It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Iraq conflict still in early stages, report says

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 05:44 AM
link   
The war in Iraq is still in its early stages and US and British troops are likely to be bogged down in the conflict for decades, a report by the Oxford Research Group said on Wednesday.


Financial Times

The independent think tank’s report will make unwelcome reading for the British and US governments, both of which have indicated that they hope to begin reducing the number of troops in Iraq after the next Iraqi parliamentary elections in December.

Under growing pressure from domestic opponents of the war, both governments have suggested that the improved capabilities of the Iraqi security forces - now numbering 200,000 - may allow them to reduce their military commitment in Iraq next year.

Ensuring a friendly government in Baghdad is an essential part of US security policy, even if this requires a permanent US military presence, because long-term access to oil from the region is essential to the US, given its increasing dependence on imported oil, says the report.

Iraq has become a magnet for young jihadists, replacing Afghanistan as a combat training zone, even to the extent that jihadists from that country now travel to Iraq to gain combat experience, taking their skills back to Afghanistan to use against western forces there, it says.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

Interesting Report.

Kind of reminds me of the Cold War days and the Russian invasion of Afganistan, where the Russian army broke its Back on the Afgani Rebels. The Situation is kind of similar, atlho there are some differences.

First - Iraq has ALOT of Oil, and US presence in a Country with large oil reserves is extremly positive for for the US; if ofcourse the Iraqi goverment is friendly with the United States.

Second - the combat area is changed from mountain wasteland of Afganistan to Urban combat of Iraqi Cities. That was a problem for Every Army - Urban Combat. Every house is a Stronghold, every street is a Frontline.

Bottom line is, that this Conflict is Tailor Made for the Neo-Con Foreign Policies to spread the USA Influence through the Middle East, to create and keep a strong Military Foothold here and to Secure Oil reserves, which are the priority for the Armed Forces, because without it, tanks, airplanes and some ships can just stand still.




posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 05:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah

Ensuring a friendly government in Baghdad is an essential part of US security policy, even if this requires a permanent US military presence, because long-term access to oil from the region is essential to the US, given its increasing dependence on imported oil, says the report.


Here is a little old, but also interesting collection of articles.

Petrodollar Theories of the War


A small but significant number of observers consider the issues around which the newspaper discussions of the Iraq war revolve to be nothing but a screen that hides other causes fueling the present conflict -- causes that require some knowledge of economics to grasp. According to this view, a leading motive of the U.S. in the Iraq war -- perhaps the fundamental underlying motive, even more than the control of the oil itself -- is an attempt to preserve the U.S. dollar as the leading oil trading currency, on the view that the institution of petrodollars, as these have developed since the early 1970s, is fundamental to well-being of the U.S. economy.


[edit on 24-11-2005 by yanchek]



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 06:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by yanchek
Here is a little old, but also interesting collection of articles.

Petrodollar Theories of the War


A small but significant number of observers consider the issues around which the newspaper discussions of the Iraq war revolve to be nothing but a screen that hides other causes fueling the present conflict -- causes that require some knowledge of economics to grasp. According to this view, a leading motive of the U.S. in the Iraq war -- perhaps the fundamental underlying motive, even more than the control of the oil itself -- is an attempt to preserve the U.S. dollar as the leading oil trading currency, on the view that the institution of petrodollars, as these have developed since the early 1970s, is fundamental to well-being of the U.S. economy.


Great Point yanchek!



And lets not Forget, that Saddam wanted to "Bypass" OPEC (led by Saudi Arabia ofcourse), which sells Oil in USDollars, and wanted to start selling in EUROS. I think you will find the following article Interesting also:



Oil can be bought from OPEC only if you have dollars. Non-oil producing countries, such as most underdeveloped countries and Japan, first have to sell their goods to earn dollars with which they can purchase oil. If they cannot earn enough dollars, then they have to borrow dollars from the WB/IMF, which have to be paid back, with interest, in dollars. This creates a great demand for dollars outside the U.S.

