We went to war for OIL

Really?

IF that is the case how come we have been buying less and less oil from the Middle East since 1973?

NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--U.S. crude oil imports from Africa are consistently surpassing volumes from the Middle East as global competition for secure supplies intensifies.

In five of the first nine months of this year, the U.S. relied more on crude imports from Africa than from the world's richest oil basin, the Middle East, data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration show. On average through September, both regions account for about 22% of U.S. crude oil imports.

But reflecting a thirst for light, sweet grades of crude over increasingly heavy Middle East grades, U.S. refiners are sharply boosting imports from Africa.

U.S. crude imports were basically flat through September compared to a year ago, at around 10.2 million barrels a day, a review of EIA data shows. However, imports of African crude are on pace to top 2005 full-year import levels by around 4.5%, while Middle East volumes look set to lag 2005 by about 0.5%.

So far in 2006, crude oil imports from Algeria, are running 54% above year-ago levels, and are on pace to average at their highest level since 1980. Algeria, a member of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, has regularly pumped well above its assigned OPEC production quota as it gained market share in the U.S.

Algeria, regularly in the top 10 of U.S. crude sources, supplied more than 500,000 barrels a day in August, the most since April 1980, EIA data show.

U.S. crude oil imports from Angola and Chad appear on course to set annual records. U.S. imports from Angola, through September, are averaging more than 500,000 barrels a day, even as the growing West African producer ranks as the top or second-biggest supplier to the booming Chinese market, as well.

Nigeria Flow Steady, Despite Unrest

Volumes from Chad have been topping 120,000 barrels a day in recent months, putting it among the top 15 suppliers, while year-to-date supplies are running near a highest-ever annual rate of near 90,000 barrels a day, EIA data show.

Though Nigeria has been battered by regular sharp cuts in output due to unrest in the Delta producing region, crude supplies to the U.S. are averaging near 1.06 million barrels, slightly above a year ago and not far from the annual average of the past two years, of 1.08 million barrels a day.

The increasing return to the U.S. market of Libyan crude is also pumping up the African share of the U.S. market. After an absence from 1983-2003 due to U.S. sanctions, imports of Libyan crude are averaging around 63,000 barrels a day through September, compared with a full-year 2005 average of 44,000 barrels a day.

Politicians have been trying to limit U.S. dependence on oil imports from the volatile Middle East since the 1973 Arab oil embargo, long before President George W. Bush declared that, "America is addicted to oil" in his state of the union address early this year.

Citing the Middle East twice, Bush said U.S. oil is "often imported from unstable parts of the world," and he set a goal to "replace more than 75% of our oil imports from the Middle East by 2025." The comments ruffled feathers in Saudi Arabia, the world's largest oil exporter, but Bush aides said the aim was to replace the volume - with homegrown fuel sources such as ethanol – not literally the Middle East crude.

Still, while African crude imports to the U.S. are rising - from below 1.2 million barrels a day, or less than 13%, in 2002 - to more than 2.2 million barrels a day, or 22% now, the flow from the Middle East is declining.

EIA data show U.S. crude imports from the Middle East, which averaged more than 2.7 million barrels a day, or 29% of U.S. imports in 2001, have fallen to 2.3 million barrels a day so far this year, also at 22%.

Saudi US Flow Lowest Since 1999

Saudi Arabia has deliberately focused its recent market growth in Asia, where it is making inroads in meeting booming demand in India and China and has developed strong ventures in South Korea.

In the U.S., crude imports from Saudi Arabia through September have fallen by 4.6% from a year ago, and at about 1.4 million barrels a day, are on pace to be the lowest annual rate since 1999.

In September, Saudi Arabia climbed into second place among U.S. crude sources, its highest ranking since March 2005. Saudi supplies, of 1.546 million barrels a day, were the most since April and were 4.7% higher than a year earlier, as the kingdom boosted flows to the West Coast to cover reduced supplies of Alaska North Slope crude.

As supplies of prized light, sweet crude decline in Norway and the U.K., analysts expect oil producers in the West Africa Gulf of Guinea region, including Equatorial Guinea and Congo Brazzaville, to play a bigger role in the U.S. market. Still, while some analysts project that the West Africa/Gulf of Guinea region itself will supply 25% of U.S. imports within 10 years, compared with 15% last year, the region, like the Middle East, is rife with concerns over political stability.

