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.

 

Was the War in IRAQ all about Oil?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 16 2004 @ 01:35 PM
link   
"seems common sense isn't all that common."

Certainly hope you aren't throwing "oil" into the "common sense" strawman equation.....


"Summertime shocker: Gas could hit $3 a gallon"
Link:
www.suntimes.com...

Will post one on "wintertime shocker"...the price of home heating oil when find.....


Still waiting on that "Iraqi oil" that this war was fought over.....*ECK's comments are noted*



regards
seekerof




posted on Jan, 16 2004 @ 01:36 PM
link   
The oil companies got far more money from the Oil for Food programme under the UN than they have received since Iraq was invaded.

Go whine to the UN. All the while sanctions were imposed, they were paying off the oil companies with "war reparations".

The oil companies have actually lost money from the invasion.



posted on Jan, 16 2004 @ 02:30 PM
link   
Reshaping the middle east, control of Iraqi oil and supporting Isreali policy aside, it's truly an economic issue in the national security sense. (concerning OPEC and the EURO.)

Had this subject been discussed honestly and openly, many of the people who opposed the invasion and occupation probably would've supported it. However, they chose to mislead. (Paul Wolfowitz, himself, acknowledged this in statements he later made. See Vanity Fair, June.) Maybe they thought if the American people knew just how close we actually are to economic collapse, it would cause mass panic. And really, it should.



posted on Jan, 16 2004 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by enomus
exactly how many reasons did the bush administration go through to justify this war? terrorism, wmd, iraqi freedom, blah blah blah.

the US has supported and continues to support regimes and countries that are just as bad as saddam...


Unfortinally we cannot kill all the bad guys, and sometimes we must ally them to kill the greater evil. Blows doesnt it?



posted on Jan, 16 2004 @ 02:47 PM
link   
The Euro Effect

Although completely suppressed in the U.S. media, the answer to the Iraq enigma is simple yet shocking. The upcoming war in Iraq war is mostly about how the ruling class at Langley and the Bush oligarchy view hydrocarbons at the geo-strategic level, and the overarching macroeconomic threats to the U.S. dollar from the euro.

The Real Reason for this upcoming war is this administration's goal of preventing further OPEC momentum towards the euro as an oil transaction currency standard. However, in order to pre-empt OPEC, they need to gain geo-strategic control of Iraq along with its 2nd largest proven oil reserves.



Just thought I would throw this link into the mix.

[Edited on 16-1-2004 by KillerD]

[Edited on 16-1-2004 by KillerD]



posted on Jan, 16 2004 @ 02:48 PM
link   
Very interesting KillerD. However I dont think it nessicarly was about the Euro v Dollar.



posted on Jan, 16 2004 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Taxman
Very interesting KillerD. However I dont think it nessicarly was about the Euro v Dollar.


It's hard to know what to believe
You could probably research this forever and never find a conclusion.



posted on Jan, 16 2004 @ 03:10 PM
link   
Just read this on ATSNN:
NEWS: Update on Chemical Weapons Found in Iraq

Less than a week ago we heard reports of Danish troops unearthing (36) mortar shells containing possible Blister agents. Testing by American and Danish scientists have come up inconclusive. Five shells have come up negative and have no traces of any chemical's.
 

America is having trouble in finding any of the so-called WMD's that were relied so heavily upon the current administration as reasoning to invade Iraq. Since the war ended last year, the U.S.-led coalition has found several caches that tested positive for mustard gas but later turned out to contain missile fuel or other chemicals.

Other discoveries early in the U.S.-led occupation turned out to be old caches that already had been tagged by U.N. inspectors and were scheduled for destruction.

The questions continue?



posted on Jan, 16 2004 @ 03:16 PM
link   
Its seems that the US is hell bent on finding these weapons, there quite possibly could have been WMD info in the CIA's Intel. Also rember, the CIA director, had intel on WMDs in Iraq, Many Senators and Congressmen said so, both parties. Also the CIA director was Clinton's appointment and is a democrat who had no bussiness with Bush until Bush was President.



posted on Jan, 16 2004 @ 06:03 PM
link   
In the end it all is about money and power. And what does Iraq has that can give one money and power ?
Yes indeed, the Oil is the source for any reason you come up with.

What else ? Use your logical thinking for a change.
A war for oil it self isn't a crime I think. If someone is trying to spoil something that is vital for all of us, than he or she must be prevented for doing so. Even if that means militairy actions.

So I don't mind it was about the oil, but I do mind the fact that they had to mislead us for justification. That is never right. One must be able to trust a government at all times, when there is doubt something must be done about it. If not it will be too dangerous for the population.



posted on Jan, 16 2004 @ 06:06 PM
link   
One thing for sure it was not about freeing the iraqi people.



posted on Jan, 16 2004 @ 06:15 PM
link   
why go into iraq for oil when there's more in alaska?



posted on Jan, 16 2004 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Leveller
The oil companies got far more money from the Oil for Food programme under the UN than they have received since Iraq was invaded.

Go whine to the UN. All the while sanctions were imposed, they were paying off the oil companies with "war reparations".

The oil companies have actually lost money from the invasion.


oh, those poor, poor oil companies! we should start a relief fund for them.


it's ok, anything they lose they'll more than make up for with the millions of dollars in write-offs/refunds they receive every year from the good ol boys, aka our government. we americans should sleep soundly at night knowing our tax dollars are hard at work making sure the CEO's of these poor companies can keep giving themselves million dollar raises and bonuses every year.


Originally posted by Taxman

Originally posted by enomus
exactly how many reasons did the bush administration go through to justify this war? terrorism, wmd, iraqi freedom, blah blah blah.

the US has supported and continues to support regimes and countries that are just as bad as saddam...


