Iraq War was NOT about Oil - Yeh, Right.

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by SMM, Sep 13, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. SMM macrumors 65816

    SMM

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2006
    Location:
    Tiger Mountain - WA State
    #1
    This is a good place to get a quick glimpse of the situation. Oil companies salivating over new profits from neo-colonialism. Notice one of the name - Hunt Oil of Texas. My God, what a coincidence! A Texas oil company, and one of the most loathsome humans on earth. This is one of the men running the country. George and Dick (head) take their orders from HIM. You remember him, right? He and his brother tried to get a monopoly on the silver market to inflate its value. Thankfully, there was not another Texan in the WH that time.
     
  2. adrianblaine macrumors 65816

    adrianblaine

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    Location:
    Pasadena, CA
    #2
    It's always been about the oil. I think any president is scared to death of what will happen when we don't have cheap oil any more and are willing to do a lot (like start a war, ironically where it was started) to avoid that happening on their watch. It would be a nightmare come true because we are 100% addicted to the stuff.
     
  3. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #3
    The Hunt itnerests are Pipsqueakville in the world of oil. Since they went bankrupt over the silver deal in 1980, they've been nowhere.

    But the whole middle-east deal has always been about oil. Has been since the first major discoveries in the first years after WW II. If there were no oil there, nobody would care at all about the area, and they'd still be practicing animal husbandry on their camels.

    Without the petroleum-based chemical products, all our lives, worldwide, would be materially poorer. Cheap transportation fuels are what have made our material standard of living as wondrous as it is. (Plus cheap electricity, of course.)

    As it is, from an oil-money standpoint, 25% of the world's construction cranes are in use in Dubai. The plan is to create a world financial center and playground for the wealthy...

    'Rat
     
  4. FrankBlack macrumors 6502

    FrankBlack

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2005
    Location:
    Looking for Lucy Butler
    #4
    Ewww! :eek: I was going to post this question, but you already did. The question was simply this: If there were no oil in Iraq, not a drop to be found anywhere, would there be any U.S. military presence there at all? I have asked this question of the hard-liners (I prefer to call them "Cheneyistas". It drives 'em nuts.) both in the real-world, and in the on-line world. No one will answer with a simple yes of no. They dance around it, or word-weasel their way out of it. But no, no direct answer.

    Isn't Dubai the place where they built in indoor ski resort? No, really, I saw this on some news show. Somewhere in the hot arid middle east, they have built in a gigantic, indoor ski resort, with slopes, ski lifts, 24/7 snow making, and intensely air-conditioned, massive buildings. Okay, so they've got all that money, but that is just crazy.
     
  5. Blue Velvet Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #5
    Alan Greenspan says it was all about the oil.

    He also has this to say about George W. Bush.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2007/09/16/cngreen116.xml
     
  6. SMM thread starter macrumors 65816

    SMM

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2006
    Location:
    Tiger Mountain - WA State
    #6
    I knew Greenspan had recently gone on the record about the current administration. I linked a few stories, but have not got to them yet. Just looking at the few excerpts you provided, I am surprised (for lack of a better word). He is usually very guarded and thoughtful in what he says. For him, this is pretty radical stuff.
     
  7. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #7
    Damn! A fiscal spanking from their own hero. That's gotta sting.

    Of course, Al's just a disgruntled former employee. And probably gay, or an al-Qaeda sympathizer.

    It won't be long now before the knives come out in the righty wingnut-o-sphere.
     
  8. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #8
    It's way past time to start using alternative energy. Anyone who truly claims to be "patriotic" should be screaming for it. I mean, my god, let's starve them of their lifeline. It's ridiculous that we're fighting wars over an energy source that isn't going to be around that much longer.
     
  9. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #9
    FrankBlack, had there not been oil, odds are that we wouldn't have worried about the USSR going into Iran for access to a warm-water port, which is why we replaced Mossadegh with the Shah. No oil? We'd have ignored the whole Iraq-Iran conflict. No Desert Shield/Storm, either, as there'd have been no interest in Kuwait or Saudi Arabia. And no oil money to support the machinations of the mad mullahs of the muslims...

    I've seen photos of some of the development going on in Dubai. Incredible! Is it Bahrain where they built a new race track so they could have an F1 race? Dunno what it cost, but I know the Chinese spent $500 milion on their track.

