Bush admits real motive for mid-east wars: Oil and Israel!!!

Silly me, here i was thinking that the Big 5 oil companies are about to win access to Iraqi oil not seen since before the 1972 nationalization, and an unprecedented level of windfall profits(not for us, for the companies)...

21st century globe: no country is soveriegn, multinational corporations and world bankers have replaced nation-states.

Iraqi oil has not been privatised, but PSA's make privatization(controversial) unnecessary.
The relationship IS NOT the same as under Saddam Hussein (neither in terms of Oil nor Dollar[as opposed to Euro]).

"They sell it, we buy" is a HUGE over simplification.

 

Buzzword: PSA

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Production_sharing_agreement

Why this matters, a quick google search:

Whenever a globalist(neo-con/neo-lib) asks "if it's about oil, then where's the oil?" they are either decieving you, or are being very short-sighted.

The war has only lasted for about 3 1/2 years now.

Big Oil will be reaping profits for decades to come, and the West gains another strategic foothold for the coming Resource Wars....

Other than the intensity of the insurgency(which will die down once the country is carved up and new regimes are given free reign to control their extremists), everything is still going according to plan.

Nothing will stop the advancement of the capitalist industrial/technological system until it burns out on it's own, setting the world on fire....

resistence is futile, as they say.

 

Hello?


Pepik?

You still there?

 

Yes I'm still waiting for some evidence. Got any yet?

 

Regarding WMDs, yellow cake, mobile labs, and a Saddam-Bin Laden connection?
Aren't we all...

 

Extremely interesting links-this is what I've been saying that the motive for the war was all along. All you have to do is look at the amount of oil reserves that a country in that region has to see why we're interested in it. And who's our best friend in that part of the world? Saudi Arabia. Why? Because they've got the world's largest oil reserves. They're also the least free and democratic country. None of this military action has anything to do with democracy, dictators, wmd's, or anything else other than oil. It's what I've been saying all along.

 

That's because you are using common sense.

In a world with rapidly diminishing natural resources, a growing population, and an overreliance on petro, why else would we invade?

 

No, I mean proof that it was a war for oil. Got anything on that yet? I don't want buzzwords, I want some real evidence. Considering how absolutely convinced you are, I'm just surprised you can't come up with anything.

 

Just for you Pepik:

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/43045/

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/oil/2005/crudedesigns.htm

The fact that the administration is now admitting that only when the oil interests are secured can the US's military role in Iraq be considered finished only supports this.

 

Pepik

OK..now show us proof that it wasn't..no buzzwords please..we want solid evidence.
(silly neocons)

 

Gardner, thanks for your links. I doubt you even understand them. Anybody can go to some left wing website and copy and paste anti capitalist editorial. If you can't make your own argument in your own words, how can I debate you?

The evidence is that the war was not for oil is that we have no oil. Before the war, they sold the oil and we bought it. After the war, they sell the oil and we buy it - at a higher price. France and Russia were able to sign oil deals with Iraq even after supporting the invasion of Iraq in 1991 - there is no reason the US couldn't have dropped its opposition to Saddam and signed deals like everyone else. And why didn't we take out Iraq in 1991, when we had the chance? Did US multinationals not want oil back then? And why, under US occupation, was privatisation of Iraqi's oil industry specifically rejected?

That's the evidence that it wasn't a war for oil. I'm still waiting for evidence that it was a war for oil.

 

I find that just a few short months after the beginning of the war this was the executive order signed:

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=03/08/04/151238


http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/05/20030522-15.html

Perhaps Pepik you could explain it to the rest of us.

Not a link to a left wing site, rather to your own governments documents. Perhaps you in your wisdom could explain why this executive order was deemed necessary so early in the conflict.

You may feel the democracynow article is left wing, but I find their programming to be much more documented and responsible than Fox News.

 

Ever wonder why France, Germany and Russia came under such harsh criticism before the war, because Iraq owed them money. And one of the first things we did after our occupation was to ask these same countries to excuse the debts.