If OPEC oil could be sold in other currencies, e.g. the euro, then U.S. economic dominance-dollar imperialism or hegemony-would be seriously challenged. More and more oil importing countries would acquire the euro as their "reserve," its value would increase, and a larger amount of trade would be transacted and denominated in euros. In such circumstances, the value of the dollar would most likely go down, some speculate between 20-40 percent.

The Invasion of Iraq: Dollar vs Euro

And the same thing will Happen with Iran when they start to Challenge US Currency...



The Iranians are about to commit an "offense" far greater than Saddam Hussein's conversion to the euro of Iraq’s oil exports in the fall of 2000. Numerous articles have revealed Pentagon planning for operations against Iran as early as 2005. While the publicly stated reasons will be over Iran's nuclear ambitions, there are unspoken macroeconomic drivers explaining the Real Reasons regarding the 2nd stage of petrodollar warfare - Iran's upcoming euro-based oil Bourse.

The Real Reasons Why Iran is the Next Target

So, it was never about no Weapons of Mass Reduction, ooops I mean Destruction - or Al-Qaeda, or Nuclear Missiles; it was all about PetroDollars!

[edit on 24/11/05 by Souljah]



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 07:22 AM
link   
The Bush administration has been saying it was going to be a long war from the begining.

What is new about this?



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 07:34 AM
link   
It's very interesting that the petroeuro oil burse in Iran wil start to operate in march 2006. That's why the US administration is so eager to scare us to death with Iranian nuclear program. They are definatelly in a hurry.

Oh did you know we also have Eurodollar?

Cheers



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 07:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dronetek
The Bush administration has been saying it was going to be a long war from the begining.

What is new about this?

Really? Damn I must have Missed it!

I thought it was MISSION ACCOMPLISHED a long time ago...




posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 07:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by yanchek
It's very interesting that the petroeuro oil burse in Iran wil start to operate in march 2006. That's why the US administration is so eager to scare us to death with Iranian nuclear program. They are definatelly in a hurry.

Our conversation belongs to the PEAK OIL section - but I think its still very connected to the War on Terrorism. I am sure that US can not afford PetroEuro threat to emerge again - so I think 2006 is the Year to take care of Iran. Spring probably.



Oh did you know we also have Eurodollar?

EuroDollar?

Now that is SCARY.

One step closer to the ONE WORLD ORDER.



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 08:05 AM
link   
I agree Souljah.

The problem is that all this things are just so intertwined, you cannot talk about one without another.

That's why they are called Conspiracies.



[edit on 24-11-2005 by yanchek]



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 09:11 AM
link   
Iraq does sit on a lot of oil. And the US is not going to allow that oil to be pumped anywhere until we get our share, and until Iraq uses profits from oil to help rebuild itself. Regardless of what reasons are give for our continued presence there, that is what I believe to be true.

I also agree with you that this will mean a long term US presence in Iraq (after all, how long have we been in Aramco?). But I don't think it will take the number of troops that we have there now. Why? Because sooner or later, the Iraqis will have to take over their own security duties. And that means, guard the pipelines.



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 09:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
Iraq does sit on a lot of oil. And the US is not going to allow that oil to be pumped anywhere until we get our share...

And Ofcourse sell it in PetroDollars.

GODFORBID, that OPEC would start to use another Currency for a value of an Oil barrel...

Iraq will require an Everalsting presence of US Troops - because the Insrugency is not stopping, since there are US Troops in Iraq. The circle is Complete and Oil flows in the "Right" direction.



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 09:21 AM
link   

And Ofcourse sell it in PetroDollars.

I had forgotten about that critical point. I don't want to think about what would happen if they switched to Euros.

As yanchek stated...things are just so intertwined..



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 09:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
Iraq does sit on a lot of oil. And the US is not going to allow that oil to be pumped anywhere until we get our share, and until Iraq uses profits from oil to help rebuild itself. Regardless of what reasons are give for our continued presence there, that is what I believe to be true.


Your share for doing what exactly? Destroying the country?

