New Studies Suggest That Iraq Has the Largest Oil Reserves in the World, So Why...

No link on these new studies?

 

And, maybe they don't wanna, maybe they think they already paid with the lives of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, maybe they want to decide what to do with their oil...

 

Good grief.

Iraq is producing oil as fast as they can. The entire world is. In my view, a view shared by many others, we are producing at high 90's percent capacity today. It's not like you pull up to the Iraq Wal-Mart and purchase 20 million barrels a day for the next 10 years. It doesn't work that way. Infrastructure must be built, geology must be analyzed, investments made, work performed... prior to bringing on new production... Even then, your reservoirs don't produce everything at once (hilarious to think otherwise) and have decline curves that force you to bring more online just to catch up to where you once were...

It's clear that the American public needs a lot of education on this topic...

 

do you know that iraq is currently running budget surpluses? in otherwords, your post as usual has nothing to do with the topic. iraq is producing oil and they're making money, and we're spending billions a day there. try and stick to the subjet next time. tia

 

Thanks.

 

Imagine a window connecting a nursery to an office. Then imagine a small child slinging a dirty diaper through the window and onto your conference room table during a meeting. That's the equivalent of your work in this thread, pgabs.

 

the insult moritorium is over i guess. the issue isn't why isn't iraq producing oil, the issue is why are we spending money over there. what are they paying for with their current revenue. why are we spending billions a month? that's the subject, we don't need a lecture on oil production.

 

article on topic at hand

WASHINGTON - Iraq is not spending much of its own money, despite soaring oil revenues that are pushing the country toward a massive budget surplus, U.S. auditors told Congress on Tuesday.

The expected surplus comes as the U.S. continues to invest billions of dollars in rebuilding Iraq and faces a financial squeeze domestically because of record oil prices.

"The Iraqis have a budget surplus," said U.S. Comptroller General David Walker. "We have a huge budget deficit. ... One of the questions is who should be paying."


Walker and the other auditors did not give a figure for the likely surplus. U.S. officials contend that Iraq's lack of spending is due primarily to Baghdad's inability to determine where its money is needed most and how to allocate it efficiently. Two senators have called for an investigation into the matter.

Democrats say the assessment is proof that the Iraq war as a waste of time and money. The U.S. has spent more than $45 billion on rebuilding Iraq. And while officials in Iraq contend that much progress is being made, many projects remain unfinished and U.S. troops are still needed to provide security.

"They ought to be able to use some of their oil to pay for their own costs and not keep sending the bill to the United States," said Sen. Patrick Leahy, a Democrat.

In recent months, Iraq experienced its highest oil production and export levels since the war began five years ago, said Stuart Bowen, special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction.

That spike in revenue combined with the highest oil prices in history, "coalesce into an enormous revenue windfall for the Iraqi government," Bowen told the Senate Appropriations Committee.

Whereas Iraqi officials estimated $35 billion in oil revenues last fall, Bowen said the final number is likely to be closer to $60 billion.

"That certainly gives them resources to carry forward with an extensive reconstruction plan," Bowen said.

But according to other U.S. officials, a major problem is that Iraq does not have the capacity to allocate the money without it being wasted or pocketed by corrupt officials.

"I think they are beginning to do more," particularly in improving its military and buying new weapon systems, said Claude Kicklighter, the Pentagon's inspector general. "And I think that's certainly the trend that we should be following."

'U.S. taxpayer money is involved'
The Government Accountability Office estimates that the U.S. has designated $6 billion to rebuild Iraq's energy sector and $300 million to develop Iraq's government ministries. But GAO contends that the U.S. does not have a strategic plan on how to accomplish either goal.

The State Department told investigators it believes the Iraqis should be responsible for devising such a plan. GAO disagreed.

"In our view, it's a shared responsibility. U.S. taxpayer money is involved," Walker said.

Last week, Sens. Carl Levin, a Democrat, and John Warner, a Republican, asked GAO to investigate what Iraq is doing with its oil revenue. The senators estimated that Iraq will realize "at least $100 billion in oil revenues in 2007 and 2008."

 

They should be paying.......no doubt......

DD

 

for the first time, i agree with TJ.

peak oil is true, folks. it's not that the world is running out of oil, it's that the rate at which the world produces oil is not growing anymore to match booming demand.

for every bump in efficiency we gain, physical supplies are dwindling.

time to harness the sun, tides, and wind - which won't stop, until we blow up the moon in 2031.

 

all your problems are over in 2012, my friend.

 

no one's arguing with TJ's logic. its just not the subject of thread. remember, not only is iraq running a surplus, some say massive, but this was some of the logic about why this war would work, oil revenues would pay. Well oil is up over $4 today right now, let the oil start paying for this war.

 

pgabs, the thread starter had ONE question in the original post, which was related to oil supplies. That is what I addressed and what others addressed. You sir, are lost.

 

my bad. yep - we are definitely not reaping any benefits from a supposed "good reason" to be in iraq... we're getting bent over. but i still think that a contributing factor is the fears of increased supply shortage due to instability of the middle east.

 

Those are only estimated discoveries from exploration. At best, we're only running fields with the capacity from Saddam's post Iraq War 1 with no-fly zone. There is still alot of terrorism and sabotage that has been preventing us from running at full capacity. Wolfowitz's dream of having the war pay for itself will continue to be a dream.

The goal of not dipping into their treasuries for now is for them to rebuild their nation and make them a legitimate trading partner who can pay our oil companies to build more fields for them.

The bigger questions of this fact is why are we so eager to pull out from another Saudi Arabia, with strategic and economic priority, after we won it? How would we able to trust a wildcard leader not to become another Saddam in light of all this new wealth? How would we be able to maintain a presence with rival nations salivating over all that wealth?

 

It's the US's responsibility to estimate the costs before starting the war. What you're really saying here is "this is more expensive than we thought, why don't Iraq chip in." When in fact the Iraqi people didn't sign up for this war, there is no contract, so they are under no obligation to give you anything. However, you have taken hundreds of thousands of lives, feel free to leave when you have repayed your debt by stabilizing the country.

What you should really be asking is "Why did our country have such a terrible cost estimate?"

Furthermore it's very naive to think that none of that is coming back to the US. Please have a look at who's digging up the oil and in turn receiving humongous revenue.