1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

The true cost of oil

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by The Running Man, 4 Mar 2010.

  1. The Running Man

    Caporegime

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 35,989

    Location: block 16, cell 12

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8548707.stm

    SO the US quest for profit by oil extraction has hit a bump.

    How much should the US have to pay in reparations to the people in these areas? who will enforce payment?

    With the medical bills potentially continuing for many generations - how does this effect the profitability of the oil they went to sieze in the first instance?

     
  2. cosmogenesis

    Mobster

    Joined: 15 Mar 2007

    Posts: 3,120

    Its ever thus. The USA is the law unfortunately.
     
  3. Gaidin109

    Mobster

    Joined: 12 Jul 2009

    Posts: 4,878

    That News report doesn't mention Iraqi oil being the cause of the birth defects. It attributes the alleged rise in defects among children to weapons used in the fighting against Insurgents.

    So the alleged causes were a result of fighting Terrorist Insurgents, not as a direct result of oil. The cost of Oil will not be effected in the slightest by this, neither will its profitability for the owners of Iraqi oil...The Iraqi's.

    Dr Samira al-Ani of the Falluja General Hospital said "I am a Doctor. I have to be scientific in my talk. I have nothing documented. But I can tell you that year by year, the number is increasing", so what we really have at the moment is a report that has no scientific evidence to support it and no official reports indicating the veracity of this Doctors claims. The true causes of the problems are not known so anything else is speculation.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8548961.stm


    Poor attempt at igniting a conspiracy theory thread on the reasons for the Iraqi Invasion by Nickg in my opinion.
     
  4. Dutch Guy

    Capodecina

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 24,563

    Location: Amsterdam,The Netherlands

    @Gaidin109, I don't think Nickg literally means the price of oil as in the price a barrel of oil costs but more the uneccessary human suffering because of the invasion into Iraq
     
  5. The Running Man

    Caporegime

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 35,989

    Location: block 16, cell 12


    i think you misread or miscomprehended the original post...

    the war to enter Iraq was undoubtably for control of the oil...this isnt a comspiracy theory...

    the weapons used by the US cause huge side effects to the local population...US profits from control of the oil - US should have to pay reparations to locals for the problems they have caused through the use of weapons like white phosphorus in heavily populated areas?

    Or should you be able to invade any land, use weapons with known side effects and NOT expect to have to pay out to foot the medical bills or provide compensation to the families of those effected...?

    given that the medical situation could continue for generations the cost to the US to compensate everyone could be huge, thus bringing into question how financially viable the invasion was to begin with...IF the US are ever brought to task by the UN/Nato or whoever and forced to pay up?

    Kind of like the fall out from Gulf War 1, where the US soldiers got ill from the munitions used and were i guess compensated by the US for it, should the civillians of the land you are advancing into not expect the same kind of compensation if there is a link between the weapons used and the resultant health implications as a result of the fall out?
     
  6. Gaidin109

    Mobster

    Joined: 12 Jul 2009

    Posts: 4,878

    Has it been proven that the Iraq war was about Oil and not fighting terrorism and the toppling of an unstable and viscious dictator?

    Have the problems with birth defects been proven to be caused by Weapons used by the US and not another reason?

    the answer is NO to both questions.

    There should be an investigation into the causes of the fallujah problem, the reasons why its is not endemic across the entire warzone and if reasonable precautions could have been taken to limit the exposure if proven to be so.

    When this has been done, then blame can be attributated and reparations made if neccessary.

    That the Iraq war was primarily about securing the oil assets for the US to steal is conspiracy theory, and Nick, it detracts from what is a serious problem in Iraq that should have been discussed and debated without the shadow of such theories hanging over it.
     
  7. anything I don't mind

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 28 Dec 2009

    Posts: 13,054

    Location: london

    depleted uranium bombs in 2003 apparently.

    google depleted uranium babies (*WARNING HIGHLY GRAPHIC PICTURES*)
     
  8. The Running Man

    Caporegime

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 35,989

    Location: block 16, cell 12

    So are you insinuating that the US corporations have not moved in to begin farming the Iraqi oil?

    if they have - should the profits go to those who were inflicted upon during the attacks?

    bear in mind that these are civillians NOT prisoners of war,

    note that the accepted reason for attack - i.e imminent nuclear strike capability has been disproven, therefore the real motives for the attack are debatable and at the same time as likely to be for oil as for any other single reason. There are many unstable dictators out there, yet we have not invaded all of the countries where these guys preside...why would that be if the actual reason for invasion was an instable leader? clearly this was NOT the reason for invasion.

    But even if it wasnt for the oil implicitly, what reparations should the US have pay to the iraqis IF it is ever proven that use of WP or similar rounds was the root cause of the birth defects?

    What kind of precedent would it set if you can invade any nation, use any weapon that may contaminate the innocent civillians and NOT have to pay for the ensuing medical care?
     
  9. Gaidin109

    Mobster

    Joined: 12 Jul 2009

    Posts: 4,878


    While I am aware of the allegations, and I also agree that investigations should be made and reparations given if neccessary. It was the connection to the unproven allegation that the Iraq War was fought to secure its oil that is in doubt. The OP title is misleading in my opinion, and the issue of the use of depeleted uranium and phosporus is separate from the political reasons for the war and detract from the seriousness of the use of such weapons.
     
