Oil for War

[Gman3ID]

Not a bad idea.



OIL FOR WAR

By Michael Savage

For years, I have been calling for Iraq to pay us back for the cost of liberating them from the torture chambers of Saddam Hussein. Iraq's sustainable oil production capacity is almost 3 million barrels per day. The earth beneath Iraqi sands holds more than 112 billion barrels of oil – the world's second largest proven reserves – and unexplored regions could yield an additional 100 billion barrels, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Iraq also contains 110 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. And yet this war has nearly bankrupted our treasury.

I was surprised to hear Senator Carl Levin, a Democrat from Michigan, call for this very idea at the Petraeus hearings this week he said, "We need to put continuous and increasing pressure on the Iraqis to settle their political differences, to pay for their own reconstruction with their oil windfalls, and to take the lead in conducting military operations."

It is fascinating to hear a liberal congressman repeat my idea while the so-called "conservatives", the Whig Party of our time, the Republicans continue to pump money from American taxpayers to support this unpopular war instead of pumping Iraqi oil. We have spent 500 billion, half a trillion dollars so far on making the Sunni triangle safe for democracy, but it hasn't even kept our own Marines safe from prosecution. The month that President Bush was sworn into office, gas was $1.40 a gallon. This week, gas is averaging $3.30 a gallon, and near $5 a gallon in Los Angeles. Two dollars a gallon more for the war on terror! Make the Iraqis foot the bill for their own liberation!

When the Republican Party stops depleting the tax base for this endless war, Iraq's oil can be used to rebuild their country and pay us back. Now it is time for the 24 million liberated Iraqis to pay back their liberators. With the one resource they have – oil.

http://michaelsavage.com/oilforwar.html

[Lau]

That is one BIG pile of BS!!!

[Gman3ID]

That is one BIG pile of BS!!!

Please, Do tell !!!

[2Sheds_Jackson]

I believe the last deal on the table from the Iraqis was a $50 Bennigans gift certificate.

[Dominique]

First off this belongs in the Political discussion/Rants section. As far as the article content goes, yes it would be nice if the Iraqi's could pay for reconstruction, but the fact is they're broke, and will be for years to come. Their entire infrastructure is shot, and it will take decades to repair most of it. They can't provide basic utilities such as running water. Add to that they owe EVERYONE.

Secondly, I've got an issue with the author asking for them to "pay us back", last I checked the Iraqi's didn't ask for us to come there, and it's a little pompus of him to expect them to pay us back for invading. It would be like you being taken hostage by a family member, the SWAT team from anohter county coming in and rescuing you, and then sticking you with the bill.

[jennery587]

lesson for GWBush and **** cheney war monger

[Chulo]

lesson for GWBush and **** cheney war monger
Go on, do expand on that thought please

[Dominique]

lesson for GWBush and **** cheney war monger

And what lesson would that be? Pretend I'm an idiot and break it down for me.

[jennery587]

bush cheney plans, was iraq sadam hussein have 4 000000000000 billions $ oil reserve, if you smart enough you can break it down for yourself, see why we invade iraq

[Gman3ID]

First off this belongs in the Political discussion/Rants section. As far as the article content goes, yes it would be nice if the Iraqi's could pay for reconstruction, but the fact is they're broke, and will be for years to come. Their entire infrastructure is shot, and it will take decades to repair most of it. They can't provide basic utilities such as running water. Add to that they owe EVERYONE.

Secondly, I've got an issue with the author asking for them to "pay us back", last I checked the Iraqi's didn't ask for us to come there, and it's a little pompus of him to expect them to pay us back for invading. It would be like you being taken hostage by a family member, the SWAT team from anohter county coming in and rescuing you, and then sticking you with the bill.

Not true, Iraq is by years end to have a 25 billion dollar surplus.
http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/ma10_delahunt/pressconf41008.html

And much of the debt has been forgiven from the the Iran-Iraq war.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,139155,00.html

These people did ask.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_National_Congress

I cant understand the last statement, but it I am sure it's similar to your earlier remarks.

Mod's this isnt looking good, I thought the political statements were interesting, And a debate about them would be thoughtful, but I can see where this is going.

