Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Junkdrawer

(27,993 posts)
Fri May 31, 2013, 07:46 AM May 2013

WW I - Oil War...WW II - Oil War...WW III????

Last edited Fri May 31, 2013, 08:32 AM - Edit history (1)

Oil is way up there in most historian's appraisal of either the casus belli or primary strategy of modern war.

WW I - Coal became obsolete as a fuel for warships. Fuel Oil was more energy dense and easier to load. Britain had coal, no oil. Germany had neither, but had lots of money and was in the process of building the now infamous Berlin-to-Baghdad railway to compete with British access to Iranian oil.

WW II - Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor was after we embargoed her oil. Germany's march toward Poland? Galician oilfields in southeastern Poland.

You DO know that Keystone XL oil is NOT for US markets, right? And we're shipping as much coal and asphalt to China as we possibly can. Iraq...Africom...Afghanistan...Oil...Oil..Oil Pipelines.

Right now China and Russia are making kissy faces. Russia now feels emboldened to challenge US hegemony. I keep saying the most dangerous moments in world history is when a declining #1 Empire sees an ascendant #2 about to become King of the Hill and decides "Now or Never".

So, if mitigating Climate Change were not enough reason to LOVE Wind, Solar and other renewable energy sources.....

25 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
WW I - Oil War...WW II - Oil War...WW III???? (Original Post) Junkdrawer May 2013 OP
??? WWI and WWII were both fought for the sake of bloody conquest and territory, not oil. DetlefK May 2013 #1
In WW II, it was more strategy than cause. As for WW I, this holds up pretty well.... Junkdrawer May 2013 #2
That's a great video. I remember seeing that years ago. Javaman May 2013 #3
Thanks. One of my All Time favs.... Junkdrawer May 2013 #4
Everybody should know this stuff. n/t Egalitarian Thug May 2013 #16
What is your source of history for the wars? dixiegrrrrl May 2013 #5
I don't have one specific source. Just grab a random history-book. DetlefK May 2013 #9
Actually, Japan had been at war for years. Savannahmann May 2013 #19
It's never one thing Re: The Great War. Savannahmann May 2013 #6
"To say that Oil is the ONLY cause of war, is to seriously misunderstand the era, and the people." Junkdrawer May 2013 #8
PS. A big ommision in my OP was that the German uboats in WW II (not sure about WW I).... Junkdrawer May 2013 #15
Oil was a strategic material to enable the fight Savannahmann May 2013 #18
Good info on the WWI uboats and Mexico. As for "oil wasn't discovered in Iraq until 1927".... Junkdrawer May 2013 #20
Again, Oil in Iraq was suspected, but not confirmed. Savannahmann May 2013 #23
ww3 has already begun. that's why the US is involved in conflicts in 72 countries HiPointDem May 2013 #7
Yes and no.... Junkdrawer May 2013 #10
but -- the terrorists!!! they're everywhere!!! HiPointDem May 2013 #12
That is the truth there Hipoint Puzzledtraveller May 2013 #11
One could also say that WWI never really ended. The treaty of Versailles gauranteed WWII, Egalitarian Thug May 2013 #13
or one could say there is no war but the class war HiPointDem May 2013 #14
In my case, one has. But that always ends badly around here. Egalitarian Thug May 2013 #17
Water wars. Are_grits_groceries May 2013 #21
GREAT POINT!!! Junkdrawer May 2013 #22
I wish I had such a simplistic understanding of history nadinbrzezinski May 2013 #24
That could be said about many resources sarisataka May 2013 #25

Javaman

(62,504 posts)
3. That's a great video. I remember seeing that years ago.
Fri May 31, 2013, 08:05 AM
May 2013

and noticing how the first place that Britain occupied when hostilities broke out in WWI was Iraq.

Junkdrawer

(27,993 posts)
4. Thanks. One of my All Time favs....
Fri May 31, 2013, 08:12 AM
May 2013

And funny how the "Joint Sunni Shiite Uprising" he talks about was followed by a bloody civil war, huh?

Just another coincidence, I'm sure.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basra_prison_incident

dixiegrrrrl

(60,010 posts)
5. What is your source of history for the wars?
Fri May 31, 2013, 08:48 AM
May 2013

Certainly differs from mine.

