If you have oil, then we go to you!

“If you have oil, then we go to you!” Such a phrase can be considered the real motto of most modern military conflicts. The pronoun “we” in this case means all countries that cannot say goodbye to their imperial ambitions. First of all, it is of course the USA.


If you have oil, then we go to you!


If we consider the so-called export of revolutions, then practically in each of them one can find an “oil” or “gas” trace. Analysts even noticed the following pattern: the more oil and gas reserves the state has, the more fierce these revolutions take place. As soon as American foreign intelligence forces allow the “worm of contention” into the apple of the domestic system, the process begins to take on certain forms.

In order to trace the ratio of conflicts with the level of hydrocarbon reserves, we turn to historical events. The events of the Great Patriotic War clearly indicate that the German troops wanted to get oil from the Soviet Caucasus. That is why the battles in this direction were no less fierce than the battles for Moscow. Trying to break through to the oil wells, the fascist machine moved to Stalingrad. How this campaign ended, we all know very well.

American troops at the beginning of 90 started active hostilities in Iraq, that de jure “liberate” the people of Kuwait from the “yoke” of Saddam Hussein, and de facto get the opportunity to control untold hydrocarbon reserves.

As everyone understands, the current situation in Libya is also closely related to the oil fields of this country. Many European countries have long had their hands on the Libyan "black gold", but Gaddafi’s tough methods of government kept the border closed, not only preventing Western "partners" from actively participating in the development of Libyan oil, but also, in fact, dictating to Europe their conditions oil and gas contracts. Of course, Gaddafi was a thorn in the eye of the West, until "liberation" wars rolled across North Africa. The world has been watching the confrontation for about six months, the essence of which is not even in who will be the new head of this Arab country, but in whose hands the threads of oil business management in Libya will be. Surprisingly, at a time when people continue to die in the streets of Libyan cities and bomb explosions are heard, the PNS is already beginning to dictate conditions to many foreign states in terms of concluding contracts. An example is the treatment of representatives of the new government, which, by the way, is not yet completely legitimate, to the states that did not participate in the operation against the forces of Gaddafi. As everyone understands, such states are Russia and China. So, the rebel leaders declare that they say that you (Russia and China) did not support the resolution against the colonel and didn’t go to war in vain. Now, they say, do not wait for the conclusion of agreements on oil issues on favorable terms. In the West, such a reaction is considered adequate. Still - she is the West and directed. Russia, even directly from the United States, declares that it is not necessary to be so conservative - it is necessary to immediately respond to global processes. And the Americans and their henchmen call these processes violent actions against whole nations in exchange for crude oil. One should not forget that in 90, the United States Congress seriously considered the question of how Siberia would be divided into areas of responsibility for the transportation of oil reserves to the European Union and the United States. Talk about the fact that Siberia belongs not only to Russia, but to the whole world is being held in the West today. It turns out that these "adherents of democracy" just sleep and see how the incredible reserves of Siberian oil flow into their bins without any payment. Of course, why “barbarians”, that is, you and I, have so much natural wealth.

That is the seed of all sorts of Western plans, supposedly aimed at the democratization of foreign societies, support for freedom of speech, and grow on this soil. Here, too, it is worth noting the stars and stripes: “Why did you, my friends, remove you from the position of the head of S & P, who decided to lower the credit rating of the States?” It turns out that freedom of speech, even within the United States itself, is nothing more than a fiction. After this, no democratic masks can no longer hide the gaze fixed on the oil regions of the world.

On this occasion, some people may wonder: what are the Americans doing in Afghanistan, because there has never been oil in this country. The thing is that the oil issue is not only in wells, but also in transportation. If the Americans established control over Afghanistan, which, as we well know, is impossible in principle, then the transit route of Central Asian oil towards Southeast Asia would fall into their hands. That is, the Americans at the beginning of their “democratic” operations in Afghanistan really tried to get a reliable channel for the supply of crude oil to China, Korea, Japan, Singapore and India near Russia. The prospect was more than tempting, but the Taliban were quick to remind the NATO army that it was not their place to give up their positions. And now the Americans are happy to get out of a long war, but so far they cannot think of anything to present such a solution in the form of victory. The billions spent on the operation yielded no result - what kind of president will dare to admit it ...

Obama, too, became quiet, although how it all began ... And this White House guest needs money for the election campaign - this is the reason for the Libyan merciless and senseless rebellion. It is naive to believe that the goal of NATO and the United States is Muammar Gaddafi. One goal - "black gold".

In such a situation, you need to understand that the "partners" will stop at nothing to gain access to oil and gas reserves in any region of the world.
Author:
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

14 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. LESHA pancake
    LESHA pancake 1 September 2011 07: 38 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Well, this is not new, now the West is changing the reason for invading a foreign country (objectionable regimes, governments and leaders of other states)
  2. Che
    Che 1 September 2011 07: 55 New
    • 9
    • 0
    +9
    All sane people understand this. In Russia, we should somehow remove the gringo minions from TV screens from print. They are preparing bastards platform for the west. People wake up. Take a look around. otherwise it will be too late.
  3. bels
    bels 1 September 2011 08: 29 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    The goal for the United States was not oil, for the United States it was more important to prevent the creation of an African Bank under the auspices of Libya (as opposed to the IMF) and to prevent China from entering the African continent. For Italy and France, there really is an interest in oil.
  4. AlexiusKit 1 September 2011 10: 06 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    The basic principle of the US military doctrine - If any state is able to challenge the USA - it is ENEMY No. 1 ... And so it will be with everyone ... as long as the USA is on the planet Earth de facto ... angry
    1. APASUS 1 September 2011 21: 08 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: AlexiusKit
      The basic principle of the US military doctrine - If any state is able to challenge the USA - it is ENEMY No. 1 ..

