Why do we have wars? (Photo)

$10 billion Iran-Iraq-Syria Natural Gas Pipeline Construction

Christian Science Monitor

Energy Voices: Insights on the future of fuel and power
US destroyers near Syria. Oil market likely to shrug off a strike.

Syria is not a huge oil producer and the US increasingly is, sheltering the latter somewhat from turmoil in the former. Although oil prices are rising as US destroyers head for Syria, analysts say prices are unlikely to skyrocket unless the Syrian conflict spreads to Iraq.

By David J. Unger, Correspondent / August 27, 2013

"The US has deployed four US Navy destroyers in the Mediterranean Sea, according to news reports Tuesday, in preparation of a possible attack on Syrian military sites. If American forces strike against Syria in the wake of alleged chemical weapon use by the Bashar al-Assad regime, its impact on energy would probably not be as significant as it would have been 10 or 20 years ago.

That's mostly because Syria's oil output is a fraction of what its neighbors produce. It's also because North America has had its own energy boom, better insulating it from shockwaves abroad.

Still, the threat of conflict spreading across the region has already put upward pressure on prices. And American allies in Europe still rely heavily on Middle East oil and gas, even if US imports are down dramatically since peaking in 2005 ...

US crude rose upwards of $3.00 to $109.32 early Tuesday, matching its high for the year. Prices were already on the rise due to unrest in Egypt, a low-output oil country, but one that controls vital trade routes.

"The business and energy markets don’t like risk," David Biette, an energy analyst at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, a Washington-based think tank, in a telephone interview. "They want to know what’s going to happen." ...

It has also delayed construction of a $10 billion Iran-Iraq-Syria natural gas pipeline aimed at transforming Syria into a crucial energy transit hub. The pipeline would bring Iranian gas to European markets, in competition with Qatar's plans for a similar pipeline.

The shifting of the global energy landscape has helped minimize the spikes of unrest in Egypt, Syria, and elsewhere in the region. New drilling techniques have flooded North America with its own supplies of oil and gas, loosening the Middle East's grip on global oil markets ..."

Inspiration

Just reading through some old stuff today. Here is one that is good -

I think this is what we need:

1) Universal Health Care

2) Promotion/Development of Local Food Systems

3) Increased Gas Prices, At Least Doubled

4) 80% Reduction In Military Budget

5) Immediate Development Of Nationwide Mass Transit System

6) Immediate Withdrawal Of US Troops From All Parts Of The Globe

7) Triple The Taxes For Anyone Making Over $75,000/ Year. Sliding Scale Tilting Upwards

8) *edited*

9) Immediate Dissolution Of All Federal Banking Systems, Creation Of Local Currencies

10) Elimination Of Rent/Mortgage

11) Fair Trials For All Members Of The Senate

12) Open Borders For People, Closed Borders For Bananas

13) Elimination Of The Automobile Industry

Naturally when I skip into my polling place and look for these issues on the ballot I'll be aroused and gleeful to pull that lever "in favor of"

Shared by Chlamor - 2007

The Trans-Pacific Partnership: A Threat to Democracy and Food Sovereignty

I got this paper from Food First today. It discusses the Trans-Pacific Partnership - very interesting information about our US "interests" in the South Pacific -


INSTITUTE FOR FOOD AND DEVELOPMENT POLICY
VOLUME 19 • NUMBER 2
SUMMER 2013

The Trans-Pacific Partnership:
A Threat to Democracy and Food Sovereignty

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), perhaps the world’s most ambitious free trade agreement,
is currently under negotiation. What began as a small regional free trade agreement has become
one of the primary tools in the United States’ geopolitical pivot towards the Asia-Pacific region.
The agreement—negotiated in secrecy—will dramatically expand the rights of corporations over
those of food producers, consumers, workers and the environment. This Backgrounder outlines the
agreement’s assault on democracy and food sovereignty and examines the TPP’s likely impacts on
food and agriculture in Japan, the latest country to join negotiations.

What is the Trans-Pacific Partnership?

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) began as a trade agreement signed in 2005 between Brunei, New
Zealand, Chile and Singapore. Since then, seven more countries came on board: Australia, Canada,
Malaysia, Mexico, Peru, Vietnam, the United States and, most recently, Japan. For the time being, South
Korea is not participating, despite pressure from Washington...

... The negotiating partners seek to reach an agreement in time for the October 2013 Asia-Pacific Economic
Cooperation (APEC) summit in Indonesia—though this is highly unlikely to be achieved after Japan’s
entry. Considered the most ambitious Free Trade Agreement (FTA) in the world, partners hope the
TPP will set the agenda for future World Trade Organization (WTO) negotiations. For the United
States, the agreement represents an expansion and deepening of its 19 existing bilateral and regional
FTAs and a strengthening of US influence in the Asia-Pacific region. Over 60 percent of US trade is
with APEC member nations, and 34 percent is with TPP partners. The US is particularly interested in
accessing markets in TPP countries for its agricultural products and financial services including banking
and insurance; streamlining and enforcing intellectual property rights; and placing limits on state-owned
enterprises. As the most powerful US ally in East Asia, Japan’s participation further strengthens US interest in the
TPP. While there is no existing US-Japan FTA, trade with Japan already accounts for 6% of total US goods
trade and 7% of total US services trade in 2011 ...

More here: http://www.foodfirst.org/sites/www.foodfirst.org/files/pdf/2013_Summer_Backgrounder_-_TTP.pdf