Source: David Bird, Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-4423; [email protected]

My goodness if this is correct then the Gulf War was not about oil for America, neither was the war in Iraq. WOW

On a side noted I made another mistake. On one of my posts I said that the US imports only 10% from the Middle East when in fact it is 22%. Sorry but when I make a mistake I correct it. Funny how all the know it all's did not catch that one.
5,204 views 15 replies
Reply #1 Top
My goodness if this is correct then the Gulf War was not about oil for America, neither was the war in Iraq. WOW


Invading an oil-rich country that was slapped with sanction will lower oil price worldwide. And even you has to admit that America is addicted to the stuff.

It was good for you economicly. It was about oil.
Reply #2 Top
Invading an oil-rich country that was slapped with sanction will lower oil price worldwide. And even you has to admit that America is addicted to the stuff.

It was good for you economicly. It was about oil.


If what you say is true then how come the price of oil has been going up since the Gulf war instead of down? I worked for Carnival Airlines when the Gulf war started I was a security coordinator so I got to watch the entire ground operation for each of our aircraft. It cost about 9k to fuel a jet, after the war it cost 11k to fill up the same jet. The price of Jet A fuel has not gone down yet only up. Petrol for cars has also gone up over the years. where is the cheap fuel you speak of? Sorry but that myth does not hold fuel or water.
Reply #3 Top
If what you say is true then how come the price of oil has been going up since the Gulf war instead of down? I worked for Carnival Airlines when the Gulf war started I was a security coordinator so I got to watch the entire ground operation for each of our aircraft. It cost about 9k to fuel a jet, after the war it cost 11k to fill up the same jet. The price of Jet A fuel has not gone down yet only up. Petrol for cars has also gone up over the years. where is the cheap fuel you speak of? Sorry but that myth does not hold fuel or water


- Well, post-war went a lot worse than originaly planned, so no cheap oil after all
- Non-Iraq events worsened the oil situation (Katrina & Rita jumps to mind, but there are others)
- China is still increasing it's oil consommation by 2 digits % every year. That counts for a LOT. If Iraq had gone as well as in Bush's wetdream, it would be less of a problem.
Reply #4 Top
- Well, post-war went a lot worse than originaly planned, so no cheap oil after all
- Non-Iraq events worsened the oil situation (Katrina & Rita jumps to mind, but there are others)
- China is still increasing it's oil consommation by 2 digits % every year. That counts for a LOT. If Iraq had gone as well as in Bush's wetdream, it would be less of a problem.


All good reasons, too bad they don't work. The Gulf war was when daddy Bush was in office and there was a steady raise in gas prices then too. None of the things you list had anything more than a temporary raise in price. You see the price of oil is not set by the government it is set by speculators. Since oil prices are not controlled by the oil companies or the government is does not matter how the war goes it matters how the war is perceived by the speculators. If you want the price to go down you need to put out happy news not bad news. lol

When the news says the war is going badly the price goes up. When things are stable the price goes down. Twice a year the price goes up because of seasonal changes in the composition of the fuel. Winter and summer blends. It is the environmentalist that cause the price of oil to go up. To save the environment we have 57 different types of fuel. The environmentalist don't want any new refineries and each year we consume more and more fuel so the price goes up because there is only so much fuel the current refineries can make in a season. It is funny how they say the same myth about Iran and its oil fields. What no one seems to notice is that most of the oil Iran uses is refined in the United States. Now if you want to bring the price of fuel down all we have to do is stop refining fuel for other countries. Then there will be more room in the refineries for our oil and the increase the supply.

To summarize: to bring the price of oil down all we need to do is get the environmentalist to allow us to build more refineries, and drill for oil in the US meaning we won’t have to import as much oil. Then we need to stop refining oil for other nations, and last but not least have all the gloom and doom people shut up!