[hell]

bush cheney plans, was iraq sadam hussein have 4 000000000000 billions $ oil reserve, if you smart enough you can break it down for yourself, see why we invade iraq

Out of curiosity, who are the "we" you are speaking of? I'm well aware that you could be a US immigrant that speaks English as a second language, but I'm leaning more towards the idea that you're the citizen of a country that didn't have anything to do with the invasion.

[Dominique]

bush cheney plans, was iraq sadam hussein have 4 000000000000 billions $ oil reserve, if you smart enough you can break it down for yourself, see why we invade iraq

I'm guessing that you're saying the US invaded to get Iraq's oil? Or am I miss reading your comments.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

From my POV, our commitment at this level cannot be open-ended. A point will eventually be reached where they will have to begin to compensate the coalition to remain there in force to provide security (if required). When that happens and the form of the compensation are up in the air - but the US taxpayer won't tolerate footing the bill for a for-profit exercise (that's one of the reasons we invaded in the first place i.e. the perpetual oil-for-food scam being run at our expense).

[Lau]

Please, Do tell !!!

So, you want the Iraqi people to pay for the invasion of their own land?

Christ, most of them are sick and tired of the the US+coalition. The Iraqis didn't ask for any assistance against Satan Hussein, how can you expect them to pay for it?

Leave, and save money that way.

[Laworkerbee]

bush cheney plans, was iraq sadam hussein have 4 000000000000 billions $ oil reserve, if you smart enough you can break it down for yourself, see why we invade iraq

If Iraq was invaded for oil the coalition need not have gone past Basra since all the oil is in the South you knucklehead.

The United States could have created a Shia protectorate and robbed it blind.

[Chulo]

So, you want the Iraqi people to pay for the invasion of their own land?

Christ, most of them are sick and tired of the the US+coalition. The Iraqis didn't ask for any assistance against Satan Hussein, how can you expect them to pay for it?

Leave, and save money that way.
Really? What happened during/after GW1?

[Lau]

Really? What happened during/after GW1?

Do tell?.......

[Chulo]

Do tell?.......Im asking if you know what you are talking about. since you said The Iraqis didn't ask for any assistance against Satan Hussein you seem to know about the situation well enough to answer my question yourself

[Lau]

Im asking if you know what you are talking about. since you said The Iraqis didn't ask for any assistance against Satan Hussein you seem to know about the situation well enough to answer my question yourself

LOL! This is not a 'pop' quiz. If you have something to say, then say it! :roll:

[Laworkerbee]

Do tell?.......

Operation Provide Comfort & Operation Northern Watch.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_no-fly_zones

[Chulo]

LOL! This is not a 'pop' quiz. If you have something to say, then say it! :roll:Well then you dont seem to know- After GW1 there was an attempted uprising in the south, hoping that the collation would drive past the border- at that time they asked help- so you saying they didnt ask for help would be wrong

[Lau]

Operation Provide Comfort & Operation Northern Watch.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_no-fly_zones

And that is supposed to be the Iraqi people telling the US+coalition to invade Iraq?

No, that was a desperate Saddam Hussein who were asking for someone to please assassinate him... Which I think would have been the better choice.. and cheaper.

[Chulo]

And that is supposed to be the Iraqi people telling the US+coalition to invade Iraq?

No, that was a desperate Saddam Hussein who were asking for someone to please assassinate him... Which I think would have been the better choice.. and cheaper.
did you even read it?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_uprisings_in_Iraq

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_Uprising_in_Karbala

There were hopes that help would come to over throw saddam - and because of these revolts one of the reason why the no fly zones were established

[Lau]

Well then you dont seem to know- After GW1 there was an attempted uprising in the south, hoping that the collation would drive past the border- at that time they asked help- so you saying they didnt ask for help would be wrong

Some people in the south did. And that's why the south is relatively calm. But does that justify what we see now? Does that justify the American losses, or the Iraqi ones? No...

If the Iraqi people had a choice between Saddam Hussein and what they have now, what do you think would be their choice?

[Chulo]

Some people in the south did. And that's why the south is relatively calm. But does that justify what we see now? Does that justify the American losses, or the Iraqi ones? No...

If the Iraqi people had a choice between Saddam Hussein and what they have now, what do you think would be their choice?
you are avoiding the fact that you gave a false statement

[Laworkerbee]

And that is supposed to be the Iraqi people telling the US+coalition to invade Iraq?

