What really scares me about USUK aggression

problem_child · October 3, 2003, 08:31

First off I'd like to say that this thread is for those that will not waste all our time by discussing the irrelevant propaganda-issues put out by USUK leadership regarding weapons of mass destruction or the evilness of Saddam or 45-minutes or World security or any of the other chewing-gum-topics divulged for the benifit of the voting public.

The US and UK invaded Iraq to gain control of the oil supplies of the second biggest oil producer after Saudi Arabia, they did this because industrial society runs on oil, it's as simple as that.

What I want to discuss is what you think we should be more afraid of:

The lies, cynicism, brutality, and willingness to bend/twist/manipulate/manufacture and forget the truth and history, as practised by the US and UK leadership- so that they could invade an entire country, destroy it's infastructure, and render all the protests from within their 'democracies' irrelevant, and causing all the 'serious debate' in the West to confine itself to made-up issues that have nothing to do with their [USUK leaderships] real motivations, while the soldiers and oil-men plod on with doing what they're really there to do (occupying the land and contracting-up the spoils of war)

or

That the Leadership of the US and UK think that it is necessary to do these things, because they beleive that controlling the Oil is worth it... because when the oil supply to the West runs out, Industrial society will end, and it would run out/be prone to impossible levels of manipulation sooner, had they not invaded Iraq.
In decades agriculture and translocation will buckle under the price of energy, people will starve, people will freeze, economies will crash. Without energy, or with overly expensive energy, even America could become like a 3rd world country, and California-class energy failures will become more widespread. Perhaps the men who run the US and UK, were actually taking very sobre steps to prevent the end of the world as we know it... perhaps the real reason they went to war- to secure the vast energy reserves we depend on to run the 'modern world', is justified?

Discuss...

Personaly I don't think it is justified, the modern world could find or build the infrastructure to derive alternative energy sources, but as things currently stand, energy is refined/transported and processed by a select few, an 'Energy Elite'.

The oil-moguls and their cousins in the military/industrial/corporate conglomorate aren't interested in finding alternate sources of 'sustainable energy' as this would take the power from their hands, and lead to the 'democratization of energy'. Imagine everybody having their own rooftop solar-plant or bio-waste methane plant! The horror! Therefore their lobbies will continue to support the worlds dependance on non-sustainable high-yield oil-energy because it keeps them rich and powerful, even though it is finite, and running out.

And because the oil is running out we will see more energy wars launched by the US (a very energy-hungry beast) disguised as humanitarianism or anti-terrorizm or WMD-control in the future.

The whole thing is merely an extension of the Kissinger plan first floated in the mid-seventies concerned with 'seizing Arab oil supplies', thereby placing the US in a position to 'control the worlds economies' (China, Europe, Russia and the rest).

Verto · October 3, 2003, 08:35

Quote:

First off I'd like to say that this thread is for those that will not waste all our time by discussing the irrelevant propaganda-issues

You're right; it's about spewing out the same mindless garbage over and over again.

problem_child · October 3, 2003, 08:42

You're Polish... so what's your angle in detracting from the discussion?

The Andy-Man · October 3, 2003, 08:42

Quote:

The US and UK invaded Iraq to gain control of the oil supplies of the second biggest oil producer after Saudi Arabia, they did this because industrial society runs on oil, it's as simple as that.

No offence, but its only Guardian reading students, and the loony left and greens in general who think that it 'all about oil'.

The US Gets most of its oil from OTHER PLACES, ie, Russia, LAtin America and so on, they get a rather tiny fraction from the middle east.

Also note, there is more going on then just oil. Not everything is about oil!

Verto · October 3, 2003, 08:44

Quote:

Originally posted by problem_child
You're Polish... so what's your angle in detracting from the discussion?

No, I'm Texan.

MikeH · October 3, 2003, 08:55

Quote:

Originally posted by The Andy-Man The US Gets most of its oil from OTHER PLACES, ie, Russia, LAtin America and so on, they get a rather tiny fraction from the middle east.

http://www.ott.doe.gov/facts/archives/fotw246.shtml

problem_child · October 3, 2003, 08:58

Quote:

Originally posted by The Andy-Man

No offence, but its only Guardian reading students, and the loony left and greens in general who think that it 'all about oil'.

The US Gets most of its oil from OTHER PLACES, ie, Russia, LAtin America and so on, they get a rather tiny fraction from the middle east.

Also note, there is more going on then just oil. Not everything is about oil!

Iraqi oil costs 1$ a barrel to process, Russian oil costs 6$ a barrel to process. The US get's only a tiny fraction of its oil from the Middle East... the worlds biggest oil region... and you don't think they are interested in changing this state of affairs?

