Libya, you're tired of threads about it but hear me out.

Cybertron85

Could it be about oil after all?

I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong here, I'm just looking at it from a purely strategic point of view so bear with me. I'm not shouting conspiracy, but it does stink of oppertunism.

We know oil comes in different categories, priced differently on the world markets depending on the quality and some geographical factors (although quality seems to be a main driver here). There are 11 countries currently priced under the OPEC basket reference and this category also contains most of the largest producers of crude oil, especially Saudi Arabia.

Let's have a look at the list of countries and see what your first impression is:

Libya, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Venezuela, Nigeria, Algeria.

Straight away you'll notice that most of these countries are either close allies or hated 'enemies' of the West, perhaps with the exception of Nigeria & Algeria who seem to be quite neutral. They're all quite unstable areas, that much is sure.

Oil is a finite resource, it will not be a moneyspinner for many of these nations which have little else in mineral wealth (Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, Kuwait are largely desert) so the shrewd decision is obviously to get the best price possible for your product. These producers can restrict their own supply, but why cause friction in the symbiotic relationship with the industrialised West already heavy hit by economic crisis when one producer is already being taken off-line (the price of ORB crude has been steadily climbing since the start of the Libyan conflict).

Best case scenario for these countries is for this conflict to last as long as possible which could explain why they waited so long to intervene. Both Yemen & Syria are closer to Saudi Arabia & UAE but they both prefer to send their jets to Libya to 'promote democracy', if that doesn't smell of alterior motives I don't know what does.

Why would the West be so eager to help them you might say.

Well, let's look at the big players pushing for the Libyan intervention here, and correct me if I'm wrong, but its US, UK & France. Now let's look at the six largest, non state-owned energy companies around the world.

Trading under various names around the world, they are considered to be:

* BP p.l.c. (BP) - United Kingdom
* Chevron Corporation (CVX) - United States
* ConocoPhillips Company (COP) - United States
* ExxonMobil Corporation (XOM) - United States
* Royal Dutch Shell plc (RDS) - Netherlands & United Kingdom
* Total S.A. (TOT) - France

Judging by this I'd say they're angling for some lucractive contracts when the dust in Libya settles, do you think the incoming government of former rebels will be falling over themselves to oblige them? I have a sneaky feeling they will.

I rest my case, I'm sure some folks will disagree, and I admit that part of it is my own hypothesis, but it's based on reality. Be your own judge.

Overheal

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056213719

Cybertron85

ah, balls. Totally overlooked that thread. thanks.

Saila

No...............................................................................................










I wont hear you out.

My name is URL

I doubt it's about oil in this case.. at least as far as the US are concerned, but - http://www.irishcentral.com/news/Over-23-percent-of-oil-used-in-Ireland-comes-from-Libya-116807583.html

mikemac

Civil war, let them sort it out themselves

epgc3fyqirnbsx

Tbh, I was of the opinion, though I hadn't looked into it too much, that in the case of a civil war with the absence of genocide that perhaps they should be left to their own devices.

But now that it has happened, and in the event that Gadaffi would be victorious in the absence of foreign intervention, his retributions would be severe to say the least.

So in this case, I think the internatrional community is doing the right thing. And no, I wouldn't say it's about oil. England had a very cosy relationship with gadaffi but I believe Cameron is trying to do the right thing.

We seem to have a default position whereby we assume governments have a hidden agenda, and understandably so, but I don't think this is always the case.

I still think that civil wars ought to be just that, but then very case is different

Sharpshooter

Cybertron85 wrote: »

ah, balls. Totally overlooked that thread. thanks.

Hi, OP.

Thanks to Overheals link this thread can now be closed as he pointed out, it already exists in Conspiracy Theories.:)