No silly that was an answer to your previous post.


The Iraqis didn't ask for any assistance against Satan Hussein

They did request it, and were given it (though a bit late after many Shia were slaughtered after uprising in the South)


No, that was a desperate Saddam Hussein who were asking for someone to please assassinate him... Which I think would have been the better choice.. and cheaper.

I agree, killing thousands of Iraqi's and occupying a country to get rid of one man and his inner circle is terrible, however American laws prohibit our government from sanctioning the killing of other heads of state.

[Lau]

you are avoiding the fact that you gave a false statement

If some of the Iraqi people asked for it, does that mean they should all pay? You cant really say that the majority of Iraqis asked for it, since we don't now.

All we know is, it turned out the way it did, and a majority of the Iraqis (according to some), don't want the US+coalition in Iraq. So again, why should they pay for something they don't want, and for a lot of people, never wanted?

Let them have their free election, let them decide whether the US should be in Iraq. If the answer is yes, then by all means, let them pay with oil.



I agree, killing thousands of Iraqi's and occupying a country to get rid of one man and his inner circle is terrible, however American laws prohibit our government from sanctioning the killing of other heads of state.

Which is amazing, since the invasion and subsequently killings of thousands US troops + civilian Iraqis is not Prohibit! But OK, even an evil dictator deserves a fair trial.

[Laworkerbee]

By the way, these politicians calling for this are true neo colonialists and these are liberals mind you.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

So, you want the Iraqi people to pay for the invasion of their own land?

Christ, most of them are sick and tired of the the US+coalition. The Iraqis didn't ask for any assistance against Satan Hussein, how can you expect them to pay for it?


Have the populations of other nations who were invaded (i.e. Germany etc.) not been forced to pay reparations? Whether or not the Iraqi people were begging us to come stop Saddam is irrelevant. His government invaded Kuwait, ended that war with a promise to us that we could inspect him for WMD - the Iraqi people worked for him and supported him. They bear a large portion of the blame for what went on under his leadership.

Saddam did not personally invade Kuwait, it was those nice Iraqis. Saddam didn't rob them blind, didn't gas Kurds and Iranians - it was rank and file Iraqis. Now why is it patently unfair for the same people to simply make reparations to the world powers who have had to step in to eliminate the menace they created and supported? We're not dragging their women and children off to use as slaves - we're not stealing all their treasure - all we'd be asking for is a portion of the profits - or I dunno maybe a discount or something - that they're now able to make on their improved oil infrastructure. Is that unfair?

[SuperCavitator]

I don't think anyone having total knowledge of all the reasons we invaded Iraq, if any such person exists, is ever going to tell the whole story. Hell, there are still different camps as to the reasons we went into Vietnam. I drive myself nuts trying to sort the reasonable theories from the tin foil.

But, now that the US is there, I am not convinced that keeping control over the Iraqi oil is necessarily wrong. It's a tough f&^king world.

I frequently point my liberal friends to the end of the movie "Three Days of the Condor," when the guys in black suits talk to Robert Redford on the bridge in Switzerland, about being cold in the winter and having no gas. I think that when these friends drive home, past gas stations, some of them may have some very serious cognitive dissonance about the right and wrong of protecting oil supplies with force.

[hell]

Have the populations of other nations who were invaded (i.e. Germany etc.) not been forced to pay reparations? Whether or not the Iraqi people were begging us to come stop Saddam is irrelevant. His government invaded Kuwait, ended that war with a promise to us that we could inspect him for WMD - the Iraqi people worked for him and supported him. They bear a large portion of the blame for what went on under his leadership.

Saddam did not personally invade Kuwait, it was those nice Iraqis. Saddam didn't rob them blind, didn't gas Kurds and Iranians - it was rank and file Iraqis. Now why is it patently unfair for the same people to simply make reparations to the world powers who have had to step in to eliminate the menace they created and supported? We're not dragging their women and children off to use as slaves - we're not stealing all their treasure - all we'd be asking for is a portion of the profits - or I dunno maybe a discount or something - that they're now able to make on their improved oil infrastructure. Is that unfair?

