• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

It was all about Oil

Do you believe that U.S intervention in the Middle East, Asia and Europe is Oil motivated?


  • Total voters
    20
  • Poll closed .
The US is offering weapons and military protection to Saudi Arabia because they're the biggest exporter of crude oil to the US, S.Korea, Japan and India. The US dollar is backed by the petrodollar and every country trades in petrodollars. Countries which have attempted to leave the petrodollar system by trading oil in other currencies (Iraq and Libya) have shortly afterward been targeted by the US in military interventions. The collapse of the petrodollar system would be very damaging to the US economy.

Very good point. Rump will keep enough troops in Syria at the request of Israel, to protect oil fields. Rump will deploy troops to KSA to protect the oil supply. Trump will pull troops in Syria so he can boast he brought troops home. Mean while our Kurdish allies are being deserted and most likely Isis has been empowered. If only the Kurds had oil fields, maybe then Rump would not have done the dirty on them. With Rump, its all about $$.
 
Very good point. Rump will keep enough troops in Syria at the request of Israel, to protect oil fields. Rump will deploy troops to KSA to protect the oil supply. Trump will pull troops in Syria so he can boast he brought troops home. Mean while our Kurdish allies are being deserted and most likely Isis has been empowered. If only the Kurds had oil fields, maybe then Rump would not have done the dirty on them. With Rump, its all about $$.

IMO it's about more than money. When Trump pulls troops out of Syria or Afghanistan, it's because Putin told him to. In addition to Putin, I think there's several factions controlling Trump's decisions. In Syria, putting aside the civil war going on internally there's external factions there like Russia and Iran who have interests, not in their civil war, but in the natural gas pipeline that runs straight down though the center of Syria. It's called the 'Friendship pipeline' and it's protected by Iran, Iraq and Syria. So there's where their interests lie. As far as for Russia, they have a major port in Tartus, Syria which is now not only Russia's sole remaining naval base in the Middle East and on the Mediterranean Sea but also an important Russian military-intelligence base and listening post.

Russia has been openly augmenting its Black Sea Fleet and intends to increase its strength by procuring more than 80 new ships during the next five years. It is also building a second naval base for this fleet at its Black Sea port of Novorossiisk. In this power play, its naval base at Tartus in Syria is the linchpin of Russia’s strategic calculations. If it falls, Russian warships would have to traverse the narrow waters of the Bosporus, under control of Turkey, a NATO member.

The considerations for protecting natural gas pipelines and routes to the Mediterranean Sea and the shipping of oil to all parts of the world are of primary consideration. The conflicts happening in the Middle East are essentially religion-based and people that have been enemies for thousands of years will fight for another thousand if the world survives. But the major powers manipulating these warring tribes of people are Russia, Iran, the US and Saudi Arabia and it's for control of the oceans and of the oil.
 
Strange then that the bipartisan declaration of war on Iraq in 2002 did not list oil among the 12 reasons given for the invasion.

Are you being serious? Next war, they will list Oil among reasons for the invasion of other countries.
 
I have to definitely reject this idea that Syria was always about oil. It ignores a number of different things and interests and is much too narrow-minded to the point that it oversimplifies a situation.

There are a number of overlapping interests with regards to Syria. On the US front, Syria is a major ally of Iran and friendly to the Palestinian cause. The US, in wanting to aid Israel and Saudi Arabia, while at the same time attempting to suck Iran in, funded terrorists in order to destabilize Syria. Initially the goal was to overthrow Bashar Al Assad, but as time went on and the chances of that decreased, they moved to just continuing the bloodletting as to suck up the resources of Syria, Iran, Hezbollah. These reasons are pretty similar for Saudi Arabia and Israel differs only slightly as it also has the Golan Heights coming into play as well.
 
It's always about oil, gas. Why do some people think that the United States invaded Iraq to topple a regime that is described as a dictator even though during the 1980s, it was supplying that regime with weapons and ammunition? Weapons of mass destruction are only a pretext because it was supplied by Western countries such as the United States and Britain, and Iraq didn't have the technology to produce them. It is naive to think that the United States resembles the big heart cowboy who helps the inhabitants of isolated towns get rid of the bad guys because they don't know how to use weapons, and he demands no money.

