Critics of the Iraq war who claimed that it was a war for Israel, engineered by the neocons in the Bush administration and promoted by their allies in the media, were routinely disparaged by the well known pundits of the US Left and the leading organizations of the anti-war movement that insisted that it was a war for access and control over Iraq’s oil. This was, they declared, in so many words, a "no-brainer."
Without casting aspersions on the wisdom of the latter, this story, in which T Boone Pickens complains that US firms have been shut out of Iraq’s oil market, is but the latest to undermine the "war for oil" theory. But don’t expect what remains of the Left to admit their error anytime soon. Reuters:
the Iraqi government has awarded contracts to foreign companies, particularly Chinese firms, to develop Iraq’s vast reserves while American companies have mostly been shut out."They’re opening them (oil fields) up to other companies all over the world … We’re entitled to it," Pickens said of Iraq’s oil. "Heck, we even lost 5,000 of our people, 65,000 injured and a trillion, five hundred billion dollars."
Posts
The "war for oil" folks might not have necessarily been wrong ... at the time. What can't be overlooked is the extent to which the US has subsequently been blackmailed by US creditors such as China. It could well be that China came to us and said, "Let us in on a choice oil contract or we'll completely tank the dollar. Oh, and thanks for securing the oil for us!"
ReplyDeletePonter,
ReplyDeleteIn any event the annual oil revenues are a fraction of the cost of occupation, making it a ridiculous business venture from the get go, if indeed it was ever a motive.
The bulk of the debt that the US has piled up is related to militarism, proof that the concept of coming out ahead (on "securing oil") is a non-starter.
Big oil would have rather been able to do business with Saddam Hussein and wanted the sanctions lifted which is the more likely motivation behind the Zionist push for the invasion.