Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on January 21, 2017
President Trump Just Told The CIA The U.S. Should Have Stolen Iraq’s Oil
President Donald Trump told the CIA on Saturday that the so-called Islamic State probably would never have existed if the United States had seized Iraq’s oilfields, a claim that flies in the face of the analysis of most foreign policy experts and international law.
In unprepared remarks introducing his pick to lead the intelligence agency, Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.), Trump told CIA officials that when the United States went into Iraq, we should have “kept the oil.”
“Now I said it for economic reasons,” Trump said. “But if you think about it, Mike, if we kept the oil, you probably wouldn’t have ISIS because that’s where they made their money in the first place, so we should have kept the oil. But, OK, maybe we’ll have another chance.”
It’s a claim that Trump repeatedly used on the campaign trail. But the president’s willingness to tell the CIA ― and, indeed, the international community ― that he thinks the United States should have looted a country’s resources is a new mark in foreign diplomacy and yet another signal that there will be no shift to more responsible rhetoric now that Trump represents the country as its leader.
The strategy of taking Iraq’s oil is plainly in violation of multiple international laws and United Nations agreements.
Politifact looked into this claim from Trump in September and found a number of reasons why taking Iraq’s oil, as Trump advocates, would be illegal.
“What Trump seems to be advocating here would be a fundamental violation of international law embodied in numerous international agreements and in recognized principles of customary international law,” said Anthony Clark Arend, a Georgetown University professor of government and foreign service.
Specifically, Arend cited the Annex to the Hague Convention of 1907 on the Laws and Customs of War, which says that “private property … must be respected (and) cannot be confiscated.” It also says that “pillage is formally forbidden.”
In addition, Arend said, the 1949 Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Times of War provides that “any destruction by the Occupying Power of real or personal property belonging individually or collectively to private persons, or to the State, or to other public authorities, or to social or cooperative organizations, is prohibited, except where such destruction is rendered absolutely necessary by military operations.”
Richard D. Rosen, the director of Texas Tech University’s Center for Military Law & Policy, added that Trump’s idea “appears to constitute aggression of the type condemned by the United Nations by resolution in 1974.” The resolution states that “any military occupation, however temporary, resulting from such invasion or attack, or any annexation by the use of force of the territory of another State or part thereof” qualifies as an “act of aggression.”
Arend said the only way he could envision an idea like Trump’s being acceptable under international law would stem from sanctions imposed by the U.N. Security Council. But that would be moot in this case since the 2003 Iraq War was not undertaken with the approval of the Security Council.
Foreign policy experts also seem to think taking Iraq’s oil would neither be feasible, nor desirable.
Experts cited the long-term damage to the United States’ reputation as an imperial force seizing the natural resources of countries, as well as the practical challenges in actually taking a country’s oil. Devoting such a large number of troops to pillaging oilfields and protecting oil pipelines and transportation routes would require a more permanent presence in Iraq and far more troops than the United States has available.
It’s also difficult to see how looting oil would better U.S. standing in Iraq and not lead to more extremism.
But hey, in Trump’s words, “maybe we’ll have another chance.”
76 Comments on "President Trump Just Told The CIA The U.S. Should Have Stolen Iraq’s Oil"
joe on Sun, 22nd Jan 2017 10:15 am
Looks pretty desperate to me. Im not sure ice shelves cause any sea level rises because they are already in the water, but still, its a sign of the times.
Apneaman on Sun, 22nd Jan 2017 10:23 am
Daily CO2
January 20, 2017: 406.17 ppm
January 20, 2016: 402.75 ppm
December CO2
December 2016: 404.48 ppm
December 2015: 401.85 ppm
November Temperature
Warmest November since 1880: 2015
Coolest November since 1880: 1907
https://www.co2.earth/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxYsi5Y-xOQ
Ghung on Sun, 22nd Jan 2017 10:52 am
peakyeast said; “It is funny how the media can call on all of Trumps lies – but never did the same to Obama nor Bush…”
When all that comes out of the Trump cabal is lies or constructed ‘reality’, it’s hard to report anything else.
I’ve learned the hard way to always trust my gut, and this time, my gut has a very bad feeling about this administration; bad auras around just about every one of them. Indeed, just before Trump took the oath, nature called; at the moment he said “I do”, I pinched off a big greasy.
