It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Aquarius1
Of course the reason we are there is "Oil", sad that our soldiers are dying over there so we can drive cars.
Thanks for sharing what you finally found out and we have known for years.
Originally posted by double_frick
thank you for the pics!
its one thing to know these things and another thing to see the proof. :/
very sad.
i can't believe most americans find this acceptable. it makes me sick.
Originally posted by TruthSeeker8300
reply to post by Stop-loss!
So where are the photos?
Originally posted by EvolvedMinistry
reply to post by johnny2127
Okay, so then I agree with much of your post. However, it should not be in OUR interests to take the natural resources of other sovereign nations especially when IT DOES NOT BELONG TO US. There's a word for that, and I'm sure that you don't need to be reminded of what that word is.
Eventually, our greed will inevitably be the end of us and the Karmic wheel will shift in a far different direction.
Originally posted by gandalph
Originally posted by Aquarius1
Of course the reason we are there is "Oil", sad that our soldiers are dying over there so we can drive cars.
Thanks for sharing what you finally found out and we have known for years.
What an ignorant comment! It's not "so that we could drive cars". It's so that few people could get very rich. It has nothing to do with your or my right and affordability to drive a car.
It has everything to do about acquiring a valuable resource in an illegal manner and profiting from it.
In this case it's oil, in Afghanistan it's gas, or it could be diamonds from Sierra Leone.
Bottom line - you'd drive your car anyway, and you can heat your home too, but what changes is who gets rich while you're in the process of doing so.
And he who controls the resources, controls the world.
So, please stop spewing such uninformed rhetoric that you've been brainwashed to believe by communist-sponsored green movement.
Originally posted by Jazzyguy
Originally posted by johnny2127
Can you really not understand how if those oil pipelines were not protected, it would even further destabilize Iraq and the region? So think of how bad things are now..... they would be worse. Oil is Iraq's economic lifeblood. If those northern pipelines are going, things get EVEN WORSE in Iraq. Less resources for both private citizens, companies and the Iraqi govt = even more reliance on the US = more troop deaths = more troops there = more Iraqi deaths...... and on and on.
I really cannot believe that you all read something sinister into protecting these pipelines. Its not what most or even a significant portion of troops are doing in Iraq. Its just one of the thousands of missions there. They must be protected. Its best for Iraq, its best for the US, its best for the region. Nothing good could come from not protecting those pipelines. Think and research before you speak people.
No, you're the one who don't understand my question actually.
Let me ask you the question again. Before the Iraq war, what happened in Iraq that warrants the US incursion into Iraq?
I also ask you what do you think is the number one reason the previous administration choose to go to war with Iraq.
Originally posted by johnny2127
Originally posted by EvolvedMinistry
reply to post by johnny2127
Okay, so then I agree with much of your post. However, it should not be in OUR interests to take the natural resources of other sovereign nations especially when IT DOES NOT BELONG TO US. There's a word for that, and I'm sure that you don't need to be reminded of what that word is.
Eventually, our greed will inevitably be the end of us and the Karmic wheel will shift in a far different direction.
I never said anything about taking their natural resources. I was talking about securing the oil for Iraq's best interests AND ours. Like I have said, it's Iraq's economic lifeblood, and without it, things get even worse than it is now. Additionally, assuming that this oil field stays in Iraq's control and does not fall to and of the neighboring countries, we will still have access to buying oil from them. Thats securing a source of oil for the US. They aren't going to take the oil fields, or own them. Its securing the oil fields for both Iraq, and therefore the availability to the US. And like I said, the US has to secure sources of oil. If today we said that we were going to start drilling and refining more oil from our own soil, it would take 10 years for one drop of usable oil due to the lag time in getting a workable oil field and refineries up to speed.
Originally posted by EvolvedMinistry
Originally posted by johnny2127
Originally posted by EvolvedMinistry
reply to post by johnny2127
Okay, so then I agree with much of your post. However, it should not be in OUR interests to take the natural resources of other sovereign nations especially when IT DOES NOT BELONG TO US. There's a word for that, and I'm sure that you don't need to be reminded of what that word is.
Eventually, our greed will inevitably be the end of us and the Karmic wheel will shift in a far different direction.
I never said anything about taking their natural resources. I was talking about securing the oil for Iraq's best interests AND ours. Like I have said, it's Iraq's economic lifeblood, and without it, things get even worse than it is now. Additionally, assuming that this oil field stays in Iraq's control and does not fall to and of the neighboring countries, we will still have access to buying oil from them. Thats securing a source of oil for the US. They aren't going to take the oil fields, or own them. Its securing the oil fields for both Iraq, and therefore the availability to the US. And like I said, the US has to secure sources of oil. If today we said that we were going to start drilling and refining more oil from our own soil, it would take 10 years for one drop of usable oil due to the lag time in getting a workable oil field and refineries up to speed.
With the current economic sanctions against Iraq, they receive very little for the oil that we have secured and utilize. China is the main recipient. In the late 90's after Desert Storm, we slapped Iraq with horrible economic sanctions that starved thousands. Clinton actually continued this policy during his "wag the dog" campaign to get the public to forget about Monica Lewinski. Once Clinton had a stronghold in that region, America and the U.N. developed what is know as the "Food for Oil" agreement that allowed Iraq to only use their natural resource to feed the starving. Although this program was supposedly terminated in 2003, the current war re-established new sanctions against their government that will not be lifted until our occupation has ended. Therefore, the Iraqis do not capitalize off of their own natural resource, they are forced to use it for minimal purposes that are closely scrutinized by America, China, Russia and the United Nations as a whole.
Just type it into your search engine...Food for oil, Iraq.
en.wikipedia.org...
What an ignorant comment! It's not "so that we could drive cars". It's so that few people could get very rich. It has nothing to do with your or my right and affordability to drive a car.
It has everything to do about acquiring a valuable resource in an illegal manner and profiting from it.
In this case it's oil, in Afghanistan it's gas, or it could be diamonds from Sierra Leone.
Bottom line - you'd drive your car anyway, and you can heat your home too, but what changes is who gets rich while you're in the process of doing so.
And he who controls the resources, controls the world.
So, please stop spewing such uninformed rhetoric that you've been brainwashed to believe by communist-sponsored green movement.
Originally posted by John_Brown
I left the Army after 8 years because I felt just like Stop-Loss. I was even stop-lossed myself, but I didn't run off at the mouth and engage in behavior that might endanger myself or other soldiers.
Originally posted by johnny2127The interesting part in my opinion, is that we will never know if they end up being right. Who knows how Democracy will be viewed and spread over the next 100-200 years. There will come a time in which this war in the middle east is a distant memory. Will democracy flourish and spread in the middle east at that time? Who knows. Either way, that the brief version of why I think the US really went to Iraq. Yes oil was part of it, but it wasn't that simple in my opinion. I think they had a grandiose, region altering philosophy.
Originally posted by Dragonfly79
Originally posted by johnny2127The interesting part in my opinion, is that we will never know if they end up being right. Who knows how Democracy will be viewed and spread over the next 100-200 years. There will come a time in which this war in the middle east is a distant memory. Will democracy flourish and spread in the middle east at that time? Who knows. Either way, that the brief version of why I think the US really went to Iraq. Yes oil was part of it, but it wasn't that simple in my opinion. I think they had a grandiose, region altering philosophy.
A pretty good guess is the regime would have been in control for a time cashing in on oil deals while leaving the people in poverty, not developing as a country while others rapidly are. It surely isn't just about an ideal, there are many places in the world which could use intervention.