UFOs and the National Security State, Vol. II

[Trajanus]

Trajanus if you don't think Iraq was about Oil your mistaken.

The US didn't take over Iraq's oil. We're not pumping it out at preferential rates for ourselves. The US probably could've had all the imported oil it needs for free if it agreed to dump Israel. Of course that was never a real option because the pro-Israel lobby has orders of magnitude more political power than the oil companies. See Walt and Mearsheimer's The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy.

 

[ArchieBedford]

Trajanus if you don't think Iraq was about Oil your mistaken.

Kieran

Why do you think that? The evidence for the oft-repeated mantra that the Iraq war was "all about oil" is very weak.

The easiest way for the Bush 43 administration to gain access to the mineral oil under the sands in both southern (Shiite region) and northern Iraq (Kurdish region) would have been to do a deal with Saddam's Baathist regime - assuming the oil was needed by the west, which it wasn't in 2003 and isn't now. Far easier, far safer, far more discrete to just gain direct access to it politically. The oil isn't going anywhere - especially since 2003 when the infrastructure was smashed and the insurgency began. Waging a war that costs trillions of dollars, wrecking the oil infrastructure and making the administration catastrophically and irredeemably unpopular surely doesn't seem very smart, when a much easier way was open. So I'm not convinced this was the motive. It makes no sense.

 

[Kieran]

Kieran

Why do you think that? The evidence for the oft-repeated mantra that the Iraq war was "all about oil" is very weak.

The easiest way for the Bush 43 administration to gain access to the mineral oil under the sands in both southern (Shiite region) and northern Iraq (Kurdish region) would have been to do a deal with Saddam's Baathist regime - assuming the oil was needed by the west, which it wasn't in 2003 and isn't now. Far easier, far safer, far more discrete to just gain direct access to it politically. The oil isn't going anywhere - especially since 2003 when the infrastructure was smashed and the insurgency began. Waging a war that costs trillions of dollars, wrecking the oil infrastructure and making the administration catastrophically and irredeemably unpopular surely doesn't seem very smart, when a much easier way was open. So I'm not convinced this was the motive. It makes no sense.

Well it's not Archie. "Who ever owns the oil rules the World" There is plenty of documentation available as far back as April 2001. That show's Bush and his cabinet made a decision to invade Iraq after 9/11 because Iraq was a in fact destabilising influence to the flow of oil to International markets. There is documentation also that suggest's "Saddam" wanted to stop dealing in Dollars and wanted to switch to the Euro for selling his oil. That is a big reason there for the United states to invade a sovereign country, when they try to remove your currency as being the reserve currency for trading oil in world markets.

Archie think about it logically who benefits here? The 'oil companies and the 'nation of Israel would be the only benefactors of such a war in my view. The elite wealthy oil men who financed backed Mr Bushes campaign have influence, this people have huge investments in the oil industry have they not. When the Iraq War happened oil profit's in fact went through the Roof for the United states.

One of the biggest oil companies exporting Iraq oil out now is "Halliburton" Which was formerly run by Mr Dick Cheney" Former vice President of the United states. Get real here, Oil is the number one reason, the United states would still be in the Middle east in the first place. It's there only valuable resource that would be worth fighting over. Archie your post is after the Invasion. United states thought it be a cake walk before the invasion, but it was anything but that later. Another intelligence failure or they just didn't care what happened as long as they won, Wealthy men don't fight wars they pay young men to fight there battles for them.

I honestly think though they thought they would be able to control the population and everything would be rosy again a serious mistake by the Bush Administration. Look Archie remember before this invasion Iraq was the second largest oil Exporter in the World. There is lot to be gained here for a country that controls such a resource. American oil Companies were banished from Iraq, they in fact did not operate in Iraq before 2003. American OIL companies and British oil companies freely operated within Iran before the Islamic revolution and also in IRAQ prior to first Gulf War. Why do you think United states supported Iraq's war against Iran. Because Iran kicked out this foreign companies and put there oil under state ownership and Oil companies are still today not pleased what happened after 1979.

---------- Post added at 08:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:21 PM ----------

The US didn't take over Iraq's oil. We're not pumping it out at preferential rates for ourselves. The US probably could've had all the imported oil it needs for free if it agreed to dump Israel. Of course that was never a real option because the pro-Israel lobby has orders of magnitude more political power than the oil companies. See Walt and Mearsheimer's The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy.

