news of the domestic auto industry's demise was premature in the 1960s, and is likely premature now as well. there are and have been plenty of cheap shitboxes offered for sale in the u.s. and the market has, time and again, shown little interest.)



seriously....i mean i'll buy some piece of shit gizmo at the dollar store, if it breaks who cares...i'm not sure i'd buy a car at the dollar store....if it breaks i might care if i happen to be in the car when it happens...

[CrashinCarey]

in related news, chinese food places have been springing up all over the place is urban areas around moscow

and wealthy chinese business men have been buying russian mail order brides left and right

[Phuturephunkshun]

seriously....i mean i'll buy some piece of shit gizmo at the dollar store, if it breaks who cares...i'm not sure i'd buy a car at the dollar store....if it breaks i might care if i happen to be in the car when it happens...


..This is true, but if I could commute and zip around the city in a shitbox that only costs me 20 bucks a month to insure, and leave the Acura for weekend warrior duty, I'd probably do it...think of the savings on insurance because of the reduced milage..

[Phuturephunkshun]

In a related note, cheap Chinese cars are expected to flood the US market by 2010. Who's going to selling them? The top company to do business with China - Wal-Mart.

Once Detroit goes under, Americans will quickly wise up.



Quickly wize up about what? :confused: Walmart, or American Auto Makers?

The latter I actually like, we do have the capacity and the know how to build a solid automobile, and honestly the quality has been pretty good coming from our own companies the last decade..I think people are stuck in the 80's a bit too much sometimes. I mean yeah, there are some stinkers, but overall, we don't build a bad automobile..

Then again, try telling that to all the Euro-cocksuckers out there that just demand to overpay for an overengineered (but nice) car that will cost double what you paid for it in repairs.

[IB75]

I predict a major war being fought over Siberia, between Russia and China within the next 15 yrs. With Russia, beating the shit out of China.

[ManWhore]

With Russia, beating the shit out of China.

you mean nuking

[Daveraver]

I predict a major war being fought over Siberia, between Russia and China within the next 15 yrs. With Russia, beating the shit out of China.

I predict you're wrong. Siberia's got nothing in the way of sizeable resources. War goes where the oil goes, we've been nuking the fuck out of the Caspian basin because ten years ago we thought there was an oil field the size of Saudi Arabia under Turkmenistan, Kazahkstan, etc.

Now we've realized they've got no oil (they've got about 6 billion barrels) but they've got tons of natural gas, so we've built a pipeline across our new loft, Afghanistan, through Pakistan to Dahbol, India (from Turkmenistan).

Stan stan stan.

So China's going to start pumping out cars, cool. We might get some, but they're going to get bajillions of them and that means oil demand goes through the roof. They see us helping ourselves to Irag's 11% share of world oil production and they realize we're making a run on whatever resources we can get, so we can screw them out of that giant Chinese economic boom they've been threatening to make ever since 1466.

So of course they're going to team up with Russia, they're super cozy now. Russia's so bent out of shape after the complete economic raping we helped their oligarchs do to the country that they'll sell warheads and spy planes to a class of first graders if they had the cash. That and they're anyone's lap dog and war ally for the right kind of cash. (Read: Putin being Bush's bitch during the election). Russia may be completely fucked as far as nations go, but they're still a pretty scary name when it comes to global warfare.

So, predictions:

Saudia Arabia goes postal. Interal coup, something of the sort, we shuffle in to help restabilize our "staunch allies in the war on terror." That's another 25% of the world's oil.

As some of the what, sixty or so, planned oil digs and drills get underway on the Ivory coast, Africa gets fucked by the rest of the world.

Wow. That was long.

[noiseboy]

joint war games?

like stoned tic tac toe???

it'll take 'em years to figure out to get the computer to play itself.

:p

[ManWhore]

So China's going to start pumping out cars, cool. We might get some, but they're going to get bajillions of them and that means oil demand goes through the roof.

China's state enterprises have been buying up natural resources all over the world. However, China has been overpaying for what its been getting.


China's Splurge on Resources May Not Be a Sign of Strength
By HOWARD W. FRENCH

Published: December 12, 2004


HANGHAI — Over the last year, the Chinese government and some of its largest companies have hopscotched the globe, from Australia to Angola and Canada to Sudan, writing huge checks. The idea is to secure supplies of oil and other raw materials with which to prime China's formidable industrial sector.