Countries like the United States and Britain are known to have supported dictatorships such as Augusto Pinochet in Chile and Argentina's military regime. Before that, the United States supported all coup attempts in Latin America. It started with the 1954 coup in Guatemala because President Jacob Arbenz had nationalized part of the United Fruit Company's unused land. Propaganda against Guatemala, which focused on being a state ruled by a communist president, was carried out by the famous propaganda tycoon Edward Bernays. But what the United States did there would not be surprised when everyone recognizes the names of the United Fruit Company owners. All the crimes committed by the military regimes in Latin America were not enough to provoke humanity and human rights sentiment with successive US administrations.

Oil is the primary reason behind every conflict from Europe to Latin America and the Middle East. Even in Asia, in Burma, a country important to China as a potential transit area for oil pipelines. The conflict over the South China Sea fueled by US interventions in Asian affairs has to do with oil. The US worried about the growth of Chinese military power and the economy is seeking to block it off from its energy sources. A new Cold War in Asia with China not the Soviet Union as the peer and, of course, the United States, a country addicted to wars and proxy intervention in other countries' affairs. The conflict in Ukraine over the region known Dneiper-Donets is only another chapter of the world's oil wars. The region bordering Russia is floating on an enormous oil reserve estimated at billions of barrels of oil in an unconventional area for oil deposits. In Syria, Western countries such as the United States, Britain, France and Arab allies have financed terrorist organizations such as Al Qaeda and ISIS to topple a regime they describe as bloody and dictatorial. But these organizations, bragging about their crimes and publishing videos in which Syrian civilians are beheaded, is nothing but a tool in Western countries to use in proxy wars that have been linked in one way or another to oil.

To conclude the thread by talking about Iraq as it began, there is a number of facts confirming American intentions to invade Iraq, which is floating on the second oil reserves after Saudi Arabia. First, Halliburton, whose former director, Dick Cheney, US Vice President George W. Bush, published a report in October 2002 on the control of oil fields and refining facilities after the invasion and occupation of Iraq. The American occupation forces took control of the Iraqi Oil Ministry even before its military deployment in Baghdad was completed. Second, in the weeks following the invasion, the US deputy defense secretary admitted that oil was the cause, not the fight against terrorism. Third, the United States has tried hard to find even weak evidence linking the Iraqi regime to fundamentalist Islamist organizations such as al-Qaeda but failed. Finally, no weapons of mass destruction have been discovered in Iraq and turned out to be fabricated and false reports by Iraqi opposition and citizens who wished their refugee applications accepted in Western countries by fabricating fictitious stories of chemical and biological weapons in mobile trucks roaming the various regions of Iraq for camouflage.

All these wars, which killed hundreds of thousands of dead, wounded and missing, massive destruction of infrastructure, and economic collapse have only one reason: the US desire to control the sources of energy and its transmission lines for geopolitical goals within the framework of the new Cold War and its conflict with Russia. And China.

End

Yes and no. We were blindsided by 911. We couldn’t see ship movements or convoys, or upticks in armaments being manufactured. We got ambushed.

So getting involved in the middle east sent a message: “Do you want our infidel asses up in your face for another 20 years? Try anything like that again and we will never leave”.

We don’t need their oil but modern countries do.
 
Yes and no. We were blindsided by 911. We couldn’t see ship movements or convoys, or upticks in armaments being manufactured. We got ambushed.

So getting involved in the middle east sent a message: “Do you want our infidel asses up in your face for another 20 years? Try anything like that again and we will never leave”.

We don’t need their oil but modern countries do.

You don't need that Oil, but what do you need is to control it to control the geopolitical faith of the world.
 
Strange then that the bipartisan declaration of war on Iraq in 2002 did not list oil among the 12 reasons given for the invasion.

You are hilarious. Do you expect they include Oil in that 12 reasons given for the invasion.
 
The US has a long legacy of promoting national control of strategic resources and championing its corporations, economic and geopolitical interests, regardless of the cost to the countries its interventions result in, or their liberty, with democracies proving as disposable in pursuit of these interests as dictatorships. In fact, friendly dictatorships were often preferred to the messiness and unpredictability of democratic governments. This was doubly true during the Cold War; Kissinger was perhaps the most notorious promulgator of such realpolitik foreign policy which, in the long run, more often than not featured disastrous or averse unintended consequences for the States and others involved.

