Posted by andreas from dtm2-t8-2.mcbone.net (188.8.131.52) on Saturday, January 04, 2003 at 4:45AM :
A"brilliantine" analysis by PeterBetPazzo
Ital. "pazzo" = "mad, disturbed, nonsensical" - to put it mildly)
"brilliantine" = "oily, greasy hairdressing or such a mental attitude: twisting, winding, smeary etc."
The unstated goal of a war with Iraq
Beth Suryoyo Assyrian (Othuroyo) Forum
Written by Peter BetBasoo on 03 Jan 2003 23:00:46:
The unstated goal of a war with Iraq
There are four reasons the U.S. might wage war against Iraq.
remove weapons of mass destruction
liberate the Iraqi people
secure the world's second largest oil reserves
eliminate the financial backbone of the terrorist network
From its inception the Saddam regime has actively pursued a weapons of mass destruction (WMD) program, culminating in the Israeli bombing of the French built nuclear reactor, which the Israeli's argued was engaged in producing fissionable material for a nuclear bomb. Iraq also attempted to develop the infamous "super canon", and has developed chemical and biological weapons. There is no question that Iraq's WMD program poses a security threat not only regionally, but also globally should these weapons fall into the hands of terrorists.
But Iraq is not an ideological crucible of terrorists; it only uses terrorism opportunistically, as a tool, a David's slingshot. A normalized Iraq, functioning within the bounds of international law and governed by the rule of law, is a country of high culture and education, a perennial leader in the Middle East. Such an Iraq would not produce terrorists; it would produce artists and scholars.
It is for this reason, for the potential that is Iraq, that Iraqis must be liberated from the tyrannical rule of Saddam Hussein. This liberation, it is clear, cannot come wholly from within, because the security apparatus of the government is too entrenched and pervasive. This liberation must come from an external source, from an overwhelming force that cannot be ultimately resisted by Saddam and his Republican Guards. It is clear that most of the Iraqi army will defect once the war begins, and only the loyal Republican Guards will resist (even the Republican Guards may witness defections).
For the year 2000, world oil consumption was approximately 77 million barrels per day (mbd), and it is projected to rise to more than 100 mbd by 2015. Our civilization cannot survive without oil; neither consumers nor producers can afford a disruption in oil supplies. As an example, Saudi Arabia derives 40% of its revenue directly from oil.
Table 1: Saudi Arabia: Gross Domestic Product by Economic Activity (% of total)
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Agriculture, Hunting, Forestry and Fishing 6.24 6.81 6.92 6.71 6.29 6.05
Mining and Quarrying
Crude Petroleum and Natural Gas 37.92 33.28 32.66 33.4 35.79 36.77
Other 0.42 0.45 0.47 0.45 0.42 0.41
Petroleum Refining 4.05 3.55 3.49 3.59 3.82 3.96
Other 4.46 4.96 5.28 5.48 5.5 5.58
Electricity, Gas and Water 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.16
Construction 8.46 9.28 9.5 9.24 8.69 8.46
Trade, Restaurant and Hotels 6.77 7.28 7.33 7.04 6.7 6.41
Transport, Storage and Communications 6.16 6.66 6.77 6.57 6.16 5.96
Finance, Insurance and Real Estate
Ownership of Dwellings 1.51 1.63 1.67 1.61 1.53 1.49
Other 4.11 4.4 4.47 4.23 3.95 3.8
Government Services 16.14 17.75 (17.8 18.32 17.68 17.76
Other Community, Social and Personal Services 2.73 2.92 2.97 2.88 2.7 2.62
(source: The Europa World Year Book, 1997-1999)
If we disregard the infrastructure and essential services (electricity, water, construction), we see that Saudi Arabia has not significantly developed any other industry, not in manufacturing and not in services. Given this, it is particularly vulnerable to disruptions in oil revenue since it would not be able to substitute other revenues to offset such losses. It is precisely for this reason that the U.S. is going to war with Iraq.
The first unstated reason of the war on Iraq is to secure Iraqi oil, which is the world's second largest reserve. This will guarantee that the oil will flow. It is expected that the U.S. will remain in Iraq for many years. The second unstated reason for war on Iraq is to eliminate the financial sources of the terrorist groups. This brings us to Saudi Arabia.
Fifteen of the nineteen 9/11 terrorists were Saudi nationals. Osama Bin Laden is a Saudi national. The Saudi monarchy spends hundreds of millions of dollars in the Islamic world, exporting its radical and fundamentalist interpretation of Islam, Wahabism. It donates money to construct mosques and religious schools in most Islamic countries, and these schools and mosques teach Wahabism.
Wahabism is a chauvinist, fundamentalist interpretation of Islam that makes Shi'ism appear liberal by comparison. It is allowed to be a practicing Christian in Iran and to build churches, and Assyrians even have their own representative in the Iranian Parliament. In Saudi Arabia, it is illegal to be a Christian, one cannot wear a cross, nor pray in public, and no churches can be built. At the height of the Gulf War, when U.S. troops were on Saudi soil defending the country from Iraq, the Saudi government officially asked the U.S. government not to conduct Sunday church services for the soldiers on Saudi soil; the services had to be conducted off-shore on U.S. Navy ships.
It is Saudi Arabia that is funding Islamic terrorism. It is Saudi Arabia that is the ideological crucible of terrorists. Wahabism has as its goal the subjugation of the dar-al-harb (the zone of war, i.e., the non-Muslim world) and the conversion of all infidels to Islam.
In securing the world's second largest oil reserves, those of Iraq, the U.S. will be in a position to threaten or possibly disrupt Saudi oil sales, which petrodollars are used to fund terrorism, and will effectively nullify OPEC and Saudi Arabia. As I showed above, Saudi Arabia cannot survive without oil revenue.
Two months after 9/11, the Bush administration announced that it was completely diverting all government research funding from improving gasoline engine efficiency to developing hydrogen fuel cell engines. This was a quiet announcement, and did not receive much coverage, but the implications of this policy decision are enormous. The Bush Administration has put Saudi Arabia on notice, that the U.S. and the free world will eventually not require oil, and the oil revenue that Saudi Arabia uses to fund terrorism will disappear. Quietly, the U.S. fired a long-term salvo directly at the funding source of terrorism û petrodollars.
It is for these reasons that we can say a war on Iraq is not a war on Iraq, it is a war on Saudi Arabia, and a war to defend the free world from Saudi State sponsored terrorism. The U.S. hopes to cut off the money supply that is feeding terrorism by controlling the oil supply (and hence revenue). When seen in this light, "dubya" and his administration does not come off appearing stupid, rather he appears brilliant, behind a bold plan that goes to the very heart of the problem of terrorism.
-- signature .
Post a Followup