Absolutely amazing this piece by Naomi Klein. She’s managed to grasp two basic economic points:

This isn’t the boom in Iraq sparked by the proposed new oil law – that
will come later. This boom is already in full swing, and it is
happening about as far away from the carnage in Baghdad as you can get,
in the wilds of northern Alberta.

Yup, she’s discovered that oil is a global market. You never know, next she might learn the meaning of the word "fungible". She does, sadly, rather miss a point though, in her eagerness to pin this all on the Iraq war. The oil sands were opened up once before, in the early 80s, when prices rose (in inflation adjusted terms) above current ones.

Both techniques are costly: between $18 and $23 per barrel, just in
expenses. Until quite recently, that made no economic sense. In the
mid-80s, oil sold for $20 a barrel; in 1998-99, it was down to $12 a
barrel. The major international players had no intention of paying more
to get the oil than they could sell it for, which is why, when global
oil reserves were calculated, the tar sands weren’t even factored in.
Everyone but a few heavily subsidised Canadian companies knew that the
tar was staying put.

Then came the US invasion of Iraq. In March
2003, the price of oil reached $35 a barrel, raising the prospect of
making a profit from the tar sands (the industry calls them "oil
sands"). That year, the US Energy Information Administration
"discovered" oil in the tar sands. It announced that Alberta –
previously thought to have only 5bn barrels of oil – was actually
sitting on at least 174bn "economically recoverable" barrels. The next
year, Canada overtook Saudi Arabia as the leading provider of foreign
oil to the US.

And there we have her second major enlightenment. Changes in prices and technology create resources.

You think we might manage to get her to believing in markets anytime soon, she does seem to be getting some other economic points?