For those who believe the war is about oil....?

Question

explain this theory to me. If this war is about oil why do we pay so much for gas? Give me some PROOF that what you say is true....and PLEASE don't cite any of your kooky left wing web sites. That is not proof it's propaganda.

Answer 1

man this is a great question. I am an oil and gas man from Oklahoma. May interest you to know that Devon co. hit a well in the gulf of mexico this week 44% larger than the oil reserves in alaska (well named jacks # 2) (source daily oklahoman)expected to produce 1.5 million barrels per day.

Anyway, few people understand how dependent the world is on oil. Over the years we have shifted from as the primary source of energy from whale oil to kerosene to coal to petroleum. (water, wind and nuclear make up a small percentage of the whole)

Oil is a huge factor in national security. The reason Japan attacked Pearl Hardor was because we had been providing info leading to the sinking of their tankers bringing fuel back to their mainland. Which was our stratagy, at the time, in helping to defeat them, which was to cut off their fuel supply.

During the naval buildup between Great Britian and Germany prior to WW 1, G.B. converted from coal powered ships to oil powered ships although 95% of the known oil resreves and refinaries were owned by Standard oil, a forein corporation to the Brits.

In WW II General George Patton was sceaming for fuel to move his tanks in an attempt to chase the Germans back to Germany before Great Britian's Montgomery confronted them first.

Todays current price hike is a result of the tremdious amount of fuel being used by our military. Coupled with the fact, that during the Clinton administration, Clinton released fuel held in national reserves something that the Bush administation has done only rarely and on a limited basis.

During times of inflation, one way to slow down the economy is by raising interest rates, However, by far, the quickest way to slow the economy down is to reduce the supply of fuel; thus raising prices of manufacturing, trucking, ect. while simotaniously limiting discrecionary spending of consumers.

So fuel is critical not only in military operations but also to econmical survival. Thus is a major consideration to national interest. So much so, that if push came to shove, we would be without alternative to ensure its continiued flow by any means nesseccsary.

Those who make moral arguements agianest a war claiming we are fighting over oil are making a frivioulious argument. They do not understand just how completely dependent upon oil we are. The United States' current usage is one thousand barrels per second and steadly growing each year (not a misprint)

The thing that is so prohibitive in changing from one primary source of energy (ie whale oil, kerosene, coal) to another is infastracture of supply lines. China has and edge as they develop themselves in to a major world power. They are starting from scratch in a lot of situations rather than having to change over from exsisting supplies. The advantage to that is because with change, someone is going to make and someone is going to lose some money ; thus causing resistance to change even when change is benefital to the whole.

When we went from lighting our homes with kersone lamps and heating our homes with wood buring stoves to having coal as our primary source of energy, we discovered the light bulb and criss crossed the US with steam locamotives. Then came the current age in which we live; "the age of hydrocardon man" and we have had cheap fuel for the past 75 years and unparalled growth and prosperity.

Change is inevitable. Who will be the next "standard oil" is yet to be determined. However, once a large scale replacement for oil is made, it will change the entire geo political scene of the middle east. It will change the entire worlds power structure; the deserts of the middle east will once agian become barren desserts of the middle east.

Kurshev once said, "we will buy from the US the rope in which we hang them with". In todays enviroment, we are buying the rope for them, in which, they are trying to hang us. As we fight radical Islam, funded by oil producing middle east countries, not only are we funding our war againest them, we are also funding their war againest us. Isn't that a kick in the nuts?

Three books are listed as sources and suggested as reading for those interested in the subject. A thousand barrels per second is highly recommended reading.

PS. Watch for prices to come down as the Republicans prepair for midterm elections.

Answer 2

There are two flaws in the oil-invasion theory. First, the cost of the invasion heavily outweighs the cost of the oil. Second, the oil will be controlled by American or Iraqi companies which will sell the oil on the global market; this makes the controller of such oil irrelavant.

The only effect of the war on the price of gas is in the stability of the region; ergo, a war between anyone in an 'oil nation' will have an effect on gas price, not just us invading Iraq. They say 'buy on cannons, sell on trumpets' for good reason.

With the number of oil gurus in the administration, I find it difficult to believe that they would base the invasion entirely upon oil.

Answer 3

confident, I do. The excuse became into that Saddam became into helping terrorists. He by no skill did. In his time there became into no Al-Qaeda in Iraq. This conflict is bearing directly to the PNAC (undertaking for the recent American Century) considered placed into prepare. regrettably 9/11 got here approximately and it blew all of the PNAC plans. administration of the middle East oil became into the objective of the Neo-conservatives. Bush and his cronies theory that the Iraqis might help and welcome the individuals as quickly as Saddam has been bumped off. properly, properly....ask your self. the reason for the oil fee to pass up is with the help of the fact the area is a large number now. Turkey scuffling with the Kurds, Iran apprehensive approximately an attack, the mire it is Iraq and so on.

Answer 4

The war is NOT about oil...People that believe this are idiots and have obviously been corrupted by Al-jezzera TV... There is no proof to support these allegations and such statements are usually made by individuals whom have little to no education..LOL..its sad… Perhaps these idiots who say “the war is all about the oil” should go to the pump…pay $50 to fill up their car…and then make those ridiculous statements…LOL….my GOD, in 2002 gas was 99cents per gallon..its now 3 times higher…

Answer 5

It's not only about oil, but Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld all worked for Oil Companies. Cheney met with Oil company execs before the war and reviewed a map of Iraq to go over who would get what (I'm too tried to provide the link right now) The reason gas prices are high is mainly because it's all about making a profit but also they haven't got the production in Iraq up to where it was.

Answer 6

Why not ask this question: If we were in so much trouble getting oil, why did Exxon have a 3 BILLION DOLLAR PROFIT??? Look that up....

Lets say he wasn't there for oil. Why is he there at all? He has changed his reasons a bunch of times, and even HE stated Saadam didn't have ties to terrorists. HE said that in a news conference. Look THAT up...

Answer 7

There is no proof either way. Only logic can answer your question. My logic says, the administration made up of for profit oil men who are making record profits and getting huge tax breaks don't care about keeping the price of gasoline low. They want higher prices and they want inflation to ease them out of their deficit in future years to be paid back with cheaper dollars.
Second, the oil in Iraq is safely in the ground for the next 50 to 100 years. That's their time frame. They are in no rush to get to it. Why should they be?
Now, can you prove I'm wrong?

Answer 8

Like Orwell's 1984, the war is about....war!
Controlling the federal budget is much bigger than firmer control of the oil. However, while firmer control of the oil is not necessary, losing control of the oil is fatal.

Answer 9

It is not about oil. Most of the liberal senators and representatives that try to say that have tons of stock in oil. It is just another way of practicing partisan politics. The people that say that are just trying to get people to listen to them and pass their own agenda.

Answer 10

If it WAS about oil, why don't we bomb Iran? They're driving up our oil prices with their saber rattling. Plus they have oil we can use. Or maybe Saudi Arabie, why haven't we bombed them for oil? The point is that the liberal argument that it is a war for oil is false.

Answer 11

I'm no expert but why invade one country of repressed people when plenty of other countries are in the same boat? Oil does spring to mind, and will continue to do so until Tibet or N Korea get the same treatment....