Sorry Iraqi people to bomb you to stone age. You know sometimes our flyboys get realy crazy behind the stick. All those videogames you know.
We understand you don't have food, clean water or a place to stay, but now you have freedom and democracy. But this don't come cheap. We want our cut.

Yey, capitalism.



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 09:32 AM
link   
What is new about this, is the fact... this isnt a WAR!

its a RESISTANCE fighting an OCCUPATION

I mean, if this was a war, wouldnt the enemy be considered a soilder?

thus allowed all rights under geneva?

but the US has so strictly abolished those rights because these are militia types whom form no real army.

Thus this isnt a war.



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 09:46 AM
link   

Your share for doing what exactly? Destroying the country?

For doing something at all. The rest of the world was invited along for the ride, but they were already milking Iraq, so they declined. That's reality. If you can't handle it, too bad.

It wasn't all about the oil, or initially about the oil, but the oil was/is there. He was a tyrant with two offspring waiting to carry on his tradition for another fifty years after he was gone. I'm happy to see him gone.



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 09:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah

Originally posted by Dronetek
The Bush administration has been saying it was going to be a long war from the begining.

What is new about this?

Really? Damn I must have Missed it!

I thought it was MISSION ACCOMPLISHED a long time ago...




Way to spin and distort history. They have never described it as anything other than a long struggle.



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 09:49 AM
link   

I mean, if this was a war, wouldnt the enemy be considered a soilder?

thus allowed all rights under geneva?

Well the next time you go over there, tell them to dress in a uniform and let us know where their embassy is so that we can fight a "real" war. OK?



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 10:16 AM
link   
JSObecky, I never said anything could be DONE about it, so stop with the ' im so smart ' BS

... The US likes to call this a war, yet for there own objectives class the enemy as militia... not even so.

This is an occupation. No matter how you look at it.
Therefore, they are a RESISTANCE.

This is not a WAR. It is a ONCE sovereign state fighting off an occupying force.



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 11:37 AM
link   
The American people are going to demand a pullout before long.

The simple fact is this isn't WW2, we weren't attacked by Iraq. Iraq was not a military leviathan trying to take over the planet. Now that Saddam is gone and the WMD's proved to be a fiction, there is little clear reason for us to stay there. Except of course the oil, but they'll never admit that.

"Restoring stability?" What bunk. Our invasion was the primary cause of the instability in the first place, our occupation continues to fuel it. The insurgency is never going to end as long as we're there - every time we waste a carload of civilians we give the insurgency a few hundred new recruits. The only way to end the insurgency is to a) depopulate the country or b) pull out.

Since the American people will not tolerate A, B is the inevitable answer.

[edit on 11/24/05 by xmotex]



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky

Your share for doing what exactly? Destroying the country?

For doing something at all. The rest of the world was invited along for the ride, but they were already milking Iraq, so they declined. That's reality. If you can't handle it, too bad.

It wasn't all about the oil, or initially about the oil, but the oil was/is there. He was a tyrant with two offspring waiting to carry on his tradition for another fifty years after he was gone. I'm happy to see him gone.


Look jsobecky.

We are all happy Saddam is gone. He was a second hand dictator with expired date of use. And there are many like him still in power all over the world. You wan't to get rid of them all?

If that is the case, hell, I'm game.

But we all know that is not the case here.

No matter with what noble cause or good intentions we wen't to Iraq, at the end of the day, we have illegal war, sovereign country invaded, dead and maimed soldiers and civilians,tortured prisoners, beheaded people, destroyed and occupied country, humilliated nation ... everything ugly and unfair.

But what pains me even more is the great divide that happened here on this board. We spent time, nerves, received warns and threats, some were even banned.

And for what?

So that politicians can score political points, corporations and their minions earn obsene ammounts of money and psychopats enjoy in people's suffering.

All this is happening on the board that should unite all freethinking, intelligent an courious people that are willing to learn the truth. But instead of doing that we're still bickering about who is the smartest and who has an agenda.

Cheers



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 03:22 PM
link   
For that Post, You receive my WATS Award, mister yanchek!



You have voted yanchek for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have used all of your votes for this month.


I am behind you 110%!




new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join