The Oil factor and the War on terror
Following a viewing of a documentary featured at Sabbah’s blog, I left a comment that has been “gobbled up” by the “system” and I am not certain that it will appear. That comment is now presented as an entry here.
——–
I am afraid to say that I was disappointed (but found it veerry interesting on so many other levels). While the documentary does contain much information that have today acquired credibility, parts of it look and feel like propaganda for the Bush regime and its war on Iraq & “terrorism” [example: "winning the peace" - whatever that means; "the war will not be won completely" - does that sound like they are preparing the public for "reality" or what; the part that Robin pointed out about Iran & Hezbollah], all in all making me fairly uncomfortable. And one cannot but feel some weirdness in seeing Chomsky (appearing from nowhere kind of) as if to provide the documentary with some sort of legitimacy in the eyes of anti-war viewers. Given the controversy surrounding Chomsky, it is all starting to make sense.
Now, here is my verdict: THAT DOCUMENTARY IS A RED HERRING!
HOWEVER, if viewed within the context of the “zionization” of the US, then the same images make ample sense. Fast forward to the Israeli assault on Lebanon and you have this:
The bombing of Lebanon is part of a carefully planned and coordinated military road map. The extension of the war into Syria and Iran has already been contemplated by US and Israeli military planners. This broader military agenda is intimately related to strategic oil and oil pipelines. It is supported by the Western oil giants which control the pipeline corridors. In the context of the war on Lebanon, it seeks Israeli territorial control over the East Mediterranean coastline.
In this context, the BTC pipeline dominated by British Petroleum, has dramatically changed the geopolitics of the Eastern Mediterranean, which is now linked , through an energy corridor, to the Caspian sea basin:
‘[The BTC pipeline] considerably changes the status of the region’s countries and cements a new pro-West alliance. Having taken the pipeline to the Mediterranean, Washington has practically set up a new bloc with Azerbaijan, Georgia, Turkey and Israel,’ (Komerzant, Moscow, 14 July 2006)
Israel is now part of the Anglo-American military axis, which serves the interests of the Western oil giants in the Middle East and Central Asia. [Source]
And one other thing, on the Iraq debacle, just about everybody is saying that the Bush administration “failed” in Iraq. Not according to Youssef Aschkar! In which case, Bush is quite right to accuse the Americans (and us all) of being naïve.
Here again, one sees the zionization of geopolitics whereby the World (or more to the point, societies, to quote Aschkar) are in chaos and the Ziocons win!
Thus I beg to differ that this war is about OIL. Indeed, many times during that documentary, the PNAC guy was repeating that the Iraq war is not about oil. Only we are not well disposed to believe him since he is a Neocon. But he is right. The Iraq war and the war on “terrorism” are about the survival of Israel - just as Jeffrey Blankfort says in his critique of Noam Chomsky (through the control of the flow of oil to the World - or at any rate to Europe)!
September 28, 2006 at 8:10 pm
Filasteen,
I posted a reply to you over on Sabbah’s. where you were not “gobbled up by the system” One thing I didn’t say over there is that I agree with you that Ashkar is correct in his assessment of the “World being in chaos” and the winners are the Zionists and the neocons. It is all a game of chess and I believe the invasion of Iraq was done precisely to create more chaos in the Middle East. THAT is why there was NEVER a plan for the “peace” in the warplan. And that is NOT to say the invasion was ever correct in the first place. I lived in the Middle East for five years, was married to a Muslim, and am AMICABLY divorced (I only offer you this so you might know where I am coming from) From the moment the invasion of Iraq was in it’s planning infancy I KNEW it would be a disaster on every level because there is NO way for such a thing to come to any happy end but a “happy end” was NOT the intention in the first place. Who profits? The US and Israel fueling their business coffers, be it oil or any of the various “rebuilding and support” entities. Who suffers? The peoples of the Middle East due not only to direct targeting by outside forces but also those forces within their own societies fighting eachother once the US decided to invade and occupy. It is a MESS, and the ones who created it are also the ones profiting from it, even if they have not met their desired goals yet. What do I wish to happen? I wish for all the countries affected by this aggression to WIN and eventually work out their own problems which it is THEIR and ONLY THEIR right to do. I wish for my own country to COMPLETELY change their foreign policy concerning Israel and to get the hell out of Iraq which they should have NEVER gone into in the first place and STOP their manipulations of the other Arab countries. My wish of peace to all of the people of the Middle East and may Palestine SOON be free. In solidarity.
