Korean Job Discussion Forums

[some waygug-in]

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]

2.5 billion is too small.


and they would get the bulk of the benefits , can you show that?

You are the one making the charges so it is your responsiblity to do so.

[some waygug-in]

Here is your source.

http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/intlrel/hfa48119.000/hfa48119_0.htm#17

48–119 CC
1998
U.S. INTERESTS IN THE CENTRAL ASIAN REPUBLICS

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON
ASIA AND THE PACIFIC

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED FIFTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

FEBRUARY 12, 1998

Printed for the use of the Committee on International Relations


What is "alternative" about that?

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]

underline it and post what you want.show what you want me to see

[some waygug-in]

I already did.

But here's more if you want it.

How quickly will oil volumes coming from this region overwhelm a few pipelines? I think it's very difficult to say. Certainly the first couple of pipelines that are built will be filled. After that, I think the third and fourth pipelines and the fifth pipeline that are built out of that area will probably also be filled. After that, it becomes a question as to which pipeline comes online first and which provides the cheapest route. That is why this question of netback is so important.
Netback is essentially a measurement of the incentive of the producer to use a certain route because it measures what he is going to get as a return. That is why to a certain extent, these pipelines will be in competition on a commercial basis.

Go to the link, scroll down and read pages 31 - 34.

http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/intlrel/hfa48119.000/hfa48119_0.htm#17

Mr. Chairman, the Caspian region contains tremendous untapped hydrocarbon reserves. Just to give an idea of the scale, proven natural gas reserves equal more than 236 trillion cubic feet. The region's total oil reserves may well reach more than 60 billion barrels of oil. Some estimates are as high as 200 billion barrels. In 1995, the region was producing only 870,000 barrels per day. By 2010, western companies could increase production to about 4.5 million barrels a day, an increase of more than 500 percent in only 15 years. If this occurs, the region would represent about 5 percent of the world's total oil production.
One major problem has yet to be resolved: how to get the region's vast energy resources to the markets where they are needed. Central Asia is isolated. Their natural resources are landlocked, both geographically and politically. Each of the countries in the Caucasus and Central Asia faces difficult political challenges. Some have unsettled wars or latent conflicts. Others have evolving systems where the laws and even the courts are dynamic and changing. In addition, a chief technical obstacle which we in the industry face in transporting oil is the region's existing pipeline infrastructure.
Because the region's pipelines were constructed during the Moscow-centered Soviet period, they tend to head north and west toward Russia. There are no connections to the south and east. But Russia is currently unlikely to absorb large new quantities of foreign oil. It's unlikely to be a significant market for new energy in the next decade. It lacks the capacity to deliver it to other markets.
Two major infrastructure projects are seeking to meet the need for additional export capacity. One, under the aegis of the Caspian Pipeline Consortium, plans to build a pipeline west from the northern Caspian to the Russian Black Sea port of Novorossiysk. Oil would then go by tanker through the Bosporus to the Mediterranean and world markets.
The other project is sponsored by the Azerbaijan International Operating Company, a consortium of 11 foreign oil companies, including four American companies, Unocal, Amoco, Exxon and Pennzoil. This consortium conceives of two possible routes, one line would angle north and cross the north Caucasus to Novorossiysk. The other route would cross Georgia to a shipping terminal on the Black Sea. This second route could be extended west and south across Turkey to the Mediterranean port of Ceyhan.

Page 32 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
But even if both pipelines were built, they would not have enough total capacity to transport all the oil expected to flow from the region in the future. Nor would they have the capability to move it to the right markets. Other export pipelines must be built.
At Unocal, we believe that the central factor in planning these pipelines should be the location of the future energy markets that are most likely to need these new supplies. Western Europe, Central and Eastern Europe, and the Newly Independent States of the former Soviet Union are all slow growth markets where demand will grow at only a half a percent to perhaps 1.2 percent per year during the period 1995 to 2010.
Asia is a different story all together. It will have a rapidly increasing energy consumption need. Prior to the recent turbulence in the Asian Pacific economies, we at Unocal anticipated that this region's demand for oil would almost double by 2010. Although the short-term increase in demand will probably not meet these expectations, we stand behind our long-term estimates.
I should note that it is in everyone's interest that there be adequate supplies for Asia's increasing energy requirements. If Asia's energy needs are not satisfied, they will simply put pressure on all world markets, driving prices upwards everywhere.
The key question then is how the energy resources of Central Asia can be made available to nearby Asian markets. There are two possible solutions, with several variations. One option is to go east across China, but this would mean constructing a pipeline of more than 3,000 kilometers just to reach Central China. In addition, there would have to be a 2,000-kilometer connection to reach the main population centers along the coast. The question then is what will be the cost of transporting oil through this pipeline, and what would be the netback which the producers would receive.
For those who are not familiar with the terminology, the netback is the price which the producer receives for his oil or gas at the wellhead after all the transportation costs have been deducted. So it's the price he receives for the oil he produces at the wellhead.