I agree to this point, Israel was a major factor behind this war been given the go ahead, but realistically a country like the United states would only enter into a war if they saw other benefits beside helping a friend out with an enemy.

 

[ArchieBedford]

There is plenty of documentation available as far back as April 2001. That show's Bush and his cabinet made a decision to invade Iraq after 9/11 because Iraq was a in fact destabilising influence to the flow of oil to International markets.

What documentation? Credible references? No ignorant ranting conspiracy sites please. They're invariably full of outright lies, and shit.

---------- Post added at 09:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:38 PM ----------

There is documentation also that suggest's "Saddam" wanted to stop dealing in Dollars and wanted to switch to the Euro for selling his oil. That is a big reason there for the United states to invade a sovereign country, when they try to remove your currency as being the reserve currency for trading oil in world markets.

Sure, oil will be traded in Euros - by China for instance, which already does a huge volume of international trade in Euros. I don't see the US invading China with military force as a consequence. You can't seriously believe this as a cause for war.

---------- Post added at 09:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:45 PM ----------

Archie think about it logically who benefits here?

All kinds of people benefit. The biggest beneficiaries by far are the majority Shiite population in the south, who now run the country and hold all positions of power instead of being persecuted and murdered. So that's as far as the "who benefits?" argument goes. You saying they masterminded the invasion?

Sorry, the oil argument is lame. Maybe a minor factor, but no more. Haliburton made money in Iraq but it's far easier for them to generate billions in the US so that's not a convincing argument, so though there may be some merit in it there's not much.

 

[Kieran]

What documentation? Credible references? No ignorant ranting conspiracy sites please. They're invariably full of outright lies, and shit.

---------- Post added at 09:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:38 PM ----------



Sure, oil will be traded in Euros - by China for instance, which already does a huge volume of international trade in Euros. I don't see the US invading China with military force as a consequence. You can't seriously believe this as a cause for war.

Archie what about "Alan Greenspan" chairman of the United states federal reserve. "His backs up my assertion fully" Credible reference? I have read about this over the years, you have to forgive me if i don't have the documentation right now. I need to gather the information for you. A come on Archie don't be naive comparing Iraq and China, is like comparing a fly to a human. Large countries bully small countries if they can get away with it. Look the Cold war for example "the United states hated and disliked the communist Soviet union, but they weren't going to invade or attack a country that was a strong and able to defend itself.

 

[ArchieBedford]

Look Archie remember before this invasion Iraq was the second largest oil Exporter in the World.

This isn't exactly true. From 1990 (Invasion of Kuwait, subsequent war and international isolation) Iraq exported virtually no oil at all. Zilch. Reason? UN embargo prevented any exports until the WMD thing was resolved. You may be thinking that Iraq is supposed to hold the second-largest oil RESERVES in the world - under the ground, that is KNOWN ABOUT FOR SURE. This isn't quite the same as pumping it out and exporting it.

BTW you mprobably know >80% of all oil from the ME goes to China, Japan and India and the US in fact imports very little from this region, and this will likely continue unless and until local sources (Gulf of Mexico, Alaska etc.) begin to diminish. If I understand your point it sounds like the usual CT narrative that Cheney planned it all so Halliburton could make billions pumping Iraqi oil blah blah blah. Well, the facts on deep examination don't really stack up to support that I'm afraid, which is why I can't buy it.

---------- Post added at 10:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:03 PM ----------

A come on Archie don't be naive comparing Iraq and China, is like comparing a fly to a human.

My Chinese friends would like that one!

 

[Kieran]

This isn't exactly true. From 1990 (Invasion of Kuwait, subsequent war and international isolation) Iraq exported virtually no oil at all. Zilch. Reason? UN embargo prevented any exports until the WMD thing was resolved. You may be thinking that Iraq is supposed to hold the second-largest oil RESERVES in the world - under the ground, that is KNOWN ABOUT FOR SURE. This isn't quite the same as pumping it out and exporting it.

BTW you mprobably know >80% of all oil from the ME goes to China, Japan and India and the US in fact imports very little from this region, and this will likely continue unless and until local sources (Gulf of Mexico, Alaska etc.) begin to diminish. If I understand your point it sounds like the usual CT narrative that Cheney planned it all so Halliburton could make billions pumping Iraqi oil blah blah blah. Well, the facts on deep examination don't really stack up to support that I'm afraid, which is why I can't buy it.

---------- Post added at 10:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:03 PM ----------



My Chinese friends would like that one!

