• Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    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.

    • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        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.

        • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          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.

          • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            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.

      • Herbal Gamer
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        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

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        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.

        • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          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
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            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

            • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              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
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Fighting over resources is not healthy

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