Page 33 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
The second option is to build a pipeline south from Central Asia to the Indian Ocean. One obvious route south would cross Iran, but this is foreclosed for American companies because of U.S. sanctions legislation. The only other possible route is across Afghanistan, which has of course its own unique challenges. The country has been involved in bitter warfare for almost two decades, and is still divided by civil war. From the outset, we have made it clear that construction of the pipeline we have proposed across Afghanistan could not begin until a recognized government is in place that has the confidence of governments, lenders, and our company.
Mr. Chairman, as you know, we have worked very closely with the University of Nebraska at Omaha in developing a training program for Afghanistan which will be open to both men and women, and which will operate in both parts of the country, the north and south.
Unocal foresees a pipeline which would become part of a regional system that will gather oil from existing pipeline infrastructure in Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Russia. The 1,040-mile long oil pipeline would extend south through Afghanistan to an export terminal that would be constructed on the Pakistan coast. This 42-inch diameter pipeline will have a shipping capacity of one million barrels of oil per day. The estimated cost of the project, which is similar in scope to the trans-Alaska pipeline, is about $2.5 billion.
Given the plentiful natural gas supplies of Central Asia, our aim is to link gas resources with the nearest viable markets. This is basic for the commercial viability of any gas project. But these projects also face geopolitical challenges. Unocal and the Turkish company Koc Holding are interested in bringing competitive gas supplies to Turkey. The proposed Eurasia natural gas pipeline would transport gas from Turkmenistan directly across the Caspian Sea through Azerbaijan and Georgia to Turkey. Of course the demarcation of the Caspian remains an issue.
Last October, the Central Asia Gas Pipeline Consortium, called CentGas, in which Unocal holds an interest, was formed to develop a gas pipeline which will link Turkmenistan's vast Dauletabad gas field with markets in Pakistan and possibly India. The proposed 790-mile pipeline will open up new markets for this gas, traveling from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan to Multan in Pakistan. The proposed extension would move gas on to New Delhi, where it would connect with an existing pipeline. As with the proposed Central Asia oil pipeline, CentGas can not begin construction until an internationally recognized Afghanistan Government is in place.

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]

show me the illegal meeting bush had with the taliban and show me the contents of that meeting .

Was in about oil

or was it about other stuff.

Or was the US holding out the chance of economic ties in exchange for the taliban turning over bin laden

[some waygug-in]

Bill Richardson, the US Ambassador to the UN, meets Taliban officials in Kabul (all such meetings are technically illegal, because the US still officially recognizes the government the Taliban ousted as the legitimate rulers of Afghanistan). US officials at the time call the oil and gas pipeline project a ��fabulous opportunity�� and are especially motivated by the ��prospect of circumventing Iran, which offered another route for the pipeline.�� [Boston Globe 9/20/01]

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2001/bostonglobe092001.html



"By then, we knew that a lot of things would have to be addressed before we could move forward in any way with them," Inderfurth said.

But others thought the lack of clear opposition from the start gave a different message. Even after Albright's declaration, Bill Richardson, then US ambassador to the United Nations, met Taliban officials in Kabul in early 1998.

In part, the ambiguity revolved around the prospect of building a pipeline that would run roughly 1,000 miles from the Caspian Sea region through Afghanistan to the Indian subcontinent, a proposal that Raphel described as a "fabulous opportunity." Two groups vied for the project: Bridas, an Argentine oil company, and a US-Saudi consortium led by Unocal. US officials say the project could have contributed millions of dollars to Afghanistan, whose war-wrecked economy relies largely on the thriving opium trade and international aid. More compelling for policy makers was the prospect of circumventing Iran, which offered another route for the pipeline.

For that project to work, stability was needed in Afghanistan, and the Taliban seemed to offer the best chance of reaching that goal.

At that time, US officials sent strong signals to Pakistan and the Arab world that Washington would not object to commercial ties, or perhaps diplomatic links, with the Taliban, said Abdul Raheem Yaseer, assistant director of the Center for Afghanistan Studies at the University of Nebraska in Omaha.


