Ulrich said...
"It's very interesting that ISIL has captured towns and regions that have been vital for the US policy in the region -- one is the oil-rich [region], America's training and funding of Kurds, and Israel in fact started training of the Kurds in 2005 and the thinking that oil from Iraq would go to Israel, and it's happening...."'I don't believe for a moment that America has given up the idea of having Iraq and Syria and Iran under its full control,' the independent researcher and writer empathized." ("US raises ISIL specter to stay in Iraq," Press TV)
Bingo. The "too sectarian" trope is a fraud. This is all about Washington stationing combat troops where the oil is. It always gets back to oil, doesn't it? U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel summed it up perfectly in July, 2007, when he said:
"People say we're not fighting for oil. Of course we are. They talk about America's national interest. What the hell do you think they're talking about? We're not there for figs." (Washington's blog)
So how does Obama's bombing of ISIS jihadis outside of Ebril (N Iraq) fit with his earlier comments that he wouldn't help defend Iraq unless there was movement on the political front? (In other words, until Maliki was removed from office.)
He sure changed his tune fast, didn't he? But, why?
Oil, that's why. Let's put it this way: There are 10 reasons why Obama bombed ISIS positions outside of Ebril. They are:
1--Exxon Mobil2--Chevron
3--Aspect Energy
4--Marathon Oil Corporation
5--Hillwood International Energy
6--Hunt Oil
7--Prime Oil
8--Murphy Oil
9--Hess Corporation
10--HKN Energy
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
2
1
1
