Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
privatefraser

Iraq Was About Oil And So Is Iran

Recommended Posts

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadA...le.asp?ID=19354

For those countries looking to challenge U.S. influence in the Middle East,

U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham has a clear message, “Energy security is a fundamental component of [u.S.] national security. Military force will be an increasingly important prerequisite to safeguard the flow of foreign oil.” Simply stated, any independent or coordinated threat to the U.S. oil supply originating in the Middle East will be met by an overwhelming U.S. military response.

I never had any doubt myself. Surely no intelligent person can deny this.

Gordon Brown said yesterday

"The first action we must take is to tackle the cause of the problem, ensuring concerted global action is taken to bring down world oil prices and stabilise the market for the long term," he said.

Notice the phrase CONCERTED GLOBAL ACTION.

That only ever means one thing : WAR.

But this time they may have to mess with China.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadA...le.asp?ID=19354

I never had any doubt myself. Surely no intelligent person can deny this.

No big secret, this has been the case for years.

Gordon Brown said yesterday

Notice the phrase CONCERTED GLOBAL ACTION.

That only ever means one thing : WAR.

But this time they may have to mess with China.

War! How did you jump to this conclusion? He means by getting OPEc to increase production.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gordon Brown said yesterday

Notice the phrase CONCERTED GLOBAL ACTION.

That only ever means one thing : WAR.

But this time they may have to mess with China.

Don't be stupid, there couldn't be a better way to drive oil prices north of $100.

The oil companies actually told the Bush administration not to invade Iraq since it would disrupt supply and distabilize the market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
War! How did you jump to this conclusion? He means by getting OPEc to increase production.

Not from Brown's statement. I dont think the UK are important enough on their own to cause a war.

I am thinking of the upcoming clash between China, Iran and the US (with the UK on the yanks coat-tails) over Iran's oil and gas.

did you read the article i linked to ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not from Brown's statement. I dont think the UK are important enough on their own to cause a war.

Why did you say the following then? :-

Gordon Brown said yesterday

[...]

Notice the phrase CONCERTED GLOBAL ACTION.

That only ever means one thing : WAR.

Iran is nothing like Iraq, it has three times the population more landmass and lots of nice weaponry, you are totally off your rocker if you think we're going to invade Iran. Even when Iran gets the bomb we're still not going to invade, of course it becomes academic at that point, you couldn't invade without taking down the whole region and associated oil production with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Don't be stupid, there couldn't be a better way to drive oil prices north of $100.

The oil companies actually told the Bush administration not to invade Iraq since it would disrupt supply and distabilize the market.

did they ? they have not been shy about raking in their enormous profits since the war started.

didnt BP make 10 billion pounds profit and Shell likewise ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And what exactly is frontpagemag.com? Some of the article look like they've been written by very weird people.

Cconcerted global action does not mean war. Politically, the Americans could not gather much support for military action against Iran. The Labour Party would not support Blair if he wished to partake in such actions, the EU would oppose it and the US does not have the resources to mount another campaign when it has its local difficulties in Iraq. I suspect the American people would not be too thrilled either, especially after the display of arrogant incmopetence in New Orleans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
did they ? they have not been shy about raking in their enormous profits since the war started.

I've now contented myself about the reasons for the US warmongering. I might even have done the same myself.

Please please please read the first 3 hits from google:

google iran euros war

and it all falls into place.

In the context of preserving the petro dollar they have won the Iraq war. The US still import the current account deficit continues to widen. The maddness continues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And what exactly is frontpagemag.com? Some of the article look like they've been written by very weird people.

I agree they are weird. They are ultra neo-cons.

They are war making , money grubbers but you have to sit up and take notice when they start talking war with Iran.

I dont think you can dismiss the articles contents out of hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the US does not have the resources to mount another campaign when it has its local difficulties in Iraq.

I think this is the main point, the US cannot afford to go to war in Iran now.

They may want to. They may talk about it a lot but I don't think they can afford it.

