And we'd do it again.
Published on September 22, 2004 By d3adz0mbie In International
Truthfully, the US led global forces did invade Iraq for the oil, but not in the way most conspiracy theorists' would claim. It is because of oil that Saddams direct link to terrorism can be shown, but again, not in the way conspiracy theorists' would claim. Let me explain.

In 1979, just after taking firm control of the Iraqi government, Saddam realized that he could extend his power by taking control of a single resource, oil. To begin this goal of extended global influence, Saddam set his sites on what he considered a weak oil country, Iran. Although he was mistaken about the strength of the Iranian people, who took Saddams 6 month invasion plan and turned it into an 8 year stalemate, Saddam maintained the idea that oil was the key for global influence.

Using the economic crisis that had resulted from an 8 year conflict as an excuse, Saddam accused Kuwait of actually stealing oil from the two countries shared oil fields, thus 'preventing Iraq's economic recovery' . Other accusations were also thrown by Saddam, such as Kuwait suppressing oil prices by overproduction, but the key point is that in all the reasons Saddam gave during the build up to the Kuwait invasion by Iraq, oil was on his mind.

Saddam invaded, took control, and did his best to fortify his position. Then, 5 months later, never satisfied, he started an incursion against Saudia Arabia! Even the Soviet Union understood the consequences of Saddams actions. The Soviets were boycotting the UN Security council at the time, yet they were so alarmed they put aside every other issue they had with the global community and came back to the table to help deal with Saddams grip on the combined oil fields of Iraq and Kuwait. It was not until Saddam entered direct negotiations with the USSR, offering them several major oil fields to stay out of the conflict that the Soviets withdrew. Oil, oil, oil.

Saddam understood that by controlling Kuwaiti oil fields, he would gain considerable influence over the global economy, acquiring power akin to that of a nuclear superpower. This is simple economics - the world runs on oil. Dropping the prices by flooding the market would bankrupt key countries, wrecking oil production and increasing the strength of a two oil country Saddam. Or cutting production would cause the prices to skyrocket globally, slowing production and again wrecking the global economy. This is his legacy of terror.

Yes, Saddam is guilty of atrocities. They are recorded, documented, on VHS and DVD at a store near you. But few people realize the global terror Saddam was trying to achieve. Almost everything you use during the day, regardless of where you live on the Earth, had oil involved in its manufacturing. Your chair, your computer, your home, your refrigeration systems, your phones - all require oil to be produced. If not for a stable oil market, none of us would be here blogging, or online at all for that matter.

Saddam wanted to destroy that. He wanted to wreck the economy of your country, my country of every country in the world that wouldnt cow to his demands.

After 12 years of containment, it can be asked, "Was Saddam a threat?". Wasn't he contained? Isn't North Korea more of a threat to global security? Perhaps, perhaps not. People view nuclear war as 'the end all', but it is not. A limited nuclear attack by North Korea would be horrible, but it would not come near the scale of of a global oil crisis. Billions would die, civilization would crumble without oil, as our current society is based. In the growing climate of international terrorism, Saddam has the greatest historical record of attempting terror on a global scale by attempting to gain control over a major portion of the worlds oil fields. With the current global population, oil is life, make no mistake of that.

This alone justifies the war, it may not excuse the lame reasons that were given. But it does make sense, and it makes sense in a very scary way, regardless of your political dogma.

Damn skippy the USA invaded Iraq for oil. 35 other countries understood this and acted accordingly, to finally, once and for all, get it out of Saddams hands. *

*Originally posted by me at Neowin.net. The article has been cleaned up for reprint on my blog.

Comments (Page 3)
3 Pages1 2 3 
on Sep 23, 2004
Theres no point in drilling in ANWAR if we can get the oil from other places. If it's not available, well that's another story.

Th3l1v1ngD34d....I have always liked Ike's "military industrial complex" speech. Very nice quote! You just earned an insightful!
on Sep 23, 2004

Reply #20 By: Sanjay (Anonymous) - 9/23/2004 5:29:38 AM
Also one thing we shouldn't forget that there were not even a single WEAPON of MASS DESTRUCTION in Iraq which was the "Real" reason behind all this blood bath of people. Till now US has not been able to establish even a single connection with Saddam and Al-kayda.

Also last 2 wars happen at the time of BUSH Family administration, who themselves have personal interest in Oil.


Not a one huh?? I'll ask you the same question I asked on another thread. If they had not one WMD where then did the 155mm howitzer shell filled with *SARIN* gas come from?
on Oct 23, 2004
Anyone that has ever seen a fork lift run[and that is just one piece of equiptment in a couple hundred] has never seen one pull up to a gas station to fill up. Why ? because it runs on propane in a portable tank.


Well, I used to work for Humpheres Lumber Yard and 17 out of 20 of our forklifts were gas powered. so I have seen it. Opinions are one thing but to state ones opinions as a fact is another. Resarch the issue first.
on Oct 23, 2004
Isn't North Korea more of a threat to global security?


No, because everything made in Korea usually breaks...if they built nuclear devices they'd probably bug out before launch...

~Zoo
3 Pages1 2 3