U.S. Wars to Blame for Rise in Gas Prices
Published in Polska Times
(Poland) on June 11th, 2008
by Jan M. Fijor (link to original)
(Poland) on June 11th, 2008
by Jan M. Fijor (link to original)
Translated from
by Justyna Surowiec.
Edited by .
In the last year the price of oil in the US has drastically increased. The prices will only climb as long as the U.S. doesn’t end the war in the Middle East and quiet the rumors of further conflicts.
In the last days of May, CNN and Fox News simultaneously published the results of an opinion poll about the causes of the rise in oil. Regardless of the ideological standings of both stations (CNN is left wing, and Fox News is conservative) the similarity in opinions by both stations is astonishing.
In the opinion of Americans, the increase in gas prices is a result of the greed of gas producers, the insolence of the producers in OPEC, and global warming. Only a small fraction of Americans know the real reasons behind the increase in gas prices in the Near and Middle East.
How did it happen that hardly anyone paid attention to the most important cause of the increase in gas prices, namely the War on Terror, especially its last phase: the planned attack on Iran and Syria? There’s a significant positive correlation between the U.S. military activities and the rise in oil prices.
After the September 11th attacks, until the end of 2002, the price of a barrel only rose slightly, staying around $28-$30. Even in 2003 when the USA attacked Iraq, the oil prices stayed at $38. The escalation in prices began only late spring on 2006, when Donald Rumsfeld sharply criticized Iran, affirming that the USA will not remain inactive in regards to the weapons proliferation activities taking place in the country.
After that the price of oil skyrocketed from $50 to $70. The prediction of Rumsfeld’s departure from office in 2006 caused the fall of oil prices to $60. Yet, in 2007, the price rose to $80 a barrel following greater tensions in the relationship between the USA and Iran.
The expenditures for maintaining the war machinery and armies have long surpassed America’s ability to pay. The financing of these activities was possible thanks to inflations and devaluation led by the dictation of the White House through the Federal Reserve Bank. This led to the fall in the value of the dollar against the more valuable currencies of the world. Part of the explanation in the increase in prices, generally the rise from $50 to $80 a barrel, is a result of the fall in the strength of the dollar.
The last sharp increases in oil prices, particularly the rise from $80 (in Feb. 2008) to $140 a barrel on June 6th was a result of the talks of possible attacks on Iran led by president Bush. If it’s not because of him, then why do all contracts that involve oil prices agree that oil prices will come down to no more than $70 after Bush leaves office?
The prices will be even lower, if in November Barack Obama becomes president and removes American troops from Iraq.
Yet, I’m surprised that the American opinion poll did not address this.
In the last days of May, CNN and Fox News simultaneously published the results of an opinion poll about the causes of the rise in oil. Regardless of the ideological standings of both stations (CNN is left wing, and Fox News is conservative) the similarity in opinions by both stations is astonishing.
In the opinion of Americans, the increase in gas prices is a result of the greed of gas producers, the insolence of the producers in OPEC, and global warming. Only a small fraction of Americans know the real reasons behind the increase in gas prices in the Near and Middle East.
How did it happen that hardly anyone paid attention to the most important cause of the increase in gas prices, namely the War on Terror, especially its last phase: the planned attack on Iran and Syria? There’s a significant positive correlation between the U.S. military activities and the rise in oil prices.
After the September 11th attacks, until the end of 2002, the price of a barrel only rose slightly, staying around $28-$30. Even in 2003 when the USA attacked Iraq, the oil prices stayed at $38. The escalation in prices began only late spring on 2006, when Donald Rumsfeld sharply criticized Iran, affirming that the USA will not remain inactive in regards to the weapons proliferation activities taking place in the country.
After that the price of oil skyrocketed from $50 to $70. The prediction of Rumsfeld’s departure from office in 2006 caused the fall of oil prices to $60. Yet, in 2007, the price rose to $80 a barrel following greater tensions in the relationship between the USA and Iran.
The expenditures for maintaining the war machinery and armies have long surpassed America’s ability to pay. The financing of these activities was possible thanks to inflations and devaluation led by the dictation of the White House through the Federal Reserve Bank. This led to the fall in the value of the dollar against the more valuable currencies of the world. Part of the explanation in the increase in prices, generally the rise from $50 to $80 a barrel, is a result of the fall in the strength of the dollar.
The last sharp increases in oil prices, particularly the rise from $80 (in Feb. 2008) to $140 a barrel on June 6th was a result of the talks of possible attacks on Iran led by president Bush. If it’s not because of him, then why do all contracts that involve oil prices agree that oil prices will come down to no more than $70 after Bush leaves office?
The prices will be even lower, if in November Barack Obama becomes president and removes American troops from Iraq.
Yet, I’m surprised that the American opinion poll did not address this.
Next article![]( "Bill Clinton: Obama Must \"Kiss My Ass\"")
