[Rhodes22-list] Baffle them with Bullshit

[DCLewis1 at aol.com]

In a message dated 7/5/2006 7:38:47 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
flybrad at gmail.com writes:

60%.http://www.debka.com/ 


 
Brad, 
 
I think Bill's made some good points.  I don't think your Hormuz  #'s are 
right; your initial post cited old data, the 5443 link flipped me to a  Mar 2005 
article-more old data, I searched the Debka link and never  found your Hormuz 
data, I think you're off by a factor of 100 with your  Wheaties analyses,  I 
think your claim that 1 sunk tanker can top shipping  in the Straits of Hormuz 
is wrong.  I don't want to stifle discussion,  but there is a pattern here.  
We all err, some caution may be in  order.
 
Regarding $100/bbl oil:  It's possible and it may not be the end of  the 
world.  As I recall, an analyst at Goldman Sachs called for $105/bbl  oil in the 
near future about 6 months ago. Many laughed at the time and thought  it was a 
self-serving analyses, but now it appears it might be possible.   I think 
light-sweet oil closed at $75.19/bbl today and it could easily go  higher - all it 
will take is a hurricane through the production infrastructure  in the Gulf 
of Mexico, or wherever, or the Iranians, or ????.
 
The cost for oil has gone from about $30 - $40 in 04 to more than $70 this  
year, and the world economy has done pretty well. I can believe it might go to  
$100/bbl temporarily, that would hurt but it probably wouldn't be the end  of 
the world or US economies.  80% of the worlds supplies will still come  
through and nations everywhere are struggling to get off their oil habit and  
develop alternative resources - they finally realize that having  cheap oil is much 
different than having reliable energy, and reliable  energy is important.  
Synfuel projects are cost effective at more than  $43/bbl (as I recall), 
Canadian oil sands become cost effective (and are  currently ramping up facilities 
and production), Brazil has shown  the way with ethanol - the basic energy 
picture is starting to change in a  fundamental way.  The hybrid cars you see on 
the road are testament to the  change taking place.  I suspect the world could 
cope with $100/bbl oil,  although it might cause a recession which would 
mitigate demand.  In  the long run though (5 years, maybe less), if the price of oil 
continues at  these elevated levels I think the losers are going to be the 
unreliable oil  producers and prices will drop as alternate resources (synfuel 
and tar  sands) that can produce at $40-$50/bbl come on line.
 
As for the Iranians building nukes, that's a serious problem for the  
Israelis, and the Turks, and the Russians, isn't it?  I'm confident that  any of 
those 3 countries are fully up to the task at hand, assuming our  intelligence 
community is actually right regarding Iran.  To my knowledge,  the Iranians have 
no delivery system that could remotely threaten these  United States.  It 
doesn't have to be our problem, we don't need 3 wars at  once.  Again, jmo.   I 
suspect the JCS are pointing this out to  Rumsfield, Rice, and Bush in a way 
they can understand - I think the  military is max'd out "nation building, as it 
were" in Afghanistan and  Iraq.  
 
(Oh, and if Saddam (total turkey that he was & is) were still in  power I 
think it's likely we wouldn't be having this Iranian problem; somehow I  think 
the nuclear issue with Iran would have been taken care  of.)
 
Dave