Last month, as President Hu Jintao jetted around South America, Argentina won deals worth $20 billion, much of it in railways and energy exploration, and Brazil was not far behind, with China agreeing to build roads and pipelines to help get resources to market.

It is tempting to see this shopping spree as a sign of strength, or even proof of China's emergence, finally, as a true economic rival to the United States.

But many analysts look at China's global push for resources - and especially the hefty prices it is paying - as a sign of weakness and national insecurity.

The reason for Chinese anxiety, particularly in energy markets, is that big Western companies are already well established in the richest oil regions and can outdo China's producersfinancially. China also sees the American military presence in places like Iraq, Afghanistan and Uzbekistan as part of a drive to control Central Asia's rich oil reserves.

"China can be competitive in markets where they face the junior varsity, but not with the varsity," said Andrew Thompson, a China expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, in Washington. "Paranoia is one way to describe their behavior. I would call it an acute awareness of their vulnerability. The new kids on the block who lack faith in the rule of law because they don't have it themselves, they don't see the international system as being in their favor, and engage in a constant quest for vertical integration in their business dealings, wanting to control every aspect of whatever it is they need.

"The basic reality, though, is that they don't have the ability to compete internationally yet."

While a few nations where China is signing expensive oil deals are major producers - like Iran, where Beijing committed $200 billion last month - most are niche players. China is spending a reported $1 billion in an oil deal with Brazil that includes building a pipeline, an investment that some analysts say may cost three times the market value of the oil involved.

China has also invested heavily in Sudan to find, drill and ship an estimated 70,000 barrels of oil a day, a relatively small return. In Angola, China recently committed $2 billion to exploit an oil field with an estimated daily output of just 10,000 barrels.

If it turns out that China is paying too much for resources, the world economy could feel the effects.

In one closely scrutinized deal, China's state-owned Minmetals Corporation is bidding to purchase Noranda of Canada, the third-largest zinc producer and ninth-largest copper producer in the world, for a reported $5.5 billion. The deal is expected to include assumption of a substantial amount of debt not reflected in the cash price, and appears to be based on the assumption that commodity prices will stay high indefinitely, said Jason Kindopp, a China analyst at the Eurasia Group, a New York-based political-risk consulting firm. Mr. Kindopp said that China risked waking up one day to find itself holding vastly inflated contracts in a global recession in commodities, much the way Japan suffered major losses after having overpaid for international assets during its boom in the 1980's.

The difference between Japan then and China now is that Japan's economy was far better prepared to withstand such shocks.

"Wanting to go out and buy equity in natural resources is not inherently wrongheaded, but you have to travel pretty far down the road, in terms of conspiratorial views of the world, in order to justify the way they are going about it," Mr. Kindopp said. "China's economy is grossly imbalanced at this point, with an overwhelming dependence on investment versus consumption - possibly the most imbalanced country in human history," he said, adding that "China is paying peak prices for commodities today, and if their economy stumbles in any significant way, we are going to see really significant declines in the prices and some very serious pain as a result."

Other experts acknowledge a speculative bent in the way China is investing, but say the Chinese deem the prices justified by the sense of security they bring.

"Chinese companies are not as mature as Shell or BP, which can evaluate their risk better, but for now, their priority is to go out and find new supplies," said Han Wenke, vice director of the Energy Research Institute, a part of the Chinese government's State Development and Reform Committee. "It is very difficult to say if these investments will pay off in the long term. But all of these companies - state-owned companies - have stockholders, and they will control that."

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/12/weekinreview/12fren.html?oref=login

[GLauren]

I predict you're wrong. Siberia's got nothing in the way of sizeable resources.

you're kidding right? :lol: :lol:

Gold mining.

and just because Russian workers are too fuckin' lazy and alcoholic to dig it all out (thus ensuring the endless future wealth of the country and creating an actual middle class), doesn't mean it's not sitting there.

[Daveraver]

you're kidding right? :lol: :lol:

Gold mining.

and just because Russian workers are too fuckin' lazy and alcoholic to dig it all out (thus ensuring the endless future wealth of the country and creating an actual middle class), doesn't mean it's not sitting there.

I meant fossil fuels, I should have been more precise.

