T Nation

Iraq: There for Their Oil?


#1

Seriously, the liberals all say that we are there b/c of oil but i fail to see how this would be true if at all. Its not like the soldiers are piping it up and selling it to anybody else. If anybody knows about this please pipe in.


#2

Let's not be too harsh on the liberals. Not all of them think this, only the "ultra liberals." Those are the ones who went to the Michael Moore fantasy film and thought it was a documentary actually based upon fact.

Some liberals say this because the Bush family was (or is) in the oil business. Therefore, the best way to smear the man is to claim that we are sending soilders to Iraq to die for oil.

It has ZERO validity and only harms the credibility of those who spout this swill.

If you and I get lucky one or two of those ultra liberals will drop by this thread and start slinging the mud....


#3

Whether the US is fighting for Iraq's rich oil supply is debatable, but keep in mind these facts:

  • The US is currently the greatest oil consumer in the world, gulping a quarter of all oil extracted globally each day

  • More than half of America's oil requirements are imported, mostly from Middle Eastern countries (that includes Iraq)

  • China is growing to be the US' fiercest oil competitor and is aggressively pursuing secure oil sources

Having such an oil dependent economy, can the US sit cozily at home while its suppliers of oil are disrupted by political turmoil? The American people are highly accustomed to their energy intensive lifestyle, and are not about to forfeit it so quickly and abruptly.

That being said, you can make your own mind regarding the intention of the American foreign policy.


#4

So we would spend 80 billion plus dollars to try and be able to have/control/consume the most oil?

That makes about as much sense as spending $1k on a lawyer to fight a little speeding ticket.


#5

Oh yeah... can you please post links of these "facts"? Thanks.


#6

Anybody checked gasoline prices lately...........


#7

@HouseOfAtlas
http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/oil.html

By the way, tell me another reason to go the country with second biggest oil reserves in the world.


#8

its amazing how easily people can be brainwashed thinking its about fighting for something difrent than for oil.
remainds me of communism..


#9

What does that have to do with it? Over in Europe, prices are sky high and have been like that for years.

What exactly is your point about the gas prices? Are you saying GWB is taking all the oil and putting it behind the White House for his own personal use?? LOL

Come on!


#10

Funny! You get a source from an extreme liberal. Find a neutral source, please.

And for the reason we went to the country with the second biggest oil reserves in the world (supposedly) was to capture a guy that is one of the biggest mass murderers on our planet.

Would you want Saddam running our country? Would you want Saddam on our streets?


#11

Actually, Iraq is the third largest. Canada is well above Iraq:

http://www.mapsofworld.com/world-top-ten/world-top-ten-oil-reserves-countries-map.html

Why didn't we invade Canada? LOL!


#12

dont you know?
it
s to free those people ofcourse.
now that saddam is gone,it`s so much more safe there.
give the Nobel prize for bush and rumsfeld!


#13

We are not there to steal the oil, but oil is certainly part of the equation.

It would be easier to let these crackpot Islamic extremists have their twisted little utopia over there if they didn't have control over a vital resource.

One of the reasons the world has done little to stop the horrors in Sudan, Rwanda etc is because they are not vital to the worlds economy.

Sad but true.

Saying no blood for oil is a catchy slogan, but it is also bullshit.

If we are not willing to risk spilling blood for a precious commodity like oil, what are we willing to spill blood for? Food? Warmth? Oil is currently vital to supplying the necessities of life to most people on the planet.


#14

So what if we are fighting for oil? As oil reserves become more scarce, competition among countries to control sources of energy will become more and more violent. Controlling access to energy sources will become a critical piece of US national strategy.

Not now, not in ten years, but there are some estimates that say the current world oil reserves will not last 50 years. Our need for energy will clash with the needs of the rest of the world. If we are getting the jump on the rest of the world by establishing military presence in oil rich countries (not just Iraq, but Turkmenistan, Azerbijan, and Kazakhstan) then we are just getting prepared for the inevitable conflict.
Is it right?....Should the US change it's energy usage to avoid securing foriegn energy sources?....