I dunno about the reparations argument you've got going. Sure, Germany paid after WWII, but they also paid after WWI, and they were the invaders. To the victors go the spoils. It's been cited that Germany would have charged reparations to France if they had won WWI, and France sure as **** didn't have a totalitarian dictator in charge, nor were they a menacing threat to anyone in particular (well, there's the colonialism, but that's a different issue).

I do agree that Saddam certainly didn't invade or otherwise kill anyone all by his lonesome, many people surely collaborated, but there were also folks that didn't want war in Iraq, and if any of them spoke up at the time, it's the reason we never heard from them again. But I'm in somewhat agreement with alot of folks, they have the capital, help out some. They may not like our presence, but almost all of them agree that if we were to leave now, they'd go downhill like a fat kid in a barrel.

Just for some quick clarification, I'm not defending Lau in any way, I don't really agree with any part of his statements, just chiming in my own, I suppose.

[Mamont]

Actually it's kinda fascinating in some very twisted and frightening way to see and hear that Iraq, already punished for Kuwait must pay for tools, used for his destruction.. Why didn't US also charge the families of the dead to pay for the bullets, used to kill them for instance?

[lightcav]

This may be a little off topic but I would like to point out a simple economic principle. Its called supply and demand. Supply and Demand curves affect price.

how this relates to iraqi oil is this:

If you control the supply (by invading Iraq and keeping the oil there) the supply curve will shift to the left becaus you have effectively made the oil supply smaller by not pumping the oil out.

This will result in a higher price for oil as demand stays the same.

Also speculation on oil supplies do to instability and uncertainties of the future will also cause the supply of oil to become more exaggerated. in effect raising prices as more oil traders speculate oil will be less available in the future.

I'm not saying that we invaded Iraq for the oil but it is one hell of a coincidence that we chose to invade the second known largest oil reserve in the world at a time when demand for oil has never been greater.

Also there is the fact that Iraqi oil had been under a trade embargo for the last 10 years before we invaded meaning that while Saudi Arabia and other oil producing countries produced at unprecedented rates, Iraqi oil just sat there untouched.

But hey thats crazy talk everybody knows we invaded Iraq to bring democracy to a bunch of crazy head chopping arabs and protect the freedom of this great country.

[Indiana Jones]

Have the populations of other nations who were invaded (i.e. Germany etc.) not been forced to pay reparations? Whether or not the Iraqi people were begging us to come stop Saddam is irrelevant. His government invaded Kuwait, ended that war with a promise to us that we could inspect him for WMD - the Iraqi people worked for him and supported him. They bear a large portion of the blame for what went on under his leadership.

Saddam did not personally invade Kuwait, it was those nice Iraqis. Saddam didn't rob them blind, didn't gas Kurds and Iranians - it was rank and file Iraqis. Now why is it patently unfair for the same people to simply make reparations to the world powers who have had to step in to eliminate the menace they created and supported? We're not dragging their women and children off to use as slaves - we're not stealing all their treasure - all we'd be asking for is a portion of the profits - or I dunno maybe a discount or something - that they're now able to make on their improved oil infrastructure. Is that unfair?
Jesus 2Sheds, you will not further your image as the foremost resident crypto-fascist by insisting on asking whether a course of action is unfair or not. You desperately need to come to your senses and abstain from these effeminate antics. You got a reputation to lose.

[Nano]

The article makes a convincing case for an insurgency. Really does anyone wonder why the insurgency started up in the first place? My guess would be along the lines of defending their country from this sort of exploitation. The Iraqi's are not Americans and have not be fooled one bit by the underlying reasons that initiated this war. Start taking their oil for war as this article puts it and you will see both Shiites and Sunnis fighting the coalition side by side. Gee and people wonder why they did not welcome us with flowers and kisses. Savage is a wanker who should enlist if he thinks the oil is that important.

[wagon]

Whatever the reasons in the first place, the US, UK, Australia and others invaded Iraq. The place is a mess. Now that 'we' are there, we have little choice but to keep going until the job is finished. Is the 'coalition' there for the oil? Maybe. Is it there to stabilise a country and help its people? I would say, for all the brave men and women who are there, they are trying to help in a situation where their efforts may go unappreciated. They are just trying to do their jobs and I expect 'stealing Iraqi oil' is the last thing on their minds.

