What about use of US military in Columbia to protect oil pipelines? What about the use of US military to grab oil resources? What about oil industry payments to the brutal government in Nigeria in exchange for brutal "security services" from the Nigerian military, and so forth?

All of these behaviours make me believe that the whole discussion takes place in a context of bad faith. This undermines the discussion considerably.

Isn't this what economists call "externalized" costs? Or what some people would refer to as "hidden subsidies?" What is the true cost of oil right now, given that all this bad-faith behavior is paid for by the consumer -- if not at the pump nozzle, then in taxes or higher prices elsewhere? Certainly, the concept of a "free" market, with the various participants in the market exchanging their products on a level playing field is a cruel hoax.

WAAAAAY OFF TOPIC, BUT WOTTHEHELL...

What about use of US military in Columbia to protect oil pipelines?

If you're genuinely concerned about US policy towards Colombia, please will you spell the country's name correctly? And maybe educate yourself a little before posting outdated myths? Los gringos are minority players in Colombia - the largest producer(by far) and largest refiner/distributor is the national oil company...

http://www.ecopetrol.com.co/contenido.aspx?catID=30&conID=36274

Classic declining production/increasing domestic consumption exportland, by the way - and guess who their biggest customer is...

FLAME OFF - FOR NOW

RE: US military involvement in Colombia related to petroelum.

Read "Blood and Oil: the Dangers and Consequences of America's Growing Dependency on Imported Petroleum" by Michael T. Klare.

Stop by a bookstore and check for "Colombia" in the index.

For 30 years Colombia has been "lacerated" by a 4-way civil war. The US has been very involved in this, first under the cover of the "War on Drugs" and now explicitly to provide security for petroleum infrastructure.

In addition to billions of dollars earmarked for "Plan Colombia" Bush required another $98 million for protection of one of Occidental's pipelines in 2002, and another $147 million in 2004. In addition, US Special forces train Colombian forces during actual military missions.

The US troops are deployed in active combat zones, and together with other US military operations around the world are part of the (at minimum) $150 billion annual cost of direct military expenditure to sieze or secure petroleum.

Of course we do not know the additional "off the books" costs or programs to secure oil and drug supplies, but my guess is that they are substantial. (Read "White Out" and other studies related to the USA as drug dealer.)

The US involvement in Colombia, like that in the Middle East, involves propping up corrupt and brutal elites who represent the interests of multinationals against the people of their country.

A swell way to win hearts and minds in Latin America.

Actions speak far louder than words, do they not?

I know that RR and other good folks do not want to acknowledge the staggering duplicity of the petrofascists, but there it is -- pretty plain for all to see.

To ignore this duplicity is to support it.

Remember MLK's later speeches -- the ones conveniently expunged from official observances of his contributions to our political and cultural life.

Give old US Supreme Court Justice William O Douglas' "Points of Rebellion" (1968?) a read. I'm pretty sure it is available online.

Or check out Michael Parenti's superb talk here:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11635.htm

I love this quote in particular:

"Globalization is an attempt to extend corporate monopoly control over the whole globe. Over every national economy. Over every local economy Over every life."

Parenti minces no words regarding the criminal nature of our petrocolonialism around the globe.

Colombia will see far more US military involvement, as will the rest of Latin America: resource war,