Unfortinally we cannot kill all the bad guys, and sometimes we must ally them to kill the greater evil. Blows doesnt it?


well, the only part i agree with is it blows!


can you, or anyone else tell me how iraq was a threat to the average american citizen? so much of a threat that it justified spending billions of dollars and killing hundreds of innocent people, iraqi and american troops!?

for arguments sake, lets say the war wasn't even about oil...what if it was about the euro and america being on the brink of economic disaster like some have mentioned above...does that justify lying to us, killing a bunch of people and helping your friends get rich in the process?

when all is said and done, who benefits from this war the most? i'd say the companies that are getting paid billions of dollars to provide the weapons and clean up after its over. did we really need this war? if we're on the verge of economic ruin is it wise to spend billions on a war and then start talking about billion dollar lunar space stations and manned trips to mars? it just doesn't make sense to me but hopefully someone here is wise enough to show me the light...



posted on Jan, 16 2004 @ 07:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk
One thing for sure it was not about freeing the iraqi people.


How can you nessicarly say that? The congressmen may have voted 'yea' pecause of what he did. The war did liberate those people and yes, they will have a better life than under Saddam.



posted on Jan, 16 2004 @ 08:56 PM
link   


How can you nessicarly say that? The congressmen may have voted 'yea' pecause of what he did. The war did liberate those people and yes, they will have a better life than under Saddam.


Dont get me wrong I am not crying for sadam and the iraqis will be better off without that psycho but if it was REALLY about freeing the people we would not have sold him the weapons to keep them oppressed to begin with. I think it is more about putting a pro American government in power than the oil (although that is part of it).

If it was just about freeing them, the muslim clerics are ready to rule ala Iran, but that is not gonna happen. And you cant blame old georgie boy for not letting that happen, the last thing the world needs is another country ruled by fundamintlists, reguardless of the brainwashers, whoops I mean realigious leaders

[Edited on 16-1-2004 by Amuk]



posted on Jan, 16 2004 @ 09:12 PM
link   
Iraq was the mortal enemy of Iran, which we thought and knew was the greater evil.

Speaking of weapons, you know France, Germany, and Russia kept giving Saddam arms for oil even after the sanctions and regulations. I wonder why the didnt want us to take down Saddam?



posted on Jan, 16 2004 @ 10:52 PM
link   
Ohhh, fannyballs. I've seen this topic more times than I've wiped my own arse. The Iraq war (as a small part of the larger issue) wasn't a case of controlling or profiting from its oil supply directly; they are quite prepared to pay for it. Iraq was just about creating a constant and reliable supplier. When Iraqi oil production is finally up and running properly it’ll be running at a far higher rate than it ever was under Saddam. That's just the cheese on the cracker. To explain the rest it’d be as pleasurable as taking the grater to my own cheese production centre.
So I won’t. Ha ha #ing ha. I’m glad I’m pissed.



posted on Jan, 17 2004 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by enomus


oh, those poor, poor oil companies! we should start a relief fund for them.




That's my point dude.
The UN Oil for Food programme WAS a relief fund for them.



posted on Jan, 17 2004 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by KrazyIvan
why go into iraq for oil when there's more in alaska?


Look at
www.xist.org...

If the link doesn't work just go to www.xist.org... and scroll down to the updated chart "oil reserve".

look at the top 5 countries. Ok may be old news, but still in 2003 those were the nr's.

And besides, in this case the oil is used as an instrument for control.



[Edited on 17-1-2004 by TigeriS]



posted on Jan, 18 2004 @ 02:12 AM
link   
It almost certainly had something to do with Israel, since World War 2, America has been donating $13,500,000 to the state every day, $5,000,000,000 every year. This is the largest voluntary transfer of funds and technology in history, far more than given to the rehabilitation of Western Europe under the Marshall Plan after World War 2.

Why? Because the “Holocaust” is claimed to have been a factual historical occurrence, commonly called “genocide” targeting Jews, and thus entitling Israel to special consideration and protection among nations.

Israel probably knew about the hijacking plans in 2001 before anybody else. After all, of the 4,000 Jews living in the New York area, and of the 80 different nationalities killed in the attacks, not one of them Jewish, could they have been warned prior to the attacks? Quite possibly, and what reason other than morality would they have had to stop them? None, this war has been the best thing for Israel since the Holocaust myth. Anyone who knows Islamists will know they wanted Judaism out of the Middle East for years.

This war wasn’t possible without the World Trade center bombings in 2001. What makes this even more astonishing is what Israeli Prime Minster said two months afterwards; “You don’t have to worry about pressure from America. We, the Jewish people, run America, and the Americans know it.” Israel violated more UN resolutions than any other state, and suspected of having the atomic bomb.

But so what? Chemical and biological weapons are all over the place. We know, for a fact, that Weapons of Mass Destruction weren’t the reasoning for the war. Saddam Hussein was less of a threat than other countries, but in all reality, there is no nuclear threat to the United States of America. The only nuclear threat, is the threat of the United States of America’s nuclear weapons to the rest of the world. The first Gulf War saw thousands of diseases, and the DU munitions fired into Iraq in this Gulf War have caused as many as 15,000 diseases and sicknesses in Iraq.

Maybe it was oil, 62% of the United States oil in 2003 came from foreign soil, and do you know how important oil is? America would crumble without it. Maybe it’s because of the economy, but they’ve blown $200,000,000,000 on Iraq, and they seem to be able to give so much of their money away to Israel, and also the $150,000,000,000 a year spent on prosecuting “consensual” crime which one with sanity can argue is unnecessary. Maybe it’s just capitalistic imperialism, or maybe it’s Bush’s vendetta against Saddam for trying to assassinate his daddy in 1993. Whatever the cause, it really had nothing to do with the safety of America. Americans mean # to their leaders compared to money, and the Americans [don’t] know it.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join