The Left’s ‘Blood For Oil’ Fraud

Pages: 1 2

To date, the pipeline has barely started and there have been no contracts let on the Afghan portion of the project. Michael Moore continues to push this conspiracy theory despite the fact that for all intents and purposes, the pipeline is a mirage.

But if we went to war for oil, what happened along the way that caused all that crude to slip through the fingers of the evil oil companies?

Something called “Iraqi sovereignty” intervened to thwart American imperialism. But this explanation isn’t any good because the left has been saying since the first post-invasion Iraqi government was voted into office that Baghdad is a “puppet” of the US. One would think puppets would do the bidding of their puppet masters.

Indeed, the most recent government auction of oil leases didn’t feature a single American company, says the New York Times. Is it because there aren’t enough American troops to scare the Iraqis into doing our bidding?

Richard Fernandez of Belmont Club answers that question:

The US firms tried going north to Kurdistan where they were welcome. But that made them anathema in the south. American oil companies are now being punished by Baghdad for daring to develop oil resources in the Kurdish regions.

Puppets “punishing” their puppet masters? Something is terribly wrong with the left’s interpretation of history. When they decide what it is, I’m sure they’ll let us know.

Iraq has proved that it is a sovereign nation capable of making its own policies and decisions. Of course, this singular fact doesn’t jibe with the liberal narrative that Iraq is a tool of American policy and grabbing Iraqi oil wealth was the primary reason we invaded.

American oil companies will no doubt share in Iraq’s oil wealth eventually. Our majors are among the most technologically advanced oil companies in the world and have proven themselves in every kind of terrain, on land and sea. But Iraq has internationalized the leasing process as the New York Times reports:

Exxon Mobil has by far the largest stake of any American company in Iraq, but most of the major players are European and Asian, like Lukoil and Gazprom from Russia, and Chinese companies like China National Petroleum and China National Offshore Oil Corporation.

None of those nations sent troops to Iraq, and were, in fact, major critics of America’s invasion and occupation. It throws the entire “No Blood for Oil” meme into a cocked hat when you realize that the winners in the Iraqi oil derby – after the Iraqi government and people — are from countries much admired by the left, and who had absolutely nothing to do with Iraq’s liberation or its continuing transition to a democratic state.

Funny we don’t hear any protests from the left against Russian imperialism or capitalist exploitation by China.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Pages: 1 2

  • Russ P.

    And even if American oil companies were buying oil from Iraq, that wouldn't prove anything unless they were getting some kind of "sweetheart" deal. If they are paying market price like everyone else, then what did they or we gain from our supposed "war for oil"?

  • kong.ming

    2004 Hype and Blame => 2006 Hope and Change => 2008 Pomp and Fame => 2010 More Hype and Blame.

    8 years ago the American media and the big money protest degenerates exploited each other with slogans like "No Blood for Oil" and "Regime Change DC Not Baghdad" and "Bush is a terrorist. Resist! Resist!".

    Today they try to paint a picture of a united America in 2001 but it was even more partisan than it is today, with Noam Chomsky proselytizing American Nazism in Central America and leftists saying 9/11 was a much deserved bloody nose for the big American bully. Somehow these sick comments were made not only when all the facts about 9/11 were still being rolled out, like toddlers on the planes which crashed into the WTC, people jumping from a hundred floors up to avoid being burnt to death, stewardess bounded in wire; but also speculation about the next al-Qaeda attack like weaponizing small pox, infecting a suicide agent, and infection networks concerning multiple trans-national flights.

    Today the anti-war lobby still has free reign, with no honest debate concerning the real problems we faced in 2003, like hundreds of thousands of soldiers stationed in Kuwait to allow for weapon inspections in Iraq, or the clear UN bribery, or the emerging chemical-nuclear showdown between Saddam with his institutional rapists and chemical missiles versus the Ayatollah with his nukes and delusional psychopathic terrorist army.

    The 2006 Democrat majority came to power due to a steady stream of "look at the kids George Bush killed today" on the nightly news which coincidentally disappeared after Obama's election. Mortgage fraud increased, the credit market crashed, Obama was reelected with an hallow irrational platform based on pessimism of conservative foreign and economical policy and now we are facing the potential collapse of the Western economy due solely to big government spending and insolvency.

    Please end this nightmare now and elect sane leadership who can actually produce anything with $3 trillion worth of resources a year.

    • WilliamJamesWard

      The Obama criminal enterprise will not go quietly but on the other hand it will be nice to make
      a lot of noise in getting rid of them, investigations aftert he election must take place and the
      tax payers made whole. The crimes against the Nation are a plague from the left and the lefts
      inherent evil…………………………William

      • scum


        • WilliamJamesWard

          Thank You!!!…………………………..William

        • pagegl

          I bet you didn't use that label for people who were calling for investigations of the Bush administration.

