Iraq & Oil

Salaam

In the Iraq topic, the Oil bit has been sidelined (for the right reasons).

It needs its own place to discuss.

Constantine[/url]"]As for oil - as far as I know we have not touched any. However the additional flow of Iraqi oil into the world market was taken into consideration "the war will pay for itself." It was theorised that the price would go from 35$ per barrel down to 25.

Obviously that hasn't happened.

Currently the proposal is for longterm contracts that take away the oil from the government. This is projected to cost the Iraqi people betwee £40bn, and £194bn.

I have linked to this previously... I will try to find the link aswell.

I don't think the Iraq war was really about oil.

I think the cause of it was the people around Cheney who originally wanted to overthrow Saddam in 91 when Cheney was defense secretary. George Bush senior stopped this because he knew it would end up as a disaster and apparently he was right. This taught the neo-cons that in order to push through their policies they needed to influence a president without a brain.

I've watched some Michael Moore stuff. [i]do you really [/i]want my opinion(on the war)?

hint.hint. Insurgents stealing American weapons and armour because troops were sent (presumably diverted from other posts) to secure the oil wells/refineries leaving those guarding munitions under staffed.

Gentleness and kindness were never a part of anything except that it made it beautiful, and harshness was never a part of anything except that it made it ugly.

Through cheating, stealing, and lying, one may get required results but finally one becomes

It does not matter if the war was for oil, or some other made up reason.

What matters is what is done.

wih the oil, it will be taken away from the Iraqi people, and the contracts would be signed abroad, so the Iraqi ov would not be able to do anything even if they wanted to.

"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.

"Dawud" wrote:
I've watched some Michael Moore stuff. [i]do you really [/i]want my opinion(on the war)?

hint.hint. Insurgents stealing American weapons and armour because troops were sent (presumably diverted from other posts) to secure the oil wells/refineries leaving those guarding munitions under staffed.

Michael Moore is a polemicist. Does he actually have an ideology?

Just because they're guarding oil fields doesn't mean that's why they went there.

"salaf" wrote:
I don't think the Iraq war was really about oil.

I think the cause of it was the people around Cheney who originally wanted to overthrow Saddam in 91 when Cheney was defense secretary. George Bush senior stopped this because he knew it would end up as a disaster and apparently he was right. This taught the neo-cons that in order to push through their policies they needed to influence a president without a brain.

I agree, although oil was certainly a consideration... otherwise they wouldn't have bothered looking into the figures for what the effect of iraqi oil on world markets would be.

As for Michael Moore - he's just interested in media attention. Raises some interesting questions but his research is somewhat shoddy and his "documentaries" are usually rather propagandist.

His ideology is making a buck.

"Constantine" wrote:
"salaf" wrote:
I don't think the Iraq war was really about oil.

I think the cause of it was the people around Cheney who originally wanted to overthrow Saddam in 91 when Cheney was defense secretary. George Bush senior stopped this because he knew it would end up as a disaster and apparently he was right. This taught the neo-cons that in order to push through their policies they needed to influence a president without a brain.

I agree, although oil was certainly a consideration... otherwise they wouldn't have bothered looking into the figures for what the effect of iraqi oil on world markets would be.

As for Michael Moore - he's just interested in media attention. Raises some interesting questions but his research is somewhat shoddy and his "documentaries" are usually rather propagandist.

His ideology is making a buck.

In my opinion Michael Moore is just a left-wing version of Christopher Hitchens. Although technically Hitchens is left-wing as well.

Well, you know what I mean. Basically they're both after media attention and don't really have any firm ideological convictions.

are you serious! oil was the biggest reason, greed and global domination are the only reasons countries invade these days

Mr Moore makes his films for money - so we all work for our money

There's a whole boat of injustice going on giving glimpses of it in a palatable form - now that's pure genius

Oil was a reason.

However IMO the primary reason was revenge. America was hurting and wanted to kick someone. Afghanistan did not provide the required feedback.

Now some sense is returning to the Americans, and hopefully they will not be dragged by the regime into another war.

"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.

Well under international law, regime change is illegal, so it couldn't have been coz of Saddam.

Saddam Hates Bin Ladden, so it couldn't have been 11/9

And as for WMD, hmmm, I don't think there are any.

Gentleness and kindness were never a part of anything except that it made it beautiful, and harshness was never a part of anything except that it made it ugly.

Through cheating, stealing, and lying, one may get required results but finally one becomes