http://blog.psaonline.org/2006/12/28/sometimes-a-lack-of-oil-is-just-a-lack-of-oil/ Wed, 08 Feb 2012 08:45:45 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 http://blog.psaonline.org/2006/12/28/sometimes-a-lack-of-oil-is-just-a-lack-of-oil/comment-page-1/#comment-1784746 Masud Isa Sun, 22 Mar 2009 06:22:13 +0000 http://blog.psaonline.org/2006/12/28/sometimes-a-lack-of-oil-is-just-a-lack-of-oil/#comment-1784746 Middle East is the hotbed of conflicts because of its oil. Iran being a country that refuses to accept the way USA or its allies want it behave, have become one of the axis of evils. The analyses above by the writer and also Sufi Saleque are quite rational . For energy security any country has the right to work on its own strategy. Fossil fuel is finite and will end some day. The middle eas oil is approaching its fast depletion.Now these rulers, who have little obligations to their people, may bow down to their master - but Iran being somewhat different from others, shall naturally think of its future in the event of oil being sucked up completely.USA being the sole superpower, does behave with little respect towards others and during the regime of Bush acted on pretexts and not reasons and facts to attack and impose its will. The holding of huge nuclear arsenals by USA and Israel, which everyone is aware of, does this country has any credibility to teach morality and responsibility to others? USA, instead, should take the lead to destroy all its and its allies nuclear ursenals and work out to destroy the same from others as well including India, Pakistan and other members of the security council. USA should remember that its power and capacity to harm and threat others wont remain forever and before it is too late, it is important that USA should change its course of conducts and as it appears, President Obama is moving in that direction. Middle East is the hotbed of conflicts because of its oil. Iran being a country that refuses to accept the way USA or its allies want it behave, have become one of the axis of evils. The analyses above by the writer and also Sufi Saleque are quite rational . For energy security any country has the right to work on its own strategy. Fossil fuel is finite and will end some day. The middle eas oil is approaching its fast depletion.Now these rulers, who have little obligations to their people, may bow down to their master – but Iran being somewhat different from others, shall naturally think of its future in the event of oil being sucked up completely.USA being the sole superpower, does behave with little respect towards others and during the regime of Bush acted on pretexts and not reasons and facts to attack and impose its will. The holding of huge nuclear arsenals by USA and Israel, which everyone is aware of, does this country has any credibility to teach morality and responsibility to others? USA, instead, should take the lead to destroy all its and its allies nuclear ursenals and work out to destroy the same from others as well including India, Pakistan and other members of the security council. USA should remember that its power and capacity to harm and threat others wont remain forever and before it is too late, it is important that USA should change its course of conducts and as it appears, President Obama is moving in that direction.

]]> http://blog.psaonline.org/2006/12/28/sometimes-a-lack-of-oil-is-just-a-lack-of-oil/comment-page-1/#comment-53481 Saleque Sufi Wed, 28 Mar 2007 04:49:08 +0000 http://blog.psaonline.org/2006/12/28/sometimes-a-lack-of-oil-is-just-a-lack-of-oil/#comment-53481 Un should try to diffuse tension and try its best to protect innocent people while war mongers are always looking for excuse to flex their muscles.The world community failed to stop Iraq war. now if Iran crisi culminate in another awr that will destabilise world peace and billions of innocent people all over the world will suffer. Can all parties behave rationally. It is not very difficult to establish whether British marine intruded Irania territorial water or not. Even if they crossed let this be reolved ammicably before things go beyond control. Un should try to diffuse tension and try its best to protect innocent people while war mongers are always looking for excuse to flex their muscles.The world community failed to stop Iraq war. now if Iran crisi culminate in another awr that will destabilise world peace and billions of innocent people all over the world will suffer. Can all parties behave rationally. It is not very difficult to establish whether British marine intruded Irania territorial water or not. Even if they crossed let this be reolved ammicably before things go beyond control.