I'm a bit ignorant but didn't somebody say something about chinese loans propping up the US economy? :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they do attack iran it may well prove to be one conquest to far. Doesn't iran have a number of russian supersonic anti ship missiles against which US ships have no defence? A lucky hit on a carrier could prove decisive, and the straits of hormuz would be an easy way to shut off oil.

The US can buy all the oil it needs, for free, thanks to the having $ as the settlement currency. That will end if Iran's oil bourse gets popular with the euro spending crowd, and then we'll see what happens

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadA...le.asp?ID=19354

I never had any doubt myself. Surely no intelligent person can deny this.

Gordon Brown said yesterday

Notice the phrase CONCERTED GLOBAL ACTION.

That only ever means one thing : WAR.

But this time they may have to mess with China.

You really think we are going to war with Iran & China?!?!

Did you not see the pictures out of New Orleans? :blink: It should be clear to everyone the US mlitary is in no position to invaid an uninhabated rock, let alone Iran and/or China.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm a bit ignorant but didn't somebody say something about chinese loans propping up the US economy?  :huh:

This is the main point. If oil moves to Euros (as Iran are planning in March 06), then the Dollar could cease to be the main world reserve currency, then lots of countries can happily pull out of the dollar. Dollar crashes. No one buys dollars any more. America can't buy anything anymore. Bo ho!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The US can buy all the oil it needs, for free, thanks to the having $ as the settlement currency. That will end if Iran's oil bourse gets popular with the euro spending crowd, and then we'll see what happens

It's due to open in March isn't it? Can't wait! Watch for the fireworks (economic or otherwise).

As you say, it will be very risky for the US to invade. Read somewhere that they've done the war simulations, and they lose everytime.

(Don't why this makes me so happy - think it's just my dislike of american SUV culture)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree they are weird. They are ultra neo-cons.

They are war making , money grubbers but you have to sit up and take notice when they start talking war with Iran.

I dont think you can dismiss the articles contents out of hand.

FrontPageMag is a nasty rightwing rag run by David Horowitz. By linking to articles like that to backup arguments is somewhat extraneous.

It's a little like asking people to judge UK foreign policy based on a tirade published by Robert Kilroy-Silk.

Maybe HPC should assign The Sun or The Morning Star as the single authoritative source for this site, after all, if it's published on the internet it must be true!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with you on this one privatefraser.

When I first came to this board I dared to suggest US interest in conflict with Iran and ultimately China. Needless to say I was promptly shot down.

I'm as sure about this as the I am the HPC.

"In the context of preserving the petro dollar they have won the Iraq war."

And that's what it's about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Oil Industry is the driving force behind the "Military Industrial Complex" and the truth is there is a lot of money to be made out of conflict. And in times of "tension" the Oil Industry makes profits hand over fist.

It's ironic that the leader of the so called Western Democracies will question the cost of saving the poor and starving in Africa down to the last nickel. Yet is willing to spend billions of Dollars when it comes to killing people. But you only have to look at which industries the Bush dynasty invests in to understand why that is so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FrontPageMag is a nasty rightwing rag run by David Horowitz. By linking to articles like that to backup arguments is somewhat extraneous.

It's a little like asking people to judge UK foreign policy based on a tirade published by Robert Kilroy-Silk.

Maybe HPC should assign The Sun or The Morning Star as the single authoritative source for this site, after all, if it's published on the internet it must be true!

Are you saying the quote from Abraham was made up ?

Horowitz and the other neo-cons at the National Review etc are hardly lunatics on the fringe. They ARE LUNATICS. But they are definitely not on the fringes of power. sadly.

How you can think they are is staggering already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is the main point. If oil moves to Euros (as Iran are planning in March 06), then the Dollar could cease to be the main world reserve currency, then lots of countries can happily pull out of the dollar. Dollar crashes. No one buys dollars any more. America can't buy anything anymore. Bo ho!

Well Crap!!!

I knew about the US being in serous debt wth China. I know about China changing how Renminbi is valued (it used to be tied to the dollar). I had even heard about Iran selling in Euros. I also knew there is a comming recession/depression. For some reason I never connected the dots. It's going to be bad, very bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've now contented myself about the reasons for the US warmongering.  I might even have done the same myself.