And do you honestly think that even if the gold was mined the people of Russia would see Ruble one from it? C'mon now, you're close enough to that situation to know exactly what happened during the 1990's and to know exactly who's running shit over there.

[IB75]

[QUOTE=Daveraver]I predict you're wrong. Siberia's got nothing in the way of sizeable resources. War goes where the oil goes, we've been nuking the fuck out of the Caspian basin because ten years ago we thought there was an oil field the size of Saudi Arabia under Turkmenistan, Kazahkstan, etc.

Now we've realized they've got no oil (they've got about 6 billion barrels) but they've got tons of natural gas, so we've built a pipeline across our new loft, Afghanistan, through Pakistan to Dahbol, India (from Turkmenistan).
QUOTE]

Siberia has oil, gas, timber, diamonds, gas, coal, water, copper, nikel, zink, aluminium ores,iron, precious metals, gold, half of Russia's limestone deposits are allocated in Siberia. There is a reason , Russia is the biggest world oil producer outside of the middle east. oil-producer in the world, and those oil reserves are not located on the outskirts of Moscow

[GLauren]

I meant fossil fuels, I should have been more precise.

And do you honestly think that even if the gold was mined the people of Russia would see Ruble one from it? C'mon now, you're close enough to that situation to know exactly what happened during the 1990's and to know exactly who's running shit over there.

nah you're right about that.

but the 90's were the 90's. Yeltsin was too busy hittin' the bottle to give a rats ass. and granted Putin is a Soviet crook but he can just up and decide at any moment "hmmm...maybe by mining that vast taiga, the economy will dig itself out of this crap. let's try it."

the amount of gold,timber and other resources that are just sitting there are innumberable.

but i agree, oil is another "animal" entirely...in the scheme of geopolitics.

[Daveraver]

Siberia has oil, gas, timber, diamonds, gas, coal, water, copper, nikel, zink, aluminium ores,iron, precious metals, gold, half of Russia's limestone deposits are allocated in Siberia. There is a reason , Russia is the biggest world oil producer outside of the middle east. oil-producer in the world, and those oil reserves are not located on the outskirts of Moscow

Understandable, but do you really think that China is going to invade Russia, which still has a host of nuclear weapons to secure oil production?

[GLauren]

China and Russia are gonna be strategic/military allies. plain and simple. they're gonna create a whole new counterbalance to the U.S. hegemony.

cause Europe is sure as hell not gonna do it. at least not militarily. the EU is more for economic purposes.

[ManWhore]

"hmmm...maybe by mining that vast taiga, the economy will dig itself out of this crap. let's try it."


but he won't.

or he'll say: "hmmm...maybe by mining that vast taiga, I can get filthy rich"

[IB75]

Understandable, but do you really think that China is going to invade Russia, which still has a host of nuclear weapons to secure oil production?

It's been done before..late 60s-70s..territorial disputes.

[GLauren]

Siberia has oil, gas, timber, diamonds, gas, coal, water, copper, nikel, zink, aluminium ores,iron, precious metals, gold, half of Russia's limestone deposits are allocated in Siberia. There is a reason , Russia is the biggest world oil producer outside of the middle east. oil-producer in the world, and those oil reserves are not located on the outskirts of Moscow

you're forgetting Venezuela. why do you think we have been giving a rats ass about the state of their economy and politics?

Sans oil, the only thing Venezuela has to offer anyone is ridiculously gorgeous women,imo of course. :lol:

[CrashinCarey]

the amount of gold,timber and other resources that are just sitting there are innumberable.
.

what is this age of empires?

(best game ever)

[GLauren]

what is this age of empires?

(best game ever)

you'd be surprised. :lol: :nonono:

Putin and other Eastern leaders are still of this mindset.

why do you think he wants an Eastern/Soviet/pro-Russian president in Ukraine?

he needs the leader of Ukraine, (which is a huge resource rich country and the main conduit between Russia and Europe) to be his bitch.

[CrashinCarey]

you'd be surprised. :lol: :nonono:

Putin and other Eastern leaders are still of this mindset.

why do you think he wants an Eastern/Soviet/pro-Russian president in Ukraine?

he needs the leader of Ukraine, (which is a huge resource rich country and the main conduit between Russia and Europe) to be his bitch.

obviously Putin doesnt play Risk

[Daveraver]

It's been done before..late 60s-70s..territorial disputes.

