Are we stealing oil from Iraq?

Great Debates
1

I posted this video in the Pit. (I am not posting a link because the thread has turned out to be pretty worthless…meh)

But in the video Dr. Dahlia Wasfi delivers a scathing oratory demanding the immediate and complete withdrawal of American forces.

I agree with most of what she says. However at one point she asserts that this is a front for stealing oil.

Really?

This war is a clusterf*ck of monstrous proportions, the origens of which are either pure evil or utter incompetence. But is there any evidence we have pilferred oil?

So, does the “war for oil” mantra hold water today?

2

Who is we. The international oil companies want the oil. Not to sell it ibut t to control it. You can not control the price if you can not control the supply. Strangely Iraq, Iran and Venezuela were the wild cards in oil pricing. They are being taken care of one at a time.

3

The current stealing makes the oil for food scandal of the past look like a tricycle compared to a rocket car:

I have the feeling that dealing effectively with that corruption also required even more boots on the ground and other people enforcing anti corruption efforts from the beginning, because I see that as an impossibility I do think this is yet another item that shows how incompetent the administration was with the planning.

I do think that many companies or groups that are operating in Iraq are benefiting from this chaos, and it benefits them that this drags on. Making it one of the big reasons why the US is remaining in Iraq. (didn’t Halliburton had/has contracts to repair or set many of those meters?)

4

Smedley Butler on Interventionism That is what our military does. Works for nthe capitalists.

5

All propaganda and speculation aside, it depends on who you think the oil belongs to in the first place. Iraq’s government (arguably) doesn’t represent the Iraqi people, so if your first reaction was to say “the Iraqi people” then you can make a good argument that buying oil from the Iraqi government is the same as stealing it. Also, you can make a good argument that American corporations are coercing Iraq to sell oil under unfavorable conditions, and that the trade is unfair. That could also be a type of theft.

6

I looked at this and asked “If we aren’t, why not?” Look at the money that we are dumping into that country, building infrastructure and providing security while at the same time our roads and schools are crumbling, we have homeless people, our energy prices are skyrocketing - and we are not getting any of the oil? I wonder how long it would be before the Iraq government would be able to stand on its own if they were not getting all the services for nothing?

7

[QUOTE=ASAKMOTSD]
I looked at this and asked “If we aren’t, why not?” Look at the money that we are dumping into that country, building infrastructure and providing security while at the same time our roads and schools are crumbling, we have homeless people, our energy prices are skyrocketing - and we are not getting any of the oil? I wonder how long it would be before the Iraq government would be able to stand on its own if they were not getting all the services for nothing?
[/QUOTE]
We aren’t dumping money into Iraq; we are just using it as an excuse to funnel money into companies like Haliburton and Blackwater while we squat on the ruins. We aren’t rebuilding them or providing security.

And, we are the reason the place is a disaster in the first place. We wrecked the place, killed thousands, destroyed the government, the military, the economy, the legal system; the society in general. WE owe THEM, not the other way around, not that it’s a debt we are willing or able to pay.

8

Stealing oil? Is any oil even being shipped out of Iraq any more?!

9

[QUOTE=ASAKMOTSD]
I looked at this and asked “If we aren’t, why not?” Look at the money that we are dumping into that country, building infrastructure and providing security while at the same time our roads and schools are crumbling, we have homeless people, our energy prices are skyrocketing - and we are not getting any of the oil? I wonder how long it would be before the Iraq government would be able to stand on its own if they were not getting all the services for nothing?
[/QUOTE]

You don’t walk into someone’s house, wreck their furniture, and they say you deserve part of their salary to pay for the damage you caused.

10

[QUOTE=RickJay]
You don’t walk into someone’s house, wreck their furniture, and they say you deserve part of their salary to pay for the damage you caused.
[/QUOTE]
Don’t forget killing and otherwise abusing family members.