  10. anything I don't mind

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 28 Dec 2009

    Posts: 13,054

    Location: london

    the reasons for entering iraq and afghanistan was too over throw sudam a leader who they have setup decades earlier and helped. to take control of the region for oil and opium production.

    israel was a major driving force behind the invasion as much as you would like to pretend otherwise. aipac manipulating american foreign policy. massive defense contracts with blackwater (xe), haliburton etc etc. where they spent billions and billions... not only did they spend billions they wasted billions by getting ripped off by these defensive contractors, spending like $4000 on toilets seats and $millions on humvee, over pricing everything.
     
  11. anything I don't mind

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 28 Dec 2009

    Posts: 13,054

    Location: london

    i agree that it is separate matter some what.
     
  12. The Running Man

    Caporegime

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 35,989

    Location: block 16, cell 12

    but it doesnt even matter if the oil was for the oil, the fact is we are profiting from the redistribution of the oil - but to my knowledge we are not compensating those who are suffering because of the conquest.

    lest you forget that the oil was originally destined for the USSR

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/2670083.stm

    until suddenly it becomes property of the US...

    so whichever way u try to screw up the thread, you'll see that oil was a priority, and that given that we are draining their natural resources for profit that this could easily be given back to the local population for the devastation caused by the indescriminate use of these weapons.
     
  13. Gaidin109

    Mobster

    Joined: 12 Jul 2009

    Posts: 4,878


    So the US invaded to secure the Oil fields of Iraq, but then proceeded to allow the sale of the oil rights to Russian consortiums?

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,580077,00.html


    Doesn't make much economic sense now does it?

    As for the rationale behind the Iraq War itself, the US congress Iraq War Resolution cited its justification

    Iraq's alleged WMD's and the Programs to develop them. (the veracity of such claims is now doubtful)

    Iraqs non-compliance with weapons inspectors.
    Iraqs brutal repression of its civillian population.
    Iraqs hostility to the US and the attempted assassination of Bush Snr
    Al-qaeda members know to be in Iraq
    Iraq's continuation of aid to known terrorist organisations.

    So, nowhere does it mention Oil, in fact on several occasions UN has denied any rationale that includes oil as the reason for the war.

    The legitimacy of the Iraq invasion in 2003 is open to dispute, but to say it was fought over oil without any corroborating evidence is misrepresentation at best and conspiracy theory at worst.

    The allied nations also are spending Billions on the reconstruction of Iraq. All Iraqi oil fields and the rights of issue are owned by the Iraqi Government, not the US as is seen in the current argument over the Iraqi Oil law and the use of settling it in election promises within iraq.

    http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hJgM-Mnth7K_cFoq1f-C25fZImUgD9E6MVMO0
     
    Last edited: 4 Mar 2010
  14. anything I don't mind

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 28 Dec 2009

    Posts: 13,054

    Location: london

    well we have testimonials from the military veterans that spoke about securing oil fields and how they would be assigned to oil tank fleets that would move in packs for security reasons...

    whether the reason for going there was for oil or not we can't be sure, but opium and oil is definitely coming out of the region more than it was prior to being there.

    What is your opinion on the rebuilding effort Gaidin109 ? Do you think that it is the responsibility of the west to spend the money, that it doesn't realy have to rebuild the country, given that they destroyed a lot in the recent conflict and where does it end and how does that fit into a withdrawl, or do you see an end in sight for it ?

    I think that is a valid point saying that iraqi government still owns the oil fields, but we get little information from the ground and do not know the opinions of the people on the current situation, ie what they think of the government and how the government owning the oil fields is going to help the people. etc.

    Seems it could be open to corruption and such being a war stricken country.
     
    Last edited: 4 Mar 2010
  15. Gaidin109

    Mobster

    Joined: 12 Jul 2009

    Posts: 4,878


    All are issues which are separate from the OP, which attempted to link a specific tragic situation in fallujah to a hypothetical reason for the war in an attempt to validate it.
     
  16. anything I don't mind

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 28 Dec 2009

    Posts: 13,054

    Location: london

    i am sure OP won't mind. I could make another thread then and post the same question, not sure how this one went off on an oil tangent...
     
  17. Gaidin109

    Mobster

    Joined: 12 Jul 2009

    Posts: 4,878

    It went off on the Oil tangent because the post was engineered to do so by the OP. To give his conspiracy theory weight he attached it to the story of Children in fallujah. A story unrelated to Oil, whether ethically or not.
     
  18. anything I don't mind

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 28 Dec 2009

    Posts: 13,054

    Location: london

    you seem pretty defensive about it. why is that ?

    are you a part of the military, involved in some way etc ?
     
    Last edited: 4 Mar 2010
  19. Gaidin109

    Mobster

    Joined: 12 Jul 2009

    Posts: 4,878


    Not any longer I am not, I was never involved in the 2003 invasion of Iraq anyway.

    I'm not being defensive. I just think that Conspiracy Theories do not have any place in the SC, which is supposed to be about serious intelligent debate on newsworthy issues. While I concede that the story of sick children in Fallujah is serious and newsworthy, I do not think linking it to oil conspiracies in Iraq is either intelligent or newsworthy.

    Begin a thread on the perceived reasons for the invasion of Iraq by all means, I find conspiracy theories entertaining after all.
     
  20. anything I don't mind

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 28 Dec 2009

    Posts: 13,054

    Location: london

    i think nickg was saying "look at this crazy story about deformed babies, i wonder if this will affect the oil price" which i agree realy is not related and he was being bit facetious

    i think it is commonly accepted that iraq was about oil, by a lot of people. i think you label things conspiracy theory as an easy way of pushing it away, so you don't have to consider it. there is more than enough evidence for it to be at least, not classfied as a conspiracy theory, even for the likes of ex military people.
     
    Last edited: 4 Mar 2010