          • WilliamJamesWard

            The Bush Administration was the most hounded in History and if there was proof of
            wrong doing with all of the Democratic railings it surely failed to surface because laws
            were not broken by Bush. The point I make is Trillions of Dollars were sent out by Obama
            and I maintain it is all a scam to enrich himself and his fellow travelers. This will all
            become moot as within a short amount of time the government will not have the funds
            to prosecute a traffic ticket. If you do wrong you should be outed for it, being in
            government is no excuse, we shall all see that all and everything will be erased along
            with our personal wealth and the future of our children, I think you get the picture,
            I have maintained that the beast that is destroying America has two giant sets of claws,
            one Democrat and the other Republican, ripping the tax payer to death……………………William

  • davarino

    The left are being exposed

  • Expat

    The reason the United State Government will going to war with Iran.
    The number one currency in the world is totally dependent on the black gold in the ground in the Middle East and Africa.

    The US Dollar is backed by our military protection of the Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the entire Middle East. It is called the nuclear deterrent, atomic bombs parked on the aircraft carrier – the USA Fifth Fleet in the Bahrain Port and in Incirlick, Turkey You see, our Fort Knox is the Middle East; it contains black gold, Texas tea. The industrial nations will be in Iraq and the Middle East until the oil is depleted, especially the USA, the industrial nations can never leave Iraq and the ME. All due the fact they are not an exporter of oil. Oil, the cheapest, less expensive commodity that supplies the energy to drive their industrial might.

    • Indioviejo

      Our defense budget is our gift to the Socialist European Union and to the totalitarian Muslims. We loose in this deal, so we should leave the ME to their own crao-hole and buy Oil in the open market. Oops, we already do this, so why do we bother with ungratefull untermensch.

  • Expat

    The only reason the US Military invaded Iraq, pure & simple. The giant Ghwar oilfield in Saudi Arabia is running out of oil or was until they hired Nabors International (a take-over prospect by Halliburton) to work over their existing oil wells. Last week while on my flight from Manila to Bahrain, I sat beside a one of the 50 Filipino rig Oil field roughnecks, he informed me that they have 30 each 1,600 hp work over rigs performing horizontal drilling on top of the Ghawar oilfield, the place we constructed $1.3 billion water and gas injection system in 1991-1993. Some of the worked over wells are now producing 5,000 psi, in 1993 the injection pressures were 3,000 psi into the field and out at 2,000 psi. Today with Hydraulic fracturing the natural pressure is 5,000 psi. This means the Saudi’s now have a lot more oil to flood the market that could improve the world economies, if only the problem in Greece would just go away, the US stock markets could revive a bull market.

    • Indioviejo

      Your delusions are boring.

      • scum

        And yet you refuse to debunk.

  • expat

    Why will the United States Military invade Iran? Since the US Treasury Department enforced on International Banks the embargo of all purchases of Iranian oil in USD. Now the South East Asian countries i.e. India, China, Japan and South Korea are purchasing Iranian oil in Japanese Yen and a basket of other currencies, but not the USD. Thus, this is the beginning of the great decline of the USD, the fall from grace, the beginning of other oil exporting nations to not using solely the USD for oil purchases. As a direct result of the United States Government being a $200 Trillion debtor nation, by the purchases of oil not being solely in USD. This means that the USD is no longer in great demand and a great decline in the abundance of USD in circulation through-out the world. The United States Government can no longer just print more money to fund their debt, for without the demand there is no supply.

    • Indioviejo

      But not before the EURO.

  • expat

    Thus, in order for the United States Government to support its national debt, national interest, the United States is forced to go to war with Iran to correct this imbalance for the demand for the USD, for the United States Government is totally dependent on the USD as the world currency and the USD must remain the world currency for all nations to purchase oil in order for the United States Government to support its national debt of $200 Trillion. Therefore, the industrial nations need Bahrain as a logistics base to support their control of the oil and to invade Iran. The fear is… if Bahrain goes so does Saudi Arabia. The four major US Oil Companies i.e. ExxonMobil, ChevronTexaco distribute the Saudi oil in the international network of convenience stores. This is the way the United States corporations and government are in bed with the enemy. The industrial world strategic planning department, the pentagon have been planning the invasion of Iran from the day the shah fell from power, and the Bahrain people have upset the donkey cart, thrown a monkey wrench into the planners critical path management chart.

    • Indioviejo

      Your resons for bombing the hell out of Iran is complicated, as a simple man y would destroy Iran jsut because they took over my Embassy. I believe in revenge forever.

