Did the US really steal Iraq's Oil?

[PhantomWolf]

That's what he's saying? No less than 9/11? That's ridiculous! Did those Chileans and other Latin types jump at the chance to pin this 'terrorism' on an unrelated country - and use the pretense as an excuse to invade that country, steal their oil and murder 100s of thousands of innocent civilians?

I see this claim tossed around a lot, but what actual evidence is there that the US stole Iraq's oil?

Looking at the figures, the US imports less Iraqi oil now than it did prior to the 2003 invasion, nearly 50% less. Only in 2004 and 2008 did it even come close to the levels it was importing from 1999-2001.

Not only that but I have seen no evidence that the US doesn't pay for the Iraqi Oil it does import.

So did they really steal Iraqi Oil? What evidence of the claim is there or is it just a nice slogan for the anti-US crowd with no real basis in reality?

 

[Mister Earl]

As one who was deployed over there, I can at least confirm that in my when and where over there, nowhere did I see anyone stuffing gobs of oil in backpacks and trouser pockets.

 

[Molinaro]

I doubt if I could google it up today but I remember when the Iraq government gave out the 1st round of oil drilling rights, after the war. No US companies won a contract. If I remember correctly the 2 countries who got the largest contracts were China and Turkey. The US had no say in the matter.

 

[WildCat]

is it just a nice slogan for the anti-US crowd with no real basis in reality?

Yes.

/thread

 

[Arcade22]

Nope.

 

[Garrette]

Not only is there no evidence of it, the idea is ludicrous on its face. The US could have had the oil cheaply--far more cheaply than the cost of even a well run occupation--simply by being friends with Saddam in the 90s or any time before 2003.

 

[Puppycow]

It's just a nice slogan for the anti-US crowd with no real basis in reality.

 

[WildCat]

Too bad monty is no longer here to explain how we're controlling all the oil in the Middle East from bases in Afghanistan.

 

[geni]

The general suggestion is that those in charge of the US planned to aquire Iraq's oil fairly cheaply (in part to offset the cost of the invasion). This has the advantage of making some actual sense compared to the reasons given for invading.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

STRATEGIC ENERGY POLICY CHALLENGES FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
Commissioned by Dick Cheney in April 2001

Iraq has become a key “swing” producer, posing a difficult situation for the U.S. government...

The United States should conduct an immediate policy review towards Iraq, including military, energy, economic and political/diplomatic assessments...

A new plan of action should be developed to use diplomatic and other means...

Iraqi reserves represent a major asset that can quickly add capacity to world oil markets and inject a more competitive tenor to oil trade.

Guess what the 'other means' turned out to be?

But it wasn't stealing. Oh no. We paid market rates!

Bully: Hey dude, that's a nice jacket you got there. Sell it to me for a dollar!

Victim: Er, I don't think so - it's worth more to me than tha...

Bully: <BOOT>

Victim: <doubles over in pain, drops jacket>

Bully: Thanks for the jacket dude, here's your dollar (might help to pay your medical bills, hah hah!).

...and all the oil companies lived happily ever after.

 

[casebro]

But Roger,Iraq was already selling it's oil on the world market, and did all through the embargo. It doesn't matter whther they sell to use or the Chinese, it's a fungible commodity- the more ANYBODY sells, the better for us.

But, to answer a conspiracy with a conspiracy, Iraq may have been a strategic move, to get us a toe hold in the middle east, in the center of the Arab contingent. Since Iraq I, no country has attacked another country ANYWHERE. And even Al Quaida has not pulled another 9-11. I'd say, whatever the pretext, going into Iraq was A Good Thing.

 

[kedo1981]

Is that why gas is so cheap these day?

 

[Mike!]

How do we know they didn't, has anybody actually seen the oil lately?

 

[squealpiggy]

I'm of the opinion that Iraq was an attempt to encourage a western style democracy in the Middle East that wasn't Jewish. If it was successful then the prosperity and happiness of the new Iraq would act as a beacon to other dictatorial regimes and erode the anti-American feelings that foster extremism. Iraq was an ideal place to start: It was already fairly secular, its military was demoralised and weakened and there was already casus belli to invade based on Saddam's game of hokey-cokey with the UN resolutions.

Unfortunately this failed for numerous reasons, initially because of a lack of international support resulting in the appearance of unilateral American aggression compounded by the utterly boneheaded attempt to retroactively justify the invasion on the pretext of finding "WMDs" instead of concentrating on stopping the insurgency.

Iraq became a beacon alright.

On a more positive front the campaign in Afghanistan and later Pakistan seems to have fulfilled its primary objective of destroying Al-Qaeda's ability to organise.

In answer to the OP I would suggest that no, "stealing" oil was not on the agenda. It would be considerably less expensive both politically and financially to start drilling in Alaska before invading Middle Eastern countries who already sell oil to the West on extremely inequitable terms.

 

[WildCat]

STRATEGIC ENERGY POLICY CHALLENGES FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
Commissioned by Dick Cheney in April 2001
Guess what the 'other means' turned out to be?

But it wasn't stealing. Oh no. We paid market rates!

Bully: Hey dude, that's a nice jacket you got there. Sell it to me for a dollar!

Victim: Er, I don't think so - it's worth more to me than tha...

Bully: <BOOT>

Victim: <doubles over in pain, drops jacket>

Bully: Thanks for the jacket dude, here's your dollar (might help to pay your medical bills, hah hah!).

...and all the oil companies lived happily ever after.

Where does it say anything about stealing the oil, or even selling it at a discount? You just made that up, yes?

 

[sarge]

I wish we had invaded Iraq for the purpose of stealing their oil. It would make much more sense than our actual reason. We stumbled into Iraq, we stumbled through Iraq, and we stumbled out of Iraq - to no advantage and for no real purpose that made much sense.

 

[BenBurch]

There was some very public talk by the Bush mouthpieces in the media that we would not have to worry about the cost of the very short war we were about to start because reparations in oil would pay for it.

 

[WildCat]

There was some very public talk by the Bush mouthpieces in the media that we would not have to worry about the cost of the very short war we were about to start because reparations in oil would pay for it.

IIRC that was floated by Dem Congresscritters, not by the Bush admin. And it never went anywhere.

eta: I'm thinking about Kerry's famous "I voted for it before I voted against it" fiasco. What he voted for was diverting Iraqi oil revenue to pay for the $87 billion, when that failed he voted against the $87 billion funded entirely by the USA.

 

[IDB87]

There was some very public talk by the Bush mouthpieces in the media that we would not have to worry about the cost of the very short war we were about to start because reparations in oil would pay for it.

So, have the reparations in oil paid for the war?

 

[A'isha]

IIRC that was floated by Dem Congresscritters, not by the Bush admin. And it never went anywhere.

Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz are "Dem Congresscritters"?