All military intervention is tied to economic benefits – Blood for Oil

All military intervention is tied to economic benefits –   Blood for Oil

U.S. imperialism in the Middle East has always been naked and brutal. It is primarily responsible for upholding backward, dictatorial regimes that, without its help, would have been overthrown long ago. Middle East specialist spelled it out: "It is much simpler to manipulate a few ruling families (and to secure fat orders for arms and ensure that oil prices remain low) and other natural resources, than a wide variety of personalities and policies bound to be thrown up by a democratic system. But such brutality always provokes a reaction–as the new uprising shows. "If history is any guide,"  "hegemony by the United States or any other party in the Middle East tends to produce resistance." That resistance is back–not just in the Arab countries and third world countries, but in the large sympathy demonstrations throughout the region. The struggle against U.S. imperialism in the Middle East is intimately tied up with the aspirations of the mass of Arab workers and peasants in that region, not only against the American "colossus," and other foreign interests but against their own ruling classes and dictators with repressive governments.

YJ Draiman for Mayor of Los Angeles

Increasing renewable energy and conservation will stabilize and reduce oil - gasoline prices. It will also revitalize our economy.

You do not have to spend money to save Energy and Water

All you have to do for starters is change your habits.

Monitor how you use your energy at home and at work, you will notice how much is wasted due to lack of attention.

I have done energy audits in homes and businesses, when my recommendations were implemented my clients saved between 25-50% on their utility bills.

YJ Draiman

Petro-altruism; Selfish military intervention in oil-rich countries

Humanitarian motives of the West in Libya

"And what would be the purpose of regime change? It is possible the economic benefits of lucrative oil, gas contracts and other natural resources for Western companies, and securing energy supplies for Europe from a source that would be convenient both for ease of supply and for defending, provide sufficient motivation. I would, however, posit another geostrategic benefit that would be of more direct interest to the United States: a strategic insurance policy with regard to the now-uncertain trajectory of Egyptian politics. In the meantime, since geostrategic opportunities can flow in more than one direction, Egypt would benefit, as all states would, from having a powerful influence on the politics of a direct neighbor; indeed, there have been apparently confirmed reports the Egyptian military has been supplying arms (in violation of an official arms embargo on Libya), and unconfirmed reports of Egyptian special forces support, to the Benghazi-based rebels.

I must add that the cost of military intervention should be paid back. It is not a gift from the taxpayers.

The U.S. and oil While American interest in the region isn't motivated by the pursuit of fossil fuels alone, the historically complicated U.S. relationships with Iran, Iraq, and the Gulf states have often revolved around oil -- specifically, ensuring an adequate supply at a reasonable cost.

Since Standard Oil's 1936 discovery of massive oil deposits in Saudi Arabia, ensuring access to the region's fossil fuels has been on America's foreign policy agenda. The 1973-1974 OPEC oil boycott and the invasion of Kuwait in 1990 are both dramatic examples of how regional forces have challenged U.S. access to fuel. The 1973 boycott was particularly powerful; at the time, Arab nations supplied 37 percent of the oil consumed by the noncommunist world. To this day, ensuring the supply of oil from the region factors heavily in the development of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East.

Yj Draiman