The War Was About Oil, After All
By Anthony Gregory • Tuesday April 19, 2011 1:21 PM PDT • 4 Comments
At least in part. In the run-up to the Iraq war, many protesters brandished signs declaring, “No War for Oil!” The response from those pushing for the war was typically that this was a childish and silly admonition. And of course, the precise economic reasoning involved in much of this dissent was indeed faulty: Often leftists assume that the U.S. wages war for the strength of the overall economy, which in fact suffers in war, as opposed to narrow interests, which indeed prosper in war.
Yet it turns out all those young people shouting in the streets were probably more correct than those respectable voices in the mainstream press pushing for war. In the case of the UK, anyway, newly exposed memos demonstrate that oil was one of the major motivations behind the government’s support of the invasion, reports The Independent. In particular:
Over 1,000 documents were obtained under Freedom of Information over five years by the oil campaigner Greg Muttitt. They reveal that at least five meetings were held between civil servants, ministers and BP and Shell in late 2002.
The 20-year contracts signed in the wake of the invasion were the largest in the history of the oil industry. They covered half of Iraq’s reserves – 60 billion barrels of oil, bought up by companies such as BP and CNPC (China National Petroleum Company), whose joint consortium alone stands to make £403m ($658m) profit per year from the Rumaila field in southern Iraq.
As with practically all other modern wars, the motivation given is rarely the same as the main motives of those behind the scenes. Economic interests in particular have long weighed heavily on the West’s foreign adventures, and certainly the United States is no exception. If not for the desire of favored businesses to capture markets, harm competitors, seize resources, and other such economic goals that are often so much easier accomplished when the costs are socialized rather borne internally, it is difficult to imagine the last century of war transpiring nearly the way that it did. There were other motivations behind the Iraq war — some of them simply misguided, but many of them nefarious — and yet the thirst to control oil appears to have been a clear leading factor behind the support for the Iraq war coming from Britain, America’s greatest ally in this conflict.
Tags: American History, Economics, Energy, Fascism, Government subsidies, Imperialism, Iraq, Mercantilism, Propaganda, The State, War 
Guys, have you looked into the phenomenon of petro dollar recycling? Sure, it was about oil but the urgency of the invasion was dictated by Saddam deciding to sell his oil in euros instead of US dollars. Iran and Venezuela began to follow suit. Allowing nations to undermine dollar hegemony would have been devastating to the Empire. Think back to King George’s Currency Act and how recently the Feds have labeled citizens who mint gold and silver coins “economic terrorists.” Rejecting a currency removes the power of the currency’s issuer. The targeting of Gaddafi has much to do with his banking system being outside of the manipulation of international banks.
Musso | Apr 20, 2011 | Reply
The Iraq war is a direct subsidy to the world’s largest and most influential special interest group, the military-industrial complex. The deficit financing obtained by the military and military contractors during the course of the conflict dwarfs any other beneficiary, real or potential. $658 million profit per year is NOTHING. The military spends $20,000 million (or 20 billion) a year in Afghanistan on air conditioning alone!
http://cryptogon.com/?p=16709
And when the military spends that 20,000 million a year on air conditioning, it does so by making very, very lucrative contracts with certain favored contractors. The oil companies like the wars not because there are additional oil supplies in the middle east, but because they get a guaranteed buyer for 1.1 million gallons of refined gasoline PER DAY, probably at inflated prices.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/supplying-the-surge-in-afghanistan-20100220?print=true
Why is this so hard for people to understand? Everything else is noise compared to the size of this incentive.
Ghost of James Caan | Apr 20, 2011 | Reply
This is news? Every War since Korea has been more about lining pockets than the actual philosophy of wright and wrong, good or bad. Kennedy and Johnson escalated what was originally suppose to be a “police action”in Vietnam. Really helped the war machine but they also employed millions of people and look at the technology that was a result of that effort. The Computers, Cell Phones and so much more came from the development of the war time technology. Also if we were drilling in our own backyard the we probably wouldn’t need to be in those countries save for the protection of Israel.
Mark | Apr 21, 2011 | Reply