Please please please read the first 3 hits from google:

google iran euros war

and it all falls into place.

In the context of preserving the petro dollar they have won the Iraq war. The US still import the current account deficit continues to widen. The maddness continues.

There is certainly American discontent about the growth of the Euro and especially it becoming a petro-currency. Nevertheless, the ongoing crisis in Iraq, and the terrible tragedy in New Orleans indicate the the Neo-Con project has reached the end of the line. The era of Reaganomics is over.

They could not attack Iraq unless they did it on their own. They have no global support, even from the UK or Australia. It could not be seen in any way as even pre-emptive self-defence (an oxymoron if ever I've heard one). Indeed, as others have said, the EU, China and oil producing countries have a lot of dollars, and therefore influence, over the US.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you saying the quote from Abraham was made up ?

Horowitz and the other neo-cons at the National Review etc are hardly lunatics on the fringe. They ARE LUNATICS. But they are definitely not on the fringes of power. sadly.

So you're basically saying that nutcases hold nutty ideas and this proves we're going to war with Iran.

In other news Pat Robertson called for Chávez to be assassinated, and the US media is run by a liberal conspiracy. *yawn*.

People say lots of things, the internet gives them a voice, but doesn't mean it's true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So you're basically saying that nutcases hold nutty ideas and this proves we're going to war with Iran.

Did you read all those nutty neo-con quotes about going to war with Iraq from 2002 onwards ? Did you read that Mein Kampf like tract by the PNAC ?

These were/are not isolated nutters.

They included people like Rummy , Cheney and Wolfowitz.

They are now making the same noise wrt Iran.

You ignore these people at your peril.

They have already invaded 2 countries in the ME after threatening them so why should i doubt they may also attempt an invasion of Iran.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Been lurking for a while, thought I'd register and make a comment on yet another Bush-is-an-ignorant-chimpy-fascist thread.

So, was the 'orange revolution' in the Ukraine for oil? Were the protests and subsequent resignation of the Government of Lebanon for oil? Were the Palestinian elections for oil? All of these things are happening now in the shadow of Iraq's own election, and they all have a tie to it, indirectly or otherwise. Now I ask you: did any liberal 'human rights' organization bring this about? Did any protests from Stop the War Coalition?

Here is a question, where did 80% of the oil in Iraq go?

Germany

Russia

China

and France

The United States was never a large consumer of Iraqi crude ( as it had to be refined more then other crude in the region) and the US never got the majority of its oil out of the middle east. Mexico, Venezuala, Nigeria, UK, and Norway combined were a larger part of US oil imports then the middle east.

Here's the thing I don't get about you lot. You would be completely in favor of a humanitarian war, but if we gained any sort of benefit from it, that would be wrong. I don't get it. Should we only fight wars that are not in our national interest?

I love it when someone points out the strategic value of oil to the United States.

A reduction of 10% in oil production, whether it occurred in Russia, the Middle East, Canada, or the United States, would plunge the world into another Great Depression, the brunt of which would be felt by children in third world countries.

See - invading Iraq is really all about The Children, not Big Oil.

Can you bring yourself to admit that while Saddam was in power our precious European countries had far more of a stake in his oil reserves than the US did, and thereby have far more Iraqi blood on their hands?

If the war is only for oil, wouldn't it have been easier and cheaper to lift sanctions, help the Iraqi oil industry recover, and buy the oil? The anti-war crowd never seems to answer that one.

If Bush were doing this for oil or for money or for "revenge" against the man who tried to kill his dad, he wouldn't be able to say so in a single meeting. He couldn't say such a thing to his inner circle, let alone his senior staff or the hundreds of people below them who make the policy. Word would get out. Opponents would leak it. Ambitious men would blow the whistle and become heroes. Decent men would blow the whistle too.

In other words, Bush would have to keep all of his motives secret from the people he'd have to convince to go along. Now, since most of these anti-Bush, antiwar types also think the commander-in-chief is an idiot, it's hard to imagine how they think he'd be smart enough to pull off a con like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 336 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.