So What If "There's Oil in Them Hills"?
Considering yesterday's breaking news about stockpiles of yellowcake being removed from Iraq and ending up in Canada, this is as good a time as any to finish my series in response to our Useful Idiot, Sean S.. For previous installments, go here and Middle Eastern oil is the dominant source for oil hungry nations. In other words, the Middle East has the world over a barrel (pardon the pun). Not just the USA, but pretty much the entire world. Read just the first three paragraphs of this document and you'll get the drift. Consider also that Iraq has vast pools of oil reserves under her soil and is within easy reach of further vast pools in Iran, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. Moreover, there are "Big Oil" interests whose head offices, CEOs and major shareholders are in many countries other than the United States. So not only is continued access to that oil vital to US interests, but it is also vital to the interests of a vast swath of humanity.
2) Consider next that during Saddam Hussein's blitzkreig strike into Kuwait in 1991 (the conflict that became known as Gulf War I) he also made it into the north east corner of Saudi Arabia and could have kept going if he hadn't been stopped by the Americans. Saudi Arabia, as you probably know, is home to the largest supply of as yet untapped oil into the world, or at least what was known to be at that time. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what was on Saddam Hussein's agenda.
3) Consider also that Saddam Hussein went to war with his eastern neighbour, Iran, in 1980. The war with Iran, locus of another large pool of oil reserves, lasted eight years and if it hadn't been for the American's crafty game of giving each side just enough support to ensure neither side would win, it is quite possible Iraq would have won. Iraq had the fourth largest army in the world at that time. Only the US, the Soviet Union and China had bigger armed forces. Saddam Hussein was a megalomaniac who wanted to control the Middle East. He imagined himself a modern day Hammurabi or Nebuchadnezzar. You were still wet behind the ears at the time, so I don't expect you to know that Saddam Hussein, as with many Third World tyrants during the Cold War, was a master at playing the Soviets off against the West. If he had defeated Iran and had, as a consequence, been in control of the Strait of Hormuz, what would have stopped him from quickly shuffling that deck?
4) Contemplate the modern day implications of Saddam Hussein being in control of all of that oil by considering this piece of war game modeling done in the 1970s, as told by blogger Soldier's Dad (link in my sidebar), a man who was in a position at that time, to know whereof he speaks:
5) Finally, consider what we all know and acknowledge about his record as a brutal tyrant. The list of his crimes against his own people is way too long to go into in any depth here, but if you don't know, read just this one for a general flavour of life under the Butcher of Baghdad. His atrocities are well documented and almost every retard leftist customarily acknowledges that record, even as they cavalierly wave it aside. His people were suffering and dying under a heavy handed sanctions regime, which he, of course, with his usual deft prowess, was sidestepping with the help of his buds at the United Nations. He also had two sons, one of whom was a psychotic, drug addicted monster, waiting to take over and extend the brutality well into the next generation.
We also know, although the left is more inclined to be in denial on this one, that he had a long record of supplying support to Middle Eastern terrorists, support in the form of training, financing and providing a safe haven inside of Iraq. The man was beefing up his ties with terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda. He had the technical know-how and the raw materials to supply them with WMD and the connections to see it accomplished. There would have been a far greater swath of humanity than just Europeans plunged into the dark ages had he been able to achieve his goals, and it wouldn't have been solely because he could have denied access by the energy hungry world to the crude. It would also have been because of what he could arrange to have done via his terrorist proxies.
Honestly, Sean, should the farce of the sanctions regime not have been lifted and, if so, do you really think it would have been a good idea to restore him to his previous status, leaving him in a position where it was possible he could be in control of all of the oil in the Middle East? Can you imagine what he or his sons could have done with all that wealth? I can tell you, sweetheart, it would not just rival the stunt we've come to know as 9/11. It would monumentally dwarf it.
Are you telling me that the left really prefers that this dynasty be left intact, just because you want to believe and promote the idea the American's only interest was getting its hands on Iraq's oil? Hell. All the Americans had to do was act like leftards, ignore the threats, make like Saddam Hussein was president of the Rotary Club, cozy up to him and buy his oil! It would have been far cheaper and a lot less costly in American lives. But don't for a minute believe it would have stopped the Husseins from carrying on with their mega-maniacal ambitions. Six years after Neville Chamberlain proclaimed "peace in our times", as he waved his document of appeasement before the British press, 48 million people in more than 30 countries were dead. Would that have been okay with you, just as long as you get to bash George Bush?
