Chico State Instructor Says Iraq War Was All About Oil… oh, really?

by Jack

Chico State instructor John Crosby was just interviewed by Heather Hacking for the ER regarding the new book Yellow Birds, one soldiers story about the Iraq war. Crosby has co convinced himself the Iraq war was about oil, plain and simple. This is a popular view among liberal academics, so popular that it’s been reinforced ad naseum by like minded thinkers ever since the first protest slogan, “No blood for oil” was invented.

no-blood-for-oil-protest-450x335There’s only one problem. It’s not true!  Among the myriad of reasons for the Iraq war, oil didn’t even score in the top 5, yet the left touts it as the one and only reason! Well, once again the facts don’t square up with the left’s rhetoric.  (No doubt oil was a consideration at some point, but it was in no way as simple as the left would have you believe.) 

If oil was the key objective for war in Iraq, where is it? Most of our imported oil doesn’t even come from the Middle East. Canada and Latin America provide about 35% of our imported oil. Another 10.3 percent comes from African sources. The entire Persian Gulf, led by Saudi Arabia at provides us with about 13% of our imported oil. Currently Iraq ship’s us less than 4.5% of our total imports. Heck, before we had a falling out with Saddam we were getting far more oil from Iraq.

Sometimes I think liberal left has a selective learning problem. But, the disturbing part of the ER story is not how wrong Crosby’s conclusions are, but that he’s teaching our kids leftist revisionist history as the gospel…despite the facts.


This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to Chico State Instructor Says Iraq War Was All About Oil… oh, really?

  1. J Soden says:

    Mr. Crosby should certainly give credit to those who wrote those talking points. Aren’t you supposed to do that when you borrow someone else’s work?

    Believe they occurred directly from a Taxocrat anti-war propagandist.

  2. Pie Guevara says:

    John Crosby is just the sort of horse’s ass the UC system entrusts to mold the minds of our youth … and Heather Hacking is just the sort of ER horse’s ass to give him voice.

  3. Anon says:

    I keep hoping for better from our teachers, but they’ve all been indoctrinated when they were students too. It’s an unhealthy situation.

    • Post Scripts says:

      Pie: lol Great link…for those who won’t use links here’s the tweet, “Obama speaking about foreign policy is turning into the rhetorical equivalent of Dukakis riding around in the tank.” The best jokes always have an element of truth.

  4. Paulindurham says:

    Shaw had it half right. Iraq invasion was about keeping Oil traded in the US Dollar not Euros. The media reported his plan in 2000, along with other countries desire to do the same. Read Time magazines article.,9171,998512,00.html.
    We have been bulling the world since WW II with our nuclear weapons and military. Nothings changed. Your hatred of the left has blinded you to the reality!

    • Post Scripts says:

      Paul, take a look at my article on American Isolationism, then tell me I am blind. -Jack

      • Post Scripts says:

        Just a quick thought, but what other currency is more popular for trading than the us dollar? There’s a reason…it’s called stability. Even the Euro can’t measure up…very little chance oil would be traded in another currency, so that’s hardly a reason to go to war. It may be one of those indirect payoffs of engaging in war, but it was not the motivation. The motivation was far more compelling and more complex, along with a long number of second, third, fourh, fifth, sixth,… chances for Saddam’s regime to correct and comply with a treaty they signed and kept violating to test US resolved and make Saddam look tough. Amazingly enough treaty violations apparently do have consequences or at least they did back in Bush’s day.

  5. Pete says:

    So why did we go to war in Iraq? Was it worth it?

  6. Tina says:

    Paulindurham: “We have been bulling the world since WW II with our nuclear weapons and military.”

    Bullying? Interesting choice of words.

    Do you value freedom? I hope you figure it out before you give it away.

    Who and what were we defending in the Korean and Vietnam wars and why was it necessary? Do you have any idea at all?

