Question to those who think the wars in the middle-east is about oil

Gizmo j

Golden Member
Nov 9, 2013
1,067
293
136
What makes you think a war is necessary to take their oil?

You don't need soldiers to build an oil rig.
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
70,165
28,813
136
Most of the current wars are the result of the Wahhibiist House of Saud trying to establish hegemony over Sunni Islam.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pmv

Thebobo

Lifer
Jun 19, 2006
18,574
7,671
136
We are exporting oil and gas, why we are raving our lands for a few companies to make rich companies richer at the expenses of the environment is beyond me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zorba

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,189
14,114
136
Increased exports?

It makes no difference which countries we buy our oil from. If oil supplies are disrupted, the prices go up for everyone. We aren't net exporters of oil so any disruption in supply will only hurt us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pmv

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,986
3,320
126
It makes no difference which countries we buy our oil from. If oil supplies are disrupted, the prices go up for everyone. We aren't net exporters of oil so any disruption in supply will only hurt us.
The United States will become a net oil and gas exporter by 2022, the Energy Information Administration (EIA) said in this year’s edition of its Annual Energy Outlook. Slower domestic demand, along with growth in natural gas, oil, and oil product production will drive the transformation, the EIA said.

That sounds like President Trump’s dream of energy dominance come true, but of course, this would only happen under certain circumstances, as the EIA notes in the beginning of the report. For starters, the forecasting model the authority uses stipulates annual economic growth of between 1.5 percent and 2.6 percent between 2017 and 2050, with energy demand varying between flat and growing by 0.7 percent.

Another important stipulation in the model is the growing adoption of renewable energy and natural gas instead of oil. These are trends we can already see, and they will likely only intensify, despite the 30-percent import tariff on Chinese solar modules, which caused some to fear that the U.S. solar industry would suffer a severe blow. While the tariffs may be a deterrent to the solar industry, it will get a boost from favorable federal and state renewable energy policies, tax incentives, and lower costs thanks to technological improvements.

Oil and gas production will also continue to grow along with renewables, although oil production growth will stagnate around 2032, according to the EIA forecast. As demand at home slackens, oil and gas will have to find other buyers. Higher oil prices, the EIA notes, will motivate higher exports and lower local consumption, so the country could become a net oil and gas exporter even before 2022 if prices are high enough.
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,189
14,114
136
The United States will become a net oil and gas exporter by 2022, the Energy Information Administration (EIA) said in this year’s edition of its Annual Energy Outlook. Slower domestic demand, along with growth in natural gas, oil, and oil product production will drive the transformation, the EIA said.

That sounds like President Trump’s dream of energy dominance come true, but of course, this would only happen under certain circumstances, as the EIA notes in the beginning of the report. For starters, the forecasting model the authority uses stipulates annual economic growth of between 1.5 percent and 2.6 percent between 2017 and 2050, with energy demand varying between flat and growing by 0.7 percent.

Another important stipulation in the model is the growing adoption of renewable energy and natural gas instead of oil. These are trends we can already see, and they will likely only intensify, despite the 30-percent import tariff on Chinese solar modules, which caused some to fear that the U.S. solar industry would suffer a severe blow. While the tariffs may be a deterrent to the solar industry, it will get a boost from favorable federal and state renewable energy policies, tax incentives, and lower costs thanks to technological improvements.

Oil and gas production will also continue to grow along with renewables, although oil production growth will stagnate around 2032, according to the EIA forecast. As demand at home slackens, oil and gas will have to find other buyers. Higher oil prices, the EIA notes, will motivate higher exports and lower local consumption, so the country could become a net oil and gas exporter even before 2022 if prices are high enough.

Like I said, we are not now, nor have we ever been, a net oil exporter. Meaning any disruption in supply will only hurt us. The fact that this might change in 3 years is irrelevant to our current and past motives for involvement in the middle east.

When I say "hurt" us, by that I mean it will cause gas prices to go up for a time. Longer term, it only helps us if gas prices go up because that encourages development and use of cleaner sources.
 

dawp

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
11,347
2,709
136
OP, you have to ask yourself if we would have boots on the ground in that area if it were not for oil and I believe the answer is no, we would not be there if it were not for the oil.
 
Jul 9, 2009
10,728
2,075
136
Talk about a timely, help is on it's way story!