  • scum

    It's all too true: the Left thought there was some diabolical plan because they made the mistake of conferring some degree of rationality on the Right. If the Moriarty-like Blood for Oil theory were true, at least the Right could be accused of having a plan, however diabolical. Instead, the truth was far more mundane, and pointless: Bush didn't orchestrate 9/11, there was no Blood for Oil, there was only Bush/Cheney 'getting back' at Saddam (although it was the US that invaded Iraq in the first Gulf War, with catastrophic results), Bush/Cheney got played by the second-rate politician/felon Chalabi, and they touted WMD's when everyone knew better. We invaded Iraq (again) because they were weak, not because Saddam was Moriarty.

    • mcwrath

      '' Although it was the US that invaded Iraq in the first gulf war'' You make it sound like the US just took a whim and decided that it was a good idea to just go an invade Iraq. And not that the kuwaiti government did'nt plead with America and the world to reverse the Iraqi invasion. Typical left disinformation… In your chomsky like anti- American spreel it is a wonder you don't start blaming America for invading europe in 1944.
      No doubt you blame America for the Vietnam war but you should take note of what patricia nixon said about hanoi jane…'' if jane fonda wants to stop the vietnam war she should just get her friends in hanoi to stop invading the south.''
      Why do'nt you and your liberal lefty friends mouth off about american involvement/ interference in korea.

      • scum

        No disinformation in the least. I'm well aware that Saddam, who was nicknamed "Our Man In Baghdad by American conservatives who supported him (and knowingly sold him crop dusters as he gassed the Kurds), invaded Kuwait. And?? Last time I checked, Kuwait isn't inside our borders. And just because a country 'begs' the US to invade, we do? I didn't say squat about the Vietnam War, but I can. "South Vietnam" was a fiction, a puppet govt set up by the US after refusing democratic elections in the 1950s. Ngo Dinh Diem was a repressive Catholic who trained at American seminaries and repressed his own Buddhist population. It's no wonder his own administration had to take him out (after getting the green light from their bosses, the CIA). The Vietnam War was an unmitigated disaster, and those are the facts, Jack.

        • Chris Nichols

          Where is your proof of this "Our man in Baghdad" nonsense you liar. Those chemicals he used were supplied by the French and Russians. And Ngo Dinh Diem didn't kill three million South Vietnamese like the North Vietnamese communists did after the war; a war by the way that was halted by a cease fire the North signed and then violated once we left. Those are the facts Jack.

  • Mik

    If GWB serving the purposes of his buddies in the oil business when gasoline was $2.50 a gallon, what can be assumed about BHO when gas is $4.00 a gallon? Why no liberal outrage at the enormous profit that the oil giants are making?

  • Schlomotion

    What a bunch of doublespeak! The war was not about oil because Exxon did not get enough profits out of it, and the chant "no blood for Oil" is false, but we should shed blood for oil? The oil company called your blog, Rick. They are going to buy you some kneepads.

    As for me, I'm going to buy the Jewish Lobby a godd*mned treadmill.

    Bariatrically I have told off 950 lbs of Jewish Lobbyist this morning. I am about to read my third person now.


      Happy Eternal Nakba Schmucky!

    • UCSPanther

      Is that all you got?


    • Ghostwriter

      Does everything have to revolve around Jews with you,Schlobrain?

  • Alex Kovnat

    You want a REAL example of blood for oil? When you drive a little car instead of a big one, you're increasing the risk of death or serious injury if you're unfortunate enough to get into an accident. THAT'S blood for oil, in that you're increasing road deaths to reduce importation of same.

    • Asher

      I wouldn't drive one of those little puddle jumpers, (death traps) if someone bought me one, or paid me to do so. People want a comfortable, roomy, well made, solid car that puts more protection between the road, the oncoming accident and their family and children. Its not the cars, its the regulation and dependence on foreign oil driving up the cost of gas to blame….the left wants us to sacrifice safety and comfort for green energy…the Volt did not sell, and people to not want electric cars, its a hassle! This country has done very well on gasoline powered vehicles…we just need the right people in office to promote Independence and cheap fuel!

      • Jim_C

        Fuel's not going to get cheaper. And car companies offer alternatives for those who don't want to pay $60 at the pump every week. They're businesses–if the alternatives don't sell they'll stop offering them.

        I also think it's cute that people imagine we'd just use the oil we produce domestically but for the leftist meanies standing in the way.

        I do think we all should drive big gas guzzlers, though, in order to force the advancements we'll inevitably need in infrastucture, fuel and transportation. I'm all for the big cars!


    The "compassionate" release of the convicted "dying" bomber of Pan Am 103, in exchange for Libyan oil contracts for BP (British Petroleum) is an example of "Blood for Oil".

  • UCSPanther

    If there was blood-for-oil, it was the oil-for-food program, an "aid" project that helped the Hussein regime to evade the sanctions, and became a major cesspool of corruption.

    Of course, it was quickly buried.

  • Anamah

    The left is hanging by their own failure… slowly choking it self with less tales to seduce new generations of innocent and stupid kids.

  • Flowerknife_us

    Tax revenues from processed Oil products flood Goverment coffers. The Demoncrats know this quite well and have never done anything to actually reduce the price. They love to bitch about the price and lay blame on others but never actually do anything other than restricting its axcess and processing..

  • Asher

    Heck we don't need to take anyone elses oil, we have a huge abundance of Oil and Shale oil, even more than Saudi Arabia and Iraq. We need our own energy drilled and refined, and let these Muslim nations sell to someone else and then they won't be funded to committ terrorism against us! The West has been stupid to continue being dependent on foreign Oil. Self sufficient is the way to go, Cheap energy makes a prosperous Nation!

    • Jim_C

      Hmm…I don't think the oil companies share your view.

  • Glennd1

    Which proves we are the biggest morons in the industrialized world. We can't even get business after we invade a country and prop up a new govt – wtf? We did all this so China and Russia can benefit? I say we send Iraq a bill – call it an even trillion USD. And if they don't pay, we take the oilfields required and pump that money direct in to our treasury. When the bill is paid, we leave. And we give the rest of the world the finger. We look so foolish to the rest of the world, and most Americans don't know it.

    • koran kid

      Why stop there? Marry the women and carry the men off into the bondage of shovel ready projects, and do the complete restructure job ground up, at their expense using the oil, so they can return to a better place some day. And at a nice profit. Cleaning out someone else's dirty toilets should be highly paid work! But the biggest joke is the foreign aid, the peace corps, and all the other silly efforts to help make the elites feel better for their complicity in the reign of fear in these backward hell-holes. It was the French who were behind the food for oil scam that evaded sanctions, wasn't it? Who told Saddam the Yanks would never invade, since they the French would block them at international levels? At least Bush lost his patience, and knew that as the leading world power, if you are insulted by some pipsqueak dictator, you should bash him up bad. Reason enough to invade Iraq, but then why not impose sanctions on the cowardly French, rather than just barge them out the way. The cowardly geek philosopher with airs and graces needs to have his tuck rationed, or his books confiscated, the school bully needs a good thumping. Is it so difficult? No wonder the school is falling apart.

      • Glennd1

        Lol, typical response from someone who thinks they know a thing or two. Taking remuneration/reparations in war is very common – maybe if you know something about history you'd understand that. And taking oil is not the same as 'marrying the women and carrying the men off' – which you suggested not me. Any agreement on the cessation of hostilities should have included reparations direct from Iraqi state owned assets.

    • Jim_C

      Glennd1, we ARE the biggest morons in the world for allowing our country to do this. I'm pretty sure the history books are going to puzzle away at this one. What's the gain? Was it worth the cost? What was the mission even supposed to be?

      Poorly conceived, deceitfully sold, bunglingly executed.*

      If it was a war to reform the Middle East, it was a pipedream almost too naive to even be called a pipedream.

      If it was a war for oil, where's our oil?

      Who profited? (now this one is a bit of a stickler).

      *There have been some positives: Excellent training ground for armed forces, our intelligence is better than it was in 2001; the invasion confers some strategic advantages.

      • Glennd1

        You act as though you don't know why we invaded Afghanistan or Iraq. Afghanistan was to decapitate Al Qaeda and to throw the Taliban out of power. Iraq was to prevent Saddam from disseminating WMD to terrorists. In Afghanistan, we accomplished that mission in less than 4 months. In Iraq, we were wrong about Saddam. You should watch the Frontline episode on the FBI interrogator who spent 4 months with Saddam. He finally admitted that he created the illusion of WMD for Iran's consumption, he wasn't trying to effect us. And of course the biggest winner from our conquest of Iraq? Iran. Lol. We're not nefarious, our "military industrial complex" isn't railing for war – no, we are just stupid.

  • pabloschwartz

    Michael Moore, of course, is a vainglorious lout. But even a broken clock sometimes gets it right: in Moore's case, the House of Saud *is* the problem. They are global sponsors of the Wahhabi cult, cousin-in-law to both al-Qaeda and the Taliban. Unfortunately, Saudi investment in American media is such that Moore will continue to be pillorized for all the wrong reasons ..

  • fonts for tattoos

    This web site definitely has all of the information I wanted concerning this subject and didn’t know who to ask.

  • Jim_C

    Ah, a "fraud;" I see.

    Now, I agree–"no blood for oil" was a simplistic slogan. Therefore, nine years later, attack the slogan? Gee, that's helpful.

    So we've been in Iraq for almost ten years because…?