Foreign interventions by the United States - Wikipedia

In Iraq specifcally, I don't find that it was solely about oil, but it was overwhelmingly about advantaging perceived American interests, oil control of which was a major one, and its core motive was most certainly not to 'liberate' the Iraqi people, or eliminate any kind of real existential threat.

Good comment
 
Well, of course it is...it's always about the greed...what's in it for me...do you think people go to war over ethics? lol...
 
The US is offering weapons and military protection to Saudi Arabia because they're the biggest exporter of crude oil to the US, S.Korea, Japan and India. The US dollar is backed by the petrodollar and every country trades in petrodollars. Countries which have attempted to leave the petrodollar system by trading oil in other currencies (Iraq and Libya) have shortly afterward been targeted by the US in military interventions. The collapse of the petrodollar system would be very damaging to the US economy.

The #1 source of imported oil into the US is Canada.
 
It's always about oil, gas. Why do some people think that the United States invaded Iraq to topple a regime that is described as a dictator even though during the 1980s, it was supplying that regime with weapons and ammunition? Weapons of mass destruction are only a pretext because it was supplied by Western countries such as the United States and Britain, and Iraq didn't have the technology to produce them. It is naive to think that the United States resembles the big heart cowboy who helps the inhabitants of isolated towns get rid of the bad guys because they don't know how to use weapons, and he demands no money.

Countries like the United States and Britain are known to have supported dictatorships such as Augusto Pinochet in Chile and Argentina's military regime. Before that, the United States supported all coup attempts in Latin America. It started with the 1954 coup in Guatemala because President Jacob Arbenz had nationalized part of the United Fruit Company's unused land. Propaganda against Guatemala, which focused on being a state ruled by a communist president, was carried out by the famous propaganda tycoon Edward Bernays. But what the United States did there would not be surprised when everyone recognizes the names of the United Fruit Company owners. All the crimes committed by the military regimes in Latin America were not enough to provoke humanity and human rights sentiment with successive US administrations.

Oil is the primary reason behind every conflict from Europe to Latin America and the Middle East. Even in Asia, in Burma, a country important to China as a potential transit area for oil pipelines. The conflict over the South China Sea fueled by US interventions in Asian affairs has to do with oil. The US worried about the growth of Chinese military power and the economy is seeking to block it off from its energy sources. A new Cold War in Asia with China not the Soviet Union as the peer and, of course, the United States, a country addicted to wars and proxy intervention in other countries' affairs. The conflict in Ukraine over the region known Dneiper-Donets is only another chapter of the world's oil wars. The region bordering Russia is floating on an enormous oil reserve estimated at billions of barrels of oil in an unconventional area for oil deposits. In Syria, Western countries such as the United States, Britain, France and Arab allies have financed terrorist organizations such as Al Qaeda and ISIS to topple a regime they describe as bloody and dictatorial. But these organizations, bragging about their crimes and publishing videos in which Syrian civilians are beheaded, is nothing but a tool in Western countries to use in proxy wars that have been linked in one way or another to oil.

To conclude the thread by talking about Iraq as it began, there is a number of facts confirming American intentions to invade Iraq, which is floating on the second oil reserves after Saudi Arabia. First, Halliburton, whose former director, Dick Cheney, US Vice President George W. Bush, published a report in October 2002 on the control of oil fields and refining facilities after the invasion and occupation of Iraq. The American occupation forces took control of the Iraqi Oil Ministry even before its military deployment in Baghdad was completed. Second, in the weeks following the invasion, the US deputy defense secretary admitted that oil was the cause, not the fight against terrorism. Third, the United States has tried hard to find even weak evidence linking the Iraqi regime to fundamentalist Islamist organizations such as al-Qaeda but failed. Finally, no weapons of mass destruction have been discovered in Iraq and turned out to be fabricated and false reports by Iraqi opposition and citizens who wished their refugee applications accepted in Western countries by fabricating fictitious stories of chemical and biological weapons in mobile trucks roaming the various regions of Iraq for camouflage.

All these wars, which killed hundreds of thousands of dead, wounded and missing, massive destruction of infrastructure, and economic collapse have only one reason: the US desire to control the sources of energy and its transmission lines for geopolitical goals within the framework of the new Cold War and its conflict with Russia. And China.

End

What weapons of mass destruction did the US and UK provide to Iraq?
 
Back
Top Bottom