    We didn’t lose those wars; we lost the peace and stability…we lost to the enemies of freedom because of the bungling of leftist radicals who side with the oppressive regimes that were the aggressors in those wars. (Hint: they think people like Castro and Chavez, Mao and Lenin were the white hats in the world)

    Who and what were we defending in the Iraq war? If you don’t know you had better learn.

    Obama has done such a terrible job of stabilizing in the ME and defending freedom that he has awakened the oppressive governments and enemies of peace and freedom. The aggressors are growing in confidence. They now see America as a wounded and broken nation led by an incompetent fool. These enemies are not restrained by any sense of morality that you would recognize. They are regimes that have used WMD on their own people, that throw their citizens into prisons without trial, that oppress free speech, that control energy and food production and distribution…barbarian regimes by the standards of free western nations. Totalitarian thinkers who revere and seek power over others. Human life means nothing to these types…the human condition even less.

    You have lived in a free country so you think it is the natural state…it is not. America has been a bulwark for freedom and freedom seeking people around the world. We have never been an imperial nation…never done anything but attempt to shore up the bulwark by helping people to be free around the world.

    America is about liberation, not bullying.

    The purpose behind keeping oil traded in American dollars is defending your freedom. A collapsed American economy would make America very weak and ripe for invasions and oppression by aggressive enemies.

  7. Tina says:

    Pete I hope it is always a good thing to fight for freedom in the world as long as there are those who wish to oppress and deny people freedom. When we are strong we can accomplish a lot just by being an example. We weaken that position when we give respect to oppressive regimes. A weak America will mean more war and worse conditions around the world.

    The men and women who fought the Iraq war for us fought for freedom and it makes me sick that there good work is now being undermined and destroyed simply because leftist radicals refuse to see the value in standing for freedom against aggressive/oppressive enemies. Even worse they blindly align with them against America.

  8. Pete says:

    Then by your logic you would be all for reengagement of the war in North Korea, starting a war with China and invading many of the countries in Africa. Come on Tina, that’s not the reason we went into Iraq. I’m disappointed in your answer and know that you can do better.

  9. Tina says:

    Pete the answer isn’t always invasion. Reagan brought down the USSR without firing a shot by being a strong communicator and showing the world he had a spine. American strength is incredibly important because we do stand as an example of freedom and individual rights. As we are witnessing currently under a very weak president the world becomes a more dangerous and less free place when America is weak.

    Iraq had been thumbing its nose at the UN and the world, leading UN inspectors around by the nose. It was in breach of the cease fire agreement with the US following Kuwait. It was a nation the entire world believed had WMD. Saddam had used them before against his own people. It was known that Saddam Hussein had been a supporter al Qaeda terrorists. Following the 911 attack on our nation, Iraq became the logical entry point for war to defeat terrorism. It was strategically smart to free Iraq and eliminate a dangerous dictator in the heart of the Middle East. Our media did a lot to undermine and discredit the war. Bush managed to win against Saddam and the strength of the terrorist organizations despite criticism. He handed Obama a fairly stable situation with al Qaeda greatly weakened.

    Al Qaeda has gained in strength under Obama’s weakness and spread across the world.

    China and Russia are forming an alliance with Iran under the weakness of the current administration. We have not only given them reason to grow in strength but to become once again the aggressors they once were.

    Obama should have defended Georgia and placed those defense missiles per the agreement made by GWB. The situation with Russia and the world would be different had he shown he had a spine.

    He should have taken steps to create a strong recovery after the financial melt down. His weakness created a never ending non-recovery which has weakened our position with China and the world.

    I’m not sure what you think would be a better way to approach the world but surely you can’t think the last five years have done much good for anyone.

    How about you do better, Pete? Defend the weenie stance. 😉

  10. Libby says:

    I think that (unless he burns them, and I believe there is too much conceit, arrogance and ego for that) in forty-fifty years we will have access to Cheney’s papers, and they will prove that the Iraq war was motivated entirely by “energy policy”, as he would put it.