I can say exactly where I was when Kennedy got shot, when Challenger blew up, when 9-11 happened, and when Trump was sworn in.
peakyeast on Sun, 22nd Jan 2017 11:07 am
@GHung: Maybe its true what you say. I havent had the chance to pay much attention to what Trump says nor Hillary. I simply dont have the time. 🙁 I just notice that Hillary could make a doo-doo in front of MSM and it would be mentioned once and then disappear. When Trump seemed to do the same there was a shit-storm.
Right now in the Danish media they say its a terrible problem for Democracy to not be able to punish the president (Trump) for lying. The lie in mention is about how many that turned up to his “party”…
I find other lies much more concerting when it comes to “Democracy”.
I also feel that the next 4 years are going to be exciting in a bad way. I think they would be with Hillary also!
Cloggie on Sun, 22nd Jan 2017 11:11 am
George Soros bot Madonna proclaiming the revolution:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKhVp–feJk
She and her ilk have problems understanding the outcome of a regular democratic election.
All she will achieve is increasing division and in the end the break-up of the country.
Nobody is going to miss the Material Girl:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qx5IMCJFIMw
peakyeast on Sun, 22nd Jan 2017 11:28 am
@GHung: But considering what people he has chosen it sure dont look like it is going to be boring.
Cloggie on Sun, 22nd Jan 2017 11:29 am
Who does Trump think that he is?! He has the Republican and Democratic elite against him, the media, the elite in Europe, most of the corporations, the Chinese elite, academia.
All Trump has is the American and Russian population. Who does Trump think he is 🙁
Cloggie on Sun, 22nd Jan 2017 11:34 am
The Dutch Trump Geert Wilders yesterday in Koblenz-Germany:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyQc0Wh7E_E
(In German, English subs).
The European Right is highly inspired by what happened in the US and is preparing for the take-over in Europe as well.
Ghung on Sun, 22nd Jan 2017 11:35 am
@ Peaky; Hillary is history and I didn’t support her either. Moving forward, I’m focused on the horrible choice America has made for it’s president whose primary objective has been to stifle and de-legitimize the press while using his own bully pulpit to force his propaganda on the public. Where/when have we seen this in the past? How did it work out for those societies?
America now has a billionaire president who is a bully; is a liar; is entirely self-serving; who has done nothing for his country in the past; has demonstrated a complete inability to tolerate criticism; who ignores long-standing policies of avoiding conflicts of interest; who promised to “drain the swamp”, then filled his cabinet with swamp creatures…. These are incontrovertible facts. That’s what I’m focused on. Again, where/when have we seen this in the past, historically? How did that work out for those societies?
penury on Sun, 22nd Jan 2017 11:48 am
Regardless of what anyone thinks, Trump was elected legally and openly. The anti Trump outcries are merely the next phase of the on=coming problems in the U.S. The political climate in the U.S is much more acrimonious than any time since 1859 and I do not see much effort being expended to close the rifts. Enjoy the revolution.
peakyeast on Sun, 22nd Jan 2017 11:50 am
@GHung: I supported Trump – Because it was my belief that he will provoke a severe reaction of some kind. I thought it would be an external threat he would handle badly. But who knows… Maybe he will invent an external threat to handle the internal one. That is always a “good” move. From your description of him it seems everything and anybody is an “external threat”. 😀
IMO The quicker we “go” the better a chance of a civilized species in the future.
Anonymous on Sun, 22nd Jan 2017 1:15 pm
The ‘don’ is only stating publicly? what the peoples of the world, and Iraq, already know. The US did, in effect, steal Iraq’s oil. The uS is theft based empire after all, like all the larger ones tend to be. Maybe one of these days, after the CIA and friends let don in on the ‘big secret’ that the USlamic state works for the amerikan empire, the don will blurt that out in public too. Of course, given president hairpieces tendency to say the first thing the comes into his head, I fully expect him to drop many more colorful, and revealing tidbits about the real nature of the empire of freedom fries in the years ahead.
Course, right atm, he still thinks ‘ISIS’ is exactly what CNN and faux news tells all the other brain dead amerikans what it is. I can just imagine the CIA circulating a memo NOT to EVER tell don the uS created, funds, supplies, trains and runs the USlamic state’s media relations, lol.