      What are you a young man confused! Is it Afghanistan (the country lives almost in the Stone Age) challenged the United States or Iraq dared to aim at the oil wealth of Alaska?
  5. svvaulsh
    svvaulsh 1 September 2011 10: 29 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    And I liked the photo montage! Well, what terminators do you need to be in order for the four to rock the rocker !!?
  6. sergant89 1 September 2011 10: 33 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    10-15 years of the same power and the scenario of Iraq, Yugoslavia, Libya will be repeated here, although this is most likely earlier.
  7. AleksUkr 1 September 2011 10: 34 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Everything is correctly noted in the article. Oil wars were, are and will be. For us, too, there is a direct threat. The Americans have long dreamed of establishing control over Siberia. They don’t even hide it. Even the US Secretary of State, as if unobtrusively, turned her democratic eyes there too. Among other things, Russia has always been the number 1 enemy for the United States. Only our not very respected shit and their followers always say the opposite, but this is in my understanding of their lobby. Especially in this direction, some radio and TV workers say it all. He doesn’t care. But they themselves cannot decide which country they are citizens of. Dangle back and forth. For them, the main thing is to cut down more dough. The moral side touches them a little. They do not recognize patriotism in principle. Our helmsmen, their environment, it is time to understand for a long time that there is nothing to admire, that they patted him on the shoulder, hugged. How much you can flush with delight when the rulers of the world pay attention to them. It is necessary to strengthen the country. To get down from all kinds of dependence on the West. Although, unfortunately, even our military department, with the explicit tacit agreement of the tandem, wants to sit on the needle in the field of armaments. Real addicts.
    1. ballian
      ballian 1 September 2011 11: 37 New
      • -6
      • 0
      -6
      Gospedi, what a solid conspiratorial brother-in-law, as if someone refuses to sell oil to the "West".
      Oh, how many shawls shawed damned want to seize Iraqi oil-and did not seize., The United States suffered gigantic losses from the war
      I was especially amused about how NATO is sweating in Afghanistan to provide oil to China, Korea, Japan, Singapore and India :)))))))))))))
      AleksUkr - a trick with an alleged statement by the Secretary of State for Siberia has already been exposed.
      1. dmb
        dmb 1 September 2011 11: 44 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        I would like to know where and by whom it was exposed. And, as for the sale of oil, because you want to buy it cheaper or not pay at all. As for Iraqi oil, the welfare of Iraqis as a result of its production is growing right before our eyes.
  8. zczczc
    zczczc 1 September 2011 12: 38 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    What to cry about "what bad states" - they will not become better. We must save strength! So that they sit and think every day - will we mark them or not.
  9. Rico1977 2 September 2011 02: 05 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Absolutely agree. And Putin is right that he is trying to rearm and not make sudden movements. Including in Libya. We need time to recover, and in no case do we need a revolution, about which so many comments say so much. What are you? We cannot stand another revolution, and life after such revolutions only gets worse. And then the whole revolution - fools or something, did not understand that a new scenario of the Orange Revolution was tested in Libya - this is when it is impossible to arrange a bloodless change of power in supposedly democratic elections, and then one part of the country is pitted against another, and it raced. Guess who is running in for? AND? Only very unintelligent people can now want a power scenario for a change of power, and for me let Putin be, to replace him anyway with no one, if only one more “transitional advice” from pro-Western puppets.
  10. Rico1977 2 September 2011 02: 29 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    And one must think how to deal with such revolutions. The Internet, traitors and a crowd of fools (or mercenaries) - and here the scenario of the revolution is ready in Russia too. With a huge mass of passive population. Didn’t you understand that a new scenario of the Orange Revolution was tested in Libya - this is when it is impossible to arrange a bloodless change of power in supposedly democratic elections, and then one part of the country is pitted against another, and it raced. Guess who is running in for? We have all the voices about the revolution coming up - well, here's one of the parties to the conflict. Give these people (who completely consider themselves Russian, and who want good things for Russia, probably) money, weapons, information and military support - and here we are in Libya. Well, they are getting ready for the 12th year - Putin will most likely win too, and now the crowds of angry (both prepared in advance and information, and who military) will start a mutiny somewhere in Siberia. Some kind of transitional council will be created, out of incomprehensible persons (the liberals have already lit up, we need unknown ones). Selling generals and officials will start to buy up and run across, the army too - we do not like the core, we want a better life - more democratic. And all this under the deafening applause of the West on all news channels. And even if the rebels do not win, the country will fall into at least two parts (and the one that immediately will be friends with the West with resources). As an option - it’s very possible. Well, think what is more important to you, but I’d better go shoot such rebels - the rulers come and go, and I have one country.
    1. Marat
      Marat 3 September 2011 01: 09 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      A very important point raised Rico1977!

      Indeed, external opponents will support everyone who will call for revolution (even under communist slogans) and those who will beat their country - Nikolai Starikov wrote well about this - among the British pendos it turned out well to create and warm up the feeling among our citizens that WILL NOT WORSE ALREADY. No, comrades - then it really got worse - and much more!

      We must be careful! From patriotism to betrayal, you can slide even through negligence.

      Yes, we must persuade people to vote for the Communist Party, yes we must criticize the government for supporting the oligarchs - we must make efforts to remove the oligarchs from power - - but you can’t cross the line - the line

      after all, this is our internal affair — we must do this without pendos and not to their joy — again destroying only the state that appeared

      And we should not stop the integration of the republics because the oligarchs are doing it - they will leave and the country will remain!

      There is a difference between exposing and criticizing the vices of the oligarchic system and total rejection of the entire state and country. Nikolai Starikov calls such critics "all-scribblers." Do not step on the same rake as with the collapse of the USSR -