 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
23,972
13,488
136
Right now, war in the ME is about paying your debts to those who helped you get into power.
In other words: War with Iran is the small price you pay for the privilege of a Trump presidency.
CONGRATULATIONS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JEDIYoda

pmv

Lifer
May 30, 2008
13,602
8,508
136
OP is making a heck of a straw man argument. I don't think anybody thinks all the wars are all "about oil". There have been quite a lot of wars in the region and they all have complex causes. Ultimately, though, the need to secure the profits from the oil - and to ensure it keeps flowing - is a big factor in the West's attitude to those wars. If Saudi Arabia didn't have so much of the stuff we'd probably take a different attitude to its behaviour in Yemen, for example.
 

pmv

Lifer
May 30, 2008
13,602
8,508
136
Like I said, we are not now, nor have we ever been, a net oil exporter. Meaning any disruption in supply will only hurt us. The fact that this might change in 3 years is irrelevant to our current and past motives for involvement in the middle east.

When I say "hurt" us, by that I mean it will cause gas prices to go up for a time. Longer term, it only helps us if gas prices go up because that encourages development and use of cleaner sources.

There's also the question of what is meant by "us". Different groups have different vested interests. I don't think one can treat nations as unitary actors.

Plus there's the question of the US having an interest in the continued functioning of the global economy - even if it is not dependent on middle-eastern oil itself, other countries are, and a hit to them would be a hit to the global economy. That's the weird thing about the world, it seems to me, it's both competitive and inter-dependant. Nations have conflicting interests and yet also will be harmed if their rivals take too much of an economic hit.
 

dawp

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
11,347
2,709
136
also OP, you might want to read up on the 1953 Iranian Coup where British interests talked the US government into overthrowing the duly elected government all because they had the audacity to want their oil fields nationalized and the brits did not like that.


a lot of the troubles in the region can be traced back to that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hayabusa Rider

pmv

Lifer
May 30, 2008
13,602
8,508
136
also OP, you might want to read up on the 1953 Iranian Coup where British interests talked the US government into overthrowing the duly elected government all because they had the audacity to want their oil fields nationalized and the brits did not like that.


a lot of the troubles in the region can be traced back to that.

I suppose one could quibble that a coup is not a war! Seems quite obvious that Western involvement and interference in the region has everything to do with the presence of oil. Confining the topic to 'war', as if it's just about physically seizing oil fields through conventional warfare, is silly. And it's not even about getting 'the oil', if it's anything it's about who gets the profits from the oil. The locals would likely sell us that oil in any case.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,125
30,076
146
It makes no difference which countries we buy our oil from. If oil supplies are disrupted, the prices go up for everyone. We aren't net exporters of oil so any disruption in supply will only hurt us.

It hurts the consumers, which means it helps the people that control the prices/distribution. Which is why Cheney, et al have long masturbated over killing all the browns to sew perpetual chaos in that region as possible.
 

BonzaiDuck

Lifer
Jun 30, 2004
15,879
1,549
126
The Ghost of Abraham Lincoln appeared to me in a dream.

He said "You can have all the wars about oil some of the time, and you can have some of the wars about oil all of the time. But you can't have none of the wars about oil all of the time."

Most of the wars in modern history included oil as a causative or decisive factor.

World War I was triggered by Turkey's threats to cut off middle-eastern oil to British shipping -- so the British could fuel their homes and their ships.

Looking at Germany's own oil resources today (they hardly have spit), it reflects Germany's situation with oil in the time of Trump's earlier Satanic incarnation. Why did he split up the Panzers on the eastern front? To capture the Baku oil-fields. If he hadn't done that, he might have actually won the Battle of Stalingrad.

Then, the Cold War, the overthrow of Iran's Mossadegh and all that history since -- up to this very moment. Vietnam and oil in the South China Sea. Japan's need for a Southeast Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere, because they didn't have much oil.

It has always been a struggle for resources. We have a Strategic Oil Reserve; oil is a "Strategic Mineral".

There's no sense anymore in splitting hairs about this. Why is Trump against windmill power generation and solar? Because President Satan Beelzebub Anti-Christ won't have a justification for war if we no longer need oil. With no justification for war, he can't mobilize national unity to stay in power and destroy the human race.

It's all very simple. Apocalypse is upon us. We can only be obligated to struggle against Satan's Spawn in the White House, even as saving the world and winning the eternal war of Good versus Evil has a questionable chance of success.

