Hmmm.  Well, my biggest problem with this argument is that it doesn't mesh with reality. 

Since the invasion of Iraq, oil has become far MORE expensive.  It isn't cheaper - not by a long shot.  In fact, the high price of oil single handedly has a negative effect on the economy.

If oil was 3 or 4 times cheaper than it was before we invaded, then I would say your argument would be far stronger.  But the fact is that oil continues to get more and more expensive, making everything more expensive and in turn, slowing the economy......making the "purely about oil" theory a bit too oversimplified.

It will keep going up.  So how does that help the US?  If it were about oil, and we know for a fact that oil prices increase with instability (this has ALWAYS been the case), why would we prosecute a war in that region?  It seems counterintuitive at best.


I disagree.  Oil prices are driven largely by speculation.  The mere mention of war is enough to bump oil prices up.  Even with a victory in Iraq, it was practically guaranteed from the outset that we would have a long time of higher oil prices.  The first Gulf War should have taught us that.  Oil prices never came down after we won there - so why would they do so this time around?

And I don't think what you are stating are necessarily facts.  For instance, nobody was disrupting flow of oil.  OPEC decides on production and controls the market price with great success in that manner.  Unless we essentially take over all of the OPEC nations (or just enough to force them to do our bidding), then this will not work.  Now, if we take out another half dozen Middle Eastern countries and wipe out Venezuela - then I'll rethink my position.


And of course, this all begs the question:  Why oil?  If the US is as greedy and money hungry as people assume, wouldn't we spend our money on eliminating our need for oil?  Why not invest tens or hundreds of billions into alternative energy, build a world monopoly on it, and assure American economic supremacy for the next 100 years?

I'm not disagreeing that oil is a factor.  If it weren't for oil, we wouldn't have any reason to care about the Middle East.  That is fairly well understood.  I think what is happening in Iraq is more complex than mere oil. 

Oil is something we can buy.  It is far cheaper to buy the stuff than spend half a trillion dollars on a war that actually makes it more expensive.  It does not make any economic sense if this were about oil and only oil.  I think it did have to do with terrorism, I think it does have to do with democracy, it has to do with oil, and perhaps even a little revenge thrown in for good measure (no, I'm not talking about 9/11).

In all, I think America is being unfairly sold as a criminal nation, with nefarious intentions when it looks to me that we are just in over our heads.  We messed up, and unfortunately, Iraqis are going to suffer for it.  The region is in very big trouble, and we aren't going to be able to fix it. 

If you have a problem with a mod I suggest that you place it in a PM to an admin or at least in the suggestions forum instead of here.  Its only going to get buried here.  The only reason I saw it was b/c of piece of this thread got sent somewhere private...a place mods/admins look at.

And I can't control everything that goes on here.  I'm not this site but 1hr a day lately (used to be 4-6) and its going to be that way for a while.  Try PMing the admins/mods if you have problems.  THere is going to be some trash talking here and there....this is a relatively relaxed site in terms of free speech so you need thick skin. 

I was just suggesting to you (as a noob) to not insult people from the get go...it won't build any credibility.  If you're a veteran then its a different story.

Orwell, did this come as some grand realization to you? Its like saying "Hey, we figured out whats with all that water stuff,,,,its WET!"

If not for the oil, the middle east would be no more meaningful to the "west" than africa is, infact even less so because atleast africa has diamonds. We would read about the barbaric Muslims who dominate the area and say thingw like "Can you believe those heathens Martha?"

Even if it wasn't about oil at the beginning (not the point of this reply)....it is now.

Ask yourselves why the front-running Democrat Presidential candidates are talking about a prolonged deployment/semi-permanent/ultimately permanent presence in Iraq after screaming about withdrawal earlier.

Their position now is not much different than Republicans with regards to our presence in Iraq...whether it's 20,000-50,000-or 150,000 deployed...it is still a hell of alot of troops no matter which way you slice it.

I think they've cozied up to the idea of a protracted stay because they know the hypocracy of screaming of withdrawal and then doing no different from Republicans on the mission and number of troops will bite them on the ass at the midterms in 2010....assuming they win in '08.

Cryptomaniac,

The reason that the Iraq Occupation has not yet brought down the price of oil is because the oil is not yet flooding the market, nor is it officially under control of western oil firms.  But the US is trying to make that all change with a bill (written in US) that if passed through Iraqi Parliament will essentially grant US and Euro oil firms exclusive rights to Iraqi Oil for the next 35 years.  Opposition to this plan is one of the main factors fueling the insurgency.

I posted the complete document on IAP several months ago, but no one seemed to find it important.  Which I find amusing now that they are still trying to decide whether oil was a motivating factor in going to war.

I suggest you google the "Iraqi Hydrocarbon Law" and spent a good while reading.

Dude don't even try.  There will never be peace in the ME...forum... 

Ironic isn't it?