I had to do a few jobs so sorry for the late reply.
It's not about were the oil goes Archie, it's about who benefits from selling it. This is something you kind of overlook here with your argument's. Archie, Iraq exported plenty of Oil to countries that didn't support the UN embargo. Oil ratings for producer countries have been determined by respected bodies. The number of active Oil well and fields in a country determines the overall rating. Yes there is oil untapped below ground but there is estimates, surveys, work practices carried out to determine this.

Iraq is the second Largest exporter" Archie that is fact that is widely accepted by professional's who work in the Oil industry. You can dismiss the fact "Cheney" and "Bush" and others were close to the Oil industry all you want, but i outlined a respected source in the Financial arena "Alan Greenspan" He in a news paper interview claimed the Iraq war was about Oil and that was the main reason for the conflict. It caused a scandal at the time because he was a friend of the White House. It was hussed up very quickly and forgotten about, but his statements are on the record and can be viewed online.

 

[Xylo]

Oil and the establishment of a power base in the middle east. Supposedly if the US is able to station troops in the middle east, US foreign policy mandates will be easier to enforce, by sheer intimidation. Gaining a foothold in this particular region is the keystone. Unfortunately the defense contractors see more benefit in waging a war of occupation and ensuring the never-ending conflict in both Afghanistan (we can't learn from Russia's mistake?) and Iraq. Coming soon: Iran as well.

 

[ArchieBedford]

Coming soon: Iran as well.

Well Xylo, full-time conspiracists have been saying this for seven years now, with no result so far. The US military budget would need to increase exponentially and army recruitment to at least 5x and probably 10x current establishment more than two years prior to any invasion of Iran to be even contemplated without catastrophic and humiliating failure - unless of course you claim that the Obama administration is simply going to use the nuclear annihilation option.

Have any of you been to Iran recently? Do you know the place? How enormous and modern it is, how huge and sophisticated the population?

IMHO there is absolutely no chance of the USA initiating any open conflict with Iran within at least 20 years, and probably never. The logistics are too intimidating, too unrealistic. And to what purpose? And is anyone in the US population going to buy it? No.

Diplomacy and bridge-building will be the way. Wait and see.

---------- Post added at 07:18 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:15 AM ----------

Err...this thread is supposed to be about Richard Dolan's book, yes?

 

[Trajanus]

That show's Bush and his cabinet made a decision to invade Iraq after 9/11 because Iraq was a in fact destabilising influence to the flow of oil to International markets. There is documentation also that suggest's "Saddam" wanted to stop dealing in Dollars and wanted to switch to the Euro for selling his oil. That is a big reason there for the United states to invade a sovereign country, when they try to remove your currency as being the reserve currency for trading oil in world markets.

That had nothing to do with it, if it was true at all. After 9/11 Wolfowitz sternly lectured Bush about the "need" to invade Iraq and shrub was too much of a cretin to know better.

Archie think about it logically who benefits here? The 'oil companies and the 'nation of Israel would be the only benefactors of such a war in my view.

Essentially just the latter. Again the Iraq war was mainly a democratization scheme, with Israel the supposed longterm beneficiary. If oil was the principal concern, they'd just take that, and not bother with democratization--which incidentally, doesn't seem to be working out too well....

The elite wealthy oil men who financed backed Mr Bushes campaign have influence

Not a third as much as the pro-Israel neocons; again see Walt and Mearsheimer's book.

I honestly think though they thought they would be able to control the population and everything would be rosy again a serious mistake by the Bush Administration. Look Archie remember before this invasion Iraq was the second largest oil Exporter in the World.

No, just second largest proven reserves.

I agree to this point, Israel was a major factor behind this war been given the go ahead, but realistically a country like the United states would only enter into a war if they saw other benefits beside helping a friend out with an enemy.

Lol, one shouldn't underestimate the tremendous clout of that lobby. It's so powerful that Israeli interests have long been given precedence even over our own.

 

[Kieran]

That had nothing to do with it, if it was true at all. After 9/11 Wolfowitz sternly lectured Bush about the "need" to invade Iraq and shrub was too much of a cretin to know better.



Essentially just the latter. Again the Iraq war was mainly a democratization scheme, with Israel the supposed longterm beneficiary. If oil was the principal concern, they'd just take that, and not bother with democratization--which incidentally, doesn't seem to be working out too well....




Not a third as much as the pro-Israel neocons; again see Walt and Mearsheimer's book.