Edited to add: you might want to read Daniel Yergin's seminal history of oil and how it affected militant land grabs from 1900 to present.

DetlefK

(16,423 posts)
9. I don't have one specific source. Just grab a random history-book.
Fri May 31, 2013, 09:13 AM
May 2013

WWI:
All of Europe was itching for a fight. The assassination of Duke Ferdinand in Sarajevo, combined with the various pacts of mutual assistance in case of war, was just a convenient excuse to start a war.

WWII:
Hitler hated Jews, hated Communists and wanted to colonize Eastern Europe to give the german race more space. (Please note that his plans included all of Eastern Europe, not just the oil-fields at the Black Sea.)
The Italians wanted to conquer Africa, just like in the good old days of the roman empire.
And Japan wasn't interested in war at all until the USA cut off their oil supply-lines.

 

Savannahmann

(3,891 posts)
19. Actually, Japan had been at war for years.
Fri May 31, 2013, 10:20 AM
May 2013

Japan had been invading China for fully five years. When France fell, Japan took the former French Colonies of French Indochina, and Korea.

Japan's navy had been planning for a decade to fight the Americans, which is why they designed the Battleships Yamato and Musashi. Those ships were designed to be superior to any American ship, as were all ships in the Japanese Navy, if only by a single gun, or a single knot of speed.

Interestingly enough, the Japanese Army didn't have many plans for fighting the Americans, they were completely focused on fighting the Russians, again. Most nations have issues regarding communication and co-ordination between army and navy. Japan took those issues to a level never before seen in history. It was more than the left hand not knowing what the right had was doing.

The Japanese, much like the Germans of WW I, felt themselves encircled by enemies, who had gotten their colonies, and then declared the game over, no one else could or should get colonies. Again, if there was a single cause for the war, it would have to be arrogance and racism. Japan felt themselves racially and culturally superior.

The Japanese decided that there would be war with the Americans, they started planning and training for the Pearl Harbor attack months before the embargo of oil had been enacted. The Americans would not stand still while Japan created their Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity sphere. In other words, all of Asia colonized and ruled by Japan, which was their divine right as a culturally and racially superior people.

 

Savannahmann

(3,891 posts)
6. It's never one thing Re: The Great War.
Fri May 31, 2013, 08:53 AM
May 2013

Even if the issue of oil was taken out of the mix for WW I, you would still have had a war. King Edward the British Monarch worked to shore up relations with old adversaries, especially the French. At the same time, Germany was making itself a threat to Britain by creating the Grand Fleet. Germany's Monarch, Kaiser Wilhelm practiced what historians call inspirational diplomacy. He was constantly running around and trying to get someone to join him so they could crush someone else. He encouraged and harangued Nicholas of Russia into the Russo Japanese war. When Russia was badly handled by the Japanese, Wilhelm blamed the Russian Generals, and said no blame could be attached to him.

Fear the Yellow Peril, was a phase that has lived in history, and was started by Wilhelm. Racism needed no help, granted, but it got more help than it deserved from Germany's Monarch.

Austria-Hungary had a diverse empire, which was not loyal to Vienna based up anything other than they had been conquered or captured over the centuries past. They needed to smack the Slav's down to make sure that the idea of Slavic Independence did not get a foothold in their empire. Sadly, many Historians agree that Ferdinand probably would have granted Independence to the more Slavic Regions, allowing them to form their own nations, ala Yugoslavia etc. But the Baltic Independence groups wanted it now, and they instead killed the first target of opportunity. It was the trigger for an empire looking for an excuse.

France had never gotten over the defeat of 1870, and all their war plans, like Germany's, called for regaining the lost regions of Alsace and Lorraine.

Everybody wanted war. Everybody had what they thought was the perfect plan. If the enemy did what they expected, so much the better for us. Interestingly enough, both the German Generals, and the French Generals uttered that phrase in discussing the expected enemy movements. If they do that, so much the better for us.

It is never one thing. No single insult, or cause is ever the one thing if we could get rid of it, would have prevented this war or that conflict. It is always a culmination of things that becomes intolerable. The United States got involved, the Zimmerman Telegram was the last straw, but there had been plenty of things leading up to it. From sinking of American Flagged ships, to German Agents working in the US to cause labor difficulties, destruction of vital bridges, destruction of supply ships, and notification of sailings for the German U-Boats.