I've gotta say, if I'm a Chinese general, I'm going to look at the situation and say, "Hmmmm, let's see, we've got oil and reserves and shit in Africa and the Middle East, places with no nuclear weapons, and then there's a lot of oil in Russia, and they've got enough functional ICBMs to turn us into Mars.... Oh let's definitely attack Russia."

Here's a better prediction, although the certainty of it I have no idea: Russia and China get in bed together and start sharing some great deals on oil, and neither nation gets burnt to an ionized shadow of its former self, because neither country is stupid.

[GLauren]

obviously Putin doesnt play Risk

:D

Kramer: Or is it because I've built a stronghold around Greenland? I've driven you out of Western Europe and I've left you teetering on the brink of complete annihilation.

Newman: I'm not beaten yet. I still have armies in the Ukraine.

Kramer: Ha ha, the Ukraine. Do you know what the Ukraine is? It's a sitting duck. A road apple, Newman. The Ukraine is weak. It's feeble. I think it's time to put the hurt on the Ukraine.

Ukrainian: I come from Ukraine. You not say Ukraine weak.

Kramer: Yeah, well we're playing a game here, pal.

Ukrainian: Ukraine is game to you?! Howbout I take your little board and smash it!!

[347]

let's get it on with those ruskies and chinamen right now.

USA will fuck their shit up in a nuclear war.

[bsb2002]

is drago involved in this in any way?

[GLauren]

is drago involved in this in any way?

you can bet your perogies on it!

http://www.rhythmism.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=15024&stc=1

[ManWhore]

nuclear war.

its nucular. get it right. :mad:

[Grumpygus]

A few thoughts.

Siberia is a vast wilderness rich with natural resources. It is also Siberia. Good luck developing those resources in a profitable manner. You have to process the resources and get them to markets, and the brutal excesses of that climate and the distances involved diminish your margins. And of course, there is the corruption.

China and Russia have nothing to gain by way of armed conflict. They tried that in the late 60s, and I doubt that they will do so again. Their geopolitical interests don't tend in that direction. Moreover, both have simmering Islamic separatist movements that they need to address. China is now a leader among nations and does not stand to gain from the collapse of the international order. Hence, their engagement with North Korea. At the same time, China has its own interests, particularly vis-a-vis its increasing energy needs. In consequence, and far more problematic than some war games, the Chinese government is getting closer to Iran. This is not good. The mullahs look to China's example as their own way forward, i.e., maintain a repressive political state, but allow economic liberalization as a conduit for the frustrated ambitions of the people.

China does not want war with the USA. No one can afford this scenario. If you wnat to look at global economic meltdown, don't worry about Chinese imports, worry about their increasing ownership of our national debt, and their ability to effect the fortunes of our currency on international markets.

Finally, Drago!!! I was on a flight years ago when the movie was Rocky Whatever, and they started the voice over without playing the film or letting us know what was up... "My name is Drago. The world does not know who I am, but soon everyone will know my name..." People thought we were getting hi-jacked and totally freaked out. Such is life.

[commando]

I am not even going to touch this with a 10 foot pole.

[dj bradley]

I am not even going to touch this with a 10 foot pole.


would you touch it with voyeur's incher?

[dullboy]

I predict you're wrong. Siberia's got nothing in the way of sizeable resources. War goes where the oil goes, we've been nuking the fuck out of the Caspian basin because ten years ago we thought there was an oil field the size of Saudi Arabia under Turkmenistan, Kazahkstan, etc.

Now we've realized they've got no oil (they've got about 6 billion barrels) but they've got tons of natural gas, so we've built a pipeline across our new loft, Afghanistan, through Pakistan to Dahbol, India (from Turkmenistan).

Stan stan stan.

So China's going to start pumping out cars, cool. We might get some, but they're going to get bajillions of them and that means oil demand goes through the roof. They see us helping ourselves to Irag's 11% share of world oil production and they realize we're making a run on whatever resources we can get, so we can screw them out of that giant Chinese economic boom they've been threatening to make ever since 1466.

So of course they're going to team up with Russia, they're super cozy now. Russia's so bent out of shape after the complete economic raping we helped their oligarchs do to the country that they'll sell warheads and spy planes to a class of first graders if they had the cash. That and they're anyone's lap dog and war ally for the right kind of cash. (Read: Putin being Bush's bitch during the election). Russia may be completely fucked as far as nations go, but they're still a pretty scary name when it comes to global warfare.