Davy on Sun, 22nd Jan 2017 3:02 pm
“In Speech to the CIA, Trump Offers to Build Them a Room Without Columns: ‘Do You Understand That?”
http://tinyurl.com/zxulr8f
“At the end of Trump’s speech to a room filled with 400 employees of the CIA, Trump said, rather cryptically, that maybe he’d build them a bigger room ‘by someone who knows how to build and we won’t have columns, do you understand that? For those of you who are fucking retards and haven’t the slightest clue what that could mean, I suggest you read up on the fifth column theories — which are essentially the existence of a shadow government.”
DerHundistlos on Sun, 22nd Jan 2017 3:17 pm
‘Trump has the Republican elite against him.”
The Republican elite are being appointed to positions of power and influence. If what you say is true, than where is the evidence? If what you claim is true, than what explains their critical silence? Even the neocons are singing his praises. Trump appointed a neocon’s neocon in John Bolton.
Trump HAD a unique opportunity to transcend party politics as usual by appointing at least a few Dems. President Obama did appoint moderate Republicans to cabinet level positions and ambassadorships.
Cloggie on Sun, 22nd Jan 2017 3:28 pm
Currently watching the German talk show “Anne Will” about how the world should react to president Trump.
5 Jerries (anti-Trump) and 1 passport German with US roots (pro-Trump).
http://www.pi-news.net/2017/01/tv-tipp-anne-will-angst-um-die-weltordnung/
(show will be posted in a couple of hours after the show end).
That the Republican elite was against Trump was self-evident during the campaign for everybody who paid attention.
Now they know that the victory of Trump is something they can’t ignore and the majority of the Republicans now grudgingly are accepting him.
95% of the ca. 3000 counties in the US fell to Trump. Dems, that’s merely big cities only, or the face of the US towards the rest of the world.
Davy on Sun, 22nd Jan 2017 6:07 pm
Der hund, I don’t think Trump appointed Bolton to anything. He talked about it but I don’t think it happened. I hope not. The guy makes me ill.
DerHundistlos on Mon, 23rd Jan 2017 12:31 am
The Trumpeters can’t avoid stepping on their pecker….”The message has been less that of a “president for all Americans” than the us-vs.-them mockery conveyed Saturday morning by Michael Flynn Jr., son of Mr. Trump’s national security adviser, retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn. “What MORE do you want?” he asked of participants in the Women’s March. “Free mani/pedis?”
DerHundistlos on Mon, 23rd Jan 2017 12:46 am
@ Davy
Thanks for some good news.
I support a number of Trump’s positions like on immigration, political correctness BS, flogging the elite responsible for the mess we are in now, and no more wars, to name a few. Further, Billary nauseated me as with so many. So for the first time ever, I did not vote in the presidential race. While I do consider myself a Dem., there have been two notable exceptions when I voted Republican- in 1972 no way I could support McGovern and in 1988 no way I could support Dukakis the clown. The only president I supported with great enthusiasm was Jimmy Carter. We now know Carter never stood a chance thanks to the Arms for Hostages Scandal. Military hardware promised to the Iranians in exchange for their agreement not to release the hostages until after the 1980 election.
I’m simply feeling disappointed that the beast known as BAU is squirming itself back into a position of power.
Cloggie on Mon, 23rd Jan 2017 4:56 am
Joe says Looks pretty desperate to me. Im not sure ice shelves cause any sea level rises because they are already in the water, but still, its a sign of the times.
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses
In reality the precipitation on Antarctica still outweighs the “loss” at the sides in the ocean. Their are even reasons to fear for mechanical destabilization of the planet if too much asymmetric ice deposition occurs, which could cause the entire earth’s crust to move over the mantle. An idea tentatively even supported by Einstein:
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/atlantida_mu/esp_atlantida_9a.htm
This could be a perfect explanation for “ice ages” (as in: they never occurred), it is just that the “last ice age” ended when the north pole was shifted from the Hudson Bay to the current position. During the last “ice age” Holland for instance was partially covered by ice, but not Siberia, which doesn’t make sense, as Siberia is far north than Holland… unless you assume polar shift/earth crust shift (with catastrophic results and global floods).