To say that Oil is the only cause of war, is to seriously misunderstand the era, and the people. The French wanted war, to regain Alsace and Lorraine and recoup honor lost in 1870. The British wanted war to eliminate a threat to their very livelihood in the form of the Grand Fleet. Germany wanted it to make sure they got their place in the sun, convinced that German culture was vastly superior, as evidenced by the rapid destruction of France in 1870. Austria wanted it to forestall the rise of the Slavic Threat. Russia wanted it to cement their position as leader of the Slavic people and to recoup their position as a major European Power after the defeat in the Russo Japanese War. Japan wanted it to gain German colonies in the Asian Region.

Everyone wanted war, and Oil while needed by both sides to fight the war, was not the cause.

Junkdrawer

(27,993 posts)
8. "To say that Oil is the ONLY cause of war, is to seriously misunderstand the era, and the people."
Fri May 31, 2013, 09:08 AM
May 2013

I agree - as long as the word "only" is thrown in. But I thought the first sentence in my OP made that clear.

Trying to capture resources beyond one's border IS a primary cause of war. Has been through the ages.

Junkdrawer

(27,993 posts)
15. PS. A big ommision in my OP was that the German uboats in WW II (not sure about WW I)....
Fri May 31, 2013, 09:28 AM
May 2013

went after the oil tankers trying to get US oil to Britain.

There was a time WE were lousy with oil. Ahhh...memories....

 

Savannahmann

(3,891 posts)
18. Oil was a strategic material to enable the fight
Fri May 31, 2013, 10:01 AM
May 2013

But it wasn't the cause, even slightly. First, British supply of Oil came mainly from Mexico, which is a big part of the reason the Germans were haranguing Mexico to go to war with the United States. It would in one move cut off almost all the supplies that the French and British were getting. Food, Clothing, Medical supplies, and munitions were coming from the United States. Oil and Rubber from Mexico and South America.

In fact, oil wasn't discovered in Iraq until 1927, although it has been suspected for a very long time, and the oil exploration company was formed in London in 1911. The investment of Iraq, Iran, and Egypt was to surround the Turkish forces that had because of British Blunders in Diplomacy which were caused more by arrogance than any other reason, had driven the Turks into the Central Powers camp. England had built two Dreadnought class battleships for Turkey, then instead of delivering the ships, already paid for, had seized them and told Turkey that after the war, they would discuss any reparations that might be due, if Turkey was smart enough to understand that British Friendship if not a treaty, was always in Turkey's best interest. Those ships became the HMS Erin, and HMS Agincourt. Germany, seeing the presence of a potential ally, gave Two ships to Turkey, to cement the treaty, and then with German crews sailing under the Turkish flag, fired on Russian forces, and Turkey finally announced that they had joined the Central Powers. Never before had the cost of two ships been so high. A million soldiers were tied up fighting what could have been an ally if not for racism and arrogance on the part of the British Government. Of course, it did lead to a nice propaganda piece with Lawrence of Arabia.

The U-Boat was because of the Presence of the British Fleet at Scarpa Flow, the only maritime units that could be used to try blockade the British the same way the British were blockading the Germans. The German High Seas fleet was bottled up, and if they came out would fight from a serious disadvantage, being outnumbered by the British. When they did come out, German Gunnery was better, but the disadvantage of fleet size was too great to do as much damage as was hoped.

There are lots of books to read on these era's in history. There are plenty of sources of information. One of my favorites is The Guns of August, a pulitzer prize winning book by Barbra Tuchman. She has a gift of words, and of explaining the difficult to understand. She gives historical people personality, and does an outstanding job in explaining the causes leading to the war, and the first month of the war in 1914. There is so much information to cover, including the seeds of the present Middle East problems, planted by Lawrence of Arabia, who promised Independence to the people of the Middle East, if they fought for the British. Later, the British, showing admirable arrogance, decided that Lawrence who had been told to make this offer, was a relatively low ranking officer, Lieutenant Colonel, and did not have the authority to make such promises. A book of blunders from that era would almost collapse under it's own gravitational weight.