Beleive me, oil is the most important resource in the modern world, and it is naive to think it's not worth going to war for, my opinion is that maybe it is worth killing for... killing thousands of people for, and that's my question, what's more scary, the killer- or his desperation?

CerberusIV · October 3, 2003, 09:06

Does anyone really think that if OPEC get difficult and the oil price quadruples then 280 million Americans (or however many it is now) or 60 million Brits are just going to say "That's OK, we'll pay the extra and we don't mind having the power turned off 8 hours a day".

Governments are elected to keep the lights on, the traffic moving and all that. Not doing those things loses elections. Invading other countries doesn't if you can find a good enough excuse.

If you don't like it go live somewhere else.

MikeH · October 3, 2003, 09:07

Actually if you don't like it you can vote for a different government, it's the whole point of democracy.

reds4ever · October 3, 2003, 09:10

Whats all the fuss about oil anyway? the windfarms will take up any slack in lost oil production, maybe we should invade a windy country next?

problem_child · October 3, 2003, 09:13

Cerberus, that's not what the likes of Tony Blah have been saying, they say it's because of WoMaDs and humanitarianism and such like, I am disturbed by a government that can lie with such an earnest expression... George W Bush looks like an honest upstanding individual where at least you know what you're getting compared to the diabolical slimeyness of Tony Blair.

MikeH, after this I've lost my faith in democracy. I don't beleive dictatorships or Communism is the way to go now... but 'democracy' seems to be just a way of handling the masses of tax-payers so that they don't interfere with the objectives of those that rule. If politicians are the herdsman, then who is the landowner?

MikeH · October 3, 2003, 09:14

The problem with democracy is that people don't care about what happens as long as they can buy a nice TV and eat ok.

reds4ever · October 3, 2003, 09:22

Quote:

Originally posted by MikeH
The problem with democracy is that people don't care about what happens as long as they can buy a nice TV and eat ok.

True, I know its small minded but mortgage interest rates are of more concern to me than whether we find WMD in Iraq

problem_child · October 3, 2003, 09:28

No, I disagree. In some parts of the world people take democracy very seriously indeed. The same parts of the world that people get 'disapeared' and where the press is tightly controlled and where the CIA run around in the shadows handing out money and guns etc.

In the West, a 'Crisis of Democracy' is when people actually start paying attention to things and protesting and so on. If people accepted that GW2 was about Oil, then the least of US governments problem would be looking as predatory as it is... people might start thinking :

'Well if oil is that important to the survival of our society, and the manner to which we are accustomed... then maybe we should find alternatives to being so dependant on it'

I think the 'landowners' that run the energy industry for instance, and other military/industrial influencers wouldn't like that at all. The real reason we were lied to about the invasion of Iraq, and the invasions to come, isn't because it makes our governments look bad, but because it would make us realise how unsustainable the current world order is.

Oerdin · October 3, 2003, 09:32

Quote:

First off I'd like to say that this thread is for those that will not waste all our time by discussing the irrelevant propaganda-issues put out by USUK leadership regarding weapons of mass destruction or the evilness of Saddam

Good plan. If you ignore the main points of your opponent then you will be freer to endless drone on about it being "all about the oil". We wouldn't want you to bother actually responding or refuting the other side's arguments. It’s much better to just keep repeating the same tired old claim which has been proven to be false.

Arrian · October 3, 2003, 09:33

Quote:

First off I'd like to say that this thread is for those that will not waste all our time by discussing the irrelevant propaganda-issues put out by USUK leadership regarding weapons of mass destruction or the evilness of Saddam or 45-minutes or World security or any of the other chewing-gum-topics divulged for the benifit of the voting public.

Translation: I dismiss anything that doesn't fit into my worldview out of hand, and I wish to have a tea party with other posters who share said worldview. We can all get together, rag on Bush and the US of A, and maybe have a singalong.

:vomit:

-Arrian

Donegeal · October 3, 2003, 09:35

Moron. You and David Floyd should hook up.....

[Edit] Intended for problem_child, not Arrian.

Az · October 3, 2003, 09:36

What scares ME, is that people actually treat the USUK actions as something unbelieavable that never happened before. What kind of sheltered life have they been leading?

MikeH · October 3, 2003, 09:38

When Saddam invaded Kuwait to steal their oil there was an uproar from the international community. No-one seemed that bothered about his regime before that.

Oerdin · October 3, 2003, 09:42

Azazel: I think deep down they know that, but, they so hate Bush and company that they will ignore the facts. I find it sad. It was sad when the right went on a witch hunt for Clinton and now it's sad when the left mindlessly does the same to Bush.

I mean there are so many real issues where people could easily debate Bush's policies but instead of doing that Problem_Child decides to effectively say "I'm going to bash people/countries and I don't want anyone to tell me if what I'm saying is unfair or untrue".