  11. Tina says:

    Too bad you will likely be dead by then. Cheney worked in the oil industry. He was likely well informed of the potential for fracking in America and the possibility for energy independence if the idiot greens with their fraudulent schemes and political ambitions could just be exposed and sent packing.

    The highly qualified and brilliant Dick Cheney was vilified without basis by the radical Saul Alinsky left. That will be what is “exposed” when his papers are exposed to the light.

  12. Dewey says:

    here’s only one problem. It’s not true! Among the myriad of reasons for the Iraq war, oil didn’t even score in the top 5, yet the left touts it as the one and only reason! Well, once again the facts don’t square up with the left’s rhetoric. end quote

    Epic Fail! The documents are out – The truth is public but OK if ya say so George, but I have the golden gate bridge for sale ya interested?

    • Post Scripts says:

      Gee Dewey, did you sleep through the part of the war that was about repeated violations of the peace treaty? Did you also miss all those UN warnings? What do you think the sanctions were about? The UN just being mean for no reason? And what about shooting at our aircraft and the humanitarian violations and kicking out UN inspectors? DID YOU FREAKING MISS THAT…HUH DEWEY? CAUSE I THINK YOU MUST SPEND HALF YOUR LIFE IN A COMA YOU MISS SO MUCH OF WHAT IS GOING ON!

  13. Dewey says:

    LOL Jack, I saw most of it, so how about all the recent documents released, leaked, and truth?

    LOL I am worried about ya! Such anger!

    Try catching up, the proof is out Dubya wanted to get Sadamm as he entered office, the info is out, try catching up!

    You might try reading real news and facts my friends and get off the propaganda blogs.

    The info is available in many places….

    Try reading the docs they are available…Dubya knew exactly what he was doing and his admin lied to Americans PERIOD

  14. John Crosby says:

    As the “liberal” professor who is the object of this discussion I need to weigh in. I am not a leftist academic. I am a retired Army officer who participated in the invasion of Pamana in ’89 and in Iraq in ’03. If you are in desperate denial about reality then I really can’t help you but if you stop to think for one minute you would clearly see an entire world order structured around relatively cheap energy. I am not saying that is a bad thing, petroleum products allow us to have a very decent standard of living compared to 200 years ago. We would be screwed without it. The Bush administration had multiple reasons for invading Iraq but the largest one that makes the most sense is that our invasion freed up Iraqi oil to go to the Chinese or Indians who make our remarkably cheap consumer goods. Iraq is the fifth largest producer of oil in the world and the US would never have allowed Saddam (who was a bastard who needed killing) to go back into full production. The answer is simple, eliminate Saddam. The question is how do we pursue that policy goal? Invasion? General Zinni, CENTCOM Commander from ’98 to 2000 believed containment was the best policy. Bush and company opted for invasion. Back to the point. Why are US forces in the Middle Eastin the first place? Because we love them? No silly, it is about defending the flow of oil and maintaining our lifestyle. The first article in the military’s code of conduct is “I am an American fighting man. I serve in the forces that guard our country and protect our way of life. I am prepared to give my life in that defense.” Or that is how I remember it 30 years ago when I went through infantry basic in Fort Benning Georgia. There are a lot of ruthless dictators in the world that should suffer the same fate as Saddam but you don’t see us invading every messed up country. Only the ones with oil (see Libya). Does Syria have oil? That is why we’re not there. Start thinking for yourself and stop letting the blowhards and the spin doctors do the thinking for you. You are right though, I am a Liberal but the world is best seen through the eyes of a Realist. If you are confused, pick up a book.

  15. Chris says:

    Good to hear from the source. I think John Crosby makes some excellent points. While I do not know if the Iraq War was really about oil or any other economic concern, I do know that the Bush administration used intelligence on WMDs that they had every reason to believe was faulty in order to justify the war. They were dead set on it before they had all the facts.

  16. Smithd902 says:

    Wow, awesome blog layout! How long have you been blogging gedagcgfedcgfgdf

Comments are closed.