- 5,677
The oil was another motive on top of those things. However invading iraq just for oil would not have presented a very good image now would it.
Photos from Iraq
- Thread starter rinard
- 489 comments
- 12,607 views
The oil was another motive on top of those things. However invading iraq just for oil would not have presented a very good image now would it.
- 2,767
What would make me think that the world largest oil consumer would be interested in the 2nd largest oil reserve in the world?
Cheney, Rice 3 generations of Bush are or were highly involved with oil companies, and those companies invested more than 1 billion in the last electoral campain... but you're right, oil does not have anything to do with it and I don't have a proof. We did it for humanitarian purposes, and I candidly belive that Iraq oil profits will stay in Iraq... It's good to see that you are glad to spend a lot more doing "so much good" for Iraqi people but pissed at the same time for having to pay a fraction of that money to help some Americans who needs it....
Oh, that's true... I forgot about those WMD. Meh... who haven't forgot about those anyway... t hat was last year urgent reason for invading Iraq, not this year's...
Danoff
Premium
- 34,011
- Mile High City
I don't believe we did it for the good of the Iraqi people, if I did, I'd say we shouldn't be wasting my tax dollars on it.
(I've said this many times before)
We did it to create a center for democracy in the middle east, an American influence that can at the same time be a focal point for terrorist hatred and a positive influence for democracy in the region.
We did it to make them sympathetic to us 25 years from now. We did it so that our military could take the brunt of the terrorist attakcs over there and keep our buildings standing tall over here. It was excellent strategy and it keeps me safer.
Good use of my tax dollars.
- 5,677
Common sense makes me think that. One of the major aspects of liberating Iraq was to protect it's oil fields. Iraq's proven oil reserves are 113 billion barrels, the second largest in the world after Saudi Arabia, and eleven percent of the world's total. The total reserves could be 200 million barrels or more, all of it relatively easy and cheap to extract. Thus increasing Iraqi oil production will diminish the market pressure on oil-importing countries like the US. It will also weaken the power of OPEC to influence oil markets by decisions to restrict output. Which is what it's currently doing and raising prices everywhere. Indeed, were Iraqi oil production to expand to near its capacity, the quotas established by OPEC would cease to be honored in today's market.
Another thing is that OPEC prices on oil are in US dollars and they are considering changing over to the Euro. The chief reason why dollars are more than pieces of green paper is that countries all over the world need them for purchases, principally of oil. This requires them in addition to maintain dollar reserves to protect their own currency; and these reserves, when invested, help maintain the current high levels of the US securities markets.
As Henry Liu has written vividly in the online Asian Times (4/11/02)
"World trade is now a game in which the US produces dollars and the rest of the world produces things that dollars can buy. The world's interlinked economies no longer trade to capture a comparative advantage; they compete in exports to capture needed dollars to service dollar-denominated foreign debts and to accumulate dollar reserves to sustain the exchange value of their domestic currencies. To prevent speculative and manipulative attacks on their currencies, the world's central banks must acquire and hold dollar reserves in corresponding amounts to their currencies in circulation. The higher the market pressure to devalue a particular currency, the more dollar reserves its central bank must hold. This creates a built-in support for a strong dollar that in turn forces the world's central banks to acquire and hold more dollar reserves, making it stronger. This phenomenon is known as dollar hegemony, which is created by the geopolitically constructed peculiarity that critical commodities, most notably oil, are denominated in dollars. Everyone accepts dollars because dollars can buy oil. The recycling of petro-dollars is the price the US has extracted from oil-producing countries for US tolerance of the oil-exporting cartel since 1973.
There is also a major potential threat to the overpriced dollar in Japan's unresolved deflationary crisis. As observers like Lawrence A. Joyce have commented, the dollar would take a major pummeling if the Japanese government (as seems quite possible) were suddenly required to fulfil its legal obligations to bail out failed Japanese banks (which could easily happen if a sustained scarcity of oil were to keep oil prices at $40 a barrel or higher):
"There is only one place where the Japanese government can get enough money to bail out its banking system: The Japanese government owns about 15% of our U.S. Treasury securities. And it would have to start selling them if it found itself facing a major banking crisis.