Resist.
Impeach.
Defeat.
Overthrow.
 

brandonbull

Diamond Member
May 3, 2005
6,338
1,215
126
It hurts the consumers, which means it helps the people that control the prices/distribution. Which is why Cheney, et al have long masturbated over killing all the browns to sew perpetual chaos in that region as possible.
So Cheney wasn't a greedy a-hole but a racist, greedy a-hole?
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,986
3,320
126
The Ghost of Abraham Lincoln appeared to me in a dream.

He said "You can have all the wars about oil some of the time, and you can have some of the wars about oil all of the time. But you can't have none of the wars about oil all of the time."

Most of the wars in modern history included oil as a causative or decisive factor.

World War I was triggered by Turkey's threats to cut off middle-eastern oil to British shipping -- so the British could fuel their homes and their ships.

Looking at Germany's own oil resources today (they hardly have spit), it reflects Germany's situation with oil in the time of Trump's earlier Satanic incarnation. Why did he split up the Panzers on the eastern front? To capture the Baku oil-fields. If he hadn't done that, he might have actually won the Battle of Stalingrad.

Then, the Cold War, the overthrow of Iran's Mossadegh and all that history since -- up to this very moment. Vietnam and oil in the South China Sea. Japan's need for a Southeast Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere, because they didn't have much oil.

It has always been a struggle for resources. We have a Strategic Oil Reserve; oil is a "Strategic Mineral".

There's no sense anymore in splitting hairs about this. Why is Trump against windmill power generation and solar? Because President Satan Beelzebub Anti-Christ won't have a justification for war if we no longer need oil. With no justification for war, he can't mobilize national unity to stay in power and destroy the human race.

It's all very simple. Apocalypse is upon us. We can only be obligated to struggle against Satan's Spawn in the White House, even as saving the world and winning the eternal war of Good versus Evil has a questionable chance of success.

Resist.
Impeach.
Defeat.
Overthrow.
Very well said!!! -- th3UWB22U6.jpg
 

BonzaiDuck

Lifer
Jun 30, 2004
15,879
1,549
126
There are two views of this. Either you totally believe the American system works to promote the Good and never exhibits failure farts like a wrong-turn president or quickly corrects them, or you worry that the Congress might not save us from this scourge and we're running out of time.

I could worry about my words getting Secret Service attention. But I'm more worried about whomever saw the long game and the largest number of chess-moves with this Saudi tank-farm drone attack. What are we going to do then? Bow and go along with it?

Sumbitch has got to go! He's got to go! I was hoping we could prevail on Pope Francis to set up a platform in the middle of Lafayette Square and perform a Papally Powerful Exorcism. No luck with that. He's already too busy bothering Brazil's president about the Amazon burning.
 

whm1974

Diamond Member
Jul 24, 2016
9,436
1,567
126
There are two views of this. Either you totally believe the American system works to promote the Good and never exhibits failure farts like a wrong-turn president or quickly corrects them, or you worry that the Congress might not save us from this scourge and we're running out of time.

I could worry about my words getting Secret Service attention. But I'm more worried about whomever saw the long game and the largest number of chess-moves with this Saudi tank-farm drone attack. What are we going to do then? Bow and go along with it?

Sumbitch has got to go! He's got to go! I was hoping we could prevail on Pope Francis to set up a platform in the middle of Lafayette Square and perform a Papally Powerful Exorcism. No luck with that. He's already too busy bothering Brazil's president about the Amazon burning.
I don't think that you will have to worry about the Secret Service as they are most likely keeping Trump from the Football and the Codes...:eek::rolleyes:
 

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
32,080
10,880
136
what worries me more than anything is the "trump quote for every occasion"...this occasion being "obama will start a war in the middle east to get reelected"
 

OccamsToothbrush

Golden Member
Aug 21, 2005
1,389
825
136
Every war ever fought has had at the root of things, power. It's always about power. Who has it, who wants it, who needs more of it, who's trying to protect theirs and how do you keep someone from getting more than you. Ultimately, if you paid attention to history class, that's what they're all about back to the dawn of time. The crux was always about who could own/control the most stuff and what had to be done in that time/place.culture to get control and wield power. Period.

In the hunter/gatherer stage of human development wars were fought over territory. Who had the best hunting grounds had the most people and the best life. If your tribe had more buffalo and better water you could have a bigger tribe and a better life and others would fight to take that away from you.