]]> http://blog.psaonline.org/2006/12/28/sometimes-a-lack-of-oil-is-just-a-lack-of-oil/comment-page-1/#comment-17147 Joe Roeber Sun, 31 Dec 2006 14:02:55 +0000 http://blog.psaonline.org/2006/12/28/sometimes-a-lack-of-oil-is-just-a-lack-of-oil/#comment-17147 Saleque Sufi's point is surely the fundamental one. Iran is a sovereign nation and must be left to take decisions in its own interest, provided they do not intrude on the territorial integrity and human rights of others. Roger Stern's analysis is a useful corrective to the hysteria surrounding what is, after all, a very distant (10+ years) threat, if it exists at all. And it is not new. I was told by an official in the Kuwait oil ministry 25 years ago that Kuwait might be interested in nuclear because "It releases oil for export and it only costs us money!" Rather sweet, you might say, and certainly innocent. Oil exporters are interesting in exporting oil. The disingenuousness of American policy in the region does not incline me to accept their present moralistic and warlike noises, any more than it did before the Iraq invasion. When so many and such specious reasons are being offered, you know you are being conned. The question is, What is the con? And the answer has to be oil, Israel and regional hegemony. If the US administration were really interested in removing the nuclear threat, they would make a start by pushing for the de-nuclearisation of the Middle East. Then at least there would be no suggestion of double standards. But, when there is no suggestion that Israel should lose its nuclear weapons, what is the rest of the world to think? What else except that US foreign policy is driven by nothing more elevated than the need to maintain its control of strategic areas. Compliant and/or useful friends, like Pakistan and Israel, are allowed freedoms rigorously to be suppressed in any country that shows any sign of independence. If this is realpolitik, so be it. But let us see it for what it is and, please, lets not dress it up as a moral crusade. The US is not interested in peace, it is a colonial power interested only in control. Saleque Sufi’s point is surely the fundamental one. Iran is a sovereign nation and must be left to take decisions in its own interest, provided they do not intrude on the territorial integrity and human rights of others. Roger Stern’s analysis is a useful corrective to the hysteria surrounding what is, after all, a very distant (10+ years) threat, if it exists at all. And it is not new. I was told by an official in the Kuwait oil ministry 25 years ago that Kuwait might be interested in nuclear because “It releases oil for export and it only costs us money!” Rather sweet, you might say, and certainly innocent. Oil exporters are interesting in exporting oil.
The disingenuousness of American policy in the region does not incline me to accept their present moralistic and warlike noises, any more than it did before the Iraq invasion. When so many and such specious reasons are being offered, you know you are being conned. The question is, What is the con? And the answer has to be oil, Israel and regional hegemony.
If the US administration were really interested in removing the nuclear threat, they would make a start by pushing for the de-nuclearisation of the Middle East. Then at least there would be no suggestion of double standards. But, when there is no suggestion that Israel should lose its nuclear weapons, what is the rest of the world to think? What else except that US foreign policy is driven by nothing more elevated than the need to maintain its control of strategic areas. Compliant and/or useful friends, like Pakistan and Israel, are allowed freedoms rigorously to be suppressed in any country that shows any sign of independence.
If this is realpolitik, so be it. But let us see it for what it is and, please, lets not dress it up as a moral crusade. The US is not interested in peace, it is a colonial power interested only in control.

]]> http://blog.psaonline.org/2006/12/28/sometimes-a-lack-of-oil-is-just-a-lack-of-oil/comment-page-1/#comment-17111 Saleque Sufi Sun, 31 Dec 2006 04:44:40 +0000 http://blog.psaonline.org/2006/12/28/sometimes-a-lack-of-oil-is-just-a-lack-of-oil/#comment-17111 Iran should have equal right as anyother sovreign country to opt for any option for its own energy security.If it wants to cut down oil and gas production to prololong its reserve depletion and generate nuclear power UN or for that matter world community must not interfere.But while Nuclear armed countries are performing their act with very little control why Iran or for that matter a particular country will be pressurized to abandon the plan.Is it not a double standard that ? Which other country has more weapons of mass destruction than the country which leads the so called war against WMD. It is felt that Iran should be monitored closely but economic sanction may prove counter productive.It will affect innocent people and not war mongres. Iran should have equal right as anyother sovreign country to opt for any option for its own energy security.If it wants to cut down oil and gas production to prololong its reserve depletion and generate nuclear power UN or for that matter world community must not interfere.But while Nuclear armed countries are performing their act with very little control why Iran or for that matter a particular country will be pressurized to abandon the plan.Is it not a double standard that ? Which other country has more weapons of mass destruction than the country which leads the so called war against WMD.
It is felt that Iran should be monitored closely but economic sanction may prove counter productive.It will affect innocent people and not war mongres.

]]>