"That would send the already ailing dollar down even further. And the initiation of a sale of our Treasury securities by Japan, of course, would immediately trigger a worldwide stampede to do the same before the securities become worth only a fraction of what they were purchased for. At the same time, interest rates in the U.S. would immediately go through the roof."
The United States has at present little reason to fear a challenge to the dollar from Malaysia. But Malaysia is an Islamic country; and the US has every reason to fear a similar challenge from the Islamic nations in OPEC, were they to force OPEC to cease OPEC oil sales in dollars, and denominate them instead in euros.
The bush administration denys that we went in for oil reasons but it is oil that this country runs on and needs to continue to run so thinking that it was not a valid reason is foolish. Both our way of life and economy is deeply rooted in oil and untill an alternate source is found we are dependant on it.
///M-Spec
Staff Emeritus
- 4,928
I think there's no point in denying oil is a factor. A major oil producing, economically healthy democratic nation that is on good terms with the US and the western world is undeniably attractive. How much of a factor is anyone's guess unless you have the ability to read a person's mind.
But even if it was a factor, so the hell what? If you agree that invasion, occupation and regime change is justified because Saddam was a serious threat to regional stability, then the oil is just a side perk.
If you think the US had no business there regardless, then rising a stink about oil is just dumb and completely beside the point. No business there is no business there; it doesn't matter what any possible alterior motives there are. Making one up and touting it around is just a propaganda tactic that ignores the issue at hand.
M
But even if it was a factor, so the hell what? If you agree that invasion, occupation and regime change is justified because Saddam was a serious threat to regional stability, then the oil is just a side perk.
If you think the US had no business there regardless, then rising a stink about oil is just dumb and completely beside the point. No business there is no business there; it doesn't matter what any possible alterior motives there are. Making one up and touting it around is just a propaganda tactic that ignores the issue at hand.
M
Danoff
Premium
- 34,011
- Mile High City
Bologna
You have to have little faith in humanity to claim this.
Conspiracy theories are often long and tedious with lots of events needing to fall into place with all of the right motives ascribed to them to work. Your answer there reads like a conspiracy theory to me.
That's a great quote by the way... the US only produces dollars. Brilliant. I wish I could get paid to sit around and think up things that had no resemblance to the truth.
On the basis that our government is composed of real people and not movie villains, I'll stick with my reasoning for why we went in. My answer requires only the assumption that Bush wanted to respond to terrorism and was looking for a long term solution. Your assumption requires that bush has been scheming for a long time to secure oil reserves that are not ours and decided to pull an elaborate wool over the eyes of the world in an attempt to do so.
Danoff
Premium
- 34,011
- Mile High City
I'm claiming that it's not. I honestly believe that Bush had only terrorism in mind. The oil is a side perk for the iraqis.
Edit: Try to remember what it was like during september 11th fallout. Try to remember how all of us were concerned with future terrorist attacks and how our leaders were looking for a long term solution to what they realized was a huge cultural problem.
Bush's (and the world's) long term solution for the oil problem is technology.
- 2,767
This would be a good idea, and I'd like that. But I still think Oil was the major concern, and if I didn't heard anything about Israel I would probably be as optimistic as you are... 25 years? For how long is the Israeli/Palestine conflict going on? Does it look like it's going to end soon? If such a crisis was the main argument radical fundamentalists used to create terrorist groups like Al Quaeda in every part of middle east, don't you think invading Iraq won't throw some oil on the fire and give them new volunteers? If a lot of people from occident and America believe that the war was launch on false claims and that oil was the primary issue, now how do you think muslims see it?
///M-Spec
Staff Emeritus
- 4,928
Let's get specific here. "Oil was the major concern."
What does that mean? Do you think Bush sat around the Oval Office one day and said: "Let's attack Iraq and just take all the oil there." I know that at least some people actually believe this is true. I see them on the news.
"Bush is in Iraq to steal the oil."
