academiccompositionab
Empowerment Equalizer
SSaragian
Antony Sammeroff
Ann Sterzinger
Rodney
RJ
busterjames
cainusmaxus
Craig FitzGerald
David Heleniak
Caity & Dan Greene
keirmartland
Keith Preston
Bill the Butcher
ljp711
MRDA
Jack Donovan
Rachel Haywire
comrade hermit
Michael
Vince
Regan
robertstark2014
Noonan
S E Pearson
Rachel Haywire
Nexus X HumectressBy DoomerNat
Since the aggressive war in Iran started, many political commentators have tried to concoct an explanation for the war that does not place the blame on Israel. This has been a common phenomenon since political anti-zionism first manifested in the United States. Many anti-zionists cling to the narrative that Israel is just another colony of the American empire, and America’s unwavering support for the zionist entity masks its own imperial interests. However, mounting evidence from the current conflict makes it increasingly clear that Israel, not the United States, is pulling the strings.
Many have offered that the real reason America is going to war against the Islamic Republic is not just to cut off the “head of the snake” of the biggest backers of anti-zionist resistance groups, but it is also to isolate China and Russia from a key ally. This is silly for several reasons. First, while China is a major buyer of Iranian oil, that does not make it reliant on Iranian oil. Iranian oil exports account for only 13% of Chinese oil imports, and that percentage has been falling over the years.
When looking at who actually sells oil to China, key American allies such as Saudi Arabia are larger suppliers than Iran. If America were so concerned with who sells China oil, convincing Saudi Arabia to stop instead of declaring a disastrous war seems to be the most rational answer. Also, remember that China does not consume much oil in the first place, with oil consumption accounting for only 18-20% of energy consumption. It is true China imports most of its oil from the Middle East, but so do American allies in East Asia such as Japan and South Korea who are much more reliant on oil than China is (oil makes up 38% of Japan’s energy consumption and 37-42% for South Korea.)
If this war were about encircling China, why would America also throw the two biggest competitors (and encirclers) into an energy crisis, one that China is much better prepared for? If anything, China is well-positioned to increase its share of global manufacturing, given its comparative advantage over Japan and South Korea, as it is much less affected by a pending energy crisis. Also, if this war is to further isolate China, why would America partially demilitarize South Korea by removing THAAD interceptors so they can be sent to Israel? Surely, if America wanted to isolate China, it would not militarily weaken a key ally and opponent to China.
Russian oil revenue. This war could not have been at a better time for Russia, since revenue from oil exports was at a
5 year low. Furthermore, Russia is a major beneficiary of the conflict, as oil prices have spiked significantly. Likewise, due to America sending all its interceptors to Israel and the Gulf States, it has basically zero to give to Ukraine. And remember it is entirely the fault of US sanctions that Iran has strengthened ties with China and Russia in the first place. If America did not want Iran to become more entangled with Russia and China, it would not have forced Iran to do so. Likewise, no one can say this war is specifically aimed at weakening America’s imperial adversaries, because it has done the exact opposite.
Now, maybe a proponent of this theory of American imperial conquest can say this war is just for preserving America’s colonies in the Middle East (Israel and the Gulf States). This can not be seriously argued since the Gulf States have been significantly economically damaged by the war due to the closing of the Strait of Hormuz and Iranian attacks on energy infrastructure. The economy of Saudi Arabia which is heavily oil reliant (40% of GDP) has agreed to scale oil production back by 20%. The UAE is taking most of the brunt as well. It has been estimated that the region is losing 600 million dollars per day due to a decline in tourism, with most of this loss concentrated in the UAE.
In fact, people are leaving the UAE so quickly that it’s already showing early signs of a housing crisis. And do not overlook the economic damage in the heartland. Since the war started, American gas prices have increased by 47%, and diesel prices have increased by almost 54%. There is absolutely no way to argue this war is over, simple American imperialism, especially when considering America had intel that Iran was not seeking a nuclear weapon, nor was it planning a preemptive attack.
Being in geopolitics for any amount of time, you have undoubtedly heard the word “Petrodollar,” and also some variant of “this war is over oil.” Basically, the argument goes that in 1974, America made a deal with Saudi Arabia: Saudi Arabia agreed to sell oil exclusively in US dollars and invest those dollars in US Treasury Bonds, and in exchange, America guaranteed military security. Saudi Arabia, as the largest oil exporter and the only one selling oil exclusively in USD, helped launch the Petrodollar system, and the USD is now backed by oil. The argument continues that America invades countries to protect the status of the dollar because the countries we invade, in some way or another, pose a threat to American dollar hegemony.