2) Consider next that during Saddam Hussein's blitzkreig strike into Kuwait in 1991 (the conflict that became known as Gulf War I) he also made it into the north east corner of Saudi Arabia and could have kept going if he hadn't been stopped by the Americans. Saudi Arabia, as you probably know, is home to the largest supply of as yet untapped oil into the world, or at least what was known to be at that time. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what was on Saddam Hussein's agenda.
3) Consider also that Saddam Hussein went to war with his eastern neighbour, Iran, in 1980. The war with Iran, locus of another large pool of oil reserves, lasted eight years and if it hadn't been for the American's crafty game of giving each side just enough support to ensure neither side would win, it is quite possible Iraq would have won. Iraq had the fourth largest army in the world at that time. Only the US, the Soviet Union and China had bigger armed forces. Saddam Hussein was a megalomaniac who wanted to control the Middle East. He imagined himself a modern day Hammurabi or Nebuchadnezzar. You were still wet behind the ears at the time, so I don't expect you to know that Saddam Hussein, as with many Third World tyrants during the Cold War, was a master at playing the Soviets off against the West. If he had defeated Iran and had, as a consequence, been in control of the Strait of Hormuz, what would have stopped him from quickly shuffling that deck?
4) Contemplate the modern day implications of Saddam Hussein being in control of all of that oil by considering this piece of war game modeling done in the 1970s, as told by blogger Soldier's Dad (link in my sidebar), a man who was in a position at that time, to know whereof he speaks:
"The modeling in the 1970's as to what would happen if Middle East oil stopped flowing was 30,000 people a month would freeze to death in the first winter in Europe. Unemployment in Europe would reach 50% withing 90 days and unemployment in the US would reach 50% in 180 days. Every energy dependent country in the world would face massive civil unrest. Then the real war would start.We already know that Saddam Hussein spent mega oil bucks on his own ego boosting self-aggrandizement, don't we? All those palaces serve as testimony to that.
Neither China nor India were particularly large energy consumers then. They are now."
5) Finally, consider what we all know and acknowledge about his record as a brutal tyrant. The list of his crimes against his own people is way too long to go into in any depth here, but if you don't know, read just this one for a general flavour of life under the Butcher of Baghdad. His atrocities are well documented and almost every retard leftist customarily acknowledges that record, even as they cavalierly wave it aside. His people were suffering and dying under a heavy handed sanctions regime, which he, of course, with his usual deft prowess, was sidestepping with the help of his buds at the United Nations. He also had two sons, one of whom was a psychotic, drug addicted monster, waiting to take over and extend the brutality well into the next generation.
We also know, although the left is more inclined to be in denial on this one, that he had a long record of supplying support to Middle Eastern terrorists, support in the form of training, financing and providing a safe haven inside of Iraq. The man was beefing up his ties with terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda. He had the technical know-how and the raw materials to supply them with WMD and the connections to see it accomplished. There would have been a far greater swath of humanity than just Europeans plunged into the dark ages had he been able to achieve his goals, and it wouldn't have been solely because he could have denied access by the energy hungry world to the crude. It would also have been because of what he could arrange to have done via his terrorist proxies.
Honestly, Sean, should the farce of the sanctions regime not have been lifted and, if so, do you really think it would have been a good idea to restore him to his previous status, leaving him in a position where it was possible he could be in control of all of the oil in the Middle East? Can you imagine what he or his sons could have done with all that wealth? I can tell you, sweetheart, it would not just rival the stunt we've come to know as 9/11. It would monumentally dwarf it.
Are you telling me that the left really prefers that this dynasty be left intact, just because you want to believe and promote the idea the American's only interest was getting its hands on Iraq's oil? Hell. All the Americans had to do was act like leftards, ignore the threats, make like Saddam Hussein was president of the Rotary Club, cozy up to him and buy his oil! It would have been far cheaper and a lot less costly in American lives. But don't for a minute believe it would have stopped the Husseins from carrying on with their mega-maniacal ambitions. Six years after Neville Chamberlain proclaimed "peace in our times", as he waved his document of appeasement before the British press, 48 million people in more than 30 countries were dead. Would that have been okay with you, just as long as you get to bash George Bush?
posted by Louise at 6:52 am
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home