Oil, Geopolitics, and the Coming War with Iran

Jo Canadian

Jo Canadian

Council Member
Mar 15, 2005
2,488
1
38
PEI...for now
As the United States gears up for an attack on Iran, one thing is certain: the Bush administration will never mention oil as a reason for going to war. As in the case of Iraq, weapons of mass destruction (WMD) will be cited as the principal justification for an American assault. "We will not tolerate the construction of a nuclear weapon [by Iran]," is the way President Bush put it in a much-quoted 2003 statement. But just as the failure to discover illicit weapons in Iraq undermined the administration's use of WMD as the paramount reason for its invasion, so its claim that an attack on Iran would be justified because of its alleged nuclear potential should invite widespread skepticism. More important, any serious assessment of Iran's strategic importance to the United States should focus on its role in the global energy equation....
Click to expand...

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0411-21.htm
 
Vanni Fucci

Vanni Fucci

Senate Member
Dec 26, 2004
5,239
17
38
8th Circle, 7th Bolgia
the-brights.net
Anyone read the Grand Chessgame by Zbigniew Brzezinski?

http://www.wanttoknow.info/brzezinskigrandchessboard

I haven't myself, but I've read enough exerpts to know that what he wrote in 1997 is a Howto manual for gaining control of all oil reserves in the Middle East...

From www.onepalistine.org

In the aftermath of the US defeat in Vietnam, the United States found itself unwelcome in many places around the globe. Strategic thinkers such as Carter's US national security advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, thought of a new strategy to regain lost national glory. Brzezinski called his strategy the "Grand Chess Game," arguing that the US should concentrate its efforts, strategic planning, and wars in the Middle East - putting all the eggs in this one basket would pay. This new outlook was a fundamental departure from Eisenhower's "Filling the Void" approach, where the region was considered a wall that could be used to encircle the USSR. The "Grand Chess Game" considered the Middle East a quagmire for anyone attempting global competition with US.

Brzezinski's chess board divided the world into four major blocs. US domination over the economic and political sovereignty of these blocs required that all of their conflicts and interests meet and filter through the Middle East. The Middle East was vulnerable because it lacked deeply rooted resistance, sovereignty, technological capabilities, and political stability. In large part, this weakness was due to six hundred years of Turkish occupation in the name of Islam, which left the Arab world lagging behind the industrial world, and politically and socially disoriented.

According to Brzezinski, the four blocs were:

1) The Eastern European bloc. Before the fall of the USSR, US military intervention was limited by Soviet military and nuclear capability.

2) The Western European bloc, a very important ally of the US with important cultural and economic ties. Western Europe was already being played as the major theater for the Cold War. The Europeans were exhausted from World Wars I and II, which left them uneasy about facing war conditions again.

3) The Far Eastern bloc, whose nations are known as the "Asian Tigers." The US adventured here twice in the Korean and the Vietnam wars. The outcome of these two brutal attacks made clear the US interest in global domination. In this region, China played the dual role of opening to the US and displaying power and sovereignty that required less US military policing of the region.

4) Finally, the Middle East, so named by Imperial Britain because it was half way to the Far East from Britain. In the 40's and 50's, under the Marshall Plan, the Arab world was starved to famine levels as its oil was siphoned off. The revenue from this oil was then used to rebuild and stabilize Europe. The robbing of the Middle East made it possible for Europe to salvage its colonies in Africa and Asia as well.

For Brzezinski, conditions in the Middle East were ideal for destabilization and for manufacturing wars, as needed. The conditions were perfect for bringing down the USSR. The bloc was exceptional for its susceptibility to being made weak by division among peoples, to be broken into small states, to be periodically attacked by the US proxy state of Israel, and, most important, for its ability to finance Uncle Sam's imperial ambitions, thanks to its huge oil resources. The US simply followed the European formula.

US wars on terrorism and communism were motivated not by stopping these supposed menaces, but in order to secure supreme power under their pretext. These wars were both governed by unsurpassed racism and cruelty against Arab and Muslim people. The US public, the people of Western Europe, and Arab compradors are all responsible for the scourge generated by this US policy. They have made it possible through the payment of taxes, through silence, through inexcusable ignorance, through unthinking greed and privilege, through complicity, and through an unbelievable betrayal of basic humanity over a period of more than 60 years. From the ravages there is now emerging a fierce will to fight back. It is visible today in the Iraqi resistance, which is beginning the long task of bringing the US to justice for its monumental crimes.
Click to expand...

Yikes... :confused1:
 
N

navrose

New Member
Apr 13, 2005
1
0
1
India
RE: Oil, Geopolitics, and

Do not forget that many countries were liberated by the US. People of many countries in Europe and Asia are now breathing air of liberty and freedom, otherwise they would have been suffering under cruel ( communist ) regimes.

US secret intention for the Iraq war may be the oil, but Qwait was liberated and there is US presence but the Qwait is not complainig that it's oil is being robbed or others countries are not denied oil supply.

I think whatever the real reasons for invading Iraq, the people of Iraq are liberated from a cruel dectator and now they can breath freedom and build better future for their children.

We should not support the terrorists in the name of resistance or any other gloryfing causes.Their target should be military. They killed innocent children, men and women probably more than the civilian people killed in the war. This unscrouplous voilance can only push Iraqies into more hardships, they definetly want peace, prosperity and democracy not revenge and destruction.
We should protest and condemn the illegal and bad acts
commited by the US, but at the same time we should strongly condemn the killing of the innocent people for whatever reasons.

Freedom is Beautiful!
 
mrmom2

mrmom2

Senate Member
Mar 8, 2005
5,380
6
38
Kamloops BC
I think whatever the real reasons for invading Iraq, the people of Iraq are liberated from a cruel dectator and now they can breath freedom and build better future for their children.
Click to expand...
And they can also breath depleted urainium and have all kinds of birth defects and disease courtsey of the US :roll:
 
Machjo

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
Let's see, now.

The US attacks Iran (The PRC is now Iran's single biggest customer) so China steps in to defend Iran. India is now trying to patch things up with China, so I suppose Inia would remain on the sidelines (seeing that China still has agreements with Pakistan which irritate the Indians somewhat, but then again, the US is pretty cozy with Pakistan too). Meanwhile, S korea is ticked off at the US backing Japan for its Security council bid, and is therefore warming up to China too, at least somewhat.

Has Bush really got a brain? Sinse I can't believe any man can be that stupid, I'm starting to believe in the other possibility. Bush is the most brilliant spy the world has ever come across! He's a mole who's now taken control of the most powerful nation in the world, so as to destroy it from the top! The question is, who hired him?

Was it Al-Qaeda? he's done marvels for their recruitment, not to mention the near breakdown of NATO and the build up of anti-American paranoia in Iran and N Korea!

Was it the Iranians? He gave them a new potential ally in Iraq?

Was it the Chinese? He's really ticked off the S Koreans by supporting Japan's bid for the Security Council, not to mention warming India to China a little by having the US be so friendly to Pakistan while ignoring India, and pinning the US forces down in Iraq should there be any conflict with Taiwan!

Was it Canada or the EU? He gave the WTO a reason to allow those countries to tarrif US goods as retaliation for its WTO rule violations?

Was it someone in the UN? Bush has brought about a situation where I think many Americans just want out of the UN, and many in the UN would love to boot the US out of it!

Hmmm. Naw, I'm still convinced he's a genuine nationalist republican, but just much thicker!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom