So, although I've said time and time again that I don't think the government would (until the resources become EXTREMELY SCARCE) attack a foreign government simply to seize their oil, I guess I now have to admin I'm incorrect. According to
This BBC Article:
The United States considered using force to seize oilfields in the Middle East during an oil embargo by Arab states in 1973, according to British government documents just made public.
The papers, released under the 30-year-rule, show that the British government took the threat so seriously that it drew up a detailed assessment of what the Americans might do.
It was thought that US airborne troops would seize the oil installations in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait and might even ask the British to do the same in Abu Dhabi.
The episode shows how the security of oil supplies is always at the forefront of governments' planning.
I guess it's not entirely surprising - our culture's obsession with bright, shiny objects and "black gold" has always been a problem, and I've always said that the sooner we switch to renewable resources and loosen Big Oil's grip on the world, the better. We have to avoid a situation like this, especially now that it's come to light that some of our leaders think that it's worth killing to keep our already-over-indulgent way of life in tact.
It really frightens me to realize this... I don't like war at all, but at least most of the wars we've been part of have been for good causes... most of them. There are exceptions, but war for oil? The chanting of these words is one of the things that kept alot of anti-war groups looking like fringe lunatics during the beginning of the Iraq conflict. No one believes that we would attack a country for its resources alone, but apparently, that's not the case.The Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) assessment said that the seizure of the oilfields was "the possibility uppermost in American thinking when they refer to the use of force; it has been reflected, we believe, in their contingency planning."
This phrase indicates some knowledge of American plans.
Other possibilities, such as the replacement of Arab rulers by "more amenable" leaders or a show of force by "gunboat diplomacy", are rejected as unlikely.
The JIC believed that military action would take the form of an airborne operation, possibly using bases in Greece, Turkey, Cyprus, Iran (then a US ally) or Israel.
"We estimate that the force required for the initial operation would be of the order of two brigades, one for the Saudi operation, one for Kuwait and possibly a third for Abu Dhabi," it said.
Two divisions would then be flown in but the report gives a warning that the occupation might have to last 10 years. It would also alienate the Arab world and provoke a confrontation with the Soviet Union, though the JIC did not think that Moscow would use military force itself.
Pretty scary, if you ask me.
Read more of my thoughts at Dirty Greek dot Org