China is a different story, China is the reason for higher housing costs around the globe because of their incresed building projects to bring them into the 20th century and because of this the cost of cement has gone up world wide for the past 5 years. They need fuel as well so that goes up a bit as well because unlike oil the world is running out or refining capasity.
Reply #5 Top
All good reasons, too bad they don't work. The Gulf war was when daddy Bush was in office and there was a steady raise in gas prices then too. None of the things you list had anything more than a temporary raise in price. You see the price of oil is not set by the government it is set by speculators. Since oil prices are not controlled by the oil companies or the government is does not matter how the war goes it matters how the war is perceived by the speculators. If you want the price to go down you need to put out happy news not bad news. lol


Well, Bush did put sanctions on Iraq, one of the big supplier of oil in the planet, right? So, that means an eventual rise of the prices. Luckily for us, Saudi Arabia compensated.

Oil exploitation in Iraq (post 03 Iraq) have been handed to American businesses mainly, which means there are more oil flowing on the markets, which means the speculators are happy. In theory. Off course, in practice, they just hate to see Iraq getting blown up every week.

The 2 middle paragraphs are pure gibberish off-topic. Stop smoking joints.

China is a different story, China is the reason for higher housing costs around the globe because of their incresed building projects to bring them into the 20th century and because of this the cost of cement has gone up world wide for the past 5 years. They need fuel as well so that goes up a bit as well because unlike oil the world is running out or refining capasity.


Ok. So you bringed something totally off-topic to make a big arguments about China, and I stilll don't see the point, and at the end...

They need fuel as well so that goes up a bit as well because unlike oil the world is running out or refining capasity.


"That does up a bit"?? IT INCREASED BY 25% IN THE LAST 4 YEARS! And nothing shows that China will slow down. They are the 3rd country that consumes the more oil in the oil. So, I'm sorry to say, but you are freakenishly (is that a word?) underating the problem.
Reply #6 Top
We need it, they have it, and from the dawn of mankind we have fought with each over land and resources.


That's right. Just ask an Indian.
Reply #7 Top

Iraq's exports in oil were about $27 billion in oil at its height in the early 1990s (that's in today's dollars).

When I see someone say that the war was about oil it gives me comfort that at least I can ignore that person's opinion on any topic going forward because it's such a monumentally ignorant opinion that demonstrates a lack of geopolitical knowledge, economics, and history all rolled into one.

Reply #8 Top

Who cares, really? If it was for oil (not that i personally believe that) so what? We need it, they have it, and from the dawn of mankind we have fought with each over land and resources.

Why is it somehow 'shameful' for America to act in her own best interests?

Those of you complaining about it will be the first to point fingers of blame when there's no gasoline available for your precious SUV's, you know, the ones with "no blood for oil" stickers on the bumpers?

Hypocrites.

I agree with you totally.  We went there for our own best interests (we BETTER have).  But it wasn't for oil. It was for security purposes which have largely been achieved (removing an open enemy of the US who had significant resources to provide capability to his hatred).

That is why I can't undrstand these people who want to condemn the US for acting out of its own self interest.  What planet have they been living on? Are they so out of touch with reality that they forget that yea, that's what governments are supposed to do -- act in their self interest.

Reply #9 Top
Brad

What can you expect from people who think that the President should invite people like Saddam, Kim and/or Fidel to breakfast at IHOP to talk about how they can all help make their citizens Lives better?
Reply #10 Top
"That does up a bit"?? IT INCREASED BY 25% IN THE LAST 4 YEARS! And nothing shows that China will slow down. They are the 3rd country that consumes the more oil in the oil. So, I'm sorry to say, but you are freakenishly (is that a word?) underating the problem.


Yes, 6.25% more a year of what they used in the past. Not a big increase. The reason we have high oil prices is not the oil pulled out of the ground but the limited refining of that oil. There are oil wells all over the world but there are limited amount of refineries. Since 1990 we have been at full capacity in the US. Last year we were refining oil at 103% of the designed capacity. None of the solutions that will bring prices down are quick fixes. To build more refineries will take decades. Any thing that threatens a refinery will drive oil prices up. China is going through a growth spurt that will be in flux for a while. Once they get settled they will start looking for oil in their homeland and when they find it and build the refineries to go with it the price will drop again.

Ok. So you bringed something totally off-topic to make a big arguments about China, and I stilll don't see the point, and at the end...