11

[QUOTE=RickJay]
You don’t walk into someone’s house, wreck their furniture, and they say you deserve part of their salary to pay for the damage you caused.
[/QUOTE]

Well…the police do this all the time. Afaik they don’t pay for any damages they do to a house or furniture when they are performing a raid…if anyone pays for it I’m guessing mostly it’s the home owner (or their insurance). At least that seems to be the way it works from my own, um, experience.

Who’s ‘we’? If you mean the US government then I’d say the answer is no…I’ve seen no evidence that ‘we’ are stealing oil from Iraq. I would have to say that various Iraqi groups are probably stealing oil from Iraq…and if I were to guess, I’d say that inevitably some US companies (as well as other foreign companies) are in on it to one degree or another. Corruption is rampant from what I’ve seen.

Certainly…if you broaden the ‘mantra’ to ‘war to secure US strategic goals and resources in the ME, RE:Oil’ then it’s the same today as it was then. Mind…I don’t think the goal was worth the war myself. And I seriously doubt many people today think the cost of the war was worth the pay off we seem to be, um, getting. But if you take away all the rhetoric and bullshit and boil things down, as long as the US needs oil the ME is going to be strategically vital to us, and therefore it’s in our best interests to ensure the flow of oil is uninterrupted. Of course, it would have been in our best interests not to have an idiot like GW at the helm, trumping up and then botching an invasion, and generally screwing the poor pooch every way conceivable…but we only have ourselves to blame for electing the idiot not just once but twice.

-XT

12

[QUOTE=xtisme]
Well…the police do this all the time.
[/QUOTE]

Well, they’re the police, and have the legal authority to do that sort of thing, assuming they have a warrant. The United States doesn’t.

But even then, that’s not what ASAKMOTSD is suggesting. Let me see if I can construct an equivalent scenario: what he’s suggesting is equivalent to the police raiding your house*, killing your son**, and wrecking your stuff***, only to discover that the drugs**** they claimed were in there weren’t there because, as it turns out, their informant***** was a liar who was believed only because the chief of police****** hated your guts and wanted an excuse to raid your house. And THEN, on top of all that, garnishing your wages to pay themselves for the trouble of having wrecked your house.

    • Invading Iraq.
      ** - Killing Christ only knows how many Iraqis.
      *** - Wrecking the country.
      **** - WMDs.
      ***** - Ahmed Chalabi, every neocon’s favourite spy/murderer.
      ****** - George Bush, Paul Wolfowitz, Dick Cheney, Richard Perle, etc. etc.
13

[QUOTE=RickJay]
Well, they’re the police, and have the legal authority to do that sort of thing, assuming they have a warrant. The United States doesn’t.
[/QUOTE]

It’s debatable if the US had or had not the ‘legal authority’ to invade Iraq. I would say that we did…by our own legal system. After all, the President had authorization from Congress, so all the boxes were checked and forms filled out in triplicate and all that. One could say that the US had a ‘warrant’…from a certain perspective. This doesn’t even get into the can of worms that was the various UN sanctions and proclamations/resolutions of course (probably because this would be shaky ground IMHO).

[QUOTE=RickJay]
But even then, that’s not what ASAKMOTSD is suggesting. Let me see if I can construct an equivalent scenario: what he’s suggesting is equivalent to the police raiding your house*, killing your son**, and wrecking your stuff***, only to discover that the drugs**** they claimed were in there weren’t there because, as it turns out, their informant***** was a liar who was believed only because the chief of police****** hated your guts and wanted an excuse to raid your house. And THEN, on top of all that, garnishing your wages to pay themselves for the trouble of having wrecked your house.
[/QUOTE]

Well…except for the police chief hating of guts part I’ve seen the police raid a house (with a warrant), and bust up said house and hurt some of the people in the house…and all because an informant gave them faulty information (at least, when they did the raid there were no drugs on the premises).