"The blessing of America for the development and success of the Taliban at the beginning affected everybody," Yaseer said. "It affected Unocal. They believed the Taliban might succeed, might have control of the country, and so everybody wanted to have them on their side. That's why Unocal wanted to cut a deal, because the Taliban already had the blessing of the Americans, Arab world, and Pakistanis.

"The US never admitted supporting the Taliban, but everyone knew the US was giving approval to whatever they were doing early on," he said.

Charles Santos, a vice president of a consortium partner, the Saudi-owned Delta oil company, said the consortium was never intent on undertaking the pipeline under a Taliban government and that the Taliban's lack of flexibility eventually doomed the project in 1998.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/htmlContent.jhtml?html=%2Farchive%2F1997%2F12%2F14%2Fwtal14.html

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]

I don't think Clinton had anything to do with the WTC bombing. ( I voted for him ) see there that was not the Bush adminstration there. That was the Clinton administration there., you said the Bush administration.

Bill Richardson was Bill Clintons' ambassador to the UN.

[some waygug-in]

Yes, but guess who was governor of Texas at that time and closely involved in deals with Unocal.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/htmlContent.jhtml?html=%2Farchive%2F1997%2F12%2F14%2Fwtal14.html

THE Taliban, Afghanistan's Islamic fundamentalist army, is about to sign a ? billion contract with an American oil company to build a pipeline across the war-torn country.

The Islamic warriors appear to have been persuaded to close the deal, not through delicate negotiation but by old-fashioned Texan hospitality. Last week Unocal, the Houston-based company bidding to build the 876-mile pipeline from Turkmenistan to Pakistan, invited the Taliban to visit them in Texas. Dressed in traditional salwar khameez, Afghan waistcoats and loose, black turbans, the high-ranking delegation was given VIP treatment during the four-day stay.

The Taliban ministers and their advisers stayed in a five-star hotel and were chauffeured in a company minibus. Their only requests were to visit Houston's zoo, the Nasa space centre and Omaha's Super Target discount store to buy stockings, toothpaste, combs and soap. The Taliban, which controls two-thirds of Afghanistan and is still fighting for the last third, was also given an insight into how the other half lives.

The men, who are accustomed to life without heating, electricity or running water, were amazed by the luxurious homes of Texan oil barons. Invited to dinner at the palatial home of Martin Miller, a vice-president of Unocal, they marvelled at his swimming pool, views of the golf course and six bathrooms. After a meal of specially prepared halal meat, rice and Coca-Cola, the hardline fundamentalists - who have banned women from working and girls from going to school - asked Mr Miller about his Christmas tree.


Also here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/west_asia/37021.stm


By the way, I apologize for the angry tone of my earlier posts.

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]

So because Bush was the governor of texas at the time and he had some busienss connections with Unicol he is behind the whole thing?


It is only a 2. 5 billion dollar contract ,

I want to see the meeting Bush had with taliban officials and the contents of that meeting.


You said:


" What would cause George W. Bush to think he had to hold ILLEGAL meetings with talliban leaders in Texas, if this were only "small stuff"? "

[some waygug-in]

But what's this?

http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo/eo-13129.htm

Executive Order 13129 of July 4, 1999


Blocking Property and Prohibiting Transactions
With the Taliban

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0201/08/ltm.05.html

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0201/09/ltm.06.html

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2001/irishtimes111901.html

Jean-Charles Brisard, who wrote a report on bin Laden's finances for the French intelligence agency DST and is co-author of Hidden Truth, met O'Neill several times last summer. He complained bitterly that the US State Department - and behind it the oil lobby who make up President Bush's entourage - blocked attempts to prove bin Laden's guilt.

The US ambassador to Yemen, Ms Barbara Bodine, forbade O'Neill and his team of so- called Rambos (as the Yemeni authorities called them) from entering Yemen. In August 2001, O'Neill resigned in frustration and took up a new job as head of security at the World Trade Centre. He died in the September 11th attack.

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]

but you links make Clinton out to be as responsible as Bush.


http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0621-02.htm

[some waygug-in]

And both of them should be hauled in to answer all the questions surrounding this.

Don't you think so?

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]

question everyone. I think they are innocent but why not.

[some waygug-in]

Why not indeed. Then maybe there could be some closure on this issue and we could move on. Maybe there wouldn't be 1000 wild theories flying around. Well, I guess that would still happen, but there would be at least some sense that the government was being held accountable.

The way Bush has been acting it's as if he is saying, "I can do whatever the F^&* I want, and nobody can stop me". Some democracy

A friend told me something back in my university days, when the conservatives were out ruining my home province of Saskatchewan.

He said, "Governments like to build huge monuments to themselves, and people generally like to bury them underneath those monuments. "