Syria

[Malcolm Tucker]

you took him seriously when he talked about sweden and refugees

[capitalist]

I take your mum, seriously.

[Oswald]

Originally Posted by Malcolm Tucker

you took him seriously when he talked about sweden and refugees

carry on believing trump is a moron with an IQ of 80, just like the media tells you

[Malcolm Tucker]

never watched that one

[Enoch Powell]

France's President Emmanuel Macron says he has "proof" that the Syrian government attacked the town of Douma with chemical weapons last weekend.

He said he would decide "in due course" whether to strike Syria.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-43740626

[capitalist]

Yes, US, UK and France... all countries with oil interests in Syria. CONSPIRACY THEORY.

[Enoch Powell]

IT'S A CONSPIRACY THEORY BECAUSE THERE'S NO PLAUSIBLE ALTERNATIVE

(even though there obviously is a very obvious alternative: simply that our own governments are massive liars.)

[Malcolm Tucker]

I'm not convinced oil is what the US are after, I know you love that angle but kinda feels a bit redundant to assume it's the reason now, not since their recent energy revolution with shale oil.

https://www.npr.org/2012/04/11/15044...y-be-surprised

Since the Arab oil embargoes of the 1960s and 70s, it's been conventional wisdom to talk about American dependence on oil from the Persian Gulf. But the global oil market has changed dramatically since then.

Today, the U.S. actually gets most of its imported oil from Canada and Latin America.

And many Americans might be surprised to learn that the U.S. now imports roughly the same amount of oil from Africa as it does from the Persian Gulf.

...

America is now one of the world's largest oil producers, and close to 40 percent of U.S. oil needs are met at home.

"People have tended to exaggerate how much oil we imported from the Middle East," says John Duffield, an energy expert and professor of political science at Georgia State University.

"In the long term, it may look like a historical anomaly that the U.S. became so involved in the Persian Gulf," he adds.

Now that the U.S. involvement in Iraq has wound down, Crane says, oil seems to be less of an American security concern.

"Do you need military might to preserve access to oil? I don't think there's a lot of evidence to say that's really important," he says.

[capitalist]

Because, as Chomsky would explain better than me, it's not about where you get the oil from personally, it's about control of oil and oil transit - and hence maintaining the dominance of the petrodollar.

[Malcolm Tucker]

Originally Posted by capitalist

Because, as Chomsky would explain better than me, it's not about where you get the oil from personally, it's about control of oil and oil transit - and hence maintaining the dominance of the petrodollar.

That's true, but according to your boyfriend Chomsky that only works for significant producers of oil. Iran is an example where they could theoretically disrupt the global price of oil. Syria though is waaaay down the list, not even in the top 20 countries of global reserves (they actually have slightly less than us ) so I don't buy it.