Oil 1 Peak Oil 21
Download 9.54 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Food Prices - Riots
- Developing Countries – Central America
- Developing Countries – Pakistan Advantage
- Developing Countries – Pakistan Advantage Terror Impact
Food Prices - LinkPersistently high oil prices are spiking food prices New Vision, 6-12-08 http://allafrica.com/stories/200806130042.html, Uganda: High Oil Prices Worry Food Dealers, All Africa News DEALERS in food items have expressed concern that food prices will continue to rise as long as the world oil price remained high. "Fuel prices determine the food prices since agricultural products need to be transported from rural areas to urban markets," noted Fatuma Lwere, a maize flour dealer at Nakasero Market. "The Government cannot control the world fuel prices. Food will, therefore, remain costly." In a bid to reduce transport costs, Dr. Suruma in his speech proposed to scrap Value Added Tax (VAT) on trucks above 3.3 tonnes. But Lwere is convinced that transporters will continue charging high fares, arguing that the vendors were not able to interpret the budget proposals. "If transporters charge lower prices, food dealers will reduce the prices as well," she explained. Joan Seguya, a dealer in pesticides on Ben Kiwanuka Street in the city centre, said the budget proposals will not make a difference to his business. Food Prices - RiotsSoaring oil prices spur food price spikes and poverty Intl Herald Tribune, 2-24-08 http://www.iht.com/bin/printfriendly.php?id=10339966, High oil prices take a toll on the Gulf's middle class Even as it enriches Arab rulers, the recent oil-price boom is helping to propel an extraordinary rise in the cost of food and other basic goods that is squeezing this region's middle class and setting off strikes, demonstrations and occasional riots from Morocco to the Gulf. In Jordan, the soaring price of oil led the government to remove almost all its costly fuel subsidies this month, pushing the price of some fuels up 76 percent overnight. In a devastating domino effect, the cost of basic foods like eggs, potatoes and cucumbers doubled or more. In Saudi Arabia, where the inflation rate had been virtually zero for a decade, it has reached an official level of 6.5 percent, though unofficial estimates put it much higher. Public protests and boycotts have followed, and 19 prominent clerics posted an unusual statement on the Internet in December warning of a crisis that would cause "theft, cheating, armed robbery and resentment between rich and poor." The resurgence of inflation has many causes, from rising global demand to the monetary constraints of currencies pegged to the weakening U.S. dollar. But one cause is the skyrocketing price of oil itself, which is creating unheard-of riches for governments in the Gulf even as it helps push many ordinary people into poverty. Developing Countries – Central AmericaIncreased oil prices are wreaking havoc on Central America LA Times, 7-18-08 http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-fg-poverty18-2008jul18,0,7874890,print.story, Oil prices threaten Latin America's economic gains Though exporting nations such as Mexico, Brazil and Chile have profited handsomely from their petroleum, soybeans and copper, Central America has reaped few benefits from the commodities boom. The region imports much of its grain and virtually all of its oil. Pain at the pump is severe. Drivers in San Salvador pay about $4.76 a gallon, up more than 25% over the last year. The price of diesel, the most heavily used vehicle fuel in the country, has jumped about 75% over the same period, to about $5.13. The capital's bus drivers recently raised fares by a dime on some routes, a 40% increase that has hit consumers hard. Rising fuel costs have rippled through the supply chain, boosting the price of virtually everything. In fact, a slowing U.S. economy has retarded growth of remittances, which are crucial to the Central American economy. A weak U.S. dollar means the money sent home from the States buys less than it used to. Many in El Salvador, which embraced the greenback as its official currency in 2001, are longing for their old currency, the colon. Developing Countries – Pakistan AdvantageContinued high oil prices will lead to collapse of Pakistan Tom Whipple, fmr CIA energy analyst and editor at Falls Church News, 7-16-08 http://www.fcnp.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3301:the-peak-oil-crisis-the-blackouts-spread&catid=17:national-commentary&Itemid=79, The Peak Oil Crisis: The Blackouts Spread, Falls Church News-Press Currently, the most serious situations appear to be in Pakistan and Bangladesh. Both are nations with populations in excess of 150 million people that are ensnared in devastating power shortages that have destroyed their export industries. Both are facing water and agricultural problems that threaten their food supplies. Liquid fuels are running short and reductions in exports threaten their ability to import oil and natural gas. It was recently revealed that the Saudis already are forgiving $6 billion of Pakistan's $12 billion annual oil import bill. On top of this, Pakistan has nuclear weapons and its strategic location is vital to the course of the insurgency in Afghanistan. Worsening blackouts, the liquid fuels shortage and probably the food situation are likely to lead to serious political instability before the year is out. Collapse of Pakistan results in terrorist seizure of nuclear weapons and an attack on Kashmir Frederick Kagan, resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and Michael O’Hanlon, senior fellow at the Brookings Insitute, 11-18-07 http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/18/opinion/18kagan.html?ref=opinion, New York Times, Pakistan’s Collapse, Our Problem AS the government of Pakistan totters, we must face a fact: the United States simply could not stand by as a nuclear-armed Pakistan descended into the abyss. Nor would it be strategically prudent to withdraw our forces from an improving situation in Iraq to cope with a deteriorating one in Pakistan. We need to think — now — about our feasible military options in Pakistan, should it really come to that. We do not intend to be fear mongers. Pakistan’s officer corps and ruling elites remain largely moderate and more interested in building a strong, modern state than in exporting terrorism or nuclear weapons to the highest bidder. But then again, Americans felt similarly about the shah’s regime in Iran until it was too late. Moreover, Pakistan’s intelligence services contain enough sympathizers and supporters of