Is that what you truly think JP? That the US is going to send a bunch of people to Iraq, build some pipes, shoot the oil into several thousand Halliburton tankers docked in the gulf and just haul it all away??
Seriously.
M
- 2,767
The rest of them thinks that we provoked them first by supporting Israel... (wich, was in my opinion the biggest ****up we could do... to help a nation invading (uh sorry... colonizing) another country. That is really what pisses me off the most about all this, because more than 50 years after that happened, my children may not grow up in a safe place because of that. (Canada is 4th or 5th on Alquaeda's threat list).
///M-Spec
Staff Emeritus
- 4,928
Its possible either way, danoff. I don't read people's minds, so I'm not going to pretend to know what Dubbya was thinking.
Besides, to me it is a non-issue. An act of war is either legal or illegal according to international law. Motivation is irrelevant and can only prejudice the evaluation.
M
- 5,677
I need no faith in humanity to know the plain truth. As I said the US dollar and thus the economy is highly supported by oil. If the nations of OPEC decided to screw us over by continuing to raise prices or cut supply to the US our economy would fail. Other countires abandoning the USD and adopting the euro to pay for oil would be a financial disaster. With our economy in ruins how long do you think we would remain a superpower? How would we maintain our military our way of life? Without other countries needing dollars to buy oil they would have no interest in our economy and no one would bail us out if our econompy were to collapse. Yes our governement is composed of real people, people who are dependant on oil. The car you drive, the planes and tanks used in the war and our nations defenses.
Clothing Ink
Heart Valves
Crayons
Parachutes
Telephones
Enamel
Transparent tape
Antiseptics
Vacuum bottles
Deodorant
Pantyhose
Rubbing Alcohol
Carpets
Epoxy paint
Oil filters
Upholstery
Hearing Aids
Car sound insulation
Cassettes
Motorcycle helmets
Pillows
Shower doors
Shoes
Refrigerator linings
Electrical tape
Safety glass
Awnings
Salad bowl
Rubber cement
Nylon rope
Ice buckets
Fertilizers
Hair coloring
Toilet seats
Denture adhesive
Loudspeakers
Movie film
Fishing boots
Candles
Water pipes
Car enamel
Shower curtains
Credit cards
Aspirin
Golf balls
Detergents
Sunglasses
Glue
Fishing rods
Linoleum
Plastic wood
Soft contact lenses
Trash bags
Hand lotion
Shampoo
Shaving cream
Footballs
Paint brushes
Balloons
Fan belts
Umbrellas
Paint Rollers
Luggage
Antifreeze
Model cars
Floor wax
Sports car bodies
Tires
Dishwashing liquids
Unbreakable dishes
Toothbrushes
Toothpaste
Combs
Tents
Hair curlers
Lipstick
Ice cube trays
Electric blankets
Tennis rackets
Drinking cups
House paint
Rollerskates wheels
Guitar strings
Ammonia
Eyeglasses
Ice chests
Life jackets
TV cabinets
Car battery cases
Insect repellent
Refrigerants
Typewriter ribbons
Cold cream
Glycerin
Plywood adhesive
Cameras
Anesthetics
Artificial turf
Artificial Limbs
Bandages
Dentures
Mops
Beach Umbrellas
Ballpoint pens
Boats
Nail polish
Golf bags
Caulking
Tape recorders
Curtains
Vitamin capsules
Dashboards
Putty
Percolators
Skis
Insecticides
Fishing lures
Perfumes
Shoe polish
Petroleum jelly
Faucet washers
Food preservatives
Antihistamines
Cortisone
Dyes
LP records
Solvents
Roofing
All made from oil. Shall I continue to list things? Oil is as necessary to our country as water is to human life.
Please show me where I said that bush was scheming to secure the oil becasue you are misunderstood. The goal is not to steal the oil. The goal is to have an oil producing nation that is friendly to the US and has an alternative source for countires to buy from and not have to be dependant on OPEC for all of our oil. THis would also help lower gas prices. Or would you prefer to keep paying high prices? I'm not saying that stopping terrorism wasn't a reason for invading iraq, I agree with you but oil does have an influence.
