By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Is there any evidence for the Iraq War being about oil?

famousringo on 30 July 2010
mrstickball said:
famousringo said:

Not easy info to find. This information is a little old, from 2006, but it shows the US getting nearly half of Iraq's exports, and Iraq's exports are 84% oil and another 8% petroleum products:

http://internationaltrade.suite101.com/article.cfm/iraqs_trade_buddies

It's worth noting that Iraq's three next-biggest customers are NATO allies, not rival powers like China or Russia.

That has changed notably, as the US has dropped quite a bit:

http://www.theodora.com/wfbcurrent/iraq/iraq_economy.html

Notice that #2 is not a NATO country. If we were there for oil, why would the numbers be dropping against our favor? You'd think that obtaining oil from Iraq would be a long term conspiracy, and not a flash-in-the-pan of actual data that suggests that other countries are becoming more invested in Iraq than we are.

It's funny how much can change in a few years.

But really, I agree with many other posters in this thread saying that it was a "war for oil" is a gross oversimplification. Securing energy resources was one factor, but then there was the distractionary theory of war (Iraq gave Bush a good spike in approval ratings leading up to re-election), belief in a 'reverse-domino effect,' and searching for a geopolitical ally in the region other than inflammatory Israel.

There were lots of reasons why Iraq was invaded. I just don't think for second that the presence of WMDs was anything but a pretext.



"The worst part about these reviews is they are [subjective]--and their scores often depend on how drunk you got the media at a Street Fighter event."  — Mona Hamilton, Capcom Senior VP of Marketing
*Image indefinitely borrowed from BrainBoxLtd without his consent.

Around the Network
Zkuq on 30 July 2010

AFAIK there no evidence for any other reason (actually it seems more like there's evidence against every other reason) and oil seems to be the most logical answer.



mrstickball on 30 July 2010
famousringo said:
mrstickball said:
famousringo said:
 

Not easy info to find. This information is a little old, from 2006, but it shows the US getting nearly half of Iraq's exports, and Iraq's exports are 84% oil and another 8% petroleum products:

http://internationaltrade.suite101.com/article.cfm/iraqs_trade_buddies

It's worth noting that Iraq's three next-biggest customers are NATO allies, not rival powers like China or Russia.

That has changed notably, as the US has dropped quite a bit:

http://www.theodora.com/wfbcurrent/iraq/iraq_economy.html

Notice that #2 is not a NATO country. If we were there for oil, why would the numbers be dropping against our favor? You'd think that obtaining oil from Iraq would be a long term conspiracy, and not a flash-in-the-pan of actual data that suggests that other countries are becoming more invested in Iraq than we are.

It's funny how much can change in a few years.

But really, I agree with many other posters in this thread saying that it was a "war for oil" is a gross oversimplification. Securing energy resources was one factor, but then there was the distractionary theory of war (Iraq gave Bush a good spike in approval ratings leading up to re-election), belief in a 'reverse-domino effect,' and searching for a geopolitical ally in the region other than inflammatory Israel.

There were lots of reasons why Iraq was invaded. I just don't think for second that the presence of WMDs was anything but a pretext.

That could very well be the case. On one end, I tend to agree, because the WMD argument shouldn't really be the grand reason you'd go into a country and do what was done. On the other end...Its hard to say there'd be a specific one grand reason, because the result of the Iraq war has been so varied in its succuesses and failures, that no real 'desired' outcome has been achieved that I can tell....Unless the goal was to make Bush hated around the world, or depose of Saddam.



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

ocean-1984 on 30 July 2010

If we don't know what is it about, it must be about money.

oil=money

money>human life



MrBubbles on 30 July 2010

canada wasnt a nice invasion target because they know they would get beat up just like all the other times :)



"I like my steaks how i like my women.  Bloody and all over my face"

"Its like sex, but with a winner!"

MrBubbles Review Threads: Bill Gates, Jak II, Kingdom Hearts II, The Strangers, Sly 2, Crackdown, Zohan, Quarantine, Klungo Sssavesss Teh World, MS@E3'08, WATCHMEN(movie), Shadow of the Colossus, The Saboteur

Around the Network
famousringo on 30 July 2010
MrBubbles said:

canada wasnt a nice invasion target because they know they would get beat up just like all the other times :)


I thought it was because the US already has easy access to nearly any natural resource they want from us, plus a close strategic military alliance.

Not to suggest that there aren't some serious perks to being the biggest trading partner and arguably closest ally to the world's only superpower. Ever wonder why Canada gets invited to all those high-level meetings that much larger and more powerful countries aren't invited to? Americans would rather not be completely surrounded by Europeans and Asians, so they let their little brother tag along.



"The worst part about these reviews is they are [subjective]--and their scores often depend on how drunk you got the media at a Street Fighter event."  — Mona Hamilton, Capcom Senior VP of Marketing
*Image indefinitely borrowed from BrainBoxLtd without his consent.

megaman79 on 31 July 2010
Ssenkahdavic said:
megaman79 said:
Ssenkahdavic said:

Unless evidence comes out that Iraq was planning on cutting off the supply after the 2002 year (and there is not any I am aware of) I do not see how we went to war just for oil.  If we did, wouldnt our supply SINCE the war be greater if not equal to what it was before the war?

THERES NO OIL LEFT. We're at peak oil already.

 

Thats a pretty good reason in my view, but again, OP go find out for yourself please.

What do you mean exactly?  And if there is a peak oil, source?  I have not seen anything related to that (when I was looking for my graph)

And who do you by "We're"? Austrailians?  (just trying to clarify)

You haven't seen the price of oil skyrocket?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil  (see - concerns over stated reserves) There is a reason why offshore drilling, and freeing up more US coastline for drilling, is becoming increasingly popular. Then theres alternative oil extraction, like oil sands in Canada.

 

 



“When we make some new announcement and if there is no positive initial reaction from the market, I try to think of it as a good sign because that can be interpreted as people reacting to something groundbreaking. ...if the employees were always minding themselves to do whatever the market is requiring at any moment, and if they were always focusing on something we can sell right now for the short term, it would be very limiting. We are trying to think outside the box.” - Satoru Iwata - This is why corporate multinationals will never truly understand, or risk doing, what Nintendo does.

Xoj on 31 July 2010

war aren't fought for only one reason, oil may be one of them, but USA is known in history  to sticking their noses in everything :p.



Rath on 31 July 2010

I can't possibly reply to this entire thread, and so far I have to admit I have seen little evidence that the USA invaded for oil, otherwise the amount of oil imported by the USA from Iraq should have increased. Though the Halliburton thing seems like a bit of a conflict of interest it seems, that doesn't seem the reason the USA invaded in the first place.

 

I must say I'm more than slightly drunk while posting this, but it seems to me that Bush needed to be seen to be doing something after a direct attack on American soil (9/11) and the Iraq war was a part of that. The war on terror was something that was demanded by the American people who needed to see a response to the attack. The fact that it was misguided seems to me to be at least partly down to the fact that it was hurried by the anger of the American people.



sad.man.loves.vgc on 31 July 2010

it's about nuclear weapons, idiot! :)