Lets hope that the whole mess is sorted out soon. Is it worth thousands of lives (both sides) to do all this?

Saddaam is gone. Good. Is what replaced him any better? Not yet, but lets all hope it will be. Soon.

[Nano]

Whatever the reasons in the first place, the US, UK, Australia and others invaded Iraq. The place is a mess. Now that 'we' are there, we have little choice but to keep going until the job is finished. Is the 'coalition' there for the oil? Maybe. Is it there to stabilise a country and help its people? I would say, for all the brave men and women who are there, they are trying to help in a situation where their efforts may go unappreciated. They are just trying to do their jobs and I expect 'stealing Iraqi oil' is the last thing on their minds.

Lets hope that the whole mess is sorted out soon. Is it worth thousands of lives (both sides) to do all this?

Saddaam is gone. Good. Is what replaced him any better? Not yet, but lets all hope it will be. Soon.

I agree, but this sort of thinking and supporting it makes it all the more difficult for those troops to do their well intended jobs in rebuilding. The lives of those troops are put in danger more so if this thinking is openly discussed and supported by the people. It is in short order arrogant and retarded to no end to even speak of this in the open.

[Calanen]

If Iraq was invaded for oil the coalition need not have gone past Basra since all the oil is in the South you knucklehead.


They also would have grabbed it in 1991. Much easier back then.

[Sergei]

Actually it's kinda fascinating in some very twisted and frightening way to see and hear that Iraq, already punished for Kuwait must pay for tools, used for his destruction.. Why didn't US also charge the families of the dead to pay for the bullets, used to kill them for instance?

This is some hilarious stuff.
You break into a china shop, destroy everything and then tell the owner "Look, how I have over-exhausted myself, you should pay me for all that energy I spent destroying all your goods" :)

Who will pay for ransacking Iraqi museum of national treasures with artifacts dating back to the Babylon civilization?

[Kampfbaer]

@Sergei

Good points

Well it seems, that might still makes right.

War is the same as an armed robbery written large! (freely taken from Tom Clancy)

In this case it is easy to see who is to be the victim........

But I don´t wan´t to go back to the whole: was OIF justified or not thing, it´s overdone and everyone has his point of view.

[Vorian]

I am disgusted by the suggestion of the article and anyone that supports it....

Is this why 4,000 Americans and God knows how many Iraqis died for?

[deli_dumrul]

They also would have grabbed it in 1991. Much easier back then.

You will leave your oil fields, and billions of investment in infrastructure under threat from, not only Iran with its influence on the Shiite population, but people fighting in civilian clothes from neighboring regions.

Militants Occupy Oil Installation In Nigeria, Shutting Down Production
http://www.rttnews.com/FOREX/gblnews.asp?date=04/11/2008&item=13

How about the existing infrastructure? You need to get the oil to the markets as easily as possible. Supply vs demand as mentioned above.

http://www.btinternet.com/%7EnlpWESSEX/images/iraqpipelines.jpg

It's the same with Ukraine, Macedonia, Georgia, Kosovo, and Albania. You have to protect your investments - by arming these countries and accepting them into NATO.

http://www.inogate.org/en/images/maps/oil_map_big.gif
http://www.inogate.org/en/images/maps/gas_map_big.gif

It is all about money. Everything else is mambo jambo.

[Foxbat]

I agree, killing thousands of Iraqi's and occupying a country to get rid of one man and his inner circle is terrible, however American laws prohibit our government from sanctioning the killing of other heads of state.

the constitution also says not to go to war without the approval of congress.

[Mordecai]

...does anyone wonder why the insurgency started up in the first place? My guess would be along the lines of defending their country from this sort of exploitation...

It was started by those factions who want to rule Iraq through terror just as the previous dictator. The factions in Iraq fight as much amongst themselves as they do the coalition. Also, the insurgency is supported and led largely by Iranians, make no mistake about it. Iran doesnt want a strong, democratic nation as a neighbor no more than than want Israel to thrive.

War is war and innocent people always die. Saddam should have been removed from power years ago for the crimes against his own people. Facts are facts.

I always find it somewhat funny that is seems those countries who have the greatest problem with the Iraq war are largely the ones who were liberated by US/British forces during WW-II.

Crip