If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Its true that the oil reason has never been officially recognised by the US or any of its partners.
The WMD claim has been proven to be false.
The remaining plausable reason given by our leaders was to rid the world of a vicious and oppressive dictator.
What other reasonsd can you think of?
There is of course the shocking idea that some of them were so stupid they believed the evidence (not that unlikely I dont think).
Defence contracts are always nice to have, especially when you dont have to bid, there is no control over spending and you can make massive profits.
Government money is always nice too, so big increases in department funding is nice to play with.
War is, traditionally at least good for business, a little war gets the economy going, though this one may have got a little out of control for that now.
Pointless and stupid revenge type feelings, wanting to finish 'what they started' (people are arogant arses rememeber).
And of couse the reason I think Tony Blair wanted it, because he thought it would actually be for the good of the world.
The US and Britain certainly didn't care much about brutal dictator Saddam Hussein during the 1980s, when he was actually doing most of the gassing, killing and massacring. Why, we actually supported him and gave him all sorts of weapons, including WMDs. And the people of Iraq be damned.
Just as they don't care (or at least they didn't care until a few months ago, before they were asked to leave the country) about butchers like President Karimov of Uzbekistan, a man who subjects children to slave labour and tortures and kills thousands of his citizens.
Of all the lies, claims and bullshit regarding the US and Britain's foreign policy, the one thing that pisses me off the most is their regular crocodile tears regarding human right abuses, freedom and democracy. The fact remains that the US and British governments couldn't give a flying fuck about human rights torture or freedom. All it matters if the regime and country in question is of geopolitical or economic interest.
So that is our reason for war. He's changed his tune since though, don't you think.
The other reasons would never be officially recognised as a good reason for war.
If George Bush told the world that he was going to invade Iraq for revenge, he would have been shot down where he stood.
The other reasons are all money related, and where will this money come from? - below the desert of course. The initial investments in infrastructure would be made by western companies, bringing jobs and security to the local people, making it seem like we are doing them a favour. But really were stealing their resources because they're to weak to defend it.
Tony Blair is a muppet for believing the Intel, but even more-so for following Bush.
Not really, oil is more expensive now than before the war, so that hasnt worked, and it will take many years before Iraq may give enough oil to make the cost worth the effort.
The money for all these jolly adventures actually comes from China and Japan in loans to the US government.
The point is that the US gets what they want. - inexpensive energy for the next 15 years.
The drilling and pumping operations have to belong to Iraq, but they will no doubt receive investment from an organisation who is ultimately connected to the wellbeing of the US economy.
This is where I disagree, its not cheap, it was never the cheap option, it will not be 'inexpensive' at all, the war is costing hundreds of billions of dollars, more than enough to buy the oil on the normal market.
The argument that it was for war assumes that they are all thick and wouldnt have foreseen the war being really expensive.
If the war was started for monetary reasons (and I think at least in part it was) then it is because it is expensive, not because its the cheaper option.
The cost of energy produced by the extraction of crude and its by-products is only going to increase in the next few years unless hither-to untapped resources are exploited.
There is a HUGE supply of oil under Iraq, and a modest drilling infrastructure at present.
It presents without doubt the best opportunity to maintain the required level of world consumption for around 15 years.
Don't forget that without energy, super powers will not be super for very long.
IMO the US needs to retain its stranglehold on the energy market in order to secure its position as a super power for the forseeable future.
Where has anyone said that?
Quite possibly not, but then it wouldnt have happened either if we didnt have the specific history with the country, its a unique example, it wasnt picked just for the oil.
What I'm suggesting is that 'war for oil' is too simplistic and was far from the only reason, and in many ways its the stupidest reason, you could have just bought it from Saddam in a more effective oil for food programme for much cheaper.
Arguments such as "we are paying more now" or "the oil isnt yet flowing" entirely miss the long term agenda for which this invasion, like that of Afghanistan, was made.
Knowing few will bother, I once again suggest that people obtain and read Brzezinski's extensive expose on the prevailing global agenda of the neocons "The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives" if you wish to understand the elite magalomania and objectives behind the ongoing interventions as well as the broader fraudulent WoT itself.