No, just second largest proven reserves.






Lol, one shouldn't underestimate the tremendous clout of that lobby. It's so powerful that Israeli interests have long been given precedence even over our own.

I strongly disagree with you, but that is always been the case hasn't it, i post and then you reply back always, disagreeing. Your my Evil twin following me around lol. Only messing.

Israel was a bigger factor for why Saddam was taken out, i agree with you, and i think, it was good thing not a bad thing. But the control of Iraq's oil was the number one reason for WHY the war plan got the go ahead in Washington. Testimony to this fact been true can be seen today. Iraq oil everyday is distributed by WESTERN OIL companies only. The gain from this not lose out on it. There is enough reliable information out there to prove this, all ye guys are dongs is giving me your opinion's to why ye don't agree with me. Yet i posted a credible person like "Alan Greenspan" a powerhouse in the economic world and he, has gone on the record, to claim the war in IRAQI was all about the Oil.

 

[Tom From Hong Kong]

With respect to the Iraqi War, I wouldn't be surprised if only a significant fraction of the actual reasons for the war are publicly visible and capable of being publicly debated.

 

[Paul Kimball]

Err...this thread is supposed to be about Richard Dolan's book, yes?

Indeed. Let's get it back on that track. There are other places to argue about 9/11 or the Gulf War - I was just using it as an example of a general principle.

 

[Kieran]

Well Xylo, full-time conspiracists have been saying this for seven years now, with no result so far. The US military budget would need to increase exponentially and army recruitment to at least 5x and probably 10x current establishment more than two years prior to any invasion of Iran to be even contemplated without catastrophic and humiliating failure - unless of course you claim that the Obama administration is simply going to use the nuclear annihilation option.

Have any of you been to Iran recently? Do you know the place? How enormous and modern it is, how huge and sophisticated the population?

IMHO there is absolutely no chance of the USA initiating any open conflict with Iran within at least 20 years, and probably never. The logistics are too intimidating, too unrealistic. And to what purpose? And is anyone in the US population going to buy it? No.

Diplomacy and bridge-building will be the way. Wait and see.

---------- Post added at 07:18 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:15 AM ----------

Err...this thread is supposed to be about Richard Dolan's book, yes?

Archie i had to reply to this post and Xylo can reply if he so wishes to you later. Archie "Bush and the "Neo-cons" in Washington listed these Countries are being Evil as far back as 2001. The "Axis of Evil" was a Term used by John Bolton and George Bush and others. Countries like Iran, Iraq, Syria, North Korea, Cuba were on the list and were considered a threat to the national security of the United States. One of the countries on the list was taken out, IRAQ, so how is that a conspiracy? when the Bush administration for eight years believed this countries were a threat and openly said as much. The Neo-cons did not go out of existence once Obama got elected, they still are alive and kicking, believe you me, and 2012 will be an interesting year when Election times comes around again in the united states.

Archie you don't need to invade a country with troops, you can try to destabilize it with other methods. The plan was Iraq first and then Iran, but Iraq made them rethink their strategy. But there still politicians going on "Fox news" today saying we should attack before it's too late. I'm not a supporter of the Iranian Regime, it's a regime that has plenty of problems, but it should be allowed to achieve it's own destiny as long as it doesn't threaten their neighbours in the process of doing so.

IF the United states attack's Iran it not about them having a nuclear weapon, it just a ruse to fool people into supporting or believing there is a threat to United states. Archie, Israel will go alone if they have to, make no mistake about it, it will happen, if the UN can't stop Iran, Israel will. That's not a conspiracy, it just a fact. Ok i agree we have gone of topic here, But this issues need addressing and probably require a separate thread of discussion.

 

[dyingsun]

Indeed. Let's get it back on that track. There are other places to argue about 9/11 or the Gulf War - I was just using it as an example of a general principle.

Paul, sorry for being a bit off-topic, but is there a way to order a 'Best Evidence' dvd somewhere? This Weekend I and some friends got a little wasted and discussed the whole matter of UFOS, while noone was opposed to the 'idea' that there is something anomalous going on in our skies, I'd love to show them something substantial.

 

[Trajanus]

Israel was a bigger factor for why Saddam was taken out, i agree with you, and i think, it was good thing not a bad thing. But the control of Iraq's oil was the number one reason for WHY the war plan got the go ahead in Washington.