So, predictions:

Saudia Arabia goes postal. Interal coup, something of the sort, we shuffle in to help restabilize our "staunch allies in the war on terror." That's another 25% of the world's oil.

As some of the what, sixty or so, planned oil digs and drills get underway on the Ivory coast, Africa gets fucked by the rest of the world.

Wow. That was long.

That was like: "Miss(ed) Manners goes political" :lol:

[Simael]

Saudia Arabia goes postal. Interal coup, something of the sort, we shuffle in to help restabilize our "staunch allies in the war on terror." That's another 25% of the world's oil.


W burnt so much political/diplomatic juice on the sideshow of Iraq.. something that will be badly needed <i>when</i> the Saudi situation escalates.

Also if the goal of removing Saddam was cheap oil (i don't think it was actually), this wasn't even accomplished. There are still probably a few dollars in the price of oil because of the invasion - essentially a huge tax on the world's economy. US contractors and drillers may have been helped, but in the short run invading oil-producing countries raises the price of oil.

[Daveraver]

W burnt so much political/diplomatic juice on the sideshow of Iraq.. something that will be badly needed <i>when</i> the Saudi situation escalates.

Also if the goal of removing Saddam was cheap oil (i don't think it was actually), this wasn't even accomplished. There are still probably a few dollars in the price of oil because of the invasion - essentially a huge tax on the world's economy. US contractors and drillers may have been helped, but in the short run invading oil-producing countries raises the price of oil.

It's not so much cheap oil as it is the control of the oil. For the most part, oil hasn't dropped in price because of scale of the insurgency over there. Most media outlets and official government replies still make out the rebellion to be small pockets of resistance, while CIA documents say that the whole thing is spiralling out of control. Try to produce cheap oil when you've got thousands of miles of pipeline to protect.

What else could the war in Iraq possibly be about? Freedom? Terrorism? WMD's? :lol: In every single one of those reasons there are like forty other nations that would have been better served by invasion/occupation.

As for Saudi Arabia, the plan to go in there has been around for about two years, ever since we started distancing ourselves from them with anti-Saud PR, right around when King Fahd's health dropped through the floor. America's pretty much shown that it doesn't need or want world favor for doing this kind of thing.

If the situation goes south (i.e. the princes separately controlling the national gaurd and the army start threatening civil war), then expect us to be able to sweep in there to provide "stability."

We started moving our Saudi based military out of there very quietly in 2002. Whatever's not in Iraq is still stationed in Qatar, just a helicopter flight away.

[Phuturephunkshun]

As for Saudi Arabia, the plan to go in there has been around for about two years, ever since we started distancing ourselves from them with anti-Saud PR, right around when King Fahd's health dropped through the floor. America's pretty much shown that it doesn't need or want world favor for doing this kind of thing.

If the situation goes south (i.e. the princes separately controlling the national gaurd and the army start threatening civil war), then expect us to be able to sweep in there to provide "stability."



..With Mecca and Medina both situated in that country, there's no sane way we could ever set foot in that place in a hostile way, civil war or not. It would be instantly galvanizing to any zealot with an agenda..

If we ever have to 'invade' SA, whether invited by a faction or not, WWIII would have officially begun..

[Simael]

It's not so much cheap oil as it is the control of the oil. For the most part, oil hasn't dropped in price because of scale of the insurgency over there. Most media outlets and official government replies still make out the rebellion to be small pockets of resistance, while CIA documents say that the whole thing is spiralling out of control. Try to produce cheap oil when you've got thousands of miles of pipeline to protect.

What else could the war in Iraq possibly be about? Freedom? Terrorism? WMD's? :lol: In every single one of those reasons there are like forty other nations that would have been better served by invasion/occupation.


Yes i'm saying there wasn't a sufficiently good reason for going into Iraq vs. other countries, including the control of oil.

Since there is a competitive market for oil out there, to some extent price <i>is</i> control. In other words I think the issue of control is overrated and can be reduced to price assuming that you have somewhat rational sellers - that they want money, as Saddam did and the current Saudi regime does. So the idea of going into Iraq in order to "control" the oil is counterproductive.