It is not off topic. You brought up China. The topic is the myth that America went to war for oil. America currently only gets 22% of its imported oil from the Middle East with a stated goal of reducing that to 0% This stated goal was made in 1973 long before there was an Al Qeda, or a President Bush. We used to get close to 80% of our imported oil from the Middle East. We get more oil from Mexico than we do the Middle East. If our goal is not to import any oil from the Middle East why would we go to war to get their oil? It was already proven that the area is unstable and they spend the money we give them to do things that hurt American interest. Europe on the other hand gets all of their imported oil from the Middle East and helping our our friends there is in the interest of America.

Well, Bush did put sanctions on Iraq, one of the big supplier of oil in the planet, right? So, that means an eventual rise of the prices. Luckily for us, Saudi Arabia compensated.


Prove this statement.

Oil exploitation in Iraq (post 03 Iraq) have been handed to American businesses mainly, which means there are more oil flowing on the markets, which means the speculators are happy. In theory. Off course, in practice, they just hate to see Iraq getting blown up every week.


We spent our time and American lives freeing that country to ensure we are safer. Is it not prudent that we allow our industry to make money to pay us back?

Well, Bush did put sanctions on Iraq, one of the big supplier of oil in the planet, right? So, that means an eventual rise of the prices. Luckily for us, Saudi Arabia compensated.


Yeah, it meant we bought 1% more oil from the house of Saud than we normally would have bought.

Reply #11 Top
That is why I can't undrstand these people who want to condemn the US for acting out of its own self interest. What planet have they been living on? Are they so out of touch with reality that they forget that yea, that's what governments are supposed to do -- act in their self interest.


Because it seems selfish and for them perception is reality. If we are perceived as selfish then we are selfish. Yet when we act like fools and allow idiots like Saddam insane to do what he wants its ok until he hurts them then they scream that something should be done.

In the 70’s they thought President Carter was a wonderful person because he did not support a dictator we installed in Iran. He allowed the Ayatollah to take power. See how good we are the Iranians were overjoyed with their new leader. All was right with the world. Then they took our embassy and those same people that heralded President Carter as a wise and good leader turned on him for allowing “those” people to make America look bad. They demanded we send in the Marines and make Iran pay for this outrage. But the wisdom of the time caused the military to be weakened because war was bad. We did not have the resources to stop Iran short of nuclear weapons which were also bad.
My point is that giving these little babies what they want instead of what is best for the nation created the problem of instability in the region. The oil embargo of 73 taught us that the Middle East no matter who is in charge is not a stable source of oil. This is why we have slowly been cutting down our use of Middle East oil. That is why I say we did not go to war for oil.
Reply #12 Top
What can you expect from people who think that the President should invite people like Saddam, Kim and/or Fidel to breakfast at IHOP to talk about how they can all help make their citizens Lives better?


Because they are idealistic, the higher ideals are more important than the stupid harsh realities. Read Silent Poet for example. Wanting us to be perfect in an imperfect world, this is good to strive for but dangerous in the real world. This is because the people that want to hurt us see those ideals as being weak and in that part of the world weakness is held in distain, it is repugnant. In that part of the world might makes right. Negotiation is only done when you are weak, never from a position of strength. But this is off the topic.
Reply #13 Top
That is why I say we did not go to war for oil.


Whilst I agree oil wasn't one of the major factors in invading Iraq there are considerable advantages to controlling its oil supply. Even if America doesn't need that supply its control means Europe and Asia must first deal with America if they want oil. As an alleged former agent of the government I'm sure you can understood the advantages control of a strategic resource can offer.
Reply #14 Top
war for safety. war for land.... war for oil... all the same.
Reply #15 Top
Whilst I agree oil wasn't one of the major factors in invading Iraq there are considerable advantages to controlling its oil supply. Even if America doesn't need that supply its control means Europe and Asia must first deal with America if they want oil. As an alleged former agent of the government I'm sure you can understood the advantages control of a strategic resource can offer.


Yes, I do understand but it is not the case or we would have taken the entire Arab lands long before they started with the terror game. The 1973 oil embargo would have forced us to take action but instead we just took it and let them do what they wanted while we started looking to spend our money somewhere else. It used to be that each Saudi citizen was paid a portion of the oil money. They don't do that any more and for the first time in a generation they actually have to look for work in order to feed themselves.