Posted on 06/22/2004 6:31:13 AM PDT by Constitution Day
Ready for $60-a-Barrel Oil?
The Iranian election strategy at work. So the Iranians seized some British "warships" yesterday, and arrested eight British naval officers. That's what the Iranians announced in the morning, and that's all we've heard. The chatterers were agog. Why would the Iranians do such a crazy thing? Do they really want war (If that isn't a good old-fashioned causus belli, what is?)? Etc.
Yes, they're crazy, no doubt. But they're not stupid. And if an Iranian action seems stupid, you're probably misinterpreting it. There's a perfectly straightforward explanation for the whole episode: The Brits were laying down a network of sensors to detect the movement of ships toward major Iraqi oil terminals. The Iranians considered that a bit of a threat. So they attacked.
And why, you might ask, did the Iranians feel threatened?
Because they were planning to attack (or have their surrogates attack) the oil terminals, silly.
And why attack the oil terminals?
Because they want to defeat President Bush in November, and they figure if they can get the price of oil up to around $60 a barrel, he'll lose to Kerry.
Not to mention a considerable side benefit: At $60 a barrel, they can buy whatever they may be lacking to get their atomic bombs up and running.
It's not that hard to understand the mullahs once you learn to think as they do, and understand their hopes and fears.
What do they hope? That Bush will lose; that the Coalition will collapse; that they can dominate Iraq and create an Islamic republic in the Iranian image. That will expand their power in the region, totally demoralize the internal democratic opposition, and drive America from the Middle East, thereby permitting them to complete their nuclear-weapons program at their leisure. A dream come true.
What do they fear? Above all, their own people. (And a free, relatively stable Iraq would inspire the Iranian people to demand the same freedom for themselves, meaning the end of the mullahcracy). An aggressive American policy in support of democratic revolution in Iran, for the same reason. A collapse in oil prices. The reelection of George W. Bush.
So you see at once the bases of Iranian policy: Drive oil prices up and the Americans out of Iraq, whatever the cost. The Brits were in the way, blocking easy access for saboteurs to the Iraqi oil facilities. Ergo the "crazy" action. Which turns out to be not so crazy at all.
And one other thing: The Iranians figure they've got the Brits under control, because the Brits have lots of contracts with them. Thus far, the Brits have behaved like good little boys, forestalling any effective steps to get in the way of the nuclear program, and lobbying the Bush administration to be "reasonable" and "patient." You can be sure that the British foreign office has every confidence that no harm will come to their officers, and that the incident will be resolved quickly and even amiably.
Not crazy at all. In fact, they're winning.
If anybody cares, it's a good bet that Iranian-sponsored hit squads will be going after lots of oil terminals and refineries in the next couple of months.
But it's hard to find anyone who cares. I guess we can afford $60 a barrel, and I suppose Foggy Bottom and the CIA will be able to manage a nuclear Iran. Right?
Ping.
Ping.
Sorry for the double ping.
That translates into $5-$6 a gallon. President Bush may be looking for another job in November if he doesn't nip in the bud Iranian efforts to jack up the price of oil and destabilize the Middle East fast.
Oil IS the world economy. Send in the Navy to protect those ports.
Are the Iranians prepared to have their nuclear program set back a hundred years?
Plausible? Time will tell.
I don't know what Bush should do. Iran has become a thorn in our side but Bush could not afford to do anything drastic until after the election. Guess we will have to wait and see what Britain does in the mean time.
How about their society back to the stone age?
Crude Oil Prices Slip
By TSC Staff
6/22/2004 8:02 AM EDT
Oil prices slipped Tuesday, following the resumption of more than half of Iraq's exports Monday.
The benchmark U.S. crude fell 12 cents, or 0.3%, to $37.65 after a 3% decline yesterday. Gasoline prices slipped a fraction of a cent to $1.559 a gallon.
Repairs were completed on one of two major pipelines feeding the country's main southern export terminals after having been damaged in attacks last week. Iraq's exports resumed at about 1 million barrels a day.
Iraqi exports have ranged between 1.6 million and 1.8 million barrels a day recently. Fellow members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries have pledged to compensate for any short-term supply disruption, but it remains unclear how long it will take to fully restore exports.
Prices enjoyed a late-week rally last week as violence in Iraq -- including the latest attacks on its oil infrastructure -- and a strike by Norwegian oil workers renewed concerns about short-term supply.
Oil prices are down about 12% from their record high of more than $42, touched right before OPEC's meeting two weeks ago. Prices briefly fell through $37 last week.
Members of the cartel agreed to raise the group's production quota by 2 million barrels a day in July and another half-a-million barrels a day in August, should that prove necessary. The current ceiling is 23.5 million barrels a day. Market analysts say the move is largely symbolic because the cartel's members are already producing some 2 million barrels a day above their official quotas.
Traders bid up oil prices on short-term supply concerns triggered by strong global demand and terrorist attacks on oil industry personnel and facilities in the Persian Gulf region, as well as the peak summer driving season in the U.S. and Europe.
http://www.thestreet.com/_tsclsii/markets/marketfeatures/10167125.html
It sure would be nice if the Brits took the lead on this one. The seizure of their ships and sailors would be a good pretext to go in wipe out the Iranian nuclear threat. Unfortunately, Blair is already on shaky ground politically, so he probably can't do anything dramatic. That leaves our Israeli friends ...
Sounds like something out of a Tom Clancy or Vince Flynn novel. If this this is a gambit by the Iranians, Bush is facing a strong fork (chess terms implied*) where he will have to decide how to counter the Iranians in light of domestic political opposition to any resolute action.
This will be interesting news to watch develop, I wonder if it will be picked up with the same 'analysis' and speculation on the major news outlets.
*please note, the Persians are the ones who invented Chess
Bump. I don't think the links between Iran and certain elements of the Iraqi "opposition" (to use a term I heard on the news last night) are all supposition. Whether this was something planned at a high level or the actions of an overzealous local commander remains to be seen. Since totalitarian governments tend to frown on initiative, I betting on the former.
That would be even better. Of course, they are not to far from the stone age now.
Bush is not Kerry. He does not do what has to be done because of the election , If he did we wouldnt have gone to Iraq. Bush will do what has to be done in spite of the election.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.