If fundamentalists take-over in SA and don't want to play ball, that's another story, although i think that invasion would be qualitatively different because of the religious implications.

[Daveraver]

..With Mecca and Medina both situated in that country, there's no sane way we could ever set foot in that place in a hostile way, civil war or not. It would be instantly galvanizing to any zealot with an agenda..

If we ever have to 'invade' SA, whether invited by a faction or not, WWIII would have officially begun..

Don't be so sure. We can't be more disliked by the world muslim population as it is. Saudi Arabia has been in our pocket for so long that I doubt the reaction to an occupation would be much different than the invasion of Iraq.

Remember, people here have been quick to eat up the whole, "Have to stabilize the region" line of bullshit. If Saudia Arabia actually does become unstable, wouldn't the reasoning behind an occupation make much more sense?

Remember, 15 of the 9/11 hi jackers were Saudi Arabian (according to their passports). They're nine times the state sponsor of terror than Iraq ever was. Wouldn't you actually feel a little safer with them under our boot than Iraq? I think it's an explanation that more Americans than you'd think would be okay with.

[Daveraver]

Yes i'm saying there wasn't a sufficiently good reason for going into Iraq vs. other countries, including the control of oil.

Since there is a competitive market for oil out there, to some extent price <i>is</i> control. In other words I think the issue of control is overrated and can be reduced to price assuming that you have somewhat rational sellers - that they want money, as Saddam did and the current Saudi regime does. So the idea of going into Iraq in order to "control" the oil is counterproductive.

If fundamentalists take-over in SA and don't want to play ball, that's another story, although i think that invasion would be qualitatively different because of the religious implications.

All your points are very salient and could very well be true. I'm simply speculating here. However, what if you knew that we're coming to an impasse with oil. i.e. The amount of new oil finds is virtually zero, and for the most part, we're not finding anything significant anywhere.

Again, this is all hypothetical (but believed to be true by many many people in both the administration and elsewhere), but with supply about to drop and demand exploding, wouldn't it make sense to grab all the oil you could under the pretext of protecting your country from the clear and present danger of terrorism? (Iraq and SA together make up about 40% of the world's developed, unpeaked oil production).

[Simael]

Again, this is all hypothetical (but believed to be true by many many people in both the administration and elsewhere), but with supply about to drop and demand exploding, wouldn't it make sense to grab all the oil you could under the pretext of protecting your country from the clear and present danger of terrorism? (Iraq and SA together make up about 40% of the world's developed, unpeaked oil production).

I only disagree with the word "grab". In no case are we simply declaring that we now own oil that had belonged to Iraq. Certainly we are creating a ton of business for various contractors and the regime we installed will provide relatively cozy contracts to US interests, but i object when people suggest that we are just plundering resources outright.

Since demand/price is climbing (esp because of China) Iraq and SA would have been compelled to sell all the oil that could now, so again the control issue doesn't seem that relevant to me. The only control issue would have been "well, what if saddam goes crazy/dies and the pipelines are shut down". This remote possibility would have resulted in higher oil prices. So in order to avoid this possible future price shock, we just created our own!

IMO, some of the money spent on the war should have gone towards providing tax-cuts or even subsidies to companies researching alternate energy sources.

[Phuturephunkshun]

Don't be so sure. We can't be more disliked by the world muslim population as it is. Saudi Arabia has been in our pocket for so long that I doubt the reaction to an occupation would be much different than the invasion of Iraq.

Remember, people here have been quick to eat up the whole, "Have to stabilize the region" line of bullshit. If Saudia Arabia actually does become unstable, wouldn't the reasoning behind an occupation make much more sense?

Remember, 15 of the 9/11 hi jackers were Saudi Arabian (according to their passports). They're nine times the state sponsor of terror than Iraq ever was. Wouldn't you actually feel a little safer with them under our boot than Iraq? I think it's an explanation that more Americans than you'd think would be okay with.


..I can understand that from a 'tow the masses along with the idea' way, but as far as us starting shit inside that country and not allowing them to work it out..it'd be armageddon..

Any two bit preacher with an ounce of charisma could sell it as the 'infidels' making their final push to destroy the heart of Islam..I have a feeling that someone on their side would actively attempt to nuke one of our cities if it indeed got that far...

This is really chilling stuff..

