this post was submitted on 21 Nov 2023
449 points (98.3% liked)

World News

39385 readers
2284 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

OK, oil could be an incentive, but I doubt that it is much or one would have heard of them.

I should have excluded pure rhetorics as a reason. The Chinese at least had a good economic reason to get Hong Kong into their hands.

[–] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

OK, oil could be an incentive, but I doubt that it is much or one would have heard of them.

Don't mean to be rude, but you could also just not have been educated on the matter, and its actually more important than you think, especially to those who claim ownership for the oil rights reasons.

Usually world politics, when it comes to oil access/ownership, is not something that is discussed in the open, often. We in the US never say that we do stuff in the Middle East for the oil, we say its for a hunder other reasons, but its first and foremost its for the oil, not that news stations will ever report on that fact.

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

OK, looks like there is actually serious amounts of oil there. But quite deep and under water. Still, worth more than all of the island wrapped up as a present ;-) TIL.

[–] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Its really crazy how that stuff works. I read an article once about how nations try to claim even the smallest piece of rock in places just so that they can have claim over the resources not on land itself but in the ocean around it. Has to do with some UN treaties/rules about resource availability/ownership.

[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago

Either a 100km or 200km radius around land, if I'm not mistaken. Leads to some very.... "interesting" situations in Greece/Turkey.

[–] HerbalGamer@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We in the US never say that we do stuff in the Middle East for the oil, we say its for a hunder other reasons, but its first and foremost its for the oil, not that new stations will ever report on that fact.

Oh everybody knows that

[–] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Oh everybody knows that

But they never say it in public, if they can help it.

[–] SCB@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We in the US never say that we do stuff in the Middle East for the oil, we say its for a hunder other reasons, but its first and foremost its for the oil,

While a common conspiracy theory, this is never borne out by evidence.

[–] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We in the US never say that we do stuff in the Middle East for the oil, we say its for a hunder other reasons, but its first and foremost its for the oil,

While a common conspiracy theory, this is never borne out by evidence

It's actually been stated officially during reporter questioning actually, multiple times throughout the years. It's just not something you see discussed much on CNN directly.

Don't mean to be rude (in case you're not a bot) but it takes a special kind of ignorance to believe that oil has nothing to do with what's going on in the Middle East. It's not the only factor, but it's definitely a factor.

[–] SCB@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oil dictates our relationship with Saudi Arabia, but is not tied to overall ME policy, and there is 0 evidence to the contrary.

Not only am I not a bot, im old enough to remember "no blood for oil" protests and how dumb and distracting they were from legitimate reasons not to engage in ME war.

Your conspiracy theory has gotten people killed

[–] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

and there is 0 evidence to the contrary.

As I've mentioned previously, during official news conferences officials have stated the need to protect the oil supply and the access to it.

Not only am I not a bot, im old enough to remember “no blood for oil” protests and how dumb and distracting they were from legitimate reasons not to engage in ME war.

As someone who is also old enough to remember those kind of protests, and the embargos, etc., I agree. Fighting over resources is not healthy, and that resources should be shared instead.

Your conspiracy theory has gotten people killed

Its not a conspiracy theory, its what drives the politics in the ME, on multiple levels. And its not my theory, its what the majority of people have decided on (the importance of oil).

[–] SCB@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago

Fighting over resources is not healthy

This is quite false, but the US generally uses soft power for oil.