There are two glaring problems with this narrative. The first is that the Petrodollar system does not exist, and the second is that, even if it does, the war in Iran cannot be explained by it. The American dollar is not backed by oil. If you compare the value of the USD to the value of oil, there is no correlation until recently.
Percentage of GDP. The more recent correlation is due to America becoming a net oil exporter. There are a host of other reasons the Petrodollar story is nonsense. Oil transactions are low and (historically) shrinking, with countries that hold the most US Treasury bonds not massive oil-producing nations (such as Japan), as you can see. The biggest foreign investors in the American stock market, it is abundantly clear that recycled Petrodollars are not at all a significant contribution.
But even if all the above were not true, and America’s dollar relied upon oil, the war in Iran would still not be about the preservation of the Petrodollar system. Because of US sanctions, Iran is essentially not allowed to hold USD, thus making it impossible to accept USD as payment for oil exports. How could America declare war on Iran to preserve the Petrodollar system if America has systematically kept Iran out of it? The answer is that the Petrodollar is irrelevant.
The concept of the Military Industrial Complex is even more fake.
As the story goes, America goes to war constantly because there is basically an alliance between the US government, military, and defense contractors. The narrative is that America spends so much money on the military, so the military can make contracts with defense contractors that US officials have invested in. So America declares war and defense contractors ramp up production, they get paid by the military, and US officials get a nice increase in personal net worth. An “Iron Triangle” of sorts. The problem with this hypothesis is threefold. First, military spending as a
percentage of GDP is historically very low, and so is military spending as a percentage of the federal budget.
However, a more damning problem for this narrative is that, when comparing the profits of corporations supposedly comprising the MIC with those of other sectors of the economy, the MIC is vastly less profitable. As you can see from the data collected by Ryan McBeth.
The MIC is less profitable and often significantly smaller than tech, pharmaceutical, and consumer product companies.
And also, one has to wonder if the war in Iran is just so defense corporations can make a bunch of money, why pick Iran? Especially when considering how damaging this has been for the American empire, why would America not just have gone to war with Cuba and continue with its “Neo-Monroe Doctrine”? This answer is because the war in Iran is not because of the MIC, and the MIC does not exist.
It’s increasingly undeniable that Israel is calling the shots in the conflict, and American foreign policy generally, it is important to show how much of a stranglehold jewish zionists have on the Trump/Kushner Administration. The Jewish influence on the administration is evident when looking at who the biggest donors to Trump’s 2024 run were. Looking at the ten biggest donors to the 2024 presidential run shows 8/10 went to Trump, and 4/8 were jewish zionists (Adelson, Uihlein, Yass, and Singer). Marco Rubio is a literal protege of Adelson, with the Jewish lobbyists giving him over a million dollars throughout his career. Rubio is such a rent boy to the Adelsons that Trump himself made fun of him for it during the 2016 campaign. Likewise, just look at who America was sending to talk to Iran. It was Kushner, Witkoff, and Lutnick, all jews.
Not only are they Jewish, but Witkoff would also literally stop in Israel before meeting with Iran. Why would he do this if it was not for representing Israel, not the US, during negotiations? The case that Israel is driving the conflict is extremely easy to make. Secretary of State Marco Rubio literally stated as such. Rubio said that America had foreknowledge of an Israeli strike, so America followed suit. The State Department has also said the war is at “the request of Israel.” It is simply the case that Israel was going to attack Iran, and because of the Jewish capture of our government and institutions, we went in too.
What kind of colony acts like this? Can you imagine if an actual vassal state like South Korea just decided they were just going to attack North Korea, even though there was no evidence that North Korea was planning to attack them? There is no way America would just fall in line with South Korea and fight alongside them against North Korea. To further discredit the “Israel is controlled by the US” theory, look at how Israel has conducted itself during the war. Trump has repeatedly stated he wants peace with Lebanon and has even stated there is a ceasefire between Lebanon and Israel. This has not stopped Israel from attacking Lebanon. If America controls Israel, why aren’t they acting like it? Because they aren’t. Jewish supremacists and Israel call the shots, and America follows along.
Much effort has been made to subvert anti-zionist analysis of America’s relationship to Israel and redirect blame to the United States. The aggressive war against Iran can not make it anymore clear it is Israel that steers the ship. America is willing to sacrifice its allies in the Middle East, Europe, and Asia, along with its own citizens, in order to serve Israel’s ambitions in the region. This conflict absolutely proves that what drives America’s policy in the region is not oil or the MIC, it’s ZOG.
Attack the System
Categories: Uncategorized