Q Classic · October 3, 2003, 09:43

you think this was all about oil?

idiot. oil was a small fraction of it. this was about pure power.

humanitarian issues, womd issues, oil issues, all of that is worthless crap used to dress up how countries like america operate in the real world, based on realist principles.

the middle east is a strategic location, and a place where we need to exert our influence: sure, there's oil, but we also want to keep an eye on them so they stop killing us.

unfortunately, you can't project power across water very well, so going into iraq was a move designed to create a very strong pro-us base from which we could project our power.

it wasn't about oil.

MikeH · October 3, 2003, 09:47

If the US didn't spend so much time projecting power overseas people wouldn't be wanting to kill Americans.

So why does the US feel a need to have bases around the world? To protect it's economy.

Why is it important to have bases in Iraq rather than neighbouring NATO member Turkey?

problem_child · October 3, 2003, 09:47

Azazel, your point is worth addressing. I think you misunderstand my position, actually I think that the imperialism of the 'old world' never actually ended... why did anyone ever beleive it did? What, so Britain and America hooked up to fight the Nazi's, and after imperialism and wanting to control others was banished forever.... no.

The US and UK hooked up to resist rival empires and succeeded, now the world belongs to the US hegemony. Nothing changed... but the deception of US and UK citizens into thinking every imperialist war they get engaged in is actually some kind of moral heroism... that sucks more then the old 'civilizing the savages' line the British empire used to use, because today we should all surely know better then to buy it.

Arrian/Oerdin etc... come on, they knew they'd find no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but that doesn't matter coz they got to invade the place anyway... I find it unbeleivable that you're willing to give credit to the excuses the US and UK governments are leading you around with. Now they'll back-excuse the invasion by saying it was the Iraqis fault for pretending they had WMDs etc (even though the Iraqis insisted they didn't in the first place) and you'll dutifully give credance to that. If you guys were 16-year old girls... every half-brained jock in your school would have sweet-talked their way into your knickers by now.

FrustratedPoet · October 3, 2003, 09:51

OMG!!1

LOL I GET IT NOW!!!

"USUK" = "U SUCK"

LOL!!!!

\m/

Oerdin · October 3, 2003, 09:52

Quote:

Originally posted by MikeH
When Saddam invaded Kuwait to steal their oil there was an uproar from the international community. No-one seemed that bothered about his regime before that.

You're right. When Iraq tried to militarially annex one of it's neighbors people did take notice. He also probed into Saudi Arabia and the Saudis were so nervous that they called upon the US to honor the defense agreement.

problem_child · October 3, 2003, 09:52

Quote:

Originally posted by FrustratedPoet
OMG!!1

LOL I GET IT NOW!!!

"USUK" = "U SUCK"

LOL!!!!

\m/

ta-daa. A lil childish of me perhaps but *shrugs* what pleasures one can eh.

Az · October 3, 2003, 09:56

Quote:

Azazel, your point is worth addressing. I think you misunderstand my position, actually I think that the imperialism of the 'old world' never actually ended... why did anyone ever beleive it did? What, so Britain and America hooked up to fight the Nazi's, and after imperialism and wanting to control others was banished forever.... no.

Now you're getting it.

UN? Yep, world powers deciding upon conflicts is REAL impartial.

Another point well-worth adressing is that it isn't some inherently bad quality of the west, America, or whatever. It's just a direct continuation of whatever went on in the ancient times, the Middle ages, etc.

problem_child · October 3, 2003, 10:05

Quote:

Originally posted by Q Cubed

you think this was all about oil?

idiot. oil was a small fraction of it. this was about pure power.

humanitarian issues, womd issues, oil issues, all of that is worthless crap used to dress up how countries like america operate in the real world, based on realist principles.

the middle east is a strategic location, and a place where we need to exert our influence: sure, there's oil, but we also want to keep an eye on them so they stop killing us.

unfortunately, you can't project power across water very well, so going into iraq was a move designed to create a very strong pro-us base from which we could project our power.

it wasn't about oil.

You're quite infatuated with yourself arent you... The idea that America is extending it's force and power in the Middle East to stop them from killing you is so ridiculous that out of mercy I have decided to spare you. You are right however, and wrong at the same time.

The US in Iraq is about pure-power, oil-power IS pure power, the finger on the tap dude... the ability to control the growth of whole economies, not just to supply the USs own domestic needs, not just to protect US industry, but to dictate the growth of all the idustrial world, to maintain US preeminance, economicaly and militarily. Power isn't just about having lots of tanks and planes, those things are just brawn... dependant on real power.

Power is something you pump, power is something you can turn day into night with, power burns with blue fire from the back of a jet-engine....

C0ckney · October 3, 2003, 10:13

just out of interest problem child, how old are you?

DaShi · October 3, 2003, 10:21

The Man with his finger on the button.