The biggest mistake all these climate hysterics make is that they assume they have a clear model for climate on this planet, that they have it all figured out.
The core of their “climate model”: climate on this planet is constant under all circumstances, were it not for these darned humans, who f* everything up with their CO2, in line with the prevalent “Original Sin” baloney from our Christian culture.
There is absolutely no reason to assume that climate on this planet is constant. In reality Mother Nature herself is responsible for huge oscillations for every thinkable parameter, like sea level, that over the past hundreds of thousands of years varied over more than 100 meter. Or drought. The famous Indian Harappa civilization was wiped out by decades if not centuries of catastrophic drougt. That was 3600 years ago:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indus_Valley_Civilisation
Suggested contributory causes for the localisation of the IVC include changes in the course of the river, and climate change that is also signaled for the neighboring areas of the Middle East. As of 2016 many scholars believe that drought and a decline in trade with Egypt and Mesopotamia caused the collapse of the Indus Civilization.
That is not to say that CO2 doesn’t influence climate, but it too premature to draw conclusions. And we wanted a renewable energy base anyway, namely for reasons of local energy production, which reduces the potential for geopolitical conflicts.
Cloggie on Mon, 23rd Jan 2017 5:17 am
“The Path of the Pole”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22E1ye8sERE
https://www.amazon.com/Path-Pole-Charles-Hapgood-ebook/dp/B003F7PEFG/ref=sr_1_3
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Hapgood
Davy on Mon, 23rd Jan 2017 6:31 am
Clog, you should read “The Ice Chronicles: The Quest to Understand Global Climate Change”. It is a bit dated being written in 2002 but it chronicles ice history and gives us a glimpse into climate and abrupt climate change. It changed my view of life and climate way back in 2003. Forget the future for a moment. Maybe we have an ice age coming. Maybe we have runaway greenhouse event. These dramatic changes will likely operate over scales beyond our civilization anyway. Our civilization likely has an ending date that is not going to be affected by these great events of the longer term. Yet, if you study climate history it is those abrupt and new climate regimes that are the most threat for humanity that has built its civilization on agriculture and stable settlements.
You are grossly deceived if you take what is occurring with a cavalierness. We are seeing changes that are going to cause mass disruption at a time our foundational energy systems are failing to achieve needed growth. Economies are in systematic overextension. Localized ecological failures with ecosystem decline is ravaging our planet. A subspecies extinction event is in progress. Population overshoot prevents meaningful mitigation of any of these problems. In the best of climate stability times these other issues would put man to the test. If you add abrupt climate change to the equation it is likely this will beyond man’s ability to cope.
Abrupt climate change can happen in as little as a decade per the ice cores. It appears we have been in abrupt change for at least half a decade. The problem with optimist today is they are able to discount and dismiss the extreme arguments of the dangers to civilization. What optimist fail to understand is minimum operating levels and small amounts of change that matter. When you have a high performance system it is small changes that can have dramatic consequences. It is the small amounts of randomness and chaos introduced into a system that precipitate failure. It is the small perturbation of the wrong kind that take civilization down. It is these mild forms of extremes that precipitate into the extremes that destroy especially when in combination. While I agree the extremes of climate change are not our biggest worry now I do not agree we can discount abrupt changes that are not as extreme but that still are enough to cause cascading failures. I do not agree what is happening now is not abrupt change. I am in touch with nature more than many here because of my lifestyle. I see and feel it daily. I read and observe the science daily. This is not something to take lightly and deniers are missing the key points of systematic failure.
Cloggie on Mon, 23rd Jan 2017 7:07 am
You are grossly deceived if you take what is occurring with a cavalierness.
I don’t, that’s why I am in favor of a rapid energy transition.
Maybe we have an ice age coming. Maybe we have runaway greenhouse event.
That’s exactly my point. We still understand far too little about climate (change). The topic has been too politicized.
To the advantage of the climate change worriers: we know that we could survive (a little too good) in the old system. So yes, that is good enough reason to at least attempt to not change climate too much. Because we don’t know if we will thrive in the new system. It could even be that extra CO2 could be very advantageous for planetary greening. But also for catastrophic temperature increase.
My “cavalier” attitude: promote the energy transition away from fossil towards renewable as quickly as possible and for the rest have a “clear conscious” about it.
