Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Sunday, August 10, 2014

Islamic State militants seized four small oilfields when they swept through north Iraq last month and are now selling crude oil and gasoline from them to finance their newly declared "caliphate". But the monopoly over fuel in the territory it has captured gives the Islamic State leverage over other armed Sunni factions who could threaten its dominance in northern Iraq.

Advertisement

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Advertisement

Subscriptions

Author Info

LarryMohr

 

Advertisement

MORE STORIES

 

Advertisement

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

www.newrepublic.com

If the Obama administration wanted to prevent the world's peoples from brutal dictators and repressive regimes or from takeovers by terrorist groups, there are other countries besides Libya and Iraq where it could intervene. What distinguishes these two countries is that they are major oil producers.

#1 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2014-08-10 01:36 AM | Reply | Flag:

Oil is fungible, so while Americans can argue that they aren't buying oil from terrorists, in effect they are. Too bad that conservatives in this country have given conservation of fossil fuels short shrift for so long. Gas up at Exxon, support Islamic terror and repression at no extra charge...

#2 | Posted by catdog at 2014-08-10 01:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

If I can save 10 cents a gallon, sign me up!

#3 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2014-08-10 05:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

You also support terrorism by paying taxes too.

#4 | Posted by shirtsbyeric at 2014-08-11 09:13 AM | Reply | Flag:

This only supports something that I've been saying all along:

We don't need to go to war to gain access to Middle Eastern oil. No matter who is in charge, they will sell it because they have no choice.

US corporations may be squezed out of the deal by certain regimes. But that's not the same issue. And investors who put their money in unstable parts of the world are suppose to lose out once in a while.

#5 | Posted by Sully at 2014-08-11 12:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

We don't need to go to war to gain access to Middle Eastern oil. No matter who is in charge, they will sell it because they have no choice.

Correct. Too many other countries produce oil for the ME to have a stranglehold on the market. The fact that ME economies produce little else puts them even more at the mercy of global oil consumption, not the other way around.

#6 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-08-11 12:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

No mana from heaven for them.

#7 | Posted by Tor at 2014-08-11 03:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

ok i see media and others referring to the "islamic state". who else (besides themselves) has designated that legitimacy to them?

#8 | Posted by NerfHerder at 2014-08-11 03:33 PM | Reply | Flag:

As long as ISIS sells their oil in dollars, it's no problem.

#9 | Posted by Ben_Berkkake at 2014-08-11 05:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

#9 so, so correct. Iran is our enemy because of their oil bourse.

#10 | Posted by Prolix247 at 2014-08-11 07:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

The fact that ME economies produce little else puts them even more at the mercy of global oil consumption, not the other way around.
#6 | Posted by JeffJ

To me that's like saying the pimp is at the mercy of his ----, or McDonald's CEO is at the mercy of his minimum wage employees. There might be a glimmer of truth at times, but the power exchange pretty much runs the other way.

#11 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-11 07:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

ok i see media and others referring to the "islamic state". who else (besides themselves) has designated that legitimacy to them?

You're apparently the only person who cares to verify the facts. In the end, they can call themselves what they want, and continue to bring a bad name to Islam.

#12 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2014-08-12 09:17 AM | Reply | Flag:

To me that's like saying the pimp is at the mercy of his ----, or McDonald's CEO is at the mercy of his minimum wage employees. There might be a glimmer of truth at times, but the power exchange pretty much runs the other way.

#11 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-11 07:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

You're comparing consumers to employees in this analogy. They sell a commodity. Yes, the demand is huge. But they aren't the only suppliers. And holding it back only makes alternatives more viable. And they have no other way to make money. An employer isn't at the mercy of his low level employees because he can easily replace them. They can't replace oil revenue. If they want money they sell oil. And if they want to hold onto the oil fields, they better make money or people with more resources are going to come along and take those oil fields.

#13 | Posted by Sully at 2014-08-12 09:32 AM | Reply | Flag:

Advertisement

Post a comment

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2014 World Readable

 

Advertisement

Drudge Retort