Yes, Oil Plays Big Role As Motive for Iraq War(barf Alert)

Newsday ^ | 4/4/03 | Youssef M. Ibrahim

[Sparky760]

This war may not be about oil in the first place, but to argue that the United States is committing more than 300,000 armed men and women to the single area of the world sitting atop two-thirds of the global oil reserves without having oil on its mind is a bit of a stretch.

[Sparky760]

And you wonder why no one holding up these stupid No Blood for Oil signs have anything inteligent to say. Now I see why.

[netmilsmom]

Furthermore our pursuit of Iraq in an attempt to turn it into some private American gasoline-pumping station could lead us into a quagmire. No people, be they Iraqis, Iranians or Saudis, will accept American dictates over their single national resource - oil.

---

There's the Q word again!

[m1911]

"Furthermore, we have always preserved in one way or another a hegemony over the Persian Gulf region..."

"No people, be they Iraqis, Iranians or Saudis, will accept American dictates over their single national resource - oil. "


So he's saying we can't do what he claims we've already done?

[Timesink]

Any article - ANY ARTICLE - in which the author uses the word "hegemony" can be dismissed out of hand. Normal people simply do not use that word in the 21st century. That it's even bouncing around their heads is more than adequate proof they're an off-the-shelf Bush-hate liberal.

[AmericanVictory]

What if it turns out fairly shortly that we don't need their oil? What then will be this man's argument?

[bjcintennessee]

I didn't read the full article, but wanted to add a comment. The first Gulf War did have something to do with oil. It was pretty much a given that after Kuwait, Saddam had his sights set on Saudi Arabia (that's the only reason the Saudi's let us set up a base there). The fear was that Saddam had plans to control the world's greatest oil supply, in which case he could blackmail any country into pretty much anything he wanted.