If it is not enough, may the devil get us. These things are much bigger than any of us. Everything ends sooner or later anyway.
It is the small amounts of randomness and chaos introduced into a system that precipitate failure.
So what can we do?
Build solar panels, wind turbines and pray it is enough.
Davy on Mon, 23rd Jan 2017 7:15 am
Der Hund, I like Trump because he is disturbing the status quo. He is not disturbing it like I would have liked. For me a great leader would be one to turn his back on techno optimism and the traditional societal narrative of progress. He would speak about imminent destructive change that represent a collapse process that our modern civilization cannot survive for long. He would talk about the need for lifeboats and hospices for a die off and a crashing level of affluence. That is not going to happen. The best we can hope for is to get destructive change by proxy. Trump and other forces in the world are breaking with the status quo and it will end the status quo. With the end of status quo will come the end of our civilization. Maybe not quickly but the process will be accelerated. It is my hope this end is not as quick and not as extreme then would be the case by more of the same. More of the same that the establishment was trending on is not the needed change that is called for. Forces were building with the status quo that were a magnification of corruption and the prevention of needed change.
We are not going to get the change we want by any means. I hear Trump haters here whining and wailing about Trump. Yet, I have heard them in the past railing against the status quo. The problem with wanting change on these levels is you are not going to get it how you want. If you want change at these levels it will be different than your ideal. I don’t know if Trump’s change are real per my view of it. It is too early. The guy is too unpredictable. The US deep state and the deep state within the global world order is very deep. Yet, these forces are also exposed to destructive change beyond human intervention that has weakened and made them vulnerable. It is a small change like Trump that can precipitate cascading failures that need to happen to adapt behavior and affect needed change by force of crisis. There will be no needed change in the status quo. Every metric including the green movement of techno optimism is the wrong direction. It “may” only be by embracing a collapse process and less affluence for all that we can navigate the gauntlet of collapse to a less extreme outcome. The price will be paid but can we amortize it or do we pay in full soon?
Besides I like how Trump is kicking ass and taking names with the politically correct liberal elite. He bitch slapped the neocons and conservative establishment dumb. The global leadership that is so misguided and complicit in the gutting of our civilization in wealth transfer has their asses puckering. He is telling multinationals things by three line tweets that are getting them to jump like the dogs they are. He is slapping the status quo in the face and knocking it out of its daze. He is not doing it for the right reasons but it is being done. He is doing things that are against what I stand for. I want more ecological protections and less destructive industrial activity. I want more protection of the poor and oppressed. That shit was not happening before and it is not going to happen now except by destructive change causing crisis that dramatically changes our collective behavior.
This point of view of mine that in crisis there is change is only a gamble. It might not work out. We may end up with a world far worse. Yet, maybe Trump at a minimum will make some kind of peace with Russia. Maybe he will inadvertently allow nationalism to reverse globalism enough to get people to think more locally for survival instead of to Walmart. I don’t know anymore about much because life is one big fucking mess. I am seeing people whine and complain about things then when change does occur they whine and complain about that. I am saying “fuck it” call in the airstrikes. I am saying Trump is like calling in airstrikes on my position that is being overrun. It is my hope that I will survive the airstrikes and being better off than the known of being wiped out by the overrunning enemy. That last scene in “Platoon” is what I am talking about.
Davy on Mon, 23rd Jan 2017 7:20 am
Damn, Clog, I got you to let loose of some optimism. Good boy, lol! Yea, I am all for your techno solution over the alternative of more airports and highways. My point is at least among us grown up here on the board let’s leave the party optimism for the kids. Let them believe in Santa and the Tooth fairy otherwise they might not clean their rooms up.
Sissyfuss on Mon, 23rd Jan 2017 10:03 am
“Small amounts of randomness and chaos introduced into a system.” Ya gotta be talking
about Trump, Davy. He may be the butterfly initiating the hurricane with a gentle flapping of his wings.
pointer on Mon, 23rd Jan 2017 3:00 pm
joe:
“Looks pretty desperate to me. Im not sure ice shelves cause any sea level rises because they are already in the water, but still, its a sign of the times.”
Ice shelves do not cause sea level rise, but the glaciers held back by ice shelves certainly will.