Yeah, technology has done alot to replace oil. Oil is not something that can easily be replaced, it would take a very very long time to find an alternate source and to build equipment that can run on this new source.
- 24,344
- Midlantic Area
- GTP_Duke
Not to mention the fact that evrybody who screams and moans that "we're there for the oil" acts as if we're going to use the Army to steal it. At the very least what we're going to do is get the country organized so we can give them more money in exchange for oil. Sheesh.
That's if we can get the idiots to stop blowing up their own power plants, water plants, and other infrastructure.
Tercel_driver
(Banned)
- 1,773
Nobody asked this country to help Iraq.
Besides, you know that the United States of America is such a caritative country, that only worries on helping their fellow countries.
Besides, you know that the United States of America is such a caritative country, that only worries on helping their fellow countries.
///M-Spec
Staff Emeritus
- 4,928
Here's a better list for you to make. Which nations are the leading suppliers of oil to the United States? Break them down by percentage. Now, which of these nations are in the Middle East?
Don't worry. I saved you the trouble and found one.
While it is true countries in the Middle East produce quite a bit of oil, they certainly don't hold a monopoly on it. In fact, the US produces quite a bit on its own, and Venezuela, a founding member of OPEC and one of the largest crude oil producing nations in the world, is fairly stable and doesn't particularly hate us this week.
Plus, there is a small matter of the various strategic reserves the federal government keeps around in case of emergancy. So, you see, the US economy isn't quite tettering on the edge of collapse at the mercy of OPEC whims as you suggest it would.
M
Danoff
Premium
- 34,011
- Mile High City
Oil is something that would be replaced in very little time if we were to not have affordable access to it any longer.
Try having a little faith in humanity.
We didn't need anyone to ask. We had cease fire agreements with Iraq at the end of the persian gulf war. We were justified in invading the moment they violated those agreements (days after the war was over I'm sure).
I'll be the first to admit that we're using Iraq for our own purposes, we just happen to be liberating an oppressed people in the meantime and have moral grounds for entering from multiple points of view.
///M-Spec
Staff Emeritus
- 4,928
Truly. Not to also mention that before we got Saddam the hell out of there, the only person in Iraqi selling oil and pocketing the earnings was.... gee, Saddam.
If anything, we're taking the oil from Saddam and giving it back to the Iraqi people so they can sell it to us and get rich. Irony is a hoot, ain't it?
M
Tercel_driver
(Banned)
- 1,773
Oh, I wouldn't say "liberate".
If you think the US is "liberating" the Iraq people, then why are the hostilities happening. I bet there is something more than liberation in there.
More like violating tradition. They don't give a crap about any other country liberating them. They just want to live their lives exactly how they have been doing.
Btw, you should play this game.
Freedom Fighters.
If you think the US is "liberating" the Iraq people, then why are the hostilities happening. I bet there is something more than liberation in there.
More like violating tradition. They don't give a crap about any other country liberating them. They just want to live their lives exactly how they have been doing.
Btw, you should play this game.
Freedom Fighters.
Danoff
Premium
- 34,011
- Mile High City
I guess I can't claim that it's not possible either way, but I'm making an attempt at seeing it from Dubbya's point of view and I think I understand his motives.
Because a few of them didn't want to be liberated. That doesn't mean that the fast majority of the population enjoyed Saddam's butchery.
- 10,081
- WFG9
Liberation from Saddam, not all ills that may befall them.
- 10,081
- WFG9
James, you may want to rephrase your post.
why would i want to do that what happned to freedom of speach.
the attacks on the twin towers were not done by countries seeking war but by small groups of orginised people. would it not of been better to take out these groups with special forces which minimise the damage and loss of life to the normal people of the the countries who have no qurall with the westen world
the attacks on the twin towers were not done by countries seeking war but by small groups of orginised people. would it not of been better to take out these groups with special forces which minimise the damage and loss of life to the normal people of the the countries who have no qurall with the westen world
- 3,133
o.O The US doesn't produce half of its oil supply.. they get half of it from Canada..