No, it's just that 9/11 tipped the administration in favor of far-right, pro-Israel (neocon) plans. Does the US actually now control Iraq's oil? A new Iraqi government could if it wished, deny us oil.

Testimony to this fact been true can be seen today. Iraq oil everyday is distributed by WESTERN OIL companies only

But the bulk of oil companies and the biggest have always been western.

---------- Post added at 02:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:17 PM ----------

The Neo-cons did not go out of existence once Obama got elected, they still are alive and kicking, believe you me, and 2012 will be an interesting year when Election times comes around again in the united states.

Well, the worst of the neocons were defanged by realization that the Iraq invasion was a mistake and a very costly one. But the pro-Israel lobby is still dominant.

I'm not a supporter of the Iranian Regime, it's a regime that has plenty of problems, but it should be allowed to achieve it's own destiny as long as it doesn't threaten their neighbours in the process of doing so.

I agree.

Archie, Israel will go alone if they have to, make no mistake about it, it will happen, if the UN can't stop Iran, Israel will.

But not IMO without an administration more supportive of an attack. The pro-Israel bunch may first try to get rid of Obama and replace him with Palin or Romney--somebody who may be more willing to go along, however ill advised.

 

[Kieran]

No, it's just that 9/11 tipped the administration in favor of far-right, pro-Israel (neocon) plans. Does the US actually now control Iraq's oil? A new Iraqi government could if it wished, deny us oil.



But the bulk of oil companies and the biggest have always been western.

---------- Post added at 02:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:17 PM ----------



Well, the worst of the neocons were defanged by realization that the Iraq invasion was a mistake and a very costly one. But the pro-Israel lobby is still dominant.



I agree.



But not IMO without an administration more supportive of an attack. The pro-Israel bunch may first try to get rid of Obama and replace him with Palin or Romney--somebody who may be more willing to go along, however ill advised.

Naive, an occupying force maintains control always.. An IRAQI government is only a puppet regime until the day the United States pull's out of Iraq.

Yes a majority of oil companies are western and your point is? Ok let me explain; but they weren't and did operate in Iraq until after the invasion and today are still shipping this oil out to countries and taking must of the profit for doing so, of course the Iraqi government get's paid, but it receives less then should get from these Western oil Companies.

Iraqi Government can complain here, but the fact there country is an occupied land. Well it's obvious there is no real freedom here.

Iraq was a mistake realised as being such later after the invasion, agreed, but trust me mate, they had years in office to prepare the ground work for WAR against Iran. No Israel government will allow Iran to have the Bomb ever. If Israel get's intelligence that Iran is very close to having the N- Bomb. They will attack without warning, even if it doesn't get the go ahead, at the Pentagon or at the White house.

 

[Trajanus]

Naive, an occupying force maintains control always.. An IRAQI government is only a puppet regime until the day the United States pull's out of Iraq.

Coming soon. Naive? Regarding American foreign policy, what's surprising about that, lol.

Yes a majority of oil companies are western and your point is? Ok let me explain; but they weren't and did operate in Iraq until after the invasion[/quote]

Excluded because of sanctions.

No Israel government will allow Iran to have the Bomb ever. If Israel get's intelligence that Iran is very close to having the N- Bomb. They will attack without warning, even if it doesn't get the go ahead, at the Pentagon or at the White house.

An attack might only set back Iran's program, and lead to very costly repercussions for Israel and the US. Israel is too dependent on the US to be a lose cannon. I think they'd love to try but again, first they have to have an administration willing to go along i.e. another cretin like Bush--Palin(?).

 

[ArchieBedford]

Paul, sorry for being a bit off-topic, but is there a way to order a 'Best Evidence' dvd somewhere? This Weekend I and some friends got a little wasted and discussed the whole matter of UFOS, while noone was opposed to the 'idea' that there is something anomalous going on in our skies, I'd love to show them something substantial.

In addition to "Best Evidence" you might think about using James Fox's films "Out of the Blue" and "I Know what I Saw" both of which are excellent and designed precisely for the purpose you have in mind.

Or you could recommend they read Dolan's books...the supposed subject of this thread...

Cheers.

 

[dyingsun]

In addition to "Best Evidence" you might think about using James Fox's films "Out of the Blue" and "I Know what I Saw" both of which are excellent and designed precisely for the purpose you have in mind.

Or you could recommend they read Dolan's books...the supposed subject of this thread...

Cheers.

Archie, thanks for the suggestions, seen them all, I need the one that makes the strongest case.