Anyway, in brief...i prefer to see Israel with nuclear weapons then Iran! At least Israel won't use them, so who cares if they have them really. They have enough conventional weapons to deal with any of their enemies.
Iran on the other hand have a large army that is not well paid and a large air force made up of jets that are antiquated at best.
Israel will probably be asked to intervene, but even if they do not, it means little. Iran will not be allowed to develop as far as North Korea did. North Korea is with in the sphere of influence of China, they allowed them to develop, now we all pay the price!
In short, the US didn't have the balls to face an opponent that could give it a good run for its money.
You're kidding right? A country which can't even feed its own people isn't going to be one of the top military powers - its a bit more difficult than kidnapping innocent Japanese citizens
Yes, T-34, GO! Get that Abrams!
North Korea is China's bitch, just as it has always been. America going into North Korea is the same as China sending troops to south America. The sphere of influence rule applies.
Not true. The Chinese are becoming increasingly worried about it themselves. It really is, a rouge state now.
Whatever dismissive label a Murdoch-owned network deigns to give the rationale of PNAC ideologues hardly suffices as substantive counterargument to the analyses of Washington insiders like Brzezinski as well as those of credentialled academics and policy/industry watchdog organisations.
To laugh at the very central economic pillar of US militant interventionism, especially in this critical energy producing region of the globe, only highlights a significant lack of scrutiny.
Further analyses on the question of the petrollar vs Euro as a causal factor in renewed US militarism can be found in the links below. The annotated references provided by the authors provide additional source material for those who care to do more than expose their ignorance..
http://www.energybulletin.net/7707.html
additional reading:
http://middleeastinfo.org/article4398.html
http://www.forbesbookclub.com/bookpage.asp?prod_cd=INLLK
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2003/cr071003.htm
(with particular mention of the role of neocon agenda sympathiser, Rupert Murdoch, and the facility of his global media empire to divert public attention away from the actual underlying objectives of The New American Centruy)
A wealth of reports on "dollarization" can also be found here:
http://www.globalpolicy.org/nations/sovereign/dollarindex.htm
Conclusion, better to do some actual reading before resorting to intellectually shallow retorts such as "conspiracy theory".
Well word for word, what you have quoted and referenced is the content of the television show "Conspiracies" on sky one in reference to why Iraq was invaded to protect the dollar, and it was dismissed by credible intellectuals as just that...a conspiracy theory! Interesting you are supporting the nonesence of a television show from a Murdoch network Clandy.
True to form however Clandy has jumped in two feet first, claiming to know all about the topic, then showing his woeful ignorance, resulting in his need to throw out nonesensical references to "idealogues" and his usual rant about how "The never ending quest of American militantism to conquer the world of weak and poor nations." *yawn* as if we havn't all had enough of this never ceasing arrogance and lack of knowledge. You reference all these sources and make a huge quote then complain about how no one else has read Brzezinski, hen we all should because he is apparently the only person in the whole of the world apart from Clandy who knows anything about every topic there is to debate.
Also true to form, Clandy finds himself alone believing things few others do so has no choice but to jump to petty and incredibly childish name calling and insults. Shame on you Clandy, you really should learn to grow up and be mature just once. I mean everyone else understand my line about "North Korea been China's bitch" was just a throw away quip that was breaking down into a simple comment about "sphere of influence" which can not be denied as anyone who has studied world history and world politics for 7 years, (GCSE to University as i did) knows is important.
Now to actually debate with some one whose opinion matters and counts;
Teh Gerbil, yes China is concerned, because North Korea is within their sphere of influence and they are finding as years go by and they move away from communism and into the natural evolution of capitalism, they hold less and less influence over North Korea. That however does not mean North Korea are not still afraid of the 6 million strong standing army north of their boarder that could easily take over their country should the need arise.
i mean no offence but ...i imagine your educational level to be somewhat like mine and your perception of events too.
also ...your difficulty in getting your point across fully.
i seem to agree with you .
a lot of people here get into great complexity ...when it isn't needed.
the FACT is ...it is all about oil. it is all about oil.
to simple for some people.
some people will look to history religion all manner of things and divert themselves and others from the very simple truth that ...we are now in the age of resourse wars.
diminishing suplies of everything are a reality that was predicted a long while back ...we are now there.
the people who currently have the clout ...are not as fucking stupid as some people wish.
the invasion of afghanistan and iraq has been planned for twenty five years ...all info publicly available.
those who have the might ...will do whatever ...to retain it as long as possible by whatever means.
the fact that people see current events as new ...different ...unplanned ...are missing a whole historical content here.