As the world moved to more sedentary lifestyle and learned to build an economy, war was fought over the farmland, the fishing areas, the trade routes because whoever controlled the food and the trade controlled the money and the people. Wars were fought to gain routes and trading partners, ports, capture farmland, to build power and to protect the power you had from ambitious invaders who wanted that power. Food was the coin of the realm at that time, if you controlled the flow of food you had the power.

Fast forward to an era with more stable food supplies and wars were fought over other resources. Gold, iron, timber were what everyone wanted because they had replaced food as the big ticket items used to secure power. Control the gold mines and buy mercenaries armed with iron weapons and build a big fleet of ships with your timber. So wars were fought to capture the resources other people had to use them to increase your own power or to weaken your enemies power. Resources = money = power. It's been that way since day one.

Nothing has changed. The wars in the middle east are still about power, who has it, who wants it and who do they need to kill to gain more or tighten their hold on what they have. The only thing that has changed is the resource that gives the powerful their power. Wars in the middle east were fought over water supplies because that was power. Then wars were fought over the few fertile land areas because food was power. Then wars were fought over gold, raid the rich cities like Damascus and Jerusalem, sack Rome and Athens, steal gold and slaves, gain power. Now oil = power. It's the same people fighting the same wars for the same reason, they just have bigger armies because oil buys them their power and whoever has the most of it can built the biggest army and be the most powerful.

Christ, what's happening in the middle east now is almost an exact copy of how Europe ripped itself apart for 1000+ years . Every petty king wanted more power, every 3rd tier country looked jealously at their neighbors and thought of taking their fishing village, or farmland or mines to get more for themselves. All the religion, all the grudges and clan warfare, it's all window dressing, ways for the powerful to convince people to die on their behalf so that they don't have to it themselves. There is not a single war in world history that can't be traced to the simple equation of resources = power and whoever controls them wins. Everything that happens in the middle east now is about oil because oil is what buys tanks and jets and missiles so that you can keep your oil.
 

Sunburn74

Diamond Member
Oct 5, 2009
5,037
2,615
136
what worries me more than anything is the "trump quote for every occasion"...this occasion being "obama will start a war in the middle east to get reelected"
I too am concerned that we will get dragged into this as mostly a political ploy to save his failing re-election attempts. People are just stupid enough to fall for it.
 

BonzaiDuck

Lifer
Jun 30, 2004
15,879
1,549
126
I don't think that you will have to worry about the Secret Service as they are most likely keeping Trump from the Football and the Codes...:eek::rolleyes:
Now I'm even more worried. But we knew that from the beginning. You could see who and what he was in the middle of '16. Frankly, I knew who and what he was during the ~2010 birther frenzy. I just couldn't imagine the enormity of it at that time. And who would've thought . . . the Russians, the swing states? Who would've fully imagined even if they imagined at all?

I'll save y'all a sequel post to this one. Just had a thought.

From what Trump has said himself, you could say that any new ME war would be about oil.

But Trump is not a chess-player. He can't adequately strategize, but for gauging media reaction to things he says and firing up his Base. He's not the sharpest knife in the drawer by a long shot.

He wants to "prove" that everything Obama the N**** did was wrong and misguided. So he simply undoes anything and everything. He's no decisionmaker. He's a reactionary on steroids.

So he's meddling in the Middle East, prodding Iran's wounds from sanctions, just because Obama made a multi-lateral deal with the Iranians over nuclear weapons development. Therefore -- this agreement must be obliterated, just like the ACA must be obliterated.

But as for the influence of Big Oil, Tillerson is gone, baby, gone. Trump doesn't listen to anyone. Even if he THINKS whatever he does has a strategic oil motivation, he won't do it right, or it will be another disaster.

What worries me, as I've already said somewhere, is the party, persons, faction, country, world leader who has the furthest vision through all the possible chess moves, perhaps knowing exactly how Trump will react at each stage of the game. Hmmm. Who might that be? I could put in a guess. I could . . put in . . . a guess or two, maybe. . . .

It could still be the Iranians, but if Trump had just left things alone with the nuclear deal, if he hadn't thumped his chest, made sanctions more severe, we might be in a much better position by now, and perhaps the Iranians would be in a better position as well.

We need to get rid of this scourge, and fast. Screw the Base. They're all space-alien filth anyway. They sold us out. Let them stir things up, go to jail, or eat hot lead. Not my fellow Americans, and we'll be Great Again if they would just deport themselves to their home galaxy. SmackaTrumpie.
 
Last edited: