logoalt Hacker News

refulgentislast Sunday at 3:09 AM6 repliesview on HN

"in the past the government wouldn't have been so honest"

I'm 37, so I was young at the time of Afghanistan/Iraq, about 14. I recall thinking the adults who said it was "for the oil" were dangerously naive: neither had significant oil resources that would alter supply dramatically, gas prices weren't high, the administration had 0 to say on that front, and it wasn't even close to a focus once fighting settled.

This leaves me curious about conclusions drawn from that.


Replies

20after4last Sunday at 5:43 AM

Control of the poppy trade (opium/heroin) and suppression of some of Israel's neighborhood enemies. And a lot of profits for military contractors.

Remember Dick Chaney had huge conflicts of interest. It was also about oil but not only oil.

show 1 reply
indubioprorubiklast Sunday at 11:29 AM

And the us became a oil net exporter, which makes you more interested in a constricted supply. The whole story just never checked out, if you move it around just a little bit.

tdecklast Sunday at 3:19 AM

It was about giving US companies control over the profits from the oil industry and crushing an unaligned country in the region to turn it into a US puppet state, not just to carry barrels of crude oil home.

show 3 replies
BurningFroglast Sunday at 4:17 AM

Those who think the US is evil were not affected by these predictions not coming true.

It's typically not an empirically based conviction.

qcnguylast Sunday at 8:16 AM

Iraq has huge oil reserves. Afghanistan, not, but Iraq yes.

show 2 replies
XorNotlast Sunday at 4:35 AM

I find a lot of that type of thinking is born of conspiracy theory motivations: they want the world to make sense so there has to be "a plan". It leads to people chronically overvaluing money and chronically underestimating ideology.

show 1 reply