You are your own worst enemy subject, but a boon to those towards whom you choose to spew your ill-informed nonsense.
Whereas you reference nothing but a lone Murdoch produced "mockumentary" with the expected parade of supposed "experts" (for which we have again nothing but your word). Undoubtedly you've taken them at face value without an ounce of effort in researching their supposed creds or the veracity of their supposed arguments. Im sure the other posters here will see the substantive gulf between what you claim and the analyses provided by yours truly.
You'd do yourself a big favor if you would actually cease from your drivel and pay attention to the geopolitical agenda being played out, empirically so to boot, since the neocons gained ascendancy in Washington.
And btw, whilst whilst we all recognise your penchant for making erroneous and inflated claims about the arguments of others, I defy you to substantiate your assertion that have called Brzezinski "the only person in the whole of the world...who knows anything about every topic there is to debate". Fact is he has has far more peer reviewed credibility on the subject of US foreign policy imperatives than a whiny, clearly uneducated child like yourself.
I suggest you also learn the fundamentals of proper debate and actually disprove the role of petro dollar hegemony in current US militarism in the region rather than demonstrating Monocrat styled quips such as:
A little actual research on the matter will disabuse you of your pet delusions. Notwithstanding the fact that my duly provided supporting references show such comments false.
Further supporting analyses for those who care to inform themselves:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/ENG401A.html
can you show evidence of that?
http://www.flonnet.com/fl2002/stories/20030131007701800.htm
Not so alone as our new resident naysayer seems to find himself, I'm afraid.
Dr Owen Hartley
Dr D. S. Bell
Dr M. Szeftel
Dr Dan Jones
Dr J. Ralph
Dr C. Jones
Dr N. Winn
Are a few experts, lecturers and Doctorate holders in politics.
I draw your attention primarily to Dr Owen Wilson, a fantastic man who is also a NATO advisor and expert in politics and modern warfare.
These are the best of the Professors who educated me and although i choose not to bore everyone with endless reams of text copied from books i read while i attended university i did read them and formed my own ideas.
Unlike you who continues to regurgitate nothing but Hate and insults.
I pitty you Clandy for been the person you are.
Now, if anyone would like to continue talking about Iran and politics, that would be best. I am now ignoring clandy as he does nothing in the way of debate, he just dismisses everybody elses ideas out of hand, spouts some rheotric then gets insulting when no one agrees with him. I refuse to take part in his derogatory, insulting and increasingly and unneccessarily unstable vendetta against me!
As for your assertion of hatred, also false. I have little interest in wasting energy hating you, only in exposing your routine lack of any substantiation upon which true debate rests and which you regularly demand of others.
Given that "debate" is concerned with facts not opinions, kindly provide some credible reference works which contest the role of petrodollar hegemony in US militarism or do us all a favour and spare us from further evasive drivel. Thanks.
I suspect you mean "pity" and thanks, but I suggest you pity your own lack of demonstrated research.
In answer to your question MR, the proof is in the pudding as it were. Seems we have a Monocrat reborn in new guise.
Edited to add:
Well having searched for any relevance to the issue of US Interventionism in the ME (and the policy imperatives driving such) from any of the professors listed by subject, the result is no peer reviewed recognition of expertise let alone publications on the subject. Not unsurprising.
It has a right to use such a technology for production of domestic electricity, as do all nations.
Watching a former IAEA (international Atomic Energy Agency) inspector on CNN news recently whose words were something like:
'The Iranian reactors are currently only capable of being used for the enrichment of uranium for the purposes of power generation, but we are concerned that at some point, in the future, it is likely that they might possibly be able to be upgraded to potentially allow the enrichment to produce weapons grade plutonium, but this is some years away'
All very vague isn't it.
Im not saying that Iran needs nuclear power generation plants, but why are they pushing the technology when they have a vast crude reserve waiting to be tapped.
BTW - stop the bitching you slags :no: :banghead:
Oil - Currency Warfare in the Middle East, Part II