How would it have looked to those in the US and allied forces families that had lost children in Desert storm. It wouldn't have made political points for any one that espoused it.

If it wasn't about oil, what was it about Pepik? Please enlighten us?

 

We didn't take out Iraq in 1991, because it was deemed that it would destablize the area too much, allowing Iran to move in. Afterall we funded Sadaam in order to control Iran's influence in the middle east. Perhaps you should read your history books. I actually lived through iit.

 

I find it humorous that Robert Gates a player in the Iran Contra scandal is now the nominee to take Rumsfields place. These guys are just so blatant in their cronism. And they just keep getting wealthier, while folks like Pepik buy into their propaganda.

 

You know, look-the government is not going to come out and overtly say that the war was all about oil. The people that are in elected office in this country cater to an electorate that is unusually simple-minded compared to most other democracies. The average voter consumes a few sound bytes, goes down and votes, and goes about his or her business, unwilling to really educate themselves about what's really going on in the world.

"Our good Christian president" "democracy" "dictators" "freedom" "pro-life" "weapons of mass destruction". Aren't these nice catchy phrases? Now go down and vote, and don't think for yourself about what the war or your society here at home is really about.

Is the war about deomcracy? Who are our best friends in that part of the world? The Saudis. Their country is also one of the least democratic in the entire world-an absolute monarchy, with no freedom of speech or religion. They also happen to have more oil than any other country on the planet. Of course, our government doesn't come out and explicitly SAY that's why they're our best friends. Of course not. They're catering do a bunch of voters that believe all these pious little sound bytes and that don't take any time to think for themselves about what this whole scenario is really about.

Thinking for yourself for a minute, do you really think that we would have had any real interest at all in Iraq if it didn't have the world's second largest oil reserves? Would we have been at all concerned that Iraq invaded Kuwait, a little strip of desert land, if both countries hadn't been so oil rich? Look at the incredible atrocities that go on in Sudan all the time, hundreds of thousands of people mercilessly slaughtered by their Muslim government because they happen to be the wrong religion (Christian) and ethnicity (non-Arab), and do we do anything about it? No. Why? Because it's not an oil-rich country that the US wants its hands on for accesss to its petroleum resources. Does our government come out and overtly admit it? Of course not. It has to keep the pious little sound bytes going so that enough dumb sheep will go down to the polls believing all this mumbo-jumbo about 'freedom' so that they can get re-elected and carry on their unholy little materialistic agenda.

Iraq under Saddam Hussein was a secular government, and had freedom of religion. Saddam's Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister were Chaldean Catholics, not Muslims. Saddam's government gave protection to Christian churches, and to Christians themselves. Attacks on churches and on individual Christians weren't tolerated. Now the whole country is in chaos due to the American invasion, and Muslim extremists have de-facto control over the whole damned country. Not only that, but there are virtually no Christians left in the government. Oh, golly gee, I thought this was a war against terrorism and Muslim extremism? Well, I'm sorry, but that's just too much for my tiny little brain to handle-let's change the subject, because I just can't handle any more info-I just can't 'believe' (that's what it's really about-belief, not facts) that our "Good Christian President" would lie to us. That's just a little too deep for my shallow little brain, so I'll just let Mr. Bush continue to do my thinking for me....

 

That's a bit of an oxymoron, he doesn't even think for himself. He just chuckles as his and his families bank accounts grow larger and larger.

 

What's extremely sad is that American and coalition families continue to sacrifice their sons and daughters and watch innocent civilians killed so that a handful of people can remain rich and powerful

 

Pepik

That's not "evidence" as you say, that's "buzz" ...an assupmtion.
The war blew up in the oil stealing, money grabbing neocons face...the dumbasses thought they where going to be greeted as liberators and pillage the country like they did America. But the Iraqi's seen through the scam..now we're fucked.

 

Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig.
- Robert Heinlein