    'Rat
     
  10. Naimfan macrumors 68040

    Naimfan

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2003
    #10
    Well said, and exactly correct.

    The short answer: No. If there were no oil, we (the US) wouldn't care. As Talleyrand (I think) said, nations don't have friends, they have interests. Worth remembering. . .
     
  11. SMM thread starter macrumors 65816

    SMM

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2006
    Location:
    Tiger Mountain - WA State
    #11
    Not only patriotic nationally, but globally too, lee (as I am sure you are keenly aware)! Unfortunately, the world's most powerful lobby, big oil, is not going to let that happen. They have way too much invested in infrastructure to allow that to happen, before every last drop has been harvested.
     
  12. MACDRIVE macrumors 68000

    MACDRIVE

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Location:
    Clovis, California
    #12
    I guarantee you if North Korea was sitting on a pool of oil, Bush would have already gone in there. As North Korea sits now, it's no use to Bush.
     
  13. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #13
    Of course it's all about the oil. We know that, they know that. That's why when we attacked them, that's what we guarded while they were making off with the weapons. That's why they started going after the pipelines. They know exactly why we're there. One of the many reasons they hate us. Bad enough we're there at all.

    If it was about terrorism, we would have actually gone after real the terrorists and stayed in the 'stans.
     
  14. MACDRIVE macrumors 68000

    MACDRIVE

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Location:
    Clovis, California
    #14
    It seems like it would've been easier and a whole lot safer to take that 452 billion dollars that's been spent so far and rather spent it on a hydrogen infrastructure to where we no longer need oil. Then let all the Muslim bastards find some other way to make money.
     
  15. Peterkro macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres
    #15
    On the contrary, North Korea is a partial block on the development of the north Asian economic area,it's a problem getting energy and mineral supplies from Siberia to South Korea,Japan and China. For the US's strategic interests it's a good thing it is there,hence the different treatment from Iran.
     
  16. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #16
    Unfortunately, MACDRIVE, hydrogen is even worse than corn-based ethanol for energy/cost utility.

    Figure out a way to get the same BTUs per dollar as from oil, and we'd all be golden. (IIRC, gasoline is about 19,000 BTU/lb; around six pounds per gallon.)

    'Rat
     
  17. Swarmlord macrumors 6502a

    Swarmlord

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    #17
    You mean making money by selling more oil to China and India? Weaning their cash flow is a few years off I'm afraid.
     
  18. Iscariot macrumors 68030

    Iscariot

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Toronteazy
    #18
    'Rat's right, in terms of energy efficiency, oil is way ahead of any of the alternative fuels we have. Wind energy generation technology results in a 25% cost increase, and low wind speeds make it unfeasable for America's "wang", and there needs to be a development of energy storage to compensate for the uneven generation.

    As much as I hate to say it -- and I really, really do hate to say it -- but without a boatload more funding and research, energy alternatives are a long ways off.
     
  19. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #19
    good greif people love this hydrogen bull crap. It is NOT the fuel of the future. It wil NOT solve our current problems. We have 2 sourse of hydrogen. Water and fossil fuels.

    Water is very bad source for multiple reason.
    1. It takes way to much power to break the bond of hydrogen and oxgen and get by far than what is required to break the bond in return.
    2. Freshwater supply world wide are stretch paper thin. In the US almost the entire country is struggling to get enough freshwater to use (east cost being the the worse shape)

    Fossile fuel sourse is bad because it is a HUGE waste of potentional power getting the hydrogen off of it. Does not reduce our need of fossil fuels. Hell it increases it by a lot because it a lot of engery loss from the fuel in breaking the bonds.


    Add in hydrogen has transposition problems (it likes to leak out) and it is unpractical to put it in it liquid form.

    Said part is we do not have anything on the horizon to remove our dependents on fossil fuel. Hell about all we have is ways to reduce it and really all it does is just keep our demand for it from increasing because the demand for power is increasing very rapidly world wide.
     
  20. furious macrumors 65816

    furious

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2006
    Location:
    Australia
    #20
    You forgot the Sun and Jupiter. I think Bush is just crazy enough to be suggestible to mining hydrogen from the Sun. Our closest Hydrogen neighbour.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page