[Daveraver]

I only disagree with the word "grab". In no case are we simply declaring that we now own oil that had belonged to Iraq. Certainly we are creating a ton of business for various contractors and the regime we installed will provide relatively cozy contracts to US interests, but i object when people suggest that we are just plundering resources outright.

Since demand/price is climbing (esp because of China) Iraq and SA would have been compelled to sell all the oil that could now, so again the control issue doesn't seem that relevant to me. The only control issue would have been "well, what if saddam goes crazy/dies and the pipelines are shut down". This remote possibility would have resulted in higher oil prices. So in order to avoid this possible future price shock, we just created our own!

IMO, some of the money spent on the war should have gone towards providing tax-cuts or even subsidies to companies researching alternate energy sources.

Kellogg Brown and Root, a Haliburton subsidary got that $8 billion dollar no-bid contract, remember that one? Well, hidden in the contract is a little byline that says they get to basically reconstruct the Iraqi oil industry, and use the sale of oil to recoup costs.

American oil is SO involved over there in Iraq, Haliburton, Bechtel, Exxon/Mobil, you name it, they're operating. The reconstruction effort alone is HUGE. With Saddam out, who's going to pump that oil? People we're about to indict as war criminals? Nah, the American Oil industry is going to step in to "help the Iraqi people get back on their feet."

If you think the now "free" and "democratic" nation of Iraq is going to see anything but goverment cheese from their oil sales for years to come, you're deluding yourself.

I don't think we as a nation are grabbing anything, we're simply incorporating ourselves economically at such a high level that the term become virtually interchangeable.

I absolutely agree that we should have been researching alternative forms of energy eons ago. Unfortunately, we are so dependant on fossil fuels that even to change to something else, if it were readily available, would means years and trillions of dollars. :( So either demand is going to go down (think about it) or all hell is going to break loose.

[Daveraver]

..I can understand that from a 'tow the masses along with the idea' way, but as far as us starting shit inside that country and not allowing them to work it out..it'd be armageddon..

Any two bit preacher with an ounce of charisma could sell it as the 'infidels' making their final push to destroy the heart of Islam..I have a feeling that someone on their side would actively attempt to nuke one of our cities if it indeed got that far...

This is really chilling stuff..

Find and read Zbigniew Brzezinski's 1997 book, The Grand Chessboard. Brzezinski was the National Security advisor for Carter, member of the Trilateral commission and Council on Foreign Relations.

It basically outlines the need to create a direct external threat in order to justify a military push to control certain geopolitical hotspots and resources. Going back and reading it now reads like a timeline from 9/11 on.

I really only bring up Saudi Arabia because it's been on my mind the most lately. Like I said before, I'm speculating. Iran is just as likely to get it in the butt next.

However, what we CAN be sure of is that this nation for the most part, will not care. If they're scared enough of more terrorism, or say.... a NUKE in the hands of Iran, they won't give a damn if we bomb the place into a sheet of glass, and that's a fact.

People are scared enough as it is, still, three years after the attacks, I doubt another one is neccessary for us to justify all the ass whooping they're doing.

[Simael]

If you think the now "free" and "democratic" nation of Iraq is going to see anything but goverment cheese from their oil sales for years to come, you're deluding yourself.

I don't think we as a nation are grabbing anything, we're simply incorporating ourselves economically at such a high level that the term become virtually interchangeable.


I agree that some of the contracting arrangements seem cartoonishly evil and there is theoretically a point where there is little difference between "grabbing" and incorporation/mediating. Maybe we disagree about where we currently are on that spectrum though. I'll look into this more when i get a chance, as these are specific questions relating to specific contracts.

[Daveraver]

I agree that some of the contracting arrangements seem cartoonishly evil and there is theoretically a point where there is little difference between "grabbing" and incorporation/mediating. Maybe we disagree about where we currently are on that spectrum though. I'll look into this more when i get a chance, as these are specific questions relating to specific contracts.

Yeah it's really just an area that I've been reading a lot about lately, and with recent knowledge in the brain one becomes infinitely more opinionated about a subject. My facts could be a tiny bit spotty as well, I'm quoting from a far-from-perfect memory.

I'd appreciate your looking into it as well, I know I'm going to. I'd say my thoughts on the subject are really based more on a general feeling of dread and recent historical precedents than on actual reported and documented fact.