Anyway, I don’t want to hijack the thread. Even though I made the analogy I don’t think you really can compare the actions of a nation state to those of a law enforcement agency operating internally within a nation. And all of that is beside the point of if the US is or is not stealing oil from Iraq…which I’ve seen no indication that this is so thus far.

-XT

14

[QUOTE=gonzomax]
Who is we. The international oil companies want the oil. Not to sell it ibut t to control it. You can not control the price if you can not control the supply. Strangely Iraq, Iran and Venezuela were the wild cards in oil pricing. They are being taken care of one at a time.
[/QUOTE]

How many threads have you been a part of where it has been demonstrated that the oil companies are not controlling the price of oil to any great extent? Are you being deliberately obtuse or is the fact that they don’t not fit your particular slanted world view?

15

[QUOTE=xtisme]
It’s debatable if the US had or had not the ‘legal authority’ to invade Iraq. I would say that we did…by our own legal system.
[/QUOTE]

This is logically equivalent to me saying that I have the legal authority to rob your house and murder you, according to my personal legal system. The Constitutionality of declaring war on Iraq is a purely American matter (and I agree, contrary to what some nutballs and Bush haters have said, that the war is Constitutionally valid; the Congressional authorization for force was equivalent to a declaration of war in accordance with the Constitution.) and doesn’t have anything to do with whether or not Iraq owes the U.S. anything for the pleasure of having been attacked.

And I could get my wife’s permission to rob your house.

16

[QUOTE=RickJay]
And I could get my wife’s permission to rob your house.
[/QUOTE]

Whose laws were actually broken (other than Iraq’s, I suppose)?

17

[QUOTE=RickJay]
This is logically equivalent to me saying that I have the legal authority to rob your house and murder you, according to my personal legal system.
[/QUOTE]

Only if you think that somehow nation states are equivalent to individuals…which is a pretty poor comparison. But ok…let’s look at your analogy seriously.

WHY don’t you have the legal right to rob my house and murder me? Well, because you live in a nation state that can enforce laws. If you DID rob my house and murder me then the police (an agency/instrument of the state) would most likely hunt you down like a dog and toss you in jail. Right?

First off, what gives the state the right to arrest, try and sentence you? I don’t have that equivalent right. I can’t arrest and try you for robbing someones house and murdering them. The state however DOES have that right…as we all acknowledge just by living here.

So really…your analogy is poor. Sovereign states DO have rights and abilities that we as individuals don’t have.

[QUOTE=RickJay]
The Constitutionality of declaring war on Iraq is a purely American matter (and I agree, contrary to what some nutballs and Bush haters have said, that the war is Constitutionally valid; the Congressional authorization for force was equivalent to a declaration of war in accordance with the Constitution.) and doesn’t have anything to do with whether or not Iraq owes the U.S. anything for the pleasure of having been attacked.
[/QUOTE]

Well, I’m not sure where you got this part from “and doesn’t have anything to do with whether or not Iraq owes the U.S. anything for the pleasure of having been attacked”…did I say that Iraq owes the US anything for invading them? I didn’t even say that it was right for us to do so…nor that from Iraq’s perspective it didn’t suck big time. I merely said that it was legal for the US to do what it did…because the correct process laid out in the Constitution was followed.

[QUOTE=RickJay]
And I could get my wife’s permission to rob your house.
[/QUOTE]

Does your wife have the authority to authorize that…or anything? You have no legal authority to do any such actions…while the Congress DOES have the legal authority to authorize military action outside of the US. And the President DOES have the legal authority to prosecute war outside of the US. So, your analogy doesn’t work as there is no comparison between you and a sovereign nation state like the US.

Just so we are clear here, I’m not saying the US SHOULD have invaded Iraq…FWIW, I think it was a major fuckup and a stupid thing to do. But that wasn’t the issue you quoted of me that I was responding to.

And whether we should have gone into Iraq or not is besides the OP…as is the legality of our invasion. I’ve still not seen any indications that the US (the government) is ‘stealing oil from Iraq’.

-XT