Will an established democracy in the middle east (Iraq if we succeed) be more willing to trade w/ the United States in the future?....good questions. Can the American people change the currently massive demand for oil, until they do, I think this administration and future administrations will continue to plan for war over oil.


#15

Canada's total military is smaller than the United States Marine Corps. We could secure the canadian oil fields and oil shale fields very quickly without really disturbing most of thier population. If we play Quebec against the rest of Canada, we could start enough civil unrest up there to "intervene" for the good of the North American continent. Cheap Molson and Best of Rush albums for everyone!


#16

Europe's gas prices are and have been significantly higher than ours because the countries tax the shit out of it.

If you believe the Bush administration's statement that Iraq was sponsoring terrorism, posed a threat to the area's stability, and was capable of anything, you are a fucking sheep.

GW wanted to get Saddam to "finish" what some believed his father should have done back in '91.

All but a few of the terrorists were from Saudi Arabia. Why didn't we attack them? Oil. And if you didn't believe Michael Moorer's presentation of how closely related the Bush family is to Saudi Royals simply do some research. Please watch the Sundance Channel's "Uncovered: The Whole Truth About the Iraq War". The expertise of the people interviewed will astound you.

Let's not forget Haliburton and the Carnegie Foundation. How about the ex-Bush administrators coming out and talking about the "Iraq Stategy" that was made before 9-11?

Remember when Colin Powell was the only one against war with Iraq before his presentation to the U.N. He was the only one of them who ever fought in wars and knew the truth about Iraq. He changed his tune quick when he was almost forced to resign. There for their oil? Our entire economy is based on oil and we are making our economy more secure by invading. Fucking people amaze me with their stupidity.


#17

Let's work this theory out.

Shall we?

Ok, every now and then I like to indulge psychotics in their fantasies.

For the sake of argument, let's do it.

We invaded Iraq because of oil.

Ok. It would follow that we would secure the fields, rebuild the fields, transport the oil to the world and this extra supply would inevitably cause a decrease in oil prices, right?

More supply would lead to OPEC decreasing prices and cutting production to compete. Right?

What is happening? More production, the highest prices ever. Even given the rise of China, does anyone seriously think that the "new Iraqi oil" wouldn't show in the market?

Ok. Another pet fantasy of the left is George H.W.'s friendship with the Saudi's. First of all, I cannot imagine the amount of work, meetings, and bribes that it would take to force the Saudi's to break from their own oil conglomerate. Imagine how difficult that would be. Does anyone seriously think that H.W.'s pocket, desires, and influence are that deep? Please.

So in order for the fantasy to work, the Saudis would have to repudiate OPEC, form a special alliance with W./Iraq and agree to doctor the prices. Wouldn't it follow that the Saudi's would agree to lower/keep production at the same rate, drive up demand, and consequently drive the prices up for maximum profits?

As usual, I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but your fantasies don't hold up when subjected to the harsh light of reality.

Thanks for playing,

JeffR


#18

i really think its not wrong to go there for oil.
it
s the way world goes,bigger and stronger will always get the smaller and weaker.
what i dislike is the hippy peace bullshit thats been fed to people about it.
i mean stop pissing in my back and tell me it
s raining.
its for OIL!
i don
t care if you`re left of right,live with it.


#19

Its great to see that we dont have a bunch of sniveling pu$$e$ in here.

Seriously though more facts and im against the conflict in iraq i just want to be away for the right reasons -

  • We were buying oil before the conflict.
    Sadaam don't care; he's a greedy ba$%ard and was happy to sell us oil.

  • Now we have to prop up the oil bidness in iraq and actually you could look at the whole iraq conflict as an enormous " tax " that wasn't there before. I know bush the ol' yale MBA is gonna look at this w/ a bidness perspective. Check it out dubya - we're losing money.


#20

Zap, very true. Good post!