Junkdrawer

(27,993 posts)
20. Good info on the WWI uboats and Mexico. As for "oil wasn't discovered in Iraq until 1927"....
Fri May 31, 2013, 11:07 AM
May 2013

I think the Brits were less interested in GETTING Iraqi oil and more interested in keeping Iraqi oil out of German hands.

In fact, between Redlining, the Achnacarry Agreement, and then later the Iraqi Oil embargo after Gulf War I, Iraq is one of the few places on earth with MASSIVE, still under explored oil. Doesn't get much ink in the West (hmm, wonder why) but Big Oil (with a token Chinese presence) is starting to bring those reserves online now. And speaking of a casus belli for WW III......

Gotta run...

 

Savannahmann

(3,891 posts)
23. Again, Oil in Iraq was suspected, but not confirmed.
Fri May 31, 2013, 11:22 AM
May 2013

The war ended in 1918, and it took almost another decade to discover the oil in Iraq. The British were able to get all the oil they needed to keep their ships which were mostly oil fired, from Mexico. Germany tried to get Mexico to cut off the supply of oil from the British a number of times. Even going so far as to fund several coup attempts, and spending millions of dollars to buy military supplies.

President Wilson was embroiled in Mexico almost from the day he was sworn into office. He hated the Mexican President Huerta, and refused to recognize him as the legal leader of Mexico. We invaded Vera Cruz Mexico in 1914, and all the while, the British are encouraging the Americans to get along with Mexico, because Britain needed the oil.

The story of Huerta is one of incredible stupidity. He died in Texas in 1915, trying with the German's help to get back into Mexico, where he had fled in Exile, chased out by among other Pocho Villa, who was at first, supported by President Wilson, and then opposed by Wilson. Wilson never could understand why the Mexican people just didn't do what he, Wilson, thought they should. After all, he was far more intelligent, and far wiser, and knew what was best for the Mexicans than they did.

Junkdrawer

(27,993 posts)
10. Yes and no....
Fri May 31, 2013, 09:17 AM
May 2013

As long as there is no opponent or alliance of opponents to challenge us, it's more Imperial Expansion than World War.

That's why improving Sino-Russian relations could change everything.

 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
12. but -- the terrorists!!! they're everywhere!!!
Fri May 31, 2013, 09:21 AM
May 2013

hey, we're already fighting the russians and the soviets

also collaborating with them

its a barnum and bailey world

just as phoney as it can be

but it wouldn't be make-believe if

Puzzledtraveller

(5,937 posts)
11. That is the truth there Hipoint
Fri May 31, 2013, 09:20 AM
May 2013

Why wait for global conflict when we can have it perpetually, subtly, and covert(for the most part).

 

Egalitarian Thug

(12,448 posts)
13. One could also say that WWI never really ended. The treaty of Versailles gauranteed WWII,
Fri May 31, 2013, 09:24 AM
May 2013

and the U.S. - Soviet Union split continued WWII.

Either way, we are reaching the next breaking point and psychopaths still rule the world.

 

Egalitarian Thug

(12,448 posts)
17. In my case, one has. But that always ends badly around here.
Fri May 31, 2013, 09:36 AM
May 2013

None of these or this war was begun in a vacuum and under all of the various reasons and justifications was a global rise of the working class saying "We've had enough. You (the parasites) need us to exist and we don't need you at all".

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
24. I wish I had such a simplistic understanding of history
Fri May 31, 2013, 11:49 AM
May 2013

But it explains the back and white thinking perfectly. Now I got your number

sarisataka

(18,501 posts)
25. That could be said about many resources
Fri May 31, 2013, 12:03 PM
May 2013
either the casus belli or primary strategy of modern war


wars needs lots of material- oil, iron, aluminum... Very few countries have enough to self supply in a major war situation so securing strategic materials do become an interim objective.

WW1 was less as most warships still did use coal- coaling stations were a serious matter for the navies. The Falkland Islands had some importance to German raiders who attacked the British coaling station to resupply themselves.

WW2 German had access to Romanian oil which was sufficient in the short term. As the war continued they required more resulting in the push towards the Caucasus oil fields and Stalingrad...
For Japan, oil was one cause as they had no source internally. Much debate went on prior to war about seizing the French and Dutch South Pacific oil fields without attacking the US. In the end since Japan believed war with the US to be inevitable, that Japan should start conflict on its terms.
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»WW I - Oil War...WW II - ...