PS, and as I stated over there I can see why you would call the film a “red herring”, but I wish to thank you very much for going MUCH further than my specified disclaimer to the portion of the film I objected to AND your additional links which are well taken. Also, thank you for informing me about the contraversy about Chomsky which I was completely unaware of because he is raised by so many as a defender of Palestinian rights and even used most recently by Chavez for other purposes Very interesting the info you provided. Shukran!!!!
September 28, 2006 at 10:52 pm
Hi Robin, I have read your reply at Sabbah’s. Thank you for your input both over there and here. I shall respond to it soon. I have to get back to Boris on another post first. He has important questions that I would like very much to address. I’ll get back to you very soon! Thank you for your patience!
September 29, 2006 at 2:13 am
[Copy of comment posted @ Sabbah's]
Shukran, Robin, for your comments! As with most things, it is all in the interpretation one gives to them, isn’t it? I agree with you that the documentary is an important one. It does cover many aspects from which the current situation we are in evolved (minus the Lebanon crisis, which it precludes). Indeed that is what makes it interesting in my eyes. Someone, somewhere wanted us to make the “oil connection”, excluding all others, which the Lebanon crisis brought to light, namely the Israel connection. In that sense, that documentary is quite something and I thank you for bringing it to my attention. In the end, one can fault the authors of that documentary in the same way that Blankfort faults Chomsky: where is Israel in all of this? And why isn’t it mentioned?
I was also impressed with your argument that BOTH Israel and the US are at fault here. That is an interesting point that Professor Finkelstein has addressed in his article “It’s Not Either/Or - The Israel Lobby”. He writes:
“In the current fractious debate over the role of the Israel Lobby in the formulation and execution of US policies in the Middle East, the ‘either-or’ framework — giving primacy to either the Israel Lobby or to U.S. strategic interests — isn’t, in my opinion, very useful.
Apart from the Israel-Palestine conflict, fundamental U.S. policy in the Middle East hasn’t been affected by the Lobby. For different reasons, both U.S. and Israeli elites have always believed that the Arabs need to be kept subordinate.”
http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=11&ar=205
I tend to agree with him that we need to adopt that frame of reference in order to better grasp what we are up against.
Till then, regards Robin!
October 9, 2006 at 4:32 am
I have to confess, this is all a little bit too mind-blowing at the moment, and I think I would sooner believe in the secret society of little green men than I would the strategic genius of one George W Bush.
October 9, 2006 at 6:30 am
Adrian, Bush is just a puppet albeit a lethal one! There is a theory I have been working on for some time: like Finkelstein I believe that it is not a question of either/or. Only I come to that conclusion from a different angle.
It has to do with preventing the axis of power from shifting towards the Shanghai Cooperation Organization for one. Benefitting is the western industrial-military complex.
Secondly, it has to do with the eventual annexation of all the Occupied Territories by Israel and the transfer of Palestinians (Jordan? elsewhere?). For that Israel needs the Europeans to be on its side at the UN to legitimize the “take-over”. Well, the pipeline that the US is planning that will take oil from the Caspian to Europe is supposed to go through Israel territory. That’s a lot of clout, I would think. It is long term but I don’t think it is preposterous to imagine such a scenario. Benefitting are Israel AND the House of Saud known to be working in tandem with Israel (and obviously the US and possibly France & UK according to some experts) on the “rezoning” of the Middle-East.
October 9, 2006 at 6:33 pm
An interesting conspiracy theory. I had just recently written an article about Eisenhower’s foreshadowing of the possibility of corruption of the American military-industrial complex. Still, this is far beyond anything I might have imagined. I am still loathe to assume that the Israeli’s can get away with the annexation of any other terroritories on a permanent basis, previously occupied or not, as the media has strongly put their faith in the idea that Israel is acting in good faith by withdrawing slowly.
The idea that Israel will send the Palestinians out of their homeland to Jordan is almost too outrageous for me to fathom. It would signal an all-out confrontation with Israel from the Arab states, or at the very least turn Hizbullah and al-Qaeda’s attention squarely on the Zionist state. I might be inclined to believe in aspects of your theory, but this one is a little too hot a potato.
October 9, 2006 at 6:57 pm
Yes, I guess we will just have to wait and see on this one. BTW, I did not put that theory out as a “conspiracy” thing, more as a “war game scenario”.
October 9, 2006 at 8:16 pm
Yes, certainly. The term conspiracy theory certainly comes with negative connotations.