the Afghan Taliban, and enough nationalists bent on seizing the disputed province of Kashmir from India, that there are grounds for real worries. The most likely possible dangers are these: a complete collapse of Pakistani government rule that allows an extreme Islamist movement to fill the vacuum; a total loss of federal control over outlying provinces, which splinter along ethnic and tribal lines; or a struggle within the Pakistani military in which the minority sympathetic to the Taliban and Al Qaeda try to establish Pakistan as a state sponsor of terrorism. All possible military initiatives to avoid those possibilities are daunting. With 160 million people, Pakistan is more than five times the size of Iraq. It would take a long time to move large numbers of American forces halfway across the world. And unless we had precise information about the location of all of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons and materials, we could not rely on bombing or using Special Forces to destroy them. Developing Countries – Pakistan Advantage Terror ImpactNuclear terrorism will result in escalatory nuclear wars culminating in extinction Jerome Corsi, PhD in political science from Harvard University, 4-20-05 Horrific scenario: NYC hit by terrorist nuke, http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:esn5cwuNRWwJ:wnd.com/news/article.asp%3FARTICLE_ID%3D43817+%22exacting+revenge%22+%22less+than+one+hour%22+corsi&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=firefox-a The United States retaliates: 'End of the world' scenarios The combination of horror and outrage that will surge upon the nation will demand that the president retaliate for the incomprehensible damage done by the attack. The problem will be that the president will not immediately know how to respond or against whom. The perpetrators will have been incinerated by the explosion that destroyed New York City. Unlike 9-11, there will have been no interval during the attack when those hijacked could make phone calls to loved ones telling them before they died that the hijackers were radical Islamic extremists. There will be no such phone calls when the attack will not have been anticipated until the instant the terrorists detonate their improvised nuclear device inside the truck parked on a curb at the Empire State Building. Nor will there be any possibility of finding any clues, which either were vaporized instantly or are now lying physically inaccessible under tons of radioactive rubble. Still, the president, members of Congress, the military, and the public at large will suspect another attack by our known enemy – Islamic terrorists. The first impulse will be to launch a nuclear strike on Mecca, to destroy the whole religion of Islam. Medina could possibly be added to the target list just to make the point with crystal clarity. Yet what would we gain? The moment Mecca and Medina were wiped off the map, the Islamic world – more than 1 billion human beings in countless different nations – would feel attacked. Nothing would emerge intact after a war between the United States and Islam. The apocalypse would be upon us. Then, too, we would face an immediate threat from our long-term enemy, the former Soviet Union. Many in the Kremlin would see this as an opportunity to grasp the victory that had been snatched from them by Ronald Reagan when the Berlin Wall came down. A missile strike by the Russians on a score of American cities could possibly be pre-emptive. Would the U.S. strategic defense system be so in shock that immediate retaliation would not be possible? Hardliners in Moscow might argue that there was never a better opportunity to destroy America. In China, our newer Communist enemies might not care if we could retaliate. With a population already over 1.3 billion people and with their population not concentrated in a few major cities, the Chinese might calculate to initiate a nuclear blow on the United States. What if the United States retaliated with a nuclear counterattack upon China? The Chinese might be able to absorb the blow and recover. The North Koreans might calculate even more recklessly. Why not launch upon America the few missiles they have that could reach our soil? More confusion and chaos might only advance their position. If Russia, China, and the United States could be drawn into attacking one another, North Korea might emerge stronger just because it was overlooked while the great nations focus on attacking one another. So, too, our supposed allies in Europe might relish the immediate reduction in power suddenly inflicted upon America. Many of the great egos in Europe have never fully recovered from the disgrace of World War II, when in the last century the Americans a second time in just over two decades had been forced to come to their rescue. If the French did not start launching nuclear weapons themselves, they might be happy to fan the diplomatic fire beginning to burn under the Russians and the Chinese. Or the president might decide simply to launch a limited nuclear strike on Tehran itself. This might be the most rational option in the attempt to retaliate but still communicate restraint. The problem is that a strike on Tehran would add more nuclear devastation to the world calculation. Muslims around the world would still see the retaliation as an attack on Islam, especially when the United States had no positive proof that the destruction of New York City had been triggered by radical Islamic extremists with assistance from Iran. But for the president not to retaliate might be unacceptable to the American people. So weakened by the loss of New York, Americans would feel vulnerable in every city in the nation. "Who is going to be next?" would be the question on everyone's mind. For this there would be no effective answer. That the president might think politically at this instant seems almost petty, yet every president is by nature a politician. The political party in power at the time of the attack would be destroyed unless the president retaliated with a nuclear strike against somebody. The American people would feel a price had to be paid while the country was still capable of exacting revenge. Directory: file -> view view -> Western Europe after wwii view -> Author study: paul fleischman view -> Qpa1 7ela study Guide view -> Arctic Oil/Gas Neg view -> November 1970 Approximately 150,000-500,000 deaths Bhola Cyclone Bangladesh view -> Grade Level: 6 Unit of Study: Caribbean glce view -> Citation: Duffield, Katy view -> Table of Contents Lesson # view -> Chinese Wind Energy Disad Download 9.54 Mb. Share with your friends:
|