Just reading through your other comments.

I think you gang analogy is right on the money. But I might want to supplement some of your points.

It's easy to cherry pick through history and isolate incidents or turning points and go "Aha!” But when we overview countries, millions of people, changes in regimes and their thinking, new influences, etc - it's hard to just say "this was a direct response to this" or “this fulfilled this need."

With oil and the Middle East, the US and Britain, not to underplay the equally thirsty French, Germans, Dutch and others, want access to the oilfields, no question. They feel they are unfairly controlled by a bunch of childlike but dangerous savages who have to be in turn, humoured, flattered, threatened, and so on, depending on their mood, the time of day, something that just happened, the phase of the moon, etc.

What I'm trying to say is that world situations and the political responses are multi-factorial and constantly in flux. No simple answers and analogies only go so far.

The US may decide one year installing a co-operative easy to manipulate puppet government is a solution for easy access to a desired resource. A new administration may find the relationship onerous and say "To Hell with this" and make different move on the chessboard. A decade later the situation may change and priorities shift.

The US may want to maintain it's position as top dog, but sometimes this means controlling the neighbourhood with an iron fist, and at other times with the velvet glove.

It can be cheaper just to cut an advantageous resource deal and let a country do it’s own thing. This is what the arrangement with Canada, where I live. We are the primary source of US oil, and we have our own sandbox government. The US just raps our knuckles when it feels we are getting out of line. In return we have our autonomy and can play at being low level big shots on the international stage.

Sometimes the US actually makes moves that turns out to be advantageous for the little guys. It’s not always as simple as oppressor and victim.

Pretty much every Iranian I've ever known feels the Shah's regime, even with the ugly back story of it’s installation, turned out to be a good time for the country. Modern Iranians aren't belligerent by nature. Like may Muslim populations, they gravitate towards and respond best to a benign paternalism. The Shah may have been a crook, but he was their crook. We’ll never know how another government would have evolved. Maybe they would have been worse. A 1980 liberating Robert Mugabe can turn into a dictator given time and the opportunity. Castro 1959 is not Castro 2009.

My point I’m getting to in a rambling way – the predominantly Muslim Middle East has been blessed with more oil than anyone. Those who want it have done their best to gain controlled access to this vast resource at a preferred price.

But we should not delude ourselves that even if the West had played honourably and fairly that there would be no abuse of power and corruption and that everyone would have lived happily ever after. It never seems to work out that way. The US is greedy, manipulative and unethical. Can we be certain that the locals or others with even less scruples and sense of fair play would be running the show if the West had been marginalized in the Middle East.

Imagine a world where the Saudi royal family ruled the roost, for example.


Mike F

Another interesting thread well done OP I do like reading your threads. The way I see it the US authorities are always sticking their noses in other countries business.

I believe it would be in the best intersts for its citizens and much better for them to sort out their own problems before interfering with other peoples.

Originally posted by franspeakfree
Another interesting thread well done OP I do like reading your threads. The way I see it the US authorities are always sticking their noses in other countries business.

I believe it would be in the best intersts for its citizens and much better for them to sort out their own problems before interfering with other peoples.

Let me ask you this...

If you no longer have heat at home (cold area) or fuel for your car will you be all that concerned about who had to die in the Mideast or just happy to turn the heat back on and go to the store? Think hard on it and what the real options are and you will be amazed at what you may be willing to accept.

Originally posted by Alpha_Magnum

Let me ask you this...

If you no longer have heat at home (cold area) or fuel for your car will you be all that concerned about who had to die in the Mideast or just happy to turn the heat back on and go to the store? Think hard on it and what the real options are and you will be amazed at what you may be willing to accept.

Hey, I'm with you on this 100%. Also want to add that you've pushed me over the edge in realizing how important oil control has become in international political maneouvering.

As you pointed out water is another component of the bigger picture.
The region does not have sufficient water for irrigation and human consumption. Fresh water or more importantly the lack of it -
will be affecting billions of people and impacting on regional boundaries more significantly in the very near future.

Much of the Middle East jockeying behind the scenes with Israel and elsewhere already has to do with this vastly underreported issue.

The way things are moving fresh water will be the oil of the 21st Century.
We're seeing it happen in Africa, and it will become more apparent worldwide and soon.

Normally I like to provide supporting data for my claims, but my information has come mainly secondhand from friends here in Canada who do research in environmetal fields.

Trust me, you don't want to know about our water table here and what's happening to it now.

More soon


Mike F

Does this article appear on any MSM outlets, I searched and couldn't find it?

I am generally suspect of foreign articles, which are written in American. All of you should be as well.

The only American media source is the NYT article from 1953.

The US gives support to Iranians trying to initiate a regime chage, but likely so do the French, British, Saudis, and who knows who else.

The Iranians do what they can to foul up American intelligence, the Chinese have hacked into the US highest level security systems, and the Russians are all over the map. Remember a KGB bureaucrat is running the country.

Nothing new here really, it used to be called spying, and has been going on for centuries and always will.


Mike F

The NWO wants the oil in Iran, the 3rd largest oil field in the world and they want Iran because Iran will not deal in fiat Fed Reserve notes any more. Iran has their own non-NWO currency and getting rich and powerful because they are not playing ball with the NWO. Good for them! I sincerely believe the US needs to end the illegal, unconstitutional, private, non-federal Fed Reserve now! and break the hold the NWO's banking cartel has on the US. Stop the Fed! End the NWO!