http://www.time.com/time/world/article/ ... 65,00.htmlAny notion that the invasion of Iraq was simply an oil grab took another hit on Tuesday ...
Iraq: oil auctions show war was NOT about oil???
Moderator: Peak Moderation
Iraq: oil auctions show war was NOT about oil???
Re: Iraq: oil auctions show war was NOT about oil???
Hm. I wouldn't go to Time magazine for in-depth, politically neutral reporting. My guess is that there is all sorts of stuff going on behind the scenes that tells a very different story.Vortex wrote:http://www.time.com/time/world/article/ ... 65,00.htmlAny notion that the invasion of Iraq was simply an oil grab took another hit on Tuesday ...
"We're just waiting, looking skyward as the days go down / Someone promised there'd be answers if we stayed around."
-
WolfattheDoor
- Posts: 318
- Joined: 10 Jan 2006, 13:19
- Location: Devon
- Contact:
It was never about taking Iraq's oil, but rather having military bases in a "safe" (as they believed) Middle East country. That's why, despite the apparent departure from Iraq, the military bases are still there (and in Afghanistan).
www.wolfatthedoor.org.uk
Alerting the world to the dangers of peak oil
Alerting the world to the dangers of peak oil
I'm not convinced of that. The Iraqi Oil Ministry was the sole building that was guarded to the hilt immediately after the invasion, while looters were allowed to run riot in Baghdad's museums.WolfattheDoor wrote:It was never about taking Iraq's oil, but rather having military bases in a "safe" (as they believed) Middle East country. That's why, despite the apparent departure from Iraq, the military bases are still there (and in Afghanistan).
"We're just waiting, looking skyward as the days go down / Someone promised there'd be answers if we stayed around."
-
Blue Peter
- Posts: 1939
- Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
- Location: Milton Keynes
But you can have more than one reason for an action. It can be both oil and bases; and also jobs for the military industrial complex and a political opportunity and a personal grudge in the Bush family, and...WolfattheDoor wrote:It was never about taking Iraq's oil, but rather having military bases in a "safe" (as they believed) Middle East country. That's why, despite the apparent departure from Iraq, the military bases are still there (and in Afghanistan).
Peter.
Does anyone know where the love of God goes when the waves turn the seconds to hours?
Ummm, why have bases there if they didn't want to control that all important resource - the black gold? Remember, the American way of life is non-negotiable....... so oil has to be got......WolfattheDoor wrote:It was never about taking Iraq's oil, but rather having military bases in a "safe" (as they believed) Middle East country. That's why, despite the apparent departure from Iraq, the military bases are still there (and in Afghanistan).
Real money is gold and silver
-
WolfattheDoor
- Posts: 318
- Joined: 10 Jan 2006, 13:19
- Location: Devon
- Contact:
Maybe I didn't make myself clear. Of course it was principally about oil but not just taking Iraq's (as the article suggests). The US wanted to secure the flow of oil from all of the Middle East countries so they needed military bases in the region to "step in" if threatened.snow hope wrote:Ummm, why have bases there if they didn't want to control that all important resource - the black gold? Remember, the American way of life is non-negotiable....... so oil has to be got......WolfattheDoor wrote:It was never about taking Iraq's oil, but rather having military bases in a "safe" (as they believed) Middle East country. That's why, despite the apparent departure from Iraq, the military bases are still there (and in Afghanistan).
Saudi is and will be an insecure partner, Iran we know about, and the others are too small so Iraq was the obvious choice. Since Saddam was no longer the USA's ally, they decided to invade. Now if only the occupants had refused to fight back...
www.wolfatthedoor.org.uk
Alerting the world to the dangers of peak oil
Alerting the world to the dangers of peak oil
-
ziggy12345
- Posts: 1235
- Joined: 28 Nov 2008, 10:49
I have to agree with WolfAtThe Door.It was and is all about oil, just as Afghanistan and Pakistan are about a gas pipeline (TAPI versus IPI)
I was reading something the other day which suggested that Iraq & Afghanistan are primarily about having a military presence in the region, to ensure oil flows in general ... and also to keep out other super powers in the years to come.
Oh I agree, and the construction of the TAPI pipeline will ensure increased US control thereby destroying Iran's hopes of doing the same thing with its proposed IPI pipeline.Vortex wrote:I have to agree with WolfAtThe Door.It was and is all about oil, just as Afghanistan and Pakistan are about a gas pipeline (TAPI versus IPI)
I was reading something the other day which suggested that Iraq & Afghanistan are primarily about having a military presence in the region, to ensure oil flows in general ... and also to keep out other super powers in the years to come.
The TAPI pipe could also supply us with a lot of LNG. The contracts have already been signed between the US and the participating countries. You only have to look at where the British and American forces are fighting to see they follow the proposed supply route.