View Single Post
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 04-13-2007, 06:14 PM
Detector's Avatar
Detector Detector is offline
DodgeBoard Commissioner
 

Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,528
Casino Cash: $50167
Disagrees: 0
Disagreed With 1 Time in 1 Post
Agreed With Other Posts: 43
Members Agreed 56 Times in 19 Posts
It's called "protecting our interests." Although at this time America is working toward reducing our dependency on oil, our economy would crash without Iraq. If Iraq were to be taken over by say a Chavez of Iraq we'd be in big trouble. Iraq and Iran, together, could bring America to it's knees and they know it.

Just another reason why "Failure is not an option" is a fact.

Source: Oil Wars: Transforming the American Military into a Global Oil-Protection Service

Oil Wars
Transforming the American Military into a Global Oil-Protection Service

by Michael T. Klare


Quote:
American leaders have responded to this systemic challenge to stability in oil-producing areas in a consistent fashion: by employing military means to guarantee the unhindered flow of petroleum. This approach was first adopted by the Truman and Eisenhower administrations after World War II, when Soviet adventurism in Iran and pan-Arab upheavals in the Middle East seemed to threaten the safety of Persian Gulf oil deliveries. It was given formal expression by President Carter in January 1980, when, in response to the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan and the Islamic revolution in Iran, he announced that the secure flow of Persian Gulf oil was in "the vital interests of the United States of America," and that in protecting this interest we would use "any means necessary, including military force." Carter's principle of using force to protect the flow of oil was later cited by President Bush the elder to justify American intervention in the Persian Gulf War of 1990-91, and it provided the underlying strategic rationale for our recent invasion of Iraq.
__________________
The real treasure is in the hunt...
Reply With Quote